Oh it's a whole lot more than "feminazis" who are pissed off about this. But something tells me it's exactly his kind of mentality that caused someone to tell you to take a hike at some point, thus leading to this angry, consuming obsession of yours.
Latest feminists to incite hatred and genocide against men
- Thread starter BeatMan
- Start date
Oh it's a whole lot more than "feminazis" who are pissed off about this. But something tells me it's exactly his kind of mentality that caused someone to tell you to take a hike at some point, thus leading to this angry, consuming obsession of yours.
double post
you don't know me stop making assumptions.
https://reason.com/blog/2016/10/12/ut-student-now-being-investigated-for-se
Remember the University of Tennessee student who received a zero on a quiz because he filled in a random name for his lab instructor? Well, he's now being investigated for sexual harassment.
Previously, his professor had merely maintained that his actions—writing the name "Sarah Jackson"—met the technical definition of sexual harassment under Title IX. The university is now apparently looking into the matter.
Here's a refresher. The student, Keaton Wahlbon, had to take a geology quiz featuring the following question: "What is your lab instructor's name? (if you don't remember, make something good up)."
Wahlbon followed the instructions: he didn't remember, so wrote down the first generic girl name that came to mind—Sarah Jackson.
Unbeknowst to Wahlbon, Sarah Jackson is a real person: a pornographic model. Of course, there are hundreds (thousands?) of other Sarah Jacksons in the world, and Wahlbon had no idea that his lab instructor would interpret his answer in such a specific and malicious manner.
His answer was marked "inappropriate" and he received a grade of zero on the quiz. Wahlbon appealed to his professor, Bill Deane, but Deane maintained that Wahlbon had committed sexual harassment.
Wahlbon contacted the head of department because, well, that's nonsense. He told me via email that no resolution has been reached yet.
But according to The Knoxville News Sentinel, the university is now investigating the matter as if a complaint had been filed—even though no one has taken such an action.
"This has better be a very, very, very short Title IX investigation," the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education's Peter Bonilla wrote on Twitter.
In a press release, FIRE said:
FIRE is watching UT's investigation closely and hopes that it will be promptly closed with no charges against the Wahlbon. We also caution UT faculty against setting such a low bar for what constitutes a Title IX violation (which, again, this clearly is not), given the ease with which professors can find themselves the targets of prolonged Title IX investigations for what they say or write, even when the claims against them are baseless.
I've reached out to the professor, who did not respond to a request for comment.
The only thing more ridiculous than giving Wahlbon a zero on his quiz would be finding him guilty of a Title IX investigation. Let's hope the university recognizes how absurd this situation is. And soon.
Remember the University of Tennessee student who received a zero on a quiz because he filled in a random name for his lab instructor? Well, he's now being investigated for sexual harassment.
Previously, his professor had merely maintained that his actions—writing the name "Sarah Jackson"—met the technical definition of sexual harassment under Title IX. The university is now apparently looking into the matter.
Here's a refresher. The student, Keaton Wahlbon, had to take a geology quiz featuring the following question: "What is your lab instructor's name? (if you don't remember, make something good up)."
Wahlbon followed the instructions: he didn't remember, so wrote down the first generic girl name that came to mind—Sarah Jackson.
Unbeknowst to Wahlbon, Sarah Jackson is a real person: a pornographic model. Of course, there are hundreds (thousands?) of other Sarah Jacksons in the world, and Wahlbon had no idea that his lab instructor would interpret his answer in such a specific and malicious manner.
His answer was marked "inappropriate" and he received a grade of zero on the quiz. Wahlbon appealed to his professor, Bill Deane, but Deane maintained that Wahlbon had committed sexual harassment.
Wahlbon contacted the head of department because, well, that's nonsense. He told me via email that no resolution has been reached yet.
But according to The Knoxville News Sentinel, the university is now investigating the matter as if a complaint had been filed—even though no one has taken such an action.
"This has better be a very, very, very short Title IX investigation," the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education's Peter Bonilla wrote on Twitter.
In a press release, FIRE said:
FIRE is watching UT's investigation closely and hopes that it will be promptly closed with no charges against the Wahlbon. We also caution UT faculty against setting such a low bar for what constitutes a Title IX violation (which, again, this clearly is not), given the ease with which professors can find themselves the targets of prolonged Title IX investigations for what they say or write, even when the claims against them are baseless.
I've reached out to the professor, who did not respond to a request for comment.
The only thing more ridiculous than giving Wahlbon a zero on his quiz would be finding him guilty of a Title IX investigation. Let's hope the university recognizes how absurd this situation is. And soon.
Human Rights Commissioner Gillian Triggs will allow the Australian Bureau of Statistics to discriminate against hiring men
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...n/news-story/77143fa1b5fa1967a29a86a83b9fb742
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...n/news-story/77143fa1b5fa1967a29a86a83b9fb742
The Rwandan Genocide started with similar hate and incitement speech. Duke University goes a stop further in creating re-education classes for men to be indoctrinate on how their masculinity is toxic.
here is the latest one mandatory male privilege classes in Victoria, Australia schools
http://imgur.com/2EQ8oZm
here is the latest one mandatory male privilege classes in Victoria, Australia schools
http://imgur.com/2EQ8oZm
Sierra College Feminist ‘Police’ Hand Out Tickets To Men Who Make Them Feel ‘Uncomfortable’
http://heatst.com/culture-wars/sier...to-men-for-harassing-behavior/?mod=sm_tw_post
http://heatst.com/culture-wars/sier...to-men-for-harassing-behavior/?mod=sm_tw_post
Male Feminist and anti-Gamergate Matt Hickey Charged with Multiple Counts of Rape
http://www.oneangrygamer.net/2016/10/matt-hickey-anti-gamergate-journalist-charged-with-rape/14088/
http://www.oneangrygamer.net/2016/10/matt-hickey-anti-gamergate-journalist-charged-with-rape/14088/
The new trend: parents who hope for girls, not boys
The toxic poison of feminism has caused a lot of damage to society, devaluing and degrading men. Is it any surprise, then, that brainwashed women and even some brainwashed men are hoping to only give birth to daughters, and not sons?
http://newsmachete.com/?news=1878
The toxic poison of feminism has caused a lot of damage to society, devaluing and degrading men. Is it any surprise, then, that brainwashed women and even some brainwashed men are hoping to only give birth to daughters, and not sons?
http://newsmachete.com/?news=1878
Ohio feminist mother admits to killing her 3 sons to prevent them from"abusing women" when they grow up
will this starts a new trend of feminist mothers killing thier sons? and feminists committing hate crimes against men?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ils-smothered-3-young-sons.html#ixzz4Ne2PrPxH
will this starts a new trend of feminist mothers killing thier sons? and feminists committing hate crimes against men?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ils-smothered-3-young-sons.html#ixzz4Ne2PrPxH
The United Nations has made the fictional character Wonder Woman an "honorary ambassador" for the "empowerment of women and girls." The United Nations must believe that women, by virtue of being women, are subservient and obedient and need liberating. Do you think this is going to be a campaign aimed at Muslim countries?
In any event, feminists are upset because they say Wonder Woman's costume is too revealing.
...like most superheroes, she is inseparable from her clothing.... And that clothing unavoidably indicates to everyone that part of the source of her power is her babeliciousness, as defined in a particularly retrograde way.
The reason Steve Trevor, her original love interest, falls for her is not just that she can defend herself and him, gallop into battle and choose not to kill her enemies. It’s because, let’s be honest, of her looks — when she takes off her glasses, stops being that dowdy Diana Prince in a buttoned-up shirt and blossoms into her barely clad self.
Which raises the question, even accepting that she is an exaggerated character in an exaggerated world: Is that really the message we want to send about female empowerment to our daughters in an era when there are a number of fully clothed, notably powerful female role models?
Feminists believe that women choosing to dress in ways that men find attractive is somehow degrading to women. There has always been more than a tinge of man-hating to feminism, and I think feminists grit their teeth when women make an effort to make themselves appealing to men.
Perhaps their influence was reflected in the costume for the new Wonder Woman, where skin is hidden with painted rubber ballast.
[originally published in AT]
http://newsmachete.com/?news=1885
In any event, feminists are upset because they say Wonder Woman's costume is too revealing.
...like most superheroes, she is inseparable from her clothing.... And that clothing unavoidably indicates to everyone that part of the source of her power is her babeliciousness, as defined in a particularly retrograde way.
The reason Steve Trevor, her original love interest, falls for her is not just that she can defend herself and him, gallop into battle and choose not to kill her enemies. It’s because, let’s be honest, of her looks — when she takes off her glasses, stops being that dowdy Diana Prince in a buttoned-up shirt and blossoms into her barely clad self.
Which raises the question, even accepting that she is an exaggerated character in an exaggerated world: Is that really the message we want to send about female empowerment to our daughters in an era when there are a number of fully clothed, notably powerful female role models?
Feminists believe that women choosing to dress in ways that men find attractive is somehow degrading to women. There has always been more than a tinge of man-hating to feminism, and I think feminists grit their teeth when women make an effort to make themselves appealing to men.
Perhaps their influence was reflected in the costume for the new Wonder Woman, where skin is hidden with painted rubber ballast.
[originally published in AT]
http://newsmachete.com/?news=1885
women comitting voilence against men is now perfectly acceptable
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/thin...od-for-business--but-assault-on-men-is-never/
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/thin...od-for-business--but-assault-on-men-is-never/
Not only has it always been acceptable but in some instances encouraged. And to make matters worse, guys are even seen as whiners and crybabies when we get mad about it. But we're still supposed to somehow believe this trite notion that women are still suppressed.
http://www.fathers-4-justice.org/20...trator-assaulted-husband-nightclub-attendant/
The face of the new Childline campaign from the NSPCC, Cheryl Cole, has a conviction for assaulting a black woman and has previously admitting being a domestic violence perpetrator.
The pop star was convicted of assaulting nightclub toilet attendant Sophie Amogbokpa at a nightclub in Guildford in a violent attack in 2003.
In her 2012 autobiography she admitted beating up then husband Ashley Cole, ‘I hit him in the face. I couldn’t help it. I was shaking him, kicking him, scratching his face’
Fathers4Justice today questioned whether it was appropriate Cole should be used to front such a campaign and pointed out the hypocrisy behind the move.
Said F4J founder, Matt O’Connor, “Fathers lose their children for far less than what Cole was convicted for, yet a domestic violence perpetrator is being celebrated by the NSPCC as a role model for their campaign.”
“It’s unthinkable that a man convicted for assault or who had admitted beating a woman would ever be the face of a campaign connected to children.”
“Yet again this demonstrates the shocking hypocrisy and discrimination at the rotten heart of children’s services in the UK.”
Sentencing Tweedy (as she was then) in 2003, Judge Richard Haworth criticised her for showing no remorse over the attack.
He said: “This was an unpleasant piece of drunken violence which caused Sophie Amogbokpa pain and suffering. Her eye was painful for three or four weeks, there was bruising for three months and for a while she had blurred vision.”
“You showed no remorse whatsoever.”
The face of the new Childline campaign from the NSPCC, Cheryl Cole, has a conviction for assaulting a black woman and has previously admitting being a domestic violence perpetrator.
The pop star was convicted of assaulting nightclub toilet attendant Sophie Amogbokpa at a nightclub in Guildford in a violent attack in 2003.
In her 2012 autobiography she admitted beating up then husband Ashley Cole, ‘I hit him in the face. I couldn’t help it. I was shaking him, kicking him, scratching his face’
Fathers4Justice today questioned whether it was appropriate Cole should be used to front such a campaign and pointed out the hypocrisy behind the move.
Said F4J founder, Matt O’Connor, “Fathers lose their children for far less than what Cole was convicted for, yet a domestic violence perpetrator is being celebrated by the NSPCC as a role model for their campaign.”
“It’s unthinkable that a man convicted for assault or who had admitted beating a woman would ever be the face of a campaign connected to children.”
“Yet again this demonstrates the shocking hypocrisy and discrimination at the rotten heart of children’s services in the UK.”
Sentencing Tweedy (as she was then) in 2003, Judge Richard Haworth criticised her for showing no remorse over the attack.
He said: “This was an unpleasant piece of drunken violence which caused Sophie Amogbokpa pain and suffering. Her eye was painful for three or four weeks, there was bruising for three months and for a while she had blurred vision.”
“You showed no remorse whatsoever.”
OMG!!!!!
Seriously???
What the fuck are they thinking???
Boys have ALWAYS been preferred, and for good reason!
It truly is the end of the fucking world!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :hammer:
Just when you thought Lena Dunham couldn’t get any more ridiculous, she suggests white straight men should go extinct, adding that it’s not about “the end of men” but rather just “the evolution of men into better men.” How nice of her.
Last night, she tweeted a video featuring her voice asking a man how he feels “about the extinction of white men”:
http://heatst.com/culture-wars/lena...ove-men-by-making-white-straight-men-extinct/
Last night, she tweeted a video featuring her voice asking a man how he feels “about the extinction of white men”:
http://heatst.com/culture-wars/lena...ove-men-by-making-white-straight-men-extinct/
acenipplelicker
Banned
a darn shame
Even as a black guy, I find these statements to be ridiculous and absolutely absurd, but seeing as how she's a fucking abhorrent beast herself I can't be too shocked.
Similar threads
