Karla Borger, Julia Sude boycotting volleyball event over bikini ban - "Germany’s beach volleyball stars Karla Borger and Julia Sude have said they will boycott a tournament in Qatar next month because it was “the only country” where players were forbidden from wearing bikinis on court. Female players have been asked to wear shirts and long trousers rather than the usual bikinis, a rule which the world beach volleyball federation FIVB claims is “out of respect for the culture and traditions of the host country”. “We are there to do our job, but are being prevented from wearing our work clothes,” Borger told radio station Deutschlandfunk... The Qatar volleyball association reacted to the news by explaining they were “committed to ensuring that all athletes are made to feel welcome and comfortable at next month’s event.” They said all athletes were free to compete in their international uniforms. “We would like to make clear that we are not making any demand on what athletes should wear at the event,” a statement insisted... Borger said that they would normally be happy to “adapt to any country”, but that the extreme heat in Doha meant that bikinis were necessary. Her teammate Sude pointed out that Qatar had previously made exceptions for female track and field athletes competing at the World Athletics Championships in Doha in 2019. The country also allowed female beach volleyball players to compete in bikinis at the ANOC World Beach Games in 2019."
From 2021
Meme - Failures Of Feminism: "God forbid you call women that agree with feminism _ _ _ _"
REINAAA @etheralfem: "misogynists are so fucking ugly"
H. Pearl Davis @pearlythingz: "Tune in tonight!"
The Feminist Mistake? - "Across Canadian universities, women currently comprise 39 percent of total STEM graduates. The ratio is most uneven in engineering (23 percent) and abstract sciences such as math and computing (33 percent). To correct the gender imbalance at his school, Hamdullahpur has created a host of special programs and inducements: summer science camps exclusively for girls in grades six to eight, on-campus recruitment efforts for female high school students, $12,000 female-only undergraduate STEM scholarships, gender equity research grants for faculty, and plans to increase the number of female STEM professors and chairs to serve as role models. Many other Canadian universities have made similar efforts. Yet while Hamdullahpur may be entirely correct in asserting that females are underrepresented in STEM areas, it seems equally necessary – particularly given the attention and funding this issue currently receives − to point out that this is not the biggest gender imbalance on Canadian campuses. The real crisis is happening everywhere but STEM. And it doesn’t involve women at all. Women are a minority in programs heavy in math and computing, but they’re a majority in nearly every other course you can name. Often an overwhelming majority. Of the 13 broad categories of university subjects tracked by Statistics Canada, nine graduate more females than males. Education is 76 percent female, health 75 percent female, life sciences 55 percent female, humanities 64 percent female. Even business, law and social sciences such as economics are now predominately distaff. Across Canada, women account for 56 percent of all post-secondary students and 58 percent of all graduates. They’ve been in the majority since the early 1990s... As for complaints that engineering schools in particular are sexist enclaves that deliberately make life uncomfortable for female students, an exhaustive review of current research on retention rates in engineering programs by the University of Saskatchewan engineering faculty and presented at the 2015 Canadian Engineering Education Association meeting found no consistent evidence that attrition is higher among women, as would be expected if they were subjected to systemic sexist behaviour. (Drop-out rates for the University of Waterloo’s first year engineering class are the same for men and women.) Of bigger concern for the U of S investigators was the fact female students who dropped out displayed lower levels of self-confidence than male drop-outs and expressed more displeasure with the traditional engineering school style of learning that emphasizes abstract problem-solving and excessive workloads to ‘weed-out’ weaker or less committed students. If the campaign to boost female representation in STEM proves successful, more women who already plan to attend university and show an inclination for math and science may be convinced to major in those subjects. It’s also possible that the preponderance of special summer camps, scholarships and other inducements will convince