Demonizing male sexuality

You've just found the penis-shaped door to freedom. GET ON YOUR FUCKING FEET. Turn the tables on your masters. Light the entire world on fire. The time for sitting there like a little bitch is OVER.
Forum rules
This section is open to the public. Feel free to post questions, criticisms or comments. Thank you.
Post Reply
User avatar
Professor
Dean of Beatdowns
Posts: 9977
Joined: Sat May 15, 2010 10:34 am
Contact:

Demonizing male sexuality

Post by Professor » Wed Dec 29, 2010 3:57 pm

From Yahoo Answers:
Whats with all these sickos trying to get off on chatroulette?
In never ceases to amaze me how low some people can get. You go on Chatroulette for some innocent fun and every other person is some dude wacking off. You can't get away from it.

I was wondering...WHY?

If you are one of those wankers...WHY DO YOU DO IT??

Do you really think everyone wants to see your thingy? It's like a haven for pedos.

What are you hoping for? That the next person is going to be some hot Megan Fox look alike gushing over the beauty of your "thing"?

Get real...no one wants to see that so put it away. If you want to wack off in the privacy of your own home..then be my guest...but for pete's sake...DONT DO IT ON THE LIVE WEB!!!


Do you realize how many young people get on there? Of course...I'm sure that is why many of them do it.

Which makes it even more sick.


So if you are one of the wankers...just answer this one question...WHY?

WHY DO YOU DO IT?

I DONT WANT TO SEE YOUR D.O.N.G


I have absolutely NO desire to go and flash my man parts on there...I dont know why you think its "cool" to do that.


Now to all the NORMAL people...what do you think of all that?

Top Rated Response given:
I don't know what all the tens of thousands of other guys' reasons are for exposing themselves on Chatroulette. But this is mine.

I am a 36 year old, single man. I go to work, pay my mortgage, have friends and family. However, I am one of the men who jerk off on Chatroulette. I am not a sicko or a pedo. I think I am a NORMAL person. But, I am what an elitist would call, a loser. I am overweight, ugly and have a small penis. I have not had sex in 15 years. Women who have to deal with me look at me with disgust, the rest completely ignore me. Masturbating to porn in the privacy of my own home has become as mundane as vacuuming the carpet.

But I am a human being. I desire sexual interaction with women, just like any guy. I never, ever get it in real life. But I found it on Chatroulette. Believe it or not, I've had about 1 woman per week watch and encourage me on Chatroulette. This is the closest thing I get to a sexual relationship, even if it is only for 4 or 5 minutes.

I have no desire to flash underage chatters so I have a sign held up rather than be naked right off the bat. I of course "next" anyone who looks questionable.

One question. After 10 months of everyone on the net talking about the non-stop penis show on Chatroulette, why do you think you can "go on Chatroulette for some innocent fun"? There are plenty of chat sites that outright ban nudity. Why go to the one site that it is the most prominent?

I am sorry for those who find us so awful. I wish I was handsome. I wish I was skinny. I wish I was sexually attractive to women. I don't think it's "cool" to flash my penis on a webcam. But it's my last resort. It's the only way I can have a sexual experience without resorting to prostitution.


Please forgive me.
in our feminist society today, fat women receive validation, approval and protection from the media. fugly women have thousands of dating resources. single mothers have government subsidized programs providing a cornucopia of handouts. teen girls have an unconstitutional Council on Women & Girls created just for them. college women have the feminist educational system's affirmative action propping them up.

..... so what do men have?

Image

ridicule.

lots of it.

when men look for answers, they're told one of 2 things:

1. "Man up"

or

2. "Fuck off"

they don't have the luxury of crying on the shoulder of a culture that values women more than men. and the real irony is, most of these men will end up as manginas because they listened to a woman.

this generation of men has been raised by single mothers (yes the same single mothers who raise the vast majority of felons that end up behind bars according to government statistics); those women who love to criticize, mock, shame, scold and condemn men are the very same hypocrites who raised them. women are essentially blaming men for a problem they helped create.

but instead of helping men, instead of encouraging men, instead of supporting men, instead of respecting men, instead of training men, they abandon them.

at Manhood 101, we realize that men are largely the product of their training. we are more than happy to receive all the incompetent men of the world and prove to our feminist society that, with the proper training, men can far exceed the dysfunctional social expectations placed on their shoulders.

we have yet to be proven wrong.
social interaction is an interruption.

shape or be shaped.

Juliath

Re: Demonizing male sexuality

Post by Juliath » Wed Dec 29, 2010 11:17 pm

When women realize that being pro-women doesn't mean you must automatically be anti-men (which appears to be the dominant message among feminists), more boys will be saved from scorn and be given an opportunity to have some needed male leadership in their lives. Until then, we can only influence as many as we can find.

User avatar
Professor
Dean of Beatdowns
Posts: 9977
Joined: Sat May 15, 2010 10:34 am
Contact:

Re: Demonizing male sexuality

Post by Professor » Sat Mar 19, 2011 5:49 pm

B.C. suspends penile sex tests on young offenders

CBC News, Wednesday, July 28, 2010

The B.C. government has suspended a controversial test called a penile plethysmograph, which it was using to assess young sex offenders to determine their risk of reoffending after treatment.

On Wednesday, the B.C. Civil Liberties Association demanded the government intervene after it learned of the tests.

Within hours, the government suspended the sex testing after the provincial advocate for children and youth announced she would conduct a review.

B.C.'s Children's Representative Mary Ellen Turpel-Lafond says she only learned last week of this clinical testing on young people, about a week before the BCCLA went public with its concerns.

Turpel-Lafond says after she raised concerns with senior ministry officials, the practice was suspended.

"They have assured me this testing is not happening at the moment and they will not continue this testing until my office has completed a review of the matter," she said.

"I think we're going to look very carefully at the balancing of the rights of the youth, their vulnerability, the process that was used," she said. "Is this a necessary tool? Is it valuable? I think we're really going to have to look at all of the key issues with this."

Youths shown images of naked children

During the test, a youth would attach a device to his penis that is designed to measure his physical sexual arousal.

Image

Researchers in another room then play images of adults having sex, followed by images of naked children and infants, as they monitor the youth's level of arousal, according to Robert Holmes, the president of the B.C. Civil Liberties Association.

The images are accompanied by audio of a male voice that describes forced intercourse with male and female infants as young as two, according to Holmes.

The youth's genitals are covered by a sheet during the testing, and the youth is monitored by researchers behind one-way glass who measure whether or not there is some kind of stimulation effect, said Holmes.

"Male children, often abuse victims themselves, are subjected to this treatment by a government responsible for their care and well-being," said Holmes.

The youth subjects are predominantly children involved in the criminal justice system in B.C., he said.

"In our view, serious rights issues are involved with this. That is particularly so given that the individuals involved are vulnerable youth. The public is entitled to a full explanation," he said.

"These tests are a clear breach of the children's basic human rights. In any other context, subjecting children to violent pornography would be considered sexual abuse," said Annabel Webb, director of the advocacy group Justice for Girls.

Proponents of the program say a youth's parents have consented to the tests, which they say allow officials to predict whether the youths are likely to reoffend.

But Holmes questioned whether consent was properly obtained from the youths and their families. He also said the test has a high error rate and could adversely affect the youths involved.

Used to determine risk of reoffending

The tests are conducted by Youth Forensic Psychiatric Services, part of the Ministry for Children and Family Development.

Children and Family Development Minister Mary Polak says the test is conducted only on young people who have committed serious sexual offences as part of a treatment process to try to determine the youth's likelihood of reoffending.

"The ministry relies on the advice of medical professionals and clinical practitioners with regard to research and therapeutic intervention as it relates to the treatment of youth who have committed — and have been found guilty of — serious sexual offences," Polak said in a statement released Wednesday.

Polak said it's completely voluntary, involves parental or guardian consent and can be withdrawn at any stage, but she takes the concerns seriously and will co-operate with the review by the Representative for Children and Youth.
Image
social interaction is an interruption.

shape or be shaped.

User avatar
Professor
Dean of Beatdowns
Posts: 9977
Joined: Sat May 15, 2010 10:34 am
Contact:

Re: Demonizing male sexuality

Post by Professor » Mon Mar 21, 2011 4:10 pm

Image
social interaction is an interruption.

shape or be shaped.

