No End to Feminist Self-Entitlement
This is the latest but probably not the last bit of lunacy arising from feminism. The feminist division of the Nottinghamshire Police, in partnership with Nottingham Women’s Centre, have decided that ‘hate crime’ includes wolf whistles, photographing women without consent, unwanted sexual advances, uninvited physical or verbal contact, and unwanted messages via mobile phones, if such things are perceived by the ‘victim’ as occurring ‘because she is woman’.
So talking to a woman you want to get to know, without invitation, is now likely to be treated as a ‘hate crime’ by those police! Women really do want to be treated like royalty. “How dare he speak to me uninvited; off with his head!”
The Nottinghamshire feminist police think it’s ok to treat people, read MEN, as criminals even when no criminal offence has been committed. In effect, they are treating normal, legal behaviour as criminal only because those who do it have penises. This is dangerous discrimination on the basis of gender.
How on earth is a man to know whether or not a woman will not want to be approached until he has tried and she has perhaps informed him that she doesn’t want that? But the Notingshamhire feminist SS now expect men to read women’s minds in advance to avoid causing women the terrible trauma of being talked to or propositioned by a (gasp) man uninvited!
The definition of this feminist hate crime is as stupid as the idea: It’s a ‘hate crime’ if the woman believes a man’s communication towards her was because she is a woman. But any courtship approach by a heterosexual man will in large part occur because the subject of his interest is a woman. Essentially, all heterosexual courtship behaviour initiated by any man can now be labelled as a hate crime and the unfortunate bastard involved can expect to be spied on, harassed and charged with something for his trouble.
On the other hand, you can be sure that any man objecting to being talked to by a woman uninvited, or to being photographed by a female journalist, will be ignored or laughed away by those same cuntstables.
Another very bad aspect of this nonsense is the degree to which one person’s behaviour is defined as a crime on the basis of another person’s subjective feelings about the behaviour. The same has long applied in NZ’s ‘protection’ order regime, with subjective claimed fear on the part of the applicant, if female, being sufficient to deprive the male respondent of many civil and parental rights. Nothing he actually did, or whether he ever broke any law, is of much relevance.
In fact, the Nottinghamshire lunacy will show many more people the ridiculous and dangerous nature of feminist ideology and demands. It will hasten the wave that is growing.
Wow! Just wow!
I can see the incident they’ve used to justify this in my mind.
Men don’t whistle at women generally so there must have been something special about her, on that occasion. I’ve been in her situation – when I was wearing a top only at the railway station and as an athlete, my legs were in good shape….. I agree it didn’t feel good but I don’t think it’s fair to arrest someone on feelings.
Besides, the 23 year was happy that the men (most likely young) were pulled up internally by their boss.
But now the police can give them a record which will affect their livelihoods forever. Ie: you can’t travel when found guilty of a hate crime, you can’t work in many professions, blah, blah. It’s life altering and it’s pathetic, imo.
I am only just now understanding ‘ENTITLEMENT’. It’s a real eye opener.
Here’s a hate crime (read post for definition)
You many already know about ‘Man Spreading‘. Men taking up more space than women.
Look at alll these men who’ve had their photos taken and are being attacked for being a man.
Entitlement – like teenage female students ordering the Lecturer?
We have the same situation here.
The woman feels threatened, calls the police, the man is arrested and locked up.
The man pleads not guilty
Elects trial by jury.
The police assess their chances of conviction
They drop the charges
The man was arrested, perhaps for the weekend for no reason.
He did not break the law.
The police with drew the charges but breached their powers of arrest perhaps.
So as we can see its the same here already
Moreover how did those kiwi mothers react to a father caring for his sons?
How did NZ society react to a father caring for his sons?
Dont you know we are all rapists and violent man I thouught we all knew that bye now lol but seriously we need to stay strong and teach our boys how to be real men, respectful and to believe in equality but not believe third wave feminist that all men are privileged, rapists violent misogynists.( single dad two boys at home with me)
Teach our boys to be men you say.
The nazi femmes feel capable of teaching our boys. They don’t value a fathers input and they work hard to ensure that the father goes.
The femmes feel they know best. They are now a laughing stock, look what we have become, our child abuse statics are tragic in NZ at a time when the Family Court has done its dandest to ensure that consistent father input is eradicated. How can this be? Rub out the dad, do nothing when the mother does not adhere to parenting orders, judges can make directions with no evidence, recommend a change over venue run by a convicted fraud steer , drug dealer – ensure the father gives up. Support the mother when she has a dead body in her garage for the children to walk in on, so what if she turns into a bikee meth hoe and uses her gang associations to threaten the father in open court.
Have the psycologist create bullshit reports.
Put the father under survallance dear council for the child when he pipes up about these things.
Do your best to eradicate the father in the aforementioned way and still our child abuse statics are a national disgrace.
But wait, what if the perpetrator is so often mummies new boyfriend, with the father gone – (thank you court process) this guy is free to abuse away and does.
In very case where a child suffers, and the natural father has gone or given up if there is a family court file it should be made public.
This seems all ok
And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus.