Last Wednesday, during the clashes in Jerusalem’s Old City as police protected Jews from being attacked by crazed Muslims who were incensed at the very thought of Jews walking freely around the holy city, one Muslim woman attacked an Israeli police officer who happens to be a black woman.

The caption for this video on the PalInfo Facebook page was “In Jerusalem [a woman] hits and pulls the hair of an African Zionist soldier who came from the jungles of Africa to kill and desecrate our holy places.”


PalInfo is a popular media website that has been around for years and is pro-Hamas.

Naturally, no one seems too concerned at the explicit racism of Arab media. Because Western “progressives” – who seize on any example of Israeli racism they can find, real or imagined –  think that Arabs can’t be expected to act any better. They are only Arabs, after all.

Which means that we have identified two groups of racists here.



D.M. Murdock/Acharya S speaks with Aeon Byte radio host Miguel Conner about her book “Did Moses Exist?”


Miguel’s writeup: Moses is widely considered a main patriarch for the Abrahamic religions. Although many today regard his existence as suspect, few understand the powerful mythological resonance of the Moses figure. Moses is actually a syncretic and composite godman reaching into many ancient cultures and faiths. He is part sun-god, part lawgiver archetype, and plenty hero of a thousand faces. We enter the Myth of Moses in order to discover the censored wisdom of ancient Gnosis and the fury of an angry volcanic deity that has ruled the West for thousands of years.



One woman colleague of mine recently threatened me of filing sexual harassment complaint. Even though she was joking and it was only when we were discussing feminism in a lighter mood she said that but this light remark enlightened me of another dimension of women’s value in today’s life. We were discussing about my human rights blog and she was objecting saying I portray all women as criminals and she wanted to say “Not all women are the same”. I gave her a open challenge to prove herself on any of my articles and suggested that we could have discussion on my blog instead of an open discussion on the floor.

She is married recently and she denied introducing her husband to me because “he would immediately give her divorce, if I was introduced to her husband”.  I told her that if she is the so called good woman, she needn’t have to be afraid of me or my blog as my blog is only against feminists who are criminals and want to claim all advantage simply based on their gender. When she could not prove herself initially she told that she wanted to kill me and then told she would file harassment case against me, because as she said “my blog was harassing her”.

I used to consider her as a good friend of mine. Like her there were many other women colleagues who were close to me till such time they knew that my blog existed. They started thinking that because of my bad relation with ONE woman I am fighting against all women. I thought of asking them – “would you say the same thing to a rape victim who wants to HangTheRapist?”

What none of those women understood that we did not need to get raped to protest against rape. If it did, then no man would have ever come forward in support ofHangTheRapist campaign.

Today men have gone to the extent of suggesting chopping off genitals of the rapist and in one case in India they have done that too, simply based on rape attempt (and NOT actual rape). This proves that men want to show that they are not criminals and they don’t support a crime like rape. There are many men who openly give statements shaming their manhood. On the contrary, women when they can’t win simple argument want to file sexual harassment complaint or at least threaten to file one. Even if we consider this incident as a joke and probably she didn’t mean what she said but we would never see any man joking and telling a woman colleague of raping her? You can imagine if anyone ever did that then what would have been the reaction from others?

One of my friends from Hyderabad narrated a similar story. While travelling in his car he overheard a woman telling her boyfriend that she wanted to file sexual harassment complaint against her male boss and resign, as he was overloading her with work and she was getting late every day. These complaints are in fact very easy nowadays and the results are known to everyone. The guy loses his job instantly and the woman gets a pay raise and probably easier assignments or promotion.

When any woman files such false cases or takes benefit of such situation she actually proclaims that she gets more benefits because she has a vagina and she does not care about anything else. In a way such women prove only one point, women need to be valued for their vagina and not for their merits or behaviour. When any woman does that she makes it hard for men to distinguish between good and bad women. This distinction becomes harder when other women do not protest against such false cases or do not demand any outrageous punishment for such criminals. All such mute women prove that women need to be valued only for their sexuality and nothing else.

This is applicable for any woman who enjoys any benefit given to her only for being a woman. For instance, reserved seat in bus or in trains, legal provisions for women, reserved seats in educational institutions or grace marks in IIT or IIM. In none of such cases a woman’s merit is considered but only consideration made is of her gender. In other words women are reduced to their genitals with each of these benefits provided to them. Those who provide these benefits and those who enjoy these benefits do not want to recognize themselves as humans, because if they did they would have protested this kind of gender bias in the first place and India’s political history would have been written in a different way.

Personally I am not against reservation for women if that helps them in coming to the mainstream of population, makes their daily commute easier and helps them to participate in workforce. But in all such cases we see that eligible and worthy men are deprived off and women are given such benefits simply based on their gender and that causes more harm to female gender than anything else.


more at http://parthasadhukhan.wordpress.com/2014/10/18/how-indian-women-are-losing-their-value-every-day/

VFM offers reward for Anita Sarkeesian’s threatened attacker

As many of you may have just read, Andy Bob has contributed a feature article on the most recent “threat” to Anita Sarkeesian, a “pop culture critic” for whom threats have been quite rewarding, financially.

The latest of these threats is related to Sarkeesian’s scheduled presentation at Utah State University. The university allegedly received an email warning them that allowing Anita Sarkeesian to speak there would result in “the deadliest school shooting in American history.”

Of course, and completely predictably, feminist hacks like David Futrelle are pointing to the MHRM as the culprits.

Quelle surprise.

Full disclosure here. We don’t know anyone who really thinks that the current “threat” came from anyone associated with the men’s movement. And there are plenty here looking at the content of the alleged email and being overwhelmed by the scent of feminist rats.

After all, it would not be the first rats we have encountered. The Danielle D’Entremont story is fresh in the minds of a lot of people. Her MHRA “attacker” was never found, and everyone in the case went silent after men’s groups pledged several thousand dollars in reward money for the arrest and conviction of her alleged assailant. No feminist group stepped up to match our pledges.

Anita Sarkeesian has a similar and much more expansive record of intractable and illusive boogeymen threatening her at every turn. No one is ever identified or arrested, and no real crime is ever proven, but the money has kept finding its way into her Paypal account.

Still, on the outside chance that there is any truth to the feminist spin, AVFM is going on record with a very sincere offer. We want the person or persons who sent this threatening email, should they actually exist, to be arrested and punished accordingly. One of our affiliates has already written us pledging $250.00 to a reward fund for this purpose. We are pledging an additional $1,000.00 for a start-up pot of $1,250.00.






LGBTQ activist and guest speaker at Minnesota State University Mankato (MNSU) accused a public forum attendee of exerting white privilege for filming the university event.

On Monday, October 6th, MNSU Mankato held an event to show The New Black, a documentary “that tells the story of how the African-American community is grappling with the LGBTQ rights issue in light of the recent marriage equality movement and the fight over civil rights.”

“The film documents activists, families and clergy on both sides of the campaign to legalize gay marriage and examines homophobia in the black community’s institutional pillar—the black church and reveals the Christian right wing’s strategy of exploiting this phenomenon in order to pursue an anti-gay political agenda,” according to the film’s website.

A panel discussion followed the screening with Dr. Shannon Miller, assistant professor in the Gender and Women’s Studies Department at MNSU, and Andrea Jenkins, an openly transgender Minneapolis activist, writer, poet, educator, and performer.

In video obtained by Campus Reform, Dr. Shannon Miller asks an attendee filming the event why he was doing so. The attendee, who wishes to remain anonymous, informed her he was just filming the event because he found it interesting. Dr. Miller accused him of disrupting the event shortly before the video cuts.








Recently the topic of teenagers, and how awful they are, came up in a Twitter conversation I involved myself in. While I’ve mentioned the topic in the past, I thought I’d write a bit more on them here.

Adolescence is a modern invention/perversion. Until about the 1800s or so, a person of about the age 13 was considered an adult. Since about that time, better nutrition has led to puberty occurring earlier (in the 1800s it occurred at about 15-16, it now occurs at about 12-13), but at the same time independence has also decreased. A teenager is a biological adult. (Mentally, a person continues maturing until sometime in their mid-20s).

The problem of rebellious or destructive teenagers is not a fault of the teenagers, but rather a fault of society. A teenager is an adult being treated as a child. A 14-year-old should be learning independence and self-sufficiency by going out into the world on his own (on an apprenticeship, to college, to his own shack on the family farm, etc.) and should be looking for a wife shortly therefore after. Instead, in our modern world teenagers live under the dominion of their parents as a child.

Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh. (Genesis 2:24 ESV)

Of course teenagers rebel, any adult treated as child will rebel against being infantilized. They lash out because they know at some level that their parents having dominion over them is wrong, because an adult still under their parents is against the natural order. It is not teenagers that are the problem, it is the parents and the society.

Now of course, teenagers are not always going to make the best decisions because they are new at being adults and are learning the basics of adulthood, but in our current order, instead of learning about adulthood at age 15 so they are responsible adults by their 20s, people are now making the same failings in their early-20s and sometimes even their late-20s/early-30s, so your average person is not a responsible adult until their 30s.

Despite this, most modern teenagers would probably break is left on their own. This is, again, not the fault of the teenagers, but most children nowadays are so thoroughly over-protected and over-controlled by their parents and infantilized by the school system that they have never been learning the kinds of independence a healthy adult needs.

Children nowadays are being raised to learn a horrible combination of lack of freedom and lack of discipline. A child learning both will be the most self-actualized and most successful. A child with freedom but no discipline will generally pick up some level of discipline through trial and error, and a child of of discipline but no freedom will usually be able to survive although possibly not thrive, but one with neither will drown.

Ideally, we should start training our children to become adults when they should do so, in their mid-teens.


This is not going to happen on a society wide scale because infantalized adults are useful for the long march.

Adolescence gives the public school system an extra 4-6 years (8-12 extra if he goes to university) to condition a person to the docility and obedience necessary to get a man to be willing to work in a cubicle or factory for 3-4 decades of his life. It conditions a man to accept schooling and academics as being the primary measures of worth, so that he is willing to feed his mind, time, and money into the progressive college system. It prevents early family formation and helps keep the squeeze on the family so the state can continue to interject itself. It conditionsdependence and a slave mentality in a man so he is more likely to see dependence on the state as normal. Adolescence is just another case of how its all related; the long march continues.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 289 other followers