Ladies Under Duress : Week in Review #2

Another week has passed us by as we continue to fight the good fight against those ghastly feminists intent on minimising or dismissing men's issues. Thankfully our ladies are continuing their fight for us and we remain ever so thankful for it.

Something that I just can't let go of is the double standard in the acceptance of vulgarity and offensive language in our media that is currently being afforded to Clementine Ford. One of our ladies, Daisy Cousens, had to endure the worst profanity from Ford when part of a panel discussing male privilege on ABC2. I had the privilege of attending Daisy's screening of The Red Pill in Sydney earlier this month and what I always appreciate is her assuredness and what can only be described as classy demeanour. On the Hack Live program she never once nodded her head mindlessly like many people did when Clementine spat her vitriol at them and she displayed poise and maturity that seems missing in most women on television these days. She used polite, careful words that befitted respectable language for a sensible television audience (not the demented live audience of nodding sheep), even when she was outlining the disgusting language and tone Ford had previously and continually used against Miranda Devine.

'You've called Miranda Devine profanities that I won't say on this program,' - Daisy

Clementine Ford shot right back in what appeared to be an angry reaction to Daisy's polite phrasing of the matter which Ford simply has no ability or interest to match.

'I called her a c*nt' - Ford.

(It was actually a f*cking c*nt, but anyway..)

Ford seems intolerant towards femininity which Daisy has buckets of, but that does not mean that Daisy is a shrinking violet, she is strong and holds her own with Ford. She actually has the maturity and compassion to apologise for the moment she let herself down and lowered her communication standards to that of Ford's. The apology may seem to have been directed at Ford compassionately, but I secretly hoped she was actually apologising to herself for letting Ford compromise her communication standards.


Check out this link from Anti-Feminism Australia that shows the disgusting depth of the vile comments this foul woman is allowed to unleash, and still complain about the backlash.Clementine Ford - Offensive Bitch

Then we see this vile and insulting message Ford penned for a fan when signing her latest book.

"Have you killed a man today? If not, why not?"

I officially complained about the tweet that Ford published about this, obviously proud in her confidence to encourage women to kill men, even though she cries victim of internet trolling. (She is the absolute definition of an internet troll.) It doesn't take many Facebook messages or tweets to realise this. I am certain my complaint to Twitter will not go anywhere because feminists seem to be a protected species in social media which is why they attack anti-feminists at will. Particularly other females, like Corrine Barraclough.

Corrine published a very personal and heartfelt article on Facebook yesterday and asked for people to be kind with their comments. The article was about her personal struggle with possible cancer and you would think other women would be compassionate, given that it detailed her ability to have children, a prevalent female matter. But Corrine was attacked by feminist trolls none the less, proving that they don't care about issues, they just care about politics and attacking people in a frenzy. Why bother making a valid argument when its easier to attack the credibility of the author, right? This is what they wrote in response to her personal account of facing cancer.

“Go neck up whore”,“U should have been aborted”, “you’re a dumb slut” & “aids ridden whore”.

Why does Corrine bother them so much? She is an anti-feminist. I would say these comments are a good testament of why she is one. Who would want to be a feminist carrying around so much hatred and intolerance?

Here is Corrine's latest piece

In brighter news, today someone commented on my Spectator Gillard piece (below) with interesting info I want to share – and not just because it says nicer things about me than the above (maybe a bit). "This is a very astute article [why, thank you]. Misandrists and feminists like Gillard relentlessly try to persuade people that it is Men's fault that they are committing suicide at 4 times the rate of women. The truth is, it is external societal factors (as Corrine has accurately informed us) [thank you again] that are, literally, driving Men to suicide. I am currently writing a book on the subject. You can directly trace the rise in the "suicide gap" between Men and Women to the onset of second wave feminism in Western Cultures. You can tie the decline in the birth rate in Western nations directly to the onset of second wave feminism in Western Cultures…"

Hats Off to Daisy Cousens and Corrine Barraclough, divine ladies through and through.

Professor Janice Fiamengo

Professor Janice Fiamengo, Department of English at the University of Ottawa, is declared anti-feminist, defender of freedom speech and campaigner for the right to dissent. She tried to give a public lecture on men’s issues, equality and rape culture at the university on March 28 2014, But as shown in an hour-long YouTube Video, she was repeatedly interrupted by a group of about 30 students shouting and blasting horns.
In 2013, Professor Fiamengo wrote a very telling article on how feminism pushes the belief that the only pain that matters is women's pain, and the highlights the double standards that plague the movement.
She mentioned a light hearted moment at the opera where humour is happily tolerated by both sexes when the subject of the mocking is a man, but questioned if this would be equally accepted if the subject was a woman.
"Please silence anything in your possession that may be annoying to those around you. That includes cell phones, other electronic devices, your husband …"
Personally, I would not be offended by that joke, I'd smile and move past it, but if I stopped and considered the alternative, "your wife", would I still want to laugh? (yes) Would the audience still laugh in the same way? (probably not) Would I be sneered at for laughing - or worse? (probably) Would there be complaints? (absolutely!)
The article moves deeper into this double standard that is either deliberately ignored by feminists or a double standard that they are proud to not only enforce, but openly defend. Professor Fiamengo examines the "Don't Be That Guy" campaign in Canada, an anti-rape campaign by a coalition of women’s groups in conjunction with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, which met with general approval in the mainstream media. Men’s Rights Edmonton countered this with their own "Don't Be That Girl" campaign, which was an anti-false rape claim campaign to address this important issue facing men in Canada, but this was met with outrage and criticism of the movement. Professor Fiamengo explains that "the difference in the posters’ reception  tells us a good deal about the enormous social power of the woman as victim theme in Canada today" and that "the pervasiveness of feminist ideas about female innocence was vividly on display".
"The poster campaign is unsettling for its insistence that no matter what a woman does—no matter how careless and irresponsible—she is always innocent".
The article quite succinctly explains that taking personal responsibility is seemingly not required for women in the situations depicted in the "Don't Be That Guy" campaign. Instead of encouraging women to take sensible measures to avoid being in such scenarios, it ignores that entirely and places the responsibility purely on men who may be in the vicinity. But even worse than that, it describes the practise of encouraging women to take responsibility for their safety as misogynistic.
"Just because you regret a one-night stand … doesn’t mean it wasn’t consensual." is the message that Men’s Rights Edmonton expected its campaign would deliver, but it was criticized for making rape a joke, yet it was not about rape at all. It was about false charges.
This led to a further assumption in the community that women just don't lie about such things. This has been proven wrong, and even withstanding that, it is highly naïve to assume all women are always honest about rape accusations.
Enter Karen Straughan. She cited the case of Soner Yasa, an Edmonton cab driver who was saved from a false allegation only by the camera in his taxi, which proved his accusers’ story to be a vindictive fabrication.
Professor Fiamengo also provides three examples of crimes in Canada where women had dodged criminal charges by claiming to have been victims of unsubstantiated abuse, and all received reduced sentences or, in Doucet’s case, no sentence at all because of the credulity of justice system officials about female victimization.
* Karla Homolka, who participated with her husband in the sexual torture and murder of her sister and two girls whom she lured to their home.
* Allyson McConnell, who drowned her two sons in the bathtub after her husband left her.
* Nicole Doucet, who hired a contract killer to murder her husband.
The "Don’t Be That Girl" campaign message was simply, both men and women commit crimes, and men are tired of being singled out for condemnation while women’s culpability is denied. Many crimes and social problems that are often targeted by posters (fetal alcohol syndrome, home invasions, shoplifting) that involve groups other than white men, never receive such defamatory attention.
Professor Fiamengo goes a bit further in questioning the double standard and unfair targeting of white men in these situations, and this is still quite prevalent in Australia a few years since its publication.
"Can you imagine "Don’t be that Muslim" in a campaign about Islamic jihad? Or "Don’t be that Aboriginal Mother" in a campaign about fetal alcohol syndrome?"
I agree with Professor Fiamengo  that  critics would claim that "an entire group of people was being unfairly targeted for the actions of a few and in a manner more likely to induce public humiliation than behavioral change. The same is true of the image of white men promoted in "Don’t Be That Guy," and yet men are not even allowed to say so without incurring further outrageous accusations".
Hats Off to Professor Janice Fiamengo, keep up the good fight against those aggressive and ignorant feminists.

