Tynamite’s thoughts on Patriarchy Theory

I'll polish this up in July


After reading countless feminist articles, I decided that I wasn’t a feminist because I didn’t agree with the feminist talking points, such as.

  • Pay gap
  • Patriarchy
  • Male gaze
  • Objectification
  • Rape culture
  • Airbrushing
  • Equality of outcome
  • Gender is a social construct
  • Gender roles are harmful
  • Banning stereotypes in adverts
  • Male privilege

I don’t usually write response articles, but here goes. I was reading a feminist article in The Guardian, and noticed that it had no comments section. (The article was about a Labour MP who received harassment on Twitter.) As I could not leave a comment under the article, I thought it would be better for me to write a response article to that article. I will link to the article later on. But for now, I’ll use this article as a good way to finally explain my thoughts on the feminist “patriarchy theory” that they sprout on about all the time.

When feminists use the word “patriarchy”, my mind fuzzes out whatever they’re going to say next. That’s an exaggeration, I do listen, but that doesn’t mean I’ll neccesarily agree with them. But what is the patriarchy? I’ll explain.

The “patriarchy” is a theory that is intregal to feminist theory, that we live in a society that is catered to and elevates men, and oppresses or represses women and makes them second class citizens. A feminist said online, that denying the patriarchy, is like denying the holocaust and global warming. Well people do deny those things!

The woman who said that, is from India, a country where the “nuclear family” has its stranglehold, divorce and affairs is taboo, and a place where the wealth between the rich and poor is stratified – there is no socialism there. In India, people shit on the streets, the streets are flooded with beggars, and the poor live in shacks and have to get water from the local water pipe, that is delivered from a water hydrant. She said she was a feminist because she wanted all women to have the opportunities her mother had, to go to university and have a high paying white collar (office) job. She lives in India, I live in Britain. We both have a different socioeconomic background.

My male gender doesn’t give me extra privileges in running Hostingz Accent

It doesn’t make sense to me to believe in the patriarchy, not because women aren’t oppressed or repressed in society, but seriously though, on the flip side, that suggests that my “male gender” gave me EXTRA privileges in running Hostingz Accent, that I would not of benefited from if I was born female.

What these feminists fail to realise, is that ALL my success comes from hard work, not my gender. Remember, I’ve made my own Google!

Patriarchy theory will resonate with the “#metoo activists” who are routinely aggressively catcalled and psychologically abused by men in a power trip. Rather than improve their “stature and footing” and call the police, their friends or human resources, they expect society to change, like a child who cries because their biscuit fell inside a cup of hot water. If you are an Instagram model, then “patriarchy theory” is more likely to resonate with you, especially if you do cosplay. What about rape culture? This article is not about rape culture, so I’m not going to discuss that in this article. That would be conflating two entirely different things. But I did see these two images on her Instagram Story.

So when you think about what I’ve just said above, you can see why (I hope), why it doesn’t resonate with me, someone who runs a company, and works VERY hard to get where they are today.

Laws and Social Engineering

First, rape and murder was made illegal in the BC times. Fast forward to after the millenium, when before you could approach girls on the street for their numbers in the 90s, feminist pressure group Hollaback made catcalling no longer socially acceptable. The movement spread worldwide due to a video of an attractive girl walking down NYC for 10 hours, which went viral. This caused a global backlash, and that probably gave way for the #metoo movement.

Feminists complained about upskirting (I don’t know how they did it), which was already illegal under the Sexual Offences Act 2003, and for some strange reason, the law was updated (not created) in 2018. I’m not a law person, don’t ask me why and how the law changed. All I know, is that it was already illegal in the first place!

Now that men and women have equal rights under the law, society has moved from “rights equality”, to “agency equality”. Who has more privilege in society? Men or women? We could debate that all day! The typical feminist response is to look at a “male privilege checklist”. When I searched Google, I found these results. [one] [two] [three] These articles make a lot of sense, and I am not discounting the points made in the article.

However I have to wonder about the general disposition and mental health of a person who would write such an article, or ask me to read such an article. If you get a stone and an axe, and you keep chipping away at the stone, the stone will eventually snap or break. Not straight away, but it will. I was on Instagram which I have an account because “tynamite” was taken years ago arghhh, but I don’t use Instagram. Some people love Instagram. I hate it. Yes I follow people because why would I have an account and not follow anyone? But I rarely post photos because I keep forgetting to because I’ve got so many things in my Trello, or because nobody asks me to.

Well anyway, continuous abuse causes mental health problems. The problem with these male privilege checklists, from a male perspective, is that they fail to explain to the reader, the socioeconomic background of the author. Before you have a conversation about privilege, you must first know the socioeconomic background of the author or speaker. If the person you are speaking to, doesn’t know that, your efforts in trying to make them see your point of view, will be lost and wasted on them. This is a problem that Quora tried to solve with the Real Name Policy, but catastrophically failed! A real name, photo, location, workplace and university, does NOT explain the socioeconomic background of a person. Knowing who a person is, is very different to knowing about the life they once lived.

Anyway, I moved away from my original topic, but anyway though, now we have “rights equality”, feminists want women to have “agency equality”. How to achieve this, is hotly debated. That’s not a question I’m going to answer in this article.

People are just people on the gritty streets

Below is a real conversation I have seen while in school.

“Women are confusing”


“They just are!”

“No they’re not, we’re just people :)”

Is that a reason for the sexual harassment women face, or a reason why people who are bullied or are shy, don’t know how to be socialable? What about the people who have been bullied in school or have selective mutism, who grow up not knowing how to be socialble, because they don’t have tactile experience of talking to guys and girls, in a socialable environment? How do you socialise someone who has faced adversity or anxiety, and give them the knowledge or confidence they need to be happy and make friends? Luckily I’m selling my first non-fiction book that took me 6 years to write.

Britain has a class system, meaning that people who have money, can do things, that people who don’t have money, can’t do. Luckily I’ve got my 3rd job from today onwards that this time is not a temporary job, so I’ll be able to do things, that people who are unemployed can’t do. I met someone who was 33 and unemployed because she quit her job. I don’t know why, she just did. The point is, when you actually go out there and speak to people, you’ll find out that people are just people. However if you think women are confusing, you’ve not spent enough time around them, for whatever reason.

Feminists are one sided

I think that feminists are solipsists when it comes to gender. They spend so much time talking about male privilege and the patriarchy, that they fail to realise the privileges they experience, that men do not experience. The common response to this, is that feminists do care about men’s wellbeing and they say that the patriarchy hurts men too, but that women are oppressed or repressed more than men in our western society. I have a newsletter, and only 11 people are subscribed to it, and one of them is from sharia law Pakistan. I will now list some things that I see happen to women with my own eyes, that have never happened to me.

  • A person (male and female) has never smiled at me and asked me “how are you” when I order pay for something at a shop counter. Women get that treatment off men.
  • A person has never helped me get off the ground by holding their arm out to pull me up, after I fall on the ground. Women get that treatment off men.
  • A person has never approached me in school or university and offered to help me with my work. Women get that treatment off men.
  • A person has never someone in my presence who has visibily upset me to apologise for what they did. Women get that treatment off men.
  • A person has chimed in to defend me or backup my arguments, when I’m in a debate with someone or multiple people online on a forum or social network. Women get that treatment off men.
  • Women being represented in a positive way in television and movies rather than be portrayed as stupid, violent or criminal like men are.
  • Newspapers having women’s sections which provide content for women, but no men’s sections.
  • Having more funding given to breast cancer than testicular cancer.
  • Female colleges and universities existing, of which the male equivalent does not exist
  • When police are called to the house to sort out domestic abuse situation, the woman is automatically belived by the police because she’s female
  • Domestic violence shelters being exclusively for women and none existing for men to live in

There is probably more examples, but given that I’ve missed out on a lot of things in life for being a man without it being blatantly obvious or shown by an undeniable event, how would I know?

