India’s men and women must unite to reject feminism: David Usher

October is “Violence Against Men and Boys Awareness Month” (VAMBAM). VAMBAM originated in India in year 2015. The idea behind observing VAMBAM is to break the silence and address female violence against men and boys, which is stoked by gender politics.

On the occasion of VAMBAM, Uma Challa interviews Mr. David Usher, the President of Center for Marriage Policy, United States. In this interview, Usher shares his thoughts on being male in the United States, and also gives a thought provoking message to the world. Marriage and family still being the cornerstone of Indian society, Usher offers his perspectives on the way forward for countries like India.

Portrait of David Usher.
Photo by Chris Usher

 How are men represented in popular media and news media in your country?

•         News:  stories about men’s criminal behavior are highlighted.  We don’t see much reported about women’s criminal behavior, and when it is, it is usually towards the end of the A section of the paper in synopsis form.

•         TV shows: men are stupid, oafish, and at the periphery of the family (in family shows).  Fathers are sidelined in favor of the lioness at the gate.  Just about any TV show will do here.

What kind of messages are being given to boys and men in terms of what is “appropriate behavior” for males in your culture and your country?

•         Being a boy is not OK.  Boys that act like girls in school are the ones not treated harshly.  

•         Men:  The “Titanic Principle” (as I call it) applies universally.  Whether it be divorce, illegitimacy, domestic violence, relationship problems, economic collapses, or riots in Ferguson, “The men must go down with the ship”.

•         In the corporate world it is OK for women to accuse men of “harassment” to get what they want when there is a decision to be made. This word is applied loosely in the corporate world and most male employees are not aware that federal law is fairly precise as to what actually constitutes harassment.  So male managers and employees revolve around power playing women.   Some women are power players and are not capable of making rational decisions.  I have seen this personally but cannot share it because it would be a violation of corporate policy at my employer.

What kind of an effect do you think these media representations and social expectations have on men and boys, women and girls?

•         Most men ignore it as best they can and are “survivors”.  

•         It discourages men from participating in certain professions such as teaching and home real estate.

•         Fewer men are going to college – only 1/3 of undergrad degrees go to men.  Men are shunted to vocational professions in high school, while women are put on the college track with loans.
•          

What kind of female violence/abuse do most men and boys face in your country?

•        There are several kinds of violence against men that I talk about that are not in the mainstream lexicon.

1.       Out of wedlock pregnancy:  This is often a power play to get a lot of child support income and welfare.  Since most birth control methods are invisible,  men are fraudulently abused both economically and socially.  In the U.S., the majority of illegitimacy is in the 30-45 female age group – women who are experienced and know what they are doing.   Some women do this to force marriage, but most just want the money and the life of a serial spinster.  I call this “serial mistressing”.   I am a big supporter of the male pill because it gives men control over when they will become parents.  It is also fair to women because it is unfair for them to be completely responsible for birth control.

2.       Domestic Violence:  

1.        The system is geared to automatically blame everything on men.  Some police and judges know the game and do a more thorough job.
2.      At least 70% of serious domestic violence involves substance abuse.  I believe this is the primary driver of DV.  When women are loaded, men usually get in trouble if she has even one mark on her body.  It is guilty until proven innocent:  men have to prove they were defending themselves – usually with audio or video evidence.  I coach guys to keep a small mp3 recorder on them or easily available to record altercations as evidence.  It works very well.  Motion sensing home surveillance cameras can be used, but this generates a lot of data and can be illegal as well.
3.       Paternity fraud is another form of social violence.  Many states still presume that any child born into a marriage is the product of the marriage and cannot be contested.  We have a double standard here: DNA testing can be used anytime to prove paternity – even 25 years down the road – but it usually cannot be used to not prove paternity

What kind of protections if any does your Government provide for men in distress?

•         None whatsoever.

What kind of social support do men in distress have in your country?

•         Nothing at the government level.  Fathers rights groups are dead here.  Feminists took them over on college campuses.  That project was executed in the 1990’s by Lenore Weizman. They established “Men’s Support Centers” at universities under the Department of Psychology that were extensions of the gay/lesbian rights centers. These groups were gay rights groups and discluded normal men.  Men such as myself who tried to organize men on college campuses were banned as “haters”.   

Note: Lenore was inventor of the myth that women’s income declines significantly after divorce.  That was debunked in Sanford Braver’s book “Divorced Dads, shattering the myths” after her “lost” research was found in a closet at the University of Maryland and found to be entirely phony.  This was used to shape the “Williams Model”, on which most states base child support.  The Williams model is deeply flawed because it allocates no living costs or expenses to the father, while preserving the standard of living for the entire household (which is alimony, not child support).  

•         Suicide, the corner bar, homeless shelters, and bankruptcy are the only social supports for men.   

What are the similarities and differences in issues faced by men in other cultures or countries that you are aware of?

•         Dr. Murray Straus, who was the lead researcher calling for federal Domestic Violence (DV) laws (which became the Violence Against Women Act), was shocked at the monocular approach of our DV laws as established by feminists.  Murray is an old friend of mine. He has done more studies on international DV and violence than anyone.  Here they are:

http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/ID-Sample-4-04.htm  Its all in the studies. Basically speaking: DV rates for men and women are very close in most countries, about 50/50.    False chivalry is everywhere in Western culture now.  English law that India essentially adopted put women on a Victorian pedestal, which is of course what feminists leverage when they add laws that blame men for everything.

What is your message for the world during Violence Against Men and Boys Awareness Month?

Good men must natively trust other men.  Without the cooperative brotherhood of mankind there are no protectors.  Feminists massively misuse chivalry to trick individual men into thinking they are good, but all other men are dangerous, and conscripting them to serve the feminist army destroying other men.  I call it an army because it has guns made of laws and pieces of paper that dismantle marriages, one at a time, behind closed doors.    

Men whose roles as fathers and husband have been destroyed often become social zombies.  Their assets are usually depleted.  They have no social role or proscript to fulfill in life.  There is often hate of government, distrust of women, and even religion because most religions do nothing to fight the feminist takeover.

Gandhi believed in unity.  Just as India won independence by uniting against the British, all men must stick together and fight for their rightful roles as husbands and fathers or be demolished one by one.  Married men who have high incomes and forward-looking corporations MUST fund pro-marriage policy organizations.  If they fail to do so, many of them will find their roles, businesses and money expropriated or taxed away to pay for exploding social problems, after which it is too late (which is now evident in the United States).

We can block feminist legislation only by having better policy than what feminists propose, and by having enough corporate financing to spread the message to legislators.  We cannot win as “men’s rights” activists.  This was tried in the U.S. for fifty years.  Fears about men’s wrongs always prevails because of the Titanic principle: “men must always go down with the ship”.  Battling alligators in the river is a loser.  We must drain the river and make them fight us on dry land where we have the advantage.  Sensible, honest public policy that gives all men and women what they want and need is impossible for feminists to fight.  Their policies do not give women what they really want and need.  Feminist policies lead only to poverty and having to “do it all” in urban areas full of de-socialized men. Our (pro-marriage) policies lead to contented wives, husbands, children, low taxes, and a good life in the large majority of cases.

I have said many times the feminism is the source of contemporary war.  From an aerial view, world conflict today is essentially an increasingly-violent clash between marriage-centric middle eastern nations that flatly reject feminist Marxism and stridently-feminist western nations that insist on forcing the feminist agenda on Muslim nations.  Muslim men and women are not about to let the West force or export feminism on them, which the West began doing in the early 1990’s.  This was done by dropping planeloads of U.N. feminists in conservative countries to tell them what to do.  This export program was in full swing by the time Hillary Clinton spoke at the 1995 Beijing Women’s Conference ( I was working in Chengdu, China at the time – her talk was soundly rejected by both students and academics at the University of Chengdu and in the media.).   

Wise countries such as Singapore, Saudi Arabia, and China block feminism at the border and on the internet.  Wise countries focus on making money while the West destroys its social fabric and spends itself into financial oblivion, while Muslim nations get bombed for sponsoring terrorism.   India would be wise to duplicate the East-Asian model.  If India fails to do so, we can predict increasing religious radicalism and terrorism in India.  Feminism is based on Marxist socialism, which will also destroy the economic fabric of India as it has in the West.  These changes will occur slowly over time in a way that is noticeable only by longitudinal scholars, who like in the West, will be ignored because “fighting terrorism” and propping up a sinking government will be the only thing that government and individuals have the bandwidth and money to handle.   

India’s men and women must unite to reject feminism.  Men’s rights, women’s rights, or other “inequality” only result in the downward spiral of war between the sexes, classes, and income groups.  Marxist theory knows that the best way to destroy a nation is to initiate class, sex, and economic warfare.  This machinery must be removed from India to prevail.

In the end, a socio-economic collapse in India would be worse than in the United States because India’s cities are so large.  Large cities can only survive when the vast majority of citizens are peaceful and productive.  Large unpopulated areas are the training grounds for terrorism.  Every disaffected man has little left to believe in – which is why terrorist organizations have been so successful signing up western men to act as suicide bombers.   

I say unequivocally that India’s survival as a peaceful and prosperous nation depends decisively on removing feminist activists and literature from the country and enacting pro-marriage policies such as what we have created in my organization.

Marriage is the only institution in the history of mankind and world religion that raises kids and supports families effectively.  Marriage is the cornerstone of religion, and religion is the house that marriage lives in.  It is our duty as men and women to protect marriage, the nation’s social fabric, and the sanctity of religion from the nuclear destruction that took place in the United States and much of Western Europe.   

I have a number of ranking conservative friends who believe it is too late to save the United States from collapse.  It is not too late for India.  

***