Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

F.A.S.H.I.S.T!
Townhall.com ^ | September 15, 2008 | Mike S. Adams

Posted on 09/15/2008 5:16:19 AM PDT by Kaslin

I just got an email from our new Provost telling me that I – like everyone else working at the university – must start attending mandatory sexual harassment awareness training sessions every two years. The good news is that I’m going. The bad news is that I’ve gotten some other angry white men together to help me completely disrupt the training sessions.

On October 20th, there will be a meeting of a new campus group called “Faculty Against Sexual Harassment Initiatives and Sensitivity Training” - or FASHIST. I’m the founder of the new group. And the reason I’ve chosen the name FASHIST is twofold:

1. Our university is moving rapidly in the direction of fascism and we need to turn things around as quickly as possible, and

2. We need to go ahead and call ourselves FASCIST because that’s what the feminists – who don’t actually know what fascism is - will call us when we try to oppose a government-mandated thought control program.

Our first order of business will be to adopt a slogan for the new group. One of the other founding members of FASHIST wants “Hell no, we won’t go” to be the slogan. This is largely due to his contempt for the hippies that work in his department. But I like the phrase “We don’t harass, so kiss our ass!” But I’m concerned that the chancellor will deem the slogan to be itself harassing.

Those who join UNCW FASHIST will not attend the sexual harassment training sessions biannually as has been proposed. We will attend every single one of them. And we will interrupt the meetings – just like the radical protestors of the 1960s – with a lot of tough questions for the administration. Some examples follow:

1. UNCW defines harassment as “unwelcome conduct based on race, color, religion, creed, sex, national origin, age, disability, veteran status or sexual orientation that is either a condition of working or learning or creates a hostile environment.” If the university forces me (unwelcome conduct?) to attend sexual harassment training (based on sex?) as a condition of working at UNCW then, obviously, I’m being sexually harassed. Can we then fire the administration for imposing this mandate?

2. Is the term “mandate” sexist?

3. Our university sets lower admission standards for blacks than it does for whites. We don’t do it for the black females who can cut the mustard. We do it for the black males who can’t. But some of the black males we admit on lower standards drive around campus with their windows down blaring rap music denigrating women by calling them whores. Is this hostile environment sexual harassment? Is our affirmative action policy therefore sexually harassing?

4. Five years ago the administration chipped in $60,000 to help bring Ludacris to campus. He sang a lot about hos. Shouldn’t we be forcing the administration to attend mandatory sexual harassment training not the other way around? Is there a short bus that drops these intellectually challenged administrators off at work every day? Certainly, we don’t let these people drive themselves to work.

5. Let’s say a black professor complains about racism so often that we just let him fornicate with his white students in order to get him to shut up. Is this an example of sexual harassment against women? Or racial harassment against white professors? Just curious.

6. When a female student wears a top that fully exposes her nipples, has she sexually harassed the men in her class? What if they like it? Does that mean only the gay men are sexually harassed? How about the lesbians?

7. What if a feminist professor comes walking up to me in the hall and touches (actually rubs) the lapel of my blazer, looks into my eyes and comments on the softness of the fabric. Does that mean I can rub her blouse without her permission? If so, just how close can my hand get to her breast?

8. What if I get erectile dysfunction after a feminist rubs my lapel. Can I sue for damages?

9. What happens when a gay pride group steals my rainbow – an important Old Testament religious symbol, of course – and converts it to a symbol of approval of acts specifically prohibited by the Old Testament? Is that religious harassment? Or homosexual harassment?

10. Finally, I’ll have something to say about the Professor of Psychology who recently told members of his psychology class that I referred to the Chancellor as a “whore” in one of my columns. That is a lie. But, of course, it doesn’t matter since the university pays for speech that characterizes women as “hos.” But I suspect that many psychologists would tell us that making up a story like that is a form of projection. So maybe the psychology professor subconsciously thinks his boss is a whore. That leads to my final question: Can subconscious misogynistic thoughts be sexually harassing?

Of course, all of those hippies who were protestors in the 1960s have to be excited about my plan to shake things up at UNCW by speaking truth to power. But, unfortunately, many of them have married feminists who won’t let them join an organization like F.A.S.H.I.S.T. For the record, they are the ones I call “whores


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial
KEYWORDS: academia; mikeadams; politicalcorrectness; sensitivity
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-50 next last

1 posted on 09/15/2008 5:16:19 AM PDT by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

LOL - you should have dropped the SENSITIVITY part from the title. That would have made for a more interesting abbreviation!


2 posted on 09/15/2008 5:18:37 AM PDT by reagan_fanatic ("And how can this be? For I am the Kwisatz Haderach! " - Barack Obama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Of course, all of those hippies who were protestors in the 1960s have to be excited about my plan to shake things up at UNCW by speaking truth to power. But, unfortunately, many of them have married feminists who won’t let them join an organization like F.A.S.H.I.S.T. For the record, they are the ones I call “whores".

Mike Adams bump. Thanks for posting!

3 posted on 09/15/2008 5:21:28 AM PDT by Rummyfan (Iraq: it's not about Iraq anymore, it's about the USA!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

FASHIST - I like it. You are in the trenches at the front lines, my friend.


4 posted on 09/15/2008 5:22:06 AM PDT by PGR88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
A tip "O" the hat to Mike Adams.

May being a F.A.S.H.I.S.T. spread to the far ends of the country, because ... were mad as hell, and are not going to take this propaganda anymore!

5 posted on 09/15/2008 5:22:47 AM PDT by G.Mason (Duty, Honor, Country)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I once asked the presenter at one of these ‘seminars’

“Isn’t the leaeding cause of ‘the feminization of poverty’ no-fault divorce laws that were enacted under pressure from groups like yours?”

and

“If having a picture of a woman in a swinsuit creates a ‘hostile working environment’, are you telling me that I cannot put up a picture of my wife at the beach?”

I also took them to task for callign ‘stay-at-home’ mothers “stupid”. I informed them that since my wife stay at home at HER choice, that I was highly offended and that she owed my wife an apology - my wife (then) had gone to four major colleges and had two degrees.

funny how they haven’t forced me to attend another session...


6 posted on 09/15/2008 5:25:09 AM PDT by camle (keep an open mind and someone will fill it full of something for you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

you may want to ask them also where they were during the Clinton impeachment hearings - the epitome of sexual harassment when most ‘feminist’ groups sided with the powerful boss against the weak female who could not give consent because of the ‘power’ relationship...


7 posted on 09/15/2008 5:26:22 AM PDT by camle (keep an open mind and someone will fill it full of something for you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Professors and the left make the University their re-education camps. Trying to undo any ignorant, stupid read (conservative) views yuor parents might have inflicted on you. They teach you which views are the ELITE views (PROGRESSIVE/LEFT) the ones of the Smart and Cultured. Any other ideas are INTOLERANT, JUDGEMENTAL, and IGNORANT. DO you want to be an intelligent person?? Then you MUST tolerate OUR views no matter how they are challenged with LOGIC, FACTS, or even plain TRUTH. ACCUSE THE ENEMY OF OUR TACTICS POISOING THEIR MIND.ONCE THEY HAVE BEEN USED WE ARE JUSTIFIED IN REATALIATION. THE THOGUHT POLICE ARE WATCHING.


8 posted on 09/15/2008 5:26:35 AM PDT by jakerobins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

That reminds me, I finally watched V for Vendetta last night. I thought it was actually kind of an interesting flick but doubt I saw it in the same light the libtard anarchists did.


9 posted on 09/15/2008 5:36:31 AM PDT by cripplecreek (Voting Conservative isn't for the faint of heart.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Al Bundy. He was WAY ahead of his time...


10 posted on 09/15/2008 5:37:01 AM PDT by TLI ( ITINERIS IMPENDEO VALHALLA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I like and fully support the idea. Going to various re-education classes and showing the contradictions and illogic of the course material is a favorite of mine. However, your methods and arguments seem childish and extreme and will be counterproductive. For example, are you really considering “We don’t harass, so kiss our ass!” as a slogan? That would be a good way to instantly destroy your credibility. Thoughtful reasoned argument is the way to go, not hyperbole. It may work for Ann Coulter, but it will just get you fired.


11 posted on 09/15/2008 5:42:11 AM PDT by Hacklehead (Crush the liberals, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentation of the hippies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TLI

Ha! Might have to get one of those... ;-)

Are they actually for sale?


12 posted on 09/15/2008 5:43:57 AM PDT by PreciousLiberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
2. Is the term “mandate” sexist?

Gotta love it. Persondate (I came up with this while I was resting my legs on the ottoperson.)

Then I suspect "date" echoes and resonates with the fundamentally sexist and exploitative custom of male persons taking female persons out for food and entertainment in exchange for sex (that part of the deal, however, rarely worked out, historians say). Truly liberated people would gather to eat tofu burritos while discussing gender politics. WE could call this a "Seminar" (thus "personsseminar" to replace "mandate") except for the blatant sexesm of "seminar". So we propose "Session". Thus "personsession" replaces mandate.

We hope all you persons out there like it. We're just doing out bit to improve political discourse and equity.

13 posted on 09/15/2008 5:44:05 AM PDT by Mad Dawg (Oh Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to thee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PreciousLiberty

Just... wow. Whoda thought?

http://www.amazon.com/Married-Children-Bundy-tshirt-White/dp/B000EWK8YC


14 posted on 09/15/2008 5:50:06 AM PDT by TLI ( ITINERIS IMPENDEO VALHALLA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

It’s about time this issue received some visibility. I worked for the U.S. Government for almost 30 years and we were never subjected to this idiotic training until that sleaze-bag and womanizer, Wm J. Clinton, had to justify his unspeakable behavior. That’s when all civilian employees of the U.S. Army were mandated to attend POSH (Prevention of Sexual Harassment). I was incensed! I’m still incensed by this garbage even though I retired almost 5 years ago.


15 posted on 09/15/2008 5:50:23 AM PDT by steppinhi (God Bless & Protect Our Troops and their families!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TLI
Bundy did it third. The Stooges did it second. Fatty Arbuckle started it with "The Woman Haters".


From the Stooges' "Woman Haters" episode.

16 posted on 09/15/2008 5:50:44 AM PDT by raybbr (You think it's bad now - wait till the anchor babies start to vote!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
While I like Mike Adams, I don't think that I'd want him working for me.

After attending my "mandated sexual harrasment class" at a former employer, I thanked the (feminist, very difficult, very arrogant) presenter and told her that "thanks to her class, I was even better at sexual harassment than I had been before."

She didn't like it very much, but alas, it didn't get me fired (at that point, I was already leaving so I didn't care). She was likely too lazy to fill out the paperwork. I guess that sexual harrassment only counts if you harrass intelligent, motivated women.

17 posted on 09/15/2008 5:56:55 AM PDT by wbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Such BS exists in my world as a “government employee.”

I salute your effort.

What a waste of taxpayers money and in your case student tuition as well.


18 posted on 09/15/2008 6:00:49 AM PDT by Nextrush (Sarah Palin is the new Ronald Reagan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I like the plans.

Speaking as a white female, or course.


19 posted on 09/15/2008 6:01:51 AM PDT by the OlLine Rebel (Common sense is an uncommon virtue./Technological progress cannot be legislated.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
It happens in Corporate America, too, as many of you well know. In order to inoculate themselves against the ever-present threat of lawsuits by deep-pockets trial lawyers, many large corporates have chosen to force their employees into mandatory "sensitivity training". Of course, there is nothing remotely "sensitive" about holding entire classes of people presumptively guilty for their words or non-physical actions (e.g. - a lusty glance) simply because another person "felt" uncomfortable because of them.

To make one person responsible, regardless of intention for another person's emotions is tyrannical. It is also no business of government. In business, the issue of what behaviors are inappropriate for employees ought to be governed by rational (reasonable person) standards and the needs for efficiency and productivity, rather then by fear of lawsuits, fines, and publicity.

20 posted on 09/15/2008 6:04:47 AM PDT by andy58-in-nh (Somewhere in Illinois, a community is missing its organizer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-50 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson