Three personal consequences of society’s addiction to female victimhood | HBR Talk 207


Remember that twitter conversation I talked about a couple of weeks ago when we were looking at the end of that dating advice article from the gold-digger forum?

Oh. My. Giddy. Aunt. Sally.

If you want to see just how off the rails an unstable woman can get, tell her that her right to control her own body comes with a responsibility to control her own body, and then stand your ground in the face of every anti-accountability argument she makes.

The resulting display of high-effort hypoagency will be very entertaining. There will be weeping, and gnashing of teeth… logical contortion and other mental gymnastics that would put even all-time-record-setting oppression olympians to shame, tag-team damseling, psychotic breakdancing, all ending in a spectacular pyrotechnic tantrum.

But it’s just an argument on social media, right? How could something like this even be worth talking about when there are real issues, current events to cover, disadvantages to talk about, and powerful politicians to criticize? Should we really be focusing on this when new anti-male law and policy is being created?

Yes. We absolutely have to, in fact. 

This isn’t just a few women on social media. This conversation revealed a prevailing social attitude, one that is foundational to our society’s readiness to discriminate against men and boys for the purported benefit of women and girls. 

Of course, I’m talking about the accountability gap, an immeasurable gap in societal expectations for personal accountability regarding one’s own welfare, one’s chosen responsibilities, and the consequences of one’s personal choices, depending on the sex of the individual. I’ve had a lot to say about that, most of which can be summed up by comparing the phenomenon to western society having metaphorically cut women’s legs off, strapped their legless bodies to men’s backs, expected that to result in equal outcomes between the sexes, and accused men of oppressing women whenever it doesn’t. However, this isn’t just about that gap. It’s about how gynocentric responses to social issues prop that gap wide open.

When confronted with evidence of its existence, gynocentric women display a deep, almost innate sense of entitlement to maintain it. They don’t even necessarily have to be feminists, as gynocentrism also underpins the way gender-roles are defined within traditional, conservative religious values. In fact, it underpins the entire relationship between men and women throughout recorded history, regardless of feminism’s belief in systemic misogyny and oppression.

To protect their precious double standard, these women will abandon their personal agency, recoiling from it in visceral horror when confronted with any evidence of female power, and then begin taking steps to eliminate the threat to their status as unquestionably immaculate, virtuous, magisterial beings. They will sound the alarm, rally their gynocentric grassroots, and strive to drown out any advocacy for a gender-equal standard of accountability. They will appeal to authorities to silence any discussion of disapproved ideas, striving even to quash majority views using application of policy as a substitute for logic and reason. This is where efforts to make anti-male discrimination into law and policy, and opposition to any reform effort aimed at bringing about gender-neutrality in our systems, gather their steam. If we want to appeal to legislators and policy makers in regard to issues pertaining to men and boys, this social phenomenon is one of our major obstacles.  

To overcome it, we have to be able to dismantle it, and to figure out how to do that, we have to examine it. A physician cannot know what medicine to prescribe unless he first correctly diagnoses the disease.

If feminism is cancer, this underlying gynocentric addiction to the accountability gap is the virus that feeds it. In fact, you could say it’s the most damaging social disease humanity has ever faced.

This week, HBR Talk will unmask gynocentric female hypoagency addiction, a fundamental social underpinning of our society’s gender gap in personal accountability, through examination of its manifestation in a large, heated social media brawl. The discussion streams on multiple platforms. You can tune in to the youtube livestream on Thursday at 7:30PM EST, or find other listening options on

Opening Monologue transcript

Want more?

Support the badgers:

Patreon us on patreon:

Subscribe to us on minds

Follow us on twitter!

Join our Facebook group!

Watch us on twitch!

Brian –

Max Derrat –

Hannah –

Prim Reaper –

Karen –

Alison –

Anna –

Mike –

Aydin –

Deborah Powney –

Hannah Wallen
Facebooktwitterredditpinterestmailby feather

About the author

Hannah Wallen

Hannah has witnessed women's use of criminal and family courts to abuse men in five different counties, and began writing after she saw one man's ordeal drag on for seven years, continuing even when authorities had substantial evidence that the accuser was gaming the system. She is the author of Breaking the Glasses, written from an anti-feminist perspective, with a focus on men's rights and sometimes social issues. Breaking the Glasses refers to breaking down the "ism" filters through which people view the world, replacing thought in terms of political rhetoric with an exploration of the human condition and human interactions without regard to dogmatic belief systems. She has a youtube channel (also called Breaking the Glasses), and has also written for A Voice For Men and Genderratic. Hannah's work can be supported at

By Hannah Wallen

Listen to Honey Badger Radio!

Support Alison, Brian and Hannah creating HBR Content!

Recent Posts

Recent Comments





Follow Us

Facebooktwitterrssyoutubeby feather