Hoes Gon’ Be Hoes: Karen Fratti Wants To Discriminate Against Men Based on Women’s Feelings

A POZ femshevik Karen Fratti is mad because men are using the laws to prevent women from illegally discriminating against men.

The horror.

But don’t worry, she’s got a really good reason for it:

Her feelings.

Remember last spring when a movie theater chain was advertising women-only showings of Wonder Woman and some people lost their minds in outrage? Now a comedian is being sued by a men’s right group for hosting her own women-only show in Los Angeles, and he might actually have a case citing anti-discrimination laws. But is banning men from women-only spaces sexist or is it just a way for women to have any safe space in this world? It’s something we should all think about.

Presumably, your house is pretty safe. Why not just stay there?

A few men got their boxer briefs all bunched up when the Alamo Drafthouse advertised a handful of women-only Wonder Woman showings in Austin and New York last year. They weren’t banning men from seeing it altogether. There were tons of other showings they could attend, but the movie theater chain blocked out a few nights for women to come together and watch the girl power flick together. For example, at one Brooklyn theater, there were 70 showings of the movie in one week, and one of them was for women only.

It Doesn’t matter. New York is one of the enlightened states that has made it illegal for a place of public accommodation to discriminate against the public on the basis of their sex.

In New York City, one man filed a complaint with the New York Human Rights Commission. In Austin, another man did the same. Ultimately, the Alamo Drafthouse admitted that it violated both cities’ anti-discrimination laws and apologized for running the promotion. And now, comedian Iliza Shlesinger might have to do the same. But really, she shouldn’t have to.

Oh? Why is that?

A guy named George St. George and his buddy bought $30 tickets to her Los Angeles show advertised as “No Boys Allowed” online. According to a suit eventually made public by Variety, he and his friend were told at will call that they could enter, but would have to sit in the back row. When they left to kill time before the start of the show and returned, they were denied admission altogether and given a refund. His suit likens being told to sit in the back to the Montgomery bus boycotts from the Civil Rights era.

Well, you enlightened women who hold up half the sky (or some such nonsense) were telling him that you intended to give him inferior accomodations (the back row) in a place accessible to the public because of his sex.

According to California law, St. George might have a case. He’s saying that the comedian, the talent agency, and the venue violated a state law that bans any discrimination based on “sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sexual orientation, citizenship, primary language, or immigration status.” There’s also a California Supreme Court case, Koire v. Metro Car Wash, in which men tried to get a discount aimed at women at a car wash. In that case, the court ruled that places of businesses couldn’t ban any protected class unless there was “strong public policy” to do so, like now admitting a toddler into an adult video store. So there is precedent for this lawsuit against Shlesinger.

The frustrating thing about this is that St. George attempted to get into the show, from as as far as we can tell, because he wanted to be turned away, provoking controversy where there didn’t have to be any. It’s hard to imagine a misogynist like this finding a woman funny anyway. And then he wanted to hire Alfred Rava, which he did, a lawyer who is an avid “men’s rights lawyer” and has brought almost 200 similar cases to court, including one where a baseball team gave swag away to women only on Mother’s Day. This guy is part of the National Coalition For Men’s Rights, which also takes offense at women’s only self-defense classes and blames women for campus assault. So…this is what we’re dealing with here.

He was creating a situation where he would have standing to sue. He’s practically a freedom rider sitting at a segregated lunch counter and waiting for the police to come get him so the NAACP could swoop in and argue that we’re all equal and legal segregation is evil and stain on American values.

God bless America and California über alles.

The upset on social media about the Wonder Woman showings was highly dominated by men’s rights groups, which allege that women getting equal rights has led to their oppression. But really, this claim is utter nonsense and a pretty next-level form of misogyny.

Still waiting for you to offer some proof as to why discriminating against men isn’t sexism. You could trot out ‘sexism = power + privilege.’ That’s always good for a laugh. It’s like the Bolsheviks claiming that because they weren’t motivated by capitalist, imperialist profit, therefore, butchering people and overthrowing their governments was okay.

Jason Posobiec, a well-known “alt-right” troll, was the guy who complained to the Human Rights Commission in New York. He’s the kind of guy who believes that men need safe spaces too, as if the entire world wasn’t already made up of them.

Cupcake, I hate to MANSPLAIN a thing to you, but I believe his name is JACK POSOBIEC.

And what ‘safe spaces’ are there for common men in this world?

In Texas, an anonymous man filed a complaint against the Alamo Drafthouse with Stephen Clark, a lawyer who handles LGBTQ employment discrimination cases. He told MyStatesman, “I’m a specialist in anti-discrimination law, so I was fairly certain that this was not lawful. If they were trying to do a gay-only Brokeback Mountain, I would feel the same way.”

It’s true that allowing businesses to not sell tickets to someone based on race or gender or religion is a slippery legal slope. And just telling men that they should “calm down” about a group of women gathering for a comedy show is not enough. Men have been telling women that same thing for generations when they banned them from social clubs and other man-only zones. They should technically be allowed to buy tickets.

It’s not a slippery legal slope at all. It’s called property rights and once upon a time, they were important in America. Then, the Warren Court happened. In the ‘wisdom’ of the Supreme Court, it was decided that if a property owner opened himself for commerce, he had no right to refuse to do business with people he didn’t want to do business with. Businesses don’t have the right to exclude people based on their immutable traits because…that would be wrong. Supposedly. Roberts v. Jaycees offered further judicial enlightenment on the topic that men did not have the right to exclude women on the basis of their sex.

Because women are hard-headed and short-sighted, they did not foresee that by using the imprecise, bludgeoning tool known as the law to invade male-exclusive spaces, they made the same tool available for men to destroy female-exclusive spaces.

Excellent work, dumbasses.

But men should think long and hard about taking up front row seats, chiming into a conversation, on top of examining exactly why they would want to be in a woman’s safe space or party in the first place. Much like a white woman shouldn’t be upset when women of color at work form their own group to talk about issues, or LGBTQ students form a club at school, or people of any religion have their own weekly prayer groups and meetings.

Most of the time these groups exist because there is not, overall, a safe place for these conversations to happen in the real world. People in these groups generally have a lot to talk about when it comes to the discrimination and micro-aggressions they face on the regular from every part of their lives. Men, especially straight, white men, don’t have these problems on anywhere near the same scale. They just don’t. They have all the rights, all the power, and are never interrupted, belittled, or dismissed. In fact, just asking most men to listen is misinterpreted as telling them to “shut up,” as the men’s rights groups seem to believe. That’s how unaccustomed they are to being quieted.

She’s realized that there is no legal grounds that allow the exclusion of men, so she’s wagging her little finger at men and implies that we should be ashamed of ourselves for having the audacity to violate the sanctity of the gynaeceum when women have treated the andron like public property and force the ‘feminism means equality’ crowd to abide by their own slogan.

In India, women’s only subway cars exist because men so frequently assault women while riding in mixed-gender cars. Given the amount of violence perpetrated by men toward women, maybe barring men from entering a movie theater or comedy show is like not allowing a kid to enter a porn video store. To so many women, men are actually dangerous. We’re not making this up. Men can turn having fun into a scary experience, like being groped on a club’s dance floor. Is it so hard to understand that women want spaces that offer respite from that possibility?

India is 7000 miles away and is irrelevant to men in the Anglosphere and the women who are allegedly against discrimination. But if you want to play this particular game, you’re not going to like where it ends up. You want to discuss India, let’s discuss India, where men ought to be very afraid of women, not to mention other men.

53.2 per cent rape cases filed between April 2013-July 2014 false, says DCW

Men are more likely to be harmed by other men than women are to be harmed by men. Women are socially a protected class when it comes to physical harm. White women are the most sacrosanct and least victimized when it comes to violence in the world. So, men not only have to prepare (because unlike women, we don’t worry, we adjust because nobody gives a damn about our feelings) in case we have to go at it with another man, we also have to mitigate the possibility that some woman might put a rape case on us for shits and giggles.

Maybe these dudes should stop trying to infiltrate women’s safe spaces to prove that feminists are *so mean* and should form their own groups to figure out why we need these safe spaces to begin with. (Then again, we already know what happens when a bunch of butthurt men get together.) Considering the very real fear and discomfort that women experience every day in mixed company, maybe men should stop whining that they’re not invited to the party. Their “problems” are not problems. Or hey, they can come in, fine, but they have to at least try to respect what’s going on in the room. If they can’t do that, they’ll just have to be escorted out. That’s not against the law.

The mean-spiritedness and vindictiveness of feminists has been proven a hundred times over. It requires no further proof. It’s axiomatic at this point. What Rava is doing is forcing women to abide by the rules they have tried to force on men; that we must suffer your presence when we don’t want it, regardless of any ‘discomfort’ we might feel in mixed company. When women want to invade male-spaces, we just have to suck it and deal with it. When we demand EQUAL treatment, suddenly, the womenfolk are ‘afraid’ and we must consider their widdle fee-fees.

Fuck that.

Enjoy the law being applied equally. That is what feminism is all about, right? Get over your petty fears and be as stunning and brave as we’ve been told you are.

Archived Source


Bill De Blasio Wants Millionaires to Subsidize the New York Subway System

Today, Hizzoner Bill De Blasio of New York City trotted out his brain trust and union allies to declare “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need.”

Oops, that comes later.

De Blasio played that tired old song of “the rich need to pay their fair share”, this time, the rich need to pay for capital improvements to New York subways. It’s the same lame song that has seen an exodus of wealthy citizens to more friendly areas (see Chicago and Los Angeles).

Rather than attempt to excise the rot that caused the problem (MTA mismanagement of resources) De Blasio and company would rather paper over the MTA’s malfeasance with an infusion tax money, taken under sound moral theory of “how could you be so heartless as to deny me your stuff? You have so much and I have so little! If you don’t give me your stuff, I’ll suffer and it will be your fault!”

Here are some examples MTA malfeasance.

June 21, 2017:

Two MTA board members admitted Wednesday that the agency has mismanaged its money — as a top transit official declared that the current subway crisis is “an emergency.”

Board member James Vitiello griped that not enough money has been spent on issues that need to be urgently addressed, like subway maintenance.

“We have taken on projects that have been expensive . . . like Second Avenue Subway or cashless tolling,” he conceded during a meeting at MTA headquarters in Manhattan. I think we’re coming around to seeing we may have done some of that at the expense of day-to-day maintenance.

Members acknowledged the agency is beset with problems — and a chronic lack of accountability. Scott Rechler called the entire MTA system “immensely broken.” “We are at such a point of crisis that it requires approaching it differently,” he said.

In short, the MTA has spent more money on subway photo ops rather than subway functionality.

May 17, 2016:

Tens of thousands of New Yorkers left stranded; 2.5 million pick-up and drop-off times may have been manipulated to show more favorable performance; Less than 50% of one car service’s trips were on-time

More than 31,000 times in 2015, New York City residents booked Access-A-Ride vehicles that never showed up and failed to provide service, stranding thousands of New Yorkers with disabilities, seniors and others who are unable to take mass transit, according to a new audit released today by New York City Comptroller Scott M. Stringer. The audit found that the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) allowed vendors to act with impunity, failing to monitor and correct problems or improve its Paratransit service.

“Access-A-Ride is absolutely essential for thousands of people to get around New York City every single day, yet this program stranded thousands of people, wasted millions of taxpayer dollars and caused untold harm and distress,” Comptroller Stringer said. “We found serious breakdowns in oversight and operations which have contributed to a culture of indifference and neglect by the MTA. After years of mismanagement, it’s on the MTA to take action now.”

Access-A-Ride services are mandated by the Americans with Disabilities Act, which requires public transportation authorities to provide a paratransit system for passengers who cannot use public bus or subway services. In assigning Access-A-Ride trips, the MTA delivers service through a network of 16 companies. These companies provide service using MTA Paratransit Division-owned vehicles, such as specially equipped buses and cars, and for hire vehicles that provide transportation to ambulatory passengers through car services.

The Comptroller’s Audit examined Access-A-Ride services for which the MTA paid $321 million in calendar year 2015.

The MTA is paying contractors for services they never performed and then cooking the books to cover up their mismanagement.

May 9, 2011:

Over the years real estate and banking interests have been the most prevalent occupations of MTA Board members. At the Brooklyn Public Hearing for the service cutbacks held in March 2010, a small group of protesters raised signs critical of the MTA’s deal to sell Atlantic Yards for below market value. In 2009, a lawsuit was filed to that effect. But it was hardly the only questionable land deal under the MTA’s watch.

Hudson Yards

Several years ago, the MTA entered into a deal to sell the air rights over the Long Island Rail Road yards near Penn Station. Although fair market value was received in that deal ($2 billion), the MTA has been criticized for the payment terms allowing the developer to hold onto much of the cash for 30 years.

