Uncommon Sense

politics and society are, unfortunately, much the same thing

Student whistleblower: Diversity class presents multiple ‘isms’ as fact without allowing debate

Student whistleblower: Diversity class presents multiple ‘isms’ as fact without allowing debate
February 10, 2017 by NATHAN RUBBELKE

What does a fictional “Normal University” look like?

It’s a place full of racism, homophobia, toxic masculinity, white privilege and sexism, according to a diversity class currently taught at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst.

At UMass Amherst, students are required to take two “social justice” classes to earn diploma, and this course — Education 115: Embracing Diversity — fulfills one of those requirements.

In it, students must act out examples of racism to prove America is racist “from A to Z.” Students must also read about how society is dominated by “white privilege” and discuss ways to combat that. They’re charged with creating a mock sexual assault awareness campaign and taught U.S. society pushes male “domination” over women. Another assignment has them coming up with ways to make a university more welcoming to a low-income black lesbian majoring in engineering. New vocabulary words thrown at students include “internalized classism” and “cultural imperialism.” And a “Man Box” assignment teaches students that when men try to prove their masculinity it ends up “with frequently disastrous consequences.”

‘It was just these are the facts and that was it’

The class is led by Professor Benita Barnes, who has a definite liberal bias, a student who took the course told The College Fix.

“She really thinks that everyone [in the United States] is inherently racist or sexist, and I think she just thinks that the school is a subset of that,” said the student, who requested anonymity to speak freely on the course.

Barnes, both a professor and Director of Diversity Advancement, did not respond to a request for comment.

The student described the course as a “hostile” environment where the professor and some students would get agitated when comments were made pointing things out that might be false or when ideas were questioned.

“There were no real discussions. There [were] no debates or anything like that. It was just these are the facts and that was it,” said the student, who provided to The College Fix a stack of assignments from the course, which he took last fall.

According to the syllabus, “Embracing Diversity” is designed for first-year students and dedicated to how students can better see themselves and others “through an appreciation of attending college as a cultural experience, with its own unique set of rules, biases, and expectations.” The course, the syllabus adds, pushes to move “the discourse of diversity beyond mere tolerance, celebration, or appreciation.”

‘Embracing Diversity’

One reading assignment in the class, “Normal University and the Story of Sam,” tells the story of Sam, a low-income black lesbian who attends “Normal University,” an Ivy League-like university whose namesake had a role in the slave trade. Sam faces all sorts of oppression during her freshman year.

Her roommate’s friends make racist remarks, funds are diverted from the campus LGBTQ organization and a protest over the use of bathrooms remind her of stories shared “about the Jim Crow era.” To top it all off, she studies in a “male-centric” engineering department where a woman has never been promoted and tenured.

At the end of the reading, students in the course are tasked with choosing an option to make the university more welcoming for Sam.

This is one of many course assignments obtained by The College Fix that were included in the course and purport a society of racism, sexism and oppression.

The course, according to the syllabus, used a “team-based learning” strategy and included numerous in-class activities that pertained to the class’s five modules.

Here’s a few examples:

Module 2: ‘Men have domination over women thus they (women) become their property’

Covering “Inequality and Oppression,” module 2 included a reading about “Social Justice University.” The case study explained four “folk beliefs” regarding sexual assault and, at the end, tasked students with creating a mock sexual assault awareness campaign for the fake university.

Expanding on one of the four “folk beliefs,” the reading stated “our society has socialized both men and women to believe that men have domination over women thus they (women) become their property as well as are required to bend to their wants and wishes.”

The document goes on to say that when a man acts aggressive or possessive towards a significant other, “women internalize this (bad) behavior as acceptable and end up feeling ‘loved’ as opposed to harmed.”

Module 3: Racism ‘from A-Z’

Dubbed “Race, Racism, and (White) Privilege,” the course’s third module included readings titled “What is Racial Domination?,” “Understanding White Privilege” and “White Institutional Presence: The Impact of Whiteness on Racial Campus Climate.”

An in-class assignment told students “examples of racism can be found in our society from A-Z.” To prove it, students were given 15 letters and had to “identify an act, behavior, law, practice, etc., past or present, that exemplifies racism.”

