On the suggestion that women-only police stations might help the fight against domestic violence

I first came across this proposal in a post within the Facebook page of the feminist advocacy group ‘Domestic Violence NSW’. I contributed a comment which they quickly removed (as recounted in another of my blog posts), and which I will now re-iterate and expand upon here.

In the article Women-only police stations an effective way to target domestic violence, law professor says, Professor Kerry Carrington is quoted as saying that:

“Women’s access to justice is the key thing and the key things that most women complain about is not being believed, not being heard, not having appropriate support or response.

“That’s one of the key findings of most research, and of course that puts police in the firing line, but one way of alleviating that is to have specially trained police who work in these police stations.”

(Professor Kerry Carrington is Head of the School of Justice, Faculty of Law, Queensland University of Technology, and author of Feminism and Global Justice, Routledge, 2015. Her original blog post on this subject can be accessed here)

But Prof. Carrington doesn’t just want specially trained police, she wants specially trained female police. In fact Prof. Carrington’s idea goes even further than that, calling for women-only police stations, a proposal that carries with it more than a whiff of separatism or gender apartheid.

In terms of enhancing the battle against domestic violence, to what extent would Ms. Carrington’s idea contribute above and beyond that which is, or could be, achieved with the existing system of mixed-gender police stations?

It’s probably fair to assume that some women would be more comfortable reporting domestic abuse to female police officers. I certainly understand and support that with respect to (for example) having female officers assist traumatized female rape victims. As a consequence one tangible benefit of women-only police stations could be an increase in the percentage of female victims of domestic violence lodging reports of violence.

But even if that were the case, would these further reported crimes translate into more effective sanctions, and eventually a corresponding reduction in rates of perpetration? I’m not convinced.

And given that the percentage of male victims of domestic violence currently lodging reports is substantially lower than for female victims (7% vs 21%), then perhaps addressing that segment should be accorded a higher priority?

I think we can assume that it is not Ms. Carrington’s intention to press for one male-only police station for every two female-only stations (to reflect the fact that one in three victims of domestic violence are male). Thus the proposal is sexist and discriminatory in that it provides a publicly-funded service for women in the absence of a similar service for men

Another point to consider is that domestic violence is only one of many crimes dealt with by local police stations. Even if women-only police stations were more effective at addressing domestic violence, would it be practical and cost-effective to establish special police stations to tackle one particular crime?

In the broader scheme of things, additional reports of domestic violence might well result in incremental increases in government funding for the domestic violence industry. But one has to ask just how effective has that consortium’s efforts been in reducing the incidence of domestic violence over recent decades? Hardly inspiring, I would suggest.

And what of other potential negative aspects of Ms. Carrington’s suggestion?

        • It reinforces the false view that women are more empathetic and/or that male police officers are incapable of displaying empathy (even specially trained ones)
          • It reinforces the false view that domestic violence is limited to men’s violence towards women (and ignores the reality of male victims and female perpetrators)
          • It reinforces the notion that it is appropriate to have differing systems of justice for men and women, rather than one uniform and consistent justice system for all Australians
      • It may be the case that some citizens would be subject to inconvenience, or even additional danger, as a result of finding themselves further removed from a traditional mixed-gender police station. There would be some additional cost associated with the proposal, and thus there would be a corresponding ‘opportunity cost’ in that funds would be unavailable for alternative and perhaps more effective measures aimed at curbing domestic violence

See also:

Police officer sacked for ‘wholly inappropriate’ grooming of vulnerable and suicidal teenager (16 June 2019) UK

Shocking vision of hair pulling exchange between woman and police officer (22 June 2018)

AFP’s call for female recruits causes major stir online (1 October 2017)

Female police officers much more likely to kill unarmed suspects than male police officers (5 December 2016) Reddit discussion thread with linked article

Related reddit mensrights discussion thread #1

News5 Investigates: CSPD veteran officer says she was forced into early retirement over new physical fitness exam (24 June 2015)

Queensland researcher to start world-first study into women-only police stations (22 June 2015)

Related reddit mensrights discussion thread #2

Do Female Officers Improve Law Enforcement Quality? Effects on Crime Reporting and Domestic Violence Escalation (October 2013)

Disturbing Eyewitness Video Captures Calif. Officer Fatally Shooting Unarmed Homeless Man ‘About a Second’ After He Called Her a ‘B**ch’ (1 August 2013) and related reddit discussion thread

Freeze! I just had my nails done (16 March 2005) More female police = more civilians shot? Hmm.

‘DV Connect’ is “non-judgemental” (but men calling their helpline are sneaky perpetrators)

I read an article yesterday entitled ‘A connection to hope in a world of violence‘, concerning the operation of a charity active in the sphere of domestic violence and sexual assault called ‘DV Connect‘. It featured the usual feminist spin that comes with the territory, but the part that turned my stomach was the following:

“Every now and then a perpetrator calls, desperate to find where his spouse is. Often these men present themselves as victims, hoping to unearth the addresses where their partners might be seeking safety from the storm.

Now, just a quick reminder to readers that at least one third of the victims of domestic violence are men. Staff at DV Connect are apparently so astute that they can confidently differentiate between those men (actual victims) and that very small minority of men who are actually abusers. A remarkable feat by any standards.

In their web site DV Connect describe themselves as follows:

“DVConnect is the only state wide telephone service offering anyone affected by domestic or family violence a free ‘crisis hotline’ 24 hours a day 7 days a week

We offer free, professional and non-judgemental telephone support, wherever you live in Queensland.

DVConnect Womensline takes over 4000 calls every month from Queensland women who are in fear of or in immediate threat of danger from Domestic or Family Violence, and on average we assist over 350 of them and often more than 400 children to be moved to safety every month.

We can arrange practical assistance such as counselling, intervention, transport and emergency accommodation for Queensland women and children who are in danger from a violent partner or family member”.

Yes, you read that correctly, their telephone support is “non-judgemental”. I guess they just mean the service provided for female callers, because they seem perfectly willing to judge the men who call … as mainly comprising perpetrators.

And notice how, within the space of a few lines, they morph from an organisation providing services to “anyone affected by domestic or family violence“, to one that’s here to help “Queensland women“.

They actually do provide a Mensline service, which includes the offer of “specialist assistance for men who are seeking help and looking for ways to address their own use of violence and other destructive patterns in their personal lives and relationships”. Is a similar service promoted in the corresponding Womensline page? Ah, no, because Queensland women are apparently never violent.

Further details about the discriminatory manner in which the Mensline service operates can be found in this reddit discussion thread.

I was unable to locate DV Connect within the Australian Charities and Not-for-Profits Commission’s register, but their 2013/14 annual report can be downloaded here. A few extracts illustrating the gynocentric bias within this organisation are shown below:

(p9) “We not only work with almost every specialist and community service throughout Queensland around the safety needs of women and children but we also have the unique position of having a ‘helicopter view’ of the sector as a whole … The physical and psychological safety of women and children living with domestic violence is the overriding focus of our work both on Womensline and Mensline.”

(p14) “An even smaller number of men call Mensline because of violence from a female partner or family member. Often this violence is on a very different level to that experienced where the male is the perpetrator of violence. Most of these situations do not have the element of fear in these relationships …”

(p17/18) “Sadly, hundreds of women, children and their beloved pets across Queensland are constrained in violent and fearful relationships because the fear and practical challenges of leaving are just too overwhelming.”

“Every month in Australia six women die at the hands of their intimate partner, at least one of them is from Queensland” and “Sadly in the year ended June 2014 we held 10 rallies for 18 women who died at the hands of their male partners“.

Minimal mention is made of male victims, apparently less important than pets. And when they are acknowledged (as above) their experience is discounted/diminished. And no mention anywhere, in the entire report, of female perpetrators.

I wish I could say that this type of unfair gender-stereotyping was rare or unusual, but I can’t. The fact is that most organisations working in the field, both government and non-government, are just as biased. Their web pages, their helplines, and their brochures and PR material, all relentlessly drive home a message of men as perpetrators and women as their victims. I provide a few examples of this in other posts within my blog, such as this one.

One of the outcomes of this situation is that only a small number of men call seeking assistance and/or to report what is happening in their homes. I would further suggest that another outcome is the large number of suicides by men involved in situations of actual or alleged domestic violence.

Perversely, DV advocacy groups then use this fact (very small number of male callers versus female callers) to to ‘prove’ their claims that very few men are victims of domestic violence. They also use it as a basis for, for example, reducing the level of services provided for men whilst ramping up the services for women.

Men know full well that they won’t be taken seriously if they call these organisations, and that they may be accused of being perpetrators in denial. Many also know that even if they are given a sympathetic hearing then there are no actual support services available to them (e.g. beds in shelters). In fact, by and large, the only services provided for men are anger management classes (yet, ironically, no such classes are available for the women abusing them).

And invariably (and ridiculously) when anyone dares to question the status quo they are attacked on the basis that they are either ignorant, wilfully denying that women are victims of DV and/or uncaring about the plight of female victims.

But back now to DV Connect’s annual report. The financial statement included within the report informs us that the organisation’s total revenue in 2014 was $3,231,446. The statement does not provide a breakdown of their revenue sources, which is somewhat unusual. I have, however, subsequently been advised by the relevant agency that:

“DVConnect Ltd received $2,853,133 in 2013-2014 and $2,666,064 in 2012-2013 from the Department of Communities, Child Safety and Disability Services to provide domestic and family violence and sexual assault support services.”

