[Ill Eagle 1999 issues are at www.ivorcatt.com/99.htm ]

[Ill Eagle 2000 issues are at www.ivorcatt.com/00.htm ]

Ill Eagle 1, may99

ISSN 1466-9005

1p1

The Poor To Stay Poorer

In his March budget, the Chancellor described the Married Man's Allowance as neither an allowance nor a benefit. He then stripped away the last symbolic vestige of marriage as a meaningful union. The subtext to his changes will prevent even more fathers from seeing their children and cuts directly across the green paper "Supporting Families" - page 2 col 1

Patricia Morgan speaks to Lords

Speaking to a Parliamentary Committee, Patricia Morgan slammed the Budget. "The Budget reinforces, with a vengeance, the massive discrimination against married couples. .... At any given income level, lone parents enjoy a higher living standard, because the benefit and tax regime ignores how many mouths the benefit must feed." - page 2 col 2

Domestic Violence is Beneficial - says Open University

Who'd be a feminist these days ? Feminists just recovering from Home Office Research Paper 191, showing that women were at least as violent as men, are "decked" again by another survey.

The Open University reveals that domestic violence is not the negative, nasty thing we all thought it was - especially from a women. According to their study, being violent is considered attractive and on a par with being assertive and aggressive. The reason given is that it "gets things done" - (no more backchat from inferiors, one supposes). "What the results of these studies tell us is that for women in ordinary, everyday life violence is mostly a matter of the mundane. As participants in this study made clear, ordinary women who behave violently seldom pose any serious threat at all. They can be nasty, stroppy, mean and manipulative, but hardly ever will they cause serious injury or act uncontrollably", said Ms Chappell. . (Daily Telegraph 9/4/99). Your views please to EOC, Women's Unit and Open University.

Australia's Violent Women

by Lynnette Haas

Unfortunately, much research into domestic violence (like the Australian Bureau of Statistics study several years ago) still only questions women and ignores men and their experiences completely, and so, unsurprisingly, conclude that only women experience such abuse and violence.

'Husband Abuse as Self-Defence', a paper presented by associate professor of sociology Sotirios Sarantakos (Charles Sturtat Univ.) to the International Congress of Sociology in Canada last year, details an ongoing study of 198 violent marriages in rural Australia, identified 64 abused husbands.

Through a series of intense interviews, conducted over many years, the wife, one of the couple's children over 16 and one of the wife's parents (usually the mother), Sarantakos investigated the claim that most female-male abuse is self-defence - that the male victim physically encourages the attack. He found otherwise.

He found that the vast majority of abusive wives admitted they did not hit their husband in self-defence. Nor did they 'feel threatened' by the husband even after they assaulted him and were not in need of protection from the husband.

However, many of the major domestic violence organisations are unconvinced by these findings. Research says it exists, and in significant numbers yet welfare groups, the frontline workers, say it doesn't !

Relationships Australia executive director Ian MacDonald accepts female-to-male abuse does occur, but sees it "at a minuscule rate, compared with male-to-female violence that's reported to us". He believes it's no more difficult for a man to report domestic violence than it is for a woman, though he concedes that the sceptical response of police can make men feel 'awkward'.

Queensland - large-scale research has been scant in Australia's Sunshine State. In 1988 the Queensland Domestic Violence Taskforce, researching male-female abuse, reported that 6.2% of domestic violence victims were male.

However, one Queensland organisation which fully supports the notion of female-male violence, the Waterford-based Men's Rights Agency, run by husband and wife team Reg and Sue Price, has been ridiculed as right-wing extremist for its stance on family issues.

While government money is available for abusive male programmes, there is nothing to help male victims. So, nationwide, this one self-funded organisation is the only one open which is sympathetic to abused men.

Sue Price says: "If a man comes to me with his children in tow, trying to escape his violent wife we have nowhere to send him".

Having helped men through various personal crises, Price is convinced many men will never report their violent wives.

Victoria - The Victorian Injury Surveillance System last year concluded that of 372 victims of "partner - inflicted violence" identified by several hospitals 76.1% were female and 23.9% were male. It further concluded: "The admission rate was 14.6% for male and 10.9% for females, suggesting that a greater proportion of males received more severe injuries".

Brisbane - Meeta Iyer, director of the Domestic Violence Research Centre at Brisbane's inner-city West End, says since July 1998 out of a total of 700 or 800 help calls only five calls from male victims seeking counselling or information. She believes those 5 calls represent the true overall incidence.

"While there is a lot of information out there that says men find it difficult to talk about domestic violence, I think it is the same (for women)," she says. "I believe (this figure) is indicative of true victims of domestic violence who are men."

But Peter, (who won't reveal his surname) of the Men's Domestic Violence Telephone Counselling Service emphasises that since its inception in 1996 the service has primarily fielded calls from men "who are perpetrators of domestic violence, with 20% of incoming calls from men who say they're the aggrieved spouse".

Peter says the difference between male-to-female and female-to-male violence is that most abused males do not fear their partner's attacks and seem to be part of a mutually violent relationship.

The landmark study by Strauss, Gelles and Steinmetz in the 1980's "Behind Closed Doors: Violence in the American Family", revealed that 49% of spouses reporting domestic abuse, admitted they were both violent.

In the previous year 27% of men claimed they were the sole perpetrators of violent incidents compared to 24% of women.

In instances of so-called severe violence, 3.8% of wives were identified as victims, while 4.6% of husbands were victims.

[This supports the UK findings that men suffer more severe injury because women use weapons while men do not. -Ed ]

Croatia's Appeal

On 24.4.99, our London HQ received a request from Croatia for advice on how to set up their own organisation. "One of the last negative examples is the 'Family Law' which was written in co-operation between women's organisations and the Croatian Gov't with very little participation by men." - Ivan Kasanic

1p2

The Poor To Stay Poorer - Official

The last symbolic vestige of marriage as a meaningful union was stripped away in the last budget.

However, we must thank the Chancellor of the Exchequer for clarifying the use and abuse to which the Married Man's Allowance had become distorted over the last few decades. In his March budget address he described the Married Man's Allowance as neither an allowance not a benefit. Indeed, he went on to describe how it was routinely paid to married couples with children, married couples without children as well as couples with children but who weren't married. We must be grateful that a cabinet packed with an inordinate number of homosexuals, not that we are implying that the Chancellor of the Exchequer is homosexual, should be the ones to clarify the situation.

The Chancellor outlined his vision of a regime where all credits and State benefits were paid to women and mothers - regardless of marital status - on a 'needs', not a 'contribution', basis. This, as we have said many times before, is the Road to Ruin. Already, at 1994 prices, single mothers alone cost the taxpayer over £18 BILLION a year - an amount equivalent to Britain's entire Defence Budget. !

In "Supporting Families", the Consultation Paper issued last year on funding families in the future, great play was made of married couples and the importance of stability and continuity for the healthy development of children.

However, at the first opportunity to endorse that view with real money, the Gov't has done nothing. Any increases are given across the board and not aimed or skewed toward married families. This contradicts the doctrines contained within "Supporting Families" and "Children First", as it is disproportionately unfair to married couples. Single mothers and unmarried couples already have extra allowances denied to married couples. A token of good faith would have been to equalise the situation. In the Budget, the Gov't also felt unable to disengage from universal Child Benefit payments in not tapering or cutting off the benefit to wealthier families. In effect "Cheryl and Tony Blairs" are siphoning off money from the poor. This meant that only a smaller increase to desperate families could be given. This cuts across the Gov't avowed intention to aim and channel benefits to the poorest in society and limit benefits to the better-off in the upper income bands.

We feel there may yet be more unplanned adverse side effects of the Chancellor changes. (See Atticus, below.) We foresee that changes in the CSA will cause an even greater incidence of fathers being prevented from seeing their children by wilfully obstructive mothers.

The Chancellor may yet rue the day he failed to return to a tax system that paid allowances to married couples via the man/husband. Since benefits became payable only to women, the taxpayer has seen the amount spent double and double and double again - from 1 billion a year in 1976 when paid to husbands to over £8 billion pa today, when far fewer children are being born than in '76, and benefit rates have remained almost static.

Atticus, Sunday Times, 14mar99, sect1 - p19;

"Gordon Brown did not realise he had blundered in his budget ... The small print .... removed tax relief from child maintenance payments by divorced fathers - the very people the government wants to encourage to 'do the right thing'."

Patricia Morgan slams Budget - speech at the House of Lords.

Patricia Morgan's address to the Lord's Committee for Family and Child Protection (March 10^th) opened with an unequivocal broadside on the budget proposals. "The Budget reinforces, with a vengeance, the massive dis-crimination against married couples". She went on to detail how the Working Family Tax Credit actually penalises working married families who do not qualify for the CCTC (Child Care Tax Credit) in the way that lone parents do.

Like the Family Credit regime it replaces, no account is taken of the extra costs involved in actually staying at home to raise children. Instead, it gives extra credit to lone mothers to employ another person (possibly another lone mother) to care for her children.

Married couples, she also pointed out, were more penalised than single mothers through the Council Tax regulations. As the country moves toward more means-tested benefits, it is married couples who are hurt more. The withdrawal of benefits when households begin to enjoy incomes are set at the same for the lone mothers and married couples. The same applies to the 'savings' test criteria. In effect, this means disqualification at only half the savings level for married couples if a per capita basis is used.

Paradoxically, says Patricia Morgan, while the analysis of poverty takes into account the size of the household, the benefit and tax regime meant to alleviate poverty completely ignores how many mouths the standard benefit must feed. The evidence suggests that at any given income (wage) level, lone parents enjoy a higher living standard than do married couples. This is only to be expected, given one less adult to feed. Also, benefits are greater for lone parents than for marred couples.

It is therefore almost idiotic to base additional support solely on how many children "and their needs" there are in the family, and to totally ignore the plight of the parents or adults in a same sized household. It leaves married couples less well off, and their children actually poorer, and in greater need of financial help.

Although Society now places no value on mothers caring for their children at home, these women's husbands (i.e. the one income families) actually subsidise, by the taxes they pay, the costs involved in the creation and provision of Child Care facilities so that single mothers can enjoy a better lifestyle than the one income family.

The Performance & Innovation Unit

The Performance and Innovation Unit established last year by Gov't is charged with cutting across the boundaries of Whitehall depts and assist in joined-up government and sensible policy making. The PIU is keen to reach out beyond Whitehall and draw in the private sector. It is looking for volunteers for 6 - 9 month placements to work intensively on projects.

These include Developing Electronic Commerce in the UK; Active Ageing (improving the well-being of older people by helping them to remain active in paid and unpaid work); Central Gov't role at the regional and local level; Accountability and incentives for joined-up government (the reform of Whitehall's accountability and incentive systems to encourage joined up policy making and delivery); Objectives for rural economies (examining the key factors affecting performance of Gov't policies). The PIU is seeking secondees for this autumn. Tel. Lesley Bainsfair 0171-270-1527 or email PIU@cabinet-office-gov.uk

Suicide

Doctors get help to spot suicidal young men, by Marie Woolf, Political Correspondent, Independent on Sunday, 21mar99, p4.

".... GPs .... are often the first port of call for people contemplating suicide.

.... The Government is devising strategies for high-risk groups, such as drug users and young men. In 1997, 1,759 young men between the ages of 15 and 34 killed themselves compared to 412 women of the same age.

.... Suicide is linked to severe depression, and areas of Britain with high unemployment, drug use and low incomes will be targetted."

The Labour Market Supply Division of the Department for Education and Employment, tel. 0171 533 6176, confirmed that their "Claimant Count Data Base" figures for the years 1995, 1996, 1997 and 1998 showed three times as many males as females for age group 18-24 unemployed for more than 12 months.

Totally ignoring their own unemployment figures, all the Govt initiatives are to get young women into work, not young men.

________

Mankind National Conference

for members is on Saturday June 5 - see Page 2 of Male View.

Refreshments will be at 1.30-2pm, with the conference beginning at 2pm. It is expected to end about 5pm.

It will be informal, with plenty of time to meet the NEC in person to chat.

"The Tournament" pub, Old Brompton Rd., London SW5 9JU. Between Chelsea F.C. and Olympia. Earl's Court Tube Stn. 200 yds. Owner Alan Piper, (0171 370 2449.

unpaid work); Central Gov't role at the regional and local level; Accountability and incentives for joined-up government (the reform of Whitehall's accountability and incentive systems to encourage joined up policy making and delivery); Objectives for rural economies (examining the key factors affecting performance of Gov't policies). The PIU is seeking secondees for this autumn. Tel. Lesley Bainsfair 0171-270-1527 or email PIU@cabinet-office-gov.uk

1p3

Editorial

The crisis Senator Anne Cools

refers to in her address to the

Canadian Senate (see page 4) identical in many countries - including England.

In this, the first issue of Mankind's new monthly newsletter, we see that feminist judges in the 'developed' world represent a Fifth Column. The illegality of the English family courts is duplicated around the world, giving rise, not only to the name of this newsletter, but to identically catastrophic social outcomes.

The ACFC (American Coalition for Fathers and Children) has concerns identical to ours. In this bulletin, the political scientist Prof. S. Baskerville, says the US family courts are 'out of control'.

It is significant that ManKind is moving toward an assertion of Men's human and civil rights at a time when the same evolution is occurring in the US. This leads us in two directions; first, the international nature of the problem, and second, the uniform pathological outcomes produced as shown in the social statistics from so many countries.

Our opponents now have to answer why the same crisis has developed simultaneously; why the numbers of male suicide is still escalating amongst the young; why we have the same ratio of false accusations and charges of violence and sexual abuse; and why we continue with secret and unaccountable courts which continually break the law.

What we need is a Sen. Anne Cools, not just for the UK, but for Australia, New Zealand, and all the counties of Europe.

You can play your part in this. Our Chairman (Robert Whiston) called for 'volunteers' to help with this heavy workload in any way they can. My contribution is to take on the task of Editing our Newsletter. Please help me in this by telling me if you have access to equivalent or sympathetic organisations both here and abroad. Newsworthy items, letters and other contributions will be appreciated. Contact me at:-

(1). Suite 367, 2, Lansdowne Row,

London W1X 8HL.

(2) www.ukmm.org.uk

(3) The Editor, Ill Eagle, 121

Westfields, St. Albans AL3

4JR, England.

(4) Email :- ivorcatt@

electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/

Lord Irvine found

guilty as charged

Oh, how I wish, but the sad truth is that his only crime was to express a personal opinion and show a preference in appointing his own confidential Adviser. Not an outrageous thought, given the sensitive nature of the work, but outrageous enough for 'a woman with an agenda' to bring an action - and win. To humble the nation's highest Law Administrator in a court action, drag in a Prime Minister, Tony Blair, (whom Lord Irvine consulted on how to make the best appointment) is surely to take on Gov't and win. Only a woman can do this.

At "Ill Eagle" we feel so sorry for Lord Irvine that we thought we might make him an 'Honorary Member', with a Citation to the effect that he too has now suffered at the hands of 'gender neutral' laws that were never intended to penalise men in this way.

Silent Women's Unit ?

ManKind's protest letter to the Women's Unit about its recent biased domestic violence report has been answered - but by the Home Office. The explanation given for refusing to meet a ManKind team is that the HO "has the lead responsibility for the Gov't's policy on domestic violence" and doesn't normally agree to such requests. The Home Office in their letter while accepting that DV is perpetrated by both men and women still contends that women are "more frightened" by DV, and therefore, (they reason,) the protection of women as victims must remain the priority.

Threats by men, they assert, also frighten women, who are more likely to be injured or seek medical help. Men are also less upset by threats. Their letter assures ManKind that "Gov't will develop policies to tackle domestic violence on a gender-neutral basis"

"The Beak" drawn by James Wood.

'Jungle Survival' 4 men

"The UK Men's Movement is campaigning to redress what it sees as discrimination against men in areas such as education and health". Robert Whiston, Chrm, is quoted (Sunday Times, 28/3/99) as saying, "We are seeing a return to Victorian times with women getting preferential treatment. Men are no longer feeling valued enough". According to Tom Robbins' article, the men's movement got underway with advent of Robert Bly's book in 1991. "Over the last 2 years there has been a ground swell of men's self help". Interviewed at length, the article cites the male suicide rate of 3.7 times that of women. Dr. Thapar-Bjorkert admits that the "women's movement went wrong somewhere. We were talking about gender relations but only ever discussed women".

U-Write ~~ Newsfrom the Regions.

Central London

Mankind took to the airwaves in a 1-hour 1-2-1 phone-in and interview on Talk Radio. Most of the callers understood the problems faced. Some asked for advice and guidance. Many were obvious casualties of the legal process, believing that when they went into court they would be given a fair hearing (like in the movies -Ed). Women also phoned. Many were sympathetic to the predicament men face. Some of course were hostile. The Station Interviewer pressed hard on some points, but the Mankind representative (NC member Edward Crabtree) dealt adequately with all topics and all 'spins'.

Lincolnshire

This dedicated and determined branch daily bombard TV and the Media. GMTV recently advised viewers to use Instamatic cameras to proves domestic violence injuries. But as the Branch pointed out Gay Phillips of GMTV, when a man offers them to a judge they're deemed "of no consequence" and thrown out as evidence. She says she's always keen to hear from viewers. [So write.]

Stoke.

Football legend and Stoke City manager Lou Macari's son has been found hanged. We can only imagine his grief and suffering. The word 'condolences' seems somehow inadequate. Lou has given much to the game and it is therefore all the more tragic that he will not now be able to pass on and share those wonderful moments with his son

Malta.

"Male-Order" the men's movement, in Malta's reports another year of increased activity. Not only have they achieved widespread TV and Radio coverage but "engaged" with politicians. Malta now has a Director of Women's Rights at the Prime Ministers Office (what nation doesn't these days ? - Ed). Male-Order also reports that domestic violence statistics take many turns in a country where divorce isn't really permitted. One husband was attacked by his knife-wielding wife Simple case of domestic violence- you might think.- wrong ! After the

attack she headed off for the cliffs and was later found drowned.

The 'official' statistics recorded this

as an instance of suicide not DV.

Sheffield.

Sheffield members report that their archdeacon has "rapped" as selfish parents who stop their children from parents (fathers) after divorce or separation. The Venerable Stephen Lowe, who is to become the next Bishop of Hulme (Manchester) has hit out at what he calls the selfishness of parents who somehow think they have priority over their children. He condemned those parents who 'act out their hatred' by actively preventing contact. He is concerned with the rising level of mental illness amongst the young and has called for urgent action for the homeless.

Leicester.

Members in Leicester succeeded, courtesy of the Leicester Mercury, in taking a sideswipe at those on the city council who fund and support domestic violence schemes. Prominently placed on the Readers Letter page they detailed the implications of the Home Office report into domestic violence against men as well as women (HO paper 191) together with key elements of the earlier screened C4 "Dispatches" programme.

In the past Leicester City Council has waved aside attempts to get domestic violence listed as both a male and female problem. No longer can they describe male victims as "a very small minority not meriting attention."

Somerset

County organisers have successfully pressed the CSA to improve communication for members. After discussions with CSA officials a dedicated "hotline" for ManKind members is in place.

Lie Detectors Needed

In order to keep custody of a child during divorce proceedings, French women are increasingly falsely accusing their former husbands of sexually abusing their children.

"I lived with that, the most heinous of accusations, for nearly one year," Philippe said. "She falsely charged that I'd molested and raped their little girl. You cannot imagine the devastation that brings on."

SOS-Papa (France) says it has counted more than 200 cases similar to Philippe's. The court is obliged to investigate once a charge is made. "We cannot know in advance that the accusation is false," one investigator said. Until the charges are disproved, fathers can be thrown into jail., unable to see their children for as long as a year.

1p4

Fathers Movement

emerges in the US.

Deborah Mathis

WASHINGTON DC, DC

A surging US Men's Movement has spawned hundreds of organizations and conferences, much scholarship and countless Websites. As an indication of the movement’s growth, men will descend upon San Francisco for an International Fatherhood Conference 31/5 to 5/6/99 [see www.internationalfathers.com ] sponsored by the Ford Foundation, the U.S. Department of Labor, the State of California and other mainstream institutions.

Prof. Steve Baskerville, a political scientist, said, "It may take a while for the fatherhood movement to take off, but I think we’re making great strides."

Baskerville, of Howard University, says the movement is on two tracks: one, advocating men’s rights, the other promoting preparedness and responsibility in fatherhood. The patrons behind these efforts for men who want to be better fathers include social service agencies, religious groups and corporations who sponsor workshops support groups

Like many of his colleagues and millions of men in the movement, Baskerville was jolted into action by his own divorce.

He now channels most of his anger into the Civil Rights arena, alleging that Family Courts automatically favour women in divorce and child custody cases. This, he contends, gives impetus to the movement.

"So many fathers are being hit by this, it’s an epidemic," Baskerville declares. "I think it is more than just gender bias. I think it’s a system of organised crime. It is legalised child-stealing for profit and power."

[I prefer to say that the English judges simply ignore the law. - Ed]

"The court ordered me to stay away from my children most of the time," Baskerville, 41, explains. "I was stripped of all custody rights and decision-making rights under pain of incarceration. I pay about 60 percent of my income to people who took my children. … This is the kind of shake-down racket that "Family" courts have now become"

However, Washington, D.C. - based American Coalition for Fathers and Children, paint a bleaker picture of fatherless children than the self-described "growing, national Civil Rights movement."

"People [the general public] are unaware that fathers are having their children simply stolen…by family courts," Baskerville says.

The US federal government inaugurated a nationwide database (Autumn 1998) to help states collect the $50 billion ordered in Child Support each year. States had been collecting less than one-fourth of the total owed by the 16 million parents required to pay. Most are men.

Baskerville says Virginia’s Child Support Enforcement Division is pursuing 428,000 fathers for payments. "This is absurd on the face of it," Baskerville said. "Half a million fathers are turned into criminals."

Still, Baskerville (hot property on the speaker’s circuit these days) believes the militant wing of the fatherhood movement will soon upstage the self-improvement wing.

"I think I’ve struck a chord," Baskerville said, "and I think you have a new generation of fathers who are outraged at the way we’re being treated in the courts." He noted that the Virginia task force includes 15 women and eight men. "Some fathers are upset about that ratio," he said.

U.S. Statistics mirror UK experience

As many as 19.5 million American children live apart from their fathers. Four out of 10 do not live with their biological fathers.

Compiling statistics from state, federal and academic reports, the ACFC also says children without fathers at home are 10 times more likely to abuse chemical substances, nine times more likely to end up in a state institution and 20 times more likely to be imprisoned than others.

According to that organization, children from fatherless homes are five times more likely to commit suicide, 32 times more likely to run away, 20 times more likely to have behavioural disorders, 14 times more likely to commit rape and nine times more likely to drop out of high school.

Fourteen states and the District of Columbia now require family court judges to act on the presumption that joint custody is in the child’s best interest. Men’s rights groups say fathers are falsely accused of sexual or physical abuse or child support violations in order to deny them custody or visitation right.

Canadian Storm insexual assault case.

Anne C. Cools, Canada's Senator outspoken for men's rights, launched a searing attack on feminists in the Canadian Judiciary. Members of Canada's Senate (the Parliamentary upper chamber) were asked why the American feminist, Catherine MacKinnon, had been allowed to shape much of Canadian domestic and sexual assault laws.

"I speak of the Supreme Court of Canada judgement delivered on February 25, 1999 in the case of Regina v. Steve Brian Ewanchuk, in particular, Mdme. Justice Claire L'Heureux - Dubé's concurring reasons for judgement and her stinging attack on Mr. Justice John W. McClung, and his subsequent distraught letter to a national paper.

She reminded members that Mr. Justice McClung, heard and passed sentence on an Alberta case involving a young woman's alleged "sexual harassment" complaints against a prospective employer.,

"The Supreme Court's Madame Justice Claire L'Heureux-Dubé is a well-known feminist judge. The profound reaction of the legal community, lining up on Judge L'Heureux-Dubé's side and ignoring the fact that her hurtful and thoroughly unnecessary words started the battle, is a striking example of how politics has taken over the issues surrounding sexual assault. It is clear that the feminist influence has amounted to intimidation, posing a potential danger to the independence of the judiciary. I deplore any attempt to use the Canadian Judicial Council as an agent of the women's movement, through the filing of complaints against judges whose remarks do not accord with the feminist world view. Feminists have entrenched their ideology in the Supreme Court of Canada and have put all contrary views beyond the pale...."

Mrs. Cools continued, "Honourable senators, these two justices, McClung and L'Heureux-Dubé, have dominated news reports this week. Shortly after his first letter, Mr. Justice McClung apologized profoundly and generously to Madame Justice L'Heureux-Dubé for his hasty letter. This apology was published on March 2 in the newspapers.

"Off with his head," shrieked many gender feminist headlines. "Complain to the Judicial Council," and "Remove him," shrieked others as feminists and their supporters mobilized citizens to Madame Justice L'Heureux-Dubé's side. "The public has no appetite for gender feminist injustice and the public discussion is revealing this."

"Mr. Justice McClung is a scholar of the law, a great jurist, and a great luminary of the bench of Canada. He has upheld the law as an instrument of justice. He has upheld parliamentary institutions as the givers of the law and public policy, and has declined to join the current judicial activism and certain judges' unashamed and unabashed entry into politics. He is persona non grata with the judicial, charter, and feminist activists".

Opening the senate debate she asked, why MacKinnon's was permitted to influence Canadian jurisprudence, and what such a raw, gender feminist, ideological diatribe who sought to criminalize man-woman sexual relations had to do with the Supreme Court of Canada, or with an Alberta Superior Court judge".

She described MacKinnon, as "a gyno-centric feminist", who postulated in her 1989 book, Toward a Feminist Theory of the State, "that man-woman sexual relations are abhorrent because they violate women, and that in a patriarchal society all heterosexual intercourse is rape". MacKinnon helped craft sexual assault laws in Canada. "This gender feminist ideology has driven much law in Canada, and consequently has driven much injustice. It has ravaged law, justice, many careers, and many human lives. It resulted in positions, jobs, grants, and even appointments to the bench. It created a terrible silence as it inflicted obvious injustices on many. It was buttressed by feminist terrorism and aggression, ready to pursue to destruction anyone who gets in its way, while chanting its mantra that all evil and violence are men's, and that all goodness, virtue, and truth are women's. .

Judge L'Heureux-Dubé was hell-bent on re-educating Judge McClung, bullying and coercing him into looking at everything from her point of view.

"Honourable senators, as members of Parliament, we have a special role in the superintendence of the behaviour of judges and a representative role in upholding the public interest in this. I believe that radical judicial activism is a serious threat to parliamentary sovereignty and judicial independence. ...[more available on my website electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/ - Ed]

****************************

There are problems with transferring Ill Eagle 2, june99

***************************

Ill Eagle 3, july/aig99

3p1

Black TV boss 'hadn't suffered

enough' to adopt

- Sarah Toyne and Maurice Chittenden, Sunday Times, 18july99, sect. 1 p7.

"A black television executive and his white wife were turned down for adopting a child because social workers claimed they had not suffered enough racial abuse.

"The couple were stalled for more than two years by staff at a Labour council who also said their home was too tidy and that their existing child was too normal.

"Their case has been seized on by MPs who want to end the scandal which keeps 51,000 children in foster care at a cost of £2 billion a year when thousands of couples are prepared to offer them loving homes. The social security inspectorate is to investigate whether misguided political correctness among social workers is contributing to the problem. .... ....

"They say they were perceived as too middle class and were told that as all mixed-race and black children came from 'severely damaged' situations, they were all disruptive."

This report confirms the findings in Patricia Morgan's mar98 book "Adoption and the care of children", pub. I.E.A. tel. 0171 799 3745. Her most startling statistic is on p9; "The rate of trans-racial adoptions plummeted: there was a 40 per cent decrease between 1971 and 1972 alone." This shows how such activities can be heavily, and rapidly, influenced by fashion. We read of the same disgraceful factors as in the family courts. "The law is widely ignored..." (p12). The whole scene is driven by ignorance, bigotry and fashion, as are the family courts, with ignorant so-called experts playing the same destructive role; in this case social workers instead of court welfare officers. "Staff specialising in adoption are rare. The result is diminishing expertise, with decisions being made by people without relevant training or experience, so that social workers feel that they are 'left just to flap in the wind'." (p13) The prejudice against the normal family is repeated.

Prof. Betsy Stanko of Brunel University

Telephone Stanko on 01895 -203068 or 203085 for your free copy of her disgraceful Oct 98 booklet "Taking Stock", which is sexist propaganda masquerading as research. In view of Home Office Study No. 191, it discredits her. She will also send you the A4 leaflet "Violence Research Programme" (VRP) which tells you that the ESRC is giving her £3.5million of your taxpayer's money to fund so-called "research". Further leaflets outline each of the 20 programmes she funds, using Gov't money. This is our money, and is being used to mislead voters and legislators. The inevitable result will be rising suicide among young men for a further fifteen years, until the crisis forces itself upon their attention. To see why, take the opportunity to request her 1999 study "Counting the Cost".

See also next article.

The myths of domestic violence.

Home Office Research Study 191 on domestic violence, published in January this year, was based on self-reporting interviews with about 10,000 men and women as part of the 1996 British Crime Survey of England and Wales. It is thus by far the most comprehensive and reliable study of domestic violence carried out in this country, and as such should be viewed as having authority. [Compare with the 200 people in Hackney interviewed by Stanko leading to her report stating 25% of women being subjected to violence, headlined in the Express and elsewhere].

The Home Office study 191 found an almost equal and numerically very small culpability of 4% in couple relationships. In a 12-month period 4% of men and 4% of women reported being assaulted by their partner, although more women reported injury (in a ratio of two to one), and more women were chronic victims (in a ratio of three to one). Even in the longer term (over a life-time), 15% of men reported that they had been assaulted by a female partner compared to 23% of women by a male partner. It is at this point that the probability over a lifetime magically turns into the "1 in 4 women suffer domestic violence etc. Across the Atlantic, somewhat lower but still substantial proportions of male victims were reported in the latest 1998 National Violence against Women Survey. Despite this being aimed principally at women as victims, the Survey still found 835,000 male victims of domestic abuse, compared to 1.5 million women (physical or sexual abuse), a proportion of about 36% male victims. ....

The results of the study 191 are repeatedly being brushed aside. We reported in June that Jack Straw, Home Secretary, said; ".... domestic violence is men beating women". Another example of where survey is ignored is Consultation Paper on Contact between Children and Violent Parents (May99) published by the Children Act Sub-committee to the Advisory Board for Family Law.

For further information and booklets on domestic violence contact; Dewar Research, Constables, Windsor Rd., Ascot, SL5 7LF.

Fathers to face new threat to "contact".

New proposals to restrict still further the chances of fathers seeing their children after divorce have been published by the Lord Chancellor's Dept. Overall control is in the hands of the long titled "Children Act Sub-Committee of the Advisory Board on Family Law". The Advisory Board was set up after the Family Law Act 1996 to monitor its implementation but is also responsible for monitoring the Children Act 1989.

We immediately contacted the Chairman of the Children Act Sub-Committee and our Chairman writes; "I have received a reply from Mr Justice Wall [Chairman] welcoming our interest in Contact between children and violent parents (CBCAVP). Wall has indicated that he would be pleased to hear comments from both individual ManKind members and collectively.

The proposals suggest introducing New Zealand's 1993 method of allegations of violence by one parent to create a barrier for contact. In a country of only about 10,000 divorces there are 7,000 "protection orders". Enquires in New Zealand show that since its inception the legal aid bill has risen fro $20m to an expected $100m this year.

Among the many contributors to "Contact between children and violent parents" is a summary by a NZ judge on the merits and working of the regime. Responses from New Zealand men paint a more jaundiced picture. Other contributors to the CBCAVP include Brenda Hoggett, a.k.a. Mrs Justice Hale.

We are well placed to counter any untoward influences if we act now. The closing date is Nov 1st.

For your copy, telephone 0171- 210-0642 and ask for "A consultation paper on Contact between children and violent parents." The extent of its reforms and lack of safeguards for men will shock you. To convey your views and opinions please write to: Mr Justice Wall, Royal Courts of Justice, Strand, London WC2. If you would like to participate in contributing to ManKind's official response (which has to be delivered by Nov 1st) contact our London Office at Suite 367

3p2

Suicide Prevention Effort Launched in America

- by Laura Meckler, A.P.

"Suicide is the eighth leading cause of death in the United States, claiming about 30,000 lives in 1997, compared with 19,000 homicides". In Washington DC the surgeon general today declared suicide a serious public health threat for the first time, launching an effort to educate school counselors, parents and even hairdressers on how to spot signs of trouble.

"This is a national tragedy and a public health problem demanding national leadership,'' said Tipper Gore, the vice president's wife, an advocate for mental health issues. "Let's talk about the reality of suicide in our national life,'' she said, "Let's encourage all Americans to get the help they need.'' She joined Surgeon General David Satcher in releasing a "call to action.'' "We must act now,'' Satcher said in his report. In 1980 there were 20,489 male victims as opposed to 6,363 female victims. The numbers in 1996 were 24,980 male victims and 5,899 female victims. The number of annual male victims increased by 449 lower the time frame, that of the annual female victims decreased by 464 over the same interval. It seems that whatever is being done to decrease the risk of suicide for women is working extremely well, in spite of the large increases in the number of women in poverty due to the escalating divorce rate. However, what works well for women appears to have the opposite effect on men at ten times the numbers. As to the 19,000 annual victims of homicide, the vast majority of those too are male.

British men fear to touch children - Richard Reeves and Martin Bright, The Observer, 25july99, p6

"....based on interviews with 1,000 men.... Such is the obsession with, and fear of, paedophilia in the UK that advertisers are being warned off using images of men with children. .... ....

"Adrienne Burgess, ...., said the report confirmed the British 'obsession' with child abuse.

"'The impact of some feminist critiques in the early 1960s, which said all men were rapists, was greater here than elsewhere. .... which makes it seem abnormal when a man does touch a child, sometimes even his own. ....'"

Domestic Violence

Some of the best research into domestic violence is by Dr. Malcolm George, of Queen Mary College, London. His analysis of some of the grave problems we face and the flaws in modern research are detailed in "Beyond All Help ?" - avaialbel from Dewar Research (£5.00).

"A Critique; Domestic Violence: a health care issue?", (Dewar Research) outlines the flaws in the BMA report of 1998 into domestic violence. Orders should be sent to; Dewar Research, Constables, Windsor Rd., Ascot SL5 7LF.

Understanding the sentencing of women

by Lindsay Jackall - Australia.

"The Home Office have just released British Research Study 170, which deals with the discrepancy betwen the sexes in jail and penal sanctions. It establishes beyond any doubt that women are treated significantly more leniently than men for the same crime.

"The difference, as you'd suspected, is that everyone, from the judge downwards tries their hardest to find "mitigating circumstances" [ie excuses] to let her off (this also extends to the Media). Judges interviewed this study also candidly admit to 'feelings' that women, especially mothers, should be treated more leniently. With mothers they feel that any punishment given to them will be suffered by the children but felt no such sympathy or connection for fathers with their children, who are

curiously 'blamed'. [this mindset hasn't changed since Hanging Judge Jeffereies - Ed].

Edited by Carol Hedderman and Loraine Gelsthorpe, it is availabel from the Home Office Research and Statistics Directorate London.

The full text can be downloaded at:

http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs/hors170.pdf.

"Women are not as hard, aggressive or predatory as men. They are more sensitive of others' feelings. A woman who gets on to drink and drugs often does so because her relationship with a man has gone wrong. The male quest for conquest, sensation and change is more likely to cause unhappiness than the female quest for affection, children and a stable home life." - Judge James Pickles, "Straight from the Bench", pub. Dent 1987, p83.

Erin Pizzey Writes

- sent in by Ted Diggins.

"I'm appalled by the decision to attempt to ban 'violent fathers' from seeing their children. In 30 years working with violence-prone people, I've treated just as many violent women as I have men. Fathers have been a political football for the past 30 years.

"There is a politically motivated, million-pound industry, run by political extremists, who have dedicated their lives to destroying family life in this country. The first step on their agenda is to remove fathers from their children and the second is to encourage women to go out to work.

"The third part of the programme is that children should be raised by the state. Home Office research shows that both men and women can be equally violent. When will the judicial war against fathers come to a halt? By staying silent, men and women in this country are condemning thousands of children to a fatherless life. Children need both mothering and fathering to become healthy, happy, mature adults." - Erin Pizzey, Family SOS. - Letter in the Daily Mail, 30june99, p58, by Erin Pizzey. Sent to Ill Eagle by Ted Diggins.

When Erin tried to publish her research results, that 62 out of the first 100 women who came to her pioneering refuge in Chiswick were as violent as the men they had left, she and her co-researchers were censored. They received death threats and other threats which led to her having police protection. In the end, for safety, she left the country. After fifteen years in exile she has now returned, and lives at a secret address, where I visited her. Text books on the law credit Erin's book on her experience in founding the first women's refuge, Scream quietly or the neighbours will hear, as having been the main factor in causing the courts to embark on a policy of ousting fathers from their homes. This is why the later discovery by her researchers, that her women were as violent as their menfolk, had to be censored out. This had to be suppressed in order to save the anti-man policy in our courts, which has continued for twenty years, resulting in the collapse of marriage and remarriage rates and the escalation of suicide among young men. Erin says that the feminists hijacked the domestic violence industry, and all her funding, and drove her out. They used violent threats. - Ed.

Lynette Burrows' book re-launched

Following hard on the heels of her 1998 book "The Fight for the Family, which lifted the lid on the mrky world of child abusers Lynette Burrows has released an updated edition.

Available from FET, (Tel 01865 -556848) it develops the interrelation between apparently innocuos pressure groups and the undisclosed network's secret agenda, involving for instance anti-smacking, run by a few political (not to mention sexual) extremists.

Law complaints system to close for one year

Francis Gibb, Legal Correspondent, The Times, 23july99, p1.

".... The crisis has reached such a pitch that members of the public are being told that their current complaints - about high fees, mishandling of cases, bad advice and delays - may not be dealt with for another year.

"The effective closure of the Office for the Supervision of Solicitors .... comes with some 25,000 complaints awaiting attention. .... complaints .... are rising by 300 every week."

With 80,000 solicitors in the country, this is far more than a backlog of three complaints per solicitor. Those solicitors working for large companies are unable to generate complaints from the public over their shoddy work.

Letter to Ill Eagle. ".... 25,000 complaints awaiting attention. ...." Whereas parliament set down that 'delay is not in the interest of children', nobody will be able to bring and resolve any complaint against incompetent, corrupt, drunk, deviant, or defrauding solicitors for a long time now. The self-regulating solicitors' body (by its failure to provide an effective complaints procedure) has closed its doors to anybody with information about solicitors whose conduct damages children.

"It thus comes as no surprise that Lord Woolf ruled it may be 'undesirable in the interests of justice' for a McKenzie Friend to witness the conduct of lawyers and judges in Britain's Secret Courts." - EH.

3p3

Editorial

Part 2 of Masculinity has to go into this issue because Part 1 went in the last issue. The fact that Part 2 is so good crept up on me, and it is impracticable for it to split off from Part 1, and migrate to its rightful place, Male View.

Another growing insight is into the behaviour of male rulers. Two sources, L and G, have independently told me that men divide into three groups; the rulers (5% to 10%), the wheeler-dealers, and the grovellers. We have to concentrate on the rulers, to try to understand why they are nonchalant about the current attack on the civil rights of young men, and actually assist in the attack.

The story goes as follows, and I shall embellish it later when I gain fuller understanding of it.

An important sub-class of our male rulers resemble psychopaths more closely than they resemble normal men. Whereas the unintelligent psychopath ends up in jail, the intelligent psychopath becomes a ruler.

Their characteristics are as follows. They are risk takers. They are indifferent to the effect of their actions on others. They are driven by power. Part of their concept of power is sexual, to have access to numerous women. They have a contempt for women. Extreme examples are Maxwell, Aitken, Goldenballs and so on. However, most of our current male rulers, including senior judges, are also in this class. They do not suffer from divorce as normal men do. The destruction of men by feminists and their agents gets rid of the competition, and so they welcome it and even collaborate.

This explains the partly feigned incomprehension shown by our male rulers, including our judges, when presented with the tragic impact of their policies on fathers and their children. They see children are trophies, not as human beings. (A female judge will screw you for sexist reasons, while a male judge will screw you and your children for pathological reasons.) They have to fail to comprehend, or it would be more difficult for them to connive in, or even engineer, their destruction of men in order to reduce the competition they face for positions of power.

Women do have empathy, but only for other women. When feminists drive for equality, equality is not the result. Rather, we end up with 90% women and 10% men. The few remaining men take the top positions. The power feminists, having driven out nearly all the men, need the small number of remaining powerful men to rule above them. For them, power is an aphrodisiac, so like the male rulers, their motivation is not only power (or empowerment, as they describe it,) but also sexual. The surprising result of radical feminist policy is not only polyandry lower down (=  a woman taking control of her sexuality), but the harem higher up.

The powerful man was brought to power by vested interests including the feminist lobby. He knows that, once in power, he will have to pay their price, which is to assist them in legislating against men.

Whereas L bemoans the stupidity of men in not defending themselves, G says that our children's main enemy is not the feminists, but powerful men.

ManKind and Ill Eagle can be reached at;

(1). Suite 367, 2, Lansdowne Row,

London W1X 8HL.

(2) 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/

Anti-dad ad makes me mad.

"The government's intention of screening a TV commercial to encourage children to report their violent fathers in cases of domestic violence .... is an outrageous and sinister development.

"To encourage children to report only one violent parent is highly sexist and pernicious, especially when there is now strong evidence to show that mutual combat is the norm in violent households. Not only does this approach deal with only half of the problem, it diminishes further the status of fathers, both in the eyes of children and society. It also negates the plight of those children who live with violent mothers.

"This advertisement uses public money to vilify men and to further confuse the emotions and loyalties of the unfortunate children of violent parents. Why is there no protest from children's charities?" - David Yarwood, letter in The Express, 28nov98

Why won't they just leave men alone?

"I am becoming more and more certain that there is a national commitment among the powers that be to diminish, demean and denigrate the male sex in its entirety. Every time I read a newspaper, be it national or local, ...., it seems there is yet another movement, or law passed or proposed, which hits men as hard as possible. .... men can .... be put in prison or fined huge sums if the fail to come up with maintenance. Why is it always believed that the man .... is actually the cause of the breakdown? Why can women act as badly as they like ....? Do women have no responsibility at all ....? .... there is just as much violence against men by their partners .... Women .... can .... be capricious, spiteful, and downright dangerous .... I feel that society has turned against men in a most devastating way .... - Heather Causnett, Yorkshire Evening Press, 6july99.

Boys' exam results plummet

The gulf between boys' and girls' exam results continues to widen .... 11 per cent more girls are obtaining five or more A-C grades. .... in some parts of the country boys' results have gone into freefall. .... Martin Bright, Observer, 20june99, p2.

GCSE girls are sprinting away from the boys

"The gap between boys and girls at GCSE has reached a record level, according to a new government analysis .... The gender gap had continued to widen throughout the school system. .... At GCSE, the gap has widened markedly since the start of the decade .... The gulf is most evident in the top grades, with one in 30 entries by boys awarded the coveted A* compared with almost one in 20 girls." - John O'Leary, The Times, 4aug99, p11.

No one spotted the problems looming in the fine print.

- Leader, The Guardian, 2july99.

Unpublished letter to The Guardian by Ill Eagle Ed; "Your first leader today about the CSA says; 'No one spotted the problem looming in the fine print.'

"I heard Ros Heppelwhite lecture to FNF AGM three months before she set up the CSA. (Her father deserted her family when she was two years old.) I told everyone that the CSA would self-destruct. FNF literature was full of prediction of disaster even before the CSA was set up, with reasons given. The Guardian refused to publish any material from Men's Organisations." Ten years later, Men's Organisations were again excluded from the consultation process leading to the current CSA 'reforms'.

"Will the Guardian now publish our current analysis, and predictions of future greater disaster and further escalation in the suicide rate among young men, to be caused by the 'reformed' CSA?" There was no reply, and the letter was not printed.

In The Sunday Telegraph, 18july99, p10, David Bamber reported;

"Solicitors 'admit to excessive charging'. .... NatWest bank's professions unit questioned more than 1,000 solicitors. .... only one per cent of solicitors took up the profession because they were interested in the law. One in 10 solicitors admitted they were in the profession purely because of the financial rewards."

Two barristers have told me I know more about the law than they do. I am shocked by the ignorance of lawyers, and their apathy except when it comes to taxing the case - jargon for their fees. - Ed

Absent Fathers

".... 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." - Daily Telegraph Leader, 27aug99.

Legal Aid

In 1996-7 the Legal Aid Board spent £392 million on matrimonial and divorce proceedings. The average cost to the legal aid board of ancillary relief proceedings connected to divorce was £1,759 and the average length of such proceedings was just over 2.5 years - Family Policy Studies Centre, Family Briefing Paper No. 10, June 1999.

3p4

Masculinity - are men in crisis or not? Part 2 - concluding article.

by Robert Whiston

For Crick, "Virtu", that is to say what is proper to a man, has the following attributes; "Courage, fortitude, audacity, skill and civic spirit - in fact a whole classical and renaissance theory of man...." The Shorter Oxford English Dictionary includes "valour" as essential.

Renaissance writers asked; "Does a state have 'virtu' among its citizens or not? Are there, in a word, citizens ?" [Citizen here means a Plebeian, male or female, with 'virtu' -Ed]. If a State had too few of these citizens, then it is doomed to a tyrannical personal rule; but if many, then a Republic can flourish, and will prove - the by now familiar argument - the stronger form of state." Crick (1970) then cites the Arabs and the Israelis - the Israelis dominate because the Arabs lack citizens with Virtu.

Of all the attributes 'civic spirit' is the least expected - it is not manly, nor sex related - but at the same time it is seen by all writers as an essentially male-only trait. To make more sense of "Civic spirit", one has to read in the Middle English used in the King James's Bible and Shakespeare. In the context of 20th century English one might say "for the common good", but that is a lack-lustre translation.

To test whether civic spirit is an aberrant component more befitting the Classical and Renaissance age and associated value systems, enquiries were recently made in the US, asking for definitions of masculinity. The response from young men was interesting. Despite their country's lack of classical or renaissance history, their replies make interesting reading;

".. tell them that men are altruistic, honourable, just, and fair-minded. That's the difference between us and them..."

".....I think that if the truth be known, men are honourable, generous, and fair people. (E.g., how many rich women do you know who have married a man who had no career or significant income ? Now reverse the genders and do the same tally)".

".... I think that women, especially feminists (male ones too) are less honest and altruistic, being more interested in themselves than in others."

"...... in the political arena, women seem to do what's best for themselves first, then come others, and then maybe, way down the list, they'll do what's right for men, as long as it also benefits them, or at the very least, doesn't hurt them".

".. as for Amneus, I think that while his ideas are sound and valid, his methods will not work in current American society. Women run things here, despite what feminists say, and his methods are too alienating to women for them to work. You have to allow women to save face (pride is another big issue) and his methods don't do that. Feminists may have shamed men into co-operating, but I also think that men are basically really fair and just people; I don't feel that women will act like men in this regard, so a different approach is needed, one that allows for excuses, copping out, and saving face. Unsavoury though that might be, it's the only way to get any co-operation from the (female) powers that be".

The above comments could come from any man in any country in the Western world. They are universal and archetypal.

If that is true, then one immediately sees why Angela Philips (who gave a keynote speech to a Home Office seminar) is so dreadfully wrong and dangerous in her approach to 'Macho'. Her idea that school boys should "talk about the hidden agenda of educational failure" cuts across all natural laws of masculine cultural norms. Her recipe for "bolstering boy's self-esteem" is to ensure boys are able "to shine" through "music, drama and dance". This proposed remedy can only be damaging to the male psyche which instinctively pushes in the opposite direction. Young men aspiring to attain 'virtu' in the Classical, Renaissance and Modern age can-not identify with "music, drama and dance" [or nursery education, see Burgess,] as their primary outlet.

'Macho' is an essential element of male identity. Even in the negative scenario of U.S. city gangs it contains all the ingredients politicians need to hold a nation-state together; honour, defence of turf, duty and loyalty. Macho implies knowingly taking risks and accepting those risks. Risk-taking makes boys into men. Ms. Phillips tells us that we should shy away

from "macho attitudes" and reject "outmoded stereotypes of masculinity". But in the 1960's that Angela Phillips and other feminists refer to Macho was not a pejorative term. Spanish dictionaries show it in a positive and praiseworthy light. In contrast, the Shorter Oxford Dictionary of 1975 as well as the 1980 edition don't list macho or machismo.

Boys inevitably see themselves as young men, and younger men have always sought acceptance and approval by older men. Young men have thus always need a 'rite of passage' in some form. This is crucial if we are to attain a caring, balanced society.

Historically, jobs, apprenticeships and even wars served as rites of passage. The average age of our fighting 'men' (from Agincourt to D-Day to the Tet Offensive) has consistently been 19 years of age.

Today, with no wars and no jobs, what answers have the Social Engineers ? How are they going to 'create men' ?

For the past 15 years the situation has deteriorated and young men have been denied their basic human rights. Disenfranchised and de-constructed young men face the prospect of being created and moulded according to feminist dogma. New Gov't initiatives sees Society on the brink of launching itself into another 15 year term of social re-engineering. Engineering aimed at reducing lone mothers hood, teenage pregnancies and soaring young male suicides.

The question has to be asked as to whether after this second 15 years, we will have learnt enough about our mistakes to throw out the manuals and acknowledge human rights for both sexes, and return to men their confiscated Human Rights and Civil Liberties ?

Adrienne Burgess's reply:-

Dear Robert [Whiston],

I very much enjoyed your essay. I love the concept of 'virtu'.

Courage, fortitude, audacity and civic spirit ! Truly wonderful as a definition of positive masculinity. Oh, but can't I - a woman - be that too? My father (and mother) certainly brought me up with that spirit!

Masculinity I suppose means 'appertaining to a man'. But psychologists have always got themselves into a mess when they dub qualities 'masculine' or 'feminine' because they keep finding each of them in both sexes, and often mixed in the same person. For example, autonomy and expressiveness - or what the psychologists would have once called 'masculinity' and 'femininity' - are qualities which often coexist, in the most remarkable and valuable way, in the one human being - male or female. They are not polar opposites - you can be high in both or low in both. So cannot women, too, have 'virtu'?

I think your final question is where it is at - with no wars, and no traditionally 'masculine' jobs, what is to become of the male 'virtu'? The answer has to be, that new arenas have to be identified as suitable places for men to exercise courage, fortitude, audacity and civic spirit. This may include rediscovering areas where men's presence was once valued, but which today have become so identified with women that some men may feel their masculinity would be compromised if they were to enter them. For example, maybe it's time to recall that in the early days of nursery education, in the nineteenth century, almost all nursery school teachers were men..

[My italics - Ed.]

I hope you will be able to use your essay, or part of it, in ManKind. - AB

Editor comments. Column 2; music, drama, dance (my italics). This column; courage, fortitude, audacity and civic spirit followed by nursery education. With uncomprehending friends like Phillips and Burgess, what need do our young men have for enemies! The inability of women and their poodle-men - Boateng and the rest - having hijacked the scene, to grasp how to enable young males to flourish is here for all to see. Also, we all know that today, if a man really wants to go to jail, he should try teaching in a nursery. - Ed.

Reading List

With your help, Ill Eagle will develop a list of recommended books. Many thanks to Edward Crabtree for starting the list. - Ed.

3p5

Railroading all men accused of Rape

"Speaking up for Justice" is an interdepartmental report published in June 1998 by the Home Office (250 pages).

The General Election manifesto of the Labour Party (pre May 1996) stated that "greater protection will be provided for victims in rape and serious sexual offences trials and for those subject to intimidation including witnesses". Tracking its progress, it is a rush to justice.

Almost fortuitously, in 1996 the Ralston Edwards case (we still do not know the plaintiff's name) too advantage of the freedom for a defendant, without legal representation, to cross-examine his accuser extensively. In 1997 a similar set of circumstances occurred in another rape case. In both cases it was pointed out that judges already have wide discretion to limit the defendant's time and line of examination if they feel it "inappropriate", and that the discretion can be exercised at any time.

The Home Secretary, Jack Straw, announced in June 1997 that he was setting up an "interdepartmental" working group. The "interdepartmental" tag gives the impression that bodies outside Gov't would be excluded. Apart from the Home office and related senior Whitehall dept, the Women Unit, Victim Support, Local Gov't Association (all associated with anti-male activities in other arenas) were included.

The interdepartmental working group first met on 1aug97, and met monthly thereafter. The working group, because the remit was so wide, considered it "very important to seek opinions and views on issues that needed to be addressed…. from interested parties and individuals". A literature review was commissioned. This was complied by Robin Elliot (female) of the Home Office Statistical Directorate and covered UK and overseas developments. Its findings are mentioned as being in Annex A. However, Annex A cannot be found in the "Contents" list.

The "working group" wrote to 84 organisations, inviting them to submit written comments. Not one men's or fathers' group was approached. Thus a balanced picture was impossible.

The speed, if not the thoroughness, of the Report is exemplified by the fact that two conferences "to test out some of the ideas" were held in Oct and Nov 1997. Magistrates, the judiciary, the legal profession and a "wide range of non-governmental organisations" accepted invitations. The working group later reported that they found this dialogue most useful.

Again, men's and fathers' groups were not invited.

The organisations approached and who responded are set out in Annex B and are listed below:-

Rape Crisis Federation

Women's Aid Foundation

National Council for women

Child and Women Abuse studies (University of N. London).

Women Against Rape

Cleveland Rape and Sexual Counselling Service

Doncaster Rape and Sexual Abuse Counselling Centre

London Rape Crisis Centre

South Essex Rape Crisis Centre

Doncaster Rape Crisis

Milton Keynes Rape Crisis Centre

North Staffs Rape Crisis

South Cheshire Rape Crisis Centre

Tyneside Rape Crisis Centre

Leicester Rape Crisis Centre

First Net

British Assoc. of Women Police

Female Aggression

BBC 'Midlands Today' news programme reported the ordeal of a Halesowen girl who was kidnapped by two women. The girls was driven around town in the back of a car for several hours and subjected to verbal abuse, slaps and punches. Police are still searching for the assailants.

In the same programme, two women employed as care workers at the Sunfield Residential Home were found guilty at Worcs. Crown Court of a "catalogue of incidents of abuse and violence" dating from 19995-98. The prosecution alleged that the two had not only "kicked and punched patients", but shown spite toward them. BBC 20/7/99

Ottawa

According to a new Canadian study, women are just as violent to their spouses as men, and women are almost three times more likely to initiate violence in a relationship. The current study, which will appear again, in the Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science - says that while the need to stop violence against women is obvious, violence against men is being ignored.

"Our society seems to harbour an implicit acceptance of women's violence as relatively harmless," writes Marilyn Kwong, the Simon Fraser University researcher who led this study.

"Furthermore, the failure to acknowledge the possibility of women's violence ... jeopardises the credibility of all theory and research directed toward ending violence against women." But this "new" study of 705 Alberta men and women that reported how often males hit their spouses was conducted in 1987, not 1999. Until now, the full results have never been published.

Because it focussed on "how often males hit their spouses", at the time it was pounced on by feminist groups as evidence of an epidemic of violence against women.

The study shows that roughly 10.8% of men in the survey pushed, grabbed or threw objects at their spouses in the previous year, while 2.5% committed more severe acts, such as choking, kicking or using a weapon. By contrast, 12.4% of women committed acts of minor violence and 4.7% committed severe violence.

The original Alberta study was published in the Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science in 1989, and although the researchers asked women the same questions as men, their answers were never published until now [see infamous "Hackney" survey. - Ed]. Now it is to be republished in full by the same journal.

It didn't help society to understand when the researchers, Leslie Kennedy and Dutton, said at the time they were primarily interested in male-to-female violence. [Whether this is true or whether they feared harassment and reprisal by women's groups a la Straus ad Gelles is not revealed - Ed]

In the following year the 'Kennedy-Dutton study', as it became known, was cited extensively. In 1990, it forced Brian Mulroney (the former Canadian prime minister) to call a two-year, $10-million national inquiry into violence against women.

The inquiry's 460-page report made 494 recommendations aimed at changing attitudes in governments, police departments, courts, hospitals and churches. It also led to a torrent of lurid news features about battered women. (see Senator Cools. Ill Eagle, June 99)

Courts show teeth to wifely assassin

A wife who shot dead her husband as he slept in bed has been given a 'life' sentenced of 15 years. The jury rejected Mrs. Kim Galbraith's (30) claim that she had endured years of sexual abuse from her policeman husband and that she has been driven to the verge of insanity. She was found guilty of creeping upstairs, laying down next to her sleeping husband, and shooting him at point blank range through the back of the head with his own hunting rifle.

After she murdered her husband, she wrecked the house to make it look like the shooting was part of a break in. She told police 2 masked burglars broke in shoot her husband and then raped her.

Mr Galbraith's 2 year old daughter is being looked after not by his parents - but by the parents of his wife who is now in jail ! [In the UK all firearms have to be securely locked in a 1/4" thick steel cabinet at all times - Ed].

Women groups are outraged, and Dr Mairead Tagg (Glasgow psychologist) and member of Women's Aid said they planned to campaign of Mrs Galbraith's behalf.

- Daily Telegraph 5june99

A parody on fathers.

A young man asks his father if he loves him. “No,” Dad replies. “Look, son. Like most fathers over the past 30 years, I didn't give a shit. I dumped you and your mom, ran off with my attractive Secretary, and only saw you because a court order said I had to. Sure, I was rich, but I paid child support late or not at all. ... Can’t you take a hint?”

From What women want

pub. Virago 1996

Meaningful equality. However, this is a hopeless dream while patriarchy is a male power and privilege which favours men's interests at every class level throughout society - Hazel, Sheffield, p30

3p6

Marriage "is about more than just children"

Sourcehttp://www.the-times.co.uk/news/pages/Times/frontpage.html?105124

- Dominic Kennedy, The Times, June 1 1999

"MARRIAGE is good for childless couples and ministers should stop treating it as just a useful way to bring up children, say government advisers. In an attack on Labour's 'pro-family' agenda, a panel says that people should be encouraged to marry even if they have no desire to become parents.

"The annual report of the Lord Chancellor's Advisory Board on Family Law, a body that advises on divorce policy, expresses concern that, to the Government, "the institution of marriage is seen predominantly within the context of the welfare of children". The board says: "Members consider that there are a number of positive socio-economic benefits to marriage and to stable relationships for couples who do not have children. These should not be overlooked." The focus of their attack is the Green Paper Supporting Families, which supports marriage on the ground that it "does provide a strong foundation for stability for the care of children".

"Following Labour's strategy of moving the emphasis of family values towards helping children rather than promoting marriage, the last Budget also used the theme supporting families, and abolished the married couple's allowance.

"The advisory board is chaired by Sir Thomas Boyd-Carpenter, the former Deputy Chief of Defence Staff. The members include Mr Justice Wall of the High Court Family Division".

Dear Mr. Justice Wall,

Children Act Sub-Committee of the Advisory Board on Family Law.

We have now had an opportunity to review "Contact Between Children and Violent Parents" and can detect several fundamental flaws.

We have also had time to begin collating experiences from New Zealand fathers as to how this legislation works in practice. The results to date are not encouraging.

Many judges in the UK depend on Court Welfare Officers (CWO) reports when 'sentencing' children in divorce cases. They assume the reports to be exercises in objectivity. This is not the case. CWO's are Probation Workers who have undergone either zero or three days of "training". As such they are not sufficiently qualified to pass opinion in such important matters. We use the word opinion advisedly as the core of the Probation Service, and Home Office branch responsible for it, is presently convulsed by internal reviews and external scrutiny.

Recently in the High Court a Chief Probation Officer conceded that his profession does not have professional standards, benchmarks or guidelines. Also conceded was the fact that no research is undertaken into outcomes of their opinions i.e. father custody .v. mother custody. In addition they have no library listing preferred and essential reading for officers. They have undertaken no investigation as to the efficacy of, for instance shared parenting and cannot state why they are implacably opposed to it.

The NAPO document defining equality (which is essential reading to understand the mind set of ACPO and CWO's) states that every effort should be made to ensure that mothers are given custody of children because women are "always oppressed" - even when it is obvious that they are not.

It is against this backdrop that we are alarmed to find the Sub-Committee adopting the ACPO definition of domestic violence.

Nowhere in NAPO or ACPO policy statements is there a hint that violent women will also be barred from seeing their children - or that women can be as violent (if not more so) than men.

Nowhere in recent newspapers stories or the Sub-Committee's paper is there a hint that violent women will also be barred from seeing their children. And nowhere in the New Zealand legislation is there a hint that violent women will also be barred from seeing their children.

In fact, the presumption in the consultation paper is that violence can only come from fathers.

We feel it is unhelpful and unworkable to adopt the ACPO definition of domestic violence. We feel it is a wrong to include emotional and psychological harm or 'perceived' threats. It would then, we feel, become a Blackmailer's Charter.

Our reasoning is that such a test is totally subjective and would immediately bring the whole procedure into disrepute - as has happened with Unreasonable Behaviour in the divorce courts. The upshot would be to further politicise the subject of family life to the advantage of anti-family activists.

Already responses from New Zealand fathers indicate that this antipathy and contempt for the law has taken hold.

Thus we firmly believe that the proposals will only drag down the law's reputation while failing to address the suppressed levels of violence perpetrated by women against men and children (see attached).

Yours sincerely,

Robert Whiston. Chairman, UKMM.

Parents are always in the wrong

"'He never hurt me. It was all blown out of proportion by the social services,' said 15-year-old Georgina Brundle, after her father had been arrested and held in a cell for six hours following her complaint of assault. .... Mr. Brundle explained that he had fears for his daughter's welfare when, after taking up with a black 25-year-old American serviceman at Lakenheath air base nearby, and starting to consort with undesirable friends among whom drugs were common, she had been absent for four days. ....

".... the welfare service .... took his daughter into 'care' while he was locked up in a police cell. Care meant returning her to unsuitable friends in .... a dosshouse, from which she emerged with a ring in her nose. She .... preferred to go back to her family.

".... the rules they have to apply were drawn up by mindless fanatics. Whatever a child says must be believed. .... they have sought to transfer some of the revulsion that attaches to a practising paedophile upon a parent who speaks roughly to his child. ...." - Auberon Waugh, Sunday Telegraph, 1aug99, p31.

The rape reform that makes all men guilty

- Melanie Phillips, Sunday Times, 4july99, sect. 1 p17. Within days, this article was on websites round the world.

"....There is overwhelming evidence that women initiate domestic violence at least as much as men. The Home Office itself has published research [jan99, study no. 191] showing that 4.2% of men and 4.2% of women said they had been assaulted by their current or former spouse or lover. Shouldn't the government be launching a drive against all violence, committed against men as well as women? ....

"The amount of violence in marriage is small (most violence takes place between cohabitants and lovers). ...."

Melanie's article is packed with important, well researched statistics. Ill Eagle can supply a copy in return for a s.a.e.

melaniephillips@msn.com

Police keep back vital video in rape trial

A judge at Nottingham Crown Court demanded to know why police had failed to reveal a video that conclusively proved a man's innocence.

The tape from a teenager's night club showed the 16 alleged rape victim happily walking out with the 18 year old man (who we shall not name!). She had claimed to police of him "dragging" her forcibly out of the club, and raping her. The young man's defence lawyer commented, "Another fascinating thing about this case was that the police 'decided she should phone the defendant' in an attempt to incriminate him - in fact it provided more evidence of innocence for the defence than the prosecution.

- Daily Telegraph 20/5/99.

A legal shambles

The present anti-father initiative will pile damage onto existing destruction. On the allied matter of ousters, the following quotes are historic.

In Richards v Richards [1983] 2 All E.R., p811, Judge Pennant, when evicting a husband from his home,

3p7

said; "I think it is thoroughly unjust to turn out this father, but justice no longer seems to play a part in this branch of the law." (He felt he had to follow Samson v Samson.) On p818, Lord Scarman said; ".... [regarding ouster orders], The statutory provision is a hotch-potch of enactments of limited scope passed into law to meet specific situations or to strengthen the powers of specified courts. The sooner .... these powers .... are rationalised .... the better. .... ....The courts have .... sought to establish a common basis of principle in deciding whether or not to make an ouster order. They have signally failed."

Lord Scarman also addresses the problem that if fathers are ousted in large numbers, that might transgress the mantra; "The interests of the children come first." He is old fashioned enough to think that a child might need its father. Of course, we know that there is no problem really. The mantra is always interpreted as "The interests of the woman come first." The whole system comprehensively ignores the interests of children, and damages them in many ways. The reason why the myth that all men are violent is promoted so heavily is in order to get round the mantra "the interests of the children come first". It is clearly not in the best interests of a child to cut it off from its father. That is why all fathers have to be criminalised, to validate the expropriation of their homes and children in the face of the supposedly ruling mantra.

My son fell victim to playtime paranoia

- Anonymous, The Observer, 25july99, p6

"A fellow parent had spotted another boy from his class examining my [four year old] son's bottom. .... Such is the current climate .... the head teacher agreed to hold an enquiry. .... the mortified parents of the other boy were humiliated .... My son .... [said] .... that he had not been interfered with. Finally, the issue was dropped.

"Months later I am still angry over how unnecessary and upsetting the whole incident was."

Man overboard

"MAN O MAN (Saturday ITV) is a primitive and utterly degrading exhibition of human beings. I cannot believe men participate in this humiliating programme.

"Imagine the national outrage there would be if roles were reversed and ten women were chased, booed, inspected and pushed into swimming pools by a studio audience of critical but enthusiastic men in an attempt to find the most physically attractive." - Lucy Pollock, Radio Times 31july/ 6aug99, p122.

Scouts facing crisis over leaders'

social stigma

Scout groups are closing at the rate of four a week even though an estimated 80,000 boys are waiting to join .... A shortage of adult volunteers has created one of the worst membership crises within the history of the Scout Association. .... the decline will dismay officials at the Mental Health Foundation, .... lack of opportunities .... were behind the failure of young people to thrive emotionally. .... one in five teenagers suffers from psychological problems and one in 10 requires professional help ....

There is a stigma attached to being a volunteer, added Jo Tupper, a spokeswoman for the Scout Association. "If a man says I want to work with young boys, people jump to one conclusion. ...." - Linda Jackson, Sunday Telegraph, 25july99, p10.

Damn this demonising of we men

[Even a journalist or editor with fractured grammar should not be cut off from children. - Ed]

".... if I saw that crying child, I would not go to help. I would have to curb my instincts. ....

"It is 12 years since more than 200 children were seized from their parents in Cleveland by .... Higgs and .... Wyatt. .... The £4million .... Butler-Sloss inquiry cleared the parents ..... and criticised Higgs and Wyatt. .... But in 1997 the two doctors .... star guests at a conference called Cleveland .... continued to propound the discredited theories of mass abuse. [Stuart Bell, the local M.P., quit his front-bench post in order to deal with the Cleveland child abuse crisis. I strongly recommend his book When Salem came to the Boro, pub. Pan 1988 - Ed] .... What is the point of demonising men and their paternal instincts to the point where decent, well-meaning people are frightened to help their communities by teaching, or leading Scout troops, or coaching the local under-11 football team? .... if .... a little child has to remain frightened and alone because men don't dare help, then that is a victory not for good, but for evil." - David Thomas, Daily Mail, 27july99.

The best interests of the children

"That there would be one or several books about the Cleveland child abuse crisis was inevitable. That it should be about the families was less so. Those families .... might give evidence to the judicial enquiry .... this evidence would be held in private and the public would never know what .... [the parents] and their children had endured. The decision that the families' stories should be told in private was made in the best interests of the children, but it meant that the public would never understand the full extent of the crisis .... The comparison between the Cleveland crisis and the Salem witch-hunts stood out a mile. ...." - Stuart Bell M.P., When Salem came to the Boro, pub. PAN, 1988, p353.

Cleveland Boro settled one million pounds in damages on the victim families that they had attacked. Parliament then rushed through immunity legislation for councils and social workers so that the Orkney and Rochdale victim families only received a written apology from their local councils.

So much damage is being done in secret to our children in so many places, secrecy being in the best interests of incompetent and destructive officials, that I believe the time has come when each and every one of us must repudiate secrecy wherever it raises its ugly head - Ed.

".... in the darkness of secrecy all sorts of things can go wrong. .... in public you can see that the judge does behave himself .... it keeps everyone in order." - Lord Denning on radio in 1960.

In a disgraceful Appeal Court decision this July, Lord Woolf has decided that any judge can exclude any Mackenzie Friend (meaning the very able amateur lawyer Dr. Michael Pelling, who is too good for them) from any secret court without giving significant reason. Pelling, who knows the law, has been forcing ignorant and high-handed judges to obey the law, so he had to go. - Ed

Men's Health Prostate Cancer

Prostate Cancer, rarely mentioned and more rarely funded by Gov't, is, after lung cancer the biggest killer of men. Only breast cancer in women compares with the mortality of Prostrate Cancer.

For this reason all men should regularly visit their GP for a check up. Inflammation of the Prostate gland doesn't men you have cancer but it does gives doctors time to detect it and take correctives moves. An exploratory diagnoses by your GP takes only 3 minutes.

The prostate gland is positioned under the bladder and surrounds the urinary tract to the penis. When it becomes inflamed it pressures both the bladder and the tract. Secretions from the prostate keep the urinary tract moistened and healthy. The most common form of prostate irritation is the non-cancerous "benign prostate hyperplasia" (BHP)

The symptoms of BHP include; frequently getting up in the night to pass water; difficulty or delay in passing urine; urine trickling out after urination; a weakened urinary flow over the last 12 months; a "stinging or burning sensation" when urinating; a feeling that the bladder is not fully empty.

Any of the above symptoms means you should see your GP as soon as possible.

You should see your GP as a matter of URGENCY if you have any of the following symptoms; passing blood with your urine; a "stinging or burning sensation" when urinating; when your bladder is full you have to urinate immediately.

From What Women Want

pub. Virago 1996

To be taken seriously by male colleagues .... for contributions .... different in style. - Laura, Oxford, p35.

3p8

After 20 years of domestic violence research, scientists can't avoid hard facts

Source: http://motherjones.com/mother_jones/MJ99/updike.html

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.

When the 1980 study was released, it was so controversial that some of the researchers received death threats. Advocates for battered women were outraged because the data seemed to suggest that the risk of injury from domestic violence is as high for men as it is for women, which isn't true. Whether or not women are violent themselves, they are much more likely to be severely injured or killed by domestic violence, so activists dismissed the findings as meaningless.

But Moffitt's research emerges in a very different context -- namely, that of a movement that is older, wiser, and ready to begin making sense of uncomfortable truths. Twenty years ago, "domestic violence" meant men hitting women. Period. That was the only way to understand it or to talk about it. But today, after decades of research and activism predicated on

that assumption, the number of women killed each year in domestic violence incidents remains distressingly high: a sobering 1,326 in 1996, compared with 1,600 two decades earlier. In light of the persistence of domestic violence, researchers are beginning to consider a broader range of data, including the possible significance of women's violence.

This willingness to pay attention to what was once considered reactionary nonsense signals a fundamental conceptual shift in how domestic violence is being studied.

Violence in the home has never been easy to research. Even the way we measure it reflects the kind of murky data that has plagued the field. For instance, one could argue that the number of fatalities resulting from domestic violence is not the best measure of the problem, as not all acts of brutality end in death. It is, however, one of the few reliable statistics in a field where concrete numbers are difficult to come by. Many nonlethal domestic violence incidents go unreported or are categorized as something else -- aggravated assault, simple assault -- when they are reported. But another reason we haven't been able to effectively measure domestic violence is that we don't understand it, and, because we don't understand it, we haven't been able to stop it. Money and ideology are at the heart of the problem.

For years, domestic violence research was underfunded and conducted piecemeal, sometimes by researchers with more zeal for the cause of battered women than training in research methodology. The results were often ideology-driven "statistics," such as the notorious (and false) claim that more men beat their wives on Super Bowl Sunday, which dramatized the cause of domestic violence victims but further confused an already intricate issue. In 1994, Congress asked the National Research Council, an independent Washington, D.C., think tank, to evaluate the state of knowledge about domestic abuse. The NRC report concluded that "this field of research is characterized by the absence of clear conceptual models, large-scale databases, longitudinal research, and reliable instrumentation."

Moffitt is part of a new wave of domestic violence researchers who are bringing expertise from other areas of study, and her work is symbolic of the way scientists are changing their conception of the roots of domestic violence.

"[She] is taking domestic violence out of its standard intellectual confines and putting it into a much larger context, that of violence in general," says Daniel Nagin, a crime researcher and the Theresa and H. John Heinz III Professor of Public Policy at Carnegie Mellon University.

Moffitt is a developmental psychologist who has spent most of

her career studying juvenile delinquency, which was the original focus of her research. She started interviewing her subjects about violence in their relationships after 20 years of research into other, seemingly unrelated aspects of their lives: sex and drug-use habits, criminal activities, social networks and family ties, and signs of mental illness.

"I had looked at other studies of juvenile delinquency," Moffitt says, "and saw that people in their 20s were dropping out of street crime, and I wondered, 'Are all of these miraculous recoveries where they're just reforming and giving up crime? Or are they getting out of their parents' home and moving in with a girlfriend and finding victims who are more easily accessible?' So I decided we'd better not just ask them about street violence, but also about violence within the home, with a partner."

What she found was that the women in her study who were in violent relationships were more like their partners, in many ways, than they were like the other women in the study. Both the victims and the aggressors in violent relationships, Moffitt found, were more likely to be unemployed and less educated than couples in nonviolent relationships. Moffitt also found that "female perpetrators of partner violence differed from nonviolent women with respect to factors that could not be solely the result of being in a violent relationship." Her research disputes a long-held belief about the nature of domestic violence: If a woman hits, it's only in response to her partner's attacks.

The study suggests that some women may simply be prone to violence -- by nature or circumstance -- just as some men may be.

Moffitt's findings don't change the fact that women are much more at risk in domestic violence, but they do suggest new ways to search for the origins of violence in the home. And once we know which early experiences can lead to domestic violence, we can start to find ways to intervene before the problem begins.

Prevention is a controversial goal, however, because it often calls for changes in the behavior of the victim as well as the batterer, and for decades activists have been promoting the seemingly opposite view. And even though it is possible to talk about prevention without blaming victims or excusing abusers, the issue is a minefield of preconceived ideas about gender, violence, and relationships, and new approaches may seem too scary to contemplate.

In domestic violence research, it seems, the meaning of any

new data is predetermined by ideological agendas set a longtime ago, and the fear that new information can be misinterpreted can lead to a rejection of the information itself. In preparing this column, I called a well-known women's research organization and asked scientists there about new FBI statistics indicating a substantial recent increase in violent crime committed by girls ages 12 to 18. The media contact told me the organization had decided not to collect any information about those statistics and that it didn't think it was a fruitful area of research, because girls are still much more likely to be victims of violence than perpetrators.

It's impossible to know yet whether such numbers are useful, whether they're a statistical blip or a trend, or whether the girls committing violent crimes now are more likely to end up in violent relationships. But to ignore them on principle -- as activists and researchers ignored the data about women's violence years ago -- is to give up on determining the roots of violence, which seem to be much more complicated than whether a person is born with a Y chromosome.

What's clear is that women's and girls' violence is not meaningless, either for researchers or for the women themselves. It turns out that teenage girls who commit violent crimes "are two times more likely than juvenile male offenders to become victims themselves in the course of the offending incident," according to an FBI report. I'd like to hear more about that, please, not less. Moffitt's findings about women's violence and the FBI statistics are invitations to further research -- not in spite of the fact that so many women are being beaten and killed every year, but because of it.

from What Women Want

pub. Virago 1996

Respect! A voice! Recognition! Position!

- F.A., p161

Ill Eagle 4, sep99

4p1

Expedient in the interests of corrupt and incompetent judges and lawyers

In his biography of Lord Denning, p117, Edmund Heward wrote unmistakably about secret courts.

"Denning was a good friend of the Press, believing that the reporter was the watchdog of justice. .... Speaking in Adelaide in 1967 he criticised the provisions of the Criminal Justice Bill, which prohibited full reporting of criminal proceedings in the Magistrates Courts. He said: 'Every court should be open to every subject of the Queen. I think it is one of the essentials of justice being done in the community. Every judge, in a sense, is on trial to see that he does his job properly.' Again he once said: 'Reporters are there, representing the public, to see that magistrates and judges behave themselves. Children's courts should also be open. .... proceedings should never be conducted behind closed doors.' This does not happen in the High Court, even today. Proceedings about the custody, care and control, access and maintenance of children are held in private. Ninety percent of High Court work is done privately, in chambers, by Masters and Registrars."

I had come across the mantra "expedient in the interests of the child" for some years. It was used to justify secrecy at many levels, resulting in widespread, multiple damage to our children. However, our corrupt, incompetent courts ran into difficulty when no children were present or involved. The crisis first arose when Michael Pelling tried to get the hearing held in public when lawyers' fees were to be determined ("Taxation" in brogue). He lost in the court of appeal, in a scurrilous judgement which defied reason and justice. So, more than five years ago, we already had the absurd situation when it was allegedly in the interests of the child that nobody should hear about how judge and barrister talked through how much taxpayers' Legal Aid money the one should award to the other. Further attacks on the proper, open conduct of a court appeared in "Consultation paper on Part IV of the Family Law Act 1996 dated mar97. On p12 clause 43 it substitutes "expedient in the interests of justice" for "expedient in the interests of the child". Thus, in spite of the fact that they are all Denning men, our judges found it necessary to sidle deeper under the mantle of secrecy.

Now, The Times of wed18aug99 Law Report on Regina v Bow County Court, ex parte Pelling, reports Lord Woolf of all people increasing the depths of secrecy even further and betraying his June95 Interim Report "Access to Justice" (available on Warwick University's website). Whereas in june95 he was even more rabid than I am about the failure of our court system, chiefly complaining about cost, his irresponsible 18aug99 Judgement intentionally increases costs and also increases secrecy. The full report will come out later in FLR. Send s.a.e. to Ed for a copy. Richard Gregory, editor of FNF's Mackenzie, published a good article on the case in The Times, 17aug99, p21.

Fathers angry over child-access ruling

- Frances Gibb, The Times, 6aug99

"Divorced fathers seeking contact with their children are angry about a court ruling [by Thorpe july99] that says they have no right to question the court [welfare] officer [CWO] who recommends whether they can see their children. .... the court ruled that it is a matter for the discretion of the judge in the particular case and they are within their rights to refuse. ...."

This is an example of the way court secrecy and gagging orders limit the information available to those who publish on the crisis. Gibb does not know the half of it. CWOs are actually probation officers with only criminal training. Judges sense that the CWO is so vulnerable in her ignorance that a parent is not allowed to bring expert witnesses who are leaders in the field of child psychology and the like to interview a child involved, or to testify, either verbally or in writing. (Defending this immunity from scrutiny, one CWO said; "Research is not relevant. What is relevant is the distress of the child." Argument that the child might be upset by competent interviewing is used by ignorant CWOs to justify their exclusive access to children of divorce, and the exclusivity of their written and verbal testimony.) Judges do not know that CWOs are untrained, but suspect enough to fear the presence of child experts in their courts, or even expert written contribution, and so ban them. Judges dare not have their ignorant CWOs exposed, even in our secret family courts, for fear that the news might leak out. That is a measure of how insecure participants feel in the destructive mess which is our family courts. The other arm of their arrogance and fear and indifference to the public interest is Woolf's barring of experts in the law like Pelling, as discussed in this issue and the last issue of Ill Eagle. The court is denied both child expertise and legal expertise, and so inflicts maximum damage on its victims. Judges want no one present who has proper expertise on children or proper expertise in violations of the law or human rights. Such violations are pandemic, and proliferate in total secrecy and ignorance. - Ed

Before promotion to the Court of Appeal, Thorpe announced to a startled barrister that the crime of bigamy in the 1861 Violence against the Person Act was for the protection only of women., totally ignoring the wording of the act, which begins "Whosoever shall ...." In spite of this gaffe, he still got promoted to the Court of Appeal, but only after his arch rival Ward beat him to it. Our children are in the hands of third rate minds - Ed

(Ignorant Thorpe) x (ignorant CWOs) = chaos²

To The Rt. Hon. Justice Thorpe,

Civil Appeals Office,

Royal Courts of Justice WC2A 2LL

Dear Sir, I was in court on 29july99 [re A Minors] when you ruled that there was no right of cross-examination of a Court Welfare Officer [CWO]. You also said:

"The CWO is the most important limb of the inquisitorial process;

"They may not even be required to attend the Hearing, although they often do;

"It is very rare for the CWO even to be sworn-in;

"They are highly experienced people and the Family Courts rely on their findings."

What is the basis for your blind faith in people who posess no relevant professional qualification and have received no training whatsoever in how to conduct their so-called "inquisitorial" function? [As discussed in my book "The Hook and the Sting", available on my website,, I have also heard Thorpe say in court that the Family Courts are Inquisitorial. - Ed]

You appear to have very little knowledge of what actually happens in the lower courts, as opposed to what you think happens.

CWO's reports regularly contain substantive errors and omit vital information. When they are cross-examined, their statements are regularly shown to be untruthful, ill-informed and highly prejudiced against the non-resident mother or father. Judges regularly throw their reports out.

You suggest that it is perfectly safe for Courts to place greater reliance upon CWOs that on Expert Witnesses. Expert witnesses .... typically, would have undergone at least 5 years' training and must have passed rigorous examinations.

Why shield CWOs from cross-examination ....?

- Tony Coe, Equal Parenting Party, www.EqualParenting.org 0171 589 9003

4p2

Judge is reprimanded for indecency incident

- Jo Butler, Western Mail, 10sep99, also 25aug99.

"A judge cautioned by police for gross indecency has been 'severely reprimanded' by the Lord Chancellor Lord Irvine."

This judge can operate in total secrecy in his court in Wrexham, with legal experts like Pelling and experts on children debarred from court, between his public sessions down the road in the public convenience, where he was caught getting up to no good with another man.

We should not have the likes of District Judge Hoffman free to make decisions on our children's future in secret without the advice of competent legal or child experts, as at present. This, rather than the point urged by Vernon Crouch, is what interests me the most. Vernon, in contrast, is concerned that other than a judge would have received a severe sentence, not merely a slap on the wrist from Irvine, who failed to fire him although he had the power to.

On the other hand, Set a thief to catch a thief. The Western Mail reported that it was this same judge who had the courage to break the cloak of secrecy and trigger Britain's biggest child abuse scandal, about children's homes in Clwyd. What a relief when variously oriented miscreants don't hang together! - Ed

Violent Labour Party Members?

Rachel McLean, 0171 802 1223, will send you a copy of the Govt's 30june99 document Living without Fear, provided you say, in a squeaky voice like mine, that you are a party member. Or you can ask The Women's Unit direct, 0171 273 8880. This document, outlines the £6million + £6.3m + £14m of govt and near-govt money available for schemes to combat violence, but only violence against women. Have so many labour men turned violent again because they feel New Labour (and their own wives) betrayed them? Why do they blame their wives? Were many labour wives secretly New Labour? - Ed

I should not really joke about it. Very like Home Office "Research" Study 196, from 0171 273 2084, whose authors, in spite of their Fig. 3.1, also fail to distinguish between a crime and an allegation, Living without Fear is an appalling, socially destructive document, evincing an anti-social attitude on every page. Incompetence begins early, with a less than 100% rise in reported rape in ten years on p2 contradicting a 165% rise on p4. "And seven out of ten women under 30 worry about being raped." No source. Ten out of ten citizens should worry about such vicious propaganda masquerading as research put out by The Women's Unit. It is signed by Jay, a marriage breaker, and Straw, who comes from a broken home. Other researchers convince me that there is now a torrent of ignorant, destructive, misleading propaganda published by the Home Office. The consequences will be dire. I hope each member of ManKind will phone for and read at least one. Or you might read the BMA's deeply flawed 1998 Domestic Violence: a health care issue from 0171 387 4499, now promoted by the Home Office, and also read a critical analysis of it, available for £2 from Dewar Research, Constables, Windsor Rd., Ascot SL5 7LF. - Ed

£ Balance of £ £Probabilities£

Carolyn Parrington, 45, is a rape victim with a difference. She has deliberately waived her anonymity and chosen a path that will bring her to the attention of many. The stated reason is that she "did this for women everywhere".

Appearing before the Court of Appeal, Ms Parrington (now remarried) won her 8 day long civil action against the man said to have raped her and was awarded £74,000.

Mr. Marriott, the man accused of raping her twice, was her employer from 1985. After her marriage broke up in 1992 she left the company in 1993. She suffered from depression and post traumatic stress disorder and then suffered a nervous breakdown in 1994.

The level of compensation awarded to victims of rape by the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme is £7,500. Unfortunately for the police, Miss Parrington, a mother of three, delayed going to the police which meant that vital scientific evidence was lost. Mr Marriott was found ‘guilty’ and ordered to pay compensation "on the balance of probabilities" - not on the basis used in criminal cases of "beyond reasonable doubt".

Mr Marriott was ordered to pay costs and damages to Miss Parrington of £132,000, which included £11,155 for loss of earnings, £25,000 general damages and £30,000 aggravated damages plus interest. The Court of Appeal turned down Mr Marriott’s appeal to reduce the damages and overturn the County Court verdict on the basis of facts and wrong findings. He maintained that it was "consensual sex" and occurred on several occasions. He was ordered to pay the costs estimated to be £95,000.

Thus, the rape victim can expect to gain/earn £7,500 + 132,000 = 139,500. And the victim of rape allegations (false or real) can look forward to the prospect of it costing him

£132,000 + 95,000 = 227,000.

[Info. from Daily Telegraph Feb 20th 1999]

Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme

"The Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme provides payment to victims of crimes of violence. .... Payments can be made to victims of rape, sexual assault, .... sexual violence.

".... Among other things, the consultation paper specifically invited comment on whether .... awards for rape/child abuse should be increased ...." - Living without fear, 1999, p41, from Women's Unit.

Eddie Hampton

Eddie Hampton (real name) in Maidstone Prison, writes "I am in contact with an inmate in another prison in a similar situation and he passed on some statistics which makes interesting reading and may help you in any campaign you may mount. Since 1994 when corroborated evidence was removed from sexual offences, there has been a 68% increase in successful convictions and a 74.5% increase in allegations of sexual abuse. Since Germany removed compensation, except in extreme circumstances, there has been a 97% drop in allegations of sexual abuse. I think that tells a story." (Can anyone confirm these statistics? - Editors, Newsletter No. 2 of AAFAA, Action Against False Allegations of Abuse, PO Box 84, Leeds LS5 3XZ)

Perjury

I had a hearing before Circuit Judge Stockdale, the only reason for the hearing being my request that my allegation of perjury be investigated. He stated that the courts had no facilities for investigating perjury. A number of solicitors have told me that there is no procedure for pursuing perjury. I have come to the same conclusion after many hours of study of law books. [Aitken was a show trial.] In contrast, Appeal Court Judge Thorpe had the gall, on 16th May 1996, to say in a Pelling Appeal Court hearing that the family courts were inquisitorial; that the judge's primary duty was to establish the facts. They live in the surreal world where establishing the facts involves ignoring an assertion under oath that there has been lying under oath. - Ivor Catt, The Hook and the Sting, pub. Westfields Press 1996, p63, also on Website www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/

American men's activist in Europe

Date: 19 September 1999 09:01

Hi, I am an American mens and fathers rights activist travelling through England and Europe until the beginning of November trying to link up with other mens activists.

I am the author a book titled Surviving the Feminization of America; excerpts on my website:www.geocities.com/Athens/Oracle/5225/

Men throughout Europe, the Americas, Australia and New Zealand have the same issues: war, money, fathering, feminism. I believe that we can increase our impact and influence by cooperating across national boundaries.

BBC TV flew me from my home base in Montana to Glasgow, Scotland to tape a TV show on men and mens issues by arrangement with George McAulay of the U.K. Mens Movement. Since BBC paid for the plane ticket over here I borrowed what cash I could with the intention of visiting as many mens organizations in Europe as I can before I run out of money.

If you are interested in having me visit your group please reply to this email [via Ed.] I need places to sleep and an occasional meal to sustain myself on the road.

I will be in London the end of September and hopefully Paris the first week of October. From

??????????????????????????

4p3

???????????????????????????/

Ms Betty Moxon heads the Sexual Offences Review Group. On 2aug99 David Yarwood wrote to her objecting to the absence of men's groups from the list. Betty Moxon invited Robert Whiston and Ivor Catt from ManKind to attend her 10sep99 seminar in Leicester. ManKind member William Coulson also managed to fill in for a cancellation.

The UKMM report that after much effort by our Chairman, the Home Office have begun to dialogue and invite us to inter-departmental seminars. The Leicester seminar, attended by our chairman, and myself as editor of Ill Eagle, gives a great deal of food for thought and much to report, some of which I intend to do later.

There were men there, but they were poodle-men. None of the 50 attendees had the concept of a false allegation.

I completely missed the reason why those present wanted to excise charges of incest and replace them with charges of statutory rape, claiming that the stigma of incest was so much worse! Only next day did I realise that a statutory rape charge was better because it exonerated the offending female. Those present, including the poodle-men, only wanted to avoid attaching stigma to a female. (The 1993 Sexual Offences Act changed the law so that boys under the age of 14 could be charged with rape.)

They toyed with the idea of charging a step-father with incest. However, this foundered on the problem of who was a step-father. I remembered that when Jack Straw came to speak to the Lords and Commons Family and Child Protection Group last year, I urged our Chairman, who was on the committee, to get Straw to define parent. Robert replied that he planned first to get him to define family, which however he failed to do. [Straw clothed in Teflon is very slippery. Remember when he ran away abroad and left Boateng holding baby?] The PC destruction of meaning of the word family undermined much of the discussion in Leicester. It meant that those at Leicester could not "get" the step-father on incest, since we have also lost the definition of step-father. This is the way in which the failure of radical feminists to work out the details of their Brave New World means that their machinations unravel.

From the Seminar Programme; "Would an offence of abuse of trust be a better way to catch looser family arrangements?" The discussion drifted towards the idea that one who was dependent on another could be sexually abused by him, whether or not there was consent. I countered by saying that that meant that a sixteen-year-old who married her mother's lover could not lawfully have sexual intercourse unless she went out to work! The institution of marriage was a real irritant in the discussions.

The marriage of my parents in 1932, when two became one flesh, which involved sexual intercourse and dependency and much else, did not exist within the conceptual framework of those present. They lived in a transactional world of thought (which is also a weakness in Amneus), implicit in the word empowerment, so their proposals for future legislation were bound to founder.

The next seminar we've been asked to attend is in Oct at the Home Office itself.

ManKind and Ill Eagle can be reached at;

(1). Mankind, Suite 367, 2 Lansdowne Row, London W1X 8HL.

(2) 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/

Reading List

I visited the I.E.A. last week, and agreed their price to you for two excellent books which members of ManKind should not only read, but own. £2.60 each post free, tel. 0171 799 3745 with credit card no. I myself have read all Morgan's and all Dennis's IEA books twice. I view them as primary sources for members of ManKind. - Ed

Patricia Morgan, Farewell to the Family? jan95, new edn. june99, 240pp.

Norman Dennis, Families without Fatherhood, sep92.

Women Can't Hear What Men Don't Say

-by Warren Farrell

A Jeremy P. Tarcher/Putnam Book; $24.95 US/$34.95 Canada; October 4, 1999

Contacts: Lori Fuller, Tarcher/Putnam/Penguin: 818.783.5016; fax: 818.783.5678

Dr. Warren Farrell: 760.753.5000; fax: 760.753.2436

Domestic Violence. After examining over 50 domestic violence studies, Dr. Farrell discovered that each revealed one of two things: either men and women batter each other about equally, or women batter men more. See Chapter 6 (and the Appendix).

Man-Bashing. Dr. Farrell discovers why we are so angry at men, how it is affecting our sons, and what we can do about it before we create another fatherless generation. See Chapter 4.

Dr. Warren Farrell is one of the most original thinkers of our time.

-Nancy Friday

Warren Farrell has given us a gift by writing Women Can't Hear What Men Don't Say. He points us to the only way to end the battle of the sexes in the 21st Century. -Karen DeCrow, Attorney; Former President, National Organization for Women (NOW)

[Farrell's The Myth of Male Power pub. Fourth Estate 1993 was the best researched book of its time. He will soon have a website. - Ed]

It's a wise father that knows his own son

It's a wise son that knows his own father.

"Twenty percent of the times that the husband requests a blood test for paternity in a divorce, it turns out that the husband is not the biological father. (Then the judge orders him to pay child support anyway) This has been published in the LA Times and the New York Times." - email 20sep99

Answer to a request from a father wishing to check the DNA of his son. http://www.affiliatedgenetics.com/ in Utah. It appears test kit can be ordered by credit card over the phone (currency converted by credit card company) and the swabs sent back to the USA for testing. Apparently there is no kit that does it all at home.

DNA Testing Services Paternity Screen. A highly confidential, low cost alternative to traditional paternity testing. This test is used to obtain paternity answers when legal admissibility is not required. This screening test is used for personal information or can preview the results of a traditional paternity test at a much lower cost.

Cost: $325.00 plus $5.00 shipping and handling.

A kit containing cheek swabs, packaging and return postage is mailed the same day the order is received. Cheek swabs are used to collect the DNA samples. (Additional $5.00 for orders outside of the United States.)

How to order a test or for more information Call: 1-801-298-3366 Fax: 1-801-298-3352 Email: btanner@burgoyne.com

Order tests with VISA/MC or send check/money order to: Affiliated Genetics, Inc. P.O. Box 870247 Woods Cross, Utah 84087-0247

Affiliated Genetics, Inc. was founded in 1994 by Kenneth Ward, M.D.. Dr. Ward is an Associate Professor of Obstetrics and Gynaecology at the University of Utah School of Medicine. In addition to his training in Obstetrics and Perinatology, Dr. Ward is board certified in medical genetics and molecular genetics. He is the laboratory director of Affiliated Genetics and also directs the DNA Diagnostic Laboratory at the University of Utah.

This information given by Ill Eagle without prejudice.- Ed

4p4

Stanko

Much of our work is investigative. It has to be. Newspapers today have largely become mere conduits for 'official briefings'. With notable exceptions, they and by-line journalists; pawns in a political game of bluff reduced to testing the water for Govt policy manoeuvrings that will hit us a few months down the line. Scouring the Internet we downloaded on June 30th information from the Cabinet Office re. domestic violence ( www.open.gov.uk 'Organisational Index' choose 'Cabinet Office' choose 'What's New' - 30.6.99 Press Release).

This reported the joint Ministerial launch by the Home Office (HO) and the Women's Unit - but it appeared to omit certain key statistics, namely HO study 191. However, it did quote a study by 'Stanko et al', which claimed that 1/. Domestic Violence costs £278 million pounds in London alone and 2/. Govt sources or 'official' Govt figures showed that 1 in 4 women suffer domestic violence. All the national newspapers picked up and quoted these 'official' Govt figures.

Having debunked the 1 in 4 figure in the summer of 1998 (See last issue) we promptly made enquires at the Home Office. They were evasive as to the veracity of the "official figures", stating they hadn't come from them. They did however direct us to "Stanko et al" as Prof. Stanko at Brunel.

Prof. Stanko replied by email; "I will forward you a copy of the report 'counting the costs'…. As for the figures used by the Cabinet Office [in "Press Release" above], there is no citation for that figure in the report. I suggest you contact the Women's Unit directly as I only received my copy of the document this week. I did not write it". But Counting the Costs is written by Prof. Stanko together with 3 other female authors, and it does cite the "1 in 4" totem. It is published by Crime Concern and funded by the Children Society and Hackney Safer Cities.

The so-called "survey", of only 107 postal respondees to agencies and 129 women in GP's surgeries, is loose, lightweight and limited, but still manages to stretch to 70 pages. By the time the reader gets to page 9 it is blatantly apparent that this is a document based on speculation, estimates and assumptions. From the beginning, is piles estimate upon estimate, guess upon guess, making magical intellectual leaps between them to arrive where the dogma says they should be, i.e. p 16. Domestic violence is defined throughout the paper as only women (and sometimes children) as victims.

Our understanding, from the Home Office, is that domestic violence is not actually a criminal offence, but the report states that it is (p 17).

Of the 107 postal surveys sent out to public service providers, only 49 were returned with some information on them, 23 resulted in no response at all and 29 were not completed. Those "key agencies" targeted also produced only 32 vague data on "the global cost" of their operations, 7 provided unit costs and with regard to number of clients only 10 knew the exact number or could estimate the ratio of domestic violence to clients (whatever that means).

"Key agencies" were defined as the police, solicitors, housing dept. Women's Aid, Social Services, GP's, health visitors.

The report is fond of using the word "trawl" to imply a thorough examination e.g. its trawl through local authority and agency files.

Unfortunately for the researchers, many key agencies replied that domestic violence "was not a primary presenting problem" and few incorporated it into their daily practice monitoring framework (p 8). Indeed, at page 44 they concede "that some case studies" may not be thought to "represent true domestic violence".

This inflammatory report is based on Hackney. Hackney is not typical of England. 46% of its population subsists on Income Support (State Benefits). The average income of the rest of London is 66% greater than that of Hackney. Over 65% of housing in Hackney is "social housing". In the past it has been the stomping ground of villains like Jack the Ripper and multifarious gangsters e.g. the Kray Twins. The area is a melting pot of over 10 nationalities multiplied by as many cultures.

The survey reveals that except for Women's Aid and the Domestic Violence Housing Service, none of the public service providers (Social Services, Police, etc) could estimate the cost of domestic violence. Nor could they estimate the prevalence of clients that "present" themselves for help.

In 1996 the police introduced CRIS (Crime Report Information System) which has a mechanism for highlighting particular crimes e.g. domestic violence. But because of "teething troubles" and the fact that they were "acutely aware" that police figures would be "conservative", the Stanko team had to estimate again. The team also realised they had no way of knowing or even estimating the cost in educational terms of domestic violence, but they nonetheless were soon able "to generate local estimates".

Citing the 1993 Home Affairs Select Committee on domestic violence, which concludes that domestic violence was common and the Assoc. of Chief police Officers evidence that domestic violence is "not based on either reliable or accurate data", the report continues to assert that it is grossly under-recorded. However, they concede that while nearly a third of domestic violence incidents resulted in victims seeking medical support, only 3% actually sought hospital attention. This would seem to underscore the proposition that seeking medical care, if not for police purposes, is purely an emotional prop.

At page 13 of Counting the Costs we read of earlier surveys into this field. Beginning with estimates from the British Crime Survey (1996) it moves on to Mooney's 1994 survey in Islington (less than 500) which found that 37% of women reported some form of domestic violence and 1 in 4 reported being injured from domestic violence in their lifetime - which is a meaningless statistic.

Painter's survey of 1,000 women; one in eight said they had been raped while married.

McGibbon et al survey (1989) (less than 500) in Hammersmith showed that of 281 respondees 39% had experience verbal or physical abuse by a partner.

Dominy and Radford (1996) - a survey of less than 500 - found that they had to add in a significant number of women who had suffered domestic violence where the women themselves (15%) did not view it as such. Of the above, only Mooney's was randomly distributed.

All research, the report concludes, shows that its findings that 1 in 4 experience some form of domestic violence in their life time and between 1 in 8 and 1 in 10 in the current year, "echoed" the work of other researchers and Women's Aid.

Significantly, Stanko et al. state; "Perhaps more disconcerting is the number of women who continue to maintain their silence about their experiences, or those who, when they spoke to someone, were not heard". This is difficult to credit, given the setting and antics of "Eastenders".

One 70 year old who responded to the GP questionnaire said " .. In old age sexual violence becomes mental cruelty. Weak shits remain weak shits".

It would be more accurate and trebly difficult (if not ideologically impossible) for 'Stanko et al" to come to the same conclusion about men who suffer domestic violence.

Of dubious interest is the assertion that domestic violence is a feature in 1 in 3 instances of separation or divorce (Hester 1996). It will take more research to find out whether that is true of only cohabitees, or of married couples that separate and divorce. Actually, as we all know, allegations of violence during divorce proceedings, which cannot be countered in our courts, are merely a mechanism to validate the confiscation of a husband's home and children.

Majorities unwelcome

- Decca Aitkenhead,

The Guardian, 30aug99, p13

".... In the main, most men's clubs are comfortable social enclaves, existing for exactly the same reason as gay clubs, and they would be distorted by women members in just the same way.

"The energy burnt up by women's movements over the right to have a drink in this or that room is one of the greatest wastes of time imaginable. ...."

Note that this assertion could not be published by a man. - Ed

Ill Eagle 5, oct99

5p1

Will only good fathers get their pocket money?

On Oct 9, 17:19, Brian [who?] wrote:

"Subject: Employers to pay men's wages into their wives' bank accounts.

What a good job no man in his right mind would get married again. If you were in any doubt that we have the feminist party in power........"

On 4 Oct 1999 23:35:04 in alt.mens-rights Blake Thoresby <thoresby@nym.alias.net> wrote:

"The British Minister for Women has announced plans to compel employers to pay men's wages into their wives' bank accounts. Baroness Jay said that the new rules, which will come into force in April, will reduce poverty in the family by ensuring that family income is not wasted. She said that wives will have sole discretion over whether or not they receive their husband's wages directly. This is in line with the current regulations which allow wives to decide which partner is paid Child Benefit.

Men's rights groups have expressed concern and say they are particularly worried about separated men who will have to ask their estranged wives for enough money to live on.

Legal experts say that the new Family Income regulations will also be applied to unmarried couples with children who live, or have lived, together."

Hail to ".... the gender warriors behind the Women's Unit .... The Women's Unit speaks not for ordinary women but privileged feminists." - Melanie Phillips, Sunday Times 10oct99, p21.

[The British Minister for Women is reported to have broken up at least one marriage when she ran amuck in Washington DC. Did her husband, the famous economist, fail to finance her travel from tryst to tryst?

I begin to wonder why I bother to read and analyse the vicious, anti-social rubbish, for instance Living Without Fear, signed by (fly-by-night) Jay and (Man of) Straw, put out by her Women's Unit. Tel. 0171 273 8880 for your copy. We now see that Jay is totally out of touch, a loose cannon, Leader of the House of Lords, at the heart of government. Vanity Blair dare not touch her, since he is surrounded by power feminists; Cheri, Coote, Hewett, Harman, and other obscure orientations who also benefit from the demeaning of normal men. As with our judges, he doesn't want to lose his salary and children, or end up homeless - Ed.]

Kennedy's Mea Culpa

In his keynote speech to the Liberal Party Conference, Kennedy said that he, along with members of all parties, was to blame for not studying the details of the CSA when its inauguration was being rushed through Parliament. This confession was not mentioned in the analyses of his speech, or in evening news, or in The Times next day. - Ed

Is the gun or the Single Mother Home more lethal?

For more than half a year after Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris shot fellow students in Littleton, Colorado, the media successfully and completely concealed the fact that Klebold is yet another product of an SMH (single-mother household). Nobody ever had the impression from the media for this entire time that both of these children were nothing but ordinary children from ordinary families. Dylan Klebold was "ordinary" only by a fact beyond his control, but not of his mother's, that almost 100% of mass murderers, assassins, and school shooters were born to or grew up in SMHs, where they are 8 times more likely to become murderers than children who grow up with their biological fathers.

www.angelfire.com/yt/eharrisdklebold/images/dylan5.jpg

A woman's world

Domineering middle-class "feminists" have always been detrimental to ordinary people (Melanie Phillips, Comment, 10oct99, p20). A notorious early example was their hijacking of the suffrage movement, turning it into a violent organisation which lost sympathy for the cause.

The current contrary motion of the sexes, women going into the workforce while men go into the dole queues, merely reflects their respective starting points. Men have left secure skilled work, woman have left the home, but both have left secure positions to move downhill to the labour pool.

Survey after survey of young women (18-24) reports most of them saying their favoured lifestyle when they reach 30 would be looking after their children full-time, supported by a husband with a secure, reasonably paid job. This after 30 years of feminist propaganda.

Along with their colleagues producing fiscal policies which penalise proper parenthood, the gender warriors are promoting greater exploitation dressed up as "choice" and "liberation".

- William Coulson,

Sunday Times, 17oct99, p20.

Sex Offences Review

(See Editorial, sep99.)

Ms Betty Moxon heads the Sexual Offences Review Group. ....[She] invited Robert Whiston and Ivor Catt from ManKind to attend her 10sep99 seminar in Leicester....

There were men there, but they were poodle-men. None of the 50 attendees had the concept of a false allegation. The other men listed were; Judge Francis Allen; Chris Atkinson, NSPCC; Simon Bass, Churches' Child Protection Advisory Service; Richard Beckett, Consultant Psychiatrist; David Congdon, MENCAP; Dr Simon Court, Designated Doctor Child Protection; Gerry Egan, DoHealth; Marcus Eldridge, NSPCC; David Johnson, Social Services; Peter Lewis, Chief Crown Prosecutor Lincolnshire; Miles McColl, Stip. Magistrate; Malcolm Ross, Chief Supt. Gloucs. Constabulary; Imam Abduljalil Sajid JP, Chairman Muslim Council of Britain Social Policy.... ; Robert Street, Home Office Research & Stats. Female members included Gill Keep, Childline.

The poodle-men invited to give 'balance' were in a minority. This is perhaps why, if anything, they out-shone the female majority in demonising their own gender. Although senior professionals, they behaved as if they believed the propaganda [all men are potential rapists etc.] and did not know the true statistics. This made the women present believe that they were not part of a prejudiced subculture. What about instituting a Roll of Honour for leading Poodle-Men?

".... there are critical men around the generally female, sexual abuse lobby, who as politically correct opportunists say nothing about the demonisation of men as pathological abusers. .... Up front are children's organisations such as the NSPCC, Childline and Kidscape. Less known are ones like Ritual Abuse Information Network Support, ChildWatch, the Beacon Foundation and the British Association for the Study and Prevention of Child Abuse...."

- Newsletter 2 of AAFAA, Action Against False Allegations of Abuse, Summer-Autumn 1999, 01635 202433.

[General terms; Poodle-man; Quisling; Uncle Tom; Castrato; Male feminist. This links with my Eagle 3 Editorial - Ed]

5p2

Our Secretary and the UN

Barry Worrall is at barryw@hisown.demon.co.uk

More details on our website www.ukmm.org.uk

UN submission under the '1503' procedure.

This UN submission concerns the definition of 'marriage' in the UK and the degrading treatment of unimpeachable men in divorce

HISTORY

28 April 99 : we make initial submission to UN High Commissioner for Human Rights about violations of Articles 7 (degrading treatment in divorce) & 23 (right to marry and to found a family) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). We make this submission under the '1503' procedure which allows a submission about a 'consistent pattern of violations' of human rights law. The submission is supported by a copy of The Emperor's New Clothes, which is available under our www publications pages.

25 June 99 : UN requests 7 further copies of submission document and our report The Emperor's New Clothes. These sent.

30 July 99 : UN inform us that they are referring the submission to the UK government.

SYNOPSIS OF SUBMISSION

For those men in an on-going marriage there are no benefits or protections. Further, men who are innocent of any matrimonial offence are being divorced using fabricated grounds and are having their lives seriously damaged, so having done no substantive wrong, they are treated in a degrading manner which violates Article 7 of ICCPR. On average marriage is therefore damaging to men.

At the heart of our submission is that what is referred to as 'marriage' in the UK is actually more damaging on average than not marrying. Article 23 of ICCPR guarantees the right to marry. What is referred to as 'marriage' in the UK is not compatible with the act 'to marry' in Article 23 of ICCPR. Men may not 'marry' in the UK in terms consistent with Article 23 of ICCPR i.e. in any meaningful sense. READ THE SUBMISSION on the www

Dear Mr. Worrall, [Secretary, ManKind,] This is to acknowledge the receipt of your communication referred to above.

In accordance with a procedure set out in the enclosed resolutions, a copy of your communication will be sent to the authorities of the country concerned and a summary of it will be confidentially submitted to the Commission on Human Rights and the Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights. Yours sincerely, Hamid Gaham, Officer-in-Charge, Support Services Branch, United Nations High Commission for Human Rights. 30 July 1999.

States must pay compensation for obstructing access

Source - Barry Worrall.

In the European Court for Human Rights (ECHR) [it has a good website] the case of "Elsholtz v Germany (No. 25735/94) concerning complaints about refusal of access to his son and about alleged unfairness of the proceedings concerned" should be of interest to all dads. This case follows others originating in Sweden and Finland

(see Hokkanen v. Finland on

www.ukmm.org.uk/camp/hokkanen) where States have been ordered to change their ways (re Fathers and access/visitation) and pay compensation. UKMM members need to study the Hokkanen case, on the web, or send one pound in stamps to Ed for a copy.

[In Finland, as in England, the mantra "best interests of the child", used to ignore the law and to deny a child's civil rights, exerted its baleful influence. Where Finland got caught was that initially they asserted that a father had rights, but later the State frustrated them. This happens in virtually every divorce case in England. English judges make the same mistake. Although English judges do their best to make a father appear feckless, all the same they initially admit a father's rights by making an order for access. Later they refuse to enforce the order. The Hokkanen case makes a precedent leading to a class action by English fathers against the UK govt. Even at £10,000 each, this would work out to tens of billions of pounds. The Appeal Court decisions not to enforce court orders re access will be ruled out by the European Court. Pelling agrees with me that the reason why, when a father appeals to a court to enforce a court order for access, the courts makes a new order giving less access, may be in order to reduce the compensation payable by our Govt. However, it is more likely that our ignorant judges do not know the Finnish case. We have a dilemma. How does a father show that he kept trying, without giving the govt the chance to claim that the best interests of the child had called for ever less access, so as to diminish its Hokkanen liability? - Ed]

Mr Hokkanen in Finland had been cut off by deliberate obstruction to contact with his daughter. His wife had died, and his daughter looked after by his wife's parents - his daughter's grandparents. They had obstructed contact over a 3 year period, despite repeated applications to court. Mr Hokkanen applied under Article 8 of the European Convention (respect for family life and no interference by authority in that). He obtained 100,000 Finish marks - about £11,000 compensation.

[A good summary would be the partly dissenting judgement, p19, see below, which presumably called for a higher fine to be imposed on the Fiinnish Govt. - Ed]

"PARTLY DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE DE MEYER, JOINED BY JUDGES RUSSO AND JUNGWIERT

(Translation)

"In our opinion, there has been a breach of the applicant's right to respect for his family life both as regards custody and as regards access, and in respect of the latter since 21 October 1993 as well as before then.

"Over many years the Finnish authorities were faced with and tolerated the prolongation of a situation which they had on many occasions noted to be unlawful and which they were accordingly under a duty to bring to an end. (No distinction needs to be made between the various authorities which intervened in the case; they all engage the respondent State's responsibility.) On each occasion they yielded in the face of the grandparents' persistent obstination and thus enabled them to create a fait accompli which the authorities eventually resigned themselves to endorsing as regards both custody and access.

"Having thus brought upon themselves this capitulation on both fronts, they may well have thought that matters had got to such a point that it was no longer in the child's interests to go on trying to remedy the situation.

"The fact remains nevertheless that ultimately the authorities deprived the applicant of the exercise of rights which naturally vested in him as father, although they had previously recognised on numerous occasions that he should not be denied them. (See, in particular, as regards access, paragraphs 10, 12, 25 and 29, and as regards custody, paragraphs 14, 16, 18, 22, 24 and 27 of this judgement.)

"Far from stopping the infringement of these rights, they thus permanently put a seal on it." [This maps directly onto behaviour by the English courts. - Ed]

"Trusted babysitter, 12, 'killed infant in her care'

- wrote Paul Kelso, The Guardian, 29sep99, p5"

Hot from a day studying political correctness at the Home Office conference in Leicester, I read this article as a clear demonstration of the massive move away from the old culture, where children came first, to our current radical feminist culture, where the mature woman comes first, and children and men take the hindmost.

A 26 year old mother left her baby in the care of a 12 year old girl, who was ".... trustworthy and mature for her age." The mother now claims the girl killed her baby. The girl is on a murder charge.

25 years ago the baby would have had a father to protect it. Failing that, the mother would have been on a criminal charge for leaving her baby in the care of a 12 year old child. Today, that is not possible, because by definition a mother is blameless. A girl child can be relied on to be responsible, as compared with a boy child, who can be relied on to rape and kill.

Nobody criticised the actions of the mother. - Ed

5p3

Editorial

For many years I have rated Norman Dennis a major player in the problem of family breakdown. He did primary research when he compared two nearby estates, and found that crime and other social breakdown occurred in the estate which lacked fathers, and not in the estate which merely suffered poverty. However, generally, in deference to feminist control of the media, I have only cited female experts, and so drew much less attention to Dennis and Amneus than to Barbara Amiel, Patricia Morgan and Melanie Phillips.

The importance of the dialogue which follows is that even though Norman Dennis was writing for the pro-family Institute of Economic Affairs, IEA, generally regarded as the premier right wing (which they deny) think-tank, he still avoided laying any blame on women for fear that he would not get published.

Melanie now closes the loop

".... girls cast aside the constraints which deep down they may still feel are in their own best interests." - Melanie Phillips, Sunday Times, 17oct99

Self censorship by Norman Dennis

To Norman Dennis. The following letter was sent to you (N.D.) on 30apr98. I held this back because the tone was unpleasant and explosive. However, I feel I should send it off [to you] rather than delay ever longer for the time when I shall write a more diplomatic note. I certainly felt very strongly at the time. Ivor

21feb98

Norman Dennis,

Emeritus Professor,

Dept. of Religious Studies,

University of Newcastle o Tyne.

Dear Norman Dennis,

I heard you lecture at a seminar organised by John Campion in Oxford Street, London, some years ago. The event was important for me. I had just read an article by Patricia Morgan, which caused me to attend. Also, Amneus spoke. The other key event was a five minute talk by a Hausa tribesman from Nigeria, who spoke of the impact of English divorce laws on his people living in England. (The significance of what he said is totally missing from your writings.) [Hausa fathers knew they would all lose home and children. Every father was getting together what money he could, and escaping back to Nigeria. - Ed]

I identified you, Morgan and Amneus as three of the four most important contributors to the analysis of the growing crisis. The other one is Melanie Phillips.

....

I have just re-read your 1993 Families without fatherhood, and then re-read your 1993 Rising Crime ...., followed by my reading your jan97 The Invention of Permanent Poverty for the first time.

The most horrifying part is the last para. of "The Invention....," where your myopia stands out most starkly, although it pervades all your books; your belief that a woman is not responsible for her actions, and men want to escape responsibility. Nowhere in your writings is mention of a woman's responsibility. It is incredible that you, who reiterate astonishment at the Sociology Establishment's refusal to see what is staring in their faces, (re poverty cf. crime), do much the same thing yourself.

p171 Penultimate para; ....men's sexual liberation.

Final para; .... the frustrations of fathers without families.

I am forced to conclude that the male chauvinism shown in your books links up with the chauvinism of the New Victorians, the radical feminists, in assuming, or even asserting, that a woman is not responsible for her actions. [We now know that it was not chauvinism, but his fear of censorship. - Ed]

Do you have the concept of a man being driven out of his home? Where in all your writings is the evidence?

Robert Whiston told me a year ago that you had switched, and now comprehended a woman's responsibility as a major factor in the crisis. However, I am told by someone else that within the last two months in a lecture you still showed the old chauvinist attitude, that only a man is responsible for his actions. Do you not know that the vast majority of divorces are started by women? Do you not know the suicide statistics among young men, their increase, and the comparison with that of young women? Why do these happy, free, liberated, libertine young men increasingly commit suicide? Do you not know the relative long term unemployment statistics for young people, male and female? You really should, if you feel you have the right to so roundly charge the Rowntree axis with ignorance, where you are correct. I see no evidence of knowledge of these things in your books; only the reiteration of the young male, eager to be promiscuous and evade responsibility for his children, given the chance. The woman is an object, not a sentient being. Try to find cases where she figures in your books. This is terribly shallow, for one who has done the amount of careful research that you have done. Your writings show no evidence of any knowledge about how the family courts are operating. This information is readily available, from me if necessary. [Now see my website - Ed] This has major impact on your findings, and your myopia certainly taints and blunts your findings. This is serious, because you are one of the four major players in the debate. Your selective ignorance does much more damage than that of the average man.

Yours sincerely, Ivor Catt

The reply

by phone

may 98 cc Norman Dennis ....

5.5.98 Today I received a phone call from Norman Dennis. This was my first communication from him. My rambling comments below are because I thought I should put something in writing, but since there is obviously much goodwill between us, I do not have to be too careful or accurate. So I will not hold back further copies until he okays what follows. He said a number of things. Although he said he was willing to be quoted, and I replied that I had no intention of so doing, I have since decided to do a very approximate quote of some of what he said. We spoke for perhaps 15 minutes.

1. The key point was that he thought he was remiss (he definitely did a 'mea culpa' more than once. That clears the air;) in giving only part of the story (In Families without Fatherhood and Rising Crime and the Dismembered Family) in the early 90's. (He thought my letter was fair.) His reason was in my view valid; that his main message was poverty and crime. I have sympathy with him in his objective at the time; to show that family breakdown, not poverty, caused crime. I agree that this issue is some way from the issue of blame for family breakdown, and that to some degree he was entitled to discuss the one (which he did very well indeed, and attracted me to him) while evading, or at least de-emphasising, the other. We should remember that the more damaging excesses of the feminazis occurred later than his time of writing, and it was not certain that they would become so very anti-social. (It is over-simplistic to say that he placed no blame on women in order to ensure publication, but there is more than a tinge of that in what he said.)

2. His second message is that he is very much in agreement with John Campion and with Ivor Catt, and that differences of opinion are only very minor. He talked about women wanting to have their cake and eat it. I think he also emphasised the plight of today's young man.

3. He said he was now into studying the drug industry, and was not fully up to date on our concerns. However, I said that, being aged 68, he was even more valuable than I was (age 62) in that he knew the perceptions and mores of the 1950's and 1960's, which younger people do not. For instance, he agreed with me that in 1960 the concept of a 'career' which led to an income large enough to support only one or two people, did not exist. This is not known by the younger E or Adrienne. (In 1960, activity which only supported one or two people was not caller a 'career'.) (I am coming across many other conceptual blocks. For instance, E and Adrienne do not seem to understand the tripartite (or even more multiple) nature of marriage in 1960, in particular the separation of civil from religious marriage, and that in 1960 everyone understood the distinctions. Dennis is very much needed, even if he does no more research, because he knows the past. He was there, and active in sociological study.

By coming in to the fold, I feel he plays a very important role in the ongoing saga. It is very significant that he discerns very little difference between his view and those of myself and John Campion.

5p4

My message to Adrienne Burgess is that she really needs to draw on him, for instance to clarify her understanding of the nature of marriage in 1960.

ND's possible suggestion that criticism of women would hazard his chances of getting published reinforces the assertion of Janet Daley that men are debarred from communicating on this subject; this assertion even reiterated by Polly Toynbee in the Guardian, 6may98. It's reached a pretty pass when even a female chauvinist sow like PT suggests that men are not allowed centre stage; although grudgingly stated in her case. [Of all people, PT was the only one allowed to attack the CSA in her recent three part TV analysis Can't Pay, Won't Pay - Ed.] I think the suppression of scholarly comment by men will ensure that the crisis will go far deeper, only to be ended when men are allowed to join the discussion.

I have recently realised that even the best woman, Melanie Phillips, will need the input of male scholarship and understanding before she can fully master the crisis, which is complex and difficult. (FNF punkah-wallahs will remain on the fringe, playing their silly personality games.) Ivor Catt 5.5.98

Reply by letter

12may98 From N Dennis to IC

Dear Ivor, Thank you for your very fair and clear account of the discussion we had the other day.

As it seems that you are anxious in case you misinterpreted or misheard what I said on any point, I'm writing rather than telephoning to say that you have reproduced my opinions as I expressed them to you.

I greatly appreciate your courtesy. Best wishes, Yours sincerely,

[signed] Norman Dennis.

"Women Behaving disgracefully

Women, not men, are driving a collapse in moral values that is undermining the family and ultimately themselves, says Melanie Phillips" - Sunday Times, sect.5, p6, 17oct99. Also 24oct99. A full page by Melanie on her new book, The Sex Change Society, £12 from 0870 165 8585.

Deadlier than the male

"Women are at least as violent as men, but the evidence is everywhere being dismissed or ignored" - Melanie Phillips, Sunday Times, 24oct99, sect. 5, p10.

A Time to Honour Bravery

We have to honour the bravery of Canadian Senator Anne C. Cools [see my website - Ed], Erin Pizzey, who insisted to me that most child abusers are women, and now Melanie Phillips, who says that it is the disgraceful behaviour of women that is destroying society. Such assertions are made by the brave, and in doing so they suffer great pain. Their adversaries are vicious. Erin had to have police protection, and fled the country. She now lives at a secret address. - Ed

Deadbeat dads

- Helen Wilkinson,

The Independent, 1july99

".... plans .... to criminalise fathers .... delinquent in paying child support ....

"The proposals .... have a distinctly American flavour. .... the infringements of personal liberty .... by many American states are quite shocking .... perpetuating vicious cycles of exclusion.

".... The federal government now recognises that unemployed, non-resident fathers, as well as single parent mums, have specific needs .... if they are .... to fulfil their parental obligations."

Not so the British govt. E has researched the way in which, in Britain, access to back to work, parent sickness and other child-directed benefits intended by parliament for any parent are illegally (according to European law) witheld from a divorced father through the administratively convenient (according to Harriet Harman) mechanism of funnelling them through a single Child Benefit Book, always kept by the mother. Michael Pelling is actively pursuing this case thru to Europe. - Ed.

Boys lost in fatherless homes

Charles Moore,

Nova Scotia. 2sep99.

More than 40 per cent of children now spend a large proportion of their childhood in single-parent homes, compared with just five per cent of kids who lived only with their mothers in 1960.

70% of institutionalized juvenile offenders in the U.S. come from fatherless homes, and children from broken families are twice as likely to drop out of school.

Little girls doubtless miss absent fathers profoundly, but the burden of growing up fatherless weighs heaviest on the male child. Most girls get ample exposure to female role-models and have little difficulty developing a clear idea of what women do.

Fatherless boys get only sporadic glimpses of what men do, and thus receive few clues as to what they're supposed to become. As he grows, the fatherless boy-child desperately attempts to tap into the collective male identity, usually taking his cues from likewise father-hungry peers and pop-cultural influences.

Not that the entertainment media is much help. A National Fatherhood Initiative (NFI) study released in March found only 15 prime-time shows (less than 15 per cent of 102 shows on the major U.S. networks) with fathers as regular, central characters. Only four of those portrayed functional fatherhood.

As U.S. Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan observed: "A community that allows a large number of young men (and women) to grow up in broken families, dominated by women, never acquiring any stable relationship to male authority, . . . that community asks for, and gets, chaos."

Less than 30 per cent of juveniles imprisoned for violent offences grew up with both parents.

Until about 100 years ago, fathers were unquestioned familial child-rearing authorities. Most men worked at home or close to home, and participated hands-on in their children's' upbringing. Educators of boys were also nearly always male, and the social environment boys inhabited was predominantly masculine.

In traditional cultures, boys spend lots of time with their fathers and other adult male role-models, developing into manhood surrounded by masculine energy. In the West, the Industrial Revolution destroyed normal family and community dynamics, removing fathers from the home.

Carl Jung observed that sons develop their image of absent or emotionally distant fathers through the mother's often aggrieved and resentful eyes, and learn to view their own masculinity through the jaundiced lens of her hostility. This results in wounded images of both father and self.

Today the problem is amplified. The notion that children are corrupted by exposure to masculine values is gaining increasingly wider acceptance.

In modern child-rearing theory and "progressive" education, supposedly "female values" of compassion, nurturing, forgiveness, rebirth and renewal are emphasized positively, while supposedly masculine qualities of strength, protection, justice, judgment and punishment are disparaged.

"The old traditionally male values of constancy, gravitas, restraint, heroism, dignity and honour are seen as belonging to a past world," writes British feminist author Fay Weldon. "Perhaps they do. Perhaps it is no bad thing."

It is a very bad thing. Boys who grow up in a predominantly feminine environment risk low self-esteem, excessive and unhealthy dependence on females, and emotional immaturity.

[Angela Philips's .... recipe for "bolstering boy's self-esteem" is to ensure boys are able "to shine" through "music, drama and dance". This proposed remedy can only be damaging to the male psyche which instinctively pushes in the opposite direction. - Ill Eagle 3, p4. - Ed]

Only men can confer a sense of soul-union with other men. Only men can understand and truly empathize with the particular fears, anger, sadness, and sometimes despair that are part and parcel of being male.

Children need men as a constant in their lives. Both girls and boys need fathers who understand and affirm an essentially male approach to parenting, and who can teach them that family life is something in which men can and should participate. .... ....

5p5

Comments and suggestions are welcome.

E-mail: wcr@supernet.ab.ca

USA's Privatised CSA out of control

Ginger Thompson, President, West Virginia Alliance for Two Parents; Remarks to Joint Domestic Relations Subcommittee Sept. 12, 1999

As we are hearing today, the system is tragically broken and does not work for anyone - those who are paying support or those who are receiving it. That means the ones who are really suffering are the children .... it is meant to help.

In addition to the problems with child support enforcement, there is an underlying problem in West Virginia's child support system - the very philosophy and methodology upon which support is set and collected.

West Virginia uses the Williams formula, also called the Income Shares Formula, upon which to base its child support guidelines. It's named for Dr. Robert Williams, a self-appointed child support guru who has built a multi-million dollar business out of developing child support formulas as well as collecting child support. Various versions of Dr. Williams' guidelines are used in 31 states.

The most astounding aspect of Dr. Williams' involvement in West Virginia's child support system is his blatant conflict of interest. Dr. Williams is the president of Policy Studies Inc., based in Denver, Colorado. Policy Studies' subsidiary, Privatization Partnerships Inc., is the private child support collection agency that does business in West Virginia.

As a consultant to federal and state governments, Dr. Williams has been able to create a market from which he and his company can profit. He has influenced policy as a consultant to the federal government's child support enforcement agency and used his inside knowledge to develop a consulting business and collection agency.

In 1996, Williams' company had the greatest number of child support enforcement contracts of any of the private companies that provide such services. Reimbursement to his company for child support enforcement ranges from 10 to 32 percent of what his company collects, according to the General Accounting Office. He and his company have cost the taxpayers billions of dollars, without really improving the lives of the children who are supposed to be helped by child support enforcement.

It is not to Policy Studies' benefit to track down the true deadbeats; but to instead concentrate their efforts on the cases that are easy to collect. [In England, Polly Toynbee's 3 part TV series Can't pay Won't pay said our CSA very soon gave up on difficult fathers, and instead, increased the claims against fathers who were already paying, in order to meet the CSA's cash targets. - Ed.] It also makes them less willing to correct errors. It is to Dr. Williams' benefit to design a child support formula that calls for high amounts of support which easily create arrearages. After all, the more collected, the more profits for his business. ....

Dr. Williams' income shares formula has come under intense scrutiny of late. The spring issue of the Family Law Quarterly, published by the American Bar Association, included two articles very critical of current child support policy. Several analysts have studied Williams' formula and have published reports which illustrate its flawed methodology. ....

[Things could get worse here. Wait until Blair hears about privatising the CSA in the USA! The problem is being thoroughly aired in emails from ACFC - Ed.]

Researchers scuffle over domestic violence

by Karen S. Peterson,

USA TODAY, 27july99

Who hits first, the man or the woman? The latest in a list of government-funded studies comes up with a controversial answer. Women hit men at least as often as men hit women, says research funded in part by the Justice Department.

That finding, reported this month, is ratcheting up one of the biggest debates in the field of domestic violence.

Two camps with different agendas are once again glaring at each other, each backed by prestigious but contradictory studies. And the tension will increase today when smaller-scale research is released, showing that girls in middle school are just as aggressive as boys with their partners.

The debate

In one tent are those who stress the greater damage men do when they hit women, regardless of who hits first.

In another are those who say women, especially younger women, hit first about as often as men. And they also must be held accountable, even if they do little physical harm.

"Neither side is motivated to understand the other. Rather, each seeks to impose its perspective because they believe (their) preferred definition is vital to advancing their moral agenda and professional objectives," says pioneering researcher Murray Straus in the chapter he contributes to the new Violence in Intimate Relationships (Sage, $29.95).

Small-scale studies are being presented this month at two conferences on domestic violence. They also show that women - especially young women - may be willing to participate in a literal battle between the sexes.

In a study of 872 students in five Philadelphia middle schools, about 65% of against a favored member of the opposite sex, researcher Michele Cascardi will tell the International Family Violence Research Conference today at the University of New Hampshire in Durham.

Cascardi emphasizes that contact basically means pushing and shoving and is considered "no big deal" by the kids - although it concerns those who worry that such behavior could escalate later. Her team is testing a school-based prevention program to heighten awareness among sixth- through eighth-graders

Arresting research

Other researchers have found girls to be physically aggressive, Cascardi says. Sociologists speculate that such behavior often is seen as more acceptable from girls today.

Research presented this month at the Penn School of Social Work's Conference on Intimate Violence concerned the behavior of women. More are being arrested for assaulting their male partners, a result not expected by advocates who support laws to protect women from domestic violence, says Sue Osthoff of the National Clearinghouse for the Defense of Battered Women.

Osthoff says that as more jurisdictions require police officers to make an arrest when answering a call about domestic violence, more women - who may have struck men in self-defense - are being arrested. Her information is anecdotal: Nobody monitors such statistics at a national level.

But landmark researcher Richard Gelles of the Penn School of Social Work says his research shows that women hit men just as men hit women, and it is not surprising that more women are being arrested. "When you set out the nets for tuna, you are going to pull some dolphins in," he says. "And advocates for women will have to wrestle with that."

The Justice Department study does not exonerate women. That project, which lasted 21 years, found that 27% of young women and 34% of young men had been physically abused by a partner, and 37% of women and 22% of men said they had perpetrated the violence.

Nobody - advocates for women or for men, researchers, concerned social scientists - suggests that the results of most physical abuse are the same for men and women.

"This is not an equal playing field," Gelles says. Virtually all the scientific studies show that women are much more apt to be hurt. And they are much more likely to be killed by a domestic partner.

"There are now about 500 male victims a year and in excess of 1,200 females," Gelles says.

For such reasons, advocates for battered women are reluctant to read newspaper headlines saying women and men hit each other at about the same rates.

5p6

The day after USA TODAY reported on the Justice Department study, Juley Fulcher of the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence called to say, in part, "It is hurtful to people to be able to claim that (domestic violence) is going both ways, that nobody is really to blame."

The public, she says, often only reads headlines and doesn't evaluate the study involved. Battered women, she says, "are much less likely to get assistance if there are people saying this is a two-way street. We hear callous remarks like 'Let them beat each other up.' ... We don't want to give the public an excuse to turn their backs on domestic violence, the way we did 10 or 20 years ago."

The Justice Department study was co-authored by psychology professor Terrie Moffitt, now on sabbatical from the University of Wisconsin-Madison. The research was done with 1,037 young New Zealand adults, 52% of them men and 48% women.

The study didn't include "who started each incident or if some of the acts were in self-defense, but it is clear that in most cases of partner violence in this age group, the parties are involved in mutual violence," Moffitt's report says.

Straus and Gelles say the Moffitt study is sound: Their research shows that women and men attack their partners at similar rates.

Patricia Tjaden also applauds the study, but her research produced a different result: Women are three times more likely to be assaulted in some way over a lifetime by a male partner than the reverse, and they are seven to 14 times more likely to be beaten, choked or threatened with a gun. Her research for the nonprofit Center for Policy Research was sponsored by two government agencies.

Unanswered questions

Why the discrepancies in such heavy-duty studies?

"That is the million-dollar question," Tjaden says. "After 20 years of research in this area, we are now left pondering the most basic questions. How prevalent is partner violence, and is there parity between the sexes?"

Tjaden says that when researchers ask only about being victimized, they get more men as batterers. If researchers ask about being victimized and victimizing others, they get more equality between the sexes. A lot of scholars agree, she says, that "women are just more likely to admit stuff than men are" and will confess to hitting a partner while a man won't. It also is more socially acceptable for a woman to fess up than it is for a man.

Straus says domestic-violence studies are a minefield. The quarrels start over definitions. Some define abuse broadly and include emotional mistreatment. Some include pushing and shoving, [Incredibly and disgracefully, London's Home Office 1999 Research Study 196, A question of evidence? Investigating and prosecuting rape in the 1990s, includes pushing as a form of violence, see p19. - Ed.] while others stick to physical assaults that are intended to cause injury. And some ask about a lifetime pattern of abuse, while others focus on the past 12 months.

Studies tend to fall into two broad categories, Straus says. Those based on actual crime statistics usually show low overall rates of assault, but more by men than women. When an arrest is made, the injury is more apt to be serious and is still more apt to be inflicted by a man.

Also, context matters. When victims are asked in terms of crime, they may not think a slap or kick is serious and won't report it, he says.

But what Straus calls "family conflict" studies focus on a broader definition. They include assaults that don't result in injury. Routinely, he says, "family-conflict studies have found about equal rates of assault by the male and female partner."

The two types of studies, he says, focus on "different groups of people and reflect different aspects of domestic assault." Women's groups tend to focus on crime studies that document battered women, he says, but crime studies might not reflect the population at large.

Both types of studies are valid and needed, Straus says. "Society would lose if either side gives up their perspective."

Which particular study catches the public's eye truly matters, experts say: The statistics influence policy decisions, such as the funding of women's shelters.

Tense confrontations

The confrontation over findings can get ugly. Straus says one of his colleagues received a bomb threat when she found women to be partners in violence. [In England, Erin Pizzey had to have police protection. - Ed.] Some of his graduate students have been told they will never get a job if they work with him, he says, and he and other peers have been booed from speakers' podiums. Virtually all of the studies have critics. The family-conflict methodology pioneered by Gelles and Straus is "irresponsible and totally flawed," says

Joan Zorza, editor of the Domestic Violence Report. The method, she says, intentionally sees violence as part of a family system and therefore tends to find "men and women equally violent."

Tjaden is convinced that "women are the primary victims of intimate-partner violence." But, she says, "I regard myself as a researcher and scientist, not an advocate." Scientists, she says, "don't poke fingers at each other and say, 'My numbers are right, and yours are wrong.'

"It may be we are measuring two different things," she says. "That is where future research has to go."

Letters

Mr. David Rudnick wrote an article in The Times this week about making punishment fit the crime, (15th or 16th Sept.), and drew attention to the case at Southwark Crown Court of Lee Tate who admitted the manslaughter of a prize winning researcher, Mr Seung Lee, of Clare College, Cambridge in an unprovoked attack whilst Mr. Seung was taking a stroll with his wife, sister and two friends. The judge sentenced him to 2 ½ years in prison. Later that month at Manchester Crown Court, M/s Carla Hunter admitted running over and killing Gina Armitage, another motorist, after a road rage incident. She deliberately drove her Mercedes car backwards, then forwards over the victim's prostrate body after running her down! An initial manslaughter charge was dropped! Hunter was given a year's imprisonment for dangerous driving. Do you think a Mr. Hunter would have had a manslaughter charge dropped or would it have been made one of murder? And even if against all expectations the manslaughter charge had been dropped would it have only been a year's jail? Contrast that with the man who got six weeks jail for common assault for smacking a female student's bottom in exhuberance when he was in a celebratory mood which was reported the next day in the Times.

....

I find Ill-Eagle interesting, illuminating and a good index to the UL's prejudice and discrimination against men and hope you can long continue it.

- Jim Tye, Abergavenny

.... I suggest that you print the address of Mankind in Ill-Eagle....

PS Congratulations on the excellent job that you are all doing. I am sure that many men are very grateful to you. -Wynne Hobey, Bath

INPOW

The Family Court Welfare Service & The Family Division: A Question of Abuse, available from INPOWw, 4 Cardcross St., London W6 0DR

I am concerned that this beautifully written piece by Oliver Cyriax on the Court Welfare Officer scandal languishes unnoticed in a corner of our UKMM website, www.ukmm.org.uk/camp/inpoww.htm Oliver has worked long and hard on this matter, and his conclusions are devastating. - Ed

The nation's health

- Daily Mail Comment, p12, 24sep99

".... men suffering from prostate cancer stand no better chance of survival than if they lived in achingly-poor Estonia or Slovenia .... The Govt spends 100 times as much on breast cancer as on cancer of the prostate .... the attitude towards prostate cancer in this country remaiins a scandal that needs to be addressed with considerable urgency."

Victory for men on winter fuel may cost £20m

- Martin Fletcher, The Times 24sep99, p17

Civil Rights organisation Liberty helped Mr Taylor, a member of Parity, tel. 01344 621167, which campaigns for equal rights for men and women, to take his case for entitlement to a winter fuel

5p7

payment between the ages of 60 and 65, which women receiving a state pension are entitled to, to the European Court. He is now 90% certain to get the law changed. Help the Aged said; "20,000 people die of cold-related illnesses every year."

David Lindsay of Parity also has his eyes on unfairness over bus passes, and eventually on the state pension age. I would inform him that a recent European Court decision said that if someone failed to make a claim because his own country's laws unlawfully said he would fail, then he could not be penalised for failing to make the claim. "(5) Until the directive has been properly transposed into national law, a member state cannot rely on an individual's failure to pursue proceedings to assert his or her community rights, even after these have been declared by a ruling of the Court of Justice, as a reason for refusal to pay benefits in compliance with the principle of equal treatment. This is because the effect of continuing to retain provisions of national law which deny such benefits is to make it difficult or impossible for individuals to ascertain the full extent of their rights, and thus to infringe the principle of legal certainty which is also fundamental in community law: judgment of 25 July 1991 in case C-208/90 Emmot v. Minister for Social Welfare [1991] ECR 4269". This means that Lindsay should think in terms of a class action over the state pension which will make retrospective claims for men between age 60 and 65. It is important to bring this country's government to its knees for ignoring European legislation which enforces equal rights for men as well as women. This Govt has only obeyed the European laws when they favoured women, and consistently, selectively, ignored those same laws when it came to parity for men. Our Govt has behaved thus because it is riddled with radical feminists. The backlog of Govt liability to men will make the £1 billion litigation by women against the MoD over inequality look like chicken feed. These bigoted feminists in Govt who have denied equal rights to men should be sacked for bringing our Govt to its knees by ignoring European injunctions when they benefit men.

I did not embark on this exercise; vindictive women did. Other women failed to restrain them. This means that women have to lose the historic broadband discrimination in their favour, which virtually everyone is brainwashed into not noticing, although it is obvious. In the age of chivalry, which extended well beyond 1960, when Greer was falsely claiming victimhood for women soon after wholesale male slaughter in war, no man ever published a complaint at being conscripted and then dying for his country; dying for his unconscripted womenfolk, who sat at home knitting socks for the soldiers in the trenches. We were all brainwashed into feeling pity for the German women who would never marry because of the first world war's losses, rather than for the dead young men. Recently, I asked my friend Mary; "Would you rather be single or dead?" She replied; "Single."

"Women and children first into the lifeboats," although women, with an extra layer of fat, survive longer in the sea. Because other women failed to restrain the bigots like Jay, we have to look more objectively at issues of equality. Heads the woman wins, tails the man loses, will only cause deepening social disaster, for women as well as for men, and particularly for children, as we are now seeing.

Did a poodle-man Martin Fletcher choose the mealy-mouthed heading, or was it his feminist editor? - Ed

A vicious incubus in Govt; one of many

".... In honeyed words, Jay tried to repair the damage [done by the Women's Unit's ignorance]. 'Society is indebted to mums who play a crucial role,' she said. .... Tell that to Gordon Brown, the chancellor, who is deliberately penalising those mothers who stay at home. Tell it to the gender wareriors behind the Women's Unit.... The Women's Unit .... speaks not for ordinary women but for privileged feminists .... delivers .... self-serving and dishonest rhetoric ...." - Melanie Phillips, Sunday Times, 10oct99, sect. 1, p10.

Phone 0171 273 8880 and ask for your free copy of "Living Without Fear", a vicious anti-social propaganda document published with your (tax) money. Also ask for the Voices, the magazine that Melanie is attacking.

Divorced dads ready to wage a revolution

- Kathleen Parker,

The Orlando Sentinel, 10oct99.

WASHINGTON - Dr. Ned Holstein, physician and president of the Massachusetts-based Fathers and Families, is projecting numbers, graphs and percentages on the screen. He uses words such as strategy, constituency and, yes, even revolution.

No longer a glossary word in history books, the R-word is being revived by divorced fathers who, impatient with lawyers, legislators and judges, are ready to bloody their white flags.

One cannot exaggerate the extent of anger, pain and frustration among the hundreds of thousands - maybe millions - of men who now constitute what is loosely known as the Fatherhood Movement. I've met many of them, talked to them, listened.

These doctors, lawyers, psychologists, lobbyists and laborers are not an insignificant body. Many are well-educated; more are getting organized; all are motivated by a degree of anger that is potentially volatile and should not be ignored. They've reached the boiling point, they say, and they've exhausted the system.

Holstein's presentation was one of many at the recent Children's Rights Council's annual meeting in Alexandria, Va. The CRC is one of the oldest, better organized of the 500 or so "fathers" groups in the United States that deal with issues of divorce and family. I qualify "fathers" because, though most groups focus on men's issues, many of their members are women who also believe that children need, want and deserve fathers.

I attended the CRC meeting as an invited (unpaid) speaker and listened to Holstein's presentation with a mixture of concern and sadness but, more important, of apprehension. I believe in the sincerity of these men, in their desire to be a part of their children's lives, in their sense that they've been mistreated by courts that award children like chattel to mothers and treat fathers as mere financial providers.

Concern and sadness are reasonable responses to that understanding and to the fact that 82 percent of children from divorced families have little more than a visitation relationship with their fathers. According to the 1989 Census, 37.9 percent of divorced fathers have no access to their children.

Granted, not all these disenfranchised dads are model citizens. Some really are bad guys who don't care about their kids, beat up their wives or shirk duty and responsibility. But experience and the preponderance of research do not support the widespread belief that most men are deadbeat, abusive and neglectful, nor the public policies that treat all men accordingly.

Were mothers routinely robbed of their children, barred from their homes and jailed for failing to pay extortionate sums, we would see blood in the streets. And, curiously, sympathy from the grandstands.

Men get no such sympathy, and that's where the apprehension comes in. When people are pushed to their limit, when they feel mistreated, unheard and unseen; when they feel that they've been robbed of the only things that matter - things tend to get ugly.

"You can only torture people for so long," said Stuart Miller, senior legislative analyst for the American Fathers Coalition. "You can't steal something as important as someone's children and money and property and think you can walk away without any repercussions."

Miller predicts that Holstein's theories of social change will seem like a dream compared with the nightmares simmering in someone's living room in every town or city, in every state, every night of the week. Violence is inevitable, he said, as evidenced by the American courthouse decor these days. Call it police-baroque. Only the Berlin Wall had more barricades, metal detectors and armed guards.

"Why would the government be so afraid of the people?" asked Miller. "Is it because the people are bad actors or because the government is acting bad?"

Good question. The answer is, we're all acting badly within a system that treats divorcing couples as enemies, courtrooms as war zones, judges as arbiters of issues more emotional and psychological than legal, and children as hostages to be traded for dollars.

The divorce system is counterintuitive and morally bankrupt, and needs reinventing before talk of revolution becomes action. What the organized fathers' groups want isn't wrong or mean-spirited but right and fair to

5p8

children. Who among us can blame a man, wrongfully denied his own child, for shouting out that he was framed?

E-mail: kparker@kparker.com

A Practice Note of 26 June 1978

An independent investigation by the Law Society concerned at the proliferation of ex parte (secret) injunctions reported as follows;

"An ex parte 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 per cent 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 ...." - B Bassingham & C Harmer, Law & Practice in Matrimonial Causes, 4th edn., pub. Butterworths 1985, p332.

[1978] 2 All ER 919, [1978] 1 WLR 925

The situation has greatly deteriorated since that report. I am a long term Quaker, and I was ousted in a ten minute secret court hearing without my knowledge by perjured affidavit falsely charging violence, which my wife took to the court. So were most of the divorced men I know. - Ed

East Midlands Branch of ManKind

William Coulson, 0116 264 0351, tells me that they are formally starting the East Midlands Branch.

Against the Grain

The comment line is atg@courttv.com. Please write. They are very interested in the subject.

Against The Grain.

Fred Graham talks on US TV with with Howard University Professor Stephen Baskerville about the rights of divorced fathers.

AGAINST THE GRAIN 10/15/99

FRED: Welcome back to AGAINST THE GRAIN, a contrarian look at the law. This week we have Howard University Professor Stephen Baskerville who says that divorced fathers paying child support have fewer rights than common criminals. Now, Professor Baskerville, why do you say that?

BASKERVILLE: Well, it's more than just divorced fathers paying child support, its any father. What we are seeing in this country is the criminalization of fatherhood and by that I mean that any father at any time can be turned into a criminal not because of what he's done but because of what the government has done. Throughout this country, fathers who are accused of no wrongdoing, fathers who have not agreed to a divorce or given grounds for a divorce are being hauled into family courts, they are being stripped of custody of their children, all rights taken away to make decisions about their children.

FRED: Because their wives are suing them.

BASKERVILLE: At the simple request of their spouse, that's right. They are ordered to sat away from their children most of the time, they are ordered to begin making child support payments, they are ordered to pay the fees of lawyers they have not hired, for services they have not requested and if they object or refuse or fail to abide by these orders, they can be ncarcerated without trial, without charge and without an attorney.

FRED: Anyway, this just sounds so Dickensonian.

BASKERVILLE: It is astounding, the reason it is happening is because we have created in this country a very dangerous machine, it's a machine that thrives and grows by taking as many children as possible away from their fathers.

FRED: What is the machine?

BASKERVILLE: The machine is the divorce industry, it consists of bureaucratic police, social workers and many other people who have all one thing in common and that is having as many children as possible taken away from their fathers.

FRED: Now, some people would say, this has grown up because of the problem of the "deadbeat dad" that doesn't pay child support.

BASKERVILLE: Yes, the American public has been subject to a massive propaganda campaign by discoverment that is designed to vilify fathers. The "deadbeat dad", I don't want to say doesn't exist, but it has been the subject of this huge propaganda campaign. Most fathers, most divorced fathers, in fact do pay child support, over 90% when they have visitation rights with their children, but the larger issue here is not why fathers are paying child support, the issue is why they are being made to pay child support in the first place. Child support guidelines are, in fact, are devised by the very people who enforce and apply them. They are made not by legislatures often, but by courts and by child support enforcement agencies.

FRED: Now, we read about men's rights groups, this sort of thing, why haven't they been able to level the scales of justice?

BASKERVILLE: Well, there's a huge interest here, there's a huge special interest as I say who have a vested interest in perpetuating this regime, this regime of what amounts to forced divorce, of forcing divorce upon fathers and their children and then plundering the fathers for everything they have. Child support orders which can be as much as two-thirds or more of their income. Legal fees that are in the thousands and tens of thousands of dollars against fathers who have not hired these lawyers and who have not even sought their services.

FRED: Well, do you see any way that this can be rectified, the political process, litigation?

BASKERVILLE: What needs to be done is two things. First, we need to arrive at a consensus in this country that no child should ever be taken away from a parent who has done nothing wrong at then very least, a parent who has not agreed to divorce and custody. Secondly, we need drastic reform of the family court systems. These courts operate in secrecy with very little oversight. One family court judge says that family court judges, the power is almost unlimited, and this is true, unlimited power is unaccountable power and it is now out of control. These judges and these courts need to be investigated where necessary, they need to be prosecuted and it needs to be made clear to them they have no right and no power to take children away from parents who have done nothing wrong.

FRED: Professor Stephen Baskerville, very interesting. Thank you very much for sharing your thoughts with us.

BASKERVILLE: Thank you.

Send e-mail to Fred at atg@courttv.com.

President's Report

By the President of the American Coalition for Fathers and Children

email 7oct99 acfclist@usa.net

Reprinted with permission.

There is good news and bad news for families as this is written. The good news is that the importance of fathers in their children's lives is increasingly acceptable to discuss publicly, after so many years of suppression. The harmful effects on children of father absence that we have been talking about for years, are becoming increasingly a matter of public common knowledge.

The bad news is that most of government and the family court system is still lost in the dark ages of family policy. Although now forced to pay lip service to the importance of fathers, most of the solutions to the crisis of families proposed by politicians, bureaucrats, and their legions of fellow-traveler consultants and "experts", amount to thinly veiled attempts to simply continue or intensify the same empire building bureaucratic mentality that has already destroyed half of the families in America.

It is truly astounding to sit in hearings in Congress and watch the parade of witnesses pandering to the status quo with rosy colored reports of "progress" in this, and "progress" in that, while Rome continues to burn around us. Most witnesses are professional-looking young women fresh from women's studies college programs spouting the same fantasyland rhetoric about women and children as eternally helpless victims, and the need to "force fathers to be more responsible." It is amazing that advocates who appear so concerned with their "self-esteem", talk about themselves as if they were wallflower victims in a Gothic novel, waiting for Prince Charming (read Big Brother government), to come rescue them from their helplessness. No self-respecting real woman would ever talk this way, and it is even more amazing that this kind of victimology rhetoric is taken so seriously in the halls of Congress.

If thirty years of such policies have only made the situation of millions of families unbelievably bad, it is hard to see how even more draconian child support collection,

5p9

and "streamlined" procedures for throwing fathers out of their homes and their children's lives without due process of law on often frivolous restraining order charges, will help fathers remain part of their children's lives, but this is a mystery that I leave to the reader to ponder.

Older professional-looking women on the Committees appear to sagely consider this testimony, while plotting to squeeze more money out of the Federal Treasury for their political constituency. Most of the men on these Committees look like scared rabbits, who when they dare to speak, usually utter no more than mealy-mouthed obeisance to the blatantly obvious "power structure." The few legitimate representatives of the fatherhood movement who are allowed to speak at all, are almost totally ignored. How these people expect to solve the crisis of fatherhood without listening to fatherhood representatives, is a mystery that I also leave to the reader to ponder.

Based on his experience with the spectacle of ancient Athens, Aristotle believed that democracy inevitably leads to tyranny. All too aware of this tendency of democracy, the Founding Fathers instituted a Constitution to try to prevent this in America. The current power structure has almost completely forgotten the Constitution, and until supporters of the fatherhood movement get organized, the feeding frenzy of pigs at the trough of Federal dollars will undoubtedly continue, despite its obvious devastating effects on American families. Fathers will not achieve equality in the home that women have achieved in the workplace, until this power structure learns to exercise power responsibly, and they are a very long way from that. Instead of all this talk about the need to make fathers more responsible, many of these people should look in a mirror, and pull the plank out of their own eye.

WHAT ACFC IS DOING

ACFC believes that the best way to deal with the fantasyland of Federal and state family policy, is to continue its mission of public education through the media that are willing to deal with reality, and to continue our grassroots organizing. Until public attitudes shift decisively, and until the fatherhood movement is represented by organizations with larger membership, little progress should be expected. Once these goals are achieved, we believe that the politicians will follow like the herd of sheep that they are. This is simply the reality of politics.

ACFC has been consistently in the media representing our members with the word that children need both parents. This doesn't happen by accident but only by hard work, dedication and persistence. ACFC puts out frequent press releases to get our message out to the media, and then works with media who call with requests for information in an effort to educate the public on our issues and to help create positive change for our children and families.

These efforts have resulted in the following media stories. The June 21st, 1999 issue of Time magazine mentioned ACFC in a story about "Deadbolted-Dads" and their access and visitation problems. "Deadbolted Dads" was also the topic of the Montel Williams show where we appeared talking about fathers who are locked out of their children's lives with no way to get back in. ACFC was quoted on the front page of the New Orleans Times Picayune newspaper objecting to a new law that passed 36-0 in the Senate, and 99-0 in the House, that allows fathers behind in child support to be publicly shamed by putting their names, addresses, and birthdates on a web-site and on television. As a result of the newspaper article featuring our quote, ACFC Executive Director, Dianna Thompson, appeared on a large Louisiana radio station debating the state of Louisiana's Child Support Enforcement Director. The following day she appeared on a large radio network debating the sponsor of the new law.

Earlier she had appeared on national television on FOX News Now to discuss the National Child Support Registry that recently went into effect nationwide. CNN listed ACFC as a reference for the story they did on the Massachusetts gender bias lawsuit. More recently, the October issue of Redbook lists ACFC as a fatherhood resource. Our legal spokesperson, Attorney Jeffery Leving appeared on the Leeza Gibbons show objecting to custodial parent move-always. Stuart Miller represented ACFC on MSNBC, a national cable television network talking about fatherhood issues. A Fathers Day article written by Dianna Thompson and Stuart Miller ran in a Virginia newspaper and was picked up on the Knight Ridder news wire.

ACFC has written numerous letters to legislators and policy makers on behalf of our affiliate organizations who are out there working hard on supporting or opposing legislation that will affect our members. ACFC was a speaker in Los Angeles before 31 judges and commissioners for LA County discussing Access and Visitation Denial.

As a result of these media efforts, ACFC is now recognized as the place the media turn to for the fatherhood perspective on national issues. These efforts have had significant impact on the changing climate of public opinion about our issues. And ACFC has grown rapidly in the past two years, now with 92 chapters and affiliate groups across the country. There is much more work to be done, but as a result of this coordinated plan, fatherhood issues finally have a voice on the national stage.

MannKind and Ill Eagle can be reached at;

(1). Mankind, Suite 367, 2 Lansdowne Row, London W1X 8HL.

(2) 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/

JP fell asleep

"A man's conviction .... for .... road rage has been quashed after a magistrate fell asleep in his trial ...."

- The Guardian, 29sep99, p10

Ill Eagle 6, nov/dec99

6p1

Primary problems

From Ted Diggins,

a letter to the Daily Mail, 20oct99

"Further to the lack of male primary school teachers, I know of several men who have been unsuccessful in getting accepted on teacher-training courses.

"At the age of 40, my husband decided that he would fulfil his dream of becoming a primary school teacher. He did an access course and was given an outstanding achievement award. While not studying, he helped at our young son's infant school, where the head gave him an excellent reference.

"However, the college didn't seem so keen. Throughout his interview he found it impossible to make eye-contact with the female interviewers and he felt like the invisible man.

"Not surprisingly, he was turned down. When he asked why, he was told that he should read the Times Educational Supplement and get more classroom experience.

"Meanwhile, we know of a single mother who has been accepted on this year's course.

"She told us she hadn't set foot in a classroom since leaving school and admitted she didn't understand many of the questions put to her at interview."

- Frances Daly, Broadstairs, Kent.

"No woman should be authorised to stay at home and raise her children. Society should be totally different. Women should not have that choice precisely because, if there is such a choice, too many women will make that one." The first feminist, Simone de Beauvior, quoted by Melanie Phillips in her 1999 book..

Educating boys

".... at the age of seven, .... 60% of boys and 71% of girls reached the expected level in reading. .... at 14, 54% of boys and 72% of girls reached the expected level.

"In English, the difference was greatest among 14-year-olds in working class Islington, where 63% of girls and only 30% of boys reached the expected level, and in middle class Wokingham, .... 88% and 61% ....

".... the worst performing authorities all being in white working class and multi-racial inner city areas.

"Overall, the proportions who passed [GCSE at A to C in] English, maths, science and a modern language - the foundation of a decent education - were 34% of girls and a mere 24% of boys. Those are the figures that really matter .... "

John Clare, Education Editor,

Daily Telegraph, 7 and 27oct99

No mention of the disappearing male teacher

Some years ago in Islington, where boys' performance is now worst in the country, the then Head of Education in the Borough (who has now moved on to greater glory with New Labour) decreed that boys must all sit at the back of the room in key subjects, so as to reduce the disadvantage of girls. Now they are performing so terribly, have boys been allowed back nearer the teacher? - Ed

Sex Equality for Older Men

PARITY defeats UK Govt over fuel payment discrimination - p4.

"single-sex classes to help boys ....

Rachel Sylvester

Daily Telegraph, 25oct99

"Mixed state schools are to be encouraged to hold single-sex lessons to improve the educational standards achieved by boys.

"Ministers are concerned that they are falling far behind ....

"The drive to improve boys' performance is to be made a priority during this school year, following recent GCSE results showing they are falling ever further behind girls."

Rachel did not mention the problem of the disappearing male school teacher, or of the disappearing father. We know that both correlate closely with school failure for boys. - Ed

"Parents 'want more men' in childcare

Alexander Frean,

Times, 6nov99, p5

".... many children .... in single-parent families, spent their early years almost exclusively in the company of women ....

".... Many [parents] .... saw men as good role models for boys .... Single mothers thought male workers were especially beneficial for their children ....

"Some [parents] did accept, however, that a policy which only allowed female staff to change nappies could be helpful ...."

So the witch-craze prejudice continues, even in appeals for more male adult contact for children. - Ed

Men in the Nursery,

pub. Institute of Education.

"Lone parents to rent a gran

- Jack Grimston,

Sunday Times, 14nov99, sect. 1 p4

".... Children without grandmothers will soon be able to have publicly funded substitutes under a government-backed scheme to be announced tomorrow. Mothers with small children who do not have close relatives to help out can apply for 'community grandmothers'.

"'It will be like recreating an extended family,' said the Department for Education and Employment. 'When a person is feeling low, they have someone to turn to.' ....

"Barry Wirrall, director of the Cheltenham Group [and ManKind's Secretary from the Worral] ...., said it was 'absolutely outrageous' to spend government money on the programme. 'Good fathers are more important than surrogate grandmothers. It is ridiculous. Three million children, a third of the total, are in single-parent families, and divorce settlements systematically separate fathers from their children.'

"The community grandmother project .... will be announced tomorrow by David Blunkett ....

"The programme aims .... reducing low-weight babies ...."

[Single Mother Home children (SMH) are much lighter than children living with both father and mother. - Ed]

[I remember that my case was typical when the state connived in my wife's defiance of my contact order. However, this created a problem of care for her. I found that I was welcome to care for the children of another family, who in turn were illegally cut off from their own father. By caring for another's children, I did not threaten the New Order. Quite the reverse. I helped to fill the void. ('.... It would be far more effective to undermine the social and legal need and support for the marriage contract. .... simply extend legal recognition to different types of household and relationships, and .... end such privileges as the unjustified married man's tax allowance. .... the right of all women, whether married or single, to give legitimacy to their children." - Carol Smart, The Ties That Bind, RKP 1984.) Biological fathers' access to their own children threatens to undermine the radical feminist's ideal of the SMH or Gay/Lesbian family unit as the norm. Substitutes for the father - an old women or even, as a last resort, other men - have to be found, preferably with govt funding, as in Blunkett's community grandmother project. The primary objective of radical feminists is, not to have mothers bring up their children alone, which would be tedious for them. The primary objective is to

6p2

cut children off from their own fathers. However, in doing so, the child loses half its grandparents, aunts, uncles and cousins, which then have to be replaced by Blunkett's project. The view that today's gender racists cannot possibly hold such totally mad ideas is not valid. Hitler, another racist, seriously promoted even madder ideas. - Ed]

Homelessness and Single Parenting

-Janet Daly, Daily Telegraph 16nov99, p28

".... these two problems - homelessness and single parenting - are not unconnected. The most recent statistics show that while only seven per cent of children living with their natrual parents ever run away from home (even briefly), around twice that number from single parent families do so, and fully three times as many abscond from families where there is a step-parent. .... where there is real abuse or serious conflict with a legal step-parent or a mother's boyfriend. So the problem of family breakdown, which has been encouraged by the state's own benefit system, feeds into the problem of rough sleeping ...."

"UK guilty of child neglect

Clare Dyer,

Guardian, 6nov99, p2

Five children were subjected to 'torture or inhuman or degrading treatment' .... for more than four years, the European Commission on human rights has ruled. .... Britain had violated srticle 3 of the European Convention on human rights by failing to protect the children ....

"The three sisters and two brothers .... were subjected to extreme physical and emotional neglect.

".... Their father twice asked the council to take them into care ....

"But .... only .... after their mother threatened to batter them unless they were taken away .... described .... as .... horrific."

The Guardian's PC reporter is careful to avoid telling us whether the father had been ousted. After all, she had to get past her poodle-man editor! - Ed

Fear of flirting

- Jenny McCartney,

Sunday Telegraph, 31oct99, p37

"An Australian 'communication expert' called Allan Pease attracted widespread attention last week when he told British men that they do not touch other people enough.

....

"Most men are aware that tactile gestures - especially those directed towards women and children - can be woefully misinterpreted. The fear of complaints and litigation is now entrenched ....

"It is even more dangerous for a man to touch any child not his own. Hysteria about paedophiles is rampant.... The Scouts have a shortage of volunteer leaders.... Male trainees for primary-school teaching are reportedly deeply anxious....

"Touch is a language that children learn to speak and understand from an early age. But if friends, teachers, and even relatives are increasingly wary of touching children in an affectionate way, how can children learn that language? America and Britain have mingled a weird sex-obsession with puritanism, in a style unthinkable in Spain or Italy, and ended up by viewing touching as equivalent to sex.

....

"If Mr. Pease is really worried about why [British] men aren't tactile at work, perhaps he ought to look at what is stopping them."

The real betrayal of our lost children

- Lynda Lee-Potter,

Daily Mail, 20oct99, p13

" .... on Channel 4 .... The lives of runaways in London,

?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????/

????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

"Full rights to fathers outside marriage

- Marie Woolf, Telegraph, 8dec99

"Unmarried fathers are to be given full parental rights over their children's upbringing ....

"Ministers hope the move will encourage unmarried fathers to take a greater day-to=-day interest ....

"'This is one more threat to .... marriage,' said Julian Brazier, Chair of Conservative Family Campaign.

".... couples who are married have an 81% chance of staying together after 10 years but [cohabitors] .... have only a 15% chance, unless they marry later."

"Rape claim student jailed for wasting police time

-Sean O'Neill,

Daily Telegraph, 30oct99, p3

"A university student .... in an elaborate attempt to claim that she had been raped was jailed for two months yesterday. ....

".... officers had been diverted from other major inquiries including a genuine rape case, the manslaughter of a baby and the investigation into the murder .... of 14-year-old Kate Bushell. ...."

"Mistakes found in half of CSA cases

- Jon Hibbs, Political Correspondent,

Daily Telegraph, 29oct99

"Mistakes are being made in more than half of maintenance assessments handled by the Child Support Agency ....

"The annual report of the independent Chief Child Support officer .... blames [many] factors including .... a drive to clear 324,000 cases from the backlog and an unexpected rise in cases.

"The DSS said the caseload would continue to rise for another two or three years .... [to] about a million cases a year."

"Inquiry team to monitor the CPS

by Rachel Sylvester,

Daily Telegraph 16nov99, pp1-2

".... Ministers have decided to appoint a new chief inspector of the CPS {Crown Prosecution Service], because they fear that incompetence is leading to the conviction of innocent people while criminals escape prison. ...."

6p3

Editorial

The Sex-Change Society. Feminised Britain and the Neutered Male - Melanie Phillips, pub. Social Market Foundation nov99. £12 from Sunday Times tel. 0870 165 8585.

Previous watersheds known to me were;

Daniel Amneus, The Garbage Generation, pub. Primrose Press 1990

Neil Lyndon, No More Sex War, pub. Sinclair-Stevenson 1992

Warren Farrell, The Myth of Male Power, pub. Fourth Estate 1993

Patricia Morgan, Farewell to the Family?, pub. IEA 1995

Of these, Amneus and Morgan still have to be read.

(I missed David Thomas, George Gilder and some others.)

Now comes Melanie with a comprehensive and understanding analysis of the crisis through which the family is going. She clearly shows that the new androgyny wave in the Home Office and elsewhere under Adrienne Burgess - "men must change" - will only compound the crisis and further increase the suicide rate among young men. The gender racists who control government will only allow androgynysts to have power and influence during the next decade or two. Only after that, with the crisis much more severe than today, will the complex analysis developed by Melanie, our chairman Robert Whiston and others be allowed to influence government social policy. Melanie's book alone will be a very good primer for someone wanting to get up and running quickly. Most of it will not be known to most members of ManKind.

ManKind and Ill Eagle can be reached at 0171 413 9176;

(1). ManKind, Suite 367, 2 Lansdowne Row, London W1X 8HL.

(2) 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/

"Irvine seeks to cut 'fat cat' barrister fees

- Marie Woolf,

Telegraph, 7dec99, p2

".... paid too much out of public funds compared to other professions. .... the £1.6 billion legal aid budget. .... the Lord Chancellor .... saying that rates payable to lawyers for legal aid work 'are at a level that is not sustainable'"

Bleak House

Before it collapsed, the Russian empire appeared impregnable to most people. Similarly our legal industry.

There are many indications of iminent collapse of our legal industry. However, it may teeter on for further decades, and continue to inflict massive damage on our country.

Some years ago the woman in Lancashire running the organisation for litigants in personal injury cases told me that the average time a case took was seven years. Usually the claimant dies first. The damages awarded are usually slightly more than the claimant's costs. The whole thing is highly cynical.

When Dickens wrote Bleak House, the average time for a case to get through Chancery was eight years. Chancery was shut down shortly afterwards.

When the legal industry targetted my friends the Adsheads, aiming to steal their large, valuable Derbyshire hotel, I remember Eva Adshead saying to me, after nearly a decade in court, that the legal industry was "just another business". (See The Hook and the Sting, on my website. - Ed.) I find this exactly echoes Dickens' view. He had long experience as a reporter in Chancery.

The legal industry today is very similar to that Dickens described;

"The one principle of English law is, to make business for itself. There is no other principle distinctly, certainly, and consistently maintained through all its narrow turnings. Viewed by this light it becomes a coherent scheme, and not the monstrous maze that laity are apt to think it. Let them but once clearly perceive that its grand principle is to make business for itself as their expense, and surely they will cease to grumble. - p503

"Lawyers have twisted it into such a state of bedevilment that the original merits of the case have long disappeared from the face of the earth. It's about a Will, and trusts under a Will - or it was, once. It's about nothing but Costs, now. We are always appearing, and disappearing, and swearing, and interrogating, and filing, and cross-filing, and arguing, and sealing, and motioning, and referring, and reporting, and revolving about the Lord Chancellor and all his satellites, and equitably waltzing ourselves off to dusty death, about Costs. That's the great question. All the rest, by some extraordinary means, has melted away." - p87.

In the family court, the interests of your children, and the disposition of your home and salary, just melt away. - Ed

Jail threat for access row woman

by Richard Savill,

Daily Telegraph 2sep99

"A mother was told by a court yesterday that she could face jail if she continued to refuse to give her former husband access to their eight-year-old son.

"The warning coincided with concern, expressed by the London-based charity, Families Need Fathers, that "institutionally biased family courts" do not help fathers, most of whom want to see their children and are not absent by choice.

"At Glasgow sheriff court, Andrea Brennan, 35, a trainee nurse, was held in a cell for four hours after she admitted more than a dozen counts of contempt of court.

"She had failed to allow her husband John Duffy, 41, to pick up their son, John, from school once a week and from a police station handover point as agreed at the court.

Sheriff Kevin Drummond, QC, ordered Brennan, of Glasgow, to be held in the cells while he considered what action to take. When she was brought back into court her lawyer said she promised to comply with the order.

"Sheriff Drummond deferred sentence until Oct 29 and warned Brennan she would go to jail if she broke her promise.

"Last night, Jim Parton, chairman of Families Need Fathers, said: 'Courts regularly send fathers down for contempt of court and they are not small sentences. The only woman I know who got sent down spent 11 days in jail. Women should be treated equally to men and court orders should be upheld. At the moment they are a joke.'"

This report is misleading. Twice, the Appeal court in London decreed that court orders re access would not be enforced against a defiant mother. "The interests of the child are paramount" was used to justify this decision. It was asserted by breathtakingly anti-social judges, one of them a woman, that a defiant mother, if forced to allow access, might take vengeance on the child, so she must not be thwarted by a court order.

In The Independent, 12jan94, magistrate Jasmine Salisbury said "Parents seeking legitimate contact, and the courts they resort to, are engaged in a charade." A court order re access is not worth the paper it is writteen on. See The Hook and the Sting, p19, on my website - Ed www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk

"Are you too fussy to fall in love?

Kate Saunders,

Sunday Express, 31oct99, p45

" .... Earlier this month, govt statisticians predicted an explosion of singles. .... The blokes, .... even more terrified of commitment."

"Help us beat the cancer no one mentions

Daily Mail Campaign p1, 2nov99

"The Daily Mail today launches a £1million fundraising campaign to crack Britain's 'forgotten disease', prostate cancer. .... this woefully neglected .... disease.

"Though prostate cancer kills 10,000 men every year .... just £47,000 a year is currently spent researching it. Yet £18 million goes on scientific projects looking as Aids, which kills 400 a year. .... [See my website for the AIDS scandal - Ed]

".... Prostate cancer is now the most common cancer in men, the death toll has doubled over the last 20 years and the figure is still climbing. .... Experts predict that .... One man in ten will be affected. ....

"There are 150 organisations across the UK promoting awareness of breast cancer and raising funds for research. Yet just one exists solely to raise the profile of prostate cancer - the Prostate Cancer Charity. ....

6p4

"[p47/49] .... we spend almost 100 times as much on breast cancer as we do on studying and treating cancer of the prostate. .... Breast cancer research receives funding of about £4.3 millions a year .... [deaths were about equal.]

"There is a gross and unfair imbalance between expenditure on breast cancer research and treatment, and research into treatment of prostate cancer. So why has this quite appalling disparity developed? Part of the answer must be the power of feminist groups and women's organisations, ...."

Daily Mail 2nov99 p49 said that in 1996, 30,000 died from prostate cancer, 35,000 died from breast cancer and less than 5,000 from cervical cancer.

"Doctor chosen to lead cancer care service shake-up

by Robert Shrimsley,

Daily Telegraph, 25oct99

"A Cancer 'tsar' to oversee all NHS treatment and to improve the service given to patients is to be appointed today by Alan Milburn, the Health Secretary.

"Professor Michael Richards, .... Guy's and St. Thomas's Hospital .... Mr. Milburn was given the health brief to improve public perceptions of Government action ....

"Professor Richards's first job will be to set national standards for treatment and he will focus particular attention on breast and ovarian cancer. ....

"Mr Milburn .... said: 'Cancer care should not depend on where you live. The standard of care is too patchy.'"

Mr. Milburn believes cancer care should be universally available, but not for men. Prostate cancer was not mentioned. - Ed

Is Robert Shrimsley a poodle-man, or is he just holding onto his job?- Ed

"Three women....

-Jacqui Thornton, Sunday Telegraph, 14nov99, p25

"Britain's record on cancer care puts us 'in the Third World' .... condemnation of Britain's record on cancer care. .... the Government .... was forced to hang its head."

The whole page was devoted to shortcomings in care of breast cancer. No cancer which only a man might catch was mentioned. - Ed

".... the health service is structured around the health of women, spending eight times as much on them as on men. This proportion cannot be explained solely by provision for pregnancy and child-birth." Melanie Phillips, The Sex-Change Society, 1999, p12, tel. 020 7222 0310 for a copy.

"Operation offers hope for prostate patients

- Alsling Irwin, Telegraph, 14dec99

"A surgeon used a tiny piece of nerve from a patient's foot to fix an important nerve near the prostate .... slived apart in the cancer operation.

"If it works, [it] will rescue the patient from incontinence and erectile dysfunction, which often follows [prostate] sirgery."

Office of National Statistics

reported by David Norris,

Daily Mail, 6nov99, p39

Employment of mothers in a relationship rose in the 1990-97 period from 61% to 68%, but the number of single mothers taking a job increased from just 41% to 44%.

Of today's 1.7m lone mothers, 0.6m have never been married.

"The Conservative Family Campaign has estimated that a child born outside marriage has only a 15% chance of its parents being together by the time it is ten."

Fathers are 'too proud' to seek aid

David Taylor,

Sunday Express, 31oct99

"Millions of fathers are desperate for support for their family problems but are too proud to seek help ....

"A national freephone helpline launched in the summer with £1 million of Government backoing .... just one in five of its callers are men. .... anonymously .... fathers admit they do want help and support when the everyday trials of family life become too much. ....

"The charity, formed following the merger of Parentline and the National Stepfamily Association, will also raise concerns that services provided by charities and councils to help families are shutting fathers out."

"Call Parentline on 0808 8002222"

"It's Many Happy Returns to the M1

Leo McKinstry,

Daily Mail, 2nov99, p13.

".... the great motorway which celebrates its 40th birthday today.

".... Once a funeral cortege of two hearses .... one carrying a coffin, were (sic) stopped for speeding.

"'If the police hadn't stopped us, we might have made it to the funeral on time,' said one of the undertakers."

Is it technically possible to be late for your own funeral? What about missing your own birth? - Ed.

Sex Equality for Older Men

On the 16 December in Luxembourg, the European Court of Justice helped to redress one of several statutory sex inequalities existing against older men in the UK when it ruled that the present procedure for granting winter fuel payments based on state pension age was an unlawful sex discrimination, since the ages are unequal for men and women.

Despite its previous bland assertions when challenged that the discrimination was not in breach of European law, the Government promptly accepted the ruling and agreed that payments in future would be made to all those households with anyone of age 60 or over residing with them, so ending the present discrimination against men (and their families) aged between 60 and 65 in entitlement to winter fuel payments. The Government also accepted that they were obliged to backdate payments to 1997 when the scheme was introduced. The Government now has to introduce measures to identify all men between the ages of 60 and 65, not on income support or other qualifying benefit, who have been previously discriminated against.

The case is a victory for PARITY, a small voluntary organisation campaigning for equal rights in law for men and women, and for the applicant, John Taylor, an executive committee member of PARITY, now aged 64. Mr. Taylor and his wife were denied benefit because his retirement income was just above income support level and his wife had no state pension in her own right.

PARITY achieved a similar success in October 1995 when the European Court ruled that older men and women should qualify for free NHS medical prescriptions at the same age, the ages previously being also biased on the different state pension ages for men and women. The Government equalised the entitlement age at 60 the next day.

New legislation enacted in November (but yet to come into effect) providing for equal survivors benefits for widowers can also be attributed to PARITY, which, in collaboration with Liberty and Child Poverty Action Group, successfully challenged in the European Court of Human Rights the previous discrimination against widowers, the Government admitting that a case challenging such discrimination was admissible under the Convention.

The present inequality in the entitlement of older persons to bus-passes, again because it is based on state pension age, is the next target for PARITY. PARITY already has a case challenging this discrimination before the European Court of Human Rights, but because of the huge backlog in cases before

????????????????????????????????????????????????

???????????????????????????????????????????????

6p5

Abuse of rights is on our doorstep

Today is International Human Rights Day, and it is worth pausing to reflect that too often we have thought of human rights abuses as being outrages which happen overseas. But in Britain, too, we have witnessed inhumanity and a drop in the standards we must expect from a civilised world. Violence and sexual abuse against women and children in the home is now recognised as a human rights violation.

While many are aware of the British Council's cultural and educational activities, few know of its extensive and innovative work in good governance, especially in the emerging democracies. The Council is well placed to link organisations working in human rights and children's rights. This network strengthens organisations, supports key individuals, initiates projects and disseminates information.

The international community is taking human rights more seriously and the change in the Zeitgeist is tangible. Last year, by voting for an international Criminal Court, 120 countries expressed their desire to see human rights abusers brought to justice. In the UK, we have the landmark Pinochet decision and the new Human Rights Act.

Just as democratic rights was the dominant idea at the start of this century, human rights will carry us into the next with optimism.

- Baroness Helena Kennedy

of the Shaws QC,

Chair, The British Council,

Spring Gardens, SW1.

Letters, Evening Standard, 10dec99, p28

I have requested information as to what is the purpose of the British Council. We are in deep water here - Ed

"Law Society officer could face more claims of bullying

- Frances Gibb, Times, 21dec99, p4

"Between 15 and 20 allegations of bullying or harassment have been made against Kemlesh Bahl, the vice-president of the Law Society. .... [but] four black organisations pledged their support for Ms Bahl, who is facing an official inquiry. .... due to examine two allegations pf harassment .... One involves a senior official at the Law Society and the other a former Law Society employee. .... In a separate move, a former senior employee of the Equal Opportunities Commission .... also accused Ms Bahl of intimidation when she was chairman of the Commission - before [joining the] Law Society ....

Ms Bahl is due to become the first woman and the first black President of the 250-year-old society in July."

Conundrum

Your item on the Prime Minister's paternity leave failed to point out that MPs, unlike the rest of us, get paid if they take it. Therefore Tony Blair is entitled to claim almost £1,000 per week for the first three weeks after his child is born. We would encourage Mr Blair to take as much leave as he can fit into his busy schedule - a few days, at least, of bonding with his new child (and support for his wife) are essential, and the country is unlikely to grind to a halt in his absence. The real question is, will he have the gall to take the money?

Richard Gregory, Editor of Mackenzie, FNF, letter in the Evening Standard, 10dec99, p28

Spot the message(s) - Ed

The Truth behind Domestic Violence

Summary of a talk given to members of ManKind in Taunton by the specialist on domestic violence, Erin Pizzey. Det. Sergeant Steve Mackay and Inspector Mike Vince were present. None of the other Domestic Violence units in Somerset who were invited, attended.

Origins of her refuge - she joined a women's collective in the hope of joining that she thought would be a young mother's community centre. It turned out to be a feminist cell where she was informed that men were the enemy and all mothers were oppressed. Her protectations at this were met by being described as a revisionist and being thrown out. At this point they had no agenda and no funding.

The Chiswick Refuge - she started this as a community centre but it repidly turned into a refuge as battered women came seeking help. It was not long before the following facotrs emerged:

<>Most of the violent men were those with criminal records.

<>Of the first 100 women, 38 were genuine cases and 62 of the women were as violent if not more violent than their husbands - the real victims were the men. In one instance when she asked a woman why her husband had blacked her eye, she replied "because I stabbed him, but you are not supposed to ask that."

<>The Feminist movement had found their cause and a means of fund raising and despite Erin's protestations that it was a two-way affair, nobody listened to her.

<>The real victims were the children because neither men nor women were treated for their violent behaviour and children stemming from such a relationship often repeated the violence whether they were male or female.

<>Men's violence was usually reactive, whereas women's was premeditated.

Gender issue - DV has now become a gender issue rather than a people issue and whilst society if comfortable with men being violent and being locked up, it has difficulty in accepting that women are equally violent.

Mediation should be the order of the day with Courts being used to rubber stamp the ensuing solution rather than deal with it, as many of the Government Agencies (Probation Service and Social Services) were politically mnotivated and would invariably rule in favour of the mother regardless of the safety of the children.

Home Office Guidelines to the Police - the current guidlines (1990) continuously describe the man as the perpetrator and the woman as the victim. In 1996 the British Crime Survey stated that 4.2% of both men and women suffered from Domestic Violence, however, the guidelines remain unchanged. Erin stated that the Police were in the middle of a political battle and as such it was easier to take a man down to the station than a woman. In response, the policemen present zassured everyone that in the event of a man being injured, that they would arrest the woman. They did acknowledge that whilst they could refer a woman to a refuge, there was nothing that they could offer a man. This would probably explain why they had recently received only 4 DV calls from men and 67 from women.

Local Complaints - we entered into the experiences of our groups.

<>Bristol - a member was threatened with a cricket bat by his ex-wife who then proceeded to break his window in. He had a witness plus his daughter who was sat the other side of the glass.When the PC and WPC arrived they refused to believe him, accusing him of doing it himself as his wife had a witness who saw him do it. The witness turned out to be non-existent. To add insult to injury the PC said that she was entitled to do it as it was still her house and the WPC said that they would not dream of arresting a pregnant woman (she was 4 months pregnant). It required an official complaint to get them moving.

<>Yeovil - meanwhile in Yeovil, a man who was legitimately trying to see his children had an argument with his wife in the street. One call from her prompted an immediate caution from the police. Later, he had the cheek to put his foot in the door when he was trying to collect the children and another call for help prompted yet another caution. She then cancelled a weekend pick-up from the school but told the children he would be there. In order to avoid problems he visited her place of work to try and understand her intentions and left promptluy when asked. On our advice he went to pick his children up (despite her telling him not to) asking the police to accompany him in case of trouble. They were too busy - on arriving at school the mother was not there - she had put him in a catch 22 situation. Turn up and risk confrontation, don't turn up and risk no-one being there for the children. You do not have to ask - the police gave him another caution for going to her place of work.

<>Taunton - meanwhile a man in Taunton who still occupied the house allowed his ex-wife to visit the house to pick up some items. She requested a police escort and was given one. Later the situation was reversed and he requested a police escort and was denied one as they were too busy. On reaching his house she had locked the garage

6p6

holding his posessions and would not unlock it. He used minimal force to open it and one call from his ex-wife reesulted in three squad cars arriving to bundle him away.

.... on asking the policemen present for their advice, .... They made it clear to all those present that men would have to start complaining if they did not receive fair treatment and that in the case of domestic violence, although they could offer nothing, men should still inform the police.

Erin concluded that she felt that the meeting had been very positive, which no whinging and sensed that the group was actively trying to solve probmems. She was especially pleased to see the police present and had great respect for them.

Erin Pizzey was thanked for her contribution along with Inspector Mike Vince and Detective Sergeant Steve Mackay for attending our meeting.

ManKind nationwide

West Midlands (plus Staffs, Shrops, Worcs., Hereford) 01922 442442

East Midlands (Derby, Notts, Leics, Warwicks, Northants) 0116 264031

Northern England (Cumbria, Northumberland, Durham, Tyne & Wear) 01912 274330

Eastern England (Lincs, Rutland, Cambs, Norfolk, Suffold) 01522 526028

South-East (Berks, Hants, IOW, Surrey, Sussex, Kent) 01483 767314

London 0181 9488797

South-West (Somerset, Devon, Bristol, Cornwall, Dorset, Wilts, Glos) 01643 863352

North-West, North-East and Home Counties - we need organisers. Tel 01643 862289

Conference on 7/8jan00. All Regional Organisers will be meeting at our regional HQ in the south-west to plan our campaigns for the year 2000. Subjects include Probation Service; DV; Men's Health; Lord Woolf's initiative on rights of both parents to see their children.

It is vital that you become involved with your appropriate group - Stephen Fitzgerald (National Organiser - ManKind)

July 22, 1999

To: Her Majesty the Queen

Buckingham Palace

London, England SW1A 1AA

Your Majesty

Before I begin my letter of concern, let me say, "Long live the Queen", "Long live the Queen Mother," and "Long live the Royal Family."

I am an 84-year-old veteran of the Second World War who served in the war effort as a member of the British Royal Marines on duty in Great Britain. In recognition of my service during the bombing of London I received a citation from the Lord Mayor of London. After the war in 1955, I moved to Canada where I currently reside.

As a defender of democracy and freedom for Great Britain and a loyal supporter of the Monarchy, I am asking for your Majesty's help in my last, yet most difficult battle of my life. I am turning to you for help, your Majesty, for although I am an old solder who is strong in spirit and mind, I must admit that I am too old in body to fight alone in battle any longer. My comrades who served with me to defend England and to fight for democracy and freedom are no longer here on this earth to help me during my time of need. Like a wounded solder, I am turning to my most Noble Leader for help and reassurance in my final battle.

The help that I so humbly ask for is not for myself but for the many children and their families who lives are being torn asunder by a Family Justice System in Canada that has no mercy on children or their parents, especially good loving fathers. Many of the fathers being destroyed today by Canada's Family Justice System are the sons and grandsons of the many brave men who fought and died for Great Britain and its allies during the war. Many of the fathers who died did so for the cause of Democracy, Freedom and a desire to give their descendants a better way of life. Yet, if my comrades were alive today, they would be utterly shattered by what they would see is being done by the Justice System to their children and grandchildren today. None of us who were part of the war effort would have imagined the sons and grandsons of those who fought in the war to be victims of injustices of a system of government they defended.

During the war, I defended the cause of freedom and democracy, but in this, my last battle, I fight for the cause of justice for children and families. It is a fight that many of the fallen comrades of Great Britain would gladly fight alongside of me if they were alive today.

I have enclosed with this letter a package of materials being produced by many ordinary, hard working Canadians. These materials expose only some of the injustices being perpetrated against children and families by lawyers and a powerful legal system supposedly in the name of Justice. Unfortunately, those entrusted by the people for the administration of Justice in Canada have allowed the family justice system to deteriorate to a point where it is a disgrace to all those who believe in Justice and Freedom. Many of those who administer the laws and many of those who misuse the laws are literally ripping families apart under the shady veil of the law.

I have learned that some members of the Royal Family are Honorary Members of the Law Society of Upper Canada. I find it unfortunate that the reputation and good names of members of the Royal family are being used to bring credibility to a lawyer's organization whose reputation has come into such disrepute and whose members are adversely affecting the lives of many children and families. I believe that these injustices would be of great concern to members of the Royal Family whose names are being associated with these lawyers. I believe that members of the Royal family are unaware of the actions of some of those who they are associated with at the Law Society. It may be very likely that my letter will be one of the first to bring this situation into the open. I am sure that other people, like myself, will be scrutinizing the conduct of Law Society members and looking as well at what those who lend their names to these organizations do to maintain the respectability of the organizations to which they are a part.

I understand that it may not be desirable for the Royal Family to interfere with the internal affairs of Canada but the interests of children should have no boundaries. The children of Canada need your help, your Majesty. You, and only you, can do something for the children of Canada that no other person can do.

The injustices being waged against children and their families by the bureaucrats and members of the Law Society cannot be fought with the weapons of war but only with the weapons of words from those with wisdom and respect. The influence of Your Majesty and members of the Royal Family can correct injustice in a way that no government can do. If there were ever a time for your Majesty and the Royal Family to direct its wisdom and influence in a meaningful way towards a good and honourable cause, then this would be a time to do so. I humbly request that the Royal Family speak out and to set right the course of justice for children. Many lawyers and others within the legal system are literally destroying children and families while they claim support from the Royal Family for their organizations. I am sure, Your Majesty, The Royal Family never intended the principles of laws to be used in this manner.

I humbly request Your Majesty, that should you be so kind as to write a letter as a token of your concern, voicing the peoples concern to the Prime Minister of Canada, the Rt. Honourable Mr. Chretien, which I hope he will circulate in the right areas, that much will be achieved in correcting the injustices. This would be greatly appreciated by many, many families, and myself affected by the judicial situation.

Your Majesty, should you accede to my request, you will make many, many Canadian families happy to know that their most Noble Queen greatly cares for her subjects.

Your loyal subject Maurice Conway (d.o.b. Dec. 26, 1914)

From 'The Thoughts of Chairman Greer'

"There is no race on earth more barbaric than we, no race on earth more misognyistic."

- Germaine Greer,

Evening Standard, 10dec99, p31.

Email received by Ivor Catt on 16nov99

Butler-Sloss's attack on the family, see next article, is echoed in Canada. The timing is not coincidental. - Ed

6p7

".... Recently, Madame Justice Claire L'Heureux-Dube delivered the keynote speech at the law school of Queen's University. According to the Kingston Whig-Standard, in her address, the Supreme Court Justice said it's time for the law to look beyond traditional relationships of men and women, and start extending equality to partners of all types who live together. The failure to do so may be doing violence to the fabric of our society, she said.

" 'Legal scholars say the issue will be the next frontier in Canada's courts,' says the Whig-Standard, reporting on a conference of academics, lawyers and government officials. The conference was co-sponsored by the university and the Law Commission of Canada, a radical body created in the Trudeau years; it was formerly headed by Antonio Lamer, who later became Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, a position in which he was able to push ideas which his Law Commission had been unable to sell to elected legislators.

" 'Why does the law distinguish between partnerships?" L'Heureux-Dube asked in her speech at Queen's. "Why must it value some relationships and reject others?'"

Children are the Gays' gravy train

The courts have now ruled that homosexual couples are a family. Dame Elizabeth Butler-Sloss publicises the view that the secret Family Court system thinks that homosexuals should be allowed complete their family by adopting children. The following are some figures which compare state help to gay couples with state help to heterosexual couples.

Case One:

Two gays have a child (6-yr.) living with them. Suppose they are unemployed, and they draw unemployment

????????????????????????????????????????????????????

?????????????????????????????????????????????????????

"Learning to relate £ 24.90

TOTAL PROVIDED BY STATE FOR NON-HOMOSEXUAL COUPLE £105.55

In other words: New Labour (heavily dominated by lawyers) gives unemployed homosexuals an extra £ 22.15 per week.

Case Two:

Two gays or lesbians have a child (6 yr.) living with them. Suppose one of them works and earns £220 and the other is unemployed to look after the child.

The one who does not work is able to claim Income Support (£51.40) plus money for the child (£24.90). On top the one who looks after the child would be able to claim housing benefit (up to £ 100 pw).

Heterosexual men and women who are married or living together as husband and wife are treated as a couple. When one of them works and earns £220 the other gets NOTHING as income support, NOTHING EXTRA for the child NOTHING extra for the housing.

Thus the TOTAL PROVIDED BY STATE FOR HOMOSEXUAL COUPLE £176.30 cf nothing for heterosexual couple.

Conclusion: New Labour Government (more than a quarter of which is homosexual or lawyer or both) offers homosexuals an extra £176.30 per week (£8,996 p.a.) as an incentive to "complete their family" when one of them works. Chris Smith has to get hold of a child a.s.a.p.

Gay, and sad

The Lewisham social services appear to have taken leave of their senses. Dismayed that a two-year-old boy has been sharing a room with an older boy, they have planned his removal from his foster parents, the one home that he has known all his life, and will be handing him to a homosexual couple with the aim of adoption. There is no suggestion that the boy had been maltreated. From what we know, he was well attached to his foster mother, father and siblings. It was simply enough that he was sharing a room, however innocently, with an older boy. When The Daily Telegraph contacted Lewisham for its comments, its immediate reaction was to threaten an injunction. Repeated assurances to its legal department that the paper had no intention whatsoever of identifying the boy or his foster family fell on deaf ears. By 8pm it was attempting to persuade Mr Justice Wall to prevent publication of the story.

Whether or not the social services are justified in presuming that sexual abuse is rife in foster homes, this is not alleged in this case, and it is surely peculiar that they should seek a homosexual couple for remedy. Only married couples are allowed to adopt. There is no provision under English law for cohabiting men to adopt jointly. When it occurs, it is surreptitious. Only one of the men is listed as the official parent, so that the adoption can be falsely categorised as a single-father case. The courts are now acquiescing in this ruse. Dame Elizabeth Butler-Sloss,. President of the High Court's Family Division, appeared to endorse it last month when she praised the "increasing number of cases where a child is cared for by parents of the same sex". The law has been stretched beyond the intent of Parliament by judicial activists with an ideological agenda.

Indeed, the law hardly seems to count when it conflicts with homosexual activists' demands for further privileges. London health authorities are violating Section 28 of the Local Government Act by offering a guide to the etiquette of "cruising and cottaging" - encouraging homosexual acts with strangers in public lavatories. The Prison Service is being stymied in its efforts to enforce its ban on homosexual activity because a judge has ruled that prison officers must provide condoms to gay prisoners.

One might be forgiven for thinking that the law treats homosexuality as a "normal" and "valid" alternative to heterosexuality. It does not. The 1967 Sexual Offences Act, which offered a defence for the practice, none the less did not legalise it. For the militant homosexual groups, however, tolerance is not enough. They demand active approval and insist on debilitating the institution of marriage in their fury to break down all barriers. What is reprehensible is that so much of Labour's governing class is willing to play along. - Editorial, 13nov99

[One thing to notice is the linking of homosexuals with attack on the family with Labour govt. This points to an alliance between homosexuals and anti-family radical feminists, both of whom are heavily represented in Vanity Blair's Cabinet.]

Secret in the interests of whom?

"Charles Moore, the editor of The Daily Telegraph, said: 'We welcome the judge's refusal to impose an injunction on us and do not understand Lewisham council's attempts to obstruct a proper resolution of the issue. While we absolutely agree with, and insist on, the need to handle stories of this nature sensitively, it is imperative that local authorities and others [judges? - Ed] should not be able to avoid public scrutiny by sheltering behind laws designed to protect children.'" - 13nov99, p7

Butler-Sloss defies the law

The Judgement of Solomon

[1994] 1 FLR 669

A v A (MINORS) (SHARED RESIDENCE ORDER)

Court of Appeal

Butler-Sloss LJ and Connel J

3 February 1994

The above Judgement is on the Internet.

This judgement demonstrates that, using the mantra "The interests of the child comes first", our judges will ignore legislation, including the Children Act 1989, and any further legislation on family matters passed during the next fifteen years. Once the Silly-Sloss's verbiage is stripped away, it is a clear declaration of defiance of Parliament, and a declaration of the supremacy of judges, to do with our children as the ignorant whim takes them. For full analysis, see my article in a future issue of Male View, or send me £1 in stamps for a copy of both judgement and article, or see my website - Ed

Homosexuality and Suicide

The Daily Telegraph of 7dec99, p8, includes an assertion by junior

6p8

environment minister Lord Whitty that Section 28 of the Local Government Act, preventing councils from promoting homosexuality, was "pernicious" and harmful to children. .... One young homosexual in five would harm themselves or attempt suicide, Lord Whitty told peers.

Whitty has got it back to front. He needs to be told that adult homosexuals attempt suicide six times more often than normal men [Male View, jan99, p20]. This in spite of the fact that their chance of promotion, for instance into the cabinet, is far greater.

Here we have the ultimately confused, dangerous minister. Homosexuals are deeply disturbed people. 30% of members of alcoholics anonymous are homosexual. Their expectation of life is terrifyingly low, 30 years less. The idea that encouraging young men into that lifestyle will save lives is the ultimate absurdity.

Britain's institutions acquiesce in face of Gay lobby

Some of our respected national organisations are frighteningly ambivalent towards Politically Correct positions when tackling the issue of homosexuality and children.

They include; The General Council of the British Medical Council; the Health Education Authority; The Royal College of Psychiatrists.

Gay Rights and the Family

- Melanie Phillips, Sunday Times, sect. 1 p13, 26dec99

".... the gay rights campaign aims not to protect homosexuals but to destroy the traditional family."

Parentectomy

email recd 4nov99

To All;

.... I think that the bonehead label isn't very useful either. In my opinion, what we are dealing with is people who are afflicted with PTSD, (post-traumatic stress disorder).

Having your children taken away from you is more than merely traumatic, it may be the most traumatic event one could ever experience. Here are three of the many reasons why this is so........

1) The situation represents "ambiguous loss", so one is not in any way free to mourn, as in a death of a child situation. (Some author has written a brilliant book on ambiguous loss). It's sort of like the type of loss where you keep on losing and get no resolution.

2) This type of loss is personal, yet the victim appears visibly intact, so the social empathy received is far less than proportional to the extent the injuries deserve. If one were to lose a limb, for example, one's social experience would include an invaluable empathy component which would facilitate personal healing. In the case of child seizure, empathy is not only appallingly inadequate but many people even suggest to the victim that HE IS NOT INJURED, or that the injury is minimal. This "anti-empathy" is a very large part of why the PTSD from this type of trauma becomes so severe, catapulting its victims into near insanity.

3) This injury is sanctioned by and often administered by the government itself. This places the injury in the same class as any other government-sanctioned violence at any time in human history. Most individuals, from a very young age, possess at least some notion that the function of government is to assist them somehow or offer them some form of protection. When it is demonstrated that the opposite is the case, it turns one's perceptual apparatus upside down, especially in cases where the victim was formerly some sort of an ardent or active supporter of government.

I applaud the strength of individuals who have suffered child-seizure trauma and continue to wake up each morning and face a new day. It is a testimony to the courage, strength, resilience and abundant inner resources of multitudes of victims, mostly men, and some women, that there are not daily a great many homicide sprees and suicides in response to the stress caused by child-seizure trauma. This situation is a psychological time-bomb, my friends, and hyperbolic talk is the least of our worries. Strength and patience to us all..............Allan.

Punished for being a man

Daily Telegraph, 13nov99, p5 and p15.

1. p5 [3 months for harassment plus 21 months for being a man. - Ed]

"A barrister obsessed with a woman lawyer was jailed for two years for defying court orders to stop harassing her.

".... the pair met at the Bar and embarked on an affair ....

"When she [ended] the affair .... Webster could not accept it. .... He warned her .... he would ruin her career .... He sent her letters .... He called her on the telephone. .... He .... attempted suicide ...." - p5

2. p15 "A jealous policewoman who .... [tracked] down her love rival, and then threatened .... to stab her and to .... plant drugs on her .... was jailed .... for three months.

"The .... magistrate added: 'I have found little evidence of remorse ....'"

Those who sow the wind and reap the whirlwind

Scurrilous stories are circulating about Esther Ranzen's and Desmond Wilcox's daughters. It is being suggested that one's m.e. and the other's bulimia was caused by family sexual abuse.

These rumours are probably the work of one of Ranzen's rivals in the sexual abuse lobby.

It looks as though the monster Esther helped to create is now threatening her own family.

- reported by AAFAA, 01635 202433

Children Sold Short - again ?

Some of the prestigious children's charities that tacitly support lowering the age of consent for homosexuality.

1/. NSPCC

2/. Barbados

3/. Save the Children.

Puffs from the BMA

The General Council of the British Medical Assoc. is quoted as stating that: "There is no convincing medical reason against reducing the age of consent for male homosexuals to 16 and to do so may yield positive health benefits".

We can see that reducing the age of consent from 18 to 16 will have little or no effect on the shortened life span (to 42 years) of the average homosexual. But we are at a loss to explain what positive health benefits it could possibly yield. All suggestions to the Editor, please.

Male driving worsens to confirm that only women should drive

"Crash Driver 'had cat on head'

"A driver had a cat sitting on his head when he crashed after failing to stop at a roundabout, a court heard yesterday. A woman driving behind David Levy said she saw a black cat sitting on his bald head when the accident happened ... 'I thought the cat was a toy, but then I saw it sit on his head.'

"Levy, 65, appealing against a careless driving conviction, .... denied that one was on his head. His appeal was rejected." - Daily Telegraph, 13nov99, p2.

[No one should lie about use of a cat. Although they get lost more often, women drivers never use a cat guide. - Ed]

**********************************

Ill Eagle 7, jan/feb00

ISSN 1466-9005

p1

The Poodle-Man Archetype

"Learning to relate to father

"Bitter experiences as a child and a parent have taught Ed Straw, brother of the home secretary, how to build closer families.

"My father left home as the result of a court order when I was eight years old. I didn't see him again for 35 years. .... After he left, I behaved as though I didn't have a father. ....

"There were five children - Jack, Sue, me, Willie, Helen. My mum was a teacher and we lived in a council maisonette in Loughton, Essex. .... at that time there was a huge social stigma about not being a perfect nuclear family. .... Financially, things were tight, and periodically we ran out of money and went hungry. ....

"Jack was the eldest, and 10 when my father left. Almost immediately, he went away to boarding school. Willie, who is younger than me, and I also won state scholarships to this school. The education was good, but it specialised in turning out emotional cripples.

"I met my first wife at Manchester University; I was 23 when we got married. In those days that wasn't thought young, but actually I was very immature. I got a job, and became Mr Responsibility. We had three children, Dan, Adam, and Chloe, who are now 24, 22 and 18. I wanted the security of marriage, but I hadn't a clue how to run a long-term relationship.

"I craved intimacy, but I didn't know how to handle intimate relationships. ... I had to learn how to enjoy and to "do" intimate relationships. .... I had to learn .... to talk about apparent trivia. .... This comes naturally for most women, but I had to learn to talk trivia in male relationships with my sons, and my brothers.

".... In the late 1980s, I was facing a merger at work, amid a recession. I felt as though I was falling apart. I was 40, and having a mid-life crisis. My marriage broke up, I left home, and eventually I went to see a psychotherapist. ....

"He helped me with some of the male role model and fathering I hadn't had, to build a long-term resilience to run a long-term relationship, ....

"Of course, I have regrets about my first children. I had done what my father had done. I had walked out and left them. I felt a terrible loss and a huge sense of guilt and failure. ....

"I got [re]married shortly after my reunion with my father, and this re-relating in the family encouraged me to become chairman of Relate. ....

"Ed Straw is a government adviser on the family. He is a contributor to Family Business, published by Demos tomorrow. He was talking to Ann McFerran." Sunday Times, 6feb00, sect5 p8

The implications of this article are very serious. Please would readers send in their comments. - Ed

Radfem propaganda paid for by you

Amnesty announced by ManKind

13dec99

Second copy sent to my MP Pollard and to Moxon, Home Office, 1feb00.

To Kerry Pollard MP

From Ivor Catt

Re your letter to me dated 18nov99 [see my website], please send me information as to the "staged disciplinary process" mentioned therein.

Our plan is to announce that after an amnesty to 1july00, civil servants who are associated with research reports which have been twisted to a political agenda, and research figures falsified, after 1july00, will be dismissed. That will give enough time for the introduction of a new era of honest research reporting by civil servants in government departments. We need to have full knowledge of your "staged disciplinary process" well before that date.

The initial announcement is by way of putting this document onto my website today. It will also be announced in the next issue of Ill Eagle, which I edit.

Yours sincerely,

Ivor Catt

cc Betty Moxon, Home Office

The Gvardian and Equal Opportvnities

The Gvardian should be congratulated for its commitment to Equal Opportvnities. However, their reforms may be incomplete.

I will give a personal cheque for £5 to the first reader who spots a male heterosexual journalist working for The Gvardian. (No formal proof required.) I plan to Name and Shame the deviant in a future edition of Ill Eagle. - Ed

Animal Farm

p7, The Sun, 28jan00

Sent in by Bill Tomlinson

"School mum jailed for sex with pupils.

".... Judge Hale said, 'If you had been a man acting in the same way toward young girls, the sentence would have been much greater."

"Love you to death

by Adam Craig,

Sunday Times, p5-11, 6feb00

"When I fell in love with my wife I told her that if she were ever unfaithful to me I'd whack her with a Chinese meat cleaver. She thought I was joking. I opened a drawer and showed it to her.

"'I [know of] 21 poisonous plants,' I added ominously, 'most of which are extremely difficult to detect.'

"Reader, she married me, and the meat cleaver has lain rusting in a drawer for the past 16 years."

[continued at end of page 2

Sexism in "Science"

"A Natural History of Rape: Biological Bases of Sexual coercion" by Thornhill and Palmer

MIT has accelerated its publication schedule because of strong media interest.

Note the disturbing attempt of the New York Academy of Science to profit from "sexism in science", so "substantiate" the notion that men are born rapists.

For more information see www.nyas.org/

"Bankrolling Gay Proselytism

The case for extending Section 28"

For the best report on this subject, 'phone 0191 281 5664 for their £2.50 post free, 44pp booklet with the above title.

Named and shamed

Leader, Daily Mail, 8feb00

"[We welcome] the decision of the judge at Newcastle Crown Court to reveal the identity of a woman who falsely accused a male colleague of rape

.... charges .... for three years have blighted the life and career of Martin Garfoot and his family. Yet this is but the latest in a succession of .... such accusations .... against innocent men. .... The award of £400,000 damages to Mr Garfoot will be little comfort to him ...."

p2

Counterblast

BBC2 7.30pm 24jan00

http://www.bbc.co.uk/knowledge/home/index.shtml

George McAulay is Scottish Chairman of the UK Men's Movement and this week on Counterblast he's a man with a mission. Tired of being insulted and vilified for being male by feminist writers in the media, George says it's time for men to fight back.

"I hate feminists because they're phoneys, they're liars," George explains. "Feminism is not based on the notion of equality for women, it's based on a hatred of men and a hatred of their family. In a sane and well ordered world men and women between themselves resolve what is right and proper in their relations but feminism like Marxism seeks to impose a standard of behaviour on everyone."

According to George, shocking the public with his own extreme views is the only real way of raising an awareness of the problem. Feminists who engage in male bashing are allowed to get away with it because society is running scared. As a result, George has developed some strong opinions of his own and there are no holds barred. George sees a breakdown in society thanks to the hateful views of feminists like Valerie Solanas whose ideas are still being taught in Women's Studies at Universities throughout Britain.

"We allow these media witches to put their stuff in our papers day in, day out and you people buy it," he says. "I make people challenge the cosy assumptions that they're comfortable with."

George says while most people today are afraid to speak out against these scathing attacks on men because they worry about the disapproval of others or fear their career will suffer, he's ready to champion what's right in the battle of the sexes.

"It's this spiritual ability to struggle and face the unpalatable and the unacceptable within yourself which I think is men's strength, women's vanity is overwhelming. There's very few women who manage to go beyond the material in life and I think that women's vanity and materialism in modern society has become untempered."

George McAulay has been campaigning on pro-family issues and issues that affect men for the past eight years. He says the hate propaganda against men spread by feminists working in the media and advertising industry is sheer exploitation and an abuse of privilege. George believes that the slander and lies they propagate are causing the breakdown of the family, community and the traditional roles of men and women.

"When I say that a man should be the head of the family, in no way does it mean that women are demeaned or second class citizens or reduced to the trivial. They realise that man has a certain strength and consistency of emotion that makes him better suited for steering the ship of the family."

American anti-feminist author Rich Zubaty joins George to talk about the sort of privileges women enjoy today as they head into positions of power in society.

"Men have to register for military service in the States, women do not. I don't know how women can become congressmen and senators and CEOs of huge corporations and they're never required to somehow protect or defend the form of government that allows them these high privileges," Rich explains. "If we created a special class of men who were born into a privilege whereby they never had to fight in war, they were never expected to do hard physical labour, we would consider these men aristocrats and throwbacks to a couple of centuries ago. But the fact that women can be born into a class where they never have to fight in a war, never are expected to do physical labour is a type of aristocracy."

Rich believes female chauvinism is based entirely on the belief that men are the oppressors of women. He says this is not true today nor has it ever been the case despite the fact that the entire feminist agenda is built upon the notion. "Men have always been the ones to fight the wars, to mine the minerals, to drill the oil, to bring comfort and security into the lives of women.

Nineteen out of twenty people who die on the job are men. If nineteen out of twenty people who died on the job were women we'd have a federal investigation into this tragedy."

George's TV programme was very good. Write to me asking about availablity of a videotape. - Ed

Cannabis and Tobacco

".... They say .... that cannabis isn't addictive .... Yet it is addictive; moreover, cannabis is smoked with tobacco, is itself carcinogenic and, used with tobacco, causes cancer much faster than tobacco alone. ....

"Cannabis hits the immune system .... one joint every other day causes permanent brain damage .... cannabis stays in the blood for weeks ...."

- Melanie Phillips,

Sunday Times, 9jan00, p1 - 17

Please would a reader enlighten other Ill Eagle readers? Where is the scholarly information on whether tobacco and cannabis multiply, rather than add, their cancer-causing effects? Also, the other assertions. - Ed

Spain leaves Britain with £15m legal bill

by David Graves,

Telegraph, 17jan00, p9

".... £15million and could rise higher....

".... bill for the nine-strong team of solicitors and barristers [fighting extradition] has been estimated at up to £12,000 per day. ...."

As Irvine is reported to have said recently, legal costs are spiralling out of control. Journalists are incapable of looking rationally at a bunch of rogues, lawyers and judges (who, even in the Appeal Court, often turn out to be barristers serving as judges part time; roles could be reversed a week later!) are ripping off the country by grabbing millions of pounds in return for thinking about whether one old man should be given to Spain. I have found that the top judges are ignorant and sluggish of intellect, certainly compared with Dr. Michael Pelling, whom they struggle to ban from our courts. Apart from being venal, it does cost a lot of time (and therefore money) for these fellows to struggle through legal issues which contain some difficulty. We should be interested in this, because they fool about in the same way in the Family Courts. - Ed.

"Irvine 'asked if Maxwell inquiry should be cut'

by Rachel Sylvester,

Telegraph, 17jan00, p10

"Lord Irvine .... was concerned that millions of pounds of taxpayers' money were being poured into the inquiry with no sign of an imminent outcome. ....

"The Maxwell investigation .... included £1,677,000 in legal inspectors' fees and £7,097,000 in accountant inspectors' fees..... now risen to £10 million .... cost to the taxpayer ...."

"Flood of runaway children shatters poor homes myth

- Jenny Jarvie, Telegraph, 11nov99

"Still Running, [from 0171 8414400, £12,] the most important extensive inquiry into runaways ever published, found that more than 100,000 children a year in Britain spent a night or more away from home or care without permission. ....cuts across class boundaries ....

"More than 20% .... living in step-families had run away once, compared with 13% in lone parent families and 7% of those living with their natural parents. .... report .... surveyed 13,000 children ...."

[Shared parenting is missing. Jenny does not distinguish between single father and single mother families, but we know from other research that outcome from single father is much better than that for single mother. - Ed]

"Love you to death

[continued from page 1

".... I once sat on a jury in which we were asked to consider whether a jilted man had poured paint over his girlfriend's car. Not one of the male members of the jury could bring themselves to vote guilty .... he had already brought retribution so thoroughly upon himself. In court he was a pathetic wreck. ...."

[I have reversed Male and Female in the article, actually written by Amanda Craig. Violence and jury misconduct by women, in the original article, was PC. Comments please. - Ed]

p3

Editorial

The crisis in the family is many-faceted. I myself have been learning about it for more than ten years. Already, five years ago, I had written my book The Hook and the Sting, about the collapse of the legal system, which is available on my website,

www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/

I remember being invited to a secret day-long combined meeting of members of the Vexatious Litigants Society and the Litigants in Person Society at a secret address some five years ago. RG, one of the most expert in family law, who helped me most with my book by pointing out Lord Denning's role in destroying our legal system by introducing uncertainty, (see Portia's Speech,) sat nonplussed as court junkies traded specialist knowledge about arcane details of English law and judicial misconduct. He knew that judges, particularly judges in our secret courts, would ignore legal niceties which were not to their liking. The junkies thought they had judges on the run. However, it was obvious that if a litigant became too skilled, judges would say "It's my game, and I'm not playing with you any more." (This had happened to a third of those present.) The skilled court junkie would be forthwith banned from any civil or criminal court for ever. One of the junkies present had been banned ten minutes after winning ten million pounds in damages, from a company in which perhaps the judge held a large holding in shares, or in which his brother was Chief Executive. He never collected his ten million. Some junkies were even discussing the legal niceties of Vexatious Litigant legislation, and how it was getting more draconian!

The reason why there are less vexatious litigants, banned forever from our decaying courts, than one would expect, is that judges have many more tricks up their sleeves, for instance Mary Bell, to get rid of those who threaten to force judges to obey and enforce the law and to keep to their own court procedures, laid down in the rule book.

This brings me to what I believe is a valid rift running through the campaign to restore basic civil rights to divorced men and their children. Those like myself believe that the situation is bound deteriorate for a further fifteen years because of the stranglehold of radfems, with further increase in the suicide rate among young men and an unavoidable drift into civil disorder twenty times worse than the Poll Tax riots. They tend to be the same people, for obvious reasons, as those who put greater effort over a longer period into analysing all aspects of the crisis. They are confronted by the Young Turks, usually younger and with less experience of the crisis, who either believe that the crisis will be resolved within only a few years, or who cannot or will not study the subject thoroughly. The Young Turks want rapid, explosive action to exploit their dynamism, or perhaps to camouflage their lack of application (or even their stupidity), depending on how you look at them.

Their is a similar division, possibly the same division, between those who want to parade in public drama, carrying banners up and down Whitehall, and those like myself who lurk in the shadows, putting particular government officials under the hammer, trying to force them to do their jobs properly.

We lost twenty-five years because FNF was neither one thing nor the other. It was controlled by the Old Guard, who however would not do their homework, but who all the same blocked the Young Turks. I believe, however, that we will be able to recognise a valid difference of emphasis, and compromise, rather than confront and block, as happened in FNF. It should be possible to make a fuss in Whitehall but at the same time gain expertise, with some of us only doing one or other. After all, I am not totally certain that the situation will not begin to turn round within three years or so, and I respect some of those who think it will, even when I think their judgement is clouded by their desperate desire to see and to protect their own children.

ManKind and Ill Eagle can be reached at;

(1). Mankind, Suite 367, 2 Lansdowne Row, London W1X 8HL.

(2) 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/

Campaign for open justice update

New Development

Destruction by Civil Rules 1998 of Right to Trial in Open Court

The destruction by the CPR of the constitutional right to trial in open court (a right both of the parties and of the public) in certain categories of civil proceedings is an illegal by-product of Lord Woolf's Reforms which seems to have passed without notice by the legal profession. Didn't anybody think it strange that, for example, Landlord and Tenant possession cases for non-payment of rent should suddenly switch from public hearing in open court to private hearing in chambers in 26 April 1999? But that is a direct consequence of CPR Rule 39.2(3)(c) and Practice Direction 39PD Para.1.5(2). How could mere rules of court and practice directions abolish the Common Law rule that trials must take place in open court? The answer is, they couldn't, and the relevant rules and practice directions are ultra vires. Nothing in the primary legislation, the Civil Procedure Act 1997, permits abolition of the Common Law rule of trial in open court, a rule conclusively upheld by the House of Lords in Scott v. Scott [1911-13] AERep 1 HL.

The Practice Direction 39PD Para.1.5 sets out a whole list of categories of proceedings where trial in private is now the rule: arguably nearly all unlawful (e.g. besides Landlord and Tenant cases, Consumer Credit Act 1974, mortgage repossession, and Protection from Harassment Act 1997 cases). Incredibly this Practice Direction was made by three of the most senior Judges in the land: the Lord Chief Justice, the Master of the Rolls, and the Vice-Chancellor: see [1999] 1WLR 1124. Are these judges bent on destroying the constitutional security of trial in open court? - or were they merely half asleep when they nodded through a set of practice directions dreamed up by some civil servants in the Lord Chancellor's Department?

Judicial Review

Basic democratic rights must not be abolished without Parliamentary sanction. Having been refused access, as a member of the public, to Landlord and Tenant cases at Bow County Court by H.H. Judge Bradbury in November 1999, the writer's application for Leave to move for Judicial Review was duly filed in the High Court on 7 December 1999, case CO/4774/99- R v. Bow County Court ex parte Pelling. This application will be heard in open court at the Royal Courts of Justice on 26 January 2000. The legal consequence of a trial being unlawfully held in private is interesting: the whole proceedings become voidable at the option of any party: McPherson v. McPherson [1935] AERep 105 PC, [1936] AC 177. So every solicitor and counsel who has acted for a landlord or tenant who lost his case held in private is under a professional duty to advise the client that he can have the possession order etc. set aside and obtain a retrial in open court.

Latest Development

On 26 January 2000 leave was refused by Mr. Justice Keene who held that Section 1(3) of the Civil Procedure Act 1997 - "The power to make Civil Procedure Rules is to be exercised with a view to securing that the civil justice system is accessible, fair and efficient" - had altered the Common Law position and empowered the making of rules authorising proceedings to be held in private which formerly had to be in open court. That included trials of landlord and tenant possession cases for non-payment of rent.

It is not clear how holding trials in secret courts makes justice more accessible, fair and efficient.

- Dr. M. J. Pelling, the first two items reprinted from Contact, East London FNF Branch Newsletter, dec99, no.3

"In the darkness of secrecy sinister interest, and evil in every shape, have full swing. Only in proportion as publicity has place can any of the checks applicable to judicial injustice operate. Where there is no publicity there is no justice. Publicity is the very soul of justice. It is the keenest spur to exertion, and surest of all guards against improbity. It keeps the judge himself while trying under trial." - Jeremy Bentham, 1748-1832, one of the most influential writers on jurisprudence.

p4

Divorce: Why we women are to blame

- Vanessa Lloyd-Platt,

Mail, 9feb00, p22

Britain's leading female divorce lawyer argues that it is the aggression of her own sex that's responsible for soaring rates of marital failure.

A prestigious matrimonial lawyer, Vanessa Lloyd-Platt, has specialised in divorce for the past 20 years. The London-based solicitor now runs her own practice - Lloyd Platt & Co .... Her vast experience of marriage has led her recently to conclude that women are to blame for the high rates of divorce. Here Vanessa, a mother of two and married to accountant Daniel Lloyd Platt, sets out her controversial argument. It is something every wife - and girlfriend - should read.

Twenty years as a divorce lawyer have finally led me to the disturbing conclusion that in most cases it is women and women alone who are responsible for the dissatisfaction in so many relationships.

It grieves me to say it, and I do not do so lightly, but after seeing so many couples unhappy as a direct result of women's behaviour, I feel I must speak out.

After analysing thousands of divorce cases, a clear pattern has emerged. Men from all walks of life are saying that over the past 10-15 years, and especially the past five, women have changed beyond recognition.

From being soft, compliant and loving, they are now volatile, hard and distant. Many tell stories of how aggressive their women have become .... They mean the whole package. From hostile body language to repeated shouting matches, unfounded accusations, constant disagreement, criticism and unrealistic demands. Men are not just saying their wives are nags, they are saying they are character demolishers.

.... While some husbands have identified this aggressiveness in wives who do not work, in my experience it is working women who are mainly the problem. .... men did not even get as far as the doorstep before their wives started bombarding them with their problems. ....

It has been said that women believe themselves to be intellectually superior to men. .... then we have the capacity to recognise that men have different needs and are not going to change when it comes to relationships. We must recognise this problem and use our common sense to solve it.

[I fear that Ted Straw, p1, has had all his common sense stuffing knocked out of him. He is now a loose cannon with a lot of firepower. Men, take cover from a wrecker in sheep's clothing, and from Relate! -Ed]

Single Mother Households (SMH) are the most dangerous living arrangement to

Children

From: Bill Wood

<bill-wood2@worldnet.att.net>

In Single Mother Households, 422 children are fatally abused each year. In Single Father Households, 25 children are fatally abused each year. In Dual Parent Families, 16 children are fatally abused each year. 430 children are killed by firearm accidents each year. Of 430 children killed by firearms, 322 are killed in Single Mother Households. Single Mother Households account for 70% of fatal child abuse and accidental firearm deaths.

Source: Donna Shalala, "National Child Abuse Prevention Month" and "Child Maltreatment 1994: Reports from the States to the National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect". Patrick Fagan, Heritage Foundation, "THE CHILD ABUSE CRISIS: THE DISINTEGRATION OF MARRIAGE, FAMILY, AND THE AMERICAN COMMUNITY", Rick Thomas, "The Dirty Little Secret: Abuse in Foster Care"

The Heritage Foundation

report "The Child Abuse Crisis: The Disintegration of Marriage, Family, and the American Community," May 15, 1997 notes that: "[due to] ... the disintegration of family and community ... America's infants and young children, about 2,000 of whom -- 6 per day -- die each year," and provides the following estimate:

Total Children Killed Per Year 2,000

Killed by Mothers 1,100

Killed by Stepfathers 250

Killed by Live-In Boyfriends 513

Killed by Biological Fathers 137

www.fathermag.com/news/1778-Heritage01.shtml

his study demonstrates that the least dangerous place for a child is with the father by a margin of over 15 to 1 (2000 / 137 = 14.6). Directly or indirectly, the stepfathers and live-in boyfriends are associated with the mother's household and therefore a child is 15 times more likely to be killed while in the mother's care. Excluding stepfathers and live-in boyfriends, mothers are 8 times more likely to kill a child than the biological father (1100 / 137 = 8.0).

An epidemic of lies

- Dennis Austin, Backlash Magazine, August 1999

The use of false allegations in divorce is rapidly becoming an epidemic which is spreading throughout the world. According to the National Shared Parenting Association (Saskatchewan Chapter), in Canada a Children's Aid Society study showed that of 1200 complaints of abuse, 900 involved custody disputes. Of those 900 allegations, two thirds (600) were found to be false.

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services states that there were more than 1,000,000 documented child abuse cases in 1990. In 1983, it found that 60% of perpetrators were women.

Setting up your own Website

25jan2000

Dear Sir, I was intrigued by the final item in Eagle 06, and could not resist the enclosure, which comes from The Complete Idiots Guide to Internet UK by Peter Kent, Alpha Books.

Actually, when working at the keyboard, a cat on the head is far too heavy. A hamster is much lighter, as well as being far quieter, e.g. a purring cat can be mistaken for a ringing telephone. When motoring, a simple alternative is to wear a coonskin (Davy Crockett) hat. It this is unavailable, avoid the temptation to try a parrot on the shoulder, especially a female one. They tend to bew backseat drivers, 'mind that bus, slow down for the crossroads' etc.

Yours sincerely,

Mr. E Watkins (546)

Ill Eagle 8, may00

p1

Violence by "not noticing" next?

The ever-broadening definition of DV by the Home Office (HO) suggests we should organise a Competition among ManKind members for the next kind of behaviour or inaction which will be classified as DV. Ideas please? - Ed

Amongst a plethora of HO press releases comes GPADV (Gov't Policy Around Domestic Violence). (http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/cpd/cpsu/domviol98/htm" dated 9dec99)

This seems to invent new categories of abuse perpetrated by men, including "financial-abuse". ishisThis is a wholly sloppy and ambiguous report which begins by citing the unsophisticated definition first used 7 years ago by the Home Affairs Select Cmttee (HASC). The same HASC that forbade the input of any men's group view point.

Overlooking for a moment the ritualistic mantra in GPADV where the HASC notes that "in most cases the abuser was male and the victim female", HASC also states that DV occurs "in all social groups and classes". While it may occur in all, it is more common in some.

However, the real delight comes at para 2.4 (page 2 in a 10 page release) which declares that DV can take many forms including: actual violence, threatened violence, intimidation and "physical violence accompanied by intimidation" plus "humiliation and deprivation which can include keeping a woman without money". Para 2.4 also lists as DV degradation, mental and verbal abuse, isolation, systemetic critisism and belittlment.

GADV states that he defination of DV was crystalised in april 1999 for use in all police forces, but that it is intended for "statistical purposes only". To counter this, GPADV suggets ".... Organisations are encouraged to make their own definitions according to local needs and circumstances."

Thus, once again it appears that the Home Office is out of control and countermanding Parliament.

[We are in an extremely dangerous situation. Melanie Phillips (20feb00) observes that "The government wants more men convicted and doesn't care how." - Sunday Times, sect.1 p7 - Ed ]

Britain backs peers on Section 28

David Hughes,

Daily Mail, 11feb00

Nearly two thirds of the country thinks peers were right to vote to save Section 28, a poll suggested yesterday. .... opposition to scrapping the law which bans gay propaganda in schools has been strenghtening fast .... among younger adults, .... a majority back the Lords. .... there was no 'Islington factor' to suggest more support for the gay lobby in London. To get involved in fighting the repeal of Section 28 contact George McAulay Tel 01419544994 (UKMM Scottish Chm.), your local Mosque, Baptist or Catholic church.

Feminist Arithmetic

Tom Utley, Daily Telegraph 09Feb00, writes movingly of his concerns for women victims of rape. He is concerned that Women Against Rape (WAR) is too hard line and seeks, not justice, but vengeance (which comes as a surprise to him). He notes that WAR estimate that only one rape in 200 is reported and convicted. But as only the unschooled are permitted to comment on social issues affecting men, is it any wonder if he blunders blindly ?

However, by Feb. 19th this musing out loud had become a torrent of indignation as both the Telegraph and The Sunday Times (19th and 20th respectively) poured scorn on Home Office's projected figures for rape. Thus we have at last toppled the subjects of both rape and of false allegations into the mainstream of public debate. The taboo is now broken. Meanwhile, WAR continues with its unarithmetic dogma. In 1997 there were 599 convictions for rape. If, as WAR states, only 1 in 200 rapes are reported, then there should be 120,000 reported rapes every year (200 x 599). The actual figure, unfortunately, is only 6,281. If, on the other hand WAR are referring to this latter figure for their 1 in 200 ratio, this means there are 1,200,000 rapes pa. Nearly all women will experience rape at sometime in their lives, and can be excused (to quote Margaret "Lady" Jay) for living in fear of rape. The logical outcome to WAR's figures gets worse. women's life expectancy averages close to 80 years, so they should expect to be raped 4 times in their lives. A natural progression will be the need for Govt to initiate an accelerated prison building programme. We can anticipate that every man will have raped at some time before he dies at least once - and for many men to have raped dozens of times. With a scenario where millions of men are about to be convicted, this must assume the highest priority if the present witch hunt is to be sustained. Seen in this light, homosexual men pose a more attractive alternative to women.

The BBC's report, however, came closer to the true situation (see http:news2.thls.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid%5F63500/63512.stm) when they quoted Ruth Hall as saying " .... only about 1 in 12 women report their rape to the police." She continued, "Men take for granted that they will be physically serviced and emotionally cared for by women. Rape is an extension of this expectation.". What all the commentaries and reports fail to include is the False Allegation factor - presently running at around 80% of all reported rapes (see HO report 196). Study 196 concedes that 1 in 5 men charged are victims of fabricated rape claims.

"First Frame" in their 16mar00 Ch4 documentary for Dispatches (based on Study 196) have failed to capitalise on a golden chance to further obscure using biased but 'official' figures. For what First Frame tried to prove was the opposite of 196 conclusions. Had we had editorial control we could have produced a more truthful, accurate and far more convincing analysis of Study 196. One that would have been as riveting as the appalling "collateral damage" caused to men by false accusations and highlighted in a programme two nights earlier on Ch5.

Silent Sisterhood !

Women in the UK are invariably more lightly sentenced when found guilty (HO 170). So why does the demand for equality fall silent ? Instead, we have the distasteful situation of "our Julie" and her band of short haired women friends pleading for dispensation in cases like that of Diana Butler who was the woman allegedly "degraded" by Roger Carlin, so she knifed him to death - and then walked free from the Court of Appeal. The fact that she had knifed her previous two partners including her ex-husband (Lady Jay, please note) was taken into oconsideraton in her acquittal.

Three weeks later we find Julie Bindel and her band of short haired women demanding the full savagery of the law for a man who murdered his wife afer yearsof provocation.

Feminists insist; "We are capable of working the same jobs for the same pay. We are as intelligent as men and we can make our own decisions". Why shouldn’t they be held as accountable as men ?

p2

Female paedophiles

Sex crimes aren’t only committed by men. We know women rape (aka seduce) younger boys, sometimes with traumatic and lasting effects if the age gap is too great and the euphemistically termed "sex games" too explicit. But now comes a new dimension. According to a US source (Fathers Manifesto), female paedophiles kill 8 times as many children as male paedophiles (42 vs. 8). This means that male paedophiles account for 0.003% of female deaths each year.

'Women who abuse children: the awful truth'

by Jonathan Green, Elizabeth Udall

5 pp in Marie Claire, march00

"Female paedophiles are possibly society's darkest secrets. Reviled for crimes against nature or simply ignored as though their actions are unthinkable, very little is known about them and even less done to help them. Transition Place is a pioneering treatment centre for women child-abusers, but its patients have always been too wary to give interviews. Now, for the first time, they have chosen to speak out - to Marie Claire - and discuss their lives frankly with Jonathan Green.

"The Last Taboo"

"Female child-abusers such as Nancy .... and Ruth .... have largely been ignored by a society that refuses to believe that women sex offenders exist.

"Shelley molested her three-year-old son and a friend's baby; Michelle had oral sex with a twelve-year-old boy. Elsie had sex with her ten-year-old son and his thirteen-year-old friend.

"Some of the names in this article have been changed." [Why? Are these women more equal than others? I am afraid the article, in a women's magazine, is too upsetting for me to give you more. - Ed ]

"Spirits of the Age"

"Suffolk County Council has banned Mark Cook from his papier mâché evening class because he was the only man among two dozen women." - Sunday Telegraph 20feb00 p32, reporting from The Times

.

Father custody

From our Dutch collegues we learn of an intersteing speech by feminist professor, Dr. Henrietta Maassen van den Brink given on 12jan00 [euro-dads@ eGroups.com]. at teh university of amtrdam

Dr. Henrietta Maassen states that, "To improve the negotiating position of women inside relationships children ought to be placed more under the custody of the father. It is best when both partners do not know in advance which partner will get custody.

"The majority of men have the same living standard 5 years after divorce. Women never reach their old living standard. Alimony does not compensate for this loss.

"The children are usually placed under the custody of the mother, thereby decreasing her chances of creating an income of her own . The care of the children is also an obstacle to finding a new partner.

"This unequal position has consequences for the position of men and women within the marriage. Women adapt to decrease the chaces of a divorce."

[ So if we introduced father custody in England, more women would sue for divorce! Does the fact that they get everything after divorce deter them? Should Maasen have mentioned the home? Obviously, the difference is that the Dutch all rent. - Ed ].

"Wasted lives of 1,500 young suicide victims

- Beezy Marsh,

Daily Mail, 2mar00, p37

".... the rising number of male suicides .... more kill themselves .... than die in road accidents.

"Nearly 500 aged 15 to 24 take their lives annually and the figure for the 25 to 34-year-olds is more than 1,000. ....'We need to look urgently at this tragic loss of life....'

".... the number of female suicides among 15 to 24-year-olds is around a fifth of that for men. In the 25 to 34 age group, it is a tenth of the male figure...."

Dr. Banks was speaking to a conference on men's health. The Daily Mail did not report the reasons for the epidemic, which we in ManKind know very well. - Ed

Adoption is the answer

Leader, Sunday Telegraph, 20feb00

".... From Leicester to Chester, from Cambridge to Lambeth, Islington and Hackney, there have been dozens of reports into the disgraceful abuse in care homes. ....

".... For at least two decades local authority officials and social work 'professionals' have operated policies that have harmed children. .... There was, for instance, a deliberate decision to promote the employment of homosexuals, on the basis that they were less likely to abuse the girls in their care - overlooking the fact that they were more likely to abuse the boys. That is exactly what happened. ....

"In Ealing, for instance, inspectors last year reported that just one child out of the 393 in care homes was adopted. Social workers placed a five-day-old baby in care - and then visited it just twice in the following year. No one drew up any plans at all for the long-term future of that child. It was simply abandoned. .... many councils still enforce a 'same race' adoption policy, in violation of .... guidelines. Many apply a policy of discriminating against the better-off, the better-educated, and the middle-aged [applying to adopt]. .... love is much less important than politically correct attitudes - which, along with abuse, is about all children get in care homes. ...."

Today, Valerie Riches of FYC 01865 351 966 told me that FYC had complained about the fact that the policy of The Children's Society, among others, was to preferably employ homosexuals. FYC's journal "Family Bulletin" Autumn 97, cites research which found the heavy preponderance of homosexuals among paedophiles - ".... 35% of paedophiles are homosexual whilst only 2% of adult men overall are homosexual.".

What Women Want

pub. Virago, 1996, p80

"Research into, and action on, male violence against women and children. Freedom from prejudice about women's roles. Recognition (and equal pay) at work. More women in decision making positions in society." - Sally Littlejohn, software writer.

Secret Courts

Maureen Freely writing in the The Observer 20feb00 about CWO- probation officers who masquerade in Britain's SECRET COURTS as experts in matters of child welfare: "By training, they are criminal probation officers. When they take on this specialised job, they receive no extra training in child development, and no guidelines about how to interpret such concepts as 'reasonable contact'. Most of the reports they write are based, therefore, on personal conjecture. ... In the 20 years since the Family Court Welfare Service was founded, there has not been a single follow-up study. The service has never checked its officers' reports for anything except spelling. Because court records are closed to the public, nobody else can check them either. ...

"When the nation wondered why it was that so many fathers left home and lost touch with their children within the year, and why it was that about 900 other fathers were driven to kidnap their children every year, they rarely asked how many of those absent and kidnapping parents had been barred by the Family Welfare Service from seeing their children."

The article went on to praise Oliver Cyriax.

Also see Oliver, "INPOWw's Campaign" on www.ukmm.org.uk/

"Women take lead in Welsh cabinet

Julia Hartley-Brewer,

Gvardian, 23feb00, p10

"The Welsh cabinet yesterday became the first executive body in the western world to boast a majority of women ministers.

"The appointment of a fifth woman in the nine-member cabinet was hailed as a milestone in equal opportvnities by the new Labour first secretary, Rhodri Morgan. ....

"This is a small step for the Welsh cabinet but it's a giant leap for Welsh womankind."

Although only partly Welsh, I would be proud if our Welsh Cabinet were the first to reach full equality, with nine women cabinet ministers; or perhaps six women and three gays. - Ed

p3

Editorial

My last Editorial identified two types of member of ManKind. It omitted a third group, the subject of something that I wrote two years ago. I will alter the quotation from Patricia Morgan, elsewhere in this issue, to describe this group, who could make up a major part of our membership.

Large numbers of unattached males who have never taken on the responsibilities of family life, or who have been ejected from families, now meet the classic conditions for membership of ManKind.

They are subjected to discrimination in; education, health, employment, law, military, pension, marriage/divorce.

The Cheltenham Group is linked with ManKind. In their 1998 booklet Marriage and Fatherhood : Important Information for Young Men, page 45, we read; "One simple piece of advice is not to get married, and not to become a father." These men, denied the traditional dynastic progression through life, are our hoped for third group of members.

Dispatched

The horrific Dispatches programme last week [apr98] is the last straw for me. In prime time on a major TV channel, poisonous lying and man-bashing was allowed to continue for an hour or so. Such propaganda against any other segment of society would have led to prosecution. However, the climate is so hostile that I expect there will be no protest.

Whether the allegations are true or not, the conclusion is the same.

First, the allegations. Attacks on women - wives, mistresses and others - by men are pandemic. In your street, at least three women are assaulted on a regular basis, and their bruises are then covered by clothing in order for the victms to hide the victim's embarrassment. The police are indifferent. However, the bones broken during these assaults by men cannot be covered up, and our hospitals are overcrowded with women with broken limbs. Pregnant women are attacked, hit in the womb, leading to miscarriage. The programme's researchers found that the extent of battering of women is far greater

than anybody had previously imagined.

Let us now look at the repercussions from this programme, and so many others nearly as extreme. First, let us assume that the programme's assertions are true. What should a young man do? The conclusions are obvious. No young man worth his salt should let himself become a member of a class (cohabiting men) who represent such a threat to society, and to other people. No man should associate with women, let alone cohabit or marry. Further, since men not only batter women but also sexually molest children, a young man should not father children. Further, since a father represents the greatest threat to a child, he should distance himself as far as possible from his children.

Now let us suppose that the allegations in the programme are false. I have to advise the young man that our courts always believe the false scenario, and act on it. Any woman can trade in her husband at any time, and expropriate his home, assets and children, all of which he will never see again. Again, no young man should become a member of such a vulnerable class.

Our past chairman John Campion summarised The Law Commission (1966) Reform of the Grounds of Divorce. The Field of Choice. Law Com No. 6. HMSO in this way; "The Law Commission feels .... that it is false allegations that provoke the hostility and that any attempts to defend himself or his children are the consequence of venting his anger in retaliation for such allegations. They find this 'paradoxical' since perjured evidence is merely a verbal device for obtaining the divorce."

We need to remember that in the past, divorce court officials more or less openly connived in the perjured story of the divorcing man spending a dirty night in Brighton in order to enable his wife to obtain a divorce. Thus, the divorce courts have a tradition of conniving in perjury, so the fact that judges today welcome perjury by wives is nothing new.

The idea that false allegations are an essential component in the smooth running of our secret family courts, and are merely a metaphor to validate the expropriation of fathers, is a crucial concept for those trying to understand the mechanics of our family courts, and the central role played by false allegations, and why perjury by mothers must not, and will not, be punished. It also explains why these courts are secret, and why they are more hostile to totally blameless divorcing fathers, who force court officials to connive in fabricating charges, which they do not enjoy doing. Even judges, barristers and solicitors, other things (i.e. their fees) being equal, prefer to be honest.

A barriater pointed out to me that if he used legal aid to defend a divorcing man against false allegations, he might never again get legal aid funding from a feminised Legal Aid Board, explains why your lawyers will betray you, and put on that blank look when you try to interest them in the horrendous, false allegations being made against you.

Today's young men live in a culture where control of the police, the judiciary and the media has fallen into the hands of a small group of dedicated, man-hating, family hating gender sectarians, who saturate the media with male bashing and family bashing propaganda. 'Ruler' Males (editorial, july/aug99) like Aitken, Fayed, Goldenballs and Maxwell are very happy to allow them to disempower the main body of respectable men, who are their traditional competition. Male supremacists have no fear of the feminazis. Thus, female supremacists are allowed, or even encouraged, by the dominant males, (who may have their own, probably illegal ways to control their own women,) to attack males in general.

- Ivor Catt, 22apr98

ManKind and Ill Eagle can be reached at;

(1). Mankind, Suite 367, 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/

Action Against False Allegations of Abuse

(See Male View oct/dec99, p32)

Statement by AAFAA

"AAFAA Conference - London -
Saturday 11th November 2000

"This will be an excellent chance for the people who have contacted AAFAA to meet. The Conference, provisionally titled Resisting the Inquisition, will be in the Small Hall of Friends House, Euston Road, London (opposite Euston Station) from 10.30 till 4.30. Speakers will be a campaigner, writer, criminologist, and ex-prisoner. Demand is already building up for tickets. Bookings can be made now by sending a £10.00 cheque or P.O. to our address, made payable to AAFAA, PO Box 84, Leeds LS5 3XZ, with a note to say that it is for the Conference."

My knowledge of AAFAA is based on some three hours on the phone with the national contact for AAFAA, Hilary Seddon, 01635 202433, and reading their excellent occasional newsletter. They do not have membership for fear of being taken over by paedophiles. We need views from ManKind members on how much False Allegations should figure in our range of interests. I myself argue that our secret family courts run on perjury. Our chairman, our Male View Editor and myself think it should play a significant part, but there may be opposing views. - Ed

I have the following details on other "false allegations" organisations;

British False Memory Society, Old Brewery, Bradford on Avon BA15 1NF, (01225 868682 www.bfms.org.uk bfms@compuserve.com

N Wales child home scandal, Gwen Hurst, Oakleigh, Cross Lanes, Marchwiel, Wrexham LL13 0TH ( 01978 781220

www.besst.org.uk

Friends of Derek Brushett, Gale Saunders, Wellwood Rise, Wellwood Drive, Dinas Powys CF64 4TM ( 01222 513016

FACT, Harry Fearns, 122 Bleak Hill Rd., St. Helens WA10 6DR, (01744 20056 "On sat20nov99 a meeting took place in Liverpool to form an organisation to campaign for a review of the dangerous

p4

developments of Police investigation adopted by Operation Care.... three hundred former and present care workers and teachers have been arrested ...."

On 10aug99 Judge Jonathan Crabtree said that Police forces that have "fished" for allegations of sexual abuse in children's homes are in danger of garnering "false accusations, childhood fantasies and dreams". "They are not waiting for complaints. Instead they have asked children who used to live [in care] if they have any complaints to make ...."

It is these police trawling methods .... in most cases fuelled by the attraction of large compensation payments, that concern FACT. - Ed

Our chairman noticed that Professor Stinko also wrote about "trawling" for her evidence of domestic violence.

"Homosexuality

"The numbers of homosexuals living in stable relationships is too low to count, researchers [in the new Government General Household Survey (GHS)] said.

"The survey offered those living in same-sex couples the chance to declare themselves as such by the request: "May I just check, are you living with someone in the household as a coupls?' But out of 16,000 people interviewed, fewer than 50 said they were in a gay or lesbian partnership. The GHS results suggest that fewer than one in every 300 people lives in such a relationship. The figure contrasts heavily with claims made by gay lobby groups. Outrage says a fact that should be taught to schooolchildren is that there are five million gays and lesbians in Britain and one in ten people are mainly homosexual." - Daily Mail, 2mar00, p7.

My article in Male View jan/mar99 recommends the most reliable source for statistics on homosexuality, "making up barely 1% of the total sample of men." When we get to the real numbers, we are obviously seeing a fringe group of disturbed people. If only 1% of babies sucked their thumb, such action would attract concern for the little 'un. Homosexual practice is much more peculiar and unusual, and dangerous. Why does Vanity Blair pack his Cabinet with them? Does he have difficulty in controlling normal men ? - Ed

From a member

To the Attorney-General. You cannot keep the lid down on the kettle any more. The pressure is too great. Ivor Catt, Editor, Ill Eagle. [sent to the Attorney-General on 25feb00, with a copy of Melanie Phillips, Sunday Times 20feb00.]

23feb00

Dear David, Prompted by the moves to name rape-hoax women, may I suggest that this be extended to include women who have made other types of false allegation, wasting tax-payers' money, court and other resources - and usually involving perjury - all of which is generally condoned (and even supported), and scarcely ever punished by, the courts?

I have a well-documented file on the allegations of sexual abuse made against me by my wife, starting 2 days after I was given custody of our 3 children by an insightful female judge (Pat Coles, QC). Over some 4 or 5 years, (1990-5), these allegations escalated to paedophilia.

Early on, Social Services eagerly called a Child Protection Conference - a great waste as they already had convincing evidence that the allegations were false and malicious.

In spite of collusion between 2 social workers and my wife, the Child Protection Conference eventually cleared me completely. This was due in part to the involvement of an honest, no-nonsense police-woman who had interviewed each of my children separately and became disgusted with my wife (and some of her colleagues in Social Services).

Nevertheless, in June 1991 an extremely prejudiced judge (Marian Norrie) saw fit to return the children to their mother after 12 months spent happily and successfully in my custody, and against the children's admitted wishes. Norrie did not comment on my wife's obvious malice.

I have evidence for all this, and more, and would be perfectly happy for you to publish the judges' names with that of my wife: Marjorie Mary Mortleman, nee Grieveson. Yours sincerely, John Mortleman.

Susan Hampshire in Radio Times

26feb00 p10

".... We're talking about harmony and millions of years of instincts, which won't change overnight. I can't think it's satisfying for a woman to be a ballbreaker, and it must be dreadful for the man. .... I worked when my son was small and although I had the most excellent and qualified nanny, I missed out on a tremendous amount. It's criminal how the media have made women think they're nobody unless they have a job. Why be ashamed of being a mum? Bringing up children should be glorified. It's far more difficult to be a mum than to do business conferences. If you're in an office everyone thanks you all the time, but you're taken for granted if you clean the house and bring up well mannered children to be happy citizens."

"Men in fear of attacks by women

- Carmarthen Journal, 16feb00

"Growing numbers of women are responsible for vicious attacks and fights in Carmarthenshire. Police figures reveal that men are also increasingly becoming the victims of domestic assaults. The number of arrests for violent attacks, fights and brawls among women has rocketed in recent years. .... women from their early teens to middle age are being arrested .... for assaults. 'There are more girls and women fighting now than before. Not long ago it would have been unheard of' .... men are suffering in silence .... Men may be ashamed to come forward...." - noticed by Dave Norris.

Booklists

Have you noticed how in your public or college libraries the feminist, womens's issues books outnumber men's issue titles about 60 to 1? Yet there are plenty of excellent books stating our case. The fact is we are not using the system as well as the opposition. Libraries are required to buy a proportion of new titles each year, related to the population in their catchment area. They rely on requests from readers to make up this quota. Knowing this, the feminists get in there ordering while there is money in the kitty. We should be doing the same. Ill Eagle will provide lists on a regular basis which members are advised to read, and get on the shelves for the students and browsers. - William Coulson

The Gvardian and Equal Opportvnities

The Gvardian should be congratulated for its commitment to Equal Opportvnities. However, their reforms may be incomplete.

I will give a personal cheque for £5 to the first reader who spots a male heterosexual journalist working for The Gvardian. (No formal proof required.) I plan to Name and Shame the deviant in a future edition of Ill Eagle. - Ed

Last month, there were no takers. Does this prove that the Gvardian is sompletely eqval? Or would a claimant betray his bigotry by suggesting that the Gvardian illegally deviates from full equality of employment opportunity between women and gays? My offer, made in the last issue, is still open, but raised to £10. - Ed.

Also see Male View oct/dec99, p3.

When the gay rights campaigners go too far

- John Humphreys, Sunday Times, 20mar00, sect. 1, p19

[Even though a man, he is allowed to publish because he shows such ignorance. {See my website on HIV and the rest;

www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/} However, his commentary on excesses in the Gvuardian is useful. - Ed]

.... 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 then 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 ...."

p5

A vision that turned into a nightmare

Only now after some twenty-five years are we beginning to see some accurate figures about domestic violence. I was aware of this great fraud being perpetrated in the west by the women's movement greedy for money. Others, like Strauss, Gelles, Steinmetz in America and Senator Ann Cools in Canada, warned the general public of the danger of this evil movement. Millions of men and children have suffered. Family life has almost been destroyed as these women moved into positions of power in the justice system, in social services, in the media - anywhere where they could pervert the course of justice to their cause. Their cause had no substance in fact. Their aim was to collect and to squander hard earned taxpayers money to fund their devient and pathological abnormal behaviour. These women can only be described as the 'Terrorists In The Family.' The question is this? Do those of us who know the truth, sit back and allow further millions of funding to go into these women's hands? Or do we begin to indentify those women who have deliberately and knowingly lied and cheated, altered figures and statistics to justify their lies and lived off the money that should have been given to victims of domestic violence? I said twenty-five years ago and I still say: Of the first hundred women coming into the first battered women's refuge in the world in Chiswick, London 62 were as violent as the partner they left. I expect, once true figures can be correlated to find that figure reproduced as a true and accurate figure. What we all have to face is that domestic violence is a learned pattern of behaviour and when small children are exposed to physical and emotional violence, these are the strategies for survival they will bring into their adult life.

Women are as violent as men, and are more likely to use violence in personal relationships. The reason why their violence has been hidden is because it is hidden violence - behind the closed front door of the home. Women intimidate the family because of their strong central position in the family and are now able to blackmail men, thanks to the bias against men that has been prevalent in the last twenty-five years. For me, the effect on the children of this nightmare cannot be undone. But I do hope that somehow this whole lie can be exposed, justice can be seen to be done and those fathers that I have known who have been destroyed, lost their homes, their reputations, their jobs and their children, can somehow feel that all the suffering was not in vain? Will we see, this year, another tranche of money being poured into the hands of the women's movement so they can hold their endless conferences? Probably, unless a few good people are willing to take on the job of exposing them?

- Erin Pizzey; founder of the first domestic violence shelters, a vision that turned into a nightmare.

Millions of false allegations

In Armin A. Brott's article; A system out of control: The epidemic of false allegations of child abuse, he states, "In California, for example, the Victim/Witness program will pay directly to a licensed therapist up to $10,000 per child for counseling - as long as the child was alleged to have been abused. An additional $10,000 is available to counsel the child's mother. The only catch: to get their therapy paid for, the child victim and her mother must see a therapist from an approved list. Guess who directs the mother to a therapist who would be best for her and her child? CPS, of course."

These CPS workers often ask leading questions which can distort the children's memories. In their reports to the court, they often ignore evidence that would clear the accused, such as lie detector tests and outside therapist evaluations, and rely solely on the child's evaluations which have been skewed by the CPS and the therapists that they recommend. In a report disseminated by the National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect (NCCAN), Child Maltreatment 1995 Reports From the States to the National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System depicts more than three million reports of alleged child abuse and neglect in 1995, of which two million of those complaints were without foundation.

False allegations of abuse in divorce is an epidemic that is sweeping the world. Children are becoming heirs to hatred passed down to them from their parents and because this is all they know, they in turn foster this pain, hatred and deceptiveness in their own adult relationships. The children are crushed under the weight of the system and a parent that is only looking out for their own best interests.

News Release

" ...eighty percent of those polled said they had actually handled a case where they believed there was false accusation of abuse, as in disputes over custody of children, for instance." [News Release, from The Dilenschneider Group Inc., (representing the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers), Three First National Place, 70 West Madison Street, Chicago, IL 60602, 11/91.]

Sweden

From the web pages of Umgngesrtts Frldrarnas Riksfrening (UFR) which provides its name in English as: Association for Equal Parenting. www.ufr.org

Dated November 1999.

Dagens Nyheter (Swedish Newspaper) has written about a government analysis of the new joint custody law. Investigator Eva Elfver-Lindstrm has read all 475 judgments from the country's courts published during the first half of 1999 which have to do with cases where separated parents fought over custody. In 134 of theses cases the parents agreed to joint custody during the process. But in 73 cases the court ordered joint custody against the objection of one of the parents -- in most cases the mother.

"It is for the children that the father's position is being strengthened," says Eva Elfver-Lindstrm.

The judgments involve 784 children, 415 boys and 369 girls. IN 241 cases sole custody was awarded. In 133 cases the mother got sole custody against the wishes of the father. In 48 cases the father got sole custody against the wishes of the mother. In 50 cases the parents agreed that the mother should have sole custody. In 10 cases the parents agreed that the father should have sole custody. In 207 cases parents got joint custody. In 47 cases courts refused to go along with a parent's request for sole custody when the parents already had joint custody. In 15 cases the court ruled in favor of a parent's request for joint custody against the other's wish.

BBC. Monday, October 11, 1999 Published at 12:56 GMT 13:56 UK

"Lie detectors" used on sex offenders

In a little publicised move the Home Office have tested out Lie Detectors on sex offenders. This is the first "official trial" of its kind in the UK - something we have advocated to Govt as a first 'screen' to filter out malicious claims of rape against men (see ill eagle, April 1999). Regrettably, only alleged assailants, and not their accusers, were investigated by the lie detector (polygraph).

We believe the week long pilot study of the US-style polygraph machines, conducted by the West Midlands Probation Service, concluded in October 1999. The results have been released to other probation services and some are said to be interested in conducting further tests of their own.

The questioning was led by polygraph consultant and former US police officer, Dan Sosnowski. Lie detectors have been widely used in the US since the 1950s but are not accepted by all courts.

A spokesman for the West Midlands Probation Service said a number of techniques were used with sex offenders (suspects) and the lie detectors were being looked at as another option. Accepting that some offenders (accused) would be able to 'trick' the machine, he thought the evidence presented suggested a therapist was easier to trick.

Lie Detectors monitor breathing, heart rate and perspiration from sensors fixed to fingers, upper arms, stomach and waist. The idea is that people who are guilty, i.e. lie in response to a specific question react more vigorously (muscular tension) to relevant questions.

"One woman in five has been stalked. One woman in four suffers from violence in the home. More than half of rape victims have been attacked by a boyfriend, former "partner" or close friend. And .... 88.2% of statistics are made up on the spot." - Jenny Bristow, Telegraph, 28july98, p20

p6

Abuses of Abuse

Mary D., Petitioner v. HONORABLE CLARENCE WATT JUDGE OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF PUTNAM COUNTY AND GEORGE D., RESPONDENTS, [190 W. Va. 34, ; 438 S.E. 2nd 521; 1992 W. Va. LEXIS 76]. In a candid dissenting opinion, Supreme Court Justice Workman wrote: "We now have a system in which a female parent need only scream child abuse in a loud voice to keep the male parent from seeing a child. Indeed, sexual abuse these days seems to arouse all the hysteria that was associated with witchcraft in yesteryear. In fact, it has even spawned a witch-huntingesque cottage industry, to-wit badly trained, ideological rape trauma experts, rape counselors, bachelor level pseudo-psychologists, social activists, and other assorted species of Jacklegs. I am a firm believer that the best interests of the child are paramount, but that does not mean never allowing a father to see his children when the evidence preponderates on his behalf even though, like an accused witch, he cannot clear himself beyond any shadow of a doubt. Continuous yelling and screaming of an accusation does not make that accusation any more true."

-------------------------------------------

Telling excerpts from The Booming Domestic Violence Industry, August 2, 1999, John McGuire, Massachusetts News

"The legislature has loosened the standard. Now the person seeking the order need only state he or she is "in fear" of the other person. It doesn't take a cynic to point out that when a woman is getting a divorce, what she may truly fear is not violence, but losing the house or kids. Under 209A, if she's willing to fib to the judge and say she is "in fear" of her children's father, she will get custody and money and probably the house."

Long-term emotional damage to children's fathers -- surely not good for children -- often begins with a restraining order, she says.

"A man against whom a frivolous 209A has been brought starts to lose any power in his divorce proceeding. They do start decompensating, and they do start to have emotional issues, and they do start developing post-traumatic stress disorders. They keep replaying in their minds the tape of what happened to them in court. It starts this whole vicious downward cycle. They've been embarrassed and shamed in front of their family and friends, unjustly, and they totally lose any sense of self-control and self-respect. They may indeed become verbally abusive. It's difficult for the court to see where that person was prior to the restraining order."

This is a different era from the 1950s, she points out, and many fathers are very close to their children, and bond closely with them from an early age. "In this day and age, we have fathers who take an extremely active role in parenting -- sometimes more than the mother."

"I call them mother-dads," she says. In many restraining-order cases, she says, "These fathers are completely frustrated because they can't co-parent their child because of a restraining order. They have been raped of their parenting relationship with their child." While Friend and others see false restraining orders as enormously destructive, and permanently traumatizing, the $24 million domestic violence industry is built on the restraining order. Most of the activities that people get paid for in the domestic violence industry cannot start until a restraining order has been issued.

False charges whether they are Domestic Violence, Child Abuse, and Child Sexual Abuse cases in divorce and custody proceedings are widespread and rampant. Women are the OVERWHELMING MAJORITY of those who employ false charges, add to these the trauma and emotional damage to children, women emerge as the most likely to abuse a child for their own personal gain.

____________________________

In the Mary D., Petitioner (citation omitted) case noted above, we now have an industry that uses these charges and allegations (false or otherwise) to prey on families and children. Their entire goal to collect funding is to "find" (or manufacture if necessary) victims in larger and larger numbers to justify greater and greater levels of funding. - RW

Land of the Free imprisons most

- Guardian, 15feb00

Anger grows as US jails its two millionth inmate. The land of the free is now home to 25% of the world's prison population.

Vigils are being mounted .... to draw attention to the arrival of the two millionth inmate in American jails. The US comprises 5% of the global population yet it is responsible for 25% of the world's prisoners. It has a higher proportion of its citizens in jail than any other country in history, according to the November Coalition, an alliance of civil rights campaigners, justice policy workers and drug law reformers. ....

"Incarceration should be the last resort of a civilized society, not the first," said Michael Gelacak, a former vice-chairman of the US sentencing commission. "We have it backwards and it's time we realized that."

Nora Callahan said; "We are calling on state and federal governments to stop breaking up families and destroying our communities. Prison is not the solution to every social problem".

In New York City, the Prison Moratorium Project will focus on the fact that one in three black youths is either in custody or on parole. Kevin Pranis, of the project, said: "New York state is diverting millions of dollars from colleges and universities to pay for prisons we can't afford."

[According to Amneus, The Garbage Generation, pub. 1990, we are moving from patriarchy to a fatherless matriarchy, the new model being the black ghetto in the USA, the Caribbean community, or the American Indian. Such a culture, associated with the underclass, is discussed by Murray elsewhere in this issue. Whereas in the US a large proportion of black youths are in jail, we will have to imprison a large proportion of our white youth when we have adopted their fatherless culture. As an indicator of where we are heading, among West Indian children in Britain, 65% do not have their biological father living with them, and 68% of teenage girls are unmarried mothers - see The Unequal Struggle by A. Gibson, 1986, pub. Caribbean House, Bridport Place, London N1 5DS. Half of the muggings in London are by blacks. White youths will join them as we adopt their culture. - Ed]

Criminal justice is already a campaign issue in the presidential race. The Republican front-runner George W. Bush, governor of Texas, is a staunch supporter of both the death penalty and stiffer sentencing for drug offences.

Since he took over in Texas, the prison population there is up from 41,000 to 150,000, much of this as a result of locking up people for drug possession. This is one of the reasons that commentators have pressed Bush to be more open about his own alleged drug use in the past.

Second biggest employer

Of those held in federal rather than state prisons, 60% are drug offenders with no history of violence. Aminah Muhammad, who is organizing the Los Angeles vigil, said: "My husband is doing 23 years for just being present in a house where drugs were found, so my 10-year-old son doesn't have his father.

Lockdown America, a book by Christian Parenti, analyses the US criminal justice system. He notes the expansion of the private prison sector - dubbed by one investment

firm the "theme stock for the nineties" - which now runs more than 100 facilities in 27 states, holding more than 100,000 inmates.

A total of 18 private firms are involved in the running of local jails, private prisons and immigration detention centers. It is estimated that firms such as Goldman Sachs and Merrill Lynch write between $2-3 billion in prison constructions bonds every year. This has led some commentators to suggest that the United States is effectively creating a prison-industrial complex in much the same way as the military-industrial complex operates.

Critics of the system suggest that so much money is invested in incarceration that politicians would find it difficult to reverse the trends against the wishes of their financial backers and lobbyists.

In his study Christian Parenti suggests: "In many ways the

p7

incarceration binge is simply the policy byproduct of rightwing electoral rhetoric."

The cost of building jails has averaged $7 billion per year for the last decade and the annual bill for incarcerating prisoners is up to $35 billion annually. The prison industry employs more than 523,000 people, making it the country's biggest employer after General Motors. Some 5% of the population growth in rural areas between 1980 and 1990 was as a result of prisoners being moved into new rural jails.

The national convention of the American Bar Association, held in Dallas, Texas last weekend, was told there was growing momentum for a moratorium on the death penalty. This follows the recent announcement by the Illinois governor, George Ryan, that the state will suspend executions pending an investigation into the number of death row inmates who turn out to have been wrongly convicted. There are 3,600 people awaiting execution in the US - 463 of them in Texas alone.

....

In 1985, the then Chief Justice Warren Burger said: "What business enterprise could conceivably succeed with the rate of recall of its products that we see in the 'products' of our prisons?"

Charles Murray

Charles Murray's Underclass was first published in the Sunday Times Magazine in November 1989. In America, where the growth of the underclass has accelerated, his theories about the disintegration of society have found acceptance even on the left of the political spectrum.

In 1989 Murray predicted that within a decade Britain's underclass would become proportionately as large as that of the U.S.

On 13feb00, sect. 5 p1, The Sunday Times published two pages where Murray updated his analysis.

".... the complexities of individuals do not trump statistical tendencies. My fundamental thesis is that large increases in the three indicators I used in 1989 - dropout from the labour force among young males, violent crime and births to unmarried women - will be associated with the growth of a class of violent, uncivilized people who, if they become sufficiently numerous, will fundamentally degrade the life of society. ....

"The short story is that the precentage of young working-aged males not in employment was dramatically higher in 1999 than it had been in 1989. Among males aged 18-24., the percentage not in employment went from 20.5% in 1989 to 31.2% in 1999, an increase of more than half. .... there is no obvious benign explanation for the large increases in young males out of employment between 1989 and 1999. .... The trend conforms exactly to what one would expect from a growing underclass.... Over the past two decades, larger and larger numbers of British children have not been socialised to norms of self-control .... larger numbers of British children are not being raised by two mature, married adults. .... most serious forms of child abuse are rarely inflicted by a married biological father."

Murray does not know that all government initiatives are to get young women into work, although for a decade their long term unemployment rate has been only one third of that for young men. When I noticed this statistic in radfem research (BT Forum factsheet 1, tel. 0800 800 926,) funded by the then Director of BT Forum, radfem Joanna Foster (using your telephone money, £2 millions p.a.!), and pointed it out, Foster and the female researcher Dr Liza Catan, then realising its significance, falsely stated that their statistics were false. (Catan to Catt, 9may97.) This must be unprecedentedly disgraceful, deeply anti-social chacanery in a democratic country. The truth of the 3 to 1 ratio for 12mos unemployed can be confirmed at govt no. 020 7533 6176 or 6094 - Ed

[Copy of draft sent to Dr Liza Catan on 27feb00, giving her the opportunity to comment. - Ed]

The back cover of the 1995 issue of Farewell to the Family?, by Patricia Morgan, 0171 799 3745, states; 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'.

Wonderful women

Auberon Waugh,

Telegraph, 11mar00, p25

The latest Home Office brainwave is to "target" wife beaters. These loathsome people will be tried and imprisoned even if the wife refuses to complain and give evidence.

This must be seen as a great victory for the feminist sisterhood which is beginning to make itself felt in every aspect of our lives. How they must be patting themselves on the back! There is no suggestions that persistent husband-beaters should be similarly discouraged.

Almost everyone must know of at least one couple where the husband is reduced to a quivering wreck by the threat of physical violence from the wife. Yet in the ideology of the times, these people simply do not exist....

p8

So what's feminism ever done for us?

- Heather Causnett,

Yorkshire Evening Press, 8mar00

.... I find it interesting to look back to the birth of feminism. As long ago as 1792, a book called A Vindication Of The Rights Of Women was written by Mary Wollstonecraft .... Then came a succession of women who changed our world - Florence Nightingale .... Emmeline Pankhurst .... Marie Stopes .... They have a lot to answer for, good and bad....

Much that was beneficial came of their efforts, .... but in the last couple of decades, the darker and more aggressive face of feminism has emerged from the shadows....

Children are used as pawns in bitter divorce actions, separated from their fathers, who are as often as not the innocent party but who can lose their homes, be forced to pay through the nose and possibly end up on the street. Nine out of ten homeless people are men - I wonder how many of those have lost their homes through the break-up of marriages?

.... career minded women .... have missed out on what matters most ....

I cannot honestly say that there is a single aspect of today's accepted feminist trend that has brought true happiness or lasting contentment to people of either sex, and certainly children suffer under most of its rule. ....

Are women winning rights at the expense of our menfolk?

- Ann Widdecombe,

The Universe, 7mar00

.... Positive discrimination [women shortlists] is, of course, just another way of saying discrimination against men. ....

Some figures suggest that a young man today has less than a 50 per cent chance of being actively involved in bringing his children to maturity and in inner cities that can fall to as low as twenty per cent. ....

The courts .... nearly always award custody to the mother in family break up and in informal partnerships the man has fewer rights still.

.... even if the woman is a multiple adulteress and has walked out on him she will still be likely to keep the children ....

.... Yet men appear to be sleepwalking through these mammoth changes. ....

I do not know if they are dazed by the speed with which it has happened or too complacent to notice but it is time they woke up and stirred themselves to a bit of protest.

Otherwise I predict that three or four elections hence the candidates will be falling over each other to convince the electorate that they provide the best policies to give equal rights to men.

Tory rekindles row over lone mothers

Emma Pearson,

Western Mail, 4mar00

Shadow Home Secretary Ann Widdecombe has incensed women's groups and community leaders by suggesting that single mothers are the root of teenage crime. .... she said the breakdown in traditional family lifestyles had led to children turning to crime because they had no male role models.

"One of the biggest problems is that there is a second or third generation who have never seen the pattern of a moderately successful lifestyle," she said. "They have never had a father or only had a succession of people they call uncle.

Indecent claims

-Leader, Telegraph, 19feb00

Everything about the new Home Office study which claims that each year between 118,000 and 295,000 women may be raped or sexually assaulted in England and Wales is deeply dishonest. First, the figures themselves: with that vast margin of possible error - 177,000, or more than 40 per cent - they clearly represent nothing but wild guesswork. Why, then, do the researchers pluck those precise-sounding numbers out of the air? Why 118,000, and not, say, 100,000? Why 295,0-00, and not 300,000? The answer can only be that, by avoiding round numbers, they hope to lend their findings a spurious scientific credibility. How they insult our intelligence.

Then there is the way in which they arrive at their figures. That, too, is dishonest. First they announce, without citing the evidence, that "it would be reasonably safe to assume" that the police fail to record a third of complaints reported to them by women who claim to have been attacked. They also assume, without evidence, that every complaint made to the police must be justified. Then they on to say that between 75 and 90 per cent of cases go unreported. So it is that, magically, they transform 25,300 recorded crimes into as many as 295,000, simply by multiplying the recorded figures by random numbers.

There is also something dishonest in the report's finding that men who display "patriarchal attitudes" are more likely to believe that wife-beating is "legitimate". The aim here is to subtly discredit the traditional idea of the husband as head of his household, by linking it in people's minds with violence. .... that is the seed that these Home Office researchers are clearly trying to implant in our minds.

It is absurd that public policy should be determined by this nonsense. Yet here is the Home Office, accepting every rubbishy word of it, and giving an extra £6 million of public money to women's groups on the strength of it. And here is Baroness Jay, the minister for women, solemnly declaring: "It is unacceptable that a quarter of women experience domestic violence at some stage in their lives and that many more are so scared of rape or sexual assault that they are frightened to leave their homes."

It is indeed unacceptable that women should live in fear of rape and sexual assault. But no wonder they are frightened, when the Government gives credence to an unscientific, scaremongering report such as this.

Ill Eagle 8, june00

p1

A mother's wish

- Telegraph leader, 4apr00

.... the findings of a poll released today by Mother and Baby magazine .... that 81 per cent of the mothers with young children would prefer not to work - stands in direct contradiction to one of the Govt's most important assumptions. [govt] ministers have offered financial inducements to those willing to hand over .... care to professional child-minders. So the woman who devotes her time and energy to her own family has received no recognition from the Govt (which makes no attempt even to understand her motives and values .... [Would the mother, or the child-minder, be buying the magazine? So much for ill-defined statistics. - Ed]

Reward

yourself

Special offer

to new members

Free London theatre tickets for 2

To enter our Special Draw simply write to us at Suite 367, enclosing your name address and telephone number (full address on page 3).

Offer open to only ManKind members

who have joined after July 1st 1999

Closing date June 30th 2000.

Lawyer of the week

Deborah Harman

- Linda Tsang, Times, Law, 9may00

Deborah Harman acted for Roy Burnett, who was jailed for life in 1986 after a jury convicted him of rape. Last month the Court of Appeal quashed his conviction.... "I was recommended to Roy by a prison officer.... I was absolutely stunned to discover that every record of Roy's trial had been shredded five years after his conviction. .... Had the Metropolitan Police not kept a copy of the original police report and a copy of the photographs of the victim's injuries, there would not have been the slightest chance of proving his innocence.... .... I find it abhorrent that changes to the criminal law can be contemplated on the basis of statistical conclusions that not a high enough proportion of charges result in conviction. .... When I heard the words in Roy's case: 'The conviction must be quashed.' .... is the only time in my career that I have had to wipe away tears of relief at a court decision. ...."

Advertisement

Have case - will travel

Need a McKenzie Friend ?

Divorce - Custody - Advice

Contact: Ray Hemmingway Tel 01484-316489

ManKind A.G.M.

23sep00 12.30-4.30

Quality Hotel, Bentley, Walsall WS2 0BS, (01922 724444

At Jct. 10, M6.

Army bullies force desertions

- Jason Burke, Observer,

4june00. p1

"Desertions from the Army, often prompted by bullying and mistreatment, have reached record levels, prompting warnings of a crisis in the armed forces. .... higher than at any other time since the end of National Service. .... last year 1,998 cases of desertion and being absent without leave - one for every 48 soldiers. .... compares with .... one in 75 in 1996 .... at the time .... considered a historic high. .... many young soldiers decide to desert .... after mistreatment and bullying by their superiors or colleagues. .... more then 30 investigations under way into allegations of brutality.

At least 30 servicemen are separately taking the MoD to the High Court .... If their cases succeed, the MoD could be forced to pay out compensation totalling millions of pounds.

The absenteeism exacerbates an already serious manpower crisis. The Army is now understrength by at least 7,000 men...."

Recently, the plan to induct women into combat duties was again discussed.

I have just realised that since radfem dogma requires that exclusion always results from oppression, it was oppression that kept women from the pleasure of close combat with bayonets. This illustrates the total lack of strategy among radical feminists. The false dogma that women were historically disadvantaged required that trench warfare was a pleasure. Small wonder that 50% gullible women pioneering such rights in the U S Army suddenly reported pregnant when posted to the Gulf War.

As to bullying, I experienced sadism in the RAF in 1953 which was exactly the same as that experienced in the RAF in 1922 and written about by T E Lawrence in his book "The Mint", and also experienced within two years of Lawrence by my father, see my website www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/

The crass ignorance of radical feminists means that they are inciting other, gullible women, into the front trenches. They do not know that the whole problem of whether, in order to win in battle, it is necessary to drill and to brutalise your troops, will be unknown to radical feminists, who view every compulsory activity by men as something that women would enjoy. For my part, my greatest nightmare, having been trained for it, is to be in a bayonet attack. This is one of the many, many ways in which women have been traditionally extremely favoured. - Ed

Lord Northbourne .... clearly thinks that the campaign for women's rights has gone far enough. He has tabled a question asking the government if it will appoint a minister for men. Will Baroness Jay .... answer it? ....

- Atticus, Sunday Times, 4june00, sect. 1 p19.

Fathers entitled to 'widowed mother's allowance'

Times, 10may00

Comment by Ed.

European Court of Human Rights judgement, 25apr00, struck out applications no. 36578/97 and 38890/97 when the UK authorities agreed to pay social security benefits in arrears to two male widowers as if they had been bereaved widows, pending new legislation.

The British government always fights a rearguard, against the interests of half of its voters, to avoid until the last possible moment giving equal rights to men. Yarwood was associated with forcing equality on fuel payments for old men. Why does our government always spend our money fighting expensive cases to avoid being forced to enact equality? This must be because our feminised government believes that some are more equal than others. As the shadow home secretary wrote, quoted on the last page of Ill Eagle 8, ".... men appear to be sleepwalking ...."

p2

Just Potty

-Jasper Gerard, Mail, 21apr00, p37

" .... feminists at Stockholm University are campaigning to scrap the urinals on the grounds that their male-use-only design is intrinsically sexist. .... at least one Swedish primary school has already ditched the wall-fixed porcelain to acclimatise young male Swedes to the new order. Others are expected to follow. .... this men-to-pee-like-women project is beyond parody. .... one of the more imaginative examples of feminist paranoia .... of women's desire for absolute equality ...."

Dworkin's Vision - "Take No Prisoners" in the future 'Womanland'

- Linda Grant, Guardian,

Guardian Weekend, 13may00, p8.

".... The common view is that Dworkin began to write about porn because of her own traumatic marriage, in which being beaten and kicked wasn't an occasional incident, but the everyday....

"So now we come to what Andrea Dworkin wants and it is this: she wants women to have their own country. .... if you don't want to live in Womenland, so what? Not all Jews live in Israel, but it is there, a place of potential refuge if persecution comes to all. Furthermore, Dworkin says, as the Jews fought for Israel so women have the right to execute - that's right, execute - rapists and the state should not intervene. .... she was serious .... every act of penetrative sex is potentially an act of rape...."

In the article, Dworkin herself writes; ".... the beating and torture I experienced in marriage some 30 years ago; I finally got away ...."

Catherine A. MacKinnon cites Dworkin on rape, pp139, 190, 198, with approval in her 1989 book Toward a Feminist Theory of the State. [In a welter of scholastic gobbledygook, she seeks, and fails, to show that radfems can be scholarly.] In Mar99, Canadian Senator Anne C. Cools, available on my website, says; "Catherine MacKinnon, a gynocentric feminist, postulates that man-woman sexual relations are abhorrent because they violate women, and that in a patriarchal society all heterosexual intercourse is rape. MacKinnon helped to craft sexual assault laws in Canada. This gender feminist ideology has driven much law in Canada, and consequently has driven much injustice. It has ravaged law, justice, many careers, and many human lives. .... It was buttressed by feminist terrorism and aggression ...." Cools is a friend of Erin Pizzey.

Dworkin is not large; she is extremely large, and perambulates with great difficulty.

Whereas in the Grant interview Dworkin argues for "Womanland", but also mentions that earlier she was a prostitute, in another very different Guardian 2june00 article Dworkin writes about being raped last year, aged 52; all of her! With the recent admission by Betty Frieden, the first radfem, that she made up allegations that her husband was violent, sense that radfems make up all the most horrible allegations in order to keep the writing commissions coming in.

Saving the boys from the gender benders

- Andrew Sullivan,

Sunday Times, 28may00, sect. 5 p7

Hell hath no fury like an American feminist. If you've ever met the professional variety, you will learn that soon enough. You will discover as well that any attempt at rational dialogue with such a person is enough to prompt a torrent of abuse that is now one of the mainstays of the American left. .... Boys are essentially being told that what comes naturally to them - rough-and-tumble play, confrontation, physicality, mischief - are psychological disorders. In one school, boys were disciplined for making guns out of their fingers and pretending to shoot one another. .... What is happening now in America is the slow crumbling of an ideological edifice that was constructed with perfectly good intentions on the basis of a lie. Too bad that several generations of boys and men have been the victims of that lie. And too bad that few people until now have had the courage and intellectual honesty to expose it.

What Women Want

Recognition of the unique qualities women can and do bring to society and industry. An end to barriers created by gender stereotyping and narrow-minded men. - Lucky, p180, in What Women Want, pub. Virago 1996.

Power to young people

In her 1998 book Fight for the Family (from 01865 552774), Lynette Burrows argues that the Children's Rights movement has been infiltrated by paedophiles. According to her, the public's reaction against a campaign to legitimise sexual intercourse between adults and children had to go underground. The argument used by childcare organisations to justify preferring to employ homosexuals, on the grounds that they are less likely to molest girls in their care, tends to confirm this.

A bizarre article by "One of our panel of columnists" Peter Tatchell in the magazine Community Care, 23mar00, tends to support the Burrows thesis. Here is part of it.

"By saying that under-16s are not allowed to consent to a sexual relationship, the unspoken message is that they have no sexual rights - which is the precise mind-set of the abusive adult. .... Denying under-16s the right to consent to sex, reinforces the idea that they have no right to make sexual choices. Isn't this what child sex abusers believe?" - "Peter Tatchell is a spokesperson for the gay rights group OutRage! ...."

Letter to the Editor

Dear Sir,

Have received and read through your 'Ill Eagle'; which I think is excellent.

Thank God there are people like yourself and ManKind that are doing something to loosen the strangle hold that feminism has over society.

From my experiences of life things have got gradually worse for men.

I think the problem has been exacerbated also by the increasing amount of single mothers who are bringing up sons mainly on their own, and this has lead to a lot of young men being brainwashed by their mothers into thinking that men are 'bad' and this had led to the majority of young men having low self esteem.

To my mind women have always had 'equal rights' to some degree, as over the ages there always have been some jobs that are better suited to womankind. There used to be a balance between men and women. Unfortunately over the last 50 years the women's movements have got hold and have gone over the top on 'equal rights' and the balance has swung grossly in their favour, so much so that the family unit, I will go as far as to say, has been destroyed ii this country and therefore causing a lot of the ills of society. Instead of the man being the head of the household, the woman coming a close second, and the children a close third; children come first with their mother a close second and the man, well, a long way adrift in third.

I would like to attend the AAFAA Conference in London on Sat. 11nov00 [Action against false allegations of abuse, tel. 01788 811912]

Keep up the good work.

Yours sincerely, P Bendell.

Working mothers warning

- David Brindle,

Guardian, 7apr00, p11

.... young children looked after by other people may be more prone to bad behaviour. .... hitting and disobeying .... But .... the higher the quality of day care, the fewer the problems. .... Professor Jay Belsky, of Birkbeck College, who will present the findings .... 1,300 children in the US .... and 125 first-born boys [in England].... Family environment was found to be the most important influence on a child's development.

[Following her pivotal 1995 book Farewell to the Family?, recently re-issued, from 0207 799 3745, in 1996 Patricia Morgan gave us Who Needs Parents?, same publisher. She carefully shows that child care when mum goes out to work, if it does not damage the child, is too expensive, except for high flying women like Harriet Harman and Mistress Blair. Gilder said the same in 1973. Pied Piper HH and the rest say; "Copy me. I don't damage my children," but you will. - Ed]

Single mothers are 70% more likely to die early than married mothers and are more prone to death by suicide, violent abuse or alcohol, says a survey in The Lancet today. The analysis, from Sweden, ... used a sample of more than 750,000 women.

p3

Editorial

The Hiatus

"When the Americans leave, then the civil was can begin." This is a quotation from a Vietnamese woman on the back cover of one of the key books published during the American phase in the Vietnamese war of liberation. The Americans used all their wealth and power, spending £4,000 per year per man, woman and Vietnamese child, to force the natives into conceding that they were trying lose their independence in a monolithic, world empire of godless communism, not trying to get rid of foreign domination. (It would have cost less to send every Vietnamese citizen to Harvard University.) Because the Vietnamese could not compromise over their independence, (there had been terrible famines with millions of deaths under French rule,) they were forced to break the American war machine, the most powerful in history, and also break the American economy. The U.S.A. went off the Gold Standard, and in ignominy left Indochina, leaving a wake of terrible, long term destruction.

My first two books, one available on my website, www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/ show clearly that in 1970 we had major social questions which needed to be addressed, and if possible, solved. The lasting achievement of radfems was to suppress analysis and therefore progress in resolving major social problems for a third of a century. Everything had to be viewed through the distorted lens of the dogma of female oppression. Today, anything said in pursuit of social reform is interpreted through this dogma, very much as Marxists in their day could not listen to, or respond to, social issues in a competent way. That is why Erin Pizzey's assertion that radfems are Marxists who have jumped ship, is so instructive. Their blindness and aggressiveness is so similar, as is the falsification of statistics and suppression of opposition. In her 1989 book Toward a Feminist Theory of the State, radfem Professor Catherine A. MacKinnon begins with an 80 page section; The Problem of Marxism and Fenminism.

The failure of women to call a small minority of their kind, the radfems, to heel, will lead to the other lasting achievement of the radfems. Women continue to take short term advantage of a legal system which is controlled by radfems, expropriating men on a grand scale, cutting fathers off from their children, now leading to the jailing of men in ever greater numbers. This copies the U.S.A.'s attack on its black, fatherless youth, a significant, rising proportion of whom are now in jail, many on rape charges. Interestingly, most men in jail for rape are black. Thus, the radfem struggle to jail more men on rape charges is a racist attack by the sisterhood on the black brotherhood. In the same way as Gentiles failed to restrain Hitler, and all Germans finally paid a terrible price for it, so will generations of women pay for the indifference of this generation to the escalating crisis. The worldwide contempt for German Gentiles continued for two generations. The failure of women to check the excesses of radfem behaviour, including their distorted, corrupting dogma, leads to a growing contempt for women in general, so that the following article will be one of many. Thanks to their conniving with radfems, women are at the Last Chance Saloon in their quest to save parity of esteem, carefully constructed over centuries, now to be lost for a long time. One Melanie Phillips, one Erin Pizzey, one Senator Anne C. Cools and one Patricia Morgan cannot save the respect that women are losing.

A necessary part of the Dream which is love and marriage is respect for women. That is why the radfems are so corrosive.

ManKind and Ill Eagle can be reached at;

(1). Mankind, Suite 367, 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/

The Radical Feminist

With no effective rituals of initiation, and no real way to know when our slow progress toward adulthood has reached its goal, young men in our culture go around in circles. - Robert Bly, The Sibling Society, 1996, p44.

Recently, the question; "Why are the radical feminists so bitter and so destructive? What is driving them?" was posed to me again.

I have been reading Margaret Mead, Male and Female, 1950/64 and at the same time discussing Daniel Amneus, The Garbage Generation, 1990. While Amneus draws heavily on Mead to develop the idea that the weakest link into the family is that of the father, and that civilised society progresses by reinforcing that link, the present discussion is about something else.

Mead is valuable because she pre-dates the myth-making of radical feminism, and gives us some thinking untainted by it. She may have been "discredited" because she did not toe the later PC radical feminist line. However, for our purpose, even that question does not matter.

Mead cites two adult roles in a culture, the male and the female. Each role may have wide permissible variations, or it may be very restrictive. It is important to engineer a society where wide variation is allowed within each role. This is because a child, particularly a young man, may decide that he will fail to fulfil the required role. In that case he may take on the role of the female, and go off to weave mats with the women. Mead believes that virtually all homosexuality is a social construct, used by a child to evade his fear of failure to fulfil the appropriate adult role. This correlates with the observation that homosexuals are deeply disturbed people; the majority of members of Alcaholics Anonymous are homosexual, their suicide rate is very high, and so on. The massive bias in favour of promoting homosexual at the expense of heterosexual men to the Cabinet means we must give up the idea that discrimination against homosexuals leads to their alcoholism, suicide and so forth.

There is much concern in many cultures to ensure that a boy is properly inducted into the role of adult man. The aim of the initiation .... is imagined as a way to complete the development of the being from a neutral genderlessness to a state of genuine masculinity. - Robert Bly, The Sibling Society, 1996, p116. A number of activities are undertaken towards that end, some of which we would call rites of passage, something which is particularly lacking in our culture. Sport, possibly particularly team sport, probably served that purpose for most boys. It is instructive that the radical feminist opposes competition in sport, even team competition.

Only recently did I realise why a girl had less need of a rite of passage. Menstruation clearly tells her that now she is a woman. Such reassurance has to be artificially given to a boy by social construct(s).

Other events than rites of passage occur in tribal societies which serve the purpose of assuring a boy that he has made the difficult transition into manhood. These include all-male clubs and all-male ceremonial.

A study of radical feminists shows that they strongly attack each and every one of these cultural constructs, usually under cover of demands for equality. The question we have to ask ourselves is, "Why?"

Recently, in our society, the enormous fear of appearing to be feminine evinced by boys has been remarked upon.

My first experience of a radical feminist was when her then husband drove me and my wife to Marge Piercy's home to be guests for the night. A week later, I found that on arrival my wife, as well as myself, had immediately feared that we would be thrown out into a very cold midwinter Cape Cod night, miles from anywhere. This is the only time in my life that such a fear has come over me, when a house guest. I am sure that it was also the only time my wife ever had such a fear.

Six months later I went to a lecture by Piercy in London. There were 25 women present plus myself. She rapidly got involved in talking about rape.

p4

If, as is generally asserted, rape is a power syndrome, not sexual, then the urge to rape will not be restricted to males. A decade ago I concluded that the urge to rape existed in many radical feminists. They were bitter because they lacked the equipment. They hated men who raped, and had contempt for men who, having the equipment, did not. That is the only way I can explain their tremendous frustration; their fixation on rape, which is a minor social problem, with quite as many male victims as female. Radical feminists show no concern for the major problem of rape of males in prisons. Part of this indifference is to rename it as a minor offence. (Similarly, more young men are mugged, not old ladies.)

(An interesting dislocation in PC is that, whereas we are esked to extoll buggery as just another orientation from normal sexual intercourse, in the case of attacks on men we are asked to dismiss forced buggery as

Now let us address the fact that radical feminists work to destroy all male rites of passage and all mechanisms for reassuring a boy of his newly found manhood.

The desire of radical feminists to rape is an extreme expression of their more general sexual confusion. Like the sensitive boy in the tribe, they fear that they will fail to fulfil their expected, female, adult role. They look with fondness and also with envy on another possible option for them, the role of man. This fear of alienation from the woman's role is fuelled if the radical feminist has been educated beyond the traditional woman's role. It is also fuelled by radical feminists' persistent denigration of a woman's traditional role.

Under cover of demands for equality of opportunity, radical feminists invade all aspects of male activity, even the least appropriate. A recent absurd example is that legislation in the USA now requires that the amount of government money spent on female soccer must equal that spent to encourage male soccer, although soccer has developed over a century as a sport tuned to the male physique, which women, with their different pelvises, are obviously unable to emulate. (The result is that the USA is near to top in the world female soccer stakes.) Further evidence that radical feminists are evincing the same confusion and fear as that evinced by the occasional boy in Mead's tribes, is that they make no effort whatsoever to induct boys or men into strictly female provinces. That is, androgyny, or equality, is a one-way road. There is no effort to encourage men into any of the many female provinces, for example the teaching of young children.

Generally, the attack on male virtues is by way of caricature. Male valour is vilified by calling it male violence. Every attack by radical feminists on an obviously anti-social activity is actually a coded attack on a very fine, somewhat similar male virtue. Thus does the radical feminist evince both a desire to enter the male sanctum, and also a desire to destroy the male sanctum.

It is instructive to look up the Shorter Oxford Dictionary which predates the perversion of our language by radical feminism.

Macho and machismo do not exist in 1975 vintage English, although radical feminists claim that we have to erase the macho culture of that time.

Virtue is the most important word. It has been totally changed from 1973 to rid it of male characteristics, all of which are now denigrated under the newly imported boo-word macho. Virtue then included; Physical strength, force or energy; The possession or display of manly qualities; manly excellence, manliness, valour. In women, it cites Chastity, sexual purity, these also now denigrated by radical feminists.

Chivalry, another word indicating a boy's chance to grow into man, is also now denigrated. It included; disinterested bravery, honour, and courtesy. All of these are under attack from radical feminism. The social analyst Lipschutz claims that when in power, chivalry is a necessary virtue. He says that the failure of powerful women to show chivalry to weak men is why our society is out of control, out of balance. He says that powerful women, far from showing chivalry to weak men, despise them.

"There was also a need to ensure that the curriculum included areas which would allow children to find ways of shining which were not to do with being macho - music, drama, dance." - Angela Phillips, the keynote speaker at the 16nov98 Home Office conference entitled Boys, young men and fathers, from which men's organisations were excluded. Here we see the attempt to destroy every rite of passage for the boy, including sport, in a Home Office conference supposedly about the problem of the growing alienation of boys. As a boy at school, I retreated from music, drama and dance, although now, as a confident adult, I sing in one of the best choirs in London. (At school, drama meant A Midsummer Night's Dream, a nightmare for boys. Dance was worse.). Even while in the conference where she is supposed to be discussing alienated boys, Phillips, invited by a radical feminist Home Office, tries to destroy mechanisms for boys to stay engaged through to manhood. Her ignorant crocodile tears are destructive.

Ivor Catt, 121 Westfields, St. Albans AL3 4JR 2aug99

Probation

In mar00 the County Organisers of ManKind sent a questionnaire to a random selection of 21 out of the 50 Chief Probation Officers throughout the country. We have now received a standard response from the Lead Officer of the Family Court Welfare Network (LOFCWN).

Steve Fitzgerald has taken up his offer of a meeting. In addition, SF has requested a more specific response to the question about "The NAPO Policy Document". This is a policy which in its entirety discriminates against men.

The Myth

ASSOCIATION OF CHIEF OFFICERS OF Probation

1 Brooklands Avenue,

Cambridge CB2 2BB

Tel: 01223 712345

5apr00

Mr S Fitzgerald,

National Organiser, ManKind (etc.)

Dear Mr. Fitzgerald, I write to you in my capacity as LOFCWN for the Association of Chief Officers of Probation (ACOP). Members of your organisation in different areas have been writing to local Chief Probation Officers (CPOs) seeking clarification of a number of points and issues. Essentially, they are presenting the same paper written by you to different CPOs. In the circumstances, it seems sensible that ACOP should make a response to you and your paper along with a request that you make that response as widely available as possible to your membership. I hope you are agreeable to this way of moving things forward.

Your paper clearly sets out the matters which concern you and I will reply within the headings you use.

1. Training: All Family Court Welfare Officers (FCWO), in common with Guardian ad Litem and Social Workers, hold a Diploma in Social Work (or its equivalent). Pre-qualification training includes study of child development, separation and loss, families in crisis, Law, assessment and report writing. Probation Officers are generally assigned to Family Court Welfare Service (FCWS) only after 2-3 years experience within Probation. During this time, they increase their knowledge and understanding of families, risk assessment and report writing - all of which are of central importance when they come to work as Court Welfare Officers (CWOs). When they are assigned to FCWS officers are sent for Induction Training, which is organised on a national basis. This training covers the key elements of the FCWO task. The training is supported by an induction manual produced nationally. Area Probation Services have arrangements for observation, induction and mentoring to ensure that new officers move into the work in a controlled and supported way. Area Probation Services are responsible for providing training necessary to ensure officers work to a satisfactory standard. Annual appraisal against a robust schedule of practice competences is the mechanism for testing that an officer's work is at the required level.

ACOP has produced two distinct learning packs:

(1) Working with Children.

(2) "Cornerstones" video trigger-training - working with diversity.

in order to support local training. We also run an annual practice conference at which research and developments in practice are discussed.

While we are not complacent, we know that this level of training compares favourably with that

p5

provided for others operating in the Family Justice System.

2. Parental Alienation: FCWS is aware of several articles written on the subject of Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS). ACOP's view is that PAS represents one contribution amongst a wealth of research studies on the effects of separation and divorce, all of which must contribute to our understanding of the different ways children and families cope with disruption of their family life. It is dangerous, in our view, to promote one piece of research over all others.

3. Contact Guidelines: ACOP has good links with the Association of Family Court Welfare |Officers (AFCWO) and there is dialogue between the Associations. ACOP's understanding of the AFCWO "guidelines" is that they are merely a contribution to the debate on how best to arrange contact. They are not intended to be definitive or prescriptive. ACOP has its own guidance "Children and Contact - A Framework for Assessment". I enclose a copy for your information.

4. Equal Parenting: By "equal parenting" I understand you mean a set of arrangements made by parents so that children spend part of each week with each parent in their separate homes.

ACOP is absolutely clear that the Children Act 1989 guides us towards particularity, rather than generality, ie it is what is right for this particular child that determines the nature and extent of contact.

Accordingly, "equal parenting" will be right in some circumstances for some children and wrong for other children in different circumstances.

You may be interested to know that in parts of the United States of America the notion of the "nest" is gaining ground with some children. This is an arrangement whereby the children remain in one home and it is the parents who come to live in that home at different times during the week. These children appear to like being based so that possessions, friends etc are all in one place.

What is clear to us is that where parents are prepared to co-operate and keep the focus on the children's needs all sorts of imaginative solutions can be found to the issue of contact.

5. NAPO Document: All FCWOs are expected to carry out their duties in accordance with the law, national standards and any guidance which may be provided by Area Probation Services. Work which demonstrably failed to meet required standards would be dealt with robustly, regardless of whether it were authorised by a NAPO policy document or not.

6. Complaints Procedure Each Area Probation Service has a complaints procedure, approved and authorised by its Probation Committee. Any perceived shortcoming in a Service's procedure should be taken up with the Probation Service concerned.

6.2 Collection of Information / Quality Control The purposes of a welfare report are such as to make it necessary and desirable for the FCWO to make decisions about what to include or exclude from a report. Parties are at liberty to challenge a report and ask the court to order the CWO's attendance at the hearing to answer questions, if they wish.

It is not the purpose of quality control procedures to scrutinise in detail transactions between FCWO and parties.

6.3 Challenging a Report You are, no doubt, aware of the restrictions placed upon the uses to which a welfare report may be put and who can see it. The report is the property of the court and only available from the court, at which proceedings are to be heard. This means that statutorily the welfare report can only be made available after formal filing with the court.

ACOP does not accept your view that it is too late to challenge a report by the time it comes before the Judge, as this view discounts the very judicial process which is at the heart of proceedings. In our view, any lack of confidence you may have with the court process should be taken up with the Lord Chancellor's Department, not deflected into spurious discussion of challenging a report prior to its reaching court.

6.4 Content and Conduct Most complaints procedures seek to make a distinction between complaints against content, professional judgements, conclusions and recommendations reached in a report and complaints against the way in which a FCWO carried out his/her inquiries. The reasons for this is that, in our view, the Judge who hears all the evidence, and where necessary may question (and hear questioned) the FCWO in court, is best placed to decide what weight to give to the welfare report and the FCWOs verbal evidence. No complaints procedure can hope to re-visit issues which have been dealt with through due process of law.

Complaints procedures should, therefore, generally be seen to be able to deal with complaints which relate to FCWO conduct, but not able to deal with matters relating to report content.

All area services are required to have a complaints procedure in place and part of that procedure is their annual report which is available from area services.

I hope this is useful to you in furthering your understanding of the Probation Service's position on the key issues which you raise. I wonder if it would be worth meeting to have a more free-flowing discussion of issues of mutual interest?

"Probation Officers are generally assigned to Family Court Welfare Service (FCWS) only after 2-3 years experience within Probation." [This is why they always look for, or even assume, criminal tendencies in fathers. - Ed.]

6.2 ....Parties are at liberty to challenge a report and ask the court to order the CWO's attendance at the hearing to answer questions, if they wish. [Not true - Ed.]

The Reality

"Views" by probation officers who masquerade as experts in matters of child welfare are screened against scrutiny. It is treated as contempt of court for fathers to 'disclose' Probation Officer CWO Reports (containing the views, professional practice methodology and philosophy of poorly trained probation service staff). Since Family Court judges can sit on the committee of local probation areas (and thus are the 'employers' of CWOs who are failing) some English Family court judges (not excluding those at the Royal Courts of Justice, RCJ) have reasons to be concerned that the poor performance by their officers might leak to the general public. Failure by staff impacts children. England is habituated with doing things on the cheap, however given that some 70 000 CWO reports have impact on the lives of children it is worth considering the reports by the HM Inspectorate for probation which are in the public domain and which throw light on Probation Officer CWOs.

THE HM Inspectorate of Probation, Family Court Welfare Work, Report of a Thematic Inspection, Home Office 1997, page 104 is damning.

Reading either this or the 1991 report, we notice the number of occasions where service provision was described as 'varied', 'ranging between' or 'non-existent'. The geographical location of the parties and their children determined what provision was available for them.

The Inspection of welfare reports found an alarming level of welfare reports failing to address the Section 1(3) Children Act Welfare Checklist. (P49) The HM Inspector found that;

36% of the CWO reports failed to address the wishes and feelings of the child,

30% failed to address the child's physical needs,

50% failed to address the child's educational needs, and

46% of Welfare reports failed to address the range of powers available to the court."

In the light of the Home Office's own report, denial of cross examination constitutes an abuse of a fair hearing, and denies the voting public necessary information in a democratic society.

In Court of Appeal Lord Justice Thorpe made a decision in Re A that there was no right to cross-examine CWOs. [Refer back to the false statement by the LOFCWN]. Lord Justice Thorpe should know the facts which the Home Office considered important enough to make public. He made this decision knowing that once procedures get held behind the locked doors of Family Courts, fathers are denied the right to consult with competent professionals on methodological flaws by CWOs.

In my own case I had a solicitor acting for me who as former psychologist was shocked about the lack of training amongst CWOs and like other solicitors did not hesitate to express his concern about the poor quality of reports in cases

p6

where he had acted for parents. But as member of the legal system he was not prepared to take up my invitation to publicly express his concerns. He did however, at my instruction, apply that in my case an independent child development expert be called upon to report prior to a Probation Officer CWO dealing with my children. The application at the RCJ was refused, and amazingly, my solicitor was even threatened with having to personally pay costs for wasting court time by bringing my application to court. Obviously, once a CWO did report, the attitude that the court then took was that a further report by a qualified independent expert was undesirable as "delay is not in the best interest of the child". So you can't have an expert, you are blocked by the myth that untrained Probation CWOs are good enough experts. Little wonder that courts ban scrutiny to prevent professionals from witnessing the world of decision making behind Family Court's closed doors.

However, buttressing the Family Courts was Lord Justice Thorpe's decision in relation to matters where the welfare of hundreds of thousands of children is in the hands of courts who do not want the electorate in a democratic society to sit in scrutiny over the workings of the organs of justice.

The Access to Justice Act 1999 does not contain any provision giving a right to cross-examine Court Welfare Officers, or for parents to appoint their own independent expert.

by Y. A. Name

The Greater Spotted Feminist (Femmus Mercenarius)

by ordinarythologist

Large numbers of this predatory bird are quite common throughout the British Isles. Some varieties are commoner than others. Its plumage often changes, and is sometimes false, e.g. false eyelashes, false hair colour, false suntan, false laugh then trying to ingratiate itself with a mate.

The Greater Spotted Feminist is very attracted to bright objects, such as money, large cars, jewellery, and consumer goods, and frequently picks them up and takes them away.

It is parasitic by nature, never paying for its food, drink or nest, and has cuckoo characteristics, both physical and mental. Once having persuaded a male to share his nest with it, the Greater Spotted Feminist frequently breeds with anything that is passing, before throwing its mate out of the nest entirely.

Although banished from the marital nest, the male is still expected to provide all the goodies the feminist demands, whether for his own offspring or that of other males.

The Greater Spotted Feminist has a monotonous cry of 'I want, I want' which remains the same throughout its usually long life, and never changes with the seasons. It is generally regarded as a foul pest, but unfortunately, stupid legislation means that it is a thoroughly protected species, which can do whatever it likes.

Bang 'em all up!

"Ms Betty Moxon heads the Sexual Offences Review Group.... [She] invited Robert Whiston and Ivor Catt from ManKind to attend her 10sep99 seminar in Leicester. ManKind member William Coulson also managed to fill in for a cancellation.

".... The Leicester seminar, attended by our chairman, and myself as editor of Ill Eagle, gives a great deal of food for thought and much to report, some of which I intend to do later.

"There were men there, but they were poodle-men. None of the 50 attendees had the concept of a false allegation." - Ill Eagle, sep99.

There followed extensive correspondence between your Ed, his MP, and the Home Office, see my website. My MP was a dead loss, so I ask readers to pursue the matter through their own MPs.

My two objectives were to get false allegations onto the political agenda, and also to develop a mechanism for restraining the flood of false reports and statistics emanating from the govt. See "Amnesty announced by ManKind", Ill Eagle jan00. Recently, Margaret Jay repeated the notorious "one woman in four is assaulted" fabricated by Stinko of Royal Holloway College, see Ill Eagle sep99. (Overheard muttering by the skunk who fabricated statistics, when the wind changed; "It's all coming back to me now.")

At last, after six months of obfuscation, during which I had to simplify my question into words of one and two syllables, I have received the admission that false allegations are not within the remit of anybody in government. ".... there is no specific policy consideration in government being given to the issue of false allegations, ...." - letter to Catt from -Tooke, Sex Offences Review Team, Home Office, 21mar00. If you find this unbelievable, phone M-Tooke tel. 0171 273 3875 or email her at sex_offences_review.ho@gtnet.gov.uk

A few days after this admission, the case of Roy Burnett, falsely jailed for brutal rape for 15 years, hit the headlines.

As to the Amnesty for officials who have falsified reports; after six months of correspondence with my useless MP, who stated on 18nov99, see Ill Eagle jan00, that there was a "staged disciplinary process" for officials who fabricated statistics, I have at last received from -Tooke the first information on the process in an email from -Tooke to me, 13apr00; "The Home Office, in common with other Government Departments, has an internal discipline procedure. This can be instigated by a letter of complaint from a member of the public. .... - Su McLean-Tooke, Sex Offences Review Team, Home Office. I have a long way to go before being in a position to react quickly to the next piece of false, anti-social rubbish coming out of Govt. - Ed

Letter from your Editor to David Davis M.P., Chairman, Public Accounts Committee.

20apr00. Dear David Davis M.P., I note your comments on the Child Support Agency (CSA) in today's Evening Standard, p8, summarised below. Before the CSA was set up, its first chairman, Ros Hepplewhite, lectured to the FNF AGM. I immediately said that there was no possibility that she would pay any attention to the advice of its clients, divorced fathers, and that the CSA would self-destruct. I strongly urged men's organisations not to attack it. Her own father deserted his family when she was aged two, and the operation was set to be punitive. Up to and including today, the CSA and those who run it and periodically attempt to reform it, ignore the advice and expertise of divorced men. For this reason, the latest reforms are dead in the water.

A marker of continued failure will be the continually increasing suicide rate of young men and of divorced men.

The women in the Home Office have at last invited me and one other man to one or two of their inappropriate seminars. However, control of decision making in the whole field of family breakdown remains firmly in the hands of sexually dysfunctional women.

Recently, for the first time, my colleague was invited onto a relevant committee in the Lord Chancellor's Office, but one swallow does not make a spring. With him are at least three women with a long, documented track record of attacking the family as an institution.

Whereas the increasing suicides among men will cut no ice, the development which will force a change from the present bolshie attitude of those in power, will be increasing disorder in the streets, up to twenty times that over the Poll Tax. I predict that we will reach that stage in about fifteen years, as disempowered, unemployed, vilified young men finally react as predicted by Patricia Morgan in her 1995 book Farewell to the Family? [from 020 7799 3745]; "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'." They are waiting for a Fascist leader.

There is no substitute for taking divorcing and divorced men into the decision making and law-making process, wresting it from the radfems and their poodles like Boateng and Straw's brother. It will have to happen in the end, after many more lives have been lost. Why not now? In the absence of any power to influence decision making, divorcing men will finally retake power in the manner outlined on my website electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/

p7

under the general descriptor Retreat. This has already been tested, causing a judge to capitulate and make a court order as prescribed by the father, who, as is usual, of course, was about to lose all his assets and all contact with his children. However, the situation will deteriorate further before divorcing fathers face up to taking that course of action.

CSA must clear up 'polluting legacy of errors' say MPs

- David Shaw,

Evening Standard, 20apr00, p8

The CSA came under fresh fire today from a Commons watchdog demanding it clear up a "legacy of errors" which persists in blighting thousands of lives despite five years of reforms.

The damning criticism came from the Public Accounts Committee which found that the agency is continuing to make a catalogue of errors and pays out derisory compensation to those it wrongs.

The MPs say that having damaged hundreds of thousands of people at very stressful periods of their lives the agony goes on. They say that one in four new assessments is inaccurate, more than one in three payments from absent parents are for the wrong amounts, and four out of five maintenance account balances are incorrect. Committee chairman David Davis said today that after a number of changes to the system and several different chief executives, further improvements proposed for next year risk being undermined. He said: "Changes to the system proposed by the Government, combined with a new information technology system, offer a solution but to make the new arrangements work it is vital that the CSA clear out the legacy of errors to avoid polluting the new arrangements from day one."

The MPs criticise compensation payments, saying that cash paid for maladministration has quadrupled to more than £4.35 million. However, they say: "The bulk of this sum merely puts people in the position they would have been in had the agency not made an error. The committee questions whether these payments really do compensate individuals."

Today's report says: "It is important that the existing high levels of error in the agency's records are rectified quickly and are not allowed to contaminate the data on which the new arrangements will rely.... [on] staff turnover the report says: "The latter remains worryingly high. ...."

What now?

"It is true that what is happening to our young men is very worrying. It appears that as the traditional routes to adulthood no longer exist for them, many have removed themselves from any concept of parental responsibility.... They are being infantilised and there is a crisis in male identity. .... any discussion about the family which does not call for men to change ...."

- Sue Slipman, Director of the National Council for One Parent Families, in Would You Take One Home With You?, p68 of her chapter in Underclass: The Crisis Deepens, by Charles Murray, pub. I.E.A. 020 7799 3746, 1994. For £100,000 p.a., Slipman now presents the benign face of Lottery Camelot.

As the suicide rate among young men continues to escalate, will Sue continue to say that they must change, and leave it at that? When I heard her speak on 9may00, she stuck to her guns. According to her, the admitted crisis for young men was merely the price that had to be paid for the transition away from oppression of women. Similarly, Bolshevic Russia and post-revolution France justified their tyrrany by saying that it was only transitional. Sue Slipman's very plausible argument will collapse after fifteen more years, when the suicide rate among young men has gone through the roof. She speaks so convincingly that many must die to prove her wrong, before civil rights will begin to be restored to young men.

Straw at talks on Underclass

Jack Straw debated the emergence of Britain's underclass with Charles Murray, [Ill Eagle, mar00, p7] plus Melanie Phillips and Sue Slipman (of Camelot, previously rep. for single mothers,) on 9may00.

I was ashamed that our Home Secretary descended to crude mud-slinging against Charles Murray. Because of his attitude, we are in for many long, hot summers.

"There is no doubt that the intruders are members of Murray's underclass." True to Murray's model, Fred Barras, the burglar killed by Martin, never knew his father. - See Sunday Times, 23apr00, p12.

Liberal folly has turned farm killer into a martyr

- Melanie Phillips,

Sunday Times, 23apr00, p17

What maddens people is the injustice of it. It is the refusal to distinguish between right and wrong behaviour by making whole groups of people victims (women, asylum seekers, single parents) and defining other groups (white people, men, middle classes) as oppressors so that they can never be the victims of anyone in the designated classes. This leaves people feeling bitterly powerless and disenfranchised. ....

It is a dangerous sign when men such as Martin are turned into heroes of Middle Britain; and it has happened because middle Britain has turned into a term of abuse. People are under assault for committing the petit-bourgeois crime of aspiring to better themselves by working hard, protecting their families and themselves from harm, and espousing values of family life and elementary justice to do so.

Human Rights Act 1998

The Human Rights Act 1998 comes into effect on the 2 October this year. The Act incorporates in full the European Convention on Human Rights (ratified by the UK in March 1952) and the two protocols to the Convention also ratified by the UK, the First Protocol (November 1952) and the Sixth Protocol (May 1999).

Article 14 of the Convention protects against discrimination on any ground but only in respect of the rights and freedoms set forth in the Convention and protocols. Article 14 has no force in itself, and thus does not protect against discrimination in other legislative areas outside the scope of the Convention and protocols, and thus of the Human Rights Act 1998, for instance in public health, social welfare, and public transport.

There is therefore no all-embracing fundamental right under the Human Rights Act 1998 not to be discriminated against. [In any case, no national or international convention, law or statute or case law gives a child the right of access to its parent. I have been saying this for more than ten years, the reaction from all parties, including all fathers cut off from their children, being one of total indifference. It's a strange world, full of strange people. - Ed

Matters relating to the family or family circumstances must rely on the protection afforded by Articles 8 and 12 of the main Convention and Articles 1 and 2 of the First Protocol, taken together with Article 14 prohibiting discrimination on any grounds.

Article 8 states that: "Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence. There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others."

This Article thus allows a wide range of 'let-outs' for a government tempted to interfere with or frustrate this right. Nevertheless, any protection that is afforded must be without discrimination on any grounds. [The monstrous invention of the concept of their jurisdiction over 'indirect access' by our rascally judges some ten years ago will not be ended by this mealy-mouthed Article. Thus, mothers will continue to intercept letters from father to child and child to father with impunity, and with the support of our judiciary. There is money to be made by lawyers so long as this interception is not a criminal offence, and can be argued about. - Ed]

Article 12 of the Convention states that : "Men and women of marriageable age have the right to marry and to found a family, according to the national laws governing the exercise of this right".

This protection is more clear-cut and again must be without discrimination on any grounds.

p8

[Years ago, I argued that Saudi Arabia, if it routinely cut off her children from a divorced mother, could sign up to all this stuff with impunity. I retain that view. ".... according to the national laws...." makes Article 12 useless. - Ed]

Article 1 of the First Protocol deals with property rights: "Every natural or legal person is entitled to the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions. No one shall be deprived of his possessions except in the public interest and subject to the conditions provided for by the general principles of international law. The preceding provisions shall not, however, in any way impair the right of a State to enforce such laws as it deems necessary to control the use of property in accordance with the general interest or to secure the payment of taxes or other contributions or penalties."

The Article allows some let-outs "in the general interest" but generally protects the rights of persons to enjoy their possessions, taken together with Article 14, without discrimination on any grounds. The enforced transfer of property by the courts following family breakdown or repeated false allegations of domestic abuse might well be questioned under this Article. [I disagree. This Article is full of holes, and tends to confirm Lynnette Burrows' view (see The Fight for the Family, from (01865 556848) that the committees in Europe brewing up this stuff have been 'got at' by radfems, and the value of all this stuff negated. - Ed]

In recent years, the European Court of Human Rights has widened the scope of the meaning of 'possessions' to also include 'pecuniary interests', example benefits from a statutory contributory scheme. The previous lack of statutory survivors benefits for widowed fathers in the UK was successfully challenged in 1998 on this basis taken together with the prohibition of sex discrimination under Article 14, the Government accepting admissibility and subsequently equalising benefits for both widows and widowers under the Welfare Reform and Pensions Act 1999.

Article 2 of the First Protocol relates to the right to education. In particular: "the State shall respect the right of parents to ensure such education and teaching in conformity with their own religious and philosophical convictions."

Taken together with Article 14, this implies that both parents have an equal right in this process including after family breakdown. [I disagree. I have urged that Jack Straw be asked to define the word 'parent', and, even more important, to define the word 'family'. Butler-Sloss, head of the Family Courts, has said that a pair of homosexual men should be regarded as parents just as much as are natural father and mother. Since there is no longer a valid definition of the word 'parent', it is impossible to transfer an asserted right for 'parents' to a single 'parent'. Interestingly, I believe we have also lost the concept 'in loco parentis'. For instance, Adrienne Burgess would not know what it used to mean. - Ed.]

Regrettably, and to some, scandalously, the most relevant protection relating to the family, Article 5 of the Seventh Protocol, is excluded from the Human Rights Act 1998 since the UK has neither signed nor ratified this protocol. This states that: "Spouses shall enjoy equality of rights between them, and in their relations with their children, during marriage and in the event of its dissolution. This Article shall not prevent States from taking such measures as are necessary in the interests of the children."

This Article still allows some let-outs for a government determined to subordinate parental rights 'in the interests of the children', but nevertheless should provide powerful protection against discrimination between parents both during a marriage and, more pertinently, after family breakdown and parental separation. [I disagree. It will be ignored, using the mantra "The interests of the children", in a secret court where the determination of such best interests was made in secret, by ignorant and prejudiced CWOs. My article "The Judgement of Solomon", on my website and in Male View Apr00, shows Sloss using this mantra to defy British legislation which makes shared parenting the preferred option. - Ed] The term 'spouses' presumably is confined to married persons, so the position of unmarried parents under this Article is unclear.

Finally, Article 13 of the Convention states that: "Everyone whose rights and freedoms set forth in this Convention are violated shall have an effective remedy before a national authority notwithstanding that the violation has been committed by persons acting in an official capacity." [Europe plays the ball back into our home court, where we were denied our rights! - Ed]

From the 2 October this year, such persons will presumably have the choice as to whether to proceed by bringing a case under the Human Rights Act 1998 in the UK courts or by taking a case to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. The pros and cons of this have yet to be established. [I predict a Catch - 22. - Ed]

David Yarwood.

"Rape case men 'must prove their innocence'

- Matthew Hickley,

Daily Mail, 7apr00, p8

"Men in rape cases would have to prove their innocence under radical proposals for law reform.

"Legal experts say the change would reverse the sacrosanct principle that all defendants are innocent until proved guilty. ....

"Such a shift of the burden of proof could also bring British law into conflict with the European Convention of Human Rights....."

"There is no greater nightmare than being tortured for information you don't have. But that, in effect, is what we have been doing to Roy Burnett for 15 years.

"Being wrongly convicted of a crime he not only didn't commit, but probably never even happened is appalling enough But to spend many extra years inside because you refuse to admit your guilt is diabolical. .... his accuser eventually admitting she had made up a second rape story two years ago.

"This frightening miscarriage of justice .... warning to those who want to change the whole balance of British justice .... [in] Rape .... there are so many miscarriages of justice .... the original trial contained many inconsistencies ....

"Except that it was his accuser who was the nutter.... the unbalance woman .... Roy Burnett was easy meat ....Put him away. lads, he's a sexual nutter. Bang him up, good riddance...."

- Richard Stott,

News of the World, 9apr00, p7.

"The woman whose rape lies put Roy Burnett behind bars .... destroyed any chance he had of seeing his baby grow up. Now the boy .... is 18. Roy hasn't seen him since he was a three...."

- James Millbank,

News of the World, 9apr00, p6

After the Orkneys scandal, which finally resulted in a letter of apology from the local council (hurriedly given immunity by govt legislation) which had kidnapped the children in a pre-dawn raid, the clergyman who was supposed to have stood in the middle of a circle and selected and dragged in a child for molestation into the centre with a shepherd's crook, wrote to me that his church had betrayed him, as had the Quakers betrayed the victim Quaker families. Further, he wrote that such false charges of sexual abuse went right to the core of his being. - Ed

The Rape of Justice

"What isn't permissible is to have a law diminishing the rights of innocent persons accused of some types of offence only.

"What might happen, for instance, to a man accused of rape and robbery [or rape and assault]? Would he be allowed to ask questions on the robbery charge not permitted on the rape charge? Would the burden of proof on the two charges be entirely different?" [Could one alleged victim magically appear to turn into two?]

- John Mortimer Q.C.,

Daily Mail, 7apr00, p13.

ManKind Conference

The Oxford Street conference, organised many years ago by our ex-Chairman John Campion, made a major impact on me. There, I heard Daniel Amneus, author of The Garbage Generation, 1990, speak. I had been attracted to the conference to hear Patricia Morgan, Farewell to the Family?, 1995. Norman Dennis, Rising Crime and the Dismembered Family, 1993, also made a major impact on me. There I met Eugen for the first time, leading to a very fruitful collaboration.

I will be proud to be partly responsible for our conference, at Friends House, opposide Euston Station, London, on Saturday 28oct00, 0900 - 1630, if it approaches the quality achieved by John. The maximum number in the small hall is 230, so send off £10 now for your ticket (member or non-member), to ManKind, Suite 367, 2 Lansdowne Row, London W1X 8HL.

p9

U.N. goes Radical feminist ?

Yet men appear to be sleepwalking through these mammoth changes - quoted from Anne Widdecombe, Ill Eagle 8, p8

From: ACFC Website <acfclist@usa.net>

12 June 2000 13:17

"Thanks to John Hand for sending us the following."

Folks familiar with "genderspeak" in America, and how it translates into public policies that directly discriminate against fathers in the family via unsubstantiated allegations of abuse, and how all this builds an "attorney driven" country will find the below to be a somewhat shocking jolt towards a deeply radical feminist world. In one fell swoop it appears the U.N. went from fundamental protections against violence to a full array of radical feminist policy.

Note: Those of you who are not experienced at "gender speak" might not understand what is really being said between the lines. Remember this: what is being said here is exactly what is being said all across America by the same radical feminists. Their goals overseas are no different than they are here -- to talk women out of being mothers and wives and into divorce and the helplessness of the feminist welfare state. Prior U.N. conventions do have reasonable gender-neutral, and in some cases, woman-specific protections against abuse and violence. But as we know, this is not what they are after.

I have warned you this was coming, beginning when radical feminists took over the U.N. by storm beginning about 6 years ago. Now, here it is. We can only hope that the U.S. Congress will not be stupid enough to sign on to this should the U.N. be stupid enough to pass it.

Reference links and additional information can be found toward the end of this message.

Womens' Delegates Reach Agreement

by Edith M. Lederer,

Associated Press Writer

UNITED NATIONS (AP) -- Delegates from 180 countries reached agreement this morning on a new U.N. plan to accelerate progress toward women's equality after an all-night debate over abortion, sexual rights and other key issues.

''It was absolutely worth it,'' said U.N. Assistant Secretary-General Angela King, a special adviser on the advancement of women. ''I feel that all those millions of women who are looking at us are totally vindicated, and they have something to grasp to assist them for their battles for equality.''

The new document reaffirms the 150-page platform for action adopted at a landmark 1995 U.N. women's conference and moves forward with tougher measures to combat domestic violence and trafficking in women, and tackle the impact on women of HIV/AIDS and globalization.

But attempts to move beyond Beijing on the contentious issues of abortion failed -- and proposed references to sexual rights and sexual orientation were dropped from the final text by delegates meeting in committee.

The final text maintains language from Beijing on women's reproductive and sexual health.

''I'm very happy that the dire predictions that there would be a rollback of Beijing have proven false,'' King said. ''Instead for all the world to see, we have a very strong document which not only reaffirms Beijing and other relevant conferences on human rights and social development but also moves forward.''

The agreement was reached shortly after 5 a.m. and delegates were told to return two hours later to wrap up the conference. But when they arrived -- many not having slept -- U.N. officials informed them that the General Assembly session to formally approve the document by consensus was delayed further because translators needed more time.

During the night, several issues were resolved -- including a dispute between the United States and Cuba over the effect of U.S. sanctions against the communist island nation on Cuban women.

The final text calls on governments to set a target date of 2005 to eliminate the gender gap in primary and secondary education. It also moves ''substantially beyond Beijing in the roles men and boys can play to achieve gender equality,'' King said.

Delegates also agreed on strong planks calling for prosecution of all forms of domestic violence, now including marital rape. The traditional practices of forced marriage and honor killings are addressed for the first time in an international consensus document, with the draft text calling for laws to eradicate these human rights violations.

Many of the issues that stalled negotiations here also dominated the Beijing conference -- sexual rights, sexual orientation, abortion, sex education for adolescents and family values.

After a lengthy fight in Beijing, references to sexual orientation -- which the Vatican and several Islamic and Catholic countries vehemently oppose -- were dropped from the platform.

The term ''sexual rights'' was never included in the Beijing platform, though it does state that women have the right to ''decide freely and responsibly on matters related to their sexuality ... free of coercion, discrimination and violence.''

Conservative activists fear that sexual rights could be broadly interpreted as condoning homosexuality.

The battle lines for the current conference -- known as Beijing Plus Five -- mirrored those at Beijing: the Vatican and a handful of Islamic and Catholic countries against the West and hundreds of pro-Beijing women's rights activists.

Cuba and the United States, meanwhile, clashed for days over Havana's insistence on referring to the negative effect of U.S. sanctions, especially on women and girls.

King said the dispute was settled early today when both countries agreed to compromise language taken from a previous U.N. conference. It notes that ''in some countries, advancement of women is adversely affected by unilateral measures not in accordance with international law ... that create obstacles to trade relations among states.''

Several organizations issued a joint statement registering disappointment with the final document but reaffirming their commitment to work for implementation of the Beijing platform.

''We regret that there was not enough political will on the part of some governments and the U.N. system to agree on a stronger document with more concrete benchmarks, numerical goals, time-bound targets, indicators, and resources aimed at implementing the Beijing platform,'' said the statement, which was issued by the Center for Women's Global Leadership at Rutgers University and the Women's Environment and Development Organization.

UN Women's Meeting Nears Agreement

by Edith M. Lederer

Associated Press Writer

UNITED NATIONS (AP) -- U.N. delegates meeting in a special session were deadlocked late Friday over abortion and other key issues contained in a plan to accelerate progress toward women's equality.

The General Assembly negotiators working into the night did agree on several other issues. If a final agreement is reached, the plan would provide tougher measures to combat AIDS, trafficking of women and domestic violence.

But with a midnight Friday deadline looming, representatives from more than 180 nations were still meeting behind closed doors, trying to reach consensus on many of the same issues that dominated the landmark 1995 U.N. women's conference in Beijing.

Senior U.N. officials said they were not expecting the final document to go much beyond the Beijing platform for action on sexual and reproductive matters. And it was unclear whether there would be consensus on a final document.

After a lengthy fight in Beijing, references to sexual orientation -- which the Vatican and conservative Islamic and Catholic countries vehemently oppose -- were dropped. The term ''sexual rights'' was never included though the platform does state that women have the right to ''decide freely and responsibly on matters related to their sexuality ... free of coercion, discrimination and violence.''

p10

The United States also remained at odds with Cuba over a plank on the detrimental effects of sanctions on women, which delegates said Iraq also supports. Washington maintains embargoes against both Cuba and Iraq.

A U.S. official said the language the Cuban delegation wants in the document is not relevant to the issues facing women. ''Furthermore, it is language Washington can't live with, and is an attempt by Cuba to dictate policies on another country,'' the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity.

The chief of the Cuban delegation, Vilma Espin, said the United States was preventing the conference from telling the truth about the deaths of women and children caused by its economic embargo against Cuba. [Women and children? The men are all so violent they grab all all the food! - Ed]

Many Western nations have been at odds with the Vatican and a handful of Islamic and Catholic countries -- including Libya, Algeria, Iran, Sudan and Nicaragua -- over parts of the agenda.

The Vatican and a number of conservative countries object to the Beijing platform's reference to nontraditional families, which they view as an implied blessing of homosexual unions, single parents and couples living together out of wedlock. And a coalition of anti-abortion and religious activists have blamed rich Western nations for pushing ''radical language'' on abortion, sexual rights and homosexual rights.

U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan and U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright voiced concern Thursday that the final document might retreat from the ambitious 150-page platform adopted in Beijing.

But even before the final text was complete, U.N. officials and delegates were saying there would be no rollback of the Beijing agreement.

''There is no evidence in the text that seems likely to be adopted that there is any backward movement on any of the Beijing language, and in certain areas we are very heartened to see a strengthening of the Beijing language,'' said U.N. Assistant Secretary-General Angela King, a special adviser on the advancement of women.

She cited tougher action to address the trafficking of women and girls, the impact of AIDS on women including AIDS education programs for women, calls on governments to set target dates to eradicate illiteracy and ensure education for all girls and education programs to enable men to engage in safe, responsible sex.

Negotiators have also agreed on strong planks calling for prosecution of all forms of domestic violence, now including marital rape, and for the first time in an international consensus document, the traditional practices of forced marriage and so-called honor killings are addressed. The draft text calls for laws to eradicate these human rights violations.

----

This is the latest markup of the outcome document. It's current as 8 June 2000, 3:00 a.m.

Ad hoc committee of the whole of the special session of the General Assembly entitled "Women 2000: gender equality, development and peace for the twenty-first century"

Status of negotiations as at 8 June 2000, 3:00 a.m.

Proposed outcome document: Further actions and initiatives to implement the Beijing Declaration and the Platform for Action

http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/followup/infocon.pdf

----

The following links have to do with the ratification of CEDAW by the U.S.

Ratify the Women's Rights Treaty

US Women Connect

http://www.uswc.org/action.html

Amnesty INternational

http://www.amnestyusa.org/commit/

----

The following link provides links to what the U.S. has done to ensure compliance with the commitments it made during Beijing '95. There is a strong correlation between the information provided here and the social policies the U.S. pursued since Beijing '95. As an added note, it would probably be benecial to not forget the role the White House (especially H. Clinton) played in achieving these goals.

http://secretary.state.gov/www/picw/2000commitment/index.html

[The stories that Hilary is bisexual, and that she recently had a ten year affair until her lover shot himself, seems relevant when we consider her level of loyalty and support for the family. We should look at Jay in the same way. So many of these people in high places are exorcising their private personal problems through us. It is reminiscent of I, Claudius. - Ed]

This is the DAW site monitoring Beijing+5.

http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/followup/beijing+5.htm

Mother laments -"I miss them" ....

- Jan Disley, Mirror, 19apr00, p1

The Mirror headlined the anguish of a mother after her two children had been murdered by their father. "I miss them so much it's not fair. I miss them coming running round the corner.... I loved them to bits...." Heartrendingly, Claire Fairless spoke out as it was revealed that her estranged husband Frank then hanged himself. Clair spoke to the Miror as it was revealed that her former husband, Frank. was due to face two separate cherges of rape and assault. He had no previous convictions for violence.

The Guardian, came closer to the truth when it chimed in with "Child killer faced rape charge. .... Frank Fairless was also due to stand trial on separate charges of assaulting his wife, Claire, 31, and her father, James Forrington, last Christmas. ...." ( Martin Wainwright, 19apr00, p10,)

.... and here's what really happened ...

Initially, it was reportedf that Frank Fairless, who built his dream house for his wife and two sons, naming the house Oliverchris after his sons' names, was cut off from them for six months after his wife left with them. Then on the first night when he was allowed to keep them overnight, he killed them and himself. He was fearful of losing them forever.

Two days later, 19apr00, p5, Maurice Weaver reported in the Telegraph that Frank was on a rape charge "involving a woman in North Lincolnshire".

I telephoned Weaver, and he told me that local correspondents believed the woman making the rape charge was Frank's wife. This could totally alter the picture, from a no-good husband to a deeply destructive wife. [See how destructive is secrecy for alleged rape victim but not for alleged perpetrator.] However, the world will forever believe that Frank raped another woman. Thus is information manipulated in the battle of the sexes. Why did a male journalist connive in such terrible man-bashing? Write to him and ask him, at 49 Manor Rd., Solihull B91 2BL. I have sent him a draft on 22apr00, inviting him to comment in Ill Eagle. He did not reply.

Mum kills sons to get revenge on dad

- Any Lines, Mirror, 29mar00, p15

A mum murdered her two little boys after losing a custody battle to their dad. ....

Smith, 31, strangled Cody, five, and three-year-old Tristan .... after opening their Christmas presents.

Three days earlier a court had given her ex-husband Brit custody of the youngsters.

Smith .... admitted murdering the boys but told a court in Dallas, Texas, she was suffering from a severe mental illness at the time. .... given two .... life sentences.

A bit of a mystery to the sisters

Profile: Germaine Greer

- Sunday Times, 30apr00, p17

.... Germaine Greer was allegedly tied up and beaten in her remote rural home last week .... the alleged perpetrator of the assault was not some monstrous, muscle-bound male thug, but a 19-year-old female student who had become obseessed with the women's movement's most controversial icon. .... she lives the domestic life of a recluse at her Essex home, surrounded by catds and geese. Idolised by a generation of feminists for her seminal book, The Female Eunuch, she has savaged her sisters as often as she has turned her considerable intellectual fireposer on men. .... her string of lovers has included martin Amis, Julian Barnes,

p11

Jonathan Aitken, Warren Beatty (whom she ... found "disappoonting"). .... she once published a photograph of her own genitalia in the pornographic magazine Suck .... .... Greer took "stupid risks" with contraception in her young, promiscuouis days .... irreparable damage was done to her fallopian tubes. .... she came to want a child, giving birth was no longer possible. Her infertility - together with childhood abuse, rape and the menopause - is something that, naturally, Greer has chosen to tell the sorld about.

Now 61, she was born in Melbourne, Aust., to a wastrel father and a mother who was heavy on slapping-about discipline and light on learning. Greer has called her father "a lounge lizard, a line-shooter, a larikin, a jerk" and her mother " a woman who has done nothing but lie on beaches for 70 years". .... By the age of 18 she was at Melbourne University, where she was well known for carrying round a bag of coloured condoms and emplopying earthy language to describe her sexploits. In Melbourne she was raped "by just the sort of boy my mother would have liked me to marry". She .... became part of a bohemian, free-love set known as "The Push", "a fratrenity of desperates, drop-outs gamblers and poets manqués". .... Cl;ive James .... describes her striding "like a Homeric goddess through the doors of the university cafateria" to take his virginity. He escaped and hid behind a gum tree.

.... Greer arrived at Newnham College, Cambridge in 1964 to do a doctorate on Shakespeare's comedies. ....

Sexually, she was not impressed by Britain. "The Poms all try to look like Michael Caine, but it's a con. .... They're either queer or kinky. You know what the last Pom [I went to bed with] said to me? 'Let's pretend you're dead.'" .... she married Paul du Feu, a building worker with an English degree. They stayed married for three weeks, after which du Feu posed naked for Cosmopolitan.

Greer went on to teach at Warwick University, but found fame with The Female Eunuch in 1970. [I started re-reading it recently, and was horrified that it showed her culpability for what happened around the world thereafter. I could only read about 20 pages. Melanie Phillips, when reviewing a more recent Greer book, recounts how, when intervied by Greer with a view to her becoming a student at Warwick, Greer said; "Come now, you want to come to University to sleep around", or some such. She complained back at school, and an apology was extracted from the University. - Ed.] The book, which went on to argue that marriage could be seen as a form of slavery, sold 1m copies. .... She and James Hughes-Onslow began a relationship that lasted 18 months, during which she tried desperately for a child. It was thought that earlier damage to her fallopian tubes - caused by an IUD - could be rectified, but no pregnancy ensued.

"Germaine began to suspect this might be my fault and sent me to Harley Street .... Perhaps unconvinced by the positive results of these tests, she later embarked on a relationship with an Eton contemporary of mine, William Shawcross." .... Germaine went ballistic when a journalist Suzanne Moore commented on an inaccurate report that Greer had had a hysterectomy at 25. Moore was described as having "hair bird's-nested all over the place, f***-me shoes s#and three inches of fat cleavage". .... a similar fate awaited .... Christine Wallace .... She was called "flesh-eating bacterium" abd told she would be "kneecapped".

But Greer was beginning to change her tune. In Sex and Destiny in 1984, she had argued that western society was anti-children, anti-family and sex-obsessed. Two years later she said: "I'm beginning to think that sex is really disgusting and that we should have nothing to do with it." .... her deliciously stroppy performances on BBC2's self-congratulatory arts programme, The Late Review. .... Not long ago she was banned from driving after speeding iin a bid to save her goslings from being eaten by foxes. She has often remarked that she could have bought a Picasso with the money she has spent trying to conceive ....

$2m plot

- Sarah Boseley,

Guardian, 7apr00, p1

Philip Morris, the world's largest cigarette manufacturer, mounted a [successful] $2m .... campaign to .... undermine a scientific study on the dangers of passive smoking, targeting researchers, the media and government....

The tobacco industry is accused in The Lancet of attempting to subvert the normal scientific process. .... the journal warns .... against putting too much trust in companies intent on profit. "Tobacco is not the only aspect of medicine open to twisted corporate communications strategies. All policy-makers must be vigilant to the possibility of research that is being manipulated by corporate bodies...." [See the case of AIDS on my website www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk - Ed]

.... the Institute of Health Policy Studies of California charges that scientists in the pay of the tobacco companies attempted to infiltrate the biggest European study on the effect of passive smoking and .... it was successful in a strategy to get the study's findings discounted.

[Philip Morris spent more than the cost of the feared study in fraudulently discrediting it. - Ed]

Law website forced offline

A website set up by Kamlesh Bahl, the former Law Society vice-president, has been shut down by the internet service provider Freenetline after a complaint that it contained defamatory statements.

Mr Bahl .... resigned after findings by an independent inquiry that she bullied five members of staff....

- Guardian, 7apr00, p6

Lawyer fiddled legal aid to pay for lovers

Paul Stokes, Telegraph, 26/5/00,p3

A solicitor defrauded the legal aid board of £170,000 to finance a lavish way of life that included paying for two mistresses .... large houses, expensive cars, and his tangled love life..... he was acquitted of sijmilar charges against the legal aid board in 1995. .... Following his acquittal, the legal aid board trusted him ....

To the Editor, Ill Eagle

The law stipulates that the rights of a child take precedence whenever there is conflict between its rights and those of its parents.

There is a waiting list of would-be adoptive parents willing to offer excellent homes to new-born babies.

On our sink estates, young girls frequently give birth to illegitimate babies they haven't a prayer of being able to look after properly.

If our judges took the slightest notice of the law which they are sworn to uphold, they would take these babies from their mothers and give them to the would-be adoptive parents.

In so doing they would save much grief in the future. It is no co-incidence that the word bastard has for centuries been used as a term of abuse rather than in its dictionary meaning.

Regards, Bill Tomlinson

Crimes against children drop

- Lucy Adams, Sunday Times, sect. 1 p5, 11june00

The streets are safer for children than ever before. .... The myth of lurking danger behind every street conrner has so alarmed the children's charity Play Scotland that .... it set out to convince parents that they are damaging children by being .... overprotective. .... they lost an average of one hour's play time every day. .... "Abductions have not increased in more than 60 years .... Unsupervised play time is essential for the development of relationships and independence."

In 1991, almost 380 children died in road accidents in the UK. By 1998, this had dtopped to 206. Between 1988 and 1999 the number of children murdered between the ages of five and 16 decreased from four per million to three. The number murdered under the age of five dropped from 12 per million to nine.

The number of offenders in England and Wales found guilty of gross indecency with a child dropped from 334 in 1988 to 264 in 1998. ...."

Third of young Scots 'carry weapons'

- Sarah Boseley and Gerald Seenan,

Guardian, 7apr00, p7

Around a third of 11- to 16-year-old boys and 8% of girls in Scotland have carried weapons

p12

ranging from flick knives to replica pistols and knuckle-dusters, according to a survey carried out in schools .... 3,000 subjects. [but] Even in schools in the most deprived areas, Ray Murphey, education officer for north Lanarkshire where much of the research was carried out, said .... it would be extremely unusual for a school to have more than one incident involving a weapon in a year .... almost never more than a stick.

[These apparently contradictory findings tend to support the thesis by our Scottish chairman George McAuley, linking gun control with feminism, see my website, that the weapon is a status symbol increasingly needed by young men as their masculinity comes under increased attack from the radfems.

Also note the back cover of Patricia Morgan's 1995 book following family breakdown; "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'. - Ed]

Who's your daddy?

- Lois Rogers,

Sunday Times, 11june00, sect. 1 p 6

[A full page on DNA testing and its social implications.] .... John Burn, professor of clinical genetics at Newcastle University, set up North Gene to provide private paternity testing at £450 per family. ....

Gnome kidnappers strip French gardens

Anti-capitalist groups target symbol of middle class

- William Langley,

Sunday Telegraph, 21may00, p28

A wave of garden gnome kidnapopings has forced police to issue a general security alert to anxious suburban homeowners. Hundreds of gnomes have been snatched in a series of raids that have been carefully executed by at least two shadowy groups.

An exhibition of more than 2,000 gnomes .... in Paris was broken into .... and several dozen stolen. .... The Garden Gnome Liberation Front claimed responsibility. "This odious exhibitiion must be closed immediately," it said, "Or we will strike again." .... a senior police office declared that "no gnome can now be considered safe".

"The people behind this, by targetting gnomes, are attacking the wider values that gnome-owners hold dear," said Prof. Boumard..... "I have known people who talk to their gnomes every day, who even put them to bed. They are treated almost as members of the family."

Ill Eagle 10, aug00

p1

Titanic

- Telegraph leader, 4apr00

Perfectly reasonable friends of mine repeat the assertion that in the past, women were oppressed. Following my comment in June, that presumably part of patriarchal oppression was to deny to women the pleasure of close combat with bayonets, I would like to add further evidence of this "oppression" from the past, taken from the book Titanic. An Illustrated History, by Don Lynch and Ken Marschall, 1992.

The percentage of men saved from the sinking was 20%. The percentage of women and children saved was 70%. In every class of passenger; first class, second class, third class, and crew, the % of women saved was vastly greater than the % of men saved.

Having been conned for decades into feeling sympathy for German women after the losses in the Great War, I recently asked an 80 year old woman friend of mine; "Would you rather be single or dead?" She replied, "Single."

We must begin to react when we hear the cliché; "In the past, women were oppressed." Women have always been highly favoured.

School mum jailed for sex with pupils

- Bill Tomlinson, Sun, 28jan00, p7

Judge Hale said; "If you had been a man acting in the same way towards young girls the sentence would have been much greater."

Judges to lose luxury lodgings

- Jack Grimston, Sunday Times, 30july00, sect. 1, p11

Extravagant perks enjoyed by English and Welsh judges are facing the axe. .... Lord Irvine .... is expected to close many of them. Last year they cost £5m .... to maintain .... The most expensive was Carr Manor in Leeds, a grade II listed Victorian gothic house with 10 bedrooms. It cost £402,000 to maintain in 1998 .... The most uneconomic was in Flintshire, where the 1970s penthouse flat overlooking the Clwyd hills was occupied for only five weeks in 1998. Each judge who stayed cost more than £1,800 per night .... The judiciary is likely to fight moves to downgrade accommodation .... Irvine .... was heavily criticised when he spent £650,000 of public money redecorating his official residence ....

Battle on for more women MPs

Tony Blair is being pressed to include a promise of new laws to allow the party to draw up all-women shortlists. Ministers are saying that without immediate action, the number of the party's women MPs is likely to fall, making 1997 merely a blip.

- Times, 24jan00

But opponents of the move point out that the large number of women Labour MPs swept into parliament at the last election .... have actually been a bit of a flop - Observer, 6aug00, p28

Scandal

Not really. The whole field of family law is scandalously destructive and incompetent and expensive. This scandal is only one of so many. Actually, every aspect of the secret family court system is in a scandalous, destructive state.

In the last month, the govt's ONS (Office of National Statistics) asked the Lord Chancellor's Department (LCD) for information on outcome for custody after divorce; what percentage of children went to the mother, and so on. The LCD replied that they had no information. Thus, nobody knows how often child custody is given to the mother. Nobody has bothered to look into the numbers. You and I know that in disputed cases, it is 98% to the mother, but nobody else knows; the courts and their decisions are secret "in the best interests of the children"!!! You can throw away your court order giving access. It is not worth the paper it is written on. Twice, the High Court decreed that it would not enforce an order for access against a defiant mother.

My website has some relevant Canadian/USA research at www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/08094.htm

The Squirt

Dr. Anthony Clare wrote a book and a series of Sunday Times articles on men in crisis. He also gave a series of talks on the radio, to which George McAuley (who did well) and Adrienne Burgess contributed. Adrienne is the High Priest of Androgyny, which Clare also promoted.

I came to realise that, like the radfems, Clare is imposing his own personal problems on us. Only the likes of him will have access to the media for a long time, until the crisis has deepened. I was struck by Clare's remark; ".... women envying men their penises and their phallic strength." Another contributor even said that a man's admiration of valour was homosexual! These whimps seek to confuse (1) sexual perversion with (2) our admiration of valour, and (3) sexual prowess. I tend to conclude that we are listening to generally inadequate men, bent on decrying both valour and sexual prowess. Obviously, a radfem dominated media will use such Quislings to 'represent' men.

Women lead the porn revolution

- Tracy McVeigh, Observer, 6aug00, p12

.... More than 50% of websites in the booming online pornography business are now owned and operated by women - and the number is steadily rising.

The new 'scarlet-collar' worker is typically a 25- to 35-year-old former prostitute or lap dancer with young children and a desire to better her income ....

A psychologist has described the webmistress phenomenon as 'neo-feminism'. 'Women whose lives were once controlled by male pimps, porn film-makers and publishers are moving up the food chain,' said Dr Kimberlianne Podlas. .... Podlas talked to the owners of 71 heterosexual websites. She believes cyberporn may have to be re-evaluated by feminists.

'It may, in fact, combat negative imagery and increase women's power,' she said. .... '[we may] very soon see men barely represented in this industry....'

Another American born star, Annie Sprinkle, said she believed feminism was now pro-porn....

____________________________

A woman went to a solicitor and wanted a divorce. The lawyer got out his note pad and proceeded to ask some questions.

"Do you have any grounds?"

"Oh, yes,: she replied. "About three quarters of an acre."

The lawyer paused for a moment and then proceeded. "Do you have a grudge?"

"No," the woman said, "but we do have a lovely carport."

The lawyer paused again and then asked, "Does he beat you up?"

"No. I get up before he does every morning," she replied.

"Does he beat the children up?" asked the frustrated litigator.

"Only when there are no cartoons on tv." she yawned.

That was too much for the lawyer, so he blurted, "Lady, why do you want to divorce your husband?"

"It's because," she exclaimed, "that man can't carry on an intelligent conversation."

p2

Fathers, but no relations

What happens to men denied access to their children ....

- Sophie Petit-Zeman,

Times, 25july00

.... a study at London's Birkbeck College into relations between fathers and their children after separation.

....James Heyes, a volunteer with Depression Alliance. He has seen his son once since 1986, when his wife left, taking the 18-month-old son with her. .... sadness that his own parents were being denied a relationship with their grandson....

Many agree that one of the key issues is not only fathers' rights to see their children, but the rights of children to have access to both parents....

[From Ill Eagle 9, June00, p7; In any case, no national or international convention, law or statute or case law gives a child the right of access to its parent. I have been saying this for more than ten years, the reaction from all parties, including all fathers cut off from their children, being one of total indifference. It's a strange world, full of strange people. - Ed]

For information about the Birkbeck College survey, contact Helen Barrett, 020 7631 6296; h.barrett@bbk.ac.uk

Zero-tolerance for others

Anne Widdecombe, Shadow Home Secretary, a fierce advocate of zero-tolerance policing, caught driving at 50mph in a 40mph zone, received an automatic £40 fine and three penalty points. She did not criticise the real Home Secretary, who went more than twice as fast, but was not fined.

Better to be real, not just a shadow.

See Times, 5aug00

Mother killed son, 6

A mother who threw her six-year-old son from the 14th floor was jailed for five years. Campbell woke her two sons because of a fire. The boy was hear to say "Mum, don't do that" before he was thrown from the balcony. Campbell, who had alcohol and drugs problems, was said to be laughing See Times, 5aug00

Leave the Holocaust out of it

Homosexual activists who are demanding a social revolution run the risk of provoking a backlash

- Daniel Johnson, Telegraph, 12feb00, p24

Matthew Parris is one of the most influential and successful journalists in Britain today. .... Matthew is no longer interested in toleration for homosexuals.: he wants "homophobia" .... no longer to be tolerated. This is a crucial distinction. .... ever since, a century ago, support for homosexual reform began to spread through Europe and America, the purpose of this form of emancipation, like that of other minorities, has been seen as the achievement of toleration and self-acceptance. .... That aim was achieved, in most Western countries, buy the 1970s. Like feminism, however, the "gay rights" movement was radicalised.

Under the influence of Michael Foucault, a homosexual French philosopher, all sexuality has come to be seen in terms of power. He encouraged homosexual campaigners to demand not only the end of discriminatory laws, but a "new way of life", which would not merely release homosexuals from their "ghetto", but extend it to embrace the whole of society in a hedonistic utopia. The corollaries of this "social triumph of the sexual will" would be the relativisation of marriage, the instrumentalism of children, and the proscription of any politically incorrect morality (such as the Judaeo-Christian one) that discourages homosexuality.

.... If Peter Tatchell's Outrage! achieves its demands for the legalisation of homosexual intercourse in public places - lavatories, pubs, parks, saunas - then others, especially parents with children, will no longer dare to go there. Abolishing the offence of "outraging public decency", removing the last privileges of marriage: these are not requests for toleration, but demands for a social revolution for the benefit of perhaps two per cent of the population.

Surely Matthew Parris, who is so much subtler and shrewder than Peter Tatchell, can see where this is leading .... A period of silence is needed to avoid a backlash ....

Why should gays have the right to public sex?

- Melanie Phillips, Sunday Times, 30july00, sect. 1 p21

.... Section 28 remains on the statute book for the time being, thanks to the moral courage of Baroness Young and the other members of the House of Lords who braved personal vilification to defeat the govt's proposal for repeal.

The Home Office review of sexual; offences which was published last week .... [with] its proposal to do away with the offence of gross indecency means that homosexuals would be able to have sex in public lavatories. ....

.... Equality is one thing; but legitimising cruising and cottaging isn't equality. Heterosexuals just do not behave like this. The core premise of the Home Office review is false. But then the gay rights agenda, despite its rhetoric, isn't about equality at all. It's about browbeating society into declaring as equal a type of behaviour that is both different from heterosexual activity and profoundly antisocial. Ant it justifies this by the most weaselly arguments. .... The police, utterly cowed by the terror of being denounced for prejudice, have long abandoned our open spaces. .... All public sex is an affront to human dignity. .... those who endorse such behaviour are pushing something quite vile and pernicious, with damage that is potentially incalculable.

[Unfortunately, I think Melanie over-reacted to advance leaks on the report. I quote the Home Office report, Setting the Boundaries, july00, p144; "Proposed offence - Sexual activity in public: to undertake any sexual activity in a public place (including public toilets) which was likely to cause fear, alarm and distress to another. Proposed maximum penalty, 6 months. - Ed]

Comment

See when the ignorant Portsmouth demonstrators learn that 35% of paedophiles are homosexual! You ain't seen nothin yet. Wait for the marches on our rather gay Cabinet. Let us analyse the present PC madness. The Man on the Clapham Omnibus knows that to avoid the charge of bigotry he must adulate buggery and other perversions that his betters say he should welcome as a necessary feature of a more liberal society. On the other hand, his betters (excluding Tatchell) tell him that paedophilia is a perversion. If he is ever told that, although less than 2% of the male population are buggers [note 1], 35% of paedophiles are drawn from that 2% [note 2] - he will smell a rat. He is most afraid of his children being buggered.

The leaderless demonstrations in Portsmouth are a forerunner of the big backlash resulting from an Establishment which promotes contradictory, ludicrous and unsustainable propaganda. - Ed

Note 1. K Wellings et al., Sexual Behaviour in Britain, Penguin, 1994, p183.

Note 2. Dr T Stammers (quoting K Freund), FYC bulletin Autumn 97, from fameduc@apol.com

Speaking Invitation to Quaker Leaders

.... Try to understand new growing points in social and economic life. Seek to understand the causes of injustice, social unrest and fear.
Are you working to bring about a just and compassionate society which allows everyone to develop their capacities and fosters the desire to serve? - Clause 1.02.33, Quaker Faith and Practice, 1999

.... Seek to discover the causes of social unrest, injustice and fear; try to discern the new growing-points in social and economic life .... - Clause 23.01, QFP99. This is the Book of Discipline for Quakers.

To Helen Rowlands, Clerk, Yearly Meeting; Roger Sturge, Clerk of Meeting for Sufferings, Friends House. [These are the most senior officials in Britain Yearly Meeting ].

ManKind would like to invite you to give a twenty minute lecture, followed by twenty minutes of questions, at the ManKind Conference at Friends House, 28oct00.

The purpose of your lecture will be to explain why the problem of family breakdown and the crisis for young men is outlawed from the Quaker Universe of Discourse.

For evil to triumph, it is only necessary for good men to do nothing

Ivor Catt. www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/te26quag.htm www.quaker.org.uk

p3

Editorial

Pity the Judge

A circuit judge telephoned me and proceeded to 'cry on my shoulder' for an hour.

After ten years in the Family Courts, he was brought close to a nervous breakdown. Then, three years ago, just in time, he transferred to the criminal courts.

The key items from his astonishing story were as follows;

The family courts should not be held in secret. They are beyond reform. The system is a shambles from top to bottom. The Court Welfare Officers (CWO) should be open to cross-examination. The CWOs are ignorant and do not investigate their cases. He got some CWOs removed, but the problem continued. You will not begin to instigate reform because Civil Servants will scupper your attempts, burying them in minutiae. [CAFCASS please note.] He agonised over the damage being inflicted on children by the family courts, which is obviously what brought him close to breakdown.

His story is remarkably similar to my analysis in my book The Hook and the Sting, on my website www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/

In particular, I urge you to address his assertion that the system is beyond reform, as I say in my book. Also, I believe that in its death throes, it will become more dangerous and destructive. Oliver Cyriax has caused a total revamp of the CWO 'system', via CAFCASS, but I think that does not go to the heart of a venal, corrupt, incompetent, deeply destructive and arrogant system.

My view is that the judge did not solve his problem, only ameliorate it, by jumping out of the Family Court frying pan into the Criminal Court fire. I am willing to concede that the criminal courts are less anti-social. However, in my view, the complete judicial system is beyond reform, not just the family courts. Twice, just before coming to power, I heard Vanity Blair say on TV; "The Criminal Justice system is on the point of collapse." - Ed

Labour always blamed crime on unemployment. So how come, with record numbers back in work, crime is soaring?

- Simon Heffer, Daily Mail, 14july00

You do not need a long memory to recall why, according to Labour politicians, crime rose so steeply under the last Conservative Govt.

It was, they said, because of high unemployment - and because that was the Govt's fault, they added, then so too was the 'resulting' rise in offending.

Many doubted this. In the depression of the Thirties, as Norman Tebbit so pungently reminded us [and as did Norman Dennis], people were far worse off - and yet crime was at a historic low. ....

The Prime Minister and his colleagues are proud of the million new jobs created since 1997. Unemployment has not been lower since the mid-seventies. Crime, however, continues to rise inexorably. ....

This is a shocking indictment of the Govt's failure to tackle a problem it claimed to have spotted so clearly in opposition. Our mounting prosperity finally proves that economic factors do not have the bearing on crime Labour politicians used to imagine....

Research into the underclass by the American sociologist Charles Murray and others agrees on one point in particular: that children growing up without a father or other long-term adult male role model in their home are more likely to under achieve at school, make bad relationships that harm their children and end up in jail. ....

The Govt, however, has chosen to do nothing to encourage the role of fathers, or to provide incentives for stable, married life.

The breakdown of families has contributed incalculably to the breakdown of a stable, ordered society. It is one of the greatest causes of crime, yet the Govt still encourages it.

.... It refuses to believe that children, and boys in particular, are likely to turn out better if they grow up with a father.

The impressive unemployment figures should prompt Labour politicians to .... ask: if it wasn't poverty that caused crime, what was it? .... only the Govt has the power to influence social policy in a way to do this.

It might mean encouraging marriage, discouraging single parenthood .... [we have] the highest crime figures on record and the highest prison population in our history. The waste, misery, suffering and victimisation they entail hardly bear thinking about. ....

SMFs are wealthier, but still breed more criminals

Try to put yourself into the mindset of the anti-family radfem. She, and poodle-men like Martin Bright, must believe that, since poverty (not fatherlessness) is the cause of crime, then criminals must come from the lowest tenth of society in terms of income.

We know that criminality concentrates in children from Single Mother Families (SMF).

"Compared to children living with both biological parents in similar socioeconomic circumstances .... Overall, children of never-married mothers have behavioural problems that score nearly three times higher than children raised in comparable intact families." - Testimony Before the Subcommittee on Human Resources of the House Committee on Ways and Means .... June 29, 1999 www.house.gov/ways_means/humres/106cong/6-29-99/6-29rect.htm

Thus, according to radfems, SMFs must be poor, their poverty causing their children to go off the rails.

Not so. Reading the back cover of the 1995 edition of Patricia Morgan's book Farewell to the Family? from hwu@iea.org.uk; At any given level of earnings, the lone parent will derive a higher income than a married man with the same number of children. As a result of the Child Care Allowance introduced in October 1994, a lone parent with two small children can work for 20 hours at £4.00 per hour and end up with a net income of £163.99 after rent and tax. A married father of two small children working for 40 hours at the same hourly rate would take home £130.95.

Thus, SMFs are wealthier than the poorest married couple families.

Now let us look at the critical point in society, where criminality is supposed to be bred; the poorest tenth. Only a small proportion of children in the poorest tenth are in SMFs. In 1995/6, in the bottom 10% of the income distribution, 2½ times as many individuals (42%) were in two parent families compared with those in SMFs (17%). (Source: Dept. of Social Security, Households Below Average Income 1979-1995/6.)

Thus, in the face of economic pressure on all those poor married couples with children to produce criminal and otherwise antisocial children, they fail to do so. These criminals come from the more wealthy ranks of SMF households.

One source says that eight out of every nine rapists comes from a SMF.

I would emphasise that although the pool of the very poor contains only 17% of individuals from SMFs, they breed far more criminals and rapists than they should statistically. Or else, wealthy SMFs breed criminals. We have to conclude that father absence is much more destructive than we would have imagined.

ManKind and Ill Eagle can be reached at;

(1). ManKind, Suite 367, 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

p4

Charles Hanson, wife murderer.

From Charles Hanson

HM Prison, Kingston, Milton Rd.,

Portsmouth PO3 6AS 22june00

Dear Mr. Catt, I have acquired the 'Taking Stock' booklet by Stanko and the Home Office Research Study No. 191 on Domestic Violence. It really does stretch the imagination that the general public is misled by the women M.P.s who are now campaigning to prevent (so-called) violent husbands/ partners from having contact with their children. I am a life sentence prisoner convicted of domestic murder. I was exhausted at the time trying to get help, whereas my wife made all kinds of weird and wonderful allegations against me including one that I had made a threat to kill her. I was charged, held in custody and eventually acquitted unanimously by a jury.

It didn't stop there. The aggravations went on even after we divorced. In the end I stabbed her to death. I had reached the end of my tether. No one, even the police, would listen to me; I couldn't afford solicitors' fees to stop her, yet she continued to make allegations and WAS listened to, especially by social workers.

This prison, the only all lifer prison in Europe, contains mostly domestic murderers like myself. There is a clear history of frustration, anger, confusion and injustice at the way some of us were demonised by social workers, divorce courts, at child custody - access hearings, how some of us lost everything including our self esteem before we committed the ultimate act.

I have recently come across a reference book on psychology written by a Canadian woman psychologist and she referred to a Canadian Government hearing which sought to criminalise those instances where women in child custody/access hearings make bogus allegations of violence and abuse. It is estimated that about 40% of claims are bogus. The details are:- 1998 Joint Committee of the Senate and Parliament; 'For the Sake of the Children'; Report of the Special Joint Committee on Child Custody and Access; December 1998; Canadian Publication Services Ottawa. I have written to the Canadian Embassy for details on how to acquire the report.

I believe that this topic is deserving of wider coverage within the context of domestic violence, for it is here that so many men become victims not only of the wife/ex-wife/partner but [also] of the system that generates inequality. Perhaps you could let me know what you think. Yours sincerely, Charles Hanson.

24july00. Kingston Prison (as before) Dear Ivor, Thank you for your recent letter ....

Kingston Prison was always a domestic lifers prison although a few non-domestic lifers are now creeping in. We domestics are never viewed very favourably by the politically correct psychologists, probation officers etc.

We are expected to undergo Offending Behaviour courses and there are specific ones for us, - Relationships, Anger Management, Spouse Homicide, Thinking Skills to name a few.

It matters not that my son from an earlier marriage was having a sexual relationship with my wife, having lost control and stabbed her I am treated like I should have just accepted it and entered therapy implying that there was something wrong with me to have objected, I am now deemed a danger to women by politically correct women probation officers and their ilk. The fact that I had been married 3 times suggests that there is something wrong with me. Who but these liberals made divorce so easy? Who but these want to see the breakdown of family and traditional values and then condemn those like me for being forced to go along with them?

Of course, I regret taking the life of the woman I loved. I can never forget it, and I will be haunted by it for the rest of my life. Life for me and for her parents will never be the same, and I don't need reminders of it. However, the politically correct will not let me forget it. I have to attend dubious courses, where I have serial bereavements.

I do not have the defences usually and only available to women; for example, PMT, abuse, provocation, the effects of HRT and Prozac. I am expected to cope, and indeed tolerate, what women would get sympathy for. As a domestic lifer I don't have the equivalent of feminist campaigns to free me. I am left with the thought that the male species are indeed the stronger. It is what by implication the feminists seem to perpetuate by holding men like me culpable. The same, however, is not true of the Sarah Thorntons of the world.

Wherever and whenever you want to quote me, please feel free to do so.

I look forward to hearing from you. Yours sincerely, Charles Hanson.

P.S. I don't believe that the Home Office or the Prison Service maintain records of wife killers, or as the PC term now applies, 'Partners'. I could be wrong, however. CH

27july00 Dear Charles,

Thank you for the lengthy telephone discussion between yourself, myself and my colleague. You represent a major resource. Generally, men's organisations and individual male experts are excluded from the consultation process leading to future government policy and legislation (except for the occasional poodle-man, perhaps salaried by a charity: Baroness Young told the last FYC AGM that every children's charity was now anti-family). However, some of my colleagues have acted on the fringes of government quangos and the like for some time, and read vast numbers of their silly reports. This puts us in a position to make a general judgement that the level of competence, knowledge and understanding in government departments and among the relevant ministers like Straw, Boateng and Jay, is minimal. A major reason for this is that, apart from ignoring any contribution by men with expertise, all their discussions and would-be factual reporting is filtered through PC dogma. The result is that they are constitutionally unable to establish the facts. They are remarkably ignorant. I am referring to Home Office, Lord Chancellor's Dept., and other relevant departments.

I believe that, unfunded, my colleagues and I should be able to assemble an infrastructure of facts which will rise head and shoulders above the rubbish that our salaried servants wallow in. (If we were funded, Equal Opportunities policy would force us to employ some radfems, who would proceed to falsify our information bank, making it no better than that of the Home Office or the Women's Unit).

My colleagues and I are convinced that the situation will deteriorate for a further fifteen years. (At the FYC AGM, Baroness Young said it took us thirty years to get into this mess, and it would take thirty years to get out of it.) The marker of the continual deterioration with be the ever increasing suicide rate of young men. That will not prompt reform in a culture which is so hostile to young men. What will force reform, however, will be the lapse into public disorder something like twenty times worse than the Poll Tax riots, in about twenty years from now. Thus, we have plenty of time in which to establish our infrastructure of facts and understanding, to be made available in a decade or two when deep crisis has been reached.

I quote from the back cover of the original edition of Patricia Morgan, Farewell to the Family?; "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'.

When my adult son experienced the rampant perjury in our secret family courts, encouraged by judges, he said to me that we would have to lie too. (I told Circuit Judge Stockdale that the courts welcomed perjury.) Similarly, one or two of the men who want to reform the family courts argue by email that we need to lie in order to counter the lies from radfems. I am in total disagreement. Our strength will be in our ability to be rigorous about our facts. Thus, when you give us information, please bear in mind that we want it to be able, some time in the future, to survive vigorous examination for its truth.

Although they are not central to our interests, radfems have forced the centre of interest to be violence and also sexual abuse. (For instance, both of these false allegations have been made against me in perjured affidavits that Stockdale said the courts had no way to investigate.) Since radfems wallow in these subjects, we have to establish factual information in their chosen fields. .... ....

Best wishes, Ivor 27july00

p5

[While some time ago I wrote to Lord Ackner (see my website for letter) that an inevitable result of lawyers and judges covering up for errors in court procedures and other legal incompetence in our shambolic courts would be a drift into corruption, Hanson leads me to conclude that false allegations of a crime, so often welcomed by our court system, can cause the very crime falsely alleged. - Ed]

An Expert Agenda

Extract from forthcoming book by Kristin Lloyd Scott

Here's an extract I've just written about feminism in my book which you can if you wish include in your ill eagle if it helps your issues. The book is titled 'An Expert Agenda'.

'Feminism was a tricky subject not least because I was a woman and was therefore expected to offer full support. It seemed to be divided into two kinds of women. One sought equality and approval, the other, control and revenge.

I belonged to neither category. While I offered support to the first, I frequently came into conflict with the latter and their extreme views, which they paraded behind the veil of children's rights. When I looked closely at the roots of many child rights organisations, I found that feminists were plotting their way ahead using children's issues to indiscriminately attack the male population.

Many of these women were behind the mythical thinking that child abuse was rampant, in a direct attempt to discredit and oppose men, upon whom they apportioned blame and guilt. Frequently, they were lesbians. Hiding behind children's rights, lesbians sought approval and acceptance for their alternative lifestyle. I regularly told them to find their own bandwagon, instead of using children. As a parent, and as someone who had listened firsthand to their scheming and propaganda, I found their views wholly offensive. I made no reservation in telling them so.

These women seemed to ignore the fact that men are still the wealth creators, and still the main providers. If anybody ever wonders why child poverty has increased so consistently in recent years, they only need to take a look at how many incentives there are for men to stay around. Extreme feminists promote the view that all men are potential paedophiles and rapists and that they cannot be trusted with women and children. Because of this view, men cannot in law defend themselves against an allegation of abuse. If they are accused of being an offender, they are ousted out of the family home whether they are guilty or innocent, while in custody battles fathers who are generally the losers.

The decent man's ego has been trampled over and crushed into the ground. Why on earth would any man want to get married, or stand by his children these days If he does, where is the praise for the good guys?

I feel that women who publicly sue their employers for millions of pounds for alleged sexual harassment do not win any moral victory for the cause of women. They further an underlying current of male resentment and mistrust. Before much longer, this may erupt into a step back into the past, and men will no longer feel inclined to tolerate the presence of women. That is why only lip service is being paid to the politically correct fashion of allowing women into the top professions, and it is why the world is still, as it always has been, predominantly ruled by men.

To attack and alienate the male ego is to stick a knife into the heart of society. To say that all men are abusers, the view commonly held by many extreme feminists, is to create a false reality which ultimately could lead to woman losing what is now a war between the sexes.

To bring down men is to bring down the wealth and opportunity systems, not to mention pensions, benefits and other financial security measures. Where will our children, and indeed where will women, be then?

As a woman, concerned with equality in every sense of the word, discriminating, scheming, alienating and excluding the man, is not the way to get the best deal. My aunt used to have a saying, 'know when to take the cake out of the oven. When it is burnt, no one can eat it'.

No doubt, after this book is published, I will be inundated by letters from irate feminists. Save yourselves the time and paper, because I will get double the amount from relieved and reassured men. (c) Kristin Lloyd Scott

kristin@kristinlloydscott.com

Kristin will speak at our conference on 28oct00

PM fights IVF for singles

- Mark Metherell and Judith Whelan, Sydney Morning Herald, 2aug00

The Prime Minister will attempt to change the law which allows single women and lesbians to use fertility treatment, after declaring yesterday that a child's right to a mother and a father was "paramount".

Mr Howard said the Government would amend the Sex Discrimination Act to prevent its use against State laws that prohibit fertility treatment for single women and lesbians.

...................

The leader of the Democrats, Senator Lees, said the Prime Minister was "all too keen" to overturn women's rights ....

He said there was "overwhelming" Cabinet support for the move. Cabinet's view was that the Sex Discrimination Act was never intended to deny the rights of States to legislate on an issue involving "the right of children in our society to have the reasonable expectation, other things being equal, of the affection and care of both a mother and a father".

Domestic violence explodes

Police find the problem 'mind-blowing' as attacks double in parts of Britain

- Martin Bright,

Observer, July 16, 2000

An epidemic of domestic violence is sweeping Britain's homes, fuelling the disintegration of family life and the sharpest rise in crime for almost two decades.

Exclusive figures obtained by The Observer [they followed their nose] reveal that reported violence within the home has doubled in some parts of the country in a year.

....

'The scale of this problem is mind-blowing,' said John Godsave, of the Racial and Violent Crimes Task Force. 'We have to make domestic violence as socially unacceptable as smoking and drink-driving.'

The findings horrified groups working for women. [Lesbian] Julie Bindel, of pressure group Women for Justice ....

Professor Elizabeth Stanko of Royal Holloway College, London, who carried out the research, said: 'The focus of the politicians is wrong. It has taken years of work to get women to come forward and if they do you expect crime levels to rise.'

The Met will this month publish minimum standards for domestic, racial and homophobic crime. They have also extended their definition of domestic violence to include threatening behaviour, violence or 'psychological, physical, sexual, financial or emotional' abuse between adults who are or were partners or family.

[I have mentioned 'financial abuse' in Ill Eagle 8. Bright fell for Stinko's phoney statistics (Stinko, Dim told me, was "highly regarded"!), which get ever more hysterical. We then gave him a rough time, and later, in an article on paedophiles, he showed more competence, by citing false allegations. Can we say; "Once a poodle-man, always a poodle-man?" No. Poodle-men are yellow. - Ed]

Anti-male bias increasingly pervades our culture

- John Leo, Jewish World Review,

25july00

http://www.jewishworldreview.com

A famous television newswoman told this joke last month at a fund-raising dinner for a women's college: A woman needed a brain transplant. Her doctor said two brains were available, a woman's brain for $500 and a man's brain for $5,000. Why the big price difference? Answer: The woman's brain has been used.

Most in the audience laughed, but one man stood up and booed. What's wrong? asked a woman at his table. The man said, "Just substitute woman, black or Jew for 'man' in that joke, and tell me how it sounds."

At about the same time, American Greeting Cards launched an ad campaign in Newsweek, Life and

p6

other magazines. One ad featured a "Thelma and Louise" greeting card, pasted into the magazines, that said on the front: "Men are always whining about how we are suffocating them." The punch line inside the card was this: "Personally, I think if you can hear them whining, you're not pressing hard enough on the pillow." [I have read suggestions that these offensive cards be defaced in the shop, perhaps with a dab of oil or grease. -Ed]

The newswoman, who is a friend, seemed shocked when I phoned and raised questions about her joke. "The poor, sensitive white male," she said. A spokesman for the greeting card company saw nothing wrong with a humorous card about a woman killing a man. He faxed a statement saying the card had been pretested successfully, and besides, "We've heard no protests from consumers who are buying and using this card." But would American Greetings print a card with the sexes reversed, so the humor came from men joking about suffocating a woman? No, said the spokesman, because 85 percent to 90 percent of cards are bought by women. There is no market for a reverse card. ....

"There used to be a certain level of good-natured teasing between the sexes," says Christina Sommers, author of "Who Stole Feminism?" "Now even the most innocent remark about women will get you in trouble, but there's no limit at all to what you can say about men."

Men's rights groups phone me a lot, and I tell them my general position on these matters: The last thing we need in America is yet another victim group, this one made up seriously aggrieved males. But these groups do have an unmissable point about double standards. On the "Today" show last November, Katie Couric suddenly deviated from perkiness and asked a jilted bride, "Have you considered castration as an option?" Nobody seemed to object. Fred Hayward, a men's rights organizer, says: "Imagine the reaction if Matt Lauer had asked a jilted groom, 'Wouldn't you just like to rip her uterus out?'"

The double standard is rooted in identity politics and fashionable theories about victimization: Men as a group are oppressors; jokes that oppressors use to degrade the oppressed must be taken seriously and suppressed. Jokes by the oppressed against oppressors, however, are liberating and progressive. So while sexual harassment doctrine cracks down on the most harmless jokes about women, very hostile humor about men keeps expanding with almost no objections.

Until recently, for example, the 3M company put out post-it notes with the printed message: "Men have only two faults: everything they say and everything they do." Anti-male greeting cards are increasingly graphic, with some of the most hostile coming from Hallmark Cards' Shoebox Division. (Sample: "Men are scum ... Excuse me. For a second there I was feeling generous.") JWR columnist Cathy Young sees a rising tide of male-bashing, including "All Men Are Bastards" and "Men We Love to Hate" calendars, and a resentful "It's-always-his-fault" attitude pervading women's magazines.

Commercial attempts to increase the amount of sexual antagonism in America are never a good idea. And if you keep attacking men as a group, they will eventually start acting as a group, something we should fervently avoid. But the worst impact of all the male-bashing is on the young.

Barbara Wilder-Smith, a teacher and researcher in the Boston area, was recently quoted in several newspapers on how deeply anti-male attitudes have affected the schools. When she made "Boys Are Good" T-shirts for boys in her class, all 10 of the female student teachers under her supervision objected to the message. (One, she said, was wearing a button saying "So many men, so little intelligence.") "My son can't even wear the shirt out in his back yard," she said. "People see it and object strongly and shout things." On the other hand, she says, nobody objects when the girls wear shirts that say "Girls Rule" or when they taunt the boys with a chant that goes, "Boys go to Jupiter to get more stupider; girls go to college to get more knowledge." Worse, she says, many adolescent boys object to the "Boys Are Good" shirts too, because they have come to accept the cultural message that something is seriously wrong with being a male.

"The time is ripe for people to think about the unspoken anti-male 'ism' in our colleges and schools," she says. And in the rest of the popular culture as well.

When rules don't count Double standards are no accident; they arise from a theory

John Leo, Jewish World Review, 1aug00

I made a mistake of sorts in my recent column on double standards: I ran out of space before I could bring up the name of Herbert Marcuse. If a National Museum of Double Standards is ever built, we should name it for Marcuse and put a huge statue of him on the roof. Maybe he should be shown holding up two fingers, one for each standard.

Marcuse was a fashionable radical intellectual of the 1960s who believed that tolerance and free speech mostly serve the interests of the powerful. So he called frankly for "intolerance against movements from the right, and toleration of movements from the left." To restore the balance between oppressors and oppressed, he argued, indoctrination of students and "deeply pervasive" censorship of oppressors would be necessary, starting in college.

By the late 1980s, many of the double standards Marcuse called for were in place. Marcuse's candor was missing, of course, but everyone on campus understood that speakers, student newspapers, and professors on the right could (or should) be treated differently from those on the left. The officially oppressed knew that they were not subject to the standards and rules set for other students.

Marcuse's thinking influenced a generation of radical scholars who in turn deeply influenced the colleges and the law schools. They include Mari Matsuda, Richard Delgado, and the dread Catharine MacKinnon, who more or less invented hostile-environment theory and sexual harassment doctrine all by herself. Matsuda, who calls for censorship and speech restrictions for the powerful, sits on the National Advisory Council of the American Civil Liberties Union - one indication of how respectable double standards have come to be among the chattering classes.

Double standards are all around us now: Endless restrictions on abortion protesters that would never be applied to other demonstrators. The belief that all-black college dorms are progressive but all-white ones are racist. Explanations that the killing of whales is a universal social horror, except when conducted by the oppressed (American Indians).

A quarter century of feminist yawning over feminist Mary Daly's ban on males in her Boston College classes, though a male professor who tried to bar females would have been hammered into submission in one day.

A reader sent in his favorite double standard: For the left, it's wrong to try to change homosexuals' behavior-their choice or orientation must be respected and left alone. But this no-change policy does not apply to boys in general. It's OK to view their boisterous behavior as a social problem to be solved.

We have reached the point where the public understands and resents the flood of double standards but hasn't found a way to speak out. Bryant Gumbel's recent adventure with naughty words, for instance, passed without much comment. After interviewing a man from the Family Research Council on the CBS Early Show, Gumbel mouthed the words, "What a - - - - ing idiot!" A prominent TV executive, not known as a conservative, told me: "Can you imagine if a conservative had done that on national TV? He would have been fired in two minutes."

Another example is the new movie Chuck and Buck, a sympathetic portrait of a creepy homosexual stalking a heterosexual male. New Yorker film critic David Denby wrote: "If the movie were about a hetero man pursuing a woman . . . wouldn't it be seen as an obnoxious brief for harassment?" Of course.

Hate-crime legislation is the classic example of the double-standard mind-set, offering different punishments for similar crimes committed against oppressors and oppressed. Yes, the laws are written so that the oppressed can get extra jail time too, but that rarely happens. Clarence Page, the columnist, recently wrote that foot-dragging by police and the news media on antiwhite violence is endangering hate-crime laws. Maybe so. But police, prosecutors,

p7

and the press downplay minority hate crimes because they understand what the law is meant to accomplish-benefiting members of minorities, not putting more of them in jail.

A lot of readers chided me after my recent column for picking examples only on the left. Fair enough. Many conservatives who say they believe in family unification opposed the return of Elián González to his father. And states-rights conservatives are forever calling for federal laws that override states rights. Hypocrisy can be found everywhere on the political spectrum. But the left has a special problem: It has a Marcusian philosophy of double standards hovering over its social programs and the judgments of its people in the news media.

Double standards, inevitably, erode honesty. The Marcusians at colleges can't say to parents, "Thanks for the $20,000. By the way, we've politicized the university, and we're going to indoctrinate your children and treat whites as oppressors." The program has to be cloaked in concern about hate speech and diversity. Intolerance poses as tolerance, and the double-entry bookkeeping leads to deception. It's all a house of cards, bound to collapse sooner or later. Sooner would be better.

Dads stage protest outside judge's East Devon home

by John Goodwin

Midweek Herald, 19july00, p10

A Group of West Country parents, some from East Devon, descended on Marsh Green in a bid to air their grievances about access to their children with Britain's top Family Court judge. Dame Elizabeth Butler-Sloss lives in the village and her home was targeted as the latest stage in a campaign to give parents fairer treatment at the hands of the legal system when it comes to deciding access to children after relationships break up. Dame Elizabeth was not at home so the campaigners delivered letters and left their banners draped at the entrance to her property, Higher Marsh Farm. Though the protest was not exclusively populated by fathers, members of Dads Against Discrimination, were prominent in it. In June they had 30 members in a peaceful demonstration outside Exeter Crown Court which coincided with similar protests outside other courts in other cities to raise the profile of the case as Father's Day approached. Planned next is a visit to Downing Street on October 2, designated as Human Rights Day. Mark Harris, who coordinated the Marsh-Green protest, said: "Britain has signed up to the European Convention which is supposed to uphold the family, yet our country's Family Court seems to undermine this with its decisions. We want the Government to sort out the Family Court." Among fathers in the Marsh Green protest, attended by 45 people, were two East Devon men. One, who wants his anonymity respected, said he had found himself in a catch 22 situation when he took the decision to give up his job so he would be able to devote full time care to his two daughters following the break- up of his relationship. However when the court decided who should have custody of the children it decided on the mother, on the basis that he did not have the financial means. He claimed that the court had cast doubt on the evidence submitted by the mother in her case for custody, but had still awarded her a residence order. He went to the Court of Appeal in London and presented his own case, but threw his bundle of documents across the courtroom in frustration when the judge told him "to chill out". He even made a complaint of perjury which he alleged was found to have grounds by the police, but not proceeded with. Claiming the thrust of the law should be directed at the best of interests of children involved in such cases, he said that in practice it seemed to be the interests of the mother that were best served. He is hoping to fight on in a civil action if he can engage a lawyer on a no-win, no fee basis. Another East Devon man, the father of a boy, is trying to get open-ended access to see his child. Currently he is allowed to see him only at his Tuesday night swimming session in Liskeard, involving a 160-mile round trip, and to make one telephone call a week. He said: "This was the first protest I have been to. Some of the fathers there are in a worse situation than I am." Mr. Harris said: "We seek dialogue and attention, no changes to the law, but better implementation of the Children Act of 1989. This assumed shared residence orders would become the norm, but in reality they are rarely made. Contact orders of just six or 12 times a year are becoming commonplace, if any orders at all can be obtained. This is unjust, unfair, damaging to children and adults - and expensive. In my own case, which has gone on for more than six years, a judge recently agreed with me that the total cost to the taxpayer is about £300,000. There have been in excess of 110 hearings. "There should be a presumption to frequent contact, unless proven compelling grounds for anything other materialise ".

p8

Article number two...

Judge targeted by DAD campaigners

21July00

A Plympton man behind a campaign to help fathers get more access to their children organised a demonstration outside the house of Britain's top family judge. Mark Harris, 41, [of ManKind] from Elford Crescent, set up Dads Against Discrimination in April to help fathers who are denied access to their children after separating from or divorcing their partners. The group campaigned outside Plymouth Crown Court in April and May, and in June held a demonstration which spread as far as Exeter, Taunton, Bristol and Birmingham. After feeling previous protests had been ignored, DADs demonstrated outside the home of Dame Elizabeth Butler-Sloss, the president of the Family Division of the Courts, in Marsh Green, East Devon. Forty-five people attended Saturday's march, which began in the village centre, before making its way up to the high court judge's house. The judge was not at home so letters of protest were delivered through her door and placards left in her garden. Mr Harris hopes the action will persuade Dame Butler-Sloss to implement an order of shared residency as introduced by the Children's Act in 1989. The rule works on the basis that the children of separated parents should be able to spend as much time as possible with both after a relationship breakdown. Mr Harris believes that if Dame Butler-Sloss implements the ruling, her influence will force lesser courts to follow suit. 'She ignored our court protests in April, May and June, we are hoping now it has been a bit closer to home she'll pay it more attention. If she doesn't we'll come back,' said Mr Harris. Mr Harris started the group as a result of his own experiences. He has been in a wrangle with his ex-wife for six years and after two court hearings and an overall cost of £300,000 has just six days a year access to his children.

The DADS movement is continuing to grow and new members include women who have had similar experiences after separation. One of them is London-based author Penny Cross who wrote the novel Lost Children in 1997, which recounts her own battle with the courts to win visiting rights to her children. The group has also gained the support of the Equal Parenting Party, whose members joined them on the march. The EPP, a single issue political party, was set up last July to fight to increase access rights for the non-resident parent after a split. The next joint DADs and EPP gathering takes place in London on October 2 when Britain signs the Bill of Human Rights which is hoped will improve access rights for fathers and non-resident parents.

Charles Colson Commentary

on BreakPoint Radio #000726

26July00

The Cleveland Avenue School in Atlanta has all the amenities you would expect a new school to have: computer equipment, an up-to-date library, and modern classrooms. It has everything except a playground.

No, it wasn't an oversight. It was designed that way, in order to make little boys behave more like little girls. And it's part of a trend.

In 1998, Atlanta eliminated recess in its elementary schools. Other cities, like Philadelphia, retained something called recess, but it bears little resemblance to the unstructured play time most of us enjoyed as kids.

Why? As Christina Hoff Sommers says in her new book, The War Against Boys, educators today are intolerant of boys acting like boys -- moving, making noise, and engaging in raucous play. This intolerance goes beyond the need for order and discipline. The rule is "no running and no jumping," and boys who engage in normal active play are frequently punished or sent home.

When boys aren't being punished for being boys, they are being medicated to accomplish the same result. It is revealing that 95 percent of the kids on Ritalin today -- a drug used to treat hyperactivity -- are boys. [The important figure to find out is, what fraction of the multiple classroom killers in the USA were on Ritalin. While nearly all assassins, e.g. Lee Harvey Oswald, come from SMFs, a small proportion of the classroom multiple killers do not. Possibly, in their case, the cause is not the traditional one, lack of a father, but Ritalin. See p9, Doping Kids - Ed] As Michael Gurian, the author of The Good Son, puts it: "If Huck [Finn] and Tom [Sawyer] were in today's schools, they would be labeled ADD, having attention deficit disorder, and drugged."

Behind this campaign against what Sommers calls "youthful male exuberance" is, in her words, "misguided feminism." Many feminists insist that it is maleness itself -- defined by characteristics like aggressiveness, competitive-ness, and assertiveness -- that causes violence.

This view has found its most receptive audience in education, which is dominated, to a greater extent than other professions, by women. The result is a commitment to what Dr. Sommers calls feminizing boys: monitoring and policing characteristically male behavior, and getting boys to participate in "characteristically feminine activities."

As a result, our sons think there's something wrong with being a boy. As Dan Kindlon, a child psychologist, puts it, our sons feel like a "thorn among roses" and a "frowned-upon presence" in our schools.

This war that's being waged on sons isn't only cruel; it's culturally disastrous. When Christians say that God made us male and female, it isn't only about sex. It's an acknowledgement that the attributes of both sexes were intended to complement each other, and achieve results that neither sex, acting on their own, could achieve.

While she isn't a Christian, Camille Paglia, a feminist author, understands this. She has written that masculinity is " ... the most creative cultural force in history." "Men," she adds, "created the world we live in and the luxuries we enjoy."

To be more precise, it is the masculine role as provider and protector, as restrained by clear standards of right and wrong, that has produced the civilization we know.

But our schools are failing our sons today by not encouraging them in this role.

We need to help our neighbors understand that a generation of boys who are taught that there's something intrinsically wrong with being male will not be able to act as the kind of responsible and creative force that Paglia describes. And our sons won't be the only ones paying the price.

If we really understand what's really at stake in society's "war against boys," we'd realize that a little "male exuberance" on the playground is a small price to pay.

You can get a copy of Christina Hoff Sommers The War Against Boys at BreakPoint Online: http://www.breakpoint.org/

Family friendly firms face staff backlash

- Steve Doughty,

Daily Mail, 28july00

Firms which give working mothers extra time off to look after their children risk a backlash from other staff .... Resentment is building among childless colleagues - especially women - who believe they should also have the chance to stay at home.

Many are unhappy at being left to do the work of staff who desert the office to spend time with their families.

The mistrust and dislike of the way working mothers are seen to take advantage means some bosses are reluctant to employ parents.

The unrest over fashionable 'family-friendly' policies emerged in a survey of nearly 2,000 executives by the magazine Management Today. ....

The report also found that women are far more willing than men to sacrifice earnings for more time of their own - 45% against 27%.

More than a third of women managers said that if they had more time they would spend it to enjoy themselves rather than with their families.

A 1997 Panorama programme said that up to 35% of paedophiles are women. An interesting result of some other research is that the long term damage from female paedophiles appears to be considerably greater than damage from male paedophiles.

p9

Observer campaign: families at war

- Dina Rabinovitch,

Observer, 2, 9, 16 july00

see www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/08099.htm (also see /02058.htm)

Oliver Cyriax (whom she mentions) tells me that Dina set out to write articles about how the family courts were unfair to women! After learning from him, but seemingly having already written some of the usual "violent man" - bashing stuff, she switched to a comprehensive indictment of the corruption, confusion, and destructiveness of the family courts. She interviewed Thorpe and Hale, and others.

On 16 July Dina wrote; "Only yesterday a delegation from 'non-resident parents' groups marched on the home of Dame Elizabeth Butler-Sloss, president of the Family Division, demanding better treatment." (See photograph.)

Dina quotes Oliver Cyriax; "The Lord Chancellor's opposition to elementary training for the key agency CAFCAs [is understandable]. Guidelines suggesting how to do the job right would categorise most previous Children Act decisions as hopelessly wrong."

It is extraordinary that FNF seem to have removed the magnificent article by Oliver Cyriax from their website. Was I wrong to praise it?

Fathers and sons

- Daniel Johnson

Telegraph, 22july00

.... Young teenage mothers, ...., are usually provided with a more or less functioning support system. They receive housing benefits from the state, families rally round, Gordon Brown rides to the rescue .... there is no longer anything "illegitimate" about the unmarried mother or her children.

Nor is there any real incentive to say "no". .... their desires are just as strong as boys'. ....

How different it is for the young fathers. Society and government are united in condemnation of their fecklessness, but silent about their paternal feelings. There is no message from those around them about how these might be harnessed for the common good. .... Is it any surprise that most of the troubles of which we complain derive from young men? We seek to deny them the only status to which they can aspire that would infallibly distract them from the egotistical pursuit of self-gratification. To deprive them of the prospect of progeny, the obligation to provide and care for a wife and child, is to keep them in a state of perpetual adolescence. .... The hooligans of whom we are so terrified are not bogeys, but babies.

In a couple of generations, we have reverted to the pre-patriarchal social order, something like the prehistoric matriarchy imagined by 19th-century writers. The task we face is nothing less than the reinvention of marriage. We have bequeathed our teenagers a more primitive notion of love and its purposes than that of Adam and Eve. A fatherless society is a lawless society. ....

Our young are growing up cut off from the past, without a moral compass to guide them through the tempest of their own sexuality. Nothing is more urgent than to provide such a guide for the perplexities of puberty. To identify the problem is to point towards the solution. A political party that took a pro-family agenda seriously, however, would be more revolutionary than anybody has so far dared to contemplate.

Which Blair project?

Richard Ingrams,

Observer, 13aug00, p28

Pictures of a bewigged Cherie Blair .... freely made available .... will also ensure maximum publicity for Mrs Blair's new Matrix Chambers, especially set up to cater for the new Human Rights legislation .... Mr Blair introducing legislation that his wife will then profit from in a professional capacity.

This has the making of a major scandal that could finally sink Mr Blair.... can only be avoided by his wife temporarily giving up her legal career and perhaps devoting more time to her family, who .... could all benefit from a bit of TLC.

But there is a fat chance of that happening .... Mrs Blair has made it clear that her career takes precedence over everything else. If things go wrong ....

Doomed youth

Leader, Observer, 13aug00

.... Jack Straw's and Paul Boateng's achievement as Home Office Ministers is to make Howard appear a model of good sense. .... Boys are exposed to bullying and rape by being house in wings with hardened, adult criminals. The Criminal Justice Act supposedly outlawed this repellent response to overcrowding, but a succession of gesture politicians in the Home Office has ignored its provisions. .... The result is that 80% of Feltham graduates re-offend within two years....

Locking up under-18s 'must stop'

- Martin Bright,

Observer, 13aug00, p8

.... Since 1995, at least 26 people have committed suicide in young offenders' institutions, more than twice the number in the previous five years. Last year alone eight young people killed themselves. .... 'There are simply too many kids ii the system, so they end up being stockpiled in prisons. The number of children in secure units has risen from 200 to 400 over the last year. More children will die if this continues.'

Doping Kids

By Kelly Patricia O'Meara

Though shocked by bizarre shootings in schools, few Americans have noticed how many shooters were among the 6 million kids now on psychotropic drugs.

Just three weeks after Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold went on their April 20 killing spree at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colo., President Clinton hosted a White House conference on youth violence. The president declared it a strategy session to seek "the best ideas from people who can really make a difference: parents and young people, teachers and religious leaders, law enforcement, gun manufacturers, representatives of the entertainment industry and those of us here in government."

. . . . There was, however, complete silence from the president when it came to including representatives from the mental-health community, whom many believe can provide important insight about the possible connection between the otherwise seemingly senseless acts of violence being committed by school-age children and prescription psychotropic drugs such as Ritalin,

Luvox and Prozac.

. . . . There are nearly 6 million children in the United States between the ages of 6 and 18 taking mind-altering drugs prescribed for alleged mental illnesses that increasing numbers of mental-health professionals are questioning.

. . . . Although the list of school-age children who have gone on violent rampages is growing at a disturbing rate -- and the shootings at Columbine became a national wake-up call -- few in the mental-health community have been willing to talk about the possibility that the heavily prescribed drugs and violence may be linked. Those who try to investigate quickly learn that virtually all data concerning violence and psychotropic drugs are protected by the confidentiality provided minors. But in the highly publicized shootings this spring, information has been made available to the public.

a.. April 16: Shawn Cooper, a 15-year-old sophomore at Notus Junior-Senior High School in Notus, Idaho, was taking Ritalin, the most commonly prescribed stimulant, for bipolar disorder when he fired two shotgun rounds, narrowly missing students and school staff.

b.. April 20: Harris, an 18-year-old senior at Columbine High School, killed a dozen students and a teacher before taking his own life. Prior to the shooting rampage, he had been under the influence of Luvox, one of the new selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor, or SSRI, antidepressants approved in 1997 by the Food and Drug Administration, or FDA, for children up to the age of 17 for treatment of obsessive-compulsive disorder, or OCD.

c.. May 20: T.J. Solomon, a 15-year-old at Heritage High School in Conyers, Ga., was being treated with Ritalin for depression when he opened fire on and wounded six classmates.

. . . . Two other high-profile cases from last year show a similar pattern:

p10

a.. May 21, 1998: Kip Kinkel, a 15-year-old at Thurston High School in Springfield, Ore., murdered his parents and then proceeded to school where he opened fire on students in the cafeteria, killing two and wounding 22. Kinkel had been prescribed both Ritalin and Prozac. Although widely used among adults, Prozac has not been approved by the FDA for pediatric use.

b.. March 24, 1998: Mitchell Johnson, 13, and Andrew Golden, 11, opened fire on their classmates at Westside Middle School in Jonesboro, Ark. Johnson had been receiving psychiatric counseling and, although information about the psychotropic drugs that may have been prescribed for him has not been made public, his attorney, Val Price, responded when asked about it: "I think that is confidential information, and I don't want to reveal that."

. . . . A great deal has been written about all of these cases. There have, however, been no indications that all of these children watched the same TV programs or listened to the same music. Nor has it been established that they all used illegal drugs, suffered from alcohol abuse or had common difficulties with their families or peers. They did not share identical home lives, dress alike or participate in similar extracurricular activities. But all of the above were labeled as suffering from a mental illness and were being treated with psychotropic drugs that for years have been known to cause serious adverse effects when given to children.

. . . . At the top of the list of so-called "mental illnesses" among children is attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, or ADHD, which is diagnosed when a child meets six of the 18 criteria described in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, or DSM-IV, published by the American Psychiatric Association, or APA.

. . . . ADHD was determined by a vote of APA psychiatrists to be a "mental" illness and added to the DSM-IIIR in 1987. By definition, children with ADHD exhibit behaviors such as not paying attention in school, not listening when spoken to directly, failing to follow directions, losing things, being easily distracted and forgetful, fidgeting with hands or feet, talking excessively, blurting out answers or having difficulty awaiting turn. The most common ADHD remedy among pediatricians and representatives of the mental-health community is, as noted, Ritalin.

. . . . First approved by the FDA in 1955, Ritalin (methylphenidate) had become widely used for behavioral control by the mid-1960s. It is produced by the Swiss pharmaceutical company Novartis. According to the Drug Enforcement Administration, or DEA, the United States buys and uses 90 percent of the world's Ritalin. A U.N. agency known as the International Narcotics Control Board, or INCB, reported in 1995 that "10 to 12 percent of all boys between the ages of 6 and 14 in the U.S. have been diagnosed as having ADD [attention-deficit disorder, now referred to as ADHD] and are being treated with methylphenidate."

. . . . But opponents are concerned about evidence they say confirms a close relationship between use of prescribed psychotropic drugs and subsequent use of illegal drugs, including cocaine and heroin. While the United States has spent more than $70 billion on the war on drugs, says Bruce Wiseman, president of the Citizens Commission on Human Rights, a California-based organization that investigates violations of human rights by mental-health practitioners, "if you think the Colombian drug cartel is the biggest drug dealer in the world, think again. It's your neighborhood psychiatrist ... putting our kids on the highest level of addictive drugs."

. . . . This complaint is not new and there is a lengthy list of government agencies connecting the prescribed psychotropic drugs to use of illegal substances.

. . . . Twenty-eight years ago the World Health Organization, or WHO, concluded that Ritalin was pharmacologically similar to cocaine in its pattern of abuse and cited Ritalin as a Schedule II drug -- the most addictive in medical usage. The Department of Justice followed the WHO by citing Ritalin in Schedule II of the Controlled Substances Act as having a very high potential for abuse. As a Schedule II drug, Ritalin joins morphine, opium, cocaine and the heroin substitute methadone.

. . . . According to a report in the 1995 Archives of General Psychiatry, "Cocaine is one of the most reinforcing and addicting of the abused drugs and has pharmacological actions that are very similar to those of Ritalin." In the same year the DEA also made the Ritalin/cocaine connection, saying, "It is clear that Ritalin substitutes for cocaine and d-amphetamine in a number of behavioral paradigms," expressing concern that "one in every 30 Americans between 5 and 19 years old has a prescription for the drug."

. . . . Despite decades of warnings about the potential for abuse of Ritalin, experts continue to argue that the benefits far outweigh the consequences. Yet the INCB has reported that "Methylphenidate's [Ritalin] pharmacological effects are essentially the same as those of amphetamine and metham-phetamine. The abuse of methylphenidate [Ritalin] can lead to tolerance and severe psychological dependence. Psychotic episodes [and] violent and bizarre behavior have been reported."

. . . . These are, in fact, some of the same symptoms exhibited by Eric Harris.

. . . . David Fassler, a child and adolescent psychiatrist and chairman of the APA group on Children, Adolescents and Their Families, says he is unaware of any research to suggest a correlation between the recent cases of violent behavior in school-age children and the widespread prescription of psychotropic drugs. Fassler argues that the number of school-age children suffering from mental illnesses such as depression is "more than earlier believed and it is important that there be a comprehensive evaluation by a mental-health clinician trained in this area." He stresses that "treatment should be multimodal -- not left to medications alone."

. . . . Mike Faenza, president and chief executive officer of the National Mental Health Association, the country's oldest and largest mental-health group, notes that "there is little known about how the drugs affect brain function." Faenza adds that "we do know that a hell of a lot of kids commit suicide because they aren't getting the help they need. It's irresponsible not to give them the help just because we don't know what causes the mental illness."

. . . . Opponents are quick to capitalize on this admission. "There is no such thing as ADHD," declares Wiseman. "It's not a deficiency of 'speed' that makes a kid act out. If you look at the criteria listed in the DSM-IV for ADHD, you'll see that they are taking normal childhood behavior and literally voting it a mental illness. This is a pseudoscience, entirely subjective. Unlike medical conditions that are proved scientifically, with these mental illnesses the only way you know you're better is if the psychiatrist says you're better. That's not science."

. . . . Pediatric neurologist Fred Baughman not only agrees that there is no such illness as ADHD, but says: "This is a contrived epidemic, where all 5 million to 6 million children on these drugs are normal. The country's been led to believe that all painful emotions are a mental illness and the leadership of the APA knows very well that they are representing it as a

disease when there is no scientific data to confirm any mental illness."

. . . . Peter Breggin, a psychiatrist and director of the International Center for the Study of Psychiatry and Psychology and author of Talking Back to Prozac, Toxic Psychiatry and Talking Back to Ritalin, for years has waged a war with the APA about what he regards as its cavalier diagnoses of mental illnesses. "Psychiatry has never been driven by science. They have no biological or genetic basis for these illnesses and the National Institutes of Mental Health are totally committed to the pharmacological line." He is concerned that "there is a great deal of scientific evidence that stimulants cause brain damage with long-term use, yet there is no evidence that these mental illnesses, such as ADHD, exist."

. . . . Breggin points out that the National Institutes of Health, or NIH, admitted as much at their 1998 Consensus Development Conference on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. Thirty-one individuals were selected by NIH to make scientific presentations to the panel on ADHD and its treatment.

p11

The panel made the following observations and conclusions: "We don't have an independent, valid test for ADHD; there are no data to indicate that ADHD is due to a brain malfunction; existing studies come to conflicting conclusions as to whether use of psychostimulants increases or de-creases the risk of abuse, and finally after years of clinical research and experience with ADHD, our knowledge about the cause or causes of ADHD remains speculative."

. . . . If so, there is little evidence to support a scientific basis for classifying ADHD as a mental illness. On the other hand, there is an abundance of evidence that stimulants such as Ritalin can produce symptoms such as mania, insomnia, hallucinations, hyperactivity, impulsivity and inattention. And the DEA's list of potential adverse effects of Ritalin includes psychosis, depression, dizziness, insomnia, nervousness, irritability and attacks of Tourette's or other tic syndromes.

. . . . While Ritalin is the drug of choice for treating ADHD, other mental illnesses such as depression and obsessive-compulsive disorder, or OCD, from which Columbine shooter Harris suffered, are being treated with new SSRI antidepressants. Harris' autopsy revealed that he had used Luvox (Fluvoxomine), an SSRI, prior to the shooting spree. And days earlier he had been rejected by the Marine Corps because he was taking the psychotropic drug.

. . . . Luvox, a cousin of Prozac, has been approved by the FDA for pediatric use, although research shows that a small percentage of patients experience adverse effects such as mania, bouts of irritability, aggression and hostility. But many physicians still prescribe it to children.

. . . . More disturbing to those who believe sufficient evidence exists that prescription psychotropic drugs may play a role in the violence being carried out by school-age children is the response of physicians to the issue. Rather than erring on the side of caution by reducing the number of kids on mind-altering drugs, physicians instead are prescribing psychotropic drugs even to infants and toddlers. The warning label states that "Ritalin should not be used in children under 6 years, since safety and efficacy for this age group has not been established" and "sufficient data on safety and efficacy of long-term use of Ritalin in children are not yet available."

. . . . A report in the July 1998 issue of the Clinical Psychiatric News revealed that in Michigan's Medicaid program, 223 children 3 years old or younger were diagnosed with ADHD as of December 1996. Amazingly, 57 percent of these children, many of whom are not yet capable of putting together a complete sentence, were treated with one or more psychotropic drugs including Ritalin, Prozac, Dexedrine, Aventyl and Syban. Thirty-three percent were medicated with two or more of these drugs.

. . . . But it is Ritalin that is being prescribed to 6 million American children. Children's Hospital in Washington has been running television advertisements expressing concern. According to its spokeswoman, Lynn Cantwell, the ads were part of a series covering many medical issues. "We wanted to advocate that children get a comprehensive evaluation because we are finding that children were coming in who were taking Ritalin who actually did not have ADHD."

. . . . Wiseman has suggested that the only way to gain control of the situation is to expose widespread "fraudulent diagnoses" of psychiatrists. "Without the diagnoses, you can't get the drugs," he says. Baughman's answer isn't too far from Wiseman's. He says, "A big-time class-action lawsuit needs to be filed."

ManKind Conference

The Oxford Street conference, organised many years ago by our ex-Chairman John Campion, made a major impact on me. There, I heard Daniel Amneus, author of The Garbage Generation, 1990, speak. I had been attracted to the conference to hear Patricia Morgan, Farewell to the Family?, 1995. Norman Dennis, Rising Crime and the Dismembered Family, 1993, also made a major impact on me. There I met Eugen for the first time, leading to a very fruitful collaboration.

I will be proud to be partly responsible for our conference, at Friends House, opposite Euston Station, London, on Saturday 28oct00, 0900 - 1630, if it approaches the quality achieved by John. The maximum number in the small hall is 230, so send off £10 now for your ticket (£20 for non-member), to ManKind, Suite 367, 2 Lansdowne Row, London W1X 8HL.

ManKind A.G.M.

23sep00 12.30-4.30

Quality Hotel, Bentley, Walsall WS2 0BS, (01922 724444

At Jct. 10, M6.

p12

There was an old Scot called McTavish

Who attempted an anthropoid ravish,

The object of rape

Was the wrong sex of ape

And the anthropoid ravished McTavish.

Ill Eagle 11, oct00

p1

ManKind October 2000 Conference

The age of violent young males. Causes and remedies.

The list of speakers at our conference is truly awesome. They represent most of the leading experts in the world. It is at Friends House, opposite Euston Station, London, on Saturday 28oct00, 0930 - 1630. The maximum number in the small hall is 230, so send off £10 now for your ticket (£20 for non-member), to ManKind, Suite 367, 2 Lansdowne Row, London W1X 8HL. However, I have now booked two further rooms. Details are at www.mankind.org.uk or from www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk

List of speakers;

Prof. Norman Dennis. His key book is "Rising Crime and the Dismembered Family", pub. I.E.A. 1993, from tel 020 71 799 3745 Melanie Phillips wrote on Dennis on Waterhouse, Sunday Times, 24sep00. See Catt's website.

Erin Pizzey. Founded the first refuge for battered women, in Chiswick. Her key book is "Prone to Violence", reached via Catt's website

Mary Cleary. AMEN (Ireland) Founded the first refuge for battered men (where I have stayed - Ivor Catt)

Dr. Patricia Morgan Researcher, writer and broadcaster. Her key book is "Farewell to the Family?", pub. I.E.A. 1995/99, from tel. 020 71 799 3745

Prof. Stephen Baskerville (USA). Lecturer in law, Howard University. Writer and broadcaster in the U.S.A.

Dr. Malcolm George Researcher in University College, London. Specialises in violence and in brain research. More details.

Dr. Aidan Rankin (LSE). Co-Editor, "New European".

Lynette Burrows. Writer and broadcaster. Her key book is "The Fight for the Family", 1998/99, from fameduc@aol.com (Broadcaster)

Eugen Hockenjos, Researcher. His key article "A good man is hard to find" in The Guardian 20mar96 ; "How will Tommy learn to care if he has no access to male role models?"

Oliver Cyriax (INPOWw). Spent ten years working towards reform of the Court Welfare Service.

John Waters (Irish Times) Writer and Broadcaster. Probably a videotape of his stunning speech at the second International Conference organised by Mary Cleary.

Charles Hanson. A taped message from the prisoner who was enmeshed in the family courts for years, and reacted by murdering his wife.

Josephine Morris - Rape Barrister Concerned about possible wrong convictions.

George Williamson (AAFAA) Broadcaster. Supplied by the False Allegation organisation, tel 01788 911912.

Gendercide

The delights of close combat with bayonets, in which I received training denied to oppressed women, were highlighted on the front page two issues past, followed by the statistics on male deaths in the Titanic disaster. Again, an oppressive, patriarchal society prevented the death of many women. Now we follow with the suppressed concept gendercide.

From: Stephen Baskerville <Baskers@email.msn.com>

To: ACFC <acfclist@usa.net>

Subject: "Gendercide and Genocide" (major article)

Date: 03 September 2000 04:45

This article, "Gendercide and Genocide" by Adam Jones, Executive Director of Gendercide Watch, is from the June 2000 issue of the Journal of Genocide Research. Not for the squeamish.

A few highlights:

"Gendercide, at least when it targets males, has attracted virtually no attention at the level of scholarship or public policy. As such, it can be classed as one of the great 'taboo' subjects of the contemporary age."

"Non-combatant men have been and continue to be the most frequent targets of mass killing and genocidal slaughter, as well as a host of lesser atrocities and abuses."

The Stalinist purges were "perhaps the worst gender-specific slaughter in human history."

"Crucially, the most vulnerable and consistently targeted population group, through time and around the world today, is non-combatant men of a 'battle age,' roughly 15 to 55 years old. . . . The 'non-combatant' distinction is also vital. Unlike their armed brethren, these men have no means of defending themselves, and can be detained and exterminated by the thousands or millions. "

"Perhaps the most concentrated mass killing of any kind -- targeted male prisoners-of-war barely half a century ago. . . . Daniel Goldhagen gives a figure of '2.8 million young, healthy Soviet POWs' killed by the Germans, 'mainly by starvation ... in less than eight months of 1941-42." Most were noncombatants.

http://www.gendercide.org/gendercide_and_genocide.html

Break-up of families costs £30bn each year

- Philip Johnson,

Telegraph, 14sep00

Family breakdown is costing Britain £30 billion a year in extra welfare payments, poorer health, lower productivity and higher crime.

The financial consequences of the dramatic increase in divorce over the past 30 years are detailed in a study commissioned by a parliamentary group. It suggests that previous cost estimates ranging from £4 billion to £10 billion have been too low.

The report, The Cost of Family Breakdown, from the Family Matters organisation, says the social consequences of the British "family crisis" are enormous.

"The whole of society is affected," the report adds. "It impairs the health of the nation, reduces educational achievement of children, increases the crime rate, places a burden on the economy and a strain on social relationships." ....

Two in five marriages end in divorce and one child in four will experience family break-up before they are 16.

The impact on children is probably understated since the rate of relationship breakdown is even higher among cohabiting couples.

"We challenge those who are indifferent to, or even contemptuous of 'family values' to acknowledge the massive financial and social costs which society is paying." .... ManKind worked with the report's author David Lindsay.

Blair rubbishes our courts

On 1sep00, The Independent reported that Blair "promised to deliver a courts system for the 21st century". He "declared the justice system anarchic". He made a "strongly worded attack on the state of the courts, police and probation services." He said "I think we have effectively got a 19th century justice system in a 21st century world".

- reported by Peter Mahaffrey in a eurodads email, 4sep00.

p2

After 40 years of feminism and with girls excelling at exams, myths about gender persist, researchers say

Parents still say boys have the brains

- Jonathan Thompson,

Independent on Sunday, 1oct00

.... Brushing aside a mountain of evidence to the contrary, parents still believe their sons to be more intelligent than their daughters, according to Professor Adrian Furnham of University College, London. Men consistently rate themselves as brighter than women, and judge their offspring accordingly.

"Fathers differentiate more than mothers do," he said, "but there is still a pattern. Mothers still think that their daughters are not as bright as their sons.

....

"... women's overall intelligence is under-rated because of their comparative weakness in mathematical subjects. People still consider intelligence to be mathematical and spatial," says Furnham ....

[This last statement, by a man who presumably did badly at maths, correlates closely with my statement in Male View, oct98, p10; "As far as I can tell, these feminizations, or de-mathemati-cisations, of maths in England are occurring with no public discussion or debate." I telephoned Professor Furnham, 020 7679 5395, and raised the possibility that boys were now underperforming because young men were in crisis, but they and their parents thought their intelligence was higher than was shown by their demoralised test results. He replied that the 18 year old male students that he dealt with did not feel they were in crisis. Thus, we can expect him to think that test achievement will correlate with ability. What will he say as the test performance of young men continues to decline, and their suicides continue to increase? Here we see an accidental Poodle-Man, a victim of radfem censorship. (Via a draft copy of this article and a copy of my oct98 article, I am also asking Furnham to comment on the other point, that maths is being feminised to suit girls.) - Ed.]

Footnote. Rex Harvey obviously describes Furnham in Male View, oct00, p3, para 2. - Ed

Wife rape

Dear Mr. Whiston,

I have been given the name of your organisation [ManKind] by a friend of mine ....

My case is unusual. I am the first man in this part of Britain to be convicted of raping his wife. ....

I was living [with] .... my wife for ten years. In August 1998 I came home after a night out; had an argument with my wife, made friends again, kissed her, she smiled and responded, and we ended up having sex. At court I was found guilty of rape, as she claimed to have not consented to having sex with me. It had taken until last January for the case to get to court. During this time my wife joined Rape Crisis and I was charged with a further 4 counts of rape over the period of our ten years together. I was found not guilty of the previous 4 counts, guilty of the last one, and given a seven-year sentence. I have a clean record before this happening and I have lost everything. We also have an eight-year-old daughter, and I have not seen her since August 1998. Also, I have been put on the sex offenders' register for life.

My solicitors wanted me to appeal my case, but also said that I could be retried on the not guilty counts. As I was in shock, I did not appeal my case. I was found guilty by a 10-2 majority.

I know I did not rape my wife. Also, this sentence is unfair, because a similar case in the south where a married man broke into his own house and raped his wife got 3 years, but I got 7. The judge in my case said he had given me seven years because I put my wife on the stand, yet I was found not guilty on the four earlier counts of rape. Also, I find going on the sex offenders' register for life very harsh. It will affect my human and civil rights for life.

If there is anything you can do for me, please let me know. I can let you have full details of my case through my solicitors.

Yours faithfully,

BJ Number A7138

Her Majesty's Prison O aug00

17sep00 Dear Ivor,

.... fine .... put my case on your website .... keep my name out of it .... my case has been referred to the Criminal Case Review Commission ....

The Case for Marriage They Don't Want You to Hear

October 5, 2000

Maybe you can't judge a book by its cover, but boy, you can sure tell a lot from its critics.

"The Case for Marriage" (Doubleday) by Waite and Gallagher is a new book I co-authored with University of Chicago Prof. Linda Waite whose research on the advantages of marriage over other lifestyles is turning heads and raising scholarly eyebrows: Should we embrace all family forms equally? Do husbands really oppress their wives and hog all the marital goodies? Is it really true that the single life offers more rewards for women than the average, ho-hum marriage?

Well, no, no and no actually. Not if you look at the evidence. Here's the scientific case for marriage in a nutshell: marriage changes men and women's lives in powerful ways that other sorts of relationships, such as cohabitation, do not. Marriage is not just another lifestyle, but a productive, wealth-creating institution that (like education) builds human and social capital and (like education) therefore deserves public support. Linda Waite and I call for innovative new public and community efforts to strengthen marriage, and reduce divorce.

Divorce, these days, is too-often framed as the gateway to happiness for adults, which they must (or must not) sacrifice for their kids sake. But for some time now I've wondered whether fewer divorces would require such awful sacrifice from adults. "Divorce and be happy - or stay married and miserable for the kids' sake" is the way most Americans now frame the question. Framed that way, just a third of Americans, now believe people should stay married for the children's sake.

But what about the other possible outcomes? For example, you could divorce and be miserable, right? If divorce is such a great way to fulfil yourself, why is it that just 18 percent of divorced persons say they are "very happy"? Why are married women much, much happier than divorced, never married or even cohabiting women?

Then again, there's that other pesky possibility: stay married and get happier. In the Case for Marriage we looked at what happens to bad marriages that don't end. The turnarounds were shocking: Five years later, 77 percent of very unhappily couples that stayed married now called their marriage either "very happy" or "quite happy." A bad marriage is not a hard fact. It's a judgement by one person at one moment in time about a future that can change. Just as good marriages go bad, bad marriage "go good" and they are more likely to do so in a society that strongly prefers staying married to divorce.

This is pretty interesting stuff, right? As is the news that says, marriage reduces domestic violence, or that 3 out of ten middle-aged guys who aren't married will likely die prematurely as a result, to list just two examples of new data. So it's pretty curious to me that the first two reviews out of the box by the alleged cultural elite, one by Nation editor Katha Pollit in Slate and one by Margaret Talbot in the October 1 Sunday New York Times are not only negative but actually dismiss The Case for Marriage as "old news" about a debate nobody cares about. (If you doubt me, you can read them at Thecaseformarriage.com).

Curious too such prestigious editors assigned The Case for Marriage to writers who have published articles condemning me and anybody else who wants to reduce divorce. Curious most especially that Pollit calls The Case for Marriage a "clip job" and Talbot implies (either ignorantly or out of malice) that Linda Waite is just some second-rate ideologue instead of a top family scholar. Finally, curiouser and curiouser isn't it, that two such keen intellects cannot seem to locate a marriage debate in America just a few weeks after Time magazine put "Who Needs a Husband?" on the front cover?

All of which makes me wonder: What exactly is it about this new case for marriage the divorce advocates don't want you to hear?

......................................................

There was a young girl of Australia,

Who went to a dance as a dahlia;

When the petals unfurled,

It revealed to the world

That the dress, as a dress, was a failure.

p3

Editorial

The Donkey and the Carrot

The scene. A blameless father who has recently been threatened with a divorce action. After talking with such as myself for less than ten minutes, he knows that he will manage his own case better. He knows he is blameless, and that, whether or not he bears ill will towards his wife, he will steadfastly put the interests of his children first. He will not be mean or grasping or incompetent, as I must have been, and the courts will soon see this, and treat him and his children well. His eyes, not his speech, convey these last points to me. As agents of the state, judges and lawyers will do what they can to help him to safeguard his children's future. After all, they regularly say; The interests of the child come first. The Walrus and the Carpenter is merely a rather juvenile poem in a book for children, and can have no bearing on serious matters like his divorce. Most lawyers do not eat oysters, and would certainly not dream of eating such an upright Englishman as he.

'O Oysters, come and walk with us!'

The Walrus did beseech.

A pleasant walk, a pleasant talk,

Along the briny beach:

We cannot do with more than four,

To give a hand to each.'

The eldest 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.

But four young 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 cabbagee - and kings -

And why the sea is boiling hot -

And whether pigs have wings.'

....

'Now, if you're ready, Oysters dear,

We can begin to feed.'

'But not on us!' the oysters cried, Turning a little blue.

'After such kindness, that would be

A dismal thing to do!'

'The night is fine,' the Walrus said.

'Do you admire the view?'

Our divorcing Sir Galahad goes into denial when faced with an alternative scenario. The court system is collapsing. His own lawyers connive with the judge to keep up appearances. They all know that the father must lose everything, while at the same time the lawyers must maximise their fees. As one women barrister said to her (father) client; You must fight. You'll lose, but you must fight.

Divorcing men are in denial, want their day, year or decade in court, and want the drama. They do not notice that their idea of fighting means funnelling the maximum amount of money, their own and the taxpayers', to lawyers and judges. Many judges are failing lawyers doing the job of judge part time to supplement their fees. This is why they string cases along

Should such an upright Englishman despise the donkey who strives for the carrot? What is the difference?

If the donkey stopped striving, he might even earn a carrot!

The successful Retreat strategy, where a father who truly cares for his children takes on the court system, telling it that he will not fund the parentectomy, is available on my website

www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/ The proper role of a father is not to ape radfems in victimhood and self image building, but to go to the core of the problem and fight for his children. In spite of Retreat's first success, I find that all other divorcing men prefer their day in court, the creeping loss of their children and their assets, and the imagined glamour of victimhood.

Why does the divorcing father play it straight, like the donkey, when he knows that it almost always leads to loss of children and assets?

Retreat will be outlined at our conference on 28oct00.

AIDS

I have found massive censorship by the lucrative AIDS Industry

My research into pandemic censorship in my own fields, for instance electromagnetic theory, led me to study censorship in other disciplines, finally lighting on AIDS, where censorship has had the most serious repercussions. I then studied the politics of the AIDS Industry for more than ten years, and signed up to the list of scientists demanding a rethink of AIDS fundamentals.

Mr. Mbeki took over Mandela's mantle as President of South Africa. One night, unable to sleep, he surfed the www, and stumbled on suppressed information, which can be reached via Nobel Prizewinner Mullis or Warman on my website

www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/.

With 10% of his country adjudged HIV+, and with Glaxo-Wellcome, whose HQ is next door to our 28oct00 conference in London, charging $11,000 per patient per year for their lethal AZT 'medicine', he already knew that his country had a major problem.

Mbeki read that false positive diagnoses by both the fashionable HIV tests were likely in a country like South Africa, the real culprit being malnutrition, tuberculosis, malaria, or other. In any case, the test was too expensive, so that in Africa, diagnosis was usually made without the test.

That sleepless night, Mbeki's discovery that a major group of scientists worldwide disagreed with all the generally held facts, which I will call 'factoids', underlying the AIDS industry, brought him up sharp. It cannot have helped him to get to sleep. He knew immediately that he might have the solution to the financial crisis faced by SA as a result of extortionate AZT prices, but he could not have imagined the scale, power and commitment of the forces ranged on the side of the $4 billion p.a. AIDS Industry.

In 1994, Warman, after writing; History may well prove the HIV/AIDS phenomenon to be the greatest public scandal of the late 1980s and early 1990s, listed the major disputed facts as follows;

- who discovered HIV?

- the role of HIV in causing AIDS

- the origin of HIV

- the definition of AIDS and geographical variation in the way it manifests itself

- the reliability of the test for HIV

- the efficacy of AZT in treating and preventing AIDS

Although there is minor disagreement between the suppressed dissidents, every expert whom I respect agrees that AIDS will not break out of the ghetto, and also that it is not sexually transmitted by normal copulation. They all agree that the main threat to life is the treatment for AIDS, making it an iatrogenic disease (one caused by the doctor's treatment). To check this, go to Woolworths, and for £2, buy Medicines. A Comprehensive Guide, pub. Bloomsbury 1995, which lists the side effects of every prescribed drug. You will find that the side-effects of AZT, DDC and DDI, the drugs fed to those who have been diagnosed HIV+, are identical with the symptons of AIDS. Thus, it is not those who are ill, but rather those who are unfortunate enough to be diagnosed HIV+, who are doomed, unless they refuse the drug treatment. Refusal has proved very difficult for new-born babies of mothers diagnosed HIV+. Babies are particularly vulnerable to these lethal drugs, so that some parents have escaped from Britain in the face of court orders forcing them to drug their babies.

The first crack in the monolith which is the AIDS Industry appeared when Andrew Neil, Editor of the Sunday Times, supported research by his reporter Neville Hodgkinson's, and paid for him to travel the world to interview all the key players in the drama, for instance Dr. Eleni Eleopulos in Perth, Australia.

Today, the best book on the tragedy remains Neville Hodgkinson, AIDS The Failure of Contemporary Science, pub. Fourth Estate 1994. When Murdoch fired Neil, Neil claims because he was jealous of Neil's success, the new editor and his staff reverted to Establishment AIDS theory, behaving as if Hodgkinson and his reports had never existed. In the following ten years, prior comment on AIDS in The Sunday Times has been ignored by The Sunday Times, including letters asking today's Editor why he ignores his paper's past..

p4

Mbeki has formed an international committee which includes key AIDS dissidents, for instance Duesberg and the man described as a hero by Andrew Neil, Professor Stewart. Mbeki poses a major threat to a worldwide AIDS Industry, dominated by a highly corrupt WHO, the NIH and by Wellcome. I feel that the Industry and its credulous running-dogs will succeed in isolating and destroying Mbeki. They are describing him as arrogant, racist, another Mugabe, deranged, a tyrant, an enemy of the people, and so on. (Sunday Times 27aug00 sect5 p3, Telegraph 16sep00 p19, Times 11july00 p14). 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. However, you can help a little by warning HIV+ victims to look at these websites, and to learn about the threat that the prescribed drugs pose to their lives.

AIDS and Apartheid

- Tim Butcher,

Telegraph, 21sep00, p22

South Africa's Anglican Church said yesterday that government inaction on Aids ranked as a crime against humanity comparable to apartheid.

The statement from the head of the Church .... heightened the government's isolation over Aids. .... ".... a crime against humanity," it said.

The trade unions and some political parties have also attacked the government's stand, heightening a sense of crisis over the issue.

President Thabo Mbeki and the Health Minister, Manto Tshabalala-Msimang, claim that poverty and other diseases as well as HIV cause Aids. ....

Mr Mbeki maintained his position yesterday, insisting that doubts about the true causes of Aids had been raised by "very eminent scientists".

"There are other things that result in the collapse of the immune system," he said.

.... Mr Mbeki says more research is needed into the toxicity of the drugs offered by Western firms, though they are used elsewhere.

He faced further attack on the subject yesterday when the South African Human Rights Commission said it was considering suing the government over its refusal to provide drugs to counter the development of HIV into Aids....

Mr Mbeki's stance on Aids is increasingly isolating him internationally and domestically....

ManKind and Ill Eagle can be reached at;

(1). ManKind, Suite 367, 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

Child's the right of access to its parent

From Ill Eagle 9, June00, p7

There is therefore no all-embracing fundamental right under the Human Rights Act 1998 not to be discriminated against. [In any case, no national or international convention, law or statute or case law gives a child the right of access to its parent. I have been saying this for more than ten years, the reaction from all parties, including all fathers cut off from their children, being one of total indifference. It's a strange world, full of strange people. - Ed]

From: Walter H. Schneider <sheep_@telusplanet.net>

22sep00 Dear Ivor, You asked in your letter to Poyser (Poysner?): "Where in International Law or Statute or Declaration or in National Case Law or Statute is a child's right of access to its parent enshrined?" [Arran.Poyser@doh.gsi.gov.uk, the responsible civil servant, answered with a mass of gobbledygook, and since then has refused to communicate. - Ed]

To my knowledge it is not enshrined in any laws anywhere, *but once upon a time it was!* Canadian Senator Anne C. Cools (Liberal) did some research of case law to determine where and when the doctrine "In the best interest of the child" originated." She reported on her findings at the Calgary Workshop on Family Conflict (Peter Lougheed Centre, 1998 09 26). Senator Cools presented an analysis of the doctrine "In the best interest of the child." She had found that the first time the term had been mentioned in any legislation was in a 19th Century ruling, in a hearing by the Lord Chancellor in Britain -- the highest Court in the U.K., responsible for questions of judiciary equitability and ethics -- in which it became established that children have the right to both of their parents and that the King will be the protector of that right. She then recounted a trail of decisions during which that premise became modified repeatedly until it has come to mean today that children are the property of, and an adjunct to, their mothers, with most of those changes having taken place during the last three decades. She concluded by asking how it was possible to come from the beginnings of a doctrine with such noble intentions to where we are now.

I'm sorry for not being able to tell you the case reference of the hearing in the Court of the Lord Chancellor. I don't take short hand, and the organizers of the work shop did not deliver on the promise to make available the tapes that were made at the workshop. However, you may be able to do something with the lead. It is doubtful that the Court of the Lord Chancellor heard all that many cases during the 19th century. If Senator Cools found the case then it should be possible to find it again.

I tried to obtain a transcript of Senator Cools' presentation or a copy of Senator Anne C. Cools' notes pertaining to her speech, but her office told me that because the speech was not delivered in the Senate they could not make either available.

My notes on the Workshop on Family conflict are accessible at http://www.crosswinds.net/~fathersforlife/calgary.htm>.

--Walter Schneider

From: Catt To: Schneider <sheep_@telusplanet.net> 1oct00

Walter, The correct spelling is Poisoner. Not the only one among our civil servants, anxious to inflict maximum damage on the children of divorce. .... If you go to my website, www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/ you will find that I have already put up speeches by Anne Cools. It is clear that there is a very small number of socially responsible individuals in the world, including Anne Cools, Erin Pizzey and Melanie, who bother to do the study and research, and bravely speak and write the truth. (No coincidence really that Cools and Pizzey toured Canada together, and right now are together in the Caribbean at a conference.) They are up against the dead weight of anti-social layabouts, many, for instance Baroness Jay and Boateng, with socially destructive ideologies (except Jay's intelligence limits the scale and subtlety of her dogma. I notice even the London Daily Guardian does not fully stomach her. "Jay's bid for country credibility backfires", Guardian, 26sep00, p8. She is even too anti-social for the Guardian, who on 25sep00 published a "party manifesto" of their own to parallel those of Labour and Tory. It was totally radfem, except that on 26sep00 peterwasher@barclays.net pointed out that it did not adulate buggery enough to satisfy them.).

I have been trawling for the information in your email (below) for 10 or 15 years. So I am very grateful to you. How wonderful that the magnificent Canadian Senator Anne C Cools did the research.

On another matter, the massive response by the world's top experts when invited to speak at the 28oct00 London conference that I am organising, is awesome. Seven out of the world's top eight experts/contributors (by my judgement) will be speaking. Only Melanie Phillips is not speaking. See www.mankind.org.uk/ Tonight, Norman Dennis wrote that he felt honoured to be invited, and would come to speak. Ivor Catt 1oct00

From: Walter H. Schneider <sheep_@telusplanet.net>

Date: 03 October 2000 15:30

Ivor, Stephen Galvin pointed out that there is quite a bit more information about the history of the doctrine "In the best interest of the child.".

p5

Stephen wrote:

---Quote---

"The father is the person entitled by law to the custody of the child. If he abused that right to the detriment of the child, the court will protect that child. But there is no pretence that the child has been injured for want of nurture in any other respect. Then he, having a legal right to the custody of the child, and not having abused that right, is entitled to have it restored to him."

Lord Ellenborough, C J. Rex v De Manneville (1804) 5 East, 102 Eng Rep 1054 quoted in Joakimidis, J. Back to the Best Interests of the Child, Child Support Action Group Adelaide 1994 p.13.

Joakimidis goes on to recount the history of the 'tender years' doctrine which progressively eroded the presumption of the father being the natural caregiver for the child.

Stephen

---End quote---

The question now is whether that can be made the basis of a legal challenge. Is it that the law was subsequently broken repeatedly, or was that decision rightfully overturned?

If fundamental and "inalienable" rights mean anything, then it shouldn't be possible for the law to make a 180 degree turn, even if it took almost 200 year to complete it.

More must be done than to merely ask: "How did we get from there to where we are now?"

--Walter

From: ROGER ELDRIDGE <eldridgeandco@eircom.net> on 06 October 2000 07:04

How homosexuals have targeted the Boy Scouts of America from http://www.worldnetdaily.com/

Rape of a sacred trust

How pedophiles have targeted the Boy Scouts of America

Editor's note: The following report is excerpted from an in-depth exploration of pedophilia, homosexuality and the Boy Scouts of America in the October edition of WND's sister publication, the monthly WorldNet Magazine. Readers may subscribe to WorldNet at WND's online store.

By David M. Bresnahan 2000, WorldNetDaily.com, Inc.

"You shouldn't have done it. It ruined our lives," cried one of several boys from the back row of a Medina, Ohio, courtroom last week. Michael Maggy, 35, a former Boy Scout leader, had just pleaded guilty to rape and sexual battery, and the poignant comments from his victims were brought home by a sentence of life in prison issued by Medina County Common Pleas Judge Christopher J. Collier. "I know what I have done to you, "Maggy said to his scout victims, as reported in the Cleveland Plain Dealer. "I can't apologize enough." Confessing that he too had been sexually molested as a boy, Maggy said he had lacked the courage to seek help. "I did not get counseling or even talk about it. Look where it got me," he said.

Crafting 'gay' children.

Many homosexuals are attracted to young boys, they fantasize about young boys, they frequent websites about young boys, they cruise the streets for young boys, and they volunteer as Boy Scout leaders in an attempt to have sex with young boys, according to a world-renowned researcher and author. Dr. Judith Reisman, formerly a research professor at American University, veteran pornography researcher and expert witness before the attorney general's commission on pornography, is the author of "Kinsey: Crimes and Consequences."

Having extensively researched the homosexual lifestyle, Reisman and other experts have reached some disturbing conclusions. Contrary to the popular view that there is little crossover between homosexuality and pedophilia, she says homosexuals are anxious to recruit young boys -- a practice that is becoming easier thanks to sex education and "diversity programs" in schools that teach children to consider homosexuality as both acceptable and normal.

In one of the major cultural battlefronts of the year, the Boy Scouts of America has taken the legal challenges to it before the Supreme Court and won the right to deny avowed homosexuals entrance as adult leaders. Nevertheless, ever since the BSA's founding early last century, it has been plagued with a constant undercurrent of pedophile scout leaders preying on the vulnerable, trusting boys they "lead."

Greg Shields, Boy Scouts of America's national spokesman, says homosexuals cannot serve as examples to young boys because they do not live by the Scout Oath to be "morally straight." Although painfully aware of the problems BSA has had over the years of men preying on boys, Shields takes a somewhat corporate and elusive line in separating the organization's homosexual policy from its child sexual abuse policy.

"Unfortunately, child molestation can come from anyone. We are teaching boys character values. Everyone knows where we stand on this. We have never accepted homosexuals as leaders and we never will," said Shields. But Reisman says what 90 years of police blotter statistics prove -- that young boys are in real danger of sexual molestation, and that the BSA has sound reasons to ban homosexuals.

Reisman conducted two recent scientific studies that challenge the popular mantra of homosexual activists who insist that: 1) they are "born that way," 2) homosexuals make up 10 percent of the population, and 3) youths should be able to have sex at an early age.

"Crafting 'Gay' Children: An Inquiry into the Abuse of Vulnerable Youth Via Establishment Media and the School Room" and "Partner Solicitation Language as a Reflection of Male Sexual Orientation," are continuations of the work Reisman began with her study, "Kinsey: Crimes & Consequences." (Regarding her book, Charles E. Rice, professor of law at Notre Dame Law School, notes, "Dr. Reisman's study supports the conclusion that Alfred Kinsey's research was contrived, ideologically driven and misleading. Any judge, legislator or other public official who gives credence to that research is guilty of malpractice and dereliction of duty.")

Since the Supreme Court's June 28 decision in favor of the Boy Scouts, activist attacks on the 90-year-old organization have increased dramatically. Homosexual political organizations have gone into overdrive, lobbying and threatening corporate sponsors to discontinue their support; President Clinton has been urged to step down as honorary President of BSA; a few members of Congress even tried -- unsuccessfully -- to revoke the organization's honorary charter. And Clinton even signed an executive order, which was followed in lockstep by a Justice Department memo designed to evict the Boy Scouts from federal lands and facilities -- on the grounds that the organization illegally discriminates against homosexuals.

All this, in spite of the Supreme Court's favorable decision three months earlier. Although homosexual activists claim they are no more likely to sexually molest children than heterosexuals are, Reisman says research proves the opposite. "They're claiming that homosexuals are not looking to have sex with boys, yet you have this massive number of boys out there prostituting themselves. And how do you have all these Internet sites if they're not looking for boys? This is not heterosexual. By definition, when you're having sex with someone of your own sex, that's homosexual," Reisman said.

Based on data from a study of non-incarcerated child sex offenders, Gene G. Abel, M.D., has found that homosexuals "sexually molest young boys with an incidence that is occurring five times greater than the molestation of girls." A professor of psychiatry who has taught at several medical schools, including Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, Abel is currently affiliated with Emory University School of Medicine and Morehouse School of Medicine.

He has been a research scientist in the field of sexual violence for 25 years, and the National Institute of Mental Health has awarded him funding for six long-term studies to investigate sexual violence and to design new ways to stop it. Specifically, Abel's report provides data to show that, on average, 150.2 boys are molested per homosexual pedophile offender, whereas only 19.8 girls are molested per heterosexual pedophile offender.

Incredibly, homosexual offenders admitted between 23.4 and 281.7.

p6

acts of molesting boys. Reisman's research in "Crafting 'Gay' Children" determined that the total population of homosexual men in America was no more than 2 million in 1991. During the same year, "U.S. Population, Statistical Abstracts" show that 6-8 million boys under age 18 were sexually abused.

Meanwhile, the population of heterosexual men in the U.S. was approximately 86--88 million in 1991, and an estimated eight million girls were sexually abused that year. Based on the government's own statistics -- the "Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1992, Data on Boys and Girls," published by the U.S. Commerce Department -- Reisman cited the following for that year: Of 86 - 88 million heterosexual men, 9 percent of them victimized 8 million girls under age 18, which constitutes 25 percent of all girls. An uncertain percentage of the estimated 2 million homosexual men victimized 6-8 million boys, under age 18, amounting to 17 - 24 percent of all boys.

Therefore, considered in the aggregate, 3 to 4 boys are sexually molested per homosexual adult male. Only .09 girls are sexually molested per heterosexual adult male, which is to say that, on average, 1 in 11 heterosexual males victimizes a girl under 18. Within the child protection establishment, sexual abuse is defined simply as an adult having sex with a juvenile under age 18 -- whether "consensual" or not.

When dealing with children, "consensual" is not the legitimizing criterion it is for adults. Indeed, almost invariably, sexual predators defend their "loving" physical relationships with children as being "consensual," when in reality the seduction and manipulation of children -- resulting in their "consent" -- is both an art form and the stock in trade of pedophiles.

The Simon and Schuster book "Homosexualities," by Alan Bell, reports that 25 percent of homosexual men admit to having had sex with boys who are 16 or under. Further corroborating this well-hidden homosexual proclivity for targeting younger males are the following findings published in the Journal of the American Medical Association: 50 percent of male AIDS victims reported having sex with an adult male by the age of 16. 20 percent of male AIDS victims had sex with an adult male by age 10.

"The Advocate," a popular homosexual newsmagazine, conducted a survey of its readers. Of the 2,500 responses obtained, 21 percent admitted that an adult man committed a sexual act with them by the time they were 15. 'The ideal situation' Boy Scout camping trips provide a perfect setting for homosexuals to pursue their forbidden desires, according to Reisman, who added that any organization that provides opportunities for homosexuals to spend time with young boys will become a magnet for homosexual child molesters.

In fact, Justice Ignazio Ruvolo of the First District Court of Appeals in San Francisco recently ruled that the Boy Scouts of America should be held responsible for a Southern California scout's sexual molestation at the hands of a pedophile scout leader. Why? In making his case that the Scouting organization -- despite a comprehensive national program to prevent sexual abuse -- should have done even more to protect kids from pedophiles, the judge said, "It should be reasonably foreseeable to the Scouts that a child participating in Scouting might fall prey to a sexual predator."

Attorney Charles A. Bonner, representing the victim who had been molested back in 1991 by his assistant scoutmaster, Jorge Paz, was even more direct. He said BSA national leaders know that "the organization attracts pedophiles like a magnet attracts metal." Of all the various youth groups today, "the Boy Scouts provide the ideal situation" for men to find young boys to molest, according to Reisman. The BSA does all it can to protect boys from child molesters, says Shields.

Every "Boy Scout Manual" comes with an insert about child abuse placed in the front. Troops have a video to show to boys, entitled, "A Time to Tell," which teaches boys to recognize attempts to sexually molest them, to resist the attempt and report the offender. The BSA has strict rules designed to prevent child abuse of all kinds, said Shields. Rules include "Two-Deep Leadership," which requires a minimum of two adults to be present with boys at all times. Another basic rule is that adults may not be in the same tent as boys (except their own children). Shields told WorldNet that when the rules are followed, there are no problems. "Each incident (of abuse) took place when the leaders were not trained or the rules weren't followed," he said.

Despite the BSA training and rules, the incidents of reported child molestation have been on the rise. The scouting organization attributes the increase to greater awareness because of the training given to boys and to a record number of boys in the program -- about 5 million. BSA statistics and various media reports over the past 20 years show a near-tripling of sexual abuse cases -- from about 70 cases a year then to about 200 annually now. Reisman expressed concern that the BSA rules may not go far enough.

The ideal situation, she said, is for fathers to go on camping trips with their sons. Fathers should stay in tents with their own sons, and boys who are not related to them should not sleep in their tent. She recognized, however, that not all boys have a father to go with them. She also advised that young, single men should never be permitted to camp with boys, but that it would be ideal, rather, if leaders are married and have children participating in the program.

The 'helping hand'

In Gilbert Herdt's book, "Gay and Lesbian Youth," Douglas Feldman, a medical anthropologist and a member of the homosexual activist community, is quoted as saying, "These kids are our future and we must invest in them." Feldman states that teen-agers are "very susceptible to sexually transmitted diseases," and that sexually abused boys "have about a 1 in 4 chance of developing AIDS in approximately five years." Herdt speaks of adult male homosexuals as "coaches" and "guides" who should help young boys overcome their heterosexual "victim" status by "coming out" into homosexuality. Reisman blames the nation's public schools and lawmakers for granting various protections to such "coaches" and "guides" within the nation's schools.

"They teach confused children about tolerance, sexual diversity and such. They like to tell young boys that 'at least one in 10 of you are gay.' Anyone who objects is immediately labeled homophobic," she said. In his study, "The Role of Adult Advisors" (as quoted from Herdt's "Gay Culture in America"), homosexual advocate Frederick Lynch says, "What has not been brought out fully in some other coming-out studies is the role of the guide, teacher or 'helping hand' in either the signification state, the coming-out stage or both ... the often benign and helpful role that older, more experienced homosexual men play with regard to younger (males)." Reisman is concerned that educators have embraced the homosexual agenda and now encourage boys to have sex with each other at an early age.

One of the places such experimentation could easily take place is in a tent during a Boy Scout camping trip, she said. Boys who have been told that experimentation is acceptable may also be willing to accept the advances of an adult male or older boy, she added. "They tell these impressionable kids that if they feel different, confused, strange, or if they are questioning, that they may be gay," she said. "What child isn't confused at that age, anyway? These kids don't know what to think, and then they're told it's OK to experiment to find out."

Project 10

School programs like "Project 10" -- a nationally used public school curriculum which has been a prototype for other similar programs -- teaches students that 1 out of every 10 children is a homosexual. Without question, claims Reisman, such programs serve as a catalyst for the seduction and homosexual recruitment of young people.

She adamantly disputes the 1 in 10 claim, as do many other researchers. But she goes much further: Reisman blames the press for not exposing what she says is the core deception, one that began with "Sexual Behavior in the Human Male" by Alfred Kinsey in 1948. The text given to teens in the "Project 10" program is "One Teenager in 10." Reisman found that 38 percent of the short stories used in the text describe sexual activity between children and adults. One story begins: "I have been a lesbian since I was 12. I had.

p7

known my dance teacher for three years before she brought me out." The claims made in the 1948 Kinsey report --principally the claim that 1 in 10 people are homosexual -- have been used ever since both to legitimize homosexuality and to justify what increasingly amounts to open near-recruitment in the nation's schools.

The recent, widely publicized event at Tufts University in which youths as young as 14 were taught the finer points of "fisting" and other homosexual practices -- by Massachusetts state employees -- is typical. That particular event was "outed" and its participants rebuked only because a "mole" critical of the program attended it and taped the entire event, subsequently making the tape available to the news media. The media, however, never bothered to check Kinsey's methods or his data, says Reisman. And the burgeoning homosexual-rights movement, flexing its newfound muscle, used the Kinsey report as a battering ram to knock down society's traditional condemnation of homosexual behavior. "They simply continued, with the support of the media, to repeat and to desensitize [the public] over and over and over again, until finally, at a certain point, people believed what they were being told," said Reisman.

"Middle America never applied [the Kinsey report] to themselves, but their kids did. The kids believed it, and the kids believe it about their parents. "It happened in the '60s when the kids talked about their parents being a bunch of hypocrites, because allegedly their parents engaged in all these sexual peccadilloes. See, the children went to college and their professors told them, and of course, the professors were engaged in such sexual peccadilloes. So Mom and Dad got smeared with the same brush. The American public came to believe Kinsey because all the authorities were saying this was true. It took on a life of its own once it got underway," said Reisman.

The homosexual activist movement's strategy, she says, is classic -- basically, that if you repeat a lie often enough, people will end up believing it. Repeat often enough that an apple is an orange,and sooner or later people will not only believe that an apple is an orange, but will argue the point and help persuade others to the same viewpoint. "It took 50 years," Reisman concluded, "but here we are."

The preceding has been excerpted from WorldNet Magazine's October cover story. In the balance of this exclusive in-depth report: how pedophiles operate; how victims of pedophiles become victimizers; the Internet's hundreds of pedophile websites featuring boys in Scout uniforms; and the astonishing criminal fraud perpetrated by sex "pioneer" Alfred Kinsey.Readers may subscribe to WorldNet Magazine at WND's online store.

David M. Bresnahan is an investigative journalist for WorldNetDaily.com

(Below is an easy to see example of how anti-family feminists operate as censors in the media and suppresors of everything that might show their ideology to be groundless and noxious. Roger Eldridge, Co. Roscommon, Ireland, eldridgeandco@eircom.net)

Article from Daily Telegraph Sept 30th 2000 (re-written by Robert Whiston).

Annual breast screening is a "waste of resources"

-Robert Whiston

For the second time in two years cancer specialists are saying that the estimated £35m spent on breast screening women (in the UK) aged between 50 and 62 is a waste of money.

Arguments have long raged over whether the normal interval between screening for women of every 3 years is too long or should be annually. Now, the second European Breast Cancer Conference in Brussels has heard from Prof. roger Blamey that a study shows evidence to the contrary.

Prof. Blamey, of City Hospital, Nottingham, gave details to the conference of a study in England and Wales of a "normal" screening programme covering 76,000 women. Although smaller cancers were found in the annual screening there was no significant difference in outcomes or types of cancer.

With only a 2.5% variation, the conference heard that the "clear findings" were that the benefits of annual screening compared with triennial screening could not be justified on cost or survival rate terms. They were almost equal.

In March 1999, as we reported in Ill Eagle, cancer specialist and founder of the Breast Screening Programme, Prof. Michael Baum, said "it is now redundant" and "no longer represents an effective use of money" (Evening Standard 1/3/99).

In a letter (dated 29/6/99) Baroness Hayman of the Dept of Health confirmed to us that there were 2 Beast Screening Programmes (BSP) for women. The one for women in the 50-64 age groups cost £35m pa.

The NHS funded Cervical Cancer Screening Programme (CCSP) checks 4 million women aged 20 - 64 pa. The CCSP costs an estimated £132m pa. and treats 3,900 case pa and prevents 800 deaths pa (again all official estimates not from the Dept but from the National Audit Office). Translated this means the screening cost of checking each of the 4m women is £33 each.

Or put another way the cost of treating the 3,900 cases found is a whopping £33,864 per woman / pa. Compare that with the derisory £4m recently gifted" by Gov't for prostate cancer (£4m divided by 10,000 deaths = £400 for each dead man who could have been treated or survived).

The Separation Organisation

A new website

(www.separation.org.uk) is soon to be launched to provide support for people going through separation and divorce. This site is different because it is not controlled by a law firm. The Separation Organisation was founded by John Foley as a place where people could get useful help and advice without being drawn into the adversarial legal route. John has spent many years mentoring distressed men and women who have been affected by family breakdown. Members of the site will be able to discuss their experiences and share information online. There is also a database evaluating family lawyers. "Some lawyers might be uncomfortable" admits John, "but the voice of the user must be heard in this age of consumer information", he says.

Killer who refused parole dies

- Oliver Wright,

Times, 10oct00, p10

A convicted murderer who refused parole for 12 years in an attempt to clear his name died yesterday, six weeks after his case was referred to the Court of Appeal.

Harold Williams, 68, who had spent 23 years in prison for murder of his former lover, died in hospital in Burton upon Trent after a stroke at the weekend.

Hid fight to clear his name was supported by David Hallam, a former Hereford MEP .... the Criminal Cases Review Commission .... said yesterday that there was nothing to stop Williams being declared innocent posthumously.

[I wrote in The Hook and the Sting on www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk that those who refuse to admit guilt serve their full term, whereas the guilty get parole after half their sentence. This has relevance to the family courts, where false allegations are known to be merely a technical device to validate the expropriation of fathers and husbands. Lawyers who connive to expropriate fathers prefer to pretend that they are expropriating villains. It is important to keep a watertight separation between the family and the criminal courts. - Ed]

ManKind October 2000 Conference

For over thirty years, the social policies of successive British governments have failed to stem the tide of decay and disintegration.

We have never been richer; never more fully employed; never more able to enjoy the good things in life. Yet why are we still so apprehensive ?

The received wisdom is that men are inherently violent. But are such men born violent, or has our society made them so? Go to the centre of an English town on a Saturday night; the picture you will see is one of drunkenness, aggression and violence. The perpetrators are nearly always young men.

"The Age of Violent Young Men" is a conference that aims to discover and answer these questions.

p8

[pictures]

October 2, 2000, saw the implentation of the Human Rights Act in Britain. Now we will se what scalliwags like Sloss get up to.

p9

[Norman Dennis's talk to our conference, see my website - Ed.]

p10

p11

p12

Come to our 28oct00 conference to hear the rest of Norman's talk. He made a great impression on me seven years ago when he spoke to the previous ManKind conference. Aged 69, Norman, a Reader at Newcastle University, lived and researched in the age long before radfem propaganda and fraudulent "research" corrupted our knowledge base. He is our route back to healthier times. - Ivor Catt, Editor.

Ill Eagle 12, dec00

p1

Sex under Sixteen?

Family Youth Concern's autumn issue of Family Bulletin discusses their largest research project, a detailed and comprehensive study of the attitudes towards sexual relationships of over 2,000 young people aged 13-15. Sex Under 16? is priced at £15.00, obtainable from fameduc@aol.com or 020 74015480. They also tall us that The Sex and Relationships Guidance is obtainable free from DfEE Publications, 0845 6022 260.

Gay Adoption

- Ben Summerskill,

Observer, 1oct00, p1

Children's charities are targetting gay and lesbian couples as adoptive parents in a bid to solve Britain's crisis of children in care. .... a spokesman for the Catholic Media Office said: 'The only ideal to which we should aspire is a family uinit consisting of a man and a woman.' ....

A cruel prejudice

Blair must fight for gay adoption

- Leader, Observer, 1oct00, p28

In Channel 4 .... a cross-section of .... twentysomethings turned on one of their number as he trotted out the claim that homosexuality was connected with paedophilia. [See Ill Eagle 8, p4; 10, p2; 11, p5.] It should serve as a stark warning for Conservatives that anti-gay intolerance may no longer wash with electors under 30.

Comment

- From Ill Eagle 10, p2

See when the ignorant Portsmouth demonstrators learn that 35% of paedophiles are homosexual! You ain't seen nothin yet. Wait for the marches on our rather gay Cabinet. Let us analyse the present PC madness. The Man on the Clapham Omnibus knows that to avoid the charge of bigotry he must adulate buggery and other perversions that his betters say he should welcome as a necessary feature of a more liberal society. On the other hand, his betters (excluding Tatchell) tell him that paedophilia is a perversion. If he is ever told that, although less than 2% of the male population are buggers [note 1], 35% of paedophiles are drawn from that 2% [note 2] - he will smell a rat. He is most afraid of his children being buggered.

The leaderless demonstrations in Portsmouth are a forerunner of the big backlash resulting from an Establishment which promotes contradictory, ludicrous and unsustainable propaganda. - Ed

Note 1. K Wellings et al., Sexual Behaviour in Britain, Penguin, 1994, p183.

Note 2. Dr T Stammers (quoting K Freund), FYC bulletin Autumn 97, from fameduc@apol.com

- From Ill Eagle 10, p2

Mankind 'helpline '

Male victims of

Domestic Violence

telephone

01775- 840501

for free, immediate

and confidential advice.

The Gvardian and Equal Opportvnities

The Gvardian should be congratulated for its commitment to Equal Opportvnities. However, their reforms may be incomplete.

I will give a personal cheque for £5 to the first reader who spots a male heterosexual journalist working for The Gvardian. (No formal proof required.) I plan to Name and Shame the deviant in a future edition of Ill Eagle. - Ed

Last month, there were no takers. Does this prove that the Gvardian is completely eqval? Or would a claimant betray his bigotry by suggesting that the Gvardian illegally deviates from full equality of employment opportunity between women and gays? My offer, made in the last issue, is still open, but raised to £10. - Ed. [Now, nov00, raised again, to £15.]

From Ill Eagle 8, p4. There is one Gvardian/Observer stable. Also see Male View oct/dec99, p3.

When the gay rights campaigners go too far

- John Humphreys, Sunday Times, 20mar00, sect. 1, p19

[Even though a man, he is allowed to publish because he shows such ignorance. {See Ill Eagle 11 p2 and my website on HIV and the rest;

www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/} However, his commentary on excesses in the Gvuardian is useful. - Ed]

.... 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 ...."

[Homophobes work for the Sunday Times. Gays work for the Guardian/Observer. - Ed]

To Elizabeth Fowler, Censor-in-Chief, St. Albans Quaker P. Meeting, 33 Camp View Road, St. Albans AL1 5LN.

cc Convener of Elders.

Dear Elizabeth, Our conference, "The Age of Violent Young Men; Causes and Remedies", at Friends House, 28oct00, went very well. (Details on www.mankind.org.uk) You are welcome to buy the set of five audiotapes for £10, so as to hear our speaker Patricia Morgan, whose book you blocked from our St. Albans Meeting Library. The letter of invitation to speak, (published in Ill Eagle 10,) so that they could explain why the conference subject is banned from the Quaker Universe of Discourse, was declined by Quaker leaders Rowlands, Sturge, and many others.

A further opportunity to explain the Reconstructed Quaker's position will occur at our next conference at Friends House, in the Main Hall, on 26may01. The subject of the conference will be "Censorship". I shall be very grateful if you accept my invitation to speak. It is important that, for balance, the censor's point of view be aired.

Invitations will be sent to leading Quakers at Friends House, but I feel that you should also be invited to speak. The content of your 25 minute talk will be of your choosing, but you may like to familiarise yourself with the interests of ManKind, see our website www.mankind.org.uk

Ivor Catt

Why little boys are not sex offenders

- Dea Birkett,

Guardian, G2, 21nov00, p5

Yesterday the NSPCC published a report which should horrify every adult .... You should be afraid. You should be very afraid. But the fear should not be of our children, or those of our next-door neighbour, .... We should be afraid that childhood has become the latest landscape to be invaded by often misrepresented statistics .... let's not try and make cheap points for our own ends and not the well-being of damaged children ....

Depression Alliance

Working for people with depression. 020 7633 0559 www.depressionalliance.org

p2

The truth will come out

- Stephen Wright and Alison Boshoff,

Mail, 28nov00, p5

.... Mick Hucknall was cleared of a rape allegation yesterday, only a day after he was accused .... a friend of Tony Blair who has donated £50,000 to the Labour Party, [he] is the third music personality to be arrested by Surrey police in a month.

Paul Weller was interviewed following an allegation of rape but a week later police said they had dropped the case.

The former leader of the Jam called for a change in the law after being cleared. ....

Last week millionaire record producer Jonathan King was arrested and charged with child sex offences.

He will face court at Staines on Thursday.

Access Protest

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.

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

"[U.S.] Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Executive

Office for Weed and Seed January 5-7, 1998

<http://www.ncjrs.org/txtfiles/172210.txt>)

Economic Shifts That Will Impact Crime Control and Community Revitalization

Cicero Wilson

As we approach the year 2000, the United States is nearing the end of a prolonged period of prison construction. The growth of violent crime and sentencing reforms in the 1980s and 1990s have led to record numbers of incarcerated adults and juveniles. ....

Trend Four: There is an Increase in the Number of Fatherless Children, Who Are More Prone to Delinquency and Other Social Pathologies As the incidence of father absence grows, community disintegration and crime, especially youth crime, will continue to grow. Between 1960 and 1990, the percentage of children living apart from their biological fathers increased from 17 to 36 percent. By the year 2000, half of the Nation's children may not have their fathers at home. While the heroic efforts of single women to raise their children alone are laudable, the economic and social requirements for raising healthy and productive children are hard to achieve by poor single parents alone. Reengaging fathers in the economic and social life of their children is an important but overlooked aspect of addressing poverty, community revitalization, and crime. Many of our problems in crime control and community revitalization are strongly related to father absence. For example: --Sixty-three percent of youth suicides are from fatherless homes. --Ninety percent of all homeless and runaway youths are from fatherless homes. --Eighty-five percent of children who exhibit behavioral disorders are from fatherless homes. --Seventy-one percent of high school dropouts are from fatherless homes. --Seventy percent of youths in State institutions are from fatherless homes. --Seventy-five percent of adolescent patients in substance abuse centers are from fatherless homes. --Eighty-five percent of rapists motivated by displaced anger are from fatherless homes. Without fathers as social and economic role models, many boys try to establish their manhood through sexually predatory behavior, aggressiveness, or violence. These behaviors interfere with schooling, the development of work experience, and self-discipline. Many poor children who live apart from their fathers are prone to becoming court involved. Once these children become court involved, their records of arrest and conviction often block access to employment and training opportunities. Criminal histories often lock these young persons into the underground or illegal economies. Behaviors related to father absence that directly contribute to the growth of welfare and the difficulties in creating jobs in communities include: --Sexually predatory behavior that results in out-of-wedlock births. (Most teen mothers are impregnated by older men, not teen boys.) --Domestic violence that occurs as a result of arguments over enforcement of child support payments. --Welfare pimping, which is the practice of men collecting part of the welfare check from girlfriends or the mothers of their out-of-wedlock children. Some pimps collect from five or six mothers on welfare per month. Innovative father engagement programs have had an impact on child rearing, family economic stability, and gang involvement. Unless community revitalization and crime reduction programs begin to address the need for father engagement programs and services, the cycle of poverty and crime could continue virtually unabated.

Letter:-

Father's Manifesto, CaliforniaUSA

Subject: Re: Daily Mail

Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000

Hello, Robert,

I have been following your excellent posts. You are right on target, so we surely hope that you pursue this to the very end (Re: Daily Mail).

Many things have happened since our last email. While our rape data hasn't been published in the mainstream media, the word has really rotten around. We all greatly appreciate the excellent research you provided in that area. We wouldn't understand half the problem without it.

We understand much more about how powerful the mainstream media is and why it pursues its anti-Christian agenda. This is as shocking to the senses as the rape and incarceration data, so your level head might discover if and how we went wrong.

We have been had Robert, big time. These were such simple facts to verify but nobody ever bothered to do that simple thing for so long. It's really embarrassing.

I really look forward to your feedback.

Sincerely, John Knight.

A slow-footed stockman called Beales

Slipped up with a bull at his heels;

When trying to rise

He got quite a surprise,

Learning something of what a cow feels.

Cyril Mountjoy

p3

Editorial

Beyond Dull Care: An informal guide to the Residential Care of Children

by Ben Vincent

Home Office Advisory Council in Child Care No. 1, H.M.S.O. 1968

"[Ben Vincent] writes with a unique experience of, and insight into, the topic with which he deals." - Preface

p94 "Touch-hunger in under-fives must be fed by soothing cuddles and exciting romps and kisses and butterfly-kisses. I remember the anger of a foster-mother who told me once, 'Do you know, Mr. Vincent, they hadn't even taught my little Barney how to kiss when I got him from St. Theresa's.'

"But touch-hunger is terribly hard to cope with in older children .... Touch-hungry girls will just have to do without the baby treatment they want until they are engaged or married. A man who is conscious of a potentially homosexual situation must also keep his hands off .... but most can jolly along a touch-hungry lad of 10 - 14 wiithout the slightest harm, .... only in public .... Do not let the fear .... cause you to deny adolescents the comfort of putting an arm around you .... But gaily, promiscuously and in public."

A deep chasm, built by sexually dysfunctional radical feminists, exploiting their virtually total control of the media for decades, separates us from the attitude shown above by my late mentor Ben Vincent in the 1960's. I hope some member of ManKind will further investigate the writings in this HMSO series. We have to rediscover the ambience of those days, before all was comprehensively poisoned by radfems with their corrupted attitude to life in general as well as family relationships in particular. A copy of Ben Vincent's book is in the library of Friends House, London, opposite Euston Station.

Quarter of men accused are black

- John Steele,

Telegraph, 25oct00, p1

More than a quarter of people accused of crimes in London, ranging from mugging to burglary and fraud, are black, according to new police figures. ....

The black population of the capital is thought to be no more than 10%.

.... these figures, compiled by Scotland Yard .... show for the first time that black people are accused of all common offences in disproportionate numbers. ....

London's overall non-white population, of which black people are only a part, is now put at 26%.

[In Ashton Gibson's 1986 book, The Unequal Struggle, pub. Centre for Caribbean Studies, p83, 65% of West Indian children did not have their biological father living with them as part of the household. In contrast, almost all the Asian children who completed the 26% above, who persistently failed to commit crime, lived with their fathers. - Ed]

SMFs are wealthier, but still breed more criminals

Try to put yourself into the mindset of the anti-family radfem. She, and poodle-men like Martin Bright, must believe that, since poverty (not fatherlessness) is the cause of crime, then criminals must come from the lowest tenth of society in terms of income.

We know that criminality concentrates in children from Single Mother Families (SMF).

The above two paragraphs, showing that SMFs, not poverty, causes crime, came from Ill Eagle 10, aug00, p3. Elsewhere, I have written that the initiative to increase the conviction rate for rape, which in ten years has fallen from 15% to 8% , is a racist attack by the white sisterhood against the black brotherhood. This is because perhaps half of the prisoners in U.S. jails are black. Couple this with the fact, drawn from Betty Moxon of the Home Office as if drawing her teeth, that no one in government has as part of their remit the alleged problem of false allegations (see my website www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/ ) Add that police will find it much more easy to frame the child of a SMF, which lacks family support, into jail.

I now present another interesting statistical package. It is somewhat suppressed (although see previous article) that half of the muggers in London are black. Even though suppressed, the statistic which is even more suppressed is that criminals are nurtured by single mothers, and a very heavy proportion of blacks are the product of single mother families. Thus, the true statistic will be that the vast majority of muggers come from SMFs. It is racist propaganda to suppress this fact, and so give credence to the less suppressed fact that the majority of muggers are black. They are not black; they are brought up by single mothers. Here is a good instance where PC suppression is racist. I challenge Stinko to do this research with the millions of govt money she receives (for her vrp) to research into violence. However, she disapproves of objective research, which is called "patriarchal" in the 1988 book she wrote a chapter for. "Feminist research" would not be able to cope with the subtle points outlined above.

For the help of a sluggish radfem intellect, I will end by saying that it is unlikely that a black who was brought up by both parents would become a mugger. Thus, he would mug, not because of his colour, but because of his upbringing. I do hope Boateng is bright enough to understand the point I am making. He is moving our way. At present, he thinks that a father should have supervised contact with his children. We have to hope that he moves further, towards a full comprehension of the role of a father in bringing up his children to be law-abiding. Surely, not by supervised contact for two hours under the watchful eye of a radfem social worker!

Social Workers

John Hutton M.P., of the Dept. of Health, responsible for Social Care policy, has expressed concern over the low standard of qualification required to practice as a Social Worker, moreover that 80% of those engaged in the caring industry had no qualifications whatsoever.

Concern was also expressed at the low status of social work, but what is remarkable is that the recognised qualification in the U.K. for social workers, the Diploma in Social Care Work, is not recognised by the European Union.

Until recently, this diploma was also the recognised qualification for Probation Officers, but it has been replaced by the Diploman in Probation Studies - old wine in new bottles. Entry qualifications into the Probation Service never did demand undergraduate qualifi-cations. Indeed, for those under the age of 25, the basic requirement was 5 GCSEs with 'on the job' training and study. For those over the age of 25, no GCSEs were required, let alone any formal qualifications. Acceptance was based on an interview, the criteria being life experiences and ideology.

For sure, those who subscribe to Political Correctness are in, while those who hold strong family values are regarded as being eccentric, and are most definitely out.

The 'on the job' training and study leading to the Diploma in Aocial Work clearly demonstrates how unqualified such people are, given that other countries in Europe regard the diploma as insignificant.

Yet it is these people who make decisions about other people's lives; reports on defendants in criminal proceedings, reports on prisoners to the Parole Board, and most significantly, reports in Family Court Proceedings.

You do not find too many Conservative voters in either Social Work or Probation, and most certainly never in the Court Welfare Service. Like psychologists, the Probation Service is self-regulating and self-serving. It would be easier to fly to the moon than to have a complaint against any Probation Officer of Court Welfare Officer upheld.

p4

There has always been uneasiness, certainly among lawyers, about complaints against the police being investigated by other police officers, yet this is precisely how the probation and Court Welfare Services operate. Many decisions made by them can often have far longer far-reaching consequences than any complaint against a police officer.

As a convicted wife killer, if a prison Probation Officer tells me that I have a problem with women, it must be taken as fact. To challenge the assertion amounts to being bombarded with psychobabble. The world that springs to mind is 'denial'. If I attempt to explain the circumstances leading up to the murder, I am accused of rationalizing the offence. I can then expect to be 'prescribed' a dose of courses in Thinking Skills and Social Skills programmes. Failure to undertake them can result in the prolongement oÛ¥-/@ -€Ç

~‰·âjâj.....

.àî=Œ6ztztztztfàuþ[1]ztÞxX6y(^y^y^y^y^y^y^y^y[1]`y`y`y`y`y`y‑±}4å}%~y3

---

.~y~yd�;**********************************

Ill Eagle 7, jan/feb00

ISSN 1466-9005

p1

The Poodle-Man Archetype

"Learning to relate for me at least, so far been tutored by females. It is all seen as a type of therapy by self-assumed therapists. I put a new slant on the word therapist - THE - RAPIST.

People who believe that they know what is best for others are denying other people's truths. Whenever our own truth is invalidated, we experience the greatest fear we can ever know, the annihilation of ourselves. Power is the right to have your definition of reality prevail over all other people's definition of reality, even where you know that your argument is flawed, or where facts prove the contrary.

The radfems have clearly learnt from this, and, within their politically correct industry, they have many supporters and sympathizers in the Court Welfare and Probation Service, services that seem to rely less on academic achievements and qualifications and more on radfem and politically correct agendas.

Charles Hanson, nov00

Shelter in a storm

Donna Laframboise,

Jeff Vinnick, National Post

16dec99

[Solid evidence, previously pointed out in Ill Eagle 5, oct99, that radfems, and now the rest of society, are too deeply disturbed to properly consider the needs of children. - Ed]

Sandra Cliffe thought she was doing her job as a women's shelter worker when she reported a suspected child abuser. Her co-workers disagreed

Sandra Cliffe recently quit her job at Yew Transition House: "I've been treated like a skunk at a picnic."

A year ago this week, Sandra Cliffe, an employee of a British Columbia women's shelter, followed her conscience. She contacted child protection authorities with concerns that a nine-year-old girl staying at Yew Transition House was being emotionally neglected and abused by her mother.

On medical leave since then, Cliffe recently submitted her resignation. "I've been treated like a skunk at a picnic," she says, "even though, by law, if I believe a child is being abused I'm obligated to report it."

The shelter, which receives nearly $300,000 a year from the British Columbia government, distributes flyers describing itself as a "safe place for women and children." Among the list of services provided by the shelter, according to these flyers, is "support and advocacy for children."

But Cliffe, who worked 20 hours a week at Yew House for more than four years, says this is little more than lip service. Because many of her co-workers were hardline feminists, she says, a child's needs took a back seat.

This isn't the only time the quality of care children receive in women's shelters has been in the news. In 1997, five-week-old Jordan Heikamp died of starvation despite the fact that his mother, Renee, was then a resident of Anduhyaun, a Toronto shelter.

In the B.C. case, a woman, who by law cannot be named in order to protect the privacy of her child, arrived at Yew House in Sechelt, a community on the Sunshine Coast, on Oct. 9, 1998. She gave the shelter fake names for her and her daughter.

Cliffe says the pair turned up after another shelter, Nanaimo's Haven House, called to see if Yew House had any openings. She says shelter staff learned that the woman and her daughter had stayed at Haven House for an extended period, and before that had been housed by Rape Relief, a Vancouver agency.

Unlike the women-support workers who were the majority of her colleagues, Cliffe's job as a child-support worker was to observe, interact with and counsel children who have witnessed or experienced abuse. As the mother of a son the same age as the woman's daughter, Cliffe says her concerns developed early.

"We made cookies one day. We got out the cookbook, and I said, 'Here's the recipe right here,' and I ran my finger down it. She couldn't read the word 'egg.' "

Indeed, the girl had never been to school. Although her mother claimed to be home-schooling her, a child protection social worker would later tell a B.C. judge, "The child is unable to read and write." The social worker reported that the child had rarely seen a doctor, had been compelled to adopt four different aliases since leaving California and was highly anxious. "If she feels she gives out too much information, she freezes and stops talking."

Despite the fact that Yew House has a 30-day maximum-stay policy, the woman -- who claimed her daughter had been sexually abused by her former husband -- remained in residence well into December, 1998. Cliffe's written statement to child protection authorities notes that, during those two months, the woman prohibited staff from even taking her daughter for a walk.

The girl has "no independence, no voice," reads the report. Her mother "has denied her child the opportunity and means to develop at an age appropriate level ... She has demonstrated to me a defensive, hostile attitude when confronted with [the girl's] unmet needs. I have never witnessed her hug, touch or have any physical contact or display any outward affection towards her child."

Cliffe says she discussed her concerns with her supervisor and repeatedly raised them at weekly staff meetings. It was during these discussions, she says, that she learned the woman was on the run from the law after kidnapping her child in California. (An Orange County arrest warrant was issued in 1994.)

Yew House did not return calls from the National Post. When asked why the shelter would assist a fugitive, Cliffe replies: "They are staunch feminists who believe what a woman says with no questions asked. So this woman says one sentence -- she claims the father was sexually abusing this child -- and they believe it."

The RCMP's Missing Children's Registry later said there was no basis to the sex abuse allegation, adding this was the second occasion on which the woman had kidnapped her daughter in the midst of an acrimonious custody battle.

The woman has also had her problems with Canadian Immigration. Arrested in March, 1998, following the expiration of her visitor's visa, a warrant was issued for her arrest when she failed to show up for a hearing. After coming to the attention of authorities last December, she applied for refugee status, forfeited a $4,000 bond, and went AWOL once again. At the moment, she is the subject of yet another immigration warrant.

By early December of last year, Cliffe says she had seen enough at the shelter. Even if the child had been molested, she says, there was no excuse for how she was being treated.

Many of Cliffe's co-workers held a different view. When she told them she was going to alert child protection authorities, the shelter convened an emergency staff meeting on the morning of Dec. 14 in an attempt to dissuade Cliffe from making the call she placed that afternoon.

"They got me in on Monday morning and spent three and a half hours taking the skin off my bones." According to Cliffe, they shouted, banged on the table, swore

p5

at her and declared their intention to help the woman escape.

"I was asked, 'How dare you pass judgment on this woman? This woman is saying she's educating this child. Who are you to put your middle-class values on her?'

"They were saying: 'If you make this child protection report you're going to send this woman to jail and you're going to send this child back to be sexually abused. Who in the f--- do you think you are?' "

Cliffe left the meeting (which occurred off-site), returned to the shelter and made her report. "I phoned Child Protection and I was sobbing at that point," she remembers. When three of her co-workers arrived back at the shelter, she felt it was best to leave.

"I didn't feel safe. My knees were knocking. I felt physically unsafe after what they did to me.

"They were all sitting by the door. When I walked through them, my boss said to me: 'What have you done?' I did my job. I don't feel I did anything that any one of them shouldn't have done."

When the authorities arrived at the shelter shortly afterward, the woman and her daughter were indeed gone. At that point, the RCMP became involved, catching up with the pair at a bus station. Immediately taken into foster care, the girl was returned to California soon afterward.

Despite having told the shelter she had no ID and therefore needed help cashing money orders, nine fake IDs were found in the woman's possession.

Cliffe says that although the woman was sent $10,000 (US) by a relative during her Yew House stay, she wrote letters to local churches asking for financial help so she could flee to New Zealand. Cliffe says a number of churches wrote cheques for hundreds of dollars to Yew House, which then turned the money over to the woman.

"She got around 12 or 15 hundred bucks from the churches in this community."

Despite the fact that it distributes millions to the province's 85 women's shelters each year, the B.C. Ministry of Women's Equality remains untroubled by the behaviour of the Yew House staff in this instance.

Although this woman is hardly the first on the run from the law to seek refuge in a women's shelter, the province has no explicit policy on this matter. Terry Harrison, a women's ministry spokeswoman, says, "That kind of level of detail is not the kind of thing you would see in policies or protocols." Shelters are merely told to obey all the laws of the land, she says.

The ministry says it does not need to conduct its own investigation -- it has never interviewed Cliffe regarding her experiences. Even the fact that the employees of Yew House refused to talk to the RCMP leaves the women's ministry unconcerned.

"That is not something that's our responsibility," says Harrison. "That's between the police and Yew House."

Corporal Danny Willis of the Sechelt RCMP detachment says that while a decision was made during the past month not to pursue charges, he says this doesn't mean Yew House's behaviour is acceptable.

"Charges aren't always the best way to deal with some [matters]," he says. The fact that a group of people were involved (thus making it more difficult to determine individual responsibility), in addition to the dollars required to fly U.S. authorities up for a court case, influenced the decision. "It was probably more to the cost factor than anything else that it was not carried through," he says.

A criminal prosecution shouldn't be necessary, says Willis, for the women's ministry "to recognize that there was a problem with what happened and it needs to be corrected."

As a taxpayer, never mind a police officer, he says, he expects the women's ministry to be "stepping in and saying, 'Whoa, there's a problem here. We're going to have to review [Yew House's] contract and decide whether we're going to renew it.' "

Cliffe says that, after placing the fateful call, it became impossible for her to return to Yew House. "I loved my job, and I was good at my job. But the bottom line is I can't work for such an organization. These women are educated in abuse issues. How come no other transition house did anything to help this child?"

Cliffe says she doesn't want to be viewed as a victim. But a year later, her family is struggling financially while everything's apparently business as usual at Yew House.

"I teach my children to stand up and tell the truth," says Cliffe. "But they're going without because I haven't had an income.

"What message is this sending? You stand up and be honest and you'll be punished?"

Lies of revenge put husband in a prison cell

- Frances O'Shea,

The Australian, 10feb00

When Christine Campbell thought her de facto husband was sleeping with her sister, she decided on revenge.

The mother-of-two, 20, called police saying Troy Hall, 19, had beaten her at their home.

She repeated the story after police charged Hall with assault, showing bruises she alleged he inflicted by kicking her in the head and attempting to choke her in their inner-Newcastle flat.

Hall went before Newcastle Court on January 18 and pleaded not guilty to the charge, but he was convicted and sentenced to two months' jail.

Justice, it appeared, had been done that is until Ms Campbell confessed to police on Monday that she had made the whole thing up.

Hall, who had already spent almost three weeks behind bars, was released immediately after she made a retraction.

Her de facto's conviction on the assault charge was quashed.

But Campbell has now been charged with public mischief and will appear in Newcastle Local Court on February 28.

According to a statement tendered to the court, Campbell admitted she had told the lie as revenge for Hall sleeping with her sister.

Campbell said bruising she had shown police at the time had actually been sustained in a fight with her sister and not Hall.

"I thought he had slept with my sister but after Troy was sent to jail I found out that wasn't true," she told police.

She told police that after she made up with her sister, she had a change of heart.

Police had been called to the couple's Darby St unit on October 20 last year after a report of an assault.

Campbell told the officers they had argued about Hall sleeping with her sister and he then assaulted her. She said after the assault Hall left the flat.

Police found him several blocks away at a park and eventually charged him with the assault.

Hall did not appear at his first court appearance but telephoned the court to say he had problems.

On the next appearance, the magistrate convicted him of the assault.

Hall arrived at court the following day and was sentenced to two months' jail.

He then lodged an appeal against the sentence and was brought to Newcastle court on Monday to apply for bail pending the appeal. While he was in the court cells, Campbell admitted her lie to police.

"I know now what I did was very wrong," Campbell told police.

She said she had thought Hall would only get an AVO and did not think he would go to jail.

Campbell has been with Hall for the past four years. She said her former partner was now living with his mother on the central coast.

She said although they were separated she still hoped for a reconciliation.

"Troy still had another five weeks to go," she said.

"He said he was scared in jail and was so glad to get out. I just want it all behind me now."

A public mischief conviction can carry a hefty fine or a jail sentence.

p6

Cools on False Accusations in Canada

[My editorial in the next issue of Ill Eagle will explain how I see the Cools speech as finally sorting out the jigsaw. Clue: "adversarial or inquisitorial" - Ed]

Debates of the Senate (Hansard)

2nd Session, 36th Parliament,

Volume 138, Issue 29

Thursday, February 17, 2000

The Honourable Rose-Marie Losier-Cool, Speaker pro tempore

THE SENATE

Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Cools, seconded by the Honourable Senator Milne, for the second reading of Bill S-9, to amend the Criminal Code (abuse of process).-(Honourable Senator Cools).

Hon. Anne C. Cools: Honourable senators know that I have studied a terrible and pernicious heart of darkness that has developed in our court system, being the use of false accusations in civil justice. This is the mischief of litigating parties, usually mothers, suddenly within the context of divorce and within child custody proceedings falsely accusing the other party, usually fathers, of the sexual abuse of their own children.

These false allegations are often made with the overt or covert complicity of their lawyers. They are a lethal weapon in the business of parental alienation.

They are a tool for achieving sole custody of children and creating fatherlessness.

Bill S-9 addresses the serious social and legal problems surrounding the employment of false accusations by parties and their counsel as an instrument to defeat adversaries in court proceedings. It would enact the principle that such willful use of false accusations in civil justice is an abuse of process. Bill S-9 would amend the Criminal Code, Part IV, entitled "Offences Against the Administration of Law and Justice," being sections 118 to 149. Particularly, Bill S-9 will amend that subset of these sections entitled "Misleading Justice" by adding two new sections, 135 and 135.1. Bill S-9 will make the willful use of false accusations in judicial proceedings an offence against the administration of justice, an offence of misleading justice, and will augment the other related sections, including perjury and the obstruction of justice.

Honourable senators, Bill S-9 had been Bill S-4 in 1996 and then Bill S-12 in 1998. Both bills passed second reading here unanimously and were referred to Senate committees for study, where they were when Parliament was dissolved in 1997 and prorogued in 1999. I spoke to Bill S-4 twice, on March 26 and on October 28, 1996. I spoke to Bill S-12 on March 26, 1998. In addition, on July 13, 1995, I also spoke on these false accusations in my inquiry on the Ontario Civil Justice Review and again on November 23, 1995, in my inquiry on the Hill v. Church of Scientology Supreme Court of Canada decision.

In addition, the 1998 Special Joint Committee of the Senate and the House of Commons on Child Custody and Access heard of countless cases of false accusations of child sexual abuse against parents and grandparents in civil justice in divorce and custody cases.

Honourable senators, on May 20, 1998, a witness, psychologist Dr. Brian Hindmarch, appeared before the special joint committee. Speaking of false accusations of child sex abuse against good fathers, Dr. Hindmarch said at page 26:57 of the committee proceedings:

In the majority of the cases where an allegation of sexual abuse arises in the context of an open custody assessment, you have a father who has never had any history of sexual aberration...and has never been in trouble with the law or anything else. In the context of an acrimonious custody battle, he is then accused of sometimes the most heinous and rarest, from a psychopathological perspective, of sexual abuse allegatioÛ¥-/@ -€Ç

~‰·âjâj.....

.àî=Œ6ztztztztfàuþ[1]ztÞxX6y(^y^y^y^y^y^y^y^y[1]`y`y`y`y`y`y‑±}4å}%~y3

---

.~y~yd�;**********************************

Ill Eagle 7, jan/feb00

ISSN 1466-9005

p1

The Poodle-Man Archetype

"Learning to relate davits and with the full support of their solicitors...However, there should be some means by which more common sense and sensitivity could be injected into these situations by lawyers.... In order to "win", there is a propensity to enshrine on paper and for the public record, issues and allegations which, when read later, no doubt are psychologically traumatic to the children involved. The bland acceptance of such inflammatory material by lawyers is unacceptable. A heightened level of sensitivity...attention to the principle of the child's best interests...should be stressed in the legal profession.

In his testimony, Dr. Hindmarch went directly to the important question of lawyers' involvement in false accusations within divorce and child custody proceedings. He told the committee at page 26:53:

Lawyers often will allow or encourage sometimes the most inflammatory of allegations to be included in affidavits.

Honourable senators, Bill S-9 addresses the role of lawyers in the use and advancement of false allegations in civil justice by creating three new offences in the Criminal Code. It would make it an offence for counsel, that is lawyers, in judicial proceedings: first, to make public statements outside the tribunal that are known by that counsel to be false or that counsel has failed to take reasonable measures to ascertain were false; second, to institute or prosecute proceedings known by that counsel to be brought primarily for the purpose of intimidating or injuring another person; or, third, to wilfully deceive or to knowingly participate in deceiving the tribunal or court or wilfully presenting or knowingly relying on false, deceptive, exaggerated or inflammatory documents, whether or not under oath.

Bill S-9 will cover those unsworn court documents that lawyers call pleadings. Pleadings include statements of claim, statements of defence, notices of motion, et cetera, and are court documents which though vital to court proceedings are not, as are affidavits, sworn under oath and therefore are not subject to perjury provisions, being section 131 of the Criminal Code and the related offence against justice. The integrity of such documents, pleadings, have relied on solicitors' and courts' privileges and lawyers' honour, and consequently they have not been buttressed by Criminal Code prohibition. The process has relied on confidence that lawyers, as officers of the court, have a duty to truth and integrity and on confidence that lawyers on their honour alone would not use court proceedings for unjust or dishonorable purpose. Bill S-9 focuses on this and lawyers' role in developing court documents, court defence and court strategy in cases of false accusations within judicial proceedings.

Honourable senators, Bill S-9 creates no new standard for lawyers or imposes no new burdens. It supports the ancient standard of honour, integrity and ethics in the conduct of court proceedings by creating a criminal offence. Bill S-9 will defend the ancient standard of lawyers' honour as described in the lawyers' "Rules of Professional Conduct." The perjury provisions of the Criminal Code are insufficient and inadequate because many of these false allegations are not made under oath but are made in pleadings which, as civil justice proceedings, are privileged and are shielded. Given that these false accusations are mostly made in civil proceedings, such as divorce and child custody, they are submitted to a lower standard or burden of proof than if they were made in criminal proceedings. Interestingly, most, though not all, of these false allegations in custody cases have diligently, even strategically, avoided criminal process to avoid the higher standard of proof.

Honourable senators, previously in speeches here I had discussed the 1995 Civil Justice Review of Ontario, co-chaired by Justice Blair. The Civil Justice Review's first report had a chapter entitled "Focus on Family Law," which raised the question of lawyers. Justice Blair said, at page 272: Concern and frustration were expressed about the number of allegations made in affidavits that

p7

were not capable of being substantiated in any way.

(1440) He continued: Lawyers were criticized for their drafting of lengthy, damaging, and sometimes unsupportable affidavit material. Justice Blair's report concluded that the civil justice system in Ontario "is in a crisis situation."

Honourable senators, I had also described the 1996 Manitoba Civil Justice Review Task Force, chaired by Manitoba MLA David Newman. The Civil Justice Review Task Force Report's Chapter "Court of Queen's Bench Family Division" addressed also false accusations of child sexual abuse in civil justice. The report said, at page 20: The Task Force heard horror stories about the traumatic impact on the accused person, on the immediate family and children affected by malicious false allegations designed to achieve sole custody, prohibit or restrict visiting privileges, and to punish the other parent.

The report added, at page 20: When false allegations are discovered, strong and effective sanctions are necessary to discourage such conduct .... Lawyers, of course, must never assist in making false allegations and should be on guard against becoming the tool or dupe of an unscrupulous client.

The role of lawyers is raised yet again. That last statement, honourable senators, also warns that judges and courts should also be on guard against becoming the tool or dupe of unscrupulous counsel.

Honourable senators, this heart of darkness, this inhuman, aggressive hurling of false accusations of child abuse, the "weapon of choice" during child custody proceedings, is diabolical. It is the Devil's own work. For those, mostly fathers, broken by false accusations of child sexual abuse of their own children, it is ungodly. For a parent to be accused falsely of something so terrible is soul-destroying. Such false accusations have been used routinely in recent years since about 1987 by one parent, usually a mother, to injure and damage the other parent, usually a father, for the purposes of destroying the other parent and destroying their relationship with the child. They have been directed to obtaining sole custody of the child by imposing insuperable and inhuman burdens on the other parent. These burdens are emotional, legal, and financial. This phenomenon is the most recently identified form of child abuse and child maltreatment. It is also a new form of civil molestation and civil harassment, as the courts and legal process are enlisted as instruments of injury, malice and deceit during civil litigation. The enormous financial burden borne by those personally affected and by the public treasury and taxpayer is overwhelming. The emotional and psychological consequences to the affected children is incalculable and unspeakable, and such child abuse shames us all.

Honourable senators, I have brought many cases of false allegations of child abuse in divorce and custody to the attention of the Senate. I have applied the highest test. That highest test for me is a finding or a confirmation by a judge in a court that the allegations are false or groundless. I bring to the Senate cases where findings have been made by judges. There are numerous cases that have never been adjudicated, but these cases that I bring today have been. However, I add that all false accusations in civil justice are pernicious, even if the impugned cannot financially or emotionally sustain the adjudication, and the issue is compelling senators' investigation. I have already cited several of these judgments and quoted the judges in my several speeches here. I shall enumerate those 10 judgements that I have already quoted. They are as follows.

From British Columbia, I have quoted three judgements: by Justice Rowles, 1990,

in P.(G.L.) v. P.(J.M.), B.C. Supreme Court; by Justices McEachern, Legg,

Hollinrake, 1992, in Lin v. Lin, B.C. Court of Appeal; by Justice Preston, 1992,

in the case Metzner v. Metzner, B.C. Supreme Court.

From Manitoba, I have quoted two judgements, being: by Justice Carr, 1992, in

Plesh v. Plesh, Court of Queen's Bench (Family Division); and by Justice Jewers,

1997, in Margaret Pott v. Winnipeg Child & Family Services & James Pott, Court

of Queen's Bench.

From Ontario, I have quoted four judgements, they being: by Judge Dunn, 1987, in

Children's Aid Society of Durham Region v. Dorian Baxter and Sharon Baxter,

Provincial Court (Family Division) of Ontario; by Justice Somers, 1994, in the

Dorian Baxter case, B(D) and B(R) and B(M) v. Children's Aid Society of Durham

Region and Marion Van den Boomen, Ontario Court of Justice (General Division);

by Justice Wallace, 1996, in the Wayne Allen case, Allen v. Grenier, Ontario

Court (General Division) Family Court; by Judge Dunn, 1998, in the Barbosa case,

L.B. v. R.D., Ontario Court of Justice (Provincial Division).

Finally, from Saskatchewan, I have quoted one judgement, by Justice Dickson,

1994, in Paterson v. Paterson, Court of Queen's Bench. This case had included

false child sexual abuse allegations against the father arising from the

mother's false memory. All 10 judgements were adjudicated by judges - some

excellent judges. In all 10 judgements, false accusations were made by mothers

against fathers, eight involving false accusations of child sexual abuse and two

involving false accusations of child physical abuse. I shall now repeat my

previous quotations from three of these judges, being Justices Somers, Carr, and

Preston.

Honourable senators, first: Ontario's Justice Somers in the case of Reverend

Dorian Baxter, an Anglican minister. His wife falsely accused him of sexually

abusing their two daughters. The Children's Aid Society believed and supported

her. Reverend Baxter was exonerated and awarded custody of the girls. After 10

years and hundreds of thousands of dollars, he was successful in his suit

against the Children's Aid Society and their worker Marion Van Den Boomen. In

that 1994 judgement in favour of Reverend Baxter, Justice Somers stated:

...one can certainly understand the frustration the father must have felt in

this case attempting to deal with allegations against him which were untrue and

which he regarded as utterly repugnant, and with a bureaucracy that treated him

with ill concealed contempt....as I have said I do believe that much of the

damage sustained by the Plaintiff was as a result of the machinations of his

former wife...

About the testimony from an experienced child abuse professional, Justice Somers

said:

Ms. Chisholm indicated that the experience has been for some time that sexual

assault allegations made by a mother against a father in custody disputes are

very prevalent nowadays and indeed have become what she called "the weapon of

choice".

Honourable senators, my second repeat quotation is from Manitoba's Justice Carr

in Thomas Plesh v. Wendy Ellen Plesh. Justice Carr stated:

It is patently obvious from the evidence and the manner in which it was given

that the mother...set out to punish the husband....The only ways she knew of

were to deprive him of property (she took all of the furniture) and their son.

Her motivation was revenge, pure and simple.

Justice Carr continued:

...she cried child abuse and continues to make the allegation to this date. In

so doing she has nearly destroyed her husband and his relationship with their

child. I conclude that she never believed that their son had been abused, not

when she reported the abuse and not now....and there was not then and is not now

a shred of evidence to suggest it!

Honourable senators, my third repeat quotation is from B.C.'s Justice Preston's

judgement in Martha Metzner v.Dr. Louis Metzner, a case of false allegations by

a mother against a father, not of child sexual abuse but of child physical

abuse. Justice Preston stated:

Mrs. Metzner was interviewed by Sergeant Armstrong of the West Vancouver Police

Department on January 8, 1990. The officer's notes indicate that she told him

that there was no history of abuse and that Dr. Metzner had never hit her or the

children. His notes also contain the entry "Martha said lawyer told her that

this would be enough to get him out of the house because he wouldn't leave."

Justice Preston's words raise yet again the role of lawyers in these matters.

Honourable senators, I have 39 more judgements in adjudicated cases of false

allegations of child abuse, mostly child sexual abuse and a few of physical

abuse, that I shall place before the Senate today. I shall list them as before;

by province, judge, year, and by judgement. They are as follows:

From Alberta, one judgement, being by Justice Nash, 1997, in Spurgeon v.

Spurgeon, Court of Queen's Bench.

From British Columbia, 15 judgements: by Justice Finch, 1987, in Rodgers v.

Rodgers, B.C. Supreme Court; by Justices McEachern, Taylor and Wood, 1990, in

Bartesko v. Bartesko, B.C. Court of Appeal; by Justice van der Hoop, 1991, inLin

v. Lin, B.C. Supreme Court; by Justice Coultas, 1991, in M.(H.B.) v. B.(J.E.),

B.C. Supreme Court; by Justice Coultas, 1992, in Kobylanski v. Kobylanski, B.C.

Supreme Court; by Justice Newbury, 1993, 1995, 1996, three judgements in C(G.E.)

v. C(M.B.A.), B.C. Supreme Court; by Justice Edwards, 1995, in C.(R.M.) v.

C.(J.R.), B.C. Supreme Court; by Justice Shabbits, 1995, 1996, two judgements in

Dawson v. Stalker, Supreme Court of B.C.; by Justice Cooper, 1996, in Hillstead

v. Hillstead, Supreme Court; by Master Powers, 1996, in Huyghue v. Huyghue, B.C.

Supreme Court; by Justice Sigurdson, 1996, in James v. Turner, B.C. Supreme

Court; by Justice Melnick, 1996, in Scheffer v. Scheffer, B.C. Supreme Court.

From Manitoba, three judgements: by Justice Carr, 1998, in Colquhoun v.

Colquhoun, Court of Queen's Bench Family Division; by Justice Guertin-Riley,

1998, in McKenzie v. McKenzie, Court of Queen's Bench; by Justice Allen, 1999,

in the Antonovich case, Winnipeg Child & Family Services v. L.M.T. & A.A.A.,

Court of Queen's Bench.

From Nova Scotia, one judgement by Judge Legere, 1997, in W.A.H. v. S.M.L., Nova

Scotia Family Court.

From Ontario, 14 judgements: - the hotbeds seem to be Ontario and British

Columbia - by Justice Thompson, 1987, in Demeester v. Demeester, Supreme Court

of Ontario; by Justice Fitzgerald, 1990 in Scott v. Scott, Ontario Supreme

Court; by Justices Tarnopolsky, Finlayson, Abella, 1992, in M.(B.P.) v.

M.(B.L.D.E.), Ontario Court of Appeal; by Judge Webster, 1993, in W.(K.M.) v.

W.(D.D.) , Ontario Court of Justice (Provincial Division); by Justice Webber,

1994, in R. v. Robert A. Clark, Ontario Court of Justice (General Division); by

Judge Magda, 1995, in A.N. v. A.R., Ontario Court of Justice (Provincial

Division); by Justice Wallace, 1995, in Jenkins v. Farrauto , Unified Family

Court; by Justice Killeen, 1995, in Lindsay v. Lindsay, Ontario Court of Justice

(General Division); by Justices Austin, Laskin, Moldaver, 1996, in the Baxter

case, B(D) and B(R) and B(M) v. Children's Aid Society of Durham Region and

Marion Van den Boomen, Court of Appeal of Ontario; by Justice Aston, 1996, in

B.(B.J.A.) v. R.(K.J.), Ontario Court of Justice (General Division) (Family

Court); by Justice Wilson, 1996, in M.K. v. P.M., Ontario Court of Justice

(General Division); by Justice Czurtin, 1997, in the Wayne Allen case, Allen v.

Grenier, Ontario Court (General Division) Family Court; by Justice Fitzgerald,

1997, in R. v. Viinalass, Ontario Court of Justice; by Justice Bellamy, 1999, in

Jepp v. Brandon, Ontario Superior Court.

From Quebec, two judgements: by Justice Gomery, 1991, in Stuart-Mill v. Cher,

p8

Quebec Superior Court; by Justice Marx, 1996, in M.B. v. Y.M., Quebec Superior

Court.

And finally, from Saskatchewan, three judgements: by Justice Dielschneider,

1991, Philipowich v. Philipowich, Court of Queen's Bench; by Justices Cameron,

Wakeling, Lane, 1992, in the Philipowich case again, P.(K.L.) v. P.(P.M.),

Saskatchewan Court of Appeal; by Justice Hunter, 1999, in Miket v. Miket, Court

of Queen's Bench Family Law Division.

(1450)

Honourable senators, that is a mouthful to speak and that is a large number of cases. Of these 39 judgments, all are in the context of divorce, separation and custody proceedings; 31 deal with false child sexual abuse, eight deal with false child physical abuse and most are by mothers against fathers. Honourable senators, that may have been a mouthful, but what I have cited here is nearly 50 cases of judgments where a judge has said these allegations are false. I think it a shame, a tragedy and a crisis.

Honourable senators, I shall now quote judgments in four of these last 39 cases just listed. In the Alberta case of Leslie James Spurgeon v. Barbara Leah Spurgeon, the father was falsely accused by the mother. This is a classic case of access denial, parental alienation, and false accusations of child sexual abuse against the father. About a letter from mother to father, Justice Nash said, at paragraph 21:

Those paragraphs, in my view, illustrate what is often referred to as an example of parental alienation. The girls are 10 and 12 years old. By involving them in the on-going conflict between their parents, Mrs. Spurgeon is involving them as her allies in the position that she had taken regarding access.

Madam Justice Nash continued, at paragraph 22: Another concern that I have is the apprehension of bias on the part of the Department who investigated the allegations of sexual assault. Mr. Spurgeon was cleared by the polygraph which, I appreciate, is not admissible in a Court of law. There was no medical evidence supporting these allegations. These judgments often mention the role of the child welfare protection agencies.

Honourable Senators, next is Justice Coultas of British Columbia in George Juris Kobylanski v. Lorrie Kathleen Kobylanski, a case of a mother falsely accusing a father repeatedly. The mother abducted the child and fled the province with the child to a women's shelter in Yellowknife, N.W.T. Women's shelters is also a recurring theme. Justice Coultas said at page 4: Mrs. Kobylanski deposes that she left the Province because Stephanie had disclosed that her father sexually abused her. Allegations of the father's sexual abuse are not new. In my March 4th Reasons I recited the history of these earlier allegations. They were first made just prior to a Hearing to enforce an order for overnight access, and, as a consequence, overnight access was denied Mr. Kobylanski.

Justice Coultas added, at page 5: Although I did not make a specific finding that the Petitioner had invented these allegations, I thought it highly probable that she did so...

Justice Coultas continued, at page 12: In spite of her deviousness and irresponsibility I continue to think that it is in the child's best interest to be, for the moment, with her mother, for the child is bonded primarily with the mother. I do not believe that Mr. Kobylanski has ever abused his child sexually. He has fought tenaciously for access rights because he believes that he can be a good influence in the child's life.

Honourable senators, next is Justice Newbury in the case of Gary Christopherson being C.(G.E.) v. C(M.B.D.) in British Columbia. This was a case of a mother's false accusations of child sexual abuse against the father, a custody change from mother to the father, and then, finally, the mother and new mate kidnapped the children to Europe. This is three separate judgments by the same Justice Newbury, being March 19, 1993, August 15, 1995, and January 4, 1996. On March 19, 1993, Justice Newbury said, at paragraph 95: ...I find that there is no real risk that Mr. C. has abused or will abuse E. or K. in the future. The case against him can only be described as flimsy at best and while it may not be a deliberate fabrication, it is the product of Ms. D.'s hostility and suspicion.

In the second judgment, two years later on August 15, 1995, Justice Newbury said, at paragraph 50: In my earlier judgment, I concluded that there was no `real risk' that Mr. C. had abused or would abuse E. or K in the future. I reach the same conclusion again concerning the latest allegation, but with even greater confidence.

In the third judgment, a year later, on January 4, 1996, about the mother's contempt of court, the integrity of the court and the children's best interests, Justice Newbury said, at paragraph 13: ...the results of those acts of contempt have taken their course - the custody of the children has been changed. This is not to imply that the custody of Ellen and Kirsten was changed in order to punish Ms. Durville's conduct. From the parties' points of view, however, little would now be served by exacting a penalty against Ms. Durville for these acts. Accordingly, although I conclude that Ms. Durville's conduct does constitute contempt of court, I decline to impose any penalty on the basis that remedial action is now unnecessary, and punishment would be ineffectual at this late date. As of last fall, Mr. Christopherson did not know the whereabouts of his children. [Even though a judicial order gave my daughter half her time with me; when she and her mother disappeared, the CWO wrote to me that he was not allowed to reveal their whereabouts! - Ed] Even though he has custody, even though there is a court order against either parent removing the girls from the province without the other's consent, Ms Durville kidnapped them to Europe. He has not seen them for two years, is impoverished emotionally and financially, and can only afford a bicycle to commute to work....

[For the rest, go to http://www.parl.gc.ca/36/2/parlbus/chambus/senate/deb-e/29db_2000-02-17-e.htm

where it resides temporarily, or to the Editor's website www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/

and search for Anne C Cools.- Ed.]

.... I turn now to the question of lawyers' involvement in the advancement of these false allegations. I have laid before honourable senators almost 50 judicial findings that the allegations were false. There is a crisis in civil justice and in the practice at bar. That these particular false allegations seemingly arise in the context of separation and divorce and within civil justice proceedings of child custody points to lawyers. Today in civil justice, almost all documents, even sworn affidavits, are written and prepared by lawyers. Lawyers are both practitioners at the bar and also officers of the court. As officers of the court, they are entrusted with privileges whose very purpose is the protection of truth and the securing of justice. These are ancient and important privileges. Their maintenance, protection and proper use should be the goal and duty of every lawyer. The heart of the problem in this civil justice crisis is the misuse of these privileges that are entrusted to lawyers as officers of the court. These privileges, both the absolute and the qualified privileges, shelter lawyers from criminal and civil liability, even personal responsibility, for unsworn statements made within court documents and court proceedings which are false. These privileges originate in Her Majesty's Royal Prerogative as the dispenser of justice and guardian of subjects and are bestowed upon solicitor-barristers when they are admitted as Officers of Her Majesty's Court. Officers of the court hold these privileges in trust from Her Majesty as the Fount of Justice. Privileges are conditional grants from the sovereign to protect the sovereign's interest in justice and her subjects' right to the sovereign's justice. These privileges are part of the sovereign's protection for the processes of discovering truth and securing justice itself. Her Majesty's privileges cannot be enlisted to defeat truth or justice or to deceive her courts. ....

[Now Cools plays politics. We know that most lawyers are behaving criminally, conniving in false accusations in the family courts, in all these countries - UK, USA, Canada, Australia. Cools knows this, but for political reasons pretends that it is a small criminal minority. This gives her a better chance to carry the other Senators. - Ed] Undoubtedly, the majority of lawyers - and I have many friends who are - are honest and ethical professionals. As always, it is the small minority, the deviants, who abuse process and who need sanctions. The Criminal Code is all about the deviant minority, not about the honest majority [!!- Ed]. Parliament has a duty to protect the children who are the subject of these ugly and inhuman proceedings, and to ensure that sharp practice is discouraged. Parliament must use the Criminal

p9

Code to limit the misleading of justice by codifying the deceit of the courts by some of its officers and declare that the deceit of the court can form no part of any duty by any solicitor to any client.

Parliament must enact that such activity is an offence against the administration of justice.

....

At present, the full text is at http://www.parl.gc.ca/36/2/parlbus/chambus/senate/deb-e/29db_2000-02-17-e.htm or go to my website www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/

Kathy McCann, 16nov00

pp Prime Minister,

10 Downing St.,

SW1A 2AA

Dear Kathy McCann,

Research competence.

Betsy Stanko was in receipt of £3,500,000 of ESRC funding for her "Violence Research Project", now at Royal Holloway College. (Search for "Betsy Stanko" on the www.)

From an aberrant cohort of 200, Stanko generated the bogus "one in four women are attacked in the home", recently repeated by Baroness Jay, Leader of the House of Lords.

Stanko may be in receipt of some of the recent £6,000,000 research funding recently announced by Boateng.

We have begun to research Stanko's background, and find that she herself cites ideological reasons why she will not do objective research. The implications for the family as an institution, since she is so heavily supported by government, and quoted by government, are devastating.

E. A. Stanko (Betsy Stanko), Fear of Crime and the Myth of the Safe Home, a chapter in Kersti Yllo and Michele Bograd; Feminist Perspectives on Wife Abuse, pub. Sage, 1988, p83;

The Task Force, however, uncritically clings to the notion that the traditional family unit is the 'fundamental unit upon which society is built', rather than a unit that in many ways contributes to violence within the family.

Stanko will never separate out violence between married spouses and the much greater incidence of violence between cohabiting couples (and of course very much greater between gay and lesbian couples). This is because the target for her attack is the (relatively very peaceful) traditional family. The above book even states that it does not intend to make the distinction, calling all cohabiting couples "wife and husband", see p12 and p19;.

p12 Wife abuse is defined in this volume as the use of physical force by a man against his intimate cohabiting partner. .... As feminists, we believe that the social institutions of marriage and family are special contexts that may promote, maintain, and even support men's use of physical force against women. For ease of exposition, the term 'wife abuse' will be used throughout the volume, although the intimate partners may not be legally married.

p19 .... Husband-to-wife violence is thus conceived, not as an aberrant phenomenon, but as a fundamental dimension in most normally functioning families.

It is deeply scurrilous and anti-social to first confuse marriage with cohabiting (a much more violent status), and then assert that Husband-to-wife violence is thus conceived, not as an aberrant phenomenon, but as a fundamental dimension in most normally functioning families.

In the first instance, will Stanko repudiate the Introduction to her book?

Best Wishes,

Ivor Catt

cc Principal, Royal Holloway College;

cc Stanko, vrp;

cc Kerry Pollard, MP for St. Albans.

cc Paul Boateng.

16nov00

Dear Mr Catt

Professor Stanko's research is approved by highly respected independent authorities and the College and the University will not enter into any further correspondence on this matter.

Professor Drummond Bone

Principal

Royal Holloway, University of London [Egham, Surrey.]

<D.Bone@rhbnc.ac.uk>

To: Bone D

Please give me the names of "highly respected independent authorities".

This is the first correspondence I have had from "the College and the University". This problem will not go away. The fate of children of divorce and children of SMF's is too important, and the crisis is going to deepen. The marker is the suicide rate of young men. We have started our investigation of Stanko, studying one of her books. As a result, I today wrote a letter to the Prime Minister, Boasteng, yourself, Stanko, and my MP, and posted it (copy below) before I received my first ever communication from you, the head of the college where the Stanko "research" is now going on.

You will find that you are backing a bronco, not a horse.

Ivor Catt 16nov00

From Ill Eagle 9 June 2000 p6;

Bang 'em all up!

"Ms Betty Moxon heads the Sexual Offences Review Group.... [She] invited Robert Whiston and Ivor Catt from ManKind to attend her 10sep99 seminar in Leicester. ManKind member William Coulson also managed to fill in for a cancellation. ....

"There were men there, but they were poodle-men. None of the 50 attendees had the concept of a false allegation." - Ill Eagle, sep99.

There followed extensive correspondence between your Ed, his MP, and the Home Office, see my website. My MP was a dead loss, so I ask readers to pursue the matter through their own MPs.

My two objectives were to get false allegations onto the political agenda, and also to develop a mechanism for restraining the flood of false reports and statistics emanating from the govt. .... I have received the admission that false allegations are not within the remit of anybody in government. ".... there is no specific policy consideration in government being given to the issue of false allegations, ...." - letter to Catt from -Tooke, Sex Offences Review Team, Home Office, 21mar00. If you find this unbelievable, phone M-Tooke tel. 0171 273 3875 or email her at sex_offences_review.ho@gtnet.gov.uk

A few days after this admission, the case of Roy Burnett, falsely jailed for brutal rape for 15 years, hit the headlines.

Husband and Father behaviour continues to deteriorate

[Stinko's research techniques, as described in her chapter in the book "Feminist Perspectives ...." detailed above, show us the frightening trend in the behaviour of husbands and fathers, and the grave risks now run by all wives. - Ed]

A postman who killed his wife .... was jailed for eight years .... Judge Martin Stephens .... told Frisby: "With two children in the house, you meticulously dismembered her body, distributed the parts arond the country and baked her head in the oven." He buried the head on a golf course in Sidcup ....

- Sue Clough,

Telegraph, 17nov00, p12

Blair abandons pretence on family values for 'inclusive' approach

- Rachel Sylvester,

Telegraph, 16nov00, p10

.... Tony Blair has been forced to step in to break up a fight between ministers who want the Govt to promote marriage and those who think cohabiting couples and single parents have equal validity.

The Prime Minister used his casting vote to oppose support for the institution. Ministers tell me that all references to marriage as the "best model" for family life have been removed from a forthcoming Govt paper on the subject after the intervention of No. 10.

The ministerial committee has been locked in conflict for months as it tried to agree the wording of the crucial pre-election statement in this Middle England touchstone issue.

The men - Jack Straw, the Home Secretary, who chairs the groups, and Paul Boateng, his junior minister - have said that the paper should single out marriage as the ideal context for raising children. They want the Govt to take a strong stand.

p10

The women - Baroness Jay, the leader of the Lords, Margaret Hodge, the education minister, Baroness Hollis, the social security minister, and Patricia Hewett, at the Dept. of Trade and Industry - have advocated a more "inclusive" approach. They think that children from broken homes or single parent families will feel inferior if the Govt promotes a particular structure. They also said Cabinet ministers, many of whom are either divorced or homosexual, [see "Statistics as the Sword of Truth", Male View jan99 p19, or www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/ ] could leave themselves open to a "back to basics" style campaign if they preached a lifestyle that they had not followed themselves. .... The positions have been deeply entrenched and the discussions passionate. Neither side has been willing to compromise. At one point an early draft .... including the commitment to marriage, was leaked to the Guardian columnist Polly Toynbee who duly duffed it up. It was a clear attempt by the sisterhood to get the pro-marriage rhetoric watered down.

The final version will be a compromise, similar to the fudge of the 1998 green paper Supporting Families .... Now it seems that the Prime Minister has realised that he can no longer get away with trying to imply that ministers think marriage is the "best" way.

[On 2dec00, in The Telegraph, p10, Rachel Sylvester added divorced Tessa Jowell, minister for employment and women (friend of Margaret Jay. ".... we're very close....") to the throng of women close to Blair who want the govt to assert no preference for marriage. To add to the muddle, Jowell "thinks some groups of men - those over 50 and working class boys - are now more disadvantaged than their female peers." How much time, and how many suicides, will it take before these dreadful women to sort themselves out? - Ed]

Return of a heretic

- Neil Lyndon,

Sunday Times, News Review, p1

[Neil Lyndon's world came crashing down after he wrote a pioneering article in The Sunday Times attacking feminism. He was treated as a pariah, and his young son was taken away from him. .... ]

I was amongst the highest-paid .... feature writers in British journalism. .... [After the article] I became a pariah, a professional and social outcast. My income plummeted from many thousands of pounds a month to hundreds. .... A group of women who worked for The Sunday Times Magazine wrote a round-robin to the magazine's then editor, Philip Clarke, asking him not to publish my essay and warning that it would leave "an indelible stain" on the magazine's reputation. .... Clarke stoutly told them to mind their own business.

[Neil followed with the first book of its kind; No more sex war; The failures of feminism, pub. Sinclair-Stevenson 1992, just before the weightier book by Warren Farrell, The Myth of Male Power, pub. Fourth Estate, first published in 1993 in the U.S.A.]

The anti-marriage fanatics won't see why children fail

- Melanie Phillips,

Sunday Times, 19nov00, p19

Round three, and not yet out. Behind the scenes in Whitehall, a battle has been raging over marriage. In the nuptial corner are Jack Straw, Paul Boateng and David Blunkett. Opposing them is the feminist hard core made up of Baroness jay, Harriet Harman and sundry women junior ministers.

They've been slugging it out for months over whether a white paper should say that marriage is the best option for raising children. Now the prime minister, stepping in to break up the fight, has sided with the sisterhood. ....

How amazing that these women are going to such lengths to prevent the m-word from even being mentioned in policy. .... The argument for promoting marriage is extraordinarily tenacious. And that's because it's based on solid evidence which won't go away.

The simple fact increasingly troubling govt is the enormous and escalating cost to the country of family disintegration. It's adding billions of pounds to the pressures on housing, social security, healthcare, the criminal justice system. And it is storing up even more costs; increasingly solitary lifestyles and the reluctance to form permanent relationships will destroy the networks of kinship which caused generations to look after not just their children but their elderly parents, too. .... Only 36% of children born to cohabiting parents are still looked after by both parents - even if they eventually marry - by the time the children are 16, compared with 70% of children born to married couples. ....

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. ....

Marriage is the best way says minister as he goes off-message

- Steve Doughty,

Daily Mail, 15sep00

A senior Minister yesterday broke ranks and called for the state to teach people about the benefits of marriage.

.... Paul Boateng veered away from the Govt line that all kinds of families are equally good by insisting that marriage is a better way of life than cohabitation or single parenthood. .... which .... appeared to put him directly at odds with his boss Jack Straw. ....

Comment.

Boateng used the marriage issue to distance himself from Vanity Blair when Blair went into freefall.

I read Melanie after I had put Rachel Sylvester into Ill Eagle. Melanie virtually proves that Rachel was not just flying a kite. The Cabinet is split, with Boateng on the side of the angels! The split follows gender lines, with the many Cabinet Gays not present, but surely supporting the viragos.

I have been proved wrong when I predicted, after the last General Election, that the Blare Babes would split down the middle, depending on whether they had sons or not. However, a different split has occurred, on the same issue. MG tells me that this is payback time; radfems got Blair into power, and he has to let them continue their attack on the family.

Since the Tories do not understand the issues, and the intentions of Stinko and the rest, they would give little respite. I expect the situation to deteriorate anyway. The more the family is attacked by Hewett and the rest, with the help of the Cabinet Gays, speeding the crisis, the less will be the total damage over the years.

In the News Section, Sunday Times, 19nov00, p4, Melanie Phillips attacks the "research" of Stinko;

.... Stanko's research does not stand up to scrutiny. It lends support instead to a propaganda offensive that demonises men and minimises or conceals the fact that women can be equally if not more violent, a distortion that has cost many men their homes and their children.

The darkest secret of child sexual abuse

Far from posing a threat, traditional families offer children a sanctuary from abuse. The real danger is found in broken homes, says

Melanie Phillips, Sunday Times, Sect. 4, 26nov00, p8

It is a commons perception that there is an epidemic of sexual abuse of children within the family. Reports of the press of last week's findings by the NSPCC conveyed the same message. .... Yet the facts are rather different, demonstrated not least by the NSPCC's own report .... Accused in the past of inflating figures for its own ends, the charity was taken aback by the way its statistics were distorted by the media. .... child sexual abuse takes place within only 4% of families. A mere 1% of children are abused by a parent. The remaining 3% are abused by other relatives, with brothers or stepbrothers by far the largest category. .... Within families they found much more physical violence, suffered by about a quarter of the sample. Yet another significant fact was that most of this occurred at the hands not of the fathers but of the mothers.

So the NSPCC's research destroyed some potent myths about child abuse. But the stereotype of sexual abuse hidden within the family has become deeply embedded in the public consciousness.

The impression is given by many commentators that the traditional family is a dangerous place for a child to be.

p11

This view was on display on Newsnight. Forget strange paedophiles., said the programme: child sexual abuse was rampant within the family and was perpetrated mainly by parents.

Yet the programme did not acknowledge the NSPCC's finding that child sexual abuse within families was, in fact, extremely rare. .... failing to acknowledge that its own harrowing examplke featured a fractured family and a stepfather.

There was no discussion of the role of family disintegration in child sex abuse. Yet this is the really explosive secret: that sexual abuse occurs mainly in families that have broken or reconstituted and that marriage is actulaly the best protector for children. ....

.... concern about child sexual abuse has been used to attack married families, ignoring the fact that both sexual and physical abuse occur much more frequently where the biological parents are no longer together. .... children are no less than 20 to 33 times safer when they live with their biological parents than when they live in any other type of household. ....

[Last Ill Eagle reported that Melanie reported that our 28oct00 Conference speaker Norman Dennis, in his analysis of the Macpherson Report (from www.civitas.org.uk), found;. " …. no officer to be racist; no evidence that the policies of the Metropolitan police were racist; no racist conduct by officers; indeed, it rejected the claim that the police investigation into the murder had failed because of racism." [Melanie's full text is at www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/0a113.htm] [Long may her remarkable commentaries continue, trying to stem the tide of anti-social, destructive lies and misrepresentation by Stinko, Jay and the rest. - Ed.]

Dr. Bill Thompson, criminologist, speaking at the AAFAA conference at Friends House, London, 11nov00. (The same room as our 28oct00 conference.)

w.thompson@reading.ac.uk

Having spent over a decade as an 'expert' in our 'best in the world' legal system, I have no confidence in the way allegations - especially those concerning sexual assaults - are handled.

While I try to undertake my obligations seriously and offer opinion without 'fear or favour', I despair at the way, from initial allegations to Appeals, the same mistakes, which can be traced to the obsession 'to get a result', are made time and time again.

The majority of these can be traced to a refusal to review an investigation process which is based upon unproven assumptions and consists of simplistic and reductive reasoning,

This approach is encouraged by the fact that the police (and social services) are not concerned with uncovering the truth, but gathering 'evidence' that will secure a prosecution. Evidence to the contrary, and ambiguities within what 'evidence' they collected, are NOT seen as a reason for reviewing ALL the evidence; so much as creating barriers to a successful prosecution.

The concept of a false allegation is rarely rather than systematically considered; and those who gain a 'not guilty' verdict are considered to have 'got away with it' rather than been innocent all along,

When this approach is wedded to political agendas - such as the 'believe the children' movement - 'miscarriages of justice' will multiply. And that is what is happening in the case of child sexual assault allegations.

We are told 'we have to take all allegations seriously', though this is selective: when the Orkney children were badgered to name people and included the Prime Minister - no one rushed round to 10 Downing Street. Yet ordinary people are arrested, BEFORE any background inquires are made.

The need to ask how likely are these events to have occurred before arresting people would have saved hundreds of ruined lives in the case of the Satanic Panic.

This does not happen because in the case of sexual assault - guilt is presumed, and evidence to the contrary is not investigated with the same rigour and to the same depth as 'evidence' for the prosecution.

And this applies as equally in the more bizarre allegations as in the 'run of the mill' allegations.

The government ignores such attitudes and appears to care less about training to develop a critical approach. Courses I have offered to Investigators on error avoidance - which I thought was in the best interest of justice - have been inexplicably cancelled.

Thanks to the simplistic training served up at 'child abuse awareness programmes' - the scientific basis of which is often dubious -investigators share erroneous assumptions that inform and motivate their investigations.

As a result, the interview techniques used on children continue to replicate many of the mistakes officially denounced in Cleveland, Roachdale and Orkney.

Amongst the many problems, supposedly ended by the Memorandum of Good Practice, I still find

* no record of the context of the original revelations/disclosure - which frequently lies not upon what a child said - but an interpretation

* In multiple cases, the interview technique used is the same irrespective of the age/mental development/vocabulary of the child

* The child rarely determines the pace of the interview

* adult accusers are often present.

* The MOGP is broken again and again - especially the instruction NOT to refer to the offence/ask for a repetition of a previous account is constantly broken.

* I rarely see any attempt to secure a free narrative account; interviewers speak twice/three times as much as the children

* In cases where the child offers NO indications of assault, let alone any details, interviewer invariably proceeds to probing.

* Most interviewers could not tell an open-suggestive question from a closed-objective question - the training is so pitiful.

* Silence/reticence - which would appear in cases where nothing untoward has happened - are seen as the child having been sworn to secrecy or being too traumatized to tell.

* Unruly or sullen behaviour is inevitably seen as confirmation of a damaged child, rather than a possible indication that the child does not want to cooperate with the interviewers because they don't want to frame someone.

Many of these problems could be solved by checking the origin of the allegation again.

However, the MOGP actually encourages bad practice. For example when MOGP explains that a child's silence could be caused by guilt at not having told earlier, the MOGP's failure to record alternative explanations, helps ensure that this suggestion is interpreted as a green light to probe silent children - when there may be nothing to tell.

But the biggest problem is what are known as 'validity indicators';

Originally designed as a review tool, post interview, to assess the viability of what the child had said; interviewers seek to elicit, and in many cases, even model the answers that will look like indicators to a court. It should be clear that when a claim like - 'he put his thing right inside me', is simply stated and the child can not provide ONE SINGLE detail about the mechanics of sex, even from a child's perspective - something must be wrong.

Yet, legal aid defences rarely explore the interviews for such discrepancies, or bother to cross examine the interviewers and hear their justifications for what are - despite all assurances to the contrary - very leading interviews. Likewise, medical 'evidence' still used in the UK to infer assaults have taken place, despite being long since been disproven by American controlled studies, is not challenged.

These defence failings are then compounded by the UK Appeal procedure, which refuses to consider such questions because they could have been at the trial. Yet, when so much is at stake, the failure to have interviews and medical evidence reviewed before a strategy is adopted is shoddy practice, especially because the fallacies promoted in 'abuse awareness' over the last 30 years means that, otherwise, it is difficult to get a fair trial any where.

[For the terrible case of Ray Shuttleworth, still in jail, graphically illustrating police misconduct outlined by Bill Thompson, see The Observer, 26nov00, p18, or Panorama, 26nov00.]

p12

Hillary Seddon of AAFAA agreed to a joint conference next year. I have booked the Main Hall, Friends House, for our Censorship Conference on sat26may01. - Ed

ManKind October 2000 Conference

The age of violent young males. Causes and remedies.

The awesome list of speakers at our conference came up to expectations, making an historic event. You can order the five audiotapes from me, Editor of Ill Eagle, for £10. The videotape, which can also be ordered, will come later. The speakers represented most of the leading experts in the world. It was at Friends House, opposite Euston Station, London, on Saturday 28oct00. Details, including some of the speeches, remain at www.mankind.org.uk and at www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk

The penalty for pleading innocence

- Auberon Waugh,

Sunday Telegraph, 3dec00, p41

.... Nobody can doubt that many innocent people have ended up in prison. .... Downing is not in prison for having murdered a 32-year-old secretary 27 years ago. Whether he is innocent or guilty of that charge, he completed his punishment for it 10 years ago. For the last 10 years he has been kept in prison for the crime of refusing to admit that he was guilty. .... The reason he has stayed in prison these last 10 years is that by refusing to admit his guilt he throws a terrible doubt on the entire legal system of the country. ....

ManKind takes on "Les Chiennes de Garde"

At midday on Dec 2nd the "World Service" of the BBC "Newshour" carried a short debate between Robert Whiston, Chairman of ManKind, and Isabelle Alonzo, a French feminist and author.

Her complaint was that men, personified by the Deputy Prime Minster, John Prescott, (UK) unfairly abused women every day of the week by shouting at them, not being courteous and treating them differently from the way they treated other men.

She cited the French women Minister at her recent negotiation in the Hague, Dominique Voynet, as victim, and Prescott as "chauvinist pig" (Prescott quoted Voynet as confessing she was "too tired" and had "cold feet" about the global warming deal).

After pleading for special treatment and preferential treatment by Isabelle Alonzo, Whiston gave her short shrift by reminding her that minister Dominique Voynet, who may have only been promoted by affirmative action, can't expect to be shielded if she wants to be equal to a man ("... now that she's playing with the big boys in Europe .... ").

Judge's rooms

are raided by fraud police

- Chris Hastings,

Sunday Telegraph, 3dec00, p9

A judge's chambers have been raided by fraud squad detectives investigating his alleged links to a corrupt solicitor. .... police are examining the raltionship between Raymond Tynas, a district judge in
Cheshire, and Robert Holmes, a wealthy solicitor who was jailed earlier this year for swindling clients. ....

Mr Tynas, who lives in the village of Bollington in Cheshire, specialises in family law cases, which are often held in private. .... [always in private, so that corruption is made easier.

However, this only mildly echoes the case brought to me by A.G., with details of a 'magic circle' of most senior family court judges, barristers and solicitors, who conspire to maximise acrimony in wealthy divorce cases so as to get the family home sold as a source of massive fees, some to be forwarded to the judge through a secret bank account. - Ed]

Plans for 'no fault' divorce scrapped

- Martin Bentham,

Sunday Telegraph, 3dec00, p5

The Government is to abandon plans for "no fault" divorces because of evidence showing that the move would not reduce acrimony between many separating couples. .... Pilot studies, in which couples have undergone mediation, are believed to have shown little or no reduction in acrimony or signs that divorce will not end in bitter court battles. ....

Access Protest See picture below. These protests are organised by Mark Harris, who is a ManKind member. The picture is from the Sunday Independent newspaper dated November 19th. 2000

*******************************************************************

Ill Eagle 13, feb01

ISSN 1466-9005

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

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]

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 my website. www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/ 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 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 367, 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

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, 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 www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/ ] 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.

p5

Campaigning pays off;

Penny drops at HO ?

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]

Joshua Rozenberg, Legal Editor, Daily Telegraph, is married to my hero Melanie Phillips. - 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

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)

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

p8

ManKind 2001 Conference on

Censorship

I have booked Friends House for all day sat15sep01. (may01 was too early for us.)

Local Quaker Censor-in-Chief fights back

[See Ill Eagle 12, dec00, p1]

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-judges. 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.]

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) 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!

p9

[Cyriax analysis of CAFCASS]

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

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 Father and Child Reunion is excellent.

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

p12

[[Discussion of Miskulin hunger strike and gagging order, plus picture.]

Ill Eagle 14, apr01

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>

ivorcatt@electromagnetism.demon.co.uk

Subject: Retreat to Success !!

Date: 25 February 2001 14:58

Dear Ivor, Remember we met at the High Court !

I have had a personal victory in the County Court this week. Despite having a good CWO report about me, the conclusion was to reduce contact with my son from once a week to once a month. My wife obviously jumped on this idea. My solicitors and barrister said there was nothing I could do as the judge would take CWO report.

THEREFORE, I fired my solicitor and barrister and represented myself. I stated to the judge that I would deny myself access to my son for his benefit as I should be seeing him every week, MINIMUM, and would never be able to financially support him in the future, ( The Retreat Strategy ). By calling his bluff, the Judge threw the CWO report out and stated the status Quo be preserved. Therefore not one of my wifes demands were met. The case continues in 3 months time .....

Finally, I am a believer in doing things, not just talking and have recruited a new chap called Steve, I have given him details of Mankind etc and no's. There are more like him at the contact centre and I will be passing these people onto Mankind one by one. There is even a lady there with the same situation as the men with whom I will be speaking with soon.

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 webswite www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/ and search for "Retreat". 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

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.

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]

Barmaid unfairly sacked by husband

- Telegraph, 9mar01, p12

A barmaid sacked by her husband after she sought a divorce won her claim for unfair dismissal at an industrial tribunal yesterday. .... Hilary ....the fourth wife of Larry Hammans, was not only working alongside him but also his second wife, Rosary. .... unsubstantiated gossip that Hilary, 42, had been having an affair with a local golfer.

Challenged by Mr Hammans, 59, she started divorce proceedings and "separated" from her husband last August, even though they continue to live under the same roof.

He responded by giving Mrs Hammans her notice, prompting a claim for unfair dismissal - which was upheld - and another for sex discrimination, which she withdrew. .... Mrs Hammans was denied financial compensation because she has since found a better-paid post.

As the couple left, Mr Hammans told his wife: "I"ll see you at home."

From a member

11mar01

Dear Ivor, I must thank you very much for sending me the [audio]tapes of the ManKind [oct00] Conference, 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)

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".

p3

Editorial

"... just a Dworkin the Catt .... "

Lynette Burrows, speaking at our 28oct00 conference, 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, see Ill Eagle 11, oct00, or website www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/ 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.)

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

p4

Fatherhood, Families, and Politics - Cont'd

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

Advertisement

Have case - will travel

Need a McKenzie Friend ?

Divorce - Custody - Advice

Tel: Ray Hemmingway 01484-316489

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

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

p7

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 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.

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

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 were right before, and are wrong now. It is that they were boy-friendly before, and are now girl-friendly. The previous 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]

p10

Help, at last, for suicidal young men -

Mankind very warmly welcomes the moves highlighted in The Observer Sunday March 4, 200. The plight of men driven to suicide Is one issue we have highligeted for some years. In the Anthony Browne's, article "... more males in their twenties were dieing by their own hand than in car crashes" and MPs were said to be demanding action. Not a menment too soon asfar as we are concerned

We have tracked and documanted "the soaring suicide rate among young men" and in this issue print the information sent to Gov't departments.

The Observer reaffirms our conclusions that young men "are now more likely to die by their own hand than be killed in a car crash". The only thing we would add is; how many of those motoring deaaths are in fact suicides ?

But we are more than releived to learn that this week the problem will be confronted by a new parliamentary committee set up to investigate the scale of the tragedy.

Each year about 3,600 men take their lives, compared to 1,200 women. Dr Ian Banks, chairman of the Men's Health Forum, which advises the Government, said: 'If this rate of death among young men was an infection, there would have been a lot more attention paid to it.'

The issue of suicide was first raised in Men's Health Forum, by ManKind and Foorum member Mark Crump. His initiative was repaid by a request for his immediarte resignation durt to pressuer from other members (50% of Men's Health Forum, is made up of women and womens groups). Two montsh later a junior Gov;t miniister adressed the forum and lauvh a Gov;t initiative into guess what - yes, suicude.

Anoteh black spt seesm to be Simon Armson, chief executive of the Samaritans. He is reported as saying in the Observber aricle that men's refusal to talk about problems is a key reason why men are more likely to kill themselves than women. He went on; 'They are more likely to internalise feelings until it gets too big a burden to bear, and then it leads to self-destruction.

The British culture of stiff upper lip still reigns supreme,' he said.

This man is seruously out of touch wi5th ordinary maen and real world. Though any effort

Such as The Samaritans targeting young men advertising on beer mats and in changing rooms is better than nothing.

Psycholgists are just as bad . Tey persist in not seeing what is stsring them in the face. Psycholgists, unael; to expelain the teenafe shotings of columbine et all persist in never mmentonig Rital;in and faterhless families as the 2 common denomiators. Similarly wwhen Psycholgists say that "the rise in suicide among men is a result of their loss of a role in society" they miss the point.

There is a huge range in suicide rates among different groups of men. It is far higher - and rising - among unskilled men than among professional men. Men are more likely to kill themselves if they are unmarried, gay or from an ethnic minority. The simmilarity to DV profile also seems to have escaped commentatoprs.

The suicide rate for young men has doubled since the early Eighties, while for women it has almost halved. Suicide is now the biggest single cause of death of men aged 25 to 34, who are more than five times likely to take their lives as women of the same age, according to figures from the Office for National Statistics. The All Party Group on Men's Health is so alarmed that in its inaugural meeting it will press for measures to ensure that suicidal young men can find help. The launch is being supported by Public Health Minister Yvette Cooper.

Howard Stoate, chairman of the men's health group, said: 'It's the commonest cause of death among young men. It's an important issue and is under-recognised - most people have no idea it is so high - but the statistics are shocking.'

Overall, suicide has overtaken car accidents as a cause of death among men.

Dale Peters, a market trader selling plants and flowers, hanged himself at 25 after splitting up with his girlfriend. 'He found it difficult to see where he was going. He was ticking over with a small business, but he wasn't doing particularly well - he didn't see a

future for himself,' said his father, John Peters, who teaches psychology and works for the self-help group Survivors of Bereavement by Suicide.

'Many men have expectations they should be providers, and for a small percentage they don't live up to it.'

Males are falling behind females at school and university. The loss of unskilled jobs has hit men with few educational qualifications particularly

hard. 'Young men cannot see what their role is, and often their parents cannot see what their role is,' said Peters. 'The men can be perfectly sane in coming to that decision. For so many it is a very determined act.'

More women than men attempt suicide each year, but are less likely to succeed. They usually choose methods such as an overdose of pills which can

often be tackled in casualty wards, and are often seen as pleas for help.

Men tend to choose violent, decisive methods, such as hanging, jumping off

buildings, crashing a car or shooting themselves.

'There's fatalism about the whole thing. People say they're going to do it anyway, but that's just not true,' said Banks. 'There are many practical things we can do. Changing men's attitudes to themselves is a long-term

job, but it's not impossible.'

anthony.browne@observer.co.uk

p11

[Graphs and a few small items omitted.]

p12

Ill Eagle 14, may01

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.

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'."

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. Already, the divorcing father files with the judge an extensive set of documents from Retreat culled from www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/ 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

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.

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. ....

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

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

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

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!!!

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

* http://www.massnews.com/

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, see my website www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/ -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

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 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

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 apite 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 dea diver with someone who takes an occasioal 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 secxual 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

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

www2.prestel.co.uk/littleton/ek1_global_warming.htm 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

http://www.john-daly.com 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

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 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

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

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

[picture]

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.

p16

[CAFCASS; draft appendix to 'contact guidlines']

Ill Eagle 16, aug01

p1

'WAVE' DAD BANGED UP WITH MURDERERS

- Kirsty Turner,

Sunday Independent 8apr01

in Ill Eagle 15, p1

2aug01 From Mark Harris

Dear Ivor,

Can I please place a very big thank you in the next "Ill Eagle" to everyone who supported me during my stay at HMP Pentonville. I am totally convinced the pressure upon the family court Judiciary-who, let's face it, have little respect nation-wide anyway - played a major part in my release.

I am still in total disbelief as to what Madness Munby did in sending me down for such things as trying to bribe the mother into complying with a Contact Order (4 months), giving my children their birthday presents on a contact last year (4 months) ,driving near their home in hope of seeing them between contacts (6 months consecutive to the 4 months) while working as a driving instructor, but also his total disregard of four very good Court Welfare Reports and eighteen (yes, 18) Social Service reports of observed Contact between 1994 - Oct 2000, ALL of which detail my kids happy at contact.

Unfortunately, we had the Official Solicitor involved, who in my experience simply does not ever support contact if the mother opposes it, so therefore sends a Child Psychiatrist (why on earth we had one of them when no-one ever claimed any of my three kids were mentally ill, I'll never know) to

interview the kids in the mothers presence, and therefore gets them dissenting against contact, so then Mad Dog Munby could then elevate this version of the kids wishes to the forefront, and disregard the 22 good welfare reports.

I tried to appeal this on 2 July, but Sloss and Thorpe dismissed my appeal as it was Madness Munby's "discretion" to disregard the contact reports by a total of two CWOs and five Social Workers, in favour of the Corrupt Child

Psychiatrist (Dr Hamish Cameron, 2 Kings Ride Gate, Richmond, Surrey) who never saw a single contact.

Therefore, although endless Perjury by the mother is accepted and encouraged, bias reports-against the father of course-are often passed through and accepted "on the nod", in my case GOOD welfare reports are simply disregarded in favour of the mothers wishes-just get the kids interviewed in front of her!

I have now gone back to Mad Dog Munby with my youngest's latest school reports, this is the first year she has not had any contact at all. All her previous reports (she's 10) describe her as "a popular member of the class", "polite and helpful", eager to please", etc. This year's now describes her as "very disruptive", "attention seeking" "very silly at times" and "often falling out with her peers". The only change to her life in the last year has been no contact with me at all. Interests of the child, Munby style! Let's see what his reaction to her reports in my application to restore contact will be-is he man

enough to admit he got it wrong? I won't hold my breath.

THE THORPE PROTEST

I will post a copy of the Wiltshire Gazette article from our demo on 21 July, and his response via the Lord Chancellors department. As can be seen, they/he are defending their position. But I do wonder just how much longer they will hold out before wanting to talk to us. We shall see, the next protest, August 18, Somerset!

If Madness Munby ignores or dismisses my application to restore contact based on the adverse school report, I intend holding a series of vigils outside his Manningford Bruce home (Frith Copse, Manningford Bruce, nr Pewsey, Wiltshire) in due course.

Anyone interested in coming along would be more than welcome. Press have already shown an interest, and I do intend to leaflet his village inviting the residents along to discover what sort of man lives in their village, with the lure of soft drinks, crisps, sweets and snacks for all those who come along.

His anger in Court just five days after the excellent protest outside his London home in April, I think, shows this nature of action - to the very doorstep of their exclusive homes - is a very effective weapon of hope to bring eventual justice to the unjust and corrupt family courts of today.

All any father wants is the same status as mothers new man; a presumption that you are fine to live with/spend time with/look after your kids UNLESS you actually do something wrong.

Just why should (as in my case) I live with my kids until the eldest was almost 7, then in the space of just 2 hours (the time it took my ex to clear my home of possessions and children while I was at a Football Match) I have then had to go to Court over what is now 120+ times just to prove (unsuccessfully on the most recent) that I am good enough to just see them?

Yet her new man moved in, and has never been interviewed, checked out, or even observed with my kids, although THORPE himself found (Court of Appeal, dec95) that he had indeed ASSAULTED them in breach of orders not to. And, of course, to this day, still lives with them. What we must all continue to do is ram home, time and again, the injustice, farce and corruption that goes on every day in these Family Courts. The shift AWAY from contact has got progressively worse since Sloss became President of the Family Courts. Increasingly, the rarity of positive welfare reports are consistently rejected by the current breed of hostile feminist/wimpish male Judges coming though the ranks since Sloss's appointment, but negative welfare reports are followed, consistently.

It is painfully obvious that since Sloss took charge (and backed up by the aggressive Mrs Justice Bracewell in the role as chair of the children act advisory committee) that ANY form of contact order is unlikely if the Court think the mother will become problematic over it.

All we seek is the same status as the mother's new man/men-that being a simple presumption you are fine with your kids UNLESS you actually do something. If it's good

p2

enough for the mother's new plaything, then it's sure good enough for fathers. We have press attention, the vast majority of the public perceive the Family Courts as bias to the mothers, we must, now the Judiciary are panicking, take them to the CORRUPTION that goes on, every single day up and down the Country, of perfectly good men being denied the right to be fathers to their kids for no good reason at all. We have right on our side, there are enough of us to bring about change, it's a simple case of us ALL being sufficiently motivated to do something - Join the protest movement.

More information as to future protests, call me 01752 346395.

- Mark Harris. 2aug01

Ivor, Demo in Somerset this coming Saturday, Aug 18, which means it will probably have happened by the time illeagle comes through. However, Candlelight vigils are planned outside a number of Judges houses on 25 Sept at 8.30pm for 1/2 hours.

We are doing one outside Sloss' in Exeter, perhaps you could seek support for ones outside Bracewell's (Somerton, Somerset), Thorpe's (Seend, Wiltshire), HHJ Hamilton (Coventry), and at least one London vigil (Probably outside Lady Justice Hale in N1).

You can put my number as a contact if you want, and I will put interested parties in touch with local organisers. - Mark Harris. 12aug01

From Judge Munby's ludicrous (Harris) Jail Committal order;

www.ivorcatt.com/18152.htm

For instance; "....4) On 26 April 2000 he did hand birthday presents to (middle) and (youngest) during the session of contact and without the presents first having been approved by Plymouth City Council thereby breaching paragraph (h) of the order,...."

" (2) for each of his said contempts 2,4,5. and 8 above the Contemnor Mark Dean Harris do stand committed to Her Majesty's Prison at Pentonville for a period of 4 months or until he shall be sooner discharged by due course of Law ...."

As my favourite barrister said to me, the senior Family Court judges come from Planet Zog. - Ed

The Abuse of Power

Patricia Hewett, The Abuse of Power, pub. Martin Robertson 1982, p93; "The ability of the courts to extend the law of contempt in unexpected, indeed absurd, directions, was amply illustrated by the Harman case. Harriet Harman [now deputy to the Attorney General], legal officer of NCCL .... The Divisional Court and the Court of Appeal both held that Harriet Harman had committed a serious contempt of court .... the govt refused to accept an amendment to the Contempt of Court Bill to reverse the Harman decision. ...."

Also see p88; "Perhaps the most difficult consequence of secrecy to identify accurately is the manipulation of information [by Munby] which such a system permits. The cloak of secrecy is not evenly woven. Ministers [and judges] are only too willing to pass out to receptive journalists the official [Munby, ignorant] version of [Harris criminal[ events, knowing that their versions cannot be set against the background studies .... But the clak is wearing threadbare." [1982! Sloss secrecy is well out of date. - Ed]

Parents take access fight to judge's home

- Jill Crooks, Devizes Gazette & Herald, 26july01

Divorced and separated parents fighting for access to their children took their protests to the Seend home of a senior judge at the weekend.

About 35 parents holding placards took part in a demonstration outside the home of Lord Justice Mathew Thorpe, one of the country's most senior appeal judges on Saturday afternoon.

The parents had come from London, Cambridge, Plymouth, Bristol and Wiltshire. They have all been battling with the courts for access to their children.

As they stood outside the driveway to Lord Justice Thorpe's house they shouted "children need both parents."

Protest organiser Mark Harris, and Tony Coe, both members of the Equal parenting Council, knocked on the judge's front door to deliver letters outlining the concerns felt by parents about the way family courts are run.

In the drive was a white L-registered Volvo 440 car. The shutters on both ground floor widows were drawn. No one answered the door so Mr. Coe posted the letters through the judge's letter box.

The protest continued for a few minutes outside the drive and as the protesters dispersed, two police cars pulled up, but there was no trouble.

Lord Justice Thorpe had been invited to the Bell inn in Seend to discuss the problems, but did not attend.

Mr. Coe, the President of the Equal Parenting Council, said that family courts were not carrying through the ruling contained in the 1989 Children's Act that parenting should be shared.

He said: "The key point is that one parent is being excluded for no good reason. If there is abuse or violence going on then of course there should be limitation of the parent's role, but we are talking about ordinary, loving, devoted parents that are being excluded from their children's life.

"Why is it that one parent has all the say? The other parent has the right to make an application to the court but the other parent can keep saying no and it can go on for months and years.

"If the system doesn't value the other parent (the parent who is not living with the children) then the children will think that. From the point of separation we need to treat the parents equally."

Mr. Coe dubbed the protests outside judges' homes the "judicial education programme." He added: "Not everybody agrees with the approach we are taking and I fully understand that view.

"But we have to make these people feel a little uncomfortable because the process makes our lives and our children's lives uncomfortable."

Richard Day, a 50-year-old father of two teenage daughters, has been fighting the Child Support Agency and the courts for the past seven years. He says as a result he has suffered financially and emotionally and sees his daughters no more than twice a year....

"We are reasonably minded people. We want what is best for our children and we need a system to be doing the same. If judges are not doing their jobs properly they should be sacked."

Lord Justice Thorpe, 62, has been an appeal judge in the family division on the High Court since October 1995.

His first marriage ended in divorce in 1989 and he remarried in the same year. He has three sons.

He was unavailable for comment about the protest outside his home in Seend....

A nasty piece of work

It may be worth pointing out that the nasty feminist who sent Mark back to jail when he lost his appeal was none other than Justice Hale who, a decade ago, when she was Mzzz Brenda Hoggett, said; "Family law no longer makes any attempt to buttress the stability of marriage or any other union. It has adopted principles for the protection of children and dependent spouses which could be made equally applicable to the unmarried. In such circumstances, the piecemeal erosion of the distinction between marriage and non-married cohabitation may be expected to continue. Logically we have already reached a point at which, rather than discussing which remedies should now be extended to the unmarried, we should be considering whether the legal institution of marriage continues to serve any useful purpose."

- email from Brian Robertson. 19 June 2001 23:26

A rider to the Mowbray Editorial, overleaf. Crucially, research shows that whereas the mother's role is "touchy-feely", compromising, soft, that of the father is as described in Mowbray's speech. ("Wait till your father comes home!") Poodle-man judges connive with radfem judges to force those few men they do not evict from their homes and children, to improperly play the mother's role, particulerly in the courts, thus destroying for their children the fatherly, upright example which protects them from lapsing into drugs and other loose behaviour. When a mother commits perjury it is less damaging to her children than when their father does. It is the persistent encouraging of perjury and of breaches of court orders which feminises the family courts and undermines fathers. - Ed

p3

Editorial

.... My dear dear lord,

The purest treasure mortal times afford

Is spotless reputation; that away,

Men are but gilded loam or painted clay.

A jewel in a ten-times barr'd-up chest

Is a bold spirit in a loyal breast.

Mine honour is my life; both grow in one;

Take honour from me, and my life is done:

Then, dear my liege, mine honour let me try;

In that I live, and for that will I die.

- Mowbray's Speech, Richard II, Act 1, Scene 1.

The great crime committed by Sloss, Thorpe, Hale and the rest of the anti-social rogues at the top of the Family Division is their continuing to inculcate a climate of perjury. They caused their junior judges to encourage perjured libels against fathers in order to validate the confiscation of fathers' children and property.

This was a crime much greater than theft, as we see in Mowbray's speech. Has Sloss ever bothered to consider the impact on a father when he finds that a judge in a secret court is so keen to believe any ridiculous allegation against any father? The clergyman caught up in the Orkneys scandal told me that a false charge of sexual abuse goes to one's innermost soul. These judges have been playing with fire. Of all people, because of Cleveland, Sloss ought to know. What she learned in Cleveland makes her failure to clamp down on perjury in her family courts all the more inexcusable.

Those who commit such high crime must not be allowed a hiding place. Until today, they have been inaccessible because of the weakness of a small number of men controlling the Men's Movement. Now that the collaborators have been brushed aside, the rogue judges stand exposed. They have to be got rid of as soon as possible, and replaced by an honest judicial system, or no system at all, so as to bring an end to the damage these irresponsible, vindictive judges continue to inflict on our children's image of their missing fathers.

Ivor Catt 21july01

When a judge tries the shrink ploy

As in my divorce, which pre-dated the film One flew over the cuckoo's nest, judges may connive with a divorcing wife to pretend that her husband has psychiatric problems. This is one way for a judge to validate his expropriating the father and cutting him off from his children. In my case, my wife launched a posse of three shrinks at me, including mad shrink Bryan Robinson, who remained desperate to drug me for a year, but fortunately failed to do so. So the judge had to invent other ruses, and still took my home, all my assets and my children.

I found some good material which far more succinctly than I can, give reasons to tread this ground with great care.

I also think this may assist you when dealing with a court calling for "psychiatric reports".

Here is the link:

http://mentalhelp.net/perspectives/articles/art090620004.htm

and The Rhetorical Paradigm in Psychiatric History:

http://www.enabling.org/ia/szasz/vatz2.html

Damned if you do ...

- Nicci Gerrard, Observer,

Review, 22apr01, p1

One in three women has had an abortion and 92% of us agree with the right to choose....

[Two full pages on the subject of abortion. Fathers did not enter into the subject. I think they first appear briefly half way through the second page;]

.... I told my boyfriend, and he said; "It's up to you." That made it more difficult, because he was involved, and the decision wasn't so completely obvious....

.... Every so often a man will try to stop his partner having an abortion, and we enter the jungle of moral issues. Should men have any legal rights over the potential child? Over a bundle of cells inside a woman's body?

A few weeks ago one such case hit the headlines. Stephen Hone .... [total number of words about Hone/Hansell, just over 100 - two column inches.]

.... One of them had been raped by her husband, who wanted her to give him a child.

[That was the total appearance of fathers in a two page article. - Ed]

ManKind and Ill Eagle can be reached at:-

1). Suite 367, 2 Lansdowne Row,

London W1X 8HL.

2) www.ivorcatt.com/

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 )

The M6 Protester

Family Life in Britain - 2001

Mark Harris is the divorced father who is prevented from seeing his children. But Jason Biddulph is a married father and he is also prevented from seeing his children. Both have tried all legal means and have been jailed for their pains.

Jason Biddulph and his wife have had their children taken off them by Birmingham Social Services - itself under review by the Ministry. Their crime was firstly being poor, secondly to be poorly educated, thirdly to be made unemployed (after an industrial accident) and fourthly to be overwhelmed by the complexities and bureaucracies that implement our social laws and regulations. His only way out was to protest. His protest was to threaten to jump onto the busy M6 Motorway in Birmingham on May 10th 2001.

The children had been whisked away to an undisclosed destination by Social Services. The children's grandparents (paternal and maternal) had been denied contact or any visits. Even the children's mother, Mrs. Biddulph, had been refused contact and visits. This has all the hallmarks of a stitch-up.

Jason appeared handcuffed before Judge McCarthy in Wolverhampton County Court. It was the first anniversary of the death of his 3-year-old daughter Paige - the incident which triggered the massive Social Services (SS) over-reaction.

Meanwhile Social Services had already put all his children up for legal and permanent adoption. Members of SS staff had been to the Biddulph households to collect momentos and family photos to give to the children as they grew up to remind them of their parents and grandparents, who would most probably be dead when the children reached the age of majority.

Jason's barrister asked the court for a psychological report to be carried out. Immediately the judge, very surprised, said; 'But that will take about 8 weeks. Why do you want him to remain in custody for another two months? He's been there for a month already'. This was an obvious display of sympathy from him.

The smears against this husband of many "convictions" printed in the newspapers prior to the trial hearing were scurrilous. They relate to his prosecutions for shoplifting - the only items ever stolen were clothes and nappies for his children.

For months he awaited trial nursing broken ribs and rope marks around his neck - not from his attempted jump but from the police who came to "rescue" him, and protect him from self-harm and who "gently" lowered him but who actually injured him. No family member has been allowed to photograph his injuries (B'ham Six ?).

When so many families are falling apart, do Social Services really need to add one more to that number, or to justify their own employment by tearing apart an intact family? Yes. Read Baskerville on their need to justify their jobs and income levels. - RW

From The Times Thursday 17 May 2001 : Law report

Jobseekers' allowance sex bias unlawful

COURT OF APPEAL

Hockenjos v Secretary of State for Social Security

Before Lord Justice Aldous, Lord Justice Tuckey and Lord Justice Kay

Judgment May 2, 2001

The statutory scheme of the Jobseekers' Act 1995 was to provide protection against the risk of unemployment. The Act therefore fell within the Equal Treatment Directive which prohibited discrimination on the ground of sex, whether directly or indirectly. The Court of Appeal so

p4

held in a reserved judgement in allowing an appeal brought by a separated father, Eugen Herman Hockenjos, against the dismissal by Mr Commissioner Goodman on May 2, 2000 of his appeal from the social security appeal tribunal which had dismissed his appeal from the adjudication officer, holding that he was not entitled to an additional amount in respect of his two children who stayed with him for different but approximately equal parts of the week, as they did with their mother who received child benefit.

Comment by EH: The COA has now instructed the Social Security Commissioner to finally hear arguments that it is unlawful when a parent (nearly always the father) who has parental responsibility (as defined in 89/UK/ Children Act) gets excluded from obtaining child additions and Family Premium increases when temporarily dependent on Social Security Benefits.

What will be considered is the question of whether direct linkage of Dependants Allowances to receipt of Child Benefit has a disproportionate impact on fathers when compared to mothers. I say linkage to receipt of Child Benefit creates Indirect Discrimination and that such linkage is in breach of European Law Directive 79/7/EEC.

No adjudication of the claim that indirect discrimination operates has been made to date.

The COA ruling merely established that Income based Job Seekers Allowance (JSA) is a scheme that falls under the orbit of EU Directive 79/7 (council directive which makes it unlawful for EU countries to operate Social Security schemes for the unemployed, sick and disabled if such a scheme has elements of direct or indirect discrimination on the grounds of a claimant's gender).

Dr Pelling's record

To: Ivor Catt

Date: 18 July 2001 14:03

Hi there,

I think it is about time that I personally put on record the credit owed to Dr Pelling for what he has done in my case which recently made the headlines. See the write-up in The Times: http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/0,,200001-202923,00.html

For the last three years Dr Pelling has worked brilliantly developing with me the fine legal arguments. Not only that, but he was also extremely supportive when I got emotionally tired of fighting a case which has tremendous opportunity to do much good for fathers and their children. Dr Pelling dealt with all the paperwork, he photocopied for me, he prepared bundles, he even walked to the court to file necessary urgent paperwork, and most importantly: it was Dr Pelling who acted as my representative on five occasions as the case wound its way through the appeals process. Without Dr Pelling it would not have been possible to fight my case. And for all that work and committed help he received the princely reward of about one dozen London Underground travel tickets when he came to see me!

The only reason why Dr Pelling's name does not appear in the Court of Appeal write-up is because the rules of court prevented him from addressing the court himself. Thus I have to say: All credit is owed to him is huge.

Hope the myths that hold Michael as anything other than a committed fighter for father and children's rights are soon laid to rest - I hope people would recognise Michael for what he is: namely a tireless fighter for civil liberties and human rights, and doing a great job.

I also should put on record that FNF was not able to help me with my request with either statistics or names of persons. Given that FNF has been around for 25 years their inability to assist me with details on people who have (like I had) a shared residence order was most disappointing. FNF failure also is a pointed why it's time for a massive shake-up.

I wish FNF people would judge Dr Pelling on the basis of his record. Then they would be able to see that when dealing with matters of law, courts, procedures, Dr Pelling is the most knowledgeable person of all the people who want to get a fair deal for fathers.

I think when the Old Guard FNF trustees wanted to chuck him out of FNF it may have been because they simply could not handle it that there is someone who can actually achieve results without going along with disempowered fatherhood rituals which Old Guard FNF is encouraging fathers to accept.

If you need more info please feel free to contact me - Eugen Hockenjos

Secret Courts

I studied the case which Pelling took to the European Court of Human Rights quite a lot, leading to a 5-2 judgement against him. It is very wrong that people are trying to cite cases when Pelling loses, to argue that when he loses, he damages fathers and their children.

The dissenting judgement by the Greece and the Lithuanian(?) judges is very important, and will be the basis on which we (= Pelling) goes forward. Years ago, John Campion told me that Europe, like the UK, was heavily feminised. Now radfem dogma is full of inconsistencies. Pelling needs to go to these lengths to tease out these inconsistencies.

In any case, I hope the recent Hock victory against the Secretary of State in the Appeal Court (great credit for that going to Pelling), and the recent Pelling victory against FNF in the High Court, will stop these innuendoes against Pelling's excellent work in court, very much to the benefit of fathers and their children. Pelling's ability and dedication is far greater than we deserve. - Ed

Women's Quarterly

- summer01, no. 28. The Journal of the Independent Women's Forum. www.womensquarterly.com info@iwf.org

p25; ....when choices and other factors are included, women earn 98 cents on a man's dollar. Feminist organizations like to claim that the wage gap is much wider, painting a bleak picture of the status of women. Crittenden notes that the IWF arrived as the 2-cent gap by comparing young childless women and men. [This is what I do at www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/04074. This maps very well onto; ".... the pay gap between women and men is largely a result of family responsibilities. The earnings of single childless women, on average, are over 95 percent of those of single, childless men: but married mothers earn, on average, only 60 per cent of the pay of married fathers." - Patricia Hewitt and Penelope Leach, Social Justice, Children and Families, pub. IPPR, 1993, page v." Ms Joshi, North London, has gone further by inventing the concept of "lifetime earnings". Women need to have their lifetime earnings made up to those of men because they do not earn when mothering. A rough estimate puts their lifetime (mothering) loss at £200,000. The obvious solution is to impose a man tax, payable only by men. With the population equally divided, this means that each man should pay a further £100,000 in tax, which will be about £2,500 p.a. during his working life, to be given tax free to an equal number of women. Thus, the after-tax income of a single working woman, for fairness, will be £5,000 p.a. more than that for a man, married or unmarried. Margaret Jay has been agitating about lifetime earnings. Jay and Joshi please note. Jay believes that only pay parity will free women from bondage. All I have done is roughly work out the numbers necessary to meet her vision of pay parity. Jay will like the side-effect, that single women will not marry. Her marriages were rocky. - Ed]

p30; Many govt agencies proudly trumpet their partnerships with feminist groups. .... [One] including [the dreadful] NOW and the National Committee on Pay Equity - the latter organisation that uses misleading data about the gender wage gap to call for more regulation of the economy on behalf of women.

[The present initiative, to increase single women's pay (by exploiting the low earnings of married women), will push that of single women above that of single men, and make young men even more unmarriageable. One reason will be that the financial penalty for both women and men who marry will increase. iwf have assembled ten major statistics which have been falsified by radfems throughout the world. One, of course, is Stinko's "one in four" lie trotted out by Jay and Livingstone. - Ed]

p7; There is a widespread belief that sexual abuse of children is endemic to society. This is a relatively new notion. In fact, it can be traced to a particular moment in history: April 17, 1971.

On that day New York Radical Feminists, a group that at its height boasted no more than 400 members, held a groundbreaking conference in New York. .... It was Rush's conclusion that electrified her audience: "The family itself is an instrument of sexual and other forms of child abuse," Rush declared. She added that this abuse "is permitted because it is an

p5

unspoken but prominent factor in socializing and preparing the female to accept a subordinate role .... In short the sexual abuse of female children is a process of education that prepares them to become the wives and mothers of America."

Many women at the gathering had backgrounds in the New Left of the 1960s. They felt their male comrades had exploited them, relegating them to making coffee, typing, and sex.

Now they could show that feminists had uncovered the great American secret: Behind the picket fences, hidden by those starched suburban curtains, fathers were raping their daughters to prepare them for their proper role in society. Beyond racism, imperialism, and capitalism lay the true root of evil - patriarchy .... Catherine MacKinnon, the law professor who helped develop the legal definitions of sexual harassment, announced (absent any evidence) that 4.5% of all women are victims of incest by their fathers and, if brothers,, stepfathers, uncles, and family friends are thrown in, the figure rose to 40%. "In fact," wrote MacKinnon, "it is the woman who has not been abused who deviates." Seemingly scholarly studies by feminists-with-credentials such as Harvard psychiatrist Judith Herman bolstered the case for widespread incest. Herman dedicated her 1981 book, Father-Daughter Incest, to the women "estimated by us to be millions, who have personally experienced incestuous abuse." No wonder Andrea Dworkin wrote that, for a woman, the home is the most dangerous place in the world! .... According to Herman, Freud simply could not confront the reality that incest "is an inevitable result of patriarchal family structure." ....

[IWF, in which Christina Hoff Sommers is a key player, is the backlash against the man-hating, anti-family, massively federal funded NOW. Better late than never. ]

The first 80 pages of Catherine A. MacKinnon, Towards a Feminist Theory of the State, pub. Harvard UP, are entitled; "Feminism and Marxism". Erin Pizzey's friend Cools said she had a major influence in the drafting of Canadian legislation. Erin, our 28oct00 conference speaker, says that feminists are marxist. Now see nasty Hale, back on p2.

'Who Stole Feminism ?'

by Christina Hoff Sommers.

- Review by Antonia,

a reader from UK, 22may01

Ivor,

Next I'll try to get a copy of her 'The War Against Boys' and review it.

Brilliant expose of gender feminism.

This book is unique. It exposes the myths propounded by gender feminists about women's oppression and victimhood, but without preaching. The author has a very lucid style, and goes for an unusual tactic as far as feminist writers are concerned, which is to hunt down important statistics.

Sommers relentlessly hunts down the sources of widely-quoted statistics about women (1 in 4 are victims of rape, 150, 000 women in the USA die of anorexia every year, etc.etc.) - statistics which have been publicised by gender feminists. They are false and therefore profoundly misleading to the general public. They are also very damaging for public policy. This is what interests me most about this book. I wish someone in the UK would write a book like this, because these issues never get thrashed out in the open like in the US, and they really need to be. Intellectually, Sommers scores best in this book on debunking 'feminist epistemology', the erroneous view that philosophy and science done by women elicits a different set of methods. This is very insulting to female academics, most of whom do not agree with the philosophy behind gender feminism. Gender feminists have tried to promote things like feminist philosophy of science and even mathematics, which is ludicrous but also, again, an affront to those women who do exceptionally well in these fields. As a woman I cannot help think that one of the driving forces behind gender feminism is a secret jealousy of those women who have succeeded academically, socially and politically without it. That is why these people are so infuriated by Sommers' book and have to resort to being so rude about it. So, all in all, this book is a very challenging read, whatever you think of the various types of feminism. Hurling abuse at it will only serve to further confirm its conclusions.

Lessing lashes out

- Louette Harding, You, Mail on Sunday, 12aug01, p10

Doris Lessing's The Golden Notebook was seen as one of the 60s' great feminist novels. Yet these days Lessing has nothing but scorn for the women's movement, and says that it is men who are undervalued. .... She has won .... the prestigious Asturias prize .... and will be going to the presentation. .... 'every journalist will say, "You have been fighting for the rights of women ...." and I will patiently say, "No, I haven't." But it's a waste of time. I fill a need.' ....

She reserves her scorn for the women's movement, likening its early days to a little girl ripping off her knickers: 'The great figures of that time do have a pretty exhibitionist streak.' There followed a period 'when they were so heavy and pompous and they couldn't say anything without rubbishing men. It was a religion. They had a faith and you couldn't attack it. You couldn't make jokes, God forbid.'

She believes the pendulum has swung so far that 'old-fashioned love is in defiance of the spirit of the times. It is hard to defend. I know several people who are rather guilty and apologetic about the fact that they have a totally satisfactory love going on.'

.... ' Women do give up a great deal for their children but of course so do men. It's not noticed when men do it. I'm trying all the time to combat this automatic women-here, men-there business. We're always assuming we're so different, but I'm wondering .... I don't think we are.'

Appetite for family destruction

A little-noticed commission is beginning work in Virginia that has major implications nationwide for both families and governmental ethics. Every four years, each state is required to review its guidelines for child support. In Virginia the outcome may be less remarkable than the process.

The last review in 1999 was a classic case of the foxes guarding the hen house. The review panel was selected by the director of the state's Division of Child Support Enforcement (DCSE), and at least 10 of the 12 members derived income from the divorce system: two judges, four lawyers, a feminist, an enforcement official, two custodial parents, and a legislator. All these people have a stake in encouraging divorce and criminalizing fathers and therefore in making child support as onerous as possible. "By virtue of the Director of DCSE deciding its make-up, conflict-of-interest concerns are both evident and also reflective of much larger improprieties."

The words are from the minority report of Barry Koplen, the lone representative of parents paying court-ordered child support....

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.

"ANC trio 'plotted to murder Mbeki'

- Tim Butcher,

Telegraph, 26apr01, p17

".... three senior members of the ruling African National Congress were accused of plotting to kill President Thabo Mbeki .... who has looked increasingly under threat after a series of public policy gaffes over Aids and Zimbabwe. .... Mbeki refused to deny that his life was being threatened ...."

["The [AIDS] Industry has to destroy Mbeki. There is so much money at stake ...." - Ill Eagle 11, oct00, p4]

p6

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. - Ill Eagle 15, may01. For latest update, go to www.ncfm.org/will.htm

Women's unit 'failing in its role'

- Sarah Womack,

Telegraph, 9aug01, p10

A scathing assessment of the govt's women's unit and its work was published by the Equal Opportunities Commission yesterday.

It said the unit, which would cost taxpayers £2.3 million this year, had failed to meet key criteria set down by Labour, which included clear aims, ....

"On occasion there has been tension between promoting a family-friendly policy and a woman-friendly one. The govt's support of the former and hostility to the latter generated an ambivalence regarding the women's unit." .... widespread criticism of Baroness Jay .... criticised after spending £100,000 telling women looking for work to visit the Job Centre or look in the .... papers.

[Do we see here that EOC radfems can casually write their propaganda that the family oppresses women, and then a female (radfem?) journalist puts it in the Telegraph? - Ed.]

"'I am so angry about the rude way she treated me, making me feel like a worm, that I wrote saying so and posted it through her letterbox....' - Sally Soames, Sunday Times photographer, on the Labour peeress Baroness Jay" - Sunday Times, 12aug01, sect. 4 p10.

The Russian Effort to Abolish Marriage

When the Bolsheviki came into power in 1917 they regarded the family, like every other 'bourgeois' institution, with fierce hatred, and set out with a will to destroy it. 'To clear the family out of the accumulated dust of the ages we had to give it a good shakeup, and we did,' declared Madame Smidovich, a leading Communist and active participant in the recent discussion. So one of the first decrees of the Soviet Government abolished the term 'illegitimate children.' This was done simply by equalizing the legal status of all children, whether born in wedlock or out of it, and now the Soviet Government boasts that Russia is the only country where there are no illegitimate children. The father of a child is forced to contribute to its support, usually paying the mother a third of his salary in the event of a separation, provided she has no other means of livelihood.

http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/26jul/russianwoman.htm The Atlantic Monthly | July 1926

The Russian Effort to Abolish Marriage

"Men took to changing wives with the same zest which they displayed in the consumption of the recently restored forty-per-cent vodka." by A Woman Resident in Russia

.....

The question whether marriage as an institution should be abolished is now being debated all over Russia with a violence and depth of passion unknown since the turbulent early days of the Revolution. Last October a bill eliminating distinctions between registered and unregistered marriages and giving the unmarried consort the status and property rights of the legal wife was introduced in the Tzik, or Central Executive Committee. So much unforeseen opposition to the proposed law developed that the Tzik decided to postpone its final adoption until the next session, meanwhile initiating a broad popular discussion of the project....

Full text at www.ivorcatt.com/17148.htm

Beatrix Campbell

In 1983/87 Beatrix Campbell co-authored a book Sweet Freedom with Anna Coote. Coote is one of the close Harriet Harman - Patricia Hewett trio. ("Over the past twenty years Patricia Hewett, Anna Coote and I have developed our ideas together" - Harriet Harman, The Century Gap, 1993, pvii.; Patricia Hewett, About Time ...., 1993; "I want to thank my colleagues at IPPR, .... Anna Coote .... Harried Harman .... gave me helpful comments ....") Thus, Bea's extremely nasty hatred of men is close to the centre of the Blair government.

[Elsewhere, on TV, Bea Campbell announced that she was lesbian. Her attacks on heterosexual men (below) clash with the statistics, which say that 35% of paedophiles are homosexual, although homosexuals make up less than 2% of the population (Ill Eagle 10, p2). However, some sources claim that lesbians despise gay men.]

Unofficial Secrets

- Beatrix Campbell,

pub. Virago 1988

p23 "[Dr Buchanan said;] 'A child's vagina is not made for abuse, it doesn't dilate. So for abusers who want orifices the anus is the place. They've been at it for years. Abusers will abuse anything - holes in the floor, their own children, anybody else's, anyone or anything.'

"In the 1970s Buchanan's consciousness had been raised by reading feminist texts like Shere Hite's studies of adult sexual relationships. ' .... the pressure women felt and all those for whom there was no pleasure in sex at all. It was shattering. Sex was designed for chaps. Male attitudes play a major part in abuse: pressure, coercion, threats.'" [At our 28oct00 conference, Lynette Burrows told us that when on TV with Shere Hite she, and secretly the men present, found Shere totally ridiculous. This demonstration via Bea of her influence close to Blair's Cabinet tells us that Lynette is wrong to ask us to laugh Shere off. Nasty, false propaganda is circling around Blair. - Ed]

p153 "The men's movement. What made the Cleveland case so remarkable was not so much the number of referrals as the mass dissent from the diagnosis. Not in 100 years had patriarchal society been so profoundly and publicly confronted by the scale of men's sexual abuse of children. Male sexuality was the problem, but in the great sex scandal of the 1980s that had become almost unsayable."

p164. ".... whether professional men have children .... doesn't make any difference - they don't care for them anyway, someone else does .... men's irresponsible fatherhood is material to our social world ...."

[Bea sees the Cleveland sex abuse as inhering in male sexuality, particularly that of fathers. Fathers assert patriarchal power by violence and sexual abuse, or else the threat of them. Thus it makes good sense that this govt's agents cut off as many children from their fathers as possible. The very low statistics on father violence and father sexual abuse caused falsifier Stinko to switch talking (in the dreadful Yllo 1988 book Feminist Perspectives on Wife Abuse) about a woman's horror of the threat of violence, which threat lasts longer than actual violence. (This whole fraud collapses under the suppressed stat that women initiate more violence than do men. {Ill Eagle 3, p8} ?He was going to hit me, so I hit him first?) Anyone wanting to dismiss Stinko should bear in mind that Margaret Jay, close to Blair, promotes this Stinko idea of Fear of Violence. Even though she also quotes Stinko's false "one in four" stat, Jay can avoid facing the music when 1 in 4 is discredited by switching to Stinko's Fear of Violence. These women are deeply disturbed, anti-social, evil, devious, and close to Blair. - Ed Also see www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/18154.htm]

From the last Ill Eagle, p11

["Also, the organisation is irrationally biased against homosexual men. This prejudice is reflected in the pages of Ill Eagle...."

....

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 apite of his excellent speech to us on 28oct00, we have to conclude from his persistent refusal to define his

p7

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]

Later, Aidan promised me an article outlining his views on homosexuality, but he has not delivered. I will try to fill the gap by quoting from Green.

The Sexual

Dead-End

- by Stephen Green,

pub. Broadview, sep1992

p1 ".... the head of a local human rights agency was asked on American television, just before a gay rights measure was debated, whether she thought there really was no moral difference between giving special protection to people who happened to be born black and giving special protection to those who had made a voluntary choice to commit sodomy with other men. 'Why' she announced, 'Gays would never do that!'" [S.G. quoting R G Magnusson]

p11 [Quotes survey of homosexuals by Ebbeson et al., "Sex Habits ....", Archives of Sexual Behaviour, vol. 13 no. 4, 1984, p294; "Of the 240 persons who provided information, 95% had been involved in anal intercourse ...." [See Ill Eagle 8, may00, p4]

Whereas on p92 he has 7% having had a fist up their rectum, on p93 the figure is 41%.

p101 "The rectal spincter of homosexuals who allow other men's penises, hands and arms into their anus gradually loses its ability to contain waste. The subject becomes incontinent and dribbles at inconvenient times .... a sanitary towel becomes a necessity .... 'fisting', which is the insertion of the fist or forearm into the rectum and colon was .... almost unknown in Kinsey's day .... 'fisting' causes, at a minimum, rectal trauma .... It can also rip the intestine .... and allow faecal matter into the abdominal cavity. Immediate surgery may prevent death."

[At this point Green does not mention that amyl nitrites, or poppers, are used to relax the spincter, which is much tighter than the vagina. Duesberg believes that since poppers are immuno-suppressant, they are the main cause of AIDS. Root-Bernstein's 1993 book gives further less serious immuno-suppressant aspects of the lifestyle of some homosexual communities .

In FYC (fameduc@aol.com) bulletin no. 89, 1997, Dr. Stammers correctly interpreted Cameron et al. in Omega, Journal of Death and Dying, vol29 no.3, 1994, as giving an expectation of life for gay men as a staggering 30 years less than that for normal men. Curiously, he has now backed away from his previous correct evaluation towards only 10 years or so shorter lifespan for gays. When a leading Gay attacked Chris Smith for wrongly saying in the Commons that one was born with it, saying that in fact one had a choice, he did not go on to say one could choose between life and death! - Ed]

p323 "Robert Bly has been difficult enough for the liberal media to understand and his thesis is already awkward for commentators to accept. Application of his work to the psychological deficiencies of homosexuals would tip him immediately into political incorrectness and obscurity.

"According to Robert Bly, there has been no coherent masculine response to feminism, which recognises only two types of man, its favourite Aunt Sally of macho-man, and the approved vulnerable new man. Bly asserts that the hard-drinking, womanising bully is most certainly not a valid role model for a man, but then neither is the wimpish - or 'soft' - new man, who throws out the baby of masculinity with the bath water of macho man."

p337 "The pro-gay stance of the unions was as a result of pressure from the National Council for Civil Liberties, which had since the mid seventies had its very own well established Lesbian and Gay Group. One Barry Prothero was appointed to be its full time gay rights officer in 1980, again inevitably during the tenure of Patricia Hewett and Harriet Harman. ["Patricia Hewett, General Secretary of the NCCL for the past seven years ...." - back cover of P Hewett, The Abuse of Power, pub. Martin Robertson 1982] Mr. Prothero's qualifications for this post included being a member of the Gay Activists Alliance and having shared a home with Paul Crane, the 'gay' lawyer, Stephen Gee of the pro-paedophile Gay left and John Lloyd, co-founder of [pro paedophilia] Paedophile Action for Liberation.

[We see lesbian Bea working hard to smear heterosexual fathers with child sexual abuse, while at the same time she has a strong link via Hewett and Harman (through Prothero, whom Hewett appointed, and who lived with a paedophile) to pro-paedophilia activism by homosexuals! Bea sees the heterosexual males' main ambition (but not the Gays'!) as being to bugger. What does Prothero's flatmate Gee enjoy? - Ed.]

When love fails

By Bettina Arndt, The Age (Melbourne) 4 August 2001

http://www.theage.com.au/news/state/2001/08/04/FFXEX9OUWPC.html

"Our darling Greg died of a broken heart," announced the death notice placed by his mother and sister when federal MP Greg Wilton killed himself last year.

Wilton's death attracted massive publicity, highlighting his marriage break-up and loss of his children as events precipitating his drastic action. Three weeks earlier, Wilton was found in a distressed state in a car with his two young children.

Wilton, 44, was well aware of the vulnerability of men in his situation. Three years earlier he gave a speech in parliament commenting on a report on youth suicide, pointing out that the group at greatest risk of killing themselves were adult men.

"From the extensive research (of) the last five years ... it becomes apparent men kill themselves due to an inability to cope with life events such as relationship break-ups of the kind (I) myself have suffered," said Wilton, whose first marriage had ended in divorce.

Each year in Australia, more than 1000 men aged 25-44 take their own lives. The rate of suicide among these adult males is more than twice the teenage (15-19) suicide rate.

While the male teenage suicide rate has been stable for the past decade, the rate for adult males has been rising since the 1970s. Most of them, like Greg Wilton, are casualties of family breakdown.

A Queensland study of 4000 suicides found more than 70 per cent were associated with a relationship break-up. The study, conducted by Professor Pierre Baume, who is now at Monash University, showed men were nine times more likely to take their lives following a break-up than women.

In the 1990s we spent more than $31 million on youth suicide prevention. Yet no federal suicide funds have been targeted at the males showing the most consistent rise in suicide rates. The plight of these men has only just made it on to the national agenda.

This month our peak suicide prevention body - the National Advisory Council on Suicide Prevention - for the first time is considering national initiatives addressing this risk group. A series of meetings is being held between state and federal suicide bodies, plus expert panels, to determine how to reach these men.

Professor Ian Webster, chairman of the council, names this group as the priority facing his committee. "It is a real problem for us. We are trying to determine how best to approach it. I don't feel that as yet we have any clear way of engaging with this risk group or deciding how to appeal to them."

Webster said his committee is likely to invite key research and interest groups to propose new initiatives, an invitation welcomed by Chris Cantor, a Queensland psychiatrist who has spent the past six years researching and writing journal articles drawing attention to the unmet needs of this risk group in suicide policies.

Cantor, who conducted some of his original research with Baume at Griffith University's Australian Institute for Suicide Research and Prevention, believes the link with relationship breakdown is critical.

His own research shows the risk of suicide is far higher for men in the period following marital separation - the suicide risk among separated men was 18 times that of separated women - but, after divorce, the rates for men declined to three times those of women.

Baume's data also points to the separation period as the critical risk time. "The real risk is within four to six weeks of the separation rather than after divorce. Men are most vulnerable immediately after rejection," he said.

Cantor questions whether the first weeks are so vital but feels this issue needs exploring. He would like, through the Family Court, to track families from the point of

p8

separation through to six months post-divorce, with regular interviews of both parents and children to measure mental health, depression and suicidal tendencies.

From his previous research, Cantor suspects that loss of meaningful contact with children will emerge as a major risk factor for suicide. His research shows women with children are less likely to commit suicide than similarly aged women without children.

"It seems highly likely that most of the suicide problems associated with separated men may relate to child access problems. The research suggests that some non-custodial mothers may be in the same boat," he said.

Overseas, other researchers are reaching similar conclusions. Augustine Kposowa, associate professor of sociology at the University of California at Riverside, analysed data from the National Longitudinal Mortality Study and found the risk ratio for divorced men is 8.6 times the rate for divorced women. He, too, is convinced the key factor is men's loss of their children.

"Even with visitation rights, a man may not get to see his children. He's already experienced loss of love through the break-up of the relationship and then he faces the loss of his children. This drives some men, especially in the early stages of separation, to come to the conclusion that life is not worth living," said Kposowa, who is researching the role of the court system and loss of custody in the heightened suicide risk for divorced men.

Edward Kruk, social work professor at the University of British Columbia in Canada, has conducted research in both Britain and Canada on the impact of divorce on fathers.

He found that, after losing daily contact with their offspring, the fathers in his study passed through a grieving process similar to that of parents whose child has died - 61 per cent described mental health difficulties they had not experienced prior to the divorce, including suicidal tendencies.

Meanwhile, in Australia, an organisation supporting separated men is gathering data that demonstrates worrying suicidal tendencies in separated men. MENDS (Men Exploring New Directional Strategies) programs have been running for more than six years, recently with Commonwealth Government funding. Psychological evaluations of more than 500 men attending the programs show most of them fall into the highest risk category for "suicidality" - showing thinking processes and behavior known to precede suicide.

MENDS has evidence its programs - based on education and the group support provided by men sharing similar experiences - have a significant effect on suicide risk during the critical separation period.

But the problem is how to reach separated men who are floundering on their own.

The founder of MENDS, psychologist Owen Pershouse, believes he has a possible answer: "Between 30 and 40 per cent of calls we get following up publicity about MENDS come from women. They are mostly mothers, sisters, sometimes a work colleague or even the ex-wife. Women notice what's happening to men they care about. They are the ones to target."

Baume agrees that women may provide the key to reaching these troubled men. He believes the ultimate solution lies in long-term cultural change, teaching boys that it is not unmanly to express their feelings so separated men don't end up so isolated. But, given the reticence of the typical Australian male to admit he's in trouble, Baume believes the answer lies in harnessing the power of women to get men to talk to them.

Women like Alice. That's not her real name, but as the mother of a 23-year-old who has just attempted suicide, Alice naturally wants to avoid publicity. Her son is reeling from the loss of his two-year de facto relationship. The couple has a three-month-old baby.

"This girl is his whole life. He feels life isn't worth living without her and his new baby," said Alice, who luckily works in New South Wales community services and was able to quickly obtain good psychiatric help for her son. Her nervousness is increased by the fact that three years ago her son attempted to hang himself when his first major relationship came to an end.

Listening to this mother talk about her son's dependency on these two young women, one wonders how often broken relationships feature even in youth suicides, when young men suffer the loss of that first taste of intimacy after emotionally constrained years of male adolescence.

Clearly relationship breakdown isn't the whole story in the worrying increase in male suicide - there are numerous other relevant factors, such as substance abuse, mental illness, and unemployment. But given the evidence suggesting it could be a key factor, at least it offers policy makers somewhere to start.

What Baume, Cantor and Pershouse are suggesting is public campaigns drawing attention to the fact that recently separated men are high risk. If we can run youth suicide prevention campaigns encouraging young men to look after their mates, why can't we teach our community to watch out for men who have lost their families?

Cantor, who suggests workplace initiatives may be effective, believes these men may be an easier target than youth, being more mature and aware of their responsibilities to their families.

Bettina Arndt is a staff writer.

[Like Wilton, I was high profile Establishment (Sir Clive Sinclair had just given me £500,000 for my computer invention, to much media acclaim,) when I divorced my wife. Six weeks later, to suddenly find myself a pariah, under attack by all arms of the Society that I had so recently been at the centre of (police, psychiatrists, social workers, lawyers, 'friends', all my relatives,) was traumatic. Although society's attack on young men and on fathers is similar in the UK, USA, Canada, Australia, NZ, the situation is marginally worse in Canada and Australia. This explains why the first research into a taboo subject should be done, and should then even be published, in those two countries. As the crisis deepens, the censorship will finally fail. However, there are still some years and a lot of deaths to go first before these dreadful women like Stinko, Jay and Bea lose their grip on research funding and on the media. - Ed]

Widowers Benefit Changes

How to obtain more than the Act states

Sexual Discrimination over Death Benefits

As from April 9th 2001 the law will change with the implementation of the Welfare Reform and Pensions Act 1999, to the effect that widowers will become entitled to the same state benefits as do wives losing their husbands. Previously, men were denied these benefits, which amounted to clear sexual discrimination in gross contravention of Article 14 of the European Convention of Human Rights.

However, whilst husbands losing their wives before the 9th April 2001, will, thereafter, receive the same benefits as do widows, they will not receive those benefits backdated to the date of death. SO THE UK GOVERNMENT REMAINS IN BREACH OF THE ECHR FOR THE PERIOD PRIOR TO APRIL 9TH 2001.

The Government have demonstrated their readiness to hold up their hands to the charges in that they have offered privately to a number of widowers who have sued them in the European Court of Human Rights settlements that amount to payment in full backdated to the date of death.

It would seem that the Government will provide the monies that widowers are entitled to under the ECHR, but only to those who are prepared to present an application to the European Court.

Anyone wishing to consider pursuing a backdated claim can register at the web site www.TheClaimRoom.com

Epistemologies

Feminisms, ed. Sandra Kemp and Judith Dquires, OUP 1997, p142

.... these feminst epistomological frameworks tend to share a critical stance in relation to rationality, objectivity, and universality, asserting the significance and legitimacy of emotional, politically engaged, and particularistic ways of knowing"

p9

[ad for ManKind 2001 Conference. See my website. - Ed]

p10

[Sloss damily scandal in News of the World. See my website.]

p11

ditto

Hobson's Choice.

Would you rather have Sloss or pay for it?

Full text at www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/zbbsloss1.htm and

www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/17134.htm

p12

Father Facts

From the internet on 29july01. For the full text, see www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/17137.htm

This is a nine page compendium of statistics on the outcome for children who are cut off from their father. The outcome is worse than for those children who are cut off from their mother. Many of the bad effects of cutting a child off from its father propagate down through later generations.

In the end, when the crisis has become grave, judges will bow to these statistics, and give up trying to make mother custody work. Having proven total incompetence in imposing shared parenting, they will switch to father custody. I hope that fathers with custody will behave better than mothers with custody have behaved.

Sexual activity. In a study of 700 adolescents, researchers found that "compared to families with two natural parents living in the home, adolescents from single-parent families have been found to engage in greater and earlier sexual activity." Source: Carol W. Metzler, et al.

A myriad of maladies. Fatherless children are at a dramatically greater risk of drug and alcohol abuse, mental illness, suicide, poor educational performance, teen pregnancy, and criminality. Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

Drinking problems. Teenagers living in single-parent households are more likely to abuse alcohol and at an earlier age compared to children reared in two-parent households. Source: Terry E. Duncan, Susan C. Duncan and Hyman Hops

Drug Use: "...the absence of the father in the home affects significantly the behaviour of adolescents and results in the greater use of alcohol and marijuana." Source: Deane Scott Berman

Sexual abuse. A study of 156 victims of child sexual abuse found that the majority of the children came from disrupted or single-parent homes; only 31% of the children lived with both biological parents. Although stepfamilies make up only about 10 percent of all families, 27 percent of the abused children lived with either a stepfather or the mother's boyfriend. Source: Beverly Gomes-Schwartz, Jonathan Horowitz, and Albert P. Cardarelli

Child Abuse. Researchers in Michigan determined that "49 percent of all child abuse cases are committed by single mothers." Source: Joan Ditson and Sharon Shay

Deadly predictions. A family structure index -- a composite index based on the annual rate of children involved in divorce and the percentage of families with children present that are female-headed -- is a strong predictor of suicide among young adult and adolescent white males. Source: Patricia L. McCall and Kenneth C. Land

High risk. Fatherless children are at dramatically greater risk of suicide. Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

Suicidal Tendencies. In a study of 146 adolescent friends of 26 adolescent suicide victims, teens living in single-parent families are not only more likely to commit suicide but also more likely to suffer from psychological disorders, when compared to teens living in intact families. Source: David A. Brent, et al.

Confused identities. Boys who grow up in father-absent homes are more likely that those in father-present homes to have trouble establishing appropriate sex roles and gender identity. Source: P.L. Adams, J.R. Milner, and N.A. Schrepf

Psychiatric Problems. In 1988, a study of preschool children admitted to New Orleans hospitals as psychiatric patients over a 34-month period found that nearly 80 percent came from fatherless homes. Source: Jack Block, et al.

Emotional distress. Children living with a never-married mother are more likely to have been treated for emotional problems Source: L. Remez, "Children Who Don't Live with Both Parents Face Behavioral Problems," Family Planning Perspectives (January/February 1992).

Uncooperative kids. Children reared by a divorced or never-married mother are less cooperative and score lower on tests of intelligence than children reared in intact families. Statistical analysis of the behavior and intelligence of these children revealed "significant detrimental effects" of living in a female-headed household. Growing up in a female-headed household remained a statistical predictor of behavior problems even after adjusting for differences in family income. Source: Greg L. Duncan, Jeanne Brooks-Gunn and Pamela Kato Klebanov

Unstable families, unstable lives. Compared to peers in two-parent homes, black children in single-parent households are more likely to engage in troublesome behavior, and perform poorly in school. Source: Tom Luster and Hariette Pipes McAdoo

Beyond class lines. Even controlling for variations across groups in parent education, race and other child and family factors, 18- to 22-year-olds from disrupted families were twice as likely to have poor relationships with their mothers and fathers, to show high levels of emotional distress or problem behavior, [and] to have received psychological help. Source: Nicholas Zill, Donna Morrison, and Mary Jo Coiro

Fatherly influence. Children with fathers at home tend to do better in school, are less prone to depression and are more successful in relationships. Children from one-parent families achieve less and get into trouble more than children from two parent families. The Consortium for the Study of School Needs of Children from One Parent Families

Divorce disorders. Children whose parents separate are significantly more likely to engage in early sexual activity, abuse drugs, and experience conduct and mood disorders. This effect is especially strong for children whose parents separated when they were five years old or younger. Source: David M. Fergusson, John Horwood and Michael T. Lynsky

Troubled marriages, troubled kids. Compared to peers living with both biological parents, sons and daughters of divorced or separated parents exhibited significantly more conduct problems. Daughters of divorced or separated mothers evidenced significantly higher rates of internalizing problems, such as anxiety or depression. Source: Denise B. Kandel, Emily Rosenbaum and Kevin Chen

Hungry for love. "Father hunger" often afflicts boys age one and two whose fathers are suddenly and permanently absent. Sleep disturbances, such as trouble falling asleep, nightmares, and night terrors frequently begin within one to three months after the father leaves home. Source: Alfred A. Messer

Disturbing news: Children of never-married mothers are more than twice as likely to have been treated for an emotional or behavioral problem. Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

Poor and in trouble: A 1988 Department of Health and Human Services study found that at every income level except the very highest (over $50,000 a year), children living with never-married mothers were more likely than their counterparts in two-parent families to have been expelled or suspended from school, to display emotional problems, and to engage in antisocial behavior. Source: James Q. Wilson

Fatherless aggression: In a longitudinal study of 1,197 fourth-grade students, researchers observed "greater levels of aggression in boys from mother-only households than from boys in mother-father households." Source: N. Vaden-Kierman, N. Ialongo, J. Pearson, and S. Kellam

Act now, pay later: "Children from mother-only families have less of an ability to delay gratification and poorer impulse control (that is, control over anger and sexual gratification.) These children also have a weaker sense of conscience or sense of right and wrong." Source: E.M. Hetherington and B. Martin

Crazy victims: Eighty percent of adolescents in psychiatric hospitals come from broken homes. Source: J.B. Elshtain

The full bibliography, with full details on sources, is five times as long. See

www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/17137.htm

p4; "The single most distinguishing feature of feminist scholarly work has been its overtly political nature, and feminism's commitment to material change has played a significant role in undermining traditional academic boundaries between the personal and political." - Feminisms, see our p8 endpiece.

p13

From: Lakritz, Naomi <LakritzN@TheHerald.Southam.ca>

To: <ivorcatt@electromagnetism.demon.co.uk>

From: Lakritz, Naomi <LakritzN@TheHerald.Southam.ca>

Date: 19 June 2001 15:37

Ivor: Here is the column you wanted:

Happy Person Day, dads

Naomi Lakritz, Calgary Herald, 17june01

Happy Father's Day, dads. Would you like a tie or another pair of socks? You can have anything you like, as long as you don't ask to sit at the table with the other half of the human race. Recently, the National Association of Women and the Law, along with the Ontario Women's Network on Custody and Access, threw a hissy fit and said they will boycott the federal Justice Department's national consultations on custody legislation because - gasp! - they'd have to sit at the same table as fathers' rights groups.

What are they afraid of - that the guys might burp or scratch themselves in some inappropriate place?If only it were that simple. Instead, the phrase "fathers' rights" is an oxymoron to people like OWNCA member Ghislaine Siroris who complains that if men are included in the seating arrangement, it doesn't demonstrate a clear commitment to women's equality.

It would be nice if the strident feminist element would make up its mind once and for all whether biology is destiny.

They'll lobby long and loud for a national day-care system because professional carers are better than moms any day, but when it comes to child custody, suddenly their view is that nobody can do it better than mom. Seems biology is indeed destiny, but only when it suits their purposes.

The women also objected to the "gender-neutral" language in the Justice Department documents that had been prepared for the hearings.

Didn't they just spend three decades emasculating the English lexicon and forcing everyone to convert to "chairperson," "spokesperson" and "personhole cover" on pain of being carted off for sensitivity re-education? And now that they've gelded the grammar as systematically as a farmer might a litter of piglets, they're still not happy. Oh, brother. Oops. Oh, sibling.

Much as these women would love to think they can reproduce by parthenogenesis and grow a child from an unfertilized egg, they can't. Much as some obviously believe it would be far more efficient to cuddle up to a turkey baster than to acknowledge that men's role in parenting is larger than just providing sperm, they can't do that, either.

When women like these set out to carve up the language into person-words, they also tinkered with meanings. Equality now means whatever gives them an edge over the guys and women's rights are synonymous with a self-serving agenda that is strikingly similar to the one they accuse men of using for thousands of years to oppress women.

"Women's organizations believe the outcome of this consultation will jeopardize the rights and safety of women and children," yaps NAWL spokesperson Bonnie Diamond.

Maybe her organization should change its name to the National Association of Women ARE the Law since that appears to be their premise.

Is there a species on the planet more unjustly maligned than fathers? Used-car salesmen get a better rap than dads do. Fathers are abusers, bullies, deadbeats, child molesters and all-around sexist clods who have a lot of gall wanting a relationship with their children once the initial moment of conception is over.

If these matriarchy-uber-alles groups want to boycott, girlcott or personcott the public consultations, then the hearings should get underway without them.

Why bother coaxing these crybabies back to the fold when all they have to say on the serious issue of changes to the federal Divorce Act is "gimme"?

These organizations speak only for themselves. They certainly do not speak for those of us who will have no ties to gift-wrap this Father's Day because the hard-working, decent, honourable guys who were our dads have passed away. We will not allow them to be insulted.

Pull up a chair, all you fathers, and join in the debate. You have every right to be there.

Falsely accused pair win judgment

- Valerie Richardson,

Washington Times, 4aug01

Six years after a police child-sex-ring investigation spread terror through the rural apple-picking community of Wenatchee, Wash., those wrongly accused of holding satanic rituals involving rape and molestation are finally starting to see the money.

On Tuesday, a Spokane County jury awarded $3 million to a Wenatchee couple, Honnah and Jonathan Sims, caught up in the now-discredited sex-ring allegations. The award is the largest to date in a case that has been compared to the Salem witch trials of the 17th century....

The latest award brings to about $6 million court-ordered damages stemming from lawsuits brought so far by dozens of plaintiffs seeking to clear their names and pin the blame on the Wenatchee police department, the Douglas County Sheriff's Office and the state Child Protective Services.

The Wenatchee case is considered the largest of several child-sex-abuse investigations since 1980 that have since been found to be based on coerced testimony from children. The jury foreman in one Wenatchee trial called the probe a "witch hunt," and the Seattle Post-Intelligencer described it as a "thoroughly discredited investigation."

Still, winning monetary damages hasn't been easy, even for those who spent years in prison on false charges and saw their children placed in foster care. Before the Simses could win the award, they first had to change state law....

"She [Honnah Sims] was scared. She didn't know when she was going to be arrested, and people all around here were being arrested," said Mrs. Hrycenko. "She shipped her child to live in Kansas so the Child Protective Services wouldn't take him. Then she went to jail and was strip-searched, and we didn't feel that was appropriate." ....

Most of the accused were women. Many were poor and uneducated, and a few were considered mentally handicapped. Many saw their children placed in foster care or sent them out of the state to avoid having them taken away by authorities. All of the accused have since been freed from jail, either because they were acquitted by juries or because they agreed to plead to lesser, unrelated charges in order to win release quickly.

The urgency of the case led to the creation of Innocence Project Northwest, a pro bono, legal-aid organization begun by lawyers and students at the University of Washington Law School. Lawyers affiliated with the project were instrumental in winning the release of many Wenatchee clients.

Representatives for the city and county could not be reached for comment. Full text at

www.ivorcatt.com/17144.htm Also see www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/18154.htm

http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/front/2001/0614/fro3.htm

Domestic violence more likely from women - report

By Padraig O'Morain, Health and Children Correspondent

Women are more likely than men to perpetrate domestic violence, according to new research on Irish couples who seek marriage counselling.

The report, published yesterday, also found that domestic violence was one of the less important factors in marriage breakdown in the largely middleclass group studied.

It was produced by a team led by Dr Kieran McKeown, who has a distinguished reputation in social research and was commissioned by Marriage and Relationship Counselling Services, one of the main counselling organisations in the country.

In a survey of 530 clients of MRCS, the researchers found domestic violence occurs in almost half (48 per cent) of all relationships which are sufficiently troubled for one or both partners to seek counselling.

Where there is violence, about one-third (33 per cent) inflict violence on each other, "while female-perpetrated violence occurs in about four out of 10 couples (41 per cent) and male-perpetrated violence in a quarter of couples (26

p14

per cent) leading us to conclude that women are more likely than men to be the perpetrators of domestic violence", the report's authors say.

They say the findings "do not tell us anything about the severity of the violence involved, the context, reasons or initiation of the violence or the extent of injuries resulting from it".

They cite research from the US, Britain, Canada and New Zealand which, they say, shows that the "prevalence of domestic violence among men and women, both as victims and as perpetrators, is broadly similar for all types of violence, both psychological and physical, minor and severe. In addition, both men and women are about equally likely to initiate domestic violence and seem to give broadly similar reasons for doing so.

"However, it needs to be emphasised that the outcomes of domestic violence in terms of physical and psychological injuries tend to be considerably more negative for female victims than for male," they add.

International studies suggest "domestic violence probably occurs in about 10 to 20 per cent of all heterosexual relationships - with considerably higher prevalence rates for younger cohabiting couples - and tends to be severe in about one-third of all cases".

Dear Padraig

A few words from Amen re the MRCS study as discussed on the telephone this evening. ....

These findings come as no surprise to those of us who work in Amen and vindicate what we have been saying for the past three and a half years. In the light of these findings there is an urgent need to radically reform public policy in relation to domestic abuse and to provide the same level of support and services for male victims of domestic abuse as is provided for female victims of domestic abuse.

Public policy is predicated on the premise that women are the only victims of domestic abuse. Other than the services voluntarily provided by Amen there are virtually no other supports for men and their children who are suffering at the hands of violent and abusive women.

The findings of the survey of over five hundred clients of the MRCS, namely that women are more likely to perpetrate domestic abuse, concur with all reputable studies in other countries.

Let us now move to a platform where we can examine the dynamics of domestic abuse in a more sophisticated way instead of the crude gender-based paradigm which currently depicts men as devils and women as angels.

Mary T. Cleary

Co-ordinator, Amen (Eire)

086 6013448 www.amen.ie

...and in the home, the gender gulf is highlighted by a new study - though it's not all doom and gloom

Home truths for middle-class marriage

Sunday Independent, 17june01

A new survey shows women more likely to initiate violence than men, but it's the survival of the marriage that most concerns those seeking help, writes Patricia Redlich

Wives can be violent too. In fact, women are more likely than men to instigate domestic violence, at least in troubled, middle-class marriages, according to research on couples seeking marital counselling.

But that violence is not what concerns them most. The real damage to the relationship is done by criticism, insults, failure to listen, and, particularly on the part of men, avoidance of conflict, either by walking away or blowing up.

Social researcher Dr Kieran McKeown surveyed 530 clients of the Marriage and Relationship Counselling Service, one of the main counselling organisations in Ireland.

The majority of these clients came as couples, but a sizeable minority, namely four out of 10, were individual partners, mostly women, seeking help with an unhappy marriage. They were generally in their late 30s, married around 13 years, had children under 11, were financially secure, often dual earners. The men tended to work long hours, and the couples were not only unhappy but seriously stressed.

Marital unhappiness, it seems, is vastly more stressful than unemployment or poverty.

Violence was part of the disharmony in around half the marriages. In four out of 10 cases, the woman assaulted her husband, in three out of 10 cases they assaulted each other and in 2.5 out of 10 cases the men were the aggressors.

But all the couples argued that the violence was not the issue. Nor was unfaithfulness, which occurred in one in three of the troubled marriages. Unfaithfulness was more likely to be a husband's prerogative, though not exclusively so, and was almost invariably known to his wife. That said, when women did stray, they were better at hiding it.

There was widespread dissatisfaction expressed by women seeking help about the sharing of housework and childcare. But when these were investigated, the level of dissatisfaction bore no relationship to the actual amount of help that husbands gave. Which suggests that housework and childcare have replaced sex and money as the symbolic arena for marital battles.

That's what modern, well-heeled, unhappy couples fight about. But just like sex and money, it's not the issue.

Criticism, particularly by wives; insults; not listening to one's partner; and refusal, usually by husbands, to discuss problems, affected nine out of 10 who attended counselling and it was these issues which pained couples most. For such behaviour sets up a seriously destructive and alienating pattern of non-communication, described by the researchers as the "demand-withdrawal" syndrome.

The typical scenario is one where a wife uses criticism as a means of demanding change. Her husband then withdraws and either ignores the demand or responds with angry confrontation. All this might be all right except for two crucial factors. Men can't handle criticism, not because they're nasty but because they are vulnerable.

And women can't handle either withdrawal or confrontation. For they want closeness and togetherness.

Laid out like that, it sounds like women start the spiral into unhappiness.

But that's not necessarily the case. Often what happens is that women see problems earlier because they are less likely to avoid emotional issues.

Men's avoidance behaviour, in other words, is not ignited by their wives, but part and parcel of their emotional baggage, or their emotional make-up, depending on your point of view. This, however, should not be confused with a lack of commitment. "Men are less distressed and more committed to their relationships," the report found.

And women, as either part of their emotional baggage, or their almost biological make-up, seem to be more affected by marital problems than men. They take them more seriously, find them more distressing, feel driven to fix them. The "demand-withdrawal" scenario, in other words, is the classic chicken and egg dilemma, the task of counselling not to apportion blame but to help clients cut through the vicious circle.

In simple terms that means she has to stop criticising and he has to stop avoiding.

Counselling, it seems, can help, although for details on counselling outcome in this Irish survey, we have to wait for the next stage of this report.

International research, however, shows that the clients, rather than the counsellors, are the ones who determine whether counselling is effective or not. It is the strength of the couple, rather than the skill, or theoretical orientation, of the counsellor which ultimately decides on the fate of a marriage.

"Good counsellors, therefore, built upon the existing strengths and resilience of the couple, and, above all, restore faith and hope in the couple's own capacity to overcome their problems," the report concludes.

Such faith and hope are not misplaced. For love is alive and well: the fact that couples are seeking help is as much testimony to this as any statistic about happy marriages.

(pto) On the surprising results of research into domestic violence

p15

The two sides of domestic violence

Brenda power,

The Sunday Tribune, 17june01

THERE'S a women's refuge close to where I live and I pass it several times a week - from the top deck of the bus you can see in over the barbed wire-topped walls to a colourful playground in the garden of the large, fortressed building. In such a grey and ominous setting it is a rather poignant sight, as is the occasional glimpse of young children in school uniforms trotting up to the heavy doors of the refuge to ring the bell and wait for admission.

These reminders of the purpose of the building, of the misery and disruption and mundane concerns of families sundered by domestic violence - kids still need somewhere to play, schoolwork still goes on - never fail to pull me up short. That refuge is a very uncompromising monument to a truism that is as unshakeably rooted in the national consciousness as the foundations of that big grey building on the main street of a busy suburban village. Men are violent, women and children are their innocent victims.

I've never heard any man I know express discomfort at the sight of it, even though I imagine that women would be far quicker to voice resentment if evidence of the bad behaviour of a few of their sex was so baldly advertised in a very public place. I can't quite see a refuge for battered husbands openly operating between the gourmet shops and the bistros of a fashionable suburb. And yet men certainly flee violent homes, and new research on troubled marriages last week revealed that women are almost twice as likely to initiate domestic violence as their partners.

It's just that men are slower to challenge stereotypes about themselves, less vigilant than women in confronting images that demean and undermine them. It may be that they fear appearing weak if they keep on carping about sexist notions and perceptions, that the idea of a battered husband is just too humiliating for many men to stomach, that it seems a waste of time to battle against the consensus that casts men as aggressive, crude sexual predators when it's so firmly established as an everyday reality that a battered women's refuge rarely merits a second glance.

But in not challenging these stereotypes, in failing to be dismayed by the sight of such a sorry building and in neglecting to highlight the reality of domestic violence, they are simply providing comfort for the few men who are guilty on all counts.

The most remarkable thing about the research on domestic violence, was that it was not commissioned by some support group for lone fathers or men in violent relationships. It would certainly have been trashed and denounced as hysterical sexist if it did, though, so it's probably just as well that the figures came from a distinguished research team commissioned by the Marriage and relationship Counselling Services to study Irish couples seeking marriage counselling. The research found that violence occurs in almost half of all relationships which are troubled to the point where the parties seek counselling, and of that violence, 41% was initiated by the women, compared to 26% by the men. It's not as if we're talking about a few percentage points either way - the gap is so huge that it can't have gone unrecorded by the various third parties dealing with incidences of domestic abuse over the years, like doctors, Gardai, counsellors, lawyers.

But any time the suggestion of female violence has arisen in the past it was swiftly shot down by groups working with abused women and children, and they always point out that, whoever starts it, the consequences of domestic aggression are still more serious for women than for men. Nevertheless, these figures shift a significant element of the control, if not the blame, for domestic violence onto some of the women involved. You don't need to be a crack psychologist to predict that if a man is struck, however feebly, his first instinct is to strike back - just look at the footage of John Prescott versus Egg-Throwing Lout - and that instinct will be all the harder to control if he's got drink on him.

Yet all the wisdom on domestic violence, all those harrowing Christmastime ads with voiceovers of brutish exchanges, all insist that the man is inevitably the unprovoked aggressor and, even though these new statistics suggest they've always had ample basis to challenge this perception, men are slow to tackle it.

They are also much slower than women to tackle negative and demeaning images in advertising, which again, perpetuate a particularly condescending and unhealthy view of relationships between men and women. I can't remember which washing powder runs that nasty ad about the poor chap who comes in from working in the garden and is forced to strip on the kitchen floor in front of his wife's sniggering chum, while the two women giggle over a smutty innuendo about his physical attributes, but I wouldn't buy it if I could - not, at least, until the same advertiser runs a similar campaign featuring men making crude jokes about a vulnerable women's body, of which there is a fat chance. They'd be swamped under a barrage of complaints and chastised by the Advertising Standards Authority, but nobody gets particularly exercised when the object of ridicule is a man.

Even the sexual harassment legislation, much in the news these days, is arguably another product of unchallenged presumptions about male and female roles. Whatever the rights and wrongs of the topical matter, a man's career has been destroyed and he will be forever tainted with the stigma of 'sex pest', when a far more equitable framing of the law would just outlaw bullying, harassment and abuse of power, regardless of the gender of the parties involved, and leave any element of a sexual threat, to the proper jurisdiction of the criminal courts. But 'sexual harassment' is implicitly a transaction in which the male is the perpetrator and the woman the victim, since it'd be a rare and brave man who'd take such a case against a female employer.

It will be interesting to see the fall-out from those domestic violence statistics. They are striking enough to suggest that some interest groups [Paedophiles, Stinko, Margaret Jay, Mayor Livingstone, Bea Campbell, MacKinnon, Dworkin, gays and lesbians, radfems] have been capitalising on the enemy's reticence and promoting a version of events that suits their purpose, which does nobody any great service. If women are truly responsible for instigating most domestic incidents, even if they then come out the worst of it, this must be honestly explored if the problem is to be tackled, and not just covered up because the men are too dispirited to protest.

[This is a first in two ways. 1. Woman journalists round the world have taken the Eire research figures as valid. This is what was needed, from women, for them to retain our respect. 2. The last paragraph above is the first time a woman journalist has suggested an evolved conspiracy by man-hating radfems and others to smear men in general using false statistics like Stinko's. However, one swallow doesn't make a spring. Many young men still have to die.

"Thanks to their conniving with radfems, women are at the Last Chance Saloon in their quest to save parity of esteem, carefully constructed over centuries, now to be lost for a long time. One Melanie Phillips, one Erin Pizzey, one Senator Anne C. Cools and one Patricia Morgan cannot save the respect that women are losing. - Ill Eagle 9 June00 - Ed]

Results of previous violence research suppressed by radfems in Eire govt

Full text at

www.ivorcatt.com/17145.htm

From: Roger Eldridge; This is strong talk but never underestimate the people in power. In Ireland here after the second very successful World Conference on Domestic Violence hosted by Amen (www.amen.ie) the Department of Justice initiated a similar research project to enquire into the true nature and extent of domestic violence in the Western societies.

That report was presented to the Minister last June. It is now 12 months since he received it and no word has emerged of its contents other than to say (not unlike what has happened in Canada; do these people keep in touch?) that there would be a period of 'internal' consultation.

One suspects that the results offer such a condemnation of the policies that the government have followed that it is taking a long time to come up with a good excuse for having ruined so many lives in the past and (one suspects) wanting to continue without any significant change into the future.

Roger Eldridge, Co. Roscommon, Ireland, eldridgeandco@eircom.net

(pto)http://www.mensactivism.org/article.pl?sid=01/07/13/2047227

p16

The Battle for Men's Rights in Scotland

By ManKind member Douglas Rome <douglas-rome@lineone.net

Full text at

www.ivorcatt.com/17145.htm

Dumfries, Scotland

Embattled men in Scotland have won crucial new rights in the teeth of bitter opposition from the Scottish matriarchy. The Scottish Executive - the new devolved government in Scotland - has started an inquiry into women's violence against men.

For decades, feminists have insisted that domestic violence is inflicted exclusively by men on women. Now, after unrelenting pressure by the men's movement, the Executive has been forced to concede otherwise. Announcing the inquiry to the Scottish Parliament in Edinburgh, the social justice minister (and feminist ) Jackie Baillie said (through gritted teeth) that the results should be known by early next year....

It is not known yet who will lead the probe or how far-ranging its research will be; but campaigners for men's rights have made it clear that if the inquiry team works to a brief dictated by the feminist agenda, they will not accept its (predictable) conclusions....

Also see

www.ivorcatt.com/17149.htm

Some dads wronged by paternity laws, critics say

- Penny Owen, Staff Writer,

The Oklahoman, 5aug01

powen@oklahoman.com

http://www.oklahoman.com/cgi-bin/show_article?ID=730471&TP=getarticle

.... a man learned he had a son eight years after the boy was born. After $15,000 in legal bills and another $20,000 paid in a child support settlement, the father and his current wife say they have yet to meet the boy, now 22.

Or the case in Anadarko, where an Army retiree learned that he wasn't the father of the girl he had raised for 10 years. The news didn't come until the girl turned 17. But that didn't exempt him from owing $23,000 in back child support.

Nor has child support been stopped for a man in Atlanta, who said he learned he wasn't the father of the daughter he had raised. Fed up with the system and realizing he wasn't alone, Carnell Smith started a Web-based support group, Citizens for Paternity Fraud (www.paternityfraud.com).

The site is geared for fathers who feel wronged when it comes to support for a child they either thought was theirs and learned otherwise or who never knew the child existed.

Interestingly, some of the biggest advocates of changing child support laws are the current wives of the fathers they say are victimized. These women say their pocketbooks, livelihood and own children suffer because of unfair or antiquated laws that favor mothers who, as one put it, connive to "change fathers in midstream," depending on who can pay.

In Oklahoma, a bill pending in the House of Representatives proposes new, more father-friendly legislation that would help both men who learn they are fathers years after the fact and those who learn they are not.

House Bill 1077 is authored by state Rep. Lloyd Fields, D-McAlester, who personally was ordered in 1997 to pay $26,000 in back child support after a messy and drawn-out battle involving a daughter and divorce.

The bill, in essence, would allow any man to challenge paying child support if a paternity test proved he wasn't the biological father. As the law stands now, a husband who has served as father to a child in a marriage for two or more years is liable for child support, even if the parents divorce and a paternity test proves he isn't the father.

That part was inspired by state Rep. Jim Glover, D-Elgin, who said he was contacted by a man in his district who was being forced to pay child support on two children, even though paternity tests proved he wasn't the father.

The reason he remained obligated, Glover said, was because he was married to the mother and put his name on the birth certificates. Unless the law changes, he will pay child support until the children turn 18, Glover said. The mother is now living with the biological father.

"If you're not the father, why should you pay child support? There's just nothing fair about it," said Glover, who added that HB 1077 passed in the House twice, but was killed in Senate committee.

The bill also would not force a man to pay back child support for a child he never knew existed. As it is now, said Ray Weaver, the director of child support enforcement for the state Department of Human Services, anyone found to be the father of a child, even if he didn't know it, can be liable for child support up to five years before the discovery.

The whole issue of child support, paternity and liability is a mess at best, and each case has its differences and complications. One side, loaded with women as well as men, complain of mothers who trick men into fatherhood while knowing they aren't the fathers. The other side argues that families come first and scientific findings shouldn't destroy a child's understanding of who its parents are.

Paternity testing is now highly accurate - and 28 percent of the men tested for fatherhood in 1999 and 2000 were proven not to be the father, according to the American Association of Blood Banks and Oklahoma's human services department.

Some, like Norvell Gattison, didn't learn until years after the fact - 17, to be exact.

Gattison's wife said her husband married the mother of a 2-year-old girl because he was told he was the father. They divorced when the girl turned 12, and the relationship with his ex-wife deteriorated further. In the end, Gattison owed $23,000 in back child support, which is being garnished from his Army retirement check.

More painful, however, was learning the truth.

Gattison's wife, Marilyn, said the mother blurted out the truth when the daughter was 17, prompting Gattison to take a paternity test. Both father and daughter were there when the letter arrived with the results.

"I opened the letter and looked at him and said 'You're not the father,'" Marilyn Gattison said. "And they both started crying. It really hurt both of them."

The father-daughter relationship has since been damaged because of subsequent fights over child support between Gattison and his ex-wife.

At least Gattison had some relationship with his daughter - unlike the husband of Pat Conrady of Fairview, who learned he had a son after an old girlfriend's husband was arrested for child molestation and thrown in prison.

Conrady said when the mother applied for social assistance, she named her husband as the father. He then got a bill for back child support. When he said he wanted to meet the son he never knew, Conrady said the mother disappeared, only to reappear years later, again wanting back support.

They nearly went bankrupt fighting the case and finally gave in by agreeing to a $20,000 settlement - which, with legal bills and all, ate up their own childrens' college fund and put them in debt.

To say Conrady is bitter is an understatement, and she knows she's not alone.

"They write him off with this other child as a deadbeat father and it's not like that. He never had a chance to be a father," said Conrady, who described her husband as a devoted husband and provider with the same job for 22 years, who always supported the children he knew he had.

She says her husband willingly would have supported the new-found son as well, had he been able to develop a relationship with him.

"They're destroying other kids and other marriages just to get money for these women whose marriages didn't work out and who want to change fathers in midstream," Pat Conrady said. "Our kids are all out of the house now, and we should be at the point where we can travel and enjoy life a little bit, and we can't because we have this debt to pay off."

On the other side of the argument are those who say the past is simply catching up with men who knowingly took a risk, however long ago.

"That part, 'I didn't have any idea I was the father' bothers me a little bit," said Weaver of DHS. "Everyone knows how children are conceived. And if you don't remember conceiving a child, I don't think it's harmful to society to have a genetic test to remind you that you did conceive a child."

Weaver also pointed out that recent legislation has tried to get absentee fathers more involved in their children's lives by such things as providing work retraining for those who can't afford child support. Studies have shown that the more fathers are involved in their children's lives, the more likely they are to pay support.

Some, however, say legislation is too little too late. Gattison, the Army retiree, lost his commercial driver's license, private investigator license and fishing license because he owes back child support. No doubt laws have cracked down on so-called deadbeat parents.

More than just the fathers are affected, too.

Strapped for cash because her husband couldn't work, Marilyn Gattison said she applied for food stamps - and was turned down because of the back support owed.

"I said, 'You're telling me I have to tell my husband to leave the home in order for me and my child to eat?'" Marilyn Gattison said. "I'm just having a hard time. I don't know what law can make a man pay for a child that's not his. And if DHS has all these resources, why can't they go after the real father?

"The sad part about it was, when me and him got married, we decide to adopt a child - and now we can barely afford it."

Also see www.ivorcatt.com/17146.htm

p17

http://www.csmonitor.com/durable/2001/07/25/fp8s3-csm.shtml

The Christian Science Monitor

Opinion: Letters

Wednesday, July, 25, 2001

Fearing divorce, men eschew marriage

The July 17 article "Vow or never," was interesting, but failed to point at the principal reason there are so few marriages. Men are becoming increasingly aware that they have no rights at all in marriage - nothing, just responsibility, responsibilities that will continue after their wives divorce them, which they are very likely to do.

Men don't want to raise and love children, only to have them stolen away, along with their financial capability of having a reasonable life or indeed any chance of ever having children again....

Alan Carr, Chelmsford, England

System failure

Julie Wheelwright, Guardian, 9may01

If you can't agree with your ex about custody and access, a complete stranger will decide what's best for your kids. The government is investing in a new family court service, but will it make any differenc

You're a mother with young children and your marriage has broken down. The children live with you and see their father regularly, but your ex-husband, on the recommendation of a family solicitor, has issued an application for residence. As the date for your hearing looms, a teacher at your son's nursery remarks, as casually as she can, "I received a letter this morning from the probation service about your child." You thought this process was within your understanding but, at that moment, you realise that nothing has prepared you for this. Soon after, the court welfare officer (CWO) charged with making an independent assessment of your children visits your home. You are on a knife-edge - this complete stranger, a criminal probation officer with no guarantee of specialist training with children, holds the future of your family life in his hands. He alone will recommend to the courts how often you see your children, where they live and with whom they spend their holidays. In the majority of cases, the CWO's recommendations are accepted.

Before you appear in court, you will be under enormous pressure to reach an agreement - a form of negotiating that puts a premium on compromise for its own sake, while the children's best interests run a poor second. If you come before a judge, he will be free to make whatever recommendations and whatever personal comments about your appearance, behaviour or parenting he sees fit. Finally, if the judge decides not to uphold the plans for your children that you have fought for, costs may be awarded against you. There are no guidelines for contact, no way to appeal against decisions and no proper system for complaints. There are countless such stories from parents throughout the country of disagreements that result in either one parent having limited or no access to their child or a vindictive ex-partner continuing needless legal proceedings. If it isn't every parent's nightmare, it ought to be. Approximately 70,000 children a year are put through a system which one campaigner, Oliver Cyriax (a solicitor and writer who represents Information on Probation Officers in Welfare Work), has described as "rotten to the core".

But now the government has created a new body with a £72m budget to take over all responsibilities relating to the welfare of children and families in courts. Earlier this year, there was welcome acknowledgment from Lady Justice Butler-Sloss, president of the high court's family division, that the old system needed reform. "It's very important for the families to make [the new organisation] work," she told the Family Law Bar Association, "and to have the chance to have an infinitely better system than we have had." The Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (Cafcass), which came into existence on April 1, is poised to overhaul the whole process for families in dispute. Or is it? A Day-Glo orange sign provides a lurid welcome to Cafcass's sparkling offices in London's Victoria. But the fact that Anthony Hewson, the organisation's chairman, has agreed to meet me is a step towards dismantling the secrecy that surrounded the old Family Court Welfare Service (FCWS). "We are confident that we can make a difference to families and children," he says. "Families are important, courts are important, but children are our primary focus. This country doesn't have a very good reputation for listening to children." He explains that Cafcass has been in touch with the NSPCC and NCH Action for Children; there may be forums for children in future, and he admits there is a need for better research about how to minimise the trauma of a breakup for them. This information might form a basis for changes that would feed directly into how the newly renamed "court and family reporters" (who replace CWOs) go about their job. Diane Shepherd, chief executive of Cafcass, says the organisation has a team working with "stakeholders" to draft new national standards.

"We'll come to our own views about whether a lot of these systems and procedures that envelop people's lives are in the child's best interests," says Hewson. "I'm quite sure they'll discover that some of them are not."

Among ideas to deter separating parents from taking their disputes to court, Hewson is investigating US schemes where parents are shown a video about the likely impact upon their children. "If we provide a better way of hearing children's views, then perhaps parents will think more carefully about whether they are going to march into adversarial activity." He also mentions a joint initiative by the Lord Chancellor's Department and the Legal Services Commission, due to start in October, designed to encourage mediation and counselling as alternatives to legal action.

Another innovation would be guidelines for child-parent contact, since there are wide variations: from non-resident parents who never see their children to those who have alternate weekend contact with half of all holidays and midweek overnights. Changing the culture within the probation service may therefore prove a Herculean task. David Lye, the former Cafcass project director, wrote a letter to Welsh Assembly minister Owen John Thomas earlier this year in which he admitted: "The services that provide advice to the courts have always resisted [guidelines] on the grounds that each case involves different circumstances and unique individuals." But without guidelines, many parents and campaigners believe that there is endless potential for dispute over the degree and circumstances of contact.

Although Hewson's proposals are potentially good news, many parents are understandably cynical about how much will really change. "These disputes are exacerbated by the existing system and those in the system never listen to parents who come to them for help," says Scott Bradfield, an academic who brought a complaint against the FCWS in 1999. Diane Shephard insists that Cafcass is open to parents' views, but Bradfield is not convinced. During a Cafcass internet chat in early April, he says, some messages from parents were blocked: "Any criticism of the service was prevented from being aired."

Dina Rabinovitch, a writer who gained unprecedented access to the family judges and courts, says that honest CWOs admit their job is virtually unworkable. "An adult whom the children have never met goes into a room and asks these children, at a complicated time in their lives, questions about 'Mummy's house' and 'Daddy's house', and then writes a report which purports to represent those children's views. Anyone who has children knows that getting an accurate picture of children's feelings is a subtle business - and, in fact, may not be anybody's business at all, at this intensely private time for children."

For Rabinovitch, the adversarial court system will never be the right place for these issues. As Kate Green, chair of National Council for One Parent Families points out, mothers often end up making compromises over contact arrangements simply to prevent costly and painful legal action. Green adds that Cafcass should spend part of its research budget on investigating what arrangements work best and how conflict might be minimised.

"What we are all aware of," says Green, "is that, where there is a relationship with a lot of conflict, that will continue after a break-up, and the family needs support at every stage."

Meanwhile, at the Cafcass offices, Anthony Hewson contemplates the

p18

challenge that he faces in bringing credibility to a system that, according to its critics, such as Tony Coe of the Equal Parenting Council, has blighted a generation of families. "I think Cafcass is only a new sign over the door of the old service," he says. "But the glimmer of light is Anthony Hewson."

[mid july01]

The 'friends' on the Left are to blame for Bradford

By Sin Simon (Electronic Telegraph)

News: We were overwhelmed say Bradford riot police

It is fitting to begin, in seeking explanation for what's been happening in the mill towns of the North, with E P Thompson's Making of the English Working Class. That great masterpiece hums with the early industrial life of the very places now plunged into convulsions. Bradford, Burnley, Oldham and Leeds have 71 page references between them. Yet the following distinction drawn by Prof Thompson in his passage dealing with riots remains pertinent today:

"In 18th-century Britain riotous actions assumed two different forms: that of more or less spontaneous popular direct action; and that of the deliberate use of the crowd as an instrument of pressure, by persons 'above' or apart from the crowd." As a revisionist Left-winger writing in 1959-63, Thompson's thesis was that historians had too often favoured the latter interpretation of riots, thereby devaluing the notion of the riot as a positive response to working-class disfranchisement, poverty and alienation.

Forty years later, the positions have reversed. The general assumption of the liberal establishment is that riots must necessarily be an outpouring of tensions so seethingly underlying that they were always bound eventually to boil over. My first premise is that this is not true here: the recent events have tended to be caused by the cynical intervention of outsiders, and would not have occurred were it not for that manipulation. True, "you can't agitate a man on a full stomach"; it is no coincidence that these riots were in Manningham not Mayfair; but that was neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition.

My second point is one that has been neglected by the media: the most effective agents provocateurs have not been the neo-Nazi Right but the revolutionary Trotskyist Left. I know this for sure because what they succeeded in doing in Bradford on Saturday and elsewhere in previous weeks, they failed to do in my constituency on the final Saturday of the general election campaign.

A seemingly innocuous sentence from the front page of yesterday's Observer (one similar to which was carried by the rest of the media) conceals the sinister truth: "Two people were stabbed and 80 police officers injured after a protest march against the National Front turned violent." Not by the National Front, you will note, but against it.

Decent people, reading such a sentence, may fail properly to examine what it means. They might well assume that concerned citizens naturally want to march against the National Front, that the phenomenon is similar to the food riots of the late 18th and early 19th century which, according to Thompson, were "legitimised by the assumptions of an older moral economy", being "popularly regarded as acts of justice, and their leaders held as heroes".

What happened in Erdington, in which a National Front and a Trotskyist Socialist Alliance candidate were standing, was that the National Front initially threatened to march down the High Street. Local reaction was so uniformly appalled that the threat was withdrawn. However, the local Anti-Nazi League - exactly the same handful of militants who made up the Trotskyist Socialist Alliance, but with a different letterhead - absolutely refused to cancel its planned "counter-demonstration". It was now to be a "celebration" that the streets had been reclaimed from the fascists.

And on the day that the NF march was supposed to have taken place it was the ANL, not NF, supporters who poured in from outside wearing balacavas and frightening people. It was against them that the shops pulled down their shutters and the riot police lurked warily. Fortunately, the NF was nowhere to be seen, so there was no one for the Trotskyists to fight, and there are greatly fewer young Asians to be incited in Erdington than there are in Bradford so, after a while, the militants left.

Given that the recent riots have been such a fillip for the neo-Nazis - giving them publicity, exciting fear and xenophobia and thus promoting the recruitment which is their prime objective - one might have thought the supposed anti-Nazis would recognise their own leading role in bringing it about as counterproductive. Such thinking ignores the ruthlessness of revolutionary socialists. For them, there is no difference between the proto-fascist skinhead youth and the Bangladeshi militant: there is only one working class, only one class struggle. Cities on fire. Police under siege. Oppressed urban proletariat rises up against the agents of the boss class. They love it.

Which is sickening, because the only way they can get these mini-revolutionary kicks is by cynically playing the race card. After all, they constantly invite people to meet, march, protest and generally overthrow the decadent institutions of capitalism. And they are constantly, roundly and spectacularly ignored. In Erdington, after fighting a vigorous and vocal campaign, they polled less than the National Front, which fought no campaign at all. (Neither got 700 votes.)

The only way the revolutionary Trotskyists can get a response is to go into Asian communities and frighten people with the spectre of neo-Nazism. And in so doing, the Trotskyists - deliberately and for their own purposes - give the fascists a credibility they don't deserve. Yes, the NF "starts it" by turning up in Asian communities. But the Trotskyists are the catalyst without which these terrible conflagrations would not occur.

The NF is a pathetic and puny group of stupid and cowardly hooligans rarely capable of more than getting drunk, shouting idle threats and scuttling away. They're so disgusting, on the other hand, that their mere existence in the pub around the corner is bound to inflame the passions - when stoked by professional agitators bused in from outside - of young Asian men whose economic condition gives them every right to feel neglected and resentful.

As the summer swelters on towards autumn, I implore such men to pause and reflect. It's not the fascists you need protecting from. They are just rubbish that will blow along the gutter to the next place if you pay it no mind. It's the other strangers who kindle the pyres, the ones who say they are your friends, but who have the same interest as the Nazis in seeing you burn your streets down. Like the fascists, they will be gone by morning.

Sion Simon is Labour MP for Birmingham Erdington

Newcomers aren't to blame, it has always been bad here

- Alison Coggan,

Express, 9aug01, p6

.... Glasgow's troubled Sighthill estate .... "It's not the asylum seekers," said the woman, who was too frightened to give her name. "It's all the gangs of young men roaming about. I've lived here for 35 years. I used to go to the bingo at night but I'm too scared now."

.... Its young men have fought with rival gangs from nearby ....

Now, the differences in skin colour and culture mean gang warfare has been re-branded as racism. ....

"It's not the asylum seekers we want rid of. It's the hooligans and drug addicts," ....

[This maps well onto my ideas, and those of our repeat speaker Geoffrey Ben-Nathan, that we are seeing a rite of passage. See http://www.ivorcatt.com/zb038.htm

http://www.ivorcatt.com/18136.htm

http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/0acv115.htm - Ed]

First enforcement of access order

From: SEAN KELLY <noddi@esatclear.ie> 12July01

JULY 11th: A Co. Kildare single father a who has been denied access to his daughter by his ex girlfriend, brought a prosecution against her for denial of access, breach of an access order and for contempt of Court to the (criminal) District Court in Naas Co Kildare.

p19

The evidence was laid before the judge in OPEN court, how she had opposed his access application, how she had made false allegations against him, how he finally won access to his child despite every obstacle she vindictively put in his way and finally how she had persistently denied him his Court Awarded access for other reason than she wanted to punish him. He presented a diary showing how he had been denied access on 81 separate occasions this year.

Judge Murrough Connellan convicting the accused, warned her that her behaviour was unacceptable and he fined her £200 or 5 days in jail.

This is a new departure for the Judiciary and only modesty prevents me from making a possible link between the outcome of this case and recent Father's Day protests.

There has always been an unwillingness on behalf of Judges to enforce Access Orders so that fathers could have some level of "control free " relationship with their children.

One client of mine had been through the mill for 7 years of social workers, child psychologists, (all of whom initially viewed him as a pariah), and 3 section 20 reports, his vindictive alcoholic wife point blank refused to allow him to see his children. After he had paid the Mortgage (for the home where she lived with a succession of boyfriends) all other bills and his maintenance, he had £27.oo to live on every week. He filed in court to have his access order enforced. The Judge played a blinder he said "Oh you have a very good case Mr. XXXX" "But I think I will reopen this entire case and order another section 20 ". By doing this he very skilfully AVOIDED the issue. The reality of this action was, however, that my client was further denied access to his children indefinitely. That was 18 months ago he still had not seen them and they are totally poisoned against him by her lies and twisted mental state.

Another client went before a judge to have his access order enforced: the Judge said: "Do you really want me to put the mother of your children in prison?" The man replied: "I want you to simply uphold the Law" "But by doing that you are asking me to imprison this woman" Said the Judge "I want you to do your job and uphold the Law" replied the frustrated man, "Do not presume to tell me what my job is or I will hold YOU in Contempt! " replied the Judge, "Case dismissed" ....... Again another COP OUT.

Let us hope that this judgement of new appointee, Murrough Connellan, is a first step by the Judiciary in addressing the anti male/ pro female gender bias that is ubiquitous, in not only in the family Courts but in all aspects of the law. A bias that upholds and supports a cultural paradigm of the "Madonna" female "victim" the "Ogre" Male .

Let us hope that this will bring under control the epidemic of belligerence, non-compliance and implacable hostility of custodial mothers, who, oppose the concept of responsible Shared Parenting by using innocent children as vindictive weapons of leverage to copper - fasten their positions as power brokers in family break down situations. [Who wrote it? - Ed.]

A number of sources assert that the US black family was complete (father mother children) until early last century, when the welfare state destroyed it. Thus, it was the state, not slavery, which destroyed the black family. Now the white family is following the same path. - Ed

http://www.dadi.org/1stdaout.htm

www.ivorcatt.com/18151.htm

First, Remove the Fathers

Gerald L. Rowles 7/30/01

First, remove the Fathers. It's not Shakespeare (First, kill all the lawyers) but it is a drama that rivals Oedipus in its parallels and impact.

It started out as the "Great Society" and, 30 years later, became the "Welfare State".

In that same span of less than one generation, the black family was decimated and the State became parent to 70% of its black children. How was this accomplished by the Great Society? Simply by throwing money at black women for having more babies and, "no man in the house". That was the basic tenet of the welfare contract. "We will support you and your children at subsistance levels as long as you remain unencumbered by the male parent."

"A woman (And her child) needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle."; sayeth the State, parroting the Women's Movement.

Across this nation today, the burgeoning prison industry is populated by more than 50% black males, even though the black population of the United States is hovering in the neighborhood of 14% (about half of whom are females - making the proportion of imprisoned black males even more pronounced). From the professional experience of working within a State prison population, I can attest to you that 85% of these males grew up without a father presence, or even knowledge of who he might be.

Has there ever been a more dramatic and clear-cut outcome in any social science study? Is this not validation of countless contemporaneous scientific studies that have pointed to the many real threats to fatherless children? These studies have grown more numerous in recent years, but this is merely a reiteration of what had been discovered more than fifty years ago in the period following WWII. Social scientists of the Forties detected a social disruption caused by the removal of the vast numbers of American males to foreign shores. Those who had married and left children and wives behind returned to find wives that had become symbiotically attached to their children and more invested in their maternal families than their own nuclear one.

But no one seems to be listening, or taking the information seriously. A columnist contacted me the other day asking for a data source demonstrating "how a marriage helps kids". I reported back to this individual, somewhat tardily and apologetically, on some of the most powerful outcomes obtained by various authors and researchers. And the response was: "Not too late, but not too useful, either. This is typical of lots of the data I've seen, five years or more old. I'm looking for the freshest data and best example of how marriage helps kids. "

This was stunning. Validity was being judged by recency if not immediacy, not content nor scientific rigor. "Lots of data", no acceptance. I'm reminded of the adage - For those who would hear, no explanation is needed; For those who would not, no explanation is sufficient.

An astute observer, Rev. Jesse Lee Patterson (President of B.O.N.D.) recently observed:

White Americans are afraid to deal "straight up" with this issue for fear of being called racists, and as a result, this wicked government takeover is now spreading into the mainstream. We are now beginning to see the dissolution of the family, open mockery of the man, and fathers being removed from their homes via false accusations of spousal abuse. The love of the family is being drained away.

Rev. Patterson proposes to "Rebuild the Family By Rebuilding the Man."

And not a moment too soon, particularly if that primarily involves rebuilding the image of men and fathers - not just reiterating more recrimination.

The growing power of the State over the family is becoming near total. Just this past Friday (7/27/01) the State of Oregon assumed just such a totalitarian stance. The Seattle Intelligencer announced "the Children's Plan by Kitzhaber". Under this plan

"All Oregon parents could have their first-born children screened for medical and social problems under a state-funded program signed into law by Gov. John Kitzhaber yesterday. ... Kitzhaber, a former emergency room physician, says more screening of children for possible developmental risks, such as a parent's drug or alcohol abuse, can help reduce juvenile crime, failures in school and other social problems. ... The measure "sets Oregon apart from the rest of the nation in terms of our vision, our commitment and our resolve toward helping children," Kitzhaber said before signing the measure, HB3569."

And just exactly what happens when the State finds that these parents fail to meet its criteria? And what will be the criteria? Substance abuse? Spousal abuse (based on whose report and what evidence)? Practice Christian religious beliefs? Own a firearm? Raise their children with basic moral and ethical beliefs - and spanking? Demand that their children take responsibility for their actions? Refused a trip to Disneyland?

Tens of thousands of American children are being removed from their parents' homes for just exactly such "justifications", to be raised by States throughout the Union. And at least in one case I know of, sent to Disneyland on taxpayer dollars.

Are you shivering yet? Is Oregon merely the vanguard in reaching the "final solution" to the "parent problem"? (For those the same age as the columnist who contacted me, this is the wording used in Hitler's Germany to justify the onset of the Holocaust. Just substitute the word "Jewish" in place of "parent".)

Once again I will call upon the un-minced, un-spun message of Rev. Patterson to suggest the answer to this potentially virulent State takeover of the family:

"I have attempted to show the level of destruction that the United States government, and now the United Nations, is capable of achieving by simply removing the father from the family equation. Understand that the black family, as it exists today, is a living microcosm of this destruction. In order to change the hell that has taken over our once-noble nation, we must first put fathers and mothers back together, take back the authority (over) our children from the government, reaffirm a strong belief in God and country, get the United States out of the United Nations, and say "hell, no!" to the U.N.'s Convention on the Rights of the Child."

Amen Reverend; A-MEN

p20

[picture, protest outside Thorpe's home in Seend]

Ill Eagle 17, oct01

p1

Hamilton vows to seek sex assault law change

Neil Hamilton has vowed to try to change the law to counter false accusations of sexual assault. In his first speech since being cleared by police of sex abuse allegations against Nadine Milroy-Sloan, Mr Hamilton said he would leave no stone unturned.

Mr Hamilton told a meeting of the men's civil rights organisation, ManKind, in Euston, central London that there is an epidemic of false accusations of sexual assaults. He said: "I'm not just going to wash my hands of this case and go back to Mr Hamilton said he would use "the contacts that we have in Parliament and the media" to attempt to change the law.

Mr Hamilton said there was "a very disturbing trend" of people who think "there is gold in them thar lies". "There is now, as the world knows, the opportunity for any gold-digger to come forward and make a set of false allegations against somebody who has a high profile."

Mr Hamilton told how he and his wife Christine feared that the allegations might have been that they were part of a sexual assault that happened at five o'clock in the morning, as that might have been very difficult to disprove.

Story filed: 13:19 Saturday 15th September 2001

Copyright © 2001 Ananova Ltd

The objects for which the Company (i.e. ManKind) is established for charity status ("the objects" clauses) are:-

a/. the alleviation of hardship and distress, in particular amongst those suffering such hardship and distress a result of break-up of marriage and family.

b/. the protection and preservation of men's health both mental and physical in such ways as the company shall decide.

c/. the prevention of discrimination against males on the ground of sex so far as such discrimination is unlawful".

-------------------------------------------

The writer Doris Lessing thinks men are having a hard time. Well, all I can say is it's about time

- Germaine Greer, Sunday Times, 2sep01, sect.4 p10

You don't know how difficult it is being a closet heterosexual - David Bowie, ibid.

12yr Old Males are a "threat"

My wife recently attended a training session where some of the DV shelter feminazis presented this interesting fact. Apparently there are NO DV shelters in the Puget Sound, Washington State area that will take in women that have male children with them aged 12yrs or older.

The reason, my wife was told; "They are a threat. They represent revictimization".

Regards; Bluelytes@hotmail.com 18sep01

Open Day at Royal Holloway College

Subject: Stanko

Today 13-Oct-01 the Royal Holloway College, Egham, Surrey, discovered a number of individuals protesting about false domestic violence statistics. Prof Elizabeth Stanko, who promotes the 1-in-4 domestic violence lie and is based at the Royal Holloway, was unavailable for comment.

The college was holding an 'Open-Day', but immediately leaflets began circulating to prospective students within the college their security forces decided that they were having a 'Closed-Day'. Evidently the Marxist-Feminist Polit-bureau had learnt nothing from their Polish comrades and elsewhere about the difficulties of closing down Samistat style leafleting.

Most Universities regard Open-Day as a chance to show round would-be students, and members of the public, who want to know more about their activities. Most Universities are quite open about their activities and are only too happy to engage in debate with members of the public. Not least they see this as a public duty towards the very people who fund them through their taxes.

The Royal Holloway college, by contrast, had employed a massive security presence. Far more prevalent than one could expect at Heathrow airport. It became very clear that here was a University that would tolerate: no debate, no alternative views, and not even the peaceful distribution of leaflets. The result of the colleges' purge was that the protesters were relegated to the front gates and forced to make use of a loud-hailer, and posters, in order to contact would be students and voice their concerns. Many people going in and out of the gates took leaflets and expressed interest in the issues being raised by the protesters. A large number of students came forward to take leaflets and make enquiries. The attempt at femi-cleansing of distributed leaflets also failed. Apparently some of the 'SammysDad' leaflets made their way into the Royal Holloway suggestions box.

The UK is following the lead of highly feminist Universities in the USA and Canada in the onward march of feminism. In Canadian Universities for example female students who attend women art history courses are shocked to discover they receive training in lesbian masturbation techniques using vegetables see http://www.escape.ca/~scruples/uw/main.html. These organisations are intolerant of any alternative viewpoints and lifestyles such as: two parent families, and hetero-sexuality. Indeed the Royal Holloway was showing worrying signs of this trend today. In the college 'Bedford Centre for the history of Women' a library a poster advertised a Postgraduate Seminar on 17-Oct-2001 "When a Woman Speaks the truth About Her Body: Ethyl Smyth, Virginia Woolf and the Challenges of Lesbian Auto/biography". Do parents really want their children to be educated by a University that promotes hatred of the opposite sex?

This battle will no doubt move off into cyber-space. The femi-nazi government will need all of their wimin-only candidates to push through the legislation for the femi-equivalent of the 'car clamp' on campaigners computers and the introduction of new 'thought' crimes.

The Royal Holloway student helpers were at all times extremely polite and helpful. The security guards however would have felt more at home in commie Poland.

Elizabeth Stanko can be contacted at: b.stanko@rhul.ac.uk Photos of the protest can be seen at: www.lbduk.org in the history section. From: Brian Robertson brian@coeffic.demon.co.uk

From: Brian Robertson to Ivor Catt

Subject: Hubble Bubble

Date: 15 October 2001 22:14

Whilst joining in on the fun of the open-'coven' day at the Royal Holloway there were a few issues noticed:

Bedford Centre for the history of Women Library stocks books overwhelmingly by extreme feminists. These books and titles can be checked out at www.rhul.ac.uk and doing a search for the library. Some examples of the Library feminist authors with number of titles in: S. Orbach [3], G. Greer [8] F. Weldon[6], G. Steinem [1], A. Dworkin [2], C. MacKinnon[2] just one such example of hate-male; "men are

p2

biologically aggressive; their fetal brains were awash in androgen; their DNA, in order to perpetuate itself, hurls them into murder and rape." - Andrea Dworkin, Letters from a War Zone, p. 114

The same History of Women library was not open for the open-day. Why not I wonder? Could this be because of a policy of concealment? Were they embarrassed about this library? Did they think the library would be attacked by an enraged dad?

The University has a 'safety policy' of no female rooms being on the ground floor. So when a burglar breaks into a male room, and disturbs him sleeping, and the student gets his head kicked in, and is injured for life, then that's OK then?

Postgraduate Seminars pushing the Lesbian agenda e.g. 17-Oct-01 (above founder's library). "When a woman speaks the truth about her body: Ethyl Smyth, Virginia Woolf and the Challenges of Lesbian Auto/biography".

Note that it was male-only security guards who were defending this feminist establishment. Surely the sisters with their infinite superiority over men would have been an infinitely better choice? Cluck cluck.

A wonderful Man's Hour interview covering the protest can be heard at; http://www.geocities.com/menshour/p06n.smil

The next protests at RHC open-days will be: Sat 16-Mar-2002, Wed 19-Jun-2002 - Mr M. Mouse

False Allegations

10oct01 Dear Mr Catt,

Thank you for the copies of e-mails, which I read with interest. At the moment I am trying to get as many people as I can to look at the processes that lead people to be arrested and convicted, rather than individual cases.

I believe that the processes are open to abuse, and that by simply tape recording the witnesses' statement much concern would be alleviated.

I am trying to form an all-party group for the falsely accused, but the vast majority of MPs are very reluctant to join, concerned I guess that they might be seen to be supporting abusers. Please encourage your MP to join my group. Try to reassure him or her that we are essentially interested in the process that leads to conviction.

Claire Curtis-Thomas MP Member of Parliament for Crosby

Warren Farrell

Dear Ivor, re 15sep01

There is nothing that prevents our sons from growing up without feeling shame, guilt and like second-class citizens more than the lace curtain of censorship that prevents their life experience from being aired equally to women's. When both our sons and daughters are being deprived of their dads because we are not exposed to how important to children dads are, we are leaving the next generation with a "father wound" (similar to the wound of economic security many depression dads still feel no matter how rich in fact they are).

No research has impacted me more than the research on the lace curtain of censorship that encompasses the government, media, helping professions and academia. Getting that published in Women Can't Hear What Men Don't Say made me realize how difficult it is for men to speak up so anyone can hear.

Your conference, by unwrapping censorship, is exposing the world to a present it must give itself. That present is half of who we are.

Warren Farrell, Ph.D. 13 Sep. 2001

Amen

To: Ivor, Robert and colleagues.

We in Amen wish you well with your conference and fully support the good work you are doing in addressing the many flawed and damaging aspects of the Family Law System.

We are disappointed to learn that Lord Mayor Ken Livingstone and the GLA have launched an initiative on domestic violence which is based on an outdated and discredited paradigm. This initiative is certain to fail in its stated objectives of preventing and reducing domestic violence as it perpetuates the myth that women are the only victims and men the only perpetrators. Amen's experience and all reliable research show that domestic violence is a 50/50 phenomenon.

In Ireland, recent research, carried out for the Marriage and Relationship Counselling Services (MRCS) in Ireland, showed that women are, in fact, more likely than men to perpetrate domestic violence. This report, based on a survey of 530 clients of MRCS, found that where domestic violence occurs mutual violence accounts for 33% of cases, female perpetrated violence accounts for 41% and male perpetrated violence for 26%.

The Department of Health and Children has also carried out research, to be launched shortly, which will also vindicate the MRCS research and the experience of Amen. In the light of the findings of this research the Government has provided a grant of £50,000 to Amen to run an Awareness and Development Campaign this year. We are at present having consultations with the relevant Government authorities regarding mainstream on-going funding to enable Amen to expand its services in future years.

From the information available on the GLA initiative it would appear that the political establishment in the UK is even more entrenched in the erroneous propaganda based stereotypes than their counterparts in Ireland. Conferences such as yours, which challenge such attitudes, are vital so that the truth emerges for the benefit of families and society generally. I regret that due to circumstances beyond my control I cannot be with you. Again I wish you every success in your endeavours. - Sincerely, Mary T Cleary, Amen, sep01

Men in hiding

http://www.shethinks.org/articles/an00084.cfm from http://www.shethinks.org/index.cfm sep01

NEW REPORT: "Hooking Up, Hanging Out, and Hoping for Mr Right - College Women on Dating and Mating Today"

.... .... There appears to have been a reduction in male initiative in dating and courting on college campuses. Recognize that the burden of dating and mating should not fall on women alone, and that there is a need for greater male initiative.

Recognize that socially defined courtship is the historical pathway to marriage. When it comes to inherently social acts such as romance and marriage, social rules do more than restrict individual choice, they also facilitate it. The absence of appropriate updated social norms, rituals and relationship milestones leaves many young women confused, and often disempowered, in their relationships with men.

The Institute for American Values (IAV) conducted the research and prepared the study for the Independent Women's Forum (IWF). For more information, contact Kate Kennedy or Ivy Stewart at 703-558-4991 [IWF info@iwf.org is the backlash against the dreadful NOW in the USA. Their ideas are similar to ours, but sometimes take us further, e.g. in their journal femina, june01, pp4,7; "Women actually earn 98 cents on the dollar when factors such as age, education, and experience are taken into account." - Ed]

CSA refunds 'dad' after DNA test

http://www.htvwales.com/news/ 17oct01

A bachelor from Cardigan is getting a £30,000 refund from the Child Support Agency after a DNA test proved he was not the father of a baby. Gerard Bradbury has been paying up to £100 a week for seven years after a brief affair with a woman who then claimed she was having his child.

It is only the second time in Britain that a man has overturned a maintenance order after a DNA test proved he could not have been the father. Mr Bradbury decided to pay for the £200 test because he could barely afford the payments from his £400 a week wages and had a "nagging doubt" about being the boy's father. He said: "There must be hundreds of men throughout the country in my situation and I would urge them to have a DNA test. If the baby is yours then you grin and bear it and pay up. But I think a lot of men are being taken for a ride."

Gerard is due to get the refund - plus interest - in the next few weeks. CSA officials will decide whether the mother will have to bear the cost of refunding the money. [Nice to know our taxes pay for female fraud. - Dave Ellison]

Also at http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/wales/newsid_1604000/1604281.stm

p3

Editorial

Censorship

See www.ivorcatt.com/2001.htm

Ex-Minister Neil Hamilton was only one among a bevy of excellent speakers at our 28oct01 conference on censorship. The conference was video recorded, as was last year's. In these recordings, we have a capital asset on which we can draw for many years.

Following the excellent initiative from the West Country, targeting rogue judges' homes (which led to our activist member Mark Harris being jailed), I am grateful to Brian Robertson for extending our range to targeting radfem academics who falsify statistics. Colleges like RHC, which continue to harbour staff who falsify their research results, are especially vulnerable on their Open Days, when we can warn potential students and their parents against studying there. We also need to approa