Dear Mr. Bennett,
It has recently come to my attention that a number of websites that address issues affecting the lives of men and boys, including avoiceformen.com, have been targeted as “hate sites” by your company. In this I am referring to one of your products, Norton Internet Security.
As I have had confirmed from multiple sources, individuals that attempt to access this site though your screening software are given an “access denied” message, along with the claim that avoiceformen.com is a “known hate site.”
Your customers are given no supporting information or rationale for such a listing, and no immediate option to override the warning and proceed according to their own will; just the simple invective of being painted as a hate organization.
Given this information, I thought it only fitting to write you publicly to say thank you.
As someone who I am quite sure is familiar with internet marketing, you are no doubt aware of the “Streisand Effect,” a term coined after singer Barbara Streisand sought to have images of her home removed from the internet. Naturally, given the intractable nature of the medium, her efforts were rewarded only by a spectacular proliferation of the very images she sought to sequester from public view.
Now, the decision to target avoiceformen.com, and label it as a hate group, is very likely to be significantly below your pay grade, whether the decision came from outside political forces, or simply from an enthusiastic and ideological low level manager. Either way, responsibility is at the top, and so appreciation should likewise be afforded in that direction.
We have little concern over traffic here, as avoiceformen.com is a very robust, well-traveled site. The benefit you are providing for us is profound, nonetheless. Our regular users will find their way to the site, primarily by not using your products. But your labeling us as a hate group will (and has) caused people to come investigate for themselves.
What they find when they get here is a highly diverse group of men and women, of all races, ethnicities and nationalities, of varying sexual orientation and of different religions and lack of religion, all bound together in the cause of human rights.
They find good people, working together out of concern for what is happening to our boys, who are falling out of education at alarming rates, and subsequently out of the work force. What they find are people who are concerned about the rising rate of male suicide and unemployment, about injustices men face in family courts, and about children who are suffering the absence of their fathers.
They look at our editorial board and they find individuals like Erin Pizzey, the founder of the world’s first shelter for abused women, and many other esteemed individuals who dedicate their lives to finding comprehensive solutions to very serious social problems. And they find a spirit of camaraderie and compassion that would be very difficult to nurture in an environment of hate.
In other words, they find that Norton Symantec has lied to them.
There have been some that have suggested that as the founder and publisher of avoiceformen.com that I should avail myself to your appeal mechanism, and seek to have this site removed from your list of hate groups.
I think not.
First, it is not in my personal nature, or worthy of this organization to go hat in hand to corporate tyrants obsequiously pleading to be spared their defamation. But much more importantly, your efforts to mislead your customers not only leads more people to this website — and our message of compassion for men and boys — but also paints a clear picture of the unsavory actors pulling strings under your nose to do their bidding. These happen to be the same kinds of ideologues causing many of the problems we seek to ameliorate.
So the current arrangement is a win across the board for us. And for that I offer my thanks.
Paul Elam, publisher, A Voice for Men
Tags: Norton Symantec, Steve Bennett
660 Posts in Total
donations either one-time or on a monthly subscription basis.
If you don't have paypal, check out the other options.
If you want to get some merchandise and sponsor us at the same time, consider the AVfM store.
Peter Wright (Tawil):
Bewildered:
Mike Jakermen (@MikeJakermen):
Sanguifer:
Roderick Roderick:
Lucian Vâlsan:
Norton sucks. I’ve lost count of how many personal computers I’ve uninstalled it from.
Also, Norton is supposed to protect your computer from viruses. When did they get in the practice of censoring websites for content and politics?
Isn’t that why we have “parental controls?” Aren’t most grown adults capable of exercising free will and navigating away from pages we find offensive? Why is Norton deciding for its customers what they will allow them to read?
What virus is some Norton feminist/white knight hack worried about customers contracting from AVFM and NCFM? The truth? I suspect the truth is a very dangerous virus to the person(s) who did this.
Heaven forbid the slaves learn to read.
This. Norton’s terrible. They desperately want to reclaim the early 2000′s before better and cheaper software was released.
They’re basically the NBC of virus scanning programs
Norton’s terrible. It’s incredibly obtrusive and bloated software. It’s slowed down the performance on every machine I’ve ever used it on to the point where they’re unusable.
Their stock’s been in the toilet for the past four years as well. One of the reasons they appointed this joker from GE as a turnaround expert.
Slaves learn to read!?! Well, there goes the plantation.
A friend of mine is an I.T. guy for a local utility company. He told me that many of these computer virus companies invent viruses then sell people the anti-virus. Another words they create the need for their own existence. Sounds a little tinfoil hat to me. But for some reason it sounds very familiar.
It’s not tinfoil hat at all but it also isn’t something that reputable anti-virus companies engage in to my knowledge.
What happens is that a company creates a virus that infects your computer. It may even install an icon on your desktop for the anti-virus company that created the virus.
This virus often prevents you from accessing the internet, but you can use the icon to get the software–for a fee of course. Now the company has your credit card information and has only disabled or hidden the virus. It may also download more viruses on your computer and gather information from it.
A running joke amongst IT professionals it that you can’t get a virus on your computer with Norton installed because Norton simply doesn’t leave room for a virus.
If you need protection for your computer, Windows Essential Defender (which comes free with Windows 7) is good enough.
Internet security suites, in general, are a bad idea. Too much bundled together that not only causes conflicts between program components, but that also overloads memory to the point where crashes are a regular occurrence. For Windows users, it’s far better to simply enable Windows firewall and then add a dedicated anti-virus program that protects solely against viruses and malware. If content management and access control is your concern, there are plenty of third-party vendor products that work just as well as an integrated security suite, but at a fraction of the cost and without the associated hassles.
And yes, Norton does indeed suck, big time. The very first thing I’ve done with the last two Windows laptops I’ve bought that have come bundled with Norton ISS is to uninstall it.
I ditched my Norton Antivirus protection some months ago. It’s basically an anti-virus program that behaves like a virus. There are better free anti virus programs available on the web.
Norton has always sucked, I’ve been deleting it from my computers for a long time.
Unfortunately the only way to truly eliminate this abusive controlling resource-hog of a program is format the hard drive.
After uninstalling, run regedit32.exe and you’ll find your computer’s registry riddled with Norton references, and it will still be on your hard drive.
It’s worse than any virus. It also doesn’t surprise me that Norton has taken to censorship.
A registry cleaner will get rid of all the Norton residue.
Wow. When I next update my A/V software I plan to switch from Norton to another provider – can anyone recommend a good company? McAfee, maybe? What if men (and women) started to switch on a large scale?
Given tthat he ratio of software selling prices to the marginal cost of provision is so high, Norton would soon sit up and take notice.They’re really shot themselves in the foot here. Good news indeed for AVfM.
Try avast!, Mike.
Never had any problems with it so far, and you can download a free version to check it out first.
Here! Here! Avast, I’ve used and found it to be sound. Norton is not the product it’s cracked up to be.
AVG:
http://www.avg.com
There is a free version that I used to install on all my home computers.
I would recommend installing Linux on your computers though.
Yep. Avast or AVG (which i use) crush the two “big names” (mcafee and norton)
Why not just the free “Microsoft Security Essentials”? The virus checker is as good as any.
Well before ditching MS Windows for good last year Avast was one of the best out there – it is not as clunky as McAffee or Norton and also has an excellent free version as well as paid for products. http://www.avast.com/free-antivirus-download
McAfee sucks just as badly as Norton (and it’s also the U.S. DoD’s ISS of choice. ‘Nuff said).
As I mentioned in response to Tara Palmatier, if you’re a Windows user, just enable Windows firewall and then install an AV program (one that’s strictly AV/anti-malware, not a full internet security suite). Not meaning to plug any products here, but one that I’ve used for the last couple of years on my Windows machines is F-Secure. Compact, efficient, unobtrusive, and runs in the background (and also, interestingly voted in 2012 by Internet Security magazine as among the top five vendors of internet security products).
Alternatively, if, like me, you’re primarily a Linux/MAC OSX user, Clam Antivirus (ClamAV) is an open source, free AV program that almost never has issues (I haven’t tried it on a Windows machine, but I think there’s a downloadable Windows version available).
What these products have in common, unlike Norton and McAfee, is that they concern themselves only with malicious code, not content and access control, something that should be left entirely up to the system owner and/or individual end-user.
I replied below…Avast.
I work in the IT field and, as others have stated, Norton is a joke and I know of not a single professional that doesn’t grind his or her teeth when they see a machine with it installed.
Follow the instructions I laid out below and install Avast. But make a cup of coffee…Norton does not like being removed from a system.
Emsisoft Anti-Malware. They’re a small group of developers who can’t afford to pay for the main stream testers, so few have heard of them. But those who have tested it for free, have found that it has higher detection rates than virtually every other anti-malware program out there. It has 2 different signature scanners and the Mamutu behavior blocker, for catching zero-day threats and other illicit operations, plus a dangerous site blocker and numerous updates every day, including regular program updates. Despite this combined protection, it is surprisingly light, (though still a little heavy), on system resources. They also offer reduced prices, for multi-year subscriptions and have excellent customer service. Sorry to practically advertise for them here, but I’ve used it for three years with very few issues and an extremely clean, well protected pc as a result.
Both AVG and Avira are good. Both have free versions and the option to upgrade to a paid Premium version.
I wouldn’t use AVG. Do a search for “AVG Blue Screen of Death” and you’ll see why.
I’m a longtime, happy user of AVG, put it on my computer and computers of family members. I’m also a pretty heavy gamer, and built my own machine, so I pay very close attention to latency and performance.
AVG is so lightweight, so intuitive, and so non-intrusive, that I can’t understand why anyone would dislike it.
I use Avast on my windows machines, and ProtectMac on the Apples.
Dumped Semantic from my work network many years ago it interfered with virtually everything and slowed our workflow to a crawl , awful stuff, thats why they give away 6 months of if free with new pc’s hoping you will pay money for it afterwards.
ESET NOT32 also pretty good. You can try that one also. there are free trial version available from their website.
One thing i can’t get my head around … !! They are blocking men’s rights sites when men are the major customers of their product … !!
Oh man.. !! This is excellent …. FTSU on Resonance …. !!!
Many leaders in the global “human rights” industry deceptively use that term as a cover for their anti-rights (and frequently anti-human) social engineering agendas. Norton seems to hold to the formula that “everybody has human rights, but some groups have more human rights than others.”
This is what happens when members of the smug ultra-elite band together and fund NGOs that shape global policy that is then stealthily imposed on national political bodies.
It is time for elected public servants in localities to nullify (and interposition themselves against) the federal (violating the sovereignty of we the people) and international (UN treaties) agendas promoted by unelected bureaucrats that deprive us of our liberties.
Norton needs to reform itself or it needs to lose customers. Pick one, Norton. Get honest or get lost.
Market forces will hurt Norton. You just have to scoff when Norton’s name is mentioned. It doesn’t require explanation. The gravytrain virus will work its evil magic.
Norton is also the firm whose CEO publicly stated, eight or so years ago, that all hacking, even for purposes of trying to determine vulnerabilities in products and develop mitigation strategies accordingly (i.e., “white hat” hacking), should be a criminal offense punishable by jail time. That’s when I swore that I’d never have anything to do with that company ever again, under any circumstances (their products already sucked then and I already refused to by them, but that move on the CEO’s part sealed their fate with me).
Norton is also the firm whose CEO publicly stated, eight or so years ago, that all hacking, even for purposes of trying to determine vulnerabilities in products and develop mitigation strategies accordingly (i.e., “white hat” hacking), should be a criminal offense punishable by jail time.
Simply because they just can’t provide the required security, so they are afraid of hackers and hateful to them and to their talent. So they just want to ban their activity. What a moron ….. !!
Seems pretty much like a feminist to me ….. !!
When you can’t fight intellectually just squeeze the throat of the opposition….. !!! Plain Feminist … !
Simply because they just can’t provide the required security, so they are afraid of hackers and hateful to them and to their talent. So they just want to ban their activity. What a moron ….. !!
Yup. The primary mission of any internet security software vendor, especially one that touts its AV product, is to stay constantly on top of emerging and changing threats. Obviously the Laurel and Hardy of internet security software (McAfee and Norton) are failing at this. In fact, any AV software that is still based on virus definitions (as are both McAfee and Norton’s products) rather than heuristics, is completely obsolete and ineffective.
Personal boycott of Norton products + recommendation against aforementioned to all friends, family + fellow freedom fighters.
radfemhub is a love site? WTF?
I wonder if radfemhub is blocked by this Norton filter.
They are not. We checked.
Methinks there be a subject for a follow-up article somewhere in there.
Surprise, surprise. I’d also be willing to bet that if there’s an organization of female paedophiles out there that’s the equivalent of NAMBLA, their website isn’t blocked either.
Well, they might be blocked if they express intolerant views against bestiality. That is the next politically correct big thing. You think I’m joking?
how about http://cherryblossomlife.com/ a love site as well no doubt?
Well, they do love to hate..
Probably the only thing that makes them tingle, come to think of it.
This act of Norton’s + Paul’s expose are already leading to a spontaneous boycott, anyway.
Well if someone could hit a franchise of the estabishment in question which have Wifi and do a test. Since that business does not operate up here in the Great White North I can’t help you out.
I just cancelled by auto reup of Norton on a couple of my laptops and PC’s in the house. All of my other stuff has AVG or is OS.
I just cancelled by auto reup of Norton on a couple of my laptops and PC’s in the house.
And I’ll bet you’ve already noticed that the performance on all of your machines has improved greatly since then.
Sure did feeriker. I have a question for you.
I find AVG a little cumbersome as well. In your opinion can I de-install AVG and use Windows Essential Defender.
I used AVG for a number of years and found it becoming increasingly clunky. You might like to try the free version of Avira. It is unintrusive and does not seem to slow things down. The virus signature files update daily and apart from a splash screen at each update you hardly know its there.
Try ESET SMART SECURITY … or ESET NOD 32. Free trial Version available on their website.
It’s worth a shot. I’ve noticed that many of the once “top-shelf” solutions that used to be effective have become clunky, expensive, bug-laden, and ultimately unusable. ZoneAlarm and Kaspersky are two products that come readily to mind.
My suggestion notwithstanding, I definitely recommend that you back up ALL data and programs before making any major changes, just in case removing AVG causes issues (and in any Windows-based machine, that’s a strong possibility).
” As I have had confirmed from multiple sources, individuals that attempt to access this site though your screening software are given an “access denied” message, along with the claim that avoiceformen.com is a “known hate site.”
Your customers are given no supporting information or rationale for such a listing, and no immediate option to override the warning and proceed according to their own will; just the simple invective of being painted as a hate organization. ”
Isn’t this sufficient to sue them for libel ?
Nope. See my reply to Stu below.
Is Norton the culprit behind avfm being blocked by the restaurant chain mentioned a few weeks ago?
What other Men’s Rights sites have been blocked?
http://ncfm.org/
http://egghead.adamsspace.com/
http://www.antimisandry.com/
http://www.avoiceformen.com/
http://www.the-niceguy.com/
http://counterfem.blogspot.com/
http://markymarksthoughts.blogspot.com/
http://masculistadvice.blogspot.com/
http://www.mens-rights.net/
http://www.rulymob.com/
http://www.angryharry.com/
http://whatmenthinkofwomen.blogspot.com/
http://equalbutdifferent.blogspot.com/
http://mensrightsboard.blogspot.com/
http://failuresforgodesses.blogspot.com/
http://www.antifeministtech.info/
http://theantifeminist.com/
http://www.mensactivism.org/
http://no-maam.blogspot.com/
http://www.mgtow.com/
http://www.manwomanmyth.com/
http://mensrightsedmonton.com/
Quite a list there. Can you say…..class action law suit.
I notice radfemhub is not on the list.
Nah. They are well within their legal rights to have the opinion that we are a hate site, and to regard us that way in their product.
Besides, we don’t need to sue. The PR will work out better for us if we just exploit the fact that they are lying to the world.
Politics aside, many people don’t like to due business with businesses that lie to them. And this particular lie is one that sparks curiosity in those that have not been here. Like I said, win-win, only not so much for Norton.
I have rarely felt so proud of my home city as I do now, to have mensrightsedmonton.com included in the list of horrible, misogynistic, woman-raping, wife-beating, ladies-keeping-downing, troglodytic, knuckle-dragging, chauvinistic, Schrodinger’s [insert evil here] hate sites.
Not even when we had a string of Stanley Cup wins back to back…
BTW, I’m uploading a video as we speak where I’m imploring my viewers to also contact Norton and thank them for the PR-boost.
Can’t wait.
I hope this censorship trend stops, my reading list is getting rather long and we are getting into the busy season at work.
I’ve got books to read off of a university endorsed burning list and now blogs to read of a “blocked for hate” list.
How can i ever have a social life.
Thanks for the info.
holy shit this is truly orwellian corporate censorship!
Thanks for the list Paul. I have never heard of half of these sites. Now, thanks to Norton, I have
PS: as for problems with accessing AVFM at restaurants and such, I just reroute the website through a free proxy server. You can get around most security that way.
I just reroute the website through a free proxy server. You can get around most security that way.
BINGO. Proxy servers are becoming more and more essential as shit like this escalates. Also, I highly urge everyone who hasn’t done so to consider (and, if you decide to use it, support) the Tor Project.
Um guys? I have had Norton Internet Security for seven years now (and still do) and I’ve NEVER had any problems accessing this site, angry harry, or any other men’s rights site on the above list (I just clicked on all of them).
Are you sure we’re talking about the same Norton here? Maybe it’s just the California or Swedish branch of Norton or something, lol. Either way, I know that this article is completely false, at least as it pertains to me.
Maybe Norton just likes me. Or maybe Norton cooperates with the specific settings of your Internet Service Provider. There are some sites which certain providers, like AOL, block, and maybe they use Norton to do it, as per your contract with that provider, or something (I have Comcast). All I know is that this site is working fine for me and I’ve never dealt with Norton on any subject other than virus protection. I’m curious where these people who are having these political issues with Norton live.
And no, I don’t work for Norton, nor do I represent them. I am not in business with them in any way. I’m just their happy customer for the last seven years. That’s all.
Older Norton program.
I receive regular updates every year for free. It uninstalls itself and reinstalls the latest version. I think my current one is Norton 2012, or something.
It is not PC SW, but the Internet hosted service Norton DNS.
Okay, this makes more sense.
Way back before windows when we had all PC’s working on MSdos or IBM machines using PC Dos, NU or Norton Utilities was a great program for backing up and retrieving files that one had accidentally deleted. However, I am a bit of a PC guru to many friends, and I have spent the last 15 years removing Nortons from friends PC’s that were absolutely fine until they run Nortons PC Fixit program, or whatever it was called. It is basically a virus in itself, it invents problems, then supposedly will fix them if you pay for a version. I consider Nortons a virus and will delete it from any PC I work on. McAfee is the same.
So what anti-virus program would you recommend?
@ Gamer
I am not in “IT” nor an expert (just know a little more than some of my friends) but if Nortons is giving you no problem then stay with them, y’now, if it aint broke.
There are plenty of more expert opines than mine around here on this subject
Ca Internet security suite plus seems ok to me, although it is quite strict and you need to turn it off if accessing things like the Itunes store. It is not free software, nor am I necessarily recommending it, but I use it. I also have Malwarebytes, which is free, and I run a scan from time to time with that.
