Trudy
Schuett
Archive
 

Trudy W. Schuett is an Arizona-based online veteran with 10 years in cyberspace; an author and multiblogger. She has held workshops on blogging, writing, and promo for writers at the New Communications Forum and Arizona Western College, and has participated in world blogging events such as Global PR Blog Week. She is also an advocate for unserved victims of domestic violence. She is is the author of three novels, two how-to books and eight blogs. Note: Books are currently out of print, but two appear in blog form. She currently publishes New Perspectives on Partner Abuse at partnerabuse.com. She has a video at her site that provides a look into the circumstance of a few men. Entitled, Husband Beaters It is in five parts and was part of the Secret Lives of Women series on the WE network. She publishes the AZ Rural Times and New Perspectives on Partner Abuse , she is on Twitter and Facebook She lives in Yuma AZ, with her husband, Paul. desertlightjournal.blog-city.com/ or E-Mail..

Abusegate: a generation deceived


I’ve followed the issue of Climategate with great interest, as it has seemed that the issue has mirrored events in the field of domestic violence and partner abuse. Abusegate also occurred due to money, political power, and careers at stake.

Where Abusegate is concerned, however, there is one more element – the life or death of feminism, and its determination to liberate women from the so-called “oppression” of marriage and family. The story of Abusegate is as much about the attempt by feminists to obscure their real intentions as it is about feminist attempts to conceal the reality of partner abuse, in order to claim the issue as their own, and possibly the only issue available at the time to keep this essentially destructive philosophy alive.

As Joanne Nova, [1] Australian science writer has said, “Science has come full-circle, taking a page from the medieval Church by using fear and persecution to silence skeptics. The oppressed have become the oppressors. Given that most professional scientific bodies and peer-reviewed journals have been active accomplices in this scandal, one wonders how many other so called scientific consensuses have been similarly engineered and waiting for their own ClimateGates before truth is known.”

That quote is important because it addresses the politicization of science and research. Dean Esmay, the owner of Dean’s World, [2] where I blog occasionally as part of a group, has often commented that politics and science don’t mix. While I haven’t been in the field of research myself, it’s fairly well-known that going after grants and funding has become a difficult process, often fraught with politics and cronyism.

What feminism is supposed to be about is the definition provided by Merriam-Webster.

1 : the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes

2 : organized activity on behalf of women's rights and interests. This is a current popular definition, however, and has little to do with the goals of feminism, which has its roots not only in Marxist ideals, but also in anti-male hatred and a desire for power and control over society where it is most beneficial to feminists themselves. According to [3] Erin Pizzey: “There never was a feminist movement. A bunch of disenchanted women refused to support their left wing men who were fighting capitalism. They changed the goal posts and said capitalism was no longer the battle ground it was now 'Patriarchy' and declared war on all men and the family.”

In the 1970s, and into the 1980s, feminism was still an emerging movement. Except for the halls of academia, which began to offer “women’s studies” courses, and a few academicians pushing “feminist law,” and “feminist psychology,” the general public had little interest in a movement that was so clearly designed to create antipathy between not only the sexes, but between career women and those choosing more-traditional paths for themselves.

It was about the same time that the issue of partner abuse began to emerge as an issue on the public radar. In 1971, Erin Pizzey founded the first shelter for abused women in the UK. There were also a few shelters for women developing independently in various places in the US.

This did not escape the attention of the zealots of the feminist faith and other opportunistic women. Surely there was profit and power to be gained in promoting this cause.

According to the [4] Herstory of domestic violence, “In the 1970s ‘We will not be beaten’ becomes the mantra of women across the country organizing to end domestic violence. A grassroots organizing effort begins, transforming public consciousness and women's lives. The common belief within the movement is that women face brutality from their husbands and indifference from social institutions.”

A theory regarding abuse was formulated, relying almost entirely on feminist supposition and the input from self-identified abused women. There has never been any kind of formal research or investigation of the feminist theory of abuse; it has simply been presented as a fait accompli and seldom, if ever, questioned. A look through the “Herstory,” (on the Minnesota Center Against Violence and Abuse website, funded by your tax dollars) reveals a stunning lack of mention of research of any kind behind the feminist concept of domestic violence.

Del Martin [5] a lesbian activist, wrote one of the earliest works on the issue in 1976. She says, “At the outset I was told I had to produce extensive and verifiable statistics on the incidence of violence against women…I concluded that incidence and incidents of violence in the home reached into the millions. My editor deleted my estimate on the grounds that I couldn’t prove it. Since then, academia has confirmed my virtual estimate and admitted that lacking uniformity in the way data are accumulated makes it impossible to provide actual statistics.”

Lenore Walker [6] author of "The Battered Woman" “When I first began my study of the psychological impact of domestic violence on the battered woman, it was the mid 1970s and the feminist movement had a negative reaction to anything that came with a clinical psychology label…”

Ellen Pence Duluth [7] Domestic Abuse Intervention Project “Many things that we did were new and groundbreaking. We introduced the power and control wheel and its accompanying theoretical framework, which tried to shift away from seeing violence against women as the problem of a few psychologically distorted men and lots of bad marriages, by linking men’s violence toward their partners to other forms of domination—class, race, gender, and colonization. We built on the work of previous projects that held individual agencies responsible to protect women and proposed a fairly bold notion of linking agencies together and forming a community-based advocacy program.”

This is probably the most astonishing fact of Abusegate: While Climategate has at least some basis in research and scientific theory, there is none whatsoever behind the myriad programs and laws established since the 1970s by the so-called, “Battered Women’s Movement.” Even the term itself was created for its impact by feminists whose goals had very little to do with providing aid for women.

As radical activist Susan Schecter [8] said, "I believe it is most urgent for this movement's future to declare that violence against women is a political problem, a question of power and domination, and not an individual, pathological, or deviant one. Continuing to make violence against women public is itself a crucial continuing task. We also must become a movement led by battered women, women of color, and working class women. We must develop a progressive agenda, a long range vision of what kind of society is needed so that violence against women would not exist, and to ally with groups sharing a vision of a just society" This statement appears on the main page of the website for the West Virginia Coalition Against Domestic Violence, [9] also funded by your tax dollars.

Since the early days of the Battered Women’s Movement, nearly everything that has come after has been based on feminist principles devised out of thin air. Even today, in the US there is no standard definition of what domestic violence is or is not. Yet thousands of men are incarcerated, families destroyed, and women and children thrown into a permanent condition of life in turmoil because of nothing but the aberrant personal beliefs of a few women a generation ago.

While the feminists of the 20th Century are dying off or retiring, their ugly legacy of opportunism remains. Legions of divorce lawyers, shelter advocates, and organizations providing feminist education all benefit from the multi-billion dollar industry that now forms the basis of society’s approach to partner abuse.

The real tragedy of Abusegate is that victims of genuine partner abuse are still left without hope and support. They have been doubly victimized by a society that has been too willing to accept answers without first considering the problem.

Reference Links

1. Joanne Nova joannenova.com.au/global-warming/climategate-30-year-timeline

2. Dean's World deanesmay.com/2009/12/03/climategate-hitting-more-than-just-one-area-of-science

3. Erin Pizzey www.erinpizzey.com

4. Herstory of domestic violence www.mincava.umn.edu/documents/herstory/herstory.html

5. Del Martin www.mincava.umn.edu/classics/chapters/Chapter%2011%20Martin%20reflection%20by%20Martin.pdf

6. Lenore Walker www.mincava.umn.edu/classics/chapters/Chapter%2015%20Walker%20reflection%20by%20Walker.pdf

7. Ellen Pence www.mincava.umn.edu/classics/chapters/Chapter%2023%20Pence%20reflection%20by%20Pence.pdf

8. Susan Schecter www.mincava.umn.edu/classics/chapters/Chapter%2014%20Schechter%20reflection%20by%20Schechter.pdf

9. West Virginia Coalition Against Domestic Violence www.wvcadv.org

The Domestic Violence Industry’s War on Men


Barbara Kay, an outspoken Canadian voice of reason, illustrates how a single event in Montreal — the incident at École Polytechnique in 1989 when 14 female engineering students were gunned down by a sociopath — was hijacked by radical feminists as an example of all men’s violence toward all women.

Writing at Pajamas Media, she says:

Feminists everywhere in the West appropriated its emotive themes to lend greater credence to an already widespread pernicious tripartite myth: namely, that all men — the “patriarchy” — are inherently prone to violence against women, that all women are potential victims of male aggression, and that female violence against men is never unprovoked, but always an act of self-defense against overt or covert male aggression.

The unspoken corollary to these falsehoods is that violence perpetrated against males, whether by other males or by females, is deemed unworthy of official recognition or more than minimal legal redress, and that while female suffering must be acknowledged as socially intolerable, male suffering may not make a parallel moral claim.

In fact, as any number of peer-reviewed research and government statistics make clear, although women are far more likely to report domestic abuse, equal numbers of men and women experience some form of DV during their lifetimes; men and women initiate abuse in equal measure; and far from any inherent “patriarchal” instinct to control women, DV — in Judeo-Christian culture at any rate — is almost always attributable to individual psychological dysfunction (see Abusegate RADAR report).

For the overwhelming majority of boys and men who harbor no ill feelings toward women and no wish to control them — indeed, whose impulses are largely chivalric; feminists have never explained why all those “patriarchal” and “controlling” men on the Titanic died after voluntarily ceding the lifeboats to women and children — the social and cultural fallout from feminist misdirection about DV beggars any honest observer’s descriptive powers to summarize. The unjust loss of children in biased family courts under judges trained by feminist DV “experts,” lives ruined by unchallenged false allegations of abuse, men’s ineligibility for psychological and logistical services lavishly provided for women — these are just a few of the human rights abuses men routinely endure because of DV industry myths.

At the heart of the myth-propagation problem is the 1991-initiated White Ribbon Campaign , impulsively organized by leftist male Canadian politicians eager to ingratiate themselves with politically influential feminists in the hysterical wake of the tragedy. The “educational” and commemorative campaign, which rapidly spread to 57 countries, is based on scaremongering falsehoods perpetrated by feminists pulling the communications levers of the DV industry, such as the canard that one in three (in some accounts, four) women will be a victim of male aggression in her lifetime, or that spousal homicide is the leading cause of death for women (in fact, it is not even on the list of leading causes).

Credible information on DV is easily accessed, but the largely liberal media compliantly channel the disingenuous “findings” and “reports” churned out by hopelessly biased advocacy groups, whose methodology does not, to put it kindly, meet the gold standard of community-based, peer-reviewed research, or who use definitional ruses, or who collect only male-on-female violence information, or who withhold data on female violence — and I could go on.

The controversial and irrefragably anti-male Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) is coming up for renewal in Congress this year. VAWA partakes of exactly the same philosophy as the White Ribbon Campaign and doubtless owes its provenance in large part to the Montreal Massacre juggernaut.

Is there hope for a breakthrough in correcting the public’s perception on DV, the necessary precursor to a gender-neutral approach to support for DV victims by policymakers? One encouraging indicator has surfaced this month in the form of a high-profile Abusegate campaign, organized by a coalition of groups and individuals working to reform domestic violence laws. The campaign will include a concentrated lobbying effort on Capitol Hill explaining how flawed information leads to flawed public policy. It will also feature a series of radio interviews with internationally respected domestic violence expert Dr. Donald Dutton of the University of British Columbia, author of Rethinking Domestic Violence. * But Abusegate’s most tangible contribution to public exposure of the DV industry’s willful deception of policymakers and the public is encapsulated in a scrupulously referenced special report drawn up by a reliable research group, RADAR (Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting): Fifty Domestic Violence Myths .

The report deserves widespread distribution in the media, as well as in political, educational, and legal circles. It completely debunks the received wisdom on many aspects of DV. For example, it tells us that: women are as likely as men to be controlling; fewer than 1% of hospital visits by women — not 22% as often touted — are attributable to DV; the actual annual number of rapes reported by the FBI is 90,427, a tenth the number claimed by feminists; 71% of children killed by one parent were killed by their mothers; and 46 other little-known facts the DV industry would prefer you didn’t know.

This report will not have relevance for everyone: it is only for men and for those women who have, or have had, or may have in the future kind thoughts for a father or male partner or brother or son or son-in-law or male friend or, indeed, any man who has, or may someday, contribute something positive to their lives or to the lives of those they love. So as I say, this report may not be relevant to you, in which case you should not feel obligated to pass it along to anyone else. For those to whom it is relevant, you owe it to the men in your life to share it with others.

Be sure to read the whole thing!

* Dr. Dutton’s radio appearances will occur this month — should have already started.

When a man is a victim of partner abuse


The US Dept. of Justice says there about 840,00 male victims of domestic violence each year.

These are just the men we know about. If there’s anything I’ve learned in 10 years of advocacy for unserved victims of partner abuse, it’s that men don’t tell. Some men even think that being abused is the price they have to pay for living with a beautiful/wonderful/sexy women.

Nobody really knows how many men are being abused by their wives or girlfriends. The numbers of victims don’t actually matter; what matters is that men are being abused every day, and it’s no joke. Despite the popular presumption that men should somehow be able to “control” the woman in their lives, and if they can’t, then they deserve what they get, the fact is that today a man who tries to defend himself is more likely than not to end up in jail.

Several decades of awareness campaigns devoted to shedding light on the issue of battered women have resulted in laws that have tipped the scales so far that not only do male victims have little or no legal recourse, abusive women have learned to take advantage of these women-friendly laws and public policies as an aspect of their abusive behaviors.

So what can a man do, when the behavior of his significant other is either violent, abusive, or both?

Because the few objective researchers into the matter have recognized partner abuse as a multi-faceted problem, with a number of causes and origins, there are no easy answers. There are, however, a few things you can do on your own to help not only yourself, but your partner as well.

Probably the most important thing to recognize is that not all situations are alike. Not only is there no single cause for partner abuse, abusive people – male or female – do not all follow the same pattern. There is no supportable evidence for the idea that domestic violence is always a deliberate choice; neither does it always progress in severity.

First, try to look to the cause. It’s possible that some women just don’t realize what they’re doing.

Maybe they’ve been brought up in the kind of an environment where this kind of behavior is considered usual. Some people live their entire lives in an atmosphere of mutual combat on a regular basis – we’re talking about long-term marriages of many years. If that’s the kind of family she had growing up, perhaps she’d be willing to get some counseling, if she knows she’s causing harm to her husband or children.

Is there a medical problem? If a woman who has been congenial and serene suddenly becomes angry or violent, there’s a possibility that a visit to a doctor could be helpful. There are a number of conditions and diseases that can cause behavioral changes, and early recognition and treatment for these problems is important. Fortunately, women are more likely to seek medical treatment if they know that it’s necessary.

What about drugs or alcohol? Is the abusive behavior something that seems to occur when she’s under the influence? Would she be willing to get help for this problem if she knows it’s causing harm to her family?

If those kinds of solutions have not been helpful, perhaps then it is a case of a psychological problem such as borderline personality disorder.

At the extreme end of the scale is the woman who knows what she is doing, and doesn’t care. In that kind of a situation, then it’s up to you to decide whether you can live under these conditions, or you need to get out for your own safety, or the safety of your children.

There are a few things you can do to be proactive in dealing with a situation that is violent or has the potential to turn violent:

  • Move the argument: if you are in the bedroom or kitchen, try to move. The bedroom has understandable reminders of issues that could be important, and the kitchen can be a dangerous source of weapons. The living room or even the front yard is a better place for you to be.
  • If you have collections of guns or knives get them out of the house, and store them elsewhere. Women tend to go to weapons as equalizers more quickly than men. While even simple items as CD cases and wine glasses can be turned into weapons by a violent woman, it makes sense to remove the obvious dangers.
  • Get witnesses. Tell family or friends about your situation, difficult as that may be. Even one person with first-hand knowledge of your problem can make the difference between your wife or girlfriend getting help or using the issue against you. That’s why I suggested the front yard in the earlier point. A nosy neighbor can be your best friend in some cases.
  • Do not phone police unless you are in immediate danger, and your life is at risk. Law enforcement professionals nationwide have been trained to presume the man is always the perpetrator. There have been many cases where a man has been arrested, even while his wife is in the process of assaulting him and/or a police officer. Don’t add this extra risk unless you absolutely cannot avoid it.
  • Have a safety plan. Put together a bag with a change of clothes, cash, spare keys and toiletries, and keep it somewhere away from your residence. If you have children, make provisions for them as well, and also include such things as birth certificates and social security cards. You may want to start storing your important papers in a bank safety deposit box. Be sure to arrange for a place to go if you need to spend a night or more away from home.

It’s important for male victims to be aware than you cannot rely on help from traditional domestic violence programs. You are not welcome at most shelters, and some domestic violence hotlines train their employees to attempt to convince male callers they are actually at fault.

This article is only an overview of the main points of the issue. For more information here are some resources for men:

Domestic Abuse Helpline for Men and Women
Men's eNews
Menstuff
The San Diego Men’s Centers
Stop Abuse For Everyone

I also have video at my own site that provides a look into the circumstance of a few men. Entitled, Husband Beaters , it is in five parts and was part of the Secret Lives of Women series on the WE network.

When a man is a victim of partner abuse


The US Dept. of Justice says there about 840,00 male victims of domestic violence each year.

These are just the men we know about. If there’s anything I’ve learned in 10 years of advocacy for unserved victims of partner abuse, it’s that men don’t tell. Some men even think that being abused is the price they have to pay for living with a beautiful/wonderful/sexy women.

Nobody really knows how many men are being abused by their wives or girlfriends. The numbers of victims don’t actually matter; what matters is that men are being abused every day, and it’s no joke. Despite the popular presumption that men should somehow be able to “control” the woman in their lives, and if they can’t, then they deserve what they get, the fact is that today a man who tries to defend himself is more likely than not to end up in jail.

Several decades of awareness campaigns devoted to shedding light on the issue of battered women have resulted in laws that have tipped the scales so far that not only do male victims have little or no legal recourse, abusive women have learned to take advantage of these women-friendly laws and public policies as an aspect of their abusive behaviors.

So what can a man do, when the behavior of his significant other is either violent, abusive, or both?

Because the few objective researchers into the matter have recognized partner abuse as a multi-faceted problem, with a number of causes and origins, there are no easy answers. There are, however, a few things you can do on your own to help not only yourself, but your partner as well.

Probably the most important thing to recognize is that not all situations are alike. Not only is there no single cause for partner abuse, abusive people – male or female – do not all follow the same pattern. There is no supportable evidence for the idea that domestic violence is always a deliberate choice; neither does it always progress in severity.

First, try to look to the cause. It’s possible that some women just don’t realize what they’re doing.

Maybe they’ve been brought up in the kind of an environment where this kind of behavior is considered usual. Some people live their entire lives in an atmosphere of mutual combat on a regular basis – we’re talking about long-term marriages of many years. If that’s the kind of family she had growing up, perhaps she’d be willing to get some counseling, if she knows she’s causing harm to her husband or children.

Is there a medical problem? If a woman who has been congenial and serene suddenly becomes angry or violent, there’s a possibility that a visit to a doctor could be helpful. There are a number of conditions and diseases that can cause behavioral changes, and early recognition and treatment for these problems is important. Fortunately, women are more likely to seek medical treatment if they know that it’s necessary.

What about drugs or alcohol? Is the abusive behavior something that seems to occur when she’s under the influence? Would she be willing to get help for this problem if she knows it’s causing harm to her family?

If those kinds of solutions have not been helpful, perhaps then it is a case of a psychological problem such as borderline personality disorder.

At the extreme end of the scale is the woman who knows what she is doing, and doesn’t care. In that kind of a situation, then it’s up to you to decide whether you can live under these conditions, or you need to get out for your own safety, or the safety of your children.

There are a few things you can do to be proactive in dealing with a situation that is violent or has the potential to turn violent:

  • Move the argument: if you are in the bedroom or kitchen, try to move. The bedroom has understandable reminders of issues that could be important, and the kitchen can be a dangerous source of weapons. The living room or even the front yard is a better place for you to be.
  • If you have collections of guns or knives get them out of the house, and store them elsewhere. Women tend to go to weapons as equalizers more quickly than men. While even simple items as CD cases and wine glasses can be turned into weapons by a violent woman, it makes sense to remove the obvious dangers.
  • Get witnesses. Tell family or friends about your situation, difficult as that may be. Even one person with first-hand knowledge of your problem can make the difference between your wife or girlfriend getting help or using the issue against you. That’s why I suggested the front yard in the earlier point. A nosy neighbor can be your best friend in some cases.
  • Do not phone police unless you are in immediate danger, and your life is at risk. Law enforcement professionals nationwide have been trained to presume the man is always the perpetrator. There have been many cases where a man has been arrested, even while his wife is in the process of assaulting him and/or a police officer. Don’t add this extra risk unless you absolutely cannot avoid it.
  • Have a safety plan. Put together a bag with a change of clothes, cash, spare keys and toiletries, and keep it somewhere away from your residence. If you have children, make provisions for them as well, and also include such things as birth certificates and social security cards. You may want to start storing your important papers in a bank safety deposit box. Be sure to arrange for a place to go if you need to spend a night or more away from home.

It’s important for male victims to be aware than you cannot rely on help from traditional domestic violence programs. You are not welcome at most shelters, and some domestic violence hotlines train their employees to attempt to convince male callers they are actually at fault.

This article is only an overview of the main points of the issue. For more information here are some resources for men:

Domestic Abuse Helpline for Men and Women
Men's eNews
Menstuff
The San Diego Men’s Centers
Stop Abuse For Everyone

I also have video at my own site that provides a look into the circumstance of a few men. Entitled, Husband Beaters , it is in five parts and was part of the Secret Lives of Women series on the WE network.

Everybody Deserves Better


On International Women’s Day, it is time to consider the roots of the women’s movement of the 1960s. Back then, the issues were focused on equal rights for women. In 2005, most if not all, the issues have been successfully resolved, in terms of literal equality in western industrialized nations. The movement has evolved over time into something more about female supremacy rather than equality. While there are those women who will never be content with their lot in life and always imagine their perceived lack of prestige, or success, or whatever to be entirely the fault of men in general, that simply does not apply to women today.

Most women accept the challenges presented to them in their lives, work through them, and move on to enjoy the benefits provided women which may or may not have existed before. They wish to live full and balanced lives, and are free to organize the varied parts of their lives – marriage, children, and career in whatever way they choose.

Generally speaking, the radical elements who haven’t yet realized their work is done are easily dismissed, and most often ignored. Malcontents in society will always be with us. It is only when we allow these malcontents to dictate public policy, and our government to fund programs to further their extremist philosophies that society puts itself in harm’s way.

Such is the case with the issue of intimate partner abuse, most popularly recognized as domestic violence. Today’s programs are still operated by the same radical feminists, in the same ways as they were in the 1970s. The only difference in these programs is that they are now being given public funding; to the detriment of any community which supports these programs. They have ceased to be helpful, if in fact they ever were.

At the root of the problem is the fact that domestic violence is neither a political issue, nor a gender issue. To address this social issue in this fashion, from this standpoint, is a mistake which sends victims down a dangerously wrong path. All it does it set the immediate problem on hold temporarily while creating a new set of problems for the victim to confront. Offered no other choice, victims follow the direction of shelter programs, unaware the actions suggested will have ramifications that may never be resolved for years, possibly even causing permanent, irreparable, damage to themselves, and their children and families.

The only victims willingly served by existing programs are women – preferably those with no male children over the age of 12. Male abusers are eagerly placed in re-training or incarceration programs by institutions created to do just that. There are no effective screening measures in place in either case to demonstrate evidence of need; only a verbal request or accusation is ever required.

The nationwide network of women’s shelter programs actively and constantly remind the public that men are to blame for the problem, and naturally enough, refuse to aid male victims or female abusers. (While many programs claim to serve all, in an awkward attempt to address the public perception they provide assistance without regard to gender, in practice there are few equally-accessible services available for anyone other than female victims and male abusers.) This same network maintains a stranglehold on public funding for domestic violence services, and goes to great lengths to prevent agencies intending to serve those other populations from doing so.

It is time this project in the cause of feminist ideology came to an end.

Everything You Thought You Knew about Domestic Violence is Probably Wrong

There is a morass of confusing dogma surrounding the subject. It is often lumped together with other issues of stalking, sexual assault and divorce which are in fact, entirely separate issues and should not be considered in the same way, and at the same time.

However, the establishment in charge of these programs has found it expedient and profitable to allow the confusion. In fact, it could be said that misconstruction and partial truth is the hallmark of feminist marketing and activism. This has worked well for them for decades, but in these days of transparency and accountability, the abilities they may have had in the past to revise everything from history to the laws of physics are no longer so dependable.

Some misconceptions have become part of conventional wisdom. But, just because “everybody says so” doesn’t mean everybody is right. Here are some of the most widely-repeated tales:

95% of victims of domestic violence are women. This came to be due to either a misunderstanding or an outright manipulation of Dept of Justice figures. While it seems logical to shelter personnel, that is because shelters are in practice open to women only. Female victims are the only victims they see.

There is an epidemic of domestic violence. Since the actual meaning of the term is something to the effect of “a greater than usual amount of cases,” it can’t possibly apply. Nobody knows what is usual in the first place. From a marketing perspective, the word sounds good for emotional effect, but that’s all.

Domestic violence is unknown and unrecognized. We maintain a running search for articles in media and online, and even on a slow day there will be about 50 articles relating to the issue. Ironically, many of those articles contain a quote from somebody saying nobody ever talks about domestic violence. A recent Google search for the term yielded 5,810,000 results.

Battering always escalates, and the eventual conclusion is death. This untrue, unsupportable statement gives some important insight into the mindset of those running shelter programs. They do not recognize their clients as individuals, and there is no provision in shelter programs for meeting the needs of individuals. Therefore, it is easy to make blanket statements regarding this situation, despite a lack of actual evidence.

Domestic violence is a deliberate pattern of power and control. While this is true in some cases, it cannot possibly be true all the time. Again, this relates to the inability of current programs to treat victims as individuals. It also reflects on the viewpoint of feminist-run shelters that domestic violence is political in nature. In this ideology, men are the cause, and women are the hapless victims, unable to deal with their problems without outside intervention.

We can have an end to domestic violence, if only _________. This purely human problem has been with us long before it was given a name, and will be with us as long as we continue to be human. Certainly, we can have an end to the parts of it engineered by the feminists as soon as control of these programs is given to apolitical professionals with an understanding of family problems. It is unreasonable to even consider there will be a day when there is no domestic violence whatsoever, just as it is unreasonable to consider there will ever be an end to crime, greed, or any other human failing.

How Did Things Get This Way?

People in general, and Americans in particular, have a deep well of compassion and concern for other individuals. Yet, in the 20th Century there was a new reliance on the word of “experts” in dealing with personal issues, as the population became increasingly mobile and separated from the extended family situations of earlier times. The 20th Century was also a time when socialist ideals became attractive to a people faced with issues such as unemployment and alcoholism. Welfare programs, such as those established in the Great Depression of the 1930s appeared to succeed, even though Prohibition on alcohol did not.

Still, there was an acceptance of the idea that politicizing and criminalizing dysfunctional human behaviors was an appropriate means of dealing with those kinds of issues. By the 1960s, socialist activists and various groups seeking improved levels of social acceptance for specific groups of people appeared all over the country.

Among these groups were the feminists, who claimed to want “equal rights” for women. This term was, and still is defined differently, depending on who is using it. What the most radical and militant feminists considered equal rights included dominance over men, and the dissolution of marriage and traditional family structure. This would be replaced with government control, including placement of children in public childcare facilities from birth to adulthood.

By the 1970s, most of the more-realistic goals of equality for women were achieved, leaving the radical elements with few issues to confront. Here and there, shelters and services were beginning to be established to help battered women, which were prime targets for the radical feminists. These were usually small grassroots efforts run by people with little or no experience in political activism. The only thing the early shelter volunteers had in common with the radical feminists was sometimes a shared hatred of men and everything they did. This happened often enough that the feminists were given free rein in their activism. What had once been agencies providing simple aid on a volunteer basis became massive concerns, with infrastructure, staffing, and funding to match.

The well-publicized goal of these programs was “an end to domestic violence.” Advocates for these programs were constantly lobbying legislatures at all levels for favorable laws fostering divorce, and criminalization of perceived abusive behaviors by men, as well as ever-increasing levels of funding. No law, no amount of funding, was ever enough.

Any legislator, researcher or public figure of any kind who attempted to object to this level of government control of private lives, who suggested seeking solutions other than divorce or that men and women were equally responsible for the problem was labeled a misogynist, an abuser, or worse. Many careers have been ruined by shelter advocates resisting change or accountability for their programs. Some questioning these programs have even suffered threats of physical harm or specious lawsuits. This kind of behavior on the part of anti-male, anti-family factions of the radical feminist movement continues today.

In 1994, the initial Violence Against Women Act was passed, and a new social problem was recognized by Congress. “Gender violence” was claimed by advocates to be the #1 issue facing women everywhere. Despite the fact the term has no meaning on its own, the law passed, and $3.5 billion dollars in public funding was earmarked for these women-only shelter programs.

Meanwhile the general public, believing the problem was under the control of well-meaning experts, not only supported this act, but encouraged the programs to expand and the laws to become more restrictive and inequitable. Legislation suggested by shelter advocates moved farther and farther away from the core issue as time went on. Today it is almost impossible to have a discussion of either divorce or domestic violence without mentioning the other, or bringing in the blame issue.

We are no closer to finding practical solutions to the problem, for either victim or abuser, than we were when the first shelter was established in 1971 by Erin Pizzey. Her early attempts at providing equitable services were promptly eradicated by the feminist takeover of shelter services everywhere.

What Can We Do to Change Things?

First, the public needs to recognize the difference between the fictions promoted by those implementing an ideology, and the reality of the situation. Those who have been able to avoid intervention by the established domestic violence industry, and study the problem using accepted scientific methodology and objectivity have found a quite different problem than is generally claimed. Intimate partner abuse is something that can often be addressed in other ways than the overly simplistic intervention/divorce/relocation scenario provided by existing programs.

There are also different people involved. While the male abuser/female victim is part of the picture, there are also female abusers, male victims, mutual victim/abuser situations, serial victims, and a small group of those who appear to have an addiction to violence.

There is a nascent, but emerging pattern of individuals and groups seeking alternatives to the ideological approach, which could be encouraged to come forward. In some locales, human services programs have deliberately removed themselves from the national network of services in order to serve their communities without interference. Some agencies, that depend on the funding and networking opportunities provided by the national network, have an unspoken, but functioning “open door policy” that provides those limited services allowed by the network to a greater population than only the female victims mentioned earlier. Others, such as the Domestic Abuse Helpline for Men, function independently of the network, as it has repeatedly been refused admission.

While the issue is nowhere near as cut and dried as is publicized today, an opening up of inquiry, allowing honesty and objectivity to prevail will go a long way itself to provide otherwise-unknown solutions for some cases. Here and there, in isolated shelters and counseling programs, are the seeds of these new, and unidentified approaches.

Federal, state, and municipal government needs to stop funding organizations that are using public monies for ideological purposes and divert those funds to those who are operating on equitable terms, and providing practical assistance to members of their communities without regard to gender.

A serious investigation of organizations such as the Violence Against Women Office, National Coalition Against Domestic Violence, the National Domestic Violence Hotline, and the individual state DV coalitions needs to be undertaken, and criminal charges filed where necessary, if misappropriation of government funds or other wrongdoing is found. Civil litigation needs to be pursued in those cases where these agencies and coalitions have caused economic or other actionable damage to communities and individuals.

Legislators and public officials at all levels of government who have opposed the feminist-based programs and been hesitant to speak out due to fear of political repercussion should be encouraged to make their positions clear, by taking the lead in restoring their communities to the sanity of equal treatment for all.

In addition, they can withdraw and/or oppose any legislation that is related to increasing criminal penalties for domestic violence. Past laws have been proven to be of little value, and only serve to add to the burden of already overcrowded prison populations. They are only reflections of the politicization of human relationships, which is part of the feminist ideology, and has no place in addressing domestic violence from a humanitarian point of view.

Screening procedures must be developed to ensure that applicants can demonstrate a need for services of any kind. There is no screening procedure in place today, and many cases of abuse of the system itself go unrecognized. Current services have resisted any suggestion that they either screen applicants or network with other agencies to avoid duplicating efforts.

Finally, since there is no procedure in place to determine whether shelters actually aid women in becoming free of abuse in their lives, there should be some way to establish independently whether these shelters provide the community with any service at all.

Some have said to me that this idea of scrapping VAWA entirely is the wrong approach, that we should simply correct the problems and give this system credit for the good it has done. If I knew of any actual good to anyone, I would give credit where credit is due. I’ve been writing about this issue since 1999 and not once have I ever had a single positive e-mail about women’s shelter services from a recipient of same. I don’t believe they come away from these programs any better off than before.

Allowing these prejudicial, deeply biased and regressive programs to continue unchecked will only serve to add to the numbers on the welfare rolls, in the jails and under the care of government-sponsored child protective agencies.

In the United States of America, in the 21st Century, our families deserve better.

America’s War on Families


You’ve heard about the war on drugs, the war on poverty, and other wars on various problems, but are you aware of the War on Families?

Our federal, state, and local governments spend an amount equal to the entire Canadian military budget on this operation every year.

Where there used to be a family made up of a mom, a dad, and kids; there is now a single mom, working full time to support herself and her kids whether she ever wanted to or not, a dad deleted from his children’s lives like some sort of typographical error, and children who will spend the rest of their lives wondering what horrible, bad thing they did to deserve all this.

While people have been led to believe that divorce is a solution; an end to the fighting, for most divorcing families today it is only the beginning. The system we have in place today has seen to that. The tragedy here is that so much of this anguish and pain could have been avoided if only people knew the truth.

That truth is that there are people in this country who do not want families to exist. That’s because a strong family unit can face almost any difficulty, any problem and come through it. Some even come out of it stronger and more resilient than before. These strong families have no need of government programs. They won’t put up with a government official, a stranger to them and their kids, making their major life decisions for them. Families want to make their own choices of where to live, with whom, and how they will support themselves.

Call them progressives, Marxists, feminists, whatever you like, but they all have one goal: get rid of those families so they can take control.

The War on Families is far more successful than any of the other wars I mentioned earlier. That’s because the American people have been led to believe this war is about something entirely different.

This is one of those issues most people think they know about, but unfortunately what they know is a product of several decades’ worth of political maneuvering without much substance.

Since 1984, the United States government has quietly conducted an operation with only one outcome in mind: the destruction of the American family unit. Under the guise of “protecting” women from partner abuse – now called domestic violence by such laws as the federal Violence Against Women Act of 1994, and the Family Violence Prevention and Services Act – many thousands, if not millions of families have been eliminated.

With the current divorce rate at about 50%, about half of all marriages seem destined for failure. This is a very good thing for the anti-family warriors, as it means a never-ending flow of money and personnel to carry out their strategy.

Alumnae of women’s shelters emerge with no skills beyond the gamesmanship of divorce and “working the system,” so all those newly-single moms and fatherless children need endless support from government programs, from infant nutrition all the way to burial at public expense. Many go on to new abusive relationships, having had no instruction in ways to avoid future problems.

You have to go back to the early days of the Communist Party in the Soviet Union to see how this all plays out. If you Google “abolition of the family” you will find a wealth of information, from both pro-communist and anti-communist sources. Some of the material is quite recent, so you can see it is an idea that has endured over a hundred years.

The durability of the concept does not bestow it with any sense of humanity, however. It is as cold and dehumanizing as ever, ignoring the demonstrable fact that human beings have emotions and needs that can never be addressed by any economic system.

Americans in particular have resisted much of the socialist and communist ideology in the past, but this has begun to change. Over the years the anti-family warriors have become adept at cloaking their ugly intentions in a soft fabric of lies that have fooled many otherwise-intelligent people. They use words like “protection and “equality,” while all the time what they are really looking for is submission.

This is the reason why there have never been any changes to women’s shelter programs in 50 years; it is why the lion’s share of that funding we provide through our tax dollars goes not to helping women in distress but to anti-family “education” efforts, to ensure millions of law enforcement and court personnel see partner abuse as a political and gender issue.

It is why the only solution ever provided by these federally-mandated programs is now and has always been divorce, and why they will never give more than lip service to suggestions of reform or improvement.

These programs have nothing whatsoever to do with partner abuse. They are about eradicating the very concept of the family from the public consciousness. It is but a single skirmish in the larger current crusade for our hearts and minds by the progressive/socialist/communist movement, but we can win this one.

How?

That’s the easy part. Just tell the truth.

Both VAWA and FVSPA are up for reauthorization this year, and we can end the War on Families by pointing out the reality of those laws to our legislators, as well as our state and local officials. There is not a state, city, or county in this country that is not directly affected by these laws.

Tell them they are taking our tax dollars to use against us and our families, and you can’t continue to support their other efforts if they let our families be destroyed. These programs do not just affect victims of domestic violence, they affect everybody, because that’s what they are intended to do. These programs have been so effective in their actual purpose that right now almost everyone knows somebody who has been through a bad divorce, accused of domestic violence, or a victim of domestic violence, real or imagined.

Nearly all that trouble for their constituency could have been avoided if they’d only known what the proponents of these programs were up to from the beginning. After all, if you call the fire department when your house is on fire, they don’t come with a backhoe and tear down the house, then walk away while the remains are still in flames, do they? Of course not.

But that’s exactly what these programs do. And that’s all they do.

In these difficult economic times, we do not have the luxury of spending scarce funding on programs that do not function to the immediate benefit of the taxpayer. Allowing damaging programs to exist is foolhardy.

The evidence is clear, on every website and every handout provided by these programs. It is all talk and very little action, and there is still no proof that anyone has actually been helped with the specific issue of partner abuse. After all this time, the successes should be obvious, but there are none.

Can we really continue to fund programs that only provide negative outcomes?

For more detail, including analysis, facts, and figures, visit the Stop Abusive and Violent Environments website and read the most recent report:

“Assaulting our Rights: How Domestic Violence Laws Curtail our Fundamental Freedoms.”

You can be part of an historic Congressional hearing


It’s time to STOP dehumanizing, ineffective VAWA programs!

Since 1994, programs and policies created by the Violence Against Women Act have destroyed countless families and left victims of domestic violence with no practical help, and no possibility of future advances in the field.

VAWA programs are unique among all helping programs as they have not changed in any way in 50 years, yet society continues to evolve.

Because of VAWA, victims of domestic violence and partner abuse literally have nowhere to turn in an emergency, and allowing these programs to continue will ensure they never will.

The VAWA concept of partner abuse is only about advancing a political agenda and not at all about seeking real-world solutions for the families and people affected.

All of this has come at a cost of billions of dollars per year, with no demonstrable return on this investment. It is time to STOP funding a Marxist political agenda and START helping taxpayers get the help they are paying for.

The next VAWA is currently being drafted by the National Task Force to End Sexual and Domestic Violence in preparation for introduction and passage in 2011.

For the first time since its inception, Congress is allowing opposing viewpoints on this issue to be aired at the first hearing.

“The Increased Importance of the Violence Against Women Act in a Time of Economic Crisis”

The hearing was Wednesday, May 5, 2010 at 10:00 a.m. in Room 226 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building.

Scheduled to speak is Richard Gelles, PhD. who is a Dean at the School of Social Policy & Practice at the University of Pennsylvania. He is a leading researcher in the filed of partner abuse from a non-political perspective. His take on the most popular and enduring myths surrounding the issue is here.

You can be part of this landmark event!

Even though you can’t be there in person, you CAN submit testimony to the Committee. It’s simple…just write a concise, polite letter about your experiences with VAWA, and email to Senators Leahy (Democrat of Vermont) and Sessions (Republican of Alabama). It is preferable that your letter not be longer than one page.

Just fill in the missing places in the draft letter below, and email it to:

Anya McMurray (Leahy’s staffer): Anya_McMurray-at-judiciary-dem.senate.gov

Bradley Hayes (Sessions’ staffer): Bradley_Hayes-at-judiciary-rep.senate.gov

Send a copy of the letter to: news-at-saveservices.org . The deadline to receive your letter is this coming Tuesday, May 11!

DRAFT LETTER

RE: Violence Against Women Act

Honorable Patrick Leahy
Honorable Jeff Sessions
Senate Judiciary Committee

Dear Senators Leahy and Sessions:

I am writing regarding the May 5, 2010 Judiciary Committee hearing on the Violence Against Women Act.

[POLITELY, FACTUALLY, AND CONCISELY DESCRIBE YOUR EXPERIENCES AND RECOMMENDATIONS HOW TO REFORM VAWA.]

Sincerely,

[YOUR NAME, ADDRESS, AND TELEPHONE NUMBER]

Abuse arrest policies push gender bias: report


Biased domestic violence arrest policies are violating the civil rights of innocent Americans and allowing abusers to go free, according to a report released today. The report, “Predominant Aggressor Policies: Leaving the Abuser Unaccountable?” charges such policies violate 14th Amendment equal protection guarantees and worsen the cycle of violence.

The analysis is published by SAVE – Stop Abusive and Violent Environments, and is available online: www.saveservices.org/downloads/Predominant-Aggressor-Policies

The report analyzes domestic violence policies in 23 states designed to guide law enforcement personnel in arrest decisions. The document calls on states with predominant aggressor laws to repeal such policies.

The predominant aggressor report follows SAVE’s recent release of “Assaulting our Rights: How Domestic Violence Laws Curtail Our Fundamental Freedoms,” which concludes abuse laws result in the curtailment of civil liberties of over 2 million Americans each year.

Research shows men and women are equally likely to instigate acts of partner aggression: www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm . But in Roanoke, Va., police officers are instructed to assess the “Height/weight of parties,” a criterion that openly biases the officer to arrest the male.

In Maine, law enforcement personnel are expected to assess the “Power and control dynamics.” Law enforcement expert Richard Davis of Plymouth College, Mass. charges these criteria represent “more a polemic ideological rant than a domestic violence intervention program.”

In several states, police are told to evaluate “Risk or potential of future injury.” But experts question the scientific basis of such recommendations.

“Predominant aggressor laws pressure police officers to arrest the man regardless of who called the police or what person instigated the abuse,” according to SAVE spokesman Carl Starling. “Females that provoke violent acts are not held accountable for their abusive behavior, while innocent men end up with an arrest record for life.”

Last September, San Diego Chargers linebacker Shawne Merriman was arrested on charges of domestic violence, following an accusation by an inebriated woman. Lacking any evidence of harm, the D.A. dropped the charges. Columnist Dean Tong later wrote, “Shawne Merriman was falsely accused of domestic abuse charges, but may always carry a scarlet letter emblazoned upon his name.”

Bleeding out alone due to political correctness


Barbara Kay: First, kill the husband. Second, claim sympathy as a widow from the June 14, 2010 Canada’s National Post

Most of you have probably already read the article, but I was actually present in the courtroom in a similar case, here in Yuma a few years ago.

I’d volunteered to show up in place of the family of the late Bill Kirkham, who was beaten with a lamp and left to bleed out as his live-in, Margo, walked her dogs and chatted with friends on the phone.

He was found by his AA sponsor the next morning.

By the time the Yuma court got around to sentencing his murderer, Bill’s family was fatigued in their very souls and like so many others, battered by the system. They’d been treated by local LEOs as family of an abuser from the get-go, which is where I came in.

My job was just to observe and report, while giving these good people a bit of peace, because they had no idea what that day would bring.

So I went, and was truly astonished to hear this violent, remorseless woman attempt some kind of throwing herself on the mercy of the court thing — because she was a widow!!!

Even the judge did a double take.

She got three years, and our local paper located her kids in Florida, who was glad that judge put their mother away. The article of the time didn’t elaborate, but can you even imagine how abusive she must’ve been to her own children?

It’s really not forward-looking or helpful in any way to continue to pretend that only men abuse, only woman are victims.

It only enriches the hatemongers who claim they have the ultimate solution for domestic violence — to the tune of multiple billions of dollars each year.

Meanwhile, men like Bill Kirkham are left alone to bleed out, and no one will help them.

Would you click 4X to help victims of domestic violence?


We need your help! Our agency has been entered into the Chase Community Giving challenge…Just 4 clicks from you and Domestic Abuse Helpline for Men and Women (DAHMW) has a chance at 20K for victim’s services. Time is of the essence as there are only have 11 days left to this challenge. It takes just 4 clicks for you to participate. The top 200 organizations that bring in the most votes win so why can’t Domestic Abuse Helpline for Men and Women (DAHMW) be one of the lucky winners of 20K? With all of you participating we can not lose!

DAHMW needs each one of you to vote and then ask your friends to do the same. Right now with just 58 votes we rank at 822… we can move up the ranks quickly with your help. Help DAHMW get some money for victim’s services…click on the green banner on our page at the Chase Community Giving site and vote today…

Your 4 clicks start here:

Hines and Douglas publish on men’s experiences with partner abuse


Denise Hines and Emily Douglas have published the first article from their project on male victims of partner abuse.

Entitled, A Closer Look at Men Who Sustain Intimate Terrorism by Women it appears in Partner Abuse, Volume 1, Number 3 and can also be accessed thru the Men’s Experiences with Partner Aggression Project website

Abstract:

Over thirty years of research has established that both men and women are capable of sustaining intimate partner violence (IPV) by their opposite-sex partners, yet little research has examined men’s experiences in such relationships. Some experts in the field have forwarded assumptions about men who sustain IPV – for example, that the abuse they experience is trivial or humorous and of no consequence, and that if their abuse was severe enough they have the financial and psychological resources to easily leave the relationship – but these assumptions are not based on any empirical studies. The present study is an in depth, descriptive examination of 302 men who sustained severe IPV from their female partners within the previous year and sought help. We present information on their demographics, overall mental health, and the types and frequency of various forms of physical and psychological IPV they sustained. We also provide both quantitative and qualitative information about their last physical argument and their reasons for staying in the relationship. It is concluded that, contrary to many assumptions about these men, the

IPV they sustain is quite severe and both mentally and physically damaging; their most frequent response to their partner’s IPV is to get away from her; and they are often blocked in their efforts to leave, sometimes physically, but more often because of strong psychological and emotional ties to their partners and especially their children. These results are discussed in terms of their implications for policy and practice.

Also of interest in the same issue of Partner Abuse are

Explaining Gender Differences in Police Arresting and Charging Behavior in Cases of Spousal Violence by Paul Millar and Grant Brown

and

Thirty Years of Denying the Evidence on Gender Symmetry in Partner Violence: Implications for Prevention and Treatment by Murray A. Straus

You can give underserved victims of domestic violence a lifeline


Getting people to vote for a community effort is every bit as hard as getting people to contribute cash. Maybe even harder, because so many figure the internet is so big, there are so many people – surely plenty of other people will take the time, and my single vote won’t mean much.

That’s really not true, because in this case especially, we have a small group to begin with. People just don’t realize the extent of the need for this project. Neither do they realize how much one person can do to help it along.

Without going into a complex explanation of how things like blogs, Twitter and Facebook work, what I will say is this: each person voting has the potential to influence hundreds, or even thousands of others. That’s because the Pepsi Challenge has provided several ways for each voter to also engage their blog’s readers, their FB friends, their Twitter followers, who in turn have their own networks of different people.

In other words, you don’t have to know a lot of people online, because you have friends who do.

So, you already know the importance of your help in this, but what is this project, anyway?

Jan Brown says it better than I ever could:

“Studies show that men who are in relationships with abusive partners do not see themselves as victims of domestic violence . Domestic violence has been so narrowly defined in our society that most people, including abused men, believe that it begins and ends with men beating their intimate female partners.

Many men who suffer physical, emotional, psychological, financial, and/or sexual abuse at the hands of their intimate partners do not realize that this, too is domestic violence . They will usually write it off as their partner having a bad day or feel that they must have done something to deserve the abuse.

Further, agencies that offer a myriad of supportive services and shelter to victims of domestic violence do little to encourage abused men to come forward and seek help. Few offer outreach to male victims.

The Domestic Abuse Helpline for Men and Women is hoping to change that with the first national public awareness campaign on male victims of domestic violence. We have entered the Pepsi Refresh Project. We are seeking a $250,000 award from Pepsi for our project idea to bring public awareness to male victims of domestic violence. This funding will enable us to send outreach materials (brochures, posters, booklets and placards) about male victims to 7,500 agencies that work with victims of domestic violence across the country.

In order to obtain this $250,000 award we need your help. The public determines, through voting on their favorite project ideas at the Pepsi site, who wins. Please click on this link to vote for our project idea!

Voting goes from Aug.1st to Aug. 31st. Remember to vote DAILY and ask your friends and family members to do the same. Thank you for helping us to bring awareness and services to victims and their families.

Because abused men need awareness and services too.

We already know that this information is wanted and needed. A good percentage of calls to the Helpline come from those very agencies Jan mentions, whose main experience has been working with women. They want to know what they can do for men.

Because of the antiquated laws and policies in place, DAHMW does not get any of the billions of dollars that flow to domestic violence programs each year. They must rely on private donations and campaigns such as Pepsi Challenge in hopes of keeping services for men available.

If this effort succeeds, it has the potential to cause a sea change in the way the public at large sees domestic violence, and thousands of families nationwide could begin to heal.

©2010, Trudy W. Schuett

*    *    *



Contact Us | Disclaimer | Privacy Statement
Menstuff® Directory
Menstuff® is a registered trademark of Gordon Clay
©1996-2017, Gordon Clay