Trans Male Attacks Ben Shapiro On National Television

Zoey Tur, a male and ex military, decided to verbally and physically threaten writer, and nice Jewish boy, Ben Shapiro on national television. Before I hear any whining about Ben Shapiro being a Conservative, stop. I don’t wanna hear it.

Dr. Drew had a panel discussion about Bruce Jenner winning an award. The panel went nuts when Shapiro flatly said males are males and Jenner is a male.

‘What are your genetics sir?’

That’s the question Shapiro asked Zoey Tur which resulted in Tur grabbing Shapiro by the back of the neck and threatening to put him in an ambulance. He also threatened Shapiro to wait in the parking lot after the show and on Twitter threatened to ‘curb stomp’ Shapiro.

Shapiro takes a radical feminist position on the trans question. Shapiro talked about Tur’s threats and even filed a police report on the manly behaviour of Tur. Here’s the video of Shapiro talking about the incident and replaying what happened.

CoolStoryBro Dude Is Like Totally Rosa Parks

A Canadian MRA tommygilfiger takes a trip to Poland with a bunch of other males and females. They have their own bus but it’s crowded and two people have to share one seat. During a dinner outing the girls get back to the bus first so they get on first. The boys are late. The teacher tells the boys they should sit in the back of the bus. MRA has a mantrum.

So quick description, I’m 18 (M) and I’m on a trip from Canada to Poland for this teaching opportunity, and there are around 16 of us total. 5 guys and 11 girls youngest from 15 to 20. We’re visiting a well known land mark outside of the city. And were taking a small bus on for our group. We were finishing up dinner and we had to use the rest room, but the girls all finished early and went to the bus. I meet up with them first and everyone is standing outside including all the organizers which are all ladies. I get there and the organizing lady tells me in polish that us guys have to sit in the back of the bus. I didn’t know what she meant, because I didn’t see why we would have to sit I the back or it could have been a joke about us having to sit in the truck because we’re late. Which if that was a joke I would’ve been fine because I try to keep a light sense of humour, but I digress. Let me get this straight I speak both fluent polish and English. But I was confused by what she meant by that so I didn’t really know how to respond. Then the lady asked If I understood, I guess questioning a comprehension of Polish. So one of the girls translated it. I replied that I knew what she said but I didn’t understand what she meant. They told me we have to sit in the back row. And I was like why would we have to sit in the back, and I asked how many seats there are. They replied with ‘4’, but there are 5 of us. He are decently sized guys and we have to squeeze into 4 already small European seats. I told them that it wasn’t fair and why we should be uncomfortable. They said because we’re guys. And that “it’s proper etiquette”, I stated that this was sexist. And they laughed at my frustration. I felt belittled and if any of you know polish it just makes it sound more patronizing being told that. They didn’t give any logical rational reasons, all they said was that because they’re girls, we should be sitting in the back. No compromise, just that we deserve the uncomfortable position. We got on the bus and honestly it’s terrible. I’m writing this write now with my cousins arms on mine and there is a giant sweat stain on my arm from him. Not his fault, just the fruit of situation mixed with 30 degree summer weather.

Yet, the most infuriating thing has been the laughing, that even if I did say something. They laugh and if I raised it to the attention of the organizers, all the girls would think I’m being a little bitch. You know what Fuck it, I’m going to tell her and I’m going to say that it isn’t fair. I’m done with their bullshit. There were more instances of gender stereotyping and sexism, however this was one that infuriated me and I felt like I needed to rant.

I do not identify as a men’s rights activist, but I’ve been reading many many posts and I see it daily. But I can mostly deal with it but I at least try to verbally let people know. And I’m lucky that my girlfriend sees this too. So lucky that I found a girl that sees equality the same way and not just saying she deserves something because she’s a girl.

Edit: it was a very small bus. There are 18 of us and only 17 seats. Edit 2: I apologize if I was unclear, but the girls with us explicitly stated that we had to sit at the back of the bus because of the fact that were guys. And they stated that it was “proper etiquette” for guys to do that for girls. What happened was not a result of the tardiness.


Twenty Years On

If you find yourself not knowing much about Srebrenica, it’s ok, I didn’t know much either. I was 24 years old and pretty ignorant of world politics at that age. I knew about the war in Yugoslavia but it was reduced to sound bites and magazine covers to the American public. There were the good guys and the bad guys.

A Short Intro on Srebrenica

Srebrenica was designated a ‘safe space’ for Bosnian muslim refugees and protected by a tiny UN peacekeeping force during the Bosnian War. The safe space of Srebrenica was overtaken by the Serbian army in July of 1995, the women and men separated, and the men executed and buried in mass graves. The numbers of men executed are argued about as is their manner of death. Some say 2,000 and others say 8,000 men were killed. I won’t address these questions in this post. I will just cover main issues.

Here’s a video explaining what happened in Srebrenica. It was made by Norwegians and is in English. It’s hard to watch.

AVFM Blames Srebrenica Executions on Feminism

AVFM’s Arne Hoffman wrote an article about Srebenica blaming the UN and feminists for the atrocities that occurred there. He claims the UN has a gynocentric mandate which allowed the Serbian Army to massacre the men who were deliberately separated from the women and children at Srebrenica.

‘Women, children and the elderly had been allowed to flee through the UN convoys; adult men from the civilian population had been left back in the city – despite the people in charge having been fully aware that, in such cases, it was almost always the male population murdered en masse.’~Arne Hoffman

Let me make my position clear so that people can understand where I’m coming from.

I believe the systematic murder of Bosnian muslim men occurred. They were indeed separated from the women, children and elderly and then executed by Mladic. Yes, they were.

We can debate why Srebrenica happened for years. Yugoslavia’s roots of conflict between its ethnicities go deep. Very deep. I am only writing this post to show MRA’s like Hoffman that there is no UN feminist gynocratic policy that either allowed or mandated the executions.

I researched Srebrenica and the Yugoslav Civil war and saw no such feminist mandate. None. UN Resolution 819 addressed Srebrenica and other so called ‘safe areas’ in Bosnia. A Dutch peace force named UNPROFOR was responsible for protecting the Bosnians but they couldn’t. The force was too small and not organized at any level.

It is true that many men were executed and the majority of women were not (they were raped, impregnated, and tortured instead) but not due to some UN feminist mandate. The UN could never defend Srebrenica and they knew it so when the Serbs started shelling the enclave, giving gifts to the Dutch commander, and then capturing some of the UN Dutch peackeepers, the Serbs easily walked in.

Let me say from here on out that murdering people is wrong, whether men or women. However, Arne Hoffman is indicting some boogeyman feminist policy that had nothing to do with Srebrenica. There are some deep questions around the Serbian’s justifications for executing the Srebrenica men which they claim were fighters under Naser Oric who, prior to Srebrenica, were raiding Serb villages and murdering Serbs from within the ‘safe space.’ There is also speculation about weapon shipments to the Bosnian muslim enclave in order to kill Serbs in neighbouring villages.

The truth of this Civil War has been coming out slowly over these 20 years. In my personal opinion there were massacres on all sides but ultimately the breakup of Yugoslavia was heavily influenced by Western forces and capitalists who wanted to stoke the ethnic tensions of each population using the backdrop of harsh economic conditions that existed in the 80’s.

Gender, Masculinity and War

Women on the whole did not actively fight in this Civil war. It was the ‘sons’ fighting each other while rich men in power were busy trying to get their piece of the power pie. This is patriarchal greed fellas. This is a bunch of men in every ethnic camp on every level wanting power over anything they could get their hands on. Indeed, what if the average man refused to pick up weapons against his neighbour and refused to fight?

Take a look this Serb soldier describing how his manhood depended on him picking up arms against his neighbours. You’ll see the effect of gender written all over every man, on all sides. They were the ‘sons’ of Yugoslavia, dedicated to masculinity.

So when Hoffman and AVFM whine that feminism is responsible for the death of the men in Srebrenica, I just want to put a book in front of them.  They wouldn’t read it though. Better still, how about the 400 page NIOD report? Maybe the 1999 report by the UN? Too complex for them. They need simple themes like ‘women’s selfish nature was responsible for execution of men.’

How the fuck can this be blamed on feminism? It can’t, of course. MRA’s will use any tragedy to justify their hatred of women and write long screeds about non-existent ‘feminist policies’ to inject into any situation in order to avoid serious analysis. It’s a shortcut to thinking for MRA’s. They seem incapable of analyzing a situation and wrapping it in any context. Context is a foreign thing to them.

Could the UN have done more to protect the ‘safe’ areas? Of course. Did some of the Dutchbat peacekeepers know what General Mladic was doing when he separated the men from the women? Yes. Were they powerless to stop it? Yes.

Whenever I wade into the Manosphere I find myself asking these questions: ‘Why do MRA’s make such silly assertions? What are they getting out of this?’ We can all speculate on why MRA’s make such stupid claims. My guess is that they like to emotionally rile each other up. One makes a silly remark and then the next guy has to come up with something more outrageous. Plus, the internet allows them to pile up and try to outdo each other. This is why the Manosphere is monitored by the SPLC and other organizations. It’s easy to imagine some guy getting radicalized by going to the Manosphere because it’s already happened.

I’ll leave you with a quote by a woman from Bosnia who is part of a feminist organization trying to help people heal and rebuild their lives.

‘Women were not the makers of the war and were not at the negotiating table when the conflict stopped. But they were the first ones to cross imaginary and imposed borders and began working on rebuilding the country inside out,”’ ~ Taida Horozovic

There’s the feminist influence fellas.

Compare and Contrast: Sandra Bland

Sam Seder made a great point on his show about Sandra Bland’s arrest. Check it out.

Here’s how a traffic stop is supposed to be done. This belligerent white guy doesn’t end up in the county jail and dead three days later. Also notice his New England accent, one of which I own, happily.

Contrast that with the cop who pulled Sandra Bland over. Sam talks a bit in the beginning:


What do you think was the reason the cop 1) pulled her over and 2) why it went down the way it did? Of course I have my own thoughts about this case and in time I’ll publish those thoughts.

Paul Elam ‘My Opinions On My Intellectual Property is the American Way’ and Other Bigoted Ass Ramblings on the Confederate Flag

Elam confederate flag photoUPDATE: Dean Esmay leaves AVFM and they claim it’s amicable but also say Dean wants to take his ‘activism’ in another direction and has health issues. Keep an eye out for why he really split.

Poor, white males and their racist terrorists who commit murder. That’s what the reaction of MRA’s and other right wing idiots has been like since Dylann Roof shot up a church and killed 9 people.

‘Only a fourth to a third of people in the South owned even one slave. Yet every White person is treated as if they had a slave owning ancestor.’~Dylann Roof

‘What gets me about your argument is that it (sic) appear to interpret the North as good, South as bad when that in nowhere a complete picture.’ ~Paul Elam

‘They are always thinking about the fact that they are black. This is part of the reason they get offended so easily.’~Dylann Roof

‘Today’s people love to be offended. Their victim mentality is astonishing. Sure 9 black people were murdered, but that does not give right to use such heinous atrocities to exploit for political gain and infringement.’ mgtowman (AVFM)

‘Black folks who the condemn the Confederate flag over slavery are hypocrites.’~AlfromBayShore AVFM

‘People that assign malice to the south remind me of atheists who assign malice to Christians by citing the Crusades. It’s true, Christians have killed in the name of Christ, and Muslims kill in the name of Allah. But let’s look at everyone to get some proportion.’~Joe Buck AVFM

They fought to save the union, not for black americans.

Elam’s gone off his rocker again in denying the Civil war was about slavery and yelling that African Americans should stop feeling revulsion about the Confederate flag because it’s only symbolizing ‘facts.’ He cites Fox News in his 2-source rant about those pesky ‘civil rights ‘activists” and their desire to shame him (he’s from Texas).

You know who else denies this reality? Gavin McInnes and of course Stormfront, the white nationalist website. (I won’t link that here)

gavin mcinnedSince I’m not an expert/historian of the Civil war let’s examine the South’s own words as to why they seceded. In the Declaration of Immediate Causes, the South admitted why it was seceding.

Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery—the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun.

The issue here is Paul’s ego. He’s a white male who’s placing his masculinity into a fucking flag because in his mind it represents white male power and ‘freedom.’  Hey, that’s sorta like White Nationalists! Even his own commenters get what he’s doing:

‘This is avfm, so perhaps an appropriate metaphor would be to cast the South in the role of todays’s men, and the battle flag of the confederacy as the mrm.’ ~billybob AVFM

Now for Elam’s flimsy little defenses of the flag which he calls ‘opinions about his intellectual property':

It can be summed up thus:

Some men in the North were bad too.

‘I hate the sight of the American flag.’~Dylann Roof

‘The American Flag would seem a much more logical choice given that there has been a thousand times more atrocities committed while waving it.’~Paul Elam

That’s it folks. Slavery in the South, in which the US fought a Civil war over, the Confederate flag being its most visible symbol, wasn’t really that bad because a few white men in the North thought slavery was great, or something.

‘I have no desire to blot out the artifacts of our history in order to offer meaningless appeasement to people who could be working on real, more meaningful problems than just choosing to be offended.’

Like the hordes of white males who’ve made endless videos on Youtube as a response to yet another white male going on a racist, terrorist shooting spree, Elam wasn’t going to be outdone.

The Confederate Flag, he says, is really about

‘the ending of slavery and subsequent efforts to keep the hope of freedom alive.’

WTF? Who’s freedom would that be?

‘I do not know what motivated a madman to commit those horrific acts in South Carolina. I just know that it wasn’t a flag that pulled the trigger.’~Paul Elam

‘So what drove his rage? We will never know.’ ~brxman AVFM

‘I wish with a passion that niggers were treated terribly throughout history…‘ ~Dylann Roof

A few MRA’s weren’t going to stroke Elam’s fragile white male southern pride. They attempted to educate him but were quickly banned.

Rule #1 at AVFM: You are not allowed to question or disagree with Elam when he shows the world what an insensitive bigoted asswipe he really is.

Here’s how it went down (thank you screen cap software) CLICK TO ENLARGE IMAGES TO FULL SIZE:



The MRA’s sure know how to appease Elam before disagreeing with him:


A mod steps in to try and reframe Paul’s argument which he rightly says is about pointing at the North and saying ‘but they’re BAD TOO!’David King standing up for Elam

You are abusing Paul by disagreeing with him, even though you pampered him before you did it. Banned.David King bans Fonda

‘If you don’t like what somebody is saying, don’t listen to them. Or, better yet, argue back with better logic and reason. More speech is always better than censorship.’ ~Mod David King at AVFM

Another MRA very carefully disagrees with Paul and asks a few questions

antisocial questioning Elam

Dean Esmay steps in to save Paul and scream obscenities at the commenter. You cannot disagree with Paul.

Dean ESmay sticking up for ElamThey decide to unban the first guy and give him a warning but he’s not going to let Elam get away with his non-answers and refuses to stroke Elam’s ego.ban gets reversed but Fonda gets a warning

Elam begs, in his own way, for the ban and says we shouldn’t be outraged at a white male killing 9 African Americans because it has nothing to do with racism. Elam is saying the same bigoted shit as white men on Youtube making videos saying we should look at everything else but white male racism and entitlement.

Elam reacts to the banning

Sue McCarley steps in. She wants the ‘warned’ commenter to submit to Elam by assigning her own meaning to Elam’s rant. She understands that Elam is masculinizing the flag and taking it as a slight to his poor manhood:not before driversuz argues for the last time with Fonda

He gets banned again, for the final time for refusing to go along with Elam. Elam finally shows he knows what censorship is when it concerns blocking but can’t figure it out when private establishments either kick out or don’t want to host his misogynist friends.

Fonda ultimately gets banned again

Sue McCarley suddenly thinks context is important and describes the article as being about bigotry. LOL:driversuz on the banning

Other MRA’s question Elam too:antisocial questioning Elam

Elam responds with some cover story about what the Civil War was really about (not really slavery) forgetting the premise of his article and dismissing African Americans and other civil rights activists.PE1

Then he completely counters what he just said and admits it was really about slavery.PE2

This comment shows precisely that Elam is masculinizing a fucking flag.PE3

Elam refuses to answer a single question by calling the questioner David Futrelle:PE4

Lynching is really women’s fault says AVFMer keen to minimize Elam’s bigotry:

Women's fault there's lynchingElam admits he doesn’t care about how African Americans feel. He’s all about facts and doesn’t give a shit about racism. Elam tells anyone who doesn’t like it, and by extension black people, to stuff it. These comments from Silvermane are being erased as I type by Elam.

Silvermane questions Elam tooPaul once again dimisses a question by labeling the questioner an SJW and claiming that banning the flag is a question of his manhood. He also dismisses black men with a curious twist:

Parul Elam puts men above black menI’m betting that the commenter was banned because Elam noticed I upvoted their comment. It’s pure projection. I’m glad I screencapped them since Elam is throwing them in the bin and erasing them from sight.

PE6 shapeshiftingThe rest of the comment section is MRA’s circlejerking about wars and other human atrocities as if they themselves are such manly men for doing so. The biggest battles these guys have ever fought were from behind a computer with a feminist on Twitter while in mom’s basement.

I love watching Paul flip flop:

‘The South did not simply start the war “just” over slavery, but soverignty as well.’~Paul Elam can’t spell

I agree totally that the south seceded over slavery, and little to nothing else, but as abhorrent as that institution was at the time it was indeed a state’s right, including states that did not secede.’~ Paul Elam

‘What I don’t think is semantics, though, is the idea that the north went to war over slavery. It didn’t. The north went to war over control of the south to maintain forced inclusion in the union — and nothing else. Not banking laws, and not slavery.’~Paul Elam

If you’re wondering about the links between white nationalist orgs and Paul Elam, there are connections. Elam is a fan of RamzPaul, a member of the white nationalist group American Renaissance where the Texas based Earl Holt III hangs out. Earl Holt III is the leader of the Texas based Council of Conservative Citizens that played a major role in radicalizing Dylann Roof. If you look at Ramzpaul’s video on Roof, you can see some Manosphere dudes there. It’s not a great surprise that the men’s rights movement overlaps with white nationalist movements. My friend from HailtotheGynocracy wrote about it extensively.

As a personal experience, when I attended University in Boston I came into contact with a southern dude who hung up Confederate flags in his dorm room. I listened to him talk for the first time and he wasn’t very bright. What an ass to bring that flag to Boston while attending Uni with several African Americans. He didn’t last at Uni and ended up leaving before the end of the first semester.

In the past week, since Roof’s racist killing spree, many articles are being published about the fact that the Civil War and the flag were about slavery because the right wing southern pride dudes are coming out of the woodwork.

“Confederates Speak: Yes, We Fought the Civil War Over Slavery” by Jackblog | Jackson Free Press | Jackson, MS

Fox News Contributor: ‘Civil War Was NOT About Slavery. Google It,’ And People Did (TWEETS) | If You Only News

The Confederate Cause in the Words of Its Leaders – The Atlantic

Exactly which ‘states’ rights’ do today’s Southerners say was worth Civil War? | | Dallas Morning News

Historian will school you:

I Will Not Argue About the Confederate Flag. | The Tattooed Professor

And finally, here’s a song that encapsulates Paul Elam’s thinking:



While surveying the shit holes of men’s rights activists I come across a lot of stories. The stories these men tell are pathetic and quite hilarious. To read about an MRA in their natural environment, or what we’d call reality, is to see them for what they really are. When they tell a story about their day to day life you can’t help but notice the social ineptness and complete inability to read human signals or comprehend the word ‘no.’ MRA’s tend to be pretty geeky as in, the stereotype we have of the geeks and the nerds who completely failed social cues 101. It’s no wonder there’s such a thing as Gamergate.

When I read these little tales I can’t help but think these men are doomed to live a life of total isolation. Men aren’t ‘going their own way’ out of some need to get away from women. They’re going that way because they have no clue what they’re doing. I hope they all go to ‘MGTOW Island’ or whatever the fuck they’re calling it. Just leave women and children out of it.

Here’s Bob Brown (pseudonym?) and his real life tale. Bob is/was a student in college and has come to the conclusion that Title IX is a real waste based on personal experience. Take it away Bob!

‘Title IX has been around since the seventies. It exists to protect victims of sexual misconduct, ranging from harassment to rape. It gives schools the ability to charge the accused with misconduct when there is persistent unwanted behavior or in serious cases such as a single instance of rape.

My school does not distinguish between which behaviors require persistent unwanted sexual advances and which behaviors are serious. But Title IX also adds an extra parameter to the definition. It also allows schools to consider behavior sexual harassment when it negatively impacts a student’s education or creates a hostile learning environment, saying this is discrimination based on gender. This broad definition of sexual harassment gives schools the ability to protect victims, but it prevents the accused from defending his or her innocence.

In most cases, men are the accused. Despite the ability to prosecute, this law does nothing to prevent against the most common cases of sexual misconduct. Furthermore, it does not prevent misconduct from happening in the future, as the worst sanction a school can impose is expulsion, which puts a potential sexual offender on the street.

There are many reasons sexual misconduct accusations reach a school’s administration. Persistent unwanted behavior is the most common, but serious cases happen more frequently than you might think. Because the definition is broad, “persistent” does not have a clear definition. Even if your peers would consider your actions reasonable, under Title IX, with as few as two unwanted communications, an administrator can consider you in violation of their code of conduct, especially if your accuser feels like your actions created a hostile learning environment.

Any physical act is usually more serious. I’ve observed both. I fell for a girl after spending a lot of time together studying just before spring break. I asked her out over text, and she gave excuses as to why she couldn’t meet. In the past, this has been cited as evidence that she didn’t want my advances. She said she wanted to be friends, and I expressed a desire to be friends as well. After spring break, I watched her harass male students, even going so far as to sit on the lap of a guy she just met without asking, creating a hostile learning environment for everyone.

After expressing my discomfort, we grew apart. Two weeks later, the sheriff escorts me off campus and tells me that I can’t come back until my hearing. Another member of our study group, a woman, routinely tells this same girl that she would become a lesbian for her. Expressing that these sexual jokes were unwanted did not deter this female student from sexually harassing my accuser. Despite more obvious sexual misconduct around me, I was the one facing expulsion.

All of these behaviors are potentially sexual harassment. The persistent sexual jokes from one female student to another, the physical contact without expressed consent, and multiple attempts to plan a day to hang out. While there are many reasons misconduct reaches an administrator, it’s primarily male to female harassment that seems hostile.

According to Crossing the Line: Sexual Harassment at School By Catherine Hill, and Holly Kearl, published in 2011 by the AAUW, 48% of students in a representative sample of middle and high school experience some kind of sexual harassment. With such a broad definition, it’s no wonder so many people “experience” it. I showed 20 people the transcripts of our online and text interaction, some part of the study group where harassment regularly took place, some were strangers. None of them considered any of the 9 pages of transcript reasonable evidence  that my behavior was either serious or persistently unwanted. Witnesses to our interactions reported the same results.

It’s clear that despite the hard line the federal government is forcing schools that receive federal funding to take on sexual harassment and assault, this doesn’t prevent sexual misconduct under the school’s definition; it only deters people from intentionally sexually harassing others or assaulting others.

The problem at the root is not satisfactory punishment. Advocacy groups continue to object when an accused student is allowed to remain on campus or is acquitted of the charges. The Washington Times, for example, described the situation Columbia University faced when Emma Sulkowitz began carrying around a mattress to air her grievance that “the student she accused of rape was not punished.”

Facing a hearing, two months from my degree (worth about $8,000 dollars so far), I face expulsion. This means I don’t graduate, I don’t finish the semester in good academic standing despite being an honors student with a 3.6 GPA, despite having to drop classes because I’ve been accused in the past, and that means I can’t use the credits I’ve earned to transfer. I’d have to start over again, and I just don’t have that kind of money.

I consider this a violation of my civil rights as I’m considered guilty before I even walk into a hearing. I’ve had two before, and this third one will be worse because they’ll cite my history as evidence of persistent unwanted behavior, meaning that they don’t need persistence with a single girl, they just need something similar to what I’ve done before.

While rape is detestable, and sexual harassment creates hostile learning environments, and schools should give victims the ability to prosecute, people lack the understanding that sexual harassment is not based on the intentions of the accused, and that it is not just serious cases such as derogatory terms like calling someone a slut, or stalking. Even telling someone sexual interest or asking personal questions about their sex life can be harassment according to my schools student handbook.

Unfortunately, I’m prevented from linking to the code of conduct or naming the school by a retaliation clause.

Students don’t believe that they’re doing anything wrong when they call someone a pet name, when they joke about sexuality, or when they ask about personal details in general conversation. Cited in my last hearing was calling a girl “Kit Kat” as a way to remember her name, asking about her ex-boyfriend, and asking her on a date multiple times – even though she said I could call her kit-kat, even though she agreed to go on a date with me, and even though she told me that she didn’t want to go on a date with me because she wanted to get back together with her ex-boyfriend.

They said that a pet name was “derogatory,” that I persistently made sexual advances even though she didn’t want me even though I was seeking clarity, which is something they teach in their listening course. I didn’t know I did anything wrong and felt I was actually doing something right. Now I see examples of harassment everyday. Even though I’ve started to tell people they’re misbehaving, they don’t believe they could face expulsion or even civil charges.

On the current course, the school could continue to increase the severity of sanctions and have teachers actively look for evidence of harassment; however, that would marginalize half the student population. Schools will not risk violating the right citizens have to access education of so many people.

A more reasonable option is to create standard code of conduct. This would outline behavior not just describe unacceptable behavior but describe a courtship process and how to handle rejection and reject unwanted advances. For example, courtship would require a formal request issued to the desired date and an impartial witness. Dates would have clear guidelines and a chaperone.

Should both parties request a date without a chaperone, then the school cannot accept sexual harassment claims unless the accuser issues a warning to the one harassing her and an impartial witness, such as a teacher, faculty member. To file a harassment claim without issuing a formal warning, a victim would need to file a civil suit. This would protect future victims, and it would it would afford the accused due process.

To read more about due process concerns here are two articles. “Five harsh realities of sexual assault in school,” and “Expulsion Presumed/No due Process.” The code of conduct would reference alcohol in date guidelines, making sexual assault more clear, and (as formal courtship requires a witness) it reduces the likelihood that consent is questionable, and that knowledge a person cannot give consent is questionable such as with disability.

This code of conduct could be easily distributed and prominently displayed around campus. Students would not glance over it thinking that they would not sexual harass or assault others, and it would provide a fair and objective measure to judge sexual misconduct. Protecting both men and women, preventing many future misconduct due to ignorance, and giving victims the same strength to prosecute assailants without ambiguity causing civil rights violations and due process violations.’

The first thing that jumped out at me was the nine fucking pages of messages he sent her after not being able to hear the word ‘no.’ You can see he perpetually asked her about sex and her sex life. The dude is totally clueless and his solution is a chaperone on dates and a manual to handle rejection. LOOOOOOOOOOL Then he gets butthurt and decides to start policing the entire school for instances of sexual harassment, probably to bring up at his expulsion hearing to justify his own harassment. ‘This woman sat on a man’s lap and you think what I did was bad?’

Should I make #Coolstorybro a regular feature here? If you like it, let me know.

Our Favourite Things: OPEN THREAD

1970’s advertisement for The Doric

I haven’t had an open thread in quite some time. This will be for my sisters to share their favourite things so we get to know each other a bit better and can cheer each other up with favourite things while wading in the swamp that is the Manosphere.

I’m a pretty simple person in that small things make my day. A smile from a woman on the street or a chat with a woman I meet really does wonders and allows me to get closer to women. Part of being a feminist, for me, is that solidarity I have with other women I don’t know. I make a point of sending out good sisterly vibes to women in my community.

I have other interests of course. I love mice, which drives the Manosphere nuts. Haha. They call me ‘ratlady’ which is hilarious since I don’t have rats. They can’t even get that right and you expect them to understand feminism?

I love aviation and watch a ton of videos watching the large commercial jets taking off. Here’s a comm air, a new 787 Dreamliner by Boeing that did a near-vertical take off at the Paris 2015 airshow. The pilots couldn’t do that with passengers on board although I wouldn’t mind it.

My next project is to build a model 747-400 to hang from my ceiling.

I remember when I was young I traveled extensively and flew at least twice a year. One flight I’ll never forget. We were going to Haiti and we took a late night flight from Boston to JFK, to stay over in New York for a night so we could leave early the next morning. The plane we took was a 747 (largest comm jet at the time) and it was almost empty. I felt like a little Queen having that huge plane to myself. I ran in the aisles, exploring under the seats. We stayed at the Hilton, right at the top suite and all night I could hear the planes coming into JFK. The sound of planes actually relaxes me and I slept so sound. Most people don’t like living near airports but I’d be a top candidate.

My favourite airplane. Model 747-400 Delta Livery

My favourite place is Bermuda. I’ve been there several times. The sand is pink. I love Front St. and The Southampton Princess where we always stayed. Each night, after dinner, I’d beg my grandfather for money so I could go to the oyster seller to find a pearl. It was $1 and oyster and the man would open it and if you found a pearl, it was yours. I eventually found one, a perfect sphere. My grandmother had it set in a golden cage on a gold necklace. I especially loved seeing the cruise ship called The Doric when I was young. The ship was massive. Everything looked larger when I was young. I know how mice feel about everything being bigger than them!

Capturing girlhood

I admit, I love traveling. One of my sisters on Twitter is in Puerto Rico, which brought back memories for me. I stayed there when I was 4 years old and went back again when I was 9. I remember seeing a manta ray for the first time. It was at least 15 feet across and had a leopard pattern. It was in shallow water.

My 3 month trip to Australia was my latest excursion. I had friends there who invited me to come. I sold my car to do it. The ticket was almost $3,000 dollars. It was an 18 hour flight, Vancouver to Los Angeles and then on to Melbourne where I stayed for a week, and finally a short flight to Tasmania, where I stayed.

Cape Barren Goose feathers

It was the first time I drank water from a mountain spring on Mount Wellington. I held baby wallabees, stroked a wombat and held a Koala. My favourite animals were the birds. I have several feather collections I snuck back into Canada to add to my large feather collection. My favourite bird was the Cape Barren Goose. The feathers have a black heart shape at the tip.

I could go on about my many travels but we’ll leave it there for now. Threads like these are my way of taking a break from misogyny-land. If you think I need to do these more often speak up and let me know. I’d like to hear from my sisters on their favourite things.

Aurini Wants $15 Thousand Dollars After Releasing 40 Minutes of The Sarkeesian Effect

Aurini has made a long winded, dishonest video begging for money and released and a 40 minute ‘preview’ of his silly movie The Sarkeesian Effect.

Who in the fuck releases a 40 minute rough preview?

Go Fund Me has forbidden Aurini from raising any money on their site so he’s taken to a simple donate Paypal scheme and he wants FIFTEEN THOUSAND DOLLARS. For what? I dunno since his editing is just Youtube quality, nothing special. You can tell Anita’s videos are much higher in quality and don’t contain terrible soundtracks that aren’t mixed properly.

Aurini claims his job is mostly ‘keeping Jordan from exploding.’

Anyone who can’t see the dishonesty in both Aurini and Owen deserves to see all their cash taken away from them so an adult can monitor it.

Aurini is begging for cash to hire a PI to dig into Anita’s past as suggested by porno-stalker Michael Whiteacre:

The 40 minute preview I won’t show here, but just link it. I have a feeling this will turn into a lolsuit as Aurini spent a great deal of time saying both he and Owen can use the footage which I doubt is true. He even released a contract on his website that was never signed by anyone but confirms Michael Whiteacre as the mediator. See my last post on the shady Whiteacre and his involvement with the shitty project.

As usual the men’s rightsers responsible for Gamergate and making and funding this film, along with some porn actresses who know less about video games than Anita does, can’t manage to make a single coherent argument against Sarkeesian.

The critique Sarkeesian did of Bayonetta, in which she claims the female lead character is hypersexualzed and objectified, is NEVER countered by Aurini and Owen. Aurini simply says that Bayonetta was designed by a woman, therefore it’s not made for a male audience and cannot possibly objectify women. *yawn* Even the cover of the game shows the female lead’s legs open with her crotch staring male customers in the face.

Aurini and Owen make strawman after strawman. It’s not even worth it at this point.

Introducing David Shackleton President of CAFE Ottawa Men’s Rights Group

David Shackleton is part of the CAFE (Canadian Association for Equality) men’s rights group. He’s president of CAFE Ottawa. CAFE made a video to promote his new book ‘Feminist Power Under the Banner of Powerlessness.’ He’s also written a book called ‘The Hand That Rocks the World’ which CAFE has promoted as well. In the video he explains how he refused to apologize to a woman he was working with for demeaning her. He mansplained to her why she had to do the photocopying while the dude engineers were paid more. He never says he was fired, but I’m guessing he didn’t last long in the working world. As CAFE has made him president of CAFE Ottawa, he was the main speaker at CAFE’s inaugural event in Ottawa.

He thinks women need men’s protection, money and political power. He proposes that men and women are unconsciously co-dependent. He thinks men have failed by ‘punishing’ women through removing their physical protection, economic abandonment and political power. Women’s three ‘power roles’ are validation of men, emotional tending of men, and giving sex to men and reproduction. Notice how the three power roles of men women are capable of doing themselves while women’s role (gender) is all focused around men’s needs? That my friends, is gender, and Shackleton worships it.

masculine and feminine

From David Shackelton’s post on MenWeb

For a moment I’d like to focus on gender and women. We say as radical feminists that gender isn’t real because we know it’s just a system of power, of patriarchy, that trains women through ‘gender’ education from birth to be of service to men. Whether it’s being the nurturer or the object of sexual gratification, it’s the system of male power that puts women in the subservient role. In other words, women can and do discard ‘gender.’

My sister Dirt who runs the blog The dirt from Dirt is one such woman. She, along with many lesbians, has thrown ‘gender’ in the garbage. This is how we know gender isn’t real: lesbian existence. This is also why men target lesbians for corrective rape. ‘Gender’ is why society sees lesbians as a warped version of a male because in patriarchy you are either feminine submissive or you are male dominant. Since lesbians don’t service men through ‘gender’ they become the dispossessed.

The freedom of women will be led by lesbians. I am convinced of that.

Boys tend to absorb and manifest those behaviours and attitudes described above as masculine, and girls to value and embrace the complementary feminine set. One consequence of that, of course, is that men and women are pychologically drawn to each other. The opposites attract because we unconsciously seek out what we lack.’~David Shackleton

David Shackleton: neckbeard misogynist who thinks women are evil doers.

Back to Shackleton. He was part of the father’s rights movement that was prominent in the early 90’s in Canada. He’s characteristically divorced (no surprise there.) His wife took the dog and told him she was going to the vets office and then phoned him to tell him she had left him this way because she was concerned for her safety. He uses this story to claim he doesn’t benefit from male violence, which he does.

He thinks feminists aren’t compassionate to men and we need to ‘feel’ men’s feelings. He wants women to be ‘held accountable‘ which usually means abused by men. His worship of gender is complete but of course can’t properly define them in any way that would make a lick of sense except to say the highest feminine archetype is ‘love’ and for masculine it’s ‘truth and the objective world.’ He’s just another Jungian rip-off psychobabbler, catering his crap theories around hatred of women.

‘Feminists are pushing into men’s areas,’ he chides, ‘and men are giving them more and appeasing, like Nazi Germany.’ He compares feminists to nazis again in his recent interview with CAFE.

‘The majority of women’s issue have been settled, they’re already in law.’

Knobhead. I can make laws against rape all day dude but if our society doesn’t change how it views issues around rape, like untested rape kits, victim blaming, male violence due to gender training, and how we count sexual assaults in statistics then I can prattle on about the law too. I can also tell you about laws made to protect the working woman but it’s no use if the employer discriminates and under his breath and won’t hire young women for fear of their biology. Look at the Tim Hunt issue. This dude is a Nobel laureate and during a public talk said:

“Let me tell you about my trouble with girls. Three things happen when they are in the lab: you fall in love with them, they fall in love with you, and when you criticize them, they cry.”

Notice first that he doesn’t call them women, but ‘girls’ as if they were children. He suggested sex segregated labs so that the wimminz aren’t tempting his dick and so the men can do ‘true science’ without hearing women crying, because we all know that’s what women do. Ever wonder why STEM fields are so difficult for women? This is the patriarchal attitude in every man that makes decisions about hiring, firing, promoting, work assignments and pay. Of course MRA’s and the other sexist menfolk are up in arms that Hunt was fired from his University post. ‘It’s just a joke!’


Shackleton thinks sexism and woman-hating are just jokes. ‘Issues that aren’t issues will get raised with great hysteria.’

He doesn’t think there’s a rape culture but a ‘moral panic.’ He’s not the first men’s rights weirdo that can’t get the definition of rape culture correct. The real problem he says is men being raped.

Shackleton’s website ‘MenWeb‘ is a good read if you want to understand how he compares women to children and Nazis. Because he worships gender and female submission he thinks women have no reason to fight for our rights. Women are too emotional to have an argument for their liberation in his mind.

‘modern feminist arguments always reveal themselves to be built not on objective gender equality but on female superiority.’~ David Shackleton

He labels feminism an ‘evil ideology’ based on ‘archetypally feminine child abuse.’ He also sounds like he’s against abortion like many other MRA’s including Paul Elam and Dean Esmay. He worries that women’s sexual attractiveness is getting out of hand and men are sexual psychopaths that never stop thinking about women’s body parts:

‘We have sexual harassment laws addressing the ways that men might abuse women’s sexuality in the workplace, but no laws addressing (or even acknowledging) women’s use of their sexuality to unfairly advance their careers.’

He denies the pay gap and compares women to welfare bums:

‘They want to increase their consumption without any increase in their production. They want a legal entitlement to it. And they’re getting it. Their goal is to regress women to the state of childhood: i.e., rights without responsibilities, consumption without production.’

His goals is to take the evil women down some notches. Notice he’s hurling this not at feminists but WOMEN:

‘we have to take women off the pedestal, and we won’t do that as a culture until we see the evil that they do.’

CAFE has a a lot of questions to answer. They claim they’re not against women but have a president that thinks women are evil. I recommend that all feminist activists in Canada who are monitoring CAFE take note of this. It’s clear to me that we have a serious problem in Canadian Universities and CAFE, along with its counterpart A Voice for Men, are the main reasons for this problem.

I was just reading the report on Dalhousie Dentistry whereby a group of men set up a private Facebook account where they expressed incredible misogyny, racism and homophobia. One of the defenders of the men claimed the reaction to the misogyny was ‘self justified  misandry  [hatred  of  men]  in  the  name  of  fighting  misogyny.’ ~pg 12 This is a hint that MRA’s are on Canadian campuses and injecting their particular brand of asshattery and misogyny into the mix.

CAFE has done everything it can to present itself to the public as an equality group but they are far from that. Their group is made up of men like Shackleton who would love nothing more than to hurt women in any way he can.