As is typical for the sector, the overwhelming bulk of DV Connect’s expenditure goes towards salaries and employee-related expenses:

“DVConnect now employs 54 staff including a small management and administration team and almost 50 counselling staff all of whom work varying shifts to cover our 7 day 24 hour telephone service.”

In May 2015 it was announced that “DV Connect will receive an extra $750,000 per year for two years, on top of existing funding ($3.17m in 2014/15) for services including counsellors to expand its Womensline telephone support service.”

This reddit.com discussion thread discusses the discriminatory nature of the Mensline service, and calls on people to write letters in an attempt to resolve this situation.

Further information about DV Connect is available from their web site and Facebook page

And elsewhere in Queensland?

nooptionstoreport

Here are two screenshots from the web site of a Queensland Government agency. The wording assumes that any men seeking help in relation to domestic violence are perpetrators, and that any women seeking help are victims.

Unfortunately this bias is replicated in the web sites of other similar Australian government and non-government agencies. One example, involving a Western Australian government agency, is addressed in another post in my blog.bias

Postscript 27 March 2015: In order to provide further insight into the mindset within DV Connect, let me relay what just occurred. I contributed a comment to the Facebook page of DV Connect, in relation to an item about the release of the QLD Task Force report on family violence. I simply noted that I had prepared some comments on the report and included a link to the relevant page (refer screensave below). By the next morning the comment that I posted had been removed from public view. It seems that DV Connect wants to prevent their supporters accessing alternative perspectives. That looks a lot like ‘controlling behaviour’ to me.

dvconnectdvconnect2

To the left is what I see when I visit DV Connect’s page whilst logged-in to my Facebook account. The screen-save below shows what is visible to members of the public, i.e. no comments

 

 

Postscript 14 April 2015: Further censorship with the removal of my comment in response to an inaccurate statement in the DV Connect web site. I simply cited the relevant ABS statistic, but I guess the reality that men face more violence than women was just too triggering.

DVconnect_zap

 

 

On 11 September 2015 Di Mangan was quoted as saying that they couldn’t justify running the Mens Helpline on a 24 hour basis as so few calls were being received. Gee, I wonder why?

Fast forwarding now to January 2016 and along comes another advertorial for DV Connect, naturally with male victims & female perps air-brushed out of the picture.

This January 2016 article includes the following quote from the CEO of DV Connect:

“Mangan said abusive men were “emboldened” by the public murders that shook Queensland in 2015, noting that many of the calls received by DV Connect were from men warning that they wanted to harm their partners. Some of the men wanted help while others were calling to make a threat.”

In November 2017, the Courier-Mail published ‘DV Connect chief executive Diane Mangan axed from role amid dispute‘. I’d like to think this move was about improving efficiency & accountability, rather than just personalities, but have little faith in either of the parties involved.

The sort of gender discrimination practiced by DV Connect has been discontinued in one part of the United Kingdom as described in this November 2017 article by HEquel.

Elsewhere in this blog you might also be interested in these posts:

On recognising and supporting male victims of domestic violence

So what exactly is the ‘Domestic Violence Industry’?

Australian taxpayer-funded organisations that do little/nothing for men (other than demonising them)

My submission to the Premier’s Special Taskforce on Domestic and Family Violence in Queensland

My response to the report of the Queensland Task Force on Family Violence

Is it my imagination or does media coverage of mens health focus too much on shaming men?

Readers might be aware that there are a number of areas when men compare poorly with women in terms of disease prevalence and outcomes, rates of suicide, and overall life expectancy. I talk about some of these factors in my earlier post on men’s health.

Many factors contribute to this situation including aspects of male physiology, a propensity towards greater risk-taking in leisure pursuits, and working longer hours – sometimes in more dangerous occupations. Other individual factors include things like attention to diet and exercise, and receptiveness to seeking/receiving medical treatment.

Let’s try to split all the factors contributing to men’s poorer health outcomes into two groups, comprising those things that individual men can exercise significant control over versus those things that they can’t.

At the outset we must recognise that there is clearly a huge range of individual variation within male and female populations in relation to these factors with further variables like degree of education, income level, and age for example. Thus there are limits as to the extent that we can make meaningful generalisations about “all men” or “all women”. Further, in the case of some factors over which one might think people do have control, the extent to which an individual actually can exercise personal choice, is very limited in some cases. An example of this would be a poorly educated man choosing to engage in a risky occupation to support his family.

So what of the factors that most individuals don’t have any control over? Well one that springs to mind are decisions made by governments, health agencies and drug companies (for example), that determine funding priorities/subsidies/etc for medical research and treatment. To give an example, the fact that the death rate from prostate cancer is higher than for breast cancer might be more indicative of the disproportionately greater funding for breast cancer research and treatment than the extent to which men “take their health seriously“.

And yet despite the above, all too often the focus of campaigns and articles about men’s health seems to be an implied or overt suggestion that men’s health problems are of their own making – that if men weren’t so silly/lazy then everything and everyone would be better off.

For now I’ll just mention a few examples, with more perhaps to be added later.

I came across this article about a men’s health campaign fronted by well-known actor Samuel L Jackson. Jackson was visiting the UK to promote a new male cancer campaign called ‘One For The Boys’ that hopes to “change male mentality”. Apparently men in the UK are 60% more likely to get the cancers that affect all sexes and 70% more likely to die from these cancers.

The campaign is based on the premise that the higher incidence of cancer in men is caused by men neglecting their health. “If only men would only stop being so dumb and talk about our health then we’d stop dying from cancer in greater numbers.”

The author of the article disputes both the validity and appropriateness of this message, claiming that a major reason for the different rates of cancer between men and women is greater expenditure of research and treatment in relation to women’s health.

The author would prefer a more positive message for men, and suggests something more along the following lines:

“Listen brother, every man’s and woman’s life is precious so why are we putting less time, energy and money into fighting cancer in men? It doesn’t make sense to me. Is it any wonder that more men than women are dying of cancer every single day? Are you okay with that? I’m not. So here’s what we’re going to do. Us men, all of us, we’re going to get together and make sure we start putting more time, energy and money into fighting male cancer, cos that’s the only way we’re going to beat this goddam, mother***ing disease. So who’s with me? Are you with me brother? Are you with me?”

The author closes with: “Now that’s the kind of good man narrative that I’d be happy to be part of, and it could apply to any of the issues that men and boys face.”

Fast forward to February 2015 and Ice-T has established the Male Awareness Foundation (MAF), which appears to be in a similar vein. MAF is described as a non-profit organization whose mission is to reach men and boys where they live, work, play, and pray with sickness prevention messages and tools, screening programs, educational material, advocacy opportunities, and patient referrals.

Now the following media story may appear relatively benign, and the research was no doubt well-meaning, but male-shaming remains nonetheless quite apparent. On 6 October 2014 an item appeared on the television news entitled ‘Men at risk of mental health problems‘.

I subsequently wrote to the Australian HQ of the ‘Movember’ organisation to query whether the ‘problem is that men don’t take their health seriously’ angle for the story originated with them or whether the media created this angle of their own volition. I received the following reply the next morning:

“Thanks for your email this morning in response to the news coverage overnight.
With regard to the claim that some men don’t take their health seriously, this was a finding from a study we conducted last month into the attitudes Australian men have towards their health and well-being.  It revealed that 1 in 3 Aussie men don’t take their health seriously, in response to a specific question that asks whether they agree or not with the statement ‘I take my health seriously’.  We surveyed a representative sample of over 1,500 men from around the country, aged 18+.
The media reported it as 1/3 , so they (not Movember) are saying it’s all men.  In fact, it’s good to know that 2/3 do take health seriously, but there’s still some work to be done to raise awareness amongst the remaining 1/3 who don’t.
The purpose of the report is to shine a light on some of the challenges facing men and their health, with a view to raising awareness and sparking conversations about these issues, something the Movember aims to do through our annual Mo growing campaign.  It certainly wasn’t intended to denigrate men or portray them negatively.  We’re all about supporting men, raising awareness about their health and funding programs that help tackle prostate cancer, testicular cancer and men’s mental health.
I hope that answers your query, Chris.  Please do get back in touch if you have any further questions or concerns.” (Meagan Bell, Movember, 7 October, 2014)
I wrote back as follows:
“Thanks for your prompt response. Yes, I don’t disagree with the fact that some men need to take their health more seriously, and they should be encouraged and supported in doing so. My concern is that there are many factors contributing to men health problems, and that how seriously they take their health is but one of these. It is unfortunate though that this aspect – which brings with it an element of male-shaming – seems to more often than not be the focus of media articles and health campaigns. I would like to see more effort made to put this variable into a broader perspective of men’s health and for men to be encouraged – in a positive way – to do what they can to maintain good health.
Recognition must also be given to the fact that some contributing factors, like government support for medical research and treatment for men’s health issues versus the level of support given to women’s health issues – are not directly under men’s control.”
Another common assertion about men and their health – particularly mental health – is that men need to talk about things more. Especially their feelings.
A couple of issues crop up here:
When men do speak up they are often shamed or called things in the media/social media. Things like ‘whiny man-child’
Research and anecdotal evidence suggests that many men are not helped by talking about things, this approach only adding to their anxiety. Most likely this is a point of difference between most men and most women.
On this last point I asked for relevant references on Reddit mensrights and several relevant sources were nominated including this excellent discussion thread with more than 200 readers comments.
See also:
How’s your walnut, mate? Why men don’t like to talk about their enlarged prostate (4 May 2016) The second shaming article in ‘The Conversation‘ this week. The theme of this one is that men are ignorant. Author avoids mention of contentious issues like number of related male deaths and paucity of research funding relative to (for e.g.) breast cancer.
Men more reluctant to go to the doctor – and it’s putting them at risk (2 May 2016) Apparently masculinity is the problem (isn’t it always?)

We’ve all heard of the gender ‘income gap’, but what about the ‘expense gap’?

In two other posts within this blog I explore the concept of the gender wage gap:

How feminists misrepresent the gender ‘income gap’, and
That tired old feminist chestnut that is the ‘gender wage gap’ resurrected in Australia

Those posts found that the ‘wage gap’ is an issue that is persistently misrepresented by the feminist lobby, and that differentials in salary are generally reflective of personal choice rather than gender discrimination in the workplace.

This post explores the notion that there is a flip-side to the ‘wage gap’, that I label the gender ‘expense gap’. This concept is borne from the premise that men/boys incur significant additional expense, in comparison to women, to access or obtain various goods or services and/or to perform the role that western society demands of them.

The existence of a gender expense/cost gap is addressed in the media from time to time, but such discussions are limited to the gynocentric meme of a ‘pink tax’. Such articles, examples of which are provided below, focus on women paying more for retail products such as shavers, fashion, haircuts and sanitary products. The reality that men pay more than women for other goods/services is overlooked.

Tesco cuts price of women’s razors so they cost the same as men’s (2 January 2017) UK
NYC pharmacy introduces ‘man tax’ provoking protests which it labels ‘hate’ (14 October 2016) USA
The Pink Tax (25 August 2016) A video by ‘ShoeOnHead’ (a female MRA)
The ‘tampon tax’ is not a marginal issue – it’s the force of structural sexism at work (25 July 2016) USA
This Is How Much More It Costs To Be A Woman (2 April 2016)
Price discrimination isn’t only about pink razors (6 February 2016) UK
‘Pink tax’ angers women from New York to London (3 February 2016)
CBS News goes undercover to reveal gender price discrimination (25 January 2016)
Pink premium? There are greater problems (24 January 2016)
Britain’s ‘sexist’ high streets: How women are being charged TWICE as much as men for almost identical items (19 January 2016)
Ever heard of the ‘pink tax’? It’s real and cutting into women’s finances in a big way (30 December 2015)
Why you should always buy the men’s version of almost anything (22 December 2015)
So Who Is Responsible For The Gender Cost Gap? (23 December 2015)
Women Pay More for Everything From Birth to Death, Report Finds (23 December 2015)

The Gender Expense Gap is broader and more pervasive than simply retail pricing differentials, encompassing for example:

  • Men being required to pay more for a particular product or service than a woman for the same or similar product or service (i.e. gender discriminatory pricing). A broad range of examples can be identified including nightclub entry, membership of online dating sites, and insurance (health, life, auto, etc). Here is one such example.
  • Men being expected (via social convention) to meet the full cost of a given expense, e.g. a restaurant meal or a holiday, rather than the relevant expense/s being split 50/50 with their female companion
  • Men being forced, by law, to incur certain expenses that would either not be incurred by women, or would only rarely be incurred by them, e.g. payment of alimony or spousal support
  • Men being unable to avoid particular expenses (without a penalty being applied), that women in the same circumstances would or could avoid  (e.g. in the US, women are less likely to meet their commitments to pay child support, and less likely to be penalised for doing so)
  • Men being denied compensation or financial support that would, in the case of women, offset costs incurred by them. Consider for example discounts or financial incentives or external funding support denied to men but available to women, e.g. scholarships and educational grants (example), superannuation top-up payments (here and here), maternity leave, and rebates or tax reductions for female-owned business start-ups.

How might we also, for example, assign a financial cost to factors such as workplace deaths (overwhelming affecting men), and the health impacts of reduced medical research/treatment (whereby the government spends a pittance on men/boys relative to women/girls).

This is a most challenging task as far as economic analysis goes, but nevertheless ‘nothing ventured, nothing gained’. A related reddit discussion thread can be found here.

Let’s look now at some of the specific factors that might be considered:

Courtship expenses and celebratory days

Men are still expected to subsidise most of the costs associated with courtship. The issue of who pays for dates is addressed in another blog post. One of the articles listed there is ‘Why women should never go halves on a date’ (27 November 2014).valentines-spend-ecommerce

Men are also expected to spend more on celebratory days, for e.g. birthdays, Mothers Day and Valentines Day, than are women.

The Fathers Day spending deficit is addressed here, but some related articles include:

The Father’s Day spending gap: Why does mom always win? (10 May 2015)

Less spent of Father’s Day gifts than Mother’s Day gifts (6 September 2014)

Valentine’s Day spend twice as high for men: bank research (13 February 2017)

Valentine’s Day spending driven by single men in search for love (12 February 2015)

Valentines Day, by the numbers (14 February 2013)

Why Are Some Men Such Awkward Gift Givers? Let Them Explain (5 December 2016) USA. Talk about ‘look a gift horse in the mouth’! On that note see also “Men are also pretty useless at buying gifts in general”

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2385196/Sorry-gents-results-Men-really-ARE-good-fear-women-need-rid-spiders.html#ixzz4wCarcD3N
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

And on a lighter note, see If girls proposed to guys (Video)

Marriage and co-habitation

Although times are certainly changing, men typically remain the primary breadwinner in the family and are responsible for supporting most/all of the living expenses of their spouse and children. Men are also likely to bring considerably more assets into the marriage than are women. Woman however still typically remain in charge of making most of the decisions regarding the expenditure of household income.

WA de facto couples will be able to split super if relationship breaks down (25 October 2018) Men typically bring significantly more assets into a relationship, but the fact that they might take out more is “fundamentally unfair” … gynocentric much?

Is this the new normal? Women who live on a weekly ‘allowance’ from their husbands (7 May 2017)

New research reveals females control the household budget (27 November 2015)

‘I get a wife bonus — and I deserve it’  (29 May 2015)

Women who out-earn their husbands are also more likely to make money decisions for the family (17 March 2015)

New fathers must have same pay rights as mothers, says Nick Clegg, who vows to smash ‘Edwardian’ view on raising children (20 October 2014)

oppression

http://www.aifs.gov.au/institute/pubs/diversity/17spending.pdf

Men make more, women decide how to spend it (11 May 2012)

I declare the gender pay gap to be a truly dead and gone issue (27 April 2014)

The following quote addresses the average differential between earning and spending in male/female households:

“Men earn 61.5% of all income but only account for 25% of domestic spending. Men only spend 40% of what they earn after tax. In contrast women make up 38.5% of all income but control 75% of domestic spending, women on average spend 90% more money that they earn. Men are exploited as cash machines and even with spending on children accounted for women still spend more money on themselves than the combined spending for men and children.” (Source)

Divorce/Separation, incl. spousal/partner/child support and alimony

Sources addressing the issue of spousal maintenance/alimony can be found in this other blog post, but some examples are provided below.

Rosenblum: As times change, should alimony change, too? (25 March 2016)

Afeni Shakur And Whether Or Not Men Deserve Alimony (18 March 2016) USA

Group pushes male-dominated S.C. Legislature to change permanent alimony law (1 March 2016) USA

Report: NJ woman sued for writing ‘bum’ and ‘loser’ on ex-spouse’s alimony checks (19 December 2015) More on this case in this discussion thread and linked article

Breadwinning Women Are Driving Alimony Reform (18 November 2015) and related reddit discussion thread

Even though 37% of women earn more money than their husbands, only 3% of divorced men receive alimony (30 June 2015) Reddit discussion thread

Retired farmer must pay more in alimony than monthly income, Nebraska Supreme Court rules (27 June 2015)

Are Moms Less Likely Than Dads To Pay Child Support? (26 February 2015)

Divorced wife told to get a job and stop living off her ex-husband (23 February 2015)

Deadbeat moms? Should mothers be required to pay child support? (20 April 2014) and related reddit mensrights discussion thread

Jail Becomes Home for Husband Stuck With Lifetime Alimony (27 August 2013)

Woman sues ex-husband for a share of wealth he made years after they divorced (9 December 2014)

Why Do So Few Men Get Alimony? (20 November 2014) USA

Working woman in /r/legaladvice divorcing and is horrified that she has to give part-time-working ex-husband half her assets (15 November 2014)

Ex-wife of US oil baron to appeal $1 billion divorce award (13 November 2014)

Halle Berry’s Child-Support Fight: Female Breadwinners Can’t Have It Both Ways (20 October 2014)

Businessman is ordered to pay £28,500 to ex-girlfriend in landmark court ruling because he led her to believe he would look after her for life (17 October 2014)

Veteran chooses jail over giving his disability money to ex-wife (17 September 2014)

Alimony is broken – But let’s not fix it (1 September 2014)

Cost of education (esp. regarding the availability of financial support via government or university grants or discounts for example)

ICRAR Visiting Fellowship for senior women in Astronomy (July 2019) Some previous fellowship recipients here.

Widespread sex discrimination found in college scholarship programs (18 May 2019) USA

Among 1,161 sex-specific scholarships, 91.6% were reserved for female students, with only 8.4% designated for male students.

Sydney University partners with UN Women Australia to offer women-only scholarships (March 2019)

Jordan Peterson, dozens of academics attack Ivy League anti-male bias (8 February 2019)

New data shows women now surpassing men in STEM fields (3 December 2018) USA. And then read this paper (2 March 2019)

The Science Ambassador Scholarship (December 2018) USA

Anti-male discrimination complaint gets UMN to change scholarship rules (2 November 2018)

Scholarship funding available for women working in the horticulture sector (28 September 2018)

Scholarships for Women in Male-Dominated Industries (12 September 2018)

Scholarships for ‘Board Ready’ Women in the Disability Sector (30 June 2017)

Sydney University defends new scholarship that favours men as ‘consistent with diversity’ (8 February 2017) Feminists lose it when a university faculty applies the same logic to attract more male students, and cry ‘sexism!’

Storm over Shami’s £500,000 to help girls get degrees … (4 January 2017) UK

Women in MBA Scholarship: 30 full rides. There are no men in biology or men in elementary education scholarships (23 September 2016) Australia

VCAT green light will let Ivanhoe Grammar School offer more places to girls (11 August 2016) Australia

“The decision [to escape provisions of sex discrimination legislation] will allow Ivanhoe Grammar to target female students in its advertising and to offer sweeteners to attract girls, including “scholarship and bursary assistance”.”

UN Women National Committee Australia MBA Scholarship (April 2016) Just one example – how many more like this?

There are four times as many scholarships for females as there are for males (28 February 2016) Reddit discussion thread and linked article

“It would be bad enough that men are continuously shamed for earning more than women, and told that because women get better grades in easier subjects, that women are more intelligent (SourceFed, 2014) or motivated (Lewin, 2006). However, women are also given disproportionate financial aid to attend college, even though they are now a sizeable majority of college students compared to men. While data is difficult to find, using the University of Oklahoma as an anecdotal example, in 2007 women received 78% of scholarships, and between the years of 2008 -2013 women received 89%, 77%, 68%, 94%, 92%, and 100% respectively (OU SLIS, 2013).

Government grants are another major source of funding for women wishing to attend college. There are numerous resources available created specifically for women (Scholarships for Women), but none specifically for men, unless you count athletic scholarships, which are a sticking point with Feminist activists who resent that female athletics lose money while male athletics make money for colleges (Bloomberg News, 2011). It seems fans aren’t interested in paying to watch female athletes perform at the level of a male high school junior varsity team. However, if you put athletics aside, and focus only on the resources available to help men obtain college degrees, those resources are sorely lacking, while money is being thrown at women who are wasting it on Liberal Arts degrees instead of STEM.(Source)

scholar

Scholarship discrimination (7 December 2015) Reddit discussion thread

How the Australian Research Council promotes gender equality … by providing “at least two named Australian Laureate Fellowships targeted at outstanding women researchers” (2015) None for men

Verizon donation makes STEM summer camp for girls free of charge (20 November 2015)

Female postgraduate engineering students entitled to taxpayer-funded sponsorships worth £22,750, on the basis of gender alone (30 April 2015)

http://www.forbes.com/sites/ccap/2012/02/16/the-male-female-ratio-in-college/

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/education/2005-10-19-male-college-cover_x.htm?csp=14

http://www.macleans.ca/general/why-do-women-still-deserve-special-scholarships/

Supporting women scholarships (February 2015) Australia. How many men-only scholarships are offered? My guess is ‘none’

4x as Many Scholarships for Women — a Disadvantage for Men? (27 February 2013)

Student Loans Help Women More than Men in Reaching Graduation (21 February 2013)

Insurance

Why Men Don’t Care About The Healthcare Debate (13 November 2017) USA

Men pay £170 a year more than women for car insurance despite EU gender rules (3 October 2017)

Men ‘pay £101 more’ for car insurance than women (13 January 2017) UK

Differences in insurance costs (29 June 2016) Reddit discussion thread

Men paying more for car insurance. Mensrights discussion thread and linked article (3 May 2015) Ireland

The benefits gap — a cursory analysis of US social security (OASI) and disability insurance (DI) (28 October 2014) A Reddit discussion thread

Canada’s Insurance Rates: Men vs. Women (17 January 2012)

Articles that address other gender-based expenditure/cost/revenue differentials

Vodafone is paying women 500 extra a year for being women, possibly in violation of the 2009 law Fair work act in AU (15 March 2017)

The Travel Insurance Company Tackling Australia’s Gender Pay Gap (15 February 2017)

“Equal Pay is Not Enough”, says violent feminist ad for overpriced shoes complaining that women pay more for things (25 January 2017) Video with related Reddit discussion thread here.

About a company that operates lounges at conferences and to promote equality, men are charged more for refreshments based on the gender pay gap (18 January 2017) Reddit discussion thread with linked article.

Female scientists with young children offered extra $10,000 annually to stay on at Brisbane Institute (17 December 2016) Australia

Swiss parliament rejects paternity leave plea (27 April 2016)

Give Your Money To Women: The End Game of Capitalism (10 August 2015)

Why Do Women Have More Credit Card Debt Than Men? (28 June 2015)

“Bring it on” – Says Fitness center illegally charging men more for membership in the UK when complaints are raised (9 April 2015) Reddit mensrights discussion thread. And here’s how that story eventually played out.

Goldman Sachs 10,000 Women program Financial support for entrepreneurs (males need not apply)

You Should Know About: Feminist Perversion of Scientific Research. Athena SWAN – The go-to positive discrimination vehicle for feminists in STEM HE (14 November 2014)

Elsewhere in this blog you might be interested in:

On taxation and the ‘Female Economy’

Len & The Lamprey: The other side to the issue of financial abuse

When banks divert from banking to social engineering

Good manners versus chivalry

#IfIWereABoy

Oh here we go again … another hashtag craze. This time it’s #IfIWereABoy, and it’s discussed in this article and here it is on Twitter.

The people at reddit/r/mensrights (and here) have suggested wording for the banners that they think should be held up:

#IfIWereABoy…I’d probably be dead by now

#IfIWereABoy I’d collapse under the pressure of being held responsible for the consequences of my own decisions

#IfIwereaboy, I would be glad that I live in a country where there is no mandatory army service for boys.

#IfIwereaboy I would be scared to go to college in the US because I’d fear a girl would cry “rape” if I did as much as look at her.

#If I were a boy people would make fun of me for the job I love to do, namely being a nurse

#If I were a boy I’d still be in jail.

#If I were a boy I would see my children less.

#If I were a boy I’d had an idea about male socialization and social pressures.

#If I were a boy I wouldn’t hold up this sign.

#If I were a boy I’d be pretty pissed about the lack of empathy on these signs

#If I were a boy I’d probably have had my genitals mutilated at birth

#ifiwereaboy I’d be nine times more likely to die in a work related injury

#ifiwereaboy I’d be expected to work 30% longer hours for the same pay

With regards to the banners that feature in the article the folks have also suggested a number of interesting alternative perspectives for the ladies to consider. See reddit and elsewhere for further details

My submission to the Australian Government Inquiry into Domestic Violence

 A submission to the Senate Inquiry into Domestic Violence in Australia

“I think the sad part is the way husband abuse is treated at the moment is exactly the way wife abuse was treated thirty years ago” Dr Sotirios Sarantakos[1]

 The Inquiry’s Terms of Reference

My submission addresses the nature and adequacy of policy and community responses to domestic violence. I also wish to submit the following comments in relation to the Inquiry’s terms of reference:

Points six and seven of the terms of reference limit consideration of certain matters to their impact on women only:

  • the effects of policy decisions regarding housing, legal services, and women‘s economic independence on the ability of women to escape domestic violence;
  • how the Federal Government can best support, contribute to and drive the social, cultural and behavioural shifts required to eliminate violence against women and their children

I disagree with this limitation given the substantial number of men who are also victims of domestic violence, and who face the same or similar issues as do female victims. That this restriction was considered appropriate reflects the existence of gender bias and outdated notions of gender stereotyping, viz. there are now for example substantial numbers of house-husbands who may be financially reliant on a working partner.

I also object to the use of the phrase “violence against women and their children”.

Firstly, it should be recognized that children generally have two parents and they are not the property of one or the other. Neither should it be assumed that one particular parent is more competent to look after the children than the other, based purely on their gender.

Secondly, when men are victims of domestic violence, it is often the case that the female partner is also abusing or may potentially also abuse children in the household. In such cases the male partner may be forced to leave the home and take the children with him for their safety.

Clarification and disclaimer

Domestic violence (DV) is comprised of man-on-man, woman-on-woman, man-on-women, and woman-on-man violence. The current debate about DV, and the community’s response to it, focuses almost entirely on man-on-woman violence.

I believe that such a focus more closely reflects the prevailing ideology within the DV sector, rather than actual patterns of perpetration. The continued existence of this disparity constitutes a significant barrier to effectively dealing with domestic violence and related issues of concern.

I believe that a solution to the problem of domestic violence will continue to elude us as long as we continue to only recognise and address one piece of the puzzle. Further, the current narrow focus on male-on-female violence generates or accentuates additional problems that I will touch on in this submission.

Those who have previously advanced this perspective have been accused of seeking to ameliorate the behavior of male perpetrators and/or to downplay the suffering experienced by female victims. Be advised that this is most certainly not my intention.

From my research regarding the subject of DV, I am well aware of the highly defensive and oftentimes aggressive response directed towards those who question the ‘DV=men’s violence towards women’ model. This pattern of threatening behavior, shaming and abuse is nothing new, and dates back to the experience of Erin Pizzey in Britain in the 1970’s.[2] It is for this reason, and out of concern for the welfare of my family, that I have chosen to put forward this submission on a confidential basis.

Much of the data about patterns of domestic violence that appears in the media and in the web sites of DV agencies is misleading

The starting point of any discussion about domestic violence must be accurate assessment of the nature and extent of the problem. In my view many of the statistics being circulated in discussions about DV are inaccurate or at the very least, highly misleading. This is unfortunate as suitable data, albeit imperfect or incomplete in some regards, is available for those who genuinely seek it.

From this one might well conclude that misleading statistics are at times being deliberately advanced in order to support a particular ideological perspective that is held by many, if not most, working in the field of DV.

A red flag for astute observers is the absence of comparative statistics for men and boys within much of the literature about domestic violence.[3] In some cases this is because men were not surveyed, or in other cases survey instruments were biased and/or did not ask appropriate questions about female perpetration and male victims. In other cases the relevant comparisons were available but were not reported, presumably as doing so would undermine the predetermined narrative.

For me to provide details concerning the debunking of these widely cited yet misleading ‘findings’, and to provide accurate statistics in their place, would substantially increase the length and complexity of this submission. What I will do instead is provide a series of links to relevant online sources within the body of this submission where the Committee may readily access the relevant information.

The view that is put forward by most within the DV sector is that this preoccupation with male violence is justified because the number of female perpetrators is almost insignificant – that female perpetrators are almost an aberration.

When provided with irrefutable statistics showing gender symmetry (or near symmetry) in rates of perpetration, the fall-back position is typically that females only perpetrate violence in self-defence, that the physical violence they perpetrate is less severe, and/or that the impact of DV is greater for women than men.

The first statement is demonstrably false[4] and the subsequent statements demand careful qualification and interpretation.

The US organization ‘Stop Abusive and Violent Environments’ (SAVE) examined DV research results from around the world and noted that “These studies show that rates of female perpetration are very similar to male perpetration rates. The authors conclude, Results of this review suggest that partner abuse can no longer be conceived as merely a gender problem, but also (and perhaps primarily) as a human and relational problem, and should be framed as such by everyone involved.

These conclusions mirror findings in the United States, where research shows men and women initiate most forms of abuse at equal rates, for similar reasons, and rarely in self-defense.” [5]

I would invite members of the Committee to review the following references:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CsgeDrlRQWc (Donald Dutton)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KgBVedec_0

http://www.reddit.com/r/mensrightslinks/comments/y0mnx/dvipc_summary/

Intimate partner abuse of men (Edith Cowan University, 2010) at http://www.ecu.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/178297/10_Tilbrook_Final-Report.pdf

http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/V71-Straus_Thirty-Years-Denying-Evidence-PV_10.pdf

http://www.fact.on.ca/Info/dom/heady99.pdf ‘Domestic Violence in Australia – Are men and women equally violent?’

http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/V74-gender-symmetry-with-gramham-Kevan-Method%208-.pdf

http://newscastmedia.com/domestic-violence.htm

http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=12153&page=0

http://reason.com/archives/2014/02/22/are-domestic-violence-statistics-bogus

http://www.familylawexpress.com.au/family-law-news/research/family-violence-research/domestic-violence-study-suspended-by-unsw-for-breach-of-ethics/2165/

http://time.com/#2921491/hope-solo-women-violence/

http://www.avoiceformen.com/women/working-with-violent-women/ (Erin Pizzey)

These and further references can be found at http://www.fighting4fair.com/misrepresenting-reality/domestic-violence-one-sided-media-coverage-and-bogus-statistics/

Consider also the trend of increasing violence by women and girls generally

The claim that women are rarely responsible for domestic violence becomes all the more implausible when one considers recent trends showing substantial increases in violent crime by women and girls. Such increases also exceed the trend in similar crimes by males.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/violent-crimes-committed-by-teenage-girls-have-surged-in-nsw/story-e6freuy9-1226239405809?nk=5f0a5e0064e7e26d5416acaf028e02d8

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/girls-get-violent-1345290.html

http://www.theage.com.au/national/girls-at-war-the-new-face-of-violence-20090815-elsm.html

http://www.news.com.au/national/arrests-of-women-in-nsw-are-rising-and-now-at-a-faster-rate-than-men/story-fncynjr2-1226937589292

http://www.aic.gov.au/media_library/conferences/evaluation/gelb.pdf

These and further references can be found at http://www.fighting4fair.com/women-behaving-badly/on-the-recent-increase-in-violent-crime-carried-out-by-women-and-girls/

How and why is the current focus on men’s violence towards women a problem?

Firstly it is a problem because this focus is reflected in language and in statements that paint a picture of all men as abusers or potential abusers. Web site content, even to promote help-lines, is written in such a way as to pre-judge visitors based on their gender. I will provide a link to one such site in a footnote, but the agency in question is by no means unusual in this regard.[6] The material posted online in most Australian federal, state, and NGO web sites dealing with DV is assiduously judgmental and anti-male in its nature.

Take for example the document the ‘National Plan to Reduce Violence against Women and their Children’ which sets the scene for addressing domestic violence at both federal and state level. That document, as do many others like it, waves away the welfare of battered men within the first few paragraphs. The Plan states “While a small proportion of men are victims of domestic violence and sexual assault, the majority of people who experience this kind of violence are women in a home, at the hands of men they know.  Men are more likely to be the victims of violence from strangers and in public, so different strategies are required to address these different types of violence.”

As a consequence of both the message being communicated by DV agencies, and broader social forces at work (i.e. anti-male bias and sex-role stereotyping), many male victims are discouraged from coming forward to report crimes and/or seek assistance. By the same token it is also entirely likely that the overt profiling undertaken by DV agencies results in fewer women coming forward to seek help for their own aggressive tendencies.

Under-reporting by male victims then has a flow-on effect of reinforcing the misconception that there are few female aggressors, that facilities for male victims are unnecessary, that survey question on male victims/female aggressors are redundant, etc.

There are many reports of male victims who do come forward being treated with suspicion, if not downright hostility. They claim to not have been believed, and that they were considered as abusers who were denial. Even when they are treated sympathetically, the next problem they encounter is that there are either nil or minimal services (e.g. beds in shelters) or assistance available to men, and even more so for men accompanied by children.

When this mantra of ‘DV=men’s violence towards women’ is disseminated through the community via the media it encourages the view that men are inherently violent, and that should you see a man involved in a violent incident with a woman then the man is the perpetrator.

This is demonstrated in the videos at http://www.fighting4fair.com/promulgating-inequality/differing-public-response-to-partner-violence-depending-on-gender-of-victim/

Be assured that men suffer deeply from the affects of domestic violence. Another largely unreported outcome of the current situation is a very high rate of male suicide linked to involvement in domestic violence – which is often exacerbated by subsequent isolation from children.[7]

The man’s separation from children can and does occur regardless of whether the father is the perpetrator, the alleged perpetrator, and/or the victim of domestic violence (as for e.g. in the case where no emergency accommodation is available for fathers with children).

Focusing wholly on male perpetrators is akin to handing violent women a free-pass

The Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network (RAINN) prepared a submission to the White House Task Force to Protect Students from Sexual Assault. RAINN is the USA’s largest anti-sexual violence organization. In that submission they wrote:

“… an inclination to focus on particular segments of the student population (e.g.,
athletes), particular aspects of campus culture (e.g., the Greek system), or traits that are
common in many millions of law-abiding Americans (e.g., “masculinity”), rather than on the
subpopulation at fault: those who choose to commit rape. This trend has the paradoxical
effect of making it harder to stop sexual violence, since it removes the focus from the
individual at fault, and seemingly mitigates personal responsibility for his or her own actions.”[8]

Now if we change ‘sexual violence’ to ‘domestic violence’ you might see where I am heading with this. As stated earlier, many within the DV sector are loudly asserting that ‘domestic violence is men’s violence towards women’, and devoting their resources to educating/shaming men as a collective group. But by doing so they are inadvertently sending a message to violent women that ‘whatever you are doing must be something other than domestic violence’, and ‘given the violent nature of men your actions might well be justified’.

It also follows that violent women would be less concerned about being prosecuted in the knowledge that they will probably be believed more readily than their male partner should the authorities become involved.

Recommendations

  1. First and foremost, I would implore members of the Committee to consider this submission, and the linked references it provides, with an open mind and in an objective manner. You may or may not share my view that the results of the approach now taken towards domestic violence are somewhat less than stellar. Truly, domestic violence is a difficult and multi-faceted problem with which to wrestle.

Please be open to the possibility that the limited success achieved to date may also be partly due to shortcomings in both the philosophical approach that is driving current efforts, and the fixed attitudes and preconceived notions of many of those tasked with addressing the issue.

Indeed I am very much aware of the ‘elephant in the room’ that is feminist doctrine, and of the combative ‘us and them’ approach often adopted by adherents to that movement. But as is usually the case, we can and must find a middle path that will lead us to a fair and equitable solution to the scourge of domestic violence.

2. Evaluate and modify all documents and web content produced by government agencies in order to identify and remove any bias that might be present in relation to gender or sexual orientation. None of this material should pre-judge who is or might be the perpetrator or the victim in the relationship, or their motivation for coming forward.

3. Ensure that gender bias is removed from survey instruments and in research methodology in order to ensure accurate, unbiased and truly representative findings.

4. Evaluate and adjust the composition of relevant sections within agencies, committees, and panels dealing with DV issues so that, as far as practicable, they are representative of the broader community, particularly in relation to gender and sexual orientation.

At the moment it is my impression that many such groups are currently comprised entirely of women, and it is quite possible that this is introducing a degree of bias which could limit the scope of approaches being considered or undertaken to address the problem of DV.

It is also important that any budget committee, steering committees or similar should contain representatives who are completely independent, in a financial sense, from any of the matters being considered. It would be naïve to assume, given the huge amounts of money directed towards domestic violence at the state and federal level, that there was no potential for financial considerations or self-interest to influence decisions regarding the approaches undertaken.

5. Evaluate and adjust the allocation of funding and resources so that it is in accordance with the reality of the domestic violence problem in its entirety. In the first instance this would almost certainly necessitate additional resources being directed towards male victims of domestic violence and counseling for female perpetrators of violence.

6. Although it may be beyond the scope of the Committee’s consideration the manner in which the welfare of men has been largely ignored in the case of DV is partly indicative of the lack of any advocacy for the interests of men and boys within the federal sphere. This of course contrasts strongly with the situation for women where there are generously-funded agencies or sections within agencies to advance the interests of women and girls. This may not be the time or the place to consider this issue, but it is a disparity which should not continue to go unquestioned.

[1] http://mensrights.com.au/domestic-family-violence/violent-women/

[2]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erin_Pizzey

[3] http://www.fighting4fair.com/misrepresenting-reality/gender-bias-at-the-australian-department-of-social-services/

[4]See for example http://www.mediaradar.org/docs/Dutton_GenderParadigmInDV-Pt1.pdf, See  p687

[5]http://www.saveservices.org/dvlp/policy-briefings/partner-abuse-worldwide/

[6]http://www.fighting4fair.com/misrepresenting-reality/addressing-anti-male-bias-by-an-australian-state-government-department/

[7]http://mediaradar.org/docs/Davis-DomesticViolenceRelatedDeaths.pdf See Conclusion

[8]https://rainn.org/images/03-2014/WH-Task-Force-RAINN-Recommendations.pdf

*****************************************************************************

Further information concerning the Inquiry can be accessed at http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Finance_and_Public_Administration/Domestic_Violence.

PS: The tabling of the Inquiry’s report has been postponed from 27 October 2014 to 2 March 2015, and then extended again to 18 June 2015. On 15 June 2015, the Senate granted a further extension of time for reporting until 20 August 2015. I was extremely disappointed with this delay – it was really quite a pathetic effort.

Here is a link to the final report which I have yet to review (that review may well form the basis for a separate post).

An interim report was released on 19 March 2015. Regretfully there is nothing in that document to suggest that any consideration whatsoever has been given submissions from those offering a non-feminist perspective on the matter. As a consequence the report continues the tradition of turning the other way with respect to the existence of male victims and female perpetrators. To give an example, clauses 1.11 and 1.38 only refer to behavioural modification programs in relation to male perpetrators.

The One in Three organisation has had a significant degree of involvement with the Senate Inquiry. In this paper they recount the bias and antagonism that they have witnessed and experienced because of their efforts to seek a fairer outcome for men who have been subjected to family violence.

On being male or female (incl. innate differences, stereotyping and so on)

This blog post remains a work in progress and for the time being simply consists of a list of links to external resources …

Female to male trans discover the reality of male privilege (February 2019) Video

The nature of sex, by Andrew Sullivan (1 February 2019)

“Sex differences in mate preferences, with women more set on earning capacity and men on physical attractiveness in the opposite sex, did not lessen in countries with greater gender equality” (5 December 2018) Link to Tweet

Men and women really do think differently, say scientists (13 November 2018)

Crossing the divide: Do men really have it easier? (20 July 2018) Interesting observations within the profiles of four people who transitioned from female to male

The Gender Equality Paradox (22 October 2017) Video

Stereotype that women are kinder and less selfish is true, claim neuroscientists (10 October 2017)

Jordan Peterson – Why Men & Women Are Very Different (26 August 2017) Video

Differences between Men and Women are Vastly Exaggerated (7 August 2017) Some interesting readers comments here

Bigger brains put men ahead of women in the IQ stakes, says research (2 July 2017)

Time to stop bickering and start understanding (4 May 2017) Addresses that popular line of attack against men … alleging that they are lazy with housework.

Mindfulness meditation helps women but not men, first study suggests (20 April 2017)

Social psychologist Roy Baumeister challenges bias (7 January 2017) Australia

Researchers’ sexism fears are putting women’s health at risk, scientist claims (29 November 2016)

Being A Man Is Harder Than You Think: 50 Men Explain Why (17 September 2016)

We Think Women Are Better People, But They’re Not (6 November 2016)

A PMS warning App (3 September 2016) Women have periods but men don’t. Some women experience mood swings and/or erratic behaviour prior to menses, which the people around them can better accommodate with due warning, for the benefit of all involved. This is sexist how exactly? Acknowledge an issue, manage an issue. PMS is not an invention of misogynists, it’s accepted as reality by most self-aware adults.

Feminism Is Its Own Worst Enemy (31 August 2016) with related Reddit discussion thread here

Why can’t women do pull ups? It’s a culture thing (16 August 2016)

New study: working longer hours harms women, but protects men (23 June 2016)

Gender equity can cause sex differences to grow bigger (21 June 2016)

“Why we’re glad the Matildas lost against a team of 15-year-old boys.” (27 May 2016) Related Reddit discussion thread here

The Myth of Female Rationality – Part 1 (10 February 2016) USA. I love Bob’s description of his moderation procedure, this guy has a handy turn of phrase.

Feminism, sex-differences and chivalry (7 February 2016)

Queens (17 August 2015) Feminists have often stated that throughout history men have caused all the wars (cue: toxic masculinity). This study explores the notion that female monarchs are left prone to conflict that male monarchs

Men have better sense of direction than women, study suggests (7 December 2015)

Why Males Are More Violent (undated)

Guardian: “men are pretty terrible people” piece is half right (30 October 2015)

Machiavellian Thinking vs. Conventional Logic (8 February 2015)

We’re socializing girls all wrong (5 October 2015) USA

New Study: Testosterone Changes the Brain (31 August 2015)

New study reveals Australian women more likely to lie on social media than men (5 August 2015)

Testosterone increases honesty (2012)

Violence does not come naturally to men and boys (5 June 2015)

War Against Human Nature: 100% Failure (11 May 2015)

On differences in male and female humour (9 May 2015)

My cannabis induced epiphany about men and women (9 May 2015)

‘B-But Gender is A Social Construct’ (15 March 2015) Youtube video with related reddit mensrights discussion thread

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV): Women ‘More Patient,’ Less inclined to war than men (18 April 2015) Reddit mensrights discussion thread and linked article

Philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer’s “On Women” (15 April 2015)

Multitasking is scientifically impossible, so give up now (2 April 2015)

A Biology Professor Mansplains Why Women Are Superior. No Thanks (1 April 2015)

Could Jesus have actually been a woman? (1 April 2015) Because men don’t possess qualities like humility and compassion – so says this feminist author

Are men inferior to women? Let’s check the data , by Christina Hoff Sommers (30 March 2015) Video

Men are violent: Wrote this email to professor in response to a misandrist passage in a required textbook (31 March 2015)

Five Stupid Clichés About Women That Are Mostly True, by Janet Bloomfield (30 March 2015)

5 things women do better than men, by Janet Bloomfield (1 April 2015)

Why men aren’t ‘stupid’ and women aren’t ‘crazy’ (28 March 2015)

Boys will be boys? Yes, neuroscience shows: New technology highlights differences in development (2 October 2014)

How Gender Feminism became the new Creationism (18 December 2014)

http://www.new-gallery-of-art.com/pdf/antioch/humsex/StraightMale/Testosterone.pdf

FEMININITIES –Toxic Femininity (20 June 2013)

Men are exceptional (16 October 2014)

The Evolution of Culturally-Variable Sex Differences: Men and Women Are Not Always Different, but When They Are … It Appears Not to Result from Patriarchy or Sex Role Socialization (13 September 2014)

Reddit/mensrights discussion thread about the lived experience of someone who has lived as both a man and woman (September 2014) Further readers comments can be found here

2006 Self Made Man: Norah Vincent chooses Female Privilege over Male Privilege (17 November 2013) Youtube video and related reddit mensrights discussion thread Woman lives as a man for 18 months to see what it’s like

Camille Paglia 2013 video interview

The Mars and Venus question (2 August 2014)

This Accidental Experiment Shows The Superiority Of Patriarchy (5 April 2014)

The Crying Game, by Rollo Tomassi (26 February 2013)

Why don’t women ask men out of first dates? (30 April 2011)

Men Have Emotions, But Women Don’t Listen (14 January 2009)

Gender differences in behaviour: Activating effects of cross-sex hormones (1995)

http://siryouarebeingmocked.tumblr.com/post/91199368447/claim-freeing-women-from-their-gender-roles-will-free

http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi/10.1371/journal.pone.0029265

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/24/verizon-ad-tells-parents-to-encourage-girls_n_5526236.html?ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000037

http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/290ji7/because_men_who_dont_conform_to_male_stereotypes/

Differing public response to partner violence depending on gender of victim

In a segment on the ‘Sunrise’ morning TV show there appeared a video where actors simulated a display of partner harassment/violence in a public space. In the first scenario the man was the aggressor, and in the second scenario they reversed the roles. The differing reaction by members of the public was profound. The same clip has been circulating on the internet for some time now and has been the subject of much discussion in fora such as Reddit Mens Rights (see link below).

I was interested to see how the topic was dealt with on Sunrise for a couple of reasons. Firstly in promotional clips they seem to suggest that the story was about whether members of the public should intervene in instances of partner violence – rather than about the different reaction to having a male as aggressor versus female as aggressor.

Secondly, I was interested because one of those presenting the story was Andrew O’Keefe who is heavily involved in the ‘White Ribbon Campaign’ in Australia. The issue here is that the ‘White Ribbon Campaign’ is complicit in injecting into the public’s consciousness the notion that ‘domestic violence = men’s violence towards women’. In so doing the ‘Campaign’ and other domestic violence advocacy groups like it, divert attention from the other facets of domestic violence (i.e. M+M, F+F, and female on male violence).

It was indeed ironic then that Andrew tut-tutted the contrasting public reaction to female on male violence shown in the video, given that could be viewed as an outcome of the message broadcast by the White Ribbon Campaign and many pro-feminist organisations like it.

The unfortunate fact is that the average member of the public simply does not now recognise a woman’s aggression towards a male as being domestic violence, or that women’s aggression generally is of any particular social significance.

Jeremy Kyle slams audience for LAUGHING at male domestic violence victim who threw himself off a balcony (12 May 2015)

Youtube has apparently removed at least one video showing women abusing men (after it hit 6,000,000 views), but has left online videos showing men abusing women – details in this reddit discussion thread (30 October 2014)

Here is a good blog post about the video by Ally Fogg

An article in the The Independent (27 May 2014) and related Reddit discussion thread

An article about the same video in The Daily Mail

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbPmdePpfG0 and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LlFAd4YdQks (A second/separate video showing public reaction to women abusing men)

In this hidden camera experiment a women is seen spiking her date’s drink – see how bystanders react. And yes, drink-spiking by women occurs quite often in real life – here is just the latest incident to appear in the media.

In this hidden camera experiment first a woman, and then a man, take money from a sleeping homeless guy. See the differing reaction by members of the public.

Another hidden camera experiment – Many people come to the aid of a women being abused, but yet again no-one comes to the aid of a male being subjected to abuse by a woman

A feminist justifying the differing public response to M/F and F/M violence and a related reddit discussion

This discussion thread and linked video isn’t about partner violence, but it does show how many members of the public will paint a man as the aggressor even when a woman initiates violence and continues despite efforts to reason with her.

This paper contains many links to further sources proving examples of male victims of domestic abuse not being taken seriously.

Also not about partner violence but still relevant – this video shows a female student assaulting a male student while a female teacher watches on but fails to control the situation.

Why didn’t I stop to help a woman in need? (5 August 2014)

Reaction to women abusing men in public (26 March 2008) Video

But maybe public reaction will be different in the case of sexual harassment. Hmm, maybe not

See also:

Girl in a classroom hits male student. No-one steps in until he finally strikes back – and people seek to rescue her (Tweet & linked video)

Tania Reynolds on Men as stereotypical perpetrators of harm : Half hour of Heterodoxy #40 (30 November 2018)

I abused a man in public and no one cared (11 October 2017) with Reddit discussion thread here

Bystanders often don’t intervene in sexual harassment – but should they? (21 February 2017) Although artfully camouflaged, the gender bias runs deep in this article. It ignores violence against men, ignores violence by women, and suggests that women more likely to intervene to stop violence.

VIDEO: Do our beliefs about domestic violence match the facts? (12 January 2017)

Dash Cam captures the moment a ‘disgruntled’ wife rams her husband’s van (4 January 2017) Australia

An Open Letter To Eddie McGuire & TripleM (13 March 2016) Australia

Gang of ‘vigilantes battered a man to death with a hammer after they saw him having an argument with his girlfriend in the street’ (4 March 2016) UK

It’s not clear whether this incident at a US school was partner violence or not, but I have included it here as the media coverage and school commentary certainly display a gender-based double standard (18 February 2016)

No more slapping (15 February 2016) Video

Would YOU intervene if you saw a woman slap her boyfriend? Shocking video shows strangers ignoring domestic violence in the street – but they rush to help a female victim (10 November 2015)

Anti-bullying video carried empowering message (29 October 2015) But no mention of the corresponding reaction when a boy was bullied. Why not? Well perhaps because it was produced by the same guy who did the infamous street harassment of a woman in New York video.

Feminist Student repeatedly assaults boy until he responds (16 June 2015)

Taraji P. Henson Slaps the Hell Out of SNL‘s Taran Killam in New Promo (9 April 2015)

Physically Abused Boyfriend Hits Girlfriend Back In Public Experiment! (6 April 2015) Another hidden-camera video

The ‘Women are Wonderful’ effect (Wikipedia entry) and this video by Christina Hoff Sommers (30 March 2015)

Insightful article by Jim Muldoon regarding why men may not always choose to step in for women (1 March 2014)

Reality TV actress slaps male contestant. White knights in studio audience beat male contestant when he slaps her back (12 February 2013) Youtube video

An article about gynocentrism: This paper concerns the mindset that underpins the widespread failure to recognise men as being worthy of assistance or positive intervention in situations like domestic violence. This concept is further explored here.

 Elsewhere in this blog you might be interested in reading:

But when a woman hits a man it’s different
How men are portrayed … Haw Haw Haw! The jokes on us
On recognising and supporting male victims of domestic violence

‘Sunrise’ TV show offers sop to feminists

Yet another case of two steps forward and one step back. In two earlier posts in this blog I described how members of the ‘Sunrise’ TV show purposefully stood their ground against strident feminist criticism. I had hoped that they would keep the positive momentum going with some segments about the excesses and mistruths of the contemporary feminist movement. Unfortunately that was not to be the case. Well, at least not yet. (Postscript: Pleased to see ‘Sunrise’ step up with this interview with MRA Paul Elam on 5 July 2014 … kudos to ‘Sunrise’)

I just watched a segment on ‘Sunrise‘ – an interview involving Michael Kaufman of the ‘White Ribbon Campaign‘ and Sunrise’s resident ‘White Knight‘, Andrew O’Keefe . The segment came across as something of an attempt by ‘Sunrise’ to win back some street-cred with pro-feminist viewers. It’s sad that they feel the need to curry favour with a movement represented by thisthis and this.

The ‘White Ribbon Campaign‘ is a pro-feminist organisation whose goal is to stop violence by men towards women. They ignore violence by women, and for the most part they ignore violence by men towards other men. They do acknowledge problems that disproportionately affect men like suicide and homelessness, but claim that these are a reflection of the pressures of gender stereotypes imposed on boys and men (i.e. be a man!). The solution, they say, is for men to be comfortable showing what are seen as feminine attributes – and then they would not have to hurt women. The ‘White Ribbon’ crowd thus conveniently choose to ignore more potent forces such as the increasingly toxic environment in schools and universities for male students, the pervasive anti-male bias in the media, etc etc.

By all means please do address the problem of violence – violence by people of all genders. And by all means address the imposition of negative gender stereotypes – again, by people of all genders. But by focussing entirely on violence by men towards women, the White Ribbon Campaign reinforces the prevailing stereotype of men as brutes and women as victims. That being the case, they are as much part of the problem as they are part of the solution.

One of the outcomes of this telescopic view of ‘domestic violence = mens violence towards women’ is the trivialising of the other dimensions of intimate partner violence (i.e. womens violence towards men, male on male violence, and female on female violence). This bias is a pervasive influence across society, and is discussed and demonstrated in another blog post which includes links to videos showing public reaction to male and female actors playing out different scenarios of partner violence.

The concerns of others regarding the White Ribbon Campaign can be ascertained by googling on the words ‘White Ribbon Campaign criticism’ (some examples herehereherehere, here and here). 

 

On fathers and their children

Fathers rights comprises both a very important set of social issues, as well as a highly visible and significant component both within and beyond the MHRA movement.

Anyway I will start the ball rolling by mentioning an article in the ‘Genderratic’ web site entitled ‘The Feminist Crusade against Fatherhood‘. One notable feature of this well-researched article is that it provides a historical background to the issues of child custody and the provision of financial maintenance.

Various papers concerning, or of concern to, fathers

The future of men and marriage is bleak, by Suzanne Venker (14 June 2019)

Chris Mackney was a father who was driven to commit suicide due to his treatment at the hands of an abusive wife and a legal system that is strongly biased towards the rights of woman. Read more about Chris here.

‘You can’t tell me women don’t lie, of course they do’: why Men’s Rights Activists hate AVOs (12 May 2017) More misandry and feminist misrepresentation courtesy of ‘The Age’, a once great newspaper.

You’ve probably noticed that one of the many, many criticisms of men is that they don’t help out with family/household as much as they should (& women already do). And yet men who choose to become house-husbands are often viewed with disdain. This phenomenon is apparent in this reddit discussion thread.

Bettina Arndt has asked me to raise awareness of an alternative Australian family law resolution service offered by Professor Patrick Parkinson, which you can read about here.

The Effect of Fatherlessness on Children (November 2018)

‘It’s only for mothers, you sicko’: Woman threatens to call security on dad changing son’s nappy in parents’ room (8 October 2017)

One reason why there aren’t more stay-at-home dads (15 July 2017)

Child support: Stop bullying dads. It’s not fair, by Corrine Barraclough (17 April 2017) Australia

Scarlett Johansson’s divorce case shows why men are scared of being stay-at-home dads (10 March 2017)

Dad’s DNA Nightmare: Your legal questions answered (13 February 2017) Men can’t win. When you read this story, and then others about non-biological parents (men) who are forced to pay child support until age 18 even when DNA evidence is available!

Son, let me tell you all about how dadsplaining works (13 January 2017)

5-Year-Old Boy Accidentally Walks to School on Saturday, So Cops Arrested Dad (28 December 2016)

How ‘Disney Dads’ are making life hell for their partners (23 October 2016) Australia. Related Reddit discussion thread here.

MPs call for end to abusive men using courts against families (16 September 2016) UK. How dare these uppity men insist on defending themselves against false accusations of neglect and/or domestic violence.

How ‘dad deprivation’ could be eroding modern society (22 June 2016)

Canberra psychologist disciplined after labelling children with unrecognised condition (7 June 2016) Australia

Mothers DON’T have stronger bonds with their children than fathers (26 April 2016)

Most powerful American feminist organization kills another shared parenting bill: N.O.W.’s crusade against actual gender equality slips into the limelight (16 April 2016) USA

Family Court rules kids can stay as dad’s private habits won’t affect them (17 March 2016)

British Employers: Good for Pregnancy, Bad for Sick Leave (18 February 2016) Comparison of Maternity leave/Paternity leave in various European countries

The untold grief of childless men (14 February 2016) Australia

Dumb-Ass Stuff We Need To Stop Saying To Dads (8 February 2016) USA

The men hijacking family law reforms (6 February 2016) Australia. Ooh, see the feminist journo seethe when pollies listen to fathers for a change

Dear Dad, from a boy (16 December 2015) Satirical Australian video in response to the feminist #DearDaddy campaign

The Beauty of Men, by Mark Dent (16 November 2015)

Yahoo Parenting Doesn’t Care About Male Survivors of Abuse (16 November 2015) Reddit mensrights discussion thread

Gender bias in family law in Australia (14 November 2015) Reddit discussion thread and linked article

Men are Losers, says new feminist campaign (6 March 2015) Video

Australian Family Law Gender Inequality (26 October 2015) Reddit mensrights discussion thread

I am a dad. Not a terrorist (Australian blog post)

Study Throws Light on Maternal Gatekeeping (31 August 2015)

How to treat him as a human being (2 September 2015)

Backlash and praise for lawyer who spoke out for men (31 July 2015) Australia

Fathers stage protest at Westminster Abbey (21 June 2015)

Why men don’t want to be dads (June 2015)

Moms. Let dad be dad (16 June 2015)

Beware the ‘stray-at-home’ dad (4 June 2015) and related reddit mensrights discussion thread

Rand Paul cites a ‘lack of fathers’ in Baltimore. Here’s what the data actually show (29 April 2015) and related reddit mensrights discussion thread

“Can we make them talk about your father?”: Reclaiming Respect for Fatherhood (11 April 2015)

Most dads are deadbeats? (20 March 2015)

6 Truths About Dads Feminists don’t Want You to Know, by Janet Bloomfield (21 March 2015)

Fatherlessness linked to increased risk of child abuse (31 January 2015) by Augusto Zimmermann

Daddy lies (Youtube video)

Why there won’t be a male pill anytime soon (25 November 2014)

Weekend Dad Ken Doll (23 November 2014) Youtube video

The ‘baby talk’ gap? Moms may favor girls when talking to infants (3 November 2014)

Shared parenting laws misrepresented by ex-judge Richard Chisolm (23 October 2014) Reddit mensrights discussion thread and linked article (Australia)

Halle Berry’s Child-Support Fight: Female Breadwinners Can’t Have It Both Ways (20 October 2014)

New fathers must have same pay rights as mothers, says Nick Clegg, who vows to smash ‘Edwardian’ view on raising children (20 October 2014)

Article from the National Parents Organisation about dealing with the issue of custodial parents wasting child support money (19 October 2014)

A permanent family crisis (11 October 2014)

‘Culture of not talking’ with fathers (29 September 2014)

The vengeful mothers who tear fathers from their children’s lives (15 September 2014)

‘Dangerous, feckless and disinterested’ – former social worker on how stereotypes about dads put families at risk (11 September 2014)

Park swing controversy: Is this what being a dad in 2014 is like? (3 September 2014)

Robin Williams $30 million alimony to ex-wives contributed to his death (17 August 2014)

Why great husbands are being abandoned (13 August 2014)

Reddit discussion thread regarding public reaction to men with their young children (13 August 2014)

A stay-at-home dad reports on the mommy wars (12 August 2014)

Divorce-related Malicious Mother Syndrome (1995)

False accusations of paedophilia damage fathers involved in custody battles (23 July 2014)

Why men can be just as good primary parents as women (24 July 2014)

Not the father but court refuses application to have paternity payments refunded (24 July 2014)

Why Swedish men take so much paternity leave (22 July 2014)

Rewritten NHS baby guidelines ban the word ‘dad’ (12 July 2014)

The pre-pregnancy contract (10 July 2014)

Fathers trump mothers when it comes to reading (25 June 2014)

A new generation of dads juggles work and childrearing (27 June 2014)

Father with no rights: Mother stops him seeing daughter for 12 YEARS – despite 82 court orders demanding she back down (9 December  2013)

‘Daddy Don’t Go’ Documentary Aims To Help Dads Reject the ‘Deadbeat’ Label (4 December 2013)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/parenting/wp/2014/06/05/dads-who-stay-home-because-they-want-to-has-increased-four-fold/

Child psychologist Penelope Leach says sleepovers at dads ‘may damage brain’ (18 May 2014) Unbelievable that the media would publicise such views, and imagine the uproar from the feminist lobby if the genders were reversed. In this article the author of the study cited by Ms. Leach rebukes for misrepresenting his findings. Imagine that, a feminist misrepresenting the actual facts in order to further their own ideology … who would have thought?

Manifesto of the new fatherhood (13 June 2014)

Why dads matter (23 February 2014)

Lack of justice for fathers is one of the biggest scandals of our time (17 June 2014)

http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/287dh3/poll_how_many_dads_are_here_today_not_being_able/

https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/6089613/mum-not-dad-more-likely-to-neglect-kids/ (23 September 2009)

Vernon Beck (Youtube)

The best first date (Youtube)

Interview with Barry Williams of the Lone Fathers Association Barry is a true pioneer of the Mens Rights movement in Australia

Dr. Jennifer McIntosh, Anti-father “Researcher” Humiliated (22 May 2014)

“…an estimated 50,000 persons are kept in jail or in prison on any given day in the U.S. for child support arrears.” (13 January 2012) Statistics such as this need to be probed, but with feminists controlling the relevant government agencies we know that is not going to happen anytime soon. For example, how many of these men are not the biological parent of the child in question? How many women are not paying their share of child support, and what percentage of them are being jailed? etc

A mans right to choose (20 October 2000)

Fathers are treated as mere sperm donors‘ (16 June 2013)

Child support protest under way in Florida (20 April 2014)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/democracylive/scotland-26466965

http://journalstar.com/news/local/911/nebraska-high-court-again-rules-father-s-consent-necessary-for/article_16e69668-f0f0-58c2-a683-8e6c4b127835.html

http://antimisandry.com/articles/systemic-war-against-fathers-309.html

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2014/03/19/barbara-kay-after-a-divorce-equal-parenting-rights-should-be-the-norm/

http://www.mgtowhq.com/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=474 (Divorce horror stories)

http://judgybitch.com/2014/04/04/dating-single-fathers-just-say-yes-a-note-for-all-the-single-ladies/

http://www.avoiceformen.com/misandry/an-ambiguous-apology-or-just-bullshit/

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/2014/04/19/todd-hoffner-minnesota-state-mankato/7915369/

http://www.answerisland.com/child-support-kickbacks.html About custody decisions and child support payments in the USA

http://www.tampabay.com/news/courts/he-says-he-said-no-to-sex-now-says-no-to-child-support/1183449

Reddit discussion thread about the issue of spousal support

For information about the situation in Australia see the linked papers listed below:

http://www.australianmensrights.com/Fathers_Rights-Australia/Rise_of_Australian_Fathers_Rights_Groups_Worries_Australian_Feminists.aspx

http://mensrightsmelbourne.com/2014/04/07/family-court-australia-march-2014-update-senator-john-madigan-dlp/

Fathers demand mandatory paternity testing (see also http://mensrights.com.au/category/paternity-dna/ for related articles)

http://www.khou.com/news/Men-owe-child-support-despite-not-being-fathers-172217511.html

http://au.avoiceformen.com/allnews/australian-mp-george-christensen-speaks-out-about-family-lawchild-support-system-reform/

baby_doll

gorillafunny_meme-169x300

In a discussion thread on reddit.com/r/MensRights, created in response to the meme shown above (centre), ‘AmazingFlightLizard’ posted:

“… I’m a single dad to two little girls after their mom decided it was more important to go be a party girl. Go fxxk yourself.”

Take a look at the interesting discussion that ensued at http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1y6htj/on_my_facebook_i_just_hate_this_garbage_so_much/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter judgejudy

fatherless