Connect with us

Red Pill



New book hits Amazon debating if “Men Are Obsolete”

Strong independent women have published the transcript of a Toronto feminist event in a new book called Are Men Obsolete? Women on the panel insult and berate men as if they are little children or sitcom caricatures.




Here we go again.  Strong independent women who got together in Toronto at the end of 2013 for a public pow wow on the usefulness of men, have now published the transcript of the event in a new book called Are Men Obsolete?  I know I will be ordering my copy right away, along with the Twilight Forever: Complete Saga Box Set and The CB-6000 Male Chastity Device.

The messed up part about publishing a forum transcript on men’s utility and their place in society, from a conference attended by no men and a panel featuring no men, is the sheer balls on some of these women to actually tell attendees what men need and want.

The UK Telegraph’s Theo Merz reports:

Supporting the motion [of men being obsolete] was Maureen Dowd, the New York Times columnist and author of Are Men Necessary?, and Hanna Rosin, who wrote the social study The End of Men. Arguing against the motion was the feminist academic Camille Paglia and The Times’s Caitlin Moran.

So it’s an intentionally provocative title, and while you can only imagine the outcry a book called “Are Women Obsolete?” would cause, I don’t feel we all have to be ready to leap to offence just because a minority of feminists are. It’s also jarring to have four women discussing the role of men in the modern world, but let’s come prepared to accept the truth from whoever tells it.

The problem is in the manner of the telling; in the hen-party humour, the resignation as they speak of the Lessons Men Must Learn. All of the speakers claim they want to help “obsolete” man adapt to the changes in his environment, but who are they trying to convince with this?

Theo Merz must be a red pill journalist for sure.  He is spot on by pointing out that women worldwide would conjure up a shit storm if a conference were held called “Are Women Obsolete?”  The entire conference and book speak volumes as to how clueless these ladies are. They suffer from a severe case of solipsism, and are clearly unable to see the world around them for what it is, not for how they wish it to be.

Needless to say, these women’s studies graduates on the panel continue to insult and berate men as if we are little children or sitcom caricatures…

Fortunately Rosin, Dowd’s teammate, has made some unilateral decisions about how men can remain relevant enough to survive in the modern world. “We don’t want to castrate men [Cheers – ed]. We don’t want to turn them into eunuchs. We don’t even want to feminise them that much. We just want to keep whatever we love about manhood and adjust the parts that are holding men back.”

Later she addresses the men in the audience directly: “You are allowed to preserve the parts of manhood that you love and value – whether that is craftsmanship, or macho-ness, or eating nachos and playing video games.”

There is, I admit, a poetic justice in female public intellectuals telling men what they can and can’t be after centuries of educated men doing the same to women. But it doesn’t seem much like progress.

So here is a thought, since Ms. Rosin is telling us men what we can keep about manhood and what we should do away with, how about we do the same, and express our desire as men to women, to preserve feminine values and traditional gender roles.  So Ms. Rosin while you are telling men how to act and behave, take a 10 minute break from your whining and go make me a sandwich.

The entire women’s movement was based on equality between the sexes and now that this has been achieved (and then some) people like Rosin and Dowd are so drunk with power that they must enslave and shame men in order to subliminally segregate society between bourgeoisie females and the proletariat males.

Here is a scenario for Rosin, Dowd and all her disciples to consider. How about 5% of all men go on strike for one day.  One fucking day, 5% of men, would be all that is needed for the entire world of things we need, not want, but need (energy, raw materials, distribution) to grind the cushy life of women like this to an absolute halt. We are talking a social collapse like nothing ever scene, the minute men follow Rosin and Dowd’s advice and just make themselves useless.

Luckily their were cooler heads and more rationale ladies on the panel to bring some logic to the table.

The issues raised in the book do need to be discussed. The economy is changing in a way which seems to value ‘female skills’ over traditionally male ones; as Rosin points out, in every part of America, young single women have a higher median income than young single men. And I’ve seen first hand the problems that pressure to live up to traditional models of masculinity can cause, whether it’s in men who are returning from war, or have been sexually assaulted, or have mental health issues.

Moran, opposed to the motion, makes the point that this is not a zero-sum game; women don’t ‘win’ if they decide men are surplus to requirements. “We can’t keep having arguments about men versus women: this is what screws us up…We’re in this together.” Which is of course true, though there’s a certain irony in the fact she came to an all-female discussion of male obsolescence to get this across.

Moran sums it up well, we are in this together.  We were made to compliment one another, not suppress each other.  It is this acceptance of each sex’s strengths and weaknesses that will provide the way forward.  Women everywhere need to tell “intellectuals” like Rosin and Dowd to get lost.  If we treat men as invisible working drones with no value other than to benefit a woman’s “sex and the city” life style, then men will begin to lose motivation and simply check out. It’s already happening at alarming rates and all of society will suffer because of feminist greed, hate and misandry.

Men thrive on motivation and the female partner is the greatest motivator in human history. The minute the female partner shits on her male peer, then the chains of production break down and we are all screwed.


Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!

Leave a Reply

3 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
3 Comment authors
askgiveooopatldrredpillvideos Recent comment authors
newest oldest most voted
Notify of

RT @redpilltimes: Are Men Are Obsolete? According to a new book, men are disposable. #redpill truth is needed.


RT @redpilltimes: Are Men Are Obsolete? According to a new book, men are disposable. #redpill truth is needed.


RT @redpilltimes: Are Men Are Obsolete? According to a new book, men are disposable. #redpill truth is needed.


“Transphobic” Swedish Professor May Lose Job After Noting Biological Differences Between Sexes

A university professor in Sweden is under investigation after he said that there are fundamental differences between men and women which are “biologically founded”



Via Zerohedge

A university professor in Sweden is under investigation for “anti-feminism” and “transphobia” after he said that there are fundamental differences between men and women which are “biologically founded” and that genders cannot be regarded as “social constructs alone,” reports Academic Rights Watch.

For his transgression, Germund Hesslow – a professor of neuroscience at Lund University – who holds dual PhDs in philosophy and neurophysiology, may lose his job – telling RT that a “full investigation” has been ordered, and that there “have been discussions about trying to stop the lecture or get rid of me, or have someone else give the lecture or not give the lecture at all.”

“If you answer such a question you are under severe time pressure, you have to be extremely brief — and I used wording which I think was completely innocuous, and that apparently the student didn’t,” Hesslow said.

Hesslow was ordered to attend a meeting by Christer Larsson, chairman of the program board for medical education, after a female student complained that Hesslow had a “personal anti-feminist agenda.” He was asked to distance himself from two specific comments; that gay women have a “male sexual orientation” and that the sexual orientation of transsexuals is “a matter of definition.”

The student’s complaint reads in part (translated):

I have also heard from senior lecturers that Germund Hesslow at the last lecture expressed himself transfobically. In response to a question of transexuallism, he said something like “sex change is a fly”. Secondly, it is outrageous because there may be students during the lecture who are themselves exposed to transfobin, but also because it may affect how later students in their professional lives meet transgender people. Transpersonals already have a high level of overrepresentation in suicide statistics and there are already major shortcomings in the treatment of transgender in care, should not it be countered? How does this kind of statement coincide with the university’s equal treatment plan? What has this statement given for consequences? What has been done for this to not be repeated? –Academic Rights Watch

After being admonished, Hesslow refused to distance himself from his comments, saying that he had “done enough” already and didn’t have to explain and defend his choice of words.

At some point, one must ask for a sense of proportion among those involved. If it were to become acceptable for students to record lectures in order to find compromising formulations and then involve faculty staff with meetings and long letters, we should let go of the medical education altogether,” Hesslow said in a written reply to Larsson.

He also rejected the accusation that he had a political agenda – stating that his only agenda was to let scientific factnot new social conventions, dictate how he teaches his courses.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading


Kavanaugh Accuser’s Classmate Backs Off Claims She Heard About Alleged Assault

“That it happened or not, I have no idea,” Cristina King Miranda told NPR’s Nina Totenberg. “I can’t say that it did or didn’t.”

The Duran



Authored by Amber Athey via The Daily Caller:

A classmate of Dr. Christine Blasey Ford is backing off of claims that she knew anything about an alleged sexual assault committed by Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.

Cristina King Miranda, who attended high school with Ford, wrote on Facebook this week that she heard school rumors about an incident involving Kavanaugh and Ford back in the 1980s. Miranda later deleted the post and said she did not want to talk to the media about her claims.

However, Miranda spoke to NPR on Thursday and clarified that she has no information about an alleged assault.

“That it happened or not, I have no idea,” Cristina King Miranda told NPR’s Nina Totenberg. “I can’t say that it did or didn’t.”

Miranda’s new statement directly contradicts her Facebook post, in which she wrote, “The incident DID happen, many of us heard about it in school.”

“In my post, I was empowered and I was sure it probably did [happen],” Miranda told NPR this morning. “I had no idea that I would now have to go to the specifics and defend it before 50 cable channels and have my face spread all over MSNBC news and Twitter.”

Miranda said the Senate Judiciary Committee reached out to her after her post but that she would not testify if asked.

Dr. Ford previously said she had not told anyone about the incident until a therapist meeting in 2012. Ford also said the incident happened during the summer, contradicting Miranda’s assertion that she heard rumors about it in school.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading


Pat Buchanan: “The Late Hit” On Judge Kavanaugh

Wha exactly is professor Ford’s case against Judge Kavanaugh?

Patrick J. Buchanan



Authored by Patrick Buchanan via

Upon the memory and truthfulness of Christine Blasey Ford hangs the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh, his reputation and possibly his career on the nation’s second-highest court.

And much more. If Kavanaugh is voted down or forced to withdraw, the Republican Party and conservative movement could lose their last best hope for recapturing the high court for constitutionalism.

No new nominee could be vetted and approved in six weeks. And the November election could bring in a Democratic Senate, an insuperable obstacle to the elevation of a new strict constructionist like Kavanaugh.

The stakes are thus historic and huge.

And what is professor Ford’s case against Judge Kavanaugh?

When she was 15 in the summer of ’82, she went to a beer party with four boys in Montgomery County, Maryland, in a home where the parents were away.

She says she was dragged into a bedroom by Brett Kavanaugh, a 17-year-old at Georgetown Prep, who jumped her, groped her, tried to tear off her clothes and cupped her mouth with his hand to stop her screams.

Only when Kavanaugh’s friend Mark Judge, laughing “maniacally,” piled on and they all tumbled off the bed, did she escape and lock herself in a bathroom as the “stumbling drunks” went downstairs. She fled the house and told no one of the alleged rape attempt.

Not until 30 years later in 2012 did Ford, now a clinical psychologist in California, relate, in a couples therapy session with her husband, what happened. She says she named Kavanaugh as her assailant, but the therapist’s notes of the session make no mention of Kavanaugh.

During the assault, says Ford, she was traumatized. “I thought he might inadvertently kill me.”

Here the story grows vague. She does not remember who drove her to the party. She does not say how much she drank. She does not remember whose house it was. She does not recall who, if anyone, drove her home. She does not recall what day it was.

She did not tell her parents, Ford says, as she did not want them to know she had been drinking. She did not tell any friend or family member of this traumatic event that has so adversely affected her life.

Said Kavanaugh in response, “I categorically and unequivocally deny this allegation. I did not do this back in high school or at any time.”

Mark Judge says it never happened.

Given the seriousness of the charges, Ford must be heard out. But she also needs to be cross-examined and have her story and character probed as Kavanaugh’s has been by FBI investigators as an attorney for the Ken Starr impeachment investigation of Bill Clinton, a White House aide to George Bush, a U.S. appellate judge and a Supreme Court nominee.

During the many investigations of Kavanaugh’s background, nothing was unearthed to suggest something like this was in character.

Some 65 women who grew up in the Chevy Chase and Bethesda area and knew Kavanaugh in his high school days have come out and spoken highly of his treatment of girls and women.

Moreover, the way in which all of this arose, at five minutes to midnight in the long confirmation process, suggests that this is political hardball, if not dirt ball.

When Ford, a Democrat, sent a letter detailing her accusations against Kavanaugh to her California congresswoman, Anna Eshoo, Ford insisted that her name not be revealed as the accuser.

She seemingly sought to damage or destroy the judge’s career behind a cloak of anonymity. Eshoo sent the letter on to Sen. Diane Feinstein, who held it for two months.

Excising Ford’s name, Feinstein then sent it to the FBI, who sent it to the White House, who sent it on to the Senate to be included in the background material on the judge.

Thus, Ford’s explosive charge, along with her name, did not surface until this weekend.

What is being done here stinks. It is a transparently late hit, a kill shot to assassinate a nominee who, before the weekend, was all but certain to be confirmed and whose elevation to the Supreme Court is a result of victories in free elections by President Trump and the Republican Party.

Palpable here is the desperation of the left to derail Kavanaugh, lest his elevation to the high court imperil their agenda and the social revolution that the Warren Court and its progeny have been able to impose upon the nation.

If Kavanaugh is elevated, the judicial dictatorship of decades past, going back to the salad days of Earl Warren, William Brennan, Hugo Black and “Wild Bill” Douglas, will have reached its end. A new era will have begun.

That is what is at stake.

The Republican Senate should continue with its calendar to confirm Kavanaugh before Oct. 1, while giving Ford some way to be heard, and then Kavanaugh the right to refute. Then let the senators decide.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading


Your donations make all the difference. Together we can expose fake news lies and deliver truth.

Amount to donate in USD$:

5 100

Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...


Quick Donate

The Duran
Donate a quick 10 spot!


The Duran Newsletter