Module 4: ‘Internalized classism,’ ‘privilege,’ ‘cultural imperialism’

Dealing with “Class and Classism,” a Module 4 class activity required students to define terms like “internalized classism, “privilege” and “cultural imperialism.”

At the end of the assignment, students were asked “what are the possibilities and restraints of what students can do to create a less classist environment on campus?”

The assignment also called for students to apply five of the defined words to the stories of Emily and Matthew, two Amherst College students profiled in the book “Speaking of Race and Class: The Student Experience at an Elite College.”

Emily came to campus unsure how to talk to black students and was once called “White Trash.” However, she forms a diverse set of friends but begins to see people back home as close-minded and judgmental.

“I would never want to bring my gay friend home or my black friend,” she said in her account.

Conversely, Matthew came from an affluent family but also broadened his social group in college.

“He embraced the exposure, the learning, and the people he met and liked, all the while while increasing the awareness of his relative privilege,” the book states.

Module 5: The ‘Man Box’

The course’s final module dealt with “Gender and Sexism” and students watched the film “Guyland: Where boys become men.”

According to a class assignment, the 36-minute film “maps the troubling social world where boys become men” and shows how men try to prove their masculinity “with frequently disastrous consequences for young women and other young men.”

Following the movie, students created a “Man Box,” which the assignment described as “a figurative box made up of acceptable qualities for men to possess and society’s expectations of how men must act.”

Terms inside the box included “objectifies women, emotionless, aggressive and dominant.” The assignment forced student to either pull six traits from the box or add six from a separate list of positive traits. Words on the latter included “honest,” “open minded” and “ambitious.”

abuse, bias, bullies, culture, discrimination, diversity, education, elitism, extremism, hate speech, ideology, indoctrination, intolerance, left wing, liberalism, marxism, pandering, philosophy, political correctness, progressive, propaganda, racism, scandal, sexism

Filed under: abuse, bias, bullies, culture, discrimination, diversity, education, elitism, extremism, hate speech, ideology, indoctrination, intolerance, left wing, liberalism, marxism, pandering, philosophy, political correctness, progressive, propaganda, racism, scandal, sexism

Is feminism anti-human?

Feminism is far from a monolithic single-minded entity. There is vast diversity of thought within feminism, and not all denominations of the movement agree with one another. Some wings of feminism are not even acknowledged by others. Part of the problem is that, while all feminists at least seem to be fighting for equality for women, not all of them actually are fighting for that goal.

Among the nuance one might have noticed 3 primary schools of thought within feminism: the pro-equality school, the pro-women school, and the anti-male school. The latter has a fairly bad reputation in western culture with the most extreme flavors of feminism falling into this category. That reputation, sadly, is well earned. It should not have to be said that an anti-male attitude is not the same as a pro-woman attitude, and certainly not a pro-equality one. This radical brand presumes to be the primary voice for women in the world. This ultra-left flavor of feminism gives all feminism a bad name and it should be called out for what it is. So what is it exactly that needs to be called out?

First, not all brands of feminism are inherently Marxian, as is the ultra-left anti-male feminism. Marxism teaches, among other things, that life can be understood as a contest between oppressors and the oppressed. The problem with this mentality is that it is tragically reductive, over simplifying life to a simple equation utterly dependent on fomenting anger and bitterness. In the anti-male feminist school this amounts to treating men as inherent, inevitable enemies of women. To understand life in these terms is not to understand life at all. While plenty of evidence can be found to support this rabid view of life, to maintain such view the believer must ignore most of life’s experiences or distort them in a way as to confirm the predetermined bias. Any confirming evidence is treated as the norm (i.e., “rape culture”), and conflicting evidence treated as an aberration, if acknowledged at all. This is how confirmation bias works, but it is not how understanding (or intellectual honesty) works.

Second, the anti-male school of thought unintentionally ends up being anti-woman. Think about it. What are the most common ways extreme feminists advocate to empower women? By urging women to act more like men! Women are denigrated for living a lifestyle which militant feminists would ridicule as “gender stereotypes”. Motherhood is often treated as a form of slavery, marriage as a form of oppression. The maternal instinct is regarded as something like a disease that must be educated out of a women in order to free them. In this way womanhood itself is denigrated and shunned. Women are instead encouraged to abandon traditional hallmarks of womanhood and instead become aggressive, like men. On the one hand we have the feminization or Oprahfication of men and the masculinization of women, both of which are designed to reduce men and women to a politically correct delusion where the sexes are the same. Not equal, mind you – the same. Treating people equally is one thing, trying to make them the same is quite another. You are not the same as other people in the world, you are a unique person. You are more than your sex organs or life choices. But the militant wing of feminism has made it seem they reduce women to mere tools, politically viable weapons and force women into a victim mindset. Whether that was the intent of this brand of feminism, this is in fact how it makes itself appear.

Which leads us to a third issue with militant feminism: it is anti-freedom. We are not allowed to think for ourselves regarding militant feminism. If these feminists see a situation as the oppression of women, even falsely accusing men of rape is blindly accepted as truth, where there is no need to verify any evidence. If something is deemed sexist we are not permitted to view the situation is any other way. (Some feminists insist the tradition form of narrative (story telling) is sexist because it models the male sexual experience – as if that were the only legitimate way to think of narrative).

Ruling in Twitter harassment trial could have enormous fallout for free speech
July 14, 2015 by Christie Blatchford

Likewise, women find militant feminism attempts to control them by pushing for some choices and denigrating others. A woman who has a college degree is often pressured into following a career, as if she has an obligation to womanhood to do this. If such a woman instead, of her own will, chooses to be a home maker and mother, that same woman can expect to be treated as a traitor to her sex or as a blind zombie mindlessly falling into a patriarchal trap. Women are encouraged to treat sexuality with the same selfish, consequence-free fantasy (and childish) attitude men are often criticized for. With bully tactics like this (telling other people what to think) we find militant feminists constructing a way of womanhood while claiming to abhor social constructs.

At the end of the day it seems modern feminism (the anti-male type) is intent on destroying anything feminine in women, even the freedom to make their own life choices.

On the other hand there are women who fight for equal rights for women without devoting their lives to attacking men. Such women have the misfortune of being attacked by extremist feminists but they also offer a far better picture of empowering women. These women fight an uphill battle against a hyper-politicized and well funded extreme left wing brand of feminism.

One such woman is Christina Hoff Sommers of The Factual Feminist. Sommers is an academic who does not allow falsehoods and fraudulent augments to pass for truth in feminist circles. She challenges bogus data and politically motivated bunk because feminist fraud doesn’t help women, it harms real efforts to help them.

Another woman fighting against bogus feminism is the infamous Phyllis Schlafly. I say “infamous” because Schlafly is often accused of being anti-woman. I’ve seen Schlafly in person and read numerous criticisms of her. I can’t help but notice a deliberate effort to misconstrue and mischaracterize her work by those who accuse her of being against women. Besides, Schlafly’s experiences show she didn’t need a militant feminist movement to earn her education or establish her career – she did all that before most modern feminists were even born (let alone “helped her” achieve what she has achieved). I’ll let her tell her own story:

abuse, bias, bullies, corruption, culture, elitism, extremism, feminism, fraud, hypocrisy, ideology, indoctrination, intolerance, left wing, liberalism, marxism, pandering, philosophy, political correctness, progressive, propaganda, relativism, sex, sexism, socialism, victimization, video

Filed under: abuse, bias, bullies, corruption, culture, elitism, extremism, feminism, fraud, hypocrisy, ideology, indoctrination, intolerance, left wing, liberalism, marxism, pandering, philosophy, political correctness, progressive, propaganda, relativism, sex, sexism, socialism, victimization, video

Selective respect for academic freedom in higher education

The Chronicle of Higher Education’s Andy Thomason supports academic freedom. In How One Professor’s Tweets Got Her Fired — or So It Seemed at First Thomas makes no bones about his opinion: academic freedom should be respected no matter how racist a woman of color (Zandria Robinson) may be. The University of Memphis’s questionable handling of the situation is secondary; Thomason clearly thinks academic freedom is the essential element of the debate here, not Ms. Robinson’s racism. This is different from the plain, matter-of-fact reporting about another incident where a student hung a noose on a civil rights statue at the University of Mississippi. In both cases someone expresses overt racism out side of the academic setting (not in class, not in any official capacity of a university function). But, the woman of color gets a pass and the white student gets punished.

