January 10, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

Focus on the Family

January 9, 2008

Dads may be participating more than ever with moms in helping raise their children, but they are still not included in most studies of children and their families, Dalhousie University doctoral student Erin Moon has concluded.

“The research has not kept up with the changes in society, with fathers being more and more involved in children’s lives,” Moon, a clinical psychologist, told CanWest News Service. “Almost all the previous research has been conducted with mothers.”

Moon is researching the parental response to a child’s pain, specifically if fathers react differently based on whether a son or a daughter is suffering. She discovered that the questionnaires and tests previous researchers conducted all excluded the responses of fathers, presumably because it was thought that mothers were the primary caregivers….(Full Story)

_________
Comments:

The full article is well worth reading, as it uncovers much of the silence in Academe regarding the vital involvement of fathers in being part of the parenting that children receive. Yet, many or even most of the sentiments expressed in the article bring to light not much more than that fathers are parents, too, parents that are almost as good as mothers. In other words, “mothering” is an important thing, and fathers are almost as good at it as mothers are.

The reality is that the proportions of parenting done by fathers and mothers are equally important but different. They augment one another, and their combined effect becomes in the system of parenting in the traditional nuclear family greater than the sum of the parts contributed individually by mothers and fathers. The principle of synergy comes into play. That is far more prevalent in families in a general sense than it is within the narrow focus of the study done by Erin Moon, namely the comparable reactions of fathers and mothers to their children’s pain.

Two articles address the benefits of parenting by fathers and mothers within the family in a much wider sense.

1. Shacking UP and Breaking DOWN
   Common-law marriage and break-up are booming, and so is a host of related social ills. By Candis Mclean (Alberta Report, June 22, 1998, page 28)

   The Alberta Report is no longer being published, but a condensed version of the article is available at the website of Fathers for Life.The AR article concludes with a quote by columnist Charles Moore from an article in the Western Catholic Reporter:

   “Marriage is more than a private relationship between two individuals. The reason it has traditionally benefited from positive discrimination [special benefits, subsidies and rights] is recognition of the contribution to the common good by stable family units — specifically, the procreation and healthy upbringing of children….All other domestic arrangements — heterosexual or homosexual — must be deemed purely private relationships that society has no interest in subsidizing. It may take a political or even constitutional revolution to accomplish this, but the alternative is continued disintegration of our civilization.”

2. The sorry facts behind common-law marriage
   By Lorne Gunter, Edmonton Journal, 28.6.98 (that article is available in the same web page at the website of Fathers for Life)

But there is more yet behind the invisibility of fathers as far as the perspective of social researchers goes. For all intents and purposes, social research is a feminist-dominated and -controlled academic field in which it is not politically correct to illuminate the role of fathers in families or, for that matter, the constructive role of men in society. The invisibility of fathers and men in feminist social studies is not accidental, it is deliberate.

Feminist social “research” is advocacy research and does not live up to the standards against which respectable and reputable scientific inquiries must measure up to become objectively acceptable.
Advocacy research does not stand up to scientific standards, although many people make a good living doing it. Advocacy research could more accurately be called science fiction on account of collecting or manufacturing data that support a hypothesis, discarding or altering those data that do not support or do contradict the hypothesis the advocacy researchers set out to prove and then presenting its conclusions disguised in the cloak of science. Feminist “research” is almost entirely comprised of advocacy research.

Advocacy research uses selective study samples that are likely to produce the desired results. It does not use randomly selected study samples, as those are far more likely to produce objective answers that are contrary to the point the advocacy researcher wishes to promote. There is no objectivity in the reporting done by advocacy research. Without exception, advocacy research is seriously flawed.

Posted in Censorship, Health, Family, Feminism, Propaganda Exposed | Print | No Comments »

January 8, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

From a feminist source of “facts” and “news”:

Get the [feminist] facts on domestic violence and women’s rights, including feminist news on violence against women: Domestic Violence Info Center at the Feminist Majority Foundation.

The vast majority of domestic assaults are committed by men. Even when men are victimized, 10% are assaulted by another man. In contrast, only 2% of women who are victimized are assaulted by another woman.

Let’s assume for a moment that those statistics are correct. In that case, “when men are victimized”, and if “10% are assaulted by another man,” that means that 90% of all violent assaults against men are by women perpetrators of violence against men, and that if “only 2% of women who are victimized are assaulted by another woman,” then the other 98% of women victims of violence are being victimized by men.

That means that men and women get victimized in roughly equal proportion by members of the opposite sex, but that virtually all funding for catering to victims of violence goes only to women. The question that comes out of that is: Why exactly is that a crime against women? Is it that women get all of the funding and men get none?

However, logic has never been a feminist strong-point. Feminists have a name for logic. They call it “patriarchal linear thinking.” Feminists deplore logic and even hold it to be an offence.

Violence against women from a more objective perspective

Annual fatalities by sex

Posted in Anorexia Nervosa, Propaganda Exposed, Women's Violence | Print | 1 Comment »

January 8, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

The big list: Female teachers with students
Most comprehensive account on Internet of women predators on campus, by WorldNetDailyNews

Posted in Education, Family, Women's Violence | Print | No Comments »

January 6, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

We often receive help requests such as that by Lisa and George (not their real names) quoted here.

To Whom it may concern,

My husband and I met 10 years ago. He was briefly married to a women for 1 year and they had a baby boy.

After $30,000 and 3 years later in court fees, my husband finally received joint legal custody.

We have my stepson (now 11) on a one-week-on, one-week-off basis.

The week that we have him we must still pay the ex wife $120.00 and she spends this on herself. (FYI, she has remarried and has 2 more children of her own.)

She wanted my stepson to attend private school and took us to court to pay her more money. Of course she won, and the tuition 5 years ago was $6,500/yr (we pay 60%).

Now that my stepson is going on to highschool (Quebec starts in grade 7) the tuition is $10,500. My husband and I have 2 other boys. This is ridiculous.

Could a judge possible make us pay more? Can my stepson not go to a public school? We have no more money to give and we cannot afford to go back to court unless we are sure we can win this case.

My husband is so distraught.

Is it possible to guide me and my husband to any website, document or even someone we can telephone for more info?

Thank you so much for taking the time to read this.

Lisa

I offer generic advice in such situations and I did so now.

Unfortunately I cannot hold out much hope for you that you or any lawyer can get the injustices against George, against you and against your common children corrected.

The reason for what you experience is not so much a miscarriage of justice that can be corrected than it is a consequence of the implementation of the international agenda for the planned destruction of the family.

One may argue that if that is so, then such injustices should equally befall men and women.  However, the way this starts is that men and fathers are the weakest link in marriages and are therefore the easiest to be removed (and punished for wanting to be fathers in families).  The idea is to prevent the formation of marriages by scaring men (and women) away from forming marriages.  As that objective was promoted for two-hundred years and more by feminists (male and female - there are more of the former than of the latter), it stands to reason that first wives will not lose as much through the culture of divorce as their husbands do.  However, one of the biggest motivators for the creation of the devastation and privation caused by the divorce industry is no longer so much the goal of the complete and total destruction of the institution of the family as it now is - plain and simple - profit.  (See Stephen Baskerville’s articles on the nature and consequences of the war against fathers and families.)

The only ones who consistently win through divorce are the lawyers and the adjuncts of the divorce industry.  Let there be no mistake, judges are lawyers, too, and they win because the divorce industry has grown into a major sector of the legal industry.  Therefore they have become and continue to become increasingly more powerful and richer.  Be clear on this as well, the financial burdens placed upon you by what you call “court fees” are actually minimal.  The majority of your court costs that you had to pay as time went by were in fact fees that had to be paid by you not to the courts but to the lawyers you hired.  Furthermore, it happens very often that divorcing or divorced husbands are being ordered by the courts to pay their ex-wives’ court costs and lawyer fees as well.

Yes, women who are being financially rewarded for having become divorced cannot and will not in any way be held accountable for how they spend their alimony payments in the disguise of “child support”.

You explained that you have become financially exhausted and can no longer fight court battles.  That is bad news, because it is not very likely  that without a lawyer you can manage to get your court-ordered financial obligations disentangled and adjusted so that they become manageable.

I cannot point you to anyone in particular who can help you, but I can direct you to some organizations in Quebec that can help you with advice.  Check these links:

• If you live in Canada, check the  Canadian Equal-Parenting-Groups directory (Many of the listed organizations have help lines.)
• If you live in the USA, check the home page of the Equal Justice Foundation for a link to a directory called “Men’s And Women’s Resources — By State”.

Pick organizations that have regular meetings of their members.  By getting in touch with those members at those meetings you will gain from the experiences of others who are going through troubles like yours or who went through them and got them resolved somehow.

You will not only learn what works and what doesn’t, but you will also be able to determine what your chances are and with which lawyers you can make the best progress.

You will quite likely learn far more from working with such an organization than you can from any lawyer.  Be careful with using a lawyer.

Lawyers generally work primarily for themselves, not for you.  Never forget the nature of your relationship with a lawyer you hire: you are the boss, and he (or she) is the contractor you hired to solve your problem.

Therefore, you need to know how lawyers work, what standards they use, what you want them to do for you, where, when and how and - most of all - how well it all needs to be done.

Just as with any other contractor (e. g.: a construction company for building a house), you need to be careful about how to select a lawyer:

1. Have a “blueprint”;
2. Present that to more than one contractor;
3. Ask for an estimate of the costs and of the probability of success;
4. Ask for references as to similar jobs done;
5. Compare the answers you get, and
6. Make your selection.

Things don’t end there.  You need to monitor:

7. Start dates and locations of court actions and be certain that the lawyer is prepared and will be there;
8. That your intentions are properly translated into legal actions, and
9. You need to have included in a court order for visitation or custody that the police will be required to enforce the provisions of the court order issued if the mother of the child obstructs the court order in any way or manner.

Here is another recommendation that I give to all men who come to me with problems similar to yours.  As crazy as that may seem to you, you must have a paternity test done before you do anything else (or as soon as possible and concurrently with anything else that you feel needs to be done right now).  The reasons for that are explained in the following:

• Paternity
• Paternity Fraud
• The Henry-Report on Paternity Fraud (2007)

Hope that helps (but write if you need more pointers).

Walter Schneider
http://fathersforlife.org
http://blog.fathersforlife.org

Posted in Divorce, Men and Women Work, Shared Parenting, Child-Custody Awards, Feminist Jurisprudence, Family, The New World Order | Print | 1 Comment »

January 6, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

Everyone must borrow money now or then.  If so, he should use a mortgage and loan calculator to help him make the right decisions.

Here is a link to the FOXbusiness mortgage calculator.

The FOXBusiness mortgage calculator requires Java to be enabled on your PC, but is very easy to use.

Amongst the things it can do for you, the FOXBusiness mortgage calculator lets you calculate by how much the term of your mortgage or loan will be reduced if you make an extra payment of any desired amount at any given time, or if you wish to increase the amount of your monthly loan payment.

Of course, none of that will matter if you like contributing to the record profits our banks are making each year, or if you don’t mind if your government is squandering the taxes you pay.

Isn’t it odd that many people complain about the ever-increasing taxes they must pay to the government, but that very few people ever mention the far higher interest payments they make to the banks?

I suppose that if governments were as adept at public relations work as the banks are, we could even get to like paying taxes.

Some people quit working or don’t work overtime because they wrongly feel that paying the taxes for that makes that work unprofitable.  The reality of that is that as long as one pays taxes he is making it worth-while for him to go to work.

On the other hand, few people will quit working because they must make interest payments to the banks.  I suppose that is because the possession of personal things (that are in reality owned by the banks for the duration of the loans the banks provided for them) is deemed to be more important than to enjoy the goods and services provided through the government out of our tax contributions — goods and services that we ostensibly own and get to share equitably.

–Walter

Posted in Men and Women Work, Education | Print | No Comments »

January 6, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

Accuracy in Media (AIM)

AIM Report: New Evidence of Liberal Media Bias - November A

AIM Report | By AIM Report | November 6, 2006

NEW EVIDENCE OF LIBERAL MEDIA BIAS

By Andrew G. Selepak*

(Editor’s Note: This study found evidence that conservatives were more likely to perceive media bias than liberals, but that both conservatives and liberals detected bias in media outlets that leaned against their political perspectives. In the end, however, because conservatives were more critical of the media both in general and in response to specific outlets, the results seem most consistent with the claim that a liberal political bias exists in the mainstream news media.)

Conservative claims of a liberal media bias are having an impact upon public perceptions of news coverage.

Claims of media bias are not new, but increasing claims of bias, especially a perceived liberal media bias, have led to diminishing credibility ratings among news outlets, and an increased level of skepticism of all news coverage.

A 2004 study by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press showed that 53% of Americans agreed with the statement, “I often don’t trust what news organizations are saying,” and 48% believe that the people who decide on news content are “out of touch,” and those numbers are rising. In 1987, 62% of the public believed election coverage was free of partisan bias, down to 53% in 1996, 48% in 2000, and 38% by 2004….(Full Story)

Posted in Media Bias | Print | 1 Comment »

January 5, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

to the Roman Catholic Church in the U.K.

I am, in fact, convinced, that what feminism promotes in its radical form is no longer the Christianity that we know; it is another religion.

Pope Benedict XVI
speaking (as Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger) on radical feminism.
Excerpt from ‘The Ratzinger Report’ (Ignatius Press)

The preceding quote is from http://www.catholic-feminism.co.uk/.

This resource website on catholic feminism has been created in response to a series of articles titled “The Feminist Threat to the Church” by Patricia Phillips, published in the monthly journal Christian Order. It has been produced and funded by an inter-diocesan group of Catholics, who are not affiliated to, or funded by, any organisation/journal. The adverse effect that radical feminism is having on the Church in the UK - and indeed across the world - is a matter of deep concern to many Catholics. There is also grave concern regarding the failure of the bishops even to acknowledge there is a problem, let alone address it….(Full Story)

Posted in Family, Feminism, The New World Order | Print | No Comments »

January 5, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

Court denies father’s motion in child custody case

Marianas Variety; Jan.4, 2008

By Cherrie Anne E. Villahermosa
Variety News Staff

THE Superior Court has denied a man’s motion to set aside a judgment  stating  he is the biological father of a minor child.

The court said it is statutorily prohibited from declaring the nonexistence of a father-child relationship and finds that such declaration would not be in the best interest of the child….(Full Story)
__________________
The ruling is ludicrous.  No one is asking for a declaration of the non-existence of a father-child relationship.  The request is to identify that the fingered man is not the the real father.

Posted in Family, Paternity Fraud | Print | 1 Comment »

January 5, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

Country Comparison > Total fertility rate (unless indicated otherwise, the figures shown are as of January 2007)

There was a time, about 30 and more years ago, when the promoters of population control called for Zero-Population Growth. Zero-population growth requires a total fertility rate of 2.2 children per average woman of fertile age in a given country. Total fertility rates of less then 2.2 are indicators of population reduction, in effect not of Zero-population growth but of negative population growth.

As the list of total fertility rates for 217 countries shows, there are now 117 countries (all developed nations are amongst them) that have total fertility rates of 2.2 or less. That means that the population in the countries with total fertility rates of less than 2.2 are seeing declining populations, the more so the smaller their total fertility rates are. Nations with total fertility rates of about one are designated 4-2-1 countries, countries in whom one worker needs to support two non-productive parents and four non-productive grandparents.

More and more nations have declining total fertility rates that cause them to expect population reductions of 30 percent or more with every successive generation, with population shortfalls to varying extents compensated for through legal and illegal immigration from lesser-developed and underdeveloped nations (e. g.: in France and Germany through immigration from Islamic nations, in Canada through immigration from Asia, Africa and South-East Asia, and in the USA mainly through immigration from Mexico).

Still, the desired objective, the reduction of the world population to between 300 million and a billion people is a few generations off, perhaps a 150 years in all. It is hard to imagine what it will be that by then constitutes a developed nation, as by then there will insufficient numbers of people left that are able to keep them operational by the methods we have become accustomed to.

The question is whether the populations in the developed nations will get the chance to vanish in peace. The collapse of social safety nets (pension plans, old-age security and health-care systems) and of the infrastructure (utilities, sewers, road, rail and airline networks, and even of buildings) will become unavoidable. There will simply not be enough people working anymore to be able to pay the taxes required -let alone do the required work - to maintain them. The developed nations already increasingly suffer from shortages of workers, engineers and other skilled professions.

See also:

• World Population Control — U.S. Strategy and UN Policy Program
• World population reduction by 80%

Update June 7, 2008:

Current total fertility rates (TFRs) for countries in the world - Rank Order.  The web page accessible through the preceding link lists the rank order from highest to lowest, with a TFR of about 2.2 indicating a stable population. The TFR required to maintain a given country’s population varies a little from country to country, depending on the life expectancy for the average resident in that country. (Source: CIA World Factbook)

As of June 2008, the CIA World Factbook showed 104 countries (generally the richest and most developed) to have TFRs of less than 2.2.  In other words, in those countries the population is in the process of shrinking. (Related Articles at Fathers for Life)

Posted in Abortion, Health, Family, The New World Order | Print | No Comments »

January 5, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

From:  LifeSiteNews

Mainstream Media Systematically Misreports Attendance Figures - Reuters, Associated Press deflate official figures

By Matthew Cullinan Hoffman

MADRID, January 2, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com)–Between one and two million people gathered in Madrid’s Colón Plaza and surrounding streets on December 30th to affirm the values of marriage and family, and to protest the socialist government’s attacks on the institution…. (Full Story)

See also: “Spanish leaders want bishops’ apology for pro-family rally“

Posted in Abortion, Health, Family, Propaganda Exposed, The New World Order | Print | No Comments »