VICE Says It’s Criminal For Women to Join, Belong to NRA

Last fall, the media company was revealed to have a toxic office culture teeming with sexual harassment.

On Friday, VICE tweeted how horrible it is for the National Rifle Association (NRA) to want to train preachers, school teachers, club goers, and gasp, women, on gun safety.

Here’s the complete list of people the NRA wants to arm, which is apparently offensive in VICE’s eyes:

Women should be allowed to safely handle and use firearms? How dare they want to protect themselves against attack? How dare they choose to empower themselves? How dare they have options to defend themselves? The horror, the horror!

Is VICE projecting its shortcomings? That appears to be the case. The media is fending off criticism for boasting a toxic office culture that invites and breeds an environment encouraging sexual harassment. Here’s more on the media company’s troubling office culture:

Phoebe Barghouty, a former associate producer for Vice, told the Daily Beast that in 2015, her boss, Kaj Larsen, would inappropriately touch her and take her to parties in Los Angeles, which she thought was unusual.

Barghouty, then 23, said she went to a human resources representative to voice her concerns and was reportedly told, “When it comes to talent, we can’t really tell them what to do.”

“They bring in the money and attention and you just have to deal with it,” she claimed she was told. The rep disputes those remarks.

During another occasion after a meeting, Larsen reportedly told Barghouty, “If you’re going to get anywhere with Vice guys, you’re going to have to be a lot sweeter,” she told the site. She added, “It felt like a threat.”

“The way he looked at me, the way he grabbed my arm. I remember feeling scared,” Barghouty recalled.

It’s undeniable that women, especially Millennial women, are the fasting growing bloc of gun owners and hunters (see herehere, and here). It’s criminal for women to trained by or a part of the National Rifle Association, apparently. This is the usual Left calling into question womanhood if females choose not to subscribe to subservience and groupthink common in the female establishment. Remember the Colorado state lawmaker who said the best deterrent against attack is for women to induce vomiting, to resort to screaming, or best of all, to urinate on themselves? VICE seems to be on the same page.

As we have learned over the last few days, it was the fault of Broward County Police Department—not the NRA or Second Amendment advocates—for ignoring warning signs about the Parkland killer. Sheriff Scott Israel received 18 calls about the Parkland killer’s questionable behavior, and the department received 39 calls about the killer over the course of seven years. More specifically, four deputies hid as Stoneman Douglas High School was ambushed by the killer. This has rightly prompted calls for Sheriff Scott Israel, who berated NRA spokeswoman Dana Loesch and the NRA for inspiring the Parkland killer, to resign.

It was recently revealed Sheriff Israel rewarded political favors to supporters by awarding them and their family members jobs doing public relations and community outreach for his department:

The outreach workers, who mainly attend community events, are in addition to political activists and others Israel hired into community affairs roles, writing and designing printed pieces about the agency, and sharing it on social media. The employee log shows six hired into community affairs roles, their salaries totaling $388,729.

Israel’s opponents say he’s built a publicly funded political machine, paying back supporters with jobs and using them to keep him in office. They say the money could be better spent, particularly after the sheriff complained about not having enough funding to secure the county courthouse, where a murder suspect recently escaped.

Moreover, comedians like Amy Schumer and Jim Gaffigan are coordinating with Everytown for Gun Safety to bully Google, Roku, AppleTV and other streaming services to drop NRATV with calls to #DumpNRATV and #BoycottNRA.

It seems like finding reasonable solutions won’t be achieved anytime soon, as the Left and anti-gunners continue to scapegoat innocent and law-abiding Americans for the crimes of a sick depraved individual and negligence by authorities who abdicated their duties by not stopping this guy in wake of warnings. But yes, let’s attack women who choose to involve themselves with the NRA.

I’m proud to be an NRA member and hope you consider joining too. Register here.

Oxford University Changes Core History Exam To Give Higher Grades To Women

Oxford University – long held as one of the premier educational institutions in the world – is changing one of its core history exams in order to ensure that more women get the highest possible grade on the test.

One of Oxford’s five final-year history exams will be replaced by a paper that can be done at home to try to improve results for female students.

The move, which begins in the next academic year, comes as statistics showed 32% of women achieved a first in history at Oxford, compared with 37% of men.

Under the new exam structure, students most likely will be given similar questions to the existing exam, but rather than completing the test within a specifically designated time frame, students will have several days at home to finish.

University officials say that the “gender gap” was a major factor in considering the new exam, along with the fact that the new format would “reward research skills rather than memorisation, or performance under pressure.”

The decision isn’t without its controversy, however. Even the university admits that the risk of plagiarism grows with a take-home test. There’s no guarantee that students won’t collaborate, cheat, or seek outside help with the exam.

The exam isn’t exactly a hit with professors either.

Not everyone in the faculty welcomed the move away from traditional exams. While the introduction of a “take-home” paper was supported by staff and students, some of those who attended meetings about the reform warned that it increased the risk of plagiarism and could reduce academic rigour. “We don’t want girls within the faculty to be blamed for ‘softening’ the course,” one said.

So in this era when the college experience seems more and more like a joke, even highly acclaimed institutions like Oxford are changing important exams simply for the sake of giving higher grades to one group. Even if the new exams are a good idea and truly become a better barometer of academic performance, the reason behind it is totally ridiculous.

It’s enough to make you worry about the future – as if we didn’t have enough to create concern to begin with.

New Miss USA Chastised for Speaking Truth on Healthcare, Feminism

Last night, the 2017 winner of the Miss USA pageant made two bold declarations: healthcare is a privilege while feminism doesn’t make us more equal in standing.

When probed by judge and famed dancer Julianne Hough about affordable healthcare,  Miss District of Columbia Kara McCullough, 25, said her position in the U.S. government influences her view that healthcare is a privilege, not a right.

“I’m definitely going to say it’s a privilege,” said McCullough. “As a government employee, I’m granted healthcare. And I see firsthand that for one, to have healthcare, you need to have jobs, so therefore we need to continue to cultivate this environment so that we’re given the opportunities to have healthcare as well as jobs for all Americans worldwide.”

That’s an interesting view, no? Here’s how the Twitterverse responded to the newly crowned Miss USA’s answer:

Despite some backlash, many people heaped words of praise for the newly crowned Miss USA:

https://twitter.com/cross_bearer89/status/863966350942797825

Even worse for leftists: she also rejected the feminist moniker–preferring the “equalist” label instead. Here’s how McCullough responded:

 

“As a woman scientist in the government, I’d like to transpose the word feminism to equalism. I try not to consider myself this diehard, like, I don’t really care about men.”

 

Kara McCullough is a scientist at the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and boasts a chemistry degree from South Carolina State University. She is the daughter of a retired U.S. Navy officer. She also self-funds a program called Science Exploration for Kids, which offers tutoring for science- and math-based activities for kids in sixth to 11th grade. Best of all, she’s an advocate for empowered women yet she doesn’t believe goose-stepping with feminism is the right way to achieve these goals. How refreshing is that?

Interestingly enough, this is the same pageant series that now-President Donald Trump oversaw from 1996-2015. The competition has become overtly political in recent years, so it’s not surprising to see these questions come to the forefront.

For a competition that previously crowned a former Planned Parenthood intern and traditionally crowns girls with leftist views, it’s encouraging to see a pageant winner who can win the crown yet stay true to her more conservative beliefs.

NEW: Dana Loesch Lands Awesome Spokesperson Role with NRA

Conservative commentator and gun gal Dana Loesch has a new role with the National Rifle Association:  Special Assistant to the Executive Vice President for Public Communication. Previously, Loesch served as a Special Advisor on Women’s Policy Issues and currently hosts a show on their TV network, NRATV.

“During the past year Dana has proven herself to be a powerful voice for the Second Amendment rights of all Americans,” Wayne LaPierre said in a press release. “It is clear that Dana has the communication skills, experience, and natural ability to serve our organization well as one its very public faces in the news media.”

He added, “I’ve been impressed with Dana’s command of the issues facing the NRA, as well as her ability to communicate our positions and connect with women, and men, on those issues.”

Here’s more from Loesch on the announcement:

Many took it to social media to congratulate Dana on her new spokesperson role:

 

https://twitter.com/DanaTheBlaze/status/834090439040983044

Dana Loesch couldn’t be a better fit for this role. Her tireless, impassioned defense of Second Amendment issues has made her a leader in the shooting sports. Moreover, she helps give life to the issue as a woman, mom, and constitutionalist. The world could use more Dana Loesch’s and fewer Shannon Watts’.

Loesch currently hosts a popular syndicated radio show and “Dana” on The Blaze. She is a frequent guest on major TV networks where she often appears on behalf of the NRA. Dana has also authored two bestseller books, Hands Off My Guns (2014) and Flyover Nation (2016).

I’m proud to know Dana and am confident she’ll excel in this role. You go girl!

 

“Women’s” March Welcomes Sex Workers

As thousands are marching on Washington today, it’s important to note what a busy week it’s been for the “Pro-Prostitution, Pro-Choice, Anti-Gender Norms, Pro-Illegal Immigration, Anti-Trump Women’s March on Washington.” (I’m sorry – were you under the impression this was an event for women? That “all-inclusive” group has a very specific target audience.)

In a mere three days, the March has gone from kicking out pro-life women to dropping and then reinstating their encouragement of sex workers to participate.

A freelance writer covering the Women’s March noticed that their statement regarding sex workers had changed. Originally, the statement read “in solidarity with the sex workers’ rights movement,” but was replaced with a general statement of support for “those exploited for labor and sex.”

The change insinuated that sex workers are not a part of the group, and the word “exploited” portrays them as weak – both very unwelcome revisions to the sex workers.

The coordinator for Sex Workers Alliance Ireland, Kate McGrew, reportedly noticed the replacement first. (She cried tears of joy for the sex workers’ inclusion when she saw the original statement, so obviously this replacement was probably a trigger for her.)

Needless to say, she was “flooded with relief” when the statement was reinstated. After all, the so-called “women’s rights” group hasn’t always welcomed the sex workers with open arms in the past.

Janet Mock, a transgender rights activist, claimed the original statement that ended up being reinstated was hers. On her Tumblr account, she wrote:

“I cannot speak to the internal conflicts at the Women’s March that have led to the erasure of the line I wrote for our collective vision but I have been assured that the line will remain in OUR document.”

She continued:

“I know that underground economies are essential parts of the lived realities of women and folk. I know sex work to be work. It’s not something I need to tiptoe around. It’s not a radical statement. It’s a fact.”

It’s also a fact that prostitution is illegal in this country, with the exception of a few counties in Nevada. As a true feminist, I want something better for women. Yes – that’s right – I’m insinuating that sex work isn’t an ideal career. Assuming there are others that share the views expressed in Mock’s post – these activists see this as being a career that’s preferred by some women and was to encourage them – despite the fact that it’s illegal in almost every part of the country.

The group claims their unity statement is a “living, breathing document” – and it has to be to keep up with their very specific target audience. They also note their organization is “committed to being bridge-builders” – however, given their actions with the pro-life women, that statement does not apply to all groups.

Pro-Choice, Anti-Gender Norms, Pro-Illegal Immigration, Anti-Trump Women’s March on Washington

The anticipated Women’s March on Washington is expected to kick off this Saturday in D.C., but don’t let the title of the event fool you, as not all anti-Trump women are welcome.

A pro-life group, New Wave Feminists, opposes President-elect Donald Trump and was listed as an official sponsor of the event. But after an article written by Emma Green, one of the march’s co-chairs, was published in The Atlantic, sharing pro-life women’s involvement, stating “We must not just talk about feminism as one issue, like access to reproductive care,” a tweet storm ensued and they were abruptly kicked out.

The reason for kicking these women out? “The right to choose is a fundamental part of feminism.”

Here’s the statement from Women’s March on Washington regarding their “error”:

Destiny Herndon-De La Rosa of New Wave Feminists told LifeSiteNews that the group will still be attending the march on Saturday, with a statement that I just love:

“It appears that the [Women’s March on Washington] only wants to include a ‘diverse’ array of women who think exactly like them,” she said. “That’s unfortunate, but we will not be deterred.”

I’ve often wondered where the modern-day definition of feminism has come from. According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, feminism is:

“The theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes”

Last time I checked, men didn’t have the ability to terminate their pregnancies, so I guess I’m a little confused as to how abortion has any effect on how much of a feminist you are – let alone being a “fundamental part of feminism.”

Curious if you qualify for the Women’s March on Washington? Review their unity statements to get a feel for what they’re looking for in a woman. (Note: Having female genitalia, believing in equal women’s rights and not supporting President-elect Trump’s divisive language isn’t enough.)

Modern-day feminists joke about, and embrace, their stereotype of being “nasty women,” but claim the reality is that they only want equal rights for women. They claim it’s us, the conservatives, that paint them in such a negative light.

Perhaps I’m shining a light by writing this article, but they are definitely doing all the painting.

‘Baby It’s Cold Outside’ Gets Feminist Harpy Makeover

The Huffington Post is ecstatic over a new version of the Christmas classic, “Baby It’s Cold Outside,” created by a singer-songwriter couple who found the original song “aggressive and inappropriate.”

Apparently, Lydia Liza and Josiah Lemanski found themselves tortured by the unrevealed fate of what they imagine is the date-rape victim described in the tune. “You never figure out if she gets to go home,” worries Lydia to CNN. So they made up new, consent form-approved lyrics, complete with phrases like “You reserve the right to say no,” and hipster favorite Pomegranate La Croix sparkling water replacing that suspicious drink.

Since the dawn of time, men have been trying to convince women to get it on, and women have made them jump through hoops to get there. This basic, politically-incorrect male-female dynamic seems to be lost on millions of my fellow Millennials, so allow me to relieve Lydia, Josiah, and their fellow feminists of their anxieties about the lady’s well-being.

The man and the woman in the song had sex, and they both enjoyed it.

(For my next trick, I’ll explain to you why Jimmy Stewart does a double-take when he sees the bed in his new married home in “It’s A Wonderful Life.”)

Every year, campus feminists and their hysterical media counterparts reiterate their concerns about the song’s “problematic” nature. One feminist columnist could barely stand to listen to the lyrics; “even typing those four, slimy words forced me to take seven showers,” she wrote. Though the critiques range from the laughable to unhinged, all of them focus around the idea that the man in the song is convincing his unwilling partner to stick around, and perhaps drugging her – “say, what’s in this drink?” – to do so.

These staggering misinterpretations of the courtship dance between a man and a woman can only sound reasonable in a culture that insists that there are no differences between male and female sexuality, sex differences in general are a societal construct, and traditional masculine and feminine behaviors are problems to overcome through indoctrination.

Meanwhile, back on planet Earth, most women enjoy being the object of male pursuit. Most men enjoy pursuing women more when that pursuit has at least the veneer of a challenge. That this even has to be spelled out shows how confused relations between men and women have become in the modern era.

If the 1960s were about sexual “liberation,” the 2000s have been about trying to put that genie back in the bottle through an ever-expanding notion of consent. If the only legitimate reason to condemn sexual activity is lack of consent, it stands to reason that the concept of consent will have to be stretched to cover territory previously governed by archaic notions like fidelity, morality, and loyalty. Enter the affirmative consent contract, because contracts are such well-known aphrodisiacs.

