Parents' outrage over educational program that teaches children 'men are the greatest threat to women'

Rampant feminism.  The hate never stops

The organisers of an educational program which teaches school children 'men are the greatest threat to women' have received a barrage of hate mail.

Privately run Frame Initiatives travels between about 30 Western Australian schools to teach children about respectful relationships.

Last week, a Perth student set off outrage when he took a picture of a slide with the words 'globally and historically, men are the greatest threat to women' and posted it online, The Australian reported. The slide was part of the Men of Respect workshop for boys in Years 7 to 9.

Director Dan McGrechan said the words were taken out context and was referencing US comedian Louie C.K.  The controversial statement was intended to 'stimulate discussion', he told The Australian.

Critics have accused Frame of teaching superficial and biased content.

The barrage of hate mail appears to have led organisers to delete the Frame Twitter account.

The programs for girls include Please Like Me and Back Off: Sexual Harassment. Other programs for boys, aside from the Men of Respect workshop in question, include Problems with Porn, Sexual Harassment, and Date Rape and Consent.

SOURCE






Police forcibly remove Sydney College of the Arts student barricade after 65 days

Student activists who barricaded themselves inside a University of Sydney building to protest proposed cuts to the Sydney College of the Arts have been forcibly removed after 65 days.

The students had occupied the top floor of the administrative building since August 22 in opposition to planned campus, course and staff cuts, before they were evicted by police and security guards on Tuesday morning.

Sydney College of the Arts students, staff and friends protest in July about University of Sydney plans to relocate and downsize the SCA.

Protesters claim they were treated unfairly and with unnecessary force when they were ousted, and vowed not to stop fighting the changes.

"This will only strengthen the resolve of the 'Let SCA Stay' campaign to continue to fight for the arts and for the interests of the public," protester Stephen Dobson said.

The University of Sydney said it was reluctant to remove the activists and supported their right to protest, but warned students who took part in any further campus barricades could be expelled.

"It has chosen not to do so at this stage, but students and their representative groups have been warned that any further attempt to occupy could see the university exercise this right," a University of Sydney spokesperson said.

SOURCE





Judge backs wife: Islamic ‘divorce on the porch’ not on

The Family Court of Australia has refused a Muslim husband’s effort to divorce his wife under Islamic law under conditions that would have left her with 10 per cent of their million-dollar property pool.

The wife, who cannot be named but is known in court documents as Ms Basra, appealed to the Family Court for help after her husband attempted to get out of the marriage, which produced three children, for $100,000, ­despite having more than $1 million in assets.

The husband, known as Mr Ahmed, wanted the court to recognise an Islamic divorce he says took place on his porch in 2009, with a sheik and several other men as witnesses. But Ms Basra denied she had taken part in such a ceremony and produced an official document from Beirut that recorded her husband as married to two women — herself and a second wife — rather than having been divorced and remarried.

The court heard the couple was married in an Islamic ceremony in Australia, and again in Lebanon in July 1997, when Ms Basra was 18. He was 10 years older. The Lebanese marriage was recognised under Australian law.

Mr Ahmed told the court, with judge Garry Watts presiding, that he divorced his wife in 2009 in front of a sheik and “a number of other men” from the community.

He said the sheik asked his wife whether she wished to go through with the divorce, and whether she understood her entitlements under Islamic law, which were vastly less than she would have­ ­received under Australian law, as a full-time mother of three.

He said he then divorced his wife by uttering the words “I ­divorce you” in front of witnesses, and both parties signed the statement of Islamic divorce.

Ms Basra admitted she had been taking a single-parent payment from Centrelink for several years, saying she had done so only after her husband told her to “call Centrelink, and tell them we are separated but living under one roof so you receive the single parent benefit payment”.

Justice Watts said it was unclear from her evidence whether she had done so because she believed they were actually separated or was defrauding the taxpayer.

Counsel for the husband argued Ms Basra was “attempting to portray herself as this downtrodden, under-the-thumb Islamic woman”. The wife “quite candidly conceded this was exactly how she saw herself”, and she was “cynically trying to present her husband as (a) barbaric, misogynist, Arab man”. The wife presented evidence of three apprehended violence orders she had taken against him during the marriage.

The husband argued against a settlement larger than $100,000, saying his assets had been boosted more than $150,000 by compensation for an accident. He said he had given his wife more than 2kg of gold, valued at $115,000; she said it was more like four gold bangles, a necklace and ring.

Judge Watts ruled the divorce on the porch “is not a divorce that would be recognised under Australian law” and ordered a 70-30 settlement in the wife’s favour — partly because he believed the husband had access to resources beyond those he had declared.

SOURCE





Why a Qld ambulance officer described Dreamworld victims as having suffered ‘injuries incompatible with life’

AMID the unfolding tragedy of four deaths on a ride at Dreamworld on Tuesday, an ambulance officer’s seemingly heartless description of the victims’ injuries had social media in uproar.

It caused a social media maelstrom, with many attacking the Gold Coast's acting supervising officer — and the media for reporting it — for a seemingly cold description so soon after four deaths.

But the clearly shaken, senior officer, facing a live national television cross fresh from leaving the grisly scene, was using a clinical term commonly used by medical professionals, police and other emergency services.

Unknown to many was that the term gave a sad insight into the extent of the injuries the victims suffered.

When injuries are deemed by paramedics to be so severe that they are “incompatible with life”, CPR is deemed a futile exercise.

The Queensland Ambulance Service official clinical practice guidelines for resuscitation outline a number of instances in which CPR should not be attempted.

They include where the patient has sustained injuries that are “totally incompatible with life”.

Many social media users rushed to defend Mr Fuller’s use of the term on live television.

A 32-year-old woman and her 35-year-old brother were killed in Tuesday afternoon’s tragedy, which happened on the Thunder River Rapids Ride. The man’s 38-year-old male partner also died. All three were from Canberra. The woman’s 12-year-old daughter was thrown clear of the ride and watched in horror as her mother and uncles perished. Another unrelated woman, 42, from Sydney was also killed. Her 10-year-old son was also thrown free from the raft and watched his mother die.

SOURCE

Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here