What a feminist said

Every time I post about feminism, the patriarchy and toxic masculinity, I always get backlash that I am “attacking” men.

I am doing no such thing. I am merely explaining that men are part of a system which harms everybody. I am expressing it in a manner where women are the primary victim of such a system, and being a woman myself I am often using themes that I have experienced, seen, read about, or all three etc.

Men are the primary oppressor, meaning men are hurting men, and men are hurting women.

Women cannot systematically oppress men in any way, attacks on men in any kind are single cases. Man on man, man on woman attacks do contribute to the system of patriarchy.

Men are victims to men, women are victims to men.

When women attack men physically in any way, it is a single case scenario, and the ystem gets reinforced by stereotypes about women and men, usually by the public, male judges, gaslighting or in a few cases (because there are significantly less) female judges, this by no measure means that woman on man attacks aren’t awful, they are, they are just not reinforcing the patriarchial system, except for the internalised shame and public stereotypes.

Feminism wants all attacks, especially rape and domestic abuse, to stop. But since these attacks happen significantly more to women, that is where our main focus lies.

Abuse of any kind is an institution, a systemic behaviour. That institution needs to be torn down beforre we can go in and do any case by case work.

Yes, men get abused, but it is 1-2% of the mass sum. If we could get female abuse down to the same amount and it becomes 50/50 I would be happy, because then we can actually work more closely with the underlying cause of rape, abuse etc, and not with a system of oppression, a system of inequality.

Men are more likely to hurt both men and women and I am positive that if we try to enforce feminist ideas, we will dismantle the toxic behaviour which leaves men hurting men in the process of stopping abuse against women. Someone who knows abuse is wrong will not discriminate their views between woman and man, they will know each life is worth the same.

This is why we need feminism, why we ALL need feminism.

My response to that opinion is as follows…

  • Women do abuse men, but as they can’t use aggression as men are stronger than women, they do it in a psychologicial way. A more sophisticated way.
  • That’s YOUR reality! In your reality, you and your friends experience rape and domestic abuse. In my reality, I have fun! Yes my life isn’t particularly happy or plain sailing, I have a lot of problems and shortcomings in my life (eg. money). But the way I choose to life my life, I have fun! Not everyone gets to have fun in their life, and it’s sad.
  • Being a feminist and not abusing women, is not mutually exclusive. There are lots of men who are against feminism, who don’t abuse women. There is more to being a feminist than believing in equality for women. Feminism is an ideology, it is a collection of beliefs that a particular group holds. Not everyone is going to believe in your opinions on intergender dynamics, even if they don’t abuse women.
  • If abuse of any kind is an institution, then WHO is enforcing this institution??? Adverts, schools, movies? If you can’t point to a single place that is encouraging or condoning the rape and domestic abuse of women, considering that the vast majority of people don’t endorse that, your argument is as good as dead!

Feminists want to expand the definition of hate crime, to make “negative sentiment” a hate crime

I bet you’re wondering what the article was that prompted this response article.

Review brings misogyny as a hate crime a step closer | Society | The Guardian

Yes, that was the article!

The headline, is comedy gold. How does one make misogyny a hate crime? I mean, how do you define misogyny? I was banned from Roosh V Forum twice for trolling, so I quit the forum. In my opinion, I wasn’t trolling. Trolling is subjective. What one person finds offensive, another does not. You can have negative thoughts, sentiment, words, actions and violence. But there are different kinds of words, on a sliding scale. On Twitter and Quora, you can precede an accusatory statement with the word “probably”, and because you used the word probably, you won’t get in trouble for defamation.

I’ll try to shed some light on this.

Quora bans and censors people who criticise feminism or are against it. A question about that is here. I got banned from Quora (so I moved all my Quora answers to Compesh), and Indian feminist and Top Writer Surbhi Dhawan had this to say about me. As I was banned from Quora, I did not have the opportunity to respond to her, so now I will in this blog post.

Ah, the good old ‘Quora is biased towards feminists, and unfairly bans people who criticize feminism.’ I’m glad you mentioned names, because I went to take a look at Adisa Nicholson’s content, and this is what I found:

“Yes, I am sexist. I make generalizations about 50% of the population or even 100% of the population. What’s wrong with that?”

To write, is to provoke. If you are not provocative, you are not a writer. Men and women have distinctly different attitudes and behaviour patterns. To not recognise this, is grossly ignorant.

Not my words, OP. Not mine. Also, a self appointed sexist wants to “criticise feminism”. Surprise, surprise!

Making generalisations about men and women doesn’t mean you hate women. I am perfectly capabale of having friendships and relationships with women.

“Basically the IQ for men ranges from low to high, but for women, it stays in the middle.”

Yes, women are basically not as smart as men are, with their IQ that stays in the middle. Does this sound explicitly disrespectful and sexist only to me, OP?

IQ science is controversial, yet is true. I have scientific evidence to show that IQ dictates one’s life chances.

Take I.Q., for example. Despite the noise trotted out by those with lower-to-average intellects about the validity of I.Q. tests and scores, I.Q. remains the strongest single indicator of financial abundance, vocational prestige, academic success, and a host of life’s other achievements. On average, men and women have roughly the same I.Q., give or take a negligible point or two. The glaring differences, however, arise in how this average is distributed. Compared to women, who tend to flock towards neither extreme, men deviate from the average far more, and thus fill out most numbers at both the top and bottom ends of life in general.

It is for this reason, perhaps more than any other, that the majority of outstanding achievers are men, and have been throughout history. The vast majority of scientists, philosophers, musicians, academics, inventors, writers, political leaders, and so forth, are men. But men also comprise the bulk of society’s shit heap. The homeless, long-term unemployed, criminals, drug addicts, mental health patients, alcoholics, and degenerate gamblers are also, overwhelmingly, men.

The I.Q. variation between the genders is considerable. Mensa International High I.Q. Society, for example, is composed of a membership in which men outrank women 2 to 1 — roughly the same representation of men to women in Australia’s homeless populations. This sort of imbalance goes a long way to explaining why an even fifty-fifty split between the genders in every area of life is both impossible and misguided.


“The differences in AVERAGE IQ between men and women are small in magnitude and inconsistent in direction, although the variability of male scores has been found to be greater than that of females, resulting in more males than females in the top and bottom of the IQ distribution.” http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_and_intelligence

If you look at the image below, you’ll find that men’s jobs are at the top and bottom of the graph to make up the elites and the glass floor with cleaning and plumbing jobs, and that women’s jobs are in the middle – matching the fact that men’s IQ range from low to high, but women’s stay in the middle.




“Feminists hate evolutionary psychology because most feminists are ugly (I have scientific evidence for this too).”

Whoa. So, you mean to tell me you have scientific evidence to back up that a person is ugly, as a result of being feminist, and somehow this is your idea of a constructive, logical statement?

Do you know what game theory is? Game theory is the theory that life is a zero-sum game, meaning that for someone to win, someone else must lose. Gambling is a zero sum game. For someone to win in gambling, other people must lose. Farming is a positive sum game, as the farmer, the land and the people benefit from farms. From my own personal experience, feminists tend to be people who cannot compete with others on their own stature, so they start to damage everyone else’s footing. Because they can’t compete on their own merits, they try to move everyone else down. That’s my lived personal experience.

“I don’t judge you for your views though I might think you’re stupid but it’s nothing personal.”

I just randomly call people who disagree with my views, which by the way seem to have a recurring pattern of being sexist towards both genders, stupid, because why not.

I don’t know the argument or debate in question, so I don’t know what the stupid opinion was. It’s funny how she can call me a bigot who condones and encourages the abuse of women, which is completely false, but I can’t call a person stupid for having a stupid opinion.

“The reason why women get loads of messages on dating sites, is because women are more selective with their mating choices than men, much more selective. This is why men send loads of messages on dating sites, as women are much more selective than men, so they have to.”

I didn’t know I was obligated to date the first man I lay my eyes on, or the first man who was remotely interested in me.
Also, nice try justifying harassment of women, because they won’t respond to your advances.

I never justifed the harassment of women. I said that women are more selective when looking for mating partners. Men face 100x more rejection than women do – that’s a fact! If a woman is single, it’s by choice. If a man is single, it’s by force.

– men and women – on Quora, apart from spewing out explicit hatred towards women,

Making generalisations about men and women is not indicative of hating women. Men and women have distinctly different attitudes and behavioural patterns.

by insisting that they are inferior to men,

I never said that. Men and women being different does not make one better than the other. They are just different.

calling ‘patriarchy’ a myth,

I hope you read this article

“Carry on thinking that the “patriarchy” is responsible for women being under-represented in STEM, CEO’s and politics and that there’s a glass ceiling or discouragement responsible for women not proliferating those jobs, because the “patriarchy” doesn’t even fucking exist!”

If you want more women in STEM, stop complaing about it on Quora and Twitter and either start learning and doing STEM, or creating a program to get women into STEM.

undermining the very grave issue of  ‘lack of equal opportunities and recognition given to women in positions of strength’,

You live in a third world country. I live in the UK.

supporting traditional gender roles,

I have NEVER supported traditional gender roles ever in my life.

apologizing for people who harass women online + offline,

I have NEVER apologised for people who harass women online and offline. Where exactly have I endorsed abuse against women?

and since this might make more sense to you – painting all men as beings who are driven only by sex,

and repeatedly implying that if women were not the ‘providers of sex’, men wouldn’t give two fucks about engaging with them.

Women do use marriage to get money in exchange for sex. Ask any heterosexual man who doesn’t spend all their time in the house watching Netflix, playing World of Warcraft and smoking weed, and they’ll tell you it’s true.

I didn’t need to look any further, as I got whatever I needed to know about this person from their first few comments.
As a vocal feminist, it is not new for me to come across people who want to debate the need for feminism, and frankly I welcome these “criticisms” as long as they are constructive, well thought out, do not take a personal jab at me, and do not use “science” to justify bigotry.
So, you see, this person was not “criticizing feminism” as you claim. This person was attacking individuals

I was stating opinions on intergender dynamics. I did not attack any individuals. She has accused me of being a bigot for making generalisations about men and women and for saying that women use marriage to get money in exchange for sex. Her accusations are unfounded. A generalisation does not mean someone is bigoted.

I hope that makes sense.

I hope this article also makes sense.

Typical feminist response: who hurt you?

I’m not going to answer that retarded question.


Back in the 90s, feminism wasn’t a thing. You would ask someone, “are you a feminist?”, and they would answer yes or no, and that would be the end of it. No why. No discussion. No debate. Conversation done.

Now we’ve got so many different types of feminists and feminist pressure groups that keep popping up all over the place, people don’t even know what to think any more – it’s hilarious! That’s why I read and watch Infowars and Natural News, because the jokes just write themselves!

Seriously though, I am shocked to read an article in The Guardian, about a feminist who wants to make misogyny a crime. Is misogyny really that bad in the UK? That question is outside the scope of this article. The point is, why are all these things happening, what can we do about it, and is there really a patriarchy that exists in the UK like a demon that permeates everywhere.

I hope this article should shed some light on why I don’t believe in the patriarchy. For all the suffering women out there experiencing domestic abuse by some verbally or psychologically abusive man, if that’s happened to you on a routine basis, feminism would be a more viable option to you. If that hasn’t happened to you, just go about your way.