Article here. Excerpt:

'Here’s a question we haven’t asked about structural sexism in academe: Do we still keep citing the scholarship of serial harassers and sexists? Within their institutions, they may finally get the fate due to them (or not). But their citational legacy will live on, sometimes even in the form of the pro-forma citations that reviewers expect to see in a manuscript, and ask for if they don’t.

And for those men whose academic sexism hasn’t risen to the level of actionable correction, and very likely won’t — while they continue ignoring female scholars and belittling their work on a daily basis — their reputation overall will remain clean. A serial sexist is unlikely to cite the work of female scholars, but if he is a predominant voice in your field or subfield, there is no way for you to avoid having to continue to build his academic reputation through citations, even if you would like to avoid doing so.'

Article here. Google the first paragraph text to jump the paywall. Excerpt:

'To fix the stubbornly low numbers of women serving on corporate boards, investors have tried to pressure companies to add more female directors. Lawmakers have pushed to make boards report their diversity statistics and have passed resolutions urging companies to add more female directors voluntarily. Start-ups have curated lists of qualified, director-approved female candidates.

But now California has a new tactic: Force boards to hire women — and levy monetary fines if they don't.

The state legislature recently passed a bill that would require every publicly traded company with its principal offices in California to have at least one woman on its board by the end of 2019. The bill, which is opposed by many business groups and could face legal challenges, is waiting for Gov. Jerry Brown's signature.'

Article here. If I recall right here in the US it is unlawful to take ova from a dead woman's body and use them to create a baby unless she has specifically permitted it in writing prior to her death. Any lawyers out there who can chime in? Excerpt:

'A wealthy couple harvested sperm from their dead son and used it to create a "designer grandson" in likely the first case of its kind in Britain.

The couple were left devastated after their only child was killed in a motorcycle crash and seemingly ended their chance of becoming grandparents.

But the pair, who are in their 50s, were reportedly desperate for an heir decided to harvest the 26-year-old's sperm, which was frozen and exported to the US, bypassing strict laws in the UK.

Their grandson is now three and is believed to be living with them in Britain in a case that highlights ethical and legal concerns.

The grandparents chose to use gender selection techniques to create a grandchild, who was born using donor eggs and a surrogate, the Mail on Sunday reported.

Article here. Excerpt:

'It’s always entertaining when a poorly thought-out feminist argument refutes itself, saving the rest of us the trouble.

In a widely shared moment late last week, Sen. Kamala Harris asked Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, “Can you think of any laws that give government the power to make decisions about the male body?”

The question was in the midst of Harris’ extensive grandstanding so Kavanaugh didn’t have an immediate answer. But there’s an obvious one: Selective Service.

Every American male 18-25 has to register with the Selective Service System, which maintains their information in the case of military conscription. If America is ever again in a war and needs to reinstate the draft, those male bodies will be the ones to go.

Had Kavanaugh thought of that answer, it would have exposed a hidden truth: Being female is amazing. Meanwhile, being a man does not seem like a good thing at all.

Article here. Excerpt:

'CBS Corporation announced on Sunday that chairman and CEO Leslie Moonves is departing the company, effective immediately. Moonves' exit comes hours after The New Yorker published accounts from six women with allegations of sexual assault or misconduct, following allegations by six other women in July.

A financial exit package for Moonves will be withheld pending the results of an ongoing investigation into the allegations against him. Moonves was eligible for as much as $180 million if fired without cause, according to an employment contract he signed in May 2017. Recent reports indicated a potential payout in the range of $100 million.

The company said in a statement that CBS and Moonves will donate $20 million to one or more organizations that support the #MeToo movement and equality for women in the workplace. The donation will be made immediately, the statement said, and deducted from any severance he ultimately receives.

Article here. Excerpt:

'Nevertheless, the man who was foolish enough – and, it transpired, drunk enough – to put his hand on my behind clearly thought he was perfectly entitled to do so and that he could get away with doing it.

What he did was rude, unacceptable and wrong, as I explained in no uncertain terms, before insisting he apologise.

But was his bottom-slapping a crime? And does the fact that he only did it to me because I am a woman make it an even worse crime?

According to Labour MP Stella Creasy and her band of feminista warriors, the answer to both those questions is an overwhelming Yes.

Article here. This article does a great job showing why investing in sex-bot development is a good move. Excerpt:

'He looked scared. Somewhere in our five-year age gap, a dramatic shift must have taken place in sexual training. I sensed this would be a different kind of hookup than I was used to, but I couldn’t predict how.

I lay down on my bed, and he lay beside me.

“Is this O.K.?” he said.

“I invited a guy from Tinder to my empty apartment on a snow day,” I said. “Let’s just assume you have blanket consent.”

“I’m not comfortable with that.”

I looked at his earnest eyes, hair flopping into his face, stubble that was already reddening my skin (I had already decided I didn’t mind). Hadn’t I already said yes several times? Wasn’t I lying there with him, my leg tossed over his, my whole body arcing toward him?'

Article here. Excerpt:

'Today, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit issued the strongest judicial opinion to date in support of the right to cross-examination in campus judicial proceedings that turn on credibility. The decision is also remarkable for its support for allowing students the active participation of an advisor, which would provide effective cross-examination while avoiding the potential problems with having the parties personally cross-examine one another in sexual misconduct proceedings.
...
The court, building on its September 2017 decision in Doe v. University of Cincinnati, held that “if a university is faced with competing narratives about potential misconduct, the administration must facilitate some form of cross-examination in order to satisfy due process.”'

Article here. Excerpt:

'Sen. Kamala Harris of California asks Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh: "Can you think of any laws that give the government the power to make decisions about the male body?"'

---

Circumcision Legality and Consent Laws

Article here. Excerpt:

'A public university in Colorado has formed a “feminist fight club” as a part of the administration’s effort to identify and correct behaviors that may disadvantage women in the classroom and workplace.

Colorado State University has partnered with the author of the book Feminist Fight Club, Jessica Bennett, to form an on-campus chapter of “feminist fight club” that will help to promote gender equity on campus.
...
As a part of their efforts, the club has created several exercises that help to show how gender discrimination exists in society. One example of this is a “Penile Service Announcement,” in which women are invited to list several ways in which men can be an ally to women. As a part of the exercise, women are encouraged to photocopy fliers for the PSA and distribute them on male desks in the classroom.
...

Article here. Excerpt:

'Prof. Ted Hill, Professor Emeritus of Mathematics at Georgia Tech, wrote an article, whose background research had been supported by the National Science Foundation, on the ‘Greater Male Variability Hypothesis’ (GMVH), which asserts that there are more idiots and more geniuses among men than among women. This hypothesis is well known in the data on sex differences, and has a long lineage in evolutionary biology.

Article here. Excerpt:

'In the May 2000 issue of the Atlantic, Christina Hoff Sommers wrote an article titled “The War Against Boys” and its opening sentence was, “It is a bad time to be a boy in America.”

In 2018, Warren Farrell and John Gray authored “The Boy Crisis: Why Our Boys are Struggling and What Can We Do About It?” Its opening quote by the leader of the New Zealand Labour Party is, “I am sorry for being a man.” It seems as though in the 18-year interval, things have gone from bad to worse for boys.

A review of “The Boy Crisis” needs a summary of Sommers’ article on how this crisis came to exist in order to place this book in perspective. She questioned the assumptions about educational inequality that many held — that schools favor boys and grind down girls. But the truth was exactly the opposite; by virtually every measure in 2000, as well as now, girls thrive in school and boys struggle.'

Article here. Excerpt:

'The steady slide of males enrolling in college, as well as the predictions of the low proportion of males on college campuses in the future, has gone mostly unnoticed in society. The college recruitment books of "three (students) under a tree" will soon have the male as a mere shadow.

When discussed, the quick visceral reaction by female progressives, among others, is something such as "Tough. These privileged males are getting their comeuppance; it is our turn."

Additionally, it is understandable not to expect concern over a male's station in life with the steady beats of "this is the year of the women;" "Let's break the glass ceiling;" "pay disparity;" and "there are not enough women working in (fill-in-the-blank occupation).

Article here. Excerpt:

'For seven years, men accused of sexual assault, a category elastic enough to encompass “broad ranges of behavior” (read on), have been convicted, sometimes expelled, their futures blighted. Sometimes justice has been done, but injustices have been perpetrated by improvised campus tribunals orchestrated by administrators with vocational incentives to discover offenses that justify their offices. The “guidance” has mandated convictions on the basis of a mere “preponderance of the evidence” — 51 percent suffices — not “clear and convincing” proof, let alone proof beyond a reasonable doubt. The guidance strongly discouraged allowing the accused (almost always males) to cross-examine their accusers, who frequently are identified in proceedings as survivors — note the prejudgment. Accusers could appeal acquittals, exposing the accused to double jeopardy.
...

Article here. Excerpt:

'Some men now view all women as suspect.

That's what one female business owner told cleveland.com after Shatter, our women's issues page, asked if men have stopped mentoring women in their offices.

"It's almost like all women are a ticking time bomb that could take them down at any minute," she wrote in an email. "These guys genuinely don't seem to know the difference between inappropriate sexist behavior and other behavior, so they just pull back and interact awkwardly. They ask me weird questions like, 'So I just can't kid around at all anymore?' They're genuinely perplexed."

That seems like hyperbole -- until you read the cleveland.com comments. They're startling in their fervor that #MeToo has victimized men.'