NAGOYA – A group of current and former workers at mover Hikkoshisha Co. filed a lawsuit Friday with the Nagoya District Court against the company, seeking some ¥70 million in compensation for lost wages used to reimburse for damage incurred during transit.
The 12 plaintiffs, calling the company’s practice unjust, demanded that its Nagoya branch and other subsidiaries of the Hikkoshisha group remedy the situation.
The Nagoya-based firm, whose full name is Arisan Mark no Hikkoshisha, advertises itself with a logo showing two ants carrying heavy weights.
According to the petition, Hikkoshisha forced the employers to reimburse customers for damage to furniture and other items incurred during transit or in accidents caused by the company’s truck drivers.
When the compensation cost was too high for employees to cover, the company’s mutual aid association, established to provide financial support to its workers by offering loans, paid the whole sum and later deducted it from their salaries.
The plaintiffs are arguing that damage incurred when the crew performs its duties with caution and without negligence is one of the business risks that a company has to manage, and reimbursing by deducting the sum from workers’ salaries is unreasonable.
The plaintiffs also say Hikkoshisha frequently cuts workers’ pay when the company posts poor business results, and demotes workers without any grounds. This maltreatment inflicts financial and other serious problems in daily life, leading to emotional distress, they say.
Hikkoshisha said it couldn’t comment on the lawsuit.
One of the plaintiffs, Takuya Suzuki, 28, who joined Hikkoshisha after graduating from college and worked there about three years, said it was a common practice that all damage during transit was deducted and reimbursed from workers’ wages.
“We got used to it, and thought it was natural for us to compensate the damage,” Suzuki said.
He recalled an incident in which a cardboard box of kimono got wet because of rain, and he and a co-worker were forced to pay more than ¥100,000 for their cleaning.
Suzuki also said he was ordered to pay compensation twice, around ¥400,000 and ¥250,000, for damage when he was driving a moving truck.
He said he decided to leave the company three years ago when his wife became pregnant because he feared that his debts would increase if he caused any more accidents.
But when he was contacted in February by a current employee of the company who said Hikkoshisha’s working conditions may be illegal, Suzuki began to think the company’s practices were wrong, he said.
He said he sought help from the Precariat Union — a labor union working to protect the rights mainly of young workers and part-timers — and entered negotiations with the company, but Hikkoshisha failed to deal with the problem.
“I’m worried about those who are still working for the company,” Suzuki said. “This company has to change.
“I worked hard for the company, but I was often disappointed to see my pay slip,” he said after filing the lawsuit. “It wasn’t worth working for. There is no way I can accept this.”
TAIPEI, Taiwan — Taiwan’s economy grew at its slowest pace in three years in April-June, data showed yesterday, hammered by a plunge in its key export sector and falling demand in China.
The results underscore the challenge Taipei faces in diversifying from its traditional mainstays of electronics and hardware exports, as it tries to encourage tech innovation from smaller homegrown businesses as a way to boost the economy.
Growth came in at just 0.64 percent year on year in the second quarter, sharply down from 3.37 percent in the previous three months and badly missing a forecast of 3.05 percent, the Directorate General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) said.
Compared with the previous three months, the economy shrank 7.65 percent.
Exports fell 9.81 percent as inventory of electronic products remained high and mainland China expanded supply chains within the mainland.
The soft reading came despite a 2.81-percent rise in private consumption, which beat expectations of a 2.75 percent increase.
DGBAS Expects 2.68% Growth for 2015
Wang Shu-chuan, a specialist with the DGBAS, said that if the agency only took into account the weaker-than-expected second-quarter GDP growth, Taiwan’s economy could be expected to grow 2.68 percent in 2015, lower than an expansion of more than 3 percent forecast by both the government and major think tanks.
But the actual result will depend on how the economy performs in the second half of this year, she said.
In May, the DGBAS cut its forecast for Taiwan’s GDP growth in 2015 to 3.28 percent from a previous estimate of 3.78 percent, citing slower exports and private consumption growth.
The DGBAS will update its forecast on Aug. 14.
Wang said the global economy showed signs of slowing down in the second quarter as demand appeared to weaken, and inventories in the electronics industry remained high, hurting Taiwan’s exports, the backbone of the country’s economy.
Wang said mainland China’s efforts to build its own supply chain in the manufacturing sector also compromised demand for products from Taiwan in the April-June period.
Friday, July 31, 2015
The number of Hong Kong women marrying mainlanders reached a record 7,685 last year, according to census figures.
But the Census and Statistics Department noted that the magnitude of growth is still relatively small.
For the number for such marriages surged 10-fold between 1986, when there were just 675 such unions and 2006 to 6,483.
Meanwhile, the number of unions featuring Hong Kong men and mainland brides fluctuated throughout the period.
A total of 15,776 such unions were registered in 1986. The number rose dramatically to 28,145 in 2006. But it dropped again last year to just 18,645.
The number of married Hongkongers generally increased for both men and women between 1986 and 2014.
There were more married women than men since 2001, but the scales are reversed when foreign domestic helpers are excluded.
The same period also saw a growth in the numbers of men and women of marriageable age aged 15 or above who never married, with increases of 14.3 and 61.7 percent, respectively.
Such marriage patterns follow a continuous drop in ratio of males to females over the past three decades from 1,087 in 1981 to 858 in 2014.
Notably, there are generally more women than men in the 20-39 age group since 1996 as well as in the 40-44 age group since 2001.
The number of divorces soared from 2,062 in 1981 to 22,271 in 2013, and dropped slightly to 20,019 last year.
The median age of Hong Kong women’s first childbirth rose steadily since 1981.
In 2014, the median age was 31.3, as compared with 25.1 in 1981 and 29.4 in 2001.
Recently I wrote (here) about a Muslim rally in Ireland against the Islamic State, that drew a grand total of fifty people. It was led by Shaykh Dr. Umar Al-Qadri, who said this about “radical teachings”: “We as Muslims, we must condemn them. We must not remain silent. The Mosques, the Islamic centres, the organisations, we should not ignore these, because these people are like an infection, like a cancer. If you remain silent you will let them come in the Mosque and they will speak to the youth and spread the cancer of extremism to the Muslim youth.”
However, it turns out that Al-Qadri is not quite as vigilant against this “extremism” as many may have assumed. Here is some important information from Mark Humphrys:
Umar Al-Qadri of the Blanchardstown mosque attacks Israel at a protest in Dublin in Jan 2009.
This video was here but was deleted.
- He has a fanatical hatred of Israel. He calls Hamas “my brothers and sisters”. He says “Hamas loves peace.” But of course reluctantly has to be fanatically violent.
- He says (at 5 min) that he stands with Hamas in not recognising Israel. No two-state solution here.
- He claims Israel rapes Muslim women in front of Muslim men: “If you kill our children, rape our women in front of us, in front of our eyes, how can we remain peaceful people?”
- The crowd chants Islamic war cries during his fanatic speech. An uncovered infidel woman stands by on stage with these religious maniacs as they chant their war cries. This is possibly Freda Hughes.
- Umar Al-Qadri’s mosque was inaugurated by Minister for Justice Brian Lenihan in January 2008. Did Brian Lenihan ask a single question about Islamic extremism at this mosque? Did it ever cross his mind?
- Umar Al-Qadri organises demo against ISIS, July 2015. Great. But how does this square with his support for Hamas?
It is remarkable how many “moderates” prove to be anything but when it comes to Israel.
What did Anita know and when did she know it? OK, it’s not quite to that level. But Ms. Sarkeesian and others on her side of the cultural debate have repeated tried to tie GamerGate to mass shootings and the like. Some have explicitly (and fraudulently) made the connection between GamerGate and Elliot Rodger. Arthur Chu comes to mind, for one. But Anita referenced him as well. Here’s what she had to say:
HE USED THE INTERNET? Are you for real? Well, we should obviously regulate the fuck out of it now and make it a safe space.
Real threats should be taken seriously, yes. I don’t know of anyone who’s saying they should be ignored. But we can’t turn the Internet into some pussified playroom for yuppies. The fundamental characteristics should not be changed, and if they are, the entire project will be worse off. I don’t want the government to fuck shit up more than they already have. I don’t want companies to be able to do that either, which is why I also support net neutrality.
But back to what Anita knew…It looks like there’s a decent chance that she actually knew Elliot Rodger. I will resist the urge to make an off-color joke about how she should have blown him…OK, no I won’t. But the point is, she was tight with his stepmom, took pictures for her wedding, and probably saw Elliot himself often. I can tell you that I never saw the motherfucker. So Anita has a lot more to do with him than I fucking do. I don’t think any other GamerGate people were friends of the family either, although I could be mistaken haha.
more pictures of the lying cunt Anita can be found here
“Don’t be shocked if you expect one thing and find something entirely different,” writes Anas Fouda, editor-in-chief of the Huffington Post’s brand new Arabic-language edition, HuffPost Arabi, in his inaugural editorial.
The warning is apt, for presumably few readers indeed will have expected the liberal American media juggernaut to launch a venture headed by two prominent figures of the Middle East’s religious right.
Fouda, previously an executive producer at Al Jazeera Arabic (AJA), is managing the website in partnership with his old boss, former AJAdirector general Wadah Khanfar. Their profiles may make for interesting perusal for existing Huffington Post readers unfamiliar with the Arabic-language media landscape.
An Egyptian national now living in Turkey, Fouda was arrested in the United Arab Emirates in 2013 on suspicion of affiliation with the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) – an affiliation which he freely admitted had existed since 1988, though he claimed to have held no formal party role since 1995. A browse of his Twitter timeline shows his politics to be fairly bread-and-butter MB; recommending, for instance, articles praising “His Eminence” Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the Holocaust-revisionist cleric who routinely denounces Shiite and Alawite Muslims, to say nothing of Jews. Indeed, Fouda has himself on occasion found less-than-obliging things to say about his Semitic cousins, e.g., tweeting last July that, “Only after the latest Israeli aggression on Gaza did I realize the number of Egyptian Jews has increased greatly since the coup.”
