Activism Change

Request for data concerning VAWA

Question:

Some time ago, there was a discourse on this and other Newsgroups about the new incarnation of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA). Several people cited evidence that funds authorized under this act could not be spent for the sake of men or children.  A number of us have quoted that interpretation widely when pressing against this horrible law. Well, I finally got an answer from the Acting Director of the "Violence Against Women Office" (one Catherine Pierce) in response to my letter to John Ashcroft about VAWA, and she says: "You may not be aware that both men and women victims are eligible to receive services under programs supported by VAWA.  It is our understanding that grantees currently provide services to both men and women victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, and stalking as well as their children.  In addition, victims of domestic violence, whether male or female, and are seeking assistance and services for a domestic violence situation can call the National Domestic Violence Hotline at 1-800-799-SAFE (voice) or 1-800-787-3224 (TTY).  Hotline staff have access to an extensive database which contains information on programs and their services all over the country." I sincerely believe that the above is hogwash, since most of the organizations which I have queried (which are designed to help victims of domestic violence) either exclude men or make it very difficult for men to obtain services anywhere near that which is available to women. If anyone reading this note has *hard evidence*, please either post it here or send it to my e-mail address directly.  I would like to challenge Mr. Pierce and Mr. Ashcroft, but I need good data for that. Many thanks, Bob Robert A. Fink, M.D., FACS, P. C. 2500 Milvia Street   Suite 222 Berkeley, California  94704-2636  USA Telephone:  510-849-2555 FAX:  510-849-2557 <http://www.rafink.com "Ex Tristitia Virtus"

Response:

Some time ago, there was a discourse on this and other Newsgroups about the new incarnation of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA). "You may not be aware that both men and women victims are eligible to receive services under programs supported by VAWA.

Sure, that’s why it’s named …WOMEN…because it includes mem? Technically I’ve heard that a man can actually join NOW, but why would one?

Response:

Some time ago, there was a discourse on this and other Newsgroups about the new incarnation of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA). "You may not be aware that both men and women victims are eligible to receive services under programs supported by VAWA. Sure, that’s why it’s named …WOMEN…because it includes mem? Technically I’ve heard that a man can actually join NOW, but why would

one? For the wonderful dating opportunities?  With that kind of odds, I would think your chances of scoring would be really high!  Maybe we should share this secret with learn2beaplayer? sam Be careful that the toes you step on today are not attached to the body of the a** you have to kiss tomorrow.    (anonymous)

Response:

Sure, that’s why it’s named …WOMEN…because it includes mem?

Aaaaaa!!!   I made a typo… Technically I’ve heard that a man can actually join NOW, but why would one? For the wonderful dating opportunities?  With that kind of odds, I would think your chances of scoring would be really high!

I shudder just thinking about it…and not in a good way…

Response:

Hiya Bob, – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – "You may not be aware that both men and women victims are eligible to receive services under programs supported by VAWA.  It is our understanding that grantees currently provide services to both men and women victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, and stalking as well as their children.  In addition, victims of domestic violence, whether male or female, and are seeking assistance and services for a domestic violence situation can call the National Domestic Violence Hotline at 1-800-799-SAFE (voice) or 1-800-787-3224 (TTY).  Hotline staff have access to an extensive database which contains information on programs and their services all over the country." I sincerely believe that the above is hogwash, since most of the organizations which I have queried (which are designed to help victims of domestic violence) either exclude men or make it very difficult for men to obtain services anywhere near that which is available to women. If anyone reading this note has *hard evidence*, please either post it here or send it to my e-mail address directly.  I would like to challenge Mr. Pierce and Mr. Ashcroft, but I need good data for that.

VAWA was amended in the final month or so before passage, to include language that would prevent a clear gender bias from showing in the law. Actually, how it came to that was amusing – NOW, which was bitterly disappointed by the failure to pass the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA), (in part because opponents of that bill stated it was unnecessary,) responded to critisism about the gender bias in VAWA by saying: "If VAWA discrimated based on gender, then it would be unconstitutional". Very funny, ladies, due to the failure of the ERA, that statement is *not* true. I am sure the political PR people at NOW could barely restrain their laughter as they cited that arguement. Anyway, where VAWA becomes discriminatory is in the organizations it supports, primarily Social Services and Domestic Violence Industry organizations where anti-male sentiments are philosophical cornerstones of the organizations themselves, and many (although not all) of the leaders and employees of those organizations. Just follow the money, and see who is getting it! In Maine we have officials of the Domestic Violence industry making such statements as: "There are no male victims of domestic violence, they are just a bunch of fakers", "In too many cases we see the woman being arrested for domestic violence when it is the man who is the instigator", "There is no need for services for men"… etc, ad naseum. Meanwhile we see Family Crisis workers and Social Services urging women to make false claims of domestic violence, and we have several of those cases well-documented in Maine and Massachusetts. Imagine, if you would, an affirmative action program…. to be administered by the KKK. Here in Maine, the Battered Men’s Helpline was formed in response to the need expressed by battered and abused men, men in need who were turned down by the Family Crisis services, denied help by Social Services, and literally rideculed by police (who had been "trained" by the DVI to deal with domestic violence). We receive *zero* governmental funding. It is just not there for programs for men. Period. Hey, don’t take my word for it – try to get VAWA funding for any organization that supports men. It just can’t be done. Best – Fido – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Many thanks, Bob Robert A. Fink, M.D., FACS, P. C. 2500 Milvia Street   Suite 222 Berkeley, California  94704-2636  USA Telephone:  510-849-2555 FAX:  510-849-2557 <http://www.rafink.com "Ex Tristitia Virtus"

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Some time ago, there was a discourse on this and other Newsgroups about the new incarnation of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA). "You may not be aware that both men and women victims are eligible to receive services under programs supported by VAWA. Sure, that’s why it’s named …WOMEN…because it includes mem? Technically I’ve heard that a man can actually join NOW, but why would one? For the wonderful dating opportunities?  With that kind of odds, I would think your chances of scoring would be really high!  Maybe we should share this secret with learn2beaplayer?

They let me (and a lot of other women) eat at the really nice little Thai restaurant housed in the university YMCA. —– Kathryn Litherland | Department of Anthropology | University of Illinois People make their own history, but they do not make it under circumstances of their own choosing.           –Karl Marx, _The 18th Brumaire_

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Some time ago, there was a discourse on this and other Newsgroups about the new incarnation of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA). Several people cited evidence that funds authorized under this act could not be spent for the sake of men or children.  A number of us have quoted that interpretation widely when pressing against this horrible law. Well, I finally got an answer from the Acting Director of the "Violence Against Women Office" (one Catherine Pierce) in response to my letter to John Ashcroft about VAWA, and she says: "You may not be aware that both men and women victims are eligible to receive services under programs supported by VAWA.  It is our understanding that grantees currently provide services to both men and women victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, and stalking as well as their children.  In addition, victims of domestic violence, whether male or female, and are seeking assistance and services for a domestic violence situation can call the National Domestic Violence Hotline at 1-800-799-SAFE (voice) or 1-800-787-3224 (TTY).  Hotline staff have access to an extensive database which contains information on programs and their services all over the country." I sincerely believe that the above is hogwash, since most of the organizations which I have queried (which are designed to help victims of domestic violence) either exclude men or make it very difficult for men to obtain services anywhere near that which is available to women. If anyone reading this note has *hard evidence*, please either post it here or send it to my e-mail address directly.  I would like to challenge Mr. Pierce and Mr. Ashcroft, but I need good data for that. Many thanks, Bob

Deer Bob. Are u marreed? Loev, Ms Pants – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Robert A. Fink, M.D., FACS, P. C. 2500 Milvia Street   Suite 222 Berkeley, California  94704-2636  USA Telephone:  510-849-2555 FAX:  510-849-2557 <http://www.rafink.com "Ex Tristitia Virtus"

Response:

Deer Bob. Are u marreed?

Lacking your usual level of wit today? Philosophers and plowmen,each must know his part To sow a new mentality, closer to the Heart. BOYCOTT CHINESE GOODS! To Reply by e-mail remove the number 1 from

Response:

Even in those unusual cases I came across with battered men, I found plenty of evidence of mutual combat, and so – given that the willingness to fight seemed equal, I still blamed the violence on the man who was physically dominant and so, IMO, had a greater responsibility to restrain his violence.

Two logical failures – first, you have managed to absolve the woman of any respoinsibility in these situations – if there would be violence – it would always be the man’s fault. I have discussed that "legal freedom of responsibity" here before. Secondly – remember that only a minority of incidents that are being calssified as "domestic violence" include serious injury. That term has been expanded to include "verbal abuse", "emotional abuse", and even what is now considered a "domestic violence act" of keeping the household checkbook. Women are much more capable of being guilty of "domestic violence" uncder the expanded definition – but, guess what, a women would *never* be found to have been guilty of domestic violence if she would keep the househould checkbook. Nor would she be found guilty of domestic violence if she would be emotionally or verbally abusive. Those crimes are reserved soley for the male gender. You pretty much need an injury requiring hospitalization in order to be able to suggest to the sherriff that a woman might have committed an act of domestic violence. Or have a dead guy lying around… but even in those cases, half of the time it would be the man’s fault she killed him. Hey, I don’t make this stuff up. In Maine, the Cumberland County District Attorney has made a bit of a career invoking a scorched earth policy to "get men". This demonization of men also seeems to be an avocation of some of the local news editors…. TO: Certain editors and staff.. Re: N Grape Column Portland Press Herald 5/27/01 "All kinds of families deserve support"  p.5C While I appreciate the support that yourself and the editorial staff have given to the modern "blended" family, one particular type of growing family has apparently slipped under the radar detector of the Portland Press Herald editors. I am speaking of single parent father-headed families. While we see support and mention of "two-mommy" and other types of blended families, these unusual situations are much less prevalent then the growth of father-headed families. Instead of recognizing this, we see a consistent demonization of fathers in the media. While vocally promoting the "celebration of diversity" and concern for the problems expressed by minorities, we see the media quickly dropping those causes when more sensational stories (and less newsworthy stories) pop in front of them, when those stories permit the perpetuation of the myths of fatherhood. Last summer the trial of two Portland police officers who were charged with beating a black student on the streets of Portland in broad daylight ("Welcome to America") was deftly shoved to the back pages when the media savvy Portland police chief gave them a story guaranteed to rivet the attention of the press: a "Bad Dad" story. A half dozen police officers and social services personnel kicked down the door of a single father in Portland – finding – horrors! Children living without mattress pads on their beds, and cat feces on the floor. While this situation may have been a concern to those of us who look for the best situation for the children of Maine, the media reaction was astounding – this story dominated the front page of the paper for about five days. The transparency of this media manipulation – the timing of this story that buried the story of the trial of the police officers, and the absurd over-playing of the story (Was this story about gender? Of course it was. If it was not, then consider whether the police chief would have kicked down the door of a single mother in town and inspected the house for cat feces – and having found one, immediately removed the children while holding self-serving press conferences…. …. I think *not*!) clearly demonstrated the priorities of the story editors. Geee…. Does the Portland Press Herald hate fathers? Well, let’s look at the positions and stories of the paper the last year or so. The paper voiced strong support for the appointment of Cumberland County DA Stephanie Anderson to a federal position. What did Anderson do to deserve such strong support by the editorial staff? Let’s look at some well-publicized cases undertaken by DA Anderson recently. Anderson states that she is a strong proponent of protecting children. In two "test" cases Anderson brought to the Maine Supreme Court, she brought child abuse charges against *fathers*. Well, that is nice, but why were these two cases against *men* when 75% of child abuse and neglect committed by *women*? It wasn’t because DA Anderson was preying on the demonization of men and fathers perpetuated by the media was it? In one case a father was prosecuted for putting his hand over the mouth of his child when the father wanted the child to stop talking. The child testified *against* the father in that case. After the Maine Supreme Court found in favor of the father, the father’s attorney stated that a long process of reconciliation between the father and son would have to be started. Was this just a matter of some minor over-zealousness by Anderson’s office? Ummmm… In a different case involving an *admitted* pedophile, the DA’s office refused to put children on the stand because of concern it would traumatize them. So, the pedophile walked. What is going on here? A child can testify against his father, but children cannot testify not against a pedophile? I am sure that DA Andersen’s office can do a fine job rationalizing their choice of legal strategies. However, I think no explanation is necessary. The strategy of the DA’s office is completely obvious. I just don’t think it has anything to do with the protection of the children. Maybe I am missing something here. I spoke to a divorced father who made a complaint to the Cumberland County sheriff’s department after he was assaulted by his wife, who he was in the process of divorcing. The sheriff’s department told him they would not investigate, because they told him "She was just upset about the divorce." Well, that seems like a fairly high threshold for domestic violence. He took out a mutual restraining order against her in court, instead.   Several months later, he taped a fortune cookie message to his child support check: "A happy and harmonious family is important to you." She complained to the *same* sheriff’s department that *he* complained to after she assaulted him. DA Anderson got personally involved, and claiming "zero tolerance for domestic abuse" convicted him, got a six month sentence, and he was required to attend a batterer’s class. What is going on here? The entire government of Cumberland County seems to be swept up in this insanity – to wit. – a deputy, speeding, without siren on, and playing with the police radio cause an accident the kills two teen-agers (Deborah Hall). She requests a jury trial, and includes as part of her defense that she was driving recklessly because there "might have been domestic violence" at the location she was going to. Jury finds her "not guilty" of manslaughter. ??? A couple has a fight, the man (Wood) goes out for a drive, and while he is gone, his girlfriend is killed in a hit-and-run accident. He, of course, is arrested, and is subject to what the court later finds to be coercive interrogation, and is held in prison for one year before the state police announces that the "evidence" at the scene, car parts at the scene of the hit and run were not from Wood’s car. And traces of blood identified on his car was not human blood. Well, I have no idea what happened that night, but gee, I’d say the evidence pointed *away* from Wood. However, it seems because it *might* have been a domestic violence case, the police were completely unwilling to consider any other alternative to the investigation. From here, the Cumberland County government seems insane. I can’t see

