Royal Marines find their living quarters reduced to put in female facilities… despite having NO women recruits

Our thanks to Danuta for this piece from the latest Mail On Sunday. The start of the piece:

Royal Marines have complained that their living quarters are being reduced to make way for female facilities – even though they don’t have any women recruits.

Women’s washrooms and toilets are being built beside dormitories at the Commando Training Centre Royal Marines in Lympstone, Devon.

The renovations, which have left male recruits competing for space to store equipment and possessions, were given the green light despite the failure of female Royal Marine candidates to qualify for the corps’ 32-week basic training course.

To date, every female candidate to attempt the four-day Potential Royal Marines Course has failed.

If everyone who read this gave us just £1.00 – or even better, £1.00 or more, monthly – we could change the world. Click here to make a difference. Thanks.

SAS: Women allowed to join for first time (Who Dares, Whines)

Kat Dixon

A picture in the BBC article. Make-up perfectly applied. That’s the ticket! what a pretty, pretendy soldier!

Our thanks to Nick for this. He writes:

Some nice girly smiles on those soldiers there then.

Good news.

We can all sleep safe in our beds.

Mark my words, more men than women will die, or be injured, as a result of this insanity. The only common sense in the BBC piece comes at the end:

However, retired officer Col Richard Kemp said the new policy would “cost lives”.

“My experience is if you have a team of men, even with one or two women, it could lead to divisiveness.”

“I am not blaming women, but anything that undermines that teamwork will cost lives.”

If everyone who read this gave us just £1.00 – or even better, £1.00 or more, monthly – we could change the world. Click here to make a difference. Thanks.

Emily Dawes, blithering idiot and student union president, causes outrage after vowing to take down war memorial mural because it contains only white men

Emily Dawes, the Student Union President, said the mural was too white and male

Emily Dawes, blithering idiot.

Our thanks to O for this, a piece by Helena Horton in The Telegraph today:

A Student Union President has caused outrage after she vowed to remove a mural commemorating students who died in World War One because it contains only white men.

Emily Dawes, who leads the University of Southampton Student Union was widely condemned after tweeting: “Mark my words – we’re taking down the mural of white men in the uni Senate room, even if I have to paint over it myself.”

The Rothenstein memorial, to which she refers, depicts an unnamed student receiving a degree from the Chancellor of the University of Cambridge, representing all the young men who lost their lives in the war and were unable to complete or collect their degrees.

It was painted in 1916 by Sir William Rothenstein, former Principal of the Royal College of Art, and presented to the University of Southampton in 1959, by the artist’s son, Sir John Rothenstein.

It features many key academics from the era of the Great War, including vice-chancellors and chancellors, and the then poet laureate Robert Bridges, and other panels of the mural feature young war poets who lost their lives in battle.

It is unclear whether she was aware of the significance of the memorial, although she had tweeted linking it to Armistice Day.

She wrote: “ONE OF THE WOMEN JUST SAID ‘it’s nearly armistice day so are we covering up this tapestry??’ AND HOLY S—. F— YES. GRL PWR.”

The privately educated physics graduate has been labelled “the epitome of stupid” by angered commentators as the university condemned her statements.

Ms Dawes attended the £5,000-a-term Northwood College for Girls, according to her LinkedIn page, and has said her favourite thing about Southampton is the “pretty dope” vegan food.

Southampton Itchen MP Royston Smith, who served in the RAF for 10 years, said her comments were “disappointing.”

He told the Daily Mail: “With freedom comes responsibility, and considering the President of the SU holds a position of authority she has clearly overstepped the mark.

“I hope she will reflect on what she has said and realise it has been conducted in poor taste. Those who know the history of our island are fully aware and appreciate the involvement of black and Asian soldiers against tyranny.”

Conor Burns, MP for Bournemouth West, added: “Pathetic. She would be better going to the Hartley Library and reading some history. She could read of the sacrifice that allows such fatuous virtue signalling today.”

The Southampton University Conservative Association labelled her comments “unacceptable,” tweeting: “Our union president promising to vandalise a memorial to those who served in the Great War, near the centenary of the end of the Great War. This is unacceptable.”

A spokesman for the University of Southampton said: “The comments made by the students’ union president regarding the Rothenstein Mural are not shared by the University of Southampton and do not represent the views of the university community.

“We are very proud to display the mural, painted in 1916, which serves as a memorial to all members of British universities who served in the Great War (World War I).”

A spokesman for The Royal British Legion said: “We believe the unique contribution of our Armed Forces should be remembered today, tomorrow and forever, however we respect the right of others to express their opinions within the law. Our Armed Forces community, past and present, have made sacrifices in defence of the freedoms we have today, including the freedom of speech.”

Ms Dawes has since apologised, and said in a statement: “Firstly, and most importantly, I would like to apologise for the offense and upset I have caused with what I have said.

“I never meant the disrespect to anyone past, present and future. I had no intention of the tweet being taken literally, and upon reflection have realised how inappropriate it was.

“My intention was to promote strong, female leadership and not the eradication and disrespect of history. I do not believe that to make progress in future, we should look to erase the past.”

You can subscribe to The Telegraph here.

If everyone who read this gave us just £1.00 – or even better, £1.00 or more, monthly – we could change the world. Click here to make a difference. Thanks.

University of the West of England, Bristol, only university in UK with a men’s officer, scraps role after its sole candidate suffers harassment

James Knight said that 'with a heavy heart' he was standing down
Telegraph caption: James Knight said that ‘with a heavy heart’ he was standing down

Our thanks to Nick for this piece in The Telegraph, by a female journalist, Helena Horton (what are the chances?):

The only university in the UK with a men’s officer has scrapped the role after the candidate withdrew due to “harassment”. [J4MB: The sole purpose of the speech marks is to denigrate the claim, although the claim is substantiated in the article.]

James Knight put his name forward to be men’s officer at the University of the West of England, but claims he was harassed, and has withdrawn. He was the only candidate in the race.

The University of the West of England told The Telegraph that the position has now been suspended pending review.

The roles of transgender and women’s officers have also been brought in this month.

Knight said he stood to highlight “the poor state of mental health services at UWE” and told a student paper: “I know how deeply mental health issues can run in men and how much of a taboo it can be for men to talk about their mental health.”

However, students and National Union of Students officers quickly began a campaign against the role.

NUS officer Ilyas Nagdee accused the university of “weaponising tragic student suicides” at Bristol University “ in order to pursue this vile undemocratic shambles of a men’s officer”, labelling the election: “The worst thing I’ve seen in student politics.”

Student Rebecca Sheeres added: “Can someone explain to me why a men’s officer is necessary please?” [J4MB: The question denotes complete disinterest in, and understanding of, men’s issues.]

NUS women’s officer Sarah Lasoye said: “The role of a men’s officer is entirely obsolete and the attempt to implement one stems from a fundamental misunderstanding of liberation and almost always an unearned sense of entitlement.” [J4MB: Says an Entitlement Princess.]

Mr Knight said the negative response to his campaign, coupled with alleged harassment, caused him to step down. He said in a statement: “Due to the negative reaction to the men’s officer position and continued external harassment, I have taken the difficult decision to stand down as a candidate.”

A spokesman from the students’ union at UWE said: “Following the withdrawal of the candidate from the Men’s Officer Role, the election for that position is no longer running. As per our previous statements, we will be seeking ratification of the role at the next Student Council. We will look to move this forward based on their decision.”

Why would any man at university seek a role dependent upon approval of a Student’s Union? Men should be standing up for men, and telling their Student’s Union to stick their opinions where the sun doesn’t shine.

You can subscribe to The Telegraph here.

If everyone who read this gave us just £1.00 – or even better, £1.00 or more, monthly – we could change the world. Click here to make a difference. Thanks.

