How feminist groups skewed the Obama stimulus plan towards women's jobs..

No Country for Burly Men
How feminist groups skewed the Obama stimulus plan towards women's jobs.
by Christina Hoff Sommers
06/29/2009, Volume 014, Issue 39

A "man-cession." That's what some economists are starting to call it. Of the 5.7 million jobs Americans lost between December 2007 and May 2009, nearly 80 percent had been held by men. Mark Perry, an economist at the University of Michigan, characterizes the recession as a "downturn" for women but a "catastrophe" for men.

Men are bearing the brunt of the current economic crisis because they predominate in manufacturing and construction, the hardest-hit sectors, which have lost more than 3 million jobs since December 2007. Women, by contrast, are a majority in recession-resistant fields such as education and health care, which gained 588,000 jobs during the same period. Rescuing hundreds of thousands of unemployed crane operators, welders, production line managers, and machine setters was never going to be easy. But the concerted opposition of several powerful women's groups has made it all but impossible. Consider what just happened with the $787 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.

Last November, President-elect Obama addressed the devastation in the construction and manufacturing industries by proposing an ambitious New Deal-like program to rebuild the nation's infrastructure. He called for a two-year "shovel ready" stimulus program to modernize roads, bridges, schools, electrical grids, public transportation, and dams and made reinvigorating the hardest-hit sectors of the economy the goal of the legislation that would become the recovery act.

Women's groups were appalled. Grids? Dams? Opinion pieces immediately appeared in major newspapers with titles like "Where are the New Jobs for Women?" and "The Macho Stimulus Plan." A group
of "notable feminist economists" circulated a petition that quickly garnered more than 600 signatures, calling on the president-elect to add projects in health, child care, education, and social services and to "institute apprenticeships" to train women for "at least one third" of the infrastructure jobs. At the same time, more than 1,000 feminist historians signed an open letter urging Obama not to favor a "heavily male-dominated field" like construction: "We need to rebuild not only concrete and steel bridges but also human bridges." As soon as these groups became aware of each other, they formed an anti-stimulus plan action group called WEAVE-- Women's Equality Adds Value to the Economy.

The National Organization for Women (NOW), the Feminist Majority, the Institute for Women's Policy Research, and the National Women's Law Center soon joined the battle against the supposedly sexist bailout of men's jobs. At the suggestion of a staffer to Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, NOW president Kim Gandy canvassed for a female equivalent of the "testosterone-laden 'shovel-ready' " terminology. ("Apron-ready" was broached but rejected.) Christina Romer, the highly regarded economist President Obama chose to chair his Council of Economic Advisers, would later say of her entrance on the political stage, "The very first email I got . . . was from a women's group saying 'We don't want this stimulus package to just create jobs for burly men.' "

No matter that those burly men were the ones who had lost most of the jobs. The president-elect's original plan was designed to stop the hemorrhaging in construction and manufacturing while investing in physical infrastructure that is indispensable for long-term economic growth. It was not a grab bag of gender-correct programs, nor was it a macho plan--the whole idea of economic stimulus is to use government spending to put idle factors of production back to work.

Link to all of the article..

Facts For Feminists..

If you're a feminists, here are some questions and facts you really need to know and come to grips with..

I love it when women wake up and finally comprehend what feminism is really all about..

Police woman 'assaulted man'..

As we have already witnessed, the 256% increase in women being physically abusive is not just limited to drunken laddites apparently..

I think we can finally expect to see more and more exposure as women via their feminist induced "victimhood" training automatically react to any situation as an aggressor and hopefully get away with it as they do on most occassions..

Omnidox..
It will be interesting to see/hear if she experiences similar outcomes as a
man would.

Interesting that she has not been named, as many men in a similar situation
would be.

http://www.news. com.au/adelaiden ow/story/ 0,22606,25698579 -5005962, 00.html

The Advertiser (Adelaide)
27 June 2009

Police woman 'assaulted man'

A policewoman has been charged with assaulting a man during a domestic
dispute in Sydney's south west.

Police say a 31-year-old female constable, attached to South West
Metropolitan Region, assaulted a 26-year-old man during the disturbance at
a home about 7.30pm (AEST) on Friday.

"As a result, the man suffered cuts and bruising to his face," a NSW police
statement said.

Camden police arrested the policewoman about 2.30am (AEST) on Saturday.

She was taken to Camden Police Station, interviewed and charged with assault.

She is due to appear at Camden Local Court on Thursday 16 July 2009.

Typical female sentencing discount..

The Ultimate Female Sentencing Discount - Serial Killer Hellen Moore

http://counterfeminism.info/?p=1029

( From Porky’s Place )

I know that we have seen some truly egregious examples of the female sentencing discount recently, but the case i am about to detail is by far, bar none, the worst case of the female sentencing discount i have ever come across - the case of Australian serial killer Helen Patricia Moore.

In May of 1979, in the Western Suburbs of Sydney, 17 year old Helen Patricia Moore suffocated Suzanne McIntosh, a 16 month old cousin whom she was babysitting - the child’s death was at the time put down to cot death.

In January of 1980 Moore attempted to suffocate yet another of her babysitting charges, 12 month old Nicholas Vaughan. Having thought her latest attempt at murder a success, Helen Moore went back to calmly watching TV. A while later the baby boy started crying, she called the ambulance and the boy made a full recovery.

Despite this latest suspicious incident, the babysitting jobs kept coming and on February 1st 1980 Helen suffocated two year old Aaron Crocker with a pillow, again failing to finish the job properly. Little Aaron survived but was left blind and crippled and died several years later as a result of Moore’s attack.

A few weeks later on February 24th 1980, two year old Rachel Hay died while in the care of Helen Moore.

In march of 1980, Helen’s seven year old brother Peter was found dead at the bottom of the stairs in the family home, only then did Helen’s mother Jesse realize something was up. She called the police and the whole story came out, with Helen quickly confessing first to the murder of Peter then to the other crimes.

Now here’s the thing, when Helen Moore was sentenced in 1980 the judge gave her life, but a dozen years later she sought a sentence review and that original sentence was reduced to 13 years and nine months, and in 1993 Helen Moore was given parole! Think about it, this is a serial killer who preyed on children and they let her out of jail after just 13 years.

Could someone please find me a case wherein a male serial killer, especially one who preys on small children, is allowed to go free after only thirteen years in jail, even if he was 17 at the time of the murders?

I seriously doubt that such a case can be found, as i am something of a true crime fan and i’ve never even heard of such a thing.

And just to underline how pro-woman and disregarding of children’s safety our western patriarchies are, a year or two into her parole she got pregnant, and even though they took the baby away from her for a very brief period, it was soon handed back to her, despite the fact that she was a killer of small children. Now if that doesn’t show the precedence that women’s rights take over the safety of children, nothing does.

Helen Moore’s parole period ran out in 2005, and even though i haven’t been able to confirm it, it is highly likely that she was set free, and that right now, out there in Australia somewhere, a serial killer is living free and easy, and why?

Because our society places such a high value on women and such a low value on men and children, that’s why.

By the way, don’t bother googling Helen Moore’s name - all i could find was an article about how they briefly took the daughter away from her when she was born, all else i got from a book called “Australia’s Serial Killers” by an Australian crime writer called Paul B. Kidd. The book was published in 2001, hence my not being able to confirm that she did make it through the parole period.

Female Perpetrators put in battered women’s shelters, not programs..

A fine example of the complete and utter denial feminists have introduced in the very profitable Domestic Violence Industry..

It is worth a lot more to falsely increase the amount of "customers" in shelters, women's shelters that is as men's shelters barely exist..

Feminists can continue to shuffle these abusive women from one shelter to another and register each entry as a NEW client, a NEW arrival instead actually confessing that she is just a traveler, swelling those imaginary and fictitious statistics..

Here is that example of bias and stupidity that prevails....

I'm continually being told by domestic violence people not to talk about violent women... when I discuss female abusers with [leading Georgia domestic violence authorities], I can see them immediately tense up.

But feminists are for equality. Wrong lifetime apparently..

‘Many female perpetrators are put in battered women’s shelters instead of batterers’ treatment programs’
By Glenn Sacks, MA for Fathers & Families | Jun 29, 2009

I recently attended the excellent Los Angeles domestic violence conference "From Ideology to Inclusion 2009: New Directions in Domestic Violence Research and Intervention."

The conference featured many domestic violence dissidents--researchers and clinicians who do not believe that the mainstream domestic violence establishment and its "men as perpetrators/women as victims" conceptual framework is properly serving those involved in family violence.

Dr. Michelle Carney, associate professor at the University of Georgia, says that she has often had conflicts with the DV establishment, explaining:

I'm continually being told by domestic violence people not to talk about violent women... when I discuss female abusers with [leading Georgia domestic violence authorities], I can see them immediately tense up.

Carney explained that under the current system, "many female perpetrators are put in battered women's shelters instead of batterers' treatment programs."

With the violent women who do end up in batterers treatment programs, she says it is interesting the way they are different than male batterers. She says that male batterers tend to minimize their own domestic violence. By contrast, women generally don't, and will sometimes boast about their violence against their male partners.

I would guess that this is reflective of two factors:

1) Because of the often draconian and anti-male domestic violence arrest policies, some of the men in batterers' treatment programs are not batterers, and do not belong there.

2) Society has always condemned male violence against women. The feminists, to their credit, have made this condemnation even firmer. By contrast, traditionally women's violence has not been taken seriously, and the feminists have unfortunately helped to cement this.

The result, of course, is that male abusers may minimize their violence because their violence is socially stigmatized, while female abusers are less likely to minimize their violence, because their violence is not socially stigmatized. In fact, one gets the impression from Carney's experience that these women feel that their violence against their male partners will be applauded.

To read all reports from the Conference, please click here.

From Ideology to Inclusion 2009 featured some of the world's leading experts on domestic violence, many of whom serve on the Editorial Board of the new peer-reviewed academic journal, Partner Abuse, published by Springer Publishing Company. The conference was presented by the California Alliance for Families & Children and co-sponsored by The Family Violence Treatment & Education Association. Some of you may remember that I also wrote extensively about the 2008 conference--to learn more, click here.

Link to Glenn's Article..

Wives who turn victimhood to their own advantage..

The much practiced and fine art of "being the victim" played daily in Family Courts or when a female driver is being presented with a ticket on a traffic violation..

How To Play It As The Scorned Wife In The Media Lights

By Amy Alkon | Jun 28, 2009

How To Play It As The Scorned Wife In The Media Lights
In Newsweek, Kathleen Deveny calls Sanford's wife a "media genius" for the way she worked the media to her best advantage:

She said she still loves her man and that she remains willing to forgive him and welcome him back. She quoted Psalm 127, that "sons are a gift from the Lord and children a reward from Him."

When I first heard it, I felt a stab of disappointment--yet another political wife scorned, somehow willing to put on a pastel suit and sob quietly in the background as her husband explains all the very good reasons why he had boinked a dear (tan) old friend , had an affair with a man, or spent good money on a tacky hooker. All of those wives have my sympathy: Suzanne Craig, wife of former senator Larry (wide stance) Craig. Dina McGreevey, former wife of former New Jersey governor Jim ("I am a gay American") McGreevey. Silda Wall Spitzer, wife of former New York governor Eliot (Client 9) Spitzer.

But there are a few wronged political wives who get my respect, as well. And I'm beginning to think Jenny Sanford is one of them. On second read, her statement is kind of perfect. It's loving. It's forgiving. It is pious. And she really kicks some butt, if you're willing to read between the lines. She reclaimed the high ground: she "put forth every possible effort to be the best wife during almost 20 years of marriage" (i.e., she did nothing to deserve this). She believes in the sanctity of marriage (he's a cheating bastard). She is ready to forgive completely (because she's a better person than he'll ever be) "as long as he continues to work toward reconciliation with a true spirit of humility and repentance" (there will be hell to pay). She says she will continue to focus on raising her sons to be honorable young men (unlike their dirtbag father). She had kept the separation quiet, she said, to protect those four beautiful boys, and because of the separation, she really hadn't a clue about where her husband was.

It is completely possible that she didn't mean any of those things. But what wife (or former wife, in my case) can't imagine what she'd like to say if she found herself in Jenny Sanford's pumps? And I'm guessing she had an inkling that the luv guv wasn't hiking the Appalachian Trail. By letting him hang himself--and look really dopey while doing it--she somehow managed to come out of a god-awful mess with a little bit of dignity. She may even have become the latest member of an elite club no woman wants to join: Scorned political wives who turn victimhood to their own advantage.

DV: Feminists Deny that Women Can Be Violent..

The feminist hate groups are besides themselves over this report.

How the hell can they get more money if it's proven and accepted that their lying about domestic violence is just another bit of orchestrated hysteria. Where in the world would that stop, forcing the world to believe that "Women are capable of violence". Perish that thought..

No equal opportunity here. Women are not permitted by feminists to be batterers, abusers or involved in any DV, by order of..

Quote #1: Dr Graham-Kevan said: "We wanted to find out whether men's use of controlling behaviour within a relationship is different to women's. This
is important as the current treatment approach in the UK is based upon the
premise that men use control as a means of enforcing male supremacy over
women. If women are using controlling behaviours in similar ways to men
then this undermines such an approach."

Quote #2: Male and female domestic violence perpetrator reports of
controlling behaviour across samples from the UK (36 men and 50 women), and
the USA (231 men and 184 women) were compared. The results found that the
controlling behaviour of men and women were very similar. "Men and women
perpetrators of domestic violence were found to have very similar levels of
financial control, sexual control and intimidation in relationships. This
leads us to believe that we can't only attribute controlling behaviour to
men."

Quote #3: "The results of this study tell us that we need to challenge some
of the assumptions around domestic violence if we are to really tackle the
issue and develop programmes that prevent continued violence, one such
assumption is that controlling behaviour in relationships is unique to men."

------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- ---

Here's what ideologically- driven, man-hating feminists are saying about
this report. Notice both the denial, hatred and venom in their words.

1. Karen Henning: Another Study to avoid Looking at Men's Violence. Another
Study to muddy the waters and avoid looking at the violence of Men... and
how it relates to Male supremacy.

2. Martin Dufresne: found this juxtaposition very telling of the author's
agenda: "...it was found that 10 per cent of the female victims had hit out
first during the violent episode."
(...) ""It seems that once a punch is thrown, whether it is from the man or
the woman, then all acceptable behaviour goes out of the window," continued
Dr Graham-Kevan. "

3. Stephen McArthur: In the last few weeks I have had the privilege to hear
Eve Ensler, Lundy Bancroft, and Gloria Steinhem speak and each of them
spent time addressing the backlash against the movement to end men's
violence against women, and Lundy spoke specifically about the
well-organized, internet active, men's supremacy movement which, by the
way, will exploit this study for all it's worth. The meaning, impact and
intent of women's violence is clearly different from men's, especially in
the context of domestic and sexual violence. This perverse distortion of
reality only serves sexism and men's continuing oppression of women. The
next thing they'll have you believe is that most rapes are committed by
women, that war is waged mostly by women, and that a culture of female
violence is at the root of most of the violence in our lives. - Stephen
McArthur, Violence Prevention Educator & Hotline and Court Advocate,
Battered Women's Services & Shelter, Washington County, Vermont, Leadership
Forum, Vermont Approach to Ending Sexual Violence, Member, Vermont Sexual
Violence Prevention Task Force

------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- ---

http://www.medicaln ewstoday. com/articles/ 155185.php

Medical News Today
24 June 2009

Psychologists Examine Role Of Control In Domestic Violence

Male and female perpetrators of domestic violence exhibit similar levels of
controlling behaviour. This is one of the findings of a study presented at
the British Psychological Society <http://www.bps. org.uk/> Division of
Forensic Psychology <http://www.bps. org.uk/dfp/> annual conference
<http://www.medicaln ewstoday. com/articles/ 153868.php> yesterday, 23 June
2009 at the University of Central Lancashire, Preston.

Dr Nicola Graham-Kevan from the University of Lancaster compared the
controlling behaviours of men and women perpetrators and victims of
domestic violence from new data from the UK, the USA and Mozambique.

Dr Graham-Kevan said: "We wanted to find out whether men's use of
controlling behaviour within a relationship is different to women's. This
is important as the current treatment approach in the UK is based upon the
premise that men use control as a means of enforcing male supremacy over
women. If women are using controlling behaviours in similar ways to men
then this undermines such an approach."

Male and female domestic violence perpetrator reports of controlling
behaviour across samples from the UK (36 men and 50 women), and the USA
(231 men and 184 women) were compared. The results found that the
controlling behaviour of men and women were very similar.

"Men and women perpetrators of domestic violence were found to have very
similar levels of financial control, sexual control and intimidation in
relationships. This leads us to believe that we can't only attribute
controlling behaviour to men."

In a further sample of 1,442 female victims of domestic violence in
Mozambique it was found that 10 per cent of the female victims had hit out
first during the violent episode. These women were found to be high in
levels of a variety of controlling behaviours including intimidation and
financial control as well aggression towards their male partners. These
more controlling and aggressive women were also on the receiving end of
worse levels of violence.

"It seems that once a punch is thrown, whether it is from the man or the
woman, then all acceptable behaviour goes out of the window," continued Dr
Graham-Kevan.

"The results of this study tell us that we need to challenge some of the
assumptions around domestic violence if we are to really tackle the issue
and develop programmes that prevent continued violence, one such assumption
is that controlling behaviour in relationships is unique to men."

Source: British Psychological Society

---

Program: PDF, 46 pages
<http://www.uclan. ac.uk/informatio n/services/ fm/services/ conferences/ forthcoming_ conferences/ files/DFP_ Conference_ Booklet_(Final_Version) .pdf>

Abstract (from Conference Program):

Controlling behaviours of male and female partner violence perpetrators

Nicola Graham-Kevan
University of Central Lancashire

UK policy on domestic violence places the need to control a romantic
partner as central to the understanding and treating of men's violence
towards their partners. Convincing evidence exists however that both men
and women who are partner violent also use controlling behaviour. This
presentation discusses new data on partner violence and control from
several samples: A sample of men and women attending batterer programmes in
the USA, a sample of male and female students from the USA & UK, a
population sample of women from Sweden, three samples of partner violence
perpetrators attending treatment in the UK (two community and one prison
based). Sex and sample differences and similarities will be discussed in
relation to current government thinking and practice guidelines.

-

And another Abstract of possible interest:

Sex differences in and predictors of violent and nonviolent offending

Abi Thornton, Nicola Graham-Kevan and John Archer
University of Central Lancashire

Offending and antisocial behaviour are traditionally deemed to be male
dominated acts. However, an area of research which conflicts with this
pattern is partner violence (PV) research. Studies have found that women
can be as violent as men within intimate relationships. Few studies have
assessed general violence, PV and non-violent criminal behaviour in men and
women, although the General Theory of Crime suggests that offenders rarely
specialise and instead have a propensity to commit wide variety of criminal
acts. This study investigated sex-differences in the perpetration of
general violence, PV and non-violent offending in a sample of men and
women. Sex differences in personality and personality disorder traits were
also investigated. Findings showed correlations between the three crime
categories for both men and women. Many sex differences in risk factors for
offending were found however, suggesting that men's and women's involvement
in crime may have different etiological origins.

---

The full programme, along with other information about the conference, is
available on the Society's website:

<http://www.bps. org.uk/conferenc es-and-events/ event-listing/ events$/2009/ june/dfp_ annual_conferenc e2009/dfp_ annual_conferenc e2009_home. cfm?subsite=>

<http://www.uclan. ac.uk/informatio n/services/ fm/services/ conferences/ forthcoming_ conferences/ dfp_2009. php>

---

http://www.uclan. ac.uk/scitech/ research/ rae2008/psycholo gy/staff_ profiles/ ngrahamkevan. php
Dr Nicola Graham-Kevan
Senior Lecturer
01772 893726
ngraham- kevan@uclan. ac.uk

Also see:

http://www.uclan. ac.uk/scitech/ psychology/ research/ aggression_ research. php

http://www.i- psy.co.uk/ conferences/ 8/presentations/ graham_kevan. ppt
Johnson's domestic violence typology: Implications for intervention
programmes (PPT, 155KB)
http://www.israsoci ety.com/2006meet ing/abstracts/ 29pssp1c. pdf
Johnson's domestic violence typology: Implications for intervention
programmes (PDF, 90KB)

<http://www.respect. uk.net/data/ files/old_ site/Nicola% 20Graham- Kevan%20Does% 20Gender% 20Matter% 20Conference. pdf>
Research on Gender & Domestic Violence National & Longitudinal Surveys
(PDF, 250KB)
http://www.respect. uk.net/pages/ 926-events. html

http://www.thefreel ibrary.com/ Graham-Kevan, +Nicola-a114
The re-emergence of male victims
http://www.thefreel ibrary.com/ The+re-emergence +of+male+ victims.- a0165430143
Author presents an introduction to this special issue dealing with male
victims of violence by women. The author argues that the scholarly neglect
of this topic has limited our overall understanding of violence in intimate
relationships. A brief overview of the papers is presented.
Keywords: women's aggression, male victims, partner violence, sexual
assault, sex-differences

http://www.mensheal thaustralia. net/index. php?option= com_content& task=view& id=158&Itemid= 79
Investigating Three Explanations of Women's Relationship Aggression by
Nicola Graham-Kevan & John Archer
http://www.blackwel l-synergy. com/doi/full/ 10.1111/j. 1471-6402. 2005.00221. x
Appeared in Psychology of Women Quarterly, 29, 3, 2005. Reputable research
that rejects the emerging idea that "intimate terrorism" is the preserve of
males. (Note: You may need institutional membership of a University Library
to access this article).
ABSTRACT
This study investigated explanations of women's partner aggression in a
sample of 358 women. Women completed measures of physical aggression,
control, and fear. Three explanations of women's partner aggression were
explored: (a) that its use is associated with fear, (b) that it is
reciprocal, and (c) that it is coercive. Each explanation received partial
support, with multivariate analysis showing that collectively they
explained significant proportions of the variance in women's self-reported
use of physical aggression toward their male partners. These results
indicate that women's physical aggression toward male partners cannot be
understood using a unitary explanation.

http://www.mediarad ar.org/alert2006 1021.php
Time to Blow the Whistle on the UN Violence Report

<http://books. google.com. au/books? id=e9YJKzn5LDcC& pg=PA145& lpg=PA145& dq=Dr+Nicola+ Graham-Kevan& source=bl& ots=m5gQv61PK6& sig=tCmr7PgtXwBY AV4LTqCD88qHHxw& hl=en&ei= YGRESuLFHaGG6APC 5eEi&sa=X& oi=book_result& ct=result& resnum=9>
Partner Violence Typologies - Theories of Partner Violence (Chapter 7)

<http://www.google. com.au/search? hl=en&q=Dr+ Nicola+Graham- Kevan&btnG= Search&meta=>

============ ========= ===

Unrelated but may be of interest:

http://www.respect. uk.net/pages/ 926-events. html

Respect conference: Does gender matter?
17th January 2008 at the Sage Centre, Gateshead

9am - 4.45pm

Respect, with support from the Northern Rock Foundation, hosted a
conference at the beautiful Sage Centre in Gateshead. The theme of the
conference was to explore the meaning and function of gender in the
experience, and use of, a range of abusive behaviours in intimate
relationships. Gender remains a topic of debate, for example, in terms of
how we understand women's use of violence, men's experience of abuse and in
the construction of responses to domestic violence.

Chair

The conference was chaired by Beatrix Campbell

Programme

Download: does gender matter programme.doc
<http://www.respect. uk.net/data/ files/old_ site/does% 20gender% 20matter% 20programme. doc>

Aim

The aim was to get people talking and debating about gender and domestic
abuse. To enable this there was a question time style panel, where the
audience had the opportunity to ask questions of the panel.

Speaker's Presentations

Presentations given by conference speakers can be downloaded for your
information.

Marianne Hester
Professor of Gender, Violence & International Policy (University of
Bristol) presented findings exploring what is really happening when both
partners are seen as violent.
Presentation PDF (79.7 KB)
Download: Marianne Hester Does Gender Matter Conference.pdf
<http://www.respect. uk.net/data/ files/old_ site/Marianne% 20Hester% 20Does%20Gender% 20Matter% 20Conference. pdf>

-

Mark Coulter
Male Victims Development Worker, at Respect shared findings from his pilot
of a needs assessment tool with male victims in London.
Presentation PDF (40.6 KB)
Download: Mark Coulter Does Gender Matter conference.pdf
<http://www.respect. uk.net/data/ files/old_ site/Mark% 20Coulter% 20Does%20Gender% 20Matter% 20conference. pdf>

-

Jo Todd
Director of Respect spoke about why gender matters and what is wrong with a
gender neutral approach to domestic violence.
Presentation PDF (61.3 KB)
Download: Jo Todd web Does Gender Matter conference.pdf
<http://www.respect. uk.net/data/ files/old_ site/Jo%20Todd% 20web%20Does% 20Gender% 20Matter% 20conference. pdf>

-

Jenny Pearce
University of Bedfordshire and Chair of the National Working Group on Young
People and Sexual Exploitation presented on gender, young people and
domestic violence.
Presentation PDF (69.8 KB)
Download: Jenny Pearce Does Gender matter conference.pdf
<http://www.respect. uk.net/data/ files/old_ site/Jenny% 20Pearce% 20Does%20Gender% 20matter% 20conference. pdf>

-

Evan Stark
In his newest book, Coercive Control: How Men Entrap Women in Personal
Life, Dr. Stark reframes domestic violence as a crime against women's
liberty and calls for a reinvigorated grass-roots movement that demands
freedom and equality for women as well as safety. Dr. Stark is currently
Professor of Public Administration at Rutgers University and Chair of the
Department of Urban Health Administration at the University of Medicine and
Dentistry of New Jersey's School of Public Health.
Presentation PDF (281 KB)
Download: Evan Stark Does Gender Matter conference.pdf
<http://www.respect. uk.net/data/ files/old_ site/Evan% 20Stark%20Does% 20Gender% 20Matter% 20conference. pdf>

-

Nicola Graham-Kevan
University of Central Lancashire, presented research literature on gender
and domestic violence: findings from national and longitudinal surveys.
Presentation PDF (243 KB)
Download: Nicola Graham-Kevan Does Gender Matter Conference.pdf
<http://www.respect. uk.net/data/ files/old_ site/Nicola% 20Graham- Kevan%20Does% 20Gender% 20Matter% 20Conference. pdf>

BBC: bias and leftist dogma..

Ever wonder why the BBC never ever seemingly promote or even try to promote an even view..

Wonder why the BBC is such an anti-male, male hating pro-feminist organisation ?

Here we are..

Farrah Fawcett..

I really cannot ignore the passing away of this lovely and courageous lady..
What can or could be worse than ending one's life this way. Farrah has been part of my life for many years as we attest public people to be. We can remember when they first infiltrated our lives and for how many years they have done so..

Anyway sweetheart, you rest in peace..

Actress Farrah Fawcett dies

By TIM NIXON

Published: Today

CHARLIE'S Angels star Farrah Fawcett has died aged 62 after a long battle with cancer, her spokesman said today.

The actress passed away at 9.28am US time at St John's Health Center in Santa Monica, California.

Her partner RYAN O'NEAL was at her bedside when she died.

Fawcett was diagnosed with anal cancer three years ago and recently returned to hospital following complications.

Speaking after her death, O'Neal said: "She's gone. She now belongs to the ages.

Dr Phil and Oprah: Have they ever fixed anything..

Lester Burnham doing a Dr.Phil..

A very good example of what Dr.Phil is all about..

KER..Ching..

Black widow woman who drugged, raped ten men..

Another article that once again puts the lies that feminists make as if their credibility is anything to go by..

"Women do not make false claims about rape but if they do it something that men should learn"..

Well, enough said..

Fortunately, once again feminists are demonstrated to be liars and there is a new revelation !

Women can raped and pillage at will, the law courts have clearly allowed that to happen. Anything women do wrong is put down to being either emotional or for the benefit of some other issue. Women have got to be sick about their sex being treated like children. But then again maybe not. There are advantages..

No jail for false rape claims..
No Jail for raping an underage student..
No jail for anything as long as they have some emotional excuse for their actions..
Feminists as well as the privileged princesses must be proud..

Still want respect ?

Unfortunately there is always some dipshit that not only failed to grow from childhood but admires the abuse ( I call them Farmboys). It's probably as close as he will ever get to such a "body". Another sycophant..

“It was great,” the unnamed man said.

“I like hot women. I only wish she hadn't use the clonidine on me.”

The ignorance is astounding..

Black widow woman who drugged, raped ten men

Article from:

June 19, 2009

A YOUNG Russian woman, a devoted collector of horror films and spiders, is on trial for sedating and raping 10 men.

The police were shocked that 32-year-old Valeria K., a quiet good-looking woman from the city of Tambov, was the mysterious rapist who abused 10 local men after poisoning them with clonidine, Life.ru reports.

Valeria, who has already been nicknamed the Black Widow for her love of spiders, would get acquainted with men and invite them to her place.

She gave them drinks with clonidine, which almost immediately sent them to sleep for almost 24 hours.

After that, she undressed her victims and raped them, tightening a rope on their male organs to keep them erect.

Waking up in hospital with clonidine poisoning and penis trauma, all the victims could remember was a friendly brunette who gave them drinks.

Finally, local police identified the offender and arrested her.

At present, the police know about ten of Valeria’s victims, although one of them refused to file a complaint against her.

“It was great,” the unnamed man said.

“I like hot women. I only wish she hadn't use the clonidine on me.”

Feminists actually believe their hypocrisy is correct..

One thing feminists do not like is being reminded about is their blatant bias and their male-hate program. I know there are quite a few male (manginas) in that movement who are under the illusion that male-bashing is not only a time honoured habit but they fail to comprehend the fact that feminism has gone way to far to "correct" issues that were either a dellusion of their imagination but they still continue in that delusion..

If you have a look at the suffering that feminism has wrought on all society if would be without precedence the amount of bias they have delivered on all men..

Are they happy causing that bias ?
Do they consider that they have gone way beyond their original intentions ?
Do feminists actually believe that they are for equality ?

It's a Hate Group, they know nothing else..

Well, think again, if you are capable of thinking outside their poison..

Madam's arrest 'will shock' Hollywood..

Damn, here they are again.Making millions of the backs of women and yet, feminists demand that the users rather than the providers be jailed, fined and castigated as they have been actively promoting in England especially that major, male-hater Harman..

I have never directly paid for it, never handed over money specifically for that purpose and never will. But have a think about the affect it would have on those women that work in that industry ?
No money, no income and blaming the user is akin to blaming a drug user instead of the pusher..

Only feminism would,could and does come out with that type of lunacy and hypocrisy..

Madam's arrest 'will shock' Hollywood
Article from: AAP
By staff writers

June 25, 2009

HOLLYWOOD gossip mags are honing in on a court case against a Florida woman said to watch over a list of clients and "A-list" call girls that will "shock" onlookers.

Michelle Braun has been alleged to have presided over a 70-strong stable of “the most expensive call girls in the world” commanding up to $60,000 a night out of her base in Boca Raton, Florida.

The case echoes that of infamous Hollywood madam Heidi Fleiss, who in the ’90s named A-list stars such as Charlie Sheen among clientele that paid up to $14,000 a night for access to her girls.

Braun was caught by the FBI after flying a girl from Los Angeles to New York to meet an undercover agent.

She is believed to have banked more than $10 million since filling the void left by Fleiss’s arrest in 1997.

She charged clients $2000 to sign up for online memberships to her company, Global Travel Network, to which her call girls would charge up to $10,000 a day for “travel expenses”.

Braun’s phone records and computers have been seized and details from them are likely to be aired at her court hearing set down for October.

Braun has already entered a plea deal which should see her avoid jail, but her arrest has sent a “wave of panic” through Hollywood, according to reports.

“Let's just say you'd be shocked,” her lawyer Marc Nurik told the Daily Mail when asked who was among her clientele.

Link..

Greer, feminism: Fuck You House-wives..

http://video.msn.com/?mkt=en-au&brand=ninemsn&tab=m163&from=39&vid=A4473FD4-9F6C-44B2-A114-F1C88C4B5C8E&playlist=videoByTag:mk:en-AU:vs:0:tag:AUnews_AU60minutes:ns:MSNVideo_Top_Cat:ps:10:sd:-1:ind:1:ff:8A

Hopefully this link will work and the reason I hope it does as it reflects and demonstrates how women are rejecting the feminist dogma and that women are returning to their natural ability of raising children and being "GASP" housewives..

What is the world coming to. Women actually enjoying being mothers, actually having a life, women actually doing what they knowingly enjoy being and being great at..

Revelation..

We cannot have this. Feminists have TOLD women that there is no way that they should enjoy themselves being what they are, naturally that is, mothers, enjoying that home life, enjoying looking after hubby, enjoy spending time with their children...

Anyway, it's great to see the girls, the moms, really, truly doing what their DNA and their physiology and their time clock and their common sense tells them to do. Doing something they really, really enjoy doing..Feminists must now be wondering what destroyers of life they really are and have become..
This is a great and inevitable response and revelation to their fundamental and irresponsible, destructive doctrine they have for so long tried to promote..

Good on you moms..

You have seen it, breathed it, sanctified it and now totally destroyed their efforts to denigrate you and make your effort seem irrelevant and mundane..

I Love it..

This is what we have been working towards since the inception of the male-hate doctrine and finally women per se, have finally realised that feminism does not deliver or encourage anything that is harmonious for any human being and continues to discourage any effort on this planet to participate in or realise that the intricate and ongoing facts that we have learned through the eon of experience of life and that which is booked into the DNA will eventually surface and banish their insignificant effort...

I love it..

Feminism has died through the efforts of the male-hater Greer as well as all those lackies, manginas and malcontents that still follow their irrelevant and destructive mantra..

Feminism, go to hell. You are finished..

Domestic Violence-Related Assault by Women Has Soared by 159 per cent..

Again we are faced with the truth that we have been stating for so long it has become boring. Meanwhile try your hardest to see these results or even find one single front page headline demonstrating that women are abusers ?

Noticeably, women are portrayed as angels and victims only. Watch any sitcom or view any commercial and notice how men are continuosly demonstrated to be an idiot, a buffoon or plodder while the female is always the smartly dressed, all knowing executive types..

Hardly reality..

Meanwhile it's funny when a female abuses a man but how funny is it when a man abuses a female..

Know what I mean ?

That's not funny. See the bias, see the irony ?

Update..

2,336 women faced court on charges of domestic violence

This is just ONE State in Australia. What about the other 5 States and 2 Territories ?

Can we add some figures ?

How about adding another 5000 for the rest of Aus. to that figure as a general total and wonder why those states are just totally ignoring it !

That's 7336 Men being abused by women..

Bigger than the road toll, bigger than the deaths by most illnesses, a lot bigger than the " stolen generation", but who cares..

Obviously the wrong sex..

Let the bias continue..

Women do not need to be in government as those manginas in place cater continually to just ignore the men's issues while they grant any and every option for the privileged princesses..

Keep voting them in folks as we will see much of the same..

Quote: Shocking figures have revealed that the number of women who have
been charged with domestic violence-related assault has soared by 159 per
cent over the past eight years.

------------ --------- --------- --------- ---

http://news. ninemsn.com. au/national/ 828309/husband- beating-on- the-rise

NineMSN
22 June 2009

'Husband-beating'on the rise

It's been revealed that women are becoming more violent towards their partners.

Figures from the NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics show the number of women
charged with domestic violence-related assault has increased dramatically.

The figures show 2,336 women faced court on charges of domestic violence in
2007, mainly for bashing their husbands, compared with just 818 in 1999.

News Ltd says men's groups say they're happy that police are finally taking
men seriously, but it's still hard for husbands to admit they've been
attacked by their wives.

Research shows women tend to use guns, knives, boiling liquids and irons to
attack their partners.

The increase in violence, which is often fuelled by alcohol, has sparked
calls for refuges for men.

Assistant Commissioner Mark Murdoch says there's no definitive explanation
for the increasing number of women being prosecuted for domestic violence
offences.

------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- ---------

http://www.news. com.au/dailytele graph/story/ 0,22049,25667548 -5005941, 00.html

The Daily Telegraph
22 June 2009

More cases of women being violent to partners before courts
By Janet Fife Yeomans

Women are becoming more violent towards their partners.

Shocking figures have revealed that the number of women who have been
charged with domestic violence-related assault has soared by 159 per cent
over the past eight years.

The figures, from the New South Wales Bureau of Crime Statistics, show 2336
women faced court on charges of domestic violence in 2007, mainly for
bashing their husbands, compared with just 818 in 1999.

Men's groups said yesterday they were happy that police were finally taking
men seriously but it remained tough for husbands to admit they had been
attacked by their wives.

Research shows women tend to use guns, knives, boiling liquids and irons to
attack their partners.

The increase in violence, which is often fuelled by alcohol, has sparked
calls for refuges for men.

"Australia is probably worse than anywhere else in the world for this
problem," Michael Woods, of the Men's Health Information and Resource
Centre at the University of Western Sydney, said.

"We're really behind the eight ball in trying to stop domestic violence
against men because we don't understand it."

Mr Woods said Britain and Holland had shelters for men but there was
nothing similar in Australia.

The figures show that although the number of women prosecuted for general
assault remained stable between 1999 and 2007, there was an increase of 11
per cent a year in the number of women prosecuted for domestic violence.

During the same period, domestic violence charges against men rose by 2.3
per cent a year.

Reg Price, who runs the Men's Rights Agency, said domestic violence against
men occurred in families of all incomes and status, as did violence against
women.

Mr Price said police were beginning to recognise it was a reality and had
stopped telling men they were "big boys" and to go away.

He said men had told him they were afraid to retaliate for fear of having
an apprehended violence order imposed on them and being unable to see their
children.

Assistant Commissioner Mark Murdoch said there was no definitive
explanation for the increasing number of women being prosecuted for
domestic violence offences.

http://www.theaustr alian.news. com.au/story/ 0,25197,25667548 -5006784, 00.html

Phyllis Schlafly: Why Women Are Unhappy..

The anti-male Hate Movement recieves another sound thrashing form one of it's former members and once again outlines precisely what this blog and what MRA's are all about..

Read and weep. This is what feminism is all about. Massive distortions of the truth. Denial of human nature and while they are at it, let's try and change human nature in the process..

No wonder so many women spit on the ground every time anyone suggests they have any connection to that hate-movement that is called feminism..

Another good post from Omnidox..

Quote #1: Betty Friedan started the feminist movement in the late 1960s
with her book "The Feminine Mystique," which created the myth that suburban
housewives were suffering from "a sense of dissatisfaction" with their
alleged-to-be- boring lives. To liberate women from the home that Friedan
labeled "a comfortable concentration camp," the feminist movement worked
tirelessly to make the role of fulltime homemaker socially disdained.

Quote #2: The feminists whine endlessly using their favorite word "choice"
in matters of abortion, but they reject choice in gender roles. The Big
Mama of feminist studies, Simone de Beauvoir, said: "We don't believe that
any woman should have this choice. No woman should be authorized to stay at
home to raise her children ... precisely because if there is such a choice,
too many women will make that one."

Quote #3: According to feminist ideology, the only gender-specific
characteristic is that men are naturally batterers who make all women
victims. On that theory, the feminists conned Congress into passing the
Violence Against Women Act (note the sex discriminatory title), which
includes a handout of a billion dollars a year to finance their political,
legislative and judicial goals.

Quote #4: The feminists have carried on a long-running campaign to make
husbands and fathers unnecessary and irrelevant. Most divorces are
initiated by women, and more women than men request same-sex marriage
licenses in Massachusetts so that, with two affirmative- action jobs plus in
vitro fertilization, they can create a "family" without husbands or fathers.

---

Download the report (PDF, 43pp, 650KB) from:


------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -

http://townhall.com/columnists/PhyllisSchlafly/2009/06/16/why_women_ are_unhappy

Townhall.com
16 June 2009

Why Women Are Unhappy
By Phyllis Schlafly

The National Bureau of Economic Research released a study to be published
soon in the American Economic Journal that shows women's happiness has
measurably declined since 1970. It's no surprise that this has stimulated
much comment.

This study covers the same time period as the rise of the so-called women's
liberation or feminist movement. The correlation demands an explanation.
You can read the entire study at www.eagleforum. org/links.

[Specifically:
]

One theory advanced by the authors, University of Pennsylvania economists
Betsey Stevenson and Justin Wolfers, is that the women's liberation
movement "raised women's expectations" (sold them a bill of goods), making
them feel inadequate when they fail to have it all. A second theory is that
the demands on women who are both mothers and jobholders in the labor force
are overwhelming.

I'm neither an economist nor a psychologist, but I'll join the conversation
with my own armchair analysis. Another theory could be that the feminist
movement taught women to see themselves as victims of an oppressive
patriarchy in which their true worth will never be recognized and any
success is beyond their reach.

Feminist organizations such as the National Organization for Women held
consciousness- raising sessions where they exchanged tales of how badly some
man had treated them. Grievances are like flowers - if you water them, they
will grow, and self-imposed victimhood is not a recipe for happiness.

Another theory could be the increase in easy divorce and illegitimacy (now
40 percent of American births are to single moms), which means that
millions of women are raising kids without a husband and therefore expect
Big Brother government to substitute as provider. The 2008 election returns
showed that 70 percent of unmarried women voted for Barack Obama, perhaps
hoping to be beneficiaries of his "spread the wealth" policies.

In the pre-1970 era, when surveys showed women with higher levels of
happiness, most men held jobs that enabled their wives to be fulltime
homemakers. The private enterprise system constantly produces goods that
make household work and kiddie care easier (such as dryers, dishwashers and
paper diapers).

Betty Friedan started the feminist movement in the late 1960s with her book
"The Feminine Mystique," which created the myth that suburban housewives
were suffering from "a sense of dissatisfaction" with their
alleged-to-be- boring lives. To liberate women from the home that Friedan
labeled "a comfortable concentration camp," the feminist movement worked
tirelessly to make the role of fulltime homemaker socially disdained.

Economic need played no role in the feminist argument that marriage is
archaic and oppressive to women. A job in the labor force was upheld as so
much more fulfilling than tending babies and preparing dinner for a
hard-working husband.

Women's studies courses require students to accept as an article of faith
the silly notion that gender differences are not natural or biological but
are social constructs created by the patriarchy and ancient stereotypes.
This leads feminists to seek legislative corrections for problems that
don't exist.

A former editor of the Ladies' Home Journal wrote in her book "Spin
Sisters" that the anorexic blondes on television are every day selling the
falsehood that women's lives are full of misery and threats from men.
Bernard Goldberg calls the mainstream media "one of America's most
pro-feminist institutions. "

According to feminist ideology, the only gender-specific characteristic is
that men are naturally batterers who make all women victims. On that
theory, the feminists conned Congress into passing the Violence Against
Women Act (note the sex discriminatory title), which includes a handout of
a billion dollars a year to finance their political, legislative and
judicial goals.

The feminists whine endlessly using their favorite word "choice" in matters
of abortion, but they reject choice in gender roles. The Big Mama of
feminist studies, Simone de Beauvoir, said: "We don't believe that any
woman should have this choice. No woman should be authorized to stay at
home to raise her children ... precisely because if there is such a choice,
too many women will make that one."

The feminists have carried on a long-running campaign to make husbands and
fathers unnecessary and irrelevant. Most divorces are initiated by women,
and more women than men request same-sex marriage licenses in Massachusetts
so that, with two affirmative- action jobs plus in vitro fertilization, they
can create a "family" without husbands or fathers.

Despite the false messages of the colleges and the media, most American
women are smart enough to reject the label feminist, and only 20 percent of
mothers say they want full-time work in the labor force. I suggest that
women suffering from unhappiness should look into how women are treated in
the rest of the world, and then maybe American women would realize they are
the most fortunate people on earth.

---

Phyllis Schlafly is a national leader of the pro-family movement, a
nationally syndicated columnist and author of Feminist Fantasies
.

Feminists will sacrifice women just to uphold their lies..

Some more facts on DV and also how feminists will endanger women just so their doctrine of lies can continue..

Feminism ain't good for no-one..

Drum Roll! The Winner of the 2008 Award for Political Incorrectness is…
By Carey Roberts | Dec 30, 2008

It's that time of the year — Christmas carols, shiny-wrapped presents, surprise visits by long-lost in-laws. And of course, our announcement of the annual Award for Political Incorrectness.

Previous winners of this highly-sought after prize include California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger who took up the dicey issue of paternity fraud; columnist Phyllis Schlafly (Shame on members of Congress who lack the courage to stand up to feminist outrages.); and Mark Inglis, the double-amputee who conquered Mt. Everest.

Last year's unanimous winners were Dave Evans, Reade Seligmann, and Collin Finnerty, the former Duke lacrosse players who bravely overcame a firestorm of rape hysteria unconscionably fanned by the media and university activists.

Let's open the envelope for 2008.

This year's award goes to an unassuming university professor who has devoted his career to the understanding and remedy of family violence. He has received funding from the National Institutes of Health and was elected president of the National Council on Family Relations and the Eastern Sociological Society. Needless to say, his resume is lengthy and impressive.

When he began his research in the 1970s, the public was well-acquainted with the stereotype of beer-swilling men who bullied their wives. That was the good professor's assumption, as well. But when he published his research findings in 1975, everyone was amazed — women were just as likely as men to engage in partner violence.

When he did follow-up surveys over the following 20 years, the gender-equal results confirmed his original research. More surprising, when other researchers studied homosexual relationships, they found lesbians had the highest rates of partner aggression.

There was a problem, but not with the research itself.

The burgeoning feminist movement had staked out the domestic violence issue as its cri de coeur. The feminists had ginned up their own theory: Domestic violence is a hate crime perpetrated against women. Gloria Steinem said it best: "The patriarchy requires violence or the subliminal threat of violence in order to maintain itself.".

But what if all the research paints a completely different picture, showing heterosexual women are equally likely to aggress, and the highest rates of battering are found among lesbians? Obviously the hate crime theory goes out the window, and Steinem's breathless claim seems pretty far-fetched, as well.

So what’s a good feminist to do about the good professor's research? Well, why not start a whispering campaign? Anything for the cause of female empowerment, right?

So feminists at his university organized telephone ring accusing him of being a misogynist. He was picketed repeatedly. At the University of Massachusetts, a group of shouting and stomping women prevented him from delivering a guest lecture. (Yes, these are the same women who claim to be working for a more peaceful and tolerant society.)

In Canada, Pat Marshall, chairwoman of the Commission on Violence Against Women, made this charge to a reporter about her meeting with the professor's wife: "I have never met a woman who looked so victimized." But when the writer called the woman, she said she had never been struck. Marshall was later forced to apologize.

When the professor was elected president of the Society for the Study of Social Problems, a group of feminists stood up and walked out as he began his presidential address. And the threats continue to this day — recently one of his PhD students was told she would never find a job if she did her doctoral research with him.

In the face of such opposition, many academics would go into another line of research, or begin to skew their data to be politically acceptable. But he would have none of that. Rather than being cowed by the threats, he opted to expose the motivations behind the attacks.

In one interview, he charged the criticisms of his work are "justifications of violence by women in the guise of feminism. This is a betrayal of the feminist ideal of a nonviolent world."

Then we went on to shed the light of truth their tactics.

Writing last year in the European Journal of Criminal Policy and Research, he cast the spotlight on how feminist academics conceal, deny, and distort the evidence. Then he detailed the ways in which feminists have corrupted the research on female-perpetrated abuse, even scheming to obstruct research funds that might identify female offenders. Finally he took aim at researchers who have "let their ideological commitments overrule their scientific commitments.".

Interested persons can read this no-holds-barred paper here: http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/V74-gender-symmetry-with-gramham-Kevan-Method%208-.pdf .

Congratulations, Dr. Murray Straus, director of the Family Research Laboratory at the University of New Hampshire. You are the winner of the 2008 Award for Political Incorrectness.

The feminist dilemma..

Another example of a women of this great talent actually praising the man in her life and the feminists did get into a flurry, they hated it..

How dare any female give any credit to any man for just being there and loving the girl in his life..

Wife and Mother..
Enjoy..

Repeat: Joe Cocker and the girls inclusion..

Yea I know I have shown this before but having some great memory from the seventies it demonstrates a few things..

Music was great..
It was entertaining..
Notice the amount of women involved..

Sure puts paid to the feminist propoganda of "all women were victims" would you not agree..

Womenomics..the eeeeaaassy life..

Got to love the thinking women as our Dr Helen is. Nothing much misses her scrutiny, another good article..

Womenomics–the slow slide to socialism
By Helen Smith | Jun 5, 2009

I read a bit of a new book called Womenomics: Write Your Own Rules for Success,started to post on it and realized I couldn't stomach it, and dropped it off at my local bookstore for someone more hardy to digest. There were a number of points I wanted to make about it, mainly that the female authors thought it a good thing for women to cut their workweek and just kick back and live the life they wanted. "If everyone decides to do this, what happens to US productivity," I thought, "and why is it that work is seen as distastefull unless one can set their own hours, have free access to childcare and a loving boss?" It's called a JOB, for goodness sakes. But, in the interest of staying calm, I did not blog about these things but I did see that Vox Day had a good post on the book and I will turn it over to him:

The problem with this book, I suspect, is that the usual female fascism will likely rear its incoherent but lushly-maned head and demand that everyone do less work so as not to make working women look bad by comparison, thereby transforming what could be a reasonable call for workers to examine their individual priorities into yet another justification for government intervention into the workplace.

I fear that Womenomics is just a buzzword for a slow descent into becoming like France, where the unemployment is high and the vacations are generous. Is this really better?

Want to Work ? Not women apparently..

Got to love the thinking women as our Dr Helen is. Nothing misses her scrutiny and obvious illusions that feminists try on for size..

Is this another attempt by feminists to raise the "wage gap" mantra and once again demonstrate that those bastards are making more money than us because they are investing 70 hours a week and we do not want to, attitude..

The Bastards..

Betcha I am right..

Womenomics–the slow slide to socialism

By Helen Smith | Jun 5, 2009

I read a bit of a new book called Womenomics: Write Your Own Rules for Success,started to post on it and realized I couldn't stomach it, and dropped it off at my local bookstore for someone more hardy to digest. There were a number of points I wanted to make about it, mainly that the female authors thought it a good thing for women to cut their workweek and just kick back and live the life they wanted. "If everyone decides to do this, what happens to US productivity," I thought, "and why is it that work is seen as distastefull unless one can set their own hours, have free access to childcare and a loving boss?" It's called a JOB, for goodness sakes. But, in the interest of staying calm, I did not blog about these things but I did see that Vox Day had a good post on the book and I will turn it over to him:

The problem with this book, I suspect, is that the usual female fascism will likely rear its incoherent but lushly-maned head and demand that everyone do less work so as not to make working women look bad by comparison, thereby transforming what could be a reasonable call for workers to examine their individual priorities into yet another justification for government intervention into the workplace.

I fear that Womenomics is just a buzzword for a slow descent into becoming like France, where the unemployment is high and the vacations are generous. Is this really better?

UN Comes One Step Closer to Creating New Women’s Super Agency..

Just keep voting those socialists at your own peril folks. What goes round comes round.

Some way or other we will all pay for this extravagance, hopefully some more than others..

UN Comes One Step Closer to Creating New Women’s Super Agency
By Samantha Singson

(New York – C-FAM) At United Nations (UN) headquarters this week, member states moved another step closer to setting up a new women's "super-agency." Last month, nations had pushed back when UN staff insisted governments approve a new office without providing details on its budget, structure, staffing, or mandate. At this week’s meeting, Member States were presented with a "consolidated response" paper from the UN Secretariat which detailed the staffing and cost projections of a new UN "gender entity."

For almost three years, the UN has discussed reforming its "gender architecture" by creating a centralized office which would be "the leader and voice on gender equality and the empowerment of women" and which would be "adequately resourced and with authority and capacity to drive and hold the United Nations system accountable." In her presentation to UN delegates on the new gender office, UN Secretary General's Advisor on Gender Issues Rachel Mayanja stated that the aim of the new gender office was to have "global coverage."

Presently, all organizations within the UN system are mandated to address gender and women's rights, and there are four offices charged with dealing with women’s issues: the Office of the Special Adviser on Gender Issues and Advancement of Women (OSAGI), the Division for the Advancement of Women (DAW), the United Nations Development Fund for Women (UNIFEM), and the International Institute for Research and Training for the Advancement of Women (INSTRAW). The total number of staffers in all four divisions is 278, and current funding for the four divisions is just over $88 million.

The response paper approximates that the new UN entity would require over 1000 staffers, whose annual salaries alone would total almost $300 million. It is estimated that the overall budget for the supersized new entity - with 6 proposed "headquarter divisions," five regional offices and dozens of country offices, would total $1 billion annually - including non-voluntary funding from the United States and other major UN donors.

Radical feminist non-governmental organizations, such as Equality Now and the Women’s Environment and Development Organization (WEDO), have campaigned hard for the new gender office alongside prominent former UN officials such as Stephen Lewis, the former deputy director of the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) and ex-UN African AIDS czar. Last year, WEDO commenced a formal campaign for Gender Equality Architecture Reform (GEAR), lobbying for a "stronger, consolidated, higher status women’s entity." Three hundred organizations have signed onto the GEAR campaign.

Despite calls from Member States for more time and details on the new entity, UN officials are pushing for a quick decision, saying that there is a "compelling need to take decisive action without further delay in order to better equip the United Nations with an adequate institutional capacity to fully realize the goal of gender equality and the empowerment of women." Member States are expected to come to a final decision on the structure and funding of the new "super-agency for women" and present a resolution to be voted on by the General Assembly in the fall.

Woman Arrested for Alleged NRL Blackmail..

Never let an opportunity pass if you can make some money out of false claims of abuse or rape. It's a major money earner, ask any female going through the courts and claiming the major amount..
It has been fairly rare for any women to be arrested over any false claims or even a felony. Even though there has been a major increase in women breaking the law but ofcourse the accountability is just there as they have been educated to believe that they can get away with just about anything and not have to face any consequences..

Woman arrested for alleged NRL blackmail
AAP
June 12, 2009.

Sydney police have arrested and charged a woman with attempting to blackmail Parramatta and the Wests Tigers NRL clubs in the wake of the Four Corners rugby league sex scandal.

A 33-year-old woman has been charged with three counts after contacting the Eels and Tigers over a sexual encounter with Kiwi Test prop Fuifui Moimoi back in 2006.

It is believed the woman sought $10,000 from the Eels and an undisclosed amount from the Tigers or she would go to the media with details of the sexual encounter.

The woman alleged Moimoi's housemate, Tigers winger and fellow Kiwi Test player Taniela Tuiaki, was also involved in the incident but he has denied this to police.

She did not contact either club until after the ABC Four Corners report into the sex culture in rugby league was aired last month.

"Police from Leichhardt Local Area Command have charged a 33-year-old woman with three counts of demand money with menaces," said the police statement.

"The charges relate to reports that the woman made threats via phone to two sporting clubs. The woman was granted conditional bail to appear at Blacktown Local Court on July 7."

A Parramatta spokesman said the club fully supported Moimoi.

"We are supportive of Fuifui and at no stage did we think that he was in the wrong," said the Eels spokesman.

"The judicial process must be allowed to take its course and the club is not in a position to make any further comment."

A Tigers spokesman said the club were aware of the situation, but were also remaining tight-lipped on the situation.

"We are aware of it and we must allow the judicial system to run its course," he said.

Woman arrested for alleged NRL blackmail..

Never let an oppotunity pass if you can make some money out of false claims of abuse or rape. It's a major money earner, ask any female going through the courts and claiming the major amount of income, accounts, house and car..

It works a treat. No varification or facts need apply, just her word is appently sufficient..

Ah yes..Blind justice, blinder than ever before..

Woman arrested for alleged NRL blackmail
AAP
June 12, 2009, 5:23 pm

Sydney police have arrested and charged a woman with attempting to blackmail Parramatta and the Wests Tigers NRL clubs in the wake of the Four Corners rugby league sex scandal.

A 33-year-old woman has been charged with three counts after contacting the Eels and Tigers over a sexual encounter with Kiwi Test prop Fuifui Moimoi back in 2006.

It is believed the woman sought $10,000 from the Eels and an undisclosed amount from the Tigers or she would go to the media with details of the sexual encounter.

The woman alleged Moimoi's housemate, Tigers winger and fellow Kiwi Test player Taniela Tuiaki, was also involved in the incident but he has denied this to police.

She did not contact either club until after the ABC Four Corners report into the sex culture in rugby league was aired last month.

"Police from Leichhardt Local Area Command have charged a 33-year-old woman with three counts of demand money with menaces," said the police statement.

"The charges relate to reports that the woman made threats via phone to two sporting clubs. The woman was granted conditional bail to appear at Blacktown Local Court on July 7."

A Parramatta spokesman said the club fully supported Moimoi.

"We are supportive of Fuifui and at no stage did we think that he was in the wrong," said the Eels spokesman.

"The judicial process must be allowed to take its course and the club is not in a position to make any further comment."

A Tigers spokesman said the club were aware of the situation, but were also remaining tight-lipped on the situation.

"We are aware of it and we must allow the judicial system to run its course," he said.

Link..

Women guaranteed lenience at law..

Here is a great example on how they protect women regardless which country they are in..

Good old chauvinism..

The woman should always be protected as she has done nothing wrong. How twisted is this coverage ?

First we have..

Knox occasionally paused to take a breath and had a wound on her upper lip, which her family said was a cold sore caused by stress. However, during most of her testimony she appeared calm and confident.

Obviously a major part of the process..

Knox said she last saw Kercher on the afternoon of November 1. They talked about what they had done the night before - a Halloween night out - and Knox said Kercher still had a bit of her vampire makeup on.

No, honestly this was reported..

The woman was a victim of the "lip" virus..

"The declarations were taken against my will, so everything that I said was said in confusion and under pressure," Knox said under questioning by Lumumba's lawyer.

I didn't know what I was saying, right..

And ofcourse we must have the dress revue..

Knox smiled as she walked into the court before her testimony. She was dressed in a white shirt and white trousers and had her hair pulled into a ponytail.

And this..

Knox's father, Curt Knox, said his daughter looked "confident in what she wants to say."

"She has nothing to hide," he told The Associated Press during a break. He said he hoped people could now see a "different Amanda," - different from the way she has been portrayed by the media so far.

What is that crap ?
Can we at least stick to the facts or is that just too difficult ?

But let's have some more irrelvance..

The trial has been closed to cameras but the presiding judge, exceptionally, allowed them in to film for Knox's testimony - only to ask them to leave a few minutes later for causing too much disruption. The cameras were then crammed in the press room, where proceedings were being shown on a screen.

Like who f**cking cares, but it's the status of journalism today. Irrelevance and fillers, bugger the facts and bugger the truth..

Knox takes stand in Italy murder trial
AAP
June 13, 2009, 11:02 am
An American student on trial in Italy for the murder of her British room-mate testified Friday for the first time, her voice sometimes shaking, and said the last time she saw the victim was hours before the killing.

Alternating between English and Italian, 21-year-old Amanda Knox said that on the night of the murder, in November 2007, she smoked a marijuana joint, had sex with her boyfriend - now her co-defendant - at his house and then fell asleep.

Prosecutors contend that Knox, an exchange student from Seattle, and Raffaele Sollecito killed 21-year-old Meredith Kercher in the apartment she shared with Knox in Perugia, central Italy.

Kercher's body was found there in a pool of blood on November 2, 2007, and legal experts said she had been killed the night before. Prosecutors said Sollecito was holding her by the shoulders from behind while Knox touched her with the point of a knife.

"On November 1, I told Raffaele that I wanted to watch a movie so we went to his place," Knox said. After dinner, they went upstairs to his room, she said.

"I sat on the bed, he sat at his desk, he prepared the joint and then we smoked it together," she said. "First we made love, then we fell asleep."

Knox occasionally paused to take a breath and had a wound on her upper lip, which her family said was a cold sore caused by stress. However, during most of her testimony she appeared calm and confident.

Knox said she last saw Kercher on the afternoon of November 1. They talked about what they had done the night before - a Halloween night out - and Knox said Kercher still had a bit of her vampire makeup on.

Sollecito then arrived at the house; he and Knox had something to eat while Kercher was in her room, Knox told the court.

"She left her room, said 'bye,' walked out the door," Knox said, at this point speaking Italian. "That was the last time I saw her."

Sollecito, 25, has said he was at his own apartment the night of November 1, working at his computer. He said he does not remember if Knox spent the whole night with him or just part of it. The two have said they could not remember events clearly because they had taken drugs.

Knox also repeated her accusations that she was beaten by police and confused when she was questioned in the days after the killing. Police have denied any misconduct.

After the killing, Knox accused Diya "Patrick" Lumumba, a Congolese man who owns a pub in Perugia, of being the culprit. Lumumba was jailed briefly in the case, but he is no longer a suspect and is seeking defamation damages from Knox.

Knox was called to testify both in her own defense and in a civil case brought by Lumumba.

"The declarations were taken against my will, so everything that I said was said in confusion and under pressure," Knox said under questioning by Lumumba's lawyer.

"They called me a stupid liar; said I was trying to protect someone. I was not trying to protect anyone," she said. "I didn't know what to respond. They said I left Raffaele's home, which I denied, but they continued to call me 'stupid liar."'

Knox smiled as she walked into the court before her testimony. She was dressed in a white shirt and white trousers and had her hair pulled into a ponytail.

Knox's father, Curt Knox, said his daughter looked "confident in what she wants to say."

"She has nothing to hide," he told The Associated Press during a break. He said he hoped people could now see a "different Amanda," - different from the way she has been portrayed by the media so far.

Knox and Sollecito have been jailed since shortly after the slaying. They are both charged with murder and sexual violence.

They could face Italy's stiffest punishment, life imprisonment, if convicted of murder. The trial began in January and a verdict is expected after a summer break.

A third suspect in the case, Ivory Coast national Rudy Hermann Guede, was found guilty of murder and sexual violence and was sentenced to 30 years in prison. He was given a fast-track trial at his request, and his appeal is set to start in November. He, too, denies wrongdoing.

The trial has been closed to cameras but the presiding judge, exceptionally, allowed them in to film for Knox's testimony - only to ask them to leave a few minutes later for causing too much disruption. The cameras were then crammed in the press room, where proceedings were being shown on a screen.

The Vagina Vote, oops..the woman's vote..

Okay they keep mounting as I am bored and have I some time on my hand, finally..

Here is a prime example as to why you should never vote for any politician who is after the "women's" vote and sometimes reverred to as the "vagina vote"..

These politicians will ensure that their offering will favour women only instead of serving society. This blatantly sexist behaviour is common amongst mangina politicians as they know that women will flock if they offer something tangible that they feel they deserve..

Many a politician can lay claim to this method..

Manginas like Obama(USA), Rudd(AUS), Brown(ENG) demonstrate how easy it is to get women voters onside as all they ever seem to think about is number one, what they will get and how much..

It's sickening how they flock to these manginas just to benefit themselves, but that is reality..

Sex sells for Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono in wooing female vote
Stephen Fitzpatrick, Jakarta correspondent | June 13, 2009 
Article from:  
The Australian

JAKARTA's sophisticated set has a joke about why Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono will win the presidential election next month - and it has nothing to do with his handling of the economy or his leadership skills.
It's all about sex, and how to win the female vote. 
This attempts to underline the slow progress after five years of Dr Yudhoyono's careful hand, and to show Mr Kalla would leap out of the blocks to get things done. 
But the affable and considered Dr Yudhoyono, the wits point out, will have women falling over themselves to tick his box next month with his simple directive: "More! More!"

When Women Rule The World, part 2..

Here we have another female politician moaning and complaining about sexsim, but in reality she was caught out screwing the chauffeur. This is a maried female with children and now here it is claiming sexism for not being able to be either honourable or even keep her marriage vows or even behave like a reasonable human being. Incapable of demonstrating any dignity or have the decency to keep it's mouth shut for being a common whore..

But ofcourse women as usual expect and demand special treatment regardless of their behaviour or inability to do the job properly ( she was voted in on her Father's reputation, he did not spend his time bonking the chauffeur)..

It's sickening and about the standard behaviour we expect from female politicians that consider themselves to be above the law. Thank goodness there are some decent female pollies out there but I can only count them on one hand..

Privileged princesses ?

Allegations that she had sexually harassed her former lover and driver Ben Chaffey were wrong, something she claims Mr Bartlett accepted.

If that is the case how come he received a $55,000 payout after that incident was investigated ?..

See the coverup ?

She also admitted she had made a mistake in having an affair with her ministerial chauffeur Ben Chaffey, who has received a $55,000 government payout.

See the above link..

The usual "women are only victims" angle we expect from feminists as they protect the privileged princesses from imaginary harm..

How sexism, stigma and scandal destroyed my political career: Paula Wriedt


EXCLUSIVE: Julie-Anne Davies | June 13, 2009
Article from:
The Australian

FORMER Tasmanian frontbencher Paula Wriedt claims her treatment by two Labor premiers shows the level of sexism and poor understanding of mental illness in political life.

The late Jim Bacon forced her to resign as education minister because she was pregnant, she says, and David Bartlett sacked her after she tried to take her own life.

In an exclusive interview with The Weekend Australian Magazine, Ms Wriedt has spoken for the first time since she quit politics in January about her anger and hurt at being dumped as a minister, despite Mr Bartlett's assurances he would allow her time to recover from her life-threatening depression.


Ms Wriedt shot to national prominence just days before her suicide attempt when former AFL player Sam Newman made a lewd comment after she appeared on the Nine Network's The Footy Show.

Born into a Labor dynasty - her father is Ken Wriedt, a Whitlam government minister and former Labor leader in Tasmania - Ms Wriedt, 40, was regarded at one time as a possible future premier.

Her dramatic exit from politics divided Tasmanians, many of whom felt their premier reacted too harshly by sacking her while she was still recovering in hospital.

"Don't believe anyone who tells you the stigma of mental illness is lessening," Ms Wriedt says. "It's not."

Allegations that she had sexually harassed her former lover and driver Ben Chaffey were wrong, something she claims Mr Bartlett accepted.

But he was not prepared to allow her to stay in her job as economic development and tourism minister while she defended herself, Ms Wriedt claims.

"It was neater for the premier if I resigned rather than him sack me, but one way or another I was going," she says.

When she found out news of her affair with Mr Chaffey was going to be made public, her mental unravelling was complete, and Ms Wriedt, Tasmania's youngest female minister and the first MP in that state to give birth while in office, spent six weeks in a psychiatric clinic.

She says the lack of compassion shown by her former ALP colleagues has been a particularly bitter blow. "The silence has been deafening," she says.

"I guess trying to take your own life when you're in public office can do that. It would have been more convenient if I'd had cancer."