Story here. Excerpt:

'A man in his 20s who was rejected after applying to a women-only university where he planned to study nutrition is suing the college for gender discrimination.

In what is believed to be the first case in Japan challenging the constitutionality of a publicly run women’s university, the man is seeking a verdict from the courts that would allow him to take an entrance exam at Fukuoka Women’s University, according to a lawyer representing the man.

“Not allowing men to take the exam violates Article 14 of the Constitution, which proclaims equality before the law,” the man, whose identity has not been revealed, was quoted by the Asahi Shimbun as saying. He is also seeking ¥500,000 in damages.

A lawyer representing him is arguing that women-only colleges are no longer relevant and discriminate against men.

Story here. Excerpt:

'A University of Cincinnati athlete and a former UC law student sued the university Tuesday, alleging UC presumed them to be guilty of sexual allegations made against them, violating Ohio's Constitution.

"In practice, the UC system is biased against those accused of misconduct," the suit filed by local attorneys Josh Engel and Mike Allen, noted.

Article here. Excerpt:

'Like millions of others, I've had it up to here with whingers whose pettifogging grievances and herd mentality are making feminism a toxic word by encouraging women to embrace victimhood, take offence where none is meant and revile and belittle men. Fortunately, their more idiotic campaigns sometimes backfire.

We've had plenty of absurdities recently. There was the pillorying of David Cameron - who does as much child-minding as a prime minister can reasonably be expected to do - because he refused to be photographed making a prat of himself wearing a T-shirt saying, 'This is what a feminist looks like'. Fortunately for him, newspaper allegations that the T-shirts were made in Mauritian sweatshops caused the mob to retire in embarrassment.

Story here. Excerpt:

'A new law on domestic violence, making it illegal for someone to exercise ‘coercive control’ over their partner, will be unveiled by the Government this week.

Theresa May [link added], the Home Secretary, is expected to announce new powers allowing the police to prosecute those who are guilty of psychological and emotional abuse.

It means for the first time men who control their partners through threats or by restricting their personal or financial freedom, could face prison in the same way as those who are violent towards them.

Article here. In order to jump the subscriber-only wall, go to Google and search on "Misogyny doesn't account for Julia Gillard’s missteps as PM" and click on the first search result item. Excerpt:

'Gillard’s [link added] period is unique because it involves gender. Her assertion of this is confronting: “Even if you are the single most powerful person in your country, if you are a woman, the images that are shadowed around you are of sex and rape.” This is Gillard’s perspective of Australia from high office. In the end Gillard’s proposition is that she faced more abuse than other prime ministers because she was the first woman. It sounds initially plausible yet it is nonsense. Gillard undoubtedly was subjected to sustained and grossly offensive sexist and misogy­nist attacks for which there is no excuse and no equivalent experience for a man.

The reality, however, is that the overwhelming majority of day-to-day criticism of Gillard arose from her policies and political actions, not because of her gender. They included her removal of Rudd, her carbon tax broken promise and the deals she did — some sleazy — to sustain her minority government. Gillard’s experience leads her to the accusation of sexism and misogyny in Australia’s culture and its power structures. She is explicit: the problem was not just in society’s margins. It came from the mainstream: the opposition, business and media. By laying this considered accusation, Gillard’s gender story becomes inextricably woven into her political story. The two parallel narratives run together and intersect.
...

Article here. Excerpt:

'Read BuzzFeed’s account of what happened to men who went through these college disciplinary processes to see just how big this can be. One man lost his job after an anonymous caller notified them of his “convictions” -- which were for “non-consensual kissing.” It can go on your permanent record, making it hard to get into grad school -- you might possibly recover from a youthful bad grades, or plagiarism, but our society doesn’t offer much rehabilitation for sex offenders. You’ll probably lose credits, and for those attending selective schools, it seems likely to me that a man with such a notation on his record would have a hard time enrolling in another elite school.

When people say this is “no big deal,” how many of them would shrug off having this happen to them, on the basis of a hearing where the odds are stacked in favor of believing the accuser, and double standards are often rigorously applied? Which is to say: when two people who are equally drunk have sex, the girl can be presumed to be unable to consent—while the boy is held to be fully capable of determining her level of intoxication, and of making the informed decision not to have sex with someone too much the worse for wine. And this in the name of promoting equality between the genders.

I’m not belittling the crime of rape, or how traumatic and awful it is for the women it happens to.  Rape is a terrible thing, which is why we try it in courts, and lock rapists away for a good long time.  It’s also why we treat rapists like they are terrible people who may be admitted to normal society only after convincing repentance and rehabilitation.

Link here. Excerpt:

'After scouring hospital records and doorknocking, police have identified the mother as a 20-year-old Quakers Hill woman. She has been taken to Blacktown police station and is being interviewed.

A group of passersby managed to lift the top of the drain and saw the baby lying at the bottom early on Sunday. ...
...
... He had his umbilical cord cut and clamped which Lagats said seemed to indicate the baby had been delivered in a hospital, or at least received medical attention before being abandoned.

He said police were concerned for the mother’s welfare.

The baby’s abandonment has spurred fresh calls for emergency hatches to be rolled out nationally at hospitals.
...
“We are really worried about primarily his welfare and mum’s. We would want mum to come forward. We can give her the help and support she needs. She must be feeling distressed. If the parents come forward, we will be able to work with them to find out what support, what they help need and be able to assess where we go from here,” she said.

“Often when this sort of thing happens, people are in a place of desperation. There has been cases where mothers have had postnatal depression or those issues or are very young and don’t know where to go to for help.”
...
When the possibility of emergency hatches at hospitals was raised, Charet said there was support for struggling parents already available.

“I think people are scared if they come forward, there may be consequences. You can go to a hospital, they will support you,” she said.
...
Baby abandonment is currently treated as a criminal offence, with parents liable for prosecution.

Polley wants baby safe havens established across the country in places such as fire stations, police stations and hospitals.
...

Story here. Excerpt:

'Swarthmore College in Pennsylvania has settled a lawsuit brought by a student accused of sexual assault, admitting the school acted unfairly in charging the student.

In April 2011, a student identified as John Doe shared a kiss and at a later date “consensual physical encounters” with another student identified as Jane Doe, according to the lawsuit filed earlier this year. On May 1, 2011, Jane came to John’s dorm room and initiated consensual sex. The lawsuit alleges Jane admitted she initiated the encounter.

But 19 months later, Jane reported the kiss and initial physical encounters to Swarthmore, saying she had been coerced. After a two-month investigation, the school closed the matter without bringing charges against John.

Article here. Finally! Preach on, sister! Excerpt:

'Ayaan Hirsi Ali [link added], a harsh critic of Islam’s treatment of women, said Wednesday that modern American feminism is focused on “trivial bullshit” and needs to be reclaimed.

Speaking at the Independent Women’s Forum Women of Valor dinner, where she received an award for courage, Hirsi Ali reminded her audience of how far feminism has strayed from its original purpose.

“I want you to remember that once upon a time, feminists fought for the access — basic right — access of girls to education,” she said.

Article here. Excerpt:

'Joe Sorge opened the Divorce Corp. Family Law Reform Conference with a call for less fighting because less fighting is good for everyone. Ned Holstein, Founder and Chair, National Parents Organization, and Joe Sorge, Director, Divorce Corps, ended the two-day conference with the call for action.

With his usual flair for presenting complex data in a form all can grasp and understand, Joe Sorge quickly made the case for how home and work life in the United States have changed dramatically yet our family laws and our family law courts and child support guidelines have remained stuck in the past. Modern family roles and structures have evolved, yet the laws have not.

Article here. Excerpt:

'There are a number of very strange aspects to this case. The lower court judge Hon. Jeffrey Dana Gillen never appointed a Guardian ad Litem to advocate for the best interests of the child and testimony by a child mental health professional was not allowed during trial. The lower court also placed a gag order on Hironimus preventing her from speaking about the case to the media or publicly raising funds for an appeal. She was also ordered not to tell her son that she opposes the procedure in any way, and for visitation to be with the father for two days prior to, and twelve days following, the procedure. 

Article here.  Excerpt:

'Some students have voiced opposition to the nature of the debate between visiting speakers Jessica Valenti and Wendy McElroy, whom Janus Forum fellows director Dana Schwartz ’15 said were chosen as representatives of conflicting viewpoints on campus sexual assault and rape culture.

Their opposition sparked the staging of two additional events — at the same time as the debate, a faculty member will present research on rape culture in the Building for Environmental Research and Teaching, and BWell Health Promotion will host a “safe space” for emotional support in Salomon.
...
Students who may feel attacked by the viewpoints expressed at the forum or feel the speakers will dismiss their experiences can find a safe space and separate discussion held at the same time in Salomon 203. This “BWell Safe Space” will have sexual assault peer educators, women peer counselors and staff from BWell on hand to provide support.

Article here.  Excerpt:

'On Monday morning, in a suite behind a neighbourhood drugstore and across from a city park, Toronto’s first dedicated “men’s centre” will open its doors to the public — and to fresh scrutiny from feminists wary of its motives. The Canadian Centre for Men and Families, run by the Canadian Association for Equality, often dismissed by critics as a “men’s rights group,” will focus on men’s “health and well-being,” by way of counselling, support groups and workshops. “Ultimately,” director Justin Trottier wrote in a press release, “Our aim is to catalyze a fundamental change in society’s attitude towards boys and men.” It’s interesting timing considering the fallout from the Jian Ghomeshi scandal, casting attention toward how men treat women. But another hope for the centre, Mr. Trottier told the National Post‘s Sarah Boesveld, is that its existence will help sap the venom from a pernicious gender war:'

Article here. Excerpt:

'Since 1980, the prevalence of incarceration in the U.S. has risen to an extraordinary level. U.S. mass incarceration is widely recognized to be a major public problem. While domestic violence policies have scarcely been discussed in that context, a harshly punitive regime ofdomestic violence emergency law developed in conjunction with mass incarceration. State actions under domestic violence emergency law now account for a majority of justice system actions addressing interpersonal violence. Domestic violence polices are central to the development of mass incarceration in the U.S. from about 1980.
...
Beginning about 1976, U.S. states rapidly enacted laws specifying civil processes for issuing domestic violence restraining orders. Civil petitioning for a domestic violence restraining order has developed into filing a pre-printed form that is perfunctorily judged ex parte. Restraining orders have also become a common condition for bail and for a plea bargain following a criminal charge of domestic violence. ... About 1.2 million initial domestic violence restraining orders are issued per year. Violations of a restraining order can be nothing more than the otherwise ordinary act of making a non-harassing telephone call. Most states have made violating a restraining order a criminal offense. Restraining orders are highly effective instruments for criminalization and incarceration.'

Also see: Gender Protrusion in Imprisonment:

'Socially recognized, acutely felt imprisonment confines highly disproportionately men... Around the world, for every woman prisoner, there are about fifteen men prisoners.

Article here. Excerpt:

'National Parents Organization just released its 2014 Shared Parenting Report Card.  It is the first national study to provide a comprehensive ranking of the states on their child custody statutes, assessing them primarily on the degree to which they promote shared parenting after divorce or separation.

“Despite what you might believe, shared parenting is not the norm in instances of divorce and separation. In fact, family courts award sole custody, usually to the mother, in over 80 percent of child custody cases,” said Ned Holstein, M.D., M.S., Founder and Chair, National Parents Organization. “Our report highlights that many states are not only discouraging shared parenting, but they are also depriving children of what they benefit from most — ample time with both of their parents — while also enabling a system that fosters parental inequality.”