The MRM Glossary
This is a collection of terms you're likely to encounter on the websites dealing with men's rights and issues, with links to relevant articles; intended as a quick reference for the veteran manosphere readers/writers, and also as a beginners' resource to make themselves familiar with the men's rights and the obstructions in their ways. Some less commonly used terms have been included within other terms, so if you cannot find their entry in the list, try using your browser's text-search functionality. A few of the definitions are based on my personal interpretation, and might not be completely accurate. Feel free to suggest new terms - along with any relevant links - and correction/extension to the existing ones. (Updated: 2014/01/08.)

Helpful Contributors: My sincere and heartfelt thanks goes to:
~ corbyworld: For great statistical data, studies, sources, and links referenced from numerous terms. For enhancement to the term Rationalization Hamster.
~ Factory: For the terms: AFC, Cock Carousel, Hamsterbatics, Rationalization Hamster, SMV, The Wall.
~ Leviathan: For correction/extension to the terms: Evo-Psych, Male Privilege, NAWALT. For suggestion about removing conspiracy site link in the term: Title IX.
~ nomereape: For extension to the term Evo-Psych.
~ Patrick Henry: For the term: Briffault's Law.
~ Ragnar: For correction/extension to the term: MGTOW.

Translation Queries: The points below should answer the most common questions regarding the translation of this glossary. In case of any other question or for more detail, please post a comment using any of the comment boxes on this blog, mentioning your email for the correspondence. (Comments on this blog are not published if such is desired; in those cases they work like a "Contact Us" form.)
~ Feel free to translate the glossary in any language of your choice and post that translation anywhere. Since the glossary here gets updated periodically, it's recommended to include the last updated date of this glossary to which the translated work corresponds.
~ You can also send a link to the translated and published document through any of the comment boxes on this blog; and that link will be put up here to help the readers of that language.
~ If you want the translation to be published on this blog itself, please upload the translated document (in HTML format) at some file hosting website and send a link to it using any of the comment boxes on this blog. (Please note a limitation with this approach: The translations published here won't get updated when the English glossary gets updated.)

Here we go.

2+2=5: (The slogan is part of Orwellian speak.) Refers to the outright lies and half-truths (for example, hiding the figures on the male victims or female perpetrators) in the feminist statistics and studies. Common feminist disinformation tactics include choosing biased samples for the studies and surveys, and presenting fabricated statistics and observations based on some truth with lies and biased conclusions. If the results of a study or survey actually favor the females over the males (for example, the life expectancy is higher for the women), the feminists select a measure (arithmatic mean, geometric mean, harmonic mean, or whatever) that has a lower value for the females, and give it a misleading and catchy name to show that the females have a lower value of that measure than the males and therefore resources (money) must be allocated to the female-favoring programs in order to make the value higher! Similarly, the feminist-influenced organizations sometimes present the actual numbers and the other times the percentages, depending upon whichever version enhances the female victimhood and/or the male notoriety. They often reveal only part of the truth and call it the whole, in order to spread FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt).
Here are some half-true or false statistics, dishonest/wrong/biased conclusions and results from studies/researches/surveys, and myths used and spread by the feminists.
All of these lies, even after having been repeatedly debunked, still go unchecked, and are believed by the politicians and law-makers (for their selfish reasons), and by the general blue pill populace. This way, the feminists misdirect the outcome in their favor. They also find themselves justified in doing so because they think they're doing all this "for the Greater Good" or for the sisterhood, and that the "ends justify the means".
Here are some statistics, studies/researches/surveys, and news related to the issues, hardships, and discrimination faced by men and boys.
Since these statistics go opposite to the feminist narrative, these are often manipulated, suppressed, rejected, hidden, omitted, or downplayed. (See also: Affirmative Action, Apex Fallacy, Bigot, Blue Pill, Date Rape, Dear Colleague, Double Standards, DV, Feminism, Feminist Logic, Feminization, Kangaroo Court, Misandry, Orwellian, Quote Mining, Rape Culture, Reverse Discrimination, Schrodinger's Rapist, Title IX, Vagina Syndrome, Wage Gap, Walk a Mile in Her Shoes.)

AFC: (Acronym for "Average Frustrated Chump". Also known as "Beta Orbiter".) A man who cannot attract women with his natural skills (physique, personality, brains, wits, etc) and so chooses to try ideologically, that is, by adhering to the feminist-defined norms for a 'Nice Guy'.
A related term is "Friendzone", which is the level (between just friendship and love/relationship) at which a selfish female desired by an AFC keeps him. The said female pretends to be more than just his friend, by using him as her emotional tempon or by letting him buy stuff (gifts and presents) for her, etc (and neither tells him that she loves him, nor that she does not, thereby keeping his expectations high). However, as soon as she finds a man of her choice, or as soon as she has sucked up all she could from the AFC fellow, she dumps him. If the AFC at this point complains about her being insensitive, her typical reply is, "I never saw you from that angle, I thought we were always just friends". Additionally, she also blames the AFC for considering himself entitled to (or obsessed with) sex/love just because a female became his good friend. (See also: Beta, Briffault's Law, Game, Incel, Mangina, PUA, Shit Test, White Knight.)

Affirmative Action: (Short form: "AA".) This is preferential allotment (or reservation) of jobs and other opportunities to the women, minorities, and other interest groups (African-Americans etc). However, gender trumps race - racial discrimination against Whites is now being considered to be wrong, but discrimination against men is okay. Affirmative Action, under various designations, is present in countries other than the US too; for example, it is manifested with the name Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) in Australia, and a similar policy exists in Canada too. Under the Affirmative Action, women -
~ Making up 52% of the total population, 54% of voting power, and two-third of the global consumer spending power (women control 80% of household spending).
~ 60% of the college enrollment and 65% of the university students.
~ Being majority of the job-holders, holding majority of wealth, and earning higher than the men.
~ Receiving all kinds of scholarships/subsidies even in the areas where they already excel and outnumber men.
are termed as minorities; whereas men -
~ Having no protection from domestic violence and discrimination.
~ Being the majority victims of violent crimes.
~ Having no reproductive choice or rights (but all the responsibilities), and still feminists opposing male birth-control pill (called the 'Male Pill' in short) and other male birth control means on the dishonest and solipsistic grounds.
~ Having 6 year shorter life spans. On average, American men die almost 5 years earlier than women do, and boys are significantly more likely to die before reaching their 18th birthday than girls are.
~ Being the majority of the homeless.
~ Being the majority of the unemployed.
~ Making up 93.2% of the total prison populace.
~ Making up a very large number of prison rape victims.
~ Making up almost 100% of war deaths. There's little concern over the Military Suicide rates; the society is busy attempting to elevate much lesser female sacrifice (or even their mundane tasks) to the same level as the male sacrifice and undermining the male sacrifice, while the army wives engage in Facebook wars among each other featuring vile taunts and threats of physical violence.
~ Making up 92% of work deaths - Basically, 30 men die for every 1 woman.
~ Leading in 6 out of 10 leading causes of death, and having an overall higher rate of death.
are supposed to be privileged. Such absurd policies and laws exist everywhere. (See also: 2+2=5, Apex Fallacy, Dear Colleague, Double Standards, Entitlement, Feminism, Feminization, Glass Ceiling, Hyperagency, Hypoagency, Male Disposability, Man Up, Matriarchy, MSM, Orwellian, Paycheck Fairness Act, Princess, Pussy Pass, Pussy Pedestalization, Reverse Discrimination, SCUM, Title IX, Victimhood, Wage Gap, Walk a Mile in Her Shoes, White Ribbon Campaign.)

Alimony: (Also known as "Spousal Support".) Family-court enforced allowance for support paid by a person (usually man) to the person's former spouse (usually woman) after separation or divorce. Even women fully capable of supporting themselves are awarded lifetime alimony. Owing to the unjust alimony laws, women usually devise ridiculously dishonest reasons or create situations to provoke the husband as to create a ground for the divorce. And the laws are extremely misandric, allowing a woman to threaten her husband of divorce and thereby shifting the power balance toward the woman. If you're a man and are having to pay, even the Marriage Contracts or Prenups (short for 'prenupital agreements') are not worth the paper they're printed on. Here are some examples of men getting the short end of the stick in the marriages:
~ The judges make extremely inhumane and sadistic alimony decisions against a man in the cases of divorce.
~ Property tycoon Scot Young, worth £400 million, jailed for six months after failing to provide financial details during bitter divorce with ex-wife Michelle Young. That is, despite men having health problems or other problems (including the illegal covert surveillance by the wives), the laws make men prove that they have a huge amount of money so as to transfer the correspondingly large part of it to the wives, even when the said wives are capable of working themselves and have no minor children to take care of.
~ Female judge overrides marriage contract to make the husband pay. (Proof that courts will always invalidate their own legal contracts on the pretext of avoiding hurting the women's feelings.)
~ Lee Kallett of St. Pete Beach, FL pays $4K in permanent alimony to Elvina Kallett who left the marriage because she chose to live a lesbian lifestyle. As a result, she is never able to marry legally in Florida and the only way for Lee's permanent alimony to end is his death. He is now unable to ever consider retirement. Slavery is the only word that can describe this.
~ In fact, now the husbands are expected to pay a monthly salary to the wives, even without any divorce, separation, or anything at all - merely for being a husband.
In the manosphere, this subset of the system of wealth transfer from men to women ("To rob Peter to pay Paula") in the form of various '-monies' (alimony, chalimony, palimony, etc) is also combiningly known by the term Vaginamony. This type of policies (any proposed reform to which is vetoed; actually even the reforms are proposed only after a mere 3% of the women have had to pay the alimony) eventually leads to breakdown of the family unit, discourages new bonds, and is the next step toward the completion of the Orwellian feminist utopia. Of late, the MRM has been making some progress in making the alimony laws fair to everyone; but the government always despises a cooperative complementary marriage/relationship that does not involve the state agents who control the involved partners and their children. (See also: Chalimony, Common-Law Marriage, Double Standards, Feminism, Gold Digger, His-Fault Divorce, Hyperagency, Hypoagency, Kangaroo Court, Manosphere, Marriage Strike, Matriarchy, Misandry, MRM, Objectification, Orwellian, Palimony, Wage Gap.)

Alpha: A man who is head of the group, or the leader among his peers or people in his circle, even if only because of being popular owing to personal characteristics. Alphas are assertive and have dominant personalities. An alpha can exist anywhere (in any kind of grouping of people); being an alpha is not necessarily about being in a powerful position. For example, the male student most popular in the class is an alpha (but has no special powers). A boss in an office is also an alpha (and has special powers). An alpha can be good or bad for the men's rights; there's nothing in being alpha specifically related to their behavior toward men. Celebrities are usually considered alphas.
Alphas give gina tingles to women, whereas the feminists consider it rape if a dominant man is having sexual relationship with a woman (according to the feminist norms, a sexual relationship between a man and a woman is not rape only if the man is a sex slave and the woman a mistress). So when someone points out that according to the feminist definition of rape, women preferring a dominant man is women wanting to be raped, the feminists use their quote mining skills to paint the statement as an endorsement of (real) rape. (See also: Apex Fallacy, Beta, Evo-Psych, Gina Tingles, Hypergamy, Mangina, Omega, Quote Mining, Shit Test, Social Proofing, White Knight, Zeta.)

Apex Fallacy: The general mentality of a woman to always look only at the men that are at a higher social level than herself (alphas), ignoring the men (and problems faced by them) who are at her level or below it (betas). So the women assume that the men always have some kind of male privilege that women lack, and never face any major hardships or difficulties like the women do. This is, of course, a fallacy. This partly explains why women in general are unable to see the problems and discrimination faced by the men; the men equivalent to or lower than them are invisible to them. Apex fallacy is observed quite frequently in daily life. For example, when it's reminded to a woman that the men are having difficulty in making it to the college owing to the misandric policies and rules, the woman might respond like thus: "True, but the problems faced by women are much greater and serious", etc. That's because the college men are invisible to her; she is only seeing men at the higher positions like CEO's, politicians, athletes, movie stars, etc. Another common statement showing apex fallacy in action is, "It's a man's world" or "Men run the world" (the speaker is only seeing the top male leaders while saying this, completely ignoring the common men and their problems, and dishonestly refusing to see the women on top, constatntly claiming that women on top will be better despite no evidence to support this). Feminists always show this behavior. (See also: 2+2=5, Affirmative Action, Alpha, Apex Fallacy, Beta, Briffault's Law, Cause and Effect, Cognitive Dissonance, Double Standards, DoubleThink, Evo-Psych, Feminism, Feminist Logic, Glass Ceiling, Gold Digger, Hamsterbatics, Herd Mentality, Hyperagency, Hypergamy, Hypoagency, Male Privilege, Matriarchy, Misandry, Patriarchy, Paycheck Fairness Act, Penis Envy, Projection, Rationalization Hamster, Reverse Discrimination, Solipsism, Title IX, Victimhood, Wage Gap, Walk a Mile in Her Shoes.)

Beta: A common man, not leading other people (but might be led by a leader or might be working under a boss). This defines the largest proportion of the men. Currently, a marriage strike is being observed among the beta men. In relationships, a beta is a man only moderately successful with women. (See also: Alpha, Mangina, Marriage Strike, Omega, White Knight, Zeta.)

Bigot: A bigot is an:
~ Arrogant.
~ Close-minded.
~ Hopelessly stubborn.
~ Intellectually dishonest (full of lies and misinformation).
~ Judgmental.
~ Mean.
~ Prejudicial.
~ Self-centered.
~ Self-promoting.
~ Self-righteous.
~ Stereotypical.
adherent and blind-follower of a certain faith, ideology, or religion, who automatically labels anything (or anyone) contrary to its sacred beliefs as hateful and wrong, instead of making some effort to look into its truth or even to contradict it logically (as opposed to using something like the feminist logic, hamsterbatics, and rationalization hamster). Bigots are indoctrinated, ideology-possessed, feeling-driven, emotional, supremacists for their ilk, who cling to their beliefs assuming that their brand of truth would reign supreme forever, and they refuse to accept or even see (and are afraid of) a new thought that challenges their status quo. They're narcist but consider and present themselves as altruist. They adhere to and are characterized by hatred, rampant selfishness, and a terrifying repudiation of reason.
They are adamant that anything (or anyone) that goes even slightly against their own held beliefs is false and unacceptable, and they try to make it non-PC. For example, if you see anyone discrediting/slandering someone (or something, like the MRM) simply for it being pro-male or anti-feminism, rather than for some actual logical reason, you're seeing a bigot. When someone points out the error in the bigots' ways, they deal with it not by facing up to their realities, but by shutting down the inconvenient argument altogether. To anyone questioning their beliefs, bigots provide no contrary evidence or arguments, but just hurl insults, blanket denials, and gratuitous abuse (like mansplaining, misogynist, "rape apologist", "typical man", "you're part of the problem" etc). Here's the additional shaming language used by the bigots (particularly typical of a bigot):
~ 'Anti-woman': Anything seeking the removal of laws or policies favorable to women and discriminatory toward men. This is a specific case of the more general bigotry tactic: Simply represent the opposition to any unconstitutional or discriminatory policy as "anti-[something]" or "hateful toward [something]" or "[something]-phobic", so that the blue pill people will see it as wrong and unjust, and the opposition would be shut (or shouted) down.
~ "It's not cool...": Most commonly used by a mangina or a white knight, who has been taught to use this 'argument' against anyone saying something logical and true that does not align with the feminist agenda. For example, if a woman physically assaults a man and the man procceds on to calling the police, the nearby bigot would say, "It's not cool to call the cops for such a small thing" or something like that. In other words, when the bigot lacks logic or reason to justify the feminist agenda, it will resort to use the 'not cool' tool.
~ "It's different" or "It's not the same": This statement highlights the double standards inherent to the feminists. Feminists (or women) say this when they laugh at (or do not take seriously) a female doing something wrong or bad (to a male or in general) and someone points out the hatred or hypocrisy in their views by giving them an example of an event where if a male did something similar (to a female or in general), they wouldn't find that funny (for example, by telling them to reverse the sexes/genders). This statement presents the bigotry of the feminists, who tend to view the female wrongdoings as perfectly acceptable or harmless, no matter how much damage it causes (especially to a man).
Here are some examples of bigots.
Feminism is a bigotry, since it's intolerant toward anything against its held beliefs, no matter how logical the said thing is. Therefore, all feminists are bigots. However, while being a feminist is a sufficient condition to be a bigot, it's not a necessary one; not all bigots are feminists. (See also: 2+2=5, Apex Fallacy, Blue Pill, Cause and Effect, Cognitive Dissonance, Double Standards, DoubleThink, DV, Fembot, Feminism, Feminist Logic, FTSU, Glass Ceiling, Hamsterbatics, Herd Mentality, Herstory, Kangaroo Court, Male Privilege, Mangina, Matriarchy, MRM, NAWALT, Nordic Model, Patriarchy, PC, Projection, Pussy Pedestalization, Quote Mining, Rape Culture, Rationalization Hamster, Reverse Discrimination, Schrodinger's Rapist, Scum, Shaming Language, The Plan, Title IX, VAWA, Victimhood, Wage Gap, War on Women, White Knight, Witch Hunt, Womyn.)

Blue Pill: (This term is influenced from the movie "The Matrix".) A person who cannot see the reality or refuses to accept it even after being presented with adequate evidence is said to have taken the blue pill (or a blue pilled person, or a blue-piller). Owing to the feminist indoctrination so prevalent in the academia, politics, and the mainstream media (which freely distribute blue pills in terms of doublespeaks), most people are by default blue pill people; they see the word through a feminist viewpoint (men as bad, oppressors; women as good, victims). Blue pill people can be anything from bad to harmful, even if sometimes unintentionally, just because of their stereotypical mindset. (See also: 2+2=5, Bigot, Feminism, Glass Ceiling, Orwellian, Red Pill, Reverse Discrimination, Solipsism, Wage Gap.)

Briffault's Law: The female, not the male, determines all the conditions (of relationships) of the animal family. Where the female can derive no benefit from association with the male, no such association takes place. There are corollaries to this law:
~ 1. Past benefit provided by the male does not provide for continued or future association. (That is, as a male, do good and forget it.)
~ 2. Any agreement where the male provides a current benefit in return for a promise of future association is null and void as soon as the male has provided the benefit (see corollary 1). (That is, as a male, don't expect any ROI once your utility for the female is gone.)
~ 3. A promise of future benefit has limited influence on current/future association, with the influence inversely proportionate to the length of time until the benefit will be given and directly proportionate to the degree to which the female trusts the male (which is not bloody likely). (Well, duh.)
A similar term is Deti's Laws:
~ Deti's First Law: There is no difference in attraction triggers between Christian women and their secular sisters. Christian women want confident, dominant men with status just like their secular sisters do. The reason is that the laws of attraction don't change simply because of the spiritual beliefs of the people living them out.
~ Deti's Second Law: Wherever two persons have a relationship with each other, one partner is dominant and the other is submissive within the relationship. This law applies to all relationships between any two people, regardless of the nature of the relationship. There's a corollary to this law: In any marriage described as "egalitarian", the wife is the dominant partner in the marriage.
The laws largely hold true for most relationships, some exceptions (like those of zeta people) also exist. (See also: Cock Carousel, Common-Law Marriage, Evo-Psych, Feminist Logic, Game, Gold Digger, Hamsterbatics, Hypergamy, Male Disposability, NAWALT, Objectification, Paternity Fraud, PUA, Zeta.)

Cause and Effect: Cause is the reason of something happening, effect is the consequence of that happening. The cause gives rise to (results in) the effect. So if there's a cause, the effect is expected. However, if there's only effect, a specified cause may not always be correct or the only one ("Correlation does not imply causation"). The phrase 'cause and effect', when used like this: "confusing cause and effect" or "reversing cause and effect" or "not understanding cause and effect well", means that someone (wrongly or falsely) believes that the effect is implying the cause ("Correlation proves causation"), which is a fallacy. Here are some examples of feminists getting the cause and effect wrong:
~ The cause of the marriage strike is the unjust laws, the effect is men getting uninterested in marriage; but the PC machinery spreads the message that men are uninterested in (or incapable of supporting) marriage and that is the cause of the women's unhappiness after marriage and therefore more of women-centric laws are needed.
~ It is claimed, mostly to combat the problem of marriage strike, that people who get married report being happier, being healthier, living longer, and generating almost twice as much wealth as those who never marry. That is, marriage is being touted as the 'cause' of happiness. Fact is, marriage is the 'effect' of that kind of happiness - men with better health and wealth are more likely to get married owing to the hypergamous tendencies of the women, who divorce as soon as the previously higher-earning husband's income declines.
~ Feminism claims that the difference in the male and female behavior is not biological or due to evolution, but is defined solely by societal conditioning. However, since society is a reflection of our behavior, actually the societal conditioning has been caused by the difference in the behavior, not the other way round.
~ A 'scientific' study claims that the cause of menopause in the older women is that men prefer younger women as their mates, thereby ending the need of fertility in the older women. In fact, the reason the men prefer younger women is that the younger women are more fertile.
Solutions based on the approach arrived at by getting the cause and effect wrong are always ineffective and often with devastating results. (See also: 2+2=5, Apex Fallacy, Bigot, Cognitive Dissonance, Double Standards, DoubleThink, Evo-Psych, Feminism, Feminist Logic, Glass Ceiling, Hamsterbatics, Herd Mentality, Hypergamy, Marriage Strike, Nordic Model, Orwellian, PC, Patriarchy, Projection, Paycheck Fairness Act, Rationalization Hamster, Reverse Discrimination, Wage Gap, Witch Hunt.)

Chalimony: Court enforced allowance for CS (Child Support, which in reality is Mommy Support - in high profile cases, the child never sees one-tenth of the money, if that) paid by a person (usually father) to the person's former partner (usually mother) after separation or divorce, when the child custody is not directly awarded to the person. Here are some related terms:
~ Bradley Amendment: This is a series of laws designed to prohibit non-custodial parents (read fathers) from having their child support arrears reduced/eliminated regardless of the circumstances (and regardless of even if the mother committed paternity fraud). The amendment allows disregard of changes in a non-custodial parent's circumstances like job loss, incarceration, military service, or physical disability. (Routinely, there are cases where courts order fathers to pay chalimony dues to the mother instead of paying the hospital fee when the father is under severe medical condition or operation, no matter if he dies.) It also enables pursuing legal remedies (including asset seizure, un-expiring property liens, driver's license suspension, professional license suspension, suspension of voting privileges and incarceration) against the non-custodial parent the moment a payment was missed, without having to first go through a quasi-judicial or judicial proceeding. In short, a non-custodial father is a legal slave to the woman who now owns his child too.
~ Pay Per View: The father has to pay chalimony in order to get limited visitation rights to his child, which makes chalimony like a payment as per the pay-per-view plan for the father. (More commonly, outside the manosphere, pay-per-view refers to the money an advertiser pays to a website for a certain number of ad-impressions viewed by the visitors of that website.)
~ Tender Years Doctrine: A legal principle in family law, a common law doctrine that presumes that during a child's tender years (age 13 and under), the mother should have custody of the child in the cases of divorce. This is based on the biased view that mothers are always the best parent for the children, no matter the actual conditions of a particular case. Many children have lost their lives due to this mistakenly held view. Despite the "maternal preference" of the Family Law Court in custody battles, statistics show that children are more likely to be abused, or even killed, when in the custody of their mothers. Research shows children are safer with their biological fathers. An Australian Institute of Health and Welfare report has found 42% of substantiated abuse - including physical, emotional, and sexual abuse - happened in single-female-parent families, while only 4% of abuse occurred in single-male-parent families.
The chalimony rules are so one-sided (female-favoring) that women are incentivized to regularly make any ridiculous false allegations whatsoever, to reap benefits from the unjust and broken legal system. Whereas the women get free pass for being the majority of defaulters in paying chalimony, there are numerous ways in which male slavery is legally enforced through chalimony:
~ Warrant issued for arrest, which may be criminal or civil.
~ Finding of contempt of court.
~ Fines, jail, or both.
~ Revocation of passport.
~ Suspension, revocation, or denial of various licenses - professional, driver's, hunting/fishing/boating.
~ Denial of tax refunds.
~ Exclusion from receipt of certain government benefits.
~ Garnishment of wages, including unemployment and worker's compensation.
~ Having a lien placed on property to cover payment.
In addition, the government can peer into noncustodial fathers' bank accounts without their permission and seize the funds whenever it wants to, without the need for any due process at all. Too often judges order a man to pay more than he makes in chalimony, and throw him into jail for being unable to pay. No wonder the CSA's (Child Support Agencies) have harassed many fathers to the point that they committed suicide. Even the men who donate sperm to lesbian couples are forced to pay child support, even when they had had the agreement with the mothers at the time of donation about not paying any child support. Same with the fathers hiring surrogate mothers. In fact, the courts go out of their way to send even the abused and frightened children to the mother despite even the child welfare agencies' recommendations to the contrary, and bend the laws to take any decision that harms the father and benefits the mother (that is, extracts chalimony from him, or adheres to the feminist training of the judges); for example, in one case, the biological father's paternity claim on his child is being challenged, and in another case, a non-biological father has been barred from rejecting paternity claim on a child that is not his! In fact, there are cases where, for example, a man is paying child support for a child that died years ago, showing that child support actually has nothing whatsoever to do with supporting the child; it's all about bloating the feminist pork. (See also: Alimony, Double Standards, Feminism, FRA, Gold Digger, His-Fault Divorce, Hyperagency, Hypoagency, Kangaroo Court, Manosphere, Matriarchy, Misandry, Objectification, Palimony, Parental Alienation, Paternity Fraud, Pork, Single Parents, Wage Gap.)

Cock Carousel: A girl's or woman's chosen promiscuous lifestyle of freely having sex with multiple male partners. The feminist government policies encourage this kind of lifestyle for girls and women, promoting it as the "liberty" for them. (See also: Briffault's Law, Evo-Psych, Gina Tingles, Gold Digger, Hypergamy, Marriage Strike, Nordic Model, Objectification, SMV, Social Proofing, The Wall.)

Cognitive Dissonance: Feeling of anxiety owing to simultaneously holding two or more conflicting beliefs, attitudes, or ideologies together in mind. The feminists seek to normalize the cognitive dissonance (remove the feeling of anxiety and doubt for holding conflicting views), turning it into the doublethink. (See also: Affirmative Action, Apex Fallacy, Bigot, Cause and Effect, Double Standards, Doublethink, Evo-Psych, Fembot, Feminism, Feminist Logic, Feminization, Glass Ceiling, Hamsterbatics, Herd Mentality, Hyperagency, Hypoagency, Orwellian, Patriarchy, Penis Envy, Projection, Pussy Pass, Rationalization Hamster, Reverse Discrimination, Shaming Language, Social Proofing, Solipsism, Vagina Syndrome, Victimhood, Wage Gap.)

Common-Law Marriage: (Also known as "De-Facto Marriage".) The Common-Law Relationship or Marriage is a legal enforcement that treats an unmarried couple living together for a certain period of time (from a few months to 2 years or so) as a married couple. In Kenya, for example, men are liable for alimony after a 7 months relationship with no marriage or kids involved. Here are some related terms:
~ LTR: Acronym for "Long-Term Relationship" (often sexual). STR is "Short-Term Relationship". These are alternatives to, or sometimes warm-ups before, a marriage.
~ Live-In Relationship: This is a long-term relationship where the unmarried couple lives together (cohabits).
~ SO: (Another form: "Sig-O" or "Sigo".) Acronym for "Significant Other". One's LTR or live-in relationship partner. Also used for a spouse but less commonly.
Marriage is too legally risky for men and so they started to opt for unmarried relationships. Common-Law makes sure that these men cannot escape from the legal slavery (palimony and property/assets splitting; chalimony is always enforced regardless of the Common-Law Marriage) even if they don't go the way of marriage. (See also: Alimony, Briffault's Law, Chalimony, Game, Kangaroo Court, Marriage Strike, Matriarchy, No-Fault Divorce, Palimony, PUA, Shit Test.)

Date Rape: Sexual intercourse between a man and a woman (who are not strangers to each other, and are usually either on a date or see each other in a pub/club/party) happening with mutual consent, and which turns into a rape if the woman is drunk (doesn't matter if the man was also drunk), or if she later regrets having sex because:
~ She doesn't want to be scolded for returning home late or for getting love-bite marks.
~ She becomes pregnant but doesn't want to name the actual lover or rapist.
~ She just wants to avoid being labeled a slut or a drug addict.
~ She was caught watching porn by her family.
~ She wants to hide her infidelity and one-night-stands from her husband or her fiance.
~ She wants to avoid telling her family about her pregnancy.
~ She wants to get famous.
~ She wants some attention.
~ She wants to gain sympathy from her friends.
~ She wants to win back her lesbian or straight lover.
~ She wants to make her partner guilty for leaving her alone somewhere.
~ Her sexual advances were rejected.
~ She is drunk (even if women prefer to have sex while drinking alcohol).
~ She is angry at the man.
~ She feels that she didn't like it, regretted it, or felt guilty/embarrassed by it.
~ She seeks vengeance against her lover for disagreeing with her.
~ Her ex was beaten up by her current lover (or a man was harassing her boyfriend) and she found it a good chance to take a revenge.
~ She wanted to meet her lover and he didn't show up.
~ She wants to move to a new neighborhood.
~ She wants to win $10000.
~ She wants to avoid paying the cab fare of $3, £6, or so. These incidents are so common that the taxi companies are leery of young women.
etc. In other words, when the only tool you have is a vagina, every problem looks like a rape. Any trivial reason is sufficient for a woman to destroy a man's life (it's like a 'Game of Rapo' to her), and the police and the law help her in her mission. It's not about whether she was actually raped, it's about the legal power and control (sometimes financial, political, and social favors too) that these accusations give to the women over men. For any rape allegation that has been proved false, an unknown number of false allegations exist that have never been proved and the accused men are in jail for a crime they never committed. Date rape is yet another extension of the definition of the word rape, just like:
~ Birth rape: Acts of doctors/nurses of inserting fingers, biceps, etc into a woman's reproductive organs when she's giving birth to a child.
~ Brazilian Bikini Wax Rape: The procedure of the Brazilian Bikini wax involves the removal of almost all hair from the pubic region. The technician, wearing gloves, applies wax to the area surrounding the genitals; pressure is applied to the area being treated (to reduce the amount of pain associated with the removal of the wax), and the wax is removed. According to the Human Rights Watch (HRW), this turns into rape if a woman undergoing the wax "feels" (no evidence needed, just her feelings) that the technician touched her inappropriately.
~ Chant Rape: Anyone (who is not a feminist) using the words typically related to rape, e.g., "consent", "under-age", etc in a chant/song/poem/etc. Rape is a topic that nobody is allowed to say anything or joke about because the feminists consider it their sole right to use it in accordance with their ideology.
~ Drunken Hook-Up Rape: Any hook-up where the woman is drunk. It doesn't matter if the man is also drunk or it's the woman who initiated it; only the woman is considered innocent. When both are drunk, it changes into Accidental Rape (of course, a male-on-female one, on the assumption that the man might have accidentally raped the woman, and never the other way round), but rape it still is. In short, do anything, say anything, claim anything, and somehow just blame and punish the man, period.
~ Gaze Rape: A man staring at a woman for more than a few seconds, usually 3 to 30. This actually is a legally punishable offense in some places - In France, Italy, and Spain, man can go to jail if he looks at a woman (or if the woman just says he looked at her).
~ Gray Rape: This is yet another kind of date rape led by the "hookup culture", wherein both parties are unsure of whether they wanted to have sex or not. (Nevertheless, as you may have predicted by now, the rapist is always the male, and the victim the female.)
~ Kiss Rape: Forced insertion of man's tongue in woman's mouth.
~ Mini Rape: When a man compliments a woman.
~ Sexual Regret Rape: The full extension and generalization of date rape where the woman regrets any (yes, any) instance of having consensual sex with a man (not necessarily a stranger, just any man, including a boyfriend or husband etc).
~ Thought Rape: Man thinking of having sex with woman.
~ Verbal Rape: A man verbally assaulting a woman (even if she is also verbally assaulting him or she is the one who started it all).
etc. While these ideas are stupid, the sad thing is, they're being believed; and many have been (and many others are being) adopted by the legal system. The policies and recommendations like 'Dear Colleague' are a result of this type of extensions. Here are some related terms:
~ Date Rape Drug: A myth propagated by the feminists and believed by the female college students, according to which, most of the date rapes happen to those women because their male partners spike their drinks with drugs. The truth is, as revealed by research, the police have found no evidence that rape victims are commonly drugged with such substances. The female students are in "active denial" that drinking large amounts of alcohol can leave them "incoherent and incapacitated". (On a side note, women do use drugs on their lured male victims for stealing their valuables. And also for raping them. DrinkSavvy founder Mike Abramson himself - along with 3 of his close friends - became unwitting victim of being drugged in past 3 years; so his company will now ship plastic cups and straws that change color if a drink contains common date rape drugs, viz, GHB, ketamine, and rohypnol.)
~ "Men can stop rape": This is the kind of slogans used in the events and rallies organized by the feminists to "teach men not to rape"; the implication being that without specific instructions like these, the male half of the human race by default has a complete desire toward committing the violent crime of rape. Here are some other examples of such slogans: "Instead of teaching your daughters to be careful, teach your sons not to rape", "Don't be that guy", etc. These campaigns are even supported and encouraged by the police. (The equivalent "Don't be that girl" campaign, organized to point out the feminist manipulation, is not tolerated, thereby showing the feminist hypocrisy and double standards.) This is nothing but a collective shaming of a whole group of people (all men) on the basis of the actions of an extremely small minority. Evidently, it's only against the men that this kind of Collective Guilt tactic can possibly be tolerated. Plus it excludes the female rapists. Studies have revealed that young girls have become socially assertive in calling young boys on telephone and even asking for dates at a very early age. Also, women are expressing themselves in aggressive sexual behavior patterns; as many as 7% of women self-report the use of physical force to obtain sex, 40% self-report sexual coercion, and over 50% self-report initiating sexual contact with a man while his judgment was impaired by drugs or alcohol. But feminists support and encourage the female-on-male rape.
~ "Rape is about power/control/domination, not sex": Yet another feminist meme to somehow introduce patriarchy into the equation, by any amount of twisting of logic. Feminists make people believe that a rapist does not want to have sex with the victim, but he (a rapist is always male and victim always female, as per feminism's theory of patriarchy) commits rape because this is the way (all) men want to keep exerting their power, control, and domination over (all) women. This 'theory' fails to explain why men sometimes rape children or other men (or animals); or why women rape children, men, or other women (or animals). Similarly, it fails to explain why rape is considered a crime and the rapist is punished. But since when have factual objections meant something to feminism? So it dismisses them and continues to push the 'theory' forcibly down the blue pilled people's throats (or, if you prefer, feminism continues to metaphorically rape its believers' intellect).
~ "SlutWalk": Name for the rallies in which half-naked women wearing slutty dresses encourage all women to act like sluts and freely show off their 'womanhood' or 'feminity' (sluttiness), and spread propaganda using false stats; for example, the outright lies like "97% of rapists will not spend a day in jail". In fact, by going naked, they're actually unknowingly showing off more of the male protection guarding them than the male attack on them. The walks also ignore the fact that Slut Shaming is mostly used by the females themselves against each other, rather than by the males against females.
~ "Take Back the Night": This is the slogan for rallies that encourage those (mostly college-)women who regret after having sex with their boyfriends to report their boyfriends to police as (mostly date-)rapists.
At the same time, the real and serious issues like Prison Rape (a prisoner - almost always male - being raped by either another prisoner or by the male or female guard), apathy toward the male victims of War Rape, etc are ignored (worse, in favor of women's casual problems in prison), made fun of, made jokes about, are either not addressed or mentioned in gender-neutral language (as if mentioning the words 'men', 'boys', or 'male' in the context of their being victims is something dirty or wrong, and must be avoided at all costs). It's a common misconception that the perpetrators of the prison rape are almost exclusively the other males. This is not true at all. The vast majority of prison guards who have sex with inmates are female. "Among the 39121 male prison inmates who had been victims of staff sexual misconduct, 69% reported sexual activity with female staff", study has found.
In juvenile facilities, 90% of boys who complained of sexual harassment by prison officials said they were solicited, and often raped, by women. However, no action is taken against the female guards, even when the proof is as clear as the guards getting pregnant from having sex with the inmates. (See also: 2+2=5, Blue Pill, Cock Carousel, Dear Colleague, Double Standards, Feminazi, Feminism, Feminization, Hamsterbatics, Hypoagency, Infantilization, Kangaroo Court, Orwellian, Patriarchy, Pussy Pedestalization, Rape Culture, Schrodinger's Rapist, Shaming Language, Vagina Syndrome, Victimhood, Walk a Mile in Her Shoes, War on Women, Witch Hunt.)

Dear Colleague: (Also known as the "April 4 Directive".) This is a US government directive/guidance letter under Title IX according to which, in the educational institutions like colleges, if a female student accuses a male student of any sort of sexual misconduct (even falsely, and even when she has been proved to be lying and the male student has been proved to be innocent), the male student will have no right to the due process (or to even confront his accuser or the witnesses - carefully constructed written statements are all that is required from them). An even more shocking extension is the DOJ and OCR's joint letter decalring that any conduct may constitute sexual harassment even if it is not "objectively offensive"! So, sexual harassment is now defined on the basis of another student's "subjective" feelings - as attorney Wendy Kaminer explains: "If a student feels harassed, she may be harassed, regardless of the reasonableness of her feelings, and school administrators may be legally required to discipline her 'harasser'". The letter also makes it mandatory that "a university must take immediate steps to protect the complainant from further harassment prior to the completion of the... investigation/resolution". These steps include "disciplinary action against the harasser". "These steps should minimize the burden on the complainant." The feminist extremists, having tasted the blood following the April 2011 Dear Colleague letter, are now going for the kill - Let the witch hunt of innocent men begin.
These policies are based on the big feminist lie that women never lie (or at least about sexual misconduct by men), and that there are no false accusations. Obviously there have been, and are being, cases of false accusations resulting in destruction of the future prospects of male students (and other men, including cops); but this is acceptable to the government on the grounds that such cases are an inevitable result of the letter and should be ignored so that more victims get encouraged to report the crimes, as they always are whenever innocent men are discriminated against. Funny that except where the women's lies are destroying a man's life, the other kind of lies told by the women are illegal. Goes to show that it's only against men that sexism and such blatant violation of constitution can possibly be tolerated and made normalized - Women get more severe sentences for killing a pig than for killing a man.
The height of feminists' hypocrisy is that whereas they're so worried about the sexual misconduct (or Campus Rape) that, according to them, is so rampant in the educational institutions, they oppose the sigle-sex education system, despite numerous studies proving that it's better for all the students. The fact that the boys benefit from an all-male class more than the girls benefit from an all-female class might be the reason the feminists are opposed to the idea of single-sex education system. So they force boys to be with the girls, then setup and enable the system to punish them on getting falsely accused by the girls.
The feminist stance of the government can also be checked by the fact that there's only a "Register Him" program from the government for registering the male sex offenders and making their identities public for life; there's no equivalent "Register Her" program from the government - women are exempted from being rapists or the performer of violence, etc. (See also: 2+2=5, Affirmative Action, Date Rape, Double Standards, Entitlement, Feminism, Feminization, Kangaroo Court, Male Disposability, Man Up, Matriarchy, Orwellian, Princess, Pussy Pass, Pussy Pedestalization, Rape Culture, Reverse Discrimination, Schrodinger's Rapist, SCUM, Title IX, Welfare, White Ribbon Campaign, Witch Hunt.)

Double Standards: Refers to the two (different) sets of standards (usually contrary to each other - one good, one bad) for judging two groups of people based solely upon their natural identity (for example, females and males). Feminism is full of double standards. When a bad thing is done by a person, the feminists would call for blood if the person is male, but give excuses and justify the wrongdoing if the person is female.
A related phrase used to demonstrate the double standards at play with a thought visual of the situation at hand is "Reverse the genders" or "Reverse the sexes" (or "Role Reversal"), which means, imagine if there were a male in place of the female and vice versa in the actual situation. The imagination usually looks absurd, uncommon, and not quite right. This demonstrates how much inequality and feminist hypocrisy is at play where the double standards have been normalized.
Here are some examples of the double standards shown by the feminists, the mainstream media, and the society.
The double standards are the norm in, and reveal the hypocrisy and one-sidedness inherent to, the ideology of feminism. The whole feminist logic is based on hamsterbatics and double standards. (See also: 2+2=5, Affirmative Action, Apex Fallacy, Bigot, Cause and Effect, Cognitive Dissonance, DoubleThink, Dowry Law, DV, DVPO, Femicide Law, Feminism, Feminist Logic, Feminization, Hamsterbatics, Infantilization, Kangaroo Court, Male Disposability, Male Privilege, Misandry, MSM, No-Fault Divorce, Objectification, PC, Pussy Pass, Reverse Discrimination, Shaming Language, The Plan, Title IX, Vagina Syndrome, VAWA, Victimhood, Wage Gap, White Feather.)

DoubleThink: (This is part of the Orwellian newspeak.) Simultaneous acceptance of two mutually conflicting beliefs or attitudes as correct, depending upon which one is beneficial in a given situation. In other words, making the cognitive dissonance the norm. For example, under feminism, women are empowered when it comes to demanding rights, and still victims when it comes to accept the corresponding responsibilities; and nobody seems to notice or question the contradiction. In an effort to always paint men as bad/violent/oppressors, and women as good/compassionate/victims (i.e., eating their cake and still keeping it whole), feminism has become full of self-contradictory illogical theories. This usually shows up in the comments of a dishonest poster (like a fembot).
Here are some examples of the doublethink shown by the feminists.
This behavior is so common (and has been so much normalized) among the feminists that they can make statements like "The female murderer of an innocent man is a victim" and "Although men are clearly not oppressed in any way, there are ways in which men are discriminated against" with a straight face. (See also: Affirmative Action, Apex Fallacy, Bigot, Cause and Effect, Cognitive Dissonance, Double Standards, Evo-Psych, Fembot, Feminism, Feminist Logic, Feminization, Glass Ceiling, Hamsterbatics, Herd Mentality, Hyperagency, Hypoagency, Orwellian, Patriarchy, Penis Envy, Projection, Pussy Pass, Rationalization Hamster, Reverse Discrimination, Shaming Language, Social Proofing, Solipsism, Vagina Syndrome, Victimhood, Wage Gap.)

Dowry Law: (Also known as "Anti-Dowry Law", or Section 498A of IPC - Indian Penal Code.) This is a legal tool for a wife to get (or to blackmail her in-laws by threatening to get) her husband and his family members (including children) arrested and put in jail at any time, without any research or inquiry on her complaint. Dowry is the gift money or goods that a bride's family offers to her (and hence to her husband-to-be's family) on marriage; the Dowry Law makes dowry illegal, and a wife can accuse her husband and/or in-laws of harrassing her for dowry to get them arrested, no matter whether the complaint is true or not. It's like, shoot first ask later, or witch-hunting. About one-third of complaints received from women in Madurai accusing men of dowry harassment, DV, and other such malice are found to be false, and even petty quarrels lead to registration of criminal cases.
There are more than 40 men's rights NGO's (Non-Government Organizations) in India (equivalent to US non-profit 501 organizations). SIFF (Save Indian Family Foundation) is one such organization dealing with the cases of false DV/dowry allegations, divorce, child custody, and related matters. SIFF recently opened its Jammu chapter. Maanav Mishra, whose wife and her family had falsely accused him of torturing them for dowry, after recently winning his case, volunteered to head the organization in Jammu. Bakshinagar's small time magazine business owner Rajinder Kumar's wife left him for her parental home along with their 2 little children, and threatened to launch a police and court offensive if he failed to provide her an astronomical amount every month, which is beyond his means given his petty earnings. He says, "It is only the initiative taken by SIFF and Maanav that I am feeling little secure..." (secure from the government and the judicial system that is, which are eager to imprison and rob him; this is shameful). One Mr Gupta (first name hidden to conceal identity), who is a lawyer himself, is another aggrieved husband whose wife falsely accused him of demanding dowry. The case was settled out of court as Gupta succumbed to her demands to save his reputation (reputation of an individual means a lot in the Indian social settings). Less the retained reputation, the case is otherwise the same: He is parting with a substantial amount from his earnings to give to his wife. This clearly shows how biased the dowry law in India is - Even a lawyer knows that it's next to impossible to win a dowry case against a man, otherwise he could have easily challenged the case (given that he is anyway having to pay the money to his wife). Gupta is now also a formal member of SIFF.
India has over 48 laws (and many more coming up) that are explicitly anti-male. (Combine that with the fact that 36% of India's judiciary is corrupt, and you have a feminist disaster for the men.) There exist a number of misandric and gender-biased tools (err... laws) like the dowry law for the women (or corrupt courts) to exploit them for harassing the men (or getting bribe money from them). For example:
~ Dowry Death Law (Section 304B of IPC): This law assumes that for any unnatural death of a woman within 7 years of marriage, the husband and his family are guilty for her death. They are then put behind bars immediately. In other words, if you're a man in India, your wife must not die within 7 years of marriage except naturally (no matter where she goes, what she does - she won't be responsible for her actions); otherwise you (and your family) are the culprit and would immediately go to jail. In fact, now if a couple is in love (not marriage), and for any reason the man leaves the relationship, and the woman commits suicide as a result, the man is arrested!
~ Proposed changes to the divorce laws will make them even more misandric than they already are in terms of wealth and property distribution. The proposed changes are based on the assumption that the woman should retain the same standard of living after the separation (no word about the effect on the man's living standards), no matter how little she has contributed toward the wealth/property while married. During divorce, the woman is entitled to even the inherited property of the man!
~ IrBM (Irretrievable Breakdown of Marriage) Act: This act makes the well-known money-sucking tool of the no-fault divorce available to the women of India (and here it's exclusively for the women only). It is speedier (that is, all the decisions are already there, a divorce filing is all it takes to start the cheques coming) and much easier (the wife can file for the divorce the very next day after the marriage, no need to bear the husband-burden for too long when it's only his money you yearned for). The financial slave (also called the husband) can not object to a wife pushing for divorce, while the wife can object to the husband filing for the same (in other words, divorce is totally in the hands of the wife). A minimum 50% of the assets of the husband is mandatorily given to the wife by law (and the judge can decide to give her more than that, but not less). Only the husband's assets are taken into consideration - inherited and non-inherited, movable and immovable, pre-marriage and post-marriage - all of them. The wife's assets, on the other hand, are considered "Stridhan" (i.e., a woman's own property, rather than shared with the family), and are not subject to division during divorce. It gets better: If the couple has n children, the husband gets to keep only (100/(n+2))% of his property, and is forced to 'give away' the rest to the wife. (Illustration: For 1 child, the husband keeps 33%; for 2 children, the husband keeps 25%; and so on). Fast indeed. The MRA's protesting against such atrocities are arrested.
~ The husbands are expected to pay a monthly salary to the wives, even without any divorce, separation, or anything at all, merely for being a husband.
~ Indian minister awards women money for slapping and beating their drunk husbands in public, the more severe the beating, the more prize money. Nice first-person shooter game, eh? By the way, since there's no support for the male victims of DV, even without any official award from the government, husband-beating is quite common in the South India. That is not to say that the North India is completely free from it - wives do beat husbands in North India too.
~ Rape has been defined to be exclusively a male-on-female act, that is, the females are exempt from being rapists (and the males from being rape victims). At the same time, the government is also expected to propose enhanced jail terms for those found guilty of outraging the "modesty of women" (a women-only entitlement) and using obscene gestures or words against them. In other words, whereas a woman can get away with raping a man, a man would be imprisoned for merely saying something that makes a woman feel bad. The reason provided for this is the usual "bowing to pressure from the women's groups (feminists)". The Indian government regularly provides this reason for passing the misandric laws, as if it's a perfectly valid and acceptable reason for passing laws.
~ An atrocious bill passed in the parliament has given the police the power and rights to arrest any man based on the complaint (no proof required) given by a woman. If the woman "thinks" that a man is staring at her or showing some kind of gesture that makes her feel uncomfortable, the man will be arrested for that immediately without any warning. The bill included a large number of different things that could get a man arrested even without him expressing any verbal or physical expression toward a woman. In short, whether a man remains free or goes to jail is now totally at the wish of any random woman. This seems ridiculous and unbelievable but is absolutely true. And the feminists are proposing even more misandrous rape laws.
~ Once a man and a woman agree to marry, have consensual sex, and then for any reason the man refuses to marry, the consensual sex turns into rape. If the woman refuses to marry, however, and the man complains, that is not given any hearing at all, not even a case is registered.
~ Okay, let's simplify and speed up this whole 'sex' thingie: Having casual sex (even a one-night-stand) means you're legally married, period. So you're required to pay the alimony and chalimony as you would during a divorce.
The new workplace sexual harassment law is feminist (male victims do not exist according to it), provides great financial incentives to the women for making false complaints against men, and is kind of like alimony without the hassles of showing fake love, marriage, and then divorce. It's also been made mandatory that it would be feminists who would make any decision in case of a complaint, and that their group will have the same power as a court (thereby making a law degree obsolete - If one is a female feminist, she is automatically, and quite literally, equivalent to a judge).
~ For the third time in less than a week, the Delhi High Court has decried that rape laws are often misused by women as "a weapon for vengeance and vendetta" to harass and even force a man to marry. The courts themselves have shown concerns over increasing false rape accusations, and the High Court has suggested the trial judges to be vigilant against the false rape cases. However, even so, no changes in the misandric laws are expected because the feminists have a stronghold on the Indian judicial system, and any remaining honest law-makers are powerless before them. A 5-year study shows that 18.3% cases of rape are false, where rape has been used as a weapon to malign and attempt revenge. (And that too is based upon only the FIR - First-Information-Report - filed with the police, and excludes thousands of cases where the accusations come out to be false in investigations after the accused has been jailed.) Anger towards the accused (lynch mob mentality) prompted allegations of rape in 25% of the false charges. An equal number of such cases were filed at the behest of family members. Every 5th false allegation was made by a minor "coached" to cry "rape" as an attempt to settle family scores. About 15% were situations of panic after clear consent, while the remaining 15% defied categorisation.
~ India has had the 'honor' of enacting forced sterilization (vasectomies) of men (but not of women) for things like parking tickets, in order to reduce population. This is the realization of part of Theodore Kaufman's book "Germany Must Die", which advocates forced sterilization of the whole male German population. By the way, UK is not far behind in terms of forced sterilization of men, either. (Of course, no forced strelization, or anything else, is ever considered if it's a woman.)
~ India is known for enacting ridiculous reservation policies for the women in the education, farming, parliament, workforce, and other areas. The intellectual dishonesty of the feminists showed up during a discussion of the Women's Reservation Bill committee. A proposal was announced to extend the bill to have 50% reservation for women in the Armed Forces as well. However, since the forces require one to put oneself in the risk of life and limb, Anjana Tumhaari, who led the women's lobby for the discussion, quickly said, "How can one even think of women taking so many risks? And if women start taking risks, what will the men do? Won't they become redundant? Please understand we are not against men, we are fighting for their rights as well. This is so ridiculously anti-woman an amendment. I don't know when will this society learn to respect women? We never wanted these kind of laws to be made. We want true gender equality. Is it so difficult to give women their due rights in a male dominated world? We will protest against this amendment." So the feminists are fighting for men's rights only when those rights ensure male disposability, but cannot care less about the men becoming "redundant" in the other areas. With friends like these, who needs enemies?
~ Food Security Bill: This is similar to the food stamp program under the US Welfare programs. The Indian government will provide free or subsidized food to the eldest woman in the household as the only official recipient. She is free to decide how the food is shared in the family, with no means put in place to ensure that she is distributing the food appropriately to every member of the family without discrimination or blackmailing (in fact, she is free to sell the received food, and no man in her family has the right to question her). Effectively, this makes the men totally dependent on the goodwill of the women, establishing matriarchy.
~ The income slab below which the tax rate is nill is lower for the men than for the women.
~ Low-cost airline GoAir to only hire female flight attendants. The reason was given to be fuel saving, because the airline plans to hire thin women (with lower weights) only. However, it fails to say why the males with the same or lower weight cannot be hired. Obviously, had the discrimination been against hiring women, there would be uproar and the airline would be 'corrected' by the government pretty fast.
Even Women's Rights activist Madhu Kishwar (an ex-feminist from the 70's) has this to say, feminism in India has no integrity; you can't trust it; which is actually true of feminism everywhere, not just India. However, the Indian feminists are known for making contradictory statements without being too subtle or careful about it, because they don't have to - They know they'll be excused for anything and everything they say. There are so many extremely severe problems men face in the same country; for example,
~ More than 70% of male suicides are committed by married men. According to the National Crime Records Bureau - Ministry of Home Affairs, in 2011, out of a total of 87839 men that committed suicide, 62433 were married men. This figure is increasing every year. Married men commit suicide at a rate much higher than women around the globe.
~ Average life expectancy of women (65 years) is higher than males (62 years), which implies that women live longer and healthier, and hence have lower malnutrition. This is further supported by the better health care facilities for women in India. WHO data shows that deaths due to diseases and injuries for males is 883.2 per 100000 as compared to women as 788.7 per 100000.
~ Men are the majority victims of crimes; 92% of all crimes happen against men.
~ Groom Kidnapping (also known as "Pakaruah Shaadi" and "Jabaria Shaadi") is common in the western parts of Bihar and eastern Uttar Pradesh, wherein a woman's family abducts a most suitable male bachelor (young man who has either cleared the prestigeous IAS exam, or has a medical or engineering degree, or has secured a government job), keeps him captive, and often beats him into submission before later forcibly marrying him to her - Often at gun-point with a rope tied around his waist so that he can't run away, just like a captured animal or slave. (Notice that the Wikipedia article mentions that this is done to avoid dowry, which is false and just a feminist justification of the male rape. Dowry is already illegal, and if avoiding dowry were the reason, why would they choose the most successful men only? In most cases the bride's family is financially strong and politically connected, so affording dowry would not have been a big deal to them. The real reason is, the woman is not suitable for or liked by the man and so he would refuse for the marriage if asked. The reason of dowry may be applicable to a few of the cases but not a major reason as implied.) If the forcibly married man later tries to get a divorce, he may suffer criminal charges under the dowry law and end up fighting lengthy legal battles in which the chance of his winning is virtually zero. So the dowry laws are, in fact, used as a measure to make the men comply with the forced marriage. This phenomenon is never brought up in the media, and few people know about this (and certainly nothing is being done by the government to check it). Had a similar thing been affecting women instead of men, it would have been all over the globe. Forced marriages of men are observed outside this 'regional tradition' also.
~ Man thrown out from moving train for mistakenly boarding the women's car (the women-only compartment of the train). In another instance, women beat men badly for mistakenly boarding in the women-only train cabin.
etc. But these problems are never addressed. The politicians are busy erecting more and more anti-male laws for every single case of crime happening against a female, while totally ignoring the far greater number of males dying and being victimized in bulk. (See also: Alimony, Chalimony, Double Standards, DV, DVPO, Entitlement, Femicide Law, Feminazi, Feminism, Feminist Logic, Kangaroo Court, Male Disposability, Marriage Strike, Matriarchy, Misandry, MRA, NAWALT, Proxy Violence, Pussy Pedestalization, The Plan, VAWA, Victimhood, Witch Hunt.)

DV: (Acronym for "Domestic Violence".) Violence happening among people residing together including elders, siblings, and children, but mostly between a married or live-in couple. When a woman carries it out (no matter if the man was completely silent and stable, and no matter if the man is the one who reports to the police), it's considered self defense, by law (so even a video proof will be void). When a man performs this (even if it's in self-defense, or even if the woman claims falsely), then it's DV. Even though the DV laws in some countries are seemingly gender-neutral (and so the male victims of DV can look for the same signs in their partners' behavior as the female victims), the policy of the feminist-trained police and judges to respond to the DV complaints from the male victims is extremely female-favoring, and the man who complains can face counter allegations and be considered the perpetrator himself. So the gender-neutral wording merely exists on paper, not in practice. Here are some related terms:
~ Coercive Control - includes emotional abuse, threatening behaviour, "economic control", and manipulation - including the manipulation of children: These are the kinds of DV primarily invented for extending the definition of DV to encourage more women to make false claims of DV and target more men.
~ Duluth Model of DV: (Short for "Duluth Power and Control Wheel model".) Under this model or paradigm, DV is a collective tool or method of all men (or the patriarchy) to oppress women. In laws and policies created based on this model (like The Plan, VAWA, etc), instead of looking at the realities and particulars (proof and evidence) of the DV case at hand, the violence is assumed to be coming from the male partner. That is, patriarchal oppression is assumed from the male partner, and victimhood for the female one. (And so the restraining orders are automatically issued against the man). The law enforcement professionals and the police are also trained to support and apply this model, rather than act according to the realities they see or find on the spot. If a male victim of DV seeks help from the doctor, councilor, police, etc, then it's assumed to be his attempt to bully his partner institutionally (that is, it's assumed that he's using the system against her), and so is denied any help. Even the Eropean Union has followed this ideological feminist viewpoint to base the official EU model, which correlates every form of violence, discrimination, hate, and rape to 5 key factors (male victims need not apply), including masculinity and... well... patriarchy. This model drives the Gender Mainstreaming Strategic Initiative in Europe.
~ Economic Violence: Husband not allowing the wife to work.
~ Gender Profiling or Sexual Profiling: This is the profiling (including the police or legal one) of a person as the aggressor in a given case of DV or a potential sexual offender, not based on the particular case, but based on the sex/gender of the person: Man violent/sexual perpetrator, woman innocent/victim. This follows partly from the Duluth Model of DV. In reality, gender profiling is just misandry. Even organizations claiming to be for child protection are inherently feminist and corrupt, and unjustly target the men in the house.
~ IPV: Acronym for "Intimate Partner Violence" or "InterPersonal Violence". (Also known as "PV" - Partner Violence.) A variant of DV to include the LGBT couples and to exclude the elders, siblings, and children of the house (mothers are overwhelmingly the majority of child abusers).
~ Mandatory Arrest: At several places, there's a mandatory arrest provision of the male, no matter what. Even if the house belongs to the man, and the woman is just his partner/girlfriend (not wife and not living in the same house), the man will not be allowed in his house and arrested without any proof.
~ Primary Aggressor Policy: Under this policy, in a case of DV, men are assumed to be voilent and women their victims - regardless of any reality, proof, and evidence. This policy follows from the Duluth Model of DV. (By contrast, there's no equivalent 'Primary Abuser' policy for the women even though women are the majority that abuse children.) Why was the primary aggressor policy invented? Well, it so happened that in California, the feminist-inspired DV mandatory arrest policies (enacted in the 1980's, when the arrests were made of the actual aggressors) led to a 37% increase in arrests of men and a 446% increase in arrests of women, presenting a pretty solid evidence of gender symmetry in DV. So, within a few years, the feminist legal experts had written and successfully implemented Predominant Aggressor policies (which prioritized relative height, weight, strength, and patriarchal/feminist models of DV, i.e., the Duluth) over inconvenient matters such as "Who is the actual abusive party?" In other words, this kind of dishonest changes in the policies made the outcomes conform to the feminist theory (rather than the policies conforming to reality). As predictable, the arrest rates returned to 'normal', that is, at least 85% male (at least one-third of whom would actually have been victims).
Reproductive Coercion: Forcing or manipulating one's partner into getting oneself pregnant with or making one's partner pregnant, when the said partner is not willing to have a child. From the CDC data, men (8.7%) are more likely to be victims of the reproductive coercion than women (4.8%) (excluding conflict over the use a condom, which could be due to sensation and not necessarily to reproductive control).
Voilence is gendered: The feminist propaganda that the violence has a male gender, that is, all violence should always be ascribed to the male sex (hence, "Women HAVE the problem and Men ARE the problem that must be eliminated/solved"). When women commit the DV, it's assumed to be because those women are "victims of patriarchy" (feminist logic). Of course, like typical feminist parroted memes, this one is also patently false, because women are just as violent as men. Erin Pizzey, in her book "Prone to Violence", shows that the DV is genderless - Both men and women are prone to it.
~ Withholding Sex: When a man refuses to have sex at the demand of his female partner, it is legally wrong (women are entitled to demand sex from their slaves... err... male partners). However, if the woman refuses to have sex at the demand of her male partner, that is okay (as it should be). In fact, women regularly use (and are even encouraged by the mainstream media to use) the tactic of withholding sex for coercing men into submitting to their whims. A woman can even report her male partner for sexual coercion / Marital Rape (also called Spousal Rape, a handy allegation for the woman to accompany the DV allegations during a divorce/separation in order to gain the upper hand in child custody and chalimony, and in general to take a revenge or 'teach him a lesson'). Aaron Larsen says: "Due to the institutionalization of feminist ideology within the legal system - along with the political correctness that pervades our society - a lot of men have been defamed, imprisoned, and/or fined due to the false accusations that were made against them by women. For this reason, a lot of divorce lawyers encourage their female clients to falsely accuse their husbands of rape, child abuse, and/or DV."
In short, as a man, whether you have dated, lived with, or had casual sex with a woman, you are deemed to have been an "intimate partner" of hers. As such, you are liable to eviction from your home and mandatory arrest (and imprisonment for an indeterminate time) at any time, at any place, without a warrant, and without any substantiating evidence. A simple call to 911 or a statement like she is "afraid" on her part is all it takes. A call from one of her relatives, or a neighbor, will suffice as well, as hearsay is admissible (even if your wife/girlfriend herself is not at all complaining about anything, disagrees with the accusation, and resists your arrest - Police is feminist-trained to assume that she is afraid to speak up because you're abusing her). As a result of such a call you will be placed under restraining orders that will prevent you from ever possessing a weapon again, and forbidden to possess or consume an alcoholic beverage or controlled substance. Also, because you cannot communicate with anyone known or related to the "victim", you will be grossly handicapped in gathering evidence in your behalf. And this punishment, that includes a night or weekend in jail, occurs long before any determination of guilt on your part.
As is clear, the policies and laws being used in the DV cases are like legal witch hunting of the men, where the deck is stacked against them. Once accused, the male can only use responses that the evaluator is already primed to see as disingenuous. He is guilty until proven innocent and, even then, he will probably be judged guilty by many just on the basis of the woman's accusation. So not only is a man accused ex parte but he is convicted in absentia. He may also be punished by the court and required to pay for 'treatment' before his trial if he pleads innocent.
Despite it having been shown and proved that the men and the women face DV at approximately equal rate, the female-on-male DV has been highly under-reported as crime statistics and in the feminist-biased media. The DV research and policies do not take the male victims into account. The female-on-male violence is considered comical (it's even encouraged) and the male victim is ridiculed and made fun of. Men attempting to report DV face disbelief, ridicule, and counter allegations. Embarrassment is also a barrier for the men being abused by their intimate partner, as a result of which they report DV only after the situation has become extreme, and even then they face counter allegations where only the woman's word is believed. There's no support system for the male victims of DV, and actually they're more likely to get arrested themselves if they make a call or report to the police (yes, you read that right). Men seeking the government DV helpline/hotline are told that they're violent abusers. For these reasons, men are much less likely than women to tell others or report - Only 10% of men would actually tell the police in the UK, 3 times less than women. The DV figures for Ireland also suggest that the male victims under-report the abuse they suffer, which is true of other places too.
The feminist media programs also spread lies about the male victims of DV, such as, male perpetrators are likely to call the police and pretend they are the victim (even though it's actually the women who are more likely to cry victimhood), etc. Usually, men don't even complain about the DV happening to them, one reason being no resources or help available to the male victims of DV; while women casually use it as a tool against men (in fact, the DV laws encourage the women to make false allegations of DV against their male partners), with heaps of government and non-government support and services available exclusively to the women. For example, a woman can tell the man to leave the house any time at her whim, and call the police if he doesn't comply, rendering him prone to any and all kinds of deadly proxy violence, resulting in permanent damage (including physical) and suffering to him. In fact, the government provides incentives to the women to make false DV allgations by rewarding them for that. 50% of restraining orders are for the DV reports in which a physical assault is not even alleged, 70% of restraining orders are for trivial or false DV reports, and there are 0 district attorneys in the US who routinely prosecute false allegations of DV. The DV figures are mostly based on trivial incidents arising from women who are using the police to aggress against their partners, and mostly not from the women who are in fear of DV.
Here are some strories of false DV allegations.
How does the government incentivizing the females, and the feminists encouraging them (including indoctrinating them with feminist theories in the DV shelters, which are hotbeds of misandry), to treat males with utter contempt affect the society? Research suggests that women, while initially reluctant, inflict more pain when they're encouraged by the authority. In the Milgram electric shock experiment that tested 22 women, the women, although reluctant at first, were more likely (75%) than men (65%) to go all the way to the highest voltage/pain. The hypothesis was that women are more inclined to obey authority and appease what they perceive is best for The Group. Echoing the infamous Milgram experiment from the 1960's, the ABC News program "Obeying or Resisting Authority: A Psychological Retrospective" set up a psychological test in which an authority figure urges men and women to inflict pain. The program also analyzed the 1971 Stanford Prison Experiment as well as the 2004 hoax in which a McDonald's manager and her fiance - directed by a caller impersonating a police officer - strip-searched and abused an employee. In a social psychology experiment, "Social Psychology Experiments: Role of Gender", that tests the influence of authority on human behavior, women tend to show more empathy at the beginning of the experiment but when urged to do so, they continue on to higher levels of inflicted pain. In "Social Psychology Experiments: Gender Differences", women are more likely to the inflict highest degree of pain than men.
Almost no DV Shelters (or DV Helplines or DV Hotlines) exist for the male victims of DV, even though more married men (2.3%) suffer from partner abuse than married women, according to the latest British Crime Survey. Whenever a shelter is erected for the male victims, there's no funding (neither from the government nor from the society, while there's no lack of funding and support for shelters for even single women with no children). Even then the idea of a men's shelter is regarded as discriminatory and inclusion of women is forcibly sought, then women complain about the men living with them, then men are booted out, and the shelter turns into yet another women's shelter. It has been like this ever since the beginning, when the whole DV shelter thing was started by Erin Pizzey (who received death threats from feminists for advocating to allow the male victims into the shelters too). Since then, the DV 'industry' has been hijacked by the feminists, who claim that men cannot be victims of violence, ever (the patriarchy theory). They rationalize the lack of shelters (or any other kind of funding) for the male victims on the basis if the argument that women are the majority victims of DV! If that were logical, would it be correct to say that the wounded female soldiers should not get to use the same facilities as the wounded male soldiers (since there are more male wounded soldiers)? Of course, no. Hence you see how vile and disgusting the feminists really are.
Here are some stories showing that women are fully capable of all kind of violence, including the notorious cases of mass murders. (Most female serial murderers are poisoners; men are more likely to use a gun for violent crime and suicide, women lean more toward chemicals and knives.)
However, even the politicians skirt the truth of female-on-male abuse (though lately they've occasionally been called out on their politics of sexual corruption and misandry) and the misandric DV laws based on the Duluth Model continue to exist everywhere, for example:
~ In Brazil, they have a DV against women act called Maria da Penha Law, which has some horribly abridging provisions. It has been challenged in Supreme Court several times and has still prevailed.
~ In Spain, the so called Anti Gender Violence Law permits a woman to have a man arrested with a mere call to the police. Article 153 of the criminal code (under which are reported nearly 80% of all DV offences) makes it an offense to cause mental suffering or to mistreat without causing physical injury, i.e., a simple argument involving harsh language, even where the man says something like "You'll find out!" is reason enough to report a gender crime (but only if the complainant is a woman). A call of the woman like "My husband called me fat at the discussion" results in the arrival of police, which gets the man directly to jail where he stays incommunicated for 1 to 3 days. A public lawyer then recommends him a plea bargain, without informing that plea bargains are not appealable. Also, if the man does not do whatever he is asked for, he should go to a special court (one of the "Courts of Violence against Women") that can rule on civil, criminal, and family law. In that court, woman's testimony has presumption of veracity, and according to the Spanish special law applicable at that tribunal, the burden of proof of innocence is on the man. And, being a man and having bruises after a discussion (in self-defence) is enough to warrant a jail for the man! Because, according to the gender special law policies, the man having had to defend himself is always a felony. No wonder 1/3 of Spaniard jail population is jailed by these special courts. Men have been convicted for reasons as arbitrary as flatulence during a discussion, or simply using the word "fuck", or causing the partner abuse via "telepathic" means.
As is clear from all these laws and policies, this is the standard way of the governments to exert more control over men by imprisoning them or contriving circumstances to threaten them with imprisonment. (See also: Double Standards, Dowry Law, DVPO, Femicide Law, Feminism, Feminist Logic, Gold Digger, His-Fault Divorce, Hyperagency, Hypoagency, Kangaroo Court, Male Disposability, Man Up, Marriage Strike, Matriarchy, Misandry, Parental Alienation, Patriarchy, Projection, Proxy Violence, Pussy Pass, The Plan, VAWA, Victimhood, White Ribbon Campaign, Witch Hunt.)

DVPO: (Also known as "Dove-Po". Acronym for "Domestic Violence Protection Order".) UK's DV law, which would serve to exclude a man from his home for up to 28 days on no evidence other than an accusation of violence from his partner. (And, for manufacturing more victims, even coming near to a property occupied by the accuser has been defined as an act of molestation.) No investigation will be carried out to test the truth of allegations. The man is threatened with an arrest for non-compliance. No consideration has been given to the possibility of false DV accusations. Police will be making assessments on risk (there goes out presumption of innocence and the due process). The DVPO will be issued on the balance of probabilities, not on whether a threat is proven beyond reasonable doubt (remember that police will be the sole assessors). In fact, now merely raising your voice, shouting at your partner, criticising your partner, and denying money to your partner also count as DV (previously it used to be about physical violence), and can bring down draconian penalties from the courts, including throwing you out of your house. The wording of the ruling is gender-neutral, but of course, practically it would be used mostly against men only - Women even physically hitting their men are routinely ignored.
Here are some other atrocities being carried out against men in the UK:
~ Female criminals won't be jailed for any crime they commit, no matter how serious - pussy pass enshrined into the law.
~ Men, on the other hand, will be jailed for 14 years(!) even on the mere accusation by their female partners of hurting their feelings. Any report, true or false, made by a woman regarding any action of the man ("I felt threatened by the way he looked at me") is sufficient for caging the man, no evidence needed.
Clearly, there's a matriarchal regime reigning in the 'United Queen-dom'. (See also: Double Standards, Dowry Law, DV, Femicide Law, Feminism, Feminist Logic, Matriarchy, Misandry, Proxy Violence, Pussy Pass, The Plan, VAWA, Witch Hunt.)

Entitlement: Something (for example, a job, scholarship, etc) reserved for or desired or demanded by a person based, not on the ability, but on the person's being from a particular group (most commonly, for being female, but sometimes also homosexual or Black etc). Tax cuts or quotas in the jobs if the person is a female, government rewards for the single parents (read single moms), pussy pass, etc are things the recepient start considering themselves deserving of or entitled to, just because of their existence and not ability. Some recepients feel so entitled that they claim, without any evidence, that what they got is not sufficient and they deserve more just for being a female etc, while some even become violent if their demands of entitlements are not fulfilled. (See also: Affirmative Action, Bigot, Dear Colleague, Feminism, Feminist Logic, Feminization, Gold Digger, Hypoagency, Male Privilege, Matriarchy, Orwellian, Paycheck Fairness Act, Princess, Pork, Pussy Pass, Reverse Discrimination, Single Parents, Solipsism, Title IX, Victimhood, War on Women, Welfare.)

Evo-Psych: (Short for "Evolutionary Psychology".) Study of human behavior from a perspective of their biology and how it evolved with time as the biology underwent changes. According to Evo-Psych, the evolution of the humans, along with bringing changes to the body shapes, also resulted in development of instincts and natural behaviors. It explains the sexual tendencies of men and women (such as, hypergamy, women are at least as promiscuous as men, women prefer sex with promiscuous men, men - especially intelligent men - prefer relationship with sexually inexperienced women, etc). Feminism, on the other hand explains the difference between the male and female nature and behaviors as being purely Social Constructs (rather than biological) and (of course) a result of patriarchy.
Leading sex researchers argue that women's sexuality is not the rational, civilized, and balancing force it's so often made out to be; but it is base, animalistic, and ravenous - everything we've been told about the male sexuality. Female sexuality can be terrible in its power, but knowledge disarms much of that power. If men had got to know about the real nature of female sexuality, not much bonding would have been possible that was necessary for the development of the human race. That is why the "constraints" put on female sexuality are really hard and fast rules so much as they are components of an illusion that renders unknowing men all but helpless in the face of the angelic female ideal; and It is women - not men - who have been most vigilant in maintaining this illusion, because it profits them. The frequently-cited claim that only 40% of our male ancestors but 80% of our female ancestors successfully reproduced is flat-out false.
Here are some related terms:
~ Hunter-Gatherer: During the earlier phase of evolution (prehistory), men used to bring food by hunting animals, and women used to gather it at home. This difference in the roles has resulted in some gender-specific skills and abilities, which one of the genders receives naturally (with birth) and the other gender is not so good at. For example, in terms of vision, males excel at tracking fast-moving objects and discerning detail from a distance, while females excel at discriminating among colors. Men shine in detecting quick-changing details from afar, particularly by better tracking the thinner, faster-flashing bars within a bank of blinking lights, which is due to neuron development in the visual cortex, which is boosted by masculine hormones like testosterone - They're born with 25 percent more neurons in this brain region than females. The men's "significantly greater sensitivity for fine detail and for rapidly moving stimuli" is probably because the hunters "would have to detect possible predators or prey from afar and also identify and categorize these objects more easily". And the vision of female "gatherers" may have become better adapted recognizing close-at-hand static objects, such as wild berries. Females are often "worse off in terms of absolute chromatic [color] sensitivity than males", but excel at noticing subtle differences among shades of a color.
~ Essentialism: The view that every distinguished group entity (such as, men, monkeys, sparrows, women, etc) has a set of traits/attributes that is the essence of it for existing as that entity, and if any of those essential attributes is taken off from a member of that entity, that member can no longer function as a part of that entity. (For illustration, consider a member of the entity "men"; that is, consider a particular man. If he does not have a leg, he still is a man. Therefore, a leg is not an essential attribute of the entity "men". However, the Y-chromosome, or maybe the Testosterone, is an essential attribute of this entity. Similarly, the X-chromosome is an essential attribute to the entity "women".) Evo-Psych says that the male and female human beings have different essential attributes determined as per their biology and evolution. There also is Non-Essentialism, according to which, for any entity, no specific traits are a must to be possessed by that entity for existing (or being classified) as that identity. Feminists agree and disagree with Essentialism (showing their hypocrisy inspired by doublethink) as it suits to them and their dishonest ideology (feminism).
~ Nature vs Nurture: A comparison of the relative importance of the roles of the nature (biology, evolution, heredity, instincts, etc) and the nurture (education, environment, wealth, etc) of an individual, in determing that individual's physical attributes (size, strength, etc) and behavior (emotional, logical, etc). This debate is analogous to the debate of Agency vs Structure or Individual Autonomy vs Socialization or Sex vs Gender. In any of these debates, feminism usually sides with the latter and denies the former.
~ Blank Slate: The idea that the behavioral traits of the human beings are purely a result of their nurture (as opposed to the nature having a role), the human beings are born as 'blank slates' with no mental content, and all their knowledge and mental development is the product of their social conditioning; that is, "gender is purely a social construct".
~ Biodenialism: An extension of the Blank State theory to include the physical traits of the human beings (in addition to their behavior) to be determined purely on the basis of the nurture alone. So according to this theory, when a child is born, it's not a male or female (despite the clearly visible physical differences), and can be converted into any of the biological sexes by nurturing it accordingly. Feminists and postmodernists peddled this concept for long (the more illogical, ridiculous, and stupid a concept, the more the feminists feel compelled to adopt it and force it down everyone's throat), but the idea has largely fallen out of fashion in the recent years.
How is the conclusion of the evo-psych that the males and females are inherently different supported by scientific evidence, and why is this fact bitter to the feminists? Well, in psychological tasks that analyze decision making (such as the Iowa Card Task) women require some 60-70 odd trials (out of a total 100) before they come closer to the performance that men dish out. When a maze model of decision making experiments was done using rodents, once again the male rodents were shown to be substantially better at making advantageous decisions. In other words, the male advantage to make advantageous decisions is not specific to humans, but goes way back in evolutionary history to lower animals. This is nothing surprising to those familiar with animal studies. Among many smart animals throughout the animal kingdom, it is often the males that are majestic, magnificent, intelligent, and sometimes demonic in their aggression. This difference shows up in children (who are only 3 years old), in adoloscents and adults, and even in Wistar rats. This is as predicted by evolutionary selection, and appears to be moderated by prenatal (before birth) brain organizational effects of Testosterone (a hormone feminists hate). Note that some of this advantage could be a "spill-over" from Testosterone's powerful effects on intelligence. So, contrary to the PC thinking, not all things (including talent, intelligence, and decision-making capacity) are "randomly distributed". Testosterone is one of the key elements that determine high intelligence in both genders, and this is partly the reason why there about 9 times more men than women in the top 0.2% of the intelligence distribution (IQ=145). When it is claimed that Testosterone makes the world go around, there are much deeper truths to it than most people realize. Now, if the feminists accept that the males and females are fundamentally different, their house of cards that is the patriarchy theory falls apart (which claims that women were forcibly held down by the men and denied certain male roles, rather than choosing their female roles according to their own priorities and abilities). So they maintain the illusion of no difference between the sexes.
In short, Evo-Psych treats the differences in the behavior and psychology of the male and female human beings as the "effects" of evolution. However, since those facts are bitter to the feminists, they tend to suppress Evo-Psych by painting it as a theory that "causes" (i.e., spreads) those tendencies, which they believe are not true; thereby reversing the cause and effect. Funny that they call Evo-Psych a pseudo-scientific theory while showing their full commitment toward a theory like patriarchy as if it's something scientific. (See also: Alpha, Apex Fallacy, Briffault's Law, Cause and Effect, Cock Carousel, DoubleThink, Gina Tingles, Gold Digger, Herd Mentality, Hypergamy, LGBT, Male Disposability, NAWALT, Paternity Fraud, Patriarchy, PC, Penis Envy, Social Proofing.)

Fembot: A troll employed by the feminists, commenting on a site with pre-selected or typically stale and known messages, as if like an automated script. Fembots often join the manosphere websites, constantly looking for (and even trying to provoke the members into making) statements from which they could quote mine. (In this respect, a fembot is like a search engine crawler, e.g., a Google search bot.) Fembots are also sent in droves to downvote an article/comment that discusses problems and issues faced by the men, or the wrongs done by feminism or women; this makes use of the fact that the fembots merely work by following the instructions provided to them, rather than forming their own views by seeing to the truth or provided evidence.
A fembot tries its best to hide its identity but in general that effort ultimately shows up. For example, look at the comments of 'Brittney' on this article. Ultimately, a fembot is anyone blindly following the feminist preaching, without any logic, without question, without even knowing what certain things mean, just like a script with no brain of its own. Typical characteristics of a fembot include:
~ Using bans or shaming language to silence any talk about men's problems/issues or rights.
~ Refusing to acknowledge the men's issues, despite overwhelming evidence presented.
~ If the evidence presented is not refutable (and nor can be silenced), trying to show that the fembot was interesting in knowing something about the men's issues and has newly become aware of the men's issues ("I've learned something new, I wasn't aware of these issues", etc). Sometimes, the person really is new to the men's issues though; so this symptom must be used along with other symptoms (and not as standalone by itself) to determine if the person is a fembot. Other symptoms are generally self-sufficient and a dead giveaway even individually.
~ Acknowledging that men's issues exist but refusing to agree that they're systematic or that there's a need to do something about it. (That is, when a minority of women, or just a single woman has some kind of problem, it's systemic; but when the majority of men are routinely having the very same problem, they're one-off instances, common interpersonal slights, anecdotal, or hearsay - no different from everyone else facing some problem at some point). In other words, categorizing male-specific problems as the general problems.
~ Acknowledging that men face systematic problems but refusing to accept that feminism is the cause of them; or Co-Opting the problems, that is, claiming that women face those problems too (like, "Women suffer from prostate cancer too"), or that those problems give rise to problem for women, and so it's not a men's issue but a women's or feminist issue! This allows the feminists to bend the problem to their will (blaming it on their favorite myths like patriarchy) and "solve" it in a feminist and misandric manner, eventually excluding the male sufferers and making it totally about the women alone (that is, feminizing it). In general, feminism has to co-opt other movements/issues and feminize them (make them all about the females). Its ridiculously petty and cheap demands are not important enough in themselves.
~ Acknowledging that men face systematic problems but brushing them off as unimportant or secondary to the women's problems. This style is known in the manosphere by the famous quote "Yes, but..." or "Can't we all just get along?". That is, whenever you say that men are facing a certain problem, the fembot would reply, "Yes, but women are facing another problem which is more important, and therefore we must first focus on the women's problem", or that "Alright men have problems but a movement (the MRM) for that is not needed", etc. Fembots also inject a women's problems in a discussion about the men's problems in order to derail the discussion or change the subject.
~ Acknowledging that men face systematic problems; and claiming that they're due to patriarchy, that feminism has all the solutions, that the feminists are "working on the men's problems", and the men (or the MRA's) just need to be patient. They also claim that the MRM is a hindrance in the way of feminism toward solving all of the men's problems forever, so the MRM needs to die if men want their problems to be solved fast.
~ Acknowledging that men face systematic problems and claiming that it's okay because they deserve it after historical domination (patriarchy, male privilege, etc).
A related term is "Concern Troll", which is a commenter that appears to be friendly to (self-identifying with) the cause being discussed but is actually trying to discourage or weaken it. The concern troll does its work by presenting negative arguments against the cause in such a way as to make it look like it is expressing legitimate concern over the misuse or abuse of the cause. (See also: Bigot, DoubleThink, Feminism, Feminization, Hamsterbatics, Male Privilege, Manosphere, MRA, MRM, Patriarchy, Projection, Quote Mining, Rationalization Hamster, Shaming Language.)

