Finally, A Voice For Men!

This is apparently a real organization




Because God knows we fellas have been silent long enough! It's like we barely even have anyone to speak for us. Fir example, here's the weekday schedule of programs on our local talk radio station here in Atlanta:

Atlanta's Morning News

Atlanta's Morning News with Scott Slade

Weekdays 4:30a – 9a with live team coverage of the top stories

Herman Cain

Hear Herman Cain’s one-of-a-kind commentary on WSB weekdays from 9am - Noon.

• Neal Boortz joins AMN at 8:45am

The Rush Limbaugh Program

You can hear the Rush Limbaugh Program on WSB Weekdays from Noon-3pm.

The Clark Howard Show

Weeknights from 8pm - 10pm, Clark teaches you how to save more, spend less, and avoid getting ripped off! 

The Sean Hannity Show

Listen 3pm - 5pm & 7pm - 8pm weekdays on WSB

Atlanta's Evening News with Erick Erickson

Erick Erickson is host of the Atlanta’s Evening News with Erick Erickson on WSB weeknights 5-7pm.

• Call the show: (404) 872-0750

Mark Arum

He has been a member of Triple Team Traffic since 1997 and currently hosts a show weekdays from 10pm-Midnight on WSB.

Neal Boortz

You can still catch Neal Boortz daily on WSB at 8:45am during Atlanta's Morning News for his commentary.

And, sure, that may seem like a lot of male voices, but just look at that top picture. There are at least TWO WOMEN on the morning news team. TWO! At least! How are men supposed to make their voices heard over all that female talking?

Fortunately, A Voice For Men is here to try and un-tip that balance of power. For instance, they may be the only group with the courage to talk about the victims of domestic violence. The male victims.

It’s day 7 of Domestic Violence Awareness Month. A Voice for Men, Shrink4Men and DAHMW are committed to raising awareness about male victims of domestic abuse, the invisible victims.

 (And yes, there are apparently at least teo other organizations concerned about this horrific trend)

And they recently held a conference so that finally would talk about the issues that MEN care about. Finally!

 

AVFMS Report: The First International Conference on Men’s Issues, sponsored by A Voice for Men

So, let's look at some of the people pictured there on the dais.

First up, there's Adam McPhee of the not-at-all-ironically-named Canadian Association for Equality who knows all about issues of sexual violence, given that, as he says,  "I have been raped, assaulted, and sexually harassed by females in my life as a male."
And who could doubt that? I'm sure it happens all the time, women using their superior physical strength to force a man to get an erection and stick it in their hoo-hahs. It's probably the most common occurrence in the world.

And you can tell how seriously he takes the subject by his use of this illustration to accompany the article:



There's Jonathon Taylor, who looks sort of like a 12-year-old Jerry Seinfeld, the founder of  A Voice for Male Students, an organization dedicated to these principles:

The mission of A Voice for Male Students is to advocate educational equity for men and boys. It seeks to:

• Raise awareness of  the structural and cultural barriers men and boys – and in particular male students – face in receiving an equitable education;
• Promote advocacy and activism in behalf of male students, and support men’s issues groups in academia which generally accept the nine values of this site;
• Host and distribute resources beneficial to male students who are at-risk or victims of abuse, suicide, discrimination, and so forth;
• Thoughtfully, tactically, and aggressively foster a culture of accountability toward those who display and promote institutional bias against men and boys.
• Recruit individuals and build networks to more effectively delegate a wide array of talent to carrying out the above tasks.

 Because obviously, it's really hard for male students to get a fair shake, what with all those female students, um. . . also, um, being there? I guess? I don't know, but its patently obvious that this anti-male bias is the reason I didn't do better in college. That and having to work full time, and maybe drinking a bit too much, and not really caring enough. But mostly girls!

While those who oppose a voice for men and boys in our education system often suppress their freedom of expression, this website does not encourage retaliating with the same underhanded tactics

Those underhanded tactics apparently consist of not wanting males students to be rapists which is obviously Misandry! #NotAllMen

Next up, there's Dr. Warren Farrell, a man with stunning insights such as:
.

In America and in most of the industrialized world, men are coming to be thought of by feminists in very much the same way that Jews were thought of by early Nazis. The comparison is overwhelmingly scary.

 I know I'm terrified! 

Feminism justified female 'victim power' by convincing the world that we lived in a sexist, male-dominated, and patriarchal world.

I know, because who could possibly have more power than a victim?

 

 

I've been trying to tell ya!

 

 

And with the rape, I was showing why the rape statistics are exaggerated, and saying that date rape was much more complex than the way feminists had portrayed it, as men oppressing women.

 

 

Wait, what? Complex? How could. . . you know what, no. I don't want to know.


 Then we have Paul Elam, who has really figured out the way things work:

"The problem we see is a culture that still puts women first in so many ways, and men come in last," Elam, who is based in Houston, told The Huffington Post. "Whether people want to acknowledge it or not, if you look at the numbers, men come in last every time."

And you might think, from reading that above quote that Elam is maybe a kind of unintentionally funny guy. Let me disabuse you of thsat notion with this much more horrific quote:

(TW: rape, misogyny,  pretty much every horrible thing you can think off)

I have ideas about women who spend evenings in bars hustling men for drinks, playing on their sexual desires so they can get shitfaced on the beta dole; paying their bar tab with the pussy pass. And the women who drink and make out, doing everything short of sex with men all evening, and then go to his apartment at 2:00 a.m.. Sometimes both of these women end up being the “victims” of rape.

But are these women asking to get raped?

In the most severe and emphatic terms possible the answer is NO, THEY ARE NOT ASKING TO GET RAPED.

They are freaking begging for it.

Damn near demanding it.

And all the outraged PC demands to get huffy and point out how nothing justifies or excuses rape won’t change the fact that there are a lot of women who get pummeled and pumped because they are stupid (and often arrogant) enough to walk though life with the equivalent of a I’M A STUPID, CONNIVING BITCH – PLEASE RAPE ME neon sign glowing above their empty little narcissistic heads.
 

 Hmm, what do we say about a guy who has an "I'm an evil, violent, hateful sexual predator, please jail me" sign above his?

Okay, this whole Voice for Men thing stopped being funny quite a while ago, but holy fuck, this guy is a monster!


So, I really can't even look at this shit any more tonight, maybe we'll look further into this tomorrow?


a

Why is this a thing?

So here is a new product that I can't imagine anyone really wanted:







Which is basically a flesh-colored bikini top (if you're Caucasian) with nipples painted on it.

No kidding.

 

I don't know who the target market is for this. I mean, aren't most women  already annoyed by men (#NotAllMen) staring at their breastses anyway? Why give them extra reason to ogle?

And here's the really weird part. It's not being marketed by some sort of Frederick's of Hollywood sleaze merchant. The organization selling these tops apparently thinks they're doing Goddess's work.

Here's the motto from their website:

See everything. Do everything. Read everything.

 Find your own truth.

Sounds like good advice, but what does it have to do with wearing fake nipples? Hell if I know.

The TaTa Top is far more than nipples on a bikini top. As a brand we work to promote questioning the social norm and digging deeper when it comes to society's expectations. 

Apparently, it has to do with the #FreeTheNipple campaign, which is a thing that exisits on social media and may have been started by Bruce Willis's daughter?

Scout Willis sparks #FreeTheNipple movement in NYC

Scout Willis has started a movement in NYC after she famously strolled topless in public and tweeted a picture of her selfing using #FreeTheNipple.

 Although, if she is Bruce's daughter, I have to think there's a good chance she didn't realize she was topless until someone told her and she slurred "oh, yeah, I totally meant to do that! Free the Nipple, man!"


Now, I certainly have no problem with the ol' baby feeders. They're perfectly lovely and definitely not "dirty" or " lewd" or whatever, but is this really something that a lot of women feel strongly about? In this day and age, when women still earn something like 75cent to a man's dollar, when rape culture not only exists, but seems to get worse and worse each day, when reproductive choice is a pipe dream for women in many states, who thinks that what women really need to fight for is the right to walk around topless?

Do very many women even want to walk around topless?

I'm pretty sure that if you walked up to 100 women on the street and said "hey, did you hear? They changed the law, you can take your top off in public now," about 99 of those 100 women would say something along the lines of "in your dreams, lech!" while reaching for their pepper spray.

(pictured: The 100th woman)

But maybe if you are the wealthy daughter of Hollywood royalty, maybe this is the biggest complaint you have. No one is paying you less than they should because you don't ever have to have a real job. If you ever need to terminate a pregnancy, you can take the private jet to whichever state has the fewest Republicans running things and be in and out and back home for dinner. So maybe the biggest complaint you have is "no one ever gets to see my tits." Or maybe "not enough people are paying attention to them. I mean me. Paying attention to me."

Maybe it runs in the family.











a
a

GOP Faith looks promising

So the Republican party has launched a new on-line thing to appeal to super-right-wing religious fanatics, because you know how hard it is for the GOP to attract those guys.

It is called "Gopfaith" Here are some excerpts:

This website is designed for faith voters like you. As the RNC’s Faith Engagement Director, Chad Connelly, describes GOPFaith.com is built to keep pro-faith voters up to date with how the Republican Party is fighting for religious freedom

 

Hahahaha!! "Religious freedom!"

 



Yes, that's right. They are fighting for religious freedom, as long as that freedom doesn't include, say building a mosque, or having a Wiccan give the invocation at your city council meeting or not having your tax dollars go to fund slut-shaming abstinence-only programs or creation museums. Basically, they will fight to the death to defend the religious freedom of the one group whose religious freedom needs no defending.

As the RNC’s Faith Engagement Director, Chad Connelly, describes GOPFaith.com is built to keep pro-faith voters up to date with how the Republican Party is fighting for religious freedom, learn how to register voters at your place of worship and mobilize them  on Election Day.

Maybe also learn how to construct a coherent English sentence? Then learn how to violate your church's tax-exempt status.

In an unprecedented show of support for the pro-life cause, Chairman Reince Priebus delayed the start of the Republican National Committee’s annual winter meeting so that he and other members could join hundreds of thousands of others and participate in the 40th annual “March for Life” on the Mall in Washington, DC.

Right. Unprecedented. Because up until last winter, Republican support for forced childbirth had been so tepid.

 

 

 

 

Here's a little highlight of the press release celebrating this new endeavor.

 

“This shouldn’t be outreach, this should be who we are — it is who we are,” said Chad Connelly, director of faith engagement for the Republican National Committee and the force behind this new initiative, GOPfaith.com.

 

Well, at least you've realized that. At least you know that this sliver of hate-fueled religious fanatics, this paranoid fringe of Rapture-awaiting, tongue-speaking, snake-handling delusionists is who you are. This and only this is who you are.

 

 

 

Evangelicals, Connelly said, “are our biggest, most reliable voting bloc.”

The problem, however, is that even though evangelicals identify more closely than ever with the GOP, they have not been turning out at the polls in sufficient numbers to carry Republican candidates to victory.

 

 

Honest to God, Connelly it's not that. It honestly is not a turnout problem. The turnout rate for Evangelical nuts is higher than for any other demographic. There just aren't that many of you. And you're dying off. Not quickly enough, but your base is dying off. This is only going to get worse for you. And by worse for you, I mean better for America. 

 

The aim of the website is, as it says, “to build an army of conservative pro-faith activists” — sympathetic believers of all faiths, [oh, please]  but in particular conservative Christians. The plan is to identify 100,000 believers who will spread the word at the grass roots, especially in churches

Central to the effort are pastors, who Connelly said have been too reticent to preach about political issues. Under federal law, houses of worship could jeopardize their tax-exempt status if they endorse individual candidates.

“Let’s overcome that myth of the IRS saying you can’t talk about this from the pulpit,” he said. “Look, if there’s no freedom of speech in the pulpit, there’s no freedom of speech.”

 

 Um, except it's not a myth.  They actually do say that. They have said it explicitly. You may think you can challenge this rule and win (and with this Supreme Court, I wouldn't bet against you) but that is actually the rule.

“Let’s overcome that myth of the IRS saying you can’t talk about this from the pulpit,” he said. “Look, if there’s no freedom of speech in the pulpit, there’s no freedom of speech.”

“Now is the time of righteous indignation,” he said, a time to be the “turn-the-tables-over Jesus” and not the “meek, turn-the-other-cheek Jesus.”

Wow. You do know why Jesus turned over the tables, right? Because the people at those tables were bringing the outside, secular world into a house of worship. They were doing it for profit, but I'm fairly sure that if their tables had been littered with political tracts, he would have had the same reaction. In the analogy you're making here YOU are the money-changers. You're the ones that Jesus is throwing out of the Temple. How do you not get that?
Why is it that the people who talk the most about the Bible and the Constitution never seem to understand either one?

 

 

Asshole of the Day

It's Arizona's superintendent of Public Schools John Huppenthal!

Maybe?

"We all need to stomp out balkanization. No Spanish radio stations, no Spanish billboards, no Spanish TV stations, no Spanish newspapers. This is America, speak English."

Huppenthal followed up with another post on the same site that said, "I don't mind them selling Mexican food as long as the menus are mostly in English. And, I'm not being humorous or racist."

No, you certainly are not being humorous. You are, of course, being racist. If you're not sure how to tell, here's a helpful hint. The sentence you say just before saying "and I'm not being racist" is ALWAYS a racist statement.


Also, I don't think you understand what the term "Balkanization" means. It means that there are different religious and/or ethnic groups who all hate each other. It doesn't mean that different groups exist. That's just called "the world."

So, in conclusion, John Huppenthal, let me just take a moment to say:

Vete a la mierda

Foda-se

Vaffanculo

Vas te faire encule

Qij ju

And FUCK YOU!

Boehner stakes claim to title of National Joke

Boehner plans lawsuit against Obama over executive orders

Posted by

CNN Senior Congressional Producer Deirdre Walsh



No, really. He's serious.

Washington (CNN) – House Speaker John Boehner Wednesday told reporters that he plans to sue President Barack Obama over his use of executive action.
"I am," the Speaker said when asked if he was planning to initiate a lawsuit.

Can he even do that? Don't you have to be able to show that you have been in some way harmed by the other person's actions in order to have standing to sue? Well, maybe he has been harmed. Let's see what he has to say.

"You know the constitution makes it clear that the president’s job is to faithfully execute the laws and in my view the President has not faithfully executed the laws," Boehner added at a news conference on Capitol Hill.

That's it? That's all you got? Some vague dissatisfaction with the way the President has administered the law? That's a basis for a lawsuit? Because I'm pretty sure that every president in history has executed the laws of the land in a manner which a lot of people found unsatisfactory. So you vote for the other guy next time. You don't try to sue him.
You don't go whining to the courts like some pathetic little crybaby that the mean old President won't do what you want him to.

 

Oh, right. That is kind of your thing, isn't it?

 



Okay, if you're going to try to file suit against the President, you really have to have something concrete and specific on which to base your suit. It can't just be "I don't feel like he's executing things all that faithfully." You have to be able to say specifically what wrongdoings you are accusing him of.

In a memo to House members announcing next month's vote, Boehner indicated the legal action would cover a number of issues but did not cite specific cases of executive overreach.

 

Oh, I am shocked. Shocked! that you couldn't name any specific instances.

 Your entire legal theory is "POTUS is a big jerk?" I am shocked, because usually you're the sort of person whom I would totally take seriously. I'm shocked that this most recent tantrum lacks the gravitas you usually bring to the Speaker's role.

 

 

"On matters ranging from health care and energy to foreign policy and education, President Obama has repeatedly run an end-around on the American people and their elected legislators, straining the boundaries of the solemn oath he took on Inauguration Day,' the memo said.

Oh my God, how many times do we have to go over this?
Passing a law you don't like is not illegal.
When the democratically-elected majority of both houses passes a bill and the democratically-elected President signs that bill into law, that is not an "end-around" on the American people. It is not a hit and run on the American people. It is not an alley-oop on the American people, or any other tortured sports analogy you care to make. It is how laws happen in a Democracy. Geezus, go back and watch Schoolhouse Rock.



And as to foreign policy, isn't generally accepted that foreign policy is under the prevue of the executive branch? And hey, it's not like he embroiled us in two decade-long debacles based on a pack of shameless lies or anything, right? Because that would be something you might have wanted to get upset about.

Oh, and also, this:

So fuck you, Boehner, you pathetic, weepy drunken little joke.