But this is their stated goal. It’s just that no one wants to hear it so they go “la la la la la la” so they don’t have to hear the real plan that feminists are following to a T.

So, I’m doing an extensive quote from an interview with the person had the first idea that brainwashing 18 year old girls through intensive re-education courses could achieve the feminist final solution.

And all, your mother, your sister, your daughters, your co-workers, the woman walking down the street, they all know this is the plan, outwardly say it’s ridiculous but never admitting they know about it or that they support it…but they never deny it or protest against it. Especially the mothers of boys because mothers in feminist societies hate their son’s.

Am I being harsh? I am certainly not. Is the feminist here? Most certainly. I am simply quoting from an article by the actual article herself, the current modern third wave feminist architect of this “final solution”. Like talking to Osama Bin Laden about Al Quida and still denying the truth of what he’s saying. That’s how men have been in the last 100 years and probably for millenia before that.

Here is the rope feminist, why don’t we hoist you up your own petard. (That means let your own words hang you).

Direct Quote:

Sally Miller Gearhart, a feminist and a lesbian (but I repeat myself) who as a professor at San Francisco State University in the 1970s helped develop one of the first Women’s Studies programs in the nation. For quite some time, I’ve seen a quote from Professor Gearhart posted in various places around the Internet:

“The proportion of men must be reduced to and maintained at approximately 10% of the human race.”
This tne plus ultra expression of feminism’s genocidal hostility to men was sufficiently intriguing to me that I tracked down the source. Gearhart’s quote is from her essay, “The Future — If There Is One — Is Female,” which was included in the 1982 anthology Reweaving the Web of Life: Feminism and Nonviolence, edited by Pam McAllister.
Thanks to the generous support of readers — “Hit the Freaking Tip Jar!” — I obtained a copy of this book from Amazon. Here is an excerpt that provides the context of Gearhart’s infamous quote:
Enslaved by male-identification and years of practice within the system as we all still are to one degree or another, the assumption must be that the present system of monopoly capitalism and patriarchy must be replaced and that non-male-identified women must be the responsible ones. . . .
At least three further requirements supplement the strategies of environmentalists if we are to create and preserve a less violent world. I) Every culture must begin to affirm a female future. II) Species responsibility must be returned to women in every culture. III) The proportion of men must be reduced to and maintained at approximately 10% of the human race. . . .
To return species responsibility to women means in very practical terms that erotic and reproductive initiative must be restored to women all over the globe. . . . Make the decision entirely that of the woman as to how she will be impregnated and how often, if indeed she chooses to be so at all, and whether by heterosexual intercourse, artificial insemination or a form of ovular merging. Restore to each woman the inalienable right to say what shall become of any fertilized egg and to control absolutely the number of children she wishes to emerge from her body. . . . Make nonexistent any male’s say-so in the process of reproduction. Create and protect alternative structures of economic and psychological support for independent women — women not attached to men — who are child-bearers and child-raisers. . . .
Women will bear the number of children they know can be sustained not just by their own social group but by the wide ecological system. They will not bear the children that some man wants only to perpetuate his name or the family possession of his property; they will not bear the children they presently convince themselves they must have because their only role is obedient wife and mother; women will not have the children men think are necessary to perpetuate the tribe or the religion or the specific culture. Instead they will bear the children that they want, that they can care for, and that they assess are needed by the specific group and the entire species. . . .
In every culture it must be women in charge of the changes: women-identified women, no women who are pawns of men, not women who out of their fear of losing their lives or those of their children, still hold to the securities of that dangerous patriarchal culture, but women utterly free of coercion, free of male influence and committed to the principle that the right of species regulation is their own, and not the prerogative of any man. I suggest that lesbians and other independent women are already moving in this direction. . . .
To secure a world of female values and female freedom we must, I believe, add one more element to the structure of the future: the ratio of men to women must be radically reduced so that men approximate only ten percent of the total population. . . .
We now come to a critical point: how is such a reduction in the male population to take place? One option is of course male infanticide. It differs very little from the female infanticide that has apparently been carried out even into the twentieth century by some cultures. Such an alternative is clearly distasteful and would not constitute creative social change. . . .
f women are given the freedom of their bodies then they may well choose [experimental “ovular merging” technology that produces only female embryos] in great enough numbers to make a significant difference in the sex ratio of women to men. A 75% female to 25% male ratio could be achieved in one generation if one-half of a population reproduced heterosexually and one-half by ovular merging.
Such a prospect is attractive to women who feel that if they bear sons no amount of love and care and nonsexist training will save those sons from a culture where male violence is institutionalized and revered. These are women saying, “No more sons. We will not spend twenty years of our lives raising a potential rapist, a potential batterer, a potential Big Man.”day, think that women are fighting for control, supremacy, control of the children, and that’s true, but that is real goal.

http://theothermccain.com/2014/09/13/feminism-the-final-solution/

But feminists say,”these are rad-fems, they don’t represent “real” feminists”, “most women aren’t feminists, feminists have gone too far” and then celebrate a 70% out of wedlock rate for the first group in the U.S. that any hitleresque eugenicist would target, in fact the very group Margaret Sanger herself wanted to target: The Black Community.

As a child in the 1970’s we knew the black family was being destroyed by government fiat through threats of defunding social programs, like housing for poor people, if a husband was present.

They got their 70% single motherhood and elimination of fathers and men from the black women. Now the hispanic and white women are not far behind and rising fast with a 40% single mother rate among whites.

Birthrates are at an all time low, the world wide quiet currently coordinated by Hitlary feminist revolution is working,and abortion’s are far more common than marriages.

Now World Emperor of the New Women’s Order, Hitlary Clinton, will be the first world wide Emporette to over 50% of the worlds population she has been courting ever since being made secretary of state. Do you know what I think Hitlary thinks…”wow, people question what I did as secretary of state? I say it in every appeareance but they don’t seem to understand…boy people are stupid, women can run the world”.

Because every time she speaks she openly states that she is the women’s and girls candidate, thus by exclusion not men and boys, and has been going around the world as secretary of state building a network of female leaders.

In a “lucky” move, feminists have now, just this year, wrested control of half the parliment seats and half of all board members in corps, in all the western countries. Without a popular vote, without debate and certainly without male debate.

Women have been meticulusly and carefully and openly brainwashed for 40 years. Two generations. So, women have no intention of a relationship. They want a sperm donor, will abort any males, and you will, in prepetuity due to the laws of the feminist state “create and protect alternative structures of economic and psychological support for independent women— women not attached to men — who are child-bearers and child-raisers.

They state it in writing for all the world to see yet the blind mangina’s hide their heads in the sand. Go your own way or not, it really doesn’t affect me, I’m all set up and doing great, you have to make your own decision.

But these are the facts. And these are the only way to explain the behavior of women and they’re government over the last 40 years. It’s all according to the plan laid out in the 1980’s. Their ahead of schedule, can you read?

Words and actions spell it out, it’s up to you what to believe.

See guys, if this wasn’t a thing why do they get so defensive about it? This troll posted within minutes of my writing this. That’s how closely our femin-nazi friends keep tabs on what the uppity ex-slaves are telling their manservants.

(– our ability to smell the addiction of attention and drama from a thousands of miles away)   😉

Have a nice day, whatever makes you sleep well at night, cute princess!  x

Feminists who advocate mass androcide are one of my prime motivators for obvious reasons. I’d like to see exactly how they determined which 10% of men are to remain. Manginas would be a very poor choice IMHO.

@HRP: I’m sure they have a virtual army monitoring us, but I have no f~~~s to give about it. No screaming banshee feminist is going to stop me.