Article here. Excerpt:

'Even if it could be proven that Christine Blasey Ford deliberately slandered Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh — and I am not saying that’s the case — that act of willful character assassination wouldn’t be the worst thing about this horrid chapter in American life.

Donald Trump has received an enormous amount of criticism for the damage he’s done to constitutional and democratic norms. I have been among those critics at times. But few of his transgressions can hold a candle to the mob assault on many of those norms in recent days.

Over and over, elected officials and leading commentators alike have insisted Ford’s allegation that Kavanaugh attempted to drunkenly rape her must be true because other men have done such things. “But really,” said Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), “guess who is perpetuating all of these kinds of actions? It’s the men in this country. And I just want to say to the men in this country: Just shut up and step up, do the right thing for a change.”

Article here. Excerpt:

'Former Vice President Joe Biden said the claims of assault leveled against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh bring “back all of the complicated issues that were there” in 1991 when Anita Hill accused then-federal judge Clarence Thomas of sexual harassment, reported The Washington Post.

Biden, then-chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, presided over Thomas’ confirmation hearings for the Supreme Court that year and faced widespread criticism for allowing ― and some said abetting ― an all-white and all-male committee to badger Hill with probing and skeptical questions.

Speaking to reporters Monday at an event at the residence of the U.S. ambassador to Ireland, Biden again expressed regret for how Hill was treated and insisted he’d believed her allegations against Thomas from the very start.

“I thought she was telling the truth at the beginning,” Biden said, according to the Post. “I really did.”

Article here. Excerpt:

'As early as the fourth grade, girls perform better than boys on standardized tests in reading and writing, and as they get older that achievement gap widens even more, according to research published by the American Psychological Association.

"The common thinking is that boys and girls in grade school start with the same cognitive ability, but this research suggests otherwise," said David Reilly, a doctoral student at Griffith University and lead author of the study published in American Psychologist. "Our research found that girls generally exhibit better reading and writing ability than boys as early as the fourth grade."

Reilly and his colleagues analyzed information from the National Assessment of Educational Progress, a nationally representative data sample of standardized test scores from more than 3.4 million students in the fourth, eighth and 12th grades in the United States over a span of 27 years.

Article here. Excerpt:

'Ohio State University had terrible luck with U.S. District Judge James Graham over the past few years.

The day before Donald Trump’s election, the federal judge refused to dismiss the lawsuit against the public university by a student found responsible for sexual assault.

It claimed that the student’s hearing panel got “biased training” – dubious statistics about most men admitting to “sexually aggressive behavior” – and administrators hid “exculpatory evidence” from “John Doe,” including the suspicious timing of his accuser’s claim.

A year and a half later, Judge Graham hit a Title IX official with distressing news: She could be held personally liable for helping the accuser lie to the panel.'

Article here. Excerpt:

'The nature of Australian politics would improve if there were more women involved, former foreign minister Julie Bishop has declared, while suggesting some of her male counterparts had risen through the parliamentary ranks without merit.

Ms Bishop, who quit her position after attracting just 11 votes in the leadership ballot that made Scott Morrison the prime minister, said there were questions across the world about the demise of Malcolm Turnbull.

The long-standing member for Curtin has signalled she will remain in her seat, though rumours continue to swirl she may step aside if a good female Liberal candidate could be found to replace her.

Ms Bishop, who was the only woman in Tony Abbott’s first Cabinet, said the absence of women from the parliamentary system was changing its nature.

Asked if a more equitable split on gender lines would lift the tenor of politics, she agreed.'

Article here. Excerpt:

'Parking spaces for females only have sparked new claims they are sexist.

The City of Perth council has designated 28 spots in the CBD as 'reserved for female drivers'.

Outraged motorists have claimed the parking spaces discriminate against men, and perpetuate the myth that women are bad drivers.

The 28 female-only parking bays are fitted out with brighter lights, emergency help buttons and situated near exits to assist in creating a safer environment for female patrons, City of Perth chief executive Martin Mileham said.

Some drivers have been quick to mention female privilege and question whether these prime spots impact the elderly, disabled, or parents with prams.

But others say the statistics speak for themselves, and insist safety is often a serious concern for women in dark, enclosed parking garages.'

Article here. Excerpt:

'Male privilege. We've heard it time and again from the Left. The United States — the freest country on the planet — is run by a shadowy Patriarchy in which men get a leg up with a wink and the nod while women get raped on college campuses at astronomical rates and implicitly dismissed.

But this is untrue. Alternatively, may I suggest to you "female privilege" (to intentionally appropriate a term from the Left): the power a woman has to ruin a man's life with a mere allegation.

The latest politically-motivated shenanigans by Democrats surrounding the circus-like confirmation process of Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh are a distilled example of this, though thus far incomplete.

Article here. Excerpt:

'If Supreme Court Justice William Brennan were posthumously discovered to have aggressively groped a girl once in high school, should that fact discredit his landmark opinions expanding press freedom, legal protections for criminal defendants, and voting and welfare rights? Would it have been better for the country, from a liberal perspective, if Brennan’s judicial career had been derailed from the start? What about Justice John Marshall Harlan, whose groundbreaking 1896 dissent from the majority opinion in Plessy v. Ferguson declared that the Constitution was “color-blind” and rejected state-sponsored segregation? If Harlan had once jumped on a girl as a 17-year-old, should that one-time outbreak of boorish adolescent male hormones efface his contributions as a public thinker?

Article here. Excerpt:

'I have a problem when I get angry. The problem is that I’ve long ago learned – particularly in dealing with traditional publishers – to get depressed instead of letting myself go berserk. Mostly because when you’re dealing with publishers they’re not near enough to vent your berserker on, so you just end up hurting yourself. (Whoever said stress is the feeling you get when you can’t strangle someone who righteously deserves it was right on the money.)

Lately, I’ve been getting deeply, profoundly depressed, which is why I’ve been so silent. (Yes, post three on how to write short stories is on the way.)

IMO, this is the kind of story one may be inclined to believe is *likely* to be true. Corroboration is still required. However I am inclined to believe the accusers. One may feel that they were far from total innocent fawns and I agree they were. However that doesn't mitigate the alleged behavior of the accused. That I am inclined to believe them doesn't vacate the need for corroboration however but it looks like they can provide it. Fellow MRAs, please comment. What is your opinion? Excerpt:

'Veteran professors at the Manhattan school renowned for training future crime-fighters ran a lawless den of depravity called “the swamp,” where they allegedly used and sold drugs, and “pimped” out and sexually preyed on students, according to two women at the center of a widening scandal at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice.

The shocking allegations are now under criminal probe by the Manhattan District Attorney’s office and the state Inspector General, The Post has learned.

Article here. Excerpt:

'On June 8th, 2018, Dr. Suzanna Danuta Walters - professor of Sociology and director of the Women’s, Gender, and Sexuality Studies Program at Northeastern University, and editor of the Gender Studies journal Signs - published an opinion piece in The Washington Post entitled "Why Can't We Hate Men?" The title of this article immediately struck me as deeply offensive, but having earned my B.A. in Literary Studies, I am well acquainted with the technique of authors and journalists who employ shocking and/or hyperbolic headlines or titles simply to hook their audience. Thus, I decided to give Dr. Walters the benefit of the doubt and read the article.

Article here. Excerpt:

'North America is the country where some women have gone on a long feminist march to misandry and it is poisoning the culture. American newspapers now routinely give women a platform to publish the most vile man-hating stuff in the name of feminism.

Suzanna Danuta Walters, a sociology professor and editor of the "gender studies journal" Sign, wrote in the Washington Post, "It seems logical to hate men...When they have gone low for all of human history, maybe it's time for us to go all Thelma and Louise and Foxy Brown on their collective butts."

"Going low" presumably includes the works of Shakespeare and Tolstoy, the paintings of da Vinci and Michelangelo, the music of Beethoven and the Beatles, the discovery of penicillin and electricity and all the other quite mind-shattering creations and inventions of the male sex through history.

Article here. Excerpt:

'#MeToo has done a lot of work exposing uncomfortable truths, but now its eagerness to denounce is taking on a censorious tone. #TimesUp is becoming #ShutUp.

Recall that the movement got going when women who had long remained silent felt emboldened to speak up after many years. Yet last week one such woman was telling her story. There was a broad public attempt to silence this Korean runaway who doesn’t know her own birthday and grew up eating out of garbage cans on the streets of Seoul before being dumped into an orphanage. Her adoptive mother, she says, regularly belittled her, abused her and essentially made her serve as a household domestic. Then this crazy momster labeled her daughter “retarded.” After all of this, Soon-Yi Previn doesn’t get a right to speak? Because she’s married to Woody Allen?'

Article here. Excerpt:

'Kavanaugh, many Democrats say, is clearly guilty.

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) said Thursday: "I believe her because she is telling the truth and you know it by her story."

"Judge Kavanaugh has not asked to have the FBI review the claims," Gillibrand added. "Is that the reaction of an innocent person? It is not."

When Sen. Duckworth (D-Ill.) was asked about Kavanaugh denying the accusation, the senator responded, "Well, I have heard, you know, many, many predators say and refute allegations against them."

Former spokesman for Bernie Sanders and CNN contributor, Symone Sanders, said she didn't even need to wait for more information: "For me there is no debate. I believe Professor Ford. Judge Kavanaugh has lied multiple times under oath."

And here are other select quotes from Democratic lawmakers:

Article here. Excerpt:

'Rule 1: No one should presume that either party is lying or telling the truth. There is no gender-based gene for truth telling. Some women tell the truth; some women lie. Some men tell the truth; some men lie. Without hearing any evidence under oath, and subject to cross-examination, no reasonable person should declare psychology professor Christine Blasey Ford to be a victim or federal judge Brett Kavanaugh to be a perpetrator. Nor should anybody declare the opposite. The issue is an evidentiary one and evidence must be heard and subject to rigorous cross-examination, preferably by an experienced and sensitive female litigator.