A man from northern China who divorced and sued his wife earlier this year for being ugly has recently won the lawsuit, according to a report from PlanetIvy.com.
Jian Feng said his issues with his wife’s looks only began after the couple’s daughter was born. Feng was appalled by the child’s appearance, calling her “incredibly ugly” and saying she resembled neither one of her parents.
With that being the case, Feng initially accused his wife of cheating. It was at that point that his wife, who has not been named, came forward saying she had spent $100,000 on intense plastic surgeries to drastically change her appearance before she met Feng. She never told Feng about those surgeries.
When Feng found out about the procedures, he filed the lawsuit. He said the woman convinced him to marry her under false pretenses.
A judge agreed, awarding Feng $120,000. (Read more)
The comments on this article are almost all sympathetic to the petition.
He asked, “Is this the most racist White House petition ever created?” After taking a look and not having reviewed any of the other wacky petitions flooding the “We the People” page on the White House web page, I would have to answer yes. Yes, it probably is.
Someone named Albert D. petitioned the Obama administration on Jan. 11 to “STOP WHITE GENOCIDE: Halt MASSIVE third world immigration and FORCED assimilation in White countries!”
Albert’s not kidding.
“Africa for Africans, Asia for Asians, White countries for EVERYBODY?” he writes. “White countries are being flooded with third world non-whites, and Whites are required by law to integrate with them so as to ‘assimilate,’ i.e. intermarry and be blended out of existence.”
He says that this is a violation of the United Nations Convention against genocide. Thus, he is petitioning President Obama to “end White Genocide in the United States, and to call for the end of White Genocide in Europe, Britain, Australia, New Zealand and Canada.”
And Albert ends with this. “Supporting White Genocide is not anti-racist. It’s anti-white!”
I don’t know where to begin. Frankly, there’s no use trying to understand the mind that would form such twisted views, let alone one that would share them on the Web site of the president of the United States. (Read more)
This seems more like a protests than a “Mosque Attack” as the headline indicates, but that’s how the Big Media treats anyone opposed to forced integration of cultures.
Some 73 protesters from a movement called Identity Group seized a mosque in the western city of Poitiers on Saturday and unfurled a banner referring to Charles Martel’s historic defeat of advancing Muslim troops there in 732.
They stayed for more than six hours before police ejected them. (Read more)
Two men have been arrested after a series of incidents in London saw members of the public harassed by self-styled vigilantes who posted footage of their activities online. One included a clip showing a man being subjected to homophobic abuse.
The incidents are believed to be linked to a group claiming to be behind “Muslim patrols” of Whitechapel. (Read more)
A survey in France published this week revealed 70 percent of the population believe there are too many foreigners living in the country and 74 percent believe Islam is not compatible with French society. (Read more)
Feminists hate video games. The culture and structure of the industry makes it difficult for them to penetrate the way they penetrated the movie and television industries.
The National Endowment for the Arts is funding a new interactive game from filmmaker and digital media artist Ayoka Chenzira, Ph.D. It’s called HERadventure, a science fiction-based, multimedia platform project intended to target women 18-25 with the aim of bringing awareness to social issues affecting women like depression, discrimination, or pollution. The star of the project is HER, a black female superhero from another planet.
Inside Spelman asks, “What would happen if the societal issues affecting women put other planets at risk?” The answer is HER, the superhero created by Chenzira. Spelman College was recently awarded a $100,000 grant from the NEA to pursue HERadventure and one of four nonprofit organizations to receive a grant for a gaming project. (Read more)
Here’s the Ted talk given by the recipient of the $100k. It’s astoundingly unimpressive:
SEGOU, Mali — On a sweltering afternoon, Islamist police officers dragged Fatima Al Hassan out of her house in the fabled city of Timbuktu. They beat her up, shoved her into a white pickup truck and drove her to their headquarters. She was locked up in a jail as she awaited her sentence: 100 lashes with an electrical cord.
“Why are you doing this?” she recalled asking.
Hassan was being punished for giving water to a male visitor.
… [R]efugees say the Islamists are raping and forcibly marrying women, and recruiting children for armed conflict. Social interaction deemed an affront to their interpretation of Islam is zealously punished through Islamic courts and a police force that has become more systematic and inflexible, human rights activists and local officials say.
Doesn’t this type of thing happen among Islamists in London?
1) You are one of the leading dissident voices in the gender debate. Could you please explain your vision of individualist feminism, what are its main tenets and how it differs from mainstream feminism?
The main tenet of individualist feminism is that women and men deserve equal treatment under just law. A just legal system is one that seeks to protect the person and property of individuals equally, and it is applied to all individuals.
Mainstream feminism advocates social and economic egalitarianism, which necessarily violates the property rights of individuals. For example, affirmative action and non-discrimination policies dictate who should be hired by private companies, who risk sanctions such as lawsuits if they do not comply. Mainstream feminists applaud this use of governmental force to violate the property rights of individuals — including business owners — in order to distribute money and power within society from men to women.
2) Is the free-market enough to allow a full emancipation of women, or should the government intervene in order to reduce the gender gap and change things more rapidly?
The answer depends on what you mean by “full mancipation”; frankly, I think every individual has to decide its personal meaning for themselves. But if you mean “complete fairness” or “social justice,” then ‘no’, the free market will not provide that in and by itself. Other peaceful forces may well be necessary, such as moral suasion applied to those who are unfair, offensive, denigrating, etc.; this is largely what happened in the American civil rights movement before it was co-opted by government. What I do contend about the free market is that it delivers emancipation better than any other competing system, such as state interference. Indeed, any governmental interference aimed at providing social justice actually provides the opposite. That is to say, it violates individual rights which must be the basis of all justice.
3) In spite of the undeniable distance from mainstream feminism, libertarian feminists chose to contend the label “feminism” rather than picking a different name. Do you believe that this strategy is effective? Is there a risk this choice can reduce the appeal of your ideas among that silent majority who associates feminism and leftist statism, while hardly gaining ground among tradition self-identifying feminists?
Yes, there is not merely a risk but an inevitability that some people will automatically reject individualist feminism because of the word “feminist.” I have experienced this frequently.
Nevertheless, I persist in the label for a few reasons. First, I want the roots of American feminism to be recognized and acknowledged; those roots were profoundly individualist and grounded in the early 19th century abolitionist (anti-slavery) movement. Happily, this is happening. Individualist feminism was unheard of in academia when I started to write but it is now generally recognized. (Read more)
***
This is a nice counter-point to the Stefan Molyneux video I posted a while back “Feminism is Socialism with Panties.” Here it is again:
Who says universities don’t teach valuable job skills? They teach thousands of students how to be professional victims. For example, you’ll never hear feminists applauding the 85% drop in rapes since the 1970s, which occurred despite many expansions of the definition of rape. Instead, we encounter the increasing prominence of the term “Rape Culture” in the feminist lexicon.
I’ve found myself increasingly interested in Cultural Marxism, including its feminist branch. Did you know there’s an emerging Men’s Rights Movement (MRM) which actively refutes feminist claims, at least in the freedom of internet communications? Some university feminist groups consider the MRM to be hate and resort to violence to suppress them.
Below is a collection of wonderful videos which I recently watched, plus a few articles. You can also check out the archives of my relatively new category Egalitarianism/Culture Wars.
***
The core of feminism refuted: Men have had harder lives than women, and the relationship between men and women is not adversarial.
***
On Blaming Men for Not Marrying:
All the of approved paths to a positive male identity . . . are gone . . . men have always been willing to work and sacrifice and sweat and bleed if they were rewarded with the means through which to see themselves as worthy of respect, but when every single role
society wants to cram you into is not longer a way to respect yourself or have the respect of others, then its time to throw those roles away. One thing [feminists & fellow travelers] . . . will never realize is that using shame to coerce men into doing what’s expected of them isn’t going to work this time, because while it’s possible to shame a man into giving his life for his country, if there’s a promise of respect in it, it’s impossible to shame someone into working his ass off and risking his future just for the joy of looking in the mirror and seeing Homer Simpson . . . looking back.
***
The White Feather Campaign began with the creation of the white feather as a symbol of cowardice and unfulfilled civic duty. With the war effort and the recruitment campaign in full swing, the women of the White Feather would present any healthy young Englishman in civilian dress with this token, in order to symbolize their scorn for him and his failure to be man. Upon receipt of a white feather, these men were being told that they weren’t “real men” and that the women around them looked upon this apparent lack of masculinity with disgust.www.studentpulse.com/articles/151/the-white-feather-campaign-a-struggle-with-masculinity-during-world-war-i
There’s no such thing as rape culture in the Western World.
***
Rebutting Patriarchy Theory.
***
The ridiculous dating discussion of feminists.
***
Feminism is (mostly) socialism with panties. When choosing between women and the state, most feminists will choose the state and shun women like Ayn Rand, Margaret Thatcher, etc.
***
Evolution and the train of men to help women.
***
In my view, as the state replaces the father, women are increasingly resorting to tribal mating patterns. Perhaps this is a cause of the widely observed moral decline which RamzPaul satires here:
A man from northern China who divorced and sued his wife earlier this year for being ugly has recently won the lawsuit, according to a report from PlanetIvy.com.
(Read more)