A Montgomery County, Texas woman called police claiming her male friend had sexually attacked her in his apartment.
Two officers were then sent to the apartment to investigate the incident. The women told the two officers that her 26-year-old male friend had sexually assaulted her. However, upon further investigation, the deputies watched a video recording the male had made that showed the woman telling him that she was calling the police because he was making her leave the apartment and she would tell the police he assaulted her. After the Montgomery County officers viewed this video, the woman was arrested. Her name has not been released.
What would have happened if this guy did NOT make the video? He would have most likely been wrongly arrested and spent an undetermined time in jail on false charges. Yet feminist continue to claim that women don’t lie about sex crimes.
Furthermore, the fact that the woman's name has not been released appears to indicate the Montgomery County court wants the incident out of public view so they can quietly either dismiss all charges or levy only a small fine. This woman made the false sexual assault complaint because she knew there would be only a small chance she would be punished.
In feminist America, women generally are not held accountable for their actions.
Consider the example of Joanne Baldwin. She was married to actor Dan Baldwin. Earlier this summer, Dan said police told him to take the couple's two children out of the house when the children witnessed Joanne punching him in the face. Additionally, Dan said his wife had watched a documentary on women who killed their husbands and quoted her as saying "'Now I know how to do it, I understand why they did it. You have been warned. Move out of this house or I am going to kill you."
She has received precisely no jail time for what in essence is a domestic violence incident. Additionally, the documentary on killing husbands, no doubt offered an array of excuses on why the wives should not be held accountable for their actions. (And these nitwits can't figure out why men increasingly avoid marriage).
Consider also the recent story of 28 year old wife Amanda Leann Kueht from Houston. She is a substance abuse counselor who was caught in a sexual relationship with a 16 year old boy. Yet many Houston press commenters are stating she did nothing wrong and is a good person.
This wife cheats on her husband - WITH A MINOR- lies to her husband's face and demands he be faithful to her. Yet people claim she is good person. Imagine if the roles were reversed and it was discovered her husband was dating a 16 year old girl. Think he would be categorized as a good person?
In feminist America, women generally are not held accountable for their actions - definitely not to the same degree as men.
US Military Integrity Wilting Under Feminism
The Associated Press stated a married Naval officer and a married female Army soldier had an inappropriate relationship. The naval officer was identified as Capt. Robert Gamberg.
Because of this relationship, the Navy has removed Gamberg from his post as the USS Eisenhower aircraft carrier's second in command. Additionally, the Navy is now considering kicking him out of the service. Rear Adm. Ted Branch, commander of Naval Air Force Atlantic, has recommended that Gamberg be required to show why he should be allowed to remain in the Navy.
However, the United States Military has refused to identify the married female soldier. The Navy said revealing her identity and any other parties involved would be "clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy."
The US military command appears to be frightened of feminists.
One of the fundamental principals of feminism is that cheating wives should be held to a different accountability standard than cheating husbands. If the Navy revealed the wife's name than this principal would be violated.
An example of this accountability double standard was displayed during the infamous Arnold Schwarzenegger affair. Media outlets such as Forbes, Associated Press, TIME, the Huffington Post and others described Schwarzenegger as just another philandering, womanizing husband and asked "How could he have had a child with another women?" "How could he have deceived his wife for so long?" Yet, the woman whom he had child with (Mildred Baena) was also married at the time. She had lied to her husband, telling him the child was his. Reports indicate her husband raised the child for 11 years believing the boy was his son. Only in 2008, during the divorce, did he find out he was lied to. THIS MAN WAS A VICTIM OF PATERNITY FRAUD. None of America's feminist media outlets had a problem with Mildred's cheating, lying and fraud. None of the female chauvinist reporters asked "How could SHE have deceived HER HUSBAND for so long". She was not held accountable.
The military's humiliating a cheating husband but shielding a cheating wife indicates the Department of Defense (DOD) is beginning to wilt under feminist pressure. The DOD is losing its sense of integrity and replacing it with chauvinistic double standards. How can a government institution charged with coordinating operations for the defense of the nation not even defend itself against feminism?
The DOD is becoming another government institution infiltrated by a chauvinistic and corrupt ideology. If feminism has not already negatively impacted the military's efficiency then it will do so in the near future.
