29 Aug 2014

Is Amanda Marcotte Flirting With Me?

6oodfella: Amanda, do you have any Scottish in you?
Do you want some?

Watch Out Women, Porno Will Steal Your Soul!

By : Now, women are being told that their use of erotica and pornography is increasingly tainted by the dangerous scourge of pornography addiction. In this recent article at the Washington Times, some of the worst lies and half-truths about sex addiction surface again, now in an article that seems calculated to drive women to fear their sexuality, and fear the dangerous effects of a dirty “pop-up” picture on the Internet.
The article cites sociology and women’s studies professor, Mary Ann Layden, who makes some wildly unsubstantiated claims: “The more pornography women use, the more likely they are to be victims of non-consensual sex.” Wow, this is a staggering statement, and a frightening insight into the rebirth of the “blame the victim” argument against rape. How, exactly, could this work? A woman gets too into pornography, and stops being very selective in her social and sexual activities, and ends up getting raped? Excuse me? This is an awful statement. So a female victim testifying against her assailant is going to be asked about that time she downloaded a dirty movie to watch? And that has what to do with the immoral, narcissistic, selfish and angry acts of the man who violated her rights? The only way this has any kernel of truth is that highly sexual women are more likely to report use of pornography. Highly sexual women are also likely to report greater numbers of partners, and somewhat higher risk of an incident of sexual abuse or rape, possibly as a result of situations of date rape. But it’s not the pornography, and it’s not even the women’s sexuality. It’s the act of a person who violates the rights of another.
This is just more of the anti-sex version of feminism, suggesting that the only way women can be safe from men is to keep their sexuality locked up tight as a drum in that neat little box society gives women. Sorry, it didn’t work for Pandora. It won’t work today.

Al-CIA-da Publish Car Bomb ‘Shopping List’ And Suggest UK Targets

In another desperate attempt to deflect from the latest Israeli high tech precision slaughter with WMD's and Chemical weapons of 600 children in Gaza, Phantom American Zio-Nazi designed Al-CIA-da published an on-line magazine this week featuring instructions on how to build homemade car bombs and an appeal to Muslims to attack UK and US targets in the vein of the Boston bombers.
RT: The English-language magazine, entitled ‘Palestine: Betrayal of the Guilty Conscience Al-Malahem’, urges Muslims in the West to assemble pressure cooker bombs like those used to attack the Boston marathon last year.
In a list of “examples of targets,” the magazine suggests attacks on the UK’s Royal Military Academy at Sandhurst, MI5’s Thames House and Marks & Spencer department stores during Friday prayers, so as to avoid harming Muslims.
The list features US targets including Times Square, casinos in Las Vegas, Georgia Military College, the US Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs and the General Atomics headquarters in San Diego. It also suggests attacks on Israeli, British and American company headquarters and holiday destinations abroad, oil tankers and busy train stations.

J4MB Publicly Challenges Roz Hardie, Chief Executive Officer Of OBJECT, A UK Feminist Campaigning Organisation

By I was recently in the studios of London Live TV, being interviewed along with feminists in response to a prerecorded piece from Laura Bates, the inaugural member of The Whine Club. There were four recorded discussions in total, of which we’ll be posting links to the videos shortly.
Not a “morning person” at the best of times, I had to set my alarm clock at 02:30 in order to get to the studios in Kensington before 06:00. The studios are in Northcliffe House, the plush headquarters of the Mail, Independent, and Evening Standard newspapers. All the people I saw working in the building at that time were of the male persuasion. A security guard was “manning” reception, later in the day the sole preserve of women, needless to say.
I digress. The first three short interviews on the topic of sexism were at around 06:15, 07:15, and 08:15, and Roz Hardie was the feminist with whom I had the unadulterated joy of debating. Hardie is the chief executive officer of the campaign group OBJECT. The ladies at OBJECT have been wittering away for over 10 years now—surely generating enough hot air to lift a fleet of hot-air balloons—and the following extract from their website should give you a flavour of their “thinking”:

UK Column v The NWO

"Our country is not being governed for our benefit, it is being governed at our expense! ...Codex alimentarius, Agenda 21 and unconstitutional carbon tax all courtesy of an unelected international body who's members are almost certainly in the pay of international corporations. If you are still not concerned about the demise of our constitution, then you should be."

