Category Archives: Politics

Feminist terrorist arrested

Sorry for not posting any new stuff in awhile. I’ve just been somewhat busy, and didn’t feel at all like writing anything. My posting schedule will probably be a little more irregular from now on.

Anyway. Lately, I’ve seen a few claims from, none other than feminists, that ”Feminists have never used violence to get their point across.” Obviously, these feminists must either; be in denial, or live in a cave.

Adrienne Gerhäuser, one of Germany’s most militant feminists and leader of the Red Zora gang, has placed self-constructed time bombs in the Institute of Genetic Research, in West Berlin, and in a women’s clothing factory. Yep, female scientists in a first-world country like Germany are definitely being exploited and oppressed! They probably don’t even have the right to wear t0 vote! (Note the sarcasm.) The real oppressor here, however, is Adrienne herself. Had the bomb exploded, the female scientists who have been left without a job. Great way to make feminism even more hated.

The Red Zora gang–an offshoot of a deadly outfit known as the Revolutionary Cells responsible for knee-capping politicians–has existed since 1977, and has carried out a total of more than 40 attacks. The gang has placed bombs in the offices of the German Doctors’ Association, sex shops, cinemas, biotechnology institutes, the Philippines’ Embassy (don’t they ever think? They could have caused another war! But since the men would have been the ones fighting, it doesn’t matter to them), and in the cars of pimps.

From The feminist who fought sexism with fire bombs faces justice, by the Times Online.

‘The Ten Most Common Feminist Myths’

A very interesting article on feminist myths I found on S.P.A.R.C. (Separated Parenting Access & Resource Center). It does a great job at dispelling common feminist lies. Link to the article.

1. Myth: One in four women in college has been the victim of rape or attempted rape.

Fact: This mother of all factoids is based on a fallacious feminist study commissioned by Ms. magazine. The researcher, Mary Koss, hand-picked by hard-line feminist Gloria Steinem, acknowledges that 73 percent of the young women she counted as rape victims were not aware they had been raped. Forty-three percent of them were dating their “attacker” again.

Rape is a uniquely horrible crime. That is why we need sober and responsible research. Women will not be helped by hyperbole and hysteria. Truth is no enemy of compassion, and falsehood is no friend.

(Nara Schoenberg and Sam Roe, “The Making of an Epidemic,” Toledo Blade, October 10, 1993; and Neil Gilbert, “Examining the Facts: Advocacy Research Overstates the Incidence of Data and Acquaintance Rape,” Current Controversies in Family Violence eds. Richard Gelles and Donileen Loseke, Newbury Park, CA.: Sage Publications, 1993, pp.120-132; and Campus Crime and Security, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, 1997. *According to this study, campus police reported 1,310 forcible sex offenses on U.S. campuses in one year. That works out to an average of fewer than one rape per campus.)

2. Myth: Women earn 75 cents for every dollar a man earns.

Fact: The 75 cent figure is terribly misleading. This statistic is a snapshot of all current full-time workers. It does not consider relevant factors like length of time in the workplace, education, occupation, and number of hours worked per week. (The experience gap is particularly large between older men and women in the workplace.) When economists do the proper controls, the so-called gender wage gap narrows to the point of vanishing.

(Essential reading: Women’s Figures: An Illustrated Guide to the Economic Progress of Women in America, by Diana Furchtgott-Roth and Christine Stolba, published by the Independent Women’s Forum and the American Enterprise Institute, Washington, D.C. 2000.)

3. Myth: 30 percent of emergency room visits by women each year are the result of injuries from domestic violence.

Fact: This incendiary statistic is promoted by gender feminists whose primary goal seems to be to impugn men. Two responsible government studies report that the nationwide figure is closer to one percent. While these studies may have missed some cases of domestic violence, the 30% figure is a wild exaggeration.

(National Center for Health Statistics, National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey: 1992 Emergency Department Summary , Hyattsville, Maryland, March 1997; and U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics, Violence-Related Injuries Treated in Hospital Emergency Departments: Washington, D.C., August 1997.)

4. Myth: The phrase “rule of thumb” originated in a man’s right to beat his wife provided the stick was no wider than his thumb.

Fact: This is an urban legend that is still taken seriously by activist law professors and harassment workshoppers. The Oxford English Dictionary has more than twenty citations for phrase “rule of thumb” (the earliest from 1692), but not a single mention of beatings, sticks, or husbands and wives.

(For a definitive debunking of the hoax see Henry Ansgar Kelly, “Rule of Thumb and the Folklaw of the Husband’s Stick,” The Journal of Legal Education, September 1994.)

5. Myth: Women have been shortchanged in medical research.

Fact: The National Institutes of Health and drug companies routinely include women in clinical trials that test for effectiveness of medications. By 1979, over 90% of all NIH-funded trials included women. Beginning in 1985, when the NIH’s National Cancer Center began keeping track of specific cancer funding, it has annually spent more money on breast cancer than any other type of cancer. Currently, women represent over 60% of all subjects in NIH-funded clinical trails.

(Essential reading: Cathy Young and Sally Satel, “The Myth of Gender Bias in Medicine,” Washington, D.C.: The Women’s Freedom Network, 1997.)

6.Myth: Girls have been shortchanged in our gender-biased schools

Fact: No fair-minded person can review the education data and conclude that girls are the have-nots in our schools. Boys are slightly ahead of girls in math and science; girls are dramatically ahead in reading and writing. (The writing skills of 17-year-old boys are at the same level as 14-year- old girls.) Girls get better grades, they have higher aspirations, and they are more likely to go to college.

(See: Trends in Educational Equity of Girls & Women, Washington, D. C.: U.S. Department of Education, June 2000.)

7. Myth: “Our schools are training grounds for sexual harassment… boys are rarely punished, while girls are taught that it is their role to tolerate this humiliating conduct.”

(National Organization of Women, “Issue Report: Sexual Harassment,” April 1998.)

Fact: “Hostile Hallways,” is the best-known study of harassment in grades 8-11. It was commissioned by the American Association of University Women (AAUW) in 1993, and is a favorite of many harassment experts. But this survey revealed that girls are doing almost as much harassing as the boys. According to the study, “85 percent of girls and 76 percent of boys surveyed say they have experienced unwanted and unwelcome sexual behavior that interferes with their lives.”

(Four scholars at the University of Michigan did a careful follow-up study of the AAUW data and concluded: “The majority of both genders (53%) described themselves as having been both victim and perpetrator of harassment — that is most students had been harassed and had harassed others.” And these researchers draw the right conclusion: “Our results led us to question the simple perpetrator-victim model…”)(See: American Education Research Journal, Summer 1996.)

8. Myth: Girls suffer a dramatic loss of self-esteem during adolescence.

Fact: This myth of the incredible shrinking girls was started by Carol Gilligan, professor of gender studies at the Harvard Graduate School of Education. Gilligan has always enjoyed higher standing among feminist activists and journalists than among academic research psychologists. Scholars who follow the protocols of social science do not accept the reality of an adolescent “crisis” of confidence and “loss of voice.” In 1993, American Psychologist reported the new consensus among researchers in adolescent development: “It is now known that the majority of adolescents of both genders successfully negotiate this developmental period without any major psychological or emotional disorder [and] develop a positive sense of personal identity.”

(Anne C. Petersen et al. “Depression in Adolescence,” American Psychologist February 1993; see also, Daniel Offer, and Kimberly Schonert-Reichl, “Debunking the Myths of Adolescence: Findings from Recent Research,” Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, November 1992.)

9. Myth: Gender is a social construction.

Fact: While environment and socialization do play a significant role in human life, a growing body of research in neuroscience, endocrinology, and psychology over the past 40 years suggests there is a biological basis for many sex differences in aptitudes and preferences. In general, males have better spatial reasoning skills; females better verbal skills. Males are greater risk takers; females are more nurturing.

Of course, this does not mean that women should be prevented from pursuing their goals in any field they choose; what it does suggest is that we should not expect parity in all fields. More women than men will continue to want to stay at home with small children and pursue careers in fields like early childhood education or psychology; men will continue to be over-represented in fields like helicopter mechanics and hydraulic engineering.

Warning: Most gender scholars in our universities have degrees in fields like English or comparative literature–not biology or neuroscience. These self-appointed experts on sexuality are scientifically illiterate. They substitute dogma and propaganda for reasoned scholarship.

(For a review of recent findings on sex differences see a special issue of The Scientific American “Men: The Scientific Truth,” Fall 2000.)

10. Myth: Women’s Studies Departments empowered women and gave them a voice in the academy.

Fact: Women’s Studies empowered a small group of like-minded careerists. They have created an old-girl network that is far more elitist, narrow and closed than any of the old-boy networks they rail against. Vast numbers of moderate or dissident women scholars have been marginalized, excluded and silenced.

(Essential reading: everything by Camille Paglia; Daphne Patai and Noretta Koertge–Professing Feminism: Cautionary Tales from the Strange World of Women’s Studies; and Christina Hoff Sommers–Who Stole Feminism? How Women have Betrayed Women)

Men and their Y chromosomes are soon parted

The article Homo erectus extinctus on the Times Online can be summed up in one phrase: ”men and their Y chromosomes are soon parted”, according to senior scientist Lois Rogers. Lois is determined to prove men have become useless in modern society. She uses social and political trends to lend weight to her ”theory.” Mistake #1: biologists don’t look at social or political trends in research.

According to Lois, due to technology that can produce artificial sperm, or even create offspring from 2 females, men have become redundant. She has no idea we have the technology to create artificial wombs to create babies in. It seems women are as redundant as men, now. [1]

The Y chromosome has scant function other than the production of sperm, and in many men it is not performing well. Male infertility is already surprisingly common: about 7% of men, or 1 in 13, are affected, often as a result of a defect in the coding mechanism for sperm production on the Y chromosome.

So is female infertility. In fact, women are more likely to be infertile than men. Women account for more than 40% of fertility problems, while men, only 30-40%. (10-20% of infertility cases are unassigned to any particular cause. They are most likely due to environmental pollutants, and occupational hazards, such as working in nuclear power plants.) [2]

Then, she says:

There is considerable evidence that sperm counts are declining overall […]

And attributes it to men’s defective Y chromosomes, when in fact, it’s due to the hormone estrogen, found in female chickens, and our drinking water [3]. Both are common ingredients of our diet. Estrogen counters the hormone testosterone, which is necessary for sperm production. A highly likely, logical explanation for men’s decreasing sperm count.

Then, the article switches to Oxford University Professor Bryan Sykes, who happily claims that ”Many species become extinct because their Y chromosomes apparently disintegrate.” Keywords: many species. This means humanity will become extinct if men’s Y chromosomes were to ”wither away”, as Bryan Sykes so aptly puts it.

Thank God that ”Others are keener to help keep men going.”

One of the world leaders in the field, Karim Nayernia, professor of stem-cell biology at Newcastle University, has already shown that unlimited sperm can be derived from early stem cells present in an embryo. He has also proved that it is possible to overcome the shortage of donor sperm by using the stem cells stored in bone marrow, generally destined to provide replacement blood cells on demand.

Such manufactured sperm would initially be used to restore fertility in men made sterile by cancer treatment, but the technology has other possibilities. Nayernia is awaiting ethical approval to see if he can also produce synthetic sperm cells from women’s stem cells. “We want to see if we can test the functionality of female sperm produced in this way,” he said. “There would be no possibility of using it for human reproduction. We want to use it to make other tissues.”

It gets even more absurd from then on:

The social trend that we are witnessing indicates many more women than expected could be migrating towards lesbianism.

Oh, the ignorance! Homosexuals are born, not socialized.

This on is a killer:

….there is growing evidence that women are outstripping men intellectually. Sociologists and education specialists are bemoaning the continuing triumph of girls over boys at every level of the education system […]

”Sociologists and education specialists…” So much for ”this is a scientific study.” You can tell it’s not geneticists, or evolutionists, who have conducted the research, as these wannabes know nothing of evolution; if boys out-performed girls in the education system 60 years ago, when schools were separated, then women have not ”evolved” to be smarter than men in a mere 60 years. I wonder what they think of the fact that boys used to out-perform girls at school, in the past. They seem to have left this out. Further evidence of these biased fools’ agenda. One thing worth mentioning that they also have left out, is that recent research points out men have an IQ of 5 points higher than women. This is supported by another study concluded by scientists and psychologists alike, but they didn’t mention that. Wonder why… Anyway, these IQ tests were probably biased in men’s favor, just like girls out-performing boys in the U.K. school system is due to bias towards boys. (Remember ”boys are stupid, throw rocks at them?”) Need proof feminists don’t want equality? They fought hard against helping struggling boys in schools. See the article Stop helping boys, says equality watchdog. (The report in the above mentioned article was written by feminist professors Becky Francis and Christine Skelton.)

A number of academics think that if you remove men’s higher earning power and their unique ability to father children, more women will inevitably choose to live with other women.

These ”academics” are most likely not scientists. Even if you were to remove these male ”abilities”, many women would still choose to live with men. Pardon me for my upcoming sexist statement, but if you were to remove women’s higher cleaning power and their unique ability to mother children, men would still choose to live with women, as can be seen today; we have dishwashers and washing machine, and men can adopt, but men still choose to live with women nonetheless. This is because homosexuals are born, not socialized.

Even if their findings were, indeed, correct, it doesn’t mean men will die off–a gravely incorrect assumption on Bryan Syke’s part. What it means is that men will evolve into women, but with only one X chromosome instead of two, making these new ”men” slightly more prone to genetic deceases. Furthermore, these ”researchers” have not found any change in women’s X chromosomes. Meaning that men are evolving too fast for women, and as a result, women will become extinct along with men, if men were to ”die off.” (They might survive a couple centuries more, due to sperm banks, but that’s it.)

References & Sources
[1] Men redundant? Now we don’t need women either
[2] Reproductive Infertility: Prevalence, Causes, Trends and Treatments (PDF)

Hoe hoe hoe!

Ho ho ho! It’s Christmas time, and Australian Santas are rebelling against attempts to ban the traditional ”ho ho ho” greeting to ”ha ha ha.” Guess Santa won’t be delivering presents this year!

Santas were told not to use ”ho ho ho”, as it was too similar to the American slang term ”hoe”, for prostitute.

Hoe Hoe Hoe!

Have a merry Christmas! Translation into political correctness: happy Holidays!

‘Are men really necessary? Good question’

ManA short while ago, while looking-up something on Google, I stumbled upon this article from columnist Minette Marrin from the Times Online: ”Are men really necessary? Good question.”

An excerpt from the article:

I loathe the word celebration, as it is now used, but what we need, I believe, is a celebration of men and masculinity. If feminism is running according to the usual historical rules, we will probably get one: a backlash is overdue. Men have wonderful qualities which women often lack and need. Men are much more likely than women to be of exceptionally high – and exceptionally low – intelligence; they are on average stronger, funnier and have a better three-dimensional sense and they are usually better at techy things. They are much more likely to be architects, composers, mathematicians, joke tellers and orators and are more inventive. As Camille Paglia once said, if civilisation had been left to women, we’d still be living in grass huts.

It’s a very interesting piece of writing. I invite you to read it for yourself.

Male nurses face discrimination

Male nurses in the United Kingdom cannot give intimate procedures female patient without a chaperon, yet female nurses can provide such an operation to male patients with no male chaperon present, according to the National Health Service’s policy.

The policy was based on the misandrist assumption that ”all men are sexual predators, untrustworthy, and voyeuristic”, according to this Telegraph article.

Chaperones are routinely offered to female patients when an intimate procedure will be given to them by a male nurse, but not vise-versa (male patients are not offered male chaperones when a female nurse will give them an intimate procedure).

The victim–Andrew Moyhing–sued claiming male nurses are treated like second-class citizens, but his case was denied by the tribunal. He was later backed-up by the Equal Opportunity Commission and managed to successfully alter the court’s decision. Moyhing was awarded £750 in compensation, which he refused as to not divert resources from the NHS.

The lie of the gender wage gap

How many times have you heard ”Women make 75¢ for every dollar a man makes’’? Or ”Women earn 23¢ less than men?’’ Probably many.

The amount women earn for each dollar a man makes changes all the time depending on who you hear it from. The reason being is that it was a lie passed on from person to person, and every time it was passed on, the teller would exaggerate or minimize the original amount, creating multiple different amounts. It is similar to stories of old; they were passed on from one generation to the next, and every generation would add or change a bit of the story, and by the end, it would be a completely different story from the original and there would be ten different versions.

There may be a few studies out there stating women make less than men due to evil, misogynist male employers being prejudiced against women and paying them less, but the extreme majority of those studies were made by feminists and only compare men versus women overall or full-time working women vs full-time working men overall. None of those feminist-conducted studies compared men and women within a same company, with the same job and job title, who have been working for the company just as long, working the same amount of hours each week, with the same flexibility (ability to work extra hours), with the same credentials & experience(s), who chose not take any maternity leave.

For years now, feminists have perpetuated this lie; the lie that women earn less than men due to discrimination on male employers’ part. I shall now put this lie to rest.

The origins of the wage gap are unknown, but in 1963, the Government of the United States of America passed a law–the Equal Pay Act of 1963–prohibiting sex-based wage discrimination between men and women in the same establishment who are performing under similar working conditions. Why are you, as a woman, not suing your employer for sex-based discrimination if you’re so sure you’re being discriminated against in the form of lower pay? If you work for a big corporation, you could become rich enough that you never have to work another day in your life! Let me tell you why you’re not suing your employer: because your employer is not discriminating against you, and neither are 98% of all the other employers out there. Male employers can risk their luck breaking the law to save a few cents here and there, just like female employers can, but it is extremely rare, and if it does happen, the employees end up suing their employer for billions of dollars and you hear about it on the news for weeks. Also keep in mind that men tend to be more aggressive in their negotiations and as a result, are promoted more often than women and receive a higher starting salary [1]. Keep in mind there is no incentive for employers to only pay a specific group less as employers wish to save money, and will pay anyone as little as possible!

Another recent study made by the New York Times found out that in big American cities, young men make 20¢ less per hour than young women [2]. Yes, you read it correctly: in big American cities, men make less than women. Just like women making less, it’s not due to discrimination, but their own choices.

Ask yourself this: if a woman and a man both had the same education and experience(s), and worked just as hard, why would anyone hire a man over a woman considering the woman is cheaper? Why would anyone buy a can of Pepsi for $2.50 if they can get it for $1.00? Imagine how much money an employer could save by having an all female staff! Let’s do a quick calculation:

30¢ ● 40 hours = $12/week
$12 ● 1,000 employees = $12,000/week
$12,000 ● 52 week = $624,000/year*
*Based on the average work time of 40 hours a week, the average lie that a woman makes 70% of what a man makes, and assuming the company has 1,000 workers.

That’s a lot of money! If you think the calculations are wrong, verify them for yourself! Imagine how much money international fast-food corporations such as McDonald’s would save!

The wage gap is not due to discrimination, but women’s own choices…and missing work more frequently [3]!

References & Sources
Women Less Likely to Negotiate a Higher Salary
For Young Earners in Big City, a Gap in Women’s Favor
Women Absent Nearly Twice as Often as their Male Counterparts in the Workplace

See Also
ABC News:
Is the Wage Gap Women’s Choice?
CBC News:
Revisiting the Wage Gap
The Wage Gap Myth by the National Center for Policy Analysis (PDF)
The Fact About Women’s Wages by the Nevada Policy Research Institute
Why Men Earn More by Warren Farrell
AAUW’s Fuzzy Math an Insult to Working Women by Carey Roberts
Gender Wage Gap is Feminist Fiction by the Independent Women’s Forum