September 30, 2006 by Walter Schneider.

“In Los Angeles County, about 75 percent of HIV cases are among men who have had sex with other men. But nationwide, gay and bisexual men account for about half of recent HIV transmission, according to the national Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta.” (Associated Press)

That is amazing. Gay and bisexual men comprise about 2 percent of the population and account for half of all HIV cases!

Related to the article identified in the preceding link:

CDC HIV/AIDS Fact Sheet:

In the United States, HIV infection and AIDS have had a tremendous effect on men who have sex with men (MSM). MSM accounted for 70% of all estimated HIV infections among male adults and adolescents in 2004 (based on data from 35 areas with long-term, confidential name-based HIV reporting*), even though only about 5% to 7% of male adults and adolescents in the United States identify themselves as MSM [1,2]…..

STATISTICS
HIV/AIDS in 2004

In the 35 areas with long-term, confidential name-based HIV reporting, an estimated 19,575 MSM (18,203 MSM and 1,372 MSM who inject drugs) received a diagnosis of HIV/AIDS, accounting for 70% of all male adults and adolescents and 51% of all people receiving an HIV/AIDS diagnosis that year [1].

The number of HIV/AIDS diagnoses among MSM increased 8% from 2003 through 2004. It is not known whether this increase is due to an increase in the testing of persons with risk factors or due to an increase in cases of HIV infection….

RISK Factors AND BARRIERS TO PREVENTION
Sexual Risk Factors

Sexual risk factors account for most HIV infections in MSM. These factors include unprotected sex and sexually transmitted diseases (STDs)….

Since the beginning of the epidemic, an estimated 295,520 MSM (256,053 MSM and 39,467 MSM who inject drugs) with AIDS had died, accounting for 67% of all male adults and adolescents and 56% of all people with AIDS who died [1]….

(Full Story)

Sexually transmitted diseases are a risk factor in contracting an HIV infection? At first glance that seems to be an oxymoron, but it is logical. Lesions caused by any STD make it that much more likely for men who have them and have sex with other men to contract an HIV infection.

Posted in Gay issues | Print | No Comments »

September 29, 2006 by Walter Schneider.

Thanks to the US Family Research Council, who identified two important articles:

1. Marriage gap could sway elections

Updated 9/27/2006 9:19 AM ET

By Dennis Cauchon, USA TODAY

The wedding band could be crucial in this fall’s congressional elections, according to a USA TODAY analysis of 2005 Census data.

House districts held by Republicans are full of married people. Democratic districts are stacked with people who have never married. This “marriage gap” could play a role in the Nov. 7 congressional elections. Democrats need a net gain of 15 seats to take control of the House of Representatives.

FERTILITY GAP: Political divide explained

Twenty-seven of the 38 Republican-held districts with seats considered vulnerable by independent political analysts have fewer married people than found in the average GOP district. The USA TODAY analysis also shows that:

• Republicans control 49 of the 50 districts with the highest rates of married people.

•Democrats represent all 50 districts that have the highest rates of adults who have never married.

The political tug-of-war is between people who are married and those who have never been….

(Full Story)

2. ‘Fertility gap’ helps explain political divide

   Updated 9/27/2006 7:36 AM ET

   By Dennis Cauchon, USA TODAY

   House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi, a Catholic mother of five from San Francisco, has fewer children in her district than any other member of Congress: 87,727.

   Rep. Chris Cannon, R-Utah, a Mormon father of eight, represents the most children: 278,398.

   These two extremes reflect a stark demographic divide between the congressional districts controlled by the major political parties.

   Republican House members overwhelmingly come from districts that have high percentages of married people and lots of children, according to a USA TODAY analysis of 2005 Census Bureau data released last month.

   MARRIAGE GAP: Elections could sway on status

   GOP Congress members represent 39.2 million children younger than 18, about 7 million more than Democrats. Republicans average 7,000 more children per district.

   Many Democrats represent areas that have many single people and relatively few children. Democratic districts that have large numbers of children tend to be predominantly Hispanic or, to a lesser extent, African-American.

   This “fertility gap” is crucial to understanding the differences between liberals and conservatives, says Arthur Brooks, a professor of public administration at Syracuse University. These childbearing patterns shape divisions over issues such as welfare, education and child tax credits, he says….

   (Full Story)

It is simple, isn’t it? Both, conservatives and liberals, do everything “in the best interest of the child”.

• True conservatives promote actions that will strengthen the family, so that children can thrive emotionally, spiritually, physically and socially. That course of action is in the best interest of children and gave us a thriving civilization.
• True liberals promote actions that will further sexual freedom and weaken the family, so that children become emotionally, spiritually, physically and socially impoverished, thus providing a never-ending need to do more socially destructive things “in the best interest of the children.”

“Sexual freedom” is newspeak. Marx and Engels promoted it as “free love“, but the price for “free love” is high: the destruction of society.

Which way things will evolve depends on what we, the parents, think is best for us: children within or without families, fathers within or without families, and mothers within or without the comfort and security of the family.

It’s a no-brainer and as old as the hills.

The “family” in all ages and in all corners of the globe can be defined as a man and a woman bonded together through a socially approved covenant of marriage to regulate sexuality, to bear, raise, and protect children, to provide mutual care and protection, to create a small home economy, and to maintain continuity between the generations, those going before and those coming after. It is out of the reciprocal, naturally recreated relations of the family that the broader communities—such as tribes, villages, peoples, and nations—grow.

— Dale O’Leary, The Gender Agenda, p. 24,
original source: Allan Carlson,
What’s Wrong With the United Nations Definition of ‘Family’?
in The Family in America (August 1994), p. 3

Posted in Family, The New World Order | Print | 1 Comment »

September 27, 2006 by Walter Schneider.

OTTAWA — Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s government tightened federal purse strings by $2-billion yesterday — slashing spending hated by many Conservatives, such as medicinal marijuana research — even as Ottawa disclosed that its coffers are bulging with another near-record budget surplus….(Full Story)

__________________
The article also states:

Spending on the chopping block includes funding for… the Court Challenges Program, which funded litigation in the name of equal rights — an initiative that partisan Conservatives have always derided.

“I just don’t think it made sense for the government to subsidize lawyers to challenge the government’s own laws in court,” Treasury Board president John Baird said.

Right! The Court Challenges Program was the vehicle used by feminists such as those in women’s law societies (Odd, isn’t it, that there were never any men’s law societies?) to do just about all of the social engineering that changed Canada in the course of a few decades to a parody of its justifiably-proud former self.

Interestingly, the budget cuts also include,

$5-million: Administrative reductions to Status of Women Canada

That cut puts icing on the cake, but I look forward to having all funding for Status of Women Canada cut, at least until we see an equally funded government department called Status of Men Canada being set up. Still, let’s be careful of what we ask for. It is quite likely that we’ll get more of it than we wish to have.

A society that puts equality—in the sense of equality of outcome—ahead of freedom will end up with neither equality nor freedom. The use of force to achieve equality will destroy freedom, and the force, introduced for good purposes, will end up in the hands of people who use it to promote their own interests.

Milton and Rose Friedman
in Free to Choose: A Personal Statement
(Milton Friedman won the 1976 Nobel Prize for Economics)

Posted in Feminism, The New World Order | Print | 1 Comment »

September 26, 2006 by Walter Schneider.

By Nancy Levant
September 26, 2006
NewsWithViews.com

I am sick to death and horrified by dictatorship in the United States of America. It has infiltrated every single social system in this nation. Education, religion, transportation, business/goods and services, science/technology/communications, economics, human health, politics – you name it - dictatorship is alive on the homeland and crushing the people.

Every one of these systems is eliminating our voices, our opinions, our choices, and our physical ability to thrive and succeed. And to add unconscionable insult to injury, gender control is in full swing. Men are losing their rights to work, to react, to opinion, to Constitutional duty, to bear arms, to fatherhood, and to control what money and resources they have….(Full Story)

It is obvious.  Feminism does not speak for all women.  It is safe to say that feminism speaks only for a minority of women, for those who make a living off the social devastation that feminism brought into the world.  The USA is not the only country affected by feminism.  Although it is presently one of the most-severely affected ones, many other developed nations and increasingly so the developing and under-developed nations are becoming affected.
For more information on that and how it is made to work towards the creation of the New World Order refer to the links in the Table of Contents for Feminism, at Fathers for Life.

Posted in Feminism, The New World Order | Print | 2 Comments »

September 26, 2006 by Walter Schneider.

RedOrbit.com

Posted on: Sunday, 24 September 2006, 03:00 CDT

By KEN MURRAY

A STUDY of patients attending family doctors has found that 52 per cent of men and 43 per cent of women have experienced domestic violence.

The research, carried out by Trinity College Dublin and published in the European Journal of General Practice, reflects the findings of all other two-sex studies carried out in Ireland….
(Full Story)
Original Source: Sunday Mirror; London

__________________

Of course, we all knew that all along, and it was one of the primary motivating factors for setting up the website of Fathers for Life. However, if you didn’t know that and wish to find more information, with references to numerous studies - some of which date back decades, then check the index page for Family Violence at Fathers for Life.

Many will ask how that can be, given that we spend so much on combatting violence against women. Well, that is a complicated story that has been addressed in this collection of articles, “How did the Popular Views on Domestic Violence come about?“.

Most of all it is the outcome of a sustained, decades-long propaganda campaign against the largest visible minority in the world: Men. It was easy to launch and became a rout, all because propaganda no longer is an art, as it was during and before the second world war, but it is now an applied science.

The principle for success of propaganda is simple and very effective:

The function of propaganda does not lie in the scientific training of the individual, but in calling the masses’ attention to certain facts, processes, necessities, etc., whose significance is thus for the first time placed within their field of vision. …

All propaganda must be popular and its intellectual level must be adjusted to the most limited intelligence among those it is addressed to. Consequently, the greater the mass it is intended to reach, the lower its purely intellectual level will have to be. But if, as in propaganda for sticking out a war, the aim is to influence a whole people, we must avoid excessive intellectual demands on our public, and too much caution cannot be extended in this direction. …

The receptivity of the great masses is very limited, their intelligence is small, but their power of forgetting is enormous. In consequence of these facts, all effective propaganda must be limited to a very few points and must harp on these in slogans until the last member of the public understands what you want him to understand by your slogan….

The function of propaganda is, for example, not to weigh and ponder the rights of different people, but exclusively to emphasize the one right which it has set out to argue for. Its task is not to make an objective study of the truth, in so far as it favors the enemy, and then set it before the masses with academic fairness; its task is to serve our own right, always and unflinchingly.

—Hitler, Mein Kampf, Chapter VI

Let’s hope that we all learn from that and that we always keep it in mind. To make the point clear, I will paraphrase it here:

The aim of propaganda is not to make an objective study of the truth, in so far as that favors the enemy (men that is), and then set it before the masses with academic fairness; its task is to serve our own right (the interests of the radical feminists), always and unflinchingly.

Josef Goebbels, the Minister of Education (a.k.a. Minister of Propaganda) in the Nazi regime paraphrased Hitler by stating:

The rank and file is usually much more primitive than we imagine. Propaganda must therefore always be essentially simple and repetitious. The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly… it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over.

And the fundamental point of the redfems’ propaganda is: Women are good and men are bad. That is all it took. That is all it takes. Just watch TV, you’ll see it day-in, day-out, hour after hour, in the programs, in commercials and in public service anouncements, without end: “Women good! Men bad!” without flinching and over and over.

It works, doesn’t it? Why knock it, right? Who cares about the truth as long as money can be made?!

Posted in Propaganda Exposed, Women's Violence | Print | 4 Comments »

September 26, 2006 by Walter Schneider.

Angry Harry has officially designated September as, …

Abuse Awareness Month

“Woman” = Victim - an up-to-date summary of the BBC news.

“Man” = Perpetrator - an up-to-date summary of the BBC news.

Notice also that while it is true that men are many times more often the victims of violence, miscarriages of justice, homelessness, suicide, and industrial or military accidents - and, in fact, the majority of victims in almost any area one chooses to investigate - and also more prone to most diseases - the BBC still continues to spread the false impression that the majority of ’sufferers’ are women!

Indeed, the notion that “women are victims” seems to be the defining feature of women as far as the BBC is concerned.

And, clearly, the defining feature of a ‘man’ is that he is a ‘perpetrator’ of some kind.

Furthermore, we should remember that this organisation attracts a huge audience from around the world. And its fundamental message to the world is that “women are victims” and “men are perpetrators”.

And yet it is men, mostly, who have created and maintained just about everything that has brought about civilisation and protection from the harsh realities of Nature. Indeed, apart from the production of offspring - which every female mammal can do - women have contributed very little indeed in comparison to their men.

But, according to the BBC, the defining feature of a ‘man’ is that he is a ‘perpetrator’….

(Full story)

__________________

Angry Harry states that, “…men are many times more often the victims of violence, miscarriages of justice, homelessness, suicide, and industrial or military accidents - and, in fact, the majority of victims in almost any area one chooses to investigate - and also more prone to most diseases….”

Yes, that is true.  You don’t believe it?  Well, check the following:

• Causes of Death, Canada (1992), by sex
• Death by Numbers — Some mostly Canadian statistics.  19 out of every 20 job-related fatalities are men.
• Differences in the life expectancies of the sexes — in various countries in the world
• Women: Victims of Men’s Shorter Life Span
• When one cancer is more equal than another
• Emergency Department Injury Surveillance Report (South Fraser Health Region, B.C. Canada)
• Fatal Job Injuries (USA) by sex; 1992 - 2001
• NIH is Neglecting Heart Disease in Men
• Suicide
• U.S. Cancer Deaths
• U.S. Deaths from Heart- and Cardiovascular Diseases
• World Health Organization and the UN pursue discriminatory and sexist health programs

Whether you are a man, or whether you are a woman who respects or loves men, you can and should help to change all of that for the better.  The first step on the road to recovery is to stop listening to feminist propaganda (a.k.a. femprop).

Posted in Feminism, Propaganda Exposed | Print | No Comments »

September 22, 2006 by Walter Schneider.

By Ronald K. Henry
Family Law Quarterly of the American Bar Association, vol. 40, no. 1, Spring 2006

From the article:

If paternity fraud were a “one in a million event,” we might shrug and say that the random strike of paternity fraud is no worse than the random strike of lightning. The reality is that the lowest estimates of the number of paternity fraud victims [in the USA] are in the tens of thousands, and I believe that the number may be in excess of one million. The scandal is that the child support enforcement bureaucracy has consciously chosen to make no attempt to quantify the problem.

Ronald K. Henry

The full story, thanks to the Equal Justice Foundation, is accessible here.

Posted in Paternity Fraud | Print | No Comments »

September 21, 2006 by Walter Schneider.

Paternity fraud (falsely alleging that a given man fathered a specific child and thereby using that child as a source of income) is rampant.

More than 300,000 DNA tests are performed annually by the American Association of Blood Banks. The tests prove that 30% of the alleged fathers are not the biological fathers of children they are alleged to have caused to be conceived. However, feminist jurisprudence ensures that the falsely alleged fathers pay almost without fail for children that are not theirs.

The Association of American Blood Banks found that in one year, out of more than 300,000 DNA tests for paternity, the men who were fingered as the fathers were not the biological fathers in about 30 percent of the cases. Doesn’t it make you wonder what the percentages will be if DNA testing for paternity is mandatory at the birth of every child?

The Association of American Blood Banks reports that for 310,490 DNA tests made for paternity in 2001, “of the cases reported 90,227 were reported as exclusions or a rate of 29.06% exclusions [i.e.: paternity was proven to be falsely alleged].” (Source: Annual Report Summary for Testing in 2001, prepared by the Parentage Testing Program Unit, October 2002, Association of American Blood Banks, Table 2 — PDF file, 129kB) [The data from the AABB also show an annual increase in the proportion of falsely alleged paternity of about one percentage point each year. Does that mean that increasingly women lie more often or cheat more often, or both? –WHS]

Posted in Propaganda Exposed, Paternity Fraud | Print | No Comments »

September 15, 2006 by Walter Schneider.

An instance of feminist anti-male bias in reporting by the media

The newspaper coverage that this story deserves barely exists, even though the article in question states:

Canadian Press

Sept. 12, 2006 07:37 PM MONTREAL - Sentencing arguments will begin in November for a woman who followed in the footsteps of Lorena Bobbitt, the Virginia woman who gained infamy in 1993 for slicing off her husband’s penis.

Andree Rene’s weapon of choice was fondue fuel. ….

It seems very doubtful that Andree Rene will gain infamy to the same extent that Lorena Bobbitt did.

She is out on bail.

More than five years after she committed her crime, and a year after having been found guilty of aggravated assault (why was she not charged with attempted murder?) she is still waiting to be sentenced.

She is in essence free and most likely will remain free even if sentenced.

Most of all, given the little bit of news coverage the case got, Andree Rene will most certainly not gain the extent of infamy reached by Lorena Bobbitt.  We are all lucky to even have heard of the case and will quite likely be even luckier to hear anything else about it.

That is censorship, feminist censorship!

Full Story

Posted in Women's Violence | Print | No Comments »