An ex-co-workers from 1996(!) sent me a conservative video series from the UK, called Heresies. I watched the video below on the state of men and men’s rights in the UK. The UK has some of the most terrible laws for men of any Western country. The video is a series of interviews with men (or with the lawyers of men who committed suicide) who were victims of the government and the courts.
Here’s the video:
And here’s the blurb:
Whether it be deserving men unable to progress their careers due to female quotas & all-women shortlists, the naming of men in rape allegations whilst the female accuser remains anonymous, or the appalling treatment of men in the family court system — such as denial of custody rights over children, crippling divorce settlements & child maintenance orders that invariably favour wives over husbands –, many are now asking whether men are now second-class citizens.
In this documentary, (Episode 7 in the New Culture Forum’s acclaimed “Heresies” series) the Rt. Hon Ann Widdecombe explores the issue of men’s rights in the modern age, an age when men & masculinity are consistently derided and attacked. The ubiquity of the new phrase “toxic masculinity” provides a perfect example of this.
Featuring interviews with well-known figures in men’s rights and experts in the psychological damage these experiences are regularly causing men.
Well worth the listen. It’s important for men to be guarded about how society sees them, so they can adjust and make good decisions.
I get into debates about abortion, and sometimes my opponent will complain that if Roe v. Wade were overturned, then thousands of women would die in illegal abortions. Well, if that ever happens to you, this post will help you to know how to respond to it.
First of all, if Roe v. Wade were overturned, then each of the 50 states would pass legislation deciding when abortions would be legal.
Red states are more pro-life than blue states in this map. For example, New York is ranked #6, and Tennessee is ranked #45.
So, if a woman did have irresponsible sex with a hot bad boy, then she easily could terminate her child in one of the blue states.
Second, the number thrown around by abortion advocates is not accurate. It’s simply not true that “thousands of women” were dying from poorly-performed abortions when abortion was still illegal. Actually, abortions were performed by trained medical personnel, but it just wasn’t reported to the police.
Here’s a recent article from the radically leftist Washington Post:
Erica Sackin, a Planned Parenthood spokeswoman, directed us to a 2014 policy statement issued by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG): “It is estimated that before 1973, 1.2 million U.S. women resorted to illegal abortion each year and that unsafe abortions caused as many as 5,000 annual deaths.”
There is no citation in the statement for the estimate of “as many as 5,000 annual deaths,” even though many of the other sentences are carefully documented. None of the citations around this sentence supports the figure, and there is no explanation about how it was calculated.
[…]Meanwhile, Sackin also sent a variety of reports, many of which were referenced in a footnote in a document published by NARAL Pro-Choice America. One of the citations especially caught our eye: Frederick Taussig, “Abortion Spontaneous and Induced: Medical and Social Aspects,” (1936).
Why was a study from 1936 being cited? Because in 1936, we didn’t have antibiotics! People were dying all the time from any kind of surgery – not just abortion.
More:
The advent of antibiotics such as penicillin and improved medical procedures suddenly made abortion less risky. Another prominent researcher, Christopher Tietze, argued in a 1948 paper that the number of deaths from abortion was rapidly declining because of three reasons: contraceptive methods had improved so fewer women were getting pregnant, abortion providers were getting better at avoiding infections, and many lives had been saved because of the introduction of sulfa drugs and penicillin.
[…]The data collected by Tietze showed 2,677 deaths from abortion in 1933, compared with 888 in 1945, with much of the decline in septic cases associated with illegal abortions. (The numbers also include deaths from “therapeutic abortions,” permitted by law, and “spontaneous abortions.”)
By 1959, a leading researcher wrote: “Abortion is no longer a dangerous procedure. This applies not just to therapeutic abortions as performed in hospitals but also to so-called illegal abortions as done by physicians. In 1957, there were only 260 deaths in the whole country attributed to abortions of any kind. In New York City in 1921, there were 144 abortion deaths, in 1951 there were only 15.”
The writer was Mary Steichen Calderone, at the time medical director of Planned Parenthood. She attributed the decline in the mortality rate to antibiotics and the fact that 90 percent of illegal abortions were done by trained physicians.
OK, so abortion advocates cite the study from 1936, which already relies on questionable estimates, because they know that the later numbers are far, far lower – thanks to the widespread use of antibiotics. They’re lying, essentially, because lying helps them to persuade people who think with their feelings, and don’t look too closely at facts.
Third, there are over 2,000 pregnancy care ministries and clinics operating throughout the continental United States. Women who want help with pregnancy or adoption can get help from one of these clinics.
Fourth, even if women hurt themselves during abortions, that wouldn’t be a reason to legalize abortion. Bank robbers hurt themselves during bank robberies, and drug dealers hurt themselves during drug deals. We do not legalize criminal activities just because criminals get hurt during the commission of those activities. So the real question is, what is the unborn? If the unborn is a living human being, then abortion on demand takes the life of an innocent human being without justification, and should therefore be illegal.
I noticed that social media, e.g. – Facebook, is marking photos of gas prices as “Misleading” and “Missing Context”. That is because fact checkers with English degrees don’t like the idea of voters blaming Biden for the skyrocketing price of gas. So, in order to get around that little problem, I’m going to list out the specific decisions and policies of the Biden administration that led to this mess.
If Biden signaled full-throated support for US drillers to get to work — and perhaps allowed the re-starting of the Keystone XL Pipeline from Canada — global oil prices could similarly fall sharply, the industry experts told The Post.
“Biden could go to the oil and gas industry and say, ‘OK, I’ve said we’re going to get off oil and gas and that you guys are yesterday’s industry, but I’m going to drop that,’” surmised Myron Ebell, the director of the Competitive Enterprise Institute’s Center for Energy and Environment. “Part of the run up in oil prices is the psychology of it,” he said.
[…]Just last week, CEO Rick Muncrief of Devon Energy — a large driller worth around $40 billion — told Bloomberg that he’d be happy to talk to US officials about upping production. But there’s been no call. “I’m a little mystified that there hasn’t been some dialog,” he said. “It’s not been that long ago that we were asked to drill less, not more,” he said. “They need to be talking about what is it they would really like U.S. producers to do.”
That’s the kind of inaction that’s keeping prices high — up more than 40% since Russia invaded Ukraine and the war has worsened — and up nearly 90% over the past year when looking at the global Brent crude benchmark, which has risen as high as $123 a barrel in recent days when compared to its level of around $63 a year ago.
Note that: the price of oil was rising LONG BEFORE Russia invaded Ukraine. And that’s because of Biden’s anti-energy policies.
More:
The administration is reportedly in diplomatic talks with longtime foes Venezuela and Iran as it looks for alternative sources to stave off the financial crunch facing US motorists — but outreach to US firms has been limited.
Republicans and other Biden critics say his actions and proposals since taking office – such as canceling the Keystone pipeline, suspension of new federal oil and gas leases, higher drilling fees on federal land and a Democratic-led push for the Federal Reserve to implement climate change policies – have sent a clear signal to US producers.
Tom Kloza, the global head of energy analysis for OPIS, noted the Biden administration has developed an “adversarial relationship” with US producers who now face calls to increase their output.
“You’ve got diplomacy on Ukraine. You’ve got diplomacy with Iran. Now you’ve got diplomacy with Venezuela,” Kloza said. “You know, it might be advisable to have some diplomacy with oil and gas companies.”
The Biden administration has put people in power who hate oil and gas, and believe nonsense like the “Green New Deal”.
The Biden White House plans to cancel all oil and gas leases in Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge…
Interior Secretary Deb Haaland… will publish an order to formally rescind existing leases months after the new president mounted a White House crusade against fossil fuels on day one with moratoriums on new drilling in the Arctic and other federal lands.
[…]The Biden administration’s animosity towards fossil fuels, featuring Haaland at the top, a climate activist-turned two-term congresswoman described as “Green New Deal Champion,” has promised to make survival harder for the industry with new restrictions which could last beyond a four or eight-year term.
I asked myself whether this “climate activist” person would have a Bachelor’s degree in English, and thought “no, that’s not possible – they wouldn’t be that stupid. She has to have earned degrees and private sector work experience in the hard sciences!”
But, no. English degree:
After graduating from Highland High School, Haaland worked at a local bakery. In 1988, she enrolled at the University of New Mexico, where she earned her Bachelor of Arts in English in 1994. She earned her Juris Doctor in Indian law from the University of New Mexico School of Law in 2006, but is not a member of the New Mexico State Bar.
The Biden administration is filled from top to bottom with unqualified non-STEM people with no work experience in the private sector related to their jobs. They want to migrate to renewable energy sources, but that’s already been tried in places like California, Canada and Germany – and it always fails.
What green energy policies did to electricity costs in California
Let’s start with California. California has long been at the forefront of converting their energy production to “green” sources.
Here’s an article from Forbes that talks about their results:
California’s big bet on renewables, and shunning of natural gas and nuclear, is directly responsible for the state’s blackouts and high electricity prices.
“We will be forced today to ask utilities to cut off power to millions today, and tomorrow, and beyond,” said Stephen Berberich, the President and CEO of California’s Independent System Operator, CAISO, on a Monday morning conference call. “Demand will greatly exceed supply.”
The immediate cause of California’s blackouts is a mismatch between electricity supply and demand.
[…]The underlying reason blackouts are occurring is because California lacks reliable, in-state supply. And the reason for that is California has been closing both natural gas and nuclear power plants.
[…]Despite these capacity shortfalls, the state is moving ahead with plans to remove 2,200-MW of reliable electricity from the grid. That’s the amount of power produced by Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant, which will be closed in stages in 2024 and 2025.
Well, how about Germany? They closed down their nuclear power plants in favor of wind and solar. It didn’t work.
Germany’s power grid almost collapsed in January due to poor performance from wind turbines and solar panels, according to data from a major trade union.
Wind and solar power plants under-performed in January, 2017, because of cloudy weather with little or no wind, setting the stage for massive blackouts.
[…]Green energy approaches failed to meet Germany’s stated energy goals, even after spending over $1.1 trillion. The country’s “Energiewende” plan to boost wind and solar production to fight global warming hasn’t significantly reduced carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and may have actually caused them to go up.
[…]Due to the inherent unreliable performance of wind power and political opposition to nuclear power plants, Germany has been forced to return to coal to generate electricity. Coal now provides 44 percent of Germany’s power, This shift caused Germany’s carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions to actually rise by 28 million tons each year following the policy shift.
All of Germany’s subsidies and support for green energy have sharply increased power prices, with the average German paying 39 cents per kilowatt-hour for electricity. The average American only spends 10.4 cents per kilowatt-hour by comparison.
Well, third try is the charm. How about Canada? They’ve gone Green New Deal for more than a decade. How is that working for them?
Back in 2010, deep green environmentalist Rick Smith, then head of Environmental Defence Canada, hailed Ontario’s Green Energy and Green Economy Act regime as a cost-free operation that would catapult the province into the big leagues of renewable energy. Through fat subsidies and high prices offered to wind, solar and other renewable industry players, jobs and growth would boom and Ontario would be free of its dirty coal plants. It was the End of Coal, the government said. The birth of a renewable miracle.
Now, Canadians are paying more:
The doubling of electricity prices since 2005 is big politically, but it is just the top-line item on a long list of problems, misconceptions and outright fabrications that lurk within the Liberal government’s decade-long pursuit of radical greenism.
Because they didn’t listened to engineers… they listened to their hearts:
Ontario’s Society of Professional Engineers has issued more than half a dozen critical reports on the Liberals’ tendency to let green talk and politics override sound policy. Instead of following the expert advice of engineers and people who understand the intricacies of electricity production and distribution, the government took to issuing directives right out the Premier’s office.
We have to do what works to reduce electricity prices for the poor. What works is more natural gas (fracking) and more nuclear power.
