Welcome to my blog

Friday, May 30, 2014

Cathy Young on the Santa Barbara massacre

Elliot Rodger's 'War on Women' and Toxic Gender Warfare
The Santa Barbara killer wasn't just a misogynist; he was a malignant narcissist.
Cathy Young | May 29, 2014

Last weekend's horror in Santa Barbara, California, where 22-year-old Elliot Rodger killed six people and wounded more than a dozen before shooting himself, unexpectedly sparked a feminist moment. With revelations that Rodger's killing spree was fueled by anger over rejection by women and that he had posted on what some described as a "men's rights" forum (actually, a forum for bitter "involuntarily celibate" men), many rushed to frame the shooting as a stark example of the violent misogyny said to be pervasive in our culture. The Twitter hashtag #YesAllWomen sprung up as an expression of solidarity and a reminder of the ubiquity of male terrorism and abuse in women's lives. Most of the posters in the hashtag were certainly motivated by the best of intentions. But in the end, this response not only appropriated a human tragedy for an ideological agenda but turned it into toxic gender warfare.

For one thing, "misogyny" is a very incomplete explanation of Rodger's mindset, perhaps best described as malignant narcissism with a psychopathic dimension. His "manifesto" makes it clear that his hatred of women (the obverse side of his craving for validation by female attention, which he describes as so intense that a hug from a girl was infinitely more thrilling than an expression of friendship from a boy) was only a subset of a general hatred of humanity, and was matched by hatred of men who had better romantic and sexual success. At the end of the document, he chillingly envisions an ideal society in which women will be exterminated except for a small number of artificial-insemination breeders and sexuality will be abolished. But in an Internet posting a year ago, he also fantasized about inventing a virus that would wipe out all males except for himself: "You would be able to have your pick of any beautiful woman you want, as well as having dealt vengeance on the men who took them from you. Imagine how satisfying that would be." His original plans for his grand exit included not only a sorority massacre he explicitly called his "War on Women," but luring victims whom he repeatedly mentions in gender-neutral terms to his apartment for extended torture and murder (and killing his own younger brother, whom he hated for managing to lose his virginity).

Some have argued that hating other men because they get to have sex with women and you don't is still a form of misogyny; but that seems like a good example of stretching the concept into meaninglessness—or turning it into unfalsifiable quasi-religious dogma.

Of course, four of the six people Rodger actually killed were men: his three housemates, whom he stabbed to death in their beds before embarking on his fatal journey, and a randomly chosen young man in a deli. Assertions that all men share responsibility for the misogyny and male violence toward women that Rodger's actions are said to represent essentially place his male victims on the same moral level as the murderer—which, if you think about it, is rather obscene. And the deaths of all the victims, female and male, are trivialized when they are commemorated with a catalogue of often petty sexist or sexual slights, from the assertion that every single woman in the world has been sexually harassed to the complaint that a woman's "no" is often met with an attempt to negotiate a "yes."

A common theme of #YesAllWomen is that our culture promotes the notion that women owe men sex and encourages male violence in response to female rejection. (It does? One could much more plausibly argue that our culture promotes the notion that men must "earn" sex from women and treats the rejected male as a pathetic figure of fun.) Comic-book writer Gail Simone tweeted that she doesn't know "a single woman who has never encountered with that rejection rage the killer shows in the video," though of course to a lesser degree.

Actually, I do know women who have never encountered it. I also know men who have, and a couple of women who have encountered it from other women. I myself have experienced it twice: once from an ex-boyfriend, and once from a gay woman on an Internet forum who misinterpreted friendliness on my part as romantic interest. There was a common thread in both these cases: mental illness aggravated by substance abuse.

Yes, virtually all spree killers are male, though there are notable exceptions, such as Illinois mass shooter Laurie Dann and Alabama biology professor Amy Bishop; but the number of such killers is so vanishingly small that a man's chance of being one is only slightly higher than a woman's. As for the more frequent kind of homicide feminists often describe as expressions of murderous misogyny—such as killings of women by intimate partners or ex-partners—the gender dynamics of such violence are far more complex. If patriarchal rage and misogynist hatred are the underlying cause, how does one explain intimate homicide in same-sex relationships without resorting to tortuous, ideology-driven pseudo-logic? How does one explain the fact that some 30 percent of victims in such slayings are men (excluding cases in which a woman kills in clear self-defense)? What feminist paradigm explains the actions of Clara Harris, the Houston dentist who repeatedly ran over her unfaithful husband with a car (and got a good deal of public sympathy)? Or the actions of Susan Eubanks, the California woman who shot and killed her four sons to punish their fathers, apparently because she was angry about being "screwed by men" after her latest boyfriend walked out?

Defenders of #YesAllWomen say that the posts in the hashtag do not target all men. Maybe not; but they push the idea that all women—including women in advanced liberal democracies in the 21st century—are victims of pervasive and relentless male terrorism, and that any man who does not denounce it on feminist terms is complicit. They wrongly frame virtually all interpersonal violence (and lesser injuries) as male-on-female, ignoring both male victims and female perpetrators, and express sympathy for boys only insofar as boys are supposedly "raised around the drumbeat mantra that women are not human beings." And sometimes, they almost literally dehumanize men. A tweet observing that "the odds of being attacked by a shark are 1 in 3,748,067, while a woman's odds of being raped are 1 in 6...yet fear of sharks is seen as rational while being cautious of men is seen as misandry" was retweeted almost 1,000 times.

One can argue endlessly about the real lessons of the Elliot Rodger shooting, including the complex dilemma of responding to danger signs from mentally ill people without trampling on civil liberties. Perhaps, as Canadian columnist Matt Gurney writes, the most painful lesson is that no matter what we do, we cannot always prevent "a deranged individual … determined to do harm to others" from wreaking such harm—if not with guns, then with knives or with a car. But the worst possible answer is a toxic version of feminism that encourages women to see themselves as victims while imposing collective guilt on men.


Roosh weighs in on this too.

Thursday, May 29, 2014

The manosphere on the factor

We got mentioned on the Factor. On the 5-28-14 O'Reilly Factor Bill mentioned the manosphere and actually said that we are not at fault in the Elliot Rodger case. He showed a clip of one of the Southern Poverty Law Center's (SPLC) pit yorkies attacking the manosphere. O'Reilly shot this theory down. It seems that feminists are getting very nervous. Perhaps the misandry they spreaded throughout society is starting to backfire on them. What you sown you shall reap.

Tuesday, May 27, 2014

Feminism: the real terrorist group

Because of the Elliot Rodger tragedy feminists are trying to label the men's rights movement a terrorist group. Really. Let's take a look at who the real terrorists are:

If were going to equate terrorism with hatred then we can see that feminists are the true terrorists.

Let's see some more videos:

Violence by feminists is nothing new. In fact it started with suffragettes and is still used to this day. Let's not forget the Bobbitt case where NOW condoned what Lorena Bobbitt did to her husband. Fast forward a few years to the crimes of Katherine Kieu Becker and the jokes made about her husband whom she maliciously wounded. We can see whom the real terrorists are and they are feminists.

Monday, May 26, 2014

Men:the forgotten rape victims

When Men Are Raped

A new study reveals that men are often the victims of sexual assault, and women are often the perpetrators.

By Hanna Rosin

men and sexual assault.

For some kinds of sexual victimization, men and women have roughly equal experiences

Last year the National Crime Victimization Survey turned up a remarkable statistic. In asking 40,000 households about rape and sexual violence, the survey uncovered that 38 percent of incidents were against men. The number seemed so high that it prompted researcher Lara Stemple to call the Bureau of Justice Statistics to see if it maybe it had made a mistake, or changed its terminology. After all, in years past men had accounted for somewhere between 5 and 14 percent of rape and sexual violence victims. But no, it wasn’t a mistake, officials told her, although they couldn’t explain the rise beyond guessing that maybe it had something to do with the publicity surrounding former football coach Jerry Sandusky and the Penn State sex abuse scandal.

Most Read
Hanna Rosin is the founder of DoubleX and a writer for the Atlantic. She is also the author of The End of Men. Follow her on Twitter.

Stemple, who works with the Health and Human Rights Project at UCLA, had often wondered whether incidents of sexual violence against men were under-reported. She had once worked on prison reform and knew that jail is a place where sexual violence against men is routine but not counted in the general national statistics. Stemple began digging through existing surveys and discovered that her hunch was correct. The experience of men and women is “a lot closer than any of us would expect,” she says. For some kinds of victimization, men and women have roughly equal experiences. Stemple concluded that we need to “completely rethink our assumptions about sexual victimization,” and especially our fallback model that men are always the perpetrators and women the victims.

Sexual assault is a term that gets refracted through the culture wars, as Slate’s own Emily Bazelon explained in a story about the terminology of rape. Feminists claimed the more legalistic term of sexual assault to put it squarely in the camp of violent crime. Bazelon argues in her story for reclaiming the term rape because of its harsh unflinching sound and its nonlegalistic shock value. But she also allows that rape does not help us grasp crimes outside our limited imagination, particularly crimes against men. She quotes a painful passage from screenwriter and novelist Rafael Yglesias, which is precisely the kind of crime Stemple worries is too foreign and uncomfortable to contemplate.

I used to say, when some part of me was still ashamed of what had been done to me, that I was “molested” because the man who played skillfully with my 8-year-old penis, who put it in his mouth, who put his lips on mine and tried to push his tongue in as deep as it would go, did not anally rape me. … Instead of delineating what he had done, I chose “molestation” hoping that would convey what had happened to me.

Of course it doesn’t. For listeners to appreciate and understand what I had endured, I needed to risk that they will gag or rush out of the room. I needed to be particular and clear as to the details so that when I say I was raped people will understand what I truly mean.

For years, the FBI defined forcible rape, for data collecting purposes, as “the carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will.” Eventually localities began to rebel against that limited gender-bound definition; in 2010 Chicago reported 86,767 cases of rape but used its own broader definition, so the FBI left out the Chicago stats. Finally, in 2012, the FBI revised its definition and focused on penetration, with no mention of female (or force).

Data hasn’t been calculated under the new FBI definition yet, but Stemple parses several other national surveys in her new paper, “The Sexual Victimization of Men in America: New Data Challenge Old Assumptions,” co-written with Ilan Meyer and published in the April 17 edition of the American Journal of Public Health. One of those surveys is the 2010 National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey, for which the Centers for Disease Control invented a category of sexual violence called “being made to penetrate.” This definition includes victims who were forced to penetrate someone else with their own body parts, either by physical force or coercion, or when the victim was drunk or high or otherwise unable to consent. When those cases were taken into account, the rates of nonconsensual sexual contact basically equalized, with 1.270 million women and 1.267 million men claiming to be victims of sexual violence.

We might assume that if a man has an erection he must want sex. But imagine if the same were said about women.

“Made to penetrate” is an awkward phrase that hasn’t gotten any traction. It’s also something we instinctively don’t associate with sexual assault. But is it possible our instincts are all wrong here? We might assume, for example, that if a man has an erection he must want sex, especially because we assume men are sexually insatiable. But imagine if the same were said about women. The mere presence of physiological symptoms associated with arousal does not in fact indicate actual arousal, much less willing participation. And the high degree of depression and dysfunction among male victims of sexual abuse backs this up. At the very least, the phrase remedies an obvious injustice. Under the old FBI definition, what happened to Rafael Yglesias would only have counted as rape if he’d been an 8-year-old girl. Accepting the term “made to penetrate” helps us understand that trauma comes in all forms.

So why are men suddenly showing up as victims? Every comedian has a prison rape joke and prosecutions of sexual crimes against men are still rare. But gender norms are shaking loose in a way that allows men to identify themselves—if the survey is sensitive and specific enough—as vulnerable. A recent analysis of BJS data, for example, turned up that 46 percent of male victims reported a female perpetrator.

The final outrage in Stemple and Meyer’s paper involves inmates, who aren’t counted in the general statistics at all. In the last few years, the BJS did two studies in adult prisons, jails, and juvenile facilities. The surveys were excellent because they afforded lots of privacy and asked questions using very specific, informal, and graphic language. (“Did another inmate use physical force to make you give or receive a blow job?”) Those surveys turned up the opposite of what we generally think is true. Women were more likely to be abused by fellow female inmates, and men by guards, and many of those guards were female. For example, of juveniles reporting staff sexual misconduct, 89 percent were boys reporting abuse by a female staff member. In total, inmates reported an astronomical 900,000 incidents of sexual abuse.

Now the question is, in a climate when politicians and the media are finally paying attention to military and campus sexual assault, should these new findings alter our national conversation about rape? Stemple is a longtime feminist who fully understands that men have historically used sexual violence to subjugate women and that in most countries they still do. As she sees it, feminism has fought long and hard to fight rape myths—that if a woman gets raped it’s somehow her fault, that she welcomed it in some way. But the same conversation needs to happen for men. By portraying sexual violence against men as aberrant, we prevent justice and compound the shame. And the conversation about men doesn’t need to shut down the one about women. “Compassion,” she says, “is not a finite resource.”


Indeed it is. Any compassion I had for women has been replaced by indifference and they have no one to blame but themselves.

Sunday, May 25, 2014

SB 967 is back


MEASURE : S.B. No. 967
AUTHOR(S) : De León and Jackson (Principal coauthor: Assembly Member
Lowenthal) (Coauthors: Senators Beall, Cannella, Evans,
Galgiani, Monning, Pavley, Torres, Wolk, and Yee)
(Coauthors: Assembly Members Ammiano, Fong, Gonzalez,
Quirk-Silva, Skinner, Ting, and Williams).
TOPIC : Student safety: sexual assault.
+LAST AMENDED DATE : 03/27/2014

Majority Vote Required
State-Mandated Local Program
Non-Tax Levy

LAST HIST. ACT. DATE: 05/23/2014
LAST HIST. ACTION : From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 5. Noes 2.)
(May 23).
FILE DATE : 05/27/2014
ITEM : 6

COMM. ACTION DATE : 05/23/2014
COMM. ACTION : Do pass as amended.
COMM. VOTE SUMMARY : Ayes: 05 Noes: 02 PASS

TITLE : An act to add Section 67386 to the Education Code,
relating to student safety.

It looks like new life has been breathed into this Frankenstein's monster of a bill. We've got to act fast. We need to contact the Assembly,the Senate and the Governor. I was wondering when they would try something and now here it is.

Elliot Rodger and the misandric society

This is a young man who snapped. After being told feminist lies while growing up. I've touched upon this before and here. A young man who was put through a misandric school system by a misandric society that prized women no matter how evil they were while putting down men no matter how noble they were. Today we act surprised and horrified that young men are snapping. We act surprised that when boys are bullied by misandry they snap. Our society hasn't caught on to this "cause and effect" thing yet. Or so it seems. This is the same society that makes excuses for female killers such as Casey Anthony,Clara Harris,Jodi Arias,Susan Smith and Andrea Yates. This is the same society that put down what happened to John Bobbitt. America,you exalt feminists and feminism,in it's full misandric form. You exalt women above men then you act surprised when a young man who has been spit upon by society lashes out. You can only kick someone for awhile before they fight back. This young man was never given a choice. You,America,were given a choice and you chose to discount men. Well,America,I hope you can live with your choice. This is a country that says men should not have emotions,that men are unfeeling brutes. Well we can see that is not the case. One young man did care,in fact he described himself as the "supreme gentleman". We have a society that has women give lip service to chivalry yet when it is practiced they have disdain for it. Women say they want someone "sensitive" but in practice they despise such a man. So after being lied to and betrayed he snapped. This society demands that men be stoic and uncaring but that appears not to be the case.

Tuesday, May 20, 2014

Reminder about the Maine Republican primary

The Maine Republican primary is coming up and pro-male candidate Erick Bennett needs your help. He is running against incumbent Senator Susan Collins. If he gets the votes he will be the first pro-MRA candidate in the race for Senate. I don't need to tell you this is big. But he won't go anywhere without your vote. If you are registered to vote in the State of Maine on June 10 and are able to vote for Bennett in the primary then by all means do so. The faster we get a pro-MRA into the Senate the faster we can turn the misandry around. For more information about Erick Bennett: click here

Sunday, May 18, 2014

If you're going to Detroit watch out

There is going to be an international men's group that is going to hold a conference,that is the good news. The bad news it is in Detroit. Detroit is America's answer to Beirut or any other hell hole. Why they are meeting there is beyond me. Detroit is a good place to be murdered and most of the homicides go unsolved. There is an new saying: if you want to kill someone kill them in Detroit. I'll give you an example: in one apartment building there have been dead bodies in the hall ways and it took the city days to pick up them up. It is that bad. Holding this conference in New York or Los Angeles makes more sense than Detroit. If you're going there watch your back.

Futrelle's commenters and my response to them

These are some of the comments posted about me on Fooltrelle's website. Since Dave is selective on which comments he'll allow to be published (yes he's rejected my comments many times so I didn't "run away" as one of them put it). Here are their comments and my reactions:

I’m sorry you are subjected to this vileness, David. You are a brave man, and what you do is vitally important.

Is it feasible to contact law enforcement when one is targeted with such specific threats of assault? It is criminal, to my mind.


And we'll send feminists to prison in retaliation.

Sometimes mrm memes* make me angry, sometimes they confuse me, the above linked just made me smile.
A stockphoto of a conventionally attractive woman laughing?
“This is how women view men’s pain”


You call me a misogynist yet you practice misandry. Hypocrite.

Reading his…writings, you
dave futrelle are now a jellyfish submitting to a mistress.


A moment of clarity.

I’m drunk as fuck right now, and shouldn’t be commenting at all, but screw that. I’m stuck at this:

He lists Warren Farrell’s The Myth of Male Power as one of his favorite books

He lists Warren Farrell’s The Myth of Male Power as one of his favorite books.

He lists Warren Farrell’s The Myth of Male Power as one of his favorite books.

Just… just imagine the level of failure involved in that. Like, daymn.

I’ve read that book. Anyone who likes it is a shitload of diarrhea wrapped in herpes and syphilis and seasoned with seething hatred of life,

beauty and reason. Bull-fucking-shit. Masculinist Man is a reprehensible person, a rape-apologist and a willful idiot. And also a poopyhead.

Look for more hatefilled comments in our new product, “I can’t believe it’s not an over-the-top cartoon villain!”

David, you’re awesome. That is all.


Praising fucktrelle is something a drunk would do.

@ grumpycatisagirl
It’s a terribly clever play on the fact that David is spineless. You see because jellyfishes don’t have spines. Also it was ‘mistresses’ which

was even more dramatic. For David ex-priest celibate jellyfish only ever does anything to curry favour with women. Though all us commentators are

apparently lesbian feminists or wannabes(?) so quite why he’s so desperate to impress us I don’t know.


This is the only shot at sex he has. The neighborhood children run from him and no amount of money will get a hooker to even go near him. So feminazi pussy is the only shot he has.

Michelle C Young:

I haven’t seen “In the Company of Men,” but I read the synopsis. It appears that a couple of men were hurt by some women, and they decide to get

revenge on “womankind,” by targeting a completely innocent woman, who never did anything to hurt them.

Revenge – you’re doing it wrong. You’re supposed to hurt the one who hurt you in the first place, not innocent bystanders. You hurt the innocent

bystanders, and the ones who hurt you, in the first place, go blissfully on through their lives, completely unaware of anything you’re doing, and

not in the least bit hurt by your actions. Plus, INNOCENT bystanders? That’s not revenge. That’s just plain evil.

Sounds way too skeevy to me.


Thelma and Louise did the same thing and feminists love them.

Michelle C Young:

@Lea – If you enjoy watching bad movies, may I recommend “Hydra”? It’s so ridiculously bad.

My favorite scene is when the hydra bites the head off a man, and “blood” splatters across the camera. Then, the shot changes to an overhead shot

of the forest, and you hear the LOUD and tortured screams of the man whose head was just bitten OFF.

Logic! Why, it’s just as logical as an MRA.


So you like the idea of killing men. Then get off my case hypocrite.

Buttercup Q Skullpants:
I’ve been a masculist for over 20 years and have been very activist,both on and offline. I’ve debated phonies and feminists and have prevailed

over both

According to who? The Internet Argument Judges? Do they hold up little cards saying “10.0″ every time he comments?

Also, there’s a certain irony in someone with “KARMA” in his handle calling up people in the middle of the night to leave threatening, creepy

messages. Karma has a way of coming back around and rebounding on the original actor, no matter how aggrieved they may feel. People confuse karma

with one-sided, permanent, consequence-free revenge, and that isn’t what the concept is about. Karma is never-ending. The whole point is to try

to get rid of it, not magnify it with threats and violence. It’s another instance of an MRA perverting a term to suit their own purposes without

fully understanding it.

Thanks for all the work you do exposing this vile movement, David. Every playground insult they hurl at you is a badge of honor.


I used facts and they couldn't refute what I was saying. That's how I won. That is how we will win.

Saturday, May 17, 2014

My response to Dave Futrelle

I left a comment on Dave Futrelle's webpage about him being being screwed in the butt. Instead of publishing the letter he gives me a post dedicated to me. An entire post dedicated to me yet he won't link to my site like he does the other MRA sites. First of all I didn't threaten anyone. All I said was I agree with a comment that ask how Dave Futrelle is blind to the truth about feminism and feminists. That they are highly misandric and that once a male no longer suits them he is expendable. Look at what happened to ex-Senator Bob Packwood from Oregon,he served feminists interests for a long time but when he was no longer useful they threw him to the wolves. We were wondering what it would take to make Dave Futrelle see the truth about feminism and feminists. Dave Futrelle is worse than other feminists. Other feminists use straight out lies while Futrelle uses half truths. Yes I did list In The Company of Men as one of my favorite movies but then again how many feminists loved Thelma and Louise? A lot. In fact here is some misandric garbage and very recent too. I think it is hypocritical to give them a pass yet hold me accountable. Yes,I am allied with A Voice For Men and The Spearhead. But then again I'm allied with a lot of MRA sites.Futrelle really needs to get over his persecution complex.

UPDATE:I've let Dave Futrelle and his audience know about this post so that I may present my side of the story. I would try but it's not posted and I posted it a while ago. I mean if Futrelle is this helpless victim and I'm this mean evil man then he would certainly want his audience to know that but he doesn't. Why is that? Because only half truths exist with the likes of Futrelle. Half truths are worse than any lie.

UPDATE2: Futrelle has labeled me a "dick". Thank you,dave I take that as a compliment. You see dicks like me fuck pussies and assholes,royalfuckingly. I see a lot of feminists love the Starcrash video someone posted. In fact here it is. Fucktrelle heaps more shit upon men who end up being martyrs while excusing violent women who only get violent because they are bored. Typical feminist.

Friday, May 16, 2014

Another university gets sued because of the "dear colleague" directive

MAY 16, 2014

A Win for an Accused Male at St. Joe's
Posted by KC Johnson

A federal judge has permitted a second denial-of-due process suit against a university to proceed. First it was Xavier--after which the university quickly settled with Dez Wells. Now it's St. Joe's, where district court judge Felipe Restrepo (an Obama appointee) has issued a ruling that narrowed the lawsuit filed by Brian Harris, but has allowed the case to proceed.

The Harris case is one of a number with depressingly similar facts: a student is accused of sexual assault by an accuser who either doesn't go to the police or who authorities deem non-credible. The college nonetheless proceeded forth, seemingly cutting corners along the way, and branded the student a rapist despite what appeared to be sketchy evidence.

Restrepo allowed Harris to continue with his case on three grounds, the most significant of which flows form a Pennsylvania law holding that "'[a]ny person who purchases or leases goods or services primarily for personal, family or household purposes and thereby suffers any ascertainable loss of money or property' as a result of the seller's deceptive or unlawful actions." Based on Restrepo's ruling, Harris will now have the opportunity to subpoena the university's records regarding how it "investigated" his case. (Restrepo also dismissed St. Joe's claims that the university's investigation should be deemed "quasi-judicial" and therefore immune from a civil suit.) The ruling permitted Harris' defamation claims against St. Joe's and against his accuser, Lindsay Horst, to proceed. And finally, over St. Joe's objections, Restrepo accepted an amicus brief from FIRE.

That said, Restrepo dismissed two of Harris' claims, regarding breach of contract and Title IX violation (though the judge did grant permission to amend the complaint within 20 days). And the manner in which Restrepo ruled provides a reminder of why courts shouldn't cling to the old, pre-2011 reality, and recognize that in an environment in which colleges are strongly pressured to carry out rigged criminal investigations and judicial inquiries, some type of oversight from a real judge is necessary.

Regarding the breach of contract claim, Restrepo conceded that the student handbook is a contract. (This issue varies from district to district; in the Duke case, Judge James Beaty held that Duke had no legal obligation to enforce its student or faculty handbook.) But he held that Harris had not been specific enough in outlining which portions of the handbook St. Joe's violated, and urged Harris to specify in an amended complaint. That said, Restrepo cast strong doubt as to whether Harris could successfully amend this portion of the complaint, given that St. Joe's handbook holds that "subsequent reviewers shall not determine anew whether there was a Community Standards violation" and "the decision made on appeal [by the Vice President for Student Life/Associate Provost ('VPSL')] will be final."

These provisions make perfect sense regarding academic matters. But in an environment in which colleges are functioning as investigators, prosecutors, and judges regarding an allegation that's a crime, a schools should not be allowed to wholly immunize themselves from judicial review for failing to respect their (minimal) due process protections.

Regarding the Title IX claim, Restrepo held that the facts alleged by Harris "do not suggest gender bias as a motivating factor." Yet the entire thrust of sexual assault policy over the last three years is that "gender bias" requires college to minimize due process protections for students accused of sexual assault. If--as the OCR has claimed--an intimate connection exists between gender bias and due process protections, then presumably male students should be allowed to explore the issue (from the other direction) in court.

Regardless of the manner in which he reached his decision, Restrepo has allowed the lawsuit to proceed, and on multiple grounds. Will St. Joe's follows Xavier's path and quickly settle?


There is a pattern here. All these colleges and universities getting sued and forced to settle meanwhile those that crafted this directive and those who made contributions toward it get away without paying a penalty. Meanwhile more men are going to sue more universities and more universities are going to either settle out of court or take their chances with a jury civil trial. Most colleges and universities will of course do the former which will either keep them out of the limelight all together or minimize bad publicity because of it. Like I said the feminists crafted this directive and as usual someone else takes the blame for them. A blame the feminists richly deserve too.

California elections

I've received word from my California correspondent that he vetted the the political candidates running for office in his state and this is what he said:

The following candidates are running for Governor of California:

Robert Newman-Independent newmannotes@roadrunner.com
Tim Donnelly-Republican tim@timdonnelly.com
Luis J. Rodriguez-Green Party info@rodriguezforgovernor.com
Richard William Aguirre-Republican richard@aguirreforgovernor.com
Joe Leicht-Independent jedleicht@aol.com
Cindy L. Sheenan Peace and Freedom cindy@cindy2014.org
Glenn Champ-Republican bjhancock@netptc.net
Andrew Blount-Republican andrew@andrewblount.com

The following candidates are running for Lieutenant Governor of California:

Ron Nehring-Republican ron@ronnehring.com
Alan Reynolds American Elect reynolds4california@gmail.com
Eric Korevaak-Democratic electamoderate@voteforeric.com

The following candidates are running for Attorney General of California:

Orly Taitz-Independent orly.taitz@hushmail.com
Jonathan Jaech-Libertarian jonathan@jaech.net
John Haggerty-Republican johnkhaggerty@yahoo.com

The following are running for state Assembly:
Marc Steinorth

The following email was sent to all of them:

I am a men's rights activist. I advocate for men's issues and I have the following questions for you.

Where do you stand on:

1. Capital punishment-currently in capital cases only men receive the death penalty while women are spared. Not only that but when women are sentenced they are given a finite sentence while a man would receive life without parole. Does this sound fair to you? It doesn't to us.

2. When a man and a woman are arrested for the same crime the prosecutor will make a deal with the woman to convict the man,even if the woman is the mastermind. Not only that when they are sentenced men receive more time for the same crime than women do. Does this sound fair to you? It doesn't to us.

3. Prisons-women's prison's are in nicer condition than men's prisons. Also women are given privileges that men are denied,such as access to their children while incarcerated. Also there are allegations of female staff members and correctional officers abusing their position to coerce sex or other favors from the prisoners. What would you do to combat this?

4. There are a lot of at risk young men out there who are fatherless. These fatherless boys often become gang members who commit crimes and populate the state's prisons. If elected what would you do to combat fatherlessness?

I await your answers to my questions.


Men's Rights Activist,Registered Voter
and Concerned Citizen

The following are their stance on gender issues:

Orly Taitz:

As I stated before, I believe in non-discrimination and equal rights for men and women.
Women fought for equal rights and they should get them.
I hope your organization helps my campaign and donates to my campaign

Eric Korevaar:

Thanks for contacting me with your questions.

1. I think we should eliminate capital punishment in California for a number of reasons. It is not administered equally (you have pointed out one example), it is very expensive, and the process drags on, delaying closure for the victims.

2. Men and women should be treated equally if the circumstances are the same.

3. I don't know enough about your 3rd question to comment on it.

4. I don't have a specific plan to combat fatherlessness. If you have some suggestions, or some material you feel I should read, please feel free to share it with me. I do support family planning and a woman's right to choose, and believe that it is best when parents want their children and have made a conscious decision to have them and nurture them.


Eric Korevaar, Candidate for Lieutenant Governor

Jonathan Jaech: He states that he is in favor of equal rights for men and fathers and that he is for equality. He is against jailing men for child support. He is also opposed to victimless crimes.He also states he is open to input.

Joe Leicht:

Thanks for the inquiry, I appreciate the opportunity to reply.

1 - I am not in favor of the death penalty in any circumstance. I think that is the one penalty, on the off chance someone is wrongly convicted of a heinous crime, we as a society cannot go back and change that. 2 wrongs don't make a right, so as Governor, I would work to eliminate the death penalty as a punishment. To answer your question more succinctly, no, I do not thaink that sounds fair.

2 - Again, no, I do not think that sounds fair. The law is supposed to be colorblind and should also be gender neutral. The law should equally apply to both men and women, and, to my knowledge makes no exception based on gender. Frankly, to the victim, it means nothing if the perpetrator was a male or a female.

3 - As far as conditions in the prisons go, I would have to do some research into that issue. I think that is a question that would have to be addressed with an investigation into prison conditions, and working with the Attorney General to ensure that guards are held to the same standards of ethics.

4 - I agree that children who grow up without a father lose the opportunity to have a positive role model, and it certainly increases their risk. Obviously, that doesn't mean there won't be successful people who overcome seemingly EVERY adversity, but we could do more. I'm happy to be involved with a group called YOCF, Your Own Community Foundation, a non profit that helps families through difficult times. On my facebook page, we just recently started a campaign, "What can you do for California?" It's along the same lines as JFK's question, "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country." We are not asking for money, that helps, but what we are asking is that people get involved. There will always be people in need, and at risk. It's the age old question, If not now, when, if not you, who? When you see someone in need, what is your reaction? Is it, "wow, that's a shame, government should do something about that?" or is it "wow, that is awful, let me go see what we can do to help." The latter help is immediate. Often times, a lot of people want to help, but don't know how. The best way to help is get involved, either through church, or through groups suchs as YOCF. You can find out more about them at www.YOCF.org. But don't forget about the YMCA and the YWCA, Rotary Club International, Kiwanis, the Key Club, or even local community centers. There are plenty of ways to help. You may be involved in one or several already.

I don't mean to sound "preachy" but unlike Ms. Sheehan, I have a much more optimistic view of society as a whole, and I believe working together, we can effect a positive change in society. Will it happen overnight? No, of course not. But as a public servant, it would be my job (and my pleasure!) to help bring attention to issues such as these, so that working with people such as yourself, we can truly "be the change we wish to see".

Thanks again for your question, I appreciate it,

Joe Leicht

Cindy L. Sheenan: Major feminist. Not friendly to men

The following are running for Congress District 31:

Eloise Gomez Reyes
Paul Chabot
Lesli Gooch

The following email was sent to the candidates for Congress

I am a Men's Rights Activist. I have a problem with the federal government overlooking men's needs and I have the following questions for you:

1. Under the selective service program men are the only ones required to sign up if they want to stay out of jail. Women,on the other hand,are exempt from this requirement. That doesn't sound very fair. That is not constitutional as per the 14th Amendment.

2. There are federal programs for women but very few for men even though men suffer most of the on-the-job fatalities. There is a Whitehouse Commission on Women and Girls but none on boys and men. Does that sound fair to you? It doesn't to us.

3. When a man and woman are accused of a federal crime the prosecutor will make a deal with the woman to implicate the man even if the woman is the mastermind. Not only that men are given longer prison sentences than women. Does that sound fair to you? It doesn't to us.

Thank you for you time.

Men's Rights Activist,Registered Voter
and Concerned Citizen

I have not received any replies.

The fact that he received no replies is telling. It tells me they are less than sympathetic to our plight. If that is the case then we only vote for those who were considerate enough to respond. The rest can stay in the private sector.

Thursday, May 15, 2014

Swathmore violates its own rules to persecute men

On College Campuses, a Presumption of Guilt
By Peter Berkowitz - February 28, 2014

SWARTHMORE, Pa. -- On Feb. 22, in celebration of its sesquicentennial, Swarthmore College proudly hosted “The Liberal Arts in Action: A Symposium on the Future of Liberal Arts.”

In what seemed an unrelated event, a month before, a former Swarthmore student expelled by the college in the summer of 2013 filed a lawsuit in federal court of the eastern district of Pennsylvania. The student, identified as “John Doe,” was found guilty under campus disciplinary procedures of sexual misconduct. (Pseudonyms were used to protect both the accused and the accuser.) His legal complaint alleges that Swarthmore “failed to follow its own policies and procedural safeguards” and violated his “basic due process and equal protection rights.”

The litigation was not mentioned at the high-minded, if self-congratulatory, afternoon symposium. Yet the future of liberal education is closely connected to John Doe’s assertion that in the course of expelling him Swarthmore trampled on fair process—and to the willingness of the federal judiciary to examine it.

Liberal education is the culmination of an education for freedom. Among its crucial components are the offering of a solid core curriculum, the promotion of liberty of thought and discussion, and the cultivation of intellectual diversity.

Another vital feature of liberal education consists of fostering an appreciation of the principles of due process. They are principles free societies have developed over the centuries to adjudicate controversies, establish guilt, and mete out punishment in ways that justly balance the rights of those who claim they have been wronged with the rights of those who have been accused of wrongdoing.

In cases involving serious accusations, due process requires a presumption of innocence, settled rules and laws, timely notice of charges, adequate opportunity to prepare a defense, the chance for the accused to question the accuser, and an impartial judge and jury.

Although college disciplinary procedures have been roiling campuses for decades, none of this was discussed at the Swarthmore symposium. Instead, the keynote address, “The Role of the Arts in Liberal Arts Education”—delivered by Mary Schmidt Campbell, Swarthmore class of ’69 and dean of the Tisch School of the Arts at New York University—as well as the subsequent panel discussion on “The Future of Knowledge” and the concluding panel on “Fostering a Democratic Society Through Education,” were of a piece.

The speakers—Swarthmore graduates who have risen to prominence in the world of college and university administration—properly praised the importance to liberal education of certain skills: questioning effectively; thinking critically; weighing evidence and analyzing arguments; solving problems; seeing things from a multiplicity of perspectives; taking the initiative; innovating and creating; collaborating; and working across interdisciplinary boundaries.

Yet with the notable exception of Tori Haring-Smith, president of Washington & Jefferson College, who spoke compellingly about the vigorous measures adopted by her institution to teach students the importance of listening to opinions different from their own and of learning to live with the people who hold them, the panelists spoke as if our liberal arts colleges are doing a bang-up job. The only question they raised was how to extend to broader segments of the nation the lessons of freedom and democracy that Swarthmore is purportedly already teaching so well to its own students.

John Doe’s lawsuit gives a different impression of the school’s commitment to the principles of freedom. He contends that 19 months after three separate consensual sexual encounters—a kiss, sexual conduct not including sexual intercourse, and sexual intercourse—a fellow student reported to Swarthmore the first two and claimed she had been coerced. The accuser, according to the complaint, “offered no physical or medical evidence, and no police or campus safety reports.” After a two-month long investigation, Swarthmore appeared to conclude the matter without taking disciplinary action.

Approximately four months later, according to John Doe, Swarthmore suddenly re-opened the case against him. The college did this, he maintains, in response to public accusations—including a complaint filed with the U.S. Department of Education by two Swarthmore female undergraduates—that the school mishandled a number of sexual misconduct cases. And John Doe asserts that in the second round of hearings, which culminated with his expulsion based on a finding that he had merely “more likely than not” committed sexual misconduct, Swarthmore repeatedly and egregiously violated its own rules for disciplinary procedures explicitly set forth in the official student handbook.

John Doe’s lawsuit presents one of the nation’s finest small liberal arts colleges acting in haste and panic, railroading a young man in order to convince the public and the federal government that it had, in the words of Swarthmore President Rebecca Chopp, “zero tolerance for sexual assault, abuse and violence on our campus.”

Swarthmore, for its part, has filed a motion to have the John Doe complaint dismissed. “The College believes that the suit is without merit and will vigorously defend the litigation,” Swarthmore’s attorney Michael Baughman said in a written statement. “The College is committed, and always has been committed, to providing all students with a fair process of adjudication in student conduct proceedings.”

A trial court will determine the merits of John Doe’s allegations, but in light of the sorry condition of due process at our colleges and universities, the charges against Swarthmore are plausible.

For example, in 2006, the Duke faculty and administration were quick to treat as guilty three lacrosse players accused of rape by a black woman whom their fraternity had hired as an exotic dancer. After a year-long investigation, the North Carolina attorney general dropped all charges and took the remarkable step of pronouncing the accused players innocent.

In 2010, a campus tribunal found University of North Dakota student Caleb Warner guilty of sexual assault. The Grand Forks police department investigated the case and not only declined to charge Warner but charged his accuser with making a false report. Nevertheless, the university refused to reconsider its verdict. Only when the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education stepped in a year and half later was the school impelled to revisit the case and eventually overturn the judgment.

Just a few weeks ago, Dartmouth Sexual Abuse Awareness coordinator Amanda Childress asked at a University of Virginia conference on campus sexual misconduct, “Why could we not expel a student based on an allegation?” To clarify where she stood on the question, Childress went on to say, “It seems to me that we value fair and equitable processes more than we value the safety of our students. And higher education is not a right. Safety is a right. Higher education is a privilege.”

Safety, however, is not a right. It is a goal. Due process is a right. Moreover, history has shown that honoring it is the best way over the long run to achieve the greatest amount of safety and security for all.

John Doe’s account of his encounter with Swarthmore disciplinary procedures suggests the invidious effects of Ms. Childress’s reasoning—and of allowing the verdicts of pseudo-judicial proceedings to stand without legal review. An honors student in high school (with an excellent record in college) who chose Swarthmore over other elite schools because his parents met and married there, Doe is now effectively blackballed from higher education. He had completed his junior year when the school abruptly ordered the second investigation. After being expelled, he inquired about admission to some 300 colleges, all of which told him that Swarthmore’s verdict rendered him ineligible for transfer to their school. Of the 19 colleges that didn’t have such bright-line rules, 18 required disclosure. Only one of those accepted him—and required him to enroll as a junior.

This case occurs in a context in which our colleges and universities have aggressively eroded due process protections for those accused of sexual harassment and sexual assault. Over and over, colleges and universities have transformed disciplinary procedures into kangaroo courts that appear to operate on the assumption that an accusation creates a presumption of guilt and the burden is on the accused to prove his innocence. Due process is equally offended, it should not be necessary to add, when universities cover up for star athletes accused of sexual misconduct.

For the sake of genuinely liberal education, faculty and administrators must get out of the business of investigating the most serious forms of sexual misconduct, particularly sexual assault. Professors and university officials must be educated to recognize their woeful lack of the expertise necessary to properly gather and analyze evidence, establish guilt, and ensure fairness for the accuser and the accused. And they should be taught to promptly advise all students who believe they have been sexually assaulted to report their allegations to the police.

And as an indispensable element of their obligation to teach the principles of freedom, colleges and universities must be persuaded to restore to disciplinary procedures that they rightly conduct the presumption of innocence—a cornerstone of justice—and all the ancillary protections that follow from it.


Wednesday, May 14, 2014

Protest Senator Barbara Boxer's sexist hypocrisy

From SAVE Services:

While introducing the International Violence Against Women Act (S. 2307) last week, Senator Barbara Boxer highlighted recent violence by Boko Haram. Boxer said: "The recent kidnapping of more than 200 Nigerian school girls underscores the horrific violence that too many women and girls across the globe face every day."

So, we are asking: "WHAT ABOUT THE BOYS?"

Islamist militants from the group Boko Haram attacked a school in February. After allowing the girls to leave, they gunned down the boys. Some buildings were sealed up and set on fire, burning the boys to death. Those who were able to escape had their throats slashed.

According to the World Health Organization, men are twice as likely as women to die of violence-related causes. Violence against men and boys is no less horrific than violence against women and girls.

Please tell Sen. Barbara Boxer that you don't appreciate her Boko Haram Hypocrisy!

Call: (202) 224-3553

Email: click here
Facebook: click here
Twitter: click here
Mail: Office of U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer
112 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510

Sunday, May 11, 2014

It's no accident that boys are lagging behind girls in education

by Hilary White

For decades we’ve listened to teachers and ‘academics’ shedding crocodile tears as they bemoan the terrible ‘failure’ of the boys in their classes falling behind girls.

Now a five year University study has shown why.

Those same teachers are just deliberately marking boys down – even when they do better in tests and exams than their female counterparts.

A five-year research project, funded by the Departments of Education and Justice in Northern Ireland, found “systemic flaws” in teaching techniques led to teachers discriminating overtly against male students.

The shocking survey blows the lid on how since the 1970s, when feminist critics complained that the school system favored “male thinking,” grades have been decided not by performance and knowledge, but on a teachers whim.

Feminists condemned intelligence and knowledge as ‘too masculine’. And they argued successfully that pupils should be marked on ‘emotional intelligence’ (a phrase which means nothing, and so is entirely subjective), and social skills (which means being nice).

Facts, dates, rote learning, and maths skills went out of the window and “fair” teaching styles were introduced in which no matter what a pupils test results, what the teacher thought of them held sway.

As a result mainly female teachers have been expressing low views of their boys students and favouring girls.

They discriminate against blacks and hispanics in the US, while in Ireland where the survey found boys from rough areas of Belfast were particularly looked down on, and so marked down.

Dr. Ken Harland and Sam McCready from the University of Ulster said that the problem of apparent boys underachievement at school has been clear for “several decades.”

But they said “it was extremely difficult for the research team to find specific strategies addressing boys’ underachievement.”

“Although teachers who were interviewed as part of this study recognised the predominance of boys with lower academic achievement, they generally did not take this into account in terms of learning styles or teaching approaches,” Dr Harland said.

The Belfast Telegraph quoted one pupil who told the researchers, “Teachers should understand better the way boys think and why they do some things. They’re out of touch.”

The problem of boys’ underachievement in primary and secondary school follows them into their later lives.

Research from 2006 has tracked the decline in male academic performance over the same period as the rise of feminist-dominated ideologies in academia and policymaking.

Radical feminism was first embraced as an actual political policy in the United States.

In the US the ratio of males to females graduating from a four-year college stood at 1.60 in 1960, fell to parity by 1980, and continued its decline until by 2003, there were 135 females for every 100 males who graduated from a four-year college.

Another study found that half of the current gender gap in college attendance can be linked to lower rates of high-school graduation among males, particularly for young black men.

The work of one American researcher may offer clues to the question of why and how.

Professor Christopher Cornwell at the University of Georgia has found that a heavily feminist-driven education paradigm systematically favours girls and disadvantages boys from their first days in school.

Examining student test scores and grades of children in kindergarten through fifth grade, Cornwell found that boys in all racial categories are not being “commensurately graded by their teachers” in any subject “as their test scores would predict.”

The answer, Cornwell found, lies in the way teachers, who are statistically mostly women, evaluate students without reference to objective test scores.

Boys are regularly graded well below their actual academic performance.

The expert discovered that boys are falling significantly behind in grades, “despite performing as least as well as girls on math tests, and significantly better on science tests.”

After fifth grade it’s almost completely up to the teachers personal opinion whether a student passes or fails.

Cromwell says student assessment becomes a matter of “a teacher’s subjective assessment of the student’s performance,” and is further removed from the guidance of objective test results.

Teachers, he says, tend to assess students on non-cognitive, “socio-emotional skills.”

This has had a significant impact on boys’ later achievement because, while objective test scores are important, it is teacher-assigned grades that determine a child’s future with class placement, high school graduation and college admissibility.

It’s entirely to blame for the supposed ‘failure’ of boys, which teachers regularly speak of and bemoan, but never seem to want to do anything about.

Eliminating the factor of “non-cognitive skills…almost eliminates the estimated gender gap in reading grades,” Cornwell found.

He said he found it “surprising” that although boys out-perform girls on math and science test scores, girls out-perform boys on teacher-assigned grades.

In science and general knowledge, as in math skills, the data showed that kindergarten and first grade white boys’ grades “are lower by 0.11 and 0.06 standard deviations, even though their test scores are higher.”

This disparity continues and grows through to the fifth grade, with white boys and girls being graded similarly, “but the disparity between their test performance and teacher assessment grows.”

The disparity between the sexes in school achievement also far outstrips the disparity between ethnicities.

Cornwell notes that “the girl-boy gap in reading grades is over 300 percent larger than the white-black reading gap,” and boy-girl gap is about 40 percent larger than the white-black grade gaps.

“From kindergarten to fifth grade,” he found, “the top half of the test-score distribution” among whites is increasingly populated by boys, “while the grade distribution provides no corresponding evidence that boys are out-performing girls”.

These disparities are “even sharper for black and Hispanic children” with the “misalignment of grades with test scores steadily increases as black and Hispanic students advance in school.”

The study, he said, shows that “teachers’ assessments are not aligned with test-score data, with greater gender disparities in appearing in grading than testing outcomes”. And the “gender disparity” always favours girls.

The American thinker Christina Hoff Sommers wrote that “the idea that schools and society grind girls down has given rise to an array of laws and policies intended to curtail the advantage boys have and to redress the harm done to girls.”

Sommers wrote in The Atlantic,“These are things everyone is presumed to know. But they are not true.”

She notes an incident at New York’s tony Scarsdale High School in which, at a conference on student achievement, a male student presented evidence from the school’s own records showing that far from being pressed down, girls were far outstripping boys.

When the teachers checked the student’s data, “they found little or no difference in the grades of boys and girls in advanced-placement social-studies classes. But in standard classes the girls were doing a lot better.”

The revelations, she said, were not well received. Scarsdale is a school that has thoroughly accepted the received wisdom that that girls are systematically deprived, and this belief has led their gender-equity committee to offer a special senior elective on gender equity that continues to preach the message.

“Why has that belief persisted, enshrined in law, encoded in governmental and school policies, despite overwhelming evidence against it?”

Sommers traces it back to the work of one academic feminist, Carol Gilligan, a pioneer of “gender studies” at Harvard University.

Gilligan’s speculations launched a veritable industry of feminist writers, citing little or no reviewable data, lamenting the plight of girls “drowning or disappearing” in the “sea of Western culture”

“Most of Gilligan’s published research, however,” Sommers points out, “consists of anecdotes based on a small number of interviews.”

Sommers has identified the work of Gilligan and her followers as “politics dressed up as science” and points out that she has never released any of the data supporting her main theses.

Nevertheless, the idea that girls are lagging behind boys continues to lead the discussion at nearly every level of public policy on education, and not only in the U.S.

The global reach of American left-wing feminism has led to similar changes, and similar outcomes, in nearly every Western nation.


Boys and men: the other half of the slave trade

Caught: Sex Trafficked Boys & the Violent Cycle of Powerlessness
February 24, 2014 by restoreone

Sexual violence against men and boys is a topic that is seldom discussed. Often we hear victims are women and children, and we assume that the children are girls and that males are the primary perpetrator. At Restore One, we seek to serve a population that is often unspoken for, sex trafficked and sexually exploited boys. The phrase, sex trafficked children, does not specify an exact gender or ethnic population. However, folks are always very surprised to hear that boys are sex trafficked and sexually exploited just like girls. You may ask, how are boys sold and where and who buys them?
The sexual exploitation of boys remains hidden. I’d go as far as to say it is an even more hushed crime than female sex trafficking. It is an immense moneymaker for those governing the trade. The buying and selling of boys for the purposes of sex are found throughout the United States both in the ritziest neighborhoods and poorest districts of the city. The research study The Commercial Exploitation of Children in New York City in 2008 estimates that as much as 50% of commercial sexually exploited children are males.

Regardless of the location or by which means the deed is done, one link remains true to every story I’ve witnessed or heard, the sexual violence against boys is directly linked to powerfully exploiting the powerless. While money is the blatant fuel behind the sex trafficking and sexual exploitation of boys, the cycle of powerlessness is what leaves boys vulnerable to violence. To explain the cycle of powerlessness in relationship to the sex trafficking and exploitation of boys, I created the story of Paul. Paul was inspired by my countless interactions with male survivors and the honor it’s been for me to hear their many stories. Thus, The story of Paul.

Paul is a teenage boy with a jaded history of sexual abuse, foster care, low self-esteem and parent maltreatment. He had no part in the choices that his parents, the state and others have made on his behalf that have caused him much harm and heartache at a young age of 15. Life has left him vulnerable and powerless. In the mist of his despair, he is sought out by a pimp and recruited into the life.

The men he is forced to service are men in power, patrol cops, wealthy business owners, a college football coach, politicians and even pastors. His pimp is part of a large criminal ring, and they traffick boys and girls in every state. If Paul were to run, he’d never really get out because they would find him and welcome him with a beating. His pimp tells him that since he’s had sex with men, he’s not good for nothing but turning tricks.

One night during a large undercover rescue operation, Paul was found along with other children who’ve been sex trafficked. When the agents see Paul they are stunned. When he was first interviewed, they were testing him to see if he was a trafficker but after some probing they saw that he was a victim. Determining this though was not much help because there were no services specifically for boys who’ve been sex trafficked. Law enforcement did their best and referred him to the Department of Social Services, and he was then placed in a foster care home. Within a few weeks Paul is groped by one of the older kids in the home and he immediately remembered the words of his pimp, “You ain’t good for nothing but turning tricks.”

In a state of frustration, Paul believed the haunting words of his pimp, ran away and went back into the life.

Unfortunately Paul is the story of many boys. Boys find when seeking services or wanting out of the life that their power is rendered and immobilized when service care providers refuse to provide proper services due to gender. With no services specific to meet their fragile needs, there is little hope for boys to exit the life. A victim of violence again is left powerless and the cycle continues.

I’ve had countless conversations with community members advising me to focus on women and girls and that the community is not ready to deal with sex trafficked boys. When it comes to the topic of male victimization, our culture demands we look the other way. Direct services for victims of sexual violence are harshly female centered with few gateways for males. The Department of State claims that the often hidden crime of sex trafficking boys remains under wraps largely due to the cultural climate and taboos around the practice. I’ve found that the majority of Americans want to believe two things about the sex trafficking of men and boys: 1) Men and boys always have the power to get out, therefore they are not considered victims; 2) Men and boys are not in need of the same victim services that are offered to women and girls. However, I believe with an able body and willing heart, the story of Paul can change and so can these taboos around the trafficking of males. Males, who are victims of sexual violence such as sex trafficking and sexual exploitation, need you to advocate on their behalf by being a voice. I charge you to speak up and to do your part to begin addressing the gap in victim services for males within your own community. Remember, the cycle of powerlessness can end with just your voice.


Now also take into the fact that most sex traffickers are women. We can reasonably conclude that it is women who are trafficking boys and men while white knights with guns hold them hostage to do their mistresses bidding. I can see why feminists abandoned human trafficking. They would have implicated themselves.

Student sues over "not alone" policy

University of Michigan Student Found Guilty of Sexual Assault & Expelled - No Trial, No Jury, No Witnesses, No Attorney
Suzanne Hamner May 9, 2014

It seems the University of Michigan has followed the recommendations in the White House Task Force report entitled "Not Alone" to enact a four-year suspension against a student who was found guilty of the charge of sexual assault – "despite receiving little notice of the charges against him, no attorney, no trial and no jury." Drew Sterrett, the former University of Michigan student, is now suing the institution for violating his rights guaranteed by the US Constitution due process amendments. The incident occurred in 2012, Sterrett's freshman year.

According to The Daily Caller, Sterrett had sex with a female student in his dorm room. According to Sterrett, his roommate was present during the encounter and could attest to it being consensual. While at home for summer break, five months later, Sterrett was informed by the university the female student had filed a rape complaint against him. The university told Sterrett any time in trying to procure a lawyer would result in the proceedings commencing without him. In a hearing via Skype communication later that day, Sterrett denied any wrongdoing.

"'At no point during the call/interview was [Sterrett] given notice of the specific allegations which had been made against him,' the lawsuit claimed."
Sterrett's accuser had second thoughts about the details of their encounter being made public resulting in the investigation being halted in September. He was warned to stay away from the dorm where his accuser resided while being totally unaware of the full accusations against him. The university proceeded to adjudicate the matter anyway resulting in administrators informing Sterrett "he was found guilty of raping his accuser and creating a 'hostile environment' for her, and would be suspended until 2016."

Sterrett denied the charges. He called them "ludicrous" and claimed the proceedings were "a gross perversion of justice." The university denied Sterrett adequate representation and the opportunity to address the specific allegations against him made by his accuser. Regardless, a university appeal board upheld the suspension.

The lawsuit filed by Sterrett maintains, "the decision of the Appeals Board was a rubber stamp of the flawed investigation and Report and Addendum, lacked fundamental fairness, was reckless, arbitrary and capricious, and clearly denied [Sterrett] due process." The lawsuit demands the university reinstate Sterrett and pay damages.

The University of Michigan denied any wrongdoing. Kelly Cunningham, a spokeswoman for UM, said, "The University is reviewing the complaints and plans to defend them vigorously."

In a recent article regarding the White House Task Force report "Not Alone" and its falsification of facts, the problems with these "recommendations" for college campuses, that were urged to be put in place as soon as possible, were the removal of the rights of due process afforded all citizens of the US, upheld by the US Constitution with the Fifth and Sixth Amendments, already in place on some campuses with the administration praising those institutions that arbitrarily dispensed with the rule of law in regards to complaints of sexual assault and rape. As stated in the previous article, this dispensation of the right to due process affects everyone's children regardless of political affiliation, political viewpoint, religion, creed, national origin, race or socioeconomic status. And, it could cause irreparable harm to those who are falsely accused or a complaint filed because of revenge or a prank.

While liberals and those on the left cheer the administration when it participates in violations of law that promote their cause, these individuals have heralded the dismissal of "the rule of law" on college campuses, recommended by the Obama administration, in favor of the "rule of men." In their thinking, the rules would not apply to them as the administration is "liberal friendly" seeking to thwart conservatives and those believing in the rule of law – the law of the land, the US Constitution. However, they too will bear the fruits of their labors.

Whether this student is innocent or guilty is not the issue – the issue is the removal of the right of due process upheld in the US Constitution by an institution, individual, or group that does not have the right to eradicate individual God-given rights.

While all of us would like to believe that our children do not or would not engage in casual sexual activity, it has become evident this does happen and happens at earlier ages: sometimes despite the teachings of parents. In this case, the accused claims the encounter was consensual and even reported having a witness to verify that fact. In the report, "Not Alone," the definition of sexual assault is to be redefined that may include many innocent situations, possibly a consensual situation between individuals of consenting age. Unfortunately, Drew Sterrett has been caught up in a war between the upholding of the rule of law versus the implementation of the rule of men. He will end up paying the price while the posturing of Congress, this administration and the public continue.

The left is busy condoning debauchery at every level, destroying the family unit, and promoting the early sexualization of our children; then, this group has the audacity to support the eradication of due process. Sterrett believed he was not in the wrong by engaging in consensual sexual relations, so did not worry about the encounter. It is proving costly as he attends a university who denies due process to those accused of wrongdoing.

The liberal left needs to re-evaluate their mantra. Oh wait, that would mean that a right-wing extreme woman that someone let out of the kitchen where she needs to be kept was actually right about the consequences of trampling the US Constitution. Well, sometimes that chicken comes home to roost.


I guess dear colleague didn't go over so well so now we have not alone,which is another misandric assfucking from this administration. The weird thing is that the administration making our lives hell is the same one that put together a fucking website that didn't work for shit. In fact it was a running joke on FOX news. All this administration has done is managed to piss off everyone and make them sue the government. I'll bet Biden is the brains on this one,it is that asinine.

Friday, May 9, 2014

Bring back our girls? What about the boys?

By now you've heard about the incident where 300 Nigerian schoolgirls were kidnapped by a militant Islamic group,Boko Haram. It is hard to miss it with the media plastering it all over the place,both the left wing and right wing media pushing it. Hannity is completely taken in by this,as I suspected he would be. Only the female Republicans are making any sense by saying let's stay out of it.The federal government is getting in a lather about it as well. Even with a sad face Michelle Obama holding up a sign that says "save our girls". Everyone in the government is in a rush to play the white knight. Why? It is not our problem. Why should American men sacrifice their lives to save foreign nationals when it's not in our national security interest? What has Boko Haram threatened to with the girls? They have threatened to marry them off to their soldiers. Here is something you may have not known: prior to kidnapping the girls Boko Haram MURDERED 58 Nigerian boys and not a peep from the world,let alone the American government and media.(Source: The Factor with guest hostess Laura Ingram 05/08/2014)That's right we let Boko Haram get away with slaughtering 58 boys. We didn't make a sound. Nothing from the media,nothing from the government. No angry calls to rush in and avenge them. The Obama administration sure wants to rush in and save those girls but this is the same Obama administration that let 4 American men be murdered in Benghazi,Libya. We have no suspects,no one in lock-up for it and a president that is going to stonewall this but I guess 300 foreign females that may or may not favor the United States are more important than 4 American men who definitely were loyal to their country,a country that didn't reciprocate that loyalty. There is now a House Select Committee looking into Benghazi and I hope they reach the truth and I hope to be informed about it by a media source that is not afraid to look politically incorrect.(this is America,what is a "correct" opinion anyway,everyone has different opinions which they deem to be "correct". Political Correctness is Proletariat Communism. IOW a dictatorship) We as a nation need to keep an eye on this administration. We can not forget Benghazi. We cannot forget Obamacare,the murdering of the Bill of Rights and the UN dictatorship this administration would shove down our throats.

Saturday, May 3, 2014

Free Ryan Walker

this boy was jailed for retaliating to bullies. in memory of all those that didn't fight back and ended up commiting suicide release this boy (who has admitted what he did was wrong!) and send a message to bullies everywhere that this will not be tolerated!

Sign the petition

He stood up to two women who were bullying him and taunting him so he fought back.

If you're going to ask me as a MRA how I can be cavalier about this how can you as a society be so cavalier about it:here and here