Saida Grundy, another racist (and sexist) woman of color working at an American university, who also happened to express vile hatred and racism via social media, also drummed up a little storm but also got a total pass from her employer and from the Cronicle of Higher Education where Thomason again has no criticism for the racism of the instructor in question, but certainly makes a plug for academic freedom by quoting a Boston U official whose more concerned about allowing anti-white racist professors “latitude to express their opinions and provoke discussion” and “supporting a new colleague”.

But, as is common knowledge, former Harvard president Lawrence Summers lost his job (as president of Harvard University) because of comments that, by many, were deemed sexist. Why the outrage there? What happened to academic freedom there?

An athletic coach at U of North Carolina gets fired after working to defend men accused of rape (given the almost complete absence of due process for the accused). The university claims his firing pertains to the athletic team’s performance over the years, and has nothing to do with his advocacy for the men he’s trying to help. So we are apparently supposed to take the university’s word for it, rather than assume the worst. But if someone accuses white males of rape, oh there’s no need to verify any facts or anything, is there?

Apparently there are different standards in place. If you’re a white male, even if you hold and promote a progressive world view, there is very little forgiveness for you. But if you’re black or female (especially black and female) you can be as venomous and hateful as you want and you’ll suffer no professional set back because of it. In higher education, academic freedom means nothing in the former situation, but it means everything in the latter. Privilege is a wonderful thing. Never mind of education itself is corrupted in the process.

Do you think there should be a separation between school and state?

bias, bigotry, bullies, corruption, culture, discrimination, diversity, education, elitism, hate speech, hypocrisy, ideology, intolerance, left wing, liberalism, oppression, pandering, political correctness, progressive, propaganda, racism, racist, relativism, scandal, sexism

Filed under: bias, bigotry, bullies, corruption, culture, discrimination, diversity, education, elitism, hate speech, hypocrisy, ideology, intolerance, left wing, liberalism, oppression, pandering, political correctness, progressive, propaganda, racism, racist, relativism, scandal, sexism

Real rape culture on campus: the war on men

Another reason to separate school and state

original article: Columbia Univ. sued for supporting fake rape allegation
April 25, 2015 by streiff

Most of you have heard Emma Sulkowicz. She’s the rather homely girl, shown above in her natural environment, who has made a college career of lugging a mattress about campus as a way of commenting on sexual assault on campus. You see, Sulkowicz claimed that she, herself, was raped and the Columbia University did nothing about it.

In fact, Columbia and other authorities have cleared the young man with whom Sulkowicz is obsessed several times and they have done this even in the feminist dominated world of academia and under the impossibly low standards of proof required to convict in the Star Chambers/kangaroo courts that universities use to investigate these matters. Both parties were subject to confidentiality agreements. The young man kept his end of the bargain. Sulkowicz, unsurprisingly as it has turned out, did not. Rather she began a campaign of harassment that has driven the innocent man from college, achieve heroine status for herself among the hairy-armpit feminist set, and she got college credit for doing it. Because carrying a mattress to protest something that didn’t happen qualifies as performance art, much like covering yourself in chocolate syrup and beans sprouts. For instance, slightly bonkers NY Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY)2% invited Sulkowicz to be her guest at the last Obama “State of the Nation” speech.

Via the New York Times

The lawsuit alleges that Jon Kessler, the professor who is named as a defendant, not only approved the project but also “publicly endorsed her harassment and defamation” of Mr. Nungesser.

“She is actively earning course credit from Columbia for this outrageous display of harassment and defamation,” the lawsuit says, with the school aware that “Paul’s legal rights are being violated and that his well-being and future prospects are suffering immensely.”

Ms. Sulkowicz is not named as a defendant in the lawsuit, which was filed in Federal District Court in Manhattan. The suit seeks damages in an amount to be determined at trial for what it calls the harm caused to Mr. Nungesser’s reputation, and his loss of educational opportunities and future career prospects.