User avatar
Professor
Dean of Beatdowns
Posts: 9977
Joined: Sat May 15, 2010 10:34 am
Contact:

Re: Demonizing male sexuality

Post by Professor » Mon Apr 18, 2011 10:26 pm

'Make accused rapists prove consent': experts
Published: 7 May 09 07:07 CET

Two legal experts want to see changes to Sweden sex crimes laws to require a man accused of rape to prove he had the consent of the woman with whom he had sex.

In recent years, the number of reported rapes in Sweden has been steadily increasing, but a similar rise in rape convictions hasn’t been forthcoming.

Eva Diesen, a lawyer and researcher, and Christian Diesen, a professor of criminal law at Stockholm University, have followed up on around 1,200 rape reports and presented their results in a report due this week entitled Övergrepp mot kvinnor och barn (‘Attacks against women and children’).

Since 1965, when Sweden first enacted a sex crimes law, roughly 100 to 200 rapists have been convicted every year.

However, the number of rapes reported annually has increased from around 300 to more than 5,000.

Many of the reports are written off because they boil down to he-said-she-said disputes, writes the Dagens Nyheter (DN) newspaper.

Diesen is convinced that it’s not only the number of reported rapes, but also the number of crimes, which is increasing.

The victims are also getting younger, with the median age of date-rape victims sinking from 27- to 22-years-old during the last decade.

Rape should be classified as a violation of personal integrity, rather than a violent crime, according to the researchers.

The way the law looks now, women are sexually available until they say no or put up resistance.

A law based instead on a requirement for consent, would those not require evidence of violence or threats.

Rather, a man would have to show that he had done something to ensure he had the woman’s consent, according to Diesen.
....so basically you have her sign a notarized consent form in triplicate, turn on your video camera, and you're good to go?

this article pretty much goes hand in hand with this one: 'Swedish women fake rape to claim payouts' (15 Apr 11)
social interaction is an interruption.

shape or be shaped.

User avatar
Dr. Wang Long
Backhandus Emeritus
Posts: 11
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2011 9:44 pm

Re: Demonizing male sexuality

Post by Dr. Wang Long » Fri May 13, 2011 1:28 am

In the case of the County of San Luis Obispo v. Nathaniel J., a 34 yr old woman seduces and rapes a child. The woman was convicted of her crime. After she gave birth to a daughter, she got a fat welfare check. The feminist legal system told the raped child that he was financially obligated to pay for his rapist, saying: "[t]he law should not except Nathaniel J. from this responsibility because he is not an innocent victim of [the defendant's] criminal acts." This was based on the minor's enjoyment of the sex.

In holding Nathaniel J., a statutory rape victim, financially liable for child support, the California Court of Appeal joined other feminist courts across the country that have held that as long as the minor is male, the rape victim can be forced to pay for child support.
so in other words, if you're a man having sex with a minor, IT'S BAD--YOU'RE GOING TO JAIL.

BUT

if you're a woman, you can apparently rape an infant just as long as you convince the child to say that they liked it. nevermind the fact that A GODDAMN COCKSUCKING MOTHERFUCKING MINOR CAN'T GIVE CONSENT BY MOTHERFUCKING DEFINITION.

so on one hand, the law tells us: IT DOESN'T FUCKING MATTER WHAT A MINOR SAYS; being a MINOR, AT NO POINT ARE THEY ABLE TO GIVE CONSENT TO SEX, EVEN IF THEY SAY, "HEY PLEASE FUCK ME IN THE ASSHOLE, I'M ALL LUBED UP AND READY TO GO!"

MINORS. CAN'T. GIVE. CONSENT. EVER. PERIOD.

...imagine if you raped a little 10-year-old girl and made her cum. do you think you could just waltz into court and use that as a defense?

"oh come on, Your Honor, i made the bitch squirt. come on, man. she came, so my crime is now justified. case closed."

they'd laugh you out of court because AT NO POINT IN TIME ARE MINORS LEGALLY ABLE TO GIVE CONSENT.

...oh, but the feminist legal system makes one tiny exception: if you're a MALE, we don't consider you a MINOR. we consider you LESS VALUABLE THAN A FEMALE.

in other words: FEMALES aren't accountable for their actions. they are considered MINORS and above reproach. they are professional victims just by virtue of their gender alone.

MALES on the other hand are accountable for EVERYBODY'S actions. they are the professional perpetrators who are guilty by virtue of their gender alone. the professional scapegoats of this feminist generation.

this is what happens when feminism runs your world.

time to wake the fuck up, and do something about it.
A tired rooster never sees the sunrise, and a jade monkey never eats the sparrow's egg.

User avatar
Professor
Dean of Beatdowns
Posts: 9977
Joined: Sat May 15, 2010 10:34 am
Contact:

Re: Demonizing male sexuality

Post by Professor » Sun May 15, 2011 11:10 am

Fairfax teacher Sean Lanigan still suffering from false molestation allegations
By Tom Jackman, Published: May 14

Sean Lanigan’s nightmare began in January 2010, when the principal at Centre Ridge Elementary School pulled him out of the physical education class he was teaching and quietly walked him into an interrogation with two Fairfax County police detectives.

He had no warning that a 12-year-old girl at the Centreville school had accused him of groping and molesting her in the gym.

The girl, angry at Lanigan about something else entirely, had made the whole thing up. But her accusations launched a soul-sapping rollercoaster ride that still hasn’t ended.

“Emotionally, a part of me has died inside,” Lanigan said in a recent interview. “I’m physically and mentally exhausted all the time, how the whole process has been dragged out to this date. It certainly has affected the quality of life for me and my family at home.”

Lanigan remains in limbo, nearly a year after a jury’s acquittal. The Fairfax School District transferred him from Centre Ridge in a move that ultimately forced his wife to quit her job. School officials are now transferring him again. And the district has refused to pay his $125,000 in legal fees, even though Virginia law allows reimbursement for employees who are cleared of wrongdoing on the job.

Lanigan will never forget the day he was pulled from class. Shortly after the detectives questioned him, Lanigan, then 43 — a married father of three with a long history of service as a teacher, top-ranked soccer coach and neighborhood babysitter — had to tell his children he was going to be arrested.

“We try to teach them to do the right thing,” Lanigan said, “and I had to tell them that Daddy was going to jail and my name was going to be on the news. It was heartbreaking.”

That was followed by four nights in the Fairfax County Adult Detention Center.

“It was scary,” he said. “I was just wide-eyed. I’m an accused child molester. I’m thinking, ‘How am I going to last in here?’ ”

From there, Lanigan spent months in anxious exile, forced from his school, his players, his neighbors and his friends, pondering the possibility of up to 40 years in a state penitentiary.

That soon turned to relief. A jury found him not guilty after just 47 minutes of deliberation — virtually unheard of in a child sex abuse case. Jurors were outraged by the lack of evidence, with one weeping in sympathy during closing arguments.

But still the nightmare continues, as Lanigan struggles to earn back his reputation and career.

Within two weeks of the accuser’s report — without ever speaking to the girl — Fairfax detectives arrested Lanigan and charged him with aggravated sexual battery and abduction. The Washington Post is not naming the accuser because she is a minor.

Police issued a press release with Lanigan’s booking photo and home address, and the school district sent home a letter about his arrest. TV trucks descended on the school and his neighborhood, and Lanigan’s reputation took a lasting beating. Even today, the first thing that comes up in a Google search of Sean Lanigan is a Web site called “Bad Bad Teacher.”

Police declined to allow Nicole Christian, the lead detective on the case, to be interviewed for this article. Several months after Lanigan was acquitted, Fairfax prosecutors dismissed another of Christian’s child abuse cases in the middle of trial, a rarity, when the detective acknowledged that she had “misstated” some key facts in her sworn testimony.

Instead of Christian, Fairfax police allowed a former child sex abuse lieutenant to be interviewed about investigative procedures, but he was not involved with Lanigan’s case.

In addition, they released this statement from Officer Don Gotthardt, a spokesman: “There is a system of checks and balances between the police department, the commonwealth attorney and the magistrate. That system was followed, and it was determined that sufficient probable cause existed to proceed with prosecution.”

Fairfax Commonwealth’s Attorney Raymond F. Morrogh declined to comment for this article.

The Fairfax County School District declined to comment.

The parents of the accuser declined to comment.

Sean Lanigan grew up in Herndon, graduated from Herndon High School and earned a business degree from George Mason University. But he struggled to find a career until he volunteered to coach the crew team at Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology.

Lanigan is a jock, a soccer fanatic, a goalkeeper with “GK” tattooed on his leg. Coaching and teaching was a way to keep sports in his life.

“I fell in love with it,” he said. “Seeing kids through and watching them develop, mature, grow into productive citizens. I come to work with a smile on my face every day.”

After working in the mortgage business, Lanigan had to return to college to earn another degree, in physical education, to get a teaching job in Fairfax. But he did it, and after working briefly at Stone Middle School in Centreville, he was placed at Centre Ridge in 1998.

“His heart was really with the kids,” said Kathy Young, a longtime sixth-grade teacher at Centre Ridge. “He’d pick kids up and twirl them. But what I really liked about Sean, as much as he liked playing with them, he’d always say, ‘Your schoolwork comes first.’ ”

In his Centreville neighborhood, where Lanigan lives with his wife and children, ages 14, 11 and 8, he was the dad all the kids loved, the carpool driver, the babysitter, the human jungle gym, with nicknames for everyone. “I have no qualms about having him around my children,” one mother said. “He makes my kids feel at ease. My son just adores him. He doesn’t understand how all of this happened.”

Lanigan has coached soccer continually, both at the youth travel level and high school at his alma mater — Herndon is unbeaten and the top-ranked team in the region. But Centre Ridge was his second home. When Young’s future son-in-law died in a fire, Lanigan arranged a fundraiser. In 2002, when the school needed a new playground, he and another teacher helped raise tens of thousands of dollars to get one built.

In December 2009, Lanigan was head of the Centre Ridge safety patrols. He received a phone call from a parent, complaining that a 12-year-old girl on patrol on a school bus was abusive to other children. Lanigan warned the girl that she would lose the privilege of being on patrol if she did not behave. Another teacher heard this exchange and told the girl she could also be removed as a news reader on Centre Ridge’s morning TV news show.

“Mr. Lanigan’s a jerk,” the girl told her friends, according to teachers and trial testimony. “I’m going to make him pay.”

After a second conversation with Lanigan about losing her patrol position, in January 2010, the girl and one of her friends began telling this story: Lanigan had picked up the accuser the day before, during “PE Pals,” in which students help clean up the gym and then are allowed to play there. The girls reported that Lanigan carried her over his shoulders into the main equipment room in the gym, briefly touching her breast and buttocks.

Once in the equipment room, the girls decided, Lanigan laid the accuser on a stack of blue tumbling mats, began massaging her shoulders, then laid on top of her and told her he would “treat her like a queen,” while the other girl stood in the doorway. The accuser said that she tried to get up, but that Lanigan pushed her down and asked where she was going. The accuser said she had patrol duty, and Lanigan then allowed her to leave.

Several witnesses said the tumbling mats couldn’t even fit in the equipment room, but there is no indication in reports or trial testimony that Fairfax police ever checked.

The accuser told her parents that she had been molested by her PE teacher, records show. Her parents contacted James Baldwin, who was Centre Ridge’s principal, the next day and he promptly called police. The case was assigned to Christian.

But Christian did not meet with the accuser or her parents. Instead, after the Martin Luther King Jr. holiday weekend, she watched from another room as Krista Davidson, a social worker from Fairfax child protective services, interviewed the accuser. Davidson, a school district investigator and another police detective had interviewed the girl’s parents beforehand.

Some experts say that interviewing a child sexual abuse victim too many times is harmful to the child and to the case. But Lanigan and his supporters say that with a man’s life in the balance, a lead detective should do a firsthand interview.

Christian, Davidson and Steve Kerr, the schools investigator, also spoke to the accuser’s friend, who corroborated her story. They spoke to two boys who also were in the gym, who said they saw nothing, Christian’s report shows. Then they spoke to two other friends of the accuser, who reported what the accuser told them.

The following day, Jan. 20, Christian and Rich Mullins, the other child sex crimes detective, told Baldwin, the principal, to pull Lanigan from his class and bring him to the office, Lanigan said.

Christian and Mullins “were very nice for the first 25 minutes,” Lanigan said. “A lot of small talk, get-to-know-you-type questions. About 25 minutes in, Detective Christian said, ‘You really have no idea why you’re here, do you?’ ”

Lanigan had no clear memory of whether he had picked up the girl eight days earlier, but said he might have. “I play just like I do with my own children,” he later told the jury. “Kids ask me to pick ’em up, flip ’em over.”

The detectives zeroed in. Did he carry the girl into the equipment room? Did he fondle her? He said no.

“They were throwing a lot of scenarios at me,” Lanigan said. “I felt like they were trying to trick me into a confession. They just didn’t take my word and call it a day.”

Lanigan stuck to his story and was released, badly shaken. Then he met with Kerr, who demanded his keys and school badge. He was suspended with pay, and Kerr walked him out to his car. Soon, his pay would be suspended as well.

“I drove off school property and just sat in my car,” Lanigan said, “stunned that this could have happened to me.”

On Jan. 29, police obtained felony charges of abduction and aggravated sexual battery against Lanigan. He was told to turn himself in at the Fairfax jail, which he did that afternoon.

Lanigan had no experience with jail, and he was warned to keep a low profile in light of the charges against him. He was put in a holding cell where the lights are on 24 hours a day.

“I just tried to avoid eye contact,” he said. “I realized I was in more or less a mental ward,” the protective custody wing where those who are a danger to themselves or others are held.

After a preliminary hearing in which the accuser and her friend both recanted the claim that Lanigan had laid on top of her, a judge still sent the case to a grand jury for indictment.

Lanigan’s attorneys met with Morrogh, the county prosecutor, and asked him to dismiss the case. Morrogh refused.

Lanigan fired his lawyers and hired Peter Greenspun, a veteran of emotional and high-profile cases such as that of the D.C. sniper John Allen Muhammad.

Meanwhile, Lanigan’s family was having trouble making ends meet. He wasn’t receiving a paycheck. He wasn’t allowed to coach soccer, his true love, or drive the carpool to school with the neighborhood kids.

“I wasn’t allowed to be alone around any other children,” Lanigan said. He had to meet every week with a probation officer who specializes in sex offenders. “I felt like a prisoner in my own home.”

Lanigan wasn’t working. He wasn’t coaching. And he was facing 40 years in prison.

But neighbors brought meals, every day in the first two weeks. People sent random checks by mail, or gift cards to the grocery store. Supportive e-mails poured in. “That’s what got me through the spring — the amount of support,” Lanigan said. “It’s just amazing how many people stepped up.”

Although supporters were filling a Facebook page, online detractors appeared, too. “I was afraid for my family’s safety,” Lanigan said, “based on some of the things posted to the blogs.”

As the trial approached, Fairfax Assistant Commonwealth’s Attorney Katie Pavluchuk offered a deal: Plead guilty to misdemeanor assault — no sex offense, no jail time. Lanigan refused.

“I was really excited,” Lanigan said. “I wanted the truth to come out. I wanted my life back.”

On the witness stand at trial, the accuser wore a white hooded sweatshirt over an oversized “Washington” T-shirt. Her long black hair fell frequently into her face, and sometimes she sank so low in her chair that jurors couldn’t see her.

She repeated her story about Lanigan picking her up, carrying her into the equipment room and laying her down on the mats.

She testified that Lanigan told her he would “treat her like a queen,” which is a line from a song by one of her favorite rock groups, the Ataris.

Greenspun gently cross-examined, and she admitted a history of bullying younger children, her conflicts with Lanigan and her Facebook posting that “it was a joke.” The girl also acknowledged she was mad at the gym teacher for not playing her favorite music in PE class.

“Did you tell other kids you hated Mr. Lanigan?” Greenspun asked.

“Yes,” the girl replied.

“You hated him before this happened?”

“Yes.”

Lanigan took the stand in his own defense: “I scooped [the accuser] up by her knees, put my hand on her back, just spun her around, ‘whooo’ and put her down.”

Greenspun asked, “Did you ever take [the accuser and her friend] to the large equipment room?”

“Absolutely not,” Lanigan said.

“I love kids,” Lanigan told the jury. “I’ve tried working in the real world. Teaching and coaching is my life.”

“Did you grope or molest this child?” Greenspun asked.

“No.”

The closing arguments had barely ended when jurors rendered their not-guilty verdicts.

“It was an easy decision, and we were all in agreement,” juror Asman al-Ghafari said. “I just hope Mr. Lanigan can get his life back.”

“There was no evidence,” said Jacklyn West, who wept in the jury box as the lawyers made their closing arguments, later explaining that the 12-year-old accuser “had no idea of the consequences” of her allegations. “This poor man. That’s why I cried.”

Virginia’s public soccer leagues immediately reinstated Lanigan as a coach. But the Fairfax school district was much slower. It waited three months, until just before the start of the school year, to decide that Lanigan could not return to Centre Ridge. He was transferred to South Lakes High School in Reston, and given a part-time job, teaching five out of every 10 days, though he was paid a full-time salary.

His wife couldn’t work because South Lakes was far enough away to deprive Lanigan of his role in watching and driving their children. She had to take up the slack.

Despite the acquittal, the district began an internal reprimand process. And in December, as Lanigan pushed to have his legal fees reimbursed, the district presented him with two pages of specially tailored “guidelines and expectations.”

“Do not touch FCPS students as a means of greeting, playing with, showing approval of, or otherwise interacting with them,” the guidelines state. “Avoid placing yourself in close physical proximity to any student, particularly in a manner that could be interpreted as sexual. . . . Do not be alone in your office or other rooms with a student unless the door is open and you and the student are visible from outside the room.”

Bill Cummings, a longtime friend and supporter of Lanigan, said: “They are so fixated on him being guilty that they’re pushing to put the set of expectations in his file, so he could inadvertently trip on one of them and cause them to dismiss him. They can’t see that everyone knows him as an honest and decent man.”

In March, the school district offered to pay $60,000 of Lanigan’s fees, less than half, if he would waive any future legal claims. And last month, he was “de-staffed” from South Lakes, meaning that he must apply for a job at other schools in the district.

“I just hope that one day I can put this whole mess behind me,” Lanigan said, “and outlive the dark cloud over my name and reputation from this false allegation.”
social interaction is an interruption.

shape or be shaped.

throwawaydude

Re: Demonizing male sexuality

Post by throwawaydude » Fri May 20, 2011 10:14 am

Allow me to share something that royally pissed me off yesterday.

My wife posts on her online blog privately to her friends, asking them if they had any ideas for increasing libido after we had a baby about 6 months ago. She then subsequently gets absolutely flooded by her friends with posts like, "LULZ, he has a hand, tell him to back off and stop manipulating and guilting you into sex, he doesn't have a right to sex because he is your husband, I didn't have sex for 2 years after I had my baby, buy him a fleshlight to get him off your back, LOLZORS".

1 - The assumption that I'm being a manipulative ass about it. What?

2 - This is the part that pisses me off the very most - why is sex treated so differently than other parts of a relationship? It's part of a loving, caring, mutual relationship. I do things all the time for my wife that I don't feel like doing, but I do them anyway beacuse I love her and care for her and I like doing things for her and I like making her feel loved and special and helped, etc., etc. I just spent a lot of time and money moving our washing machine and dryer upstairs (myself) because it would help make her life much easier, for example. I really don't see sex as any different. I'm not saying I demand it, or that I have a right to it, but let me put it this way - you can bet your ass if I said to my wife, "Uh... I don't really feel like taking the trash out right now, I'm just not in the mood. It might be a few months before I feel like taking it out again, so don't pressure me. And if you do pressure me, I'll call you a manipulative bitch and it'll make me resent you and I'll want to do it even less" - that every woman who responded to my wife's post would be completely infuriated and calling me the biggest self-centered asshole in the entire universe. Sex gets a free pass, though? When it comes to that particular subject, suddenly all the things that go into a mutual loving and caring relationship go right out the window?

Let me give another thought here. I'm not just looking to get laid; I want to have an emotional, connective experience with my wife that I can't get anywhere else. To participate in something that only her and I share. I really feel like something is missing between us when we don't have sex for a while, and I don't like being far away from her emotionally. But clearly all her friends seem like they think I just want to tear off a piece and go on my merry way, or that a fleshlight is just the same. I don't like being portrayed as an animal or a perv when I'm trying to be close to the woman I married, but THAT'S ALL MEN ARE WHEN IT COMES TO SEX, AMIFUCKINRITE?!?!?!!!111

I hate that things are this way between the sexes.

User avatar
Professor
Dean of Beatdowns
Posts: 9977
Joined: Sat May 15, 2010 10:34 am
Contact:

Re: Demonizing male sexuality

Post by Professor » Fri May 20, 2011 10:17 am

Your wife's libido always takes a hit when you fail to direct the relationship. The best aphrodisiac is not powdered rhino horn, oysters, equality or compromise. If you want to turn a woman on, you have to learn how to exercise your authority over her.
social interaction is an interruption.

shape or be shaped.

User avatar
Professor
Dean of Beatdowns
Posts: 9977
Joined: Sat May 15, 2010 10:34 am
Contact:

Re: Demonizing male sexuality

Post by Professor » Fri May 20, 2011 9:29 pm

anti-male legislation is shaped by academic feminists like this:
A Man Is a Rape-Supporter If….
Posted on May 18, 2011 by Eve's Daughter

This is a handy guide for women who involve themselves with men. I’ve recently received a bunch of comments from men who say that they aren’t rape supporters because they (1) have never “raped” a woman and/or (2) are gay. If you are around a man who claims to be anti-rape, see how he stacks up.

A man is a rape-supporter if…
  • He has ever sexually engaged with any woman while she was underage, drunk, high, physically restrained, unconscious, or subjected to psychological, physical, economic, or emotional coercion.
  • He defends the current legal definition of rape and/or opposes making consent a defense.
  • He has accused a rape victim of having “buyer’s remorse” or wanting to get money from the man.
  • He has blamed a woman for “putting herself in a situation” where she “could be” attacked.
  • He has procured a prostitute.
  • He characterizes prostitution as a “legitimate” “job” “choice” or defends men who purchase prostitutes.
  • He has ever revealed he conceives of sex as fundamentally transactional.
  • He has gone to a strip club.
  • He is anti-abortion.
  • He is pro-”choice” because he believes abortion access will make women more sexually available.
  • He frames discussions of pornography in terms of “freedom of speech.”
  • He watches pornography in which women are depicted.
  • He watches any pornography in which sexual acts are depicted as a struggle for power or domination, regardless of whether women are present.
  • He characterizes the self-sexualizing behavior of some women, such as wearing make-up or high heels, as evidence of women’s desire to “get” a man.
  • He tells or laughs at jokes involving women being attacked, sexually “hoodwinked,” or sexually harassed.
  • He expresses enjoyment of movies/musicals/TV shows/plays in which women are sexually demeaned or presented as sexual objects
  • He mocks women who complain about sexual attacks, sexual harassment, street cat-calls, media depictions of women, or other forms of sexual objectification.
  • He supports sexual “liberation” and claims women would have more sex with (more) men if society did not “inhibit” them.
  • He states or implies that women who do not want to have sex with men are “inhibited,” “prudes,” “stuck-up,” “man-haters,” or psychologically ill.
  • He argues that certain male behaviors towards women are “cultural” and therefore not legitimate subjects of feminist attention.
  • He ever subordinates the interests of women in a given population to the interests of the men in that population, or proceeds in discussions as if the interests of the women are the same as the interests of the men.
  • He promotes religious or philosophical views in which a woman’s physical/psychological/emotional/sexual well-being is subordinated to a man’s.
  • He describes female anatomy in terms of penetration, or uses terms referencing the supposed “emptiness” of female anatomy when describing women.
  • He defends the physical abuse of women on the grounds of “consent.”
  • He defends the sexualization or sexual abuse of minor females on the grounds of “consent” or “willingness.”
  • He promotes the idea that women as a class are happier or more fulfilled if they have children, or that they “should” have children.
  • He argues that people (or just “men”) have sexual “needs.”
  • He discusses the “types” of women he finds sexually appealing and/or attempts to demean women by telling them he does not find them sexually appealing.
  • He sexually objectifies lesbians or lesbian sexual activity.
  • He defends these actions by saying that some women also engage in them.
So, let’s see how many women reading this know at least one male over the age of 18 who does not fit this list. Anybody?
Image
social interaction is an interruption.

shape or be shaped.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests