This is what rape hysteria driven misandry looks like

When you deal in fear mongering, it is only a matter of time before your response becomes completely unreasonable. Such is the case with Kasey Edwards’s reaction to all the hyperbolic concern over child sexual abuse.

No one can fault a parent for wanting to protect their children from abuse. However, Edwards’s method is pure stupidity:

When our first daughter was born my husband and I made a family rule: no man would ever babysit our children. No exceptions. This includes male relatives and friends and even extracurricular and holiday programs, such as basketball camp, where men can have unrestricted and unsupervised access to children.

Eight years, and another daughter later, we have not wavered on this decision.

Edwards argues that it is too easy for men and boys to lure her daughters away without being noticed. Never mind that the vast majority of men and boys are not child abusers. Never mind that despite all her efforts would not prevent a woman or girl from abusing her daughters. No, Edwards is convinced that men are a threat to be avoided. Continue reading

Marvel Comics abandons its feminist agenda

Marvel Comics decided to abandon their pandering to the progressives and feminists. I have noted several times that for all the political bootlicking Marvel engaged in, it did not result in strong sales. While one can argue that the films and TV shows provide greater revenue streams for Marvel and Disney, the comics still need to make money to justify their publication.

Marvel’s sales have not fallen so low that the publisher would close its publishing branch, but they have not been that good. The Star Wars books sell better than many formly popular superhero titles. This is primarily due to Marvel scrapping or demoting the original heroes.

Marvel did this to bring in new readers. Yet rather than try to win over those who love the films and shows, Marvel decided to appeal to the far left. They introduced identity politics into their comics, and took to alienating their core fan base. These are the same fans who stuck with Marvel after the horrendous Spider-Man clone saga storyline, the company filing for bankruptcy, and the insanity of repeatedly relaunching titles for the sake of quick #1 money grabs.

Comic book fans are among the most loyal fans. Few things run them off of their favorite books. For some reason, Marvel decided to do three of the most likely things to cost them fans: remove their favorite characters, tarnish the histories of those characters, and insult the fans who complained. The latter proved most insidious because the insults accused fans of racism, sexism, homophobia, and bizarrely resorted to stereotypes about comic book fans. Continue reading

Karen Straughan explains why she’s not a feminist

Karen Straughan released a video titled Why I am not a feminist. In It she critiques the ideology and breaks down the specific reasons she is turned off by the ideology.

I have thought about doing something similar for some time. The primary reason I have avoided doing it is because I do think anyone should have to justify or explain why they do not support an ideology. It is one thing to ask someone directly. To have to provide an explanation as if it is somehow wrong to object to a certain ideology is ridiculous.

However, I found Karen’s video enlightening in terms of her reasons for rejecting the ideology. According to her, several other Honey Badgers will also create videos about the topic. I think I will create a post listing those and perhaps other videos of people explaining their reasoning for rejecting the ideology. Continue reading

Feminist explains why it’s “okay” to objectify men

Who does not love a good double standard?

One would think that movement supposedly built around respecting people’s agency and humanity would avoid anything that would make it appear they do not follow their own standards. For example, if a movement argued that it was wrong to sexually objectify one sex because reducing a person to an object is inhumane, one would expect this to apply to the other sex as well.

Yet one would be wrong. Sabrina Maddeaux argued in a National Post article that it is perfectly fine to sexually objectify men because it is “different”. As she explained:

Male objectification isn’t threatening because men don’t suffer from a severe power imbalance that puts them at risk economically, socially and physically.

A two minute Google search proves this wrong. People judge whether to hire, date, or befriend men based on the men’s appearance. The notion that unattractive men have it easy or that men’s appearances have little impact on how people treat them is nonsense. The evidence suggests that unattractive men do face severe power imbalances due to their looks.

We do not even need to look at studies to demonstrate this. We can follow Maddeaux’s model and use movie stars. Actors like Paul Giamatti and Steve Buscemi do not headline most films. They are fantastic actors, yet they are rarely given the leading man role.

Let us use another example: Aaron Paul. Continue reading

Feminists still can’t take a joke

Piers Morgan gave brilliant response to the women’s marches held on Saturday:

The amount of whining and complaining about the joke tweet was incredible. Hundreds of people tripped over themselves to set Morgan straight. Actor Ewan McGregor pulled out of an interview with Good Morning Britain in protest, although Morgan’s response was classic.

The contrast here is interesting. Morgan was clearly joking. He would not support an actual men’s march. He would mock it relentlessly along with most of the people attacking him. His point was that the women’s march essentially had no point. It did not change anything. Donald Trump is still president and the people who voted for him were not swayed by a bunch of entitled, well-off women wearing “pussy” hats complaining about not getting their way after losing in a fair election. Continue reading

Two men ruled to be rapists despite never facing trial

Few things are as frightening as the lack of due process. The idea that someone could be held responsible for an act they may not have done without any means of defending themselves brings up thoughts of the medieval Inquisition. One would think that as a society we would be past the point of denying someone a trial or any means of defending themselves. Yet a UK judge recently ruled that two men accused of rape are “rapists” despite neither men facing any charges or trial:

A former Scotland international footballer and his ex-teammate have been ruled to be rapists and ordered to pay £100,000 damages despite never facing a criminal trial.

Denise Clair, who was left “devastated” by a Crown decision not to prosecute, sued striker David Goodwillie.

She also sued Goodwillie’s then Dundee United colleague David Robertson.

She claimed they raped her at a flat in Armadale, in West Lothian, after a night out in Bathgate in January 2011.

It was the first civil rape case of its kind in Scotland.

The first question this raises is why the Crown chose not to prosecute. Rape cases are often difficult to prosecute due to lack of evidence or the accuser’s lack of credibility or the accused possessing an alibi. There are a number of other reasons that go into that decision. That the case was not prosecuted is not evidence of misconduct or disbelief. It may simply be a situation in there is no way to put on a winning case.

According to the article: Continue reading

Puritanism’s Shameful Secret

The Honey Badgers had an interesting stream with YouTuber TL;DR about the “puritanism” of the current progressive and feminist movements. The Badgers and TL;DR break down some of the reasons why so many modern leftists fall into the a cycle of smug arrogance. As TL;DR notes in the stream, everyone has this capacity and everyone does it from time to time.

Alison mentions this as well. She notes that she and Karen Straughan went through a series of videos and noticed the smug looks on many feminists’ faces in the videos. This is something I have noticed as well in my dealings with feminists, both offline and online. The contempt for those who disagree with feminists or feminism is often palpable, as is the arrogance when feminists know they are in a protected space.

One can see this in spaces in which the opposition is heavily moderated or banned. The feminists in those spaces behave with a kind of self-righteous indignation based solely on their assumed superiority over whomever represents the opposition. Yet this attitude quickly shifts when they enter uncontrolled spaces. Feminists then become defensive to a comical extent, reflexively accusing anyone and everyone of hating feminists, women, and social justice. Continue reading