One of Gillard's Finer Moments..Pure class ain't she..

This would have to come under the "Woman in Charge" category. Here we have Australia's "fearless, scheming" leader, who obtained office via blackmail and corruption plus stabbing the previous leader in the back. Channeling billions of dollars of funds to independents to ensure their adherence and ensure this harridan keeps her place in tact. Regardless of the fact that she stabbed one those independents in the back (take 2) last month, by not fulfilling an agreement regarded one of their pet projects..
In order to finance the billions it's wasted on hair-brain schemes. We have this same "Star" wanting to drive the country into further poverty with her "Carbon Tax" and "Mining Tax," which in her opinion is just there to fund other socialist ideals. So stealing from Paul to subsidies Peter, while driving him broke, is the name of the game..

Meanwhile we have a prime minister who is that loathed, for telling lies before being elected. Those included the "there will be no carbon tax under the government I lead" statement which she promptly broke as part of a deal with the watermelon Green movement to keep her in office as well. Fascinating stuff..

She is now regarded to be a compulsive liar, incapable of telling the truth and incapable of running the country. On top of all those national screwups, she is in the throws of subsidising to the tune of billions of dollars, a scheme that will remove the basic fundamental rights of men and boys in Australia via the "White Ribbon Campaign" crowd, a scheme which has been "researched" by radical feminists. One would not need to go too far into that legislation to find those aims. This we will see when introduced..

So here we have this paragon of indecision and sheer arrogance, granting the occasional "News" report at which, in most cases in the past, she has just used to implant even more lies and misinformation, sound familiar, anyone !!

So a"Woman in Charge" does what again. I feel the need for a refresher course, just so I can re-establish that falsehood that the feminastie movement keeps introducing, You know, the "Women make better something or another than men" fallacy. I really do need another fix, one that does not demonstrate how totally ludicrous and ridiculous that statement really is..

On rare occasions, it takes time to have a little assumed gloat, as that does not come around too often..

Gillard confronts her media critics

Andrew Bolt March 20 2012 (1:51pm)

Sanchez,feminist and hypocrite, queried on voter fraud..

She (Rep. Loretta Sanchez, D-Calif (above)) single-handedly helped prove, once and for all, the hypocrisy of the feminist movement when she scheduled a fund-raiser for Al Gore at the Playboy Mansion. 

Rep. Loretta Sanchez (D-CA) Caught in Multiple Scandals; Sex & Voter Fraud

Feminists have no problem whatsoever in introducing their own versions of what law should be in their own opinion and in the case of human rights or the independence documents, well, they are just a hindrance to their efforts at ensuring men are not only vilified but also falsely charged and jailed for something they were not aware of. This "rape law" introduced by feminists could have been introduced by other species pretending to be feminists, maybe it was..

Air Force Col. Don Christensen, called it “almost incomprehensible.”“If you had 100 monkeys with a typewriter, they’d probably come up with something like this,” Christensen declared during a 2009 aggravated sexual assault case.

And he could leave it there but more was required to clarify what level of brain dysfunction and damage those feminists were suffering from..

Christensen, the Air Force judge, said during a trial. “I just think it’s a prime example of what happens when legislation is influenced by what they see on ‘Oprah’ and what advocacy seekers propose, as opposed to what’s really necessary.”

‘Flawed’ New Rape Law Roils Military Justice System 

WASHINGTON _ Six years ago, Congress tried cracking down on rape in the military. Prompted by disturbing reports of sexual assaults in military academies and war zones, lawmakers rewrote the rules. They wanted to protect victims and help prosecutors.Now it’s clear that the effort backfired.The politically attractive but poorly understood legal changes have incited courtroom confusion, judicial frustration and constitutional conflict. Extensive interviews and a McClatchy review of thousands of pages of court documents and internal studies find a congressionally caused crisis of military justice that few civilians know anything about.The rewritten sexual assault law puts judges “in an impossible position,” the top military appellate court warned. 

Military lawyers find it “cumbersome and confusing,” a Pentagon task force noted. It leads to “unwarranted acquittals,” Defense Department officials added. And some judges call it unconstitutional.“The law is an abomination as it is now written,” said Charles Gittins, a former military judge advocate who’s now a defense attorney.Individual military judges likewise assail the new law. One, Marine Corps Lt. Col. Raymond Beal II, called it “horribly flawed.” Another, J.A. Maksym of the U.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals, blasted it as “poorly written, confusing and arguably absurd.” Yet another, Air Force Col. Don Christensen, called it “almost incomprehensible.”“If you had 100 monkeys with a typewriter, they’d probably come up with something like this,” Christensen declared during a 2009 aggravated sexual assault case.A Senate bill introduced in June and proposed by the Defense Department tries to fix the problems that the earlier congressional action created. 

The bill is pending.The present law now under fire has particularly complicated trials that involve intoxicated victims and those who say they’ve been assaulted by acquaintances, two common allegations in the military. The confusion about the law can lead to injustice.Consider the case of a former Air Force enlisted man stationed at California’s Travis Air Force Base.Stephen Prather, 23, had been accused of aggravated sexual assault by an intoxicated guest of a party that Prather and his wife threw in October 2007.Prather said he and the guest had engaged in consensual sex. The woman, though, testified that she fell asleep and woke briefly to find Prather on top of her. When she awoke again, she said, she found semen on her underwear.Prather had raised the woman’s alleged consent as a defense. Prosecutors countered that the woman, whom court documents didn’t identify, was too intoxicated to give consent. 

The problem was that the rewritten law had shifted the burden of proof involving consent, appeals court judges concluded. Prather, as the defendant, had the burden to prove that the alleged victim was capable of consenting. Under the Constitution, though, it’s the prosecution that’s supposed to shoulder the burden of proof.This “results in an unconstitutional burden shift to the accused,” the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces said of the new law in its February 2011 decision dismissing Prather’s conviction.Prather already had served almost 11 months of a two-and-a-half year prison sentence. He’s awaiting his discharge papers.“I just want Congress to know this law has messed up a lot of people’s lives,” he said in a telephone interview from his home in Houston.“My wife left me. I can’t get a good job. I had to register as a sex offender. My life is ruined. All for something that should have never been a crime to begin with,” Prather added.Recently, the military decided not to re-prosecute Prather. 

For other military defendants, the legal ambiguity will continue as challenges inundate appeals courts. The Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces will review several challenges to the law in coming months.Meanwhile, sexual assaults in the military continue.More than 4 percent of active-duty women and almost 1 percent of active-duty men reported unwanted sexual contact in 2009, according to the latest annual study from the Pentagon’s Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office.All told, the military services completed investigations of more than 3,200 suspects in sex-related crimes in fiscal year 2010. Of these, 16 percent faced court-martial.Heightened political scrutiny of the military’s handling of sexual misbehavior dates at least to the 1991 Tailhook affair, in which Navy aviators aggressively groped women at a convention in Las Vegas.Congressional involvement accelerated in early 2004, after reports of sexual assaults on female troops in Iraq.A year later, the Pentagon established an office dedicated to responding to and preventing sexual assault. 

Lawmakers also directed the Pentagon to review the military’s laws, known as the Uniform Code of Military Justice.In an 826-page report, the Pentagon ultimately advised that no changes were necessary. Congress thought otherwise and rewrote the sexual assault provisions as part of a fiscal 2006 defense authorization bill. The intention was clear: Lawmakers wanted to assist prosecutors and shield victims.Rep. Loretta Sanchez, D-Calif., a key proponent of the changes, called them a “major step” in convicting rapists. Skeptics feared otherwise.“I’m not a member of Congress, and that’s their job to do what they think is necessary,” Christensen, the Air Force judge, said during a trial. “I just think it’s a prime example of what happens when legislation is influenced by what they see on ‘Oprah’ and what advocacy seekers propose, as opposed to what’s really necessary.”

Nota rape culture, just a PC one ByJulia Fisher
Let’smake this perfectly clear: there is no rape culture at Yale.
IfYale had a rape culture, there would be students and faculty speakingin favor of rape. Rape would be a common practice; it would beroutine to hear someone talking about raping or being raped bysomeone last weekend. People would discuss what styles or methods ofrape they prefer. Obviously, the existence of a rape culture is afarcical idea. These things just don’t happen at Yale.

Thereare isolated incidents of rape, and that is surely a severe problem.Beyond the physical harm the victim suffers, rape erodes trust. Likeany crime, it arouses fear.
Rapefalls somewhere on a wide spectrum between murder and robbery. Thenumber of people who commit rape is a tiny percentage of thepopulation at large. The vast majority of people are notcriminals.
Whenwe talk about a rape culture, when we look at everyone as a potentialcriminal, and when we condemn different opinions as promoting rape,we create an environment of suspicion. This suspicion, like crime,erodes trust and arouses fear.

No one has ever denied that rape does not exist or never happens as to do that would not only be foolish as well as totally incorrect. It does happen and the appropriate punishment and assistance programs are in place to help and assist anyone faced with that ordeal.
The problem that has reared it's ugly head and which has made the issue just another feminist tragedy is that they are incapable of taking a realistic view, a comprehensive analysis and offer even the slightest positive input or answer to  assist in reducing or rectifying this problem resorting only to slanging and insulting the male sex while females can continue their activity at will.
The fix part is the furthest from their minds as it is in their interest to keep the rape culture active and alive for as long as they can because they are far from interested in creating any positive outcomes, that would hinder their political and emotive advantage. They are quite happy to offer a few sacrifices as that will benefit them no end. More female fodder at the alter of feminist hypocrisy and what does it matter if a few or a hundred or more are sacrificed. So they loose a few in the process, who cares. Sacrifices must be made for the evil empire while the fodder lines up to be counted..

One must not forget the biggest of all hypocrites in the ranks of that hegemony. Those deranged  females taking part in the "slutfest" marches would have to be awarded the "hypocrites of the year" award as never before has that level of hypocrisy ever been witnessed. Take for example the march in Oregon which was organised and attended by the lesbian crowd who have been recorded as being the most abusive females so far on the planet. Their record stands at triple the normal heterosexual couples amount for physical abuse, murder, suicide, illness and deaths, you name it and there they are "tongue in cheek", helping the sisters complain about an issue that does not exist or if it does, it is so minor as to not even be noticeable. Incredible..

Feminist Fodder with matching mentality.Rather watch paint dry.