Monday, April 24, 2017

Sean Hannity accused of sexual harassment

Sean Hannity

No good deed goes unpunished. I'm sure Sean Hannity is finding that out the hard way. He may lose his Fox gig if anymore women jump upon the bandwagon. They did it to Cosby and that gained attention. They did it to Bill O'Reilly and now they are doing it to Hannity. Hannity always played the white knight. When that situation with Ray Rice went down Hannity didn't care about Ray Rices's version Hannity went on the offense against Ray Rice. And now Hannity is getting fucked by a woman and not in the way he wants. Women don't love white knights they despise them. I'm sure Hannity is now finding this out.

Sunday, April 9, 2017

Snowflake central

The gynocracy
all hail the gynocracy

Male Student Ostracized, Publicly Shamed After Questioning the Existence of Rape Culture

Earlier this week, Patrick Borum, a 20-year-old student at Grand Valley State University, questioned one of higher education’s most dearly held dogmas: the existence of a “rape culture,” where society “normalizes and trivializes” sexual violence.

“Rape culture isn’t real,” Borum posted on his personal Facebook account Tuesday. Cue the outrage.

Since then, other students have accused Borum of being a supporter of rape and even a possible rapist; his peers have slammed him with messages on social media calling him “a piece of shit,” “a piece of dirt,” and worse; he’s been a central subject in a campus town hall meeting on sexual assault; and his fraternity and the student senate have publicly denounced his comments as ignorant and offensive, prompting his resignation from both.

“My comments went absolutely viral on campus, and everyone was pissed off about it,” Borum told Heat Street. “I’m being ostracized in my own community. … I 100 percent feel like I’m being bullied.”

The controversy began earlier this week, when members of campus fraternities were told to take a mandatory survey, administered by a third party, about Greek Life and sexual assault, Borum said. He and other students noticed with dismay that almost all of the questions seemed to imply that alcoholism, misogyny, harassment and assault were commonplace in fraternities.

“The questions were all leading,” Borum said. “There was no correct answers you could post, so it seemed like you were a danger to women.”

For instance, fraternity members were asked to indicate their level of agreement with statements like, “If a girl comes to a party dressed like a ‘slut,’ she is probably looking to hook up,” “in general, I try to control the women in my life” and “if a girl gets too drunk at a party, it would be partially her fault if she had sex with someone and didn’t really remember what happened the next day.” Students were also asked how many nights a week they drank, Borum recalled, “and there’s no zero answer provided.”

By deadline, Grand Valley State University did not answer Heat Street’s emailed questions or provide us with a copy of the survey. A spokeswoman said the university was unable to comment, saying many of its communciations staffers were absent this week because of the local K-12 spring break.

Frustrated by the experience, Borum took to Facebook. “It was four words,” he said. “It said, ‘Rape culture isn’t real.’ I just think that there’s really no factual evidence that our society likes to encourage rape. I think that’s actually ridiculous. … For people to say that women here in the United States are living in a ‘rape culture,’ that’s so dismissive to other people in the world where women don’t have rights and are actually are being regularly submitted to rape.”

The backlash was immediate, occurring in 15 minutes or less, Borum said.

On its official Twitter account, Kappa Sigma, where Borum was a member, Tweeted that it did not “accept or identify with” his comments. “RAPE CULTURE IS REAL, whether he understands that or not. We are embarrassed,” the fraternity added.

Josh Perez, the grand master of the fraternity, also issued an immediate statement apologizing for Borum’s “gross, pitiful and downright disrespectful social media post,” adding that the Kappa Sigma executive board would investigate the situation.

“I’m under the impression that [Borum] thinks his demographic as a fraternity person is being targeted, when really what rape culture is is belonging to a society that continually perpetuates the idea that rape and sexual assault is acceptable. And it shouldn’t be,” another Kappa Sigma member told the local Fox affiliate.

Borum said he felt like almost his entire fraternity had turned on him, so he submitted his resignation. Kappa Sigma denied it, saying it wanted to expel him instead, Borum added.

Perez did not answer Heat Street’s emailed questions about Borum’s membership status or the fraternity’s stance on free speech.

“First and foremost, we at Kappa Sigma would like to apologize for the action of an individual within our organization,” Perez wrote in an email. “We hope that you can recognize that his view does not represent the view or the pillars that our Fraternity is built upon.”

Two weeks ago, Grand Valley State University held its elections for student senate, and last week, Borum found out he’d won. His first day as a senator would have been Tuesday—but Borum said he heard other members of the student government were trying to pre-emptively impeach him because of his Facebook post.

The president of the student senate, Ella Fritzmeir, publicly denounced him, Michigan Live reported. By deadline, Fritzmeir did not respond to Heat Street’s request for comment.

Feeling frustrated, Borum also submitted his resignation to the student government. “I’m not going to be a part of an organization that is so hateful and won’t allow diverse thought,” he said.

Sean O’Melia, the student senate’s executive vice president, said Borum’s resignation was entirely of his own accord.

“We respect his decision and his freedom of speech,” O’Melia said. “We as a Senate disagree with his position on rape culture and think that more students such as Patrick could be better educated on sexual assault and how to best advocate to end this important issue. We hope that people can use this is as a learning experience and that more students will be aware of the consequences of their social media uses and the importance of not condoning rape culture or cyber bullying.”

O’Melia seemed to consider the post questioning rape culture to be “cyberbullying”—but all week, Borum said, he’s been deluged with mean messages from other students. He provided one such message to Heat Street as an example.The outcry against Borum wasn’t limited to social media. Grand Valley State University had scheduled a town hall meeting on sexual assault on Tuesday, the same day Borum made his controversial Facebook post. About 100 students attended, and the discussion quickly focused on Borum and his Facebook post.

“I think to deny rape culture is to support rape,” one student said, calling for Borum’s removal from student government before learning he’d already resigned.

“People would pre-suppose that [Borum] could be or possibly was, like, you know, or likely to rape someone because he was a white, fraternity young male,” another student said in a video, which was recorded by MLive.

“Statistics show, yes, he is more likely to,” responded one of the town hall speakers.

She added that “the fact that Pat could say this and think that’s an acceptable thing to say” was evidence “the education we have is not effective, or we’re not going far enough with the education ” about rape culture.

Borum, a junior, says he’s gotten far enough into his education at Grand Valley State University that transferring elsewhere isn’t really an option. He says he’s going to try to graduate early. Still, he’s feeling like most people on campus hate him.

“Now, I feel like everything I thought [about Grand Valley] is crumbling down,” he said. “I thought people would have acted better. I have not been met with any tolerance. I’ve been called a rapist. I’ve been called pro-rape. I’ve been called many things. If there’s a group of people on campus who are tolerant and will talk about the actual discussion rather than name-call, it’s a small minority.”


Sunday, April 2, 2017

The other shadow presidency

Don't forget to call home,ET

One thing I don't like is the other shadow presidency. We have covered the one by Barrack Obama but now there is another one. The one by Ivanka Trump. When she was asked if she was going to be an adviser when she moved into the White House. She said she was there to be a daughter. She played it off very cutesy. I don't find it "cutesy" I take it as troublesome. Daughters have tremendous influence over their fathers and Ivanka is a feminist. She has admitted that to us. We've been getting loud and proud when it comes to men's rights and telling her father about it. I'm sure that has her very concerned. We can cause problems for the matriarchy and they know it. In fact we are very good at it. I like causing problems for the matriarchy especially big problems. I like keeping them up at night. This is a problem but not a major one. We've fried feminists before and this is no exception. Ivanka,if you are reading this,this song is dedicated to you:

Saturday, April 1, 2017

Damned if we do damned if we don't

“I know this move!”

That’s what Sarah Mimms, a deputy editor at BuzzFeed News, thought this week when she read about an agreement between Vice President Mike Pence and his wife, Karen Pence.

Mike Pence won’t eat alone with a woman who isn’t his wife, and he doesn’t attend events with alcohol unless Karen is present as well. Or at least he didn’t back in 2002, when he was a Congress member from Indiana. This detail about the Pences’ marriage was included in a Washington Post profile about Karen Pence.

The vice president’s office has not confirmed whether the Pences still have this agreement. We also don’t know whether it applies to Mike Pence’s women staffers, or just to social relationships outside of work.

Still, Mimms is familiar with members of Congress who follow similar rules restricting their contact with women: She reported on the phenomenon in 2015 when she worked for National Journal. She found that among a small group of congressional offices, women staffers were not allowed to spend one-on-one time with their bosses. For these young women, the rules could be a serious career hindrance.

I spoke to Mimms about her story to gain an understanding of why some congressmen would enact such a policy and how that could impact the careers of young female staffers. This interview has been edited for clarity and length.

Karen Turner
What did you learn when reporting out the story?

Sarah Mimms
We were doing a “women in Washington” feature at National Journal. We sent out anonymous surveys to women who worked on Capitol Hill. There was one question in the survey that was, “Has your gender ever gotten in the way if your work on the Hill?” And there were, I believe, two or three women who said point blank: I’m not allowed to spend any one-on-one time with my congressman boss because of how it will look, or for whatever reason.

So I started to report out the story. I talked to some female staffers who worked in offices where they weren’t allowed to drive around with their boss around or interact with them at evening events where drinks were being served.

I talked to some staffers who worked in offices where women weren't allowed to drive around with their boss or interact with them at evening events where drinks were being served. I also talked to male staffers who felt that they benefited from this policy because they were able to spend more time with their boss at evening events when a more senior staffer, who was female, was barred from attending.

Based on my reporting, it doesn’t seem like this is a very large problem on Capitol Hill. I didn’t find that a majority of offices do this. But there are certainly some. And for the women in those offices, this is a huge problem in being able to advance in their careers. What generally happens is that they hit a certain level and they realize they’re not gonna get past it. They move either to a new office or off the Hill entirely.

Karen Turner
Why does this happen? What was the cause?

Sarah Mimms
Between talking to some members who had informal policies like this and staffers who were in these kinds of offices, it seemed like this wasn’t about feeling like female staffers are lascivious or anything like that. They’re not concerned about what is actually going to happen. The concern is about giving people a reason to start rumors in a town that loves to start rumors about politicians and sex.

In some cases, it seems like it’s the wives that are uncomfortable with it. I heard that from a number of people. A lot of these guys, particularly in the House, they are from these more rural, small-town-based districts where the idea of walking around with an attractive woman under the age of, say, 30 at night, and being seen constantly with a young woman next to you could be a problem. So it’s really about trying to stop rumors before they start.

What’s interesting is when I talked to members who have this policy or who have similar, more informal policies in their offices, like not letting a female staffer drive them around, I felt that the idea that this could be preventing these female staffers from advancing in their careers honestly had not occurred to them.

When I was reporting out that story, I talked to congressmen Jason Chaffetz and Tim Huelskamp. Chaffetz, he won’t allow staffers to stay very late or show up very early, and Huelskamp said he likes to make sure that he’s surrounded by several people so that he can’t wind up being alone with any one staffer. Both [Chaffetz] and ... Huelskamp, who is actually not in Congress anymore, but who was at the time, were saying it’s really more preventing a certain perception. And I completely understand that. That makes sense to me.

But here’s what other women who have been in different offices are saying. They’re saying, I can’t become chief of staff if I can’t spend one-on-one time with my boss. They were saying, I can’t advance my career if I can’t spend this time with them. Men are being allowed to go to these events at night where, quite frankly, a lot of policy talk happens, and I can’t be there.

I got the sense that this just didn’t occur to congressmen who had this rule. It wasn’t something they had thought of. Again, this is not something that affects a large number of offices. But it still seems to be happening. It doesn’t seem to have changed. And I think the reason for that is that members of Congress have to get reelected. Everything in their lives is about perception. And it’s just such a big deal to them that that’s kind of taken precedence.

Karen Turner
Can you elaborate a little more on why this can be damaging to female staffers and their careers?

Sarah Mimms
Moving up in a congressional office is really about forming a close relationship with that member. It’s really like in any work environment. You get closer to a boss by being able to anticipate their needs, by understanding them on a policy level, by being able to write in their voice. And you can’t get that with limited access.

In some of these cases, I heard about how female staffers couldn’t sit with their boss in his office with the door closed. How are you supposed to have a conversation with your boss about raises, about moving forward in your career, about things you could be doing better, or issues with another office, how are you supposed to be having those conversations when the door is open? You really can’t.

A lot of women were saying to me, I had to leave my job, or I’m going to have to leave my job because I just don't see any other way for me to advance. And they’re saying, I care about my career and that’s why I came to Congress and Capitol Hill, because I wanted to work here and I want to do it at a high level and do it very well. But how can I move forward when men are able to have these interactions and I’m not?

Karen Turner
Is this practice discriminatory?

Sarah Mimms

I talked to a discrimination lawyer here in DC and Congress’s Office of Compliance. The lawyer, her name is Debra S. Katz, she said this was pretty cut-and-dried. If this was happening in the private sector, it would be discriminatory. These women would have grounds to sue. It would be a really, really major problem. The question is how does that apply to Congress and does it apply to Congress?

She’s been doing this for a while and reached out to a few other colleagues for me and passed on their responses as well. Their overall consensus was they had never seen this. Not in modern times. This is not something they had cases about, and they had not heard about this from clients. This was just not a thing outside of Congress.

And I think again that some of that is the nature of Congress. It’s very image-focused, it’s all about crafting an image around yourself, avoiding scandal, and it’s kind of the nature of Washington and Washington reporters. We love this kind of scandal. But also, it’s pretty old-fashioned up on the Hill in general. So it’s almost — I don’t want to say it’s not surprising, but if I knew that it was happening somewhere, it seems like Congress would be that place.

Karen Turner
Do you feel like the Mike Pence controversy fits into this practice?

Sarah Mimms
I was reading about the Mike Pence controversy the other day and immediately thought, “I know this move!” But for one thing, we do not know if this applies to meetings with staff. This is something that he said 15 years ago about having dinner with women or going to events where there’s alcohol with women without his wife present. So I don’t know if it applies to him having meetings with staff or anything like that, which was true in Congress. So just that caveat.

But with the Pence thing, this seems to be similar to the Billy Graham rule ... modeled after the famous evangelist. His rule was that you should not spend any time with a woman who is not your wife one-on-one as a married man. The rule says there’s no reason to do it, it’s better for the marriage, and you should avoid temptation and scandal.

Now, I didn’t see any particular correlation between this [female staffer exclusion] happening with very religious or evangelical members, although there were certainly some who fit that. But I do wonder how prevalent this really is outside of Congress and within the Christian community in general.

Karen Turner
Are there any women who don’t mind the policy?

Sarah Mimms
One former Capitol Hill staffer who I talked to was a young woman working for a House Republican, and he had a similar policy, not letting women drive him around and things like that. She was not bothered by this policy. She told me she appreciated that he was showing her that kind of respect. For her, it was more a sign of respect. Which I thought was really fascinating.

But that was a minority opinion of the women that I talked to. Now, it’s very possible that it was a self-selecting group of people who weren’t bothered by it who didn’t talk to me for the article. In particular, in light of this Pence thing, I have had a lot of people tweet at me about the topic, saying this is relationship goals, this is the way men should be — only wanting to spend time with their wives. So I think there’s a very interesting debate here.

But again, one of the reasons I wrote the piece and one of the things I talked to a lot of these members about was that I think what’s sort of flying under the radar here is just how much this can affect a very young woman’s career, particularly the career of a woman who wants to go into public service. And I think that’s the important part here.

Correction: This article has been edited to include that some male staffers felt that they benefitted from being able to attend events in place of a more senior female staffer barred from going.


First of all I don't blame these guys. No one wants to be falsely accused. It almost cost Clarence Thomas the Supreme Court Judgeship. If these guys are Republicans that are doubly screwed because they already have a target on their back by a media ready to destroy them. It seems these feminists have trouble connecting the dots or they do connect them and they don't like what they see so they play the ignorance card. If he is alone with a female staffer and she gets mad at him or just PMSes out she can accuse him of sexual impropriety,guilty or not and the press will eat it up. If you women have a problem with this take it up with your fellow sisters. You know the ones who make false accusations and get away with it. If he isn't alone with her she cries discrimination. If you women have a problem connecting these dots you are in bigger trouble than I thought.

Thursday, March 30, 2017

3 manginas bite the dust

The alleged getaway driver now facing possible murder charges in the fatal shooting of three teen burglary suspects outside Tulsa, Oklahoma, on Monday allegedly "instructed" the trio to rob the house, according to a probable cause affidavit.

On Tuesday, police with the Wagoner County Sheriff's Office identified the alleged driver as 21-year-old Elizabeth Marie Rodriguez. Authorities also released the names and ages of the slain teens: Maxwell Cook, 19; Jacob Redfearn, 17; and Jaycob Woodruff, 16.

Killing of 3 teens during burglary may test Oklahoma 'stand your ground' law

Authorities said that around 12:30 p.m. Monday, Zach Peters, the son of the homeowner, called 911 to report that people had broken into his home and that he'd shot them in the kitchen area with an AR-15 rifle. Peters was in the house with his father at the time, police said. Neither were hurt.

In a 911 recording released today, Peters tells the operator that the alleged burglars were shot in the upper body and that he can hear one of the alleged burglars still talking.

"I'm barricaded in my bedroom," he says. "I am still armed in the southeast corner of my house."

Police said when they arrived, they found three deceased male teenagers. Two were in the kitchen area of the house; one appeared to have run from the home after being shot but had died in the driveway. Chief Deputy Les Young said the teens had been shot multiple times.

According to police, Rodriguez turned herself into authorities after the shooting, allegedly saying that she had information about the incident.

According to the affidavit, Rodriguez told police that she'd dropped the teens off at the residence and was waiting for them to return. The affidavit said that she "willfully" took the teens to the house and only left when she heard gunshots.

"It was learned through a witness at the scene that Rodriguez had previous knowledge of the house and the homeowner even [called] him by his first name," the affidavit said. "Rodriguez planned the burglary and took the three suspects to the residence on two separate occasions on today's date wanting to steal items."

Rodriguez was arrested on three counts of felony first-degree murder (for deaths that occur during the commission of a felony), three counts of first-degree burglary and one count of second-degree burglary. She has yet to be formally charged.

Authorities said they had not determined if Peters would face charges. Oklahoma has a "stand your ground" law, which applies the Castle doctrine to any place. State law presumes homeowners have a fear that justifies use of defensive force just by virtue of someone breaking into a home.

Rodriguez is scheduled to appear in court on April 5.


Wednesday, March 29, 2017

President Obama’s legacy lives on and continues to thrive under the Trump administration and Republican lawmakers.

Mia Karvonides

The White House and Congress, which ostensibly want to undo the expansive regulatory framework of a Democratic administration, are doing nothing as its Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) expands its longstanding mission of blackmailing colleges into judging all accused students guilty of rape.

Brooklyn College Prof. KC Johnson, co-author of The Campus Rape Frenzy, writes at Minding the Campus that OCR is amassing enormous power for itself without so much as a peep from the White House.

Don’t be fooled by the “skinny budget” request by the Trump administration for the department as a whole, which doesn’t address OCR, says Johnson.

An OCR leader hired three days before Donald Trump’s inauguration is now enforcing its lawless diktats, former Harvard Title IX coordinator Mia Karvonides, who is a “true believer” in Johnson’s words:

The slowness with which Trump has filled executive appointments has maximized the power of Obama holdovers. … Karvondes’ rushed appointment leaves the impression that the outgoing administration intended to maintain the unfair Obama rules regardless of what Trump did. Every day that passes without Trump staffers in OCR allows Karvonides to implement her agenda unchecked.

The rogue office also continues to impose “voluntary” resolutions on schools under Title IX investigation, meaning they won’t be affected by any Trump reversal, and on its way out the door, the Obama administration sought funding for 157 new OCR staff investigators.

That’s because OCR’s years of encouraging students to file Title IX complaints had produced a bumper crop of sexual-violence allegations – and they aren’t just going to be investigated case-by-case.

Johnson cites a recent BuzzFeed article that says the recently departed OCR chief – now the chair of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights – secretly changed its protocol:

When Catherine Lhamon ran OCR under Obama, she expanded all Title IX sexual violence investigations to become institution-wide, so investigators reviewed all cases at a school rather than just the cases that sparked federal complaints, former Education Department officials told BuzzFeed News.

Here’s what this means, according to Johnson:

[Lhamon] had decided OCR would investigate not merely the complaints it received but thousands of other cases, even though no accuser had filed a Title IX complaint about any of these individual cases. On this matter, as on virtually all OCR-related matters during the Obama years, no sign of congressional oversight existed.

The next step is for the Justice Department under Attorney General Jeff Sessions to show it’s consistent about reining in Title IX abuse, and refuse to defend OCR’s 2011 and 2014 “Dear Colleague” letters that junked due process for accused students.

But more importantly, Congress needs to wake up and use “the power of the purse” to stop OCR’s vast agenda in the Trump administration, Johnson says.


This is getting old. Real old real fast. We need to get in touch with the right people. We've got to shove this in the face of the Republican leadership. That is why we contact the Speaker of the House Paul Ryan and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. Senators James Lankford and Lamar Alexander are not to friendly to this bullshit either so we write them as well. Let's also contact President Trump and let him know too. The more of us they hear from the better. We helped to get rid of Cantherine Lhamon now let's get rid of Mia Karvondes and Dear Colleague.

Monday, March 27, 2017

Attention feminist/mangina troll

I received several comments from a feminist or mangina telling me I have a small dick,can't get laid and other material that has been used and abused over the years. This individual posted their comments on several posts. Rather than respond individually I would address them here. If you are a feminist then we got your attention and if you hate my blog that tells me I'm doing something right so I march on. If you are a mangina keep this in mind. Feminists eat their own. Especially male feminists. Men making deals with feminists in like making a deal with the devil. How close do you get before you get burned? Come back and tell us when they kick your ass. Then we'll see what tune you're singing then.