Article here. Excerpt:

'A spring course at Ohio State University will analyze the “construction of violent white masculinity.”

According to a report from The College Fix, a new course at The Ohio State University will focus on “white male masculinity” and its manifestations. One of the course’s assigned readings focuses exclusively on the “construction of violent white masculinity.”

Jackson Katz, in his article about the “construction of violent white masculinity,” argues that media portrayals of “white masculinity” glorify violence. “The appeal of violent behavior for men, including its rewards, is coded into mainstream advertising in numerous ways,” Katz writes.

Article here. Excerpt:

'The terms of this war of sex and power have changed, and so have the weapons. Physical violence and threat won’t work for you here. You are trying to fight against whispers and rumors and inference, against righteous rage, against charges of hypocrisy, exploitation, and crass dehumanization that hit home with career-ending accuracy. And you’re trying to fight this war with an arsenal you don’t know how to use, against an army that has been training with these weapons for generations, because these tools of emotional warfare are the only ones they have ever been allowed, because they are women.

You are going to lose.

I don’t care that you’re fighting on your home terrain, that you’ve always been told that sex and power belonged to you and you could set the terms. You want to fight women over who has been more wronged in the field of sex and power. A lot of people also tried to invade Russia in the winter.

Article here. Excerpt:

'In the magazine this week I have written a piece about the Canadian Professor Jordan Peterson. He has been in the UK over the last week to talk about his new book 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos. Among many other things – much more of which I go into in the piece – his visit showed up the UK’s broadcast media in a very bad light.

On Saturday morning, Peterson made an appearance on Radio 4’s Today programme. They gave him a hurried four minutes at the end of the show. They could have quizzed him on almost anything and got a point of view different from almost any other they had ever allowed their listeners to hear. Instead they decided to treat him in an alternately jocular and hostile manner. First: ‘Look at this whacky Canadian from out of town’. Then: ‘warning signs: heretic’. The Today programme wasted the opportunity.

Article here. Excerpt:

'A third rape case in just over a month has collapsed after it emerged images from the defendant's phone showing him cuddling the alleged victim were not disclosed.

The case against Samson Makele, 28, was halted after his defence team unearthed vital photographs from his mobile phone which had not been made available.

Mr Makele, originally from Eritrea, was accused of raping a woman after they met at Notting Hill Carnival in 2016 but he always claimed the sex was consensual.

And his case, which was due to begin next month, was thrown out after more than a dozen photographs were found which showed the pair naked and cuddling in bed.
...
It follows the collapse of two rape cases in December, which sparked an urgent review by Scotland Yard into around 30 sex cases.

Mr Makele's lawyer, Paris Theodorou, said an error in judgment or an inaccuracy in unveiling evidence, could cause 'irreparable damage'.'

Article here. Excerpt:

'In case you haven’t seen the overused, far-left, anti-Trump hashtag, #Resist enough, the extremely liberal CBS “comedy” Superior Donuts made sure to repeat it in an outrageously biased and inaccurate portrayal of the debunked gender wage gap myth on Monday’s episode, “Sofia’s Choice.” And they threw in a bit of male-bashing for good measure, too.

Business owner and frequent donut shop patron Fawz (Maz Jobrani) announces that he needs to hire extra security guards after recent break-ins in one of his apartment buildings. He ends up hiring two other regulars from the shop owned by main character Arthur Przybyszewski (Judd Hirsch) - Carl 'Tush' Tushinski (David Koechner) and Officer Randy DeLuca (Katey Sagal) who is on a temporary leave of absence.

Article here. Excerpt:

'CNN’s Chris Cuomo tried arguing the definition of “mansplaining” with Republican National Committee Chairwoman Ronna Romney McDaniel during a Wednesday “New Day” segment.

“Part of the fallout wound up being the Senate panel interviewing the Homeland Secretary Nielsen and her saying she doesn’t recall. She got into it with Cory Booker. You accused Booker of mansplaining to Nielsen, Sec. Nielsen, who is of course a woman. Why? Why did you call it that?” Cuomo asked.
...
“How is it mansplaining? Just because she’s a woman, that’s what you’re saying. Because they talk to people like that all the time. They talk to men like that all the time,” Cuomo replied.'

Article here. Excerpt:

'In 2014, a white female student at the University of Findlay accused two black athletes of sexually assaulting her. The university expelled the two men—a basketball player and a football player—24 hours later, without bothering to interview witnesses who would have contradicted the accusation. According to the two men's lawsuit against Findlay, investigators didn't even interview the young woman.

In my original write-up of the lawsuit, I called it perhaps the most blatantly unfair Title IX case I had ever covered. (Title IX is the federal statute prohibiting sex-based discrimination in education.)

That dispute is still working its way through the courts. In the meantime, one of the young men—Alphonso Baity, now 23—was finally able to find a basketball program that would let him on the team: Duquesne University. That was quite an accomplishment; students expelled for sexual misconduct can have a tough time earning admission to another school, no matter how farcical the charges against them.

Article here. Excerpt:

'There's a word that has become popular in feminist circles these days: "mansplaining." The word is a mashup of "man" and "explaining" and refers to men who condescendingly explain the facts of life to women. So, for example, if a man believes a woman doesn't understand directions and slowly repeats those directions to a woman, he's mansplaining and, therefore, guilty of cruelty and stupidity.

Well, feminists, it's time to stop "feministsplaining" sex to men.

The #MeToo movement has been good for America. It's good that women who have been sexually assaulted and abused are coming forward; it's good that we're finally having conversations about the nature of consent and the problems with a casual hookup culture that obfuscates sexual responsibility. But the #MeToo movement hasn't stopped there. Men are now being pilloried for the sin of taking women too literally -- of not reading women's minds.'

Article here. Excerpt:

'Booker, who is black, told Nielsen that racism and violent white supremacism festers when people don't speak up about it, that he and other minority senators had faced death threats, and that Nielsen's "silence and amnesia is complicity."
...
Video clips of the exchange, which included Booker sharply cutting Nielsen off when she tried to respond, went viral on the Internet. Along with acclaim from supporters, Booker faced criticism, with some saying his outrage was feigned, something he learned from actors who contributed to his campaigns. Others said his treatment of Nielsen was akin to assault.
...
The RNC sent out in an email with pictures of Booker gesturing angrily and accusing him of spending 10 minutes "mansplaining" about immigration policy to the woman who runs the department responsible for it.

Article here. Excerpt:

'I’m apparently the victim of sexual assault. And if you’re a sexually active woman in the 21st century, chances are that you are, too.

That is what I learned from the “exposé” of Aziz Ansari published this weekend by the feminist website Babe — arguably the worst thing that has happened to the #MeToo movement since it began in October. It transforms what ought to be a movement for women’s empowerment into an emblem for female helplessness.
...
Pu+ in other words: I am angry that you weren’t able to read my mind.

It is worth carefully studying Grace’s story. Encoded in it are new yet deeply retrograde ideas about what constitutes consent — and what constitutes sexual violence.

Article here. Excerpt:

'The New York Times now has a “gender editor” and “gender team,” created in the wake of the #MeToo movement to infuse feminist sensibility even further throughout the paper. The gender editor, Jessica Bennett, penned an op-ed last month that serves as a template for the hypocritical state of modern feminism. Bennett had unforced sex with a 30-year-old acquaintance when she was 19 because “saying ‘yes’ [was] easier than saying ‘no,’” as the op-ed’s title puts it. She allowed the encounter to proceed out of “some combination of fear (that I wasn’t as mature as he thought), shame (that I had let it get this far), and guilt (would I hurt his feelings?).” Naturally, Bennett attributes her passivity and embarrassment at that moment to “dangerously outdated gender norms.” It is the patriarchy, she claims, that makes “even seemingly straightforward ideas about sex—such as, you know, whether we want to engage in it or not—feel utterly complex.”

It just came to me. Certain women/girls, probably feminists but not necessarily, may for whatever reasons seek to avoid contact with men/boys. They avoid starting conversations with men, eye contact, etc. They limit contact to just absolutely necessary interactions. And there is a greater chance such women will conclude quickly that something he says is unwanted/offensive/etc. It's better therefore for men to avoid initiating contact with such women. But how can you tell who are the "Buzz off, man" kind?

How about this: women who want minimal contact with men can pin a small red reflective disc to their shirt/blouse/etc. Red of course represents "stop", like a red traffic light. We call them Minimal Male Contact Badges", or MMCBs for short.

Article here. Excerpt:

'It seems that I am a "Bad Feminist." I can add that to the other things I've been accused of since 1972, such as climbing to fame up a pyramid of decapitated men's heads (a leftie journal), of being a dominatrix bent on the subjugation of men (a rightie one, complete with an illustration of me in leather boots and a whip) and of being an awful person who can annihilate – with her magic White Witch powers – anyone critical of her at Toronto dinner tables. I'm so scary! And now, it seems, I am conducting a War on Women, like the misogynistic, rape-enabling Bad Feminist that I am.
...
This structure – guilty because accused – has applied in many more episodes in human history than Salem. It tends to kick in during the "Terror and Virtue" phase of revolutions – something has gone wrong, and there must be a purge, as in the French Revolution, Stalin's purges in the USSR, the Red Guard period in China, the reign of the Generals in Argentina and the early days of the Iranian Revolution. The list is long and Left and Right have both indulged. Before "Terror and Virtue" is over, a great many have fallen by the wayside. Note that I am not saying that there are no traitors or whatever the target group may be; simply that in such times, the usual rules of evidence are bypassed.

Article here. Excerpt:

'To call the downfall of Hollywood titan Harvey Weinstein precipitous feels like an understatement. On Thursday, The New York Times reported that the Miramax chief had quietly settled at least eight sexual harassment complaints over the years. They involved serious allegations that ranged from groping to demanding nude massages. On Sunday, after the mogul’s attempt at rehabilitation and damage control was undercut by new claims of abusive behavior, the Weinstein company fired its co-founder.

It’s a striking morality tale. But what is the moral?

In a climate in which both partisan politics and gender politics are already at fever pitches, responses to the Weinstein revelations have focused mainly on two themes: liberal hypocrisy on women’s issues and male abuse of women.'

Article here. Excerpt:

'For years, universities and funding organizations have attempted to address women’s underrepresentation among science faculty, whether by removing barriers to recruitment and retention or trying to dispel biases among employers and grant makers. Two newly announced programs take the less common, more contentious approach of affirmative action—offering positions or funding specifically for female investigators.

One program launched in 2017 in Australia, where the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) developed an initiative to fund more research by female scientists. Another is in Germany, where the Max Planck Society created a program to start in 2018 to increase the number of research groups led by women each year.