Marc A. Says:
September 18th, 2008 at 4:23 pm mailbag@edmsun.com, mindy.jacobs@sunmedia.ca, editor@edmsun.com; david.black@sunmedia.ca; gord.schwinghamer@sunmedia.ca; graham.dalziel@sunmedia.ca; donna.harker@sunmedia.ca

Dear Editor,

Mindy Jacobs’ gender bias is as loud as ever in “Divorced from Reality” (9/18) Initially, in “When Dad is Just Bad” (9/10), she aired feminist ad hom attacks on the fathers’ rights movement but totally omitted the fathers’ rights side. Now, after a “fusillade of male outrage” she grudgingly gives us the “other side.” But not without throwing some gender bias into the mix, such as saying: “There is no denying that women are much more likely than men to be the victims of the most severe physical abuse and spousal homicide.”

I guess the emotional damage children experience by witnessing DV - regardless of severity - doesn’t matter to Jacobs. It appears all she cares about is defending her journalistic bias and the genderizing of a human issue.

Men sustain at least one-third of DV injuries (www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm), and according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control men account for 25% of DV deaths. http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/dvp/ipv_factsheet.pdf

In fact, a recent study announced by Harvard Medical School found “while injury was more likely when violence was perpetrated by men, in relationships with reciprocal violence it was the men who were injured more often (25 percent of the time) than were women (20 percent of the time).” http://pn.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/42/15/31-a

I guess that’s not significant enough for Jacobs, who has shown a gender bias so prevalent that a global coalition of concerned DV experts has formed to combat it, including Canadian Professor Don Dutton of the University of British Columbia. Their website is at http://www.nfvlrc.org/

Please give both sides - fairly - next time you do a story on these issues.

Marc E. Angelucci, Esq.
Board Member
National Coalition of Free Men
http://www.ncfm.org

[address & phone]

shamelessly copied from Glenn Sacks:

http://glennsacks.com/blog/?p=2771#comment-485381

“Jennifer Collins’ mother Holly was forced to take her children to the Netherlands to escape their abusive father. ”

I’ve written here before about children who are abused. That was the main thrust of my opening post: listen to the children,  and make a record of every report.  Here we have a mother who felt she had to abscond with her kids to flee abuse.

Holly took Jennifer and her brother into hiding in 1994 after the children reported abuse by their father. Declarations from doctors, social workers and psychologists confirmed the children’s claims and recommended against the children being in their father’s care, but the family court judge ordered the children be placed in the father’s custody.

It’s unconscionable that kids would be returned to an abusive household  where abuse has been confirmed.  A child in such a situation learns an important lesson:  the cops are worthless, and sometimes harmful. I’ve cited The Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology showing that abuse and neglect were more common in the backgrounds of serial killers.

Here we see the response from so called professionals - doctors, psychologists, and social workers confirmed the abuse.  In divorce cases, the mother is still presumed to be the one who should have custody of the kids, unless there is a well made case that she is abusive.  The judge not only did nothing (which would be allowing this presumption to be his guide) - he ruled against that mother and gave custody to the dad.

This from the daughter:

 The judge said that there was not enough evidence to prove a pattern of abuse to us kids. Did you hear that? “Pattern!” There was ‘only one’ Fractured skull and a few other minor injuries, but they were isolated incidents and not necessarily a clear consistent pattern!

I’d have fled the country too.

Quickie:

According to two Maryland researchers,  Craig Garthwaite and Tim Moore, Oprah’s endorsement of Barack Obama netted him about 1 million votes in the primaries.

Oprah Winfrey endorses skinmedica, developed from the skin stolen from sexually mutilated (circumcised) boys.

Dear St Petersburg times, Lane DeGregory, and Melissa Lyttle:

I was saddened and outraged by the treatment that Danni received at the hands of her mother, but also at your treatment of the story online.

Danni wore diapers beyond age 6, because of neglect by her mother.  She slept on a worn mattress on the floor, and has almost non-existent verbal skills.

Don’t get me wrong:

Nobody would desire the treatment that Danni got before her rescue. I can’t fathom how the mother can rationalize her neglect and abuse of that child.  But we know about Danni.

In your  full expose of neglect(1), Danielle’s mother briefly mentions her older brother once.   Toward the end of the “how could she let it happen” video, you’ll hear that Daniel’s her mother’s son (as described) didn’t potty train until he was 4.

How can we stand around and weep for Danielle without giving a thought about her brother as well?

What the fuck is happening with Danni’s brother, and why the hell has nobody - except the mother - shown to  mention him  in all of this  coverage?

(1) http://www.tampabay.com/specials/2008/reports/danielle/

A State government recognizes that:

Males can be victims

Females can be aggressors

It is a problem not to recognize those two things.

Look at the source:  the State of Texas Department of State Health Services.

>However, there is a paucity of professional literature and clinical practice that describes the needs of the female sex offender. Professional literature often presents females as victims even when they are identified as perpetrators. This lack of attention is regrettable for those who have been victimized by females.

Council on Sex Offender Treatment
Treatment of Sex Offenders - Female Sex Offenders

Applications/Forms Complaint Process Contact Us Enforcement Actions Links Open Records Rules/Regulations Statutes/Laws Although the majority of sex offenders are male, it is clear that female sex offenders exist and this population of offender is largely unrecognized and neglected. Recent research consistently reveals that females account for about one in four offenders (Pearson, 1997). Additionally, because females often fulfill care-taking roles, female sex offenders may abuse a child under the guise of appropriate care (Jennings, 1993; Mitchell & Morse, 1998). However, there is a paucity of professional literature and clinical practice that describes the needs of the female sex offender. Professional literature often presents females as victims even when they are identified as perpetrators. This lack of attention is regrettable for those who have been victimized by females. A female as a sex offender is an idea that society has difficulty acknowledging and it challenges society’s beliefs about females. The notion of females as aggressive, exploitive, violent, and deviant offenders is not compatible with society’s picture of women as mothers, sisters, wives, and the “gentler sex”. Many professionals do not accept the idea that females would use their position and power in this manner. This creates a professional and cultural state of denial. In a 2000 study, Snyder estimated that females commit 12% of all sexual offenses against victims under the age of 6 and 6% of the sexual offenses against children between six (6) and twelve (12) years old. It is estimated that 64% of the sexual abuse committed by females were crimes against biological relatives and 19% were against victims who were unrelated to the offender (Saradjian, 1996). The age of onset of the abuse was 3.2 years old (Rosencrans, 1997). Recent findings strongly challenge the belief that female sex offenders are rarely violent (Marvasti, 1986, Johnson and Shrier, 1987). Seventy percent (70%) of the female sex offenders in this study used extraneous violence against their victims. It is important to acknowledge that this population of female sex offenders does exist. Last Updated July 5, 2005

Jim Adkisson took a shotgun into a Tennessee church with the intention of shooting to kill church members and himself.  He survived and will be tried.  Found among his things were books about conservatives and the conservative movement, and a note that said he hated liberals.

I have no fondness for that man or what he has done.   I see no reason to blame Bill O’Reilley, or conservatism for his actions, nor do I agree that “liberals” or “feminists” ought to be killed or maimed, but others do.  (I hope they all come to their senses,  not suffer injury.)

Soon after, blogs and videos showed up explaining that Bill O’Reilley is really at fault, because Bill O’Reilley also hates liberals.  If Bill O’Reilley is responsible for the murders committed by Adkisson because of some imaginary mentor relationship, because he managed to brainwash him over television, or demanded that he read his books, then why aren’t radical feminists, radical feminist broodcasters  and printers of  ‘boys are stupid’ t-shirts  responsible for violence by women and girls?

this said in praise of the estrogen channel:

 Just ask the hundreds of nonprofit organizations who swear that Lifetime’s commitment to raising awareness about issues — including breast cancer, violence against women, race relations, bullying problems at schools, and AIDS — has increased tolerance in their communities. Members of Congress and administration officials also credit Lifetime with helping to shape public policy and enact legislation to make video voyeurism a federal crime, which translates to landing more rapists in jail. That’s something both sexes can respect, right?

To some extent, yes.  Except that the channel highlights all of those things only as problems that victimize women.

They don’t raise awareness: they portray women as victims, and advocate laws against men.

Breast cancer affects men as well as women, but they only mention women as breast cancer victims.

Intimate partner violence affects men as well as women, but a large portion of their programming is dedicated to ‘men are evil’  broodcasts.

The issue of race relations is important, but again, Lifetime trots out women as the victims and sensible ones.

Bullying problems at schools - again women as victims

AIDS - women again, are the primary victims.

This, film.com  draws out as the biggest sales pitch for men:

There’s clearly something juicy going on here. A friend of mine told me that all of her girlfriends’ significant others love Lifetime TV. But they won’t tell anyone. But come one, what dude in his right mind isn’t at least mildly intrigued by a show with the word naked in the title?

that’s not insulting to men at all.

David R. Usher calls Lifetime a major radical feminist lobby machine.

It’s difficult to disagree.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lifetime_Television#Criticism

Though I’m often accused of it, I’m not only arguing against radical feminists.

The Val Solanases and Biting Beavers and asspoliding Jezabel women are risible without my commentary.

It’s the nonradicals who scare me more. Because they get laws passed.

VAWA - VAWA II - IMBRA - HRES 590 (2007)

CALIFORNIA HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE SECTION 124250-124251
124250. (a) The following definitions shall apply for purposes of
this section:
(1) “Domestic violence” means the infliction or threat of physical
harm against past or present adult or adolescent female intimate
partners, and shall include physical, sexual, and psychological abuse
against the woman, and is a part of a pattern of assaultive,
coercive, and controlling behaviors directed at achieving compliance
from or control over, that woman. [1]

You cannot be a domestic violence victim in California unless you have a vagina.

That’s not just a position held by radicals. It’s not merely a diatribe on some “I hate men” website.

It was passed by both houses of the California congress and was approved by the Governor, and has not yet been struck by the courts.

It’s exactly that attitude that leads to situation like this.

[1] http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cacodes/hsc/124250-124251.html

accessed 30 July 2008.

UPDATE: The Appellate court in California has ruled the exclusion of males in DV shelters unconstitutional.

Danica Patrick has had some rough times.

Mean old Japan is trying to make her put extra weight in her car

Lasyt June, she shoved Dan Wheldon for some driving spat.

This last May, she shoved  Ryan Briscoe for some other driving spat.

And Monday, she, felt entitled to better treatment at the Honda Indy 200 practice sessions, and made the proper hisses and moans at Milka Duno in order to express her opinion on the matter.

Does she need an attitude adjustment?

Perhaps the next time Santa steals her car, he should keep it.  but that would be completely the fault of the patriarchy.

Earlier this month, the Supreme Court of India ruled that women need no corroboration for rape accusations.  One “she-said” and he’s guilty.

Now, women’s groups are lobbying to get alimony payments for women who didn’t marry anyone, but just shacked up with some guy.  Collection of this shack-up-amoney is as morally repugnant as prostitution, and more profitable: A prostitute can be had for a few dollars a night.

now a woman can claim a lifelong alimony by even spending one night with a man (as a prostitute)

A woman who calls a one-night stand a relationship can get money for life.

And the reason a woman who claims to have been raped IS raped? (from the Indian Supreme Court)

“A girl or a woman in the tradition-bound, non-permissive society of India would be extremely reluctant even to admit that any incident which is likely to reflect on her chastity had ever occurred,” it said.

“She would be conscious of the danger of being ostracised by society and when in the face of these factors the crime is brought to light, there is an inbuilt assurance that the charge is genuine rather than fabricated,” the bench said.

James got a motel room in order to avoid driving drunk.  A woman coaxed him into letting her sleep in the room.  She then raped him, with the threat that she would accuse him of rape.

http://jameslandrith.com/content/view/3148/79/