The Sale of its Midtown Headquarters

We can only wonder how the MTA’s latest proposal to sell three adjacent properties at 341, 345, and 347 Madison Avenues will turn out and if it is best to sell these as a single entity as the MTA has proposed, or if a better deal could be struck if the properties were offered as three separate sales? Would a single developer have to pay more if there is increased competition?

Two Broadway

This is not the first time the MTA has thought about vacating its midtown Manhattan headquarters. When 2 Broadway was acquired at the southern tip of Manhattan, the MTA’s original plan called for purchasing that property to enable the MTA to stop the cash drain from its short term leases at 50 separate locations. That was the rationale used to sell the idea to the MTA Board. It seemed to make sense because a property owned by the MTA would have some equity should the MTA ever decide it no longer needed that property, and with real estate values on the rise, the MTA could make a killing.

Don’t ask me how it happened but somehow a purchase turned into a 99-year lease instead. I am not a real estate expert, but I fail to see the advantage of trading 50 leased properties for a single leased property in one of the most expensive areas of Manhattan, especially when the tenant (the MTA) still has to pay the massive renovation cost to adapt the building to its needs. Further, the renovations, over budget and behind schedule, have been the subject of questionable practices, including accusations of mob ties – enough to launch more than one investigation.

Amazing how our so-called public servants seem to find ways to enrich themselves and their friends at the expense of the people whose interests they claim to service.

June 4, 2010:

On Wednesday, the Empire Center for New York State Policy released payroll data showing over 8,000 MTA employees made over $100,000, including overtime and extra pay, and an overall average pay raise of 2.4%. There’s a searchable database of the employees and their salaries, leading to factoids like “Eleven of the 561 employees who earned more than $150,000 in 2009 were Long Island Railroad car repairmen who earned an average of $167,342 – which was $102,477 over their annual base pay rate of $64,865.” Yup, overtime is costing a fortune.

The NY Times points out, “A Long Island Rail Road conductor who retired in April, made $239,148, about $4,000 more than the authority’s chief financial officer” and “more than a quarter of the Long Island Rail Road’s 7,000 employees earned more than $100,000 last year, including the conductor, Thomas J. Redmond, and two locomotive engineers — who were among the top 25 earners in the entire transportation authority.” (Related: LIRR employees on disability.)

This news comes as the MTA is trying to deal with a $400 million budget shortfall. The MTA released a statement saying the 2.4% wage increases “reflects built-in raises provided under multi-year labor contracts” and says the data does show the “MTA reduced its workforce and held down costs by foregoing management raises.” Plus: “The MTA’s $800 million budget shortfall for 2010 — caused by State budget cuts and deteriorating tax revenues — means there’s much more work to be done. We are in the process of overhauling every aspect of our business, including the elimination of approximately 3,000 positions this year. One key part of this effort is a focus on the work rules, pension padding and management oversight that leads to some of the unnecessary overtime highlighted in today’s report.”

And on perfect cue, the managers will blame the greedy union boys for taking as much as they can carry, and the union boys will blame the managers for being pampered egg-heads who ain’t down with the working man.

Meanwhile, neither side will stop raiding the budget for every dime they can get.

May 21, 2010:

MTA officials are locking horns with the Transit Workers Union over rules governing overtime and sick time. The MTA brass says employees have been abusing the system and costing the Authority $560 million annually; part of that big expenditure was caused by the 25% of bus and subway workers took more than two weeks worth of sick days last year. Now the MTA is assigning a task force to crack down on employees who abuse sick days. Of course, the union is up in arms about it.

“These bureaucrats, they’ve never done a day’s physical labor in their life,” TWU Local 100 boss John Samuelsen tells the Post. “And they would faint if they had to work under the conditions that Local 100 members work under every day.” Speaking to the Daily News, he fumed, “They demean their own workers publicly on a consistent basis, and they fail to acknowledge NYC Transit workers work in some of the most horrific conditions you can imagine. Several bus operators are assaulted every week, subway workers breathe in toxic fumes… We put our lives on the line to move the riding public, and when we get sick, the company tries to portray us as slackers.”

But some high-profile incidents have revealed that some NYC Transit employees have in fact been on vacation while calling out sick. And one subway operator made the equivalent of what he would have earned in five days by just showing up for three days and then working overtime. The MTA says he called out for unpaid sick time the other two days, but because overtime kicks in after each eight-hour shift (not after 40 hours) the operator made his regular week’s pay. And the cherry on top is that his replacement on the sick days was paid time-and-a-half!

MTA officials estimate that the OT belt-tightening will result in $22 million in savings this year, while the Authority faces a $400 million budget shortfall. Next year the MTA will try to save $60 million by reducing overtime, though that will require union consent, so get the popcorn ready.

Not only is the management gaming the system for every dime they can get, the union boys have their hands in the kitty as well, freely dipping and double dipping sick time and overtime.

This is the classic public bureaucracy set-up: Politicians looking for easy answers, managers who are out to enrich themselves and their friends at the public’s expense, and an untouchable union out to scrape up whatever hasn’t been stolen by the first two because, hey, they aren’t going to be the suckers who actually do the right thing when everybody else is doing wrong.

I have to give the Devil such credit as he is due. This is not a problem of Bill De Blasio’s creation. The problem can be traced to Albany and the state legislature’s implicit consent to the MTA board’s effort to put fresh paint on a burning house. De Blasio’s proposed solution is temporary at best. It is a sin tax, and like any sin tax, it lasts only so as the sinner perpetrates the sin, or remains in the reach of the taxing authority.

A long-term solution would involve reevaluating fares, manager pay and decisionmaking, worker pay, and MTA accountability practices. But that doesn’t play well to the champagne socialists and government unions that swept De Blasio into power.

You always dance with the one who brought you.

Full Press Conference:

Death Wish the Remake; Progressives Get Triggered

Joshua Rivera, a writer for GQ, saw the new Death Wish trailer, starring Bruce Willis.

He was not amused because Bruce Willis (originally a comedian before he became an action star) cracks a joke in the trailer.

I’ll give you a moment to recover from the overwhelming shock of the man who coined the phrases “Yippee-kai-yay motherfucker!” and “welcome to the party, pal!” says a darkly humorous thing in a movie prominently featuring death and explosions.

Now that we’re all off of the fainting couch, let’s get to Progressive sermonizing Rivera engages in and why it is so stupid.

In moving the setting to Chicago, a city where gun violence is both well-documented and highly politicized, and setting the trailer to “Back in Black”, the remake tips its hand: 2017’s Death Wish comes off as a work of cowardice and opportunism, piggybacking off hard-right fear-mongering and a government that’s completely and utterly disingenuous in its rhetoric about violent crime when nationwide, crime rates—despite rises in cities thanks to mass shootings like the Pulse massacre in Orlando—remain historically low.

Rivera serves the reader up with this run-on sentence packed with several different items that are not related to each other.

In moving the setting to Chicago, a city where gun violence is both well-documented and highly politicized

“Gun violence”? Let’s call it what it actually is: Negroes murdering other Negroes over petty bullshit. According to the Chicago Police Department, in 2011, 75.3% of the murder victims in the city were Black. As for offenders, Blacks made up 70.5%.

We’re #1! We’re #1! We’re #1!

Oh wait, this is actually not a good thing.

And now, for the really fun stat: The clearance rate for murders in Chicago in 2015 was *drumroll please* 25.6%. You have a roughly 70-75% chance of getting away with murder in the city of Chicago.

Those are the documents. No spin, no politicizing, no bullshit.

and setting the trailer to “Back in Black”, the remake tips its hand:

They should have gone with “Shoot to Thrill”, but Roth would have had to fight Disney over it (because of Iron Cash Cow, I mean Iron Man) which is probably not worth the licensing fees.

2017’s Death Wish comes off as a work of cowardice and opportunism

No! You’re a coward and an opportunist!

Name-calling is boring.

piggybacking off hard-right fear-mongering

Russians. Russians are everywhere. They are hiding under your bed. They are all up in your DMs, jacking your emails, leaking your nudes.

Nope. Only the hard-right is fearmongering around here.

a government that’s completely and utterly disingenuous in its rhetoric about violent crime when nationwide, crime rates remain historically low.

No thanks to traditionally Democrat-controlled metropoli like Chicago, Detroit, Los Angeles, New York, Baltimore, etc.

despite rises in cities thanks to mass shootings like the Pulse massacre in Orlando.

I can’t help but notice that Rivera neglected to mention that the murders done last year in Orlando at the Pulse nightclub, were perpetrated by Omar Mateen, a Jihad-enthusiast of Afghani-descent.

Must have been an oversight.

But, to the gungrabbers, motives don’t matter. The gun is actually the guilty party. This is why they count suicides as “gun violence.” which is why they insist that only the police be armed, because, through the magic of POST, they will always be present to prevent or stop crimes, and gain perfect knowledge of when and when not to use their guns.

This stands in stark contrast to the state of violent crime in the U.S. during the ’70s, a decade that did see rising crime as well as some of the most notorious killers in the nation’s history.

Bullshit. America has long had a voyeuristic fascination with killers, going back to Levi Weeks and the Manhattan Well Murder. Bonnie & Clyde. John Wilkes Booth. Charles Guiteau. H.H. Holmes. Thanks to the unholy marriage of TV and yellow journalism, murderers and psychopaths transformed from local legends to national celebrities.

The new Death Wish has an entirely different context, one where guns are routinely turned on black citizens by white supremacists and white cops, where mass shootings regularly occur and lawmakers refuse to do anything about it, where guns in the hands of the populace is not a rarity but arguably an epidemic. It takes a profound level of either ignorance or craven, willful opportunism to think that this is a moment to make a film about a white man’s rage channeled through the barrel of a gun.

This is just a rewording of the previous paragraph with a conclusion about “the white man’s rage channeled through the barrel of a gun.” Yeah. And when the Black man channels his rage through the barrel of a gun, usually against another black man, as is the norm in Chicago, Josuha Rivera, and mincing Progressives like him, are as quiet as mice pissing on cotton.

Black people, understand that this is the progressive norm. They will shed a thousand tears for you being killed in a movie, but won’t lift a finger to prevent you from being killed in real life, especially when it is by your most natural predator, another black man. These progressives mean you no good. They are part of the system of your debasement and destruction. They are advocates of the system that broke the Black family. They are defenders of the system that leaves millions of black men and black women miseducated, poorly educated, or flat-out uneducated. Progressives are the beneficiaries of generations of government subsidized dysgenics practiced on Black people.

But progressives want you to be outraged over a movie in which fictional social parasites and reprobates receive their just reward as a result of the lives they’ve led. Divine retribution in the form of a man named Paul Kersey.

This is going to be the first Eli Roth movie I pay to see.

The Washington Post Wants You to MAN UP and March for Women; I Think I’ll Pass

In about a week and a half, the Avatar of Kek, the Great Wall-Builder, the Reigning and Defending King of New York, Donald J. Trump, will be sworn into office and the 45th President of the United States.

Supporters of the defeated candidate, Hillary Rodham Clinton, however, are still incredibly salty about this. In response, a number of feminists and veteran Hillary campaigners have organized a March for Women on the day after Trump’s inauguration (January 21, 2017).

On Donald Trump’s first day in office, organizers of the Women’s March on Washington are calling on “all defenders of the human rights” to join together to stand up for women and other groups that have been marginalized.

The author re-establishes the narrative in the first paragraph: ALL women are marginalized. Marginalized by who?

Non-women, or as they are commonly known, MEN.

All men are oppressing all women.

Check that feminist article of faith off of the checklist.

But there’s one group, comprised of about half of the population, that is hard to find in the social media and logistical frenzy leading up to the highest profile event protesting Trump’s politics: Men.

Sorry, I’m rather busy marginalizing women and can’t participate. It’s kind of a full-time gig.

Of the 175,000 people who indicated they are going on the March’s Facebook page, just a fraction appear to be men. And the #WhyIMarch Twitter feeds show far more mothers and sisters than fathers and brothers. On the ground, march organizers in Houston, Cleveland and Pittsburgh reported that just a handful of the seats on their buses have been reserved by men.

“This is a movement that is led by women, but it is not just for women. It’s for all people,” said Linda Sarsour, one of the march’s lead organizers.

One caveat: “You have to be okay with being led by women,“ she said.

I’m okay with being led by a competent leader, man, woman, or Dalek. But because Feminism is a female-supremacist movement, its members are expected to submit only to female leadership, but never male leadership.

The same test that played out when Americans went to vote for the nation’s first female president is now playing out in the anti-Trump response to the election. Some scholars of gender and politics say that while plenty of these men believe in women’s rights and abilities to lead, many still aren’t comfortable shouting their views through a bullhorn or spreading them on Twitter. Even those who show up might be unlikely to signal so beforehand.

You had a chance to vote for the nation’s first female vice-president in 2008. The response from the feminist orthodoxy was to shit on Sarah Palin from great height and with great volume.

You had a chance to vote for a female president in 2012. Again, the feminist orthodoxy shit on Michele Bachmann from great height and with great volume.

Clearly, you are not looking for a “woman president.” You are looking for a person who adheres to certain political positions, to assume power. And that would be fine, but for the fact that you also want that person to be a woman (oppressed class) to give them a built-in defense against opposition to those political positions (“Disagree with President Hillary? YOU’RE SEXIST!”)

“A lot of men are quiet supporters of women,”said Jackson Katz, author of Man Enough? Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton, and the Politics of Presidential Masculinity. Millions of men voted for Hillary and support women’s rights both politically and personally, he said, but they don’t have a powerful voice.

Plans to attend the march formed quickly among female friends and relatives, many of whom also took to social media to channel their disappointment after the election. Katz attributes the more muffled support among men in part to efforts that Trump and other Republicans have made to challenge the masculinity of men who support liberal causes or women in leadership. Trump repeatedly cast himself as the strong man.

Alex Mohajer, co-founder of Bros 4 Hillary, an advocacy group, said it this way: “There is a sense [that] if you outwardly support a woman you are less deserving of your man stripes.”

Let’s just pretend that Hillary Clinton did not cynically attempt to manipulate and shame men to vote for her by trying to ding their manhood.

The November election exposed the largest gender gap in more than 40 years, with women favoring Clinton by 13 points and men favoring Trump by 11 points. The gap was most stark for white men, in particular non-college educated white men, 71 percent of whom voted for Trump. For this group of economically challenged men, Trump’s appeal to a simpler time when men ruled the family resonated.

Men are wrong for favoring Trump, but women are right for favoring Hillary.

Got it.

At the same time, millions of men went to vote for Clinton as the first female president. Among them, 82 percent of African American me and 63 percent of Latino men. Younger men — aged 18 to 29 — were also more supportive of Clinton and also are likely to support gender-equality when it comes to a range of family-friendly policies.

We need to be deliberate about understanding the different paths that can land women in prison, be more attentive to women’s unique needs while they are incarcerated, and do more to support women and their families once they are released. I will institute gender-responsive policies in the federal prison system and encourage states to do the same …

-Hillary, April 27, 2016

“Gender-responsive,” not “gender-neutral,” and not “gender-equal.” Hillary believes that there are too many women in prison.

The number of men in prison?

Just right.

Katz said these men will need to speak out if they don’t want to see abortion outlawed, given Trump’s pledge to appoint anti-abortion judges to federal courts. They will also need to make known, he said, that they believe preventing sexual violence should be a priority, after Trump openly bragged about assaulting women.

Men should be more concerned about preventing violence in general, as men are the primary victims of violence in general.

Secure your own mask first before helping others.

“That means taking some risks in challenging other men, and literally standing up to the bullying that comes from the right about masculinity,” Katz said. Women are leading the charge for the march, heading up logistics and legal work, while male volunteers are playing mostly supporting roles. It’s a contrast to the 1963 March on Washington, when women largely worked behind the scenes.

Rather than improving on the model of the 1963 March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom (notice, they did not call it the “March For Blacks”), feminists have decided ex ante that all male participants, regardless of their skills, qualities, or talents, must be relegated to subordinate or supporting roles.

Tell me again about how “Feminism means equality.”

“This is all a part of straightening that bend in the road that women did not have a voice through the years,” said Harry Belafonte, the music legend and civil rights leader who worked with Martin Luther King, Jr. and was asked to be an honorary co-chair of the event with feminist icon Gloria Steinam.

“A lot of women are going with their friends, their sisters, and their mothers,” said Leah Burnett, a musician who helped organize five bus loads of marchers from Cleveland. “I think it’s a bonding experience.”

She counted less than 10 of the more than 250 seats that she can confirm have been reserved by men.

Many men who have pledged support for the march on Facebook say they are motivated to attend to continue the progress that women have made.

Tim Riddick, a 36-yeard old photographer from Woodbridge, said he plans to join the march because he wants to set an example for his three young sons.

“I am worrying about the way my boys will treat women when they are older. I want to make sure they not only respect women but that they fight for women as well,” he said.

Riddle me this, Riddick: Why are women, as a class, entitled to “respect” (respect being synonymous with “esteem, regard, high opinion, admiration, reverence, deference, honor, etc.)?

Riddick calls himself a “purple elephant,” a rare liberal who is also an observant Christian. He believes that women should be leaders in the church and also in the nation – and he believes women’s rights will not be successful without support from both genders. That means blending the line on what is considered a “women’s issue” to start with, including access to abortion and birth control.

“Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says.”

– 1 Cor. 14:34

Observant Christian, indeed. Cafeteria Christian would be more accurate.

Jeffrey Allan Ellis-Lee, a public school teacher in New York City, volunteered to be a bus captain, helping to shepherd a fleet of more than 60 buses that are scheduled to bring protesters from New York City and building on organizing work he did during Clinton’s campaign.

“This was such an anti-woman campaign,” he said. “There are so many issues, but this is the issue that I am standing up for during the march itself.”

“This was such an anti-woman campaign.”

But “44 boys is too many!”

Gerald Dudley, 33, is attending a solidarity march in Austin, Tex, where he works for a company that hosts pub quizzes. He said he wants to be much more outspoken in his support for women’s rights. “It’s not enough to say, ‘I’m not a misogynist,’” he said. “This year I am trying to put my money where my mouth is.”

To him, that means donating to feminist causes, seeking out more women’s perspectives in his reading, and calling out sexism when he encounters it. “When I hear a joke where the butt of the joke is a woman … Maybe I could say, ‘I don’t get it: Why is that funny?’”

Because females are unintentionally hilarious. Like birds flying into glass doors.

Darren Battle, a 51-year old chef in Atlanta, is coming to Washington for the March because he wants to support equal pay and other equal rights.

“There are not many female chefs. But if they are doing the job, they should be making what I am making,” he said.

Agreed. If they are doing the same job as you at the same level with the same experience, then yes, they should be offered the same money.

Duncan Chaplin, an education policy researcher in Petworth, said when he heard about the Women’s March he immediately planned to go and invited friends from out of town.

“Being part of a loyal opposition is important,” he said. “I want to oppose what Trump stands for, and women’s issues are clearly a part of that.”

Wait…does Trump stand for women’s issues? Or are women’s issues in opposition to what Trump stands for?

Anyway, this is just one thing, among the many things, that is so despicable about Feminists:

Out of one side of their mouths comes “EQUALITY!” (which they shall not practice when given the opportunity to do so)

Out of the other side of their mouths comes “UTILITY!” (men should make themselves useful, and even put themselves in harm’s way, for the cause of Feminism, which relegates them to a “supportive” role based on their sex, or, as most of us might comprehend it, sex-based discrimination).