Bettina Arndt update

We’ve just received the following email from Bettina Arndt:

Next Stop in Bettina Arndt’s Campus Fake Rape Tour

It’s taken a long time to pin down Bettina next campus talk – which is happening now at Macquarie University at 6.00 pm on Wednesday November 7.

The University took forever to agree to allow the talk to go ahead – presumably to try to ensure that there is no controversy and only a small audience for the event. And the organisers weren’t allowed to mention the “rape crisis” because it might have triggered rape victims and traumatise them during their exams!

Can everyone please spread the word and encourage a big audience for the event? Bettina wants to reach ordinary students who are being fed endless propaganda by the university promoting the rape crisis. They need to know learn the truth about this issue.

Everyone is welcome. Local people, please come along and offer support to Bettina. It’s a free event. It would be also great if students in other universities could use their networks to alert students at Macquarie to what is happening.

The other good news is that Senator Amanda Stoker is grilling higher education bureaucrats about Sydney University battle night in Senate Estimates, appearing before the Education and Employment Committee.

Her questions will be broadcast sometime between  7 – 10  pm tonight, Thursday, Oct 24.

All estimates sessions can be viewed live through the Parl View website:

https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fparlview.aph.gov.au%2Fbrowse.php&data=02%7C01%7C%7C88096e582f6d46c5a73a08d63a346195%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636760393995599963&sdata=NWGqjQh8OlLz2FSyxQGuFSf0fuVQWWiE6z0kN7y3jhc%3D&reserved=0

All sessions can also be re-watched through the same website if you are unable to view the estimates session live.

If everyone who read this gave us just £1.00 – or even better, £1.00 or more, monthly – we could change the world. Click here to make a difference. Thanks.

Natalie Haynes on ‘Patriarchy’

Our thanks to Michael for this (audio, 13:39). He writes:

The most painful 14 minutes of feminist propaganda ever broadcast on Radio Feminist. [J4MB: BBC Radio 4.]

The programme was hosted by Michael Rosen, giving the broadcast a wafer-thin veneer of respectability.

But the actual content of the programme was 12 minutes of Natalie Haynes delivering feminist propaganda at full intensity, with Rosen offering about 2 minutes of the most token, capitulating and paper-thin critique of Haynes’ deranged insanity.

If everyone who read this gave us just £1.00 – or even better, £1.00 or more, monthly – we could change the world. Click here to make a difference. Thanks.

The Voyeurism (Offences) (No.2) Bill

Our thanks to Douglas for this:

The Voyeurism (Offences) (No. 2) Bill had its Second Reading yesterday. Personally I wasn’t aware of this one, so thought you might not be. https://www.theyworkforyou.com/lords/?id=2018-10-23a.784.0#g784.2

“The Bill will insert two new offences into the Sexual Offences Act 2003 to make the practice of upskirting a specific criminal offence.”

I notice that Women’s Aid have been hard at lobbying this one again. Of course, as a charity supported by the taxpayer, they aren’t supposed to get involved in lobbying but no doubt they use one of their hundreds of companies and charities to work around the law. Anyway, Baroness Gale was sticking her feminist oar in, and she is a part (owner?) of Women’s Aid.

There’s an interesting like from Baroness Barker (lesbian, feminist and a right f***-up)

https://www.theyworkforyou.com/lords/?id=2018-10-23a.784.0#g792.0

“There is a group of Conservative MPs, mostly white men, who take pride…”

Yet another feminist attack right in the House.

Thankfully, there was at least some sense talked. Lord Keen, for instance, was hot on the subject of mens rea (criminal intent), which legal principle the feminists want to disband altogether.

https://www.theyworkforyou.com/lords/?id=2018-10-23a.784.0#g801.1

” I come back to one point: the mental element in a criminal offence. Being a Scots lawyer, I am rather hot on the topic of mens rea, if I might term it as such. It certainly seems to me unusual—indeed, wholly exceptional—to bring forward a new criminal offence without allowing for the mental element that we regard as mens rea.”

If everyone who read this gave us just £1.00 – or even better, £1.00 or more, monthly – we could change the world. Click here to make a difference. Thanks.