FEMINAZI

  • Women wising up to the feminazi fraudsters and their devious DV lies and stats(VIDEO)
  • Female 'work' v REAL work (VIDEO)
  • Foster mother jailed for 14 years for torturing three children in her care set to be released from prison (Feminist Womens Aid won't be marching down the street protesting over this one)
  • High Court Judge: Don't always believe claims of domestic violence
  • The big list: Female teacher paedo's ,lesbians and predators caught having sex with students
  • Female Sexual Predators
  • Long Term Effects of Sexual Abuse by a Female
  • Female Pedophilia increasing?
  • Female Paedophiles
  • De-NWO Your Heart and Mind (from a female perspective)
  • Labour feminists like Harriet Hatemen protected homopaedo agenda
  • How three of the Labour party's most senior figures campaigned for a vile homopaedo group now being probed by police for 'abusing children on an industrial scale'
  • Labour's feminist / lawyer Harriet Hatemen and her homopaedo protecting network
  • Just one more man (lottery winner) screwed by golddigger


  • Lottery winner gets screwed by stable-girl fiancée (There seems to be no laws protecting mens estates when women can steal with impunity)
  • Billionaire zionist George Soros has ties to more than 50 ‘partners’ of the Women’s March on Washington

    What is the link between one of Hillary Clinton’s largest donors and the Women’s March? Turns out, it’s quite significant

    In the pre-dawn darkness of today’s presidential inauguration day, I faced a choice, as a lifelong liberal feminist who voted for Donald Trump for president: lace up my pink Nike sneakers to step forward and take the DC Metro into the nation’s capital for the inauguration of America’s new president, or wait and go tomorrow to the after-party, dubbed the “Women’s March on Washington”? The Guardian has touted the “Women’s March on Washington” as a “spontaneous” action for women’s rights. Another liberal media outlet, Vox, talks about the “huge, spontaneous groundswell” behind the march. On its website, organizers of the march are promoting their work as “a grassroots effort” with “independent” organizers. Even my local yoga studio, Beloved Yoga, is renting a bus and offering seats for $35. The march’s manifesto says magnificently, “The Rise of the Woman = The Rise of the Nation.”

    It’s an idea that I, a liberal feminist, would embrace. But I know — and most of America knows — that the organizers of the march haven’t put into their manifesto: the march really isn’t a “women’s march.” It’s a march for women who are anti-Trump. As someone who voted for Trump, I don’t feel welcome, nor do many other women who reject the liberal identity-politics that is the core underpinnings of the march, so far, making white women feel unwelcome, nixing women who oppose abortion and hijacking the agenda.

    To understand the march better, I stayed up through the nights this week, studying the funding, politics and talking points of the some 403 groups that are “partners” of the march. Is this a non-partisan “Women’s March”? Roy Speckhardt, executive director of the American Humanist Association, a march “partner,” told me his organization was “nonpartisan” but has “many concerns about the incoming Trump administration that include what we see as a misogynist approach to women.” Nick Fish, national program director of the American Atheists, another march partner, told me, “This is not a ‘partisan’ event.” Dennis Wiley, pastor of Covenant Baptist United Church of Christ, another march “partner,” returned my call and said, “This is not a partisan march.”

    Really? UniteWomen.org, another partner, features videos with the hashtags #ImWithHer, #DemsInPhily and #ThanksObama. Following the money, I pored through documents of billionaire George Soros and his Open Society philanthropy, because I wondered: What is the link between one of Hillary Clinton’s largest donors and the “Women’s March”?

    I found out: plenty.

    By my draft research, which I’m opening up for crowd-sourcing on GoogleDocs, Soros has funded, or has close relationships with, at least 56 of the march’s “partners,” including “key partners” Planned Parenthood, which opposes Trump’s anti-abortion policy, and the National Resource Defense Council, which opposes Trump’s environmental policies. The other Soros ties with “Women’s March” organizations include the partisan MoveOn.org (which was fiercely pro-Clinton), the National Action Network (which has a former executive director lauded by Obama senior advisor Valerie Jarrett as “a leader of tomorrow” as a march co-chair and another official as “the head of logistics”). Other Soros grantees who are “partners” in the march are the American Civil Liberties Union, Center for Constitutional Rights, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch. March organizers and the organizations identified here haven’t yet returned queries for comment.

    On the issues I care about as a Muslim, the “Women’s March,” unfortunately, has taken a stand on the side of partisan politics that has obfuscated the issues of Islamic extremism over the eight years of the Obama administration. “Women’s March” partners include the Council on American-Islamic Relations, which has not only deflected on issues of Islamic extremism post-9/11, but opposes Muslim reforms that would allow women to be prayer leaders and pray in the front of mosques, without wearing headscarves as symbols of chastity. Partners also include the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), which wrongly designated Maajid Nawaz, a Muslim reformer, an “anti-Muslim extremist” in a biased report released before the election. The SPLC confirmed to me that Soros funded its “anti-Muslim extremists” report targeting Nawaz. (Ironically, CAIR also opposes abortions, but its leader still has a key speaking role.)

    Another Soros grantee and march “partner” is the Arab-American Association of New York, whose executive director, Linda Sarsour, is a march co-chair. When I co-wrote a piece, arguing that Muslim women don’t have to wear headscarves as a symbol of “modesty,” she attacked the coauthor and me as “fringe.” Earlier, at least 33 of the 100 “women of color,” who initially protested the Trump election in street protests, worked at organizations that receive Soros funding, in part for “black-brown” activism. Of course, Soros is an “ideological philanthropist,” whose interests align with many of these groups, but he is also a significant political donor. In Davos, he told reporters that Trump is a “would-be dictator.”

    A spokeswoman for Soros’s Open Society Foundations said in a statement, “There have been many false reports about George Soros and the Open Society Foundations funding protests in the wake of the U.S. presidential elections. There is no truth to these reports.” She added, “We support a wide range of organizations — including those that support women and minorities who have historically been denied equal rights. Many of whom are concerned about what policy changes may lie ahead. We are proud of their work. We of course support the right of all Americans to peaceably assemble and petition their government—a vital, and constitutionally safeguarded, pillar of a functioning democracy.”

    Much like post-election protests, which included a sign, “Kill Trump,” were not “spontaneous,” as reported by some media outlets, the “Women’s March” is an extension of strategic identity politics that has so fractured America today, from campuses to communities. On the left or the right, it’s wrong. But, with the inauguration, we know the politics. With the march, “women” have been appropriated for a clearly anti-Trump day. When I shared my thoughts with her, my yoga studio owner said it was “sad” the march’s organizers masked their politics. “I want love for everyone,” she said.

    The left’s fierce identity politics and its failure on Islamic extremism lost my vote this past election, and so, as the dawn’s first light breaks through the darkness of the morning as I write, I make my decision: I’ll lace up my pink Nikes and head to the inauguration, skipping the “Women’s March” that doesn’t have a place for women like me.

    Asra Q. Nomani is a former Wall Street Journal reporter. She can be reached at asra@asranomani.com or on Twitter.

  • FULL ARTICLE HERE
  • Crystal Wright DESTROYS The Women's March VIDEO
    The Women's March Does NOT Represent ALL Women VIDEO
    Globalist Soros Exposed Funding Over 50 Organizations In Women’s March on DC

    These marches are well funded and well orchestrated by the zionist billionaires who prey on the spoils of men not part of their judeo freemason clubs

    An investigation by a New York Times affiliate has revealed that billionaire globalist financier, George Soros, who recently called Donald Trump a “would-be dictator” during an interview at Davos, and whose Open Society Foundation works to finance and forward progressive causes across the world, and is intimately connected to numerous color revolutions, the Arab Spring, and various other political uprisings across the globe, has been revealed to be connected to more than 50 of the groups that organized the nationwide “Women’s Marches” that saw millions of Americans take to the streets across the country.

    The march’s official website says, “We stand together, recognizing that defending the most marginalized among us is defending all of us.” Many people turned out to be a manifestation of that ideal, but it’s important to understand the reality of what is happening on a strategic political level as an inorganic politically contrived and funded event. This, in no way, takes away from the validity of standing up for women’s issues but is important to note that women are being used as pawns in a larger ideological political game that has international overtones of power politics.

    These marches were largely billed as “spontaneous” and “grassroots” actions, by publications like The Guardian and Vox. However, the reality exposed by an investigation by self-described liberal feminist, Asra Q. Nomani, writing for New York Times affiliate Women in the World, revealed that after studying the “funding, politics and talking points of the some 403 groups that are ‘partners’ of the march,” contrary to the non-partisan rhetoric used in these marches, they were not really “women’s march” but were rather “for women who are anti-Trump.” Nomani reveals that the “Women’s Marches” were actually organized as political tools to be used to strategically forward a progressive political agenda against President Donald Trump — exposing the protests to largely be an organized, top-down driven political operation — and not an organic movement of concerned Americans taking to the streets as reported by the mainstream media.

    According to Nomani’s Women in the World/New York Times report:

    Following the money, I poured through documents of billionaire George Soros and his Open Society philanthropy, because I wondered: What is the link between one of Hillary Clinton’s largest donors and the “Women’s March”? I found out: plenty.

    By my draft research, which I’m opening up for crowd-sourcing on GoogleDocs, Soros has funded, or has close relationships with, at least 56 of the march’s “partners,” including “key partners” Planned Parenthood, which opposes Trump’s anti-abortion policy, and the National Resource Defense Council, which opposes Trump’s environmental policies. The other Soros ties with “Women’s March” organizations include the partisan MoveOn.org (which was fiercely pro-Clinton), the National Action Network (which has a former executive director lauded by Obama senior advisor Valerie Jarrett as “a leader of tomorrow” as a march co-chair and another official as “the head of logistics”). Other Soros grantees who are “partners” in the march are the American Civil Liberties Union, Center for Constitutional Rights, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch. March organizers and the organizations identified here haven’t yet returned queries for comment…

    Much like post-election protests, which included a sign, “Kill Trump,” were not “spontaneous,” as reported by some media outlets, the “Women’s March” is an extension of strategic identity politics that has so fractured America today, from campuses to communities. On the left or the right, it’s wrong. But, with the inauguration, we know the politics. With the march, “women” have been appropriated for a clearly anti-Trump day. When I shared my thoughts with her, my yoga studio owner said it was “sad” the march’s organizers masked their politics. “I want love for everyone,” she said.


    The way Soros operates is as an “ideological philanthropist,” whose Open Society Foundation provides funding for organizations whose interests align with his own, and which blurs the line between political advocacy and social justice – thus being able to leverage selected/funded social justice organizations to affect political discourse. This method is confirmed in a memo released by WikiLeaks, which was sent to Soros by Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta. The Clinton campaign reveals the political motives behind using grassroots organizations to “control political discourse.” Podesta wrote to Soros that he wanted to “better utilize these networks to drive the content of politics through a strong echo chamber.”

    Control the political discourse. So much effort over the past few years has been focused on better coordinating, strengthening, and developing progressive institutions and leaders. Now that this enhanced infrastructure is in place—grassroots organizing; multi-issue advocacy groups; think tanks; youth outreach; faith communities; micro-targeting outfits; the netroots and blogosphere—we need to better utilize these networks to drive the content of politics through a strong “echo chamber” and message delivery system.

    Anyone familiar with the history of the Soros Open Society Foundations in Eastern Europe and around the world since the late 1980s, will know that his supposedly philanthropic “democracy-building” projects in Poland, Russia, or Ukraine in the 1990s allowed Soros the businessman to literally plunder the former communist countries’ wealth, according to the New Eastern Outlook. A report in New Eastern Outlook revealed exactly how Sores-affiliated organizations across the world operate:

    The totality of what is revealed in the three hacked documents show that Soros is effectively the puppet-master pulling most of the strings in Kiev. Soros Foundation’s Ukraine branch, International Renaissance Foundation (IRF) has been involved in Ukraine since 1989. His IRF doled out more than $100 million to Ukrainian NGOs two years before the fall of the Soviet Union, creating the preconditions for Ukraine’s independence from Russia in 1991. Soros also admitted to financing the 2013-2014 Maidan Square protests that brought the current government into power.

    Soros’ foundations were also deeply involved in the 2004 Orange Revolution that brought the corrupt but pro-NATO Viktor Yushchenko into power with his American wife who had been in the US State Department. In 2004 just weeks after Soros’ International Renaissance Foundation had succeeded in getting Viktor Yushchenko as President of Ukraine, Michael McFaul wrote an OpEd for the Washington Post. McFaul, a specialist in organizing color revolutions, who later became US Ambassador to Russia, revealed:

    Did Americans meddle in the internal affairs of Ukraine? Yes. The American agents of influence would prefer different language to describe their activities — democratic assistance, democracy promotion, civil society support, etc. — but their work, however labeled, seeks to influence political change in Ukraine.


    Additionally, during the 2016 presidential cycle, Soros committed $25 million dollars to the 2016 campaign of Hillary Clinton. Per the standard Clinton operating procedure, this was indicative of the symbiotic relationship of favors between the billionaire and his array of political puppets across the globe. Soros has often been accused of using his wealth to attempt to socially engineer the national domestic politics of entire states. He was accused of being connected to organizations that organized and funded the nationwide protests after the election of Donald Trump — a claim that Soros denies.

    “There have been many false reports about George Soros and the Open Society Foundations funding protests in the wake of the U.S. presidential elections. There is no truth to these reports,” said a spokewoman from Soros’s Open Society Foundations in a statement, adding, “We support a wide range of organizations — including those that support women and minorities who have historically been denied equal rights. Many of whom are concerned about what policy changes may lie ahead. We are proud of their work. We of course support the right of all Americans to peaceably assemble and petition their government—a vital, and constitutionally safeguarded, pillar of a functioning democracy.”

    Make no mistake that the events you’re seeing transpire nationwide are largely being coordinated, in part, by a billionaire political elite class that is looking to strategically forward a political agenda. Soros has used the same formula to foment domestic unrest to affect political goals in numerous nations –and it certainly looks as if he now has the United States in his sights. It’s clear that Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals is being employed by the left in an effort to destabilize and undermine political discourse in the U.S. Women’s rights are unquestionably a human rights issues, not a political issue, which makes it disappointing that we, as free individuals, don’t organically create manifestations like these large-scale marches, without oligarchs and their vested political interests essentially making it happen as a means of forwarding their particular ideologically driven political agenda.

    Jay Syrmopoulos writes for TheFreeThoughtProject.com, where this article first appeared.

  • FULL ARTICLE HERE
  • Anti Trump women marches show how organised rabid feminists have become





    Not only are they showing their true colours marching against Trump but their plans to take over the world with feminist Clinton in the White House has been shot in the foot when more women voted for Trump than top feminist mouthpiece Hillary Clinton.

    For decades we have been alerting a population particularly young men of the devious ploys being adopted to strip men of their rights to their home, their children and their money all of which is being undermined by the establishment bowing to rabid feminist demands and enjoying the vast spoils as heterosexual men are left impoverished, homeless and childless.

    It has to take the likes of Piers Morgan ( a compliant media lackey no less) to express the views that many of the marches against Trump attracted man hating feminists who haven't suddenly appeared from the bushes but have for years orchestrated vast pressure groups that control the mass media narrative that all men, apart from their homosexual buddies, are abusers and do not deserve the sympathy of the press or the sheeple who believe the bullshit and propaganda pumped out by the far right feminists within the likes of the BBC and Guardian.

    As men who have experienced the tyranny of family courts we know how many rabid feminists play a part in destroying men's lives within the legal mafia's and social services with a government employing men haters to bring about the downfall of the family unit with strong men at the helm. Something the powers that be, in particular the zionist freemasons, ensure men with the ability to stand up to their abuse of power are left destitute and with limited resources to fight the oppression within our midst.

  • FULL ARTICLE HERE
  • Piers Morgan says Womens March against Trump attracted rabid MAN hating feminists
  • Feminazi's have a live journal called the SCUM (The Society to Cut Up Men)
  • Fifty Thousand Angry HATE FILLED Women march in London against HATE VIDEO


    The tragedy is that millions of American WOMEN voted for Trump but they dont count

  • Rabid feminist Guardian promotes rabid feminist hate filled march (The Guardian is filled with man haters promoting Womens Aid stats and the removal of fathers while ignoring mothers who kill)
  • Rabid feminist nutjobs at the Guardian claim HATE march is really for love
  • Rabid Guardian feminists and the Nasty Women of the world unite
  • Madonna calls for violence and hate, “I have thought an awful lot about blowing up The White House”
    Madonna really is a lot like Hillary Clinton. Violent, corrupt, and manipulative.

    Aside from dropping numerous f*** bombs in her speech to a huge crowd of liberal religious worshippers, Madonna also threw out some fresh bait for some crazy liberal radical to undertake…blowing up the president. HERE

    “I have thought an awful lot about blowing up the White House, and I know this won’t change anything. We cannot fall into despair.”

    The liberal left is so inclusive, tolerant and peaceful.

    Where were was the outrage when Bill Clinton was killing Christian women and children in Serbia

    Where was this outrage when Hillary Clinton was killing women and children in secular Libya?

    Where was this outrage when Barack Obama was killing women and children in Afghanistan, Somalia, Yemen, and secular, liberal Syria…

    All the while funding ISIS, a group that persecutes and kills gays, and wishes to impose Sharia Law.

    I have a special F*** YOU saved up for Madonna and every single person that descended onto DC in protest of a man that has not killed a living thing in his life

    Leave it to Zerohedge to ask these half a million snowflakes, radical feminists, anarchists, and cuckold beta males…“What was the March about again?”

    The Queen of Pop began her remarks by addressing the crowd of an estimated 500,000 women (and men) in the nation’s capital and alluding to Donald Trump becoming the 45th President of the United States, saying “Welcome to the revolution of love, to the rebellion, to our refusal as women to accept this new age of tyranny, where not just women are in danger but all marginalized people, where being uniquely different right now might truly be considered a crime. It took this horrific moment of darkness to wake us the f— up.”

    She later said, “To our detractors that insist that this march will never add up to anything, f— you.” She then repeated the expletive for a third time.

    Both CNN and MSNBC quickly cut away after Madonna’s third f-word, with CNN’s Brooke Baldwin apologizing for the expletives that they aired.

  • FULL ARTICLE HERE
  • Trump brings the lunatic feminazi bitches out on to the streets

    Selfish self centred feminists out on one of their 'I WANT I WANT I WANT' marches.

    If there was any more stark example of what heterosexual men are facing is the rabid feminist extremists that masquerade as defenders of equality but are really pushing for entitlement, positive discrimination and massive cheques on the way out of divorce courts.

    We are not defenders of Trump, who like Hillary Clinton is a zionist hand picked lackey and a more important threat than any sexist claims by the nutters out on the streets over a Trump presidential win. They were planning celebratory marches over a feminist Hillary Clinton win but that changed when more women voted for Trump. The same lunatics ignored the abuse of women by Clinton's hubby and the threats lawyer Hillary Clinton made against any woman that dared to accuse her husband of sexual abuse while he was in the White House.

    Hypocrisy at the extreme and it has been lawyer President Obama and lawyer President Bill Clinton and their lawyer wives that have spent so much time legislating for feminists, lesbians and homosexuals while ignoring heterosexual mens rights and why Clinton did not get the vote the feminazi were hoping for.

    They are a lost cause as many women turned against their MAN HATING rage and voted for Trump despite a massive campaign to discredit him by a hostile press that has been pushing LGBT and feminist rights for so long the public now see the damage both sets of extremists are doing as families collapse under brutal legal legislation imposed by the biggest terror cell on the planet emanating from a global law society that props up these high profile demonstrations with money stolen from men during divorce.

    Men are now seeing first hand how the feminazi have been deviously operating behind the scenes to force men into homelessness, poverty and childlessness thanks to the corrupt legislation enacted by the judeo freemason political and legal mafia's only to happy to attack and destroy heterosexual men while sharing the spoils of divorce the biggest multi trillion dollar industry on the planet.

  • FULL ARTICLE HERE
  • Piers Morgan quote: "I'm planning a 'Men's March' to protest at the creeping global emasculation of my gender by rabid feminists. Who's with me?"
  • Hell hath no fury as 100,000 bonker feminazi take to Britain's streets as part of worldwide protests against Trump
  • It’s hard to argue with a million pussy-marchers – especially the really nasty ones like Madonna - but possessing a vagina is a matter of biology, not a political argument
  • Nasty Women's March warning to Trump (They have been playing the victim card for to long at the enormous expense of men being smeared to satisfy their golddigging)(VIDEO)
  • 'Make America Great Again' hat or a Pussyhat?(VIDEO)
  • Rabid feminists listen to Ashley Judd NASTY WOMAN rants(VIDEO)
  • Nasty Women's March on Washington (Women supporting Trump beaten up by Nasty women protest and Obama told police to stand down)(VIDEO)
  • Madonna Threatens to Bomb the White House - During Nasty Women's March Speech in D.C. (VIDEO)
  • Rabid feminists scream after failing to take over the planet VIDEO
    Types of Women to Run From VIDEO
    They wanted equality and now they have it "Man-imony VIDEO
    Femen: Exposed VIDEO


    THE CRAZY BITCHES THAT WILL GO TO ANY LENGTHS TO GET THEIR WAY
    When feminist leaning mason cops prejudice only see MEN as the problem you get tyranny VIDEO
    One positive bit of news this week


  • London's feminist library faces eviction in rent hike row (Run by vile man haters
    who see entitlement and NOT hard work as a way to turn themselves into millionaires)

  • Why Women DESTROY NATIONS * / CIVILIZATIONS - and other UNCOMFORTABLE TRUTHS VIDEO
    A Well Known Feminist Going Full Retard VIDEO
    MP blames "militant feminists and politically correct males" (freemasons) for stirring up problems between men and women
    An issue we have been raising for decades now being discussed by the political mafia as to WHY so many men die from suicide.

    An MP has blamed "militant feminists and politically correct males" for stirring up problems between men and women.

    Conservative Philip Davies said there was an attitude in Parliament that equality "often applies just to women". But his comments were criticised by fellow Tory MP Maria Miller, who accused him of trying to belittle discrimination faced by women. They were speaking as MPs debated male suicide and International Men's Day.

    International Men's Day is celebrated on 19 November, aiming to address issues including men's shorter life expectancy, higher suicide rates, and "the negative portrayal of fathers, men and boys". Mr Davies, who had led calls for a debate on the subject, told MPs in Westminster Hall he did not think there was "an issue" between men and women.

    'On merit'

    He added: "I think often the problems are stirred up by those who might be described as militant feminists and the politically correct males who sometimes pander to it." The Shipley MP said it was "depressing" that a select committee for women and equalities had been established, saying he "couldn't care less" if every MP in the Commons was a woman, "as long as they were there on merit".

    He added: "It seems to me that we've therefore got this 'equality when - but only when - it suits' agenda in Parliament that often applies just to women." Another Conservative MP, Lucy Allan, said parents should not make their sons feel "ashamed of their sex" when raising them, adding that it was wrong "to blame today's men for the patriarchal society of yesterday".

    Ms Miller, the former equalities minister, said equality was not a "competition between men and women", saying it was not a "myth" that women faced discrimination on a daily basis. SNP MP Paul Monaghan said he found many of Mr Davies' remarks "unrelated to the title of the debate", saying the Scottish government was "deeply concerned" about suicide rates.

    For Labour, shadow mental health minister Luciana Berger called for an "urgent review" of the government's suicide prevention strategy, which was published in 2012, and criticised a delay in producing official figures.

  • FULL ARTICLE HERE
  • University of York cancels International Men’s Day event thanks to the feminazi
    WE RECOMMEND ANY YOUNG MAN CONSIDERING SIGNING UP TO JOIN YORK UNIVERSITY SHOULD AVOID LIKE THE PLAGUE.

    Outcry from students and staff forces university to pull event, but campaigners hit back saying move sends out message that ‘men’s rights are not important’


    A row has broken out at York University after plans to mark International Men’s Day on Thursday were cancelled following an outcry from staff and students.

    The university had signed up to the event, which aims to highlight issues affecting men and boys, including the high male suicide rate, men’s shorter life expectancy and “the struggles that boys can face in getting an education”. It has since been cancelled at York after students, staff and alumni signed an open letter to the university objecting to the event. However, a number of students are campaigning to reinstate the day, and accuse the university of sending out a message that “men’s rights are not important”. A petition has been launched, which states: “It is important that we recognise men’s day just as much as women’s day. True feminists should be fighting for gender equality for both men and women. To cancel men’s day is simply hypocritical. Equality is not just for women and should concern both genders.”

    The dispute began after a statement appeared in connection with International Men’s Day in which Adrian Lee, of the university’s equality and diversity committee, said men were under-represented in some areas of the university and that women had a higher chance of being appointed to academic staff posts than men. “In the area of gender equality, the focus has rightly been on raising awareness about – and removing barriers for – women,” Lee was quoted as saying. “We are, however, also aware of some of the specific issues faced by men. Men are under-represented in the student population as a whole; they are also significantly under-represented in a number of academic disciplines across all three faculties. “In academic staff appointments, the data suggests that female candidates have a higher chance of being appointed than men. In the professional support services, there are areas where men are significantly under-represented. Likewise in academic departments, the support staff complement is often heavily weighted towards women, with some departments employing no men at all in these roles.”

    About 200 members of the university staff, students and alumni signed an open letter suggesting the reputation of the university could be damaged by aligning itself with the event. “We believe that giving practical application to concepts of equality and diversity should be taken seriously by the university,” the letter said. “However, we do not believe that this is furthered by the promotion of International Men’s Day in general and are concerned by the particular way in which the university has chosen to do so. “A day that celebrates men’s issues – especially those outlined in the university’s statement – does not combat inequality, but merely amplifies existing, structurally imposed, inequalities.”

    Addressing claims about men’s under-representation at the university, the letter said secretarial and support work were demeaned as “women’s work” whereas men dominated senior, better-paid roles. “The statement is particularly crass in view of the fact that of the 12-strong university senior management group, three-quarters are male.” The university later apologised. “The intention was to draw attention to some of the issues men tell us they encounter and to follow this up by highlighting in particular the availability of mental health and welfare support which we know men are sometimes reluctant to access.” Matthew Edwards, a third-year politics student, said the university’s U-turn was shameful. He is among those calling for the event to be reinstated. “By cancelling the day entirely, they have sent out the message that men’s rights are not important, which is astonishing,” he said.

    “International Men’s Day is about raising issues like the high male suicide rate, male rape and male domestic abuse; it’s about issues in education, and child-father relationships. These do not necessarily conflict with women’s rights. “Perhaps I am a little biased given I am a male but that does not mean my points are not valid. Indeed, they are not just my points but many people’s points who are disgusted with the university’s shameful decision.” A university spokesperson said: “We have withdrawn the original statement about International Men’s Day, and do not propose to mark this event formally. In gender equality, our main focus has been, and will continue to be, on the inequalities faced by women, such as under-representation in the professoriate.

    “At the same time, we will not neglect other aspects of equality, and will take a balanced approach to all nine protected characteristics as defined in the 2010 Equality Act. Our overriding goal is to strive to treat every member of the university community with dignity and respect.”

  • FULL ARTICLE HERE
  • Feminazi mouthpiece ELLE on lack of women at the top(or just to many freemasons?) VIDEO
    Michael Kaufman the male feminazi promoter who writes bile about heterosexual men VIDEO

  • Michael Kaufman the biggest male peddler of feminazi heterosexual male smear campaigns
  • Michael Kaufman instigator of the feminazi White Ribbon campaign against heterosexual men
  • The Feministing Five: Michael Kaufman
  • Refugee men in Scotland cajoled into feminazi White Ribbon agenda(VIDEO)
  • More feminist bullshit gets another platform in the complicit media VIDEO
    The world of Sugar Daddy golddigga's VIDEO
    Branson hotels go after the feminist dollar VIDEO
    Potty mouth feminist Amy Schumer on women's magazines at GLAMOUR women of year Awards VIDEO
    Women wising up to the feminazi fraudsters and their devious DV lies and stats VIDEO
    Feminists push for woman on American bill VIDEO
    Two 12 year old girls use 'Slender man' excuse for murdering friend VIDEO


    How many more times will females use male (in this case a fictional male)
    pressure to justify their actions?
    BBC interviewee claims women should not be made to look victims of men VIDEO
    Sex Lies And Rinsing Guys VIDEO
    Brutal abuse by female staff against children in South Korean nursery VIDEO


    And they claim they are the weaker sex?
    The homopaedo warmongers pushing feminazi domestic abuse campaigns
    Despite massive exposures recently by the gutter press, that are only repeating what many victims on the internet have been exposing for decades, the scum and filth political establishment behind gross homopaedo abuse, murder and its cover up and who also support warmongering by the British and American neocons are determined to continue to ramp up the feminazi driven domestic violence mayhem.