Corrine Barraclough - 7 truths Feminists must accept about Male Suicide

Corrine Barraclough recently took a well deserved swipe at the Red Heart Campaign and it's anti-men stance.
The Red Heart Campaign claims it is "a platform for survivors of intimate partner violence, domestic violence and familial child abuse to share their stories of strength, survival, hope and inspiration", yet it fails to address in that statement is that it is purely for FEMALE victims and their children only. You just have to look at the statistics it has interpreted on Domestic Violence. No statistics relating to male victims seem to apply. They report that one woman a week is killed by a partner or former partner in Australia, no mention of how many men are killed; 1in 3 women experienced physical violence since the age of 15 - no mention of how many men also have; 1 in 5 women has experienced sexual violence, no mention of how many men have; the list goes on. You have to scroll down quite a bit to a section regarding men, yet there are no statistics listed at all. One can only assume that they couldn't be bothered to give an actual comparison so that people can see the truth for themselves, or that they simply are not interested in violence against men at all. Instead they offer the below description of their view about violence against men.
"All violence is wrong, regardless of the sex of the victim or perpetrator. (Great opening at least) But there are distinct gendered patterns in the perpetration and impact of violence. For example, both women and men are more likely to experience violence at the hands of men, with around 95% of all victims of violence in Australia reporting a male perpetrator. While men are more likely to experience violence by other men in public places, women are more likely to experience violence from men they know, often in the home. The overwhelming majority of acts of domestic violence and sexual assault are perpetrated by men against women, and this violence is likely to have more severe impacts on female than male victims. (So where are the stats? Show the actual comparisons for your sweeping statements!)  Recognising the gendered patterns of violence doesn’t negate the experiences of male victims. (thank you) But it does point to the need for an approach that looks honestly at what the research is telling us and addresses the gendered dynamics of violence. (Bullshit!!! show the statistics!!)
If they are serious about domestic violence they would not take such a one-sided approach towards women.
Getting back to Corrine, she has provided 7 truths in her post on Mark Latham's Outsiders Facebook page - see the below.
1) Tanveer Ahmed, psychiatrist and author of Fragile Nation tells MLO relationship breakdown and custody battles affect men.
"Suicide is multi-factorial. It is ridiculous to think or say that relationship stressors don’t affect men, just as they affect women; relationship breakdown is a key contributor. Often people have their own vulnerabilities so they could be more susceptible to the loss of a relationship, or a job for instance. Men often lose their social networks in their 30s and 40s as they slip into the ‘provider role’. They have a greater emotional dependence upon their spouse and feel the loss more acutely. Women tend to be better at maintaining their social networks. This makes men more susceptible to the effects of relationship loss or custodial battle.
What I see clinically is men often find the Family Court extremely difficult, it is one place where all manner of accusations are accepted until disproven. Their identity as a father in particular often takes a battering. The concept of innocent until proven guilty does not apply here."2) Pete Nichols, CEO, Parents Beyond Breakup says growing evidence shows male suicide is connected to "Situational Distress"
"Sherelle Moody is right to say that statistics are vital tools used by governments and not-for-profits when making decisions about where to direct cash and resources. She is also right to say that the ABS does not currently collect data on the link between family law matters and suicide. She is wrong, however, to suggest that no such evidence exists. There is a common misconception that male suicide is predominantly associated with diagnosed mental health issues, however there is growing evidence that male suicide in particular is often, if not mostly, associated with "situational distress" and examples in Australia would be situations such as separation."
3) Pete Nichols, CEO, Parents Beyond Breakup also says Beyond Blue do have an opinion."According to Dr Stephen Carbone of Beyond Blue, ‘it’s not just those with mental health concerns that can lead to one contemplating taking their life. There are other major risk factors, like a relationship breakup or a financial crisis." To say Beyond Blue has no opinion is simply wrong; it also links to the World Health Organisation document Preventing Suicide A Global Imperative Myth’ which states '"Heightened suicide risk is often short-term and situation-specific.""4) Pete Nichols, CEO, Parents Beyond Breakup says Lifeline also recognise the role relationship breakdown can play.
"This position is supported by Alan Woodward of Lifeline who says: ‘Regardless of what mental health issues surround a suicidal person, it is likely that the crisis state that they are experiencing is fuelled by specific negative life events such as relationship breakdown’."
5) Pete Nichols, CEO, Parents Beyond Breakup further says a quarter of men who suicide have experienced relationship breakdown."In terms of statistics on the correlation between male suicide and relationship separation, the most reliable source of data comes from the Australian Institute of Suicide Research and Prevention (AISRAP), which is recognized as a World Health Organization Collaborating Centre for Research and Training in Suicide Prevention. Based on AISRAP’s research into the coronial reports collected in the Queensland Suicide Register, is that nearly a quarter of men who die by suicide have experienced relationship separation, making them four times more likely to suicide than separated women."
6) Pete Nichols, CEO, Parents Beyond Breakup adds that we must acknowledge societal causes of male suicide."Suicide kills six men a day in Australia, with men three times more likely to take their own lives than women. If we are serious about tackling this issue, then we need to put more focus into the societal factors that are known to increase men’s risk of suicide. It has long been known that relationship separation is one of the major risk factors for male suicide, which is just one reason there is an urgent need to invest more time, money and resources into making services like the highly successful Dads In Distress programs available to separated men all over Australia."7) Pete Nichols, CEO, Parents Beyond Breakup asks, shouldn't we all work together?
"Not knowing the exact figure is not a reason to avoid addressing the very real and present problem."
Finally, to quote Corrine...
"One thing’s for sure. Anti-men messaging from fierce feminist organisations and anti-male policy is not helping our male suicide crisis. Deny that? You’re denying the truth"


