'An Arizona woman went on a naked rampage early Monday after her live-in boyfriend refused to have sex with her, police report.
Ashley Marie Prenovost, 24, was already intoxicated when her beau returned to the Glendale residence the couple shares with their four-month-old daughter. Prenovost, according to a court filing, “wanted to have sex with him and got naked.”
When her boyfriend declined to have sex, Prenovost became enraged, according to police. She allegedly punched two holes in a bedroom wall, and “punched a picture hanging on the wall in the hallway, causing glass to break and causing injuries to both of suspect’s hands.”
Pictured in the above mug shot, Prenovost was arrested on a variety of charges, including assault, disorderly conduct, and criminal damage. She was also hit with several child abuse counts since, during her tirade, she raced around the home with her baby in her arms. At one point, the child’s head struck a bedroom dresser.
Prenovost was freed from custody yesterday. She is scheduled for a February 24 court appearance.
'Wall Street Journal columnist James Taranto is under fire after his latest piece about rape on college campuses.
In a column on Monday entitled "Drunkenness and Double Standards," Taranto suggested the female college students are as guilty as their aggressors if they are sexually assaulted while intoxicated.
"If two drunk drivers are in a collision, one doesn't determine fault on the basis of demographic details such as each driver's sex," Taranto argued. "But when two drunken college students 'collide,' the male one is almost always presumed to be at fault. His diminished capacity owing to alcohol is not a mitigating factor, but her diminished capacity is an aggravating factor for him."'
'As the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education notes, at some campuses the accuser's having had one drink is sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt:
Stanford's definition of consent to sex imposes a concept that is foreign to most people's idea of adult consent and inconsistent with California state law. Stanford policy states that sexual assault occurs "when a person is incapable of giving consent. A person is legally incapable of giving consent . . . if intoxicated by drugs and/or alcohol." In other words, any sexual activity while intoxicated to any degree constitutes sexual assault. This is true even if the activity was explicitly agreed to by a person capable of making rational, reasoned decisions, and even if the partners are in an ongoing relationship or marriage.
In theory that means, as FIRE notes, that "if both parties are intoxicated during sex, they are both technically guilty of sexually assaulting each other." In practice it means that women, but not men, are absolved of responsibility by virtue of having consumed alcohol.
That is self-evidently unjust, yet it turns out to be a matter of high principle for many feminists. Last fall Slate's Emily Yoffe, the mother of a college-age daughter, was the target of a Two Minutes Hate for a post titled "College Women: Stop Getting Drunk," even though she offered the same advice to college men: "If I had a son, I would tell him that it's in his self-interest not to be the drunken frat boy who finds himself accused of raping a drunken classmate."'
'An Arizona woman jumped from the second-floor bedroom of a 15-year-old boy after his mother caught her cavorting naked with the teen last month, investigators report.
Keri Gonzalez, 34, broke her ankle when she crashed to the ground outside the residence in Marana, a town 30 miles northwest of Tucson.
After gathering her clothes, Gonzalez exited via the window. The boy’s mother spotted Gonzalez “limping as she walked down the street away from the home,” deputies noted.
After fleeing the home, Gonzalez later returned to report to the boy’s mother that she had broken her ankle. The teen’s mother recognized Gonzalez as a “family acquaintance” whom she had previously caught “flirting” with her son.
During a January 25 police interview, Gonzalez, who had a cast on her ankle, provided a deputy with “information which helped to verify what the mother and victim had said occurred.” She was later arrested for sexual misconduct with a minor and providing false information to police, and booked in to the county jail, where the above mug shot was taken.'
'Given that zero allegations have been brought against Justice Thomas in his 23-year tenure on the Supreme Court and positive endorsements from his female staff, including Laura Ingraham, I think the Senate deeming Hill's testimony "inconclusive" was the appropriate decision. The released phone records indicating Anita Hill had, in fact, called Thomas several times after departing the EEOC raises the biggest doubt for her side of the story.
On March 14 of this year, nearly 23-years after the hearings, and 33-years after the alleged offense, the Tinseltown feminist elite will release a new documentary called Anita that will undoubtedly present Anita Hill as an unrequited saint, sacrificed before an altar of male dominance. The film's trailer and poster accompanied by the tagline "Speaking Truth to Power" confirms that speculation. ...
By attempting to downplay the film’s obvious mission of discrediting the only black conservative Justice to ever serve on the Supreme Court, the feminist left has billed this "documentary" as an exposé on the hardships women face when bringing sexual harassment charges to light, as stated by Eboni Williams on Fox's Megyn Kelly last Thursday.
There is cause for skepticism. After all, these are the same women who howl at the moon over invisible "glass ceilings" of male hegemony and then proceed to railroad Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachmann in their run for higher office. Anita stems from their two-faced modus operandi - seeking to consolidate power for the feminist elite by libeling their (right-wing) male counterparts as "sexist" for defending and applauding men like Clarence Thomas. “Raise awareness for sexual harassment” usually means "raise awareness for sexual harassment by conservatives.”
'Calling the practice a “war on women,” a female legislator wants to make what’s been called “female circumcision” a state crime.
Her legislation would make a felon [sic] of anyone who not only performs the procedure on a girl younger than 18 but also anyone who tries to take a girl out of Arizona to have that done. SB 1342 would carry a presumptive prison term of seven years for a first offense and nearly 16 years for someone with two or more prior felony convictions.
And the measure, set for debate today before the Senate Judiciary Committee, includes a mandatory fine of at least $25,000.
Burges said any comparison of the practice with more routine male circumcision, a practice mandated under Jewish law, is invalid.
“That usually is for cleanliness issues,” she said. “This is not.”
A 1996 federal law already makes the practice illegal when performed in the United States. But it took until last year for Congress to include a provision in the National Defense Authorization Act to make it a crime to take a girl to another country to have the procedure done.
Nearly two dozen other states already have such laws.'
'A male client of Your Community Connection recalls realizing his marriage was over.
That decision came after he was beaten with a pipe in front of his young son.
The middle-aged man said the most difficult part was turning to police and then to YCC for help because he was embarrassed for many reasons, including that he had allowed the situation to escalate.
Last week, YCC announced it is nearly two-thirds of the way to its goal of raising $1.5 million to add a separate wing, creating the state's first designated space as a domestic violence shelter for men.
"It is important that we get the message out that NO ONE should be abused," said Julee Smith, executive director of YCC. "I think those men that have asked for help are courageous. They know that something is wrong and needs to change."'
'Members of the Boston University community collected over 1,000 signatures for a petition to defend BU’s wrestling program in a Save BU Wrestling cross-campus campaign Friday.
Since BU Athletics officials announced that the wrestling program would be cut after its 2013-14 season, BU students, alumni and supporters of the program across the country have banded together to protest the decision. The “Save BU Wrestling” Facebook page now has over 7,000 members.
“[The decision] has had a devastating impact on our current students, their families, but also 50 years of [wrestling program] alumni. It’s been extremely difficult to deal with,” said BU coach Carl Adams. “If you pick one program out of 24 and you single that one program out [to be cut], you need to have a really, really good reason.”
“They [the administration] say that wrestling does not fit the strategic direction for the future of the athletic department at BU,” said wrestling team member Brad Lewis, a College of Arts and Sciences senior. “That’s a very political kind of response that they’re giving because it doesn’t actually say anything or give anyone any real reasons.”
Alumni have been investigating the decision since April and believe that the program is being cut to meet Title IX requirements, Lewis said.'
'The Philadelphia High School for Girls -- with its 1,100-plus spaces reserved for academically talented young women -- stands as a living monument to institutional sex discrimination. While former Superintendent Arlene Ackerman repeatedly professed her commitment to "ending inequity" in Philadelphia's public schools, she, incongruously, turned a blind eye to the manifest inequity of the District's operating a special admission, academically superior high school for girls without an equivalent school for boys. In its continued operation of Girls' High, the District is promoting a gender-based double standard of educational opportunity.
Moreover, in denying male students equal educational opportunity, the District egregiously violates federal and state anti-discrimination laws. These include Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, the Equal Protection Clause of the federal constitution and, more significantly, the Pennsylvania Equal Rights Amendment, which has been the law of the Commonwealth for more than four decades. That amendment provides that "equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania because of the sex of the individual." As has been observed by the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania:
That no other school district in Pennsylvania has a special all-boys or all-girls high school like Philadelphia High School for Girls, without a corresponding, equivalent school for students of the other sex is not surprising. Such asymmetry in educational opportunity is clearly unlawful. As indicated above, the Equal Rights Amendment of the Pennsylvania Constitution flatly prohibits discrimination "because of the sex of the individual" and will not countenance special benefits being conferred by a school district, or by any other governmental entity, based on gender.'
Due to problems with user accounts being used for spam, we require all new user account requests to be sent via email to firstname.lastname@example.org. Please let us know what username you would like in your email. Thanks for your patience while we look for a more permanent resolution to our spam problems.
We encourage everyone to feel free to further distribute the information found on our site, and we only ask that you help to spread the word about Mensactivism.org in the process: so please, say you saw it on Mensactivism.org!
Mensactivism.org - Tracking Men's Rights News Around the Globe!