some girls to attend university (and enroll in STEM courses) who otherwise might have chosen a different path. If this proves to be the case − and if every STEM degree program in the country were to reach gender parity − the overall ratio of females to males in Canadian universities would rise to approximately 62:38. STEM programs are the last male bastion on Canadian campuses. Take this away and we can expect men to retreat even further from undergraduate studies: perhaps to the point of irrelevance... “Boys are underachieving at an alarming rate,” agrees Mark Fedy, a teacher at St. Mary’s High School in Kitchener, Ontario. A large part of the reason for the gender gap, he argues, is that high school curriculums have become increasingly girl-friendly in recent decades by putting greater emphasis on exposition and writing skills over the active learning styles typically preferred by boys. “We’ve got all sorts of push to create opportunities for girls, but there’s just not the same level of support or concern for boys,” he says, adding that “it’s time to shine the light in a different spot.” After watching the annual graduation ceremony at his school distribute a variety of female-only awards – including one exclusively for the girl with the highest mark in Grade 12 chemistry − Fedy set out to bring some gender balance to the event by trying to find a sponsor for a male-only award. He’s still looking. “The optics would be bad for a boys-only scholarship,” he was told by one well-funded Catholic charity. Similarly, Brian Hendley, former Dean of Arts at University of Waterloo, was serving on a provincial university oversight committee when he once suggested that nursing schools should do more to attract men, given the severe imbalance in gender ratios. “I was laughed at,” he recalls. “The general response was: ‘Aren’t you a wit.’ No one thought it was worth worrying about.” While a shortage of women in STEM is treated as a national emergency requiring the attention of the federal budget, the opposite problem in every other area of study at universities across the country attracts only amusement or indifference... university administrators have convinced themselves, based on observed gender ratios, that “man-made myths and obstacles” are what’s standing in the way of greater female participation in STEM. And further, that this situation requires immediate remedial action and plenty of resources. If so, then surely the same evidence, logic and concern ought to apply for the much bigger problems faced by men across the rest of the post-secondary universe. Or does a commitment to gender equity only apply to one gender?... Due to the tremendous importance of post-secondary schooling in the modern workforce, educational underperformance by men today risks future economic underperformance for the entire country. As the Conference Board of Canada warned late last year, the labour force participation rate for poorly-educated young men is falling at an alarming rate"
From 2017. So much for feminism being about gender equality, and about it being for men too
Necessary sanctuary or blatant discrimination? The decades-old battle over women-only spaces - "The Ladies Baths is the only remaining coastal pool in Sydney exclusively the domain of women and children. When it opened in 1876, it was because women were barred from using other public pools except during small windows of time. It was granted an exemption from anti-discrimination laws in 1995, after a local man launched proceedings with the NSW Anti-Discrimination Board, claiming that his exclusion from the pool amounted to sex discrimination. This week, almost three decades later, a similar argument played out before the Tasmanian Civil and Administrative Tribunal, not over a pool but a women-only lounge within Hobart's Museum of Old and New Art, better known as MONA. Part art installation and part high-tea spot, the Ladies Lounge was created by artist Kirsha Kaechele — wife of MONA owner David Walsh — and is billed as a "tremendously lavish space" where "women can indulge in decadent nibbles, fancy tipples and other ladylike pleasures". The small space is lined with green fabric, adorned with Picasso works, and serviced by male butlers — the only men permitted behind the curtains. So when Jason Lau visited the gallery in April last year only to find he was unable to enter the exhibition despite paying for a ticket to the venue, he complained to Tasmania's Equal Opportunity Commissioner. At the hearing on Tuesday, the question was not whether the exhibition was discriminatory, but whether it was justified to provide equal opportunity to a disadvantaged group. "I think the rejection of men is a very important part of the artwork," Kaechele said. In many ways, a lounge only open to members of one gender seems like something from a different era. Certainly, detractors would say it's a clear case of sex-based discrimination. But anti-discrimination law isn't so clear cut, and many argue that women-only spaces remain an important antidote to centuries of gender inequality. So in 2024, is there still room for women-only — or men-only, for that matter — spaces?... As part of her argument at the tribunal, Kaechele pointed out that it wasn't until 1965 that women won the right to drink in public bars, rather than being relegated to ladies' lounges. "Over history, women have seen significantly fewer interiors," she said... Lumby says she sees no problem with continuing the tradition of women-only spaces, "because it's not a zero-sum game". "Historically men have had their own spaces all over the place, whether it's dominating the workplace, whether it's Parliament House, whether it's pubs that historically women fought to be allowed to drink at the public bar, there's a whole lot of male establishment clubs," she says. "Looking at various cases across the past couple of decades where men have sought to challenge the right of women to have a women's only space, those arguments are rarely made in good faith. "It's an argument that tends to rely on a sense of 'oh, now we're the victims', but what it fails to understand is that this is just going some way to redress the balance — because men have hogged all the space for decades when it comes to positions of power and places to gather."... As society's understanding of gender has evolved beyond the categories of "men" and "women", policing who is welcome in gender-specific spaces has become more complex. It's an area, Gaze says, where the law has been slow to catch up. "Most states protect sexual orientation and gender identity … but the act still talks about men and women," she says. "So it doesn't talk about people who don't identify as male or female."... "If someone is living as a woman, then I say, welcome to the party," Lumby says, while acknowledging that it's important to avoid viewing gender exclusively through a binary. "And I think it's heartless and discriminatory not to allow them into women's spaces. That's my personal view." For now, at least, experts say there is no real threat to women-only spaces that can justify their practices under the special measures provisions. "As long as there's misogyny and bigotry in the world, there will be a need for women's only spaces," Lixinski says. "And as much as I would like to say I'll see a world without misogyny and bigotry before I die, I don't think that's likely to happen, so there will still be a need for those places." Lumby points to what she calls an ongoing "an epidemic of domestic violence, sexual assault and sexual harassment". "So to say to have a small space for women in a big museum is somehow a form of discrimination against men is to ignore one of the most striking forms of discrimination that we live with, which is women's ability to live safely."... "Every now and then you get someone like this guy in Tasmania who goes, 'What, that's not fair? I can't be left out of things'," Gaze says, "and you sort of think, hey mate this has been happening to women for decades"."
Power relations means never having to say you're sorry
Weird how historic discrimination is supposed to justify current discrimination. And we're told that men are lucky that women only want equality, not revenge
It's only not a zero sum game when women benefit. You can't want equality "in good faith" unless it benefits women
Weird how "non binary" people are not women, but it's "heartless and discriminatory" not to allow them into women's spaces. If as a "non binary" person you want to enter a women's only space, are you saying that you're a woman?
There's misandry and bigotry in this world, but good luck getting feminists to justify having men's only spaces
Clearly in the feminist worldview, men cannot be victims of domestic violence, assault and sexual harassment, and women cannot be perpetrators of it
End Wokeness on X - "Firefighters- 88% men Construction- 94% men Combat troops- 84% men Trash collectors- 95% men Cable installers- 95% men Road builders- 96% men Iron workers- 94% men Coal miners- 96% men Electricians- 96% men Plumbers- 99% men Notice how the feminists never complain about these gender gaps… I wonder why."
Mike McCarthy on X - "Combat fatalities - 97% men Alimony payment - 97% men Work suicides - 94% men Work fatalities - 93% men All war deaths - 81% men Homicide victims - 77% men Notice how the feminists never complain about these gender gaps… I wonder why."
