Judge Carol Hackett Garagiola: More information..

More on the

Judge Carol Hackett Garagiola: Another Male Hating Judge..

Another comment among many regarding the above female Judge, promoted and installed by the feminist hegemony via the "positive discrimination" process, just to cause as much pain and suffering as possibile under the guise of "the best interest of the children", which as usual, really does not give a damn about them but adheres solely to feminist doctrine and feminist jurisprudence which they have so corrupted as to be useless..

Surely, sometime in the future, some of those feminists will be made to face the suffering and abuse of human rights they have introduced,  they have forced onto society under the guise of improvements, which is as fake as their abortion clinics claims to save lives..

 We need to get this woman off the bench. She is destroying lives.

I agree.. 

This Judge is a monster..

A slight adjustment made as I break the article into readable bits..

Anonymous said...

This is not a simple folder; apparently you have not read my step children’s folder. You say 2 sides; my concerns lies with one side, the Childs side, a judgment should be based upon facts. Judge Garagiola has abused her position. She has contradicted her own judgment. We followed everything she required to the letter. Her own court officials, therapists, DHS, Child’s attorney, We were evaluated by the head of the physiatrist department. This is one we went out of county for, and she ordered. We were found to be the better parents. Mother was found to be a pathological liar, whom manipulated the children, also our youngest child was molested by one of her boyfriends, we went to trial, he got off because she could not identify him. She was forensically tested to determine truth.

They believed her. Our higher power once again opposed professional’s advice. We had weekly visits by court appointed official. They all testified in court on our behalf, you think she is a higher power, I challenge you. I guess my 13 year old dating an 18 year old is okay as well, I refuse to allow this woman a shred of sympathy or respect. She has destroyed my daughter’s lives, and they have no chance at a future without education. They have gone from honor role, perfect attendance to 79 plus absences, 149 doctor notes and other excuses for not attending school. (since January 1st)

This was a pattern prior and a factor for receiving custody. The children were sleeping on floors, living with random men. Mother is a prescription drug user, and alcoholic. Why don’t you guess who is footing the bill, you and all the other tax payers. Great we can afford to keep her in her lavish life style. Bridge card, we estimated her income to be 30,000 dollars at one point, with all insurance included. I pay 350 a month for myself and my children. So she is able to get drunk at bars and do drugs.

One of the children was wearing maternity clothes when she came to live with us. All were on every drug for hyper active behavior, depression drugs and downers so they can sleep. Only one child is on medicine. He goes to a professional neurologist, which concluded he is suffering from fetal alcohol syndrome. Mother never worked a day in her life, and has lived off state and child support from another father of children. So my daughters have learned how to cheat, lie to get whatever you want.

This is how the Mother has WON? Who can afford to go to court, we can’t but she can all her attorneys are paid by state. Michigan really needs to waste money and time on this kind of bologna. Again these are facts not a story. I have transcripts to prove it. I ask you to rethink before you make such a broad statement. Read these blogs. They all have a similar ending.

We need to get this woman off the bench. She is destroying lives. It’s not about the girl’s father and I winning, that is a very inept thought. It is about what is in the best interest of the children. We have 2 of his children whom I am proud to say carry an above 3.0 average and near perfect attendance. The girls left to have a party and because we took away cell phone for running an extremely high bill. I guess parenting with the purpose of raising a child with morals and values, and contributing to society in your words is not winning. Then you tell me who wins?

Link one..

Judge Hackett Garagiola made me go pro per in the court hearing, without attorney representation,

 Link Two.. Youtube Video

Judge Hackett-Garagiola is the judge over the Skousen's case. During the time she has been judge over the case her husband, Detroit Channel 4 newscaster Steve Garagiola was given an exclusive interview by Mitt Romney. There are also missing court documents which carry the Romney, name, which have strangely disappeared.

 Link Three..

A group of 11 protesters, all men, stated they wanted to raise awareness about her alleged unfair treatment of fathers in family court cases.They picketed Friday outside Howell Nazarene Church, which was hosting the ninth annual Michigan Fatherhood Conference. Steve Garagiola, the judge's husband and a Detroit news anchor for WDIV-TV, served as master of ceremonies at the conference. "Bias deprived me of due pro-cess of law," one sign stated. Livingston County resident Dave Kluesner said he hasn't seen his two sons in six months and put some of the blame on the judge, who handled his case three years ago. Kluesner said he decided to protest "to help fathers going to court to have some chance ... at being heard and being accepted."

Comedy: Amanda Marcotte & Jessica Valenti Giving Advice to Men..

My brain just did a double-take when I saw this..

Amanda Marcotte giving advice to Men about dating..


And Jessica Valenti given advice to Fathers..

Link.. 

Now I am absolutely dumbfounded as why MALE Haters such as these two would actually spare time from their usual anti-male slanging and raging to pen some "pathetic" advice on topics that neither have got a clue about..

Another example of women telling men how to behave..

Then I remembered the episode when feminists changed their tune on "married mothers" and "stay at home moms"; they relentlessly cursed and maligned them until all of a sudden they were onside and hailing the "supermom" image and how raising children was the hardest job in the world (Oprah)..

Feminists have capitulated before to serve their lying agenda and gained additional devotees in the process especially after the mothers gave feminists a fright..

So now it would appear to be the same case here. Feminists know that they are getting a canning from the MRM on a daily basis and the writing is on the wall. Knowing this they have changed tack by introducing two of the "most hated feminists on the web", into the "Men's advice business" knowing full well that relationship topics are one of the biggest hits on the web. One that will guarantee attention and demonstrate to the gullible how "touchy, feely" those haters really are. Back that up with "The Good Mangina Project" and just watch and wait, while they try to squirm their way into the opposing side and try to dismantle the MRM by trying to sound "reasonable". It's pathetic and totally misleading but what else would you expect from the feminist movement and especially those two..

The Good Men Project has taken on the daunting task of introducing, unlocking and dismantling the so-called Men’s Rights Movement in a special series of posts this week. My top pick, naturally, was Amanda Marcotte’s, in which she debunks the feminist-scapegoating delusions held by so many misogynist trolls men’s rights activists (MRAs).

From Ms. Magazine's blog..

 

To Get a Job, change your Sex..

No, I have a problem with Bias..

The bias instituted by feminised women is there for all to witness. They blamed men in the past for being sexist and here we see clearly that they obviously do not practice what they preach. The ever accusing finger is attached to it's hypocritical owner..

My Gender Bending Resume Experiment

I thought I would share some of my job search issues with the forum. During the past 2 months I have been hunting for a job. My resume is in tip-top format, my references are ready and willing to give me a good reference. The exception is that for 100+ resumes sent to targeted positions, I have got 7 responses.

This bothers me since I have a great skill set, a masters degree, and over 25 years of experience in Information Systems and Management. I really wanted to know what was happening. Was it ageism? Was it sexism? I need to know. So I set out to find the reason behind the silence.

My first name is Roger. I altered my resume to become Christi and also Christy, and Kirsten. My phone answering system is a generic female computer voice that says simply “Please leave a message. Your call will be returned-BEEEP”.

I submitted the following resumes:

· Christi: 5 submissions to large fortune 100 companies
· Christy: 5 submissions to companies I already submitted resumes to.
· Kirsten: 5 submissions to positions a few levels above my experience and typical pay grade.

Here’s the results:

· Christi: 3 requests for phone screens, 1 offer for a face to face with a program director (Ms. Green)
· Christy: 2 requests for a phone screen, 1 offer for a face to face interview with the hiring manager (Ms. Walsh).
· Kirsten: 1 request for a phone screen, 1 for a face to face with the VP of technology (Ms. Berger)

I realize that this study is by no means scientific, but it really shows the sad fact that there is now an anti-male bias in hiring practices by female HR workers, and by female manager/directors.

A post by The Possible Human

Reject the Proposed SaVE Act..

Being treated like a third rate human being as men and boys are, we must at least make some effort to resist legislation that is designed to out-privilege the already privileged females..

This legislation will automatically condemn you or your son/s for even the slightest intrusion into the lives of females..

Just when you thought it could not get any worse, just when you thought you could sit on your morals and have a break from all that MRM action, along comes another issue that you just cannot ignore..

Tell Congress to Stop Treating Your Son Like a Presumed Criminal: Read and Sign the Petition

Click here to read and sign: Reject the Proposed SaVE Act Absent Amendments to Protect the Presumptively Innocent

To our readers: U.S. Senator Bob Casey (D-PA) has introduced legislation to combat sexual violence on college campuses called The Campus Sexual Violence Elimination Act (SaVE Act) (S.834), cosponsored by Senator Patty Murray (D-WA). It amends Title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965. There is so much wrong with this proposed Act that we could have made our petition into a mini-novel. We decided to focus on two areas which most people would agree are problems.  We also stayed clear of divisive discussion of rampant false rape claims, the underreporting canard, etc. and instead discussed only matters that are not open to serious debate.

Pierce Harlan

Feminists Will Not Tolerate Any Positives if it's Male..

Don't ever mention anything positive about any man otherwise the feminasties will go haywire, rabid, reaching for the mood controlling snorting powder..

Back in September 2010 (No Sperm, No Peace), I did this post on the affects of sperm on female behaviour. The injection and absorbtion of sperm has so many major beneficial affects as to rename it "SuperCum", as no other pill, diet or vitamin shot comes anywhere remotely near it..

Perhaps it's how that saying may have come (what pun?) about, "sucking you dry"..

In fact, semen has a very complicated chemical profile, containing over 50 different compounds (including hormones, neurotransmitters, endorphins and immunosupressants) each with a special function and occurring in different concentrations within the seminal plasma. Perhaps the most striking of these compounds is the bundle of mood-enhancing chemicals in semen. There is good in this goo. Such anxiolytic chemicals include, but are by no means limited to, cortisol (known to increase affection), estrone (which elevates mood), prolactin (a natural antidepressant), oxytocin (also elevates mood), thyrotropin-releasing hormone (another antidepressant), melatonin (a sleep-inducing agent) and even serotonin (perhaps the most well-known antidepressant neurotransmitter).

Personally, I don't think that the deposit extracted by the opposite sex is properly compensated..

The left-wing, pro-feminist, male-hating Huffington Post presented an article (no link) and the feminasties were salivating that much that I swear my screen was starting to fog up..

Here is an excerpt..

Dr. Greenfield noted the therapeutic effects of semen, citing research from the Archives of Sexual Behavior which found that female college students practicing unprotected sex were less likely to suffer from depression than those whose partners used condoms (as well as those who remained abstinent).
Presumably it was the closing line that caused the controversy: "So there's a deeper bond between men and women than St. Valentine would have suspected, and now we know there's a better gift for that day than chocolates."

Ah yes, but never assume that women have a sense of humour, especially feminists as everything is somehow motivated, designed or targetted at their privileged entitlements. It is best to stay ignorant unless "enlightened" by compulsive liars who twist and spin facts like candy makers..

How offended were they ?

TRAVERSE CITY, Mich. — The world's largest organization of surgeons has accepted the resignation of its president-elect after he wrote a Valentine's Day column for the group's newspaper that some members found demeaning to women.
Dr. Lazar J. Greenfield, a renowned surgeon and professor emeritus at the University of Michigan Medical School, said Monday he had stepped down from his leadership post with the American College of Surgeons after the association's board rejected his attempts to make amends.
His column divided the 77,000-member group, with some saying it insulted women and exposed a male-dominated culture within the profession. Greenfield's defenders said he had encouraged many aspiring women surgeons and accused his critics of overreacting to a clumsy attempt at humor.
In the Surgery News editorial, Greenfield described semen as a mood enhancer for women and referred to a scientific study that described female college students who had unprotected sex as less depressed than those whose partners used condoms.
"So there's a deeper bond between men and women than St. Valentine would have suspected, and now we know there's a better gift for that day than chocolates," Greenfield wrote.

Feminist Kate to half-marry Prince Bill..

Ah yes, the endless drooling continues as the "I want to be a princess too" dream materialises. The endless carping about this wedding I have avoided purely by avoiding the idiot box. Nothing annoys me more than the fairy princess story and it's endless hype. But it's every girls dream, really, more the suckers them. There ain't too many royalty about to fulfill the countless millions who "dream" about this exact moment happening to them. Boring as all hell..

Chateau really states precisely what I thought all along..

Her feminist sensibilities have got the best of her,

Yep !! another one bites the dust and if you remember that last royal "princess" nuptial, you will already be aware of it's inevitable outcome. If in doubt why not ask the Dianne worshippers, she could do nothing wrong accept maybe find someone else who wanted to tolerate it..

Prince William: Beta Chump

April 28, 2011 by Chateau

Kate Middleton, a rather mannish-looking princess-to-be (get a load of that wedge-shaped chin), has excised the ‘obey’ part from her wedding vows. Her feminist sensibilities have got the best of her, so she will not be vowing any obedience to her Prince. Perhaps William could take a page from her book and alter his wedding vows to suit a more contemporary interpretation:

Kiss this..

“I, beta supremo, take thee, annoying ballbuster, to be my lawful wedded wife, to have and to hold from this day forward, for better for worse, for richer for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love as a legally recognized equal in every way except for those times I’m required to prop her on a pedestal and sing her praises to all and sundry, till death or a financial catastrophe from divorce us do part, according to culturally specific traditional folkways; and thereto I plight thee the last vestige of my manly fortitude.”
I’m sure Kate batted her eyelashes and glowed a bit in the cheeks when she kindly
asked directed William to accept her changes to the traditional English wedding vows, and I’m sure William, being the good enlightened poodleboy he is, pretended to happily agree, figuring that she would love him even more for his understanding and progressive attitude.

I’ve got news for ya, ol’ chap. She won’t. In fact, she’ll likely come to resent you for caving to her demands.
To understand this female peculiarity with issuing demands they don’t really want to see acceded, you have to envision that each woman has two mouths. One mouth, the face mouth, says the words that your ears actually hear. This is the mouth that concatenates and delivers the sentence fragments that form in the prefrontal cortex of her mind. She means these words, inasmuch as that part of her brain retains control over the other parts of her brain. Unfortunately, that is rarely the case.
The other mouth, the vagina mouth, only says words that her hindbrain hears. These are words not meant for either your ears or her ears. Her hamster, though, does hear them, and his job is to spin those words, devilish as they are, into palatable rationalizations which are then shuttled to the polite and civilized cortex for mastication.
So, the face mouth says ‘I will not obey and he better agree with me’, while the vagina mouth whispers ‘Jesus, if he bends to my feminist will I’m going to dry up in bed and start daydreaming of the gruff bouncer at Shariadiscoteque.’
Before I knew of this ‘obey’ tidbit, I would have given this celebutard marriage pretty good odds of surviving to the decrepit end. After all, she is marrying a prince. And she’s not exactly the hottest babe he could have snagged. But now that this has come out, I revise my estimate downward. The chance of Kate absconding with a swarthy southerner on a weekend junket aboard his yacht has just doubled.
Like father, like son. Even royalty can’t compensate for cringing betaness.

Women Groping Men, Gee Eh !; What else is new..

Well, golly gee, women groping, women demanding sexual favours. How new is that ?

Grope this..

Apart from groping little boys, old women groping younger lads who are apparently quite happy banging them silly. Regardless of that fact, change the sex. Change the sex and we have hysterics, we have rape claims, we have court cases and men jailed for years on end..

Is that equality or is that just BIAS..

How can any female make any claim to equality when this behaviour is so clearly demonstrated and not be held accountable..

I think I will cancel that sex change. I would rather have some dignity than live that sex..

 Scandal flares after mass groping of cadets by female officer

Neutral Sweden has long had something of a credibility problem over the standing of its armed forces. A few years ago a group of female soldiers went to the European Court of Justice to secure the removal of the testicles from the heraldic lion of the country’s rapid reaction force in a move that was widely derided as political correctness gone mad.
Today, Sweden’s English language newspaper, The Local, is reporting that 50 percent of officers complain of back pain due to the increasing weight of their back packs. According a report by the Swedish military some soldiers are now carrying packs of up to 60-80 kilograms.
The paper said the typical back pack in the Second World War was 25 kilos and the load had been increasing ever sense. Andreas Davidsson of the Swedish Air Force Rangers was quoted as saying: “That’s just not possible. Carrying an extra 100 percent of your bodyweight is not progress.”
The “progressive” credentials of the Swedish armed forces were also called into question in another article from The Local late last week.
The paper reported on a scandal in which a female officer at the country's military academy had been accused of groping five of her cadets at a party.
According to the report: “One of the cadets described how he suddenly felt the officer's hands on the inside of his underpants while on the dance floor. Another cadet said that he found the female officer getting a bit too friendly and acting as if she was intoxicated. A while later, she was making out with a third cadet, although [] he later admitted he was acting of his own free will”.
The Swedish armed forces are investigating though, according to The Local, the cadets have said that they “do not feel violated and have no intention of reporting the woman for sexual harassment but that they feel it was inappropriate behaviour by a senior officer”.

Need a break..

Strueth..

I need a break..

Some Photos of my trip to the Europian Continent..

Denmark: Nice of them to name something after me..

Denmark..You work it out..

Denmark: 1080-1086.. Gotta love history..

Amsterdam, a bit of seafarer history..

Napoleon liked this dutch craftman's design so much he ordered some for all his Palaces.. Currently also the Louvre in Paris as well as in the Royal Palace in Amsterdam, Holland..

Now just in case you are wondering how bad this really is, have a look at this..

Female Pedophiles..

Yes, those rapists are busy and ignored. Even when their activities are recognised and appear in court for their crime, most are just let off or given some pathetic decision that in no way reflects the damage they have caused, not only to the child but also to the families and relatives..

This joke has been defended and promoted by feminists defending women as being "victims" regardless what "SHE" does. On top of this, if this isn't worse enough, women will automatically defend the actions of their own regardless of the monstrosities they perform..

The Feminist Rape of Little Boys

by Featured Guest on April 28, 2011

By Zorro
Americans believe in ideals of equality and fairness. All children, regardless of ethnic heritage, religion, gender or sexual orientation whether straight, gay or transgendered, deserve to be treated with respect and dignity.
How do feminists describe the birth of a baby boy? A crime against humanity.
During 2010, over four million boys, one in five of school age, were victims of feminist rape. (Note 1)
The essential elements of rape are power and control over the victim. Men who rape use physical force to assault their victim. Feminists who rape little boys use psychological manipulation and verbal coercion to assault their victim.
Feminist rape is the sexual attack of an adult woman upon a minor male child either emotionally or physically in an attempt to subtly emasculate a little boy’s self-esteem, intellectual and social development. Feminist rape is an attempt to psychologically castrate a little boy from his male identity. Rape is the only word that can describe this crime.
The most vicious and cruelest forms of violence are psychological especially against innocent children. Feminist rape upon little boys is as emotionally destructive, devastating and violent as any male rape attack leaving victims traumatized and debilitated.
Physical rape is a criminal act. Feminist rape is an elusive and insidious act difficult to prove. Little boys do not have the emotionally maturity to realize they are being raped. Feminist rape activities may be so subtle as to appear innocuous and are always rationalized as being in the best interest of the little boy. Feminist rape is the perfect sex crime against little boys.
In Chris Hansen’s to “Catch a Predator” there was never an episode of a female predator being caught. Male predators are forced to prey for their victims online. Feminist predators have no need to prey online. They enter education and child care situations where they are in positions of authority, power and control over their victims. Their victims are forced to come to them. Feminist predators are in perfect positions to develop long-term emotional manipulative control of victim relationships.
Feminists dominate education and have successfully gender cleansed elementary schools of male teachers. Over 95% of elementary teachers are women. The primary male academic role model for young boys in elementary schools is the school janitor. Feminist rape culture and shaming language brands any male who wants to teach young children as a male pedophile.
If adult men have been socially bullied, intimidated and terrorized from entering elementary teaching professions then imagine the vulnerability of little boys in feminist classrooms.
Imagine you are a little boy in a feminist classroom. You are going to watch an educational video which will be required in many classes across our country. The reader MUST PROMISE to watch the entire video posted on YouTube. As a little boy in a feminist classroom, you have no choice. It is important to take notes as you watch because I am asking the reader to write a one page essay of what you learned from the video. You will also be required to give an oral presentation of your essay before friends and peers of what you learned. You can go to YouTube and type “Dear Women” in the search box or use the link
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_uRIMUBnvw.
This video represents the core values and beliefs of many American elementary school teachers. If you do not agree with the views in the video it is because you, especially if male, are a sexist, are academically inferior or blinded by male privilege. If you found it difficult to sit still, you became agitated or couldn’t concentrate on the video; it is because you suffer from ADHD. You would be forced against your will to receive Ritalin in this school to help become a more compliant and passive student. You realize as a boy student, you are not expected to provide any independent or critical analysis in you essay or oral report. You know from experience the teacher will eviscerate, mock and humiliate you in front of the class unless you regurgitate the views in the video.
This type of video presentation format was initially seen during the Korean War when American prisoners were brutally, psychologically tortured into making statements against the United States.
One has to wonder, what happened to the men in the video as little boys to possess such feelings of guilt and shame for being male? Did their fathers teach them these ideas? Some of these men were serially raped by feminists throughout their young lives and to this day do not even realize they were manipulated and abused as little boys. Maybe they should change the title to “Unconscious Rape of Little Boys.”
In feminist culture, a mind is a terrible thing to waste, unless it is a boy’s mind. Feminists modified teaching methods and redesigned curriculums to guarantee the encouragement and support for the exclusive success of girls.

Feminists have imperceptibly programmed little boys for academic and social failure with great success. American education has been designed to oppress achievement, competition and creativity of boys. The cultures of elementary schools are hostile academic and toxic social environments for boys. Boys hate school and rush home to play on video games where they are allowed to express their boyhood.
What real evidence is there that feminists have been raping little boys? The evidence is ordinary common sense applied to social reality.
There was never any real evidence the great American gangster, Al Capone, was ever guilty of any criminal activity but it doesn’t mean he was innocent of his crimes. It was the fruits of his crimes, the enormous wealth he accumulated from criminal activity that was used to convict him of tax evasion.
For example, consider “The Graph of Feminist Shame”. (Note 2) One would think feminists who preach on the altar of victimhood and believe they represent equality and fairness would be ashamed of the 60%/40% college enrollment of women over men.
In the prior years to 1980, the little boys of the past contributed to landing humans on the moon, developed satellite communications, ushered in the Agricultural Green Revolution, invented birth control pills, the Internet, personal computers and cell phones but in the last two decades have developed serious learning issues.

The graph shows discrimination against girls prior to the 1970’s. This became an affront to all fair and reasonable Americans.
Americans agreed that all children, female and male, should have equal opportunities in academics, sports, and all activities in life. During the seventies changes were made and girls began to approach the 50% mark of college degrees conferred. It appeared as though all children were receiving equal educational opportunities.
During the 1970’s, feminists lured American society into radical educational reforms saying, “feminism is about fairness and equality ” translated “come see the puppy in my van.” Feminism was never about fairness or equality. Feminism was and is about power and control.
The changes in degrees conferred since the 1980’s in the graph through the present reveal feminists are either the worst teachers of boys in human history and/or the betrayal of feminism to dreams of equal educational instruction demanded by fair and reasonable Americans. There is no other social explanation for the decline of boys in education other than feminist rape and blatant discrimination against little boys. General social problems would apply to both boys and girls yet only boys have been severely impacted. Boys are stupid in not a reasonable explanation. When feminists claim girls are outperforming boys in school because of their academic abilities it is a euphemism for “we’ve been very successful in raping little boys.” Social inequities of the past cannot be used to rationalize or justify rape in the present. The treatment of little boys in the United States today is a national disgrace and tragedy in the enormous loss of human potential.
What do feminist teachers call boys who complete high school and are accepted into college? Damn Survivors. Education in America is stealthy designed to discourage boys from learning and achievement. What do feminist teachers call African American boys who complete high school and are accepted into college? Goddamn Survivors. White feminists in ivory towers have a peculiar hatred of African America boys. What do feminist teachers call effective educational spending for African American boys: build more prisons.
Too many boys do not survive and drop out of school much more than girls. It is boys who kill themselves four times more than girls. It is boys who become promiscuous, abuse alcohol and drugs more than girls. America’s boys have lost ambition, lack motivation, lack self-esteem, possess negative self-images, and are depressed even withdrawing from society. America’s boys are and have been displaying classic post-traumatic behavior of rape victims.
Social pundits ponder the disintegration of female-male relationships in American society. The tens of millions of little boys who have been raped by feminists find it difficult to trust or respect women. After thirteen years or more of rape and psychological abuse, little boys who grow into men are incapacitated in their ability to develop healthy intimate and long-term relationships with women. There should be no mystery why there are so many single women and single mothers compared to forty years ago.
Feminists will say only a minority of feminists rape little boys and you can’t demonize an entire social group. Only a minority of Nazis gassed Jews to their deaths and other people they considered socially inferior. The culture of Nazism was pure evil and the culture of Feminism today is pure evil.
In the spirit of feminist shamming language, any person who identifies themselves as a feminist should be ashamed of themselves. They should be shunned by decent people who sincerely believe in equality and fairness. Individuals who believe in equality and fairness are called Americans. The term American Feminist is an oxymoron that makes as much sense as a Jewish Nazi.
Feminism has become a Marxist Misandry movement. Feminism is the hate of heterosexual love between men and women, husband and wife, father and daughter. Feminism is the hate of heterosexual family. Feminism hates fathers who love who love their children. Feminism hates the religions of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam because of their absolute moral standards and ideals of honor and fidelity. Remember, the very first Feminist was Satan. Feminism is a culture of discrimination and psychological castration of little boys. Feminism has become a reprehensible culture of little boy rape.
Those boys who excel in mathematics and logic begin to realize as they mature into young men that: If all men are rapists then all feminists are boy rapists.
Note 1:
According to the Childstats.gov website, there were 42 million school age children ages six to seventeen in 2010 throughout the United States. About half of these children are boys representing a potential victim pool of 21 million boys. One can estimate 20% of boys have exposure to feminist teachers resulting in 4,200,000 victims of abuse. This is a conservative estimate.
http://www.childstats.gov/americaschildren/tables/pop1.asp
Note 2:
I believe this graph was compiled by Dr. Mark Perry. Please see the blog “Carpe Diem” on June 2, 2009:
http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2009/06/women-dominate-higher-education-at.html
Note 3:
This analysis was not funded by a million dollar federal grant. Nor is this analysis endorsed by the White House Counsel on Women and Girls, the National Organization of Women, the American Association of University Women or the North American Man Boy Love Association.
My only qualification for writing this analysis is that I love my sons.
I am the luckiest man in the world to be joyfully married to a beautiful, intelligent, loving and independent thinking woman but do not feel ashamed for being born a male. I express great gratitude to my teachers, male and female, who encouraged and inspired learning for my family and myself.

Angry Harry: What a piece of shit man is!!..

Angry Harry once quoted "what a piece of shit man is", He did not mean it in a derogatory sense but just how men are viewed by society even though society would crash the instant all men disappeared. It cannot exist without us..

It appears to be irrelevant..

Men have an automatic inbuilt reaction to care for women but women don't have that same response mechanism. This is how feminism rose to it's great heights. In the past I would wax lyrical and throw in some expletives just for affect and reduce my own frustration, but hey, I am getting older and nothing appears to surprise me much any more..

We should take a little better care of each other..

A question on one of the forums I frequent..

Two days back i saw a lady collapsing on the busy street of Mumbai. Summer season is going on here(temp even rising to 45 degrees), people easily get dehydrated here if they walk on open busy streets - same happened with that lady too. The moment that lady collapsed one guy came to her and splashed some water on her face,gradually he was followed by many other men. I just decided to watch the game carefully. I was surprised to see that the only people helping her were all men on the other side women preferred to watch silently but didn't even come to help her despite being of the same gender.
Finally that lady woke up and said i am ok but still those men were so much sensitive toward her that they gave her some cold drinks and hired a taxi with their own expense

now read the other part of the story - fairly more than a month back i saw an old man(could be above 65) collapsing in a same way on the busy street but location was different this time.Many people saw him lying on ground without any movement but no one came to help him.Infact what i saw was shocking some people were so much busy in their walking that they were ignoringly kicking him. I was just there hoping for someone to come and help him(i waited their for 45 mins, i was on the other side of road).More than a hour just passed by - now many people were just pointing their fingers and weirdly staring at the old guy but were just mute spectators and didn't help him. I thought wtf? i decided to cross the road and help that guy as no one was helping him but the moment I was about to go my bus arrived and i had to board that bus.I dont know what happened to that old man - i am feeling sorry for him as I was also the same mute spectator.

what do u guys say about these two incidents.

One response and that is the irony..

Why didn't you help the old man?

Yes, that is the question..

Are liberal women responsible for neutering men..

Are liberal women responsible for neutering men

Do bears shit in the woods, do fish breathe under water. Have a look at the gormless wimps who called themselves male feminists (The Good Men Project aims precisely at this) and ask yourself if they are not female imitations..

In a word, yes.

Man was First on the Moon

Gee, who would have thought that ?

Nice to witness the odd politican standing up for the lads and put the word out against the hate movement that is feminism. Rare, unusual and yes, heroic as the left wing rage raising it's blood level to vein popping dimensions achieving apoplexy, hopefully..

How dare anyone tell them the truth, the damn cheek..

Allen West is Right: Leftist Women Castrate Our Men

by Suzanne Venker
Posted on April 26 2011

Are liberal women responsible for neutering men, as Rep. Allen West told a group of Tea Partiers in Boca Raton, FL last week? In a word, yes.

Here’s the statement West made to a group of conservative women that has people on the left riled up:

We need you to come in and lock shields, and strengthen up the men who are going to the fight for you. To let these other women know on the other side — these planned Parenthood women, the Code Pink women, and all of these women that have been neutering American men and bringing us to the point of this incredible weakness — to let them know that we are not going to have our men become subservient. That’s what we need you to do. Because if you don’t, then the debt will continue to grow…deficits will continue to grow.

I’m sure West’s use of the word “subservient” was like nails on a chalkboard to the left. After all, servitude is the very thing they pride themselves on having saved women from. The notion that men are in any way subservient is laughable to this group — they think men in America have it made.

Yet West is correct: American men have been demoted. They were once respected providers and protectors; today, they’re considered unnecessary, irrelevant, and downright expendable. Men do need lifting up, and conservative women are precisely the ones to do it.

The best example to date of America’s new attitude toward men is a statement actress Jennifer Aniston made in August of last year:

Women are realizing more and more that you don’t have to settle, they don’t have to fiddle with a man to have a child.

Isn’t that just Hollywood talking trash, you ask. Don’t these women live on another planet? Perhaps. But no Hollywood actress would have dared to think, much less say, such a thing forty years ago – whether she was a Republican or a Democrat. One could only feel comfortable making such a statement in a society that’s gone off the deep end.

Here’s another example.

In a More magazine interview, actress Mary-Louise Parker – who has never married but has two children – was asked what it’s like to date as a single mom. She responded that a man once asked if her being a mom meant the two of them would not be able to go out alone together very much. To which Parker replied,

Yes, that’s exactly what it means. It means you come fourth, ’cause it’s my kids, my job, and my family.

Okay, okay. Perhaps I should leave the women of Hollywood out of this. How ’bout these examples then?

1) Journalist Natalie Angier begins an article in the New York Times by writing this:

Women may not find this surprising, but one of the most persistent and frustrating problems in evolutionary biology is the male. Specifically . . . why doesn’t he just go away?

2) In a CNN interview with Maureen Dowd about her 2005 book Are Men Necessary? Dowd says,

Now that women don’t need men to reproduce and refinance, the question is, will we keep you around? And the answer is, ‘You know, we need you in the way we need ice cream—you’ll be more ornamental.

3) Several years ago Katie Couric interviewed a young bride on the Today show who had been jilted at the altar. Jokingly, Couric asked the young woman if she’d “considered castration as an option.”

4) Lisa Belkin, an author and blogger for the New York Times, wrote,

We are standing at a moment in time when the role of gender is shifting seismically. At this moment an argument can be made for two separate narrative threads—the first is the retreat of men as this becomes a woman’s world.

5) In an article in The Atlantic titled “Are Fathers Necessary?” author Pamela Paul wrote,

“The bad news for Dad is that despite common perception, there’s nothing objectively essential about his contribution.”

What do all these women have in common? They are card-carrying members of the feminist elite. It’s a bona fide cult, and liberalism is their God.

Indeed, if Allen West made any mistake in his analysis, it was his use of the term liberal. A better term is feminist. Modern liberal women are nothing more and nothing less than feminists — and feminists are the most visible group of women of America. Simply put, they drive the bus.

But the feminist worldview is in direct opposition to the conservative worldview. That’s what Allen West meant, I believe, when he said conservative women must stop liberal women in their tracks.

I couldn’t agree more.

The problem is that too many Americans, women in particular, are afraid to take a stand against feminism. They think being opposed to feminism means being against women’s rights or being throwbacks to a bygone era when women were at home doing nothing else with their lives but caring for children — which, besides being untrue, is not a bad thing anyway. But that is precisely how liberal women want people to think of feminism: as American women’s saviors.

But feminism did not save the women of America. If anything, it ruined them.

That’s because feminism is about rejecting the timeless institutions that makes most people happy and any good society flourish: marriage and motherhood.

Liberal women don’t explain it this way, of course. They insist they’re not against the traditional family but merely want women to have choices. Hogwash. Not only do feminists subtly and overtly undermine traditional gender roles, they take credit for something they didn’t do. American women’s choices (a.k.a. “progress”) were expanded not from the bra-burning demonstrations that sought to reform society but from a natural evolution that was aided by technology – technology that was invented by men, I might add. American women should be thanking men, not feminists, for the lives they have today.

Allen West’s argument that liberal women have neutered men was courageous and spot on. It just wasn’t self-explanatory. West would have done well to quote antifeminist warrior Carolyn Graglia when making his argument.

The traditional family will remain in peril until we derail the feminist engine of reform by killing the sexual revolution, by replacing no-fault divorce laws with laws that protect homemakers and families, by ending preferential treatment of women in education and workplace, and by reforming all laws that discriminate against one-income families through requiring them to subsidize child care for two-income families.

But these things will not happen until a change occurs in those men who have rejected the value of a woman’s traditional role and of a man’s contributions that make this role viable. Without those contributions, what do men think will define their manhood? If women’s traditional role is expendable, then, as increases in the number of well-educated, never-married mothers indicate, so also are men expendable for all purposes other than sperm donor. The result is a society increasingly like Sweden’s, which has the lowest marriage rate and one of the highest illegitimacy rates and employment rates of working-age women in the western world.

I believe this was Allen West’s point. And it’s an excellent one.

Suzanne Venker is co-author of the new book The Flipside of Feminism: What Conservative Women Know – and Men Can’t Say. Her website is www.suzannevenker.com.

Another hat tip to K.

And ofcourse, we cannot forget my entertaining MP3 on precisely this topic. Gee, I wonder if someone is listening to my MP3's ?

Women Less Likely To Multitask Than Men: Oops..

For those of you who have seen Monty Python's "Holy Grail", I believe it was (I am going on memory here), where a knight in armour fights another and has his arm severed, belligerently, he continues to attack and looses his other arm, he continues to attack and is left as a stump with both arms and legs, gone. But does he stop, No, he proceeds to gnaw away at the attackers knee, still threatening and still belligerent..

That's where feminism is today. They have been completely laid naked, appendages missing and they still lie, cheat and steal (taxpayers money under false pretences)..

Now we come to the lies they so consistently vomit as truth and here is another one..

It must be humiliating to be a feminist female, how much more can they take. I have witnessed the many wallow in this lie as a face saver when they wanted to demonstrate how "great" their sex was and use this as a final retort, a last desperate lunge at seeking superiority..

"But women can multi-task, you men can't"..

Wrong again. That's gotta sting..

From womenagainstmen.com

Women Less Likely To Multitask Than Men

Over the years we have been hearing the myth than women are supposedly better at multitasking than men.
The source of this myth has sometimes been explained on the simple basis that women acquire better multitasking abilities through doing more housework.
A new study from the Tinbergen Institute of The Netherlands has come up with some interesting findings.
In its Discussion Paper, the Tinbergen Institute states:

…our results do not support the stereotype that women are better at multitasking. Women suffer as much as men when forced to multitask and are actually less inclined to multitask when being free to choose.

As mentioned in a previous article on the multitasking myth I could not find any conclusive research to support that one gender is better at multitasking than the other. This new study reflects this view:

The media regularly mentions research which supposedly shows that women are better at multitasking but to the best of our knowledge, none of this has been published in peer-reviewed journals.

The Discussion Paper concludes with:

We do not find any evidence for gender differences in the ability to multitask. Besides, the share of switchers is exactly the same for men and women and the average number of switches is higher for men. Thus, the results contradict the claims of Fisher (1999): if men think so much more linearly than women, why don’t they insist more on a sequential schedule? Moreover, why is it that women do not adapt better to multitasking than men when forced to alternate? In sum, the view that women are better at multitasking is not supported by our findings.

You can read the complete Tinbergen Institute Discussion Paper here.

Campus False Rape Claims..

How many times have you seen the following figures regarding "sexual assaults or rape" on campuses. It originally started at the feminist imaginary figure of "1 in 4" and then as those numbers were questioned as being obviously untrue, it elevated to "1 in 6" which ofcourse not only exposes the original feminist lie but questions their credibility. Why is that number or ratio rising ?

Bear in mind also that Universities have on their campus those blatantly sexist organisations like "sexual assault" units or "women's centres", being more training camps for the feminist hate doctrine than actually offering any help or assistance. Those sites suck in huge amounts of taxpayers dollars thanks to notorious legislation like VAWA and others determined to mainline funds into the feminist hegemony..

But lies they tell and lies is what feminism lives on..

From the False Rape Society site..

Then there's this article, which quotes college administrators who brag about how their internal (higher) numbers of sexual assault are more reflective of reality than the Clery Act numbers. According to the school's internal numbers, 112 women reported being sexually assaulted in 2009, out of a campus of more than 20,000 women. Hmm. Let's see. Over four years that works out to 448 reports, which is about 2.2 percent of all college women reporting they were sexually assaulted during college. Correct me if I'm wrong, but that's still a far cry from 25%, isn't it? 

As you can read, 2.2% is not "1 in 4" or "1 in 6", but feminists always let a good lie stand in the way of truth. I would even question that reported number as even touching a female these days, even accidentally, can be regarded as sexual assault. So those numbers could well be skewed as well..

Question are asked with no response from the liars who continually quote them..

"How did they find it if it was unreported? Much of life is ugly but not criminal. If it's a crime report it. If it's not a crime, what was it? What are these statistics that get thrown at us constantly? I've been seeing them since 1988 when 'I Never Called It Rape: The Ms. Report on Recognizing, Fighting, and Surviving Date and Acquaintance Rape' was published. Over the years, college women have learned to call it rape, but why haven't they learned to report it, if it is rape or some other crime? You can chose to think of something bad that happened as a crime but are you willing to hold your opinion up to the judgment of officials who have the obligation to treat the accused man fairly? Almost all of those incidents go unreported. Exactly why?"

 False Rape Society Link..

The argument is ofcourse as follows. If a woman has been educated to recognise sexual assault or rape then why does she not know how to report it. Surely as there are so many services offered to women on campus, why has that figure not increased. Coverage and studies have already demonstrated that those young female co-eds get pissed out of their minds and wake up the next morning wondering what happened. This in the past was usually termed consensual sex but now they are working on another term (I think they already have) to enhance the artificial numbers..
.
One has to suggest that "it's because there is no rampant outbreak on campuses and that it's only another attempt by feminists to increase their funding, based on lies they generate"..

Those Blogger Awards..

To be honest, I have no idea who nominated this site for these awards. But, as anyone would know, an award would expose this blog to a lot more on the net and that is the idea of starting this blog to begin with.

So, I have a certain resistance to grovelling and begging for your vote so I will resist but bear in mind that an award here would not go astray, heh!..

Apparently, the routine is that you will have to spend some time, probably more time than you would search on Google, to login in and post your preference. But hey, you have better things to do, right..

But, just incase you don't..




I just had a look at this and this may be the best link..



Here is a better link for this second option

Apparently, only a couple of hundred votes may do it..

Feminised Australian Government Not Interested..

Seeing as I have missed the great work that the Men's Rights Agency(MRA) has wrought for many years. Here is an article that I would have definately written if I have not already (refer previous posts)..

Great site and great explanation on what Men in Australia face on a daily basis. Do not forget that we have a feminised Labor (US:liberal/Socialist) government determined to descimate all men as their self confessed feminist Leaders have already demonstrated. For example, the following members of that feminist castrati have already confessed to being "feminist" -

Leader Julia Gillard, Prime Minister (feminist),
Kevin Rudd (feminist mangina),
Penny Wong (Lesbian feminist),
Nicola Roxon (feminist),
Tanya Plibersek (feminist),
Kate Ellis (feminist),
Jacinta Collins (feminist).

LINK..

This is the government at this point in time. Don't believe me than check them out for yourself. I do not make this stuff up..

Those people are in the position of power, right now and you may wonder why there is no Men's Health Department (as promised by Roxon in 2009) or anything done where men anything is concerned. Well, there is your explanation and yet men vote for that party, WHY ?

Really? Women bash men?

National Times, 08 March 2011

Talk about spoiling the party! Just as the 100th International Women’s Day dawns over a perfumed world Aussie professor Kim Halford has released a study on female violence.
Women wallop men just as much as men wallop women, says the prof who claims domestic violence can often be blamed on the missus getting in a pre-emptive whack first. That’s what he calls the “usual pattern”. She hits him, he hits her, now you’ve got a punch-up.
Halford  – he’s a Queensland clinical psychologist – doesn’t paint a very rosy picture of marriage. Almost a quarter of the 379 couples (22 per cent) told him there had been “at least one act of low-level violence in the year leading up to and including the wedding.” (Makes you wonder why gays want to join in the nuptial free-for-all and indeed angry word-regurgitator Helen Razer sneers at the concept in a current rant).That “low-level violence”, by the way, means slapping or shoving, rather than punching.
Interesting finding, this. In the comments to my recent blog “Do men get a rough deal?” there were all sorts of wild claims (well, they sounded wild) about men being bashed by women. I mean, men are usually bigger and stronger than women, aren’t they?
Well yes. Doc Halford says man-whacking is not a clever move by the ladies because “it is usually the women who end up getting injured and feeling psychologically intimidated”. But not always. Males everywhere recoiled at the report last month about Xian Peng, the 48-year-old bloke in Sydney whose former girlfriend drugged him, tied him up then stabbed him and cut off his penis. Peng bled to death and now Jian Chen has been charged by police. Ouch.
Let’s have a look at some stats. Los Angeles police data records a doubling of female violence against men from 1987 to 1995: from 340 women arrested for violence against men (7 per cent of 1987 total) to 1262 (14.3 per cent of 1995 total). Quote: “While the number of men arrested for domestic violence increased by 1.6 between 1987 and 1995, the number of women arrested for the same reason increased nearly fourfold (by 3.7) in the same time period.”
Of course that is in the US of A where the wives have long ruled the roost. An Oregon-based site notes: “Very little is known about the actual number of men who are in a domestic relationship in which they are abused or treated violently by women.  In 100 domestic violence situations approximately 40 cases involve violence by women against men.  An estimated 400,000 women per year are abused or treated violently in the United States by their spouse or intimate partner.  This means that roughly 300,000 to 400,000 men are treated violently by their wife or girl friend.”
In good old laid-back Oz another study in 1996-97 showed 5.7 per cent of men quizzed had been scratched or kicked or slapped or hit by their ever-loving brides – whereas 3.1 per cent of women said the same. “This remains an unacceptably high rate of domestic violence,” said the researchers. They also reported: “An important but unanticipated finding was that violence runs in couples. 54% of respondents who reported that they had been assaulted, also admitted that they had assaulted their partners.”
Some years back a bloke named Ray O'Sullivan used to wrestle on air with Melbourne radio 3AW's Paul Barber about domestic violence stats, trying to convince a disbelieving Barber that women were just as culpable. O'Sullivan, now in Berlin, fired in this email after my earlier blog:
"Here are a few stats that never seem to get aired: 75% of suicides, men, and no wonder, when you look at the following stats.  80% of homeless, men. 90% of work place deaths, men.  99.9999% or war dead and injured, men. 90% of prisoners, men. More health related deaths at an earlier age, men.  Lowest gender specific government health spending, men. Most unemployed, men. lowest tertiary intakes, men.  Most discriminated in family courts, men.
"Feminism was constructed, paid for and supported by multi-national corporations who believe in the idea that work gives women freedom and this is what they have been selling women for years, and you don't have to be Einstein to work out the advantages to big business, because more money earned, means more money spent, and governments getting more taxes. Yes gentlemen, we've fallen for the propaganda/spin again.  But who cares, we are only male chauvinist pigs."
OK, so maybe the clergyman needs to add an extra line in that part of the wedding ceremony: "In sickness and in health... and in recovery from injury incurred by your spouse... do you take this assailant to be your lawfully wedded wife?"

A Men’s Convention..

This I like and this I totally endorse. This is exactly what we should be promoting and getting behind. Make that special effort to support and get involved..

Just a special mention which I have totally forgotten about is the "Men's Rights Agency" in Aus. I am kicking myself..

Men's Rights Agency..

This site has been operating for some time and produced some great advances for Men in Aus, my apologies Sue..

Anyway..

This is more important..

A Men’s Convention? Seriously?

by W.F. Price on April 26, 2011

Some time ago, we discussed the idea of a men’s convention here on The Spearhead, and a lot of men really liked the idea. It sparked a lot of interest, some speculation and a few offers of assistance. Eventually, however, the idea sputtered out, largely because most of us simply don’t have the time to organize something like that. Of course, pulling a convention off is a big undertaking. Event management is far beyond the scope of my abilities, and probably most others’ as well. It takes someone with energy, zeal and dedication, and those people are not exactly a dime a dozen in this workaday world where most of us come home just plain tired five days out of the week.

But what if I told you there’s already someone doing this? Some time ago, a man got in touch with me about his business and his idea. He told me about his work and his dream. Not only is he running a men’s convention; he’s running one that isn’t preaching about how we need to be better slaves to women and big brother government. Even better, it was founded in large part out of respect for a good friend who was dealt a very unfortunate hand. In fact, it’s about fellowship, moving forward in life, and respect for ourselves and the men around us. And, almost unbelievably, it’s already an international event.
To me, it sounded almost too good to be true. Why hadn’t I heard of it before? I wondered…
So I had a few conversations with the man behind the convention, and listened to what he had to say. His name is Anthony Johnson, and it turns out he’s young, he’s idealistic, and he shares a lot of our concerns. I found myself liking this young man quite a bit.
Although Anthony has been focusing on the challenges facing younger men in the Game/dating arena for some time, he’s indicated that he wants to expand into other men’s issues as well — a move I think shows a lot of maturity and foresight on his part. When we grow up we find that there’s more to life than simply getting laid, after all, and he’s committed to moving beyond the simple application of Game to life. This is a step I wholeheartedly support, because while Game has a lot of utility, it is simply a first (however important) step toward creating a new, better place for men in today’s society. I also think some of our readers and authors could offer him some assistance in that regard, and broaden the appeal of the event.
After a few talks, I told him to let me know when his events are coming up. I knew readers would be interested, but I didn’t want to jump the gun. Additionally, I like to catch the feminists flat-footed. It takes time for their squawking to translate into action, and I know they read this site on a daily basis. No point in giving them plenty of prep time to try to sabotage a perfectly decent men’s event.
So, here on The Spearhead, I’d like to officially introduce and endorse The 21 Convention, a convocation of 21st century men dedicated to moving forward and taking on challenges.

In 2011, Anthony is holding two conventions. The first, a UK event, will be held in London on June 2. The next will be held in Orlando on July 21.
The respective links follow:

The 21 Convention 2011 of London England
The 21 Convention 2011 of Orlando Florida

Anthony has also been kind enough to offer a discount code for Spearhead readers, which will be offered through the newsletter (sign up through the MGTOW logo and newsletter link on the top left sidebar and the introductory email will provide the code).

Finally, I should add that Anthony let me know that the price will go up incrementally at the end of each month prior to the event due to increased late booking costs, so those who are sure they are interested in attending ought to get in as soon as possible.

Personally, I hope to make it to one of the events. London would be my preference (I’ve wanted to go to Europe again for some time), but I’ll have to act soon and am not sure I can make that one. I’d love to meet some readers, and I think this would be a great venue for that. It would be great to see a contingent from The Spearhead represented at The 21 Convention, and I know Anthony would welcome us with open arms. I’m quite optimistic about this convention, and very pleased to see a young man devoting so much of his time and talent to making it happen. I’m going to keep readers updated on the events’ status, and would be happy to have reports from attendees.

Women's Special Privilege Enablers..

One has to consider the fact that it is not only feminists and their loathing, hate and condemnation of Men and Boys to be the only hurdle the Men's Movement has to endure and change..

One of the main culprits are the "White Knight" and "feminist Men" who are quite happy condemning their own in order to make an ill conceived change which in their opinion is for the betterment of our sex. Those delusional enthusiasts blatantly side with women at every turn without given even the slightest thought about what it is they are doing. Unfortunately, the inbuilt and automatic "protect the women" DNA switch, trips, every time they deem or perceive any negative affect on their worshipping of the other sex (women by the way have no such mechanism, their attitude is sole survival and no one abrogates that law, period).

So we have women consistently and without apology, furthering their list of special privileges and we have "some" Men ensuring that those privileges remain intact regardless of the cost it bestows on himself or his own sex..

The Men's Movement has two targets to achieve in order for Men and Boys to get back their legislated and God given rights. But it will mean that we will have to take those rights back at the expense of women (cannot have an omelette without breaking the egg), and that is going to take some doing as neither those two protectors of privileges are willing to give an inch (25mm)..

So, it would appear that we have a lot of convincing to do and so little time to do it (the Internet will not always be free or unedited especially if feminists achieve their aim)..

We need help to spread our message, we need help to convince those "white knights" and "feminised wimps men", the error of their ways but I would imagine that that may be a little too late, so we must teach our sons and daughters to at least look at equality the way it was meant to be, not just focussed on one sex at the detriment of the other..

Here is a very good example of the Main Stream Media (MSM) promoting the anti-male attitude and women gloating over their special privileges..

NEWSWEEK: once an actual magazine of interest, now the megaphone of the feminist male hate program..

Dead Suit Walking

By Men's Activism News | Sat, Apr 23 2011, 04:56 PM

Newsweek gleefully asks "Can Manhood Survive the Recession?" Fewer publications enjoy watching and reporting on the decline in the status and fortunes of men more than Newsweek/Time, do they? I'll be so glad when they finally go out of business. Excerpt:
'Two coasts. Two men who can’t find jobs. And one defining moment for the men in the gray flannel suits who used to run this country. Or at least manage it.
Capitalism has always been cruel to its castoffs, but those blessed with a college degree and blue-chip résumé have traditionally escaped the worst of it. In recessions past, they’ve kept their jobs or found new ones as easily as they might hail a cab or board the 5:15 to White Plains. But not this time.
The suits are “doing worse than they have at any time since the Great Depression,” says Heidi Shierholz, a labor economist at the Economic Policy Institute. And while economists don’t have fine-grain data on the number of these men who are jobless—many, being men, would rather not admit to it—by all indications this hitherto privileged demo isn’t just on its knees, it’s flat on its face. Maybe permanently. Once college-educated workers hit 45, notes a post on the professional-finance blog Calculated Risk, “if they lose their job, they are toast.”'

For Your Health: Is Sugar Toxic ?

Bugger, now I will have to stop using this in my coffee. Doesn't life suck sometimes..

Those organizations that now advise us to cut down on our sugar consumption — the Department of Agriculture, for instance, in its recent Dietary Guidelines for Americans, or the American Heart Association in guidelines released in September 2009 (of which Lustig was a co-author) — do so for this reason. Refined sugar and H.F.C.S. don’t come with any protein, vitamins, minerals, antioxidants or fiber, and so they either displace other more nutritious elements of our diet or are eaten over and above what we need to sustain our weight, and this is why we get fatter.

Link..

Next thing you know, it will be this stuff.. as that contains copious amount of that stuff..

So what next, don't even think of banning this brew as wars were fought over it. Well nearly, maybe just this whine session..

 Just in case you are wondering what affect it will have on you, well, take a look..

OH Look!, they are actually doing something about Men's Something..

I really love reading this type of drivel that feminists and their feminised wimps continually promote and endlessly introduce in their man control legislation..

Notice, there is NEVER anything wrong with women as far as feminists are concerned. The SUN virtually rises at their beckoning. They are the saviours of the world apparently, they do NO wrong. They are blameless and every action they take is for the betterment of humankind..

Right..

I am so sick to death of hearing or reading that drivel that it makes me want to vomit. Blood..

In the past, Men were held accountable for the actions of women and jailed, humiliated and castigated by all and sundry. Men went to jail because some selfish, self serving bitch f*cked the next door neighbour and you wonder what the f*ck we are up against. Those privileged princesses have that ingrained in their DNA, they do no wrong and if they did, someone else should pay and guess who ?

Now I could go thru the Google search routine but I neither have the time or inclination as I have done that so often that it is just so boring as I already know the outcome. Google is good for this..

Normally, I would be thrilled to read this but as you can see, this has happened before and as usual, if it gets too hard and it contradicts the feminist male-hating policy they just drop it and no one protests and no one basically give a f*ck whether it works or not..

So who cares, right?

This is just another yawn but let's see where this goes. It's not like Men are half the population or anything, EH?

Hat tip to Zetamale..

Global On Scandinavian Men's Boards

from antimisandry.com by zetamale

Quote:

---

Norway has done it, and now Iceland and Denmark are doing it: appointing special men’s panels with the aim of getting men onto the gender equality scene. But what issues should the Nordic men be focussing on?

By Ulrikke Moustgaard

When International Women’s Day was celebrated this year, on 8 March, the Danish Minister for Gender Equality Lykke Friis had some news up her sleeve. On the day before, she announced that she had appointed a men’s panel – the reason being that the minister wished to have both genders involved in the Danish debate on gender equality.

"Today, only women discuss women with women", as Lykke Friis put it in the newspaper Politiken.

Consisting only of men, the new men’s panel is the second one in Danish history. Its objective is to suggest new perspectives within the field of gender equality. Thus Denmark also joins a Nordic trend: men’s panels have returned in the 2000s, after their first appearance in the 1990s.

The Norwegian government appointed its second men’s panel four years ago. Iceland has recently set up a new men’s committee – also for the second time. Finland, for its part, has had a permanent men’s committee, within TANE, the Finnish Council for Gender Equality, for 23 years. Sweden has not had a specific men's panel, but already in the eighties Lars Jalmert wrote the first Nordic book about masculinity, which was also published as a Swedish Government Official Report.

In other words, men are a high priority on the political gender equality agenda in the Nordic countries. But what are the gender equality issues that concern Nordic men? And what new perspectives are needed? There are no simple answers to this question.

Farewell to male ideals
A look at the work of the Norwegian Men's Panel shows that there are more than enough issues to tackle. In 2008, the Panel presented 50 new gender equality suggestions, which ranged from a more equal division of parental leave and developments in women’s military service to improvements in men’s health.

Nevertheless, there was a strong common denominator. The 32 men in the Panel greatly emphasized the fact that the male ideals in Norwegian society must change, if gender equality is to improve for both men and women. It must be legitimate for men to be caring, vulnerable and concerned with close relationships. This is so, since gender stereotypes take their toll; for example, in the form of violence against women; poor health for men as they do not dare seek help; or men not being allowed to participate in the care of their children.

"Many men are ascribed a role that they don't feel comfortable in. But breaking free from it would mean being effeminate. I’ve myself been called effeminate by my friends since I became chair of the Men's Panel", Arild Stokkan-Grande told the newspaper Aftenposten when the work of the Panel had been completed.

---

rest of the article

There are a lot of other parts, but nothing sticks out as much as the section on "Male Ideals" which don't seem to be male ideals at all.

So are these boards going to help or hurt men's rights in the long run? I don't think its possible (at this point in time) to have a feminist-less board for men in a government and dislike a lot of the people they are putting in, but I think creating boards for men is a step in the right direction, and they have done some good things (my whole thoughts here

What does Socialism and Climate Change have in Common ? WOMEN..

One does have to wonder what level of wimp one has to be, to be a college professor or even a member on any teaching facility.

Here's another example of the total wimp-hood we will have to get use to as they slobber over their cups of chai and wring their bassilicum oil soaked security blankets while they agonise about how unfair the world is towards women. How their little minds are incapable of..

“Here is yet another study finding that women underestimate their scientific knowledge – a troubling pattern that inhibits many young women from pursuing scientific careers,” McCright said.

It would appear to be the case where standard accepted behaviour in the faux thinking circle is that you must always consider the thick and self interested, first, then find the appropriate apology akin to that embarrassing shallow and purile video "Good Woman", dumb down and grovel..

“Women and men think about climate change differently,” he said. “And when scientists or policy makers are communicating about climate change with the general public, they should consider this rather than treating the public as one big monolithic audience.”

Thank goodness for that, but wait, didn't feminists always claim that we were the same, yoono!, product of our environment and not sex or something as erroneously stupid as that..
So in order to explain it to those little socialist voter and climate deviants they now have to tailor the science to their way of thinking. Arrrgggghhhhh....

Study: Women more likely than men to accept global warming

EAST LANSING, Mich. — Women tend to believe the scientific consensus on global warming more than men, according to a study by a Michigan State University researcher.
The findings, published in the September issue of the journal Population and Environment, challenge common perceptions that men are more scientifically literate, said sociologist Aaron M. McCright.
“Men still claim they have a better understanding of global warming than women, even though women’s beliefs align much more closely with the scientific consensus,” said McCright, an associate professor with appointments in MSU’s Department of Sociology, Lyman Briggs College and Environmental Science and Policy Program.
The study is one of the first to focus in-depth on how the genders think about climate change. The findings also reinforce past research that suggests women lack confidence in their science comprehension.
“Here is yet another study finding that women underestimate their scientific knowledge – a troubling pattern that inhibits many young women from pursuing scientific careers,” McCright said.
Understanding how the genders think about the environment is important on several fronts, said McCright, who calls climate change “the most expansive environmental problem facing humanity.”
“Does this mean women are more likely to buy energy-efficient appliances and hybrid vehicles than men?” he said. “Do they vote for different political candidates? Do they talk to their children differently about global warming?”
McCright analyzed eight years of data from Gallup’s annual environment poll that asked fairly basic questions about climate change knowledge and concern. He said the gender divide on concern about climate change was not explained by the roles that men and women perform such as whether they were homemakers, parents or employed full time.
Instead, he said the gender divide likely is explained by “gender socialization.” According to this theory, boys in the United States learn that masculinity emphasizes detachment, control and mastery. A feminine identity, on the other hand, stresses attachment, empathy and care – traits that may make it easier to feel concern about the potential dire consequences of global warming, McCright said.
“Women and men think about climate change differently,” he said. “And when scientists or policymakers are communicating about climate change with the general public, they should consider this rather than treating the public as one big monolithic audience.”
###
Michigan State University has been advancing knowledge and transforming lives through innovative teaching, research and outreach for more than 150 years. MSU is known internationally as a major public university with global reach and extraordinary impact. Its 17 degree-granting colleges attract scholars worldwide who are interested in combining education with practical problem solving.

 A response and an appropriate one..

This sociology professor obviously believes the “scientific consensus,” and anyone who agrees with him is “more scientifically literate.” I think it’s interesting that the alarmist party line is bought by sociologists, psychologists, liberal arts graduates, and some climatologists. On the other hand, the skeptics tend to be physicists, engineers, chemists, statisticians, computer programmers, other climatologists, and farmers.

Fred Explains: The Aim of the "Good Men Project"..

Here is probably the best explanation that I have come across to explain precisely what feminists and their mangina site "The Good Men Project" are up to..

Gelding, By Lily

The sorrowful rise of neuter man. by Fred Reed


Ever wonder why masculine men are dying out--the old strong, silent type who rolled cheroots one-handed while roping dogies with the other--and being replaced by delicate androgynous Ken-dolls who look like Tinkerbell with a flat chest? Or why women look increasingly . . . not masculine so much as sexless?
Tell you what I think.
(I'll bet that surprises you.)
Used to be, men and women were different, and they knew it. They weren't in competition. So a guy could be Marlboro Man, or sort of anyhow, and grunt, and stand tall in the saddle, and say, "Hoo-ahhhh!" and ride Harleys. And if anybody messed with his kids or women, he'd take a tire iron to'em, or a thirty-thirty, depending--or at least imagine that he might. He had sense enough, anyway, to know that it was a good idea.
Back then, a woman could like a big hairy-chested hunk, because she wasn't competing with him. In fact, the hairier and chesteder he was, the better, because she was vying with her girlfriends to see who could get the manlier man. And a lot of women liked the idea of 240 pounds of muscle in a Stetson that meant to take care of them.
She meanwhile could afford to be cute, feminine, and curved, and dress like a woman, and maybe wield a gorgeous smile that she used to play him like a banjo--which he probably knew, and figured that was OK too, because that's how things worked, and anyway guys are guys. She didn't have to out-hairy him. She wasn't trying to be a guy.
East was east, and west was west, and the twain would meet at the drop of a hat.

Then everything changed. Women decided they wanted to compete with men. OK. I can understand it. If I were a woman with an IQ of 160, I'd probably want to be a biochemist instead of child-herd and doily-polisher. The idea seemed reasonable to most women, and to most men. A kajillion gals poured into the workplace.
Thing was--and nobody had really thought this out--they didn't expect to compete on their merits as individuals, get as far as they got, and figure that was the hand God dealt them. They wanted to duke it out head-to-head, self-consciously and avowedly, as a class, with men. It wasn't Sally wrestling with the law boards. It was Us agin Them.
Which was a Whole Nuther Thing. No society or species had ever tried it.
Problems arose. Fact is, men are hard to compete with. Physically, they are taller, heavier, much stronger, more durable and more enduring. Except for nymphet gymnastics, there may be no sport in which women hold the record. Intellectually men have a large advantage mathematically and a slight one verbally at the high end, that becomes rapidly greater as one moves to the right of the mean; This is the Glass Ceiling. Men are more aggressive, exploratory, adventurous, and versatile. Sorry, but there it is.
Women moved up some, and some moved up a lot, but they didn't catch up numerically with men. It was because they couldn't, and that's a pretty good reason. And when you got down to it, women just didn't care enough. They had other things on their minds, like families and rugrats.
They didn't quite understand this. Nobody did. All women wanted, they said early on, was to be judged by the same standards as men. It was a bad idea. If I judge Cup Cake as a woman, I note that she is sleek, smart, funny, graceful, sweet as sorghum on a Moon Pie, and dances like a dream raised in Arkansas. I'm smitten.
If I judge her as I judge men, she's an emotionally unstable dwarf. How much respect am I supposed to have for a 5'3" guy who bench presses a twenty-ounce Pepsi?
Antagonism inevitably ensued. Men said that the ladies didn't want to be women, and couldn't be men. Why, they asked each other, did a first-rate woman want to be a second-rate man? The women said men were bigoted. Men said they were just observant. Women, who had always regarded men as commitment objects and pre-med objects, became enraged that men regarded them as sex objects. Men were puzzled. They didn't know what else to regard as sex objects.
I was confused myself. I remember a woman screaming at me, "Women don't want to be objects!" Trying to be conciliatory, I said, "OK, you can be subjects." That didn't suit her either.
They don't know what they want. And that's the problem.
They got angry and developed chips on their shoulder pads. War ensued, in which women raged and men didn't know what the hell was going on. When natural ability failed, women discovered, politics would serve. And so we got affirmative action, which means, "pretending."
Depending on the venue, the women needed very little or lots of pretending. The military was worst. It pretended either that women could climb obstacles, or that wars didn't involve obstacles. Soon soldiers discovered that most women couldn't throw a grenade beyond its bursting radius. This will make you unpopular on battlefields. Besides, a woman throwing a grenade looked like a sea lion waving its flipper. So the Army built a little wall for them to drop grenades over.
It was ridiculous. It is ridiculous. Affirmative action always is. Nobody is fooled. Still, it spread like peanut butter on a hot day. For those women who didn't like men anyway, it was sweet revenge. Except--it wasn't quite. The men knew, and the women knew they knew. On the other hand, the checks cashed.
Intuitively women knew they had to push for unisex. To compete with men, women had to act like men, who are competitive, and get men to behave like women, who aren't. They bought ugly sexless suits, did boring things with their hair, and practiced being disagreeable, often succeeding wildly. Meanwhile the media, fronting for them, went in for pretty male models who waxed their chests and weren't threatening. The compassionate man emerged like a grub from a log.
The women won. Marlboro Man, or anybody too clearly of one sex or the other, is out of style. Both the New-Age woman, and her docile man-surrogate, would be intimidated, and ol' Marlboro would have trouble knowing which was the girl. God it's boring.

Fred Reed's Column Page

Copyright 2000, Fred Reed www.FredOnEverything.com