 |
|
Add to My Group
| May 7, 2007 at 07:00:02 |
|
 
|
Editor's note: Please also check out this article, Publishing Without Comfort; Thoughts on Editorial Policy, which discusses this article. The deafening silence from Duke University in its failure to apologize to the Duke Lacrosse players, and its failure to change campus policy with respect to feminist harassment of men, has not gone unchallenged. The watershed event at Duke has ignited long-overdue scrutiny of cultish women’s studies programs that have impressed hatred and sexism towards men at our Universities. Duke University cannot rebuild its crumbled foundations until apologies are made to the Lacrosse players, and changes are made to campus policy and curricula to ensure that radical feminist professors cannot control the campus by manipulating students to serve the next generation up on the platter of radical feminism. 
One thing is clear: feminist campus activities at Duke in 2006 did not occur because of spontaneous student outrage. They were organized by professors in the Women’s Studies department in cohort with national feminist organizations such as the National Organization for Women and the American Association of University Women.
The “take back the night” rally at Duke was organized in the same style Castro orchestrates public events in Cuba. Students were spoon-fed agitprop and then sent out to put on a show for the media. What a carnivale of hate it was! Wanted posters with photographs of 40 members of the Lacrosse team were posted all over campus. Wild epithets were brandished about a “culture of rape” that exists on college campuses.[i] Students were told to come forward and tell “stories” about “rapes”. Walls of protesters emerged brandishing sexist signs.
Even the Duke Divinity School participated in the rampage,[ii] holding a revivalist service, and carrying the mindset forward into the divinity school’s “women’s week”. Finally, we have found some religious nuts crazier than Muslim fundamentalists and probably just as dangerous. Perhaps we should send them on a field trip to Iraq, to teach their hate to Muqtada Al Sadr. They would come home with much wiser liturgical attitude towards American men.
Duke’s “Group of 88”[iii] professors published a signed group statement cloaking anonymous feminist claims about violence in a valedictorian cap and gown.[iv] To this day they still disavow responsibility[v] for officiating and propelling a mob environment inexcusably hateful to men at Duke University. They pretend their involvement amounted to nothing more than “listening to students”. Their statement[vi] issued in response to demands for apologies is a shocking twisting of facts: “The disaster is the atmosphere that allows sexism, racism, and sexual violence to be so prevalent on campus” reflects directly on them.
There are 87 indignant humanities professors[vii] at Duke who are the disaster creating an atmosphere of racism and sexism on campus – one that imagines sexual violence in every dorm room. One English professor, one “Ms. Holloway”, still pretends that “Something did happen on Buchanon”.[viii] Like Stephen A. Douglas, they have not realized their condonation of brute discrimination has been laid bare by Abe Lincoln for all to witness.
At Columbia University, feminists held a jaded speak-out rally powered by a most paradoxical ideology: “Tonight is a night of survival in the most active sense of the word. We shout to combat the silence that is forced upon us.” [ix] In a day where there is a rape and women’s violence hotline phone number literally everywhere we look, there is no evidence that violence against women is a silenced issue anywhere in America.
North Carolina Central, where liar, stripper and prostitute Crystal Mangum[x] was a “student”, established a “student support fund” for Mangum. President James H. Ammons screeched “Our hearts go out to her, and we'll do everything to support her … We throw our arms to our student with moral and financial support. There's no place for racial discrimination or sexual violence. We stand firm in our stance." [xi]
The American Association of University Women is a leading oracle of cult misandry in America. Their claims are widely published by media and cited around the world as reason for turning justice on its head.
For example, the AAUW claims that “42% of college women who are raped tell no one about the assault”.[xii] Like the vast majority of feminist statistics, this baseless number springs magically from a litany of anecdotal “stories” collected by Robin Warshaw, titled “I Never Called It Rape”. The book lays out a meaningless definition of rape nearly as expansive as Marilyn French’s infamous statement “All men are rapists and that's all they are”.[xiii] One book review even points out that the book’s claims lack reasonable scientific foundation.[xiv]
The AAUW also claims that 25% of college women are raped during their college career,[xv] but only “5% of rape incidents are reported to police”.[xvi] With feminist rallies several times per year, and a noisy radical women’s support center on every college campus, can anyone believe these outrageous lies?
Elsewhere, the New York City Alliance Against Sexual Assault held a “speak out” in April, 2006 for self-nominated “rape victims” to spit out rumor-mill imaginations of victimization and rape. Like reality-TV, this event encouraged extraordinary extremism to command attention. This organization claims that 22,000 women and 8,000 men are raped in New York City each year, despite the fact that only 1,700 rapes are reported to police each year.[xvii] The V-Day celebration in New York[xviii] was no less astonishing. We normally ignore nuts on soapboxes ranting the unimaginable to earn their ten minutes of loquacious fame. But when it is organized by the National Organization of Women, we take the insane seriously.
In June, 2006, the National Organization for Women pretended that doubts about Crystal Mangum’s story constituted putting the accuser on trial.[xix] N.O.W. has been mute about the Duke case ever since. But it still continues to liturgize about rape and violence against women as if Duke never happened.
There is no palpable credibility to these sordid diatribes against men. Certainly, rape does exist. The problem must be addressed accurately and forcefully, not with the atom bomb of radical feminism.
In balance, rape is far from pandemic. We know that 40% to 50% of rape allegations are clearly false.[xx] [xxi] The Innocence Project[xxii] has proven the effectiveness of feminist Klan ideologies and federal entitlements misused to lock up perfectly innocent people in spite of case facts.
In fact, we can say that the mass murder at Virginia Tech could have been avoided if police had not immediately concluded that the first victim’s boyfriend was the killer. The first double-murder suggests something more than a domestic disagreement. Seung-Hui Cho was a well-known campus nut. Police ignored what many students and a few professors first concluded: Cho was the murderer. Had police locked the campus down until Cho was found, thirty murders could have been prevented.
There is a deeply-ingrained culture of neo-paternalist hate on our college campuses that is deeply offensive to the reasonable mind. This inhumanism is not a reflection of credible research or qualitative analysis. It is the klannish cult of radical feminism,[xxiii] impressed on the educational system by off-campus NGO’s, largely financed by federal VAWA funds. These programs are indoctrinaire, not educational. It is time this practice is ended, and our campuses firewalled from it.
We know that federal laws such as the Violence Against Women Act, and family and criminal jurisprudence are abused dangerously. Stephen Baskerville, Ph.D. demonstrates that our “open politicization of scholarship by domestic violence advocates with an ideological agenda is also simply accepted.”[xxiv]
All change begins on our college campuses. The onus and responsibility for corrective action rests on the shoulders of Colleges and Universities. They are solely responsible for academic programs and the events sponsored or permitted on their campuses. Many colleges gladly allow feminist lynch mobs lacking only ropes and hoods to convict the majority of men of rape or violence, and to harass all men into thinking that all other men are abusers or rapists. The rancid transmogrification of diversity to cold hate is simply not acceptable.
College men must take the lead. There are many college women[xxv] who know how dangerous feminism is who will join you. If you do not want to live your adult lives being called an abuser, and end up divorced and one of those “deadbeat dads” you hear about all the time, you must do this. You must organize and hold feminists feet to the factual fire. It is my experience in the world of politics that feminists run when exposed, but only when you show you are not afraid of them.
I am willing to work with college men and women who have the wisdom to change the future before they get there, and teach them how to win. College is a bigger investment in your future than you ever imagined. Your degree will not be worth a nickel when feminists end up destroying half of all marriages, leaving women in poverty, and men criminalized if they cannot support two households.
The modern Women’s Ku Klux Klan has no business running our college campuses.[xxvi] The foundations of Duke University and many college campuses are in bigoted ruins. Apologies are not good enough to end the culture of misandry on college campuses. American universities cannot be resurrected until radical feminism is banned as an organized institution both in academia and as an entitled student institution.
Until that time, parents should wisely send their children to college in countries that actually teach real coursework, where sex is not taught as a war, and where marriage is considered normal. The University of Singapore or the University of Tokyo are two good choices. If you want your children to get ahead in the next generation, there are few choices left in America worth wasting your money on.
-------------------------------------------------
David R. Usher is Senior Policy Analyst for the True Equality Network and President of the American Coalition for Fathers and Children, Missouri Coalition
-------------------------------------------------
[xiv] http://www.division42.org/MembersArea/Nws_Views/articles/Reviews_Books/never_calledit_rape.html
[xv] Ibid.., 11
[xvi] Ibid., 11
[xx] McDowell CP. False allegations. Forensic Science Digest, Vol. 11, No. 4, December 1985
[xxi] Kanin EJ. An alarming national trend: False rape allegations. Archives of Sexual Behavior, Vol. 23, No. 1, 1994 http://www.sexcriminals.com/library/doc-1002-1.pdf
[xxv] Caldwell, Lucy; “Rushing to Rape” Harvard Crimson, April 8, 2007; http://www.thecrimson.com/printerfriendly.aspx?ref=518304
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
 Contact Author |
Contact Editor |
 View Authors' Articles |
|
|
|
| 42 comments |
|
From the Publisher
This article is an odd one for OpEdNews. The idea of discussing the "feminist klan" challenges our regular approach, which is to advocate FOR women's rights and against discrimination. But within any system, one must consider and the ideas of homeostasis-- the varying elements which contribute to maintaining balance. Balance. It is LIKELY, that in the effort to change a system, ay system, some energy, some force, will not be enough, will fall short (we see that all the time with limp-spined Democrats) and some will go too far. Some people, some groups may go to far, even when the intention is good, right and fair. When that happens, injustice can occur and ammunition may be provided for those who oppose the good, right and fair change that really IS needed. In medicine, you "titrate" dosage to determine how much is just right. How do you titrate how much is just right when it comes to activism, to protest, to prosecution? In medicine, it is possible by prescribing too much, to overdose. Then, you must do something to reverse the overdose-- the imbalance you've created. This is called "iatrogenic illness" and it is one of the biggest causes of death in the USA. Once you realize that an "overdose"condition exists, what do you do to reverse it? Then, can the "treatment" to reverse the "overdose" be too extreme, even toxic? And will it actually do what it is intended to do-- reverse the imbalance and bring about a healthier condition? These were the considerations I evaluated in publishing this article, which, at first glance, I found repugnant. But, having been in a custody battle (which I won) I know that in my county, 80% of custody battles are won by women-- and that 20% win rate for men is unusually high. While there is still a long way to go for women to receive full equality with men, and we have a lot of work to do to get to that point, there are still some areas and will be situations where things go too far. This article makes me uncomfortable. I don't like the tone. But it raises some points which, even if you don't agree with them, are worth thinking about. And we can go further with this. Substitute the word White people" for feminist, and replace "black men" for the "men" referred to as abused in this article, and it takes on a useful perspective. We still have sooo much work to do to get our culture right. We don't want to make mistakes of excess that hand arguing and talking points to the other side. I'm hoping this article will raise some useful discussion. by Rob Kall (952 articles, 4177 quicklinks, 374 diaries, 2087 comments [45 recommended, 3 rejected]) on Monday, May 7, 2007 at 7:21:35 AM  (0+)
|
|
Reply: Duke Rape case
Hey Rob: This was a new one to me also. I mean as a woman I have been feeling threatened by men all my life and most of it comes from are politicians who has used a womans body to get into office(I am against abortion crap). I think the main points that was posted on here says a lot about our culture. It also says alot how we got to this point. I know that in this white man sexist patriarchial society that we live in woman had to endure alot even today in regards to their body, Most dont want a woman having the right to vote. It seems to be alot of mistrust on both sides but we as a nation cant get their if we are allowing those who are making it worse. I feel that abortion should only be handled by the woman period. But their are men in this country mostly conservatives who are terrified over woman because of their masculinity issue. This only produce circles where nothing gets done. I think if we pass in equal rights for woman and men, well for everyone these types of issues can be dealt with because then it will come from a balance view. And that is we all should be given the respect that we deserve. by chip90043 (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 60 comments) on Monday, May 7, 2007 at 4:08:28 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: "Points we need to THINK about"???
How many women DON'T think about rape every day, Rob? How many rape victims DON'T relive our traumas whenever we hear these lies about US being the liars? And how many places, now, can we go where we DON'T have to defend our right to defend ourselves???! This article isn't an attempt to "raise important issues." Its only intention is to silence women from fighting for our equlity. by Mars Caulton (1 articles, 1 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 88 comments) on Tuesday, May 8, 2007 at 1:07:11 AM (0+)
|
|
just sharing
A family of our friends invited us to the 40s birthday of a husband at the restaurant. There were other families there with children. During the process suddenly a stripper came in dressed as a policewoman and started to undress herself first at the husband's and then going around other men. Apparently, that was a gift from a wife to her husband on a birthday. I, an adult man of about 50 refused to participate and was ridiculed by others ( although my wife supported me and I surely don't give a damn on what they think) Let me ask you all, folks, why do we have to invite strippers and what kind of a perversive instinct do we satisfy doing that? Maybe that should be discussed first. by Mark Sashine (72 articles, 19 quicklinks, 269 diaries, 4101 comments [131 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, May 7, 2007 at 8:25:47 AM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Yes
Yes, I agree with you. I don't feel comfortable with that kinda stuff either. Even at my own wedding I didn't feel comfortable with that "garter" stuff. by Bob Gormley (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 1094 comments [65 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, May 7, 2007 at 9:47:50 AM (0+)
|
|
Misogyny is Alive and Well in America
I’ve obviously missed something, apparently women are trying to eliminate men, or at least subjugate them. I’ll have to make a note of that. I’ll also have to let all the women I know that they are in charge of everything, especially universities… and they didn’t even know it!! Go figure. JRM by John R Moffett (89 articles, 18 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 697 comments [14 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, May 7, 2007 at 10:16:08 AM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Elimination or subjugation?
Hi John, "To call a man an animal is to flatter him; he's a machine, a walking dildo." Scum Manifesto. (Valerie Solanas) "All men are rapists and that's all they are." (Marilyn French) "Probably the only place where a man can feel really secure is in a maximum security prison, except for the imminent threat of release." (Germaine Greer) "I believe that women have a capacity for understanding and compassion which man structurally does not have, does not have it because he cannot have it. He's just incapable of it." (Former Congresswoman Barbara Jordan) "All sex, even consensual sex between a married couple, is an act of violence perpetrated against a woman." .... "You grow up with your father holding you down and covering your mouth so another man can make a horrible searing pain between your legs." (Catherine MacKinnon) "We can't destroy the inequities between men and women until we destroy marriage." I prefer my slogan, created in 1998: "We must now grant to fathers the same right to be in the family as we have granted to women in the workplace". Since half the fathers in America have been driven out of the family, I suggest there is a lot of elimination or subjugation to reverse. by David R. Usher (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 22 comments) on Monday, May 7, 2007 at 11:09:21 PM (0+)
|
|
Echo of the real thing
This is a very old trick in the book: our media pins people against each other: women against men, black people against white, immigrants against native-born, etc. In reality there is only one confrontation- poor against rich. Those boys invited a stripper because they were rich or at least with means. They had very little interaction with the real world and they did not know that they were and are just puppies. The actual wolves- people who benefited from all that are parasites: media people, commenters, movie folks, etc. See who benefits. If people were smarter they would understand, count the money and then see where it went. And next time they better be sure not to invite strippers but maybe look into the mirror and see who they are. by Mark Sashine (72 articles, 19 quicklinks, 269 diaries, 4101 comments [131 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, May 7, 2007 at 1:15:30 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: GAMMA DELTA IOTA
I find it very difficult to feel sorry for the young men. They knew there was a party, there, and they knew that alcohol was being served to students who were not of age. There are too many partying partiers at any given school in the US. Oklahoma University is NOW a no alcohol university, which includes Frat and Sorority houses. (An alcohol related death, 2 years ago.) So, ... the party at Duke was moved off campus, for obvious reasons. As far as I am concerned, they should have hog-tied all of them and took them to meet their parents. During the whole sordid mess, the young men were the victims. Bull. They made the choice to go to the party. If they hadn't gone, their names wouldn't have surfaced. As I told my college students, ... "... if you are involved in anything alchohol, or if I walk into your apartment and find beer cans, you're not getting any monetary support from me." by Dale Hill (59 articles, 0 quicklinks, 107 diaries, 350 comments) on Monday, May 7, 2007 at 1:38:02 PM (0+)
|
|
There is some truth to your rant
Properly-reared young men should be reared with enough sense to know that college is not necessarily a time when they can run wild and hire strippers for parties but, having done so, they should take care to be sure that the misguided women who perform are adequately proteceted against those among them who are not well-reared. But to rail against efforts to protect young women who are trying to further their education is simply silly. Not all women are man-haters, not all feminists are out to destroy the American principles of manhood. Men who behave in a manly fashion are rarely victimized by women. The struggle for equal rights is not an anti-man thing but a pro-woman thing and it has been going on for many years. My own mother had to defy my father in order to vote when women's sufferage was first enacted, but the male attitude of "barefoot and pregnant" was the only protection from becoming "wolf meat" has continued unabated. Now a woman can even have a man prosecuted for rape rather than being blamed for "asking for it" by being beautiful or dressing in an attractive fashion. The fact that there are still men who act like Neanderthals and want to lock them up in private harems when not swathed in veils does not alter the rights of a woman to live in safety. What ever happened to gentlemanly behavior? Cave men are no longer cool. by Mary Pitt (77 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 282 comments [11 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, May 7, 2007 at 1:40:12 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Dear Mumzee
Perhaps I am missing something, but I don't recall seeing a lot of campus rapists being tried and prosecuted. I am quite aware of what goes on in college. Kids try on all the hats to see which ones fit. They do stupid things. Hormones are raging. Lots of kids sleep with people they don't care about. Women chase after men they are hot for, and men do the same. But, in all of this, there are very few actual cases of rape. by David R. Usher (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 22 comments) on Monday, May 7, 2007 at 11:01:04 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: "Balance, Schmalance." This is just a pack of lies.
Women get raped: and in a smaller but just as heinous number, so do men. The vast majority (and some would argue 100%) of rapes are committed by men. College rape rarely exists? It's just hormones and aggressive women? Women just make "mistakes" and later call it rape? Thanks for making many, many MORE young women afraid to press charges against rapists on campuses. You just added another brick in the wall. Good job. I wish your insecurity around critically-thinking women was ample excuse for calling Feminists a "Klan." But there is no excuse. Many a Knightrider, Grand Wizard, or Nazi-punk got his (yeah, that's right: HIS in most cases) start by having negative experiences with someone Black, and instead of summing it up as the act of a wrong person, they summed it up as evidence of Blacks trying to take over the world. Poor, terrified white folks. And now, we get to read, (and are encouraged to thoughtfully respond to!), poor terrified men. Sorry that somewhere down the line one or two women hurt you in some way. That's not the fault of all women, especially not the fault of a women's movement that is about saving LIVES lost to depression, rape, sex industry, and battering. But you don't need a million well-thought-out responses to your claim that women are ruining the country one campus at a time. You just need some decent therapy. Good luck with that. by Mars Caulton (1 articles, 1 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 88 comments) on Tuesday, May 8, 2007 at 12:50:34 AM (0+)
|
|
And so is misandry!
Before I blast you, I have to thank you for giving me yet another reason to chuckle at your silliness. Not only are you cute, at least in that picture, you are hilarious without intending to be! That is a rare gift, and you should consider yourself lucky to have been given that gift. Now, on with the blasting! The "He man woman hater's club", for your information, is a product of the Little Rascals, not The Three Stooges! If you listened to REO Speedwagon's song Tough Guys, you would have known that. Had you ever watched classic movies on TV, you would know that as well. Had you typed in the phrase, "He man woman hater's club" into your google toolbar, you'd have known that as well. But you didn't do that, did you? No, not unlike the feminist crud who won't admit their rush to judgment against the Duke lacross team was baseless, and won't apologize for the hell that the true victims, the falsely accused, went through, you came off half cocked thinking you knew something you obviously didn't! Not every woman that cries rape is honest about it! In this time when that word brings on an almost immediate rush to judgment, it's not unheard of for women to accuse someone of rape just to get back at them, to get them in trouble, or to silence their words. As a matter of fact, I'm pretty sure it happens more than anyone cares to admit. It's called "crying wolf", or just plain old lying. When I first heard about the Duke lacross incident, I was outraged. In my own rush to judgment, I figured, "Oh, some rich fucks raped a woman and want to get away with it." Then the evidence started coming in. Once it was proved that the semen found in the vagina of that WHORE didn't belong to any of the accused, I knew right then it was a sham. She wanted her fifteen minutes of Warhalian fame, and she wanted to get back at "whitey". What better way to do that than to accuse innocent men of rape? There is no better way! There is a knee-jerk reaction to a rape accusation in this country. Instead of innocent until proven guilty, it's guilty even if proven innocent, such as in the case of the Duke lacross team. Oh yes, there are still those who feel they are guilty even though there is NOT ONE f*cking SHRED OF EVIDENCE TO PROVE THAT BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT! And why is that? Because whether we are willing to admit it or not, the feminist agenda scares the absolute sh*t out of just about every living, breathing male soul in this country! I applaud the author of this article for daring to place himself on the chopping block. I can only imagine the tenor of the emails that are assailing his email accounts even as I type this! Is it so wrong to ask for an apology in the Duke lacross case? If so, why? Al Sharpton ranted and raved against Don Imus. Don Imus apologized for a clearly offensive statement, even though being offensive was his job. Why can't the I-N-N-O-C-E-N-T Duke lacross team be afforded the same? Don Imus apologized privately to each of the girls on the Rutgers Basketball team. Why shouldn't the skanky "nappy headed ho" lying b*tch who falsely accused these I-N-N-O-C-E-N-T men apologize in person to the members of the team who spent time in jail? Why should she be afforded some special treatment because she's a woman? WHY? Rape is a heinous crime! I know rape victims of BOTH SEXES! To attempt to legitimize false accusations of rape just because you fear not kowtowing to feminists is just plain wrong. Like it or not, your position on this issue is also just as wrong, and as your statement about the "he man woman haters club" proves, ignorant as well! I am all for the rights of people to do as they please. The screaming Libertarian within me would accept nothing less. HOWEVER, right is right, and wrong is wrong. It is clear from the evidence that the so-called "victim" in the Duke lacross "rape" case is anything but a victim. It is even clearer that the true victims in this case, the falsely accused, will never get their names cleared because of the willingness for society to kowtow to the ravings of feminists. So, next time you go off half-cocked writing about what you THINK you know, run your idea through the filter of a google search engine so at least your facts are correct, even if your opinion isn't! by Pappy (61 articles, 0 quicklinks, 11 diaries, 860 comments [5 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, May 7, 2007 at 1:53:35 PM (0+)
|
|
Oh, how knowledgeable we became
Men, huh? We now know about semen and vagina. We know about abortion. We know trimesters. We know PMS. We know and can comment on the women's internal organs. Oh yes, we even are knowledgeable in female circumcision. And in all those hormons. You know, folks, men like me I would appreciate very much if we do not know all that. I would prefer us to know ( and know very well) what does that mean to be a man. I would like us to know more about ourselves. Like what is manly and what is.. SOB. Like inviting a stripper is SOB. And killing 400 birds in one day is SOB. And killing a million people and then having fun like our Prez does is SOB. And not bragging about ' scoring' in the man's washroom is manly. You know , Ernest Hemingway was asked once,'Ernest, did you sleep with your wife before you got married?' - I do not remember,-answered the Great American Man. And that was a good answer, folks. It is unfortunate that men have to spend their time studying and memorising all those feminine things. There is only one way to treat another human being- man or woman- that is as equal. The cornerstone is there. Do we do that? by Mark Sashine (72 articles, 19 quicklinks, 269 diaries, 4101 comments [131 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, May 7, 2007 at 2:29:11 PM (0+)
|
|
This is hate speech
Living in Utah, I have seen men ostracized for being participatory fathers, their children asked if they needed help, when the only indicator was that they were in a park with an older man. In North Carolina, a friend was denied a job he very much needed to support his family, and for which he was qualified, because it was "woman's work." I have also seen women humiliated, fired from jobs and even denied divorce when they dared to come forward when physically abused or raped. This article does not add to the argument that men suffer from discrimination as well because of its tone. This is not balance, and this is not merely an opposing viewpoint; it is hate speech. I expect this kind of verbiage from Bill O'Reilly and Ann Coulter, not from this site. by Eileen McCabe (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 8 comments) on Monday, May 7, 2007 at 3:24:18 PM (0+)
|
|
Appalled but supportive of decision to publish
As an incest survivor I was quite appalled at the writer's downright denial of how widespread violence against women is in America. However, I completely support your decision, Rob, to publish this article. It fosters discussion. Sometimes we need to be reminded that misogyny and bigotry are alive and well. We need to be reminded why we are activists. by Gina-Marie Cheeseman (11 articles, 1 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 23 comments) on Monday, May 7, 2007 at 5:43:56 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: To actual victims or rape or incest
Dear LilCheese, My work does not in any way defend rape or incest. I abhor it as much as anyone does. My concern is that much of our VAWA funds is not used for women who really need it. The VAWA monies wasted on Duke means that real cases went ignored. Monies wasted trying and incarcerating innocent men are resources that cannot be used to address real rape and incest. Tremendous sums of VAWA monies are spent on absurd events such as "take back the night" And, when the wrong person is convicted, the injustice is doubled: you have two victims while the perpetrator gets off scot-free. I doubt most folks would approve of resolving the issue in Iraq with a nuke. By the same token, we must reform VAWA, effect changes to balance jurisprudence, and make changes to keep political desires from affecting prosecutorial activity. We have to hit the right target, with great accuracy, and without substantial collateral damage as the norm. by David R. Usher (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 22 comments) on Monday, May 7, 2007 at 11:30:33 PM (0+)
|
|
Pappy loves to hate
Pappy, John by John R Moffett (89 articles, 18 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 697 comments [14 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, May 7, 2007 at 7:10:16 PM (0+)
|
|
David - You have gone off in the wrong direction here...
... you will find me, as my article listed a few above yours here at OpedNews will evince, more than a willing listener to ideas about mens and fathers rights, but I am still a NOW supporter as well and I refuse to cross the line into misogyny. Support of men's and father's rights does not require ridiculing of rape or charges of rape. I realize there are studies out there, and wikipedia's article on rape refers to one, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape#Rape_statistics that suggests that 40-50% of rape victims recant their charges. That is not tantamount to those charges being false. That you made that leap in logic is a shame. Most people that I know, at sometime in their lives, will decide not to pursue something worthwhile or that was due them because of the cost or difficulty in doing so. I am afraid that whatever good ideas you might have wanted to express were drowned out by you going too far in almost every instance. Yes, there are women who in their support of women's rights cross way over the line into misandery. Dont you see you just committed the same mistake in the opposite direction? by Steven Leser (255 articles, 58 quicklinks, 38 diaries, 2147 comments [63 recommended, 2 rejected]) on Monday, May 7, 2007 at 7:48:32 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Recant = False?
Hi Steven, Allegations of anything are rarely recanted, because to do so is an admission that there was no basis for the allegation in the first place. Duke was unusual in the neither the prosecutor nor Crystal Mangum could find the courage to stop the train of perscution they started. Very few men charged with rape have the fortune of having a videotape of the events. As we see, rape charges are filed for all sorts of insane personal reasons. See MSNBC: False Rape Allegation Thwarted By Police Camera: by David R. Usher (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 22 comments) on Monday, May 7, 2007 at 10:49:46 PM (0+)
|
|
perform political correctness test
To hell with the facts The modern way of rational and logical thought is to first find out whats politically correct then form your opinion or hypothesis on only that. by Gary Denson (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 283 comments) on Monday, May 7, 2007 at 9:41:49 PM (0+)
|
|
Sins of Omission
The Duke non-rape case was given virtual front page top of the fold coverage nation wide over a span of an entire year. In fact, most of the western world heard about those bad boys at Duke. As David Usher has pointed out, we were bombarded with the 'culture of rape' propaganda ad naseum an infinitum. A "mob environment inexcusably hateful to men at Duke University" was created. We were told by many anonymous victims of rape how they live in fear of men because, "all [white] men are rapists and nothing else." This nauseating propaganda was churned out continuously, that is, until the boys were found innocent. Then it became as quiet as a heart tugging altar call to repentance. Contrast the non-rape Duke to the real life double rape, torture, mutilation and murder of two young white people in Knoxville, Tennesee on February 1 of this year. Although this horrific tragedy actually happened, it has received virtually no attention whatsoever in the mainstream media. In case you don't know what took place, let me fill you in: Two young people, Christian Channon 21, and Christopher Newsom, 23, were out together driving when they were car jacked and kidnapped by four black men and a black woman. These four men raped Christopher Newsom, severed his penis, set him ablaze and shot him several times - fatally - forcing his girlfriend, Channon Christian, to watch. Unfortunately, that wasn't all they had in mind. Nice, huh? I wish I could post a picture of this beautiful young couple. Think this was newsworthy? Why didn't this make the network news or the major newspapers? Why aren't feminists groups up in arms and protesting? Where is the Group of 88? The Group of 8? Had the victims been a black prostitute stripper and the rapists/mutilators/murderers white boys instead of insanely sick black men, this would have been posted like a wanted poster on every major newspaper in the country and certainly worthy of a FoxNews Alert! in the same category as the Amber White case of Arruba two years ago. Ask yourself why hasn't this atrocious heinous crime been made public by the mainstream media of our nation? Why the silence? The obvious answer to any unbaised thinking individual is that these media moguls have an agenda they constantly push at us, both by what they publicise and what they leave out by the sin of omission. This sin of omission is not only taking place in these types of crimes, but in many other areas of our culture, society, politics and world events as well. The fact that many non-custodial dads are stripped of their children and made destitute by the very system that then demands them to pay for a double household and if they refuse or can't comply, punishes them with the loss of basic rights and privileges and in many cases incarceration, even though debtor's prison was abolished in the US in 1844. We also don't see any honest open debate on 9/11 in the mainstream media. We're expected to accept the Official Conspiracy Theory for three professionally union built skyscrappers disapearing form the New York skyline, in direct violation of the laws of physics, as the only possible explanation and go on with our lives as if nothing unusual happened or that it's unpatriotic to think our government/Israel had anything to do with it. That despite http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/ Ron Paul won the latest presidential debate according to the MSNBC online debate poll, but if not for the alternative media, you'd never know. http://tinyurl.com/18r but when one goes to the MSNBC site, where the poll was conducted, you get this instead: and Ron Paul wins the debate according to MSNBC's own online poll but Guilliani and Romney get MSNBC's accolades. The feminists pushed for 'no-fault' divorce back in the 1960s and our 50% divorce rate is destroying families, but not a word about it in the main stream media. To them, that destruction of the foundation of our nation is part of their agenda, so, it's not happening, it's not newsworthy. But white men are again blamed for the fact that they don't want to get married and raise a family. Meanwhile, adjust the pillows on your couch, tune in to the next episode of American Idol, stay up with your favorite sports team. All is well in America, the Leader of the Free World "bringing democracy" to the Arab nations so they too, can be just like us. And if they don't like it, our military - mostly young white boys - http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/68825.pdf will kill them all until they do. Or be killed doing it. There's nothing to be concerned about. If there was, the main stream media would tell us about it, over and over and over again. They will make sure we get all worked up over that problem, after all, it must be newsworthy, or they wouldn't have brought it to our attention. by Deadbeat Charles (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 6 comments) on Monday, May 7, 2007 at 9:48:19 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: The ommissions create the hype and divide
This was a horrible crime and I'm shocked I didn't hear about it. I keep abreast of a lot of news. It seems like some media would have picked it up due to some of the gory details. I also think it's unfair that the media selected to run Imus stories when the Duke Lacrosse players were exonerated. The story could have brought the corroption in the criminal justice system to the forefront. But the news is not concerned with real issues impacting America, they seem to be on a mission to divide and conquer. The ommissions help to distract citizens from the criminal activity in the nation's capital. With a war going on, you'd think we'd be working harder to be American. The hearts of the people are there, but the ommissions of the media keep us from coming together. by Edrea Davis (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 3 comments) on Wednesday, May 9, 2007 at 12:59:08 PM (0+)
|
|
accuracy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_statistics mentions the Kannin piece, and to say "We know that 40% to 50% of rape allegations are clearly false." is not justified. (The other reference is not available to me.) There does seem to be a 'fairly large' percentage of rape accusations recanted, but on the other hand there also seems to be many rapes in which no complaint is made -- what the actual number of rapes is not really known, apparantly. We may remember the hysteria over child molestation in connection with day centers some years back -- but there are many reports of people saying they were molested as children and it was never revealed. I suggest that the major problem we face is hysteria and extreme positions from both ends of the spectrum, and unfortunately, this piece doesn't help that situation, nor in finding solutions to what are very serious problems: rape and sexual exploitation; false accusations and miscarriages of justice; sexist bigotry directed against either sex, and sexual inequality; and generally emotional appeals which overshadow reason and searching get at the roots and to solve problems. "We normally ignore nuts on soapboxes ranting the unimaginable to earn their ten minutes of loquacious fame. But when it is organized by the National Organization of Women, we take the insane seriously.", you say, but do a bit of ranting yourself, which doesn't help. by Blue Pilgrim (0 articles, 3 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 997 comments) on Tuesday, May 8, 2007 at 1:29:01 AM (0+)
|
|
I have much good to say...
...you just don't want to accept that sometimes one needs to part from the party line. If you want to lay down and be a doormat for feminists, that is your affair. If you wish to subjugate your masculinity to the whiles of women who would prefer to see our gender eliminated completely, that again is your affair. Can you point out in any of the points I brought up where I am wrong? Was the accuser not a liar? Were the lives of the accused damaged? Did she do what she did just to f*ck with white men? Did she not do it with malice of forethought? Do you really believe the accused weren't harrassed or raped in jail? HUH? Do you? You can belittle me because you have a persecution complex. But can you refute any of the points I made? No, you can't. So you just go ahead and think you have triumphed by saying I hate instead of answering my points. I'd expect nothing less from someone who is more concerned with a dog's digestive tract than whether or not one of his loved ones will die a horrid death so a food company could make a few more dollars profit. Charade you are! Blessed be! by Pappy (61 articles, 0 quicklinks, 11 diaries, 860 comments [5 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, May 8, 2007 at 1:55:58 AM (0+)
|
|
SOME LESSONS NOT LEARNED
Click here for my reponse posed on Men's News Daily, wherein you can post a comment. by Rinaldo Del Gallo (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 4 comments) on Tuesday, May 8, 2007 at 1:51:09 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: to Rinaldo
From your reference: 'Panurg still writes, “pins people against each other,” and then writes a blurb about how a bunch of rich white boys exploited a black stripper. ' In the 19th Century there was a romantic brigand named Rinaldo Rinaldini who was famous among other things by quoting literature phrase out of context. All women loved him. You seem to follow him by quoting out of context. I said that our media pinned people against each other. I also expressed my opinion that it was wrong to invite a stripper in the first place and I speculated why they did it. I did not play the race card as an argument. You pulled a part of the quotes out of context and made your own construction. That is brigandish:). Also, you mention in your reference that ' that is how people think..' Well, I have here 11 articles and 190 diary entries- maybe you should first peruse those before coming to such fast conclusions, Mr. Rinaldini. Rob Kall has 500 articles- I suppose to see how he thinks you have to read at least a 100. Right now I do not know how YOU think but what YOU do I see: you behave like a cheap speculator, sorry. by Mark Sashine (72 articles, 19 quicklinks, 269 diaries, 4101 comments [131 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, May 8, 2007 at 2:53:50 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Got you right Panurg
Panurg, you said in your first entry, " "A family of our friends invited us to the 40s birthday of a husband at the restaurant. There were other families there with children. During the process suddenly a stripper came in dressed as a policewoman and started to undress herself first at the husband's and then going around other men. Apparently, that was a gift from a wife to her husband on a birthday. I, an adult man of about 50 refused to participate and was ridiculed by others ( although my wife supported me and I surely don't give a damn on what they think) Let me ask you all, folks, why do we have to invite strippers and what kind of a perversive instinct do we satisfy doing that? Maybe that should be discussed first."The Duke Lacrosse players had their reputations ruined by a lying smuck. Instead of being shocked and dismayed and ranting, you are obsessed with why these guys wanted a stripper. It responses like this that have many men floored. I haven't taken you out of context. It is pretty clear that you did not learn anything about false accusations of rape. You then say, “This is a very old trick in the book: our media pins people against each other: women against men, black people against white, immigrants against native-born, etc. In reality there is only one confrontation- poor against rich. THOSE BOYS INVITED A STRIPPER BECAUSE THEY WERE RICH OR AT LEAST WITH MEANS. They had very little interaction with the real world and they did not know that they were and are just puppies. THE ACTUAL WOLVES- PEOPLE WHO BENEFITED FROM ALL THAT ARE PARASITES: MEDIA PEOPLE, COMMENTERS, MOVIE FOLKS, ETC. See who benefits. If people were smarter they would understand, count the money and then see where it went. And next time they better be sure not to invite strippers but maybe look into the mirror and see who they are.” Hmm. Money. Like the scholarship for that fool that was making all the false accusations? Problems of the media aside, it appears that the so-called “rape victim” was the real wolf. Again, you go on and on about exploiting men and exploiting strippers. Your obsessed with the subject and don’t given a damn about the false accusation. You literally didn’t say a word on the subject. by Rinaldo Del Gallo (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 4 comments) on Tuesday, May 8, 2007 at 11:56:58 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Oh, well
everyone finds what he/she wants to find, I presume. I would suggest that take it or leave it, the Duke boys did use the stripper and thus subjected themselves to the risk they encountered. You consider that to be irrelevant because it was not illegal and strippers do exist. Of course, the family, which invited the stripper to the family birthday also did nothing illegal. But we do not live in the illegal- legal world. The same way as I have mentioned in my diary essay ' Women- In - Pill' the provocatively behaving adult woman is at least partly as a human being is responsible for the possible unfortunate consequences of her actions ( although rape is inexcusable) the people who engage in using strippers are to be aware that such activity can have undesirable consequences. In fact , that very fact that they used the stripper should be bad for their reputation anyway. Men are not ' floored'. Everyone whoever uses another human being's body for his/her amusement for money or in any other way degrades himself/herself. The fact that such degradation is not illegal is irrelevant- we should know better. And again, you can hardly make a conclusion that 'that is the way people think'. It was all your interpretation as I have mentioned it. And... Rinaldo or not Rinaldo, it was a cheap shot, sorry. by Mark Sashine (72 articles, 19 quicklinks, 269 diaries, 4101 comments [131 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, May 9, 2007 at 7:25:30 AM (0+)
|
|
Reply: On Strippers rather than false accussers
You said, " would suggest that take it or leave it, the Duke boys did use the stripper and thus subjected themselves to the risk they encountered. You consider that to be irrelevant because it was not illegal and strippers do exist." This is light years from being relevant and sounds like blaming the victim. Imagine if I wrote, "She was raped, did you see the way she was dressed." The obvious point being the assumption of guilt that these Duke players underwent was something barely of interest to you. You were obsessed with their hiring a stripper. by Rinaldo Del Gallo (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 4 comments) on Thursday, May 10, 2007 at 4:31:50 PM (0+)
|
|
Arguing logically is seemingly worthless...
...with this topic. Very few people who have posted here have argued the real points of this case: 1) the accuser was/is a liar. I made those points, and was accused of putting forth hate speech. I made those points, and because I used one specific "dirty word", the comment I made was pulled. Such is life While I support the editorial staff's right to pull patently offensive commentary, I also think it's sad that the points I made are now lost to the digital ether. I knew I should have made a copy of it. I'll think better of that next time. I accept my responsibility in having the comment pulled. I was a bit too raw. However, this is one of those topics that really gets under my skin. I have dealt with more than my fair share of radical feminists. I really have no love for them, or their ideals. That's not to say I don't believe in sexual equality. People are people, no matter what their gender. I believe that misandry is just as bad as misogyny. However, it has become clear to me that I am in a minority in holding that opinion. It's a good thing my homosexuality has made me used to the idea of being a minority. As a white male, I have had to endure being made the scapegoat for all of society's ills. It matters little that I have absolutely political or economic power. It matters little that I am, for the most part, fairly liberal in my ideology. It matters little that I attempt to be the best person I can be. I am a white male, and because of that, I am seen as some sort of beast. Oh well, such is life. I can't change my race, and I'm sure as f*ck not going to change my sex, so I'm just going to have to accept that I am the monster in the room...at least until we throw out the bullshit adherence to the feminist agenda and the misandry that is part and parcel to it. by Pappy (61 articles, 0 quicklinks, 11 diaries, 860 comments [5 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, May 9, 2007 at 2:04:40 AM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Good points Pappy
I wouldn't call these idiots "feminist," but I otherwise agree. by Rinaldo Del Gallo (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 4 comments) on Thursday, May 10, 2007 at 4:34:15 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Point well taken.
Idiots is a much better word. You are so right! Blessed be! by Pappy (61 articles, 0 quicklinks, 11 diaries, 860 comments [5 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Friday, May 11, 2007 at 2:08:57 AM (0+)
|
|
Ush tells it like it is.
I'm an ex-feminist. Well, I used to call myself one; but I didn't understand then that they hate men. Now I know. I've watched feminists lying under oath to legislators, all to stop an EQUAL parenting bill. I'd always thought they stood for equality; it's what they want us to think. The truth is: feminists are hypocrites and liars. They have no desire to see equality. They're on a fast-traveling train called domination...and our sociaty will be their trainwreck. Teri Stoddard mens news daily, ifeminists, sharedparentingworks by Teri Stoddard (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 16 comments) on Wednesday, May 9, 2007 at 7:23:17 PM (0+)
|
|
The real-rape/mutilation/murder case
Anyone else notice how the discussion is about the non-rape case of the white Duke boys and the black stripper? Why isn't anyone outraged over the real kidnap/rapes/mutilation/murder of white Knoxville Christian Channon/Christopher Newsom, who weren't strippers, drug users or 'nappy headed hos,' by four black men? by Deadbeat Charles (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 6 comments) on Thursday, May 10, 2007 at 5:38:52 PM (0+)
|
|
Yes, wacky feminists will lie to get what they want
Teri, You must live in Georgia. I was sitting in on the Judicial oversight committee meeting reviewing the proposed equal parenting bill when one of the feminist lawyers lied and got caught. She was one of those women that claimed every man is a woman beater and should be kept away from any children. Nothing was done to her. She just slithered away. The decisions made by the legislature had little to do with wacky feminists. The legislative decision had more to do with money. The divorce lawyers would lose the power to convince the parents to fight over the children and lose lots of lawyer fees. All the judges wanted to keep the power they had in making decisions over other people’s families. The judges get their election money from the family lawyers that stand before them in family cases. If they lose the decision power they lose money. Anyway, Yes, feminists will lie even in court to get what they want. I’ve witnessed it too. by Gallaher (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 4 diaries, 990 comments [34 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Thursday, May 10, 2007 at 5:59:27 PM (0+)
|
|
So sad
I studied and testified against so-called 'father's rights' groups in their monomaniacal pursuit of child custody, which is almost always a coded excuse for battering their ex-wives, their children's mothers. Just look. It's right below the surface. In reviewing court documents of fathers who had 'lost' custody, I found incredible levels of hostility directed against women and outright, documentation of unvarnished Big Lies to support their claims. These 'father's rights' zealots want nothing more than to punish their former wives for what they regard as assaults to their testosterone. Very, very often they have attorneys who suggest a custody battle as a way to keep child support low. They know that women will agree to almost anything to keep their chidlren. If you look, you'll see that what these fathers really want is lower child support, not the kids. Far from being discriminated against, statistics show that men win in court almost every time they challenge their children's mothers. The fact that custody is awarded to women 80% of the time is a testament to the reasonableness and good will of most fathers, as well as a marker of how seldom men actually file for custody. Mr Usher is pathetic. He should use his time more constructively, like supporting his children and their mother as a decent parent, rather than in such irrational over-the-top screeds, which by the way are largely unsupportedd by his many links. Get a life, sweetie. by Sandy Jewell (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 11 comments) on Friday, May 11, 2007 at 10:21:17 AM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Shared Parenting not a license to batter
This posting is a classic example of how feminist attempt to shift focus way from their agenda: sole custody, divorce for any reason, and a maximum entitlement to do so. Fathers file custody cases, most often for shared parenting, because the CARE about their children. Only the street bums don't care about children. Having a reasonable right to be a parent has nothing to do with battering women. The feminist logic simple does not compute. We do know this: PBS quietly withdrew their documentary "Breaking the Silence" after it was proven with court records that their cameo "battered mother" was, in fact, the batterer, and found in contempt of court. Newsweek published an unvetted article about Genia Shockome, who also claimed to have been battered. The court hear her claims time and time again, and after much consideration of all fact, found her in contempt because she would not shut up. Like Duke, feminists think that any allegation, regardless of absurdity, requires the courts to do whatever is demanded. Both the above cases were organized and promoted by the Battered Mothers Custody Conference, a rather nasty collective of radical feminists who continue to pretend the battering is widespread and unmitigated. they work closely with N.O.W. (but N.O.W. does not admit it). The facts of spousal violence are as follows: 1. Men and women equally intitiate serious domestic altercations. 2. 86% of serious spousal altercations involve one or two spouse(s) who has been drinking or drugging. 3. These are the issues that must be addressed. 4. Radical organizations such as BMCC, and self-appointed victims such as the above, are very dangerous people, just like those who used to make all sorts of wild claims about blacks. To readers: my comments are entirely objective in nature and point to the facts of the matter, the motives of the activists involved, and who is credible. Proactive dvances in public policy depend decisively on objectivity. To do otherwise is to continue a very sad and costly gender war in America by David R. Usher (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 22 comments) on Friday, May 11, 2007 at 12:11:20 PM (0+)
|
|
Feminst's Male Cow Dung
I was a state approved licensed foster dad. I was a state approved adoptive parent. I was a Court Appointed Special Advocate for Children. I had two FBI background checks. There was never any allegations nor were there ever any acts of 'domestic violence.' I asked for 100% physical custody of my two adopted children. I would have settled for 50%. Instead, I was made a visitor and 'allowed' meager visitation. That meager visitation was then denied by the mother with the complete approbation of the same legal system that separated my children and I. This tragedy has been ongoing for nine years. I appealed my and my children's case to the state appeals court. Denied. I sued the district attorneys office in federal district court. Denied. My children have suffered immensely from this injustice. This injustice can never be undone. My case is not unique. What is unique is that I went as far as I could in the corrupt legal system to find a remedy, that is until I was financially unable to continue. The reason I was unable to continue was because I was denied the rights due me to save my 25 year old successful business through my right to protection in US federal bankruptcy court. Judge Alan J. Jaroslovsky said this in open court at my hearing: "I have never, in the 12 years I have been on the bench, given a man back his business over the objection of his ex-wife." Jaroslovsky was rewarded for his destroying hundreds of men's financial lives with another 12 year term on the federal bench in Santa Rosa, California. It is obvious who Judge Jaroslovsky panders to - and they aren't men. Men like myself are falsely labeled 'deadbeat dads,' but men like Alan J. Jaroslovsky are not accurately labeled corrupt and biased judges. So please, jolyjuly, let's not hear of any more of your steaming male cow dung. "Far from being discriminated against, statistics show that men win in court almost every time they challenged their children's mother." And bring those statistics here to the light for our scrutiny. We almost never hear of malicious dads preventing mothers from a relationship with their children. But we do hear of malicious mothers, but of course, not in the mainstream media. In the MSM we only hear of 'deadbeat dads,' who in reality, are created by the State to feed the US law enforcement and prison growth industry. I documented every thing Deadbeat Dad available here www.lulu.com/content/315711. by Deadbeat Charles (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 6 comments) on Friday, May 11, 2007 at 8:20:13 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Pathetic
So you, too, are a victim of the judicial system. My, My. Just like all those I investigated. I suggest that there is a serious, very serious, alternative reason for the judge's actions than the one you suggest - he just didn't like you. You elect to admit nothing about your own behavior, which is without doubt the reason for your problems. It's not too late for you to grow up and prove yourself to be a decent parent, if that is possibile. There are lots of rewards to that course of action. Give it a try for once. by Sandy Jewell (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 11 comments) on Monday, May 14, 2007 at 2:43:50 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Pathetic
So you, too, are a victim of the judicial system. My, My. Just like all those I investigated. I suggest that there is a serious, very serious, alternative reason for the judge's actions than the one you suggest - he just didn't like you. You elect to admit nothing about your own behavior, which is without doubt the reason for your problems. It's not too late for you to grow up and prove yourself to be a decent parent, if that is possibile. There are lots of rewards to that course of action. Give it a try for once. by Sandy Jewell (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 11 comments) on Monday, May 14, 2007 at 3:09:23 PM (0+)
|
|
First of all...
...if you want to post something, you need only press the "post" button once. Secondly, who died and made you the voice of what is or isn't legal? Given the information provided by the comment of deadbeat, how can you dare to even make a judgment? You have no leg on which you can stand on this issue apart from your own prejudice. From my experience, the number fathers who are awarded full custody of their children pales in comparison to the number of mothers awarded the same. This is done under the supposition that it's better for children to be reared by their mother as opposed to their father. There is no real basis for this. Good parenting skills are not limited to one gender, as much as the feminists would like to think. I have seen fathers who are absolutely fabulous parents. I have seen mothers that are anything but. Since you know nothing more than was provided by deadbeat on this issue, how on earth can you sit there and condemn him or pass judgment? You can't! It is this kind of self-serving bullshit that keeps the male parent constantly covered by a black cloud of suspicion, while the mother is supposedly surrounded by angels singing! If feminism was about true equality of the sexes, then many more men would be awarded major or sole custody of their kids. Obviously, this is not the case. It makes me so glad that I am queer! I don't have to deal with women except when they move out of the periphery of my reality and closer to the core. I must say I like it that way! Deadbeat, I am sorry for your plight. It's too bad that you will probably have to deal with this reality until your kids are old enough to make up their own minds as to which parent they prefer. Perhaps one day, America will realize that misandry is as sexist as misogyny. Mind you, I'm not holding my breath that such will be the case, but hey, you never know. Blessed be! by Pappy (61 articles, 0 quicklinks, 11 diaries, 860 comments [5 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, May 15, 2007 at 3:24:11 PM (0+)
|
Want to post your own comment on this Article? 
|
||||
|
||||||||||||||
Must Read (0) 
Well Said (0) 
News (0) 
Touching (0) 
Funny (0) 
Supported (0) 
Interesting (0) 
Inspiring (0) 
Valuable (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tell a Friend:
|
Copyright © 2002-2009, OpEdNews |
