Article here. Excerpt:

'Though the prospect of circumcising a baby boy typically causes some anxiety, Jewish parents most often to go through with it. Circumcision is a concrete symbol of the ancient Abrahamic covenant, an affirmation of membership in the tribe, and a way for the boy to “look like Dad.” Sealing the deal for many is the idea that circumcision provides health benefits throughout a child’s life.

These days, however, there are Jewish parents who consider the issue carefully—and come to a different conclusion. To them, circumcision seems unnecessary, harmful or traumatic, and they decide not to do it. The question is, do these families represent a disheartening watering-down of tradition? Or do they perhaps have something unique and precious to offer to the ongoing Jewish narrative?

Press release here. Excerpt:

'WASHINGTON / July 14, 2015 – Following recent passage of a law in New York on campus sexual assault, Affirmative Consent policies are coming under fire from civil rights and legal experts. The New York law will require that “clear affirmative agreement” be expressed before any sexual activity occurs between two students.

Robert Shibley of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, a civil liberties group, notes that Affirmative Consent policies serve to promote a “guilty until proven innocent” mindset.

In her June 27 column, New York Times contributing writer Judith Shulevitz decried the notion of making “sex a crime under conditions of poor communication.” Her article quoted Harvard law professor Jeannie Suk who chided Affirmative consent as an “unworkable standard.”

Article here. Excerpt:

'The old liberal cliché that it's "better 10 guilty persons escape than one innocent suffer" has been upended in recent years — at least when it comes to accusations of sexual assault.

The cliché has been replaced by: "It's better 10 innocent persons suffer than one guilty escape."

The push to reduce campus sexual assault has bred this new sentiment, as policies purporting to make colleges and universities safer actually increase the likelihood that innocent students will be accused and punished. The new policies broaden the definition of sexual assault while narrowing the definition of consent, and remove due process protections for accused students while severely limiting what constitutes "evidence" in their defense.'

Article here. Excerpt:

'That summer, the student filed a complaint with USF against his ex-girlfriend. It was a complaint similar to the one she filed against him, claiming she violated the school’s code of conduct.

University officials did not investigate his complaint because it mirrored the one filed by his ex girlfriend, the suit says.

John Doe argued that his complaint should have be treated the same as hers.

Says his lawsuit: “Male students at USF, such as John Doe, are discriminated against solely on the basis of sex and are invariably found guilty, regardless of the evidence, or lack thereof.”'

Article here. Excerpt:

'This is the brilliant idea of Councilwoman Anita Bonds, a Democrat:

"Newly proposed D.C. legislation would require colleges to put a permanent and prominent notation on the academic transcripts of students who are convicted of sexual assault or who try to withdraw from school while under investigation for sexual misconduct — a “Scarlet Letter” that would follow them to new schools and graduate programs or into the workforce.

Council member Anita Bonds’s proposal Tuesday — which comes as the nation is paying more attention to the widespread problem of college sexual assault — immediately drew praise from several colleagues for its bold approach to attacking the issue. But it also caught officials at the city’s colleges and universities off guard, proposing what is certain to be a controversial way of permanently punishing those accused of assaults."

Article here. Excerpt:

'The encounter snowballed into a sexual assault complaint, university investigation and a finding that the male student should be suspended.

But the accused student fought back in court and won — marking what is believed to be the first judicial ruling in recent years that a university failed to provide a fair trial in a sexual misconduct case. Some legal experts said Tuesday that the finding could have a broad national impact.

"It could have tremendous persuasive influence on other courts," said Amy Wax, a University of Pennsylvania law professor who, along with 15 colleagues, has raised concerns about the rights of accused students in campus sexual assault cases.'

Tom Martin - who in 2012 sued the London School of Economics for discrimination against men on it's Gender, Media and Culture Masters programme - is now shooting a documentary in London, to investigate ways men can get women to pay their half on dates - and is hiring crew.

The camera operator ad is here, and you can contact Tom directly at sexismbusters-at-hotmail.com if you would like to collaborate in any other capacity.

Article here. Excerpt:

'After hearing closing submissions Tuesday from Chris Murphy, who represents 54-year-old Greg Elliott, Ontario Court Judge Brent Knazan is expected to rule on Oct. 6.

In the balance rides enormous potential fallout for free speech online.

Elliott is charged with criminally harassing two Toronto female political activists, Steph Guthrie and Heather Reilly, in 2012.

Allegations involving a third woman were dropped.

The graphic artist and father of four lost his job shortly after his arrest, which was well-publicized online, and if convicted, could go to jail for six months.

These are astonishing repercussions given that it’s not alleged he ever threatened either woman (or any other, according to the testimony of the Toronto Police officer, Detective Jeff Bangild, who was in charge) or that he ever sexually harassed them.

Link here. Excerpt:

'THE Chipata Magistrates’ Court on Friday committed a 40-year-old woman to the High Court for sentencing after she was convicted of indecently assaulting a 14-year-old boy.

Magistrate Philip Mpundu committed Malita Banda to the High Court for sentencing after the court established a prima facie case against her.

Particulars of the offence were that Banda indecently assaulted the 14-year-old grade four boy contrary to the Laws of Zambia.

Facts were that on April 7, 2015, Banda had sex with the boy in her house.

During trial, the boy told court that he was going to see his friend when Banda called him into her house where she had sex with him while her husband was away.
...
And Dr Jackson Kabwe of Chipata General Hospital told the court that on April 7, he received a child whose foreskin was swollen because of a sexual act.

Dr Kabwe told the court that he circumcised the minor’s foreskin to protect his manhood and signed the medical report.'

Article here. Excerpt:

'Users of We-Consent record 20-second clips naming who they're about to have sex with.

The app only works if the camera detects human faces and if both people involved are clearly heard saying "yes".

However, support group Rape Crisis says that although the app has good intentions it "throws up concerns".

Katie Russell, the national spokeswoman for Rape Crisis in England and Wales, told Newsbeat: "Someone saying 'yes' to sex on camera does not necessarily prove that they have given their consent.

"Consent must be fully and freely given by someone with the capacity to do so.

Article here. Excerpt:

'The phrase “wheels of justice,” of shady proverbial origin, is a popular way both to celebrate and lament the process of law. These wheels do turn, we are told, but they turn slowly. Are there not also wheels of injustice, constructed of a much stronger alloy, and forever counterposed to the forces of equity and morality? Most certainly there are, and they operate in too high a gear for us to bear.

The worst injustice is that which its perpetrators claim is meant to correct another. Nowadays one finds examples of this almost at random. A small British publishing house called “And Other Stories,” for instance, has committed itself to publishing only women writers for the year 2018. The stated reason is to correct the imbalance in women’s representation in the literary world, particularly when it comes to writing prizes. A senior editor at the publisher, Sophie Lewis, took to the pages of The Independent, one of London’s daily papers, to explain her company’s decision.

Article here. Excerpt:

'One of Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s flagship economic ambitions for getting more women in the workforce could have the opposite effect of widening the very gender pay she has campaigned so hard to narrow.
...
A key ambition of the Democratic front-runner is to raise the female labor force participation rate after stagnating for close to two decades. To that end, Hillary trumpeted the virtues of paid family leave as well as the reform of sick days.

Article here. Excerpt:

'Today the Prime Minister has set out to ‘end the gender pay gap in a generation’. It would be an ambitious goal, if a wage gap actually existed. According to the latest ONS figures, women between the ages of 22 – 29 earn 1.1 per cent more on average than their male counterparts and women between the ages of 30-39 are also earning more.

And it doesn’t stop there. There’s evidence that when men and women follow the same career path in the UK, women tend to out-earn and out-perform men. There is growing evidence that if you control for similar backgrounds, women actually tend to get more aggressively promoted than men by their employers.

Article here. Excerpt:

'Whenever a high-profile account of alleged campus sexual assault comes crashing down – such as Rolling Stone's gang-rape accusation – activists predictably fall back on the claim that only 2 percent of rape accusations are false.

This isn't accurate. First, the 2 percent figure refers to false reports made to the police. Making a false police report carries a penalty, which exists to deter people from doing so (although sometimes that penalty isn't enforced, such as with the Duke Lacrosse rape hoaxer). No such penalty exists on college campuses. (Indeed, even the accuser in the Rolling Stone article, though proven to have lied, did not face any punishment from the school.)

Article here. Excerpt:

'Karl Savage is the kind of guy that makes top Democrats nervous.

He lives in a working-class neighborhood, with a cigar-store Indian perched on his front stoop and a carved Harley-Davidson sign on his garage. He's voted in Democratic primaries, he's older, he's white—and he does not care for Hillary Clinton. Not one little bit.

He made this very clear, in fact, to a Clinton campaign volunteer who rang his doorbell recently only to watch the front door close on him just seconds into his pitch. A short while later, his wife, Pamela, offered this explanation before similarly shutting the door: "We're not interested. We don't like her."

So while Republicans fret about their party's outreach to Latinos and other minorities, this one Saturday morning door-knock encapsulates the fear among leading Democrats: Their party no longer speaks to white people, particularly white men, and they could lose the White House because of it.'