Tuesday, December 03, 2013

Feminists gone wild

An extraordinary demonstration has taken place in San Juan, a provincial city in Argentina.

In brief, a gathering of 7000 feminists attempted to attack a cathedral, which was defended by 1500 men. The men did not attempt to physically attack the women, but linked arms and formed a barrier.

And the feminist women? They spat on the men, sprayed them with aerosol spray paint, performed lewd acts in front of them, draped their underwear over them and generally behaved as if they had been seized by some primitive or savage spirit. I'm not going to directly paste the YouTube video (it is not suitable for work) but you can watch it here.

If you do choose to watch the video, note the contrast between the bearing of the men and the cruelly mocking and destructive behaviour of the feminist women.


  1. Their priests should be very proud of those men.

    1. Yes, I would have found it very difficult not to retaliate. But it came across very well. And it made the feminist women look very bad in comparison.

  2. That would have to be the best demonstration of the bestiality of the left I have ever seen.

    1. It's really interesting, isn't it? It's as if something unpleasant lurking in the bowels of human nature were suddenly released again.

  3. Mark, in your description of what these banshees did to the men you left out physically assaulted the men. Several of the men are bleeding, one profusely, and others with bruising.

    Their priests should be very proud of those men.

    That very much depends.

    What did so called Pope Francis say, again?

    "proselytism is solemn nonsense, it makes no sense.”

    Antipope Francis wants the Church stripped, and opposes proselytism. It is quite plain that he would oppose the actions of these men.

  4. But it came across very well. And it made the feminist women look very bad in comparison.

    Look bad in comparison to whom? Came across very well to whom?

    This is not a political act, this is an act of Faith. This is why I don't trust nor take comfort in so called "traditionalists". For you life is a political game which you think you can win through action.

    Matthew 7:16

    1. Reg, you don't think people can be both religious and political?

      I don't think it's reasonable to take the attitude that we let political people dominate political power and reshape society as they will, whilst we retreat into our churches.

      You may think that's a virtuous thing to do, but count me out. I believe that part of the 'creatureliness' of adult men, i.e. of what God made us to be, is to be protective stewards of the societies and the traditions we belong to. It is part of our calling as adult men.

      I do not think life is a "game of omission" which you win by passively not sinning. And as for faith, if you really have this, then you will seek to use the powers you were given to uphold the good, and that inevitably means being oriented not just to your church but to your wider society.

      How do small groups of liberals manage to win? Part of the answer is that the established patterns of society allow them to do this. One of these patterns is the way that non-liberals fail to engage. We should be seeking to break these patterns, not continue them decade after decade.

  5. Mark,

    I would be interested to read what you and your readers have to say to someone like myself, who, while sharing your concerns and worries, reacts to this in a diametrically opposite way: I was more infuriated by the passivity of the men than by the savagery of the women.

    Before anyone says that "linking arms" to defend a Church is not "passivity", spare me. You know exactly what I mean. The reason why these boobs act the way they do (much like the idiocy of boobs in everyday discourse and behaviour) is because they know that there will be no accountability, nothing real in opposition. Simply linking arms and saying "No" is not enough. Backing up that opposition with authoritative force is lacking, and that strikes me as the lesson here.

    Were those men brave? In my opinion, no they were not. They were the product of a feminised Church. If some of the women had to be carried out on stretchers, there would be no such future baheviour from them. The actions of these chivalrous fools has guaranteed that there will indeed be another assault on that Church, and yet another, and yet another, while the assaulting savages know full well that they will have the opportunity to beat, berate and mock the pious.

    That, as opposed to the boob's savagery, is the real tragedy here.

    1. Anon, thanks for asking the question.

      I didn't react quite the same way you did. I think the men did win a moral victory of sorts - they showed that their cause was a superior one to that of the women. I don't think we should underestimate the impact of this. Even at some sites that are usually hostile to the church there was a grudging respect for the men.

      Where I agree with you is that it's not enough for the men to leave it at that. At some point, Argentinian men have to reassert a civilisational authority. They need the confidence in themselves as men and as leaders of their tradition to do this.

      If this is an annual event then the men ought to be organising a counter-movement so that next year a large body of men can march out to meet these women a long time before they even get to the cathedral and meet them with force of numbers and energy and confidence.

      And if this event is being sponsored by the government (as I believe it is) then these men ought to be organising to cut off funding.

      I sense that there is another respect in which you might be correct. It's sometimes the case that women will fitness test men to see what they can get away with. They will provoke men to a greater degree until they finally get a reaction. So male passivity and stoicism doesn't usually work well in these situations - it just leads to escalation. It's usually better if the men assert themselves intelligently early on. I agree, in other words, that there is likely to be further assaults by the women until the men react with authority.

  6. The thing I take away most from LGBTs (lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgendered) is a deep rooted shame of their circumstance.

    Subconsciously they are too keenly aware that they can't measure up to their own ideal image of themselves and reinvent their personas to accommodate and placate their deep rooted shame complex.

    The shame is so overwhelming and their need for acceptance so all consuming that they will lash out at anything that reinforces their sorry state.

    Their problem is that the church is a mirror to their souls and they hate what they see and want to remove everything that reminds them of their inferiority complex.

  7. I have to say that I was impressed with the self-restraint of the men. I probably wouldn't have been able to maintain that, especially if some banshee started spray-painting me. I'm afraid I can't agree with Anonymous where he claims that if a few of the rioters had been carried away on stretchers, such things would not happen again. On the contrary, it would be a PR disaster for the church. The media, always sycophantic to leftist causes, would paint the women as martyrs, and completely ignore what they had done to provoke the justified self-defense of the men. While few media outlets have taken up this story as it is, if the men had retaliated and and of the women hurt even slightly, there would have been viral videos circuiting the globe, and the men would have ended up tarred as violent. I see a stronger voice of authority in their self-restraint, which did far more to condemn the antics of the rioters.

  8. Dear Mr. Richardson

    I watched the video and was disgusted and then I found this article:


    Here is what I found most interesting

    "Police were not on hand at the time. They reportedly told media they couldn’t intervene because the protesters were women.

    The incident took place on Nov. 24, Argentina’s National Women’s Encounter, held annually to bring together Argentinean feminists. It is sponsored by the Department of Culture as a social interest event."

    The police couldn't or wouldn't do anything and it was financed by the Government. Here is a classic case of Anarcho-Tyranny, whereby the Government refused to enforce the law against one set of law breakers ( the anarchy part) but is ready and waiting for the other side to fight back because then they can arrest them (the tyranny part). It is quite evil.

    Mark Moncrieff
    Upon Hope Blog - A Traditional Conservative Future

    1. Yep, the men won the moral victory on the day, but the larger problem you describe remains in place. The men need to organise politically as well as religiously, so that they have some weight in society to push back against the feminist women, e.g. by bringing pressure to bear on the Department of Culture or on the police.

  9. I find it very strange that there has been no mainstream media coverage of this story.
    One can only imagine the media uproar & condemnation, if the roles had been reversed - & it were 'Pro Life' people or Christians, who were behaving in this disgusting way.
    The young men defending the church were nothing short of heroic.