Commissioner bullies MRA attorney

Carlos Velez

Anti-feminist attorney Roy Den Hollander served a complaint today, Aug. 20, with the N.Y.C. Commission on Human Rights against the Commission’s Executive Director of Law Enforcement—Carlos Velez (212 306 7765) for discriminating against Den Hollander, in part, because he is a Euro-American. (Then again, maybe Velez discriminated against him for being an African-America. After all, everyone’s ancestors originated in Africa.)

Anyway, on July 27, 2012, Velez issued a Determination and Order that Den Hollander charges was motivated by Velez’s prejudice against Euro-Americans of protestant ancestry,divorced husbands who criticize their ex-wives, and men who choose not to meekly submit to feminist and political correctionalist totalitarianism by prosecuting anti-feminist lawsuits of which Den Hollander has done a few times.

“Totalitarianism!” That’s a little strong, or is it? “To exalt as an absolute is the mark of totalitarianism, and it is possible to have an atmosphere of totalitarianism in a society that has many of the attributes of democracy.” ~ Howard Zinn.

Believing that certain political beliefs are the only “correct” ones sounds absolute. Not good enough, how about a feminist and PCer “tyranny.”

“The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands . . . may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.” ~ James Madison, Federalist Paper 47.

So what ideology rules over the actions of most government officials—feminism and PC.

Velez’s Order dismissed Den Hollander’s age discrimination complaint against the nightclub Amnesia based on various extra-legal and bigoted reasons that expose a discriminatory intent by Velez in investigating, writing, and issuing the Order.

Amnesia refused to admit Den Hollander and his equally older attorney friend and former Democratic State Committeeman unless they bought a $350 bottle of watered down, brandless vodka. They declined. Den Hollander then filed a sex discrimination complaint with the State Human Rights Division. The State said no sex discrimination but looks like age discrimination. The State, however, lacks jurisdiction over nightclubs for age discrimination but NYC Human Rights has such jurisdiction, so off Den Hollander righteously went to complain.

At NYC Human Rights, Velez refused to accept Den Hollander’s complaint by communicating through another employee that there was no discrimination because had Den Hollander and his friend agreed to buy a $350 bottle, they could have entered. Duh, that can’t be right; otherwise years ago in the Deep South it would have been okay to require people with relatively darker skin color to enter a public bus so long as they sat in the back. The U.S. Supreme Court kicked that looney-tune reasoning out of the law in Browder v. Gayle, 352 U.S. 903 (1956).

A letter to the Commissioner forced Velez to accept the case but didn’t reign in the prejudice that colored his investigation, reasoning, and Order. Among the reasons for dismissing the age discrimination complaint Velez wrote:

Complainant [Den Hollander] is a self-professed advocate for men’s rights who identifies himself as an ‘anti-feminist lawyer’ on his website. He has filed a number of lawsuits against bars and clubs that have ‘Ladies Nights,’ and admits in several online publications that he is ‘bitter’ from an ex-wife who used him for his US citizenship and money. Complainant’s description of himself is consistent with his pattern of filing several gender discrimination suits.” Velez Determination and Order, Ex A. at p. Tres.

So what’s that got to do with an age-discrimination complaint? Sounds like the typical feminist and PC’er tactic of discrediting someone by pegging them as a member of a currently disfavored group. In Den Hollander’s case, a member of the last remaining 200 men in this country willing to fight for their constitutional rights against the feminists and PCers. Although some, such as Marc Rudov, think that number is too high.

“Discrimination itself, by perpetuating ‘archaic and stereotypic notions’ or by stigmatizing members of the disfavored group as ‘innately inferior’ and therefore as less worthy participants in the political community, … can cause serious noneconomic injuries to those persons who are personally denied equal treatment….” ~Heckler v. Mathews, 465 U.S. 728, 739-740 (1984).

Roy's complaint here

Source:click here

Give him hell,Roy. Roast his hide royally,bro. This Velez asshole looks like another UN twerp to me. Fuck you,Velez.

VP Biden ties Jobs Bill to sexual assault

In Flint, Michigan, Vice President Joe Biden suggested that more rapes and murders could occur if President Barack Obama's jobs bill is not passed.


