Quota Queens – Gimme Gimme Gimme!

 

On Sunday just gone I was flicking through various websites and decided to click into the Irish Times and lo and behold read this:

Funds for women-only professorships aim to end gender inequality: Government to back roles in third level institutions at cost of €6 million: Sun, Nov 11, 2018, 13:00: Carl O’Brien

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/education/funds-for-women-only-professorships-aim-to-end-gender-inequality-1.3693939

My first reaction, bearing in mind I was only on my first cup of coffee was………what a load of shoite! Saw the name Mary Mitchell O’Connor, sighed, saved it, closed it, and pondered for a minute  – wasn’t that the idiot who drove down the steps of the Dail (Parliament) on her very first day as a TD (Public Representative)?

And so it was – here for the benefit of those not familiar with this particular embarrassment in Irish politics is our illustrious “Minister” with responsibility for “Higher Education” Mary Mitchell O’Connor arriving on her first day as a “female” politician.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHWJPAC1EN8

Impressive – isn’t it?

Anyhoo, three specific statements jumped out at me – in particular because of the underlying ideological underpinnings, and because of that, the propagandist nature and misinformation being disseminated here.

The Government is to fund dozens of women-only professorships over the next three years to help “eradicate gender inequality” in higher education institutions.

It follows the recommendations of a taskforce which says dramatic steps are needed to ensure more women occupy key leadership positions.”

Clear evidence

However, Government sources say these posts will be in addition to existing academic staff and confined to areas where there is “clear evidence” of significant under-representation of women, such as science or engineering.”

Emphasis added

There are 7 (seven) universities in Ireland – ergo it naturally follows that there are 7 (seven) positions as “Head” of said universities – or as the IT article says “key leadership position(s)’

All Enrolments 2016/2017 – 125,281 in said Universities

https://www.iua.ie/the-irish-universities/university-fast-facts/

There are 14 (fourteen) Institutes of Technology in Ireland with 89,705 enrolled

http://www.thea.ie/

Overall, there are 45 publicly funded providers of Higher Education in Ireland.

Including for example The Milltown Institute of Theology and Philosophy, The Shannon College of Hotel Management, The Garda College (Police) The Military College, The Royal Irish Academy of Music.

But feminists are not really interested in these rather specialized colleges – are they? Can’t be much kudos being in a ‘key leadership position’ in The Shannon College of Hotel Management?

The IT article and a subsequent article on Monday makes very clear where the focus of attention is being directed

For a full list of PUBLICLY funded providers of Higher Education in Ireland see link below.

https://www.education.ie/en/Learners/Information/Providers-of-Higher-Education/List.html

So, yet again we have a another feminist whine, from the Quota Queen – Mary Mitchell O’Connor – though I think of her as Driving Miss Dozy Twat –  about mean men taking all the good jobs (usually in STEMM) away from poor disadvantaged and discriminated wimmins. Because…..well because………it’s not fwaire…..sigh.

The author of the first article on Sunday penned a follow up on Monday to ask:

Are plans to close gender gap in university posts fair? Creation of women-only posts in academia set to spark objections from many factions

Mon, Nov 12, 2018, 00:00

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/education/are-plans-to-close-gender-gap-in-university-posts-fair-1.3694042

Only this time he (Carl O’Brien) got more specific about where the ‘unfairness” lay – toward wimmin!

‘They are also far more likely to earn less, with men accounting for the vast majority of best-paid posts in higher education.

Some 70 per cent of those earning in excess of €106,000 are men at university level, while it rises to 83 per cent in institutes of technology.

Women’s chances of occupying a professorship also vary widely across individual colleges.

NUI Galway has the lowest proportion of female professors (12 per cent), while UL (31 per cent) has the second lowest, followed by DCU and Maynooth University (30 per cent).

There has also never been a female president since the establishment of the first Irish university more than 425 years ago.’

emphasis added

There are of course many private colleges – but for the purposes of this article the focus is on those that rely on the public purse for funding – including the proposed funding announced by Mitchell O’Connor ‘The Government is to fund dozens of women-only professorships over the next three years to help “eradicate gender inequality” in higher education institutions.”

Anyone want to take a bet that one of those makey-up ‘professorships” will be in………The Institute of Public Administration? My favourite though, is of course, The Shannon College of Hotel Management – 😊

Just to be absolutely clear – out of a total of 45 PUBLICLY funded Higher Education providers in Ireland, the focus of this latest bit of whingeing from feminists is, as always directed at positions – ‘key-leadership positions’ in very specific areas – areas that are considered lucrative, high profile, and apparently dominated by males because……..fill in the blanks yourselves…though most feminist whines can be encapsulated by one simple and pathetic phrase…………men are mean!

To summarise – if I may – this proposal is intended to create – apparently out of thin air – DOZENS of professorships, in highly lucrative areas, for ONLY women.

Okey dokey – in order to qualify for a position as a professor in Ireland and in usually most places in the western hemisphere a certain educational path needs to be embarked on at least 12 (twelve) years previously – obviously in the particular area that this numbskull (MMO’C) appears to be targeting – STEMM.

So, here goes. Quick summary of the level of study, length of study etc it takes to reach the point where you would be QUALIFIED to be appointed a ‘Professor” in Ireland.

Primary Degree                       3-4 years

Masters                                     1- 2 years

Post Doc                                     6 years

Research etc                              2- 3 years

Before anyone gets their knickers in a knot, I’m just giving a rough idea – have no intention of trawling through college sites and calculating times for each type of area of study.

On average, to reach the level required to be QUALIFIED to be appointed as a “Professor” of something in STEMM, we’re talking a minimum of 12 (twelve) years and a maximum of 15 (fifteen) years obviously depending on the complexity of your particular area of study/research. Which for the hard of thinking would mean that our putative female “Professors” would have had to begin their studies circa 2004/05, more or less.

See the links below for a quick look at Academic Paths in Ireland.

Ireland, Academic Career Structure

https://www.eui.eu/ProgrammesAndFellowships/AcademicCareersObservatory/AcademicCareersbyCountry/Ireland

GradIreland:Lecturer, third level

https://gradireland.com/careers-advice/job-descriptions/lecturer-third-level

Which very nicely brings us to this – courtesy of the H.E.A (Higher Education Authority)

Below is a graphic of the numbers of students enrolled in Ireland in third level study in 2004/2005 by area of study (general description) and by GENDER.

From: http://hea.ie/assets/uploads/2017/06/Key-Facts-and-Figures-0405-1.pdf

https://www.education.ie/en/Learners/Information/Providers-of-Higher-Education/List.html HIGHER EDUCATION: Key Facts and Figures: HEA funded Institutions 04/05

Take a good look – this is a graphic showing what areas of study Irish young people CHOOSE to embark on in 2004/2005.

new entrnts by field of study 04 05 HEA

Lets just concentrate for the moment on two areas – Science and Engineering, Manufacturing and Construction.

Science first – two areas immediately jump out with rather large discrepancies – Mathematics and Statistics where there were 122 male students enrolled compared to 65 female students – in effect nearly twice as many young men than young women CHOOSE this area of study.

But the biggest discrepancy is in Computer Science and Use (a relatively new area of study in Ireland at this time) 456 young men as opposed to 91 young women CHOOSE to study in this area – four times as many young men, CHOOSE to study an area that has now become extremely lucrative – bear in mind this I personally am not very technologically minded – but I do know that “knowing computers” is BIG.

Anyway – to continue – the next big area of discrepancy is in Engineering, Manufacturing and Construction – in all areas young men outnumbered young women by 834 males to 252 females, more than 3 times as many. In essence you only have to look at the figures to see distinct differences in the CHOICES young men and young women made (and I might add, continue to make) in their PREFERRED areas of study.

This is what feminists simply don’t get – or refuse to accept – PEOPLE make choices – young women made and make choices based on what they are INTERESTED IN – what really does stick in the craw of feminists is one thing.

Women make choices that FEMINISTS DON’T APPROVE OF.

I’d like to interject a little word to young women – DON’T let feminist arseholes browbeat you into doing or choosing things you personally DON’T like, don’t want to do and wouldn’t CHOOSE to do if feminist arseholes weren’t making you feel inadequate. – if you actually do like science, engineering, math’s etc – fantastic – me personally nope – but bear this mind – do it because you want to do it – and, if you are good at it, equally fantastic.

But – do NOT expect, or feel entitled to anything to do with your chosen profession simply because you are female – EARN your honours – get what you get ON MERIT, and if you’re the ‘only girl’ in a class full of boys in say engineering? So bloody what! Just get on with it – do the work – the same work – don’t be whining and sniveling and to be blunt being a girl – grow up – you’re either good at the subject or you’re not – it has nothing to do with whether you’re a girl or a boy.

Ok – let’s move on – and back to MMO’C and her pulling “Professorships”  out of her arse because a bunch of hatchet faced feminists have the hump over men making more money in areas where they (men) excel and women DON’T.

Let’s go back to 2004 – and have a look at Post Graduate statistics – produced by the HEA – and one would presume beyond reproach – they have a load of “Gender and Equality’ Reports currently on their website.

Anyhoo – if you recall, in order to QUALIFY for a position as a Professor in Ireland you need a PhD – so how went for this option in 2004 and more importantly in what areas and for the purposes of this article what was the “gender” breakdown?

Here it is:

post grad 2004

Just to keep it consistent we’ll stick with comparing the two areas we used for Graduate Studies – Science and Engineering, Manufacturing and Construction – shall we?

Again – see where the discrepancies occur – nearly three times as many male students went on to a Post Doc in Computer Science and Use as female students, nearly four times as many male student as female in Mathematics and statistics and in the Combined Engineering category we’re talking 34 male students to 7 female students.

I’m not going to bore you by going through each year’s figures that quantify the actual CHOICES that young people make when choosing an area of study – any normal sensible person (ie NOT a feminist) knows well that boys and girls show quite clear preferences from an early age in their areas of interest – many many studies have shown quite clearly where those differences lie.

I would recommend though that you take a look at William Collins seminal article Athena SWAN  http://empathygap.uk/?p=387  to get a clear and thoroughly researched expose of where this shoite emanates from.

What is clear is that Mary Mitchell O’Connor is an idiot – feel free to do your own research on this fool – she is after all a politician – an Irish politician – not known for an excess of functioning brain cells.

The area I really want to address with regard to this nonsense is the legal area – in a further article – but before I sign off on this one here are some resources to whet your appetite.

Bear in mind the core legal issue in this debacle will be the issue of Discrimination – and “Equality” and the place where this will be ultimately thrashed out in ECJ (European Court of Justice)

To that end – have a look here, as a bit of an insight into how the EU deals with “Equality” issues.

EU Gender Equality Law:  Seminar series in the framework of the European Commission’s Rights, Equality and Citizenship Programme 2014-2020

https://www.era.int/cgi-bin/cms?_SID=bf60056a4360c508a0950b2701be87f1f1c2a17500619721220498&_sprache=en&_bereich=artikel&_aktion=detail&idartikel=121643

Gender resources

https://www.era.int/cgi-bin/cms?_SID=3421f2274fef8ad43052718aefb8b3ac17a3b8f000152273532005&_sprache=en&_bereich=artikel&_aktion=detail&idartikel=121923

EU Gender Equality Law: Trier, 29-30 January 2018 – 118DV24 – EN/IT

I personally recommend you start with these two – some of the other “feminist” speakers will make you grit your teeth 😊

Positive Action and Gender Quotas in EU Law
Dr Panos Kapotas (September 2015)

Positive Action, (Gender) Quotas & EU Law
Prof. Dr Marc De Vos (May 2016)

e-Presentations

Each e-presentation features a top expert and includes high-level supporting material.

Gleiches Entgelt bei gleichwertiger Arbeit: EU-Rechtsrahmen und Rechtsprechung des EuGH
Cornelia Amon-Konrath (March 2018)

Definition of key concepts
Paul Epstein QC (March 2018)

Equal treatment between men and women in the access to and supply of goods and services: focus on the collaborative economy
Dr Eugenia Caracciolo di Torella (January 2018)

Gender pay gap and job evaluation
Sophie Latraverse (January 2018)

EU Working Time Regime, Work-Family Reconciliation, and Gender Equality 
Dr Ania Zbyszewska (November 2017)

UK Anti-Discrimination laws after Brexit
Prof. Sandra Fredman (November 2017)

The legal framework on gender equality
Marjolein van den Brink (November 2016)

Reconciliation of Work and Family Life
Marguerite Bolger (May 2016)

Positive Action, (Gender) Quotas & EU Law
Prof. Dr Marc De Vos (May 2016)

The EU Legal Framework on Equality
Dr Panos Kapotas (April 2016)

Remedies and sanctions in (sex) discrimination cases
Else Leona McClimans (April 2016)

EU-Recht zur Geschlechtergleichbehandlung: Definition der Schlüsselbegriffe
Prof. Dr. Christa Tobler (April 2016)

Reconciliation of Work and Family Life
Prof Dr Maria do Rosário Palma Ramalho (September 2015)

Positive Action and Gender Quotas in EU Law
Dr Panos Kapotas (September 2015)

The burden of proof
Philip Rostant (November 2014)

Le droit européen de l’égalité entre les femmes et les hommes
Prof Michel Miné (November 2014)

Latest EU Jurisprudence on Maternity and Pregnancy Discrimination
Prof Petra Foubert (November 2013)

Latest CJEU Case Law on Age Discrimination
Robin Allen (March 2013)

A year after the ECJ Test-Achats judgment
Prof Christa Tobler (March 2012)

Enjoy and Slainte

 

 

 

 

 

Throwing Down The Gauntlet to the TDSB – Toronto District School Board.

 

 

First off let me say this – I have received no communications from either wordpress.com or the TSDB about any matters arising out of my post:

Creating “Misogyny” out of Thin Air – in Canada – and Putting Children at Risk. – 01/01/2015

https://mensrightsarehumanrights.wordpress.com/2015/01/01/creating-misogyny-out-of-thin-air-in-canada-and-putting-children-at-risk/

In fact until “Lisa Goldsberry” sent me this youtube audio recording,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPQT66cNhds

I had never heard of the TDSB – it now appears, judging by the subsequent comments I have received that a hornet’s nest has apparently been stirred up.

I have gathered together and reproduced all the comments here and would ask if anyone else – including any member of the TDSB wishes to comment further, they do so here on this post.

Secondly – let me also say this – I am taking all these comments at face value – having said that, my inclination leans towards accepting not just the content of these comments as truthful, but the reactions, as outlined and stated in these comments of the TDSB as plausible.

As those who have laboured not just in the present but for many many years previously in the MHRM (Men’s Human Rights Movement) know, some to their cost, both professionally and personally – what feminists are prepared to do in order to maintain not just their clawlike grip on power, but how unscrupulous they are prepared to be to maintain that grip.

There have been too many documented examples of the lengths feminists in positions of power will go to in order to destroy any challenge or challenger to the poisonous influence of feminism – nowhere more so than when it comes to children.

As a result of receiving not just “Lisa’s” audio recording and Bobby Iven’s subsequent comment I did some digging. In fact I was already researching not just school policy in Canada but the care of children in general in Canada.

One of the places I found myself in was here. http://www.canadacourtwatch.com/

Of the reports I have downloaded and begun to study this one has horrified me – yes I know it sounds rather hyperbolic, but, horrified is the appropriate word to use here.

The unlawful detention of children at schools by school officials and CAS workers

http://www.canadacourtwatch.com/files/all/Schools_and_CAS_For_School_Officials.pdf

CAS = Children’s Aid Society.

There is something rotten in the State of Canada – and that rot emanates from the corrupt and poisonous influence of feminism.

Below is the series comments I have received on various different posts in relation to the TDSB – in the order they were received. Most recent to the first.

 

 

“F. Powell

Submitted on 2015/01/10 at 11:32 pm

This recording might be the same school in Toronto:

 https://soundcloud.com/canadianjustice007/the-office-administrator-lied-to-tdsb-worker

The person decided to call another department to figure out why the person was receiving a push back into contacting the school administrators. The TDSB worker claims that he received a call from the school administrator describing that the students were answering the phone calls. The TDSB worker claimed additionally that the office administrator at the school received a phone call, but she didn’t hear anyone [which is completely false because the 1st recording showed that she did speak with the person].

The school administrator acknowledged that the students were answering the phone calls during the lunch hour of September 15, 2014. This implies that the school administrator is blaming the students for the disconnecting calls, but the previous recording shows that the students are supervised by staff in answering the phone because one can hear a voice saying “hang up!” at 1:20. Strange.”

“F. Powell

Submitted on 2015/01/10 at 11:39 pm

Moderators,for your post ” Creating Misogyny out of Thin Air” has angered some of the higher level staff of the Toronto District School Board.

It looks like the Toronto District School Board is cowering under the platform of misogyny whenever someone in the general population attempts to question the school board.

It’s not surprising knowing that there are more female school administrators than men in some parts of Toronto.

Just to let you know, that the TDSB is trying to remove your entire blog because of your article which criticizes the school administrator in the recording.

I believe Bobby Iven has everything covered as to which school Superintendent is overseeing that school.

As I mentioned earlier, the TDSB is trying to find out how to remove your blog. I’m only a teacher who knows about this and would like to advise you before you sign in one day and you notice that your WordPress account is banned.”

Teacher at TDSB

Submitted on 2015/01/11 at 8:57 am

The TDSB is going down the gutter because of these incompetent teachers. Right now the school board is going through an intensive audit because of all of the financial scandals.”

“Teacher at TDSB

Submitted on 2015/01/11 at 9:06 am | In reply to anjaeriud.

I’ll respond to your question to F.Powell because I’m a teacher too and I live in Toronto, unfortunately.

The TDSB is one of the most corrupt school boards in North America, that the media reports that employees live in fear by their bosses.

To answer your question about Canadian women, I think it’s the female teachers who indoctrinate the students with feminism at an early age in school. If you wanted to know the most feminist universities in Canada, look no other than the University of Toronto and Ryerson University.

I think that article you wrote is relevant to this Youtube audio of what appears to be a journalist who complained that the same school hung up phone calls on him.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iktewmQvipw

Anjaeriud, the TDSB cannot take down your website that easily…I’m no lawyer but I guess that the TDSB have to lodge a complaint with wordpress or file a court order in the USA, which will be burdensome to enforce because America has freedom of speech, for now.

As for the previous article about the feminists creating misogyny out of thin air, I agree that the school administrator should know about TDSB policies and she should have been ready to summarize those policies.

Your article did indeed stir up some discontent by the upper-level staff at the TDSB and we know why, these school administrators are afraid of accountability and becoming exposed for incompetence.

Keep the blog going. Canada’s flag is already Communist in colour. Just don’t let radical feminism invade your country.”

Teacher at TDSB

Submitted on 2015/01/11 at 9:07 am

The feminists quotes sound like it came from a female professor from the University of Toronto and Ryerson University.”

Bobby Iven

Submitted on 2015/01/09 at 5:06 am

I stumbled on your blog. The phone number which was mentioned in the recording leads to Glenford Duffus. He is the Superintendent of the western part of Toronto.

A google search showed that the same feminazi posted another video, one who sounds like Ethan and a school secretary.

Link: vimeo.com/116131033

From what I’m hearing from some insiders at the TDSB, the principal of that school did record some calls and called the police to track the call.

In other words, the recording is real, but I don’t know how the recording got leaked. It sounds like Ethan recorded those calls to submit as evidence to the police and Toronto District School Board, but somehow those recordings are in the hands of feminazi teachers.

Which brings to a bigger picture; that fathers have no say in the welfare of their children at school.

The recordings uploaded by “Lisa” show that any father who confronts to question female authority are automatically labelled the aggressors. This is not surprising in the Toronto District School Board. The police takes the side of the female teachers and the feminist movement is allowed to attack fathers and frame them with impunity.

If you have any concerns, you can contact Superintendent Glenford Duffus or the TDSB. Don’t expect the school board to do anything except recording your calls and emails as evidence against you. This is how much feminism is a cancer in Toronto, Ontario, Canada.”

 

Personal Statement to the TDSB from Anja Eriud

I invite any member/official of the TDSB to post a comment/statement on this blog – please note I will only post that comment if it comes from a TDSB email address.

Unlike feminists I do not operate in the shadows – several allegations have been made against this organisation and it members/officials – and I offer to you the right of reply.

That is what normal civilised people do.

Should this organisation or any of its members/officials prefer to undertake the kinds of actions alluded to in the above comments – ie. Attempt to silence me or have this blog removed from wordpress (a not unknown activity of feminists and their acolytes) then I will take any and all steps I deem necessary to shine a spotlight on these actions – including legal action.

The notion that a “foreign” body/organisation would attempt to interfere with not just the Constitutional Rights of an Irish citizen to exercise Freedom of Speech – but internationally protected rights to Freedom of Speech – ICESCRInternational Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural Rights – and ICCPRInternational Covenant on Civil and Political Rights – of which both The Republic of Ireland and Canada are signatories – could almost create a “diplomatic incident”

That would be just awful – wouldn’t it? 🙂

 

For the benefit of parents and/or interested parties in the TDSB area here is the “Schedule of Board and Standing Committee Meetings – 2015

http://www.tdsb.on.ca/Portals/0/Leadership/docs/BoardMeetingSchedule.pdf

By the way the – Administration, Finance and Accountability Committee of the TDSB meets on January 28th 2015 at 5.00 pm

*Time and location of meetings will also be identified on the meeting agenda.

Agendas are available on the following website. http://www.tdsb.on.ca/_site/ViewItem.asp?siteid=88&menuid=300&pageid=230

Select Agendas, then the appropriate meeting from the pull-down menu at the top of the page

All information pertaining to the TDSB – including its Board of Trustees and Ward Councils can be found at the following link.

They have helpfully supplied the email addresses of the Trustees click on the link below.

http://www.tdsb.on.ca/Leadership/Trustees.aspx

 

To the TDSB – the ball is now in your court. 🙂

 

Anja Eriud

 

 

 

To Boldly go………Absolutely NOWHERE good!

 

According to this next generation of baby feminists – you know the one’s I’m talking about –  the ones who write asinine little pieces and articles in online publications and blogs – the ones who took “women’s/gender studies classes in college and came out clutching their parchments in one sweaty hand while striding forward to take their place as the leaders and shakers of the world. During the last 10 to 15 years, they are the new fourth wave of 21st century feminism

Those baby feminists, those social justice warriors, those social and cultural “commentators” are here to take up the banner of feminism and achieve what previous “waves” of feminism have apparently failed to do, after over nearly 100 years or so of activity – equality. For women. (that’s some effective campaign you got going on there, if you haven’t achieved your goal after 100 years!)

Yep – according to them, feminism is about achieving equality – for WOMEN. That’s it, equality per se is never actually defined, a cogent analysis of where, what and how supposed “inequality” manifests itself is never offered – it just happens – so there! Not talking about bullshit “issues” like the “male gaze” or being “objectified” or a mythical “rape culture” which is simply a product of the fevered and over active imaginations of over sexualised sluts, and a device to keep feminists in lucrative jobs.

I have a few insights for them – first one being – they’re not really feminists – seriously – you’re not – oh you’ve got the jargon down pat, you may even have read a few tedious examples of feminist “literature” and some feminist “studies” but in general, you went into college with one huge disadvantage, and came out with a useless piece of paper and an attitude. A particularly nasty, unlikeable, and rather immature attitude. What you didn’t come out as was – educated.

What? I’m admitting that girls go into and come out of college with a disadvantage? Yep, I am, but before all my fellow MHRA’s get ready to take me to task – let me explain.

BOTH boys and girls leave school with an enormous disadvantage, which manifests itself differently in boys than it does in girls.

The problem for both boys and girls is the very nature of both primary/elementary and secondary school/high school – boys get discouraged from learning because how they like to learn is deemed to be “wrong” and girls get over encouraged, because how THEY like to learn is deemed “right”.

Neither approach achieves the things that school is meant to achieve – develop the ability or desire to continue learning, or to give students the learning tools they need to progress to next level – self-directed learning. –

The other problem of course is what and how girls are “taught” – girls are praised for being mediocre, for showing up, for producing sub-standard “work” for merely parroting what they are indoctrinated with. In effect, girls come out of secondary school with the intellectual and emotional maturity of 12 year olds, spoilt, obnoxious, shallow 12 year olds, and as tantrum throwing brats and total pains in the arse.

Over the last 20 years or so, colleges and universities have not just recognised, encouraged and facilitated this, but have tailored their “courses” the ones that the vast majority of girls take, to accommodate this lack of cognitive ability, lack of critical thinking ability and complete lack of ability to form either a coherent thought or express it in anything other than the most immature, superficial and to be blunt dumbest way.

While boys are more seriously disadvantaged by this less than adequate primary and secondary educational “experience” they have one singular advantage over girls – generally boys chose different areas of interest, they have different capabilities which are not dependant on their “feelings” and boys are capable to a greater extent than girls of self-directed learning, not just from an early age, but inherently.

Girls need to be coddled, encouraged, constantly praised for every little thing they do, girls want ongoing approval and gold stars – boys?  Boys will take apart a computer, a toaster, a car – just to see how it works – and more importantly WHY it works.

I realise I am making some rather grand sweeping assumptions here, and that there are exceptions, but this is not a academic essay outlining empirical conclusions – just a general overview of the phenomenon of the complete dumbing down of education, primary, secondary and college education – and a hypothesis that posits – the dumbing down starts on the first day of school. Boys can and do overcome it, girls chose not to.

Back to my original assertion – that our current crop of baby feminists are not really feminists. They couldn’t possibly be, for one simple reason, they are completely incapable of evaluating, comprehending or analysing anything but the most basic concepts. They come to college educated on a diet of soundbites, of superficial feelings based “opinions” and with an egocentric worldview that filters everything through the prism of HOW it makes them feel. The onus being on, if something makes them feel bad, it is bad. They are feminists in name only.

Now, while most of the “writings” of those pioneers of second and third wave feminism (the ones that find themselves onto college reading lists) are turgid incomprehensible academic gobbledygook, even this shoite is beyond the comprehension ability of our latest generation of baby feminists, oh yes they’ve probably “read” it, maybe even written assignments citing it, but in possession of an ability to critically assess or analysis it? Nope. Bit like eating corn, it goes in and comes out the other end looking more or less the same. (Sorry – gross image, but effective?)

Nothing makes an intellectual pygmy feel more “bad” than feeling like an intellectual pygmy. Struggling to understand concepts, being confused and unable to process complex or convoluted “philosophical” ideas – all this makes someone who has been indoctrinated to believe she is super special, super smart and super brilliant feel really REALLY bad, ergo – it is bad – and if it is bad – it is wrong. End of discussion. Unless it is feminist “thinking” then even though they haven’t really got a clue what the hell the “author” is on about – its feminism, its about WOMEN – ergo – it MUST be good! Duh!

Shall I pause while all those baby feminists finish spluttering in rage, get all that “how dare you tell me I’m not a feminist” ranting out of the way? Guuuuuuurls, here’s how it works, you don’t get to tell ANYONE what feminism is or isn’t – it’s an idea, a set of opinions, a mish mash of “concepts” put out there into the public domain – ergo – it is whatever those who evaluate it say it is. Get over it.

 Moving on.

Historically,  “women’s rights” advocates, and unlike feminists, and I DO draw a clear distinction between advocates for “women’s rights” and feminists – regardless of feminists efforts to not just rewrite history, but to assimilate into feminism some of those who would have been horrified to be associated with “feminism”  – anyway, they wrote some stuff – quite intellectual “stuff” the kind of “stuff” that would go completely over the heads of these baby feminists – and when I say “women’s rights” advocates, I don’t mean female suffragettes/ists either.

I’m using the word “stuff” so as not to scare all the baby feminists, or make them feel bad about themselves – also, I’m not talking about frustrated housewives (Betty Friedan) sociopaths (Valerie Solanas), self-promoting attention seeking hippies (Germaine Greer) seriously disturbed man-hating lesbians (Andrea Dworkin/Shulamith Firestone/Kate Millet) or even more seriously disturbed bitter and twisted legal experts (Catherine MacKinnon)

Nope – hard though this may be to believe – the world of intellectual, philosophical thinking DIDN’T begin on the 1st January 1959.  Perhaps even harder for you all to believe, women contributed very little to the canon of philosophical thinking and literature – which is probably why you’ve never actually been exposed to these great thinkers – the emphasis being on the word “thinkers”

What all you baby feminists are is Gynocentrists – you are all simply whining and wailing for a world where being female means being endowed with special privileges, with unearned adoration for being born, with an unlimited and ever expanding freedom to be as obnoxious, as vicious, as criminal, as abusive, as nasty, as vile, as inhumane, as toxic, as stupid, as murderous, as avaricious, as greedy, as unethical, as egotistical and narcissistic as you like – and to be allowed to get away with it.

You could give a rat’s arse about “rights” – Human Rights – what you care about is maintaining and expanding female privilege.

Misguided, deluded and disturbed as most of those second and third wave pioneer feminists I mentioned above are and were, they did superficially “care” about “women’s rights” – granted they were completely wrong, and indulged themselves in major histrionic meltdowns about MINOR issues that were and would have been resolved in a reasonable and intelligent way – but – to be fair – now and again – they made some MINOR valid points, about societal attitudes prevalent at that time – but one does not and cannot legislate for “attitudes” for cultural mores – nor does one campaign for “rights” that can only be achieved by depriving others (men and boys) of theirs.

So, they launched a campaign of whining, of political nagging, of tantrum throwing, of petty vicious and nasty social, cultural and legal aggression. They bullied, coerced, blackmailed and LIED.

Feminism was and is a campaign for INEQUALITY if it is anything. From a legislative perspective, there are no rights that men have that women DON’T HAVE – in fact the reverse is true – it is Men’s Human Rights that have been systematically stripped from them over the last 50 or so years.

So, to all you baby feminists, not only are you not feminists but Gynocentrists, you are all, without exception as dumb as a bag of hammers. Read a goddamn book now and again – would you? Take a look in a mirror at yourselves, try to imagine for one instant when you’re being YOU what other people see.

In fact, rather than dismissing what the MHRM says about females like you – consider this – it isn’t them – it IS you – you are everything and more we say you are – even on your best day – most of you are barely tolerable human beings. You are enveloped in an invisible cloud of nastiness, vanity, shallowness, egotism and narcissism that completely blinds you to what you really are. Not super special, NOT super smart, NOT super brilliant, and with the intellectual depth of a puddle, but more than this, you are invariably:

Exceptionally nasty human beings.

 

© Anja Eriud 2014

A Modest Proposal….Because Equality Rocks!!!

 

Had an interesting discussion with a friend today, about all things feminist and how to further the progress of Men’s Human Rights.

As chats with friends do, things got a bit “silly” but something I believe that might be worth putting out there…..emmmm…. emerged.

As a certain feminist has been earnestly telling us –  women in effect have the answer to all problems male and therefore should be in charge of all programmes, courses and initiatives to do with improving the male – the reverse should be true?

Now, before I go on let me just say that my reference to “a certain feminist” is because I basically have a pain in my arse typing her name.

Anyhoo – moving on – where was I?

Ah yes, as feminists are the acknowledged (by themselves it must be said) experts on all things male, doesn’t it make sense that male MHRA/MRA’s are the experts on all things female.

Therefore I propose a new Femininity Studies Course – designed, prepared and delivered by – MHRA/MRA’s – well, if “they“can have a Masculinity Studies Coursewe” can have a Femininity Studies Course?

Makes sense – and this is the era of “striving for equality” is it not?

My nominations for Course Director(s) are:

Paul Elam of AVfM. http://www.avoiceformen.com/

John Hembling (JtO) http://www.johntheother.com/

Fidelbogen. http://counterfem.blogspot.com/

Proposed Course Modules

History –  Femininity through the ages: Or skirting the law in high heels while going backwards.

Robert St Estephe of The Unknown History of Misandry

http://unknownmisandry.blogspot.com/

Peter Wright (Tawil) Gynocentrism and its Cultural Origins

http://gynocentrism.com/

Relationships – Putting the Fe(e) in Fe(e)male: It ain’t cheap to end up looking this cheap.

AngryHarry http://www.angryharry.com/

Dean Esmay. http://www.youtube.com/user/deanesmay    

Andybob. http://www.avoiceformen.com/a-voice-for-men/andybobs-corner-vol-1/ 

Economics – Money Makes My World Go Round: What’s yours is MINE, and what’s mine is MINE.

Unassigned – suggestions welcomed.

Equality – Real Equality: 2 + 2 = 5 and 54% is a minority. Equal means BETTER!

Unassigned – suggestions welcome.

Consider this a “consultation” document – any and all suggestions for various modules and course lecturers of said modules welcome.

 Please bear in mind though, that as feminists (mostly female) are THE experts in “Masculinity” it naturally follows that MHRA’s/MRA’s are THE experts in “Femininity” though suggestions from anybody – no matter what they have in their knickers/pants more than welcome

EQUALITY ROCKS!!!!

 

My sincere and heartfelt thanks to Bibi for her excellent suggestions – most of which were too…emmmm…rude…and anatomically impossible, to post. 🙂

 

Que Sera, Sera……

For those of you not old enough to remember, this is the title of a song Que Sera, Sera (Whatever Will Be, Will Be)“, first published in 1956, is a popular song written by the Jay Livingston and Ray Evans songwriting team. The song was introduced in the Alfred Hitchcock film The Man Who Knew Too Much (1956), starring Doris Day and James Stewart in the lead roles”. See here and here.

Que Sera, Sera (Whatever Will Be, Will Be)

When I was just a little girl

I asked my mother, what will I be

Will I be pretty, will I be rich

Here’s what she said to me.

Que Sera, Sera,

Whatever will be, will be

The future’s not ours, to see

Que Sera, Sera

What will be, will be.

When I was young, I fell in love

I asked my sweetheart what lies ahead

Will we have rainbows, day after day

Here’s what my sweetheart said.

Que Sera, Sera,

Whatever will be, will be

The future’s not ours, to see

Que Sera, Sera

What will be, will be.

Now I have children of my own

They ask their mother, what will I be

Will I be handsome, will I be rich

I tell them tenderly.

Que Sera, Sera,

Whatever will be, will be

The future’s not ours, to see

Que Sera, Sera

What will be, will be.

 

Song lyrics hereYoutube of song performance here

It’s a catchy song with a nice melody, and of course, it is just a song, no earth shattering philosophical revelations.  Thing is, it does encapsulate a couple of rather important ideas. From a parenting perspective.

First that children turn to their parents, as role models, as the source of reassurance and guidance, and more importantly for answers.

It also illustrates something fundamental, a question that children and young people yearn to have an answer to – What will I be?

Our children are to some extent what we, as their parents make them, for good or bad, which is of course subjective, individuals having their own measure of what constitutes good, and bad. The song was released in 1956, and is of its time, for those who take issue with the lines about “will I be pretty” or “I asked my sweetheart”.

It  is worth noting that in 1956 getting married and having children was the “norm” mothers staying in the home to raise those children was the “norm”.  Betty Friedan’s book The Feminine Mystique wasn’t published till 1963, the book that is “credited with sparking off second wave feminism” see here.

Today’s generation of 15 – 17 years olds were born between 1996 – 1998 and their parents, who lets just assume were about 25 when they were born, entered this world in 1988, and their parents in 1963, the year Friedan’s book came out.

So, roughly we could say that we now have two generations who came of age under the influence of feminism and for todays 15 – 17 year old’s whose grandparents and parents were living during what has been characterised as the second and third wave of feminism. We’ll leave “first wave feminism” till last.

Second Wave feminism.

“The second wave began in the 1960s and continued into the 90’s. This wave unfolded in the context of the anti-war and civil rights movements and the growing self-consciousness of a variety of minority groups around the world. The New Left was on the rise, and the voice of the second wave was increasingly radical. In this phase, sexuality and reproductive rights were dominant issues, and much of the movement’s energy was focused on passing the Equal Rights Amendment to the Constitution guaranteeing social equality regardless of sex.” See here.

“We then move on to the second wave of feminism, which emerged in the 1960s to 1970s in postwar Western welfare societies, when other “oppressed” groups such as Blacks and homosexuals were being defined and the New Left was on the rise. Second-wave feminism is closely linked to the radical voices of women’s empowerment and differential rights and, during the 1980s to 1990s, also to a crucial differentiation of second-wave feminism itself, initiated by women of color and third-world women.” See here

Third Wave feminism

 “We end our discussion with the third feminist wave, from the mid-1990s onward, springing from the emergence of a new postcolonial and post socialist world order, in the context of information society and neoliberal, global politics. Third-wave feminism manifests itself in “grrl” rhetoric, which seeks to overcome the theoretical question of equity or difference and the political question of evolution or revolution, while it challenges the notion of “universal womanhood” and embraces ambiguity, diversity, and multiplicity in transversal theory and politics.” And here.

“The third phase of feminism began in the mid-90’s and is informed by post-colonial and post-modern thinking. In this phase many constructs have been destabilized, including the notions of “universal womanhood,” body, gender, sexuality and hetreronormativity. An aspect of third phase feminism that mystifies the mothers of the earlier feminist movement is the readoption by young feminists of the very lip-stick, high-heals, and cleavage proudly exposed by low cut necklines that the first two phases of the movement identified with male oppression. Pinkfloor expressed this new position when she said; “It’s possible to have a push-up bra and a brain at the same time.” here.

So what is it that will influence the world our children will inherit? Is it to be a continuation of feminism that this present generation of boys and girls will be influenced by? Is feminism to be the dominant ideological influence that informs the majority of public policy?

What WILL our soon to enter the adult world, children and young people be? In particular what will your sons be, or allowed to be?

Well, with each succeeding generation the influence of feminism has grown, has impacted not just on how we think and feel about men, women, children and human relationships, but insinuated its influence into the very political structure of our societies and cultures.

Before we go on, you might have noticed that I skipped a “wave” the first wave –

First-wave feminism arose in the context of industrial society and liberal politics but is connected to both the liberal women’s rights movement and early socialist feminism in the late 19th and early 20th century in the United States and Europe. Concerned with access and equal opportunities for women, the first wave continued to influence feminism in both Western and Eastern societies throughout the 20th century.” See here.

and

“The first wave of feminism took place in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, emerging out of an environment of urban industrialism and liberal, socialist politics. The goal of this wave was to open up opportunities for women, with a focus on suffrage. The wave formally began at the Seneca Falls Convention in 1848 when 300 men and women rallied to the cause of equality for women. Elizabeth Cady Stanton (d.1902) drafted the Seneca Falls Declaration outlining the new movement’s ideology and political strategies.” See here.

What is certain is that each generation, its mores, its thinking and its perspective impacts on the following generation. With each succeeding generation taking up the torch, so to speak, and running on ahead with it, making it their own.

It would be disingenuous to not acknowledge that with the birth of the information age, feminism has taken on a new energy, a more pervasive presence. Aligned to that is the rise of anti-feminism, of a growing counter/anti feminism known collectively as the Men’s Rights Movement.

We are now engaged in not just a battle to roll back and eliminate the insidious influence of feminism in our culture, but in a battle for the hearts and minds of the next generation. Unfortunately feminism has a bit of a head start on the Men’s Rights Movement and has, over the last two generations entrenched itself into positions of power and influence in politics, in education and in the judicial system. Particularly in education.

Sounds ominous, doesn’t it? actually yes and no, before the dawn of the information age, most people got their knowledge about feminism from very limited sources, now, at the click of a mouse anyone can literally go back in time and see just exactly what those early feminists really said, just exactly how feminism has managed to insinuate itself into those positions of power and influence.  More importantly anyone can track and plot how feminism has corrupted, has poisoned and has lied its way down the generations and brought us to the point we are at now. 

If you believed that feminism was about “equal rights” or if you believe that feminism is a benign influence in our culture that just wants boys and girls to have the same life chances and to stand shoulder to shoulder and side by side as equals, you are sadly mistaken. So, let’s just take a look at the end result of what three generations of feminism has achieved, in particular in education.  Because, apart from parental influences the second most powerful influence on young boys and girls comes when they go to school. Because it will provide an answer to the question “What Will I Be? If that question is asked by a boy.  Therefore:

Let’s talk about “The Boy Crisis”

“For more than three decades Congress has answered, “How high?” to the feminist command to jump, and provided millions in funding for the Women’s Educational Equity Act (WEEA). If legislation passed by the Senate Appropriations Committee in July 2006 was any sign, this year will be no exception despite the fact that the only inequity girls experience is being superior to boys on nearly every indicator of academic excellence.”

Boys are in trouble. Yet despite glaring inequities, the tired myth of the short changed girl remains strong enough to seize another $2.9 million from taxpayers last year for an outdated federal program. Even more unfortunate is how the myth of inequity is wielded to oppose real reforms that help boys and girls.”  See here.

Who is to blame for this “boy crisis? Well this is what Christina Hoff Sommers believes.*

“The American thinker Christina Hoff Sommers, author of the book The War Against Boys: How Misguided Feminism Is Harming Our Young Men, wrote that “the idea that schools and society grind girls down has given rise to an array of laws and policies intended to curtail the advantage boys have and to redress the harm done to girls.”

To Continue, Sommers in a scathing criticism lays the blame squarely at the feet of…….one particular feminist.

“Sommers traces it back to the work of one academic feminist, Carol Gilligan, a pioneer of “gender studies” at Harvard University. Gilligan’s speculations launched a veritable industry of feminist writers, citing little or no reviewable data, lamenting the plight of girls “drowning or disappearing” in the “sea of Western culture”

 “Most of Gilligan’s published research, however,” Sommers points out, “consists of anecdotes based on a small number of interviews.

“Sommers has identified the work of Gilligan and her followers as “politics dressed up as science” and points out that she has never released any of the data supporting her main theses. Nevertheless, the idea that girls are lagging behind boys continues to lead the discussion at nearly every level of public policy on education, and not only in the U.S.”

 “The global reach of American left-wing feminism has led to similar changes, and similar outcomes, in nearly every Western nation.” See here.

*Sommers is a feminist, or at least self-identifies as one, which I personally find a bit strange.

The answer for your son is that he will be:

Four times more likely to take his own life if suffering from depression.

”Although girls are more prone to depression, the suicide rate among teenage boys is four times higher. One theory as to why is that girls generally have more intimate friendships than boys do. In times of stress, girls can often lean on one another for emotional support, whereas boys tend to internalize their feelings” See here.

In extreme cases his rage and pain will explode.

Suicide is decreasing for our daughters as we increase our daughters’ ways of succeeding; it is increasing for our sons as we increase our sons’ ways of failing. Our schools are focused on raising the self-esteem of girls, on special programs for girls in math and science, on scholarships for females only. But it is our sons who are more likely to have ADHD, be loners, anti-social, and have run-ins with the law, like Robert Hawkins… Any parent knows that if we pay attention to one child and ignore the other, there is no question that the ignored child will act out; the only questions are how and when.” See here.

Your son is more likely to drop out, be medicalised/drugged, fall behind, and fail to get into college. 

“The statistics tell an alarming tale: According to the National Center for Educational Statistics:

Boys are 30 percent more likely than girls to flunk or drop out of school;

When it comes to grades and homework, girls outperform boys in elementary, secondary, high school, college, and even graduate school;

Boys are four to five times more likely than girls to be diagnosed with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD);  

Women outnumber men in higher education with 56 percent of bachelor’s degrees and 55 percent of graduate degrees going to women.

According to the U.S. Department of Education:

Boys make up two-thirds of the students in special education and are five times more likely to be classified as hyperactive.

Parents of boys — stay calm! While the statistics are disturbing, they don’t describe every boy — or necessarily your boy — but they do raise concerns about many boys’ school experience. “The odds are that if you come from a family that values education, your boy will be successful in school and will go on to college. Most boys do. However, the average American boy is struggling in school,” advises Michael” Thompson.” See here.

In a side bar on the site that I took the above quote from is a question.

“Is It the Boy — Or is It the School?”

Joseph Tobin PH.D Professor of Early Childhood Education answered that question so:

“The culture of schools, especially for young children, is much more feminine than masculine. There are almost no male early childhood educators. Many teachers of young children find boys’ interests in violence, gross things, and bodily functions to be boring or stupid. We need to recognize that many of us have ‘internal prejudices’ against these interests. Just as we used to ask ourselves in the ’70s, ‘In what ways am I being sexist in my treatment of girls?’ we now have to ask, ‘In what ways are we disapproving of boys’ interests in our classrooms?’

Joseph Tobin, Ph.D.  Professor of Early Childhood Education, Arizona State University. Author, Good Guys Don’t Wear Hats” http://www.pbs.org/parents/raisingboys/school.html

Perhaps the question for your son, instead of What Will I Be?” should be “What Will I Be Allowed to BE?”

But more important is to do something now to change the toxic atmosphere that boys have to navigate in school and not accept  – Que Sera, Sera (Whatever Will Be, Will Be) You could start with your own son. or godson, or nephew. Because…….it’s just a song and the future IS ours, maybe not to see, but at least to steer it away from making it unbearable for our sons, and all boys just setting on their future?