Hats off to Corrine Barraclough for continuing to bring awareness of the anti-feminist message, that we are not trying to dismiss women's issues, we just want similar attention to men's issues that are just as dangerous, if not more so.

Erin Pizzey

Erin Pizzey has certainly paid the price for honesty when I comes to Domestic Violence. Once praised and championed by feminists for opening the worlds first shelter for female victims of  Domestic Violence she soon became banished, exiled and threatened with her life, for showing the same care for male victims as well.
Born 19 February 1939, she opened Chiswick Women's Aid, in 1971, the organisation known today as Refuge. The reason that Pizzey became the subject of death threats was because of her belief that violence in the home is reciprocal and that women are just as violent as men. She based this on the experiences she faced in the refuge and in the film The Red Pill, footage is shown of the women in the refuge admitting to and explaining how they are not only capable of being violent but have demonstrated it in the home. This did not sit well with the feminists who had previously applauded Pizzey for opening the refuge and in Pizzey's words, it was 'militant feminists' who were behind the death threats.
But Pizzey was no stranger to threats as her early life was full of danger due to her father being a diplomat in China during extreme wartime conditions. Pizzey was actually born in Qingdao, China and as a toddler moved to Shanghai, only to be captured by the Japanese when they invaded the city. Luckily they were soon released in exchange for Japanese Prisoners of War.
Soon after establishing her first refuge, Pizzey asserted that much domestic violence was reciprocal with both partners abusing each other in roughly equal measure. She reached this conclusion when she asked the women in her refuge about their violence, only to discover most of the women were equally as violent or more violent than their husbands. In her study "Comparative Study of Battered Women And Violence-Prone Women", co-researched with John Gayford of Warlingham Hospital, Pizzey distinguishes between "genuine battered women" and "violence-prone women"; the former defined as "the unwilling and innocent victim of his or her partner's violence" and the latter defined as "the unwilling victim of his or her own violence." This study reports that 62% of the sample population were more accurately described as "violence prone." Similar findings regarding the mutuality of domestic violence have been confirmed in subsequent studies. This information has been obtained via her Wikipedia page.
Pizzey moved to Santa Fe, New Mexico, in 1981 while targeted by harassment, death threats, bomb threats and defamation campaigns. According to Pizzey, the charity Scottish Women's Aid "made it their business to hand out leaflets claiming that [she] believed that women 'invited violence' and 'provoked male violence'".She states that the turning point was the intervention of the bomb squad, who required all of her mail to be processed by them before she could receive it, as a "controversial public figure". Following the abuse and threats in Santa Fe she then moved to Cayman Brac, Cayman Islands then moved to Siena, Italy; finally retuning to London in the late 1990s.
Pizzey has "never been a feminist, because, having experienced my mother's violence, I always knew that women can be as vicious and irresponsible as men". She continues to stand as an advocate for men's issues and her recent appearance in The Red Pill documentary provided a personal insight into her ill-treatment by modern day feminists.
Hats off to Erin Pizzey and thank you for being a survivor against such militant threats from feminists over the decades.

Ladies : Week in Review #1

Well what a week it was for our ladies, supporting men's issues on the wave of the International Conference on Men's Issues 2017. The momentum is still strong and in full swing as the ladies continue to get the right messages out there. Each Friday I plan to look back and find the best moments of our featured ladies for the current week and follow up on any major issues brought to our attention, So, in no particular order....


Blogs and Vlogs.

Bettina Arndt Our feral media attacks Cassie Jaye

FACEBOOK
Corrine Barraclough
Dear angry person. Thank you for enquiring, “Who do you think you are?”

I appreciate your interest. I am Corrine, 43, I’ve been sober for two years. I’m an alcoholic in recovery. I work hard, like walking on the beach, and enjoy bonding with people with brains and compassion. Perhaps you were at Dreamworld too? Did you scream as loudly as I did on the rides? I laughed for hours. Did you? I also ate a corn dog smothered in ketchup. I was not sick. Here I am with my fabulous friend Kellie. She, like me, is not a feminist. She is an ambassador of healthy, balanced women and men. I will never call myself a feminist. If you don’t like my page, go somewhere else. Have a good weekend xx ☺

☺☺☺☺☺☺☺☺☺☺☺☺☺☺☺☺☺☺☺☺☺☺

Dear feminists, I do not take the term “boy suck” to be an insult. Thanks anyway.

From whichever angle I look at it, I see it as a compliment. Perhaps you are a tad green-eyed because I’m better at playing with boys than you? Once again, I would highly recommend yoga… for many reasons. As you were xx ☺

Erin Pizzey

Generational family violence is the root cause of violence in the family.  Those of us born into violent and dysfunctional families need therapeutic intervention to help us learn how to make loving, trusting relationships. There are no perfect parents so everyone needs to overcome some of their learned patterns of behaviour.

TWITTER

Bettina Arndt, Corrine Barraclough, Cassie Jaye

 


 Daisy Cousens, Erin Pizzey, Karen Straugan

Hats Off to all these brilliant ladies, have a great weekend!

REVIEW: The Red Pill, Hoyts Broadway, Sydney

What a joy it was to sit in a crowded theatre in Sydney and watch the absorbing film The Red Pill, hosted by Daisy Cousens. The screening was set up via the Fan Force website and was originally planned to screen at Events Cinema's in George Street. But those nasty feminists who are so threatened by the truth that this film exposes, made extensive complaints to Events Cinema's and demanded that it be cancelled, claiming falsehoods about the film to force the cinema to pull out of the event. This action is pretty much the reason why The Red Pill needs to be seen, as Australia is drowning in false feminist messaging and fake statistics and information from the media. This is having a major negative impact on men and boys across the country, preventing them from ever being able to access help or assistance.
But we are jumping the gun a little, lets go back to the beginning... The first thing we noticed in the cinema was the variety of people that were attending the screening. Naturally there were many men, but they were from all walks of life, all ages and all shapes and sizes. There were pairs of females sitting together as well as several small groups of young people and just before the film there was a flurry of people scrambling to quickly purchase a "Make America Great" cap from someone down in the front row. The connection? Well the POTUS is another target for feminists so it was cheekily brandished, in case of an ambush perhaps. Daisy gave a warm, yet brief, welcome and thanked everyone who had helped to make the screening happen, including those present who bought all of the tickets.
As the film begins, Cassie Jaye explains how she decided to choose Men's Rights Activists as the subject for her film after ten years of making documentaries about women's issues and marriage equality for LGBTs. She informs us that she was an active feminist and was always interested in gender issues which inspired her earlier films. She further explains that it was by researching rape culture that she stumbled across a website called 'A Voice for Men' and began reading the articles from Men's Rights Activist Paul Elam. She admits that she couldn't get completely through a single article due to the offensive language used in them and as a feminist she was quite offended by much of the content. Her response to this site and the men's rights movement in general was what gave her the idea to pursue this group and make a film to either expose or make people aware of what messages they were sending out about women.
Cassie went right to the source, to meet the man behind the website, Paul Elam. Many have criticised her for choosing Elam, (e.g. Andrew 'mangina' O'Keefe) but they obviously had not seen the film to understand why she went to him. Instead of exposing Elam as a woman-hater, she discovered his reasons for writing the articles on the website, and began to question whether there was more to  the men's right movement than met the eye. Elam explained that the issues they raised awareness for on the website, encountered a lot of vile backlash from feminists.
There was incriminating messages on Elam's website that Jaye was criticised for not addressing, but again if you actually saw the film you would have seen this was indeed addressed at the end. There was an article that suggested that it was 'Bash a Bitch month' and feminists went to town quoting it to further disparage the movement. But as Jaye discovers it was a response to an article in the leading feminist publication Jezebel that promoted and encouraged violence against men and shared stories of women who bash their partners with the reason "he deserved it". But those who didn't watch the film would have missed all that.
The film then goes through a series of issues that Jaye discovers as she 'goes down the rabbit hole'. She interviews both feminists and antifeminists and speaks to people who are involved with men's issues and sees the impact the feminist narrative is having on the lack of services for men.
Most striking is the death rates and legal system statistics shown in the film as the featured lawyer explains in great detail. The issues of suicide relating to those men who lose custody of their children, the difference between wrongful paternity and paternity fraud, and the abhorrent Duluth model are very serious issues that are hardly on the public radar compared with women's issues.
We meet the Honeybadgers, a group of women advocating men's issues and they discuss many more issues that men are facing without any legislative protection. We hear how a woman raped a male minor and fell pregnant, then whilst serving her prison term for raping him, was able to force him to pay child support for the child he had not even wanted due to being raped by her. But if men speak up about this, instead of being listened to, they are talked over and discredited by feminists and nothing is done.

We witness the sheer terror invoked by feminist activists whenever men wish to hold meetings about the issues they face. They raise issues in a public park and are chanted at and talked over by male feminists attacking them on megaphones and calling them women-haters, anti-gay misogynists - even though they are merely raising issues and not even mentioning women. We then witness a more violent showing of feminists needing to be pushed back by security guards who wont let them storm a venue hosting a Warren Farrell talk. A feminist dogs a man outside the venue waiting to go inside, abusing him just for buying a ticket to listen to Warren Farrell speak. They seem to be overcome with hatred and anger as they point viciously at the security guards and chant 'this is what men's rights looks like'. We witness a presentation by Janice Fiamengo being hijacked by feminists in the room making noises and chanting over her to shutdown her talk on men's issues. We then see another meeting shutdown, as feminists illegally activated the fire alarm forcing feminists and MRA's to come face to face outside the venue. This where we meet Big Red and while her manner is quite vile towards the MRA's it comes across as so bizarre that you can't help but laugh at her antics and it provides a moment of comic relief when she gets annoyed at the MRA interrupting her and advises him "I'm reading fuckface". But this is another example of the inequality of acceptance - women can speak to men like that without any consequence, but if a man spoke like that to a woman, he would be dragged over the coal and fully demonised.

I think one of the more sullen moments is the treatment of Erin Pizzey. She is famous for opening the worlds first shelter for women and her pioneering success was once highly praised by feminists. That is until she extended her compassion to offer help to men as well. The backlash against her from feminists saw her forced to leave the United Kingdom altogether. She even stated that she is banned from speaking anywhere by feminists, they lobby against her visits so places simply have to cancel. She is even banned from entering her own shelter, the building she bought, because the feminist that runs the place wont let her in. This is all because she recognised that both men and women can be violent. It is a scary world that manages to silence people if they don't like you raising an opinion or a truth that they don't agree with.

For me, apart from following Cassie Jaye's incredible soul searching, heartfelt journey as she faced her own beliefs and doubts in regards to feminism, the real standout of the film is Karen Straughan. Along with the treatment of Erin Pizzey, it does appear to be Karen to finally convince Jaye that feminism is not the way. Straughan quietly and succinctly explains how tragedies that involve men are overlooked by the media and how females are singled out. She raises the Boko Haram situation and the #BringBackOurGirls campaign. Karen explains that whilst girls may have been kidnapped from schools, all the boys were killed, burned alive, yet whenever fatalities were reported, the headlines never mentioned the words men or boys, rather used generic terms like villagers or just the number, e.g. 123 killed. Karen also examined the terminology of feminism and their description of the ever-seeing 'patriarchy' being the devil, and the force of 'feminism' as the way forward to salvation. She sees it as being very similar to religion particularly with the language and terms that feminists use. Her line, followed by a very cute smile, defines this hypocrisy. "
We're not blaming men, we're just naming everything bad after them"
Cassie Jaye, weighs up the facts and confirms that the MRA's have a point about the falsehoods and misinformation being communicated by feminists and finds the feminist narrative too narrow minded and harsh to support it, or stay aligned to it.
She ends her narrative with the following - " I no longer consider myself a feminist" - and it lingers until the credits roll.
There is much, much more in the film and it should be broadcast on the ABC immediately, but instead they decided to broadcast a film last night that has been proven to provide false claims by multiple attorneys and the film makers on "The Hunting Ground" admit it is not a factual film. Yet our ABC presented this film and promoted it as a real expose' on rape culture. It is both disgusting and humiliating to see this shit on our tax-payer funded national broadcaster. It is exciting to learn, however, that Bettina Arndt has suggested that there may be legal action taken against the individual board members of the ABC for not upholding the regulations of the charter that governs the ABC. That would be a very bitter pill for them to swallow.


Hats off to Daisy Cousens for hosting this amazing film and a big Hats Off to Hoyts for having the balls to house this event. Hats Off also to Cassie Jaye and all those who were featured in The Red Pill who provided incredible stories and information to show the world that their men are hurting and need attention and support, and above all proper legislation to help reclaim their lives.

REVIEW : Hack Live - Is Male Privilege Bullshit?

So, for the first time in my life I tuned in to Hack Live last night, purely due to the subject matter and my interest in the Men's Rights movement. On the surface it looked like it would be a debate with a mix of feminists, antifeminists and a few random panellists chosen to discuss if male privilege is real or imagined.

The first thing I need to address is that this morning I invoked feminist Clementine Ford on Twitter in regards to this program, who dismissed my claim that it was... "A platform for (Clementine Ford) and the feminist narrative". Her response was indicative of the scope of her vocabulary. "Bullshit" which would be an adjective more appropriate to describe the Hack Live program in general.

Not sure if Cassie will respond or if Clementine will address my response as yet but will keep you posted.
They seemed to have included legitimate antifeminists such as Cassie Jaye, Daisy Cousens, Karen Straughan and the Honeybadger Brigade, which certainly drew my attention. But we also knew that this was a show produced and aired by the ABC and we are very familiar with the constant barrage of the feminist narrative and the aversion to cover men's issues on all other ABC media outlets. So we were expecting a biased program from the outset and that's exactly what it was - a well planned, well constructed platform for Clementine Ford and the feminist narrative.
Tom Tilley, the host of this show certainly played his part well. He showed respect to all the females and attacked the character of the only male antifeminist on the panel, for not using his real name. He constantly referred to the 'star' of his show, Clementine Ford as 'Clem' and showed great empathy for her being the victim of online trolling, which we later realise she gives just as good trolling as she gets, if not more, as she admitted. Tilley, read his lines carefully, never missed a cue, and diligently wrapped up the show obtaining final words from the feminist panel members only. If his aim was to push his own view, that of the programs, and that of the ABC, then it was a resounding success at the expense of truth and reason.
It was a very strange panel assembled for this show, and quite clearly imbalanced with three antifeminists against five feminists, plus the feminist host. The antifeminists were Adrian Johnson, Loren Murray, and the colourful Daisy Cousens.
The main feminist was of course Clementine Ford, but was backed up by four others who made no real impact on the argument. One such was Joe Williams who is described as a professional sportsman and youth mentor, but he may as well have been billed simply as an aboriginal. He had nothing to offer the debate in regards to male privilege, he just wanted to target racism and particularly white people. While looking very confident, happy, healthy, and very well dressed, he complained how much white privileged impacted him "every day". He constantly belittled Adrian Johnson, a white male, and showed no understanding of female stealthing at all. His response to the situation when a woman tricks a man into falling pregnant without his knowledge or consent was "called taking responsibility" i.e. the man. He somehow believes that men are the only ones required to be responsible in that situation. I have no idea why he was even chosen for this program.
Then there was transgender activist Nevo Zesin who had no interest in anything except his own gender fluidity focus, so his contributions were quite shallow and condescending. Whoever put this panel together clearly wasn't interested in a serious discussion about male privilege. Zesin argued that he had more privilege since becoming male, yet his manner and appearance was hardly that of an average or typical male to be able to claim that view. The way Zesin snubbed The Red Pill movie for being two hours long with a disinterested shrug, shows he doesn't seem to have much interest in male issues at all and seems still more aligned to his female past - literally.
Antifeminist Adrian Johnson was clearly unsettled and unprepared for his appearance on this program. He was ambushed by host Tom Tilley and grilled about why he was the only person on the panel that chose to use a false name on the show. Adrian must not have been expecting this somehow and often struggled and stumbled to reply. His wanted to protect his true identity from feminist activists in order to ensure he or his family and friends were not targeted by any feminist backlash for his comments. Adrian is known by that name on the Antifeminist Australia Facebook group and so it would make sense for him to appear under that name on the program, so a little research by Hack Live could have drawn that conclusion as well. Why they took issue about his name could only be for one reason, to ambush and discredit him, a typical feminist tactic. If they don't like the message, instead of proving it wrong, they label and attack the character of the person saying it. It was a shame that Adrian was out of his league to handle the ambush as it further weakened the ability for the antifeminists to get air time.
But then Loren hit a nerve, when asked why she signed a petition to have Clementine Ford sacked. Why this even came up on a show designed to discuss male privilege again can only be an attempt to discredit and ambush her as well. But Loren was ready for this and shot back that it was because Clementine defamed a friend of hers then blocked her friend from responding. This had been documented in the media previously. As soon at that hit and was about to gain traction or at least challenge Ford's own credibility, Tilley used his feminist privilege and talked over Loren to shut it down for another time and place. Then they targeted Daisy Cousens and her online tussles with Ford. But Cousens, who held her ground all evening, was well prepared for this and detailed the abusive comments from  Ford and other feminists. Again, sensing the damage to Ford's credibility Tilley stepped in to stop the barrage from Cousens.
It was so blatantly obvious that this so-called discussion was a mouthpiece, if not an advertisement, for left-wing feminist ideology. Ford and the feminists got the lion share of the talk time and in between there were feminist experts in the audience to provide 'facts' from studies to prove the feministic opinion and discredit the antifeminist. They even had Michael Flood to disprove the rise in popularity of the men's rights movement. This is a man who lectures in gender studies at a tertiary level, which has been proven to be one of the key triggers for the hatred and aggression being instilled in feminists. Then we had Dr Rae Cooper trying to feed us manufactured statistics and discredited anyone else's figures other than those from the ABS. The Australian Bureau of Statistics has recently fallen into disrepute with an enormous amount of errors and is highly infested with leftists and feminists alike. How can we accept statistics from the ABS given what we know?
The show was just cringe worthy and very difficult to sit though, but as an antifeminist I felt it is important to see just what crap is out there and what obstacles need to be overcome to get the truth out there. I didn't care that Ford dropped the C-word to proudly boast of calling Miranda Devine a cunt on Twitter as she just continued to prove that her type of person is truly bringing down the standards of feminist columnists and writers.
I was very glad Cassie Jaye did not allow herself to be a part of this show as I'm sure they had something just as vile in store for her to try and discredit her own reputation. Her email to the program showed very accurate insight from the young filmmaker.
"I already see so many warning signs of inherent bias based on the program's marketing.... I don't see what I can gain by being a part of this when it's clear that the show is going to give selective and limited airtime to certain guests over others."
I shared my praise for her decision to pull out on Twitter and was delighted to receive the following response.

Finally, the grandest supporter of men's issues in Australia, Bettina Arndt published this awesome video in response to Hack Live. Sometimes words just don't do justice to the level of crap presented in such a god-awful program, so here's Bettina's Clip - let her words say more than I can.


Hats Off to Loren, Daisy, Cassie and Bettina! Thank you for supporting your ever-grateful male companions.