Feminists don't hate men. But it wouldn't matter if we did | Jessica Valenti | The Guardian
Judith on X - "Half of feminists are anti men while the other half pretend the the first half either doesn't exist or are fake feminists. Meanwhile, all of them think they are true feminists and the others are wrong. And then, non feminists get accused of not understanding what feminism is. 🤪"
Men's rights conference in Detroit raises security concerns - "The Houston-based group A Voice for Men is hosting its International Conference on Men�s Issues June 27 and 28 at the Hilton Doubletree Guest Suites Fort Shelby on West Lafayette... More than 2,000 people have signed an online petition seeking to cancel the conference, and the hotel last week informed A Voice for Men that it needed to hire extra security. �We have received numerous calls and threats and are concerned for the safety and well-being of our employees, our guests and your attendees,� hotel officials wrote in a letter dated Thursday to Paul Elam, A Voice for Men�s founder and publisher. �The threats have escalated to include death threats, physical violence against our staff and and other guests as well as damage to the property.�... In 2012, the Southern Poverty Law Center called men�s rights groups like A Voice for Men �women haters"
Meme - "Protesters threaten violence and death against International Men's Issues Conference in Detroit at Doubletree, Hilton"
"This is not happening, and it's good that it is". This is the same person who revels in bathing in male tears, so of course she doesn't hate men
Weird. Feminists keep claiming that they care about men and that rights are like cake - more for one doesn't mean less for another
Meme - "Unpopular opinion. You can't call yourself a feminist and also call other women a pick me. What? you don't like my views therefore they must be for male attention?"
Opinion | The Most Common Graduation Advice Tends to Backfire - The New York Times - "As American high school and college students graduate and embark on the next phases of their lives, one piece of advice they will undoubtedly receive is to follow their passions or some equivalent sentiment. It seems like fine guidance, however clichéd: Do something that feels true to yourself rather than conform to expectations. But following your passions often turns out to be a bad idea. New research that we and our colleagues conducted found that when asked to identify their passions, women and men tend to cite stereotypically feminine and masculine interests and behavior. Women are more likely to say they want to make art or help people, for instance, while men are more likely to say they want to do science or play sports. In other words, when asked to identify their passions, people seem to do precisely what following their passions is supposed to discourage: They conform to societal expectations. This finding is especially troubling for anyone concerned about gender disparities in fields like computer science and engineering, in which women are significantly underrepresented... for many young people, passions seem to be based in large part on internalized societal expectations about what is appropriate for their gender rather than complete and accurate information about what, say, studying computer science is really like... In many non-Western countries, students are not encouraged to view academic choice as a form of self-expression. The results can be striking: In countries such as Malaysia and Kuwait, the gender disparities in computer science and engineering degrees are much smaller than they are in the United States. Students in those countries typically pick their majors for other reasons — income, job security, family obligation."
"Don't follow your passions, because that will thwart the feminist agenda". Clearly politics is more important than helping people, and "stereotypes" can't reflect underlying realities. And the paradox of gender equality isn't even touched on, since that threatens feminism
Abandoning Islam for a life in porn - The Spectator World - "no matter how much and how hard many on the left claim to fight for women’s rights, I have noticed that they usually turn a blind eye to the severe restrictions Islam imposes on women, like dress codes, corporal punishment for infringing on “Islamic values,” forced marriages, and female genital mutilation. Take it from me: I know too much about Islam and its dark side. And I have seen first-hand how Islam, at its worst, operates, here in the West, right under our noses. Islam was forced on me by my biological parents, first in Afghanistan as a child and then in Britain as an adolescent. My parents told me Islam is more important than anything else, even more important than the love between parents and their kids. Based on Islamic rules, my parents directed me how to dress, what to do, what to think, and who to be. I grew up fearful of going to hell, fearful of knowing myself, and fearful of everything that goes against Islamic teachings. My parents tried to make me hate everything modern, civilised and secular. And this part of my story is not unique: this is the sad and hopeless reality of many Muslims the world over. In secondary school in East London (a girls’ school, because my parents didn’t want me to integrate), we were taught about equality. But at home there was nothing but inequality and fear. I was forced to do the cooking, cleaning, and ironing while my brothers would sit and order me and my sisters around, because it was a woman’s job in accordance with Islam’s teachings. These teachings encourage men to look down on and discriminate against women and my brothers would quote verses to us from the Qur’an and Hadiths which justified their behaviour. To put it bluntly: Islam, practiced this way, is nothing but old men’s wet dreams “deified” in order to immunise their idiocy against criticism. As I grew into my teenage years, it dawned on me that soon a moment would come, one Muslim women are told to cherish even while it amounts to nothing but violence against the spirit and the will. If I stayed in my home, I would be married off and my parents would give “ownership” of me to some man of their choosing who could do with me as he pleased since consent doesn’t exist in such a mentality. The clock was ticking... I left my parents’ house at dawn one day five years ago. I took the Eurostar to Paris from St Pancras to meet my partner. And I have never looked back. For “dishonouring” them, my parents have disowned me. I am perfectly content that they feel this way because they and so many others like them have been abusing women and children in the name of Islam; the internal logic of the religion now requires their shame... I never had any sexual experiences before I left Islam because I had been told to cover my hair, and to dress modestly (which in London makes you feel dumb because of how people stare at you in public, and in summer makes you suffer with the heat). I was told if I broke these rules I would be punished — even with my life... I am particularly dismayed by the misguided feminists speaking out against sex work and porn by saying it objectifies the female body. They are saying, in essence, “Ladies, cover up.” I wish they could see that this is no different from what the Taliban demanded in the name of God. Both the secular puritans and the Islamic ones have this in common: they believe they know better than I do how I feel and how I should enjoy myself. As a sex-positive feminist, I speak out against all ideologies — secular and religious — which maintain taboos and oppressive traditions. The way I see it, I am here to breathe free, to create, to live my life to the fullest and to do as I please in voluntary relations with other adults. I don’t give a damn if others disapprove of my choices, or if I offend their sensibilities or arouse their envy because they suspect I am having more fun than they are."
Internalised Islamophobia!
The Science Behind “Daddy’s Girls” - "So, why do girls gravitate to their fathers? Well, a study published in Behavioral Neuroscience revealed a lot of interesting things. The study, consisting of 69 heterosexual biological fathers of children ages 1–2. The participants had to wear an electronic recording device and comparisons were made regarding sounds, responses, and play with children. Any sound made on the device in the 48 hour time period was recorded. The study revealed:
Fathers with daughters engaged in significantly more singing and whistling than fathers of sons.
Fathers also responded attentively to their daughters far more than to their sons.
Fathers with daughters used more language related to sadness and used more language about the body to daughters than sons.
Fathers of daughters spent approximately 60% more time responding to their kids than fathers of boys.
Further research was conducted using an MRI brain scan, which revealed that Fathers brain activity responded differently to emotional facial expressions of sons as compared to daughters. There was significant brain activity in visual processing areas when fathers saw images of their daughters happy faces. This likely means that fathers respond more to their daughters when they are happy. There was greater activity in a portion of the brain that contributes to emotional regulating which may indicate that fathers who see their daughters happy face are more likely to attend to that child than a father of a son. Surprisingly, fathers responded most strongly to a sons neutral facial expression, not happy ones."
Feminists like to cite how men who have daughters believe in giving women more opportunities as if it's some sort of slam dunk about empathy and equality, but this suggests that men with daughters are sexist towards them rather than championing gender equality
Meme - "FEMINISM IS THE IDEA THAT WOMEN ARE FREE WHEN THEY SERVE THEIR EMPLOYERS BUT SLAVES WHEN THEY SERVE THEIR HUSBAND AND CHILDREN"
Meme - "Stephen King: My wife is rightly pissed by headlines like this: "Stephen King and his wife donate $1.25M to New England Historic Genealogical Society." The gift was her original idea, and she has a name: TABITHA KING. Her response follows.
Dear Editors (married to a wife or a husband):
In recent media coverage of a gift that my husband (ironic usage) and I made to the New England Historical and Genealogical Society, we became Stephen King and his wife. Wife is a relationship or status. It is not an identity. You could have made other choices. You could have referred to me as OfStephen. Or His Old Lady. Or His- Ball-And-Chain. I have sons. You could have referred to me as Mother- of-Novelists. I have a daughter but wouldn't it be just silly to refer to me as Mother-of-Clergy? I'm seventy. I thought I would give you permission, if "OfTabitha" predeceases me, to title my obituary, Relick of Stephen King. In the meantime, you might consider the unconscious condescension in your style book, and give women their names."
Natalie Portman's Husband's Affair: Everything To Know
Singer Celine Dion’s husband dies
Anne Hathaway's husband keeps her grounded
Ironically, this had to be posted by Stephen King, or no one would have noticed it. Which demonstrates why the headlines referred to her as his wife
The fact that women marry up and thus it is rare for women to be more famous than their husbands is somehow the fault of patriarchy
Why The Majority Of Women Don't Want To Call Themselves Feminist - "feminists begin their argument in one place and end it in quite another. In 2018, a YouGov poll found that only 38% of American women considered themselves feminist. That same poll found that of those women who responded by saying they weren’t feminist, 47% felt that “the current wave of feminism does not represent true feminism.”... What’s interesting to note is that another YouGov study conducted in five countries found that eight out of ten people do believe in equal rights. Despite a majority of people not calling themselves feminists, they do believe in equality. This is the crux of the point. Feminists would have you believe that all they are fighting for is equal rights – that’s how they convince young women that they, too, are feminist. But what’s fascinating is how divested the concept of feminism has become from the theory of equality. In Christina Hoff Summer’s book Who Stole Feminism?, she discusses how feminism has changed since the 1960’s and has moved from a fight for equal rights to a fight against men and the patriarchy. She compares equity feminism to what she terms “gender feminism” - an agenda that looks to make up for historical inequalities based on sex. “Gender feminism,” which pits men against women, is just one facet of 2020 feminism that turns people away from the term. Another is the promiscuity that is encouraged in young feminists to fulfill their empowerment. Feminism is not simply legal equality anymore – it’s equality with men’s basest urges. Surprisingly, feminists today believe in legalizing sex work and prostitution. They are also huge advocates of encouraging women to dress scantily, have sex with strangers, and leave behind their femininity in favor of becoming more masculine. Feminists don’t encourage women to respect themselves or their bodies by keeping themselves safe or making wise choices. Instead, they tell women to do whatever they want, regardless of the consequences. And if there are any consequences? Feminists respond, “Well, men wouldn’t have those consequences so we don’t want them either!” Additionally, feminism encourages women to accept themselves - which isn’t a bad thing - but to the point where there is no room for improvement. You live an unhealthy lifestyle? “You do you!” You lash out at those around you? “If you can’t handle me at my worst, you don’t deserve me at my best.” You had unprotected sex and have an accidental pregnancy? “My body, my choice.”... Now, instead of embracing the differences between men and women even as we fight for equal rights, feminists are calling for the abandonment of those differences."
57% of S'porean men think women's equality has 'gone too far' & discriminates against men: Ipsos survey - "57 per cent of Singaporean men believe that the promotion of women's equality has gone too far, to the point that men are experiencing discrimination. In comparison, 39 per cent of women feel the same... more than half of all Singaporean respondents, at 58 per cent, thought that men are expected to do too much to support gender equality. When broken down by gender, this figure rose to 68 per cent for men while it stood at 47 per cent for women... 62 per cent of Singaporeans believe the country has gone far enough in giving women equal rights with men. A breakdown of the data by gender found that 68 per cent of men and 55 per cent of women in Singapore felt the same."
57% of S'porean men think women's equality has 'gone too far' & discriminates against men: Ipsos survey : singapore - "I’m all for gender equality too, but it doesn’t make sense if the gender ratio between the rank and file and management is disproportionate just for the sake of ‘equality’. My friend works in a male dominated industry and reports to a female boss. She told him that she likely wouldn’t be in this position if she’s not female. 🤯"
Clearly, 55% of women have internalised patriarchy and hostile sexism, because women only have agency when it helps the feminist agenda
