Dating service i Edmonton, Alberta

World's best 100% FREE Asian online dating site in Alberta! Meet cute Asian singles in Alberta with our FREE Asian dating service. Loads of single Asian men and women are looking for their match on the Internet's best website for meeting Asians. Browse thousands of Asian personal ads and Asian singles in Alberta — completely for free. Find a hot Asian date today with free registration! Alberta free dating site for singles in Canada! Join one of the best online dating site among other 100% free dating sites and meet single men and women in Alberta (Canada). Meeting members at our dating service is totally free. Just add your profile, browse other personals of peple seeking like you for online dating, love and romance. Probably Edmonton's favourite over 60 dating website. Join for free today to meet local singles over 60 in the easiest way possible, right from the comfort of your own home, or right on your phone while you're out and about, completely at your own pace. Our dating service is safe, secure and completely confidential. Just a few of our member ... 100% free Edmonton (Alberta) dating site for local single men and women! Join one of the best Canadian online singles service and meet lonely people to date and chat in Edmonton(Canada). Singles living in Edmonton, the capital of Canada’s Alberta province, who are in search for love or friendship and want to improve their dating life have a wide variety of websites to choose from. If you are looking for that special someone with whom to share the good and the bad, we recommend checking out our reviews below. Online Dating in Edmonton, Alberta. Hoping to meet other singles in Edmonton, Alberta? Match.com makes dating in Edmonton easier than ever with our extensive range of services. When you sign up for a subscription on Match.com, you can easily connect with other local singles or those from neighboring cities. Edmonton Millcreek Pagan Meetup 8555 Argyll Rd NW We will meet in the parking lot of Tim Hortons and weather permitting we will walk up to the Mill Creek entrance by the Argyll community league and walk north from there. Sophisticated Simplicity . Our in-person speed dating events, virtual speed dating events and matchmaking services offer fresh alternatives for Edmonton singles. Whether you’re looking for a night out with fellow singles, prefer a night in with our virtual events or find one-on-one matchmaking to be your cup of tea, we bring just the right amount of flirty to suit any need. I am 41 yo and live in Edmonton, Alberta. Tools. Over 4 weeks ago on Meetup4Fun. MrEMan13 35 yr. old · Men Seek Women · Edmonton, AB. I am 35 yo and live in Edmonton, Alberta ... Edmonton's best FREE dating site! 100% Free Online Dating for Edmonton Singles at Mingle2.com. Our free personal ads are full of single women and men in Edmonton looking for serious relationships, a little online flirtation, or new friends to go out with. Start meeting singles in Edmonton today with our free online personals and free Edmonton chat!

For those who say, we don't know what real feminism is

2020.09.05 03:36 tiredfromlife2019 For those who say, we don't know what real feminism is

Obligatory Katen Straughan speech
So what you're saying is that you, a commenter using a username on an internet forum are the true feminist, and the feminists actually responsible for changing the laws, writing the academic theory, teaching the courses, influencing the public policies, and the massive, well-funded feminist organizations with thousands and thousands of members all of whom call themselves feminists... they are not "real feminists".
That's not just "no true Scotsman". That's delusional self deception.
Listen, if you want to call yourself a feminist, I don't care. I've been investigating feminism for more than 9 years now, and people like you used to piss me off, because to my mind all you were doing was providing cover and ballast for the powerful political and academic feminists you claim are just jerks. And believe me, they ARE jerks. If you knew half of what I know about the things they've done under the banner of feminism, maybe you'd stop calling yourself one.
But I want you to know. You don't matter. You're not the director of the Feminist Majority Foundation and editor of Ms. Magazine, Katherine Spillar, who said of domestic violence: "Well, that's just a clean-up word for wife-beating," and went on to add that regarding male victims of dating violence, "we know it's not girls beating up boys, it's boys beating up girls."
You're not Jan Reimer, former mayor of Edmonton and long-time head of Alberta's Network of Women's Shelters, who just a few years ago refused to appear on a TV program discussing male victims of domestic violence, because for her to even show up and discuss it would lend legitimacy to the idea that they exist.
You're not Mary P Koss, who describes male victims of female rapists in her academic papers as being not rape victims because they were "ambivalent about their sexual desires" (if you don't know what that means, it's that they actually wanted it), and then went on to define them out of the definition of rape in the CDC's research because it's inappropriate to consider what happened to them rape.
You're not the National Organization for Women, and its associated legal foundations, who lobbied to replace the gender neutral federal Family Violence Prevention and Services Act of 1984 with the obscenely gendered Violence Against Women Act of 1994. The passing of that law cut male victims out of support services and legal assistance in more than 60 passages, just because they were male.
You're not the Florida chapter of the NOW, who successfully lobbied to have Governor Rick Scott veto not one, but two alimony reform bills in the last ten years, bills that had passed both houses with overwhelming bipartisan support, and were supported by more than 70% of the electorate.
You're not the feminist group in Maryland who convinced every female member of the House on both sides of the aisle to walk off the floor when a shared parenting bill came up for a vote, meaning the quorum could not be met and the bill died then and there.
You're not the feminists in Canada agitating to remove sexual assault from the normal criminal courts, into quasi-criminal courts of equity where the burden of proof would be lowered, the defendant could be compelled to testify, discovery would go both ways, and defendants would not be entitled to a public defender.
You're not Professor Elizabeth Sheehy, who wrote a book advocating that women not only have the right to murder their husbands without fear of prosecution if they make a claim of abuse, but that they have the moral responsibility to murder their husbands.
You're not the feminist legal scholars and advocates who successfully changed rape laws such that a woman's history of making multiple false allegations of rape can be excluded from evidence at trial because it's "part of her sexual history."
You're not the feminists who splattered the media with the false claim that putting your penis in a passed-out woman's mouth is "not a crime" in Oklahoma, because the prosecutor was incompetent and charged the defendant under an inappropriate statute (forcible sodomy) and the higher court refused to expand the definition of that statute beyond its intended scope when there was already a perfectly good one (sexual battery) already there. You're not the idiot feminists lying to the public and potentially putting women in Oklahoma at risk by telling potential offenders there's a "legal" way to rape them.
And you're none of the hundreds or thousands of feminist scholars, writers, thinkers, researchers, teachers and philosophers who constructed and propagate the body of bunkum theories upon which all of these atrocities are based.
You're the true feminist. Some random person on the internet.
+++++++++++++
My own addition to this

Sally Miller Gearhart (born April 15, 1931) is an American teacher, feminist, science-fiction writer, and political activist.[1] In 1973, she became the first open lesbian to obtain a tenure-track faculty position when she was hired by San Francisco State University, where she helped establish one of the first women and gender study programs in the country.[2] She later became a nationally known gay rights activist.[2]
In her early career, Gearhart took part in a series of seminars at San Francisco State University, where feminist scholars were critically discussing issues of rape, slavery, and the possibility of nuclear annihilation. Gearhart outlines a three-step proposal for female-led social change from her essay, "The Future–-If There Is One–-is Female":
I) Every culture must begin to affirm a female future.
II) Species responsibility must be returned to women in every culture.
III) The proportion of men must be reduced to and maintained at approximately 10% of the human race.
Gearhart does not base this radical proposal on the idea that men are innately violent or oppressive, but rather on the "real danger is in the phenomenon of male-bonding, that commitment of groups of men to each other whether in an army, a gang, a service club, a lodge, a monastic order, a corporation, or a competitive sport." Gearhart identifies the self-perpetuating, male-exclusive reinforcement of power within these groups as corrosive to female-led social change.
Thus, if "men were reduced in number, the threat would not be so great and the placement of species responsibility with the female would be assured." Gearhart, a dedicated pacifist, recognized that this kind of change could not be achieved through mass violence. On the critical question of how women could achieve this, Gearhart argues that it is by women's own capacity for reproduction that the ratio of men to women can be changed though the technologies of cloning or ovular merging, both of which would only produce female births. She argues that as women take advantage of these reproductive technologies, the sex ratio would change over generations.[14]
Daphune Patal in her book Heterophobia: Sexual Harassment and the Future of Feminism summarizes Gearhart's essay as, "The future must be in female hands, women alone must control the reproduction of species; and only 10% of the population should be allowed to be male".[15]
Mary Daly supported Gearhart's proposals, stating: "I think it's not a bad idea at all. If life is to survive on this planet, there must be a decontamination of the Earth. I think this will be accompanied by an evolutionary process that will result in a drastic reduction of the population of males."[16]
++++++++++++++++
Not a real feminist according to some random reddit poster.
submitted by tiredfromlife2019 to antifeminists [link] [comments]


2020.07.27 17:26 pahohi1327JJul When Should a Christian Start Da-ting ?

When Should a Christian Start Da-ting ?
Check the Profiles for Free >>>>>>>>>> 🔴►🔴► Dating
10 Rules for Christian Dating 100 Percent Free Christian Dating Sites African American Christian Dating African Christian Dating Sites Arab Christian Dating Online Arab Christian Dating Site Biblical Christian Dating Black Christian Dating Online Black Christian Senior Dating Sites Black Christian Singles Dating Sites Cheap Christian Dating Sites China Christian Dating Site Chinese Christian Dating Christian Boundaries for Dating Christian Chat Dating Christian Crush Dating Site Christian Dating Advice for Teenage Guys Christian Dating Agency Uk Christian Dating App India Christian Dating Belfast Christian Dating Books for Men Christian Dating Boundaries Kissing Christian Dating Chat Rooms Christian Dating Events Near Me Christian Dating Expectations Christian Dating for Free Australia Christian Dating Headlines Christian Dating Holding Hands Christian Dating in Europe Christian Dating in Switzerland Christian Dating in the Uk Christian Dating Ireland Christian Dating is He Interested Christian Dating London Uk Christian Dating Long Distance Christian Dating Muslim Girl Christian Dating Network Christian Dating Porn Christian Dating Pursue Christian Dating Relationship Advice Christian Dating Relationship Stages Christian Dating Sites for 20s Christian Dating Sites for Widows Christian Dating Sites in Ghana Christian Farmers Dating Site Christian Latin Dating Sites Christian Lifestyle Dating Review Christian Male Dating Christian Mingle Dating Site Free Christian Online Dating Scams Christian Online Dating Singapore Christian Online Dating Sites Review Christian Perspective on Online Dating Christian Rules of Dating Cost of Christian Dating Sites Creative Christian Dating Ideas Dating a Christian Indian Man Dating a Christian Lebanese Man Dating a Divorced Man Christian Dating a Single Mom Christian Dating an Orthodox Christian Dating as a Young Christian Dating Christian Girl Tips Dating Non Christians John Piper Dtr Christian Dating Eharmony Christian Dating Apps Free Christian Dating 100 Free Free Christian Dating Apps Uk Free Christian Dating Singles Free Christian Dating Sites for College Students Free Christian Dating Sites in India Free Christian Dating Usa Free Online Christian Dating Chat Rooms Fusion Christian Dating How to Delete Christian Dating for Free Account Indian Christian Dating Uk Just Christian Dating Sa Kissing in Christian Dating Lebanese Christian Dating App Lebanese Christian Dating Site Looking for a Free Christian Dating Site Match Christian Dating Most Popular Christian Dating App New Christian Dating Sites Online Christian Dating Service Online Dating Site Christian Progressive Christian Dating Site Questions to Ask in Christian Dating Russian Christian Dating in Usa Russian Christian Dating Sites Sexual Boundaries in Christian Dating Should Christians Use Dating Sites Single Born Again Christian Dating The Black Christian Singles Guide to Dating and Sexuality Tips for Christian Dating Relationship Top Christian Books for Dating Couples Totally Free Christian Dating Sites in South Africa When Should a Christian Start Dating Who is Christian Beadles Dating Who is Christian Keyes Dating Who is Christian Serratos Dating Winona Ryder and Christian Slater Dating 1 Christian Dating Site Are Anna and Christian Dating in Real Life Atheist Dating Christian Girl Black Christian Dating Advice Born Again Christian Dating Free Born Again Christian Free Dating Site Boundaries in Dating Christian Book Christian Arab Dating Sites Christian Books Dating Relationships Christian Catholic Dating Christian Connection Dating Service Christian Connection Dating Site Christian Cowboy Dating Sites Christian Dating Advice for College Students Christian Dating Advice Kissing Christian Dating Advice Long Distance Relationships Christian Dating Advice on Kissing Christian Dating After Divorce Book Christian Dating and Physical Intimacy Christian Dating App Delete Account Christian Dating App Uk Christian Dating Baton Rouge Christian Dating Bible Study Christian Dating Books for Him and Her Christian Dating Books for Singles Christian Dating Canada Free Christian Dating Cdff Reviews Christian Dating Chat and Meet Christian Dating Colorado Christian Dating Com Free Christian Dating Community Christian Dating Company Nz Christian Dating Conversations Christian Dating Deal Breakers Christian Dating Desiring God Christian Dating Divorced Man Christian Dating Europe Free Christian Dating Facebook Christian Dating Focus on the Family Christian Dating for Christian Singles Join Free Christian Dating for Free 100 Free Service for Christian Singles Christian Dating for Free Basic Search Christian Dating for Guys Christian Dating Game Questions Christian Dating Help Christian Dating in a Godless World Christian Dating in Ghana Christian Dating in Your 30s Christian Dating Jokes Christian Dating Limits Christian Dating Love Christian Dating Maryland Christian Dating Montreal Christian Dating Movie Christian Dating Profile Christian Dating Profile Headlines Christian Dating Profile Sample Christian Dating Red Deer Christian Dating Rochester Ny Christian Dating Site Cape Town Christian Dating Site in Brazil Christian Dating Sites for Missionaries Christian Dating Sites in Dubai Christian Dating Sites in Finland Christian Dating Sites India Christian Dating Sites Prices Christian Dating Sites That Are 100 Free Christian Dating Sites Uk Free Christian Dating South Africa Christian Dating Statistics Christian Dating Tips for Guys Christian Dating Tips for Single Moms Christian Dating Topics of Conversation Christian Dating Toronto Christian Dating Verses Christian Dating Warning Signs Christian Disabled Dating Christian Disabled Dating Sites Christian Farmer Dating Site Christian Filipina Dating for Free Christian Filipina Dating Site Review Christian Fish Dating Christian Free Dating Sites Uk Christian Help Meet Dating Site Christian Internet Dating Sites Christian Lesbian Dating Sites Christian Military Dating Site Christian Mingle Dating Tips Christian Mingle Online Dating Reviews Christian Online Dating Australia Free Christian Online Dating Canada Christian Online Dating Free Sites Christian Questions to Ask When Dating Christian Relationship Books for Dating Pdf Christian Relationships and Dating Christian Science Dating Site Christian Single Moms Dating Christian Single Parent Dating Christian Single Senior Dating Christian Singles Dating Free Sites Christian Teenage Dating Sites Christian Widows and Widowers Dating Christian Youth Dating Sites Conservative Christian Dating Rules Conservative Christian Dating Sites Dating a Christian Girl Reddit Dating a Christian Man With a Past Dating Christian Sites Free Dating for Christian Girls Dating Older Christian Man Dating While Christian Deaf Christian Dating Delete Christian Mingle Dating for Free Account Devotions for Dating Couples Christian Emotional Boundaries Christian Dating Emotional Intimacy Christian Dating Ethiopian Christian Dating in Usa Filipino Christian Dating Online Free Christian Biker Dating Sites Free Christian Dating Chat Sites Free Christian Dating for Free Free Christian Dating Personals Free Christian Dating Seniors Fusion 101 Christian Dating Reviews Hispanic Christian Dating Hong Kong Christian Online Dating How Does Christian Dating Work How Many Christian Dating Sites Are There Is Dating a Sin as a Christian Is Dating Good for a Christian Is Kissing Ok in Christian Dating Largest Christian Dating Site Legit Christian Dating Sites List of All Christian Dating Sites Middle Eastern Christian Dating Muslim Girl Dating a Christian Guy Muslim Woman Dating Christian Man New York Christian Dating Site Nigerian Christian Dating Online Christian Dating Sites in Kenya Online Christian Dating Sites Kenya Online Dating Christian Advice Physical Boundaries in a Christian Dating Relationship Progressive Christian Dating Questions to Ask a Christian Guy Before Dating Real Free Christian Dating Sites Red Flags in a Christian Dating Relationship Reviews Christian Mingle Dating Site Sda Christian Dating Sites Secure Christian Dating Sites Senior Christian Dating Service Serious Christian Dating Sites Sex and Dating Christian Book Should a Christian Use Online Dating Singapore Christian Singles Dating Single Christian Dating App Stages of Christian Dating Taking It Slow Christian Dating Tallahassee Christian Dating The Best Christian Online Dating Sites The Christian Left Dating Tips for Christian Online Dating Top 10 Christian Dating Sites Uk Top 10 Christian Dating Sites Usa Top Christian Dating Sites 2018 Totally Free Christian Dating Sites Australia True Christian Dating True Christian Dating Service Truly Free Christian Dating Sites Uk Christian Dating App Wealthy Christian Dating Sites What the Bible Says About Dating a Non Christian When Should a Christian Girl Start Dating Who is Christian Borle Dating Who is Christian Nodal Dating Worldwide Christian Dating Sites Www Christian Dating Free Online Young Christian Dating 100 Christian Dating Site 100 Free Christian Dating Sites in Usa 100 Free Christian Singles Dating Sites 16 Christian Dating Principles 2 Christians Dating App A Christian Dating a Non Believer About Christian Mingle Dating Site Absolutely Free Christian Dating Sites Adventist Christian Dating Sites Age Gap Christian Dating American Christian Online Dating App Christian Dating Are Christian Dating Sites Appropriate Asian American Christian Dating Bad Christian Dating Advice Best 100 Free Christian Dating Sites Best Australian Christian Dating Sites Best Christian Books About Dating Best Christian Dating Apps for Young Adults Best Christian Dating Movies Best Christian Dating Site in Kenya Best Christian Dating Sites 2015 Best Christian Dating Sites Australia Best Christian Dating Sites for Seniors Best Christian Free Dating Sites Best Christian Interracial Dating Sites Best Christian Online Dating Service Best Free Christian Dating Apps Best Rated Christian Dating Sites Bible Verses for Christian Dating Bible Verses for Dating Non Christians Black Christian Dating Uk Carbon Dating and Christianity Christian Advice for Online Dating Christian American Singles Dating Christian Asian Dating Sites Christian Based Dating Sites Christian Bbw Dating Christian Bible Studies for Dating Couples Christian Books to Read Together While Dating Christian Books to Read While Dating Christian Com Dating Site Christian Connection Dating App Christian Connection Online Dating Christian Dating a Muslim Guy Christian Dating Advice for Over 50 Christian Dating Advice for Seniors Christian Dating Advice for Widows Christian Dating Advice Forum Christian Dating Advice When to Break Up Christian Dating After 40 Christian Dating Albuquerque Christian Dating and Courtship Christian Dating and Kissing Christian Dating and Marriage Christian Dating App for College Students Christian Dating Bad Christian Dating Before Marriage Christian Dating Bible Christian Dating Boise Idaho Christian Dating Books for Young Adults Christian Dating Books to Read Together Christian Dating Calgary Christian Dating Cape Town South Africa Christian Dating Chaperone Christian Dating Chat Line Christian Dating Christian Connection Christian Dating Courting Advice Christian Dating Dating Site Christian Dating Does He Like Me Christian Dating Events Uk Christian Dating for Christian Singles Join Free Christian Mingle Christian Dating for Free Delete Account Christian Dating for Free Kenya Christian Dating Friends First Christian Dating Goals Christian Dating Google Search Christian Dating Guide Pdf Christian Dating Guidelines Kissing Christian Dating Humor Christian Dating I Love You Christian Dating in Houston Christian Dating in Phoenix Christian Dating in Uganda Christian Dating Jewish Man Christian Dating London Ontario Christian Dating Love and Relationship Christian Dating Magazine Christian Dating Match Com Christian Dating Meetup Christian Dating Melbourne Christian Dating Muslim Man Christian Dating New Zealand Christian Dating Non Christian Verse Christian Dating Nyc Christian Dating Online Chat Christian Dating Orange County Ca Christian Dating Over 40 Christian Dating Phoenix Christian Dating Phoenix Az Christian Dating Platform Christian Dating Reddit Christian Dating Rules Kissing Christian Dating Scene Christian Dating Scotland Christian Dating Sermon Christian Dating Services Online Christian Dating Setting Boundaries Christian Dating Seventh Day Adventist Christian Dating Site Com Christian Dating Site in Netherlands Christian Dating Site Kansas City Christian Dating Site Killer Christian Dating Site Switzerland Christian Dating Sites Edmonton Christian Dating Sites Edmonton Alberta Christian Dating Sites in Kenya Christian Dating Sites in Switzerland Christian Dating Sites in Usa Christian Dating Sites Ireland


https://preview.redd.it/m2lthr674fd51.jpg?width=275&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d62afadcb878caa1ac8e7df0988a1582dc5e4e1a
submitted by pahohi1327JJul to u/pahohi1327JJul [link] [comments]


2020.07.18 02:13 UnrealManifest What is going on at the KC distro facility?!?!?

Over the past 6 months I have had numerous packages come from all 3 of the major parcel delivery providers.
USPS UPS FedEx
Out of all 3 of them FedEx is the only one that is consistently late EVERY time. On top of that each and every one of these shipments hits the KC distribution facility before going to my local FedEx facility to be delivered.
Where as USPS and UPS both always over shoot my destination and end up in Omaha, before being sorted and then sent to local facilities for delivery. Neither of these 2 is ever late.
In fact I just had a parcel sent with USPS from Edmonton, Alberta,(not exactly sure how that works), roughly 1200 miles away that had an estimated delivery date of Monday, that shipped out on Tuesday and arrived on Thursday.
I had another package ship from Texarkana, Arkansas, with UPS ground with an estimated delivery date of Saturday, shipped Wednesday and showed up today.
But this current package that's stuck in Kansas City shipped from Appleton, Wisconsin. It like every other FedEx package I've received since the beginning of the year has decided to spend 2-4 days hanging out in KC. Just like every other package that goes to the KC facility, the estimated delivery date always changes the moment it's scanned into that distro center. These packages always arrive at the center 2-3 days before the original estimated delivery date and in all reality they only have a few more hours to go before completed delivery. If I call them like I have every other time I know that I'm going to be told the exact same crap, "It appears we lost your package...". EVERY TIME.
What is going on? And don't say Covid, because if a package from Canada can make it here faster then the estimated date from another service and FedEx cant get a package here faster in 1/3 the distance then it isn't covid.
submitted by UnrealManifest to FedEx [link] [comments]


2020.07.16 02:13 botanisty [CANADA] Lichen technician (closes 4 Aug 2020, requires 2 yr degree + experience)

Visit https://www.alberta.ca/alberta-public-service-jobs.aspx and search "LICHEN" to view advert.
Location: Royal Alberta Museum, Edmonton, Alberta
Full/Part Time: Full-Time
RegulaTemporary: Temporary
Closing Date: August 4, 2020
Salary: $1,834.86 to $2,342.88 bi-weekly ($47,889 to $61,149 annually)
Role
Reporting to the Lichen Taxonomist, the Lichen Technician will provide technical support that ensures the production of high quality lichen species data that support the ABMI project. Specific job duties include:
As our ideal candidate, you will demonstrate a high degree of competency in systems thinking and creative problem solving as you effectively implement highly accurate, efficient and creative protocols for specimen identification and data entry. Time management skills are critical in order to cope with the volume of specimens that must be processed within a contractually obligated timeframe. Strong communication and interpersonal skills are required in order to communicate effectively with taxonomists, colleagues and the public, and function well in a team-centered environment.
Qualifications
A Technical 2 year Diploma in a related field plus 1 year of direct experience with lichen taxonomy. A Bachelor's of Science degree is preferred. Demonstrated experience with sorting, drying and packaging of lichen specimens is required. Direct experience with fieldwork, specifically for collecting museum-quality lichen specimens, is required. Familiarity with advanced lichen taxonomic tools such as thin-layer chromatography (TLC), high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) and molecular systematics for lichen identification will be considered an asset. Familiarity with the ABMI project and the institute's field and laboratory protocols will be considered assets. Teaching experience will be considered an asset. Equivalencies will be considered.
Notes
This is a temporary opportunity until March 31, 2021, with a high probability of renewal. The worksite is the Royal Alberta Museum in downtown Edmonton. Hours of work: 7.25 hours per day, 5 days per week, with the possibility of some weekend shifts during peak times. The successful candidate must have a valid driver's license and will be required to undergo a security screening. This competition may be used to fill current and future vacancies across government.
submitted by botanisty to botanycareers [link] [comments]


2020.07.13 23:57 kirant Covid-19 Update for July 11 to 13: 230 new cases, 145 recoveries, 1 death

Data is taken from the Covid-19 portal and today's news conference. Dr Hinshaw's next media availability will probably be Wednesday (no official statement yet and no announcement at today's conference).
In an effort to reduce clutter in these posts, the updates to outbreak facilities is shown here. Two new outbreaks were identified: FGL Sports Warehouse in Calgary, and Friesen Livestock in Medicine Hat. Multiple outbreaks are no longer listed.
Top line numbers:
Value Current Total
Total cases +230 8,826
Active cases 676 (+84)
Tests +25,132 (~1.0% positive) 540,102
People tested +19,291 466,472 (~108,055/million)
Hospitalizations 45 (-5/-10 based on the last post/Friday portal data) 417 (+10)
ICU 10 (+1) 81 (+2)
Deaths +1 (Age: 80+) 161
Recoveries +145 7,989
Division of top line numbers by day (where available):
  • Because of the reporting method by the portal, these numbers do not fully add up to the top line values above.
Value July 10 July 11 July 12
Cases 54 96 80
Test (approximate) 7528 9995 7591
Test positive rate (approximate) ~0.7% ~1.0% ~1.1%
People tested (approximate) 5807 7636 6044
Hospital usage 48 47 45
ICU 8 11 10
Spatial distribution of cases (cities proper for Calgary and Edmonton):
City/Municipality Total Active Recovered Deaths
Calgary 4643 (+84) 218 (+23) 4320 (+61) 105 (+0)
Brooks 1121 (+2) 3 (+2) 1109 (+0) 9 (+0)
Edmonton 1047 (+46) 172 (-1) 858 (+47) 17 (+1)
High River county 532 (+0) 1 (+0) 525 (+0) 6 (+0)
Fort McMurray 56 (+0) 2 (-2) 54 (+2) 0
Lethbridge 56 (+5) 13 (+5) 43 (+0) 0
Medicine Hat 51 (+1) 9 (-2) 41 (+3) 1 (+0)
Red Deer 46 (+6) 9 (+5) 37 (+1) 0
Cardston county 45 (-1) 6 (-1) 38 (+0) 1 (+0)
Warner county 44 (+2) 41 (+1) 2 (+1) 1 (+0)
Wood Buffalo municipality 40 (+2) 15 (+2) 25 (+5) 0
Grande Prairie 20 (+3) 3 (+3) 17 (+0) 0
  • Counties of interest (change since Friday, if I tracked them at that point):
    • 5 active: Cypress County (-4), Taber County (-1)
    • 7 active: Vulcan County (+0)
    • 9 active: Wheatland County (+1)
    • 11 active: Willow Creek
    • 14 active: McKenzie County (+1)
  • In addition to Warner county, Willow Creek municipality and Mackenzie county are now labelled as watch areas. It should be noted that the regions of Calgary and Edmonton previously under this designation are labelled as such no longer.
Spacial distribution of hospital usage (change based on yesterday's post):
  • Hospitalization zone are where the patient is receiving care, not zone of residence
Zone Hospitalized ICU
Calgary 11 (-4) 3 (+0)
Edmonton 25 (-5) 4 (-2)
Central 5 (+3) 3 (+3)
South 3 (+1) 0 (+0)
North 1 (+0) 0 (+0)
Spatial distribution of people tested:
Zone New Tests Total
Calgary +6967 197,416
Central +1318 34,381
Edmonton +7753 155,118
North +1508 37,380
South +1337 33,943
Unknown +428 8,234
Statements by Premier Kenney:
  • Has heard of and seen large crowds where physical distance wasn't maintained, specifically noting Sylvan Lake and indoor venues
  • Implores discipline and vigilance as such actions could jeopardize progress to date - uses the USA as an example
  • Worried about the economy of Canada/USA, which are heavily tied to each other
  • Situation is stable in Alberta
  • Notes triggers of halting relaunch once again: continued increase in hospitalizations (currently dropping), 50% of set aside ICU beds (at 20%...suggesting the limit is likely around 25)
  • Rise (<20%) in last couple weeks. May have been somewhat inevitable
  • High rate of younger individuals are young (55% are <40), major rise in 20-39 years old
  • Confident that Misericordia outbreak will be controlled
  • Confident that a potential "second wave" can be handled
  • Encourages physical distancing, mask wearing, hand washing, testing, and staying home it sick
  • On mandatory masking: doesn't feel Albertans need to be told to do the right thing. Masking when in crowded indoor areas is the right thing
  • 20 million non-medical masks will be distributed once again
  • On further reopening to Stage 3: concerned with the new case numbers. This is up to Albertans and how they conduct themselves
Statements by Minister Shandro:
  • Positive feedback from mask distribution, so a second round is being conducted
  • Drive through and at-counter distribution is possible with more masks per package
  • Long term care, seniors facilities, and social service organizations will also be provided masks
  • Multiple other groups (e.g. - transit service, places of worship, libraries, First Nations) will receive a share of the masks
  • Masking during public transit is recommended
  • About "recruiting" doctors to replace those threatening to leave: disappointed that medical graduates are being called "scabs". AHS does recruit for physicians and the 179 advertised is lower than in previous years. Claims it is a false narrative.
Statements by Dr Hinshaw:
  • Strongly recommends masking if physical distancing cannot be maintained, especially indoors
  • Wearing one is the right thing to do
  • No one measure will eliminate all exposure
  • Spread is increasing and more cases with unknown cause
  • About tracing app concerns: no timeline on fixing iPhone issues (must remain open and on)
  • About pharmacy testing: Didn't want to overwhelm pharmacies early on. Now discussing how to release the locations to the public
  • Asked about guidance that can be given to Sylvan Lake: There will be discussion this week to interested parties to ensure municipalities have the support needed
Additional information will be logged below:
Update 1 - Number of cases reported on July 10 and 12 were revised on the web page (to 54 and 80, respectively). Table updated.
submitted by kirant to alberta [link] [comments]


2020.07.12 17:57 OkLetterhead9 When someone tell you the "real feminists" want equality.

Great comment by karen straughan, i think everyone should read. and when someone tell you the real feminists want equality give it to him/her :
So what you're saying is that you, a commenter using a username on an internet forum are the true feminist, and the feminists actually responsible for changing the laws, writing the academic theory, teaching the courses, influencing the public policies, and the massive, well-funded feminist organizations with thousands and thousands of members all of whom call themselves feminists... they are not "real feminists".
That's not just "no true Scotsman". That's delusional self deception.
Listen, if you want to call yourself a feminist, I don't care. I've been investigating feminism for more than 9 years now, and people like you used to piss me off, because to my mind all you were doing was providing cover and ballast for the powerful political and academic feminists you claim are just jerks. And believe me, they ARE jerks. If you knew half of what I know about the things they've done under the banner of feminism, maybe you'd stop calling yourself one.
But I want you to know. You don't matter. You're not the director of the Feminist Majority Foundation and editor of Ms. Magazine, Katherine Spillar, who said of domestic violence: "Well, that's just a clean-up word for wife-beating," and went on to add that regarding male victims of dating violence, "we know it's not girls beating up boys, it's boys beating up girls."
You're not Jan Reimer, former mayor of Edmonton and long-time head of Alberta's Network of Women's Shelters, who just a few years ago refused to appear on a TV program discussing male victims of domestic violence, because for her to even show up and discuss it would lend legitimacy to the idea that they exist.
You're not Mary P Koss, who describes male victims of female rapists in her academic papers as being not rape victims because they were "ambivalent about their sexual desires" (if you don't know what that means, it's that they actually wanted it), and then went on to define them out of the definition of rape in the CDC's research because it's inappropriate to consider what happened to them rape.
You're not the National Organization for Women, and its associated legal foundations, who lobbied to replace the gender neutral federal Family Violence Prevention and Services Act of 1984 with the obscenely gendered Violence Against Women Act of 1994. The passing of that law cut male victims out of support services and legal assistance in more than 60 passages, just because they were male.
You're not the Florida chapter of the NOW, who successfully lobbied to have Governor Rick Scott veto not one, but two alimony reform bills in the last ten years, bills that had passed both houses with overwhelming bipartisan support, and were supported by more than 70% of the electorate.
You're not the feminist group in Maryland who convinced every female member of the House on both sides of the aisle to walk off the floor when a shared parenting bill came up for a vote, meaning the quorum could not be met and the bill died then and there.
You're not the feminists in Canada agitating to remove sexual assault from the normal criminal courts, into quasi-criminal courts of equity where the burden of proof would be lowered, the defendant could be compelled to testify, discovery would go both ways, and defendants would not be entitled to a public defender.
You're not Professor Elizabeth Sheehy, who wrote a book advocating that women not only have the right to murder their husbands without fear of prosecution if they make a claim of abuse, but that they have the moral responsibility to murder their husbands.
You're not the feminist legal scholars and advocates who successfully changed rape laws such that a woman's history of making multiple false allegations of rape can be excluded from evidence at trial because it's "part of her sexual history."
You're not the feminists who splattered the media with the false claim that putting your penis in a passed-out woman's mouth is "not a crime" in Oklahoma, because the prosecutor was incompetent and charged the defendant under an inappropriate statute (forcible sodomy) and the higher court refused to expand the definition of that statute beyond its intended scope when there was already a perfectly good one (sexual battery) already there. You're not the idiot feminists lying to the public and potentially putting women in Oklahoma at risk by telling potential offenders there's a "legal" way to rape them.
And you're none of the hundreds or thousands of feminist scholars, writers, thinkers, researchers, teachers and philosophers who constructed and propagate the body of bunkum theories upon which all of these atrocities are based.
You're the true feminist. Some random person on the internet.
submitted by OkLetterhead9 to LeftWingMaleAdvocates [link] [comments]


2020.06.30 05:37 OneFaraday The Drowned Village (M)

