November 27, 2006 by Walter Schneider.

A Nov. 26, 2006 [U.K.] Daily Mail article doesn’t exactly address the question, but it identifies that far more teachers than is good for anyone lack important and fundamental qualifications.

In a test given to more than 2,000 workers from key professions,

• Two-thirds of teachers made a basic apostrophe mistake;
• Eight per cent even muddled the use of I and me;
• In the multiple choice question, “I implied/inferred/ensued from his art collection that he was extremely wealthy”, seven per cent wrongly picked “implied” while a similar proportion believed the answer was “ensued”; eleven per cent thought it was “none of the above” while seven per cent passed on the question altogether;
• Some eight per cent failed to give the correct answer to a question requiring respondents to choose between “I” and “me”.
• One in five still has problems with spelling, punctuation and simple maths after spending at least 16 years in education.

The article concludes by stating:

A spokesman for the National Union of Teachers pointed out that teachers were far from being bottom of the class in the online test, adding: “It would be nice to eliminate the problem completely but teachers are human beings and subject to error.” (Full Story)

That philosophy turned teachers with the responsibility and ability to teach into individuals who no longer can teach but have the right to hold a teaching job.

To err is human, but to be fully human one must be willing to accept duties and responsibilities, not merely clamour for the right to be employed in a job whose demands exceed one’s capabilities. To be fully human, one must accept responsibility for the consequences of one’s errors.

I wonder how many of the functionaries of the National Union of Teachers would be willing to undergo surgery by a surgeon who has the reputation of saying “oops” too often, and who has been taken to task for botching appendectomies and amputations. If they lost their leg through medical error, I doubt it that any of the functionaries so easily ready to grant their teachers the right to err would say of a surgeon who botched their surgery, “He is a human being and entitled to commit errors.”

Teachers should no sooner be permitted to commit errors than surgeons or any professionals are.

By the way, even though one should hope that teachers will be held to higher standards than those the National Union of Teachers worked for so long to lower them to, the last paragraph in the Daily Mail article would have been more grammatically and more logically correct if it were to end like this: “…teachers are human beings and entitled to commit errors.”

After all, patients are being subjected to errors that their doctors commit, and students are being subjected to the errors that their teachers commit. Let’s hope that teachers, medical doctors, air plane pilots, engineers, and other critical professions like them, will not be permitted to commit errors at the high rate teachers are presently expected to commit them. I for one am merely a human being and object to being subjected to errors committed by others, errors that can and too often end lives and maim or injure.
_______________________

Educating Our Children for the Global Gynarchia

Fathers for Life contains more than 40 web pages or articles that contain the phrase “education system” and the word “children” in the text body. Here are direct links to some of those articles:

• Der Struwwelpeter (Slovenly Peter); Translated by Mark Twain
• Men wanted
• Poison in academe: How forced growth in mid-century produced brain-rot
• Reasons for Home Schooling
• Sex Education
• The dumbing-down of the curriculum — There is money in that, your money!
• The Fix That’s Destroying Education In America (and elsewhere)
• The Happy Days Ahead — Index, Foreword and Introduction

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

November 25, 2006 by Walter Schneider.

By David R. Usher

Hot off the presses: On Wednesday, the United Nations decided to “note”, but not to “acknowledge” the dangerous Secretary-General’s report on Violence Against Women assembled under the corrupt administration of Kofi Annan. This means that the report will probably not be acted upon.

It appears this took place because of tremendous pressure placed on the United Nations by RADAR < http://www.mediaradar.org/> and its hundreds of affiliates and co-signatories.

This is a major gain for reformers working diligently to replace senselessly-destructive feminist social frameworks with truly beneficial pro-family solutions. It is also a step forward in achieving a major goal: ending terrorism by world feminists. Radical feminism has been a focal point of the bitter major cultural disagreement between Muslims and the West in recent years.

America must now adopt moderate approaches to gender with respect to social power, law, divorce, and family policy if it wishes to reduce stark cultural tensions that have culminated in radical Muslim attacks on the West. Feminist policies must be ended. Marriage must be restored as the social norm, for this is the only arrangement assuring equal sociall rights and power sharing between men and women.

This event now points directly to the outrageousness of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), which was strongly supported by past Democrat and Republican-dominated congresses and presidents.

America is now officially out of step with the world. The new Congress must now substantially revise VAWA. Given the fact there is little worth keeping in VAWA, it would be wiser to redact VAWA entirely and replace it with useful policies recognizing the true etiology of domestic conflict and targeted towards providing preventive and interventive treatment for the benefit of spouses who request assistance dealing with an abusive partner.
____________________
David R. Usher is Senior Policy Analyst for the True Equality Network, and President of the American Coalition for Fathers and Children, Missouri Coalition

Posted in Feminist Jurisprudence, Feminism, Propaganda Exposed, The New World Order, Women's Violence | Print | No Comments »

November 20, 2006 by Walter Schneider.

This morning I did what I do every once in a while, I checked a few of the websites that link to Fathers for Life. There are too many of those links to mention them all or even to comment about those that I checked this morning, but I will mention two. One was a Dutch-language article at Wikipedia on the European Human Rights Court; in the section on Critiques of the Human Rights Court that article showed a link to http://fathersforlife.org/cps/Pelling_main.htm. Another web page with a link to Fathers for Life site was the one at http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/7/17/122412/664 You can find the link there by searching for the following entry:

#aimee… (2+ / 0-)

Recommended by:
rawls, aimeeinkc

here’s an article about recent attempts to regulate or be anti- IVF….

if you look in archived stuff, you may be able to find LOTS of articles showing “pro-life” groups against IVF….I can’t really find anything at the moment, but there’s an article in one of the textbooks we use at school that talks about it.

and here’s some sick shit… if you are willing to click on it. I don’t even know if you should…ugh.

Read Feminisms Wednesdays and Take Action

by Elise on Mon Jul 17, 2006 at 10:35:12 AM PST

[ Parent ]

I followed the recommendation in that comment, namely to “Read Feminism Wednesdays”, and found the following outpouring of anti-male hatred and female victimhood. “Boadicaea” provides opinionated falsehood after falsehood, but not one of them is corroborated with any evidence to prove her point, namely that women are an oppressed group of people.

I copied the text of “Boadicaea’s” article here and will insert a few facts or links to facts that debunk her ludicrous rhetoric. That is not so much to prove her wrong as it is to provide a counterpoint to the 163 commentaries that more or less agree with her or at best put up extremely weak counter arguments.

As long as we have people like “Boadicaea” around that are so full of misguided hatred, and as long as we have even more people that pay them attention and agree with them, we will not have equality for both sexes.

My comments are inserted in Italics and enclosed by brackets.

Feminisms: Back to the Basics of Life and Death

by Boadicaea

Wed Nov 01, 2006 at 05:25:25 PM PST

I’ll start by asking everyone to imagine that for millennia female babies have been born with a unique birthmark: a target. It appears in conjunction with female reproductive organs, female body configuration, and/or female identification of queer and transgender people. It appears regardless of race, ethnicity, geography, or century. The target mark has been accepted for thousands of years as feminine a characteristic as the ability to conceive and bear children. [It all depends how one looks at it. One can be grateful to be a woman, to be able to give life and to be blessed with love by one’s children, or one can rail against the curse of biological design and destiny and kill one’s children to boot.]

We have to imagine, because humankind would have died out long ago with this encouragement of those who consider women to be targets even without the permission of biology. There’s a point to this. Read on . . .

• Boadicaea’s diary :: ::

I’m not looking forward to tonight’s discussion of this diary. I didn’t want to write this particular diary; I dreaded writing this particular diary; I couldn’t not write this particular diary. My hope is that those who have not considered the life and death foundations of feminism will understand better where feminism comes from, even if feminism as a force that literally fights for women’s lives isn’t germane to their own.

Simply, I want everyone who isn’t a feminist–male or female–and everyone who IS, to think about where the need for women to stand up for themselves originates. It starts in the most primitive desire to live. History reeks of women’s slaughter; probably this isn’t a new idea. But think how many women have died, die, and will die for no other reason than THEY ARE WOMEN. Period. [Absolutely correct, except for one thing. All people must die, not necessarily on account of their sex but foremost because they are mortal, not immortal. However, when it comes to whether women or men are more likely to die an early death, just a little bit of checking would have shown “Boadicaea” that her proposition is ludicrous. The average life expectancy of all women in the world is five more years than that of men. The average life expectancy of women in the developed nations is from about six to 14 more years than that of men in the developed nations. Only someone completely deranged and misguided would claim that to be a manifestation of the oppression of women. — Life Expectancies of Men and Women Throughout the World]

Quickly, a rundown. Sporadic persecution of women blamed for adverse conditions–witches (Many were killed for supposedly inciting men to do the actual foul deeds, but because they were women a way was found to blame them and exterminate them. [Sorry “Boadicaea”, but you can’t have it both ways, have women who were the well-spring of life all along and have someone kill them off because they are women. Humanity would have perished a long time ago without women, with women that were killed in wholesale numbers. You are talking about isolated aberrations and commit the sin of presenting them as the norm.] New England witches were almost 100% female (one of my ancestors was sentenced to hang but her husband was well-connected and she was grudgingly allowed to live. Anne Hutchinson’s religious crime was finally “proved” because her uterus expelled what was called a “demon” and she was accused of having sexual intercourse with the devil. It was either a malformed uterus, or, probably, an unusual but not unknown even now formation of uterine warts. She was banned from her church for her religious views, but chose banishment over hanging for the evidence of her womb). [Aha, that is the point: “New England witches were “almost 100% female”, the point being that not all of them were female. In other times and places of witch hunts, half to the vast majority of the persecuted witches were men, but feminists never talk about that, right? Feminists are not about all of the truth and nothing but the truth. They lie and distort, either deliberately or out of ignorance. They repeat what they want us to believe often enough that in the end even the feminists believe that their propaganda is the truth. — See: The “evil” that men did; Pseudo-History About Witchcraft, and How many witches were really burned, and were all of them women?]

Infanticide of females over the centuries, most recently in China because male children are preferred by many who are limited to one child. [The price of tea in China has nothing to do with social conditions where “Boadicaea” lives, unless she is out to blame men in the West for Chinese moral and cultural standards.] Bride killings, usually carried out by in-laws (there is no counterpart of husband killings, no matter how unsatisfactory they may be). [“Boadicaea” again picks on cultural and moral aberrations in other countries in an attempt to garner sympathy and emotional support for her convictions. If only she would have put some numbers on how many brides have lately been killed where she lives. However, “Boadicaea” is dead wrong about there not being a counterpart for bride killings. For men there very realistically is such a counterpart, the simple fact that they are men. That is the sole reason for men’s average life expectancy being five or more years shorter than that of women. For instance, 19 out of every 20 fatal or serious job accidents involve men as victims.] An unfortunate tendency of many “civilizations” to choose punishment, often death, for only the female participant in adultery. [It is odd how the feminist mind works. Feminists, like other liberals, would like us to be more like animals and therefore urge us to forsake traditional moral standards. However, the survival instinct of animals provides them with a very strong urge to kill cuckoos. Is it not a logical human reaction that in many societies the one who brings a cuckoo into the nest is the one that is being punished for it? Nevertheless, all of that is hypothetical musing, as for 150 and more years women in the West have become increasingly rewarded for committing the crime of adultery. So what exactly is the nature of “Boadicaea’s” complaint? How can she logically complain that women are being punished for being adulterous when the truth is that the vast majority of adulterous women is being generously rewarded for their crimes of adultery? — The Fraud of Feminism (1913), and The Legal Subjection of Men (1908) Two essays by Belfort Bax (July 23, 1854 - November 26, 1926)] St. Paul’s warnings for men to “beware the widow” having been used to blame women for men’s transgressions (see “witches,” above). The instinctive avoidance of free choice after dark–women know that they can be chosen to be violated in many ways, and often killed, simply by choosing to be a woman alone in the dark. And relegation to living conditions that kill; women have historically ended up with hard, dangerous work for low pay if they could not depend upon a man for support of them and their children. Dangerous working conditions kill, and low pay leads to malnutrition, lack of medical care, below standard living conditions, death. [It seems we should not worry so much about what St. Paul said about women and men as we should worry about what people like “Boadicaea” are saying. At least St.Paul said much about love, while “Boadicaea” appears to have nothing but hatred for men.]

A good example of this is in a article I found on the Net about the Juarez killings of hundreds of young women. A reporter felt constrained to mention that four times as many men were killed on the border as women–men involved in drug trafficking. However, Diana Valdez has investigated the Juarez femicide for years and written a book about common knowlege on the border–that the women have been killed as the ending act of their use in parties as objects of “entertainment;” sexually used in many ways, including torture and murder. High level men of the Ciudad Juarez area are involved, and nobody is trying to bring them to justice. But a young woman on the street in Juarez, no matter why she is there, is looked upon as perhaps the next victim. Just because she is a woman–the ghouls and perverts who have used and killed probably 700 women in the last decade or two are only interested in using a female body. [I wonder what the real numbers are, but don’t look to “Boadicaea” for the answer. Statements such as “killed probably 700 women in the last decade or two” are neither precise nor confidence-inspiring.]

That is why five little girls in Pennsylvania died. A man wanted to molest little girls. He didn’t WANT to want to, but he wanted to. He let everyone else go; he was ready to molest. Before and after, he blamed the existence of little girls for his misery. They died because he had a problem, and because–NO OTHER REASON–they were little girls. To get rid of them was his reasoning; without little girls, he wouldn’t have his problem. [That sounds like a horrible crime. It is horrible because it is a rare aberration. It is more often the case that women kill children and kill them in vastly greater numbers than men do, not even counting abortions. However, no matter how often women do that and no matter in what numbers, the feminists will never tell us about that basic fact of life and death, but let me mention just two cases: 1.) The Butterbox Children, and 2.) The Bloody and Deadly Countess Elizabeth Bathory.]

Feminism today doesn’t deal with death on the surface very often in this country. It deals with the aftermath. How often do we think about how vulnerable we really are–because we are women, or even because we appear to be women. How often do men, even sympathetic, empathetic, and involved feminist men, think about the bottom line need for women to be considered equal and strong–to make it clear that the target should not be there. It starts with wanting to stay alive, with NEEDING to stay alive. [Right, feminism deals with the aftermath of death, not with its causes. That is why when women lose their husbands, the feminists don’t cry for the lives of the husbands lost but for the plight of the women who lost their providers and the comfort those providers now no longer can provide to their wives and families. That is why someone like Hillary Clinton can with impunity declare that women have always been the primary victims of war. That is even though bereaved women, especially in places like China, where according to “Boadicaea” there will soon be a great surplus of men, will have no problem to find replacements for what they have been bereaved of. Nevertheless, in the eyes of feminists like Hillary Clinton and “Boadicea” it is a far greater calamity for women to be spared from being killed in war than it is for men to have to sacrifice their lives and limbs in wars for home and country, moreover to have to suffer often for many years in POW camps before they are allowed to return home.]

There is so much more to say. I have literary criticisms, news from all over the world, and many more graceful and convincingly written analyses of this subject. I’ve purposely not read a recent column by Bob Herbert that looks to be covering the same subject matter, but wouldn’t you know I can’t find the link right now; I’ll get it for you.

And here are some more on the Juarez killings (”femicides” all, because the reason they were murdered was that they they were women).

www.truthout.org/issues_06/090606WA.shtml (that looks weird; you can Google “Texas Journalist Patrols Grisly Beat”)

www.cjr.org/issues/2004/burnett-mexico.asp?

www.npr.org/templates/story.php?storyId+1532607

Tags: femicide, domestic violence, rape, kidnapping, queer, New England witch trials, infanticide, Amish murders, bride killings, St. Paul, women’s rights, women’s safety, gender equality, women’s careers, validation, Feminisms (all tags)

Permalink | 163 comments

[“Boadicaea” stated above that she has “many more graceful and convincingly written analyses on this subject.” No doubt, analyses that are more graceful and convincingly written than her commentary is should not be hard to come by, but it would take some effort to find articles that are more filled with hatred and falsehoods than hers is.]

Posted in Abortion, Men's Issues, Feminism, Propaganda Exposed | Print | No Comments »

November 19, 2006 by Walter Schneider.

Yesterday, while I was writing my commentary on Shelter for Jews opens, a very similar proposal surfaced in New Zealand.

Pardon the workings of my suspicious mind, but when these things are checked out in more depth, it is often found that there is a common source or driving force for such proposals for similar actions for radical social re-engineering at opposite ends of the world.

I will not again satirize this specific article to draw attention to the similarities between the social evolution in Nazi-Germany that made it palatable to incarcerate and exterminate people by the millions then and where very similar modern developments regarding the treatment of elements deemed undesirable in today’s society will take us now.  Every such journey starts with a first step.  They all produce the same result: the State will be in a position of absolute totalitarian power.

The sovereignty of the family is all that stands between us and absolute tyranny.

Entire families could be put into care in radical plan

New Zealand Herald
1.00pm Saturday November 18, 2006

Dysfunctional families rife with drug and welfare dependency could be the taken into care as part of radical social welfare changes by the Government.

Intensive family therapy — which can include removing members from their home — is one option the Social Development Ministry is examining as it works to deal with dysfunctional homes , The Dominion Post reported today. …(Full Story)

The way I see it, first the State creates the conditions (mainly through the deliberate and systematic disfranchisement of parents) whereby families become dysfunctional in wholesale numbers.  Then the State moves in to take the place of parents and thereby usurps absolute control of families.  Nothing states anywhere that the State is prohibited from setting or changing its standards by which it is determined whether a particular family needs to be “put into care”.  The Nazis called it “Schutzhaft”, that is, “protective custody”, whereby they justified that millions of people were to be placed into concentration camps.  Those people, too, in the Nazis’ own words, were “put into care”.

First they came for the fathers, then for the mothers, and now for both parents in intact families.  In the end all children will be in the care, custody and control of the State.

— Walter H. Schneider

Posted in Men's Issues, Family, Feminist Jurisprudence, Propaganda Exposed, The New World Order | Print | No Comments »

November 18, 2006 by Walter Schneider.

Shelter for Jews opens

Stuermer Staff

Der Stuermer, B2, March 1933

Berlin’s Alternative Temporary Housing and Supports program for Jews, a.k.a. KZ lager (concentration camp) for Jews, is a pilot project that helps violent Jews live independently and address their problems, in an effort to assure the safety of women and their families, by Jews volunteering to put themselves into protective custody.  As any Jew who has been involved in the program of protective custody for Jews knows, the German term for protective custody is “Schutzhaft”.

Referrals to the  enormously popular program are accepted 24 hours a day, seven days a week.  Jews can refer themselves, or they can be referred by police, probation, correctional services, social workers and family violence prevention organizations.  Preferred time for enlisting is between 2 and 3 a.m.

“The concentration-camp program was very helpful for me,” said one program participant, Moishe B. “It helped me get away from the situation and get connected with community programs.”

_________________
The preceding article is of course a spoof, intended to put a more recent, similar article into the correct context by giving it terminology that is politically correct in terms of the dialectics that prevailed in Germany in 1933.

Here now is the article that served as the model for the preceding one:

Men’s shelter opens

Journal Staff,

Edmonton Journal, B2, 2006 11 18

Edmonton’s new shelter for men who batter their wives has opened its doors and is calling for referrals.

The men’s Alternative Temporary Housing and Supports program or MATHS, is a pilot project that helps violent men live independently and address their problems, in an effort to assure the safety of women and their families.

Referrals to the program are accepted 24 hours a day, seven days a week.  Men can refer themselves, or they can be referred by police, probation, correctional services, social workers and family violence prevention organizations.

“The MATHS program was very helpful for me,” said one program participant, Raymond B. “It helped me get away from the situation and get connected with community programs.”

_________________
The MATHS program is of course nothing more than a manifestation and unavoidable outcome of decades of promotion of hatred against men.

The reality of the politics of domestic violence is this:

• Children, not women are the primary victims of violence in families;
• Children comprise the largest single group of victims of family violence;
• The vast majority of children who become victims of family violence is being hurt by their mothers, while the biological fathers of children are about nine times less likely than those children’s mothers are to hurt their children;
• Women are not even a big majority of victims of inter-spousal violence;
• Women are more likely than men are to initiate violent altercations, but the vast majority of domestic violence incidents between adults involves cases where there is no clear indication of who initiated the violence;
• When men and women become involved in violent altercations they give and take about equally, while women are somewhat more likely than men are to become hurt in such altercations.

See aso family violence information corroborated with citations from credible and accredited sources.

Posted in Feminist Jurisprudence, Men's Issues, Feminism, Propaganda Exposed, The New World Order, Women's Violence | Print | No Comments »

November 11, 2006 by Walter Schneider.

Inter-spousal violence is not a gender issue. Neither sex has a monopoly on violence against the other sex, and the two sexes give and take in about equal proportions when it comes to meting out violence against one another.

Still that fact has not ever yet held back a single government in the world from promoting the myth that only women suffer violence at the hands of men, and that the converse is nothing we need to worry about. Men are made to suffer in silence, without recognition and without government support of any sort. Only women are victims worthy of consideration.

In the year 2004 the Department of Children Services of the Social Service Department of the Government of Alberta engaged itself in a massive intensification of the slander and vilification of men, Alberta men in particular and Canadian men and all men in general. That program for the demonizing of men was undertaken then for the benefit of women. The details of that government-sponsored and -promoted hate-propaganda campaign against men were launched through the Family Violence Roundtable Discussion.

As a result of the Family Violence Roundtable Discussion the annual provincial funding for women’s issues in Alberta was increased to about $13 million and kept there, while not a single dollar was devoted for the alleviation of violence or the consequences of violence against men, least of all spousal violence against men.

Can anyone imagine our astonishment when without fanfare of any sort, without a massive taxpayer-funded government promotion, very quietly and silently, Alberta Children’s Services published in October of 2006 two documents that acknowledge that men can suffer from violence by women?

1. New Information Sheet: Men Abused by Women (2 pages, 557 kB PDF file)
2. New Booklet: Men Abused by Women in Intimate Relationships (10 pages, 1.36 MB PDF file)

Although in its own words “Alberta Children’s Services is proud to lead Alberta’s Strategy for the Prevention of Family Violence and Bullying”, beyond the publishing of the two documents the “strategy” appears to make no provision for assistance to men and their children who became victims of a violent spouse.

As per the last paragraph on page 10 of the more extensive of the two government brochures, men who are being abused by their wives have the following resources at their disposal:

Get help

If you or someone you know is in immediate danger, call 911.

Visit www.familyviolence.gov.ab.ca or call the 24 hour Family Violence Info Line toll free at 310-1818.

Emergency protection orders, restraining orders and peace bonds are some of the legal ways to stop an abuser from contacting someone.

• The Wheatland Emergency Shelter in Strathmore accommodates abused men with or without children, phone 1-877-934-6634

• The National Clearinghouse on Family Violence has a directory of services and programs for abused men in Canada. You can find the directory online at www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/ncfv-cnivf/familyviolence/maleabus_e.html

In view of the more than $400 million spent annually in Canada to help out battered women, the help identified by Children’s Services for men is not even a pittance, but it is better and much more than existed two years ago. Mind you, some of that help is of dubious value. The last time that was checked out, the Wheatland Emergency Shelter in Strathmore (just east of Calgary) did have two places for battered men, provided those two places are not required for women in need. Still, even if those two beds were to be available to men at all times, is it practical for a man from Indian Cabins or from Fort McMurray to travel all the way to Strathmore to find emergency accommodation for himself and for his children?

To get a somewhat better appreciation of the enormous and horrendous extent of anti-male bias that a Canadian male victim of female violence is up against, execute a search for “emergency intervention order” +”victim assistance order” and examine the documents that you can access through that search.  What you read in those document is just the tip of the obstacles put in the way of male victims of female violence receiving justice.

Come on Children’s Services, get a life, and give men a bit more room to live!

Posted in Health, Men's Issues, Propaganda Exposed, Women's Violence | Print | No Comments »

November 8, 2006 by Walter Schneider.

Thanks to Gordon:

In a move going well beyond the current efforts of homosexuals in Canada to self-servingly fabricate the parental information section of birth records, an even more serious line is apparently about to be crossed Stateside, in which public records are to be falsified as a matter of policy. Like most terrible ideas proposed as policy, this one is cloaked in the garb of fairness and compassion. But how can it ever [be] a good idea for governments to deliberately lie in matters of public record? Immediate fallout:  New York City brilliantly outflanks state ban on gay marriage

New York Plans to Make Gender Personal Choice

The New York Times
November 7, 2006
By DAMIEN CAVE

Separating anatomy from what it means to be a man or a woman, New York City is moving forward with a plan to let people alter the sex on their birth certificate even if they have not had sex-change surgery….

But some psychiatrists said that eliminating identification difficulties for some transgender people also opened the door to unwelcome advances from imposters.

“I’ve already heard of a ‘transgendered’ man who claimed at work to be ‘a woman in a man’s body but a lesbian’ and who had to be expelled from the ladies’ restroom because he was propositioning women there,” Dr. Paul McHugh, a member of the President’s Council of Bioethics and chairman of the psychiatry department at Johns Hopkins University, wrote in an e-mail message on the subject. “He saw this as a great injustice in that his behavior was justified in his mind by the idea that the categories he claimed for himself were all ‘official’ and had legal rights attached to them.”….

Full Story

__________________
The article contains quite a few statements that cause concern.  Here are some:

While it may be a radical notion elsewhere, New York City has often tolerated such blurring of the lines of gender identity….

This one gives me a lot of problems:

“Somebody with a bard may have had breast-implant surgery. It’s the permanence of the transition that matters most.”

The problem with that is off course that permanence is whatever its beholder wishes it to be.  We know of a good number of lesbians of convenience who changed their “gender” at will, and back….  How will we know whether we transgress against their pleasure or feelings when or if we call them at any given time Mr., Ms, Miss, Mrs., Sir or Madam?

How about this one?

In New York, the proposed change comes after four years of discussion among health officials, an eight-member panel of transgender experts and vital records offices nationwide.

It is obvious that those transgender experts don’t care a whit about what they ram down the throats of the heterosexual majority that glared by its absence during those four years of discussions.

There are so many fallacies in the reasoning offered by the “transgender” or “transsexual” (whatever those terms may mean) advocates mentioned or quoted in that article, that what is needed is not merely an assessment of “transgendered” individuals vs. people going by traditional norms but a comparison of the mores of sheep and people, the “bestiality” of beasts vs. that of humans.

–Walter

Posted in Men's Issues, Gay issues, Family | Print | No Comments »

November 7, 2006 by Walter Schneider.

From another blog, Antimisandry, this is an important piece of news.

Bull Buster Video

By phunket at 03/11/2006 - 20:00

Have any of you guys managed to get hold of the free Bull Busters video going around? It’s called Violent Women and it is very powerful.

It is doing the rounds on the street. The other day I was aksed if I had seen it. When I said no, a guy ran home and made me a copy and brought it back to me. It is very powerful. It has the words, “Watch me. Copy me. Pass me on” written in felt tip pen on the CD. I have done just that. Anyone who would like a copy should mail me at address@removed.com I will send it on. If you are outside of the UK you have to send me postage and packaging costs (sorry).

The video shows women beating men, each other and children and makes the point that we have been brainwashed to accept female violence as part of the attempt to feminise men. It says that there has been a media conspiracy to keep the evidence from the people.

It’s excellent and very strong.

DIAL UP USERS: CLICK HERE FOR BULL BUSTER VIDEO, A SHATTERING LOOK INTO FEMALE VIOLENCE. ; File Size: 8.8MB; File Length: 30minutes.

BROADBAND USERS: CLICK HERE FOR BULL BUSTER VIDEO, A SHATTERING LOOK INTO FEMALE VIOLENCE. ; File Size: 65.00MB; File Length: 30minutes.

MAX FILE SIZE: CLICK HERE FOR BULL BUSTER VIDEO, A SHATTERING LOOK INTO FEMALE VIOLENCE. ; File Size: 300MB; File Length: 30minutes.

More content & links coming soon… Please be patient Content & links coming soon… Please be patient

19 comments

Posted in Propaganda Exposed | Print | No Comments »

November 7, 2006 by Walter Schneider.

Rick wrote (in commenting about baby farmers):

This is the home page of where I got the information http://www.richard.clark32.btinternet.co.uk/contents.html
the baby farmers http://uk.geocities.com/becky62655@btinternet.com/babyfarm.html

cheers rick

There was a similar case in Nova Scotia, Canada.

In that case it has been estimated that between 400 to 600 children deemed not placeable for adoption were killed and buried in butter boxes, incinerated or buried at sea.

Details of that story. (Make sure you follow the links identified at that web page.)

It is truly odd that in spite of much evidence to the contrary — evidence that was never hidden and that got much publicity in the media at the time — the myth of female innocence is being maintained with a passion, and numerous sociologists the world over assert that the typical mass murderer is male and Caucasian.

As Hitler said, the purpose of propaganda is not to present the truth with academic fairness.  The purpose of propaganda is to propagate the “truth” it sets out to promote and argue for.

Hitler also said that one should never underestimate the enormous capacity of the masses to forget.

Nevertheless, the pages at the links you provided tell that during the Victorian Age society took a dim view of women who were habitual baby killers and was likely to have them hanged.  Even that is not the truth, not all of the truth and perhaps something other than all of the truth.

Consider this:
(From http://www.fathersforlife.org/fv/infanticide.htm)
Infanticide, a euphemism for the murder of children.

In 1922, in England, the crime of murder was reduced to manslaughter, for murderers of victims that had not yet reached more than the age of one to two days. It is intriguing to consider the reasons given in arguments for leniency toward women who kill their children: Hormonal imbalance due to breast feeding; Failure to recover from the effects of giving birth to “such children”.

In her book “When Shew Was Bad”, Patricia Pearson says this:

In England, support for hormones as the cause of all maternal aggression against infants is enshrined in the law. In 1922, parliament introduced the Infanticide Act, which reduced the crime automatically from murder to manslaughter on the basis of insanity if a mother “had not fully recovered from the effect of giving birth to such child, but by reason thereof the balance of her mind was then disturbed.” The point of the Infanticide Act was not that British doctors had suddenly discovered a link between postpartum hormones and violent behavior. To this day that link hasn’t been categorically established. The point was to rid the courts of the necessity of imposing murder sentences, since juries had been refusing to convict women when the penalty was execution. For instance, following five thousand coroner’s inquests into child deaths held annually in Britain in the mid-nineteenth century, only thirty-nine convictions for child murder resulted, and none of those women were executed.  Similarly, in Canada, when a mandatory death penalty applied to the murder of children, “courts regularly returned ‘not guilty’ verdicts in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.” [p. 80]

It appears that at about the same time as women were given the right to vote, they were also given the benefit of being not accountable for their actions by reason of insanity due to hormonal imbalance.That was just a first step. The age of the children who became victims of child murder within the definition of “infanticide” was extended to one year, from the previously “acceptable” one to two days. Patricia Pearson says:

In 1938, Britain revised its infanticide statute, extending the age of victims from “newly born” to “under the age of 12 months.” To justify this extension, the revised statute cited “the effect of lactation” on a woman’s mind.  It was decided, in effect, that breastfeeding could drive women mad.  The experts who proposed the revision to the courts privately believed that social and psychological factors were more critical than biology.  Studies consistently show, for example, that preexisting histories of depression and life stress are a common denominator in women with postpartum mental disorders.  But psychiatrist J. H. Morton defended the diagnosis of “lactational insanity” as being acceptable to conservative judges and barristers.  It was never proposed that the Infanticide Act forgive mothers for killing older children, spouses or others, even while said to be suffering from the same insanity. [p. 80]

_____________

In Canada there have lately been a few cases where the infanticide excuse was extended to women in instances of child murders involving victims as old as five years. (Men, of course, are by law not capable of committing infanticide.  The infanticide excuse applies only when women murder children.)

For women there are excuses galore, and if those are insufficient by chance, we can always invent new ones.

For men there is never an excuse, and if women truly wish to be equal, then there should not be excuses for women either.

By the way, one of the pages you identified is also the one that shows the link to a page with information on the German female war criminals that were sentenced to death in the post-war trials and then subsequently executed (by hanging).

The hanging of those female war criminals was far from being a normal occurrence.  It was far more the norm to hear or read sentiments like this one:

27  Justice Jackson [he had presided over the Nuremberg war trials] declared: “As far as I’m concerned, I would like to make it quite clear, and I believe that at any rate it will be accepted, that the United States aren’t interested in letting their representatives travel for 3,500 miles to indict office employees, stenographers and house keepers.  Those aren’t the kind of crimes that we want to prosecute, even if they knew something; because they aren’t the kind of criminals who endanger world-peace.” IMT (1947 - 1949, volume VIII, p. 494).  Shortly after the end of the war, in the first Euthanasia process, Mar. 25, 1946, the female institution doctor and the institution nurse were sentenced to death.  LG Berlin, 25.03.4611 KS 8/46.  In the second process on Dec 21, 1946, the chief nurse was sentenced to prison and the station nurse  and nurse found not guilty.  LG Frankfurt am Main, 21.12.46.  In the subsequent trials the female and male doctors were sentenced to prison, the registered nurses and the nursing aides as a rule found not guilty.

– A Wife at His Side - Wives in the SS Clan-Community,
by Gudrun Schwarz, Ph.D.,  p. 178
– Translated by Walter H. Schneider,
German title:  Eine Frau an seiner Seite. Ehefrauen in der SS-Sippengemeinschaft

Although Justice Jackson was right about his opinion regarding female innocence as to war crimes being quite acceptable, his fundamental premise of female innocence was and remains quite wrong.  The quarter million German women that married SS officers weren’t just office employees, stenographers and house keepers.  Many of them were ruthless sadistic torturers and killers, even those who did not marry SS officers.  However, long before the female liberation of the 1960s got on the road, Justice Jackson  and other people like him promoted the whole-sale exoneration of evil women, regardless of ethnic origin, race, colour or creed.

Justice Jackson and his camp followers must surely have gotten something out of that.  At the very least, putting women on pedestals elevates them to facilitate easy and effortless brownnosing.

Posted in Child Murder | Print | No Comments »

November 6, 2006 by Walter Schneider.

Too bad, but this piece of anti-male propaganda published in The [UK] Observer is all too common, however, it is easily debunked.

Focus: Murder in the family

Sunday November 5, 2006
The Observer
In the week when one father murdered his four children, and another was jailed for life, Lorna Martin investigates the motives and twisted minds of the men Americans call ‘family annihilators’. Are they driven by hatred, revenge or mad, possessive love?
(Full Story)

Unfortunately, when it comes to murder, things are not any easier to assess or predict or to project from a single week’s worth of data than it is to state with certainty that a week of mild winter weather is a harbinger of centuries of global warming.

Without spending too much time on a piece of anti-male propaganda like “Fathers who kill their children” that the observer bestowed on its readership, let me go back to a generic piece of debunking that I did once before in similar circumstances. After all, the truth is the truth and never changes, while propaganda changes with the directions of political winds.

Check: Predominantly women, not men, kill children (2002 06 15)

Posted in Child Murder | Print | No Comments »