Boyish prows on the ship of state

Biology is not destiny” Simone de Beauvoir


Despite appearances to the contrary our liberal democracies of today have considerable female leadership in the foreground and in the background a majority influence. Old sailing ships often had female names on the bow and stern and frequently sported a mermaid sprite or womanly clasping bust as effigies under the bowsprit, yet all profits on the voyage, control of the cargo and manning operations went to men. Today, do our ships of state exhibit a similar tendency in reverse, are men carving out political careers beneath the overarching wand of women? Yes, for women voters have the overwhelming preponderant influence within advanced democracies and this has distinct downside effects for the estate of men. Excess female influence can distort notions of democracy from being a fair system of government. Some alternatives by way of correction are sketched as future possibilities. This essay is shows how men must not and cannot support a current biased feminist liberal democracy for it is not a fair system of Government. Democracy today is unfair to men.


One generation out from 1972 discrimination against men is extremely marked. Men are significantly locked out of nursing and primary teaching for example. Men were once 46% of our primary teachers, today barely 6%. In child custody battles men do not receive a fair 50-50 outcome. Men can be guilty of rape but there is no legal equivalent for women, such as nymphomania for instance. Women abusing boys are rarely jailed. Men do the dying in our society, living shorter lives than women, yet seven times as much money is spent on women’s health. If biology is not destiny then all efforts should be to bring mens health, longevity and numbers up to those of women.



Education boy performances girls do anything boys? Feminism as anti male philosophy Valery Solanas

Health men do the dying seven times

. Health and education, a favourite of women, can take a bottomless pit of funding. No one wants to die, so should emotional appeals sway a fair budget? So women’s underlying influence can directly harm a modern economy. Critics of democracy have long pointed out these defects. In sum, saying, democracy can swerve in the direction of providing popular wants (that are secretly costly and totally distracting) to the neglect of needed projects, policies and protections. It must be that women’s governance, shown here to be attractively and seductively unreasonable, by subtle influence, is actually undermining the economy, as an entire population unborn cannot buy or sell things 1 point TWO million!!!!!!!!! In NZ over sixty years!!!!!!



Migration... overly kind to strangers? Magnanimity of womens finer feelings men pay most taxes 90% response overly generous only ten percent pay real taxes!!!!!!....fair? participatory? Working for families result Naomi Klein ?

( and be in everyway economically productive: this, in the case of our own young, without any competition while they are growing up, to already existing businesses. In contrast migrant numbers include competing adults, plus other tax dependents; so it is not just about numbers alone.) which are both the fruit and means of the continuance of democracy. Long live a reasonable democracy.








Equal pay

Danger money

Remote height physical world

Gov jobs reserved

Equal pay ideology versus...anecdote


Within any system we can see almost all its physical structures; bridges, roads, dams and buildings were constructed by men. These structures everywhere take men below and above ground to a degree that endangers their lives. Even two feet above ground or below is sufficient to kill or drown men should they fall or suffer a blow. Men today still lose their lives in industrial accidents at far greater rates than women from other causes. This is why men are paid more. Men build sewers, halls, pipes, drains, shelter and other useful structures and risk their lives doing so. Yet historically these achievements create greater public good and health more efficiently than any system of hospitals ever did for all. They are directly cost effective, tremendous social bargains. Much of our interior and domestic world is also usefully constructed by men. This invisible, unacknowledged work by men is never finished, upgrades are always underway. Men do the dying building these but seven times as much is spent on women’s health? Is that right or fair? So are women responsive governments unfair to men? So could it be that men, where earning more, it is the fair reward for the risk of death they run?




Democracy how can recommend?

Longevity numbers

Bio not destiny

Pop control UN politicized

Econ crisis

Statistical genocide

all leadership may rest on the electorate being larger in the number of female voters in the population. Women can vote almost two more elections in a lifetime than men, a 10% to 12% advantage depending on which country. This privileged position

So women won not only the vote in the twentieth century but also total social, medical and political control of creating the underlying voting population in the first place. How is it that population, which is bigger than history, bigger than politics and bigger than democracy itself (in fact it determines the entire realm of political economy, not the reverse), the biggest thing on earth there is, yet in a democracy only 51% of voters get the entire one hundred percent say in a matter that effects everyone, and almost everything, within any political economy? To win the vote is one thing but to win the vote OVER the total vote entirely another: A neat controlling move that il-legitimizes democracy as a governance type, supportable by men. Do we jump then to executive systems of government? Who can tell, perhaps democracy is dead. So, should women totally control the underlying real vote in any democracy?

Early democracy is the story of the long emancipation of men. Barons and the aristocratic classes were the first to feel out their need for greater freedom of action. The political freedoms of the aristocrats were then extended to the merchant classes. Then this freedom to the trades and craftsmen. Finally arriving to the common peasants and labourers. Roman citizens in earlier republican forms enjoyed different degrees of liberty. A direct citizen of Rome enjoyed more rights. Free bread became a policy that distorted and weakened the Roman democracies. Greece is considered the fountain of democracy. The cities of Sparta and Athens vied for dominance of Greece. No early democratic states remained so for much longer than 200 years. America has been a free state for just over two hundred years. Social welfare policies can take funds from other important areas of a countries developments and upgrades


Gov by the people ...

gov by perception ie guile contestable/time for change affect

her business

best system open to improvement




Hard to remove


conscience vote/privelage stat genocide numbers so huge no proof against prosecution nor corruption... crisis changes social/ political...paradigm

retro spectivity





Within democracy it is almost impossible to vote entire parties out except for crisis conditions. Democratic elections cost money and election years cause a pronounced ‘dip’ in economic activity because of uncertainty. Executive government could be attractive for this reason. It is extremely frustrating that our popular parties do not appear to actually stand for anything as each borrows ideas off the other and both react as favourably as possible to any current fashion in ideas. The default tendency is for democracy to be womens government; hence the greater number of countries leaders being women in democracies rather than other forms barring monarchy. Democracy is not male governance and tends not to favour men. Men are virtually locked out of nursing and primary school teaching and all population decisions effecting everyone.

of contraception in New Zealand, except for research and otherwise total acceptance, for example

Votes for women ushered in immediate seeking for control over contraception. This is a disaster long term for the survival of the European Ethnos. Europeans were once 20% of the world family; today just 8%. In thirty more years Europeans will be just 3% of the world population. Anyone can see where this is going. Who cannot lament the extinction of a human species?

While our governance appears run visibly by named and titled men is it from out of felt female initiatives and electorate influence they must respond?






Democracy came into being against a background of monarchy. Monarchy is a dynastic system derived from a series of successful local warlords or barons.



More material handwritten……..






Masculist Book recommendations

These are the books this whole site references for its authority
Everything stated here is backed up by one or other of books like these.
However I consider their 'interpretations' weak and their recommendations for ACTION- in the light of population, economic, political and massive government funding biases to be highly regretable at best. For instance their recommendations are small in scale or dismissively 'ironic' as if we were talking about some tiny 'bad joke' incident.
The ramifications as to the survival of Western Civilization is really what at stake- and thus the deeper ironies run in precisely the opposite direction; how will feminism survive if it successfully destroys the so called capitalist/patriarchy/deep state structures on which it so seriously depends?





What do you think?

Send us feedback!