Photo by Lеаnnе Bеll

Evеry Dеcеmbеr 6 the representatives of various feminists groups urge us to remember the slaughter of 13 women by one Mаrc Lеpіnе at the Ecоlе Pоlytеcnіc in Montreal in 1989. They use the horrible anniversary as a marker of male violence and as an occasion to remind us that women all over the world are being killed just for being women.

I disagree.

While it is certainly true that women are being brutalized and butchered all over the world, even in the most civilized countries like ours (in fact the news item on the radio which followed the story about the anniversary of the Mоntrеаl Mаssаcrе was about an estranged husband who'd been arrested for hunting down his wife and killing her!), they are not being killed by male violence, and they are not being killed just because they are women.

For example, it was reported 10 years ago, at the time of the incident, that Lepine had gone on a berserker, shouting hateful comments about feminists while gunning down innocent female students at random in their college dorm. After he shot and killed himself, a note he had written was found on his body. It blamed feminists for destroying his life. Yet, for some reason, feminists never mention this note.

I wonder why.

The truth is there's is no such thing as male violence, any more than there is such a thing as female hysteria. Just because most of the people who commit violent crimes against women are men it doesn't mean that all men are violent towards women. That's what a term like 'male violence' implies. It should be obvious that such sweeping generalizations as this do more harm than good. For example, who are feminists counting on to stop this kind of violence? Men? Why would innocent men who are accused and convicted of being r4pists and killers in the minds of women - when in fact they probably respect and admire women - want to help them? Ask yourself what such views of the male sex do to the self-esteem of young men who have yet to find their sexual identity. Will they not learn to despise themselves for their normal sexual urges and in turn despise women for arousing them? And how exactly are such malicious spiritual attacks as are represented by the coining of the term 'male violence' supposed to convince men that women are fair and rational? Are we supposed to believe that female hysteria is a myth?

Yes, we are. We are because most women are not feminists, just as most men are not violent. Most men love and admire women, and manage to go through their entire lives without murdering any of them. It's these men women should be concerned with, not the creeps and losers. If women really want decent men in their lives it is they who will have to learn to respect us.

They must also learn to praise and celebrate ALL female virtues, including - and perhaps most importantly - their beauty and sexuality, the very things feminists belittle. We must teach young men and women that female beauty is a virtue, and that men's sexual urges towards women are a sacred duty, a duty to honour, respect, admire, love, and defend them.

Qυаsі Mоdо and Cyrano de Bergerac had it right. They are the only characters in the history of literature - that I can think of - who fell in love with a woman who did not want them but did not respond with hatred. They did not hunt her down and kill her. Instead they defended their love to their dying breath. They both embodied a little thing we used to call male chivalry.

Not surprisingly, feminists despise male chivalry. In an all but successful attempt to eradicate it from reality they have subverted the very concept with the idea of male violence. To do it they have had to repeat the most unlikely causes of brutality towards women - pornography, the word history, etc. - over and over until they sound half-plausible.

The truth is, feminists are largely a cause - not the cure - for 'male violence'. It's not a coincidence that serial killers have become more common as feminism has become more popular. This is because the root cause of violence against women is not men, but negative attitudes towards women and sexuality, views which feminists do more to perpetuate than eradicate. If you don't believe me, why not take it straight from the horse's mouth? I'd say Mаrc Lеpіnе did have his life destroyed by feminists. He was exactly the kind of weak, miserable, sexually repressed, self-loather feminists want to make all men into.

For years we have been told that all men are r4pists. Is it surprising then that some grow up to become r4pists? Little boys are being taught that kissing girls in a schoolyard is a crime. What then is r4pe? Is it merely something frowned upon like a misplaced kiss? And now, as a precursor I suppose to being told that all men hate women, we are being told that violence towards women is an intrinsicly male defect.

Why? What do feminists hope to accomplish with this? Killing women for being feminists is obvioulsy inexcusable, so why do we have to be told this over and over?

It's because hating them for it is not. Feminists want us to think some men hate all women, because they don't want anyone to know it's just feminists these guys hate.

That's why they never mention Mаrc Lеpіnе's note.

(Let me stress here, that I absolutely abhor ANY illegal and unwarranted physical attacks on ANYONE, but perhaps most especially women, and on this occasion of sorrow I'd like to extend my sincerest condolences to anyone who lost someone they loved in this way. But if such crimes are ever to be stopped, it can only be done by citing the true causes, and by suggesting the most likely solutions with the same vigour, righteousness and persistence with which feminists persist in perpetuating the causes.)