Feminist journalist, Yvonne Roberts, recently advocated reducing the number of women in Britain’s prison system by 50%.
Writing for the British newspaper "The Guardian" she claimed female prisoners "need a break". Roberts stated "Twenty-five years ago, the 'eminent' criminologist Professor Pat Carlen called for the abolition of women’s prisons for all but a minority and their replacement with a system that is 'woman-wise and otherwise'". She also named groups offering alternatives to jailing female prisoners stating "The Nelson Trust, Advance, and Women in Prison, among others, run women’s centres that offer holistic support customized to fit individual women. Triage and diversion from courts for the drug- and alcohol-addicted operate, for instance, in Manchester" She concluded "A new women’s justice board could drive innovation, pilot different approaches and treat failure as a chance to learn, not an excuse to lock them all up again."
Roberts wants the criminal system to sentence felons on the basis of their gender rather than their actions. What the feminist journalist advocates is a 2 tiered judicial system - one for men and a separate one for women.
An example of Roberts' feminist justice system occurred recently in the British town of Burnley. Carrie Harwood, Macauley Worth, both 20, and 4 unidentified teenagers attacked Ben Sharples at a service station for no particular reason. Sharples was kicked, punched, and knocked unconscious. He suffered a concussion, two black eyes and severe swelling to his face. The service station video showed Ms Harwood stomping on Sharples as he lay on the ground. Nonetheless, Harwood avoided jail. She was sentenced to nothing while her male accomplice, Macauley Worth, was sentenced to jail for 26 months. Harwood, a grown adult woman, was not held responsible for her actions.
Similarly, American feminists are also advocating judicial double standard. The National Association of Women Judges wrote a document titled "Sentencing Women Offenders: A Training Curriculum for Judges". This feminist document advocates that female felons be given more leniency than male felons. It has been promoted as a judicial guideline for nearly 15 years. In New York City, the Women’s Prison Association created a sentencing program called JusticeHome. Through this program, female criminals with children are placed under house arrest rather than sentenced to jail. The women will remain in their homes with their children and receive guidance about jobs and education. Fathers who commit the same crime, however, will NOT receive such leniency. Instead, they will be sent directly to jail.
Feminist, whether in Britain or the US, view women as an aristocratic class worthy of special privileges and pampering. Rather than judging people on the basis of their actions, feminist demand a criminal system which judges people on the basis of their gender. Instead of being an ideology of equality, feminism is an ideology of female chauvinism.
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.
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.
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',
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.
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
Is Britain a Violent Feminist Police State
At the World Conference of Science Journalists in South Korea, Tim Hunt, a British Nobel laureate biochemist said: “Let me tell you about my trouble with girls … three things happen when they are in the lab … You fall in love with them, they fall in love with you and when you criticize them, they cry.” He also stated "I'm in favor of single sex labs" and he "doesn’t want to stand in the way of women".
As a result of these allegedly "brutal" and "appalling" comments about women, feminists forced him to resign from his faculty position at the University College, London. They have also forced his resignation from the Royal Society, where he had been a fellow. Lastly, they forced his resignation from the European Research Council where he served on the science committee. Britain’s academia and media were outraged over these allegedly 'oppressive' comments directed toward women.
Contrast this reaction with the reaction to comments made by a feminist diversity officer at Goldsmiths University of London. Bahar Mustafa used an official university Twitter account to tweet with the hashtag "kill all white men". She also used the account to tweet racial slurs at student activist Tom Harris calling him “white trash”. Except for a student petition, there was no mass calling for her resignation. Much of Britain’s media had no problem with her comments. In fact, Telegraph journalist, Jemima Thackray wrote an article defending Mustafa, claiming that "kill all white men" is not violent hate speech and men cannot experience sexism. British academia was silent on the issue. They made no calls for her resignation. Additionally, Goldsmith fully endorsed Mustafa.
Would Thackray be tolerant if Tim Hunt had tweeted "kill all white female reporters"? Would British academia be tolerant with Hunt if he had tweeted with the hashtag "kill all minority women in science". Not likely in either case.
In Britain, when a narrow minded female chauvinist racist advocates killing groups of men, no consequences occur. However, when a man makes a comment about working women falling in love and crying over criticism, he is forced to resign from his posts.
This is the same country in which a feminist author, Kamila Shamsie, recently demanded male writers be barred from publishing books in 2018. She wants only female authored books published during this year so that women writers will win more literary prizes and also to honor the 100th anniversary of UK women's voting rights. One British publishing company has already adopted her proposal. 'And Other Stories Publishing' will not print male authored books in 2018. The British media was not outraged by Shamsie's comments recommending discrimination. There were no demands for her resignation. There were no calls for boycotting her works.
Feminists are converting Britain into a female chauvinist state where advocating violence against men is condoned and males are policed as if they lived under a Soviet regime.
As a result of these allegedly "brutal" and "appalling" comments about women, feminists forced him to resign from his faculty position at the University College, London. They have also forced his resignation from the Royal Society, where he had been a fellow. Lastly, they forced his resignation from the European Research Council where he served on the science committee. Britain’s academia and media were outraged over these allegedly 'oppressive' comments directed toward women.
Contrast this reaction with the reaction to comments made by a feminist diversity officer at Goldsmiths University of London. Bahar Mustafa used an official university Twitter account to tweet with the hashtag "kill all white men". She also used the account to tweet racial slurs at student activist Tom Harris calling him “white trash”. Except for a student petition, there was no mass calling for her resignation. Much of Britain’s media had no problem with her comments. In fact, Telegraph journalist, Jemima Thackray wrote an article defending Mustafa, claiming that "kill all white men" is not violent hate speech and men cannot experience sexism. British academia was silent on the issue. They made no calls for her resignation. Additionally, Goldsmith fully endorsed Mustafa.
Would Thackray be tolerant if Tim Hunt had tweeted "kill all white female reporters"? Would British academia be tolerant with Hunt if he had tweeted with the hashtag "kill all minority women in science". Not likely in either case.
In Britain, when a narrow minded female chauvinist racist advocates killing groups of men, no consequences occur. However, when a man makes a comment about working women falling in love and crying over criticism, he is forced to resign from his posts.
This is the same country in which a feminist author, Kamila Shamsie, recently demanded male writers be barred from publishing books in 2018. She wants only female authored books published during this year so that women writers will win more literary prizes and also to honor the 100th anniversary of UK women's voting rights. One British publishing company has already adopted her proposal. 'And Other Stories Publishing' will not print male authored books in 2018. The British media was not outraged by Shamsie's comments recommending discrimination. There were no demands for her resignation. There were no calls for boycotting her works.
Feminists are converting Britain into a female chauvinist state where advocating violence against men is condoned and males are policed as if they lived under a Soviet regime.
June 23, 2015
Iceland Proposes Female Only Parliament
A feminist member of Iceland's Independence Party, Ragnheiður Ríkharðsdóttir, has recently stated she wants the country's parliament to be women only. Men would resign. The idea was endorsed by parliament members from Iceland’s Left-Green party. The Independence Party initially proposed Iceland be run by an all-female parliament between 2017 and 2019. Supporters of the idea claimed the world would be a better place if it were run by women.
Iceland's proposal is based on traditional feminist stereotypes of women being fair, collaborative and thoughtful whereas men are self-centered and confrontational. In the real world, feminist gender stereotypes have proven to be a farce.
For example, American female politicians created the Campus Accountability & Safety Act, The intent of this Act is to remove any male student accused of sexual assault from college regardless of his guilt or innocence. How is this being fair? Female politicians don’t give a damn about what happens to innocent male students. They only care about women. Also, female politicians and women's groups continuously fight against paternity fraud legislation. Their efforts have forced many husbands into financing and raising their wife's boyfriend's children. These women are only concerned with the well being of the mother. They have no interest in helping frauded husbands. How is this being thoughtful? The National Association of Women Judges (NAWJ) wrote a document titled "Sentencing Women Offenders: A Training Curriculum for Judges". The document advocates giving female criminals more lenient sentences than male criminals. The NAWJ has advocated the report for a decade. How is this fair and equitable? In June 2014, a study led by Dr. Elizabeth Bates, University of Cumbria, concluded women were slightly more likely than men to be the perpetrators of domestic violence. How does committing domestic violence make women better than men? Additionally, in America, domestic violence shelters are almost always run by women. They have refused to allow male domestic abuse victims into their shelters nor give them any assistance. Is this supposed to represent women's fairness? An FBI report "Crime in the US 2011" Table 33, indicates women commit 25% of all violent crime and 38% of all burglary type crimes. There is nothing thoughtful and benevolent about either statistic. Lastly, if women are so collaborative then US Congress should be at its zenith. Currently, there are more women in Congress than at anytime in US history. Yet, rather than being more productive and cooperative, Congress has become more divided, more extreme and increasingly uncompromising.
The idea that women are the fair, cooperative sex is a female chauvinist farce. People should be judged on the basis of their actions not - as Iceland's feminist government suggest - their gender.
Feminist Iceland is slowly becoming more like 20th century apartheid South Africa using gender rather than race as its method of bigotry. Perhaps this is the reason why its people (according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development 2013) consume the most antidepressant drugs of any country in the world.
Iceland's proposal is based on traditional feminist stereotypes of women being fair, collaborative and thoughtful whereas men are self-centered and confrontational. In the real world, feminist gender stereotypes have proven to be a farce.
For example, American female politicians created the Campus Accountability & Safety Act, The intent of this Act is to remove any male student accused of sexual assault from college regardless of his guilt or innocence. How is this being fair? Female politicians don’t give a damn about what happens to innocent male students. They only care about women. Also, female politicians and women's groups continuously fight against paternity fraud legislation. Their efforts have forced many husbands into financing and raising their wife's boyfriend's children. These women are only concerned with the well being of the mother. They have no interest in helping frauded husbands. How is this being thoughtful? The National Association of Women Judges (NAWJ) wrote a document titled "Sentencing Women Offenders: A Training Curriculum for Judges". The document advocates giving female criminals more lenient sentences than male criminals. The NAWJ has advocated the report for a decade. How is this fair and equitable? In June 2014, a study led by Dr. Elizabeth Bates, University of Cumbria, concluded women were slightly more likely than men to be the perpetrators of domestic violence. How does committing domestic violence make women better than men? Additionally, in America, domestic violence shelters are almost always run by women. They have refused to allow male domestic abuse victims into their shelters nor give them any assistance. Is this supposed to represent women's fairness? An FBI report "Crime in the US 2011" Table 33, indicates women commit 25% of all violent crime and 38% of all burglary type crimes. There is nothing thoughtful and benevolent about either statistic. Lastly, if women are so collaborative then US Congress should be at its zenith. Currently, there are more women in Congress than at anytime in US history. Yet, rather than being more productive and cooperative, Congress has become more divided, more extreme and increasingly uncompromising.
The idea that women are the fair, cooperative sex is a female chauvinist farce. People should be judged on the basis of their actions not - as Iceland's feminist government suggest - their gender.
Feminist Iceland is slowly becoming more like 20th century apartheid South Africa using gender rather than race as its method of bigotry. Perhaps this is the reason why its people (according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development 2013) consume the most antidepressant drugs of any country in the world.
June 17, 2015
Louisiana False Rape Incident
Louisiana wife, Gina Louise Causey, told local police she was abducted at gunpoint in broad daylight while eating lunch along a lakefront in the town of Mandeville. She said her attacker made her lie on the floor of his car and drove for 'only a minute or so' to a nearby house where he took her inside and raped her. Causey claimed the rapist demanded she hand over her driver's license. He took a picture of it. He then put the license into a box 'with several other women's driver's licenses' and told her if she went to the police he would know. Causey said the alleged rapists was a law enforcement officer who had raped several other women in the area. Gina claimed she was impregnated by the sexual assault.
However, upon further investigation, police found inconsistencies with her time line and the location where she claimed to have been raped. When confronted with these inconsistencies, the backstabbing wife admitted the whole story was a lie. Gina Causey admitted she was trying to hide from her husband the fact she had become pregnant while having an extramarital affair.
Mandeville Police subsequently arrested the fraudulent wife. She is now charged with criminal mischief but is unlikely to face jail time.
Feminist continue to be outraged anytime police question a rape allegation. They preach "Stop victim blaming!".
Yet, a study, by Frank Zepezauer concluded 25% of rape complaints are fraud. Zepezauer stated "Empirical evidence does not support the widespread belief that women are extremely unlikely to make false accusations of male sexual misconduct. Rather the research on accusations of rape, sexual harassment, incest and child sexual abuse indicates that false accusations have become a serious problem.".
In a unique study published in the Forensic Science Digest (December 1985), the most common reasons cited by women for making fraudulent claims of rape were: guilt, revenge for ending a relationship and covering up cheating. Although the reasons for making fraudulent rape accusations probably have not changed during the last 30 years, an updated study is still needed.
Feminist view the world in terms of gender. They are not interested in judging people on the basis of their actions. They are only interested in knowing the gender of the accused and the gender of the accuser. Feminists will then determine the validity of any accusation based solely on the individuals' gender.
Feminism is sexism.
Hopefully, Mr Cauusey now realizes his backstabbing wife is a complete loser.
March 31, 2015
Feminist Convert Alcohol Into Legal Tool to Attack Men
Across multiple intuitions, feminist are using alcohol as tool to harass and intimidate men.
The Department of Defense has recently redefined alcohol as a weapon in cases of alleged sexual assault by members of the military. Boulder Colorado Prosecutor, Katharina Booth, a leading feminist demanding the redefinition, said “It’s trying to focus the blame where the blame should be, which is on the offender and their behavior rather than the victim and how much they drank.” In describing alcohol Booth stated "Its a weapon". Another advocate demanding liquor’s reclassification, feminist attorney and former director of Colorado’s Ending Violence Against Women’s Project, Anne Munch said "For the same reason that a robber chooses a drunk victim (over a sober victim), a rapist will also choose a drunk victim,"
Both Munch and Booth are adamant that when male and female cadets have sex under the influence of liquor, only the male can be charged with rape. Female cadets will receive no indictments. Liquor’s reclassification is aimed solely at men.
Claiming alcohol is a weapon more readily allows the expulsion of male officer candidates from military schools on false rape charges. Military investigators can easily frame any sexual activity as a crime because a weapon - alcohol - was present. Beer will be viewed as no different than a knife. Feminist intent in redefining alcohol is to lower male graduation rates in military officer schools by applying a gender double standard toward expulsions.
In conjunction with limiting the pool of male officers, feminist are also suing the military. A recent lawsuit filed by the Service Women’s Action Network and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) demands the military have more female officers. Currently, 17% of officers are women. Ariela Migdal, of the ACLU’s Women’s Rights Project stated "The military service academies are premier educational institutions that provide tuition-free paths to leadership and are run by the federal government – there is no excuse for the government to provide this opportunity to women at such dismally low rates.”
So what if "only" 17% of officers are women. Most of the military's hardship and sacrifice has fallen upon men. According to a Congressional Research Service report, 97.5% of US military casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan WERE MALE during the period of 2001 to 2014.
Feminist are using alcohol, in conjunction with lawsuits, as a weapon against men in the armed forces. Their objective is to limit male authority, increase female authority and maximize male sacrifice within the military.
Similarly, feminist are using alcohol as a legal tool against male college students. In 2011, the Department of Education's Russlyn Ali (a feminist) issued a "Dear Colleague Letter” stating only marginal evidence is needed to expel any college student for sexual misconduct. The letter stated "Sexual harassment of students, which includes acts of sexual violence, is a form of sex
discrimination prohibited by Title IX" and "Sexual violence, as that term is used in this letter, refers to physical sexual acts perpetrated against a person’s will or where a person is incapable of giving consent due to the victim’s use of drugs or alcohol". Any school not expelling students guilty of sexual misconduct are in violation of Title IX federal law.
As a result, nearly all schools instituted conduct policies stating any student having sex with an intoxicated individual can be expelled. An intoxicated person cannot give consent to sexual contact because their judgment is impaired. Since most college administrations have an institutionalized feminist culture, conduct codes are applied solely toward male students. Duke University's
Dean of Students, Sue Wasiolek, expressed most schools' sentiment when she stated “Assuming it is a male and female [having sexual contact], it is the responsibility in the case of the male to gain consent.”
The new conduct regulations have resulted in dozens of male undergraduates being expelled on bogus sexual violence charges. It appears not a single female undergraduate in the United States has been expelled for having sexual contact with an intoxicated male student.
Furthermore. a new law - the Campus Accountability & Safety Act- is now being proposed. Created by feminist Senators Kirsten Gillibrand (New York) and Claire McCaskill (Missiouri), the Campus Accountability & Safety Act (CASA) will regulate sexual assault investigations on US campuses. Alleged victims will be assigned advisors. Accused students will be assumed guilty. Campus investigators will receive indoctrination on "[sexual] consent and the role drugs or alcohol can play in the ability to consent". Gillibrand is adamant a female student cannot be accused of sexual assault when she has sexual contact with an intoxicated male. The law is aimed solely at male undergraduates. Schools not complying with CASA will be fined and have federal funds withheld.
CASA is designed to legally mass expel male students from college on bogus sexual violence charges. The impetus for this mass expulsion is a 2010 study by the firm Reach Advisors. The study concluded single women aged 22-30 outearn men 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 CASA, feminist hope large numbers of men can be prevented from obtaining degrees thereby allowing more women greater access to high paying jobs.
Feminist are using alcohol as a weapon against men.
The Department of Defense has recently redefined alcohol as a weapon in cases of alleged sexual assault by members of the military. Boulder Colorado Prosecutor, Katharina Booth, a leading feminist demanding the redefinition, said “It’s trying to focus the blame where the blame should be, which is on the offender and their behavior rather than the victim and how much they drank.” In describing alcohol Booth stated "Its a weapon". Another advocate demanding liquor’s reclassification, feminist attorney and former director of Colorado’s Ending Violence Against Women’s Project, Anne Munch said "For the same reason that a robber chooses a drunk victim (over a sober victim), a rapist will also choose a drunk victim,"
Both Munch and Booth are adamant that when male and female cadets have sex under the influence of liquor, only the male can be charged with rape. Female cadets will receive no indictments. Liquor’s reclassification is aimed solely at men.
Claiming alcohol is a weapon more readily allows the expulsion of male officer candidates from military schools on false rape charges. Military investigators can easily frame any sexual activity as a crime because a weapon - alcohol - was present. Beer will be viewed as no different than a knife. Feminist intent in redefining alcohol is to lower male graduation rates in military officer schools by applying a gender double standard toward expulsions.
In conjunction with limiting the pool of male officers, feminist are also suing the military. A recent lawsuit filed by the Service Women’s Action Network and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) demands the military have more female officers. Currently, 17% of officers are women. Ariela Migdal, of the ACLU’s Women’s Rights Project stated "The military service academies are premier educational institutions that provide tuition-free paths to leadership and are run by the federal government – there is no excuse for the government to provide this opportunity to women at such dismally low rates.”
So what if "only" 17% of officers are women. Most of the military's hardship and sacrifice has fallen upon men. According to a Congressional Research Service report, 97.5% of US military casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan WERE MALE during the period of 2001 to 2014.
Feminist are using alcohol, in conjunction with lawsuits, as a weapon against men in the armed forces. Their objective is to limit male authority, increase female authority and maximize male sacrifice within the military.
Similarly, feminist are using alcohol as a legal tool against male college students. In 2011, the Department of Education's Russlyn Ali (a feminist) issued a "Dear Colleague Letter” stating only marginal evidence is needed to expel any college student for sexual misconduct. The letter stated "Sexual harassment of students, which includes acts of sexual violence, is a form of sex
discrimination prohibited by Title IX" and "Sexual violence, as that term is used in this letter, refers to physical sexual acts perpetrated against a person’s will or where a person is incapable of giving consent due to the victim’s use of drugs or alcohol". Any school not expelling students guilty of sexual misconduct are in violation of Title IX federal law.
As a result, nearly all schools instituted conduct policies stating any student having sex with an intoxicated individual can be expelled. An intoxicated person cannot give consent to sexual contact because their judgment is impaired. Since most college administrations have an institutionalized feminist culture, conduct codes are applied solely toward male students. Duke University's
Dean of Students, Sue Wasiolek, expressed most schools' sentiment when she stated “Assuming it is a male and female [having sexual contact], it is the responsibility in the case of the male to gain consent.”
The new conduct regulations have resulted in dozens of male undergraduates being expelled on bogus sexual violence charges. It appears not a single female undergraduate in the United States has been expelled for having sexual contact with an intoxicated male student.
Furthermore. a new law - the Campus Accountability & Safety Act- is now being proposed. Created by feminist Senators Kirsten Gillibrand (New York) and Claire McCaskill (Missiouri), the Campus Accountability & Safety Act (CASA) will regulate sexual assault investigations on US campuses. Alleged victims will be assigned advisors. Accused students will be assumed guilty. Campus investigators will receive indoctrination on "[sexual] consent and the role drugs or alcohol can play in the ability to consent". Gillibrand is adamant a female student cannot be accused of sexual assault when she has sexual contact with an intoxicated male. The law is aimed solely at male undergraduates. Schools not complying with CASA will be fined and have federal funds withheld.
CASA is designed to legally mass expel male students from college on bogus sexual violence charges. The impetus for this mass expulsion is a 2010 study by the firm Reach Advisors. The study concluded single women aged 22-30 outearn men 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 CASA, feminist hope large numbers of men can be prevented from obtaining degrees thereby allowing more women greater access to high paying jobs.
Feminist are using alcohol as a weapon against men.
March 9, 2015
New York Cheating Wife Shoots Husband In Bed
A New York husband was shot in the head as he slept in bed on November 14, 2013. He survived the incident. Initially the husband, Ken Dearden, thought an intruder had shot him. Now, a year after the incident, he believes his cheating wife shot him in an attempt to kill him and avoid a messy divorce.
Ken Dearden said his wife had been cheating since 2011. He claims her boyfriend was pressuring her to end her 18 year long marriage. Despite the affair, Ken Dearden and his wife, Emily Dearden, were still living together with their two daughters when the shooting occurred. Even after Emily filed for divorce in August 2014, the couple continued living together.
Ken Dearden said that on the night of the shooting he went looking for Emily to take him to the hospital and found her on the floor of the family room "claiming she had been hit on the head." The house alarm was turned off a few minutes earlier. At the time of the incident, the husband told Yonkers police that he thought he'd been attacked by an intruder. When police later returned to the couple's house to investigate, they found a pair of derringers (pocket pistols) owned by the couple and determined one of them had been fired. However, the bullet taken from Ken Dearden's head was too damaged for a ballistics match.
Emily Dearden has now been charged with attempted murder. She denies the charges and is currently free on $150,000 bail. Emily has been suspended from her job as a New York Police Department psychologist and has since moved out of the couple's house. She has been ordered to stay away from her husband and children. The couple's daughters are currently living with their father.
What is certain in this case is that Ken Dearden played the role of a fool. Despite his wife having a boyfriend, he foolishly stayed with her. A cheating wife is typically selfish and bound to do selfish things. By staying with her, a husband is asking for trouble. A wise man would let his backstabbing wife move in with her sleazeball boyfriend. Within in a year, they would probably be cheating on each other. Meanwhile, the husband would be free of his loser wife. He would be free of all her lies, manipulation and selfishness. She would now be someone else's problem. Some men, however,
cannot handle reality. They cannot cope with the fact their marriage is a lie. Their wives make fools of them over and over again. As Ken Dearden discovered, failing to cope with reality can be hazardous to a man's well being.
Ken Dearden said his wife had been cheating since 2011. He claims her boyfriend was pressuring her to end her 18 year long marriage. Despite the affair, Ken Dearden and his wife, Emily Dearden, were still living together with their two daughters when the shooting occurred. Even after Emily filed for divorce in August 2014, the couple continued living together.
Ken Dearden said that on the night of the shooting he went looking for Emily to take him to the hospital and found her on the floor of the family room "claiming she had been hit on the head." The house alarm was turned off a few minutes earlier. At the time of the incident, the husband told Yonkers police that he thought he'd been attacked by an intruder. When police later returned to the couple's house to investigate, they found a pair of derringers (pocket pistols) owned by the couple and determined one of them had been fired. However, the bullet taken from Ken Dearden's head was too damaged for a ballistics match.
Emily Dearden has now been charged with attempted murder. She denies the charges and is currently free on $150,000 bail. Emily has been suspended from her job as a New York Police Department psychologist and has since moved out of the couple's house. She has been ordered to stay away from her husband and children. The couple's daughters are currently living with their father.
What is certain in this case is that Ken Dearden played the role of a fool. Despite his wife having a boyfriend, he foolishly stayed with her. A cheating wife is typically selfish and bound to do selfish things. By staying with her, a husband is asking for trouble. A wise man would let his backstabbing wife move in with her sleazeball boyfriend. Within in a year, they would probably be cheating on each other. Meanwhile, the husband would be free of his loser wife. He would be free of all her lies, manipulation and selfishness. She would now be someone else's problem. Some men, however,
cannot handle reality. They cannot cope with the fact their marriage is a lie. Their wives make fools of them over and over again. As Ken Dearden discovered, failing to cope with reality can be hazardous to a man's well being.
January 1, 2015
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)