US Hate Crime Laws To Include Gender

I highly doubt that they will prosecute some feminist parroting the "all men are scum" bullshit on the radio. Now if a man calls some women hos he will get the book thrown at him. Therefore this is not adding gender to the hate-crimes list, just women.

...but it died on the table. Unlike the US bill, the Canadian version would have specifically added "women" to the list instead of "gender" and it covered hate speech, not just crimes. The net effect would have been to provide protection to everyone but healthy, young, straight white males. It would have legalized and encouraged the hatred of healthy, young, straight white males, resulting in a net increase in the amount of hate in our culture, all while denying them an equal right to respond in kind.

Using a few hand-waving estimates, given that healthy (90%), young (50%), straight (97%), white (85%) males (49%) are very much a minority (multiplying those percentages, they're about 18% of the population), such a law would actually have deprived a potentially visible minority of the rights afforded all other citizens while giving immunity to the other 82% of people for their hate speech and crimes against the 18%. For reference, 18% is about the same percentage of people who are technically classified as visible minorities (in the racial sense) already - that group is about 16% of Canada's population.

How would the public have reacted to a bill to strip racial minorities of the protections afforded to every other member of society and which would have the effect of increasing the amount of hate directed towards them? Every head in parliament would have exploded at the thought and there'd be riots on Parliament Hill! But direct it at the correct 18% and everyone's busy patting each other on the back for being so "progressive". Nice to know where you stand if you're a member of the 18% wrong minority. Someone please explain to me why someone who is part of a 51% majority of the population (a woman) is allowed to actively advocate violence and other crimes against a minority that's 18% of the population, and instead of being punished they end up running their own government department for it.

As for the 18% young, healthy, straight white men, I guess it's too bad they're the "wrong" minority, huh? At least it's easy to demonstrate the real intent of such legislation - it's to legalize and encourage feminist-sponsored misandry, heterophobia and racism. But apparently those are all OK, as long as the target is a member of the politically correct minority.

There's another wrinkle to this kind of BS that might actually work in our favor - like Hillary's foolish decision to make feminist myths fair game for the media and criticism, blatantly sexist laws would expose the misandry lobby to all sorts of criticism because such laws would have real trouble with either the US or the Canadian constitutions. You can bet there are a fair number of feminists out there secretly relieved that this kind of thing will never make it onto the books. Why? Because their vile conduct and constant, misandric hate speech could be criminalized if "gender" was added to the list. If the word "women" was used instead, misandric laws could be openly criticized during the inevitable court challenges that would result from such an blatantly sexist statute.

One of these days the misandric feminists will discover that they can't have their cake and eat it too - either they play by the same rules we do, or they accept that we're not "equal".

At first one would think that gender being included in a hate crime bill would be a way to make VAWA fair and equal. But the way it would work is that the authorities would have to determine if a gender "hate crime" had actually been committed. And you can be certain that a man will always be charged with a gender "hate crime" and women will not. So, it is just another form of misandric governmental oppression and feminazi agenda keeping.

DON'T FALL FOR IT!

The Bush administraion has already stated this bill will result in a veto. Unforntantely, a president down the road will probably allow this bill. I'm eager to see Gandy's response.. ("This is just another example of why Bush HATES Women!").....The problem with Gandy and other hyper-senstive feminists is they really believe all men hate women. Its sad.

P.S. If a hate bill is necessary, why aren't children protected? Maybe NOW realizes that more than half of child abuse cases are perpetuated by mothers. Even children suffer at the hands of feminist propaganda. Than again, feminists want women treated like children. So much for empowerment.

Enjoy!

Anthony

This kind of legislation is "the writing on the wall," for US men especially -- since there will probably be a Hillary or Hillary-like fascist of either party occupying the White House in 2009.

(It occurs to me the American mentality today is starting to resemble that of 1954 Soviet Union citizens -- i.e. accept repression because we want to be safe from further disasters....)

I strongly encourage every MRA to obtain a current US passport, because the day is arriving when you will have to flee for an actually free country.

Check out the democratic non-feminist republics in Central America first.

Other expat recommendations are welcome!

For a lot of things the gov't/feminists are not looking at these other traits in their machinations. They generally don't much care about sexual orientation, or age when it comes to pros-/persecution of males in general. They usually could not care less about the health of men unless it is in reference to how much a man can or can't do to support a woman. As for ethnicity, they only invoke it as a dig at whites when it suits them; otherwise they care not a whit about non-white men the same way they care not a whit about white men.

So I put the 'target minority' at 45%-- ie, the %age of the male pop'n.

The problem with Gandy and other hyper-senstive feminists is they really believe all men hate women. Its sad.

It's called projection anthony (as you're no doubt well aware). They hate all men so they naturally assume that we must hate them too. It's really a shame they're so severely delusional. Hardcore racists think along similar lines.

Now that the issue is on the table, then even if it gets vetoed, what's to keep individual states from approving similar bills? Not all states are governed by a religious, moral "creation science" fanatic such as Bush.

-ax

P.S: sorry if that last part pisses anyone off, and I do acknowledge the importance of strong morals; and there may even be some sort of "univeral force" if not a deity. It's just that one little oxymoronic phrase.."creation science" - I find the notion of such a thing to be hilarious !!