libera voce/libera mente

"free voice, free mind"

Tuesday, August 23, 2005

Let the lady speak . .

http://www.americandaily.com/article/8832

BIASED VAWA PUSHES GENDER SUPREMACY
By Lisa Scott

August 21, 2005

The federal Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) is up for reauthorization in 2005. VAWA funds billions of taxpayer dollars to combat violence against women, principally domestic violence (DV). The definition of DV touted by victim advocates runs the gamut from jokes and insults to murder, with "power and control" being the overriding characteristic of the man's behavior towards the woman. Real violence is rarely at issue.

When women commit violence against men, VAWA and the DV industry go AWOL. Despite the federal government's own statistics showing nearly 40 per cent of domestic violence victims are men, VAWA persists in its monolithic response.

In the same way that some minority groups argue they cannot be racist because they aren't in power in society, gender feminists contend women cannot commit DV because they can't assert power and control over men. Any violence committed by women is, by definition, either de minimus (it could not possibly have hurt him), or self-defense (SHE is the victim of HIS abuse).

All interactions between partners are subject to this twisted logic. When the relationship sours, the woman has an easy out: "I am a victim of domestic violence and can do no wrong." VAWA supports and maintains female supremacy. It should be re-titled Victory Assured for Women Act.

VAWA's gender bias permeates law enforcement response to domestic conflict. All it takes is a woman calling 911 to summon three squad cars, teeming with police officers eager to carry out today's "tough" domestic violence laws. The centerpiece of the system is "mandatory arrest." Every domestic disturbance call must result in arrest, usually the man.

Domestic violence is whatever the man does that the woman doesn't like. Declaring he is going to file for custody of the children is a "threat." Finding out she is having an affair and demanding she stop is "abuse." Unknown to most men, such interchanges often precipitate false charges of DV. In my 17 years as a family law attorney, I have seen this pattern occur over and over.

Even when the facts clearly show the man is not an abuser (and perhaps the woman is), prosecutors refuse to drop charges. "No-drop" policies are a great publicity tool, and a way to ensure more funding. Charges that would never see the light of day if they happened between strangers on the street (accidentally bumping against someone when walking by), are routinely charged as DV "assault." (But only if the man does it to the woman; a man can be bleeding from a head wound and he won't be considered a victim).

Indiscriminate charging clogs the system with minor transgressions, yet ensures a steady stream of cases justifying more taxpayer money at budget time.

Both spouses are usually at fault when a marriage ends. Many women have discovered a surefire antidote against taking any responsibility: playing the domestic violence victim. While the husband is reading the newspaper and relaxing after work, the wife is contacting the domestic violence hotline, getting step-by-step instructions on what to say: "His abuse is escalating," "I'm fearful for my safety."

VAWA funds battered women's shelters and their misandrist staff, always ready to welcome another customer for their anti-male, anti-father and anti-family agenda. Ask a victim advocate what causes domestic violence, and she will immediately blame our "patriarchal society," ensuring that only men get the blame. One might ask what causes women to abuse children. Presumably, the patriarchy by proxy. VAWA gives short shrift to child abuse, which is most often committed by women. Indeed, VAWA earmarks a paltry $7000 per year to develop home visitation projects to look for signs of child abuse or neglect.

To assure victory in the divorce/custody case, the woman claims the man is an abuser, no matter how good a husband and father he is. Whatever wrongs he has committed, from leaving the toilet seat up to not making enough money, failure of the marriage is his fault. "No-fault" divorce laws really mean "no fault unless it's the man's fault." In other words, the Oprahization of family law.

What we really have is MAWA: Men Annoying Women Act. The man is either a relentless abuser or a hopeless wimp. Any modern man not terrified of being in a relationship with a woman has not been paying attention. (emphasis added)

The government seems unable to define gender bias except as "bias against women." Title IX forces college sports programs to spend equal amounts of money on men's and women's sports, despite the fact that the vast majority of athletes are men. Even though 1/3 of domestic violence murder victims are male, not one dime of VAWA's largesse is devoted to prevention of violence against men.

Men are far more likely than women to be victims of violence overall, yet there's no Violence Against Men Act. Men also comprise nearly all workplace injuries and deaths, but try to find a Male Workplace Injury Prevention Act.

VAWA is not about stopping violence. It is about greedy special interests slopping at the federal trough, perpetuating gender supremacy for women. If proponents were truly concerned about helping victims, they would demand that all intervention and funding be gender neutral and gender inclusive.

The existence of male victims threatens gender feminists because it knocks the underpinnings out of their theory, that the "patriarchy" causes men to abuse women. The DV industry has succeeded in creating the "victimarchy." With VAWA in their corner, women win no matter what: victim or abuser, they can do no wrong.

Lisa Scott is a Bellevue, Washington attorney practicing in the areas of family law, divorce and domestic violence. She is also a founding member of TABS, Taking Action against Bias in the System, www.tabs.org

Men's books that women should read

The Atlantic Monthly | September 2005

by Terry Castle

Seven Pillars of WisdomSeven Pillars of Wisdomby T. E. Lawrence (1926). I have yet to meet a female contemporary who has read this book—perhaps because Lawrence writes mainly about bone-jarring camel rides, blowing up Turkish trains on the Damascus-to-Medina line, and mooning over handsome Arab boys. Yet for insights into imperialism, the modern Middle East, and the kinky, coquettish personality of the twentieth century's strangest Englishman, this book is matchless. Men love other men in so many odd ways here; it's like getting into the Boys Only tree house. The intelligent female reader is freed into a pure and illuminating voyeurism. (Castle neglects to mention that this is authored by the real "Lawrence of Arabia" about which the great film was made.)

The Face of BattleThe Face of Battleby John Keegan (1976). Keegan's now classic description of what it was like to be an ordinary soldier on the Agincourt, Waterloo, or Somme battlefields is harrowing, humane, profound. Even the most pacifistic woman will be moved to new respect for the stunning bravery so many men have exhibited over the centuries in the face of horrific mass violence. The book is timely now in a new way, as American female soldiers are losing arms, legs, eyes—even their lives—in the world's latest horror show.

She also mentions The Garden of EdenThe Garden of Eden by Ernest Hemingway, and Memoirs of HadrianMemoirs of Hadrian by Marguerite Yourcenar.

(for the rest of the article, see The Atlantic Monthly)

Monday, August 22, 2005

Was Ruth Black?

Babe Ruth

A black man once asked me if George Herman "Babe" Ruth was a black man. Blacks, just like Texans--or gays for that matter--always seem to be claiming everything to their own.

Beethoven, for example. Another black man told me he heard the great German composer was black, too. Must be all that musical genius. One just assumes . .

Just as one might assume with such a towering athletic talent. It's a hard thought to shake, once it has landed.

  • Consider that all the other top home run hitters are black. One solitary white man.
  • Consider his facial features--especially the broad nose--and his physical characteristics.
  • Consider we don't know who his parents were.
  • Consider that if you were a mulatto in those days you might indeed be put up for adoption.
  • Consider that he was raised in a reform school.

Just one glaring weakness to this theory, as a black guy pointed out to me. Would a black man run like that? Ruth had a mincing way about the base paths. He must have been a bit more athletic-looking in the field, one imagines. Or perhaps when he was younger. The pot belly, and a general physical dissolution, might have influenced his gait later in life.

Friday, August 19, 2005

Concerns

Bill Keller, Editor, New York Times

Bill Keller's appearance on the Charlie Rose Show several days ago was troubling, but in that subtle way few would notice.

When asked what other media sources he read regularly, and in which languages, he first responded that his Russian was getting a bit rusty, even though he served there between the years 1986 and 1991, first as reporter to the New York Times then as bureau chief. So reading Pravda is out. What about their online English version? As the new Executive Editor of his paper, with so much journalistic experience in the former Soviet Union, wouldn't you want to be reading your opposite number with some regularity? Apparently not.

And other European newspapers, he says, follow in the long European tradition of being aligned politically, so they're out, too. Not that his paper has ever been accused of being politically aligned, charges he scoffs at by saying if we only could speak with his journalists and see just how dedicated they are, just how intensely and with what professionalism they pursue their stories, we'd see it's not about partisanship.

(A visit to their editorial board page would answer the question far more directly, but onward . .)

So what if they are partisan, the European media that is, shouldn't you be reading them? At least scanning them for story ideas? You do run America's finest newspaper, after all. Want to keep it that way?

Just some of the English papers make the cut, the Financial Times being mentioned as one of the world's best. Are the English just a tad bit close to us culturally and politically to serve as a distinctly separate view on the world, or even on us?

Then he recounts his early hours, as if perhaps to show how in touch he really is with media other than his own. His mornings begin with a work-out at home while he listens to National Public Radio (NPR) news. American. And some might argue not the most un-aligned news program in history, drawing as they do from public coffers. Some might argue they've proven themselves to be downright leftists with a capital "L" over the years, even as their funding branches out more to the corporate sources nowadays.

Then he admits the real joy he gets out of reading other news outlets is seeing how the journalistic efforts at the New York Times affect them, how his stories drive their stories. Narcissism.

So there's the head of our finest journalistic enterprise. Not necessarily partisan, but certainly not worldly curious, aware, or wise.

The New York Times Editorial Board

GAIL COLLINS, Editor

Gail Collins, the editorial page editor, is responsible for the two opinion pages The Times publishes every day. Her department includes the editorial board, as well as the Op-Ed and Letters departments. The editorial department of the paper is completely separate from the news operations and Ms. Collins answers directly to the publisher, Arthur Sulzberger Jr. She is assisted by Andrew Rosenthal, deputy editor, David Shipley, the editor of the Op-Ed page, and Thomas Feyer, the Letters editor.

Under her direction, the 16 members of the board prepare the paper's editorials. The board holds regular meetings to discuss current issues. The editorials are written by individual board members in consultation with their colleagues, and are edited by Ms. Collins and Mr. Rosenthal.

Ms. Collins came to The Times in 1995 as a member of the editorial board, and later became an Op-Ed columnist. Mr. Sulzberger named her editorial page editor in the summer of 2001. She is the author of three books: "America's Women, 400 Years of Dolls, Drudges, Helpmates and Heroines" (Morrow, 2003), "Scorpion Tongues" (Morrow, 1998) and "The Millennium Book" (Doubleday, 1991) which she co-authored with her husband, Dan Collins. She is currently working on a book about American women since 1960. Before joining The Times, she was a columnist for New York Newsday and the New York Daily News. She has also worked for United Press International and papers in Milwaukee and Connecticut and has written for magazines ranging from Institutional Investor to Ladies Home Journal. In the 1970's, she founded and ran the Connecticut State News Bureau, which covered the state capitol for weekly and small daily papers around the state. At the time of its sale, the Connecticut State News Bureau was the largest news service of its kind in the country.

For the rest of the sorry line-up, see: The New York Times Editorial Board.

"Questionable Content" as determined by "The Wisdom of Crowds"

From Blogger.com:

What is the "Flag" button?
This feature is called "Flag As Objectionable" and it's accessible via the Blogger Navbar. The "Flag?" button allows the blogging community to easily note questionable content, which in turn helps us take action when needed. So we're relying on you, the users, to be our eyes on the web, and to let us know of potential issues that are important to you.

Why We Created "Flag As Objectionable"
It is our strong belief that blogs help make the Web an important medium of self-expression; Blogger has given a voice to millions of people. Our users gossip, joke, rant, publish, share, and on occasion might post potentially objectionable stuff. We generally do not review the content posted through our service but our responsibility extends beyond Blogger users to casual readers of Blog*Spot.

The "Flag?" button is a means by which readers of Blog*Spot can help inform us about potentially questionable content, so we can prevent others from encountering such material by setting particular blogs as "unlisted." This means the blog won't be promoted on Blogger.com but will still be available on the web — we prefer to keep in mind that one person's vulgarity is another's poetry. Or something like that.

For more serious cases, such as spam blogs or sites engaging in illegal activity, we will continue to enforce our existing policies (removing content and deleting accounts when necessary).

Here's How It Works
When a person visiting a blog clicks the "Flag?" button in the Blogger Navbar, it means they believe the content of the blog may be potentially offensive or illegal. We track the number of times a blog has been flagged as objectionable and use this information to determine what action is needed. This feature allows the blogging community as a whole to identify content they deem objectionable. Have you read The Wisdom of Crowds? It's sort of like that.

Special Case for Hate Speech
When the community has voted and hate speech is identified on Blog*Spot, Google may exercise its right to place a Content Warning page in front of the blog and set it to "unlisted."

Note: users may click the "Unflag" button if they change their mind.

--

Wonder if this has anything to do with the weird formatting that's been making this blog unreadable lately. It sends the text of the blog entries down below the opening screen, and if you look to the upper right the "Flag?" button appears. First time I've ever noticed it. This entire blog is dedicated to the need to speak out freely about things we're told to shut up about. Is this message being squelched by Blogger.com?

What About Battered Men?

by Mark B. Rosenthal

For thirty years now, researchers have known that wives kick, punch, stab, or shoot their husbands about as often as husbands kick, punch, stab, or shoot their wives. But federal law ignores the facts and instead uses the power of the purse to get states to impose Kafkaesque policies that punish victimized men and reward violent women.

Back in 1975, the First National Family Violence Survey turned up results that surprised even the sociologists conducting the survey. Wives attack husbands about as often as husbands attack wives. And wives attack first about as often as husbands attack first (source), which is strong evidence that women's assaults on men can't be explained away simply as self-defense. But battered women's advocates were intent on portraying domestic violence as something only men do and only women suffer from. So they'd conveniently leave out the part about women's assaults on men whenever they cited the study's results.

Susan R. Paisner is a criminologist and longtime advocate for abused women and men. She recalls being stunned by the hostile attitudes toward male victims that she encountered at one of the nation's first conferences on domestic violence. She naïvely thought that "we were all there to do good – for all who needed it." Yet when she mentioned having read a brief newspaper article about male victims, many of the other women at the conference turned on her, saying, "This is OUR issue, OUR cause. If men are battered, then let other MEN do something for them."

The Second National Family Violence Survey was conducted ten years after the first. Contrary to advocates' claims of an epidemic of wife abuse, violence toward women had declined. But violence toward men by women had not changed since the first survey.

When battered women's advocates lobbied Congress, they quoted only the part of the results that suited their agenda. And so, in spite of longstanding knowledge among researchers about the existence of significant numbers of abusive women and victimized men, Congress enacted legislation in 1994 that addressed only part of the problem. Rather than passing an inclusive Family Violence Act, they enacted a Violence Against Women Act.

VAWA provided billions of dollars for organizations whose primary purpose is helping abused women, but nothing whatsoever for organizations to help abused men. The Violence Against Women Office, which administers VAWA, states that the law prohibits funding of programs that focus on male victims. At least one state agency that distributes VAWA funds explicitly lists "Programs that focus on children and/or men" under "Ineligible Activities" on their application form.

Even after receiving $5.1 billion under the past two VAWA bills, battered women's advocates still argue that there's too little money, and therefore the government should allocate no funding whatsoever for organizations whose primary purpose is to help the 835,000 men the U.S. Dept. of Justice estimates are assaulted by their partner annually. Yet somehow there's enough money in the current $4.2 billion VAWA reauthorization bill to make special provisions for an estimated 32,600 Native Americans, but of course, only if those Native Americans are female. No males need apply. [32,600 was estimated by multiplying the population of Native Americans (2,173,834) by the percent of the female population raped or physically assaulted by a partner annually (1.5%).]

RADAR (Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting) has reviewed the VAWA reauthorization bill and identified the numerous serious problems listed below. The bill:

  1. Misrepresents domestic violence as almost always man-on-woman violence.
  2. Violates men's Fourteenth Amendment right to equal protection.
  3. Lacks safeguards against false allegations of domestic violence, thus encouraging the unscrupulous to use false allegations during divorce proceedings to separate children and fathers.
  4. Blurs the distinction between violent crime and a verbal argument.
  5. Allows restraining orders based on a woman's word; no proof required.
  6. Encourages mandatory reporting, mandatory arrest, and "no-drop" prosecutions, policies which even the Feminist Majority Foundation says often end up harming families.
  7. Pre-empts state partner assault laws and the federal Victims of Crime Act. Spends $1 billion a year duplicating existing programs.
  8. Funds trainings that teach judges to violate the Constitution. In one such training, judges were instructed: "Your job is not to become concerned about all the constitutional rights of the man that you're violating as you grant a restraining order. Throw him out on the street, give him the clothes on his back and tell him, ‘See ya' around.’"
  9. Funds treatment programs based on ideology, not science.
  10. Represents an overreaching of federal power.
  11. Corrupts family violence research (source). VAWA-funded researchers often seek to bias the outcome of their research by interviewing only women, slanting the wording of questions, asking only questions that will produce the desired answer, or by selectively reporting research findings.
    Funds educational programs that consistently depict men as perpetrators and women as victims of domestic violence.
  12. VAWA should have treated all people equally when it was first enacted. Instead, VAWA tramples on persons' basic human rights while ignoring what scientific researchers have known for three decades. Our elected officials have a responsibility to make sure VAWA helps all victims of domestic violence.

August 18, 2005

Mark B. Rosenthal [mbr@arlsoft.com] is a self-employed software engineer in Massachusetts.

Copyright 2005 © Mark B. Rosenthal, All Rights Reserved

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig6/rosenthal2.html

Wednesday, August 17, 2005

How It Works, Ladies and Gentlemen

Women are Just as Likely as Men to Commit Domestic Violence...

MELANIE PHILLIPS
Man Beaters Behind Closed Doors
http://www.fact.on.ca/news/news0011/ti001119.htm

RICHARD GELLES
The Hidden Side of Domestic Violence: Male Victims
http://www.ncfmla.org/gelles.html

MARTIN FIEBERT
References Examining Assaults by Women on Their Spouses or Male Partners: An Annotated Bibliography
http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm

Men Sustain Over One-Third of all DV-Related Injuries...

ABC 20/20
Men Battered by Their Wives
http://www.mensrights.com.au/dvusa13g.htm

JOHN ARCHER, Ph.D.
Sex Differences in Aggression Between Heterosexual Partners: A Meta-Analytic Review
http://www.mediaradar.org/ja_sex_differences.php

LEONARD PAULOZZI
Surveillance for Homicide among Intimate Partners – United States, 1981 – 1998
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss5003a1.htm

But Men are Less Likely to Report the Incident…

DAVID FONTES
Men Don’t Tell
http://www.ejfi.org/DV/dv-22.htm#pgfId-1378765

GEORGE ROLPH
Domestic Violence and the Male Victim
http://www.ifeminists.net/introduction/editorials/2003/0422rolph.html

So Media Coverage is Often Biased…

CATHY YOUNG
The Other Aggressor in Domestic Violence
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2003/12/01/the_other_aggressor_in_domestic_violence/

GLENN SACKS
Baseball Player’s Domestic Violence Arrest Demonstrates how Men are Presumed Guilty in Domestic Disputes
http://www.glennsacks.com/baseball_players_domestic.htm

Which Allows the Myths to Continue.

RICHARD GELLES
Domestic Violence Factoids
http://www.mincava.umn.edu/documents/factoid/factoid.html

WENDY MCELROY
Domestic Violence: Behind the Stereotypes
http://www.ifeminists.net/introduction/editorials/2004/1110.html

GLENN SACKS
'Fatal Fathers' Myth Promoted in Wake of Peterson, Hacking Cases
http://www.glennsacks.com/fatal_fathers_myth.htm

SUSAN SARNOFF
The Institutionalization of Misinformation: VAWA II
http://www.womensfreedom.org/artic542.htm

(see http://www.mediaradar.org/resources.php#waj)

Friday, August 12, 2005

Why So Few Men Protest Anti-Male Sexism

FAR TOO many men tolerate anti-male sexism because they are:

  • Socialized to repress their feelings about personal matters the way women have been socialized to repress their feelings about sexual matters, and hence are often as uncomfortable talking about gender issues as nuns are talking about pornography!
  • Fearful of being the first to speak up and being scorned with: "Why are you the only one having a problem with this?"
  • Fear of upsetting women, whom men are supposed to simultaneously see as capable of handling the violence of hand-to-hand combat with enemy soldiers but incapable of handling men's mere words. Radical feminist ideology wants us to believe women can cope with death-threatening revilement "Die, slut!" from an enraged enemy soldier on the battlefield, but not with a good-intentioned compliment "Hi, gorgeous!" from an effervescent man in the workplace.
  • Silenced by seeing themselves as protectors of women. Many men, especially feminist men, want to be known as protectors of women (often to earn female approval or female votes). Since such chivalrous men are sometimes willing to sacrifice their lives for women, many can certainly be counted on to sacrifice their rights for women.
  • Silenced by a political correctness that is hostile and censorious to non-feminist views on gender, particularly to such views offered by men.
  • Silenced by the mistaken belief that all feminists work in the interest of both sexes and for the good of the country, and that to be against feminists is to be against women.
  • Taught by feminists and the media, in a sleight-of-hand manner, to see only female burdens and male power, taught even to see male powerlessness as male power. (The military conscription of men is presented as malepower, not the male powerlessness that it is. So is having to work long hours in an oppressive job in order to support a family.)


[From The Untold Side To the Gender Story (battlinbog.blog-city.com)]

Saturday, August 06, 2005

Not Very Romantic

Millard Fuller
Millard Fuller was fired from the top post at Habitat for Humanity, together with his wife, following an accusation of sexual harassment from a former staff member. She claims he put his hand on her leg and shoulder as she was driving him to the airport in Atlanta. In a statement released at the time of his firing the Habitat board said there was "insufficient proof of inappropriate conduct."

"I did absolutely nothing improper with that woman," Mr. Fuller said in an interview. "Let's face it, I'm 69 years old and was heading up the highway in a business suit on the way to do some business, and that's not what I'd call romantic."

From the New York Times, Friday, August 5, 2005.

A Sexed Equation?

"Is E=MC2 a sexed equation?" theorist Luce Irigaray asks, "Perhaps it is. Let us make the hypothesis that it is insofar as it privileges the speed of light over other speeds that are vitally necessary to us. What seems to me to indicate the possibly sexed nature of the equation is not directly its use by nuclear weapons, rather it is having privileged what goes the fastest."

From the book review by James Seaton "Truth Has Nothing to Do With It" on Theory's Empire (Columbia University Press) in the Wall Street Journal, August 4, 2005.

Wednesday, August 03, 2005

Prescriptive for U.S. Colleges and Universities


  1. Eradicate all "speech codes".
  2. Shift alcohol policy to neutral where there might appear to be encouragement, but never to a "don't drink" approach (as it can have the opposite effect).
  3. Require an "Alcohol 101" course freshman year that teaches the nature of alchol consumption in society, its impact, the characteristics of an alcoholic, what to do about seeking help for one's drinking, etc.
  4. Establish the highest standards for what qualifies as an "A" in grading.
  5. Select and promote faculty based on their intention and ability to promote free and critical thinking among their students, ever challenging them to the point where intellectual curiosity will drive them forever.
  6. Require Ancient Greek, Latin, and French (catching up for what used to be taught in high school, before that in grade school).
  7. Require an in-depth study of great books--including such works as Homer's The Iliad, Plato's Republic, Plutarch's Lives, Robert Graves The Greek Myths, the Bible, and Edward Gibbon's The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire--allowing for a semester or two to cover each. In selection of volumes to study, emphasize quality and magnitude of impact on subsequent thought over quantity.
  8. Require courses teaching the skills necessary for free and open expression, exchanging of ideas and alternate theories, critical thinking ("question everything"), argument skills, and rhetoric.
  9. Convert classes, where applicable and possible, to open debating fora, presenting at least two countering views on each topic.
  10. Convert Women's Studies programs to Gender Studies, encouraging an open debate of all dimensions, transforming from political and social indoctrination to a real and valuable academic pursuit.
  11. Teach a critique of Marxism, using countries that have experimented with his socialist theories as case studies, e.g., the Soviet Union, China, Cuba, etc., drawing parallels with the U.S. experience.
  12. Offer courses on Feminism and Political Correctness that regard them as political movements to be studied in light of others throughout history. Challenge their assumptions, encouraging a free and open exchange of ideas.

DISCUSS.

Robert J. Birgeneau, the new Chancellor of the University of California, Berkeley, upon arriving in the Bay Area, quickly vowed to solve the problems he had found. Not . .

  1. the decline in academic standards,
  2. deterioration in the quality of Berkeley's key departments,
  3. or a state funding crisis.
Instead, he complained that Berkeley has fewer "Native American"*, Hispanic, and "African-American"** students enrolled than it should . .

  1. the campus has only 3% black students, against a California population of 6.5%,
  2. 9.5% Hispanic, against 33% of the state population,
  3. and 0.4% "Native American", versus 0.92% of the state.
What he doesn't complain about is that the student body is . .

  1. made up of about half "Asian-Americans"**, while they only comprise 11% of the population of California,
  2. or that whites make up just 35% of the student body, with 45% of the state population,
  3. or that female students outnumber the male.

Asians have suffered a particularly long history of discrimination in California. Everything from immigration quotas to forced internment during World War II. Yet they still have the highest high-school graduation rates in the state. To re-jigger the racial make-up of the school, Dr. Birgeneau would have to back them out.

DISCUSS.


*Actually Asian immigrants themselves.
**Not the white ones, like Dave Matthews.
***The ones that came after the "Native Americans".


Source.

It Sure Impresses the Heck Out of the Chinese

"I have loved to shop since I was five years old.  My father was a Presbyterian minister.  On Saturdays he would go to the church to prepare things, work on his sermon [and] my mother and I would head to the stores.  So what can I say?"


(on America's fascination with her clothes)

Mexico Issues Stamp of Black Cartoon Character Weeks After Racial Flap

By Mark Stevenson
Associated Press Writer

Published: Jun 29, 2005

MEXICO CITY (AP) - The Rev. Jesse Jackson and the NAACP demanded on Wednesday that the Mexican government withdraw a postage stamp depicting an exaggerated black cartoon character known as Memin Pinguin, issued just weeks after remarks by President Vicente Fox angered U.S. blacks.

The series of five stamps released for general use Wednesday depicts a child character from a comic book started in the 1940s that is still published in Mexico.

The boy, hapless but lovable, is drawn with exaggerated features, thick lips and wide-open eyes. His appearance, speech and mannerisms are the subject of kidding by white characters in the comic book.

"I am calling on President Fox and (Mexican) Ambassador Carlos de Icaza to issue a complete and full apology and to take this stamp off the market immediately," Jackson said in a press statement.

The NAACP - the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People - called the stamps "injurious to black people who live in the United States and Mexico."

NAACP Interim President Dennis Courtland Hayes called on Mexico to immediately cease printing and distributing the stamp.

"It is inexplicable that the Mexican government would not comprehend the insensitivity of the negative depiction of blacks on this stamp," Hayes said.

Mexico defended the stamps, saying that like Speedy Gonzalez - a cartoon mouse with a Mexican accent that debuted in the United States in 1953 - the Memin Pinguin character shouldn't be interpreted as a racial slur.

"Just as Speedy Gonzalez has never been interpreted in a racial manner by the people in Mexico, because he is a cartoon character, I am certain that this commemorative postage stamp is not intended to be interpreted on a racial basis in Mexico or anywhere else," said Rafael Laveaga, the spokesman for the Mexican embassy in Washington.

But Hayes countered that "laughing at the expense of hard-working African Americans or African Mexicans is no joke and it should end at once."

Activists in Mexico said the stamp was offensive, but not unexpected.

"One would hope the Mexican government would be a little more careful and avoid continually opening wounds," said Sergio Penalosa, an activist in Mexico's small black community on the southern Pacific coast.

"But we've learned to expect anything from this government, just anything," Penalosa said. In May, Fox riled many by saying that Mexican migrants take jobs in the United States that "not even blacks" want.

. . .

AP-ES-06-29-05 2245EDT

Only in America

"Black activists are demanding the removal of a new Tutankhamen exhibition because it makes the boy-king seem too white. Along with 130 artifacts from Tutankhamen's tomb, the exhibit features three new busts derived from CT scans of his mummy. Curators claim the busts have a "midrange" skin tone, but the activists say they should be darker. "Do not deprive black children of their heritage, " said Legrand Clegg, one of the protest's organizers. "Egypt is on the continent of Africa."

(from THE WEEK July 1, 2005)

Culpa Mia?


<<. .snipped from. .>>

THE IDENTITY OF THE NEGRO
by "Nana Prempeh, Servant of the People"
3/11/05


(found 7/23/05 on a major U.S. university campus where it had been distributed loosely as part of a two-page stapled hand-out)

"During the Civil Rights protests and demonstrations of the fifties and sixties when we negroes were seeking to learn our identity, the proof that the negro has the identity of the white man was revealed. In the following statements (A) and response (B) the would-be black man who favors black people is consistently opposed by the negro--the black white man--who is against black people. He defends the white man because he is the white man. He has the identity (hatred) of white people:

A. The white man put us in slavery.
B. Man, niggers sold niggers into slavery! You can't blame the white man!

A. Whitey oughta pay us for all the work our forefathers done free.
B. Man, Whitey don't owe me nothin! The world don't owe you a thing!

A. We blacks should help one another.
B. Man, motherfuck them niggas! Be for yourself! Self-preservation is the first law of nature!

A. We need to unite like other peoples.
B. Man, them niggas ain't gon' stick together!

A. We blacks should love one another.
B. We should love everybody!

A. Whitey took it from the Indians, Um gon' take mine from Whitey!
B. He who lives by the sword shall die by the sword!

A. We oughta get guns and fight Whitey back.
B. All them guns and tanks and shit Whitey got!--nigger, you gotta be crazy!

A. We need to separate into a nation of our own.
B. What about the white man?

All negroes respond the same as B in one or more of the above responses because our feeling of hate for white people is turned backward upon black people. The result is that we are a people who fear and are suspicious of one another. We are unfriendly, rude, indifferent and hostile to one another, quick to anger, disagree and argue. We are a backward and withdrawn people mentally enslaved by the wicked white slavemaster's feeling of hatred for black people in us. We have the identity of white people."

(Nana Prempeh I was a renowned Asante leader on-and-off from 1888-1931)

Jiuping Sounds Death Knell

Nine Commentaries on the Communist Party


Part 1: On What the Communist Party Is
Part 2: On the Beginnings of the Chinese Communist Party
Part 3: On the Tyranny of the Chinese Communist Party
Part 4: On How the Communist Party Is an Anti-Universe Force
Part 5: On the Collusion of Jiang Zemin with the CCP to Persecute Falun Gong
Part 6: On How the Chinese Communist Party Destroyed Traditional Culture
Part 7: On the Chinese Communist Party's History of Killing
Part 8: On How the Chinese Communist Party Is an Evil Cult
Part 9: On the Scoundrel Nature of the Chinese Communist Part


The Epoch Times


What were her transcendent qualities?

Carly Fiorina is no more the "most powerful woman in business" (as regarded by Fortune Magazine).  She's been fired from her position as Chairman and C.E.O. of Hewlett-Packard, sending the stock up 18% in short order.  This without the naming of her successor.  Apparently investors view anybody as better.


She'd never run a major corporation before.  Compare this to a potential successor, Merrill Lynch analyst Steve Milunovich' nominee: Michael Capellas.  He's currently CEO of MCI, former CEO of Compaq, and even former president of HP (following its acquisition of Compaq).


What transcendent qualities allowed her to overcome her lack of qualifications?

Another witchhunt in Massachusetts

The first one  involved young girls telling lies about women.  This one involves a grown man telling the truth about women.

Time for a match-up

"I think really, and truly, (Annika Sorenstam)'s better than Tiger Woods." (Nancy) Lopez, as quoted in the Washington Post, March 28, 2005.


You mean "really, and truly"?  Then maybe it's time for a head-to-head match-up to settle things.


Primary Objective

The editorial "Chauvinism at the Battlefront" (The New York Times, May 20, 2005) describes a recent Congressional effort to bar women from combat positions in Iraq as a "demoralizing intrusion into the gender issue by impulsive lawmakers" that could thwart female career advancement in the military.

It makes no mention of what might really be behind this legislative move, i.e., supporting the war effort by seeking to . .


  1. protect U.S. public sensibilities from ghastly pictures of limbless and mutilated female soldiers that could shake American resolve more deeply than those of male soldiers;
  2. remove a target for Islamic militants, one they see as weaker and more exploitable, and one that garners greater international attention when taken hostage and tortured;
  3. ensure that the best fighters are to the fore against the best enemy fighters, without political machinations influencing the determination of merit;
  4. eliminate the conflicted motivation a male soldier feels when a female comrade goes down--the overwhelming biological impulse to aid her--when his primary objective of fighting enemy forces must go undiluted;
  5. keeping the fighting force at peak efficiency without the extra support it takes to keep a female soldier fighting effectively--not to mention the separate and special facilities needed to house and treat her medically, etc.;
  6. eliminate sexual attraction and activity from the battlefield where it distracts from the primary objective and can lead to numerous other difficulties (such as pregnant soldiers);
  7. remove multiculturalism and diversity from the list of priorities in battle--the ceaseless question "What about the women?" might just get more people killed;
  8. eliminate consideration of differences in the ways men and women respond to command, pressure, foreign cultures, harsh conditions (think latrine and hygiene), etc. from the commanding officers' list of concerns. They can't be worried about whose feelings are going to get hurt, but instead must focus solely on winning.

"(Women) are proving their valor in Iraq and need no demeaning protections from Congress" says the editorial. No. Men and women are getting turned into hamburger meat on the frontlines and need no journalists back home calling this career advancement.

The primary objective here is winning a war, not advancing women's military careers.  To allow for a competing objective such as this one means greater loss of human life, and might even spell defeat.

So What's Your Mission?

According to your e-mail your mission is to provide me with the best hosting solutions for my website, etc.  But your promotional picture suggests you're about promoting diversity in the workplace--what with the white female, Asian male, and Hispanic male displayed.  No middle-aged white guy to be seen, though I'm guessing he had a hand in setting up your company.  So, my question to you is, if you really hire people based on their ability to make your company more culturally diverse, and not on their ability to do the job, and I'm really interested in the best hosting solutions for my website, why should I hire you?

What would the founder say?

"Meg Whitman's eBay" . . "Meg Whitman's Bid for Growth" . . So she's the company. It's hers is it? What would the stockholders say?  If the expansions fail, will they be calling it Pierre Omidyar's?.

Pet Peeve

Is it just my imagination or do women on sidewalks always tend to block your path, at a turtle's pace walking six abreast, without any regard for your equal and rightful access to the space?  I've had them barge at me coming the other way, too, such that I've had to make way.  Why me and not them?  Sometimes they charge across my path without even looking up to see if anyone might be coming.  Are we all supposed to regard them as the privileged class?



I make here fair warning:  if it continues to happen I might be forced to make of myself a real son-of-a-bitch in response.  These are my sidewalks, too!!

Spot the Trend

Attending a meeting last night in Upper Northwest Washington, D.C., where the hoity-toity congregate, I detected a trend developing.


Before the meeting, an acquantaince of mine named "Gabe" was asking the ladies sitting next to me "Whatever happened to those women who stole all that money from the teacher's union fund?"  They recounted for him how the ringleader was put in jail (for nine years), but is in court testifying against the other defendants in the case.  Far from contrite she brags about how she used union funds to buy fur coats and other luxuries (to the tune of some $1.2 million).  "She was taking trips to Baltimore to buy custom clothes," Gabe chimed in.


The leader of the meeting says she initially promised not to "whine", but decided to anyway.  At her work of some many years they've decided to split her job in two, giving the other half to a "23-year old woman who uses baby talk, and is not smart."  She sends her e-mails inviting her to attend classes our leader is teaching.  "Just an example of the sort of thing that goes on."


The first woman who shares says she's been beside herself with happiness over her new job, especially because of the male manager she has.  But the female director of the agency, who called him "insubordinate" six weeks earlier and who our sharer "doesn't think too much of either", has shifted him out of her way.  So the sharer will not have the benefit of his training, guidance, and support and is suffering because of it.


The first guy who shares says that the "summer ESL (English as a Second Language) program is my program.  I conceived it.  I created it, I've run since it's inception.  Now they've brought back this troublemaker from last year who was always taking everything apart.  But she's from the same school as the woman who re-hired her.  I sat in a meeting with these two yesterday, the one being about 24 years old, the other being of an undeterminable age.  One of those women where you just can't tell.  They used the same--just to prove I went to college--psychometrics when they talked.  These little 'umms' and 'uhhs' and 'okays' and 'yups'.  And I'm thinking "Oh, s--t!!  This is what I'm going to have to put up with all summer."


The next woman who shares talked about how she always used to describe to the group the person she worked for whom she "despised".  I kept waiting for the "she" or "her"--because, you see, I spotted the trend early.  I couldn't really see her "despising" a male manager to this extent.  But I couldn't ask her after the meeting, either, without showing my hand or appearing like a negative-seeking missile.


Next we hear from a woman whose editor drives her crazy sending her e-mails, for example, that say "'Send in your story SAPA!' Because, you see, she's dyslexic."


After the meeting a black fellow joined us guys on the stoop outside.  "I've got the job from Hell!" he proclaimed.  "My boss was stealing money and she wanted me to help.  Because I wouldn't she kept giving me bad recommendations so I couldn't get jobs anywhere else.  I mean I'd get the job, then she'd send them a bad recommendation.  Finally they fired her, but she escaped jail--God only knows how."

Fire Chief Husband Calls Police on Wife

Monday, June 20, 2005


San Francisco (AP) --


The husband of San Francisco's fire chief called 911 Sunday night complaining that his wife had hit him over the head with a bottle, KRON 4 TV news reported.


Sean White refused medical treatment when police arrived at the San Francisco home he shares with Chief Joanne Hayes-White about 6 p.m., according to police Sgt. Neville Gittens. There were no arrests, he said.


Gittens referred to the incident as a "problem in the house" but had no other immediate details.


"A police report is being filed and will be forwarded to the appropriate investigative department," said Gittens.


Hayes-White, 41, was appointed chief by Mayor Gavin Newsom and installed in January 2004. The city's fire department is believed to be the largest in the world with a female chief. The department is considered one of the nation's most welcoming to women, with some 230 female firefighters of a total of 1,700.


Last month, however, a female firefighter fired for drinking on the job sued the department for sex discrimination, claiming that a man would have been given another chance.


(source)

A Smattering


In 1958, an investigation of spousal homicide between 1948 and 1952 (Wolfgang 1958) found that

  • 7.8% of murder victims were husbands murdered by wives
  • 8% were wives murdered by husbands.

In 1974, a study was released showing that

  • the number of murders of women by men (17.5% of total homicides)
  • was about the same as the number of murders of men by women (16.4% of total homicides).

A study of spousal homicide in the period from 1976 to 1985 found an overall ratio of 1.3:1.0 of murdered wives to murdered husbands (Mercy & Saltzman 1989).

In 1976, Wilt & Bannon wrote that "nonfatal violence committed by women against men is less likely to be reported to the police than is violence by men against women . ."

In 1977, Suzanne Steinmetz released results from several studies showing that


  • the percentage of wives who have used physical violence is higher than the percentage of husbands
  • the wives' average violence score tended to be higher
  • women were as likely as men to initiate physical violence
  • had similar motives for their violent acts.

In 1979, a telephone survey was conducted in which subjects were asked about their experiences of domestic violence (Nisonoff & Bitman 1979)


  • 18.6% of the men reported having been hit by their spouse
  • 12.7% of the women reported having been hit by their spouse.

In 1986, a report appeared in Social Work, the journal of the National Association of Social Workers (Nov./Dec. 1986) on violence in adolescent dating relationships, in which it was found that girls were violent more frequently than boys.

Another report on premarital violence (O'Leary, et al) found that


  • 34% of the males and
  • 40% of the females
reported engaging in some form of physical aggression against their mates in a year.

  • 7% of men and
  • 17% of women
reported engaging in severe physical aggression.

  • 35% of the men and
  • 30% of the women
reported having been abused.
Source.

Let the lady speak . .

"Given what we've done to fathers in the span of a generation - demoting him from Father Knows Best, which in spite of all its hyperbolic dramatization hurt no one, to the Three-D Dad: dumb, dorky and dispensable - it's a wonder men still submit to the altar.

Put it this way: If we did to Motherhood what we have done to Fatherhood, we'd all be wearing riot gear.
. . .

That a father revolt is inevitable seems a matter of cultural physics and human nature. Human beings can withstand only so much contravening pressure against what is in their interest or necessary to their survival. Men do not do well without families, as George Gilder wrote as long ago as 1973 in his landmark book, "Sexual Suicide," subsequently expanded to "Men and Marriage."
. . .

A time of reckoning can't be far off given that family courts have made divorced fathers visitors to their children's lives - 40 percent of children live in homes without their fathers - as society has embraced the "deadbeat dad" as a prototype rather than a deviation from the norm. Studies show that women file the majority of divorces, and that fathers (almost 80 percent) who have regular contact with their children pay their child support in full and on time.

Meanwhile, old-fashioned masculinity is demeaned as we celebrate "metrosexuals" and invite homosexual men to ridicule heterosexuals' fashion sense ("Queer Eye for the Straight Guy"). It's hard enough raising boys in homes without fathers, let alone in a world that finds traditional male characteristics boorish and passe.

To be blunt, raising boys and girls without their fathers is simply another, if mysteriously accepted, form of child neglect."

Source.

Boys in Crisis

A new Duke University study on child well-being . . clearly contradicts the popular notion that there is a “girl crisis” or that modern girls are disadvantaged. Instead it shows that . .


  • Boys fared equally with girls in only six of the 28 categories studied by the researchers, while girls fared better than boys in 17 of the remaining 22.
  • The male advantages were modest: males had a small advantage in math, a slightly lower propensity to smoke, and less likelihood to have been relocated in the past year.
  • Many of the girls’ advantages are huge:

    1. their death rate in the 15 to 19 age group is half that of boys
    2. boys have higher death rates at all ages than girls
    3. while girls do attempt suicide more frequently, boys aged 15 to 19 commit suicide at four times the rate of girls
    4. boys aged 12 to 19 are 40% more likely to be the victims of violent crime than girls
    5. and are significantly more likely to suffer from drug or alcohol addictions.

Further, as a related study has confirmed . .


  • The percentage of boys graduating from high school has now dropped back below 1985 levels.
  • Girls get better grades than boys and are much more likely than boys to graduate high school, enter college, and graduate from college.
  • Boys did score a couple of points better on the most recent national math test considered by the study.
  • But the girls’ advantage on the most recent reading test is five times as large.

. . and . .


  • The vast majority of learning-disabled students are boys.
  • Boys are four times as likely to receive a diagnosis of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder as girls.
  • Boys are far more likely than girls to be disciplined, suspended, held back, or expelled.

See source.

Looking for That Alpha Male

Naomi Wolf, a feminist writer, was paid $15,000 a month as a consultant to Vice President Al Gore during his presidential campaign. She suggested that Gore reinvent himself as an Alpha male (a leader) to replace his Beta male (a follower) tendencies. Gore was mocked for ostensibly needing a woman to tell him how to be a man. After the story broke in November, Wolf's salary was reduced to $5,000 a month.


See source.

Reasonable Doubt

"According to the FBI, A Woman is Beaten Every X Seconds"



  • The FBI does not calculate, tabulate, or track data on domestic violence.

  • The number of seconds depends on the study, if there actually was one, and how violence was defined.

"Domestic Violence is the Leading Cause of Injury to Women Between the Ages of 15 and 44 in the United States - More Than Car Accidents, Muggings, and Rapes Combined"


The original source of this statement goes back to two papers by Stark and Flitcraft.


  • First, the actual research the "fact" is based on is a rather small survey of one emergency room.
  • Second, in the original articles, they said that domestic violence may be a more common cause of emergency room visits than car accidents, muggings, and rapes combined.

"The March of Dimes Reports that Battering During Pregnancy is the Leading Cause of Birth Defects and Infant Mortality"


The March of Dimes actually reports that they know of no such study.


"Family Violence has Killed More Women in the Last Five Years as the Total Number of Americans Who Were Killed in The Vietnam War"


About 55,000 Americans lost their lives in the Vietnam war. According to the FBI, Uniform Crime Statistics, about 1,500 women are killed by their husbands or boyfriends each year.


"Women Who Kill Their Batterers Receive Longer Prison Sentences than Men Who Kill Their Partners"


According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, Violence Between Intimates (November, 1994)


  • the average prison sentence for men who killed their wives was 17.5 years;
  • the average sentence for women convicted of killing their husbands was 6.2 years.

"Nationally, 50% of All Homeless Women and Children are on the Streets Because of Violence in the Home


An interesting factoid stated by Senator Biden, but one without any actual published scientific research to support it.


"There are Nearly Three Times as Many Animal Shelters in the United States as There are Shelters for Battered Women and Their Children"


Another great sound bite, but one not actually based on a verified count of either type of shelter.


See source.

Let the lady speak . .

"Congress Should Kill Discriminatory Domestic Violence Act"


by Wendy McElroy
Thursday, June 30, 2005


The Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) will expire this September if it is not re-authorized by Congress. Largely viewed as an anti-domestic violence (DV) measure, VAWA has become a flash point for the men's rights advocates (MRAs) who see it instead as the living symbol of anti-male bias in law.


Although a significant number of domestic violence (DV) victims are male, VAWA defines victims as female. As one result, tax-funded DV shelters and services assist women and routinely turn away men, often including older male children.


Estimates vary on the prevalence of male victims. Professor Martin Fiebert of California State University at Long Beach offers a bibliography that "summarizes 170 scholarly investigations, 134 empirical studies and 36 reviews." It indicates that men and women are victimized at much the same rate. A lower-bound figure is provided by a recent BoJ study: men constituted 27 percent of the victims of family violence between 1998 and 2002.


Accordingly, MRAs not only accuse the Act of not merely being unconstitutional for excluding men but also of dismissing the existence of one-quarter to one-half of DV victims . . .


www.foxnews.com

Let the Saudi ladies speak . .

In response to an Oprah Winfrey show that aired recently, Saudi Arabian women are signing an online petition to say it ain't so. "No", they say in multitudes, "we are not oppressed!" Some of the individual signators comment . .
93. nadiah--"what's wrong with u Oprah?????? we like and respect u why u are saying things about us and u dont know any thing about how we live !!!!!!! oprah we invite u to saudia arabia plz come and see the saudi women"
99. Moneerah Al-Assaf--"i saw that episode and was and still am in total SHOCK that oprah said that about us, especially since that episode talked about all the cool new things that you can find in other countries and then ended up saying that about us!! I'm totally outraged. She didn't do her research, which is very disappointing in such a well educated person."
190. fatemah--"Oprah, being objective means knowing all the facts & yet you aired a segment about Saudi Arabia_I'm sorry to say_ you know nothing about. I used to be a fan but not anymore"
226. Deena--"Opera. The population is 22 million in saudi. And you say what ever u said and disiaded that all Saudis r the same cuz of 1 person? Do u think it’s right? What I ask u to do .. is come to Saudi just like u went every were else and see the right view, not the pic’s that u showen in ur program it was like 100 years old."
315. Rotana--"Hey! my name is Rotana and i'm 14 years old,im a big fan of Oprah i just love the woman,, but sinse that show when she spoke about saudi women and men something inside me got realy hurt i was thinking oh my god even OPRAH!!! the idol of love and care and judgment, i'm sure it was a missunderstanding ..so if your reading Oprah PLZZZZ know us before you judge us we realy are nice ppl u know ;)"

Not for the Queasy


Women's Shelter Volunteer Speaks Out

Unconstitutional

An online petition pressing the U.S. Congress to make the Violence Against Women Act gender neutral, includes signator comments such as . .
1.
Stanley B. Gaver
The name says it all: "The Violence Against Women Act" is government-sponsored sex discrimination.
62.
Tom Williamson
What happened to equal protection?
55.
Marc E. Angelucci
We don't have a "Men's Occupational Safety and Health Act" just because men make 92% of occupational deaths. Instead, we include everyone, no matter what the percentages. And when we speak of firefighters and the military we now consciously use gender-inclusive terms. Why not with domestic violence? Male victims are a large, hidden class of victims who have essentially no political voice and have been been swept under the rug for decades because they don't fit the feminist paradigm for domestic violence. They feel extremely stigmatized and excluded by language such as the title of this bill. A growing number of them are speaking out, and that number will multiply. The National Violence Against Women Survey found "approximately 1.3 million women and 834,732 men are raped and/or physically assaulted by an intimate partner in the previous 12 months." www.ncjrs.org/txtfiles1/nij/181867.txt There is no excuse for ignoring these victims or giving them only token recognition.
46.
Arlene Soucie
either make this gender neutral, or disolve it all together. VAWA is nothing more than a weapon overly used against men.
42.
Tom James
How about letting male victims testify at Congressional hearings this time around? Some of them are still alive.
27.
George Chalanycz
Have a friend stabbed by his wife
26.
Fredric Hayward
I've been assaulted several times by my son's mom. On two occasions, still bleeding, I went to the police. Despite a policy of automatic arrest when there are visible injuries (and despite her admission of causing the injuries), there was no arrest. No prosecution. One officer warned me (being helpful, mind you, not being mean) that "The next time she starts swinging at you, get out of there fast. If she just breaks a fingernail trying to hit you, we will arrest YOU!" My son witnessed all her attacks. How is this less harmful to him because his father was the victim instead of his mother?
17.
Tom Parker
Promoting hatred of men is no longer acceptable!
108.
Michael De Armond
This law is in direct violation of the constitution
104.
Steven Hoffman
Blatant discrimination hyped as equality. VAWA could come from an unpublished Orwell novel. But it’s real, and it’s the law in the USA. Change it!
96.
Erin Pizzey
Founder of the first refuge in the world 1971, London England.
90.
Thomas Ellis
VAWA must be gender neutral, and male victims of domestic violence MUST be acknowledged and assisted the same as female victims. Men must NOT be excluded from equality.

"Sorting Out the Reasons Couples Turn Violent"

By Scott Sleek,  Monitor staff

(The Monitor is the journal of the American Psysological Association.)

For years, Irene Frieze, PhD, wanted to keep rather quiet about her unexpected findings on dating violence. She was worried about how the mainstream media might spin her results, and how they might be interpreted by the feminist groups that had long lauded her work.

Why the hesitancy? Frieze, a psychology professor at the University of Pittsburgh, and her colleagues had found in surveys of 300 college students that women appeared more likely than men to start physical altercations with a dating partner, usually in the form of slapping, shoving or pushing.

When a Pitt public relations officer learned of the data last October and decided to issue a press release on it, Frieze’s reservations proved accurate. The National Organization for Women denounced the research as fraudulent, while a radio station exaggerated her results as showing that women 'cause most domestic violence.'

Frieze certainly wasn’t the first person to make such a discovery about women’s role in relationship violence. In fact, many psychologists, including noted feminist researchers, have collected similar results with far larger sample sizes.

But it’s not an easy topic to discuss. Some feminists deride the validity of such results, while men’s groups point to them as evidence that males are the unsung victims of domestic abuse.

But findings about women’s use of violence need to be discussed in context, psychologists say. True, a variety of studies dating to the late 1970s have shown that females are slightly more likely than males to acknowledge resorting to slapping, kicking or shoving romantic partners. Yet many researchers say romantic conflict is too complex and variable to say conclusively that one gender initiates it more often than the other.
. . .

Yet some clinicians and researchers believe women aren’t being held accountable for their physical aggression against their husbands and boyfriends. They suggest that studies may underreport women’s aggression because men may be too embarrassed to admit being hit or injured by a woman. Younger males may be an exception: Studies have shown that they are more likely to report being victims of moderate physical abuse than are their female peers. But the girls don’t seem to be disagreeing with them. They acknowledge being the aggressors more often than the boys, studies show.

Cultural norms make it more acceptable for women to hit men than vice versa, and women seem to be taking advantage of it, says Judith Sherven, PhD, a Los Angeles psychologist and outspoken advocate for victimized men. And statistics show that women are more likely than men to use a weapon in a domestic battle, perhaps to make up for their lesser strength, she adds.

Women are becoming more aggressive because they’re increasingly intolerant of men’s foibles, Sherven contends.

The women’s movement, while succeeding in helping women gain equality in the workplace and other arenas, has not helped them shed the archaic idea that 'a man should be Prince Charming,' she says.

'I see young women in my practice who are much angrier at men than my generation was,' she says. 'They want the men to be perfect.'
. . .

Where's the Movement?



  1. If the Women's Movement depends for its existence on the existence of men who brutalize women, at least relatively speaking to women who brutalize men, it disappears when they can't legitimately be found. Where's your movement?
  2. The entire power-through-victimhood movement women have used to upend society extends from this representation of females uniquely as victims, but where is the male-oriented movement for all the male victims of female aggression? Where's our movement?
  3. Male victims of female aggression exist in similar numbers to the female sufferers, but instead of society-changing organizations being set up to trumpet this fact, they are largely ignored. Where's the movement?

Let the ladies speak . .


Congress Should Kill Discriminatory Domestic Violence Act, Wendy McElroy, June 29, 2005.


Betrayal of Women - VAWA 2005, Trudy W. Schuett, June 15, 2005.


What Have Feminists Done to America's Fathers?, Phyllis Schlafly, June 10, 2005.


Dying of political correctness, Kathleen Parker, May 29, 2004.


VAWA Tests the Limits of Federal Power, Phyllis Schlafly, December 1, 1999.

Useful Book

Girl Wars: 12 Strategies That Will End Female Bullying, by Cheryl Dellasega, Charisse Nixon.


Some of the other books those who bought this one at Amazon.com also purchased appear to be highly illuminating, too.




Let the Lady Speak

The audio of  Glenn Sack's His Side from this past Sunday--"Schlafly on VAWA, Fathers' Rights, and Conservatives' Failure to Defend Fatherhood & Families"--can be heard by clicking here.