Michelle Obama Typifies the American Government’s Female Chauvinism

An education conference was recently held in New York City. The audience consisted of about 1,000 adolescent girls.  Michelle Obama was the conference's star speaker.  During her speech, she implored female students to invest in their education so they can "Compete with the boys. Beat the boys,". She also touted the work she and the president are doing through the “Let Girls Learn” initiative.

Her idea that boys should be beaten rather than educated reflects the narrow minded female chauvinist mentality that exists within the U.S. government today. Girls attend college at a much higher rate than boys. A 2010 study by Reach Advisors LLC. concluded single women aged 22-30 outearn their male counterparts of  the same age group in most U.S. cities. Reach Advisors cited college education as the main reason for the gender pay gap. Significantly more women than men earn  degrees. Yet, rather than encouraging all teenagers - including boys - to invest in their education, the only idea presented by the buffoon first lady was for girls to beat the boys in education. The first lady feels boys education is irrelevant to the country.

Additionally, the "Let Girls Learn" program, touted by the first lady helps foreign girls worldwide obtain a quality education. Thus, this administration puts more effort and initiative into educating foreign girls than it does in educating American boys. Likewise, the first lady’s program denies education assistance to foreign  boys - further emphasizing her sexist mindset. Education programs should be open to anyone willing to learn.

Michelle Obama is a female chauvinist (ie feminist) nitwit. Her mentality symbolizes the narrow-mindedness within the Unites States administration today.

October 13, 2015

Study: Women Do Not Initiate Most Relationship Breakups

Sociologists have consistently and continuously claimed men are happy in relationships with women. They contend most relationship breakups - particularly marital divorce -  are the result of women's unhappiness and dissatisfaction. Therefore, according to sociologists,  men should cater more to women's wishes so that relationships will remain  healthy and intact.

However, a recent US study disproves this propaganda. Researcher Michael Rosenfeld discovered women are no more likely than men to initiate breakups in non marital relationships.  This is true even for non married couples that live together. Females initiate the majority of breakups only in marriages.

Rosenfeld, sociologist at Stanford University stated   "The breakups of nonmarital  heterosexual relationships in the U.S. are quite gender-neutral and fairly egalitarian. 'This was a  surprise because the only prior research that had been done on who wanted the breakup was research on marital divorces." He said "I assumed, and I think other scholars assumed, that women's role in breakups was an essential attribute of heterosexual relationships, but it turns out that  women's role in initiating breakups is unique to heterosexual marriage".

However when trying to explain his "surprise" findings he fell back on feminist ideology. "It's possible that women report lower levels [of happiness] because they  experience heterosexual marriage as constraining, oppressive, uncomfortable and controlling" Rosenfeld said. He continued "Researchers have examined the unequal power  dynamic present in many American heterosexual marriages. For instance, American women are usually younger than their husbands, earn less money and often take their  husband's last name".

Why is it oppressive if the husband is older than the wife? How come men with older wives are not considered oppressed? Also, American women are also usually younger than their boyfriends in unmarred cohabitating couples yet Rosenfeld's own study concluded this did not negatively impact the girlfriend's happiness. Therefore Rosenfields statement is complete nonsense. Additionally, marriages where husbands outearn their wives are not more  likely to breakup. In fact, there have been multiple studies concluding the divorce rate increases when wives outearn their husbands. The most recent study reaching  this conclusion is "Gender Identity and Relative Income within Households" by Bertrand, Kamenica and Pan, 2013. Finally, why is it oppression if a husband makes more  money than his wife? How come its NOT 'oppression" when a wife out earns her husband?  Rosenfeld's reasoning is classic feminist double standard.

Sociologists should not have been surprised by the study's findings. They were predictable.

Marital divorce is handled primarily by the American Family Court system. This judicial system is a bastion of female chauvinism (ie feminism). Family Judges -  typically political appointees - hold hearings and decide the outcome of divorce settlements. They pass judgment on assigning alimony, dividing marital property and  any other issues relative to the dissolution of the marriage. Most believe men are responsible for all marital problems. During hearings, its not uncommon for a wife to ramble on in  support of her viewpoint while the judge prevents her husband from responding in support of his viewpoint. Additionally, accusations of domestic assault are  typically levied against husbands. Family courts operate under a "preponderance of the evidence" standard. If a wife convinces the judge there is a 50.1% possibility  her assault accusation is true then the court will slant the divorce settlement heavily in her favor. Counter accusations of domestic violence committed by the wife are  often rejected by the Court because they are not consistent with feminist ideology. Husbands can challenge any Family court ruling but that will take thousands of  dollars in lawyer's fees.

Thus, husbands have a strong incentive against filing for a divorce. They know they will lose in Family Court.

Conversely, Family Court has no jurisdiction over the breakup of unmarried couples. This is true even if the couple owns a house. Whoever's name is on the deed is  considered the owner. There is no alimony. Common-law marriage has been disbanded by the vast majority of states in America. Unmarried men can leave bad relationships without being  legally fleeced. Only when children are involved, will unmarried men face the same legalized discrimination and fleecing as husbands.

Legalized discrimination against husbands is one reason why record numbers of men are avoiding marriage. According to author & researcher Janice Shaw Crouse, a  whopping 70% of American males between the ages of 20 and 34 are unmarried. According to PEW Research, only 50.3% of all American adults were married in 2013. It is the lowest percentage ever recorded in the Unites States.

Sociologists have 'discovered' women don’t inaugurate the majority of non marital splits. Yet sociologists remain in a feminist stone age. They still believe any  relationship’s health is based on a man meeting a woman's wishes.

September 29, 2015

Does America Have A False Rape Culture

Feminists claim America has a rape culture that promotes sexual violence against women. They claim sexual assault is normalized thru laws, the media and cultural attitudes about gender. Yet, US laws and media outlets seemingly encourage a culture of false rape accusations rather than sexual assaults.

For example, the US Department of Education (DOE) issued legal guidelines, created by feminist Russlynn Ali. The guidelines require a "preponderance of the evidence" for the expulsion of male students accused of sexual assault. This means there should be  a 50.1% chance that the accusation is actually true. A 50,1% possibility is hardly convincing evidence of guilt. There is a 49.9% possibility the accusation is false. Additionally, there are no guidelines on how to determine when a 50.1% chance is achieved. A school may think they calculated a 50.1% chance of guilt but in fact only have a 35% chance of guilt. The calculation is highly subjective. Thus, the "preponderance of the evidence" standard requires very little evidence for the expulsion of male students.

Using this subjective standard, Amherst College expelled a male undergraduate accused of sexually assaulting a female student. According to the Washington Examiner, after an evening of drinking the male student identified as 'John Doe',
"accompanied the accuser (who was [his] girlfriend's roommate) to her dorm room. The accuser performed oral sex on a blacked out Doe." 
When he left, the accuser texted two people.
"First, a male student she had a crush on — whom she invited over after a heavily flirtatious exchange earlier in the evening. Then a female friend." To the female friend she texted "Ohmygod I jus did something so fuckig stupid".
"She then proceeded to fret that she had done something wrong and her roommate would never talk to her again, because  "it's pretty obvi I wasn't an innocent bystander."
According to other texts, the accuser had sex with the other male student she later invited to her dorm. Thus, a woman claims she was sexually assaulted by 'John Doe' then has sex with a different man a short time later. Amherst College claimed this meets the DOE's preponderance of evidence of 50.1%.

Once expelled for sexual assault, many male students are reporting difficulty reenrolling in any college. An expulsion note often appears on their transcript causing most schools to view them as 'troublemakers".

Feminist politicians are now proposing legislation which will legally mass produce 'Amherst College' type expulsions of male undergraduates. Senators Kirsten Gillibrand (New York) and Claire McCaskill (Missouri) are sponsoring the Campus Accountability and Safety Act (CASA). Their proposed legislation will regulate sexual assault investigations on US campuses. School investigators will be trained so they have a "firm understanding of the nature of these crimes and their effect on survivors [accusers]." Additionally, CASA assumes all rape accusations are legitimate and assigns special advisors to female students claiming they were raped. Accused male students will be on their own. Schools not expelling allegedly guilty male students can be found in violation of CASA and subsequently fined. Larger schools could face penalties in excess of $1,000,000.

The catalyst for using false rape allegations to mass expel male students appears to be a 2010 study by Reach Advisors LLC.  The study discovered single women aged 22-30 outearn their male counterparts of the same age group in most American cities. Reach Advisors cited college education as the main reason for the gender pay gap. Significantly more women than men earn degrees. By creating a legal system supporting the mass expulsion of male students based on fraudulent rape accusations, feminist politicians hope thousands of men can be prevented from obtaining degrees. Less men with degrees means more high paying jobs go to educated women.

Feminists' actions thru the DOE and US senate are creating a campus culture of false rape accusations.

Off campus, feminist are using legal means to foster a culture of fraudulent sexual assault allegations. In Norfolk, Virginia, the city's police department was getting tired of having its resources and time wasted investigating false sex crime allegations. However, the Department apparently became so disgusted with the numerous false complaints that they began doubting almost every sexual assault allegation. As a result, Norfolk police botched their investigation of an unidentified 22 year old woman's actual rape. Using this case, feminists applied political pressure against the city resulting in police policy changes for rape investigations. The new policy has been molded to project feminist ideology. Feminist rape crisis advocates shall now be present during police interviews of women filing rape complaints. Also, detectives will receive training from an online program designed by the feminist group 'End Violence Against Women International'. Lastly and most importantly, sexual assault reports will be considered valid, unless proven otherwise. Thus, a women's accusation now qualifies as 'probable cause' for the legal arrest of any man in Norfolk.

In Windsor, Colrado, feminist political influence had previously caused this city to qualify women's accusation as 'probable cause" for arrest. Thus, when Katherine Elizabeth Bennett accused Dustin Toth  of abducting her from a Safeway parking lot and subsequently raping her, Toth was immediately arrested. Proof of his guilt was unnecessary. He was jailed and lost his job. However, Windsor police began a thorough investigation of Bennett's allegations. Police said Bennett changed her story several times and deleted text messages proving her initial rape report was false. She made up the story. Toth was subsequently released. Because of his arrest, Toth had difficulty finding a new job. Potential employers viewed him as a possible criminal.

A similar incident occurred in Brookhaven, Georgia. Anamirna Cabello-Loeza claimed she was assaulted and raped by Roberto Gaona-Pina in a wooded area near a bus stop. Police arrested and jailed Mr. Gaona-Pina. Evidence was unnecessary. A woman's accusation was deemed sufficient. Upon further investigation,  police said Ms. Cabello-Loeza claims "were not truthful". Her report of being raped was false. Mr. Gaona-Pina was subsequently released from custody.

Across America, feminists are gradually converting precincts into Soviet KGB style police stations where men can be arrested and jailed without evidence nor 'probable cause'. Only a woman's accusation is needed.

Although Katherine Bennett was jailed for 32 days, false accusers are rarely prosecuted. US media culture seemingly protects them. For example, Rolling Stone Magazine printed a major article detailing an unnamed female student's claim she was gang raped at the University of Virginia. The rape  allegedly occurred at Phi Alpha Psi fraternity. Rolling Stone wrote the article with clues so that the unnamed accused men could be identified by readers. In fact, using information from the Magazine's article, feminists identified George Elias, Stephen Hadford and Ross Fowler and posted their pictures on the internet claiming they were rapists. Additionally the woman's accusation caused the temporary disbandment of Phi Alpha Psi. The entire rape story was a massive false accusation. Rolling Stone has since retracted the story. However, the magazine is concealing the false accuser's identity. Both the Washington Post and New York Times know the accuser but also refuse to divulge her name. US Senator Kirsten Gillibrand said it would be "inappropriate" for the false accuser to face any criminal charges.

There are no US Senators claiming it would be “inappropriate" for a rapist to face criminal charges. There are no major media outlets protecting the identities of rapists. There are no law enforcement agencies promoting rape. There are no US Senators proposing legislation that make sexual assault easier. There are no government agencies issuing guidelines making sexual assault on college campus easier.

There is no rape culture in America.

Instead, feminists’ manipulation of laws and media attitudes are fostering a culture of false rape accusations throughout the United States.

September 1, 2015