Ill Eagle
Ill Eagle 13 Ill Eagle
13 .. Feb 2001 .... ISSN 1466-9005 Ill13 p1 Ill Eagle for MPs Many thanks to Jerome Davis for
supplying Ill Eagle to MPs – Ed Double Squirt 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. .... Comment. 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 Ill13 p2 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. Yours sincerely Dr. David Brancher [Brancher asked that his address and
tel. no. be withheld. - Ed] Ill13 p3 Editorial Len Miskulin 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. Campion update 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 <mailbcf@yahoo.com> To: fnf-chat <fnf-chat@mono.org> 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 (2)
www.mankind.org.uk www.ukmm.org.uk (3) The Editor, Ill Eagle, Ivor Catt, 121 Westfields, St. Albans AL3 4JR,
England. 01727 864257 (4) Email :- ivorcatt@electromagnetism.demon.co.uk 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 ellis@elim.u-net.com Ill13 p4 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
m.j.george@qmw.ac.uk giving their name, postal address, telephone number or
email address. No expenses will be incurred by
volunteers, and confidentiality is guaranteed. Double Standards 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 terence@oneworld.freeserve.co.uk 0207 226 1799 Mankind Helpline 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 Liberal Fascism - 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. Ill3 p5 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 30oct00 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 Ill p6 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) Ill13 p7 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 ...." [1978] 2 All ER 919, [1978] 1 WLR925 From B Bassinghan & C
Harmer 1985, Law & Practice in Matrimonial Causes, 4th edn., pub.
Butterworths, 1985, p332. ".... from December 1 [2000] 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 Ill13 p8 ManKind 2001 Conference on Censorship http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/2001.htm 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] Dear Ivor, 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.] http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/te26quag.htm http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/x48rhill.htm http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/z026.htm http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/XIKYELLC.htm http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/ycuqcens.htm http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/w4rlectu.htm Watford Observer 26jan01,
p3 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 9feb01
13:38 Ivor,
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 fameduc@aol.com
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." CAFCASS 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 Ill13 p10 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
<jackel@melbpc.org.au> 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/ http://www2.startribune.com/stOnLine/cgi-bin/article?thisStory=83252319 Lindsay 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. Early abuse 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. Trouble again 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 Ill13 p11 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
mzack@startribune.com 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 http://lists.cpswatch.com/ Parent Support Group Support group of parents and
professionals who've been affected by the corrupt practices of Child
Protective Services. Warren Farrell 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 Miskulin 7feb01 04:32am Ivor, 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 Ill14 p1 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. Bar Code - 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
prsimons1@x-stream.co.uk Subject:
Retreat to Success !! Date: 25
February 2001 14:58 http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/retreat01.htm
http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/retreat01.htm http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/README.htm 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. CARPE DIEM 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. Ill14 p2 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. Thanks, John. [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 11mar01 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 Judicial Mindset "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] Help wanted Ivor, 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 m.j.george@qmw.ac.uk 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". Ill14 p3 Editorial "... 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. Reading
another of these ghastly, not ridiculous, radfems, Marilyn French, whom I
quote (p9), I realised the similarity in strategy between myself and the
radfems. Both propose an end to any contact between the sexes. Admittedly,
while radfems, particularly radfem lesbians, want permanent separation, I
have modified Campion's advice to young men, to not marry, cohabit or father
children. Rather, they should hold off for twenty years. The crisis is
deepening so rapidly, both the marriage rate and the birthrate having
collapsed, that the crisis will have been sorted out twenty years from now.