Proposed: How A Smaller, Less Intrusive Government Would Forward The Interests Of Men

By : In response to several articles here, on A Voice for Men and elsewhere about libertarians and men’s rights, I’m prompted to write about the history of government thought control and the means of restraining it by constitutional limitations on its powers. Western governments are more and more intrusive on private decisions, and modern feminists strongly influence their actions and propaganda from their positions in academia, government, and non-profits. 
Restricting government’s powers to interfere in private decisions and control the media message would give private personal decisions more room, and men would benefit.
Feminism started out with a quest for equity in job opportunities, voting, and freedom to choose. This initial agenda (“equity feminism”) won a lot of support from fair-minded men and women, though even then there was a strong element of gynocentrism in the movement.
By choosing to notice only the bad things that happen to women in our own time as well as other cultures and times, modern feminists have failed to work for truly equal treatment of men and women. Instead of seeing individuals and their rights as important, modern feminists and other social justice warriors believe that only a relentless focus on oppression of some categories of individuals by others is the key to righteousness, and their collectivist view of group rights leaves little space for sympathy for anyone who cannot claim membership in an oppressed class.

The Poison Manifesto - The Vanguard Report (14 & 15)

Feminism Poisons Women
A Political Statement
By Fidelbogen: The present statement carries a harshly provocative title. That is deliberate, because the title is a hook. Our main purpose is to excite the reader’s anger or curiosity and inspire further investigation. Our secondary purpose is to leave an indelible mark on the reader’s memory whether the reader agrees with us or not.
So, what is feminism, how does it poison women, and what should we do about this? Our statement will involve these and related questions.
Feminism is many things, but for now it will suffice to know that feminism is antagonistic toward men and all things male. We gain this knowledge both by long study of objective reality and by reasoning from an irrefutable premise: that feminism is the project to increase the power of women. This leads us to wonder precisely how far the feminist project proposes to increase that power, and we are forced to conclude that the project has no clearly stated upper limit.
The problem assumes a particular urgency when you consider that  the growth of female power would hit a wall if it did not, at some point, begin to meld itself with state power. Hence, the feminist project could not but infiltrate the machinery of state, and if pushed far enough could issue only in a totalitarian level of government control – ostensibly for the benefit of women. In light of all this, we must ask if the feminist project means to increase the power of women infinitely? For want of any credible feminist statement to the contrary we must reckon that it does, and make all calculations accordingly.


PragerUniversity: What ever happened to letting "boys be boys?" Take these two cases: In one, a seven-year-old boy was sent home for nibbling a Pop Tart into a gun. In another, a teacher was so alarmed by a picture drawn by a student (of a sword fight), that the boy's parents were summoned in for a conference. In short, boys in America's schools are routinely punished for being active, competitive, and restless. In other words, boys can no longer be boys. Christina Hoff Sommers, a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, explains how we can change this.

Self Hating Comedian-Ginas

It Is Time We Had A Talk - MANstream Media

Paul Elam: There is a very strong cultural code of silence about the pain and suffering of men and boys. It is still a career ending move for a lot of people. Talking about the men’s side of the gender story and telling it like it is can still end a career and result in being socially ostracized as well. It will get you shunned by a lot of men and women, get you attacked by the media and send protestors to try to stop you. So for the first program, we are going to talk about not talking, and what we think the solutions are, including the need for men’s groups on the ground. After all, we can’t fix any of men’s problems if we stay silent about them. We will also be talking about the lives of boys, from circumcision at birth, to how they are parented, to what society expects from them, to what society actually gives them.

Are Your Dreams A Lie?

Stefan Molyneux: The great secret of achievement, the momentum of willpower, making stuff happen, a dream not acted on is a delusion and born with your hand in the fire.

End Occupation Or Face ICC: Palestine Will Ask UN To Set 'Timetable' For Israeli Withdrawal

Palestine will ask the UN Security Council to set a “timetable” for Israel's withdrawal from the occupied territories, a senior official said. If the request is denied, Palestine will take senior Israeli officials to the ICC over the killing of thousands.
RT: The Palestinian leadership is going to submit the application to the UN Security Council on September 15, Ma'an News Agency reported, citing senior Fatah official Nabil Shaath.
The document will demand a "timetable" for Israel’s withdrawal from the occupied Palestinian territories.
Photo right: A Palestinian boy collects copies of the Koran from the remains of a mosque, which witnesses said was hit by an Israeli air strike, in Beit Hanoun in the northern Gaza Strip August 25, 2014. (Reuters / Mohammed Salem)
In addition there will be a meeting of the Arab League on September 5 ahead of sending the application to the UN, to discuss how to support the proposal.
If Palestine’s initiative is denied at the UN, it is going to take senior Israeli officials such as Prime Minister Netanyahu and Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon to the International Criminal Court (ICC) at The Hague, over Israel’s assault on Gaza, which left over 2,000 Palestinians dead.
The ICC is an international tribunal to prosecute individuals for genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and the crime of aggression. It is an independent organization, and is not part of the UN system.
"Taking the case to the ICC is conditional upon the Security Council response to our request," Shaath said.