I bet you the women-hating dittoheads are all rooting for the plaintiff in this lawsuit. Just as they promoted all the ridiculous lawsuits concerning Obama's birth certificates and associated issues. And these are the very same people who turn around and decry the surfeit of lawyers and lawsuits in this country- and they won't see a damn bit of contradiction.

How is it wrong to teach belief systems or about belief systems in a college setting?

If classes could be banned for inviting comments that lack intellectual rigor then the entire university system in the US would be threatened with extinction.

How in the world does a suit such as this warrant even the five minutes required of a judge (who is, I assume, on the public payroll) to reject it?

thanks for the good article,

David Terry

www.davidterryart.com

You know, the statute forbidding gender discrimination in higher education, which has been used to decimate many a sports team. Rather than suing for religious discrimination, he should have sued for sexual discrimination, because the university doesn't offer a Men's Studies program to match it's Women's Studies program.

And of course, this Men's Studies initiative would have to receive funding proportional to enrollment rates as opposed to student interest, just like the swimming and wrestling teams.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander, ladies.

Is there a demand for such a class? If there is, and the university refuses to accomodate, then I agree with you. Otherwise I think you're just trying to get Broadsheet readers riled up without reason.

...is that Columbia is a private college, so even if women's studies were a religion, there'd be no reason why they couldn't teach about it.

He called the program “a bastion of bigotry against men"

Indeed. Feminism is quite obviously just that. Take the Duke lacrosse case which is just one in a very long line of hysterical, hateful accusations against men. It was clear from the beginning that the accusation of rape was immensely fishy and yet feminists kept insisting in the face of absurdly mounting evidence that the players were guilty precisely because they were male. Feminists sympathy continued to run in favor of the accuser and against the players even after the NC State Attorney General declared the players innocent. If a white woman quite obviously falsely accused black men of raping her and I ignored evidence which seemed to show that she was obviously lying and simply kept referring to their blackness few liberals would have any trouble recognizing such behavior as racism. That's what bigotry is: refusing to accept facts in favor of one's preferred stereotype.

Here are just some of the other false claims that feminists have made against men over the years.

Snuff films: Andrea Dworkin got in front of the Meese Commission to talk about theaters in which men paid $150 a pop to see films of women being literally murdered on screen and how this was the ultimate in male sexual fantasy. Feminists used to get rather worked up over snuff films. Eventually people started pointing out that nobody had actually ever seen one. Now if I ran around saying that Jews loved seeing films of Christian children being killed on screen and couldn't produce one single such film to show it, doncha think most poeple would regard me as a looney antiSemite? Hm? Dworkin then went on to famously stereotype heterosex as inherently oppressive to women even if some women wanted the sex and were having multiple orgasm and then suggested that for heterosex to be reformed men would have to become impotent. Obviously the woman was a demented hater. Despite that she became one of the most popular feminists among feminists in the entire history of the movement. Men, if they want to be considered good liberals are, of course, to make nothing of that.

The Superbowl Sunday domestic violence hoax: Feminists ran around claiming that domestic violence jumped 40% on Superbowl Sunday because we men folk got so excited about the big football game that we just couldn't resist beating the holy crap out of our female partners. Great story, only it wasn't true. Like snuff films it wasn't a feminist fear so much as a feminist fantasy. Now if I ran around claiming that black people mugged more white people on Martin Luther King's birthday and it wasn't, you know, actually true, wouldn't you think me just a teeny, weeny bit racist?

Then there was the Satanic Ritual abuse hysteria. According to feminists who, weirdly, were in league with right-wing fundamentalists on this one, there was an international SATANIC CONSPIRACY! in which women, using alternative personalities they didn't know they had, were performing incestuous rituals with their daddies and eating fetuses and other heinous stuff which had been uncovered by heroic feminist therapists using hypnosis and mind-altering drugs. It was so big that this flagrant insanity was endorsed with a cover story in the January 1993 issue of Ms magazine. Gloria Steinem and all the usual suspects were squarely behind this nonsense. A book, written by two feminists named Lauri Davis and Ellen Bass with the monumentally ironic title "The Courage to Heal" was basically an instruction manual on how to brainwash oneself into believing they were a victim of incest and which also promoted the SRA hysteria. It sold over a million copies. Wow. Imagine if I suggested that gays were performing Satanic rituals and said that a hundreds of thousands of the straights had been molested by gays but forgot about it because it was so traumatizing. Can you imagine how much respect I would get from the liberal community for that?

There's plenty more where that came from. For instance the fact that feminists have claimed that we live in a rape culture. It's in-your-face hateful bullshit. But for some reason feminists keep getting credit for being liberals. Right.

If people think feminists are a bunch of man-hating bigots, there is a very good reason for it: To a very large extent that's exactly how they've been presentingn themselves.