'Labour' by Paris Paloma is a song that classically depicts a damsel in male-imposed distress, a novel concept
which seems to resonate with so many people, not just women, in the current societal climate. The legitimacy
of such resonance is speculatable as today, with the indulgence of sympathizers of dubious motive chiming in
at any excuse - "amplifying voices" and whatnot, there's a united front of inflated and self-reinforcing
idealists who tout righteousness, wisdom and often appeal to logic when their movements completely betray it.
A more direct way to describe the predicament is that the victim class is not under any oppression and has in
fact become the oppressor - the persistent nature of advocacy and movements has resulted in beyond the initial
goal being realized, a continuation of influence resulting in the scale tipping in the other direction, rendering
men of today the less free, the second class, etc. The crassness and rejection of civility within feminism
has furthermore ensured that combating its militants is sure to result in dogpiles, as organizations against
the occupation are nonexistent in the circles where I desire them - meaning I'm almost always one against several
thousand in a comments section. This of course exacerbates feelings of loneliness, hopelessness, all these
sensations already present in me. Beyond the injustice of outnumberedness, supposed allies or authorities within
your cause often shun or chastise the venturing out and engaging in conversation about things due to the
unlikeliness of swaying opinion - while I understand that the likelihood of conversion is abysmal with agents
of such an irrational front, I feel that staying silent is a copout. I possess a similar perspective on this as
voting proponents - so long as you still possess the ability to speak your piece, you should. Anyway, there's
a feeling of scrutiny from all angles, even within the hemisphere you represent and have sacrificed much for.
Being an unfortunate bastard on many levels, I feel a great deal of alienation - pertaining to physical strength,
appearance/attractiveness, viability (single parent upbringing), and ideology which of course telegraphs my
inadequacies, at least to those I waste my energy on attempting to converse. Reacting to a statement on a topic
conveys some attachment to it on your end, as the likelihood of an unimpacted individual going to such lengths
to uphold the character of people that probably don't share much in the way of upbringing and attribute, fiscal/
social situation, etc. is so slim that the notion isn't entertained - you are assumed and rightfully so to be
an exhibiter of whatever trait or behavior or belief system that is being disparaged. Back to what I said about
these militants and their ill civility, the possession of such a belief, the challenge to their propaganda
completely delegitimizes whatever arguments you attempt to put forth, because at this point the romantically
challenged, or fatherless, or academically unremarkable are viewed as second class citizens, with the margins
for people to be encompassed by such tags growing and growing. Tragically, this succeeds in stigmatizing the
entirety of male youth, or at least the majority of it, or the most integral regions of it in my estimation -
society, men and women are critical of the products of their failure - this hypocrisy is inescapable in the
present. To elaborate on the integrality of the disenfranchised male youth, look to the fructifiers of the
tech revolution during the 70s and onwards - young, unathletic, definitively odd males. In fact, several and
honestly most industries have been driven by people of this description - the prevailing narrative neglects this
in the pursuit of revision; the striking of us from the record and replacement with women, with usurpers, with
the exotic.

Acknowledging white supremacy's past is not difficult or a vacuum to my sails. Indeed, anglos have had their
day in the sun, Europeans mainly and Americans for a few centuries now. My question is why should the inherent
and non-exclusive fact of prior ethnic hierarchy, unfair as it may have been, justify the destruction of history and denial of the once
dominant (not vanquished however, instead courteous enough to make good on the premise of their American
dream, and for it we've seen our faces spat in)? If you were to ask a proponent of social revolution, a
progressive if you will, if the admittable goal is to file down/equalize the positions of whites and non-
whites in the western world, I'm confident they would affirm that. Equity is the objective of these groups -
and while it is comprehensible even to me the thought process which delivers these people to the call to
edit the landscape and redistribute resource, I believe it to be gravely unfair and ultimately not serving
any positive or righteous cause. Once upon a time I was a fourth grader, and my resolve every morning was
the motto of "punch him in the nose" (regarding a kid who sought to extort or play me in a palpable way.)
I was/am very familiar with the notion of settling scores physically, despite not having had to in twenty
one years of life, and really, this attitude is an undercurrent of masculinity whose absence today is
correlative to the dwindling of masculine trait. Anyway, my reason for bringing this up is that I grasp the
compulsion to settle things reflexibly.

My nihilism settles in whenever I realize that the rational approach doesn't work - that ultimately the
defeatist mindset is rooted in reality, and why delude yourself to adopt a view that you don't subscribe to.
There has been such a pronounced assassination of character of realists on the oppressed side, as a tool to
strip us of dignity - before, some strength could be sourced from the admittance, to the embrace of the knowledge
of inbalance, of nature's brutality, and the elite - no, the indocrinated - are somehow jealous of that. For
the slaves to know the permanence of their situation, they may decide to revolt or discover some way to edit
their position, resulting in a disruption to the hierarchy they (the slogan speakers, the Orwellian women)
enjoy a comfortable level within.