Mr. Nungesser’s suit only involves Columbia so Sulkowicz will not be able to testify. And by filing the lawsuit, he is able to tell his side of the story, something he had been prevented to do while Columbia colluded with Sulkowicz to paint him as a rapist. The lawsuit is here. Read it. Some of it is gold. For instance, this is Sulkowicz in mating mode:

nungesser-complaint1And Sulkowicz gives public health advice:

nungesser-complaint2

Fake rape seems to be the sign of sisterhood these days. You have the pudgy Lena Dunham claiming that an easily identifiable Oberlin student raped her. You have the fabulist at UVa conspiring with a polemicist from Rolling Stone magazine to smear and slander a fraternity. You have the Duke Lacrosse case. This is probably only the tip of the iceberg.

Conservatively, Sulkowicz is nuts and should be institutionalized. She enlisted at least two friends of hers to also accuse Nungesser of rape and she filed a false complaint with the NYPD. Columbia grossly violated its own rules in how to handle complaints and it is probably going to be an expensive lesson to them in letting political correctness and feminist-weirdoism run amok. Unfortunately, Mr. Nungesser’s life is damaged, His academic career is probably over. He will forever be the guy this promiscuous woman accused, from the Pantheon of possibilities, of raping her.

abuse, bias, bullies, corruption, criminal, culture, discrimination, education, ethics, false, feminism, fraud, ideology, justice, left wing, liberalism, litigation, oppression, political correctness, progressive, relativism, scandal, sex, sexism, tragedy, victimization

Filed under: abuse, bias, bullies, corruption, criminal, culture, discrimination, education, ethics, false, feminism, fraud, ideology, justice, left wing, liberalism, litigation, oppression, political correctness, progressive, relativism, scandal, sex, sexism, tragedy, victimization

Lack of outrage at Letterman shows us the real war on women

original article: PC LETTERMAN’S REAL ‘WAR ON WOMEN
April 23, 2015 by Joseph Farah

There was David Letterman last week warming up his studio audience before airtime, preparing them for live laugh tracks for the show.

Apparently, not being prepared with any jokes he wanted to waste off air, he decided to react to questions from the group.

According to an account in the New York Post and other sources, the first one came from a college staffer who asked what advice the scandal-scarred funnyman would give to this year’s graduates.

Without missing a beat, what came to mind for the late-night host was these politically incorrect sage words of wisdom: “Treat a lady like a whore, and a whore like a lady.”

Huh?

This from a guy who panders to so-called “progressives” with uncanny consistency – referring to Rachel Maddow as “the smartest person in the world,” characterizing Michele Bachmann as a “whacko” and throwing softballs to Barack and Michelle Obama?

Scratch a so-called “progressive” and they reveal their true character.

Now, I’m 60 years old, and I have never heard that expression. I did not grow up as a sheltered Christian. I was a bomb-throwing lefty as a young man. But this is one of the most insulting proverbs I have ever heard in my life – particularly about women.

But Letterman will survive this little controversy unscathed – mark my words. Because he has paid his dues by paying homage to “progressive” causes and personalities over the years. He’s earned immunity. He can say whatever he wants. He’s got a get-out-of-jail-free card from the PC police. That he is retiring as host of his show is beside the point.

By the way, if it was a joke, it bombed. That’s how the world even knows about it.

This is the real Letterman, by the way. Don’t forget in 2009 the married comic was forced to admit having a series of affairs with female staffers. That didn’t matter to the radical feminist crowd either – any more than Bill Clinton’s sexual predatory behavior, including at least one credible allegation of rape, did.

He, too, had earned “progressive immunity.” So did his wife who helped him cover it all up. She still does, as she carries on about the “war on women.”

We’ve learned the saying uttered by Letterman is a throwback to another age, first attributed to 1930s screenwriter Wilson Mizner. But it’s those quick retorts that often reveal more about a person’s character than the scripted material he’s used to following.

When the zinger fell flat, Letterman tried to recover by urging future alums to “eat a lot of salad” and always be nice, said one person present in the studio.

Nice try, Letterman. Quick comeback.

Think about what that saying really means: It suggests nice women want to be treated like tramps. It turns women into sex objects. It’s disgusting. I can say that as the father of five daughters. One doesn’t need to be a feminist.

Interestingly, I haven’t seen the NOW gang jump on Letterman. That makes my case. If you say Rachel Maddow’s the smartest person in the world, you can get away with being a misogynist.

Personally, I think it’s time to judge people on the basis of what they do and what they say in unguarded moments behind closed doors rather than by the carefully rehearsed patronizing political pabulum they spew.

But keep in mind, it’s not just Letterman. You will see this behavior throughout Hollywood. They love everything that smacks of progressivism, but watch what they do behind closed doors. I’ve seen it firsthand. I’ve been there. The hypocrisy is palpable. And nobody seems to care.

bias, bigotry, corruption, cover up, culture, Democrats, elitism, ethics, feminism, hate speech, humor, hypocrisy, ideology, left wing, liberalism, pandering, political correctness, progressive, relativism, scandal, sexism

Filed under: bias, bigotry, corruption, cover up, culture, Democrats, elitism, ethics, feminism, hate speech, humor, hypocrisy, ideology, left wing, liberalism, pandering, political correctness, progressive, relativism, scandal, sexism

Islamic war on women: where are the progressives?

December 14, 2014 by Sharona Schwartz

The Islamic State group has reportedly issued a guide on how to treat female slaves which allows jihadist militants to rape them, including girls who have not yet reached puberty.

The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) translated a pamphlet on the topic of female slaves titled “Questions and Answers on Taking Captives and Slaves” which it reported was issued by the Islamic State’s “Research and Fatwa Department.”

The document is presented in a question and answer form and purports to present the Shariah law position on how to treat slaves, including when it’s permissible to have sexual intercourse with them, when it’s OK to beat them and if one can sell and “gift” slaves. The leaflet goes into detail on what is and is not allowed during sex and even states that while it’s permissible to beat a slave for discipline, beating her for sexual pleasure is forbidden.

MEMRI reported that the pamphlet was posted on a pro-Islamic State Twitter account.

Here are some of the more shocking questions and answers in the document as translated by MEMRI:

“Question 4: Is it permissible to have intercourse with a female captive?
“It is permissible to have sexual intercourse with the female captive. Allah the almighty said: ‘[Successful are the believers] who guard their chastity, except from their wives or (the captives and slaves) that their right hands possess, for then they are free from blame [Koran 23:5-6]‘…”

“Question 5: Is it permissible to have intercourse with a female captive immediately after taking possession [of her]?
“If she is a virgin, he [her master] can have intercourse with her immediately after taking possession of her. However, is she isn’t, her uterus must be purified [first]…”

“Question 6: Is it permissible to sell a female captive?
“It is permissible to buy, sell, or give as a gift female captives and slaves, for they are merely property, which can be disposed of [as long as that doesn’t cause [the Muslim ummah] any harm or damage.” […]

“Question 13: Is it permissible to have intercourse with a female slave who has not reached puberty?
“It is permissible to have intercourse with the female slave who hasn’t reached puberty if she is fit for intercourse; however if she is not fit for intercourse, then it is enough to enjoy her without intercourse.”

Examining the rules for sex if two fighters together capture a woman, the fatwa committee ruled, “It is forbidden to have intercourse with a female captive if [the master] does not own her exclusively. One who owns [a captive] in partnership [with others] may not have sexual intercourse with her until the other [owners] sell or give him [their share].”

The “owner” of a slave also can’t sell her if he gets her pregnant, according to the leaflet.

Approaching the slave like other property, the group said female captives of a deceased man can be distributed among his heirs along with the rest of his estate.

“However, they may only provide services, not intercourse, if a father or [one of the] sons has already had intercourse with them, or if several [people] inherit them in partnership,” the leaflet read.

The jihadist group’s fatwa department also reportedly wrote that it’s fine to capture women who are “unbelieving.”

“Unbelieving [women] who were captured and brought into the abode of Islam are permissible to us, after the imam distributes them [among us],” the pamphlet said according to MEMRI.

The document addressed the debate over capturing Muslim women who are considered “apostates” as opposed to taking Christians, Jews and polytheists, which is not subject to debate.

“The consensus leans towards forbidding it [capturing apostates], though some people of knowledge think it permissible. We [the Islamic State] lean towards accepting the consensus,” the leaflet said.

The British newspaper the Independent reported that the document is believed to have been printed on December 3. The Independent quoted the British research organization Quilliam which said the document “can be traced back to some of the Islamic State’s most active propagandists.”

The Islamic State group used Islamic theology to justify kidnapping non-Muslim women for use as sex slaves in an October article in its online magazine.

The group’s English-language digital magazine Dabiq said that female members of the minority Yazidi sect can be captured and forcibly used as sex slaves, CNN reported on October.

original article: When Jihadists Capture a Woman, They Have a Guide to Consult on What to Do With Her. Some of the Directives Are Truly Disturbing.

abuse, extremism, foreign affairs, islam, religion, sexism, terrorism, war

Filed under: abuse, extremism, foreign affairs, islam, religion, sexism, terrorism, war

SENATOR CALLS FLIGHT ATTENDANT A ‘BITCH’

Is Senator Schumer above the law or just an elitist? Will a single apology satisfy feminists?

Shenanigans: Schumer has a flight to forget
December 16, 2009 by ANNE SCHROEDER MULLINS (hat tip to The Sports Pig’s Blog)

Sen. Chuck Schumer loves the sound of his own voice, but it carried a bit farther than he might have liked on the US Airways shuttle from New York to Washington on Sunday.

According to a House Republican aide who happened to be seated nearby, the notoriously chatty New York Democrat referred to a flight attendant as a “bitch” after she ordered him to turn off his phone before takeoff.

Schumer and his seatmate, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), were chatting on their phones before takeoff when an announcement indicated that it was time to turn off the phones.

Both senators kept talking.

According to the GOP aide, a flight attendant then approached Schumer and told him the entire plane was waiting on him to shut down his phone.

Schumer asked if he could finish his conversation. When the flight attendant said “no,” Schumer ended his call but continued to argue his case.

He said he was entitled to keep his phone on until the cabin door was closed. The flight attendant said he was obliged to turn it off whenever a flight attendant asked.

“He argued with her about the rule,” the source said. “She said she doesn’t make the rules, she just follows them.”

When the flight attendant walked away, the witness says Schumer turned to Gillibrand and uttered the B-word.

“The senator made an off-the-cuff comment under his breath that he shouldn’t have made, and he regrets it,” Schumer spokesman Brian Fallon told Shenanigans.

Ironically, Schumer has been a friend of US Airways flight attendants of late, lobbying company CEO Doug Park on their behalf after several of them asked the senator to help keep them based at LaGuardia.

Democrats, elitism, ethics, feminism, gaffe, hate speech, news, politics, scandal, sexism

Filed under: Democrats, elitism, ethics, feminism, gaffe, hate speech, news, politics, scandal, sexism

Politically correct attack on Thomas the Tank Engine

Thomas the Sexist Tank Engine
December 10, 2009 by EducationNews.org (hat tip to Education Watch International)

The children’s programme portrays a world blighted by a ‘conservative political ideology’ and is sexist, according to a female academic.

If you thought the television tales about Thomas the Tank Engine were merely light-hearted fun, think again.

In fact, they portray a world blighted by a ‘conservative political ideology’ and a rigid class system which stifles self-expression. And they are sexist.

That, at least, is the view of a female academic who took the trouble to analyse 23 episodes of the programme inspired by the books of the Rev W V Awdry.

According to Professor Shauna Wilton, women are under-represented in the stories and what few female characters there are tend to have ‘secondary’ roles or be bossy.

What’s more, she has warned that such negative messages about society subconsciously gleaned from the show might even drive its young fans off the rails in later life.

The learned professor was inspired to carry out her study after watching Thomas videos with her three-year-old daughter. While the child was enthralled, her mother was dismayed.

bias, bigotry, censorship, children, diversity, feminism, ideology, indoctrination, intolerance, left wing, liberalism, pandering, philosophy, political correctness, propaganda, sexism, study, victimization

Filed under: bias, bigotry, censorship, children, diversity, feminism, ideology, indoctrination, intolerance, left wing, liberalism, pandering, philosophy, political correctness, propaganda, sexism, study, victimization

Palin Derangement Syndrome Hits Hard

Palin Derangement Syndrome Hits Hard
November 23, 2009 by Michael Goodwin (hat tip to The Western Center for Journalism)

Let us have a moment of silence in honor of the late journalism standards of The Washington Post company. They died last week, a victim of Palin Derangement Syndrome.

First came Newsweek’s cover of Palin in running shorts, over a headline of “How do you solve a problem like Sarah?” and a snide kicker that “she’s bad news for the GOP–and everybody else too.”

Beyond the obvious partisanship, many women, Palin included, found the cover sexist and an attempt to demean her with the bimbo treatment.

There might also be legal fallout. Newsweek, owned by The Post, had no right to use the photo, according to Runner’s World magazine, which commissioned it.

The company’s flagship paper also embarrassed itself. It published dueling reviews of Palin’s book “Going Rogue,” with snarky blogger Ana Marie Cox making an astounding confession in her review:

“I cannot claim to have completely read ‘Going Rogue’ — I had to skim the last 150 pages (or more than one-third). I only got the thing into my hands late Monday afternoon with a deadline of early evening. It’s terrible, I know, but if I didn’t read it all, neither can Sarah Palin claim to have completely written it.”

My inquiry about how this could possibly be acceptable was answered by Rachel Shea, editor of the paper’s Book World. She said in a breezy e-mail: “We thought our reviewers each provided unique perspectives on the book, and Ana Marie Cox was up front about her examination of it.”
There you have it. The Post no longer requires reviewers to actually read the books they are reviewing, as long as they are “up front” about it.

It’s Sarah Palin’s fault.

bias, bigotry, discrimination, elitism, hypocrisy, indoctrination, intolerance, left wing, liberalism, news media, opinion, pandering, propaganda, scandal, sexism

Filed under: bias, bigotry, discrimination, elitism, hypocrisy, indoctrination, intolerance, left wing, liberalism, news media, opinion, pandering, propaganda, scandal, sexism

Newsweek Illegally Obtained Palin Photo For Sexist Cover

Newsweek Illegally Obtained Palin Photo For Sexist Cover
November 19, 2009 by Gateway Pundit

Apparently Newsweek Magazine obtained their photo of Sarah Palin in running shorts illegally. The photographer signed a clause with Runner’s World that stipulated his photos of Palin would be under embargo for a period of one year following publication. He broke the contract by selling the photo to Newsweek.
Daily Finance reported:

What on earth was Sarah Palin thinking when she posed in a pair of teeny-tiny gym shorts for a photograph that ended up on the cover of Newsweek — a cover she has called “sexist”? Perhaps she was thinking that her image would only appear in the magazine she was posing for, Runner’s World, and nowhere else, at least not for months and months. If so, she had good reason — since, as DailyFinance has learned, the photographer who shot the picture violated his contract by reselling them to Newsweek.

That photographer, Brian Adams, could not immediately be reached, and his agent, Kelly Price, declined to comment, saying, “I keep all of my clients’ business private.” But a spokeswoman for Runner’s World confirms that Adams’s contract contained a clause stipulating that his photos of Palin would be under embargo for a period of one year following publication — meaning until August 2010. “Runner’s World did not provide Newsweek with its cover image,” the spokeswoman said. “It was provided to Newsweek by the photographer’s stock agency, without Runner’s World’s knowledge or permission.” The spokeswoman declined to say whether Runner’s World intends to respond to Adams’s breach of contract with legal action.

It is strange though that, according to his blog, Adams sounds surprised that his photo is on the cover of Newsweek.

bias, criminal, left wing, liberalism, news media, pandering, politics, propaganda, scandal, sexism

Filed under: bias, criminal, left wing, liberalism, news media, pandering, politics, propaganda, scandal, sexism

Pages

Categories

March 2017
M T W T F S S
« Feb    
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031