Carey Roberts probes and lampoons political
correctness. His work has been published frequently
in the Washington Times, Townhall.com,
LewRockwell.com, ifeminists.net, Intellectual
Conservative, and elsewhere. He is a staff reporter
for the New Media Network. You can contact him at
Scaring the Wits out of
Halloween decorations made an early appearance this
year. In September my local grocery store put up
its wicked witch holding a rubber pitchfork.
Cobwebs soon began to sprout like silvery
hobgoblins, and scary Jack-O-Lanterns now
adorn front porches.
Last week a reader sent me this ghoulish
warning, which I now quote:
"Robbing Females Using the Bathrooms at Shopping
The way the scam works is, a man slips into the
womens rest-room and sneaks into a stall. He
waits until there is only one woman in the restroom
in a neighboring stall. The criminal then stands on
the toilet and points a hand gun into the next
stall, demanding the womans valuables. After
getting her cash and jewelry, he demands that she
remove all of her clothing and kick them out of the
stall. The thief tosses the clothing into a
shopping bag, hangs an out of order sign on the
restroom door, and slips back into the mall. The
out of order sign ensures no one will soon come to
the womans rescue. It usually takes an hour
or two for the woman to work up the nerve to leave
the restroom in the nude, giving the criminal ample
time to make his get away. The woman is left naked
and humiliated in a mall full of strangers.
The best defense, says police, is to never go
into a shopping mall restroom alone, as only women
who are by themselves are targeted.
But something didnt add up. Shopping mall
restrooms are busy places, and I can certainly
think of easier ways to steal a handbag. And why no
details about names, dates, places, and so
A quick internet search revealed the Halloween
pranksters were already hard at work. In fact this
particular hoax has been making the rounds since
2002. Thats when a bogus Associated Press
story claimed this shopping mall caper was
occurring with amazing regularity.
Why do I share this amusing tale?
Because a quick check of the e-mail thread
revealed the gloomy warning already had been sent
to 50 women, each of whom had been instructed to
PLEASE FORWARD THIS TO EVERYONE YOU
KNOW!!!! Which means over half the female
population in the United States no doubt has
received this message by now.
Now we know why women always go in pairs to
powder their noses.
This raises two interesting questions: Why do
persons start these urban legends? And why do so
many women believe them to be true? Ill come
back to that first question in a minute. Lets
now broaden our focus.
What if women began to believe that danger
lurked behind every scarecrow, moon-lit cornstalk,
and knurled tree?
What if people began to believe that the
slightest grimace or gesture could be perceived as
hostile, and concluded that harassment had reached
And what if employers began to ban Christmas
parties because such events were seen as breeding
grounds for sexual harassment? This has already
begun to happen.
What if a certain law dedicated to curbing
domestic violence kept claiming that men commit 85%
of partner aggression? All this in spite of the
research that shows women are the sex more likely
to abuse? [pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/ID41E2.pdf
In England, lawmakers are debating whether to
pass a law that would require a woman who drinks
alcohol to give her written consent before engaging
in sexual relations. Why? Because a recent rape
trial collapsed when the woman admitted she was too
inebriated to remember whether she had consented to
Lets say we all agree that if a woman
drinks a glass of sherry, her verbal consent is
null and void. (We wont dwell on the obvious
double-standard here.) So where does the slippery
Many cold medicines make persons feel drowsy and
confused. Ditto for anti-depressants. Consent forms
would be needed for those situations, as well.
Of course pre-menstrual syndrome is known to
affect ones emotions, so the list would have
to be expanded.
And why should written consent apply only to
sexual relations? Why not a full-blown competency
test for every woman who wishes to apply for a
credit card, ink a business deal, or vote in the
Do you see where this is headed? Yesireee,
were staring the Nanny State in the face.
So ladies, heres your Halloween treat:
Theres no need to fret over illusive bathroom
purse-snatchers. And dont worry about a
stealthy stalker casting a hex on your
But we do have an epidemic of abuse hysteria on
our hands -- and its caused by wicked women
who are only interested in pushing their divisive
and destructive gender agenda.
Beware the ladies knocking at your door who are
more Trick than Treat. Thats something to
really get spooked about.
Gender Newspeak at
Now for tonights Behind the News
Reneging on its duty to report the news fairly
and accurately, the mainstream media now resorts to
fake scandals and faux-tography to keep the
audience entertained and its numbers juiced up.
Nowhere is that more true than at Newsweek
Remember last year when Newsweek made the
claim that military interrogators at Guantanamo had
flushed a Koran down the toilet? But when 25,000
pages of documents failed to support the incendiary
claim, Newsweek was forced to retract the account.
But not before 16 persons died during ugly
Then the Valerie Plame brouhaha came along. Vice
president Dick Cheney and other administration
officials were accused of outing Plame, a CIA
operative, to punish Bushs political enemies.
Newsweek, CBS, and the rest of the
mainstream media pounced on the story like
horseflies drawn to barnyard manure.
But last month State Department bureaucrat
Richard Armitage admitted that he was the source of
the leak. Maybe the sham accusation wasnt a
shining moment for investigative journalism, but it
sure made for a lot of good copy.
Having elbowed their way into the competitive
ranks of Glamour and the National Enquirer, the
editors at Newsweek could not afford to rest on
So last week they ran the article,
Fighting over the Kids by reporter
Sarah Childress. [www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14870310/site/newsweek
Everyone knows fathers gain child custody only 15%
of the time. Yet Childress makes the claim that
family courts are actually biased against moms.
How did Childress reach that conclusion?
Heres the logic: When battered wives ask
for a divorce, their husbands try to wrangle joint
custody of the kids. Then to win the sympathy of
the divorce judge, they accuse the wife of parental
In support of this controversial claim,
Childress trots out two surveys.
First she cites a study by Jay Silverman. But
Silvermans conclusions are based on
interviews with a grand total of 39 self-selected
Massachusetts women. And he doesnt provide an
iota of hard evidence to back up the ladies
claims. Beginning to sound like advocacy
Then Cal State psychology professor Geraldine
Stahly weighs in with her study. But whats
the name of the article? Was it ever printed in a
respectable journal? Were the respondents
cherry-picked to provide a pre-set answer?
Lets just call it junk science.
George Orwells classic, Nineteen
Eight-Four, describes Newspeak as a lingo that does
away with dodgy words like thought and
reduces everything to polar opposites like good and
ungood. This spells the eventual demise of the
English language, which soon becomes known as
Orwell predicts, By 2050 earlier,
probably all real knowledge of Oldspeak will
Even the slogans will
change. How could you have a slogan like
freedom is slavery when the concept of
freedom has been abolished?
Heres a good example of Newspeak a la
Sarah Childress: Although men are sometimes
battered by their wives, women are the victims in
the majority of abuse cases.
Childress uses the words battering and abuse to
mean the same thing, when in fact true
battering occurs in only a tiny
fraction of abuse cases. But the
problem is not just semantic sloppiness, because
Childress claim is downright false.
University of New Hampshire researcher Murray
Straus recently released his latest findings about
dating violence in American couples. When severe
violence occurs, in 28% of cases its a female
perpetrator and 15% of the time, the man is the
aggressor. For the remaining 57% of cases, both the
man and the woman are mixing it up. [www.unh.edu/news/cj_nr/2006/may/em_060519male.cfm?type=n
Ironically, even though women are more likely to
be the abuser, its wives who are more likely
to level allegations of abuse that turn out to be
According to a report from the Independent
Womens Forum, 85% of requests for protection
orders are made by women. [www.iwf.org/pdf/young_domviol1.pdf
And to what end? Everyone knows that
restraining orders and orders to vacate are granted
to virtually all who apply, notes Elaine
Epstein, former president of the Massachusetts Bar
Association. In many cases, allegations of
abuse are now used for tactical
Now, 47 states have laws on the books that
require family judges to consider such allegations
or findings when they make child custody decisions.
When life-altering decisions are based on false or
trivial allegations, its the children who
But at Newsweek, nobody seems to be
speaking out against Newspeak. And thats
tonights report. Now back to you, Katie.
Lets face it, weve been snookered.
They promised gender liberation, now were
becoming dependents of the Nanny State. They
averred no fancy for special treatment, now we have
affirmative action. They said they only wanted to
give women a voice, now weve got speech
codes. They claimed to be for gender equality, now
boys are struggling just to keep up in school.
Why has it taken so long for us to catch on?
One of the tacit rules of the New Gender Order
is that the opinions of men dont count.
If white men were not complaining, it would
be an indication we werent succeeding and
making the inroads that we are was the
remarkable admission once made by the most
influential media mogul in the country, Arthur
Sulzberger, Jr, owner and publisher of the New
Author Warren Farrell calls it the lace
curtain, the invisible hand of editorial
censorship that throttles the First Amendment
rights of half our nations population.
Its like we claimed to be engaged in free
and open debate, all the while holding one of the
parties gagged, blind-folded, and hog-tied. Or if
men were allowed to speak, it was made perfectly
clear that they not say anything that might force
the delicate gals to resort to smelling salts
remember laffaire of Larry
But three weeks ago something snapped.
Michael Noer at Forbes.com
wrote a column called Dont Marry Career
Women. It was an advice column for eligible
businessmen thinking about making the plunge.
Predictably, the ladies reacted with
well-rehearsed outrage, forcing Forbes to run a
counterpoint by Elizabeth Corcoran,
Dont Marry a Lazy Man.
True, some of Noers facts could be
disputed. Maybe he didnt qualify his
But Noers article struck a deep chord with
hard-working men whose liberated wives had come to
look askance at anything that might remotely be
called housework. And it resonated with the average
Joes who put in long hours on the factory line,
only to come home and learn that he was a member of
the male oppressor class.
This time there would be no Button up that
lip, little man! Within hours the Internet
was buzzing over Noers apostasy as thousands
of men spoke out at Forbes.com, FreeRepublic.com,
and other sites. All of a sudden, full-throated
debate became fashionable.
Remember this line? Im as mad as
hell and I wont take it anymore! That
rant won Peter Finch an Oscar for his role in the
That pretty well sums up the attitude of many
men and women who have become disgusted with
feminist-driven, government-enforced intervention
into the personal matters of private citizens.
For years, women like Christina Hoff Sommers,
Wendy McElroy, Cathy Young, and Phyllis Schlafly
have been speaking out against government intrusion
disguised as female emancipation. Now their protest
is ringing through the lan
Take Doug Richardson of Detroit. He was forced
to pay more than $80,000 in child support, even
after paternity tests proved the child was not his.
Now hes waging a one-man campaign to expose
the swindle and bring the malefactors to
In North Dakota, Mitch Sanderson got fed up with
the raw deal that fathers were getting in divorce
court. So he started up the North Dakota Shared
Parenting Initiative. Then he quit his day job and
combed every hamlet and town in the state to get
the required 13,000 signatures to land his shared
custody bill on the November ballot.
Some guys are willing to put everything on the
Like John Murtari of Onondaga County, NY.
Murtari owes more than $60,000 in child support, an
amount he couldnt pay because the figure was
calculated based on an income far higher than what
he now earns. On July 31 he was sentenced to jail,
triggering a hunger strike that caused him to lose
29 pounds in just nine days. As of this writing his
situation remains precarious.
April 19, 1775, a rag-tag group of Minutemen
waited in muffled silence at the Old North Bridge
in Concord, Mass. Within minutes they were engulfed
in a desperate fire-fight with the British
Soon the smoke cleared. That shot heard
round the world marked the first battle of
the American Revolutionary War. It was the first
hard-fought step to freedom from government
Over 230 years later, state-sponsored tyranny
has re-appeared in our midst. And once again, a
group of uppity men are willing to risk their
lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor in
the defense of justice and family.
Like a tarantula that lurks in the shadows, radical
feminism has insinuated itself into every American
institution, waiting to pounce and extract its life
blood, rendering the carcass lifeless and
In 1964 the Democratic National Committee was
riding high. Lyndon Johnson had just crushed Barry
Goldwater by winning 61% of the popular vote, and
the Dems held a 2 to 1 edge in the Congress. Back
then, the Democrats didnt need a feminist
plank in their platform to woo the female vote.
But in 1972 the party began its process of
ritual self-immolation. That year the DNC
recommended the make-up of the National Convention
delegations be in reasonable
relationship to the proportion of minorities
and women in each state. That guideline quickly
became a 50-50 gender quota.
Suddenly ethnic Catholics, conservative
southerners, and male union workers, long the
backbone of the party, were out in the cold. And
the Dems found themselves sucked into the vortex of
The Reign of the Femocrats had begun.
If there is one person who can take credit for
the Democrats rapid descent into hysterical
irrelevance, she would be Eleanor Smeal, former
president of the N.O.W. It was Smeal who first
ballyhooed the notion of the gender voting gap, and
used it to bludgeon reluctant Dems to embrace the
While it was a matter of record that the
mens and womens vote sometimes aligned
differently, it was less clear which political
party would become the beneficiaries of that
In early 1984 Smeal guaranteed the Democrats
would enjoy a 10% boost if they selected a female
presidential running mate. So that July the
Democrats announced Walter Mondales
right-hand gal would be Geraldine Ferraro. But four
months later, only 44% of female voters voted for
the Mondale-Ferraro ticket, handing Ronald Reagan a
historic landslide victory.
No comment from Ms. Smeal about that sure-fire
10% margin of victory.
In 1985, EMILYs List arrived on the scene,
funneling millions of dollars to Democratic
candidates who advocated abortion. EMILYs
List would eventually help elect 61 members of
Congress, 11 senators, and eight governors, all of
them proponents of a death-dealing ideology.
Three years later Michael Dukakis tapped
lady-in-lavender Susan Estrich to head up his
presidential campaign. Then Dukakis waffled on what
he would do if his wife was raped and murdered.
Overnight his polling numbers plummeted, and Bush
Senior waltzed into the Oval Office.
In 1992 the two-for-the-price-of one
Clintons came to power. Practically overnight,
Hillary became the darling of the Democratic left
and feminist ideology became the operating
principle for the executive branch of the federal
Eight years later, still determined to
capitalize on the elusive gender voting gap, Al
Gore had one of his Alan Alda moments and selected
Donna Brazile to manage his campaign. No one seemed
to mind that Braziles columns in Ms. Magazine
consistently played the gender-victim card.
And in the 2004 go-around, the Dems chose
hen-pecked John Kerry, the man who admitted during
one debate, And my daughters and my wife are
people who just are filled with that sense of
whats right, whats wrong. They also
kick me around.
What of Smeals now-famous gender voting
gap? From 1976 to 2004, the DNC managed to increase
its share of the female vote by exactly one
percentage point. Thats right in 1976,
50% of the ladies opted for Mr. Carter.
Twenty-eight years later, John Kerry garnered 51%
of the soccer-mom vote.
And what of the NASCAR dads? They abandoned the
Democratic party in droves. While 50% of men voted
for Carter in 1976, only 44% of the guys selected
Mr. Kerry in 2004, translating into a 3.5 million
vote gap favoring Mr. Bush.
In the seven elections from 1980 to 2004, the
once-noble Democratic party has managed to prevail
in only two contests. The conclusion is clear: The
gender voting gap usually operates to the benefit
of the Republicans, thanks to consistently strong
support from men. [www.washingtontimes.com/functions/print.php?StoryID=20041218-100132-6503r
The Democratic party now appears to be caught in
a mental paralysis, incapable of coming up with
constructive solutions to the Iraqi war,
acknowledging the existence of the Social Security
crisis, or reversing the break-down of the American
family. The Femocrats cant even engage in
honest debate that goes beyond boo-hoo stories,
stale clichés, and Nazi comparisons.
The Democratic party has become intellectually
vacuous, psychologically emasculated, and morally
bankrupt. Call it the death knell of the DNC.
Don't Marry a Career
Woman: The Debate Heats Up
Wondering about that muffled howl youve been
hearing the last couple weeks? Its the sound
and fury of feminists reacting to Michael
Noers latest exegesis, Dont Marry a
Noers column, which ran at Forbes.com,
surveyed marriages in which the wives doggedly
pursue a high-powered career, all the while
neglecting family and home. The research shows
these women are more likely to be unhappy if she
earns more than the guy, or if she quits her job
and stays home. Either way, shes going to be
Her husband is more prone to be discontented if
she is the primary breadwinner. The house is going
to be dirtier. In the end, she is more apt to cheat
on him and the marriage will fall apart.
Of course, these findings dont apply to
every ambitious woman who has risen to the top of
her field but the connection is true in many
In practically every womans magazine,
youll find advice columns to help the reader
find Mr. Right and then entice her football-addled
boyfriend to commit for the long-haul.
But when a male columnist dispenses relationship
advice for men, that appears to be strictly
verboten -- at least according to the Shrieking
Sisters of Silliness who cut loose on Mr. Noer.
On Good Morning America, one Rutgers U. prof
claimed to be absolutely shocked: Im
surprised that the man thinks it. Im
astonished that he wrote it. And Im
astonished that anyone published it, particularly
Forbes. (No word whether MIT professor Nancy
Hopkins swooned at the news.)
Forbes hastily arranged for reporter Elizabeth
Corcoran to pen a response sporting the acid title,
Dont Marry a Lazy Man. Describing
Noers factual article as
frightening, she dispensed this
condescending advice about men: If he can
pick up new ideas faster than your puppy,
youve got a winner.
Needless to say, Ms. Corcorans screed only
reinforced the worst stereotypes of the
career woman portrayed in Noers column.
Thereupon the readers jumped into the fray, all
recounting their grudges about members of the
opposite sex. A pretty picture it was not, but the
debate is long-overdue: forums.forbes.com/forbes/board?board.id=respond_marry_career_woman
Part of the ladies discomfiture with Mr.
Noers article springs from the fact that for
the last 30 years, discussions about women in the
workforce have been guided by the unspoken rule,
Mens Opinions Dont
But then womens one-sided conversations
lapsed into over-wrought declamations about men who
didnt pitch in around the house, forgetting
that that men often put in longer hours on the job,
commute longer distances, and do physical labor
that leaves them exhausted.
Doesnt mowing the grass, killing
creepy-crawlers that traipse through the kitchen,
clearing leaves out of the gutter, and coaching
Little League count for anything?
And lets not forget the old axiom that
rights and responsibilities go hand-in-hand. If
women are demanding more rights, then what
additional duties like compulsory
registration for the draft -- are they going to
Ironically, the same day that Michael Noer
published his op-ed, columnist Nancy Levant came
out with a fem-ripper called The Cultural
Devastation of Women. [www.newswithviews.com/Levant/nancy55.htm]
Levant deplored the fact that thanks to the
libbers, American women now hire maid
services, landscapers, pool cleaners, painters,
interior decorators. . . .while losing every
intuitive aspect of our female natures. In
the process, women use men like ATMs
and bankrupt multiple men with mandatory
child support payments.
One can only imagine the hullabaloo if Mrs.
Levant had uttered such heresy at Forbes.
So whats a career woman to do? For a
moment, lets can the feminist ideology and
take stock of that rare commodity, common
Have you ever seen a woman (or man, for that
matter) exclaim at deaths door, I only
wish that I could have spent more time in the
office? Neither have I.
Its no secret that the most rewarding
parts of a persons life revolve around
relationships with spouses, children, and other
family. So why are career women driven to dismember
those connections that give the most meaning to
Its true that women find satisfaction and
fulfillment from paid work. And some have no choice
but to get a full-time job.
But the reality is, wives happiness is not
tied to living out of a suitcase or having an equal
paycheck with their husbands. Indeed, the opposite
is true. When husbands are the primary wage
earners, wives have more freedom to pursue their
So Mr. Noer, lick off those wounds, straighten
up that tie, and sharpen your pencil. Get ready for
Threatens Military Morale
Last year Naval Academy instructor Lt. Bryan Black
made a sexually-tinged remark to a female
midshipman. It was not a case of rape or sexual
assault. It was not even Ill trade you
a better grade for certain sexual favors.
Rather, the comment was a vulgar remark much
like something you might hear during a Sex in the
But Cupcake got offended and filed a complaint.
The complaint eventually made its way to the Naval
Academys superintendent, Vice Adm. Rodney
Rempt. All of sudden, Black found himself the
target of a criminal investigation.
A criminal charge for salty language?
Whats going on here?
Tailhook, thats what.
In 1991 a group of Navy aviators touched down in
Las Vegas for their Tailhook Convention, an annual
round of carousing, imbibing, and other
Gloss over the fact that most female personnel
in attendance were repeat attendees who knew
exactly what was coming. Ignore the libidinous
ladies who lined up to engage in activities like
pleasuring the rhino. Pretend that the
gals didnt engage in their own high-flying
debauchery, including package checks of
male genitalia and topless bartending.
And forget that Ensign Beth Warnick accused
three male aviators of gang-raping her, only to
later admit that she had lied so her boyfriend
wouldnt learn the truth of her
The fact was, after they sorted through all the
tawdry tales, only three of the reported incidents
of sexual assault could be considered
criminal in nature.
No matter, the media began to compare Tailhook
to the rape of Nanking. And feminists seized on the
episode as proof of a warrior culture that needed
to be brought to heel.
A full-throated -- and well-orchestrated --
hysteria over sexual harassment in the Armed Forces
was about to begin. And elected officials who
desired to curry favor with the feminist lobby
began to call for a non-stop series of hearings,
investigations, and task forces.
In 1994 the General Accounting Office did a
survey on sexual harassment in the military. The
GAO found that unwanted sexual advances
ranked dead last on the list. One of the most
common types of harassment, though, consisted of
comments that the presence of women had lowered
Thats right, men, stop griping because
women cant drag a firehose across the flight
deck or give the heave-ho to a 100-pound anchor.
Dont you realize that such remarks are
creating a hostile environment?
What has become clear from all the surveys,
though, is that a crisis of false allegations now
overshadows the problem of actual physical
Earlier this year the Sexual Assault and
Prevention Response Office (SAPRO) reported on an
analysis of 848 investigations. Among those alleged
sexual offenses, 641 were found to be
unsubstantiated, unfounded, or involved
insufficient evidence. So three-quarters of the
complaints were deemed unworthy of disciplinary
In May the Naval Academy Board of Trustees was
informed that among 40 cases of alleged sexual
harassment, 72% were found to be unsubstantiated or
Last year Joseph Schmitz, Inspector General of
the Department of Defense, released a report on
sexual harassment at the service academies. This
survey featured a new twist -- it also asked about
Among men, 72% reported that fraudulent
allegations are a problem. Likewise 73% of women
said false claims were cause for concern. The gals
realized that frivolous allegations do nothing to
enhance their standing and respect among their male
So why did it take over a decade of
taxpayer-funded investigations to come to that
Recently Elaine Donnelly of the Center for
Military Readiness concluded, these polls
embarrass the academies, demoralize the cadets, and
make the case for more lucrative contracts for
victim advocates . . . Feminist pork
needs to be trimmed from the DoD budget, not
expanded even more. [cmrlink.org/CMRNotes/ED%20Testimony%20062706.pdf
Meanwhile back in Annapolis, last January
superintendent Rempt invited the Navy cadets to
attend a performance of Sex Signals. Given that the
play contained far more sexual innuendo and X-rated
language than Lt. Black could have indulged in with
Cupcake a few months before, maybe the play should
have been called Mixed Signals.
And exactly why did Vice Adm. Rempt decide to
lower the boom on Bryan Black? Because Rempt had
just launched a zero-tolerance policy
on sexual harassment.
Of course, we live in a flawed world with
imperfect people. So in practice,
zero-tolerance becomes the basis for
ramping up the penalties for an offense that no one
can define, and abolishing due process protections
for an allegation that no person can ever hope to
Cripple the Fight against Terrorists
It is a sign of cultural confusion when the
most-heralded account of individual bravery in the
Iraqi war centers around a teenage girl who did
nothing that could be considered heroic.
When her convoy made a wrong turn behind enemy
lines, 19-year-old Jessica Lynch passed out during
the ensuing ambush. For that she was rewarded with
fawning media coverage, an official biography, and
a made-for-TV movie.
PFC Lynch didnt thwart the enemy attack,
save anyones life, or even fire a single
shot. So what amazing feat of valor qualified Lynch
for the Bronze Star? Get ready for this: she fell
to her knees and started to pray. And then she
smiled for the camera.
The chivalrous adulation that greeted
Lynchs return covered over a dirty truth:
Feminist double-think permeates the military more
than any other institution in our society.
Its what Elaine Donnelly, president of the
Center for Military Readiness, calls DSIW: double
standards involving women. That dual standard now
threatens the readiness and morale of our military
services which must now cope with the surging
threat of Islamofascism.
Women have long played an important and
indispensable role in the military. And 20 years
ago, different requirements werent a concern
when women were assigned mostly to nursing and
stateside desk jobs. But shortfalls in military
recruitment goals and demands by Rep. Patricia
Schroeder of Colorado to assign the real plum
jobs to the gals changed all that.
Soon women were being tapped to work as pilots,
ordnance handlers, and grease monkeys -- just like
their daddies used to do. Everything seemed to be
on track for the imminent arrival of the gender
Then the 1990 Gulf War came around and 40,000
females were ordered to report for duty.
Thats when the ladies began to rediscover
their inner-mom. Long-barren women became
rapturously pregnant, and military mothers were
suddenly the reincarnation of
Newspapers wailed because thousands of
American mothers are saying good-bye to their
families to face the unknown dangers in the
Gulf. Some G.I. Janes claimed their
recruiters had promised they would never be sent to
Gender-integrated basic training, which came
along three years later, proved to be an even
bigger jolt. The Sergeant Furies wondered how the
female trainees would be able to survive, much less
pass, the hand-grenade exercise, given the fact
that most women couldnt heave the thing
beyond its 35-meter burst radius.
Soon the requirement was changed so just dumping
the grenade over a cement wall gave you the green
light. After all, grenade-throwing is simply a
confidence-building exercise, and the key is to try
your hardest, right?
Battle-hardened drill sergeants were ordered to
remake themselves in the manner of Mister Rogers,
and obstacle courses were modified to resemble a
Romper Room set. Navy trainees were urged to wave a
stress card to settle frayed nerves.
And mothers were consoled with infant nursing
breaks and assorted child-bonding activities.
Despite all the gender-norming and hand-holding,
Stephanie Gutmann documents in The Kinder, Gentler
Military that women in training suffer 2-3 times
more stress fractures, back sprains, and broken
ankles. And at the Marine Corps Officer Candidate
School in Quantico, Va., last years female
candidates washed out three times more often than
the guys. [www.cmrlink.org/CMRNotes/ED%20Testimony%20062706.pdf
George Orwell once wrote, if thought
corrupts language, language can also corrupt
thought. That aphorism rings true in many of
the official statements on women in the
All soldiers, regardless of gender, train
to a single standard, the Army standard,
proclaims one regulation. Differences in
performance requirements between the sexes, such as
Army physical fitness testing scoring, are based on
physiological differences and apply to the entire
Hows that for twice-around-the-block
Then we have those politicians who gush about
the men and women in uniform who are fighting
for our country. Apparently these
well-intentioned souls dont realize that a
woman who slings an M-16 over her shoulder for a
couple hours of guard duty does not qualify as
And remember Lt. Kara Hultgreen? Her jet crashed
and burned on the USS Abraham Lincoln because she
approached the flight deck at too sharp an angle
an error she had committed twice before.
Then Navy officials tried to pin Hultgreens
death on engine failure.
Put that one in the cover-up
Six years ago Stephanie Gutmann asked, Can
Americas gender-neutral fighting force still
win wars? Some found her question to be
provocative; to others it was merely amusing.
As we approach the fifth anniversary of 9/11,
its time that we seriously ponder that
No Need to Keep Rape
Accuer's Name a Secret
Crystal Gail Mangums life has been marked by
a Kudzu-like thicket of ups and downs. After
graduating from Hillside High School in Durham, she
spent two years in the Navy as a radio operator.
She married twice, taught her first husband how to
read, worked for a while in a nursing facility, and
is now the single mother of two.
In 1996 she filed a complaint that she had been
raped but she didnt get around to
filing the police report until three years later.
And once the allegation had been made, she
didnt bother to complete the paperwork. Sorry
fellas, nothing personal.
In 2002 Mangum stole a car and and took deputies
on a high-speed chase, which eventually landed her
in jail with a criminal record. Other details of
her life have been extensively documented.
Later Mangum enrolled at North Carolina Central
University, a predominantly black college. To
supplement her income, she worked as an exotic
dancer and for an escort service locally known as
Bunny Hole Entertainment.
Thanks to time-stamped photographs, eyewitness
accounts, police reports, forensic examinations,
and dogged media interest, the timeline and events
surrounding the case are now well-documented.
Over the weekend of March 10-12, 2006 Crystal
Gail Mangum indulged in sexual hijinks with four
different men. On Monday March 13, she went to a
hotel room and participated in an X-rated escapade
with a couple. Any of these events could have
produced the minor bruises, cuts, and vaginal
injuries that Ms. Mangum later claimed were caused
by the Duke lacrosse players.
Later that evening, Mangum and fellow-stripper
Kim Pittman (aka Nikki) arrived at a
run-down house near the Duke University campus in
Durham, each knowing they would be paid $400 for a
one-hour set. The two were together for the entire
time, except for a five-minute period when Mangum
went to the bathroom. When later asked about
Mangums rape allegation, Pittman called it a
The police officer who first saw Mangum
described her as passed-out drunk. She
first claimed she had been raped. Then the officer
reported she said no one forced her to have
sex. A few minutes later she came back to her
original claim not totally surprising for
someone who is well-juiced and wants to avoid a
charge of public drunkedness.
At first she said she had been raped by 20 men,
then she decided the number was actually five, and
finally settled on three. But the photographs
revealed her bruises were there before the alleged
rape occurred. And the hospital sexual assault
nurse did not find any evidence of sexual
The DNA tests failed to produce any link to the
lacrosse players. A second DNA analysis did
implicate Mangums boyfriend, however.
When asked about the exculpatory DNA tests,
District Attorney Michael Nifong nonsensically
replied, It doesnt mean nothing
happened, it just means nothing was left
Nifongs case has more holes than the
frayed netting of a goalies lacrosse stick.
Maybe thats why Nifong speculated the alleged
rape may have been a hate crime, falsely hinted at
the use of a date-rape drug, withheld
key documents from defense lawyers, and
unconscionably delayed the trial until next
Legal commentators have excoriated Nifong for
his unprofessional and reckless handling of the
case. But by skillfully playing the race card,
Nifong did manage to come out on top during the May
On April 21, Tom Leykis repeatedly stated
Crystal Gail Mangums name on his
nationally-broadcast radio talk show. Two days
later Matt Druge again disclosed her identity.
The very next day the players defense
lawyers filed a motion listing Crystal Gail Mangum
by name. That document is publicly-available:
. During the next month the defense team filed
three more motions, all mentioning Mangum on the
MSNBC Host Tucker Carlson mentioned
Mangums name during his May 15 show. Internet
columnists Michael Gaynor and Nicholas Stix also
reported her name, as well.
A Google search under Crystal Gail
Mangum, duke, and
rape turns up 648 hits. Some persons
have misspelled her last name as
magnum, which turns up even more
documents. Crystal Gail Mangums notoriety has
reached the point that she even has her own
Wikipedia site: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crystal_Gail_Mangum
The cat is out of the bag. The identity of the
Duke rape accuser has been widely disseminated on
the radio, via the internet, in public legal
documents, and in an encyclopedia.
The name is Crystal Gail Mangum. So why would
anyone pretend her name is still a secret?
With Feminized Men,
Who will Fight the War on Terror?
As a jubilant Ned Lamont announced his improbable
win over incumbent Joe Lieberman, N.O.W. president
Kim Gandy stood cheering at his side. The National
Organization for Women press release proclaimed,
Peace is a feminist issue and the Iraq war
has been a key issue in this campaign. . . . NOW
PAC will continue to support Ned Lamont through the
general election in November.
Little did Gandy realize that world events would
soon overtake Lamonts
Because just two days later on August 10, the
world was rocked by news of a foiled Muslim plot to
blow up more than 10 jetliners. Funny, Mr. Lamont
couldnt seem to find the right sound-bite to
spin this latest episode in the international war
Forty years ago the National Organization for
Women was founded. That marked the beginning of an
unholy jihad to deconstruct masculinity. Now, a
low-level hostility to all things macho pervades
A toddler is warned that pointing his finger in
the shape of a gun will earn him 10 minutes of
time-out. No dump trucks or military figures sully
the serenity of his play area. Go play with
your Ken-and-Barbie set, his
gender-enlightened parents console him.
Want to come out and play Cops and Robbers?
Forget it, little boy!
On TV hell be treated to the likes of
Homer Simpson, that all-around dufus who can spoil
even a family vacation. The little tyke will never
learn that Leave it to Beaver lost out to Beavis
and Butthead years ago.
During the Saturday morning cartoons, hell
marvel at Wonder Woman and Firestar who easily
vanquish their male assailants. And over at the
Justice League, Aquaman was retired from combat in
order to bring in super-heroine Hawkgirl.
At school, junior is informed that tag was
banned because it promotes competition and
aggressiveness, and recess may be coming next.
In history class he learns memorable facts such
as the West was won by brave teenage girls,
Sacagawea led the Lewis and Clark expedition, and
Mary Todd Lincoln endured great hardships during
the Civil War.
If our aspiring man wants to play high school
sports, he may be enlightened, Sorry, but not
enough girls signed up for field hockey this
year. If he mentions the sex bias of Take
Your Daughter to Work Day, the female principal is
likely to take him aside and warn him those remarks
are creating a hostile environment for the
He will see girls who slap, punch, and kick
their boyfriends. Later hell attend a
domestic violence class which explains men assault
their partners because they crave power and
When Bubba goes to college, he may be required
to attend a presentation on date rape where he
learns that if a woman says No -- even
weeks after the act took place -- he can be accused
of sexual assault. And merely watching an exotic
dancer perform her routine could get him arrested
on a rape charge.
And even though men of that age group have a
three-times higher risk of death than women,
hell learn that male-dominated medicine has
been insensitive to the needs of women.
Samson was the Biblical figure of Herculean
strength who was known to wrestle lions and slay
his foes. But then he fell in love with Delilah,
who came under the sway of the Philistines.
Delilah persuaded Samson to divulge the secret
of his strength. One night as he slept, a servant
cut off Samsons seven locks, thus depriving
him of his legendary power. The emasculated Samson
was soon captured by the Philistines, who thereupon
gouged his eyes out.
Like modern-day Delilahs, feminists have taken a
generation of our men, stripped away their warrior
persona, and robbed them of their vision.
Call to mind those hollow-cheeked metrosexuals
that dolefully adorn the after-shave
advertisements. Reflect on those apologetic
girl-guys who meekly refer to themselves as
Consider the foot-dragging politicians that
governor Arnold Schwarzenegger once dubbed,
girlie-men. Ponder Joseph Biden, III,
son of senator Biden of Delaware, who recently
admitted, We Biden men know its the
Biden women who really run the show.
Think of presidential candidate Al Gore who
actually paid feminist Naomi Wolf good money to
advise him how to become an alpha male.
And of course we all know who wore the pants during
the Clinton co-presidency.
So where are the brave men we are counting on to
protect us from the terrorist threat?
A Woman can do
Anything a Man can do (Well, almost)
Fact and feminism keep tripping over each
For decades, radical feminists have prostrated
themselves upon the altar of androgeny, flatly
declaring that all differences between the sexes
are socially constructed. So when men earn more
money than women, they say thats proof of sex
But men have the Y chromosome, while women
dont. And it turns out that one chromosome
contains 78 very important genes. Those genes
contain programming instructions that control a
mans brain structure, sex hormones, and a
host of other functions.
These critical genetic differences play out in
thousands of ways that influence risk-taking, sex
relationships, and social roles. Steven
Rhoads book, Taking Sex Differences
Seriously, is an information-packed, must-read on
Women conceive babies, men cant. Women are
better at decoding facial expressions, hearing a
babys whimper in the night, and
simultaneously talking and listening. Fine.
But what happens when we insist that men and
women are social equivalents, twisting like
neutered cogs in a giant gender nirvana?
Last year I was talking with a woman who
insisted female athletes are just as skilled as the
men. A few months later, the US female Olympic
hockey team played a boys high school team
from Warroad, Minnesota. The small town boys
prevailed 2-1 over the elite Olympians and
that was a non-checking game.
Then there are the women-in-combat zealots. They
parade girls like PFC Jessica Lynch as living proof
that women can handle the fierce demands of front
line combat. You may recall that war heroine Lynch
later admitted about her Iraqi mishap, I did
not shoot, not a round, nothing. I went down
praying to my knees. And thats the last I
What about women in the media? Remember, they
were going to bring us a more balanced and empathic
perspective on the world.
Well, that was before Oprah Winfrey predicted
one in five heterosexual Americans would die from
AIDS by 1990 and Meryl Streep duped the EPA to ban
Lets not forget Connie Chungs
scientific discovery that breast implants make
women sick. Even though researchers could never
prove the link between implants and connective
tissue disease, the ensuing hysteria-driven
lawsuits eventually forced Dow Corning into
Of course theres the ever-apoplectic
Maureen Dowd, left to wonder why the New York Times
circulation numbers tumble ever-downward. And rumor
has it that once Katie Couric debuts at CBS News,
shes planning to sign up Cindy Sheehan as a
political analyst for the upcoming November
And women, it is said, will make the political
arena more ethical and fair: Research shows
the presence of women raises the standards of
ethical behavior and lowers corruption. That
quote comes to us by way of senator Hillary Rodham
Clinton, which practically makes the claim
We were promised that women in academia would
bring important new insights. But soon the ladies
came to the sobering realization that Beethoven
composed Ode to Joy to induce men into a sexual
frenzy, and Newtons Principia Mathematica is
actually a rape manual.
We should all feel especially sorry for MIT
professor Nancy Hopkins.
As a biologist, she no doubt learned how
primates engage in sex-specific courtship rituals
and hunting patterns. But then ex-Harvard president
Larry Summers suggested that innate differences in
the human species also might exist, causing the
ever-delicate Dr. Hopkins to lapse into a
Smelling salts, anyone?
Those examples are mostly amusing. But
theres one variation on the
thats downright dangerous. Its the
mothers and fathers are interchangeable
The reason is simple: little boys dont
identify with their moms the same way they bond
with their dads. And girls learn different lessons
from dads than from moms.
Look at inner city ghettos ravaged by Great
Society programs that required dad to vacate the
home before mom was entitled to collect her welfare
check. Bereft of their loving fathers, boys looked
to the media and gangs for their male role
Is anyone surprised when all manner of social
pathologies take root and flourish?
Its one of the conundrums of our time that
while demanding fealty to the dogma of androgeny,
feminists condemn the expression of masculine
qualities by men and then turn around and demand
that liberated women exemplify exactly
those same attributes.
As my mother used to say, Who said women had to
Blame it on the
The feminism is a secular religion with its own
high priestesses, dogmas, and initiation rituals.
Its creation myth holds that on the first day
Goddess created Eve, and all was right with the
world. But that idyllic state was shattered when
first patriarch Adam stumbled into the Garden,
pounded on the table, and demanded his apple.
Simply put, the word patriarchy
denotes male leadership. By that definition, the
United States is a patriarchal society.
It was our Founding Fathers who brought forth a
nation based on the principles of democracy, equal
opportunity, and limited government. Men provided
the raw muscle power and ingenuity that became the
engine for a booming economy. Patriarchs, also
known as primary breadwinners, provided sustenance
and stability to their families.
And male leadership enabled our country to
prevail through two World Wars and the Great
Those events left an indelible mark on the men
who pulled us through those terrible times. These
brave souls can be forgiven if they sometimes burp
without covering their mouth or find it hard to
talk about their feelings.
Then Gloria Steinem and her ilk came along. They
co-opted the word patriarchy, did an ideological
shake-and-bake, and stamped it Hazardous to
Women. Those same men who years before had
returned to our shores as war heroes were now
branded as bellicose ogres.
The feminist jihad then indicted the entire male
species for Crimes against Womankind. The
never-ending litany of grievances is like one of
those Whack-a-Mole games at the county fair -- as
soon as one myth is squelched, another pops up.
Here are just a few:
Count No. 1: Husbands are considered the head of
their family. Sometimes these men are known to
actually encourage their wives to stay within the
credit card limit and to stay out of cat fights.
Yes, silly, thats what leadership is all
Count No. 2: The callous brutes in the U.S.
Congress are insensitive to the needs of women.
Thats right. And those monthly checks that
keep rolling in to Grandma for Social Security,
Medicare, and Medicaid programs enacted by
and largely paid for by men are designed to
hoodwink unsuspecting women about the vast, untamed
Count No. 3: Men dont listen to their
wives. And considering all the women who rant and
rave about patriarchal oppression, maybe
theyre not worth listening to.
Sensing people still were not convinced of their
plight, the Matrons of Mischief trot out examples
of sad-sack women who suffered tremendously at the
hands of patriarchy. Take feminist icon Betty
Friedan whose husband set her up in cushy digs in
New York suburbia, provided her with a maid, and
encouraged Betty to pursue her writing
Betty expressed her gratitude by calling this a
comfortable concentration camp.
One of the tenets of the cult of feminism is
that women, being the appointed guardians of
gentleness and light, are capable only of doing
good. (For now we will ignore inconvenient facts
like the women who abort 1.3 million unborn
children each year, unwed mothers who finger some
unsuspecting dude to get a bigger child support
check, and exotic dancers who fabricate claims of
being raped by a bunch of lacrosse players.)
So when bad things happen, women have a
convenient scapegoat: male-dominated society.
- When a demonic mother drowns her five kids
in a bathtub, the chief suspect becomes her
husband who failed to protect the woman from
- When a woman castrates her husband, her
lawyer trots out the always-reliable Battered
- When a wife breaks her vows and cheats on
her husband, she evokes sympathy (and wins
custody of the kids, just for good measure) by
claiming to feel stifled in the
The notion that women should not be held
accountable for their misdeeds is laughable. You
mean to say that women should enjoy equal rights
with men, but not equal responsibilities?
Theres another reason why the patriarchal
bogeyman persists its what liberal
dragon-slayer Ann Coulter calls girly
Take men who hold immense pride in knowing their
families are well-provided for. Now lecture them
they got it all wrong -- that providing and
protecting are actually oppressive to women.
Once this fantastic guilt trip has been imposed
on male breadwinners, then tell them its
The shibboleth of oppressive patriarchy lies at
the very foundation of feminist ideology. So
imagine what would happen if people arose from
their slumber one day, looked around in amazement
at the false idols that now surround us, and came
to realize that Betty Friedan, Gloria Steinem, and
their fellow myth-makers are the modern-day
incarnations of the Jezebels and Delilahs of
Former New England Patriots linebacker Ted Johnson
was one of the lucky ones.
On July 16 the three-time Super Bowl player was
arrested in Weston, Mass. for assaulting his wife.
But last Monday Jackie Johnson came clean: My
husband, I adore him, and, it was my fault. . . .
It breaks my heart to think I would be responsible
with one emotional, irresponsible call in
destroying this beautiful mans
Judge Rucker Smith of Sumter County, Georgia can
also thank his lucky stars.
When he announced his decision to break off a
romantic relationship, his girlfriend bit him
fiercely on the leg. Then the woman called the
police to allege that he had attacked her. On May
5, the jury acquitted the judge of all charges
And lets not forget TV talk show host
Last December Colleen Nestler of Santa Fe, NM
claimed that Mr. Letterman was using mental
telepathy, facial gestures, and televised code
words to induce her to move to New York. Judge
Daniel Sanchez granted an order directing Mr.
Letterman to cease the harassment. The laughable
injunction was eventually dropped.
But few men have the financial where-with-all of
a former NFL player, sitting judge, or media
personality. So when they are accused of domestic
violence, men often find themselves dragged into a
legal machinery that eventually leaves them
penniless, disillusioned, and broken.
Often the false claims are made during an
acrimonious divorce or child custody case.
This past January Wendy Flanders of Lancaster
County, PA alleged her ex-husband acted in a
threatening manner towards her, and requested a
restraining order. Unfortunately for her, the whole
incident was caught on surveillance cameras that
proved her allegations were a complete fabrication.
Flanders is now charged with making false reports
and criminal conspiracy.
Restraining orders now come a dime a dozen. Each
year 2-3 million restraining orders for domestic
violence are issued in the United States.
And get this in half the cases, violence
is not even alleged. All the guy has to do is think
strange thoughts, make facial gestures, or use code
words just ask David Letterman.
Many men find the allegations so stigmatizing
and humiliating that years later, they are still
afraid to tell their story.
William was a Department of Defense
sub-contractor with a high level TS/SCI security
clearance who supervised an information security
project. When he broke up with his girlfriend, she
retaliated by claiming abuse. DoD Directive 5220.6
requires that a clearance be revoked, even on the
basis of a mere allegation. As a result William and
the 30 project personnel had to be laid off.
John, a successful consultant with a
six-figure income, filed charges against his
ex-wife after she assaulted him. In turn she
requested a civil restraining order, which served
to pre-empt the criminal charges against her. The
civil order was then leaked to Dunn and Bradstreet,
thus destroying the mans reputation and
business. A year later the woman recanted her
allegations, saying John had never been physically
False allegations of rape are also commonplace,
with one-quarter of rape claims believed to be a
Last February Tamara Moonier of Orange County,
CA accused six men of brutally raping her at
gunpoint. But a home video showed a laughing
Moonier cheering the men on: I just like sex,
I cant help it!
If convicted on all counts, the men could have
spent the rest of their lives in prison. But Ms.
Moonier faces a maximum sentence of 44 months for
her little white lie.
Which of course brings us to the three Duke U.
lacrosse players accused of raping an exotic
dancer. The DNA tests dont match, the pieces
of the story dont add up, and legal experts
say the chances of a conviction are slim to none.
But no matter, prosecutor Mike Nifong, who is
facing a tough re-election bid, says he has no
plans to drop the case.
Kathy Seligman, mother of one of the accused
players, recently told CBS News, You just
cant imagine what its like to see
someone do this to your child.
Over 200 years ago, brave American colonists
rose up against the shackles of English tyranny.
Their aim was to found a republic based on laws
that enshrine the presumption of innocence, a
respect for due process, and the preservation of
Sometimes the hard lessons of history only can
be learned from first-hand experience.
Women Good, Men Bad?
Its about time that we probe an assumption
that has insidiously worked its way into our
culture -- the notion that women are the guardians
of goodness and grace, while all those male
neanderthals are emissaries from the dark side.
I will freely admit that men indulge in a number
of vices, those including gluttony, greed, and of
course forgetting to put the toilet seat down.
Growing up in the halcyon days of the Patriarchy, I
was treated to my fair share of ribald humor. But
nothing quite prepared me for what I saw a couple
Strolling at the local mall I spotted a young
lass, maybe 13 years old. She was sporting a white
T-shirt with an unusual picture. The shirt depicted
a girl cold-cocking a boy. Above the how-to diagram
were etched these words: How to Drop a
For the last decade, weve been hearing the
mantra, Theres no excuse for domestic
violence. So how could anyone even think of
wearing a shirt like that?
Of course the Lavender Ladies have long scorned
traditional notions of feminine virtue. In her book
Feminist Morality, Virginia Held haughtily
dismisses the ideal of the unselfish, nurturing,
and non-aggressive woman as the whole female
So now we must ask, What happens to common
morality when selfishness, aggressiveness, and
all-around oafishness are held up as the cultural
ideal for newly-liberated women?
Im not going to dwell on the abortion
issue. Thats because no one, not even the
most rabid feminist, will claim that baby-killing
is a virtuous action. Their excuse is that we must
allow abortion so as to not put a crimp on a
womans lifestyle options.
Lets agree to put that one in the
And what about our epidemic of hyper-aggressive
Our society is reeling from stories of
sexually-assertive school teachers who prey on
their male students. We find it incomprehensible
that teenage girls would form into gangs and lurk
in the alleyways. And research now shows that
female-initiated partner violence is more common
than the male variety. [www.unh.edu/news/cj_nr/2006/may/em_060519male.cfm?type=n
Think of Xena the Warrior Princess with
Which brings me to another one of my favorite
T-shirts: Girls Lie.
Our society has become inundated with so many
feminist prevarications that it has difficulty
separating truth from falsehood.
Here goes: the oppressiveness of marriage, the
stifling effects of childrearing, the gender wage
gap, the epidemic of domestic violence against
women, the exclusion of women from medical
research, the shortchanging of schoolgirls, the
catch-all insensitivity to womens needs, and
much, much more.
Which makes you wonder, How did the Nervous
Nellies ever get through college without a Take
Back the Night rally to steady themselves?
This is my personal favorite: Women have
always been the primary victims of war. Women lose
their husbands, their fathers, their sons in
combat. That insight comes to us by way of
Now visit any of the radical feminist websites
they seethe with anti-male diatribes and
epithets. Ive seen outright bigotry in my
life, but nothing that quite compares with the
rants of Andrea Dworkin, Catherine McKinnon, or
Then theres the fairness gene or
Feminists squawk and fuss about gender
equality, but once men become an endangered
species on college campuses, all of a sudden the
message shifts to female empowerment.
When men die five years sooner than women, why does
the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
fund Centers for Excellence for the ladies, but not
And if the womens libbers want true
equality, why arent they burning their bras
so they can win the right to trek over
to the post office on their 18th birthday to
register for government service?
And now for the dirty little secret
feminists are the most intolerant people on the
Last week the flap was over the Screen Goddess
calendar that was adorned with 16 IT vixens.
[www.itgoddess.info] Naturally the
Champions of Choice became apoplectic. Girls
are often excluded from the possibility of the
profession by its cultural maleness, one
And remember Larry Summers? He said there was a
slight possibility that discrimination was not the
reason for the small numbers of female physicists
and rocket scientists. Even though he became a
serial apologizer, the red-fems tarred and
feathered the poor man and sent him packing from
his Harvard U. presidency!
Theres a lesson to be learned here: You
can never appease a feminist.
Napoleon Bonaparte once observed, Female
virtue has been held in suspicion from the
beginning of the world, and ever will be.
Thats why as feminism gains, virtue
Feminist Scheme for U.N.
You know things are getting desperate at the United
Nations when its leaders begin to listen to
feminist proposals to revitalize this talk-much,
do-little, scandal-ridden bureaucracy.
Following months of deliberation, in April the
UN jettisoned its Human Rights Commission in favor
of its new Human Rights Council. Thats a good
cost-cutting move, since the new signs will only
have to cover up the last 8 letters of the old name
and replace them with uncil. And
perfectly fine to use up the old HRC stationery, as
And thank goodness the new membership of the new
Human Rights Council includes such upholders of
individual freedoms and civil liberties as Cuba,
China, and Russia.
Of course were all supposed to stand up,
applaud, and send in our check. Just for the
record, U.S. taxpayers pony up $420 million a year
to the United Nations for assessed
dues, plus billions more in voluntary
contributions to the overall U.N. system.
In a recent article in the Financial Times, Kofi
Annan espoused the Alice-in-Wonderland view that
everything would be just fine if only the United
States would stop bruising the sensitivities of all
the developing countries by wielding its
power of the purse.
Maybe we should all chip in and buy Mr. Annan a
little sign to put on his desk to remind him,
The Buck Stops Here.
Are you ready for the next round of this Funny
In April a coalition of U.S. womens groups
sent a letter to Mr. Annan complaining the world
body did not more powerfully represent
womens empowerment and gender issues,
and demanding a new agency be established to
advance the feminist cause.
And like a white knight in shining armor,
Stephen Lewis has come to the rescue of the
beleaguered belles. For 20 years Ive
felt that the rights and needs of women in the UN
system are largely unattended, Mr. Lewis
emotes. They make up more than half of the
worlds population but efforts to address
their problems have been a travesty.
Thats right, all those agencies, programs,
and campfire circles devoted to womens issues
simply arent doing enough.
After all, nobody pays attention to the UN
Development Fund for Women (UNIFEM), the Division
for the Advancement of Women, the UN Population
Fund, the Office of the Special Advisor on Gender
Issues, or the International Research and Training
Institute for the Advancement of Women
What does it matter that the World Health
Organization has more womens health programs
than it can keep track of? UNICEF has a
high-profile Go Girls! Program, but everyone knows
its budget is a mere pittance.
And then those treaties designed to lift the
ladies out of their bondage, like the Convention on
the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination
Against Women (CEDAW), and the Protocol to Prevent,
Suppress, and Punish Trafficking in Persons,
Especially Women and Children theyre
as worthless as the paper they are printed on!
To make his case, Lewis peddles grievances that
are so far-fetched as to be farcical. Heres
one: Women are more insecure in the working
world, unemployed longer and more frequently than
Yes, being forced to take care of the kids and
having to accept money from a male breadwinner must
be a tremendous burden.
Other claims are rendered meaningless with
telltale qualifiers like up to and
as many as. Heres an example:
Up to 3 million women a year lose their lives
to gender-based violence or neglect.
Of course the U.N.s World Report on
Violence and Health found that men are twice as
likely to die from violence-related causes as
women. But the excess number of male deaths does
not appear to trouble Mr. Lewis much.
Last week was not a good one for Mr. Lewis
crusade for a feminist Camelot.
First the Catholic Family and Human Rights
Institute denounced the idea as another UN
absurdity. . . .the UN is almost totally about
radical feminism and such an agency would be a
Then the Concerned Women for America, one of the
largest womens groups in the country, gave
the proposal an even stronger tongue-lashing.
Lewis proposal would dramatically
strengthen the already-incredibly-strong radical
feminist influence at the U.N., the CWA
noted. Theres no need to create another
wasteful U.N. agency just to give feminist
activists a secure paycheck and platform.
The feminist infiltration of the United Nations
is one of the biggest reasons why this
once-respected organization has lost its social
relevance and moral compass. Ambassador Bolton,
lets put this proposal out of its misery
before it inflicts any more damage
Raman was forced to work as a brick-maker to pay
off a debt incurred years before by his
grandfather. For years, he was paid three rupees
(two cents) for a bag of bricks. If he didnt
work hard enough and long enough, he was beaten
with a stick.
Michael, 15, was kidnapped to serve as a
combatant in the Ugandan Lords Resistance
Army. During that that time, he was forced to kill
another boy, and on another occasion was forced to
watch as a boy was hacked to death.
Over the last 10 years, globalization has
triggered an unprecedented demand for unskilled and
low-skilled laborers. Employers from countries with
booming economies in Europe, Asia, and the Near
East scour the globe in search of willing bodies to
work in construction, manufacturing, agriculture,
and domestic work.
Because working conditions are often grim,
employers often tap the most vulnerable segments of
the population. In some cases, women and girls are
caught up in prostitution rings.
In its worst form, a desperate parent sells a
child into modern-day slavery. Like young Nayla of
Azerbeijan, ransomed by her mother to traffickers,
who was then shipped to Dubai to work as a club
No one knows the extent to which human
trafficking exists around the world, but many
believe able-bodied males represent the most
vulnerable group. A recent United Nations report,
Trafficking in Persons: Global Patterns, noted,
it is men especially who might be expected to
be trafficked for forced labor purposes.
A report issued last month by the U.S. State
Department notes that in several parts of the
world, boys are forced into pick-pocketing gangs.
In West African countries, men posing as Moslem
scholars lure young boys away from their parents
with the promise of teaching them the Koran. Once
removed from the custody of their parents, the boys
are turned into common street beggers.
In the Middle East, 2,000 young boys from
Bangladesh have been taken away from their families
to become camel jockeys in the Persian Gulf states.
These boys are highly sought-after because they are
the lightest possible riders for races. And when
civil conflicts flare up in Africa and Latin
America, boys as young as 12 years old find
themselves pressed into military combat.
There are those who would have us believe that
the misfortunes of women are somehow more
compelling, and therefore they are more deserving
of human rights protections.
That became apparent in 2000 when the United
Nations passed its Protocol to Prevent, Suppress,
and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women
and Children. What about men?
That bias is also found in the legislation of
many countries. According to the Trafficking in
Persons report, In many countries, the laws
relevant to human trafficking are restricted in
their application solely to women. . . In addition,
many service providers limit their support and
protection only to female and child victims. Thus,
exploitation through forced labor is often quite
unlikely to come to the attention of those dealing
Once human trafficking is defined as a crime
that only affects women, statistics become
meaningless. U.S. authorities have stated that up
to two million women and children are trafficked
each year across international borders.
But a 2002 report from the Washington, DC-based
Migration Policy Institute exposed the flaw behind
that claim: These numbers are widely regarded
as very conservative because they do not including
trafficking within countries, nor do they take into
account the trafficking of men.
Gender bias persists to this day.
Recently Janice Shaw Crouse wrote an article for
National Review titled No Tolerance for Human
Trafficking. Despite its high-minded
invocation of the human rights issue, Crouses
article does not devote a single word to the male
victims of human trafficking. [article.nationalreview.com/?q=NWEyODBjZDkxYWQ4OWU0YjZjMDUzNTk3ZjY0MGFhZjQ=
Crouses crusade is to curb prostitution, a
human vice that is demeaning to women and men
alike. But in the process, she tries to smear the
entire military establishment: Its a
given that prostitution coexists with military
bases and installations. Where there are military
forces, youll find brothels.
Mrs. Crouse makes no mention of the laborers
with calloused hands and broken hearts whose
passports are removed by their employers and told
to work ever harder. No comment about the men who
are ordered to never report the abuses being
perpetrated against them. Nothing of the millions
of Ramans and Michaels around the world who are
forced into lives of destitution and involuntary
It is high irony that some segments of a
movement that purports to advance human rights
would deem half the worlds population as less
worthy of attention and concern. That stance,
morally repugnant and intellectually indefensible,
undermines the very notion of human rights for
Its a condition thats known to be
chronic, progressive, and highly contagious. With
my own eyes Ive seen bright, caring women
fall under the sway of its deceptive allure. They
soon begin to speak and act like someone
Its initiates are taught that women are
strong and invincible, but at the same
time are the victims of an implacable patriarchal
conspiracy. These self-contradictory beliefs induce
a stress-producing condition known as cognitive
dissonance. To relieve the discomfort, the girls
are instructed to immerse themselves in the radical
The next stage of the disease is marked by a
loss of sense of humor, self-centeredness, and a
decreasing ability to perceive reality accurately.
Some adherents refuse to use lip-stick or brush
their hair, believing such actions contribute to
As the condition progresses, serious psychiatric
symptoms begin to appear, including paranoia,
hysteria, and intense anger. Some of these persons
become diagnosed with conditions such as borderline
personality disorder. [www.orangecounty.net/html/living_article5.html
In its most extreme form, the disorder becomes
life-threatening. Just look at the picture of
high-priestess Andrea Dworkin that was taken
shortly before her untimely death last year:
Somehow Ms. Dworkin doesnt appear
particularly liberated or enlightened. In fact she
looks downright miserable.
Its hard to dispute the fact that millions
of women have been duped by the chimera of radical
feminism. How will we help these poor ladies?
One program, Rachels Vineyard, offers
weekend retreats to help women (and men) grieve the
loss of their aborted children. Thats a good
But many feminists have become skeptical of the
value of therapy. Traditional cognitive approaches
dont work, of course, because these women
have been taught that reason and logical thinking
are the cause of their distress.
Other women got involved in a rogue form of
counseling called feminist
psychotherapy, which teaches patients that
patriarchy is the cause of all their woes.
Imagine going to a counselor to get help for your
abusive tendencies, and being told join the N.O.W.
for the cure! Wonder how much they charge for that
Obviously psychotherapy will make only a dent in
the epidemic. What we need is a massive
de-programming effort to help the millions of
Gender Studies grads who now endure lives of
resentment and barren solitude. They urgently need
a helping hand what will we do?
The solution is a 12-step self-help program --
you guessed it: Feminists Anonymous. With no
apologies to the Friends of Bill, here are the 12
Steps to gender recovery:
1. We admitted we were powerless over feminism
-- that our lives had become bitter, lonely, and
2. We came to believe that a Power greater than
ourselves could restore us to sanity.
3. We made a decision to turn our will and our
lives over to the care of God as we understood Him.
(Thats right, Him. Nows the time to get
rid of that Wiccan broomstick stashed in your
4. We made a searching and fearless moral
inventory of ourselves. (Hint: Humility is the
first step in the path to self-awareness.)
5. We admitted to God, to ourselves, and to
another human being the exact nature of our
6. We were entirely ready to have God remove all
these defects of character -- despite the
self-professed good intentions of Betty Friedan and
7. We humbly asked Him to remove our
8. We made a list of all men and women we had
harmed, living and unborn, and became willing to
make amends to them. (Practice saying,
Im sorry in front of the mirror
9. We made direct amends to such people wherever
possible, except when to do so would be impossible,
or would injure them or others.
10. We continued to take personal inventory and
when we were wrong, promptly admitted it. (If you
havent already taken your name off the
Feminist Majority alert list, do it now.)
11. We sought through prayer and meditation to
improve our conscious contact with God, as we
understood Him, praying only for knowledge of His
will for us and the power to carry that out.
12. Having had a spiritual awakening as the
result of these steps, we tried to carry this
message to feminists, and to practice these
principles in all our affairs.
Over the years Ive seen far too many
families destroyed, too many men broken, too many
children harmed, and too many women forced into
choices that they later came to
These women deserve our compassion and
understanding. Lets put an end to the
VDay: Until the
If you happened to take in a Yankees game last
week, you probably saw the message flashing on the
stadiums giant screen: Until the
Violence Stops: NYC. Next Tuesday you can
trot over to Prospect Park and Run Until the
Violence Stops. And the colorful posters
dotting the subways constantly remind us to
make New York City the safest place on the
earth for girls and women.
Whats going on? An invasion of the New
Well, if you havent heard, Eve Ensler,
that nice lady who brought us The Vagina
Monologues, decided it wasnt enough to get
college girls to ritualistically chant that
three-syllable word that starts with a
V. When I started this 10 years
ago, no one said the word vagina,
Ensler notes with satisfaction. Something has
shifted in people.
Now theres an accomplishment to put on
And a two-week arts festival
(thats what the New York Times calls
it) is just the beginning. [www.untiltheviolencestops.org/go.php
The NYC event soon will be serialized with encore
performances in Chicago and elsewhere. And for
V-Days 10th anniversary, well all be
snapping up tickets for the big do in the New
Before long the Girl Scouts will be selling
cookies stamped with the letters VDAY
and school textbooks will hail Ensler as the
reincarnation of Florence Nightingale.
Any way you cut it, VDAY is beyond absurd. Men
are four times more likely to be homicide victims
than women. And the latest research shows women,
not men, are more likely to engage in domestic
Of course if a couple gets into a mix-up, the
lady is more likely to get hurt. But can we expect
men to tolerate the abuse forever, especially when
the domestic violence hotlines treat men who call
for help like perps trying to game the system?
And police officers treat male victims like they
are the aggressors, no questions asked. Remember
former NFL quarterback Warren Moon? His wife
started the fight by hurling a candlestick. But
when Moon tried to act in self-defense, the police
took him away in hand-cuffs. [www.mediaradar.org/docs/Justice-Denied-DV-Arrest-Policies.pdf
Maybe were being too harsh on Miss
After all in the feminist worldview, violence is
not just being punched, kicked, or shoved. To the
luna-chicks, careless facial gestures and
inconsiderate name-calling are all proof of the
epidemic of violence that those strong, invincible
women must endure.
And then theres the rampant garden-variety
We know that caring, emotive women are far more
likely to make facial gestures than those
unfeeling, stoic men. So when the Goofball Girls
talk about violence against women, theyre
really referring to those villainous ladies who
cast grimacing looks.
This is not the first time in recorded history
of an outbreak of mass hysteria. The Salem
witch-hunts. The recreational lynchings of Black
men. McCarthyism. The Vietnam War
But there is something especially frightening
about the contemporary outpouring of feminist
angst. Because as the recipient of billions of
dollars in government largesse, the domestic
violence crusade carries the imprimatur of
Even the titans of industry have begun to smile
on VDAY. The Rockefeller Foundation kicked in
$500,000 for the New York City program. I wonder
what John D. would have to say about dissipating
his oil fortune on a high-estrogen rant?
Verizon was another VDAY Sugar Daddy. And the
Avon Foundation coughed up profits from sales of
beauty products. Mascara to cover up the bruises
Our nations frenetic crusade to stop
the violence is steadily taking us away from
our fundamental notions of freedom and protection
from government intrusion. It is making a mockery
of equal justice under law. And it has destroyed
countless families thanks to false charges of
Every person who cares about saving our country
from government tyranny dressed up as gender
liberation should read last months
bell-ringer by Phyllis Schlafly:
Violence Against Women Act money is used
by anti-male feminists to train judges, prosecutors
and police in the feminist myths that domestic
violence is a contagious epidemic, and that men are
naturally batterers and women are naturally
The result is a constitutional nightmare:
This criminalizing of ordinary private
behavior and incarceration without due process
follows classic police-state practices. Evidence is
irrelevant, hearsay is admissible, defendants have
no right to confront their accusers, and forced
confessions are a common feature.
Its time for outraged citizens to voice
their opinions to corporate America:
Rockefeller Foundation: Telephone 800-645-1133;
Verizon media contact John Bonomo: Telephone
Avon Foundation: Telephone 866-505-AVON; E-mail
Until the hysteria stops.
Playing Politics with the
Federal Fatherhood Initiative
Last week the Pope issued a wake-up call to persons
of all religious persuasions. Never before in
history, the pontiff warned, has the family
been so threatened as in todays
culture. As the traditional defender and
protector of the family, its no surprise that
fathers and fatherhood have taken the brunt of the
Fatherhood has come under attack on six
1. Smearing dads with the
2. Claiming that fathers and mothers are socially
3. Removing fathers legal say in abortion
4. Encouraging moms to summarily evict their
husbands under the pretext of domestic
5. Allowing inequities in child custody awards
6. Enacting child support laws that send men to
jail for not paying money that they dont have
in the first place
No wonder American families are falling apart.
And no surprise that so many eligible bachelors
avow no interest in marriage.
Back in 1995 president Bill Clinton directed all
federal agencies to review their programs with an
eye to strengthening fatherhood. With the
high-profile backing of vice president Al Gore, the
federal Fatherhood Initiative sprang to life.
Conferences were held, research agendas were
developed, and fathers were on a roll.
But the Lavender Ladies began to fret over the
infiltration of fathers rights
groups and plotted to throw a monkey-wrench into
the operation. Finally someone had a stroke of
genius: well insert the adjectival
responsible before the word
fatherhood. Who could ever oppose
So in his June 17, 2000 Fathers Day radio
address, Bill Clinton gave his blessing to the
catechism of Responsible Fatherhood, making it
clear that responsible dads always make their child
support payments on time. [www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=58649
Problem is, that high-sounding phrase is a
demeaning affront to fathers. Its like saying
mothers need to be taught how to be nurturing, and
of course we need a government program to take care
of that. What mom in her right mind would ever go
to a class called, Caring
With the Fatherhood Initiative now under the
ideological thumb of the child support zealots, the
whole effort quickly lost its momentum.
A few months later George W. Bush was elected on
a platform that included shoring up the traditional
family. Bush tapped Wade Horn to head up the
Administration for Children and Families, a
gargantuan $49 billion welfare bureaucracy that
covers everything from Head Start, child abuse,
homeless youth, and child support enforcement.
A psychologist by training, Dr. Horn had served
as president of the National Fatherhood Initiative
for eight years. Horn seemed destined to be the
go-to guy to re-focus and re-energize the
In the religious tradition, confession must
precede atonement. Unfortunately, the
Administration for Children and Families has never
admitted the heinous sin of Great Society welfare
programs that made fathers redundant, thus
decimating the traditional family in low-income
Wade Horn did not wish to do battle with his own
Office for Child Support Enforcement. In fact, he
became its vocal proponent. In 2003 Horn wrote in
Crisis magazine, In such cases, are we to
simply turn our backs on negligent non-custodial
parents who refuse to support their children
That stinks like a pile of fresh barnyard
Everyone knows that the problem of non-payment
of child support is concentrated among low-income
fathers. Its not Lexus-driving dads who have
negligently abandoned their kids. The
problem is a scandalous government program that
saddles poor men with a debt they can never hope to
The disinformation continues when we are told
that responsible fatherhood also means reducing the
violence committed by men.
Shame on the ACF for ignoring the well-known fact
that women are just as likely or even more
prone to engage in domestic violence.
Eventually even well-meaning bureaucrats began
to lose interest. Check out the Fatherhood
Initiatives Whats New page,
and youll see its new information
was last updated one year ago on June 20, 2005.
Guess not much is happening with fatherhood
The Fatherhood Initiative has become an orphan
program that the Sisterhood would happily kill off,
but the higher-ups know that would be politically
embarrassing. So the Initiative now floats in
bureaucratic cyberspace with no defined mandate,
leadership, operating structure, or budget.
So as we celebrate Fathers Day this year,
we might reflect on Bill Clintons
disingenuous radio address six years ago, and how
the red-fems schemed to leave millions of American
boys and girls without their daddies.
One only hopes that God will be merciful.
Is Feminism a Mental
Peer into the dark heart of radical feminism, and
youll get a glimpse of a seething caldron of
delusion, phobia, and paranoia.
Visit the N.O.W. website and youll see
dark warnings that women are still not
receiving equal pay for equal work. Things
are even worse at the National Abortion Rights
League, which alerts us that President Bush
has waged a tireless war on womens
reproductive rights and personal privacy.
But the greatest feminist boogeyman is domestic
violence. No other issue so propels the luna-chicks
into a wailing convulsion of breast-beating and
As a service to my readers, I must state the
following warning: DV HYSTERIA IS HIGHLY
CONTAGIOUS. The only known way to prevent the
spread of this condition is to inoculate yourself
with the facts. So lets see what the research
has to say.
Recently the Journal of Family Psychology
reported on a national survey of married and
co-habiting partners. In 4.6% of the couples, the
woman had engaged in severe partner
violence, compared to only 2.1% of couples with
male violence. [www.smu.edu/experts/study-documents/family-violence-study-may2006.pdf
Just two weeks ago University of New Hampshire
researcher Murray Straus spoke at a New York City
conference to share his latest research on dating
violence. His conclusions told the same story:
female-only violence is twice as common as
male-only violence not just in the United
States, but in 32 nations around the world.
Got that? More often than not its the
woman whos violent, and the man is on the
receiving end of the abuse.
Now prepare yourself for the ideological
Heres feminist icon Gloria Steinem:
Patriarchy requires violence or the
subliminal threat of violence in order to maintain
itself. . . The most dangerous situation for a
woman is not an unknown man in the street, or even
the enemy in wartime, but a husband or lover in the
isolation of their own home.
But its not just a few miscreant
wife-beaters -- Its every man and in
every class of society, according to Gudrun
Schyman, founder of the Swedish Feminist
That settles it, hubbies. All these years you
thought you were a dutiful protector for your
family. But it turns out youre really a
Sometimes DV hysteria erupts into an incoherent
rant. Heres Lis Wiehl writing for Fox News
just last week: This is one plague that
doesnt discriminate. It affects all women
equally, whether rich, poor, religious,
non-religious, black, or white.
Not to interrupt a good catharsis, Ms. Wiehl,
but you might want to re-read the fifth and sixth
paragraphs of this column. As Im sure your
Harvard Law profs told you, always read the
evidence before you render an opinion.
Feminist dementia even impairs persons
ability to perform simple arithmetic. This
months issue of Mother Jones features
domestic violence statistics. Blithely ignorant of
the research, the issue claims that 73% of abuse
victims are female and 15% are men. [www.motherjones.com/news/featurex/2005/07/dv_stats.html
Lets see, 73 plus 15 equals 88. Whatever
happened to the other 12%? Oh there I go again,
being so linear.
Ann Coulters latest book, Godless: The
Church of Liberalism devotes an entire chapter
to our national epidemic of Sobbing,
Hysterical Women. This coming week thousands
of these sad-sack fems will congregate in New York
City to attend a VDAY celebration organized by Eve
Ensler. Anyone who has heard of Enslers
raunchy Vagina Monologues knows this will be no
ladies sewing circle.
On Monday, June 12 the faithful are being
summoned to attend Enslers
once-in-a-lifetime reading of her play
Necessary Targets. The story highlights the plight
of female refugees in the Bosnian civil conflict.
The moral of the play: if only peace-lovin
women were put in charge, war would come to an end
and the gender utopia could commence.
This time around, a two-week purification ritual
is being called for.
So VDAY will continue with late-night
monologues, rants, and ritualistic chanting about
female genitalia. The festival will conclude on
June 27 with a 5K run through Prospect Park to
exorcise any remaining demons. [www.untiltheviolencestops.org/go.php
Feminism has morphed from an enlightened social
movement into high-octane mass hysteria, shunning
reason and fact in its compulsive quest to flog the
long-dead horse of patriarchy. This movement has
become the beneficiary of billions of dollars in
government largesse, much of which is channeled in
programs designed to recruit ever-more women into
its seductive fold.
Abuse hysteria is on the move and poses a threat
to the well-being of millions of normal, happy
women. That makes it worthy of a full-fledged
psychiatric diagnosis. Here it is: FIPH
feminist-induced phobic hysteria.
The Day the Matriarchy
Came to Power
It was a bloodless coup. It happened under the
penumbra of the law. In fact chief justice William
Rehnquist presided at the event. The date was
January 20, 1993.
The recent November elections had announced the
Year of the Woman, with Dianne Feinstein, Barbara
Boxer, Carol Moseley Braun, and Patty Murray all
sweeping into the U.S. Senate.
Everyone knew the federal bureaucracy was a
stronghold for those domineering patriarchs.
Obviously that needed to change.
First, equal justice had to be turned into
feminist justice. So the Rodham-Clinton
co-presidency brought in Janet Reno to direct the
Department of Justice. The NOW Legal Defense Fund
hailed the dowdy Reno as a stellar attorney
with an extraordinary track record.
Not to be outdone, the Department of Education
brought in radical chicana Norma Cantu to head up
its civil rights office. Cantu made
proportionality the only test for Title
IX compliance. Ten years later, 80,000 slots for
male athletes had been eliminated from more than
350 mens sports teams.
Next, the gender wage gap had to be fixed, so
Karen Nussbaum was named director of the
Womens Bureau at the Labor Department. With
Hillary perched approvingly at her side, Nussbaum
issued the Working Women Count! report.
The study revealed that many working women believe
I do not get paid what I think my job is
Welcome to the real world, ladies.
Over at the Department of Defense, SecDef Les
Aspin was given marching orders to clean up the
lingering fallout from the Navy aviators
Tailhook fiasco. So just three months after he took
office, Aspin issued a historic order: The
services shall permit women to compete for
assignments in aircraft, including aircraft engaged
in combat missions.
Then the blue-ribbon Department Advisory
Committee on Women in the Services got into the
act. The group opted to extend Aspins order,
pushing for female involvement in submarine crews,
Multiple Launch Rocket Systems jobs, and Special
Operations Forces. Before long the group
officially designated as DACOWITS came to be
known as Lack-o-Wits.
With all the liberated single women clamoring
for taxpayer-funded husband substitutes, the next
order of business was to expand the Nanny State. So
Hillary looked to her gal-pal Donna Shalala to head
up the sprawling Department of Health and Human
Shalala had earlier turned the Hunter College
womens studies program into a radical
feminist outpost. Within months of her appointment,
Shalala would lend credence to the porker about
medical research being conducted from the
white male point of view.
But Hillarys greatest obsession was the
promotion of international feminism. So she leaned
on Bill to nominate Madeleine Albright to the
United Nations ambassador post.
During her stint at the U.N. and later as
Secretary of State, Albright was a tireless
advocate for abortion on demand. Hitting all the
right notes, she once claimed, our voluntary
family planning programs serve our broader
interests by elevating the status of women,
reducing the flow of refugees, protecting the
environment, and promoting economic
The U.N. had slated its Conference on Women to
be held in China in September 1995. Albright was
named to chair the U.S. Delegation, and Hillary
Clinton was tabbed to deliver the keynote
Afterwards, president Clinton created the
President's Interagency Council on Women. The
Councils mission was to follow up on
U.S. commitments made at the UN Fourth World
Conference on Women meaning that
whatever promises Albright had made during her
Beijing junket should now be imposed by fiat on the
rest of us.
The high-flying Council was headed by the
triumvirate of Hillary Rodham Clinton, Madeleine
Albright, and Donna Shalala. Meeting monthly, reps
from all the top-level federal agencies were
instructed to implement the Beijing Platform for
One of the Councils Work Groups was tasked
to develop procedures that ensure the
integration of a gender perspective into the
policies and operations of government so that
different impacts on men and women may be
determined and inequities addressed.
Thats fem-speak for pressure the male
geezers to retire, so women can come in and run the
Sure enough, from 1994 to 2002 the number of
male professional workers in the federal government
fell by 17%, while the number of female employees
actually rose. [www.opm.gov/feddata/demograp/demograp.asp
Laws such as the Violence Against Women Act and the
Gender Equity in Education Act were enacted. The
federal government was soon beholden to a
far-reaching array of programs designed to promote
the socialist agenda of the U.N. Conference on
And thats how a feminist cabal overthrew
the entrenched federal Patriarchy in eight short
Legal Services Corporation
Turns its Back on Men
Chances are you dont pay much attention to
the Legal Services Corporation, a hold-over from
the glory days of the Great Society. This
bureaucracy ekes by on $335 million in federal
money chump change by Washington
The LSC was created for a good purpose: to
provide legal services so poor Americans could have
their day in court. But while taxpayers and
lawmakers looked the other way, the Legal Services
Corporation has fallen under the sway of a radical
The Journal of Family Psychology recently
published a study that revealed wives and
girlfriends are more likely to engage in domestic
violence than their male partners. According to
researcher Renee McDonald, 18.2% of the couples had
experienced female-on-male violence, while
male-on-female aggression was found in only 13.7%
This is not news. For the last 30 years,
researchers have proven time and time again that
women were at least as likely as men to commit acts
of family violence. [www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm
But to radical feminists, ideology always trumps
the facts. This has real-world consequences.
When the Legal Services Corporation was created
in 1974, the idea was to help poor people deal with
absentee landlords and faceless welfare
bureaucracies. But along came welfare reform in
1996, and the LSC suddenly found many of its
clients were no longer in need of its services.
Time for Plan B.
Plan B was to implement the radical feminist
agenda. That agenda says domestic violence is the
tool that brutish patriarchs wield to keep women in
So at the LSC, the most common type of cases
became family issues, many of which involve
securing protective order to keep spouses and
children safe from domestic violence,
according to the LSCs latest Annual Report.
Drill down and the full truth emerges. Legal
Service attorneys have Represented battered
women seeking orders of protection, child support
enforcement, and divorces from abusive
spouses, according to the LSCs Press
What about battered men seeking orders of
The LSC website reveals many examples of
taxpayer money being used to represent women
claiming to be victims of abuse but not a
single example of its funds going to help abused
For example, Legal Services funds were used to
establish a policy with the Texas Public Utility
Commission so when women meet with legal aid
attorneys for protective orders, those same
attorneys can also provide practical help in
securing affordable shelter.
That news appeared in the Winter 2005 issue of
Equal Justice Magazine. Apparently its editors were
oblivious to the irony of male victims of domestic
violence being denied equal justice. [ejm.lsc.gov/EJMIssue10/brief_T38_R5.php
The Legal Services Corporation website
highlights the story of Debra in
Minnesota, who claimed to be falsely accused of
child abuse by her ex-husband. LSC attorneys
succeeded in dismissing the protection order and
returning the children to her custody.
Apparently poor men are never subjected to false
allegations of abuse, or at least are unworthy of
receiving free legal services.
One of the LSCs grant recipients is
MidPenn Legal Services in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.
The firms latest annual report tells of
Deborah Lucas who secured a protective order and
won custody of her child. The report makes no
mention of abused men being helped by MidPenn.
Earlier this month, several Pennsylvania judges
revealed that MidPenn and other local law firms are
scripting the statements that women make to the
courts to request restraining orders. This
revelation was made to associates of the North
Carolina-based True Equality Network. The judges
expressed concern over the reluctance of local
D.A.s to prosecute false claims of abuse, according
to True Equality president Terri Lynn Tersak.
Pennsylvanias sweeping domestic violence
law includes, Knowingly engaging in a course
of conduct or repeatedly committing acts toward
another person, including following the person,
without proper authority, under circumstances which
place the person in reasonable fear of bodily
So a father who makes any effort to see his
children could be accused of placing the mother in
fear, thus putting the man at risk of
being thrown in jail. As a result, caring, decent
fathers have simply been cut off from seeing their
Back in Washington DC, the future of the Legal
Services Corporation looks bright, its financial
health now secure.
Because the Violence Against Women Act, recently
re-enacted by president Bush, now allows the LSC to
provide services to all women who claim to be
domestic violence victims, regardless of their
immigration status. [www.lsc.gov/pdfs/progltr06-2.pdf
All aboard the domestic violence gravy
Has Matriarchy made
the Sexes Equal?
A number of years ago someone came up with the idea
that Patriarchy was the cause of untold misery and
hardship of women. So why not let the ladies run
the show for awhile and see if they can clean up
That idea began to take root, and on January 20,
1993, the Matriarchy came into power. Thats
the day the Rodham-Clinton co-presidency checked
into the White House.
After thirteen years of social engineering
designed to advance the feminist agenda, we can
ask, Are we now closer to the long-awaited gender
To answer that question, we might first note
that despite its widely-publicized shortcomings,
the Patriarchy had at least a few redeeming
features. Women have long enjoyed special
consideration by chivalrous lawmakers. For example,
women were exempted from the military draft and
spared from the most hazardous occupations.
Because of their longer life spans, females were
favored by government programs such as Social
Security and Medicare. The eligibility criteria for
welfare programs such as Medicaid gave preference
to custodial parents, another nod to mothers.
Such multi-billion dollar programs, we might
note, were largely conceived, enacted, and paid for
by those linear-thinking patriarchs.
Like socialism, Matriarchy avers to be an
enlightened and egalitarian form of social order.
Lets probe that claim.
Well start with abortion. When feminists
pushed to legalize the procedure, did they envision
that fathers and pregnant women would be equal in
their decision-making? Hardly. The feminists
harsh refrain was our bodies,
When Carol Gilligan and her comrades pushed for
the 1994 Gender Equity in Education Act a
law that cast the spotlight on the needs of
schoolgirls -- did they mention that boys had
always lagged on tests of reading achievement? Not
to my recollection.
When president Bill Clinton named hard-Left
feminist Norma Cantu as director of the Department
of Education civil rights office, she became
obsessed about the under-representation of girls in
college sports programs. But did she ever worry
about the under-representation of boys on
deans lists and honor societies? Not on your
When Hillary Clinton lobbied behind the scenes
for the Violence against Women Act, did she ever
muse about the well-known fact that men, too, are
often victims of domestic violence? Nope.
And when the former First Lady advocated for
womens health, did she ever comment on the
odd fact that men were dying 6 years earlier than
women? Well, I guess I missed that speech.
Not to pile on HRC too much, but when she stumps
for her Paycheck Fairness Act, does she ever
mention the glass ceiling that keeps men from
working fewer hours, accepting less stressful jobs,
and retiring at an earlier age, as their wives
often do? Ditto on that one.
When the Lavender Ladies lobbied to stiffen
penalties for non-payment of child support, did
they ever address the problem of custodial moms who
blocked their exs from seeing their own kids?
Answer in the negative.
When feminists speak about child custody, do
they espouse the rhetoric of equality and fairness?
Not in New York, at least, where last month
feminists lobbied ferociously against a bill that
would have allowed an equal presumption of joint
So despite all the feminist hoopla about gender
equality, it is difficult to find even a single
example where reality measures up to rhetoric.
Alexis de Tocqueville was a political thinker
who charted the early stirrings of socialism in the
years following the French Revolution. Tocqueville
Democracy and socialism have nothing in
common but one word, equality. But notice the
difference: while democracy seeks equality in
liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and
In 1831 Tocqueville journeyed to the United
States to study our nascent democracy. Noting
similar socialistic yearnings in America, he made
this prescient observation:
There are people in Europe who,
confounding together the different characteristics
of the sexes, would make man and woman into beings
not only equal but alike. They would give to both
the same functions, impose on both the same duties,
and grant to both the same rights; they would mix
them in all things-their occupations, their
pleasures, their business. It may readily be
conceived that by thus attempting to make one sex
equal to the other, both are degraded, and from so
preposterous a medley of the works of nature
nothing could ever result but weak men and
Weak men and disorderly women an apt
description of how things stand in America, circa
Comic Relief from the World
Feeling a little bored, maybe suffering from
after-the-holiday blues? The World Health
Organization never fails to provide a moment of
levity in our otherwise hum-drum lives.
Take the AIDS epidemic. After all these years of
seeing the epidemic spread unchecked, Im
beginning to wonder if the world health body views
AIDS as its stealth population control
If that statement seems a bit harsh, consider
the WHOs safe sex campaign which
pushes this Russian-roulette message: Go
ahead and enjoy no-fault sex with multiple
partners, just so long as you use a condom.
As we know, condoms fail 15% of the time.
And if you want a real belly laugh, check out
the WHO Sex Work Toolkit, designed to make
prostitutes feel good about themselves as they
service their AIDS-infected clientele. Just in case
you were worried, the Toolkit comes with this
disclaimer: In no event shall the World
Health Organization be liable for damages arising
from its use. [who.arvkit.net/sw/en/index.jsp
Then theres the malaria epidemic that
claims the lives of millions each year. Spraying
tiny amounts of DDT on the walls of houses is
highly effective in killing malaria-infected
mosquitoes. But the WHO wont allow household
spraying because you guessed it -- that
might offend the environmentalists.
And last July the WHO added two
abortion-inducing drugs RU-486 and Mifrepex
to its list of essential
medicines. At least WHO wont have to
worry about providing so many vaccines and vitamin
pills to little kids.
Heres the most recent laugh-getter from
the World Health Organization. Can you imagine the
world body doing a study that cherry-picks its
participants and relies on flawed methods in order
to reach a pre-determined conclusion?
Thats exactly what the WHO did with its
recent Multi-Country Study on Womens
Health and Domestic Violence Against Women.
Every study Ive seen shows that domestic
violence is an equal opportunity problem. Professor
Murray Straus of the University of New Hampshire
interviewed over 8,000 men and women in 16
countries around the world. He found high rates of
assault perpetrated by both male and female
And recent reports from Canada
] and Australia [www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,17051698%255E1702,00.html
likewise reveal that women are equally likely to
assault their male partners.
But that rendition of gender equality
didnt sit too well with the lavender ladies
at WHOs department of Gender, Women, and
Health. They solved that problem by designing a
study that you guessed right again
only interviewed females.
Then the WHO asked radical feminist
organizations around the world to conduct the
surveys. Thats like doing a study on
persons opinions about wearing animal fur,
and letting PETA run the show.
Since the interviewers knew nothing about how to
do surveys, they were put through a 3-week
indoctrination er, training program.
The training was based on a manual called
Researching Violence Against Women
which, not surprisingly, had very little to say
about domestic violence against men.
Of course they ensured the survey not ask any
questions whether the woman had ever injured her
husband or boyfriend that might get a little
embarrassing. To top it off, they did a little
definitional hocus-pocus, absurdly claiming that
abuse is the same as
To no ones great surprise, the survey
found that theres plenty domestic violence
around the world, and of course its those
brutish men who are at fault. Predictably the WHO
apparatchiks blamed it on the all-powerful
patriarchy: Violence against women is both a
consequence and a cause of gender inequality,
laments the report.
Then they got the boss to give a
headline-grabbing endorsement. This study
shows that women are more at risk from violence at
home than in the street and this has serious
repercussions for womens health,
according to WHO director Lee Jong-wook.
Of course Dr. Jong-wook never mentioned that men
are twice as likely as women to die from
violence-related causes. That fact didnt
quite fit into the punch-line.
As if that wasnt enough, the WHO had the
arrogance and chutzpah to bill the fraudulent
survey as a landmark study.
It may be true that laughter is the best
medicine, but this time the jokes on us --
the U.S. taxpayer.
In order to support this misguided comedy
routine, each year the United States sends the WHO
$95 million for assessed dues, and another $45
million for so-called extra-budgetary
contributions. That money is funneled through the
Office for Global Health Affairs in the U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services. Eventually
your hard-earned money winds up in the Swiss bank
account of a UN bureaucracy that lacks fairness,
accountability, or intellectual honesty.
Joe Biden's Weird Sense
Call it senator Joseph Bidens family secret.
He grew up with a bully-sister. She didnt
just boss people around she beat people up.
Her name was Valerie. She was Joes younger
How do we know this? Because Mr. Biden, with his
usual unblemished candor, told us. It happened
during the Senate hearings held on December 11,
1990 to probe the problem of violence against
women. This was Bidens tell-all:
In my house, being raised with a sister
and three brothers, there was an absolute it
was a nuclear sanction, if under any circumstances,
for any reason, no matter how justified, even
self-defense if you ever touched your
sister, not figuratively, literally. My sister, who
is my best friend, my campaign manager, my
confidante, grew up with absolute impunity in our
And this was the good senators
bell-ringer: And I have the bruises to prove
it. I mean that sincerely. I am not exaggerating
when I say that.
Most politicians who had experienced that type
of childhood trauma would be pushing for a law to
protect children from abusive female siblings. But
Mr. Bidens reaction was different -- champion
a law designed to protect women. Call it the Patty
Hearst syndrome, in which an abused person comes to
identify with his tormentor.
Why does this matter?
Because thanks to senator Bidens chivalry,
taxpayers are now saddled with a
billion-dollar-a-year boondoggle called the
Violence Against Women Act, a law that looks the
other way on female batterers and throws men in
jail when they act in self-defense.
Twenty-some years ago, progressive-thinking men
began to kow-tow to the feminist shibboleth that
patriarchy was at the root of all of societys
woes. This belief was voiced by the eminent
physician Lewis Thomas, author of The Youngest
Science: Notes of a Medicine-Watcher, who floated
this wacko proposal:
Taking all in all, the history of human
governments suggests to me that the men of the
earth have had a long enough run at running things;
their record of folly is now so detailed and
documented as to make anyone fear the future in
their hands. It is time for a change. Put the women
in charge, I say. Let us go for a century without
men voting, with womens suffrage as the only
Of course, we now have the record of folly when
feminists sink their talons into once-proud
organizations like the World Health Organization,
Amnesty International [www.ifeminists.net/introduction/editorials/2005/0420roberts.html
and even the Girl Scouts. [www.intellectualconservative.com/article3139.html
Chivalry has now been transmogrified into a
convoluted line of thinking that reasons,
Yes, we must treat women as equals, so
lets enact another affirmative-action
program. Or better yet, Weve
never had a female president, so this time
its their turn.
This inflated sense of chivalry also runs
rampant in the legal system, which operates by the
unspoken code that women who come before the court
always should be given a second chance.
You may remember Debra Lafave who was accused of
having sex with a 14-year-old student. A few weeks
ago Florida prosecutors announced their plan to
drop the case. Miss Lafave is now negotiating a
lucrative book deal. [www.tbo.com/news/opinion/commentary/MGBMSQ4LBLE.html
Ladies used to express appreciation to men who
extended acts of courtesy and respect. And
fortunately most still do.
But feminists came along and did a double-cross.
First they played on mens innate sense of
chivalry to enact laws and policies that grant
women unfair advantage. Then they turned around and
claimed chivalry only put a happy-face on gender
Columnist Selwyn Duke reveals the formula:
preach equality, accept favoritism, win with
stacked decks, pretend you had no advantage, then
rub salt into the wound. [www.newswithviews.com/Duke/selwyn29.htm
Another version of the ruse is to claim that men
and women are equally chivalrous. Funny, Ive
never heard of a female soldier who charged into a
fusillade with the blood-curdling cry, Death
And some women will pretend that chivalry
doesnt exist, but never hesitate to cash in
on a free dinner from her latest heartthrob.
Back in Delaware, chivalry is alive and well.
Valerie Biden Owens, now employed at a high-powered
political consulting firm, continues as to serve as
one of senator Bidens closest political
This past November, young Joseph
Beau Biden, III announced his plan to
run for attorney general of Delaware. And guess who
he picked as his campaign manager? Missy Owens,
daughter of Valerie. [www.delawaregrapevine.com/4-06politicking2.asp
Joey junior is proud to operate at the behest of
a womans machinations. As he recently
announced, We Biden men know its the
Biden women who really run the show.
Like father, like son.
From Bias to
Bigotry: CBS News goes into Free-Fall
What will Dan Rather be most remembered for
the forged memos from the ill-fated Texas Air
National Guard story? Or will it be this candid
admission, Who among us have not lied about
somebody? I think you can be an honest person and
lie about any number of things?
No matter, now we have a new contestant in the
Her name is Katie Couric, and in a few short
weeks she will sashay into the anchor seat at CBS
News. You may remember, she was the first host of a
morning talk show to ever broadcast her own
Whether the issue is abortion, the gender wage
gap, or daycare, Couric has always crooned in
harmony with the feminist looney-tunes. She
credited Madeleine Albright as being a rock
star and hailed Nancy Pelosis ascension
to the House leadership with a you go,
In a June 2, 1994 interview, Couric invited
Christina Hoff Sommers, author of Who Stole
Feminism?. When Sommers explained that football
does not provoke male viewers into a wife-beating
frenzy, Katie offered this response:
Lets say, if one accepts your thesis,
that these statistics are inflated or used
incorrectly. Arent you worried about throwing
the baby out with the bath water?. . . Arent
you afraid that youre going to be dismissing
the problem all together if you refute that, or if
you constantly criticize that?
So Katie let the cat out of the bag when
feminists make their grandiose claims about brutish
patriarchs and downtrodden women, they dont
believe a single word of what theyre saying.
Its just that telling the truth would be
tantamount to dismissing the problem all
In 1991, Clarence Thomas was nominated to the
Supreme Court. When feminist Anita Hill switched
her testimony, senator Arlen Specter remarked on
her lack of credibility. Nine years later, Katie
was still seething.
So on March 6, 2000 she invited Specter to her
program and then proceeded to rake him over the
coals: You know you, you angered a lot of
feminists when you accused Anita Hill. In fact, you
detailed how she changed her testimony during
questioning, during the Clarence Thomas
confirmation hearings. And you accused of her
publicly, quote, Flat out perjury. Any
Always on the look-out to find sexism where none
exists, Ms. Couric invited Time magazine managing
editor Jim Kelly to her show on December 22, 2003.
Waving the magazines Person of the Year
issue, Kate demanded, Tell me why you all
decided to honor the American soldier? Wondering
why theres no woman on the cover,
When Kelly pointed out the uniformed woman on
the front, Couric began to trot out her
pre-scripted answer, only to realize too late that
she had goofed: Oh, there you go
sorry....I couldnt tell because of her
But it was a segment she did on February 8 last
year that most exposed her feminist-socialist
leanings. The piece featured a taped interview with
This was Courics best line: While
nearly as many women are now in the workforce as
men, they are still paid less. About 76 cents for
every dollar a man makes. Of course Couric
was raking in $13 million that year, plus incentive
provisions and syndication fees. Yes, Katie knows
all about the oppression of women in the
Katie is not just a perky cheerleader for the
latest feminist cause-de-jour; she has a history of
being an unrepentant gender bigot.
In a November 1997 interview of Nicole Contos,
the cast-off bride of Tasos Michael, Couric asked
Contos, Have you considered castration as an
Katie, I know of women who have gotten wet feet
at the last minute. So will you be asking their
jilted bridegrooms, Have you considered
vulvectomy as an option?
Just a month later on December 15, Couric
reported that commercials directed at men are
simple-minded, compared to those aimed at women.
Thats because women are capable of more
complex thought, according to Katie.
But above all, Katie Couric is the lead pom-pom
girl for team Hillary. After Mrs. Clinton released
her book in 2003, Couric ran a five-part series to
commemorate the event. When Hillary invented the
story about daughter Chelsea barely escaping a
firey death in Battery Park on 9/11, Katie
sympathized, At that moment, she was not just
a senator, but a concerned parent.
So as Katie Couric takes over at CBS News and
HRC revs up her presidential campaign, get ready
for more fawning interviews, tear-jerker stories,
and good ol fashioned tall tales.
Women's Health Hoax
Twenty-some years ago the mavens of medical
misfortune sounded their shrill alarm.
Hillary Clinton lashed out because of the
appalling degree to which women were
routinely excluded from major clinical trials of
most illnesses. Marcia Angell, then editor of
the august New England Journal of Medicine,
pronounced this lament: There is little doubt
that women have been systematically excluded as
subjects for study. And Dr. Vivian Pinn of
the National Institutes of Health wrote, The
exclusion of some women from clinical studies may
sometimes be valid, but not all women all the
Of course no one had ever bothered to actually
compile the numbers, so they were unable to refute
the claim. But everyone knew the male-dominated
medical research establishment was interested only
in prostates and male-pattern baldness, so the
ladies claims rang true.
Now under the political gun, the NIH hastily
created its Office for Womens Health
Research. In 1991 president George Bush (the first
one) appointed cardiologist Bernadine Healy as
director of NIH and gave her a mandate to break the
patriarchys stranglehold on medical
Feminists skillfully parlayed public outrage
into research agendas and budget allocations.
Millions were pumped into breast cancer research,
and by 1992, National Cancer Institute funding for
breast cancer reached $145 million. No one
mentioned that the prostate budget that year barely
topped $31 million. [www.nci.nih.gov/public/factbk97/varican.htm
But skeptics began to doubt the common wisdom.
An Institute of Medicine panel looked into the
matter and was forced to admit it could not
nail down the truth of the perception that women
have been under represented in medical
In 1993 Congress passed a law that required the
NIH to track sex-specific enrollments. Everyone
knew the numbers would reveal an appalling
under-representation of members of the fairer
So the following year, red-faced NIH officials
had to admit things werent so grim after all.
Participants in NIH-funded studies were 52% female,
45% male, with the remainder being unknown.
But no one was going to let facts stand in the
way of gender liberation, so the crusade pressed
forward. At latest count, male research
participation had fallen to 40%. [orwh.od.nih.gov/inclusion/FinalAnnualReport2003-2017.pdf
Two years ago Dr. S.M. Huang and colleagues at
the Food and Drug Administration published a
review, Evaluation of Drugs in Women:
Regulatory Perspective. Tallying up five
separate analyses of sex-specific participation,
they concluded women have been included in
drug development studies at least since the early
1980s in approximate proportion to the prevalence
of disease in them.
Of course the Sisters of Insincerity knew their
ruse would eventually be exposed, so they set out
to consolidate their gains. Before long a federal
bureaucracy devoted to the cause of womens
health had sprung into existence. Those programs
would boast a $5 billion budget, four times more
than the money allotted to mens health.
Theres a certain irony to all this.
Every year the government publishes a compendium
of health information that takes the measure of
Americans health. [www.cdc.gov/nchs/hus.htm
Leaf through its pages, and youll see that
men are lagging on practically every measure: death
rates, doctor visits, insurance coverage, and so
At latest count, the lifespan of women was 80.1
years, with men trailing at 74.8 years. And Black
men their life expectancy is only 69 years.
Whatever happened to the vision of gender
Today, the womens health movement has
become a multi-billion dollar interest group that
tap-dances smoothly among feckless bureaucrats,
chivalrous congressmen looking to woo the female
vote, groups like the Society for Womens
Health Research lining up to take their cut, and
media types desperate for yet another story to
pander to their female readership.
Womens health has become elevated to a
cult-like status, a religious crusade worthy of Red
Dress galas hosted by the First Lady, national
events touting a Race for the Cure, and
a recent front-cover tribute by US News and World
Being divinely-blessed is good, because then you
can enjoy your Marie Antoinette moments.
Laws that protect the fairer sex from rape,
domestic violence, and sexual harassment all rest
on a simple assumption: women who claim to be
victims are almost always telling the truth. Maybe
its time to revisit that belief.
Three weeks ago the National Center for Men
filed a lawsuit on behalf of Matt Dubay, 25, who
claims his girlfriend repeatedly assured him that
she was unable to get pregnant. When she later bore
a child, the state of Michigan went after Mr. Dubay
for child support.
Thats what people used to call
But chivalrous pundits rose to defend the honor
of this damsel in distress, dubbing Mr. Dubay a
sexual predator, deadbeat
dad, and horrors! -- a
weasel. And if you happen to believe
that men should be shouldered with the
responsibilities and women enjoy all the rights,
their criticisms certainly ring true.
Recently That's Life! magazine polled 5,000
women and asked tem if they would lie to get
pregnant. Two-fifths of the women 42% to be
exact said yes, according to
NCMs Kingsley Morse.
But that was just a hypothetical survey. Women
would never stick it to a man they actually knew.
Or would they?
Consider the paternity scam. Heres how it
Find any dim-witted man to get you pregnant.
Then look up the name of some unsuspecting Joe
whos got a steady job it doesnt
matter that you never met the poor bloke. Put his
name on the babys birth certificate.
Now cross your fingers and hope the man is out
of town when the sheriff delivers the papers. In
California, such default judgments account for 70%
of paternity decisions, according to a 2003 study
by the Urban Institute.
Or defraud one of your previous boyfriends,
assuming hes a good breadwinner, of course.
Thats what happened to Carnell Smith of
Georgia, who willingly assumed financial
responsibility for a child, shelling out more than
$40,000 in child support over an 11-year period.
But when the mother went to court to up the
payments, Smith requested genetic testing.
Thats when he learned, to his great surprise,
that he wasnt the girls father.
Stung by the injustice, Mr. Smith founded
Citizens Against Paternity Fraud, [paternityfraud.com/pf_fight_back.html
a group that works to protect men from being
cheated by these modern-day Welfare Queens.
Last year Michael Gilding, sociology professor
at Swinburne University in Australia, reviewed
studies from around the world, and concluded that
1-3% of children were fathered by someone other
than the man who believes hes the daddy.
Lets run the math. Four million children
are born in the United States each year. Using the
mid-range 2% figure, that means 80,000 men become
victims of paternity fraud.
Ready for the next scam?
This one involves false allegations of domestic
violence. Each year, one million restraining orders
are issued that serve to evict a person
usually a man -- from his own home.
Restraining orders have become so commonplace
that family lawyers refer to them as silver
bullets, slam-dunks, or simply, divorce
planning. It has been estimated that
one-third of those orders are requested as a legal
ploy in the middle of a divorce proceeding. Not
only are the orders easy to get, in many states a
restraining order automatically bans a father from
gaining joint custody of his children.
So the restraining order granted on the flimsy
grounds that he caused emotional
distress becomes the womans meal ticket
to many years of child support payments.
Prosecutors never go after persons who commit
And state welfare agencies dont get upset
either, because the federal Office for Child
Support Enforcement reimburses 66% of the costs of
states child support enforcement activities.
Think of it as a bounty payment for deleting
So lets see . . . 42% of women admit they
would lie to get pregnant. Each year 80,000
non-biological fathers become victims of paternity
fraud. And about 300,000 restraining orders are
issued in the middle of a divorce.
Assume a father so defrauded finds himself on
the hook for $250 a month for each of his children.
Over an 18-year period, that comes out to a cushy
$54,000, all legally-enforceable, tax-free, and no
In the past the American legal system was guided
by the rule, No person shall benefit from
their own wrong-doing. But now, hundreds of
thousands of women replace that dictum with the
self-indulgent excuse: Get while the getting
Word has gotten out that CBS talk-show host David
Letterman has been involved in a secret liaison
these past several years. It began back in 1993
when Colleen Nestler of New Mexico began sending
Mr. Letterman thoughts of love, and
Letterman responded with televised code words and
seductive eye gestures.
According to Ms. Nestlers 6-page
complaint, Letterman soon began to send her mental
messages seeking her hand in marriage. But the
relationship went sour. Alas, she found herself
unable to sleep at night and was forced into
Determined to fight back, Nestler sought legal
protection. So this past December 15, Santa Fe
judge Daniel Sanchez issued an order instructing
Mr. Letterman to not think of me, and release
me from his mental harassment and hammering.
One might hope such bizarre events are rare. But
it turns out they are commonplace. Each year,
500,000 domestic restraining orders are issued
without even an allegation of violence, according
to a recent report from R.A.D.A.R.
Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting.
These orders are often used as a legal tactic
designed to gain an unfair advantage during a
divorce proceeding. Columnist Cathy Young explains,
The advantages of a restraining order to the
complainant -- exclusive possession of the home
(with the alleged abuser often required to continue
paying the rent or mortgage), temporary and
probably permanent sole custody of the children --
can be tempting.
Case in point is actress Tawny Kitaen, who
happened to be addicted to prescription drugs. In
April 2002 she was arrested in Newport Beach, CA
for attacking her husband, Cleveland Indians
pitcher Chuck Finley, after repeatedly kicking him
with her high-heeled shoes.
Following her arrest, Finley filed for divorce
and was granted temporary custody of the kids. So
she dropped the nuclear bomb of family destruction,
accusing Finley of domestic violence, even though
she was the one who had been arrested and he had no
prior history of abuse.
Domestic restraining orders were originally
designed to protect persons from actual or imminent
harm. But over the years, feminists convinced state
legislators to expand the definition of domestic
So now if you live in Michigan, placing a family
member in fear of mental harm could get you thrown
out. In New Jersey, interfering with your
spouses well-being might get you
the boot. In Illinois, be careful not to cause any
form of emotional distress, that could
get you in trouble with the law.
Now judges crank out orders like counterfeit
one-dollar bills. I think judges grant the
restraining orders without asking too many
questions, admits former state Rep. Barbara
Gray, a sponsor of the Massachusetts Abuse
Once youre out of the house, a broad range
of once-normal behavior becomes off-limits. If your
wife calls and leaves a message, dont call
her back thats considered a violation
of the order. If one of your kids has a birthday,
dont send him a birthday card
thats prohibited, too.
In most cases, the victim of restraining order
abuse is a man. But in about 15% of cases, women
are the victims of drive-by restraining orders.
How would you react if a friend of yours was
fired from his job merely because a co-worker
feared but had absolutely no proof -- he
might do something violent? What would you think if
a girl was expelled from school merely on the basis
of an allegation that she was somehow harassing her
But with domestic orders the stakes are much
higher loss of family and home. New Jersey
attorney David Heleniak puts it this way: In
10 days, the hypothetical husband has gone from
having a normal life with a wife, children and home
to being a social pariah, homeless, poor, and
alone, trapped in a Kafkaesque nightmare.
In the next few days, March Madness will reach
its climactic finale. The victorious basketball
team will bask in its newly-found glory, the
colored streamers will be swept off the court, and
college students will go back to their books.
But for the rest of us, the threat of another
type of madness looms.
Black Men, Soul
Tantalize single moms with an array of juicy
economic incentives, cripple the Black family, and
blame the whole mess on those stingy
Going back to LBJs Great Society,
thats been the essence of the Lefts
social welfare program. [www.ifeminists.net/introduction/editorials/2006/0315roberts.html
The end result was to disenfranchise the male and
Now were paying the price for four decades
of the Nanny State.
When a girl is raised without the guiding hand
of a father, she is at greater risk of engaging in
sexual experimentation with its
all-too-predictable consequence of unwanted
pregnancy. One analysis found that young women with
divorced parents were three times more likely to
have an out-of-wedlock birth.
Researchers Lorraine Blackman and colleagues
recently combed through 125 social science studies
and concluded that when fathers are absent, the
harmful effects on boys are also traumatic.
According to one study, Black teenager boys from
broken homes were more likely to be suspended from
school and get into trouble with the police. And
they were six times more likely to run away from
But when fathers are allowed to stick around,
good things begin to happen.
According to Blackmans review, boys from
father-present homes benefit from three times
higher parental involvement. As a result the boys
have a much higher self-concept. They are more
likely to be prepared for school. And to no great
surprise, they are more likely to aspire to a
Overall, father absence harms boys more than
girls. Blackman concludes, The marriage
benefit appears to be much stronger among African
American boys, who receive considerably more
attention when their father is married and in the
Of course no parent is surprised by these
commonsense findings, but now we have scientific
Some pessimists look at the pattern of
intergenerational poverty, crime, and broken
families. They wonder whether we will ever find the
formula to lift Black men from the bowels of
hopelessness and despair.
The simple answer is yes.
Yes, we need strong educational development and
job training programs to help break the cycles of
social pathology. And certainly we must do away
with misguided welfare policies and
lock-em-up child support enforcement. But
book-learning, jobs, and policy reform will only be
The real answer will be found, I believe, in the
hearts of Black men. It is there that an
indomitable spirit and an unquenchable thirst for
dignity still resides.
It was that spirit that in 1968 compelled 1,300
men in Memphis to go on strike. Weary sanitation
workers picked up placards on which they had etched
the phrase, I AM A MAN. Think about
those four words for a minute. It was that march
for dignity that brought Martin Luther King to
Memphis, only to be felled by a snipers
That same spirit animated a group of brothers to
come together to establish an organization known as
100 Black Men. Forty-odd years later, the group has
grown to over 10,000 members working to improve the
social and economical opportunities for all
That animus drove the Kappa Alpha Psi fraternity
a few years ago to organize its ambitious Prostate
Cancer Global Awareness Campaign. That campaign
inspired Anheuser-Busch to pledge $250,000 in
support of the effort. Prostate cancer, of course,
if far more lethal in Black men than in Whites.
Its that ineffable character that drove
the survivors of a tragic syphilis study to
establish the Tuskegee Human and Civil Rights
Multicultural Center. Chipping in their worn-down
dimes and quarters, they hoped that future research
projects would never repeat the same mistake.
That spirit is evinced every week in small town
churches that dot the countryside, where all-male
gospel groups give their distinctive rendition of
soul-sound. Its the same spirit that guides a
group of Bahai Black men to come together
once a year to chant prayers and recommit
themselves to a life of service. I chanced across
these men a few years ago while grieving the loss
of a family member.
Relieved of artificial impediments, the physical
body has a remarkable ability to heal itself and
regenerate its functions. So too the souls of Black
Black Families, Black
Sounding like a born-again social conservative,
president Lyndon B. Johnson stepped to the podium
and made this stirring pronouncement: When
the family collapses, it is the children that are
usually damaged. When it happens on a massive
scale, the community itself is crippled.
And with his usual modesty, LBJ later hailed
that 1965 Howard University commencement address as
his greatest civil rights speech.
A few months later the Moynihan Report came out.
Despite its commonsense focus on strengthening the
Black family, civil rights leaders raised a stink
that Mr. Moynihan was trying to blame the
victim. Floyd McKissick, director of the
Congress of Racial Equality, insisted,
Its the damn system that needs
So the architects of the Great Society not only
set out to ignore the formative role of the Black
family they plotted to make things
They instituted programs with men-stay-away
names like Women, Infants, and
Children. They enacted Medicaid in 1965 that
imposed eligibility tests slighting non-custodial
parents (read fathers).
Then the social do-gooders delivered the
knock-out blow: the Aid to Families with Dependent
Children program. AFDC had its infamous
man-out-of-the-house rule that withheld
benefits if the primary breadwinner (again, read
father) resided in the house.
Sociologist Andrew Billingsley has traced the
historical lifeline of the Black family. In 1890
the number of intact Black families with fathers
and mothers at home was 80%. Over the next seven
decades through 1960, that figure held remarkably
But once the Great Society programs were put in
place, the African-American family went into a
When the number-crunchers tallied up the results
from the 1970 decennial census, they couldnt
believe their eyes the number of intact
Black families had fallen to 64%.
For the next 20 years two-parent families
continued their free-fall, reaching a rock-bottom
38% in 1990. And most of the remaining intact
families were concentrated in the Black middle
class. In the inner city, the traditional Black
family had essentially ceased to exist.
So forced to compete with a government welfare
program, poor Black men had suddenly found
themselves persona non grata in their own homes.
Like an unwelcome houseguest, Uncle Sam had moved
in, unpacked his bags, and made himself a surrogate
What two World Wars and the Great Depression
were unable to do, the Great Society accomplished
in only 25 years.
With the Black family now in shambles, no amount
of federal money could fix the problem. In 1965,
21% of all American children under the age of 18
lived in poverty. Thirty years and billions of
welfare dollars later, the number of American
children living in poverty was 21%.
Of course the Leftists refuse to admit the
obvious failures of the Great Society. And is their
habit, they tell the exact opposite of the
Robert Hill of the Urban League once spun this
whopper: Research studies have revealed that
many one-parent families are more intact or
cohesive than many two-parent studies. Excuse
me Mr. Hill, when millions of poor teenage girls
are having out-of-wedlock births, how does that fit
into your concept of intact and
Likewise, feminist scholars celebrated the
ascendancy of the female-headed household.
Believing the nuclear family is the bastion of male
privilege, feminist Toni Morrison lionized the
strong black woman who was
superior in terms of [her] ability to
function healthily in the world.
But theres a deeper reason for the Leftist
Karl Marx argued that economic realities
determine social conditions. According to that
formulation, if you pump money into a community,
social indicators will automatically improve. But
the Great Society proved the opposite
squander money on programs that weaken social
structures, and life becomes unbearably
Viewing the plight of the once-proud Black
family, Kay Hymowitz recently mused in the City
Journal, The literature was so evasive, so
implausible, so far removed from what was really
unfolding in the ghetto, that if you didnt
know better, you might conclude that people
actually wanted to keep the black family separate
and unequal. [www.city-journal.org/html/15_3_black_family.html
When I reflect on the vestiges of the American
Black family, the disenfranchisement of its men,
and the despair of its children, I admit to feeling
an abiding sense of betrayal actually
outrage is a better word.
They promised us the Great Society.
Family Make-Over Ponzi
Charles Ponzi certainly couldnt be faulted
for a lack of ingenuity. Way back in 1820 Mr. Ponzi
began to lure people in with the promise of double
your money in 90 days. Word spread, and soon Ponzi
found himself ensconced in a 20-room mansion and
was raking in $1 million a week.
A similar Ponzi scheme is at work today. This
time its an ideological pyramid scam, and it
has to do with families and fathers.
The Mother of All Confabulations goes back to
1986. Thats when feminist Phyllis Chesler
alleged in her book Mothers on Trial that
divorcing fathers win child custody in 70% of
Never mind that the actual number of fathers
winning custody was only 15%. [www.census.gov/prod/2002pubs/p60-217.pdf
And dont worry that Cheslers conclusion
was based on a sample of 60 discontented women
referred by feminist lawyers -- still, it made for
a great story.
A decade later, the National Organization of
Women was beginning to run out of real issues. So
it set out to invent new outrages calculated to
rally the faithful.
In 1996 the N.O.W.-nincompoops passed a
resolution that repeated Cheslers bogus 70%
custody figure. Then they added a new twist,
claiming that patriarchal oafs who wanted to stay
involved in their childrens lives after a
divorce represented an abuse of power in
order to control in the same fashion as do
Hows that for high-decibel
That claim may have succeeded in swelling the
N.O.W. membership rolls, but it still needed some
scientific apple-polishing. So they brought in the
Wellesley Centers for Women, a group with an
impeccable reputation for research integrity.
Well, almost. It was the WCW, of course, that
had earlier published that fraudulent fiction of
female academic underachievement, How Schools
And sure enough, the Wellesley women delivered.
In 2002 the WCW published Battered Mothers
Speak Out: A Human Rights Report on Domestic
Violence and Child Custody in the Massachusetts
Family Courts. People were ecstatic
because the report vindicated everything that the
N.O.W. had been saying.
Take a look closer, and you see the WCW report
is based on interviews with a small group of 40
Massachusetts women. Worse, the report lacks any
objective proof of their allegations of rampant
Which once again proves you can reach almost any
conclusion, just so long as youre allowed to
hand-pick your subjects and dont ask too many
Soon, the whole M.O.M. Squad -- Joan Meier, Jay
Silverman, Lundy Bancroft, and others -- was
singing the Chesler catechism. Take a look at what
they pass off as research, and
youll see they all reference each other in an
ever-expanding circle of self-serving citations.
Most disturbing of all is the tale of
sociologist Amy Neustein. She was one of the
featured speakers at the M.O.M. conference that was
recently held in upstate New York. [www.batteredmotherscustodyconference.org
Last year Neustein wrote a piece in The
Jewish Press alleging her ex-husband sexually
abused their daughter Sherry. Neustein won lots of
sympathy points telling people she lost the custody
battle due to a malfunctioning court system
that punished me for trying to protect my daughter
from abuse. [www.amyneustein.com/childless.htm
But a few months later Sherry, now a graduate
student in New York City, came along with a rather
different account: She would begin by telling
me a sordid -- and false -- story about my father,
such as a detailed account about how he had
molested me or about how he had thrown me violently
against a wall.
The truth, however, is that
my father never sexually abused me.
And lets not forget Sadiya Alilire, the
woman who was portrayed in PBS Breaking
the Silence as a heroic mom who was done wrong
by the legal system -- but was later outed by court
documents proving her to be a serial child abuser.
Seven months after Charles Ponzi set up shop,
his house of cards began to collapse. On August 10,
1920 the newspapers revealed Mr. Ponzi was bankrupt
and pronounced his scheme an odious ruse. He was
later sentenced to five years in prison.
But 20 years after Phyllis Chesler made her
preposterous claim, her siren call of family
destruction continues to make the rounds. Worse,
the Mothers Opposed to Men are on the offensive,
setting up websites, attracting sympathetic media
coverage, and lobbying state legislators.
This time, its not persons money
thats at stake. Its our families that
need to be shored up, and our children who
desperately need their fathers. [www.ifeminists.net/introduction/editorials/2006/0301roberts.html
Remember how the Great Society evicted fathers
from their homes and turned Black families into
wards of the government? Thats what the
M.O.M. Squad has in mind for the rest of us.
The Feminist Anti-Kid
Call it one of those simple yet profound truths:
only a father can help a boy become a man. And only
a daddie can teach a girl about healthy male-female
Both dads and moms are unique and special. Maybe
thats why dads love to mix it up with
rough-and-tumble play. Perhaps its why
fathers teach kids a thing or two about
risk-taking. And no doubt it has something to do
with that tough love thing.
Countless studies point to the same conclusion:
kids with hands-on dads do better in school, in the
community, and in life. I could almost write a book
about it and fortunately, someone already
But theres a somber side to this story.
Kids who lose their father are two to three times
more likely to get in trouble with the law and are
more likely to suffer from a broad array of social
The saga can be traced back to the mid-1960s
when marriage was portrayed as an oppressive
institution and no-fault divorce laws arrived on
the scene. Within 10 years, the U.S. divorce rate
And what happened to the million-or-so kids
whose parents divorced each year? Operating under
the tender years doctrine, family
courts almost always awarded custody of the
youngsters to mothers.
But the tender years apple cart was upset in
1971. That year the Supreme Court ruled in the
landmark Reed v. Reed case that the Equal
Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment
prevents courts from basing opinions on sex. Before
long, gender-neutral custody statutes had replaced
maternal preference standards in almost every
Despite those changes in the law, judicial bias
persisted. In 1994, mothers were awarded custody in
85% of cases. Eight years later, according to the
U.S. Census Bureau, that number remained unchanged.
Keep in mind, every time a father is relegated
to the status of an every-other-weekend visitor,
its the children who lose out. Its
those same kids who end up as social misfits and
statistics in your newspaper police report.
So childrens rights advocates began to
push for laws based on a presumption of joint
Not only is joint custody firmly rooted in the
notion of gender equality, its also ideal for
kids. As Dr. Joan Kelly, former president of the
Academy of Family Mediators concluded, shared
parenting is a desirable outcome which
clearly is in the best interests of children and
By 1991, over 40 states had shared parenting laws
But the M.O.M.s Mothers Opposed to Men
were not going to remain silent. In 1996 the
National Organization for Women passed a resolution
that began with this chestnut: many judges
and attorneys are still biased against women, and
fathers are awarded custody 70% of the time when
they seek it. [www.now.org/organization/conference/1996/resoluti.html
So there you have it the fact that
mothers were winning custody 85% of the time was
proof of widespread anti-female bias in the legal
The M.O.M.s then proceeded to do everything in
their power to throw dirt on the joint custody
idea. But nobody would listen to them. In fact
powerful politicos Republicans and Democrats
alike began to speak out on the importance
So three years ago the M.O.M. Squad met at tiny
Siena College in upstate New York to plot their
next move. This time they decided to drag the
domestic violence boogeyman out of the closet.
Soon the M.O.M.s were cranking out red-meat
claims like, In custody cases where the
mother alleges battery by the father, the father is
awarded custody two-thirds of the time. That
shrill allegation made its way into the recent PBS
But once again, the M.O.M.s were blowing smoke.
Despite the fact that kids with involved dads do
better, regardless of all the joint custody laws,
and in spite of the laughable antics of the M.O.M.
brigade, mothers continue to be favored in custody
decisions by a 7 to 1 margin.
All this, of course, is done in the name of the
best interests of the child.
Family researcher Judith Wallerstein once
lamented, I have been deeply struck by the
distress children of every age suffer at losing
their fathers. Maybe we should all begin by
listening to the voices of the little ones.
The M.O.M. Squad
All Points Bulletin: M.O.M.s are on the loose.
Theyre armed and dangerous. Be forewarned,
M.O.M.s Mothers Opposed to Men wield
a formidable array of fake statistics, sob stories,
and old-fashioned propaganda.
I admit, sometimes I feel a bit silly trying to
answer their preposterous charges. But since the
M.O.M.s keep saying this stuff, maybe its
time to put the kibosh on the whole thing. So here
1. The M.O.M. Squad claims that divorcing
fathers gain child custody 70% of the time, citing
Phyllis Cheslers 1986 book, Mothers on Trial.
But Boston Globe columnist Cathy Young calls
Cheslers claim a contender for the Phony
Statistics Hall of Fame. [www.lapresrupture.qc.ca/cpadec10_cathy_young.html
Fact: Fathers win child custody only 15%
of the time.
2. The M.O.M.s say that male violence
against women is all-pervasive. Heres
feminist icon Catherine MacKinnon at her
level-headed best: Just like terrorist
attacks, acts of violence against women are
carefully planned, targeted at civilians, and
driven by ideology.
Fact: Women are just as likely as men to
assault their partners. [www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm
If you dont want to look up the research,
just ask Indianapolis Colts cornerback Nick Harper,
whose wife Daniell spent a couple days in the
slammer last month after stabbing him with a
3. The M.O.M.s claim fathers commonly
abuse their children. Like the child custody
canard, that statement is the exact opposite of the
Fact: Women represent the majority of
child abusers. According to the federal
Administration for Children and Families, In
2003, 58.2% of child abuse and neglect perpetrators
were females and 41.8% were males.
The ACF also reveals that in 30% of child
fatalities, the perpetrator is the mother is acting
alone, while in 18% of cases, its the father
acting alone. [www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/cb/pubs/cm03/figure4_2.htm
Are you ready for the latest bombshell?
4. This one concerns fathers who find
they must go to court in an often futile effort to
gain joint custody of their children. This whopper
made its way into the recent PBS program, Breaking
the Silence: Numerous studies have
confirmed that approximately 75% [of fathers
seeking custody] involve a history of
Fact: This defamatory statement is akin
to the claim that Jews were wrecking the German
economy. Look beyond the histrionics of the PBS
claim and you cant help but notice that
The references cited by the films
supporters in most cases are a round-robin of
assertions, in which the same pool of authors
repeatedly cites each others opinions,
without supporting data, as one critic put
Broadcast of Breaking the Silence this past
October shifted the M.O.M.s campaign into
high gear. But their agitprop suffered a setback
when the program drew flack from thousands of PBS
viewers and producer Dominique Lasseur was grounded
by PBS ombudsman Michael Getler. [www.pbs.org/ombudsman/2005/12/introduction_and_breaking_the_silence.html
The Mothers Opposed to Men used to hang out at a
website known as the Mothers Research and
Resource Center, but then columnist Wendy McElroy
outed them. [www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,177893,00.html
Within days they yanked the incriminating evidence
but not before a copy was made.
So why on earth are the M.O.M.s engaged in this
Twenty years ago, divorcing mothers were the
beneficiaries of a legal system that reflexively
awarded them child custody. But fathers said that
wasnt fair, that gender equality is supposed
to apply to men, too. Plus, research shows kids
with hands-on fathers do far better in school and
are less likely to get into trouble with the law
think of dads as the social equivalent of
So in many states fathers pushed for laws that
say child custody should be shared between dad and
mom, assuming both parents are fit. That
common-sense approach is called a legal presumption
of joint custody.
Most would say that arrangement is good for all
parties: kids, mom, and dad. And it doesnt
cost the taxpayer a flat dime. But the M.O.M.s were
not pleased, because they view joint custody as a
capitulation to the dreaded patriarchy.
So now theyre going around the country and
meeting behind closed doors with judges and
lawmakers, spreading their anti-father calumnies.
Their aim is to stampede them into passing laws
based on the premise that dads are dangerous, so
wed be better off if they were all locked up
Look out for the M.O.M. Squad, coming to a
legislature near you.
Women who Treat Women
as Sex Objects
Advisory: This weeks column contains adult
language. And nothing is made-up.
Picture this image: 18,000 women line up at
Madison Square Garden in New York City. They pay as
much as $1,000 apiece to witness the spectacle. For
the audience warm-up, the women are bombarded with
the word Vagina! Soon, the Vulva Choir
is singing the praises of their inner-vagina.
The play features a series of vignettes,
including one about a 13-year-old girl who is plied
with alcohol and raped -- by a woman. At the end,
the girl revels in her new-found liberation from
heterosexuality: Ill never need to rely
on a man
if it was a rape, it was a good
This actually happened on February 10, 2001.
Nothing here is made-up.
The play, known as the Vagina Monologues, wins
the prestigious OBIE Award. The New York Times
hails playwright Eve Ensler as the Messiah
heralding the second wave of feminism.
Since then, the Vagina Monologues has been
staged in front of hundreds of thousands of coeds
at college campuses around the country. Listening
to women talk about their genitalia is their way of
celebrating Valentines Day. Some of them wear
self-reassuring T-shirts that say, I love my
On September 13, feminist Eve Ensler invited
former Playboy bunnie Gloria Steinem and others to
star in an event in New York called Vaginas
Vote, Chicks Rock. The event was designed to
encourage voter registration among
Democratic-leaning women. Here are a few gems from
Are there any registered vaginas in the
Step into your vaginas and get the vagina
Her speech concluded with this heart-warming
appeal: Vulva! Vulva! Vulva! Vote!
Enslers event was successful. Seven weeks
later, women turned out in record numbers. Many of
them voted for George W. Bush.
Most mental health professionals would regard
Miss Enslers obsession with her crotch as a
treatable condition. But now, a whole generation of
women has come to believe that all manner of lewd
and indecent behavior is acceptable -- just so long
as it can be justified with feminist buzz words
such as liberation,
Here are some recent examples:
In California, attorney Liana Johnsson reached
this insight (note the liberation theme here):
At some point, mens breasts became
liberated and womens didnt. So
now Johnsson is pushing the California Legislature
to pass a law allowing women and girls to
drop their tops at California beaches
Growing numbers of women enjoy viewing
pornography, and now represent 30% of all online
porn visitors. Holly Moss, founder of Women In
Adult, explains this trend: As women have
more choices in life and purchasing power, they are
choosing what they want to see and how they want
their porn. [www.xbiz.com/news_piece.php?id=1161
Did you spot the skillful use of both the
choice and power motifs in
Miss Moss remarks?
But theres more. Last year a teenager
marched into her school cafeteria in South Hadley,
Mass. wearing only a bra and sweat pants. According
to principal Melodie Goodwin, We had girls
fall out of their shirts in the sixth grade.
Now the Michael E. Smith Middle School has
tightened up its dress code. [www.masslive.com/chicopeeholyoke/republican/index.ssf?/base/news-8/110759319912580.xml
Now, liberation even extends to the Soccer Mom
set. USA Today recently reported on mothers
who parade around the house with cleavage on full
display and cook breakfast for junior wearing
three-inch heels. According to reporter Olivia
Barker, mom doesnt want to check her
sexuality at the picket-fence gate anymore.
Finally, lets not forget to mention those
TV soft-porn hits like Sex and the City and
Desperate Housewives. No surprise, these shows are
watched mostly by women.
During the former Reign of Patriarchy, men
sometimes regarded women in terms of their female
anatomy. Most persons agreed that wasnt a
very good thing. But it happened.
Then feminism came along and disposed of the
Patriarchy. Men were told to stop objectifying
So what happened? Women began to objectify
Heres the amazing part many
intelligent women became convinced that it was good
to be treated as sex objects. In fact, they were
willing to part with good money to see a play that
celebrated the rape of a 13-year-old girl.
In the past, the sexual degradation of women was
confined to the bedroom and the brothel. But now,
gender objectification permeates our culture. It is
flaunted at college campuses, on the Internet, on
prime-time TV, and during Super Bowl half-time
shows. And it is done at the behest of women.
This has really happened. Maybe the Patriarchy
wasnt so bad.
Breaking the Hearts of
Women are seeing red over the latest program from
the American Heart Association, dubbed the Go
Red for Women campaign.
Why would women ever be perturbed about that?
Because this one-sided campaign overlooks the fact
that men have hearts, too.
Wondering if the feminist campaign for gender
equality had somehow gotten side-tracked, I
contacted the AHA for an explanation. Heres
what spokeswoman Toiya Honore had to say:
When many people think of heart disease or
heart attack, the image that comes to mind is the
middle-aged white male clutching his
Ms. Honores comment may be true, but
misses the key point. That middle-aged white
male also happens to be married, with a wife
When that husband and father suddenly dies, he
leaves behind a devastated family. Mom is now
saddled with the additional burdens of becoming the
primary breadwinner and household repairman. She
has also lost her confidante, lover, and
Thats not all. When his widow reaches her
Golden Years, she will be four times more likely to
be warehoused in a nursing home (according to a
study by Lois Vergrugge), compared to a married
woman of the same age.
In contrast to that middle-aged white
male, women who die of heart disease are
typically in their 50s and 60s. Usually they are
not the primary breadwinner of a struggling family,
and their children have already grown up.
Ms. Honore offers a second justification for the
Heart Associations campaign that again is
technically correct, but misses the bigger picture.
Honore notes, overall, more women die from
cardiovascular disease than men. It is true
that of all persons who die of heart disease, 52%
are female and 48% are male.
But even a first-year public health student can
spot the flaw in that logic. Go to the nursing home
in your community, and you will see that most of
the residents are female. And heart disease is a
condition of older people. So of course women hold
a numerical edge in the heart disease tallies.
Thats a no-brainer.
But crude numbers are notoriously inadequate in
guiding program priorities. For example, the number
of Blacks who die of heart disease is far fewer
than the number of Whites. If we only relied on raw
numbers, we would start shutting down programs for
Blacks and other minorities.
And knowing that more men die of cancer than
women, is the Heart Association also calling for a
halt in breast cancer research? I certainly hope
The only accurate gauge of need is a
persons risk. The risk of dying of heart
disease is 228 per 100,000 for white males, and
only 134 among white females. In other words, men
face a 70% higher risk of dying from this dread
disease. The American Heart Association knows these
facts are true - they report them on page 10 of
their own 2004 Statistical Update www.americanheart.org/downloadable/heart/1075102824882HDSStats2004UpdateREV1-23-04.pdf.
American men die an average of five and a half
years before women. If it wasnt for the
unequal gender toll of heart disease, men would be
living almost as long as women. And far fewer women
would be spending their last years alone, gazing
blankly at the cinderblock walls of a nursing
Forty years ago the American Heart Association
sponsored a conference on Hearts and
Husbands. This conference, which taught women
how to keep their husbands healthy and alive, was
attended by 10,000 wives and wives-to-be.
Those women had far greater compassion and
common sense than the radical feminists who are now
calling the shots at the American Heart
Feminine Mystique or
Noticed how Hillarys been looking so, well,
During his recent State of the Union address,
president Bush made a light-hearted remark about
Bill Clinton. The camera turned to Hillary for a
cameo shot, and all she had to do was smile
politely. But no, she shot back her trademark
Hillary, Im afraid you were set up --
right in front of a national television
Somehow, Hillarys ire is emblematic of
everything that has gone wrong with the feminist
movement since Betty Friedan released her
celebrated book, The Feminine Mystique, in
Im admittedly mystified that so many
persons are unaware of Friedans Communist
And positively stupefied that even fewer understand
what the feminine mystique really
Here it is, in Friedans own words,
The feminine mystique says that the highest
value and the only commitment for women is the
fulfillment of their own femininity . . . this
femininity is so mysterious and intuitive and close
to the creation and origin of life that man-made
science may never be able to understand it. But
however special and different, it is in no way
inferior to the nature of man; it may even in
certain respects be superior.
Can you imagine some sweaty working stiff taking
a smoke break, and suddenly becoming inspired to
enlighten his buddies with that kind of
narcissistic drivel? Someone would have thrown a
tool belt at him and ordered him to get back to
But coming from a woman ensconced in a
well-appointed New York City suburb, Friedan was
hailed as the latest feminist savant.
Mrs. Friedan had considerable first-hand
experience with the feminine mystique. Her husband
Carl, a successful advertising executive, employed
a full-time housekeeper, which allowed Betty to
pursue her writing career. Apparently Friedan
didnt like the hired help, because she would
later denigrate housework as particularly
suited to the capabilities of feeble-minded
So 40-odd years later, is it time to pop open
the champagne bottle and exclaim, Youve
come a long way, baby? To find out,
lets do a quick tour around the country.
First stop, your local college campus.
This month, The Vagina Monologues is being
performed at 600 colleges around the country. There
smart, ambitious co-eds will look on as a lesbian
actress seduces a 16-year-old girl, only to be
reassured, If it was a rape, it was a good
rape. These women are then instructed to
reclaim their sexuality by chanting, My
vagina is huggable.
Wouldnt Betty be proud?
Now go visit the offices of your local Heart
Association. There you will learn about the
AHAs high fashion campaign, Go Red for
Of course its men who are at far greater
risk of dying from heart disease, but the AHA only
cares that women wear red dresses.
Somehow that chauvinistic phrase, may even
in certain respects be superior, is ringing
through my head.
Next stop: The Oxygen Network (women cant
breathe in patriarchal society, so they need oxygen
There, we see the Network is airing six animated
spots based on the book, Chicks Dig Fries: A Guide
for Clueless Men.
[www.chicksdigfries.com/video.htm] By any
standard, the spots are tasteless and misandrous.
But in feminist la-la land, women are always right
and men just dont get it. No wonder men are
dropping out of the dating scene.
Once men stop dating, they also stop marrying.
This is creating a panic of sorts.
One of the more sorry movies Ive seen,
Bridget Jones Diary, recounts the escapades
of a slightly neurotic thirty-something who, no
matter how hard she tries, cant seem to find
Mister Right. The movie, based on the international
best-selling book, taps into the angst of millions
of single women who are chasing after a shrinking
pool of willing bachelors.
The last stop on todays tour is that part
of America that never took a fancy to the
emancipation agenda of The Feminine Mystique.
Its that place in America where gentlemen
still hold doors open for ladies, and young women
look forward to balancing careers with marriage and
It turns out this segment of America has a much
larger following than the mainstream media is
willing to admit. According to a 1999 Gallup poll,
74% of American women do not consider themselves to
be feminist. And one CBS poll reported that 22% of
women said that being called a feminist would be
considered an insult.
Like Britney, Madonna, and Oprah, The Feminine
Mystique has left an indelible stamp on our
society. Thank goodness the majority of American
women have had the common sense to reject its
Trojan horse prescription for gender
Who's Afraid of Carol
Most feminists will come right out and tell you
they pretty much despise men. But some feminists,
like the leechers and blood-letters of yore, make
the claim that yet another spoonful of feminism
will actually make boys and men feel better.
Such is the case of psychologist Carol Gilligan,
whose nostrums were recently featured in Newsweek
magazine as the cure-all for the Boy
For years, the mainstream media has been running
cover for Dr. Gilligan, hoping no one would find
out the truth. So exactly who is Carol Gilligan,
and what is her agenda?
It all goes back to 1982 when Gilligan released
her book, In A Different Voice, hailed as the
little book that started a revolution. The
book examined the ways men and women make decisions
about right and wrong what psychologists
call moral reasoning.
Gilligan concluded that men tended to focus on
rules and principles, while women were more swayed
by their personal experiences and emotional take of
the situation. That common-sense description is
hardly earth-shattering -- in my experience,
its more often men who want to make the
rules, and women who try to bend them.
Translated into nine languages and with 600,000
copies sold, In a Different Voice was a huge
But the acclaim was not unanimous. The
Sisterhood was aghast that Gilligan would even hint
that innate differences existed between the sexes.
Feminist Linda Kerber ridiculed Gilligans
book as echoing the romantic sentimentalism
of old voices in the womens
Sure enough, Gilligan soon buckled under the
weight of the criticism and fell into lock-step
with the rad-fem vanguard. But she knew that at
some point, she would have to make amends for her
That moment came in 1990, when Gilligan
published Making Connections, which was based on
her interviews with well-to-do girls attending an
upstate New York boarding school. Gilligan reported
that at the age of 11, these carefree, confident
girls suddenly hit the wall of Western
culture (read patriarchy), and
suddenly found themselves voiceless and adrift.
Now really, I have never in my entire life seen
a group of adolescent girls who hesitated to speak
out on practically anything that crossed their
minds. But thats what Gilligans
Needless to say, Gilligan never bothered to
interview any teenage boys.
Soon Gilligan was regarded with a cult-like
veneration. Senator Barbara Mikulski, one of those
poor women who had lost her voice, now sang the
professors praises: All of us are
familiar with Dr. Carol Gilligan and her pioneering
work...Dr. Gilligans research indicated that
women speak in a different voice, but those voices
are often made silent by the stereotypes in the
Thanks to the girl hysteria that Gilligan
engendered, the Gender Equity in Education Act was
passed in 1994. Of course by that time, girls had
surpassed boys on most measures of school
But that didnt stop Gilligan from
receiving the Heinz award from Teresa Heinz Kerry,
another one of those silenced women. In 2000, Jane
Fonda, her spirit also crushed by patriarchal
culture, gushed, I know what Professor
Gilligan writes about. I know it in my skin, in my
gut, as well as in my voice.
So thanks to the GEEA, boys are admonished that
tag and dodge ball bring out their latent
aggressive tendencies, so better to stick with
hop-scotch and jacks. Go to any schoolyard, and you
will find that more often it is the voices of boys
who have become silenced.
So what is professor Gilligans
prescription for the Boy Crisis in her recent
Newsweek article? [www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10965127/site/newsweek
Because fem-speak is often shrouded in weasel words
and loopy logic, as a service to my readers I offer
a plain-English translation.
First, Gilligans solution for the Boy
Crisis involves boys recognizing their
sensitivities, building honest relationships, and
strengthening a healthy capacity for
resistance. Translation: More sexual
harassment lectures and fewer sports programs.
Then Gilligan warns against reinstituting
traditional codes of manhood, including a return to
the patriarchal family. Read, No need to
worry that 40% of American children do not live
with their biological fathers, because the Nanny
State can do the job better.
But the real message comes out in the sub-title
of Gilligans fatuous essay: A feminist
scholar explains how the study of girls can teach
us about boys. Meaning: Dont try to
take even a penny of my precious GEEA money away
from feminist indoctrination centers, ahem,
womens studies programs.
With the continued feminization of the male
species, we can all look forward to seeing the Boy
Crisis for a good, long time.
Alito Hearings Bring
Fathers Back into the Abortion Debate
The pictures said it
First was the shot of the
unflappable judge, serenely
Joe Biden would finally get around to asking his
question. Then the unforgettable image of judge
Alitos wife Martha-Ann, gasping at the
accusation that her husband was a closet
And at the end of it all,
there was Teddie Kennedy, his contorted face
reduced to a helpless, choleric rage. Richard
Durbin buried his brow in his hands. And poor
Dianne Feinstein she looked like she had
just returned from a back-alley encounter with a
pack of mating wildebeests.
Much of the Judiciary
Committees scrutiny revolved around
Alitos views on abortion, including his 1991
dissent in the now-famous Planned Parenthood v.
engaged and enraged feminists had
worked themselves into a lather. Rep. Lynn Woolsey
of California fumed that Alitos position
takes us right back to the 1950s, and a
hyperventilating Louise Slaughter said that Alito
had argued that the state effectively has the
right to give a man control over his
It may come as a surprise
to many that Planned Parenthood used to be against
abortion. Back in 1963 they issued this warning:
An abortion kills the life of a baby after it
has begun. It is dangerous to your life and health.
It may make you sterile so that when you want a
child you cannot have it.
But along came Roe v. Wade
in 1973, and Planned Parenthood decided to milk the
cash cow of abortion-on-demand. Eventually it
realized that state laws that placed restrictions
on access to abortion were robbing them of their
market share. In Pennsylvania, the Planned
Parenthood chapter began to eye a 1982 law that
required a pregnant woman to notify her
husband of her intention to abort.
Contrary to Rep. Louise
Slaughters rant, the spousal notification
requirement of the Pennsylvania law did not give
the husband any kind of veto power. In fact, the
law didnt even require a woman to
plan the pregnancy with her spouse. It
only required a simple notification, as in,
Hey hon, Im going to go out to
have my nails done, pick up some groceries, and
maybe get an abortion.
But Planned Parenthood
would not tolerate even that minimal concession to
the fathers interest to keep his unborn child
alive. So it sued to overturn the law.
At the time, Samuel Alito
happened to be one of three judges on the 3rd U.S.
Circuit Court of Appeals. Two of the judges ruled
that the spousal notification requirement was not
lawful, but Alito disagreed. He argued the
provision was constitutional because it is
rationally related to a
As we know, the next year
Planned Parenthood took the case to the Supreme
Court. In 1992, the Supreme Court affirmed that
fathers had no legitimate role in decisions to
continue the lives of their own
In retrospect, we have to
ask how so many learned judges, most of them
fathers themselves, failed to discern a legitimate
state interest in respecting the bonds between
biological dads and their children?
The 1992 Supreme Court
ruling came just months after vice-president Dan
Quayle gave his famous Murphy Brown speech which
deplored the fact that, Where there are no
mature, responsible men around to teach boys how to
become good men, gangs serve in their place.
The opinion followed a decade of revelations by
social scientist Sara McLanahan, who discovered to
her horror that fatherless children do far worse on
a broad range of social indicators.
One of the tragic results
of the decision was that fathers were banished from
the abortion debate. From the Left, fathers were
scorned as simply irrelevant. On the Right they
were reviled for their alleged hit-and-run
treatment of women, even though rape and incest
accounted for less than one percent of all
abortions. The sad fact was, dads were now persona
Planned Parenthood v.
Casey amounted to the biological disenfranchisement
of dads and the radical de-legitimization of
fatherhood itself. For every beating heart snuffed
out by Roe v. Wade, Casey drove a stake through the
heart of a proud father-to-be.
Judge Samuel Alito, who
confirmation is expected later this week, has
almost single-handedly deflated the Leftist
hegemony over the spousal notification debate. Now
we can to begin to acknowledge the obvious: men are
grievously wounded when they are removed from the
life-and-death decisions affecting their own flesh
© 2006 Carey Roberts
Menstuff® is a registered trademark of Gordon
©1996-2017, Gordon Clay