The Great American Butthurt

I have a confession to make. Kick me out of any possible minority group I might be a part of but didn’t know it, but any word ending in “-ism” annoys the daylights out of me.

• Feminism


• Racism


• Sexism


• Tokenism

Words to express our affront are being made up left and right by the mere addition of “ism” to the ends of what were formerly perfectly neutral words. It seems like pundits can take basically any word and add “ism” to the end of it and that means they’re being slighted. The list of isms could go on and on, but instead of promoting more equality, all they’re doing is promoting more division. Isn’t that divisionism?

Personally, I’m affronted by the constant barrage of affronts. When did we, as a nation, become such weenies? How is it that such a collection of whiners has become the vocal majority? Certain people are constantly offended and demand the attention of others so they can express the epic level of their personal offendedness.

So vast is the recent level of Great American Butthurt that no mainstream news outlet is complete without breathlessly exposing a secret “ism” each day. These secret “isms” are called “microaggressions,” defined as “the everyday verbal, nonverbal, and environmental slights, snubs, or insults, whether intentional or unintentional, which communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative messages to target persons based solely upon their marginalized group membership.”

Oh my gosh. SHUT UP ALREADY.

Here are a few examples of microaggression alerts aka butthurt.

Here are some examples to support my highly unpopular opinion on this matter.  Feel free to yell at me or agree with me in the comments. I promise not to tell you I’m offended. I really don’t care if you are black, brown, white, gay, straight…whatever. I’m just not into whining.

10 Ways Well-Meaning White Teachers Bring Racism Into Our Schools

In this little piece, the plight of the poor confused white teacher is brought to the forefront. White teachers are performing an injustice to children of any other race by mispronouncing their names or “valuing whiteness.”

Though I know there are actively racist teachers out there, most White teachers mean well and have no intention of being racist. Yet as people who are inscribed with Whiteness, it is possible for us to act in racist ways no matter our intentions. Uprooting racism from our daily actions takes a lifetime of work.

I’d just like to say that my children, blond and blue eyed, have their father’s Swiss last name that contains far too many vowels for American tongues, and not once did they ever have it immediately pronounced correctly by a new teacher.  We always knew if someone said their first names and then began to stutter, they were calling on my children.  Clearly, we too, have been discriminated against and my children’s very education was greatly placed at risk.

Casual Sexism in the Workplace May Hurt Women More Than You Think

Heaven forbid that someone tell a joke or make a comment that a woman looks nice at work. It’s sexist and destroying her chances at success, dontcha know?

While overt sexual harassment can make headlines, this study suggests that daily sexist jokes and comments made by co-workers can also chip away at a woman’s well-being. It’s not all bad news, though. According to the researchers, their findings can be used to spark progress: If employers recognize the detrimental effects of the more subdued, pervasive sexism, women may be motivated to make formal complaints and organization-wide actions can be taken.

Microaggressions: More than Just Race

This little gem is full of “isms” without calling them “isms”.

Microaggressions can be based upon any group that is marginalized in this society. Religion, disability, and social class may also reflect the manifestation of microaggressions. Some of these examples include the following.

• When bargaining over the price of an item, a store owner says to a customer, “Don’t try to Jew me down.” (Hidden message: Jews are stingy and money-grubbing.)

• A blind man reports that people often raise their voices when speaking to him. He responds by saying, “Please don’t raise your voice; I can hear you perfectly well.” (Hidden message: A person with a disability is defined as lesser in all aspects of physical and mental functioning).

• The outfit worn by a TV reality-show mom is described as “classless and trashy.” (Hidden message: Lower-class people are tasteless and unsophisticated.)

The most detrimental forms of microaggressions are usually delivered by well-intentioned individuals who are unaware that they have engaged in harmful conduct toward a socially devalued group.

Our racially diverse present (and future) deserves better than tokenism

Be careful when you do try to be inclusive, because if you don’t do it right, you could be guilty of “tokenism.” Somewhere there exists a fine line between making a person of a race other than white enough of that race without being so much of that race that you must certainly be mocking or stereotyping them.

There is nothing wrong with that, in theory – except that it signals to the industry that it’s acceptable to represent the growing racial diversity in American through what advertising executives like to call “ethnic ambiguity”. Minorities featured in advertising, the sentiment goes, shouldn’t look too black or brown, or sound too unassimilated or uneducated; instead, “acceptable” diversity in advertising remains middle class, unassuming and nearly invisible by being as close to “white” as possible. The problem is that, when racial difference is represented in this way, we aren’t actually acknowledging diversity: we are homogenizing it. These diverse-but-not-too-diverse advertisements create a false promise of racially normalized society.

But when you include someone’s ethnic identity, be careful not to include it too much or in any way that might be seen as insulting, because then…racism.

There are a plethora of myths out there about black people, but the question is, which ones are actually true? For years, the black community has been inundated with oxymoronic myths that just continue as the years go on.

7 Racially Coded Phrases That Everyone Needs to Stop Saying About Black People

As well, you must also take care not to use ANY of these phrases, because it’s just another way you’re secretly insulting a minority. (Even when you’re referring to someone who is NOT a minority, although I’m not 100% sure how that works.)

Now, many words act as substitutes for the slur that, more than any other, has come to define race relations in America. These words are united by a hurtful message: Black people don’t deserve to be treated with respect or regarded as fully human.

