[US] Violence Against Women Act: The Fast Food of Law

Updated 2019 05 14. to add links to related articles.

The [US] Violence Against Women Act: The Fast Food of Law, caused domestic violence (a.k.a. family violence) to be in the news throughout the whole year, but especially at this time of the year. It’s the season of domestic violence months, October in some countries, give or take a month, depending on country.

Someone pointed me to two comments by Terri Lynn Tersak, “a professional commercial photographer, the President and CEO of True Equality Network, and a member of the Steering and Legislative Committee of the Maryland based think-tank, RADAR — Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting.”

Although the first article shown below appears to reflect in its terminology decades of feminist indoctrination (one always has to look carefully when “people” are being mentioned, as the context of the discussion often leaves no doubt that the non-sex-specific “people” means nothing other than “women” who are victims), it identifies important truths. The abuse business is a big and flourishing industry, it is being used to advantage by advocates and “victims” alike out of greed and for profit, it is involved in criminal activities, and it caters to large numbers of false claims of abuse, to the exclusion of victims who are truly in need.

The article doesn’t mention that men are equally often victims of abuse by women (and of course far more often victims of abuse by other men). Men are twice as likely than women are to become victims of violence. Yet the article did not come close to touching on that, which is an odd omission for an organization that calls itself “True Equality Network” whose CEO expounds on the lack of justice and equitability in the treatment of true victims of domestic violence. Moreover, Terri Lynn Tersak’s article complains much about the abuse of women’s shelters but says absolutely nothing about the lack of abuse of men’s shelters. There is no abuse of men’s shelters because there are none of those. What does not exist cannot be abused. However, don’t male victims of domestic violence who have no shelters at all to escape to deserve a little bit of pity, at the very least from an organization that calls itself “True Equality Network”?

Another odd omission in the article is that children were not mentioned (feminists always religiously avoid doing that in connection with DV). Children are the largest single group of domestic violence victims, and children in families who are being hurt are being hurt by their mothers in the vast majority of cases (just about exactly 70 percent of serious or fatal violence against children in families is committed by the children’s mothers), while the biological fathers of those children rank almost a minuscule last place in the list of the perpetrators of violence against children.

Here is that first article:

VAWA Fails to Protect Women Who Need Protection the Most

October 11, 2006
by Terri Lynn Tersak


The second article in her series,

Violence Against Women Act: The Fast Food of Law

Wednesday, October 11, 2006
By Terri Lynn Tersak


It castigates the US Violence Against Women Act and the abuse and misuses of the women’s shelter industry even more than the first one did.

That article seems at first more balanced, or better, neutral with respect to the respective plights of the sexes, but then — about half-way down — comes this statement:

The women of True Equality Network, most of who are themselves victims of severe domestic violence, have spent almost five years in courthouses interviewing over 15,000 plaintiffs in domestic violence cases just before they entered the courtroom. The overwhelming number of those interviewed did not attempt to mask the real reasons they filed a domestic violence claim: control, money, and revenge — for everything you could possibly imagine — everything except acts of domestic violence.

Right. I don’t want to belittle the plight of these women of True Equality Network, but did they notice that the 15,000 plaintiffs in domestic violence cases whom they interviewed just before they entered the courtroom were in the majority women, while there should at least have been one man for every woman whom they interviewed, and that furthermore they apparently never got to interview any children, who should have comprised more than one-third of all of the people whom they did interview?

I guess not, because a little farther down in that article Terri Lynn Tersak stated that “Renowned professors and scientists who have reviewed this study series have said that the study was conducted using proper scientific methods and has produced … ‘significant findings that need to be widely published and cited.'”

No doubt, the study sample examined by True Equality Network produced significant findings that need to be widely published and cited, but that the study sample was taken using “proper scientific methods” is doubtful. The sample she wrote about cannot possibly be a randomly selected one. It must of necessity be a pre-determined and pre-selected selective study sample, a sample whose nature and origin exclude the possibility of making valid projections to the general population.

Even though that study comes awfully close, it may not be quite classifiable as advocacy research (that is a study that deliberately sets out to prove a predetermined outcome), because it may not have set out deliberately to prove a foregone conclusion. It was a study done by advocates for a selective cause using a selective study sample, not a randomly-selected one. The way it has been described in Terri Lynn Tersak’s article and writings linked to from her article, the study has no validity beyond the selective sample of victims it studied.

The study produced a vast amount of anecdotal evidence but apparently no hard statistics that relate to much that happens in the general population.

The next time when True Equality Network undertakes such a study it should ensure proper proportional representation of all groups of victims of domestic violence in their study sample, not just women. Furthermore it should ensure that the sample is randomly selected, not prescreened by the bureaucracy before its members make it into the court rooms.

Nevertheless, although True Equality Network in that article, too, incongruously mentioned nothing about the lack of shelters for men who need to flee violent relationships, its findings about the corruption that has come to infect the whole system are born out by many other reports on that corruption. The details may vary a little from place to place and from country to country, but the principle remains.

Objective observers of the women’s shelter industry will agree with True Equality Network on one thing: The women’s shelter movement is corrupt, an inexhaustible cash-cow for radical feminists and government agencies alike and an expedient tool used effectively for the implementation of the agenda for the planned destruction of our families.

#FeministJurisprudence #PropagandaExposed #WomensViolence

See also:

(Visited 170 times, 1 visit(s) today)
This entry was posted in Feminist Jurisprudence, Propaganda Exposed, Women's Violence. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to [US] Violence Against Women Act: The Fast Food of Law

  1. Sally,

    I am my own worst enemy? Maybe not. It seems that I could not do much worse for an enemy than having you for a friend.

    Please hold off on the ad-hominem attacks. Those are not permitted on this blog. You must read “About Dads & Things” at http://blog.fathersforlife.org/about/

    You accuse me of ranting, just because I complained that a feminist organization interviewed women who became victims of violence and did nothing to find out why there were no men to interview. Although you rant far worse than I did, you confirmed that in all those years you did not see a single man file a complaint. I assume then that my assumption was correct, and that you did not interview any men who were domestic violence victims. Is that gender-balanced, equitable and just?

    The men who died on account of spousal murder can’t complain, while their murderers go free or receive at worst a nominal sentence. Those who can and do complain get laughed out of the police stations and out of court, if they make it there. More likely they get arrested, even if they are the ones who are injured and bleeding and the female perpetrators stand by with the smoking gun. You call that equal justice?

    Certainly, many things are wrong with the system, and you blame men for all that is wrong, but only when the consequences of the system getting out of kilter hurt women, too. That is spoken like a true feminist.

    One question, though. In your rant you introduced many issues I had never touched, and you launched many insults that neither all men nor I deserve, but you did not remark on one of the three areas I had covered in my commentary. That is the fact that children comprise the largest single group of domestic violence victims, and that those child victims of DV are being hurt primarily and in the vast majority by their mothers. How come you did not respond to that? Are you that much of a feminist that you are blind to the suffering of our children and too busy to introduce strawmen into your arguments?

    The courts are the wrong places to collect data for objective statistical surveys on any social aspects. The cases that come to court are a reflection of the sum-total of our cultural and administrational biases. The judges merely add their own personal biases when they judge those cases.

    Respectable social researchers that produce credible social research know that. They stay away from the courts and design and collect their own survey samples from the general population.

    What goes into court is not all true, as you found out with the large number of false abuse allegations made by women. Was that a surprise for you? However the judgments that come out of court are not all true either. Judges are human. Many of them err, and many more judges err even more because they are feminists.

    You may need to educate yourself a little on the lack of gender-balance in DV issues and on the causes of that. I recommend that you have a look at a few of the articles identified at http://fathersforlife.org/family_violence_main_page.htm

  2. Sally Jacobs says:

    Let me open with a little fact you may have discovered had you contacted the author instead of showing your obvious misogyny by only communicating your issue about this piece with men. That little fact is, this article was edited by two men, RADAR’s Mark Rosenthal and David Heleniak. Now please show the world you are a balanced individual and post a flaming rant about them too.

    At some point maybe men will stop blasting the women who support them, which has only proven to be successful in inspiring physical violence against them by real radical feminist women. But then again maybe that is the desired result of your rant.

    Please keep in mind women in general aren’t idiots and we all aren’t your evil ex-wife. While you are at please stop promoting the logical fallacy that this is all the result of an “anti-male” agenda promoted solely by stupid, evil women.

    Take note; most of the legislators who created this horrible state of affairs, continue to support the laws behind it, and make sure they are funded are male. While we are at it, take note that most of the attorneys who support – and profit from – this reign of terror are male. Most of the judges who rule in favor of destroying father’s rights are male. Most of the law enforcement officers that impose these laws on innocent victims of false allegations are also male. Then note that none of them are anti-getting-paid. The only men who think this is an anti-male agenda run solely by wicked women are those who really haven’t though this through in practical, objective terms.

    It is, however, an anti-freedom agenda supported by evil people.

    The ideology of radical feminism is a scary thing, but isn’t the real force behind the what is going on, greed and control is. Feminism is just a marketing tool that has been shown to be very effective in garnering support from the insane, fetus murdering, “the world revolves around me” type of woman. Who by the way tend to complaint loudly when they don’t get their way.

    Being one of the women who personally conducted some of the courthouse interviews let me clue you in a few details. In five years of doing the surveys not so much as one man was seen in any of the courthouses having filed a DV complaint. So how can I include what doesn’t exist in my survey, Einstein? Calling this study by survey “close to advocacy research” is about as honest and intelligent as calling medical assessment of veterans suffering from Gulf War Syndrome “Advocacy Medicine.”

    Remember one truth, this was done to men mostly by men who let this happen to themselves by doing nothing, failing to organize and spending more time and energy fighting with each other over trivial details then doing anything productive.

    They aren’t going to fix this mess alone and attacking the women who support equal parenting and gender neutral domestic violence laws isn’t going to help fix it. Rather, it feeds into the notion of patriarchal misandry promoted by the radical feminists.

    You sir, are your own worst enemy.

    Okay I’m finished for today, I’ll let you go back into your myopic netherworld where man-hate is the cause of all of today’s evil in the world.


    Yours truly,
    Sally Jacobs
    The Center for Children’s Justice – Carolinas Chapter
    P.O. Box 891
    Concord, NC 28025

    Children Need Both Parents
    Update 2013 04 01: I just re-read that, as I am in the process of doing a bit of housekeeping, but, phew, am I ever glad Sally got that off her chest — going back to my “myopic world” now…Oh, and by the way, in my “myopic world” no one has anything against women, per se. We do have something against feminist ideology and the fact that most feminists, by far — as Sally inadvertently alluded, are men. However, Sally — blinded by ideological fervor even though her eyes are wide open — cannot see that.

    As is true of any fervent feminist ideologue, any criticism of feminism is an attack on women. “There are none so blind as those who won’t see.” –F4L

Comments are closed.