A breakdown of male and female voting patterns in the recent presidential elections in Austria which showed that 60 percent of women voted for the communist-Green—as opposed to 40 percent of men—has once again inflamed the women-haters of the alt-right movement.
This anti-female tendency is driven by an inability of many of its proponents to form relationships with women, an overreaction to the poison of feminism—and the increasing influence of homosexuals within the alt-right movement.
As detailed in the German Die Presse newspaper, a final analysis of the voting figures in the Austrian presidential election showed that 60 percent of men voted for the FPÖ, and 60 percent of women voted for the communist-Green candidate.
This differentiation provoked a storm on social media from the alt-right, which claimed that this was a reason “why women should not have the vote,” and similar suggestions.
However, this “argument” ignores the reality that 40 percent of men voted for the communist-Green candidate—and 40 percent of women voted for the FPÖ.
What this means is that although there is indeed a statistical difference in voting patterns, the differentiation is not enough to warrant an all-out attack on women by the “philosophers” of the alt-right.
In fact, there are many leading examples of women in Austria who have led the fight, both politically and socially, to save Austria from the Third Word. One prominent example is Barbara Rosenkranz, the FPÖ’s current Minister of Building Law and Animal Protection of the State of Lower Austria.
Rosenkranz was a member of the Parliament of Austria, the National Council, from 2002 to 2008, where she served as Chair of the Committee for Health Affairs, and was the FPÖ’s candidate for the Austrian presidential election in 2010, where she took 15.6 percent of the vote and came second.
In addition, Rosenkranz has contributed ten children to Austria, is critical of feminism, rejects homosexual marriage, and in her 2008 book Menschinnen: Gender Mainstreaming—Auf dem Weg zum geschlechtslosen Menschen (“Inside People: Gender Mainstreaming—The way to sexless people”), she argued that attempts to enforce artificial “equality” between the sexes in the face of their clearly differently defined biological roles—was the precursor to the destruction of the family unit.
Another leading FPÖ female politician is Susanne Winter. She served as chairman of the FPÖ in the district of Graz Straßgang, and later as leader of the party in Graz and was a leading candidate during the Graz municipal election of 2008, where she was elected as a councillor.
As a Member of Parliament, she served as FPÖ environmental spokesman, where she described climate change” as “lies and ideological pseudoscience.” Her outspoken comments continued, even in the face of threatened legal action by the state after she refused to distance herself from someone who called the holocaust into question.
Her remarks on Islam riled opponents even further. In 2008, she became one of the first Austrian politicians to warn of child sex abuse by Muslim men—a warning which has been completely vindicated by later events, most notably the series of sex attacks by nonwhite invaders upon children in public baths in Austria.
For these and other comments, Winter was charged by the Austrian state and convicted for “hate crimes” in 2009, being fined €24,000 and sentenced to a conditional imprisonment of three months for “incitement and denigration of religious teachings.”
Finally, when Winter made a Facebook post in October 2015 saying “nice, you took the words out of my mouth” in response to another person’s assertion that “Zionist money Jews” were to blame for the “refugee crisis,” she had to resign from the FPÖ during the resultant uproar. She still however sits in parliament.
To suggest, as the armchair alt-right critics do, that women like Barbara Rosenkranz and Susanne Winter—and the 40 percent of Austrian women who voted for the FPÖ in May 2016—are somehow inferior, or do not contribute to the political struggle to save Europe, is therefore a baseless lie.
What could be the cause of this women-hatred amongst the alt-right? The fact that it is primarily a phenomenon of the American alt-right provides the first clue.
Among the leaders of the American alt-right, pitifully few are married or in any sort of lasting relationship with any woman—and most are childless.
This inability to form any sort of stable relationship unquestionably leads to suppressed resentment, which manifests itself—like any suppressed strong emotion—in passive aggressiveness.
Finally, the appearance—and elevation to “leadership” status—of open homosexuals and promoters of homosexuality among the alt-right must also play a significant role in infusing the “movement” with women-hatred.
For example, the regular appearance of homosexual speakers and writers such as Jack Donovan, James O’Meara, and Greg Johnson (the latter from the heavily-promoted “Counter Currents” publishing organization), has now become so commonplace that it barely even raises an eyebrow anymore.
Just how far homosexuality has infiltrated the alt-right movement can be seen from Johnson’s open promotion of it on his blog. For example, he once wrote that “intolerance of homosexuality is Jewish” (“Homosexuality & White Nationalism”); and that homosexuals “can and do make our movement stronger” (“Gay Panic on the Alt Right”).
Johnson’s earlier promotion of homosexual marriage is also widely known but seems to be largely ignored among the alt-right.
It can thus be seen that the female-hatred which seems so endemic in the American alt-right not only denigrates all the brave women who have sacrificed so much in the ongoing political struggle, but also ignores reality.
The lack of consistency in the women-haters’ “reasoning” is laid bare when the Austrian voting figures are soberly evaluated. In particular, the fact that some 40 percent of men voted for the communist-Green candidate, is a reality on which the women-hating alt-right is mysteriously silent.
The reasons for this, as outlined above, are deeper and darker than what first meets the eye—and well worth reevaluation by anybody who has been taken in by this irrational propaganda.