Whether it’s commentators implying that Michael Brown deserved to die because he was a “thug,” or civic leaders peddling racial welfare stereotypes, coded racial language seeps into mainstream conversations far more than most people assume.

It’s an easy, yet insidious way for the speakers to prompt or stir up an audience’s negative biases against black people. 

Individually, these instances might seem insignificant. But taken collectively, the common use of these coded words — words otherwise assumed to be free of any political or historical context — serve to reinforce stereotypes that stem from a sordid history of slavery, segregation and unequal treatment under the law.

White people can’t even MENTION race without getting a smack on the hand for it. Because discussions of race are racism (there’s that ism again) unless the race discuss-er is of the accepted race.

Your Guide to Avoiding Cultural Appropriation

Heaven forbid that you think someone of another ethnicity is cool and try to wear the same things or do your hair the same way. Then, you are guilty of “cultural appropriation.

Cultural appropriation is when white media trivializes and adopts aspects of other cultures without proper recognition, representation and respect. At least, that is how we can currently define it in 2015. Because really, that’s the main issue right now.

Journalists, tv hosts, bloggers, artists, lend me your eyes! I give to you a sure-fire guide on how to avoid cultural appropriation. All you have to do is simply ask yourself these questions before you publish or submit your potentially problematic posts/stories/segments.

You can easily be guilty of cultural appropriation without even knowing it. For example, white people getting a tan is considered by some to be an affront. Those people who go to Jamaica and pay to get beads in their hair? Also offensive. Peanut butter and jelly sandwiches? Racist.

Our melting pot is boiling over

It seems to me that the most marginalized, discriminated against person in America right now is the white male. Because of his so-called “white male privilege” he’s passed over for promotions so that the more politically correct candidate can receive it. Because of his “white male privilege” he has to be even more careful about what he says and how he behaves. Everything about him is vilified.

Why does it have to be like this? Why does there always have to be an enemy? This is the problem with too many “isms” and too much butthurt. The pendulum always has to swing and whack someone else in the head. This just creates a larger divide and stokes the fire under our melting pot of a country until it boils over and makes a mess on the stove.

As parents, we teach our children not to be sore losers and throw the checker board at their opponent’s head when they lose. Unfortunately, that lesson is getting erased through our media and public school system. The odds are rarely all lined up in our favor. Overcoming them is a measure of success. Throwing a hissy fit about those odds is, however, now held up and applauded.  If it was a kid, you’d just take the game away until the child could behave.

When I worked in the male-dominated automotive industry, I certainly never wanted a handicap just because I had ovaries. That’s not how you gain respect from your peers. It wasn’t easy to get to the top of my field, but when I did, it wasn’t because I performed poorly but got the job anyway. It was because I deserved it. If you’re busy whining about “microaggressions”, where is your self-respect? Getting ahead despite the odds is far sweeter than a handout to shut you up because you’re a baby.

I know that some folks will read this and say that I don’t understand their struggles. That’s true. I have never been black or Latino or gay or blind.  But we ALL have struggles.

When will people stop searching for things to be outraged about? I’m personally outraged by the misplaced outrage. Why not take responsibility and make it impossible for anyone to pass you over because your performance is so incredible? Instead of using butthurt as fuel for your social media whining, why not use it as fuel to excel? Why not use it to propel you to make the world a better place?

You want to even things up in America?

• Go help someone.


• Teach an illiterate person to read.


• Feed a hungry child.


• Mow an elderly neighbor’s lawn.


• Volunteer.

Stop focusing all of your energy on crying the blues and expressing your butthurt. Focus it on making the world better. Be a shining example of your minority or trod-upon group instead of a wailing beacon of warning.

At the risk of sounding like I’m trying to silence people (because I seriously am – I just can’t take it anymore) …

STOP.  WHINING.

The post The Great American Butthurt appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.

Fired Engineer Damore Sues Google For Discrimination Against White Male Conservatives

This report was originally published by Tyler Durden at Zero Hedge

It has been five months since James Damore was fired from his job as an engineer at Google after posting a memo to an internal message board that criticized the company’s diversity policies for ignoring differences between the sexes (and daring to use facts to back up his statements on the differences between the sexes).

And now, amid the ever-escalating identity politics of the new normal America, TechCrunch reports Damore, along with another former Google engineer named David Gudeman, who spent three years with Google, working on a query engine, has filed a class action lawsuit against the company in Santa Clara Superior Court in Northern California.

His claims: that Google unfairly discriminates against white, conservative men.

The lawsuit, filed by Dhillon Law Group, says it aims to represent all employees of Google who’ve been discriminated against due to their “perceived conservative political views by Google,” due to “their male gender by Google” and “due to their Caucasian race by Google.”

TechCrunch notes that Damore isn’t holding back any punches here.

According to his filing, Google employs “illegal hiring quotas to fill its desired percentages of women and favored minority candidates, and openly shames managers of business units who fail to meet their  quotas—in the process, openly denigrating male and Caucasian employees as less favored than others.”

The suit also claims that “numerical presence of women celebrated at Google” was based “solely due to their gender” while the “presence of Caucasians and males was mocked with ‘boos’ during companywide weekly meetings.”

Read more here…

Damore vs Google Class Action Lawsuit by zerohedge on Scribd

Will Manliness Make A Comeback In 2018?

This article was originally published by Brandon Smith at Alt-Market.com

Men embracing their masculinity and biological heritage has not been the easiest path the past few years, at least, for those who care about being labeled a “toxic” curse hanging over the history of the world. For me, frankly, I am indifferent to the gnashing and wailing of feminists and the social justice cult. They are a paper tiger and always have been. Beyond that, it’s almost impossible to live in rural Montana without being a capable man (or living in a family with capable men), so even if I wanted to become some kind of liberal my-little-pony metrosexual, the environment simply would not allow for it. I would get eaten alive, or I would have to leave.

It is this lesson above all else that I would like to impart here — masculinity can only be abandoned when the environment is sterilized and controlled and entirely “safe.” Put any feminist out in an uncontrolled and dangerous environment (like the wilderness) for a few weeks, and it won’t be long before they will beg for someone with all those “toxic” masculine traits to come and help them.

In fact, though scientists rarely undertake any social experiments to explore this reality (due to science in our era being heavily tainted by identity politics and liberal bias), there are many examples of the vast differences between genders on display in survival shows such as the Bear Grylls show ‘The Island’.  The British reality series originally featured a group of thirteen men left on an island with nothing but a few tools and the clothes on their backs. Their goal? Work together to survive for one full month.

After accusations of “sexism”, the show started its next season with a group of men and a group of women given the same task. The show had various versions and copycats in other nations, some featuring competitions between the men and the women, but the end result was invariably the same regardless of the country.

While having their own setbacks, the men’s groups do decidedly better in every case, not just because of superior strength, but also superior organizational ability (an evil masculine trait). In the American ‘Survivor’ version of this experiment, which had the groups in proximity to each other, the women inevitably depended on the men for aid.

The reality is, when push comes to shove society cannot function without psychological traits that are decidedly masculine. This is why matriarchal (or feminized) societies generally collapse or are highly dysfunctional and regressive. For an example outside of the jungle, read this article by a female entrepreneur who had a utopian idea to build a company made up only of women – a company which suffered complete gridlock and bankruptcy only two years later from employee discord and laziness.

Because of the inadequacies of a culture without strong male presence, feminism and “social justice” as ideologies instantly lend themselves to socialism and collectivism. In fact, it’s hard to separate one from the other.

Socialism provides the governmental and legal bubble that helps to protect people who cannot or will not protect themselves, and collectivism forces capable people (mostly men) to do all the hard labor necessary to keep a system functioning and safe “for the sake of the group,” whether they want to participate in that group or not. In the beginning this is done through taxation, entitlement programs and the centralizing of wages into metropolitan areas. In the end, it is done through unabashed slavery. If you want to see an example of this simply look up the end result of the Stalinist and Maoist models – a productive minority is always tasked (or forced) to feed, house and clothe the non-producing majority.

And this is how these people hope to live out their entire lives — blissfully sheltered from unpredictable environments that require technical know-how, independent ingenuity or decisive and sometimes violent action.

Feminism in particular seeks the destruction of all masculinity as a prerequisite to a supposedly safer world. To illustrate, take a look at this article published by the ever-establishment, ever-collectivist Bloomberg titled “How To Make Better Men.”

The article is typical propaganda, falsely associating masculinity first with institutions that do not define masculinity as well as attitudes that are not necessarily only attributed to men. The goal here, of course, is the demonization of men in general through association with already-established negative events and symbols. Bloomberg ties men and male behavior to the scandal surrounding the recent string of accusations of sexual aggression in politics and Hollywood.

To be sure, these institutions and industries in particular seem to attract a certain type of deviance, not that all the accusations made so far should be treated as fact. Prosecuting someone in the media and in the court of public opinion is not the same as prosecuting them in a court of law. The #MeToo movement is mostly a farce on par with the witch hunting displayed in The Crucible; relying solely on stirring the frothing fervor of the mob rather than generating facts and evidence.

That said, the cases that do seem to be provable illustrate a pattern of narcissism and sociopathy common in the entertainment industry and in politics, and this is a problem among men AND women within these cultural structures. Just look at Hillary Clinton and her treatment of the women that threatened her husband’s career.

And despite what feminists claim, narcissism and sociopathy are not inherently masculine traits. Many women display these character flaws constantly, but in slightly different ways from men.

Is it wrong for a man to pressure a woman into sexual activity through leverage or force? Of course. But is this a “masculine” behavior, or a sociopathic behavior? Bloomberg and the feminists want to condition you to assume the two are interchangeable.

Now, many other behaviors that have been wrongly attached to rape in order to demonize men are in fact masculine and are not negative. Is it an assault for a man to tell a woman on the street she looks good? No. Is it an assault to be direct with a woman or to pursue her for a relationship? No, as long as she doesn’t tell you to back the hell off then all is fair game. Is it an assault to look at a woman and think thoughts you would not share with your own mother (unless you are a freak)? No, not at all. In fact, you will find that many women PREFER a man that is direct over a man that walks on eggshells and is constantly apologizing for acting on what is biological and natural. It is feminists who are complaining about these behaviors, and feminists do not represent women in the slightest.

How do feminists plan to weed out masculine behavior that has sustained civilization since the beginning of recorded time? They hope to accomplish this through public schools. First by propagandizing children (like Bloomberg propagandizes their readers) into believing that traditionally masculine behaviors are “bad.” Boys should be more calm in class, sit still, be quiet, less high strung, they should cry more and share their feelings, they should be admonished for playing violent games such as war with sticks and their imaginations, they should be taught to be vulnerable and less ambitious, they should be, for all intents and purposes, feminized.

Make no mistake, there is a highly concerted effort in the public school system to enforce the feminist ideology by sinking their fangs into the next generation of men and “training” the manliness out of them. Of course, it seems to me that if these behaviors weren’t entirely natural, then the feminists would not have to put so much effort into an agenda to condition children to their side. Why not keep ideologies out of schools completely and let the children decide what comes naturally when they are older?

Beyond the circus of sexual issues dominating the media for the past few weeks or the feminist final solution, I will say that the violence of action is indeed a predominantly masculine characteristic, and honestly, we need far more of it.

It seems to me that feminism and social justice, whether knowingly or unknowingly, feed into the establishment power structure and allow it to thrive. Encouraging men to be weak, indecisive, indirect, fearful of group condemnation and fearful of their own aggression makes a society less secure and more malleable. Masculinity is often raw and unpredictable. It makes sense that potential tyrants would seek to diminish it so that they do not have to worry about sudden rebellion. In ancient times, invading armies would target the military age males of a culture and kill them off. They would then assimilate the women and children, and young boys would be raised to defend the banner of the conqueror.

Today, this is being done in a different manner. Men are being castrated symbolically in media and film, or castigated through our educational system as a nuisance. We are being encouraged to abandon all the qualities that make us a threat to the establishment, in the name of social tranquility. But of course, in the end only the establishment benefits, and “tranquility” is certainly not guaranteed once we fall on our own swords.

Believe it or not, though, I am hopeful.

The tides have been turning against the feminists and the social justice cult lately. And contrary to popular belief, this is NOT because of Donald Trump. If anything, Trump’s popularity is merely a reflection of the vast and growing backlash against the extreme left and the cultural Marxism they promote.

When there is a social backlash, it usually results in people immediately educating themselves on everything the offending movement originally condemned. Meaning, if the feminists hate it then it is probably good. Will this encourage men, and the millennial generation in particular, into finally pursuing technical prowess, physical and mental toughness, independence and self sufficiency, personal security and self defense and the ambition to build something better? Will our dwindling Western populations see a resurgence of child births? Will the newest Generation Z, growing up in the midst of an increasingly difficult economic environment, adhere to more masculine traits by necessity?

If there is any indication of such a return to masculine roots, it will probably become visible in 2018 as the influence of the feminist agenda continues to wane. We shall see. If not, then the Western world is in dire trouble. For if we do not make manliness “fashionable” again and soon, it might be bred out of our culture entirely. And with this loss, a cultural death is guaranteed.

***

If you would like to support the publishing of articles like the one you have just read, visit our donations page here. We greatly appreciate your patronage.

You can contact Brandon Smith at: brandon@alt-market.com

After 8 long years of ultra-loose monetary policy from the Federal Reserve, it’s no secret that inflation is primed to soar. If your IRA or 401(k) is exposed to this threat, it’s critical to act now! That’s why thousands of Americans are moving their retirement into a Gold IRA. Learn how you can too with a free info kit on gold from Birch Gold Group. It reveals the little-known IRS Tax Law to move your IRA or 401(k) into gold. Click here to get your free Info Kit on Gold.

Democratic Campaign Tells Voters Not To Vote For A Man (Because He Has A Penis)

Authord by Alex Thomas via SHTFplan.com,

Despite losing the 2016 election largely because the Democrat Party refused to move away from divisive identity based politics they have apparently not learned their lesson, with at least one powerful female Democrat deciding to piggyback off the wave of sexual assault allegations sweeping the country by openly telling Michigan voters to vote for her because she is a women.

Democratic candidate for Michigan’s Attorney General, Dana Nessel, has released an ad for her campaign that directly implies that voters should choose her simply because she does not have a penis and therefore cannot sexually assault someone she works with like many male politicians (on both sides of the aisle) have been accused of over the past month.

“Who can you trust most not to show you their penis in a professional setting? That would be the candidate who doesn’t have one,” Nessel says with a straight face as headlines of male sexual harassment play across the screen.

Nessel attempted to explain the fact that she is now attempting to guilt voters into voting for her as a way to show that they are against sexual harassment in an interview with a local news outlet.

“If you get more women in office, if you get more women in positions of authority, you’re less likely to have issues where someone is pulling out their penis at an inappropriate time in the the workplace,” she told WWJ’s Charlie Langton.

 

“I’m not saying that all men harass and I’m certainly not saying that women are incapable of sexually harassing, but I know from many years serving as an assistant prosecutor prosecuting sex crimes, honestly, the vast, vast majority of those cases do involve men. So I thought that point needed to be made.”

So there you have it.

The Democrats apparently plan to run on a platform that uses guilt to force Americans to vote for them or risk making it look as if they do not care about the issue of sexual harassment.

Absolutely disgusting.

Wall Street Hypocrisy Exposed: Bank Behind "Fearless Girl" Statue Fined For Systemically Underpaying Women

The bar for Wall Street hypocrisy has just been raised.

In a controversy that can only be described as hilariously ironic, Boston-based bank and asset manager State Street Corp – which famously created and installed the “fearless girl” statue, purportedly symbolizing Wall Street’s progress toward gender equality in the workplace - to be a symbol of Wall Street’s progress toward gender equality, earlier this year - has agreed to pay $5 million to settle claims that it systematically underpaid female and minority employees, according to the New York Post.

State Street assented to the fine – but refused to admit wrongdoing - after being audited by the US Department of Labor’s Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs. The DOL alleges that the firm’s systemic pay discrimination dates back to at least 2010 and affected hundreds of employees, primarily in senior-level positions.

“OFCCP’s analysis demonstrates that a statistically significant disparity in compensation remained even when legitimate factors affecting pay were taken into account,” the Labor Department said Thursday in its filing.

The department alleges that black employees were also discriminated against, with at least 15 individuals being paid less in base salary and total compensation than their “similarly-situated” white peers.

By installing the statue, State Street hoped to kill two birds with one stone: Burnishing its reputation as a female-friendly employer while helping to market its new “SHE” ETF, which invests in female-led companies.

However, the statue was quickly denounced as a transparent marketing ploy, and the bank was roundly criticized by a memorable coalition of feminists, bankers and even the Italian sculptor who created Wall Street’s charging bull. Though that didn’t stop the judges at the Cannes Ad Festival from lavishing McCann, the advertising firm that helped create the statue, with three top awards.

Compounding the irony, State Street used the statue’s installation as an opportunity to tout its efforts to promote more women to senior level positions – a program that was reportedly initiated by CEO Joseph Hooley in 2010 – the same year that the bank began underpaying women, according to the DOL’s complaint.  

For what it’s worth, the bank has denied the allegations.

“State Street is committed to equal pay practices and evaluates on an ongoing basis our internal processes to be sure our compensation, hiring and promotions programs are nondiscriminatory,” a spokesperson said. “While we disagreed with the OFCCP’s analysis and findings, we have cooperated fully with them, and made a decision to bring this six-year-old matter to resolution and move forward.”

The findings from the audit were filed in Boston on Wednesday, along with the settlement agreement.

Twitter users quickly blasted the bank for its hypocrisy and blatant cynicism.

Ironic: the Raging Bull is a piece of guerilla art. Fearless Girl is a marketing ploy by State Street, a company that underpays women. https://t.co/yT9jCyJnUM

— Stanley Pignal (@spignal) October 6, 2017

Couldn’t have said it better ourselves.
 

Hillary Clinton: Women Only Voted For Trump Because Their Husbands Told Them To

Hillary Clinton’s delusions continue. It’s been almost a year since the election, and now Hillary’s blaming married women who voted for Donald Trump for her loss to the president back in November.

Still unwilling to take any responsibility for her loss to Donald Trump, Hillary continues to play the blame game.  So far, she’s blamed everyone from her most trusted advisor, Huma Abedin, to the infamous socialist and fellow democrat Bernie Sanders, for the disastrous campaign and ridiculous ideas she championed last year. But she doesn’t stop there anymore. Now it’s the fault of married women who voted for Donald Trump.

According to the Daily Wire, the quintessential modern feminist Clinton says women were too scared to stand up to their husbands, boyfriends, and fathers, who told them to vote Republican, and since, clearly, women have no agency or ability to think for themselves, they listened.  Of course, that’s according to Hillary. But she blamed socialist women as well. Clinton made the outrageous claims in an interview with NPR, where she also blamed the so-called “Bernie Bros” for bullying Democratic women into avoiding the more moderate Clinton in favor of the socialist, Bernie Sanders.

“You yourself in the book acknowledge that a good number of young women didn’t vote for you, which is presumably not a sexist choice. They just weren’t inspired by your message,” NPR’s Rachel Martin said during an interview with Clinton, out to promote her litany of excuses…er…recently released book, What Happened. “I think it’s a lot more complicated than that,” Clinton answered. “I did win the women’s vote. I didn’t win the vote of white women, but I got more white women votes than Barack Obama did,” she said.

“Women will have no empathy for you because they will be under tremendous pressure — and I’m talking principally about white women — they will be under tremendous pressure from fathers, and husbands, and boyfriends and male employers, not to vote for ‘the girl,’” she said. –Daily Wire

But Clinton also said that even though women liked and respected her (an observation American women might disagree with generally) they were too afraid to stand up to the “oppressive Patriarchial hand” that often “forces” them to hide their allegiance to womankind. Clinton also tried pretty hard to convince NPR that she is taking the blame for her loss, but no one is buying this snake oil anymore:

“I take ultimate responsibility for the loss,” Clinton said. “I was the candidate. I was the person whose name was on the ballot. And I’ll never get over that.”

And even though she lost to one of the most hated candidates of all time, Hillary Clinton is refusing to go away. “I’m not going anywhere. I have the experience, I have the insight, I have the scars that I think give me not only the right but the responsibility to speak out,” Clinton said.

Click here to subscribe: Join over one million monthly readers and receive breaking news, strategies, ideas and commentary.

Please Spread The Word And Share This Post

Author: Mac Slavo
Views: Read by 348 people
Date: September 18th, 2017
Website: www.SHTFplan.com

Copyright Information: Copyright SHTFplan and Mac Slavo. This content may be freely reproduced in full or in part in digital form with full attribution to the author and a link to www.shtfplan.com. Please contact us for permission to reproduce this content in other media formats.

Europe's Cities Absorb Sharia Law

Authored by Giulio Meotti via The Gatestone Institute,

• London Mayor Sadiq Khan banned advertisements that promote "unrealistic expectations of women"s body image and health". Now Berlin is planning to ban images in which women are portrayed as "beautiful but weak, hysterical, dumb, crazy, naive, or ruled by their emotions". Tagesspiegel"s Harald Martenstein said the policy "could have been adopted from the Taliban manifesto".


• The irony is that this wave of morality and "virtue" is coming from cities governed by uninhibited leftist politicians, who for years campaigned for sexual liberation. It is now a "feminist" talking point to advocate sharia policy.


• To paraphrase the American writer Daniel Greenfield, the irony of women celebrating their own suppression is both heartbreaking and stupefying.

Within days after the Islamic State conquered the city of Sirte in Libya two years ago, enormous billboards appeared in the Islamist stronghold warning women they must wear baggy robes that cover their entire bodies, and no perfume. These "sharia stipulations for hijab" included wearing dense material and a robe that does not "resemble the attire of unbelievers".

Two years later, Europe"s three most important cities - London, Paris and Berlin - are adopting the same sharia trend.

Paris has said au revoir to "sexist" ads on public billboards. The Paris city council announced its ban after the Socialist Mayor Anne Hidalgo said the move meant that Paris was "leading the way" in the fight against sexism. London Mayor Sadiq Khan also banned advertisements that promote "unrealistic expectations of women"s body image and health". Now Berlin is planning to ban images in which women are portrayed as "beautiful but weak, hysterical, dumb, crazy, naive, or ruled by their emotions". Der Tagesspiegel"s Harald Martenstein said the policy "could have been adopted from the Taliban manifesto".

The irony is that this wave of morality and "virtue" is coming from cities governed by uninhibited leftist politicians, who for years campaigned for sexual liberation.

There is a reason for this grotesque campaign banning these images. These cities host significant Muslim populations; and politicians -- the same who frantically are enacting mandatory multiculturalism -- want to please "Islam". It is now a "feminist" talking point to advocate sharia policy, as does Linda Sarsour. The result is that, today, few feminists dare to criticize Islam.

It is happening everywhere. Dutch municipalities are "advising" their employees to not wear mini-skirts. There are women-only hours at Swedish swimming pools. German schools are sending letters to parents asking children to avoid wearing "revealing clothes".

The first to suggest calling for a ban on posters or advertisements that "reduce women or men to sexual objects" was German Justice Minister Heiko Maas, a Social Democrat.

"To demand the veiling of women or taming of men," said Free Democratic Party leader Christian Lindner, "is something known among radical Islamic religious leaders, but not from the German minister of justice."

In 1969, Germany was overwhelmed by a debate on introducing into schools the "Sexualkundeatlas", an "atlas" of sexual science. Now the effort is to desexualize German society. The newspaper Die Welt commented:

"Thanks to Justice Minister Heiko Maas we finally know why on New Year"s Eve, at Cologne Central Station, about a thousand women were victims of sexual violence: because of sexist advertising. Too many eroticized models, too much naked skin on our billboards, too many erotic mouths, too many miniskirts in fashion magazines, too many wiggling rear-ends and chubby breasts in television spots. It is another step in the direction of a "submission"".

Instead of nipples and buttocks, Die Welt concludes, "should we urge the use of burqa or veil, as Mrs. Erdogan does?"

The same German élites who suggest banning "sexist" billboards censored the crude details of the mass sexual assaults in Cologne. Meanwhile, a liberal Berlin mosque, which banned burqas and opened its door to gays and to unveiled women, is now under police protection after threats from Muslim supremacists.

Europe"s élites have adopted a double standard: they are proud to host an exhibit of a Christian crucifix submerged in urine, but quickly capitulate to Muslim demands to censor cartoons of the Islamic Prophet Mohammed. The Italian authorities went to great efforts to spare Iran"s President Hassan Rouhani a view of nudity on ancient sculptures in the Capitoline Museums of Rome.

The Western public appears fascinated by Islamic veils. Ismail Sacranie, a founder of Modestly Active, the manufacturer that designs burkinis, told the New York Times that 35% of their clients are non-Muslim. Aheda Zanetti, a Lebanese woman living in Australia who invented the burkini, claims that 40% of her sales are to non-Muslim women. The Western public, which has been romanticizing Islam, is apparently absorbing the pieties of Islamic law. The Spectator called it "a new puritanism" and "why some feminists make common cause with Islam".

To paraphrase the American writer Daniel Greenfield, the irony of women celebrating their own suppression is both heartbreaking and stupefying.

Europe might soon have to apologize to the Mayor of Cologne, Henriette Reker. She was criticized -- denounced -- for advising women to keep "at an arm"s length" from strangers to avoid sexual harassment.

If the West keeps on betraying the democratic value of individual freedom on which Western civilization is based, Islamic fundamentalists, like those who imposed burqas on Libyan women, will start imposing them on Western women. They may even begin with those feminist élites who first created the sexual revolution to emancipate women in the 1960s, and who are now infatuated with an obscurantist garment that hides women in a portable prison.

If the West keeps betraying the democratic value of individual freedom, Islamic fundamentalists, like those who imposed burqas on Libyan women, will do the same to Western women. (Photo by Alexander Hassenstein/Getty Images)

Cornell Students Charge Well-Known Professor With 'Sexism' To Retaliate For His Union Opposition

For this story we need to adapt an old saying: “Hell hath no fury like a graduate student scorned.”

In late March, graduate students at Cornell University attempted to unionize. Several public universities have allowed this to happen, but private universities such as Cornell have been more wary. Just a few days before students were set to vote on unionization, professor David Collum, who chairs Cornell’s chemistry department, sent an email to several hundred faculty members warning of the “risk” of student unionization.

“Although we must be circumspect in communications with students, I can be brutally blunt with you: I believe it will be a disaster in the long run if unionization occurs — an existential risk to Cornell’s graduate program,” Collum wrote.

Collum told the Cornell Daily Sun he did not intend to distribute “propaganda,” but union-supporting students clearly took it as such. Some even accused Collum of violating a Code of Conduct contract between the union and the Ivy League university, but a university dean said the school investigated the claim and found no violation.

He Doesn’t Like Our Proposal. Let’s Dox Him

More voted against the union than for it, but many votes were contested. In what appears to be retaliation for Collum’s email and opposition to the union, several graduate students looked through the professor’s tweets to find ammunition to harm his reputation. They found tweets they were able to spin into claiming Collum is “sexist” and “transphobic,” then wrote to the school paper claiming these tweets prove Collum creates a “hostile work environment,” without providing evidence that anything the professor has tweeted has led to mistreatment in his department.

Instead, the students wrote that graduate students may “feel” as though they cannot send Collum complaints about sexual harassment.

Four days after the students published their letter in the Daily Sun, another professor, William Jacobson, who works in the law department and blogs at the conservative website Legal Insurrection, defended Collum, saying the graduate students took the chemistry professor’s tweets out of context to negatively paint him as sexist.

The students claimed Collum supported Mike Cernovich, a controversial figure who has been accused of being a “rape apologist.” Collum had tweeted a public message at Cernovich in response to a “60 Minutes” appearance, asking the social media personality to write about “fake news.” The graduate students claim this shows Collum supported Cernovich and everything he tweets and does, pointing out a tweet from the former in 2012 that claims “Date rape does not exist.”

When this was pointed out to Collum, he responded with: “Good point,” then deleted his original tweet to Cernovich. The graduate students left this all out, of course, in making their accusations. The argument itself was dumb from the beginning. People don’t usually go through a person’s entire Twitter history to make sure the person they’re responding to online has never said something objectionable. Collum may well have heard of Cernovich that night on “60 Minutes,” so to paint him as some sort of supporter of everything Cernovich has ever done is cheap.

If This Is All the Evidence You Guys Got…

Collum also put out a 135-page document called the “2015 Year in Review.” The students quoted a single line they found objectionable. Collum had written: “In an effort to stem a perceived epidemic of sexual violence against women, the Department of Education sent strong messages to universities…” The students claimed this sentence means Collum was “pushing the myth that rape on college campuses is a ‘perceived’ threat.”

They ignored that Collum wrote in the same section: “Women have been the object of abuse since abuse was first invented. It is obvious to all that this is wrong an [sic] should be opposed by all rational means.”

Despite their high average test scores, these Cornell students don’t seem capable of discerning facts from a narrative. It’s not a myth that sexual assault on college campuses is a “perceived” threat, because the evidence doesn’t back up the wild claims often made about “the campus rape epidemic.”

“Studies” that claim 20 percent of college women are victims can only arrive at that number by broadening the definition of sexual assault far beyond the legal definition and relying heavily on biased responses. But I guess we can’t count on students at a prestigious university like Cornell to understand something like that.

There’s also no indication that Collum doesn’t whole-heartedly accept those flawed studies.

Jacobson also identifies other examples of where the graduate students intentionally ignored context to smear Collum. In an email from Collum posted in the comment section of Jacobson’s letter to the editor, the chemistry professor issued his only response on the subject (he did not respond to my request for more information).

While Collum did say he is at odds with today’s social justice movement, he insisted that his department “provide[s] an environment that optimizes everybody’s sense of well being, happiness, and professional progress.” He also said that if students find him too polarizing, they can go to “a couple dozen” other members of the department.

“Life offers no emotionally safe spaces—statements to the contrary are a crock—but you can take actions to optimize the world around you,” Collum wrote. “The adults on campus are poised and anxious to help.”

Naturally, Collum’s email response angered social justice warriors, who were incensed that he said their movement is “becoming toxic.” A lack of self-reflection seems to be endemic among the campus crazy crowd. This is just the latest example of a professor’s reputation being dragged through the mud because he doesn’t toe the line of social justice extremism.

Female Engineer Sues Tesla For Sexual Harassment

Just days after former Uber engineer Susan Fowler alleged in a viral blogpost that that management and HR dismissed her complaints about documented sexual harassment and sexism, protected a repeat offender because he was a “high performer” and suggested that women in the company were not as skilled as men, another female engineer - this time at Tesla - has accused Elon Musk’s car company of ignoring her complaints of “pervasive harassment”, paying her a lower salary than men doing the same work, promoting less qualified men over her and retaliating against her for raising concerns.

The reason why first the Uber, and now the Tesla allegations will likely shake Silicon Valley to the core, is that if confirmed, this bastion of liberal tolerance may end up being yet another hypocritical myth, with corporate prerogatives and the bottom line driving everything.

The allegations of AJ Vandermeyden, who voiced her complaints to the Guardian, and who still works at the celebrated electric car manufacturer, "paint a picture of a hostile work environment dominated by men where inappropriate sexual behavior is tolerated and women face numerous barriers to advance their careers."

Offering a rare public account of discrimination from a tech worker who remains employed at her company, Vandermeyden said her dedication to Tesla motivated her to advocate for fair treatment and reforms – despite the serious risks she knows she faces for going public.

“Until somebody stands up, nothing is going to change,” she said in a recent interview, her first comments about a discrimination lawsuit she filed last year. “I’m an advocate of Tesla. I really do believe they are doing great things. That said, I can’t turn a blind eye if there’s something fundamentally wrong going on.”

Vandermeyden began at Tesla in 2013 and was eventually promoted to a manufacturing engineering position in the general assembly department, which consisted mostly of men and where she was paid less than male engineers whose work she directly took over, according to her complaint. It was common for her to be the only woman in meetings with 40 to 50 men, she said on a recent morning, seated in the living room of her family’s house in San Carlos, the city where Tesla was founded, located across the bay from its current factory in Fremont.

Another example: Vandermeyden recounted to the Guardian an incident in 2015 when she said a group of roughly 20 men standing on a platform above her and a female colleague began taunting as they walked past. “They all started hooting and hollering and whistling,” she said. “That can’t happen without somebody noticing … It’s disturbing.”

But her objections about sexual harassment and unequal pay only caused her more trouble, according to her complaint. The lawsuit alleges that after she raised concerns in the fall of 2015, management told her that in order to advance her position, she needed to achieve a performance standard in the factory that was unattainable and not expected of male engineers.

There is much more in the full article, but the jist is clear: while there has been a mounting pressure in the Valley to address allegations latent sexism, so far it has been mostly ignored and instead was projected externally, with the idealistic denizens of the rich enclave focusing on "social evils" far away from the California, ideally slamming Trump. Should more such accusers emerge - and they are virtually assured now that the seal has been broken - Silicon Valley may have no choice but to forget the evils of the outside worlds, look inside, and change what some have said is a very hyporcritical corporate culture.

Cop Fired After Reporting Supervisor’s Practice of Rating Female Drivers on ‘Rapability’ Scale

New Boston, N.H. – After she was fired for exposing the predatory behavior of one of her superior officers, a female cop has gone public with her case and filed a lawsuit against her former employer. According to the former officer, Alexandra Drake, her supervisor, Michael Masella, a lieutenant with the New Boston Police Department, was sexually threatening multiple female officers and would brag about he preyed on women at traffic stops.

Drake blew the whistle about her superior’s behavior and filed a report along with another employee who witnessed his behavior. However, instead of looking into the allegations, the department fired Drake and accused her of lying.

According to a recent lawsuit, Drake noticed Masella’s disturbing behavior while she was training under him at the New Boston Police department. The department alleges that she was fired for incorrectly filling out a police report, but she says she filed the report exactly as she was ordered to, by her superior, Masella.

According to the lawsuit, “After completing the stop, he told Drake that he wanted to just take them out and ‘rape’ them rather than issue a citation. Masella would routinely make comments about female drivers whom he thought found him attractive or good looking. He has apparently developed a ‘rapability’ scale about female drivers and would test Drake whether a particular driver was ‘rapable.’ ”

“Masella spoke very negatively about the two former female employees, which made Drake nervous. Drake was certain that the slightest slip could make her a target of severe harassment, termination of employment or even rape,” it continued.

Drake says that Smith made inappropriate advances towards her on several occasions while they were on and off-duty.

“Masella arrived in a cruiser while he was on duty wearing a full police uniform. When Drake opened the front door, Masella asked her if she was naked. Drake told Masella she ‘was not’ at which point Masella stated ‘Oh, alright I will come back later.’ ” the lawsuit stated.

County attorney Donald Smith denied commenting on behalf of the police department, telling NECN that, “As a policy, the Town of New Boston does not comment on pending litigation. The Town is in the process of preparing a response to the allegations brought forth by Ms. Drake.”

In the statement to the press, Smith denied the charges.

“The complaint contains inaccurate information which will be addressed as part of the ongoing legal process,” Smith said.

When Drake made a complaint to the police chief about the issue, she was the one who was interrogated instead of Masella, and she was fired shortly after.

“During this interrogation of Drake, she was subjected to a barrage of questioning lasting for over an hour while the offending supervisor, Masella stood close by,” the lawsuit stated.

To add insult to injury Drake was issued a warning for violating the county’s sexual harassment policy with her termination.

Unfortunately, this type of response to good cops, who try to call out corruption in their department is the rule, not the exception.

Previously, the Free Thought Project brought you the story of Laura Schook, who tried to call out corruption in her department. Naturally, they tried to run her through the mud and fire her.

Prior to Schook, we broke the story of a cop in Buffalo, NY who was beaten and fired after she stopped a fellow cop from nearly killing a handcuffed man. She is still fighting for her pension.

In Kentucky, a sheriff’s deputy was fired for “insubordination” after pointing out that the sheriff had planted drugs in another deputy’s car. Even though the sheriff was indicted, the deputy was still fired.

In September of 2014, we exposed the Baltimore police department’s attempt to intimidate a whistleblower officer. Detective Joe Crystal became a target of intimidation for his entire department after testifying against other officers in a misconduct case.  Following his testimony, he received threats from other officers and even found dead rats on he and his wife’s cars.

The thin blue line, it seems, is akin to the mafia — cross it and you will be snubbed out by the rest of the gang.

John Vibes is an author and researcher who organizes a number of large events including the Free Your Mind Conference. He also has a publishing company where he offers a censorship free platform for both fiction and non-fiction writers. You can contact him and stay connected to his work at his Facebook page. John is currently battling cancer naturally, without any chemo or radiation, and will be working to help others through his experience, if you wish to contribute to his treatments please donate here.