Welcome to the Net Muslims Forums.
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 39 of 39
  1. #21
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    9,779

    Default

    Feminist Kindergarten Teacher Bans Legos For Boys Citing ‘Gender Equity’

    November 19, 2015

    A kindergarten teacher in Washington state is banning the use of Legos among her male students in the name of “gender equity.

    Bainbridge Island Review reports that Captain Johnston Blakely Elementary teacher Karen Keller doesn’t allow male students to play with the blocks in order to encourage use among females. She even makes up excuses sometimes to set her agenda in order.

    “I always tell the boys, ‘You’re going to have a turn’ — and I’m like, ‘Yeah, when hell freezes over’ in my head,” Keller told the Bainbridge Island Review. “I tell them, ‘You’ll have a turn’ because I don’t want them to feel bad.”

    Keller says she started doing this because boys were flocking to the colorful blocks during their “free choice” playtime, while girls tended to play with dolls or crayons. Keller hopes by blocking use of the toys for boys that female students may be encouraged to play with them.

    The teacher says that Lego play helps with development acceleration and math skills, while dolls offer little challenge or opportunity for growth.

    She first used pink and purple Legos to try to attract the girl students to play with the toys, but she found this ineffective. Soon after she requested funds from the school to purchase Lego Education Community Starter Kits. She did not tell school officials that access to the toys would be denied for male students.

    “I had to do the ‘girls only Lego club’ to boost it more,” Keller said. “Boys get ongoing practice and girls are shut out of those activities, which just kills me. Until girls get it into their system that building is cool, building is ‘what I want to do’ — I want to protect that.”

    Keller says the practice is “fair” because she’s giving different students the tools they need to succeed.

    “I just feel like we are still so far behind in promoting gender equity,” Keller added.
    http://seattle.cbslocal.com/2015/11/...gender-equity/


    comments:

    Such abuse of boys in schools by misandric feminist teachers is very common. In fact, boys are performing really bad in schools because this bias towards them. In older classes the boys are being raped by these teachers.


    Female teachers accused of giving boys lower marks

    by Richard Garner - 16 February 2012

    A key reason why boys lag behind in the classroom is revealed for the first time today – female teachers.

    Ground-breaking research shows that boys lower their sights if they think their work is going to be marked by a woman because they believe their results will be worse.

    It also shows their suspicions are correct – female teachers did, on average, award lower marks to boys than unidentified external examiners. Male teachers, by contrast, awarded them higher marks than external examiners.

    The findings, published by the Centre for Economic Performance today, could have immense repercussions for boys because of the dearth of male teachers in the profession. Only 15 per cent of primary school staff are men.

    The findings were yesterday described as "fascinating" by one of the country's leading academic researchers, Professor Alan Smithers, of the Centre for Education and Employment at the University of Buckingham.

    He said the research, carried out among 1,200 children in 29 schools across the country, had shown a possible reason for the glaring gap in performance between girls and boys right through schooling.

    It also revealed that girls tried harder if they had a male teacher because they believed they would get better marks. Their suspicions were not borne out, though, as the male teachers tended to give them exactly the same marks as the external examiners.

    The study showed boys believed their answers would be 3 per cent lower if marked by a woman. The girls thought their results would be 6 per cent higher if marked by a man.

    Professor Smithers said: "It is fascinating research. It does stress the importance of independent marking for high-status examinations."

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/ed...s-6943937.html

    comments:

    This is the result of feminism. Women and girls are taught to expect special attention and privileges for their gender, especially from men. They are also taught to look down upon and ill-treat the opposite gender (ie boys/men). These girls act upon that belief hence their reason for expecting higher grades. The boys and men don't have such sexist beliefs; hence the fair grading by men.

    This is yet one of many reasons why it's best to home school your children than to have them to go to these predators (teachers) who will either treat them unfairly or rape them.





    We Must Stop Indoctrinating Boys In Feminist Ideology

    Feminist organisations, backed by government policy, are teaching young boys at school to feel guilty and ashamed of their gender, writes Dan Bell

    By Dan Bell - 20 Jul 2015

    On Wednesday, the Daily Mail reported that a school in Oxford has become the first to introduce “Good Lad” workshops, in which boys are singled out for sessions that teach them about “the scale of sexual harassment and violence aimed at female students” and how they must stand up for women's rights.

    The workshops are the latest in a mushrooming series of initiatives in which ideologically-driven activists are being invited into schools, driven by the belief that boys need to be re-educated to prevent them from becoming a threat to women.

    In November last year, The Times reported on a programme in London Schools in which two American women, one a former sex crime prosecutor, “re-programme teenage boys’ sexual manners so they are fit for a feminist world”.

    According to the report, they start the class by asserting that “misogyny is on the rise”, before going on to “describe real-life sex crimes that have happened to teenagers in this area with brutal accuracy”. The article concludes – approvingly -- that by the end of the session, the boys are “scarred for life”.

    In context of the chasm between boys’ and girls’ educational attainment and a rising male suicide rate that is now nearly four times that of women’s, why are schools deciding that when it comes to talking about gender, what boys need most is an extra dose of guilt and shame?

    Another organisation, A Call to Men UK, also goes into schools, stating on its website: “A CALL TO MEN UK believes that preventing violence against women and girls is primarily the responsibility of men. We re-educate through trainings (sic), workshops, presentations, school projects and community initiatives.”

    And yet another, the Great Men Value Women project, frames its mission as about helping young men, but it’s also driven by the belief that young men need to be re-educated as feminists – not just for their own good, but for women’s too. On the section of their website listing the organisation’s values, their final point simply states: “Feminism: This says it all”, with a link to a video of TED X talk entitled: “We Should All Be Feminists”.

    Really? Who says so? Most importantly though, since when was it acceptable to impose ideology on school children? And for that matter, would we ever dare to suggest school girls ought to be taught that Great Women Value Men?

    By all means, let’s teach children about healthy relationships, but that’s not really what these campaigns are about. Instead there is an overwhelming emphasis on imposing an ideological worldview that first and foremost sees young men as potential abusers and perpetrators, while routinely ignoring and minimising the very real threat of violence, both physical and sexual, that boys and young men face themselves.

    You’d never know it from the rhetoric, but a man – and particularly a young man -- is around twice as likely to be a victim of violent crime as a woman. And it’s not just drunken street violence either. A 2009 NSPCC report into domestic violence in teenage relationships, showed teenage boys suffer comparable rates of violence from their girlfriends as do teenage girls from their boyfriends.

    In the same year another report, this time by Childline, found that of the children who called to report sexual abuse, a total of 8,457 were girls (64pc) and 4,780 were boys (36pc). The charity also found boys were more likely to say they had been sexually abused by a woman (1,722 cases) than by a man (1,651).

    At the time, Childline founder Esther Rantzen, said the charity had specifically reached out to boys, because they were convinced the higher number of calls they had been receiving from girls “could not be explained by the fact that boys encountered fewer problems than girls”.

    Imagine what it must be like as a young man who has been beaten or sexually abused, possibly by a woman, to then be forced to attend a workshop that tells him that simply because he’s a young man, he should hang his head in shame as a potential abuser?

    Neither are these activist interventions just the preserve of a few radical head teachers: they in fact reflect official government policy.

    In March, the Government announced the introduction of new consent classes for children aged as young as 11. The plans were launched on International Women’s Day and the PSHE guidelines repeatedly state they are primarily part of the Government’s A Call to End Violence Against Women and Girls strategy.

    According to a “Fact Sheet” published by one of the guidelines’ key contributors, a top priority for the lessons is “challenging notions of male sexual entitlement” and the lessons should be seen “in the context of a society in which gender inequality is the norm… and girls and young women are subjected to high levels of harassment, abuse and violence - overwhelmingly from men and boys they know”.

    Apparently, in the eyes of the government, schoolboys don’t so much see girls as their friends and peers, but as potential prey.

    And the indoctrination doesn’t stop when a boy leaves school, it continues when he gets to university too – the “Good Lad” workshops in Oxford, are in fact a spin-off from compulsory consent classes for new male students that are now springing up across UK universities.

    What impact must all this be having on boys and young men, who are themselves at one of the most vulnerable stages of their lives? Last year, insideMAN published findings of a focus group of young male students, which gave a disturbing glimpse into the ideological classroom climate faced by boys, this time told by young men themselves.

    They told us that when it came to expressing any view that contradicted feminist orthodoxy, they were shouted at and publicly humiliated. They said their motives routinely came under immediate suspicion simply on account of their gender. And they said they wanted to be protected against fundamentalism by prominent and leading figures in the campaign for gender equality.

    If boys like these are already coming under attack in A Level English classes, what might they expect in a PSHE lesson that – as one of the new suggested lesson plans propose -- puts them through a “conscience alley”, in which they are asked to take on the role of a potential rapist, then walk between their classmates who tell them what they think of their behaviour?

    In 2001, novelist and feminist icon Doris Lessing made a shocking assessment of what she had seen while visiting a school classroom.

    She told the Edinburgh Book Festival, "I was in a class of nine- and 10-year-olds, girls and boys, and this young woman was telling these kids that the reason for wars was the innately violent nature of men.

    "You could see the little girls, fat with complacency and conceit while the little boys sat there crumpled, apologising for their existence, thinking this was going to be the pattern of their lives."

    Lessing expressed deep concern that what she had witnessed was just a glimpse of an increasingly pervasive culture of toxic feminism in schools that was weighing down boys with a collective sense of guilt and shame.

    She had every right to be worried. It seems there is now a drive to make shame and guilt a formal part of boys’ education.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/think...-ideology.html

  2. #22
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    9,779

    Default

    Female teachers accused of giving boys lower marks

    by Richard Garner - 16 February 2012

    A key reason why boys lag behind in the classroom is revealed for the first time today – female teachers.

    Ground-breaking research shows that boys lower their sights if they think their work is going to be marked by a woman because they believe their results will be worse.

    It also shows their suspicions are correct – female teachers did, on average, award lower marks to boys than unidentified external examiners. Male teachers, by contrast, awarded them higher marks than external examiners.

    The findings, published by the Centre for Economic Performance today, could have immense repercussions for boys because of the dearth of male teachers in the profession. Only 15 per cent of primary school staff are men.

    The findings were yesterday described as "fascinating" by one of the country's leading academic researchers, Professor Alan Smithers, of the Centre for Education and Employment at the University of Buckingham.

    He said the research, carried out among 1,200 children in 29 schools across the country, had shown a possible reason for the glaring gap in performance between girls and boys right through schooling.

    It also revealed that girls tried harder if they had a male teacher because they believed they would get better marks. Their suspicions were not borne out, though, as the male teachers tended to give them exactly the same marks as the external examiners.

    The study showed boys believed their answers would be 3 per cent lower if marked by a woman. The girls thought their results would be 6 per cent higher if marked by a man.

    Professor Smithers said: "It is fascinating research. It does stress the importance of independent marking for high-status examinations."

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/ed...s-6943937.html

    comments:

    This is the result of feminism. Women and girls are taught to expect special attention and privileges for their gender, especially from men. They are also taught to look down upon and ill-treat the opposite gender (ie boys/men). These girls act upon that belief hence their reason for expecting higher grades. The boys and men don't have such sexist beliefs; hence the fair grading by men.

    This is yet one of many reasons why it's best to home school your children than to have them to go to these predators (teachers) who will either treat them unfairly or rape them.

  3. #23
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    9,779

    Default


    Percentage of Male Teachers Hits 40-Year Low


    February 29, 2008

    An MSN article notes that male teachers continue to take a nosedive (Thanks Mike):
    According to statistics recently released by the National Education Association (NEA), men made up just 24.4 percent of the total number of teachers in 2006. In fact, the number of male public school teachers in the U.S. has hit a record 40-year low. Arkansas, at 17.5 percent, and Mississippi, with 17.7 percent, have the lowest percentage of male teachers, while Kansas, at 33.3 percent, and Oregon, with 31.4 percent, boast the largest percentage of men leading the classroom.....

    Why the downward trend in male teaching? According to Bryan Nelson, founder of MenTeach, a nonprofit organization dedicated to recruiting male teachers, research suggests three key reasons for the shortage of male teachers: low status and pay, the perception that teaching is "women's work," and the fear of accusation of child abuse.

    Many men once in the profession say they quit because of worries that innocuous contact with students could be misconstrued, reports the NEA.

    In addition to worrying about being called a pervert, men also face discrimination in the interview process, according to the article:
    For men thinking of heading into education, Nelson offered hard-won advice: Be persistent. Get practical experience first. Look for resources to help you get through school, and, when applying for a job, make sure you have thick skin.

    "People will ask you inappropriate questions," he said, recalling a recent e-mail he received from an aspiring male teacher who was asked during a job interview, "Why would any healthy male want to work with kids?"

    In such situations, Nelson suggests stressing the positive aspects of having a man in the classroom. "When kids see [a man] in front of them on a daily basis, it helps to contradict negative stereotypes," Nelson said.

    So men are told to get a thick skin, get used to handling "inappropriate questions," and learn to contradict negative sterotypes. In other words, if men are discriminated against, it is up to them to deal with the fall-out and to change negative steroptypes and to expect no help from other people. So men are guilty unless proven otherwise. Reader Mike who sent me the article link had this to say about the sexist way male teachers are handled at interviews:
    What would the NEA or NOW or NAACP or.... say if "gay & transgendered" or "woman" or "black person" or.... the acceptable list goes on & on, were it substituted for "healthy male"??? I do believe something stronger than "inappropriate questions" would be used to describe this - no? And I would expect the ACLU to be filing suit within hours - yes?

    The ACLU filing suit for sexism against men? Uhh, doubtful. Expect the downward trend of males in teaching to continue, for just like the marriage strike, most smart men will be hesitant to enter an institution where being male puts them at risk of being charged with abuse, having their livelihood taken from them with little or no due process, and being taken from the children that they love.

    http://drhelen.blogspot.com/2008/02/...s-hits-40.html

    Readers' Comments:

    JG said...
    What you get coming out of college is teachers who don't know much about the subject areas they are teaching, but who are drilled and brainwashed in all the current feminist and left-wing ideas and buzzwords.

    Nicholas said...
    I'm a 28 year old male, just beginning a Masters program in Childhood Education, and I assure you, the bias against male teachers begins well before one actually begins teaching. One of the first courses I've been required to take is a Diversity class, and so far, it has been a virtual non-stop tirade against everything that men have ever done in this country. We have basically touched on nothing that would relate to teaching, instead, we focus on how men (particularly white, European men), have apparently been responsible for everything that is wrong in the world. If this is what I, and those like me, have to look forward too, it's no wonder there's such a stunning lack of diversity among teachers.

  4. #24
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    9,779

    Default

    International Men's Day Special: Nine Sexist Laws Unfair Towards Them


    If a guy under 16 years of age has consensual sex with a girl of his age, he's a rapist. Also, men can be raped, stalked, harassed and it will not be an offense

    by Amanda - 19 November 2016

    Every year since 1992, the date of November 19 is celebrated as International Men's Day worldwide. The objective of this event is to celebrate the existence of the gender, their contribution to the society and to improve gender relations.

    Coming to India, which is a patriarchal society on a larger basis, there are still some laws which are sexist and unfair towards men and are a hurdle in the goal of gender equality. These laws were apparently made after considering the violence committed on women. But most of them are illogical and were irrelevant in that era also.

    1. If a guy under 16 years of age has consensual sex with a girl of his age, he's a rapist.

    According to the sixth situation listed in Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code , if a 16-year-old guy and girl have sex, she's been raped! Not only the law is extremely sexist but also highly illogical. 'Sex' without consent is 'rape' but this law directly refuse to obey the concept of consent.

    2. A boy is entitled to maintenance only till he turns 18, whereas a girl is entitled to maintenance till she gets married.

    Under the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act of 1956 , it is the parents' responsibility to a girl child's maintenance till she decides to provide for herself or gets married. The law was made at a time when women were only supposed to do household chores and getting them married was the prime goal of their family. Although Indian society doesn't literally use this law but it's totally irrelevant today.

    3. Only the man is prosecuted for adultery.

    According to Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code , if the husband commits adultery with the wife of another man, he can be prosecuted for the same. But if a woman commits adultery with the husband of another woman, she cannot be prosecuted. This one is an utterly sexist law and totally unfair towards men.

    4. If a man has sex on the pretext of marriage and doesn't marry, it amounts to rape.

    The fourth point of Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code states that if a man has sex with a woman after promising marriage, he can't break up with the woman. If he does, according to the laws in India, he's a rapist. This is one of the most misused law right now as several men landed up in prison after they were charged with rape by their ex-girlfriends. A Bombay HC recently observed the injustice and said the police should check if the case is genuine or not.

    5. The father of the deceased doesn't inherit property, but the mother does

    Under the Hindu Succession Act of 1956 , if the deceased has no will, the spouse, mother and children inherit the property belonging to the deceased. The father is only entitled if the deceased does not have a spouse, mother or children. On a related note, there were laws which held male child the inheritor of his father's property. It was later rectified with clause that female child have a right to them too. However, the same improvisation was not applied to this law.

    6. If a woman is treated with physical or mental cruelty by her husband and his family, she can throw them behind bars.

    No doubt this law made to stop the rising domestic violence against women was a very good step. However, it is the most misused law in India. The reason behind it lies in the Section 498 A of the Indian Penal Code which says that the woman doesn't need to give any evidence whatsoever. No wonder, there are high numbers of false cases.

    7. Under the Special Marriage Act, only the wife can claim permanent alimony and maintenance

    The law was made at a time when women didn't have a source of income and were deserted after divorce. But now, when on one side women are fighting to be independent, these dependent laws makes us sigh. Although under the Hindu Marriage Act, both the man and woman can claim permanent alimony and maintenance, but under Section 37 of the Special Marriage Act of 1954 , it isn't so.

    8. If the death of the woman is caused by burns or bodily injury within 7 years of marriage, it's the husband's fault

    It's hard to believe but yes this law does exist in the Indian constitution. According to the Section 304 B of the Indian Penal Code, the husband will be held responsible for her death even in a house fire which he wasn't aware of.

    9. Men can be raped, stalked, sexually harassed and it will not be considered an offense

    The Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013 was an improvisation the rape law just after the murder of 'Nirbhaya', the victim of Delhi gangrape case on Dec 16, 2012. The country saw a huge revolution after her death with thousands of people coming on the roads to demand justice for her. However, feminists of the countries demanded this amendment in which the sexual offense were no longer gender-neutral.

    The law directly refuse to believe that these offenses are committed on men too. Even before the amendment, there were only a few men who dared to disclose that such heinous crimes were committed on them. But the law makes that even more impossible. On the other side, it refuses the existence of marital rape. Way to go logic. The law has been strongly criticized by several human rights and women's rights organizations as well.

    Apparently, the quote 'crime doesn't have a gender' doesn't apply in real life.

    Several men activists and human rights organizations are fighting for the abolition of these laws and the International Men's Day is the perfect day to witness some changes.

    http://www.indiasamvad.co.in/special...mens-day-17925

  5. #25
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    9,779

    Default

    'Feminist' Snow-Plowing System Brings Stockholm to a Standstill

    November 17, 2016

    A "feminist" strategy for clearing the roads of snow in Stockholm ended in failure as the city ground to a halt in recent days.

    A new system, suggested by progressive politicians in the Swedish city, tore up tried and tested snow plow routes and diverted them to areas said to be used more by women.

    But the inevitable consequence was that other spaces - like main roads - were clogged up for longer, and it became impossible to get around.


    Public transport failed, traffic piled up and injuries requiring a hospital visit reportedly spiked.

    The disaster struck despite a $270,000 increase in this year's snow removal budget meant to help the new system succeed.

    The "gender equal" strategy came in last year after politicians in the Swedish Green Party argued that the old way of clearing major roads in central areas favors men, who are more likely to work in the city, and get there by car.

    Instead, the plows were sent to clear out sidewalks and cycle paths - on the basis that women walk and bike often. They also focused on areas like kindergartens, which children and parents visit in the morning.

    This public information video (in Swedish, but still comprehensible) illustrates some of the ideology: https://vimeo.com/53928212

    Unfortunately, the theory did little to save Stockholm when a bumper snowfall hit at the end of last week.

    Indeed, almost a week later buses are still struggling to run, and some 1,700 public transport passengers are planning to sue.

    Progressive politicians have gone on the defensive, with the MP who suggested it claiming that the snow plows hadn't executed the "gender-equal" plan properly.

    Despite efforts to defend it, the plan has become a laughing stock.

    Even liberal publications like Stockholm's Dagens Nyheter published this mocking listicle of "9 alternatives to feminist snow removal", including Satanic snow removal ("melt the snow with burning crosses") and Neoliberal snow removal ("the invisible hand of the market will move it").

    http://heatst.com/world/feminist-snow-plowing-system-brings-stockholm-to-a-standstill/


    comments:

    Feminists like to use the words "gender equality" and "feminism is about equality" when what they mean by that is favoring women and giving them preference over men. The first snow plowing system was designed by the men for a logical plan to benefit the whole city (men and women, aka gender equality) while the new system is planned in 'favor of women' and pushed as being "equality" and it failed because there was no logic behind it. This is the difference between feminism and the "evil" Patriarchy.

  6. #26
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    9,779

    Default

    Spoilsports: Feminists Are Failing Female Olympic Athletes

    By Emily Zanotti - August 10, 2016

    Now that Ghostbusters has all but exited theaters, and Suicide Squad is successful despite legions of whiny op-eds, feminists are forced to turn their ire on the only other thing Americans are enjoying at the moment: the Olympics.

    In an article for Salon, Mary Elizabeth Williams complains that the media is absolutely “ruining” the Olympics for female athletes.

    This pain and humiliation caused by social media headlines and off-the-cuff commentary from sports journalists isn’t immediately evident when you listen to the women athletes, who are now the majority of the American Olympic team, or women viewers, who make up more than half of the TV audience for the Games.

    But, according to Williams, feminists on Twitter and a couple of niche comedians, it’s there.

    She cites a few examples of transgressions against women, which have gone viral across social justice social media over the weekend. First, there’s the bronze medal female trap shooter, Corey Cogdell-Unrein, who got headlines in Chicago, where she lives, because she happens to be the wife of a player on the Chicago Bears.

    Clearly, this was signaling to the larger world that women were only as important as their husbands, even though the Bears made it their mission to support Cogdell-Unrein with a series of fundraisers, watch parties and even a team photo.


    The fact that she was married to a Bears player was a subject of keen interest here in the Windy City. And while the local news stations played endless mini-documentaries on local athletes—male and female—Cogdell Unrein made additional headlines, because the Bears, which have a huge, dedicated following, were so invested in her success.

    But for Williams, it was merely an example of oppressive Patriarchal sexism. In her Salon post, she quoted a performance artist who had tweeted: “Wow she trained so her whole life for that marriage congratulations unnamed woman.”

    Fortunately for Cogdell Unrein, her husband’s feminist critics were so busy railing against the male gaze and its associated sins that they may have failed to notice that she won her medal for trap shooting—an event similar to the one feminists absolutely ravaged American teenager Ginny Thrasher for winning just days ago.

    Then, of course, the media attacked again, this time “giving credit” for Hungarian swimmer Katina Hosszu’s Olympic success to her husband, who is also her coach. Williams, beside herself, decried NBC commentator Dan Hicks’ enforcement of gender-normative stereotypes that say a woman is nothing without the support of her spouse.

    What Williams and others failed to note about Hick’s comments—Hicks made the point that the swimmer’s husband was instrumental in her remarkable turnaround—was that Hosszu largely agrees with Hick’s sentiment, and that Hicks was trying to give an accurate picture of Hosszu’s relationship with her husband/coach. Shane Tusup is considered revolutionary in his approach to his wife’s training, so much so that his success could mean that coaching systems change across the sport.

    Their work together has changed her Olympic experience. But Williams thinks Hicks is just ascribing a woman’s success to a man—as though there was no other possible, logical explanation that could be derived from both the context of swimming as a team sport, or the individual relationship between a woman and her husband.

    Oh, and then there’s poor Kerri Walsh Jennings, who was ravaged by feminists on Twitter for daring to say she enjoyed being a mother almost as much as she enjoyed kicking the snot out of beach volleyball competitors.


    Heaven forbid a woman make choices in her life based on what she wants—that’s simply too much to bear! Jennings should quit her family and her passions immediately and sign up for Gender Studies classes at her local community college, declare herself a feminist, and begin the world-altering process of complaining about major motion pictures and social media headline writers.

    Frankly, Jennings should have ended her quote by saying “and I’m all out of children.” That might have sent feminist social media straight over the edge.

    At least Jennings managed to escape the wrath of Williams, who targeted Olympic moms in general instead of just Jennings specifically. She’s particularly fatigued by the line that “[b]alancing family with demanding careers is a constant struggle for many women, but you need look no further than the U.S. Olympic team for proof that you can excel at both.”

    The nerve.

    http://heatst.com/culture-wars/spoil...mpic-athletes/

  7. #27
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    9,779

    Default

    Things Are So Out Of Control Now That Feminists Are Demanding Monthly Menstrual Leave

    But what about the wage gap?

    by Lawrence Killium

    Lemme get this straight, feminists are demanding monthly time off for their periods in the name of equality?

    From BBC:
    "Several provinces in China now have laws in place to ensure women can take a day or two a month off work if they suffer from period pain. Events organiser Churan Zheng regularly takes menstrual leave, and says it is an essential option for every woman."

    Seriously? First they complain about not making the same as us for the same amount of work, then they don't want to do the same amount of work? If I'm working every workday that month, and a female coworker is taking 2 days off for "monthly issues", then we're not doing the same amount of work!

    You should be able to take time off for personal issues, we should all be able to agree on that, but having a law that requires women to be given additional time is just ridiculous.
    Advertisement

    Not to mention the unintended consequences here. The people demanding this law want to make sure that women get special rights within their workplaces. The outcome would be that the women who hold jobs would get this special treatment, but the amount of women being hired would suffer immensely. If you had a choice between two equal candidates, but one of them is probably going to require more paid time off than the other, which would you hire for the health of your company? All they're doing is creating a hiring bias against themselves.


    http://www.meninist.net/2016/12/07/t...nstrual-leave/

  8. #28
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    9,779

    Default

    Man Asked To Give Up Seat For Woman Exposes Everyday Sexism Faced By Men

    A man wrote about his train journey from Delhi to Pune via sexism on Quora after TTE asked him to give up his lower berth for a girl. When the boy begged to differ, she threatened to call female helpline.

    September 20, 2016

    Getting a lower berth on Indian trains involves sheer luck and sometimes even god's will. Of course, when you get that elusive seat, chances are someone will exchange it with you.

    Is it okay to give up a lower berth if someone needs it more than you do? Absolutely. But not everyone has a pleasant experience dealing with train berths. According to this post, a man faced verbal harassment from a woman, a TTE and fellow passengers just because he was unwilling to exchange his seat. In fact, the woman allegedly threatened to call a helpline if the man didn't give up his lower berth.

    We reproduce the man's experience in his own words. However, be warned that this story doesn't have the woman's version, and we cannot vouch for the authenticity of the incident.

    Kanishk Sinha who lives in Pune, Maharasthra, was travelling from Delhi to Pune a month ago by train. And with the blessings of Indian Railways (and lady luck), he even scored a lower berth.

    Soon, he was approached by a "pretty girl" who was around 23 years old. The girl looked for her seat and sat beside him. Her luck had got her an upper side berth. She requested the ticket examiner to get her a lower berth instead.

    "She got up and went up to the TTE who had just entered our coach. Judging by her body language and a couple of 'please' that I caught, she seemed to be asking for a favour," Kanishk wrote in the post.

    Her chat with the TTE changed the course of things soon. Quoting Kanishk, "the conversation that happened text can boil anyone's blood even in the happiest of the moments".

    Here's the original post.

    http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/m.../1/768810.html


    comments:


    This is Feminist entitlement that teaches women that they are entitled to whatever they want, including others' rights.

  9. #29
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    9,779

    Default

    Yahoo Feminist CEO Marissa Mayer Led Illegal Purge of Male Employees

    By Ethan Baron - October 6, 2016

    A prominent local media executive fired from Yahoo last year has filed a lawsuit accusing CEO Marissa Mayer of leading a campaign to purge male employees.

    "Mayer encouraged and fostered the use of (an employee performance-rating system) to accommodate management's subjective biases and personal opinions, to the detriment of Yahoo's male employees," said the suit by Scott Ard filed this week in federal district court in San Jose.

    Ard, who worked for Yahoo for 3 ½ years until January 2015, is now editor-in-chief of the Silicon Valley Business Journal. His lawsuit also claims that Yahoo illegally fired large numbers of workers ousted under a performance-rating system imposed by Mayer. That allegation was not tied to gender.

    Yahoo spokeswoman Carolyn Clark defended the company's hiring and performance-review processes, which she said are guided by "fairness." "This lawsuit has no merit. With the unwavering support of our CEO, we are focused on hiring employees with broad and varied backgrounds, and perspectives," Clark said. "Our performance-review process was developed to allow employees at all levels of the company to receive meaningful, regular and actionable feedback from others. "Our performance-review process also allows for high performers to engage in increasingly larger opportunities at our company, as well as for low performers to be transitioned out."

    In addition to Mayer, two other female executives - Kathy Savitt, former chief marketing officer, and Megan Liberman, editor-in-chief of Yahoo News, identified in the lawsuit as Yahoo's vice president of news at the time - are accused in the lawsuit of discriminating on the basis of gender.

    "When Savitt began at Yahoo the top managers reporting to her ... including the chief editors of the verticals and magazines, were less than 20 percent female. Within a year and a half those top managers were more than 80 percent female," the lawsuit said. "Savitt has publicly expressed support for increasing the number of women in media and has intentionally hired and promoted women because of their gender, while terminating, demoting or laying off male employees because of their gender.

    "Of the approximately 16 senior-level editorial employees hired or promoted by Savitt ... in approximately an 18-month period, 14 of them, or 87 percent, were female," the lawsuit said.

    Ard, hired at Yahoo in 2011, said in the suit that until Savitt and Liberman took over management of the firm's media section in early 2014, he had received performance reviews and stock options reflecting "fully satisfactory" work. But in June 2014, Liberman told him that his role as head of editorial programming for Yahoo's home page was being given to a woman Liberman had recently hired, the suit said.

    Then in January 2015, during a performance review phone call, Liberman told Ard he was fired, effective that day, because "his performance was not satisfactory."

    "Liberman stated that she was terminating (Ard) because she had not received a requested breakdown of (his) duties. (Ard) had already provided that very information as requested, however, and reminded Liberman that he had done so," the lawsuit said. "Liberman's excuse for terminating (Ard) was a pretext."

    Right after the call, Ard requested a copy of his performance review and said he wanted to appeal his firing, the suit said. "Both requests were denied and (Ard) was ordered to turn in his laptop and depart the premises immediately."

    Ard's suit also takes aim at the performance-review process he said Mayer imposed. The process allowed high-level managers to arbitrarily change scores of employees they had no contact with, and it "permitted and encouraged discrimination based on gender or any other personal bias held by management."

    Liberman, he said, once "unilaterally lowered" the scores of three men whose performance Ard had evaluated, while she maintained the scores of two women.

    Yahoo's use of this review system to fire many workers individually in a short time period broke the U.S. and California Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) acts, which mandate advance notification of mass layoffs, the suit alleged. "Marissa Mayer became CEO on a wave of optimism and then engaged in a sleight of hand to terminate large numbers of employees without announcing a single layoff," the suit said.

    Yahoo's diversity reports indicate that the percentage of women in leadership positions at the company rose slightly to 24 percent in 2015 from 23 percent in 2014.

    http://www.mercurynews.com/2016/10/06/yahoo-ceo-marissa-mayer-led-illegal-purge-of-male-employees-lawsuit-charges/



    comments:

    Feminists are getting into power positions every where from government to business to education, so such actions against men should be expected to increase and become worse.

  10. #30
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    9,779

    Default

    Oxford University Bans Gender Specific Titles

    First 'he' and 'she' became 'ze'. Now 'Mr and Mrs' is BANNED: Oxford University tells colleges to 'remove gender-specific titles'

    By Rory Tingle - 18 December 2016

    Oxford University has told colleges and academic departments to remove gender-specific titles such as Mr and Mrs from their websites and leaflets.

    The guidance, contained in a document from the Equality and Diversity Unit, suggests only academic terms like Dr and Prof should be retained.

    It advised that while the process of removing gender-specific titles is underway, people should be given the option of appearing without any prefix.

    It comes after reports that a leaflet from Oxford's students' union told people to use gender neutral pronouns like 'ze' instead of 'he' or 'she' to avoid causing offence.

    The Union has since denied ever issuing this advice, saying it would be 'totally counterproductive'.

    Gay rights campaigner Peter Tatchell supported the University's stance on gender specific titles.

    He told MailOnline: 'A person's name is usually sufficient to identify their gender if an identification is required for some good, practical reason.

    'It is a positive thing to not always emphasise gender. We are all human. Why does our gender matter so much and why should it be constantly highlighted by titles?

    'In an age when more people are defining themselves as transgender or gender-fluid, using gender-based titles ignores the new reality and could cause needless offence.'

    The University of Oxford Transgender Guidance report was published in June 2013 and remains online.

    It reads: 'The Equality and Diversity Unit suggests that departments and colleges remove all gender-specific titles from websites and print information, retaining only academic titles such as Dr, Prof.

    'In the meantime individuals should be given the option of appearing without a title.'

    The Equality and Diversity Unit's website states that the guidance is currently being revised.

    An Oxford University spokesman told MailOnline he had nothing to add to the advice already published.

    Earlier this year, Jordan Peterson, a professor in Canada, uploaded a video on YouTube discussing his refusal to use gender neutral pronouns.

    He said he was heckled and his office door was glued shut.

    'UK universities should resist this. Whole disciplines have become irretrievable from these doctrines,' he told The Sunday Times.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ic-titles.html

  11. #31
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    9,779

    Default

    Stop Calling Them "Boys" and "Girls", Schools Told

    Stop calling them boys and girls! Advisers who are paid £200k to help train teachers say using sex specific terms in the classroom is unfair to transgenders

    By Jonathan Petre and Sanchez Manning - 10 December 2016

    Children as young as seven are to be taught in schools to stop using the terms 'boys' and 'girls' - in case they discriminate against transgender pupils.

    A guidebook for teachers, parents and pupils to be sent to schools around Britain advises against using language that suggests there are only two genders. It also condemns saying 'ladies' and 'gents'.

    Instead the book - described as 'damaging' by critics - offers a bewildering array of alternative terms to describe gender and sexuality. Children who think of themselves as being the gender with which they were born are described as 'cisgender'. Other terms offered include 'panromantic', 'intersex' and 'genderqueer'.

    The book - Can I Tell You About Gender Diversity? - also features the use of hormone blockers by a fictional 12-year-old 'transitioning' from female to male in order to stop the onset of puberty. The treatment is controversially available to children on the NHS, as first revealed by The Mail on Sunday.

    Billed by the publishers as 'the first book to explain medical transitioning for children aged seven and above', it is distributed by Educate & Celebrate, a Government-funded body that goes into primary and secondary schools to give lessons on 'gender diversity'.

    The organisation received £200,000 of taxpayer-funding from former Education Secretary Nicky Morgan and is endorsed by Ofsted. Earlier this year, the watchdog described as 'innovative and visionary' their work educating staff and children on gender and sexuality.

    But politicians and leading religious figures last night lambasted the advice to stop saying boys and girls as 'damaging'.

    The book follows Kit, a 12-year-old who is transitioning from female to male, and features illustrations that may appeal to young readers, including one of a 'gender-neutral' unicorn whose genitals are masked with a star. A key passage from the book advises that the use of 'boys' and 'girls' excludes transgender children - and reinforces the idea that there are behavioural differences between the sexes.

    Former Tory Party chairman Lord Tebbit said: 'I think it is damaging to children to introduce uncertainty into their minds.'

    Sir Anthony Seldon, the former Master of Wellington College, said: 'We have to respect the feelings of everybody, including teachers and parents who want traditional modes followed.'

    And the Bishop of Chester, the Right Reverend Peter Forster, added: 'This is likely to sow more confusion than clarity.'

    As an alternative to using the terms 'boys' or 'girls', the book by C.J. Atkinson - a poet, academic and 'trans advocate' - suggests: 'It may instead be preferable to group students into classes, or houses, or pupils.' In another part of the book, Kit talks about his fictional school, explaining that when children in his class were split into groups they were divided by numbers or heights. Kit says: 'This meant that when we were asked to do something, I didn't feel that I was weird or different.'

    Other labels in the book include 'transman', which describes a man who was born female but who identifies as male; 'transwoman', which indicates the opposite; and 'panromantic' - someone who has a 'romantic attraction towards people of all gender identities'.

    The book will be released by publishers Jessica Kingsley next month. Educate & Celebrate, which holds hundreds of workshops in schools, will send copies to the 120 'best practice' schools with which it works. It expects hundreds more head teachers to buy the book.

    Founder Elly Barnes, who was awarded the OBE for her contribution to education, equality and diversity, said the book was 'much-needed'. She added: 'Not everyone identifies as male or female - that is fact.'

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...nsgenders.html

    comments:

    This is the invention of Feminists. They have invented over 30 genders for people to use. They fill influential positions (ie schools) where they can corrupt the most people.

  12. #32
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    9,779

    Default

    Washington Post Op-Ed Claiming That The Virgin Mary's Purity Is Offensive To Victims Of Rape

    by Thomas D. Williams, Ph.D. - 18 Dec 2016

    In an article titled, "Our culture of purity celebrates the Virgin Mary. As a rape victim, that hurts me," Ruth Everhart explains that especially in the Advent lead-up to Christmas, Mary becomes a problem for many Christians because of her pristine purity.

    Mary "set an impossibly high bar," Everhart writes. "Now the rest of us are stuck trying to be both a virgin and a mother at the same time."

    As a rape victim, this has been especially difficult for the author, she says, which led to her becoming a pastor, in order "to come to terms with Mary's story."

    Everhart writes that she doesn't blame her sense of ruin "entirely" on the Virgin Mary. In fact, it isn't really Mary's fault, she states; it's the Church's for manipulating Mary into a model of purity.

    "Mary is not responsible for what we've done to her story," she writes. "Church culture has overfocused on virginity and made it into an idol of sexual purity. When it comes to female experience, the church seems compelled to shrink and distort and manipulate."

    To some people, "vaginas are inherently dirty," she states. "They can never be purified."

    "And isn't that the definition of hopelessness? Does it bother you that half of the human population is condemned to hopelessness because their body parts can never be pure?" she asks rhetorically.

    Never mind that you can attend a thousand Christian church services without ever hearing a sermon on purity. Never mind that virginity is rarely held up as a model in our sex-soaked western culture, even within our churches. Never mind that Christians have elaborated an entire "Theology of the Body" to help people appreciate the human body and sexuality as a beautiful gift of God.

    For Everhart, it's the Christians' fault when people feel sexually dirty.

    "Maybe the church could ask body-owners to weigh in about their experiences," she writes, as if most Christian preachers were incorporeal beings. "Most people have thoughts and feelings about their sexual selves. Having a body is complicated. It involves trial and error," she adds, as if this were somehow news to Christians.

    Yet, teaching young people the value of purity or to appreciate abstinence before marriage is no solution, Everhart contends. Purity is no model for today's generation.

    "We want to pretend sexuality is something we can lock in a box and keep on a shelf. But a lockbox won't work. Neither will a chastity belt or a purity ring. Certainly not the abstinence pledges they make young folks sign," she writes.

    And turning to the Virgin Mary, Everhart asks: "How do you feel about what the patriarchy has done with you?"

    It's a good thing Mary doesn't answer. She might be tempted to note that she fared considerably better at the hands of the "patriarchy" than she has from her feminist sisters who twist her story into something political, petty, and ultimately uninspiring.

    http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...by-her-purity/


    comments:


    This "impossible high bar" was not even a bar to reach for women, before feminism, when chastity was the norm. Feminists have even attacked God so it's no surprise that they would attack the Virgin Mary....the woman who in Islam is regarded as one of only four women to reach (spiritual) perfection.

  13. #33
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    9,779

    Default

    Saudi To Penalize Men Found Beating Their Wives

    15 April 2014

    Saudi Arabia will implement next week a law to help curb domestic violence in the kingdom, with men found guilty of beating their wives facing payment of compensation and possible prison terms, Arabiya.net has learned.

    The minimum and maximum amounts of compensation for the offence were set at 5,000 Riyals ($1,340) and 50,000 Riyals ($13,000) respectively. Husbands found beating their wives could also face a minimum of one month prison and a maximum jail sentence of one year. Repeat offenders will face double the punishment.

    Criminalizing the behavior falls under the umbrella of a recently introduced system for the protection against domestic violence in the kingdom.

    Dr. Mohammad al-Harbi, the general director of Social Protection at the Social Affairs Ministry, told AlArabiya.net that the new system was "developed by jurists to ensure the highest standards."

    "Over a period of three months we held workshops in different areas in the country with participation from those involved in human rights and we also tasked a consultancy firm to prepare the [system] so that the ministry is not accused of having put in place everything," he added.

    He stressed that the ministry did not "interfere in drafting the regulations of the system."

    "The jurists and human rights groups set them," he added.

    Legislation aimed at protecting women, children and domestic workers against domestic violence was first passed in Saudi Arabia in late August.

    The "Protection from Abuse" law was hailed as a landmark step in the kingdom which has faced criticism for not doing enough to prevent domestic violence.

    http://english.alarabiya.net/en/News...eir-wives.html


    Husband To Be Jailed, Flogged For Slapping Wife


    Judge says verdict based on need to respect spouse

    By Habib Toumi - November 13, 2015

    A court in Eastern Saudi Arabia has sentenced a Saudi husband to one week in jail and to 30 lashes for slapping his wife and spitting on her.

    The case was taken to the public prosecution by wife's brother who reported that her husband had an argument with her and slapped her twice and spat on her.

    Summoned by the police, the husband admitted he had abused his wife, arguing that he was angry with her for leaving the house several times, Saudi news site Al Marsad reported.

    The case was referred to the court and the judge ruled that the husband had violated the Islamic principle of respecting people and not hitting them.

    In his verdict, the judge asked the husband to give a pledge not to slap or spit on his wife again.

    The judge also told the wife that she should not leave the house without informing her husband.

    http://gulfnews.com/news/gulf/saudi-...wife-1.1619505


    Over 500,000 Saudis Beaten by Wives


    Complaints revealed by Riyadh-based Waei Centre for Social Advice

    November 02, 2014

    More than half a million Saudi men have revealed that they are systematically beaten up by their wives
    , but most of them will not resort to court.

    The complaints by the husbands were revealed by the Riyadh-based Waei Centre for Social Advice, which said it received six new complaints on Monday.

    "We have received more than 557,000 complaints by Saudi men who are beaten up by their wives and needed advice," the centre's manager Sheikh Adel Al Mutawa said.

    "Most of them do not want their names to be known and want to keep the issue as a secret. They just do not want to take their wives to court to avert embarrassment," he told the Saudi Arabic language daily 'Sabq'.

    http://www.emirates247.com/news/over...11-02-1.568522

    comments:

    The west narrative is that women are abused and don't have any rights in the Muslim countries, especially Saudi Arabia. As these news stories show that women have more rights than men over there. Women can beat up their husbands without any penalty and if the husband fights back then he is punished by the law.

  14. #34
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    9,779

    Default

    This is how lies are spread to promote feminists' myths about "oppression of women". This is how "research" is misreported to fool people.


    The Wage Gap Lie



    This is the kind of lazy "research" that only helps to advance false narratives that don't stand up to closer scrutiny.

    The Economic Policy Institute (a left-leaning think tank) released their analysis of a recent population survey [1] to inform us that there is still a wage gap between men and women. The implication is, of course, that women face unfair discrimination in the workplace when it comes to wages.

    What the EPI conveniently didn't control for was the differing majors and career choices of women and men. In fact, when you click on the link to the piece, they admit:

    "By definition, young college graduates have the same level of education—which is to say, they all have college degrees. (It should be noted that these data do not allow for differentiation between college major or college quality, whether measured in quality of education or access to career connections via alumni networks.)"

    This is an important factor to so blatantly leave out.

    Indeed, research has shown that woman and men have vastly different interests when it comes to career choices [2,3]. Moreover, men are more likely to be interested and pursue careers in higher paying fields [4]. An NBER paper concluded:

    "There is no gender gap in wages among men and women with similar family roles. Comparing the wage gap between women and men ages 35-43 who have never married and never had a child, we find a small observed gap in favor of women, which becomes insignificant after accounting for differences in skills and job and workplace characteristics.

    This observation is an important one because it suggests that the factors underlying the gender gap in pay primarily reflect choices made by men and women given their different societal roles, rather than labor market discrimination against women due to their sex”
    [5]

    Of course, none of this helps advance the narrative the EPI likes, so it was intentionally ignored. This kind of lazy "research" does nothing to help anyone, and should never be taken seriously.

    References:

    [1] http://www.epi.org/publication/same-...different-pay/
    [2] http://econpapers.repec.org/article/..._3a543-554.htm
    [3] 46539522 Examining the obstacles to broadening participation in computing evidence from a survey of professional workers
    [4] https://www.stlouisfed.org/Publicati...han-Most-Think
    [5] http://www.nber.org/papers/w11240.pdf?new_window=1

  15. #35
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    9,779

    Default

    CDC Study: More Men than Women Victims of Partner Abuse

    National Study: More Men than Women Victims of Intimate Partner Physical Violence, Psychological Aggression

    Over 40% of victims of severe physical violence are men

    Bert H. Hoff, J.D. *

    SUMMARY:
    According to a 2010 national survey by the Centers for Disease Control and Department of Justice, in the last 12 months more men than women were victims of intimate partner physical violence and over 40% of severe physical violence was directed at men. Men were also more often the victim of psychological aggression and control over sexual or reproductive health. Despite this, few services are available to male victims of intimate partner violence.

    Physical violence

    More men than women were victims of intimate partner physical violence within the past year, according to a national study funded by the Centers for Disease Control and U.S. Department of Justice. According to the National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (hereinafter NISVS) released in December, 2011, within the last 12 months an estimated 5,365,000 men and 4,741,000 women were victims of intimate partner physical violence. (Black, M.C. et al., 2011, Tables 4.1 and 4.2) 1 This finding contrasts to the earlier National Violence Against Women Survey (Tjaden, P. G., & Thoennes, N., 2000)(hereinafter NVAWS), which estimated that 1.2 million women and 835,000 men were victims of intimate partner physical violence in the preceding 12 months. (One-year prevalence “are considered to be more accurate [than lifetime rates] because they do not depend on recall of events long past” (Straus, 2005, p. 60))

    If one adds in rape (606,000 victims) the total is 5,427,000 women-but there is an issue of double-counting of an incident as both rape and intimate partner physical violence. 2 Of the lifetime rape victims, 82.8% were also victims of physical violence. This suggests that a sizeable portion of the 606,000 rape victims are included in the 5,427,000 physical violence victims. But even if one ignores the double-counting of rape and physical violence, the number of female victims of rape and/or physical violence is 5,427,000 for women, contrasted with 5,365,000 male victims of physical violence, so it is safe to say that about half of the victims of physical violence are men.

    There is a significant difference between the NVAWS and NISVS surveys, in the number of victims of physical violence (4,741,000 vs. 1,300,000 women and 5,365,000 vs. 835,000 men), for which I have no explanation. In the 2001 NVAWS survey, some 38% of the victims of intimate physical violence were men, but in the 2011 NISVS survey 53% were men. This is consistent with earlier studies showing that between 1975 and 1992 (Straus and Gelles, 1988, Straus, 1995), between 1998 and 2005 (Catalano , 2005) and between 2009 and 2010 (Truman, 2011, Table 6) violence against women dropped but violence against males stayed steady. (As a point of reference, Statistics Canada (2006, 2011) reports that 45.5% of the victims of present or former spousal violence were men. The 2010 National Crime Victimization Survey (Truman, 2011, Table 5) shows only 407,700 female and 101,530 male victims of intimate partner violence: for women that’s less than a tenth of the victims reported in NISVS.)

    This drop in intimate partner violence against females and steady rate of violence against males raises an interesting policy question. Given that there are many thousands of support programs, Web sites and public-interest media items for female victims of domestic violence, and no programs and only a handful of Web sites for male victims, perhaps males, but not females, have got the message that domestic violence is wrong. There are many programs for men to stand up against domestic violence by men, and no programs urging women to stand up against domestic violence by women.

    This ratio of men to woman victims of intimate partner physical violence is not reported in the Executive Summary or other fact sheets of the NISVS survey. Instead, the NISVS focuses on severe physical violence-but omits a major contributor to severe physical violence against men reported in the earlier NVAWS survey. Some 21.6% of the male victims in that 2001 survey were threatened with a knife, contrasted to 12.7% of the women (Hoff, 2001, Table 1). The NISVS omission of threats by knife or gun is not only curious, but it flies in the face of the Centers for Disease Control’s own recommendations on data for intimate partner violence (Salzman, T. et al, 1999) The section of that document that covers the victim’s experience of intimate partner violence includes sections on sexual violence, physical violence, threats of physical or sexual violence and “psychological / emotional abuse.” (Salzman, T., 1999, §3.3) 3 But NISVS survey respondents were not asked about being threatened with a knife or gun.

    Notwithstanding that omission, the NISVS 2011 survey reports that in the last 12 months, 41.7% of the victims of severe physical violence were men. (Tables 4.7 and 4.8) 4 Of the 4,741,000 female victims of violence, two-thirds (3,163,000 or 66.7%) were subjected to severe physical violence. (Table 4.7) For men, over 4 out of 10 (2,266,000 or 42.3%) were subjected to severe physical violence. The number of men is smaller, but that is still 2.26 million men. Well over $1 billion is spent to help female victims, but there are virtually no services available in the country for over 2 million men who are victims of severe physical violence by an intimate partner.

    Psychological aggression, control of reproductive or sexual health


    What is more violent, brandishing a knife at your spouse in the heat of an argument, refusing to wear a condom, or calling your spouse fat or stupid? NISVS did not ask about knife-wielding, but did ask about condoms and name-calling. Men were more often the victims of both psychological aggression (“expressive aggression” and “coercive control”) and control of reproductive or sexual health.

    Name-calling is one of the forms of “expressive aggression,” which includes acting angry in a way that seemed dangerous, name-calling and insulting remarks. 5 The other category of “psychological aggression” is “coercive control,” such as restricting access to friends or relatives and having to account for all your time. 6 In the last 12 months, 20,548,000 men (18.1%) and 16,578,000 (13.9%) women were subjected to psychological aggression. For women, this was split fairly evenly between expressive aggression and coercive control, while for men, 15.2% were subjected to coercive control and 9.3% to expressive aggression. The main forms of expressive aggression against women were insults (64.3%) and name-calling (58.0%). For men the top items were being called names (51.6%) and being told they were losers (42.4%)

    NISVS did not present detailed data on control of reproductive or sexual health. It summarized that “Approximately 10.4% (or an estimated 11.7 million) of men in the United States reported ever having an intimate partner who tried to get pregnant when they did not want to or tried to stop them from using birth control.” (p. 48). “Approximately 8.6% (or an estimated 10.3 million) of women in the United States reported ever having an intimate partner who tried to get them pregnant when they did not want to.” P. 48)

    What services are available for men?


    Studies show that men are less likely than women to seek help, and those that do have to overcome internal and external hurdles. (Galdas et al., 2005)(Cook 2009)

    There has been little research on responses to male victims of intimate partner violence, in part because agencies refuse to fund such research. For example, the U.S. Department of Justice solicitation of proposals for Justice Responses to Intimate Partner Violence and Stalking (p. 8) stated “What will not be funded: 4. Proposals for research on intimate partner violence against, or stalking of, males of any age or females under the age of 12.” In the few studies done, many men report that hotline workers say they only help women, imply or state the men must be the instigators, ridicule them or refer them to batterers’ programs. Police often will fail to respond, ridicule the man or arrest him. (Cook 2009)(Douglas and Hines, 2011)

    In 2008 Douglas and Hines conducted the first-ever large-scale national survey of men who sought help for heterosexual physical intimate partner violence. (Douglas and Hines, 2011) Some 302 men were surveyed. This study found that between half and two-thirds of the men who contacted the police, a DV agency, or a DV hotline reported that these resources were “not at all helpful.” The study elaborates:

    A large proportion of those who sought help from DV agencies (49.9%), DV hotlines (63.9%), or online resources (42.9%) were told, “We only help women.” Of the 132 men who sought help from a DV agency, 44.1% (n=86) said that this resource was not at all helpful; further, 95.3% of those men (n=81) said that they were given the impression that the agency was biased against men. Some of the men were accused of being the batterer in the relationship: This happened to men seeking help from DV agencies (40.2%), DV hotlines (32.2%) and online resources (18.9%). Over 25% of those using an online resource reported that they were given a phone number for help which turned out to be the number for a batterer’s program. The results from the open-ended questions showed that 16.4% of the men who contacted a hotline reported that the staff made fun them, as did 15.2% of the men who contacted local DV agencies. (p. 7)

    Police arrested the man as often as the violent partner (33.3% vs. 26.5%) 7 . (p. 8) The partner was deemed the “primary aggressor” in 54.9% of the cases. In 41.5% of the cases where men called the police, the police asked if he wanted his partner arrested; in 21% the police refused to arrest the partner, and in 38.7% the police said there was nothing they could do and left.

    Some 68% of the men turning to mental health professionals said the professional took his concern seriously, but only 30.1% offered information on how to get help from a DV program. Although 106 men suffered severe physical injury, only 54 sought help from a medical provider. Some 90.1% were asked how they got their injuries, and 60.4% answered truthfully. Only 14% got information on getting help from a program for intimate partner violence.

    The best source for help was friends, neighbors, relatives, lawyers, ministers and the like. 84.9% turned to one or more of these sources, and 90% found them helpful. Two-thirds of the men sought online help and support, with half the men surveyed using Web sites and a quarter using an online support group. Some 69.1% found online support helpful; 44.9% used a resource for male victims and 42.6% for anyone experiencing partner aggression.

    The study concludes that informal help, mental health and medical services were the most helpful. The services least helpful were those that are the core of the DV service system: DV agencies, DV hotlines, and the police. On the one hand, about 25% of men who sought help from DV hotlines were connected with resources that were helpful. On the other hand, nearly 67% of men reported that these DV agencies and hotline were not at all helpful. Many reported being turned away. The qualitative accounts in our research tell a story of male helpseekers who are often doubted, ridiculed, and given false information.

    This failure of service impacts men’s physical and mental health.

    Specifically, for each additional negative experience with helpseeking, men’s odds of meeting the cut-off for PTSD increased 1.37 times. For each additional positive experience, these helpseekers were about 40% less likely to have abused alcohol in the previous year. These findings hold even after controlling for other traumatic experiences, such as childhood victimization and being injured by a partner. (p. 10)

    The NISVS survey makes a half-hearted effort to remedy this situation. Buried in its recommendations is the sentence “It is also important that services are specifically designed to meet the needs of a wide range of different populations such as teens, older adults, men, gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered people.” We can do better than this.

    What should we do?


    We need to recognize intimate partner violence by women, understand it, and recognize it as a serious social problem.

    Public service announcements need to be de-gendered. Right now, they focus almost exclusively on intimate partner violence against women. There needs to be more public education about violence to men. There are many Web sites on intimate partner violence against women. These are all woman-centered, or use gender-neutral language. They tend to minimize violence against men. There is only a handful of sites addressing domestic violence against men. None of these (except for the Clark County IN prosecutor’s site) receive any government, foundation or corporate support.

    Feminist theory states that intimate partner violence is an accepted form of “power and control” by men in a patriarchal society. But according to Straus (2011) the predominant immediate motives for violence, by women as well men, are frustration and anger at some misbehavior by the partner. “They are efforts to coerce the partner into stopping some socially undesirable behavior or to practice some socially desirable behavior. … Studies have found that women engage in coercive control as much as men.”

    Further, intimate partner violence is more likely to be mutual or female-initiated than male-initiated. In an analysis of 36 general-population studies on IPV and dating violence, Straus (2011) found that women were half again as likely to perpetrate serious physical violence. The 14 studies which also examined whether the violence resulted in physical injury showed that men inflicted injuries more often than women, but the difference was not that great. The rate for women injuring a partner was 88% of the male rate. Studies with a high percentage of men inflicting injury are, without exception, also studies with a high percentage of women injuring a partner.

    Straus found that the typical pattern is that when there are severe assaults, in almost half couples, both severely assault. The two studies with extremely high rates of mutual assault (68% and 78%) are studies of very young couples and those results are consistent with a large number of studies that have found extremely high rates for very young couples. Studies which asked specifically about self-defense found that only a small percentage of female assaults were in self-defense, such 5, 10, or 15. For one study that found high rates of self-defense, the percentage was slightly greater for men (56%) than for women (42%) (Harned, 2001).

    There is other evidence which casts doubt on the idea that intimate partner violence by women is primarily in self-defense. Eight studies providing data on who hit first have found that women initiate from 30 to 73% (median=45%) of violent incidents. One found high rates of violence by women, even when male violence was statistically controlled.

    Is there “gender symmetry” in intimate partner violence? As Straus (2011) points out, studies often confound symmetry in perpetration with symmetry in effect. Women do experience more physical injury and psychological impact, but men experience these as well (Douglas & Hines, 2010). As IPV expert Strauss puts it, saying that violence by women is not a serious social problem “is like arguing that cancer is not an important medical problem because many more die of heart disease.” (2011, p. 284)

    In the last 12 months 5.4 million men were victims of intimate partner violence, 2.3 million victims of serious physical violence, yet there are virtually no programs to serve them.

    Intimate partner violence by women increases the chances that they will themselves be victims of intimate partner violence.

    Intimate partner violence is morally wrong and criminal, but there are few programs for women batterers to show them better ways to resolve conflicts in a relationship.

    Public education efforts are need to focus on girls and women. As Straus (2011, p. 285) states,

    It is not sufficient for prevention programs to be gender neutral. They need to be explicitly directed to girls and women as well as boys and men. In addition, more than just awareness of female perpetration is needed. The target audience of women and girls also needs to be informed that PV by a woman is morally wrong, a criminal act, and that it is a danger to women because it increases the probability of her partner being violent (Straus, 2005).

    States need to offer domestic violence services to men. Many say they do, but none have data on the number of men served. Some of these programs for men are male batterer programs. The Valley Oasis Center in California and a program in Longview, WA are two of only a handful of DV programs offering equal services to men. In King County (Seattle) when I asked about services for battered men I was referred to a male better program. The Snohomish County program north of Seattle says they serve males, but men who have tried to get help inform me they were sent away. Courts in California and West Virginia have found that DV programs discriminate on the basis of sex, in violation of equal protection provisions of their constitutions. (Woods v. Horton, 2008).

    In short, we need to recognize that intimate partner violence is a people problem, not a women’s problem.


    Acknowledgements


    I would like to thank Dr. Denise Hines (Clark University, Clark Anti-Violence Education, CAVE) and Dr. Murray Straus (University of New Hampshire, Family Research Laboratory) for comments and suggestions which aided in revising the paper.

    References

    Black, M.C., Basile, K.C., Breiding, M.J., Smith, S.G., Walters, M.L., Merrick, M.T., Chen, J., & Stevens, M.R. (2011). The National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS): 2010 Summary Report. Atlanta, GA: National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/ViolencePreventio...port2010-a.pdf

    Catalano, S. (2005). Intimate partner violence in the United States 1993-2005. U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics. Retrieved from: http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/int...able/vomen.cfm National Crime Victimization Survey data.

    Cook, P. W. (2009). Abused men: The hidden side of domestic violence (2nd ed.). Westport: Praeger.

    Douglas, E.M. and Hines, D. (2011) “The helpseeking experiences of men who sustain intimate partner violence: An overlooked population and implications for practice.” J. Fam. Vio. 2011 Aug;26(6):473-485 Published online 04 June 2011. National Institute of Mental Health Grant Number 5R21MH074590. Available at: http://www.clarku.edu/faculty/dhines...%20victims.pdf

    Galdas, P. M., Cheater, F., & Marshall, P. (2005). Men and health helpseeking behaviour: literature review. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 49(6), 616-622

    Hines, D. A., Brown, J., & Dunning, E. (2007). Characteristics of callers to the domestic abuse helpline for men. Journal of Family Violence, 22(2), 63-72. Available at: http://www.clarku.edu/faculty/dhines...007%20DAHM.pdf

    Hoff, B. H. (2001), The Risk of Serious Physical Injury from Assault by a Woman Intimate: A Re-Examination of National Violence Against Women Survey Data on Type of Assault by an Intimate. MenWeb on-line Journal (ISSN: 1095-5240 http://www.menweb.org/NVAWSrisk.htm) Retrieved from Web on Jan. 18, 2011.

    Saltzman LE, Fanslow JL, McMahon PM, Shelley GA. Intimate Partner Violence Surveillance: Uniform definitions and recommended data elements, Version 1.0. Atlanta (GA): National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 1999. This is the most current version of this document, as of January 19, 2011.

    Statistics Canada (2011 January). Family Violence in Canada: A Statistical Profile Catalogue no. 85-224-X, pp. 7-8. Retrieved from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-224-...010000-eng.pdf

    Statistics Canada (2006, October). Measuring violence against women: Statistical trends 2006 (Catalogue No. 85-570-XIE). Ottawa, ON: Author. Retrieved from http://www.statcan.ca/english/resear...XIE2006001.pdf (654,000 women and 546,000 men – men 45.5%)

    Straus, M.A. (2011). Gender symmetry and mutuality in perpetration of clinical-level partner violence: Empirical evidence and implications for prevention and treatment. Aggression and Violent Behavior 16 (2011) 279-288. Available at: http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/V78%20...blished-11.pdf

    Straus, M. A. (2005). Women’s violence toward men is a serious social problem. In D.R. Loseke, R. J. Gelles & M. M. Cavanaugh (Eds.), Current controversies on famlly violence, 2nd Edltlon (2nd Edition ed., pp. 55-77). Newbury Park: Sage Publications. Available at: http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/VB33R%...ward%20Men.pdf

    Straus, M. A. (1995). Trends in cultural norms and rates of partner violence: an update to 1992. In S. Stith & M. A. Straus (Eds.), Understanding partner violence: Prevalence, causes, consequences, and solutions (pp. 30-33). Minneapolis: National Council on Family Relations. Available at: http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/V56.pdf

    Straus, M. A., & Gelles, R. J. (1988). How violent are American families?: Estimates from the National Family Violence Resurvey and other studies. In G. T. Hotaling & D. Finkelhor (Eds.), Family abuse and its consequences: New directions in research (pp. 14-36). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Tjaden, P. G., & Thoennes, N. (2000). Full Report of Prevalence, Incidence and Consequences of Violence Against Women: Findings from the National Violence Against Women Survey. U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice & Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Research Report, Nov. 2000. NCJ 183781

    Truman, J.S., (2011). National Crime Victimization Survey: Criminal Victimization, 2010. U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics. NCJ 235508

    U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice (2005, Nov.). Solicitation for Proposals: Justice Responses to Intimate Partner Violence and Stalking. Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 16.560 CFDA Title: National Institute of Justice Research, Evaluation, and Development Project. Grants Grants.gov Funding No. 2006-NIJ-1207 SL 000734. The 2007 solicitation, Intimate Partner Violence and Stalking: Research for Policy and Practice, CFDA No. 16.560, the last year of the research for policy and practice funding, states: “Within these priority areas, applicants may submit proposals that examine the criminal justice response to intimate partner violence and/or stalking as it occurs within diverse populations. This might include, but is not limited to, studies that focus on ethnic, racial, and language minority groups including immigrants; Native American women; women who live in rural areas; women with cognitive, developmental, or physical disabilities; women with vision impairments; elderly women; women living in institutional settings; women who are migrant workers; women involved in prostitution; and homeless women.” (p. 5)

    Woods v. Horton (2008), 167 Cal.App.4th 658 CA Ct. of Appeal 3rd Dist. 08 C.D.O.S. 13247 “We find the gender-based classifications in the challenged statutes that provide programs for victims of domestic violence violate equal protection. We find male victims of domestic violence are similarly situated to female victims for purposes of the statutory programs and no compelling state interest justifies the gender classification. We reform the affected statutes by invalidating the exemption of males and extending the statutory benefits to men, whom the Legislature improperly excluded.” See Men & Women Against Discrimination v. The Family Protection Services Bd., Kanawa County (VWA) Circuit Court, Civil Cause No. 08-C-1056. Decision filed Oct. 2, 2009.

    Source: http://batteredmen.com/NISVS.htm

  16. #36
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    9,779

    Default

    Feminism Made Me Hate Myself

    by Amberlee N - March 04, 2017

    According to feminists, it doesn’t matter how hard you work if you’re a woman: you are always going to be less successful than a man would be in your situation. If you are female, then your entire life you have been treated as a second-class citizen: your parents treated you differently than they would a boy, your teachers have imposed gendered expectations in the classroom, and the workplace is wrought with unchallenged bigotry and unconscious bias. That’s why so many high-paying careers have such a noticeable gender disparity, right? So the narrative goes.

    This feminist myth runs so deep that sometimes, even otherwise conservative, right-leaning females find themselves susceptible to the spin. Take myself as an example: my entire life I have been some form of conservative, both socially and fiscally. From a young age, I was a strong student and an independent thinker, and I had a close family that loved and supported me, Unfortunately, while I had no particular interest in feminism or gender theory, the noise pollution of the feminist victim narrative still managed to echo in my ears as a youngster.

    I’m still not exactly sure when or how I ended up this way, but by the time I was wrapping up my teen years, I had bought into the idea that girls had a harder time in subjects like science and math because they were on the receiving end of sexism. If a girl felt insecure or lacked confidence in her ability to compete in STEM fields, it was because of a thoughtless teacher, an unsupportive parent, or a baseless cultural norm that taught her to feel that way. If girls would only break the shackles of our culture’s learned biases to reach their true potential, occupational gender imbalances would evaporate and we all would finally achieve true equality.

    It’s a pretty heavy weight to put on a teenage girl, convincing her the world sabotaged her because she’s female. Many gals in my situation would have just embraced the full victim narrative and begun campaigning for the latest trendy awareness campaign. Fortunately, I wasn’t that far gone. My parents had taught me well, and I still believed that if I worked hard, I could overcome my sexist social conditioning to at least partially mitigate my aversion to math and science.

    Unfortunately, ineptitude is not as socially constructed as feminism led me to believe. In spite of my best efforts, my lack of prowess in the STEM realm continued to exasperate me. I wasn’t even bad in those courses, per se; I just wasn’t anywhere near as good as I was in classes such as English or social studies. I had rejected all of the narratives that I was told I needed to reject, and yet I was still coming up a failure.

    As a result, I felt resentful towards a society that had treated me differently for being a girl, and I felt weak for not being strong enough to overpower my social conditioning and achieve success. For an overachieving keener like myself, it was exhausting and infuriating. I was perpetually frustrated with myself, and I felt as if I was failing to live up to my full potential as a woman. What was I doing wrong? Was I doomed to be defined by the sexist specters of my past?

    Just as I can’t tell you exactly how or when I bought into the lies that convinced me to be so hard on myself, neither can I quite recall how I finally came around to the truth. It was sometime during university; as I became more involved in the conservative sphere, I became less dependent upon the cultural narratives and unchallenged assumptions that had previously informed my view of the world. I realized that men and women having different aptitudes and preferring different occupations weren't a sign of discrimination or misogyny; it was the result of belonging to a sexually dimorphic species, with each gender possessing traits drawing them towards certain statistical norms. As long as people are choosing their careers and education freely, why should it matter if most engineers are men and most nurses are not?

    In the case of yours truly, it isn’t anyone’s fault that my main skills in life favor compositions over computations. As it turns out, I’m just good with language and communication, and not so good at calculus. That doesn’t mean I’m deficient or inferior to somebody who is; it just means I have a different set of talents. Making peace with this fact has made me a more contented and productive person; I like who I am, and I enjoy doing the things I am good at.

    Equality of outcome between the sexes isn’t important, as long as we have equality of opportunity. In all of human history, never has another civilization granted women the unprecedented number of choices that we enjoy in the west today.

    Let’s not deprive girls of their ability to make use of that freedom; society needs to stop fixating on STEM gender quotas, telling girls that misogynists and sexists are out to get them. It’s okay for girls to be different from boys, or to have stereotypically girly skills and interests; as long as they’re choosing those things for themselves, feminists ought to mind their own business.

    https://thecanadiandaily.com/culture...me-hate-myself

  17. #37
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    9,779

    Default

    Men are beginning to recognise their appalling vulnerability when it comes to dealing with the opposite sex, and they are individually waking up to the ridiculous risks they face. Almost 70 per cent of divorces are now initiated by women, and typically it is the man who stands to lose everything — his children, his home, his future income and his reputation. With suicide being the biggest killer of young men in the UK, and with those experiencing relationship breakdown being at the highest risk, he also stands to lose his life. In response, many men are now avoiding long-term commitment, or are simply turning their backs on relationships with women altogether.

    As a result, young men are rejecting traditional gender roles, giving rise to the metrosexual male — urban heterosexual men who prioritise themselves and their lifestyle above other commitments. Such men are decidedly single.

    If we want a glimpse of what the future may hold, we only need to look to Japan where those who reject their traditional masculine role are referred to as “grass eaters” or “herbivore men”. These men are not just decidedly single, but they show little or no interest in sexual relations. With a staggering 70% of young Japanese men identifying themselves in this way, they have become a cultural and economic phenomenon, not to mention, a major target for advertisers. They are also considered the significant factor in the plummeting Japanese birth rate, and are blamed for many a single woman’s solitude.


    Irrespective of whether men are reacting consciously, having become aware of their own vulnerability in adulthood, or unconsciously, having already internalised the negativity towards them by adolescence, most are doing so on an individual basis. There is, however, a growing counter-culture of males who collectively define themselves to be “Men Going Their Own Way,” or “mig-tow,” a pronunciation of the acronym “MGTOW.” These are men who positively identify in their refusal to commit romantically to women. Many MGTOWs would disagree with Helen Smith’s metaphor of men “being on strike,” but would prefer to claim that they have simply “left the building” and are not coming back.


    https://www.avoiceformen.com/sexual-...relationships/

  18. #38
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    9,779

    Default

    Strong Indian Woman Breaks The Crime Stereotype, Kills Newborn Boy As She Wanted Daughter

    April 24, 2017

    Having failed to bear a daughter for the third time, a retailer's wife slit the throat of her 24-day-old child with a shaving blade and left him to pass on in a road on night.
    As living in Patriarchal Indian Society, her efforts still seen as something as crime, Purnima's first tyke was a stillborn kid, trailed by another kid conceived five years prior.

    This time, the 30-year-old had been certain of conveying a little girl yet when a child was destined to her around three weeks prior, she revealed to her significant other to give him away to a childless couple or relatives. But Indian society's love for male child oppressed her and she was forced to keep that patriarchal male child.

    Being an Independent and strong women
    , she also had a choice and she began avoiding the baby. Things took a grievous turn on Tuesday night when her significant other Sridhar Raju, who runs a cosmetic store in Neredmet, got a call from her that thieves had assaulted the kid before grabbing her gold 'mangalsutra'.

    Neredmet police were informed about the newborn child's death around midnight. They discovered errors in Purnima's announcements and found her conduct suspicious. "She didn't cry by any stretch of the imagination. There was no blood out and about where she said the occurrence happened. After the posthumous, the forensic expert said the harm on the kid's throat was brought about by a sharp-edged weapon. So we grilled Purnima further on Wednesday afternoon," another officer from Neredmet police headquarters said.

    Purnima was later convicted with murder and has been charged based on the investigation and supportive evidences by patriarchal police who felt intimidated by the choice of Independent Purnima's choice to kill newborn Baby. As per our women and Child minister, "All crimes are male generated". Based on this theory, it was never Purnima's fault. Indian women's struggle still remains a question. Why we are forced to keep a male child if we don't want to.

    http://indilogs.blogspot.in/2017/04/...aks-crime.html
    http://indiatoday.intoday.in/video/hyderabad-mother-kills-baby-boy-because-she-wanted-a-daughter/1/636845.html

    Comments:

    you can smell the stench of feminism with all the "patriarchal" this and that and being so called "strong" and "independent" women, excusing her infanticide by whatever bimbo wrote this article.

  19. #39
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    9,779

    Default


    I Cook For My Husband Using Menstrual Blood


    May 24, 2017

    There are few bodily fluids in the world more taboo and controversy-inspiring than menstrual blood. People react to periods the way you’d expect people to react to things that are way more unnatural and horrifying, especially considering that half the population has to deal with their menstrual cycle at some point in their lives.

    That’s why people react so strongly when we hear stories about people that involve the stuff: periods are taboo and nobody wants to talk about them. A great example of this taboo in action is the backlash an unknown woman received on the Internet for revealing that she uses her menstrual blood to cook for her husband. People were understandably outraged, especially considering that her husband didn’t know that it was happening, and as much as periods shouldn’t be so taboo, you probably shouldn’t be cooking with menstrual blood.

    However, there’s a really long and old tradition of women using their menstrual blood to cook for the men in their lives for different reasons, and unsurprisingly, it has a lot to do with magic. Here’s everything you need to know about why people use their menstrual blood in food, not to mention other things.

    An unknown woman got a lot more than she bargained for. Her story about using her menstrual blood to cook for her unsuspecting husband got a ton of backlash when the story went viral on social media. However, she wasn’t worried about it, and she even came clean as to why she does it.

    Her reasoning was simple. She admitted outright that she cooks with her menstrual blood because she doesn’t want her husband cheating on her. She swears up and down not only that it works, but that her aunt also does it and is in a happy marriage to a man who wouldn’t look twice at another woman.

    She knows it’s wrong, but also knows it’s not poisonous. While she admitted that she knew that cooking for her husband using her period blood without him knowing was wrong, she doesn’t think it’s poisonous. She was adamant that if cooking with her period blood was the way she could keep her marriage intact, she’s okay with continuing to do it. (sic) “If that is d way my marriage will be intact I have no regrets. Am a very emotional being. I might die if my heart is ever broken. Who are u people to judge me.”

    She even bragged that her husband “worships the feet she walks on.” The woman in question is absolutely sure that her husband loves her so much primarily because she “makes his food special.” In her own words: “Since I got married I can beat my chest and say my husband has never misbehaved outside.”

    This isn’t even the only story of this happening. Pherolibrary user Gegogi told a story about his ex who was practicing voodoo that involved a remarkably similar practice. He began his story setting the stage of his former relationship: “I ran into a friend of my ex and had a long talk about my failed relationship. They had a falling out and she was happy to spill the beans. My ex was secretive and I didn’t have a clue she was a witch until getting deeply involved with her. This revelation freaked me out to say the least, and helped lead to a painful and fiery breakup.”

    His ex lied about how deep she was into magic. He continued his story by saying that his ex lied about her interest in magic by saying it was strictly academic. According to her friend, she was much better at blood magic that anyone gave her credit for. “Her friend told me my ex had spells going on friends, family and, of course, all sorts of binding and love spells on me. She was serious enough to chant spells naked under a full moon on high ground! One thing she said that blew my mind was my ex frequently urinated and placed menstrual blood in my food and drinks! Apparently the belief is a man that eats or drinks a woman's pee or menstrual flow is bound to her for life.”

    He was actually surprised that he fell for his ex in the first place. “I had an overwhelming animal attraction to her and lost all my common sense and judgment (maybe she had strong natural pheromones). Sheesh, she wasn’t my type in terms of physical appearance, personally or lifestyle. I’m normally attracted to petite Asian women, easy going personalities and blend best with artist lifestyles. Something must have worked as I fell for her harder than any woman in my life and am still limping around emotionally a year later.”

    Another woman put menstrual blood in her boyfriend’s food on a whim.
    The woman, known only as Rose, was dating a man with a huge sexual appetite, and came home to him cheating on her after she went away for a week to see her parents. She forgave him, but she vowed not to forget. “After one week I forgave him because I love him, but I was still angry with him. He asked me to cook rice for him. I was on my period, i removed my pad and suck it inside water and made sure the blood was very much so in the water, I added my urine into the water and I made stew for him, he came back and ate the food without knowing.” The comments on her story are not just insulting towards her, they were downright scary to read.

    There’s a reason why women so often resort to this sort of thing. Every culture has a type of spell or school of magic that involves bodily fluids or body parts, and those body parts can vary quite widely. Most notably, they can use things like placenta, spit, semen, tears, urine, hair from both your head and genitalia, and oddly enough, nail clippings.

    Menstrual blood plays a starring role in this type of magic. It has been said that any man that consumes the menstrual blood of a woman is bound to that woman for life. Many women have done this over the course of civilization, but two major magical sects that swear by this are African voodoo and Sicilian folk magic.

    A lot of this boils down to pheromones. Many witches who do this believe that just a bit of menstrual blood in a man’s coffee, tea, or food is powerful enough to bind that man to her for life. There isn’t even a spell or a ritual involved to get this to work, the action alone carries power of its own.

    Some witches don’t even bother with that. One witch who wrote a guide to blood magic on Lucky Mojo was so upfront about her use of mentsrual blood, she didn’t even bother hiding it. “I have directly fed gobbets of menstruum to my lover, from my fingers, as one might feed a pet. This was done to bind him, but to avoid the sneakiness of slipping it into his drinks -- I want him to KNOW how much I want him to be mine, and to know that I am working the spell on him right out in the open.”

    There’s even an alternative non-menstruating women can use. This isn’t one of those love spells you can just go out an buy an ingredient for, so women who are pregnant or post-menopausal have to come up with other options. That’s where fluids like vaginal secretions and urine come into play. Men can even use their semen for love spells that work on both men and women. However, the overwhelming users of spells involving semen are women, who can use that semen to keep the men under their control.

    Any kind of menstrual blood in magic falls under a love spell.
    This is a kind of magic that basically takes the biological process where a female attracts a male to them and multiplies it exponentially. This works because the men falling victim to this are literally eating or drinking the woman’s pheromones. Clearly this is something that has some truth to it, because men who have no idea what’s in their food are falling victim to this effect without knowing it.

    While you know the reasons why people do this, the concept might still seem crazy to you. Then again, this might not be something we’re meant to understand. If you’re considering putting your period blood in your partner’s food to keep him faithful, you might need to consider just what it is you’re trying to accomplish. Magic is powerful stuff, and we shouldn’t be using it willy nilly over a dumb, cheating dude.


    http://www.rebelcircus.com/blog/cook...nstrual-blood/


 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •