Masculinists Need Not Apply at AVFM
June 23, 2014 By Paul Elam 188 Comments
This is going to a short bulletin, as I haven’t the time for a full article.
For some years now I have seen people who identify as “masculist” or “masculinist” online in a few locations. I have even seen a few of them pop up here in the comments, usually with something really stupid to say.
I can’t (and don’t want to) control whatever fucktardery that some people choose to engage. All I can do is clarify, and when needed assert AVFM editorial policy, and the philosophy that goes into it.
From my personal perspective, the following applies to masculists.
Masculinism is feminism’s mentally and morally challenged younger brother. It is an ideology, and most, (I know, I know NAMASCALT), demonstrate that with political polemics, phallo-centrism and other forms of general stupidity.
You have, as best I can know these days, never seen a “masculist” article on the pages of this site, or even mild endorsement for any of the people so identified.
And that is how we roll. The principles of inclusiveness, pragmatism, evidence based, non ideological solutions good — ideology, separatism, divisiveness, polemics, well, not so much.
That is all.
Source
That is enough. I don't know why Elam is shitting on his allies,allies that helped prop him up and his fucking website. Ever since they allowed women and gays to run wild at AVFM things have gone downhill. I liked what AVFM was,not what's it's become. Paul once told me to mend fences and now he's burning bridges,which is a stupid move. Perhaps Elam should practice what he preaches.
Thursday, June 26, 2014
Wednesday, June 25, 2014
Unseat a corrupt judge
Navy submariner Matthew Hindes is stationed on a submarine in the Pacific. But he’s been ordered to appear in a Michigan courtroom Monday in a custody battle with his ex-wife Angela involving their daughter, Kaylee.
Hindes was given permanent custody of Kaylee in 2010, after she was reportedly removed from Angela’s home by child protective services. Kaylee has been living with Hindes’ wife Benita-Lynn – her step-mother – in Washington state while Hindes is deployed aboard a nuclear submarine in the Pacific Ocean.
Despite Hindes’ assignment, a judge has ordered Hindes to appear in court or face contempt.
Hindes’ lawyers argue he should be protected by the Service members Civil Relief Act, which states courts in custody cases may “grant a stay of proceedings for a minimum period of 90 days” to defendants serving their country.
The judge hearing the case, circuit court judge Margaret Noe, disagreed, adding, “If the child is not in the care and custody of the father, the child should be in the care and custody of the mother.”
The sailor is not allowed to appear by Skype or phone, and in custody cases, being absent in court could have a huge effect on the outcome.
Hindes is not only facing the possibility of losing custody of his daughter, but also the chance to say goodbye
As a result of this blatant disregard for child welfare (the child was removed from the care of the mother by CPS) and intent to punish a father for being a member of the armed services, we call for the immediate resignation of Judge Margaret Noe.
SAY NO TO NOE.
petition
Hindes was given permanent custody of Kaylee in 2010, after she was reportedly removed from Angela’s home by child protective services. Kaylee has been living with Hindes’ wife Benita-Lynn – her step-mother – in Washington state while Hindes is deployed aboard a nuclear submarine in the Pacific Ocean.
Despite Hindes’ assignment, a judge has ordered Hindes to appear in court or face contempt.
Hindes’ lawyers argue he should be protected by the Service members Civil Relief Act, which states courts in custody cases may “grant a stay of proceedings for a minimum period of 90 days” to defendants serving their country.
The judge hearing the case, circuit court judge Margaret Noe, disagreed, adding, “If the child is not in the care and custody of the father, the child should be in the care and custody of the mother.”
The sailor is not allowed to appear by Skype or phone, and in custody cases, being absent in court could have a huge effect on the outcome.
Hindes is not only facing the possibility of losing custody of his daughter, but also the chance to say goodbye
As a result of this blatant disregard for child welfare (the child was removed from the care of the mother by CPS) and intent to punish a father for being a member of the armed services, we call for the immediate resignation of Judge Margaret Noe.
SAY NO TO NOE.
petition
Thursday, June 19, 2014
SB 967 update
SB 967 has been amended again. I will give you the good,the bad and the ugly about these amendments:
The good: this amendment lost a sponsor and the word "women" was crossed out. The accuser can no longer be exempt from the anti-drinking rules on campuses.
The bad: it is more misandric allowing for more privileges given to women at the expense of men including third party reporting.
The ugly:a third party can turn you in on a sexaul assault,domestic violence and/or stalking complaint on and off campus. That's right. If this passes your college is no longer an institute for higher learning but a feminist inquisition out to crucify men for their alleged action(s)-regardless of where they took place. Just think: someone who doesn't like you can now swear out a complaint about you or they can do it just to be sadistic.
The rest of the amendment was just a semantic shell game and a waste of California tax dollars. I wonder how they feel about that.
This bitch is going to the Assembly Committee on Higher Education so let's let the Assembly members know where we stand.
The good: this amendment lost a sponsor and the word "women" was crossed out. The accuser can no longer be exempt from the anti-drinking rules on campuses.
The bad: it is more misandric allowing for more privileges given to women at the expense of men including third party reporting.
The ugly:a third party can turn you in on a sexaul assault,domestic violence and/or stalking complaint on and off campus. That's right. If this passes your college is no longer an institute for higher learning but a feminist inquisition out to crucify men for their alleged action(s)-regardless of where they took place. Just think: someone who doesn't like you can now swear out a complaint about you or they can do it just to be sadistic.
The rest of the amendment was just a semantic shell game and a waste of California tax dollars. I wonder how they feel about that.
This bitch is going to the Assembly Committee on Higher Education so let's let the Assembly members know where we stand.
Monday, June 16, 2014
Glendale offers self defense classes to men
NCFM letter causes City of Glendale to offer free self-defense class to both men and women
June 5, 2014
By NCFM
self-defense classNCFM NOTE: Sometimes change through advocacy is a simple as a letter, like the one we sent to the City of Glendale about their free self-defense classes only for women. This is not the first time NCFM has been able to cause change, significant change we might add, with just a well written letter. For one of many examples, such a letter caused NIPPON Airlines to reconsider women only restrooms on international flights, and the PGA from having a “Women’s Day” at a major event. That letter also prevented the featured speaker from violating a host of laws. The speaker was just reelected Bonnie Dumanis, District Attorney for San Diego. These are not small victories. Each one brought with it media interest, which in turn helps us raise awareness of such inequalities. Consider, what if the city of Glendale decided to have free self-defense classes for “Whites Only?” Our guess is every Glendale elected official and employee involved in the event would be looking for other work. So, why isn’t it that way when such people turn a blind eye on half our population, e.g., men. Crazy stuff isn’t it?
Glendale male-only self-defense class scheduled
Session results from complaint of group calling for end to gender discrimination.
By Brittany Levine, brittany.levine@latimes.comJune 4, 2014 | 7:32 p.m.
Following a complaint that free self-defense classes exclusively for women and girls sponsored by a city commission violate equal-protection clauses of the Constitution, city officials have scheduled a class for men and boys for later this month, in addition to two new training sessions for females.
While the Glendale city attorney reviewed the complaint letter sent by the National Coalition for Men in March, the Commission on the Status of Women cancelled its two self-defense classes for females in April, which is also when the city celebrates “Sexual Harassment Awareness Month.”
The majority of the City Council voted reluctantly to add male-only classes at the city’s expense that month, with one calling the coalition a joke after the city attorney recommended they host the alternative training to minimize legal risk.
Reached by phone on Wednesday, Harry Crouch, president of the San Diego-based nonprofit coalition, said his group was glad the city scheduled a self-defense class for men and boys.
“We’re very pleased that the city of Glendale decided to provide the same opportunities and services to men as they would women and girls,” Crouch said.
The goal of the classes is to provide training that may help participants avoid sexual assaults and fight perpetrators if they are ever attacked. Crouch added earlier that men are also prone to violent attacks and could benefit from free self-defense classes.
Mayor Zareh Sinanyan suggested in April that the male-only class should incorporate conversations about bullying.
The two female classes, which cost $400, are to be paid for with funds raised by the Commission on the Status of Women. The cost of the men’s class will come out of the city’s General Fund, which pays for police, parks and other general services.
The two female-only classes are scheduled from 6:30 to 9 p.m. on Wednesday in the Glendale Police Department’s large community room, 131 N. Isabel St., and 6:30 to 9 p.m. on June 25 in Glendale Community College’s Student Center Conference Room, SC212, 1500 N. Verdugo Road.
The male-only class is slated to take place from 6:30 p.m. to 9 p.m. on June 18 in the Glendale Police Department’s large community room.
Participants must be 12 years old or older. Reservations are required. To hold a spot or for more information, call (818) 548-2000 or email women@glendaleca.gov.
Source
Way to go,NCFM,way to go. Thank you for this good news.
June 5, 2014
By NCFM
self-defense classNCFM NOTE: Sometimes change through advocacy is a simple as a letter, like the one we sent to the City of Glendale about their free self-defense classes only for women. This is not the first time NCFM has been able to cause change, significant change we might add, with just a well written letter. For one of many examples, such a letter caused NIPPON Airlines to reconsider women only restrooms on international flights, and the PGA from having a “Women’s Day” at a major event. That letter also prevented the featured speaker from violating a host of laws. The speaker was just reelected Bonnie Dumanis, District Attorney for San Diego. These are not small victories. Each one brought with it media interest, which in turn helps us raise awareness of such inequalities. Consider, what if the city of Glendale decided to have free self-defense classes for “Whites Only?” Our guess is every Glendale elected official and employee involved in the event would be looking for other work. So, why isn’t it that way when such people turn a blind eye on half our population, e.g., men. Crazy stuff isn’t it?
Glendale male-only self-defense class scheduled
Session results from complaint of group calling for end to gender discrimination.
By Brittany Levine, brittany.levine@latimes.comJune 4, 2014 | 7:32 p.m.
Following a complaint that free self-defense classes exclusively for women and girls sponsored by a city commission violate equal-protection clauses of the Constitution, city officials have scheduled a class for men and boys for later this month, in addition to two new training sessions for females.
While the Glendale city attorney reviewed the complaint letter sent by the National Coalition for Men in March, the Commission on the Status of Women cancelled its two self-defense classes for females in April, which is also when the city celebrates “Sexual Harassment Awareness Month.”
The majority of the City Council voted reluctantly to add male-only classes at the city’s expense that month, with one calling the coalition a joke after the city attorney recommended they host the alternative training to minimize legal risk.
Reached by phone on Wednesday, Harry Crouch, president of the San Diego-based nonprofit coalition, said his group was glad the city scheduled a self-defense class for men and boys.
“We’re very pleased that the city of Glendale decided to provide the same opportunities and services to men as they would women and girls,” Crouch said.
The goal of the classes is to provide training that may help participants avoid sexual assaults and fight perpetrators if they are ever attacked. Crouch added earlier that men are also prone to violent attacks and could benefit from free self-defense classes.
Mayor Zareh Sinanyan suggested in April that the male-only class should incorporate conversations about bullying.
The two female classes, which cost $400, are to be paid for with funds raised by the Commission on the Status of Women. The cost of the men’s class will come out of the city’s General Fund, which pays for police, parks and other general services.
The two female-only classes are scheduled from 6:30 to 9 p.m. on Wednesday in the Glendale Police Department’s large community room, 131 N. Isabel St., and 6:30 to 9 p.m. on June 25 in Glendale Community College’s Student Center Conference Room, SC212, 1500 N. Verdugo Road.
The male-only class is slated to take place from 6:30 p.m. to 9 p.m. on June 18 in the Glendale Police Department’s large community room.
Participants must be 12 years old or older. Reservations are required. To hold a spot or for more information, call (818) 548-2000 or email women@glendaleca.gov.
Source
Way to go,NCFM,way to go. Thank you for this good news.
Saturday, June 14, 2014
Feminists want to silence George Will
George Will: Colleges become the victims of progressivism
GEORGE F. WILL
June 6
Colleges and universities are being educated by Washington and are finding the experience excruciating. They are learning that when they say campus victimizations are ubiquitous (“micro-aggressions,” often not discernible to the untutored eye, are everywhere), and that when they make victimhood a coveted status that confers privileges, victims proliferate. And academia’s progressivism has rendered it intellectually defenseless now that progressivism’s achievement, the regulatory state, has decided it is academia’s turn to be broken to government’s saddle.
Consider the supposed campus epidemic of rape, a.k.a. “sexual assault.” Herewith, a Philadelphia magazine report about Swarthmore College, where in 2013 a student “was in her room with a guy with whom she’d been hooking up for three months”:
“They’d now decided — mutually, she thought — just to be friends. When he ended up falling asleep on her bed, she changed into pajamas and climbed in next to him. Soon, he was putting his arm around her and taking off her clothes. ‘I basically said, “No, I don’t want to have sex with you.” And then he said, “OK, that’s fine” and stopped. . . . And then he started again a few minutes later, taking off my panties, taking off his boxers. I just kind of laid there and didn’t do anything — I had already said no. I was just tired and wanted to go to bed. I let him finish. I pulled my panties back on and went to sleep.’”
Six weeks later, the woman reported that she had been raped. Now the Obama administration is riding to the rescue of “sexual assault” victims. It vows to excavate equities from the ambiguities of the hookup culture, this cocktail of hormones, alcohol and the faux sophistication of today’s prolonged adolescence of especially privileged young adults.
The administration’s crucial and contradictory statistics are validated the usual way, by official repetition; Joe Biden has been heard from. The statistics are: One in five women is sexually assaulted while in college, and only 12 percent of assaults are reported. Simple arithmetic demonstrates that if the 12 percent reporting rate is correct, the 20 percent assault rate is preposterous. Mark Perry of the American Enterprise Institute notes, for example, that in the four years 2009 to 2012 there were 98 reported sexual assaults at Ohio State. That would be 12 percent of 817 total out of a female student population of approximately 28,000, for a sexual assault rate of approximately 2.9 percent — too high but nowhere near 20 percent.
Education Department lawyers disregard pesky arithmetic and elementary due process. Threatening to withdraw federal funding, the department mandates adoption of a minimal “preponderance of the evidence” standard when adjudicating sexual assault charges between males and the female “survivors” — note the language of prejudgment. Combine this with capacious definitions of sexual assault that can include not only forcible sexual penetration but also nonconsensual touching. Then add the doctrine that the consent of a female who has been drinking might not protect a male from being found guilty of rape. Then comes costly litigation against institutions that have denied due process to males they accuse of what society considers serious felonies.
Now academia is unhappy about the Education Department’s plan for government to rate every institution’s educational product. But the professors need not worry. A department official says this assessment will be easy: “It’s like rating a blender.” Education, gadgets — what’s the difference?
Meanwhile, the newest campus idea for preventing victimizations — an idea certain to multiply claims of them — is “trigger warnings.” They would be placed on assigned readings or announced before lectures. Otherwise, traumas could be triggered in students whose tender sensibilities would be lacerated by unexpected encounters with racism, sexism, violence (dammit, Hamlet, put down that sword!) or any other facet of reality that might violate a student’s entitlement to serenity. This entitlement has already bred campus speech codes that punish unpopular speech. Now the codes are begetting the soft censorship of trigger warnings to swaddle students in a “safe,” “supportive,” “unthreatening” environment, intellectual comfort for the intellectually dormant.
It is salutary that academia, with its adversarial stance toward limited government and cultural common sense, is making itself ludicrous. Academia is learning that its attempts to create victim-free campuses — by making everyone hypersensitive, even delusional, about victimizations — brings increasing supervision by the regulatory state that progressivism celebrates.
What government is inflicting on colleges and universities, and what they are inflicting on themselves, diminishes their autonomy, resources, prestige and comity. Which serves them right. They have asked for this by asking for progressivism.
Source
Feminists are aiming their guns at George Will,we need to defend him. We have to show support to anyone is going to question the feminist misasndric narrative and show them they are right to question it. Some U.S. Senators were giving George Will shit about what he wrote and this is his response:
George Will responds to senators on his sexual assault column
BY GEORGE F. WILL June 13 at 5:53 PM
Editor’s note: On Thursday, U.S. Senators Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisc.) and Robert Casey (D-Pa.) sent a letter to Post columnist George Will objecting to his column published online last Friday about sexual assault on college campuses. Today, Will sent the senators a response. Here is an excerpt:
Dear Senators Blumenthal, Feinstein, Baldwin and Casey:
I have received your letter of June 12, and I am puzzled. You say my statistics “fly in the face of everything we know about this issue.” You do not mention which statistics, but those I used come from the Obama administration, and from simple arithmetic involving publicly available reports on campus sexual assaults.
The administration asserts that only 12 percent of college sexual assaults are reported. Note well: I did not question this statistic. Rather, I used it.
I cited one of the calculations based on it that Mark Perry of the American Enterprise Institute has performed {link}. So, I think your complaint is with the conclusion that arithmetic dictates, based on the administration’s statistic. The inescapable conclusion is that another administration statistic that one in five women is sexually assaulted while in college is insupportable and might call for tempering your rhetoric about “the scourge of sexual assault.”
As for what you call my “ancient beliefs,” which you think derive from an “antiquated” and “counterintuitive” culture, allow me to tell you something really counterintuitive: I think I take sexual assault much more seriously than you do. Which is why I worry about definitions of that category of crime that might, by their breadth, tend to trivialize it. And why I think sexual assault is a felony that should be dealt with by the criminal justice system, and not be adjudicated by improvised campus processes.
Source
The above link will take you to the Washington Times website where you can write a comment saying you support George Will and stand behind him against feminist oppression. The feminists want to silence their critics,we are one of those critics. I won't let them silence me. Are you going to let them silence you?
GEORGE F. WILL
June 6
Colleges and universities are being educated by Washington and are finding the experience excruciating. They are learning that when they say campus victimizations are ubiquitous (“micro-aggressions,” often not discernible to the untutored eye, are everywhere), and that when they make victimhood a coveted status that confers privileges, victims proliferate. And academia’s progressivism has rendered it intellectually defenseless now that progressivism’s achievement, the regulatory state, has decided it is academia’s turn to be broken to government’s saddle.
Consider the supposed campus epidemic of rape, a.k.a. “sexual assault.” Herewith, a Philadelphia magazine report about Swarthmore College, where in 2013 a student “was in her room with a guy with whom she’d been hooking up for three months”:
“They’d now decided — mutually, she thought — just to be friends. When he ended up falling asleep on her bed, she changed into pajamas and climbed in next to him. Soon, he was putting his arm around her and taking off her clothes. ‘I basically said, “No, I don’t want to have sex with you.” And then he said, “OK, that’s fine” and stopped. . . . And then he started again a few minutes later, taking off my panties, taking off his boxers. I just kind of laid there and didn’t do anything — I had already said no. I was just tired and wanted to go to bed. I let him finish. I pulled my panties back on and went to sleep.’”
Six weeks later, the woman reported that she had been raped. Now the Obama administration is riding to the rescue of “sexual assault” victims. It vows to excavate equities from the ambiguities of the hookup culture, this cocktail of hormones, alcohol and the faux sophistication of today’s prolonged adolescence of especially privileged young adults.
The administration’s crucial and contradictory statistics are validated the usual way, by official repetition; Joe Biden has been heard from. The statistics are: One in five women is sexually assaulted while in college, and only 12 percent of assaults are reported. Simple arithmetic demonstrates that if the 12 percent reporting rate is correct, the 20 percent assault rate is preposterous. Mark Perry of the American Enterprise Institute notes, for example, that in the four years 2009 to 2012 there were 98 reported sexual assaults at Ohio State. That would be 12 percent of 817 total out of a female student population of approximately 28,000, for a sexual assault rate of approximately 2.9 percent — too high but nowhere near 20 percent.
Education Department lawyers disregard pesky arithmetic and elementary due process. Threatening to withdraw federal funding, the department mandates adoption of a minimal “preponderance of the evidence” standard when adjudicating sexual assault charges between males and the female “survivors” — note the language of prejudgment. Combine this with capacious definitions of sexual assault that can include not only forcible sexual penetration but also nonconsensual touching. Then add the doctrine that the consent of a female who has been drinking might not protect a male from being found guilty of rape. Then comes costly litigation against institutions that have denied due process to males they accuse of what society considers serious felonies.
Now academia is unhappy about the Education Department’s plan for government to rate every institution’s educational product. But the professors need not worry. A department official says this assessment will be easy: “It’s like rating a blender.” Education, gadgets — what’s the difference?
Meanwhile, the newest campus idea for preventing victimizations — an idea certain to multiply claims of them — is “trigger warnings.” They would be placed on assigned readings or announced before lectures. Otherwise, traumas could be triggered in students whose tender sensibilities would be lacerated by unexpected encounters with racism, sexism, violence (dammit, Hamlet, put down that sword!) or any other facet of reality that might violate a student’s entitlement to serenity. This entitlement has already bred campus speech codes that punish unpopular speech. Now the codes are begetting the soft censorship of trigger warnings to swaddle students in a “safe,” “supportive,” “unthreatening” environment, intellectual comfort for the intellectually dormant.
It is salutary that academia, with its adversarial stance toward limited government and cultural common sense, is making itself ludicrous. Academia is learning that its attempts to create victim-free campuses — by making everyone hypersensitive, even delusional, about victimizations — brings increasing supervision by the regulatory state that progressivism celebrates.
What government is inflicting on colleges and universities, and what they are inflicting on themselves, diminishes their autonomy, resources, prestige and comity. Which serves them right. They have asked for this by asking for progressivism.
Source
Feminists are aiming their guns at George Will,we need to defend him. We have to show support to anyone is going to question the feminist misasndric narrative and show them they are right to question it. Some U.S. Senators were giving George Will shit about what he wrote and this is his response:
George Will responds to senators on his sexual assault column
BY GEORGE F. WILL June 13 at 5:53 PM
Editor’s note: On Thursday, U.S. Senators Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisc.) and Robert Casey (D-Pa.) sent a letter to Post columnist George Will objecting to his column published online last Friday about sexual assault on college campuses. Today, Will sent the senators a response. Here is an excerpt:
Dear Senators Blumenthal, Feinstein, Baldwin and Casey:
I have received your letter of June 12, and I am puzzled. You say my statistics “fly in the face of everything we know about this issue.” You do not mention which statistics, but those I used come from the Obama administration, and from simple arithmetic involving publicly available reports on campus sexual assaults.
The administration asserts that only 12 percent of college sexual assaults are reported. Note well: I did not question this statistic. Rather, I used it.
I cited one of the calculations based on it that Mark Perry of the American Enterprise Institute has performed {link}. So, I think your complaint is with the conclusion that arithmetic dictates, based on the administration’s statistic. The inescapable conclusion is that another administration statistic that one in five women is sexually assaulted while in college is insupportable and might call for tempering your rhetoric about “the scourge of sexual assault.”
As for what you call my “ancient beliefs,” which you think derive from an “antiquated” and “counterintuitive” culture, allow me to tell you something really counterintuitive: I think I take sexual assault much more seriously than you do. Which is why I worry about definitions of that category of crime that might, by their breadth, tend to trivialize it. And why I think sexual assault is a felony that should be dealt with by the criminal justice system, and not be adjudicated by improvised campus processes.
Source
The above link will take you to the Washington Times website where you can write a comment saying you support George Will and stand behind him against feminist oppression. The feminists want to silence their critics,we are one of those critics. I won't let them silence me. Are you going to let them silence you?
Friday, June 13, 2014
Thursday, June 12, 2014
Sign the petition to oppose feminist oppression
Detroit has a Problem — Sign This Petition to Help Fix it
June 8, 2014 By Paul Elam
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you……
As recent history would lead us to fully expect, radical gender ideologues have made it their mission to silence our efforts to address issues affecting boys and men in Detroit at AVFM’s First International Conference on Men’s Issues scheduled for the end of June. And by “us” I mean a unique, diverse and eminently qualified line up of experts on gender issues, including those affecting men and boys.
We have a former National Organization for Women chairperson and two groundbreaking women who founded the international women’s shelter movement in two countries. One of them is the first black female to take office as a senator in North America. Also speaking will be psychotherapists, psychologists, attorneys, academicians and dedicated advocates from the United States, Canada, Great Britain, Australia and India. We have concerned attendees coming from around the globe to hear vitally important messages about their sons, brothers, fathers, husbands and other men they love.
It seems unthinkable that this petition is actually necessary. Who would have imagined that in 2014 we would have to petition a city, especially one so steeped in the historic struggle for civil rights, to demand that we be allowed to stand publicly and speak to issues like suicide, homelessness, corruption, incarceration, the welfare of children and the state of education?
Yet that is exactly what is happening.
We are calling on the city of Detroit to take note. Radical feminists have corrupted the idea of gender equity. They have transformed it into a Marxist agenda of oppressive control, including the silencing of all opposing views.
You are seeing this play out on the streets of your city right now.
We are asking people across the world to sign this petition. Even if there is not a single boy or man in your life, please help us help boys and men and help us preserve the tradition of basic civil liberties.
Tell Detroit this is unacceptable.
Federal court gives men a weapon to fight back against false accusers
Students Accused of Rape Can Fight Back // Court OKs Suits Against University, Employees, and Female
With so much attention focused on alleged failures to prosecute students accused of date rape, the problem of universities whose judicial proceedings are unfair to the accused have been largely overlooked
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
PRLog (Press Release) - May 19, 2014 - WASHINGTON, D.C. -- WASHINGTON, D.C. (May 19, 2014): With so much attention focused on the alleged failures of many universities to forcefully prosecute male students accused of date rape and sexual assault, the problem of universities whose judicial proceedings are unfair to the accused, and/or are overzealous because of pressure from female students or otherwise, have been largely overlooked.
But now a new judicial ruling gives those wrongly convicted a powerful new weapon - they can sue the university, the employees who participated in the proceedings, and even the accused herself in federal court for substantial monetary damages and other remedies, notes public interest law professor John Banzhaf, who was twice called a “radical feminist.”
After a school tribunal at Saint Joseph's University found a male student to have committed sexual assault arising out of an incident of allegedly consensual sexual intercourse, he took legal action, says Banzhaf, who has been successful in over 100 sex discrimination proceedings.
The federal court held that he was entitled to sue the private university under the state's Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law, and that he could also sue the university, university employees, and the female complainant for defamation (slander), with the court holding that their accusatory statements about him were not legally privileged.
Interestingly, the court said that he could also sue the female complainant for intentionally interfering with his contractual relations with the school; an important ruling, suggests Banzhaf, because for such an intentional tort he can seek much higher punitive damages in addition to general damages. Also, the court ruled that the mere fact that the tribunal found that the male student had committed the wrongful act complained of was not conclusive as to his guilt or innocence, and did not shield the female complainant from this type of legal liability.
Several additional claims by the plaintiff were not accepted by the court on the basis of the complaint which had been filed, but the court said that the male student was not precluded from bringing up these claims again, provided they were properly pleaded.
These claims included, said Banzhaf: breach of contract, violation of Title IX (discrimination against him by the school on the basis of his gender), negligence, making public statements which place him in a false light, and intentional infliction of emotional distress (which might also warrant punitive damages).
"Female university students in 'he said, she said' rape and sexual assault cases, who were dissatisfied with the way the school handled the situation, are increasingly seeking legal remedies.
But now men who feel that the pendulum has swung too far, or that they were not treated fairly in school judicial proceedings, suddenly also have powerful legal weapons on their side.
Also, says Banzhaf, it is likely that some attorneys will take these cases on a contingency fee basis, so that both rich and poor students can go after both the universities and any women who improperly accuse them. Female students, knowing that they may have to repeat their allegations under oath in open court, may think carefully before bringing any unfounded charges, he predicts.
Source
Well shut my mouth. This is a blessing,it truly is. It's about time someone in government took action and gave men a legal remedy to fight against the injustice of being falsely accused. This is what activism and making our concerns known accomplishes. There are lots of twists and turns on this road but if it yields victories such as this one then it is worth it.
With so much attention focused on alleged failures to prosecute students accused of date rape, the problem of universities whose judicial proceedings are unfair to the accused have been largely overlooked
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
PRLog (Press Release) - May 19, 2014 - WASHINGTON, D.C. -- WASHINGTON, D.C. (May 19, 2014): With so much attention focused on the alleged failures of many universities to forcefully prosecute male students accused of date rape and sexual assault, the problem of universities whose judicial proceedings are unfair to the accused, and/or are overzealous because of pressure from female students or otherwise, have been largely overlooked.
But now a new judicial ruling gives those wrongly convicted a powerful new weapon - they can sue the university, the employees who participated in the proceedings, and even the accused herself in federal court for substantial monetary damages and other remedies, notes public interest law professor John Banzhaf, who was twice called a “radical feminist.”
After a school tribunal at Saint Joseph's University found a male student to have committed sexual assault arising out of an incident of allegedly consensual sexual intercourse, he took legal action, says Banzhaf, who has been successful in over 100 sex discrimination proceedings.
The federal court held that he was entitled to sue the private university under the state's Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law, and that he could also sue the university, university employees, and the female complainant for defamation (slander), with the court holding that their accusatory statements about him were not legally privileged.
Interestingly, the court said that he could also sue the female complainant for intentionally interfering with his contractual relations with the school; an important ruling, suggests Banzhaf, because for such an intentional tort he can seek much higher punitive damages in addition to general damages. Also, the court ruled that the mere fact that the tribunal found that the male student had committed the wrongful act complained of was not conclusive as to his guilt or innocence, and did not shield the female complainant from this type of legal liability.
Several additional claims by the plaintiff were not accepted by the court on the basis of the complaint which had been filed, but the court said that the male student was not precluded from bringing up these claims again, provided they were properly pleaded.
These claims included, said Banzhaf: breach of contract, violation of Title IX (discrimination against him by the school on the basis of his gender), negligence, making public statements which place him in a false light, and intentional infliction of emotional distress (which might also warrant punitive damages).
"Female university students in 'he said, she said' rape and sexual assault cases, who were dissatisfied with the way the school handled the situation, are increasingly seeking legal remedies.
But now men who feel that the pendulum has swung too far, or that they were not treated fairly in school judicial proceedings, suddenly also have powerful legal weapons on their side.
Also, says Banzhaf, it is likely that some attorneys will take these cases on a contingency fee basis, so that both rich and poor students can go after both the universities and any women who improperly accuse them. Female students, knowing that they may have to repeat their allegations under oath in open court, may think carefully before bringing any unfounded charges, he predicts.
Source
Well shut my mouth. This is a blessing,it truly is. It's about time someone in government took action and gave men a legal remedy to fight against the injustice of being falsely accused. This is what activism and making our concerns known accomplishes. There are lots of twists and turns on this road but if it yields victories such as this one then it is worth it.
Monday, June 9, 2014
Tomorrow is the Maine Primary election
Tomorrow is the Maine primary election and there is a pro-male candidate,Erick Bennett,in the running. More information here.
Friday, June 6, 2014
SB 967 goes to the California Legislature
CURRENT BILL STATUS
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.
HOUSE LOCATION : ASM
+LAST AMENDED DATE : 05/27/2014
TYPE OF BILL :
Active
Non-Urgency
Non-Appropriations
Majority Vote Required
State-Mandated Local Program
Fiscal
Non-Tax Levy
LAST HIST. ACT. DATE: 05/29/2014
LAST HIST. ACTION : In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.
COMM. LOCATION : SEN APPROPRIATIONS
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.
Source
It's gone from the California Senate to the California Assembly. We need to contact the Assembly and the Governor and let them know we oppose this misandric monster.
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.
HOUSE LOCATION : ASM
+LAST AMENDED DATE : 05/27/2014
TYPE OF BILL :
Active
Non-Urgency
Non-Appropriations
Majority Vote Required
State-Mandated Local Program
Fiscal
Non-Tax Levy
LAST HIST. ACT. DATE: 05/29/2014
LAST HIST. ACTION : In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.
COMM. LOCATION : SEN APPROPRIATIONS
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.
Source
It's gone from the California Senate to the California Assembly. We need to contact the Assembly and the Governor and let them know we oppose this misandric monster.
Wednesday, June 4, 2014
Sign the petition to declare feminism a hate movement
Over the years feminism has constantly attacked men and women for choosing to live their lives the way they want to. These actions have now progressed to physical violence where we have seen feminists violently attack men who are concerned about mens issues.Repeated attacks in Canada and elsewhere have left many injured and maimed. Another feminist cell activated recently and is planning on attacking another talk for men in the US. Its time we stopped the violence, its time we put a stop to the hatred feminists are constantly generating. Its time we stopped womens studied courses from brainwashing women into thinking they are victims. Its time these misandric loonatics are stopped.
Petition
Petition
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)