Brunel University Promotes Sex Discrimination

Brunel University, located in Britain, will give grants of £1,250 (approximately $2050 US) a month to 40 women studying postgraduate engineering courses.

Feminist engineering lecturer, Petra Gratton stated "Only around a quarter of students on engineering master's courses are women. Bluntly speaking, that has to change if UK engineering is going to continue to compete as successfully as it currently does. Also this Women in Engineering Program will allow us to deeply study what is still holding back female engineers from realizing their full career potential and the insights we gain will be shared throughout higher education and the engineering professional bodies." The feminist also stated "While some may see this as positive discrimination the stark reality is that UK [commerce] can no longer afford not to exploit fully this enormous potential talent pool. Every British engineering company will tell you they face crippling skills shortages and without radical action that can only get worse."

Positive discrimination? This is code talk from a narrow minded sexist woman. (Note: More formally these types of women are called feminists). 'Positive discrimination' is simply another word for apartheid. The stark reality is that Brunel University is denying men equal opportunity to advance their education. This program allows the school to give financial aid based on gender. Thus, out of pocket education expenses will be lower for women than men. Women will be getting paid simply to be female students.

Additionally, there is currently NOTHING stopping women from advancing in engineering. Ms. Gratton claims that if women aren't 50% of engineers then there is some type of discrimination. If '50% women' defines equality then why isn't this feminist vehemently advocating for more female child support payers? The British news agency "The Guardian" indicates a meager 5% of child support payers in Great Britian are women. This statistic appears verified by the "Child Support Agency Quarterly Summary of Statistics for Great Britain" December 2011 and also September 2013. Five percent is SIGNIFICANTLY LOWER than the twenty five percent that Petra Gratton claims is discrimination.

Lastly, Ms Gratton is full of feminist crap when she states British engineering companies are facing crippling skills shortages. According to the website Theengineer.co.uk, 10.9% of engineering and technology graduates are unemployed. The website stated "Ask the students what the obstacles to getting a job are, and by far the most common responses are the lack of opportunities and the difficulty of obtaining work experience". Ms Gratton is merely trying to justify Brunel's feminist program of sex discrimination.

In discussing Brunel's new program, the BBC stated the University's plan "follows growing concerns that postgraduate study risks becoming too exclusive, with high fees and limited funding squeezing out poorer students." If this were true then the program would not discriminate against poor men. Brunel's program was designed to promote female chauvinism (more commonly called feminism).

There is little doubt Brunel University's female payment policy will have an impact on America's education system. Currently, US education is largely controlled by feminist groups such as the American Association of University Women and the National Women's Law Center. These groups routinely advocate curriculum designed to help female students and oppose curriculum designed to help male students. It is simply a matter of time before these female chauvinist organizations advocate adoption of Brunel University's female payment policy.

January 23, 2014

Georgia Man Sued For Marriage Proposal Change Of Heart

Melissa Cooper sued Christopher Kelley for fraud and breach of promise to marry her after their 10-year relationship ended in 2011. The Coweta County Superior Court in Georgia awarded Ms. Cooper damages and attorneys’ fees worth $50,000, and now the Georgia Court of Appeals is affirming that ruling. The award is in addition to child support payments Cooper is already receiving from Kelley.

Melissa Cooper lived with Christopher Kelley for 10 years. They had one child and Cooper had another child from a previous relationship. In 2004, Kelley gave  Cooper a ring. She claimed the ring was part of a marriage proposal.  Christopher Kelley stated  "I never initiated the concept of marriage with her, outside of giving her that ring". "I never said the words 'will you marry me' to her."

The couples relationship ended after Ms. Cooper discovered that Kelley had cheated on her with two other women. Additionally,  Kelley wanted to end his relationship with Copper and start a new relationship with the 2nd other woman.  In court proceedings however, Ms. Cooper admitted there was a time she also had an affair with someone else.

 The Georgia Court of Appeals ruled saying "the promise to marry is enforceable and the fact that the couple lived together before and after the marriage proposal is  only collateral to the promise to marry". Cooper's attorney said Melissa plans to use the money to buy a home.

If Georgia allows men to be sued for fraud  because they change their mind about getting married (even when its unclear if they ever made a marriage proposal), then in the interest  of equality, Georgia should allow husbands to sue their ex wives for   paternity fraud. Currently,  this state does not allow such a lawsuit. According to the website Nationalparentsorganization.org, as well as several lawyers, Georgia does not allow suits against   a mother for paternity fraud. 

Yet, the very definition of fraud is when a wife cheats, gets pregnant, tells her husband to remain faithful and lies to him about his biological connection to the resulting child from her affair - year after year after year. 

Admittedly, Georgia is much more advanced than most states in regards to paternity fraud. It is one of the few states that allows men to cancel child support payments if they prove the child is   not theirs. However, permitting lawsuits against men who change their mind about marriage but forbidding lawsuits against fraudulent wives is blatant double standard. If men are financially liable for changing their minds about marriage then wives should ABSOLUTELY be financially liable for paternity fraud.

The time has come for states to begin dismantling feminist double standards within their judicial system.  Its time for the backstabbing fraudulent wife and her sleazeball boyfriend to legally be held responsible for their actions.

January 2, 2014