From Stop Hillary PAC:
Hillary Clinton and her political team have taken notice - and they feel threatened.
Just look at the email I received below - written moments after the release of our hard-hitting Stop Hillary video. Hillary's team is using the success of our new video to launch a counter offensive and ramp up their organizing efforts.
Will you help me fight back?
The movement to stop Hillary is off to a great start - but I need your immediate help today.
You see, Stop Hillary PAC is just three days away from the end of the month where we face a critical fundraising deadline.
Will you help me send a loud and clear message to Hillary by making an urgent end of the month contribution of $25, $50 or even $100 to fight back?
Fundraising deadlines are critical benchmarks to show the left-wing media and Hillary herself that Stop Hillary has the momentum and backing to fight toe-to-toe with Hillary and ultimately ensure she NEVER becomes president of the United States.
Please, before you put this email down... click here and make an urgent contribution in the final three days before our fundraising deadline.
For America,
Senator Ted Harvey (R)
Contribute to keep Hillary out of the Whitehouse
Monday, July 29, 2013
Saturday, July 27, 2013
Tell McCain not to let go
DOJ disregards McCain, McCain fails to react
by Robert O'Hara
(July 25th, 2013 Washington D.C.) As reported by AVFM News on June 28th, Arizona Senator John McCain sent a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder concerning the May 9th “blueprint” letter, sent to the University of Montana as a settlement agreement to what can only be described as a hysterical witch hunt by the DOJ. McCain pointed out several serious concerns regarding expanding the definition for sexual harassment, the virtual re-writing of law without involvement of the legislative branch and the erosion of due process for those accused of sexual harassment. McCain’s letter, sent out on June 26th, imposed a deadline of July 17th for Holder to respond.
It has now been over a week past that deadline and the DOJ has yet to respond in any way to McCain’s letter.
AVFM News made several calls and email inquiries to both the DOJ and John McCain’s office for comment regarding the letter and the past deadline but was unable to receive a statement from either. However, Chris Thomson, University of Montana’s Men’s Issues Group founder, did receive a letter from Dr. Sandra Stover from the Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights in response to his request that the DOE “expediently respond to Senator McCain’s query dated June 26, 2013 concerning apparent improper proceedings of the Department of Justice.”
She stated in her reply:
“OCR and DOJ’s May 9 resolution agreement and letter to the University of Montana require that the University take steps to prevent sexual harassment from creating a hostile environment for any student, and to eliminate and redress any hostile environment that arises. The agreement and letter are entirely consistent with the First Amendment, and did not create any new or broader definition of unlawful sexual harassment under Title IX or Title IV.”
This is not true. The May 9th resolution agreement broadly defined sexual harassment as “any unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature” including “verbal conduct.” And that this “need not be subject to objective definitions.”
Thomson sent the following counter response to Dr. Stover’s email which includes McCain‘s exact questions posed to the DOJ in his June 28th letter:
“Ms. Stover;
To begin, thank you for addressing the queries I have as a father of four sons who will enter the Montana University System in coming years. As concisely as possible, I respectfully resubmit Senator John McCain’s queries as the July 17, 2013 date has passed and, to my knowledge, there has been no formal response from the DOE.
Therefore:
1. From what source does DOJ claim its authority to revise Court-approved Title IX jurisprudence through the settlement with the University of Montana rather than by judicial, regulatory, or legislative means?
2. How do you specifically define “unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature”? Having promulgated a new regulatory standard regarding the definition of sexual harassment, how does DOJ plan to ensure consistent application of that standard to avoid undesirable outcomes, including vexatious litigation?
3. To what extent does the broad nature of the new and judicially untested “unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature” standard, increase the risk of a wrongful conviction.
4. Could the following scenarios constitute “unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature” and demonstrate reasonable grounds for filing a sexual harassment complaint under the new definition:
a. A professor assigning a book or showing a movie that contains content of a sexual nature.
b. A student who makes a joke of a sexual nature to a friend and is overheard by another student.
c. A student asking another student on a date.
d. A student listening to music that contains content of a sexual nature overheard by others.
e. A student giving another student a Valentine’s Day card.
f. A student or professor using masculine terms for generic pronouns (e.g., “Each student must bring his own laptop to the exam.”)
5. What safe harbors are available to students and teachers so that they can be assured that innocent behavior is not investigated and punished?
His email, dated July 21st, has yet to receive a reply.
A broad coalition of groups led by The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education is exerting greater pressure for action against the May 9th blueprint. In an open letter dated July 16th including numerous signatories from the ranks of civil libertarians, attorneys, and academics FIRE charged:
“The blueprint mandates a shockingly broad definition of sexual harassment—“any unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature,” including “verbal conduct”—and rejects the inclusion of a “reasonable person” standard, endangering academic freedom and freedom of expression on campus. The blueprint also requires university employees to report protected speech for mandatory investigation, allows for punishment before the completion of an investigation, and instructs UMT to keep records of the names of all students and faculty accused of “sexual harassment,” even if no wrongdoing is found.”
It is unclear why McCain, in light of increasing controversy, has uncharacteristically failed to respond to the DOJ’s delinquency in answering his inquiry regarding the basic protection of constitutional rights on U.S. campuses. AVFM will continue to cover this story.
Source:click here
Let's ask McCain
I'm serious let's contact him and tell him not to let up. That we men are a voting bloc too.
by Robert O'Hara
(July 25th, 2013 Washington D.C.) As reported by AVFM News on June 28th, Arizona Senator John McCain sent a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder concerning the May 9th “blueprint” letter, sent to the University of Montana as a settlement agreement to what can only be described as a hysterical witch hunt by the DOJ. McCain pointed out several serious concerns regarding expanding the definition for sexual harassment, the virtual re-writing of law without involvement of the legislative branch and the erosion of due process for those accused of sexual harassment. McCain’s letter, sent out on June 26th, imposed a deadline of July 17th for Holder to respond.
It has now been over a week past that deadline and the DOJ has yet to respond in any way to McCain’s letter.
AVFM News made several calls and email inquiries to both the DOJ and John McCain’s office for comment regarding the letter and the past deadline but was unable to receive a statement from either. However, Chris Thomson, University of Montana’s Men’s Issues Group founder, did receive a letter from Dr. Sandra Stover from the Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights in response to his request that the DOE “expediently respond to Senator McCain’s query dated June 26, 2013 concerning apparent improper proceedings of the Department of Justice.”
She stated in her reply:
“OCR and DOJ’s May 9 resolution agreement and letter to the University of Montana require that the University take steps to prevent sexual harassment from creating a hostile environment for any student, and to eliminate and redress any hostile environment that arises. The agreement and letter are entirely consistent with the First Amendment, and did not create any new or broader definition of unlawful sexual harassment under Title IX or Title IV.”
This is not true. The May 9th resolution agreement broadly defined sexual harassment as “any unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature” including “verbal conduct.” And that this “need not be subject to objective definitions.”
Thomson sent the following counter response to Dr. Stover’s email which includes McCain‘s exact questions posed to the DOJ in his June 28th letter:
“Ms. Stover;
To begin, thank you for addressing the queries I have as a father of four sons who will enter the Montana University System in coming years. As concisely as possible, I respectfully resubmit Senator John McCain’s queries as the July 17, 2013 date has passed and, to my knowledge, there has been no formal response from the DOE.
Therefore:
1. From what source does DOJ claim its authority to revise Court-approved Title IX jurisprudence through the settlement with the University of Montana rather than by judicial, regulatory, or legislative means?
2. How do you specifically define “unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature”? Having promulgated a new regulatory standard regarding the definition of sexual harassment, how does DOJ plan to ensure consistent application of that standard to avoid undesirable outcomes, including vexatious litigation?
3. To what extent does the broad nature of the new and judicially untested “unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature” standard, increase the risk of a wrongful conviction.
4. Could the following scenarios constitute “unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature” and demonstrate reasonable grounds for filing a sexual harassment complaint under the new definition:
a. A professor assigning a book or showing a movie that contains content of a sexual nature.
b. A student who makes a joke of a sexual nature to a friend and is overheard by another student.
c. A student asking another student on a date.
d. A student listening to music that contains content of a sexual nature overheard by others.
e. A student giving another student a Valentine’s Day card.
f. A student or professor using masculine terms for generic pronouns (e.g., “Each student must bring his own laptop to the exam.”)
5. What safe harbors are available to students and teachers so that they can be assured that innocent behavior is not investigated and punished?
His email, dated July 21st, has yet to receive a reply.
A broad coalition of groups led by The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education is exerting greater pressure for action against the May 9th blueprint. In an open letter dated July 16th including numerous signatories from the ranks of civil libertarians, attorneys, and academics FIRE charged:
“The blueprint mandates a shockingly broad definition of sexual harassment—“any unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature,” including “verbal conduct”—and rejects the inclusion of a “reasonable person” standard, endangering academic freedom and freedom of expression on campus. The blueprint also requires university employees to report protected speech for mandatory investigation, allows for punishment before the completion of an investigation, and instructs UMT to keep records of the names of all students and faculty accused of “sexual harassment,” even if no wrongdoing is found.”
It is unclear why McCain, in light of increasing controversy, has uncharacteristically failed to respond to the DOJ’s delinquency in answering his inquiry regarding the basic protection of constitutional rights on U.S. campuses. AVFM will continue to cover this story.
Source:click here
Let's ask McCain
I'm serious let's contact him and tell him not to let up. That we men are a voting bloc too.
Ariel Castro is misunderstood
Everyone is so quick to paint Ariel Castro as the bad guy just because he let 3 women stay with him thus offering them his protection. Ariel Castro gave these women a purpose. The only purpose they are on this earth for and a white knight who is a felon himself put these women back on the street where they can face real danger. When you get right down to it Ariel Castro is not really a bad guy just as Charles Ramsey is no saint. Charles Ramsey has been in and out of prison a lot and he even tried to kill his wife. No one takes into consideration that Castro himself is victim of child abuse and they don't care that some felon has added to that abuse. They don't care that a matriarchial society has victimized Castro because all they want is the blood of a man,any man. When Charles Ramsey goes on to victimize one of your brothers,uncles,fathers,nephews or male cousins then we'll see if you still regard him as a hero.
Feminists hate boys and want to hurt them
Feminists target lecture on boys’ education
By Della Burton
MR-E hosting lecture on boys in education.
Men’s Rights Edmonton has arranged a lecture event to be held on July 29th at 7pm at the Edmonton Public Library (Stanley A. Milner branch) with Dr. James Brown, author of Rescuing our Underachieving Sons.
The Stanley A. Milner Library is located downtown at 7 Sir Winston Churchill Square.
Dr. Brown, a career educator with a doctorate in education and post doctoral diplomas in Educational Administration and in Curriculum and Instructional Leadership, will be discussing the challenge of improving boys’ education.
Due to opposition by local feminists, promoting the event has been a challenge.
According to Eric Duckman, posters advertising the event have been vandalized with paint or torn down almost instantly after being put up.
This leads to the question, why would feminists be so opposed to a lecture by a highly respected and credentialed educator on improving boys’ performance in school?
There may be an opportunity to get an answer to that question at the event, as a counter-event has been organized to take place at the site. The event, titled “Feministing at ‘Rescuing Our Underachieving Sons’” is described by its organizer Brittany Kustra as a chance to confront attending men’s rights activists over their “Don’t be that girl” poster campaign, and to “see who is behind the group.”
In other words, she plans to protest a scheduled lecture on an unquestionably positive topic with demands to discuss another, unrelated topic, and she will be mining for group member identities.
MREdmonton and AVoiceforMen invited live debate on blog talk radio following news coverage of the posters, and feminists everywhere, including the most vehement critics of the campaign, lined up to not take them up on it. In light of that, it’s odd that Brittany should think it necessary to disrupt an unrelated event to revisit the controversy.
Rather than take the offered chance to have all of their questions answered, this feminist group has decided to disrupt an event held for the benefit of boys who are underserved by their education system. One cannot reasonably argue that after disregarding such an open opportunity, the goal of feminists planning to converge on Dr. Brown’s lecture is merely to ask questions. Without that as a possible motive for the protest, that leaves their other goal of identity mining.
However, a group with that goal in mind would have been more sneaky than to alert the very people they seek to identify. The Facebook event page for Feministing at “Rescuing Our Underachieving Sons” is public, and they’ve made sure that the MREdmonton group would be aware ahead of time that they were planning to crash the lecture. That seems counterproductive, unless there is a different goal.
Could it be that Brittany and her friends just absolutely hate little boys, and want to deny them any effort that might be made to improve their circumstance within the education system, or are they maybe planning to hijack Dr. Brown’s lecture and distract from its intended purpose just to draw attention to themselves?
Source:click here
This is proof feminists hate boys. This is proof that the term "feminazis" fits them to a tee. What other conclusion can you come with? the proof is in the pudding and this is the proof.
By Della Burton
MR-E hosting lecture on boys in education.
Men’s Rights Edmonton has arranged a lecture event to be held on July 29th at 7pm at the Edmonton Public Library (Stanley A. Milner branch) with Dr. James Brown, author of Rescuing our Underachieving Sons.
The Stanley A. Milner Library is located downtown at 7 Sir Winston Churchill Square.
Dr. Brown, a career educator with a doctorate in education and post doctoral diplomas in Educational Administration and in Curriculum and Instructional Leadership, will be discussing the challenge of improving boys’ education.
Due to opposition by local feminists, promoting the event has been a challenge.
According to Eric Duckman, posters advertising the event have been vandalized with paint or torn down almost instantly after being put up.
This leads to the question, why would feminists be so opposed to a lecture by a highly respected and credentialed educator on improving boys’ performance in school?
There may be an opportunity to get an answer to that question at the event, as a counter-event has been organized to take place at the site. The event, titled “Feministing at ‘Rescuing Our Underachieving Sons’” is described by its organizer Brittany Kustra as a chance to confront attending men’s rights activists over their “Don’t be that girl” poster campaign, and to “see who is behind the group.”
In other words, she plans to protest a scheduled lecture on an unquestionably positive topic with demands to discuss another, unrelated topic, and she will be mining for group member identities.
MREdmonton and AVoiceforMen invited live debate on blog talk radio following news coverage of the posters, and feminists everywhere, including the most vehement critics of the campaign, lined up to not take them up on it. In light of that, it’s odd that Brittany should think it necessary to disrupt an unrelated event to revisit the controversy.
Rather than take the offered chance to have all of their questions answered, this feminist group has decided to disrupt an event held for the benefit of boys who are underserved by their education system. One cannot reasonably argue that after disregarding such an open opportunity, the goal of feminists planning to converge on Dr. Brown’s lecture is merely to ask questions. Without that as a possible motive for the protest, that leaves their other goal of identity mining.
However, a group with that goal in mind would have been more sneaky than to alert the very people they seek to identify. The Facebook event page for Feministing at “Rescuing Our Underachieving Sons” is public, and they’ve made sure that the MREdmonton group would be aware ahead of time that they were planning to crash the lecture. That seems counterproductive, unless there is a different goal.
Could it be that Brittany and her friends just absolutely hate little boys, and want to deny them any effort that might be made to improve their circumstance within the education system, or are they maybe planning to hijack Dr. Brown’s lecture and distract from its intended purpose just to draw attention to themselves?
Source:click here
This is proof feminists hate boys. This is proof that the term "feminazis" fits them to a tee. What other conclusion can you come with? the proof is in the pudding and this is the proof.
Wednesday, July 17, 2013
Spearhead smears real activists
I was at the Spearhead reading an article entitled: Something is in the air,it started out well but then went downhill but the following is completely out of line:
Although I understand that Razz might put his job at risk if he revealed his identity, he’s doing so anyway. If he’s discovered, after all, then the effect will be the same. And because he won’t own up to his campaign, people will be under the impression that he knows he’s doing something wrong. It would be better, I think, to face the chief of police and ask whether men are any more likely to rape women than women are to lie to authorities. But to get back on subject, it does seem that there truly is a growing national interest in “MRA” or men’s issues. Maybe the work I and others have put in is starting to pay off. The activism some are engaging in might be catching people’s attention.
It's catching on because those of us who actually do activism are the ones making those in office and society in general know about our concerns and that our concerns are valid. Without us you guys would be were you were in the '90's. I couldn't believe Price has the audacity to ride on our coattails. If Price were a fellow activist I would have no problem with his article but he's not. If he were he would have published this but he didn't. If he claims it was similair to Auntie Pheminizem's comment and that is why then why did not publish it then why did Auntie Pheminizem receive some many thumbs down if he were off base? If Auntie Pheminizem were wrong then why no rebuttals? Bitching on a blog alone accomplishes nothing.
Razz,like myself,would face persecution if we revealed our true identities. Feminists have vowed to shut me up anyway they can. I'm not going to make it easy for them. Canada murdered Earl Silverman so I can imagine Razz doesn't want to be next. Also MRA's have face active persecution in Canada. Some have been jailed. Not only that but Canadian feminists are exceptionally psycho. We've seen the videos on A Voice For Men we know they are true.
In fact I even asked them what activism have they engaged in. Not only was the question not answered all I got was 14 thumbs down votes. There are talkers and there are doers and I'm a doer is getting tired of these talkers. Real tired of them.
Although I understand that Razz might put his job at risk if he revealed his identity, he’s doing so anyway. If he’s discovered, after all, then the effect will be the same. And because he won’t own up to his campaign, people will be under the impression that he knows he’s doing something wrong. It would be better, I think, to face the chief of police and ask whether men are any more likely to rape women than women are to lie to authorities. But to get back on subject, it does seem that there truly is a growing national interest in “MRA” or men’s issues. Maybe the work I and others have put in is starting to pay off. The activism some are engaging in might be catching people’s attention.
It's catching on because those of us who actually do activism are the ones making those in office and society in general know about our concerns and that our concerns are valid. Without us you guys would be were you were in the '90's. I couldn't believe Price has the audacity to ride on our coattails. If Price were a fellow activist I would have no problem with his article but he's not. If he were he would have published this but he didn't. If he claims it was similair to Auntie Pheminizem's comment and that is why then why did not publish it then why did Auntie Pheminizem receive some many thumbs down if he were off base? If Auntie Pheminizem were wrong then why no rebuttals? Bitching on a blog alone accomplishes nothing.
Razz,like myself,would face persecution if we revealed our true identities. Feminists have vowed to shut me up anyway they can. I'm not going to make it easy for them. Canada murdered Earl Silverman so I can imagine Razz doesn't want to be next. Also MRA's have face active persecution in Canada. Some have been jailed. Not only that but Canadian feminists are exceptionally psycho. We've seen the videos on A Voice For Men we know they are true.
In fact I even asked them what activism have they engaged in. Not only was the question not answered all I got was 14 thumbs down votes. There are talkers and there are doers and I'm a doer is getting tired of these talkers. Real tired of them.
Monday, July 15, 2013
Bad news on Kellett situation
Breaking news: Mary Kellett free to practice law
by Robert O'Hara
(Washington D.C. July 15th, 2013)
Justice Ellen Gorman has allowed corrupt Assistant District Attorney walk with a slap on the wrist.
Just after 10:00am today the disciplinary hearing for Mary Kellett, Assistant District Attorney for Maine’s 7th prosecutorial district, was held in Portland concerning her mishandling of the Vladek Filler case. For those new to the case, Ligia Filler falsely accused her husband Vladek Filler of domestic violence and spousal rape. Kellett in her role as Assistant District attorney withheld exculpatory evidence and made misleading statements to the jury in her closing remarks, leading to Vladek Filler’s conviction. The hearing was brief and followed a closed door meeting involving Kellett’s attorneys and representatives from the Overseers of the Bar. A plea bargain was submitted to Justice Ellen Gorman, presiding, who suspended Kellett and then promptly suspended her suspension resulting in Kellett facing no consequences for her gross misconduct during the Filler trial. She is still free to practice law and still acting as Assistant DA.
Kellett made a statement of apology before the judgment was handed down saying that she “went too far” and that it “wouldn’t happen again.” After her apology Filler was given fifteen minutes to speak. AVFM’s acting correpsondants said he was very emotional when he spoke as he told the court how Kellett’s actions have permanently damaged his life and that of his children’s. After the judgment was handed down Kellett exited through a back door leaving our correspondents and reporters from other news sources including Channel 2 News WLBZ from Bangor with no comment.
Acting AVfM Correspondents Scott Soly, Sean Campbell and Chris Caldwell conducted a video interview with Vladek Filler. This will be available later this evening along with other details.
Editorial note:
The entire staff at AVFM and many others to numerous to mention here extend their thanks to Scott Soly, Sean Campbell and Chris Caldwell who all heard the call to attend this hearing. These men did this on their own time and this was the very first time all of them had engaged in any activism of this kind. By each of them taking initiative they have sent a message that we are all watching. Please join us in thanking them in the comments below.
Source:click here
That is fucking bullshit. What a fucking whitewash. The people of the State of Maine,especially the men,are screwed. What we have here is women protecting women. The sisterhood comes first. The men of Maine? Not among the top 10 concerns of the sisterhood. This is a sad day for the men of Maine,they're lives can be reduced to shambles if rouge prosecutors like Kellett can get away and apparently they can and not have to worry about any accountability. Now Kellett is more dangerous than before because she is protected.
by Robert O'Hara
(Washington D.C. July 15th, 2013)
Justice Ellen Gorman has allowed corrupt Assistant District Attorney walk with a slap on the wrist.
Just after 10:00am today the disciplinary hearing for Mary Kellett, Assistant District Attorney for Maine’s 7th prosecutorial district, was held in Portland concerning her mishandling of the Vladek Filler case. For those new to the case, Ligia Filler falsely accused her husband Vladek Filler of domestic violence and spousal rape. Kellett in her role as Assistant District attorney withheld exculpatory evidence and made misleading statements to the jury in her closing remarks, leading to Vladek Filler’s conviction. The hearing was brief and followed a closed door meeting involving Kellett’s attorneys and representatives from the Overseers of the Bar. A plea bargain was submitted to Justice Ellen Gorman, presiding, who suspended Kellett and then promptly suspended her suspension resulting in Kellett facing no consequences for her gross misconduct during the Filler trial. She is still free to practice law and still acting as Assistant DA.
Kellett made a statement of apology before the judgment was handed down saying that she “went too far” and that it “wouldn’t happen again.” After her apology Filler was given fifteen minutes to speak. AVFM’s acting correpsondants said he was very emotional when he spoke as he told the court how Kellett’s actions have permanently damaged his life and that of his children’s. After the judgment was handed down Kellett exited through a back door leaving our correspondents and reporters from other news sources including Channel 2 News WLBZ from Bangor with no comment.
Acting AVfM Correspondents Scott Soly, Sean Campbell and Chris Caldwell conducted a video interview with Vladek Filler. This will be available later this evening along with other details.
Editorial note:
The entire staff at AVFM and many others to numerous to mention here extend their thanks to Scott Soly, Sean Campbell and Chris Caldwell who all heard the call to attend this hearing. These men did this on their own time and this was the very first time all of them had engaged in any activism of this kind. By each of them taking initiative they have sent a message that we are all watching. Please join us in thanking them in the comments below.
Source:click here
That is fucking bullshit. What a fucking whitewash. The people of the State of Maine,especially the men,are screwed. What we have here is women protecting women. The sisterhood comes first. The men of Maine? Not among the top 10 concerns of the sisterhood. This is a sad day for the men of Maine,they're lives can be reduced to shambles if rouge prosecutors like Kellett can get away and apparently they can and not have to worry about any accountability. Now Kellett is more dangerous than before because she is protected.
Sunday, July 14, 2013
They're not alone
Sexual Assault Voices of Edmonton: Don’t be THAT stupid
On July 11th, A Voice for Men received an email from a law firm claiming to represent a noxious hate group in the Edmonton, Alberta area of Canada calling themselves Sexual Assault Voices of Edmonton. They are threatening AVfM with legal action for hosting a thread on our forum entitled “Don’t be that girl”; Men’s Rights Edmonton’s parody posters were uploaded to that thread.
This group, Sexual Assault Voices of Edmonton, was founded in 2009, and has no affiliation at all with the respectable Stop Abusive and Violent Environments, a Washington DC-area group founded in 2008 which does good work that we fully support.
It’s an interesting coincidence that a group called “SAVE” in Canada that promotes demonizing literature targeted at men’s sexuality apparently stole the name of a legitimate group called SAVE that attempts to bring public attention to false accusations in the United States, and to non-sexist treatment under the law for all victims.
In fact, by the same logic they’re using to threaten AVfM, Sexual Assault Voices of Edmonton are on shaky ground referring to themselves as “SAVE.” As such we’ve decided to rename the Sexual Assault Voices of Edmonton. We have dropped the V from their acronym since that group is only a voice for the cash cow sexual abuse survivor and only while she can be milked for moolah. Let’s add in an “S” to reference their sociopathic propaganda and, viola! We have Edmonton’s Sexual Sociopaths’ Assault, or Edmonton’s SS-A, for short.
Edmonton’s SS-A has hired attorneys to attempt to censor and harass the Men’s Human Rights community, and exert control over discourse on the Internet. This is not just our own publication at stake, or even the men’s human rights movement itself, but anyone on the Internet who might happen to annoy Gender fascist groups. Or even anyone who just disseminates a witty meme with a photo they haven’t copyrighted.
Yes. Edmonton’s SS-A has declared war on Grumpy Cat. First they came for Insanity wolf…
The email, with a PDF attachment, is from the offices of Parlee McLaws, LLC drafted by Michael W. Sharp MWS.
In lieu of publishing the entire email received by our mail servers this is the list of angry demands from Edmonton’s SS-A:
undertaking
Edmonton’s SS-A’s demand we comply with their attempt to censor… the entire internet.
The phrase “Don’t Be That Guy” is a trademark of the hate group forthwith known as Edmonton’s SS-A and any use of it on A Voice for Men violates their Trademark as well as their copyright.
* Any phrases such as “Don’t be THAT girl” or “Don’t be THAT [anything]” (like “Don’t be that shyster” or “Don’t be that false accuser,” “don’t be that abusive mother,” “don’t be that hatemongering feminist,” etc.) violate their trademark and harm their business and we should cease and desist and forbid any use of the “don’t be that” phrasing.
* Don’t print or reprint their photos in any way
* Deliver up for their inspection all information we have on three of our community members (including one known as “anon,” who, as everybody knows, has been a well-known and distinguished writer for many thousands of years).
* Termination of several of our community members’ accounts
* Undertake never to do or say anything naughty that might cause them discomfort again.
* Oh, and by the way, don’t print this letter either.
Now still we could have ignored all of this, but then at the bottom of the letter appeared a section so outrageous, we simply could not resist. They demanded that we have someone sign and date the above–although who exactly they are after is never clearly stated–and get it back to them no later than July 16th, 2013.
What follows is the response of the Editorial team at AVfM.
We, the editorial team at AVfM, acting in our capacity as duly authorized representatives of A Voice for Men, hereby refuse to undertake the commitments laid out in your letter dated July 11, 2013 – specifically, we refuse your request to cease mention or discussion or parody or satire of any reference or representation of “don’t be that guy.” Your claim of copyright or trademark on “Don’t be that…” is frivolous at best, as is your claim that it is in any way a threat to your client’s disgusting business. Edmonton’s SS-A (Formerly Sexual Assault Voices of Edmonton, founded in 2009 and in no way affiliated with the praiseworthy SAVE of the Washington DC area, founded in 2008) is in our view a hate group that promotes sexual assault and sexist bigotry. Indeed, as a team we DECREE–EX-CATHEDRA, FOREVERMORE AND HENCEFORTH FOR ALL ETERNITY AMEN! that as matter of policy anyone acting under the authority of AVfM is to refuse to do anything whatsoever requested by or on behalf of the disgusting hate group known as Edmonton’s SS-A unless those requests involve things like telling them to go fly a kite or helping them dismantle their entire hatemongering sociopathic operation.
We furthermore solemnly swear and affirm that it shall from this day forward be the editorial policy of A Voice for Men that Edmonton’s SS-A shall always be referred to as a vile hate group, and/or a fascist group of censorship-minded thugs who hate freedom of expression and who seek to control discourse on the Internet so as to silence all criticism of their propaganda. We further decree, in response to this pernicious attempt at barratry by Edmonton’s SS-A that we believe that Edmonton’s SS-A’s business operation clearly intends and desires to manufacture more victims of sexual assault for profit and to marginalize unprofitable victims of sexual assault in Canada, and that Edmonton’s SS-A (founded in 2009 and not in any way affiliated with the praiseworthy group SAVE founded in 2008), is otherwise a bunch of vile thugs who shouldn’t be allowed to operate any businesses at all within any respectable community anywhere in the world, and should probably be kept out of reach and out of sight of children if at all possible.
It will also henceforth be A Voice for Men’s goal to, at every opportunity, make completely truthful statements with full intent to discredit the business, wares, and services of Edmonton’s SS-A, and to bring direct public attention to the hateful, hurtful, damaging, and rape-encouraging and victim-blaming nature of Edmonton’s SS-A advertising, services, business, wares, and to use the phrase “Don’t be THAT…” as often as humanly possible in our headlines and materials in order to mock, deride, annoy, and otherwise satirize this vile hate group. We very much hope to see them completely change their business model (which we repeat, appears to be to create more victims of sexual assault in Canada), and we frankly hope to see them driven completely out of business, as their ilk has no place whatsoever in a decent, civilized society.
We further pledge to regularly alert the public that Edmonton’s SS-A (founded in 2009 and in no way affiliated with the praiseworthy SAVE of the Washington DC area, founded in 2008) regularly operates its business in a manner contrary to ethical standards of business, commerce, or victims advocacy and in a manner directly antithetical to human rights for men, for children, and even for the women it so dishonestly purports to advocate for.
It shall furthermore be our goal in response to this puerile attempt at bullying and barratry and internet censorship to identify to the public the names and faces of all individuals in leadership positions within the Edmonton’s SS-A (founded in 2009 and in no way affiliated with the praiseworthy SAVE of the Washington DC area, founded in 2008), in order to alert the world to the sort of vile, bigoted, sexist, racist thugs who run hatemongering campaigns like “Don’t Be That Guy.” Finally, please advise your client that as a direct result of their puerile attempts at censorship, we will be regularly featuring images and articles using the phrases “Don’t be that guy,” “Don’t be that girl,” “Don’t be that scumsucking shyster crap-weasel,” “Don’t be that hatemongering feminist bigot,” and so on for the direct purposes of satire, parody, and news reporting, and shall otherwise endeavor in any way we can think of to defame, humiliate, tarnish the reputation of, and generally embarrass the hatemongering crapweasels at Edmonton’s SS-A (founded in 2009 and in no way affiliated with the praiseworthy SAVE of the Washington DC area, founded in 2008).
We also pledge to not just make regular use of the images of the despicable hate group known as Edmonton’s SS-A (founded in 2009 and in no way affiliated with the praiseworthy SAVE of the Washington DC area, founded in 2008) for purposes of satire, criticism, political commentary, and news reporting purposes, but also for the purposes of, in any way legally and ethically allowable, driving these scumsucking vermin out of the public square and into the ashbin of history’s discarded lies as soon as humanly possible. Their “business,” such as it is, is no better than the “business” of Neo-Nazis or the Ku Klux Klan, and, like the neo-Nazis and the Klan, we hope to see them disappear from human civilization forever.
We will otherwise be refusing any and all requests made in this letter dated 11 July 2013, and are fully ready to do whatever it takes to continue to refuse to comply with the wishes of the vile hate group known as Edmonton’s SS-A (founded in 2009 and in no way affiliated with the praiseworthy SAVE of the Washington DC area, founded in 2008).
To you, SS-A, and indeed, to anyone who attempts to silence us, we respond: Don’t be that stupid.
Also, fuck you.
Thank you very much for your kind attention, and warmest regards.
The Editorial Team,
A Voice for Men
The real SAVE
Source:click here
We're standing in solidarity with AVFM in telling these femihags to go fuck themselves. We're not helping them in any way. The only thing we will give them in unending defiance. No MRA's have to cooperate with them and we never will. We will stand toe to toe with them and we won't let up.
On July 11th, A Voice for Men received an email from a law firm claiming to represent a noxious hate group in the Edmonton, Alberta area of Canada calling themselves Sexual Assault Voices of Edmonton. They are threatening AVfM with legal action for hosting a thread on our forum entitled “Don’t be that girl”; Men’s Rights Edmonton’s parody posters were uploaded to that thread.
This group, Sexual Assault Voices of Edmonton, was founded in 2009, and has no affiliation at all with the respectable Stop Abusive and Violent Environments, a Washington DC-area group founded in 2008 which does good work that we fully support.
It’s an interesting coincidence that a group called “SAVE” in Canada that promotes demonizing literature targeted at men’s sexuality apparently stole the name of a legitimate group called SAVE that attempts to bring public attention to false accusations in the United States, and to non-sexist treatment under the law for all victims.
In fact, by the same logic they’re using to threaten AVfM, Sexual Assault Voices of Edmonton are on shaky ground referring to themselves as “SAVE.” As such we’ve decided to rename the Sexual Assault Voices of Edmonton. We have dropped the V from their acronym since that group is only a voice for the cash cow sexual abuse survivor and only while she can be milked for moolah. Let’s add in an “S” to reference their sociopathic propaganda and, viola! We have Edmonton’s Sexual Sociopaths’ Assault, or Edmonton’s SS-A, for short.
Edmonton’s SS-A has hired attorneys to attempt to censor and harass the Men’s Human Rights community, and exert control over discourse on the Internet. This is not just our own publication at stake, or even the men’s human rights movement itself, but anyone on the Internet who might happen to annoy Gender fascist groups. Or even anyone who just disseminates a witty meme with a photo they haven’t copyrighted.
Yes. Edmonton’s SS-A has declared war on Grumpy Cat. First they came for Insanity wolf…
The email, with a PDF attachment, is from the offices of Parlee McLaws, LLC drafted by Michael W. Sharp MWS.
In lieu of publishing the entire email received by our mail servers this is the list of angry demands from Edmonton’s SS-A:
undertaking
Edmonton’s SS-A’s demand we comply with their attempt to censor… the entire internet.
The phrase “Don’t Be That Guy” is a trademark of the hate group forthwith known as Edmonton’s SS-A and any use of it on A Voice for Men violates their Trademark as well as their copyright.
* Any phrases such as “Don’t be THAT girl” or “Don’t be THAT [anything]” (like “Don’t be that shyster” or “Don’t be that false accuser,” “don’t be that abusive mother,” “don’t be that hatemongering feminist,” etc.) violate their trademark and harm their business and we should cease and desist and forbid any use of the “don’t be that” phrasing.
* Don’t print or reprint their photos in any way
* Deliver up for their inspection all information we have on three of our community members (including one known as “anon,” who, as everybody knows, has been a well-known and distinguished writer for many thousands of years).
* Termination of several of our community members’ accounts
* Undertake never to do or say anything naughty that might cause them discomfort again.
* Oh, and by the way, don’t print this letter either.
Now still we could have ignored all of this, but then at the bottom of the letter appeared a section so outrageous, we simply could not resist. They demanded that we have someone sign and date the above–although who exactly they are after is never clearly stated–and get it back to them no later than July 16th, 2013.
What follows is the response of the Editorial team at AVfM.
We, the editorial team at AVfM, acting in our capacity as duly authorized representatives of A Voice for Men, hereby refuse to undertake the commitments laid out in your letter dated July 11, 2013 – specifically, we refuse your request to cease mention or discussion or parody or satire of any reference or representation of “don’t be that guy.” Your claim of copyright or trademark on “Don’t be that…” is frivolous at best, as is your claim that it is in any way a threat to your client’s disgusting business. Edmonton’s SS-A (Formerly Sexual Assault Voices of Edmonton, founded in 2009 and in no way affiliated with the praiseworthy SAVE of the Washington DC area, founded in 2008) is in our view a hate group that promotes sexual assault and sexist bigotry. Indeed, as a team we DECREE–EX-CATHEDRA, FOREVERMORE AND HENCEFORTH FOR ALL ETERNITY AMEN! that as matter of policy anyone acting under the authority of AVfM is to refuse to do anything whatsoever requested by or on behalf of the disgusting hate group known as Edmonton’s SS-A unless those requests involve things like telling them to go fly a kite or helping them dismantle their entire hatemongering sociopathic operation.
We furthermore solemnly swear and affirm that it shall from this day forward be the editorial policy of A Voice for Men that Edmonton’s SS-A shall always be referred to as a vile hate group, and/or a fascist group of censorship-minded thugs who hate freedom of expression and who seek to control discourse on the Internet so as to silence all criticism of their propaganda. We further decree, in response to this pernicious attempt at barratry by Edmonton’s SS-A that we believe that Edmonton’s SS-A’s business operation clearly intends and desires to manufacture more victims of sexual assault for profit and to marginalize unprofitable victims of sexual assault in Canada, and that Edmonton’s SS-A (founded in 2009 and not in any way affiliated with the praiseworthy group SAVE founded in 2008), is otherwise a bunch of vile thugs who shouldn’t be allowed to operate any businesses at all within any respectable community anywhere in the world, and should probably be kept out of reach and out of sight of children if at all possible.
It will also henceforth be A Voice for Men’s goal to, at every opportunity, make completely truthful statements with full intent to discredit the business, wares, and services of Edmonton’s SS-A, and to bring direct public attention to the hateful, hurtful, damaging, and rape-encouraging and victim-blaming nature of Edmonton’s SS-A advertising, services, business, wares, and to use the phrase “Don’t be THAT…” as often as humanly possible in our headlines and materials in order to mock, deride, annoy, and otherwise satirize this vile hate group. We very much hope to see them completely change their business model (which we repeat, appears to be to create more victims of sexual assault in Canada), and we frankly hope to see them driven completely out of business, as their ilk has no place whatsoever in a decent, civilized society.
We further pledge to regularly alert the public that Edmonton’s SS-A (founded in 2009 and in no way affiliated with the praiseworthy SAVE of the Washington DC area, founded in 2008) regularly operates its business in a manner contrary to ethical standards of business, commerce, or victims advocacy and in a manner directly antithetical to human rights for men, for children, and even for the women it so dishonestly purports to advocate for.
It shall furthermore be our goal in response to this puerile attempt at bullying and barratry and internet censorship to identify to the public the names and faces of all individuals in leadership positions within the Edmonton’s SS-A (founded in 2009 and in no way affiliated with the praiseworthy SAVE of the Washington DC area, founded in 2008), in order to alert the world to the sort of vile, bigoted, sexist, racist thugs who run hatemongering campaigns like “Don’t Be That Guy.” Finally, please advise your client that as a direct result of their puerile attempts at censorship, we will be regularly featuring images and articles using the phrases “Don’t be that guy,” “Don’t be that girl,” “Don’t be that scumsucking shyster crap-weasel,” “Don’t be that hatemongering feminist bigot,” and so on for the direct purposes of satire, parody, and news reporting, and shall otherwise endeavor in any way we can think of to defame, humiliate, tarnish the reputation of, and generally embarrass the hatemongering crapweasels at Edmonton’s SS-A (founded in 2009 and in no way affiliated with the praiseworthy SAVE of the Washington DC area, founded in 2008).
We also pledge to not just make regular use of the images of the despicable hate group known as Edmonton’s SS-A (founded in 2009 and in no way affiliated with the praiseworthy SAVE of the Washington DC area, founded in 2008) for purposes of satire, criticism, political commentary, and news reporting purposes, but also for the purposes of, in any way legally and ethically allowable, driving these scumsucking vermin out of the public square and into the ashbin of history’s discarded lies as soon as humanly possible. Their “business,” such as it is, is no better than the “business” of Neo-Nazis or the Ku Klux Klan, and, like the neo-Nazis and the Klan, we hope to see them disappear from human civilization forever.
We will otherwise be refusing any and all requests made in this letter dated 11 July 2013, and are fully ready to do whatever it takes to continue to refuse to comply with the wishes of the vile hate group known as Edmonton’s SS-A (founded in 2009 and in no way affiliated with the praiseworthy SAVE of the Washington DC area, founded in 2008).
To you, SS-A, and indeed, to anyone who attempts to silence us, we respond: Don’t be that stupid.
Also, fuck you.
Thank you very much for your kind attention, and warmest regards.
The Editorial Team,
A Voice for Men
The real SAVE
Source:click here
We're standing in solidarity with AVFM in telling these femihags to go fuck themselves. We're not helping them in any way. The only thing we will give them in unending defiance. No MRA's have to cooperate with them and we never will. We will stand toe to toe with them and we won't let up.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)