NBC's Placenta Place

The Definition of Manhood

Mention the word feminine; most people understand it instantly. Jessica Alba, Beyoncé, and Scarlett Johansson come to mind. Now, try masculine. Puzzled? Stymied? That’s because the definition of manhood is in constant flux and dilution, as men have allowed misandrists — male and female — to marginalize them. There’s no better example of a male misandrist than VP-elect Joe Biden, worshipper of women and trasher of men, who constantly brags about his unconstitutional, pernicious weapon of male destruction: VAWA.

Being manly is out in America. Instead, we have the metrosexual, the straight man who preens in the bathroom as much or more than his woman. Don’t forget the former hit TV show Queer Eye for the Straight Guy, produced by NBC Universal’s Bravo network, to have gay men teach clueless straight men about style and manner. The trendline is clear: men have been becoming, and are socially rewarded for becoming, more feminine. What’s going on?

This sinking manhood in America is confusing today’s boys about masculinity. As I stated previously, this is happening because men are allowing it to happen. Like the automakers in Detroit, American men are in denial, doing nothing, while they’re being phased out. Never forget that 85% of legislators are male — those anti-male laws are coming from somewhere, and male voters are putting and keeping these misandrist legislators in power!

Divorce, out-of-wedlock births, the preponderance of female teachers, negative images of fathers in sitcoms and commercials, and a legal system that allows, in fact encourages, women to commit maternity faud, paternity fraud, rape fraud, and domestic-violence fraud make growing up and living as a male a truly vexing experience. And, if men think someone will “save” them, they should be ashamed. Grow a pair.

Many women, however, don’t care — or deny their lack of concern — about the fate of their sons. Let me give you two examples. On December 28, 2007, I debated attorney Jennifer Brandt on Your World with Neil Cavuto about the lunacy of marketing “Hello Kitty” products to boys. Then, on February 28, 2008, I debated attorney Mercedes Colwin on Fox & Friends about the feminization of boys in school. Their rebuttals are perfect depictions of mothers who want to keep their sons umbilically attached and nourished with placenta, to prevent them from becoming real men.

See full article by Marc H. Rudov

About the Author

Marc H. Rudov is a globally known radio/TV personality, relationship coach, and author of 100+ articles and the books Under the Clitoral Hood: How to Crank Her Engine Without Cash, Booze, or Jumper Cables (ISBN 9780974501727) and The Man’s No-Nonsense Guide to Women: How to Succeed in Romance on Planet Earth (ISBN 0974501719). Mr. Rudov, the 2008 recipient of the National Coalition of Free Men’s “Award for Excellence in Promoting Gender Fairness In The Media,” is a frequent guest on Fox News Channel’s Your World with Neil Cavuto and The O’Reilly Factor.

Rudov’s books, articles, blog, radio/TV archives, and podcasts are available at TheNoNonsenseMan.com.

Copyright © 2009 by Marc H. Rudov. All rights reserved.

Someone needs to explain things to this mother

It seems Veronica Goss' son Walter Ransome had sex with a girl in the hallway of his school.?? School officials found out about it and suspended Walter for 5 days.?? Then they made it ten.?? Goss is OK with that.?? "I know he was wrong, he knows he was wrong.?? That part is resolved," she said.??

So what's the problem??? The girl (who of course is not named) involved in the tryst got no suspension at all.?? None.?? And apparently that's school policy.?? It seems that sexual activity has occurred before??on school property??and the boy was suspended while the girl was allowed to remain in school.

In fact, according to Walter, other students were "touching" in the same place at the same time he and the girl were having sex.?? The boy was suspended and the girl stayed in school.

"But how come the little girl is not wrong??? She participated in a sexual act also," said Goss.

I guess she didn't get the memo.?? You know the one about males are sexual and females aren't; males are corrupt, females are pure; males are perpetrators, females are victims.

Where's she been all these years?

Single men turning to surrogates

Jeff Walker says from as far back as he can remember, he always wanted to be a father.

Jeff Walker, with his two daughters, tried to adopt, but ultimately turned to surogacy to build a family.

"It was always something I knew, from the time I was a child." Just like his 3-year-old daughter, Elizabeth, who says she wants to be a mommy someday, Jeff says, "I knew I wanted to be a daddy."

Walker, a Manhattan music executive, says he and his partner had talked about adopting a baby years ago. But after three emotionally draining, failed attempts at adoption, they decided to turn to surrogacy. They contacted Circle Surrogacy, a Boston agency that specializes in gay clients. Their child was conceived with a donor egg, and then the embryo implanted in the surrogate, or carrier.

After Elizabeth was born, Walker and his partner separated. He then made a critical decision -- to become a dad again, single, and by choice.

"I realized my family, my two-dad family was going to look different than I thought it was going to look," he said. Without a partner, he would face even steeper challenges raising Elizabeth and a sibling alone. Walker says he gave the decision a lot of thought.

"That was the only part that was really controversial, because I do think there are a lot of challenges that single parents face, but at the same time I felt I was capable of handling those challenges," he said.

His second daughter, Alexandra, was born two years ago to the same surrogate, implanted with an egg from a different donor.

Walker, 45, is one of a growing number of single men -- both gay and straight -- who are opting to become fathers alone, with the help of gestational surrogacy.

Article here

V-Day is Valentine’s Day

Student Guide here (.pdf file). Excerpt:

'So, what’s the best tactic for dealing with V-Day? What can students do to counteract the damaging effects The Vagina Monologues has on young people and campus life? The Clare Boothe Luce Policy Institute is a voice for those who want to stand up for decency. CBLPI created V-Day Unveiled to support students who are willing to take a stand against The Vagina Monologues and the V-Day College Initiative by:

Refusing to replace “Valentine’s Day” with “Vagina Day”

Renouncing the offensive and degrading image of women and men

presented in The Vagina Monologues and V-Day activities

Rejecting the false claim that these tasteless exhibitions will put an end to violence against women and girls.'

Ed. note: CBLPI home page is http://www.cblpi.org/

The forgotten father figure

Opinion piece here. Excerpt:

'If we truly want to do something about gang violence and youth violence, it is time to reverse the crazy incentives that have thrown more and more fathers out of kids’ lives.

Here is what needs to be done, in my opinion.

1.Pass Equal Shared Parenting legislation for fit parents and do it this legislative year.

2. Reform the Massachusetts Family and Probate Courts and make it harder for a father to be relegated to a visitor. Fathers are not visitors, they are parents. Kids need their dads too.

3. Reform Title IV (d) of the Federal Social Security Act and remove the perverse incentives that throw dads out of the house.

4. Reform the Violence Against Women’s Act (VAWA) and make it gender neutral. Enforce due process laws. Make false accusations a crime.

Losing jobs in unequal numbers

1,069,000 fewer men are working than a year ago.

12,000 more women are working.

Excerpt:

Men are losing jobs at far greater rates than women as the industries they dominate, such as manufacturing, construction, and investment services, are hardest hit by the downturn. Some 1.1 million fewer men are working in the United States than there were a year ago, according to the Labor Department. By contrast, 12,000 more women are working.

This gender gap is the product of both the nature of the current recession and the long-term shift in the US economy from making goods, traditionally the province of men, to providing services, in which women play much larger roles, economists said. For example, men account for 70 percent of workers in manufacturing, which shed more than 500,000 jobs over the past year. Healthcare, in which nearly 80 percent of the workers are women, added more than 400,000 jobs.

See article

Cancer Diagnosis Rates - WOW

About 20 women per hours in the U.S. are diagnosed with breast cancer. We have all heard of Breast Cancer Awareness month, Race for the Cure, and all those pink ribbons.

But did you know 25 men per hour are diagnosed with prostate cancer. Do you know when Prostate Cancer Awareness month is? Where is the Race for the Cure, and where are all the blue ribbons?

Men just don't matter!

Men die in war - you don't hear about them but rather the women and children that are the VICTIMS!!

VICTIMS? If anyone is a victim of war it is the people who are killed (mostly men).
when was the last time you heard N.O.W complain that not enough women were being killed in Iraq and Afghanistan. and you won't. Period!!!

Prostate cancer versus breast cancer

The United States invests approximately
$16,700 for each life lost to prostate cancer
$21,800 for each life lost to breast cancer
$160,000 for each life lost to AIDS.

Breast cancer for women and prostate cancer for men are quite similar afflictions. Consider these projections from the American Cancer Society:

	Breast cancer (females)	Prostate cancer (males)
New cases (2004)	215,990	230,110
Deaths (2004)	40,580	29,900

Yet in the media and our culture, prostate cancer and breast cancer are far from similar. October is National Breast Cancer Awareness month, and the disease is receiving significant national attention, just as it does every year. Many celebrities have taken up the cause of raising money to fight breast cancer. The Arch in St. Louis is lit pink this month, the first-ever case of supporting for a “cause” by decorating the Arch. This precedent concerns the National Park Service, but they were overruled.

In stark contrast to the “popular” cause of fighting breast cancer is the short shrift given prostate cancer. I’m aware of no groundswell of support from Hollywood to raise awareness about this cancer. I can’t remember the last time I heard about a musician giving a benefit concert to raise money to fight it. And by the way, were you aware that September is National Prostate Cancer Awareness Month? Something tells me you weren’t.

See full article here

Are Feminists Rapists??

They are if the definition of rape is:
The coercion of another person into having sex

See 3 minute video

Prostate Cancer

Since Prostate cancer kills more men each year than Breast cancer kills women, and receives a fraction of the funding that breast cancer does, where is the outrage?

Where are the calls to even up the disparity in funding?

Where are the blue ribbons, and races for the cure, and such?

You just don’t see them.

Oh, yeah. Those aren't women, children or pets dying.

They’re just Men.

Boys competing on Girls' teams

Article here. Excerpt:

'Everyone has heard the argument that females should be allowed to play on male sports teams. Whether it is in youth leagues, high school or college, females have pushed the envelope and have played on all male football and wrestling teams. They have also consistently played on predominantly male Little League and youth soccer teams.

What is rarely talked about — and usually welcomes a rash of criticism — is male athletes participating on female teams. Outside of family members and teammates, there is little to no support for the male athletes.
...
“It’s really a double-edged sword,” said Taconic Hills volleyball coach Alan Eggleston. “The girls that I coached liked beating the boys but it was very hard for me to justify to them why the boys could play on a girls team.”'

Great comment I want to share that follows:

Submitted by Broadsword on Sun, 2008-11-30 21:59.

It always amazes me, that women/feminists say girls and women should be able to play on male sports teams, which would mean they are the same strength and would mean women receiving forceful blows from men in any contact sports.

But then make women out to be feeble victims when a woman gets a slap from her boyfriend.

I'm sick of their contradictions.

I don't want to hear another word about violence against women or rape. If women can play sports against men, and serve in jobs that require physical strength like the police or military, then you are an equal and there can be no victim. You get a slap, punch, kick, etc, then deal with it bitch, just like men do.

I Think this article is Appalling

"Women often struggle to figure out how to gain respect from male colleagues.”

Some ideas to try are: work hard, don’t gossip, come on time, and don’t expect special treatment from others.

Ways Women Can Hold Their Own in a Male World

Article here

Is he breathing? He's a cheater!

MSN strikes again! Check your pulse, fellas. If you have one, you are a cheater, 100% for certain. Read all about it here. Excerpt:

'When you're dating a guy, you can forgive him for some indiscretions, but it's nearly impossible to turn the other cheek if he strays. Well, Cosmo did some investigating to ascertain the traits that may make men more likely to cheat, and some of our findings were surprising eye-openers.

But before you freak, realize that just because he possesses characteristics of a mangy scoundrel doesn't mean he's actually cheating on you. "You have to listen to your gut as well as read the clues," says Gary Aumiller, Ph.D., a psychologist and coauthor of "Red Flags! How to Know When You're Dating a Loser." Run through this list of wandering-eye warning signs to see if your partner is predisposed to prowl... and find out how you can deal.'

A man having a good time at a party is a domestic abuser

DV queen asserts: A man having a good time at a party is a domestic abuser

Article here. Excerpt:

And Sandra, 56, reckons she can spot a male abuser within seconds.

'She said: “After leaving a party, I sometimes reflect on the people and tell my husband if I think there was an abuser in our midst.

But how can she be so sure she has a monster in her sights?

She said: “Men with a tendency to abuse women are usually the life and soul of the party — the outgoing man who loves to be the centre of attention.

“Often their partner will change their behaviour in front of them and become submissive and timid.

“These are early warning signs. Men who abuse women can alternate quickly between rage and charm.'

DV More Common in Lesbian Relationships

Article here, discussed by Glenn Sacks. Excerpt:

'Page Six spies saw Lohan and Ronson get into a spat outside of Citrine on West 21st Street recently, and the London Sun published details of a explosive argument this week outside Boujis in London, where Ronson was deejaying.

The paper reported "all hell broke loose" and the screaming match ended with Lohan "in tears."

The wild child sank down in tears following the 4am bust-up with DJ girlfriend Samantha Ronson.

It's not mentioned in the story's headline nor in its lead five paragraphs, but it turns out that what is portrayed as a lover's "spat" is actually a case of domestic violence.'

Women don't have to be responsible

Girl who made false rape claim won't face charges

Story here. Excerpt:

'SPOKANE - The girl who wrongly accused Ferris high school boy's basketball coach Don Van Lierop of rape is not expected to face any criminal charges, according to Spokane Police.

Detectives exonerated Van Lierop Thursday afternoon, more than two-weeks after the 16-year-old girl and her mother made the accusation.

The girl's attorney admits she fabricated the whole story.

The girl who made the accusation is currently undergoing counseling, according to attorneys.

Man of the Year 2008 Sponsored by Old Spice

The Art of Manliness

We all know men in our lives who represent what’s best about manliness. The live their lives quietly and with great dignity and honor. They work hard, do their best to be good husbands and fathers, and they serve their community and their country. Sadly, this type of man rarely gets any recognition for his example of true manhood. Honorable manliness has ceased to be celebrated.

The Art of Manliness and Old Spice would like to change that.

AoM is teaming up with Old Spice in presenting the First Annual Art of Manliness Man of the Year Award. Our goal is find a man who represents the ideals that The Art of Manliness represents. We want to honor this man and give him $2,000 in cash. And you’re going to help us.

Who is the Art of Manliness Man of the Year?

The Art of Manliness Man of the Year isn’t a celebrity or a national hero, he’s a regular guy, a man who:

• Looks out for and is loyal to his friends and family.
• Does the right thing, even when it’s not convenient.
• Serves and gives back to his community.
• Sacrifices for the good of others.
• Works hard and never complains.
• Has a confident swagger, but isn’t a pompous jerk.
• Has a sense of humor but doesn’t cut people down.
• Embraces instead of shirks responsibility.

See full article here

Child-Man in the Promised Land

Earlier this year, an article was published “Child-Man in the Promised Land.” Its main point was that too many single young males (SYMs) were lingering in a hormonal limbo between adolescence and adulthood, shunning marriage and children, and whiling away their leisure hours with South Park reruns, marathon sessions of World of Warcraft, and Maxim lists of the ten best movie fart scenes.

Many young men responded that putting off traditional markers of adulthood—one wife, two kids, three bathrooms—were because he’s immature but because he’s angry.

He’s angry because he thinks that young women are dishonest, self-involved, slutty, manipulative, shallow, controlling, and gold-digging.

He’s angry because he thinks that the culture disses all things male. He’s angry because he thinks that marriage these days is a raw deal for men.

As the disenchanted men sees it, then, resistance to settling down is a rational response to a dating environment designed and ruled by women with only their own interests in mind. “Men see all of this, and wonder if it’s really worth risking all in the name of ‘romance’ and ‘growing up,’ ”

A correspondent who calls himself Wytchfinde explains. “After all, if women can be hedonistic and change the rules in midstream when it suits them, why shouldn’t men? Why should men be responsible when women refuse to look into the mirror at their own lack of accountability?”

Man pays for county mistake

He lands in jail and loses job over wrong ID in support case

Sunday, November 16, 2008

BY PETE SHELLEM

Of The Patriot-News

When Walter Andre Sharpe Jr. signed for a certified letter from Dauphin County Domestic Relations in 2001, he didn't know he was signing on for a seven-year nightmare.

Since then, the Philadelphia man has been thrown in jail four times, lost his job, become estranged from his four children and spent more than $12,000 to support the child of another man.

It finally stopped in May 2007 when a judge reversed a finding that he was the father.

But the same judge has since ruled that Sharpe is not entitled to any compensation, not even the money he was forced to pay to support the child.

Sharpe's attorney, Tabetha Tanner, said the county Domestic Relations office "stole" Sharpe's identity by exchanging his date of birth, address and Social Security number for that of the father.

The agency fought Sharpe's attempts to have DNA testing and said it determined he was the father "after reasonable investigation."

Yet it took The Patriot-News less than an hour to track down the real father, Andre Sharpe, who said the girl that Walter Sharpe has been paying support for has been living with him for the last four years.

But in court papers, Domestic Relations blamed Walter Sharpe, a former trash collector, for not filing the proper motions in court to "disestablish paternity."

"What type of investigation were they doing if you can track this guy down in less than eight hours?" Walter Sharpe asked. "It just pisses me off. I tried my best to clear myself of this case, and it fell on deaf ears. It's like I'm guilty until proven innocent. I'm just another man crying, 'I don't know this person. I don't have their kid.' It's a routine they're just used to."

His big mistake:

See article here

An Age of Barbarism by Melanie Phillips

Twenty years ago, I started writing about the breakdown of the family, the systematic undermining of moral constraints and the ascendancy of ‘lifestyle choice’, a doctrine which forbade condemnation of any lifestyle as harmful. Non judgmentalism was now mandatory; the only judgment to be permitted henceforth was that judgment was discriminatory, and only disapproval was to be disapproved of. Stigma and shame were considered an affront to individual rights; disapproval of adultery or elective lone parenthood, for example, were dismissed as ‘Old Testament fundamentalism’.

During the past two decades, I warned repeatedly that the fragmentation of family life was in general a source of pain, damage and acute danger for children in particular but also the women in whose name modern feminists were promoting female independence from men; that mass fatherlessness was creating deserts of depravity and highly damaged children who were growing up to become highly damaged parents; that the collapse of social and moral controls was destroying the most fundamental values of civilised behaviour, with individuals raised in such emotional and moral chaos that they were incapable even of feeling the empathy with other people that is the very foundation of social relationships of the most basic kind; and that the welfare system was actually incentivising such wholesale destruction of individual lives and society itself.

Then as now, I was scorned and vilified by the ‘progressive ‘ intelligentsia. I had become reactionary, right-wing, ultra-right-wing, a harker-back to some mythical golden age of the fifties, a moraliser, an extremist, a bigot, a fascist, demented. Bien-pensant opinion spoke with one voice. Progressive politics meant the freedom to behave exactly as one wished in pursuit of instant gratification, and to destroy all external constraints, both formal and cultural, which got in the way. Anyone who, like me, spoke of the essential civilising force of stigma and shame in providing crucial informal constraints on the infliction of harm was demonised as a throwback to a cruel age of social ostracism. Government policy, egged on by activist judges who deliberately voided family law of ‘moral judgments’ on the basis that that there was no right or wrong in family life because it was always just too complicated to untangle, accordingly penalised marriage, rewarded adultery, further incentivised lone parenthood and systematically normalised irregular relationships.

Wickedly, to cover its tracks that same political/intellectual class stopped breaking down official information about household violence according to married/unmarried status so that it became impossible to show what previously official statistics had clearly demonstrated: that women and children are at vastly greater risk of physical and sexual abuse at the hands of unmarried and unrelated men passing through the household (a recent US study found, children living with a non-biological adult are 50 times more likely to die from afflicted injuries than those living with their biological parents). Indeed, we have now reached the point where official forms increasingly fail to use terms such as ‘mother and father’ or ‘parents’ in favour of the non-discriminatory euphemisms of informal ‘relationships’. Britain has simply written orderly, married, normative family life out of the script.

I also wrote years ago about the institutionalised incompetence of social work, in the grip of a political correctness so extreme that it was wholly incapable of responding to situations on the facts that plainly presented themselves, with catastrophic results. From the death of Maria Colwell in 1973 inquiry after inquiry has been convened, made recommendations and been ignored as atrocity has followed atrocity on the social workers’ watch. Then as now the same excuses were made - that social workers were under-funded, under-resourced, under-trained, under pressure, damned if they did and damned if they didn’t, unsung heroes who should not be condemned just because, hey, from time to time a child was sadistically abused or tortured to death on their watch, it was all the fault of government penny-pinching, we’re all guilty, etc etc. Then as now I was vilified as a heartless social worker-basher, extreme right-wing lunatic etc etc.

And now we can all see the truly terrible results. This week we have been presented with the life, systematic torture and death of baby P, a case so harrowing that many of us can hardly bear to read the details and cannot do so without weeping.

We read that he died at the hands of his mother, her boyfriend and their lodger. We read that the mother expressed no remorse and boasted she will be free by Christmas. We read that she had another child while she was in jail.

We read that the Director of Children’s Services at Haringey council has refused to apologise and insisted that no-one was to blame, despite evidence that social workers ignored doctors and three employees had received written warnings.

We read that four government ministers were warned that Haringey council’s child protection service was out of control seven months before baby P’s death – by a council whistleblower who was sacked and gagged for issuing this warning and who is prevented by court injunction from giving evidence to the official inquiry into the baby P case.

We read commentators falling over themselves to express horror, shock, revulsion, incredulity, outrage. Where have they all been these past two decades? We read of political point-scoring and righteous indignation at the political point-scoring.

Of course the political point scoring is obscene. Of course the book should be thrown at Haringey council.

But we also read this week of another household in Manchester where a baby and his two year-old brother were stabbed to death by a mother suffering from mental illness.

And we read of Shannon Matthews’ mother and her boyfriend’s uncle, on trial for abducting that poor child and keeping her locked up in order to extract a reward for her safe return.

The truth is that it is all far, far too late. Britain has simply undone the fabric of civilised life. And the most bitter reproach of all must be for the people at whose door the ultimate responsibility for this catastrophic state of affairs must really be laid -- not the wretched politicians, not the council officials or Ofsted inspectors or other negligent or incompetent professionals, not even the sadists who actually killed baby P or who murder or maim countless other children, but the amoral and criminally self-regarding so-called ‘progressive’ intelligentsia, who have bullied, smeared, intimidated and manipulated Britain into a truly dark age of barbarism.

Judge: Indecent Exposure Charge Just For Men

(AP) RIVERSIDE, Calif A judge dismissed an indecent exposure charge against a woman accused of disrobing in front of a 14-year-old boy, saying the law only applies to men.

Superior Court Judge Robert W. Armstrong said earlier in the week that the law only mentions someone who "exposes his person."

"It's gender specific," Armstrong said...

Teacher had Lesbian Affair with Teenager, 15

A Basketball Coach?
Gee - go figure.

Suddenly, though, when the attorney for MZ. Wallace claims it’s all “She said, She said” there is no outcry from the Femherroids about how a child would never lie, or that an accusation must be given great weight, or “blaming the victim” or what have you.

Is it because the victim is a child? Well, they claim to be all about the children.

Is it because the victim is female? But … but … I thought they were all about young women?

Oh - it’s because a woman is accused of being a monster. I see. Must protect the “Woman good” image at all times. Especially if its a lesbian thing. Can’t expose them.

The Male Vote and Personal Liberty

Excerpt from article by Marc Rudov

Obama and Biden would not be bound for the White House were it not for the male vote. What did men think about when electing them? Taxes? Defense? Economic opportunity? Did men vote logically, or were they totally emotional? Based on the contest between a known veteran conservative who ran an erratic campaign and a novice socialist who ran a smooth one, it isn’t clear.

One factor men did not consider in choosing Obama/Biden: personal liberty. Based on my experience, personal liberty is the last thing men care about. They just don’t care.

VP-elect Joe Biden has singlehandedly destroyed the lives of thousands of American men with his unconstitutional VAWA.

Crystal Gail Mangum was able to falsely accuse three Duke University lacrosse players of rape, with impunity, because of Joe Biden’s VAWA, which gives women license to destroy men. How many men know or care about that? Few. How many women know or care about that? Fewer. That’s why Joe Biden soon will occupy the VP mansion.

Had John McCain fought to eliminate the legislative and judicial injustices against men, he could have emerged as a true maverick — because, in this gynocracy, no politician has the guts to take on the feminist lobby.

Instead of exposing Obama’s weaknesses and emerging as a unique executive, John McCain, the man with experience and judgment, dithered and dashed and was diffuse in his message. And, that is why this self-proclaimed maverick is now a cadaverick, a moniker shared by the men who voted to destroy their personal liberties.

J.P. Morgan Funding DART Hate Advertising

Excerpt from article by David R. Usher

This advertising campaign is not only hate of men, it bears hate of afro-Americans as well. The greatest danger of the DART campaign is that it builds the false notion that children are safer in the custody of mothers.

An analysis¹ of the data in the U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services Child Maltreatment reports from 2001-2006, shows that:

70.8% of children killed by one parent are killed by their mothers!
70.6% of children abused by one parent are abused by their mothers!
60% of the victims are boys!

Last week, Glenn Sacks² and Ned Holstein³ notified the public that for the month of October, Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) has plastered billboards all over its buses, promoting the falsehood that only men ever commit domestic violence.

See the pictures below:

Now, let everyone draw this bank down to the ground. In addition to withdrawing your funds, please contact Elaine Agather, Chairman of Chase Bank, Dallas Region at elaine.agather@jpmorganchase.com. Give her a firm but polite piece of your mind.

Let her know that:

• 71% of children killed by one parent are killed by their mothers.⁵
• DART’s publicity campaign promoting the falsehood that women are always victims, never abusers, has the effect of promoting policies that will inevitably cause more child deaths.
• Since DART’s publicity campaign is already in progress, simply stopping the campaign will not undo the damage they’ve already done.
• The only way DART can undo the damage and save the lives of the children they’ve put at risk is for them to:
  
  1. Immediately take down all signs and billboards and stop all advertisement related to their current campaign, and
  2. Require the Family Place to allocate a budget equal to the budget for the current campaign, and run an equally prominent campaign to inform the public: “Fathers Are Best: 71% of children killed by one parent are killed by their mothers, and 60% of the dead children are boys.” This might sound a bit aggressive, but it is necessary to correct the hateful attitudes inculcated by the current advertising campaign.

Woman gets probation for putting a Man in jail

Story here. Excerpt:

A woman who helped send her former partner to prison for 10 months after lying in court has escaped with 50 hours community service.

Marion Anne Carter, 61, was sentenced in Hamilton last week after earlier pleading guilty to perverting the course of justice.

Her lies under oath helped convict Robert "Bob" Sutton of
two rapes, four assaults with a weapon and nine assaults on a number of people that saw him jailed in November 2005.'

"Womanist" blog takes on Sacks' latest campaign

Article here

Well it should come as no surprise to anyone that Mr.Sacks (I won't link to him) is continuing on with his misogynistic attacks against women. In his teeny little world, it is all about the penis, and if you don't have one your story does not deserve to be told. We certainly cannot have a world where women speak out against the violence and the oppression that they face at the hands of men, that would be far to threatening to patriarchy.

The Family Place domestic shelter paid $25,000 for 45 bus-side ads and 300 bus interior ads to appear on DART, the Dallas transit system. Sacks and his minions have declared these ads offensive to men and fathers. They have started a campaign to get the ads taken down.'

Compassion for Male Victims of DV Zero

Compassion, Support and Intervention for Male Victims Zero

The National Conference on Family Violence: Health and Justice convened in March 1994. This was 10 years after the first Attorney General’s Task Force on Family Violence. The 1994 conference noted that the problem of family violence in the United States is epidemic and estimated that the annual incidence of family members is at 2 to 4 million for children, nearly 4 million for women, and 1 to 2 million for elder adults.

This conference was co-sponsored by the American Medical Association and the National Institute of Justice. One need not be a National Institute of Justice researcher to note that the 400 professionals and 80 national experts that attended this conference estimated 4 million women were victims. The experts at this conference acknowledged zero men as victims of domestic violence.

The National Coalition Against Domestic Violence (NCADV) works for major societal changes necessary to eliminate both personal and societal violence against all women and children. The total of males victims acknowledged in the mission statement by NCADV is zero.

The National Domestic Violence Hotline Decade for Change: Final Report notes, “Despite significant efforts over the past decade to address the problem of domestic violence in our country, 33 million American women continue to experience abuse every year. The total number of men who might experience domestic violence victimization appears to be zero .

The May 19, 2006, “Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report ” in the section titled “Physical Dating Violence Among High School Students – United States, 2003” notes, “Among adult women in the United States, an estimated 5.3 million IPV incidents occur each year, resulting in approximately 2 million injuries and 1,300 deaths. The number of IPV incidents, injuries and deaths for men is zero.

The above report noted that dating violence victimization can be a precursor for IPV. It notes that 8.9% of males and 8.8% of females reported experiencing physical dating violence. My home state is Massachusetts. Massachusetts is one of the most politically liberal of states and it is a state that is proud that it stands up the rights of all of its citizens. Jane Doe is the Massachusetts Coalition Against Sexual Assault and Domestic Violence.

The Jane Doe website notes that 1 in 5 female high school students report being physically and/or sexually abused by a dating partner. The number of male high school students Jane Doe implies, by their absence, is zero .

The number of male victims that the authors of the Findings from the National Violence Against Women Survey wanted to interview about IPV victimization was zero . Despite this obvious bias they were allowed to conduct the NVAWS. After reporting that 40% of surveyed women and 54% of surveyed men said they were physically assaulted as a child by an adult caretaker, the authors conclude that IPV is first and foremost a problem for women. Is it possible that the authors over looked another precursor for IPV?

The CDC report, “ Intimate Partner Violence Surveillance: Uniform Definitions and Recommended Data Elements ” (IPVS), documents that the lack of an agreed upon definition of domestic violence limits the ability to properly identify victims at highest risk who need focused intervention and increased services. The victims at highest risk are not the only lost victims. The total times a male victim is mentioned in the IPVS is zero .

In criminal justice training, funded by the USDOJ, the NIJ and the OVW the offender is always referred to as “he” and the victims as “she.” This would seem to amount to zero male victimization. This “implicit association” – males are the offenders and females their victims – remains first and foremost in the minds of those who receive this training and remains when they respond to domestic violence incidents.

Woman falsely reports rape to get day off from work

Story here. Excerpt:

'Rape is a traumatic crime, and when police get a call reporting sexual assault, it's taken very seriously. Police want to make sure that the person responsible for the crime is locked up and prevented from attacking anyone else, but 2% of all rape cases reported are discovered to be false accusations.

Police in Marlow say that's exactly what happened when an 18-year-old woman fabricated a report of rape. Many women who falsely report rapes are seeking attention - good or bad. However, in this case, police say the young woman who admitted to falsifying two rape reports only wanted a day off from work.'

Thousands Protest Dalas Area Rapid Transit

'Over the past three days Dallas Area Rapid Transit has been bombarded with several thousand calls and letters protesting the anti-father domestic violence ads depicted above. Our campaign has received considerable media coverage on television, radio, and in newspapers--see below.

Over 60 Domestic Violence Authorities, Educators, and Mental Health, Medical, & Family Law Professionals have endorsed our campaign against these ads, including some of the world's leading experts on Domestic Violence.

Article here.

If Teen Motherhood Is A Right.....

Why is Teen fatherhood a Responsibility???
by Tony Zizza

The big problem I have with The Tennessean’s September 24th editorial topic of targeting teenage dads, and of course the guest editorials that embrace yet another social government program, is that we’re left with a truly false dichotomy.

That is, teen motherhood is an absolute “right” while teen fatherhood is just a financial “responsibility.” I am so sick and tired of hearing this same old song and dance. Teen mother - good. Teen father - bad. She had no choice but to deliver a baby she cannot afford without taxpayers footing the bill. He had all the choices at hand but now must pay financially through the nose. Not to mention, he must accept that everyone but him decide how little parenting time he actually gets. It’s a disgrace par excellence.

A lot of ink was spilled on September 24th targeting teenage dads. The Tennessee District Attorneys General Conference shouldn’t be in the business of pushing statewide education programs like “What’s The Rush?” More smoke and mirrors. Bait and switch. Teen mothers are told of all the programs that are at their disposal, while teenage fathers have it drilled into their head that if they do not pay what can be confiscatory child support, they will lose the very license they need to actually drive to a job!

Gina Lodge, commissioner of the Tennessee Department of Human Services, has got it wrong in writing “Most teen mothers must turn to welfare.” My question is this: Why don’t most teen mothers do the right thing and turn to adoption? Instead, Lodge tells us “between 75 and 80 percent of all teen mothers turn to Families First, the state’s welfare program to get the support they need to survive.” To survive? Please. Perhaps if the welfare program wasn’t in place, there would be more adoptions or father involvement.

I also disagree with Lodge in writing that “only 55 percent of parents pay their court-ordered support on a regular basis.” Where does this figure come from? What about the fact that some teenage fathers or adult fathers simply cannot afford to pay what can amount to confiscatory child support? But more importantly, it’s a solid fact that when fathers are actually allowed to be, well, fathers, they pay their court-ordered support on time and in full at a rate of about 90 percent.

This being said, teen mothers and government agencies ought to be held criminally accountable when they interfere or withhold parenting time from the father. There’s countless programs and philosophies aimed at once again financially targeting fathers to the point of garnishing wages and tax refunds. Not to mention, public ridicule supported by the state. Incredibly, there are virtually no programs in place to really punish mothers and secure a father’s time with his children.

Why is this? We respect someone as young as 15 to give birth, and they’re emotionally supported. At the same time, we view fathers as ATM machines and dead beat dads. They’re emotionally discarded. We need to stop all the word games and draconian laws aimed only at fathers. Believe me, they want to spend more time with their children. It’s simple. Just ask them.

Let’s start a conversation on not just teen parenting, but what it means to have rights and responsibilities as any parent. Who gets all the financial responsibilities? Who gets all the rights? What are we left with? Why do we automatically assume mothers of any age are more responsible than fathers? Here’s the thing. The last time I checked, mothers are the ones in the news who irresponsibly leave their children in hot cars with the windows rolled up.

Windfall moms join deadbeat dads

By Jonna Spilbor • October 12, 2008

Women on welfare should not be allowed to get boob jobs.

There, I said it.

This was not a topic to which I had devoted a lot of thought. I've rarely, if ever, stood in a grocery line behind a woman using food stamps, so impressed by her saline-filled breasts that I asked for the name of her plastic surgeon.

Recently, however, I stumbled upon a woman who not only managed to afford cosmetic surgery while feeding her family with food stamps, but who literally could write the book on "How To Beat The System and Screw My Ex-Husband All In One Fell Swoop."

She disgusts me. She disgusts me to the point where I am ready to march on Washington wearing a fake-breast costume covered in food-stamp pasties while carrying a blazing copy of the Child Support Standards Act on a stick.

As Lewis Carroll wrote in "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland," (fitting in more ways than one), I will "Begin at the beginning."

It all started in 1989, when the Legislature enacted the Child Support Standards Act, which remains the driving force in determining parents' child support obligations.

With that body of law, the "deadbeat dad" was officially born, and Maury Povich could be heard rejoicing throughout the land.

The act was necessary for a lot of reasons, not the least of which was the need to protect mothers from baby-daddies who planted their seeds without ever tending to the saplings born there from. It should be regaled for that reason alone.

Unfortunately, the act is not without its bugs, and in certain scenarios - particularly those where Dad is not a deadbeat, but rather a hard-working slob who may have fallen on hard times - the flaws in the law can truly undermine the purpose.

For example, when a mother and father live together contributing to a single household, and one spouse loses his job, neither the state, nor the court, nor Superman swoops in to shake the pockets of the non-income-producing parent. In such cases, the family sucks it up to get by. That's life. And sometimes, life doesn't include summer camp.

Once two parents live separate and apart and the non-custodial parent suffers financial hardship, there is little mercy. At this point, the custodial parent can, with the help of the court, put a boot on the ex's throat and use child support as a tool that does little to put food on the table now, and instead serves to increase the financial burden on the already strapped parent.

Compounding that is the sheer lack of oversight in ensuring the receiving parent doesn't spend the money she gets for the benefit of her children on a boob job. I don't care if she did breast feed her young. It doesn't qualify.

One mother did just that. And, this is why I am duct taping the Child Support Standards Act to a stick and dousing it in gasoline right now.

This mother took her ex-husband back to court to increase the amount of child support he was ordered to pay for the care of their 17-year-old daughter.

There wasn't much unusual about that, save for the fact that the child herself was working and well-fed. In other words, there wasn't a real need to raise the support. There was, instead, a desire for Mom to extract as much blood out of Dad as the court would allow. Shocking? Hardly. It happens all the time.

Meanwhile, Mom remained gainfully unemployed, popped Paxil, and collected public assistance. She got a free lawyer, and, get this, was charging the 17-year-old daughter for whom she was collecting child support, rent, though she and daughter were living rent free with Mom's boyfriend.

Dad fought the law, and not surprisingly, the law won.

After the hearing, Mom took her boyfriend out for a lobster dinner, and for dessert, she got breast implants. In my book, there is no bigger thief than a woman who receives assistance to feed her children, and instead uses it to feed her ego.

While the court is permitted to deviate from the Child Support Standards Act for good reason, it too often turns a blind eye to good reason. Especially in this economy, the act should be adhered to - or ignored -in a way that results in justice for all, and not as a windfall for either parent.

She was "100 percent Sure

Story here. Excerpt:

'Michele Mallin said she was "100 percent sure" when she identified Timothy Brian Cole as the man who raped her.

Her resolve never wavered, Ms. Mallin said, until she learned last May that DNA testing had invalidated her 1985 identification. The revelation came nearly nine years after Mr. Cole died at 39 in a Texas prison from an asthma attack.

The memory process works well when someone is shown a face repeatedly. But when the exposure is episodic, "we end up with the gist" of a person's looks, said Dr. Gary Wells, a nationally known expert on eyewitness testimony and a professor of psychology at Iowa State University.

She said she believes that Lubbock police and prosecutors manipulated her by repeatedly describing Mr. Cole as "a low-life hood." The Army veteran had a misdemeanor arrest record in Lubbock for gun and marijuana possession.

From everything she now knows, Ms. Mallin said, the law should not allow prosecutions based on eyewitness identifications without corroboration.

"Obviously, we're human," she said. "We make mistakes."'

Wife Kills Husband and Feeds Him to Children

A woman jailed for life for stabbing her de facto husband 37 times, skinning him and cooking his body parts as a meal for his children has lost an appeal against the severity of her sentence.

Knight stabbed 44-year-old Mr Price 37 times with a butcher's knife before skinning him and hanging his hide from a meat hook in their lounge room on February 29, 2000.

She then decapitated him and put his head in a pot on the stove, baked flesh from his buttocks and cooked vegetables and gravy as side dishes to serve to Mr Price's children.

Husband Cooker Full Story

When things as horrible as this happen in real life, how can women find a book like the one noted below as being funny? If the genders were switched would everyone find it to be so amusing?

Why is kicking a man in the privates portrayed as being funny on TV? Why do men get slapped on TV shows and most people think nothing of it?

Denver mom charged in sex assault on son, 2

A 31-year-old mother was charged today with sexual assault on her 2-year-old son.

Alicia Lee of Denver took photos of herself performing oral sex on her child and then e-mailed them to a friend in April, according to an arrest affidavit.

The e-mails were forwarded to the child's father by a friend July 31. The father reported it to police.

In an April 4 message, Lee wrote to her friend, "Did I tell you about my fantacy (sic) about the baby? It is weird but at times when I change his diaper I think of taking it into my mouth to see his reaction."

In a message the next day, she wrote, "DID IT!!././.He giggled a lot. I think it tickled him. I will try again tomorrow. I think if I do it enough he will get use (sic) to it."

Complete article here

Will & Grace and Women

An ex-gf used to watch Lifetime channel and especially Will & Grace

(the straight girl with the gay guy) and I always thought there was
something weird about her fascination and interest in the show.

I knew it had something to do with the fact that there were men in the
show but they weren't real men.

But I couldn't get beyond that.

Then I read this...thought it was great and wanted to share it...

It is a comment on one of Marc Rudov's columns

"I look to things like chick movies and many shows geared towards women
which are the culprit. I often used to joke that the problem with
Hollywood isn’t sex or violence, it is chick movies like What Women
Want (I often joke that the long and short answer to that question is
that Women Don’t Know and Men Don’t Care) Hope Floats, The English
Patient, Brokeback Mountain or any assorted movies with Sandra Bullock.
If anyone has any other chick flicks for the hall of shame just list
them right here:___________________

The other problem is with shows like Sex In The City, Friends, Will and
Grace and any other sitcom that has come out geared towards women and
hides from them the truths about the differences between the sexes which
leaves them in a state of discontent.

Will and Grace I have often said fuels a certain fantasy many women who
have gay friends that they can turn him straight, marry him and live
happily ever after. But in reality that isn’t going to happen.
The worst thing about going out on a date is to hear a woman talk about her
gay friends which doesn’t interest me at all. Talking about her gay
friends on a date is a good indicator of how misplaced her own sexuality
is.

I once heard Tom Leykis talk about Sex In The city and tell a caller
that the women on the show are virtual lesbians. The characters are so
co-dependent on one another that they are incapable of being in a
relationship with a man. I have said that to women who have responded oh
I just want to see the women get it on with one another which I respond
that they are missing the point. The characters on the show perfectly
demonstrate how so many women have that Princess and the Pea syndrome.
They can’t break from it because they don’t want to.

And women who watch these shows buy into the con which distorts their
perception of men by looking for something that just doesn’t exist."

Rape Case Thrown Out When 'Victim' Sends Accused Cards and Love Letters

Rape Case Thrown Out When 'Victim' Sends Accused Cards, Love Letters in Prison

WINNIPEG, Canada - A Winnipeg man awaiting trial for rape has had all charges dropped after the alleged victim admitted she sent the accused cards and explicit love letters behind bars.

Crown prosecutor Wendy Friesen initially told court earlier this month that the woman adamantly denied sending the letters and that they must have been forgeries.

But after a brief recess, Friesen said the woman changed her story and admitted she had written them.

The woman claimed in the letters that she missed the accused and was pregnant with his child.

The woman had originally claimed the accused broke into her home in October 2007, choked her, forced her to drink alcohol and snort cocaine, and then took advantage of her after she passed out.

Defense lawyer Sheldon Pinx said the woman should be charged with mischief, obstruction of justice or even perjury.

Comment: What sort of moronic prosecuting attorney would have bought that story. Bit I forgot "Women Never Lie about Rape". Oh yeah- I've heard that a million times.

Palin the Impaled

Palin the Impaled by Kathleen Parker

ST. PAUL, Minn. -- If conventions are supposed to be about message discipline and stagecraft, Republicans have been improv street theater to the Democrats' Broadway.

Every day has brought a brand new buzz -- and that was before the convention got started.

Republicans euphoric about vice presidential pick Sarah Palin hardly got to enjoy a news cycle before Hurricane Gustav stole headlines and resurrected the ghosts of Katrina. Then came the news that Palin's 17-year-old daughter, Bristol, is five months pregnant.

To say that this convention has gotten off to a jaw-dropping start would not be hyperbolic. While Democrats chant, "Yes we can," Republicans have been lip-syncing, "OMG."

There are, of course, other ways to view recent events and Republicans have rallied their best angels. Thus, Gustav wasn't so much an unwelcome interruption as an opportunity to demonstrate priorities: People matter more than agendas.

And so all eyes and resources turned to the Gulf Coast.

Bristol Palin, too, quickly became a humanizing symbol for reckoning and prioritizing. Most Republicans rolled up their sleeves the way families do when trouble comes. Such is life.

To social conservatives within the party, the Palin situation merely underscored the family's commitment to life. Bristol is marrying the father -- and life, indeed, goes on.

From some other quarters, the buzz hasn't been so uplifting. Some bloggers on the left initially suggested that Palin's baby, Trig, was really her grandson. Others have used what should be a private family matter to challenge Palin's preference for abstinence-only sex education.

A notable exception to the ugliness has been Barack Obama, who was both manly and gentlemanly in reiterating his position that candidates' families -- and especially their children -- are off-limits. Bravo. He also reminded Americans that his own mother gave birth to him when she was 18.

Politicizing Bristol Palin's pregnancy, though predictable, is nonetheless repugnant and has often been absurd. It may be darkly ironic that a governor-mother who opposes explicit sex ed has a pregnant daughter, but experienced parents know that what one instructs isn't always practiced by one's little darlings.

We try; we sometimes fail. There are no perfect families and most of us get a turn on the wheel of misfortune.

Were it not for the pain of a teenager who didn't deserve to be exposed and exploited, the left's hypocrisy in questioning Palin's qualifications to be vice president against the backdrop of her family's choices would be delicious. Instead, it leaves a bad taste.

Would anyone ever ask whether a male candidate was qualified for office because his daughter was pregnant?

Some also have questioned whether Palin, whose son Trig has Down syndrome, can be both a mother and a vice president? These questions aren't coming from the right -- so often accused of wanting to keep women barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen -- but from the left.

Did someone switch the Kool-Aid?

Palin is everything liberals have always purported to want for women -- freedom to choose, opportunities for both career and family, a shot at the top ranks of American political life. With five children and an impressive resume, Palin should be Miss July in the go-girl calendar.

There's just one hitch: She doesn't believe in abortion except to save a mother's life. That's hardcore, even for pro-life Republicans, most of whom allow for abortion in cases of rape and incest.

Women who won't budge on abortion have hit fast-forward in their heads and, given McCain's age, consider the risk too great that a President Palin would load the Supreme Court with pro-lifers who would overturn Roe v. Wade. Whether that is a realistic concern is debatable, but what's perfectly clear is that feminism today is not about advancing women, but only a certain kind of woman.

While we're exhausting irony, Palin would have been excoriated as a hypocrite had she or her daughter had abortions. That would have been legitimate and, probably, deal-breaking criticism. By choosing life, the Palins acted in accordance with their public positions and were ridiculed for their honesty.

There may yet be reasons to find Palin an unacceptable vice presidential choice, but making pro-life decisions shouldn't be among them. Her candidacy, meanwhile, has cast a bright light on the limitations of our old ideological templates.

Should Palin and McCain prevail come November, feminism can curtsy and treat herself to a hard-earned vacation. The greatest achievement of feminism won't be that a woman reached the vice presidency, but that a woman no longer needed feminists to get there.

Fathers 4 Suicide

Protester vows to hang at judge's home

A FATHERS’ rights protester is planning to commit suicide by hanging himself outside a judge’s home, the News of the World can reveal.

The unidentified dad is said to be suffering from terminal cancer and “has nothing to lose any more”.

The “martyr” for Real Fathers For Justice—a spin-off of defunct group Fathers 4 Justice—is targeting the judge who denied him access to his kids.

RFFJ campaign director Mike Kelly denied that the man’s grim vow was a crass publicity stunt. He said: “We are actively trying to persuade him to take a different course of action.

“He’s doing it to force the Government to discuss the problems with the family law system.”

Rest of article

Vasectomies: The only choice left for men

More and more young, single and unmarried men are choosing a radical form of birth control- vasectomies. According to the Centers for Disease Control & Prevention, half of all pregnancies in the United States are unwanted. As a man, there are traditionally two methods of birth control; condoms and relying on a woman’s word that she has reliable birth control. There are clear drawbacks to both methods. Major pharmaceutical companies have recently shelved near-ready male birth control pills and injections. They cite “lack of interest” as their reasoning to cease the multi-billion dollar investment, but that choice has left young men who do not yet want to face the enormity of being a father dangerously turning to vasectomies.

Many media commentators, pro-women advocates and even legislators subscribe to the ideology “if a man doesn’t want to father a child, he should have used birth control.” The bias in that argument is very simple- couldn’t you say the same thing about women? Yet, if a woman gets pregnant, wanted or not, she then has the option of aborting or keeping the child. She alone has the decision, and should she decide to keep the child, the man has no choice but to financially step forward and pay child support or face jail time.

One and a half million American women legally walk away from motherhood every year by adoption, abortion or abandonment, yet somehow nobody labels them “deadbeats” or “deserters”. In over 40 states, a mother can return the baby to the hospital within a few weeks of birth- completely opting out of motherhood and any child support responsibility with as much ease as going to the dry cleaners. Yet, if the mother decides she wants to keep the child, she can demand 18 (or in some states 21 or 23) years of child support from the father, and he has no choice in the matter.

Feminists have long based their support for Roe v. Wade around the slogan “My body, My Choice.” Yet, men who share in the responsibility of child rearing and financial support have no choice, with their own bodies or futures. Fatherhood is not a right or a privilege that they can opt into when they feel ready. It is instead something that is thrust upon them, partly due to a lack of choice in their options of birth control.

Research shows that many men are unwillingly drafted into fatherhood. The National Scruples and Lies Survey of 2004 conducted in the United Kingdom found that 42% of the women in the survey said they would lie about contraception in order to get pregnant, regardless of the wishes of their partner.

Experts, politicians and pro-choice advocates claim that the current system is necessary because it protects children. In reality, over time, choice for men would greatly benefit American children. If men had the same birth control options that women have, then the number of unwed births (and the huge social problems associated with them) would be reduced. Choice for men means better parenting for children because more men will be able to become fathers when they are married, willing, and stable- a huge benefit for children and society as a whole.

Women’s advocates correctly note that pregnant women often have legitimate reasons for not wanting to be mothers, including youth, finances and the lack of a suitable relationship or marriage. Yet, all of these apply equally to men. Women have a choice- men should, too.

Jeffery M. Leving

See Article

Riding the Estrogen Express

by Marc H. Rudov

In my article “Will Women Halt the Death of Marriage?” I wrote that, for men, marriage is a sucker’s deal. Before you fume at me, ladies, count the number of times you’ve seen a divorced mother writing child-support and alimony checks to her mansion-dwelling ex-husband from the card-table desk of her one-bedroom apartment. Enough said.

See article here

About the Author

Marc H. Rudov is a globally known radio/TV personality, relationship coach, and author of 100+ articles and the books Under the Clitoral Hood: How to Crank Her Engine Without Cash, Booze, or Jumper Cables (ISBN 9780974501727) and The Man’s No-Nonsense Guide to Women: How to Succeed in Romance on Planet Earth (ISBN 0974501719). Mr. Rudov, the 2008 recipient of the National Coalition of Free Men’s “Award for Excellence in Promoting Gender Fairness In The Media,” is a frequent guest on Fox News Channel’s Your World with Neil Cavuto and The O’Reilly Factor.

Rudov’s books, articles, blog, radio/TV archives, and podcasts are available at TheNoNonsenseMan.com.

Copyright © 2009 by Marc H. Rudov. All rights reserved.

Marriage as an Investment

Marriage as an Investment by Barry BeVier

Would you rather buy:

A. a low-cost insurance policy that immediately repaid you dividends
each month. And if you filed a claim you receive a large lump sum
settlement and even higher monthly dividends for many years. Guaranteed
to pay back higher returns than what you put in to it whether you cash
it in or not.

B. A stock that is guaranteed to NEVER increase in value.
Pays no dividends.
Stands a 50% chance of dropping a MINIMUM 50% in value at
some point while you own it.
After you sell it you have to pay 10-50%
of your income to the company for many years.


Option A is available only to women.
Option B available only to men.

It's the same investment, marriage

The Matriarchy is Aghast

"There are two kinds of feminists: Those who want to see the presidency available to women, and those who want to see the presidency available to card-carrying, licensed and agenda-certified female feminists. No accidental, willy-nilly women need apply.

Sen. McCain's choice of Sarah Palin made the second kind livid."

--George Jonas, National Post

Now Men

Great site: nowmen.net

Their Mission: To Educate Men on How to Enter Into Marriage Correctly

"Do unto women as they do unto men"

"Marry for wealth and power"

AntiMisandry.Com

Check out one of my favorite sites

The Farce of 18 Million Cracks

Great article by Marc H. Rudov

Women Under Glass

Within minutes of Senator John McCain introducing Sarah Palin, governor of Alaska, as his vice-presidential running mate, the talking heads on radio & TV were consumed with one question: Will Joe Biden, Barack Obama’s choice for veep, be able to debate her with his trademark brusque, adversarial manner? The answer was, universally, no. Why? She’s a woman.

Nothing is more condescending to women than kid-glove treatment, yet most men reflexively provide it and few women protest it. Such hypocritical deference, in a country where women “claim” to want equality and men “claim” to honor it, is tantamount to keeping them under glass — like Barbie Dolls arrayed on a toystore shelf.

Ironically, women who desire to be coddled and placed in a protected class — where they receive free wining & dining from men; are allowed, with impunity, to falsely accuse men of rape and domestic violence; get automatic child custody; benefit exclusively from Roe v. Wade; and are encouraged, with EEOC endorsement, to wear cocktail wardrobe at work — actually wish to be encased in glass.

The result is the so-called “glass ceiling,” an imaginary boundary that many women believe men built to prevent them from advancing into executive positions. It’s a self-fulfilling prophecy: boundaries exist only if one believes they exist. Ask Michael Phelps, the Olympic swimmer who this year won eight gold medals by believing anything’s possible. Beginning any journey with the belief in failure will, in itself, cause failure. And, blaming others for failure, as the glass-ceiling adherents do, is also failure.

If you’ve ever watched me debate women on Fox News, you know I refuse to participate in this anachronistic but still-popular custom of deference. Instead, I treat them as equals, focusing on their words — not their genitalia. Secure, fair-minded women appreciate obeisance-free discourse, and the men with the balls to engage them in it.

Vintage Victimspeak

Everything I’ve read about Sarah Palin indicates that she’s one tough cookie who will easily withstand and counter the in-your-face salvos of VAWA Joe. If that’s not the case, she’s unfit for the VP job. Trust me: Putin, Achmadinijad, Asaad, and Chavez won’t put Governor Palin under glass.

When Hillary Clinton conceded to Barack Obama on June 7, 2008, she bragged about having received 18 million primary votes, a US record. Quite an accomplishment, right? Not after she diluted it by equating each vote to a crack in “the glass ceiling.” Clinton didn’t come clean to admit that her campaign was rife with problems. No, instead, she bloviated with vintage victimspeak: Ladies, men are the reason we women fail.

As I listened to Sarah Palin accepting John McCain’s invitation to join him on the ticket that historic Friday in Dayton, she instantly impressed me with her intelligence, style, gravitas, strength, vision, independence, and energy … until she transparently pandered to Hillary’s voters:

“It was rightly noted in Denver this week that Hillary left 18 million cracks in the highest, hardest glass ceiling in America. But it turns out the women of America aren’t finished yet, and we can shatter that glass ceiling once and for all.”

What glass ceiling? If it exists, how did Palin, with virtually no experience, ascend from mayor of her small town to governor of Alaska — a very macho state? She did it with brains, guts, hard work, sharp elbows, and no victimhood whining. Despite being antithetical to her own experience, she felt that the “glass ceiling” would resonate with Hillary’s acolytes. Frankly, I think she blunted her otherwise powerful message.

The Wage-Gap Crap

Another form of the farcical glass ceiling is the oft-mentioned wage gap between the genders. It’s crap. At the DNC in Denver, Barack Obama said: “And now is the time to keep the promise of equal pay for an equal day’s work, because I want my daughters to have exactly the same opportunities as your sons.” Senator Obama, your daughters have more opportunities than our sons. Stop your nonsense.

In American universities today, 42% more women than men graduate. Women in their 20s outearn their male peers in cities such as Los Angeles, New York, and Dallas. Women on corporate boards of directors outearn their male peers.

If men in similar jobs aren’t paid equally — and they’re not — how is it possible to mandate equal pay between genders? It isn’t. Everyone is paid what he or she is worth, and that compensation is determined by job skills, job requirements, personality, geography, industry, company size, and negotiating skills. When a company offers a woman a salary, and she accepts it — without negotiating a better deal — she is agreeing to the amount. She can’t later complain that some man outearns her.

People often cite, and blindly accept, a mysterious “statistic” indicating that women earn 70 cents for every dollar a man earns. Surprisingly, few ask how that figure was derived. It’s meaningless. Moreover, it does not factor in child support and alimony, which women receive in at least 90% of cases. And, let’s not forget the imputed income to women when men pay for their entertainment and travel. All told, according to Allianz, the financial-services behemoth, women control 60% of American wealth.

Take a man earning $2M per year and another living under a bridge, earning nothing. Lump them together: each has an average annual salary of $1M. Makes sense on a calculator but not in reality. Men and women, in general, have different jobs. In addition, more women than men are in low-paying, part-time jobs. Yes, there are men and women with equal jobs in the executive ranks. But, rarely do you find women welding steel atop bridges or men changing diapers in daycare centers. So, if you take a group of women, ranging from CEO to secretary, and a group of men, ranging from CEO to Navy SEAL, the arithmetic averages of their wages will not be equal. But, because most men feel guilty for being alive, let alone walking upright, they easily succumb to this glass-ceiling wage-gap crap.

Biden’s VAWA Trap

In an amazing twist of fate, Joe Biden may fall into his own misandrist trap. Biden created the unconstitutional Violence Against Women Act in 1994 to vilify men and encase women in glass. Ironically, if he attacks Sarah Palin in the presidential debates, she would, according to VAWA, be justified in calling 911 to have him arrested.

That’s right: by making Governor Palin fearful with his hostile tone, Joe Biden will be breaking his own hateful law — thereby cutting himself on a shard from one of the cracks in the proverbial glass ceiling. What sweet justice. So, it remains to be seen whether Biden will assail Palin or keep her under glass. I guess we’ll have to wait a few weeks, won’t we!

The NoNonsense Bottom Line

In the short term, victimhood sells the feminist cause, but in the long term, it fells the feminist cause. Men never will respect women who want special treatment. The “glass ceiling” and victimhood are synonymous. Never confuse deference with respect: they are mutually exclusive.

If women want to shatter that so-called glass ceiling, all they need do is drop their desire to be kept under glass. Then, they will discover, magically, that there is no glass ceiling — only the myth of a glass ceiling, which is both a farce and a crutch.

Women have two choices: Either stay home to bake cookies as unequals, with reduced rights and deferential treatment, or compete and coexist with men as equals, with equal rights and equal treatment. Trying to have it all by cherry-picking the best features of each is a blatant attempt to be kept under glass — engendering disrespect and resentment among men.

Sarah Palin, governor of Alaska, Meg Whitman, former CEO of eBay, and Carly Fiorina, former CEO of Hewlett-Packard — all in the John McCain circle — made it to the top. How was this possible? Because they didn’t let boundaries, glass or other, stop them. Do they have bruises? Of course: that’s life in the fast lane.

The glass ceiling is a farce, as are the 18 million cracks in it. In fact, the only ceiling on your success is the one you put there.

About the Author

Marc H. Rudov is a globally known radio/TV personality, relationship coach, and author of 100+ articles and the books Under the Clitoral Hood: How to Crank Her Engine Without Cash, Booze, or Jumper Cables (ISBN 9780974501727) and The Man’s No-Nonsense Guide to Women: How to Succeed in Romance on Planet Earth (ISBN 0974501719). Mr. Rudov, the 2008 recipient of the National Coalition of Free Men’s “Award for Excellence in Promoting Gender Fairness In The Media,” is a frequent guest on Fox News Channel’s Your World with Neil Cavuto and The O’Reilly Factor.

Rudov’s books, articles, blog, radio/TV archives, and podcasts are available at TheNoNonsenseMan.com.

Copyright © 2009 by Marc H. Rudov. All rights reserved.