AngryMan writes "A new report claims that the conviction rate for child sex abuse is too low. Particularly worrying is the call for "better handling of "soft" information - such as anecdotal evidence of past wrongdoings". Are more men going to be jailed on the basis of gossip? As usual, no mention of women offenders, no mention of false accusations.

Story here"

Roy writes "A news item posted on the iFeminist site reports that a Swedish newspaper plans to publish the names and photos of men "convicted of violating the integrity of women."

Apparently women are born with this "integrity chromosome..."

It's hard to believe that American feminists have overlooked this lucrative scam to further criminalize maleness.

(Brief article here) -

Swedish newspaper to name men guilty of violence against women

STOCKHOLM : A Swedish newspaper announced on Saturday it would break with press custom and in future publish the names and photographs of men found guilty of violence against women.

Norrlaendska Socialdemokraten, the leading newspaper of the northern region of Norrbotten, made the announcement after a local man killed his ex-wife, a mother of three, with an axe.

"We will in future publish the names of men convicted of violating the integrity of women (the legal definition in Sweden of any form of violence or threat against women), together with photographs if we have these," wrote editor Lennart Haakansson.

He said there were men who "committed systematic, serious and repeated violence and acts of repression against women, worthy of the worst mafiosi."

"Very often they use violence against women they have just met," the editor continued.

He said his newpsaper's action, rare in the Swedish press in such cases, was in the public interest.

"We consider it important to let our women readers know the identities of individuals to avoid." – AFP

Full Story"

This time, they used a tazer on a 12-YO girl who was believed to be drunk, skipping class, and fleeing police. According to the article, that use of the tazer was apparently wrong-- but not the other one wherein they used it on a 6-YO boy who apparently could not be stopped from self-injury any other way.


No 2x-standards here... nope...

mens_issues writes "Toys "R" Us has an anti-boy commercial on TV showing two boys exiting their bedroom at the same time. They get stuck in the door and are apparently too stupid to figure out how to solve the problem. Their sister condescendingly says "Maybe next year boys," while reading a Toys "R" Us catalog. She goes into her bedroom and closes the door, which has a sign saying "Girls Rule, Boys Drool."


Contact these jerks here or call 1-888-869-7932. The Toys "R" Us corporate Web site is at http://www.toysrusinc.com."

The operator of http://www.respectyourman.org/ contacted MANN administrators to let us know of his site. Please take a minute to visit it. There's some good stuff there.

I wonder if the police would have done the same thing had a 6-YO girl been behaving this way? I can only imagine what sort of effects this will have on him, as clearly he is already very disturbed by something going on in his life and/or mind. I wonder if the officers will even get into any serious trouble for what they did? Now contrast the concern for his well-being as compared to the concern for this girl's, both appearing as links on CNN's home page as of this writing. Would these stories be written the same way had the sexes been reversed? You bet they would not have.

The_Beedle writes "This woman intentionally causes a collision and then babbles at the Police that she was trying to hurt her boyfriend, yet the press is calling it 'Road Rage'. What does a woman have to do before it's labelled Domestic Violence?"

Dave K writes "

After arguing that the US wouldn't do this (in a thread below)... I have to admit this is exactly what they're doing.

Looks like their belief is that it's better to force male refugees back into the city to prevent any combatants to escape than to incarcerate them. Obviously they don't want combatants in jail... they want them dead, and are willing to risk the lives of (an admittedly low percentage of) innocent Iraqi males still in the city to do it.

It's a sad thing, right or wrong."

And more lies from the British government, I'm afraid. We've sure got a long way to go, with governments largely controlled by feminist hate-mongers, but at least the truth is starting to come out.

The article states, "Men accounted for 34 per cent of victims last year, compared with 27 per cent the year before," but I suspect that the difference is due not only to an increase in victimization of males but to the fact that male victims are starting to come forward.

Remind me never to visit India.

Mobs of women are attacking and killing or burning down the houses of men, some of whom were set free by the courts after being accused of rape and other crimes. In one case, a man was stabbed and stoned to death in court by a mob led by women. Police detained five women, but released them in response to public outcry.

Story here.


I know, I know, innocent until proven guilty. Indeed, he may be making the whole thing up just to get money. Then again, maybe not. Suppose she'll be given the benefit of the doubt because she's a she? I am betting so. We all know what happens in that regard when the sexes are reversed though don't we?

AngryMan writes "France introduces chemical castration for sex offenders - but only for male ones. Sweden and Germany already use it. Story here".

bandersnatch writes "A 48-year-old teacher in Seminole County, Fla., is accused of torturing her autistic students, including allegedly rubbing a child's face in vomit and slamming another child's head so hard that he lost his front teeth."

amperro writes "How much longer will the feminists deny that this crime happens?

The_Beedle writes "A month ago the Supreme Court of Ohio didn't overturned a lower court decision to prohibit the fathering of additional children by a father on probation for failure to pay his child support charges Fox News Reference. The Court of Ohio failed dodged the issue of whether such a restriction was legal in favor of overruling this particular case on the grounds that there was no provision for the man to pay up and then have more kids.

By way of comparison, People v. Pointer (California, 1984 available at Findlaw.com, free registration required) the Supreme Court of California found that a similar prohibition for a female convicted of child abuse and neglect was too great an inhibition on her constitutional rights :

"[5d] The challenged condition was apparently not intended to serve any rehabilitative purpose but rather to protect the public by preventing injury to an unborn child. We believe this salutary purpose can adequately be served by alternative restrictions less subversive of appellant's fundamental right to procreate."

A similar ruling was handed down by the Supreme Court of California in 1992, People v. Zaring after a judge there ordered a mother of five and heroin/cocaine addict not to conceive as a term of her probation. The California Supreme Court overturned that, saying

"Recognizing that drug addiction could have an adverse impact on the unborn, we must conclude under the law that even if we were to assume arguendo that the safeguarding of the health of any yet to be conceived unborn child of appellant may properly be the subject of probation conditions, it is clear to us that other conditions, less drastic than an outright ban on pregnancy, could be used here to accomplish this objective, just as they could have been used in Pointer."

They also quoted similar rulings from Kansas, Ohio and Florida, all of which illustrates a clear double standard with respect to procreation. A woman's right to concieve is inviolate, despite convictions of child endangerment, child abuse, neglect or even kidnapping. A man's right to procreate is fair game for having incurred a bad debt."