SYSTEMS OF GUILT

Feminism’s Charm; Accusing Men

Feminism is a system of guilt very akin to the Old Catholic Church, or the hypocrisies of Victorian life, or of Mao’s pointless ‘cultural revolution’ with its little red book waving; women cadres chanting fanatically. So in such ways feminism rapes peace of mind and a good conscience. Only this time the common or garden variety of popular feminism functions as a ‘little purple book’. Only that the chanting remains inane and simplistic and just as pointless. ‘Equal pay for equal work’ which sounds Ok until you add ‘equal conditions’– for men’s conditions are often far different; like deep underground, far out to see, longer hours, night time, dark or cold or stormy or dangerously unequal conditions (See dr. Warren Farrell for similar answers) ‘girls can do anything’ (except impregnate a man, or another woman) or the infamous lie we answer here-‘rape is about power’.

Ask This about rape

If rape is about an ‘all powerful patriarchy’ why do men go to jail for it? Would not an 'all powerful patriarchy' be all powerful? Think about it. An all-powerful real patriarchy would let them off; as an exact expression of althat power. All, mind you; not some, but ‘all’ – by definition. So who is let-off in our society? Let off lightly? Not even doubted? And, as an expression of that power NOT actually press for so many falsely accused men be in jail.

Is not then the fact that up to 60% of all men in jail from mere accusation, successful false accusations, and as many ‘successfully’ prosecuted though as falsely accused and are mostly black men exactly as characterised in Susan Brownmiller extremely racist book on rape called 'Against Our Will'? And is not she a woman and a feminist.

If this were a patriarchy should not thousands of women be in jail instead for abortion, murder and sexual assaults on men? Would not this be a typical result of patriarchy if there were a war on women instead? Therefore there is a war on men in place of my obvious speculation; and Maori or black men in particular though guiltless; i.e. NOT guilty! Not even close.

Is not feminism then an illegal, racist, illegitimate discourse of a matriarchal character that is rather waging a matriarchal fascist war on black men and all men in general using the serial accusation and false rape industry as its vile cover and cowardly excuse?

If rape were about power why so many men are falsely accused of it? Matriarchy has all the power when it comes to child custody, length of life and unequal sentencing for similar crimes; why not too with rape? Why are feminists bent on destroying black families in America and the European Nations demographically? Why is the Marxist feminist Frankfurt School of Social engineering involving itself so heavily in statistical genocide and racist ethnic cleansing?

This book partly is one man’s partial answer on one issue long thought under the complete control of the female feminist criminal matriarchy: ‘RAPE’

Whereby our false accusers dared to call all men ‘rapists’ (Susan Brownmiller: “Against Our Will”) on a racist basis.

In contrast true patriarchy is nothing less than the reality based claim of men to rightful power in the public sphere for the protection of freedom loving citizens, and thus fully deserving of public respect, privileges and honours.

SOCIAL ‘RAPE’ of MEN by Women

Once was told lovingly ‘it is as if you Phillip were carrying a sign on your back, please kick me’.

In English speaking New Zealand we think we stand for the underdog: let the underdog speak and he will say ‘if I am a victim, please tell me what I am a victim of, then you can kick me’. In effect, by my own sexual violation so young at the hands of a female I was really raped.

Living in this Kafkaesque Aotearoa (another name for New Zealand; it means 'land of the long white cloud' which could mean the white people, the cloud over the temple or the infamous 'cloud of unknowing' from mysticism to a 'real politick’) swollen with its own delusions -(Fixed the earthquake yet? I taunt: as, while spurning International aid, New Zealand has hardly begun work on rebuilding the City) we actually put the boot in here when men are drowning. Feminist women apply their own butch rules where men are concerned. Most of them outright lies.

New Zealand was the first country in the World to give women the vote: it was once, long ago, briefly, the wealthiest and richest country in the entire world. More than America. It is also probably the most feminist country in the world now. While the women are the easiest once to have sex with. In WWII American soldiers were amazed at our girls, elsewhere on the globe they'd pay for what our females did for free with them. People forget that. Nowadays men refrain from having anything to do with them as they are the most fanatically feminist crones in all of creation.

Child Abuse to Me

I was rather more mature when I finally accepted that I had been abused by an older female when a very young infant: obliged myself to ‘mourn’ for two years relieved by the idea that I was free of the impending boot of doom, had an explanation for the failures of my life and saw the first period of success in my career.

