The Left’s campaign against sex rolls on

Liberals always accuse Conservatives of being “anti-sex” or prudes, yet, I can guarantee it was NOT Conservatives who came up with this mass of stupidity

Students Must Agree “Why” They Had Sex or It’s Sexual Assault

At Ohio State University, to avoid being guilty of “sexual assault” or “sexual violence,” you and your partner now apparently have to agree on the reason WHY you are making out or having sex.  It’s not enough to agree to DO it, you have to agree on WHY: there has to be agreement “regarding the who, what, where, when, why, and how this sexual activity will take place.”

There used to be a joke that women need a reason to have sex, while men only need a place.  Does this policy reflect that juvenile mindset?  Such a requirement baffles some women in the real world: a female member of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights told me, “I am still trying to wrap my mind around the idea of any two intimates in the world agreeing as to ‘why.’”

Ohio State’s sexual-assault policy, which effectively turns some welcome touching into “sexual assault,” may be the product of its recent Resolution Agreement with the Office for Civil Rights (where I used to work) to resolve a Title IX complaint over its procedures for handling cases of sexual harassment and assault.  That agreement, on page 6, requires the University to “provide consistent definitions of and guidance about the University terms ‘sexual harassment,’ ‘consent,’ ‘sexual violence,’ ‘sexual assault,’ and ‘sexual misconduct.’” It is possible that Ohio State will broaden its already overbroad “sexual assault” definition even further: Some officials at Ohio State, like its Student Wellness Center, advocate defining all sex or “kissing” without “verbal,” “enthusiastic” consent as “sexual assault.”

Ohio State applies an impractical “agreement” requirement for not just sex, but for a much broader category of  “touching” that is sexual (or perhaps romantic?) in nature.

Well, I must ask what could possibly go wrong? These fools, and social engineers, but I repeat myself, are creating a monster that basically destroys any spontaneity and passion. And, again, remember these are the same Leftists who have told us for years that we need to be more “liberated” where sex is concerned. Of course, the truth is, the Left cares only about controlling everything we say, feel, think, and do, and no, our sex lives are not immune to the Nanny Statists There is much more here

Shameless Hussies: Will someone PLEASE look at our boobs already!

Oh no, another outbreak of LOOKATMEITIS! William Teach, has the high beams, I mean high points

And if you refuse to stand up for the right of women to go topless in public, you’re probably part of the patriarchy and a misogynist and hate womyn

(The Blaze) It seems some women are planning to let it all hang out in a couple of Texas towns on Sunday.

Their argument: Breasts are less dangerous than guns.

“The 2nd amendment is very popular in TX ‘the right to bear arms’ to protect one’s family is one argument but baring breasts is illegal also ‘to protect the children,’” the group, GoTopless, wrote in a Facebook post. “Texas women, affirm your right to bare your breasts!!! If breasts are more dangerous to children than weapons, then something is truly wrong with our society!”

One steadfast rule about people who wish to parade around naked, or nekkid, if you please is that most of the time, the folks doing the nudity should never be naked. So, in the interest of giving some advice, if they are going to do this, at least hire some women who look good topless. Oh, what’s that? This is NOT about being gawked at? Yeah, right.

 

Due Process? Men don’t deserve no stinkin’ due process!

Have we reached the point where young men attending college are guilty, no matter the evidence? College insurrection takes a look

Despite the fact that a grand jury refused to issue an indictment against him, and that campus police found numerous pieces of evidence exonerating him, University of Cincinnati student Ethan Peloe continues to be prosecuted by school administrators for rape. First we did away with ‘innocent until proven guilty’, and now we’ve somehow managed to do away with ‘guilty until proven innocent’ as well. It seems all we’re left with is ‘guilty, whether you can prove yourself innocent or not.’

Jennifer Kabbany at The College Fix reports:

Cleared by Campus Police, Grand Jury – Student Still Railroaded Over Rape Claim

Campus police and a grand jury cleared a University of Cincinnati student accused of rape – but administrators continue to wrongfully prosecute the student under their campus code of conduct, a lawsuit alleges.

The suit was filed after two female students last March accused junior Ethan Peloe of attempting to rape them. The women allege that they were drunk and high the night of the incident, and that Peloe accompanied them back to their dorm room.

“One of the students alleges that she went to sleep, but was awakened by Peloe attempting to have sexual intercourse with her,” the suit states. “She alleges that she told him no and ran from the room. The other student alleges that Peloe then got into bed with her. She alleges that she had passed out and was awakened by Peloe having sexual intercourse with her.”

