Wednesday, October 17, 2018

Leftmedia Keeps Peddling the Matthew Shepard 'Hate Crime' Hoax

NPR once again exposes its leftist bias by promoting the debunked narrative for Shepard's murder.

On Thursday, it was announced that the remains of murder victim Matthew Shepard will be interred at Washington National Cathedral. NPR reported, “News of Shepard’s interment comes 20 years after he was tied up, savagely attacked and left for dead in October 1998. At the time, he was a 21-year-old college student in Laramie, Wyo. His brutal murder attracted intense media coverage at the time and galvanized support for laws protecting the rights of LGBTQ Americans.” And insomuch as the homosexual lobby, willingly supported by the mainstream media, crafted the incident into a narrative of murder motivated by hatred of homosexuals, NPR’s statement is correct.

However, years later investigative journalist Stephen Jimenez unearthed the truth behind Shepard’s murder, exposing the fact that the popular narrative that Shepard was murdered because of his homosexuality was a lie. As Mark Alexander wrote four years ago, “After years of exhaustive research on Shepard’s murder, including interviews with more than 100 people — associates of Shepard, his murderers and their associates — a respected journalist, Stephen Jimenez, has published his findings in The Book of Matt. The book dispels the notion that the murder was related to Shepard’s sexual orientation, and instead concludes he was a meth dealer and sex partner with one of his murderers — both of whom were homosexuals.”

Interestingly, following the publishing of his book in 2013, NPR interviewed Jimenez, who is himself a homosexual. In that interview, Jimenez offered a damning insight: “Once you had the president of the United States, while Matthew … being kept alive on a respirator, already making comments that this was a de facto hate crime — once that story got out, what was going to happen? How was that story going to be pulled back?” Clearly, NPR is too committed to the bogus narrative to reverse course as they are still unquestioningly peddling the Shepard “hate crime” hoax to this day.

This is a classic example of Leftmedia bias — the promotion of the leftist agenda is more important than reporting the truth if the truth doesn’t serve to support the agenda. In NPR’s Thursday piece, there is no mention of any questions over the validity of the Shepard story or of the network’s own interview with Jimenez. Instead, the only issue of “uncertainty” entertained by the story is that of Shepard’s parents and their decades-long debate over where their son’s remains should finally be laid to rest. Would that everyone here could make peace with the truth.


The Kavanaugh Smear War Broke My Decades-Long Support For Feminism

For more than two decades, I traveled the country facilitating rape and assault prevention lectures, seminars, and workshops for women of all ages. I was passionate about this work, committed to the cause, and believed wholeheartedly that what I was doing was a wholly virtuous endeavor. I considered myself a feminist. But that was then, and this is now.

All these years I silently stood by and watched third-wave feminism (with assistance from the radical left) methodically take a sledgehammer to Western society as a whole, and males in particular. Foolishly, I hoped things would eventually turn around, only to see things get worse over time.

Yet it wasn’t until I witnessed the Me Too movement snowball into an all-out, anti-male witch hunt that I realized good men were in real trouble. Astonishingly, after having been an advocate for women my entire adult life, I quickly learned I was still considered the “enemy,” simply for being a man.

Never in my wildest dreams (or nightmares) did I imagine that someday the opposite sex would view me as a threat. But it’s true, and “their” message is loud and clear: Even if you’ve been a staunch supporter of women’s rights for years, taught thousands of women and girls (many of whom were survivors of sexual assault) how to defend themselves from a violent attacker, and authored a book on the subject, you are not to be trusted solely because of your sex.

One needn’t look too far to see that today’s hyper-feminism climate has men throughout the Western world walking on eggshells at work, at home, everywhere. As a counselor, my male clients routinely voice concerns about having targets on their backs simply because they are men, and I am reticent to take on new female clients out of fear of being falsely accused of sexual impropriety.

Make no mistake: One of the goals of the radical feminist is to persecute any man who dares to wear his masculinity on his sleeve. In fact, masculinity is their true adversary.

To be sure, every man—regardless of his age, race, political persuasion, or sexual orientation—is in their crosshairs, but especially those who embody traditional masculine qualities, such as strength, discipline, direction, independence, confidence, and assertiveness. And God help him if he’s also white, Christian, conservative, affluent, or holds a position of power.

I don’t know about you, but I’ve spent a lifetime trying to be a good man, and to live a life of true meaning and purpose. Although I am far from perfect, I’d like to think that I’ve lived an honorable life, and have been a positive role model. In all my years, I have never intentionally hurt someone, nor have I ever turned my back on anyone who’s come to me for help.

Moreover, I have always aspired to be a fair-minded, compassionate, loving, kind, generous, and forgiving man. While I have fallen short of attaining these noble, masculine ideals on numerous occasions, I’ve never given up on their pursuit, and I never will.

With all of that being said, as I grow ever closer to turning 60, I am far less concerned about my future and well-being than I am about that of the next generation of boys and young men, who seem destined to be further emasculated, disenfranchised, and marginalized should the current climate remain unchanged.

If today’s demonization of males, along with the pathologizing of inherent masculine traits, continues uninterrupted, both sexes are in for much more pain than even today’s chaotic marriage market, anti-male education system, and rise in teen suicide and depression bear witness to.

As regrettable as it is, the recent attempt by all the usual suspects to block Kavanaugh’s confirmation to the U.S. Supreme Court at the eleventh hour by destroying his character, reputation, and life, via salacious, unsubstantiated, and uncorroborated allegations of sexual misconduct dating back thirty-odd years to when he was but a teenager, has obliterated the last vestiges of the “women’s advocate” dwelling inside my heart.

Setting politics aside, watching a good man being taken down by a mob with zero regard for due process and the presumption of innocence is the final straw for me. In other words, I’m done. While it pains me to say this, I will no longer champion any self-described women’s cause unless things dramatically change for the better.

Alas, there was a time when I was a feminist, but sadly, that time has come and gone.


Rejecting Second-Wave Feminism: A Review of Mona Charen’s "Sex Matters"

A morning NPR story on how women manifest anger differently from men was just the latest reminder of something we all know, and Mona Charen wants to make sure we don’t forget: sex matters. Men and women are fundamentally different in many ways that she catalogs in her latest book of the same name, "Sex Matters", and pretending otherwise has resulted in a havoc that she maps out in detail.

The book is an indictment of modern feminism, its second wave in particular. Second wavers, she argues, “were determined to change what women wanted altogether.” They were "radical, unhappy, and, ironically, enslaved to the ideas of two nineteenth-century dead, white, European males, Karl Marx and Sigmund Freud. The worldview of second-wave feminists was completely wrong about women, history, and human nature—and it left a lot of wreckage in its wake."

These feminists insisted on a new set of standards for women, ones that seemed strangely masculine despite all the talk about patriarchy. The results speak for themselves: the #MeToo movement currently roiling the country is just one manifestation of one of the ways that feminism has utterly failed to deliver on its promises of freedom and equality with men.

Charen’s map of feminism’s trajectory is uniquely comprehensive, accessible, and most importantly, honest, and her methodical takedown of second-wave feminists is particularly enjoyable. In pathologizing femaleness, to use her words, second-wave feminists set future generations up to fail. She writes:

Of the major second-wave feminists, none had a lifelong successful marriage. Few were mothers. The conventional script of marriage, work, home, children, and grandchildren (something most women hope for) was not their goal. They seemed determined to persuade American women that these things were traps and snares.

Nowadays, young women like myself are lucky if we have evaded the snare of a modern feminist outlook. From puberty on, girls are taught to engage in careless sex when in reality, as Charen points out, we are hardwired to care. We are taught to disdain marriage and delay children, when we by nature long for monogamy and commitment and find deep satisfaction in domestic life. And unlike men, we aren’t biologically set up to wait forever for a family.

Charen delves into the hormonal, biological, and physiological realities that set the sexes apart, and documents the extensive damage that denying these differences has done to both men and women. Her dissection of the campus rape crisis stands out. Charen takes conservatives to task for dismissing the severity of the crisis and missing a major opportunity to draw a straight line from what is taught about sex and power to the very real and devastating impact on the students sitting in the classroom where the lessons are being taught.

Thankfully, a “sexual counterrevolution,” as Charen calls it, is underway. A new generation of women is turning away from the mealy leftovers of a movement gone astray and seeking a new way forward. We owe woman like Mona Charen, however, a great debt of gratitude for going before us and holding a torch. Charen describes making countercultural choices like opting to stay home and prioritizing family or embracing the pro-life position when it was a total cultural anathema. Women who go confidently against the grain today have Charen and her contemporaries very much to thank for forging a narrow path that we now widen.

 “The sexual revolution,” Charen writes, “could never have succeeded without the imprimatur of feminists, who endorsed it as a part of women’s liberation.” The challenge for today’s women who seek fulfillment without abandoning what is essential to their sexual identity is to liberate feminism from its insistence on standards that pit women against their natures and men and women against each other.

For the foot soldiers of this resistance, Charen’s book is required reading.


Scott Morrison is considering moving Australia’s embassy in Israel to Jerusalem

Prime Minister Scott Morrison has indicated he could move Australia's embassy in Israel to Jerusalem from Tel Aviv - mimicking US President Donald Trump's decision that led to riots and bloodshed.

Mr Morrison is expected to make an announcement on Tuesday as part of a foreign policy statement on Israel, in Canberra.

The prime minister has also credited the Liberal Party's Wentworth by-election candidate Dave Sharma, a former Australian ambassador to Israel, with raising the issue. 'He's arguing it can be done consistent with Australia's long-running position ... he's actually changing the way in which the issue is conceived,' Mr Morrison told Fairfax Media.

Wentworth, the former Sydney blue-ribbon electorate of Malcolm Turnbull, has a large Jewish community and voters will go to the polls this weekend.

If Australia does proceed, it will be following the US which earlier this year moved its embassy, effectively recognising the holy city of Jerusalem as the 'true' capital of Israel.

Mr Trump opened the new US embassy in the city in May. On the same day Israeli forces shot dead 58 Palestinians protesting the move.

Jerusalem is also a holy city for the largely Muslim population of the Palestinian territories, and they feared that recognition of the city as a Jewish capital would imperil shared access to the many religious sites.

It would also be a departure from the position taken by former prime minister Mr Turnbull and former foreign minister Julie Bishop.

Labor, meanwhile, has attacked Mr Morrison's 'desperation' for signalling the move. Opposition foreign affairs spokeswoman Penny Wong said the prime minister was playing 'dangerous and deceitful' word games. 'Foreign policy, and Australia's national interest are far too important to be played with in this fashion,' Senator Wong said. 'The people of Wentworth, and all Australians, deserve a leader who puts the national interest ahead of his self-interest, and governs in the best long term interest of the nation.'

Labor is concerned the approach could undermine the prospect of a two-state solution between Israel and Palestine.

So far only the US and its ally Guatemala have moved their embassies to Jerusalem.



Political correctness is most pervasive in universities and colleges but I rarely report the  incidents concerned here as I have a separate blog for educational matters.

American "liberals" often deny being Leftists and say that they are very different from the Communist rulers of  other countries.  The only real difference, however, is how much power they have.  In America, their power is limited by democracy.  To see what they WOULD be like with more power, look at where they ARE already  very powerful: in America's educational system -- particularly in the universities and colleges.  They show there the same respect for free-speech and political diversity that Stalin did:  None.  So look to the colleges to see  what the whole country would be like if "liberals" had their way.  It would be a dictatorship.

For more postings from me, see TONGUE-TIED, GREENIE WATCH,   EDUCATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS and  DISSECTING LEFTISM.   My Home Pages are here or   here or   here.  Email me (John Ray) here.  Email me (John Ray) here


No comments: