Save for the historical distance and the historical differences between then and now, one would not need to force the imagination to believe it was about Cuomo that, back toward the end of the nineteenth century in Germany, a well-renown philosopher there categorized as “male asses” all types of male feminists, which you will notice, is a contradiction in terms. In true, however, male gorilla monkeys would be a more specific name for the type of male ass Cuomo turned out to be.
Just like the male gorilla, the male feminist loves nothing more than to surround himself with females and will at no time be spotted but with a retinue of them hanging out around him. Although a gorilla, he is in his own way ever full of gallantry toward them, and he picks and reserves for them the choicest leaves and fruits, and he is ever alert and full of attention and watches over them with animal zealotry and threatening jealousy. But none of this he does disinterestedly; in every favor and gift he bestows on his retinues of females there is a catch. Everything the male gorilla does for them, he does it for himself. That he wants to hold them in his debt is clear, but above all he wants to keep them from becoming indebted to any other male gorilla and to keep him off base, and at the same time to guarantee that he is the only one his female retinue can depend on. But that is not all. All the attention, the watching-over, the deference, and the pride of place that he confers over them is to make sure he can always do and have them as he pleases without expecting refusal or retaliation, since it is difficult to deny something to whom you have learned to depend on.
And so it goes with the male feminist. In his case—but this is essentially one and the same case as above—under different conditions. The male feminist also loves nothing more than knowing himself surrounded by women. To guarantee that, he is ever complacent, obliging, accommodating, and kowtowing towards them even more than they might deem necessary. If he has, or when he acquires political or another form of power, for the exclusive benefit of women, he acts as to make being around them as hard and ill-fated for other men as it is favorable to him. Thus, he makes sure there is nobody else around whom women can gravitate to, while doing the possible as well as the impossible to make himself reliable and worth depending on. To this end it is that the male feminist not only gives women everything they want and ask; he gives them even more than they ask for or need. So, in this he goes even farther than his jungle counterpart, whose means and resources are abundant but precisely in low demand. But do not let this slight difference deceive you. If he gives women more than they ask for and even more, is so that he can see himself as he wants them to see him: as their man.
That is the political, civilized equivalent of the gorilla’s way. But the gorilla’s strategy is to make more and more females gravitate toward him and away from other male gorillas; what the ass-male feminist seeks on the other hand is maneuvering room and plausible deniability in case it is needed; for he will need it but does not know it. Not that he would take no pleasure in seeing his female fandom grow. But as explained above, each has their own way to accomplish that.
Still, if the male gorilla often beats to death other males, he does it not only to prove he is the strongest and therefore the one all females can rely on, having scared off the competition; he also does it so that his retinue of females see what he is capable of, and that there is no saying no to him, or else. For his part, feeling himself secure, feeling himself above reproach but also irreproachable, having done so much good to his “victims,” the ass-male feminist takes care to ruin it for other males.
Yet here the only important difference arises between the male gorilla and his male feminist counterparts. The psychology of female mammals being essentially the same, their abilities and the world in which they operate are not. And while the mechanism of power and control of the gorilla over his females are wired onto himself, as is their fear and defensive resources, that is the exact opposite in the human world─ the world of offices, open and closed-door meetings, dealings and double-dealings, bylaws, procedurals, processes, investigation commissions, political ambitions, and back-stabbings. So, it is to women, not to the gorilla’s female retinue, to whom ample opportunities are given to learn how to handle the power mechanisms invented by men, which they would steadfastly turn on them when the opportunity is there, and when their benefactors least expect it.
It is in that world that Cuomo operated, archetype of the male feminist assiness that he is. And it is in this civilized jungle of politics that he did what he did to shoot himself in his dick. That has all to do with the extent he went to make the sexual harassment law for the state of New York far more stringent and tighter than in any other state, and more so even than it is conceived and applied at the federal level. But he did not just limit that only to the workplace; under his direction the law became almost draconian in prosecuting sexual “harassment” everywhere in the public space, too. As anyone who has taken the time to analyze the federal harassment law, behind its veneer of impartiality with respect to the sexes, such law is in practice an instrument for the legal retaliation by feminists of both sexes against heterosexual men. And that is so both if men hold any position of authority or power, or if they are just coworkers anywhere where there are female employees, and whether they directly incur in sex-related conduct or are simple bystanders or impartial witness to such conduct by other men.
Furthermore, the law essentially targets heterosexual men whether they are denounced by an alleged victim of such conduct, or by someone else not directly or indirectly involved in the incident. So, behind its mask on impartiality the law is indeed a Procrustean instrument of feminist revenge against male heterosexuality, from where men can hardly escape, as it was designed for setting female sexuality as the ruling principle around the office. You would know that is indeed the case if, when studying the law, you notice that a) only the female sexuality and the psychosexuality of women get taken into consideration therein in concluding what is “harassing” in the conduct or ways of men to women, but not the other way around. Thus, the law implicitly defines harassment as something potentially inherent to men’s sexuality. That is its foundational bias. And b) you would also notice that the law strips the meaning the word “harassment” has in the common use of the language, and substitutes for it a meaning according to the law itself. Thus, the law recreates as a crime what could reasonably be interpreted as just an ethical violation. The law creates the crime it was set up to prosecute. And lastly, c) you would also notice that nowhere does the law discuss or explain what “harassment” itself is, apart from the notion the law itself assigns to it. Study it, and soon into it you will realize the law is not more than an instrument to keep men’s authority and power in check around the workplace, and thus an instrument of sexual revenge, with articles arranged so that men have no way to win over an accuser.
Then, along came Cuomo, and gorillized things even more. What did he do? First, whereas the federal harassment law applies only to business with fifteen employees and upward, Mr. Cuomo decided that even businesses with one employee are subject to the state of New York’s version of the law. Second, whereas at the federal level a woman claiming sexual harassment is advised to first file a complaint with her immediate supervisor, and only after that proceed to higher authorities if the issue is not resolved there or the unwanted behavior continues, Cuomo changed that to allow an alleged victim to skip her supervisors and file her complaint directly with the New York State Division of Human Rights. Third, whereas the federal harassment law places a status of limitation of one year for an alleged victim to file a complaint, Cuomo extended that limit by a full two years, to three. Fourth, whereas at the federal level the law states requires that, to constitute “harassment,” other female employees should, even if only potentially, be negatively affected by any administrative decision on behalf of a woman as inducement for sexual favors, in Cuomo’s version of the law that is not necessary. Which means that a man is subject of the law if there are alleged “victims,” and the same if there are none. That is, the same woman who receives an incentive in exchange for sexual favors can proceed to file a complaint on behalf of other women negatively affected by the benefits she accepted in the exchange. And fifth, at the federal level to constitute “harassment” a man’s conduct toward a woman, besides being unwelcome, must either be persistent or serious enough to bring about a “hostile work environment,” however that is defined. But not so in the Cuomo reissuing of the law; in his sexual harassment law one strike, regardless the seriousness or lack thereof of an incident, and you are out.
The question then is why did he have to push it that far and hard on men? The answer: because he wrongly envisioned that, having him given women far more than they asked for, they would spare him as a reward for having fashioned a version of the law that effectively places all other men but himself under feminist’s thumb. But also, and more importantly, he did it because by demonstrating such resolve in going after the “harassers,” he wanted to avert fingers pointing at him. For, who would ever believe, he reasoned as a gorilla might, that someone like him, who has shown so much feminist determination to go after other men, could himself be a violator of his own law, since he knows the consequences far too well? Thus did the former Governor gorillize the workplace into a civilized jungle, attempting to place himself above suspicion. Never could have it dawn on him that by making things harder for other men by potentially placing their jobs and sexuality under the purview of feministic politics he was eventually to shoot himself in his dick.
Them being asses, male feminists understand little of female psychology, and of the feminine ways. The pleasure they take in being surrounded by the women they seek to seduce but whom they feign to protect from other men, prevents their acquiring the meaningful knowledge that could help them protect themselves from feminism. That is their irony. Of this, Mr. Cuomo is a starry example; for he would have still been the New York state Governor had he not altered the federal sexual harassing law to give women more than they asked for when radical feminists first wrote this law on their own behalf, with the approval of other feminist asses like himself. Ass male feminists are serial lady’s men with a permanent boner pretending otherwise. Just look at Clinton or Biden, or at Trump─ an ass male feminist by another name.
It is to their own regret that they prefer to have around the office women in tight pants or short-skirted, deep-low cleavage, on high heels, and crimson lipsticks, or the equivalent thereof. For that always leads to their downfall. One would have expected them to know that what so turns them on in this picture; that what gets their rocks off but keeps them from landing, giving them blue balls instead, is how sexually harassment is experienced by heterosexual men─ in the public space as well. Yet, against their own experience, male feminists pretend not to know that neither of the two sexes have a monopoly on “harassing” feelings. The male feminist is because of this the lowest type of man; for he is self-hateful out of a love for women that is not even real. But one way or another, this type of man always ends up shooting himself in his dick.