Boy in Trouble for Touching Girlfriend during Lunch

I think such cases do more good than harm. Boys already from the childhood begin to understand that girls are evil and that the world will be a way better without them.

----------------------------------------------------
Two pillars of the World of the Future:

Asexuality
Artificial Reproduction

"What freedom men and women could have, were they not constantly tricked and trapped and enslaved and tortured by their sexuality."

J. Steinbeck.

Looks like someone beat me to the story.

Women and the totalitarian state will never stop unless FORCED to. The FEMstate uses any weapon it can to strain the natural feelings women and men have for each other. First it was claiming women were overly oppressed and making up GENDERcide stories. Then it was using lesbians to incite more hatred towards men. They did not care about homosexuals, they just used it as a way to attempt to show that women don't want or need men.

Then they created the gap in the school systems which placed women ahead of men and they counted on female greed to make this gap mean something. In other words men that don't make enough to buy the pussy get edged out. It's the old whore and john relationship that drives many American relationships anyway. Then--like with this poory young man--they stop contact between women and men but to disguise it they say "no physical contact" because in this day of fed up men they might get labelled as "man haters." So they dress it up as them not wanting ANYONE to touch ANYONE else and harass this young man for hugging HIS GIRLFRIEND. It's such a weak tactic that it is laughable.

Then when the homosexual men started catching on and listening to the MRAs they switched to women having babies by themselves and claiming that some women "naturally" aren't attracted to men or other women(HETEROSEXUAL ONES OF COURSE) for that matter.

That's what our two NEW posters are espousing with the asexuality is legitimate orientation crap. Notice how they say asexuality and babies born in test tubes or whatever is the way of the future. It's just more gender discrimination--and separatism--dressed up in another name. The feminists have been trying to separate men and women for the longest and once one method fails they quickly adapt another. The outside illusion may change but the ideology is still the same at the core. The SHE-best is relentless gentlemen, so we should be the same when it comes to cracking this shit in two. Don't fall for the bullshit men because it will surely keep coming!

*E-Group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/No_Feminazis/
*Site and Blog: http://www.freewebs.com/nofeminazis/index.htm
*"the most outrageous aspect is the total and i mean TOTAL silence from women. hell, they could care less. makes me sick." ~ donnieboy57

Maybe the fundamental question ought to be ---

who benefits from the Gender Wars?

When women and men see each other as adversaries, who profits?

I have my own conspiracy theory...

It's not pretty.

I agree with you. The whole fucking system is set up to profit of the suffering of men and boys. It always has been, but with laws like VAWA and AWA (which you better bet your last dollar on the fact that and AWA like law will be passed for domestic violence as well) it's 100% percent legal to do so.

This story disturbs me not because it is an example of misandry but because it is an example of the greater cultural aversion to nonsexual physical affection in America. This school has ruled out every form of touching in existence for EVERYONE, not just the boys. That kind of restriction is ridiculous and unhealthy and only encourages these kids to believe that it is unacceptable to touch others outside of a sexual situation.

The school in general sounds insanely uptight; I feel sorry for the students.

Mr Reality,

I really shouldn't encourage you to keep going with your negative comments in regards to asexuality, which isn't even relevant to misandry in the first place, but I must say something in response to your comment here.

Please do not lump me together with the other poster who supports asexuality. I never said that asexuality and test tube babies are "the way of the future."

I don't understand how you're equating asexuality to gender discrimnation. First of all, there are both male and female asexuals, and second of all, asexuality is not about anything other than asexuality. The asexual community online is primarily devoted to exploring sexuality topics and our own lifestyles/natures. Yes, some asexuals who want children will or do choose to have it artificially done (this may work for men also, if they choose to hire a surrogate), but then again, many heterosexual and homosexual women have been having "test tube babies" for years. Homosexual men also have been using surrogacy services, besides adoption, to become parents either as single parents or with their male partners.

Personally, I would never want any children of mine to grow up without a father figure, and having "test tube babies" doesn't rule fatherhood out. If other people choose to raise children without an opposite-gender partner present, that is their choice. No one can or should force them to do otherwise.

Again, you are entitled to your opinion. All I ask is that you please stop perpetuating the profoundly false concept that asexuals have a misandric agenda. On that point, you are entirely wrong.

I really shouldn't encourage you to keep going with your negative comments in regards to asexuality, which isn't even relevant to misandry in the first place, but I must say something in response to your comment here.

Facts aren't negative or positive. They are simply facts.

Please do not lump me together with the other poster who supports asexuality.

Now I KNOW you are a feminist because you are lying. Your first post had a signature with a link to the asexual site. Your first comment was in support of asexuality. Thus you are supporting it.

I never said that asexuality and test tube babies are "the way of the future."

You are still "supporting" it; nearly half of your posts deal with it. Your INITIAL post on the Trojan thread deals with it. The other posters can verify this and show you to be a liar. Who do you think you are fooling woman?

I don't understand how you're equating asexuality to gender discrimnation. First of all, there are both male and female asexuals, and second of all, asexuality is not about anything other than asexuality. The asexual community online is primarily devoted to exploring sexuality topics and our own lifestyles/natures. Yes, some asexuals who want children will or do choose to have it artificially done (this may work for men also, if they choose to hire a surrogate), but then again, many heterosexual and homosexual women have been having "test tube babies" for years. Homosexual men also have been using surrogacy services, besides adoption, to become parents either as single parents or with their male partners. AKA Supporting Asexuality.

Science does not even support this crap as being a legitimate orientation. Yet nearly EVERY post you make rallies people to the cause. What for I don't know? You seem overly concerned with sexual relations yet propagate not being concerned with such. You and NBCSDPL--or whatever her tag is--seem to be the only ones obsessed with this 'asexuality.'

Moreover, the 'asexual is a legitimate orientation' believers have their own forums to discuss such things I fail to see why you have come to the MEN'S RIGHTS ACTIVISM site to perpetuate 'asexuality' on a thread dealing with men being portrayed as pigs for having a NATURAL sex drive; which ultimately has been responsible for the creation of human beings. It's not related.

An agenda is there no matter how much you lie about it.

Personally, I would never want any children of mine to grow up without a father figure, and having "test tube babies" doesn't rule fatherhood out. If other people choose to raise children without an opposite-gender partner present, that is their choice. No one can or should force them to do otherwise.

Now you're talking about raising children without fathers and it being 'their(i.e. the parents) choice.' What about the best interests of the child? Oh I forgot that does not matter it is all about separatism. As I said your rants are old--we have heard them before. From feminists.

Again, you are entitled to your opinion. All I ask is that you please stop perpetuating the profoundly false concept that asexuals have a misandric agenda. On that point, you are entirely wrong.

Your agenda is readily apparent. As a matter of fact I have pointed out in this very thread how much of a liar you are. Thus it is easily conceived that you are in-fact LYING AGAIN when it comes to the agenda you have.

Also, stop "P.Sing" me with this small shit. I'm not one of your converts and I value the parameters nature has set for healthy men and women which encourages sexual attraction and thus procreation. The only drawback is that two people having sex created you and others like you that have made this world the cesspool it is today.

Don't address your comments to me again. My IQ drops everytime I read your posts.

*E-Group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/No_Feminazis/
*Site and Blog: http://www.freewebs.com/nofeminazis/index.htm
*"the most outrageous aspect is the total and i mean TOTAL silence from women. hell, they could care less. makes me sick." ~ donnieboy57

Female MRA: "This story disturbs me not because it is an example of misandry but because it is an example of the greater cultural aversion to nonsexual physical affection in America."

Everything you say or do shows that you are NOT a female MRA--whom would have been concerned with the misandry--but an Asexual activist with an agenda. You should not be here. You are NOT for men's rights.

Each and everyone of your posts alludes to--or directly states something about--asexuality. I have yet to hear you promote equality for men without this agenda you seem to be carrying.

I have however heard you champion single parents, fatherless children(even while dressing it up saying you want a father for your child. If you have one that is), and a blatant dislike for the sexual attraction men and women feel for each other.

*E-Group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/No_Feminazis/
*Site and Blog: http://www.freewebs.com/nofeminazis/index.htm
*"the most outrageous aspect is the total and i mean TOTAL silence from women. hell, they could care less. makes me sick." ~ donnieboy57

Makes no difference.

The actions taken were innocent, and there shouldn't be a presumption of guilt on this boy.

That is what I have been saying he was wronged and misandry played a hand in it. This woman seems to be intent on not focusing on men's issues and instead promoting this agenda of her own.

*E-Group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/No_Feminazis/
*Site and Blog: http://www.freewebs.com/nofeminazis/index.htm
*"the most outrageous aspect is the total and i mean TOTAL silence from women. hell, they could care less. makes me sick." ~ donnieboy57

Sorry, but you are misinterpreting the notion of artificial reproduction. Artificial reproduction (or "test tube babies") means that there is no need in any surrogate mother or in any other woman's participation. The very sense of artificial reproduction is that it gives males the opportunity to get rid of dependency on women in reproduction issues. As I already said, the person who is performing here a crusade against asexuality and AR simply has problems with understanding obvious things.

You can read more about AR here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_womb
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloning

----------------------------------------------------
Two pillars of the World of the Future:

Asexuality
Artificial Reproduction

"What freedom men and women could have, were they not constantly tricked and trapped and enslaved and tortured by their sexuality."

J. Steinbeck.

Sorry, but you are misinterpreting the notion of artificial reproduction. Artificial reproduction (or "test tube babies") means that there is no need in any surrogate mother or in any other woman's participation. The very sense of artificial reproduction is that it gives males the opportunity to get rid of dependency on women in reproduction issues. As I already said, the person who is performing here a crusade against asexuality and AR simply has problems with understanding obvious things.

1. Actually artificial reproduction includes artificial insemination, in vitro fertilisation, cloning and embryonic splitting, or cleavage STUPID. Artificial insemination negates actually having sexual contact--for procreation--with the male, as documented below:

artificial insemination
n. (Abbr. AI)
Introduction of semen into the vagina or uterus without sexual contact.

Question: Are you joking or are you really just THAT stupid?

2. Getting "rid of" women as mothers still harms males as men and women were meant to procreate together. Thus it is still an attack so to speak. That is evident in the context in which you utilized it:

YOU: "it gives males the opportunity to get rid of dependency on women in reproduction issues"

3. Lesbian feminists--of which you may be one--used the same separatist tactics you are now espousing; and no matter which side supposedly benefits it is STILL separatism you are preaching. So once again your ideology fails to convince.

Also, You may want to cite a more credible source than "Wikipedia"(A user driven malleable pseudo-encyclopedia which changes daily) where anyone can write anything. They teach you that in college. LoL! Fucking clowns.

*E-Group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/No_Feminazis/
*Site and Blog: http://www.freewebs.com/nofeminazis/index.htm
*"the most outrageous aspect is the total and i mean TOTAL silence from women. hell, they could care less. makes me sick." ~ donnieboy57

You obviously have big problems not only with your intellect, but also with your emotionality. Do you remember how many times you have said that you are done with this topic and will not post on it anymore? )))

Oh... and as I also already said: you don't have any clue in this topic and you are dumping here complete nonsense from your head. Get a life and read something more intelligent than "Discovery Health". ))

----------------------------------------------------
Two pillars of the World of the Future:

Asexuality
Artificial Reproduction

"What freedom men and women could have, were they not constantly tricked and trapped and enslaved and tortured by their sexuality."

J. Steinbeck.

I'm a male MRA, and I agree with you. It seems as though everyone at this school is forbidden to do anything from shake hands to hug.

Well, I have a hard time counting myself as a conspiracy theorist; although forty years of living under feminism might justify that position.

I learned long ago, can't put my finger on the exact moment - but it may have been in Cuba during the Mariel Harbor exodus - to always pose this question:

"When you observe a system that is obviously broken, ask yourself -- for whom is this broken system working very well?"

To return to the initial event that prompted the thread (sorry, I'm disinterested in asexuality, whatever yadda yadda gender ambiguity you proclaim is your mess, not mine...) --

Somebody benefits from indoctrinating children that TOUCHING is EVIL.

Who might THEY be?

"Everything you say or do shows that you are NOT a female MRA--whom would have been concerned with the misandry--but an Asexual activist with an agenda. You should not be here. You are NOT for men's rights."

Settle down. She's right on this. Some schools have kids trading oral sex in the bathrooms, and at this place you can't even consensually put your arm around somebody's shoulder.

You obviously have big problems not only with your intellect, but also with your emotionality.

I find that amusing especially since every single one of your points have been defeated quite easily.

Oh... and as I also already said: you don't have any clue in this topic and you are dumping here complete nonsense from your head.

Actually the definition of artificial reproduction given is quite accurate. It is you whom was not aware that AR does in-fact include artificial insemination.

Your arguments have been debunked time after time. Yet you continue to come back--using moronic denial tactics(something a 9-year old does)--and make a further fool of yourself while bringing others along with from your ASEXUAL website to co-sign your folly. You're quite the joke as are the companions you keep bringing in.

Get a life and read something more intelligent than "Discovery Health". ))

The fact that I shut-down your asexual rantings--and your biased source with a non-biased one that is credible--so easily must cut deep.

Don't worry you are not the first idiot I have embarassed.

*E-Group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/No_Feminazis/
*Site and Blog: http://www.freewebs.com/nofeminazis/index.htm
*"the most outrageous aspect is the total and i mean TOTAL silence from women. hell, they could care less. makes me sick." ~ donnieboy57

Settle down.

LoL! Yet another numbskull imposter brought in to back up fraudulent arguments about nothing.

Here's a tip: You should all actually try coming in at ONCE--as opposed to coming in separately right after I blow your arguments out of the water(it is more believable that way)--so I can shut you all up and be done with it.

She's right on this. Some schools have kids trading oral sex in the bathrooms, and at this place you can't even consensually put your arm around somebody's shoulder.

I do recall a post wherein a young man was placed in prison for having consensual sex with a young girl. What happened there? They have must have forgot about only getting angry at non-sexual(READ: Asexual hint somewhere in there) contact. Get real clowns.

The girl would never have had to go through what the boy did if she touched him. Girls touch all the time. Misandry is the culprit.

If you are going to co-sign your friends' posts make sure you are making some sense first. Mr. "I'm a Male MRA."

LoL! Shut the fuck up bitch and go back to that asexwhatever bullshit. Dig up some more co-signers.

*E-Group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/No_Feminazis/
*Site and Blog: http://www.freewebs.com/nofeminazis/index.htm
*"the most outrageous aspect is the total and i mean TOTAL silence from women. hell, they could care less. makes me sick." ~ donnieboy57

We both know who benefits from the separatism the feminists keep trying to usher in under different names. Let's act like we "don't know though" for the sake of their comrades here that seem to be popping up lately.

Thanks for getting the thread back on track again. You gotta admit that nbcsdl's--or whatever it's name is--bad sentence structure is hilarious as are the oft-incorrect points she makes.

Do you think the alienation of boys will continue like it has been?

*E-Group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/No_Feminazis/
*Site and Blog: http://www.freewebs.com/nofeminazis/index.htm
*"the most outrageous aspect is the total and i mean TOTAL silence from women. hell, they could care less. makes me sick." ~ donnieboy57

"LoL! Yet another numbskull imposter brought in to back up fraudulent arguments about nothing."

I've been posting here for several years now, tool.

MrReality -- "Do you think the alienation of boys will continue like it has been?"

I believe that it is going to become much worse, and eventually much better -- and much clearer than that -- vis a vis the Gender Wars.

I believe boys (young men) are going to increasingly reject the so-called "allure" of the feminine species.

They are starting to understand that marriage is a trap.

They are also beginning to understand that any seductive female can be his DREAM-KILLER.

So, I am optimistic that men will eventually, after becoming slaves (well, we're almost there..) reclaim their dignity.

It is in the DNA. That nasty male-only chromosome.

You know, the one that created civilisation?

- Rules set by the school are extreme
- Rules seem to be for boys and girls

What she's wrong about

- That the issue is about non-sexual affection

"She has seen a poke escalate into a fight and a handshake that is a gang sign. Some students -- and these are friends -- play "bloody knuckles," which involves slamming their knuckles together as hard as they can."

- That rules defined for boys and girls get handled equally for boys and girls

- That misandry isn't a big factor

"Counselors have heard from girls who are uncomfortable hugging boys but embarrassed to tell anyone. "

"Typically, she said, only repeat offenders or those breaking other rules are reprimanded. "You have to have an absolute rule with students, and wiggle room and good judgment on behalf of the staff," Hernandez said."

"Hal's parents, Donna and Henri, say that they think Kilmer is a good school and that their son is thriving there. He earns A's and B's and, before this incident, hadn't gotten in any trouble."

"School officials said that the girl didn't complain and that they have no reason to believe the hug was unwelcome."

It does seem to be happening.
Just the fact that "feminism" is now a dirty word for today's female youth gives me hope.

That means people are talking about how wrong they think it is, and it's negative effects (especially on boys/men). I don't think that feminism would turn into an ugly prospect to girls unless the boys in their lives were making simple concise points that are making girls think twice about whether they really want to become like their mother's scared and selfish generation...

That the issue is about non-sexual affection

Of course she's wrong and she KNOWS IT. The reason she keeps bringing this up is because it relates directly to her agenda. She'll find anyway to insert this into the conversation.

As I was saying I have some new boards I am putting up in a few and you are welcome to post there until Matt starts killing off the rat problem we are having around here.

*E-Group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/No_Feminazis/
*Site and Blog: http://www.freewebs.com/nofeminazis/index.htm
*"the most outrageous aspect is the total and i mean TOTAL silence from women. hell, they could care less. makes me sick." ~ donnieboy57

Teaching people that touching is evil is directly beneficial to the legal system - who's head is the State. The more crimes that are on the books the more people are processed through the legal system, the more money for the system. That means, more police (in different forms including private security, prison guards etc...), more lawyers, more forensic psychologists and others 'doctors' who put their political agenda ahead of their professional training in their titles, more court clerks, more of everyone who supplies the legal system.

Just look at the absolute and total explosion of 'criminal justice' degrees in education in the last decade. Criminal justice has become the single hottest career path chosen by young people entering post secondary education lately. That's where the jobs are since now even touching can be a crime and the only way to potentially shield one's self from the system is to

a) become a part of it.

or

b) be born with a vagina.

...being willing and ABLE to work in a matriarchal, biased, totalitarian system they created; which gender do you think will be running the government? Hmmm...?

Well written Paragon. Well written indeed.

*E-Group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/No_Feminazis/
*Site and Blog: http://www.freewebs.com/nofeminazis/index.htm
*"the most outrageous aspect is the total and i mean TOTAL silence from women. hell, they could care less. makes me sick." ~ donnieboy57

that law is one of the most popular careers that women are getting into....

Reference from US Law

Women are now a permanent and integral part of the legal profession, comprising 24 percent of the nation's lawyers. The percentage of women lawyers has nearly doubled since 1985, when it was 13 percent, and is eight times the percentage of women who practiced law in 1971 (three percent).

Women's place in the profession continues to grow. Forty-four percent of all law students are women, and it is expected that women will make up 40 percent of the legal profession by 2010. At the same time, current projections suggest that the legal profession will never be 50 percent women, even though women are more than 50 percent of the population.

"At the same time, current projections suggest that the legal profession will never be 50 percent women, even though women are more than 50 percent of the population."

What??? First they (Source: American Bar Association, Commission on Women in the Profession, Elusive Equality: The Experiences of Women in Legal Education,1996) gloat about how many women are graduating from law school now (8 times as many as 1971!) and then they say that "current projections" indicate that they will never be 50%? Even at this growth rate? They're playing the pity game - GIVE US (WOMEN) MO' MONEY!!

Blatant attempt at sympathy-fishing.

http://petepatriarch.blogspot.com

Even if she has an "asexual agenda," of which I haven't been convinced, why are you threatened by that? There's nothing misandrist about asexuality. Some people just don't have that high a libido. Men have enough enemies already without you tilting at windmills.

that this discussion is a carry over from another thread on another topic that also got hijacked.

I personally don`t see a problem with bringing up asexuality as a factor, but it does get tiring when various topics all eventually get the same predictable tangential spin put on them without a whole lot to back it up.

Doesn't make for a very intelligent discussion...

Move on. Both you and your obsessed crew. OpEd called it right with his carthexis comment.

ON TOPIC:

I wonder would it have been taken this seriously if a GIRL were the one doing the touching? I think not.

*E-Group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/No_Feminazis/
*Site and Blog: http://www.freewebs.com/nofeminazis/index.htm
*"the most outrageous aspect is the total and i mean TOTAL silence from women. hell, they could care less. makes me sick." ~ donnieboy57