Posted on

Sugar, Spice, And Everything Nice: the Female Privilege in Western Society

“Check your privilege”. If you live close to a college campus, or are a poster in online forums that center around political debate (such as Reddit), then this phrase should not be new to you. It has become the rallying cry of special interests typically associated with the mainstream American Left. And yet, ironically, many of those who tend to use this phrase have utterly failed to check their own privilege.

Check-your-Privilege1

Now, let me first preface what I’m sure many will choose to perceive as a misogynist rant with a few acknowledgments: I am an ideological, bleeding-heart liberal who believes in freedom and equality insomuch as they can coexist. When abortion rights recently came under fire in Texas, I stood with Wendy and marched around the Capitol building until my throat was sore and my feet felt like they were going to fall off, in part because, as someone who seeks to avoid parenthood at all costs, access to family planning is as much in my interest as any female’s. I acknowledge that there are religious and social conservative interests (some would go so far as to call them patriarchal interests, but truthfully, there are both men AND women involved) in both the public and private sector, that seek to eliminate abortion, and I have spent a lifetime fighting them on general principle, just as I have fought against racial discrimination, unnecessary wars, and classist economic inequality, not out of self-interest (if my primary concern was self-interest, I would be a Republican), but out of ideological conviction.

But just because these religious fundamentalist and social conservative forces exist, and sometimes manage to obtain and wield economic and political power, does not necessarily mean that American society as a whole is inherently prejudiced against women. Quite the contrary, actually. This feminist mythology of “patriarchy” is in the same vein as tinfoil-hatted crackpottery against “the system”, which assumes the government is some kind of universally bigoted, tyrannical force, rather than the uncoordinated mess of bureaucracies manned by autonomous individuals with radically conflicting agendas it actually is.

Female delusions of patriarchal persecution notwithstanding, in reality, the past fifty years have seen vast improvements in the plight of the Western female to a point where it makes female complaints about systemic injustice harder and harder to take seriously, at least when applied to American society. Darfurs and Saudi Arabias aside, in the first world, women tend to enjoy a certain amount of privilege of which they either conveniently aren’t aware or choose not to acknowledge for the sake of argument. So let’s take a look, shall we?

Education and Employment:

“Over the past half century, women have steadily gained on—and are in some ways surpassing—men in education and employment. From 1970 (seven years after the Equal Pay Act was passed) to 2007, women’s earnings grew by 44 percent, compared with 6 percent for men. In 2008, women still earned just 77 cents to the male dollar—but that figure doesn’t account for the difference in hours worked, or the fact that women tend to choose lower-paying fields like nursing or education. A 2010 study of single, childless urban workers between the ages of 22 and 30 found that the women actually earned 8 percent more than the men. Women are also more likely than men to go to college: in 2010, 55 percent of all college graduates ages 25 to 29 were female.

As of [2010], women held 51.4 percent of all managerial and professional positions, up from 26 percent in 1980. Today women outnumber men not only in college but in graduate school; they earned 60 percent of all bachelor’s and master’s degrees awarded in 2010, and men are now more likely than women to hold only a high-school diploma.

An analysis by Michael Greenstone, an economist at MIT, reveals that, after accounting for inflation, male median wages have fallen by 32 percent since their peak in 1973, once you account for the men who have stopped working altogether. The Great Recession accelerated this imbalance. Nearly three-quarters of the 7.5 million jobs lost in the depths of the recession were lost by men, making 2010 the first time in American history that women made up the majority of the workforce. Men have since then regained a small portion of the positions they’d lost—but they remain in a deep hole, and most of the jobs that are least likely ever to come back are in traditionally male-dominated sectors, like manufacturing and construction.”

Source: http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2011/11/all-the-single-ladies/308654/
(The preceding section is actually a direct quote of a woman, from her article about how liberated women should stop defining themselves in terms of marriage, and embrace a life of youthful promiscuity until a point in midlife, when their age-deteriorated looks make marriage a more practical option for fulfilling their romantic needs)

Spending:
stop_being_poor
One of the reasons for the recent advances American women have made is very simple: A ton of money is spent on women every year! By and large, more money is spent on women than on men. By everyone. Suitors, governments, families, and the private sector. There are more federal programs earmarked specifically for women than there are for men. It costs more to raise a daughter than it does to raise a son. And female health care is more expensive. “Helping women overcome adversity” is also a very popular initiative for expensive government and corporate campaigns and programs with no male counterparts. For one of many examples, when statistical analysis of standardized testing showed that girls were flagging in math and science, and boys were struggling with reading, a special educational program was created and funded by legislation specifically geared to help girls be better at math and science, but no corresponding program was created to help boys be better at reading.

This is all due to overcompensation for obsolete stereotypes. Because girls are stereotypically perceived to be “weaker”, they are given more assistance than boys, who are expected to “be strong” and “tough it out” (with less support from their families and social institutions). Over time, this overcompensation has stacked up to create a significant advantage for women. And most women will act the part just to keep the special treatment coming. When you factor in the money that is spent on women in the course of dating, the old stereotype about women being money pits is not just anecdotally true, but statistically true as well.

And what kind of precedent is set by raising young women in this manner? A terrible one! Privilege spoils, power corrupts, and when you treat someone with kid gloves for their entire life, the effect on their character is not often positive. When you examine the systemic benefits of being raised female, you begin to understand the ridiculous sense of entitlement that many American women have. Because women have always been given special treatment, not only do they begin to expect it, but they have difficulty understanding the perspectives of anyone who HASN’T been given special treatment, in what I like to call the “Let them eat cake” effect. As privilege increases, the capacity to empathize decreases, and this explains why modern women are no longer the nurturing healers they used to be.

Sources:
http://voices.yahoo.com/the-cost-having-kids-why-daughters-cost-more-to-8900929.html?cat=25
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/12/7-facts-about-government-benefits-and-who-gets-them/266428/
http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2013/09/how-to-make-school-better-for-boys/279635/

Inequality Under the Law:
brad_chelsea
Recently, PFC Bradley Manning was sentenced to a very long jail term for treason regarding his dispersal of classified documents to Wikileaks. Upon sentencing, Manning revealed that s/he is actually a transgendered male who prefers to identify as a female. Perhaps it would have been more wise for Manning to reveal his female gender identity BEFORE sentencing, as statistically, women receive shorter jail sentences than men, even when convicted of the same crimes.

Again, it’s that idea that women are weaker, and “can’t take” the punishment, or will somehow suffer more than men for it. This is just one of many ways that women are insulated from the consequences of their own actions by a society that puts them on a pedestal. The thing is, this isn’t the only area of society where this is happening. It’s happening everywhere, but the court system is where it is documented and statistically apparent.

This isn’t the only preferential treatment that the American justice system bestows upon the female gender. Women are also statistically more likely to prevail in court, whether it is a criminal matter, divorce, custody battle, restraining order, or simple financial dispute. These statistics are symptomatic of the fact that women elicit more sympathy than men, something which might be explained by the next section.

Sources: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/11/men-women-prison-sentence-length-gender-gap_n_1874742.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/09/divorce-for-men-_n_3733399.html

Physical Attractiveness:

Women are, by and large, considered by humanity as a whole to be more attractive than men. While men tend to find only women attractive (besides the 5% homosexual statistical anomaly), women tend to find both men and women attractive. This means that women simply have more cross-gender mass appeal than men! Inherently, women are more physically attractive and hence have a greater social influence. This is a fact known by advertisers, which is why advertisements more frequently feature female models and spokespeople than males. Females are more attractive and more inherently persuasive than men. Think of it this way: would you be quicker to crush, a cockroach or a kitten? Obviously, the kitten is “cuter”, which is why they are kept as pets, as opposed to uglier animals, which are considered vermin and exterminated. Women complain about professional limitations, but really, given an equal skillset, who do you think is more likely to get hired? An attractive young woman or an ugly old man? Who would you rather be in the cubicle next to you?

How many attractive men do you know who have modelling headshots on their instagram? How many male go-go dancers are there? How about male strippers or prostitutes? Women simply have an easier time taking advantage of their looks, in some cases even making a living off of them. Most men simply do not have that option, no matter how handsome they may be. Western society simply places more value on female beauty than male handsomeness.

No wonder why women have more sex than men, and with more partners! That seems like a nice little perk to being female, doesn’t it? Not only do they have more sex, but it takes a lot less effort for them to get it.  A woman will be extended social opportunities just for being inherently attractive, even if she has no other merit.  Just look at this terrible online dating profile that was created as a joke, and yet still received over 150 messages in less than 24 hours!  Most men would be happy to get 150 messages in a year.  And of those 150, many are likely to be well-connected, rich, or able to offer the woman some kind opportunity, even legitimate job opportunities, which are only available to a man who works hard and has capability.

And also remember that female social privilege is independent of how attractive they are, or aren’t!

Sources:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1093011/Women-far-promiscuous-men-says-shock-new-study.html
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-scientific-fundamentalist/201101/women-are-more-beautiful-men
http://www.alternet.org/sex-amp-relationships/im-very-fat-and-i-still-get-laid-all-time-shocked
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/25/magazine/25desire-t.html?pagewanted=all&_r=4&

Reproductive Rights:
college_liberal

Obviously the right to choose whether to carry to term or terminate a pregnancy is something that women have been fighting to preserve for some time. But shouldn’t an individual (male or female) be held responsible for the consequences of their own choices? And yet even as women have fought for their reproductive rights, they have also stuck men with the bill. Not only that, but since the final say in the decision to reproduce is the legal power of the female, then don’t females technically bear responsibility for overpopulation? The biological imperative to reproduce is something hormonally felt by women and not men, and marriage, often painted as an evil, patriarchal institution by free-wheeling women in their twenties, is just as often considered a means to get men to fund the fulfilment of their maternal instinct by women in their 30’s. In other words, why would a woman settle down unless there was some benefit to be derived from it, IE: financial security and a good father for her offspring?

Abuse and Infidelity Perpetrated by Females:

As women have come up in Western society, so has female abuse and infidelity. It was once thought that men had a fear of commitment, but as the balance of social power has shifted towards women, we now see that fear of commitment is not a function of gender, but rather one of social power. The more social options one has, the less willing they are to commit, male or female.

The problem with female infidelity is mainly that there is no sympathy for its victims. In fact, men who are cheated on are more likely to get blame than sympathy. If a woman cheats on a man, this calls into question his virility and adequacy. If a man cheats on a woman, he is simply just another sexist pig.

Possibly the most disturbing is the trend of women perpetrating violence against men, reports of which are not often taken seriously. Legally, a man is on very precarious ground even if attempting to defend himself from such an attack. And there certainly is no safety net for battered males or single fathers, no community outreach shelters or support groups. Perhaps this, among other things, is the reason why men are statistically four times more likely to commit suicide than women.

Sources: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2353641/Husbands-watch-Number-cheating-wives-rises-40-women-close-infidelity-gap-unfaithful-men.html
http://psychcentral.com/news/2013/06/11/mens-suicide-rate-is-3-times-that-of-women/55897.html

Social Conventions and Gender Roles:

Existing social conventions flat-out give women a ridiculous social advantage, and beautiful women tend to put the “socio” in “socio-economic inequality”. Modern feminism has often sought to abolish female gender roles, even while holding men to theirs. Most women would consider the idea that cooking and cleaning are female duties to be horribly offensive to their feminist sensibilities. Indeed, it seems that any attempt made by men to define what a woman should be is vehemently resisted by women. And yet these same women have no problem defining male roles and what men should be.

Probably one of the male gender roles most abhorred by most men is that of initiating romance, mostly because feminists have drilled into us a kind of guilt and learned helplessness about it. If you hit on a girl and she’s into it, great. But woe be the man who makes an advance on a woman who isn’t feeling it. Most women have not learned the art of graceful rejection, and thus will heap a man with shame just for trying. Over time, a man with bad enough luck will simply quit trying, relegating himself to loneliness and the negation of his sexual needs. Often, men are chastised by women simply for making an attempt at romance (or going about it the “wrong way” according to women), but a man who keeps to himself will find he is settling for nothing! After all, how often do you hear of women asking men to dinner in contrived attempts to get in our pants?

What women tend to do, is passive-aggressively send signals to men in order to entice them, instead of pursuing men directly. This is because women don’t want the risk or responsibility of initiating romance, so when it turns sour, they can always say “this whole thing was your doing”. And this convention of bait and reel, enticing men to pursue, is quite deliberate on the part of females. It’s how they get men to spend time, money, and energy on them, in a kind of romantic ju-jitsu. Although women like to paint romance as the man being in control, this is only superficially true. The entire point of traditional romance is to make men subservient to women: asking them out, buying them candy and flowers, getting down on one knee to propose… The whole point is to strip men of their dignity and exploit them. The male role in courtship is the romantic equivalent of a fraternity hazing ritual, complete with paying ridiculous dues.

Think about it this way: If you were an alien from another planet with no knowledge of human social conventions, and you saw a man on bent knee, begging a woman for permission to spend money on her, who would you think was the dominant gender? What about the fact that men fight and die in resource wars while women sit pretty at home leading much easier lives? Even though men have a more robust physical system than women, they live shorter lives on average because they put more stress on their bodies for the benefit of their communities and are more likely to meet violent, unnatural ends.

This is all because of the male gender role. We are expected to “be tough” and endure hardships that are deemed “too much” for poor, defenseless women. And this isn’t just regarding physical toughness, but emotional toughness as well. Basically, men are encouraged to be dominant, aggressive, and emotionally insensitive, because it’s really the only way to fulfill our basic needs. Women are terrible at supporting sensitive males, mostly because they expect men to be slaves to female emotions, not exploring their own. It’s not quite that women are sociopaths, who have no emotions, but they assign their own emotions more importance than men’s.

What happens when one of your male friends complains of being single on Facebook? At best, they are ignored, and at worst they are called “whiny”, “needy”, etc, in attempts by society to manipulate their egos and negate their emotional needs. Women who complain of loneliness on the internet, on the other hand, are inundated with invitations to dinner. Over time, this social advantage piles up to make women the social hubs they can sometimes be, and men just spokes on the wheel. It has gotten to a point where men simply aren’t allowed to have feelings, and I sincerely doubt that most women could handle the male plight of applying for love and being rejected, as opposed to women, who enjoy the much better position of having their pick of a pool of applicants.

Trying to explain the plight of a single man to a woman is like trying to explain the plight of a person dying of thirst to a person who is drowning. Women complain of being inundated with unwanted sexual advances, without even stopping to consider what it would be like to not have any social opportunities except for the ones you create for yourself. They can’t imagine what it is like to not be invited anywhere, not be given free admission or drinks, because then you would be just another sausage at the sausage fest. Trust me, having to turn down a few people you don’t find attractive is worth the inconvenience, considering your alternative is to play the other position, face a lot of rejection, and yet still be expected to either keep making advances or die alone. And as long as men are footing the bill for any attempt at romance, promiscuity will always be in the female interest.

male_privilege

Sources:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=why-is-life-expectancy-lo
http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Entertainment/story?id=1526982&singlePage=true

Virgin Privilege

A woman’s virginity is highly prized and sought after.  This creates a privilege in the form of many unsuccessful attempts to woo a virgin, usually at the expense of men.  Conversely, there is no male virgin privilege, as a man’s virginity is not valued.  This leads to disrespect of a man’s honor.  If a man were to have sex with a woman and then disappear, this would generally be considered “taking advantage” or “disrespecting her honor”.  But if a woman does the same to a man, not only would he not be taken seriously if he complained, but he is actually supposed to enjoy it!  This is a disgusting double-standard, which is especially hypocritical insomuch as men who have “too much baggage” or a romantic history with too many partners can be castigated and ostracized by the same female community that repeatedly, purposefully jilted them.

Rose-colored Lens of Femininity

Many women I have met tend to have kind of a naive outlook on life. They think that the world is a better place than it actually is, that people are nicer than they actually are. This is because their beauty, desirability, and privilege have colored their perception of reality and the way they are treated. Because social convention requires that women be wooed, women often tend to only be exposed to the best sides of people. Whereas the poor, the ugly, the underprivileged, and the male are exposed to a totally different side of people. Because no one is trying to win them over and they might as well be invisible. Or worse yet, they might be a target of exploitation because no one respects them.

Contrary to popular female belief, there is no brotherhood among men, and men are probably even more prone to disrespect eachother than they are to disrespect women, whose favor they are expected to curry in order to get romance. So this difference in perspective can often cause women to have unrealistic opinions about the nature of society and people. When they meet a realist who sees world for what it truly is, they tend to think of this person as “negative” or “judgmental”. But in reality, their privilege has simply disconnected them from reality.

Demonizing Men

In addition to being charged with “toughness”, men are also perceived to be less moral than women. It can sometimes be hard for people to believe that a woman lied, stole, was violent, or behaved unethically. But the truth is, women have statistically demonstrated a growing propensity for violence, dishonesty, and promiscuity. And yet these are things more commonly attributed to men than women. The stereotypical man is perceived to be this violent, aggressive sex fiend, and indeed, those men who don’t fit that stereotype often have their virility questioned by the female community.

So in any dispute between a man and a woman, more often the woman’s word is valued more highly, which is probably why women do better in court. As I mentioned before, this is a general social trend which is exemplified in particular in the legal system. Judges and juries are humans and make the same cognitive errors in judgment that all humans do. What’s sad is that mistreatment of young men is rationalized by the sexist crimes of their grandfathers. It’s passive-aggressive transference when women mad at Rick Perry take it out on some jaded divorcee just because he’s angry he got cheated on by a generation of women run wild. Male-bashing and blaming men for female problems are becoming more common, as are false allegations of rape!  And speaking of rape, thanks to the Prison-Industrial Complex, America is the only country in the world where more men are raped every year than women!  So you have more women graduating from college, more women becoming lawyers and judges, and then, they put men in a situation where they will be anally raped.  Justice is served!

http://freedominfonet.net/five-stunning-facts-americas-prison-system-havent-heard/

http://books.google.com/books/about/When_She_Was_Bad.html?id=zRYqAAAAYAAJ

Conclusion: The Growing Divide between Feminism and Liberalism:

Basically, we are coming to a point in time in which the feminist special interest is beginning to come into conflict with the basic tenets of liberalism, which are: equality, compassion, open-mindedness, social inclusion, sharing, and LOVE! Yes, that’s right, even Jesus, one of the very first liberals ever, was a huge proponent of the crazy ideas that everyone needs and deserves love, that lack of love is the source of all humanity’s problems, and love cures all. But we are facing a generation of females who, while sexually available (for a price), are incapable of love.

This is why feminists are often called “feminazis”. Because when feminism devolves into petty female chauvinism, feminists aren’t liberal anymore. They have adopted a self-serving philosophy, are acting purely in self-interest and have abandoned liberal ideology, becoming conservative feminists a la Ayn Rand. These women have no interest in equality, but rather, domination. If it weren’t for the Democrats’ sympathies to their cause, they would all be lassiez-faire capitalists. Female chauvinists have simply become too selfish to rightfully be considered liberals. And given that most masculist complaints of modern women bear a lot of resemblance to feminist complaints of men fifty years ago, it is safe to say that feminists have become the very monsters they originally set out to fight.

female_chauvinism

These are complaints about women’s social and increasingly systemic advantages that most men would agree to, but few men would want to sign their name to. That’s because they don’t want to be ostracized by women as a ‘misogynist’, which has become a catch-all label for anyone that opposes the will of women, ever. But that’s OK, because I didn’t write this blog to become popular. I wrote it as a canned argument against the next trustifarian hippie-crit girl who wags her finger at my working class liberal male ass, urging me to “Check my privilege”.

Advertisements

About nonya beeznas

A little light in the darkness.

31 responses to “Sugar, Spice, And Everything Nice: the Female Privilege in Western Society

  1. Pingback: Dead Center: why I abandoned non-ideological politics | The Truth

  2. Pingback: The Rise of the Psychopath in Modern Society | The Truth

  3. TooCoolToFool ⋅

    Female sociopathy, BPD, narcissism, depression, drug use, alcoholism and bulling have been on the rise for decades. Marriage rates and birth rates have been on the decline for decades as well. Japanese, Korean and white Americans will go extinct if the trends of the past forty years hold. It seems that male privilege (the patriarchy) is necessary for a society to rise and that female privilege is necessary for a society to fall. Historically speaking, the rise of female privilege marks the latter stages of a society (the collapse stage).

    • Female privilege is disguised oppression.

      • jtourdet

        I agree. As a man, I was raised pretty negligently, but being left to fend for myself forced me to develop computer skills, mechanical skills, etc… The women in my community were better taken care of, but preferential treatment seems to have come to them at a cost of their abilities, and the saddest thing is that most of them don’t realize the extent of that preferential treatment only goes as far as their looks, which won’t last forever. So at a certain point in their lives, no one is interested in taking care of them any more, they aren’t super capable of taking care of themselves, and they have gained the wisdom to realize that they were being exploited for most of their youth. Self-destruction-enabling sycophantism in the name of ‘chivalry’ is like candy: it tastes good in the moment but has no nutritional value and is ultimately unhealthy for women.

        I myself prefer a strong, independent woman, and encourage females to better and invest in themselves by seeking higher education, career goals, and financial independence.

  4. Pingback: Hippie-Crits: The death of profundity and the proliferation of superficiality in modern counter-culture | The Truth

  5. ” This is all due to overcompensation for obsolete stereotypes. Because girls are stereotypically perceived to be “weaker”, they are given more assistance than boys, who are expected to “be strong” and “tough it out” ”
    —– Exactly, the privilege is born out of oppression. I didn’t read it as throroughly as I did the Hippie article, so I have to read it again, but I woldn’t consider this point of view misogynist at all, if anything I would consider it feminist. Feminist just means gender equality, and you’re illustrating a point of inequality between genders.

    Thing is, the name feminism is misleading, it’s not just about women, it’s about men too.

  6. Pingback: ‘Hopeless Romantic?’ False. You’re a rapist. | Justin's Terrible Thoughts

  7. NOTICE OF DEFAMATION ⋅

    As you know, you replied to a slanderous post claiming that Vivian Mavrou was responsible for improper conduct with minor students. THAT ALLEGATION IS COMPLETELY FALSE. To make it perfectly clear, Vivian Mavrou nor Gordana Stefulic sexually harassed their students at the TDSB.

    Nevertheless, you and your blog continued to make these false claims about Mavrou and Stefulic.

    I contend that your insured is liable for defamation. Your blog post was a false statement of fact that you negligently or even intentionally published on the internet.

    Another page on your own blog states that his blog is the leading and most well-read blog among misogynists.

    It is fair to say that a substantial percentage of anti-feminists and dangerous sex offenders read his blog. Your posts and comments have definitely held the teachers up to scorn, hatred, ridicule, disgrace, and contempt in the minds of the readers of your blog

    If Vivian Mavrou and Stefulic sues you in trial, they will win.

    Female teachers will not stand by and allow this misconduct to continue.In defense of Vivian Mavrou and Gordana Stefulic we hereby that demand you:

    1) Retract the blog post about the TDSB and remove all comments
    2) Arrange a list of the I.P. addresses, email addresses, login information and GPS locations of all your users of the blog
    3) Refrain from notifying your users of the release of their metadata stored on your blog
    4) A record of internet users from 1995 to 2014. You will be required by the Supreme Court of Canada to store logs for an extended
    period of fifty (50) years.

    5) A draft agreement which gives us your consent to browse through your bank accounts, computer hard drives and bank statements for any signs
    of evidence and criminal activity.

    6) A written and public apology to Vivian Mavrou and Gordana Stefulic for your slanderous posts and comments.

    Failure to delete the offensive posts will result in legal and civil proceedings against your organization.

    In defense of Vivian Mavrou and Gordana Stefulic.

    • I only approved of this comment to provide an example of how batshit insane and hysterical lawyers are. I never once mentioned the people in question, nor do I know of them or their case. Apparently someone, who could be you for all I know, left a comment on my page that mentioned your client. I don’t censor my comments, even when they attack me. I live in America, am a staunch defender of free speech, and have zero fear of extradition to a foreign country’s justice system over something so petty. You Canadian fucktards can go fuck yourselves. Take it up with WordPress and the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

      That you would expect me to give on a silver platter to some scum-sucking lawyer the right to censor me, spy on me and my readers, and raid my bank accounts is completely ridiculous. Have you lost your mind you fucking idiot? Making petty demands and threats like that only reveals how weak your position is. I am not guilty of any crime or civilly actionable offense in this case, and do not negotiate with the stupid, ignorant, or insane.

      Furthermore, I am not a misogynist and resent the accusation. I should counter-sue YOU for defamation. Your attempt to mischaracterize me and my readers as something we are not itself qualifies as libel.

      People libel eachother on the internet all the time. Deal with it, pansies. And if your client was sued or has been accused of a crime, pretty sure that’s public record anyways. The original comment looked to me like the affidavit from a filed lawsuit or criminal case. These records are public. Stop trying to censor and suppress public information, you totalitarian fascist. People like you make me sick to my stomach. Fucking lawyers. Drains on society.

    • The Truth is hosted in and regulated only by U.S. law and the laws of the state of California. Given this fact, and pursuant to Section 230(c) of the Communications Decency Act, we will not remove allegedly defamatory material. The only exception to this rule is if the material has been found to be defamatory by a court, as evidenced by a court order. In any case in which a court order indicates material is defamatory, libellous, or slanderous in nature; we will disable access to the material. Similarly, in any case in which a US Court has placed an injunction against specified content or material; we will comply and remove or disable access to the material in question.

      The Securing the Protection of our Enduring and Established Constitutional Heritage Act (SPEECH Act) provides that any foreign court judgement for defamation may not be enforced in the United States or in any State, unless the claim would also have constituted defamation under applicable U.S. law, including both the law of the state in which it is sought to be enforced, and under the US Constitution’s 1st Amendment principles. If a suit would not be cognizable in the United States, the judgement cannot be enforced in the United States. Please be aware that if a suit to enforce is brought in the United States and fails, the defendant is entitled to attorneys fees.

    • I really love this guy’s logic of how the blog’s author is running a terrorist hate network against women on the internet simply for expressing an opinion and allowing anyone to comment about it. Fucking ridiculous. The sad thing is, this isn’t the first time innocent men have been sued by suppressionists and censors over mere words published in writing:

      http://www.search.txcourts.gov/SearchMedia.aspx?MediaVersionID=14e61c78-8f2b-4d7c-8ca8-cea84f46104a&coa=cossup&DT=BRIEFS&MediaID=159ed1d8-1253-4827-a0b3-ec78bc6fd788

    • Silent Observer ⋅

      Have you heard of the U.S. Constitution and sovereignty? You lawyers only file libel tourism lawsuits like the copyright trolls.

      I’m quite amazed that here in the States, we have more freedom of speech than your Canadian autocratic requests of forcing people to hand over everything about its users.

      How many more people are you going to sue in California with the help of the copyright troll judge? Americans should file counter lawsuits against your autocratic tirades.

      Canadian feminists are wacko and I’m not afraid to say that because here in USA we have FREE SPEECH not some monarchy queen owning everything in Canada.

  8. Silent Observer ⋅

    Geez those Canuck femicommies are invading American soil partner?

    I did a lookup on the teachers in question; a few lawsuits were filed in California and they succeeded for some reason bypassing SPEECH act.

    The hysteric commenter is probably looking for evidence in their recent court filing:
    In Re Application of Ontario Principals’ Council, Gordana Stefulic, Vivian Mavrou, Varla Abrams
    Filed: June 18, 2014 as 5:2014mc80186
    Movant: Varla Abrams , Vivian Mavrou , Gordana Stefulic and others
    Court: Ninth Circuit > California > California Northern District Court
    Type: Other Statutes > Other Statutory Actions

    Other lawsuits they made in California were:
    Excerpt: “Declaration of Vivian Mavrou, ECF No. … with the account that created the allegedly defamatory blog and posting were attached to an anonymous proxy service”

    On lawsuit Ontario Principals Council vs. Privacy Tools they did tried to enforce their totalitarian fists on the defendant:

    “Applicants further request the court to issue an order prohibiting Hall and Privacy Tools from notifying the A1 Anonymous Proxy website users involved that Applicants are seeking their information via subpoena.
    Applicants contend that there is a substantial danger that these users, if notified of the subpoenas, would destroy critical evidence located on their personal hard drives
    and computers before Applicants would be able to obtain a court order prohibiting destruction ofevidence from an appropriate jurisdiction.”

    America strives to uphold freedom from unlawful search unlike the Canucks:
    “Although the court appreciates Applicants’ concern,
    Applicants provide no discussion or analysis
    of applicable statutes or case law in support of such
    a request.
    Indeed, the users involved may have due process and other
    legal rights to contest the subpoenas on
    certain grounds, and Hall and/or Privacy Tools may well have
    legal obligations to notify their subscribers or customers of such subpoenas.
    In short, Applicants have not made a sufficient showing of entitlement to such relief. [ READ MORE FROM Case 2:13-mc-00120-LKK-KJN Document 4 Filed 12/23/13]

    The femicommies themselves are willing participants to the NSA, PRISM and spying because they “feel” offended that a group of students or teachers suspect or accuse them of something which doesn’t fit the victim status of overpaid female public sector workers.

    * Dont hand over my ip-address or email to these autocrats. I merely discussed the court rulings which I seem are unconstitutional and against sovereignty.

    • I think Pink Floyd said it best:

    • CEASE AND DESIST NOTICE ⋅

      TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN

      Dear Silent Observer,

      As you know, you and other commentators replied to a slanderous post claiming that Toronto District School Board teacher Vivian Mavrou was responsible for improper conduct with minor students. THAT ALLEGATION IS COMPLETELY FALSE. To make it perfectly clear, Vivian Mavrou nor Gordana Stefulic sexually harassed their students at the TDSB.

      Nevertheless, you and your blog continued to make these false claims about Mavrou and Stefulic.

      I contend that your insured is liable for defamation. Your blog post was a false statement of fact that you negligently or even intentionally published on the internet.

      If Vivian Mavrou and Stefulic sues you in trial, they will win. Your rights under the Constitution are null and void due to the seriousness of misogyny.

      Female teachers will not stand by and allow this misconduct to continue.In defense of Vivian Mavrou and Gordana Stefulic we hereby that demand you:

      1) Retract the blog post about the TDSB and remove all comments
      2) Arrange a list of the I.P. addresses, email addresses, login information and GPS locations of all your users of the blog
      3) Refrain from notifying your users of the release of their metadata stored on your blog
      4) A record of internet users from 1995 to 2014. You will be required by the Supreme Court of Canada to store logs for an extended
      period of fifty (50) years.

      5) A draft agreement which gives us your consent to browse through your bank accounts, computer hard drives and bank statements for any signs
      of evidence and criminal activity.

      6) A written and public apology to Vivian Mavrou and Gordana Stefulic for your slanderous posts and comments.

      7) Permission for the Toronto police to investigate your business transactions. This is to prevent money laundering and financing of hate crimes.

      Failure to delete the offensive posts will result in legal and civil proceedings against your organization.

      In defense of Vivian Mavrou and Gordana Stefulic.

  9. Chin ⋅

    wow white female privilege in the comments section

  10. Michael ⋅

    Misogynists tend to spread false rumours and false news about female teachers, and
    the female employees of the Toronto District School Board are bullied by anonymous posters.

    The social media team at the Toronto District School Board suspects that your blog and comments may be liable for defamation charges.

    Moving forward, Bill C-13 now explicitly refers to the protections from civil and criminal liability when a person chooses to provide voluntary assistance to the police.
    If you fail to co-operate with preventing the misogynist libel, you may be liable for civil and criminal damages.

    You are hereby notified that your website is under watch by the social media team in order to prevent libel and slander of three
    female administrators Vivian Mavrou, Gordana Stefulic and Varla Abrams.

    If you can kindly email the Toronto District School Board customer inquires the following:

    1) I.P. addresses and email addresses of all users of your blog;
    2) Your permission for a police warrant to search your internet history
    3) The geo-location of all your users and fans of your blog;
    4) Any other form of identification of users when they signed up on your blog
    5) Your email list
    6) Data of internet traffic from 1997 to 2015

    By agreeing to the terms, you authorize law enforcement in your jurisdiction to search through your bank transactions in order
    to curb the financing of hate crimes.

    We expect you abide by the terms. If you have any questions, feel free to contact the Ontario College of Teachers.

    • A. Of the three people in question: YOU mentioned two of them that weren’t even mentioned before. If you really cared about the anonymity of the accused, why would you publicly mention their names if they hadn’t been mentioned here before?

      B. FREE SPEECH IS NOT A HATE CRIME. That’s the most ridiculous and hysterical bullshit I’ve ever heard, and I simply refuse to placate such an extreme point of view. Perhaps WordPress will see it differently, but if you are talking to me, I’m guessing they’ve already told you to go fuck yourselves. If you had any right of way whatsoever, you would not be pathetically posting comments on a blog. You would be serving me or WordPress or both with papers.

      C. I live in a state where the loser pays for the legal fees in civil litigation. This is to prevent frivolous lawsuits, like yours would be, if you were stupid enough to file it. No lawyer in the world would file a suit against me in my jurisdiction in a case like this, unless he had made a deal with the judge ahead of time, and I don’t think you or your counsel has that kind of pull down here. I’m calling your bluff.

      D. This blog is public and no one cares who reads it. Furthermore, this account is totally anonymous, and we are members of the Electronic Frontier Foundation: https://www.eff.org/ So you will be facing their lawyers, pull, and capital.

      E. I am not subject to the jurisdiction of Bill C-13. As you reside in a foreign country relative to mine, this is a diplomatic issue. And if you think I would give your commie pinko government everything you have demanded, you are either stupid, crazy, or both. As stated before, I do not negotiate with such people.

      Now, if you convince WordPress to remove the comments, fine. They have that power and can use it at their discretion. If you somehow get a court order and get an American court to abide by it, fine. I would not defy them. But all these threats and posturing in my comments will get you exactly NOWHERE. The only thing you have accomplished is making me laugh.

      • Finally, let me state that I am sick and tired of people calling free speech “bullying”. Bullying is when people beat you up and steal your money. Which is exactly what you are trying to use the force of the State to do to me. YOU ARE THE BULLIES. All I do is post my opinion on the internet and allow anyone to comment on it. I’m not putting a gun in your back, I’m not threatening you with force of any kind whatsoever. YOU are threatening to use the state to rob me.

  11. The social media team of the Toronto District School Board and (the legal representatives) have been instructed to address the damage caused to the reputation of the Toronto District School Boards administrators, GORDY STEFULIC, VIVIAN MAVROU and VARLA ABRAMS as a result of the erroneous information you have posted to this web site.

    This is your second notice that you and/or your fans have posted offensive, defamatory and harmful information to this web site.

    The Toronto District School Board has determined that this information is FALSE as attributed to GORDY STEFULIC, VIVIAN MAVROU and VARLA ABRAMS.

    The Toronto District School Board is requesting that you delete this offending and inaccurate information immediately,and to prevent misogyny by releasing the I.P addresses, Names, Mail and personal information of all your fans to the TDSB for legal purposes.

    By agreeing to your terms, you will not notify your subscribers of the search of their internet activities, and you will consent for a police search on your premises and the premises of the suspects.

    Furthermore, the TDSB will need to scan through the online bank transactions of all your users to figure out the misogynist libel posters.

    It is imperative that you remove this information as the earliest opportunity as it has been reproduced and re-posted on other websites. The offending and inaccurate content is of the most serious concern to the Toronto District School Board and to Stefulic, Mavrou and Abrams and is negatively impacting on the school community and the administrators ability to carry out their statutory duties.

    Govern yourself accordingly.

    Toronto District School Board
    5050 Yonge Street
    Main Number: 397-3000. After Hours Emergency: 416-395-4620. Report Defamation: 24 hour Call Centre: 416-395-4620. Chair 416-397-3100

    • After careful deliberation about what to do about this, including considering the rights of the accused, I have decided to delete the offending comments. However, I intend to leave YOUR comments, which mention the accused moreso than any of my commentors have, and I think are a good example of corrupted, exploitative, and oppressive lawyers and their frivolous court actions, ridiculous demands, and hysterical threats. The only difference between lawyers and extortionists is the auspice of government authority.

      To put some personal background on this, I was accused of crimes which I did not commit, and those records are still available were you to Google my legal name. There are web sites in America which blackmail people by publishing public court records and then demanding payment to take them down, and I have been the victim of these websites. I do not believe it is your legal right to force me to remove comments from my blog I could not have possibly made due to the fact that I was incarcerated at the time, however, as a Christian, I feel obligated by my creed to do you better than I have been done, even though I’m quite sure I will recieve zero gratitude from your cold, impersonal bureaucracy.

      Please find your way off of my website and back to your own lives, as your patronage of my work is neither requested nor desired. I think it’s disgusting how the force of the State is used to manage information and thus control the population, and your comments, which I intend to preserve as evidence, perfectly exemplify this.

  12. FINAL LEGAL NOTICE ⋅

    Dear webhosts,

    This CEASE AND DESIST ORDER is to inform you that your persistent actions against Toronto District School Board administrators Gordana Stefulic, Vivian Mavrou and Varla Abrams including but not limited to slander, cyberbullying and misogyny have become unbearable. You are ORDERED TO STOP such activities immediately as they are being done in violation of the laws in your jurisdiction.

    Gordana Stefulic, Vivian Mavrou and Varla Abrams have the right to remain free from these activities as they constitute harassment, libel and cyberbullying and the relevant teachers organizations will pursue any legal remedies available to them against you if these activities continue. These remedies include but are not limited to: contacting your ISP to monitor your internet activity, contacting law enforcement to obtain criminal sanctions against you, and suing you civilly for damages that they have incurred as a result of your actions.

    Again, you must IMMEDIATELY STOP the with the online harassment of Stefulic, Mavrou and Abrams and send to the Toronto District School Board counsel, written confirmation that you will stop such activities. You risk incurring some very severe legal consequences if you fail to comply with this demand.

    This email acts as your final warning to discontinue this unwanted conduct before the Toronto District School Board pursues legal action against you. This order acts as ONE FINAL CHANCE for you to cease your illegal activities before the victims exercise their legal rights.

    To ensure compliance with this letter, you must send an email to the TDSB about your agreement to hand over your internet traffic data and I.P addresses of your users. Failure to do so will act as evidence of your infringement upon the victims legal rights, and the union organizations representing the TDSB will immediately seek legal avenues to remedy the situation.

    Sincerely,

    In solidarity with Stefulic, Mavrou and Abrams

    • I took the original offending comment down. Why you continue to publicize your client’s name in connection with this case can only be explained by your obvious motivation to set me up for litigation whether I comply or not. Either that or you are simply making empty threats. Finally, you clients are not entitled to private data, nor have any of my actions been illegal.

      Mark my words you idiot cannuck, this will go down in the encyclopedia of shrill lawyer stupidity. You are making yourself look like a complete fool internationally. I want this to end up in court just so the EFF can put a dick in your ass you fucking wanna be shyster fucktard.

      • Anonymous ⋅

        Nonya beeznas, I’ve been reading the court documents which were filed by the Canadian principals counsel, and the troubling thing is that the lawyer in the original post sounds cookoo and authoritarian, but they did file a lawsuit which tried to make their subpoenas secretive (possible some KGB type of operation to control dissent?) .

        Maybe the whistleblowers in the Canadian schools need to post their documents on Mens rights forums and see if the Canucks will try to sue there without making it a public sensation on the manosphere and probably the media.

        The Arizona Judge mentioned that the Canadian principals counsel brought in a number of unrelated evidence to the case, which brings to question whether random posters are subjected to litigation?

        These types of authoritarian lawsuits are only heard of in autocratic regimes, so I’m curious why the organization representing Canadian public school principals are trying to monitor and gather information about their critics?

    • PS: If I were your clients, I would sue you for malpractice. Clearly, you are not acting in their best interest. Or even your own. You have gone about this the most counter-productive, idiotic way you possibly could have. Completely incompetent counsel. You should be disbarred.

  13. Larry ⋅

    Boy oh boy didnt expect these public union wolves to be pouncing on these manosphere blogs. Maybe someone is trying to hide all the taxpayer swindling and corruption in these public school boards.

    What a disgrace and lame excuse for a disciplinary board member. Imagine how many teachers in Kanada got off scot free for professional misconduct with minors:

    http://www.thestar.com//teacher_watchdog_chair_faces_misconduct_charges.html

    The people representing those teachers are probably trying to shut some people up because the Toronto Star newspaper is busy releasing these teacher scandals.

  14. Alert ⋅

    Mods,
    I found this on a legal website:

    Ontario Principals’ Council et al v. Giglinx Global Incorporated
    Defendant: Giglinx Global Incorporated
    Plaintiff: Ontario Principals' Council, Gordana Stefulic, Vivian Mavrou and Varla Abrams
    Case Number: 2:2014mc00050
    Filed: July 11, 2014
    Court: Arizona District Court
    Office: Phoenix Division Office
    County: XX Outside US
    Presiding Judge: Steven P Logan

    I really hope this isn’t you or any of the bloggers here.

    Female privilege- Check
    Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
    Cause of Action: Civil Miscellaneous Case

    • Anonymous ⋅

      Alert, I did a lookup on the public court records of the case.

      They tried to bring in a bunch of non-relevant individuals into the litigation. The last paragraph of the court document:——

      “Applicants show nothing to demonstrate that the Giglinx subscriber and the defendant Topix user will be the same individual. The potential to draw numerous innocent internet users into the litigation, placing a burden upon them, outweighs Applicants’ need for the discovery. Granting Applicants the form of relief that it seeks
      would impermissibly allow them to subpoena an ISP to obtain the detailed personal information of unknown numbers of unrelated individuals that Applicants could never
      make party to its foreign suit and potentially
      subject them to onerous, invasive discovery.
      This risk is evident by Applicants’ failure to previously obtain this information despite the series of other similar discovery requests sought in other district courts throughout the
      United States.
      See In re ex parte Application of Ontario Principals’ Council
      , 5:13–mc–80237–LHK–PSG, 2013 WL 6073517
      (N.D. Cal. Nov. 8, 2013);
      In re Application of Ontario Principals’ Council
      , 2:13-mc-00120-LKK-KJN, 2013 WL 6
      844545 (E.D. Cal.
      Dec. 23, 2013);
      In Re Application of Ontario Principals’ Council,
      5:14-mc-80186-BLF
      (N.D. Cal. Jun. 18, 2014). Therefore, the Court
      declines to exercise its discretion and will
      deny the application. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the
      ex parte application (Doc. 1) is denied
      .
      IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall terminate this action.
      Dated this 1st day of August, 2014.”
      [Ontario Principals’ Council et al v. Giglinx Global Incorporated]

      ………………

      Maybe the Ontario teachers need to join a civil rights movement or seek help from the Electronic Frontier Foundation?

      Never in my years of legal study did I see a libel lawsuit which sought to infringe the rights of many people, and to deny the defendant the right to notify the accused…that borderlines autocracy.

  15. Pingback: 22 Myths that Women Teach Young Men in Order to Chauvinistically Exploit the Next Generation | Jack's Terrible Thoughts

  16. Pingback: 27 Reasons Why You Should NOT Date Yet Another Feminist | Jack's Terrible Thoughts

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s