Saturday, 15 July 2017

Karen Straughan Q&A hosted by Bettina Arndt

Bettina Arndt presents a live Q&A with the fabulous Karen Straughan, the best known female activist for men’s rights. Karen, also known as GirlWritesWhat, is one of the most popular women working for the men’s movement. She has more than 160,000 subscribers on her YouTube channel and her 2011 vlog on "Feminism and the Disposable Male" video has almost 1.5 million views.

Saturday, 1 July 2017

Smashing The Glass Coffin!

by Jim Goad

When it comes to sexual equity in the workplace, the biggest “gender gap” of all is the fact that men suffer around 92% of all job-related fatalities.

According to Bureau of Labor statistics from 1992-2014, women laborers accounted for 43% of total hours worked, yet they suffered a scant 8% of workplace fatalities. In what world could this possibly be considered respectful of women’s endless quest for equality?

We still hear about the “wage gap” almost daily, and even though it’s a myth, we should still marshal our resources to rectify this imaginary injustice. Yet no one is willing to stand tall and address the fact that selfish men are robbing female workers of the right to die on the job at a ridiculously unfair rate of almost thirteen to one. This disgracefully unjust pattern persists all over the world— in Australia, Taiwan, the United Kingdom, and even Canada, a nation so uniquely fixated on social justice at all costs, it’ll eventually bankrupt them.

The sad, inequitable truth is that when it comes to jobs that actually kill you—noble working-class professions such as logging, fishing, roofing, mining, truck driving, and toiling away on electrical power lines—men unfairly comprise more than 90% of the workers in each profession. Conversely, women dominate some of the safest jobs—things such as administrative support, education, and library work—by a factor of around three to one.

It is shameful and horrifying and totally problematic and completely unacceptable that gender activists have failed to address this gaping inequality. It’s almost as if the patriarchy intentionally denies women the natural privilege of dying while working.

Women have been making strides toward equality in every aspect of the American workplace except for the jobs that actually kill you. The ladies simply aren’t dying on the job nearly as frequently as men do, and this savage inequity needs to be addressed. It behooves us as radical egalitarians to remove all the barriers that prevent women from performing deadly work.

This savage imbalance is, of course, based on patriarchal tropes such as the idea that women don’t have enough “upper body strength” to lift logs and shovel coal. We’ve been led to believe destructive and damaging myths about women being “fragile” and “emotional” and “living longer” and “having the law on their side” and “enjoying the legal and societal presumption of innocence in any dispute involving a male.” We even hear the easily debunked and totally discredited idea that “there are some jobs women just won’t do.” We must explode these harmful myths as we push ourselves blindly and self-righteously off a cliff toward equality.

The “glass coffin” is a term coined by graphic designer Kevin Slaughter to describe the fact that women haven’t quite “broken through” toward equality when it comes to working jobs that can kill you. Sure, we often hear about the impermeable “glass ceiling” that prevents women from becoming CEOs and billionaires and Supreme Court justices and running for president, but our male-dominated society turns a deaf ear to women’s righteous quest for equality when it comes to sharing the right to suffocate under a ten-ton tsunami of human waste while working in a sewer because that’s supposedly a “man’s” job.

We live in a sexist society that patronizes women and sends hurtful messages that they aren’t “tough” enough to lose their lives on the job. Equality is for everyone, and that includes the right to get squashed like a bug by heavy machinery. Why aren’t women afforded the right to be struck dead by falling objects? Didn’t Susan B. Anthony struggle nobly to make it possible for the sisterhood to drown overboard on Alaskan crabbing expeditions? Women have the same right that men do to be crushed to death in a coal-mining explosion. They deserve the freedom and dignity to be pulverized into tomato paste when their semi truck jackknifes around a mountain curve.

Enough posturing. Now is the time for action. Now is the time for women to face all the real-life danger that true equality brings. They’ve shrieked for two generations about how they aren’t the “weaker sex.” Now it is time for them to prove it. It is time for women to put their noses to the grindstone, even if that means getting their hair caught in the grindstone and being strangled to death by it.

As a forward-thinking nation of workers who have more genders than Baskin-Robbins has ice-cream flavors, we must rectify systematic inequities that permit women to suffer lower unemployment rates than men. We must no longer permit a sexist climate that forces women all across the globe to suffer life’s miseries longer than men do.

In order to reach the equality they understandably seek, it is obvious that women must start dying equally. Silence equals death—for dudes, at least. Death equality NOW!!! Close the Death Gap NOW!!! Let us raise our hammers and sickles—ladies, if they’re too heavy to lift, that’s OK, because we’ll help—and SMASH the Glass Coffin! It’s time to shout loudly for Gender Death Equality in the workplace.

Women workers of the world, unite—you have nothing to lose but your lives!

Monday, 26 June 2017

Secret Teacher: my school is an echo-chamber for leftwing views

I teach in a mixed comprehensive in a constituency where on 8 June over two-thirds voted Labour, where an overwhelming majority voted Labour in the most recent mayoral vote, and where Labour has been the largest party on the local council for decades. A large majority of staff at our school vote Labour.

As a Labour supporter, this thrills me; as a teacher, it makes me question whether my school is doing enough to help our students appreciate other viewpoints.

As teachers, we are bound by the 1996 Education Act to present different political beliefs impartially and to not promote partisan political views. Yet, probably unintentionally, my school is often an echo-chamber for the leftwing views of its staff and its students’ parents.

Views that fall outside the accepted liberal-left spectrum get short shrift in my staffroom. I have watched teachers react incredulously – almost to the point of tears – when colleagues have tried floating a reasonable case for Brexit. This would be harmless enough if it did not put in doubt their ability to empathise with views opposed to their own.

Unfortunately, I see that lack of empathy in the classroom. It worries me that few of my colleagues seem to understand why Conservatives think as they do. In lessons discussing the general election, I have seen teachers make half-hearted attempts to present a rightwing line of reasoning about the major issues. Their bored or frustrated tone of voice says it all.

In theory students are introduced to a range of ideologies through studying government and politics. But I have only heard Labour politicians being criticised by fellow teachers for being too rightwing. We have had assemblies celebrating feminists and the campaign for a living wage, which are excellent and informative, but with no attention given to right-of-centre subjects (none that weren’t heavily critical, anyway).

The latter were balanced presentations insofar as they covered arguments on both sides, although dissenting views were always delivered under an arched eyebrow. Perhaps this is unavoidable. After all, I do not think it is unreasonable for teachers to share their political views, provided they make caveats about these being personal views. In its guidance to schools, Ted Huddleston of the Citizenship Foundation warned that “it does young people no favours to shield them from views they are likely to encounter in society”.

In schools like mine, however, where students are already immersed in political uniformity, we do them no favours by merely presenting different views. What we should do is offer compelling counter-narratives, so that students can appreciate why people might reasonably hold different political views from their own, regardless of differences in background.

Teachers at my school didn’t tell students to vote Labour on 8 June – they are just as nervous about being overly partisan as many others in the profession. But by shaping our students’ climate of political opinion, my colleagues implicitly define what students come to regard as reasonable and acceptable political views.

It often seems like few other authority figures in my students’ lives are preparing them for life outside their Labour bubble, where, for example, austerity is not automatically a term of abuse, and welfare not always accepted as a good thing. The net effect is to restrict their intellectual curiosity about, and ability to empathise with, others of different political persuasions.

I see evidence for this every week when I hear otherwise bright and articulate students justify their political opinions with vague, lazy arguments. As John Stuart Mill foresaw, since they have never learned to defend value judgments that seem entirely natural to them, they will struggle to respond to their opponents beyond the school gates.

This is about more than education. With our politics increasingly polarised, it saddens me to see my students being initiated – deliberately or not – into an essentially Manichaean view of politics, with a checklist of “goodies” (leftists, trade unions, Corbyn) and “baddies” (Tories, Brexiteers, anyone who uses the phrase British values without irony).

Given this, don’t my colleagues and I have a responsibility to do more than offer, in the words of the Education Act, “a balanced presentation of opposing views” – which in practice is often just paying lip service? Ought we not to make a habit of playing devil’s advocate?

Only an active commitment on the part of all teachers to resisting the status quo in our students’ lives – whatever that might be – will prepare them for meaningful political participation. This involves making the effort to articulate an intellectually rigorous and persuasive case for political views far removed from ours – and from theirs.

Teaching active empathy with different political views than our own might require more time and work on our part but it would better prepare students to be able to reach across political divides in later life. Surely we could use some of that right now.

Wednesday, 21 June 2017

Sargon of Akkad meets Dave Rubin

This may be the best ever all-in-one introduction to Sargon of Akkad I’ve encountered - his explanations of meme politics, Pepe The Frog, Kekistan, the phenomena of trolling, social justice and the state of liberalism in the 21st century are excellent, extremely clear and informative.

Tuesday, 2 May 2017

'The Red Pill' Review

“an eye opening, informative, gripping, cringe inducing, crazy, sad documentary all of my audience should watch.”

full trailer:…

full list of where you can see it:…


iTunes US:

iTunes Canada:

iTunes UK:

iTunes Ireland:





You can also order the DVD & Blu-Ray on Amazon:

Amazon DVD US:

Amazon Blu-Ray US:

Amazon DVD Canada:

Amazon Blu-Ray Canada: