The goal of women's studies is to train students to become human viruses that infect and disrupt other fields

Yup. That's what they do, and the infection process is called "converging" the organization.

Like any disease, after the initial rush of sickness, resistance develops. There are already plenty of organizations working against this. For example, by not hiring anyone who has PC credentials.

The Marines and soldiers call those sneaky fuckers "Jody".

http://www.army-cadence.com/who-is-jody-anyway/

I think you are wrong on the sneaky theory. It is an example of mistraining. Boys are repeatedly told and indoctrinated that feminism is the only appropriate behavior. For some people the indoctrination works. That they become unable to mate and pass on their genes is irrelevant. Feminism as a whole has a lower birth rate on both the male and female side. It is an ideology that requires conversion of outsiders. Hence it's desperate need to control education institutions. Without that indoctrination resource the ideology will die out within a few generations.

Sorry, but this -- "It is an ideology that requires conversion of outsiders" -- does not explain an individual man's reason for becoming a male feminist.

See Tinbergen's Four Questions for judging behavior through an evolutionary lens.

http://www.reed.edu/biology/courses/BIO342/2015_syllabus/2014_WEBSITES/khsite/tinenbergen.html

The first time I went to college, early eighties, one of my classmates announced that he was a Male Feminist. He was dating an actual Female Feminist, and it was probably a condition from her that he be a Feminist.

I took him aside one day and said, "Dude. There is no pussy that good."

It doesn't surprise me. A number of the 1960s anti-war protesters have since said that they took part in the protests not because they cared about the cause one way or the other, but because it made them popular with the girls on campus.

"Dude. There is no pussy that good."

✅

The Sneaky fuckers strategy can also be found in Chinook Salmons.

The biggest, baddest males leave the rivers and return years later as these lusciously tasty 20+ pound beasts.

The wimpy ones however, stay at the river and remain as Minijacks, which are the fish version of the human manlets. They just sneak between the male and the female during sex during spawning and puff their tiny clouds of sperm over the eggs and achieve reproductive success.

I think Amy and Ben are both partially right.

I think the BEHAVIOR, is a mix of sneaky fucks and genuinely indoctrinated shmucks.

But those who assume the label are probably fucks with a few genuinely brainwashed victims

Women in general, but feminists in particular, try to train men out of their manliness. They try to civilize them, make them put the toilet seat down, pick up their dirty clothes, not pick their nose in public, not burp around other people. Most wives never totally succeed in this. But when they succeed and convert their hubby/boyfriend into a beta, they aren't happy and dump him.

They try to civilize them, make them put the toilet seat down, pick up their dirty clothes, not pick their nose in public, not burp around other people. Most wives never totally succeed in this. But when they succeed and convert their hubby/boyfriend into a beta, they aren't happy and dump him.

An endless series of shit tests. Most men fare well, but some "pass" and end up alone.

I dunno about the 60s protestors. The campus left had a number of characteristics.
one of them was that women who took care for their looks were frivolous, unserious, useless, to be viewed with contempt and derision.
Whatever the protestor guys thought they needed to say--I worked with some--they lusted after sorority row. Which meant they wanted to screw women they were supposed to despise. Toxic brew.
And the left selected against mesomorphs. Generally weedy pencilnecks and women who were making a statement by going out of their way to show frump.

12-20 years of indoctrination does explain individual male behavior Amy. You can get a good portion of the populace to spout utter nonsense just because you repeated it to them year after year after year. That the ideology requires conversion and cannot generate a next generation on its own is why feminism has such a love of indoctrination and is so powerful in educational establishments. If it wasn't running the education system and heavily indoctrinating other people's children then the movement would have died out by now. It just doesn't generate enough young people on its own.

Also, there is no evolutionary analysis when there is only one generation. You need multiple generations with the same behavior. If there is only one generation and it largely fails to reproduce that is just an evolutionary dead end. A mutation happened and that branch is pruned from the gene pool.

What really is the 'male feminist' reproduction rate?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNF8n9DpJT4 11:26

Psychologist Jordan Peterson discusses the male dominance hierarchy with Joe Rogan. Peterson talks about how that hierarchy came about and that women use it to select mates. At the end, how beta males create mating opportunities by supporting feminists.

The entire interview is interesting. Jump to 5:30 for the hierarchy part.

Nice people look for nice people to mate with (long term)
Alphas are fun but unreliable
Male Feminism?
All men are liars
Shhh don't tell

I'm not sure I quite agree.

Women have far more social power than men (not power over society, but the power to wield the social group in their favour). If someone is fairly low in the male hierarchy, they really can't afford to fall foul of the women and will often ally themselves with the women for protection. Also, if a man spends the vast majority of his life in contexts where many women are, he cannot risk hurting their sensitivities as they will turn on him and turn other men on him. It is less a mating strategy than a social strategy.

Feminism is primarily what happens when the white lies that pander to women's sensitivities harden into a totalizing ideology. It is like the difference between telling your friend that her ugly baby is cute and using that ugly baby as the basis for a new theory of aesthetics.

Male feminists are generally men without social breathing room, whose sociality is thoroughly monitored by women and who would be in great danger if women cut them off. The adoption of feminism can occur when it becomes easier to give in to the bullshit than to live with the cognitive dissonance of knowingly affirming falsehoods most of the time. The best way to overcome male feminism is by providing its victims with robust male sociality.

As a mating strategy it is generally poor. The male feminist is primarily seeking the protection or non-aggression of women. He will typically end up as the nondescript nice guy, who fits in with female sociality, but is not a desirable mate.

There is, however, the possibility to be a vocal male advocate and ally. Such a man turns on his own sex and, enjoying the social protection of women, validates all of their beliefs and tells them exactly what they want to hear as the chivalrous champion of womanhood (while pretending merely to be affirming women's own strength). However, as he exhibits some minimal traits of manliness, showing some element of courage in challenging other men and protectiveness towards women, many women can find him very attractive. Men who ally themselves with women against other men often turn out to be taking advantage of the women who come to them for protection and advocacy. There seems to be something dangerously intoxicating about the sort of praise such a man gets as the all-affirming hero of women.