На главную
Результаты поиска “Yesallwomen posters for classrooms”
The war on gamers continues | FACTUAL FEMINIST
 
06:01
A major humanitarian group has just come out with a lesson plan for high school students on sexism in video games. It is full of propaganda, vilifies gaming and gamers, and is likely to discourage young women from playing. Does this matter, or is it all just a game? AEI resident scholar Christina Hoff Sommers explains. Watch more of the Factual Feminist https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMw39... Subscribe to AEI's YouTube Channel https://www.youtube.com/user/AEIVideo... Like us on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/AEIonline Follow us on Twitter https://twitter.com/AEI For more Information https://goo.gl/ChiQYD Third-party photos, graphics, and video clips in this video may have been cropped or reframed. Music in this video may have been recut from its original arrangement and timing. In the event this video uses Creative Commons assets: If not noted in the description, titles for Creative Commons assets used in this video can be found at the link provided after each asset. The use of third-party photos, graphics, video clips, and/or music in this video does not constitute an endorsement from the artists and producers licensing those materials. #politics #news #feminism #feminist #games #gaming #gamer #videogames #gamergirl © American Enterprise Institute Partial transcript: “Is Gaming A Boy’s Club?” is the name of a school lesson plan developed by the Anti-Defamation League—ADL for short. The ADL is a well-respected organization that has fought anti-Semitism and racism for decades. As a long-time admirer of the ADL, I am baffled by its sponsorship of such a biased and dogmatic curriculum. The lesson plan advertises itself as meeting standards for inclusion in the Common Core—an influential national curriculum. The entire lesson plan is dedicated to the proposition that video games are a hotbed of sexism and misogyny, and it gives students the message that anyone who dares to suggest that games should be more inclusive can expect to be terrorized by malevolent gamers. Lesson materials include a video and an article by feminist critic Anita Sarkeesian—both are harsh indictments of the world of gaming. That would be fine if she were not the only assigned author. In another part of the lesson plan, the teacher places seven posters around the room—each bearing a statement about video games. Students are then told to attach Post-Its to those they agree with. Three are neutral—for example: “I have played video games” and “I have watched other people play video games.” But four are affirmations about sexism: “I have witnessed sexism in video games,” “I believe video games can perpetuate sexism.” None says anything positive about games—such as, “Gaming is an exciting activity for both women and men,” or “Sexism in video games is exaggerated.”The curriculum also includes a small group discussion on sexism and video games and “additional resources” that focus on—guess what?-- harassment, misogyny, and terror in the culture of video games. The curriculum is not only obsessively one-sided—much it is false, misleading, or exaggerated. Let’s start with the very first sentence. “Video games do not have a good track record when it comes to positively including girls and women.” But on page 3 of the curriculum students learn that women now constitute 48 percent of video game players—up from 40 percent in 2010. An important study has shown that there has been a major demographic shift in the video game industry toward the inclusion of women, but men and women prefer to play different types of games. The world of games is rich and diverse and there is room for everyone. Why give young women the discouraging message that they are not wanted? What about the idea that video games—especially those most popular with men-- perpetuate sexism? The lesson plan promotes this idea, yet offers no evidence. The fact is, as video games have thrived in the U.S., so have women’s freedoms and opportunities and participation in sports and games. As I have said in an earlier videos on gaming, gender critics have to show, not dogmatically assume, that video games make men sexist and unjust—or hold women back in some way. They have not even tried to meet burden of proof. Finally, what about the claim that when women criticize video games, they receive abusive messages or even threats. Unfortunately, this is sometimes true. Feminist critics have received threats, and that’s deplorable. But what the ADL fails to mention is that no one knows who sent them—and males (and females) who challenge the feminist critique receive them too. Milo Yianappoulos, a British writer who defends gamers from the charge of sexism received a letter that contained dead mouse impaled by a razor blade. The war on gamers continues #aei #news #politics #government #education #feminism #feminist
Просмотров: 223732 American Enterprise Institute
Date rape drugs: Facts vs. myths explained | FACTUAL FEMINIST
 
05:20
How common is drug-facilitated sexual assault? Should women really live in constant fear of GHB, or "roofies?" Women are often taught to take precautions at parties, because allegedly, predators are waiting to slip a colorless, odorless, incapacitating substance into their drinks. But is this a serious threat, an urban myth, or something in between? Deputy Factual Feminist Caroline Kitchens examines the statistics behind the stories. Watch more of the Factual Feminist http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=... Subscribe AEI's YouTube Channel https://www.youtube.com/user/AEIVideo... Like us on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/AEIonline Follow us on Twitter https://twitter.com/AEI For more Information https://goo.gl/ChiQYD Third-party photos, graphics, and video clips in this video may have been cropped or reframed. Music in this video may have been recut from its original arrangement and timing. In the event this video uses Creative Commons assets: If not noted in the description, titles for Creative Commons assets used in this video can be found at the link provided after each asset. The use of third-party photos, graphics, video clips, and/or music in this video does not constitute an endorsement from the artists and producers licensing those materials. © American Enterprise Institute Partial transcript: Ladies, have you been told not to drink the punch at parties? Have you asked a friend to watch your drink because you’re afraid to leave it alone, even for a moment? Women are often taught to take these precautions, because there are supposedly predators waiting to slip a colorless, odorless, incapacitating substance into our drinks. How common is drug-facilitated sexual assault? Should women really live in constant fear of roofies? That’s coming up next on the Factual Feminist. Hi, I’m Caroline Kitchens, in for Christina Hoff Sommers, who will return next week. Last month, a story about a predatory fraternity at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee made headlines. After a Tau Kappa Epsilon party, three women became severely intoxicated and were taken to the hospital. All three of these women had been marked with red X’s on their hands when they arrived at the party. That’s all it took for accusations of a color-coded date-rape drug conspiracy to unfold. Finally, Ashe Schow at the Washington Examiner looked at the facts. She found that there was no evidence that the X’s had anything to do with labeling women for the date rape drug. At least one woman marked with a red X mentioned in a Journal Sentinel article had multiple drinks and didn’t end up hospitalized. As for the drugs? Police did find marijuana and Adderall when they searched the fraternity house. But no evidence of date rape drugs ever turned up. This story is not unique. Panic and dubious allegations about the date-rape drug are rampant. Everything from lip gloss to nail polish to coasters has been invented to protect women from rapists armed with roofies. But the evidence does not match the hype. In 2005, forensic scientists in the United Kingdom tested blood and urine for various drugs in more than 1,000 cases where drug-facilitated sexual assault was suspected. The scientists found that alcohol was the most commonly used substance, and it was usually consumed voluntarily. Only 21 of the cases—about 2%-- could be classified as potential drug-facilitated sexual assault cases. But even in these cases, the researchers warned that they couldn't determine whether or not the drugs were taken voluntarily. Numerous other studies from around the world have come to the same conclusion. An Australian study of 101 suspected cases found no toxicological evidence that a sedative had been added any drinks. The vast majority of suspected cases involve high levels of alcohol consumption and sometimes illicit drug use. But there is no evidence that covert drink spiking is widespread. A 2009 study in the British Journal of Criminology proclaimed that date rape drugs are largely an urban myth. But when the researchers spoke with college women, they found that their perception of the risk of being drugged did not match the reality. More than half of the British students surveyed said they personally know someone whose drink has been spiked. Students believed that date-rape drugs were more likely to lead to sexual assault than being drunk or walking alone in a dangerous area at night. The researchers concluded that students often “mistakenly linked sickness, blackouts and dizziness to poisoning by a stranger—when it was likely to be caused by excessive alcohol consumption.” So what does this all mean? Calling date rape drugs a “myth” may not be right. These drugs do exist, and there are some cases in which women are drugged and sexually assaulted. Watching over your drinks at the bar and abstaining from fraternity jungle juice might still be a good idea. But a reality check is in order. Date rape drugs: Fact vs myths explained #aei #feminism
Просмотров: 153304 American Enterprise Institute
Your freedom of speech on campus is under attack | FACTUAL FEMINIST
 
05:15
Are America’s institutions of higher learning are becoming hostile environments for freedom of speech? Do students lose their freedom of expression when they enter a public institution of higher learning? The Factual Feminist examines recent encroachment on students' freedoms in the name of protecting women. Some footage by Foundation for Individual Rights in Education http://www.thefire.org/ Watch other Factual Feminist episodes: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list... Subscribe AEI's YouTube Channel https://www.youtube.com/user/AEIVideo... Like us on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/AEIonline Follow us on Twitter https://twitter.com/AEI For more Information https://goo.gl/ChiQYD Third-party photos, graphics, and video clips in this video may have been cropped or reframed. Music in this video may have been recut from its original arrangement and timing. In the event this video uses Creative Commons assets: If not noted in the description, titles for Creative Commons assets used in this video can be found at the link provided after each asset. The use of third-party photos, graphics, video clips, and/or music in this video does not constitute an endorsement from the artists and producers licensing those materials. © American Enterprise Institute Partial Transcript: In its April Fools’ Day 2013 spoof edition, the University of Alaska campus newspaper, the Sun Star, announced that the school was going to construct a new building in the shape of a vagina to “honor the schools 59 percent female demographic.” The story included a photo of a gynocentric construction taken from the 1998 Robin Williams movie Patch Adams . Campus gender activists were not amused. Guess what happened? That’s coming up on the Factual Feminist. The coordinator of Women’s and Gender Studies department, Jensine Anahita, was deeply offended by the April Fools’ spoof. She filed harassment charges, and accused the student paper of contributing to the “rape culture.” For nearly a year, the editor of the Sun Star (and author of the vagina building satire) Lakeidra Chavis and her staff were under a Title IX investigation cloud. The students were eventually exonerated. But the Gender Studies Coordinator’s complaint should not have taken months to investigate. Students don’t lose their freedom of expression when they enter a public institution of higher learning. The First Amendment remains in full force. In fact, the Supreme Court has ruled that there is no place where “the vigilant protection of constitutional freedoms” is more vital. Justice William O. Douglas, a great champion of liberal causes, put it this way in 1952: “Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions. It is the one un-American act that could most easily defeat us." Why un-American? Because in our free and open democracy—there is no Ministry of Truth. The founding fathers felt so strongly about that they not only enshrined freedom of expression in the Bill of Rights, they put it first on the list. There is no right not to be offended, challenged, or made uncomfortable. In fact the Court has also ruled emphatically that jokes, satire, and parody are a critical category of protected speech. Does that mean that everything is permitted—even verbal harassment of other students? No, the Court has recognized that sexual harassment can threaten a person’s equal right to an education. But it has set a high standard for what counts as peer harassment in an educational setting: to be actionable discrimination, sexual harassment has to be “so severe, pervasive, and so objectively offensive that it can be said to deprive the victims of access to the educational opportunities or benefits provided by the school.” The vagina building joke in the Alaska student newspaper hardly qualifies.” America’s institutions of higher learning are becoming hostile environments for freedom. As the 2014 term began, a University of Missouri fraternity member dressed up as a Teletubby and paid a visit to an outdoor sorority rally and danced around near where the girls were standing. Concerned they might have a serious harassment issue on their hands, campus busybodies turned the Teletubby in to Title IX Coordinator Linda Bennet. To her credit, Bennet determined that his behavior did not constitute a Title IX violation. But at the same time, she sent around a memo warning students that they would be breaking the law if they engaged in activities such as telling off color jokes or making insulting sounds. Students were advised to police one another for infractions and report the names of violators to the authorities. This is not only madness. As Justice Douglas said, it is subversive and un-American. In our colleges and universities, campus officials are quietly amending the Constitution and creating their own definition of harassment and, free expression. #aei #news #politics #government #education #feminism #feminist
Просмотров: 71641 American Enterprise Institute