Femicide Law: (Also knows as "Anti-Femicide Law".) Italian law for conforming to the principles of the matriarchy and de-facto feminist dictatorship. The feminist media has painted Italy as a country of femicide, where killings of women run rampant. (As always, facts are just the opposite of the feminist propaganda: Italy is one of the safest countries in the world for women, and men are the overwhelming majority of murders as well as violence in Italy.) Initially, an anti-male law was proposed in Italy, which states, among other things, an egregiously misandric principle: The punishment for a crime is 33% to 50% higher if the crime is committed against women (for example, murder of a man by a person would carry lesser punishment than murder of a woman by a man). The racket of false "Gender Violence" accusations in Italy is controlled by leftoid feminists, who want €85 million (USD 113.5 million) for erecting women-only shelters. They had proposed a law according to which the "gender violence" proceedings against men can be started by third parties (read, by feminist lawyers), without even the consent of the alleged "victim", and cannot be stopped! In other words, if the State decides to intervene into your family (even when no family member is having any problem or complaints), it should be able to, with impunity. The feminists had also proposed a law that allows non-EU women to get a residence permit by just making a claim of "gender violence", presumably against Italian men (similar to the US, where if a woman claims DV, she gets a rapid green card, house, and children's college fees).
Sure enough, the femicide law has granted each of these wishes fully, as if everything was already planned. This law (which was passed behind closed doors, without any approval or discussion in the Parliament) entitles the illegal immigrants to a residence permit if they make allegations of violence (the State will pay for the lawyer - such lawyers are usually feminists; and the police already recognize that 80% of such allegations are false). In other words, women who want to live in Italy are being incentivized to make random and false allegations of "gender violence" against men. The women will no longer have the right to stop cases created through their own allegations. Such allegations will have a "preferential path in courts" (witch hunt) and the person (read woman) who makes allegations will be "protected" (will not be questioned or asked for proof or anything to establish the truth; her word alone is sufficient); actually, the allegation can be anonymous (select a man of your choice and hit him with a false accusation; he'll never know who you are)! As immediate action, the man can be thrown away from his home if there is "a risk of danger" for a woman (and the woman's word alone will be sufficient to determine if she's in a risk of danger). That is, men will go to jail before a trial even gets to take place.
And this comes after the Italian State already took away the right of the fathers to take the kids regardless of what the mother of the kids has to say about it. In other words, the State is now controlling the men pretending to be acting on behalf of women while the latter has not even chosen to go against their men, nor can they stop the State proceedings. As for the men, it's hopeless - They have absolutely zero rights and no say at all in any matter, not even to prove that their accuser, if one does exist (and is not just a feminist lawyer who has decided to make an accusation on behalf of some woman), is lying. (See also: Double Standards, Dowry Law, DV, DVPO, Feminazi, Feminism, Feminist Logic, Matriarchy, Misandry, Proxy Violence, Pussy Pass, The Plan, VAWA, Witch Hunt.)

Feminazi: A feminist who did something particularly cruel or hateful (for example, helped passing a clearly misandric law or policy) or discussed/said/wrote such ideas, views, and plans. (See also: Date Rape, Dowry Law, Femicide Law, Feminism, Femmo, Misandry, Orwellian, Projection, Radfem, Rape Culture, SCUM, The Plan, VAWA.)

Feminism: Feminism is an:
~ Amoral, with no principles.
~ Anti-children, anti-family, and anti-father.
~ Anti-equality when it comes to sharing the equal responsibilities or enjoying the special rights (e.g., female/gender quotas) and the female privilege.
~ Arrogant. The common shaming language that hints at this nature of feminism is along the lines of "Men cannot handle (or feel threatened/intimidated by) independent/strong/etc women".
~ Bigoted.
~ Bullying.
~ Degrading. For the males, it systematically lowers their capabilities and criminalizes their behavior. For the females, it normalizes and excuses the female dysfunction, perpetuates their victimhood, and makes them misandric.
~ Dictatory to women, claiming that women were not allowed to work before feminism, and so every achievement of women belongs to feminism, and that feminism gets to tell women what choices to make and what not to. Fact is, feminism has achieved very little for the women - It is science, medicine, technology, and men that have 'liberated' women. There are women who denounce or do not want to identify with a hateful ideology like feminism, and are therefore hated by the feminists; for example, Joni Mitchell, Keri Paty, etc.
~ Discriminatory against men.
~ Evil, not in a supernatural sense, but one as in really, really bad (corrupt, malevolent).
~ Fascist.
~ Female supermacist, believing that the survival of the humans as a species is dependent upon women taking the charge of every position of power and authority, merely for being women (and not based on their abilities). Feminists consider the increase in female-on-male violence as positive and something to be celebrated.
~ Fraudulent and scammy. It's full of lies.
~ Hateful (and has always had been so). The feminist Robin Morgan says that man-hating is an honorable and viable political act - the oppressed have a right to class hatred against the class that is oppressing them. Since all feminists, by definition, believe in men being the oppressor class (the myth of patriarchy), they're all hateful bigots. Some people have the belief that the earlier 'waves' of feminism were fair (for equality) and not hateful, which is a lie (just like some people even now believe that feminism is all things good and holy); for instance, as Aaron Larsen points out, "Due to immense pressure from rabid feminists, the state was placed in the position of convicting as many accused rapists as possible, or face an onslaught of abuse from Second-Wave Feminists."
~ Hypocritical.
~ Illogical.
~ Intellectually dishonest, uses techniques such as persuading women to deny sex to their male partners in order to make men conform to their ideological whims and dishonest desires. In other words, ends jutify the means.
~ Manipulative.
~ Misandrous. Misandry is accepted, expected, and normal in feminism. In fact, not hating males is considered an imposition from patriarchy. So you cannot be a feminist and not hate males. Any feminist/woman that ever says a word of compassion to/for a man is othered and is either punished or has to apologize to the cult of sisterhood for the blunder.
~ Parasitic, which eats away its host fully before collapsing.
~ Poisonous.
~ Self-righteous: No questioning of the ideology or challenging its sacred beliefs is allowed.
~ Sexist.
~ Socialist.
~ Stereotypical. The whole theory of patriarchy, on which feminism is based, is stereotypical, for example, as is all the feminist literature. Feminism claims to be against Gender Roles (males and females expected to behave or perform differently as typical of their respective genders). However, feminism is against gender roles only selectively, i.e., only when they benefit the males and/or harm the females. Feminism actually reinforces gender roles when they benefit the females and/or harm the males. In other words, feminism enhances the female choice, rights, and privileges (while eroding male choice, rights, and privileges), and removes the female obligations (while mandating male obligation even for the exclusively female choices).
~ Terrorist, the feminist terrorism being State-sponsored at that.
~ Vile.
~ Violent, promoting and justifying violence on males even in their ads.
belief system, cult (possessing all the Cult Traits), doctrine (or a set of them), ideology, or religion, whose pursuers (called feminists) view every positive or negative action by an individual person from a social, group, or collective perspective (this is known as Intersectionality) of sex/gender ("Personal is political", "Men, as a group, are the enemy", "Women, as a group, are the victims", etc), rather than on a logical, individual level free from sex/gender bias. Under feminism, it is believed that any and every action or trait attributable to the female sex is positive and inherently good for the society, and any and every action or trait attributable to the male sex is negative and harmful to the society (basis of the feminist logic). Thus, if a woman commits any crime (particularly against a man - including his murder, or even against police), feminism enacts laws and policies across the globe ensuring that the woman will not be punished and even the innocent men will be punished on the mere accusation of women. Feminism argues that this is necessary because overall historically women have performed less crimes than the men (yes, you read that right; this is really the feminists' argument).
Similarly, feminism believes that the natural and biological male behaviors (including those of male children) are wrong and tries its best to make them illegal or punishable with the help of state and the judicial system. Feminism believes that any individual woman is always a victim because of patriarchy, no matter if she performs the crime; and any and all discrimination or violence (e.g., proxy violence) done against men is justified because they have male privilege (which is actually nothing but a privilege to remain silent and not complain when anything wrong is done to a man).
Feminism is not a theory or a philosophy, as claimed by many. A theory or philosophy starts with a question and honestly analyzes the data to get progressively closer to the answer. Feminism is an Ideology - it starts with the answer building a mythical narrative ("Male privilege/masculinity/Patriarchy is the problem", or more directly, "Men are the problem"), and manipulates, twists, and bends every observation (including stats and studies) to make it fit into that narrative. A philosophy or theory is adopted by the people as they see the truth in it and find it practical and useful, while an ideology is forced upon the people by bullying and arm-twisting them with the power of the state and the law on behalf of the dishonest cult preaching that ideology for its own selfish reasons (money, hatred, etc). Philosophers and theorists are intelligent people, basing their arguments on reason and logic; ideologues are hateful, biased, and dogmatic, and use lies and manipulation to assert their points. A philosophy or theory looks at both the positive and negative sides of a proposition, and leaves it up to the people to choose it if they prefer the positives over the negatives; an ideology, on the other hand, believes that it cannot have anything negative and it's the ultimate solution for all ("one size fits all"). A philosophy/theory is open to the alternative or differing viewpoints including opposing views; an ideology is closed to anything and everything outside itself, and considers any viewpoint not adhering to itself as bad/negative. Therefore, to an ideological bigot, if you're not an adherent to it, you're the enemy (or "part of the problem", as in grouping everything under 'black and white'). Therefore, whereas discussion of a theory or philosophy makes people more informed, the indoctrination by an ideology forces them to behave in a certain manner approved by the ideology ("theory informs, doctrine controls"). A theory does not lead or require one to be the member of a cult, an ideology does. Feminism passes all these tests of an ideological/cultist thinking with flying colors. It's a self-righteous authoritarian ideology whose followers (feminists) have the belief that rules are for other people, not themselves; that they can do whatever heinous things they want to; and that they have no respect for their opponents' rights.
Feminism is immoral and operates on people's fear. It is able to make any changes to the laws and policies not because those changes are right or even constitutional, but because it directly and indirectly threatens the people responsible for making those changes with public backlash (including violent protests), shaming them with false labels like misogynist, and using its relations in the authority (including using proxy violence through white knights like police etc) and media to inflict harm to their lives, physical and mental health, reputation, and careers. It also silences and suppresses any opposition and dissent in the same way. In other words, feminism blackmails the government and people in the positions of authority everywhere to force its rules upon the common people.
Since, however, this definition will turn many people off the cult, feminists do not define feminism in these words publicly. So that more people adopt feminism, they define feminism in some nice but decieving fashion, like calling it the radical notion that the women are human beings (hiding that the men are not). Such people that fall into this trap and adopt feminism are called:
~ Earnest Feminists.
~ Equality Feminists.
~ Equity Feminists.
~ Garden-Variety Feminists.
~ iFeminists.
~ Moderate Feminists (misandrist-lite).
~ Nice Feminists.
~ Sugar/Candy Feminists.
etc. They're not really feminists and are mostly just ignorant/misguided (blue-pilled) people, though sometimes they're dishonest and wilfully ignorant too, who know about the truth of feminism. These milder types of 'feminists' act as useful idiots for the mastermind or mainstream feminists. Even for these types of pseudo-feminists though, equality is the least that the women must get, and the most that the men can expect. (One variety is Sex-Positive Feminists, which are feminists except that they do not view every PIV - Penis In Vagina - insertion as rape. In reality, though, the term 'sex-positive feminist' is an oxymoron - You cannot be supportive of sex with the people you hate. These feminists just manipulate the men they have sex with for their own gain - money and favors, etc.)
Feminists also use misleading or completely false statistics and generalizations to get more and more misandric laws and policies passed. In short, feminism is a mental disorder spread through self-victimization, and to a feminist, exceptions are more important than rules.
A related term is "Acme Fem & Co.", representing the feminists in the position of authority. These are mastermind or mainstream (real) feminists that make and affect the policies and laws, guide the other feminists on what to do, and control the overall discourse of the gender-related matters by controlling the academia, the media, the judicial system, and the politics. (See also: 2+2=5, Affirmative Action, Alimony, Apex Fallacy, Bigot, Blue Pill, Cause and Effect, Chalimony, Dear Colleague, Double Standards, DV, DVPO, Entitlement, Femicide Law, Feminazi, Feminist Logic, Feminization, Femmo, Glass Ceiling, Herd Mentality, Herstory, Hypoagency, Male Privilege, Mangina, Masculism, Matriarchy, Misandry, Orwellian, Palimony, Patriarchy, Penis Envy, Pro-Choice, Proxy Violence, Quote Mining, Radfem, Rape Culture, Reverse Discrimination, Schrodinger's Rapist, SCUM, Shaming Language, The Plan, Title IX, Useful Idiots, VAWA, Victimhood, Wage Gap, Walk a Mile in Her Shoes, Womyn.)

Feminist Logic: (The term is actually an oxymoron.) This is a very (pseudo-)scientific, efficient, and fast-track kind of logic. Its algorithm involves the following steps:
Assumptions and rules common to all cases:
~ Males are always guilty; and females are always innocent, compassionate, nurturing, and sensitive.
~ Without any regard to the actual problem (or even to the male victims of any problem faced by all people, like natural disasters, diseases, climate changes, etc), any solution must amount to creating laws and policies that ensure benefits to the women alone; any resultant harm to even the most basic constitutional or human rights of the men can be ignored.
~ If there's a problem identified to affect men specifically more (like homelessness, higher rates of male suicides due partly to lack and denial of support, etc), policies must still ensure that only women get the benefits and men are ignored (left to die or remain homeless etc), in the name of "Greater Good" or benefit to the "society as a whole". In such instances, the "greater" circle or the "society" seems to include only those people who are not male.
If something bad has happened and a female did this:
~ Find the nearest male to blame and let the woman go scot-free. (See Katie's comments on this article.)
~ If no such male can be found, blame all the males collectively (the patriarchy).
~ If even that is not possible (very rare cases), find a historical event, a religious belief, a tradition, or whatever, and use any unimaginable twist of logic to blame males for the bad event.
~ If no such historical event can be found immediately (or at all), be creative and make something up to hold responsible a male (or just anybody or anything, like physical/mental/emotional conditions, or some feelings, or ghosts, or pets, etc).
~ If that is not possible either, paint her act of crime as something heroic or brave and worthy of reward (by painting her as a victim).
~ If all else fails (almost never happens) and the female has been found guilty, then demand acquittal, or some kind of medical/pshycological treatment (the Vagina Syndrome), or less punishment for her at the excuse of her children, or her being a woman, or her being abused and oppressed, etc.
If something bad has happned and a male did this:
~ Generalize the anecdote or personal experience ("Personal is Political"), and blame the male behavior and patriarchy (that is, this is systematic/institutionalized and all men are doing this), while also demanding the harshest possible punishment for the criminal.
~ Block any psychological research or studies that prove that the male might have performed the action under the state of a disorder.
~ Demand more laws and restrictions for punishing or putting restrcition s on all innocent males, raising the fear that they'll do it in future.
If something good has happened and a female did this:
~ Attribute it to the womanhood, while also pedestalizing the woman who did it.
~ Demand quotas or special rights for women everywhere to encourage them to perform in the same way, because if one woman did this, every woman can do this (does not apply to bad things).
~ Shame men.
If something good has happened and a male did this:
~ Stay silent.
~ If that is not possible, find some female related to the man in any way (say, his third-cousin or great-great-great gramma). Then, while praising the man, also include this: "Sisters and mothers like have been supporting and encouraging their menfolks forever; their contribution is invisible but now is the time that we must recognize it." etc.
~ If that is not possible (the man is an MGTOW, for example), attribute it to the man, and make sure not the entire manhood gets a positive mention by saying something like, "If only a few men were like him" etc.
Since the above logic lacks any democratic legitimacy (because most people won't find this logic reasonable if presented directly), the feminists (or the women buying into the feminist narrative) have to always appear angry and be permanently on the offensive while putting their points, so that people won't dare raise any questions or check their lies and distortions, and thus the feminist status quo is kept maintained. This is also why the feminists (or generally most women) cannot be funny or humorous, because of their inherent/acquired hatred toward men - hate is not funny, and their indifference/insensitivity toward the pains and sufferings of the men. For example, they don't like it when men make Rape Jokes, while the hypocrites themselves have no problem making rape jokes, misandric jokes, and all other kind of insensitive and non-PC jokes (actually they're called the "iconic feminist role model" for their 'bravery', cruelty, and insensitiveness toward the men in their lives). In fact, in order to perpetuate the victimhood, they even just make up rape jokes out of any statement that's not about rape at all by attaching their own 'unique' perspective to it.
With manginas at their feet to agree and please the feminists, and White Knights ready to carry out proxy violence on anyone who questions, how hard can it be to apply in real life? Not hard at all. (See also: 2+2=5, Apex Fallacy, Bigot, Briffault's Law, Cause and Effect, Double Standards, DoubleThink, Dowry Law, Entitlement, Femicide Law, Feminism, Feminization, Glass Ceiling, Hamsterbatics, Herd Mentality, Herstory, Hyperagency, Hypoagency, Infantilization, Kangaroo Court, Male Privilege, Mangina, MGTOW, Misandry, Nordic Model, Paternity Fraud, Patriarchy, PC, Projection, Proxy Violence, Pussy Pass, Pussy Pedestalization, Rape Culture, Rationalization Hamster, Schrodinger's Rapist, SCUM, Shaming Language, Solipsism, Vagina Syndrome, Victimhood, White Knight, Witch Hunt, Womyn.)

Feminization: (Also known as "Pussification".) Making something adhere to the feminist rules, thereby making it suitable or favorable to women and difficult/impossible and hostile to men. The entities that can be feminized include just about anything and everything; for example,
~ Sources of information and knowledge, like Wikipedia.
~ Institutions, like colleges and universities (and their curriculum).
~ The workplace.
~ Boys and men (sometimes they're even sissified).
~ Boy Scouts.
~ Masculinity Studies: Demonizing males and masculinity, and painting the females as their victims, it's just another version of the Women's Studies.
~ A society.
~ Social networks and other popular sites like Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, etc - With the excuse of saving women online to make a case for the corrupt and feminist usage of the taxpayers' money. (As if women never make online rape and death threats.)
~ Atheism/Skepticism, secular communities, and religions; including Christianity and Jerusalem's Western Wall.
~ A profession or field like business or the STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics).
~ DV and prostitution laws.
~ A country, like Sweden, where it's almost illegal to question the ideology of feminism or assert anything that goes against the feminist belief system (for example, stating that men and women are fundamentally different). The ideology of feminism is quite close to be deemed the State truth. In the University of Uppsala from Sweden, for instance, the "gender power structure perspective" (konskraft perspektiv) is deemed as absolute binding truth, contesting which means the end of one's academic career. In parts of the country and in the government buildings, men are required to pee sitting down like women, and proposals are being made to force the men in the whole country adopt this rule.
~ A group of countries such as the EU (European Union).
~ Games, eSports, and sports, including the Olympics and the Wimbledon.
~ Toys.
~ Comics.
~ Technology products and conferences, based on the unsubstantiated and misandry based claims of sexism.
~ Activities like bicycling.
~ Sitting or peeing postures, and urinals/restrooms/bathrooms.
~ Gyms.
~ Colors of the wall paint. (Guess which color was chosen, and even 'proven', to be the best?)
etc. When a system or person (e.g., a mangina) is feminized, the female traits (artificial, false, feeling based, victimizing, and misandric) are the politically correct norm for/in it, and the male traits and behaviors (natural, fact- and evidence-based, empowering, reasonable, and logical) are criminalized. The politics, the judicial system, the education system, and the MSM have largely been feminized; the military is underway of feminization under the guise of preventing "Military Rape". (See also: 2+2=5, Affirmative Action, Date Rape, Dear Colleague, Double Standards, DV, Entitlement, Feminism, Feminist Logic, Herstory, Kangaroo Court, Mangina, Matriarchy, Misandry, MSM, Nordic Model, PC, Penis Envy, Princess, Proxy Violence, Pussy Pass, Pussy Pedestalization, Rape Culture, Reverse Discrimination, Schrodinger's Rapist, SCUM, The Plan, Title IX, VAWA, Womyn.)

Femmo: (Plural: "Femmies".) Feminist. (See also: Fembot, Feminazi, Feminism, Radfem.)

FRA: (Acronym for "Fathers' Rights Activist".) A person active in the advocacy and awareness of father's rights, and removal of laws and policies that are discriminatory to the fathers (in terms of visitation rights, child custody, chalimony, etc). Contrary to feminists' claim that fathers are unnecessary in a child's life and have dangerous influence on the children, there are studies showing that father's love has great influence on a child's personality development and absence of father's love can wreck the children's lives. Research shows that 23% of young girls with absent fathers 'grow into depressed teenagers' - showing sadness or severe tiredness, and are almost 50% more likely to have mental health problems than older girls. Almost 10% of the boys in the youngest age range suffer teenage depression, the figure jumping to 17% (which is 10% higher than boys whose parents stayed together) for the 5 to 10 age group. Study also shows that men and women are equally skilled at identifying the cry of their offspring and accuracy depends simply on the amount of time that a parent spends with the child. There are scientific reasons for the fathers' presence in the children's lives as well.
However, even politicians are frightened to admit this simple fact, and feminists judges openly state that it's alright to discriminate against fathers, while the mothers regularly throw fathers out of the house using the force of the law while making up the most ridiculous false and unsubstanciated claims that are believed by the kangaroo courts (like, a bed-wetting child means the father must have sexually abused it). For example, according to the family law in British Columbia, children are not entitled to their biological father without the mother's consent. The fathers have been declared optional, like diapers - The mother can throw the real father out of the child's life, and substitute another man and name him as the father if he takes the kid out to parks/movies a few times. The law really makes no distinction between the child's biological father and any other man - it's all just up to the woman, whatever she thinks is in her best interests (while the law makes it sound like it's "in the best interest of the child"). The real (biological) fathers don't even get a consolation weekend with their kid if the mom decides so, and have even less rights then adoptive parents if the mom decides so.
The corrupt and feminist kangaroo courts go out of their way to send the children abused by the mothers back to them. It is well-known (stated even by the experienced, retiring judge of the family-court) that mothers use the false accusations of child abuse as a weapon against the fathers in the cases of chalimony / child custody. The kangaroo courts use amateur "experts", and the federal magistrates and judges are heavily reliant on inadequate "expert evidence", to determine whether a finding of child sexual abuse should be made, underpinning false allegations. There also are mothers who use the police force to shamelessly lash out on even little boys and get them arrested. In fact, when it comes to the legalities, even the non-biological lesbian mothers have more parental rights than the biological father. Report suggests gender bias against fathers in the cases of incarceration: Women who fail to pay all of their child support are incarcerated only one-eighth as often as men with similar violations. A biological father cannot even have his last name on the child's birth certificate unless the mother allows him, even though he is required to pay the chalimony when the mother claims for it. Here are some of the shaming language terms that feminists or women (and even the MSM) use for the dads:
~ 'Abusive' or 'Pedos': When men want the rights to child custody, or to take their children out in a park for a walk, or even just to sit around in a children's section of a library, etc. Fact is, removal of fathers from the home is not as much of a safety from the children's sexual abuse as it is an invitation to the actual pedophiles, including those in the government and private childcare facilities.
~ 'Deadbeat Dads': (Also known as Runaway Dads.) When men cannot earn enough to pay alimony or child support in case of a divorce and hence are either locked up in prison or run away from the authorities like criminals. The miscreant moms are never blamed for their irresponsible choices.
The disposability of the father figure becomes painfully evident to any man when he is in a park with his children (or in general, any man around any children), a female stranger comes up, and asks, "Are these really your children?" Or every time a man is asked to sign a parental consent form and the only fields printed on the paper are "Mother", "Grandparent", or "Guardian". Men are continually given the covert message from certain quarters that as a father, they do not really matter except as Sperm Donors. The media portrays fathers in a negative light, even on the Fathers' Day; and it's not just media - also available are Fathers' Day greeting cards showing how unnecessary and unimportant the fathers are. Feminists argue that the Fathers' Day (but not the Mothers' Day) must be banned as it's not inclusive enough.
At the same time, when a father wants an active role in his children's lives, he's legally denied any rights; and if he protests or begs help against this feminist tyranny, he is demonized again. That is, first, the rights of the fathers are snatched away, forcing them to either break or go against the system; and then when the fathers protest, their acts are criminalized, labelling them as unfit for becoming parents, and more rights of the fathers are snatched away. This cycle then repeats. (And it's not just the legal denial of fatherhood, this type of vicious cycle is the norm in perpetuating so many of the men's issues.) Women's groups like NOW (National Organization of Women) are also opposed to the fathers' rights and they consider the mothers abusing their children to be okay. These feminist groups use political power and taxpayer's money to spread their hateful agenda, paint the FRA's in a negative light in their publications, and spread hatred and misinformation about them. (Of course, their false accusations are never accompanied with some kind of evidence to support their claims.)
Here are some cases of abusive or dangerous mothers. There also are cases of Filicide (killing one's child) by moms.
Another unfortunate less common full form of FRA is "False Rape Accuser"; this usage is discouraged. (See also: Alimony, Chalimony, Gold Digger, His-Fault Divorce, Kangaroo Court, Matriarchy, MRA, MRM, MSM, Parental Alienation, Paternity Fraud, Shaming Language, Single Parents.)

FTSU: Acronym for "Fuck (expose) Their (the feminists') Shit (lies, misinformation, and hatred) Up". Whenever feminists' lies and hatred are exposed, they tend to say, "STFU", i.e., "Shut The Fuck Up"; not always literally - sometimes by actions like:
~ Bans.
~ Bomb and death threats.
~ Boycotts.
~ Censorship.
~ Court orders.
~ Crashing lectures that discuss the issues faced by, and falling performance of, our sons in the fields such as education.
~ False allegations of pedophilia on the men daring to question the feminist orthodoxy in Sweden, where misandry runs rampant to such an extent that the politicians have the nerve to openly propose emasculation programs and tax increases for men only (like India where men have to pay higher taxes).
~ Hidden plans.
~ Imprisonment of men questioning or challenging feminism in Norway, with changes to the legislation to make it increasingly harder to escape jail.
~ Internet free speech control; for example in Iceland, Italy, etc.
~ Intimidation, e.g., through outrageous threats of legal action.
~ Moderation.
~ Proxy violence.
~ Terrorism.
~ Violent threats.
etc in order to silence the truth and never allow it to be brought in front of the public eyes. Some people believe that the feminism has only recently gone off its path of true equality; that's not true - Feminists have historically used the STFU techniques, ever since feminism emerged. The MRM has the goal of bringing forth the truth hidden behind the misinformation spread by the feminists. In short, FTSU is the MRM's tool for taming the feminist beast. (See also: Bigot, Feminism, Intactivist, Male Privilege, Misandry, MRM, Parental Alienation, Proxy Violence, Quote Mining, Red Pill, SCUM, Wage Gap.)

Game: A specialized theory or social course helpful in learning about women's nature and psychology, and ways to manipulate them (making use of the techniques like Nexting) into having a successful relationship. People pursuing this course are called gamers. Gamers practicing their learned lessons in the real-life are called Players. The most accomplished players are most probably PUA's. (See also: Briffault's Law, Common-Law Marriage, Gina Tingles, Incel, Marriage Strike, PUA, Shit Test, Social Proofing.)

Ghosting: This is the next level in the MGTOW \ Grass Eaters hierarchy, wherein, in addition to 'grass eating' (avoiding sex with women), a man also disappears from any social gatherings and is virtually non-existing for most people. A ghost only earns as much as is necessary for his own survival, thereby avoiding taxes. He refuses any kind of support to or coopertion with the government and the society; and has a minimum number of friends (often, but not always, other ghosts or people with similar mindsets). You could also say that all ghosts are grass eaters, but not all grass eaters are ghosts. (See also: Grass Eaters, Incel, Marriage Strike, MGTOW, NAWALT, Omega.)

Gina Tingles: (Shorter and more commonly used term for "Vagina Tingles".) A woman's feelings of sexual arousal and excitement. Alphas, thugs with Street Cred, and white knights give women gina tingles; betas turn them off. (See also: Alpha, Beta, Briffault's Law, Cock Carousel, Cognitive Dissonance, Entitlement, Evo-Psych, Game, Hypergamy, PUA, SMV, Shit Test, Social Proofing, Vagina Syndrome, Vajajay, White Knight.)

Glass Ceiling: An imaginary non-existent barrier (or conspiracy by men), a myth, devised to hide the inability/shortcoming of women to (or their choices not to) achieve higher positions in their careers. There are certain fields where women do not reach higher positions (because of lack of abilities or because they make other choices). Now, under the feminism belief, every woman is just as capable as (or more so than) the best man, so it's not PC to accept any possible shortcoming in women (because they're assumed to be perfect and fully capable, except without any responsibility or accountability). Therefore, new reasons have to be created (holding men and their discrimination, harassment, and violence toward women responsible, of course) to account for women's under-achievement or failures. Glass ceiling is one of them. When a female at a higher position is pointed out, she is said to have reached there by bravely fighting against and breaking the glass ceiling (which actually never was there to begin with). By the way, it's the women themselves who often set up as a team (Team Woman) against men in the office settings due to their herd mentality; there being numerous examples in the academia, courts, politics, and elsewhere. The assumption of the corresponding behavior in the men is just their projection of their own mentality on the men. And, contrary to the feminist claims that a women-led environment would be better in every way, there's no lack of female wrong-doers in the higher positions. Here are some points showing feminism, misandry, and the impact of female misbehavior in the workplace:
~ Draconian Sexual Harassment laws and policies (like fines of up to $35000 and jail time of up to 3-years in France), whereunder the female-on-male (or even male-on-male) sexual harassment in the workplace is ignored in favor of only recognizing male misbehavior against the females. In the military, more than half of the sexual assaults are being committed against men, despite women being far less than half of the military, and still the focus is only given to the male-on-female sexual assaults. Owing to the hostile workplace environment created for men by the fear of false sexual harassment complaints that the women make against men (even if for taking a revenge or due to some disorder of their own), men face employment-loss and personal risks in working with women. However, when the work environment is sex-segregated, women again complain about separation. In other words, men are forced to work with women (in the guise of "equality" or ending "discrimination") and face false sexual harassment accusations (in the guise of "female-safe workplace environment").
~ Research shows that both men and women consider the office conflicts between women more damaging than those between men. Women do use lies and manipulation against other women too.
Here are some related terms:
~ "Days of Mad Men": Feminists use this term to describe the time when it was relatively acceptable for the men to express their opinion regarding a matter, or be assertive or non-PC (participate in the office humor), etc. (Compared to the present time when men are expected to just listen to the women and keep their heads down, no matter what.)
~ "Old Boys' Network" or "Boys' Club": Feminists' projection of herd mentality (Team Woman) on the men. Refers to the belief that the power (and money), in for example an office, is held by the men among themselves, and that they preferentially hire (and then pay higher to) the other male employees. Women themselves say it's a myth.
~ "Glass Cellar": The bottom roles (i.e., dangerous, low-paying, and risky jobs, e.g., garbage collector, sewer maintenance, roofer, welder, etc) are overwhelmingly taken by the males - Of the 25 professions ranked lowest in the US, 24 of them are 85-100% male. Men account for 93% of the roughly 4500 workplace deaths that occur every year. However, as Dr Warren Farrell points out, the government has passed more laws to protect women in the workplace from dirty jokes than it has to protect men from injury and death due to faulty rafters on construction sites. Feminists, in all their hypocrite glory, look at the fictional glass ceiling, and either illogically justify (using hamsterbatics and theories like - you guessed it - patriarchy) or refuse to acknowledge the glass cellar. Even when demanding quotas in those fields, the feminists only demand for the top positions (managers etc) for the women, not the jobs as workers.
In addition to glass ceiling, the feminists have manufactured a number of other myths, such as male privilege, patriarchy, rape culture, victim blaming, wage gap, etc. The feminists' addiction with these myths is so strong that the word "real" or "very real" is invariably prefixed to all of these myths, even in their definitions, so that the reader doesn't even think of the possibility of them being myths; as if repeating a lie multiple times makes it true. So, when reading about these myths in the popular media, always let your general experience be your guide rather than assuming that they're real without question. (See also: Affirmative Action, Apex Fallacy, Bigot, Blue Pill, Cause and Effect, Cognitive Dissonance, Double Standards, DoubleThink, Feminism, Feminist Logic, Hamsterbatics, Herd Mentality, Hyperagency, Hypoagency, Male Privilege, Matriarchy, Misandry, Patriarchy, Paycheck Fairness Act, PC, Projection, Rape Culture, Rationalization Hamster, Reverse Discrimination, Solipsism, Victimhood, Wage Gap, War on Women.)

Gold Digger: A woman who marries, makes relationship, or have kids with a wealthy man for his money, often to divorce him later (often after having children) and use the corrupt and feminist judicial system (such as by making false DV allegations) to extract grand vaginamony (alimony/palimony and chalimony) dollars from him. In other words, a gold digger is a prostitute in disguise, only prostitutes are honest and upfront about their motives.
Some literal gold-diggers are not called gold diggers though, because they don't fit the definition. Similarly, blackmailers and the women (for example, daughters) in relations other than the sexual/marriage are also exempt from this label, even though their purpose and methodology is very similar. The skill that sets a gold digger apart from the other criminals is that a gold digger uses the corrupt law and its enforcement officials itself to commit her crimes, by crying victimhood. Gold digging is not a new phenomenon either, it's been going on historically. (See also: Alimony, Apex Fallacy, Briffault's Law, Chalimony, Cock Carousel, DV, Entitlement, Evo-Psych, FRA, His-Fault Divorce, Hypergamy, Marriage Strike, NAWALT, No-Fault Divorce, Nordic Model, Objectification, Palimony, Parental Alienation, Paternity Fraud, Princess, Shit Test, SMV, Single Parents, Social Proofing, The Wall, Victimhood.)

Grass Eaters: (Another form: "Japanese Herbivores".) These are men who - seeing how the government and justice system treats them unfairly - refuse any further cooperation with the system; their prominant feature being avoidance of sex with women altogether (this feature distinguishes them within the more general set of MGTOW men). You could also say that all grass eaters are MGTOW, but not all MGTOW are grass eaters. So, the grass eaters, in addition to not marrying and having children with women, also avoid any kind of relationship (even short-term ones) and sex (including paid one) with women. Currently, this trend is being observed in an appreciably large segment of the population in Japan. Those of grass eaters who further avoid anything or any work other than necessary for their own survival are called 'ghosts'. (See also: Ghosting, Incel, Marriage Strike, MGTOW, NAWALT, Omega.)

Hamsterbatics: Tactics of classifying something as good or bad with a self-presumed moral authority as suits to one's own agenda or ideology in order to abstain from the feelings of guilt after doing something wrong. This is different from Willful Ignorance. Under willful ignorance, you know what you're doing is wrong but choose to ignore the consequences anyway. Under hamsterbatics, you define that wrong to be right under the delusional presumption (or under the indoctrination of an ideology) that you have the moral authority to do so. For example, suppose, as is too common, a feminist reports some kind of erroneous info or false statistics (2+2=5) on/about some topic (DV, rape, wage, etc), and suppose this error/fallacy gets exposed. A reasonable person would accept the error and either apologize, or at least will not pretend to be on a moral high ground if the person chooses to continue on with the error. However, the feminist would, instead, try to justify the erroneous move, saying that it's still good anyway because it allows more funding for women and their cause, and hence is alright for the "greater good". Hence the (in)famous feminist chant about the men whom a woman falsely accuses of rape: "Men who are falsely accused can learn from the experience".
The corresponding action is known as "Hamsterbation". (See also: 2+2=5, Apex Fallacy, Bigot, Briffault's Law, Cause and Effect, Cognitive Dissonance, Date Rape, Double Standards, DoubleThink, DV, Fembot, Feminist Logic, Herd Mentality, Nordic Model, Parental Alienation, Patriarchy, Projection, Quote Mining, Rape, Rationalization Hamster, Reverse Discrimination, Schrodinger's Rapist, SCUM, Solipsism, Vagina Syndrome, Wage Gap.)

Herd Mentality: (Also known as "Herd Behavior".) The natural instinct of a woman to accept and follow the path chosen by the majority of other women, without questioning it even if it seems wrong ("if other women are doing it, it must be right and good for me"). Women, in general, have a great fear of being excluded from the collective (getting "othered"); girls learn this hidden rule of the female tactics from kindergarten; this behavior is called Relational Aggression, and, in addition to teaching each other, the females even teach this to the males when the two sexes start socially mixing up together. As a real-world example of the herd mentality, when a woman's college-going son was falsely accused of rape, she stated that although she is sad about the situation, she won't fight too hard against the false accusation case because that would weaken or undo the decades of 'hardwork' of the women (feminists) to establish such (misandric) laws for the protection of women. That is, she thought of the other women first, before her son. Similarly, you're more likely to encounter a woman sympathetic toward an unknown third-world country's women sooner than one sympathetic toward the men and boys nearby her (including her relatives, friends, and family members). Here are some related terms:
~ Automatic In-Group Bias: This refers to one's mentality of automatic preference toward one's own group (that is, toward people like oneself). Study shows that women have remarkably stronger automatic in-group bias than men.
~ Faceless Collective: A group of people having some common charactristics (for example, all men, or all women, or all people from a particular race or country, etc) being viewed as, or stereotyped by, a represntative model (not real) person from that group, rather than individually. Women complain about being viewed as a collective but they don't let go off their behavior that warrants them to be viewed as the collective.
~ GroupThink: (Or "Hive Mind".) Refers to the people within a group (say, of feminists, women, etc) making/supporting wrong decisions based on what the other members of the groups think is right, instead of thinking about and logically analyzing the situation on their own. The group members favor conformity from the other members of the group over critical evaluation of alternative ideas or viewpoints outside the group (including their own real-world experiences). Even within the group, the members do not question the ideas and decisions of the group leaders out of their loyalty toward the group (and for the fear of being called out), even when they sense that what they're supporting is wrong. Eventually, the members start believing that all the decisions taken by the group are perfect (ideal), and the group can never be wrong. If someone points out something contradicting the group's ideas, that person is labeled as biased, evil, hateful, impotent, stupid, or weak. There's a loss of individual creativity, uniqueness, and independent thinking. The leaders of the group can exploit these features of the groupthink for making the desired policies avoiding any difficult questions. Victimhood is one great tool for constructing a group-think, mass-hatred (e.g., misandry) is another.
~ Collective Consciousness: A set of beliefs, ideas, and moral attitudes shared by all the members of a particular group. It can be positive or negative depending upon the group and its aim. An extreme narrowing down of the type of people in the 'collective' (group) results in herd mentality (largely negative), an extreme adherence to the collective consciousness within a particular group results in group-think (negative).
~ Othering: A form of social ostracism. Making someone feel excluded from the group/collective; for instance, by using terms like "our", "us", "we" etc (or the group-thinking) for making a member of the group (who has a different opinion or belief) feel like that member would be left alone if that member refuses to accept the group-thinking exactly as it is (right or wrong); or by using a statement like "There's a special place reserved in hell for women who do not help other women".
~ Dunking: A more severe form of othering, where women in the group torture the excluded/different woman (by beating her up, complaining against her, calling her names like slut etc, giving her silent treatment, etc) for some time, then stop to check on her to see if she has accepted herself as being wrong, and if she has not then repeat. The end result is either the separated woman accepting herself as guilty (at which point she is permanently evicted from the group) or she leaving the group herself. This is akin to submerging someone's head completely in a pond of water for some time; then taking out and asking if one accepts one's death sentence (by some other means, say, hanging); and if one does not, then dunking one's head in the pond again; repeatedly. So the subject will either accept the death sentence or die from repeated dunking.
~ Team Woman: The notion that, to make any particular woman's cherished wish come true, all the women in her circle always work together as a 'team'; for example, if one woman has decided to screw up the life of some man of her choice (even if just for fun), all the women will form a team to make this happen, regardless of any morality of the decision or the outcome. The Emily's List of the feminists (that are or must be made the top position and power holders in order to pass more misandric laws and policies, so as to realize their dream of the feminist utopia) is the feminist face of the team woman mentality, which keeps the support for a feminist politician (who is in the list) up, even when that politician has repeatedly proven itself to be incompetent and an utter political failure.
~ WomenBall: The idea that all the women can together be regarded as the ball in a ball-game - The player that controls the ball in basketball or football wins the game, the entity that controls the women in WomenBall wins over the society. The government, the media, the justice system, and the academia control the women through feminism (by playing on the women's fears), and erode the men's (or everyone's) constitutional rights to make money from them and go unopposed. Kind of like the divide-and-rule strategy.
Feminism makes full use of this mentality to poison women's minds. (See also: Apex Fallacy, Bigot, Briffault's Law, Cause and Effect, Cognitive Dissonance, DoubleThink, Evo-Psych, Feminism, Feminist Logic, Glass Ceiling, Hamsterbatics, Hypergamy, Matriarchy, Misandry, NAWALT, Rationalization Hamster, Reverse Discrimination, Social Proofing, Solipsism, Victimhood, War on Women.)

Herstory: History, as manipulated to suit the views and perspective of women: References to men's heroic and great deeds and women's wrongdoing are removed from the history to turn it into herstory; insignificant role of women in some of the fields is exaggerated and artificially made prominent; etc. The Women's Studies programs (renamed to Gender Studies programs but otherwise the same) constantly practice this kind of manipulation. For example, feminists claim that only women had to fight for the right to vote when men already had it, but the fact is, men did not get the right to vote automatically (like the women actually did, their "fight" being nothing like a real fight or war - in which people have to lose their lives - but just angry campaigns, bombing, slogans, and threates); the men actually had to fight for it, while the women were handing them white feathers, shaming them into going to the war and get killed.
Herstory may also denote a subset of history created by feminists (including male feminists of old times, which were for equality and not for female supremacy like today's manginas) and/or successful women (from any time including the present). Some feminists (wrongly) thought that the part "his" in the word "history" was sexist because it was chosen to represent only the male contribution to the story of the humankind. So they chose "herstory" for the story of humankind/womankind and they think it's not sexist.
Then there is the manosphere perspective of things, of course. From this standpoint, part of herstory might be thought of as a documentation of the cases of "Misandric Fixation Disorder". (In-)Famous cases of:
~ Aggression/wars by female rulers.
~ Black Widows (women who killed 2 or more of their husbands). The phenomenon is not gone and lost in the past; black widows are seen in the present times too, although now they don't need that much skill and planning for killing multiple victims, because even after being caught multiple times, they're usually given pussy pass for their crimes.
~ Gold Diggers.
~ Husband-killers, because it's easier than filing for a divorce, and getting the pussy pass is almost taken for granted.
~ Murders by Femmes Fatales (or Vamps). A femme fatale is a very attractive but very dangerous woman who uses her charm of beauty to get men to love her and then murders them or destroys their lives in devastating ways.
~ Female serial killers, including Bandits.
~ Serial female-killers who liked to kill females.
~ Serial infant-killers (including baby farmers) who killed infants for money.
~ Gangs and rings that professionally murder husbands for money (their 'fees').
etc are also part of herstory. In fact, female terrorists (killing 21 people per attack on average) are deadlier than the male terrorists (who kill only 13 people per attack on average). Being female also helps the female terrorists, because they're considered harmless, allowing them greater freedom of movement; plus, they use shaming language to goad men into joining in the terrorist activities. (See also: 2+2=5, Bigot, Feminism, Feminist Logic, Feminization, Gold Digger, Manosphere, Matriarchy, Patriarchy, Penis Envy, Projection, Pussy Pass, SCUM, Shaming Language, White Feather, Witch Hunt, Womyn.)

His-Fault Divorce: No-fault divorce. Since it's almost always the man who gets the short end of the stick in a no-fault divorce (or, in fact, in any kind of divorce), the more fitting name for the no-fault divorce is his-fault divorce, as if the man was the one in the fault to have deserved the outcome. Often the man is removed from his house, and the wife illegally misuses his belongings and communications (posts, letters, etc) present or still arriving in the house. Now, even the pension money of the old divorced men is set to be transferred to their partners. (See also: Alimony, Chalimony, Double Standards, DV, FRA, Gold Digger, Hyperagency, Hypoagency, Kangaroo Court, Marriage Strike, Matriarchy, Misandry, No-Fault Divorce, Nordic Model, Single Parents, The Plan, VAWA.)

Honey Badger: A female MRA, who is particularly annoying to the feminists. Feminists call her (or any anti-feminist woman) a "Gender Traitor" or a "Chick With a Dick". (See also: MRA.)

Hyperagency: (Opposite: Hypoagency.) Perception about a group of people to have more agency (rights and responsibilities) than they actually have. Men are typically the hyperagents. Hyperagents are expected to protect and provide for the hypoagents that depend upon them. Even that would have been tolerable, but the feminist-twisted laws make the hyperagents (males) solely responsible for any crime or anything gone wrong, even when the male and females are the equally involved participants in the incident. (See also: Affirmative Action, Alimony, Apex Fallacy, Chalimony, Cognitive Dissonance, Double Standards, DoubleThink, DV, Feminist Logic, His-Fault Divorce, Hypergamy, Hypoagency, Male Privilege, Man Up, Masculism, No-Fault Divorce, Objectification, Palimony, Patriarchy, Penis Envy, Proxy Violence, Reverse Discrimination, White Feather, White Knight, Zeta.)

Hypergamy: (Also known as "Marrying Up".) A woman's choice or urge to marry a man of a higher social status or more wealth than her. Survey results have shown that this is a built-in biological desire in the women. (See also: Alpha, Apex Fallacy, Briffault's Law, Cock Carousel, Evo-Psych, Gina Tingles, Gold Digger, Herd Mentality, Hyperagency, Hypoagency, Marriage Strike, Objectification, Serial Monogamy, Social Proofing, White Knight.)

Hypoagency: (Usually used as 'female hypoagency'. Opposite: Hyperagency.) Perception about a group of people to have less agency (decision-making power/capability, rights, and responsibilities) than they actually have. These people enjoy their lack of responsibilities (which are expected to be shared by the hyperagents on which they depend), and are also able to paint themselves as infants and victims claiming their seemingly less rights, and demand special rights. Women are typically viewed as having hypoagency, which is just a trap that makes it possible to hold men (or, of course, the patriarchy) responsible for any bad or wrong choices made by women. That's why it's only brought up in the cases of bad choices made by women; when they make good choices, it's because of their empowerment instead.
A related term is "Passive Aggressive", which is a behavior of opposition (aggression) to some proposal in some subtle ways (passive) but not directly (active) so as to still look innocent, nice, pleasant, or agency-less while opposing the proposal. In other words, this behavior allows the person to oppose some proposal and still hold another person responsible for the opposition. The passive-aggressive person would do this by generally agreeing with the proposal but introducing some subtle tone, body language, or words ("alright, but..., okay well...") of disapproval; so that another person (maybe the proposer itself) would reverse/cancel the decision (thereby getting the agency/blame for the reversal/cancellation). So the passive-aggressive person got its wish fulfilled but directed the responsibility to someone else. (See also: Affirmative Action, Alimony, Apex Fallacy, Chalimony, Cognitive Dissonance, Date Rape, Double Standards, DoubleThink, DV, Entitlement, Feminism, Feminist Logic, Glass Ceiling, His-Fault Divorce, Hyperagency, Hypergamy, Infantilization, Male Disposability, Masculism, NAWALT, No-Fault Divorce, Nordic Model, Palimony, Patriarchy, Princess, Proxy Violence, Pussy Pass, Reverse Discrimination, Single Parents, Vagina Syndrome, Victimhood, White Feather, Zeta.)

Incel: (Short for "Involuntarily Celibate".) Someone staying single (because of any reason - social, legal, political, etc, or due to lack of skills of attracting someone) even when one wants to be in a relationship. (See also: AFC, Game, Ghosting, Grass Eaters, Marriage Strike, MGTOW.)

Infantilization: Treating grown-up people like (or causing them to behave like) irresponsible, agency-less, immature kids, e.g., keeping them dependent (on the state and its socialist policies, for example), changing laws and rules in favor of them (just as there's more tolerance and less punishment for a kid's wrong behaviors, and more rewards for its good behavior or action), absolving them of all guilt and responsibilities (stating that they do not control their emotions and behaviors, just like kids), and painting them as innocent victims in any and all cases (the female hypoagency). This is similar to victimhood in many points. Feminism infantilizes women, with the side-benefit of simultaneously and automatically demonizing men.
A related term is Neoteny, which refers to the retention of child-like physical (bodily) features by someone even after becoming an adult. This delay in acquiring the adult bodily features is mostly characteristic of women, and is considered to be one of the reason that the women's infantilization is tolerated and their lack of accountability excused or even rewarded. (See also: 2+2=5, Affirmative Action, Alimony, Chalimony, Date Rape, Double Standards, DV, Entitlement, Feminism, Feminist Logic, Feminization, His-Fault Divorce, Hypoagency, NAWALT, No-Fault Divorce, Palimony, Paternity Fraud, Princess, Pussy Pass, Useful Idiots, Vagina Syndrome, Victimhood, White Knight.)

Intactivist: (Short for "Integrity Activist".) A person active in the advocacy and awareness of the infants' and children's fundamental human right to their bodily integrity in regards of remaining genitally intact. Or in short, an activist against infant-/child-Circumcision. The legal acceptance and encouragement (including merely on the religious grounds) of Male Genital Mutilation (MGM) despite proofs of its severe mental and physical ill-effects - including deaths from botched circumcision, viral infection, etc - remains a big problem, and an example of misandry and male disposability. Even after the rise in deaths every year, with the latest year scoring the deaths of 34 boys within just a few weeks, South Africa's health minister, who wants to circumcise 1000 boys, says that this happened only because of the greed of the people involved in the circumcision, and that the male circumcision should still continue to be carried out anyway with the UN approved method. There also are cases of male children with deformed genitalia (including due to circumcision) raised as female and with devastating results. Fact is, there's no valid reason to carry out circumcision on an infant (except under some life-threatening emergency), and there are all the resons not to mutilate the infant boys. Some people justify circumcision (of course, of the male children) by stating that it's no big deal because the boy won't remember it upon growing up! These hypocrites fail to say why this reason is (rightly) not applicable to the female children; and also, why it's not okay to molest, rape, abandon, or physically abuse the children by the same logic (because those children won't remember that either).
Feminists encourage (male) circumcision by spreading lies and myths about its benefits and suppressing and downplaying its harms to the boys. Study has found that 56% of Canadians would consider pursuing circumcision for their sons (82% where the father was himself circumcised, vs 15% where the father was intact). Canada's current circumcision rate is 32%; in the US, it's increasing to 61% of men.
To contrast, the Female Genital Mutilation - FGM - is illegal most everywhere, and still when the feminist groups hold a protest or campaign against genital mutilation, it's about the FGM only. The Royal Dutch Medical Association states that circumcision is "a violation of children's right to autonomy and physical integrity".
One reason for a lack of opposition to the MGM is that the foreskin collected is sold in bulk to the cosmetic manufacturers, as the foreskin is used to make women's facecreams and wrinkle treatment. Another is that some people falsely (or disingenuously) think that the MGM is not as severe as FGM (as if that justifies the practice; feminists even oppose the legal ban on the MGM on the basis of this reason), but nemerous studies have shown this to be untrue. (See also: 2+2=5, Bigot, Double Standards, Feminazi, FTSU, Male Disposability, Mangina, Misandry, MRA, MRM, Objectification, Penis Envy, Pussy Pedestalization, SCUM.)

Kangaroo Court: A mocking name for the local or preliminary special-purpose (read feminist) courts like the Family-Courts (also called 'Anti-Family Courts' in the manosphere since they encourage and incentivize women to break families) and the courts that pass decisions in the cases of rape/sexual assault accusations (e.g., the Honor Courts in the colleges). Kangaroo courts are extremely corrupt, feminist, and secretive/hideous in their operations (dishonesty and non-transparent/closed or hidden/secret operation are the reasons for setting them up, in the veil of serving faster justice). Kangaroo courts regularly issue all kinds of draconian and inhumane orders against the men, and operate on the laws that are unconstitutional. The judges in these courts are feminist ideologues and the decision is almost always already known (pre-determined) to be against the male, with presumption of guilt on his part. For this reason, the trials taking place in the Kangaroo courts are also called "Witch Trials". The judges in the family-courts work on the assumption that the man is the slave to his woman and the woman is the owner of her man; so the woman gets her cut from anything the man produces/gains no matter if they're long separated or divorced. In fact, the DV laws and the family-court procedures are so predictively female-centric that women can write stories/plots on just how the things would play out and realize them out in real life exactly, scene by scene, no deviation whatsoever! And the decisions can be draconian and inhumane, even in the breach of the most fundamental constitutional rights of the man (including his freedom of speech; for example, he can be prohibited from using his phone or Twitter, etc). So, if you're the male side in a Kangaroo court trial, you know your fate even before ever visiting the court. The service of justice can't get any fatser and more efficient than that, can it?
Here are some examples of men getting the short end of the stick in the corrupt kangaroo courts. (See also: 2+2=5, Alimony, Bigot, Chalimony, Common-Law Marriage, Date Rape, Dear Colleague, Double Standards, Dowry Law, DV, Feminist Logic, Feminization, FRA, Hamsterbatics, His-Fault Divorce, Manosphere, Matriarchy, No-Fault Divorce, Nordic Model, Orwellian, Palimony, Parental Alienation, Paternity Fraud, Pork, Pussy Pass, Pussy Pedestalization, Schrodinger's Rapist, The Plan, Title IX, Vagina Syndrome, VAWA, Witch Hunt.)

LGBT: Acronym for "Lesbian, Gay, Bi-sexual, Trans-gender". The first letter L emphasizes the lesbian prominence. (Less common form is GLBT, with emphasis on the gay sexual identity. Alphabetical form, free from any sexual identity prominence, is BGLT.) Here are some related terms:
~ Sex vs Gender: Your sex is determined by your biology with which you were born. That is, if you were born with a female body, your sex is female; and if you were born with a male body, your sex is male. Your gender is determined by your perception about your being a female or a male, regardless of your body. If you were born with a female body, for example, and think you're a male, then your gender is male (and your sex is female). Similarly, if you were born with a male body and think you're a male, then your gender is male (and your sex is male).
~ Cis-Trans (or Cis-gender - Trans-gender, or Cis-sexual - Trans-sexual): Two types of Gender Identity. Cis- people are those whose self-perception of their gender matches the biological sex they were born in. That is, a cis- female has female gender and female sex; and a cis- male has male gender and male sex. Trans- people (also called gender-nonconformists) are those whose self-perception of their gender does not match the biological sex they were born in. So, a trans- person has either female gender and male sex, or male gender and female sex. Owing to the difference in their sex and gender, the trans- people usually face psychological problems and difficulties, to overcome which they can undergo what's called 'Gender Reassignment'. (This may involve a surgery, operation, and hormonal treatment. There are two related terms for the trans-people who undergo gender reassignment: "F2M" and "M2F", where '2' is short for 'to', 'F' for 'female', and 'M' for 'male'.) Sometimes this view is taken to the extreme levels in case of the kids (for example, a male kid preferring female clothing is assumed to be a trans when actually he is not; similarly, some parents force their boy into wearing dresses so that he is not 'accused' of the 'hate crime' or having the 'privilege' of masculinity), and sometimes it's genuine and is the only way to restore the kid's psychological balance. So, sometimes rightly and sometimes wrongly, some people do not want (or they oppose) the gender-reassignment treatment for their children (or for children in general). Those people are sometimes labeled as suppoeters of a "Gender Binary" position (a supposedly 'privileged' position), that is, the belief that the sex and gender are one and the same thing and therefore, there's only one type of gender identity (cis) and only 2 combinations of sex and gender ('female gender - female sex' and 'male gender - male sex').
~ Homo-Hetero (or Homosexual - Heterosexual): Two types of sexuality (or sexual orientation). Heterosexual people are those who prefer sexual relationships only with the people of the opposite sex. That is, a hetero-man prefers having sexual relationship with a woman, and a hetero-woman prefers having sexual relationship with a man. Homosexual people are those who prefer sexual relationships only with the people of their own sex. Gay and lesbian people fall under this category.
~ Gay-Straight: While commonly the word "gay" refers to homosexual males, in this context (that is, in the matters involving gay and straight sexuality regardless of gender/sex-differences) it's used to represent both homosexual males and homosexual females. (The word "lesbian" always represents the homosexual females only. The MSM, and people in general, also use the word "gay" for lesbians when describing something negative done by them.) "Straight" represents heterosexual people.
~ Gay Pride Parade: A parade or rally organized by the homosexual people in which they gather together at the roads and in the streets to show that they're proud of being gay.
~ Heteronormativity: The view that the sexual relationship between hetero- (straight) people is the one that should be considered 'normal' (or most appropriate; because most people are straight) and natural (because it's reproductive); and thus, homosexuality is the exception (special case, not the norm) and unnatural or less natural (because it's a reproductive dead-end and automatically breeds out the homosexual people). Feminists believe that this view is wrong (they're reasonable up to this point), and use this as yet another tool to attack and demonize the straight-male sexuality (but not the straight-female sexuality), thereby bringing forth their male-hatred (which is unreasonable, and which actually is their goal, otherwise the feminists couldn't care less about people's sexuality). Painting the homosexual people as the victims of 'heteronormativity', feminism has quite successfully gained the favor of the LGBT community at large, and most (but not all) homosexual (gay) males are now useful idiots to the feminists who hate males and the maleness itself (yes, including the gay males).
~ Homophobia: Irrational or unreasonable fear from, or hatred of, the homosexual people or homosexuality. Dishonest people and bigots also use this word to shame anyone who (rightly) condems the wrongdoings of a homosexual person or a group of them.
~ Transphobia: Irrational or unreasonable fear from, or hatred of, the trans-sexual people or trans-sexuality. Feminism is transphobic (although some of the feminists might not show that off in public) - They cannot accept the trans people because then their theory of the gender being a social construct fails.
An extended form of the acronym is "LGBTQ", where the last letter stands for 'Queer'. Another extended form is "LGBTQIA", where the letter 'I' stands for 'Intersexual' and 'A' for 'Asexual'. All of these terms can be derived from the rarely-used term LGBTTTQQCUII2SFAAOPPO, which stands for "Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Transexual, Transvestite, Queer, Questioning, Curious, Unsure, Intersex, Intergender, 2-Spirit, Fluid, Asexual, Ally, Omnisexual, Polyamourous, Pansexual, Other" (now you know why the term is rarely used). (See also: Bigot, Evo-Psych, Feminism, Shaming Language, Useful Idiots.)

Male Disposability: (Also known as "Male Expendability".) An attitude of indifference toward (or of giving less importance to) the sufferings or deaths of male human beings, as if their lives don't count or matter. For example, you'll often hear in news stories lines like this: "13 people were killed, including 3 women", whereby the emphasis immediately shifts to the death of the women alone, as if the men who died were just mosquitos; in other words, "men" are invisible in the media as the victims, and show up prominently when they do something horrible, the exact opposite of women's media presentation. Similarly, you see rampant killings of men in the games and movies, whereas murder of a female (or violence against a female) is much highlighted as some seriously bad event (often a female never gets killed in a story plot as that would cause a big shitstorm among the feminists whereas killing of any number of men is totally acceptable). In the fictional media, the female characters are rarely subjected to the gruesome torture and violence as compared to the male characters. In addition to violence on the male characters, female-on-male rape is also presented as something totally acceptable and normal, thereby encouraging the female rapists. Feminists also demand that there be strong and positive female characters in every movie (or game, or chidren's stories, or anything for that matter), whether the story allows for that or not.
The male disposability has historically existed everywhere; for example, the slogan "Women and children first" was enforced even when it was a question of life and death during the sinking of the Titanic. However, in the older times (or, traditionally), the men got the honor of being useful and valuable in return, and there were biological/psychological reasons for the male disposability. Now there's no such thing as the "man's honor" or "man's pride" (only men's collective guilt or shame for being men), and the male disposability is enforced through the State power.
Here are some examples of the male disposability in action.
Male disposability goes hand-in-hand with (or maybe is even a result of) gynocentrism / pussy pedestalization, even though the feminists blame it on... (no prizes for guessing)... the patriarchy. (See also: Affirmative Action, Briffault's Law, Dear Colleague, Double Standards, DV, Evo-Psych, Glass Ceiling, Hypoagency, Intactivist, Man Up, Matriarchy, Misandry, Objectification, Patriarchy, Pussy Pedestalization, Reverse Discrimination, SCUM, Shaming Language, The Plan, Title IX, VAWA, Walk a Mile in Her Shoes, White Feather, White Ribbon Campaign, Witch Hunt.)

Male Privilege: A set of benefits that the feminists believe are available to the men for being men. Some men deserve/earn those privileges; for some, their ancestors or the other men have done great things to achieve them for their children; however, for the most part, male privileges don't exist; or are actually Female Privileges (or Feminist Privileges, or entitlements) projected by the feminists and women on the men. Quite the opposite, in fact; because for the most part, men have, and have always had, it harder for being men. Male privilege is used to make misandric and discriminatory laws and policies (any discrimination against men, including their murder, is justified because they're assumed to have male privilege). The feminists, instead of looking at a person's actual status, determine the privilege score with idiotic assumptions based upon the group or identity that person belongs to and has no control over at choosing. Here are some feminists' shaming language phrases, and some policies, based on the myth of male privilege:
~ "Check your privilege" (known as "Privilege Trolling"), that is, "Just accept meekly whatever we (the feminists) are saying or doing, because questioning or opposing us shows off your male privilege (so, just become a mangina)". Feminists use this silencing/shaming tactic in response to a well-reasoned argument that they're unable to counter or that demands proof of their own assertions. In such cases, this statement (or the variant used by the feminist) becomes an argumentum ad hominem (attacking the person making the argument, instead of the argument).
~ "He is angry because his (unearned, male or White male) privilege has been / is being snatched away": Or, "He is furious/sad/resenting because he's not getting (things done) his way". Uttered when a man is rightfully angry or disappointed at a discriminatory treatment he or the men in general received.
~ "Men have it easy": This statement is made when any great or worthy work done by a man is pointed out, which a woman couldn't do even when the same opportunity was available to her.
~ "What about teh menz": This is used to dismiss any demand of equal rights or treatment for the men, in effect saying that whenever men complain about not getting the equal rights, it's just their way to divert the discussion away from the women's problems. This is, again, based on the dishonest assumption that men don't need any rights because they have it easy due to male privilege.
~ "What do you have to complain about?", emitted whenever a man criticises the special rights that women get just for being women (Affirmative Action, Reverse Dicrimination, etc), assuming (dishonestly) that men already have all those things just for being male (rather than acknowledging their hard work, dedication, and problems faced by them all through their life).
~ Countries like Sweden are introducing courses like "Swedish Sexual Education" in which ten year old boys and girl are taught about the male privilege and male oppresion.
Most times, these phrases are blatantly hypocritical, or just an expression of apex fallacy. There also is White Privilege, a subset of the supposed male privileges available only to the White males. (See also: Affirmative Action, Apex Fallacy, Bigot, Double Standards, Entitlement, Feminism, Feminist Logic, Hyperagency, Mangina, Misandry, Patriarchy, Paycheck Fairness Act, Penis Envy, Princess, Projection, Pussy Pass, Pussy Pedestalization, Rationalization Hamster, Reverse Discrimination, Shaming Language, Victimhood, Wage Gap, Walk a Mile in Her Shoes.)

Man Up: A term used to shame and silence a man into conformity whenever he refuses to comply with a misandric policy, law, order, or social norm because he sees risk or danger of harm in it and wants to avoid it for his own good or oppose it for the good of his self and his fellow men. Society uses this phrase to reap the benefits for itself from the sacrifice of the man without providing any viable incentive or reward to the man in return. The phrase is also used to encourage a man to forget about the wrongs done against him (for example, if a woman hit him, abused him, or raped him, he is told to man up and forget it instead of seeking justice).
A "Real Man" is supposedly a man who always holds his (male) part of the social contract (protecting and providing for the women) and silently accepts any physical and mental violence from women. Women are never reminded of their own (female) part of the social contract (which is to not falsely accuse or attack the men) anymore. In a broader and more general sense, "real man" is a shaming language term used by some entity (a person or a group of people) to define a man's identity according to his disposable utility and compliance to that entity. For example, manipulative women who want a man to comply with their irrational misandric feelings and actions may use statements like this: "Real men don't confront or find faults with women" or "Real men do not appear threatening to women" - Notice how this ties a man's mere existence (or sense of his being what he is, including his appearance) to the other people's feelings, as if a man not doing (or looking like) anything not conforming to those other people's perceptions is not a man at all! Women have the virtue of being 'real women' just by existing as women, and without needing anyone's defintions of how they can be real women. In fact, if someone points out what a "real woman" should do to be a real woman, they may (rightly) get offended. However, some of those hypocrites do not see their double standards when they so casually define a 'real man'.
A related term is Peter Pan Syndrome, under which a grown-up male continues to behave like a teenage boy (and is shamed and referred to as a Man-Child by the feminists). Women and feminists use this term to shame men who do not provode for and protect women (that is, who do not hold their part of the social contract). Even a pseudo-scientific "study" has been performed (by surveying a group of people), classifying typical male interests and even some male stereotypes as immature, to 'prove' that men mature at approximately age 43, which is 11 years later than the women. (Interestingly, men's average age for divorce is 44, and most divorces are initiated by the women. So going by the logic of this study, those women who divorce like to be married to the immature men, right? If this seems absurd, the study is pulling out even more absurd correlations.) (See also: Affirmative Action, Dear Colleague, Double Standards, DV, Hyperagency, Male Disposability, Marriage Strike, Misandry, Shaming Language, Title IX, Walk a Mile in Her Shoes, White Feather, White Ribbon Campaign.)

Mangina: A male feminist or a male who is a female-boot-licker. The word is made up of a combination of the words 'man' and 'vagina', i.e., a man with a (mental) vagina (physically a man but who hates his own and other men's masculinity and manhood; and advocates female supremacy as a compensation for the mythical thousands of years of women's oppression - The patriarchy). In short, a feminized man - A feminist-brainwashed (fully blue pilled) man who sees the world through a feminist's viewpoint and is ashamed of his manhood and masculinity. A normal man can sometimes be turned into a mangina by repeatedly telling him that he is privileged because of being male and to check/leave his male privilege for being equal to the (supposedly disadvantaged) females (the only 'privilege' he is allowed to have is to bark at and bite the other men to support the women). Often the manginas receive bitter treatment (discrimination, insult, ridicule, and shaming, etc) from the Sistas (that is, "sisters" - the "feminists" - in the proposed feminist utopia) but most of them still refuse to see the reality, shamelessly seeking the feminists' approval to justify their pathetic existence. Manginas do not hesitate to sacrifice the lives of even their own sons to prove their faithfulness, utility, and worth to the ideological cause of their slavemasters (feminists).
Some of the manginas are men who had done something wrong to (or had had oppressive thoughts about) some woman in their lives (or women in general) and are ridden with guilt. They project their hateful tendencies and thoughts in all the men, thinking that all the men must be like themselves. They then go on to demonize all the men (make all men feel guilty for the actions of some men who are complete strangers to them) and the masculinity, to hide or get rid of their own guilty feelings, so that they can earn the societal (read female) approval of being the good people in their community again.
The female feminists use these tools to their means quite efficiently and keep the manginas like faithful dogs that prove useful from time to time. From time to time, some of the female feminists also keep reminding the manginas of their actual position by stating that the manginas are not really feminists because only females can be feminists. This keeps the manginas in their place and stops them from getting too high up the feminist ladder and from speaking up loudly with their female masters. In other words, the manginas are kept in a constantly insecure mindset by the female feminists because, for one, their identity as feminists can be revoked by the female feminists at any time, and secondly, they won't be immediately accepted in or believed by the MRM either (if they tried to get friendly with that side). "Feminist Ally", "Feminist Lapdog", and "Matriarchal Male" are other names for a mangina. Here are some related terms:
~ Manboob-Schwyzer Syndrome: Named after the uber-manginas David Futrelle (who runs a feminist website called "Man Boobz", which pretends to care about the men but actually just propagates feminism) and Hugo Schwyzer, this is a made-up and funny 'syndrome' but presents the reality (study proves it): Guys (with the said syndrome) do housework because they think it is the way to appease feminist shrikes, and then feel happy about contributing, while women get more depressed as their attraction for an apron-wearing kitchen bitch plummets.
~ Pussy Whipped: (Short form: "PW".) A man who prioritizes a woman's approval and likes over everything else, with the intent of eventually receiving sexual favors from that woman or any other. A pussy whipped man has no self-respect and does not hesitate to belittle himself and other men for gaining a woman's approval. The term is also sometimes used for a man who is afraid of a dominant woman and behaves however she wishes, lest she should beat him physically, shame him, or disapprove of or dislike his manners.
~ Sissy: A man who has dropped every last shred of manhood and masculinity, and is essentially a woman for all intent and purpose except having the priviliges and perks that women enjoy. In other words, a sissy is a man who has been (forcibly, by shaming, or by his choice) deprived of the benefits associated with being a man and those associated with being a woman.
Manginas are often pussy-whipped, sissies, and/or suffer from Manboob-Schwyzer Syndrome. (See also: AFC, Alpha, Beta, Bigot, Blue Pill, Feminism, Feminist Logic, Feminization, Male Privilege, Matriarchy, Misandry, MRM, Patriarchy, Projection, Proxy Violence, Pussy Pedestalization, Shaming Language, Useful Idiots, White Knight.)

Manosphere: (Also known as "Androsphere".) The websites devoted to the men's issues and causes, helping men know more about their actual position in the system, their rights and issues, and informing them of the related news and events are collectively known as the manosphere. In addition to the manosphere, there also are other resources for learning about the men's rights and issues; for example, literature (published books), music, videos, etc. There also are a few movies that are male-friendly. (See also: Game, Masculism, MRM, MSM, New Media.)

Marriage Strike: Dearth of marriages among young marriage-age people in a specified region. The reason for this - in addition to the female hypergamy (which makes many a man on equal or lower footing to the woman unqualified for her) - is the unwillingness of young men to marry becuase of the misandric marriage laws, DV laws (The Plan, VAWA, etc), divorce laws, child custody laws, alimony, child support, etc; wherein upon marriage, the husband gets all the responsibilities (and loses all his rights) and the wife gets all the rights (and absolutely no responsibilities). The feminism-poisoned female nature and attitude (causing stress to the man, nagging him, belittling, being abusive and violent with impunity, etc) is also a factor that repels men from marrying them. For instance, it is seen that men marrying men live longer while opposite is true for women.
Due to this status, marriage as it stands today (called "Marriage 2.0", the traditional one being labeled "Marriage 1.0") for men is like a State-enforced financial slavery, literally - men are actually imprisoned for not being able to afford to pay the alimony and child support after divorce/separation (those prisons are called "Debtor's Prisons"), and on any given day, it is estimated that 250000 to 400000 men are falsely and unlawfully placed into debtor’s prisons. The police and other agencies (courts etc) can freely abuse, threaten, and kill men, and ignore their complaints with no repercussions. Also, a woman can use any flimsy excuse to file for divorce and she will be believed at her word alone. No wonder 60 to 70% of divorce cases are initiated by the women (60% by women in most of the 19th century, over 70% by women in some states just after no-fault divorce was introduced, approximately 90% among college-educated couples), and for frivolous reasons - They have the financial incentives and a feminist judicial system for that.
For pushing people toward working hard and generating economic value, the time honored incentives (like a proper marriage institution and children) work much better than coercion (child support, threat of imprisonment, etc). However, those incentives have been destroyed and the coercive means have been put in place to compell men to make money. As a result, the divorce rates have increased and men are no longer contributing toward the economy. The result of this kind of situation can only be bad, including an economic collapse.
Here are some related terms:
~ Gay Marriage: A marriage between two people of the same sex/gender. Lesbians are generally more enthusiastic about it than the gay males.
~ Polyamorous Marriage: A Multi-Partner Marriage, that is, multiple people (rather than just 2) marrying each other. It's currently not legally recognized in most countries.
Currently, a marriage strike is going on among the straight young men in the nations like the US; and rather than blaming the real reason (the corrupt feminist laws), the MSM, the religious bodies, women, feminists, and the politicians are blaming the men (who else?) for the marriage strike (thereby adhering to the PC bullshit and getting the cause and effect wrong), and are telling them to man up and get married because... well... because women want kids! (That is, "be a provider, regardless if we actively snatch away your earning resources".) For example, a 'Handsome Tax' has been proposed on the good-looking men in Japan, in order to address the declining birth rates. (See also: Alimony, Beta, Briffault's Law, Cause and Effect, Chalimony, Cock Carousel, Common-Law Marriage, Dowry Law, DV, Feminism, Game, Gold Digger, Ghosting, Grass Eaters, His-Fault Divorce, Hypergamy, Incel, Man Up, Matriarchy, MGTOW, Misandry, MSM, NAWALT, No-Fault Divorce, Nordic Model, Omega, Paternity Fraud, PC, PUA, Shaming language, The Plan, VAWA.)

Masculism: (Another form is "Masculinism".) The male counterpart of the nice (garden or fun or sugar-candy) variety of feminism. Whereas feminism destroys gender roles (though only selectively where it benefits the females), masculism reinforces them. For example, masculists believe that men cannot be victims of sexual assault, rape, or DV by women; or at least that kind of victimization should not be pursued. Their goal is to end the whole victimhood industry (which is corrupt and gives the government the power to destroy the rights of men), rather than making it even bigger by posing men as yet another victim class.
Those following the masculism are called masculists or masculinists. Since masculism arose as a reaction when the evil effects of feminism started to become apparent, the masculists are also sometimes called "Reactionaries". They often advocate male dominance in certain specific fields and assign certain other roles specifically to females. (See also: DV, Feminism, Hyperagency, Hypoagency, MRM, Patriarchy, Victimhood.)

Matriarchy: (Also used as Gynarchy: Rule of a governance of or for women.) Literally, the female equivalent of patriarchy, with women as the heads of the house (women being the actual heads of the house has historically been the case, but now it's enforced by the State and the judicial system, rather than being an agreed upon arrangement). However, more commonly, matriarchy is referred to as a society like the arrangement in a hive of bees where men are desexualized slave workers at the mercy of women, and can be killed (disposed off) ruthlessly any time. This is the dream world idealized by feminism.
True to its ideological nature, feminism believes that the female sex is inherently superior, the male sex is inherently faulty/inferior, and this 'man problem' must be dealt with as a policy matter, that is, with the government enforcement of feminist policies. This way, feminism enforces stereotypes (while at the same time claiming to end them). Socially, feminism continuously degrades the male self-esteem while artificially enhancing the female self-worth. The goal of feminism is, globally, to:
~ Absolve women of all responsibility and accountability (and provide girls all kinds of entitlements and incentives) for their actions against men (so they can do anything, including killing men, without consequence). Mostly, pussy passes are already handed over quite generously, but it gets even better when they're enshrined in the law.
~ Criminalize or tax masculinity, all male behavior, or even being a man (in the form of Man Tax) or a male bachelor - in the form of Bachelor Tax, which existed for 51 years (1948 - 1984) in the Communist Romania, after which it was extended for single women as well (but women still had to pay a smaller rate), and finally abolished. In the state of Montana, the money collected from the bachelor tax was used to support widows.
~ Demonize and ban male sexuality, even threaten men's sexual desires with violence. For example, the mental health professionals ask healthy young boys about their feelings on sex, and the boys say they find girls walking on the street attractive and have a sexual thought (which is perfectly normal), and the boys are labeled "potential rapists". (This has been going on for years.) Once a boy gets this label, he can't work in any social job, including police, doctor, sports coach, etc. (There's no corresponding label for the girls having sexual thoughts about boys.)
~ Feminize every system.
~ Transfer everything from men to women through the power of the State.
~ Use the laws and police to silence any complaints by men about all this.
and ultimately destroy or severely reduce the male half of the population (Gendercide - for example, by using the "ancient female wisdom of poisoning" - akin to the Genocide), thereby achieving the female supremacy. Feminists call this ultimate state of the world a "Feminist Utopia" or the "Sisterhood", are trying their best to achieve it, and have been considerably successfull so far globally. The feminists' attempts toward demonizing men and then justifying marginalizing those supposed 'devils' for achieving the goal of the feminist utopia have been going on since long - even before the 1900's. And the feminists, in all their dishonest glory, whine about a mythical patriarchy even now in the era of a complete and global matriarchy, just so that they can hide their hateful agenda behind victimhood. True to its form, these true efforts at the (male) gendercide go hidden and are kept secret from the public eye (the MSM quickly removes all traces of any news story related to the male gendercide); while the feminist propaganda machine spreads misinformation about the female gendercide, some of the prominent sources going as far as defining the gendercide as just the female gendercide (just like some of the dictionaries define the word 'sexism' as just the sexism against women, thereby making the definition itself a sexist and misandric one). The most visible sources create artificial examples of female gendercide by calling the female-to-male population ratio of less than 1 a case of gendercide, which it is obviously not.
Contrary to the mythical feminist claim of existence of patriarchy (mainly based upon the irrelevant fact that more male politicians or higher-up position-holders in the businesses/corporations exist than female ones - apex fallacy), matriarchy is the de-facto culture prevalent in most countries, and is being pushed in the remaining. More top-position holders being male cannot be taken as a sign of patriarchy when they're way less than even 1% of the population, are acting (or are forced to act) on behalf of the female population (or the feminists), and are enacting more and more female-favoring and misandric laws and policies. The facts and figures show that the culture is one of matriarchy instead:
~ There are laws and policies (affirmative action, gender quotas, Title IX, etc) that force men out of the fields of education, farming, parliament, workforce, and other areas; and push women in. This results in men with lower education and low-paying jobs, and women that are their superior (bosses, managers, etc). Feminized environment everywhere makes it difficult or impossible for the males to survive. So when they do get to enter the fields of education, workplace, etc, they are made to drop out or resign in higher numbers, including as a result of false rape / sexual assault accusations from the women. Even if a boy does excel at something despite constantly facing all the hatred and discrimination, his wings are cut down, and he is actively discouraged and put in his place by the feminist authority.
~ Feminism claims to be against gender roles but actually it forces the traditionally female gender roles on the males (that is, males must stay at home and care for the children). It believes that under the norm of matriarchy, the 'new' men and boys need to adapt themselves to it, and the females (and only females) must be getting all the education, jobs, and political positions. This is exactly what is happening in most countries, e.g., Iceland: Feminist Halla Tomasdottir, the then General Director of the Chamber of Commerce, says, "It's typical male behavior [that leads to the economic collapse]". She then goes on to praising the female governance and management (matriarchy). Most of Scandinavia, especially Iceland, is trying to force men into taking parental leave so they'd stay at home and open up spots for female employees. In Iceland, the feminists have been campaigning to keep the male:female ratio in colleges/universities at 2:3.
~ Pseudo-scientific and feminist 'studies' are being presented on a weekly basis that 'prove' that men with large testicles are worse dads, or that masculine males (e.g., bodybuilders) are sexist and misogynist, or that physically strong men are right wingers (and hence anti-women), etc. In other words, anything that the females lack is being demonized; the more of a manly feature in a man, the bigger an enemy he is as viewed by the feminists.
~ British men collectively pay 72% of the income taxes which largely fund the state, and women only 28%, yet the interests of men and boys are assaulted by the State that ensures that ever more advantages are provided to women and girls. The wealth transfer from men to women is also being accompalished through the marriage/divorce laws and the various types of vaginamony (viz, alimony, chalimony, palimony, etc).
~ Fathers have been made optional by law, and children are the mother's property. After the abortion has been made totally a choice of the women, laws are now being proposed that will allow a mother to kill her children a few years after their birth. Matriachy requires women to be the owners of life and death. The culture is slowly headed there. Women already receive pussy passes for murders. Initially it was owing to the bigotry of the judges, but now it's being enshrined in the law.
~ Masculinity and male sexuality is demonized (every man is Schrodinger's rapist), feminity and female sexuality is considered divine and is celebrated.
~ Men are demonized and dehumanized (like Jews were in the Nazi Germany, so that they're deprived of any sense of self-confidence or standing up for themselves), are assumed to be collectively engaged in satanic rituals, and are painted as responsible for all the evil in the world. This makes way for passing anti-male laws and policies without much resistence. Slowly, all the human rights of the men will erode away and they'll be targets of the feminist utopian dream.
~ Men are kept in prisons; "about 1 in every 50 American men is currently behind bars, and we could think about gender disparity as perhaps being a key dimension of that problem". Another major factor is the dishonest DV and divorce laws, which have historically been misandric.
~ Witch hunt policies like the Dear Colleague and sexual harassment policies in the workplace make the life and career of a male student or employee dependent on the whim of a female student/employee. She can accuse him any time of any kind of sexual harassment and he will be immediately thrown out of the institution. As a very obvious sign of matriarchy, these policies ensure that the females are always believed at their word alone - no proof ever required, and the males are always guilty - they're not even allowed to prove themselves innocent. Same is the case with DV laws and policies.
~ Women enjoy complete or partial impunity in raping and beating/killing men and boys for their sexual satisfaction and entertainment. Currently, various vagina syndromes have been invented to get them out of legal trouble, but laws are being proposed (directly and indirectly) to just make it legal for the women to have their pleasure in those kinds of activities.
~ In countries like Argentina, murder of a woman by a male carries a life sentence; any other kind of murder carries 8 to 25 years of imprisonment. Similarly, in the proposed Italian law, punishment for a crime is 33% to 50% higher if the crime is committed against a woman by a man. Basically, the law literally states that a man's life is less valuable. Matriarchy, of course.
~ Males are not allowed to criticize the females or say anything that might make them uncomfortable (sometimes they're not allowed to even look at the women) in the name of the PC culture. This is like forcing a virtual gag and a 'niqab' on the men's mouth and eyes. Men are also not allowed to have their own spaces, while women have no such restriction.
~ Men's views and opinions (including about the things and matters that affect males in far greater numbers than females) are not sought and not given any importance, and are considered included in and represented by their owners' (women's) views and opinions.
~ India's Food Security Bill (similar to the food stamp program under the US Welfare programs) will provide free or subsidized food to the eldest woman in the household as the only official recipient. She is free to decide how the food is shared in the family, with no means put in place to ensure that she is distributing the food appropriately to every member of the family without discrimination or blackmailing (in fact, she is free to sell the received food, and no man in her family has the right to question her). Effectively, this makes the men totally dependent on the goodwill of the women, establishing matriarchy.
~ This kind of discrimination is also at the core of certain international relief programs (such as the WFP - World Food Program) run with support from the UN (United Nations), Red Cross, and such (which otherwise used to be extremely good and reputable before their feminist hijacking). For example, deliberate denial of food aid to men during the earthquake of Haiti (the false excuse, based on an unrelated report, being that all the men are selfish, and so only the women should get the food packets - This with no policies or punishments imposed to make women responsible with the food distribution to their families); and later, the men were engaged in building houses that were delivered in the names of women only (this time with no need for providing even an excuse). These are attempts at establishing women as the heads of the house and in control of the resources even when they've not earned all that.
~ The UN is blatantly pro-female and does not mention men and boys at all in its programs and policies except for using them as tools for female service and empowerment.
~ More recently, Kevin Rudd has denied refugee men entry into Australia forever. They will never be allowed to come in, even legally, and will all be sent to another - 'Third-World' - poor country having massive problems of its own. They will be dumped into canvas camps in thousands in a small town which has only a few thousand inhabitants itself. Women and children will not be sent there, however; they will be placed 'in the community' - In Australia.
~ International groups organize men's sports events (only because they are more popular and raise more money; otherwise their focus would only be on the women's events) and regardless, send the gathered money to the feminist causes (women's health, girls' empowerment, etc).
~ In Srebrenica, and generally at the Bosnian and/or Kosovo war, the UN was eager to move out the "women and children" (that is to say, female children, because 12-year-old boys were left behind) and turned a blind eye to the decimation of the male population.
Fact is, this kind of discrimination is part of a global level feminist Social Engineering, wherein, making use of the crisis caused by the natural disasters (and other factors such as poverty etc), a global matriarchy (the earlier stage of a feminist utopia) is slowly being established. Under that, men are made to be dependent upon women, be obedient to them (as the women get to decide whether the men will be kept alive or be starved), and silently submit to the violence and abuse perpetrated by the women on them (or face eviction from house, punishment by authorities, or death from starvation). In other words, under the imposed matriarchy, men are the slaves and women their owners.
Patriarchies (societies headed by the father, not the mythical oppressive feminist-defined ones) have been known for surviving and getting back at their feet after the biggest of the attacks and mishaps, while the matriarchies are not sustainable and tend to die on their own or exist in extremely low and primal (animal-like) conditions of life. (See also: Affirmative Action, Alimony, Apex Fallacy, Bigot, Chalimony, Commom-Law Marriage, Dear Colleague, Dowry Law, DV, DVPO, Entitlement, Femicide Law, Feminism, Feminization, His-Fault Divorce, Kangaroo Court, Male Disposability, Misandry, MSM, Nordic Model, Orwellian, Palimony, Paternity Fraud, Patriarchy, PC, Pro-Choice, Proxy Violence, Pussy Pass, Pussy Pedestalization, Reverse Discrimination, Schrodinger's Rapist, SCUM, Single Parents, The Plan, Title IX, Vagina Syndrome, Vajajay, VAWA, Victimhood, Welfare, Witch Hunt, Womyn.)

