Archive for the ‘Domestic Violence’ Category
A British actress has called on Londoners to re-name Valentines Day ‘Vagina Day’.
Thandie Newton today called on Londoners to re-invent the meaning of Valentine’s Day to end violence against women.
The actress, who has starred in films including The Pursuit Of Happyness, Mission: Impossible II and Crash, said that ever since she met Eve Ensler, writer of The Vagina Monologues and founder of One Billion Rising, February 14 has had a different meaning.
Newton, 40, said: “It’s Valentine’s Day today but for me it’s been
V-day, V standing for vagina and victory, since 15 years ago when I met Eve.
“Valentine’s is an ideal in everyone’s minds, it’s something that we aspire to, it’s an ideal of romance and is something that we celebrate every year. But that sat against the statistic that one third of women are victims of sexual abuse in their lifetime, it’s not right.”
She said she took her daughters Nico, eight, and Ripley, 12, with her to Parliament today to teach them about the plight of women across the world.
Meanwhile, the same newspaper reports that British schoolboys are to be forced to take lessons in relationships and sex, teaching them that violence against women is not acceptable
MPs will today call for sex and relationships education to be made compulsory in schools in a bid to tackle violence against women.
Experts believe that a zero-tolerance approach needs to begin in the classroom. Education Secretary Michael Gove will come under pressure to promote more teaching about respect and consent.
Last year more than 100 women were killed by their partners or former partners in the UK while 750,000 children witness acts of domestic abuse every year. Although sex education is mandatory, lessons often take place in science classes and schools have no requirement to teach about relationships.
Parents have a right to withdraw their children from personal, social and health education that falls outside the national curriculum. The call to make relationship education a requirement comes as thousands take to London’s streets as part of the global One Billion Rising campaign to end violence against women.
Wolf-whistling and ‘sexist remarks’ could soon be illegal throughout the EU under the latest anti-male European convention – signed on International Women’s Day.
In a special event to mark International Women’s Day, David Cameron will pledge to fight verbal and non-verbal violence against women, including sexual harassment.
By signing the Council of Europe convention, he will vow to take “necessary legislative measures” against anyone breaking the clauses within, by committing “verbal, non-verbal or physical” sexual harassment.
This is thought to include sexist comments and street harassment, including shouting or whistling at women in public.
In particular, the convention sets out a definition of sexual harassment, as “violating the dignity of a person, in particular when creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment.”
This, it says, is “subject to criminal or other legal sanction”.
This is how politics works in the eUSSR. One day, we wake up, and without discussion or debate, our leaders announce the most absurd laws that, actually or potentially, criminalise the entire male population of Europe. Another new and vaguely worded EU convention has been signed into law.
Can you imagine, for example, how Rebecca Watson’s Elevatorgate incident might potentially be covered under these new laws? In future, when you approach a woman in Europe and ask her for a coffee, if she happens to think you’re a beta male piece of disposable shit that is beneath her, then she could have you arrested for invading her dignity and creating an ‘intimidating environment’. In future, if you stop and turn your head at the slut with the see-through leggings and her boobs hanging out, it might not be enough for her to look back at you like you’re a perverted piece of filth – she could have you caged as a sex offender.
And even if the odd European country were to be brave enough to refuse to sign up to such stupidity – which never happens these days – there would still be no escape. The state now owns you, and it doesn’t matter where you commit these ‘crimes’. It was also announced today that British men who commit any ‘abuse’ against women in another EU state, can be arrested and tried in the UK if it is not possible in the country where it took place (i.e. it’s not illegal there). This ‘when in Rome, don’t do as the Romans do or you’ll end up in a British jail back home’ rule had already been introduced by the previous British government for cases of ‘paedophilia’. So, for example, even though the age of consent is 13 in Spain, you could still go to jail in the UK if you were spotted by a holidaying British police officer kissing a 15 year old senorita on the lips.
Those who rape or “seriously harm” women will be prosecuted in this country if charges are not brought abroad under the “unprecedented” agreement.
The new procedures would also cover offences such as forced marriage, female genital mutilation, and forced abortions which may not be illegal abroad.
Last night, Mr Cameron also said that stalking would be made a criminal offence. “Stalking is an abhorrent crime,” the Prime Minister said. “It makes life a living hell for victims. That is why we are explicitly criminalising stalking to make sure that justice is done.”
Currently, only murder and paedophile offences committed abroad can be prosecuted in British courts. In a joint statement to mark International Women’s Day, the Prime Minister and his deputy said they were acting to tackle the “utter scandal” of violence and domestic abuse suffered by millions of women.
One of the great Scottish philosopher David Hume’s central arguments against political anarchy was that, if you didn’t like the laws of your own country, you could simply go and bugger off somewhere with rules more to your taste. Unfortunately, in the civilised Britain of the 18th century, it must have been impossible for Hume to imagine that 300 years later, every man would have become the mere possession of the Big Sister fascist state to which he happened to be born.
Steve Moxon made a rare update of his blog today – attacking the BBC’s flagship news programme ‘Today’ over their coverage of the new domestic violence law (‘Clare’s Law’) which gives British women the right to ask the police whether their partner has a record of domestic violence :
As ever the BBC’s flagship news show, Today, totally misrepresents domestic violence (‘intimate-partner violence’ as it is properly known).The BBC reports that the Home Office is to announce plans to enable women to check up on new partners to see if they have a history of DV/IPV.No mention of the actually more serious issue of women perpetrators and their male victims.WELL RESEARCHED FACTS:1. The ‘controlling’ partner in 90% of couples is the woman, not the man.2. Serious DV/IPV is perpetrated more by women — three to six times as much.3. Injuries as a result of DV/IPV review studies show to be either parity or at most 2:1 female/male’ this despite female sex-differential body frame weakness and male sex-differential upper body strength.4. Women are more likely in DV/IPV to use a weapon, attack unilaterally, and/or to attack when the partner is disabled; eg, asleep.Nobody knows the incidence of women murdering their partners because most is hidden: either by using a third party or subterfuge.This means that most murder of husbands and boyfriends by partners is not recorded as such.By contrast, uxoricide is nearly always direct and overt — the guy nearly always kills himself straight afterwards (as, indeed, did Clare Woods’ partner); women never do so.The upshot is that it is completely false to claim that murder of partners is mainly by men.It may be roughly 50/50, and given what we know about DV/IPV it may be more by women. Nobody knows.Refuge is an extreme-feminist, separatist man-hating obscenity of an organisation, as anyone without PC blinkers readily sees.The notorious man-hating leader of Refuge, Sandra Horlick, knows all too well that men rarely seek help whereas women always do.Most accusations to police are fraudulent — even more so than rape (and that, conservatively, is 35%).If definition of DV/IPV were widened to encompass any sort of ‘abuse’ [sic] this still further plays into extreme separatist feminist hands, because although such abuse is female sex-typical, men are unlikely to complain of it — women are likely to invert their abuse to ‘project’ it on to their partner and themselves ciomplain to police!The BBC’s view of DV/IPV could not differ more from the reality.
White knight outrage has been ignited throughout the world over a video showing a female protester being savagely beaten and – apparently even worse to the Islamo/feminist mind – having her blue bra ‘exposed’ by the brutal Egyptian military.
Never mind that hundreds of protesters, nearly all men, have been killed or beaten since the overthrow of Mubarak. Never mind that the same video appears to show a man receiving at least as severe a beating that doesn’t even appear to be worth mentioning. Never mind that a 14 year old boy was killed by those same thugs at the weekend and which failed to spark any kind of similar outrage. Today an 11 year old boy became the youngest victim yet, but you might find any news about that difficult to find, lost as it is in all the White Knighting headlines. And all of this sickening media coverage shares the fantasy that those brave hijab clad Egyptian women are protesting for ‘democratic rights’, rather than the removal of the Egyptian military government, whose rule was only supposed to be a stop gap between the overthrow of secular Arab despot Mubarak…. and the imposition of some radical Islamic Arab despot.
Reading some of the comments below the media’s reporting of the ‘blue bra beating’, you’ll see almost universal white knightism mixed in with feminist condemnation of the evil worldwide patriarchy responsible for it. The following feminist’s comment at Yahoo News, upvoted 45 times and downvoted only 3 times, is particularly stomach churning :
Yep, don’t forget that the brood mare needs of the mass of plain, unattractive, and aging women come before anything else. As the semi-literate feminist implies, dumb male chivalry will always ensure that to be the case.
Two aggressive female customers violently attack a male cashier at a McDonalds restaurant. They hurl insults and slap him before leaping over the counter and then chase him, thinking he is fleeing from their rage. Unfortunately for them, this isn’t a chivalrous turn the other cheek don’t hit women type brainwashed mangina they are assaulting. He isn’t fleeing – he is picking up a weapon with which he proceeds to beat both of them until they are ready to take several weeks free board and lodgings at the local accident and emergency ward.
Of course, the media represent it as a ‘sickening attack’ on two women. The link to one news report has been posted in several different subreddits, including r/mensrights.
Here I’ve taken a screen shot of a sample of comments on the link at r/mensrights and at the r/news subreddits. At one of the subreddits the link was massively downvoted, and on the other it was upvoted. Can you guess which is the men’s rights response?
Perhaps I’m being unfair – the r/mensrights comments do seem reasonable to the extent that he did use arguably excessive force. It does seem odd though that it gets voted down in the MR subreddit, with seemingly little awareness of the media’s double standards in ignoring the violence as self-defence (even if possibly slightly excessive). Quite a contrast to the responses found in the other sub-reddits, as well as in other forums I’ve seen the video posted in.
*’The Old Firm Match’ is the local Glaswegian football (soccer) derby between Rangers and Celtic – two teams notorious for their fierce rivalry. This is due to them not only being far and away the biggest clubs in Scotland, but because their fanbases are split upon sectarian lines – Rangers supporters are protestant and unionist, whereas Celtic supporters are Catholic Glaswegians of Irish stock.
THE number of domestic abuse incidents reported to police after the Old Firm match yesterday was more than double the average amount of a weekend with no Glasgow derby.
Strathclyde Police said they had recorded 142 incidents compared to 67 on a “normal” weekend. The figure was also higher than the average of 107 on previous Old Firm weekend.
The rise comes despite warnings from police and prosecutors last week, who said offenders would be dealt with “robustly”.
Lord Advocate Frank Mulholland QC said figures published earlier this year showed a ” clear link” between Old Firm matchdays and a sharp rise in the number of domestic abuse cases.
The Old Firm Derby is just the latest sporting event to be linked to women’s victimhood ‘issues’ such as domestic violence and sex trafficking. Every 4 years feminists stoke up sex trafficking hysterias when the World Cup is staged. Each time, their fears are proven to be completely without foundation. Last year, the BBC reported that both sex trafficking and domestic abuse will rocket during the 2012 London Olympics. The sporting arena is perhaps the sole remaining place in which society allows masculinity, and men, to be celebrated. It’s hardly surprising, then, that the gynocracy is attempting to associate and tar this last bastion of male pride with their wicked myths that demonise men.
Government considering ‘Clare’s Law’ that would allow women to check on male partner’s police files for evidence of ‘history of violence’ :
Under ‘Sarah’s Law’, British women already have the right to go to their local cop shop and ask if their partners have had any convictions or accusations of paedophilia on their police record. This was a law campaigned for by a newspaper that at the same time was hacking into the phones of the relatives of the murdered girl – Sarah – who it was named after. Now it looks like women will soon have the authority to further invade their boyfriend’s privacy on the pretext of ending domestic violence (against womyn).
Footballers who had sex with 12 year olds thinking that they were both 16 are freed from prison on appeal : http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2014278/Jailed-footballers-freed-judges-rape-appeal-say-girls-12-wanted-sex.html
Yesterday, in a ruling which freed the men, Lord Justice Moses said: ‘If you have casual sex with someone you don’t know, you run the risk of having sex with someone who is under age.’
Or to put it more precisely, experience the hell of being sent to prison for ‘raping’ entirely willing 12 year old girls who you genuinely believed to be over 16 and legal. And that, of course, is the point of feminists campaigning for ever more draconian punishments for underage sex – to deter men from seeking casual sex with any female who looks remotely ‘young’.
American Apparel advert featuring 23 year old model banned because the woman appeared to be under 16 and ‘semi-nude’ :
Pervert jailed indefinitely for drawings found on his computer :
Steven Freeman, who led the Paedophile Information Exchange (Pie), became the first person to be convicted for making drawings of children being raped.
The 56-year-old admitted charges relating to 3,000 drawings at his home in Bellingham, south London, last May.
He was given an indeterminate term for public protection at the Old Bailey.
I’m never going to defend somebody who fantasises about raping boys (as I make clear here), but it surely is an insane and injust society in which women officially shouldn’t be sent to prison, no matter what crime they commit, and yet in which men can be locked away indefinitely for possessing fuc**** drawings, however vile. Bear in mind also, that due to the feminist abuse of language that has now become enshrined in law, any sexual contact with a child under a certain age (13 in the UK) is deemed child rape, no matter how willing the girl or boy involved was (as the footballers above found to their cost).
Dana White (Knight) has released MMA fighter Brett Rogers from his Strikeforce contract after the heavyweight was arrested and charged for alleged domestic assault. Not suspended, but RELEASED. Although Rogers admitted striking his partner, he claims that it was in self-defence. Dana White has made his chivalrous attitude to the helpless gender known before, praising fighter Roger Huerta when he appeared to stamp a stranger’s head into the concrete after seeing him hit a woman in a bar fight (Heurta has not been charged for the assault). Sentiments shared by the following reader at Sherdog.com :
Rodgers didn’t admit
guilt, he said he hit her in self-defense, which is the same
This comes the same day that it appears the case against Dominique Strauss-Kahn appears to be unravelling – probably too late to save that man’s career and life.