Because of this relationship, the Navy has removed Gamberg from his post as the USS Eisenhower aircraft carrier's second in command. Additionally, the Navy is now considering kicking him out of the service. Rear Adm. Ted Branch, commander of Naval Air Force Atlantic, has recommended that Gamberg be required to show why he should be allowed to remain in the Navy.
However, the United States Military has refused to identify the married female soldier. The Navy said revealing her identity and any other parties involved would be "clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy."
The US military command appears to be frightened of feminists.
One of the fundamental principals of feminism is that cheating wives should be held to a different accountability standard than cheating husbands. If the Navy revealed the wife's name than this principal would be violated.
An example of this accountability double standard was displayed during the infamous Arnold Schwarzenegger affair. Media outlets such as Forbes, Associated Press, TIME, the Huffington Post and others described Schwarzenegger as just another philandering, womanizing husband and asked "How could he have had a child with another women?" "How could he have deceived his wife for so long?" Yet, the woman whom he had child with (Mildred Baena) was also married at the time. She had lied to her husband, telling him the child was his. Reports indicate her husband raised the child for 11 years believing the boy was his son. Only in 2008, during the divorce, did he find out he was lied to. THIS MAN WAS A VICTIM OF PATERNITY FRAUD. None of America's feminist media outlets had a problem with Mildred's cheating, lying and fraud. None of the female chauvinist reporters asked "How could SHE have deceived HER HUSBAND for so long". She was not held accountable.
The military's humiliating a cheating husband but shielding a cheating wife indicates the Department of Defense (DOD) is beginning to wilt under feminist pressure. The DOD is losing its sense of integrity and replacing it with chauvinistic double standards. How can a government institution charged with coordinating operations for the defense of the nation not even defend itself against feminism?
The DOD is becoming another government institution infiltrated by a chauvinistic and corrupt ideology. If feminism has not already negatively impacted the military's efficiency then it will do so in the near future.
July 15, 2011
Anti Male College Environment
The U.S. Department of Education has issued new guidelines on sexual violence to US colleges. These guidelines state only a “preponderance of the evidence" rather than "clear and convincing evidence" is needed for determining guilt in sexual assault. Preponderance is defined as a 51% chance an assault occurred. Thus if there is a 51% chance a male student is guilty, he can be kicked out of college.
These new guidelines will be in effect for the coming school year & and are primarily the work of assistant secretary for civil rights, Russlynn Ali. She is an avowed feminist. Ali has threatened to withhold federal funding to any school not following these instructions.
The new guidelines apply only to sexual harassment and sexual assault. They do not apply to false rape. Thus, conclusive evidence is NOT necessary for a man to be found guilty of sexual assault. However, conclusive evidence IS necessary for a woman to be found guilty of making a fraudulent rape claim. This double standard is magnified by the fact two researchers (Frank Zepezauer and Eugene Kanin), in separate studies, concluded 25% of rape complaints were fraudulent. (Note: Feminist claim rape fraud, if it exists, is no more than 2%. They claim lying is a male characteristic).
Ali stated "one in five [college] women are victims of completed or attempted sexual assault." According to Christina Hoff Sommers, Ali based her statistic on an internet survey which asked college women about their sexual experiences. Sommers said 'the researchers—not the women themselves—decided whether they [college women] had been assaulted." Sommers also stated the researchers used a wide ranging definition of sexual assault that included "attempted forced kissing" and female students having sex while they were drunk. Researchers considered the drunken state of male students as irrelevant. Therefore, if 2 drunk students have sex and the female latter regrets it, the incident is classified as sexual assault. The male student will be kicked out of college. HOWEVER, if its the male student who latter regrets having sex (for example with a fat girl) it is classified as nothing.
This study is based on chauvinistic double standards yet it will be the foundation for university disciplinary policies.
Furthermore, many states define sexual harassment as sexual assault. The definition of sexual harassment is lenient. For example it includes "inappropriate looking" or unwanted attention. In a college environment, if a fat or geeky male student looks at a female student, its deemed sexual harassment which in turn means its sexual assault. Under Ali's guidelines, school's can expel these men for sexual assault without conclusive evidence. However if a fat girl gives a male student unwanted attention its deemed as "her right" rather than harassment.
Ali is full of female chauvinist crap. (In other words she is a feminist).
If the Office of Civil Rights is so interested in campus safety, where is their regulations controlling egotistical muscle heads? These "gentlemen" often behave as if they own everybody. There is more likely to be an assault by a muscle head than there is a rape on campus. Yet the Office of Civil Rights is unconcerned. Could this be because muscle heads almost always attack male students rather than female students?
THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION'S NEW GUIDELINES ARE SEXIST. They make it easier to kick men out of college and prevent them from obtaining a higher education. In fact many of the Department’s regulations are based entirely on sexual harassment definitions issued by a feminist group called the American Association of University Women (AAUW). The AAUW has caused boys as young as 4 years old to be accused of sexual harassment.
Ali's new guidelines, in conjunction with the AAUW's definitions help create a hostile college learning environment for males. THIS IS A VIOLATION OF TITLE IX.
In the coming year, male students which are fraudulently suspended as a result of these new rules should file a Title IX class action sex discrimination lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Education. Russlynn Ali and the AAUW should be held accountable for their actions.
These new guidelines will be in effect for the coming school year & and are primarily the work of assistant secretary for civil rights, Russlynn Ali. She is an avowed feminist. Ali has threatened to withhold federal funding to any school not following these instructions.
The new guidelines apply only to sexual harassment and sexual assault. They do not apply to false rape. Thus, conclusive evidence is NOT necessary for a man to be found guilty of sexual assault. However, conclusive evidence IS necessary for a woman to be found guilty of making a fraudulent rape claim. This double standard is magnified by the fact two researchers (Frank Zepezauer and Eugene Kanin), in separate studies, concluded 25% of rape complaints were fraudulent. (Note: Feminist claim rape fraud, if it exists, is no more than 2%. They claim lying is a male characteristic).
Ali stated "one in five [college] women are victims of completed or attempted sexual assault." According to Christina Hoff Sommers, Ali based her statistic on an internet survey which asked college women about their sexual experiences. Sommers said 'the researchers—not the women themselves—decided whether they [college women] had been assaulted." Sommers also stated the researchers used a wide ranging definition of sexual assault that included "attempted forced kissing" and female students having sex while they were drunk. Researchers considered the drunken state of male students as irrelevant. Therefore, if 2 drunk students have sex and the female latter regrets it, the incident is classified as sexual assault. The male student will be kicked out of college. HOWEVER, if its the male student who latter regrets having sex (for example with a fat girl) it is classified as nothing.
This study is based on chauvinistic double standards yet it will be the foundation for university disciplinary policies.
Furthermore, many states define sexual harassment as sexual assault. The definition of sexual harassment is lenient. For example it includes "inappropriate looking" or unwanted attention. In a college environment, if a fat or geeky male student looks at a female student, its deemed sexual harassment which in turn means its sexual assault. Under Ali's guidelines, school's can expel these men for sexual assault without conclusive evidence. However if a fat girl gives a male student unwanted attention its deemed as "her right" rather than harassment.
Ali is full of female chauvinist crap. (In other words she is a feminist).
If the Office of Civil Rights is so interested in campus safety, where is their regulations controlling egotistical muscle heads? These "gentlemen" often behave as if they own everybody. There is more likely to be an assault by a muscle head than there is a rape on campus. Yet the Office of Civil Rights is unconcerned. Could this be because muscle heads almost always attack male students rather than female students?
THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION'S NEW GUIDELINES ARE SEXIST. They make it easier to kick men out of college and prevent them from obtaining a higher education. In fact many of the Department’s regulations are based entirely on sexual harassment definitions issued by a feminist group called the American Association of University Women (AAUW). The AAUW has caused boys as young as 4 years old to be accused of sexual harassment.
Ali's new guidelines, in conjunction with the AAUW's definitions help create a hostile college learning environment for males. THIS IS A VIOLATION OF TITLE IX.
In the coming year, male students which are fraudulently suspended as a result of these new rules should file a Title IX class action sex discrimination lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Education. Russlynn Ali and the AAUW should be held accountable for their actions.
June 15, 2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)