August 18, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

Press Release:

FATHERS-4-JUSTICE (CANADA)

202-812 12th Street, New Westminster, BC V3M 4K1

National Coordinator: Kris Titus
T (888) F4J-CANADA or (888) 345-2262
E officefathers4justicecanada@gmail.com
W www.fathers-4-justice-canada.ca

Cross Canada Crusade to Support “Equal Parenting after Divorce”

Maurice Vellacott, M.P Saskatoon-Wanuskewin has tabled a Private Members Motion (PMM-483) which proposes changes to the Federal Divorce Act to enshrine “the principle of Equal Parenting After Divorce”.

Fathers 4 Justice Canada (F4J Canada) has supported such legislative changes since 1998 and believes that such change is long over-due. To educate and gather popular support from fellow Canadians for this important legislative action, F4J Canada will be launching a cross-country tour with the support and assistance from local groups. We invite all concerned Canadians to join with us and make their support known and visible in spreading the message that “the time has come to act”.

F4J Canada’s Everyday Superheroes Teamwill begin their crusade in Vancouver, BC on August 18, with a kick-off planned for August 17. The heroes plan on visiting major cities across the nation - from British Columbia to Newfoundland - during August and September. Their final destination is our Nation’s Capital. They plan on arriving in Ottawa ON on or before October 7, to coincide with the earliest date that the Honorable Maurice Vellacott M.P may present PMM-483 in the House of Commons.

Final plans are still being made, but at this stage we would like to ask your organization to help us in spreading the word about the F4J Canada Everyday Superheroes Team arrival in your town/city. Please see attached our CURRENT TENATIVE Schedule with local contacts. Each local group may have additional event plans.

Of course all donations towards this momentous event are gratefully accepted!

Sincerely,

Board of Directors

F4J Fathers 4 Justice Canada

http://www.fathers-4-justice-canada.ca
http://www.mauricevellacott.ca

____________________

Itinerary for Edmonton: 

Time and Date: Noon, Aug 21, 2008 (Thursday)
Location: Edmonton, Alberta – City Hall
Contact: Melanie Greenfield - 780-710-1540

Edmonton Contact:

Melanie Greenfield – Director of Public Relations
ECMAS (Equal Child Maintenance & Access Society) Alberta
T(780)710-1540 E melanie.greenfield@gmail.com
W www.ecmas.org

Please be there.

Posted in Organizational News, Paternal Rights, Social-Destruction Enterprise, Shared Parenting, Family, Child-Custody Awards, Feminist Jurisprudence | Print | No Comments »

August 17, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

Correction 2008 08 18: The story sent out by John Murtari and the comments pertaining to it that were posted here yesterday have been removed to focus attention on the all-important statement provided in the last paragraph in John Murtari’s message:

….Obviously, what someone sent me was a bit of satire on our efforts for reform. I don’t blame them for wanting to remain anonymous. It made me laugh, but it also exposed some bitter truths. What do you think? Best regards!

–
John Murtari
____________________________________________________________________
Coordinator AKidsRight.Org
jmurtari@AKidsRight.Org “A Kid’s Right to BOTH parents”
Toll Free (877) 635-1968(x-211) http://www.AKidsRight.Org/

_________________

Another comment by F4L (2008 08 18):

Obviously, the websites that had been identified in the spoof forwarded by John Murtari are not a representative sample of websites concerned with ‘Parental Rights’ & the Family Law Reform Movement in the US.  That is, they are representative only with respect to their individual rankings but not with respect to what they reflect.

There is a growing proliferation of websites for ‘Parental Rights’ and especially of websites for ‘Fathers’ Rights’, but one truth remains for virtually all of them:  Individually, they appear to have little public appeal.  That is deceiving, because collectively they and the individuals and organizations who operate and maintain them are becoming an important influence that drives a rapidly growing interest in family law reform.

Low-ranking websites that promote fathers’ rights and the traditional nuclear family may not seem to be important in the scheme of things, but collectively they constitute an important force and a very real civil rights movement based on the voice of the people.  They have become an important counter force against the incessant and escalating family-hostile propaganda that inundates all of the main-stream media.

The large and growing interest in family law reform throughout the developed nations is a consequence of the growing dissatisfaction with the destructive social engineering that since the 1960s intensified the implementation of the agenda for the planned destruction of the family.

–Walter

Posted in Divorce, Education, Organizational News, Paternal Rights, Men's Issues, Child-Custody Awards, Propaganda Exposed, Feminism, Feminist Jurisprudence, Family, The New World Order | Print | No Comments »

August 15, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

Telegraph.co.uk

By Richard Alleyne

15 Aug 2008

A Fathers 4 Justice campaigner brought rush-hour traffic to a standstill by climbing a motorway gantry dressed as batman.

Full Story

Posted in Organizational News, Paternal Rights, Divorce, Men's Issues, Family, Feminist Jurisprudence | Print | No Comments »

August 12, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

Yes, there appears to be censorship by Google.  I don’t know what can be done to stop it, other than to promote search engines that are more objective in the ranking of web pages.

Rather than harrietharmansucks.com having vanished completely from listings at Google, at google.com it is now in 135th place of 763,000 search results.  In comparison, altavista.com ranks harrietharmansucks.com in 30th place of 2.56 million results.  However, even though harrietharmansucks.com is listed now again on search returns by google.com, it, and some other similar web pages, reportedly disappeared from search-return listings for quite some periods of time.

Google provides an advantage and makes it easy to determine such things.  Set google preferences to display 100 entries at a time, but you probably knew that.  It appears that harrietharmansucks.com is not necessarily “delisted,” but that Google’s ranking algorithm possibly contains something that down-ranks such a page.

A search for fatherlessness shows http://fathersforlife.org to be in first place (it’s been there for years), and in fourth place is Trish Wilson’s

MYTHS AND FACTS About Fatherlessness
“Mainstream” fatherlessness statistics come not from valid sources but from father’s rights organizations. They are used to denigrate single and divorced …
members.aol.com/asherah/fatherlessness.html

The respective rankings for that at Google and Altavista are similar. So, why does Google pick on harrietharmansucks.com?

Life must go on.  There is a lot of apathy amongst men, not as much by individual men (those wake up when they are being persecuted, although many are punch-drunk and dazed) as there is by men as a sector in society, in the form of that sector’s collective apathy.  I check search results now and then, such as those pertaining to Women’s Studies, Men’s Studies, Women’s Studies Program and Men’s Studies Program (results over time are shown near the top of “Feminism?  You want feminism?  Which brand would you like?”)  The search returns are interesting.  They do show a distinct decline in interest in feminist issues as time goes by. Still, even though many feminists dropped out of activism through non-governmental organizations, they moved on to posh job positions in almost all sectors of government bureaucracies and intensify their fight against traditional moral values and social standards from there.

Still that men continue to fail to gain ground may not be due so much to men’s failing to rail against female supremacism as it is by men’s active collaboration, aiding and abetting in the construction of female supremacism.

You may have seen the following already.  If not, you will be fascinated by it:

The Socialist Phenomenon, by Igor Shafarevich (English edition1980, with a foreword by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, and now accessible in full and for free at the indicated link)

I came across that book as a result of reading Solzhenitsyn’s 1978 Commencement Address at Harvard.  He stated in that,

….The mathematician Igor Shafarevich, a member of the Soviet Academy of Science, has written a brilliantly argued book entitled Socialism; this is a penetrating historical analysis demonstrating that socialism of any type and shade leads to a total destruction of the human spirit and to a leveling of mankind into death. Shafarevich’s book was published in France almost two years ago [1976, in Russian] and so far no one has been found to refute it.

Igor Shafarevich is a world-renowned mathematician.  I read substantial portions of his book by now, and I must fully agree with what Solzhenitsyn stated about the book.

Solzhenitsyn did not mention feminism as a form of socialism, and neither did Shafarevich in his book, where feminism is not mentioned at all.  Perhaps neither deemed it necessary to state the obvious, namely that socialism favours the female of the human species as much as anthills and beehives favour the females of their respective insect species.  That favoritism is illusory, as it means nothing more than that females do all of the work, and males serve only a single purpose, to diversify the gene pool.

Human socialism has not yet progressed to that state of existence, but that is not for lack of trying.  Ostensibly, women take on an ever-increasing share of the workload.  Still, job fatalities comprise between 18 and 19 men out of every twenty fatalities, and with respect to serious and crippling job injuries the proportion of the sexes is much the same.  Those proportions of the sexes have been the the same since statistics on job injuries and fatalities were kept, with there being no change in those proportions on account of women increasingly entering the job market.  That means that women limit the extent of their work to doing what is safe.  They leave the dangerous, dirty, sweaty and risky jobs to men.  Women will not begin to die at rates equal to those experienced by men on account of the work they do until women have assumed at least an equitable portion of risky and dangerous work.

Shafarevich identified that socialism necessarily takes the form of chiliastic socialism (for “the thousand” at the top of the social hierarchy).  Socialism did so in Sparta.  Shafarevich, even though he quoted extensively from Plato’s writings, especially from “Republic”, apparently did not mention or allude to what Aristotle wrote about Spartan “socialism.”

Feminism is socialism, “chiliastic socialism” for women at the top of society!  It is a revival of the social architecture of Ancient Sparta, and this contains the context of what Aristotle had to say about that:

Again, the license of the Lacedaemonian women defeats the intention of the Spartan constitution, and is adverse to the happiness of the state. For, a husband and wife being each a part of every family, the state may be considered as about equally divided into men and women; and, therefore, in those states in which the condition of the women is bad, half the city may be regarded as having no laws.

And this is what has actually happened at Sparta; the legislator wanted  to make the whole state hardy and temperate, and he has carried out his intention in the case of the men, but he has neglected the women, who live in every sort of intemperance and luxury. The consequence is that in such a state wealth is too highly valued, especially if the citizens fall under the dominion of their wives, after the manner of most warlike races, except the Celts and a few others who openly approve of male loves. The old mythologer would seem to have been right in uniting Ares and Aphrodite, for all warlike races are prone to the love either of men or of women. This was exemplified among the Spartans in the days of their greatness; many things were managed by their women. But what difference does it make whether women rule, or the rulers are ruled by women? The result is the same. [My emphasis, –WHS] Even in regard to courage, which is of no use in daily life, and is needed only in war, the influence of the Lacedaemonian women has been most mischievous.

The evil showed itself in the Theban invasion, when, unlike the women of other cities, they were utterly useless and caused more confusion than the enemy.

This license of the Lacedaemonian women existed from the earliest times, and was only what might be expected. For, during the wars of the Lacedaemonians, first against the Argives, and afterwards against the Arcadians and Messenians, the men were long away from home, and, on the return of peace, they gave themselves into the legislator’s hand, already prepared by the discipline of a soldier’s life (in which there are many elements of virtue), to receive his enactments. But, when Lycurgus, as tradition says, wanted to bring the women under his laws, they resisted, and he gave up the attempt.

These then are the causes of what then happened, and this defect in the constitution is clearly to be attributed to them. We are not, however, considering what is or is not to be excused, but what is right or wrong, and the disorder of the women, as I have already said, not only gives an air of indecorum to the constitution considered in itself, but tends in a measure to foster avarice.

Politics, by Aristotle, (350 B.C.)
Translated By Benjamin Jowett

We know quite a bit about the brutal oppression of men (from the time they were small kids until they became 60 years old) that was necessary to make possible what Aristotle described, but that is what the Harriet Harmans of the world are hard at work to bring about for all men.  Still, it is important to recognize that not only women are responsible for the systemic anti-male discrimination and the exploitation of men.  We must never forget that without the active cooperation and even the leadership of men it is not possible to design, construct and install any form of socialism, not even socialism of the Spartan kind that is in essence nothing other than the construction of female supremacy as a system of government.

I will continue to read the book by Igor Shafarevich.  So far it provided confirmation of my assessment of the consequences of feminism.  (Check the four major attributes of socialism:  Abolition of private property; Abolition of the family; Abolition of religion and, Equality - abolition of hierarchies in society [except “for the top-thousand,” namely women — WHS])

Shafarevich mentions several times that socialism brings about the social structure of the ant hill, and he credits Dostoyevsky with originating that thought.  In that connection, if you have never read “Consider Her Ways” (that is, the ways of the ant), by John Wyndham, do it.  It is a novella about a subject Angry Harry repeatedly wrote about: an engineered virus (e. g.: AH is Going to Build Himself a Virus!), except that Wyndham wrote about the sterilization of all men and about the sort of society that may grow out of that: feminist, chiliastic socialism of the sort you find in an ant hill but without the drones and with parthogenesis.

Igor Shafarevich  recounts instance after instance where, throughout history, men were the primary victims of socialism, so much so that in some cases as many as two thirds of men were killed, making it necessary to establish compulsory polygamy.  (Incidentally, about 96 percent of the victims who perished in the Gulags were men.)

Interestingly, one of the last wishes expressed by Adolf Hitler was to have polygamy legalized and promoted, so as to compensate for and repair the losses his brand of socialism had caused in the male demographic sector of the population and to alleviate the resulting demographic and fiscal consequences.  I don’t know yet whether Shafarevich addressed that in his book.  The book doesn’t mention Hitler, but it does address the subject of polygamy, related consequences and goals of social-engineering in generic terms. For instance:

…an ideology that is hostile to human personality cannot serve as a point of support for it.

We can see that all elements of the socialist ideal–the abolition of private property, family, hierarchies; the hostility toward religion–could be regarded as a manifestation of one basic principle: the suppression of individuality. It is possible to demonstrate this graphically by listing the more typical features that keep appearing in socialist theory and practice over two and a half thousand years, from Plato to Berlin’s “Commune No.1,” and then constructing a model of an “ideal” (albeit nonexistent) socialist society. People would wear the same clothing and even have similar faces; they would live in barracks. There would be compulsory labor followed by meals and leisure activities in the company of the same labor battalion. Passes would be required for going outside. Doctors and officials would supervise sexual relations, which would be subordinated to only two goals: the satisfaction of physiological needs and the production of healthy offspring. Children would be brought up from infancy in state nurseries and schools. Philosophy and art would be completely politicized and subordinated to the educational goals of the state. All this is inspired by one principle–the destruction of individuality or, at least, its suppression to the point where it would cease to be a social force. Dostoyevsky’s comparisons to the ant hill and the bee hive turn out to be particularly apt in the light of ethological classifications of society: we have constructed a model of the anonymous society. (The Socialist Phenomenon, p. 269)

Maybe it is not too late, and the discourse on female supremacy — via Igor Shafarevich’s The Socialist Phenomenon — can become part of the presently feminist-dominated and -controlled education curriculum after the big feminist purge in the mid-1980s removed it from the curriculum as being politically incorrect.  If not in the education system, it can at the very least be discussed where it can reach far more people and do the most good due to the virtual absence of censorship, on the Internet.  Well, perhaps, in view of the apparent censorship of Google censorship is not quite virtually absent, but relative to the censorship of the curriculum it is nothing more than extremely slight.

–Walter

P.S.: The Internet version of The Socialist Phenomenon features an important tool that is suited to expediently cite quotes from the book.  The HTM file provides all of the page numbers along with the text of the given text in the page of the book.  The HTML source code contains bookmarks for every page of text, so that a given quote can easily and accurately be referenced to its precise source location by a link in which the page number is identified as per the following:

http://robertlstephens.com/essays/shafarevich/001SocialistPhenomenon.html#pagestart_[page number]
as illustrated in this example: (Source: The Socialist Phenomenon, p. 269)  –WHS

Posted in Men and Women Work, Social-Destruction Enterprise, Paternal Rights, Education, Men's Issues, Feminism, Family, The New World Order | Print | No Comments »

August 8, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

At the website of Fathers for Life, I stated at a number of places that feminism is communism or, more precisely, that feminism is communism in drag - communism disguised as feminism.  One could even consider, arguably, that feminism is a means by which socialism (or communism, if you will) is being implemented in the so-called “free” West, that therefore the West is steadily becoming more totalitarian; totalitarianism being something into which socialism inevitably evolves.

Totalitarianism is a form of government that theoretically permits no individual freedom and that seeks to subordinate all aspects of the individual’s life to the authority of the government. (Note that the long description of totaltitarianism at Britannica from which the preceding quote was taken mentions neither socialism nor feminism nor communism.)

Some of those ideas of mine were sparked by similar ones expressed by others.  Those ideas seem harsh to many people.  The harsher they seem to those people, the more advanced the evolution towards socialism appears to be in their country of residence.  However, the older I get and the more I keep my eyes open and look around, the more confirmations from surprising sources I find that relate or allude to the strong relationship between feminism and socialism.

This morning I re-read Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s 1978 commencement address at Harvard, A World Split Apart.  In that address, Solszhenitsyn stated:

I hope that no one present will suspect me of expressing my partial criticism of the Western system in order to suggest socialism as an alternative. No; with the experience of a country where socialism has been realized, I shall not speak for such an alternative. The mathematician Igor Shafarevich, a member of the Soviet Academy of Science, has written a brilliantly argued book entitled Socialism; this is a penetrating historical analysis demonstrating that socialism of any type and shade leads to a total destruction of the human spirit and to a leveling of mankind into death. Shafarevich’s book was published in France almost two years ago and so far no one has been found to refute it. It will shortly be published in English in the U.S.

The book that Solzhenitsyn alluded to is: The Socialist Phenomenon, by Igor Shafarevich.  Translations of the book into English (with a foreword by Solzhenitsyn) are no longer in print, but the book is available on the Internet in full and for free.

I will quote here just one page from the book.  The answer to the question posed in the header of this blog entry will become instantly apparent.

It would seem that socialist ideology has the ability to stamp widely separated or even historically unlinked socialist currents with indelible and stereotyped markings.

It seems to us quite legitimate to conclude that socialism does exist as a unified historical phenomenon. Its basic principles have been indicated above. They are:

• Abolition of private property.
• Abolition of the family.
• Abolition of religion.
• Equality, abolition of hierarchies in society.

The manifold embodiments of these principles are linked organically by a common spirit, by an identity of specific details and, frequently, by a clearly discernible overall thrust.

Our perspective on socialism takes into account only one of the dimensions in which this phenomenon unfolds. Socialism is not only an abstract ideological system but also the embodiment of that system in time and space. Therefore, having sketched in its outlines as an ideology, we now ought to be able to explain in what periods and within what civilization socialism arises, whether in the form of doctrine, popular movement or state structure. But here the answer turns out to be far less clear. While the ideology of socialism is sharply defined, the occurrence of socialism can hardly be linked to any definite time or civilization. If we consider the period in the history of mankind which followed the rise of the state as an institution, we find the manifestations of socialism, practically speaking, in all epochs and in all civilizations. It is possible, however, to identify epochs when socialist ideology manifests itself with particular intensity. This is usually at a turning point in history, a crisis such as the period of the Reformation or our own age. We could simply note that socialist states arise only in definite historical situations, or we could attempt to explain why it was that the socialist ideology appeared in virtually finished and complete form in Plato’s time. We shall return to these questions later. But in European history, we cannot point to a single period when socialist teachings were not extant in one form or another. It seems that socialism is a constant factor in human history, at least in the period following the rise of the state. Without attempting to evaluate it for the time being, we must recognize socialism as one of the most powerful and universal forces active in a field where history is played out.

[200]

Igor Shafarevich
The Socialist Phenomenon, p. 200

It appears that the feminism that is being rammed down our throats in the developed nations is the Spartan kind described by Aristotle.

If you are not yet convinced, read a bit more of The Socialist Phenomenon.  I also recommend for you to look up some of the sources used by Igor Shafarevich.  You better do that anyway, because it is extremely unlikely that much more than exceedingly little of what he wrote about was covered by the educational curriculum used to indoctrinate you with.  After all, the feminists who dominate, control and censor the curriculum (in the mid-1980s they literally purged the text books at all North-American schools, colleges and universities of all politically-incorrect content) don’t want you to know that they are socialists or communists disguised as feminists.  Most of their students probably don’t even know that is the case.  That is how indoctrination works.

By the way, you will not find anything at Wikipedia that comes even close to what I wrote about here.  But that is no surprise to you, is it?  (See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shafarevich#The_Socialist_Phenomenon)

Last, but not least, for anyone who ever wondered by feminists scorn science and are hostile to rigorous scientific examination of the expressions of their feelings they wish to have us buy and swallow, here is a quote from Solzhenitsyn’s foreword to Igor Shafarevich’s book:

World socialism as a whole, and all the figures associated with it, are shrouded in legend; its contradictions are forgotten or concealed; it does not respond to arguments but continually ignores them–all this stems from the mist of irrationality that surrounds socialism and from its instinctive aversion to scientific analysis, features which the

[vii]

---

author of this volume points out repeatedly and in many contexts….

There you have it: feminism is socialism.

Posted in Censorship, Media Bias, Social-Destruction Enterprise, Paternal Rights, Education, Men's Issues, Propaganda Exposed, Feminism, Family, The New World Order | Print | No Comments »

August 6, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

Dear Don,
OneMillionDads.com,

You recommend that we give thanks to the organizations mentioned in your message (appended) for promoting PSAs that will ostensibly create a positive image of fathers.

I see a few things wrong with the image of fathers that is being created through those PSAs.

There is nothing wrong with having dads play with their kids, but the first impression I got from those PSAs when I watched them was a cutting pain in my gut on account of dads making fools of themselves by acting like kids.

Dads are teachers, leaders and role models.  They are not likely to be respected all that much by their kids if all that they do is behave like kids.  Their kids should be shown that their dads can behave like kids, but that is not, by far, all that dads do.  Kids need to know that, too, but the PSAs don’t show that at all.

The message behind the PSAs is that dads abrogate their parental responsibilities, and that to cure that problem, all that is necessary is for dads to become involved instead of being absent from their children’s lives.  For the vast majority of dads that were expunged from their children’s lives the children’s mothers and government agencies who kicked them out are the true obstacles that need to be overcome.  Many mothers and the government are gate keepers who bar access to the fathers of the “mothers’” children.

There is not a hint of that in the PSAs you praise.  In fact, it seems to me that those PSAs are close to being insults to exiled fathers who can’t even wave to their kids if they happen to see them somewhere in the streets without running the danger of being thrown into jail for violating restraining orders that were obtained under false pretenses.

Aside from that, some of the dads who return from fighting for democracy, home and country have not much of anything left to play with.  To boot, many are being kept away from their wives and from children of whom quite a few were not even fathered by them, and they must cope with that while being fitted for artificial limbs.

Spare us insulting ads that make dads look like fools.

Sincerely,

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

Cc: Various fathers rights activists

—Original Message—

August 6, 2008

Great Dad ads deserve our thanks

Dear Walter,

The Advertising Council, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse recently launched two new public service advertisements (PSAs) designed to show dads the critical role they play in their children’s lives.

Click an image below to watch the ad. Or, click here.

Requires Windows Media Player™

Created pro bono by Campbell-Ewald, the new TV, radio, print, outdoor and on-line PSAs emphasize to fathers that “the smallest moments can have the biggest impact on a child’s life.” The PSAs conclude with the tagline, “Take time to be a dad today” and direct fathers to visit www.fatherhood.gov or call 1-877-4DAD411 for parenting tips and additional resources for fathers.

Take Action

Please thank the organizations above for creating refreshing ads promoting the importance of fatherhood. An email letter has been prepared, or you may wish to write your own.

Send Your Letter Now!

Sincerely,

Donald E. Wildmon, Chairman
OneMillionDads.com

P.S. Please forward this to your family and friends!

Posted in Paternal Rights, Organizational News, Men's Issues, Propaganda Exposed | Print | No Comments »

August 2, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

The Press and Journal

Wake-up call aims to restore men to their rightful role

By Derek Lord

Published:

THE feminist movement has a new hate figure – someone who has inspired more loathing among its members than Hugh Hefner, Peter Stringfellow and all the other male chauvinist pigs you can think of – and, shock, horror, she’s a woman.

American author Kathleen Parker has written a book entitled Save the Males that challenges the foundations of 21st-century feminism. Bravely she contends that, initially, through extreme feminism and its adoption by western society, women have demonised men and trivialised their contribution, especially to family life.

Her passionate defence of the male sex and their worth in the world at large has had many women across the pond foaming at the mouth. They regard Parker as a traitor to her gender. She dares to suggest that in trying to make the world fairer for women they have made it grossly unfair to men….(Full Story)
_____________
Comment by Fathers for Life:

The book is available through amazon.com

Save the Males: Why Men Matter Why Women Should Care, by Kathleen Parker

Book reviews at amazon.com

Out of 21 reviews, 17 are rated 5 stars, and four are rated 1 star.  One of those 1-star reviews is by someone who didn’t read the book, proving that to be a feminist one neither has to be logical nor informed.  To be a feminist, one only needs to toe the party line and to be opposed to common sense.

There is another “save-the-males” book, published before Kathleen Parker’s collection of essays.  This one is more researched and less of a reflection of opinions.  In essence, it provides the references and rigorous factual information to Kathleen Parker’s book on the subject.  See:

Save the Males: Masculinity and Men’s Rights Redux (2007, Paperback), by Richard Doyle (Author)

An earlier edition of that book was published as:

Save the Males: Common Sense on Gender and Family Issues (2006, Paperback, ISBN 978-1-4116-9633-4) by Richard Doyle

Posted in Paternal Rights, Men's Issues, Family, Feminism, The New World Order | Print | No Comments »

August 1, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

insidecatholic.com

The Government, Divorce, and the War on Fatherhood
by Todd M. Aglialoro
7/31/08

Display Full Article/Printer Friendly | Send to a Friend

The article is an outstanding review of Stephen Baskerville’s book Taken Into Custody: The War Against Fathers, Marriage and the Family.

This is what Stephen Baskerville says about it:

This review has just been published today as the cover story in InsideCatholic.com, a prestigious and influential online magazine that is the successor to the print magazine Crisis.

This review is not only highly favorable, it is also amazingly perceptive.  Note the last line, where he calls this “a critical civil rights struggle; perhaps the most critical of all.”  This guy gets it (and he should be recognized).

The full review is here.  You can also leave comments, send a letter, etc.

In your comments — and in circulating this review to influential people (for which it is eminently suitable) — I might suggest you emphasize that Mr. Aglialoro is not exaggerating (and of course neither am I).

Stephen

Read the review and send a copy of it to your legislators and representatives!

Keep in mind that although the main focus of Taken Into Custody is on the USA, the book and also Todd Aglialoro’s review make it crystal clear that the governments’ war against fathers, marriage and the family prevails to identical extents in all developed nations.  In essence both, the book and the review, illustrate and discuss the implementation of the international agenda for the planned destruction of the family.

–Walter

Posted in Health, Divorce, Suicides, Paternal Rights, Men's Issues, Family, The New World Order, Propaganda Exposed, Feminism, Feminist Jurisprudence, Women's Violence | Print | No Comments »

July 21, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

OneNews.com

2008 06 17

Marcia Segelstein - OneNewsNow Columnist - 6/17/2008

Reluctant Rebel logoIt’s been many years since the late Senator Patrick Moynihan tried to sound the alarm about the problem of fatherlessness in the black community and its long-term implications.  Not only did his words fall largely on deaf ears, he was harshly criticized for speaking up about it.

Sadly, what Moynihan saw happening in the black community has now happened in American society as a whole.  With celebrities leading the way, it is now no big deal for women to have babies out of wedlock.  The very phrase “out of wedlock” sounds positively old-fashioned.  Accidental pregnancies can be aborted — or not — take your pick.  And these days, eyebrows are barely raised over intentional pregnancies by single women.  The New York Times Magazine ran a cover story called “Looking for Mr. Good Sperm” a while back on the trend among single women, tired of waiting for Mr. Right, to seek out instead the right sperm donor.  The author writes, “As recently as the early 60’s, a ‘respectable’ woman needed to be married just to have sex, not to speak of children.”  Imagine!  What a ridiculous notion that sex was anything more than mere recreation.   And as for procreation, who needs it?!  The sex part that is.  Technology’s come a long way, baby.   So guess who’s become obsolete in an ever-growing number of households headed by single women or lesbian couples?  You got it: fathers.  But is that bad?….(Full Story)

Posted in Divorce, Paternal Rights, Health, Men's Issues, Shared Parenting, Family | Print | No Comments »

July 5, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

In the US alone, paternity fraud involves hundreds of thousands of cases each year where paternity is assigned to men who are not the natural fathers of the children they are alleged to have caused to be conceived.

Yet, once a given man has been designated as the father of a child of which he is not the natural father, he is with virtual certainty that child’s father in the eyes of the law. There is virtually no recourse for him.

Whether the man so designated is married to the mother of the child or not, whether he gets to see the child that he is alleged to have fathered but that is not his, or whether he even plays a meaningful role in the life of that child, he will with almost absolute certainty then be punished for being fingered as the father of that child, fined to pay child support for a child that that is not his, even if he can present irrefutable proof that the child is not his — with payments that can reach thousands of dollar per month until the child reaches majority or finishes his education, whichever comes later.

As per US-CAPF (US Citizens Against Paternity Fraud), there have over the years been three cases in the State of Georgia in which unjustly fingered fathers managed, at a cost of years of litigation and many thousands of dollars in each case, to have the courts absolve them from their financial responsibilities for children that were not fathered by them. US-CAPF identifies another 20 such cases in all of the US. Let there be no mistake: that is the extent of American justice out of possibly hundreds of thousands of cases of paternity fraud.

Paternity fraud: With respect to disputes over paternal rights and responsibilities, paternity fraud results in illegally obtained but court-sanctioned child-support benefits resulting from an allegation by a woman in collaboration with the legal system, supported by the courts and given the force of law through a court order, whereby a given man (often without him having been legally informed of the alleged paternity) is assigned the duties and responsibilities that come with paternity, even though he can prove through DNA paternity tests that he is not the natural father of the child or children he is alleged to have fathered.

It goes without saying that the preceding definition applies not only in cases of divorce and separation but also in practical but less adversarial ways to paternity within intact marriages or other relationships that don’t go or have not yet gone through child-support, child-custody and child-visitation litigation. In California, for example,

In Los Angeles County, eighty percent of paternity establishments are entered by default judgment, whereas for the State of California as a whole, the number is sixty-eight percent. California is not alone. The United States Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General (HHS/IG report) reported that “seven states’ child support agencies report half or more of paternities established in their states occur through defaults.” The inspector general further reported that “[t]wentyfour percent of local offices in focus states report half or more of paternities in their caseloads are established by default.” (The Innocent Third Party: Victims of Paternity Fraud (110 kB PDF file), BY RONALD K. HENRY; Family Law Quarterly, Volume 40, Number 1, Spring 2006)

What that means is that in such cases the mother of a child “determined” by various methods (e. g.: through picking a name out of a phone book) who is the father of her child.

Paternity fraud is an age-old problem: “Mothers are fonder than fathers of their children because they are more certain they are their own.” — Aristotle

Paternity fraud is rampant throughout the world.

In the US, 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, footnote to Table 2 — PDF file, 129kB)

Parentage exclusion rates per AABB Annual Reports:

2001. Of 310,490 cases, 90,227 (29.06%) were reported as exclusions (Source, p. 2 of 12)
2002. Of 340,798 cases, 97,681 (28.7%) were reported as exclusions (Source, p. 3 of 51)
2003. Of 353,387 cases, 99,174 (28.06%) were reported as exclusions (Source, p. 3 of 53)
2004. Of 374,171 cases, 100,588 (26.68%) were reported as exclusions (Source, p. 6 of 62)

Consider the following:

The practice of attributing fatherhood to the wrong man—for a variety of reasons—is not uncommon. The rate of wrongful paternity in “stable monogamous marriages,” according to the Max Planck Institute in Munich, Germany, ranges from one in 10 with the first child to one in four with the fourth. In contested paternity cases, where the alleged father wants to be sure of his paternity before allowing himself to be committed to a life-time of supporting a child to whom he may never have access, the rate of wrongful paternity is one in three in Texas and 36% of all cases in Florida.

An article in the March 27 [2000] issue of the Melbourne, Australia, daily, the Age, claims, “About 3,000 paternity tests are carried out a year in Australia. In about 20% of cases the purported father is found to be unrelated to the child. This figure is estimated to be 10% in the general community.” The article continues, “The New South Wales privacy commissioner, Mr. Chris Puplick, said the practice [of DNA testing children without the mother’s permission] was unethical and an illustration of the need for formal guidelines about genetic testing and access to genetic material. The consequence for a man of finding out he was not the father could be devastating, he said.” (Pregnant on the sly : The practice of falsely attributing fatherhood is rising among women, by Walter H. Schneider and Candis McLean; The REPORT Newsmagazine, United Western Communications, April 24, 2000)

More in Advice to Men:

• Paternity Testing
• Prices for paternity testing
• Paternity Issues
• Restitution for Paternity Fraud
• Men who pay child support for children that are not theirs — What if the child isn’t yours?
• Are you sure your child is yours? Chances can be one or better against four that it isn’t.

Posted in Paternal Rights, Men's Issues, Family, Feminist Jurisprudence, Paternity Fraud | Print | 1 Comment »