Article here. Excerpt:

'Earlier in the month of April, the National Latin@ Network (NLN) -- the national institute on gender-based violence in the Latin@ community and a project of Casa de Esperanza -- released the national Te Invito Campaign, an effort to engage Latino men and boys in the fight to eradicate violence against women. The campaign includes public service announcements that any organization can customize for local purposes as well as a toolkit that helps men and boys explore questions of gender-based violence. In light of Sexual Assault Awareness Month, these tools can be particularly helpful. Below, Juan Carlos Areán, National Director of the NLN, discusses traditional masculinity, traditional concepts of what men "can/should" and "cannot/should not" do. Are men taught to hurt others and themselves? And how can male socialization play a role in gender-based violence?'

Report here. Excerpt:

'Despite being warned by school officials not to, senior Patrick Farves used a visit by Miss America Nina Davuluri to Central York High School to ask her to the prom. Sure, it might have been awkward, but was it sexual harassment? Amanda Marcotte — at one time John Edwards’ blogmaster — says yes."

Amanda Marcotte: "I really wish people would stop acting like it’s cute when teenage boys sexually harass older women."
Vincent's Verstandsk: Still the question is unanswered. How is this Sexual Harassment? This is awkward, yes, harassment, no.

Amanda Marcotte: Pestering someone with unwanted sexual requests for the purpose of making them uncomfortable is harassment.'

Related: Miss America Asks School Not to Punish Boy Who Asked Her to Prom

Video here.

'(ABC15) JACKSON, Mich. - If a judge could throw the book at a woman, he managed to do so Wednesday.

Not physically, but certainly by his stinging words. The Michigan judge had a lot of words for 31-year-old Camia Gamet, the woman convicted of killing her boyfriend Marcel Hill in March. Gamet claimed it was self defense and showed no remorse in court.

A first-degree murder conviction by law meant she would get life behind bars. Still, while family members spoke, she would only roll her eyes and laugh, but Jackson County Circuit Court Judge John McBain would have none of it.
"You're gonna shut your mouth or I'm going to have some duct tape put on it," said McBain.

A jury convicted Gamet for stabbing and beating to death Hill. Her lawyer argued she acted in self defense, because she claimed she killed an unknown attacker in a dark room. The judge wasn't buying that and called it the worst cold blooded murder he's ever seen.

The prosecutor argued Gamet's actions were premeditated and deliberate. She stabbed Hill 11 times and had a history of violence against him.

"I hope you die in prison," McBain said.

Hill told police in March of 2013 she hit him in the head with a hammer.

Family members say justice was served and they hope a lesson was learned about how abuse can come in all forms no matter the gender.'

Article here. Excerpt:

'Like Mitt Romney and John McCain, Hillary Clinton will (probably) run for president in 2016 as a grandparent. This seemingly unremarkable fact has triggered a spasm of media self-analysis: is Clinton the victim of a sexist double standard?

It's a question that has been -- and will be -- asked often.

We keep asking, because we refuse to see the plain answer. Hillary Clinton is not the victim of a double standard. She is the beneficiary of a double standard.

Consider the grandmother question. If elected in 2016, Hillary Clinton will be the second oldest president in U.S. history, after Ronald Reagan. At age 69, will she be too old? That was a question people felt free to discuss when John McCain ran for president. reported on June 15, 2008:

"Listen to some Democrats, and you'll think the 71-year-old Arizona senator is a man lost in a perpetual fog. He is 'confused' and has 'lost his bearings' or is 'out of touch.'" The "lost his bearings" innuendo was used by candidate Barack Obama himself, in a May 2008 interview with Wolf Blitzer.
In other words: as between Hillary Clinton on the one hand, and John McCain or Bob Dole on the other, the same standard is a double standard.

The same method applies to the discussion of Hillary Clinton's marriage. The Clinton camp's view seems to be: When it's helpful to Hillary, her marriage is urgently relevant; when that marriage might be politically harmful, it's sexist and insulting to mention it.

When Hillary Clinton sought the Democratic nomination in 2008, she argued that her tenure as first lady ought to qualify as a bona fide job credential. She told National Public Radio in March of that year:

Article here. Excerpt:

'The “war on women” political slogan is in fact a war against common sense.

It is a statistical fraud when Barack Obama and other politicians say that women earn only 77 percent of what men earn — and that this is because of discrimination.

It would certainly be discrimination if women were doing the same work as men, for the same number of hours, with the same amount of training and experience, as well as other things being the same. But study after study, over the past several decades, has shown repeatedly that those things are not the same.
Constantly repeating the “77 percent” statistic does not make them the same. It simply takes advantage of many people’s ignorance — something that Barack Obama has been very good at doing on many other issues.
More than 90 percent of the people who are killed on the job are men. There is no point pretending that there are no differences between what women do and what men do in the workplace, or that these differences don’t affect income.

During my research on male-female differences for my book “Economic Facts and Fallacies,” I was amazed to learn that young male doctors earned much higher incomes than young female doctors. But it wasn’t so amazing after I discovered that young male doctors worked over 500 hours more per year than young female doctors.'

Article here. Excerpt:

'The spark was a column in The Cornell Daily Sun by student Julius Kairey, which we featured at College Insurrection. That column, titled The Truth About “Rape Culture” took issue with the statistics behind claims of an epidemic of sexual assault, and the related rush to strip the accused of due process rights:

I would be less concerned about the exaggerated statistics about “rape culture,” and thus less inclined to criticize it, if it were not causing concrete harm to students. But the belief that rape must be prevented by “any means necessary” has been used to justify the elimination of key protections for students accused of rape in campus judicial systems. Some want the claims of the alleged victims of rape to be accepted as true, and not scrutinized in a fair legal proceeding. Just two years ago, Cornell stripped those accused of sexual offenses of the right to retain an attorney in University proceedings and the right to cross-examine their accusers. A student accused of a sexual offense at Cornell is now not able to directly ask the person who is making a potentially life-ruining accusation a single question about the incident. This is an inexcusable erasure of the fundamental right to confront one’s accuser, a right that has existed for all of our country’s history. Such rights are not superfluous. They protect us against arbitrary action by those who hold the levers of power.

Article here. Excerpt:

'The event, which will bring together women from organisations across the country, takes place on June 9, which also marks 100 days to go until the historic vote.

It comes as Scottish ministers Angela Constance and Shona Robison become full Scottish Cabinet members, joining Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon and Culture Secretary Fiona Hyslop.

The event will look at issues such as gender equality, female representation on boards, the improvement of childcare and employment law, and issues of the economy and social justice.
“We are expanding child care to 600 hours from August this year for all three and four-year-olds and the most vulnerable two-year-olds. Scottish female employment rate is now the highest of any UK nation, and the inactivity rate is the lowest. The Scottish Government also wants to see women make up at least 40% of public and private boards in Scotland.

“However, there is still much work to do and I am clear that the Scottish Government must continue to lead by example.'

Report here. Excerpt:

'Ah yes. The eternal question. Subsequent readings of today’s "Deep Thoughts with Roseanne” haven’t really brought us any closer to an answer:

"Males must cease sex"

"Neuter boys at birth"

"Store sperm til employed"'

So … does any of that make sense? To anybody?

Yeah, we didn’t think so.'

I did some housekeeping tonight and had to take the site off-line for a couple hours. It had some trouble coming back to life but after a few tweaks, it was back. If anyone notices or thinks they notice something "misbehaving", don't hesitate to send me an email at and I'll look into it. But at the moment, it seems to be doing just fine. (Knock on wood...)

Oh yeah, and for those of you who mark it: Happy Easter! Thoughts go out in particular for parents of both sexes (but as MRAs know, the vast majority of such are dads) and their kids who have been shafted by the "family court" system into not having the opportunity to be with their kids this year. Keep the faith, guys.

Article here. I vigorously reject all accusations of shameless self-promotion. :). Seriously, one of IBT's editors asked me to write about this recent made-for-TV stunt from a "body objectification" POV, so I did. Excerpt:

'The MTV Movie Awards included an event that has had the web buzzing ever since it exploded onto our screens. Winner of the MTV Best Shirtless Performance award, Zach Efron had promised that if he won it, he would remove his shirt. As he began to do so, Rita Ora ran up behind him and tore his shirt wide open. The audience thought it was hilarious, and so, apparently, did Zach.
Despite the obviously-staged nature of this stunt, the reader may want to consider this: Had Rita been the one undressing and Zach the one to run up behind her and tear her shirt off, what would have been the popular reaction to it? Would there be so much glee, or would there be general condemnation from people who do - and do not - consider themselves feminists? Far lesser events have elicited protests outside a studio's headquarters.
We've not yet even touched on how men's bodies are objectified to the point of disposability in dangerous occupations such as construction, emergency services work, and military service, nor even how the recent uptick in anabolic steroid use among teenaged and pre-teen boys that signals an unhealthy early preoccupation with their physiques. Since the vast majority of ordinary workplace, EMS, and military injuries and fatalities are suffered by men, should not society's efforts to make males aware of their "non-object" status be considerably more pronounced?

Article here. Excerpt:

'As part of its support for National Parental Alienation Day, National Parents Organization is joining Jason Patric, founder of Stand Up for Gus, for a press conference at 11 a.m. on Friday, April 25 on the south lawn of the Los Angeles City Hall, 200 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, California.

Michelle Glogovac, Chair of National Parents Organization’s California Executive Committee, will be joined by other members of our California Executive Committee at this event, which is intended to increase awareness of the impact parental alienation has on children and parents.

According to Glogovac, “National Parents Organization of California is working hard at legal and legislative reform to ensure that shared parenting becomes the norm and not the exception. Jason has been present in Gus’ life for three years, parenting him and participating in the role of father, but that came to an abrupt halt when the mother filed for a restraining order and had a judge deny Jason’s parental rights to Gus, as well as Gus’ right to spend time with his father. This was a one-sided decision that not only Jason has to live with, but Gus is living with as well.”'

Link here. Is it even appropriate for the parliament to solicit public input through privately run online forums, by sponsored sites with their own agendas? Excerpt:

'Netmums is hosting an online forum for people to post their experiences of gender-based violence and opinions on how this subject is broached with their children.
Chair's comments

Dr Hywel Francis MP, Chair of the Committee said:

"We would like to thank Netmums for hosting us on this forum and hope that you will use this opportunity to inform our inquiry.

We are conducting an inquiry into violence against women and girls in the UK and are interested to hear from any individuals who may have experiences of any kind of gender-related violence, including non-physical forms, as well as parents’ experiences and opinions on how this subject is broached with their children."'

Article here. Excerpt:

'At the University of Bristol the stagnating number of female academics in multiple degree subjects has become an increasingly important and concerning issue. Over 65.4% of Bristol students, according to my March 2014 survey, perceived a noticeable imbalance of female to male lecturers. I agree. My research led me towards an obvious concern for Bristol students: gender inequality of academia in all subjects.

With The Independent reporting that 63.9% of female undergraduates are leaving universities with “good” degrees, a lack of visibility of female academics at the University of Bristol — especially in the more scientific faculties — is in stark contrast to the number of undergraduates in the same subjects. More and more articles are appearing asking “Where are the men?” seeking to discover why the gender gap of undergraduates is weighted in women’s favour, but few have even commented on the fact that women are still struggling for visibility as academics. Women are avoiding the academic world and important questions must be asked about whether this is evidence of institutional laziness on the part of universities.

Article here. Excerpt:

'Professor Janice Fiamengo had planned to speak on men’s issues and rape culture as part of a talk organized by the Canadian Association for Equality (CAFE). The lecture, called “What’s Equality Got To Do With It? Men’s Issues and Feminism’s Double Standards,” was intended to dispel the notion of rape culture, according to Fiamengo, as well as discuss issues such as suicide by young men and custody rights after divorce. But some student activists decided Fiamengo’s lecture was not appropriate, so they took it upon themselves to shut it down.

The entire display is chronicled in a 50-minute YouTube video that shows protesters booing, yelling and blowing a vuvuzela throughout Fiamengo’s attempted address. The lecture organizer tried to reason with protesters, but it didn’t work. Campus security tried to intervene, with little success. Finally, the event moved to another room, but shortly after, the fire alarm went off.

According to the student newspaper the Fulcrum, a group that calls itself the Revolutionary Student Movement (RSM) was behind the protest.

We feel that these ideas have no place on our campus and refuse to legitimize them by allowing them space to organize,” a representative for the RSM wrote in an email to the paper. “As was demonstrated, campus security will not protect our community from events that are harmful to men, women, and trans people in the community, so we decided to stand up for what we feel is right.”

Hold on — ideas have no place on campus? Surely, they can’t be serious.'

Article here. Excerpt:

'The most striking thing about William D. Cohan's revisionist, guilt-implying new book on the Duke lacrosse rape fraud is what's not in it.

The best-selling, highly successful author's 621-page The Price of Silence: The Duke Lacrosse Scandal, the Power of the Elite, and the Corruption of Our Great Universities adds not a single piece of significant new evidence to that which convinced then–North Carolina attorney general Roy Cooper and virtually all other serious analysts by mid-2007 that the lacrosse players were innocent of any sexual assault on anyone.

Unless, that is, one sees as new evidence Cohan's own stunningly credulous interviews with three far-from-credible participants in the drama who themselves add no significant new evidence beyond their counterfactual personal opinions.

They are Mike Nifong, the disbarred prosecutor and convicted liar; Crystal Mangum, the mentally unbalanced rape complainant and (now) convicted murderer, who has dramatically changed her story more than a dozen times; and Robert Steel, the former Duke chairman and Goldman Sachs vice chairman, who helped lead the university's notorious rush to judgment against its own lacrosse players.

Syndicate content