Displaying the most recent of 90925 posts written by

Ruth King

Stanford U. Teaches ‘Male Privilege’ With Its ‘Men and Masculinities Project’ By Toni Airaksinen

https://pjmedia.com/trending/stanford-u-teaches-male-privilege-with-its-men-and-masculinities-project/

Stanford University is pushing the myth that male identity is a “social privilege,” despite numerous studies indicating that men disproportionately suffer from unique issues that circumvent their economic, educational, and social pursuits.

The claim was made by the school’s Men and Masculinities Project. The project aims to convene male students with counselors to help them develop “healthy and inclusive male identities,” almost as if male students oppress women by their very existence.

“We acknowledge that male identity is a social privilege, and the aim for this project is to provide the education and support needed to better the actions of the male community rather than marginalize others,” explains Stanford officials.

Instead of aiming to help men regain parity with women in academia — men nationwide are less likely to attend college, and less likely to graduate in four years than women — the school instead aims to help men “redefine masculinity.”

College men should be “active agents of positive and sustainable change on campus and in the community, striving to understand male privilege, redefine masculinity, [and] dismantle systemic structures of power and oppression,” the program states.

Of course, men do enjoy certain privileges in society. They don’t have to worry about sexual harassment and stalking to the same extent as women, and they are far less likely to find themselves victims of sex trafficking.

But privilege isn’t a black and white issue. To acknowledge the plight of women — especially regarding sexual abuse — shouldn’t preclude a discussion of the issues that men face. Yet that is precisely what the Stanford University program does.

The issues that men face start young. Men are significantly more likely to face issues in K-12, and are significantly less likely to graduate from high school, a disparity that is even more pronounced in minority and working-class communities.

Men also are less likely to attend college, disproportionately less likely to graduate, less likely than single women to become homeowners by age 30, far more likely to be in dangerous fields of work, and significantly more likely to be homeless. Men are also far more likely to remain homeless — nonprofits and state services prioritize women and their children. CONTINUE AT SITE

WaPo’s Jennifer Rubin Calls for Mobs to Harass Sarah Huckabee Sanders for the Rest of Her Life By Paula Bolyard

https://pjmedia.com/trending/wapos-jennifer-rubin-calls-for-mobs-to-harass-sarah-huckabee-sanders-for-the-rest-of-her-life/

Washington Post columnist Jennifer Rubin went on the attack against Sarah Huckabee Sanders on MSNBC’s AM Joy on Sunday, calling on left-wing minions to harass the embattled White House press secretary for the rest of her life. She also warned two female Republican senators not to vote for any potential Supreme Court nominees who might endanger her beloved right to abort unborn children.

Rubin, the left’s favorite conservative (they call her a conservative, I don’t), claims that Sanders is inciting violence by criticizing the press. (You know, like every press secretary in the history of press secretaries.) Rubin warned that “lives are on the line” and called for a million protesters to harass and intimidate Sanders. “I don’t think what’s most effective is throwing Sarah Huckabee Sanders out of a restaurant. I wouldn’t serve her either, frankly, but what’s most successful is getting a million people on the street to protest,” she said. (Tell us more about who you would and wouldn’t serve in a restaurant, Jen. You’ve said that bakers who refuse to make cakes for gay weddings are “grandstanding on bigotry and making a virtue out of the vice of prejudice.” I guess that doesn’t apply to your virtue signaling.)

“Sarah Huckabee has no right to live a life of no fuss, no muss, after lying to the press — after inciting against the press,” a vituperative Rubin said. “These people should be made uncomfortable, and I think that’s a life sentence frankly. [Emphasis added]

But Rubin wasn’t finished with yet, warning Senators Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) not to vote for a Trump Supreme Court nominee who might erode abortion rights, an issue that appears to be near and dear to Rubin’s heart.

“Let’s get a million people to go to Maine or a million people to go to Alaska and start putting pressure on those senators,” said Rubin. “So it’s perfectly civil to do that — no one is telling them to be violent protesters, but we’re not going to let these people go through life unscathed,” she said.

“The message to those two women by Democrats, by pro-choice women in those two states, by the entire states of Maine and Alaska has to be simple,” she said. “You vote for this, Ms. Collins, Miss Murkowski, this is on you. We won’t accept these nonsense excuses.”

“It has to be all-out on the ground in those states,” she continued, “those women have to be put under a glaring light so that they finally have to make a choice that goes against their party — unless they were phony pro-choice women all along, which is distinctly possible.”

The coming Democratic crackup By Peter Skurkiss

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/07/the_coming_democratic_crackup.html
Despite media-inflated stories of the popularity of Bernie Sanders and his fellow travelers, the radicalized Democratic Party is heading for a major crackup.

The signs are there for anyone with eyes to see. Despite media-inflated stories of the popularity of Bernie Sanders and his fellow travelers, the radicalized Democratic Party is heading for a major crackup.

The trend started with the rise of the Tea Party (2009), followed by the Democratic loss of the House (2010) and the Senate (2014) and then Donald Trump’s stunning election in 2016. At each stage of this progression, left-wingers have dialed up their hysteria, their lies, their hate, and even their violence. Now it is reaching a fever pitch.

But it has been to no avail. Indeed, all the rage has been, if anything, counterproductive. Could be that this November will be a climax, forcing, among other things, George Soros to go to his grave a defeated and frustrated old man?

The media paints a picture of the left being full of fight and determination to continue Barack Hussein Obama’s transformation of America into a European-type socialistic paradise with a multicultural emphasis. This may be true for the hardcore activists, but they are relatively few in number. So what might be the dominant mood of the run-of-the-mill Democratic voter? It is one of depression and a feeling of hopelessness. They’ve seen their side throw absolutely everything at the conservative resurgence and President Trump in particular and watched as one event after another went against them. Even the media, with their fake news stories and skewed polls, can’t snap liberals out of their funk. The party’s only option seems to be doubling down on the losing hand it has been playing.

Some examples: the liberal media’s drumbeat message is that Trump and his supporters are racists, yet the president’s approval rating with minorities continues to grow. Every Democrat in Congress voted against the Trump tax cuts, predicting they would tank the economy, yet GNP growth is exploding to levels that President Obama repeatedly stated were impossible. Black unemployment is at a record low, and the overall economy is at near full employment. The Trump tax cuts have put more money in people’s pockets and confidence in America is rising.

TIME TO LEAVE? THE QUESTION THE JEWS OF BRITAIN AND EUROPE MUST PONDER BY MELANIE PHILLIPS

http://www.melaniephillips.com/time-leave-question-jews-britain-europe/
These are alarming times for Jews in Britain and Europe.

The British Labour Party is convulsed over the realization that it is riddled with antisemitism. Jeremy Corbyn, its leader and a friend to Hamas, has been exposed as belonging to Facebook groups hosting claims that the Jews were behind ISIS and 9/11, that the Rothschilds controlled the world’s finances, and other such paranoid theories. The backwash from the exposure of these groups revealed a tsunami of anti-Jewish insults, smears, and libels by Labour supporters. Corbyn’s responses, often truculent and insulting to the Jewish community, have only deepened the crisis.

Last year, according to the Community Security Trust, saw the highest number of antisemitic incidents in Britain since the CST started recording such data in 1984. In the past, surges in these incidents had occurred in response to the reporting of Israeli military action. That’s disturbing enough. But what was more disturbing here was that this record surge had occurred in the absence of any such Israeli activity.

Worse is happening in mainland Europe. In Paris, an 85-year-old survivor of the Shoah, Mireille Knoll, was stabbed to death and her body burned by a young Muslim. Last year, a man shouting “Allahu akbar” beat up Jewish schoolteacher Sarah Halimi and threw her to her death out of her Paris apartment window. In January, a teenage girl in the Paris suburb of Sarcelles wearing the uniform of her Jewish school was slashed in the face with a knife. Later that month, an eight-year-old boy was beaten in the same area because he was wearing a kippah. In February, two Jewish men in Paris were attacked with a hacksaw amid a volley of Jew-hating abuse.

In Amsterdam, a kosher restaurant long targeted for attack had its windows smashed in March by a man holding a Palestinian flag and shouting “Allahu akbar.” Holland’s chief rabbi says that, on the street, curses or taunts of “dirty Jew” are now quite normal. At the beginning of Chanukah last year, two Syrians and a Palestinian firebombed a synagogue in Gothenburg, Sweden. A few days later, a Jewish cemetery in Malmö was attacked. In Germany, the Israeli flag has been burned and Jewish pupils bullied by Arab schoolmates. And so on and on.

A Left Turn in Mexico López Obrador’s victory ends a reform era and brings new uncertainty.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-left-turn-in-mexico-1530496717

Mexico entered a brave old world on Sunday by electing former Mexico City Mayor Andrés Manuel López Obrador to a six-year term as president. The 64-year-old left-wing populist has lost twice, in 2006 and 2012, but this time he won against two weak candidates while promising more moderate policies.

The official vote count wasn’t available late Sunday evening, but exit polls gave Mr. López Obrador a large enough margin to call him the winner. Ricardo Anaya of the National Action Party (PAN) is expected to finish a distant second with Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) candidate José Antonio Meade in third. Early indications suggest the president-elect’s coattails will make his Morena front, which includes smaller parties, the largest coalition in both legislative chambers.

The campaign was marred by violence at the local level. But kudos to Mexico’s National Electoral Institute, which handled 157,000 polling stations and some nine million more registered voters than in 2012. The largely peaceful vote is another milestone in Mexico’s progress as a democracy since the days when Mr. López Obrador worked for the PRI that ran the country as a one-party state.

Europe: “The Vision is an Islamic State” by Judith Bergman

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/12619/europe-islamic-state

“The growing religiousness is not an expression of marginalization. We are talking about people who are well-integrated, but who want to be religious”. — Professor Viggo Mortensen.

“The vision is an Islamic state — Islamic society… Muslims will prefer sharia rule. But the vision for twenty years from now is for sharia law to be part of Germany, that sharia will be institutionalized in the state itself”. — “Yusuf”, in a documentary series, False Identity.

“I will pick them one by one — I will start with people around me… If every Muslim would do the same in his surroundings, it can happen with no problem… you don’t confront him [the German] with force; you do it slowly… There will be clashes, but slowly the clashes will subside, as people will accept reality.” — “Yusuf”, in a documentary series, False Identity.

Europe will still exist but, as with the great Christian Byzantine Empire that is now Turkey, will it still embody Judeo-Christian civilization?

A Dutch government report published in June showed that Muslims in the Netherlands are becoming more religious. The report, based on information from 2006-2015, is a study of more than 7,249 Dutch nationals with Moroccan and Turkish roots. Two thirds of the Muslims in the Netherlands are from Turkey or Morocco.

According to the report, 78% of Moroccan Muslims pray five times a day, as do 33% of Turkish Muslims. Approximately 40% of both groups visit a mosque at least once a week. More young Moroccan women wear a headscarf (up from 64% in 2006 to 78% in 2015) and large majorities of both groups eat halal (93% of Moroccan Muslims and 80% of Turkish Muslims). 96% of Moroccan Muslims say that faith is a very important part of their lives, whereas the number is 89% for Turkish Muslims. The number of Dutch Moroccan Muslims who can be described as strictly adhering to Islam has increased from 77% in 2006, to 84% in 2015. For Turkish Muslims, the numbers have increased from 37% to 45%. There are few secular Muslims — 7% among Turkish Muslims, 2% among Moroccan Muslims.

Is Turkey Playing a Double Game with NATO? by Debalina Ghoshal

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/12620/turkey-nato-double-game

Why would Turkey first order a Russian defense system and then turn around and make a cooperation agreement with Europe for the same purpose?

This goes back to America’s apprehension that if Turkey uses the S-400s along with the U.S. F-35s, Russia could gain access to information about the aircraft’s sensitive technology.

If Turkey is playing a double game with NATO, let us hope that the United States does not fall prey to it.

In January, 2018 Turkey reportedly awarded an 18-month contract for a study on the development and production of a long-range air- and missile-defense system to France and Italy, showing — ostensibly — Turkey’s ongoing commitment to NATO. The study, contracted between the EUROSAM consortium and Turkey’s Aselsan and Roketsan companies, was agreed upon in Paris, on the sidelines of a meeting between French President Emmanuel Macron and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

The contract for the study came on the heels of a deal between Ankara and Moscow, according to which Turkey would purchase the S-400 missile defense system — one of the most sophisticated on the global market — from Russia. The question is: Why would Turkey first order a Russian defense system and then turn around and make a cooperation agreement with Europe for the same purpose?

The answer is likely that Ankara is trying to pretend that it is still loyal to NATO, at a time when its strategic inclinations seem to indicate otherwise.

As Turkey is a member of NATO, its decision to opt for the S-400, a non-NATO missile-defense system, has been the subject of speculation and controversy. NATO has adopted the European Phased Adaptive Approach (EPAA), according to which the United States plans to deploy its missile-defense systems in various parts of Europe, to protect its forces and those of other NATO members from Iranian missile attacks. Turkey’s move appears to run counter to the EPAA.

Why Turkey Will Not Be Another Iran by Amir Taheri

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/12628/turkey-iran-islamism

Khomeini’s support came from Tehran and a few other big cities, notably Isfahan, while Erdogan’s support base is in rural areas and small and medium cities.

While at least 40,000 people have been executed under Khomeini and his successors, Erdogan refuses to bring back the death penalty in Turkey.

Right now, according to Islamic Chief Justice Ayatollah Amoli Larijani, there are 15000 Iranians under death sentence in prison, waiting to be executed.

Is Turkey going to be another Iran? With President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s latest electoral victory the question is making the rounds in Western political circles. Despite the fact that Sunday’s election gives Erdogan immense new powers, my short answer to the question is a firm: no!

In analyzing the nature of political power in any form the first question to ask concerns the provenance of that power. For where does power comes from determines where it may go.

In Iran in 1979 power was like a box of jewels thrown in the street, ready for anyone to pick up. The Shah had left the country and most members of the Council of Monarchy he had appointed were in the French Riviera, while the army Top Brass had declared “neutrality” which meant the military wouldn’t stop anyone from picking up the box of jewels in the street.

Janus and the Campus The Supreme Court’s ruling could refocus public-university unions away from political crusades. KC Johnson

https://www.city-journal.org/

The Supreme Court’s recent Janus decision ends mandatory fees for public-sector employees who don’t want to belong to a union. Previously, in 22 non-right-to-work states, such employees had to pay these fees for the union’s services on their behalf, which could include collective bargaining, but also a host of political activities to which many employees objected. Most of the debate in the case, appropriately, focused on legal questions, not the ramifications for higher education. Yet hundreds of thousands of professors teach at public universities in the 22 states affected by Janus; the example of one of New York’s largest higher-ed unions, the Professional Staff Congress (PSC), shows how relevant the Court’s ruling might prove to be.

In her Janus dissent, Justice Elena Kagan maintained that “everyone knows the difference between politicking and collective bargaining.” Yet a lawsuit against the PSC brought by my Brooklyn colleague, David Seidemann, demonstrated how difficult it is to draw these lines in the higher-education context. In a 2009 Second Circuit decision, a unanimous three-judge panel noted a lack of clarity about the PSC’s political expenditures in a wide variety of activities common to higher-ed unions—a contract campaign, donations to the parent union, lobbying of the state legislature, and paying salaries of union employees. (That the union listed political expenditures as office supplies, while claiming that a Woody Guthrie concert shouldn’t count as a political expense, did little to enhance its credibility.) The Second Circuit judges held that “courts must examine union activities carefully to ensure that dissenters are not charged for ideological undertakings not related to collective bargaining.” Rather than allow that careful examination of its expenditures to occur, the union settled with Seidemann.

Librarians Airbrush Laura Ingalls Wilder’s Name from Award By John Fund

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/07/library-association-removes-laura-ingalls-wilder-from-book-award/

Who’s next? Mark Twain, Shakespeare, Hemingway?

Politically correct radicals are now beating up on Laura Ingalls Wilder, the author of the beloved “Little House on the Prairie” children’s books, which inspired a long-running TV series starring Michael Landon that ran from 1974 to 1983.

The Association of Library Services for Children, a part of the larger American Library Association, has unanimously voted to strip Wilder’s name from a prestigious book award it has given since 1954. The reason? “Wilder’s legacy, as represented by her body of work, includes expressions of stereotypical attitudes inconsistent with ALSC’s core values of inclusiveness, integrity and respect, and responsiveness.”

To its horror the group notes that Wilder’s novels include “statements by white characters portraying Native Americans as dirty, lazy, and dangerous.”

The example that almost every Wilder critic cites is this passage in book she wrote in 1935:

There the wild animals wandered and fed as though they were in a pasture that stretched much farther than a man could see, and there were no people. Only Indians lived there.

Every other example simply reports on the attitudes of one character or another on Native Americans.

What the critics often don’t note is that Wilder was mortified when, before her death in 1957, a reader pointed out the passage to her. Wilder promptly wrote her publisher:

You are perfectly right about the fault in Little House on the Prairie and have my permission to make the correction as you suggest. It was a stupid blunder of mine. Of course Indians are people and I did not intend to imply they were not.