STEPHEN COUGHLIN: the objective of feminism is the destruction of families.

the "Open Marriage" narrative designed to liquify relationships. --Stephen Coughlin

As you watch the video clip below, one of many suddenly appearing in unison, consider this question, and do so in a dialectical frame. Is the clip a rejection of the Intersectional "Me Too" active measure, which was directed at (primarily young) women, or is it a purposefully… https://t.co/b8CoOiirj9 pic.twitter.com/fgmaqgKwTq

— Stephen Coughlin (@S_Coughlin_DC) March 27, 2026

As you watch the video clip below, one of many suddenly appearing in unison, consider this question, and do so in a dialectical frame. Is the clip a rejection of the Intersectional "Me Too" active measure, which was directed at (primarily young) women, or is it a purposefully planned continuation of it, directed at (primarily young) men? Recollect that, whether Plato (in The Republic), or de Sade (in Juliette), or Engels, or NOW in the 60s, or DSA today, the objective of feminism is the destruction of families. (While this point is terribly easy to prove, just watch the blowback.) Was the (real) objective of the "Me Too" movement to "empower" women or to antagonize men? Notice the trajectory of the supporting narratives, the Karen narratives that will become intersectional, and the "Open Marriage" narrative designed to liquify relationships. As one checks out the "Manly Mentor" clip, because it is such a foreseeable outcome to the prior narratives, is it a continuation or rejection of the "Me Too?" Then, as you ponder your answer, does it have the effect of making marriageable men reconsider the value proposition of a marital relationship? Is it a coincidence that this type of video to men comes out on social media at the same time we see a parallel explosion on social media of seemingly weak Christian men marrying porn stars? Could that make a reasonable young man ponder, "Do I really want this?" I picked this video clip, but could have chosen any number of them from just today. In dialectical attacks, those running them control both sides of the equation.