MGTOW: (Acronym for "Men Going Their Own Way". Less common form is MGHOW - "Man Going His Own Way".) These are men who get tired of the government and the society constantly telling them how to live up to their expectations and how to be a "Good Man"; and therefore, they stop caring about the government and the society, and go on to live life according to their own choice and standard. Originally, these men used to have marriages and long-term relationships with women, but ever since the government has started to enter the bedrooms of people (screwing up men in the cases of DV, marriage and long-term or live-in relationships, divorce, child custody, etc), MGTOW men are now averse to marriage and long-term relationships with women. They might have sexual relationship with women, seek paid sex, etc, but not any kind of relationship (or fatherhood) with a woman in which the government might enter and destroy their life. Except for taking such precautions with every system, MGTOW men do everything that anybody else does (they can have jobs, run business, travel, make friends, watch movies, enjoy life, etc). The sub-set of MGTOW men who avoid sex with women altogether is called the 'grass eaters'.
Feminists, unable to blame the MGTOW for the victimhood of women, try to shame MGTOW by accusing them of... ya know... misogyny. The feminists claim that since the MGTOW men do not trust any woman (rather than only those who misuse their legal power to destroy the men's lives), they must hate all women. The movement of MGTOW, being what it is, cannot care less about this kind of accusations, but some of the MGTOW men have actually argued that it's not the case of misogyny but of losing trust in the women. Just like you keeping your house doors closed does not mean you considers all the passers-by as thieves (but the one you let in can be), and just like you avoiding snakes even when knowing that not all snakes are poisonous does not mean that you believe all snakes are poisonous (but the one you decided to touch can be), the MGTOW men argue that while not all women would use their legal power over them to ruin their lives, the problem is that all the women have that unbalanced power over the men's lives in the first place, which the women can use at any point. And a very large number of women have shown that they'll use this power maliciously whenever they feel like - Because they have (legal and social) support and (cultural and financial) incentives for using it. Therefore, getting in relationship with a woman is like playing the Russian Roulette - a deadly game of chance in which a revolver is loaded with only one bullet, and the participants take turns firing it at their own heads after spinning the cylinder.
Besides, just like the women claim that they're independent and men are unnecessary, the MGTOW's offer the counter argument that women also are practically unnecessary to the men for a relationship/marriage and bring nothing of value to the table. (See also: DV, Feminism, Ghosting, Grass Eaters, Incel, Marriage Strike, Misandry, NAWALT, Orwellian, Shaming Language, White Feather, Zeta.)

Misandry: Mentality of collective hatred toward, or unreasonable fear from, men and boys (or the maleness). "Misandric" (adjective, adverb), "misandrist" (noun, adjective), and "misandrous" (adjective) are some related words. Misandry is extremely widespread (that is, global - not limited to some places or cultures) and systematic in the present culture, and is heading the society toward collapse. Misandry is so ingrained in the system that nobody notices it even when it is blatantly obvious (a similar, or even much lower level, hatred of any other identified group of human beings will be immediately called out).
Here are some examples of incidents of misandry.
The problem of misandry is not merely owing to the ignorance and the common social expectations, it's institutionalized, systematic, and being actively codified in the law. For instance, Denmark says that both men and women's haircuts must cost the same price, despite the obvious longer time it takes in case of women. Other Scandinavian States are also known to be extremely feminist and misandric. This may not be so well-known but countries/provinces/regions/unions like:
~ Argentina, where murdering a woman carries a life sentence - but only if the perpetrator is male; any other kind of murder carries 8 to 25 years of imprisonment. Basically, the law literally states that a man's life is less relevant to the society.
~ Croatia.
~ European Union tries to demand fishermen to get more women on their boats, because a Spanish woman from the Party of European Socialists says so and the Maoist leader Jose Barroso seems to agree. According to a recently issued EU report, men's role in gender equality is to be good feminists, otherwise they are deemed supporters of "Hegemonic Masculinity" (a set of everything wrong done by anyone - male or female; just like 'patriarchy' and forms its basis) and will be thrown under the proverbial bus.
~ France, the only country in Europe that bans paternity tests, has women making up 85% of the lawyers (98% in family affairs). Within French companies (e.g., Societe Generale and BPCE - the second and third most prominent bank groups of the country), there are social networks only for women to organize themselves and take up top positions. In most companies, almost 100% of project managers are women (while team members are almost all men). Family help and legal help is female oriented; even to the men they answer by mails starting with "Madame". Police does not take charges from men against women, while they take charges from women against men even by phone calls. If a woman charges a man for DV and it turns out to be fake, no charges are filed against the woman.
~ Germany, where, like India, there are female quotas for politicians. The over-representation of women is even more pronounced within the top ranks of government. One political party, The Greens, makes it a must that at least 50% of all election lists and committees be filled by women. At party meetings, female and male speakers alternate. If there's more female than male speakers, that's no problem. If the reverse is true, a vote is taken whether those remaining men also get to speak. During party meetings, women may call a women's vote at any time. In this case, all men have to leave the room. The remaining women then vote on whether to exercise their veto right. If they veto a proposed resolution, it is rejected. The Left also has a 50% female quota, The SPD has a 40% female quota. On the right side of the political spectrum, CDU and CSU have a 40% female quota. The prominent reason why parties promote and nominate women who are less competent than their male competitors is feminism. Feminists have spread the notion that there is widespread discrimination against women and that equal representation of men and women is desirable and just. They have never made any coherent arguments for these positions, but only some baseless assertions about the superiority of female leadership, occasionally backed up by some terribly flawed study.
~ Jamaica is a known matriarchy, where, among other things, gay men (but not lesbians, who are accepted as a normal part of society) can get up to 10 years in prison at hard labor for being gay.
~ Korea, where the MRA's die just to raise a little money whereas the government spends the taxpayers' money on uncountable programs exclusively for the females. Korea also has women-only parking spaces, stairs, and other female entitlements like the menstrual paid vacation, wherein women get to have a day off every month. Of course, a policy that can be abused will be abused (the feminist policies are just made with the intent of being abused by the women). So the korean women, regardless of their actual period day, take this vacation on Fridays and Mondays, so as to have longer, consecutive holidays.
~ Michigan, where a woman can buy or sell property without her husband's consent or knowledge; but a man cannot buy, own, or sell property without his wife's knowledge or consent. This is called the "Widow's Law" but applies to every couple where both spouses are alive.
~ New Zealand, where the crime of rape applies only to men and carries a maximum jail sentence of 20 years, whereas women who force a male to have sex face a charge of sexual violation which carries a maximum 14-year sentence. The New Zealand government is also considering a law that will permit women to murder their husbands in cold blood.
~ Singapore, where caning is a punishment exclusively for the males.
~ Spain.
etc are also full of misandric laws and policies, and increasingly more nations are becoming poisoned by feminism. So even the Expatriate Solution (i.e., moving to a less feminist country) is just a tempory one, if not already too late.
However, since those in the position of authority (the government, the judicial system, etc) benefit from it, misandry is not only acceptable but is encouraged by the system. These conditions are slowly leading toward the formation of a 'male bomb'. (See also: Alimony, Chalimony, Double Standards, DV, Entitlement, Feminazi, Feminism, Feminist Logic, Feminization, His-Fault Divorce, Intactivist, Male Disposability, Male Privilege, Mangina, Matriarchy, MGTOW, MRA, Nordic Model, Objectification, Palimony, Parental Alienation, Paternity Fraud, Patriarchy, Proxy Violence, Pussy Pass, Pussy Pedestalization, Rape Culture, Reverse Discrimination, Schrodinger's Rapist, SCUM, Shaming Language, Wage Gap, White Knight, White Ribbon Campaign, Witch Hunt.)

MRA: (Acronym for "Men's Rights Activist" or "Men's Rights Advocate".) A person active in the advocacy and awareness of men's rights, and removal of policies and laws discriminatory to the men; in other words, a member of the MRM. MRA's are red pill people who are not afraid of voicing their anti-feminist perspective or the truth even if goes against the PC norms. This separates them from the other red pill people who, despite knowing the reality of the feminism and the prevailing discrimination against the males, choose to stay silent so as not to go against the flow. Because the truth hurts, and the blue pill people do not want to face a bitter reality in favor of a comforting delusion, MRA's often lose some friends during their activism, and gain some new ones. This is overall positive for everyone.
While any man is in a constant danger of abuse by a woman who knows that the law would believe her at her word alone and reward her for her vicious actions, the MRA's are particularly prone to voilent physical attack and threats by the feminists. So men (and especially MRA's - male or female) must be cautious and take certain measures to protect themselves from getting into trouble.
A related term is "MHRA", which is simply MRA with the additional letter 'H' signifying 'Human'. (See also: Blue Pill, Feminism, FRA, Honey Badger, Intactivist, MRM, PC, Red Pill.)

MRM: (Acronym for "Men's Rights Movement".) A movement advocating and and raising awareness about men's rights and issues, and fighting and raising voice against laws and policies that are discriminatory to the men. The MRM is nowhere near as popular as feminism, partly because most (blue-pilled) men simply do not believe or know that there's some kind of systematic discrimination against them, because feminism has waged a the so-called Gender War against the male sex. Feminism paints itself as the same as all the women, giving the perception that if you're against feminism, you're viewed as against women. That is why in the so-called gender-war, men simply don't show up and bow out (and in fact, they even despise the people that are against feminism, considering them to be misogynists).
Currently, there's no government support or department for the protection of the men's rights (only women's rights are recognized politically and legally). Almost no politician (or celebrity figure, for that matter) speaks about men's rights; actually, most of the politicians (and celebrities) are either themselves feminists or their supporters. And therefore, MRM is basically a self-sustained (member-supported) movement comprising of a group of people (the MRA's) spreading awareness about the men's rights and issues mostly through online resources but also sometimes with posters and banners etc. There's no funding from the government, so donations from the people supporting MRM are probably the only main financial source.
One of the core principles of the movement is non-violence (violence is not tolerated even in speech, for example in comments). Another is truth and intellectual honesty (no quote mining, no twisting or bending statements out of context, etc). Yet another aspect is its open, welcoming, and embracing nature toward anyone and everyone regardless of their demographics, political views, race, religion, sex/gender, sexuality, etc. Lately the MRM has been successful in bringing about some real positive changes in the judicial system and elsewhere. Here are some of the things accompalished by the movement, directly (by sending letters to the politicians, using the courts, etc) or indirectly (by spreading awareness about the men's issues, criticising the misandric policies, etc):
~ New South Wales (NSW) State Government and Minister Pru Goward have acknowledged the previously ignored population of male victims of DV and choosen to make services available to them that were, until now, only available to women.
~ CAFE announces establishment of Toronto's first "Men's Centre".
A related term is "MHRM", which is simply MRM with the additional letter 'H' signifying 'Human'.
A less common name for the movement is MM - "Men's Movement" - sometimes also considered a superset encompassing MRM and masculism, and also including the social and emotional aspects of men's lives. (See also: Blue Pill, Feminism, FRA, FTSU, Honey Badger, Intactivist, Masculism, Misandry, MRA, Pro-Life, Quote Mining, Red Pill.)

MSM: (Acronym for "MainStream Media".) MSM comprises of the popular resources (news websites, Wikipedia, magazines, newspapers, etc) of news and current happenings. MSM is often biased and feminist while hiring its contributors and reporting news about certain groups of people, and often prefers political correctness over the inconvenient truth, to the point of unprofessional/opinionated interviewing and ideological/bigoted reporting. MSM always highlights even the smallest crimes against the women; and suppresses, hides, refuses to cover, or manipulates even the biggest wrongs done by women (particularly against men or boys). It uses emotionally manipulative wording to gain sympathy for the female wrongdoers. For example, have a look at this news reporting (including its title), which makes it almost impossible to conclude that the two adults involved were husband and wife and were equally guilty. Some of the other tactics employed by the MSM include:
~ Using words like "mom", "mother" etc for a woman criminal who happens to be a mother, even when being a mother has got absolutely nothing to do with the case. On the other hand, the word "father" is never used for a male criminal, in fact sometimes even when his being father does have to do with the case.
~ Using infantilizing words like "girl" for a woman criminal while using "man" for a male criminal (or even victim) of the same (or even smaller) age.
~ Using gender-neutral nouns ("chairperson" instead of "chairman", "fire-fighters" instead of "firemen", "person" or "people" instead of "man" or "men", "police officers" instead of "policemen", etc) for describing the positive actions accomplished by a man or a group of men, or for describing events where men are the victims. Gender-neutral nouns (like "customer", "employee", etc) are also used to hide the gender of the female wrongdoers or incompetant females.
~ Using male-gendered nouns ("conman", "gunman", "manhunt", etc) to describe the negative acts done by someone (even if the wrongdoer is female).
A broad and extensive content analysis of mass media portrayals of men and male identity conducted by Dr Jim Macnamara of the University of Western Sydney shows that 69% of mass media reporting and commentary on men was unfavorable; more than 75% of all mass media representations of men and male identities showed men in one of the 4 ways: villains, aggressors, perverts, and philanderers. More than 80% of media mentions of men, in total, were negative - compared with 18.4% of mentions which showed men in a slightly positive role. Similar conclusions are drawn by other studies too. In fact, even the famous British feminist author Doris Lessing said in 2001, "I find myself increasingly shocked at the unthinking and automatic rubbishing of men which is now so part of our culture that it is hardly even noticed... The most stupid, ill-educated, and nasty woman can rubbish the nicest, kindest, and most intelligent man and no one protests." Her audience, many of whom were feminists and assorted lefties, was stunned at a feminist publicly speaking of men's victimization.
If MSM informs the public about the truth of the misandric gender politics being played by the feminists in the top positions, the public would oppose any wrong move; so MSM does not (as during the Orwellian times, it's usually merely a mouthpiece of the politicians). Owing to media's intentional hiding of (or even silencing other sources of information about) male-hating bills and the government's wish to be less and less transparent and accountable, misandric laws are passed and the family-court proceedings are carried out secretly, when people are not watching. These laws are then used against the individual men. People don't get to know about the wrong laws eroding their most basic rights even after they have been passed. It's only when some man gets entangled that he will come to know what the law has in store for him.
The usually feminist (or pandering to its female readership) and politically correct MSM is mostly critical of only men; it ridicules their achievements and laughts at their problems, often to the extent of hypocricy. For example, it criticizes the Boy Scouts for not having gay leaders for the "unreasonable" fear of gay sex; while at the same time, it criticizes the churches for having gay priests and hence encouraging the gay sex! You see, it only picks up the negative points about men, even if they amount to totally opposite views. Everywhere, when the girls fail to achieve as much as the boys, the MSM accuses of discrimination (it NEVER states the girls' incompetency); whereas if the boys fail, that is, of course, because the today's girls are empowered and trump the incompetent boys. (And then it demands special policies to help girls!) MSM also twists statistics and omits or even creates news stories under feminist pressure. For example, you must have come across many surveys or interviews with local households; when something goes wrong in the families (for example, their children perform bad), and it's obviously got nothing to do with the fathers, the media would call it a fault of "parents", but when something good has come out, it's always due to the efforts of "moms". In short, MSM can never be trusted in the matters related to the sex and gender (or, for that matter, the race, religion, minority, or protected groups). (See also: Bigot, Double Standards, Feminization, Infantilization, Manosphere, Misandry, New Media, Orwellian, PC.)

NAWALT: (Acronym for "Not All Women Are Like That". A derived acronym is AWALT - "All Women Are Like That".) This sentiment is expressed when the bad or misandric deeds or views of a woman or a group of women suddenly get exposed to the public. Example: A man's life gets destroyed in a divorce by the family-court. When it becomes clear to the public that the fault entirely lies with the wife, some men feel that they should never marry. But that would make it impossible for the wives and the government and legal system to extract financial benefits from these men through one major source (divorce). So the NAWALT mantra is uttered to these men to encourage them to ignore the event. Within the manosphere, the term is used to represent its mythical nature; that is, when someone uses this term, the meaning is that actually all women are like that (and are using NAWALT to hide their similarity to the women doing wrong or bad).
The implication behind the idea of NAWALT (that is, the intent of the person mentioning this term) as a myth is that, while women who are not feminist or misandrist do exist, they're very rare; most NAWALT women would just claim to be against feminism in their talks but would then make full use of the feminist and misandric laws and policies to their benefit (and then still keep claiming afterward that they don't like feminism). Therefore, when confronted with a NAWALT type woman (that is, most of them), pay attention to her actions (what she does) rather than her words (what she says) - Talk is cheap, action matters. While there does arise criticism of the usage of the NAWALT concept as a myth, its supporters justify and stick to their generalization. Here are some related terms:
~ The One: The perfect woman which you, as a man, had always been searching for. (Except that you'll most probably never find one.) When a woman breaks your heart (dumps you for another man, or drags you through a divorce/separation taking away everything from you), and you complain about her, the other women would say that it was your fault for choosing the wrong woman, and that you should not give up on chasing women because at some point you'll find the woman of your dreams ("The One").
~ NAFALT: (Acronym for "Not All Feminists Are Like That".) This is a claim made by the feminists whenever someone points out something clearly wrong done by a feminist. Just as with NAWALT, in the manosphere, NAFALT means that actually all feminists are like that and for proof, one only need to look at the actions of a NAFALT type feminist rather than believing at the feminist's words.
~ "No True Feminist: Whenever a clearly unreasonable belief or view held by a feminist is pointed out, the feminist apologists would say, "No true feminist would do that" etc.
The feminists apologists expressing such sentiments fall under two categories: Either they're delusional and believe in the textbook definition of feminism, or they're the real feminists and are wilfully trying to present feminism in a good light in order to mislead other people about its true goals and ideals. (See also: Bigot, Briffault's Law, Dowry Law, Evo-Psych, Feminism, Ghosting, Grass Eaters, Gold Digger, Herd Mentality, Hypoagency, Manosphere, Marriage Strike, MGTOW, Misandry, Schrodinger's Rapist, Shaming Language, Social Proofing, Vagina Syndrome, White Feather, White Ribbon Campaign.)

New Media: The online resources (websites, blogs, online forums, etc), providing news and info to the public about the latest events, and possibly also with interactive capabilities (wherein the readers can comment on the news stories and articles), are collectively known as the New Media. Currently, the New Media related to the men's rights and issues can only be found as part of the manosphere. The currently somewhat dominant (but increasingly obsolete) print media (newspapers, magazines, etc) and TV (not online) are called the Old Media. New Media is more free, capable, and widespread for delivering the news and info from an unbiased, un-opinionated, and neutral perspective (rather than manipulating the news to appeal to the culture of political correctness). However, that does not stop some feminist-biased publications from being dishonest, although at least they can be called out on their shoddy reporting and Yellow Journalism. (See also: Manosphere, MSM, PC.)

No-Fault Divorce: A divorce that can be filed by a spouse (or both of them) without the need to prove any fault on part of anyone of them. Logically, this would mean that both partners go their own ways after separation, without any transfer of pre-marital assets and wealth etc. In practice, however, the man almost always loses the most under a no-fault divorce, so much so that in the manosphere, this kind of divorce is also called his-fault divorce.
On a related note, it has been shown that marriages in which the wife drinks more than her husband are twice as likely to dissolve (that is, the divorce rate doubles) as those in which the man was the heavier drinker.
The governments providing incentives and perks for the divorce is obvious when people start divorcing their spouses for tax-cuts in such a way as to create a surge in the divorce rates in two days. (See also: Alimony, Chalimony, Common-Law Marriage, Double Standards, DV, FRA, Gold Digger, His-Fault Divorce, Hyperagency, Hypoagency, Kangaroo Court, Manosphere, Marriage Strike, Matriarchy, Misandry, Single Parents, VAWA.)

Nordic Model: This is a misandric and sexist model for designing Prostitution laws, according to which buying sex (purchase of sex) is a crime (and should be illegal) but selling sex is not; that is, a prostitute is not guilty but the customer (commonly referred to as a 'John') is. (To have an idea of its stupidity, just consider legally freeing a drug dealer from any consequences and always holding the buyer of the drugs as the offender.) This model has been adopted by many a country (like Norway, Sweden, etc) and several others are considering it. Recently, Ireland has also passed it as their law, thereby criminalizing only the men who pursue prostitutes.
Ideally, prostitution is a matter of a mutual exchange happening between two consenting adults and the government should stay out of it unless the provider or the receiver of the service complains (when it should be dealt on a case by case basis like all other crimes). The rationale behind the laws based on the Nordic Model is that the prostitution is bad (or dangerous to the prostitutes) because it's not illegal and hence in more demand; that is, if it's made illegal to buy (but not to sell), the demand would decrease and hence so would dangers for the prostitutes. This is a case of reversing the cause and effect, since it's actually making the buying of the service illegal that makes it more underground (so that it cannot be reported) and dangerous. Moreover, the feminists cite the exaggerated stats of women Trafficking for outlawing the sex work, just like all other lies they spout to get their ideologcal demands met. They also state that the prostitutes are forced to be prostitutes. However, in general, prostitutes do not do it because they were forced to (and some not even out of necessity - They just like to make easy money while riding the cock carousel).
By the way, marriage as it stands today, does make prostitution kind of legal (but extremely risky and costly to a man). Some women also use prostitution for having children without the knowledge or consent of the biological dad. (See also: Bigot, Cause and Effect, Cock Carousel, Feminist Logic, Feminization, Gold Digger, Hamsterbatics, His-Fault Divorce, Hypoagency, Kangaroo Court, Marriage Strike, Matriarchy, Misandry, Paternity Fraud, Pussy Pass, Pussy Pedestalization, Rationalization Hamster, Serial Monogamy, Vajajay, Victimhood.)

Objectification: Treating human beings as commodities or objects. For example, the laws and policies that transfer money and children from men to women during marriage and divorce treat men like walking cash (ATM) machines and sperm donors. Most examples of male disposability are also examples of male objectification. Women use men like human shield to protect themselves; they use them as emotional tampon or shrink, or a rock to lean on; or as a dildo.
The sexual portrayal of women in media or men's romantic/sexual advances toward women is considered female objectification (although in this case they're being treated like precious objects to be liked, praised, cared for, and loved; unlike the male objectification wherein men are treated like objects of utility to be used and thrown/destroyed). It's not one-way though, as the feminists make it appear - Men are also used in ads and on billboards for pulling money/donations for feminist/women's causes, and handsome men are kicked out of the country just so that women may not fall for them. (Victim-blaming, anyone?)
In other words, women are objectified as objects of desire (though with the women's own choices) and men as objects of utility (usually by forcing/shaming them). In fact, feminism has made the female objectification so general that anything and everything can be female objectification, thereby turning female objectification into yet another trivial and stupid feminist meme.
Whereas there's no effort to combat the male objectification, the female objectification is constantly being fought against, often to the detriment of freedom of expression, for example, by proposing a ban on Pornography (unless it's "Feminist Porn" which is encouraged as 'crucial' to equality and is not opposed in the movies) and related things (often citing ridiculous reasons, like, porn is harmful to the marriage, etc); even though statistics have correlated widespread availability of porn with a decline in crimes against women. According to the Department of Justice's Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), over the past 2 decades, as pornography has become much more easily accessible over the Internet, the rate of rape and sexual assault has declined by about 60%. In 1995, the rape/sexual assault rate was reported as 5 per 1000 American women over age 12. In 2011, the rate had fallen to 1.8 rapes/sexual assaults per 1000.
Since these types of feminist definitions of objectification can be arbitrary and very broad, once such a ban is in place, the feminists can effectively censor anything they dislike by putting it in one of the banned categories. In the same way, the feminists demand feminization of games citing violence and the sexist portrayal of women as the reasons, whereas numerous studies suggest that an increase in popularity of the violent games (e.g., first-person shooters) is actually accompanied by a rapid decrease in juvenile crime.
Fact is, such demands for bans and feminization are yet another means of controlling the speech, media (including the Internet), and the overall discourse on the gender related matters, as no justification is ever given for proposing such moves other than the feminist ideologues' thoughts and feelings. Outside of the feminist 'feelings', objectification is not even an issue at all, for, why would it be wrong if someone 'objectifies' someone else in one's thoughts? However, if objectification is considered an issue, then it's not gender-specific as the feminists make it (like everything else) - It goes both ways. (See also: Alimony, Briffault's Law, Chalimony, Cock Carousel, Double Standards, Feminism, Feminization, Gold Digger, Hyperagency, Hypergamy, Intactivist, Male Disposability, Misandry, Palimony, Paternity Fraud, Pro-Choice, Projection, Schrodinger's Rapist, Shaming Language, Solipsism, White Feather, White Ribbon Campaign.)

Omega: An omega person is the lowest member of the society, someone completely or mostly deprived of money, house, job, and of course, luck. In context of relationships, an omega in a group is a person with no or the lowest number of partners. Kind of opposite of alpha. (See also: Alpha, Beta, Ghosting, Grass Eaters, Marriage Strike, White Trash, Zeta.)

OP: (Acronym for "Original Poster". The term is not manosphere specific.) Usually used in comments. On an online forum, refers to the author of the very first post (that is, to "TC" - the Thread Creator); on a blog, refers to the author of the blog-post. In case of a discussion in the comments, OP can also refer to the pseron whose comment started the discussion. (See also: Manosphere, OT.)

Orwellian: (Used as an adjective, e.g., in "We're living in Orwellian times".) Refers to conditions (laws, reforms, and policies) imposed by the government to control and limit the freedom (including freedom of speech) and options for the society or a part thereof by the use of dishonest means such as, invading the privacy of the people by excessive surveillance; raising unreasonable FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt) and propaganda (such as War on Women), spreading completely false information and half-truths; ignoring and hiding the reality (including the past historical events that don't comply with the government agenda); manipulating statistics, studies, and history to keep the public from knowing the truth (such as the feminists say 2+2=5 and make you accept it); and using the Divide-and-Conquer approach to destroy the unity among various sections of the society or even within the family (because individually, people are easier and possible to control and be made dependent on the state, united they're not). The government uses technology (cameras, voice-recorders, GPS, the Internet, etc) for invading the privacy of people; the popular media (the MSM) for spreading misinformation; educational institutions (such as schools and colleges) for indoctrinating the younger generations into believing that the authorities are always right and an individual that behaves differently from their expectations is wrong and would be punished (which also explains why the government likes to have more female teachers than male ones - women generally more readily follow the given instructions without questioning and hence help the government spread its propaganda); and the legal system to snatch away even the most basic rights of people (for example, taking away the right to the due process or the presumption of innocense, as recommended in the Dear Colleague letter), and for constructing discriminatory and socialist laws and policies (such as reverse discrimination, Welfare, etc) to destroy the unity among various sections of society or members of family (justifying them on the basis of twisted history or something similarly illogical). Following are some related terms:
~ 1984: Refers to the novel "Nineteen Eighty-Four" written by George Orwell, describing the Orwellian situation and warning the society of its evils. A famous saying about it is that the dishonest people in authority (the government and the groups controlling/threatening it like feminists) use this novel as a guide-book (or a roadmap) to implement the (controlling, oppressive) policies described in it, rather than treating it as a warning and avoiding those policies.
~ 2+2=5: Refers to the idea (the plan of the state) that if a lie is told multiple times (suppressing the truth), a large number of people would start believing it (any newcomer will then see that most people are believing it and would start believing it). In the very least, it would create confusion about the truth (for example, "I calculated 2+2=4 but people around me are saying 2+2=5, maybe sometimes it's the former and sometimes the latter, or maybe it's something completely different altogether, like 2+2=3...", etc) which will then be open to arbitrary interpretation. The government can then take any of these results and stick that result, as it deems benefitial to itself, without public backlash (because either all the people believe what government says, or different groups of people believe different things, out of which some support the particular result).
~ Big Brother: (Also known as "Nanny State".) Refers to the government watching over and controlling or micromanaging even the most basic, personal, or private aspects of people's lives and behavior.
~ Big Sister: A manosphere-favorite twist of Big Brother referring to feminist governance invading people's privacy and autonomy, and controlling all the aspects of people's lives and behavior.
~ Collective Solipsism: Controlling individuals' thoughts by first making them isolated from the rest of the society and then using their instinct to overcome the lonliness by feeding them lies that they can identify with in some aspects.
~ Euphemism: Controlling the public perception of truth by choosing suitable words for describing something bad and harmful (like a discriminatory government program or policy) to make it sound good and positive, and vice versa. Especially choosing names that are opposite of the policy's aim, for example, Dear Colleague for making the college environment hostile and dangerous to the male students, Family-Court for the feminist courts incentivizing and rewarding women for breaking up families (so much so that now they're called 'Anti-Familiy Courts' in the manosphere), "Honorable Circumstances" for the shameful circumstances of giving women medical discharge from their military duty when they have sexual relationships and get pregnant (many do this specifically to avoid that duty), No-Fault Divorce to hold the husband at fault, Paycheck Fairness Act to implement rules unfair to the more productive and contributing employees who work off-hours or late hours, Pro-Choice to limit the choice of life for an infant, 'progressives' for socialists and communists actually hindering progress in the name of equality, Reverse Discrimination for implementing discriminatory policies like Affirmative Action (a pleasant-sounding name for an Apartheid-like policy), War on Women to provide means to the women to continue their war against innocent men, etc.
~ Newspeak: Kind of like feeding blue pill. Limiting the usage of the words in the language of communication (English) to make it difficult or impossible to express any idea against the government or its plans. Some of the words are completely discarded as being negative (and are replaced with "non" or "un" followed by the corresponding positive words, etc); some others are watered down or censored to change their meaning and be almost meaningless. For example, the word "bad" is negative, so in the Newspeak, it is outdated and replaced with "ungood". Now, someone saying "The government plan is ungood" will be misunderstood or taken less seriously.
~ Doublespeak: (Part of Newspeak.) Using contradictory speech (like, the politicians say one thing, do the opposite) to make people accept two contradicting ideas without question (DoubleThink).
~ Femispeak: A manosphere-favorite twist of Doublespeak. Feminists say something using nice words but their actual intent is always extremely dishonest and misandric; for example, matriarchy is patriarchy, overt authoritarian censorship is "progressive" and "civilized"; or, sexism against men is anti-sexism; or, indecent topless exposure is 'freedom of expression' (but apparently only when women do it); or, stamping out the economic freedom from the private companies by enforcing quotas for the women is "offering flexibility" to those companies; or, the "Men bad, women good" narrative frees the society from stereotypes; etc.
~ Thought Police: Controlling even the thinking of people, and punishing people for having "improper" thoughts (that is, for commiting ThoughtCrime). The government constantly monitors all means of people's communications and information sharing, analyzes their bahavior and thought patterns, and finds and arrests those members of society who are seeing the truth (taking the red pill) and who may point this out and challenge the system. Their voices must be suppressed so that the rest of the society stays blind to the government's plans. This usually starts with making trivial or minor inconvenient or unpleasant terms non-PC, and goes on until the government can freely criminalize and ban any inconvenient truth, while calling it "respecting Free Speech of all" at the same time (euphemism).
By combining all the above things, we see that an Orwellian society is favored by a big government, socialist policies, discriminatory laws (to create and maintain a divide among people), and using police/courts to solve more and more conflicting trivial matters. And if you have taken the red pill, you also know how deeply (and increasingly more so) the current governance is on the way of being Orwellian.
Animal Farm is another novel by George Orwell, describing how some people with malicious intent (represented as pigs) brainwash the masses (represented as all the animals at a farm) by casting their current rulers (represented as humans) as evil, unneeded, and the enemy, and spreading the message of equality (represented by "Animalism") among themselves and the masses in the form of the Seven Commandments, viz,
~ 1. Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
~ 2. Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
~ 3. No animal shall wear clothes.
~ 4. No animal shall sleep in a bed.
~ 5. No animal shall drink alcohol.
~ 6. No animal shall kill any other animal.
~ 7. All animals are equal.
Once those malicious people replace the current rulers and come to the power, they start doing things that benefits only them, and in order to clear themselves of accusations of law-breaking, revise some of their original commandments, viz,
~ 4. No animal shall sleep in a bed with sheets.
~ 5. No animal shall drink alcohol to excess.
~ 6. No animal shall kill any other animal without cause.
As these malicious new rulers begin to be more and more like the original rulers (represented by the pigs starting to walk on two legs like the humans), the commandments are replaced with Maxims, viz
~ All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.
~ Four legs good, two legs better!
In the end, the old rulers and the new rulers are virtually indistinguishable. The story demonstrates how easily the political dogma can be twisted into malleable propaganda for brainwashing the public. From the manosphere perspective, as you can see, feminism perfectly fits the Animalism, and the feminists the malicious pigs; the enemy is the men (or the patriarchy); the supposed equality is the "sisterhood"; the commandments/maxims are the feminist preachings (viz, "Men are the enemy", "Patriarchy must die", etc); and the changes to them are the ridiculous and arbitrary changes to the laws, legal definitions, and the Constitution, and the shifting of goal posts by the feminists whenever they have achieved something they had desired and want something new. (See also: 2+2=5, Affirmative Action, Alimony, Blue Pill, Cause and Effect, Date Rape, Dear Colleague, DoubleThink, Entitlement, Feminazi, Feminism, Kangaroo Court, Manosphere, Matriarchy, MGTOW, MSM, No-Fault Divorce, Paycheck Fairness Act, PC, Pork, Pro-Choice, Proxy Violence, Red Pill, Reverse Discrimination, Schrodinger's Rapist, SCUM, Solipsism, The Plan, Title IX, VAWA, War on Women, Welfare, White Feather, Witch Hunt.)

OT: (Acronym for "Off-Topic".) If you have a news or something that you want other readers of an article to know but which is not relevant to the topic of the article, you may post it in a comment starting with "OT". Sometimes a commenter using OT apologizes for going off-topic even after starting the comment with "OT", so it's not clear whether OT is the aesthetically acceptable term for going off-topic or still somewhat odd. In any case, it's used quite often. As a general etiquette and for showing respect toward the writer, it's recommended that you allow some comments to be posted before going OT. If there are not enough comments after a long wait, or if the article is an old one, it's recommended to wait for a new article to post an OT comment, unless the comment is very important or urgent in which case it can be posted without following any rules. (See also: OP.)

Palimony: Court enforced allowance for support paid by a person (usually man) to the person's ex-lover or former live-in partner (usually woman) after separation. In short, this is just like alimony but for the unmarried couples. (See also: Alimony, Chalimony, Common-Law Marriage, Double Standards, Feminism, Gold Digger, Hyperagency, Hypoagency, Kangaroo Court, Matriarchy, Misandry, Objectification, Wage Gap.)

Parental Alienation: Attempt of a parent (usually mother) to turn a child away from the other parent (usually father). This is a psychological abuse to the child and the other parent, and causes a Parental Alienation Syndrome ("PAS") or disorder in the child whereunder the child starts hating the other parent, which may affect the decision of child custody (and hence chalimony) in a court case of separation or divorce between the parents. Mothers also use the 'technique' to take revenge on the fathers, for example, by persuading the children to falsely accuse their father of sexual abuse or molestation, thereby sending him to jail. Most courts do not consider Parental Alienation Syndrome a factor; even though when the father is booted out from his house on a mere DV accusation of the mother, the mother can make up all kind of stories about the event to tell the children (painting the father as the villain). In fact, changes in the legislation (Family Law Act) are being made to award Parental Alienation! (Not that it's not rewarded without those changes, although the judge might say "regrettably" about how the decision was made, as if that's excuse enough when it comes to deceiving the fathers.) FRA's have the goal of making Parental Alienation taken into consideration and outlawed.
A similar term is "Parental Abduction", which refers to one parent kidnapping the kids and taking them away from the other. In the light of the misguided views about the fathers being uncessary to the children (or in some cases just to prove themselves independent and strong), mothers regularly kidnap their children from the fathers - often with little to no repercussion (on getting caught, all they have to claim is some kind of vagina syndrome). This is not a one-off case - Majority of kid abduction is committed by the victims' parents or other relatives; of the parental abductors, women are the majority; and the fathers whose kids have been abducted have no parental rights under the law, unless there is a court order awarding them the custody (about which the laws are already skewed against fathers). In fact, the feminist establishments paint kidnapping by mothers as an act of love. (See also: Chalimony, Double Standards, DV, FRA, FTSU, Gold Digger, Hamsterbatics, Kangaroo Court, Misandry, Paternity Fraud, Single Parents, The Plan, Vagina Syndrome, VAWA.)

Paternity Fraud: The lie told by a mother about the identity of the father of her child in order to receive child support (or chalimony) from him or to continue staying with him, when actually that man is not the father.
A DNA Test can reveal this fraud; but the paternity fraud is not recognized as a crime because, well, it's committed by women. Feminists consider it a woman's right, and according to them, the DNA tests are anti-feminist. (In fact, there are countries where paternity testing by a father to know if he is the real father is considered illegal!) Thanks to the misandric family courts, even the DNA test (where the test is legal) does not necessarily give the man any rights over his children or absolve him of continuing to pay money to the fraud mother. However, those who commit Paternity Fraud are almost never punished. Nunes says, "Paternity fraud is probably much higher than currently claimed. For an example, some laws restrict the use of paternity tests because of the presumption of paternity in marriage. In other instances, the law may restrict the use of paternity tests to preserve the family if the truth would become known. Also some laws may restrict the use of paternity tests to ensure that the father will continue to support the family that may not be of his making". For instance, France bans paternity test (makes paternity testing a criminal offense) on the grounds of importance of "peace within the French family". This basically means that a woman can point at any man and declare that he is the father of her child, and there isn't a thing he can do to disprove it. Similarly, Tennessee Paternity Test Law has been killed by women's political caucus.
There's a related meme: "Mother's baby, father's maybe", meaning that a child's mom is known to be the biological mother, but the father as pointed by the mother may or may not be the biological father.
There exists another unrelated fraud, wherein women (buyers) buy positive pregnancy tests (from other, pregnant women - sellers) to trick their boyfriends into marrying them. (See also: Briffault's Law, Chalimony, Evo-Psych, Feminist Logic, FRA, Gold Digger, Kangaroo Court, Marriage Strike, Matriarchy, Nordic Model, Objectification, Parental Alienation, Single Parents.)

Patriarchy: Literally, a society where men (fathers) are the heads (or the main decision-makers) of the family and protect and provide for the women, thereby forming a "Social Contract" wherein men bring protection and wealth to the table, and women in return control the household and children. The feminists' "Theory of Patriarchy" (or the "Patriarchy Theory", a false conspiracy theory), however, is different and paints the system as one of slavery in which all women are pathetically powerless victims (slaves) at the hand of all men who are viewed as inherently monstrous perpetrators (owners) (and all boys as future predators). This is, and has historically been, a myth. Patriarchy is the name of the enemy that the feminists claim to be fighting against, but 'patriarchy' is not something tangible - it cannot be caught, beaten, or jailed - so actually it's the individual men that are the real bodies representing the patriarchy. Hence, patriarchy is nothing but a veil for the feminists behind which to disguise and spew their male-hatred.
Fact is, feminism works in harmony with the status quo (which the feminists call patriarchy and claim to be fighting it) - rather than against it, to pass misandric laws and punitive anti-male policies. In other words, the misandric rules of the so-called patriarchy that the feminists claim hurts everyone are actually established and/or maintained by the feminists themselves, and they oppose any changes to them. This fraud of feminism is like you flick (analogous to making an anti-male policy) at the back of an unsuspecting kid's ear (who represents a section of society or a region of the world) with your finger (i.e., the political power, law enforcement, and police) without letting it know that it was you (like the MSM hides the feminist wrongs), and then when the kid tries to find out, you tell it that it was a little birdie (the patriarchy) that did it and flew away but will come back any time to do it again. And then you flick the kid again (more anti-male laws). And so on.
Women were never oppressed; it was men that had all the obligations. In order to carry out those duties, some 'rights' were bestowed upon the men (just like you have to give your accountant the access to your financial information), because without those 'rights', the men would not have been able to accomplish their duties. For example, men were given the 'right' to earn money, which was actually an obligation to provide for their families. Even when women were earning money, it was regarded as 'her' money alone (and women had no obligation toward anyone else - They could literally starve their children without spending a dime from their money and it was legal). In countries like India, that still is the case, where, in case of a married working couple, the husband's income is legally regarded as the only income that is to be used for paying the bills of the entire family; the wife's income and belongings (including any gifts from her parents) are (legally) regarded as "Stridhan" (the woman's own money with no financial obligation toward any family member). And same is the case with the Muslim women. Anyway, back to the point, during that so-called 'oppressive' phase, the husbands had the obligation to pay the tax on their wives' income (with the wives having no obligation to share it with the husband/family)! And if, after spending their money on the whole family's expenses, the men had no money left and failed to pay the tax on their wives' income, they'd go to jail! (Opression, right? But not of the women indeed.) In fact, using this very fact, the British suffragettes arranged to have their husbands jailed! Even now there are the so-called "Debtor's Prisons" where mostly men are jailed for failing to pay the vaginamony. With that kind of obligation to pay on one gender, it's no surprise that that gender had to have the 'right' to earn. In fact, giving the other gender the right to earn (but without the corresponding obligations) was actually overall a hindrance toward the society's progress (it still is, and is unfortunately happening with a very fast pace, and not just with the right to 'earn' but with everything). Because, a woman taking up a job would mean a man without a job. Since the woman has no obligation toward her family, that means she has only made that money potentially for herself, thereby depriving of resources the rest of her own family members and that man and his family members. Feminists also claim women were kept out of education everywhere, which again is a lie, because, for example, women were both teachers and pupils in 1088 at the University of Bologna, about 900 years before the feminist lie emerged. Going back two and a half thousand years, Pythagoras founded a school (about 569 BC in Samos, Ionia) which also had female teachers and students.
Feminists so like to ascribe anything and everything wrong or bad to the blanket and abstract term patriarchy, rather than holding the person doing the wrong thing accountable if the person is a female. If a man does something bad (or had done something decades ago that was not considered bad at that time), the feminists induce the "male guilt" by saying that men (or the traits of masculinity or manhood) are inherently violent (and that this, i.e., being male or the maleness, constitutes or causes the patriarchy). if a woman does something bad, the mode is changed and the feminists say that since women are the perfect human beings who can never do any wrong, the patriarchy must have made them do the bad thing, or that she's a victim of the patriarchy (even if she's the perpetrator), and so she must not be held responsible for her crime.
Why was the theory of patriarchy invented? Well, as Dr Warren Farrell would say, "The weakness of men is the facade of strength, the strength of women is the facade of weakness". The theory of patriarchy is the central theme of feminism and is at the heart of this ideology of victimhood. Under the presumption of this mythical system, men, as a group, are the oppressor class and women the oppressed class, regardless of any individual person's actual actions and conditions. The feminist claim is that, since the patriarchy is a system created by men, it cannot oppress men. That is, men cannot be oppressed, discriminated against, or be victims of rape, sexism, or violence, etc (because, by definition, they're the members of the oppressor class). Fact is, a system is created by the highest few elite members (consisting of both men and women) of the society, and they use it to benefit themselves only. So, even if there were ever a system of patriarchy, common men never benefited from it (and in fact were used as disposable entities producing wealth for the designers of the system). However, the feminists view all men as the oppressors (well, that was expected; all hate groups employ the collective false guilt tactic). There's still more feminist hypocrisy at play here: When asked how feminism helps men, some feminists actually bring this point up, saying that the patriarchy fosters male disposability, and so the feminism is helping men by eroding the patriarchy. However, they fail to explain why then the feminist policies and laws also enforce (not just foster, but enforce by the proxy violence of the state and the judicial system) male disposability. Thing is, when a feminist says this, the hypocrite is referring to the two definitions of patriarchy, of course hiding the difference: The first usage of patriarchy (that hurts everyone) refers to the system designed to help the few elite class members (includes both men and women); the second usage (the one the feminism is keen on eliminating) refers to, well, the male gender/sex (or maleness/masculinity) itself as a whole. The blue pill people fall for the trap and do not try to figure out the reality.
Under the supposed culture of patriarchy, men are assumed to be animals with no right to complain about anything bad done or happening to them. Feminism considers any harm done to and discrimination performed against men and boys a collateral damage, and refuses to acknowledge and address it in the name of "social justice". So the claim of existence of patriarchy gives privileges, free pass, and legal rights to a woman to do anything (and the government to pass any laws and make any policies) against men, without repercussions. For example, a woman can kill her husband and claim that she did so because she felt threatened by him (threat being one form of oppression). Under a normal system, she will have to prove it or else she gets punishment; under the prevalent myth of patriarchy, however, she will be believed at her word alone and it's her husband who has to prove that he didn't deserve to be murdered. However, since he cannot prove that (because he is dead; in case of a man still alive, he is stripped of all the means to prove his innocence and forced to admit guilt), she is either released with little to no punishment or rewarded (in terms of praise by media, etc) for finishing a man thereby doing her part in "ending the patriarchy". As you can see, the concept of patriarchy is vital to the ideology of feminism and any feminist has to believe in it like a religion in order to qualify as a feminist. Hence the constant chants of "Patriarchy must die" etc by the feminists. Since what doesn't exist cannot die (and of course, feminists, like religious cultists, don't have to prove anything, their assumptions are to be accepted at their face value), feminists can use this myth indefinitely to keep milking the system to gain favors at the expense of men, their hard work, and their earned wealth.
Feminists have invented / cashed in on (and spread) several myths to support this biggest myth of patriarchy, such as the Rule of Thumb for wife-beating hoax, etc.
When the feminists are confronted by the MRA's in public (where the feminists cannot shut them up or ban them to control the narrative, and nor can they ignore the logic and evidence based discrimination faced by the men) or when men are no longer finding their bigotry to be justified, the feminists start chanting slogans like "Patriarchy hurts men too" and "Feminism is pro-men / good for men", etc. They then urge men to support feminism claiming that they're aware of the men's problems (even though they themselves created those problems), that "Feminism has all the solutions", and that the MRM is just hindering its way toward solving all the problems. (With such claims, they always fail to explain why they cannot work with the MRM to understand the problems faced by the men better.) When feeling cornered enough, they start showing their true colors and threatening that if men continued to demand equality, feminism will give them reasons to hate itself in terms of even more misandric and unequal (female-favoring) laws and policies (that is, "put up, or shut up"). According to the theory of patriarchy, feminists believe that the men need to change themselves according to how feminists' want to define their masculinity (and not according to their own definitions), whereas they want no input from men to bring about any changes in the women as if women are perfect as such whatever choice they make. Thus, feminism frees women from holding their part of social contract, however, expects men to still hold theirs. In other words, hiding behind a made-up concept of patriarchy, feminism pushes to achieve total control of everyone - men or women.
In fact, feminism has no definitive goals (well, except the feminist utopia) after achieving which it can say that its job is done. In order to justify its hateful existence, it keeps inventing abstractions like patriarchy and enforcing them with memes like this: [No matter how much of the female supremacy has been achieved and no matter how misandric a policy or law has become], "... but we still have a long way to go", becuase the patriarchy is still alive. Since this type of arguments can always be made without providing any justification or proof, feminism continues to claim its relevance.
The female equivalent of patriarchy is matriarchy, which is the prevalent culture in most countries, and is being pushed in the others. (See also: Apex Fallacy, Bigot, Blue Pill, Cause and Effect, DV, Evo-Psych, Feminism, Feminist Logic, Glass Ceiling, Hamsterbatics, Herstory, Hyperagency, Hypoagency, Male Disposability, Male Privilege, Masculism, Matriarchy, Misandry, MSM, Penis Envy, Proxy Violence, Rationalization Hamster, Reverse Discrimination, Vagina Syndrome, Victimhood, Wage Gap, War on Women.)

Paycheck Fairness Act: This act, on being passed, would entitle employees to disclose salary information to the co-workers even if workplace rules prohibit such disclosure, and the employers would be required to prove that any wage discrepancies are based on genuine business requirements and are characteristics of the position. While this might seem fair, it increases government control on the private businesses, snatches away their freedom to enact their policies, discriminates against the more efficient employees working over-time or off-the-hour, and provides any disgruntled employee a tool to retaliate against the employer. Men are more than twice as likely to work over 50 hours a week, and account for the vast majority of the overtime hours worked. (See also: Affirmative Action, Apex Fallacy, Cause and Effect, Entitlement, Glass Ceiling, Male Privilege, Orwellian, Princess, Reverse Discrimination, Title IX, Wage Gap, War on Women.)

PC: (Acronym for "Politically Correct" or "Political Correctness".) PC speak is used to please women/feminists and the so-called protected and minority/'unprivileged' groups, and to lend the message that it's less serious (or nothing bad at all) to commit any kind of Hate Crime against the 'unprotected' group (i.e., men in general, and straight white men in particular). Short version: Under PC speak, it's not acceptable to say anything negative about women (for example, pointing out their inabilities and shortcomings) or anything positive about men, no matter how true, evident, or supported by proof and logic. Also, apparently, if it's a crime to do something against a member of the unprotected group (read, men, especially the straight and white men), it's a "hate crime" to do the same thing against a member of a specialty group. That is, a 'crime' can turn into a 'hate crime' depending upon the group to which the victim belongs, so some people are always the victims of "hate crime" even if it's got nothing to do with their being from a particular group. For example,
~ This journalist got in hot water after exposing a transwoman's scam! Basically, this sends the lesson that, if you want to survive in your job/field, then as much as possible, never expose the wrongdoings of the women and other protacted groups; just turn a blind eye toward them and let them do whatever they want. Kind of like coping up with the policies under a tyrannical reign without complaints.
~ The welfare programs like TANF and WIC are the incentive and reason behind increasing teen pregnancy, but notice how the article never mentions the real reason behind the trend because it's not PC; instead, it quotes a ridiculously funny claim that those teens did not really want to get pregnant.
~ Calling a slut a slut is not PC; she should be called an open-minded woman with an easy-going approach in the sexual relationships.
Essentially, political correctness is just yet another tool through which the feminist control the speech and implement even more misandric policies (making men criticizing women unacceptable and also punishing them for that). It also prevents any voices being raised against the discriminatory policies that are beneficial to one group of people but affects other people badly. In other words, it's an attack on the freedom of speech to silence the opposition by the dishonest groups that cannot face the truth or public scrutiny.
A related term is "Political correctness gone mad/crazy", which means, putting excessive effort/pressure or insistence on adherence to petty PC norms, even disregarding or to the detriment of other much more important aspects of the matter at hand. In other words, the feelings of a woman must be catered to, no matter what devastating effect it brings upon anything else (like freedom of speech, efficiency/productivity of a team/system, etc). (See also: Bigot, Double Standards, Feminization, Matriarchy, Misandry, Orwellian, Quote Mining, Welfare.)

Penis Envy: Refers to the hatred and jealousy toward males that the female feminists develop because of their repressed wish to possess a penis. (Any female can develop this sense of envy including little girls, but the normal females learn to shrug it off as they grow older and wiser.) The female feminists are jealous of this organ of men because of it being active and the vagina being passive during mating. They so hate and are so afraid of this symbol of male productive power that they want to feminize anything and everything Phallic (anything resembling a phallus - erect penis), like tall buildings, skyscrapers, rockets, missiles, etc (which the feminists consider part of a 'phallocentric' culture). On similar lines, they also criticize the masculinity due to its active and positively aggressive nature. In a broader sense, feminists (and misandrous females) hate men and are negatively envious of masculinity because of a sense of their own inferiority in certain areas. Here are some of the areas where the females are inferior to the males:
~ Women are worse drivers. Also, males have more average years between collisions than females (despite driving a greater number of miles than females each year, which is not shown in the report).
~ Women are more ignorant of politics. (Can you guess who/what to blame for this?)
~ Men are better than women in games like poker, bridge, and chess. And feminists are offended to hear this, and say that truth is sexism. They say there's no evidence supporting these facts, while there clearly is (of course, the researches, as always in such cases, try to put the blame on men for being more in number of players in chess, but conveniently ignores why that is so while the population has equal number of men and women; also notice the opening of the linked article and its general tone - almost looks like the writer was hurt personally to know the facts and is in denial).
When feminists say that "Men just hate women" or "Men are raised/trained to hate women", they're actually projecting their own penis envy on to the others (men). As a 'response' to the inconvenient penis envy thingy, the ever creative 'feminist science' (an oxymoron) has made up a term, Womb Envy, which refers to the hatred and jealousy toward women that men develop because of their repressed wish to possess a womb. When you're done laughing, note that the feminists are always extremely serious (with not a bit of sarcasm) when using this term. (See also: Apex Fallacy, Cognitive Dissonance, Evo-Psych, Feminism, Feminization, Herstory, Hyperagency, Intactivist, Male Privilege, Patriarchy, Projection, SCUM, Shaming Language, The Wall, Vajajay, Womyn.)

Pork: The big sum of money collected by the feds from the tax payers (or by the feminist organizations via donations) and ready to be spent on dishonest and discriminatory causes (Welfare, VAWA, the sexual assault and DV victimhood industries, etc), from which dishonest politicians, corrupt officials in the judicial system, and officials in useless make-work type of departments benefit.
A related term is Pork Bloat, an increase in the pork dollars. This is achieved through manufacturing new victims and perpetrators by arbitrarily extending the definitions of DV and rape, and by lowering the standard of proofs from "innocent until proven guilty" to "Preponderance of Evidence"; wherein, even the mere feelings of the supposed victims are sufficient grounds for accusing (and prosecuting/punishing) someone of these acts (DV and rape). Officials also inflate stats to receive more money from the government to spend on themselves.
A similar term is Gravy Train, which means the excessive, unjustified, and unchecked financial entitlements the feminists receive for coming up with and keeping running their unquestioned feminist programs, policies, and laws. (See also: DV, Entitlement, Feminism, Kangaroo Court, Matriarchy, Orwellian, Rape Culture, Victimhood, Welfare.)

Princess: (Also known as "Cupcake" and "Snowflake".) A female person seeking entitlements (for being female, or a wife or lover, or a mother), or a female person being viewed as innocent and incapable of doing anything wrong (and hence not being held accountable for the consequences of her actions) because she's a female. Also a daughter being given excessive love and support (even for her wrongful acts) by her parent/s, or a female being shown excessive appreciation by her friends/relatives/teachers/government, which causes her to become:
~ Abusive.
~ Arrogant.
~ Hyper-sensitive toward her own needs.
~ Indecent.
~ Insensitive toward the emotions, feelings, and physical pains of the others'.
~ Irresponsible.
~ Narcissistic.
~ Nasty.
~ Obnoxious.
~ Rude.
~ Self-righteous.
~ Selfish.
~ Ungrateful.
~ Violent.
or, in other words, to acquire all the traits of a feminist but possibly, though not necessarily, without core parts like the male-hatred and the sisterhood-indoctrination). (See also: Affirmative Action, Dear Colleague, Entitlement, Feminism, Gold Digger, Hypoagency, Infantilization, Male Privilege, Paycheck Fairness Act, Title IX, Vajajay, Victimhood, Welfare.)

Pro-Choice: Supporting Abortion. Feminists believe that abortion of a child must be legal (at the choice of the woman alone) at any time during the pregnancy and a few weeks after the birth (in some countries up to 3 years after the birth; in other words, justifying infanticide as abortion). And that there should be no role of the child's father in the decision (this already is the law most everywhere, and whenever a woman aborts or kills her child, the child's father just has to watch silently and support her decision, even if he doesn't want his child to be murdered and his heart is going through utter pain while the woman kills the child). The feminists' slogan for their argument is "My Body, My Choice".
This idea assumes that the fetus/child has no "Personhood" or human right to life because the fetus/child is not a human being, but just an organism. Unless, of course, it's a matter of DNA test to catch the paternity fraud (then the child suddenly gets rights to its bodily elements), or when it's a man who aborts/kills the fetus (then the fetus suddenly becomes a person and the man is charged with murder). In other words, whether a fetus is a person or not depends upon whether it's been killed by a man or a woman - a clear case of feminist double standards. The mother can legally do anything to the fetus, or in many cases, even to the child. There have been more than 1.72 billion abortions so far and counting. (See also: Double Standards, Feminism, Matriarchy, Objectification, Paternity Fraud, Pro-Life, Rape Culture, SCUM.)

Pro-Life: Opposing abortion. This idea assumes that the child is a human being and has a "personhood" because, after all, it's the child that becomes a human on growing up. That is, if all the children are killed because they're not humans, how will the humans survive anymore? This common test is called "if applied to all" (or a variant) and is a common test to determine if something is right or wrong. The pro-choice argument doesn't pass this test; the pro-life does. MRA's, in general, have mixed views regarding being pro-life and pro-choice and regarding their support/opposition to abortion:
~ Some believe that abortion should be illegal (except under extreme medical emergency conditions or in the cases of rape).
~ Some believe that it should be legal and a mother's right alone (but with father's contribution to the child support being made voluntary rather than enforced because the father doesn't have a say in the birth of the child).
~ Some believe that it should be legal and both parents must consent for it to take place except under medical emergencies (since the father's sperm does have a role in the process/act).
~ Still others believe that this is not an issue for the MRM (only the unjustly enforced child support, or chalimony, is).
A related term is Parental Surrender, meaning that a parent can surrender its parenthood (and hence its rights to meet the child and responsibilities to provide the child support etc). This is not currently legal for the fathers (even though it's purely the mother's choice alone to have a child or not), even if the father never agreed for having a child (he, for example, merely agreed to having sex, which is not the same as agreeing to have a child), or even if the woman raped him to get pregnant! On the other hand, a mother does have that option (in the form of the so-called Infant Safe Haven laws) if she does not want to accept legal or financial responsibility for her child: She can surrender that child to the State and simply walk away. (See also: Chalimony, MRA, MRM, Pro-Choice.)

Projection: Seeing a false reflection of one's own mentality or thoughts in a member of the opposing group. For example, when feminists claim that men are violent, it's actually the feminists themselves that are violent; the feminists are assuming that men have the same violent tendencies as the feminists themselves, which is not truth but projection (one's own image into the opposing group). Similarly, feminists and women claim that men cheat more in the relationships, which again is a projection because it's women who cheat more - They're just better at lying about it.
This is not brought about often but the phenomenon of projection is in fact so widespread that almost everything a feminist says about men is projection. (See also: Apex Fallacy, Bigot, Cause and Effect, Cognitive Dissonance, Dear Colleague, Double Standards, DoubleThink, DV, Feminism, Feminist Logic, Glass Ceiling, Hamsterbatics, Herd Mentality, Herstory, Male Privilege, Matriarchy, Objectification, Penis Envy, Proxy Violence, Rape Culture, Rationalization Hamster, Reverse Discrimination, Solipsism, Vagina Syndrome, Victimhood, Wage Gap, War on Women.)

Proxy Violence: The act of a person or a group of people "A" using (urging) another person or group "B" (powerful, capable, or in position of authority) to punish (physically, verbally, mentally, financially, or otherwise) a person or group "C" for unjust reasons. The violence here is carried out on "C", by "A", but indirectly with the help of "B". Women hiring hit-men to murder the men in their lives is an example of proxy violence. Since proxy violence is mostly useful to the women against their male partners, this type of violence (including murder by a hit-man) does not count toward DV or partner violence numbers. (See also: Dowry Law, DV, DVPO, Femicide Law, Feminism, Feminist Logic, Feminization, Hyperagency, Hypoagency, Mangina, Matriarchy, Misandry, Projection, Schrodinger's Rapist, The Plan, Useful Idiots, VAWA, White Feather, White Knight, White Ribbon Campaign.)

PUA: (Acronym for "PickUp Artist". Also known as a practical or real-life "Gamer". A particularly skilled PUA might be referenced as Casanova.) A PUA is a man who seeks relationship with women (typically not a long-term one or a marriage) by impressing them with his personality and traits, while at the same time trying his best to avoid the legal danger that those women can put him in because of the female-centric laws. Some PUA's are naturally attractive to the women, some learn the techniques to attract and impress women, some fail in their efforts. (See also: AFC, Briffault's Law, Common-Law Marriage, Game, Gina Tingles, Marriage Strike, Shit Test, Social Proofing.)

Pussy Pass: (Also known as "V-Card" - where the letter 'V' stands for 'Vagina', and "Gender Card" - since it's played by the females only; there even are female politicians doing absolutely nothing but playing the gender card in order to perpetuate victimhood and get away with their incompetence on all other fronts.) One of the female privileges, wherein a woman gets away with minor to no charge or punishment for doing something for which a male person would get higher charges or sentence. Also sometimes, this enables a woman to do something that a man is not allowed to do. This is not a new phenomenon; pussy pass has historically been in existence. In fact, at one point, it was suggested that since the women always get a pussy pass for murdering people anyway, women should just be given the right to kill anyone, especially their male partners/husbands - That would save money and the court's time that get wasted in such cases, whose result is always a pussy pass. Presently, in Canada (and afterward, most everywhere else), women will soon have the legal right to kill (kind of like a 'License to Kill') their husbands and male partners any time with impunity. The judges consider the very idea of filing a case against a female criminal to be "a stretch at best".
A related term is "Womb Pass", which is a special case of pussy pass awarded to a woman for having kids or for being pregnant (in the "best interest of the child" or to protect the rights of "innocent victims"), but sometimes also used to mean just pussy pass (unrelated to pregnancy/children).
Here are some stories of female wrongdoers being awarded the pussy pass.
In many of such cases, all a female criminal needs to do to get the pussy pass is make use of victimhood (true or false doesn't matter, no proof required, people/evidence proving her to be a liar will be ignored) or a vagina syndrome; the feminist courts always go out of their way to help. (See also: Affirmative Action, Dear Colleague, Double Standards, DV, Feminist Logic, Feminization, Hypoagency, Kangaroo Court, Male Privilege, Matriarchy, Misandry, Nordic Model, Pussy Pedestalization, Title IX, Vagina Syndrome, Vajajay, Victimhood, White Knight.)

Pussy Pedestalization: The act of holding a person in high regards or giving preference and priority to that person, just because that person is a female. In other words, it's chivalry on steroids, typically shown by the white knights (mostly the cheap wannabe ones because the real ones are rare to encounter), but frequently also demanded by the feminists. It used to be voluntary but the feminism has codified it into the law and now all men are forcibly coerced into being 'chivalrous'. Here are some examples of females being treated as superior to the males (and feminists 'justify' closing all male-only spaces):
~ Women-only banks.
~ Women-only candidate selections by the electorates going on for years in India, and now also proposed in New Zealand. This forces the parties to ensure the female candidates based merely on their genetalia, no matter whom the public wants or likes.
~ Female-only councils, like the White House Council on Women and Girls.
~ Women-only events, like the Cancer Research UK's "Race for Life" which bans men from participating.
~ Female-only floors in hotels.
~ Women-only gyms, women-only hours in common gyms, and women-only sections hogging up most of the space/equipments in common gyms.
~ Women-only parking spaces in countries like China, Germany, and Korea; and parks for pregnant women.
~ Women-only passenger cars and subway cars in countries like Brazil, Dubai, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Iran, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, Philippines, and Taiwan. There also are women-only trains, in which the male passengers that get into by mistake are beaten up by the female passengers, while the police watches and encourages the violence. In Japan, some of the train cars during certain periods of days are allotted to women only; and in the periods and cars where men are allowed to travel with the women, it's rather common for young women to falsely accuse men of sexual assault crimes, usually as a means of extorting money. Women-only trains are being proposed in more countries.
~ Women-only swims. On complaining about it, the typical feminist response is, "You just don't understand. So put up or shut up".
~ Women-only taxi services.
~ On the other hand, the male-only services/places are not tolerated, and are either opened to the females or shut down entirely. For example, Augusta Club. (Related manosphere meme: "It's only sexist when men do it".)
~ Kailyn Lowry punches Joe Rivera, who then grabs her hand and tells her to not do that again. Apparently, she then called the cops and now he has a restraining order against her. The moral here is, a man is not allowed to act in self-defense when a woman is being violent toward him. Kailyn is also filmed hitting her current husband Javi Marroquin who then storms out of the house.
~ Dollar General Store employee whoops 8-year-old boy with belt striking him 25 times, because the child threw a cookie at the employee, reportedly because the employee made fun of the child. And the Fox News contributor mangina Erick Erickson says that the employee deserves a medal for her act of bravery.
You could also say it's a mild form of Female Worship (assuming the feminine to be divine and superior, and worshipping it).
A related term is "Gynocentrism", which is kind of like solipsism, except that it is expected of others rather than held as a belief by oneself. Literally, it means that in any instance of social interaction and relationships, or for making any new policy or rule, or for deciding the outcome of any case (for example, a court case), or while making a judgement about anything whatsoever regarding its being good or bad, the female (and by proxy, the feminist) needs and demands must be kept at the center (given the top priority), to the detriment of everything else (including the constitution, the rights of the male human beings, etc). In terms of the legal/constitutional equality and rights, it means more than equal rights for the females (e.g., forced female quotas even in the private companies etc). In short, this means, anything that benefits the females over the males is good, and anything that sees the females as equals (rather than superior) to the males is bad. Gynocentrism is strongly tied with male disposability. Both feminism and Traditionalism (or liberals and conservatives, and left and right) support gynocentrism, although they differ in the means through which the two express it and make it happen. Either way, it is about securing (legally as well as socially) unearned and undeserved comforts, money, power, rights, and security for the females (and females alone), at the expense - and often destruction - of the males, their families, and their lives. Gynocentrism is not a new phenomenon either, although now the males are coerced into it rather than just follow it as the social expectation. (See also: Affirmative Action, Bigot, Date Rape, Dear Colleague, Double Standards, Dowry Law, Feminism, Feminist Logic, Feminization, Intactivist, Kangaroo Court, Male Disposability, Male Privilege, Mangina, Manosphere, Matriarchy, Misandry, Nordic Model, Pussy Pass, Schrodinger's Rapist, Solipsism, Title IX, Vajajay, White Knight.)

Quote Mining: Taking parts of text (or speech) written or spoken by someone, and manipulating (twisting and bending, sometimes just plain lying about and making up) their meaning by presenting them out of context. For example, consider this hypothetical sentence by a person "A": "If you define a man's aggressiveness when making love to his female partner as rape, then yes, most women love to be raped". A feminist would only pick up the last part of the sentence, viz, "Women love to be raped", and paint the person "A" as a rape apologist / supporter of rape. This is called quote mining. Blue pilled people commonly fall for it, blind followers of feminism always fall for it. You'll often find many a fembot joining the manosphere websites, constantly looking for statements from which they could quote mine the words of, say, a hateful or violent nature, which would look absurd, non-PC, and negative when presented without the original context. Sometimes in the process of quote mining, these fembots make themselves look quite stupid, but that does not for a moment stop them from continuing on with their 'duty' (like a programmed script resuming its set of instructions after an error). The uber mangina David Futrelle has earned a special reputation for himself in the art of quote mining - Virtually anything he says about the MRA's is quote mined, so much so that even the other feminists have started to avoid referencing him since it ends their (already low) credibility.
The quote miner almost never cites (links to) the original source from where the quote has been taken (because then the reader might actually check the truth of the statement). Therefore, whenever you encounter a suspicious statement quoted by a feminist from someone not conforming to the ideology of feminism, especially without a link to the source of the statement, there's high probability that you're looking at an instance of quote mining. (See also: 2+2=5, Bigot, Blue Pill, Fembot, Feminism, FTSU, Hamsterbatics, Mangina, Manosphere, MRA, PC, Rationalization Hamster, Shaming Language.)

Radfem: (Short for "Radical Feminist".) Feminist. Someone seeking female supremacy, and destruction or severe reduction of the male sex. (See also: Feminazi, Feminism, Femmo, Projection, SCUM, The Plan, VAWA.)

Rape Culture: The false feminist belief that all men are potential rapists; that the act of rape has been normalized, trivialized, made acceptable, and is celebrated in the society (something that the experts as well as the common sense disagree with); that women are constantly in danger of being raped any time; and therefore more and more misandric laws and policies are needed. For example:
~ From 1979 to 2009, there has been an 82% decline in the rate of forcible rape from 0.28% of population (age 12 or older) to 0.05%. In order to keep the rape hysteria up, the rape definitions have been changed to artificially manufacture more rape victims and rape statistics (and to exclude female rapists). In fact, the legislation is so feminist that even the judges say that it's wrong and that they're forced to deliver wrong decisions. For example, consider the case of Fitzroy Barnaby (28), who grabbed the arm of a girl (14) to chastise her after she walked in front of his car, causing him to swerve to avoid hitting her. He was prosecuted for attempted kidnapping and child abduction charges, and even though the trial jury accepted that he did not have any such intentions, he was still found to be guilty of unlawful restraint of a minor - a sex offense under Illinois law. As a result, Barnaby must still register as a "sex offender" (those 'offenders' are listed on the government website along with their photographs and home addresses) and keep authorities informed of his place of residency. He also isn't allowed to live near schools or parks. Trial Judge Patrick Morse ordered the registration reluctantly, "I don't really see the purpose of registration in this case. I really don't... But I feel that I am constrained by the statute." In other words, any man holding the hand of any female is a sex offender. This is how the new crimes, criminals, and victims are being manufactured. Which leads to more feminist laws. Which then manufacture more criminals. And so on. All the perfectly normal things and behaviors have been made criminal, including children's play. In a few cases, even 10-year-old girls are not spared of being 'rapists' (boys of that age - or even smaller - are, of course, assumed to be rapists without even doing anything).
~ In some places, the burden of proof of innocence is on the accused man; in others, the accused man doesn't have any right to prove his innocence and is mandatorily arrested. Feminists believe that if a woman thinks she was raped, she was raped - no proofs needed from her, no nothing, period.
~ Increasingly in more countries, the laws are being proposed to make sure that a woman is immediately believed when she accuses a man of rape or sexual misconduct - without demanding any proof from her, and removing the presumption of innocence for the men. For example, in France, the French law requires no evidence whatsover to be brought by the accuser in a case of rape, her word is considered sufficient (also, the investigation is done by women officers only; and only women doctors/psychologists are employed in the case). This kind of proposition is based on the debunked feminist myth that women never lie, even though it's known that a large percentage of reported sexual assault cases never actually happen, are false, and the women are lying. Up to 41% of rape allegations may be false. NCRB data says 75% of rape cases are false in India. The cases of rape allegations are also common when women themselves beg for or demand sex; for example, without the recorded video evidence, these men could easily have been sent to jail merely at the woman's accusation had she so chosen. This is equivalent to a legal witch hunt of men.
~ There also are cases where it's known that the rape accusations are false but still the innocent men are punished by the authorities bowing to the political (read feminist) pressure.
~ Even the Marines list false acusations of sexual assault/harassment as a top concern, which is promptly ignored and rejected by the officials as baseless and 'typical male reaction'.
~ An innocent man falsely accused of rape is not released from the prison and is pressured to confess his guilt with the promise of a shorter sentence (which adds to the number of rapists and is, thus, an entry in the manufactured statistics).
~ Rape Shield laws (which are unconstitutional) make it convenient, easy, and hasslefree to falsely accuse any man of rape, because those laws do not allow making the accuser's identity public, hence preventing any background checks or public condemnation for the accuser's lies. As an added perk, there are absolutely (or almost) no legal consequences of falsely accusing a man of rape. In her book "Ceasefire: Why Women and Men Must Join Forces to Achieve True Equality", Boston Globe columnist Cathy Young details numerous questionable rulings in which potentially innocent men were prevented from properly defending themselves by the rape shield laws. The corrupt and misandrist politicians refuse to offer anonymity to falsely accused men bending to feminist pressure, even after seeing that this is the just thing to do and agreeing to it. In fact, not making the identity of the involved woman public is the only real purpose these shield laws mainly serve, no matter if she is the perpetrator or the victim (and no matter even if her victim kills himself), in the name of protecting the victim's identity (this is evident by the fact that they have no problem releasing a male perpetrator's identity in the similar cases).
~ Feminists believe that all PIV (Penis-in-Vagina) insertion (even between consenting couples) is rape, and have got this view fully implemented in the law (a woman can report any PIV activity as a rape any time, and the courts will manufacture ridiculous theories to consider it as rape).
~ Even a few anonymous people can report any man anywhere any time to the police to get him arrested, all in the name of a prevailing rape culture.
~ Sentences like Chemical Castration are only awarded to the male offenders and never to the female ones, a clear case of double standards.
On the other hand, male rape (including anal rape) is a taboo - Most (86%) male victims of female sex predators are not believed (they're considered troublemakers), are made fun of (socially shamed), ridiculed (even by the police), or are actually considered lucky for having been raped or sexually harassed (but when this reality of the society is brought forth, that's not tolerated and is labeled disgusting). And the female rapists and sex offenders easily get away with either with no to very minor punishment (compared to the male offenders) or with rewards like child support money from their male victims. The male sexual assault survivors - even boys despite being 50% of the commercially sexually exploited (CSE) children in New York City - have almost no support, help, or resources available to them. Even the male child victims of a female are actively denied any support on arbitrary grounds. (In fact, even the female victims of female sexual misbehavior and rape are not given a loud enough voice, for that matter, and the feminists actually support the rapists who rape male children, thereby creating the real 'rape culture'.) Owing to this indifference and hostility toward and to the lack of support system, the male victims of sexual abuse are less likely to disclose their experiences than are females. Researchers have found that 1 in 6 men have experienced abusive sexual experiences before age 18. And this is probably a low estimate, since it doesn't include noncontact experiences, which can also have lasting negative effects. Only 16% of men with documented histories of sexual abuse considered themselves to have been sexually abused, compared to 64% of women with documented histories in the same study (documented by social service agencies, which means it was very serious). Fact is, sexual abuse is just as harmful to the boys as it is to the girls, irrespective of the gender of the perpetrator. A 1997 study authored by Shanta Dube of the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that men and women who were sexually abused as children suffered similar health, behavioral, mental, and social problems.
Canada's largest study into the sexual exploitation of street kids and runaways, conducted by Vancouver's McCreary Centre Society, reveals that "some youth in each gender were exploited by women with more than 3 out of 4 (79%) sexually exploited males reporting exchanging sex for money or goods with a female" ('Survival Sex'). Part of the challenge in checking this crime is that "young males are not seen as being exploited because they are not coming to the attention of the police and the police aren't out there picking up the perpetrators. The system is set up to handle the sexual exploitation of young women, not young men". Female sex tourism (the women responsible for it call it "romance tourism") is also a problem that nobody wants to pay any attention to: Western women travel to Gambia, Kenya, and Jamaica to sexually exploit boys as young as 14 years old, paying for sex with clothes, meals, gifts, electronics, hard cash, and even the promise of a better future abroad. They also take pictures, go home to their country, and show their victims off to their friends as "Look, here's my boyfriend". Many of them rationalize their deeds bysaying that it's just harmless romance, and with the claim that they're just doing what middle-aged men have been doing for centuries: Taking up with someone half their age and giving them an all-expenses-paid ride in exchange for sex. Quoting a 1980's American movie "How Stella Got Her Groove Back", "Sex tourism, a product of slavery, is not new to the Caribbean. Every year, over 80000 middle-aged women flock to Jamaica to get their groove back." Various studies have shown that sexual harassment of the boys in the schools by both boys and girls is at near parity with that of the girls, and is far more common than it's generally claimed by the feminist-favoring MSM, which makes it into an almost exclusively male-on-female gender issue.
There also are countries where the government has made it into the law that rape is an exclusively male crime against a female: A female rapist or a male victim of rape is simply not recognized, by law. In New Zealand, for example, women cannot be rapists, by definition, no matter what they do (notice how shamelessly the word 'fathered' has been used in the news story for a rape-victim who was forced into it - even though in the same story later it's mentioned that he does not really have any parental rights; and this while the fathers willingly seeking a role in their children's lives are regularly kicked off and called 'sperm donors'). In Israel, the feminists have blocked the legislation that would allow men and boys to charge their female perpetrators as rapists, stating that some of the male victims might make false accusations! Feminist groups have a similar demand from the Knesset Law Committee as well.
In other words, men are rapists even when they have consesual sex with women, but women are not rapists even when they carry out forced sex with unwilling men whom they have kidnapped and tied to the bed. Therefore, whenever you read a news story in the MSM of a male victim of some kind of "sexual assault" (or even just "having sex"!) by women where the full details of what happened are not given, it can well be a female-on-male rape being disguised as a case of the general and broad category of sexual assaults (which most people would consider way less serious, like the woman forcibly touching, groping, or kissing the victim, etc; and have lower sentencing guidelines than rape, even if the maximum sentence is the same for both at some places). This type of dishonest covering-up of the female perpetrators of rape also keeps the statistics of female rapists artificially low.
There are increasingly anti-male, stupid, and ever widening redefinitions of sexual assault and rape, wherein the forced Engulfment/Envelopment of man's sexual organ does not count as rape, only Penetration does. This is also the case in the UK (where, female perpetration of genital on genital rape against a man would not be called rape, but "sexual assault" for which the sentence span is shorter); for example, see the rape laws in Scotland, or in England, N. Ireland, and Wales. This encourages female rapists to commit rapes without worries because they can be assured of getting away with merely a slap on the wrist - if that. At the same time, this type of feminist and dishonest definitions also skews the results of the studies involving rape victims, as the female-on-male rape will not be counted as rape by the dishonest definition, thereby virtually eliminating the number of male victims of rape at the hands of females. Owing to so blatantly misandric laws and policies, and manufactured rape statistics, the society has been randered into one of false rape allegations; of innocent people who are wrongly accused; and of indifference or disbelief toward, and covering-up of, the male victims of rape. The CDC classifies a sexually intimate attack on the genitals of a female victim as rape, but labels a sexually intimate attack on the genitals of a male victim as "other sexual assault". This classification has been used by the CDC and various groups citing statistics based on it to sweep part of the study's findings under the rug in order to maintain the perception that rape is a mostly male-perpetrated, female-suffered crime. The official statement is that 1 in 4 women, and 1 in 71 men have been raped at some time during their lifetime - a grossly dishonest statement. In fact, the feminist hysteria about all men being rapists is so strong that men are discouraged from working with children (and entering teaching and other child-focused professions) for the fear of accusations of sexual abuse.
Besides false accusations resulting in punishment, miscarriage of justice is also common in the cases of men accused of sexual assault or rape charges. In fact, rape has the highest wrongful conviction rate of all violent crimes, which means that sexual assault is either prosecuted even more vigorously than murder, or that many defendants have been falsely accused, or both. Given that police do make some effort to screen out false accusations, and that the prosecutors decline prosecution when they are unlikely to be successful, the false accusation rate must be significantly higher than the wrongful conviction rate; while the feminists claim that there are effectively no false rape allegations because "women don't lie" (yes, they actually base their conclusion on this emotional "fact", which is easily disproved because not only there's an abundance of false rape allegations, but there are several reasons - and incentives - for the women to lie about rape as well; in fact, the president of the Brevard, Fla. chapter of NOW - National Organization for Women - Desiree Nall herself has been charged with making a false rape report and making a false official statement). At the same time, the feminists tell women to stand together against the rape culture in the name of "sisterhood", even for those women who lie about being raped, lest otherwise the feminist lie that 'women never lie about rape' should lose its appeal. So we hear no uproar (but actually words of support) from most women when one of their "sisters" lies abot being raped. The feminists have systematically refused to consider the possibility that women lie. They have even attacked those who wanted to discuss the possibility. Law professor Alan Dershowitz reports that he was accused of sexual harassment for discussing in his law class the possibility of false rape allegations. Some colleges with speech codes have equated talk of false rape allegations with "discriminatory harassment". And despite the false rape accusations being so common and an everyday news story, people still continue to believe the feminist lie that 'women never lie about rape'. This is what you call taking the blue pill, refusing to see the reality even when it's right in front of you. It is reported that 1 in 7 male teachers has been falsely suspected of inappropriate contact with students.
Here are some cases of false rape / sexual abuse accusations.
On the other hand, women are not labeled rapists or pedophiles even when they actually rape multiple under-age boys. Older women that prey on young (teen-age) boys are known as Cougars, a term sometimes used as a symbol of pride by the cougars for themselves because women get little to no punishment for raping the teen boys and it kind of proves that they're still attractive in their old ages.
Here are some cases of cougars, female pedophiles, and other female rapists and sex offenders, including female teachers, who are always defended by the sisterhood, though more and more children are telling the Childline about the female sexual abusers. In fact, so many female teachers have been caught raping their students that the states are changing the laws to just make it legal for the teachers to have sex with their students, enshrining the pussy pass right into the law!
It has been found that most male rapist were sexually abused by an adult woman in their childhood or teen years, but the law refuses to recognize those female rapists/pedophiles for what they are, even though the women rapists rape nearly as frequently as the male rapists. (See also: 2+2=5, Bigot, Blue Pill, Date Rape, Dear Colleague, Double Standards, Feminazi, Feminism, Feminist Logic, Herd Mentality, Misandry, MSM, Pro-Choice, Rationalization Hamster, Schrodinger's Rapist, SCUM, Solipsism, The Plan, VAWA, Victimhood, War on Women, White Ribbon Campaign, Witch Hunt.)

Rationalization Hamster: Using dishonest techniques (like hamsterbatics, deprecated theories, or Twisted Logic) to provide illogical justification for a wrongful act. It's typically mentioned in relation to a woman's way of justifying her choices and avoiding being held accountable for the (negative/wrong) consequences of her decisions. Females, since their childhood, are coddled too much by the society; people are too soft and nice with them even on their mistakes; and the MSM and political institutions paint even their bad/negative traits/habits/decisions in a positive light by sugar coating them (to be PC) and/or blaming the males for the mistakes of the females ("A woman is never wrong", "You go girl...", etc). As a result, the females, and especially feminists, don't learn to own up to their mistakes, and they often provide illogical reasoning for their actions when they get undesired/bad results. Even when this excessive coddling of the females unintentionally results in something negative for them, and the rampant male bashing results in something favorable to the males, the concern immediately shifts toward how to make this all about the female victimhood again, which is another example of twisted thinking.
Here are some related and laughingly ridiculous styles of feminist argumentation and reasoning:
~ Backfire Effect: When your deepest convictions are challenged by contradictory evidence, your beliefs get stronger. That is why, the bigger a lie told by a liar, the more are the people willing to believe it despite presenting contrary evidence to them. Feminists have made extensive usage of this effect in brainwashing the masses - The lies made up by them are so absurd that the common people immediately trust them because they simply cannot believe that someone can lie in such ridiculous manner.
~ Circular Logic: To try to prove a hypothesis by citing as proof the hypothesis itself, either directly (a hypothesis 'A' is true because hypothesis 'A' is true; the latter part - the reason - is differently worded but is otherwise the same hypothesis 'A') or indirectly (hypothesis 'A' is true because hypothesis 'B' is true which in turn is because hypothesis 'A' is true; more intermediate hypotheses can be added to make it difficult to detect the circularity). Clearly, a circular logic is a fallacy and does not actually prove the hypothesis.
~ Conspiracy Fallacy: A person (or a group of people) believes that something (say, "A") is false, therefore "A" must be true (because that person or those people must be conspiring something by trying to make it appear false).
~ Kafkatrap: (The act of using this trap is called "Kafka-trapping".) An unfalsifiable claim, about thoughtcrime, intended to induce guilt so the subject becomes manipulable. Or, in simpler words, arguing that since the subject (say, "A") is denying of being guilty of something (or even asking for ways to not being guilty), so "A" must be guilty of that thing, and "A" just doesn't understand this. In short, Kafkatrap is like "Heads I win, tails you lose". Once the subject falls in this trap, it's impossible to avoid guilt no matter what.
~ Wile E Coyote Moment: A moment when a person (say, a feminist) suddenly realizes that the falseness of theories, myths, and dishonest statistics (like the patriarchy, wage gap, etc) that it had been holding on to has been exposed, and the person then tries to backpedal and justify its beliefs using the emotional/unreasonable arguments that are different from the orginal ones (because the original arguments have been deconstructed/refuted and are no longer functional) or even threats/bullying. This is a desperate attempt at getting back the credibility the person thinks it had, after suddenly getting caught lying or holding false beliefs (and hence misleading the people who had been believing that person for so long). In relation of this moment to the feminists, ordinarily, no outside counter-argument could have exposed the falsehood in the feminists' arguments because they ban or silence any counter-arguments, but in this case, the exposure comes from the feminists' own failure to tell lies cleverly enough. Thus, the logic and truth are a feminist's greatest enemies (because they expose the falseness of the feminists' own arguments). When the feminists face this moment, they're are always more afraid of losing credibility among public, rather than any actual harm (like the laws or policies based on their false arguments getting challenged or reversed); because, in order for the feminist empire - having its foundations built on lies, fear, and shaming - continue to fluorish, its public perception of being true and honest must be kept maintained.
Rationalization hamster is more of a feeling-based reasoning rather than fact-based; one is simply desperate to prove the right or wrong side of the things the same way as one feels about them, and is using any and all means to do so, valid or invalid. (See also: 2+2=5, Apex Fallacy, Bigot, Cause and Effect, Cognitive Dissonance, Double Standards, DoubleThink, Fembot, Feminist Logic, Glass Ceiling, Hamsterbatics, Herd Mentality, Male Privilege, MSM, Nordic Model, Orwellian, Patriarchy, PC, Projection, Quote Mining, Rape Culture, Reverse Discrimination, SCUM, Vagina Syndrome, Victimhood, Wage Gap.)

Red Pill: (This term is influenced from the movie "The Matrix".) A person who can see right through the feminist bullshit (the feminist lies and misinformation) and is not influenced by the propaganda is said to have taken the red pill (or a red pilled person). Few people get the chance to take the red pill, and even fewer then actually take it when they get the opportunity - the rest just reject it or outright oppose it. The reason is that the truth is very bitter and ugly, and most people prefer to live in the illusion even after they've seen the truth because the truth is going to shatter their long held beliefs about themselves and their ideals. The red pilled people become aware of the truth of the system of which they're a part, and are therefore difficult to be manipulated by it. Red pill people can be useful to the MRM when they start distributing the red pill (the truth) to the others hence bringing about awareness.
A related term is Purple Pill, which describes an attitude and knowledge midway between the blue pill (believing the clutural feminist narrative that men are evil and women their victims) and the red pill. A purple pill person has seen and now knows that even the males face systemic problems and discrimination, however, the purple pill peson is often not aware (or not ready to believe) that feminism is the cause of those problems. Sometimes, such a person knows that feminism is wrong and hateful, but does not feel the need to address the problems faced by the men as the person feels they're not affecting too many men or are not serious enough. Sometimes the person even feels the need to address the problems but does not know the correct solution. In other words, there are various levels of purple pill people and their knowledge of the gender politics and issues. They're sitting on the fence and can turn blue pilled (less likely) or red pilled at some point in the future as they do more research and gain knowledge. Feminist-turned-MRA's are often purple pilled. (See also: Blue Pill, Feminism, FTSU, MRM, Orwellian.)

Reverse Discrimination: (Also known as "Gender Quota" and "Positive Discrimination".) Discrimination carried out by (or on behalf of) a dishonest group "A" of people (women) against another group "B" (men) when the former group is unable to find any logic for the discrimination and presents manipulated irrelevant statistics from historic times to justify its actions. It should be noted that discrimination is discrimination - No discrimination of any kind can be positive. Therefore, the so called reverse or positive discrimination is nothing but an oxymoron used by the dishonest and lazy people against the people of the productive class. Discriminatory laws and policies against men are assumed to be justified even when it's overwhelmingly the men who are at the loss in any particular field; that is, equality of outcome or the Equalism (wrong) is being sought rather than the equality of opportunity or the Equity (right), and even then equality of outcome for the females actually means superiority of outcome for the females. For example,
~ There are numerous government or government-funded programs, sites, and organizations that are exclusively for women alone, which have no corresponding counterparts for men.
~ Women, once they get into the positions of power, demand quotas for other women and actively discriminate against men on every occasion they can find. This is partly attributable to the extremely strong automatic in-group bias found in women. Here are some women in the positions of power who discriminate against men: Anna Soubry, Glenda Jackson, Lorely Burt, Nicola Blackwood.
~ Budget reserves £12.5 million fund for women entrepreneurs.
~ The European Commission is now trying to force all the businesses to impose gender quotas on all levels, and opposing this Soviet-Union style measure is greeted in the committee with the usual... you guessed it... accusations of misogyny, as well as with calls for ending the economic freedom altogether in the EU (no kidding)!
~ UN creates UN Women, no 'UN Men' in sight so far. This is not a one-off instance, the UN is infamous for its feminist stance against the male victims of any crime, and regularly discriminates against the males, even boy children. It has also on a worldwide level ignored sexual violence against male victims.
~ In Saudi Arabia, violence against women is banned, but violence against men is not banned (and it's fully acceptable if committed by women because women can make use of counter allegations).
~ Men and women tennis players get equal prize money despite the men having to play more sets, which means that in fact, men are being paid less per set played.
~ And the list goes on.
The PC based favoritism toward women rather than hiring them on the basis of abilities has negative consequences. For example, when women are given jobs requiring capabilities (like physical strength, body size, etc) not possessed by them, they make use of excessive violence/weapons to compensate for their shortcomings and because of their sense of giving the highest priority to self-protection. This can result in hazard to the other people's safety.
Some stats on the number of male and female job-holders etc can be found from the government sources themselves, meaning the government is aware of the situation but is purposely silent on the sad plight of men. The most common excuse made by the supporters of reverse discrimination policies is Diversity - a make-feel-good dead horse that they continue to beat in denial even after being presented with the strong evidence that it hurts the concerned corporation/institution. Fact is, diversity just means "no male and no Whites/upper-class", headed increasingly toward "no male" since White women cannot be discriminated against and Black men are easy targets for any sort of inhumane discrimination. Lately, men with straight sexual orientation have also been discriminated against in the name of diversity. Another similar term to justify the discrimination is "Gender Intelligent", which practically means favoritism toward women. This dicrimination is also 'justified' in the name of "Social Justice" (also called "gang justice", "feud justice", and "collective guilt"), which is nothing but bigoted justification for any discrimination done against a male human being. People wanting social justice are authoritarians. (See also: 2+2=5, Affirmative Action, Apex Fallacy, Bigot, Blue Pill, Dear Colleague, Double Standards, Entitlement, Feminism, Feminization, Glass Ceiling, Herd Mentality, Hyperagency, Hypoagency, Male Disposability, Male Privilege, Matriarchy, Misandry, Orwellian, Patriarchy, Paycheck Fairness Act, PC, SCUM, Title IX, Victimhood, Wage Gap, Walk a Mile in Her Shoes, Welfare, White Ribbon Campaign.)

Schrodinger's Rapist: Any male stranger approaching a woman for any purpose whatsoever. The feminists believe that all men are potential rapists, always waiting for a chance to rape a woman, and do perform a rape on her as soon as they get a chance. (This while actually less than half a percent of the men are rapists.) The definition of rape has been arbitrarily extended to include anything and everything, including making a woman feel threatened (even if just by not looking handsome or pleasant to her). So, to avoid being a Schrodinger's Rapist, a man must not approach a strange woman in any way; only the woman can initiate any such interaction. More proof how feminism is criminalizing the male behavior and feminizing the social bonding. (See also: 2+2=5, Bigot, Date Rape, Dear Colleague, Feminism, Feminist Logic, Feminization, Hamsterbatics, Kangaroo Court, Matriarchy, Misandry, NAWALT, Objectification, Orwellian, Proxy Violence, Pussy Pedestalization, Rape Culture, SCUM, Shaming Language, Solipsism, Victimhood, War on Women, White Ribbon Campaign, Witch Hunt.)

SCUM: (Acronym for "Society for Cutting Up Men".) Refers to a piece of writing titled "S.C.U.M. Manifesto" by the feminist Valerie Solanas, in which she states that the men are not the 'proper' human beings (only women are), and therefore are dangerous not only to the women but also to themselves. Therefore, the society must not produce male children anymore, and also murder the existing males. To achieve this, she encourages women to abort male fetuses, and men to kill each other and commit suicide and die. To avoid (and downplay) the criticism of these views of feminism by the public, the piece has been called a joke or a satire, and to be taken as fun. However, when we take a look at the life-herstory of the author Solanas (who mercilessly shot men), we know that she was quite serious about what she wrote. SCUM remains relevant to the day and its ideas are increasingly being implemented indirectly:
~ Presently, SCUM is the roadmap for the goals of feminism. It manifests in the forms of mothers' hatred for or ignorance toward male children, and mothers' insistence on the sons' malnutrition and their circumcision, etc.
~ Pseudo-scientific studies are being spread telling mothers to not give birth to boys (sex-selective/gender-selective abortion) because of various reasons, like, boys' mothers live a shorter life.
~ Feminists are demanding reforms to the laws, in order to allow women to murder men on the pretext of vagina syndromes.
~ In November 2010, an event highlighted SCUM on YouTube quite a lot, when a theatre group named "SCUM" of Swedish feminists (identifying themselves as followers of Valerie Solanas) posted a video of a stage production of the S.C.U.M. Manifesto, depicting women murdering an innocent man, licking blood from the dead man's head, and dancing to celebrate the murder, followed by the message "Do Your Part" (that is, urging the viewers to target and kill the men of their choice). The MRM site AVfM and MRA's around the world criticised the video and made the world aware of this hateful stage production. Despite complaints to YouTube, the video was not taken down and remained public for a year. Since then, the original video has gone private. However, the Swedish theatre group "SCUM" continues to present the stage adaptation to the school children (yes, school children) routinely. (In January 2013, there was another video release from the same country, promoting violence on those who disagree with the feminists, and labeling them misogynists.)
~ About a half century after its publication (1967), SCUM is still in print (10th reprint has come out by 2013), and has been translated into 13 languages. It's known to be a source of inspiration to feminists, yet they continue to deny it publicly. In 2009, the book was published in Icelandic and was advertised on the National Feminist Organization's email list, describing Solanas ("super-cool") and her book in positive words. You can see the feminist deception in action in a reply from Gudrun Jonsdottir, head of Stigamot (the best funded feminist organization in Iceland), who was thankful for the ad, but warned against discussing the book and its contents outside of the innermost feminist circles - Not because the book was full of misandry, but because it could have negative impact on the public image of feminism, as it did in Sweden.
~ The ideas of SCUM are also in the roots of the Australian government's national plan named "The Plan" in short.
Once the men have been stripped of enough rights and power, a direct implementation of the SCUM ideas is expected as the next logical step. (See also: Affirmative Action, Bigot, Dear Colleague, Feminazi, Feminism, Feminist Logic, Feminization, FTSU, Hamsterbatics, Herstory, Intactivist, Male Disposability, Matriarchy, Misandry, MRA, MRM, Orwellian, Penis Envy, Pro-Choice, Radfem, Rape Culture, Rationalization Hamster, Reverse Discrimination, Schrodinger's Rapist, The Plan, Title IX, Vagina Syndrome, VAWA, Victimhood, War on Women, White Feather, Witch Hunt, Womyn.)

Serial Monogamy: Having one spouse or lover at a given time, but secretely also establishing another relationship in a wish to ditch the first one. Then repeat. It's kind of like branch swinging that monkeys do - Plant hands firmly on another branch before letting go the currently held branch. This is mostly characteristic of women and is termed as the female equivalent of Polygamy (simultaneous relationships with multiple spouses; Bigamy is a special case of polygamy when the number of such spouses is 2).
A related term is 80/20 Rule of marriage (or relationships). It has two interpretations. The first posits that 80% of women hunting for a mate are only interested in the top 20% of men (alphas). The second states that within a relationship, even if a partner "A" (usually woman) is satisfied with the other partner "B" for 80% of the things, "A" seeks to get the remaining 20% of its needs met (without realizing that nobody can meet 100% of one's expectations), and in the process, cheats on "B" by finding a new partner "C" (supposedly more alpha than "B"). This usually ends up in a net loss when "C" fails to meet more than 40% of needs of "A" (meets double of what "A" expected in "C", but no more than that). And then the search for another new partner starts. (The pursuers of the Game theory exploit this mentality of women.) The fall can continue until "A" loses all hopes of being in a relationship and gets totally disappointed/frustrated. (See also: Alpha, Apex Fallacy, Briffault's Law, Cock Carousel, Evo-Psych, Game, Hypergamy, Gina Tingles, Gold Digger, Herd Mentality, Hyperagency, Hypoagency, Marriage Strike, Nordic Model, Objectification, Social Proofing, White Knight.)

Shaming Language: (The acts of using the shaming language are known as 'Shaming Tactics'; the 'tactics' might also include actions - such as pointing, gestures, etc - in addition to language.) Words, phrases, and accusations (commonly stereotypes or just plain false) used for someone belonging to a particular group by the members of another group with a different or opposing viewpoint or ideology, with the intention of silencing or embarrassing the target person for having views different from the latter. A male person being constantly shamed for being a male by even the sources he considers unbiased and favorable (for example, the media, parents, teachers, etc) might get into what is called Male Guilt Complex. Here are some examples of the shaming language:
~ 'Bitter': Used by the feminists for a man expressing his discontent on the discrimination going on against the men. Alternatively, for a man who is obviously pissed off because a woman left him for another man, or divorced him to legally rob him of his money and children, or has done some other kind of wrong to him using the misandric judicial system. Whereas a woman facing a similar condition might have gotten sympathetic words from the men for complaining about men, women in general have no such sympathy for men. So when the ruined man complains about the system being rigged in favor of women, the women in his audience shame him by saying, "You're bitter". Also used for virgin shaming, "You're bitter because you can't get laid".
~ 'Creepy': When a woman feels that a man (any man, including a stranger) is not quite like how she'd like to see him, or when a woman feels that a man is behaving according to his own sense of being (instead of appealing to her feelings). This is used to make men behave like how the superior human beings (women) wants them to be, and not be themselves.
~ 'Faggot': A gay man not adhering to the feminist ideology.
~ Fedora-Wearing: Used by the feminists (especially by the fembot variety who never think on their own) to paint the MRA's as men who long for, and want to move the time back to, the old days (say, the 1950's or so) of their supposed male privilege. This is a particularly idiotic assumption - even by the feminist standards, because the MRM explicitly rejects traditionalism as something encouraging male disposability and pussy pedestalization (and as having nothing beneficial left in it at all for the men).
~ 'Gay' or 'Loser': When a man does not wish to engage with a woman for the fear of false accusation, or because he's not interested in her, or for any other reason. Such women think of themselves as some kind of prize or gift to any man (and entitled to the attention of any man they pick) and cannot digest rejection by any man.
~ Mansplaining: This word is used by a woman to silence a man who is explaining something about (or giving his opinion on) a topic, generally when she isn't familiar with the topic (or is wrong about it) and does not want to expose her lack of knowledge to the man, or when she is very confident (or pseudo-confident) regarding the correctness and level of her knowledge on the topic and is not open to a different opinion from the man. This especially is the case when the topic is about something related to her own self or what she thinks is within the women's domain such as children, shopping, etc (as in "Oh look, he knows more about my own experience than myself, and is 'splaining as to how I ought to think", or, "Instead of mansplaining, why don't you get in touch with your feminine side and try to understand/appreciate our feelings/problems/viewpoint"). Such a woman does not like learning something from (or hearing a different opinion of, or being corrected by) a man. In other words, it's like, you're wrong because you're male. If you're a man and tell a female feminist something about feminism (for example, your views of or experiences with it that differ from hers), she can construe this as mansplaining.
~ Dudebro: Someone who mansplains. Assumed by the feminists to be a privileged male who is complaining about the men's issues just because the women are complaining about the women's issues, and not because the men actually face any issues (or at least to the same extent as the women). A typical remark used in conjugation with this term is: "Not everything is about you" (means that everything must be about the females).
~ Femsplaining: Feminist explanation or opinion about the male experiences (or in general gender experiences) as if that is the only explanation/opinion that is right. Femsplaining is supposed to be meaningless, is based on the feminist logic and theories such as patriarchy etc, and was usually never asked for from the feminist. This term was invented in response to the feminists' invention "mansplaining"; the usage has since caught on. The difference between the two terms is the use of logic/reason/statistics (in the so-called mansplaining) vs use of ideology/feelings/bigotry (in femsplaining). Typical femsplaining remarks used by the feminists are: "You need to work on your issues" (the said 'issues' being existing as a male human, showing concern about the discrimination faced by the males, questioning the feminist ideology, etc), "You should stop obsessing about [something]" (said when the feminist lacks a logical response and cannot tolerate your persistence), etc.
~ "Lived Experience": This term is used by the feminists, commonly in conjunction with the term mansplaining (this is done mostly by the fembots) but also independently, to refer to the subset of a woman's real-life experiences (victimization in the cases of DV, rape, etc) that toe the feminist line (female victimhood). This is a tool for making anecdotes into seemingly valid generalizations. Any other lived experiences (e.g., a woman's real-life experience of being a perpetrator - or a man's being a victim - of DV, rape, etc at the hands of a woman) will be discarded as lies, or invalidated as unimportant and one-off instances (no matter how much evidence you present that shows otherwise), and argued against. A typical remark associated with this term is "That's just testosterone talking" (means that you'll understand this only if you're either a female or a mangina).
~ "Men cannot handle independent/opiniated/strong/etc women": (Or 'Men feel threatened/intimidated by an independent/intelligent/strong/etc woman'.) This is the kind of the language that hints at the arrogant and insecure nature of feminists. This is a two-way attack - In addition to shaming the men and making men excuse the female-arrogance (any possible bitchiness, rudeness, and weakness/incompetence of the woman), it can also cause an affected man to treat the (insecure) woman more favorably (for example, not question her questionable/wrong points/behavior etc), just so that he would not be seen as someone "unable to handle (or threatened/intimidated by) [that kind of] women". In other words, this is like begging (for favors/attention/excuses) by threatening (with shaming).
~ Misogynist: When someone makes a logical argument against (or questions the logic, rationale, or data behind) women's special privileges (or legal rights) and the feminist is unable to counter or justify it, this is uttered, "You just hate women" or "You just can't handle a strong and opinionated woman" (or the very famous catch-all, "You're a misogynist" - The overly-used wild card from the feminist playbook). The feminists have gone out of their way to change even the dictionary definition of the word "misogyny" when a member of their ilk used it wrongly. Fact is, when female feminists say these things on their own (while not reponding to someone), they're just projecting their own hatred (or penis envy) on to the men. Even when one says that one is not a misogynist, the feminists would argue that "Since you have to deny being a misogynist, you must be one, and you just doesn't understand that you are", using a laughingly ridiculous style of argumentation - Kafkatrap (and considering it perfectly valid too). 'Misogyny', while does exist in some places, but the word as used by the feminists is a meaningless concept which the feminists use to make it stand for just anything and everything.
~ Rape Apologist: Anyone demanding fair treatment for the men accused of rape, or anyone pointing out that the cases of false rape accusations do happen, or anyone supporting or attending any positive cause or event related to the rights of men and boys, even if it has got nothing to do with women or feminists. The fact is, as always, it's the feminists themselves that are the true rape apologists (when women commit rape, the feminists even call it a Good Rape), and they're just projecting their own thinking on to the people demanding justice for the falsely accused men.
~ Small Penis: This phrase (or the corresponding gesture made by stretching the thumb and the index finger as if measuring the length of or holding a small object) is used by women to make fun of a man or berate him. In addition to making fun of the man, this also objectifies a man as a sex-toy. Like the word 'misogynist', this phrase has quite a generalized applicability and can be used in any situation whatever - just like an ad-hominem, this phrase doesn't require any justification or logic for its usage.
~ "Typical Man": This phrase is used to shame a man's whole manhood when he makes a small or common mistake (that anyone can make; doesn't have to have anything to do with the woman who says this phrase), especially while doing traditionally female tasks.
~ Virgin Shaming: Feminists and women in general use phrases like "No woman is ever going to sleep with you with an attitude like that" against any man pointing out anything negative about women. Feminists call non-feminist men desperate failures with awkward personalities (who "can't get laid and live in mom's basement") and evil oppressive fantasies; MRA's call feminist-women hairy legged ugly loudmouths.
~ "Where have all the good men gone?" (or, in case of the feminists, Where have all the manginas gone?): A complaint often made by women (or feminists) when talking to each other or in comments on the Web, when nice men are not being attracted to them due to those women being rude, repulsive, arrogant, or feminist (or not actively supporting the ideology of feminism due to its being misandric and discriminatory). People falling for this phrase feminize the definition of good manners - bringing in the female gender to be respected and throwing out the male gender. This phrase is also used to shame men responsible for the marriage strike into marrying women despite the obvious legal danger and risk that a marriage (and its consequences, like children, divorce, etc) poses to the men, and nothing in return being brought to the table by the women. Owing to the fear of false rape/harassment accusation by women that is so common (wherein the woman is always believed and the accused man is assumed to be guilty at her word alone), some good and reputed men won't engage with even a nice woman who is a stranger. This phrase also describes such women's confusion.
~ "You're part of the problem": Feminists say this to anyone who questions their assertions or policies (or demands facts and data behind them). Feminists achieve public support for their goals by making unproven emotion-based assertions. They then recommend unjust and dishonest policies to achieve those goals. For example, feminists make the fraudulent claim that 'women never lie in rape cases' (the 'assertion'), and on the basis of this, they strive for (and in many countries have achieved) the 'default guilty status for the men' (the 'goal') whom women accuse of rape. When anybody questions the legitimacy of their assertion or talks about the men's rights being violated, feminists say that that since that person does not agree with the feminist policies, that person must be for rape (and of course, a misogynist) and hence is 'part of the problem' (the problem being the 'rape culture' in this case).
Often, even if someone speaks in favor of men, one normally shames them as if it's the men only that are at fault and the women are never to be blamed. For example, a priest who is actually in favor of fathers' rights, starts his message somewhere along these words: "Today, we know the divorced fathers are not playing an active role in the children's lives, but..." (notice how in this lecture he makes it the fathers' fault rather than the biased legal system's which almost never gives them the child custody). (See also: Bigot, Blue Pill, Double Standards, DV, Fembot, Feminism, Feminist Logic, Male Disposability, Male Privilege, Man Up, Mangina, Marriage Strike, Misandry, MRA, MRM, NAWALT, Objectification, Patriarchy, Penis Envy, Projection, Pussy Pedestalization, Projection, Quote Mining, Rape Culture, Rationalization Hamster, Schrodinger's Rapist, Victimhood, White Feather, White Ribbon Campaign.)

Shit Test: A test performed (or game played) by a woman on a man to judge if he qualifies her standards before accepting him for a relationship. The test might involve presenting a challenge (usually not meant to be accepted as such), changing the style of conversation or behavior unexpectedly (for example, a woman suddenly starting to sound more intimate or using more informal words, or appear more attractive and open), displaying opposite (double) thinking (for example, taunting the man for his masculinity and then again when he becomes a feminine Pussy), etc, with the intent of observing and analyzing the reaction of the target man to see if he is genuine enough (e.g., how close to an alpha he is) or just an AFC/PUA/beta/etc. Shit tests are usually performed by women with high SMV but any woman is capable of it depending upon the character/value of the man. Experienced women also teach other women on how to perform shit tests. Shit tests are necessary tool for a gold digger, but are not always bad intentioned because women also use them (even if maybe just instinctually) to avoid unsuitable suitors.
The correct response to a shit test is not to accept it at its face value and act to counter it, nor is to reject it as a lie even if it clearly is; it is to act even more in accordance with the shit test's implication. For example, if a woman says that you ignore her (and you sense that it's just a shit test), as a man, an example of your correct response would be, "Are you making me a sammich or I just go enjoy my video game now?"
Men do not in general carry out such tests on their partners, and tend to trust them on their word and support them no matter what. However, given the misandric laws, in the marriage, a woman can choose to destroy the man's life completely whenever she wishes. Therefore, for men who are interested in marriage despite all the risks, they need to learn to perform some tests on the women they wish to marry in order to minimize (but of course, not completely end) the possibility of choosing a wrong woman. (See also: AFC, Alpha, Beta, Briffault's Law, Cock Carousel, Double Standards, DoubleThink, FRA, Game, Gina Tingles, Gold Digger, Hypergamy, Marriage Strike, Misandry, PUA, SMV, Social Proofing.)

Single Parents: Single Moms for all intent and purpose. Since in case of divorce, the child support payment dollars benefit the moms in 90% of the cases, the overwhelmingly large portion of single parenthood is single moms. According the US Census Bureau, of 12.2 million single parent families in the US, more than 85% have a female parent at the helm. Also, single moms are the overwhelming majority that receives child support, shelters, and welfare benefits. While the government pretends to favor this in the name of the children's interest, the laws and policies actually merely benefit the women alone.
Scientists suggest that children with two parents instead of one could have healthier brains later in life, because the level of adult brain cell production is determined early on in development, and the number of parents could actually determine that, based on the amount of attention that they can give for their babies. (This scientific observation is contrary to the ideological belief of feminism that fathers are unnecessary and harmful to the children.) Research on mice has shown that on becoming adult, pups raised by dual parents had 2 to 3 times more brain cell production, which made their behaviors stronger - they were able to perform socially, physically better in their environment. The advantages of dual parenting are also passed onto the next generation. In fact, in 1992, research has already concluded that children in fractured families tend to suffer more ill-health, do less well at school, are more likely to be unemployed, and are more prone to criminal behavior and to repeat as adults the same cycle of unstable parenting. But instead of welcoming this analysis as identifying a real problem, the Left turned on its authors, branding them as evil Right-wingers for being 'against single mothers' (typical shaming tactic of bigots: Label anything/anyone not adhering to their agenda/beliefs as against/hater of a specific group of people). In fact, the feminists and politicians are so supportive of the single mothers that Michelle Obama called herself a single mother in enthusiasm!
Single motherhood in a given region has the single strongest negative correlation with social mobility (i.e., ability of poor people's children to rise above their parents' humble station), followed by the divorce rates. Strong empowered single mothers, eh? Numerous studies have shown that children raised by single moms end up becoming criminals (boys) and whores (girls). When referring to these statistics, the MSM always calls these people the children of single "parents". Most often, though, the MSM just hides these statistics and always praises the single moms calling them the "heroic" single moms (here it doesn't use the phrase "heroic parents"), blaming the dads (easy targets) for single motherhood without bothering to cite any proofs (the same - blame the men - is the attitude within the society at large). Fact is, fatherlessness is encouraged and exacerbated by government and charities. Despite all these incentives in place, still more entitlements and money are always sought for the single moms, even as the tsunami of family breakdown has started to cause 'Men Deserts' in some areas, with the rate of single parent families growing by 200000 a year (most of them being single mom families). Here are some related terms:
~ Helicopter Parent: (Mostly stands to mean 'helicopter mom'.) A parent who, like a surveillance helicopter hovering over a suspect region of land, keeps an overly close watch over the actions and behaviors of the children, and is overly controlling in dictating to the children as to what is good and what is bad for them, resulting in a hindrance in the children's independance and capacity of free thinking and decision making. A helicopter parent is often a passive-aggressive emotional manipulator, who ties the punishments and rewards for the children's actions with the parent's own whims. Such children, deprived of their own thinking power, become emotionally dependent upon the parent, seeking to please the parent by submitting to the whims of the parent and doing whatever the parent demands and believing whatever the parent tells them (for example, a mother lying to the child about the father in order to distance the child from the father - known as parental alienation).
~ "Single Parent By Choice": (This, again, largely just means "single mother by choice" or "Choice Mommy".) A sub-set of single parents who choose single parenthood by their own choice (for example, sometimes by artificial insemination), as opposed to the single parenthood resulting from a divorce/separation, death of spouse/partner, pussy pass for murder of husband, etc. According the US Census Bureau, in the single parent families, 4 out of 10 children are born to unwed mothers. The inherent hatred of some women for the men as fathers of their children is one of the reasons that the single motherhood is on the rise, another being the women's mentality that the men are unnecessary because the women are independent.
A somewhat related acronym term is SAHM (Stay-At-Home Mother), a mom who stays at home for looking after the children (the breadwinner is her husband/partner, or she might be single on the taxpayer/government support). (See also: Bigot, Chalimony, Entitlement, Feminism, FRA, Gold Digger, His-Fault Divorce, Hypoagency, Matriarchy, MSM, Parental Alienation, Paternity Fraud, Pussy Pass, Shaming Language, Victimhood, Welfare.)

SMV: (Acronym for "Sexual Market Value".) The relative sexual attraction or demand of a person. For example, all other factors being equal, after the stability of SMV has been reached (which remains for a period of a few years), a relatively young person has a higher SMV than an older one. Or a more physically attractive person (e.g., a model or a model-look-alike) has a higher SMV than a less attractive one. A higher SMV sometimes also helps females get favors like the pussy pass.
A related term is SMP (Sexual MarketPlace), which refers to the set of people available to choose from in a given relationship demographic (say, a country, a particular community, etc).
Trends in the female and male SMV's: From the teen-age, females start off with a way higher SMV than the males; the males' SMV isn't even apparent yet (it begins after 20). The SMV then increases at a slower rate for the females, and at a faster rate for the males. The female is at her peak of SMV at about age 23. It remains stable for a few years and then starts decreasing slowly. Meanwhile, the male's SMV increases fast during this period. This continues until the late 20's when the female and the male SMV's begin to converge, and remain about equal for a few years (after which the females hit the wall; hence the saying, "Men age like wine, women age like milk"). Within this period of convergence, the dissatisfied women are desperate to capitalize on their sexuality (i.e., get hold of a higher-status male), because they know this is their last chance at it, and also because of the hormones at this age. The peak of the male SMV occurs at about age 36, at which point it remains stable for some years before starting to decrease slowly. The observed trends of relationship are consistent with these changes in the SMV. (See also: Alpha, Cock Carousel, Gina Tingles, Gold Digger, Shit Test, Social Proofing, The Wall.)

Social Proofing: Assumption or judgement made by a woman about something/someone (for example, about a man being fit for a relationship, etc) based on the society's opinions on that thing/person, rather than her own personal assessment and experience. For example, women prefer taken men ("if that man has had two happy girlfriends, and women like him, he must be a great boyfriend to have"). This is closely tied to the herd mentality. PUA's use this to their advantage by making a better 'image' of themselves in society, and especially among women. (See also: Alpha, Briffault's Law, Cock Carousel, Cognitive Dissonance, DoubleThink, Evo-Psych, Game, Gina Tingles, Gold Digger, Herd Mentality, Hypergamy, NAWALT, PUA, Shit Test, SMV, Solipsism, Vagina Syndrome, White Knight.)

Solipsism: A belief of a person that that person is the only existing entity in the universe; everything/everyone else is either unknown to that person, or that person considers it a means for the person's own happiness. For example, when something bad happens to a man, a solipsist wife (or another female relative) would not at all care about his pains etc, but would say that what happened was bad because her feelings got hurt, or she felt powerless, or she had to face some difficulties or criticism etc. Similarly, if there's something positive done for the men (for example, eventually including them in a female-only health program, etc), it's not because the government is concerned about the men's problems and issues, but because it would benefit their slave-owners (the women living with them) - any benefit to the men is an afterthought, and just incidental. Majority of women are solipsists, viewing men only as objects and not caring about their feelings. Feminism is a kind of solipsism. Here are some examples:
~ When it comes to give anonymity to the alleged rapists (the accused persons on whom the rape charges have not been proved yet, who rightfully should remain anonymous just like the accuser), feminists oppose the move by saying that respecting the wrongly accused person's right to anonymity might not encourage women to make false accusations (the feminists believe that women must always be believed at their word alone by the courts); that is, any level of harm done to the innocent men, their public image, health, career, relationships, etc is okay as long as those can be destroyed at the mere word of the accusing women. This is example of solipsism because the feminists are measuring the effect of an action on men from the how it would affect women.
~ The feminists' argument that "misandry is actually misogyny" is also an example of solipsism. The feminists' claim that addressing or even recognizing misandry or the problems and issues faced by the men is misogyny, is an example of solipsistic doublespeak.
~ Instead of doing anything for actually solving them, feminists view the male health issues as inducing misogyny!
~ Women claim that women and children (and not men) are always the only victims of any war.
When this feeling is artificially induced in a group of people by the government (using slogans like, "You're the only individual that matter", "Be yourself and don't listen to others", etc), it actually works in the opposite way (just as the government planned). The targeted individuals think that they're free to be whatever they want to be and have got nothing to do with the others. As a result, they become lonely and lost, and, owing to the human instinct of wanting companionship, seek someone close to them. Now the government, using the popular media, can feed them anything (which is far from reality) that in some elements identify with these individuals, and these individuals start associating with it, making a great collective mindset favoring the government's propaganda and lies. This is Orwellian "Collective Solipsism". People think they're enjoying their free thoughts and are seeing the reality, but actually they're completely blind to the reality and perceiving it as the government intended. (See also: Apex Fallacy, Blue Pill, Cause and Effect, Cognitive Dissonance, Double Standards, DoubleThink, Entitlement, Feminism, Feminist Logic, Glass Ceiling, Hamsterbatics, Herd Mentality, Male Privilege, Misandry, Objectification, Orwellian, Patriarchy, Projection, Pussy Pedestalization, Rape Culture, Schrodinger's Rapist, Social Proofing, Useful Idiots, Vagina Syndrome, Victimhood, Wage Gap, War on Women.)

The Plan: Short name for "The National Council's Plan for Australia to Reduce Violence against Women and their Children, 2009-2021". This is the Australian government's plan to end the civil rights of men. Feminists who talk regularly about the extermination of male half of the population (just like we talk about having a dinner outside etc) held an international conference titled "SCUM Conference" in Australia. The Australian prime minister Julia Gillard (and other politically influential women) attended the SCUM Conference and came up with The Plan. (It's been shown that the Australian government is directly linked to Radfem Hub, and there's big fraud in The Plan.) Under The Plan, the man, on the mere accusation of DV, would:
~ Be removed from his home.
~ Be issued restraining orders against him.
~ Be arrested and held in prison without bail.
~ Be denied access to his children.
~ Be registered on publically accessible DV registers (future planned).
~ Lose ownership and control of his assets.
~ Have his income garnished.
And the burden of proof of innocence will be upon the man (same as in the rape cases). Also, the definition of DV has been extended to include such acts as the following (which shows how easy it is to get a man to face all the above consequences):
~ Not listening to your intimate partner (wife/SO).
~ Disciplining your dog (i.e., yelling at your pets).
~ Making purchases without consulting your intimate partner.
~ Refusing to give your money to the intimate partner when she asks for it.
~ Asking your 'intimate partner' for her money.
~ Denying sex to your 'intimate partner'.
And so on. This excludes male victims of the same acts from the DV definition, so a wife can still do all the above things to the husband. All the DV hotlines are for women only. As an example of what constitutes DV, things like displaying a weapon (even a toy gun) in the home, or leaving it laying around visible, is an act of DV in Australia. In short, pretty much anything a woman says she feels bad about is an act of DV against the man.
If you watch and listen to the Holocaust videos, you'll notice that it also began with such plans (that is, ending the civil rights of the Jews exclusively), thereby equating feminism to Nazism. (See also: Common-Law Marriage, Double Standards, Dowry Law, DV, DVPO, Entitlement, Femicide Law, Feminazi, Feminism, Feminization, His-Fault Divorce, Kangaroo Court, Male Disposability, Marriage Strike, Matriarchy, Orwellian, Parental Alienation, Proxy Violence, Radfem, Rape Culture, SCUM, VAWA, War on Women, White Ribbon Campaign, Witch Hunt.)

The Wall: The average age at which one's SMV (sexual market value) or fertility takes a sudden hit (starts decreasing fast); usually near around 35 years for a woman. Feminism has been successful in brainwashing the majority of women that they'll remain attractive and productive forever, and they can get into relationships of their choice and have their own babies at any age. This is necessary so that the feminists can force ("empower") women into (and men out of) the jobs. With a promise of all-time availability of state/government help, desired relationship, and children, feminism makes the women believe that they can 'have it all', that is,
~ Cock carousel.
~ Great career (through government policies like the affirmative action).
~ Life-partner of choice at any age (provider and for social status for the time being, to be milked later).
~ Great kids when all is settled (kids also means more money on separation in the form of chalimony).
~ Extra-marital affairs and sexual relationships with their choicest alphas (serial monogamy); even to the detriment of the children.
~ Divorce to leave the beta husband and take along his everything with state/legal force.
~ Possibly repeat the marriage cycle to extract money from another man.
etc. The reality comes as a shock to many women who fall for it, later when they hit 'the wall'. (See also: Affirmative Action, Beta, Bigot, Chalimony, Cock Carousel, Feminism, Gold Digger, Penis Envy, Serial Monogamy, SMV.)

Title IX: This is a US government rule under which, in the field to which it's applied in an institution receiving any kind of government grants, there can be no more percentage of men among themselves than the percentage of women among themselves in that field. For example, if there are 70 female students and 30 male students in a college; and if 7 female students (10%) join the college soccer team; then, under Title IX, no more than 3 male students will be allowed to join the soccer team. The only permanent way to apply Title IX is to artificially cap (limit) the male enrollments. Title IX currently applies to college sports and some other fields. There also is a difference in funding and attitude toward the males in sports (males have to pay themselves, everything is free for the females; males are treated and punished more harshly, etc). Obama has promised to bring the STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Maths) courses under Title IX in 2013, ignoring the fact that the less contribution of women in these fields is not because of discrimination, but because of their own choices and lack of abilities/interest, and (of course) ignoring the fact that it will negatively impact the male students. Title IX is also responsible for making the college environment extremely hostile, dangerous, and risky to the male students by snatching away their right to a be presumed innocent until guilty on being falsely accused of sexual misconduct, coupled with increasingly broader definition of what constitutes sexual assault (which is now virtually anything a female student says).
This, and so many other similar policies, despite strong statistical evidence of the boys' failing performance for all races in all areas and (for example, continued relative underachievement in boys' scholastic performance in reading) show that there's been a systematic and ongoing War Against Boys, which continues apace in academia (including the nursery, primary, secondary, and high / higher secondary schools) with nothing being done about it. For example,
~ For many decades now, boys have been treated as defective girls, because of the feminist rejection of the well-known fact that boys and girls behave and learn quite differently from each other. Boys are scolded, mistreated, punished, prescribed mandatory medicines, expelled, and suspended just for being boys and doing the exact same things which if done by a girl would be rewarded and considered a sign of her empowerment. This is because the teachers are directed to treat the natural male children behavior as one of the hundreds of newly discovered "syndromes" and fictitious "diseases"; even 6-year-olds (primarily boys) are being dignosed with ADHD, Autism, OCD, etc. This kind of drugging (with harmful drugs like Ritalin etc) of the boys results in hinderance in their growth and them becoming a big problem in the future. This is not a conspiracy theory any more - It's a well known fact that children being wrongly labeled mentally ill are making billions for drug firms. Spiraling numbers of children are being diagnosed with mental health issues, and the trend is affecting children at ever younger ages. Over the last 20 years, diagnosis rates of ADHD have tripled, while the ADHD drug market's value has grown from £11 million to £11 billion a year! By the way, the drugging problem has clutched in at the military soldiers too. So two of any nation's most important resources (young men and the soldiers) are being consumed by the greed of the drug industry and the feminists/politicians who benefit from it.
~ Study finds that parents devote more learning time to their daughters than their sons - reading, telling stories, drawing, and teaching new words and letters to their pre-kindergarten-age daughters than their sons (this holds true even when the boy and girl are twins); which could point to the reason for academic lag in boys (the "Boy Crisis" - where boys lag behind girls in kindergarten-level reading and math, and the fail to thrive at the primary, secondary, and post-secondary educational levels of the feminized academia). Of course, this is not favoritism according to the Canadian researchers (because that is apparently only if they favor boys over girls). Instead, the researchers proclaim, without any evidence, that it's just easier and more productive to spend learning time with girls, who are more likely to sit still compared to boys. So effectively, the researchers are saying that this is no problem, nothing serious, nothing needs to be done about it, and to just move on.
~ Boys and young men themselves, and their activities, behavior, masculinity, and sexuality, are demonized (even the gay males are not spared), while the girls are considered totally innocent (or forced by the boys) for doing the exact same things. The arguments made clearly seem more ideological (feminist) than factual.
~ Anything for the kids depicting the male sex in a positive light or as independent or in leading roles is actively banned or neutered to make it either gender-neutral or appealing to the females. The common media, including kids' programs, encourage and empower the girls by showing them as brave, independent, intelligent, and kind human beings with all the positive qualities; while it degrades the boys and makes them feel like they're uselss by portraying the male characters as cruel, foolish, and sub-par with and subservient to the girls.
~ Research shows that female teachers give boys lower marks, while the male teachers are unbiased. Another study shows that eliminating feminist teacher bias results in improvement in boys' grades. Study at the University of Ulster shows systemic bias against boys in education across Northern Ireland, and much of their finding also seems to hold true elsewhere.
~ For decades now, male students continue to have higher high school dropout rates than female students. Boys are 30% more likely to drop out before graduating high school, and the ones that do graduate are less likely to obtain a college degree.
Here are some cases showing the institutionalized hatred and dislike against boys, including in the academia. Here are some other assorted references and individual experiences.
Owing to the systematic and planned discrimination, the boys are constantly falling behind the girls. Young men, now the minority (just 35%) of those attending college and university and of the post secondary students, arrive on unwelcoming campuses, and sit quietly in the classrooms. (In fact, Black women are now more likely to be in college than any other Americans - including Asians, Hispanics, Whites, and of course, Black men.) And still, female-only scholarships are being awarded, girls-only programs are being promoted to address the lack of only girls in certain fields / leadership positions, and policies and government laws are increasingly being written to favor only the girls. (See also: 2+2=5, Affirmative Action, Apex Fallacy, Bigot, Double Standards, Entitlement, Feminism, Feminization, Kangaroo Court, Male Disposability, Man Up, Matriarchy, Orwellian, Paycheck Fairness Act, Princess, Pussy Pass, Pussy Pedestalization, Reverse Discrimination, SCUM, Walk a Mile in Her Shoes, Welfare, White Ribbon Campaign.)

Useful Idiots: A group "A" of people not belonging to (and unaware of the real goals of) another group "B" but still supporting the latter group because of their common hatred toward a third group "C". Most commonly, the hatred is orginally from group "B" toward group "C", and the group "B" later persuades (or incentivizes) group "A" into believing that "A" should also hate the group "C". For so long as the group "B" has not achieved its goals (destruction of or victory over the group "C") or the group "A" has not become aware of the real goals of the group "B" (which might be contradictory to the interests of the group "A" itself), the alliance goes well. For example, feminists are the useful idiots for the politicians - by supporting them, the politicians gain the majority (female) votes, extract money from the men, and similtaneously suppress men's constitutional rights and power to oppose their corruption and tyranny. Manginas and white knights are useful idiots to the feminists (against men). (See also: Feminism, Mangina, Proxy Violence, Solipsism, War on Women, White Feather, White Knight.)

Vagina Syndrome: This is a fun term (as an aside, there are many other not-so-popular fun terms and memes) meaning that most of a woman's lies, criminal acts, and misbehavior (including hubby/boyfriend's murder or attempted murder, child abuse or murder, rape, etc) can be explained on the basis of:
~ Childhood troubles (those are never considered for male criminals).
~ Some sort of (existing or newly invented) disorder.
~ Insanity, e.g., PPD (PostPartum Depression), etc.
~ A lack of stability of mind (due to, say, alcohol consumption or drug use).
~ Mental/psychological or emotional issues.
~ Some kind of psychiatric problem (real or made-up - Anything works).
~ Recovered/reconstructed memory hocus-pocus like "flashbacks", "a snapshot", or "an out-of-body experience", etc.
~ A syndrome.
~ A trauma.
etc (thus saving her in the courts from punishment for her crimes). That is, a woman is incapable of performing any wrong, and if she does then a syndrome or a history of abuse or something similar must have made her do so. This would still have been somewhat balanced had it been applicable to the men also, but that is not the case; quite the opposite in fact - In case of a man, his mental problems, disorders, and syndromes (sometimes these mental/psychological problems are artificially created) are used against his case. For example, if a woman kills a man, the (dead) man's trauma will be useful in charging the woman with a second-degree murder instead of a first-degree one.
All those manufactured or misapplied syndromes are collectively termed as the Vagina Syndromes. They are not something new and have been popular and widespread in the past too. So, whenever a woman's crime shows up, it can be claimed that one of the Vagina Syndromes is responsible and the "poor woman needs help" with the treatment of this disorder rather than punishment. This is like, for any crime performed by a woman, "There's a syndrome for that", like the famous quote about the Apple's iPhone, "There's an app for that" (meaning that anything is possible to do with the iPhone). For example, Claire Margaret McDonald and Susan Falls, in two separate cases of murdering their husbands, successfully used the "Battered Woman Syndrome" (also known as the Abuse Excuse) defence, each claiming she had suffered years of abuse at the hands of her husband. McDonald donned camouflage gear and lay in wait with a high-powered rifle for her husband to approach, she fired six shots - mortally wounding her husband, and murdered him execution style. Whereas, Falls paid a friend $5000 to buy a 22.calibre pistol with silencer on the black market and executed her husband in the same fashion, in what prosecutors would describe as a cunning, calculated murder. The pathetic excuse for a judge, Supreme Court Justice Peter Applegarth, appeared to be instructing the jury that it was OK for Susan Falls to murder her allegedly abusive husband and told jurors that Mrs Falls' defence lawyers did not have to prove she was acting in self defence when she shot and killed her husband, but rather the prosecution must prove she wasn't acting in self defence at the time!
The legally recognized "Marital Coercion" is another of the vagina syndromes, under which it is presumed that if a couple were together in the comitting of a crime, then the man must have made her do it. Hence the woman gets the pussy pass.
Aside from using a vagina syndrome, guilty women are not even ashamed of hiding behind a child to avoid the sentence. (See also: 2+2=5, Date Rape, Double Standards, DoubleThink, Feminist Logic, Hamsterbatics, Hypoagency, Infantilization, Kangaroo Court, Matriarchy, NAWALT, Parental Alienation, Patriarchy, Projection, Pussy Pass, Rationalization Hamster, Social Proofing, Solipsism, Vajajay, Victimhood.)

Vajajay: Vagina is invincible, or, vagina FTW (for the win). Usually used in the context of the unfair advantage a woman has/gets for being a woman (female privilege). Also signifies the fact that the feminists (and by impact, celebrities) are obsessed with vaginas (sometimes with tits and asses too), and want to make everything about vaginas, labias, and clitorises/G-spots (that is, feminize everything).
A related term is "Holy Vagina", which means that the vagina (the women's thinking or decision) is the supreme, can never be wrong, and must be obeyed/followed. (See also: Feminization, Gina Tingles, Matriarchy, Nordic Model, Penis Envy, Princess, Pussy Pass, Pussy Pedestalization, Vagina Syndrome, Womyn.)

VAWA: (Acronym for "Voilence Against Women Act".) The US DV law - Part of Obama's War on Women campaign. Under VAWA, the man's arrest is mandatory for performing any act of DV (domestic violence) as soon as the wife calls 911. VAWA extends the definition of DV to include these acts, among others:
~ Using logic when arguing with the woman (yes, you read that right).
~ Causing emotional distress to the woman; for example, hogging the TV remote can in some places be classified as creating emotional distress, resulting in a protective order and possible prosecution.
~ Using unpleasant speech ('unpleasant' is based on the feelings of the woman, which means anything can be unpleasant, so better stay silent and pray that the woman does not accuse you falsely of speaking up).
~ Looking at the woman angirily.
~ Not asking the woman for buying anything from the market with the man's own money.
~ Not agreeing to the woman's decision even if it's related to the man's own money.
And so on. The woman can file a DV complaint against the man secretely without any information given to him at all so that he cannot defend himself in any way. And if you do not support VAWA, the feminists shame you for being misogynist and violence-supporters. The fact is, the legal protections that VAWA offers to women enable and encourage the women to commit (proxy) violence against men and children with little to no penalty, and a promise of financial, housing, and other benefits from the government.
Contrary to what some people claim, the language of VAWA (actually even its title) is not gender-neutral. One of its provisions states explicitly that the authors of the act have no interest in helping male victims of DV. The VAWA also has the mandatory arrest provision, which is a blatant violation of constitutional rights. Under this provision, even if a man gets assaulted repeatedly by his wife, gets hit with an object, calls the police, the wife admits to what she did and is completely unharmed, and the man is bleeding, the police will arrest the man! In other words, under VAWA, the men have legally been made the slaves to their wives and female partners. (See also: Bigot, Double Standards, Dowry Law, DV, DVPO, Entitlement, Femicide Law, Feminazi, Feminism, Feminization, His-Fault Divorce, Kangaroo Court, Male Disposability, Marriage Strike, Matriarchy, Orwellian, Parental Alienation, Proxy Violence, Radfem, Rape Culture, SCUM, The Plan, War on Women, White Ribbon Campaign, Witch Hunt.)

Victimhood: This is a state of falsehood in which a group of people always paints itself, no matter what the people of that group do to the other people or what others do to them, in order to seek approval and reap the benefits of entitlements. In other words, despite the fact that males are everywhere more likely than females to be the victims of crimes, feminism makes women into Professional Victims, who cry about being victimized even by:
~ Their own bodily functions like menstruation and menopause. The feminists also consider such things as the labor pain during the child-birth to be the worst kind of pain, probably because most women simply experience a dearth of strong physical pain and exertion in their lives compared to the men - The feminists among them then turn their (or other women's) feelings of pain into victimhood (or bravery).
~ Fossil-fuel companies' working on the planet.
~ Climate change.
~ Gravity (which the feminists consider a patriarchal construct).
~ Animal rights violation.
~ Animals' portrayal in the children's stories as being cute and useful to the humans.
~ Petting cats.
~ Consuming milk and dairy products.
~ Eating meat.
~ Valentine's Day.
~ Marriage.
~ Missionary sex position.
~ Women giving blowjob to men.
~ Men giving oral sex to women. Also, men refusing oral sex to women. (An example of cognitive dissonance.)
~ Men glancing at women (male gaze). Notice how a man looking at a woman, in the women's feelings, eventually ends up raping and forcibly enslaving her; even though the man actually didn't so much as moved from his position. And notice how the study concludes that, somehow, it's the men (all of them) and their objectification of women that is responsible for the women's feelings of pretended insecurity, misandry, sexism, and/or stereotyping toward men. In other words, since women are the perfect human beings, they cannot be expected to improve or overcome any of their faults (because they don't have any faults); so something must be done about the men to stop them from making women feel and think in a certain way.
~ Man talking to a woman while standing close to her with his hands raised to make his points. (This apparently violates the woman's "personal space", and gets the man escorted out from his own conference.)
~ Men's sitting posture.
~ Photos of nude men in museum.
~ A marble statue ("Triumph of Civic Virtue") of a nearly nude, sword-wielding, strapping male youth, his foot crushing the necks of 2 writhing female sirens, Corruption and Vice.
~ Art.
~ A female character with bra and underwear in a movie.
~ Lip-shaped urinals.
~ A logo for the University mascot.
~ A slogan on a T-shirt.
~ Remarks on Twitter.
~ Different sausages and toys targeted at males and females.
etc. They then threaten (personally or with the power of state) anyone that questions their victimhood. The victimhood status is always claimed, often to the point of hypocrisy; for example,
~ Feminists habitually cry (without looking at the facts) that women are victims because they're repressed in education, but when reminded that women are the majority of graduates, the feminists cry victimhood again in that those students are repressed because they won't be able to pay their student loans.
~ Feminists claim victimhood when women are not allowed in the military combat, and then again when on being allowed in combat people demand women's mandatory registration to the Draft.
~ Feminists claim victimhood when women do not appear in the top job positions, and then they claim victimhood again when women are put into top jobs.
~ Feminists claim victimhood (wage gap) when women are earning less than men, and then again when they're earning more and are the majority breadwinners.
~ Feminists consider it oppression and aggression (even rape) when men make sexual advances toward women. When men stop doing that, women claim that men are ignoring them (in favor of games, porn, or whatever; of course they never try to see if it's their own behavior or attitude that could possibly be the problem) and cry victim again.
Under victimhood, since females are always the victims, it's not allowed to point out a female's own fault for getting in trouble. For example, if a woman wanders alone in an unsafe area at a risky time (e.g., at night), gets killed or looted, and you point out that it was not wise of her to have been there, you're Victim Blaming. Similarly, if a woman murders her husband claiming that he was being violent, she is still the victim and you don't blame the victim. (That is, if a woman has been a victim, or claims to be a victim, that automatically absolves her of any and all responsibilities).
By the way, victim blaming is fine and acceptable if it's a male victim of a female perpetrator/murderer ("He must have done something to deserve it"), or even a female victim of a female perpetrated crime. (See also: Affirmative Action, Apex Fallacy, Bigot, Cognitive Dissonance, Date Rape, Double Standards, DoubleThink, Dowry Law, Entitlement, Feminism, Feminist Logic, Glass Ceiling, Herd Mentality, Hypoagency, Male Privilege, Nordic Model, Patriarchy, Princess, Rape Culture, Reverse Discrimination, Schrodinger's Rapist, SCUM, Single Parents, Vagina Syndrome, Wage Gap, Walk a Mile in Her Shoes, Welfare, White Ribbon Campaign.)

Wage Gap: (Also known as "Pay Gap".) The difference in average collective earnings of men and women, women's being 77% to 84% of men's. (Current figures are much different, showing almost no gap and actually the gap reversed in favor of women for some places/age-groups.) Feminists say that this difference is due to (surprise!) patriarchal sexism against women, and that the men are paid more for the same job. While this reason already makes no sense at all (because, were the corporations getting the same amount of work done by paying less to women, they would have stopped hiring men altogether), it anyway has been thoroughly and repeatedly debunked, and it's been established that the wage gap exists primarily due to the choices women make for the kind of work they pursue and the number of hours they work for; for example, they don't want to work on high-paying but difficult jobs, or they don't want to work overtime, etc.
The newer studies have finally shown that there's no wage gap based on discrimination and the feminists lied all along. (Who knew?) However, feminist politicians and feminist infested organizations like the European Union (EU) still purport this kind of myths and lies as truth in order to get unconstitutional and misandric laws and policies like the affirmative action passed, which then artificially inflate the female employment (and wage) and suppress the male employment and wage.
This turns the wage gap from a feminists' claim of oppression to a feminists' fact twisting tactic, or, 2+2=5 (and renames it "wage gap myth", implying that the gap is not a sign of sexism but the women's own choices). Now, in order that the victimhood ensues, the feminists twist the logic even further and claim that the women are not responsible for choices made by them because the patriarchal society expects them to make those choices and hence the reason behind the wage gap is still sexism against women. The reason this myth is important to them is that this is the basis for so many misandric laws and policies in action or being proposed (like Affirmative Action, Paycheck Fairness Act, etc). In fact, now there's discrimination against men in the workplace.
After their myths about the wage gap have been debunked beyond any doubt (though the feminists still continue to use them), some of the feminists have come up with new ones, which are even more ridiculous. They believe that the reason of the wage gap is Lookism, i.e., the employers pay women different salaries according to how the women look (better looks means more pay). According to a professor of sociology at Stanford University, the wage gap is as serious as the Orgasm Gap - Men are (still) twice as likely to climax as women. (See also: 2+2=5, Affirmative Action, Alimony, Apex Fallacy, Bigot, Blue Pill, Cause and Effect, Chalimony, Cognitive Dissonance, Double Standards, DoubleThink, Feminism, FTSU, Glass Ceiling, Male Privilege, Misandry, Palimony, Patriarchy, Paycheck Fairness Act, Rationalization Hamster, Reverse Discrimination, Solipsism, Victimhood, War on Women.)

Walk a Mile in Her Shoes: This is a mile long running event organized in colleges for male students in which they wear (and are sometimes forced to wear) women's high-heel footwear (which the male students are required to purchase themselves), have placards taped to their backs while reciting slogans like "The overwhelming number of perpetrators of sexual violence is men" and carrying signs that say things like "Men can stop rape". These male students are made fun of by the onlookers (including the female students) while the male students themselves cannot laugh because they're told, 'No laughing, this is a serious event'. The cited goal is to make them apologize for men's violence against women, teach them about their male privilege, and how tough women have it (as if they forced the women to wear high-heel footwear). After being publicly humiliated, the male students are asked to help prevent violence and abuse against women by not being abusive (presuming that, by default, they all are). There's no corresponding forced 'Walk a Mile in His Shoes' event organized in the colleges or anywhere else for the women.
A related term is "She Fears You", a lecture that the male students are required to attend in increasingly more university campuses. This lecture, predictably, demonizes the male students, welcoming them by telling them that the university considers them nothing more than rapists in the waiting. It cultivates a campus-wide fear and hatred of male students, and also puts the male students on notice that one false charge of any kind of sexual assault against them and they're done. (See also: 2+2=5, Affirmative Action, Apex Fallacy, Date Rape, Feminism, Male Disposability, Male Privilege, Man Up, Reverse Discrimination, Title IX, Victimhood, White Ribbon Campaign.)

War on Women: (Short form: "WoW".) Obama's campaign for passing more man-hating laws and policies like VAWA, Title IX, etc, crushing the men and passing the taxpayers' money on to the women. It's an imaginary and manufactured fear that the American women are in danger from every corner of their life and need to be protected from men, including their own family members. This continued fear ensures the female-votes (playing the WomenBall), as this campaign is based on exploiting the fact that women always have a herd mentality and they work as a group (Team Woman). Now, according to a Ms. magazine report, 55% of the women who voted in November 2012 said they were feminists, up from 46% who said that after the 2008 election. And, from a separate survey, about 75% of women directly favored Obama even though he has failed miserably on every front other than pleasing the single moms and killing Osama bin Laden. The WoW campaign makes women believe that there's a war that the men have collectively planned on the women (and that only Obama can save them from this imaginary war). The reality is the exact opposite; it's the feminists who have planned a War on Men (by the way, this writer is no ally of men and only considers them utility objects for women) and are just projecting their own hatred in the men. (See also: Bigot, Date Rape, Entitlement, Glass Ceiling, Herd Mentality, Orwellian, Patriarchy, Paycheck Fairness Act, Projection, Radfem, Rape Culture, Schrodinger's Rapist, SCUM, Solipsism, The Plan, Title IX, Useful Idiots, VAWA, Wage Gap, Welfare, White Ribbon Campaign, Witch Hunt.)

Welfare: There are programs by the government distributing food packages and money to needy people; collectively called "welfare programs" or simply "welfare". Some of them are good to those who deserve the help, without discrimination. Many offer ridiculously large amounts of money to ONLY the women - especially those women who are single parents; government subsidies like the welfare, food stamps, and section 8, etc are not allowed if a father or male figure is present in the household. Some of these programs do not look for a person's actual financial status for distributing money or residence or other goodies; they only look for whether the person has a penis (no need to apply) or a vagina (welcome). So a man dying from poverty, lack of food, or poor health won't get anything whereas a healthy able-bodied woman will get everything under these programs. Here are some other programs of a related/similar nature:
~ Medicaid: This is a health program for low-income families and for people with certain disabilities. This is the largest source of funding for health-related services for limited-income people in the US.
~ Medicare: This is a social insurance program which collects money from everyone and spends it on the health related issues of older (65 year and up) people and people with disabilities.
~ ObamaCare: This is a socialist health care program that forces all the people to pay for insurance and then spends the collected money disproportionately on certain groups of people, the main gripe being extreme discrimination against men. Among Latino and Black adults, the majority of the uninsured are male (and this may also be the case among whites, Native Americans, and mixed-race adults). Even if any uninsured man of any race does get coverage, the coverage will not cover the screenings or treatment for the testicular, prostate, penile, or anal cancer (i.e., mostly male-specific health problems). There is far more coverage for conditions that always or almost always affect only women.
~ SNAP: (Acronym for "Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program". This is the new name for the Food Stamp Program.) This program issues electronic money monthly, for purchasing food. Eligibility criteria for the recipients is chosen to ensure the inclusion of single mothers.
~ Social Security: (Short form: "SS".) This is an insurance program that provides benefits to the retired, unemployed, and disabled people. Since women retire earlier and have on average 6 year longer life span than men, this program collects less money from women and benefits them much more than men. In other words, this is simply yet another means of transferring money from men to women.
~ TANF: (Acronym for "Temporary Assistance for Needy Families".) This program distributes money to the families with dependent children (read, to single moms), and is also simply referred to as "Welfare". This is necessary if the money provided by the other programs is still not enough for a woman's princess-like lifestyle.
~ WIC: (Acronym for "Women, Infants, Children".) This is the short name for the "Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children", a federal assistance program for distributing money to single mothers with no or low income.
~ There also are programs for providing housing benefits (Section 8 - subsidized housing provided to single moms at the taxpayers' expense, which the single moms consider themselves entitled to) and tution fee for college education.
In short, most of these dishonest and discriminatory programs of the welfare are a misuse of the taxpayers' money for the lazy entitled women who never work for themselves (because they don't need to), and incentivize single parenthood and entitlement lifestyle, where mistakes like being jobless, lazy, slutty, and irresponsibly pregnant are rewarded - A single mom is better off earning a gross income of $29000 (which amounts to $57327 in net income and benefits) than earning a gross income of $69000 (which amounts to $57045 in net income and benefits). This leads to increased taxes and national and international debt, eventually leading to the economic/financial collapse.
A related term is "Government Teat", which refers to the government programs such as the Welfare, which provides for the lazy people out of the taxpayers' money; especially in relation to the people who intentionally remain lazy (instead of seeking some kind of work) because they can always milk such government programs for free money. (See also: Affirmative Action, Dear Colleague, Entitlement, Matriarchy, Orwellian, Princess, Reverse Discrimination, Single Parents, Title IX, Victimhood, War on Women, White Trash.)

White Feather: In 1914, during the first World War (WW1), common (civilian) young men were reluctant to join the armed services and go die or get maimed for the benefit of the royals. So the royals organized common women in groups, whose purpose was to publicly humiliate their menfolk for not wanting to die. The women (useful idiots to the royals) in large numbers from all backgrounds shamelessly handed out white feathers (as a symbol of cowardice) to any men not wearing uniforms, shaming a very large number of them (including underage boys) into joining the armed forces and dying in a war that killed 10 million. This event marks the women's cruelty and hatred toward men, male objectification (as war toys), and male disposability. (The herstory completely omits this event or denies that it happened even when the feminists know it happened, because it paints women in a bad light and shows off the sacrifice the men had to endure for the voting rights.)
In the present times, a somewhat similar White Ribbon Campaign for shaming the innocent men and boys for their being male is being observed by Australia every year. (See also: Double Standards, Herstory, Hyperagency, Hypoagency, Male Disposability, Man Up, MGTOW, NAWALT, Objectification, Proxy Violence, SCUM, Shaming Language, Useful Idiots, White Ribbon Campaign.)

White Knight: A man in a position of authority, who favors and gives preference to a woman based on her being woman, even when she is in the wrong. Alternatively, any common man who, in the event of a problem or argument between a man and a woman, takes the woman's side purely because she's a woman, even if she is in the wrong. The (common) men in this latter category are actually wannabe white knights (trying to prove their self-worth by painting themselves as the unpaid security or body guards of the gender/sex they consider weaker and incapable, i.e., the female sex). A white knight is the enabler of feminism; the ideology would not have existed without him. However, white knights are not themselves feminists (this, and their self-pride as opposed to self-hatred, separates them from manginas). That is, whereas a mangina sides with the women because he considers them superior and himself inferior, a white knight sides with the women because he considers them inferior and himself superior. Both are, thus, unreasonable and harmful toward the men in their own ways. White knights often give gina tingles to women and sometimes receive sexual favors from them (however, the wannabe ones are merely seen as a utility which is sometimes useful when women themselves can't bother to get their own hands dirty). But, given the unappreciative and ungrateful nature of feminists, even white knights are not immune from being dragged through the mud, because, after all, according to the feminists, they're just men and men cannot do anything good or right. (See also: AFC, Alpha, Beta, Bigot, Feminism, Gina Tingles, Hyperagency, Hypergamy, Mangina, Misandry, Proxy Violence, Social Proofing, Useful Idiots.)

White Ribbon Campaign: This is a misandric and sexist yearly event celebrated in Australia, in which men are publicly targeted by women who confront them demanding to wear a white ribbon as a proof to support the notion that it's only the men who are violent abusers toward the women. Not much different from the historic White Feather event. The campaign, in addition to shaming men, successfully hides the women's violence on men. The campaign is also known, as shown by this study, to be dishonest in order to further the interests of organisational growth rather than contribute to addressing the social problem; to promote and advertise false data/stats; and to ignore the female perpetrated violence against men. In 2013, it has been taken to a new low: Now men are asked to register as women's unpaid bodyguards (by supplying their emails) and present themselves and start barking (like faithful dogs do) wherever they see some man saying/doing anything that fits the definition of misogyny (which is, basically, anything a male does, e.g., according to the mangina Michael Flood, "Don't be fooled into thinking that unfair criticism is not as bad as bashing with a steel pipe"), without getting into the context of the happening or inquiring about the facts or even considering their own safety. Just locate and target the 'other man' (not even "normal men" are to be spared, being man is to be the crime) and start showing him your angry teeth for his crime of existing. (Even if the result is not violent, you two will never look each other in the eye again, nor will that unknown woman is supposed to so much as say thank you. By the way, being a man, you can also be the target - Don't be fooled into thinking that you're the only idiot who registered as the intervener.) In short, this is yet another attempt by the matriarchy to end any healthy, supportive, or friendly interaction among the males, and to promote female-slavery and hatred for the other men as the only acceptable kinds of male interaction.
Other parts of the world also have its equivalents (even with the government funding), though the names may be different; for example:
~ Canadian government offers nearly $200000 for a 2-year program about DV (against women and girls only) directed at men and boys. "Young men between 15 and 25 will be engaged to end violence against women and girls."
~ In London, England, the National Centre for Domestic Violence (NCDV) has created a campaign called "Drag Him Away" that urges people to use their mobile phones to text in to stop the berating of a woman in their interactive video. After texting in a number that flashes up on the board, the man is dragged away, across multiple billboards and a message that reads, "An injunction will put distance between a victim and their abuser".
~ Saudi Arabia hosts "No More Abuse" campaign, with an ad featuring a woman covered by a niqab, with only her eyes - one blackened and bruised - publicly visible. The caption below, originally in Arabic, reads, "Some things can't be covered - Fighting women's abuse together".
~ Feminized Muslims and Sikhs are showing support for such campaigns too.
The government doesn't care about the male victims of DV. (See also: Affirmative Action, Dear Colleague, DV, Feminization, Male Disposability, Man Up, Matriarchy, Misandry, NAWALT, Objectification, Proxy Violence, Rape Culture, Reverse Discrimination, Schrodinger's Rapist, Shaming Language, The Plan, Title IX, VAWA, Victimhood, Walk a Mile in Her Shoes, War on Women, White Feather.)

White Trash: Group or area of lower-income white people.
A related term is Ghetto, the thickly populated slum area of a city inhabited by poor, neglected, and (generally) minority people who are socially, legally, or financially disadvantaged or discriminated against; usually characterized by a greater proportion of crime. Another term denoting a region where specific group/s of people live is "Bible Belt", which includes the SEC states - Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, and Tennessee. (See also: Omega, Welfare.)

Witch Hunt: (Witch hunting was an ancient practice wherein a woman suspected of being a witch was burnt to see if she really was a witch; so even if it turned out that she was not, the fact was of little use because the damage had already been done to her.) A proverb-like term used to express the view of "Shoot first ask later", that is, first punish the accused person and then inquire whether the accusations are true or false. Sometimes no inquiries are done at all, or the attempts at them are actively discouraged. And even if the accusations come out to be false, it's of no use because the wrongly accused person has already been punished. The false accusers face little to no punishment at all, the justification being given that punishing them would discourage the true accusers. Here are some related terms:
~ Mens Rea: The principle that a person must have a criminal mind in order to be a criminal. This simple principle, together with "innocent until proven guilty", is (or at least used to be) the foundation of the justice system, which has now been corrupted and hijacked by the feminism.
~ Zero Tolerance Policy: Immediately taking action against the accused/suspected offender before the completion of (or even without ever performing) any investigation. The accuser (woman in case of a rape accusation) is by default assumed to be telling the truth, and guilt is automatically assumed on part of the accused (man). For example, in the DOJ and ED's letter, the government says this on the college sexual assaults: "In addition, a university must take immediate steps to protect the complainant from further harassment prior to the completion of the Title IX and Title IV investigation/resolution. Appropriate steps may include separating the accused harasser [might include his termination from the university] and the complainant, providing counseling for the complainant and/or harasser, and/or taking disciplinary action against the harasser."
~ Lynch Mob: (Also known as lynching and Mass Hysteria.) Giving punishment to an accused man (or forcing him to admit the guilt, i.e., false confession) just because a large mass of people is aggressively demanding it (e.g., during an ensuing rape hysteria), even if no evidence could be found that proves his guilt. The politically dominant groups (e.g., feminists) often spread lies about a falsely accused man and raise hysteria using their propaganda machine, thereby turning the public perception against the accused man. This deliberate demonization of the falsely accused man (Character Assassination) 'justifies' his punishment even when he's innocent.
The legal witch-hunting of males in the form of DV laws (dowry, The Plan, VAWA, etc) and rape laws is the present-day practice of witch hunting in the prevalence of the myths of patriarchy and rape culture. This is draconian and blatantly unconstitutional. (See also: Bigot, Cause and Effect, Date Rape, Dear Colleague, Dowry Law, DV, DVPO, Femicide Law, Feminism, Feminist Logic, Herstory, Kangaroo Court, Male Disposability, Matriarchy, Misandry, Orwellian, Patriarchy, Pussy Pedestalization, Rape Culture, Schrodinger's Rapist, SCUM, The Plan, VAWA.)

Womyn: (Another form is: "Wimyn" or "Wimmin". Singular: "Womin".) Women. Originally used by feminists who thought that men are inferior to women (or they oppress women) and therefore the "men" (or "man") part of the word "women" (or "woman") needs to go. Now also used by some MRA's who think that women poisoned with feminism have fallen down so much from their respectable status that they don't deserve the part "men" (or "man").
Fact is, the oldest (original) meaning of the word "man" was "a human", and the words "wer" (as in, 'werewolf') and "wyf" (or "wæpman" and "wifman") were respectively used to refer to "a male human" and "a female human". Later on, "wer" was displaced by "man", while "wyfman" (or in the current usage "woman") retained its meaning. So, "man" began to have two meanings: One for "a male human" (new meaning) and the other for "a human" (original meaning). Of course, the feminists viewed this as something "planned" by the patriarchy and as sexist. So, in addition to demanding a separation of the meanings (reasonable), they also cried victimhood by the words (well, that's habitual, so they just can't help it) and turned the matter into one of male-hatred and female-superiority. (They also did the same with the word "history", thereby creating a "herstory", so to say.) Note that the feminists only have problem with the usage of the word "man" for the word "person" when it's in the context of something positive or good (for example, "chairman", "fireman", or "policeman" for even men is not acceptable); in case of a negative or bad thing, the feminists consider the usage of the word "man" to be okay (for example, "manhunt" is okay even for the women criminals, and "manhole" is acceptable too).
Another similar term is "Woman 2.0", to differentiate the women having more independence, money, and power (or the today's/modern women) from the ones having less (or from the traditional ones).
In fact, having free time at their hands and almost nothing useful or productive to do anymore, the feminists nitpick and whine about any and every small issue or non-issue they can find to complain about (for example, language elements, like the use of the words "ball", "god", "guys", etc), so as to justify the existence of their causeless, derogatory, irrelevant, outdated, passe, and unneeded ideology of hate (feminism). Some of them say that the words/phrases like:
~ Black Holes.
~ Chick, Female, Girl, and Lady.
~ Dongle.
~ Motherboard.
~ Mrs (the title for a married woman). Sometimes also Miss and Ms.
~ Panties.
etc are sexist, while some others have problem with complimenting a woman about her appearance or for anything she does in the kitchen. (See also: Bigot, Feminism, Feminist Logic, Feminization, Herstory, Matriarchy, MRA, MRM, Patriarchy, Penis Envy, SCUM, Vajajay, Victimhood.)

Zeta: A zeta man is one who defines his masculinity according to his own choice and standards, and rejects the notion of his manhood being defined by the external agents like the government, society, or women; because these agents often force or shame him into doing things or living life in a manner he doesn't like or appreciate. As a result, a zeta man treats the women as equals, not extending specific benefits to them for being women and not taking shit from them for the same reason. A zeta woman is one who behaves like a responsible adult, not expecting specific benefits for being a woman, and not hurting or taking advantage of people for their being men. In short, a zeta person is someone who feels comfortable in one's own skin, and neither changes oneself at the whim of others, nor forces or shames others into behaving or changing according to one's own liking and needs. (See also: Alpha, Beta, Briffault's Law, Entitlement, Hyperagency, Hypoagency, Man Up, MGTOW, NAWALT, Omega, Pussy Pass, Pussy Pedestalization, Shaming Language.)

End of the document.

1 comment:

  1. Cognitive Dissonance is not simply holding two opposing attitudes or belief's. That is just one of the 14 sub-species of CD, and a minor one at that. The main CD effect ( an uncomfortable 'tension' leading to neurosis) is due to holding a belief or attitude which conflicts with behaviour / action/'making real'. So, for example, believing in equality while acting in a gender supremacist manner; or believing in equality while demanding affirmative action. The actions are dissonant with the belief. The way to reduce CD (gain a relief from the tension) can only be by changing the attitude or belief, (easy to do when facts are presented and accepted) as it is not possible to change the action that has been performed - we cannot change what has been done only what may be done in the present of future. Hence the spiral into neurosis that feminists experience when they refuse to change their minds when facts are presented.


Comment moderation is ON. Only the following types of comments will be published (and possibly replied to): Dissenting with something, proving something wrong, asking for proof of something objective, and enhancing/correcting something. Comments of praise and encouragement are read and appreciated, but won't be published; don't feel bad about that.