Ill Eagle 13
Ill Eagle 13 .. Feb 2001 .... ISSN 1466-9005
Ill Eagle for MPs
Many thanks to Jerome Davis for supplying Ill Eagle to MPs – Ed
Letter in Ireland on Sunday, sep00, by Michael Stephens,
Pineview Grove, Aylesbury, Tallaght
In the early part of this century, an Alabama industrialist, David Edelman, forecast that increased mechanisation of agriculture would result in "negroes becoming obsolete". He, therefore, proposed that measures be taken to reduce or eliminate the negro population in the USA as society (ie white people) would have no further use for them.
His inhuman comments were, quite rightly, condemned by many public figures even in those "unenlightened" times.
If anyone, in our modern, liberal, new Ireland suggested that one section of humanity is now obsolete or redundant because the rest of the human race can survive without them, one would expect that such a sentiment would be utterly condemned by all right-minded people. No doubt, if the group declared obsolete or redundant were black people, itinerants, gay people or, most especially, women, the cries of condemnation would be deafening.
Yet, popular psychiatrist Dr Anthony Clare, in his recent book, declares men to be redundant and no one raises an eyebrow. His book, entitled Masculinity in Crisis, does nothing more than repeat the same old anti-man rhetoric that we have been hearing for the past 20 years from misandrist feminists and their sycophants.
Men are portrayed in this book as inherently violent, totally confused and unable to come to terms with the rapid changes in society. All men's problems and all women's problems are caused by men and the mythical "patriarchy". In essence, Dr Clare sees men as flawed versions of human perfection, ie, women.
In his myopic analysis of society, Dr Clare ignores the fact that men are, and always have been, the architects of virtually all social progress. The overall contribution of women to the evolution of civilisation is miniscule in comparison.
If he looked around at the reality of men's lives in the 21st century, he would see that the vast majority of men are totally at ease with their place in society and, as in the past, making valuable contributions in every walk of life, including the nurturing of children.
It is true that some men are finding life difficult as evidenced by the suicide statistics. But if commentators like Dr Clare wish to make an intelligent contribution to a debate on men's place in society, I would suggest that they first free themselves from the constraint of having to tailor their utterances to the demands of the great tyranny of our times, ie feminism.
[I first met Stephens at Amen in Eire in sep00. His letter exactly matches my comments on The Squirt in Ill Eagle aug00, p1- Ed.]
Out for the Count
- Andrew Stephen, Sunday Times Magazine, 14jan01, p37/43
.... Al Gore .... needed to employ a $15,000-a-month feminist, Naomi Wolf, to tell him how to behave like a man. .... the ludicrous "earth tone" clothes Wolf had told him to wear ....
Stealth Tax on Marriage
- Paul Eastham, Daily Mail, 22jan01, p1
Gordon Brown was accused last night of undermining the traditional family through a new payment to parents. .... millions of single parents and unmarried couples will benefit while two-parent homes will miss out. ....
British men stay single longer to play the field
- Ben Summerskill, Observer, 21jan01, p6
.... '.... Large numbers of people in their twenties and thirties have witnessed their parents' relationships break up. That can put them off.' .... Almost 30% of households in Britain now consist of a single person living alone, up from below 10% in 1960....
Let's hear it for divorce
- Carol Sarler, Observer, 21jan01, p31
.... Lord Chancellor finally bowed to the inevitable and abandoned the 'no fault' divorce reforms, which had been beating at the heart of the Family Law Act 1996. Too expensive, he said. ....
.... as with my lunching friend - divorce might be the bravest, most liberating, exhilarating thing that someone has ever done, for themselves and their families, and they should be congratulated.
A high divorce rate, in all probability, signifies more happy people, not fewer. .... Nine times out of 10, those who purse the pious lip are privately miserable but, in the absence of courage to end domestic torment, they don't see why anybody else should get out either.
Acquittals by juries reach record levels
- Tom Robbins, Sunday Times, 28jan01, p3
Juries are acquitting more defendants than at any time in the past 25 years - a trend that police fear is undermining the war on crime.
.... Dr Gary Slapper .... Open University .... shows that while acquittal rates remained static at about 32% from the mid-1970s to the end of the 1980s, they shot up during the 1990s.
In 1999, 43% of all jury verdicts were "not guilty", the highest % since the start of the survey.
"The public is so much more critical and socially and politically aware than it was in the 1950s or 1850s and so juries are more likely to think for themselves," said Slapper. "They are less prone to be reverential towards police officers, because it is more common knowledge in 2001 than it was in 1950 that police officers are capable of lying, that lawyers are capable of covering up evidence, and that judges can be less than wholesome characters."
Jack Straw, the home secretary, is determined to limit the right to trial by jury ....
As well as distrusting police evidence, juries are tending to disregard legal advice offered by the judge and returning "perverse" verdicts based on their own views. ....
"The govt argues against juries on the basis that they are too expensive and slow, but the bottom line is that they object to the fact that juries come back with verdicts that they do not like," said Michael Mansfield, QC. ....
A week before, in Sunday Times 21jan01, p17, Melanie Phillips had a perceptive analysis of the role of the jury. As the Clive Ponting trial showed, it is not there just to decide on guilt. The jury refused to convict, although they knew Ponting was guilty of breaking the Official Secrets Act when he exposed the deception by our govt over the Belgrano sinking. The jury knew there was a more important
issue at stake; honest government. RG and I myself believe that when a husband divorces, he is thereby criminalised; driven outside any legal framework, much as happened in the Middle Ages to a man who was excommunicated, or to a helot in Roman times. Thus, it is important that when a divorced man is forced to resort to extra-legal means to defend himself against illegal attack sanctioned by judges, he knows that in the last resort he can appeal to a jury, who with him will ignore the law in order to fend off our oppressive, anti-social Family Court System (allied with the Criminal Courts). ".... the facts seemed clear. But the juries chose to return not-guilty verdicts, probably in protest against the official secrets law ...." - MP.
As more and more information about our illegal, secret Family Courts breaks through the censorship, juries will begin to know enough to refuse to convict fathers who have been targeted by the courts. - Ed
The Century Gap
- Harriet Harman, pub. Vermilion 1993
[Men are one century out of date.]
[pvii] Over the past twenty years Patricia Hewitt, Anna Coote and I have developed our ideas together. [All are now close to Vanity Blair.]
[p57] The National Council of Women of Great Britain reports that .... Just 13 % of women of child-bearing age think that a woman needs a child to be fulfilled - only 25% of mothers actually think this. .... Julie Burchill noted..... "some of us will end up at forty with a cat and .... dinner for one. But more will be happy and more women will be fulfilled than ever before .... BECAUSE IT WAS OUR CHOICE!"
[p58] What must men do to narrow the century gap in marriage? .... They must begin to take more seriously what goes on within their homes and accept that becoming a husband and becoming a father .... will change their lives in fundamental ways. .... they must dramatically increase the time they spend on household chores and childcare; and they must exercise within their homes the rules of common courtesy and respect which they practise at work.
[Shape up, you uncouth men! - Ed]
Changing our Minds: Lesbian Feminism and Psychology
- Celia Kitzinger and Rachel Perkins
pub. Onlywomen Press, 1993
[p60] The word "homophobia" defines fear of lesbians as irrational. There are, according to the psychological definitions of "homophobia", no rational, sensible reasons for fearing lesbianism. This is completely at odds with radical lesbian politics. We cannot think of lesbianism as a challenge to heteropatriarchal structures and values, and simultaneously claim there are no reasonable grounds for men (and heterosexually-identified women) to fear us. We cannot write, as Adrienne Rich (1980) has done, that "a militant and pluralistic feminist movement is potentially the greatest force in the world for a complete transformation of society", and simultaneously claim that fear of lesbianism is irrational.
[Authors are UK university lecturer and Consultant Clinical Psychologist. One attempted suicide. The other had a serious depressive illness. See p75; "A national survey in the United States found that three out of every four lesbians had been in therapy at some point..."]
Failing to deliver on marriage
Editorial, Daily Mail, 22jan01, p12
.... disappointing indeed for those still prepared to believe the Prime Minister's assurances that he is an enthusiastic supporter of marriage and the family.
Last week it emerged that Mr Blair is thinking of abandoning a policy document on the family after a revolt by an alliance of divorced Ministers who objected to any official stance proclaiming that 'marriage is best'.
Now comes news that the Children's Tax Credit - Chancellor Gordon Brown's replacement for the married Couples Allowance - will leave many couples worse off. .... [it] will go to five million people, .... whereas the Married Couples Allowance .... went to ten million couples.
Most disturbing .... help is being switched from married couples to co-habitees with children, and single parents.
Resignation Protest at Ill Eagle
15 January 2001
To: Stephen Fitzgerald National Organiser, ManKind
My renewal of ManKind having come up I feel I must write.
I joined, as did my wife, because we feel that the feminist movement is fast becoming a source of injustice and grave social damage. There are so many aspects to this - the preoccupation of the media and particularly TV advertising with making men look stupid and women look dominant; the loading of divorce settlements against men; the politically corrective over-promotion of women (often a series of women) into jobs for which their talents are insufficient (from Laura Ashley to the CSA); the feminisation of primary schools, and so on. All this has coincided with a profound change in employment opportunities affecting men more than women, the projection of laddishness by television, and so on.
The result of this and many other changes and developments is a loss of identity and role models for young men to acquire the male virtues and male strengths protectiveness, fortitude, resourcefulness, sense of duty in the face of threats, a wish to earn and provide. And so on. Girls can have these also, just as men can be caring and instinctual and so on. But they are central and essential to being a worthwhile man and increasingly they cannot be learnt by boys who are in broken homes, and without decent education and without the apprenticeships where they will mix and learn from men who value work and skills.
The further result is enormous social and economic cost - for example in child support; disorder, crime and policing; the disintegration of the family - in a circle of effect and cause. For example men are increasingly unwilling or unable to play the part of father, simply because as kids they did not know one.
You will know all this better than I do. Having unloaded these thoughts I will come to the point. I see no prospect of reversing all that has gone too far, or even halting the trends, until they are better understood by the balanced and fair-minded, of both sexes.
When I joined I wrote that I was impressed with the Charter, which seemed as balanced and fair-minded as it needed to be. In contrast I am appalled by Ill Eagle. I would be ashamed to show it to my friends, in order to enlist their interest and support. I would also expect this to be counter-productive.
I have no idea who are responsible for preparing this publication, and hardly know where to begin. The punning title is obscure and childish. I find that the tone often seems obsessed, sarcastic, bitter, and even ranting. There is no touch of humour where this would help to make a point. I have to guess that the tone is the result of personal experiences, such as outrageous behaviour by women, and injustice by the system as a whole. No doubt I would be bitter and obsessed in such circumstances. Be that as it may, it is not such as to convince the fair-minded and balanced people on whom reform must depend.
As to the technical aspects of layout and style, the text is too crammed and monotonous. There is no excuse for literals in the age of the PC spell-checker. The over-use of ellipsis arouses suspicion. It is far from clear, in places, as to what is reportage or quotation, what is authored and what is editorial. Overall, I am afraid, it seems amateur. This should not matter, but it does to people who expect professionalism.
It gives me no pleasure, as a member, to say all this. But the cause is more important than any of us. A journal or newsletter happens to be the best way to attract interest from a friend or contact, because it is more indirect and a softer sell than a formal tract and donation form. As a top priority you need one that is not an embarrassment, and has a good chance of enlisting interest, top-class contributions, and support.
We have decided not to renew our membership, and I have to leave it there.
Dr. David Brancher
[Brancher asked that his address and tel. no. be withheld. - Ed]
Recently, after the Daily Mail had published on his case on 28dec00, the courts had the effrontery to gag any information on Len Miskulin, who is on hunger strike because the courts stole his home and his children; . http://members.brabant.chello.ul/g.tenbroek/hunger
http://members.brabant.chello.nl/~g.tenbroek/hunger/ I note that the court gagging order says that if you breach it, the court will not only jail you, but will also steal your property! Many thanks to Jerome David, who has supplied Ill Eagle to MPs. Please would MPs, reading this, appreciate that this is a predatorial, venal, anti-social Star Chamber (presided over by Sloss) which is completely out of control, and getting more menacing all the time. They must rein it in as a matter of urgency. In its death throes, our family court system becomes ever more secretive, vicious and anti-social.
Curiously, since Miskulin has now lost his appetite, as one does when on hunger strike, we could happily eat dinner in front of him!
I told Len that I did not approve of his hunger strike. I thought that it was premature. There would have to be many deaths, but they would occur well into the future. In particular, the 60 CSA suicides and the Miskulin hunger strike are misplaced. Nothing will happen until young men bite the bullet. They will stop proving that they are not violent, and begin to attack a society which attacks them. This counter-attack is some way into the future, with fathers still passively accepting their fate at present. See picture.
I kept to the advice to young men published by John Campion some six years ago; "Don't marry, cohabit or father children." The reason is that today, when a young man does so, he becomes a helot, losing many of his fundamental civil rights - the right to retain income resulting from his work; the right to own property; the right to have an influence on the upbringing of his children; the right of access to his children. The persistent, illegal misconduct of Court Welfare Officers and judges in Sloss's secret, gagged Family Courts is leaking out to more and more vulnerable young men, and both the marriage rate and the birthrate have collapsed.
The very recent next step in my thinking demonstrates how much we need research and deep thinking about the developing deep crisis. I modify Campion's advice as follows.
The present rapidly deepening crisis will be resolved within the next twenty years. Thus, in twenty years from now, a man will again be able to marry and bring up a family in the normal way, as used to be possible for my generation of young men in the 1960s. Thus, the modified advice which we should give to young men is, not to marry, cohabit or father children until twenty years from now, in around 2020.
I have found that when a well-meaning but indifferent woman ("It's only a backlash against the oppression of women throughout the centuries;") hears my modified advice, her reaction is electrifying.
This acceptance that when dealing with the depredations of radfems and their agents, we are dealing in raw power (which they call "empowerment", "a woman taking control of her sexuality"), nothing to do with justice or the law, should be added to another assertion of power by fathers, called Retreat, see http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/retreat01.htm http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/retreat01.htm http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/README.htm Briefly, a father in the divorce courts tells the judge that unless the court order is as he requires, then he will never work again on the white economy, and neither he nor any of his relatives will ever communicate with or finance his children again. In spite of its spectacular success in the case of EH, who as a result retains his home and his children, no other man has been willing to adopt the Retreat strategy, preferring to ape feminists in victimhood.
EH says it is time to move ahead from Protest to Resistance. The 20 year delay and Retreat are examples of that move towards a more mature movement.
The Donkey and the Carrot
From: mailbcf <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: fnf-chat <email@example.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 10:01 PM
Subject: fnf-chat recent postings
[The eldest [ManKind] Oyster looked at him,
But never a word he said:
The eldest Oyster winked his eye,
And shook his heavy head -
Meaning to say he did not choose
To leave the oyster-bed.]
"Many fathers go to quite extraordinary lengths for their children's sakes and never give up. There are men who belong to this organisation [FNF] who spend half their lives either in court or preparing to go to court, men who cross oceans for a few hours with their children and men who endure abuse and humiliation from their former partners and come back for more just for the love of their children. John Baker's account of his treatment on his first visit to his children in France must be familiar to many of us." - Barry Fry
[But four young [FNF] Oysters hurried up
All eager for a treat:
Their coats were brushed, their faces washed,
Their shoes were clean and neat -]
'The time has come,' the Walrus said,
'To talk of many things:
Of shoes - and ships - and sealing wax -
Of cabbages - and kings -
And why the sea is boiling hot -
And whether pigs have wings.']
My editorial "The Donkey and the Carrot", Ill Eagle oct00 p3, is about these men, who feed all the money they can into the Divorce Industry, to keep it going, and to build up the self-esteem of defiant mothers. Why do they think they have the right to drive those with other viewpoints out of FNF? Because they are too ignorant, stupid, bigoted or prejudiced to sustain a strategy discussion, and so have blocked it within FNF. Of course, Baker and Fry will not be able to read my editorial, because FNF refuses to cooperate with other organisations and individuals, for instance by exchanging bulletins and journals. (The editor of Mackenzie has never replied to me or to our Chairman.) I am not saying that my strategy Retreat http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/retreat01.htm http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/retreat01.htm http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/README.htm is necessarily correct. I am only saying that to block strategy discussions for 25 years within FNF is disgraceful and destructive, and has wrought enormous damage on our children.
Divergent views are welcomed in ManKind. My impression is that a ManKind member would get away with anything except stealing our funds or our name. Take me, for instance. Still here, although nobody ever loved me. Ivor Catt, Editor, Ill Eagle.
ManKind and Ill Eagle can be reached at;
(1). ManKind, Suite, 2 Lansdowne Row, London W1X 8HL. 0207 413 9176
(3) The Editor, Ill Eagle, Ivor Catt,
121 Westfields, St. Albans AL3 4JR, England. 01727 864257
(4) Email :- firstname.lastname@example.org
Below is a quote from Stephen Baskerville, Head of Political Science, Howard University, Washington, DC 20059;
The British press and public have been silenced by a gag order prohibiting spreading (not just publishing) any information about Len Miskulin's hunger strike. The ex parte order also includes a "penal order". We could do a great service by spreading information from abroad. One does not have to agree with the hunger strike in order to recognise that this is a major threat to freedom. "An injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere" (M.L. King)."
24jan01 atten. Hague MP, Widdicombe MP, Charles Kennedy MP
.... As you can see from .... below, Len Miskulin has support from Canada .... Australia, Holland, Switzerland, USA, Croatia [etc].... The British courts may have served a gagging order upon Mr. Miskulin, but they cannot gag the world. The gagging order is also a human rights abuse of Mr. Miskulin's 'freedom of expression'.
Sadly, it has come to the stage where fathers no longer respect a court that does not respects their rights to be a father and they now demonstrate outside the homes of judges. This is happening outside Butler-Sloss's home - the head of the Family Court Division. ....
- Dave Ellison email@example.com
Male Domestic Violence Victims 2001
A request for volunteers
A survey of male victims of domestic violence by female partners is being conducted by Dewar Research with the help of Dr M. George of London University.
Men who have experienced violence from a female partner during the last five years are invited to write or contact Dewar Research at 'Constables', Windsor Road, Ascot, SL5 7LF, or tel/fax 01344 621167; or email Dr. George at firstname.lastname@example.org giving their name, postal address, telephone number or email address.
No expenses will be incurred by volunteers, and confidentiality is guaranteed.
Prior to Xmas, I decided to take my extended family on a wonderful trip to the Land of Oz. However, I needed to acquire passports for a) my 8 year old daughter from my first marriage, and b) my youngest son, 10 months old.
Applications had to be in person, as we were due to travel within a few days. So there were both myself and my current partner camping out at the wonderful offices in Petty France; me in one long queue to submit forms and obtain my 8 y.o. daughter's passport (from previous marriage), whilst my partner stood in another queue next to me in order to obtain my youngest son's passport.
I submitted the relevant forms, and was curtailed by the officious official, who religiously informed me that I needed my daughter's mother's (i.e. my ex-wife's) written permission in order to obtain said passport.
When I questioned this blatant sexism sexist bureaucracy, I was slapped down with a retort that this was not sexist, as it was the passport office's policy to obtain authority from both parents in order to pre-empt any possible child abductions.
Of course, my partner in the next queue safely acquired our son's passport without my permission. - The usual state sponsored sexist bullshit. Terence Bates
email@example.com 0207 226 1799
Male victims of Domestic Violence
telephone 01775- 840501
for free, immediate
and confidential advice.
The Oppression of Centuries?
In his lecture to our ManKind 28oct00 conference The Age of Violent Young Men http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/conf/generalinfo.htm , Dr. Malcolm George showed us a mediaeval picture of a woman beating her husband.
It was a crime to be beaten by your wife. If a man was beaten by his wife, he would then be punished by society.
Yesterday, I telephoned Malcolm for the following reason. You will enjoy what I did. I went again to the British Library, the £500,000,000 overspend scandal next to St. Pancras Station, London. Forward left from the Enquiry Desk, enter the room where ancient manuscripts and books are beautifully presented. Go through, into the room called "Turning the pages". Of the six books on the monitors, choose The Luttrell Psalter, and go to Psalm 31. Top right, you will see a wife beating her husband.
Malcolm tells me that scholars assure him that there are many instances of such events.
While in the British Library, a member of the staff pointed out to me that the £700,000,000 Dome scam made the British Library less of a scandal. When an American friend got me to take her round the Dome, I was deeply humiliated. It was much worse than I could have imagined. It was such an obvious scam. Obviously, less than £100,000,000 was in evidence, and we were all held in such contempt that the racketeers assumed we would not be able to see this. Where did the money go?- Ed
- Charles Hanson, 13nov00
To isolate radical feminism as the main component in the breakdown of family life is tending to overlook all the other areas which contribute far more. The thrust of the feminist agenda has at its roots that which gives it its legitimacy - social democracy, the liberal society, that which is or is not politically correct. In subscribing to the notion of equality for all, I find it remarkable that there exist so many people whose only aspiration is to be equal to someone else, but this then is the language of the P.C. Brigade.
The Stalinist Secret Police is everywhere, telling us all how to live, love and work. The self-styled experts - social workers, probation officers, outreach workers - supported by an army of psychologists, politically laden counsellors and advisors will pigeon-hole us all according to our stance, and then in come the ists and isms; racist, sexist, racism, sexism, homophobic, chauvinist fascist, supported by the self-assumed experts' arrogance in deploying language unique to them - psychobabble sociospeak - the tools of the Thought Police. Their interpretations count - the black one legged lesbian Outreach Worker is a force to be reckoned with. Simple explanations are always attractive to those leading empty, meaningless lives. More often than not, it is just interpretation.
Take the case of the social worker who attacked Marks and Spencer for selling satin knickers to a young girl on the grounds that it would encourage perverts. It takes a special kind of sick mind to make that sordid link.
The radfem sickness is but one element of the chaotic, free-for-ell, anything goes society. Long gone are the days when family conflicts, the normal everyday life events and adversities, were dealt with by the family and extended family and neighbours. Now there's a rush for everyone to rush in, everyone wants to be the expert. Quite often, these sad and sorry individuals will expose themselves on T.V. for all the world to see, humiliating themselves and their loved ones in the process. Victims are manufactured, and everyone is left with a sense of vulnerability. This is the legacy of liberalism; the rise of a chaotic society, and with it, disorder, uncertainty and chaos.
Ivor Catt's "The Coming of Fascism" [see http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/zb038.htm ] centres on the anti-radical feminist agenda. I believe that history has a habit of repeating itself. We are already seeing the move to the right in Europe, which has little to do with the arguments against radical feminism, but more to do with the chaos of liberalism and a yearning for a return to the old order - what will become the New Order - ably directed by strong leadership.
While youth culture goes through changes and fashions, one element of youth culture has been growing in recent years - the Nazi skinhead movement - a worldwide phenomenon which extends into the old Soviet Union and Eastern Bloc countries, most notably the old East Germany. The movement also has its attraction for females.
In the United States, we see evidence of young men and not so young men enlisting in everything from survival groups, anti-Federal Government communal living, Christian Identity Churches that pursue racist, anti-feminist teachings, neo-nazi groups, the Ku-Klux-Klan, to the loners who can cause carnage, bombing government buildings and abortion clinics. The core element of all these organizations is an anti-liberalism, some would argue an anti-democratic agenda and objective.
Gorg Haider of Austria's Freedom Party is seen by social democrats to be anti-democratic, racist and fascist; remarkable since his party tool the road to power by democratic means; but liberals have a tendency to define 'democratic' in a way that suits them.
The Politically Correct will never relinquish power voluntarily, if we have to consider what they do to the family and the legacy of that on young men. Consider how nation states have been devolved, how parts of the United Kingdom have been broken up.
Unity, community spirit, loyalty and patriotism are anathema to the Politically Correct.
In seeking an identity, many young men might now turn to that which gives them exactly that the P.C. Brigade and feminists fear most - a sense of belonging, patriotism, and a sense of identity and assertiveness. Fascism was always the antithesis of decay, chaos, disorder and lack of identity.
Campaigning pays off; Penny drops at Home Office?
The Independent is the latest in a long line of national newspapers to jump on the bandwagon. Their Jan12th issue reported that the DPP (Director of Public Prosecutions) was now seriously considering the very point raised in our Minority Report (copies of which have mysteriously ended up on editors' desks), namely the unaddressed fatal flaw of anonymity for men accused of sexual offences (Copies now available £12.99).
Our campaigning has the luck to have the Mirror move 'on side' in Nov 2000 after two rock stars were both falsely accused - another central tenet of our Minority Report.
The Independent - viewed by some as more left wing and pro-Gov't than the Observer - could well be testing the waters for the present Gov't. Our Chairman couldn't resist a close of year 'reminder' letter to the head of the Sexual Offences Review Team, Betty Moxon.
The letter to Moxon is reprinted below, and The Independent article elsewhere in this issue.
Dear Mrs Moxon,
I am delighted with the coverage that a false allegation of rape has so far achieved. I know you will join me in congratulating The Independent on its sterling series of articles of today, Jan 12th.
I hope I am correct in thanking you for passing to the DPP our Minority Report. I know we can both look forward to further stimulating public debate on this matter.
Regards, RW, Chairman, ManKind
[It took me more than six months of letters to Moxon, see my website, culminating in a letter where I told her I reduced the question to words of one and two syllables, before she admitted that no one in the UK govt has as part of their remit consideration of the alleged problem of false allegations. I calculate that the class action by the innocent >33% of rape prisoners in US jails (most of them black - this is a worldwide racist attack by the white sisterhood on the black brotherhood - ) will cost the US govt something like $200,000,000,000 in damages -Ed]
DPP backs anonymity for defendants in sex cases
- Robert Verkaik, The Independent , 12jan01
The law should be changed to grant anonymity to people accused of rape and child abuse, the Director of Public Prosecutions believes.
While David Calvert-Smith's comments fall short of a direct call for such a move, his views have enraged women's groups and reopened a debate among the legal profession as to whether defendants in sex cases should have the same protection as their alleged victims.
Asked whether he would support a change in the law Mr Calvert-Smith, head of the Crown Prosecution Service, said: "I would certainly not oppose such a proposal... It would not make the life of a prosecutor any more difficult, and a case could be made [for granting anonymity until conviction] for those accused of rape or other sexual offences like child abuse which is just as damaging to a person."
By making it clear that conviction rates in rape cases - currently running at about 10 per cent of all complaints - would not be affected by giving anonymity to defendants, Mr Calvert-Smith has removed the main obstacle to change.
A spokesman for the CPS said yesterday that cases such as those involving Mick Hucknall, the singer with the band Simply Red, had raised the profile of the issue. Mr Hucknall was arrested by Surrey police after being falsely accused of rape in November.
The acquittal last month of David Jones, the former manager of Southampton Football Club, who was charged with child abuse, also prompted calls for the identity of defendants to be protected until an offence had been proved.
Groups representing rape victims said they were angered by Mr Calvert-Smith's comments. A spokeswoman for Women Against Rape said: "The consequence of being accused of any serious crime can be devastating. We are against a special case where men accused of rape are singled out for special protection.["]
She said women needed protection because rape was a "unique" crime and they would not come forward to report rape without it.
She said Mr Calvert-Smith's comments would send the wrong signals to rapists.
The Labour MP Robin Corbett, chairman of the Commons Select Committee on Home Affairs, welcomed the DPP's comments. Mr Corbett, who helped introduce a 1976 Act which granted anonymity to alleged rapists as well their victims, said: "It appears clear to me if you give the victim anonymity then you should also give it to the accused up until conviction.*
He added that an acquittal was not enough to repair the damage to the reputation of a person accused of rape or other sex crimes.
He said the right to anonymity had been "given away" in 1988 when the Conservatives gave the media the freedom to identify those accused of rape.
The Law Society said yesterday that it was time the law was reviewed. Malcolm Fowler, chairman of the society's criminal law committee, said there was a "powerful argument" under the Human Rights Act for named defendants to claim, in cases where the complainant was not identified, that their rights had been breached.
Article six of the European Convention on Human Rights gave defendants the right to an impartial trial, he said, and identifying one party and not the other might create a perception of unfairness.
Stephen Kramer QC, chairman of the Criminal Bar Association, agreed that a change in the law merited "serious consideration".
A Home Office spokesman said ministers were "aware of the concern" but had no plans to change the law at the present.
[* We would point out to Jack Straw that it would have been in his own interest if the sexual offence charge against his own brother had been kept fully secret.- Ed]
Man who served 27 years for murder freed on bail
- Joshua Rozenberg, Telegraph, 8feb01, p8
A prisoner freed on bail yesterday after serving 27 years for murder he says he did not commit could have won his release at any time during the past quarter of a century if experienced lawyers had studied his case.
They would have realised that his confessions were inadmissible, the Court of Appeal was told yesterday. ....
.... Downing had been denied parole because he refused to accept responsibility for the killing. .... He was 17 but had the mental age of an 11-year-old ....
He was never informed by police that he was under arrest or in custody and was not told of his right to see a solicitor. ....
Downing .... said he found Mrs Sewell [the victim] in a pool of blood and tried to help before alerting other people.
A constable finally arrived, but did not immediately call an ambulance. Instead, Mrs Sewell, a typist, was allowed to stagger to her feet and stumble around .... She died from her injuries without giving her attacker's name. ....
Letter from John Rhys of Bristol
Dear Mr Catt
The letter from the prisoner (Ill Eagle" of October 2000 p2), should awaken every husband in this country to unjust convictions for "marital rape" becoming common. He has the misfortune of suffering long imprisonment for a politically correct offence not recognised in about 90% of sovereign states and only partially in the remainder. Men in long term "partnerships" need also worry, as they are in a similar legal risk simply by cohabiting.
A husband can be brought to trial for this new offence invented by the feminists, if his wife alleges that he merely "pushed himself upon her even though he shares a bed with her and permanent residence." There need be no violence or evidence and only his wife's word to trigger a prosecution
and a stupid jury may convict. Few members of the public understand the current legal situation.
Marital rape trials are often show trials for political feminism. Some members of the Establishment want to use fear to extinguish the belief amongst the population, supported by Christianity and all major faiths that marriage is long term stable sexual union.
The fact that a husband convicted of "marital rape" faces having his name on the sex offenders register is surely an "extreme and degrading punishment" under terms of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as such a man would be of no danger to the general public on release from prison.
It would no doubt alarm the average man in the street to know that extreme feminists are urging the conviction of thousands of husbands for this "offence" and New Labour seems to be generally very sympathetic to their views. Their covert method is advising the legal authorities that marriages where there is a turbulent relationship should be assumed to be subject to "sexual violence" (a euphemism for "rape"). Husbands should not that forget that feminists regard a husband who persuades his wife to make love when she has a headache as "rapist" Domestic violence is now officially defined, not only as partner beating but includes "emotional" violence, ie a husband who "nags" his wife or answers back! [Withholding money from his wife is now "domestic Violence" - financial violence. - Ed] An increase in attempted prosecutions may be expected with the current inflation of public fears on the "domestic violence" issue, by false statistics.
The mere fact that intercourse frequently happens in marriage should not allow a wife to complain at trial, that may be many years ago one or more of these sexual acts where "rapes". Aside from the abuse of the word "rape" this is a formula for the legal harassment and persecution of heterosexual males. There must be a Statute of Limitation. How can a man prove his innocence to an alleged "crime" which he can't even remember!
It won't be long before we have a husband given a four year prison sentence, as one was in Australia for continuing intercourse for a "few seconds" longer than his wife requested!
Lord Mostyn of New Labour earlier this year championed the new law that has taken away a husbands right even to cross examine his wife about marital "rape". Yet it is likely that a wife embittered by a failed marriage or seeking instant destruction of a good husband's reputation will have invented the allegations! Blackmail as well as purposeful entrapment by the woman are easy options.
The emotional baggage and complexity of relationships between husbands and wives and indeed long term partners makes it impossible to safely prove allegations of "rape in marriage". The very term is a contradiction in terms. The traditional view that man cannot rape his wife as they have a sexual contract is the only morally defensible one.
The argument that a "rape in marriage" law is the only way to protect wives against regular unwanted sex with a husband to whom they are hostile yet living with is nonsense, as a wife can do this by asking for a separation and non molestation order.
The legal inquisition against sex in marriage, now unleashed, is calculated by feminists to deter young men from marriage as the law gives no credibility to sexual fulfilment offered by brides. It is a direct attack on the Christian view that man and wife are "one flesh" as a leading Catholic writer has commented. It labels a husband fertilising his wife in order father a child as a "rapist". This turns traditional morality on its head. If a husband has no legal right to sex in marriage then neither does his wife from him and the whole concept of adultery is made meaningless. It is an incitement to wicked wives to blackmail, and it destroys the trust essential to marriage.
For countless centuries it was illegal for a wife to testify against a husband even if he was involved in serious crime. Now she can secretly betray him about the most intimate of matters and effectively start a secret trial.
The real motive of the extreme feminist groups in promoting "marital rape" law was to cast a shadow of suspicion over marriage, and deter men from entering it. Hence some feminist indoctrinated young women believe that they have been rescued from the risk of mass rape in marriage before the law ended husbands conjugal rights. This is of course the reverse of traditional morality which regarded marriage as the safe and lawful arena for sex, and extra marital activity as more risky for. women.
Only 20 countries world wide have "marital rape", and Britain appears to be the only one in which husbands have no conjugal rights at all. In the USA "marital rape" law generally confines itself to cruel and violent sexual assault, not energetic love making. This was the case in this country until 1991. In 1994 Lord Lestor finally ended the last safeguard in law of husbands conjugal. rights by removing the words "lawful" from the Sexual Offences Act of 1984.
The denial in British law of conjugal rights is almost certainly against the Declaration of Human Rights which acknowledges a right to marry and have children. Historically throughout the world marriage has always been a sexual contract, As a Marxist feminist tells us in a recent book, conjugal rights where the most hotly guarded rights in British Law, and found justification in the Judeo Christian tradition, especially the Bible, which states that a husband and wife become one. Parliament has in fact never been properly consulted on the matter of its removal and there has been no public debate, as the 1991 decision by the Law Lords was obviously a gross error which the establishment is anxious to cover up.
In Canada, where the Human Rights Declaration has been observed since 1982, feminists have been outraged that the new legislation has outlawed "shield laws" which prevent the alleged victim from been cross examined, especially about her sexual history. Hopefully, if men's groups press their case, similar improvements can be done here.
I think that the best way to re-establish conjugal rights is to press for the British to be allowed to have private marriage contracts which cover every aspect of marriage including sex and divorce settlement. These are very popular in many foreign countries, and should be made to prevent State interference in what is after all a private agreement between two parties.
[This will be resisted to the death by the legal industry, who will always insist on tearing up any agreements not imposed by a judge. This maximizes lawyers' fees, and also maximizes adversariality, which further increases lawyers' fees. This issue is a good test of the good faith of the legal industry, and proves that lawyers' fees are put before the interests of children of divorce. The legal industry will always tear up a signed and witnessed agreement between spouses, when one spouse wants to renege, or is encouraged by radfems or lawyers to renege. - Ed]
Thank you for reading this long letter. I have read your brilliant book the "Hook and the Sting" [on website www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/]. The destruction of men's conjugal rights is regarded by some feminists as their greatest historical triumph, and a sure fire way to destroy marriage by attrition. For that reason as well as the injustice and suffering to husbands imprisoned by it we must act.
Yours sincerely, John Rhys
PS. The survey in London by Ruth Hall, "Ask Any Woman" (1982) which was the excuse for removal of husband's conjugal rights from common law, stated that 1 in 4 wives is "raped". The survey was on a small scale, confined to an London Inner City area and highly selective.. (See Lynn Segal's book Slow Motion Page 244.)
It appears that feminists in Parliament are using the internet to communicate information to feminist groups, resulting from Parliamentary debates, but not printing it in the House of Commons Hansard. If you search the net under "marital rape" for websites etc likely to be used by extremist feminists the follow entry appears;
HOUSE OF COMMONS HANSARD DEBATES FOR 28 JAN 1.
.. public funds was £796.. Marital Rape Mr. Carrington: to .. anonymity of a victim of marital rape is prejudiced as a result of... http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/cml99091/cmham Cached(83K)
I have checked with written copies of Hansard of that date but there is no entry. If you try to enter the above site a message comes up stating entry is forbidden. I understand from a journalist contact that it is uncommon for bits of Parliamentary debate to be left out of printed Hansard. If there is a loophole in the law of secrecy which surrounds marital rape trials then surely the public is entitled to know it, and not just prejudiced feminist groups.
Ministers win lottery fund jackpot
- Dipesh Gadher, Sunday Times, 4feb01, p8
.... seats held by some members of the cabinet have received over 10 times more money since the 1997 election than they did in the period when they were in opposition. Marginal seats have also had windfalls. ....
Blair's constituency .... has had a jackpot increase of more than 1000%. And Prescott's constituents had a 3,300% rise. ....
Ex parte ousters
A Practice Note of 26 June 1978;
"An ex parte [=secret] application should not be made, or granted, unless there is a real immediate danger of serious injury or irreparable damage. A recent examination of ex parte applications shows that nearly 50% were unmeritorious, being made days, or even weeks, after the last incident of which complaint was made. This wastes time, causes needless expense, usually to the Legal Aid Fund, and is unjust to respondents ...."  2 All ER 919,  1 WLR925
From B Bassinghan & C Harmer 1985, Law & Practice in Matrimonial Causes, 4th edn., pub. Butterworths, 1985, p332.
".... from December 1  wives will be eligible to share the benefits of their husbands' pension ...." - Sunday Times, 19nov00, p15
"Marriage is a unique institution in which the state has a stake, because if marriages fail the state has to pick up the pieces. Value-neutral family policy means expecting the taxpayer to foot the bill for behaviour that may be ignorant or unwise, such as elective lone parenthood or cohabitation. The govt is constantly telling people to live more responsibly ...."
- Melanie Phillips, Sunday Times, 19nov00, p19
Blair's warm words on marriage signals shift in party policy
- Martin Bentham, Sunday Telegraph, 4feb01, p14
Tony Blair is to declare his "full support" for the Institution of Marriage in a calculated rebuff to ministers who fear that such a forthright stance will alienate single mothers and unmarried couples.
In a statement to be read out at the start of National Marriage Week, which takes place next week, the Prime Minister will praise marriage as "the foundation of a strong and stable society". Mr Blair will also insist that marriage is the best framework within which to raise children, in a further move to distance himself from those within his own party who claim that people's marital status is unimportant. ....
It's a gay thing
- Hywel Williams, Guardian, 27jan01, p22
It takes one to know one, and believe me, Mandelson's behaviour has been recognisable.
The beguiler's fall has no significance in the politics of thought. The heterosexual commentating heavies miss the Mandelson point. Which is why they're bemused by the folly of the telephone call on the wild side, the silly daring of that two-minute surrender of judgement. What Peter Mandelson did was the political equivalent of bare-backing. And as with all such discovered episodes of unprotected sex, it's the presumption of further unrevealed audacity which thrills both voyeur and victim. How many other times did he do it? Whether his departure makes the euro more or less likely seems rather boring by comparison. .... No - Peter Mandelson's real significance is other. This is a gay thing - the story of a man who politically was once one man's bitch and then became another's. ....
.... politics appeals to gay men for two reasons, both of them dangerous. Like sex, religion and drugs, politics seems to confirm the self. ...
Political groupings are often substitute families for gay politicians - hence the virulence of the squabbling. They minister to the need to belong - even when, as in Mandelson's case, the herd mind rejects.
Of course the security is a sham, which is why the systematic rejectors of shelter - such as Peter Tatchell - are heroic. Sooner or later the price is too high. It's not just a gay thing. Politics attracts chancers of all kinds. But when it comes to gay identity there's a double discharge of drama. Here the sexual is political. Hence the flight to the common and the race to the death. At some level there is actually a desire to be found out. Mandelson's case was both exploitation of office and a challenge to be discovered in an amoral world. He was gagging for it. Hence Pink Wednesday.
.... Frustration is good for art and as gay gets mainstream, so the art dwindles. ....
When the gay rights campaigners go too far
- John Humphreys, Sunday Times, 20mar00, sect. 1, p19
.... I despaired at what I read in The Guardian last week. .... a colleague of mine, Nigel Wrench. He is gay, HIV positive .... defending .... "barebacking". .... that means unprotected anal sex. It is increasingly common among some groups of gay men. Many gay men have written in the gay press attacking those who practise it even when they know themselves to be HIV-positive. .... "Barebacking can be warm, exciting and involving ...." .... since he was infected he has had unsafe sex "more times than I can remember, often with men whose names I could not tell you ...."
Statistics as the Sword of Truth
When using statistics in politics or sociology, we usually say that an occurrence is plausible if it has a 5% chance of happening. Thus, a 4 or more homosexual representation in the Cabinet is only plausible (that is, not the result of conspiracy or manipulation) if the general male population has 9% or more homosexuals. In fact, according to leading homosexuals, they represent only 2% or 3%, leading to the impossibility of such heavy Cabinet representation except in a society prejudiced against heterosexuals.
I believe that the manipulation will have been done, not by the small number of homosexuals, but by the much more numerous and power-hungry radical feminists, many of whom are lesbian or otherwise sexually dysfunctional, or have had bad experience with their men. They are vindictive against men and obstruct their preferment; "Revenge is always sweet ...." - Suzanne Moore, The Guardian, 18may95, p5 [See "Reflections" on my website - Ed]. They do not see their future in a traditional family. Both homosexual and radical feminists are marginalised to the extent that the traditional family takes centre stage. Also, to the extent that the homosexual could be dismissed as a sort of non-threatening castrato, the radical feminist (particularly if lesbian) would prefer his preferment to positions of power to that of a conventional male. The bigoted promotion of token male homosexuals camouflages an anti-male bias by making it appear to be a very un-bigoted acceptance of the homosexual and of the male.
The weakness in the above proposition is the assumption that politicians come from a cross-section of the community. The extraordinary promiscuity of Kennedy, Clinton, Lloyd George and so many others suggests otherwise. Possibly anyone who goes into politics is a high wire artist, willing to accept the sudden loss of office always threatened in both a democratic system and in a tyranny. Thus we have to broaden the conclusion to two possibilities; homosexuals are high-wire artists, and so are politicians, or there has been manipulation of the democratic process, I suggest by radical feminists. The tragically low expectation of life for male homosexuals - they die thirty years younger than do male heterosexuals - confirms that practising homosexuals are exactly the risk-takers that we would expect to be attracted to a profession as risky as politics.
See full article in Male View, jan99, p21 or at www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/yc2death.htm
ManKind 2001 Conference on Censorship
I have booked Friends House for all day sat15sep01. (may01 was too early for us.)
Local Quaker Censor-in-Chief fights back
[See Ill Eagle 12, dec00, p1]
Thank you for sending me an invitation to speak at your 2001 conference on Censorship.
Although you chose a discourteous and public way of delivering such an invitation, I have decided to reply to you politely and personally.
You will not be surprised that I decline to address the conference. I am not competent to speak on the subject of censorship and do not have anything to contribute "on the censor's point of view", not being a censor.
I ask you to publish this reply in full in the way you published the invitation.
I request that you cease addressing me as "censor -in chief" in your published material. It is a description which I find offensive and ill-judged. I would also ask that you cease this constant harassment by sending me Ill Eagle and other material. Whatever good points you may have in your arguments, unsolicited and hectoring material is not the way to conduct informed dialogue.
[signed] Elizabeth Fowler. dec00 [Long time Censor-in-Chief for St. Albans Quaker meeting.]
The Illegal Eagles in Concert. The Alban Arena, Civic Centre, St Albans: tomorrow (Saturday), 8pm: tickets £14.50. Tel: box office 01727 844488
Stealing our thunder – Ed
Trawling through the European Court bumpf I came across a case (33290/96: decided December 1999) in which a Portuguese father had a violation of Article 8 recorded 'because he was refused custody because he was a homosexual'. Perhaps it is a case precedent! Claim you are a homosexual and then you have a case if you are not awarded custody! Has nobody told the EurCourt that most men are refused custody because they are heterosexual? In fact it is clear that just being a man is the real test. You might make some mischief with such info in Ill Eagle.
Dr. Malcolm George
[See Ill Eagle dec00, p1. .... although less than 2% of the male population are homosexual, 35% of paedophiles are drawn from that 2%. FYC Family Bulletin aug97 p1, from firstname.lastname@example.org quoting Freund K, "Pedophilia and heterosexuality vs homosexuality", J Sex Mar Ther 1984 10 197]
Govt abandons "no-fault" divorce
The Independent 17jan01
Laws intended to allow "no fault" divorces were scrapped by the Government yesterday. The announcement means couples who want to divorce in less than two years will have to continue to prove adultery, unreasonable behaviour or one of the other three grounds for ending a marriage.
The no-fault divorce legislation, introduced in 1996, had been criticised for making divorce too easy and undermining the institution of marriage.
Yesterday's decision was immediately attacked by lawyers and marriage counsellors in favour of the new legislation. They accused Labour of helping to promote a climate of acrimonious divorce.
However, the Government said it was not convinced "that removing fault grounds will substantially influence the way parties conduct themselves throughout the divorce process".
A spokesman for the Lord Chancellor's Department added: "The reduction of acrimony and the adoption of a more conciliatory approach to divorce may require a cultural change beyond the realms of legislation."
Rosemary Carter, chairman of the Solicitors Family Law Association, said: "Why should people have to conspire together to invent behavioural grounds for divorce?"
The Lord Chancellor, Lord Irvine of Lairg, in a written answer to a question in the House of Lords, blamed the complexity of the Family Law Act part II and ongoing problems with the information meetings which couples would have to attend before being granted legal aid for their divorce proceedings.
Research commissioned by the Lord Chancellor's Department found that instead of encouraging couples to seek a mediated settlement these meetings were pushing them towards the courts.
At present a "no fault" divorce can be obtained after two years, if both parties consent, or otherwise after five years. But two thirds of divorcing couples still opt for a fault-based divorce, which can be obtained in six months.
Thelma Fisher, chairwoman of the UK College of Family Mediators, said she was saddened by the decision as no-fault divorce was a [chance to] resolve issues between them.
Ms Carter said the Government had been "burnt" by the Conservatives' family law legislation, which she described as "a dog's breakfast".
But Lord Irvine said the Govt still wanted to "save saveable marriages". He told Parliament: "The Government is committed to supporting marriage and to supporting families when relationships fail, especially when there are children involved."
Significantly he said it was not just the complexity of the Family Law Act and the difficulties encountered during the information meetings which had led him to decide to ask Parliament to repeal part II of the Act. This was later confirmed as a reference to the no-fault proposals in the Act. He was able to use the results of the information meetings pilot scheme to free himself from legislation that he inherited from his predecessor, Lord Mackay of Clashfern.
The pilot schemes were launched in June 1997 and completed in June 1999 when Lord Irvine confirmed that the preliminary results were disappointing. The final evaluation report was presented to the Lord Chancellor by the Newcastle Centre for Family Studies in September 2000.
The Government said it will now build on the evidence provided by research to consider how best to provide for families experiencing relationship difficulties. Lord Irvine said: "The Government has taken forward a wide range of measures over the past three years to help families, including establishing the new Children's Fund and the Children and Family Courts Advisory and Support Service, improving maternity and parental leave arrangements, and increasing funding for marriage and relationship support to a total of £35m per annum by 2002-2003."
It is acknowledged that the situation in the Family Courts is in crisis. Oliver Cyriax (of our 28oct00 conference http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/conf/generalinfo.htm ) has fronted the work to get rid of ignorant, untrained Family Court Welfare Officers, and to get ignorant judges to change their destructive ways. He has been helped by our chairman Robert Whiston, who is on one of the CAFCASS committee set up to plan the new regime.
Those responsible for the appalling divorce outcomes for children over the last few decades have a foothold in the 'reform' committees, and are aided by anti-family radfems and an ignorant Baker of FNF in trying to cover up for the catastrophic past by obstructing future reform. Informed by Oliver Cyriax of the stalemate created by reactionaries, which include committee radfems and Baker, all Welsh MPs have written to Lye, chairman of a CAFCASS committee, asking why no progress is being made.
I hope you will get some grasp of the situation from the one page analysis by Oliver, which shows how, in trying to defend its indefensible past, the Lord Chancellor's Department has been driven into a corner by Oliver. It remains for an ignorant Baker and FNF to fog up the situation enough to save them, enabling them to inflict maximum damage on the children of divorce for another decade. After all, if the biggest Men's Organisation wants it, surely we can keep doing it with impunity!
Ill13 p9 missing
This next report is interesting.
From Home Office stats a disproportionate number of women homicide suspects are later charged only with manslaughter - compared to men. The destructive tail spin of some of these women must be a characteristic because I can think of 2 women that WAR (woman against rape) and Bindle "saved" from life sentences, via "DV so I killed him" ending their lives prematurely.
Then there's' this "He punched me in the stomach when I was pregnant" syndrome. Here we have a pregnant women who not only picked an argument and punched but ended up knifing to death a man. And apparently for the past 4 yeas no charges of trafficking in drug have been laid against her ! ! !
But the judge's phrases says it all from a man's point of view :-
""Ms. Lomax, I need to tell you that I went out on a limb for you at the time I originally sentenced you....." and "I don't want to take you away from your child....." RW
From: Lindsay Jackel <email@example.com> 2jan01
Subject: [MENTION] (USA) Before killer became a criminal, she was a victim (of DV)!
Quote: "Lomax, 26, killed her boyfriend eight months before giving birth to their child on June 6, 1996. Instead of prison, the system offered counseling, parenting classes and jail time. The main reason: A judge considered her a victim of domestic violence. The story of what went wrong in the lives of Lomax and her son over the next five years is told in court papers and hearing transcripts. Lomax, her attorneys and the judge declined to be interviewed. Before she became a criminal, Lomax was a victim."
Article at http://www.cpswatch.com/
Court system treated a convicted killer as victim
- Margaret Zack, Star Tribune, 1jan01
In October, police searched Onishea M. Lomax's Minneapolis apartment and found her there with her 4-year-old son playing within reach of crack cocaine and a loaded gun.
The child was taken to a shelter and tested positive for cocaine, apparently from ingesting it.
Lomax's arrest and charge of child endangerment ended a five-year effort by the Hennepin County court system to turn around the life of a killer and mold her into a good parent.
Lomax, 26, killed her boyfriend eight months before giving birth to their child on June 6, 1996. Instead of prison, the system offered counseling, parenting classes and jail time.
The main reason: A judge considered her a victim of domestic violence.
The story of what went wrong in the lives of Lomax and her son over the next five years is told in court papers and hearing transcripts. Lomax, her attorneys and the judge declined to be interviewed.
Before she became a criminal, Lomax was a victim.
According to testimony by a domestic violence expert, Denise Wilder, Lomax "had been beaten by her stepfather from ages 5 to 15" and she had been in abusive relationships with three men. She also had witnessed unspecified violence by her stepfather toward her mother.
Lomax turned to violence on Sept. 15, 1995, when she fatally stabbed her abusive boyfriend, Cliche Buchanan. She was pregnant; Buchanan was the father.
The killing occurred in a hall of the Hampton Inn in Richfield, where she confronted Buchanan about a woman who had been calling the home that Lomax and Buchanan shared.
Lomax said in court that Buchanan was pushing her back and forth into walls, grabbing and hitting her and telling her he was going to beat her real bad when they got home.
After a blow to her jaw, she swung back with her knife. She said she intended to hit him in the arm but struck his neck. He bled to death on the hall floor.
Lomax was charged with second-degree murder. Under a plea agreement, she pleaded guilty in March 1996 to second-degree manslaughter, a lesser crime.
Assistant Hennepin County Attorney Chuck Salter said at the time that two independent witnesses reported hearing the blows and Lomax's scream.
Wilder, a clinical psychologist, testified at Lomax's sentencing in April 1996 that she suffered from battered women's syndrome. It involves women who feel trapped in an abusive relationship and react with violence. Minnesota courts have accepted it as a reason to impose a shorter sentence when a batterer is killed.
District Judge John Holahan ruled that Lomax displayed the symptoms, which Wilder said include depression, low self-esteem and the tendency to minimize prior abuse.
The judge sentenced Lomax to 6 years in prison but ordered her to serve up to a year in jail and to spend the rest of the time on probation. One of her attorneys, Rene Clemenson, said Lomax was motivated to change, an excellent candidate for probation.
She already was attending Genesis II, a Minneapolis program that serves mothers and their children. Its mission is treatment and reeducation for women who have made inappropriate choices about their lives.
Holahan also decided that the baby shouldn't be born behind bars. So Lomax remained in the workhouse until her son was born. By then, she had spent about seven months in jail for manslaughter. While on probation, she was required to stay law-abiding and to complete the Genesis II program.
She did neither.
The young mother, after taking up residence in Minneapolis with her son, had begun using cocaine. She landed back in court in February 1997 after a positive drug test.
The judge was displeased, but sympathetic.
"**Ms. Lomax, I need to tell you that I went out on a limb for you at the time I originally sentenced you," Holahan said. "I decided to take a chance with you and to try to get you some help, and your response to that so far has been less than satisfactory...
"I don't want to take you away from your child. I want to get you some help and help you straighten out your life. But you need to understand that at some point we throw up our hands and say we're not going to fool around with you any longer, and I mean it."
Holahan sent her to the workhouse again. This time she spent just over four months there.
Gail Chang Bohr, an attorney and executive director of the Children's Law Center of Minnesota, said children of parents who are caught using crack cocaine should be a concern of the state.
"At some point, you have to have the state intervene," said Bohr, whose nonprofit group represents children living in foster care. "What needs to happen is some inquiry and assessment of the situation."
But court papers don't indicate that such action took place. The boy stayed with relatives while Lomax was in the workhouse. They were reunited after her release.
Lomax once again attended Genesis II, graduating in February 1998. She thanked Holahan for giving her a second chance.
New crime, new chance
Seven months after leaving jail, she tried to cash a $255 check on someone else's account at the Edina Liquor Store.
She pleaded guilty to felony check forgery in May 1999. Once again, she appeared before Holahan.
"I apologize for all the misunderstanding and me getting in trouble and violating my probation and everything," she told him. "I just wasn't thinking that day."
The judge responded, "Well, Ms. Lomax, I'm disappointed to see you again. I thought you were going to be one of our success stories, but I'm not ready to give up on you yet."
He sent her back to jail, this time for five months.
Lomax told the judge that her son was staying with relatives in Chicago.
They were reunited when she was released.
Court records don't describe what kind of life the boy lived as Lomax cycled in and out of jail. They apparently lived in the Twin Cities most of the time.
And not much is known about Lomax's other child, a girl who now is 8. Officials in Cook County, Ill., had transferred legal custody of that child to another relative sometime in the 1990s, court papers say. Child protection officials in Illinois and Minnesota wouldn't comment on the case.
David Sanders, director of Hennepin County's Children and Family Services Department, said cocaine and forgery violations generally would not trigger intervention by child protection workers. A parent's illegal activity usually would have to be related to the children, such as domestic abuse or drug use in front of the children, before officials would investigate, he said.
Esther Wattenberg, director of the Center for the Advanced Study of Child Welfare at the University of Minnesota, said she can see at least three red flags that call Lomax's parenting skills into question. She had no role model on how to parent, apparently had a substance abuse problem and had been unable to raise a previous child.
"Crack is very tough, very damaging," said Wattenberg, a social work professor. "People on crack cocaine lose judgment on what is safe for a child."
More drug trouble
According to court documents, Lomax tested positive for cocaine twice in September 2000 and didn't complete treatment.
In October, Minneapolis police heard from an informant that drugs were
being sold from an apartment in the 2400 block of W. Broadway. Lomax and her 4-year-old son lived there.
Also present were the boy's grandmother and another family member. Three crack pipes were found in the house, and it was believed that all the adults had been smoking, court documents said.
It is not certain how the child got cocaine into his system. Stephen Wells of the Hennepin County Poison Control Center said a child wouldn't test positive for cocaine as a result of inhaling second-hand crack smoke. The drug would have to be ingested, he said. He theorized that a child could touch crack cocaine and then put his fingers in his mouth. Garbage and other items were scattered about the house, and rotten food was in the refrigerator and on the counters. Two men carrying large amounts of cash were arrested in the apartment.
Lomax was charged with child endangerment. She pleaded guilty to the endangerment charge in November and was sent to prison for violating her probation on the earlier charges. She is scheduled to be released from the Shakopee prison in November 2002.
County officials filed a petition in Juvenile Court placing the 4-year-old boy under county protection. His case and placement will be reviewed by a judge in February.
Holahan's last words to Lomax as she left for prison were, "Good luck to you, Ms. Lomax. I'm sorry it worked out this way."
Margaret Zack can be contacted at firstname.lastname@example.org
Article sourced by and from...
CPSWatch - Watching Our Nation's Child Protection Agencies & Workers
CPSNews is a daily service of CPSWatch, Inc. http://www.cpswatch.com/
CPS Watch Email Support Groups
Parent Support Group
Support group of parents and professionals who've been affected by the corrupt practices of Child Protective Services.
Our Chairman reports that Warren Farrell's new book is excellent.
ManKind special offer means that if you are dissatisfied, you will be refunded.
Write or email your order to: - ManKind, Suite 367, 2 Lansdowne Row, Berkeley Square, London W1X 8HL
I would like to share with you the events in the Court, but suffer lapses due to having been totally overtired from a late night session the night before when I trailed the Internet for articles under the keywords "secret court German, nazi etc". I was going to get myself fully informed on what happened, but fell asleep this evening, and I am a phone call away from getting all together....
I did go to the RCJ. I did see Len, who physically appears to be extremely weak now, hardly able to walk and wheeled through the court building in a wheelchair. I was shocked with the state he's now in, significantly poorer compared to when we met.
Some ten people from the British public were there, and a number of people signed the attached document and had the usher hand it to the judge. No press, no press, no press!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
When the hearing started some members of the public entered the courtroom but they were ordered out by the judge . The hearing did not deal with the issue of there having been set a return date for an injunction against the whole world, and the whole world did not have an opportunity to address the judge on this attempt to gag the whole world.
All I will tell you right now is that (of course) there will be another hearing, and that anyone who wants to address the judge on the gagging order has to comply with the terms of the injunction, i.e. to give "two days written notice" to this. It seems clearer now that anyone who wishes can indeed address the court, but needs to give two days notice. Details on whom to mail or fax this will be provided shortly.
Please forgive me for my failure to give a proper report. I had to rush off to collect my daughter from school, doing some chores beforehand.
On a different note I would like to share my experience and feeling after spending time in the corridor of the RCJ: Being there, and witnessing the barristers, suits, female layers in expensive dresses and their "clients" made me feel contemptuous, sad and emotional. There you had the dross of the world on hourly rates pretending to do good, while next to you a guy is heading towards serious ill health, death ... The manner in which the barrister talked to Len was so devoid of humanity. A guy devoid of the human capacity to sense another human's pain, suffering, and humanity... A tossed, a rogue, a practitioner of law....
I was acutely aware that the mother of Len's children is not endowed with money. Her shoes were worn; there was no polish on them. I was struck by the expensive attire of the legal buds, and the contrast to the lack of money spent on her clothes. I was unable to stop my mind being aware that the clothes of the legal Mafiosi were going to be financed by the poor sods in front of me, yes a dying man's assets would at some stage be handed to the guys and girls in suits and expensive coats. Strange how I cannot talk about the case, but only about my impressions of disgust at seeing the spectacle which unfolds day-in day-out on this corridor, where people are led to by non-people (lawyers), papers ordering them to turn up for a hearing... I was struck how this building reminds me of Trebling (you know the purpose-built nazi camp erected in record time on a green field site optimised for the purpose of efficient destruction of human beings.
The Queens building, where day in and day out the legal dross plays their games which involve herding scared individuals towards "settling" matters on corridors, while the bleak building does not even offer those that talk, i.e. human beings, a drink of water...
Yes, the lack of water is what struck me, but then again, humanity is not what matters, people are no longer humans as biological systems with feelings and needs such as thirst... the minutes tick by, those on hourly rates know the watering holes ...I felt a sense of witnessing human dross, a sense like being in a slaughterhouse, where even the expensive suits were tatty, the barristers did no longer brush hairs and dandruff off their suits, but the female lawyers looked well dressed, well groomed - while the poor were left without water, without hope, without dignity, without humanity. The inhumanity which is needed to keep those on the take on the take, minute by minute, day in , day out...
Yes, I saw what awaits the young men who marry or who father a child. I saw the dross that's waiting the pounce ... used to the mindless minutes that give them a living.... a game where humanity becomes unfeeling inhumanity... - Y. A. Name
Ill13 p12 missing. End
Ill Eagle 14
Ill Eagle 14 .. Apr 2001 ... ISSN 1466-9005
Fury over Straw attack on 'grasping' lawyers
- Andrew Sparrow, Telegraph, 28feb01, p1
Jack Straw infuriated lawyers yesterday by accusing them of being preoccupied with making money and sometimes ignoring their "social responsibilities".
The Home Secretary claimed that there would soon be more solicitors and barristers than police officers, which he said was a trend he condemned.
He also alleged that some in the legal profession were over-concerned with protecting the interests of criminals.
.... "The reason why there are so many lawyers in our society, and the numbers have quadrupled in the last 25 years, is because lawyers never agree, except about taking money off their clients. .... .... lawyers .... trying to protect their niche markets with the local criminal fraternity act in a way which would have been unacceptable when I was practising 25 years ago."
[".... this is a venal, anti-social Star Chamber .... completely out of control, and getting more menacing all the time. .... In its death throes, our family court system becomes every more secretive, vicious and anti-social." - Ill Eagle 13, feb01, p3.]
Telegraph Editorial, same issue, p29;
Straw's an ass
.... his Govt .... fostered the tendency to go to law.
- Leader, Sunday Telegraph, 11mar01, p26
The way the legal profession is structured encourages lawyers to be inefficient and overpaid, no matter how scrupulous they may be individually. The only people who do not recognise this are lawyers themselves. Their insistence on the pricelss value of "justice" ringa a little hollow when they are part of a system which does everything possible to maximise costs. .... only plumbers compete with them in exploiting their customers' desperation and ignorance. The difference is that when plumbers perpetrate daylight robbery, they do not claim that it is "essential if justice is to be done". .... more lawyers in the Cabinet than ever before .... don't bet on [reform]....
How ill is Ill Eagle?
Ivor, I have just received my copy of Ill Eagle which I usually read in its entirety. I have just read a letter from a Dr. Brancher. It speaks well of you that you should publish his letter. I am sorry he feels the need to be so critical. I have always assumed that most of Ill Eagle was produced by cutting and pasting from other sources and so it is inevitable that the flow of the text might be different from other types of publication.
I do not think Ill Eagle is either unbalanced or ranting. More importantly I do not think we should be arguing with each other. In the end it hardly matters what we think of each other so long as we have so little power to change things. Let's win the battle first and then see what we shall see.
Paul Reed (Dr.) 27feb01
Retreat to Success
From: Paul email@example.com
Subject: Retreat to Success !!
Date: 25 February 2001 14:58
Dear Ivor, Remember we met at the High Court !
I have had a personal victory in the County Court this week. Despite having a good CWO report about me, the conclusion was to reduce contact with my son from once a week to once a month. My wife obviously jumped on this idea. My solicitors and barrister said there was nothing I could do as the judge would take CWO report.
THEREFORE, I fired my solicitor and barrister and represented myself. I stated to the judge that I would deny myself access to my son for his benefit as I should be seeing him every week, MINIMUM, and would never be able to financially support him in the future, ( The Retreat Strategy ). By calling his bluff, the Judge threw the CWO report out and stated the status Quo be preserved. Therefore not one of my wifes demands were met. The case continues in 3 months time .....
Finally, I am a believer in doing things, not just talking and have recruited a new chap called Steve, I have given him details of Mankind etc and no's. There are more like him at the contact centre and I will be passing these people onto Mankind one by one. There is even a lady there with the same situation as the men with whom I will be speaking with soon.
Children Need Both Parents NOT Families Need Fathers
All the best, Paul.
PS I read your website with great interest, I look forward to speaking with yourself again soon. Thanks once again !
[For Retreat go to http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/retreat01.htm http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/retreat01.htm http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/README.htm Also Ill Eagle 13, feb01, p3. Until Paul, all men following Eugen's spectacular success with Retreat two years ago, have preferred to lose their children and home in order to earn the sympathy which they wrongly think they will earn thereby. No one has ever criticised the Retreat strategy. - Ed]
Men Behaving Badly
by Toad, East London Branch
[of FNF] Newsletter Contact, dec00, no. 4, p9
John Baker Torpedoes Shared parenting in Cafcass
[This is now important, because in 2002 Baker took over
from our hero Parton as head of FNF – Ed, oct02.]
CAFCASS is the new Child & Family Court Advisory & support Service which comes into existence on 1 April 2001 and replaces the existing Family Court Welfare Service. Unlike the FWCS, which is part of the Probation Service, the new Service will be a "stand alone" agency independent of both the Lord Chancellor's Department and the Home office. It is therefore of the utmost importance that the guidelines under which CAFCASS will operate, including training and objectives, be settled by the deadline of 1 April in terms fair to fathers and which promote Shared Parenting.
Input is coming from various official advisory committees, of which one of the most important is the Child & Family Advisory Group, which represents the interests of the court users. Fathers' and men's organisations represented on the Group are Families Need Fathers, Fathers Direct, Association of Shared Parenting, ManKind (formerly United Kingdom Men's Movement), and the FNF sister organisation MATCH (Mothers Apart From Their Children) is also represented. The FNF representative is John Baker, a trustee and member of Council, whose principal achievement so far in FNF was to ruin the excellent national journal ACCESS that FNF used to have, after he was appointed editor in 1996, which led to its eventual replacement by the former London Branch Newsletter McKenzie.
Until September 2000 all these organisations (including MATCH) presented a united front in the Advisory Group concentrating on the fundamental importance of Shared parenting. The John Baker broke ranks and, without consulting other representatives in the alliance, began to argue about Contact instead of Shared parenting. Even in the language of Contact, Baker has failed to present a decent case and Toad is informed that during at least one meeting of the Group he has opposed moves to establish time-specific Contact guidelines.
He destroyed the solidarity of the organisations who are pro-Shared Parenting, and of course greatly weakened the case for it. Further, his use of the concept of 'Contact' has played into the hands of women's organisations such as Women's Aid who notoriously associate Contact with Domestic Violence and wish to weaken the usual presumption that fathers should have Contact with their children. Toad had naively thought that Shared Parenting, or Shared Residence if you prefer the language of the Children Act, was one of, perhaps THE, fundamental aim of FNF. Fellow traveller John Baker thinks otherwise and has sabotaged a golden and rare opportunity for FNF to influence events by having Shared Parenting expressly promoted in the forthcoming CAFCASS Guidelines and Training Manual.
[Baker still has at least one friend. "John has done well to achieve what he has achieved so far and deserves great credit. - T E, 2mar01" However, E praises Cyriax even more. He'll need a lot more oil! - Ed]
Beware the Fonda
We were nearly suckered by Fonda and the Observer. Both told us that Jane was going to endow a chair at Harvard to look into the plight of young men.
The Observer totally mis-represented Fonda's intentions, making us think she had changed her spots, and would now join us in confronting the continuing attack on young men, and its dreadful outcome for them and for society as a whole.
Our http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/conf/generalinfo.htm conference speaker Geoffrey Ben-Nathan gave us the first warning that all was not well. However, we found a more complete version of the murky story in Salon.com at www.salonmag.com/mwt/feature/2001/03/09/sommers/index.html
Probably through ignorance, Fonda is giving the money to a researcher Carol Gilligan (her sister, according to one report) at Harvard whose record for research competence is very poor. With Fonda's twelve million dollars and Harvard's imprimatur, much more stature will be given to the disastrous Androgyny cult promoted by Adrienne Burgess with British govt funding.
From a member
Dear Ivor, I must thank you very much for sending me the [audio] tapes of the ManKind [oct00] Conference http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/conf/generalinfo.htm , and also [info on] the Gilder book and Fight for the Family [by Lynette Burrows] ...
As for The Garbage Generation, this book I know well, having met and listened to Daniel Amneus in America and in London.
.... It has been fantastic to be able to listen to the various talks again and to get the points made fully.
It really was a great achievement to get together such a collection of speakers for that day.
I would like to ask you kindly to send me another set of tapes for someone else. .... Best regards, T.
Dreadful Baroness Margaret Jay chopped
Quite recently Callaghan's daughter, marriage buster Jay, (wrong side of the sheets with married Carl Bernstein and professor Robert Neild), again quoted Stinko's fraudulent "1 in 4" violence figure. Some years ago, I saw her behave ignorantly as chairman of an Establishment AIDS conference in Wellcome HQ, calling the Sunday Times a tabloid newspaper when it published Hodgkinson's dissident info.
She says she will spend more time with her grandchildren. I hope none are boys! – Ed
"You have never seen a bigger pain in the ass than the father who wants to get involved; he can be repulsive. He wants to meet the kids after school at three o'clock, take the kid out to dinner during the week, have the kid on his own birthday, talk to the kid on the phone every evening, go to every open school night, take the kid away for a whole weekend so they can be alone together. This type of involved father is pathological." - Judge Huttner, New York Commission on Child Support, quoted by Warren Farrell in his new book Father and Child Reunion, pub. Penguin Putnam 2001, p152
Found by Dr. Malcolm George
Fischer S. Body Consciousness. Fontana 1973. page 81-82
" I am impressed with the role of violence and aggression in maintaining a sense of distinction between what is masculine and feminine. Aggressive acting out is considered to be a mark of the masculine mode. It is strongly associated with the phallic image. I would speculate that when a man has arrived at serious doubts about whether his body 'feels' masculine he may be driven to an act of violence as a way of dramatically re-establishing his masculinity. The angry, thrusting, attacking use of the musculature gives nice reasssuring feedback. An interesting finding that corroborates this speculation has been provided by cross cultural studies dealing with the relationship between 'delinquent' aggressive acting out in boys and the amount of closeness they had with their mothers whilst growing up. It has been found that boys who have been relatively close to their mothers and distant from their fathers and who therefore have limited opportunity to learn directly about the 'feel' of being masculine have a strong need during adolescence to engage in hostile, predatory behaviour as a way of announcing that they are indeed of the male species. It is well known, too, that male delinquents come with unusual frequency from broken homes in which there is no visible father and where almost all of the primary socialisation experiences have been with women."
Colin Wilson and Donald Seaman The Serial Killers; A Study in the Psychology of Violence, True Crime 1992 page 40
"Serial killers are almost invariably found to have experienced environmental problems in their early years. In many cases they stem from a broken home in which the parents are divorced or separated, a home with a weak or absent father-figure and a dominant female, sometimes a home life marked by a lack of consistent discipline. As policemen and probation officers have long known, the psychological damage resulting from such a deprived or miserable childhood all to often manifests itself in a number of recognisably aggressive traits."
[The first item from Malcolm, dated 1973, predates the politicisation of the subject, and the general falsification of statistics by radfems. - Ed]
For the last year I have been trying to track down a very interesting study done in Europe which reported high levels of violence by women. It was in the context of domestic servants and their employers. Having drawn many blanks I have at last come across a study ( see below) which I think is the one I need.
The problem is getting hold of it. The EU does not answer my Emails. Is there any chance that you or someone in your network could work on this and get hold of a copy?
Malcolm George firstname.lastname@example.org 28feb01
(Our last conference lecturer on 28oct00 http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/conf/generalinfo.htm )
SOCI 106Atypical Work in the EUMarch 2000 - ENThe study provides insight into the nature and extent of discrimination against atypical workers in the EU Member States. Part-time work, temporary (or fixed term) work, seasonal work, casual work, homework, telework, self-employment and family work as forms of atypical work are examined and compared to the position of the "typical" employee. The study presents an overview of the different types of atypical work and concentrates on their formal position as laid down in legal regulations and collective agreements.
Pre-teen puberty is a myth
Claims that the age of puberty has plummeted among girls in Western nations is now being dismissed by researchers in the US.
A new report by 8 senior endocrinologists in the journal Pediatrics, argues that earler claims (1997) that girls as young as 6 are developing sexually or that all primary school age girls can now have babies is wide of the mark.
They advise examining doctors that the signs of a girl's early sexuality might ask some disorders and cancers.
UK Experts agree. Dr. Russell Viner of Gt. Ormond St Hospital said, "Puberty still begins at 10 or 11 and menstruation normally at 13".
"... just a Dworkin the Catt .... "
Lynette Burrows, speaking at our 28oct00 conference http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/conf/generalinfo.htm , told us that we should realise that radfems like Shere Hite, with whom she shared a TV programme, were figures of fun, not to be taken seriously. She would say this of Dworkin as well. Dworkin proposes a "Womanland" for women only, on the pattern of Israel, for Jews only.
Great fun. The trouble is, these ridiculous people have engineered a culture which controls our secret family courts, leading to the confiscation of all my substantial wealth and my children.
ManKind and Ill Eagle can be reached at:-
1). Suite 367, 2 Lansdowne Row,
London W1X 8HL.
3) Email Head.Office@mankinf.co.uk
The Editor, Ivor Catt, 121 Westfields, St. Albans AL3 4JR, England.
01727 - 864257 Email email@example.com
Howard Journal - A new development
Perhaps not unsurprisingly, articles continue to appear in journals that perpetuate the old domestic violence and male oppression mantras. Long after the research results are in, and despite more enlightened feminists (see July 99 'ill eagle' excerpt below), die-hard feminists are still pumping out the same turgid opinions. One such examples is The Howard Journal vol 39 no.4, nov00, p417 ( below).
"Linked to power imbalances is the claim that violent men commonly reject responsibility for their violence and place responsibility for it onto women, minimise the consequences of their violence, blame women for 'provoking' them and so on (see, for example, Leibrich et el. 1995; Dobash and Dobash 1992)" - Allison Morris and Loraine Gelsthorpe, Re-visioning Men's Violence Against Female Partners.
Even this manipulative anti-man polemic masquerading as research, by a Cambridge lecturer and a New Zealand professor, discusses the thesis, that women initiate violence. (They also cite Stinko, see p414.). Our subject is extremely difficult to master. Dr. Malcolm George's lecture at our oct00 conference http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/conf/generalinfo.htm , see Ill Eagle 11, oct00, didn't have time to mention a factor that I suspect I am only now coming to terms with, although I admit that in such a complex subject, it is easy to inadvertently reinvent the wheel. Generally, researchers, except fraudulent Home Office funded radfem researchers like Stinko, report that women initiate violence more often, but that women sustain more, or more serious, injuries. (As to whether women really do sustain more injury, we should remember that a man cannot get a home owner evicted, and gain ownership of the house, merely by going to hospital to show off a bruise. In the case of Mr Gosselin, initially jailed for six months on remand but then found not guilty, he told me that the bruise was painted on, and he had documentary proof that the lawyers had paid the "examining" doctor a £1,400 bribe. Gosselin spent years trying to get the courts to deal with it, to no avail. As I found with my allegations of perjury, he found that for years, every court referred him to yet another court). Consider the case of a woman who initiates violence on a man. He is stronger and heavier. It is still no part of our society's mores that he must not defend himself. However, in law, he must use reasonable violence in defending himself, no more. However, that is difficult to gauge, especially if she is lighter and weaker. If a mouse attacks an elephant, it is difficult for the elephant to respond with exactly the required amount of violence.
If we posit that a man's duty is to minimise violence in his home, then his correct response to an attack may be to ensure that it does not happen so often. Thus, upping the ante may be in the interests of his children, because it may reduce the frequency of the attacker's violence in the future. When a woman resorts to violence, she becomes a child, and the perceived mechanisms for controlling a child come into play. He knows that her next step may be to use weapons. However, that is a value judgement that the victim has to make in the heat of the moment; whether he should merely end the violence now, or teach his attacker a lesson. Which response would be in the best interests of the children? Is it in the best interests of the children that he allow himself to be injured?
From Ill Eagle, July 1999.
After 20 years of domestic violence research, scientists can't avoid hard facts.
by Nancy Updike May/June 1999
A surprising fact has turned up in the grimly familiar world of domestic violence: Women report using violence in their relationships more often than men. This is not a crack by some antifeminist cad; the information will soon be published by the Justice Department in a report summarizing the results of in-depth, face-to-face interviews with a representative sample of 860 men and women whom researchers have been following since birth. Conducted in New Zealand by Terrie Moffitt, a University of Wisconsin psychology professor, the study supports data published in 1980 indicating that wives hit their husbands at least as often as husbands hit their wives." http://motherjones.com/mother_jones/MJ99/updike.html
Domestic Violence, Fatherhood, Families, and Politics
Report by Stephen Baskerville, Department of Political Science, Howard University. Washington DC (He spoke at our 28oct00 conference http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/conf/generalinfo.htm )
In a historic visit to the United States on February 4-5, 2001, Senator Anne C. Cools of Canada spoke at the Ralph J. Bunche International Affairs Center at Howard University to a warm reception by students, faculty, senior university officials, and Washington policy experts. Senator Cools, who represents Canada's Liberal Party, which is currently the ruling party, later spoke at other venues in Washington, DC. In her talk at Howard on "Domestic Violence, Families, Fatherhood, and Politics," Senator Cools further vindicated her reputation as a courageous and outspoken defender of families and children as she outlined and denounced "injustice" by the government of Canada, and by implication other western democracies, against families, children, and non-custodial parents. She also used the occasion to call on the Canadian government "to bring forward a new divorce bill" to rectify the injustices.
"I have been pained that the Parliament of Canada and the courts have been reluctant to vindicate the needs of children of divorce for both their parents, both mothers and fathers," she began. "The Parliament of Canada and the Divorce Act never intended the dispossession of Canada's children of their own parents, or conversely, the dispossession of parents of their own children . . . I have also asserted that the legal term the "best interests of the child" has always included the children's interests in a meaningful involvement with both parents, fathers and mothers." The Senator's remarks come in the aftermath of several highly-publicized deaths in Canada and other democratic nations in connection with the divorce system, including the suicide of Darrin White of Prince George, British Columbia, after being cut off from his children by a family court and ordered to pay more than twice his income in child and spousal support, and Brian Armstrong, of Milford, New Hampshire, who was
allegedly beaten to death by jail guards after being incarcerated without trial for missing a child support hearing.
"In politics, men, the male of the species, have received little concern in recent times. In fact, they have received much diminution, even scorn . . . . Men have had a difficult time even surviving." At the same time Senator Cools refused to demonize either gender. "I have repudiated the concept of the moral superiority of biology and gender . . . . Aggression, violence and personal imperfection are human afflictions. They are human problems, not gendered problems."
Senator Cools quoted research from Canada, the USA, and other nations on domestic violence, child abuse, and social pathologies that proceed from divorce and single-parent homes.
"We know that male children of single-mother, father-absent homes are more likely to display aggressive behavioural problems, and that behavioural and anti-social problems in male children are often products of such environments."
We know that many more men than women are arrested, convicted and incarcerated, and that the ratio of men to women detained in Canada's federal penitentiaries is about 50 men to l woman, that is, about 15,000 men to 300 women, and that male juvenile delinquency follows this same pattern. We know that more men die violently than do women, and that . . . more men than women commit suicide.
She cited studies by Adah Maurer, The Physical Punishment of Children (1976), which found that 100% of violent inmates in San Quentin prison had experienced extreme violence between the ages of 1 to 10 years, and Alan Button, Some Antecedents of Felonious and Delinquent Behavior (1973), which found that American presidential assassins and would-be assassins had experienced violent childhoods, often at the hands of mothers.
While Senator Cools expressed dismay over the political plight of men generally, her focus was "largely on fathers, on men's suffering as fathers, on fathers' punishment in divorce and family law," criticizing government policy for being at the heart of the problem. "The data shows that on divorce women are granted custody about 80% of the time, while fathers are commonly and frequently alienated from their children," she said. "Fathers' alienation from families and their children is rampant, yet this fact raises little interest from governments and cabinet ministers." "I assert that anything that diminishes fatherhood diminishes motherhood, and inflicts pain on children," she continued. "Any social or legal theory that promotes or causes the alienation of fathers, good parents, from their children is intellectually and morally fraudulent and bankrupt and should be roundly condemned."
The Senator objected to the term "violence against women," saying it is not interchangeable with the term "domestic violence." "In fact, the term 'violence against women' is misandrous in its presupposition that violence is a male characteristic."
But perhaps her most moving words were directed at the impact on children:
The impact of family aggression on children, little boys and girls is immeasurable. The panic, fear and anxiety that awakens in their heads, minds, and bodies eludes most. Absolute terror grips them, and all this in their pre-cognitive and pre-rational minds. As these little persons' undeveloped psychological systems are strained, as their nerve endings are eroded by behaviours they cannot comprehend nor control, meted out from uncaring or uncontrolled large persons who tower over them, the damage is inflicted. Meanwhile, these little persons acquire other sets of impulses, impulses which are ungovernable, and which may become uncontrollable, violent, and even homicidal. These little persons' pain is incalculable. When these damaged little persons become big persons, the pain and suffering that they will inflict upon others is unspeakable. In the formative years, the child's mental and sensory state is essential while the child's personality structure is molded. Parents' emotional unevenness, family instability, and aggression, both physical and verbal, play a major role in the negative formation of children.
Senator Cool emphasized that she had witnessed these problems in her professional capacity as a Senator, rebuking her parliamentary colleagues and the courts and expressing shock "by this collective recklessness with children's lives." "I receive thousands of letters as burdened and anguished Canadian families appeal for help, all questioning how the governments of their beloved country could allow such injustice," she reported. "I have studied this issue, its obvious injustice, and its consequences for the children of divorce and their families. I also have studied the legal documents of hundreds of fathers falsely accused of sexually abusing their own children . . . . This phenomenon is a heart of darkness."
Senator Cools is widely considered to be the most forceful and outspoken advocate for families of any public official of national stature in the English-speaking world. "In the Senate of Canada's debate about divorce, I have drawn a line in the sand. I have asserted that the children of divorce are entitled to the financial, emotional and psychological support of both their parents . . . and that it is the duty of Canada's Parliament to uphold the need of children of divorce for both their parents." The Senator reported her position is "well supported by Canada's public" and cited a public opinion poll done for the Southam News by the polling firm Compas conducted in October 1998 and reported in the Ottawa Citizen on November 23, 1998. The front page article was headlined "Public Backs Fathers' Rights: Astonishing Majority Wants Change To Laws On Access To Children, Compas Poll Shows." The poll was not extensively reported in the United States and other industrial democracies, which face similar problems, but pollster Dr. Conrad Winn was quoted by Senator Cools and the Citizen as saying:
I can't find an adjective to describe the intensity of public dismay over family issues and the unfulfilled rights of fathers and children ... I'm surprised because these issues haven't been on the agenda of Canadian politics for a very long time. The most astonishing thing is the absolute consensus among men and women about how the rights and obligations of fathers and children are being ignored.
"The current divorce regime has left many children fatherless," Senator Cools concluded in calling for a new law. "This is begging correction. Continued inaction in the face of the evidence that is compelling and conclusive is unconscionable."
The Senator's remarks received a hearty response from the Howard University community, which presented her with an honorary citation for her distinguished career of public service.
To contact Senator Cools or schedule an interview with her, please contact her office: Hon. Anne C. Cools, Senate of Canada, Parliament Buildings, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, K1A 0A4. tel:(613) 992-2808, fax:(613) 992-8513.
Stephen Baskerville, PhD,
Department of Political Science, Howard University, Washington, DC 20059 ( 703-560-5138 202-806-7267
Captain Heinz Lipshutz d. jan01
Heinz Lipschutz's father fought for Germany in the first world war. In 1935, seeing the second war coming, he wanted out, taking his family to Argentina. However, 16 year old Heinz did not want to go. Always very pro-British, he tried to come to England. When he failed, he opted for Palestine, a British Mandate, instead (reaching England later) - never to contact his family again. There, his remarkable skills continued to flower. He began to build his first aeroplane, which was later destroyed in a warehouse fire.
While trying to test his aeroplane, he decided that underwater would be more convenient, given his limited resources. Thus, the U-Plane was borne, the heavier-than-water submarine that flies. I saw the demonstration in his bath, five years ago. A world-beater, it will never be built; see my website.
One of the first to see ahead, Heinz taught me much about the advancing crisis caused by the radfems - e.g. L in my july99 editorial. He telephoned me every day. - Ed.
H Lipschutz, Confessions of a frustrated inventor, Electronics & Wireless World mar88, p276
[See New Scientist, A year later, 9mar02, p37]
Have case - will travel
Need a McKenzie Friend ?
Divorce - Custody - Advice
Tel: Ray Hemmingway 01484-316489
ManKind's chairman, Robert Whiston interviews Warren Farrell, about his new book :
"FATHER AND CHILD REUNION"
Warren Farrell is the author of numerous books prior to Father and Child Reunion, including Why Men Are The Way They Are, Women Can't Hear What Men Don't Say, and The Myth of Male Power.
He is the only man in the US ever elected three times to the Board of Directors of the National Organization for Women (NOW) in New York City, is on the boards of numerous fathers' organizations and has appeared on over 1,000 TV and radio shows, including repeated appearances on Oprah. He will be touring Canada in June. on
Robert Whiston (RW): You say that just as the last third of the 20th century was about creating equal opportunity for women as workers, so the first third of the 21st century will be about creating equal opportunity for men as parents. What's the evidence and is this a good thing, or a bad thing ?
Warren Farrell (WF): It's a good thing. Right now, many women who have the potential for running businesses are marrying successful men rather than nurturer-connecter type men. This means the economy is deprived of many powerful women's economic potential, and children are deprived of many loving men's nurturing potential.
RW: And what evidence is there of this change ?
WF: A Harris poll in the year 2000 asked men and women in their twenties if they would give up money for more time with the children. 70% of the men said yes, versus 63% of the women. That attitude has no historical precedence.
RW: That is an attitude change. But are men also changing their behavior toward children ?
WF: Yes. You can see it in any supermarket or playground or park on a weekend. And you can see it in the fact that although only 10% of men receive primary custody, the percentage becomes almost 20% when mothers eventually turn difficult children over to their dads.
RW: You're saying men get the more "difficult" children ?
WF: Yes. Like the out-of-control adolescent. Or, for example, dads are 15 times more likely to get the young developmentally disabled child.
RW: I didn't know that. In Father and Child Reunion, you document how boys and girls do better with single fathers than with single mothers. This is something we can identify with, yet you don't conclude that men are better at fathering than women are at mothering ? Are you afraid of being politically incorrect ?
WF: Hardly! The reason I don't conclude that men are better at fathering is because the populations of single moms and dads are very different in four ways. The single dads have higher incomes, more education, and must be highly motivated to overcome the psychological, social and legal barriers to be a full-time dad.
RW: Yes, you certainly have to be highly motivated if you want to be a single dad. But you said there are four differences ?
WF: The fourth is ironic. Children do better with single dads in part because they are more likely to have their moms involved than children with single moms are to have dads involved.
RW: In other words, the other parent isn't shut out and children with single dads come closer to having two parents ?
RW: Now that's so interesting I must ask you two more questions Why is it single dads are more likely to have involved moms than vice-versa, and I've also wanted to know in what ways children do better with single dads ?
WF: Let me start with the ways the kids do better. In all academic areas, but especially maths and science both boys and girls do better with single dads. They do better health-wise too - fewer days absent from school, less likelihood of being in the hospital. They do better interpersonally (getting along with classmates and teachers).
RW: Were there any ways children did better with dads that particularly surprised you ?
WF: Yes. We usually think of mothers as being more nurturing, so I would have expected children raised by moms to be more empathetic; and we think of dads as doing more rough-housing, perhaps leading to more aggressiveness. So it surprised me that children raised by dads were more empathetic and assertive, and less aggressive.
RW: Why d'you think, that's true ?
WF: That's more subjective, but I'll give an example. Dads do in fact do more roughhousing with their children, but let's say, in the process of fighting to not be pinned down by dad, a child learns that just because it's excited, defeated or agitated, it cannot "hit below the belt", poke eyes, pull hair, scratch, etc. They are learning to be assertive, not aggressive .
RW: I see. So setting boundaries, and what's acceptable, engenders empathy. from the example set. Have I got that right ?
WF: Yes. Rough-housing teaches the child that no matter how excited she or he is, that it is necessary to think of someone besides self.
RW: But aren't mothers also always telling children that ?
RW: So then whats the difference.? You're implying that children pay more attention to the dads ? Why ?
WF: Children do seem to pay more attention to dads, which frustrates mothers no end. As for why, well, first, dads do a lot more playing, which buys teammate status - they are not always positioning themselves as the child's opponent. Second, playing creates leverage --the leverage to end playing if there's disobeying.
And second, dads' restrictions, with many exceptions, tend to differ from mom's in four important ways. First, dads tends to restrict less often; second, the type of dad who is involved full-time as a dad is the type who gives the child more input up front before restricting; third, when he does restrict, he is more likely to set up consequences should he be ignored; fourth, he is more likely to stick to those consequences. For example, dad will let the child do some punching and shadow box playfully without restricting for awhile. But if it gets too much, and dad tells the child not to punch too hard or in certain places, but the child still punches, consequences are added to the warning, "OK, if you punch again, no more playing today". If the child nevertheless punches again, the dad just stops playing. Mom is less likely to play, but, if she does, more likely to restrict quickly, sometimes with consequences threatened, but when the child continues, keep repeating the restriction, "Now, I said no punching; stop - or we'll stop playing."
RW: Good illustrations. I can recognise both situations. But how does dad's style create empathy ?
WF: The child stops focusing on trying to get its way and starts accepting that it will be rewarded more when it pays attention to others' needs. That's the beginning of empathy.
RW: Another fascinating finding in Father and Child Reunion - and which maps onto British data - was how single fathers experienced less stress juggling children and work than did the single moms. Why, do you think this is ?
WF: The consequence to parents of poor boundaries - of a child turning "no's " to "maybe", is wearing the parent down. "If I wear mommy thin, I can win" becomes the child's
strategy. Result? One worn out mom.
RW: What do you make of the findings in Father and Child Reunion that moms are more likely to abuse children physically ?
WF: Well, first, moms spend more time with children. But second, when boundaries aren't set well, and the children nag the mom into a state of frustrated exhaustion and powerlessness, mom is more likely to "lose it" and hit the child. I discuss the powerlessness behind domestic violence best in Women Can't Hear What Men Don't Say: domestic violence is a momentary act of power designed to compensate for an experience of powerlessness. These moms are having an experience of powerlessness.
RW: Father and Child Reunion creates a ranking family structures in the order in which they are allegedly in the child's best interest:
(1) the intact family; (2) shared parent-time (joint physical custody); (3) primary father time;
(4) primary mother time.
Would you explain what justifies those priorities - especially the priority of father custody over mother custody ?
WF: Yes. The intact family is no surprise. It works the best - when it survives.
RW: If the intact family works so well when it survives, why does it fail to survive so often these says ?
WF: When it survives it works well because the different contributions that dads and moms make both benefit the child. For example, mom is more likely to say "don't climb the tree, you could hurt yourself", and dad more likely to say, "oh, let her climb the tree, it's important for her to learn how to take risks and explore". In the intact family that survives a compromise is often worked out that gives the child the best of both worlds, such as climbing the tree to a certain point, with dad standing under it to cushion a fall. The child receives both protection and risk-taking.
However, when the mom and dad don't value their differences, those same differences create tension that destabilise the family. The founding fathers understood the importance of differences in governing a nation when they institutionalised checks and balances, preventing the power of the legislative, executive or judiciary from being too dominant. Unfortunately, the founding fathers' wisdom did not extend to fathers in the family in the late 20th century. By devaluing dads' contributions we undermine the checks and balances that lead to the best governing of a family.
RW: What leads you to conclude that currently there's a "War Against Fathers"?
WF: It would take a book to justify those claims, but as an example, our image is of the deadbeat dad, yet every fathers' rights group is fighting for the right to be a devoted dad. Men who owe child support are twice as likely to pay it as women who owe child support. Yet the government spends more than $300 dollars to collect child support from mostly men for each dollar it spends to prevent mostly moms from inhibiting the children's access to the dad. Most important, though, the discrimination against men is so profound, that virtually every attorney, most of whom like money, will tell a dad who wishes to fight for joint physical custody to not waste his money fighting a mom who wants primary custody. It is like living in an era in which a lawyer would tell a woman, "don't waste your money trying to get a job if a man wants it".
RW: You say in Father and Child Reunion that society's focus on the best interests of the child is often in the worst interests of the child. Too many fathers feel that.
WF: Yes. A child's best interest comes from the interests of everyone in its life being in balance. A child who grows up with only its interest being the focus of everyone' s attention is a narcissist-in-the-making.
RW: Your books says divorce leaves women economically scarred and men emotionally scarred. You then you suggest the option of the children being with the father. Without child support payments etc wouldn't this leave women more economically scarred ?
WF: It will often allow women to build up their economic independence of a man; and men to be emotionally connected to their children rather than facing the loss of their wife, home and children, leading to a suicide rate more than ten times that of a woman.
RW: Controversially you believe fathers are experiencing "Taxation Without Representation." Can you expand ?
WF: For example, being required to pay child support even while prevented from being represented in the children's life because of either denial of visitation or denial of an equal opportunity to be a full and equal parent.
RW: Father and Child Reunion says that 85% of stepparents who live with their stepchildren are stepfathers, a pattern repeated in the UK. If women have such a mothering instinct why are more stepparents fathers ?
WF: Men have a protector instinct. When a woman is raising a child, a man is far more likely to help her as a stepdad and expect no reduction of financial responsibilities (for example, having to only work part-time) than she is to be a stepmom without a reduction of financial responsibilities.
RW: In Father and Child Reunion, you document the impact when a mother moves to the other end of the country to get a job, taking the children with her.
WF Yes. Daughters require a frequently and easily available dad to be able to trust him with their innermost feelings and fears. A dad at a distance cannot provide that. A dad at a distance is a dad at a distance. It is the second most insidious form of child abuse
RW: Picking up on the last point - what is the most insidious form of child abuse?
WF: Badmouthing. Badmouthing the absent parent is insidiously tearing down the child - since the child is 50% of the genetic makeup of the other parent. The child eventually sees the badmouthed parent's body language become its own. It becomes scared it too is "no good", "irresponsible". It can't discuss those feelings with either parent. Thus badmouthing invades the child like the invasion of the bodysnatchers.
RW: Would you explain what you call the "Father's Catch - 22"?
WF: The "Father's Catch - 22" is a dad showing his love to his family by being away from the love of his family (by being at work). The more he succeeds in giving financial support, the harder it is for him to give emotional support. Not only is the time less, but the characteristics it takes to succeed at work are often inversely related to the characteristics it takes to succeed in love.
RW: Perhaps most controversially in Father and Child Reunion you list what it will take to make fathers full and equal partners in the family. You say it will take Men's ABC Rights. and Responsibilities.
Let's start with the "A" of the ABC: Abortion. The argument is that if its a woman's body, its therefore a woman's business ?
WF: Okay. But the moment she gets the man or government involved, then it's also their business.
RW: The "B" part of Men's ABC Rights and Responsibilities, you say, is Birth control. Are you suggesting a men's birth control pill is really viable ?
WF: A men's birth control pill is crucial to men not feeling tricked into fathering. No woman would feel comfortable with there being only a men's pill, or with being told, "you have rubbers; why do you need a pill". In Father and Child Reunion I explain why, technologically, a pill is within five years reach if we care enough politically to support the next phase of research and distribution.
RW: The "C" part of Men's ABC Rights and Responsibilities is Childcare options. Are you suggesting that he should have as much right to care for the child as she does if, for example, they are unwed or divorced?
RW: What's the underlying principle and goal of Men's ABC Rights and Responsibilities?
WF: No one shares rights unless they share responsibilities, unless they are forced to do so. Forcing responsibilities without rights is called slavery. If we want dads to be full and equal partners in the family, that will begin by involving dads as full and equal partners in the decision making from the moment the woman discovers she is pregnant. Women shouldn't have to go it alone. And children's lives should not be the fate of only one parent.
- ManKind (c) 2001
Can we repeat superb conference?
Date: 15 March 2001 12:32. Message to conference speakers.
(oct00 Conference see www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/ home page, click onto "ManKind October 2000 Conference")
The quality of the VHS video-record of the 28oct00 http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/conf/generalinfo.htm conference is high. It got trapped in a black hole, but has now been retrieved. I am deeply in awe of the event, as you will be when you re-live it through the videorecording. I cannot speak too highly of the gift that the speakers gave to the world on that day. They will be watched, and what they said will be listened to, for decades. Ivor Catt 15mar01
Two 3hr videotapes £10ea., or one at half speed, £10. Five audiotapes for £10. All post free.
Those who received the inferior audiotapes (wrong speed) should return them to Ivor Catt for exchange to better recordings, correct speed. Ivor Catt 18mar01.
Mankind October 2000 Conference.
The Age of Violent Young Men. Causes and Remedies.
Friends House, London, 28oct00
Inquest to speakers;
It was clear to all of you that Robert and Ivor chose a cascade of masters of their subject, leading to a magnificent day. Please try to keep in touch with the other speakers, to create a powerful network. You cannot master this gorgon on your own. Thank you to all the recording men for their efforts. As you all now, I suddenly flipped three days before 28oct, and decided that it was not a conference but rather an excuse to record a high proportion of the world's leading experts. The videotape and even the audiotape will run and run. You can expect to see it shown on TV fifteen years from now; it will last a very long time. Please would the recording experts take their time, and do a good rather than a quick job. I am truly astonished at the scale and quality of grasp of a vast, complex subject shown by the many, many speakers. The discussion across the full room between Patricia Morgan, who initiated it, Malcolm George, Baskers and Erin Pizzey was a very rare experience which will thrill viewers far into the future. It is worth working at to get Patricia's volume up. There is no question of the quality of the many performances. Proof is that the numbers held up right through a gruelling seven hours. I expected a drop after two or three hours. It was extraordinary. Robert Whiston, Chairman of ManKind, thinks in terms of a conference a year from now with Censorship as theme; both distant from and also close to today's subject, violence. Congratulations. Ivor
[The next conference, "Censorship", will be at Friends House, Euston Road, on sat15sep01.]
From: Brian Robertson <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Todays protest outside Judge Tyrer's house
Date: 03 March 2001 20:30
To everyone that came along today a big thank-you. It was a storming success. The defining moment must have been when the judges daughter came out to find what what going on. Starting from being rather alarmed, after some debate with us, I think she left even more worried about what DDaddy et al had been up to in the family courts. The neighbour was classic, charging to rescue the damsel in distress, once he found out why we were there he was very sympathetic and admitted a friend of his had the same problems. All the while the reporters were taking notes and the cameras were clicking.
It was difficult to have too much sympathy with the judge's daughter. She could spare a thought for:
* The man ordered out of his own house at night time by baton-wielding, CS-packing, policemen. Because of false DV accusations.
* The father jailed for waiving at his own children after they were driven past in the mothers car.
* The father jailed for sending his own children some Easter Eggs.
Let's hope the reporters from the Guardian and the Bucks Free Press get their story and pictures in the papers. Netty (my partner) got a surprise when she got home. Mark Harris had left a phone message in the morning, and when she phoned up Mark he was in a football match (unknown to her). With all the jeering and shouting she could hear she assumed it must still be the protest outside the judges house!
Thanks to all Brian Robertson.
From: Brian Robertson email@example.com
Subject: Judge Under Siege Report
Date: 04 March 2001 15:25
Thanks to Alan Carr for unearthing the following story:
A group of angry dads staged a protest outside a judge's house, claiming his rulings were damaging the rights of fathers. Twelve men shouted and waved placards outside the home of family court judge Christopher Tyrer in Buckinghamshire, saying the current divorce system is ruining father's relationships with their children.
The men, all members of the Equal Parenting Council, claim the courts do not grant enough access to fathers, fail to enforce the orders that are in place and discriminate against men by awarding custody to mothers in 90 per cent of cases.
The men paraded in front of the house carrying signs saying 'Tyrer or Tyrant?' and shouted that the judge "abuses the rights of children and fathers'.
Unfortunately for the demonstrators, the judge was not at home, but his 17-year-old daughter, Rebecca, was visibly upset by the protests. She told the demonstrators: "It's nothing to do with me. I don't know what you're here for. My parents are away. Please go away and come back when he is here. I am on my own."
But the men insisted they were targeting the 56-year-old High Court judge, who presides over family matters at Crown Courts such as Oxford and Aylesbury, because of what they see as his poor treatment of fathers in custody battles. The protesters had travelled from as far as Plymouth, Devon and Bristol for the siege.
Families need fathers
One father, a 49-year-old BT worker, said he had not seen his two sons since last October because his ex-partner refused to allow him contact.
"There are human rights issues here as well as strictly family issues," he said. "The injunction contravenes my freedom of speech under the Convention of Human Rights."
Another protester, Anson Allen, 58, from Bristol, said he had not seen his 15-year-old son for five years, since his wife left him. "Families need fathers," he said. "The courts are about 50 years behind the times. They think a child only needs a mother."
Are one quarter of mothers Medeas?
Medea swears, "He shall never see alive again the sons he had from me ... this is the way to deal Jason the deepest wound."
Dominic Cavendish, Telegraph, 15jan01, writes; "Greek mythology boasts many monsters, but few can match Medea. Having given up everything for Jason, leader of the Argonauts, she exacts merciless revenge when he abandons her in Corinth for Creon's daughter, poisoning her rival and slaughtering her own children to get back at their father.
'The death of the children is one of the most terrifying things I've ever had anything to do with,' [actress Fiona] Shaw states ...."
[Does today's decision by the state, that children are a mother's chattels, save some of them from being murdered, merely encouraging a quarter of mothers to commit the lesser crime, and cut their children off from their fathers? How much of a threat to her children is a mother? - Ed]
The paedophile bogeyman ....
- Melanie Phillips, Sunday Times, 18mar01, p17
If you are a man intending to fly with British Airways, beware. You won't merely have to put up with your knees being jammed somewhere near your ears thanks to the lack of space between economy class seats, or the frustrating wait because of the computer breakdown at check-in. You will be branded a potential paedophile.
A businessman on a BA flight who happened to be sitting next to two children was amazed to be asked to move because the airline didn't like men sitting next to unaccompanied minors. He hadn't spoken to them, nor had they made a complaint. It was simply its policy, said BA, to keep men away from children because of the danger of paedophiles.
How exams are fixed in favour of girls
The Spectator, 20jan01
Girls are doing better than boys in exams, but that does not mean that they are brighter, says Madsen Pirie. What has happened is that exams have been feminised - and so has the country.
Female examinees continue to carry all before them. First, they made waves in the GCSE exams, outperforming their male counterparts in every year since GCSEs replaced O-levels in 1988. Then, last summer, and for the first time, they edged ahead of boys in A-level results, with girls gaining more A-grade passes than boys did. Now they are reported to have completed the hat-trick, winning more university degrees with first-class honours than boys could manage.
According to the Higher Education Statistics Authority, more than 11,000 women gained first-class honours degrees at Britain's 170 universities, against only 10,800 achieved by the men. This reverses the previous year's position, when 10,500 men gained firsts, as opposed to 10,200 women. Only five years ago, men gained 1,800 more first-class honours degrees than women. The number of women with firsts has trebled in a decade, with women now leading the field in 12 of the 17 subject areas, including medicine, law and business. Partly, they gain more of the firsts because there are more of them. They make up 55 per cent of the university population, and gain more of all qualifications. There is, nonetheless, a clear trend running through education.
Analysts have been quick to assign causes. The superior performance of girls at GCSEs represented, we were told, the fact that girls mature much earlier, and take a more serious-minded, adult attitude to education. Last year's A-level results gave the commentators a field-day. Educational psychologists solemnly laid blame on the 'laddish' culture espoused by schoolboys. It was 'uncool', we were told, for boys to be seen as swots. Even the ones who did work had to do so furtively for fear of losing face with their peer-group.
Some commentators even managed to lay the blame on black teenagers, for setting poor role-models for their white, middle-class counterparts, and giving academic success no street cred. David Blunkett's office set up an inquiry headed by Judith Ireson of the University of London's Institute of Education. Part of its remit has been to investigate whether the 'slump' in boys' results has been caused by the rise of laddishness.
As for the success of girls at university, there has been no shortage of explanations. Tony Higgins, of the University Admissions Service, says that 30 years of work encouraging girls to stay in higher education has paid dividends. No doubt others will tell us earnestly that male undergraduates prefer to indulge in the drinking and clubbing culture of university life, while their more serious-minded female colleagues are hitting the books until the library closes. Some might see the extra effort by women as a result of the changing nature of society. Few women now think in terms of marriage as a career; most assume they will have to work for a living, and that qualifications will matter more than they did before. A recent MORI poll for the Adam Smith Institute showed that 48 per cent of women, marginally more than men, list 'owning and running my own business' among their career aspirations. If women once viewed university qualifications less seriously, it is no longer true.
There is an alternative explanation for the recent successes of girls, which many of those involved in education accept readily. It is that boys and girls have not changed very much in their habits and skills, but the examinations themselves have changed. The old exams - O-levels, A-levels and degree finals - tended to reward the qualities which boys are good at. That is, they favoured risk-taking and grasp of the big picture, rather than the more systematic, consistent, attention-to-detail qualities which favour girls. The old O-level, with its high-risk, swot-it-all-up-for-the-final-throw, and then attempt not more than four out of nine questions, was a boys' exam. The GCSE which replaced it places much more emphasis on systematic preparation in modules, worked on consistently over time. It is not surprising that girls have done better since the change was made, since GCSEs represent the way girls work.
It is not that one approach is better than the other, just that they are different. One brings out the strengths of boys, the other brings out the strengths of girls. Girls began to do better, not because the boys 'slumped', but because the exams were feminised. A Cambridge don neatly encapsulated the difference to me: 'The boy sees the big picture, takes risks, and often misses important material. The girl is systematic, does the detailed work, and sometimes misses the central thesis.' He gave a vivid account of a recent oral, in which a boy and a girl were both defending their dissertation for finals. 'They went to type,' he said. 'The girl had done an amazing amount of detail, but had not grasped what it all added up to. The boy saw instantly what it was all about, but was fuzzy on the supporting evidence. Both of them gained firsts.'
IQ tests routinely recognise the difference, and make allowances accordingly. Boys score better with numbers, pattern recognition, and abstract reasoning. Girls do better with language and situational logic. An IQ test intended for both sexes will have sections which play to each of the different skills, to avoid being easier for the one sex than for the other. Mensa, the high-IQ society, uses a variety of different tests, and its educational psychologists take it as axiomatic that girls do better on some, boys on others.
Chris Woodhead, the government's former chief inspector of schools, recognises the change. 'There is no doubt,' he says, 'that elements have been incorporated into school examinations which girls find easier to do than boys.'
Professor Alan Smithers, of Liverpool University's Centre for Education and Employment Research, takes a broader view. 'Exams are simply easier,' he says. 'They present less of a challenge, and are more easily coped with by conscientious and consistent application. Girls apply themselves more.' Not only does he think that GCSEs are less challenging than O-levels because they cater for a wider ability range; he also points out that A-levels have been broadened, incorporating modules (optional components) and covering a greater range of subjects. Twice as many people are now expected to pass through university as were once expected to pass the 11-plus. 'Where once there was history and physics,' he says, 'we now have health studies, social care, leisure and tourism.'
Professor Smithers also thinks that the changes in assessment are significant. He points out that what used to be decided by terminal examination is often now determined in part by modules and continuous assessment, both of which favour the more systematic approach taken by girls rather than the high-risk strategy which appeals more to boys.
Even the method of marking has changed. Claire Fox, director of the Institute of Ideas and a former teacher, says that markers formerly used their professional expertise on a loose set of criteria to see which grade a script merited, or whether it should fail. Today, a more prescriptive and detailed checklist is issued, including such factors as 'situated in historical context', 'personal response to the literature', or 'shows awareness of style'. This can result, she claims, 'in rewarding blindly those who methodically - even dully - fulfil the checklist criteria, regardless of passion, insight or flair, and penalising those of a more creative or individual style.'
Mark Coote, a teacher at the City of London Freemen's School at Ashtead, thinks that 'the whole nature of the GCSE and AS/A-level examinations favours the girls' approach to working'. His 17 years of teaching experience has persuaded him that girls fare better over modular courses where they can plan their study time and strategy, and that they are better timekeepers, and have the self-discipline to meet deadlines. 'Boys,' he says, 'do play a high-risk strategy, preferring last-minute cramming. They tend to rise to the challenge of final examinations where there is all (or nothing) to play for.' He cannot, in his teaching experience, remember a single girl pupil who has missed a coursework deadline for GCSE assessment, other than through genuine illness. He has, however, 'lost count of the number of boys who have worked
until three in the morning to meet the deadline, or missed it altogether. Boys perform less well in coursework than girls,' he tells us, 'although make up ground in the final exams.'
The questions themselves have changed. An O-level question was demanding of fact and understanding. Candidates might have been asked to outline the main arguments presented in the 1689 Bill of Rights and the Act of Settlement of 1701, and the effect this might have had on Catholics. A modern GCSE question, encouraging empathy, might ask, 'How might you have felt as a Jewish child growing up in Nazi Germany?' An old O-level question might have asked why the Jacobite Rebellions of 1715 and 1745 ended in failure. A typical GCSE question on the same subject, using stimulus material such as a picture, might ask as its first question (carrying one mark), 'Why is Bonnie Prince Charlie wearing tartan?'
Given these facts, the outcome is less surprising. If we change the structure of our examinations, and the methods by which they are marked, in ways which play to girls' strengths, we can hardly be surprised if boys do less well than they did before. It is not that boys are becoming less able or less academic than they were previously. It is that they now face examinations which have been feminised, and which fail to bring out their strong points. It is not that the exams bere right before, and wre wrong now. It is that they were boy-friendly before, and are now girl-friendly. The prrviopus exams discriminated against girls just as much as the present ones discriminate against boys. Commentators have observed that modern society has become to some degree feminised. The same has happened to examinations. They have been remade, perhaps unconsciously, in a feminine image which downplays competition and risk, both of which favour boys.
If we wish boys to do better in GCSEs, A-levels and university degrees, we do not need psychological insights into the 'laddish' culture, or to provide them with more worthy role-models, or to tell them that they are underachievers. We need examinations which appeal to them and which bring out their strengths. One answer might be to have different examination boards providing different styles of exam, so that teachers or students could select ones which suited the character of the applicant. Girls might be entered for those which featured more modules and coursework; boys might be steered towards ones in which the final examination counted for more.
Ultimately, we have to ask ourselves what sort of society we are producing if we feminise the entry qualification into its leadership positions. If we select the methodical over the risk-takers, male or female, and the systematic in preference to those with insight, will Britain still be capable of meeting the challenges the world throws its way? While the country might be more peaceable, more sensitive to the needs of its citizens, and more efficient in applying itself to the detail of good management, we might ask if it will still be as inventive and creative? Will it still produce penicillin and hovercraft? Or will it just produce civil servants?
One might wonder how the British economy would fare if its educational system had extinguished the flash and fire of entrepreneurial zeal, and replaced it with the duller expectations of systematic and steady progress. One might also wonder, in times of rapid change, if such a Britain would be adaptive, capable of responding instantly when needs arose? The old examinations were as much a test of character as of educational attainment. They tested the ability to stand up under pressure, and to hold one's nerve in a crisis. The new exams undoubtedly test character, too, but of a very different quality. Whether we like it or not, they are helping to determine the sort of country we will become.
Dr Madsen Pirie is president of the Adam Smith Institute.
[Also see "Feminization of Maths", Male View, oct98, p10]
[The attack on Physics is gong on hand in hand with the attack on Maths. They are the two subjects I did at A level in 1953, gaining a State Scholarship to Cambridge. Because girls do better at Geography than at Physics, Physics has now been turned into a branch of Geography. It is particularly destructive to corrupt Physics by bringing ecology propaganda into it. True Physics is objective, value-free. - Ed]
The War Against Women
Marilyn French, a leading feminist philosopher & theorist
Pub: Hamish Hamilton, 1992
.... This book lays out women's state in this world - and it is a state of siege .... - Carolyn Heilbrun (cf. back cover)
.... Andrea Dworkin provided important research materials. ....
p1; .... Women .... have been increasingly disempowered, degraded, and subjugated. This tendency has accelerated over the last four centuries ....
....p2; Industrialization did bring benefits, especially to a small group, but it also propelled most humans into new depths of destitution and misery. .... people were displaced from land thrtoughout Europe, joining the proletariat, .... the majority of whom were women and children.
.... men-as-a-caste - elite and working-class men - continue to seek ways to defeat feminism .... As kin-group and community controls erode, men everywhere increasingly fail to support the children they engender, and use violence against females - daughters, wives, lovers, mothers, and strangers. .... These actions amount to a global war against women.
This war is aimed at reasserting or tightening men's control over female bodies, especially their sexual and reproductive capacities, and women's labour.
Systemic Discrimination Against Women
p24; .... women do between two-thirds and three-quarters of the work in the world. .... they are still granted only 10% of the world's income .... And women's situation is worsening ....
Institutional Wars Against Women
p121; Women are disadvantaged in every area of life. .... the United States, where discrimination remains strong ....
The Cultural War Against Women
p166; Acclaimed modern sculptors depict women with small vacant heads and prominent or hugely enlarged sexual organs.
Men's Personal War Aganist Women
p184; As long as some men use physical force to subjugate females, all men need not. The knowledge that some men do suffices to threaten all women. Beyond that, it is not necessary to beat up a woman or to beat her down. A man can simply refuse to hire women in well-paid jobs, extract as much or more work from women than men but pay them less, or treat women disrespectfully at work or at home. He can fail to support a child he has engendered, demand the woman he lives with wait on him like a servant. He can beat or kill the woman he claims to love; he can rape women, whether mate, acquantance, or stranger; he can rape or sexually molest his daughters, nieces, stepchildren, or the chldren of the woman he claims to love. The vast majority of men in the world do one or more of the above.
- Simon de Bruxelles, Times, 2mar01, p9
A police inspector whose sergeant lover allegedly tried to strangle her had four other female admirers, including a barrister and a married woman, a court heard yesterday. ....
Miss Nash (the Sgt) is accused of trying to strangle Miss Glen (the Insptr) after discovering that she had had an intimate dinner with Katherine Willoughby, a WPC since promoted to sergeant. .... several women were vying for Miss Glen's affections in the months before the attack. ....
A doctor told the court that Miss Glen was fortunate to survive the attack, in which Miss Nash is alleged to have used a T-shirt as a ligature to strangle her while she slept. ....
[This puts a totally new slant on the sexist accusation of a girl sleeping her way to the top. Did the murder attempt fail because the victim woke up or because a casting couch wasn't available ? - Ed]
Ill14 p10, p11, p12 missing
Ill Eagle 15
Ill Eagle 15 .. May 2001 .... ISSN 1466-9005
'WAVE' DAD BANGED UP WITH MURDERERS
- Kirsty Turner, Sunday Independent, 8apr01
Father's Hunger Strike ends: ' I can't do this to my children '
A DESPERATE dad has ended his prison hunger strike for the sake of his children. Speaking to the Sunday Independent from Pentonville prison, London, father of three Mark Harris said he had begun to eat and drink after persuasion from friends and supporters.
Last week we reported how Mr. Harris was sentenced to ten months in prison on March 23rd. for saying 'hello' to his daughters aged ten, 11 and 14 and subsequently breaching injunctions restricting his access to the youngsters. He was committed for contempt of court and fined £500.
The 36 year old driving instructor from Plymouth said ' My barrister said "Expect a small fine" and so I was totally gobsmacked when I got ten months in prison.'
'I could hardly stand up when I heard.'
'I was even more gobsmacked when I realised that the only possible thing you can do in protest is to stop eating.'
'But I did think better of it after a while.'
'I had a lot of people begging me to stop and in the end I just thought, I can't do this to the children.'
At the end of his week long food and fluid strike Mark's blood pressure had shot up and he had difficulty with basic body functions. He said: ' My blood pressure went way up and by the end I had trouble walking and even seeing.'
Mr. Harris has retracted his threat to commit suicide at the earliest possibility, but he is still being watched closely. He said: 'They put me in the constant observation unit because they were worried about my well-being and I'm still there.'
'There are all sorts of people here - one man has tried to commit suicide and another tried to have a shower with his clothes on at three am one morning.' Mr. Harris said he shares living space with attempted murderers, armed robbers and drug dealers.
This week he says he was told that he was not eligible to be released two months early under the electronic tagging system. No reason was given. Mark said: ' I don't know why my application's been refused.' 'I must be extremely dangerous or something.'
Mr. Harris has lodged an appeal against his sentence and is applying for bail pending the outcome. The home office has refused to comment on the case. e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
[ManKind member Mark organised demonstrations at the homes of judges. See Ill Eagle 12, dec00, p12 for demo photo, and p2 for article reproduced below.]
ManKind gets charity status
8may01. ManKind has at long last been granted charity status. We can now confirm that our Chairman, Robert Whiston, has extraordinarily won charity status for ManKind. This terrific news has been confirmed to all ManKind's NEC. Further details will emerge during May or early June but it is clear that it was a close run thing. In a move that the Commissioners themselves believe to be unique, they have granted ManKind charity status as the first ever men's civil rights organisation.
"It has been a hard and very long road, and we have sometimes felt we would never get there", confided one NEC member.
Victory only came after a personal meeting held at the Charity Commissioner's central London offices with ManKind's chairman, Robert Whiston, who faced members of the Commissioner's legal team and applications experts.
For almost 2 hours our Chairman answered a barrage of questions from the Commissioners about Mankind's motives, aims and procedures. Finally, they were convinced by the case put to them and by the answers they had received.
"I had thought, given their past track record, that we would only reach an 'agreement in principle' stage. Therefore, you can imagine my delight when they suddenly conceded totally and withdrew all objections", said Whiston. "Seeking a personal meeting in order to break the log-jam was a high risk strategy, I admit, but I owed it to members and to our ideals to explore every avenue", he added.
What will this mean for ManKind ? It will instantly give us much more credibility; give us new opportunities that were once denied to us, facilitate working with local councils and community groups and open up funding doors that were until now closed. All of us who belong to ManKind must embrace these changes and exploit the opportunities ahead. We must all dedicate ourselves to fulfilling the dream.
[From Ill Eagle 12. "Access" means "Contact".]
Mark Harris is a ManKind member.
The following article (picture, p12) is from the Sunday Independent newspaper dated November 19th. 2000, phone number (01752 209155) e-mail: email@example.com
These protests are organised by Mark Harris, who is a father in a million, together with a lot of background work by other members of DADS; finding the appropriate addresses.
These protests are having an effect as the judiciary have admitted that they are uncomfortable with them. The pressure needs to be kept up by progressing these protests around the country, allowing people who cannot afford to travel to the South West to ' have a go ' at a protest in their area.
Anson in the 'Y' fronts is painted purple from head to toe for the occasion.
Mark is willing to offer advice and help in organising these events around the country. regards, Dave
ESTRANGED dads protesting for the right to see their children paraded outside a Somerset hotel owned by a controversial High Court judge yesterday.
The protesters claim that judge Mrs. Justice Bracewell, former chairman of the Children Act Advisory Committee, has undermined their right to have access to their children.
Among the ranks assembled outside the Lynch Country Hotel, at Behind Berry, near Somerton, were members of pressure group Dads Against Discrimination.
Its chairman Mark Harris from Plymouth, said; 'It has gone very well'.
Around forty people from all over the South West and further afield turned up.
We knocked on the door and handed a bundle of letters to a man who answered the door on behalf of Mrs. Justice Bracewell. A lot of people passing in cars showed support by tooting and putting their thumbs up.
Mr. Harris said that there would be another fathers' rights protest in Bristol city centre under the Sails, on December 22nd. starting at twelve noon.
Mailing list for those who believe that children need both parents;
To Post a message, send it to: euro-dads@eGroups.com
To Subscribe, send a blank message to: euro-dads@eGroups.com
I have had a letter from Iconoclast suggesting that we urge members to write to prospective candidates - as we approach the election - about the case of Mark Harris and also the way other men are treated by the courts. As MV will probably be too late for the election, could you put a piece in Ill Eagle about this?
Regards, David Hughes 26apr01
FT9851 Mark Harris, Hospital Wing, HMP Pentonville, Caledonian Road, London N7 8TT 14apr01
Many thanks for your correspondence that came with letters & postcards from all over the world.
Anyone who wishes to visit can simply phone the prison, quote my number FT9851 and make it clear that I am a civil prisoner - that makes me entitled to unlimited visits per week. I don't get told until it's time to actually come to the visiting room, but all visitors are most welcome.
I hope the momentum of this will continue, I've even had a letter from Charles Hanson (HMP Kingston) who told me he corresponds with you - he told me his story, and well, there but for the grace of God go I! [Ill Eagle 10, aug00, p4 "Charles Hanson, wife murderer."] Only John Baker of FNF (out of about 150 letters) did not offer total support - I've sent his letters to Tony Coe ....
I tried to purge my contempt last Thursday. I wrote to Madness Munby [Justice James Lawrence Munby, 13 Ravensdon St., London SE11 4AQ, tel. 0207 587 0107, nr. Kennington Tube Stn.] (as his committal order invites) apologising for my 'crimes' - he had me taken, alone, in a secure vehicle to the RCJ with 2 security officers. I had no time to prepare, no solicitor (I was got up at 7am & told I'm off to court - solicitor is 200 miles away in Plymouth). Munby was having none of it - refused to accept my apologies & sent me back. Got the feeling he got quite aroused by his 'power'. I hope the protest at his London home this Saturday is well supported! (And his local press, national press, Evening Standard are tipped off about it first!). Application for bail, pending appeal at the RCJ - hopeful of an early hearing.
I think 2 very important points must be kept in public view - one, judges with no expertise have the power to imprison people for up to two years in family proceedings - can this be right? Secondly, there are no sentencing guidelines on Contempt at all. A good example to quote is shoplifting has a maximum penalty of 14 years, but even the most repetitive offenders get 9/12 months on like the 30th+ conviction. Ditto burglary, again 14 yr max, repeat offenders usually get 24-30 months.
Of course, mothers (like my ex) don't even get told off for breaching contact orders - as you can see on the committal order, I got 4 months for trying to 'bribe' the mother into complying with my contact order! I can only say a big 'Thank you' to all on the outside for keeping this public. Please pass that on. - Mark, who lost his appeal on 2may01
A request for volunteers
A survey of male victims of domestic violence by female partners is being conducted by Dewar Research with the help of Dr M. George of London University.
Men who have experienced violence from a female partner during the last five years are invited to write or contact Dewar Research at 'Constables', Windsor Road, Ascot, SL5 7LF, or tel/fax 01344 621167; or email Dr. George at firstname.lastname@example.org giving their name, postal address, telephone number or email address.
No expenses will be faced by volunteers, and confidentiality is guaranteed.
On 3may01 Colin Hale, acting for the embattled pro-judge coterie at the centre of FNF, told the Appeal Court that they had rescheduled FNF AGM from 20may01 to 23sep01.
The move to make a clean sweep of the management of FNF at its AGM, 23sep01, is worth supporting. The FNF Reform website is at http://www.neck.ukgateway.net/ The rump at FNF; Hale, Berry, de la Mare, Masterman, are blocking the normal communication routes within FNF. For instance, they are illegally withholding the membership list. Dr. Michael Pelling has taken this to the Appeal Court, which will hear the case in june01.
The next stage
Having successfully imposed involuntary divorce on one parent, the divorce industry can now force it on both parents; "Divorce or lose children" - Stephen Baskerville, www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/14127.htm
The transition from protest to resistance.
It is pretty clear that our gongseeker 'allies' - Cherry, Softon and the rest, are being swept away. Also, the judges are losing their rag. These judge-home demos should have taken place 25 years ago, but the gentleman reformers got in the way, and helped to destroy a further generation of young children.
"The Law responds to public opinion" - Lord Chief Justice Taylor, quoted in my book The Hook and the Sting, p6, on my website.
The jailing of our man Harris is the first, incompetent, attempt by the judges - Sloss and her henchmen - to communicate with us. They are trying to communicate via a bullying stance, to cover for the fact that they are less intelligent than us, and know less of the law and its operation in our family courts, than we do. (One reason why Cherry and Softon shut us out is that their intellectual level is the same as that of Sloss and her henchmen.)
Sloss has to be put on notice that in spite of their ignorance, judges will do better to communicate, at which time we can go back to Protest, and they could make their contribution to the reform process. Although their track record is appalling, and they lack knowledge, we could use them.
"Protest is saying that I do not like something for this or that reason.
"Resistance is making sure that that which I do not like is not going to happen again." - Ulrike Meinhoff, German Columnist.
After many years, Ulrika and her boyfriend were both assassinated in the evening while in jail so that the Establishment could avoid prevent them from coming to court next morning. In our case, judges and their anti-family axis are in much greater difficulty. There are many more of us. The internet, unlike the German media, is not suppressed yet. Our cause is just, which Ulkrika's was not. - Ed
"Single mothers failed and fathers persecuted; Child support
- Telegraph, 6apr01
"The Child Support Agency persecuted good fathers and failed single mothers, said Alan Simpson (Lab, Nottingham South) when he called for a Commons debate on the agency so that MPs could know more about the CSA.
"'It is important for the House to have a debate on the extent to which we continue to miserably fail the women who get no support from their former partners and continue to pursue and persecute men who are good fathers,' he said.
"He said there was 'an immovable backlog' of cases awaiting the attention of the independent case examiner.
"Margaret Beckett, Leader of the House, said that every MP probably had constituents who had experienced difficulties in dealing with the CSA.
"She said Mr Simpson was right to identify 'the great distress and difficulty that is caused'."
We have it on very good authority that the most senior judges in the Family Court Division are not very bright. Nepotism may be part of the reason; Sloss's uncle failed to teach her law. Barristers assure me that a barrister or a judge has to follow the Sloss party line, or his career is blighted.
RG insisted to me many years ago, and I agree, that the family court system is one of oppression. The judge knows that he has to confiscate a father's home and his children. After all, he is married himself, and must placate his own wife; or else she is a radfem appointed by Sloss. Like Denning, Sloss took a demotion in order to get back to maximum control of the appointment of judges
My aug00 Ill Eagle 10 editorial reported on the family court circuit judge who cried on my shoulder, saying that the damage he was required to inflict on so many children had driven his close to breakdown. He had now recovered, by getting out of the family courts and into the criminal courts.
Over a period of more than two years, I found that there is no procedure for going after alleged perjury in the family courts. See my website.
After many years in the family courts, RG told me that he advised divorcing fathers to ease the course and conscience of the judge by admitting to all charges against the father. When the father validates the coming confiscation, the judge can confiscate children and home without being forced to address his own conscience more than is absolutely necessary. A father who forces a judge to address his own behaviour makes the judge more vindictive and destructive, forcing him to hint at perjury, violence or sexual abuse by the father.
The next stage in this mad saga was long coming to me, and it came to me this morning (21mar01). Remember, in our family courts, the model is the Mikado of Titipu, or Alice in Wonderland's Court Scene. Contempt of court is not an issue. The family courts are systematically contemptible.
I propose an addition to the full Retreat strategy http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/retreat01.htm http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/retreat01.htm http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/README.htm . Already, the divorcing father files with the judge an extensive set of documents from Retreat
The further document should be a sworn affidavit by the divorcing father, as follows; "I accept that there is no procedure for investigating perjury in the family courts; that the court welcomes perjury. I confirm any charges that the reason why I wish to access my former wife is in order to further batter her. Further, the reason why I wish to access my children is in order to further sexually molest them. This is why I will not accept supervised contact"
Armed with this sworn affidavit, the judge will not have to waste taxpayers' money through legal aid, and waste court time, pretending that he is deciding whether there exists major proven evidence against the father. In fact, following this route, the court hearing will be unnecessary, which is the final objective of Retreat. The judge has a stark choice. He can either expropriate the father, who will as a result never work again on the white economy, and never have any contact whatsoever with his children. That way, the judge will load a charge of £135,000 onto the taxpayer - the total cost of maintaining mother and child, less the equity in the family home. Or he can capitulate to the father, as he did in the EH and PS cases, and make a decision acceptable to the father.
During the cold war, this was called MAD. This is where a series of ignorant judges have brought us. MAD worked. Both sides backed off.
Retreat only works if the father lacks substantial assets which the judge can use to maintain the mother and child. The accumulation of assets by a father shows that the father is unwilling to do the best for his children. All of this is covered on my website.
Now the reader will see the depths of stupidity of Sloss and her colleagues. By leaving no hope to divorcing fathers, she was bound to end up losing control of her courts.
The Mark Harris case shows that fathers are willing to grasp the Sloss nettle. They have no other option.
The Pelling Drops
And immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales: and he received sight forthwith ....
- Acts, ch9, v18
Dr Michael Pelling took up the cudgels as MacKenzie Friend for divorcing men. After many years, his mastery of family law is now unparalleled. I was already concerned, some years back, when I saw him "assist" a mystified father in Judicial Review, and another in the Appeal Court. Michael also took cases to Strasbourg. On numerous occasions I saw the very high respect our most senior judges had for Pelling.
Recently, outside the Miskulin Appeal in the High Court, I asked Michael why he now was happy and smiling. He replied that he now knew that the courts were a sham, and so he did not have to work so hard at making a good case for those he helped. (This change in behaviour happened to E two years before, when he was finally convinced that our family courts were an illegal sham, when a request for leave to appeal to the Appeal Court was denied him on obviously phoney grounds.)
Since the family courts are operating illegally, we have to study where their power resides. In particular, I have tried for ten years to find out what is the procedural link between family court and police. The end will come for the family courts when police stop acting on the court's instructions.
I do know that we will not be able to stop the Land Registry clerk from confiscating a father's house on the instructions of one of these illegal judges. However, their ability to jail Mark Harris, and to engage in other anti-social activity, should be brought to an end more easily. After all, some policemen are married. Why should they continue to connive in anti-family misconduct by the judges?
ManKind and Ill Eagle can be reached at:-
1). Suite 367, 2 Lansdowne Row,
London W1X 8HL.
3) Email Head.Office@mankind.co.uk
The Editor, Ivor Catt, 121 Westfields, St. Albans AL3 4JR, England.
01727 - 864257 Email email@example.com
Dear Governor Davies,
Firstly a quote from the Daily Telegraph Leader, 27aug99; ".... For too many children today the answer to the question; 'And when did you last see your father?' is 'Never.' This is the worst social problem of our time."
Secondly, a quote from the judge who put Mark Harris FT9851 in prison; ".... He is a loving, devoted father." He said that in sentencing Mark he had taken account of the fact that none of the braces of the court orders involved any violence or threats of violence. He said he had also considered the fact that all these actions were motivated by Mark's desire to re-establish his parenting relationship with his daughters. It was accepted that there was no evidence of any harm being caused by any of these breaches of various court orders.
Mark had mainly represented himself in court for financial reasons, whilst the mother has run up hundreds of thousands of pounds in Legal Aid.
Family Court judges are in contempt of parliament and are costing taxpayers needless sums of money because they have put behind bars a working man who is supposed to have the income to support his children and ex wife and yet accept ludicrous court orders that are orchestrated by solicitors making a living out of family crises by causing litigation rather than mediation!
At a time when the Government is proposing its latest deflection tactic to avert attention from the disastrous effects on the nation's economy of the bungled foot and mouth epidemic, it would appear that you are going to need all the available space possible to house the wave of inmates that Blair is 'sending police officers out to get'.
In 1996-7 the Legal Aid Board spent £392m on matrimonial and divorce proceedings. The cost to the Board is nothing compared with the devastation to society caused by ancillary relief (money settlement) proceedings; just over 2.5 years. - Family Policy Studies Centre, Family Briefing Paper No. 10, June 1999.
In view of the above, I suggest family court cases be paroled where there is no evidence of physical or
sexual abuse. Also, family law matters should be given the due consideration that the former Lord Chancellor sought to introduce in order to reduce the various costs.
Yours concernedly, Janice Cannon, ManKind member.
Planned family court service in chaos, MPs told
- Frances Gibb, Legal Editor,
A £70 MILLION children and family court service due to start in April is in jeopardy because of disarray in plans for its 1,000 staff, ministers will be told this week. Several hundred members of the National Association of Probation Officers (Napo) who are supposed to be joining the new service say the failure of ministers to agree staffing terms, conditions and funding threaten its viability. Many of the officers are likely to refuse to transfer to the new agency, the Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (Cafcass), unless their concerns are met. Their warning comes as Lady Justice Butler-Sloss, the most senior family judge, has urged lawyers to support Cafcass, which takes over all responsibilities relating to the welfare of children and families in courts.
Lady Justice Butler-Sloss, the President of the High Court’s Family Division, told the Family Law Bar Association last week that Cafcass would take “some settling down”. She added: “It’s very important for the families to make it work and to have the chance to have an infinitely better system than we have had.” Barristers should play their part and make the work of Cafcass easier.
In a big change to present arrangements, Cafcass will combine the civil work function of the probation service, the guardian ad litem service, and the wardship responsibilities of the Official Solicitor. It will advise on issues such as what contact children will have with parents or the placing of children in care.
Groups representing divorced or separated fathers have voiced concerns that Cafcass has not ensured that officers advising on contact are properly trained. Last year the probation service dealt with 79,600 welfare reports, mediations and court appointments.
Harry Fletcher, general secretary of Napo, said: “It is vital that the court services to vulnerable children do not collapse. Ministers have seven weeks to sort out the chaos.” He said that Napo had written to ministers about their failure to provide the assurances needed to attract good staff.
Eight parliamentary questions had also been tabled by Simon Hughes, MP, he said.
A voice for the children
- Richard White and Frances Gibb, Times, Law, 10apr01, p5
The Children and Family Court Advisory Support Service (Cafcass), which took effect on April 2, combines the panels of guardians ad litem and reporting officers previously operated by local authorities or consortiums, the court welfare service previously managed by the Probation Service and that part of the Office of the Official Solicitor undertaking children's work.
It is a logical development .... In the interests of children .... It is vital that it gets off to a good start.
Anthony Hewson, chairman of the Cafcass board, .... spoke of the problems facing the organisation (www.cafcass.gov.uk). .... delay .... unforeseen problems .... there was a history of poor communications, a lack of time to think about things together and a lack of trust and confidence.
Hewson felt it necessary to ask people to accept that no one had done anything deliberately to misrepresent any matter or intentionally be dishonest. .... but those of us who did foresee and gave warning of problems were dismissed by the politicians. Cafcass, as the civil servants who set it up admitted, was made responsible to a government department that did not want it, against the wishes of the constituent bodies. They then allocated too small a team and too short a time frame to set up such a big project. Consultation and communication, now accepted by the chairman as critical, was felt by many to be a sham. Many managerial appointments have still not been made. The dead hand of the Treasury was at work and can now be seen at work again.
There are many examples of this chaotic process, .... Children with disruption in their families will suffer more unless the Government acts swiftly. ....
[Anthony Hewson has had interviews with our Chairman, with Oliver Cyriax, and with Tony Coe. - Ed]
Concern over contact
- Frances Gibb, Times, Law, 10apr01, p5
The new family court welfare service came into effect last week. What are the implications?
Divorced mothers who deny children contact with their absent fathers are to be tackled by the new children’s court service. Anthony Hewson, chairman of the Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service, said he accepted that contact between divorced parents and children was “an area of concern”.
He said that the service was working on new guidelines on how to make contact orders work, as well as research why court orders were being ignored. There is widespread concern, particularly among fathers’ lobby groups, that when children live with their mothers, court orders for contact can be flouted with impunity.
In turn parents denied access may themselves be made the subject of court orders to restrain their behaviour after persistent efforts to see children. A father, Mark Harris, was jailed for ten months and fined £500 for contempt of court recently after he flouted court orders limiting his contact.
“We want guidelines on how contact should be established and how it should work on the ground. These are very, very difficult and sensitive cases; contact often has to be supervised and we are trying to think about a more creative and informal approach,” Hewson said.
As a first step, research would be carried out on why the court orders were not complied with, he said. A second proposal was to ensure that all court welfare officers who advise on contact were trained. There has been criticism of court welfare officers who advise courts on contact between a parent and child.
Hewson, however, rejected criticism that they were untrained: “Large numbers of them have had quite a lot of training. But people do give them a pretty hard time which is often to do with the outcome of a particular court case, when people can get very angry and very upset.
“But in the main our staff provide a very valued service, although of course we want to improve it and ensure all staff are fully trained and bring them up to a consistent standard across the country.”
Hewson has the task of bringing together in one organisation all the family court welfare services in England and Wales. The new service, with a budget of £72 million, is responsible for what happens to children of broken homes and deals with some 60,000 court cases a year, from care applications to contact orders; it has 1,800 staff. Hewson said that the aim is to bring together what was now a fragmented and inconsistent service for vulnerable children. Another top priority was to speed up the timescale for bringing cases to court. Some child abuse cases were taking as long as 40 to 42 weeks, despite targets of 12 weeks. “This is a real priority. We have to get those involved to focus on the real needs of the child and in a way in which the child sees it, not on how the adult sees it.”
Fatherhood is important
Letter to Telegraph from Trevor Berry; 2may01, p25
Sir - Punitive action and the alleged ominous remarks of Mr Justice Wall (report, April 28) do nothing to allay the concerns of users of family courts.
The antipathy to shared parenting, the naive readiness to embrace "reconstituted" families as an excuse to weaken the relationship between children and their natural fathers, and the reluctance to grant unmarried men the same legal status as divorced fathers - parental responsibility. even though, for most, this is expected to become law under the Adoption of Children Bill (clause 91) currently going through Parliament - typify normal practice.
Failure to take effective action against recalcitrant parents who refuse to comply with contact orders and the lack of accountability in secret court hearings leave the public in ignorance of what goes on behind closed doors. Decisions are made in a vacuum, thanks to the dearth of research into the longer-term family effects of court hearings.
Why did Martin Mears, a former president of the Law Society, write in the New Law Journal (April 6): "The family courts frequently declare that, in children cases, the parties come before them on an equal footing. This is an unamusing fiction, as any number of litigant fathers have painfully discovered."
What are the courts doing to discourage the social scourge of fatherlessness? There are a very large number of justifiably angry fathers out there.
- Trevor Berry, President, Families Need Fathers, London EC2
[Although Berry committed a tactical gaffe in his letter (above), he merits praise for it. What a shame he keeps such bad company at the top of FNF. - Ed]
A child's right of access to its parent
Ivor, .... I remember reading something you wrote .... that we in Britain have no real rights, compared to other countries ....
Anthony Pace 30apr01
Dear Anthony Pace,
After replying to you, I remembered that I come into this matter at one point, as follows.
I discovered that nowhere in English Statute or Case Law, or in European Declaration or Statute, or in United Nations Statute or Declaration, is a child's right of access to its parent enshrined or declared in a way that has any legal significance. Recently, I learned that Canadian Senator Anne C Cools (search for her on my website) did the same research independently. Her results are published in the journal I edit, Ill Eagle 12, dec00, p6. (Also see june00 p7 and oct00 p4.) I have made this point in writing, publication and verbally for fifteen years, and always meet with total indifference by men who have been cut off from their children. This represents an awesome level of intellectual incompetence in all my alleged allies.
My statement virtually never even elicits comment by these men (all deprived fathers) who prefer to keep their minds switched firmly off while they nurse their wounds, and continue to demonstrate outside the homes of judges, presumably calling for judges to enforce a right which doesn't exist. Their total indifference means that we cannot start to move towards having the right enshrined ion statute or human rights declaration. If only that were done, we could begin the multi-billion pound class action for damages against those who routinely cut a child off from its parent. If all fathers refuse to employ their brains when addressing the problem of parentectomy, then they will not receive any sympathy from me. An important part of the supposed role model of a father is the use of rational thought.
Do I need to demonstrate outside and inside ManKind AGMs with banners demanding that members switch on their brains for the sake of our children? Is the concept above the intellectual level of our members, who are only capable of waving banners?
I know that there will be no response to this piece in Ill Eagle. Ivor
Dutch judges defy international law
From: Christopher Yavelow <Christopher@yav.com>
To: Ivor Catt
Date: 20 March 2001 21:31
I'm not familiar with the "ill eagle" but it's a great play on words. I'm grateful for any publicity that will bring my children's story wider reach. Please feel free to contact me by email or phone. My contact information is below. Up until February I had been "muzzled" about my case because my wife had filed some bogus charges against me and I was facing a 6 to 9 year prison sentence for something I didn't do. But I just won that case, so now I will tell anything and everything about the kidnapping of my children by my ex-wife. ....
I hope you will visit http://www.stolenchildren.net Keep in mind that it has been a bit "muzzled" too because of the case I recently won against my wife. Now I can take the gloves off.
The Dutch have ruled that my insane, multi-cultic, pedophile Swiss wife had full on total custody of my American children (I am American too)... The Dutch stripped me of all my parental rights, declaring that I am no longer the father of my children. My teenagers were shouting "We're American Citizens and we want to stay in America" as my wife had the FBI pick them up based upon misuse of the Hague Convention treaty. There is much more of course (they were held incommunicado for 430 days and have been subjected to continual brainwashing and abuse. Still very hard to communicate with them although my youngest (12 years old) is taking legal action against my wife to be returned to me. None of us have any Dutch relatives or ancestry -- the only reason my ex stays here is because she can get away with the sexual abuse (incest is legal between the ages of 12 and 16 in the Netherlands).
Hope to hear from you, Christopher Yavelow, Father of Celina and Stephanie
http://www.BringTheChildrenHome.com (like it says!)
http://www.ChildrenHelpingChildren.com (you can help too!)
On AOL Instant Messenger, I'm "Bytehoven"
Being a man gives cause for concern
Professor Hugh W. Jones, 18 Eastland Close, Swansea SA3 5NU firstname.lastname@example.org
letter to Times pub. 22mar01
The attitude of BA in banning men from sitting next to unaccompanied minors (letter, mar19) seems to be just part of a general policy. Simply being male is enough to be the object of immediate suspicion it seems.
Last September I was asked by Age Concern to produce a newsletter for the 14,000 elderly people of this area and seek a lottery grant through the local authority to do so. I was, after providing much paperwork and substantial referees, awarded £5,000 for the project.
The local authority then deducted £250 for administration and required me to be subject to a police check to discover whether or not I was guilty of various crimes including sexual offences, drugs use/pushing, organised crime, violence against other people and so on. I refused to co-operate, quoting Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
The grant - for the nefarious activity of contributing to and editing a newsletter of advice for the elderly - was withdrawn. I am 78 years of age and have partial paralysis of one leg. I was not to be in contact with children or any other "vulnerable" group.
The decision to withdraw the funds was taken by a local authority department dominated by women. I protested to the Lord Mayor only to be told that he had no control of the decisions of this department.
The Bullying of an Honest Man
- Daily Mail, 20mar01, p18
When Geoffrey Robinson and Charlie Whelan arrived at the Treasury for the first time after Labour's General Election victory in May 1997, some senior civil servants could not disguise their utter disdain. 'It's a sad day,' the mandarins muttered. 'We've never previously allowed spivs to set foot inside this building.' ....
[Honest] Terry Burns, Permanent Secretary to the Treasury, .... was already suspicious of the way Robinson had 'chased for the job', ingratiating himself with [George] Brown and Tony Blair by showering them with his wealth. 'He's a disaster waiting to happen,' said Burns. ....
It is a story of bullying and the twisting of the truth. It involves the browbeating of a scrupulous and honest public servant by the Chancellor of the Exchequer.
Above all, it shows how New Labour was prepared to go to almost any lengths to conceal Robinson's dubious business dealings. ....
.... a secret tax-free trust on which Robinson's wealth depended. .... the murky history of Robinson's personal finances. .... the prime source of Robinson's wealth was the generosity of a sexually vibrant older woman. ....
She protected her wealth by crude tax evasion. Facing a bill for about £6 million, she .... fled her native country.
'.... If he inherited millions by sleeping with a rich, old woman, he was cleverer than most.'
Judge attacks 'sinister erosion of free speech'
- John Steele, Telegraph, 22mar01, p2
One of Britain's most prominent judges marked his retirement yesterday by attacking a "cloud of political correctness" in the courts and a spate of criminal justice Acts that restricted judicial independence. .... he had "peered into the future" and did not like what he saw. .... "Over all this hangs the cloud of political correctness. In some of its more lunatic aspects, political correctness is merely ridiculous.
"But in the thinking behind it, there is something more sinister which is shown by the fact that already there are certain areas and topics where freedom of speech, in the sense of the right to open and frank discussion, is being gradually but significantly eroded." ....
Police press boss sacked ....
- Jason Bennetto,
Independent, 8mar01, p10
A press officer at one of Britain's biggest police forces has been sacked over claims that he sexually harassed colleagues and downloaded pornography months after he had helped to write a guide advising detectives on avoiding inappropriate language and behaviour. .... a 16-page guide called The Power of Language, .... advised the force's 7,000 officers to avoid terms such as "love", "pet" and "dear" because people might find them offensive.
Commission Settles Sex Bias Claim
From ITV Teletext, April 22
A case of sex bias against the EOC has been settled on the eve of a tribunal. Kevin Marsh, marketing director at the commission's Manchester office since 1997, acted after being rejected for the post of Head of Communications. He blames moves to increase women at the EOC and his reduced hours to care for his sons for his rejection.
Dissent in FNF Ranks
To FNF Editor, McKenzie,
134 Curtain Road,
London EC2A 3AR
[McKenzie censored it out. - Ed]
This is an open letter to the National Council of FNF in which I am expressing my extreme concern at the direction in which FNF [Families Need Fathers, 25 years old men's Organisation] is being taken.
Is the National Council operating in the same way as family courts - i.e. behind closed doors?
Does the National Council operate a democratic policy or has it become an autocratic organisation?
Is the National Council actually expressing the views of the majority of FNF membership?
At last year's AGM a resolution was carried to have representation from each branch as an observer at Council meetings. Why has this not been implemented? As things stand my branch is not officially informed when Council meetings are held and no official invitation has ever been offered to attend.
I have read John Baker's proposals to CAFCASS and I am devastated. His proposal relegates the father to the demeaning position of contact parent and leaves everything still to the discretion of Judges and CWO's - so no change there then!
Until we have a presumption of shared residence and 50/50 parenting we are all at the mercy of the Court system.
"The greatest value of residence orders established by a Court lies in the signals that they send to the parents and to society as a whole.
"A shared residence order declares to both parents and to all social authorities that, despite the divorce or separation, both parents will still remain fully involved with their children's welfare. A 'sole residence with contact to one parent order' signals a change of parental status to a double stratum of parenthood which is utterly vulnerable to abuse by the parent who holds the powerful position of 'residence'. This, as we have seen over the past twenty years, is a sure recipe for disaster and too commonly leads to the child's loss of one parent." - An FNF statement written by Bruce Lidington 1994 (Chairman of FNF)
I would ask that all National Council members re-read the entire FNF statement 'The Presumption of Shared Residence' and ask them to reflect on it.
How Bruce must be turning in his grave now.....
- Jeff Linnecar, FNF member,
2 Gaselee Street, London E14 9QZ 06/03/01
For the Sake of the Children -- The FNF guide to shared parenting
Author: Sue Secker
[Actually, it was written by Parton and Baker, who also wrote Boateng's Introduction - Ed]
Book Review by Bernard Greenwood, member, FNF East London Branch
This is NOT a guide to shared parenting. If it is a guide at all, it is a guide to living with the status quo; a guide to being a contact parent. It is impossible to fully understand the monumental irrelevance of this book to any father having problems seeing his kids, unless you have had the unfortunate experience of reading it.
Try offering this sickly sweet tome to somebody who's come face to face with the realities of the family court system and you run the risk of having it rammed down your throat.
Faults and Legal Errors
Page 8 At present, unmarried fathers have no legal rights whatsoever....
No, they have the right to apply for a section 8 order (see below), and section 576 of the 1996 Education Act defines parent to include all natural parents, and various important rights follow.(see Guidance leaflet 0092/2000 from DfEE)
Page 9 Mediation helps couples to turn an argument into a negotiation (Thelma Fisher, National Family Mediation, 1997)
If a resident parent wants to be mean unreasonable and inhumane when it comes to working out when the children see their non-resident parent, they know that the courts will support them. There is nothing mediation can do about this.
Page 10 If you have applied for a court order perhaps because your children are not able to see you or your family, then subsequently you appear to have come to an agreement with the other parent, the court is unlikely to make an order
This advice is wrong. You should both keep the court appointment and obtain a Consent Order, which the judge will normally make if you and your partner are in agreement. If your partner was unwilling to do this you would know that her agreement would be worthless and you should go to court anyway to obtain a contested order. An agreement that is not made an order of the court is worthless.
Page 11 Even fathers without PR can sometimes make application to the court in order to protect the interests of the child........
No, any parent or guardian of a child can apply for any section 8 order (residence/contact/prohibited steps/specific issue).
Page 24 In FNF's experience a high proportion of contact disputes are really about money even though they are separate areas of law
What contact disputes are always really about is one parent preventing the children from being with the other parent, and a proportion of these parents are prepared to use the children as bargaining counters for money. Don't be tempted to bribe your ex-partner in return for seeing your kids.
They are separate areas of law, and that's the way they should stay. [The explosive case is where a father is forced to pay for the housing of his own children, whom he will never see again, and also pay for the housing of the
gigolo. It would be wrong to ignore the danger to life when society creates this explosive situation, as it so often does. Admittedly, the number of murders and suicides which result has been small, but this may change at any time. - Ed]
Page 28 If you have to seek legal advice.........
This would be a good place to say go to your local FNF branch. But unfortunately legal advice is only mentioned in the context of lawyers. However Sue does criticise lawyers in her Legal Framework section.
It is acknowledged that those (judges) hearing such (Children Act) applications, having to make decisions where families cannot agree, do not have any magic solutions to contact problems.
Is this really FNF's position? Those poor old judges eh? They daren't upset anyone. Those poor old county court judges - their hands are totally tied by the Children Act aren't they? They've got no room for manoeuvre at all, have they?
Have Jim & John got any idea of what it's like in a county court where a contact/residence application is being heard? Have they got any conception of the bias and prejudice against men that goes on there.?
But most of all, do they not realise that judges DO have solutions to contact problems (they can do whatever they want), but they do not have the courage to upset a resident parent. Of course driving the other parent to despair is routine.
Page 30 If maintenance is calculated under the Child Support Act no allowance is made for these essential costs (contact travel costs).
Wrong. One can already apply for a "departure" for contact travel costs; see CPAG Child Support Handbook 2000/2001 edition page 282.
Being realistic, mothers will probably assume that children should live with them
What the book should say is:- "From the very earliest stage make it clear to your partner that the only acceptable solution is that the kids stay with each of you on a 50/50 basis. I mean it's not as if the book is a guide to shared parenting - is it??
Page 46 (on suspicion of child abuse): ......you will in effect have to prove yourself innocent,....
No. Child abuse has to be proved on the civil standard of proof and one should never permit a situation to arise where the burden of proof is put on the accused rather than the accuser. A judge must make findings of fact and mere suspicion is not enough.
Page 50 (on being coerced into using contact centres): ..be prepared to compromise in the short-term if it will help you realise your long term aim.
The more parents accept unreasonable compromises the more they will be imposed. No one should accept a Contact Centre without good cause.
Page 71 All (the Acts) work from the fundamental principle that the welfare of the child is paramount,...
No, that principle does not apply in child maintenance (e.g. s.15 and Schedule 1 CHA 1989) or in the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 or in Part IV Family Law Act 1996.
Page 72 The book tells us about Shared Residence Orders; unfortunately it does not mention that a shared residence order will almost never be made if one of the parents objects to it.
The book says nothing about the mainly negative case law on Shared Parenting.
Page 73 (of solicitors) .......and few would pass up the chance of assistance from a qualified professional
This is the last thing we need. Everyone would pass up the chance of such assistance if they knew how unbelievably incompetent and defeatist most high street solicitors are when it comes to acting for men in family law.
A common condition attached to legal aid is that any case should be commenced in the (lower) Family Proceedings Court.
This is completely untrue.
Page 76 The book mentions that Family cases in England and Wales are heard in private, it does not go on to question this - to raise in the reader a culture of questioning, perhaps mentioning that in Scotland these cases are held in open court. This line of least resistance is all grist to the status-quo mill that this book supports.
Pages 73,74, 76-78 In discussing legal aid there is no mention of the Legal services Commission (formerly Legal Aid Board ) Statutory Charge. This is a very serious omission. E.g. a father preserving a 25% share of the value of the former matrimonial home would be liable to a charge by the legal aid board on this 25%. in respect of legal fees due to his solicitor pursuant to the property settlement.
In addition if his Children Act proceedings were on the same legal aid certificate as his property settlement matters,( and the Legal Services Commission would normally insist on this) the Statutory Charge would include the costs of these proceedings as well.
This Charge could wipe out a large proportion of his settlement.
Page 79 FNF may be able to informally advise on how best to prepare a case and conduct yourself in court.
Yes, but pray tell, what is the difference between informal and formal advice? I trust it is not suggested that just because one is sitting in the offices of a solicitor paying £150 an hour you are receiving better advice than from a seasoned LIP/McKenzie? (who has effectively specialised in contact/residence, whereas a high street solicitor's practice will allocate to you the staff member, be it inexperienced solicitor or legal executive, who happens to be doing family law at that point.)
Until recently it was recognised that McKenzie friends could go into the court, and even "in chambers" with you.
No, this is completely untrue, which is why a judicial review was sought in relation to a decision of Judge Goldstein to exclude a McKenzie friend at Bow County Court. (Reported as R v. Bow County Court ex parte Pelling  2FLR 1126 CA)
(In relation to McKenzie friends being admitted into court) All you can do is present yourself as reasonably as possible, and hope that whoever is hearing your case is sympathetic.
In other words roll over.
Firstly any judge refusing a litigant in person the assistance of a McKenzie must give reasons.(see judicial review above). [Everybody is wrong. The Judicial Review brought by Pelling established that a judge can refuse to admit a McKenzie and also refuse to give reasons for this. (Bernard continues to dispute this.) - Ed]
The LIP can refuse to take any further part in the proceedings and immediately appeal to the higher court.
The LIP can participate in the hearing, having advised the judge that if the court's decision goes against the LIP he reserves the right to appeal against the decision on the grounds that his case was prejudiced by being refused the assistance of his friend.
So there we are, we don't just have to roll over.
As long as you are polite and respectful .....you need not worry too much about procedural matters.
This is a very risky strategy. Find out what the procedures are and follow them. For example, if you fear an unfavourable CWO report you need to be aware that you must ask at the appropriate Directions hearing for an Order that the CWO attend the hearing to be questioned. You cannot rely on the judge to do this.
Page 80 A reasonable case presented reasonably has a good chance of success
Do Jim & John really believe this? Everything is for the best in the best of all possible worlds? If we present a reasonable case the courts will back us up!!
Let's leave it all to the courts - it's not as if they've ever driven us to despair by consistently treating non-resident parents (predominantly men) as third class citizens with less right to look after their kids than the resident parent's childminder.
It is also customary to pay (the McKenzie's) expenses, but they must not be paid a fee.
If you look at the relevant legislation you will find that there is nothing to prevent a McKenzie charging for his or her services. The only fetter is that in a county
court, a McKenzie who acts as a representative of an LIP, i.e. is granted by the judge a right of audience, cannot sue the LIP for his or her fee.
Page 81 It is almost impossible to correct or query anything in the (CWO) report once you get to the court.
This is criminal misinformation as far as I'm concerned.
It is completely routine for the CWO to attend court and be cross examined by one or both parties on the contents of her (more rarely, his) report.
Accuracy of information, opinions and recommendations can all be challenged in court.
It is often ordered at a Directions hearing that the CWO be in attendance at the full hearing for the purposes of cross examination.
(It is true to say however that strictly speaking a judge has the power to refuse to allow a CWO to be cross examined; this has only happened extremely rarely in the experience of FNF members and is almost unheard of.) [Thorpe established in the Court of Appeal 29july99 that a CWO may not be cross-examined in court. See Ill Eagle 4, sep99, p1. Judges protect the ignorance of CWOs. -Ed (Bernard sticks to his guns; "Questioning/examining CWOs is routine - BG) ]
These are not the only faults in the book but I think they are the main ones.
Perhaps this book is aimed at couples who are going to split up and want to do the best for their children. Couples who genuinely want their kids to benefit fully from both parents.
Surely the question then is: why is FNF publishing this book? FNF is made up of members who have joined the organisation because their ex-partners have tried to unreasonably limit their time with their kids or cut it out altogether.
It's rather like Liberty (National Council for Civil Liberties) publishing a leaflet advising asylum seekers on how to choose where to live in Britain when their main concern is whether they are going to be allowed to live in Britain at all.
Which brings me to my main point:-
Shared parenting is a civil rights issue; and the greatest barrier to shared parenting is the attitude of the judiciary. The battle for shared parenting will be won or lost in the courts - the Magistrates' courts, the County courts, the High Court, the Court of Appeal, the House of Lords, the European Court of Human Rights - or maybe in Parliament if they ever make a law explicitly setting out 50/50 parenting as the normal presumption when couples split up.
This book is totally irrelevant to that battle, and is an insult to fathers and children who have been kept apart by our oppressive and grossly prejudiced family court system.
It is now painfully apparent that FNF has firmly joined the ranks of the establishment (Paul Boateng signed the preface to the book). Instead of a crusading movement dedicated to fighting for justice for fathers, it has become little more than an agency of the government (like the court system, CWOs and mediators) and an apologist for the status quo.
In Animal Farm George Orwell shows how the animals of Manor Farm drive out their oppressive master, Mr Jones, and run the farm themselves. The pigs assume leadership of their fellow animals. But eventually the animals are suffering just as much as if Mr Jones was in charge:-
"No question, now, what had happened to the faces of the pigs. The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which."
- Bernard Greenwood
[A recent email from Parton reassured the troops that they only had to stand firm for a little longer, and Establishment money would increasingly flow in to FNF (following behind the £15,000 for the Secker book that has so upset members). In the leadership view, the main battle is between FNF and Adrienne's (Androgyny) "Fathers Direct" for govt funding. (Both sides do not respect each other. "Airhead" has been mentioned.) It's difficult for them to spend a thought for the children of divorce at the same time; or for problems faced by FNF members, for that matter. Will the Troops vote the Pigs back in at the FNF AGM on 20may01? - Ed]
"Listening to Children's Views"
(Research dealing with CWOs and judges) This booklet is on the agenda of the next CAFCASS meeting.
" .... They do not have a budget to call in an expert and usually have no contact with the family for any follow up work once the proceedings are over ...." (Hunt & Lawson 1999, p31-33, 53-56)
" ... lack of experience and training in dealing with children ....." (Hunt & Lawson 1999, p38).
" ... Sawyer found that CWOs were under pressure to bring about a settlement of disputes on a pre-stated model .....
"The presumption of automatic parental rights in contested cases reduced the pressure on their workload... "
" ..... on questioning agreed that their recommendations were not in the interests of the child but .... fitted in with judicial ideology." (Sawyer, 1999).
" ... CWO's work mainly through parents rather than children ...." (Hunt & Lawson, 1999, p26).
" ... CWOs justified their practices by reference to research that they were aware of, though they were unable to cite it, nor were they aware of any criticism of this research ....".
" ... Individual children's views and indeed individual adults views were unimportant because the prevailing judicial culture is so strong that CWOs are unable to resist it ...." (Sawyer, 1999).
" .. well aware of the importance of children's welfare .... by encouraging parents to think about their children position rather than directly talking to the children themselves .... " (Murch, 1998 p18).
" ... There is general scepticism among district judges and solicitors as to the value of the statement of arrangements..."
"... District judges rarely take action after scrutinising the written details ...."
".... but did not feel the present system was at all adequate ..." (Murch, 1998).
" ... The judges expressed this as follows: 'its works on gut reaction' ... 'You just get that feeling' ... 'the totality of it all just gives you a sense of unease feeling'. (Murch, 1998).
" ... Other CWOs disagree; they feel they have not been adequately trained to work with children..." (James & Sturgeon-Adams, 1999).
These are just a sample - they get better as the pages pass - however there is much that the feminists and child's voice advocators will see as strengthening their position. It is after all a Rowntree sponsored booklet. - RW, Chairman, ManKind
ECHR Court asked me to make application
After many years of hitting my head on a brick wall, and a final plea to the Lord Chancellor to secure my rights to a fair and just hearing, the European Court of Human Rights wrote to me stating that I should now make my applcation to the Court.
As for your friend Pelling. I understand that he is a trainee solicitor, not the full cold blooded variety.
Pelling managed to have the ECHR Court support Closed Courts in Family Law matters - I intend kicking that decision into touch:-
1. In my case Closed Courts where there was a finding of fact that I am innocent of any abuse of my children have been relied upon by the Authorities to suppress and deny that I am innocent of any abuse of my children, in fact the Authorities perpetuated the belief that I sexually abused my daughter.
Clearly if the Authorities rely upon Closed Courts to perpetrate injustice and abuse of children, then the ECHR Court cannot with any reason support Closed Courts.
2. I also assert that Closed Courts are used as a venue for serious injustices like preventing individual's presenting evidence such as evidence of abuse of children by their mothers. Litigants are denied the opportunity of challenging Court Welfare Officers Reports where such reports are
prepared by incompetents, and often as in my case a tissue of lies.
Effectively in my case Closed Courts have been used to obtain Ultra Vires decisions that would be used to have my legal aid cancelled, or stop me pursuing civil action.
The ECHR allowed UK Government claims that Family Matters are not a matter of public interests - This may be true if the Courts are fair and just, but clearly they are not, and in a democratic society the voting public needs to be aware of the injustices perpetrated in the name of children within the family Courts if it is going to make voting decisions or petition for a change in the legal system. Ignorance is bliss only from the UK Government point of view.
I also challenge the UK Human Rights Act 1998 which completely deletes Article 13 of the ECHR Convention - You know?, the bit that protects our rights to a remedy for any violation of our rights when committed by persons acting in Official Capacities.
I suggest that you look at the Europa Website, and the SCADPLUS GLOSSARY related to Community Acquis, Community Law. etc.
There are many European Court of Justice judgements that state quite unequivocally that the European Community cannot carry out any act that is incompatible with the ECHR Convention. In fact one judgement makes it clear that the ECHR Convention is a Convention to which EU member states are contributors and/or signatories, where such agreements become law within Europe by giving effect to the European Treaties themselves.
Regards John C
John, I am swamped with very good material. I suspect that you buried me some time ago, and so I ran away. Note that Ill Eagle, which I edit, is supposed to be of-the-moment, ephemeral, while our quarterly Male View is supposed to be the more weightly material. In the circumstances, I shall publish your item above as is, and hope that later your more thorough exposition gets into Male View. – Ivor
This man needs your help!
Highlights of the William J. Hetherington Case
A case of false accusation by a wife against her husband during a bitter custody dispute. Help is needed now!
Wil is in a Michigan prison on a Criminal Sexual Conduct (CSC) conviction. His wife claimed that he had raped her. The case was a matter of "he said/she said". Wil has been in prison, now, for more than 14 years. During all of that time he has constantly maintained his innocence.
* Motive for the charge
- The trial took place during a bitter divorce and custody dispute. It was expected that Wil would win custody, because his wife had abandoned the family for more than two months.
*There are many improprieties surrounding this case: Wil had to defend himself in a criminal court at the same time that his divorce was proceeding. The divorce court froze Wil's assets after his CSC arrest. At the same time the criminal court refused to acknowledge that Wil did not have the use of those assets. Therefore, the criminal court refused to appoint a public defender. The way Wil obtained legal counsel was based on a "promise" to pay.
- Wil was offered a cheap and easy way out. On the first day of the trial he was offered a "no contest plea bargain". He could have walked away (after having served 11 months in the county jail). He refused the offer - went to trial and was convicted - then the same judge who offered him the plea bargain sentenced him to 30 (thirty) years. William had no prior criminal record.
- The prosecutor had argued for 30 to 60 years. State guidelines are 1 to 10 years.
*Twenty lawyers have been interested in Wil's case over the past 14 years. Most of them say there was "error in trial" and "ineffective assistance of counsel". The prevailing opinion is that the law under which Wil was convicted was not constitutional under the state constitution. The lack of money to retain them is the reason why these attorneys have not taken his case.
*Wil has been denied his automatic right of appeal under the U.S. constitution!
*Wil has been in prison since 9/24/85. He was sentenced 11/26/86. Because he has no funds he was unable to obtain an official transcript. He needed this to file his (federal) constitutionally guaranteed appeal, but
after serving 10 years the trial court finally released his trial transcript!
*The criminal court docket shows that an evidentiary hearing was scheduled for 7/29/86, but it was not held or rescheduled. An Assistant Prosecutor tried the case, but the county prosecutor who was running for State Supreme Court addressed the court on two occasions: The bond hearing and the sentencing. The implications are strong that he was "grandstanding" for the feminist vote. The judge, too, may have been looking for political favor with the feminist vote.
*The doctor who examined Wil's wife (the alleged rape victim) testified that in examining her vagina he found no injury whatsoever and that this was unusual when a woman is claiming forceful intrusion.
*Will admitted in court that he and his wife had consensual sex the day of the alleged rape. But the prosecutor discredited Wil's testimony by saying that Wil had no choice but to admit to having intercourse. As evidence he introduced a pair of Linda's blue jeans containing sperm. Yet there is no sperm in Wil's semen, because he had a vasectomy several years before.
*On the day of the alleged rape, Linda Hetherington had visited her boyfriend before going to visit Wil. It is suspected that the semen on the blue jeans is that of the boy friend. He was never called to testify at the trial.
*Linda and Wil Hetherington had been married for 16 years when the couple broke up and Linda filed charges.
*Linda visited Wil 8 (eight ) times in jail on friendly terms between the time of his arrest and sentencing. Linda led Will to believe that she wanted to reconcile their marriage. All Will wanted was to get back to his wife and family.
*There were no "battered wife" allegations in the CSC case, nor were there any such charges in their 16-year marriage. Prior to the charge Wil had filed a police report of physical attack on him by his wife. These charges were documented by police photos of his chest.
Insight On The News Magazine did their August 1, 1994, cover story on William Hetherington. The magazine did an in depth investigation and reported on it fairly thoroughly. For a back issue call (800) 356-3588. There is a charge. Have your credit card ready.
Current Court Appeal Status:
All Michigan State Court Appeals have been exhausted. The next step is an appeal to the U.S. Federal District Court. Federal Judges are appointed for life and are less likely to be influenced politically. Will needs to have his case heard in the Federal Court in order to obtain justice. An attorney has been located that specializes in these types of cases. A war chest must be established to insure Wil's defense doesn't run out of steam.
Call Gregory Singer. Chairman of Wil's Defense Team, at 212-489-0761 (New York) during normal business hours.
Donations to Wil's Defense Fund
Please be generous! Make checks out to: William Hetherington Defense Fund. Mail your check to PO Box 129, Manhasset, NY 11030. We apologize to those outside the U.S. for our banking restrictions, but we can only accept U.S. currency. Please send a check or postal money order. Thank You!!!
"Suit Filed Against Battered Women's Shelter
in Barnstable: Nev Moore Sues Independence House for Forcing Her to Accept Services"
The Massachusetts News
9 March 2001
A suit was filed yesterday by a former client of a battered women's service center in Barnstable, Independence House, Nev Moore, President of Justice for Families.
Moore claims she was forced by DSS to accept services and attend meetings at Independence House against her will. When she initially refused to attend, DSS took her children and placed them in foster care to force her to comply with their demands. She was to later discover that approximately two-thirds of Independence House funding comes from DSS. She believes that due to Independence House's financial dependence on DSS, they collude with the Department to force clients to accept services, and they help DSS open new cases by betraying women's confidentiality.
Moore claims this not only boosts DSS's cases, but pads Independence House's client numbers and artificially inflates the domestic violence statistics. These statistics are then used by DSS and Independence House to plead for more money from the legislature.
Since her own case has been publicized, Moore has received numerous calls from other women who claim that they also were forced by DSS to attend Independence House, under threat of losing their children. Their confidential conversations at Independence House meetings were also disclosed to DSS.
Independence House support groups are held behind closed doors, and a confidentiality notice is read at the start of each meeting that assures the women: "What's said in here, stays in this room."
"DSS told me that I would not get our daughter home until my attitude changed and I showed them that I had 'accepted the message' of Independence House. Attending wasn't enough - I had to 'prove' to DSS that I had 'accepted the message' - whatever that means," says Moore.
"What DSS used against me was that I complained in the Independence House meetings that I did not want to be there and was being forced to attend through intimidation, threats, and coercion. I said in the meetings that they needed to remove the word 'Independence' from their title. Their motto is 'Independence House: the Freedom to Make Your Own Choices' - well, my choice was not to be there.
"Independence House did everything to me that they claim would be control and emotional abuse if a man did it. I felt so violated. Our little girl suffered terribly. Independence House, of all places, should understand that when a woman says 'no' - it means 'no.'"
The suit, which was filed by Attorney Greg Hession of Belchertown in Barnstable Superior Court, alleges civil rights violations and unfair trade practices, breach of confidentiality, and resulting emotional abuse.
The macho disease
- Sarah Harris, Daily Mail, 26feb00, p31
Men whose GPs are also male could be at serious health risk, it was claimed last night.
This is because they avoid the doctor as long as possible, delaying seeking treatment longer than a woman would - with potentially fatal consequences.
Men are taught from an early age to soldier on through illness, said Dr Ian Banks, who chairs the Men's Health Forum which brings together a range of medical groups.
Male doctors add to the problem. They appear to have difficulty communicating with the men they treat. .... male patients are more likely to want to see a female doctor about sexual problems. ....
[The issue of suicide was first raised in Men's Health Forum, (1999) by ManKind and Forum member Mark Crump. His initiative was repaid by a request for his immediate resignation due to pressure from "some" members .... Two months later a Govt minister addressed the forum and launched a govt initiative into guess what? Yes, suicide. (Our man was not invited back onto the Forum.) - Ill Eagle 14, apr01, p10.]
Only Uncle Toms allowed on govt committees
Many thanks for another excellent Ill Eagle  and for stating what happened to me when I dared mention the issue of the high incidence of suicide, particularly among young men and other matters pertaining to men's health to the so-called 'Men's Health Forum'.
As you know Forum is dominated by women and women's groups as is this government and that is why no less than eight times as much is spent on women's health compared to men's. .... Dr. Ian Bank's comments particularly those re:- male patients preferring to be seen by a woman doctor as she is 'less judgmental'. This tells us more about HIMSELF rather than male G.P.s as a whole and I must say that speaking as a man who has been a member of the nursing profession for the past 38 years I have NEVER ONCE in all that time encountered such a reaction from patients QUITE THE REVERSE. I have been told by psychiatric patients and by patients with a learning disability that the would PREFER to come to me than a female nurse, as I am MUCH KINDER. I have been told this SEVERAL TIMES over the years.
Keep up the good work
Sincerely, Mark Crump
[Now that the escalating young male suicides are of such concern to MPs that they have set up a committee to investigate, Crump will not be invited back. He floated the problem two years too early. Young male suicides will have to increase considerably before they are treated seriously, and not merely as a political football encased in PC games. Also, our chairman has been driven off a Metropolitan Police committee. His crime was to say that the inflated violence figures they were using were based on a cohort of 60, ignoring the Fiebert cohort of 60,000 (For Fiebert, http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/07088.htm -Ed). The Met committee chairman refuses to have any other men's group rep as replacement. It is this blockage of the normal democratic process - the censorship out of divorcing fathers and their concerns - which makes it inevitable that we descend into a deep crisis. Censorship kills. - Ed]
Why divorce is an explosive issue
- Joshua Rozenberg, Legal Editor, Telegraph, 23jan01, p17
.... "Anything to do with the family is pure political dynamite .... Politicians take the view that it is best to avoid anything that looks like touchpaper." .... Should divorce be reformed? One barrister, who asked not to be named, said the problem lay with the judges: they were biased against husbands. .... if a woman got tired of her husband, she could force him out of his home.
"Whoever gets the children gets the house," he said. "Then, when the father goes round to collect his children, his ex-wife's new boyfriend won't allow him in."
As an absent parent, a father must pay child maintenance. He may also have to pay maintenance to his ex-wife, even though she may be supported by her new boyfriend. And the children themselves? Statistically, they are more likely to be abused by their stepfather than by a natural parent..
Worse still, according to the pressure group Families need Fathers, are the cases where mothers decide to live abroad and the courts allow them to take children out of the country. That can leave a father with little prospect of seeing his child again.
Trevor Berry, the group's president, claims the courts don't really know whether such a move is likely to be in the child's best interest.
Some Small Steps for ManKind
[spoke at our ManKind 2000 conference]
T.S. Eliot once astutely observed that 'human kind cannot stand too much reality'. I hope that is not true of ManKind as well. However I fear that the organisation is failing both to shift the boundaries of social debate and find practical ways to help men and boys.
When I attended the ManKind Conference http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/conf/generalinfo.htm last October, and presented a paper there, I was disappointed by the prevailing atmosphere of wishy-washy 1960s liberalism combined with a victim mentality copied from the feminists. Many of those who attended the conference supported
policies detrimental to young males, in particular, and to the wider health of society. One chap, for example, advocated compulsory and explicit sex education lessons conducted in a coeducational atmosphere. He showed no regard for the lack of privacy and the embarrassment this would cause (and does cause already in some schools) or for the biological fact that teenaged boys and girls develop differently, or that young homosexual men can be traumatised for life by such experiences - far more than they are in all-male boarding schools where there is no 'sex education' at all.
This 'Brave New World' type attitude is an extreme example but reflects the prevailing tone of the conference. Most of the men who attended seemed to sign up to the view that we are all endowed by the secular welfare state with the inalienable right to fuck - as long as we fuck members of the opposite sex. Indeed, that right is effectively a duty. The truth is that such men support the irresponsible agenda of the 'permissive society' and cling to it for dear life because they know no other truth. They see nothing wrong with the feminist agenda, except where it adversely affects them as fathers. There was a great deal of talk of 'fathers' rights' but no divorced father pledged to abstain from transient heterosexual relationships in the interests of his children. In this sense, there was no reassertion of male responsibility, merely a claim to an 'equal' right to irresponsibility.
'Equality', indeed, is the nub of the problem. Human beings are all unequal, physically, intellectually and morally. There are innate biological differences between the sexes. Some ideologies are relatively enlightened, others barbarous (this bears no relationship to technological development: Native American religions tend to be manly and moral, whereas 'born-again' Christianity is effeminate and debased). There can never be equality, only 'equity': that means treating people fairly, often by acknowledging difference. Indeed 'equality' is grossly unfair and increases the power of the state over the individual.
Nonetheless, the rhetoric of 'equality' pervaded the ManKind conference. In language that consciously apes the feminists, demands were made for 'equality with women'. This undermines one of the central planks of ManKind, that the roles of mother and father are different and that children - boys in particular - need a male role model. A mother cannot be a male role model for her son, even if she follows a traditionally 'male' career. Attempts to achieve this form of 'equality' are dehumanising for men, women and children. Strategically, the emphasis on 'equality' is wrong, because it plays into feminist hands. Every demand we make can be countered with a feminist demand and only bureaucrats, professional activists and 'human rights' lawyers will benefit. The absurdity of ManKind's position on 'equality' is reflected in its current statement of aims, which implies that opening doors for women or a 'women and children first' policy in a disaster is sexist - exactly the argument used by feminists to undermine male chivalry and public virtue, a word that significantly means 'manliness'.
Also, the organisation is irrationally biased against homosexual men. This prejudice is reflected in the pages of Ill Eagle and in the almost feminine nervousness with which the subject of homosexuality was discussed at the ManKind event. This outlook is part-and-parcel of the 1960s permissive mentality that pervaded the conference. Heterosexual promiscuity is seen as liberating, 'natural' and (for those reasons) compulsory. I am reminded of the passage in Brave New World where a young schoolboy is considered for observation because he runs away from the advances of a girl. Again, this approach is tactically wrong. Many homosexual men have no time for the 'gay rights' movement, do not want anything to do with lesbians or feminists and are prouder of their masculinity than many heterosexual men. In other words, they are merely 'chaps who like chaps' and they are often excellent role models for young men. Homosexuals do not need to defer to feminism in any way and are often the strongest defenders of all-male associations. They can always be counted upon to vote to keep gentlemen's clubs all male, oppose female ordination in the church and staff all-male schools - where they do a very good job without scandal.
ManKind currently concentrates on the problems of divorced fathers almost exclusively. Their problems are severe and need addressing, but there is a tendency to echo the feminist idea that 'the personal is political' and thus reduce the debate to a series of anecdotes and reminiscences. There is a failure to address the problems of divorced fathers in a wider context and to recognise that many men who are not fathers have a powerful role to play - and also need ManKind's support.
Once the ideological detritus of the 1960s is abandoned, there is much that ManKind can achieve, not least in improving the whole tone of political debate. For the moment, there are several campaigning areas with which we can immediately involve ourselves. ManKind should therefore take the following steps:
1.) Campaign to preserve existing all-male schools and for the creation of new ones. There are signs that government thinking is already moving in that direction and we should support recent schemes such as allowing Army and ex-Army men to train non-academic pupils.
2.) Campaign for more male teachers, more technical education and more male-oriented outdoor activities in schools.
3.) Defend the Infantry Regiments and Special Forces from misguided attempts to open them to women.
4.) Recruit more homosexual men who oppose the 'gay movement' and its links with feminism and lesbianism.
5.) Campaign for non-custodial sentences for young men. These would take the form of 'community punishments' where they learn life-skills from responsible older men.
6.) Set up a male mentoring scheme for incarcerated young men.
7.) Establish a network of all-male political discussion groups, reader and writer circles and hiking clubs. These would be open to men of all ages.
Such a strategy would enrich ManKind as an organisation and separate it from the 'equal rights' and 'victim group' lobbies that currently plague our political system. It would enable us to set a proud example of masculinity and give young men the help they desperately need.
[ "Also, the organisation is irrationally biased against homosexual men. This prejudice is reflected in the pages of Ill Eagle...."
"Many homosexual men have no time for the 'gay rights' movement, do not want anything to do with lesbians or feminists and are prouder of their masculinity than many heterosexual men. In other words, they are merely 'chaps who like chaps' and they are often excellent role models for young men."