It depends on the Norton program that you’re using. I strongly suspect that the “culprit” in the situation under discussion is the Symantec Web Gateway, which is designed to filter web access and content. AFAIK, it’s not included in the standard home use version of Norton ISS, but is generally included in all Enterprise-scale versions of Norton products. Ergo, there would be no default filtering rule set that blocks access to the sites in question.
Kaspersky
NOD32
Fsecure
These are all better, than Norton. I would never install that on my PC… Let’s overlook the fact that they are misandric douchebags, but their product is also a piece of crap.
Nice list.
Which restaurant chain might that be?
Paul has asked that we not mention the name here. The deal was that avfm was reportedly blocked from this restaurants wifi. No one new if the block was a result of the restaurants wishes or the wifi software.
Understand, but I do use restaurants about once a month. It would be nice to know which ones to avoid.
jameswilliamsgb@aol.com
It is in the original article and it is linked through.
Now if I could just find the original article.
Found it look under the MAP link
http://www.avoiceformen.com/mens-rights/ftsu-on-the-menu/
In this case, it’s not the restaurants fault. Norton and McAfee, despite being terrible, are big popular names for internet security. They picked up Norton and simply turned it on without checking to see what’s blocked. The manager probably doesn’t even know how to check.
Focus a boycott on Norton products (it’s a good call anyway, Norton hasn’t been good in years) instead of the people that are a decade or more behind the times when it comes to software.
“Is Norton the culprit behind avfm being blocked by the restaurant chain mentioned a few weeks ago?”
As the person who tipped Paul off to that, i can confirm that Norton DNS was used by the restaurant chain in the earlier post.
Thanks for the info. I kinda figured that the restaurant had no idea what was going on. Restaurants usually have more important things to worry about than censoring the internet.
In this specific case the restaurant has no responsibilities.
The responsibilities are equally shared between the person that listed the sites as hate sites, and the manager of the Norton DNS service that allows anyone to pursue such acts against freedom of speech.
I’m pretty much reaching the same conclusion. The restaurant probably either had someone in-house without any real WiFi network experience set up their wireless infrastructure or else they contracted the job out to someone who “took the money and ran.”
I would say the ‘war’ is hotting up. Fem influence is now affecting corporate bodies. This sort of behaviour can be expected. It demonstrates that AVFM is upsetting somebody. Someone once told me that when you’re getting flack you know you’re not far from the target. If Norton are playing this game, then I’m sure another provider will be happy to take their customers from them.
The nice irony aside, Paul’s quite right: it will aid this site. Norton places AVFM at stage three of the four-stage Ghandian path to victory (first they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you ….)
OTOH, there can’t be too much potential traffic, blocked or otherwise: it’s surprising Norton is still in business given its redundancy in the face of AVG, which is not only zero-cost but unkike Norton doesn’t hoplessly clash with your other software!
On another issue, I sat through the vid of the select Commons committee on women on boards. Good performance all round, but I was impressed with Dr. Catherine Hakin. She was very businesslike and knew her stuff.
Dr T. wrote, “Norton is supposed to protect your computer from viruses.”
I recently upgraded to Internet Explorer 9 because IE8 is no longer supported.
I lost Norton in the process. I reinstalled Norton from disc and it wiped my computer almost clean. I did a system restore to get everything back, but again, I lost Norton. Went through the entire loop again and with the same result. After the second system restore, I did not reinstall Norton. Norton acted like a virus.
At Mike Buchanan … I run Windows 7 which came with Windows Defender. I have been using it without incident for about two weeks now. Works for me. Maybe it will work for you.
Outstanding letter to Norton.
I like the way we are looking at this; it conserves our energy for more important matters.
I have wiped Norton from my system as from today.
Unless you used the Norton Removal Tool, the program is still on your computer.
http://norton-removal-tool.en.softonic.com/
I’m admittedly biased, but the easiest long-term solution to all of these problems is to just avoid using Windows altogether.
Twelve days have now passed …
The number and scope of problems I experienced with my computer after Norton acted like a virus; it would take ten thousand words at a minimum, to describe what Norton did to the programs on this computer. Perhaps far more expeditious would be to say that after almost a week of problems, I opted to restore my computer to its original factory settings — lots of time, lots of work, lots of loss.
Even after doing that, and to my shocking surprise, I still had Norton’s footprints on my computer. In one case, I still had what I am going to call a Norton Advertisement on my computer, which appeared every time there was a switch between users or the computer needed to be restarted. The ad left me one click away from investing in their product again, but this ad did not have one of those boxes, ‘do not show again’.
I ask you, “How unethical is that and these types of practices?”
Someone wrote to the affect, Norton’s roots go deep into a system.
Validated!
I have been of the mind for a few days now that Norton is finally off this computer, but I still have a lot of adjustments to make to get it back to where it was before I did the factory settings restoration.
I will never have a Norton product on a computer of mine in future … and I have lost some faith in both HP and Windows Systems, given their associations with one another and Norton.
‘To the moon, Norton. To The Moon!’
I frankly would like to get the Electronic Freedom Foundation involved in this. It is ridiculous.
I was at a Sheraton hotel last Friday visiting a friend who was staying there and just out of curiosity I tried accessing AVfM from there. Oddly, I could get to the front page but in trying to read any article I got “blocked” because of “hatemonger.” I don’t know if that’s Norton or someone else.
But now it’s becoming clear: DNS is now how you control who may access what on the internet. Not acceptable.
The real issue here, is the concept itself of “hate” speech, according to which you cannot even feel hate, and of course express it.
I do not want to even getting into the arguing “this is hate, this is not, this can be expressed, this cannot be expressed”.
The real problem is that speech MUST remain free, and if any speech is considered contoversial, than it shoul be exposed and let the community judge it, elaborate an opinion and react.
The hate speech laws that are under consideration in most of western countries, are actually a facet of the orwellian society we are building for fear of the unknown. Feminists might exploit this flaw in “democartic” systems but they are not the root cause. It is the society that is falling in anxiety due to media pressure (yes feminist do their part here) and politicians are providing the worst response to these fears, as ususal.
Any thoughts that this might be a result of the threats to censure AVfM by the UofT student union?
Can’t be. UTSU is holding their resolution meeting on us tonight. They have not officially addressed it yet, and they are too ignorant (and have too much AVFM tunnel vision) to compile that list of other sites.
According to the former “regulation czar,” Cass Sunstein, the progressive plan is to censor, using a range of means, including some very un-nice ones, all information and media sources that contradict politically correct orthodoxy. Therefore we should see this as an ongoing issue, regardless of any specific efforts that crop up from time to time.
Men’s Rights education is treated as just one of many politically incorrect activities and that is why the SPLC limped us in with pro-Bill of Rights people, the Nullification movement, the oath-keeping (by military and police) movement, the Constitutional Sheriff movement, the anti-Agenda 21 movement, etc. Liberty is politically incorrect and must be stamped out by those who know what is best for us.
Sunstein is a total freakshow.
Sunstein is also a technological ignoramus (to add to the long list of everything else he’s ignorant of), as is almost everyone inside the Washington Beltway. All the verbal vomitus coming out of that cesspool about an “internet ‘kill switch’” makes me laugh my ass off every time I hear or about it.
Damn you know I do love it when things meant to hurt or harm end up biting people / organizations in the a$$.
So AVfM site traffic goes up, norton’s stock value drops, and society wins.
I have been reading the other recent articles and would like to comment, so much to be said on the incredible articles rolling across these sacred pages, so little time.
Yup that’s right I said sacred pages, for they are.
My reasons are already well known, being polite with feminists just produces more cancerous situations to be inflicted upon men and boys.
So with that I say I got some ‘stickering’ to do, some questions to ask, some phone calls to make (and record of course), and most importantly the recruiting of more voices to the choir.
When you tell the truth it sells itself.
And the truth is feminism is a misandric man hating ideology. The dictionary definition doesn’t save it from being defined by its actions.
“Hey Norton!…Come down here, Self-undoing wants to talk to ya!” [In-joke for you older MRAs]
Very few people use Norton nowadays anyways. The company has been continuously under fire for their unethical practices. Support technicians claiming a customer’s computer has been infected (when in fact it hasn’t been), requesting remote access to “remove” the “infection” and refusing refunds when customers learn that there was never any infections to begin with. Failure to patch bugs which has a negative effect on their customers and their PCs. Failure to notify customers, in advanced, that their subscription has been automatically renewed until after they have been billed, and refusing refunds to anyone who didn’t want to renew. They allegedly even created viruses at one point to promote their product.
I have just emailed the newsroom of “The Register” on with this story. I would suggest that everyone else do the same and give this article as a link.
This could be big. A copy of my mail is below. Here is the address:
news@theregister.co.uk
—-
Dear Sir/Madam,
I represent MRALondon.org, a UK men’s rights group which includes women, gay men and members from all races.
I am writing to inform you that a number of websites that address issues affecting the lives of men and boys, including ncfm.org (National Coalition for Men) and avoiceformen.com (A Voice for Men), have been designated as “hate sites” by Norton Internet Security.
Full details are here:
http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/feminist-lies-feminism/to-norton-symantec-ceo-steve-bennett/
Currently, MRALondon.org does not seem to be on the list sites designated by Norton as “hate sites”, but we share the same principles as both A Voice for Men and NCFM.
Furthermore, you may be interested to know that Erin Pizzey, the woman who set up the first ever Women’s Refuge is a member of both our UK group MRALondon.org, and A Voice for Men. We are clearly not hate sites.
Andy Man
Fantastic work, Andy! I saw their article and have commented on it. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/02/11/mens_rights_site_blacklist/
It might be interesting to go through their appeal process at least to determine how this categorization was made.
a) complaints from users about avfm? if so how many?
b) splc crapola?
c) one employee’s decision?
If it was fallout from the splc, that would give a bit more reason to criticize the splc in the future regarding the recklessness charges.
And maybe it’s time to run ads from alternate anti-virus companies, VPN providers, or run an article about ways to get around blocklists, and a nice link to TOR.
I work in the field (roughly) and would professionally recommend only two IS programs:
1. Kaspersky, because historically the program has always performed excellently and adapts quickly to new threats and has unbeatable recovery options.
2. BitDefender, because it’s performed itself to the top of the heap just lately on detection rates.
I use freeware extensively on all my machines, from openoffice to vlc video player and these products, crafted by enthusiastic and skilled coders are as good as, or even surpass paid efforts.
BUT.
Pay for an AVP / IS!
It’s often been the sole pay-for program on my machines as this is the sin qua non of all systems. Reviews below.
http://www.av-test.org/en/test-procedures/award/2012/
http://www.av-test.org/en/test-procedures/award/2011/
http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/latest_comparative/index
http://www.av-comparatives.org/images/docs/avc_sum_201212_en.pdf
I almost went with BitDefender last year when I was shopping for a new AV/AMW program. They were rated the number one security product by InfoSec Magazine in 2011. The only thing that stopped me from buying was that when I called their customer service center to inquire further about the product’s technical specs and service costs, I wound up talking to someone in Romania (not that that is in any way a bad thing; I just want to be sure that, being in North America, I can get tech support in a timely manner, including product updates, rebates, etc., without hassles). They didn’t seem to have a North American sales or support footprint, so I decided to play it safe and go with a competitor. However, I’ve heard only good things about them, so I might change my mind if my present service heads south (as, alas, so many seem to do after a few years in business).
A friend of mine worked for Symantec for about 6 months a couple years ago. He said it’s an extremely feminist/grrl power corporate culture. They have mirrors hanging in several hallways with a little sign under them that says “This is what a Symantec Team Member looks like!” – I kid you not.
If you’re not living and breathing the corporate culture at some of these high tech companies, you’re found out and banished from the island. Conform or be cast out.
I’m not surprised to read this at all. Most large corporations these days, especially in the tech sector, are nothing but secular state-corporatist cults. It makes up for their complete lack of leadership, vision, humanity, and substance.
It’s too bad that the old fuckedcompany.com web site, so popular during the late 90s and early 00s during the DotCom Era, isn’t still around. That’s where I’d give anything to see Symantec (and many of its competitors) end up.
Norton. One of the more convincing arguments to just get a Macintosh.
Amen! Or a Linux box.
I don’t see a lot (or any?) ad network provided ads at AVFM.
You may wish to publish an RSS feed that contains the full content of all of your articles.
That would let people read AVFM through their feed readers, even though they would not be able to comment on articles.
(And it may be fun to mirror your content at tumblr, which may not help with norton, I don’t know, but would certainly piss off the tumblr feminists. And “better”(?) could create a nice little dilemma for tumblr when as would be inevitable, the tumblr feminists move to block avfm. But think of all the laughs to have when avoiceformen retumbls various tumblr feminist posts but then adds a bit of sanity to the replies.)
I have been using their software for about 4years now, as a matter of fact they have sent me a reminder to renew my software again, well guess what I will reply to them with never again due to their biases against men & boys , but first I got to uninstall it form any computer I have, warn others by passing the word around from now on, they & every misandrist entity can sit on my middle finger & rotate.
well anyone who’s a bit techy would already avoid Norton like the plague, because it’s famously shit software. One more reason I guess lol. Also just noticed ‘dean of student affairs as ftsu’ hahahahaha
.
WE WILL NOT BE SILENCED!!!
PS its fucking stupid to block GROWN UPS from accessing ‘hate sites’ to begin with, but this definitely isn’t one lol. I’m guessing whoever reported us spends their free time writing about how men are genetically inferior on the internet.
One word for those sorts of people SCTHUM
LMAO @ “SCTHUM”
There’s a thought for more AVFM merchandise: a t-shirt with either FUCKING SCTHUM or SCTHUM Supporter or simply just SCTHUM
Paul, it still seems strange to me. I do not think that a SW company can do it, i.e. defining a website as a hate group.
That would be a violation of laws, to my knowledge.
Are we sure that is not a specific configuration of the parental control feature of a specific customer? Just to avoid confusion.
I will try to download Norton and make a check, tonight.
Ok, I made my verification.
It is not Norton Antivirus or Norton Family; they seem ok, men’s right sites are not blacklisted, apparently. I do not reccomend those products, for my personal taste but they are not responsible for the issue.
Actually it is the web hosted service “Norton DNS” to block the access, as you can verify going here:
https://dns.norton.com/dnsweb/huConfigurePc.do
Basically if you chose secuirty level A (malware, phishing sites and scam sites) or B (A + Pornography) than you can still access avfm and other men’s right websites. If you chose level C (that include Non-Family Friendly websites) than YOU CANNOT ACCESS ANYMORE MEN’S RIGHT WEBSITES.
Technically speaking to use the Norton DNS (filter), for private use, it implies just changing the DNS settings in either your PC or router, and it is free; if you are a business it probably works similarly but you have to pay.
So Norton DO ACTUALLY DENY ACCESS TO MEN’S RIGHT WEBSITES in its more restrictive policy, Security level-C. Apparently men are not considered Family-friendly and this is no news for us. The good news is that we are not considered yet pornography.
A final consideration; since I believe that none is using the Norton DNS for private use, most probably those experiencing the issue either tried to access men’s rights websites by the internet access of a business facility or via service provider providing this added value (orwellian) service.
Hope it helps. it is not good news.
So is radfemhub accepted/allowed at level C?
Sure… !! Why not….. ??
RedFemHub people just want to throw little boys out of the window through the window glass…. !!
And just wants to reduce their nutrition intake when they are young boy, so that they couldn’t develop to their full potential growth…. !! Then it will be far easy for women to control them. Right… ??
These people are pretty much family friendly…. !! Don’t you know … ? What are worth of boys …. ? Those little parasites … and … future rapist… !!!
And Norton is in very good agreement with RedFem.
Don’t you see … ??
Norton is dead…. !! They don’t know it yet… but soon they will….!!
If no alternative is available I will install widows 2 times a day if that is what it takes to avoid viruses.
BUT NORTON … ?? NO FUCKING WAY. PERIOD.
I wonder if Norton’s list is the cause of various UK mobile phone companies blocking men’s rights sites?
I would assume so which means this has been going on for some time and therefore has nothing to do with U of T.
Here’s my article from last year on the issues in the UK:
http://therightsofman.typepad.co.uk/the_rights_of_man/2012/05/mobile-phone-companies-are-censoring-and-defaming-mens-rights-sites.html
and reddit comments:
http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/tqno3/uk_mobile_phone_companies_are_blocking_mra_sites/
To check if O2 block a site (and the reason) simply use their url checker:
http://urlchecker.o2.co.uk/
Interestingly there are two ways the likes of O2 smear MRA sites. Some are classed as “hate” sites but another classification is for them to be placed in the “hate” category. AVFM is simply placed in the “hate” category, whereas for some reason the likes of NCFM.org and antimisadnry both in the “hate” category and also a “hate site”.
It is technically possible for customers of these companies to still access the sites, but only if they explicitly make contact with and ask for the “default safety” to be turned off on their account – i.e. the standard setting for most of the major mobile telecoms companies in the UK is for most MRA sites to be censored.
Both my last two networks had the site as ‘adult content so I had to go into store to have it unblocked. Felt extremely totalitarian to have political and opinion sites blocked this way – it means a 17 year old young man is prevented from accessing avfm
The companies have a setting for “default safety” and also a “parental controls” mode.
MRA sites are classed as “hate” sites, which is the reason they’re listed as adult content” and thus blocked by default and to children.
See the O2 url checker to see how it works.
This makes me glad I don’t use Norton anymore, but if I did, that would be enough to make me immediately switch.
Bravo! Bravo! I know it gets tiring having to constantly try to explain to these small-minded people what AVfM really is. They are obviously too lazy to read the articles and see for themselves that A Voice for Men is the OPPOSITE of a hate group. It’s about GENDER EQUALITY! I don’t know why this is so difficult for some to see except to assume no one has bothered to truly look at it or perhaps they are heavily influenced by hate groups that hate the idea of compassion for men and boys (that thought is seriously disturbing).
If you really want to target hate groups, you might look at the feminist movement and those that support it (for reference, please see “Are Jews aware of their condition?” posted here February 4, 2013). But wait a minute, it appears they are getting all the support they need from companies like Norton.
As the UK branch of A Voice for Men, MRA London is also running with this news article:
http://www.mralondon.org/2013/02/press-release-norton-symantec-brand.html
I work in IT and have come across so many systems that have been ravaged by Norton’s so called “ant-virus” program.
It’s impossible to remove by normal means. They do this purposely so you can’t remove it unless you go digging around. Notice it’s on every computer you buy?
Anyway, if you have Norton on your computer I really can’t suggest more strongly that you remove it. It latches itself so deeply into your computer that when you go to remove it using the regular “Add Remove Programs” route, you get stuck into a cycle of errors and more problems.
However…most IT professionals have this little tool at their disposal:
http://norton-removal-tool.en.softonic.com/
The Norton Remove Tool will remove this terrible piece of software from your machine and remove it for good.
After removing it, I would suggest installing a real ant-virus program that runs silently in the background, only revealing itself when it detects something.
Avast, known in the professional field as the best of the best can be downloaded here:
http://www.avast.com/en-us/index
It updates its virus definitions automatically and only asks for an email address once a year to renew your subscription…unlike the countless hundreds you’ll spend if you depend on Norton and the problems it will bring you.
Thanks so much, Norwood!
I forgot all about the Norton removal tool. Thanks for the reminder – and the link!
Of the top of my head these are the ways that websites can be blocked:
The host file on your computer,
Software such as Norton or browser add-ons like WOT,
On the Router itself,
using a special DNS server such as Open DNS.
Open DNS does not appear to block AVFM.com, but someone did submit it as a Hate Site.
Many of these services work through community participation whilst others may get blocked due to internal politics.
Eternal Vigilance guys.
Norton spends more time damaging computers than actually protecting them, from what I’ve heard. This is just another sign of how bloated and out of touch this company has become. If it wasn’t for their corporate security contracts and pre-packaged initiatives, they would probably already be out of business. Judging by their conduct here, I would say it’s time for them go out of business and be replaced by a more legitimate solution provider. Bad security and bigotry, appears to be the all in one solution they offer.
Absolutely. I recommend the free AVG Antivirus.
Personally I would choose from Emsisoft Anti-Malware, Avast, Vipre or maybe Kaspersky, (not sure about them anymore but still seems alright), or Comodo AV, (which has apparently gotten much better). AVG has had some bum updates fairly recently that have caused problems for users and detection rates aren’t as good as they once were. Avira has also fallen from grace and their detection rates are way down; they may have rearranged the design team, security programs often go downhill, when that happens.
Antimalwarebytes Anti-Malware is excellent and everyone should have the free version as a backup, as it seems to be specialized towards detecting obscure kinds of malware that other scanners, sometimes neglect. The paid version also has a resident shield, but I would advise using it with one of the aforementioned programs, (just exempt the running services of each program from the other). But using more than one resident shield, carries conflict risks. So do research first.
Have the other sites on the list been notified?
Not that I know of. Good point.
Is stormfront.org blocked by Norton?
If not, I suppose Norton is literally feminazi. LOL.
This whole U of T thing is starting to look like a whole lot of smoke and mirrors. It reminds me of a scene in the late Douglas Adams’ brilliant book The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy in which he describes an extra terrestrial creature known as the Bugblatter Beast of Krall, which is the most dangerous creature in the universe. The thing is, however, it has a behavioural anomaly that renders it completely harmless to those in the know. You see, the Bugblatter Beast assumes that if you can’t see it, it can’t see you. So all you need to do if you find yourself in its vicinity is look away.
Doulgas Adams was a prophet. If he were alive today he’d look at UTSU’s behaviour and sigh in total understanding.
I’ve done a little more investigation on this, the “service” causing the issue is Norton Connectsafe, version C:
https://dns.norton.com/dnsweb/dnsForHome.do
It’s easy to test whether or not a site is blocked, you simply change your DNS server to 198.153.192.60 and that enables the “service” on your computer.
To complain about the issue go to Norton’s forums at: http://community.norton.com/
The site is blocked by Norton’s DNS servers. You don’t need a Norton security product to test this out. You can set your DNS providers to be:
198.153.192.60
198.153.194.60
And then try visiting AVoiceForMen.com, and you will find it block. This DNS pair is offered by Norton as a “Family Safe” DNS lookup, which may be why public WIFI spaces end up blocking AVfM also.
It would almost be understandable if AVfM was blocked as not “suitable for family” or something (I would disagree), but slurring us as a “known hate site” is not acceptable.
More info is here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norton_DNS
Andy
A good choice for DNS is Google DNS, which anyone can use (and Google appears to have no problem with the MHRM, per se). Their addresses are easy to remember: 8.8.8.8 and 8.8.4.4 .
Something I noticed about the MRA’s is that you all don’t believe in filing lawsuits. Isn’t there any of you who are lawyers, and even if its a private citizen, you can file a lawsuit on this company for defamation and slander, and a slew of other things. Start fighting with lawsuits when things like this happens.
Lawsuits are incredibly expensive, and are dicey because you have to prove damages and not just defamation. Is AVfM damaged by this censorship? I daresay we are, but I suspect we do better by calling public attention to this Stalinist action on Norton’s part rather than running to lawyers.
If their are any Lawyers on this site, then they should do it pro-bono, and as far as fees for filing the lawsuits, this site should establish a legal fund that goes towards satisfying the fees, where in which all MRA’s could donate specifically towards it. Also Its easy to prove damage, website traffic is able to be monetized, therefore by virtue of the fact that they are blocking people from visiting this website, that causes monetary damages to the website, in the form of traffic, and from what I am reading, people cannot even reconfigure their settings so they can visit this site, as well as other websites being censored. Causing public outcry only works for women, not men. Well that is my suggestion.
“Causing public outcry only works for women, not men. Well that is my suggestion.”
That’s a strange thing to say on a site that is growing by leaps and bounds, due to public outcry.
I didn’t say this site isn’t growing. I am saying public outcry works for women. I happen to agree with Barbarossa on the fact that class action lawsuits, and lawsuits in general is the real way to fight. Its not until you start hitting people and companies in the pockets that will you start to cause change. The more popular this movement becomes the more it will be pigeon holed as a hate group, which is why Norton has banned this site. PR is great, but its nothing compared to fighting through the courts, being popular is one thing, being known as a popular hate group is what you shouldn’t want to happen.
You said it ONLY works for women.
There’s nothing inherently wrong with lawsuits; they should be used when the results are worth the costs.
Filing a law suit like this and fighting it would cost at least $100K. Did you know that?
And even getting some publicity out of it would cost thousands more – hiring a firm etc.
Symantec has REALLY GOOD lawyers on retainer, if not employed directly.
Unfortunately there is no such thing as the ” National Men’s Law Center” to fight discrimination issues.
http://www.nwlc.org/
There was a time when there were several lawsuits. Some of which were appealed to the USSC. None were heard. Others died from the start and the plaintiffs were slapped with paying the costs of the defendant. Most of the court rulings were fabricated out of whole clothe. After that period of litigation it became apparent that relief was not to be granted by the courts.
I totally believe in law suits. But even then I don’t believe in simply suing someone for expressing their opinion. It is too similar to how we are being attacked for ours.
Just the same, for PR reasons I would sue anyway, but we don’t have the resources to do it, yet.
I’ve just submited a “false positive” report to Norton. Not sure this is the best way to engage them, but the URL is here:
http://community.norton.com/t5/Announcements/How-to-report-false-positives/m-p/225309#M19
It should be possible to get Norton to see sense on this.
I just uninstalled Norton, and during the process they asked why I was dumping them. I told them it was because they had banned a human rights website as a hate group, and I identified AVfM as the victim of their banning. Hope this helps.
What the fuck Nortan???!!!
I think people should start using the free AVG Antivirus, which is so much better compared to Nortan.
Thread on Norton Forums here:
http://community.norton.com/t5/Other-Norton-Products/Norton-DNS-defaming-numerous-human-rights-sites-blocking-them-by/td-p/905519
I think we should make our voice heard
Good stuff on this one!
Excellent work! Let’s hope it was just some zealot in their ranks and not a political position, on the part of Symantic. Or that they at least take that stance, publicly.
The following was posted this PM by one “DickEvans”, a Norton Gura and Symantec:
Welcome,
In a perfect world everything works perfectly all of the time. We are not perfect nor is the world we live in. The problem is known and the people who can fix it are working on it. They will make an announcement WHEN it’s fixed but I don’t think they are willing to guess when that will be [other than as soon as possible]
Stay well and surf safe
Dick
(end post)
Our own Andy-Man is hot on their case as well (go, Andy!)
I understand the Streisand Effect, but I’m not sure that will play out here without some assistance. In BS’s case she complained publicly with a lawsuit and her lawsuit was intended to hide the location of her home.
I’m not sure that AVfM’s situation will amount to anything without some nudging.
At any rate, it will take years for a lawsuit to come to fruition and it will likely create far more attention than the status quo.
As I recall, Microsoft was sued successfully for unfair business practices because it limited the use of competitive software with Microsoft operating systems. I think this is a similar case in that one business is using it’s software to prevent access to commercial sites it deems “hateful.”
The potential damages we might receive are probably negligible, but the exposure of a public debate on the merits of AVfM and the potential damage to Norton could be very beneficial to AVfM’s message.
I believe that they would have to prove in some quantifiable way that AVfM is a hate website. Barring that they would have no justification for labeling it as such and preventing access.
I don’t want to talk like a lawyer here for I certainly am not one. But, there are organizations that are against Internet censorship and may offer aid and or legal assistance if we plead our case to them.
This is a case of corporations attempting to stifle the human rights of actual “people.”
Some groups that might assist us:
1. Reddit
2. Anonymous
3. ACLU
Remember, the Streisand Effect didn’t happen without a lawsuit. At the time the lawsuit was filed the pictures had been viewed 6 times. Two of those views were Streisand’s lawyers! If we want this to happen we are going to have to push it. I recommend publicity of it first on social media like YouTube, Reddit, etc.
Wow, I was meaning to uninstall Noron for the longest time but always neglected to do it. It isn’t currently active on my computer (it never was on my new laptop), but it’s narly roots are still implanted in the registry, resources, and memory of my laptop because I still get their notification informing me my Norton Anti-Virus has expired. Well hearing about this ceals the deal: I’ll be removing Norton with the removal tool completely from my computer before I go to sleep tonight — and I’ll sleep far more soundly knowing it’s gone.
Norton Antivirus software sucks. There are free programs that are better than that and not as intrusive.
This whole debacle is pretty funny.
The best thing ever to happen to mgtowforums.com (in terms of membership) was when cracked.com labelled it a hate site.
Heh, Norton fanboy having a field day in here.
Maybe Bennett should fire the bigot who did this. After all it’s going to seriously damage their business.
I’ll certainly be dropping them.
I have sent this to Norton:
( MCSE = Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer) which I am..
Norton Anti-male crap:
https://support.norton.com/sp/en/us/home/current/contact?inid=hho_support_buynorton_en_au&pv=off
My message:
A Voice for men website.
As Norton has decided to ban AVFM.com website from your internet security product, and have labelled it as a hate site, I, as an MCSE, will uninstall Norton from all pc’s I come across, until you have repented. Big Fail.
I was thinking about that. Most of their stuff is sold by a few … and the majority of that few is men. Piss off those men, you just blew your sales.Bad move I tell you.
Having had a day to think about this whole thing (or to put it another way, I’ve actually read Paul E’s article all the way to the end
), it hardly matters what Norton do.
I think Norton’s mistake is, not so much to get suckered by radfems into branding sites such as AVfM as “hate”, but to set themselves up as some kind of “moral judgement service” in the first place. They are just asking to be set up and dragged into debates such as these.
AVfM is a hate site. It’s a site that hates sexism, bigotry, false allegations, corruption from those in power, etc. It pulls no punches, and doesn’t care if the way it presents the truth offends you.
I would love to see the guidelines Norton used to determine AVfM and other similar sites are ‘hate sites’. Given that information, I’m sure we could develop a lengthy lists of sites promoting misandry that would fit that criteria.
It seems to me, the more the MRM is attacked, the more reasonable people examine what it all about and come the conclusion that the attacks and allegations are unjustified. Which begs the question,’why?’
I think perhaps part of their concern is the fact that if issues that effect males are given credence it could mean less funding allocated to woman’s issues as well as a loss of power in the legal system for women.
I had very little to no interest in the MRM until someone sent me the link to the Warren Farrell protest at the University of Toronto. Their quest to silence a local event drew worldwide attention and had completely backfired on the protesters.
They may have used the SPLC list of “hate groups” as a guide.
Well that is before SPLC recanted.
“Want more Norton?”
No.
This is what MATRIARCHY looks like.
This is what MATRIARCHY looks like.
This is what MATRIARCHY looks like.
This is what MATRIARCHY looks like.
This is what MATRIARCHY looks like.
This is what MATRIARCHY looks like.
This is what MATRIARCHY looks like.
This is what MATRIARCHY looks like.
This is what MATRIARCHY looks like.
This is what MATRIARCHY looks like.
This is what MATRIARCHY looks like.
This is what MATRIARCHY looks like.
This is what MATRIARCHY looks like.
This is what MATRIARCHY looks like.
This is what MATRIARCHY looks like.
This is what MATRIARCHY looks like.
This is what MATRIARCHY looks like.
This is what MATRIARCHY looks like.
Probably this censorship is the individual act of some feminist hired by Norton and everything will be soon fixed
The (utterly ridiculous) push for feminism in STEM fields yields yet another massively UNscientific result.
Symantec has a lot of other concerns lately, they don’t need this additional and completely pointless one.
If any are reading I would recommend they find out which of their employees is an anti-human rights bigot, and let them know (in word and deed), that the company will not be dragged into someone personal politics/vendetta, and reiterate the policy on use of corporate resources for same (I’m nearly certain this sort of thing is against policy).
I normally view this site on my laptop but I wanted to show a friend something on my mobile phone. I was surprised to see that my network had restricted the site due to adult content. It’s very odd that when I checked out feminist agenda sites I had no concerns. Any idea what content they could be referring to?