United Airlines Ban on Girls in Yoga Pants Draws Feminist Outrage

Yoga pants show camel toe and ass crack. Should companies allow women to wear leggings (tights, yoga pants) to work? Are they considered professional attire?

United Airlines forced three very young girls who were children of employees flying free to cover up. In effect, the company’s position is that the girls were representing United and should follow United workplace rules.

But feminist outrage has risen over the incident. Sexually arousing men and boys seems to be the feminist game, although women claim there’s nothing more comfortable than yoga pants.

MSN

United Airlines barred two women from boarding a flight on Sunday morning and required a child to change into a dress after a gate agent decided the leggings they were wearing were inappropriate. That set off waves of anger on social media, with users criticizing what they called an intrusive, sexist policy, but the airline maintained its support for the gate agent’s decision.

The two women, who were about to board a flight to Minneapolis, were turned away at the gate at Denver International Airport. United doubled down on that position, defending the decision in a series of tweets on Sunday.

The incident was first reported on Twitter by Shannon Watts, a passenger at the airport who was waiting to board a flight to Mexico. In a telephone interview from Mexico on Sunday afternoon, Ms. Watts said she noticed two visibly upset teenage girls leaving the gate next to hers. Both were wearing leggings.

Ms. Watts went over to the neighboring gate and saw a “frantic” family with two young girls, one of whom was also wearing leggings, engaged in a tense exchange with a gate agent who told them, “I don’t make the rules, I just enforce them.”

Ms. Watts said the girl’s mother told her the two teenagers had just been turned away because the gate agent said their pants were not appropriate travel attire. The woman had a dress in her carry-on bag that the child was able to pull on over her pants, and the family boarded the flight.

Ms. Watts judged that the two women who were barred from boarding were in their “young teens” and the girl who changed into a dress was 10 or 11.

Ms. Watts described the situation in a series of tweets before her flight to Mexico took off. By the time she landed her tweets had been shared widely, often accompanied by sharp criticism directed at the airline.

United’s public relations team did not respond to a phone call and an email seeking comment on Sunday, but the company seemed to confirm Ms. Watts’s account in a response to her on Twitter, which did little to mollify the concerns of its critics.

In a series of dozens of tweets, the company said the incident was not simply the result of an overzealous gate agent. Instead, it said United Airlines reserved the right to deny service to anyone its employees deemed to be inappropriately dressed.

“In our Contract of Carriage, Rule 21, we do have the right to refuse transport for passengers who are barefoot or not properly clothed,” the company tweeted.

Furthermore, the company said the young women it turned away on Sunday were “pass travelers” — United employees or their dependents who fly standby “on a space available basis,” it explained. It described the arrangement as a “company benefit.”

“There is a dress code for pass travelers as they are representing UA when they fly,” the company tweeted. It added, “Casual attire is allowed as long as it looks neat and is in good taste for the local environment.”

Few critics appeared to be satisfied by that explanation, which also did little to de-escalate a perilous public relations situation for the company. United was the target of scores of angry and mocking tweets on Sunday, including from social media savvy celebrities like the model Chrissy Teigen and the actor LeVar Burton.

By Sunday afternoon, the company’s Twitter account was engaged in a tense back-and-forth with the Academy Award winning actress Patricia Arquette, who posted dozens of angry tweets about the situation.

Employees running United’s Twitter account spent the day walking a public relations tightrope: explaining to angry social media users why the company was not wrong to bar the young women from boarding, while reassuring potential customers that they would not also be barred if they showed up in leggings.

People like to be comfortable when they fly, Ms. Watts said, and leggings and yoga pants have become pretty standard casual attire for women.

“I’m pretty sure yoga pants are a thing,” Ms. Watts said. “They’re part of modern America. They’re a staple, a go-to clothing item.”

I’ll bet the pedophiles lurking on that flight were very upset with United for making those girls cover up. So, I wonder if some of this feminist outrage can be traced back to pedos.

(((George Soros))) Donates $246 Million to “Day without Women” Protesters

GEORGE SOROS, AGE 86, LOOKS LIKE WARMED OVER DEATH.

So-called women’s rights are today nothing but leftist nonsense intended to divide white women from white men.

George Soros does not have our best interests at heart. Anything he’s for we should be against.

Daily Mail Excerpt:

Billionaire businessman George Soros has reportedly given $246 million to multiple groups behind the Day Without a Woman protest.

Conservative think tank Media Research Center says the liberal hedge-investor gave funding to 100 out of the 544 partners supporting the women’s cause between 2010 and 2014.

Contributions were given to organizations such as Planned Parenthood, Human Rights Watch, the Center for American Progress, with the top recipient being the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) who received $37.3million.

he 86-year-old investor is said to have a net worth of $25.2billion.

The Day Without a Woman strike took place on Wednesday, as part of International Women’s Day, where females were encouraged to wear red and not attend work.

Schools across at least four states were closed so staff members can take part in the protest, according to Fox News.

And there’s the ladies who stayed home.

Georgetown U. Prof Wants to Bring Back SLAVERY: He’s a MUZZIE

PROFESSOR JONATHAN BROWN. BEING ENSLAVED BY A MUSLIM IS GREAT. TRY IT. YOU’LL LIKE IT.

A graduate of Georgetown felt compelled to write a letter asking for the good professor’s termination.

Professor Jonathan AC Brown was born an Epicopalian, but became a Muslim. WTF???!!!

Heat Street title: Georgetown Islamic Studies Professor: Slavery OK, So is Non-Consensual Sex

Heat Street

A professor at Georgetown University is teaching his students that men do not need consent to have sex with women, and that slavery is justifiable under Islamic teachings.

Islamic Studies professor Jonathan Brown recently lectured at the International Institute of Islamic Thought, where he shared his alarming beliefs with students in attendance in his lecture, “Islam and the Problem of Slavery.” Freelance writer Umar Lee expressed his shock over the 90-minute lecture, which included explicit endorsements of rape and slavery.

Brown himself uploaded the lecture to YouTube.

According to Lee, Brown’s lecture was supposed to revolve around slavery in Islam, but the lecturer moved its focus to criticize the United States, United Kingdom and China. Brown described slavery in these non-Muslim societies as brutal, which they were, but lauded the historically inhumane practice in Arab lands and Turkey.

“Indeed, according to Brown, slaves in the Muslim world lived a pretty good life,” wrote Lee. “I thought the Muslim community was done with this dishonest North Korean style of propaganda. Obviously not.”

Brown decried the use of prison labor in the United States and highlighted other problems inherent in Western society, but refused to address the abuse of foreign laborers in the Gulf or the ghastly treatment of prisoners in the Middle East. It was a one-sided lecture that glorified his religion while demonizing Western society.

The Islamic Studies professor said that in Muslim societies, “slavery wasn’t racialized,” unlike the United States. Lee points out that this is untrue, given that in the Arab world, black people are referred to as “abeed,” the Arab word for “slave.”

Brown stated that slaves were “protected by Sharia,” omitting the various atrocities committed by slave-owners. Girls and women were forced into the sex trade and their male counterparts were often castrated.

“In general you don’t find the brutality that you see in American slavery,” said Brown, who described the historically common practice as “investments” and “walking venture properties” for slave-owners.

The soft-pedaling and revisionism of historical atrocities is deplorable, to say the least.

Historically, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams conducted warfare against vassal states of the Ottoman Empire to end the Barbary slave trade, in which North African pirates conducted constant raids into European coastal towns to capture men and women for slavery.

Brown defended slavery, stating, “It’s not immoral for one human to own another human” by comparing it to marriage—a quid pro quo arrangement in which both slave and master benefited from the arrangement.

“I don’t think it’s morally evil to own somebody because we own lots of people all around us and we’re owned by people,” said Brown.

A female attendee asked Brown about the permissibility of sex with slaves, to which the professor stated that “Consent isn’t necessary for lawful sex,” and defined consent as a Western concept that emerged with women’s suffrage and female body autonomy. Brown, he said, believes that marital rape was an invalid concept in Islam.

Had Prof. Brown’s words been spoken by a practicing member of any other religion, they would’ve lost their jobs and shunned out of the academic world.

Traitor Brown’s Wikipedia page offers an interesting look at scholarly Islam, as opposed to the shallow “religion of peace” nonsense that the mainstream media present.

I speculate that Brown converted to Islam to carve out a niche for himself in higher education, where he could more easily defend “oppressed” Muslims against Western tyranny. In short, he’s a lefist taking a sneaky route to mix leftist beliefs with religion.

Stockholm Syndrome: The Video That Donald Trump was Talking About Saturday Night at Rally

Watch, even if you normally don’t watch videos. The future of America is laid out for you unless President Trump succeeds in cutting off alien cultures from entering the USA.

Jewish producer Ami Horowitz took a beating from a Muslim to get this 10 minute film made. Kudos to a conservative Jew for exposing the truth.

From the youtube information box:

Published on Dec 12, 2016

Rape and violence has exploded across Sweden due it’s immigration policies. Watch to see what Sweden has done to itself.

The pushback against this film by the MSM is just starting, now that it’s going viral because of President Trump.

Mediate

CNN’s Don Lemon interviewed Ami Horowitz Monday night about his YouTube documentary Stockholm Syndrome and the unexpected uproar it has caused after President Trump egregiously claimed an incident had occurred “[Friday night] in Sweden” after watching a Tucker Carlson segment featuring the doc.

“Let’s talk about the numbers,” Lemon said in reference to Horowitz’s film’s accusation that there was a sharp increase in violent crimes “over the last few years in Sweden” all of which could be traced back to immigrants. “We looked at the stats from the U.S. State Department. Here’s what we learned: Crime rose about 7% from 2015; much of that was non-violent computer fraud and vandalism. In 2015 violent crime would decrease slightly,” Lemon would claim of the facts he had complied. He would continue: “Where did you get your information and did you get the official numbers?”

Horowitz claims that his stats came from the Swedish Brå, an agency under the Ministry of Justice responsible for the reporting on crime trends in Sweden. He also claimed that he was speaking solely of “heavy crime — murder and sexual assault” in terms of those crimes that have seen a dramatic increase, while Lemon turns his argument to the fact that there doesn’t seem to be “a correlation between immigrants and a spike in crime.” He would go further to say that “there is no huge spike in crime there.”

Lemon would then point out that while crime fluctuated between 2006 and 2015 there was no “spike” to speak of. A tense conversation would then ensue where Lemon tried to explain how averages work, while Horowitz, not understanding, continued to argue that there was a spike in crime from 2006 to 2015.

RIP: Twitter Pays Tribute to Norma McCorvey, “Jane Roe” of Roe v. Wade Who Turned Pro-Life

It’s interesting that one Tweeter reports that CNN failed to mention that Norma McCorvey had turned pro-life after decades of working for abortion rights.

Wikipedia

McCorvey’s second book, Won by Love, was published in 1998. She explained her change on the stance of abortion with the following comments:

I was sitting in O.R.’s offices when I noticed a fetal development poster. The progression was so obvious, the eyes were so sweet. It hurt my heart, just looking at them. I ran outside and finally, it dawned on me. ‘Norma’, I said to myself, ‘They’re right’. I had worked with pregnant women for years. I had been through three pregnancies and deliveries myself. I should have known. Yet something in that poster made me lose my breath. I kept seeing the picture of that tiny, 10-week-old embryo, and I said to myself, that’s a baby! It’s as if blinders just fell off my eyes and I suddenly understood the truth—that’s a baby!

I felt crushed under the truth of this realization. I had to face up to the awful reality. Abortion wasn’t about ‘products of conception’. It wasn’t about ‘missed periods’. It was about children being killed in their mother’s wombs. All those years I was wrong. Signing that affidavit, I was wrong. Working in an abortion clinic, I was wrong. No more of this first trimester, second trimester, third trimester stuff. Abortion—at any point—was wrong. It was so clear. Painfully clear.[3]

Shortly thereafter, McCorvey released a statement that affirmed her entrance into the Roman Catholic Church, and she has been confirmed into the church as a full member.[22][23]

Later in life, McCorvey stated that she was no longer a lesbian.[24] On August 17, 1998, she was received into the Roman Catholic church by Father Frank Pavone, the International Director of Priests for Life and Father Edward Robinson in Dallas.[23]

Topless Protests in Argentina Draw Male Stares and Giggles

From slutwalks to the Women’s March on Washington, women with time on their hands are protesting something.

It’s a shitshow, tolerated by white males who have no time to stage a protest because they’re too busy working their asses off to keep the shitshow running.

Times Live

Scores of women took to the streets in Argentina Tuesday in a bare-breasted demonstration of solidarity with women recently confronted by police for going topless on a South Atlantic beach.

The demonstrations in Buenos Aires, in Mar del Plata and Rosario, were prompted by an incident two weeks ago in Necochea, 500 kilometers south of the capital.

Three women in bikini bottoms were ordered by 20 police officers to put on their tops or head out.

Many in Argentina, once one of the world’s wealthiest countries, were stunned.

Now used to struggling with economic woes and corruption, they are increasingly tired of what some see as the authorities’ overreach.