"4.) Recruit more homosexual men who oppose the 'gay movement' and its links with feminism and lesbianism."
I wrote to Aiden as follows;
"29mar01 What we need is your definition of
"27mar01 I would be grateful if you cited the locations in Ill Eagle where you have found evidence of homophobia. - 27mar01"
I wrote that I would like to add these clarifications to his piece in Ill Eagle. (draft Ill Eagle sent to Aiden on 16apr01 and 8may01). In spite of his excellent speech to us on 28oct00, we have to conclude from his persistent refusal to define his terms (above) that he is out of his depth. Confusing buggery with holding hands is like confusing a deep sea diver with someone who takes an occasional shower. The fact that this silliness is rife does not justify it in gifted scholar like Rankin. David S. Green, in Civil Society...., pub. email@example.com , 2000, p40, wrote; "One of the urgent tasks of our time is to repair the damage caused by 1970s nihilism and to recover the use of a shared vocabulary" - Ed]
".... sado-masochism and anal sex on the school curriculum .... the Scottish executive has tacitly approved .... The leaflet proposed for teachers raises such searching questions because of its implication that there is no line to be drawn between one type of sexual practice and another. It treats all activities as equal and equivalent. In doing so, it raises those activities that degrade human beings and treat them as no more than sexual objects for the infliction of pain and abuse to the level of normalcy. .... It exposes children to regard sexual deviance and degradation as normal. It exposes them to corruption ...." - Leader, The Scotsman, 29mar01 [also, 3apr01, p15, ".... encouraging 11- to 14-year-olds to role play at being homosexual .... " "....What is being advocated in this booklet will leave children without self-respect and without trust in others for years."]
From: Joe Wayland
To: Ivor Catt 6may01
The Academy is a non-partisan discussion forum that campaigns against censorship and dogma at University. Although we are
predominantly Conservatives, we are open to all free thinking young people. An organisation is only as good as its members - and you can help us make the Academy a true voice for freedom and democracy. We have no links with ANY extremist organisations.
For more information, please contact us at: The Academy, Talbot House, Box 57, Newtown SY16 3WH Or email on: firstname.lastname@example.org
"Ex-husband, not ex-father
- Robert Verkaik, Independent [Review], 3apr01, p3
" .... the Lord Chancellor, Lord Irvine's advisory board .... concluded that divorced or separated fathers who have been granted access by the courts to see their children are being increasingly blocked by mothers. The court process was also blamed for doing little to help a father's access to his children .... men's groups were 'considerably frustrated' as .... the 'passivity of the courts in the face of blatant non-compliance by mothers with 'court orders for contact'....
"The consultation paper asked whether there now needed to be other methods of treating breaches of contact orders. ...."
Paedophilia scares threaten future of music teaching
- Jenny Jarvie, Sunday Telegraph, 6may01, p9
.... the quality of teaching is under threat at tutors are widely discouraged from touching children because of growing paranoia about paedophilia. Mr Chisolm is to address the issue in a lecture to the Bath Music Festival ....
Tasmin Little .... a former pupil .... and one of the world's leading classical violinists, said she understood Mr Chisolm's concern. "Until I was 21, I was taught by women, so I never had any problems. .... Teaching music is .... about creativity. It's very close and intense. The physical side is important. ...."
Paul Carroll, professor of baroque .... said: ".... We have to escape over-awareness about the problem of harassment. .... It's getting silly - a sense of normality needs to be restored."
Falsification, by A Browne and B Summerskill, Observer, 6may01, p6;
".... biggest consumer boycott .... for a generation .... Esso sales in Britain could be reduced by more than £1 billion a year.
".... Exxon [=Esso] has steadfastly lobbied against the overwhelming consensus of international scientific opinion that burning oil and gas is the main cause of global warming."
False. Even the experts invited to report to Rio and to Kyoto are incensed that their reports have been misrepresented. Organised consumer pressure is a new addition to anti-democratic fascism - rule by an alliance of organised vested interest groups, including, of course, an ignorant or prejudiced Observer. Melanie Phillips complained bitterly about the way she was censored when writing for the Observer. Now she writes, for The Sunday Times, 15apr01, p17, "The myth of global warming endangers our planet. .... thousands of scientists who disagree with the prediction of climate catastrophe caused by human agency and who are utterly dismayed by what they see as the falsehoods of Kyoto and the IPCC report. Many have signed statements saying so; they are never reported. And some on this sceptic side are extremely eminent indeed. .... Dr Richard Lindzen of the MIT .... 'a peculiar group' in the IPCC almost all of whom have 'no technical competence' .... " Go to www.globalwarming.org/ or http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ol/climate/globalwarming.html
or search for "Sonja" on my website.
It would be easy for lazy doomsday louts Browne and Summerskill to make themselves better informed, but then they would be censored out by the Observer's green Editor - Ed
[cc to B & S on 7may01 requesting a reply]
8may01 From Sonja
This the best website about global warming site. Or they could ask for Fred S Dinger's emailed newsletter email@example.com .
Let me just warn you...the science is not clear, it is wise to be agnostic and criticise what is being done with the science by the lobbies, including Greenpeace, rather than attack the full science reports from the IPCC; it is the summaries and their interpretation that are 'politics' between vested interests (and jobs..) and the green lobby who want to destroy the big companies when they do not do what greenpeace wants, i.e. who do what the market wants instead, and this is not wasting money on R&D that is not likely to be needed.
Reader, Department of Geography,
Editor, Energy & Environment (Multi-science) Faculty of Science and the Environment, University of Hull, Hull HU6 7RX, UK
Open letter to Norman Dennis
I have now completed reading your book "Racist Murder and pressure Group Politics" by Norman Dennis, Erdos and Al-Shani, pub. Civitas sep00, at firstname.lastname@example.org This book undermines the Macpherson Report on Lawrence.
This book confirms my very high regard for your scholarship, and my belief that you are in pole position to develop the outline sociological model for the last 30 or 40 years which will help many of us trying to understand why the crisis is upon us. While the first 50 pages demonstrate your urge to show a "me too" with the upper reaches of the chattering classes in obscurantism, the last thirty pages or so convince me that you, more than anyone else, are in the position to give us what we need.
In the first instance, I will be very grateful if you give to me the best we have so far, which is perhaps the last 20 or 30 pages of the book, which I will put on my website.
An ongoing disagreement in the reform movement of which I am a part is between those who want suffering children and their fathers to be understood and given sympathy,. and my position, which is that there is no substitute for study and thought, and that those lazier would-be reformers who try to get by armed only with good intentions, are another class of enemy of reform. Their 'reforms' will drive us into new blind alleys.
I look to you very soon to provide a synthesis, however provisional, of the various tendencies, and how they interact, which have led us into crisis. You are the best source for this, and, at 70, you will not live for ever. Better an imperfect model, than nothing.
Congratulations on a magnificent book. - Ivor Catt, Ed., Ill Eagle 23apr01
Norman Dennis spoke at our 28oct00 Conference. The two conference videotapes are available from the Ed., Ill Eagle, for £10 ea. post free.
"Myron Magnet [whom Pres.] Bush calls the most influential he's read other than the bible .... predicts that hyper-race consciousness in England will prove disastrous and calls the recommendations of the Macpherson Report a recipe for soaring crime, distracting police by making them vulnerable to accusations of racism." - Observer, 22apr01, p23
[If it is true, for instance, that 50% of black male involvements are with non-black females, the disgraceful nature of current PC "anti-racism" becomes obvious. Mixed-race, and particularly multi-race, friends of mine (and there are many such) confirm that they want to be able to cleave to a preferred culture, the dominant culture, in order to establish a personal and group identity. The PC and the racist blacks forget that half-castes and multi-castes, who outnumber blacks, have civil rights too. Fortunately, I am able to forget my Welsh heritage and behave as an Englishman because of the lack of colour difference. I am not prevented from doing so by racist PC self-styled 'anti-racists' like Macpherson, who pick on colour to drive a wedge between individuals and groups, and who create the racist myth of a 'black community'. The divisions within 'minorities' are deep and bitter, and we should allow individuals and groups to escape into the dominant culture, as they did in the USA. For everyone's sake, as in the USA, the dominant culture should be nurtured, not despised, as it is at present. It is what attracted immigrants to this country. - Ed]
"One of the shops destroyed during recent riots belonged to prominent Hindu businessman Hasmukh Shah, believed to have been targeted by Muslin youths for his views on Kashmir. .... The national trend is towards groups of Asians attacking whites, not vice versa. .... usually at night on individual targets ...." - Observer, 22apr01, p15 [Driven by radfem pressure, ethnics, along with whites, will adopt Jamaican fatherless matriarchy. Their youth violence will then increase to that of fatherless whites, and finally reach the violence levels in Jamaica. - Ed]
Lord Taylor (black, Tory); "He also has to deal with the general belief
that black men do not make it to the House of Lords. 'I remember I went to talk at the Institute of Directors,' he smiles, 'and I announced myself to the doorman: Lord Taylor of Warwick. The doorman nodded. "Yes," he said, "Lord Taylor of Warwick is coming here to speak today." So I repeated to him, as politely as I could, that I was Lord Taylor. The man looked at me and said: "What, are you his chauffeur or something?"' .... I [had] thought I would join the Labour Party, because I was black. I went to a labour meeting. The speaker was Derek Hatton. I came away thinking: this is crazy. I can't join a group of gangsters and terrorists. It was the time when other Labour politicians were saying you couldn't have black bin-liners, and kids shouldn't learn nursery rhymes like Baa Baa Black Sheep - madness. .... [Then I heard] Kenneth Clarke .... who believes in the same things I do - family values, law and order ....' .... He was depressed by the extent to which that racist element still remains and appears to be tolerated by the [Tory] Party hierarchy. .... I was offended that the leader of our party allows his Press Secretary to write a dirty porn book. ...."
Alasdair Palmer, Sunday Telegraph, 6may01, Review, p3.
Women or Men - Who are the Victims?
- Erin Pizzey et al., pub. Civitas dec00, from 020 7401 5470
This book gives a convenient brief history of our 28oct00 speaker Erin's experience of family violence. She is the leading expert on family violence - also search for her longer, suppressed book Prone to Violence, on the www at http://www.vix.com/menmag/pronevio.htm
by Patricia Morgan, pub. email@example.com 2000
p33 Domestic Violence and Cohabitation .... domestic violence is higher among cohabitants than it is among the married. The US crime victimisation rate for two decades up to 1992 shows how violent crime per 1,000 females aged 12 or older was 43 for unmarried women, 45 for divorced and separated women and 11 for married women. In turn, only 29% of the violent crime towards women committed by intimates involved a current spouse, while 42% involved boyfriends or partners and another 12% an ex-spouse. ....
Marital status was the strongest predictor of abuse - ahead of race, age, education or housing conditions .... from .... US Dept. of Health and Human Services in 1994. This revealed how unmarried women were three to four times more likely to be physically abused by their boyfriends while pregnant than married women by their hubands.
Videotapes. To see and hear Aidan Rankin, Norman Dennis, Erin Pizzey and Patricia Morgan speak, order the two videotapes of our 28oct00 conference from the Editor, Ill Eagle, price £20 post free.
Error in Ill Eagle, apr01
On page 11 of Ill Eagle - 'Members Services' - the telephone number 01775 840501 is given as the 'East Midlands' domestic violence helpline. In fact this is the new national DV helpline.
The East Midlands Domestic Violence helpline is 0116 2698566
South West helpline is 016438 62289
Disabled suffering DV
An organisation serving the interests of disabled people in the East Midlands has asked William Coulson, a ManKind member, to represent the interests of disabled male victims of domestic violence in the region.
The first step will be to gather information from such victims about their present, or past, experiences with special regard to inadequate provision for disabled men suffering violence.
Mr. Coulson is preparing a local fact finding mission, but information from victims everywhere will be useful. The fruits of this work will be distributed nationwide eventually.
If you have been a domestic violence victim at any time you have been disabled, or know of a case, please telephone 0116 2698566 (East Midlands DV Helpline) or write to:
William Coulson Domestic Violence Project, Male Victims, c/o LCIL, 5-9 Upper Church Street, Leicester LE1 5TE
All contact is in strict confidence. The need at this stage is to gather evidence that there are, and have been, significant numbers of domestic violence victims doubly disadvantaged by being both male and disabled.
The definition of 'disability' for this purpose is wide ranging, extending to motor impairment; vision and hearing problems; difficulties following stroke; mental or physical illness of a disabling nature; speech or other communication problems, including dyslexia.
The definition of 'violence' is the wider one currently used in anti-male advocacy statistics, i.e. physical abuse; threatening behaviour; restricting contact with friends or outside world; verbal abuse and demeaning comments; withholding, or threatening to withhold food or needed help.
Even if your problem has now been 'solved' (by divorce, separation or improved behaviour by your partner), some details of your experience (in strict confidence) will help others. So please support this initiative.
Five years for father who killed beloved daughter
Unnamed reporter, Telegraph, 5may01, p16
A "devoted" father who gassed his 30-month-old daughter to death was jailed for five years yesterday. .... 33, .... clinically depressed and suicidal .... His marriage had broken up and he had found it "unbearable" to be separated from his daughter. .... "Hurst was an apparently devoted and supportive father who adored Danialla and who was deeply in love with her mother, Gwen. " .... Mrs Hurst moved out, taking Daniella with her. .... He pleaded with his wife to come back to him ....
From Ill Eagle 11, oct00, p3;
"I have found massive censorship by the lucrative AIDS Industry ....
"None of the reports ever gives access to the dissident websites www.duesberg.com/index www.virusmyth.com/aids/index.htm or to any other dissidents or their websites. The Industry has to destroy Mbeki. There is so much money at stake, and also so many reputations and "research" funding. The AIDS Industry will continue to rumble along, killing its victims with poisonous drugs."
"Thabo Mbeki - a classic Stalinist?
- David Beresford, Observer, 22apr01, p22
".... s famous triumph for Africa and a breakthrough in the battle against HIV/AIDS was soured. It was compromised by the knowledge that the country is ruled by a man whose odd belief is that the virus and the disease have no connection, and to whom the pricing of the anti-viral drugs has no significance. ...."
Letter to Observer, 22apr01, p22
To the best of my knowledge the media haven't discussed the observations of Sir Albert Howard who maintained, for more than 20 years monitoring his own cattle, that FMD [Foot and mouth disease] arises solely from poor diet and intensive farming methods and cannot be transmitted to healthy unvaccinated cattle. I refer to his book Farming and Gardening for Health or Disease (Faber & Faber 1945). - John M. Scott, Norwich.
[They are culling for Cash. "FMD usually kills less than 1% .... lunatics are in charge of this .... medieval barbarism ...." "A farmer friend told me yesterday that an infected ewe is now worth £10,000 on the blackest of black markets, presumably to .... avoid imminent bankruptcy / claim as much compensation as possible."
- Jonathan Miller, Sunday Times 15/29apr01, News Review, pp3,2.
Go to www.sheepdrove.com
Also, Rae West (see his website) pointed out to me that the (suppressed) discrediting by Eleopulos of Perth Aust. of "HIV tests" which merely look for proteins, not the virus, should surely discredit all such tests for proteins, including "tests" for FMD. It is not only our family courts which are medaeval. - Ed.]
20th century science, egged on by "Modern Physics", produced much balderdash. If you ever see a plane flying upside down, you have to discard Bernouilli on theory of flight and cleave to Newton's Second Law. The wing gives downward momentum to the air. The angle, not the shape, of the wing is what matters. - see Telegraph, 3may01, p3. - Ed
How exams are fixed for girls
I concur with the Editor’s opinion in Ill Eagle 14, apr01, p8, about the downgrading of Physics teaching. This has even been recommended as a gender balancing exercise at Primary School level. I read an article in a teaching journal, which said that ‘aggressive’ play by infant boys in Primary School reception classes should be discouraged, and the ‘co-operative’ style of girls encouraged.
A practical instance was given: the different way boys and girls play with toy building blocks. The ‘showing off’ done by boys, which manifested in building high towers as quickly as possible, and the ‘aggressiveness’ shown by them knocking them down with relish, were condemned as negative traits. It was advisable, the author concluded, to discourage this, even if it meant taking the blocks away.
The girls, however, should be encouraged to carry on co-operatively producing their low walls- (b-o-o-o-o-ring for boys)- as this primed them for non-sexist development and career choices (prefiguring the ‘positive action’ of all those women-only bricklaying courses promoted by the EOC). She pointed out a bonus: this limiting of boys shielded girls from being made to feel inferior.
I have heard that in some institutions, computer studies have been curtailed for the same reason: because the males excelled whilst the females struggled.
Such policies, of course, negate the advice drawn from a century of psychological research in skill development and concept formation. Everyone has heard of Piaget and Montessori, but there are hosts of others who have demonstrated a link between early play and subsequent mathematical skills. Any creche worker will tell you boys are more inventive in their play. Knocking down the brick tower again and again is like cracking eggs to make an omelette.
Mentally rearranging blocks is the stuff of mathematics.
Like pollarded trees, male skills are now getting lopped off at several stages of development: new growth keeps breaking out, only to be lopped again, and the tree is unlikely thence to reach its potential.
One of my nephews is a case in point. In early childhood, his skill with blocks and such like was such that he became a national Lego champion. This entailed assembling complex Lego models a high speed. For example, the transformation from shape to another, by disassembling and reassembling with set components, against the clock. His speed and facility at this was truly awesome. Predictably, he grew up to be good at maths, winning a place in a national children’s maths competition.
I was gobsmacked, therefore, to find that at the age of 15, he had not yet studied physics as a single subject- something which I, without his mathematical precocity, started at eleven years.
Incidentally, he was at a top-drawer, private, all boys school: the feminizing rot has penetrated even to the elite male bastions. It is not their policy to teach basic physics, even to the scientifically gifted, until the final year, and then as an option. This is much later than at my school, where I was doing the Principle of Moments, light reflection and refraction etc., along with everyone else, before I was thirteen.
I set him some exercises on Moments, Parallelogram of Forces and so on, which, not surprisingly, he lapped up with ease.
He had escaped early ‘pollarding’ like that recommended by the loony lecturer in baby bricklaying, only to endure it in his teens. He had the grounding to survive it, but what of the others, including those in less privileged schools?
How much has this destructive dogma contributed to the ‘recently discovered’ skills shortage and the appalling levels of numeracy unearthed by Basic Skills research?
Previous generations were taught ‘the Classics’- Euclid and Latin, geometry and gerunds- for ‘mind-training’. The Classics were dropped a while ago, but at least Classical Physics was left; now even that has been edged out. My own opinion is that teaching Physics to the young is very valuable for their cognitive development, in the same way as ‘educational toys’ like Lego. A lot of remedial maths teaching relies on going back to basics, showing how numbers and quantities are related to concrete properties like length and weight. It is often mental representations, drawn from everyday experience, which are deficient in the clients for remedial maths.
They are thus taught simple Physics to aid their learning of simple maths. Physics is Maths made solid, and comprehensible to the senses. It is accessible because it overlaps with commonsense. It is fundamental, with general principles and logics applicable to many other fields. It is central to science, and should not be shunted into a corner. The earlier it is learned the better, because it strengthens logical reasoning.
And boys usually love it. A form of child abuse I endured, having to leave the darkened Physics lab playing with prisms, mirrors and lenses, to go to French or, even worse, History.
But at least I did have a Physics lesson to go to, and History was not the Herstory of Wimmin’s Struggle against State Patriarchy.
Happily, there are still islands of sanity which have not succumbed to feminization: so we still have that British inventiveness abroad (Though a lot of it has to go overseas to be appreciated).
Programmes like Robot Wars tap into it, and are hugely popular. But I detect a slow-down in creativity, not only in science, but all fields, even music and television. In the Eighties, the Japanese scoured the world to find the educational system which most promoted creativity, particularly practical inventiveness. The British system was identified as the best, and they set about copying it. In the meantime, our rulers had started to dismantle it here. Feminization was part of that destructive policy. Of the fifteen fundamental laws of Physics, twelve were discovered by British men. If you were on Be a Millionaire, and Chris Tarrant asked you, for One Million Pounds, to name an invention by a woman or a feminist, what would you reply?
- William Coulson, ManKind Nat. Council. 4may01.
Are females the inferior sex?
- William Coulson, Daily Mail, 30apr01
Yes. Could I add a couple of factors to the list in Geoffrey Wansell's Genderquake study (Mail) explaining current deficiencies of boys and men? The ascendancy of females in education has occurred with an increasing contribution of project marks to exam results. This allows candidates to get help from others.
Females have a superior ability to wheedle services from people, getting dads, brothers and male students to share their workload out of male chivalry.
Cut back these 'phone-a-friend' exams and watch their scores slump.
Second, the fact that boys mature more slowly than girls could mirror the fact that in the animal world the most intelligent animals have bigger brains [horses? - Ed], go on to do cleverer things and take longer to get to their peak [jump].
The male brain takes time to condition, but ends up better than the female in some abilities, such as creative imagination. [touché.] - William Coulson, Leicester.
"Britain has a chronic shortage of maths teachers; over 5,000 posts are being covered by unqualified staff and standards are dire. .... the maths teacher crisis has been many years in the making. .... the British scored among the worst in the developed countries in maths .... Standards may be getting even worse. .... The maths fraternity is beginning to warn of the dire consequences of poor teaching in schools. 'This is just stage two in a downward spiral .... with no enthusiasm for maths, they don't do A-levels in the subject [there is a collapse in the number doing math A level - Ed.]; without [them], we won't get people doing maths degrees.' .... Maths is a crucial area. Without maths, the sciences are impossible. ...." - Geraldine Hackett and John Elliott, Sunday Times, 6may01, p14
Decline of Science. Between 1962 and 1995, the % of students specialising in Maths and science at A level fell from 45% to 17% - Guardian, 3may01, p19
The Assassination of the Black Male Image
- E O Hurchinson, pub. Middle Page Press, L.A., 1994
First, two other quotes; back cover of original issue of Patricia Morgan, Farewell to the Family?, pub. I.E.A. 1995;
"Large numbers of unattached and predatory males who have never taken on the responsibilities of family life, or who have been ejected from families, now meet the classic conditions for the creation of a 'warrior class'."
Daniel Amneus, The Garbage Generation, pub. Primrose Press Calif. 1990. Amneus says that the current drive is to evict men from their role as fathers in a family. The prototypes for the resulting matriarchy (unless Pizzey is right in claiming that eviction of the father will be followed by eviction of the mother - Harman's and Blair's 'mothers out to work' policies -) are the black ghetto family and the American Indian. If he is right, and our white society moves into a similar matriarchal state, the suicide rate and other means of death for young white men must escalate rapidly in order to match the figures given for our destination society by Hutchinson in his book on the US black male, p5;
"But America has not made the black woman its universal bogeyman. The black man is.
.... He [has] a far greater death rate from cancer, stroke, pneumonia, and AIDS than she will.
"Then there are the unnatural causes of death. Compared to her, he's five times more likely to kill himself by his own hand, three times more likely to be killed in a car accident, and four times more likely to be killed by someone else. Meanwhile, one in four young black males languish in prison, on parole of probation. One out of seven will be murdered. One out of three black males are unemployed."
This, for whites as well, is the kind of society being pioneered by Stinko and the horde of others who attack and denigrate young men, using falsified statistics and other means. - Ed
Now for the assassination of your image;
Beaten, Kicked, Raped, Stabbed
Shock figures show domestic violence attacks against women every six seconds in Britain
- Lucy McDonald, Express, 26oct00, p1
Ten women are raped, stabbed or beaten by their partners every minute, a shocking report revealed yesterday. .... The statistics shatter the illusion of domestic bliss in many households. Professor Betsy Stanko, of the Economic and Social Research Council, who analysed the results .... said: "We know that a person rings the police for help because of domestic violence every minute. .... an incident occurs in the U.K. every six to 20 seconds .... 81% of victims are women attacked by men, 8% are men attacked by women ....
"Robert Whiston, of male civil rights group ManKind, said: "Often men just don't report it. They don't want to tell people."
Could you place an appeal in the next issue of Ill Eagle please for Mark's appeal fund. The details are below:
Many readers will be aware of the draconian penalty that Judge Munby has imposed on Mark Harris for annoying the judges club. His 10-month penalty is not only mental and physical punishment but also financial.
He has not only lost his earnings but he will probably have lost his job. He has legal fees to pay and most know how expensive that is. He also has other commitments that still need paying whilst the judges reap their revenge.
Mark's leadership and tenacity has helped us all and we will continue to benefit from his "raising his head above the parapet". With this in mind Tony Coe, Colin White and I are setting up a fighting fund for Mark and we would like you to contribute as much as possible.
You can help stop the judges destroying a fine man by subscribing to his fund, all of which will be used for the benefit of Mark.
Why not start a Standing Order of so much per month? All you need to do is to tell your bank the account details below, the amount, starting date, finish date (or "until further notice") and your account number. They will also need your signature.
Alternatively, you can send me a cheque made payable to "SPC RE MARK HARRIS". - Edward Diggins, <firstname.lastname@example.org> 5apr01
The details are as follows:
SPC RE MARK HARRIS
Lloyds TSB, 22 High Street, Andover, Hants SP10 1NW
Send Cheques To: E Diggins, 66 Jermayne Court, Weyhill Road, Andover, Hants. SP10 3NP
Mark Harris was unavoidably detained while the rest of us demonstrated (below) outside the home of Justice Munby, who jailed him, at 13 Ravensdon Street, London SE11 4AQ, tel 0207 587 0107, nr. Kennington tube sta.
There have also been demonstrations in Dublin, Southampton, Wiltshire and elsewhere, against various rogue family court judges.
Ill15 p16 missing