Article here. Excerpt:

'An extraordinary thing happened in the Houses of Parliament on Tuesday. A member of the seven-strong Backbench Business Committee burst out laughing at the suggestion that MPs should be allowed to debate a range of gender issues including domestic violence, suicide and premature mortality rates.

In an age when offending the sensibilities of anti-sexism campaigners can cause Nobel laureates to be sacked and drive astrophysicists with unfortunate dress sense to tears of redemption, it’s a miracle there hasn’t been another hysterical lynching in the court of public opinion.

At least it would be if it were a male politician caught on camera chortling at the suggestion that parliament should discuss issues like violence against women, breast cancer screening and eating disorders.

The reason the media hasn’t grabbed hold of SniggerGate yet, is that the sniggering MP is female and the gendered problems she appears to find funny are issues that disproportionately affect men and boys.'

Story here. Excerpt:

'A WOMAN with a personality disorder who made a false rape allegation against a man she was angry with has been given a suspended sentence.

At the end of a brief relationship Sarah Eastwood (34) had told the man: “You messed with the wrong person, I will get you sorted out.” She later alleged he raped her in a city centre pub toilet.

The man was never arrested but was interviewed by gardaí during an extensive investigation. He had not been in the city that night and recovery of large amount of CCTV disproved the allegation.

Eastwood, of Judge Darleys Hostel, Parkgate Street, Dublin pleaded guilty at Dublin Circuit Criminal Court to two counts of knowingly making a false report during garda interviews at Store Street and Pearse Street garda stations on dates between June and August 2013. She had no previous convictions.'

Article here. Excerpt:

'A newly-released video shows that New York students remain confused about the implications of a new affirmative consent law that dramatically changes how they are expected to act in sexual situations.

Under a New York law enacted last summer at the urging of Gov. Andrew Cuomo, all colleges receiving state funds are required to handle sexual assault complaints using the standard of “affirmative consent.” This standard, also known as “yes means yes,” means that a student commits sexual assault if they do not receive explicit approval for every sexual act they engage in, from kissing to intercourse. This policy stands in contrast to current criminal law (sometimes called “no means no”), where sexual assault occurs when a person explicitly refuses to consent and is ignored or overpowered.

Article here. Excerpt:

'Women, know your place. And that place is in the boardrooms of Britain’s biggest companies.

A new Government-backed report from Lord Mervyn Davies has called for a target of at least a third of boardroom positions at FTSE 350 companies to be held by women by the end of the decade.

Lord Davies, who has been championing gender equality in the boardroom, stopped short of calling for quotas for the number of women in directorships but he hailed the “near revolution which has taken place in the boardroom and profound culture change at the heart of British business”.

And it is indeed nothing short of a revolution, with 26 per cent of board members at leading companies now being of the female persuasion – more than double the figure just four years ago.
...
If David Cameron genuinely believes that institutions benefit from having a balance of men and women working in them, then he would do well to look beyond the boardroom to the classroom.

Article here. Excerpt:

'In the four decades since Congress passed Title IX (the federal law against sex discrimination in education), the measure’s results have grown increasingly perverse. From its inception, the law started to weaken men’s athletics in the name of the great goddess Equality – despite the fact that sports matter much more to men than they do to women. After Obama’s election, the Department of Education began using Title IX to mandate date rape courts of injustice. And just this month, liberal groups have begun screaming “Title IX” to try to purge America’s campuses of speech that offends them.

Title IX has become a catch-all bludgeon for imposing feminist ideology on American universities. The threat of withdrawn federal funds – not to mention punitive damages – cows colleges into submitting, sometimes with great reluctance, to these socially destructive directives. But even conservatives seem to have forgotten that Title IX is just a law – a law like any other.

It’s time to repeal Title IX.'

Article here. Excerpt:

'Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) and Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) called out national fraternity and sorority groups for lobbying to support a bill that would limit college sexual assault investigations. 

Taking aim at the North-American Interfraternity Conference and the National Panhellenic Conference, the senators held a special phone call with reporters on Thursday to declare the groups' support of the Safe Campus Act "misguided." 

The Safe Campus Act would block colleges from taking action on reports of sexual assault unless the alleged victim also reports the attack to police. The requirement would not apply to any other form of misconduct.

"Keep in mind, they have only carved out this exception for sexual assault -- not any of the other violent crimes," McCaskill said. "So a young woman could be robbed at gunpoint, decide she wanted to just try to get that person off campus and go to their university ... but if she was raped, she would not be able to do that unless she went to the police."

The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) posted a draft research plan on screening for prostate cancer. The draft research plan is available for review and public comment from October 29, 2015 to November 25, 2015. To review the draft research plan and submit comments, go to: http://bit.ly/1LEu5g3

The USPSTF is the organization responsive for the recommendation against prostate cancer screening.  Their May 2012 recommendation reads:

"The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommends against prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based screening for prostate cancer."

This recommendation has caused massive controversy throughout our health care system.  We ask you to post your comments on the USPSTF website, at: http://bit.ly/1LEu5g3

Whether you agree with their 2012 finding or not, our prostate cancer community needs to be heard.  This new research project gives all of us an opportunity to influence the outcome of prostate cancer screening in the United States.

Even if you don't know anything about research or the PSA test, it will be helpful to let the USPSTF know that prostate cancer patients and family members like you are keeping a watch on their work. 

There are ten questions for you to comment on, spread over ten pages.  For example, on page three, you are asked to comment, What are the harms of PSA-based screening for prostate cancer?  You can select a multiple choice response and have the option to write one or several sentences with your personal thoughts. It takes about ten minutes or less to run through the pages, so please go to: http://bit.ly/1LEu5g3

Please let us know if you commented and or if you have any questions. You can email me directly at darryl@malecare.org

Best regards,

Darryl Mitteldorf, LCSW 
Executive Director
Malecare
Men fighting cancer, together. 
www.malecare.org 

Article here. Excerpt:

'Until recently, the idea of consent was associated with acts that are voluntary, free of coercion or compulsion. As theOxford English Dictionary puts it, consent is a ‘voluntary agreement to or acquiescence in what another proposes or desires’. It is ironic, therefore, that advocates of so-called consent workshops in universities want to make them, well, non-consensual. As one supporter of consent classes said: ‘It’s crucial they’re compulsory or the people who need to go won’t go.’

It seems those demanding that consent workshops be made compulsory have little understanding of the idea of consent. But then, these workshops aren’t really about the meaning of consent. Rather, they are informed by a desire to police intimacy and to moralise about student behaviour.

Article here. Excerpt:

'Jay Cheshire was cleared of rape in June. Allegations made against the 17-year old were withdrawn by the complainant just weeks after being filed, resulting in the investigation being closed. Yet, two weeks after the teenager was acquitted of the charge - and with his adult life still ahead of him - Jay was discovered hanging from a tree in his local park.

According to coroner Grahame Short, Jay was a sensitive young man who had "found it difficult to cope with the police investigation" - a conclusion reiterated by the boy's mum, Karin, who said of the accuser: "She accused him of rape and said he was a sexual offender. He was absolutely distraught."

To prosecute an individual for rape - or indeed sexual harassment of any type - is notoriously difficult. However, since the tragic events surrounding the death of Jay Cheshire, thoseopposed to the current laws and practices concerning sexual harassment have become increasingly active in voicing their criticism of the system.'

Article here. Excerpt:

'A Canada Revenue Agency worker alleges his employer discriminated against him because he had the misfortune of being born a white man.

Joe Bate, 40, is representing himself in the Federal Court case. He claims he was an “efficient and productive” appeals officer for CRA, outshining many of his colleagues.

But instead of being promoted, he says his employer used the Employment Equity Act to pass him over.

“I could be twice as efficient (as my co-workers), have better communication skills ... but, unfortunately, I was born white,” Bate told the court Tuesday.

He said the Employment Equity Act was passed in 1986 to ensure inclusion in the workplace of four groups — women, visible minorities, aboriginals and persons with disabilities. But, he said, it excludes “one specific group.”'

Article here. Excerpt:

'The consequences for students found responsible for sexual misconduct in the campus system usually end with expulsion, a curtailed career, drastically lower earning power and a ruined reputation that’s hard to repair.

For a Syrian student at Pennsylvania State University, it could mean his death.

The Legal Intelligencer reports that “John Doe” is suing the school for suspending him following its switch to an Title IX “investigative model” that “removed his ability to confront his accuser or call witnesses of his own.”

He’s asking a federal judge to place his suspension on hold while considering his claims that Penn State violated his due process rights in its investigation of allegations that he violated a female student at a frat party:

Article here. Excerpt:

'The Queensland College of Teachers (QCT) has commissioned a review to examine what influences people to choose teaching as their first career.

The review is being held as the number of male teachers in Queensland state primary schools has fallen to just 16 per cent.

QCT director John Ryan said the review would be a valuable insight for education employers looking to recruit more men.

Queensland Teachers’ Union president Kevin Bates said there was still an unfair view that teaching was women’s work.

“In our community there is a bit of a perception that it is a feminised profession,” he said. “There are elements that attach suspicion to men in the classroom, which are not justified.’’

Queensland Association of State School Principals president Michael Fay said remuneration was often a factor too.'

Story here. Excerpt:

'"M.D. doesn’t mean mutilate dicks,” a sign says. “Foreskins are fabulous,” another reads. And yet one more, “Circumcision: history’s greatest medical fraud.”

Anti-circumcision groups, who call themselves "intactivists," are in town for the American Academy of Pediatrics Conference. They’ve organized what they’re calling the Genital Autonomy Demonstration, which began on Saturday. While their main protest location is in front of the convention center, where about 10,000 pediatricians are gathered, some groups have taken their message to the White House and are considering a march on the Mall.

“It’s kind of miserable to strap a baby down and cut off part of his penis,” says Danelle Frisbie, co-founder of Saving Our Sons and the INTACT Network, which has satellite groups in different states. “But it’s a big money maker. It’s a multi-billion dollar business. There are ethical physicians who won’t do it, but others are trying to make a buck.”

Article here. Excerpt:

'The other day I saw an ad for an incumbent Democrat congressional candidate here in Maryland. As you can imagine, it was pretty inspiring. It used important words like “bold” and “leadership” and “effective” and “jobs” and other sweet-nothings that focus groups like to have whispered in their ears. It promised us that the candidate would defend the environment, take away the scary guns, “grow jobs” (whatever that means), protect entitlements, and fight for women’s rights.

Of course we’ve heard all of these things a million times from a million politicians. Still, I couldn’t help but stop and reflect upon the absurdity of it, especially the last part.“Fight for women’s rights”? Why is that listed as an issue distinct from the others? Why is it listed at all? The matter of “women’s rights” was settled a long time ago in this country. Women have rights. Where has this person been for the past century?

Article here. Excerpt:

'The Hillary Clinton campaign is pushing back against Wednesday night’s Republican presidential debate by releasing four TV ads in New Hampshire and Iowa that feature women struggling in some way due to alleged gender pay disparity.

The ads, not content to simply advocate for women, actively demonize males who work at high levels in the private sector.

The ad “Mindy,” featuring a cardiac nurse, inexplicably compares a nurse to a presumably male “top CEO.”
...
Another ad features a female office worker who allegedly has to work two extra hours to get a paycheck equal to her male colleagues.

The ad “Alexis,” at least, features a Caucasian male janitor in the background cleaning up an office, but makes no attempt to advocate for his interests alongside those of the female character in the ad.'