I’ll get some of these boring details out of the way first, because they might be relevant. Who knows?
I found the thumb drive in a McDonald’s restroom in Yorkton, Saskatchewan, on January 3rd. The service was mediocre but the food was hot and the restrooms were clean. I still felt hungover from New Year’s in Edmonton, and although the roads were alright the other drivers were typical idiots and I needed to stay alert.
I was sitting there in that tiny stall, browsing Reddit, not expecting I was about the find the video that would consume my life over the next month. I pulled on the tail of flimsy toilet paper that was dangling from the dispenser, and along with the see-through thin sheet of paper a small object fell out and clattered on the tile floor. I bent over to get a better look; it was a small blue thumb drive.
I don’t know why I bothered to pick it up and pocket it. I don’t usually put random small objects in my pockets, especially from bathrooms in roadside burger joints. But I did. I finished my business and got out of there, and almost forgot I had the little drive until I made it home safely that evening in Winnipeg.
My roommate was still with his family in Newfoundland, so I had our little apartment to myself. I didn’t start work until the fifth, so I settled in to lounge around and play pointless video games until the early hours.
When I took my pants off, the thumb drive fell out.
I held it curiously between my thumb and forefinger. There weren’t any markings on it besides the brand. There was something about it that made me uneasy; maybe it just seemed so intentional, the way it must have been tucked into that toilet paper dispenser. Like someone was hoping that it would be found. I mulled it over for a few minutes; could it be dangerous? Did it have a virus or some sort of malware that would infect my computer and send all of my personal info to it’s creator?
In the end, curiosity won over prudence. I plugged it into my gaming PC, and had a look. There was only one file on the drive, a large video file just labelled 45041.mp4. The thumbnail was just a dark blue. So of course, being the naive fool I was, I double-clicked on it.
I won’t tell you yet what I saw, but I sat there riveted. At first it seemed like it was just someone’s home movie, but weird things started happening that caught my attention and kept me glued to my seat until the very end. When I got to the end and the file stopped playing, I found myself sitting there in my dark bedroom, in my gross black second-hand office chair, white knuckles gripping the armrests, eyes so wide and unmoving they ached and stung from dryness, mouth gaping like a dead fish.
Since then, I’ve been desperately trying to piece it all together.
First, a few details about the file: it’s about an hour and forty-five minutes long. Strangely, there is no sound. When the file started I fiddled with my volume controls for a bit before realizing that there just wasn’t anything to hear. I right-clicked on the file and opened the properties tab, where I discovered the video properties showed it to be 1280x720, data rate of 6028Kbps, total bitrate of 6161kbps, 29 frames per second. I don’t know much about file formats, maybe that’ll be helpful to someone. Anyways, the point is: the audio information just says NONE.
Whoever edited it did so haphazardly. Scenes cut with no transitions, so it’s really jarring. Sometimes cuts happen mid-sentence when someone is talking. There a few boring long stretches that really should have been taken out. Maybe it made more sense with audio.
I watched the video nearly every day since, pausing frequently to analyze details and piece together what happened. Fortunately, I have an acquaintance who is hard of hearing. He’s Marc, the only other person I’ve shown the video too. At first he was pretty wary, thinking I was asking him to use his skill like he was performing a party trick, but once he saw the video he had the same reaction and understood.
Unfortunately, he wasn’t exactly able to provide a transcript. Sometimes the people in the video aren’t facing the camera. Marc isn’t entirely deaf either, he usually needs some sound in order to piece together speech. And it’s not easy to figure out what’s going on in the video, so context clues aren’t all there. However, he was able to put together enough to provide some of the dialogue that will be in my description of the video. It helps a bit, but we still don’t entirely understand the content of the video.
It was on January 20th that I finally made the big discovery, that made me realize I had somehow fallen off the deep end and had to share this all with somebody and put out my plea for help.
Okay, I’ve gone on long enough. Time to describe what’s in the video itself.
---
The first scene is inside a car. From later exterior shots, we discover that it’s a blue Nissan Altima, probably 2009. The camera is pointed out the window at some rocky hills. There are lots of trees: oak, aspen, maple, and so forth. There are a few leaves just starting to turn orange and red. A sign whizzes past; I later managed to pause and read the text “Hardwood Road 400m.” This is the first of many clues that helped me figure out their route. They’re in Ontario, heading west.
The camera turns to the driver. She’s stunning; not in the sense of a blonde instagram model, but very regal and beautiful. She had dark black hair with a few strands of white. She has a sharp jaw, grey eyes, and a few lines around her eyes. Late thirties, probably. She’s the reason I kept watching the video, the first time. Marc suspects that she’s French Canadian, which is one of the reasons he had difficulty with the transcript. The camera is pointed at her a lot. We’re pretty sure her name is Renée.
Renée notices she’s on camera. She smiles at the passenger.
“There’s a Tim Horton’s ahead. Want to stop and stretch?”
The passenger probably says something like “Yes, and let’s grab a coffee.”
“Great idea,” says Renée. “The road already feels monotonous.”
There’s a bit of silence. The passenger aims the camera ahead down the road for a bit, then back at Renée.
“Are you going to film us the entire trip?” Renée asks with a smile.
We don’t hear the response, but Renée laughs, then the scene abruptly cuts.
The next scene is on a very long bridge over a mix of wetlands, islands, and river. The camera is mostly pointed at the scenery, but a couple of times it looks over at Renée.
At one point, Renée looks thoughtful and says something like “Yes, of course she will.” We don’t know what the question was.
We see two flags pass by: one Canadian, one American. I later discovered that this is the border; they are on the Sault Ste Marie bridge, crossing into the states.
I’m still not sure where in the states they stopped next, but it looks like they took advantage of the opportunity for some cross-border crossing. There’s a shot in the parking lot outside a Walmart, where they are loading their bags into the back of the car. We see the passenger’s legs and feet in one shot, our first good glimpse of her. What we can see of her outfit is a little more feminine and fashionable than Renée’s simple, comfortable clothes. She’s wearing white open-toed shoes, and her toenails are painted. She’s wearing a flowing black skirt, and from the glimpse of her left hand holding some shopping bags, it looks like she’s got a white knit sweater.
They root through the bags and show some of their items to the camera; presumably the audio had an explanation of what they’ve bought and why, but at this point in the video it’s kind of confusing. There’s a waterproof box for the video camera. A bunch of pulleys and ropes. Road snacks and drinks. Nose clips, the kind used for diving. A big pair of bolt cutters. Thigh-length wading boots, like fly-fishers use. It’s obvious now that they’re on some sort of mission, but it’s hard to guess what. It looks like they’re going wading, rock climbing, and diving all at once. When I first saw all of this, I wondered if they were going after hidden treasure or something.
The camera pans up to Renée’s face, catching her mid sentence. Just a note- where you see parenthesis, those are off-camera gaps in the dialogue that we’ve guessed at.
“(That should) be enough. If not, ---- is only an hour’s drive from the site.” We think she said the name of a town there, but Marc just screwed up his face and shrugged. He said she spoke it very quickly, and it’s a complex word. He thinks it has an “s” in the middle and maybe an “r” on the end, and it’s probably three syllables. If we could figure it out, we might understand more about what happened.
The next shot is in the car, driving through North Dakota. It’s presumably the next morning. The camera is pointed at Renée, and we only know her side of the conversation, so it’s hard to guess at what’s going on. She sips her coffee and looks thoughtful, like she’s listening.
“Yeah, we’re not far off schedule. We should make it to Moose Jaw tonight.”
Between her accent and the strange name of the town, it took us a while to figure out “Moose Jaw.” It wasn’t until I plotted out their route on Google Maps that I realized this must be where they stopped. That was an important realization. In a very roundabout way, it led to me figuring out exactly when this trip took place. This conversation in the car took place on August 24th, 2019.
The passenger asks something like “(Do you need a break? Want me to drive?)”
“Sure, in a while,” Renée replies. “We’ll stop and stretch at the border, and we can switch drivers.”
There’s a gap where neither of them are talking. The passenger turns the camera to the road to take in some scenery, then pans back.
We’re not sure what the passenger just asked, but Renée looks suddenly serious.
“Beth,” she says, finally giving us the passenger’s name. “We can’t focus on that yet. All we can do is offer her the-”
We’re not sure of the rest of the conversation. Beth’s hands get shaky. She looks away from Renée a lot. We know that they continue this important conversation, and Renée starts to look upset but is clearly trying to keep Beth calm. Marc caught a few random words but isn’t certain: drive, river, help, and “do our best.” The scene cuts suddenly with the tension unresolved.
The next shot is a brief one. Renée is smiling now, snacking on some cheetos. They are entering a small town; a sign welcomes them to Portal.
In the next shot, they have switched seats. We finally see Beth. She is a little younger than Renée, wearing more makeup, and has big round sunglasses on. She is happy now. She puts out her hand, and Renée follows it with the camera down to her own knee. She takes Beth’s hand in her own and squeezes it. It’s a very sweet, sort of Thelma-and-Louise moment. They’re obviously good friends.
Renée watches the road for a bit. We are back in Canada. The trees are getting more sparse, and we can see more and more of the flat boring prairies Saskatchewan is famous for. Road signs are kilometres. Gas prices are in cents per litre.
At this point, I think Renée asks Beth what she wants for dinner.
“Chinese,” Beth says with a smile, and laughs.
I don’t know what the in-joke is, but I’m pretty sure of the word because suddenly the scene cuts to the inside of a restaurant. It’s a chinese buffet.
The first time I watched the video, I felt a surge of recognition, and I realized that I’d been to this restaurant before. I didn’t figure out where and when until later, when I realized they were in Moose Jaw. Then I realized that this was a restaurant I sometimes stopped at on my road trips back and forth from my hometown to my new home in Winnipeg.
Beth has the camera again. She is watching Renée eat. Renée blushes and tries to demur from the camera.
As their eating slowed and their chopsticks settled on their plates, their conversation turned serious again.
“At least a hundred and fifty feet,” Renée answers to some unseen questions.
“(Do we have enough rope?)”
“Yes, we got two hundred and fifty each. It’s lots.”
I’m not sure what the next question was.
“Then we just use the winch and pull ourselves free.”
The next part of the conversation is unknown, because Renée starts fiddling with her chopsticks, mumbling, and grazing on more of her meal. Marc rolled his eyes in frustration at this point, and said something about how “hearing people” do this shit all the time and it drives him nuts.
Presumably they continue discussing technical aspects of their adventure. Renée looks very sober and anxious about it, but she’s still clearly keeping it together for Beth’s sake.
Beth gently sets down the camera, but for some reason leaves it running and pointed at the interior of the restaurant while she leaves for the bathroom. The other patrons of the restaurant continue eating and don’t notice.
Another jarring cut to the inside of a hotel room. Beth is ready for bed, in a t-shirt and underwear. She’s sitting cross-legged on the king-size bed, holding an iPad in her lap. Her face is glued to the screen, which is shining blue light up at her. She looks like she’s been crying.
It’s unclear why Renée is recording this, it feels like a violation of privacy, but Beth doesn’t seem to mind. She looks up.
“She’s still following us, isn’t she?”
We’re not sure of Renée’s answer, but it doesn’t seem to comfort Beth much. She just nods.
There’s presumably some sort of noise, and suddenly they both look to the window. The window must be open a crack, because the sheer curtains are moving gently in the breeze. There doesn’t seem to be anything there.
Renée spontaneously rushes to the window, still holding the camera. As she approaches it, the scene cuts again.
I watched that footage a hundred times, I think, searching for whatever startled them. Sometimes I convince myself I can see a face beyond, but it’s clear from the view of the building across the parking lot that they must be on at least the seventh floor.
It’s the next morning, and they’re leaving Moose Jaw. Renée is driving again, clutching a cup of coffee in her right hand and never setting it down. She doesn’t look like she slept much.
The camera stays focused on her for a solid five minutes as she drives and sips. Then, in response to an unseen question, she suddenly speaks.
“Yes. She probably will.”
After another minute and twenty seconds, another cut. Suddenly the camera seems to be inside of a bag or something; it’s almost completely dark, but the bag must be open enough to show some blurry dark shapes moving around like someone is walking. I later speculated that they were trying to catch a conversation with someone on record, and hidden the camera in a bag. Now though, it’s just four minutes of vague blurry shapes.
Then Renée is holding the camera. It’s pointed at Beth. Beth looks like she’s been crying, but is putting on a brave face now. They take a left turn at a tiny town called Dunmore, then another there’s another sudden cut.
They eventually stop for the night. They aren’t a hotel tonight, but in someone’s home. From context, I’m guessing that these are Beth’s parents, or some other close relatives.
Renée is holding the camera now, pointing it at Beth’s mother who his cooking on the stove. She’s wearing an old-fashioned pink apron with lace edges, and has a matching oven mitt on. She looks like an older, shorter Beth, with her blonde hair cut into a bob that doesn’t really suit her. She smiles nervously when she sees that she’s being filmed, and makes some comment about “that camera” before hiding in embarrassment behind the oven mit.
Beth steps into frame and laughs, patting her mother on the back and presumably offering to help her cook, because then we see Mom handing her a cheese grater and a block of cheddar.
Renée pans over across the kitchen to where Beth’s father is stepping into the room. He looks stern, almost angry, and is clutching a tumbler of amber fluid like he wants to smash it across Renée’s face.
The father says something, but he’s saying it through gritted teeth. Marc thinks part of it is “would lead her through this,” but that’s a guess. Beth’s mother steps quickly back into frame, gently taking Dad’s glass and saying something to him to try and calm him down. He looks like he’s about to say something, but there’s another sudden cut.
The next shot is very brief, and confusing. It’s a bathroom sink- presumably at Beth’s parents’ place. From the lighting it looks like the middle of the night, and the only light on is the bathroom light overhead. The sink is full of strange, wet, tangled gray hair. The angle of the shot doesn’t let us see the mirror, so we don’t know who’s holding the camera. They just linger on the hair for about five seconds, then another cut.
The next shot is in the entryway of Beth’s parents’ house. Beth’s mother says something like “Sorry for the (incident) last night.” She almost elbows Dad in the ribs, and he mutters what must be an apology. The camera pans around the room, momentarily showing Beth and Renée in the hall mirror, before the shot ends.
I kept coming back to this shot for some reason. I thought it was noteworthy that this is probably the only shot where we can see both Renée’s and Beth’s faces at the same time. But something in the back of my head kept itching over this, and eventually I realized the obvious: from the angle of the shot, the camera should be visible. But neither of them are holding it, and there’s no one else there.
Next is another highway driving shot. It’s short, and just seems to establish that they are leaving Fort MacLeod, a town in Alberta.
The next shot is from inside the car. It’s unclear what the camera is supposed to be recording, because it’s on its side and laying on the dash, pointed haphazardly out the passenger window. It’s like they set it down, left the car, and the camera turned on by itself.
Outside the car is a parking lot, surrounded by coniferous trees. Everything looks like it’s covered in mist and fog. I speculate that they’ve made it to the Rocky Mountains now. They are probably at a rest stop.
There is a strange figure across the parking lot. It looks like a gray-haired woman, but I was never able to zoom in on this shot well enough to see. She seems to be just staring at the car, directly at the camera lens.
Renée and Beth walk in from out of frame and get into the car. They don’t seem to have noticed the woman. As the car starts up, one of them must have noticed that the camera is on, because it shakes like its being picked up. Then the shot ends.
After that, it’s really difficult to figure out their route. The next shot is inside a busy cafe where they order hot drinks and cheesecake, but there’s no clues to figure out where it is. Renée is holding the camera. There isn’t much conversation, and large parts of it are obscured by Beth’s hands or her cup. She looks uneasy and distracted. She keeps looking out the window.
The next shot is back in the car. At one point I saw a highway sign, but other than knowing that they are now in British Columbia, I can’t figure out their location.
Beth is driving again, Renée is holding the camera.
“You think filming everything will really help?” asks Beth.
“(Filming was your idea.)”
“Yeah. Yeah it was, wasn’t it? I just thought that we should, because…” This part is unintelligible.
Renée asks something, we’re not sure what.
“Maybe it’ll help. Maybe it’ll be easier for the next person.”
There’s a long pause in the conversation.
“I wish we had never found that USB drive,” Beth sighs.
Obviously, when Marc told me this part, I just about lost my mind. I’d already developed some strange kind of connection with Beth and Renée, something that I couldn’t put my finger on. But now there was some kind of parallel between us that was emerging.
There’s only one more shot. It’s impossible to know where, but I’m fairly certain that they are now far past the Rockies. The mountains in the background look different, older or more worn somehow. I think they are somewhere in the B.C. interior.
They have parked in what appears to be the parking lot of a defunct facility of some kind. Everything is in disrepair. The pavement is riddled with potholes, some of which are already growing saplings. They seem to be in some kind of valley, but it’s so heavily forested that it’s hard to see much of the scenery.
The camera glances over at the entrance to the parking lot. The road also looks disused. There was a heavy gate blocking the parking lot, but now it was swinging in the wind. I understood why they brought the bolt cutters.
Beth is holding the camera. Renée has a very strong, stoic look on her face. She turns to the camera.
“It’s going to be okay. Remember, she can’t hurt you. Okay? We can do this.”
Beth makes some sort of response, and Renée nods.
They load up their gear in a duffel bag and begin hiking down an old trail through the woods. It’s treacherous; it looks like nobody has been down here in a while. A couple of times Renée takes out a saw and clears some branches to make the way more passable.
After a few minutes, a clearing becomes visible ahead. Then they descend below the tree line, and it becomes obvious that this isn’t just a clearing.
The camera pans over the area, and I think that if I could hear them they would both be gasping in awe. I know I do every time I get to this point. They’re near the water line now, of what must have been an enormous reservoir. There is mud… literally everywhere. The water must have drained away recently, because it’s all fresh and wet and brownish-gray. It coats nearly everything below the old water level, except a few rocky outcroppings. Off to the left there is a bank that must have been a picnic spot on the shore of the reservoir, because I can see an area of green grass surrounding a picnic table and a tall lone aspen tree. Around this area is just mud. Renée and Beth carefully hike over to the table.
From here, something new comes into sight. There are a bunch of buildings below that mud line, enough to be a hamlet or a small town. They’re vague ruined blocks now, probably made of brick, coated in mud, like a child had been building houses out of clay and left them half-finished.
Beth pans over to Renée, who is kneeling next to the aspen tree, winding a rope around it. She is saying something, but it’s not very clear because her mouth is obscured by the camera angle and some of the terminology is hard for Marc for decipher. He caught “we’re going down,” “the ropes are tight,” and “pull it tight.” I thought about finding a friend with climbing experience to explain the setup with the ropes and pulleys to me, but I decided that the fewer people who knew about the video the better.
As Renée is finishing setting up the ropes, Beth says something, I have no idea what. Renée nods. She reaches into her pocket and pulls out an envelope. Inside is a piece of lined paper, written on with felt marker. She smooths it out and sets it down on the picnic table. Beth brings the camera over it, and lingers there for a few seconds. Of course, I have paused the playback to read the message several times. Why they wrote it down instead of saying it, I don’t know. The whole video they’re acting like I can hear them, but for this brief moment they seem to know that I will have to read this.
We’re very sorry. We have no control over what happens after this. We tried our best to follow the instructions perfectly, but if we have failed someone else will have to try next. Before you make the attempt, do as we did. Record your journey. Pass on this message:
Only one thing will satisfy her. Only one thing will complete the drowned village. Bring it to her, but if you fail, you must pass on the message.
The camera panned back up, and settled on Beth’s face. She had turned the camera around to speak directly into it, but her hands are unsteady so her words aren’t totally clear.
“She’s been following us for (several weeks). Ever since we found the USB drive. We see her everywhere. (We haven’t been able to) sleep. I hope this is the end of it- if not, you will have to try next. I’m so sorry. It happened to us too. Wish us luck, (but if we fail) good luck to you.”
Beth set the camera down on the table, and I watched them put on their hip waders, strapping them over their shoulders. Then they strapped themselves into climbing harnesses, and clipped themselves on to the rope. Beth pulled the nose clips out of her pocket and put one on, handing the other to Renée. I was confused by this for a while, then I realized that if this was a body of water that had recently been emptied, it probably stank. The mud was probably full of bacteria, algae, some freshwater plants, even a few fish and other animals. It was all in the early stages of decomposition.
Beth picked up the camera and followed Renée down past the water line. They tried to stick to the rocky areas, but sometimes they had to wade carefully through the mud. Some parts looked to be deeper than others, so they had to avoid getting stuck in the more treacherous areas. The purpose of the ropes became obvious: if they got mired in the mud, their only hope might be pulling themselves out.
At one point Beth leaned over to examine something. It was like a stringy texture in the uniform grey of everything, stuck into the mud. She reached down and pulled it up, and I realized it was some kind of hair algae or stringy moss. It looked exactly like the “hair” in the sink at her parent’s house. Now that I was aware of it, I realized it was all over the place.
They made it to the largest, and highest-up building. Up close, it was obviously by its architecture that it had been a small old schoolhouse. Renée walked right up to it, and Beth must have said something in alarm, but Renée just looked over her shoulder and smiled. She said something like “it should be safe.” Part of her speech is cut off as she turns back to the building, then Marc could make out more when she turns back.
“They explored it in the last video. I want to see it for myself.”
So in they went. Inside were rows of very old desks. If there had been chalkboards or decorations in the school, they were long eroded or caked in mud. The mud was calf deep, making the seats of the desks look strangely low to the ground.
There wasn’t really much else to see. They retraced their steps and checked their ropes, then descended to the town. Everywhere it was more of the same. If this town had been sacrificed to build a dam, it would have been cleared of artifacts before it was flooded. If not, if it had fallen prey to some kind of flood or disaster, then the everyday items of the resident’s lives were washed away or buried in the mud. All that was left was the structures themselves, and they were crumbling away too.
The camera looked around nervously, then settled on Renée. Renée shrugged. She reached into her pocket and pulled something out. It was an old antique bell, the kind that a farm wife might ring to call everyone in for supper.
“Yeah, I think so,” Renée replied to Beth’s unseen question. “The guy said it was from this town, but who knows. As far as we can tell, she was the schoolteacher.”
Renée carefully and ceremoniously set the handbell down on an exposed rock jutting out of the mud. She looked at Beth, then back and forth down the muddy valley.
Suddenly she screamed, and pointed uphill. The camera swung quickly around and settled on a figure standing in the mud about fifty paces away. It was that same grey-haired woman, but now I realized that she wasn’t grey from age. She was grey from head to toe, covered in that same mud.
She pointed directly at the camera, and just stood there. The camera starts shaking, and it seems like Beth and Renée are trying to quickly get out of there. At this point they must hear what’s coming.
At the last moment, the camera turns back towards the woman, but this time she’s not there. She’s obscured behind an enormous thirty-foot tall wall of white water, rushing down the valley, coming towards the camera at high speed.
There was no time to escape. The camera gets caught up in the wake. It doesn’t go too far down the valley, because it’s snapped securely into its waterproof case, which is strapped to Beth’s wrist, who is tied to the aspen tree. So it spins around and around for a few minutes, and as the initial rush of water goes past it settles to the bottom of the reservoir and lies still, pointed back up the hill where the woman is still standing, unmoved by the water. She is still staring directly into the lens.
This is the final shot, and it lasts for another four minutes. Everything is underwater, dark and still. The woman stands there unflinching the entire time. Near the end, Renée’s body floats slowly into view, still tethered to the faraway tree.
That’s the video. And now you probably know why I described it, instead of just uploading for you to watch. It was meant for me all along.
I knew this for sure on January 20, when I went back and watched the scene in the Chinese restaurant. You see, the reason I was able to figure out the exact date of the video is because I’m sitting there, in the background, eating my fried rice with a spoon. You can see me clearly once you zoom in. I’m wearing my red hoodie and black jeans.
After I watched the video, she started showing up everywhere. She comes to my window at night, watching me sleep. I see her in playgrounds, back alleys, out of the corner of my eye. I went to the movies and she was in the front row, but was gone when the movie let out. She won’t leave me alone, and I know what I have to do now.
Marc’s coming with me, she found him too. He agrees with me, we need to follow Renée and Beth’s path and try to satisfy the woman in the reservoir. I’ve barely slept in weeks; she is ruining my life.
On the way there, we’re going to have to figure out our offering to her. I have no idea what will satisfy her, but I have to try. I’m on my way to the pawn shop to buy a video camera, just in case. (Wish us luck.)
The only question left- and the thing I need your help with- where is she? I don’t know where to find the village.
submitted by OneFaraday to creepypod [link] [comments]


2020.06.14 20:52 mhandanna Scientific Study: Feminsm Makes You More Man Hating. STUDY: Self-identified feminists are much more likely than other women to "sacrifice" men in a hypothetical "Moral Choice Dilemma Task" over women. Plus other studies proving gynocentrism is real and misandry among feminists is real

Science is in from the ministry of the bleeding obvious. Feminism makes you a misandrist. See below:
https://twitter.com/manumiss1on/status/1004331266794237952 (has the study and diagrams of the studies e.g. more likely to kill, more likely to electrocute etc.)
That aside, We all know that female teachers heavily favour girls in marking and discipline, while male teachers mark girls exactly the same as external examiners.
https://www.reddit.com/UnpopularFacts/comments/ght5dj/teachers_mark_girls_higher_for_identical_work_to/
Watch a real life example of Candace Owens talking to a feminist. The feminist initialy claims she doesnt hate men, within 2 minutes of cross examination that is revealed false lol
https://youtu.be/AsJPKLfMrI0
Scientific evidence on Gamma Bias (we are seeing tonnes of it currently in COVID coverage, women are wonderful etc. man bad)
https://malepsychology.org.uk/2018/12/04/why-are-there-so-many-disagreements-about-gender-issues-its-usually-down-to-gamma-bias/
The scientific evidence for #gynocentrism is overwhelming. "When faced with either pushing a male or female bystander [to save 5 others], participants overwhelmingly choose to sacrifice a male bystander." The participant’s gender has no significant effect. http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.117
If offered money to electrocute an innocent subject, both sexes electrocuted male subjects much more than female.
Here is a write up of the research: "We’re more likely to sacrifice a man than a woman when it comes to both saving the lives of others and in pursuing our self-interests" "Society perceives harming women as more morally unacceptable” https://web.archive.org/web/2016120417
https://www.reddit.com/MRRef/comments/e2tjgj/study_both_men_and_women_especially_are_more/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x
https://www.reddit.com/MRRef/comments/e2tda3/study_men_are_more_generous_to_women_in_a/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x
https://www.reddit.com/MRRef/comments/e2tf8b/study_men_receive_less_costly_altruism_and/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x
General femnists hostility towards mens issues/ feminist misandry:
There was a proposal at Simon Fraser University (near Vancouver) to open up a men's centre on campus to address issues like suicide, drug/alcohol addiction, and negative stereotypes. The women's centre, which already existed, opposed this. They argued that a men's centre is not needed because the men's centre is already "everywhere else" (even though those issues aren't being addressed "everywhere else"). The alternative they proposed was a "male allies project" to "bring self-identified men together to talk about masculinity and its harmful effects" [1].
A student at Durham University in England, affected by the suicide of a close male friend, tried to open up the Durham University Male Human Rights Society: "[i]t’s incredible how much stigma there is against male weakness. Men’s issues are deemed unimportant, so I decided to start a society". The idea was rejected by the Societies Committee as it was deemed "controversial". He was told he could only have a men's group as a branch of the Feminist Society group on campus. This was ironic since he point them to the feminist societies own literature which states it would be extremely unreasonable for them to discuss issues about men[9].
Author Warren Farrell went to give a talk on the boys' crisis (boys dropping out of school and committing suicide at higher rates) at the University of Toronto, but he was opposed by protesters who "barricaded the doors, harassed attendees, pulled fire alarms, chanted curses at speakers and more". Opposition included leaders in the student union [2] [3].
Three students (one man and two women) at Ryerson University (also in Toronto) decided to start a club dedicated to men's issues. They were blocked by the Ryerson Students' Union, which associated the men's issues club with supposed "anti-women's rights groups" and called the idea that it's even possible to be sexist against men an "oppressive concept" [4]. The student union also passed a motion saying that it rejects "Groups, meetings events or initiatives [that] negate the need to centre women’s voices in the struggle for gender equity" (while ironically saying that women's issues "have historically and continue to today to be silenced") [5].
Janice Fiamengo, a professor at the University of Ottawa, was giving a public lecture on men's issues. She was interrupted by a group of students shouting, blasting horns, and pulling the fire alarm [6].
At Oberlin College in Ohio, various students had invited equity feminist Christina Hoff Sommers (known for her individualist/libertarian perspective on gender) to give a talk on men's issues. Activists hung up posters identifying those who invited her (by their full names) as "supporters of rape culture" [7] [8].
At Saint Paul University (part of the University of Ottawa) on September 24th, 2015, journalist Cathy Young gave a talk on gender politics on university campuses, GamerGate, the tendency to neglect men's issues in society, and the focus on the victimization of women (in the areas of sexual violence and cyberbullying). She was met by masked protesters who called her "rape apologist scum" and interrupted the event by pulling the fire alarm [10].
In 2015, the University of York in the U.K. announced its intention to observe International Men's Day, noting that they are "also aware of some of the specific issues faced by men", including under-representation of (and bias against) men in various areas of the university (such as academic staff appointments, professional support services, and support staff in academic departments) [11]. This inspired a torrent of criticism, including an open letter to the university claiming that a day to celebrate men's issues "does not combat inequality, but merely amplifies existing, structurally imposed, inequalities". The university responded by going back on its plans to observe International Men's Day and affirming that "the main focus of gender equality work should continue to be on the inequalities faced by women". In contrast, the University of York's observation of International Women's Day a few months earlier was a week long affair with more than 100 events [12].
Source: From the excellent Mens rights guide:
https://www.reddit.com/rbomi/wiki/main#wiki_2._hostility_to_acknowledging.2Faddressing_men.27s_issues
Some of these femintis in action:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iARHCxAMAO0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cMYfxOFBBM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ha2E5aQ7yb8
A long list of feminists blocking mens rights:
http://archive.is/AWSEN
Dont foget Karens Straughans excellent post in reposnse to a feminists saying these are not true feminists:
Karen Straughan:
So what you're saying is that you, a commenter using a username on an internet forum are the true feminist, and the feminists actually responsible for changing the laws, writing the academic theory, teaching the courses, influencing the public policies, and the massive, well-funded feminist organizations with thousands and thousands of members all of whom call themselves feminists... they are not "real feminists".
You're not the director of the Feminist Majority Foundation and editor of Ms. Magazine, Katherine Spillar, who said of domestic violence: "Well, that's just a clean-up word for wife-beating," and went on to add that regarding male victims of dating violence, "we know it's not girls beating up boys, it's boys beating up girls."
You're not Jan Reimer, former mayor of Edmonton and long-time head of Alberta's Network of Women's Shelters, who just a few years ago refused to appear on a TV program discussing male victims of domestic violence, because for her to even show up and discuss it would lend legitimacy to the idea that they exist.
You're not Mary P Koss, who describes male victims of female rapists in her academic papers as being not rape victims because they were "ambivalent about their sexual desires" (if you don't know what that means, it's that they actually wanted it), and then went on to define them out of the definition of rape in the CDC's research because it's inappropriate to consider what happened to them rape.
You're not the National Organization for Women, and its associated legal foundations, who lobbied to replace the gender neutral federal Family Violence Prevention and Services Act of 1984 with the obscenely gendered Violence Against Women Act of 1994. The passing of that law cut male victims out of support services and legal assistance in more than 60 passages, just because they were male.
You're not the Florida chapter of the NOW, who successfully lobbied to have Governor Rick Scott veto not one, but two alimony reform bills in the last ten years, bills that had passed both houses with overwhelming bipartisan support, and were supported by more than 70% of the electorate.
You're not the feminist group in Maryland who convinced every female member of the House on both sides of the aisle to walk off the floor when a shared parenting bill came up for a vote, meaning the quorum could not be met and the bill died then and there.
You're not the feminists in Canada agitating to remove sexual assault from the normal criminal courts, into quasi-criminal courts of equity where the burden of proof would be lowered, the defendant could be compelled to testify, discovery would go both ways, and defendants would not be entitled to a public defender.
You're not Professor Elizabeth Sheehy, who wrote a book advocating that women not only have the right to murder their husbands without fear of prosecution if they make a claim of abuse, but that they have the moral responsibility to murder their husbands.
You're not the feminist legal scholars and advocates who successfully changed rape laws such that a woman's history of making multiple false allegations of rape can be excluded from evidence at trial because it's "part of her sexual history."
You're not the feminists who splattered the media with the false claim that putting your penis in a passed-out woman's mouth is "not a crime" in Oklahoma, because the prosecutor was incompetent and charged the defendant under an inappropriate statute (forcible sodomy) and the higher court refused to expand the definition of that statute beyond its intended scope when there was already a perfectly good one (sexual battery) already there. You're not the idiot feminists lying to the public and potentially putting women in Oklahoma at risk by telling potential offenders there's a "legal" way to rape them.
And you're none of the hundreds or thousands of feminist scholars, writers, thinkers, researchers, teachers and philosophers who constructed and propagate the body of bunkum theories upon which all of these atrocities are based.
No...You're the true feminist. Some random person on the internet.
submitted by mhandanna to LeftWingMaleAdvocates [link] [comments]


2020.06.14 20:47 mhandanna Scientific Study: Feminsm Makes You More Man Hating. STUDY: Self-identified feminists are much more likely than other women to "sacrifice" men in a hypothetical "Moral Choice Dilemma Task" over women. Plus other studies proving gynocentrism is real and misandry among feminists is real

Science is in from the ministry of the bleeding obvious. Feminism makes you a misandrist. See below:
https://twitter.com/manumiss1on/status/1004331266794237952 (has the study and diagrams of the studies e.g. more likely to kill, more likely to electrocute etc.)
That aside, We all know that female teachers heavily favour girls in marking and discipline, while male teachers mark girls exactly the same as external examiners.
https://www.reddit.com/UnpopularFacts/comments/ght5dj/teachers_mark_girls_higher_for_identical_work_to/
Watch a real life example of Candace Owens talking to a feminist. The feminist initialy claims she doesnt hate men, within 2 minutes of cross examination that is revealed false lol
https://youtu.be/AsJPKLfMrI0
Scientific evidence on Gamma Bias (we are seeing tonnes of it currently in COVID coverage, women are wonderful etc. man bad)
https://malepsychology.org.uk/2018/12/04/why-are-there-so-many-disagreements-about-gender-issues-its-usually-down-to-gamma-bias/
The scientific evidence for #gynocentrism is overwhelming. "When faced with either pushing a male or female bystander [to save 5 others], participants overwhelmingly choose to sacrifice a male bystander." The participant’s gender has no significant effect. http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.117
If offered money to electrocute an innocent subject, both sexes electrocuted male subjects much more than female.
Here is a write up of the research: "We’re more likely to sacrifice a man than a woman when it comes to both saving the lives of others and in pursuing our self-interests" "Society perceives harming women as more morally unacceptable” https://web.archive.org/web/2016120417
https://www.reddit.com/MRRef/comments/e2tjgj/study_both_men_and_women_especially_are_more/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x
https://www.reddit.com/MRRef/comments/e2tda3/study_men_are_more_generous_to_women_in_a/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x
https://www.reddit.com/MRRef/comments/e2tf8b/study_men_receive_less_costly_altruism_and/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x
General femnists hostility towards mens issues/ feminist misandry:
There was a proposal at Simon Fraser University (near Vancouver) to open up a men's centre on campus to address issues like suicide, drug/alcohol addiction, and negative stereotypes. The women's centre, which already existed, opposed this. They argued that a men's centre is not needed because the men's centre is already "everywhere else" (even though those issues aren't being addressed "everywhere else"). The alternative they proposed was a "male allies project" to "bring self-identified men together to talk about masculinity and its harmful effects" [1].
A student at Durham University in England, affected by the suicide of a close male friend, tried to open up the Durham University Male Human Rights Society: "[i]t’s incredible how much stigma there is against male weakness. Men’s issues are deemed unimportant, so I decided to start a society". The idea was rejected by the Societies Committee as it was deemed "controversial". He was told he could only have a men's group as a branch of the Feminist Society group on campus. This was ironic since he point them to the feminist societies own literature which states it would be extremely unreasonable for them to discuss issues about men[9].
Author Warren Farrell went to give a talk on the boys' crisis (boys dropping out of school and committing suicide at higher rates) at the University of Toronto, but he was opposed by protesters who "barricaded the doors, harassed attendees, pulled fire alarms, chanted curses at speakers and more". Opposition included leaders in the student union [2] [3].
Three students (one man and two women) at Ryerson University (also in Toronto) decided to start a club dedicated to men's issues. They were blocked by the Ryerson Students' Union, which associated the men's issues club with supposed "anti-women's rights groups" and called the idea that it's even possible to be sexist against men an "oppressive concept" [4]. The student union also passed a motion saying that it rejects "Groups, meetings events or initiatives [that] negate the need to centre women’s voices in the struggle for gender equity" (while ironically saying that women's issues "have historically and continue to today to be silenced") [5].
Janice Fiamengo, a professor at the University of Ottawa, was giving a public lecture on men's issues. She was interrupted by a group of students shouting, blasting horns, and pulling the fire alarm [6].
At Oberlin College in Ohio, various students had invited equity feminist Christina Hoff Sommers (known for her individualist/libertarian perspective on gender) to give a talk on men's issues. Activists hung up posters identifying those who invited her (by their full names) as "supporters of rape culture" [7] [8].
At Saint Paul University (part of the University of Ottawa) on September 24th, 2015, journalist Cathy Young gave a talk on gender politics on university campuses, GamerGate, the tendency to neglect men's issues in society, and the focus on the victimization of women (in the areas of sexual violence and cyberbullying). She was met by masked protesters who called her "rape apologist scum" and interrupted the event by pulling the fire alarm [10].
In 2015, the University of York in the U.K. announced its intention to observe International Men's Day, noting that they are "also aware of some of the specific issues faced by men", including under-representation of (and bias against) men in various areas of the university (such as academic staff appointments, professional support services, and support staff in academic departments) [11]. This inspired a torrent of criticism, including an open letter to the university claiming that a day to celebrate men's issues "does not combat inequality, but merely amplifies existing, structurally imposed, inequalities". The university responded by going back on its plans to observe International Men's Day and affirming that "the main focus of gender equality work should continue to be on the inequalities faced by women". In contrast, the University of York's observation of International Women's Day a few months earlier was a week long affair with more than 100 events [12].
Source: From the excellent Mens rights guide:
https://www.reddit.com/rbomi/wiki/main#wiki_2._hostility_to_acknowledging.2Faddressing_men.27s_issues
Some of these femintis in action:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iARHCxAMAO0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cMYfxOFBBM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ha2E5aQ7yb8
A long list of feminists blocking mens rights:
http://archive.is/AWSEN
Dont foget Karens Straughans excellent post in reposnse to a feminists saying these are not true feminists:
Karen Straughan:
So what you're saying is that you, a commenter using a username on an internet forum are the true feminist, and the feminists actually responsible for changing the laws, writing the academic theory, teaching the courses, influencing the public policies, and the massive, well-funded feminist organizations with thousands and thousands of members all of whom call themselves feminists... they are not "real feminists".
You're not the director of the Feminist Majority Foundation and editor of Ms. Magazine, Katherine Spillar, who said of domestic violence: "Well, that's just a clean-up word for wife-beating," and went on to add that regarding male victims of dating violence, "we know it's not girls beating up boys, it's boys beating up girls."
You're not Jan Reimer, former mayor of Edmonton and long-time head of Alberta's Network of Women's Shelters, who just a few years ago refused to appear on a TV program discussing male victims of domestic violence, because for her to even show up and discuss it would lend legitimacy to the idea that they exist.
You're not Mary P Koss, who describes male victims of female rapists in her academic papers as being not rape victims because they were "ambivalent about their sexual desires" (if you don't know what that means, it's that they actually wanted it), and then went on to define them out of the definition of rape in the CDC's research because it's inappropriate to consider what happened to them rape.
You're not the National Organization for Women, and its associated legal foundations, who lobbied to replace the gender neutral federal Family Violence Prevention and Services Act of 1984 with the obscenely gendered Violence Against Women Act of 1994. The passing of that law cut male victims out of support services and legal assistance in more than 60 passages, just because they were male.
You're not the Florida chapter of the NOW, who successfully lobbied to have Governor Rick Scott veto not one, but two alimony reform bills in the last ten years, bills that had passed both houses with overwhelming bipartisan support, and were supported by more than 70% of the electorate.
You're not the feminist group in Maryland who convinced every female member of the House on both sides of the aisle to walk off the floor when a shared parenting bill came up for a vote, meaning the quorum could not be met and the bill died then and there.
You're not the feminists in Canada agitating to remove sexual assault from the normal criminal courts, into quasi-criminal courts of equity where the burden of proof would be lowered, the defendant could be compelled to testify, discovery would go both ways, and defendants would not be entitled to a public defender.
You're not Professor Elizabeth Sheehy, who wrote a book advocating that women not only have the right to murder their husbands without fear of prosecution if they make a claim of abuse, but that they have the moral responsibility to murder their husbands.
You're not the feminist legal scholars and advocates who successfully changed rape laws such that a woman's history of making multiple false allegations of rape can be excluded from evidence at trial because it's "part of her sexual history."
You're not the feminists who splattered the media with the false claim that putting your penis in a passed-out woman's mouth is "not a crime" in Oklahoma, because the prosecutor was incompetent and charged the defendant under an inappropriate statute (forcible sodomy) and the higher court refused to expand the definition of that statute beyond its intended scope when there was already a perfectly good one (sexual battery) already there. You're not the idiot feminists lying to the public and potentially putting women in Oklahoma at risk by telling potential offenders there's a "legal" way to rape them.
And you're none of the hundreds or thousands of feminist scholars, writers, thinkers, researchers, teachers and philosophers who constructed and propagate the body of bunkum theories upon which all of these atrocities are based.
No...You're the true feminist. Some random person on the internet.
submitted by mhandanna to MensRights [link] [comments]


2020.05.25 23:53 kirant Covid-19 Update for May 25: 19 new cases, 3 deaths

Data is taken from the Covid-19 portal and today's media appearance by Dr Deena Hinshaw. The next availability by Dr Hinshaw will be on Wednesday.
Top line numbers:
Spatial distributions (cities proper for Calgary and Edmonton):
Spacial distribution of hospital usage (change based on yesterday's post):
Statements by Dr Hinshaw:
Additional information will be logged below:
submitted by kirant to alberta [link] [comments]


2020.05.21 20:26 extriniti CINEPLEX INC (TSX: $CGX ) STOCK OPPORTUNITY

CINEPLEX INC (TSX: $CGX ) STOCK OPPORTUNITY

Cineplex (TSX: $CGX)
CINEPLEX INC (TSX: $CGX ) STOCK OPPORTUNITY
Another great medium risk but high potential return stock. The stock has taken a beating because of Covid19 & movie theater closures.
Investors think Cineworld's C$34/share buyout offer will be cancelled, yet Reuter's reported, "Cineworld Says No Change In Co's Position On Cineplex Takeover Since March" on April 7. That's double your money at C$11.69 (at post) if it goes through.
Investors also think Cineplex will cancel their monthly $0.15 per share dividend in their next ER that they delayed until June 29, 2020.
Investors are discounting Cineplex's possible rise of online movie rentals to offset their onsite losses.
The odds don't get better than this but do your Due Diligence before investing.
---------------------------------------------
The Motley Fool described Cineplex as having a "virtual monopoly" over the cinema market in Canada.
#StockPick $CGX -- #ShakingTheTree with #Shorts hitting all the #Bulls #StopLoss down. Easy double or triple opportunity here. Do your #DueDiligence. Good luck to all.
#StockPick #CGX $CGX $CGX.TO
---------------------------------------------

MY DUE DILIGENCE:

---------------------------------------------
52 Week Range:
Low: C$6.30 (Coronavirus Crash)
High: C$34.39 (Buyout Offer)
CGX Stock Performance
---------------------------------------------
Cineplex Inc., formerly known as Cineplex Galaxy Income Fund and Galaxy Entertainment Inc. is a Canadian entertainment company headquartered in Toronto, Ontario. Through its operating subsidiary Cineplex Entertainment LP, Cineplex operates 165 theatres across Canada. The company operates theatres under numerous brands, including Cineplex Cinemas, Cineplex Odeon, SilverCity, Galaxy Cinemas, Cinema City, Famous Players, Scotiabank Theatres and Cineplex VIP Cinemas.
Divisions:
  • Cineplex Odeon
  • Galaxy
  • Famous Players
  • SilverCity
  • Colossus
  • Coliseum
  • Cinema City
  • Scotiabank Theatre
  • Cineplex Cinemas
  • Cineplex VIP Cinemas
Subsidiaries:
  • Cineplex Entertainment LP
  • Player One Amusement Group Inc.
  • Famous Players LP
  • Galaxy Entertainment Inc.
  • Cineplex Media
  • Cineplex Digital Media Inc.
  • Canadian Digital Cinema Partnership (78.2%)
  • Topgolf-Cineplex Canada LP (75%)
  • SCENE LP (50%)
  • Cineplex Entertainment Corporation
  • World Gaming Network Inc. (80%)
  • Alliance Cinemas
2019-present: Proposed acquisition by Cineworld
On December 16, 2019, Cineplex announced a definitive agreement to be acquired by the British cinema operator Cineworld Group, the second-largest film exhibitor worldwide, pending shareholder and regulatory approval. Cineworld would be paying $34 per-share—a 42% premium over Cineplex's share price prior to the announcement, valuing the company at CDN$2.8 billion. Cineworld planned to pay US$1.65 billion, and to fund the remainder by taking on debt.
The sale was approved by Cineplex shareholders in February 2020. Activist shareholder Bluebell Capital Partners called for the Canadian government to block the sale, due to the COVID-19 pandemic. which in turn led to the temporary closure(s) of all Cineplex movie theatres across Canada since March 16, 2020, and up until further notice.
https://www.cineplex.com
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cineplex_Entertainment
---------------------------------------------
Cineplex Store
Browse from over 8500 HD movies including the latest releases and earn SCENE points every time you rent or buy. Watch online or look for the Cineplex Store.
https://store.cineplex.com
---------------------------------------------
ESPORTS: WorldGaming Network (WGN), formerly Virgin Gaming (now owned by Cineplex), is an online video gaming platform that hosts head to head matches, tournaments and ladders for consoles and PC gamers. WorldGaming has had over 3 million gamers register for its platform worldwide which makes it one of the most robust and dynamic global eSports communities. There have been over 6.7 million matches played over 20,000 tournaments held on WorldGaming.com since 2010.
Newzoo: Global esports will top $1 billion in 2020, with China as the top market (Feb 25, 2020):
Global esports revenues will surpass $1 billion in 2020 for the first time — without counting broadcasting platform revenues, according to market researcher Newzoo.
Globally, the total esports audience will grow to 495.0 million people in 2020, Newzoo said. Esports Enthusiasts (people who watch more than once a month) make up 222.9 million of this number.
In 2020, $822.4 million in revenues—or three-quarters of the total market—will come from media rights and sponsorship.
“As the esports market matures, new monetization methods will be implemented and improved upon,” said Remer Rietkerk, head of esports at Newzoo, in the report. “Likewise, the number of local events, leagues, and media rights deals will increase; therefore, we anticipate the average revenue per fan to grow to $5.27 by 2023.”
https://venturebeat.com/2020/02/25/newzoo-global-esports-will-top-1-billion-in-2020-with-china-as-the-top-market
---------------------------------------------
VIRTUAL REALITY
On September 13, 2018, Cineplex announced that it would acquire a stake in VRStudios—a Seattle-based provider of virtual reality installations, and utilize its equipment for as many as 40 VR centers across the country.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cineplex_Entertainment
---------------------------------------------
PLAYDIUM
Playdium is a family entertainment centre chain owned by Cineplex Entertainment through its subsidiary Player One Amusement Group. The flagship location in Mississauga, Ontario, Canada launched as Sega City @ Playdium near Square One Shopping Centre on September 7, 1996. The 11 acres (480,000 sq ft) centre cost CA$17 million to build and included an arcade, batting cages, go-karts and mini-golf. A partnership with Sega GameWorks, it featured many arcade games from that company such as Daytona USA, and eight-player racing setups for Indy 500 (as Virtua Indy) and Manx TT Super Bike. Indy 500 remains available today. In 1999, the centre was renamed to Playdium. The company opened up two more locations in Brampton and Whitby in late 2019.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Player_One_Amusement_Group#Playdium
---------------------------------------------
The Rec Room
The Rec Room is a Canadian chain of entertainment restaurants owned by Cineplex Entertainment. First opening in Edmonton in 2016, its locations feature entertainment and recreational attractions such as an arcade, driving simulators, recreational games, and virtual reality, as well as restaurants and bars, and an auditorium with a cinema-style screen, which can be used for concerts and other live events.
The Toronto location features The Void virtual reality attraction. In July 2018, Cineplex announced that it would become the exclusive Canadian franchisee of The Void and add additional locations (such as the Mississauga and West Edmonton Mall locations).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rec_Room
---------------------------------------------
SCENE (loyalty program)
SCENE is a Canadian loyalty program established in 2007 by Cineplex Entertainment and Scotiabank.
The main reward is a free movie ticket, starting at 1,250 points for a regular or 3D ticket. Over the years, the program has expanded to include a greater variety of rewards, including restaurants and sporting goods.
https://www.scene.ca
---------------------------------------------
FOOD & BEVERAGES
Cineplex has an Outtakes (French: Restoplex) restaurant in 94 theatres, some which replace previous restaurant partners (Burger King, KFC and New York Fries) and others which introduce restaurants at locations which did not previously feature one. VIP Cinemas and some Xscape locations feature a licensed lounge with more premium offerings compared to Outtakes. Poptopia is a flavoured popcorn restaurant offered in a full-service format at 22 locations. Other Cineplex theatres may feature Poptopia at the concession stand, but only in the caramel corn and/or kettle corn flavours.
Ice cream at Cineplex locations debuted with Baskin-Robbins and TCBY. Beginning in December 2007, Yogen Früz became the preferred partner. On January 1, 2014, Cineplex acquired a 50% stake in Yoyo's Yogurt Café. As of January 2017, 77 Cineplex theatres feature Yoyo's restaurants, while Yogen Fruz is still available in 23 Cineplex theatres while TCBY is available in 16 locations. Cineplex also manages Melt Sweet Creations, an in-house dessert bouqtiue brand targeted at women ages 19-35 debuted in December 2017 at Cineplex Cinemas Queensway and VIP. Melt is available at 13 locations.
Beverages are available in both cold and hot formats. Cold beverages include the Coca-Cola lineup, which replaced the Pepsi lineup used at locations formerly owned by Famous Players. 12 locations feature Coca-Cola Freestyle. Hot beverages include Starbucks as the incumbent provider with 105 locations, all which offer Pike Place Roast coffee (regular or decaf) and Tazo tea. Select locations also offer premium drinks such as caffè mocha or caramel macchiato. Tim Hortons is available as a full-service restaurant in five locations,[75] with Brossard being the only location to offer both Tim Hortons and Starbucks.
In most theatres, Cineplex offers sale of alcohol to 19+ guests in Ontario (18+ in Alberta) similar to the VIP theatres albeit from a selection of beer or cider beverages.
If Aurora Cannabis (ACB) & Cineplex (CGX) partnered up to offer CBD & THC infused Cannabis 2.0 edibles in movie theaters, especially the IMAX & 3D ones, it should do very well. Canadian Cannabis Industry stocks should also do well as I posted earlier Cannabis Stocks Opportunity.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cineplex_Entertainment
---------------------------------------------

RECENT NEWS:

---------------------------------------------
Cineworld to buy Canada's largest movie theatre chain in $2.8B deal (Dec 16, 2019):
Cineplex’s stock had been trading close to the Cineworld offer price of C$34 per share through early 2020, but has since plunged 40% following the virus outbreak.
Cineplex could lose a potential lifeline if its outstanding debt exceeds more than $725 million. As of December 31, 2019, the debt level was $625 million. The debt might balloon past the threshold with a further lockdown extension.
https://www.ctvnews.ca/business/cineworld-to-buy-canada-s-largest-movie-theatre-chain-in-2-8b-deal-1.4731547
---------------------------------------------
Cineplex shares fall after short seller raises concerns about Cineworld deal (March 5, 2020):
https://www.ctvnews.ca/business/cineplex-shares-fall-after-short-seller-raises-concerns-about-cineworld-deal-1.4840173
---------------------------------------------
Cineworld Dives After Cineplex Activist Urges Rejection of Deal (March 16, 2020):
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-03-16/cineworld-dives-as-cineplex-activist-urges-canada-to-block-deal
---------------------------------------------
Cineplex closes locations, provides Cineworld acquisition update (March 17, 2020):
https://mediaincanada.com/2020/03/17/cineplex-to-close-all-canadian-locations
---------------------------------------------
Cineplex Inc. cuts salaries of full-time employees after part-time layoffs (Mar 23, 2020):
P/T employees laid off in Canada & USA. F/T employees take reduced base salaries & senior executive team takes 80% reduction in pay.
https://www.cp24.com/news/cineplex-inc-cuts-salaries-of-full-time-employees-after-part-time-layoffs-1.4864434
---------------------------------------------
Cineworld halts dividend and says will 'monitor progress' of its buyout of Cineplex (April 7, 2020):
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/cineworld-halts-dividend-and-says-will-monitor-progress-of-its-buyout-of-cineplex-2020-04-07
---------------------------------------------
Staggered seating, nostalgic films: Cinemark offers a look at movie going post-coronavirus (Apr 15, 2020):
Cinemark, the third-largest movie theater chain in the U.S., hopes to reopen at least some of its doors to the public in July.
With no major movie release until mid-July, theaters could play “library” movies, which are movies that have already previously been released in cinemas, for several weeks.
If social distancing restrictions are still in place the company said it would either sell every other reserved seat in the theater or suspend reservations and just sell 50% of the tickets per theater.
“Even at peak periods of time in a normal environment, our occupancy levels range from 20% to 30% and we can operate profitably during those scenarios...” - CEO Mark Zoradi
He added that Cinemark has seen attendance as low as 10% and still was able to turn a profit.
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/15/cinemark-offers-a-look-at-movie-going-post-coronavirus.html
---------------------------------------------
North Vancouver's Park & Tilford Cineplex permanently closed (May 20, 2020)
The company closed all 165 theatres across Canada in March due to COVID-19, but the 1,382-seat Brookesbank Avenue location won’t be among those reopening, Cineplex has confirmed.
With Cineplex closing its Lower Lonsdale theatre in 2019, it leaves Park Royal as the only place to catch a big screen flick on the North Shore.
“We thank the community for their patronage over the years, and look forward to welcoming them at neighbouring Cineplex Cinemas Park Royal and VIP,” said Sarah Van Lange, executive director of communications. “I’ll note that our intent is to repurpose the Park & Tilford theatre space, which we’ll have more details on at a later date.”
https://www.vancouverisawesome.com/vancouver-news/park-tilford-cineplex-movie-theatre-permanently-closed-north-vancouver-bc-2365365
---------------------------------------------

OTHER NEWS & RUMORS:

Why Amazon’s Rumored Buyout of AMC Entertainment Makes Sense (May 12, 2020):
If Amazon can buy AMC, they can most certainly by CGX & dominate & control most of North America's movie theaters. Amazon would then control Hollywood! Why stop there, they should buy Cineworld too.
https://investorplace.com/2020/05/why-amazons-rumored-buyout-of-amc-entertainment-makes-sense
---------------------------------------------
AMC Entertainment Surges 56% on Report of Talks With Amazon (May 11, 2020):
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/amc-entertainment-surges-56-report-133822697.html
---------------------------------------------
Alert: Cineplex (TSX:CGX) Could Be Acquired by This Incredibly Unlikely Source (May 12, 2020):
Despite Cineworld maintaining its commitment to buy Cineplex, the market has a different opinion. Remember, Cineplex agreed to be acquired at $34 per share. As I type this, the stock trades at $14.44. There’s no way the spread would be that wide, unless investors were writing off the acquisition completely.
Fortunately for beleaguered Cineplex shareholders, a new suitor could very well come along — one virtually nobody sees coming.
Although I think there’s potential for a private equity group or some other deep-pocketed investor taking a run at Cineplex’s cheap assets, there’s a much more interesting suitor on the horizon.
That acquirer is Amazon.com (NASDAQ: AMZN).
https://www.fool.ca/2020/05/12/alert-cineplex-tsxcgx-could-be-acquired-by-this-incredibly-unlikely-source
---------------------------------------------
AMC says it will no longer play Universal Studios films (Apr 28, 2020):
“AMC believes that with this proposed action to go to the home and theaters simultaneously, Universal is breaking the business model and dealings between our two companies,” AMC Chief Executive Officer Adam Aron said in a letter addressed to Universal Studios Chairman Donna Langley.
Universal added that the company looked forward to having “additional private conversations” with AMC but was “disappointed by this seemingly coordinated attempt ... to confuse our position and our actions.”
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/28/amc-says-it-will-no-longer-play-universal-studios-films.html
---------------------------------------------
Cineworld joins AMC in banning films from Universal Studios (April 29, 2020):
Cineworld, the world’s second largest cinema chain, has followed its rival AMC in banning Universal Studios films from its cinemas when they reopen, after the Hollywood film-maker released Trolls On Tour direct to streaming platforms.
“There is a certain system of windows which are a custom in the market and this sets the time difference between the theatrical market and other ancillary markets, among them streaming. Any movie that will not respect this window will not be shown in Cineworld group,” Mooky Greidinger, Cineworld’s chief executive, said on Wednesday.
https://www.ft.com/content/3cc70161-e157-4ff1-bfbd-a886dd6d9af5
---------------------------------------------
Odeon bans all Universal Pictures films as studio skips cinema releases (Apr 29, 2020):
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2020/ap29/odeon-bans-all-universal-pictures-films-as-studio-skips-cinema-releases
---------------------------------------------
AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc.
AMC Theatres (originally an abbreviation for American Multi-Cinema; often referred to simply as AMC and known in some countries as AMC Cinemas or AMC Multi-Cinemas) is an American movie theater chain headquartered in Leawood, Kansas, and is the largest movie theater chain in the world. Founded in 1920, AMC has the largest share of the U.S. theater market ahead of Cineworld and Cinemark Theatres.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMC_Theatres
---------------------------------------------
Cineworld Group PLC
Cineworld is the world’s second largest cinema chain, with 9,518 screens across 790 sites in 11 countries: the UK, the US, Canada, Ireland, Poland, Romania, Israel, Hungary, Czechia, Bulgaria and Slovakia. The group’s primary brands are Regal (in the US), Cineworld and Picturehouse (in the UK & Ireland), Cinema City (throughout Europe) and Yes Planet (in Israel).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cineworld
---------------------------------------------
And Action! All the Movies We Can't Wait to See in Summer 2020 and Beyond (May 22, 2020):
Fingers crossed that it’ll be safe to step into a theater this summer. If they open, there will be plenty to watch. “Summer hits are the popcorn movies,” says film historian, author and podcast host Leonard Maltin. “They can be the biggest box-office hits of the whole year.”
Rest of 2020:
  • To Wong Foo Thanks for Everything, Julie Newmar - VIP (Jun 1)
  • Unhinged (Jul 1)
  • Tenet (Jul 17)
  • Mulan (Jul 24)
  • Summerland (Jul 31)
  • Random Acts Of Violence (Jul 31)
  • The Spongebob Movie: Sponge on the Run (Aug 7)
  • Sound of Metal (Aug 14)
  • Wonder Woman 1984 (Aug 14)
  • Fatima (Aug 14)
  • The One And Only Ivan (Aug 14)
  • The New Mutants (Aug 20)
  • Bill & Ted Face the Music (Aug 21)
  • Antebellum (Aug 21)
  • Monster Hunter (Sep 4)
  • A Quiet Place Part II (Sep 4)
  • The Conjuring: The Devil Made Me Do It (Sep 11)
  • The King's Man (Sep 18)
  • Candyman (Sep 25)
  • Tom Clancy's Without Remorse (Oct 2)
  • BIOS (Oct 2)
  • Death On The Nile (Oct 9)
  • The Witches (Oct 9)
  • The French Dispatch (Oct 16)
  • Halloween Kills (Oct 16)
  • Snake Eyes (Oct 23)
  • Lord And Miller Connected (Oct 23)
  • Everybody's Talking About Jamie (Oct 23)
  • Come Play (Oct 30)
  • Black Widow (Nov 6)
  • Clifford The Big Red Dog (Nov 13)
  • Deep Water (Nov 13)
  • Godzilla Vs. Kong (Nov 20)
  • Soul (Nov 20)
  • Happiest Season (Nov 20)
  • James Bond ‘No Time To Die’ (Nov 25)
  • Free Guy (Dec 11)
  • Dune (Dec 18)
  • Untitled Coming To America Sequel (Dec 18)
  • West Side Story (Dec 18)
  • Top Gun: Maverick (Dec 23)
  • Untitled Tom & Jerry Film (Dec 23)
  • The Croods 2 (Dec 23)
  • News Of The World (Dec 25)
  • Escape Room 2 (Dec 30)
2021:
  • Mortal Kombat (Jan 15)
  • Peter Rabbit 2: The Runaway (Jan 15)
  • 355 (Jan 15)
  • Chaos Walking: The Knife of Never Letting Go (Jan 22)
  • Rumble (Jan 29)
  • Cinderella (Feb 5)
  • Nobody (Feb 26)
  • Ghostbusters: Afterlife (Mar 5)
  • Raya And The Last Dragon (Mar 12)
  • Sony/Marvel Morbius (Mar 19)
  • The Boss Baby 2 (Mar 26)
  • Reminiscence (Apr 16)
  • Ron's Gone Wrong (Apr 23)
  • Shang Chi And The Legend Of The Ten Rings (May 7)
  • Spiral: From The Book Of Saw (May 21)
  • Cruella (May 28)
  • F9 Fast & Furious (Apr 2)
  • Bob's Burgers (Apr 9)
  • Infinite (May 28)
  • Space Jam 2 (Jul 16)
  • Barb and Star Go to Vista Del Mar (Jul 16)
  • In the Heights (Jun 18)
  • Minions: The Rise Of Gru (Jul 2)
  • All This Victory (Aug 7)
  • The Woman in the Window (TBD 2021)
  • Blithe Spirit (TBD 2021)
  • The Personal History of David Copperfield (TBD 2021)
  • Greyhound (TBD)
& MUCH, MUCH MORE MOVIES than listed coming to the big screens.
THE 65 MOST ANTICIPATED MOVIES OF 2020 (May 20, 2020):
https://editorial.rottentomatoes.com/article/most-anticipated-movies-of-2020
---------------------------------------------
CONCLUSION:
Nothing beats watching a great movie on the big screen in premium format:
  • Prime Seats
  • IMAX
  • UltraAVX
  • D-Box
  • VIP Cinemas
  • 4DX
I'm sick of the congested internet & buffering of online movies & services during Covid19. They need to upgrade the internet infrastructure to 5G & Fiber Optics before it can really grow in my opinion -- especially buffering 4K & 8K movies & future tech that will only require more bandwidth going forward.
Younger people are not afraid of Covid19 like the older crowd. When theaters open, they will rush in to see their favourite movies.
Betting that people won't want to go to movie theaters when they re-open, is like betting the same against live sporting events or music concerts.
No home movie theater can match a real movie theater, even the smaller discount ones, unless you're Bill Gates or Jeff Bezos etc.
With Cineplex's Canadian Monopoly & diversification into other entertainment arenas like eSports & Virtual Reality, as long as they don't go bankrupt & social distancing restrictions are loosened, the stock should increase 2 to 3 times by end of 2021 in my opinion -- especially if the Cineworld Buyout goes as planned or another company like Amazon buys them out for a strong presence & control in Canada.
If a Coronavirus Vaccine is discovered sooner than later, then this stock will rebound accordingly & rapidly -- especially if they don't cancel or even if they do, resume Dividend payments in the future. At current prices, Dividend yield is about 13% per year.
---------------------------------------------
Social distance cinema: drive-in theatres boom – in pictures (May 5, 2020):
We are all social creatures & want to go to movie theater as a social activity, to see & be seen; otherwise, why would Drive In Movie theaters boom during Covid19?
If no one goes out to be seen anymore, then all the Vanity Goods & Services will go under too & we will all dress in sweat pants & T-Shirt -- no need for designer suits & dresses working & staying at home. LOL ;p
https://www.theguardian.com/world/gallery/2020/may/05/social-distance-cinema-drive-in-theatres-boom-coronavirus-in-pictures
---------------------------------------------
Internet Bandwidth Requirements:
Online streaming remains the biggest source of 4K content, led by Netflix and Amazon’s growing selection of original series. But many consumer broadband connections aren’t fast enough to allow reliable 4K streaming.
Home Theater Movie Resolutions:
  • 4K (UHD): 3,840 x 2,160 pixels
  • 1080p (Full HD): 1,920 x 1,080 pixels
  • 720p (HD): 1,280 x 720 pixels
  • 480p (SD): 640 x 480 pixels
  • 8K: 7,680 x 4,320 pixels
For comparison purposes, 70mm film - still considered by many to be the gold standard - is roughly equivalent to a 12K resolution in digital terms, so digital's still got some catching up to do on that score.
submitted by extriniti to wallstreetbets [link] [comments]


2020.05.14 00:14 kirant Covid-19 Update for May 13: 62 new cases, 2 deaths + Mixed Phase 1 Launch

Data is taken partly from the Covid-19 portal and partly from today's media appearance by Dr Deena Hinshaw and Premier Jason Kenney:
Top line numbers:
Spatial distributions (cities proper, not regional zones, for Calgary and Edmonton):
For spacial distribution of hospital usage:
Statements by Jason Kenney:
Statements by Dr Hinshaw:
Additional information will be logged below:
Update 1: Dr Hinshaw went into some detail about the metrics they track (some has been mentioned before). Absolute thresholds: >5% hospitalization over two weeks, ICU capacity in a zone >50% capacity are signs for slowdown. Notes they are lagging indicators (2-3 weeks after transmission, slow compared to the 5-8 days for illness). Sharp rises of cases in a region (particularity with unknown source) are "contextual indicators" that will be used to also guide decision making.
Update 2: A question was asked about Quebec's masking policy and how public officials feel about it in Alberta. Dr Hinshaw recommends masking if you will be within 2 metres of a person (in addition to current distancing guidelines). Kenney mentions 40 million masks are on order for the end of the month for public distribution and will make an announcement closer to the day.
Update 3 - The hospitalization by region has been updated.
submitted by kirant to alberta [link] [comments]


2020.05.12 10:31 mellainadiba Do you experience hostility when trying to raise mens issues? Do feminists try to block you?

ANSWER

2. Hostility to acknowledging/addressing men's issues

Overview: One problem for men's issues is the general lack of awareness (and uncaring attitude towards them) mentioned previously. Perhaps even worse is the active hostility and opposition that gets thrown at people who do put effort into addressing (or raising awareness of) men's issues.
Examples/evidence: There was a proposal at Simon Fraser University (near Vancouver) to open up a men's centre on campus to address issues like suicide, drug/alcohol addiction, and negative stereotypes. The women's centre, which already existed, opposed this. They argued that a men's centre is not needed because the men's centre is already "everywhere else" (even though those issues aren't being addressed "everywhere else"). The alternative they proposed was a "male allies project" to "bring self-identified men together to talk about masculinity and its harmful effects" [1].
A student at Durham University in England, affected by the suicide of a close male friend, tried to open up the Durham University Male Human Rights Society: "[i]t’s incredible how much stigma there is against male weakness. Men’s issues are deemed unimportant, so I decided to start a society". The idea was rejected by the Societies Committee as it was deemed "controversial". He was told he could only have a men's group as a branch of the Feminist Society group on campus. This was ironic since he point them to the feminist societies own literature which states it would be extremely unreasonable for them to discuss issues about men[9].
Author Warren Farrell went to give a talk on the boys' crisis (boys dropping out of school and committing suicide at higher rates) at the University of Toronto, but he was opposed by protesters who "barricaded the doors, harassed attendees, pulled fire alarms, chanted curses at speakers and more". Opposition included leaders in the student union [2] [3].
Three students (one man and two women) at Ryerson University (also in Toronto) decided to start a club dedicated to men's issues. They were blocked by the Ryerson Students' Union, which associated the men's issues club with supposed "anti-women's rights groups" and called the idea that it's even possible to be sexist against men an "oppressive concept" [4]. The student union also passed a motion saying that it rejects "Groups, meetings events or initiatives [that] negate the need to centre women’s voices in the struggle for gender equity" (while ironically saying that women's issues "have historically and continue to today to be silenced") [5].
Janice Fiamengo, a professor at the University of Ottawa, was giving a public lecture on men's issues. She was interrupted by a group of students shouting, blasting horns, and pulling the fire alarm [6].
At Oberlin College in Ohio, various students had invited equity feminist Christina Hoff Sommers (known for her individualist/libertarian perspective on gender) to give a talk on men's issues. Activists hung up posters identifying those who invited her (by their full names) as "supporters of rape culture" [7] [8].
At Saint Paul University (part of the University of Ottawa) on September 24th, 2015, journalist Cathy Young gave a talk on gender politics on university campuses, GamerGate, the tendency to neglect men's issues in society, and the focus on the victimization of women (in the areas of sexual violence and cyberbullying). She was met by masked protesters who called her "rape apologist scum" and interrupted the event by pulling the fire alarm [10].
In 2015, the University of York in the U.K. announced its intention to observe International Men's Day, noting that they are "also aware of some of the specific issues faced by men", including under-representation of (and bias against) men in various areas of the university (such as academic staff appointments, professional support services, and support staff in academic departments) [11]. This inspired a torrent of criticism, including an open letter to the university claiming that a day to celebrate men's issues "does not combat inequality, but merely amplifies existing, structurally imposed, inequalities". The university responded by going back on its plans to observe International Men's Day and affirming that "the main focus of gender equality work should continue to be on the inequalities faced by women". In contrast, the University of York's observation of International Women's Day a few months earlier was a week long affair with more than 100 events [12].
Source: From the excellent Mens rights guide:
https://www.reddit.com/rbomi/wiki/main#wiki_2._hostility_to_acknowledging.2Faddressing_men.27s_issues
Some of these femintis in action:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iARHCxAMAO0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cMYfxOFBBM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ha2E5aQ7yb8
A long list of feminists blocking mens rights:
http://archive.is/AWSEN
Dont foget Karens Straughans excellent post in reposnse to a feminists saying these are not true feminists:
Karen Straughan:
So what you're saying is that you, a commenter using a username on an internet forum are the true feminist, and the feminists actually responsible for changing the laws, writing the academic theory, teaching the courses, influencing the public policies, and the massive, well-funded feminist organizations with thousands and thousands of members all of whom call themselves feminists... they are not "real feminists".
You're not the director of the Feminist Majority Foundation and editor of Ms. Magazine, Katherine Spillar, who said of domestic violence: "Well, that's just a clean-up word for wife-beating," and went on to add that regarding male victims of dating violence, "we know it's not girls beating up boys, it's boys beating up girls."
You're not Jan Reimer, former mayor of Edmonton and long-time head of Alberta's Network of Women's Shelters, who just a few years ago refused to appear on a TV program discussing male victims of domestic violence, because for her to even show up and discuss it would lend legitimacy to the idea that they exist.
You're not Mary P Koss, who describes male victims of female rapists in her academic papers as being not rape victims because they were "ambivalent about their sexual desires" (if you don't know what that means, it's that they actually wanted it), and then went on to define them out of the definition of rape in the CDC's research because it's inappropriate to consider what happened to them rape.
You're not the National Organization for Women, and its associated legal foundations, who lobbied to replace the gender neutral federal Family Violence Prevention and Services Act of 1984 with the obscenely gendered Violence Against Women Act of 1994. The passing of that law cut male victims out of support services and legal assistance in more than 60 passages, just because they were male.
You're not the Florida chapter of the NOW, who successfully lobbied to have Governor Rick Scott veto not one, but two alimony reform bills in the last ten years, bills that had passed both houses with overwhelming bipartisan support, and were supported by more than 70% of the electorate.
You're not the feminist group in Maryland who convinced every female member of the House on both sides of the aisle to walk off the floor when a shared parenting bill came up for a vote, meaning the quorum could not be met and the bill died then and there.
You're not the feminists in Canada agitating to remove sexual assault from the normal criminal courts, into quasi-criminal courts of equity where the burden of proof would be lowered, the defendant could be compelled to testify, discovery would go both ways, and defendants would not be entitled to a public defender.
You're not Professor Elizabeth Sheehy, who wrote a book advocating that women not only have the right to murder their husbands without fear of prosecution if they make a claim of abuse, but that they have the moral responsibility to murder their husbands.
You're not the feminist legal scholars and advocates who successfully changed rape laws such that a woman's history of making multiple false allegations of rape can be excluded from evidence at trial because it's "part of her sexual history."
You're not the feminists who splattered the media with the false claim that putting your penis in a passed-out woman's mouth is "not a crime" in Oklahoma, because the prosecutor was incompetent and charged the defendant under an inappropriate statute (forcible sodomy) and the higher court refused to expand the definition of that statute beyond its intended scope when there was already a perfectly good one (sexual battery) already there. You're not the idiot feminists lying to the public and potentially putting women in Oklahoma at risk by telling potential offenders there's a "legal" way to rape them.
And you're none of the hundreds or thousands of feminist scholars, writers, thinkers, researchers, teachers and philosophers who constructed and propagate the body of bunkum theories upon which all of these atrocities are based.
No...You're the true feminist. Some random person on the internet.
submitted by mellainadiba to AskTheMRAs [link] [comments]


2020.05.11 13:27 NotAnAlternateID No true Scotsman for Feminism

I am a long time subscriber to MensRights and only recently came to know of this sub. Thought of sharing with you lot some comments that I saved from there a long time back.
Everytime a debate about how feminists are against men's rights is brought up, there will always be an army of people who come up with the No True Scotsman fallacy to fuel their hypocrisy. An excellent rebuttal against this was made by Karen Straughen.
So what you're saying is that you, a commenter using a username on an internet forum are the true feminist, and the feminists actually responsible for changing the laws, writing the academic theory, teaching the courses, influencing the public policies, and the massive, well-funded feminist organizations with thousands and thousands of members all of whom call themselves feminists... they are not "real feminists".
That's not just "no true Scotsman". That's delusional self deception.
Listen, if you want to call yourself a feminist, I don't care. I've been investigating feminism for more than 9 years now, and people like you used to piss me off, because to my mind all you were doing was providing cover and ballast for the powerful political and academic feminists you claim are just jerks. And believe me, they ARE jerks. If you knew half of what I know about the things they've done under the banner of feminism, maybe you'd stop calling yourself one.
But I want you to know. You don't matter. You're not the director of the Feminist Majority Foundation and editor of Ms. Magazine, Katherine Spillar, who said of domestic violence: "Well, that's just a clean-up word for wife-beating," and went on to add that regarding male victims of dating violence, "we know it's not girls beating up boys, it's boys beating up girls."
You're not Jan Reimer, former mayor of Edmonton and long-time head of Alberta's Network of Women's Shelters, who just a few years ago refused to appear on a TV program discussing male victims of domestic violence, because for her to even show up and discuss it would lend legitimacy to the idea that they exist.
You're not Mary P Koss, who describes male victims of female rapists in her academic papers as being not rape victims because they were "ambivalent about their sexual desires" (if you don't know what that means, it's that they actually wanted it), and then went on to define them out of the definition of rape in the CDC's research because it's inappropriate to consider what happened to them rape.
You're not the National Organization for Women, and its associated legal foundations, who lobbied to replace the gender neutral federal Family Violence Prevention and Services Act of 1984 with the obscenely gendered Violence Against Women Act of 1994. The passing of that law cut male victims out of support services and legal assistance in more than 60 passages, just because they were male.
You're not the Florida chapter of the NOW, who successfully lobbied to have Governor Rick Scott veto not one, but two alimony reform bills in the last ten years, bills that had passed both houses with overwhelming bipartisan support, and were supported by more than 70% of the electorate.
You're not the feminist group in Maryland who convinced every female member of the House on both sides of the aisle to walk off the floor when a shared parenting bill came up for a vote, meaning the quorum could not be met and the bill died then and there.
You're not the feminists in Canada agitating to remove sexual assault from the normal criminal courts, into quasi-criminal courts of equity where the burden of proof would be lowered, the defendant could be compelled to testify, discovery would go both ways, and defendants would not be entitled to a public defender.
You're not Professor Elizabeth Sheehy, who wrote a book advocating that women not only have the right to murder their husbands without fear of prosecution if they make a claim of abuse, but that they have the moral responsibility to murder their husbands.
You're not the feminist legal scholars and advocates who successfully changed rape laws such that a woman's history of making multiple false allegations of rape can be excluded from evidence at trial because it's "part of her sexual history."
You're not the feminists who splattered the media with the false claim that putting your penis in a passed-out woman's mouth is "not a crime" in Oklahoma, because the prosecutor was incompetent and charged the defendant under an inappropriate statute (forcible sodomy) and the higher court refused to expand the definition of that statute beyond its intended scope when there was already a perfectly good one (sexual battery) already there. You're not the idiot feminists lying to the public and potentially putting women in Oklahoma at risk by telling potential offenders there's a "legal" way to rape them.
And you're none of the hundreds or thousands of feminist scholars, writers, thinkers, researchers, teachers and philosophers who constructed and propagate the body of bunkum theories upon which all of these atrocities are based.
You're the true feminist. Some random person on the internet.
Sorry if it's a repost, just felt like sharing it.
submitted by NotAnAlternateID to LeftWingMaleAdvocates [link] [comments]


2020.05.09 03:35 mhandanna Hostility to acknowledging/addressing men's issues - evidence provied, videos and sources

From the excellent Mens rights guide:
https://www.reddit.com/rbomi/wiki/main#wiki_2._hostility_to_acknowledging.2Faddressing_men.27s_issues

2. Hostility to acknowledging/addressing men's issues

Overview: One problem for men's issues is the general lack of awareness (and uncaring attitude towards them) mentioned previously. Perhaps even worse is the active hostility and opposition that gets thrown at people who do put effort into addressing (or raising awareness of) men's issues.
Examples/evidence: There was a proposal at Simon Fraser University (near Vancouver) to open up a men's centre on campus to address issues like suicide, drug/alcohol addiction, and negative stereotypes. The women's centre, which already existed, opposed this. They argued that a men's centre is not needed because the men's centre is already "everywhere else" (even though those issues aren't being addressed "everywhere else"). The alternative they proposed was a "male allies project" to "bring self-identified men together to talk about masculinity and its harmful effects" [1].
Author Warren Farrell went to give a talk on the boys' crisis (boys dropping out of school and committing suicide at higher rates) at the University of Toronto, but he was opposed by protesters who "barricaded the doors, harassed attendees, pulled fire alarms, chanted curses at speakers and more". Opposition included leaders in the student union [2] [3].
Three students (one man and two women) at Ryerson University (also in Toronto) decided to start a club dedicated to men's issues. They were blocked by the Ryerson Students' Union, which associated the men's issues club with supposed "anti-women's rights groups" and called the idea that it's even possible to be sexist against men an "oppressive concept" [4]. The student union also passed a motion saying that it rejects "Groups, meetings events or initiatives [that] negate the need to centre women’s voices in the struggle for gender equity" (while ironically saying that women's issues "have historically and continue to today to be silenced") [5].
Janice Fiamengo, a professor at the University of Ottawa, was giving a public lecture on men's issues. She was interrupted by a group of students shouting, blasting horns, and pulling the fire alarm [6].
At Oberlin College in Ohio, various students had invited equity feminist Christina Hoff Sommers (known for her individualist/libertarian perspective on gender) to give a talk on men's issues. Activists hung up posters identifying those who invited her (by their full names) as "supporters of rape culture" [7] [8].
A student at Durham University in England, affected by the suicide of a close male friend, tried to open up the Durham University Male Human Rights Society: "[i]t’s incredible how much stigma there is against male weakness. Men’s issues are deemed unimportant, so I decided to start a society". The idea was rejected by the Societies Committee as it was deemed "controversial". He was told he could only have a men's group as a branch of the Feminist Society group on campus [9].
At Saint Paul University (part of the University of Ottawa) on September 24th, 2015, journalist Cathy Young gave a talk on gender politics on university campuses, GamerGate, the tendency to neglect men's issues in society, and the focus on the victimization of women (in the areas of sexual violence and cyberbullying). She was met by masked protesters who called her "rape apologist scum" and interrupted the event by pulling the fire alarm [10].
In 2015, the University of York in the U.K. announced its intention to observe International Men's Day, noting that they are "also aware of some of the specific issues faced by men", including under-representation of (and bias against) men in various areas of the university (such as academic staff appointments, professional support services, and support staff in academic departments) [11]. This inspired a torrent of criticism, including an open letter to the university claiming that a day to celebrate men's issues "does not combat inequality, but merely amplifies existing, structurally imposed, inequalities". The university responded by going back on its plans to observe International Men's Day and affirming that "the main focus of gender equality work should continue to be on the inequalities faced by women". In contrast, the University of York's observation of International Women's Day a few months earlier was a week long affair with more than 100 events [12].
Some of these femintis in action:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iARHCxAMAO0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cMYfxOFBBM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ha2E5aQ7yb8
A long list of feminists blocking mens rights:
http://archive.is/AWSEN

Dont foget Karens Straughans excellent post in reposnse to a feminists saying these are not true feminists:
Karen Straughan:
So what you're saying is that you, a commenter using a username on an internet forum are the true feminist, and the feminists actually responsible for changing the laws, writing the academic theory, teaching the courses, influencing the public policies, and the massive, well-funded feminist organizations with thousands and thousands of members all of whom call themselves feminists... they are not "real feminists".
You're not the director of the Feminist Majority Foundation and editor of Ms. Magazine, Katherine Spillar, who said of domestic violence: "Well, that's just a clean-up word for wife-beating," and went on to add that regarding male victims of dating violence, "we know it's not girls beating up boys, it's boys beating up girls."
You're not Jan Reimer, former mayor of Edmonton and long-time head of Alberta's Network of Women's Shelters, who just a few years ago refused to appear on a TV program discussing male victims of domestic violence, because for her to even show up and discuss it would lend legitimacy to the idea that they exist.
You're not Mary P Koss, who describes male victims of female rapists in her academic papers as being not rape victims because they were "ambivalent about their sexual desires" (if you don't know what that means, it's that they actually wanted it), and then went on to define them out of the definition of rape in the CDC's research because it's inappropriate to consider what happened to them rape.
You're not the National Organization for Women, and its associated legal foundations, who lobbied to replace the gender neutral federal Family Violence Prevention and Services Act of 1984 with the obscenely gendered Violence Against Women Act of 1994. The passing of that law cut male victims out of support services and legal assistance in more than 60 passages, just because they were male.
You're not the Florida chapter of the NOW, who successfully lobbied to have Governor Rick Scott veto not one, but two alimony reform bills in the last ten years, bills that had passed both houses with overwhelming bipartisan support, and were supported by more than 70% of the electorate.
You're not the feminist group in Maryland who convinced every female member of the House on both sides of the aisle to walk off the floor when a shared parenting bill came up for a vote, meaning the quorum could not be met and the bill died then and there.
You're not the feminists in Canada agitating to remove sexual assault from the normal criminal courts, into quasi-criminal courts of equity where the burden of proof would be lowered, the defendant could be compelled to testify, discovery would go both ways, and defendants would not be entitled to a public defender.
You're not Professor Elizabeth Sheehy, who wrote a book advocating that women not only have the right to murder their husbands without fear of prosecution if they make a claim of abuse, but that they have the moral responsibility to murder their husbands.
You're not the feminist legal scholars and advocates who successfully changed rape laws such that a woman's history of making multiple false allegations of rape can be excluded from evidence at trial because it's "part of her sexual history."
You're not the feminists who splattered the media with the false claim that putting your penis in a passed-out woman's mouth is "not a crime" in Oklahoma, because the prosecutor was incompetent and charged the defendant under an inappropriate statute (forcible sodomy) and the higher court refused to expand the definition of that statute beyond its intended scope when there was already a perfectly good one (sexual battery) already there. You're not the idiot feminists lying to the public and potentially putting women in Oklahoma at risk by telling potential offenders there's a "legal" way to rape them.
And you're none of the hundreds or thousands of feminist scholars, writers, thinkers, researchers, teachers and philosophers who constructed and propagate the body of bunkum theories upon which all of these atrocities are based.
No...You're the true feminist. Some random person on the internet.

SOURCES:
[1] https://archive.is/ije1c (Globe and Mail article “A men’s centre at Simon Fraser University raises questions”)
[2] http://bit.ly/1FTdwwT (Toronto Sun article “For some, feminism no longer about equality”)
[3] https://archive.is/9zVr0 (The Varsity article “Arrest, assaults overshadow 'men’s issues' lecture”)
[4] https://archive.is/SPOkI (Globe and Mail article “Ryerson Students’ Union blocks men’s issues group”), https://archive.is/uxR0p (A Voice for Men article “Ryerson Student Union denies misandry”)
[5] https://archive.is/Jlac1 (The Eyeopener article "New RSU policy challenges new men’s issues group")
[6] https://archive.is/TfVwd (Metro News article "Protesters shut down U of O professor’s men’s rights talk")
[7] https://archive.is/IGkLt (Reason article "Oberlin Activists Posted Creepy Messages Accusing Specific Students of Perpetuating Rape Culture")
[8] https://archive.is/lLcrs (The Washington Post article "Where and when did this 'makes me feel unsafe' thing start?")
[9] https://archive.is/XxPC6 (The Telegraph article "Why are our universities blocking men's societies?")
[10] https://archive.is/gCjJg (The College Fix article "Campus speaker touting men’s rights has fire alarm pulled on her")
[11] https://archive.is/fS3NQ (Times Higher Education article "University of York apologises over ‘crass’ celebration of International Men’s Day")
[12] https://archive.is/iRD10 (University of York page "International Women's Day")
submitted by mhandanna to ProMaleCollective [link] [comments]


2020.05.09 03:16 mellainadiba The hostility to raising mens issues described and evidence provided

As with all me posts, can we look at ways of getting posts like this is into mainstream reddest? I simply cant get any through!
From the excellent Mens rights guide:
https://www.reddit.com/rbomi/wiki/main#wiki_2._hostility_to_acknowledging.2Faddressing_men.27s_issues

2. Hostility to acknowledging/addressing men's issues

Overview: One problem for men's issues is the general lack of awareness (and uncaring attitude towards them) mentioned previously. Perhaps even worse is the active hostility and opposition that gets thrown at people who do put effort into addressing (or raising awareness of) men's issues.
Examples/evidence: There was a proposal at Simon Fraser University (near Vancouver) to open up a men's centre on campus to address issues like suicide, drug/alcohol addiction, and negative stereotypes. The women's centre, which already existed, opposed this. They argued that a men's centre is not needed because the men's centre is already "everywhere else" (even though those issues aren't being addressed "everywhere else"). The alternative they proposed was a "male allies project" to "bring self-identified men together to talk about masculinity and its harmful effects" [1].
Author Warren Farrell went to give a talk on the boys' crisis (boys dropping out of school and committing suicide at higher rates) at the University of Toronto, but he was opposed by protesters who "barricaded the doors, harassed attendees, pulled fire alarms, chanted curses at speakers and more". Opposition included leaders in the student union [2] [3].
Three students (one man and two women) at Ryerson University (also in Toronto) decided to start a club dedicated to men's issues. They were blocked by the Ryerson Students' Union, which associated the men's issues club with supposed "anti-women's rights groups" and called the idea that it's even possible to be sexist against men an "oppressive concept" [4]. The student union also passed a motion saying that it rejects "Groups, meetings events or initiatives [that] negate the need to centre women’s voices in the struggle for gender equity" (while ironically saying that women's issues "have historically and continue to today to be silenced") [5].
Janice Fiamengo, a professor at the University of Ottawa, was giving a public lecture on men's issues. She was interrupted by a group of students shouting, blasting horns, and pulling the fire alarm [6].
At Oberlin College in Ohio, various students had invited equity feminist Christina Hoff Sommers (known for her individualist/libertarian perspective on gender) to give a talk on men's issues. Activists hung up posters identifying those who invited her (by their full names) as "supporters of rape culture" [7] [8].
A student at Durham University in England, affected by the suicide of a close male friend, tried to open up the Durham University Male Human Rights Society: "[i]t’s incredible how much stigma there is against male weakness. Men’s issues are deemed unimportant, so I decided to start a society". The idea was rejected by the Societies Committee as it was deemed "controversial". He was told he could only have a men's group as a branch of the Feminist Society group on campus [9].
At Saint Paul University (part of the University of Ottawa) on September 24th, 2015, journalist Cathy Young gave a talk on gender politics on university campuses, GamerGate, the tendency to neglect men's issues in society, and the focus on the victimization of women (in the areas of sexual violence and cyberbullying). She was met by masked protesters who called her "rape apologist scum" and interrupted the event by pulling the fire alarm [10].
In 2015, the University of York in the U.K. announced its intention to observe International Men's Day, noting that they are "also aware of some of the specific issues faced by men", including under-representation of (and bias against) men in various areas of the university (such as academic staff appointments, professional support services, and support staff in academic departments) [11]. This inspired a torrent of criticism, including an open letter to the university claiming that a day to celebrate men's issues "does not combat inequality, but merely amplifies existing, structurally imposed, inequalities". The university responded by going back on its plans to observe International Men's Day and affirming that "the main focus of gender equality work should continue to be on the inequalities faced by women". In contrast, the University of York's observation of International Women's Day a few months earlier was a week long affair with more than 100 events [12].
Some of these femintis in action:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iARHCxAMAO0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cMYfxOFBBM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ha2E5aQ7yb8
A long list of feminists blocking mens rights:
http://archive.is/AWSEN
Dont foget Karens Straughans excellent post in reposnse to a feminists saying these are not true feminists:
Karen Straughan:
So what you're saying is that you, a commenter using a username on an internet forum are the true feminist, and the feminists actually responsible for changing the laws, writing the academic theory, teaching the courses, influencing the public policies, and the massive, well-funded feminist organizations with thousands and thousands of members all of whom call themselves feminists... they are not "real feminists".
You're not the director of the Feminist Majority Foundation and editor of Ms. Magazine, Katherine Spillar, who said of domestic violence: "Well, that's just a clean-up word for wife-beating," and went on to add that regarding male victims of dating violence, "we know it's not girls beating up boys, it's boys beating up girls."
You're not Jan Reimer, former mayor of Edmonton and long-time head of Alberta's Network of Women's Shelters, who just a few years ago refused to appear on a TV program discussing male victims of domestic violence, because for her to even show up and discuss it would lend legitimacy to the idea that they exist.
You're not Mary P Koss, who describes male victims of female rapists in her academic papers as being not rape victims because they were "ambivalent about their sexual desires" (if you don't know what that means, it's that they actually wanted it), and then went on to define them out of the definition of rape in the CDC's research because it's inappropriate to consider what happened to them rape.
You're not the National Organization for Women, and its associated legal foundations, who lobbied to replace the gender neutral federal Family Violence Prevention and Services Act of 1984 with the obscenely gendered Violence Against Women Act of 1994. The passing of that law cut male victims out of support services and legal assistance in more than 60 passages, just because they were male.
You're not the Florida chapter of the NOW, who successfully lobbied to have Governor Rick Scott veto not one, but two alimony reform bills in the last ten years, bills that had passed both houses with overwhelming bipartisan support, and were supported by more than 70% of the electorate.
You're not the feminist group in Maryland who convinced every female member of the House on both sides of the aisle to walk off the floor when a shared parenting bill came up for a vote, meaning the quorum could not be met and the bill died then and there.
You're not the feminists in Canada agitating to remove sexual assault from the normal criminal courts, into quasi-criminal courts of equity where the burden of proof would be lowered, the defendant could be compelled to testify, discovery would go both ways, and defendants would not be entitled to a public defender.
You're not Professor Elizabeth Sheehy, who wrote a book advocating that women not only have the right to murder their husbands without fear of prosecution if they make a claim of abuse, but that they have the moral responsibility to murder their husbands.
You're not the feminist legal scholars and advocates who successfully changed rape laws such that a woman's history of making multiple false allegations of rape can be excluded from evidence at trial because it's "part of her sexual history."
You're not the feminists who splattered the media with the false claim that putting your penis in a passed-out woman's mouth is "not a crime" in Oklahoma, because the prosecutor was incompetent and charged the defendant under an inappropriate statute (forcible sodomy) and the higher court refused to expand the definition of that statute beyond its intended scope when there was already a perfectly good one (sexual battery) already there. You're not the idiot feminists lying to the public and potentially putting women in Oklahoma at risk by telling potential offenders there's a "legal" way to rape them.
And you're none of the hundreds or thousands of feminist scholars, writers, thinkers, researchers, teachers and philosophers who constructed and propagate the body of bunkum theories upon which all of these atrocities are based.
No...You're the true feminist. Some random person on the internet.
SOURCES:
[1] https://archive.is/ije1c (Globe and Mail article “A men’s centre at Simon Fraser University raises questions”)
[2] http://bit.ly/1FTdwwT (Toronto Sun article “For some, feminism no longer about equality”)
[3] https://archive.is/9zVr0 (The Varsity article “Arrest, assaults overshadow 'men’s issues' lecture”)
[4] https://archive.is/SPOkI (Globe and Mail article “Ryerson Students’ Union blocks men’s issues group”), https://archive.is/uxR0p (A Voice for Men article “Ryerson Student Union denies misandry”)
[5] https://archive.is/Jlac1 (The Eyeopener article "New RSU policy challenges new men’s issues group")
[6] https://archive.is/TfVwd (Metro News article "Protesters shut down U of O professor’s men’s rights talk")
[7] https://archive.is/IGkLt (Reason article "Oberlin Activists Posted Creepy Messages Accusing Specific Students of Perpetuating Rape Culture")
[8] https://archive.is/lLcrs (The Washington Post article "Where and when did this 'makes me feel unsafe' thing start?")
[9] https://archive.is/XxPC6 (The Telegraph article "Why are our universities blocking men's societies?")
[10] https://archive.is/gCjJg (The College Fix article "Campus speaker touting men’s rights has fire alarm pulled on her")
[11] https://archive.is/fS3NQ (Times Higher Education article "University of York apologises over ‘crass’ celebration of International Men’s Day")
[12] https://archive.is/iRD10 (University of York page "International Women's Day")
submitted by mellainadiba to MensRights [link] [comments]


2020.05.06 04:57 mellainadiba What is the opposite of a feminist? A masculinist? Is a MRA a masculinist?

ANSWER:
"Feminism is an ideology, and is not synonymous with gender equality. Being against feminism, or even opposite to it, would just be opposition to the ideology, not gender equality. There is a reason why the women’s rights movement and feminism are separate movements.
Feminism as an ideology blames men for all of the world’s problems (“patriarchy”), [to clarify, this is a fundamental concept of feminism] opposes help for issues men face, and often even denies that they can face sexism, calling any attempt to address issues men face to be misogyny (as seen in the opposition of male abuse shelters, gender neutral rape definitions, and even in Cassie Jaye’s documentary, The Red Pill. [see my notes below]
The opposite of feminism would be a widely successful ideology that blames women for all of the world’s problems. All domestic violence is the woman’s fault. Crimes such as rape and domestic violence can only be committed by women by definition. Poorly made and clearly biased studies would be used to make men, and only men, victims of just about every issue. News networks and social media will have nothing but positive things to say about the movement while the members of the movement specifically state that women cannot face discrimination or sexism. Any attempt to advocate for women would be immediately shut down. Films about what women go through would be banned in entire countries, and “sexism” would not exist anymore. It would instead be replaced by “misandry” in all cases. People will make the ideology the standard, telling others that you either support it, or you don't care about gender equality. And of course, it would be different than the Men's rights movement, just as feminism is separate from the women’s rights movement. As an ideology, it would basically be more of a religion than a movement.
Have you started a group outlining serious issues that women face? Ha! It will just be called misandry and strongly opposed.
Don't like how the swapped version looks? then fight to make feminism better as an ideology. It is defined by the members and their actions, so start with that."
Please check out these two memes of quotes by women. Both splendid. The first one, WOW. She takes so many concepts, ideas, thoughts and then just encapsulates all of that into an answer that is few line long. That is one smart mojo:
https://www.reddit.com/Egalitarianism/comments/gdyth5/this_woman_below_comment_could_not_have_debunked/
Beautiful:
https://www.reddit.com/Egalitarianism/comments/gdyth5/this_woman_below_comment_could_not_have_debunked/

Trying to talk to a feminist about boys underperformance in school:

Karen Sraughan:
I did an interview with Saachi Khoul of Buzzfeed News yesterday. I talked about boys falling behind in education from the primary school level onward, including:
* teacher bias against boys exists (female elementary school teachers grade boys down compared to gender-blinded evaluators)
* boys are aware of this bias (when third grade boys were asked to wager money on how good a grade they expected to get on a project, they wagered less when they were told the teacher was female and would know they're a boy than when they were told the teacher was male or that the teacher wouldn't know they're a boy)
* both boys and girls agree that boys receive the bulk of negative attention from teachers in classrooms
* because school at the primary level is dominated by women, and because of the above issues, and because boys might not have their first male teacher until grade 8 math, they are likely to internalize the message that school is not for boys
Her response to that was to first ask if the boys were white. I was like, "Uh... this affects all boys, including minority boys." She then said, "But CEOs of Fortune 500 companies are overwhelmingly male."
I was like... WTF? So I say, "what does what's going on among 50 to 70 year olds in the top 1 tenth of 1% of the population have to do with how boys are doing in elementary school?"
She says, "well, men are still dominant." I said, "those male CEOs were boys in elementary school 40 to 60 years ago.
What does that have to do with what's happening now in elementary schools? You have to realize there's a bit of a lag at work here, and if you look at age cohorts from oldest to youngest, you find women and girls catching up and then surpassing men and boys as you track backwards from older to younger cohorts. Single women in their 20s in cities now earn 8% more than their male counterparts. Your entire argument here seems vindictive--like you're happy to see boys punished because men are still dominant in the top 1% at age 50."
"So MRAs are complaining about women catching up, is what you're saying."
I said, "women had parity in post secondary enrolment in the 1980s."
She comes back with me not being intersectional enough. "Yes, but women of color earn much less compared to white men."
I said, "Not to get all intersectional on you, but the gender gap favoring women in post-secondary attainment in the US is largest in the black community." T
he producer interrupts and tries to get us back on the topic of bias against primary school boys and asks her to clarify her counterargument. She replies that she thinks her point about the dominance of men at the top of Fortune 500 companies is an adequate rebuttal. (WTF!!!????)
Honestly, it was like talking to a brick wall.

FEMINIST'S LONG HISTORY OF BLOCKING GENDER EQUALITY ISSUES FOR MEN

As stated, what does he mean by feminism opposes mens rights and gender equality. Well lets look at Karen Straughan's reposes to a feminist when they said those feminists are not true feminists. True feminism is about equality:
Please note Karen only talks about feminist leaders and organisations here, and this is an old list. If she were to talk about feminists in general this list would be too big for a reddit post:

So what you're saying is that you, a commenter using a username on an internet forum are the true feminist, and the feminists actually responsible for changing the laws, writing the academic theory, teaching the courses, influencing the public policies, and the massive, well-funded feminist organizations with thousands and thousands of members all of whom call themselves feminists... they are not "real feminists".
You're not the director of the Feminist Majority Foundation and editor of Ms. Magazine, Katherine Spillar, who said of domestic violence: "Well, that's just a clean-up word for wife-beating," and went on to add that regarding male victims of dating violence, "we know it's not girls beating up boys, it's boys beating up girls."
You're not Jan Reimer, former mayor of Edmonton and long-time head of Alberta's Network of Women's Shelters, who just a few years ago refused to appear on a TV program discussing male victims of domestic violence, because for her to even show up and discuss it would lend legitimacy to the idea that they exist.
You're not Mary P Koss, who describes male victims of female rapists in her academic papers as being not rape victims because they were "ambivalent about their sexual desires" (if you don't know what that means, it's that they actually wanted it), and then went on to define them out of the definition of rape in the CDC's research because it's inappropriate to consider what happened to them rape.
You're not the National Organization for Women, and its associated legal foundations, who lobbied to replace the gender neutral federal Family Violence Prevention and Services Act of 1984 with the obscenely gendered Violence Against Women Act of 1994. The passing of that law cut male victims out of support services and legal assistance in more than 60 passages, just because they were male.
You're not the Florida chapter of the NOW, who successfully lobbied to have Governor Rick Scott veto not one, but two alimony reform bills in the last ten years, bills that had passed both houses with overwhelming bipartisan support, and were supported by more than 70% of the electorate.
You're not the feminist group in Maryland who convinced every female member of the House on both sides of the aisle to walk off the floor when a shared parenting bill came up for a vote, meaning the quorum could not be met and the bill died then and there.
You're not the feminists in Canada agitating to remove sexual assault from the normal criminal courts, into quasi-criminal courts of equity where the burden of proof would be lowered, the defendant could be compelled to testify, discovery would go both ways, and defendants would not be entitled to a public defender.
You're not Professor Elizabeth Sheehy, who wrote a book advocating that women not only have the right to murder their husbands without fear of prosecution if they make a claim of abuse, but that they have the moral responsibility to murder their husbands.
You're not the feminist legal scholars and advocates who successfully changed rape laws such that a woman's history of making multiple false allegations of rape can be excluded from evidence at trial because it's "part of her sexual history."
You're not the feminists who splattered the media with the false claim that putting your penis in a passed-out woman's mouth is "not a crime" in Oklahoma, because the prosecutor was incompetent and charged the defendant under an inappropriate statute (forcible sodomy) and the higher court refused to expand the definition of that statute beyond its intended scope when there was already a perfectly good one (sexual battery) already there. You're not the idiot feminists lying to the public and potentially putting women in Oklahoma at risk by telling potential offenders there's a "legal" way to rape them.
And you're none of the hundreds or thousands of feminist scholars, writers, thinkers, researchers, teachers and philosophers who constructed and propagate the body of bunkum theories upon which all of these atrocities are based.
No...You're the true feminist. Some random person on the internet. [LOL] - added the lol
Here is a bigger list going from 1st wave feminism all the way from the Pankhurst suffragettes to now:
http://archive.is/AWSEN
If we start adding random feminists to Karen's list instead of just leaders and organisation then we'd be here all year but here's 3 videos:
https://youtu.be/iARHCxAMAO0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cMYfxOFBBM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ha2E5aQ7yb8
submitted by mellainadiba to AskTheMRAs [link] [comments]


2020.05.06 04:05 mellainadiba GREAT ANSWER: Is the opposite of feminism, masculinism? Is an MRA one?

Please share, edit, improve, post yourself, make memes whatever...
"Feminism is an ideology, and is not synonymous with gender equality. Being against feminism, or even opposite to it, would just be opposition to the ideology, not gender equality. There is a reason why the women’s rights movement and feminism are separate movements.
Feminism as an ideology blames men for all of the world’s problems (“patriarchy”), [to clarify, this is a fundamental concept of feminism] opposes help for issues men face, and often even denies that they can face sexism, calling any attempt to address issues men face to be misogyny (as seen in the opposition of male abuse shelters, gender neutral rape definitions, and even in Cassie Jaye’s documentary, The Red Pill. [see my notes below]
The opposite of feminism would be a widely successful ideology that blames women for all of the world’s problems. All domestic violence is the woman’s fault. Crimes such as rape and domestic violence can only be committed by women by definition. Poorly made and clearly biased studies would be used to make men, and only men, victims of just about every issue. News networks and social media will have nothing but positive things to say about the movement while the members of the movement specifically state that women cannot face discrimination or sexism. Any attempt to advocate for women would be immediately shut down. Films about what women go through would be banned in entire countries, and “sexism” would not exist anymore. It would instead be replaced by “misandry” in all cases. People will make the ideology the standard, telling others that you either support it, or you don't care about gender equality. And of course, it would be different than the Men's rights movement, just as feminism is separate from the women’s rights movement. As an ideology, it would basically be more of a religion than a movement.
Have you started a group outlining serious issues that women face? Ha! It will just be called misandry and strongly opposed.
Don't like how the swapped version looks? then fight to make feminism better as an ideology. It is defined by the members and their actions, so start with that."
Please check out these two memes of quotes by women. Both splendid. The first one, WOW. She takes so many concepts, ideas, thoughts and then just encapsulates all of that into an answer that is few line long. That is one smart mojo:
https://www.reddit.com/Egalitarianism/comments/gdyth5/this_woman_below_comment_could_not_have_debunked/
Beautiful:
https://www.reddit.com/Egalitarianism/comments/gdyth5/this_woman_below_comment_could_not_have_debunked/

Trying to talk to a feminist about boys underperformance in school:

Karen Sraughan:
I did an interview with Saachi Khoul of Buzzfeed News yesterday. I talked about boys falling behind in education from the primary school level onward, including:
* teacher bias against boys exists (female elementary school teachers grade boys down compared to gender-blinded evaluators)
* boys are aware of this bias (when third grade boys were asked to wager money on how good a grade they expected to get on a project, they wagered less when they were told the teacher was female and would know they're a boy than when they were told the teacher was male or that the teacher wouldn't know they're a boy)
* both boys and girls agree that boys receive the bulk of negative attention from teachers in classrooms
* because school at the primary level is dominated by women, and because of the above issues, and because boys might not have their first male teacher until grade 8 math, they are likely to internalize the message that school is not for boys
Her response to that was to first ask if the boys were white. I was like, "Uh... this affects all boys, including minority boys." She then said, "But CEOs of Fortune 500 companies are overwhelmingly male."
I was like... WTF? So I say, "what does what's going on among 50 to 70 year olds in the top 1 tenth of 1% of the population have to do with how boys are doing in elementary school?"
She says, "well, men are still dominant." I said, "those male CEOs were boys in elementary school 40 to 60 years ago.
What does that have to do with what's happening now in elementary schools? You have to realize there's a bit of a lag at work here, and if you look at age cohorts from oldest to youngest, you find women and girls catching up and then surpassing men and boys as you track backwards from older to younger cohorts. Single women in their 20s in cities now earn 8% more than their male counterparts. Your entire argument here seems vindictive--like you're happy to see boys punished because men are still dominant in the top 1% at age 50."
"So MRAs are complaining about women catching up, is what you're saying."
I said, "women had parity in post secondary enrolment in the 1980s."
She comes back with me not being intersectional enough. "Yes, but women of color earn much less compared to white men."
I said, "Not to get all intersectional on you, but the gender gap favoring women in post-secondary attainment in the US is largest in the black community." T
he producer interrupts and tries to get us back on the topic of bias against primary school boys and asks her to clarify her counterargument. She replies that she thinks her point about the dominance of men at the top of Fortune 500 companies is an adequate rebuttal. (WTF!!!????)
Honestly, it was like talking to a brick wall.

FEMINIST'S LONG HISTORY OF BLOCKING GENDER EQUALITY ISSUES FOR MEN

As stated, what does he mean by feminism opposes mens rights and gender equality. Well lets look at Karen Straughan's reposes to a feminist when they said those feminists are not true feminists. True feminism is about equality:
Please note Karen only talks about feminist leaders and organisations here, and this is an old list. If she were to talk about feminists in general this list would be too big for a reddit post:

So what you're saying is that you, a commenter using a username on an internet forum are the true feminist, and the feminists actually responsible for changing the laws, writing the academic theory, teaching the courses, influencing the public policies, and the massive, well-funded feminist organizations with thousands and thousands of members all of whom call themselves feminists... they are not "real feminists".
You're not the director of the Feminist Majority Foundation and editor of Ms. Magazine, Katherine Spillar, who said of domestic violence: "Well, that's just a clean-up word for wife-beating," and went on to add that regarding male victims of dating violence, "we know it's not girls beating up boys, it's boys beating up girls."
You're not Jan Reimer, former mayor of Edmonton and long-time head of Alberta's Network of Women's Shelters, who just a few years ago refused to appear on a TV program discussing male victims of domestic violence, because for her to even show up and discuss it would lend legitimacy to the idea that they exist.
You're not Mary P Koss, who describes male victims of female rapists in her academic papers as being not rape victims because they were "ambivalent about their sexual desires" (if you don't know what that means, it's that they actually wanted it), and then went on to define them out of the definition of rape in the CDC's research because it's inappropriate to consider what happened to them rape.
You're not the National Organization for Women, and its associated legal foundations, who lobbied to replace the gender neutral federal Family Violence Prevention and Services Act of 1984 with the obscenely gendered Violence Against Women Act of 1994. The passing of that law cut male victims out of support services and legal assistance in more than 60 passages, just because they were male.
You're not the Florida chapter of the NOW, who successfully lobbied to have Governor Rick Scott veto not one, but two alimony reform bills in the last ten years, bills that had passed both houses with overwhelming bipartisan support, and were supported by more than 70% of the electorate.
You're not the feminist group in Maryland who convinced every female member of the House on both sides of the aisle to walk off the floor when a shared parenting bill came up for a vote, meaning the quorum could not be met and the bill died then and there.
You're not the feminists in Canada agitating to remove sexual assault from the normal criminal courts, into quasi-criminal courts of equity where the burden of proof would be lowered, the defendant could be compelled to testify, discovery would go both ways, and defendants would not be entitled to a public defender.
You're not Professor Elizabeth Sheehy, who wrote a book advocating that women not only have the right to murder their husbands without fear of prosecution if they make a claim of abuse, but that they have the moral responsibility to murder their husbands.
You're not the feminist legal scholars and advocates who successfully changed rape laws such that a woman's history of making multiple false allegations of rape can be excluded from evidence at trial because it's "part of her sexual history."
You're not the feminists who splattered the media with the false claim that putting your penis in a passed-out woman's mouth is "not a crime" in Oklahoma, because the prosecutor was incompetent and charged the defendant under an inappropriate statute (forcible sodomy) and the higher court refused to expand the definition of that statute beyond its intended scope when there was already a perfectly good one (sexual battery) already there. You're not the idiot feminists lying to the public and potentially putting women in Oklahoma at risk by telling potential offenders there's a "legal" way to rape them.
And you're none of the hundreds or thousands of feminist scholars, writers, thinkers, researchers, teachers and philosophers who constructed and propagate the body of bunkum theories upon which all of these atrocities are based.
No...You're the true feminist. Some random person on the internet. [LOL] - added the lol
Here is a bigger list going from 1st wave feminism all the way from the Pankhurst suffragettes to now:
http://archive.is/AWSEN
If we start adding random feminists to Karen's list instead of just leaders and organisation then we'd be here all year but here's 3 videos:
https://youtu.be/iARHCxAMAO0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cMYfxOFBBM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ha2E5aQ7yb8
submitted by mellainadiba to MensRights [link] [comments]


2020.05.02 21:21 mellainadiba CANT HAVE IT BOTH WAYS; Cant say female mental health and suicide is worse (more attempts) is worse than male mental health AND also say toxic masculinity is why mens mental health is so bad, if women are doing worse than maybe women need stop their toxic femininity!

See here also:
There is a reason why some feminists do actually show some support of talking about male suicide which is very odd, as they actively suppress most other male issues (see list at end). Sadly the reason for the support is not good, it is because male suicide fits into one of their narratives I,e, toxic masculinity, gender roles, and how feminism can help men. That is the only reason. However, there is a group of feminists also who want the discussion on male suicide to end, to not gender the issue and to focus back on women, as they attempt suicide more. Many feminise actually flip flop from the issue deeding on when it suits
Just a quick reply to a feminists trying to say no, womens suicide rates are higher so they are victims and need the main support YET AT THE SAME TIME claim toxic masculinity is the cause of male harm to mental health:

If women are committing suicide 4x the rate of men (I don't buy that, although I have seen some data to suggest that attempt it more often), have more depression and anxiety and all sorts of mental health issues, cant report abuse etc due to all sorts of mental and trauma blocks and stay with abusive partners.... why the hell are feminists saying toxic masculinity is the problem cause for male mental health issues or imply that men should be more like women, or women are wonderful and talk to each other and all that.... clearly the crisis is in women as you say yourself, as none of that female stuff they apparently do, and open up and talk, is helping them clearly is it? Women are killing themselve 4x as much according to you, and also being too indecisive to actually do it. You cant Balme toxic masculinity now all of a sudden, if it is female mental health care that is in crisis according to you!
if feminist bang on about men being responsible for violence, then sure, but that means on the whole they are responsible for inventing everything, discovering everything, exploring and pushing frontiers for humanity (oceans, space, new countries, continents, arctic, desserts etc), fine art, music, film, history, culture, billionaires, Nobel prize winners, billionaires and leaders... leaders even in female dominated industries and female activities such as fashion, shopping, makeup, cooking (so feminists can complain its because women are a minority, as men are a minority there and face social taboo in those fields but still end up on top)
Cant have it both ways mate.
About how it is odd for feminists to support male suicide despite normally opposing mens issues:
There was a proposal at Simon Fraser University (near Vancouver) to open up a men's centre on campus to address issues like suicide, drug/alcohol addiction, and negative stereotypes. The women's centre, which already existed, opposed this. They argued that a men's centre is not needed because the men's centre is already "everywhere else" (even though those issues aren't being addressed "everywhere else"). The alternative they proposed was a "male allies project" to "bring self-identified men together to talk about masculinity and its harmful effects" [1].
Author Warren Farrell went to give a talk on the boys' crisis (boys dropping out of school and committing suicide at higher rates) at the University of Toronto, but he was opposed by protesters who "barricaded the doors, harassed attendees, pulled fire alarms, chanted curses at speakers and more". Opposition included leaders in the student union [2] [3].
Three students (one man and two women) at Ryerson University (also in Toronto) decided to start a club dedicated to men's issues. They were blocked by the Ryerson Students' Union, which associated the men's issues club with supposed "anti-women's rights groups" and called the idea that it's even possible to be sexist against men an "oppressive concept" [4]. The student union also passed a motion saying that it rejects "Groups, meetings events or initiatives [that] negate the need to centre women’s voices in the struggle for gender equity" (while ironically saying that women's issues "have historically and continue to today to be silenced") [5].
Janice Fiamengo, a professor at the University of Ottawa, was giving a public lecture on men's issues. She was interrupted by a group of students shouting, blasting horns, and pulling the fire alarm [6].
At Oberlin College in Ohio, various students had invited equity feminist Christina Hoff Sommers (known for her individualist/libertarian perspective on gender) to give a talk on men's issues. Activists hung up posters identifying those who invited her (by their full names) as "supporters of rape culture" [7] [8].
A student at Durham University in England, affected by the suicide of a close male friend, tried to open up the Durham University Male Human Rights Society: "[i]t’s incredible how much stigma there is against male weakness. Men’s issues are deemed unimportant, so I decided to start a society". The idea was rejected by the Societies Committee as it was deemed "controversial". He was told he could only have a men's group as a branch of the Feminist Society group on campus [9].
At Saint Paul University (part of the University of Ottawa) on September 24th, 2015, journalist Cathy Young gave a talk on gender politics on university campuses, GamerGate, the tendency to neglect men's issues in society, and the focus on the victimization of women (in the areas of sexual violence and cyberbullying). She was met by masked protesters who called her "rape apologist scum" and interrupted the event by pulling the fire alarm [10].
In 2015, the University of York in the U.K. announced its intention to observe International Men's Day, noting that they are "also aware of some of the specific issues faced by men", including under-representation of (and bias against) men in various areas of the university (such as academic staff appointments, professional support services, and support staff in academic departments) [11]. This inspired a torrent of criticism, including an open letter to the university claiming that a day to celebrate men's issues "does not combat inequality, but merely amplifies existing, structurally imposed, inequalities". The university responded by going back on its plans to observe International Men's Day and affirming that "the main focus of gender equality work should continue to be on the inequalities faced by women". In contrast, the University of York's observation of International Women's Day a few months earlier was a week long affair with more than 100 events [12].
Some of these femintis in action:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iARHCxAMAO0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cMYfxOFBBM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ha2E5aQ7yb8
A long list of feminists blocking mens rights:
http://archive.is/AWSEN
Dont foget Karens Straughans excellent post in reposnse to a feminists saying these are not true feminists:
Karen Straughan:
So what you're saying is that you, a commenter using a username on an internet forum are the true feminist, and the feminists actually responsible for changing the laws, writing the academic theory, teaching the courses, influencing the public policies, and the massive, well-funded feminist organizations with thousands and thousands of members all of whom call themselves feminists... they are not "real feminists".
You're not the director of the Feminist Majority Foundation and editor of Ms. Magazine, Katherine Spillar, who said of domestic violence: "Well, that's just a clean-up word for wife-beating," and went on to add that regarding male victims of dating violence, "we know it's not girls beating up boys, it's boys beating up girls."
You're not Jan Reimer, former mayor of Edmonton and long-time head of Alberta's Network of Women's Shelters, who just a few years ago refused to appear on a TV program discussing male victims of domestic violence, because for her to even show up and discuss it would lend legitimacy to the idea that they exist.
You're not Mary P Koss, who describes male victims of female rapists in her academic papers as being not rape victims because they were "ambivalent about their sexual desires" (if you don't know what that means, it's that they actually wanted it), and then went on to define them out of the definition of rape in the CDC's research because it's inappropriate to consider what happened to them rape.
You're not the National Organization for Women, and its associated legal foundations, who lobbied to replace the gender neutral federal Family Violence Prevention and Services Act of 1984 with the obscenely gendered Violence Against Women Act of 1994. The passing of that law cut male victims out of support services and legal assistance in more than 60 passages, just because they were male.
You're not the Florida chapter of the NOW, who successfully lobbied to have Governor Rick Scott veto not one, but two alimony reform bills in the last ten years, bills that had passed both houses with overwhelming bipartisan support, and were supported by more than 70% of the electorate.
You're not the feminist group in Maryland who convinced every female member of the House on both sides of the aisle to walk off the floor when a shared parenting bill came up for a vote, meaning the quorum could not be met and the bill died then and there.
You're not the feminists in Canada agitating to remove sexual assault from the normal criminal courts, into quasi-criminal courts of equity where the burden of proof would be lowered, the defendant could be compelled to testify, discovery would go both ways, and defendants would not be entitled to a public defender.
You're not Professor Elizabeth Sheehy, who wrote a book advocating that women not only have the right to murder their husbands without fear of prosecution if they make a claim of abuse, but that they have the moral responsibility to murder their husbands.
You're not the feminist legal scholars and advocates who successfully changed rape laws such that a woman's history of making multiple false allegations of rape can be excluded from evidence at trial because it's "part of her sexual history."
You're not the feminists who splattered the media with the false claim that putting your penis in a passed-out woman's mouth is "not a crime" in Oklahoma, because the prosecutor was incompetent and charged the defendant under an inappropriate statute (forcible sodomy) and the higher court refused to expand the definition of that statute beyond its intended scope when there was already a perfectly good one (sexual battery) already there. You're not the idiot feminists lying to the public and potentially putting women in Oklahoma at risk by telling potential offenders there's a "legal" way to rape them.
And you're none of the hundreds or thousands of feminist scholars, writers, thinkers, researchers, teachers and philosophers who constructed and propagate the body of bunkum theories upon which all of these atrocities are based.
No...You're the true feminist. Some random person on the internet.

submitted by mellainadiba to antifeminists [link] [comments]


2020.04.30 11:27 mellainadiba FSW: Try and raise a mens issue and see what happens:

So what you're saying is that you, a commenter using a username on an internet forum are the true feminist, and the feminists actually responsible for changing the laws, writing the academic theory, teaching the courses, influencing the public policies, and the massive, well-funded feminist organizations with thousands and thousands of members all of whom call themselves feminists... they are not "real feminists".
You're not the director of the Feminist Majority Foundation and editor of Ms. Magazine, Katherine Spillar, who said of domestic violence: "Well, that's just a clean-up word for wife-beating," and went on to add that regarding male victims of dating violence, "we know it's not girls beating up boys, it's boys beating up girls."
You're not Jan Reimer, former mayor of Edmonton and long-time head of Alberta's Network of Women's Shelters, who just a few years ago refused to appear on a TV program discussing male victims of domestic violence, because for her to even show up and discuss it would lend legitimacy to the idea that they exist.
You're not Mary P Koss, who describes male victims of female rapists in her academic papers as being not rape victims because they were "ambivalent about their sexual desires" (if you don't know what that means, it's that they actually wanted it), and then went on to define them out of the definition of rape in the CDC's research because it's inappropriate to consider what happened to them rape.
You're not the National Organization for Women, and its associated legal foundations, who lobbied to replace the gender neutral federal Family Violence Prevention and Services Act of 1984 with the obscenely gendered Violence Against Women Act of 1994. The passing of that law cut male victims out of support services and legal assistance in more than 60 passages, just because they were male.
You're not the Florida chapter of the NOW, who successfully lobbied to have Governor Rick Scott veto not one, but two alimony reform bills in the last ten years, bills that had passed both houses with overwhelming bipartisan support, and were supported by more than 70% of the electorate.
You're not the feminist group in Maryland who convinced every female member of the House on both sides of the aisle to walk off the floor when a shared parenting bill came up for a vote, meaning the quorum could not be met and the bill died then and there.
You're not the feminists in Canada agitating to remove sexual assault from the normal criminal courts, into quasi-criminal courts of equity where the burden of proof would be lowered, the defendant could be compelled to testify, discovery would go both ways, and defendants would not be entitled to a public defender.
You're not Professor Elizabeth Sheehy, who wrote a book advocating that women not only have the right to murder their husbands without fear of prosecution if they make a claim of abuse, but that they have the moral responsibility to murder their husbands.
You're not the feminist legal scholars and advocates who successfully changed rape laws such that a woman's history of making multiple false allegations of rape can be excluded from evidence at trial because it's "part of her sexual history."
You're not the feminists who splattered the media with the false claim that putting your penis in a passed-out woman's mouth is "not a crime" in Oklahoma, because the prosecutor was incompetent and charged the defendant under an inappropriate statute (forcible sodomy) and the higher court refused to expand the definition of that statute beyond its intended scope when there was already a perfectly good one (sexual battery) already there. You're not the idiot feminists lying to the public and potentially putting women in Oklahoma at risk by telling potential offenders there's a "legal" way to rape them.
And you're none of the hundreds or thousands of feminist scholars, writers, thinkers, researchers, teachers and philosophers who constructed and propagate the body of bunkum theories upon which all of these atrocities are based.

No...You're the true feminist. Some random person on the internet. LOL

submitted by mellainadiba to FeminismStopsWhen [link] [comments]


2020.04.28 00:12 kirant Covid-19 Update for April 27: 216 new cases, 2 deaths

Some data is from the Covid-19 portal. This includes data from the portal as well as the media appearance today:
Top line numbers:
Spatial distributions (cities proper, not regional zones, for Calgary and Edmonton):
Statements by Minister of Indigenous Relations Rick Wilson:
Statements by Minister of Community and Social Services Rajan Sawhney:
Statements by Dr Deena Hinshaw:
One question was raised about Millrise Seniors Village's living conditions (reports of lack of care at facility)
Additional information will be logged below if I can find more:
submitted by kirant to alberta [link] [comments]


2020.04.24 04:43 bassboy4 Out of Work, Unsure what to do

TL;DR - Having trouble finding a job with 7 years experience, ITIL/Sec+/ACMT certifications, and a BA. Should I obtain more certifications, go back to school, or just keep trying to find a job?
I live in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. I've been out-of-work since November 29th. I've been in the IT field for 7 years: first 3 years as a desktop technician, then mostly recently 4 years (3 as a team member, 1 year as team lead) on the Antivirus, Security and Encryption team at an MSP under contract to the Government of Alberta.
I have a Bachelor of Arts degree, some technical school courses in PC Support, and a few certs I've picked up (Apple Certified Mac Technician, ITIL and CompTia Security+. I had A+ cert but it is now expired and I didn't renew it).
My short-term goal was to find a job in Vancouver, BC (i.e. one province over) and relocate there.
To that end, I've been applying for jobs in several different areas which I have some background in: deskside, service desk, support team lead, system admin, security. But I worry that I don't have a strong enough background in any one area to be a strong candidate for a decent-paying position. And given I haven't had any success in my job search to date, it seems like that is the case.
So I'm trying to figure out what is holding me back - my lack of a IT diploma/degree? Not enough certifications? Lack of enough specialized experience? Or is it just that the job market is tough at the moment and I should just keep applying until something happens?
As far as long-term goals, given that I haven't succeeded in finding a job yet, I'm not sure what my long-term goals even should be at this point. My goals revolve around living in Vancouver and making x amount of dollars, but as far as career objectives, I don't know how to get there. Lacking direction and starting to lose hope at this point.
Where do I go from here?
submitted by bassboy4 to ITCareerQuestions [link] [comments]


Daniel & Lia Pre-Wedding Interview  Visual Elegance Media Services  Edmonton WHERE is Nadia Atwi? NASHI/ Ukrainian Easter in Edmonton/Великдень в Едмонтоні Day Eight: Edmonton to Lloydminster Edmonton - Topic - YouTube Leser søker bok - YouTube

The Edmonton Pagan & Witches Meetup Group (Edmonton, AB ...

  1. Daniel & Lia Pre-Wedding Interview Visual Elegance Media Services Edmonton
  2. WHERE is Nadia Atwi?
  3. NASHI/ Ukrainian Easter in Edmonton/Великдень в Едмонтоні
  4. Day Eight: Edmonton to Lloydminster
  5. Edmonton - Topic - YouTube
  6. Leser søker bok - YouTube
  7. Brewshop - YouTube
  8. Ckca Onam 2013
  9. Gasoline Alley MY17 Demo Day

__count__/__total__ Where music meets your desktop Contact Information: Online Tip Submissions: https://www.p3tips.com/tipform.aspx?ID=250# Edmonton Police Service: 780-423-4567 Crimestoppers: 1-800-222-8477 ... Any Day that ends in a Y is a good day to Ride! This video is unavailable. This video is unavailable. Watch Queue Queue. Watch Queue Queue Українські великодні вітання з Канади. Такі далекі країни, такі різні українці, яких єднає чудо ... Brewshop.no er en av Norges ledende forhandlere innen råvarer og utstyr til ølbrygging. På denne kanalen vil vi legge ut tips og inspirasjon for hjemmebryggi... Daniel & Lia wanted to share their story with their family and friends at their wedding reception. It was such an honour to work with them. They were so fun and easy going and thank you to their ... Edmonton is the capital city of the Canadian province of Alberta. Edmonton is on the North Saskatchewan River and is the centre of the Edmonton Metropolitan ... Her finner du videoer fra og om Leser søker bok. Vi håper vi kan inspirere til leseglede og lesemestring!