Article here. Excerpt:

'October is Domestic Violence Awareness Month and that’s a good thing. When it comes to partners hitting partners or parents hitting kids, we should all increase our awareness of the problem, its causes, and how to reduce its incidence. Surely there’s little controversial about that statement.

What may be controversial is the fact that, after over 40 years of awareness of domestic violence, facts about it are not very well known. Most people, including lawmakers, aren’t very aware. That’s not because we don’t know a lot about it; we do. Indeed, domestic violence has been studied in astonishing depth and we now know more than enough to educate the public and dramatically reduce violence in the home.

Article here. Excerpt:

'The Swedish director Ruben Ostlund said he had two goals for his new film, “Force Majeure”: “One is to create the most spectacular avalanche in film history. The other is to increase the rate of divorce.”
...
Selected as Sweden’s official entry for the foreign language Oscar and set in a ski resort in the French Alps, “Force Majeure” explores the fallout when a panicked father abandons his family as an avalanche approaches. His initial denial about this display of cowardice morphs into humiliation and emotional collapse, to the dismay of his two children and distaste of his wife, all of which Mr. Ostlund tracks with a darkly comic eye.

“The male superhero is the most reproduced character on film,” Mr. Ostlund, 40, said by Skype recently from his home in Goteborg, Sweden. When asked if he happened to be divorced himself, he replied, “Yes, of course.”

Video here. Description:

"This is a topic that really requires to be talked about more. These social stereotypes are damaging to everyone, of every gender, age and race. As she says and has said before, the first rule about being a man is that you're not allowed to talk about it. And what does that give us? High suicide and depression rates, the latter of which are no doubt underestimated."

Story here. Excerpt:

'A FATHER-OF-FIVE falsely accused of rape has described the 16-months leading up to the trial as “a living hell”.

Melvin Dalton, of Westcroft Court, Bideford, was arrested in May 2013 and charged with raping a woman – though the charge was later changed to sexual assault by penetration in December 2013.

The 69-year-old appeared at Exeter Crown Court last month, where the jury unanimously found him not guilty.

Melvin has spoken to the Journal about how this false accusation has changed his life.
...
Friend, 28-year-old Karlie Gleghorn, said: “He lost all confidence – he put his life on hold.”

“I have been afraid to leave the house – it ruined by life,” Melvin added.

He does see a brighter future though, but is still worried about the stigma of being accused of such a serious crime.

“I think it will always be in the back of my mind. I can’t even imagine starting a relationship, I am incredibly nervous to even speak to a woman I don’t know,” he added.'

Story here. Excerpt:

'A BARBER has told of his “14 months of hell” being shunned by friends and verbally abused in the street after he was falsely accused of rape.

A jury last week found Kyle Chilman of Clinton Road, Redruth, not guilty of raping a woman, who cannot be named for legal reasons, last August.

The 26-year-old said: “People driving past would wind down their windows and shout out “rapist” when I was walking home from work.

“Someone went into my mum’s work and said, ‘you’re not standing by that rapist son of yours are you?’

“Another person asked my flatmate what it was like to live with a rapist.
...
Despite being cleared of all charges, Mr Chilman has said the ordeal will continue to affect him for the rest of his life.

“I am now afraid to talk to women – it’s a like a paranoia. I can’t talk to them like I used to because I am afraid of the consequences. It has changed my life forever,” he said.

Article here. Excerpt:

'Or, rather: What is terrible about this law is, in fact, what is wonderful about it. The law’s “overreach,” Klein says, is “precisely its value,” authorities having hit upon “a necessarily extreme solution to an extreme problem.” That “cold winter” of which he writes? That’s a feature not a bug, the measure’s virtue being, in Klein’s words, that it will “create a world where men are afraid” enough of the authorities that they “feel a cold spike of fear when they begin a sexual encounter.” All in all, Klein adduces, “The Yes Means Yes law could also be called the You Better Be Pretty Damn Sure law.”

That’s one option, certainly. Another modest proposal might be, “An Enabling Act for the Salem Rape Culture Trials.”

Since the nation’s universities first started to go down this road, opponents of such enactments have leveled two key criticisms. The first is linguistic. As a matter of dull routine, progressives have taking to shouting “government in the bedroom!” at almost any available juncture. Don’t want women to kill their unborn children in a hospital? “Government in the bedroom!” Oppose the redefinition of marriage? “Government in the bedroom!” Believe that Catholic charities should be able to decline to provide contraception within their benefits packages? Etc., etc. And yet, now that states and colleges are drafting sexual-consent rules that, in Heather Mac Donald’s immortal phrase, “resemble nothing so much as a multi-lawyer-drafted contract for the sale and delivery of widgets,” there is nary a peep from the usual suspects. What gives, guys? Cat been given explicit written permission to clench your tongue?

Article here. Excerpt:

'Sexual liberation is having a nervous breakdown on college campuses. Conservatives should be cheering on its collapse; instead they sometimes sound as if they want to administer the victim smelling salts. 

It is impossible to overstate the growing weirdness of the college sex scene. Campus feminists are reimporting selective portions of a traditional sexual code that they have long scorned, in the name of ending what they preposterously call an epidemic of campus rape. They are once again making males the guardians of female safety and are portraying females as fainting, helpless victims of the untrammeled male libido. They are demanding that college administrators write highly technical rules for sex and aggressively enforce them, 50 years after the proponents of sexual liberation insisted that college adults stop policing student sexual behavior. While the campus feminists are not yet calling for an assistant dean to be present at their drunken couplings, they have created the next best thing: the opportunity to replay every grope and caress before a tribunal of voyeuristic administrators.
...

Article here. Excerpt:

'Twenty-eight current and retired Harvard Law School professors are asking the university to abandon its new sexual misconduct policy and craft different guidelines for investigating allegations, asserting that the new rules violate the due process rights of the accused.

“This is an issue of political correctness run amok,” said Alan M. Dershowitz, an emeritus Harvard Law professor who was among the faculty members signing an article, sent to the Globe’s Opinion page, that is critical of the new procedures.
...
In the Opinion article, the professors complained that the new investigative office is a Title IX compliance entity, rather than one “that could be considered structurally impartial,” and that the policy lacks adequate safeguards for the rights of the accused.

Article here. Excerpt:

'Obviously, universities aren’t trampling due process because they hate due process. They’re doing it because they hate campus rape, of which there is (unlike terrorism, it should be said) an awful lot. For various reasons, including the long stalemate in Washington, the movement to confront campus rape has shot up the list of liberal priorities. One can detect in this movement an impatience with balancing risk against liberty that, in other contexts, would be readily recognizable as a tone of creeping illiberalism.
...
"To work, "Yes Means Yes" needs to create a world where men are afraid. ...

Article here. Excerpt:

'Every Thursday in the city of Bucaramanga, Colombia, it’s an all-women party all night long – while the men face curfew at home.

Men in the Colombian city of Bucaramanga are being told to stay home and mind the children while their wives and partners go out to party all night long, as part of an initiative to tackle the high levels of domestic violence in the city. The women-only night, set for Thursday, is expected to be a hit with the city’s women and bring a carnival atmosphere.

Bars, restaurants and shopping malls will offer special events for women, and local authorities are organising women-only concerts, parties and dance classes in the city’s parks and squares. The Catholic Church is hosting events too. For men staying at home, restaurants are offering discounts on home deliveries.

Organisers of the women-only night, which is spearheaded by the chamber of commerce, governor and mayors of the province of Santander, of which Bucaramanga is the capital, hope it will stir debate about gender roles in a city known for its macho culture.

“The women-only night and voluntary curfew for men aims to be a symbolic event and a moment of reflection for the authorities, state institutions and society about the high levels of domestic violence and the role of men in society,” says Yamid Saldana, one of the project’s coordinators and press manager at Corpovisionarios, a Bogota-based think-tank that is promoting the initiative.

“It aims to send the message that it’s ok for men to stay at home and look after the children and wash the dishes, and it doesn’t mean they are less of a man,” says Saldana in a telephone interview.

Article here. Excerpt:

'Any delusion I might have harbored that a world where women have a bigger voice than Rush Limbaugh's would be less ugly was shattered this week. In responding to my column about the idiocy of California’s new affirmative consent law, feministas at Jezebel and Wonkette demonstrated one thing loud and clear: When it comes to talking about issues concerning their lady parts, they turn into bigger dicks than Limbaugh. These ladies ejaculated expletives such as "fuck" on their screens several times, speculated about my personal sex life, and called me names—all of which one would have chalked up to girls having fun if they'd actually managed to sneak in an argument or two.

But they didn’t.'

Letter here.  Excerpt:

'Men's Rights Activists of the world, prepare yourselves for the next couple of words, because you’re never going to hear them from me again: you're right. Feminism is not about men's problems.

Article here. Excerpt:

'When it came to educating young people about respecting personal boundaries, the rules were very simple and generally easy to understand: no means no. This was particularly true when it came to teaching young men that when things were getting ‘hot and heavy’ with someone they were making out with that if the woman at any point said ‘no’ it was time to back off (and perhaps should take a cold shower once he got home). For as long as I can remember, society was ‘teaching men not to rape’ to coin a phrase.
...
So what can we extrapolate from this case as the current state of consent? Are we now at place where John Does are fully responsible for his conduct while Jane Does have no responsibility whatsoever for her conduct? Whatever happened to the notion of equality the progressive feminists claim they want? This notion is both insulting and it infantilizes women.

And yes, I get it - I hope all young men get it, that if a woman is wearing skimpy clothing (or no clothing for that matter), is incapacitated, or unconscious she is not ‘asking for it.’ But to suggest that encouraging women to drink responsibly (if they choose to drink), should learn self defense (as Ms. Nevada did and got lampooned for it), or should carry a gun (nothing says ‘I don’t consent’ like a 9mm in the face) in no way supports the ‘rape culture’!

We are told ad nauseum by progressive feminists that we should ‘teach men not to rape’ instead. The truth is that we have been teaching men not to rape at least for a few generations now and most of us do not rape. There are still men (and women!) who do for whatever reason. Perhaps its for the same reason some people steal and murder; I doubt its a lack of education (and yet we still tell people to lock their doors and/or install alarms on our homes but no one suggests we are supporting the ‘theft culture’).
...

Article here. Excerpt:

'This August, Columbia University released a new policy for handling “gender-based” misconduct among students. Since April, universities around the country have been rewriting their guidelines after a White House task force urged them to do more to fight sexual assault. I was curious to know what a lawyer outside the university system would make of one of these codes. So I sent the document to Robin Steinberg, a public defender and a feminist.

Article here.  Children of powerful people acting privleged and entitled isn't news.  Boys and girls alike, when raised to view themselves as inherently exceptional, act that way; simple cause and effect in action, and most people know this already.  And most people also think that hate crimes against virtually anyone or any number of people belonging to some group are committed exclusively by men.  Well, guess again. Excerpt:

'Though most have heard about the brutal attack on two gay men in Philadelphia that transpired earlier this month, many haven’t learned much about the suspects indicted this week for the attack. Of the three suspects arrested, one in particular stands out as a shining example of privilege and entitlement: 24-year-old Kathryn Knott. The daughter of (Philadelphia-area) Chalfont Township Police Chief Karl Knott, Kathryn Knott serves as a living example of virtually every stereotypical child-of-privilege and law enforcement cliché including abuse of police power for personal gain.