- 275 campus sexual assaults a week is feminist disinformation.
It must be very confusing to be a young woman today following the advice of the social construct du jour. On the one hand, selling your bits on only fans is empowering and a hard earned right of the feminist movement. On the other, being stared at by lecherous dudes in a pub is physical violence and removes your rights to existence.
The 275 assaults every week was repeated on the Insiders program on 17/9 by Clare Armstrong. She repeated with emphasis "Every week". She then added that $1.5 million was given to Universities Australia to promote 'respect' and awareness of consent and complained that nothing has been spent since.
Feminism is a man hating misandrist hate cult. It seems to attract a herd mentality to conform to demonising boys and men ( they must have brothers and fathers etc and no empathy, psychopathic !) In the eighties Margaret Thatcher experienced feminists calling them poisonous to society and she was aware of their hatred towards her. How perceptive
Boy! .... another informative article by Bettina that just made my piss boil to read more about this femo-nazi conflation. Sometimes I have to pinch myself, dig deep, keep mindfulness firmly in front of me and not be sucked into a vortex of ill directed anger about this truly Kafkaesque nightmare for society in general and men/boys in particular. It can just colour my day otherwise. The maths that went into this figure of 275 assaults per week would be a giggle if it weren't so damn serious! Coincidentally I read an artricle in "The Conversation" (yes some journos there are tainted with DV poison theory but many articles are equally well researched too IMO) about #GirlMaths in action and I thought "bingo!" see here https://theconversation.com/girlmaths-a-seemingly-innocent-and-fun-way-to-justify-expenses-that-can-have-serious-financial-consequences-211903. Of course the authors couldn't help themselves by countering their amusing article by providing some sage analysis .... "First, the term is unnecessarily gendered. Gendered language operates to reinforce societal expectations with a particular gender and can promote stereotypes, biases and binary categories....." they say. Yawn.
When Katie Roiphe wrote "The Morning After - Sex, Fear, And Feminism"
decades ago it was perhaps the beginning of what is now taking place of campuses all around the world.
Janice Fiamengo in her interview with Paul Elam, spoke about how intoxicating it was to be part of the "Take back the Nights rallies". She spoke about how it might just change the chemical makeup in the brain and she is right. Research show that the hormone "Oxytocin" is released.
The protesting students get high on "Outrage" because being part of a protest releases a number of chemical mediators and my hypothesis is that these chemical mediators are the same ones that "thrill seekers" experience.
The real rape is feminists raping rational minds with distorted facts. They have to keep doing this to maintain a victimhood mentality.
The brilliant Camille Paglia is right when she said "stop blaming men." It's getting rather tedious at this point isn't it feminists? Looking rather pathetic these days?
"The Commission stressed the respondents were “self-selected students who were motivated to respond” which means these responses “cannot be regarded as representative of the Australian university student population as a whole.”"
The studies/surveys are heavily promoted in certain settings guaranteeing a bias in the numbers. I've spent time around rape crisis services in which they are promoted constantly. I'd expect it to saturate certain "womens services" in universities.
Universities are full of radicals, unfortunately these women will become politicians one day.
How can girls and women manage to hold onto the pipe dream that they are perfect in all ways? It must drive them crazy.
One well-meaning Vice Chancellor who decided to personally monitor a SASH hotline found herself confronted with late night emails from girls complaining boys were staring at them.
Heaven help us.
Thanks Bettina - I read a crazy article today about a fact checking unit caught censoring the No case on Facebook saying they had to be part of some fraudulent self-appointed international fact checking association (??). People who used to be called journalists were responsible for checking their own facts. Looks like those days are long gone, particularly at the taxpayer-funded ABC.
Great news. A man has sued the judge after being falsely imprisoned and won! The man who was wrongly jailed by Judge Salvatore Vasta has been awarded more than $300,000 in damages after he took the rare step of suing the judge personally. A father who was wrongly jailed by a judge for an alleged contempt of court in a family law case has been awarded more than $300,000 in damages after he took the rare step of suing the judge personally.
That's great Bettina! All this confirms what I've long suspected - that universities and the school system in general are targeted by extremists to make them as hostile environments for males as they possibly can make them. This is a classic case of the one-way political ratchet. The idea is to make up an outlandish figure when there is nothing suitable that is available and then to use allies in the media to give it wide publicity to pressure political parties through use of emotional blackmail to take draconian measures against these artificially manufactured threats. Any correction, if it does come is given minimal publicity by comparison and is often long after the legislative damage has already been done.
It is a good point. Universities have gone down a rabbit hole. It’s like the workplace, do employers want to be responsible for people choices in private. Uni’s would be best promoting sensible or no consumption of alcohol, and the no violence. No UN sanctioned parties on campus. Most sh&t takes place on the booze with young people and that includes poor behaviour by women. I know two blokes glassed by women at bars. One convicted, the other ran off.
It is embarrassing journos besides Bettina don’t review data before they interview/promote a topic, particularly where the HRC has cut down the assertions.
It appears that certain "leaders" within the Universities have their heads' in the sand when it comes to evaluating complaints, let alone making determinations on the outcomes of those allegations.
One of the ironies in all of this concerns the Universities disregard for empirical scholarship, at least from those servile Departmental folk who are charged with ensuring such rigour exists in the first place. How can they claim such achievements when their own behaviour is divorced from those ideals?