    Despite the fact that young boys in care homes en masse have been removed from those homes and abused by the political establishment of Britain. Many of them in care homes after being removed from fathers under the guise of domestic violence allegations these evil bastards continue to pursue policies that have driven men to suicide and destroyed their lives while their children are abused and murdered by the very scum and filth manufacturing ever more draconian laws. Laws that smear heterosexual men in family courts that still to this day remain cloaked in secrecy and with little or no evidence offered by crooked lawyers on multi million pound legal aid budgets acting for ex wives ONLY interested in golddigging and little concerned with the consequences of children being removed from the physical protection of their biological father.

    Many men who are yet to face these horrific hearing are totally unaware, thanks to endless propaganda, that they are next for the chopping block that enriches the lawmakers with powers so vast they are getting away with murder using twisted allegations that financially enrich the freemason political and legal perverts as well as satisfying their insatiable appetite for youngsters stolen by the most sinister abuse of the law. Laws they make up as they go along.

    THERE IS METHOD IN THEIR MADNESS

  • FULL ARTICLE HERE
  • Extreme feminist agenda (on domestic violence ) moves into the workplace like a stasi state
  • Stasi domestic abuse cops take rare action against female OAP after she hit her husband with a magazine (This goes on against men all the time for the most trivial of events)
  • John Hemming MP: The more secret the court, the more the system acts against the rule of law (That rule of law is what crooked judges make up as they go along)(VIDEO)
  • High Court Judge: Don't always believe claims of domestic violence
  • Family courts hold the most drastic powers of any tribunal (and that's from a judge)
  • Homopaedo orgies in luxury flats and claims three boys were murdered by VIPs
  • MAGIC CIRCLE OF HOMOSEXUAL JUDGES AND LAWYERS
  • Second top British judge faces probe over 'defence' of paedo's
  • 1,000 children a week stolen by paedo leaning judges in Britain(VIDEO)
  • European parliament petition hears about 1,000 children a week stolen by Britain's judicial mafia
  • Homosexual top judge 'should be suspended over links to paedo's'
  • Second senior judge exposed as paedo apologist who wanted age of consent to be 14
  • Judges helped protect homopaedo MP Cyril Smith(VIDEO)
  • Homosexual top judge 'should be suspended over links to paedo's'
  • Struck off, judges caught pocketing £1.5million in legal aid handouts money still missing three years
  • Judge who gave BBC paedo Stuart Hall just 15 months quits after visiting gay brothel
  • Monster nannies Womens Aid ignore at their peril VIDEO
    Why I quit feminist society behind THOSE T-shirts
    feminist politicians

    Zionist Miliband, Feminist Harman and femiman Clegg

    Self-righteous. Narrow-minded. A mouthpiece for the unions... Blistering attack on The Fawcett Society by its former vice chair Joanne Cash

    Regretful: Joanne Cash says the Fawcett Society's furious reaction to MoS revelations reinforces her view that the feminist organisation has to change Despite a long history of fighting to improve the lot of women in British life, The Fawcett Society, Britain’s oldest feminist organisation, has never been ‘water cooler’ conversation. Until, that is, the events of the last two weeks, when T-shirts bearing the words ‘This is what a feminist looks like’ attracted exactly the wrong sort of attention.

    Faced with the facts – revealed by The Mail on Sunday– that the shirts had been cheaply produced by exploiting female workers in Mauritius, The Fawcett Society then damaged its reputation still further with a self-righteous yet evasive response, suggesting that the workers’ pay (62 pence an hour) was reasonable and that the T-shirts somehow remained ethical. When any organisation publicly abandons its core values, it is time for a rethink – the more so when, in the case of The Fawcett Society, it has been fatally undermined by an aggressive and immature culture of political point-scoring. I take a personal interest in The Fawcett Society and, as a former vice chair, I felt a lot of sympathy when the story first broke.

    Yet their persistent refusal to acknowledge the facts as they emerged has left me dismayed. The society takes its name from one of our greatest feminists, Millicent Fawcett – one of my heroes. Not only did she campaign tirelessly for the vote for women, she dedicated her life to increasing female access to education and justice and the abolition of sexual abuse. Sadly, by the time I was offered the role of vice chair in the spring of 2013, The Fawcett Society had already been displaced as the most significant feminist voice in the UK.

    New campaigns with fresh approaches were leading the way – campaigns for better representation on company boards, for example, or attempts to highlight the daily abuse of women. The tone and content feels different, modern.

    In comparison, The Fawcett Society appears narrow in its focus – and reliant on union funding. While the public is increasingly disenchanted by party politics, The Fawcett Society continues to be combative. Rather than appearing to speak for everywoman, it has become pigeon-holed as Left-wing, as a mouthpiece for the unions. The issues it stands for – equal pay, women in poverty – are as vital as ever, but Fawcett makes them sound tired. Yet, with such a strong and intellectual history, I believed that it could evolve.

    When I, as an active Conservative, was appointed to the board, it gave me confidence that change was possible. What I found instead was an office full of ideological but naive young women driving a Left-wing agenda, even while the charity was on its knees. It became apparent that some members of the staff had no idea how to run the charity, let alone grow it.

    Bright women with a good eye for statistics, I am unconvinced to this day that they have any vision for the future of the charity beyond more of the same narrow focus, the same reactive, outspoken press performances. When David Cameron reshuffled his Cabinet and increased the number of female full Cabinet Ministers from three to five, promoting a range of talented women to senior positions, I thought that surely The Fawcett Society would reach out across party lines and congratulate these women on their achievements. But no, they couldn’t resist the old game: ‘The substance didn’t live up to the hype’, they said. Cameron had ‘failed’ to meet his promise to make a third of his Cabinet women by the time of the Election.

    (A complete falsehood: One third of the Conservative members of the Coalition Cabinet were, in fact, women. But not even the Prime Minister can conjure up female Lib Dems.) So with huge regret, I decided that I could not continue as vice chair as I no longer believed that the change needed could take place within the existing culture. And I stepped down. I wasn’t at all surprised to see that Left-wing politicians were being used to promote the T-shirt, but I was dismayed.

    If your potential supporters hate mainstream politicians, why identify yourself with them? Why do you need Ed Miliband when you’ve got Benedict Cumberbatch? Using the T-shirt to raise money and profile was a terrific idea but yet again the point-scoring had derailed a smart source of funding. Fawcett’s response to this story has reinforced my view that it has still to change. In an indignant fury, the charity – along with high street retailer Whistles, with whom it has aligned itself – defended the abuse of some of the world’s most vulnerable women. This is still the stated position on the website at the time of writing.

    So where does the charity go from here? There is a place for a serious feminist voice in the UK. The Fawcett Society could be that voice if it returned to the values of its founder and learned how to build coalitions and consensus. It needs to be representative of all women. I have no doubt that Millicent Fawcett would be making the case for the protection of the girls of Rotherham. She would also by now have helped us re-engage with men. Some of her greatest feminist allies were men, including her husband Henry Fawcett and the philosopher John Stuart Mill. Many of the changes now needed to progress real equality for women require society to release men from stereotypes and conventions too. How can we share family obligations when men face stigma for taking time off work?

    That is just one example of the many changes we should fight for. There is more momentum behind the equality movement now than there has been for a long time. After the T-shirt story broke, someone on Fawcett’s staff wrote a sarcastic tweet in response to the T-shirt story: ‘We’ll just have to get along without the 11 million Mail readers. Aw, shucks.’ Possibly they can do that but equality cannot to be so narrowly selective. The Fawcett Society needs to decide what it is about.

    Flustered Harman in a sweat over 'slave labour'

    Harriet Harman last week continued to back the controversial Whistles feminist T-shirt, despite MoS revelations that it was produced by women in Mauritius paid just 62p an hour. The Labour deputy leader, who wore the T-shirt at Prime Minister’s Questions in the Commons, wrongly claimed that The Fawcett Society had conducted an ‘investigation’ into the T-shirts ‘after that accusation was made about slave labour’. In fact, The Fawcett Society has admitted it has yet to investigate the £45 T-shirts and the Mail on Sunday report mentioned nothing about ‘slave labour’, instead reporting a union leader’s view that the migrant workers’ low pay and cramped living conditions constituted a ‘sweatshop’. Whistles said they intend to send someone to Mauritius to investigate our report.

    Ms Harman seemed flustered on London’s LBC radio when presenter Iain Dale asked: ‘The people were paid 62p an hour – what would you call that, if it wasn’t slave labour?’ She replied: ‘Well, I, you know, I wasn’t involved in actually… I’m totally against slave labour… erm, but actually, if an organisation which is a charity promoting women’s rights give me a T-shirt to wear, I don’t, you know, look into all the background of how it was made, you know, I take it on trust.’ Ms Harman’s spokesperson declined to comment yesterday.

  • FULL ARTICLE HERE
  • Female sex offenders: A growing threat?(or just covered up by feminist gutter press) VIDEO
    Why Feminism Needs to End: It's Time to Work Towards Equality
    against feminism Tackling feminism in today's world is -I'm told- rather a stupid idea. It's not that I'd be labelled a chauvinist pig and accused of wanting to keep women chained to chores and childcare, which I don't. It's not even that tackling a global movement as one person (which is how it feels, despite a mass of men and women attempting the same) is like standing against a tsunami wearing speedos and a snorkel; I'm aware that every word will be pulled apart, angered messages will fill my inbox and I'll be accused of ignorance and sexism.

    I've already, during initial research, acquired my first troll on my new Twitter account; I'm a "simple manbaby" apparently. The reason it's stupid for me to speak against feminism is simply because I have a penis...and the feminist does not accept a boy negatively commenting on the relevance or alleged prejudice of the feminist movement.

    I know this. Had I, as a male, pitched articles in support of feminism, perhaps I'd have been commissioned alongside the published pro-feminism male writers. But time and again, as I approached relevant sections of publications that boast a feminist voice, I was informed by the female, feminist editors that my views were 'not suitable'. I know that's like a satanist asking to put an advert for a willing, virginal sacrifice on the local church's noticeboard, but that's exactly the problem. If the media belongs to feminism like the noticeboard belongs to the church, where can you make another argument? I won't say who the guardian of feminism is, because I'd very much like to write articles for them and don't want to be blacklisted for publicly calling them sexist. But I feel I'm correct in seeing that bias.

    Also, polite conversation about feminism, with feminists, has invariably turned into my being ranted at. Apparently, the very fact I'm questioning feminism is because I'm a typical white male with all the privilege, no understanding of what it's like to be the victim in a sexist society and, therefore, have no right to question or challenge it. Even Emma Watson's speech at the UN saw feminists react in comment threads, saying that men should not have a say, despite her invitation.

    Yet, here I am; I have my speedos and my snorkel. First, I'm sorry feminism had to exist in the first place. I'm sorry about the past where women, as capable and wonderful as my own mother, my sister and as capable and strong as I know my daughters will be, were made to feel inferior, robbed of choices and treated as objects to be used and abused. I applaud the achievements of those who fought to bring about change and know there are still issues to resolve.

    But...yes, 'but'...this has gone far enough. The reason I stand here in my speedos is because there is a need. Women have faced and still face prejudice and inequality. Here's a fact, though: men do too. That men are not allowed to speak about the prejudice and inequality they face simply because they are men (and men, in generalised and historic terms, are not the victims of sexism) is just one ludicrous contradiction from feminists. That feminism apparently stands for 'equality' in order to be recognised as legitimate and politically correct, but does nothing to fight for the rights of separated fathers as equal parents, while advocating the social assumption that women are more emotionally bonded with their children based on gender stereotype, is just one transparent flaw, in the light of its own mission statement of equal rights.

    In one post, I cannot scratch the surface of all the issues: the false propaganda, the resulting angered cry of women, the politically correct expectation upon men to pay their penance for misogyny with unchallenged acceptance of feminist values in their homes, ironically leaving them silenced and without a vote. But follow me, converse with me and read my future posts.

    But here and now I'm not going to speak only on behalf of the men that I know are negatively affected by feminism. Indeed, the whole reason for my writing on the subject is because I actually care about gender equality, which is something I do not credit to feminism, or at least, what feminism has become. Women are feeling the sting too; women I care about. A recent study by Netmums found the majority of women felt feminism was too aggressive, de-valued the stay at home mum and applied too much pressure on women to do and be everything. 17% even stated it is oppressive to men.

    Women, actually, get a rough ride from feminism's soapbox rantings. There are standards to live up to, much like a Christian having to obey the 10 commandments or feel like a sinner. I have spoken to feminists and witnessed their despair as they defend their own life choices against what their feminist values dictate they should be or do. One, who prioritised her children over work, felt she let down her values as a feminist and felt pressured to work full-time. She spent ten minutes justifying her reasons for not doing so...not that I had challenged her. Another became exacerbated when stating she didn't "believe in high heels" because they symbolised the oppression of male objectification and her feminist values dictated she shouldn't wear them simply because a 'man' would like her to or because she should rely on a pair of high heels to make her attractive. She continued, taking both sides of conversation, making it clear she likes to wear them occasionally because it makes her feel good, for her, not for anyone else, it's not for a 'man', she has a right to wear them and shouldn't have to dress down simply to avoid being objectified...it went on. Bizarrely, all she was trying to do was feel justified in wearing something she liked and escape the judgement from feminists who would say she gave in by wearing them and the other feminists who would say she gave in by wearing flats. The 'man' was actually absent in this argument, apart from serving as the silent 'accused' and 'guilty'.

    Women: go out and work, put up your own shelves, make him look after the children, you don't have to cook. Be strong, be capable, make your own decisions and be autonomous. Feminism is dogmatic. It sets rules. Like a religion it praises particular behaviour, but there are too many denominations, with no central scripture. Under the umbrella label of feminism the message is mixed, destructive and confusing. The result is that wearing one flat shoe and one heel, feminism simply walks in circles.

    Feminism casts out the old gender roles of both men and women as outdated and primitive, promoting the working, confident, strong woman as 'progressive' and the stay at home mother and wife as a woman who is 'socialised' into an inferior lifestyle of old. Women are free, only, to choose feminism's idea of the 'equal woman' in this new world; it has sculpted its own idea of the perfect gender roles and is socialising both sexes into playing these 'acceptable' roles in society. The odd result is that women have more choice, but only feel allowed to choose that which is deemed acceptable, according to the stereotype of the all new and improved modern woman. Going back to the current plight of the male, it's easy to see that feminism pushes women toward choosing and living a particular role in society, whether they like it or not. Women are to choose to work, choose a reversed gender role in parenting. Choose, choose, choose. After all those years of oppression, women have the right to choose and should do so!

    Two questions:

    If the woman in a relationship has the power of choice awarded to her by feminism, what power does the man, her partner, have?

    Is this equality?

    Simply acknowledging that if women have the authority to choose, then men don't, is a step forward because it becomes glaringly obvious that the feminist agenda will not bring about equality. Men are now having to fight for their own power, even to speak. There are issues of inequality on either side and they will not be resolved if men are fighting for men and women are fighting for women. A tug of war is not over until one team has fallen into the muddy ditch in the middle. That's not equality. HeForShe? That's about men fighting for women on the assumption -and outdated notion- that women are the only ones suffering gender inequality, which isn't even a stab in the right direction. Perhaps we all need to grow up and realise that within our society, we can collectively, as united men and women, set a standard that is fair for all. I know feminism doesn't speak for all women. I know feminism actually makes it difficult for many women. I know feminism does not allow men to voice their opinions.

    So, to the women and men in our society who actually want equality, I would like to extend your formal invitation. Gender equality, prejudice and crime against anyone of any gender, is your issue too. We need to end the tug of war, put down the rope and come to the table as equals and tackle prejudice and crime together. That is the campaign where men and women stand side by side and decide what type of society we can make, acknowledging each other's flaws, faults, strengths and where we each feel we suffer prejudice from the other. Such a campaign does not begin with one side 'allowing' the other to join. Neither does its name imply one side should fight only for the rights of the other. "HeForShe"? I'd call it "AllForEquality".

    NOW PULLED FROM HUFFINGTON POST
    Women smash up McDonalds when breakfast menu expires VIDEO
    Salma Hayek pushes the feminist agenda in Hollywood (superiority NOT equality)
    salma hayek

    Feminism removes any air of sexiness when they start the ranting
  • Hollywood run by zionists and feminists
  • Feminist mouthpiece Annie Lennox on the feminazi tshirt produced in a sweat shop VIDEO


    Feminist Lennox spouts bullshit trying to justify how the feminazi she rants on endlessly about can use foreign females in sweat shop conditions then sell their tacky tshirts for extortionate sums

  • Feminist mafia like MP Harriet Hatemen and Fawcet society use females on 62p
    per hour to manufacture their twisted tshirts
  • This is what a CHUMP looks like: Miliband under fire for wearing £45 'feminist'
    T-shirt that is made in a 62p-an-hour sweatshop
  • FEMINAZI 10
  • FEMINAZI 9
  • FEMINAZI 8
  • FEMINAZI 7
  • FEMINAZI 6
  • FEMINAZI 5
  • FEMINAZI 4
  • FEMINAZI 3
  • FEMINAZI 2
  • FEMINAZI 1
  • FEMINAZI DV