1. I rather think that this is “black knighting”: payback for the use of the same laws to make meeting a womyn’s eyes “sexual harassment”.

   1. It is stupid nonetheless.. specially when self-defense is what you are screwing with.

2. Would you object to a “whites only” or “no jews allowed” self defense class?

   The “Glendale Commission on the Status of Women” is sponsoring the classes. It does not sound like a very inclusive organization to me. This is Alinsky Rules in action. As long as people use identity politics, expect identity politics to be used against them.

   The people that objected offered a reasonable compromise: “Crouch doesn’t discount the value of classes designed for women but recommended the city offer them for men as well. “Just because you come out of the womb with a penis doesn’t mean you have a black belt in karate,” he said.”

   1. The issue is not that they did not have a class for whinny bitches with testicles but that they cancelled a class for women. So they must be very proud of keeping women from maybe learning a technique or two to keep them alive.

      1. Men and boys are equally entitled to learning a technique or two to keep them alive – especially when a government entity is using taxpayer money to teach a life-saving technique or two.

3. Sounds like blatant sex discrimination to me. If the government, here the City of Glendale, is providing taxpayer-funded self-defense classes for women, then of course the City needs to provide self-defense classes for men as well. Of course, the City would never have considered providing the classes to only men.

4. So what you are both saying is that Men and Women are basically the same when it comes to defense needs? Let me ask El Guapo since I figure he is a male: What is your defensive strategy (non-weapons) while wearing a bra, pantyhose and high heels? And yes, let’s have your normal upper body strength reduced some 40%.

   1. That’s not at all what I said (actually “wrote”).

      In fact, there is nothing in what I wrote above that jibes your claim that it said “Men and Women are basically the same when it comes to defense needs.”

      For example, most men and boys are not as strong, in shape, or as skilled in fighting as famed physical trainer Jill Michaels of The Biggest Loser, or MMA champions Cristiane “Cyborg” Justino or Ronda “Rowdy” Rousey. Similarly, there are women who are not as strong, in shape, or as skilled in fighting as certain men.

      All I wrote was that if a government entity is going to provide self-defense classes for women and girls, then it needs to also provide self-defense classes for men and boys, especially when the latter pairing are much more likely to be physically attacked than the former pairing – albeit both groups are more likely to be physically attacked by men and not by women, against whom they need to defend themselves.

      1. So, either everybody is equally served at the same time or nobody is?

         1. By government programs? yes. There was this whole thing about this a few decades ago, some kind of movement about civil rights. NCFM didn’t say self defense classes including/only for women must be banned, they said that offering a service (in this case, gender specific self defense classes) to only one gender is discriminatory and therefore illegal. Whether this was rectified by adding male only classes or cancelling female classes is irrelevant.

         2. Of course. It would be the same if the City provided self-defense classes for only Caucasians. Either include people of color as well, such as Hispanics, Blacks, Asians, Indian, etc., or don’t have any classes at all.

5. “Just because you come out of the womb with a penis doesn’t mean you have a set of balls”. There, fixed it for him.

   1. By that logic no man with “balls” ever has reason to pay for private firearms training, or bother with gun ownership at all. Clearly, self defense training, like guns, are just compensation for a lack of sufficient genitalia. Gun bloggers have a term for this kind of thinking… like a somedude’s law or something…

6. And once again we have the beauty of politically correct. We are sooo busy making sure to be PC and include everybody to be tolerant and fair, that all that happens is somebody is always pissed off that they didn’t get something so therefore they have to take away something from somebody else, and now, nobody gets anything.
   I’m female, and I got more balls than that bunch of bitchy little girls!

   1. “And once again we have the beauty of THE LAW. We are sooo busy making sure to be LAWFUL and include everybody to be tolerant and LAWFUL, that all that happens is somebody is always BREAKING THE LAW they have to take away something from somebody else, and now, nobody gets anything FOR FREE.” -fixed it for you.

      The fact that you miss the point entirely and resort to emasculation indicates that you have about as much of a valid argument as the people who accuse gun owners of having small penises.

      All I’m doing here is trying to hold this blog to the standards it usually applies to it’s primary topic.

      1. I guess you missed the “Malum Prohibitum” and “Malum in Se” posts.
         Quick reminder:
         

         Maybe you being so close to DC is the problem.

         1. Au contraire, now we’re closer to the root of the issue. While expecting that the government will abide by the laws that constrain it is all well and good, that’s not why NCFM or I are against the policy. The fact that the disparity is illegal is not why we’re pissed off, it’s just advantageous.

            To deny services based on gender is sexist. If you honestly believe that sexism against men is a-okay, that’s fine, as long as you admit it.

            There really isn’t any way to get at the end of this, from your position, without ultimately asserting that the men who would have benefited from these classes but didn’t deserved what they got. Robbed, injured, raped, killed.

            I don’t think so, therefore to deny men the means to protect themselves is very much Malum in Se.

            1. Great point IK.

            2. I really do not know how to respond to this in a polite manner and not laughing my ass off.
               Let’s begin by separating you and the rest of NCFM from the concept of Men, Manhood and Males in general as you are indeed poor representations.

               Now life is sexist, get used to it. Why, because men and women are different in case you have missed that obvious point. Let’s take a bit of real life into account: Women are easier targets of violent crime than men. That is not sexist but a physiological truth. Nine out of ten victims of rape are women so that on its own sets something called priority. Since resources are limited, you put them to use where they are needed the most; that is called logic.
               I did a quick Google search, maybe all of 15 seconds and found out that there is actually a place in Glendale where martial arts classes are offered for males: the YMCA. Holy shit that was difficult to find…nobody would have thought about it!
               So, if there is an actual and very pressing reason for a male in Glendale to learn some basic self-defense, he can get it quick and solve the problem without having to resolve to being a whinny bitch and beg for it.
               Face it guys, you are Feminists (using the political sense of it) with male genitalia. You are the parents of Pajama Boy (I’d be forced to imagine that conception was made via artificial insemination) and whatever noble ideas the organization had at the beginning, they got diluted in a cup of hot chocolate and smell like a basket of potpourri.
               You were never interested in the equality of the all-female self-defense class in Glendale, you just wanted to be noticed in the news and tell the other chapeters “Hey! Look at us, we are butch!”

               And as for the idea of this blog, it is simple: you may be male or female, but YOU DEAL WITH THE SHIT. YOU DON’T WAIT FOR SOMEBODY TO DO IT FOR YOU.
               You truthfully need our help? You got it. You come to bemoan how life is so unfair and it doesn’t treat you right? GTFO. Donna g does appear to have more testicular fortitude then the lot of you.
               Done with the Trolls

            3. There’s no reply button on your last comment so I’ll just have to reply to myself. Let’s work through your argument point by point, allow me to paraphrase.

               First: “You’re not man enough to be correct.” Well, other than not refuting anything I’ve said, way to stoop to anti-gunner levels of futility. Arguments are validated by their merits, not their source.

               Second: “Women are raped more, ergo deserve more service.” That statistic is based on a definition of rape that precludes most male victims and female perpetrators, that being the forced penetration model. When all forcible sexual assault is considered, the numbers of male and female victims are roughly equal. Meanwhile, as stated above by Guapo, Men are the majority of victims of violence in general. If I believed in prioritizing based on likelihood logic would dictate prioritizing men.

               Third: “Men could have gotten classes elsewhere anyway.” And women couldn’t? Why are women too weak and stupid to do it for themselves too? They aren’t, of course, so let’s stop treating them that way. In the meantime, equality under law is no trivial matter.

               Fourth: “This is such a trivial matter you obviously suck.” And if this was the only thing NCFM, or the entirety of the MRM had done recently you might have a point. In actuality this is just one example of the activities of a single organization which itself is involved in gender equity in colleges, the courts and society. If a small gun rights group lobbied to repeal an ordinance banning people from carrying in a post office (a trivial thing) would you be telling them to man up and take on the NFA?

               Fifth: “Men should exert some agency and find classes on their own.” Well lookie here we actually agree. It just so happens that people are so set on coddling women with public money that the more achievable goal is to add a men only class. Since men are responsible for paying most of those tax monies, they might as well make use of those classes instead of paying for both their own AND others.

               And finally, a subset of the fourth point, “You’re just like the feminists.” a statement of profound ignorance to say the least. Feminists lobby for more government programs that benefit women at the expense of men. MRA’s lobby for any such thing to be eliminated, either through equalization or elimination. As a libertarian I prefer the latter, but as an MRA it’s sometimes expedient to settle for the former. It’s time women accepted some equal responsibilities to go with their equal rights.

               1. You were bitching what Daddy Government did not give you Coed classes and blocked classes for those who are in more need. I don’t give two craps about your exalted ideas, but that your meddling actually left women in possible danger is unacceptable.
                  And that makes you and your group jackasses at the same level of Shannon Watts, Sarah Brady, Ladd Everett and Josh Sugarmann…you know, people that rather see people killed than actually reducing crime as long as their ideas are maintained.

                  As I said… Done with trolls, specially whinny ones. Go seek attention somewhere else.

7. I was going to post something else, but Donna made a pretty good summation.

   1. Thank you sir! It’s a perfect example of a lesson I pray my boys learn: it’s a lot easier to piss and whine about something, than it is to look for and be part of a solution.

8. […] Go read this article… […]

9. And another thing: the class was sponsored by the Commission on the Status of Women, therefore women. My bitch is not that NCFM is pissed there is no men’s class, as we ALL have a God given right and duty to protect ourselves and our families, but that they just bitched that they didn’t get one. Get a group of willing students together, not just some cry baby keyboard commandos, and put together a class. Hell, come to St. Louis. I hold a second degree black in Kajukenbo, and am perfectly qualified to instruct men, women, and children, as I do currently three days a week. And we even do so for FREE to anyone willing to show up and get hit!
   This whole brouhaha is kinda the same thing with holidays. Just cuz you don’t celebrate Christmas, doesn’t mean you get to take my celebration away from me!
   Your right to shake your fist stops where my nose begins, bitch!

   1. Sorry Donna, but you got your facts wrong. Oh, those pesky facts!

      The class was being put on – or “sponsored” or “paid for,” etc. – by the City of Glendale because the “City of Glendale Commission on the Status of Women” is a City of Glendale entity – not some independent, private women’s group, on City of Glendale property. Therefore, it was a City of Glendale service, and a government entity like the City of Glendale cannot discriminate based on sex, race, religion, etc.

      Similarly, if there was a City of Glendale Commission on the Status of People of Color, the City’s Commission on the Status of People of Color could not have self-defense class – on or off City property, which excluded adult and/or minor Caucasians.

      Your right to free speech allows you to argue that the City of Glendale (or St. Louis) can legally provide self-defense classes to 8-12 year-old boys but deny the same to 8-12 year-old girls – or vice versa, but that does not mean that such gender-exclusive classes for children are legal.

      1. In one dark & stormy night in the ocean, a ship is suddenly in trouble. For reasons unknown, it started to take on water in the engine room stopping all power and now it is sinking. The captain addresses the crew and passengers about the problem and gives the usual order: To the lifeboats! Women and Children first!”

         Five minutes later, El Guapo arrives at the bridge and demands to talk with the captain.
         “I demand you stop the evacuation of the ship!” says El Guapo.
         “What in the name of Jumping Frogs are you talking about? We are sinking in case you have not heard.” replies the captain.
         “It is illegal for you to evacuate on the basis of gender and or age. You must ensure that there is equal representation in every lifeboat.”
         “Other than the fact that is stupid, that would take hours and we only have minutes.”
         “Captain, the law is the law and it has to be enforced. Discrimination cannot be permitted under any circumstance!”
         “Even if we all drown?”
         “The law is the law.”

         The Captain stares at El Guapo, sighs, and then calls his First Officer.

         “Mr. Jones, get two crewmen and accompany this gentleman to the port side deck.”
         “Yes sir.”
         “Once all of you get there, toss his sorry ass overboard. Make sure he is holding onto something heavy and then return to the evacuation.”
         “Yes sir!”

         (And done with another whinny droll)

   2. Perhaps I missed the point. The problem isn’t separate classes it is that the classes are paid for by tax payer money. These funds are collected from both sexes so the should be spent the same way. I also hold a 2nd Menkyo ranking in Sanjuryu (Karate & Jujitsu) and we often hold self defense classes for anyone desiring them. We do it for free, no taxpayer funds (or personal payments) are involved. How bout both sides here knock off the BS name calling & get a life?

      1. I have no problem for Pajama Boys to complain and obtain a class for Men only or coed. My problem is that they purposefully killed a self defense class to lower their estrogen level.

         PS:

         How bout both sides here knock off the BS name calling & get a life?

         Last I checked, I am the one paying for this blog.

10. Point is, you can’t have a male-only anything, whether public or private without some whiney women’s group picketing. I don’t care one way or the other, but it ought to be fair.

11. Now you’re confusing morality with legality.

    It is moral, ethical, and honorable, to live by “Women and children first!”

    It is illegal to use tax payer dollars, especially as a government entity using government resources, to deny a gender-neutral equivalent service from someone, based solely on their gender. This is official sex-segregation combined with a discriminatory denial of equal access.

    Nor is the legal hurdle solved with a gruff growl of, “Man up, Cupcake, and grow a pair — you’re a GUY and do not need any help learning to defend yourself, regardless of health, history, or disability!” Nor is that hurdle overcome by saying, “But, there’s PRIVATE self defense courses offered you can use!”, even if those courses are free. (Now, if the reason the government intervened and offered female-only classes was because there were literally NO classes for females offered, but were for males, that would be arguably permissable.)

    Nope, the hurdle can only be overcome by offering equal access to opportunity – either the government offer males a comparable opportunity at a comparable cost and bother (and that can be via mixed classes; the data indicates that, generally speaking, males _do_not_ suffer the same disadvantages in such classes, because they DON’T hold back from asserting themselves physically in a physical setting if females are present – if anything, the opposite is true), or the government offers no sex-segregated classes at all.

    For the record, I _support_ self defense classes aimed at women, including the availability of single sex class settings (it’s too well documented that a significant percentage of females are conditioned against assertiveness, especially in the presense of males – females who fall into that group simply don’t get the full benefit – if any at all – from a mixed setting defense class that they would in a sex-segregated one.)

12. The entire point is that it’s ridiculous to cancel the class…that’s why people forced it to be canceled,

    I know what you’re thinking: Wha? Come again?

    Think of it this way…if someone held an “all men” defense class would people gripe over that? Yep. And it’s that very fact that makes people want to point out the inequality that an all women’s class is ok (and should be ok) but one advertised as being specifically for men (which should be just as ok) would not be ok. Men and women are different, it should be ok to have material and classes tailored to each. And preemptively: no, that is not “separate but equal”. That was law-mandated separation. This is people doing something separate if they want to. Big difference.

    However, it is unfortunate that such a passive-aggressive form of protest ended up harming a perfectly good self defense class. I’m not saying it’s right, only that it’s predictable and easily understood.

13. […] the second time this month” Yup. The Boys of NCFM are at it demonstrating once again that politics trump safety.  As one of their now banned trolls […]

Comments are closed.