"In 2008, when Flint had 265 sworn officers on their police force, there were 35 murders and 91 rapes in this city," Biden said. "In 2010, when Flint had only 144 police officers, the murder rate climbed to 65 and rapes--just to pick two categories--climbed to 229. In 2011, you now only have 125 shields. God only knows what the numbers will be this year for Flint if we don't rectify it."

The vice president also seemed to suggest that the Obama administration's first stimulus is the reason rapes and murders were not even higher in 2010 and 2011." And God only knows what that number would have been had we not been able to get a little bit of help," Biden said.

Source:click here

Yep,same old Biden delievering the same type of message assclowns like him usually deliever: "do as we say and nobody gets hurt." They truly are desparate to resort to these tactics but then again this is their SOP. You never know what exactly is going to come out of Biden's mouth but you know you're not going to like it. Biden's only upside is that he is the target of FOX News.

Jobs Bill excludes men

Helping women reach their economic potential

By Valerie Jarrett and Tina Tchen, Published: September 25

The American Jobs Act, which President Obama sent to Congress two weeks ago, is vital for our country’s women. It would keep 280,000 teachers — most of them women — from losing their jobs due to budget cuts. It would put hundreds of thousands of unemployed women back to work. It would put more money in the pockets of almost 80 million working women, by cutting their payroll taxes next year. As the president has said, Congress has a responsibility to pass this bill.

However, even as we wait for Congress to act, the Obama administration is taking steps to create economic opportunities for women and girls.

On Monday, for example, the National Science Foundation (NSF) will announce new steps to make it easier for women to pursue careers in engineering and the sciences — fields that are critical to our nation’s economic growth.

Women working in science, technology, engineering and math careers earn 33 percent more than those in other occupations, and these “STEM” skills will become even more important in high-growth, high-tech fields such as health-care technology and advanced manufacturing.

As with women throughout the workforce, however, women in STEM jobs are often expected to establish themselves professionally at the same time they are starting families. This forces women to choose between their careers and their responsibilities at home. Understandably, many of our most promising young scientists and engineers drop out of the pipeline.

To support female innovators and help women contribute to the economy, the NSF is taking steps to allow researchers to balance their responsibilities in the lab with their responsibilities at home. For example, if a researcher needs to delay the start of a funded project for a family-related reason, such as taking care of a young child or an aging parent, the NSF will work with her to make that possible without causing her to lose her grant. If she needs to interrupt research to have a baby, there will be options to add the lost time onto the end of her funding period without penalty. In many cases, NSF will even pay for technicians who can keep labs and research projects running during a period of parental leave.

As an agency devoted to evidence-based decision making, NSF will also support research into the effectiveness of flexible workplace policies. This will ensure that the new programs are working and will help identify best practices to share with the public and private sectors.

For many women who dream of becoming scientists and researchers, these kinds of simple, common-sense changes will make a world of difference. And our entire economy can benefit, because if more women have the chance to pursue STEM careers, it will lead to more innovation, entrepreneurship and growth.

Monday’s NSF announcement also highlights the ways that flexible workplaces contribute to our economic competitiveness. There is a common misconception that workplace flexibility policies cost businesses money. In fact, the opposite is true. A study from the White House Council of Economic Advisers found that flexible workplaces often attract the best workers and experience reduced absenteeism, lower turnover and higher productivity. As President Obama has said, “Workplace flexibility isn’t just a women’s issue. It’s an issue that affects the well-being of our families and the success of our businesses.”

We also recognize that a lack of work-life balance prevents many workers from reaching their economic potential. Today, nearly two-thirds of American families with children are headed by two working parents or by a single parent. These parents cannot thrive in a job where they are unable to care for their children. At a time when working men and women across our nation face deep economic uncertainty, it is wrong to ask them to choose between their jobs and their families.

We understand that these policies are no substitute for congressional action on the economy. But we also know that government can make a difference — through direct action and by working with outside organizations. A broad coalition of groups has joined the Obama administration in addressing workplace flexibility for those in STEM fields, including the Association for Women in Science, the Association of Public and Land-grant Universities, and the Association of American Universities.

When President Obama addressed the U.N. General Assembly last week, he made a powerful economic argument on behalf of the world’s women. “No country can realize its potential,” he said, “if half its population cannot reach theirs.” As the president pursues a short-term recovery and long-term prosperity, he will continue to focus on empowering America’s women and girls, and giving every American a chance to contribute fully to our economy.

Valerie Jarrett, a senior adviser to President Obama, chairs the White House Council on Women and Girls. Tina Tchen is executive director of the council and chief of staff to the first lady.

Source:click here

The Obama/Biden administration sure know how to screw over men and this is proof. The Jobs Bill has to be defeated. Men were the hardest hit by the recession/depression and this bill will fuck them over some more. Since this is the case kill the jobs bill now. If we are excluded then why should we fund it? Just say no to the jobs bill and tell your Congressperson and Senators know you hate this bill. Tell them today with no delay.

Hank Williams Jr. fired yet the Talk continues on

Why are you so fucked up,America? Why does a country that supposedly values "equality" deny equality to men? Want an example? Fine. Recently Hank Williams Jr. was fired from hosting Monday night football by the ESPN brass. Why was he fired? He compared Obama to Hitler and called Obama and Biden the "three stooges" (even though he named only two people,as FOX has pointed out). Or maybe he didn't name the 3rd stooge. Could it be Boehner? Hank didn't sugar coat anything,he said it the way it needed to be said and that was very refreshing. He also said that things are more polarized in this country than ever before. No argument on that one,brother.

Now let's contrast that with what the Talk and the misandry that occurred on that show when they made fun of Katherine Kieu Becker's victim. The biggest instigator in all of this was Sharon Osbourne,who's only contribution to society was to spit out Ozzy's talentless offspring. Crack whores have made equal contributions to society as Sharon Osbourne has. If you've clicked on the above links you will find that worthless show is still on the air. Why? A man makes a political comment,which the first amendment is supposed to protect,and he's fired meanwhile some stupid whore who makes comments that come straight from the femreich,seeping with hatred,are allowed while political speech is censored. Why,America,why?

Women's relief groups deny relief to men in Haiti

Amidst Haiti Disaster, Women’s Groups Seek to Deny Relief to Men
by Welmer on January 14, 2010

This week’s devastating earthquake in Haiti, which struck near Port au Prince, has led to countless tragedies on the impoverished island, and is a disaster that may rival the recent Sichuan quake in China. The damage struck indiscriminately, killing young and old, rich and poor, and man and woman alike.

However, some relief groups have decided that women deserve more aid, and have come up with a number of reasons why men should be left to die from injuries and disease while women get preferential treatment.

Quoted in Salon.com in an article titled Why “women and children first” persists, Elaine Enarson (probably a Swedish woman), cofounder of the Gender and Disaster Network (“Calling for a gendered approach in disaster risk reduction”), explains why men are to be excluded:

Women in general will be in need of “hygiene supplies, continued access to birth control/reproductive health services”

[...]

Women “are central actors in family and community life,” says Enarson, and are more likely to know “who in the neighborhood most needs help — where the single mothers, women with disabilities, widows and the poorest of the poor live.”

Another women’s relief program, MADRE, has joined the relief effort to help women only, and is employing a similar rationale for doing so, stating:

“Women are often more integrated and more aware of the vulnerabilities of their communities.”

Besides these questionable assumptions, and leaving out the fact that a large number of men are bound to become single fathers as a result of their wives dying in the quake, Enarson takes it a step further, saying that providing relief to women only is a means to prevent rape and domestic violence:

They are “at increased risk of gender-based violence, especially domestic violence and rape but also forced marriage at earlier ages” due to their increased dependence on men for protection and support…

So now when men provide women with protection and support they are suspected rapists, child molesters and batterers? Are these strange, foreign women more trustworthy than Haitian girls’ fathers, brothers and grandfathers? I try to refrain from inserting my opinion when I am writing these news pieces, but Ms. Enarson is making one of the most offensive insinuations possible with the above statement, and she is dead wrong. It is matriarchal societies where women cannot rely on men for support in which women face the most danger.

That these women’s groups are heading to a disaster area with the same anti-male agenda with which we are so familiar should be cause for outrage.

It is not clear whether such discrimination in the wake of disaster is legal in Haiti. In any event, if men are needlessly dying because these women’s groups are hoarding supplies for women only, the Haitian government should send troops in to seize the supplies and distribute them equally to needy men and women alike. That would be a true act of mercy.

Source:click here