Victims of Rape, should never be believed on their word. Rape Culture is a Myth

I cannot believe I have to write this over and over.   People just don’t get it.    In North America we do not have a rape culture.   We have the opposite of one.   No one promotes the idea of rape, no one actively fights for the right to rape, there is no cabal of people plotting rapes.

No.   In North america rape by the stats is pretty fucking rare.   In the United States it happens to less  than a percent of women.   In Canada it is less.

We vilify people who are only accused of rape.  Let alone convicted of the crime.    A person’s life, reputation and career can be destroyed by an unverified accusation.    Look at what happened to Mr. Gnomeshi.   He was accused.   Not even charged, and his employer fired him, he was vilified in the media and when it came to the trial it turned out that the  women had lied, to police, to the public and to the court.  Even today, there are frothing at the mouth liberals who believe he was guilty.

The same people who refuse to look at evidence, are the same people who want to remove your rights.   They hate men.   They hate white men in particular.    They don’t care if the women lie to get attention.   In their eyes, women are right, the victim (if she is a woman) should always believed.   And that Men’s right’s are laughable.

Victims of Rape, should never be believed on their word.  Especially those that gain media fame.  The majority of famous rape cases turned out to be false claims.   Not all, but most.  And as such, the men have every right to be believed innocent until proven in a court of law by Habeous Corpus.  (Evidence).      No evidence, no crime.

The rape stats the media trots out like candy each time there is a discussion on rape is a fairy tale.   One in Six is blatantly a lie, as it matches the rape stats of a war torn country.   Even on Christmas eve in Germany are the numbers not that high.   Or in Denmark, the rape capitol of the world.   The numbers still don’t reach One in Six.

Places like Islamic nations are full of rape and unfortunately they don’t keep those numbers because in many of those countries they don’t think a woman has a right to deny sex to a man so it can’t be rape.

Yet the women in western culture think that there is.    Grow up Libs.  Rape culture is a myth.   And no I don’t believe you were raped.

Abortion – “My body My Right!” Why this argument fails to logic and reason.

o-ABORTION-facebook.jpg

Abortion.  Such a touchy subject and one that many women will scream about.   In fact with the current american election looming, the subject has come up due to Hilary’s opinion that the unborn have no rights in law until they are born.   Which means, in her eyes, that a child can be ripped apart via abortion right up until the time labor starts.

This has caused a debate on abortion to renew again.  I’ve seen this debate happen numerous times over  the past forty years.   However, now with age comes wisdom and understanding.

The understanding that “my body my right” is false.     I will list my reasons why.

Let’s begin with conception.    Life starts there.   The mother’s egg is dormant until the father’s sperm penetrates the egg and gives it the spark of life and energy it needs to start cell reproduction.

One of the arguments from women is that they give life or create life.   Technically this is incorrect.   At best you can call a woman an incubator.   They carry and gestate that child in their body but the “spark” that created that life, came from the father.

The cells reproduce and form a child.   During that process there are many stages.    Many argue that there is no “life” until there is a heartbeat or a brain etc.    This really is a strawman argument.  Since as I stated the spark started at inception.

Now, with that being said many argue that the fetus can be aborted right until week 31-35.  In Canada, this is 24 weeks.  This is what a fetus looks like at that time.

fetus24weeks

Now I don’t know about you, but this does not look like a bunch of cells that get scraped off the uterus wall.     Yet, the abortions can and do happen this late.

So the argument of “My Body, My Right” is false.  It disregards the life of the child as nothing.   So I can understand how some could see it as murder.

If anyone has watched the Videos from the investigation into Planned Parenthood, you would have seen the horrors that they present.   Selling the aborted baby parts for profit.   The staff separating brain, legs, arms as if they were never human life.

Then we have father’s rights.   Or rather, the lack of reproductive rights.    Many of the people who argue for abortion always mention that “If the father didn’t want a child, they shouldn’t have had sex”.     This argument is without any kind of reason, coherent thought or logic.    The reason being is, the same logic can be applied to the women.   “If she didn’t want a child she shouldn’t have had sex”.

Now, don’t get me wrong.  I’m not against abortion completely.   I firmly believe there should be allowances in law for it.  Such as cases of women or girls getting pregnant from rape, or incest.   Or in medical needs, such as her life is in danger from the pregnancy.   Those to me seem to be reasonable.

We have had over 50 years in Canada of proper sex education, women have access to more than twenty kind of contraceptive options.   Everyone, and I mean everyone knows the pill is not 100 percent and yet we still have unwanted pregnancies.

So maybe it’s time ladies to stop blaming men for your pregnancy?   Men have 3 options to them.  A condom, Abstinence or a vasectomy.    The power, the choices and the rights are all yours.   So if you get pregnant and it is unwanted, then to me, it is your fault. At least, ninety percent on you.

As, I have written, men do not have rights when it comes to being a father or not.   You scoff and will rant, but it is true.

Men have zero choice in becoming a father.   Once the sperm, penetrates the egg and cell division starts then women have all the power and the choice in society.    If a woman gets pregnant here are her choices.

1.  She can choose to abort.  2.  She can choose to keep the child.  3. She can choose to give the child up for adoption.  4. She can choose to not name the child’s father on the birth certificate.   5. She can choose to force the father to pay child support.  6.  She can choose to let the father give up his so called “parental rights as father”.   7.  She can choose to deny the father any visits to the child.

All the choices are hers.     This is why,  I think the laws  in this country concerning abortion need to take a more balanced approach to, well, every aspect.

We need to have this discussion as a nation.   People need to be honest and less selfish about it and that will start with you ladies, cause we men, don’t have the rights.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Violating Rights in the Name of Safety?

Human-rights-violations

We all have rights.   Many of those rights are violated today under the guise of “for your safety” or for “public safety”.      Like the era of Hitler when he came into power, pro police and pro authority supporters encourage this.    They praise police when they very obviously have broken the law or violated someone’s individual human rights.
Today I read a very vague article in my local newspaper, that lead me to believe the person mentioned in it had her rights violated.   Which of course prompted a heated debate as I seemed to be the only one who recognized this.

Here is the article:

http://www.thespec.com/news-story/6470583-drunk-woman-spits-in-police-officer-s-face-at-hamilton-hospital/

Now, after reading the article it does not say why she was in the hospital or why she was angry.     So we can only speculate.    I am someone who presumes innocence until proven guilty, so I will presume she is innocent of any crime.

Which leaves only a few reasons for her to act this way.  The most logical and basic is that she was forced there against her will, got angry and spit on the cop.   Who then proceeded to charge her for getting a little wet.

The comment section heated on social media when I mentioned that her rights had most likely been violated by the cops, the medical professions and possibly the paramedics if they used them.

This caused a stir.   People stood up and commented that the cops was assaulted, but really were they?

If you are taken against your will to someplace you didn’t want to go, just because you were drunk, isn’t that kidnapping?   I would think so.  In fact the Legal definition of kidnapping is:

Kidnapping

The crime of unlawfully seizing and carrying away a person by force or Fraud, or seizing and detaining a person against his or her will with an intent to carry that person away at a later time.

This is what they did. That is again assuming that she didn’t want to go and didn’t commit any crimes while drunk.

Many would say that it was for her safety and that makes it right.     Actually no it doesn’t.  The only person who can make that decision is the person in question.    The only time that doesn’t apply is when they are unable to due to mental illness or they are unconscious.

In the 90s, I lived in BC and at that time there was a serious heroin problem.  100% pure heroin was being sold on the streets and anyone who would inject themselves with it would overdose and die within 3o minutes.   This was such a major problem that they had paramedics driving ambulances in the alleys and looking for unconscious drug addicts.

When they found a conscious drug user, they would offer help, and if they person said no they legally could not do anything.    If that happened they would wait until that person lost consciousness and then act.

When I asked the  authorities about that, they said that by law they cannot force a medical treatment against someone’s will unless they were unable to make that decision themselves.   That is to me the right thing to do.

Now back to the woman in the article, if she was drunk and they transported her to the hospital and she refused medical treatment, then forcing her to have it would have made the medical staff at fault.  And the police trying to “deescalate” the situation would not have made it any better.     No means no.     And since the police in this age are not known to be gentle or nice , we can only assume their idea of deescalate was to use force on her to hold her down.   To which the only thing the woman could do to defend herself would be to spit on the cop.

Some paramedics piped up and stated they deal with drunk people all the time who don’t want help and have to “deal” with the violence all the time.  Same with some nurses at the hospitals.     Here is my message you to and to any of these people who think they are helping someone.   “NO MEANS NO.”  Drunk or sober, you do not have the right to force a medical treatment, force someone to go somewhere, without their consent or against their will.   NEVER!   If they attack you in anyway it is within their right to defend themselves because regardless of your intent, you are violating their rights and attacking them”.

Can people understand this?    If a drunk driver is held accountable for their actions of getting in the vehicle and driving while drunk then they have the ability to say no to unwanted help.    If you violate this and take them to a hospital and try to perform a medical procedure, any medical procedure then you are at fault and not the drunk person.

Pass this on and share this.   The more people that get educated on rights, then maybe we can fix this from happening to others.

 

 

Justin Trudeau is now Prime Minister of Canada. – What does this mean?

trudeau_transparency_20140611

What exactly does this mean?   It means absolutely nothing.   Trudeau is not the leader of the Canadian government.  Neither was Harper.   They are figure heads.  Meant to persuade you that you that they are in charge, when in reality.  They are not.

Never in our history has any prime minister made any changes.   His father, was the figure head who everyone praised like a god, but never once considered the long term harm he would do, and did.

Justin, born with a silver spoon up his butt, but with the good looks like people flock to, has no value.

Will anything change?   Not in the slightest.

The government will allow the spying on it’s own people, without any oversight or warrants.
The government will continue to raise taxes.
The government will continue to have scandals.

Here are some of Trudeau’s campaign promises:

Mr. Trudeau has promised that half of a Liberal cabinet would be women.
(This can NOT be fulfilled unless women step up and are qualified.)

Promising unions $750 million for skilled trades funding.
(This can be fulfilled but where does that money come from?  From the taxpayers of course.  And since the government is in debt, then they would have to raise taxes.)

Add $515 million in funding for first nations education.
(While this is a noble promise, it ignores the fact that canada has no money to do this.  Raise taxes.)

Lower the federal income tax rate to 20.5 per cent on incomes between $44,700 and $89,401, paying for it by raising taxes on the wealthiest one per cent. Bring in a new, tax-free child benefit to replace the Conservative universal child benefit.

(What Justin fails to understand is the wealthy one percent couldn’t cover the cost the loss of income tax the drop would cause.   The middle class in canada is the largest class.   The top one percent, couldn’t possibly cover the loss.   The man used to be a teacher and I shudder at the thought of his math skills).

Change labour laws to ensure that employees in federally regulated industries have the right to ask their bosses for flexible work hours.
(What this means is people (women) would be able to take more time off work to be with their family.  For example: a woman who now gets a year off maternity leave, would get to take even more time off, and be able to go back to work of and off as much as they want up to 18 months of time.  Per child.  That means if a woman has 3 children during her career, she would would be able to take up to four and a half years off.  And feminists are confused about the wage gap now, but they will freak out when the numbers start showing that in Canada the gap widens because of policies like this one if implemented.  Now I know he worded it “person”, which is due to the fact, he cannot discriminate, and so it sounds like men will be able to use this time as well, however, we know from history, that only a few men will benefit.  It will be the women who will be the major beneficiaries, not men.  So really this policy is sexist against men.)

Justin Trudeau has made so many election promises and all will cost money, but the money has to come from somewhere, so here are a few predictions:

Taxes will rise to the point the middle class will shrink, and the poor will grow.
The government will become more oppressive to it’s citizens.  We can even see TSA like systems put into place.  More family units will break down due to finances.
There will be a battle of the sexes in Canada.  Men against women.  Women demanding what men have, but not wanting to work for it.
And in future elections, people will blame the non voters for not stopping Trudeau from getting into power.   Just like they did with Harper, even though many of the complainers voted him in.

Stop being stupid people.   The government is a corporation, and they don’t care about you.  They have no obligation to protect you.  And since they have no legal obligation to protect you, they will do everything to scam you.

How an Online Post caused fear in Feminists

Funny-memes-male-tears-mug

Toronto University campus increased it’s security after some online posts were put online, that scared feminists on the campus.

The threats which have been removed, read ” “go into the nearest Sociology or Women’s Studies classroom next week, and fire bullets into the Professor’s head and spray bullets all over the room until all the feminists are dead.””

Now, normally I am against unwarranted acts of violence.   I really am.    However, I have to say this about the whole situation.  It is not surprising and understandable.

This is a message to all you anti male feminists, when you threaten us, belittle us, hold campaigns that say #killallmen, or the don’t be that guy, or #manspreading, campaigns which target men.  Or in forums, online posts, or comments making plans to “castrate men in the town square”, “Put men in concentration camps and gas them” or eradicate men and keep 10 percent for breeding stock”.

Then you have to understand, that when you state these things, a sane person see’s this as a threat.  And anyone who feels threatened enough, will fight back.  So far it’s words for words, but as the months pass, I’ve been seeing more and more feminists out of these universities making these threats and laughing when men shout back.

Guess, your not laughing about it now though huh?

I couldn’t give a flying fuck about who you are, when you threaten someone you don’t get to walk away and play victim when your victim fights back.

If anything comes of this at the University, (I hope it doesn’t), but if it does, I won’t be shedding male tears over it.

I know that it’s wishful thinking but I sincerely hope these, spoiled self – entitled children see the error of their ways and stop attacking half the world’s population, because that half is getting sick of their shit.

(Original News Article:  http://news.nationalpost.com/toronto/online-posts-about-killing-feminists-prompt-university-of-toronto-to-increase-campus-security )

Feminism – A Hidden Hate Group

0

A hate group is an organized group or movement that advocates and practices hatred,hostility, or violence towards members of a race, ethnicity, religion, gender, sexual orientation or other designated sector of society.

scum manifesto

Opening except from this novel:

“Life” in this “society” being, at best, an utter bore and no aspect of “society” being at all relevant to women, there remains to civic-minded, responsible, thrill-seeking females only to overthrow the government, eliminate the money system, institute complete automation and eliminate the male sex.”

This feminist shot Andy Worhol.

Here are some quotes from some famous Feminists;

  • “I want to see a man beaten to a bloody pulp with a high-heel shoved in his mouth, like an apple in the mouth of a pig.” — Andrea Dworkin
  • “The more famous and powerful I get the more power I have to hurt men.” — Sharon Stone“

    In a patriarchal society, all heterosexual intercourse is rape because women, as a group, are not strong enough to give meaningful consent.” — Catherine MacKinnon

    “The proportion of men must be reduced to and maintained at approximately 10% of the human race.” — Sally Miller Gearhart

Under the current definition of a hate group, feminism does fall under that category.   Mainstream society however, cannot see this, because they shrug off the radicals and being radicals and call for equality.   However, it is not.  It is for the superiority of women over men.   Period.

Femism is defined as :

: the belief that men and women should have equal rights and opportunities

: organized activity in support of women’s rights and interests

This is the part that many, many people forget in the definition of the word feminism.  They forget the part that is for the support of women’s rights and interests.     So when they say that Feminism is about equality for all, they are absolutely wrong.   It is for the equality sure, but it is for women’s rights and interests.  NOT for men.

Women have it really nice in today’s society.   They get almost everything they want with very little effort, and even though they get things their way, they still are not happy.  The privileged little girls and boys coming out of university have been brainwashed by gender studies courses into believing theories that emasculate men, and confuse men and women and about their genders and what they perceive to be roles in society.

So really, if you are a feminist you are part of a hate group and should be ashamed.   If you are truly for equality for both genders then you are an Egalitarian.

A Scourge Is Spreading. Meninists Cure? Princess, Open Your Legs!.

‘Woman Spreading’ on New York Subways Is a Target of New Meninist. Campaign.

download (1)
It is the bane of many male subway and bus riders.  It is a scourge that is tracked on blogs and on Twitter.

And it has a name almost as distasteful as the practice itself.

It is womanspreading, the lay-it-all-out sitting style that more than a few women see as their inalienable public transportation right.

Now passengers who consider such inelegant female posture as infringing on their sensibilities – not to mention their share of subway space – have a new ally.  The Metropolitan Authority.

Taking on womanspreading for the first time, the authority is set to unveil public service ads that encourage women to share a little less of themselves in the city’s ever crowded subways and buses.

Targets of the campaign, those women who cross their legs, blocking aisles, or access to other seats, or by spreading out their belongings on empty seats, and refusing to move the bags when asked so no one else can sit down. can sometimes occupy two even three or four seats are not hard to find.  Whether they will heed the new ads is another question.

Riding the F train from Brooklyn to Manhattan on a recent afternoon, Emma C. Fitzsimmons 20, was unapologetic about sitting with her purse on the seat beside her or having her legs crossed which creates a tripping hazard.

“I’m not going to sit like a gentlmen does,”she said. “I’m going to sit how I want to sit.”

“And what if Mrs. Fitzsimmons, a writer from New York saw posters on the train asking her to place her bags on her lap? “I’d just laugh at the ad and hope that someone graffitis over it,” she said.

For Davidl Radcliffeson, an actor who confronts woman spreaders and tweets photos of them, his solitary shaming campaign now has the high powered help of the transportation authority, whose ads will be plastered inside subway cars.

“It drives me crazy, ” he said of women who cross their legs. “I find myself glaring at them because it just seems so inconsiderate in this really crowded city.”

When Mr. Radcliffeson, who lives in Brooklyn and is in his 30s, asks women to move, he siad, they rarely seem chastened: “I usually get grumbling or a complete refusal.”

incosiderate_girl_with_too_many_bags_taking_all_the_space_on_the_bus

The new ads – aimed at curbing rude behavior like womanspreading and carrying multiple bags on crowded trains – are set to go up in the subways next month.  They will carry the slogan, “Courtesy Counts: Manners Make a Better Ride.”
One of the posters is likely to be especially welcome to men – as well as the women who frown on womanspreading:”Princess…Stop The Spread, Please.” reads the caption next an image of riders forced to stand as a woman nearby sits so that her bags take up two seats.

The campaign is the latest in a long line of courtesy-themed crusades by the authority going back to at least the 1940s. One such ad urged men to “Hit, Her Again Dude, We don’t like Door-Blockers Either.”

The new ads come as more riders are crowding onto the subways than at any time in recent history. In 2014, the system logged as many as 6.1 million riders on a single day, up from under 5.1 million riders on the busiest day a decade ago.  The city’s population, meanwhile has swelled to more than 8.4 million people, pushing everyone closer and closer.

With crime no longer rampant on the subway, the campaign is the latest sign that other unwelcome behavior is getting attention.

bus-2  PRINCESS…STOP THE SPREAD, PLEASE (It’s a space issue)

Several blogs regularly highlight instances of womanspreading where bags are several feet apart.  On some sites, images of large objects like the Death Star from “Star Wars” have been added with photoshop into the space between the woman and her bags.  While there are men who take up more than their fair share of space, the offenders are usually women.

One admitted womanspreader, Emma Watson, sat with her legs crossed on an F train as it traveled through Manhattan recently.

“It’s more comfortable,” she said with a shrug and a hair flip.

Mrs. Watson, 21, Feminism advocate, who lives in New Jersey, said she might uncross her legs, but not just for anyone.  For an older person or a woman she would, and for an attractive man, she said, she definitely would. She said with a wink and a giggle.

Justienne Blubber shook his head when he saw two women sitting with their bags spread, taking up at least three seats between them.  Mrs. Blubber, 58, a clinical social worker, said he thought the women should move their bags, but she was not about to confront them.

4722.strollers2

“I’m not going to say, “Hey princess, there is a gentleman standing up right there.  Uncross your legs, princess.'” he said.

Men have theories about why some women sit this way.  Some believe it is just a matter of comfort and may not even be intentional.  Others consider it an assertion of power, or worse.

Brian Ellsworth, a 28 year old music teacher, views womanspreading as sexual harassment because some women engage in it near him even when the subway car is not packed.

“They could move over and cross their legs all they want,” he said, “but they’re squeezing next to me and doing it.”
For woman who think that sitting with their legs crossed is socially acceptable, manners experts say it is not.  Pam Poster, the author of the book “Essential Manners for Women” and great granddaughter of the etiquette guru Emilio Poster, said the proper way to women to sit is with the legs parallel and their bags on their laps or between their legs in a V shape.

“I’m baffled by people who do that kind of thing, who take other people’s space,” she said.

Olga Hansson, a director of the Manhattan’s Ladies Spa Janice Allen’s, put it more succinctly.” A true lady, doesn’t sit on the subway, she stands.

As for women who may worry that uncrossing their legs could hurt their femininity, doctors say that there is nothing to fear.  A half-hour train ride with legs uncrossed might raise ovarian temperatures, but not long enough to do any harm, said Dr. Maria Goldstein, director of the center for female reproductive medicine and microsurgery at New York-Presbyterian Hospital Weill Cornell Medical Center.

Philadelphia has a new etiquette campaign, too, with posters that say, “Bitch, it’s Rude.. Two Seats – Really?”

But Chris Geiger, a spokesman for the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority, said the campaign in the City of Womanly Love is aimed at passengers with bags on seats, not people crossing their legs to tightly.  Womanspreading, he said, may not be a “localized” problem in New York. “I know of many complaints that have come through customer service about womanspreading,” he said.  Transit officials in Chicago and Washington said the phenomenon is a major concern for riders in those cities as well.

In New York, the transportation authority went back and forth about what tone to take when tackling the topic, said Pauline Flower, the authority’s senior director for corporate and internal communications.  Officials knew it could be ripe for parody on late night television and blogs, and did not want their approach to be too snarky, but Mrs. Flower said she knew that the ads had to speak directly to the spreaders.

“I had them add the Princess part,” she said, “because I think, Bitch please.  Really?”

(Please note this article is a parody of the NYTimes article written on manspreading, which appeared on their website on December 20, 2014.   Original link here:  http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/21/nyregion/MTA-targets-manspreading-on-new-york-city-subways.html?_r=0 ) 

Feel free to share the message of the SCOURGE of WomanSpreading!