To Feminists who tell me to MAN UP, and support Feminism, I give the following musical answer:

Archived Source

Portfolio Manager Tries to Bribe Girlfriend to Abort His Baby; Her Response? “Cha-Ching!”

A hedge-funder tried to fend off fatherhood by offering his model girlfriend $75,000 to abort their child, according to a lawsuit.

Elmira Naymark, 32, a lithe, leggy brunette, met Ron Ozer through mutual friends in 2013 and the pair quickly hit it off, traveling the world during a
2¹/₂-year courtship.

Lithe, leggy, and approaching The Wall at 70 mph. Check the numbers: She was 30 when they started dating. She’s 32 now and has his “oops” baby.

Ozer, 29, a portfolio manager for Citadel who specializes in making multimillion-dollar natural-gas deals, even introduced Naymark to his parents, gave her diamond earrings and whisked her off to Miami for New Year’s.

Of marriage, he would coyly offer, “One day, I will surprise you,” Naymark says in court papers.

For the curious, the average salary of a portfolio manager is about $100,000/year. Pretty good chunk of change and you can’t be a dummy in that area (according to Ozer’s LinkedIn, he’s a Math grad from M.I.T.). He was smart enough to string her along, treat her like she was a square girlfriend, show her some provisioning to keep continued access to her.

But being a STEM graduate doesn’t mean you can’t be reckless with your penis.

But when she told her lover in January that she was pregnant, Ozer grew cold, ordering her to “call the clinic” and “take a pill,” she claims.

When she said she was keeping the baby, he seethed, “I f–king hate you,” calling her “white trash” and “disgusting,” according to a Manhattan Supreme Court lawsuit Naymark filed last week against Ozer.

Of course she’s not going to abort her meal-ticket. Come on, Ozer, you have to be a little bit smarter than that. What did I just say about being reckless with your penis? If you are going raw in woman, either she’s sterile, you’re sterile, she’s taking birth control daily and in your presence, or you are essentially giving up your reproductive rights and future to a woman.

Ozer, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology grad who owns a $2 million West Village pad in a building where Robert De Niro once lived, swore he would deny the child was his, court papers say.

Then he had a colleague offer Naymark a pile of cash for her to end the pregnancy, even suggesting she could use the money to freeze her eggs and have fertility treatments later “with the support network of a husband,” according to court papers.

“He wants to help you out and take care of this,” the friend allegedly texted Naymark. “This isn’t the only chance for you to have children. You don’t have to force this and do it alone.

“With the support network of a husband,” meaning he wasn’t trying to marry this female, he was just playing around with her. When the feces hit the ceiling-mounted rotating oscillator, he thought he could buy her out. Little did he know, she had him scoped from the start. She was going to get a ring or a baby out of him, and either one would get her a lot more than a measley $75,000.

Now, according to the New York Child Support calculator, let’s assume his annual gross income is $250,000. For one child, the amount required is 17% from the noncustodial parent which comes out to $38,250 per year. This is not the end of the analysis. The Child Support Standards Act states that “The goal is to give children the same standard of living they would have if their parents were together.” Now refer back to the “$2 million West Village” and understand that $38,250 is a floor, not a ceiling. Elmira and the “Oops” baby will not be living in Bed-Stuy or Harlem. The court will require that Ozer set her and the “Oops” baby up in the West Village, or something comparable to the standard of living he now enjoys, but won’t for much longer.

“He wants to help you out and take care of this,” the friend allegedly texted Naymark. “This isn’t the only chance for you to have children. You don’t have to force this and do it alone.

“He’d be willing to offer a lump sum of money to you . . . I’m sure he would have no problem with 50k-75,000+.”

Naymark gave birth to a girl in September.

She claims Ozer hasn’t given her a dime — despite doing $60 million in a single business deal last year — forcing her to go on Medicaid and food stamps.

Pay attention to the Medicaid and food stamps statement. She is gaming the child support system, reducing her own income so that Ozer will be forced to pay more, despite her being a “model.”

The young mother, who briefly worked as a Manhattan leasing agent, says she is trying to get her real-estate license and relies on her mother for child care.

On an unrelated note, why is it that a lot of these models, actresses, bottle girls, and moderately-successful whores “retire” into the real estate business?

She is asking a judge to force Ozer to fund a lifestyle for his daughter “proportionate with [his] vast wealth and income,” according to court papers.

In addition to child support, Naymark is seeking a paternity test, full custody of the girl, health insurance for the baby, funding for private schools and summer camps, and a $5 million life-insurance policy listing herself and their daughter as beneficiaries.

A lawyer for Ozer did not respond to a request for comment.

Today, you bend her over, but tomorrow, she fucks you in court.

By “fund a lifestyle for his daughter proportionate with his vast wealth and income” she means “fund a lifestyle for ME proportionate with his vast wealth and income.” This looks like a textbook pre-Wall spermjacking. She was thirty, her model lifestyle was winding up, she ran down this guy’s resume, saw his account, played the girlfriend role, let him bust all kinds of nuts inside of her, and now she’s got the golden ticket to the chocolate factory, while he gets to be 18 Years a Slave.

And the Family Court will place its stamp of approval on this “in the best interests of the child.”

I don’t fear women; I fear the government that sponsors women in their mercenary pursuit of money and personal destruction.


Archived Source

Instagram Whore/Blackmailer Falsely Accuses Jay Bromley of Rape

Jay Bromley Jr., a 24-year-old Defensive Tackle for the New York Giants, has had a rough road in his life. His father was a pimp and his mother was a crack whore. He was born with an addiction. His father went to jail after beating a whore to death. He was raised by his aunt and uncle in Flushing, Queens, New York. After a stand-out performance at the Outback Steakhouse Empire Challenge (high school all-star game between New York City and Long Island), he was offered a scholarship to Syracuse University. He was a drafted by the Giants in the third round of the 2014 NFL Draft.

And his life was almost ruined by a lying, thieving Instagram whore.

Jay Bromley, like many athletes and famous men, lack understanding about the ruthless and pragmatic nature of females. All they see are tits and ass. And that’s what Jay saw when he hit up Instagram whore Chankeong (Chankeong3) for a “date.” The date was arranged for a hotel in Manhattan. When Bromley came out of the bathroom, Chankeong was naked on the bed. She sucked his dick, then demanded $2,000. Bromley refused, and stupidly, decided to stick around and fuck her. She demanded money again and Bromley hit her with the old Skeet and Skedaddle. Hotel surveillance cameras caught Chankeong chasing Bromley out of the hotel room, harrassing him, and throwing herself on the hood of his car.

But that’s not what she told the police.

The story that Chankeong told the cops was that she was drunk and vomited on his dick (nothing says class throwing up undigested chunks of lunch and stomach acid on someone’s genitals). She claims he attacked her in the room, then hit her with his car.

Thankfully, the NYPD investigated this bullshit story and to quote that other famous New York resident:

“We don’t believe you, you need more people.”

Then, the whore went into damage-control mode:

“I am a female that is emotional like a lot of entertainers I went to social media and said to heck with you, then I said let me delete this and turned to my bishop,” she said.

Chan told Bishop Lamar Whitehead the truth about what happened in the hotel that night; how a disagreement turned into a disaster.

“She said I don’t want this young man to get in trouble,” Whitehead said. “It was a situation where two careers could have been destroyed off a lie.”

Look at that phony crying and that trickle-truthing. The “disagreement” was that she is a whore and he refused to pay her. She cooked up a wild ass story and the video showed that her story was bullshit in part and likely in total.

Instagram is a veritable hunting ground for these aggressive, stalker whores, out for attention, money, or both. This same whore tried to extort Taye Diggs’ for money with a sextape last year.

But you keep right on trusting these mercenary whores if you want to.


Archived Source

Source 2

Archived Source 2

The Whore

The Whore Again

“Entrepreneur.” Fuck outta here. Professional groupie/prostitute would be accurate.

Canadian Social Workers Accuse Father of False Rape Using “Facilitated Communications” (Voodoo Science)

CHARLOTTETOWN — When the P.E.I. businessman arrived at the group home in Charlottetown to pick up his daughter, two RCMP officers were waiting for him.

He immediately assumed his daughter was dead.

“In those few seconds, I visualized a pile of bloody rags on the road, which was her body run over by a truck,” he says, his voice shaking.

The officers assured him the young woman was fine.

But his sense of relief fell away when the Mounties handcuffed him, saying she had accused him of sexually assaulting her.

It was Feb. 7, 2015. For the next six months, he and his wife were effectively prohibited from seeing their daughter as they were drawn into a bizarre legal nightmare that pitted them against police, the P.E.I. Health Department and the group home.

Independent psychological testing, later arranged by her family despite resistance from the province and group home, found she was incapable of making the allegations attributed to her.

The clinical psychologist who did the testing said it demonstrated that questions put to the woman were actually being answered by group home workers using a disputed method known as facilitated communication.

The father was never charged.

However, a judge later concluded the province’s Health Department and the group home acted in a “deplorable” manner by repeatedly ignoring the parents’ attempts to have their daughter’s communication skills independently assessed.

The case is an echo of a disturbing trend that first appeared in the early 1990s, when there was a string of cases of non-verbal people apparently using facilitated communication (FC) to accuse family members of sexual abuse.

A subsequent study of these cases, by London-based psychiatrist Elizabeth Starr, found that not one resulted in a conviction because it could not be shown that independent communication was taking place.

“In the meantime, families have faced stigma and humiliation, and have incurred enormous legal bills,” Starr wrote in 1994. “What began as a potential tool of empowerment and independence … has become a tool of devastating destruction when uncritically adopted.”

The woman’s parents, who are speaking out for the first time, say those responsible for their ordeal should be held accountable for their actions. More importantly, they say they want to make sure no other family suffers a similar fate.

Their daughter was diagnosed with autism when she was about three. By the time she entered junior high school, facilitated communication was among a long list of therapies they had tried.

First introduced to North America in the early 1990s, facilitated communication was initially hailed as a breakthrough for those unable to speak or write.

The technique involves an aide holding the user’s wrist, finger or arm as they point to letters or type on a keyboard. The theory behind FC is that the support calms and steadies the user, unlocking a previously hidden ability to communicate.

However, more than 40 scientific studies have shown that, in all but a handful of cases, facilitators unconsciously guided the hand of the FC user, says Eastern Michigan University Prof. James Todd, a longtime critic of the technique.

Despite widespread skepticism within the scientific community, supporters of FC say the method works.

The Institute on Communication and Inclusion at Syracuse University in Upstate New York — a leading force in the FC movement — says problems with FC are typically caused by failure to adhere to best practices.

“The goal is always a fading of that (physical) support toward independent access of a device,” says a statement from the institute last fall.

However, the woman in the P.E.I. case never graduated to that level. In 2001, she was using FC when she moved to a group home at the age of 21. At the time, the technique was used mainly for basic communication about meals and other simple choices, her father says.

In the last few years, the parents say, staff at Queens County Residential Services in Charlottetown told them their daughter’s FC sessions were getting longer, and she was expressing more complex thoughts and feelings.

In 2013, the parents say they started complaining about deteriorating conditions at the group home, and they say they started hearing reports that their daughter was making inappropriate sexual comments through FC.

In the fall of 2014, they say they were stunned when they were told their daughter had apparently used FC to say she wanted to have sex with a group home worker.

“I cautioned them about facilitation,” the mother said. “I said, ’Is there a problem? Could there be something going on?”’

They were told not to worry because the male staff member was married, she says.

Yes, a wedding ring is a magic shield that stops any and all sexual depredations and misconduct.

According to court documents, on Jan. 19, 2015, staff member Aaron Taylor submitted a report to his supervisor saying the woman had told him through FC that she was feeling tired and angry because her father had “kept her up playing with her vagina.”

Two other staff members signed another report confirming the allegations, also obtained through FC.

Two days later, staff member Jennifer Hendricken filed an internal report saying she used FC to determine the woman was biting her own hand and hitting herself because: “My dad touches my private parts and I don’t like it.”

Hendricken’s account, also part of the court file, alleges the woman had been assaulted nine times over a series of months during regular visits to her parents’ home.

Group home manager Barb Mullally filed a complaint with the RCMP the next day, and on Jan. 23, 2015, Const. Louanne McQuaid questioned the woman with the help of two facilitators — Hendricken and Maureen Mills.

During a videotaped interview, McQuaid was told that the 35-year-old woman was spelling out words on a small, laminated letter board that indicated her father had sexually abused her on a regular basis since she was 13.

In the video, the alleged victim rarely looks at her letter board as she moves around the room, her parents say. And some of the facilitated answers to basic, personal questions were wrong, including an answer to a question about the name of the family’s pet dog.

“She would do five taps and they would come out with a long sentence as to what she said,” her mother says. “We were horrified.”

The father was arrested after returning from a family vacation. During an interrogation that day, he denied abusing his daughter and insisted the allegations did not come from her, according to a police transcript.

“It’s about facilitation,” he told McQuaid, the RCMP’s lead investigator. “You are believing what you are hearing from a third party.”

Glad to see somebody in this Canuck clusterfuck knows what hearsay is.

The father was released on a promise to appear later in court to face a sexual assault charge and a charge of sexual exploitation of a disabled person. He signed an undertaking saying he would refrain from contacting his daughter or anyone under the age of 18.

As the investigation progressed, there were signs the Mounties may have had doubts about what they had heard through FC. An internal report dated Feb. 12, 2015 — five days after the arrest — says investigators wanted to conduct a second interview with the woman, this time with an impartial facilitator.

But that never happened.

Uh-oh, looks like some social worker got caught with their pseudoscience trousers down around their ankles again.

When a speech pathologist arrived at the RCMP detachment on March 13, 2015, the alleged victim was “unwilling to communicate,” McQuaid’s report says.

An RCMP spokeswoman said investigators sought advice from an expert, but Sgt. Leanne Butler declined to offer details, citing privacy concerns.

“We did everything we could as an investigative body,” she said. “It’s to the betterment of the investigation when we take our time.”

Between February and July of 2015, the woman’s mother made repeated attempts to visit her, but the province and the group home failed to co-operate, court records show.

“Imagine having a two-year-old and they’ve been kidnapped,” the father says. “That’s how we felt … For six months, we wondered, ’What the hell is really going on?”’

The parents decided that the only way they were going to see their daughter was to file a court application to become her legal guardian, citing reports from two family doctors who concluded she was not competent.

That’s when the province’s then-health minister intervened, exercising his role as head of the Adult Protection Program. Doug Currie issued an emergency intervention order, without explanation, stating there were grounds to believe the woman was at risk of serious harm.

The order, signed by Currie on April 28, 2015, gave the minister responsibility for the woman. A subsequent order banned the woman’s entire family from seeing her.

Dawn Frizzell, an adult protection worker, later filed an affidavit with the court saying the woman had indicated through FC that she did not want to take part in supervised visits with her mother at the group home.

“(She) told me, via her facilitated communication, that she was happy and was in support of the (minister’s) order,” Frizzell said, adding that the woman said she wanted to make decisions for herself.

Bureaucrats protecting other bureaucrats against peasants who dare to assert that they have rights. Take that down. It’s important.

The province repeatedly failed to respond to requests to have her skills put to the test, court records show.

Finally, on June 10, 2015, clinical psychologist Dr. Adrienne Perry — an expert on autism and developmental disabilities at York University in Toronto — conducted a series of tests to determine the woman’s abilities.

Images from a videotaped, 90-minute session clearly show how the woman rarely looked at her alphabet board when pointing to the letters. Perry estimated her eyes were focused elsewhere 90 per cent of the time.

More importantly, the psychologist found facilitator Jennifer Hendricken couldn’t help the woman answer the simplest of questions, unless Hendricken already knew the answers.

But somehow, using the mystical powers of “facilitated communications” she was able to tell a social worker that she wanted to get him off and that her father had been molesting her since she was 13. This was in no way some twisted fucking low-IQ “social work degree or flip burgers” asswipe getting their fucking jollies at the expense of a man (because men’s lives/reputations/sanity don’t matter).

At one point, the woman was shown a small figurine — a pink pony — while Hendricken was out of the room. When Hendricken returned, the woman was asked to use FC to describe what she had seen.

The first facilitated answer was: “I seen a picture of a ball.” Asked again, the answer was: “A picture of a kid.” After Hendricken was told it was actually a pony, the woman was asked to describe its colour. The facilitated answer? “Black.”

Other tests produced similar results.

“(She) is incapable of generating the communications that are being attributed to her. Furthermore, validity testing of FC used with (her) demonstrates that it is not (her) doing the communicating but that answers are being generated by the facilitator,” Perry concluded.

Reached by phone, Hendricken said she had been told not to talk about the case.

I think I can communicate this one without the aid of a facilitator:


You’re busted, bitch.

However, in an affidavit, Hendricken insisted the woman could independently communicate through FC — an opinion shared by three of her colleagues in similar affidavits.

“I do not point to the letters or symbols myself, rather (she) holds my hand and then she points herself to the letter or symbol with her index finger,” the affidavit says.

“I believe that (the woman) has the ability to facilitate on her own; however, she has not done so and I believe has grown accustomed to holding someone’s hand. I believe that people with autism generally … find the sensation of pressure to provide a level of control or stabilizes her hand.”

Bureaucrats are not motivated by serving the public or the common good or even a sense of morality; they protect their own asses and protect each other.

Despite those assertions, a Crown attorney filed a stay of proceedings in the father’s case on June 26, 2015. But it would be another month before Currie withdrew his protection order.

The parents were appointed guardians July 30, 2015, and reunited with their daughter two days later in the group home’s parking lot.

“They never showed any remorse for their disgusting behaviour and … (there’s) still no apology from anyone at (the group home) or government,” the father says.

The parents later sued the Health Department to recover some of their legal costs.

The parents’ lawyers argued that the health minister could not realistically claim he didn’t know that facilitated communication is, in their words, a “hoax.”

“Anyone with access to an Internet connection can determine in a matter of seconds that there is no more evidence to support the validity of FC than there is to show the Earth is flat,” their court brief says.

On March 9, 2016, Judge Nancy Key awarded the parents more than $61,000.

Sweet, sweet justice. Now if only pillorying were still a legal penalty, I would ask for the Minister and the social workers to give them a week each being exposed and heckled by the public. (Note: The pillory was the traditional punishment for perjury or subornation).

“The minister of health refused to carry out his statutorily mandated obligations to the detriment and great expense, both emotional and financial, of the … family,” Key’s decision says.

“Even a cursory review of the studies of facilitated communication would have alerted the minister of health to the very real possibility the communications of (the woman) were not her communications.”

The parents say their legal bills have exceeded $200,000.

“Most families would crumble, fall apart and be in a mental institution long before this,” the father says. “The sleeplessness, the anxiety and there’s a feeling that someone needs to be punished here … There were people who didn’t do their jobs, who were grossly negligent.”

His wife added: “Our objective is that we hope no other family ever has to go through this. There’s a danger that still lurks there.”

But they will, so long as the state regards the pseudoscientific, clinical psychiatry horseshit that social workers peddle to make themselves appear more respectable is accepted as sufficient proof of wrongdoing by fathers against which they must prove their innocence.


Archived Source