anything other then a "war on fathers" being undertaken by that office. And that War on Fathers is actively supported by the Portland Press Herald. Fathers are here, whether you like us or not. Presently 27% of the single parent families in Maine are headed by fathers – but custody is awarded to the fathers only 10-15% of the time in Maine courts, and child support collection cases in Maine include men as recipients only about 8% of the time, according to the only estimates I am able to obtain related to these situations. Father’s have taken their parenting responsibilities in Maine well beyond the expectations of the courts or social services will allow. The media is well behind the curve with respect to this issue.

Response:

Back in the early ’90s when I was a social worker and/or probation officer, I lived under the paradigm that battered spouses were women. Even in those unusual cases I came across with battered men, I found plenty of evidence of mutual combat, and so – given that the willingness to fight seemed equal, I still blamed the violence on the man, who was physically dominant and so, IMO, had a greater responsibility to restrain his violence.  

This is actually correct.  However, women have an equal responsibility not to LIE and use the system against men.  I know of no historical precedent, study, or anything else which even hints at the idea that women cannot lie or manipulate.  Odd that our ancestors took this for granted. Those were years when I was providing direct service, not setting policy and developing training as I do today.  And in my defense, they were days that were either pre-Internet access (to the general public), or days before I myself was fluent on the Internet, so to do the research that today is done with such ease over the computer, was a burden I just didn’t find time for in my life.  I expected my superiors who established policy and conducted training to know what the "facts" were.

Many of them have to answer directly or indirectly to the voters. Now that I am in an executive role with the Justice Department, developing plans, policy and training for providing services to crime victims, I have an even higher obligation to know the whole picture. Much of my education has come from research that was initiated as a result of discussions such as this one on this Newsgroup.  However, the mindset I had when I was a direct-service provider still exists in direct service – among the providers and their supervisors.  I’m doing what I can to change that in my area of influence (which covers the upstate 32 counties of NY), and am seeing some change, but it is slow, tediously slow.

And should remain slow due to our culture. I can only say that I believe with all my heart that the individuals providing direct service, and those supervising them, are honest and good people – just as I view myself to be an honest and good person – and if they are doing injustice to individuals through their services, it is out of ignorance not evil.  

They don’t belong in their jobs if they are ignorant. As long as I approach these individuals with this belief, I am also finding them open and receptive to my suggestions for change. I am not attacking them, or their beliefs.  I am giving them the benefit of the doubt, showing them I respect them as individuals and providers of service, but have some concern about the systems that were in place when they came to work at their agencies – systems which perhaps are in need of change.

"Perhaps?" Male rape is beginning to be viewed with the seriousness this crime deserves.  There are many links online to help victims of this crime (see below).  With public pressure, I don’t see why DV against men can’t receive the same attention. http://www.ncvc.org/links/Vam.htm

Simple reason: male victims aren’t sexy.  Abused women attract rescuers; abused men attract ridicule. Stalking statutes are relatively new (last decade) in this country, and many were developed with the awareness that men are as likely to be stalked as women (re John Lennon).  

Men are often stalked by other men ON BEHALF OF WOMEN (I call that "Bluto"). Research on a national, random sample of households (Strauss, Steinmetz, Gelles, 1980) seems to show that women are as equally likely as men to hit. However, when you look at who gets "hurt" the story changes. Analysis of police reports in Santa Barbara, California indicated that in 90% (in instances where injuries were noted) the injuries were women only. In the remaining 10%, both parties had injuries. In all cases where both parties had injuries, the woman’s injuries were more severe than the man’s. "

Until the woman calls Bluto and has him beat up the man….which is then counted as "male violence." Deal with THAT problem if you want to level the playing field. Again, I think the reporting problem may be the biggest problem here. But the site doesn’t appear to only give credibility to victims who are women.

How about female AGGRESSORS who use men and sexuality as weapons? Imagine, if you would, an affirmative action program…. to be administered by the KKK. Scary, indeed.

Scarier is dismissing what the KKK argues — that minorities and women are stealing opportunity from white males — just because they also have burned crosses.  Not that the KKK is a group of angels, but one can’t dismiss white rights as invalid due to its extremists.  DV laws are similar in how they treat men. Here in Maine, the Battered Men’s Helpline was formed in response to the need expressed by battered and abused men, men in need who were turned down by the Family Crisis services, denied help by Social Services, and literally rideculed by police (who had been "trained" by the DVI to deal with domestic violence). We receive *zero* governmental funding. It is just not there for programs for men. Period.

Wealthy men couldn’t afford to fund this?  Women stick together better than we do. Sharing information such as that which Fido shares here is helpful also.  I add those resources to my list – both to use as referrals (Massachusettes is my next door neighbor, and I have close contact with my federal counterparts in all of the U.S. states), and as models for change for my own community.  I’m sure some of the others reading might have similar interests.

Deal with Bluto if you want to make progress. Hey, don’t take my word for it – try to get VAWA funding for any organization that supports men. It just can’t be done. I scanned the VAWO grants available right now, and was able to find only one grant that did not, in its summary description, name women only, or women and children only, as recipients of services (pitiful – en masse – my little voice alone isn’t going to change a Washington bureaucracy):

One would need to sue to have the law declared unconsitutional, which it is (no equal protection as guaranteed by the 14th amendment). Program are awarded to nonprofit, nongovernmental organizations, such as shelters, legal aid programs, and bar associations, that support or provide direct legal services to victims of domestic violence in civil matters directly related to the domestic violence, for example, cases that involve civil protection orders, divorce or lega separation, spousal and child support, child custody and visitation, access to  benefits, housing and landlord-tenant matters,, and employment. All grant recipients must certify that a conflict screening process is in place to ensure  that no civil or criminal legal matters are handled for abusers of clients or for alleged batterers. Note: This program description will soon be updated to reflect the changes made as  a result of the Violence Against Women Act of 2000. (can we hope those changes will include gender neutral language?)

Like maybe not calling it the "Violence Against WOMEN Act of 2000?" Why doesn’t anyone deal with why these women choose these abusers in the first place? Also, how many abused women have used their men as weapons against others in the past? And how about a little boost in morale where gender neutral language is concerned from the National Center for Victims of Crime? "While most victims of acquaintance rape are female, males can also be the victims of this type of sexual assault. Victims of acquaintance rape come from every socio-economic, cultural, religious and racial background."

Men, as a rule, are not raped except by other men. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Good job NCVC – just the simple insertion of the word "reported" before the words "acquaintance rape" would make this a very valid statement indeed. Just one personal note about writing to agencies regarding the gender bias in the domestic/partner/family violence arena – some very credible statistics of intimate violence do indeed support the "fact" that more women than men REPORT being the victims of such violence.  When I write to agencies about this gender bias problem, I suggest (1) such statistics are almost certainly skewed by under-reporting by men, and (2) even if full reporting occurred, and still showed a higher number of women than men abused, I object to information sites which make this statement in a way that dismisses their obligation to address the problems and needs of abused men.  I’m not saying that ONLY battered/abused men deserve attention – I’m saying that men AND women deserve and need the attention of the resources available to put an end to domestic/family/intimate violence.  When the agency begins with the statement, "While men are more likely to be the victims of a violent crime, women are  far more likely to be the victim of domestic and sexual assault"

Many violent crimes against men are done on the orders of women.  Is this really difficult to understand? (http://www.feminist.org/other/dv/dvfact.html), men seeking help are more likely than not to close that window, assuming that the site is designed to only help women.

Or they don’t want to appear weak.

Response:

For about $50,000 or so, I could find a lawyer who could file a lawsuit against the government on the grounds that these laws violate the 14th Amendment. I’m guessing that this can’t be too important to men if they can’t be bothered finding a way to sue to challenge the laws.

Well, there is an assumption. I can think of at least two class-action lawsuits in the works right now (US) related to these issues. Best – Fido

Response:

For about $50,000 or so, I could find a lawyer who could file a lawsuit against the government on the grounds that these laws violate the 14th Amendment. I’m guessing that this can’t be too important to men if they can’t be bothered finding a way to sue to challenge the laws. Well, there is an assumption. I can think of at least two class-action lawsuits in the works right now (US) related to these issues. Best – Fido

Are they WINNING? Which lawsuits? That’s the only real redress.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Even in those unusual cases I came across with battered men, I found plenty of evidence of mutual combat, and so – given that the willingness to fight seemed equal, I still blamed the violence on the man who was physically dominant and so, IMO, had a greater responsibility to restrain his violence. Two logical failures – first, you have managed to absolve the woman of any respoinsibility in these situations – if there would be violence – it would always be the man’s fault. I have discussed that "legal freedom of responsibity" here before. Secondly – remember that only a minority of incidents that are being calssified as "domestic violence" include serious injury. That term has been expanded to include "verbal abuse", "emotional abuse", and even what is now considered a "domestic violence act" of keeping the household checkbook. Women are much more capable of being guilty of "domestic violence" uncder the expanded definition – but, guess what, a women would *never* be found to have been guilty of domestic violence if she would keep the househould checkbook. Nor would she be found guilty of domestic violence if she would be emotionally or verbally abusive. Those crimes are reserved soley for the male gender. You pretty much need an injury requiring hospitalization in order to be able to suggest to the sherriff that a woman might have committed an act of domestic violence. Or have a dead guy lying around… but even in those cases, half of the time it would be the man’s fault she killed him. Hey, I don’t make this stuff up. In Maine, the Cumberland County District Attorney has made a bit of a career invoking a scorched earth policy to "get men". This demonization of men also seeems to be an avocation of some of the local news editors…. TO: Certain editors and staff.. Re: N Grape Column Portland Press Herald 5/27/01 "All kinds of families deserve support"  p.5C While I appreciate the support that yourself and the editorial staff have given to the modern "blended" family, one particular type of growing family has apparently slipped under the radar detector of the Portland Press Herald editors. I am speaking of single parent father-headed families. While we see support and mention of "two-mommy" and other types of blended families, these unusual situations are much less prevalent then the growth of father-headed families. Instead of recognizing this, we see a consistent demonization of fathers in the media. While vocally promoting the "celebration of diversity" and concern for the problems expressed by minorities, we see the media quickly dropping those causes when more sensational stories (and less newsworthy stories) pop in front of them, when those stories permit the perpetuation of the myths of fatherhood. Last summer the trial of two Portland police officers who were charged with beating a black student on the streets of Portland in broad daylight ("Welcome to America") was deftly shoved to the back pages when the media savvy Portland police chief gave them a story guaranteed to rivet the attention of the press: a "Bad Dad" story. A half dozen police officers and social services personnel kicked down the door of a single father in Portland – finding – horrors! Children living without mattress pads on their beds, and cat feces on the floor. While this situation may have been a concern to those of us who look for the best situation for the children of Maine, the media reaction was astounding – this story dominated the front page of the paper for about five days. The transparency of this media manipulation – the timing of this story that buried the story of the trial of the police officers, and the absurd over-playing of the story (Was this story about gender? Of course it was. If it was not, then consider whether the police chief would have kicked down the door of a single mother in town and inspected the house for cat feces – and having found one, immediately removed the children while holding self-serving press conferences…. …. I think *not*!) clearly demonstrated the priorities of the story editors. Geee…. Does the Portland Press Herald hate fathers? Well, let’s look at the positions and stories of the paper the last year or so. The paper voiced strong support for the appointment of Cumberland County DA Stephanie Anderson to a federal position. What did Anderson do to deserve such strong support by the editorial staff? Let’s look at some well-publicized cases undertaken by DA Anderson recently. Anderson states that she is a strong proponent of protecting children. In two "test" cases Anderson brought to the Maine Supreme Court, she brought child abuse charges against *fathers*. Well, that is nice, but why were these two cases against *men* when 75% of child abuse and neglect committed by *women*? It wasn’t because DA Anderson was preying on the demonization of men and fathers perpetuated by the media was it? In one case a father was prosecuted for putting his hand over the mouth of his child when the father wanted the child to stop talking. The child testified *against* the father in that case. After the Maine Supreme Court found in favor of the father, the father’s attorney stated that a long process of reconciliation between the father and son would have to be started. Was this just a matter of some minor over-zealousness by Anderson’s office? Ummmm… In a different case involving an *admitted* pedophile, the DA’s office refused to put children on the stand because of concern it would traumatize them. So, the pedophile walked. What is going on here? A child can testify against his father, but children cannot testify not against a pedophile? I am sure that DA Andersen’s office can do a fine job rationalizing their choice of legal strategies. However, I think no explanation is necessary. The strategy of the DA’s office is completely obvious. I just don’t think it has anything to do with the protection of the children. Maybe I am missing something here. I spoke to a divorced father who made a complaint to the Cumberland County sheriff’s department after he was assaulted by his wife, who he was in the process of divorcing. The sheriff’s department told him they would not investigate, because they told him "She was just upset about the divorce." Well, that seems like a fairly high threshold for domestic violence. He took out a mutual restraining order against her in court, instead.   Several months later, he taped a fortune cookie message to his child support check: "A happy and harmonious family is important to you." She complained to the *same* sheriff’s department that *he* complained to after she assaulted him. DA Anderson got personally involved, and claiming "zero tolerance for domestic abuse" convicted him, got a six month sentence, and he was required to attend a batterer’s class. What is going on here? The entire government of Cumberland County seems to be swept up in this insanity – to wit. – a deputy, speeding, without siren on, and playing with the police radio cause an accident the kills two teen-agers (Deborah Hall). She requests a jury trial, and includes as part of her defense that she was driving recklessly because there "might have been domestic violence" at the location she was going to. Jury finds her "not guilty" of manslaughter. ??? A couple has a fight, the man (Wood) goes out for a drive, and while he is gone, his girlfriend is killed in a hit-and-run accident. He, of course, is arrested, and is subject to what the court later finds to be coercive interrogation, and is held in prison for one year before the state police announces that the "evidence" at the scene, car parts at the scene of the hit and run were not from Wood’s car. And traces of blood identified on his car was not human blood. Well, I have no idea what happened that night, but gee, I’d say the evidence pointed *away* from Wood. However, it seems because it *might* have been a domestic violence case, the police were completely unwilling to consider any other alternative to the investigation. From here, the Cumberland County government seems insane. I can’t see anything other then a "war on fathers" being undertaken by that office. And that War on Fathers is actively supported by the Portland Press Herald. Fathers are here, whether you like us or not. Presently 27% of the single parent families in Maine are headed by fathers – but custody is awarded to the fathers only 10-15% of the time in Maine courts, and child support collection cases in Maine include men as recipients only about 8% of the time, according to the only estimates I am able to obtain related to these situations. Father’s have taken their parenting responsibilities in Maine well beyond the expectations of the courts or social services will allow. The media is well behind the curve with respect to this issue.

Would any of you men like to put your MONEY where your mouth is? For about $50,000 or so, I could find a lawyer who could file a lawsuit against the government on the grounds that these laws violate the 14th Amendment.  The money would go to the lawyer, not me. I’m guessing that this can’t be too important to men if they can’t be bothered finding a way to sue to challenge the laws.

Response:

Filed under: Feminist

Related Posts

• Inquiring minds want to know....
• To Ron about Tambone
• My clothing no longer fits
• or did the Devil made you do it ???
• xenu manifesto - loon list
• Solitary vs. coven
• What is the GAY agenda? (ask Bob - he hates women.)
• Round & Round I Go.... Where I'll Stop... I Don't Know
• gardenia
• Ticking Bombs