Khanfar, however, is the heavyweight of the pair; the man who made Al Jazeera the titan of Arabic media that it is today. He’s also, according to ex-colleagues, the man who made Al Jazeera the Muslim Brotherhood mouthpiece that it is today. A former Baghdad correspondentcomplained that once Khanfar took over the reins, “the liberals, the secular types, the Arab nationalists [were] getting downsized, and the Islamic position [was] dominating the newsroom.” Former AJAWashington bureau chief Hafez al-Mirazi similarly said that “From the first day of the Wadah Khanfar era, there was a dramatic change, especially because of him selecting assistants who are hard-line Islamists.” Khanfar has defended his Brotherhoodisation of the editorial line as simply a reflection of a new “political reality” in the Arab world – never mind any Arabs who may seek to challenge that reality.
Western Anglophone audiences, too, have been treated to Khanfar’s perspectives in the past, in articles that may well indicate what he has in store for HuffPost. Whether it was his 2011 Guardian column titled, “Those who support democracy must welcome the rise of political Islam,” or his 2012 celebration in the same newspaper of Muslim Brother Muhammad Morsi’s electoral victory in Egypt as “a clear message that the Arab spring was still alive,” the message has been as persistent as it has been one-dimensional. On Twitter, he re-tweetsQaradawi directly.
In her own note introducing HuffPost Arabi, Arianna Huffington told readers to expect “original reporting by independent journalists” covering “problems and crises like gender inequality” and “the devastating rise of […] extremism.”
Khanfar, on the other hand, when asked in 2011 after his resignation from AJA what he planned to do next, replied, “I’m going to continue in the same spirit of al-Jazeera.” It’s too soon to tell which of these two visions – Khanfar’s or Arianna’s – will prevail on the pages of HuffPost Arabi, but it certainly can’t be both of them.
Cameroonian authorities have ordered all mosques and Islamic centres to be shut in northern parts of the country.
The decision was said to be part of a set of measures intended to increase security after several terror attacks in the region, triggered by the country’s war on Boko Haram.
In addition to the closures, young beggars were ordered to vacate the streets as all recent suicide bombers have been children.
According to the OnIslam website and fox news, the governor of the region Midjiyawa Bakari, said the new rules were a response to two incidents in the past week, referring to two suicide attacks by two girls which resulted in killing 31 and wounding tens of people.
Though no group claimed responsibility for the attacks, fingers were pointed as militant group Boko Haram.
Muslims constitute about 20 percent of Cameroon’s total population of 20.5 million.
Most of them live in northern Cameroon and hail from major tribes such as the Fulani and the Peuhl.
Last week, the Cameroonian authorities banned the use of veil among women after two women dressed in the religious garments blew themselves up on Sunday in Fotokol, killing 13 people.
The militant group says it is fighting enemies who have wronged its members through violence, arrests or economic neglect and corruption.
More than 13,000 people are thought to have died since Boko Haram began its insurgency in 2009.
Boko Haram has escalated its six-year-old campaign to impose Islamic law on Nigeria, Africa’s biggest economy and largest oil-producing nation.
The fighting has drawn in neighboring countries including Nigeria, Chad, Niger and Cameroon, as the militants broadened their border targets.
On June 26, Saif Rezgui walked on to a beach in Tunisia and opened fire on German, British, and Irish sunbathers in front of the Imperial Marhaba resort hotel, killing 39 and wounding dozens more. If various world leaders are to be believed, the massacre had nothing to do with Islam. In response to the attack which left thirty British citizens dead, Prime Minister David Cameron said the terrorism “is not in the name of Islam. Islam is a religion of peace.” A day later, Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott assured the world that “what’s being done by Daesh [the Islamic State] has nothing to do with God, it has nothing to do with religion.”
There was one notable exception to the usual nothing-to-do-with-Islam mantra. Immediately after the attack, Tunisia’s prime minister, Habib Essid, ordered the closing of 80 mosques.
Of course, the leader of a 98 percent Muslim country can’t be expected to understand Islam nearly as well as the leaders of Britain and Australia. Nevertheless, Essid’s action provides food for thought. Mosques, after all, do have something to do with Islam. “Some mosques continue to spread their propaganda and their venom to promote terrorism,” Essid reportedly said. “No mosque that does not conform to the law will be tolerated.”
According to a Reuters report, Rezgui was “a dedicated student from a stable family who enjoyed partying and practiced break dancing.” Until, that is, “he appeared to have come into contact with extremist preachers about six months ago.”
Where do you meet extremist preachers? In extremist mosques, of course—the same sort of places attended by the two terrorists who two months previously had killed 21 foreign tourists at the Bardo Museum in Tunis. According to Reuters, “the two Bardo gunmen were also radicalized in their local mosques by hardliners.”
Another indication that the beach massacre might have had something to do with Islam is that Rezgui only targeted foreigners. As he pursued the tourists, he shouted to Tunisians to “get out of the way.” Might that have had something to do with the fact that the Tunisians were likely to be Muslims and the tourists were likely not? One other confirmation of the religious motivation for the attack came from the Islamic State. A spokesman for IS praised the attack as an operation against a “bordello”—a reference to the immodest dress of the beachgoers. Apparently, cartoons of Muhammad are not the only thing that hardline Muslims consider as provocation sufficient to warrant murder.
Not all mosques are centers of extremist radicalization. On the other hand, it’s likely that the average Westerner grossly underestimates the percentage of radical mosques. Fr. Samir Khalil Samir, an Egyptian Jesuit who is also an expert on Islam, writes:
In many Muslim countries … the mosques are monitored by the police on Friday. There is a simple reason for this: many political decisions start from the mosque during the Friday khutba [sermon]. Historians of Islam know that many riots and revolutions were launched from the mosques and that jihad is often proclaimed during the khutba.
Not coincidentally, many of the Arab Spring demonstrations in 2011 were set in motion from mosques following Friday prayers. And again, it’s probably no coincidence that Rezgui scheduled his massacre for a Friday during the holy month of Ramadan.
It’s tempting to think that the mosque-mayhem connection is something that’s peculiar to Arab societies, but four separate studies of American mosques revealed that about eighty percent of them provide extremist literature and occasionally feature extremist preachers. While this doesn’t mean that every American mosque is a hotbed of terrorism, it does suggest cause for concern. For example, two very prominent American mosques which have long been thought to be of the moderate mainstream kind are now known to be connected with numerous terrorists, some of them of the high-profile variety. Major Nidal Hasan, the Fort Hood jihadist, was mentored at the Dar Al-Hijra Mosque in Falls Church, Virginia. So were three of the 9/11 hijackers. And the person who was mentoring them was Anwar Al-Awlaki, who later became one of the chiefs of operations for Al-Qaeda in Yemen. Meanwhile, the Islamic Society of Boston has two mosques (one in Boston and one in Cambridge) which were attended by the Tsarnaev brothers and nearly a dozen other known terrorists, including the founder of Boston’s Islamic society, Abduraham Alamoudi, who is currently serving a twenty-three-year prison term for terror-related activities.
Christians assume that mosques, like churches, are simply places of prayer. Many of them are, but many mosques are also places of recruitment and radicalization—staging areas for jihad. Subsequent to the beach massacre, weapons caches were found in forty Tunisian mosques. As a popular Muslim poem puts it, “The mosques are our barracks, the domes our helmets, the minarets our bayonets, and the faithful our soldiers.”
Not all Muslims think of mosques in this way, but as Prime Minister Essid understands, a not insignificant number do. He is not alone in this assessment. As Fr. Samir notes, Muslim governments have historically kept a close eye on mosque activities. Muslim leaders may give lip service to the notion that violence has nothing to do with Islam, but their actions tell a different story. Western leaders need to start paying attention.
The number of anti-Semitic hate crimes reported to police has soared in parts of the UK, police figures have shown.
A number of the largest forces in the country are recording rising numbers of offences against Jewish people and their property.
In London the total more than doubled in a year, while there were also increases in Greater Manchester, Merseyside, West Midlands and West Yorkshire. The crimes reported included assault, harassment, arson and criminal damage.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3179266/Soaring-number-sickening-attacks-against-British-Jews-Number-anti-Semitic-incidents-doubled-parts-country.html#ixzz3hToDyi85
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
“Women are a degraded and terrorized people. Women are degraded and terrorized by men. … Women’s bodies are possessed by men. … Women are an enslaved population. … Women are an occupied people.”
— Andrea Dworkin, 1977 speech at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, in Letters from a War Zone(1993)
One of the strange things about feminism is how this movement, built upon hateful slander, has acquired the power to silence its critics. In 1977, when a few dozen women turned out to hear Andrea Dworkin speak in Amherst, it was still possible to oppose feminism on an American university campus. Today, dissenting voices are almost never heard in academia, where feminists exercise the kind of controlling power wielded by the mullahs in Tehran or by Kim Jung Un in Pyongyang.
What has happened is that the pursuit of “equality” — enforced by federal authority under Title IX — has made university officials fearful of claims of “discrimination” under the so-called “hostile environment” doctrine. No one in academia dares to challenge feminism directly. Remember that Larry Summers was forced to resign as president of Harvard after he suggested there are “innate differences” between men and women. Feminists stage tumultuous protests whenever a dissident like Christina Hoff Sommers or Wendy McElroy appears on campus.
Silencing opposition is necessary to feminism’s success in reducing educational opportunities for males. Females are already 57 percent of college enrollment and in some fields, such as psychology, women outnumber males more than 3-to-1. As the percentage of males on campus dwindles, feminists in academia become ever more vehement in their denunciations of male students as rapists and harassers. Colleges now “teach women that men are the enemy and men are treated as such on campus,” as Helen Smith explains in her book Men on Strike. “Many men have just decided that they don’t belong in college . . . more and more men drop out of college or never attend.”
Feminist hegemony in academia has fostered an implacable hostility toward males on campus, and perceptive young men recognize feminism as the source of this hatred. The problem is that there are few if any male professors on the faculty of the modern university who are willing to criticize feminist ideology. With no good examples to follow, young men tend to express their opposition to feminism in ways that are crude and inarticulate, transparently motivated by personal resentment. This tendency, in turn, inspires feminists to become even more militant, as when Helen Lewis declared in 2012 that “the comments on any article about feminism justify feminism.” Such circular reasoning — that opposition to feminism proves the need for more feminism — points us toward a future of endless hostility, as feminism becomes more and more anti-male, and men become more and more anti-feminist.
We can only avert such an escalation of hostility by understanding its origins and history, which requires us recognize the actual source of this conflict, namely feminist aggression. Consider, as an example, the role played by the radical provocateur Andrea Dworkin. In her 1993 collectionLetters from a War Zone, Dworkin includes her 1977 speech at Amherst denouncing pornography:
Fascist propaganda celebrating sexual violence against women is sweeping this land. Fascist propaganda celebrating the sexual degradation of women is innundating cities, college campuses, small towns. Pornography is the propaganda of sexual fascism. Pornography is the propaganda of sexual terrorism.
Rather than to describe pornography as immoral and obscene, you see, Dworkin characterized it as expressing male “sexual fascism.” This is an important distinction. A Christian must deplore pornography as sinful, yet Dworkin was a radical atheist who hated Christianity at least as much as she hated pornography. Rather than condeming pornography on moralgrounds, Dworkin made pornography Exhibit A in her political indictment of males. Introducing the text of that 1977 speech (“Pornography: The New Terrorism,” page 197 of Letters from a War Zone), Dworkin tells us that she subsequently “gave this speech on lots of college campuses.” She also describes the immediate effect this speech had the first time she gave it to University of Massachusetts students:
They mobilized on the spot to demonstrate against the pornography being shown on campus: a film advertised in the school newspaper . . . that had been brought on campus by a man who had just been arrested for beating the woman he lived with
Porno films being shown on the campus of a state university? That never happened when I was in college in Alabama back in the 1970s, but then again, Alabama is not Massachusetts. However, there was an interesting denouement to Dworkin’s speech at U-Mass. A few months later, undoubtedly incited by her radicalism, feminists on the staff of the student newspaper began quarreling with males on the staff over editorial policy and, in May 1978, feminist protesters seized control of the newspaper’s offices:
Fifty women took over the offices of the student newspaper of the University of Massachusetts at Amherst at 2 a.m. [May 1], demanding that women’s news receive more coverage in the paper.
The protesters, who were still in the building last night, said they will not leave until their demands are met in a “legally binding document.”
The students are demanding guaranteed space for women’s news, editorial control over women’s stories and the right of women’s staff members to pick women’s news editors.
William Sundstrom, the editor-in-chief, said the paper will probably not change its policies “because news should be integrated, not segregated.” . . .
Sit-in leaders said yesterday they decided to occupy the building when provious negotiations “accomplished nothing.”
“In the past, women’s news staff attempts to provide high quality coverage of women’s issues have been consistently sabotaged by staff members of other departments,” Julie Melrose, women’s editor and a sit-in leader, said yesterday.
She alleged that the staff arbitrarily cuts news stories about women, censors feminist editorials, omits articles submitted by women, runs sexist ads, and harasses female staff members.
Michael Smolens, sports editor and one of the paper’s negotiators, said yesterday the newspaper covers women’s issues fairly, adding the protesters are upset because the news “lacks a feminist bent.”
The only time he remembers that the staff censored a feminist editorial was when the editorial attacked staff members by name, Smolens said.
Whether the claims of censorship and harassment were true is perhaps irrelevant at this late date. The point is that feminists resented the authority of the male editors, either in terms of editorial content or staffing decisions, and insisted that women on the staff should be permitted to exercise control independent of the male editors.
This incident demonstrated the teleological purpose of feminism, to abolish male power, per se. As long as any man occupies any position in which he exercises any authority over any women, feminism’s work is not accomplished. Viewing the world through the distorted lenses of radicalism, the feminist sees herself as oppressed — a member of “an enslaved population . . . an occupied people,” as Dworkin said — and resents any man who possesses superior status, prestige or influence. Feminist ideology portrays males as parasitical usurpers, and thus denies that any man can ever deserve respect for his achievements, because his success is always the result of unfair “male privilege.” Nor can anyauthority exercised by a man ever be recognized as legitimate by feminists, because male power is inherently harmful to women.
What emerges from this resentful worldview is a feminist rhetoric that is deliberately insulting toward males. No man is trustworthy, no man deserves praise and no man possesses any ability that can entitle him to feminist admiration. This is why the “male feminist” is such a pathetic figure, imagining that he can earn respect from women by endorsing an ideology that denies any intrinsic basis for such respect. (Feminism’s first rule for men is “SHUT UP!”) Feminists reserve a particularly venomous hatred for liberal men like Noah Berlatsky, whose “Playboy Feminism”has made him a target of Canadian feminist Meghan Murphy’s ire.
Confronted by the characteric hatefulness of the feminist, a young man is likely to deduce that this angry woman — who seems to despise him merely because he is male — is a lesbian. Certainly this deduction is not unwarranted, when we consider, inter alia, that the leading introductory Women’s Studies textbook is edited by three lesbian professors, and that the communications director of the Feminist Majority Foundation described herself as a “raging lesbian feminist.” To quote the title of a 2010 textbook written by Professor Mimi Marinucci, Feminism Is Queer, and who am I to disagree? Despite all evidence, including Professor Bonnie Zimmerman’s declaration that “historically, lesbianism and feminism have been coterminous if not identical social phenomena,” any man who points this out is met with angry condemnation. You are a misogynist, a bigoted homophobe expressing ignorant stereotypes, if you mention the remarkable prevalence of lesbianism among feminists.
“To the extent that women harbor negative attitudes toward lesbians and lesbianism, we demonstrate identification with men. To the extent that women express negative attitudes toward lesbians in our words and deeds, we strengthen patriarchy.”
— Dee Graham, Loving to Survive: Sexual Terror, Men’s Violence, and Women’s Lives (1994)
Recall that Professor Graham’s theories about “sexual terror” were achief inspiration for the feminist blogger Radical Wind’s rant “PIV is always rape, OK?” The well-informed researcher thumbing through the notes, bibliography and index of Professor Graham’s 1994 book notices that she cites a veritable all-star lineup of Second-Wave lesbian feminists: Charlotte Bunch, Mary Daly, Adrienne Rich, Sarah Lucia Hoagland, Audre Lorde, Sonia Johnson, Pauline Bart, Marilyn Frye and, of course, Andrea Dworkin:
Dworkin, A., 87, 93, 116, 123, 162, 200, 206, 275, 276
That’s an index entry from p. 310 of Professor Graham’s book, which includes citations to Dworkin’s Woman Hating (1974), Right Wing Women (1983) and Intercourse (1987). This is certainly not a coincidence, any more than the 1978 feminist takeover of the U-Mass student newspaper was a coincidence. Andrea Dworkin knew exactly what she was doing when she incited feminist hatred against males,, and on page 27 of Letters from a War Zone,, Dworkin describes what happened after the U-Mass takeover, “The male editors especially aroused anger against the women by calling them lesbians.” Describing this as a “hate campaign these male editors waged,” Dworkin provided the text of a speech she gave at a rally in support of the U-Mass feminists in which she compared the student newspapers male editors to Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbels:
Enemies of women, those who are determined to deny us freedom and dignity, use the word lesbian to provoke a hatred of women who do not conform. . . . This hatred is sustained and expressed by virtually every insitituion. . . The threat is that this hatred will explode into violence. The threat is omnipresent because violence against women is culturally applauded. . . .
It is horrifying, but not surprising, that the males on the [student newspaper] . . . have used the word lesbian in the malicious way I have just discribed. With contempt and ridicule, they have been waging a furtive, ruthless propaganda campaign against the feminist occupiers. They are using the word lesbian to rouse the most virulent woman hating on this campus.. . . They are using the word lesbian to hide the true history of their own woman-hating malice in running that corrupt, pretentious, utterly hypocritical newspaper.
Were they? In the wake of the protests, U-Mass hired Janice Raymond (a lesbian protégé of Mary Daly) as a professor of Women’s Women’s studies, where she remained until her retirement in 2002. In the acknowledgements for her 1986 book A Passion for Friends: Toward a Philosophy of Female Affection, Professor Raymond thanks Andrea Dworkin (“a source of inspiration and strength”) and also thanks another woman whose name may you might recognize: “Julie Melrose dauntlessly read the proofs of this book aloud with me.” Professor Raymond’s personal proofreader, you see, was the same Julie Melrose who as a U-Mass undergraduate led the occupation of the student newspaper. However, don’t speculate why Ms. Melrose would be proofreading a lesbian professor’s lesbian book years later, or you’ll be called a Nazi who wants to “provoke a hatred of women who do not conform.”
So, whatever happened to the male editors of the U-Mass Collegian? In her 1978 speech, Dworkin said these young men “used words to foster ignorance and to encourage bigotry”:
It is shameful to continue to tolerate their flagrant contempt for women, for lesbians; for words, for news, for simple fairness and equity. It is honorable and right to take from them the power they have so abused. I hope that you will strip them of it altogether.
Down with men! Strip them of their power! This is the sum and essence of radical feminism — males can never be trusted with power, because males will always use power to oppress women.
Dworkin’s denunciation, however, failed to persuade university officials to act against the Collegian‘s male editors. William Sundstrom, the editor-in-chief, went on to get his Ph.D. in economics from Stanford and is now a professor at Santa Clara University in California. Meanwhile, theCollegian‘s sports editor — the paper’s negotiator during their standoff with the feminist protest mob — has gone onto an illustrious career in journalism. Michael Smolens has been government and politics editor at the San Diego Union-Tribune since 1992.
Feminists foster hatred against men, and it should not surprise us that men resent this hatred. Nor should we be surprised by the association between feminism and lesbianism, which feminists themselves have done so much to encourage. This is a real phenomenon, as I explain in the final chapter of Sex Trouble:
In 1980, Australian feminist Denise Thompson described how “countless numbers of lesbians” joined the feminist movement because it offered them “the possibility of a cultural community of women whose primary commitment was to other women rather than to men.” Furthermore, Thompson added, the rise of the feminist movement produced a “mass exodus of feminist women from the confining structures of heterosexuality” in such numbers as to raise questions about “the institution of heterosexuality in the consciousness of those feminists who, for whatever reason, chose not to change their sexual orientation.” And why shouldn’t this have been the expected result?
Women “changed their sexual/social orientation from men to women,” Thompson explained, “in response to the feminist political critique of their personal situations of social subordination.” If the personal is political (as feminists say) and if women’s relationships with men are “confining structures” of “social subordination,” why would any feminist be heterosexual?
You can buy Sex Trouble at Amazon and read the whole thing. It is not yet illegal to tell the truth about feminism, nor is it “hate” to say that a lesbian is a lesbian. It is feminists, and not their critics, who are promoting hate by inciting hostility between men and women.
Cathy Young described Andrea Dworkin as “a relentless preacher of hatred toward men.” Dworkin has been dead for more than 10 years, but the hatred she encouraged lives on, and the only weapon with which we can fight feminism is the truth.
Anyway, I recently hired a female 28 year old transfer from our branch in Brazil. Her reputation preceded her and she’s proven to be a great decision on my part thus far.
I didn’t expect her to make as big a “splash” as she has because she’s not that attractive. In fact, I’d give her a 5/10….maybe it pushes her to a 5.5 or a 6 if she were dressed up for a night on the town. She’s a skinny woman (not bony) with shoulder length hair, and braces! Not a looker at all. Not even close.
But that hasn’t stopped every dude here from trying to get at her at some point or another. I’m certain that the reasons range from the fact that she’s “exotic” (she speaks perfect English with a heavy Portuguese accent), to the fact that she’s not overweight and tatted up like most of the women here (young AND old), and she is genuinely pleasant and kind.
What’s more is that she looks everyone in the eye, man or woman, when speaking to them or just saying hello or good morning in passing. And it’s not in a way that tries to exert power or dominance over them. She does it in a way that is welcoming and warm. She always seems to be in a good mood and the men here are drawn to that like cats to warm milk in the winter time.
In a word she’s feminine and that’s what’s got every man and woman here up in a tizzy.
The girls hate her because she’s everything they’re not and the men can’t get enough of her because they’re tired of being stonewalled by fat, blue haired, tattooed, ear-gauged, harpees who don’t even look them in the eye or even engage in casual water cooler conversation.
It’s a damn shame when a relatively unattractive woman draws the ire of females and the praise of males for simply being feminine. There are a few women who work here that look far better than her to be sure but their mannish tendencies and masculine mannerisms make them unattractive.
Any time an HB5 is getting unlimited offers from just about every man here is a testament to the sad state of affairs that is the SMV of the American woman…even the good looking ones.
Feasibility of premium taxis mulled by transport officials
Wednesday, July 29, 2015
There is to be a review into the role of taxis as well as the feasibility of introducing new services such as premium cabs, according to the Transport Advisory Committee chairman.
Larry Kwok Lam-kwong said the government move under the Role and Positioning Review of the Public Transport Strategy Study will begin this year and take at least two years.
It follows a storm of protests in recent days over the use of taxi hailing mobile apps, such as Uber, which use high-end cars like Mercedes-Benz and Tesla.
“A major issue is whether it is feasible and meritorious to introduce new types of taxi services, such as premium taxis, having regard to its implementation over other public transport services,” Kwok said.
Meanwhile, the government has ruled out a taxi trade proposal for a fuel surcharge, saying it may cause confusion. It is also difficult to reach a consensus on a suitable surcharge, he said.
“The imposition of any fuel surcharge will automatically transfer the burden of fuel cost to the passengers. This may cause confusion and give an impression that passengers are subject to a double fare increase,” Kwok said.
Introducing such a surcharge may also lead to a chain reaction in other public transport services such as buses and light buses, Kwok warned.
Separately, the number of electric taxis has fallen despite an ambitious plan to popularize them. The number has dropped from 48 a year ago to 35 in May, according to the Transport Department.
Hong Kong Taxi and Public Light Bus Association chairman Brandon Tong Yeuk-fung said the fall in petrol prices has made electric cars less attractive. The limited number of recharging stations, with some charging drivers for parking, is another problem, he said.
Tong said he agrees with the proposal to diversify the market with premium and limousine services but the question is whether any taxi owner will be willing to take the risk. Cabbies are reluctant to pay higher rents for better cars, he said. AMY NIP
As the 2020 Tokyo Olympics and Paralympics approach, the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism plans to alter flight routes and times to Haneda Airport in order to accommodate more flights to and from the airport.
The ministry is also planning on extending the time planes are allowed to fly through the airspace over Shinagawa, Ota, Edogawa and Koto wards, by four hours in the evening, Sankei Shimbun reported.
Furthermore, the ministry plans to increase the number of annual departures and landings from the current 90,000 to 129,000 by 2020.
However, voices of opposition have begun flooding in from residents living around the airport as the increased number of flights will also mean elevated levels of noise. The ministry hosted a meeting last week in Edogawa Ward to explain the new routes and flight times.
Up until this point, airspace over the city center has been off limits to plane travel, requiring aircraft to approach Haneda over Tokyo Bay and Chiba Prefecture. The new flight routes will go into effect from mid-September.
Most of the extra slots at Haneda are expected to go to foreign airlines, a transport ministry official said.
A total of five new runways are scheduled to be built at both Haneda and Narita to accommodate more flights in the future.
and other contributions made by islam
So many converts to Islam somehow get the crazy idea that Islam mandates warfare against unbelievers, and yet there is not a single program anywhere in the world in any mosque or Islamic school to teach converts to reject this understanding of Islam that the vast majority of Muslims ostensibly rejects.
“Miami federal judge sentences ISIS sympathizer to 10 years,” by Alfonso Chardy, Miami Herald, July 27, 2015 (thanks to Darcy):
ihadis? Non-Muslim Leftists? No way to be sure at this point, but the scream of “F–k Jews” suggests Islamic anti-Semitism more than just opposition to Israel. However, the hatred of Jews that these men harbor almost certainly derives from “Palestinian” jihad propaganda, which is rooted in the jihad imperative to “drive them out from where they drove you out” (Qur’an 2:191) and destroy Israel utterly.
“Toronto Jewish community on alert after threats by hooded men taking photos of synagogue,” by Toby Trompeter, National Post, July 28, 2015 (thanks to Stephen):
TORONTO — The greater Toronto Jewish community is disquieted and on the alert after three hooded men took photos and yelled threats outside a Thornhill synagogue.
York Regional Police received a call from Beth Avraham Yoseph of Toronto (BAYT) on Friday, according to Const. Laura Nicolle. That afternoon, alerts went out via email and social media from synagogues across the GTA.
“This past Wednesday night, three men with concealed faces were observed taking photos of BAYT,’’ read one alert posted to Facebook and viewed by more than 20,000 people. ‘‘When they were approached, they yelled “F— Jews. Watch!”, jumped into their black Volkswagen Golf and drove off. The car’s licence plates were covered. Unfortunately, they were out of range of the BAYT cameras. Please be alert when walking, especially near our shul, and be on the look-out for such vehicles and/or people.”
Janice Savage, a BAYT member for three years, said the synagogue has increased its security.
translated from a letter in JP by a Danish female doctor and politician:
“My family and I were on Lesbos two months ago, and we met many boat refugees. We bought bread and water, which we handed out for two days. Then we found out, however, that the refugees were not impoverished, hungry or thirsty …
While one can only rejoice at Danish tourists’ thoughtfulness when they bring toys, sleeping bags, clothes, etc. to the refugees on Lesbos, these are not things that the refugees can use. They quickly leave via Athens for the Netherlands and Scandinavia. The refugees does not stay longer on Lesbos than one or two days, and they can only carry essentials on their further travel.
My experience is that over 80 percent of the boat people are young men about 20 years old. Many wear Rayban sunglasses and Nike caps (probably counterfeit goods). They are not shabbily dressed and do not need the presented clothes. I felt great empathy with this army of refugees, but after a few days more questions presented themselves. Where will all these men live? How many will integrate?
Why are Saudi Arabia not taking in Syrian refugees, when they have the same culture? Saudi Arabia is 50 times larger than Denmark. Its gross domestic product is one to one and a half times bigger as Denmark.
Saudi Arabia has both space and money enough to receive refugees. When a Syrian chooses to flee to Denmark, it would correspond to my father fleeing during World War II to Sudan instead of fleeing to Sweden.… Refugees should be in their neighborhood.”