University

Went back to University, then finished a partially completed degree and graduated from Victoria University 2010 with good passes in English Literature. The hardest part was the humiliation of returning later to art school at Massey University in Wellington as I had been initially to Canterbury University (in Christchurch) I was not expecting any more changes in the makeup of the sexes-being around as many young men then as female fine arts students, nor in my current art style-but to continue in my established minimalist style, as I was slightly famous from being in New Zealand's Petar James Gallery stable in my decade long stint post Canterbury Art school; and was in fact New Zealand's first ideological minimalist, creating our very first monochromatic paintings in 1974 well before Steven Bambury, currently much better established than

I. And in the years where in New York the style was first exhibited. His works have the 'look' of minimalism without actually being so in their deeper structure and configuration-more on that in my upcoming book on my artworks. At Massey University Art School, COCA a fellow student came out with personal revelations built into her work that moved me. There had always been what I called ‘aberrant’ artworks in my body of work: I work ferociously in binges where I can do up to forty frameable or exhibit worthy artwork drawings or colour studies in a day. Aberrant or ‘off’ types appear frequently among them. So there were many of these in my backlist. I never knew what to do with them. Since I now accepted I ‘had a life’ inglorious though it was. The way was clear to gather them together and possibly come out 'abused and masculist' at the same time.

This I finally did in late 2013 in the last month of the semester: I was able to present on the walls of the third year studio ‘Boy, Molested by Older Female 1954-1986’.

 

‘Boy, Molested by Older Female, 1954 -1986’ Phillip O’Sullivan Tape and acrylic drawings ensemble on wall 2013 Massey University Studio II

Artwork

Since the relationship picked up again later, when unknowingly, -as we had spent the intervening years in other cities, not recalling her from infancy,-and met her again accidentally.

Over the entire time feminism raged in the background: plenty of feminist support for any little slip incurred; none for the men/boys/children victims who happened to be male and to whom the sexual slip had actually happened as per the victim rather than being the initiator. The painting features a male child (me) being molested by a female. The world of order and reason is set aside-the 'logical' tape schema-while too early a sexuality is being advanced upon.

Of all this I was then oblivious. Where was a masculist response for men to balance equally the advancement, advocacy and defenses for the male/boy gender? It simply did not then exist. The suppressed injustice now appears massive. Naturally all this fuels the consciousness behind the art and the writings I do now. The writing seems to have taken over in the meantime.

Over the years had nearly thirty one person exhibitions in Auckland, Wellington, Christchurch, Hamilton, Palmerston North, Pakuranga, and Dunedin. Plus numerous group shows and exhibitions. Of course I expected success (yet this, and much else, eludes) spent many decades wondering why.

Art School

At Art School for the second time in my life I thought I knew something of what to expect; having made an adolescent decision earlier to concentrate on non-fiction reading as many men do I was fairly sure to be able to cope intellectually with the academic side of things-previously at Canterbury University School of Fine Art at Ilam. Teachers included Don Peebles, Doris Lusk and Rudi Gopas. I studied art history with Tom Taylor and William Sutton these being my best subjects as they were academic; Modern Art, Renaissance Architecture, Expressionism and so on. Yet at Massey things were different. There was not much art in the academic, essay writing side of things at all. Less than five percent of the course in critical theory was in painting, sculpture, video, performances, drawing or art work analysis in any form; it was in fact mostly Marxist feminist politics, gender, sociology, psychology, semiology, linguistics, and so on-very politically motivated as both of the two lecturers in that 'faculty' or department were hard line Stalinist active in the local far left Mana party. It was like stepping back behind the Berlin wall into a Warsaw pact country. I almost immediately began questioning this party political propaganda; it was election year. Questioning its suitability in a modern University teaching contemporary art.

Ironically the 'school style' for its studio staff was minimalist-and they had patently never heard of me! Though I should have been considered the foremost historical philosophical personages in regard to New Zealand minimalism. See my minimalist lifestyle, artworks and minimalist philosophy. Many of the 'trade secret' things they sidled up to whisper to me I had discovered for myself nearly forty years prior. Otherwise it was a strictly ‘hands off’ non-prescriptive pedagogical method in the teaching. Help me! That method is designed to ‘enable the student to explore visual art options in an open informal manner’. In practice it meant nothing in the way of actual skills. After questioning the influence of critical theory for several years here at Massey and doing double time fashioning answering essays and videos and websites (but not submitting them) in other words I wrote the regular essays under sufferance-not agreeing with any of it, it was so easily questionable by asking obvious points from off the top of my head I virtually beat them every time, easily, I was so well read, having lived a shy life deep in my books and art, too easily without meaning to, just by asking for plain explanatory details-and for my own sanity had to reply online to satisfy myself: in a sense, if you can call it that, I enjoyed my intellectual agony as I finally saw where all those decades of political correctness came from-it lodged its hideaway home in my beloved art… I was ‘shocked and disgusted’, no wonder I did not get it before.

Theory was not my thing; I was not attempting to become a critic, certainly not a biased, jealous, hypocritical one.

What do you think?

Send us feedback!