Martin Bright, Stanko, Sloss



I am sending a copy of this to Martin Bright, the journalist who promotes radfem interests in the Observer/Guardian. I first came across him when he wrote in The Observer promoting the false Stinko "statistic" that one in four wives are assaulted in their own home by their husbands . Very recently, he has written about the plight of five women who killed themselves in prison while he ignores the 90 male deaths in prison.


I now recollect that when Melanie Phillips left the Guardian/Observer she wrote an article in The Spectator (?) complaining bitterly about censorship on this subject by the Observer/Guardian. Now, of course, she is the author of our bible in this field, her 1999 book "The Sex Change Society ...." pub. SMF (which incidentally lambasts Stinko for falsifying statistics, in particular the 1 in 4 that Bright promoted in The Observer.)


If Melanie was right, then it follows that Bright has to keep to a radfem agenda if he is to continue to publish in the Observer/Guardian.


If Bright is homosexual, as are so many in the media, then his behaviour is understandable but still reprehensible. Homosexuals are marginalised by the traditional family. Further, Lesbian and homosexual relationships are notoriously violent. In order to gain the power to adopt children, they exaggerate the violence of a father against his own children , as does Sloss, the head of the family courts, who said; "The evidence of the existence of widespread domestic assaults by one partner on the other is incontrovertible .... There is extensive research on the large number of women who have been victims of violence in the home and the adverse effects upon them and upon their ability to function normally." - see (Also , and "Sloss stokes the witch-craze" -  )  . However, Sloss's reason for conniving in falsification of statistics against fathers is probably to get back at her own husband for boasting about his involvement with black girl prostitutes in Kenya . More simply, it is possible that Sloss's husband is violent.


What counter-pressures can we apply to anti-social behaviour by men like Bright? They play a key part of a highly destructive syndrome, analysed by Baskerville and Parejko.


Ivor Catt    26 July 2003.


cc Sloss,

Higher Marsh Farm,

Marsh Green, Exeter EX5 2EX




Subject: jailing deadbeat dads


 "Remember my friend whose divorce was a bloody mess.  He lost his
 job and his wife insists on getting payments?!!   Now he's in the court
 because the wife wants to take away his visitation rights too.  Its a
 nightmare.  He's refusing to work right now and the court says this is not
 permissible because he has to support his family.  Meanwhile, the wife has a
 boyfriend living in HIS house and not working.  I think she's willing to
 have him thrown in jail if he refuses to work.  Is this possible?  Can the
 courts force men to work?" - M.Z., New York.
 "I think she's willing to have him thrown in jail if he refuses to work.  Is
 this possible?  Can the courts force men to work?" - Yes. My "Retreat
 Strategy" bears on this problem.
 Truncilleto (q.v.) favours it. - Ivor
 The imprisonment of fathers who refuse to work in order to generate funds to
 support their children which they are not allowed to see occurs in a number
 of states in the U.S.A.   Baskerville reports on cases in the USA where
 fathers have been jailed by the judge on the grounds that the judge says the
 working father could have got a job with higher pay, and so he would have
 been able to deliver more child support for children that he is not allowed
 to see. This is only one of many ways in which Family Court Judges in the
 USA trample on the U.S. Constition. The technical term is "slavery", which
 had been outlawed in the U.S.A. following the civil war, but is now brought
 back by the family courts. In the U.S.A., a father was jailed on the grounds
 that, earlier, while previously in jail, he had not earned enough money to
 supply the child support that the judge ordered. (He had of course earned
 nothing while in jail. Thus, he was jailed for being in jail.)
 The jailing of fathers who do not earn enough is being introduced in England
 at present.
 Stephen Baskerville is the best expert on this. When I left New York, I went
 to see him in Washington D.C. You would do well to get your divorced friend
 to look at his website
 While in Baskerville's house in Washington, Ed Truncilleto gave me a copy of
 the Parejko book, "Stolen Vows", see  I have now bought
 18 copies from Judy Parejko of Texas. She explains how bureaucrats and
 voluntary workers who think they are helping families are actually attacking
 families, as she did for six years without realising it. Baskerville (and
 Parejko) show how the Divorce Industry/Child Protection Industry is growing
 very rapidly in the USA, and is now a multi-billion dollar industry with
 multiple vested interests living off it.
 Best wishes, Ivor, 25july03  "The
 astounding fact is that, with the exception of convicted criminals, no one
 today has fewer rights than fathers. Even accused criminals have the right
 to due process of law, to know the charges against them, to a lawyer, and to
 a trial. A father can be deprived of his children, his home and life
 savings, and his freedom with none of these constitutional protections."
 Stephen Baskerville, PhD
 Department of Political Science
 Howard University
 Washington, DC  20059
 For more than 30 articles from over 4 years, see my website: