The Female Defense Discount or How Women are Innocent ALWAYS

There is this advertisement called How Much Time Should She Do? that has the tagline ‘If abortion is illegal women will go to jail.’  This illustrates what many people call the presumption of female innocence, that women are never criminals and should never be punished.

Imagine a website calling for ‘If animal testing were illegal, scientists will go to jail’ or ‘If child sexual abuse is a crime Priests will go to jail.’  Doesn’t have the same ring and yank at your heartstrings does it?

Of course if abortions are illegal women will go to jail.  If anything becomes a crime the people who commit the crime will go to jail.  The entire point of the ad is that women are good and great and should never be put in jail.  So we must oppose anti-abortion legislation to protect women’s innocence.

Hello! Obama is not a Muslim, and why the Hell should it matter?

Newshounds has a good article on a recent FOX/FAUX news story about Obama and his religion.  A new book out called The Faith of Barack Obama written by Stephen Mansfield investigates the history of Barack Obama’s religious beliefs.  Stepehen is an ultra-conservative Christian and his findinds were?  That Obama is a very devout Christian.

FOX’s take differs, however.  Their take is that since he was exposed to *gasp* atheist and Muslism practices as a child he is forever corrupted and can never be as goodly Chrisitan as white Christian Guys.  That even though he is Christian he is too sympathetic to Muslim views and may not despise them as the ‘evil, Islamofascist terrorists that they are.’

I just find it so hilarious that you have to be a white Christian to get elected in this country, that being a Muslim or Jewish, or Hindu somehow destroys your ability to lead this country.  Why is that?  It just doesn’t make any sense to me.  Does anyone out there have an answer for this stupidity?

The Death of Parody in Colleges and Universities

There is an excellent editorial about humor, comedy, satire, and parody on college campuses at the Boston Pheonix by Harvery Silverglate.  In it he discusses the beginnings of the downfall of parody at Harvard, and how the backlash against parody and satire reverberates today with the unlawful conduct of Colorado College against two men who made a parody of a feminist flyer and posted it up on campus.

NDSU, the school I attend is also no stranger to demonizing satire and parody.  Our school’s newspaper started printing a parody April Fool’s issue several years ago in response to heavyhanded tactics against the paper by our Student Government.  For the most part the Rectum as our parody issue is called has been well-received.

This last fall in response to Student Government reducing the Spectrum’s operating budget yet again, the editor of the paper decided to print a fall parody issue to continue the trend of fighting unethical politics with humor and satire.  The issue ridiculed and poked fun at student government comparing fictitional members of the body to Larry Craig and had a fake news story about student government threatening the paper by killing and lynching a cabbage patch doll.

Tackling more widespread and national issues, the parody edition of the paper also made fun of Britney Spears and UND for its mascot problems.  I even contributed an article on the stupidity of the terrorist threat level and Homeland Security by writing a faux security alert for Halloween since this was about the time of the printing of the issue.

The day after the parody issue came out, a huge backlash against it came pouring in.  The issue was racist, sexist, and crude, and it offended readers.  Nevermind that the front of the paper read that this was a satire issue designed to be cutting, edgy, and in your face.  Due to the pressure of the complaints and the Board of Student Publications, the editor issued a formal apology.  The board almost fired him, but let it be known that he was walking a fine line.

So what was wrong with the issue?  Everything seemed to offend someone.  The Spears article was sexist because it demeaned a woman.  Thing is it was written by one of our female writers who was sick and tired of all the media attention Britney was getting for being and idiot.

The UND article was racist because like any good parody it pretended to be racist to get people to realize the the racism behind the UND mascot debate.  So in pointing out racism and ridiculing it, we ourselves got labeled as evil racist bigots.

There were other stupid things, like just putting a noose in photo was racist even if the person being hung was white.  All in all, it proved NDSU is not an open forum for ideas and debate anymore, especially after BOSP’s reaction to the publication.

Even though the editor Stephen Baird got to keep his job after the incident, BOSP let him know that they were watching him and that he better not do anything controversial.  (Amazing isn’t it?  An advisory board that should be very hands off is telling a newspaper editor that he can’t be controversial.  I thought controversial was in the definition of newspaper.)  When April came around, the time of the normal publication of the parody Rectum issue, Stephen was told not to publish one or he could ‘read between the lines.’  (Now they are threatening him with veiled threats!)

He published anyways, and I got to sit in on a lovely three hour hearing the day the papers were to be put out where the entire board interrogated him on why he had the balls to do his job and publish his paper.  Stephen had gone to his staff and had them vote on whether or not to publish the joke issue and the vote was a tie.  He using the power he has as editor decided to go with it and publish.  In the meeting he had to defend himself and how he was going to answer to the half of his staff he went against.  I guess the half that he agreed with don’t matter!

Finally after everyone who wasn’t on the paper voiced in on how the paper should be run and the board couldn’t find anything that Stephen had done morally wrong, the chair of the board gave up her position to bring Stephen up on the charge of ‘abusing his power.’  I guess the editor of the paper deciding the content of the joke issue which he has the power to print is just such and egregious breach of his power.  Luckily, the charge lost miserably in the vote, and Stephen got to leave.

So this is the sorry state of parody and satire at NDSU.  The paper has lost its voice and it is a given that anyone who tried to find that voice again or publish their own satire will be punished for it even though that punishment is illegal.  NDSU is growing by leaps and bounds in terms of investments and size of the student body.  Unfortunately, NDSU diversity of thought, ideas, and oppennes to debate seems to shrivel up the bigger the school gets.

Math and ‘Intrinsicness’

So the gender discrepancy in math has been defeated.  Hooray.  I know women can be just as good as men at math, the math department at NDSU has more women students then men and most of them are amazingly brilliant.  I am still upset though.

When are we gonna address the claim that women are better than men at reading?  That women are better multi-taskers?  Better at this than that?  If someone mentioning that men are biologically suited for tasks that require high level logic is a horribly sexist crime that must be proven wrong and combated immediately, where is the cry to fix the problem of most male K-12 students reading at a grade level behind their female peers?  Where is the outrage at the feminists claiming that “Anything a man can do, a woman can do better.”

Feminists want women to take pride in the fact that they excel at some areas compared to men.  Men who took pride in male math and science skills were demonized as “sexist, patriarchial, old white fat guys” who should shut up and get the hell out of academia (Larry Summers anyone?).  Is it any wonder that male students fall further and further behind in education?

Men are the new minority on college campuses.  Most colleges have 40 male students to 60 female, and some colleges in America and most in Britain have a 35 to 65 ratio.  If colleges still had it where females were only a third of the population, millions and millions of dollars would be spent on trying to narrow the gap and encourage female enrollment.  Since men are the minority now, the response is this ‘Don’t you dare try to rain on the female power parade.  Women are kicking men’s butts and its their right to be proud.’

In the 1880’s in Germany, a new movement started that preached that Aryans were better than non-Aryan’s at all intellectual subjects and that the Aryan’s were being discriminated against.  Soon Aryan’s were the majority on all college campuses in Germany and only forty short years after the movement started Hitler was elected and the purges began.

Women’s studies was founded forty years ago and men are now getting purged from university and college campuses.  Today the pipedreams of radical feminists is a world without men.  In twenty years will we have our own Hitler, purging the evil men from society?  I hope not, but this world has made mme very cynical.

Kids Freedom Goes down the Drain at Texas High School

At a public Texas High School, students freedoms of expression are being curtailed by the school board.  According to the Associated Press article Prison Jumpsuits Await Gonzales School Dress Code Violators,

“GONZALES — Violating Gonzales High School’s dress code is not a crime, but some of the offenders are about to start looking a lot like convicts.

Soon after classes begin Aug. 25, violators of the school district’s beefed-up dress code must don navy-blue coveralls unless they get another set of clothes from home or serve in-school suspension. The outfits aren’t just styled like prison jumpsuits — they’re actually made by Texas inmates.”

So why is this so bad?  Most school’s have a dress code.  Well, I am personally against any dress codes that are more strict than local decency laws.  The apparel that you wear is a form of self-expression and to many people is one of the most important ways you can express yourself.  To enact a dress-code, especially one as severe as Gonzales’ denies these students there rights to self-expression.

It seems to me that today’s higher education’s only goals are to mass-produce adults who share all the same beliefs and ideologies.  High school’s stamp down on almost all forms of expression with the excuse that those in their care are children and that they know better.  The free-thinkers in the classrooms oblige since the more sympathetic teachers reassure them that when they get to college, they will have all those freedoms they yearn for.

Sadly, this is not the case either.  Colleges repeat the same crimes that high school’s do these days in the name of tolerance, diversity, and protecting the students from offensive speech.  Speech codes are rampant in almost 90 percent of public college campuses in America.

It is not the students who should be wearing the jumpsuits in Gonzales, Texas.  It is the faculty and the school board who think they can deny the students their constitutional right to free expression who should be in the prison jumpsuits, and in prison as well.

Congress Continues the Wage Gap Myth

Yesterday, congress passed the Paycheck Fairness act, which is supposed to combat the so-called wage gap.  I say so called because all economic, scientific, and intelligent academic study has debunked the wage gap idea as a myth and scam.

In fact, some of the newer studies show that women make more money than men for equal work.  Female executives make ten, fifteen, even twenty percent more than their male counterparts.  Warren Farrell, who I have mentioned before on this site spent several years researching why companies pay certain people more and discovered 25 ways that most women don’t make as much as men in general, but earn the same for the same job.

He had a good analysis of the stupididty of the wage gap claim.  In the sixties the wage gap was supposedly even worse, such that women only made 54 percent of what a man earned.  Why then are there not all women companies run by men who take the extra profits of hiring only women for themselves?  Why did women face discrimination against in hiring if they were so profitable to employ?

Everywhere I have worked, women have earned the same or more for the same jobs that the men have worked.  This new law, if passed, is only going to further divide our genders.  Women will get unfair raises and demand to know others salaries in an effort to keep everyone fair, and the men will be upset when the women get extra raises without cause.

No one likes someone who gets ahead for no good reason.

It’s Not Murder… When a Woman Does It Pt. II

A little more clarification of yesterday’s post about women who get away with murder.  I am NOT saying that the man can beat his wife and terrorize her.  Even though I say this I am sure all the feminists who read this post will argue that is what I am saying.

The woman of the story should have done something, anything else to change this situation, not commit premeditated murder then use ‘battered women’s syndrome’ to excuse the fact that she did so.  So I argue that the man should be in jail for abusing a woman, but since the woman murdered him she should get 25 to life.

‘But she was afraid for her life, in constant fear.’  Okay consider this hypothetical.  A man owns a small business and has invested all of his money and borrowed heavily to improve it so that he can support his family better and comfortably retire.  His restaurant is in the jurisdiction of an incredibly corrupt and ruthless city water inspector.  One day the inspector tells him that he will hit him with a hefty fine for some made up water usage thing unless the man gives him 2500 bucks.

The man refuses and the Inspector gives him the ticket.  The man challenges it and loses, the courts refuse to believe that the inspector is crooked and has to pay the fine which puts him further into debt.  A couple of months later, the inspector again blackmails the man and the man pays him off this time, borrowing more money.  This goes on for several years until the man is at the end of his rope and when the inspector shows up again shoots him in the face with a shotgun and hides him in the freezer for a year.  When he is finally caught, the man claims that the inspector had him in fear of his life and that he was acting in ’self-defense.’

You can argue that the man was indeed in fear of his life, the restaurant was his livelihood and the inspector was out to ruin him.  Would you argue that the man should walk away or should he go to prison for committing premeditated murder?

Its not Murder… When a Woman Does it.

So we had our Residence Hall Association retreat this last weekend.  Oh yeah, sorry for not posting in soo long, but I don’t think anyone reads this thing regularly anyways.  Well, at the retreat one of our advisors, shared a story.

One of her relatives works with domestic violence cases, and I guess this woman shot her husband in the head, covered him up with linens and blankets, covered the door with towels, and no one noticed that her husband was dead for over a year.  She even held Easter for her family in the house with no one figuring out that her dead husband was hidden and rotting in the bedroom!

The sickest part of this was how happy the advisor sounded about how the woman was going to get off totally free of the murder charge.  Pre-meditated murder for women is okay, just as long as they have been ‘abused.’

If I would have shot and covered up my abusive father for a year, I doubt I would get such a lenient sentence.  Hell, I might have even ended up on death row.  Just another example of how women get off, and men get incarcerated.

I am a Humanist, not a Feminist, or a Maculinist

I have been having a back and forth discussion with Renee, where we have been discussing my opinion’s on women’s rights, and she commented that I was one of the few Men’s Rights Activists or MRA’s that she had a pleasant dialog with. While I am happy she found our exchanges pleasant, I hesitate to call myself a MRA.

Then I saw what I put at the bottom of my post that she was commenting on about the double standards of feminism and saw that I had called myself a MRA, which I regret doing.

I am against both the “men’s movement” and the “women’s movement.” Both marginalize the other side and even if their aims are pure, tend to create inequality. What I want is a gender equality movement, a humanist movement, where both men and women are liberated and freed to live up their potentials.

I am not alone in this sentiment. Dr. Warren Farrell echoes many of the same sentiments as me and I highly recommend all of his books, especially The Myth of Male Power, and the intriguing Does Feminism Discriminate Against Men?, where he and Steven Swoboda debate whether or not feminism has become the polar opposite of what it is fighting.

NACURH ‘09

So if you’ll remember I have written several posts about the University of Delaware and their thought reform program, and how my school NDSU is adopting a similar program next year.  Well as president of my school’s Residence Hall Association, I attended the NACURH ‘08 conference (National Association of College and University Residence Halls Inc.) at Oklahoma State University.

I was shocked by the sheer amount of programs that were entirely about how to use RHA to impose diversity, gender, and racial politics ideas on the students living the in the residence halls.  There was an entire round of programs dedicated to it, and it seemed all the other sessions had at least half of their programs fitting into this category as well.

Then came the closing ceremonies.  Part of the ceremony was the announcement of the host for next year’s NACURH conference.  The winner was the University of Arizona, and they then played a video prepared by the school about the focus of their conference.  What I saw infuriated me.

The entire point of their conference is a direct copy of what the University of Delaware tried to do with their Residence Life program, impose their ideas and beliefs attendees of the conference and show them how to do similar thought reform at their universities.  The video outlined a conference program of diversity, gender politics, the environment, and sustainability.  And then there was the conference title, “It’s about time.”  Time to indoctrinate and impose their beliefs upon us, I guess.  Time to eliminate freedom of thought and debate, since they know better I guess.

The future of residence life is upon.  And it doesn’t look pretty.