Then, once again, as in 1960, a man will be able to marry and bring up a
family in the normal way; something denied to him today. The reason why
would-be reformers like myself and radfems have the same strategy, is the
lack of civic conscience shown by the broad mass of women. Like the gentiles
in Germany of 1935, they carry on blissfully exploiting the situation, not
realising that their present greed will carry a heavy price in the end, for
them and everyone else. ManKind and Ill Eagle can be reached
at:- 1). Suite 367, 2 Lansdowne Row,
London W1X 8HL. 2)
www.mankind.org.uk 3)
Email Head.Office@mankinf.co.uk
The Editor, Ivor Catt, 121 Westfields,
St. Albans AL3 4JR, England. 01727 - 864257 Email ivorcatt@electromagnetism.demon.co.uk 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 Ill14 p4 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 Obituary 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] Advertisement Have case
- will travel Need a
McKenzie Friend ? Divorce -
Custody - Advice Tel: Ray
Hemmingway 01484-316489 Ill14 p5 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 ? WF: Correct. 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 ? WF: Absolutely. 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 Ill14 p6 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? WF: Yes. 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 Ill14 p7 http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/conf/generalinfo.htm 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.] Tyrant Tyrer From: Brian Robertson <brian@coeffic.demon.co.uk> 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 brian@coeffic.demon.co.uk Subject: Judge Under Siege Report Date: 04 March 2001 15:25 Thanks to Alan Carr for unearthing the
following story: http://www.msn.co.uk/exredir.asp?startid=2861&URL=http://www.sky.com/news/uk/story2.htm 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. Daughter upset 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. Ill14 p8 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 Ill14 p9 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) Acknowledgements .... Andrea Dworkin provided important research materials. .... Introduction 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. Orientation amuck - 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 Ill15 p1 '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.' Begging '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:
kirsty.turner@sundayindependent.co.uk [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. Access Protest [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:
newsdesk@sundayindependent.co.uk mailto:newsdesk@sundayindependent.co.uk 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 Article follows:- Access Protest 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. Ill15 p2 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 Dear Ivor, 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 Dear Ivor, 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 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 m.j.george@qmw.ac.uk giving their name, postal address,
telephone number or email address. No expenses will be faced by volunteers,
and confidentiality is guaranteed. FNF Reform 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 Transition 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'." Ill15 p3 Editorial Perjury 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. 2) www.mankind.org.uk www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/ 3)
Email Head.Office@mankind.co.uk The Editor, Ivor Catt, 121 Westfields,
St. Albans AL3 4JR, England. 01727 - 864257 Email
ivorcatt@electromagnetism.demon.co.uk Mark Harris 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 Ill15 p4 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, Times, 12feb01 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. Ill15 p5 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 Hi Ivor, 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.yav.com (business) http://www.yavelow.com (family) http://www.StolenChildren.net (important!) http://www.BringTheChildrenHome.com (like it says!) http://www.ChildrenHelpingChildren.com (you can help too!) On AOL Instant Messenger, I'm
"Bytehoven" +31-23-573-7121 (home) +31-650-853-863 (mobile) +31-23-573-7120 (fax) Being a man gives cause for concern Professor Hugh W. Jones, 18 Eastland
Close, Swansea SA3 5NU hw.jones@ns.sympatico.ca
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. .... lll15 p6 .... 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 Ill15 p7 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 [1999] 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. Says who? 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 Ill15 p8 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. Conclusions 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. Page 3 " .... 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). Page 4 " ... 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). Page 5 " .. 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). Page 6 " ... 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 Dear Ivor 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 Ill15 p9 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. SCADPlus: GLOSSARY Europa 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 JohnCharville@aol.com 25apr01 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 William Hetherington 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. Questions? 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!!! Ill15 p10 "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 Dear Ivor, Many thanks for another excellent Ill
Eagle [14] 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 Aidan
Rankin [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 Ill15 p11 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 1. Homosexual 2. Homophobe" "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. books@civil-society.org.uk
, 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."] The Academy 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 Ill15 p12 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: thelionroars@iname.com "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 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 singer@sepp.org
. 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. Cheers Sonja Dr.Sonja A.Boehmer-Christiansen 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 Dear Norman, I have now completed reading your book
"Racist Murder and pressure Group Politics" by Norman Dennis, Erdos
and Al-Shani, pub. Civitas sep00, at books@civil-society.org.uk 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 Ill15 p13 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 Marriage-Lite by
Patricia Morgan, pub. books@civil-sociaty.org.uk 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 Dear Sir, 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 William Coulson 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 .... AIDS 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. ...." Howard's way 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 Ill15 p14 How exams are fixed for girls Dear Sir, 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 Ill15 p15 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." Dear Ivor, 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, <edward.diggins@ntlworld.com> 5apr01 The details are as follows: Account: SPC RE MARK HARRIS 30-90-21 2657548 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 x |
|
X |