Peloe vehemently denies the allegations. According to the lawsuit:

The case was presented to the Hamilton County Grand Jury. The Grand Jury refused to issue an indictment. The incident has been investigated by the UC Police. Peloe cooperated with the investigation. Peloe gave a voluntary statement. Peloe told the UC Police that he was willing to submit to a polygraph examination. Peloe voluntarily submitted DNA evidence. The UC Police obtained significant physical evidence which exonerated Peloe.

The evidence included:

a. A surveillance videotape obtained by the police showed that the two female UC students were not intoxicated and that they had led Peloe to their room.

b. Text messages obtained by a forensic review of the students’ cell phones called significant portions of the students’ stories into question. For example, although the students claimed to be passed out, they still sent a number of text messages. In addition, later messages joked about the case.

c. Another female student was present in the room when the alleged assault occurred. This student did not witness anything illegal.

The lawsuit also notes that rape kits submitted to the crime lab for analysis “are consistent with the version of events provided by Peloe.”

This a Feminists wet dream. All needs happen is a woman make an accusation, and BAM! GUILTY!

Sometimes eloquence only takes one word

True eloquence requires that the orator actually say something, which is why President Obama, Cornel West, Je$$e Jackson, and most Leftists will never be eloquent, One of my favorite bloggers, Stacy McCain, is an eloquent man. He also has that rare ability to make people want to read what he writes. Take this nugget from his blog today: 

On the one hand, you’ve got to figure the kind of guy who would marry a former Playmate is slightly kinkjy. On the other hand, cheating on a former Playmate with a tranny? Dude.

Who can read THAT and not want to click the link? Come on admit it you sick freaks! You WANT TO Click THAT!

You do not have to be Cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs to write for Slate

Slate is the MSNBS of online magazines, and, here is the latest outrageous outrage they have discovered. Beware Infant Gender Assignment!

Obstetricians, doctors, and midwives commit this procedure on infants every single day, in every single country. In reality, this treatment is performed almost universally without even asking for the parents’ consent, making this practice all the more insidious. It’s called infant gender assignment: When the doctor holds your child up to the harsh light of the delivery room, looks between its legs, and declares his opinion: It’s a boy or a girl, based on nothing more than a cursory assessment of your offspring’s genitals.

Declares his opinion? And you say this “opinion” is based on something as flimsy as genitals? SHOCKING! I mean, yes, in fact gender IS defined by genitals, just as writing for Slate is defined on absurdity. I am trying to conger up how the “evil” gender assignment goes. The doctor, holds up a child, peers at the genitals, and calmly calls the nurse over.

“Excuse me nurse, but this baby appears to have a penis, do you concur?”

“Why yes doctor, that looks like a penis to me”

“So, this baby then, must be a boy”

“Why yes doctor, yes”

See, this is OUTRAGEOUS! And thankfully, we have an outraged American to expose this shockingly shocking outrageously outrageous outrage! I know I am outraged! and we all should be. I mean think about where this might lead! The Slate piece continues

We tell our children, “You can be anything you want to be.” We say, “A girl can be a doctor, a boy can be a nurse,” but why in the first place must this person be a boy and that person be a girl? Your infant is an infant. Your baby knows nothing of dresses and ties, of makeup and aftershave, of the contemporary social implications of pink and blue. As a newborn, your child’s potential is limitless. The world is full of possibilities that every person deserves to be able to explore freely, receiving equal respect and human dignity while maximizing happiness through individual expression.

Wait, what? How dare this Slate writer call that infant an infant? Who the Hell are they to place that kind of label on that baby? I mean, yes, the fact IS that it is an infant, but facts do not matter. I mean, if a penis or vagina do not have anything to do with gender, then how does a baby actually being a baby mean anything either? But, this is important stuff, it MUST BE because only really important topics are covered in Slate right? Either that or this writer is as crazy as they come

With infant gender assignment, in a single moment your baby’s life is instantly and brutally reduced from such infinite potentials down to one concrete set of expectations and stereotypes, and any behavioral deviation from that will be severely punished—both intentionally through bigotry, and unintentionally through ignorance. That doctor (and the power structure behind him) plays a pivotal role in imposing those limits on helpless infants, without their consent, and without your informed consent as a parent. This issue deserves serious consideration by every parent, because no matter what gender identity your child ultimately adopts, infant gender assignment has effects that will last through their whole life.

See! Your child’s life will be RUINED, R-U-I-N-E-D RUINED if a doctor is allowed to say it is a boy, or it is a girl! Oh there are several layers of KRAZY here folks I mean this MUST be a hoax right? No one could possibly believe the absurdities uttered here right? I mean even Slate must no allow this level of KRAZY right? Wrong!

Why must we force this on kids at birth? What is achieved, besides reinforcing tradition? What could be the harm in letting a child wait to declare for themself who they are, once they’re old enough (which is generally believed to happen around age 2 or 3)?

What insanity is this? When was the last time you, as a parent, grandparent, or uncle as I a witnessed a 2 or 3-year-old “declare themselves”? I doubt anyone has, but what would it sound like? Let us think here.

Think of a family gathering. As the adults are drinking their coffees, here comes young Patrick, age 3. “Excuse me everyone” Patrick says, clinking a fork on a water glass. “I am glad I have you all hear, I have something I need to say. I am, in fact, a girl, or rather a woman, trapped in a little boy’s body. Yes, yes, I do have a penis, but do not label me because of that you genderist bastards! I am woman, hear me roar! So, I have a list of demands here, call them my Gender Justice List if you will.” I have more here, but you will have to wait for the book to be published. it is called “My fight for Gender Justice: How My Inner Vagina and I beat Genderism!”

Of course, that is a bit of absurdity to illustrate how wrong, foolish, inane, insane, BATSHIT CRAZY this writer really is. Yes, Cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs!

 

Are Feminists crazy? Wait, what am I saying, of course they are crazy

RS McCain continues his National Offend a Feminist Week by laying bare the deep insanity that IS today’s Feminism

“It became obvious that men didn’t want to interact with me or with women in general on an equal level, and that what ‘attracted’ them in women was subordination to them — as soon as we wanted to be their ‘equals’ they were repelled by it, lost interest or tried to thwart the feminist drive in me some way or another.”

Radical Wind, April 28

I hate to break it to this demented woman, but men WANT, I mean REALLY want women that are their equals. The fact is women who always want to do whatever a guy wants to do is, well boring. So, I doubt this Feminist had man problems because she was too “equal”. A more likely version is that she was a gigantic pain in the ass with her fierce Feminist act.. I mean let’s be honest here, no guy, at least no sane guy, wants to date anyone that talks like this

Just a few days ago I read Skulldrix’s post on a separatist state of mind, which I have found very refreshing and enlightening, and which brought me back to many of my own first experiences of separatism. I remember some conversations going on at FCM’s on separatism, maybe a year and a half ago, where several of us bloggers and commenters discussed whether we should call ourselves separatists or pro-separatists. FCM at the time argued that separatism wasn’t a realistic or feasible goal for most women under patriarchy because the reality is that we can’t completely escape men, so it would be more realistic to envision ourselves as pro-separatist instead of separatists.

I can’t quite remember what I wrote at the time or whether I expressed myself clearly but I thought that the distinction between pro-sep and sep was unnecessary once we conceive of it as a way of being, an ongoing journey and struggle, according to the means we have and what is safe for our survival. Though I agree about the fact that most if not all of us can’t escape men on a daily basis. Most women will have to work alongside men to some degree because that’s the only or least worst job opportunity we can find. Very often we will have to depend on men to learn a skill, or to heal from severe illnesses, because men monopolise and control all disciplines and sectors of their society.

See what I mean? Who the fuck talks like that? A crazy person that’s who! The problem Feminists have with men is NOT men, it is the Feminists constant rage-a-thon, and constant quest to be a victim of the “Patriarchy”.  So maybe your man problems are not the “Patriarchy” at all. Maybe the whole “I am a victim” act is really not very fun. You want to know what your problem is? Find the nearest mirror!

Stacy has more on Radical Wind and her RAGE!

Radical feminists are both (a) insane and (b) basically correct in their understanding of the psychology of sex. Which is to say, a careful study of what is today called “gender theory” does show that inequality between men and women — collectively, under the systematic male dominance that feminists call patriarchy — is inextricably linked to heterosexuality. Even if every conceivable reform were enacted that could rid women of discrimination in education or employment, male dominance would continue to be expressed through sexual intercourse, through manipulation or abuse within relationships, through pregnancy and through women’s greater burden in parenthood. Women who desire long-term male romantic companionship of any kind must do what is necessary first to attract, and then to maintain, his sexual interest.

Radical Wind — the wacko feminist whose rant “PIV is always rape, OK?” inspired widespread mockery – is actually very close to an important truth when she describes how men were “repelled” by her “feminist drive.” We may suppose she was hanging out with a loutish crew of young left-wing idiots when she experienced this; therefore it must have been a shocking revelation when these allegedly egalitarian men expected her to enact the “subordination” of femininity.

News flash: Men are men.

Bingo! Men are men, and women are women, and Feminists are CRAZY!