Article here. Excerpt:

'Let’s set the stage. As the politically correct, faux-Marxist college campus environment continues to deteriorate, average American families—and students—are beginning to seriously question just what they’re getting in return for enslaving themselves to increasingly inflated tuition bills.

It’s a big problem for college men in particular. In addition to having to maintain and increase both grade point averages and personal alcohol tolerance in a competitive environment, they also are required to behave like celibate monks when it comes to interacting with the opposite sex.

That’s because all college men, particularly those of the Caucasian persuasion, are viewed by college administrators and professional campus feminists as feral, potential rapists.'

----
The video on YouTube is here.

Article here. Excerpt:

'This puts me in a quandary. Men's football is loved in Britain simply because the players are men, and men like watching other men play football, and what men like to do and like to watch is, de facto, culturally important. Even the fact the men's World Cup is not explicitly stated to be a men's competition erases women – I predict there will be little fuss made of the Women's World Cup in Canada next year. So do we women sideline ourselves by boycotting the games or do we take up space and holler along because it is fun and exciting? You could argue that the Fifa World Cup is also ageist and disablist (footballers are doomed to retire as soon as their wisdom teeth fully descend and disabled people are tacitly excluded – let's not forget that a former England coach was even sacked for his dodgy views) and there is a difference in football's relationship with women.

Article here. Excerpt:

'A call to make this Father's Day a Feminist Fathers' Day and for dads, papas, bapas and all parents along the masculine gender spectrum to embrace feminism and resist misogyny in our families and society.

In the wake of the Santa Barbara mass shooting and the misogynistic and racist manifesto the killer left behind, women all over the world launched a Twitter-based rebellion that put misogyny and sexism front and center. Far too many men have responded, "but not all men act that way," using the hashtag #notallmen. At best, that such a defense is even needed proves that there is a very real, unavoidable problem; at worst, it sounds as though they are saying, "don't blame me."

Rad Dad Magazine believes patriarchal violence in society is epidemic and takes place in a vast culture of misogyny, male entitlement and male privilege. Against the reactionary cry "not all men," we say, "all men need to actively challenge misogyny and cultivate feminism in their lives, families, communities and society."

Article here. Excerpt:

'A social movement that promotes equal rights for men who want to parent their children is essentially feminist. But the current fathers’ rights movement is not.

I could simply point to the fathers’ rights fringe groups, with their misogynist rants and close ties to the men’s rights movement, to make the case that the movement is not only anti-feminist but anti-women.

But even the more moderate groups within the fathers’ rights movement engage in a backlash against feminism when they attempt to discredit the experiences of female victims of intimate partner violence and roll back legal protections for all victims of domestic and sexual violence.

Article here. Excerpt:

'Why is there no uproar about boys falling behind all other groups? It could be because it doesn’t fit the media-favored and feminist-promoted falsehood that girls are at a disadvantage in what they call a “patriarchal” society. The college completion report explores the complex reasons for the gaps as well as what we can do to improve the outcome for young men. One reason identified by the authors is the absence of a father in the home. While evidence shows little girls can escape some of the negative effects of growing up with only a mother, the same situation is devastating for boys.
...
In a New York Times article, “A Link Between Fidgety Boys and a Sputtering Economy,” the author states: “Girls who grow up with only one parent — typically a mother — fare almost as well on average as girls with two parents. Boys don’t.” In the same article, Elaine Kamarck, a former Clinton administration official, states: “We know we’ve got a crisis, and the crisis is with boys.” (New York Times, 4-29-14)

A Wall Street Journal opinion article, “Ignoring an Inequality Culprit: Single-Parent Families,” bravely addresses a sensitive issue. The authors write that “Roughly a third of American children live apart from their fathers.” They continue, “From economist Susan Mayer’s 1997 book What Money Can’t Buy to Charles Murray’s Coming Apart in 2012, clear-eyed studies of the modern family affirm the conventional wisdom that two parents work better than one.” (Wall Street Journal, 4-20-14) This lack of fathers in the home is of particular consequence for young men who need male role models, discipline, and mentoring.
...

Article here. [Ed. note: The embedded links in this post are modified from how they are in the referenced story as it currently exists. It appears as if the Time web site folks made a mistake with these links; when clicked in the cited page, they send the browser over to Time's on-line Outlook web access portal, undoubtedly not something they wanted to have done. I have sent them an email making them aware of this fact. As for the embedded hyperlinks below, they have been corrected from the originals to point to their intended places.] Excerpt:

'A weary wrestling coach once lamented that his sport had survived the Fall of Rome, only to be vanquished by Title IX. How did an honorable equity law turn into a scorched-earth campaign against men’s sports? This week is the 42nd anniversary of this famous piece of federal legislation so it’s an ideal time to consider what went wrong and how to set it right.
...
Title IX applies to all areas of education but is best known for its influence on sports. Women’s athletics have flourished in recent decades, and Title IX deserves some of the cheers. But something went wrong in the law’s implementation. The original law [see ed. note below full item view] was about equality of opportunity and indeed forbade quotas or reverse discrimination schemes. But over the years, government officials, college administrators and jurists — spurred on by groups like the National Women’s Law Center and the Women’s Sports Foundation — transformed a fair-minded equity law into just such a quota-driven regime, with destructive results.

Article here. Excerpt:

'Chelsea Clinton on Monday said more must be done to encourage gender diversity in high-tech jobs, including finding role models for young girls who want to break into traditionally male-dominated math and science careers.

"There are fewer girls who are aspirational in the math and science fields in the United States than there were 20 years ago," Clinton said during a panel discussion Monday at the Denver Museum of Nature and Science. "We have significantly fewer women graduating with computer science degrees.

"We have significantly fewer women graduating with mechanical engineering degrees than we did in the mid and late 1980s," Clinton said. "We're really losing ground in this area, which is why we have such a frenetic focus."'

Article here. Excerpt:

'A Virginia man who has fathered children with several women has agreed to get a vasectomy to reduce his prison term by up to five years in a child endangerment case that has evoked the country’s dark history of forced sterilization.

None of the charges against Jessie Lee Herald, 27, involved a sexual offense. Shenandoah County assistant prosecutor Ilona White said her chief motive in making the extraordinarily unusual offer was keeping Herald from fathering more than the seven children he has by at least six women.

“He needs to be able to support the children he already has when he gets out,” she said, adding that Herald and the state both benefit from the deal, first reported by the Northern Virginia Daily.'

Article here. Excerpt:

'Cathy Young has an excellent column in Reason.com about a bill in California that would require universities in that state to use an “affirmative consent” standard for evaluating sexual assault complaints in the campus disciplinary system for complaints involving students. Two obvious questions arise: (1) Why just on campus? If this is a good idea, why not make it part the tort system? If that’s too drastic, let’s start, with say, members of the California legislature. For internal disciplinary purposes, their sexual activity should be governed by the same standard they want to impose on students. What plausible grounds could they have for rejecting application of a standard they would impose on students to themselves? (2) If we’re limiting things to campus, why just students? Why should students be judged under this standard, but not faculty and administrators? It’s hardly unheard of for professors, administrators, and even law school deans to engage in sexual relationships of dubious morality. The answer is that it’s not a good idea, and it’s a product of the current moral panic over the hookup culture.

Article here. Excerpt:

'The scene is familiar to every soccer fan: An aggressive defender slightly bumps a striker, who reacts as if struck by a taser's barb. His arms flail. His legs crumple beneath him. He writhes on the turf, grabbing at indeterminate pain. And then, once the ref either does or does not call a penalty, he pops up, unharmed as ever, and plays on.

The Internet too often resembles that scene. Every week, a fraught subject is broached, usually imperfectly. Perhaps a wrongheaded or offensive claim is made. Plenty of thoughtful people offer smart, plausible rebuttals. But they're overshadowed by distortionists with practiced performances of exaggerated outrage. The object isn't a fair debate—it's to get the other guy ejected.

Last week, George Will was the focus of the umbrage-takers. His June 6 column, "Colleges become the victims of progressivism," isn't without flaws. The worst of them may deserve a yellow card for a careless, overaggressive tackling maneuver. But only by misrepresenting Will's argument can his least responsible critics insist that, after four decades and thousands of columns in the Washington Post, he ought to be fired from his twice-weekly perch for these 753 words.

Article here. Excerpt:

'President Barack Obama delivered a rousing speech in favor of progressive family policies Monday, declaring that paid family leave and affordable childcare “are not frills, these are basic needs.”

Speaking to a rapturous crowd at the first-ever White House Summit on Working Families Monday afternoon, Obama noted that “too often these issues are thought of as women’s issues, which I guess means you can kind of scoot them aside a little bit. “ But, he said, “Anything that makes life harder for women, makes life harder for families, and makes life harder for children.”

Obama added, “This is about you too, men.” He conceded that there is a double standard for men’s participation in parenting, where men get cheered for attending parent-teacher conferences while women’s professional commitment gets questioned for doing the same.

He also pointed out that the United States is the only developed country without mandated paid maternity leave.

Article here.  Excerpt:

'The most amazing part of this argument isn’t the Pavlovian resort to identity-card victimization, although that’s certainly amazing enough. It’s the total amnesia about how Democrats spent their 2012 summer vacation and the abject hypocrisy that follows that causes the jaw to drop. I missed this part of the Washington Post story on Democratic panic over Hillary Clinton’s continuing faceplants over her wealth, but David Frum pointed it out on Twitter (via Twitchy):
...
Here’s Brazile [link added] throwing the sexism card:

Strategist Donna Brazile, a Clinton supporter, said scrutiny of Clinton’s speaking fees smacks of sexism.

“I hope Hillary never apologizes for trying to earn a living,” Brazile said. “She’s no different than [former secretary of state] Colin Powell, no different than [former Florida governor] Jeb Bush, no different than anybody else who’s left public office and looked for ways to make an income. . . . What is wrong with a woman having the same earning potential as any man?”

Article here. Excerpt:

'No men allowed.

That’s the message women’s colleges across the country send to college applicants -- and alumnae want to keep it that way.

“Every high school graduate, female and male, should have the option of attending a single-sex college if he or she wishes,” Gretchen Van Ness, a representative of Wilson College Women said.

Wilson College, a private liberal arts college located in Chambersburg, Pennsylvania, has been an all-women's institution since it was founded over 140 years ago.

But that changed last fall when the administration admitted its first undergraduate male students, sparking debate between the school’s leadership and alumnae.

Article here. Excerpt:

'It was the instant the police officer stretched out his hand and seized the belt from Ben Sullivan’s jeans, apologetically telling him he wasn’t allowed to wear it, that the reality of just what was unfolding began to register.

Moments before, groggy and disorientated, the 21-year-old Oxford student had been woken by a rap on his bedroom door. Expecting to find one of his flatmates on the threshold, he yelled for them to come in. Instead, filling the doorway were two uniformed officers and a plain-clothed detective from Thames Valley Police.

‘It was surreal, scary and a bit stunning,’ Ben says, reliving that moment on May 7. ‘I recall glimpsing the clock and noting the time – I don’t know why. It was 6.50am.'

Calmly, the officers told him he was being arrested. An allegation of rape and one of attempted rape had been made against him, and he was being taken to Oxford’s Abingdon Road station to be formally questioned.

It was as Ben, President of the Oxford Union, the university’s 191-year-old debating society, hastily pulled on a pair of jeans and a sweater that one officer told him he couldn’t wear the belt. ‘A suicide risk,’ Ben explains with a wry smile. ‘It seemed like something from a cop show, a television drama. But it was scary. It was happening. It was real.

‘I had a total sense of disbelief and that pit-of-the-stomach anxiety when you can’t believe what is going on.’
...
‘Seeing my reputation trashed has been sobering and painful,’ he reveals. ‘My whole life has been rifled through and examined. It has been utterly draining.’

Article here. Excerpt:

'Hugs, not thugs

When David Cameron suggested that as a nation we needed to hug a hoodie he had forgotten Rule Number One.

Rule Number One in this country is that we don't like white, working class boys. From what they say to what they wear, it's all wrong. Understanding that universal truth is as much about being British as eating fish and chips.

While some nations shrug their shoulders at the testosterone--fuelled antics of young men or even put them on pedestals, in Britain they are regarded as thick, violent, drunken, lazy, racist, sexist yobs.

So why is everybody getting upset this week about a Commons report that shows WWBs and girls are under-performing at school?

What difference does it make if just 32 per cent of under-privileged white British children achieve five good GCSEs compared with 42 per cent of poor black Caribbean children and 61 per cent of disadvantaged Indian children? It's not as if there's a glut of jobs out there waiting to be filled.