“There is this macho way of thinking that just has to end,” said a protestor named Noelia, 28, who declined to give her family name. “We are the owners of our bodies and we can show our bodies if we like. We are not consumer goods.”

As older men in suits and ties scrambled out of nearby offices during the protest, some stopped to stare. A few laughed or giggled.

“You can’t miss a chance to see a bit of tit, can you?” said one man, aged around 60, to nods from others.

“Get out, man! Get out!” some demonstrators chanted, with slogans painted on their skin in lipstick.

Some of the men took selfies with the demonstrators, perhaps not necessarily in solidarity.

The leftist politician Vilma Ripoll said, “All people want to see tits on television. The real ones bother you.”

Last July, thousands of women took part in topless protests across the country after a woman was kicked out of a public area near the capital for nursing her child, triggering widespread outrage

The white male and only the white male has the power to stop the shitshow dead in its tracks. A general strike by white males would lead not just to inconvenience but to severe consequences to women and nonwhites.

Imagine a world with no white male auto mechanics on duty, no repairmen to respond to breakdowns, no airplane pilots, no truck drivers, and so forth.

Mexican men and a few black males could take up a small part of the slack, but basically everything would stop for the duration of the strike, getting worse as time went on.

Alternatively, if women are oppressed by having to keep their clothes on, then can’t the same thing be said for men?

Let’s make our rallying cry FREE THE DICK!

Let’s start taking it out and giving it some fresh air at school, in restaurans, on street corners, in airports.

FREE THE DICK! Take it out and WAVE IT AT THE PEOPLE.

I’m joking. I hope.

“Submit and Obey:” The TYRANNY of WOMEN Over MEN

The analysis of America today by Eric Peters laid out below has three dimensions:

1. We are slaves to an all-powerful evil government.

2. The bureaucrats who control us are petty, tyrannical women.

3. Sports are a tool of the Deep State used to deflect our attention from our slavery and to dissipate our manly rage, which would otherwise explode in violent rebellion.

Given the obsession with yesterday’s Super Bowl, the timing of Peter’s essay is impeccable.

Excerpt from Eric Peters Autos

These games – a new one to keep people busy almost every day, year-round – are not so much “bread and circuses,” as they are often called. They are the vivification of the fictional Two Minutes’ Hate in Orwell’s 1984. A means by which the passions – the frustrations and anger of men in particular – are diverted and dissipated.

In order that they aren’t directed at anything important.

Such as the ever-increasing control exercised over men by the state.

In red giant stage America, the average man has little meaningful control over his life. He does as he’s told – from driving the speed limit to paying “his” taxes. In the land of individuality, collectivism and conformity is the rule.

He must Submit and Obey. He must never raise his voice to question authority.

This stifling of independent action, punishment of deviation from any official orthodoxy and relentless suppression of independent judgment and self-reliance… this systematic thwarting of a normal man’s inclination to be a man. . . well, the pressure builds.

The movie, Falling Down, captured this brilliantly. Unfortunately for Michael Douglas’ character, he wasn’t interested in “the game.”

The demand that men submit and obey is also hammered into today’s boys – usually by women.

Orwell got one thing wrong. It is not Big Brother.

It is Big Sister.

Everywhere, there are short-haired, pants-suited termagants vested with power; the sort who in a better time would have been spinster librarians and generally harmless. Today they infect bureaucracies such as EPA and DOJ and many others besides.

We encounter them at the doctor’s office and DMV.

The beetle-like little men that Orwell described abound, too. But they tyranny of our times is not a masculine tyranny such as Stalin’s. Note that in the Soviet Union, people were still largely free to partake of petty vices such as booze and cigarettes. Soviet power didn’t limit the size of sodas or force people to wear seat belts. It enforced political conformity only.

Maybe that’s why fuhhhhhhttttttball was never a big deal in the Soviet Union.

America’s tyranny is the tyranny of the elementary school marm over grown up men.

These days, a man can’t even paint his own house without first begging permission from the local Gertrud Schlotz-Klink. . . and if he doesn’t cut his grass when ordered or erects a shed unapproved…

As the essay draws to a conclusion, Peters notes that sports dissipates the male anger and outrage at being lorded over by petty female tyrants.

I’d rather stay in touch with my rage, live in reality, and ignore sports. How to deal with petty tyrants is still a difficult question, one that has no easy answers.

My own inclination is to sabotage the System (legally) every time I can.