The world wrought by the contradictions and fantasies of modern feminism, besides being ruinous to many young men, is just so d*mned unsexy. No wonder women having casual sex aren’t even getting orgasms out of the deal, and women today report being more unhappy than they did under the dark days of The Patriarchy. Their partners, boyfriends, and husbands (throuple partners?) are asking “may I?” before every step of the deed.

In the new version of the song, when Lydia croons that she really “can’t stay,” Josiah responds with “Baby, I’m fine with that.” Ladies, let me give you a piece of advice. If you’re dating a man who responds to your flirtations with resigned acquiescence, walk out that door and don’t bother coming back, no matter how cold it is outside.

Trump’s Awfulness Is Nothing New. But Tonight, The Right Is Carrying Clinton’s Water As She Sells America Down The River.

Donald Trump is a very immoral person. This is no surprise to anyone who has looked into even a small part of his background.

Like many on the right, Erick has slammed Trump. He has also, like many on the right, said that Trump should drop out, or VP nominee Mike Pence should.

With respect, Erick and many other conservatives and Republicans are walking right into the Left’s trap. Consider:

First, yes, slam Trump. But the tunnel vision focus on decade-old comments ignores the real damage from the newest Clinton scandal by Wikileaks. Quoting The Washington Examiner:

Clinton said in a speech to Banco Itau, an Italian bank, that she supported “open borders” and free trade in May 2013.

“My dream is a hemispheric common market, with open trade and open borders, some time in the future with energy that is as green and sustainable as we can get it, powering growth and opportunity for every person in the hemisphere,” she said. Clinton pocketed $225,000 for the Banco Itau speech.

The excerpts were described as “flags” from the Democratic nominee’s paid speeches as identified by “HWA,” likely an acronym for the Harry Walker Agency, which represented both Clintons on the paid speaking circuit.

Other transcripts showed her touting her “great relations” with Wall Street and featured her defending big banks against the “oversimplification” people made when blaming them for the financial crisis.

She told Nexenta, a technology company, in a 2014 paid speech that she was aware of the rules barring Blackberry use at the State Department.

If the document dump is proven to be accurate, this means Clinton a) lied about risking national security through what would become her e-mail scandals, b) is probably going to protect the same banks that threw Main Street under the bus for the last decade, and c) is willing to sell U.S. sovereignty as easily as Trump sold his wedding vows.

Yes, bash Trump, conservatives and Republicans. But if his decade-old comments that have little relevance to the job of President of the United States sink him in your eyes, don’t let the media protect Clinton’s newest should-be scandal from the attention it needs.

Secondly, speaking of the media, it’s literally sexier to highlight Trump. I get it. But while I am a daily reader of Mediaite and POLITICO — and Mediaite has published me twice over the years — right now the main pages of both sites are pushing Trump’s comments far more aggressively than the new Clinton scandal that actually endangers the country, including possible lawbreaking.

They’re not alone. But it’s a fool’s errand to think that Pence is so much more electable than Trump. On its face, it sounds good, and Pence is far preferable to Trump (despite his own concerning policy prescriptions, such as a compromise that led to Medicaid expansion in Indiana and his abandonment of religious liberty last year) — but narratives like the one promoted by Vox’s Emily Crockett would dominate. According to Crockett, Pence’s pro-life views put women in danger.

Remember, it wasn’t as though Mitt Romney was as bad as Donald Trump morally or in how he presented himself, and his policies were very moderate, on the whole. Yet the Left (and President Obama, and the press) had no problem portraying him as a danger to the country, etc. — just as is typically done to Republicans.

Additionally, many Trump backers would see a Trump resignation as a betrayal, and they’d ditch the GOP on Election Day.

The GOP wrought the continuation of its own death by having Trump as nominee. Good riddance. But the right should not aid the media in allowing the Democrats’ far worse candidate, who literally puts the country in danger as she flouts the law, to slide under the radar.

I made this same argument earlier on Twitter: