Skip to main content

The Cult Of Female Supremacy

  • Author:
  • Updated date:

My General Opinion On Female Supremacy And Female Superiority

“Hey Ryan what is your opinion on female supremacy. I came across a page on here from a female supremacist she says she envisions a world where the gender roles are rightly reversed.”

I have seen enough garbage written about the cult (A woman’s words in describing it not mine, although it seems apt) of female supremacy on the internet and HubPages itself, to warrant writing a Hub about it. Especially considering that children, particularly boys, might read about this nonsense. Hubpages is after all meant to be a non-pornographic public website. Definitions vary somewhat among those that follow it. But generally speaking female supremacy is predominantly conveyed as the belief that society and relationships should be ruled by women on the false premise that women are inherently superior to men or are of greater value or worth (neither gender is superior, more valauble etc). BDSM is frequently involved or referred to and their future vision of society usually entails men being reduced to slavery, enforced servitude or some lower social class under a matriarchal system.

Now many of us might think this is all a fantasy to these people. I wish this were true and then I wouldn't really care. It is not! They want their fantasy to become a worldwide reality and all of society to join in even if they don't want to. It does not matter to these people what everyone else wants. In short, my opinion of female supremacy is that it is a paraphilia. The sexually dominant women involved, are abusing their power to exploit vulnerable submissive men. These women are nothing more than delusional sociopaths. In fact I am yet to find someone practicing this faulty belief system that is not causing harm to anyone, including to themselves.

The difference between a healthy fetish, kink or BDSM lifestyle and harmful behaviours and thoughts is very fine indeed. Hence the prevalence of the philosophies of, “safe, sane and consensual” and "risk aware consensual kink" among the sensible majority of the BDSM community. The distinction I make between healthy BDSM or kink and female supremacy, is that female supremacy is very likely at some stage to cause significant distress or harm to those promoting it or other uninvolved non-consenting people. This includes children. Female supremacy is likely at some point to impair peoples ability to go about their daily life and maintain their mental and physical health. Female supremacists can dismiss the psychology of mental illness or pose as quack psychologists on the internet all they like. The simple fact of the matter is that the dangers in their delusion are self evident to anyone with a critical eye.

Yes I am aware of the person this commentator speaks of and no I have not wasted my time contacting her and communicating with her. The only thing I have done is flag her Hubs. I note another Ryan responded to her in one of the Hubs, rest assured my criticism of her beliefs is far more comprehensive than that simplistic rebuttal. I would strongly discourage people from visiting her Hubs and providing her with attention, even if it is negative. Hence I will not name this individual (it is not Lucy83 on Hub Pages, it is someone else and that is all I will say). She seems innocent enough on the outside and is a real wolf in sheep’s clothing. Indeed I would not put it past her to cover her tracks should she read this article. Not to worry, I have anticipated that. Initially she puts on a veneer of innocence and then gradually starts to incorporate talk in her Hubs, Hub profile and associated commentary of male disposability, her desire for women to rule over men and enforce servitude on them and arguments about the inferior value of men’s lives. It is at this point that alarm bells started to ring. I felt that her reframing tactics and man hating remarks in response to a person by the name of Patrick in the commentary box of one of her Hubs, was very revealing regarding the type of person that she is. To put it simply she has the mindset of a bigot.

Visiting her website (the parts that were publicly viewable at least) and public blog confirmed my initial concerns. She literally wants to treat men as dogs, regards men as disposable creatures, calls men subhuman, goes on about the ways in which men's lives are of less value than women's, how women should rightfully rule over men and how she desires men in future society to be confined to a life of servitude to women. The personal freedom of men is of course irrelevant. I could go on and on of course but why bother. The person I am referring to is one step away from a mental asylum. She clearly can no longer tell the difference between sexual fantasy and reality. I think she would regard this Hub as disinformation, which she conveniently calls any form of criticism laid against her. But frankly anyone with reasonable intelligence can see her for what she is and the fallacies in her belief system are self evident to anyone with a critical mind.

Nonetheless she has company. Hence why I am writing this article. One has to only google female superiority, to see the plethora of blogs, websites and articles dedicated to the subject. None of this would bother me except that there are men being psychologically abused and brainwashed by these women. Some of these men are boys. In an effort to understand their submissive nature and their quest for answers, these men have been fooled into explaining it all away with female superiority. Likewise so have some sexually dominant women. A minority of deluded women and men are taking advantage of curious men and women looking to explain their sexuality and have fooled them into adopting a belief in female supremacy. That makes me mad and I will systematically eradicate this delusional belief system once and for all.

I will address this in two parts. Firstly I will go over the moral argument against female supremacy, which I think on it’s own is enough to throw it in the trash basket. In a second article (linked here), I will address the many scientific flaws, misrepresentations, myths and fallacies behind this belief system. Being a former molecular biologist myself and still having a wide access to scientific journals has helped immensely.

Scroll to Continue

The Moral Argument

Firstly the dignity of a human being whether they be a man or a woman, comes from the unique qualities of human consciousness that we all share and the individuality of that consciousness. We do not regard the life of a dog as equivalent to the life of a man or a women, because we understand that the unique elements of human consciousness are far beyond the mind of a dog. Even so we regard the consciousness of a dog to be complex enough to grant the dog certain rights, which we do not believe an amoeba or bacterium is worthy of (Hence the RSPCA). The minimum qualities of human consciousness upon which we base human rights and human dignity, are present in all men and women. In addition to this, no one on this planet has the same consciousness as another person. Therefore each one of us is irreplaceable. These two tenets are the basis of human dignity, human rights, the immeasurable value of each unique mind and the unconditional love between human beings. They are why we regard the value of every human life as equal, regardless of race, gender, age and so forth. Indeed this is the position of the United Nations and most governments.

There have been people in history like Adolf Hitler, that have made the mistake of thinking that we can measure the worth of a human life on ones abilities. It was this twisted reasoning that was used to justify the euthanasia of the mentally and physically disabled in Nazi Germany. People like the female supremacist mentioned, seem to believe they have nothing in common with Hitler. Her justification is that because her reasoning is based on evidence and not racist myths (That Jews are subhuman) it is somehow more appropriate. Facepalm.

Using that same logic we could argue that the lives of people that have an IQ above 140, are of more value than people that have an IQ of 100 or someone that is mentally disabled. Or perhaps we should treat those with genetic disorders with less dignity than healthy people? Attaching a person’s capabilities to their inherent dignity is immoral and has historically led to genocide, eugenics and oppression. Differences in intelligence (as commonly measured by IQ) between people are provable and there is evidence that demonstrates such differences exist (in fact the average difference in intelligence between strangers is 17 IQ points). The quality of the evidence does not mean the underlying belief system it supposedly supports is suddenly justified or acceptable. The principle(s), rationale and perceptual framework that a person uses to judge and derive meaning from that evidence is just as important.

I do not believe that one individual has the right to suspend another person's freedoms simply because they are more intelligent, genetically healthier, fitter, stronger or can multi-task better. I don’t believe that having superior abilities gives a person the right to rule over another person without their permission or to confine them to a life of servitude. I don’t believe a person should treat another person with less respect or dignity, just because that person has inferior abilities in some way. The reason I do not think that way is because I have a conscience and an underlying set of moral instincts which I follow.

Without such moral instincts, the human race would not have survived for the length of time that it has. Our moral compass helped develop and reinforce the social cohesion that has been essential in keeping our communities together under the most extreme of conditions. Indeed studies on babies as young as 6 months of age, have demonstrated that we have an innate moral code. We have mirror neurons for a reason and our brain is not completely concerned with just sex and our own individual survival.

This female supremacist and women like her, show a profound lack of empathy for men and the perception of a sociopath. If she had her way, which she never would for reasons I hope are obvious to people, society would collapse in a matter of weeks (possibly days). There is a real chance it might even turn into an unforgiving bloodbath as oppressed and abused men and boys rise up.

It is of great concern to me that she effectively treats moral argument as irrelevant to discussing female supremacy over men in her commentary. She even seems to think that by suggesting that the aggregate worth of men is less than the worth of women (purely on sex differences), she is not talking about the worth of a "person" (whether they happen to be male or female). Who is she trying to fool here? So if I say black people have less aggregate worth than white people, that is not meant to be taken personally by a black person? That statement has no personal relevance to a black person at all? That statement won't influence how people treat an individual black person when they see them or their attitude toward them? Riiiiiiiight....

She even has the audacity to recommend to Patrick that he stop looking at BDSM sites to understand female supremacy and female leadership. She runs a BDSM site herself and she has the arrogance to say that. Wow, just wow! Not to mention the fact that the vast majority of female supremacists are involved in BDSM, specifically female domination (to all those sane people that practice female domination safely and have nothing to do with female supremacy, you do not share their shame). Again simply googling "female superiority" or "female supremacy" will bring up a ton of BDSM websites.

I don’t really care what people do in their bedroom or what relationship they have. However if someone is going to get hurt whether it be someone in the relationship or someone outside of the relationship, then I have a problem. Justifying the imposition of your lifestyle and beliefs on a non-consenting general population is insane. When I hear “advice” from other female supremacists to share their worldview of female supremacy with their young son’s and daughters I take notice. That is clearly psychological abuse, even without acts of BDSM. Some take it further and do reportedly involve their children in acts of BDSM. One teenage boy I read about, almost beat his mother to death for what she had done to him (humiliating sadomasochistic acts) and has little or no relationship left with his sister, who was encouraged to participate in sexually abusing her brother. Acting purely on sexual instinct without a moral compass can get real bad, real quick. Female supremacists can justify their beliefs all they like, but at the end of the day the only people they are fooling are themselves.

Unfortunately given the plethora of loopy people that seem to want to share their twisted views on female superiority, I will be disabling my commentary for my Hubs on this subject. My apologies for doing so, but frankly given what I have seen unfold on other Hubs that have discussed this issue, I think I would be doing people a massive favor. Most women want nothing to do with this belief. One girl I came across called it a cult, the belief system cruel and one of the female supremacists in question the antithesis of Freud. Most sexually dominant women deplore the ideology as well and quite a few have spoken up against it, including on men's rights websites. Female domination and female supremacy are not the same thing. Female domination (like male domination) is an elaborate role play where there is mutual respect and concern for each others well-being and desires. There is no mutual respect or concern in female supremacy. Female supremacy is a one way street of exploitation based on the self-serving and false rationale that women are superior to men. Female supremacy is not even remotely close to the symbiotic and loving relationship between men and women. It is it's polar opposite.

Related Articles