I added the following text to the men's rights movement page on wikipedia. All of it is represented in the three sources. Most of the words are actually lifted directly. One of the articles appeared on here a few days ago.

In a talk on feminism and men's rights issues titled "What's wrong with women's studies," Janice Fiamengo details problems with academic feminism. She notes that it is a "fundamental contradiction" to base a "scholarly" field on an "ideological agenda." She says that women's and gender studies attempts to advance the ideological world view of feminists by whatever mean's necessary and asserts that feminist women's studies promotes a "mean-spirited bias against men" in the humanities.[15] [16] Conflict between feminism and the mens' rights movement

In response to lectures and discussions given by men's rights activists, feminists have resorted to law-breaking protests that have involved blocking doors, pulling fire alarms to cause disruption, violence, and clashing with police. They have tried to block young men from attending these events and have screamed obscenities at them. Feminist protesters consider discussion of men's issues to be hate speech and do not wish for discussions on this subject to be allowed on college campuses. In response to these actions, the mens' rights website A Voice for Men has described these protester's as "man hating bigots."[27][16]

In another incident, feminist protesters repeatedly tore down A Voice for Men website posters at Arizona state University. Commenting on this action, Amelia Lewis Professor of Constitutional Law James Weinstien said "To stop the message because they (feminists) disagree with it is the antithesis of free speech." In addition, Feminist "censors could very easily get their message across without suppressing the others' free speech rights."[28]

5 or 6 feminist harpies are on the talk page and I really can't do anything against that alone. Especially now that I am banned for the next week. They claim unreliable source even though these are all printed newspapers. They claim undue weight for a professor invited to give a discussion with an audience, and a constitutional law professor. Things they don't like they can just censor and get away with it. No justification needed.

Here are the sources:

http://metronews.ca/news/toronto/573522/mens-issues-or-misogyny-controversial-mens-group-to-discuss-womens-studies/

http://thevarsity.ca/2013/03/11/contentious-anti-feminism-lecture-met-with-protest/

And this was from a post a day or two ago on this subreddit

https://asunews.asu.edu/20130301_inthenews_weinstein