Men's Rights's topics - tribe.net

sexual deprivation

2008-07-26T02:50:19Z

http://members.aol.com/vwoodhull/chapter1.htm

At last, a book that reveals

WHO'S REALLY IN CHARGE...

...AND YOU CAN CHECK OUT THE

INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER HERE!!

Sex And Matriarchy: Explorations Of Male
Sexual Deprivation And Other Social Ills

by Victor Woodhull

1995; 178pp; ISBN 0-9643190-0-4; $10.95 paperback

"Woodhull tells all, which is enough to get our PC brothers and sisters up tight....The sort of book that burns with truth." (The Book Reader, Fall 1995)

Some people claim our lives are ruled by a system of patriarchy, but Victor Woodhull (a name suspiciously close to that of a founding mother of modern feminism) uses evolutionary psychology principles to argue convincingly to the contrary in this entertaining blend of satire and science. You are invited to sample the introductory chapter (below). Ordering information follows if you'd like to obtain a copy and find out some generally unknown truths about male-female relationships, including:

HOW females have been breeding males for their own ends for eons,
WHAT are the root causes of male sexual deprivation,
WHY combating the hidden scourge of male sexual deprivation should be a national priority, and
HOW to bring equity to America's distorted sexual economy.

Woodhull's courageous expose of the forces that enslave males by exploiting their own sexual desires is in tune with efforts to propagate the values of fairness and equality of opportunity throughout the world. For example, in 1999 the World Association of Sexology, meeting in Hong Kong, adopted a Declaration of Sexual Rights, one of which is: “The right to sexual pleasure, which is a source of physical, psychological, intellectual and spiritual well-being.” Sex and Matriarchy is an antidote to the repressive social currents conspiring to deprive millions of men of this most basic right.

TO ORDER: You may place a credit card order through Amazon.com. The Amazon.com Web page for this book is:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/stores/offering/list/-/0964319004/all/ref=olp_tab_all/103-1567147-2563064.

Or send a check for just $10.95 per copy (postage and handling free!) to the publisher:

Moniker Media
P.O. Box 995
Kaneohe, HI 96744.

Chapter I

A MANIFESTO

Sexuality is God's good gift given to all people.
(Evangelical Lutheran Church1)

If the burden of Woman is giving birth, then the burden of Man is having orgasms.
(Men's Restroom Graffiti, Harvard)

IF WE TAKE a global perspective of humankind we find that sex is a universal need. There are, admittedly, some people (mostly women) who barely or rarely feel that need, yet it's so pervasive it must be termed basic. One anthropologist lists sex as one of four primary "bio-psychological principles" (along with eating, being active, and having love or affection),2 while another describes pleasure, including sexual pleasure, as an "evolutionary entitlement " as essential for human health and happiness as friends and food.3 And according to the wisdom of Ann Landers, "The sex drive is the strongest human drive after hunger.... There must be an outlet."4

Introductory psychology texts commonly present the late Abraham Maslow's concept of a "hierarchy of needs". The lower level needs are the physiological drives (thirst, hunger and sex), and these must be satisfied before higher level needs, such as for self-expression or spiritual fulfillment, can be fully realized. Unsatisfied needs lead to ill health (mental or physical or both); a cure is achieved by satisfying these needs. On the flip side, loss of interest in sex is a telling symptom of mental depression as well as a variety of physical ailments, clearly showing that having a sexual appetite is healthy.

Research has indeed shown that human health and happiness depend on the satisfaction of basic needs. Healthy and happy people create a healthy and happy society, which ours is obviously not. The importance of individual health and happiness to society as a whole is implicit in our Declaration of Independence's inclusion of "the pursuit of Happiness" as an unalienable right.

Unfortunately, our government has totally abdicated its responsibility to uphold the natural right to sexual fulfillment. Law after law has been passed in the name of every other imaginable right, to ensure that each citizen has at least minimal access to an education, the voting booth, the TV airwaves, and so on and on without ever a mention of what virtually every man and many women as well consider essential to their well-being: sexual fulfillment. Fact is, after more than two centuries of independence, our national sexual economy remains a distorted shambles. Any woman who wants to lead an active sex life has it, while tens of millions of men suffer from extreme sexual deprivation despite heroic efforts. This book is for those of us who are intimately acquainted with such suffering on a daily basis. By revealing the sources of male sexual deprivation and presenting viable solutions to one of society's most debilitating yet most denied scourges, this book truly serves as a manifesto for our cause.

In counterpoint to feminists who view the world through a filter that makes it look like men run everything for their own interests, we'll don the equally valid filter that women are actually, though quite subtly, in control. It is they who "created" the macho male through their own eugenic mating choices over eons of evolution, who breed fighting men to plunder on their behalf while dying early by the hordes, who decide whom among men will be allowed full sexual lives, who blame men for the world's mess while manipulatively hoarding the key to balance and sanity under their skirts. But we blame them not, for they are rarely even conscious of their controlling role. We only wish to work with them to create a better world for all.

APT METAPHORS

As we shall see in later chapters, the world sociopolitical stage has been constructed by women in uneasy alliance with a relatively small number of leading men. We sexually deprived males are the teeming extras who provide the living backdrop before which women chase their dreams of genetic multiplication into realms of ever higher status. The eyes and minds of women only fleetingly examine and reject us, instead focusing on men of star quality strutting on center stage, quintessential men who are clearly more "man" than we could ever hope to be. Yet we fail to comprehend that we're mere extras whose names won't be in the credits and that our cultural scripts are written to make us act as if we matter so the whole show will seem authentic. So daily we wander the fringes of life's stage wrestling piles of paperwork and their associated headaches or exuding sweat while we labor, constantly confronted by women easily imagined as passionate participants in sensuous encounters. Most of them have spent stupendous amounts of time, effort and money getting attractive in the dressing room, suggesting they're sincere in their appearance of yearning and inviting us to envision the placid surfaces of their pampered faces growing animated with ecstasy if we were to share that magical mutuality of physical intimacy. If .... But women dress to kill only leading men, only leading men are "real", only leading men have sets with beds and scenes with sex. We are mere extras, toiling at our roles in the out-of-focus background.

Another apt metaphor for the plight of the sexually deprived male minions is that of being surrounded by water yet having barely a drop to drink. We've been stranded on a barren deserted isle by the passing tides of the Sexual Revolution. Potable water on the island usually turns out to be a mirage, but not always, so we join the teeming male horde scrabbling towards distant enticing images. The images usually disappear though, and if they are for real, on closer inspection they usually turn out to be weed-choked, mud-filled, mosquito-infested, quicksand-pitted. Our struggle for survival, and that of millions of other parched souls, barely succeeds as we subsist on raw imagination and the few drops of pleasure we manage to wring out with our own hands.

WHAT IS SEXUAL DEPRIVATION?

Sexual deprivation is surprisingly common in our so-called Land of Plenty, afflicting an estimated 27 million American men at any given time (the derivation of this estimate will be explained in detail in Chapter IV). Male sexual deprivation is a complex phenomenon, but it basically boils down to a shortage of sexually willing women relative to the sexual needs of men.

We should clarify here that this book is about the sexual deprivation of heterosexual men , which makes the beliefs and behaviors of heterosexual women a critical issue to be explored in depth. Although many homosexual men have indeed been tormented by women, overall they don't suffer much sexual deprivation because of their great willingness, generally, to engage in sex with each other. In this book we don't elevate one form of sex above another, since sexual desires are so variable and, after all, an orgasm is an orgasm. Indeed, in a later chapter we'll come to the point of considering the gay option as a possible partial solution to the daunting problem of male sexual deprivation.

As we indicated in the very first paragraph, we humans have a need for sex. The term sex drive is part of common parlance today, but was first used many decades ago by biologists and psychologists to denote the natural impulse that brings living creatures who might otherwise want nothing to do with each other into sexual union. The "hydraulic drive model" groups hunger, thirst and sexual desire as basic needs characterized by an inexorable buildup of "pressure" that, once it passes a critical point, propels the individual to seek relief.

Hunger and thirst are obviously different in nature from sexual desire because food and water are essential for immediate survival, while people can survive without sex. Yet sexual desire must be satisfied to ensure the long-term survival of an individual's genes and, hence, the species. Without an innate sex drive, humankind would not have evolved. On the other hand, humankind will survive even if many of its members forgo or are forced to do without sex, which is indeed the current situation. The issue then becomes: what are the effects on the individual and society when the sex drive is suppressed or given no outlet? Although it will be denied by the many who believe abstinence to be virtuous, the unfortunate answer is that most sexually deprived individuals suffer psychological warping that, collectively, causes society's gears to grind. All of us pay a price, for sexual deprivation leads people to behave in uncivilized ways, from use of demeaning sarcasm to rape and even mass murder.

One way to clarify the meaning of sexual deprivation is to contrast it with what the United Nations' World Health Organization calls sexual health : "Sexual health is the integration of the somatic, emotional, and social aspects of sexual being in ways that are positively enriching and that enhance personality, communication and love."5 The bedrock of sexual health is mutual genital stimulation by interacting individuals who, however fleetingly, experience a concomitant positive emotional bond. Human beings who are obstructed from interpersonal sexual contact soon experience a state of sexual deprivation. They may try to escape this painful state through self-stimulation, like caged zoo animals, but such acts give only brief relief while accentuating feelings of sexual isolation.

We can now present a definition: sexual deprivation is an absence of sexual fulfillment for long enough time to result in emotional imbalance and/or behavioral deviance . It isn't possible to be more precise as to how long is too long because sexual deprivation is a relative thing, just like every other aspect of the human experience. Sex drive isn't constant, even for a single individual, since it varies according to a myriad factors ranging from life stage to exposure to beer commercials. One man might feel deprived after a day or two without sex while another might not feel deprived for months.

However, two generalizations are possible. First, sexual deprivation is a male problem. No sex-seeking woman could fail to find a partner within a single day if she set her mind to it. Second, sexual fulfillment for heterosexual males means sex with (human) females.

That second generalization derives from how the male brain is wired. Show a heterosexual man a picture of a nude woman, or better yet a video of a couple making love, and his pupils will widen and his penis will probably twitch if not harden. It's automatic. By contrast, few women are easily aroused by something so mundane as the mere sight of genitals. In the same way that a cat goes into hunting mode when a small moving object enters its field of vision, men are automatically aroused when presented with such stimuli as female breasts, genitals, and curvaceous figures, or even just hints that such are present under clothes. The greater a man's sex drive, the more readily he's stimulated by increasingly less quintessential female stimuli. All human societies have gone to great lengths to maintain social order by severely limiting the situations in which men may act on their arousal. But it's cruel and inhumane when a society, such as ours, denies so many men the opportunity to achieve what their bodies demand, which is sex with a woman. To leave them no options besides self-stimulation is like tormenting a caged cat with a parade of free-roaming mice and tweety birds.

SEEKING RELIEF

The scourge of male sexual deprivation has been ignored ever since the Pilgrims landed largely because open public discussion of sexual issues is against American social norms. The situation in America stands in sharp contrast to that in much of the rest of the world. Just imagine, in Italy, despite its strong Roman Catholic heritage, X-rated movies are shown uncensored on television and a stripper gets elected to Parliament, while in Australia, prostitutes are allowed to claim income tax deductions on such business expenses as whips and condoms and to depreciate their beds for wear and tear.

In this book, our nation's hidden shame of widespread male sexual deprivation is finally exposed to light. It will become clear that sexual deprivation has always been a plague in America--and now it's getting even worse as some strains of feminism convince more and more women that sex with men is bad or at least unappealing (and if they ever thought otherwise it was because the patriarchal system run by men somehow brainwashed them into believing the human vagina and penis were meant to fit together).

Fortunately, our legal system is responsive to claims that the rights of particular groups of citizens are being denied. What we sexually deprived males must start doing is asserting our right to the sexual fulfillment that's taken for granted by so many of our fellow citizens. During the 1950s, the Civil Rights movement began making Americans aware of the need to ensure equal treatment for people of color, paving the way for many other deprived groups to also assert and be guaranteed their rights by Congress and the courts. If enough sexually deprived males make enough noise, we too can garner guarantees of our rights.

One of the key outcomes of the Civil Rights movement has been to infuse our government with an abiding concern for equal access and treatment for everyone, no matter what their personal attributes. That's why official terminology is moving towards the "people first" format which focuses on our common humanity. For example, people hit with all-limb paralysis should be called "persons with quadriplegia" rather than "quadriplegics" because the latter label defines people in terms of this one characteristic and strips them of other aspects of their humanity. Other correct terms include Americans with disabilities (rather than "the disabled"), persons with mental illness (rather than "the mentally ill" or "psychos"), and so on. However, we sexually deprived males emphatically reject a "people first" label such as "males with sexual deprivation"! Why? Because, as will be made clear in the next chapter, sex is a quintessential activity for the human male. A man who has been deprived of sex has, truly, been stripped of a major part of his humanity. He defines himself by his deprivation, which can reach such proportions that it suffuses his every thought and breath. To call him a "male with sexual deprivation" is to belittle his condition and imply that radical feminists are right in their absurd belief that men can easily dispel their sex drive by simply ignoring it.

No, we are truly sexually deprived males, and we know we deserve to be the next neglected group on whom Congress bestows previously denied rights. But that's something that won't happen all by its lonesome. It needs friends and relatives from the community of humankind to push it along--and the sexually deprived have nothing if not an abundance of human capital, because close to a third of all adult males are sexually deprived at any given time! That's a huge voting bloc which, if it ever gets organized, survival-conscious politicians will have to court. But the males who dominate politics are among the sexually satiated, so they need to be educated. They are so out of touch with our reality as to be oblivious to the distortions in the sexual economy that marginalize many millions of us American men and deny us vaginal access in our daily praxis. We must let politicos know that our votes are absolutely contingent on commitment to make that economy fair and open to all.

KNOWLEDGE FOR ACTION

Knowledge empowers. If our movement is to wax and thrive, we need to know the objective truth about how we came to our present abject state. There is in fact a wealth of knowledge about the complex intertwining forces which have brought us to this dismal instant in time and are carrying us into the future. Rational use of this knowledge can foster a future in which sexual fulfillment for all becomes reality rather than just another testosterone-induced fantasy.

This pioneering volume weaves sundry threads into a coherent tapestry in which we can wrap our dashed hopes and broken dreams and bury them in the landfill of history where they belong. The threads are drawn from many fields, including ethnology, geopolitics, sociology, economics, evolutionary biology, psychology, and critical praxis theory. Hence the model of male sexual deprivation which we present is called, for short, the ethnogeosocioecobiopsychobehavioral model (see Figure 1 below).

Our explanatory model resonates with the personal histories of most sexually deprived males, but it's essential that we foreground our theoretical biases and clearly present our rationale in order to convince the rest of America that we've been truly wronged. The next chapter, How Woman Made Man , provides a solid grounding in current scientific thought about human evolution and biology. This sets the stage for unmasking the hegemony of matriarchy--which obfuscates reality by condemning the hegemony of a mythical patriarchy--in Chapter III, Patriarchy in the Service of Matriarchy . In Chapter IV, The American Sexual Economy , we critically dissect the current inequitable system of distribution and exchange of our nation's sexual resources. Then in Chapter V, Of Ostriches and Solutions , we discuss what needs to be done to fix the sexual economy. This process is likely to be so arduous that many of us won't live long enough to enjoy the benefits, so Chapter VI, Advice for the Sexually Deprived Male , suggests short-term solutions for making our lives a little more bearable.

A MANIFESTO FOR THE SEXUALLY DEPRIVED MALE

As we sexually deprived males learn about the true causes of our condition and begin coming together to do something about it, we need to define our mission in concrete terms in order to guide our collective agitation for justice. The following manifesto serves that very purpose:

We, the Legions of sexually deprived Males in the United States of America, hereby demand that the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial Branches of our duly constituted Government recognize and guarantee our fundamental constitutional Right to pursue mental Health and Happiness through participation in a sexual Economy that is fair and open to All. In order to attain what has been denied to us since the founding of the Nation, the following initial enabling Steps must perforce be taken through the vigorous Enforcement of existing Laws and Regulations or, where necessary, the Passage and Enforcement of new Laws and Regulations, with sufficient Funding to fully achieve each and every of the following Objectives:

I. Recognition of sexual Fulfillment as a fundamental human Need and Right, the denial of which inevitably leads to Disturbances in individual mental Health and Rents in the collective Fabric of Society;

II. Launching of a substantive research Program on why the sexual Economy is so severely distorted and means of bringing Supply and Demand into Balance;

III. Provision of all necessary Assistance to Males who are unable to attain sexual Fulfillment due to Intelligence, socioeconomic Status, Gender, Age, physical or mental Disabilities, or unavoidable Deficits in personal Appearance; and

IV. Dismantling of Monopolies on sexual Resources by Males undeservedly advantaged by Wealth, Power, and/or personal Appearance.

FOOTNOTES

1 George W. Cornell, "Lutheran Church's Sexuality Report Stops Short of Solutions", The Washington Post , December 7, 1991, p. E16.
2 Marvin Harris, Cultural Materialism: The Struggle for a Science of Culture . New York: Random House, 1979, p. 63.
3 Lionel Tiger, The Pursuit of Pleasure . Boston: Little, Brown, 1992, p. 21.
4 October 24, 1993.
5 World Health Organization, Education and Treatment in Human Sexuality: The Training of Health Professionals , Technical Report No. 572. Geneva: World Health Organization, 1975, p. 6.

Discuss.

posted in Men's Rights - 4 replies

new moderator?

2008-07-13T20:36:11Z

I know I am new here, but nobody else seems to be posting. Does anybody want to be moderator of this tribe? Or, to be more direct, I nominate myself for moderator. Does anyone care, would this be OK with y'all?

posted in Men's Rights - 2 replies

chapin's inferno

2008-07-08T07:46:06Z

a wandering cauldron of (often men's rights-related) politically incorrect commentary...

Save the Males:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3vE_uyIEylY

Feminists Say the Darndest Things:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1-cXYqgNLI

Feminist Fantasies:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PvaWIHuQcxs

posted in Men's Rights - 0 replies

understanding men

2008-01-23T05:45:15Z

a piece i wrote a while back...
Understanding Men

Ok…to understand men’s issues…one has to be able to listen to men…we have a lot of things to say that we don’t feel safe to say…we are very emotionally vulnerable and we can be hurt when we are dismissed for simply being a man…the hazard here is that after a while we tend to act these frustrations out…one must understand that men have a lot of things to say that might not be so easy to hear…we have some darkness in our worlds…and to get us to open up…really open up…one has to be able to hear some things that are unsavory at best…one has to understand that we are in conflicting times…the way things worked for dear old dad is not working for us…if there were a men’s revolution similar to the women’s revolution…I doubt that many women would approve…it would by necessity be more radical due in part to our natures and also the enormous changes that must be put in place in relatively short order…what I perceive to be a problem here is that many men have not formed their own psychic identity…when they broke away from “mom”…they immediately replaced her with a woman they “loved”…and in loving that woman…gave her the same power that mom used to have…the power to shame and guilt…the power to approve or disapprove of actions and decisions…while remaining uninvolved or unaffected by said actions and decisions…also men need to resist the sexual manipulation and coercion that women use to influence their decisions…I believe that men should form their own identities…separate…wholly separate from women…and I don’t mean the pity/whine groups that have sprung up around the country…if a man is going to go to a therapist or counselor…he should go to a man who is capable of understand and having compassion for his plight or position he finds himself in…the other thing that men need desperately is initiation into what it means to be a man…we need groups for young men that include older males…we need to weed out the perverts who are mostly products of maternal psychic or physical abuse and absent fathers…what we need is a new way of thinking about manhood that does not involve violence and drugs and other destructive behaviors…ways that do not involve being emotionally dependent on another for your emotional well being…we need a way of thinking that encourages self-love and esteem…a way that is true for us as men to be able to be the myriad of beings that we are…

DJones 2003

posted in Men's Rights - 6 replies

Parents of boys, prepare for an emasculation of BIBLICAL proportions

2007-12-13T17:26:08Z

In many large cities, women in their 20s are earning more than men in their 20s.

See the video here.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=452808336#

A sense of humor only goes so far. When your wife earns more than you - and sure, there's a few women who actually don't mind this - most women will be utterly dissatisfied. Hell hath no fury like that of a woman whose dream of trading up has been shattered.

Not only are your future 20something boys stuck with picking up the tab for the date, and paying alimony when he gets dumped by his wife, and being door-holding chivalry slaves for his new economic masters, but he's earning less than women, too. Your boys are up for a male bashing the likes of which would make Valerie Solanas rise from the grave and do the stomp dance.

And if you think male bashing is bad now, wait'll the income gap grows. You ain't seen women bad mouthing men yet until large numbers of women in large population centers wake up and realize they're earning more than the men around them.

It's going to be misandry Armageddon.

Advice for parents of baby boys:
Train your boys to be police men, soldiers or fire fighters. A man earning less money than women is marginally acceptable if he is a hunk in uniform and can potentially protect her from danger.

Me, I'm shaking my prospectus with glee in preparation for our new economic masters. Seeing as we have one baby girl toddler and she's gonna be rich, too. :)

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for men's rights. But the fight is lost. It's done for. As women start widening their income lead over men, hatred of men in general will become as American as apple pie.

posted in Men's Rights - 6 replies

chapin book

2007-11-18T05:32:39Z

Has anyone here read this?

http://www.amazon.com/Women-Theory-Practice-Bernard-Chapin/dp/0595704530/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1195363693&sr=8-1

I'm reading it right now & I'm loving it. I think Chapin is one of the most articulate and well-referenced MRA-type writers out there... ...I think the title of the book as a little dumb but the content is pretty solid.

posted in Men's Rights - 0 replies

Anti Misandry

2007-11-08T16:55:48Z

Hi,

I'm a men's rights activist, and I run this site: www.myspace.com/mensmovement

I urge you all to check out Anti Misandry, as it is a fantastic men's rights message board: http://antimisandry.com/forums.php

Thanks

posted in Men's Rights - 0 replies

Vancouver lawyer Carey Linde stirs custody debate

2007-06-20T22:11:05Z

Vancouver lawyer Carey Linde is one of the city's foremost crusaders for fathers' rights. So it shouldn't be a big surprise that he wants Attorney General Wally Oppal to amend the Family Relations Act to recognize that fathers have equal rights as parents in custody, access, and guardianship.

In an interview in his Howe Street office, Linde said this could be accomplished by introducing a new section in the law stating that there is a "rebuttable presumption of shared parenting". "If one parent says I want 50-50 access, it's going to have to be the other parent to prove it shouldn't be the case," Linde said. "Now it's the complete reverse."

The attorney general's ministry is reviewing the Family Relations Act. Linde noted that there is already a legal presumption that property acquired after marriage should be divided equally. But Linde suggested that the onus is still on men to prove why they should have an equal right to parenting. "Where the time and money and energy is being spent now is on children, because there is no presumption," Linde said.

He added that he doesn't think the courts should be allowed to rebut shared parenting if one parent makes allegations about the other's treatment of the children without corroborating evidence or without a report from a doctor or registered psychologist. Linde also said that the past and present conduct of the parents toward one another should also be irrelevant after they've separated.

Divorce, Canadian style

> Approximate number of children from 0 to 19 who experienced separation and divorce in Canada in 2001: 2.1 million

> Median total income for single fathers in Vancouver in 2005: $45,500

> Median total income for single mothers in Vancouver in 2005: $27,700

> Men who had divorced or separated were six times more likely to report an

episode of depression over the next two years compared with married men.

> Women who underwent a marital breakup were 3.5 times more likely to report a bout of depression than their counterparts who were still in a relationship.

> Divorces in Canada in 2003 involving husbands who had previously been divorced: 16.2 percent

> Divorces in Canada in 2003 involving wives who had previously been divorced: 15.7 percent

Source: Statistics Canada

Grace Choi, chair of the Vancouver family-law section of the B.C. branch of the Canadian Bar Association, told the Straight that she doesn't think the B.C. legislature will adopt Linde's recommendation. "Basically, what he is trying to do is limit the scope of the evidence that a court should hear when considering what to do with custody, access, guardianship–all those things–when the best interests of the child is paramount," Choi said.

UBC law professor Susan Boyd, who specializes in family law, told the Straight she doesn't think that a legal presumption of shared parenting is always appropriate, because not all biological fathers and biological mothers end up sharing a household or sharing parenting. She also wondered how it would apply with lesbian parents or in cases in which three or four people are involved in parenting a child.

"Do we want to have a rebuttable presumption of shared parenting or joint custody in all of those scenarios?" Boyd asked. She also said that spousal abuse "often accelerates when parents split up".

Linde said that 15 percent of his firm's clients are women who are dealing with a "control-freak ex-husband" or with a "legitimate abuser". However, he also said that there are lots of men who end up in trials against female spouses with borderline personality disorder, which causes havoc in the family and for the children.

"The judges are too quick to think if there is a problem, it must be caused equally by both of the parties," he said. "The judges are not strong enough to call a spade a spade. They'll do it more frequently if they think the man has done something wrong."

Linde claimed that if the Family Relations Act was amended to incorporate a "rebuttable presumption of shared parenting", many women in custody fights would stop playing "head games" with former spouses.

Alison Brewin, executive director of West Coast Women's Legal Education Action Fund, told the Straight that it's a "myth" that women act out their bitterness in the court system. She added that women often can't get their story across in court because it's too expensive. "The court still has not grasped the impact of violence against women and what that means for the children," Brewin said.

Linde said that he used to be a commercial and corporate litigator but took a two-year hiatus in the early 1990s. During this period, he learned more about the importance of fathers in the raising of children.

"One of the most interesting studies ever done was done in Sweden, with thousands of people," Linde said. "The results were the children who scored best across the board were those children raised by their fathers."

He said that the study found that intact families scored second-best, and children raised by single mothers ranked third in such areas as the lack of juvenile delinquency, staying out of prison, maintaining job skills, and empathy. He said it's an interesting statistic, but he also recognizes that the sample was probably skewed because it's the motivated fathers who are more likely to seek and gain custody of their children.

"The sample of fathers who have taken the trouble to fight the system–to become the custodial prime [parent]–are not your average parent or your average father," Linde said. "They're probably better off financially, intellectually, et cetera, and they've made the effort."

He claimed that the legal system has historic gender bias that deems mothers to be more compassionate and better at rearing children. But he said the idea of equal-time shared parenting is catching on among judges. The National Association of Women and the Law, on the other hand, has claimed that women's "systemic inequality in society is also reflected in family law contexts".

Vancouver family lawyer Georgialee Lang told the Straight that Linde's advocacy is a major reason why more fathers are receiving joint custody. However, Lang added that she doesn't expect the B.C. or federal governments to grant a legal presumption of shared parenting.

"I think there would be a lot of backlash from the Canadian Bar Association," Lang predicted. "I think there will be a huge backlash from judges across Canada."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Source URL:
http://www.straight.com/article-95239/vancouver-lawyer-carey-linde-stirs-custody-debate

posted in Men's Rights - 0 replies

On a lighter note - sort of

2007-04-15T20:05:07Z

By Jeannette Walls
MSNBC

Britney Spears and Kevin Federline have hammered out the details of their split, and it’s reportedly going to cost the “Toxic” singer $13 million. What’s more, Star magazine says that Spears was reluctant to finalize the split.

“Do you really want to do this?” Spears asked K-Fed as the two met to discuss final details of their divorce, reports to the upcoming issue of the tab.

K-Fed said yes, and his estranged wife replied, “You’re the biggest mistake I’ve ever made, but thank you for my babies.”

Then the two puffed on cigarettes for a 15-minute smoking break, then hashed out the financial terms of their split, according to Star.

The tabloid also claims that Federline led Spears to believe that the two would get together after she got out of rehab because he wanted to encourage her to stay in the treatment center.

Among the details, according to the tab:

A 2004 prenup called for K-Fed to get $250,000 for each year of their marriage, but Spears upped that figure to $500,000 to speed up the negotiations.
He receives half the proceeds from their Malibu mansion, which is on the market for $13.5 million.
Spears will pay $25,000 a month in child support for each of the couple’s two children until they reach 18. He also gets custody of the boys four days a week.
Federline gets to keep all the gifts Spears bought them during their marriage.
He’s forbidden from writing a tell-all about their marriage.

posted in Men's Rights - 2 replies

Do Father's Have Rights?

2007-04-02T07:28:08Z

Eight years ago I became stepmom to a little 18 month old girl. One of the reasons I was drawn to my husband was because of the visible bond his had with his baby. They were so close and it was beautiful. For the next 2 ½ years we parented her halftime and I became a second mom to her. She went with us everywhere and when her first little brother was born they became the best of friends.

When she was 4 her mother moved about 2 hours away. We arranged for regular visitation – the standard every other weekend, 4 weeks in the summer, etc. The Court Order was never followed. My husband had to fight and argue over every single scheduled visit to insure that it would happen which it seldom did. My husband’s visitation has steadily deteriorated and now we see his 9 ½ year old girl two days a month – tops. Out of the past 365 days we have seen her 22.

My husband was his daughter’s primary caregiver for the first four years of her life. It's so sad to see my stepdaughter lying for her mother and becoming so disconnected from her dad, brothers and extended family. Why are some parents like this? I could never put my children through what my stepdaughter is being put through - being told that we are "bad", "angry", "abusive". And we are powerless. My husband is only the father after all and we live and operate in a society that doesn't value fatherhood or the father/child relationship.

One problem is that in Canada, the US and other countries access orders are not enforceable by law – child support payments are though. We pay our money every month without fail yet there is no recourse for parent/child estrangement.

The second problem is that there are some parents who simply refuse to put aside their bitterness, jealousy and hatred for the sake of their kids.

***

A few years ago I created a petition to try to make access orders enforceable by law. You can find it here:
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/329879114

posted in Men's Rights - 9 replies

Double Standards

2007-02-02T10:12:19Z

I found this thought-provoking item while poking around today....

Double Standards: Ever Wonder Why?

by Thomas Simon

Why do women have the choice between abortion, adoption, dropping an unwanted baby off at a hospital, raising the child with a father, or raising the child without a father, but the only choice men have is to agree?

Why do women dress in makeup, short skirts, bare midriffs, and low-cut blouses but complain about men that stare at them?

Why do we pretend that men are the ones that abuse children when it is a well-known fact that women abuse children more than men?

If single mothers have it so bad, why do women initiate about eighty percent of divorces and routinely commit perjury to win custody?

Why do we have a Violence Against Women Act but nothing for men when women cause domestic violence just as often as men?

Why is it funny when a woman kicks a man in the groin but terrible if a man did the same to a woman - won't the man be in more pain?

Why is it terrible for a woman to be raped once but funny when male prisoners get raped over and over?

Why is a man a wimp if he lets his wife beat up on him but a criminal if he defends himself?

Why does women’s health get much more attention when men die about seven years younger than women?

Why do we complain about legislators being mostly male when they always promote women’s rights and never promote men’s rights?

Why is it sexist to have clubs for only men but empowering to have them for only women?

If women only make 72 cents for the same work where a man earns a dollar, why don’t companies hire only women and put the competition out of business?

How do police know who to arrest when there is a domestic disturbance involving lesbians?

Why do married women complain that their husbands don’t want to change a baby’s diaper but divorced women say their ex-husbands can’t take care of a child?

Why do men that don’t pay child support go to prison but nothing ever happens to women that don’t allow visitation?

If women-in-the-military is such a good thing, why don’t they have to register for the draft?

Why are we so concerned about girls under-performing boys in math and science but not concerned about boys under-performing girls in everything else?

Why is it legal for women to lie to men about who the father of a baby is to get child support, but a crime if she tells the same lie to the government to get Social Security or military benefits?

Why do women have to prove they spent the money on the children when they collect welfare but don’t have to do the same when they collect child support?

Why do we have to cut men’s sports that have fans to create women’s sports that don’t?

Why do women tennis players win the same prize money as men when they only play three sets and men play five - isn't that equal pay for less work?

Why is it called sexual freedom when a married woman commits adultery but called cheating when a man does the same?

Why are female murderers presumed to be mentally ill but male murderers presumed to be killers?

Why do men have to support women at the same standard of living following divorce when women don’t even have to cook and clean his new apartment?

If divorced women have it worse than divorced men, why do divorced men commit suicide eight or ten times as much as divorced women?

Why do we pretend that men walk out on their wives and children when women initiate about eighty percent of divorces?

Why is it considered sexist to have a couple of television shows geared towards men when there are several channels catering only to women?

Why are television moms always portrayed as wonderful and loving and television dads always portrayed as inept buffoons?

Why is it politically incorrect to say anything negative about women but funny to put men down?

Why are women without a job considered to be exercising free choice but men without a job considered a bum?

Why do feminists demand that women be equally represented in high paying and powerful jobs but don’t complain when low-paying, dirty, and dangerous jobs remain mostly done by men?

Why do we have to say “Chairperson” and “Congressperson” but its ok to say “garbage man” and “bad guy”?

Why do we always hear the phrase “innocent women and children” but never hear about “innocent men” or “men and children”?

Why do news headlines use the terms “student”, “spouse”, or “parent” when a girl or woman, or mother does something wrong but use the terms “boy”, “husband”, or “father” when a boy, man, or father does something wrong?

Why do feminists demand equal results for traditionally male roles but object to equal or shared parenting after divorce?

Why does the term “angry mother” sound like someone that needs our help and support and the term “angry father” sound like someone that needs to be arrested and forced into anger management classes?

Why is it that when men are more successful than women it's because women are oppressed, but when women are more successful than men it's because men are lazy?

Why are only women free to criticize other women without being labeled anti-women, but both men and women are free to criticize men?

Why are feminists pushing for laws that prevent new laws from being passed that protect men from women, such as with domestic violence against men, false allegations by women, or paternity fraud?

Why is it that when a woman accuses a man of rape, the man's name is made public and he is presumed guilty, but when he is proven innocent the woman remains anonymous and the man is still ruined?

Why is it considered woman-hating or whining to point it out when women have something better than men, but we rush to pass new laws if men might have something better than women?

Why is it that we've had forty years and billions of dollars going into women's rights and men's responsibilities, but it's taboo in most circles to even suggest that maybe it's time to consider men's rights and women's responsibilities a little bit for a change?

If those who always side with women are feminists and those who always side with men are chauvinists, why don't we have a wing of a political party and billions in funding going to chauvinists when we have that for feminists?

For those who believe men had it better than women in the past and believe now it's time for women to have it better than men for a while, why don't they advocate whites being forced into slavery to blacks?

Why are men considered more privileged than women with so many double standards against men?

posted in Men's Rights - 11 replies

Advice for me please?

2006-10-04T18:54:54Z

So this is the situation of a friend of my family.
Dads fake name: Rick Mom's fake name: Bitch

2 years and 7 months ago Bitch dumps her daughters at a complete strangers house, who happened to live across the street from the father Rick.
Bitch is a drug addict who's boyfriend was killed during an attempt on HER life for unpaid drug debt.
Rick got temporary custody of his daughters after she left them on grounds of abandonment. But he had to keep renewing it every 4 weeks.

Now bitch wants her daughters back, she claims she's clean but more likely she just wants the child support that comes with them so she can buy drugs with it.

Bitch got a restraining order on Rick so he couldn't be near his daughters WHILE HE HAD CUSTODY OF THEM. Now as of today the judge said he has to give them back as of today to their mother. Who hasn't shown up for them. They are at a friends so he doesn't get in trouble for violating the restraining order. He can't get ahold of her to return them because of the restraining order, and doesn't know where she is. But he's violating court order by not returning them.

So basically the girls don't want to go back. They say they will run away. CPS won't get involved because they say that they can't just go against a court order.

So what can he do? Any advice on organizations that could help him with his case? He's very low income and would need someone to work with him. The situation is desperate so any advice is REALLY appreciated.

posted in Men's Rights - 11 replies

new member...

2006-10-03T13:01:30Z

i like this place and have some things to say...but right now i'm about to get my son off to school...i'm a single father of a 19 year old and i'm loving every minute of watching him become a very strong and astute man...

posted in Men's Rights - 0 replies

Restraining Orders

2006-08-07T15:26:46Z

What course of action does one have if you are not in fact the perpetrator of a delusional ex's imagination?

If the ex gets a restraining order (which you were not guilty of in the first place) and the ex believes you have violated it (when in fact it was somebody else) what then?

Thanks beforehand!

posted in Men's Rights - 0 replies

blue

2006-03-20T18:15:09Z

http://tribes.tribe.net/janeisgod

posted in Men's Rights - 0 replies

Shouldn't men have 'choice' too?

2006-03-10T21:26:32Z

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-daum10dec10,0,5842196.column?coll=la-news-comment-opinions

From the Los Angeles Times
MEGHAN DAUM
Shouldn't men have 'choice' too?
Meghan Daum

December 10, 2005

FOR PRO-CHOICERS like myself, Supreme Court nominee Samuel A. Alito Jr.'s position regarding spousal consent for abortion seems like one more loose rock in the ongoing erosion of Roe vs. Wade. Even those of us who are too young to remember the pre-Roe era often see any threat to abortion rights as a threat to our very destinies. We are, after all, the generation that grew up under Title IX, singing along to "Free to Be You and Me" (you know, the 1972 children's record where Marlo Thomas and Alan Alda remind us that mommies can be plumbers and boys can have dolls). When it comes to self-determination, we're as determined as it gets.

But even though I was raised believing in the inviolability of a woman's right to choose, the older I get, the more I wonder if this idea of choice is being fairly applied.

Most people now accept that women, especially teenagers, often make decisions regarding abortion based on educational and career goals and whether the father of the unborn child is someone they want to hang around with for the next few decades. The "choice" in this equation is not only a matter of whether to carry an individual fetus to term but a question of what kind of life the woman wishes to lead.

But what about the kind of life men want to lead? On Dec. 1, Dalton Conley, director of the Center for Advanced Social Science Research at New York University, published an article on the Op-Ed page of the New York Times arguing that Alito's position on spousal consent did not go far enough.

Describing his own experience with a girlfriend who terminated a pregnancy against his wishes, Conley took some brave steps down the slippery slope of this debate, suggesting that if a father is willing to assume full responsibility for a child not wanted by a mother, he should be able to obtain an injunction stopping her from having an abortion — and he should be able to do so regardless of whether or not he's married to her.

Conley freely acknowledges the many obvious caveats in this position — the most salient being the fact that regardless of how "full" that male responsibility might be, the physical burden of pregnancy and childbirth will always put most of the onus on women. But as much as I shudder at the idea of a man, husband or not, obtaining an injunction telling me what I can or cannot do with my own body, I would argue that it is Conley who has not gone far enough.

Since we're throwing around radical ideas about abortion rights, let me raise this question: If abortion is to remain legal and relatively unrestricted — and I believe it should — why shouldn't men have the right during at least the first trimester of pregnancy to terminate their legal and financial rights and responsibilities to the child?

As Conley laments, the law does not currently allow for men to protect the futures of the fetuses they help create. What he doesn't mention — indeed, no one ever seems to — is the degree to which men also cannot protect their own futures. The way the law is now, a man who gets a woman pregnant is not only powerless to force her to terminate the pregnancy, he also has a complete legal obligation to support that child for at least 18 years.

In other words, although women are able to take control of their futures by choosing from at least a small range of options — abortion, adoption or keeping the child — a man can be forced to be a father to a child he never wanted and cannot financially support. I even know of cases in which the woman absolves the man of responsibility, only to have the courts demand payment anyway. That takes the notion of "choice" very far from anything resembling equality.

I realize I've just alienated feminists (among whose ranks I generally count myself) as well as pro-lifers, neither of whom are always above platitudes such as "You should have kept your pants on." But that reasoning is by now as reductive as suggesting that a rape victim "asked for it." Yes, people often act irresponsibly and yes, abortion should be avoided whenever possible. But just as women should not be punished for choosing to terminate a pregnancy, men should not be punished when those women choose not to.

One problem, of course, is that the child is likely to bear the brunt of whatever punishment remains to be doled out. A father who terminates his rights, although not technically a deadbeat dad, has still helped create a kid who is not fully supported. And (in case you were wondering) there are dozens of other holes in my theory as well: What if a husband wants to terminate his rights — should that be allowed? What if a father is underage and wants to terminate but his parents forbid him? Should a father's decision-making time be limited to the first trimester? Should couples on first dates discuss their positions on the matter? Should Internet dating profiles let men check a box saying "will waive parental rights" next to the box indicating his astrological sign?

There's also the danger that my idea is not just a slippery slope but a major mudslide on the way to Conley's idea. If a man can legally dissociate himself from a pregnancy, some will argue, why couldn't he also bind himself to it and force it to term? That notion horrifies me, just as my plan probably horrifies others. But that doesn't mean these ideas aren't worth discussing. Though it may be hard to find an adult male who's sufficiently undiplomatic to admit out loud that he'd like to have the option I'm proposing, let alone potentially take it, I know more than a few parents of teenage boys who lose sleep over the prospect of their sons landing in the kind of trouble from which they'll have no power to extricate themselves.

And although the notion of women "tricking" men into fatherhood now sounds arcane and sexist, we'd be blind not to recognize the extent to which some women are capable of tricking themselves into thinking men will stick around, despite all evidence to the contrary. Allowing men to legally (if not always gracefully) bow out of fatherhood would, at the very least, start a conversation for which we haven't yet found the right words.

Actually, there's one word we've had all along: choice. We just need to broaden its definition.

posted in Men's Rights - 8 replies

article: Has bias pendulum swung against men?

2006-02-20T18:38:56Z

Via http://ifeminist.com

Has bias pendulum swung against men?
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=48895

posted in Men's Rights - 0 replies

P-Day vs. V-Day

2006-02-12T00:15:23Z

May 02, 2005, 8:08 a.m.
Why Can't They "Just Get Along"?
V-Day meets P-Day on campus.

By Christina Hoff Sommers

Warning:The following contains adult (in this case, collegiate) language, along with gratuitous references to male and female genitalia.

College administrators have been enthusiastic supporters Eve Ensler’s play The Vagina Monologues and schools across the nation celebrate “V-Day” (short for Vagina Day) every year. But when the College Republicans at Roger Williams University in Rhode Island rained on the celebrations of V-Day by inaugurating Penis Day and staging a satire called The Penis Monologues, the official reaction was horror. Two participating students, Monique Stuart and Andy Mainiero, have just received sharp letters of reprimand and have been placed on probation by the Office of Judicial Affairs. The costume of the P-Day “mascot” — a friendly looking “penis” named Testaclese, has been confiscated and is under lock and key in the office of the assistant dean of student affairs, John King.

(Continued at the link)

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/sommers200505020808.asp

posted in Men's Rights - 6 replies

Choice for Men

2006-01-07T07:58:10Z

One of the recent movement's in men's rights has been the movement to enact "choice for men." Men's activists cite Roe v. Wade as a turning point in reproductive rights for women, and since that point in US history, men have not received equal protection under the law, as guaranteed by the 14th Ammendment to the United States Constitution. Roe v. Wade gave additional reproductive rights to women, but no additional reproductive rights to men, thus greating unequal protection under the law.

Several proposals have been made as to methods of instituting choice for men. It should be noted that choice for men does not mean that men would have authority over women's right to choose. Quite the contrary. It would provide a method of recourse for men trapped or tricked into parenthood. Some varieties of choice for men would also give a method of "paper abortion" to a man. In other words, a man could state at any time within the first trimester that he has no desire to be a father to the child, and abdicates all of his rights as a father, as well as all of his responsibilities (including financial) to that child.

Read more here:
http://www.nas.com/c4m/
http://www.glennsacks.com/30_years_after.htm

posted in Men's Rights - 27 replies

Help for a friend

2005-11-18T03:10:17Z

A friend of mine is going through some rough times with his 6 year old son, his son's mother and custody. If I told you some of the stuff he's gone through you almost wouldn't believe it. Can you suggest a place to go here on tribe.net or somewhere else online? He's a poor working guy and the local county legal aid isn't helping much. Thanks!

posted in Men's Rights - 2 replies

Need Opinions

2005-10-31T02:33:35Z

Which of these do you like better?
http://mars.walagata.com/w/talenak/FORFRANK.jpg
OR
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v20/talenak/redcircleslash.jpg

posted in Men's Rights - 2 replies

Any noteworthy news?

2005-10-18T04:21:12Z

Anything going on in the Men's Rights front? I've heard zip in the last couple months. I'm not sure if that's good or bad.

posted in Men's Rights - 2 replies

Why Empowered Women Choose Not To Circumcise

2005-10-09T18:01:45Z

Below is the link to an excellent article.

Why Empowered Women Choose Not To Circumcise
by Aubrey Taylor

http://wnc-woman.com/0405circumcise.html

Here is the actual article.

why empowered women choose not to circumcise
by aubrey taylor

Circumcision? What on earth does circumcision have to do with being an empowered woman?

The answer isn’t obvious. The two issues seem worlds apart, one having to do with an infant’s foreskin, and the other: you. Some of us seeking personal strength and empowerment in our lives may never have children, some already have, but the fact is that knowing the truth is empowering for any woman, or any man. How many times have I heard something similar to “If I had known, I never would have let them do it.” This statement is often times made, unfortunately, by the mothers of boys who have had complications, which sometimes need additional surgery to correct. Having the truth about circumcision can only lead to an empowered decision, should the occasion arise, or having an empowered position in your community. However, knowing why an empowered woman would choose not to circumcise goes beyond simple education, and into our strengths and weaknesses; and to see it we must examine also why nowadays we circumcise in the first place, even in the face of the truth.

So let’s start with the truth. Circumcision is unnecessary. You may be thinking “But they’ve been doing it for so long, and I’ve always heard that it’s cleaner.” The medical documents regarding circumcision in the United States date back to the late 1800’s and quote well-respected doctors saying that circumcision would, among many things, end masturbation and even cure insanity.

The hygiene issue wasn’t brought up until after those ideas were realized as false, or as a sort of afterthought. No one had, at that time, ever studied the foreskin, and claiming that it’s cleaner not to have it, is like claiming that it’s cleaner to remove your fingernails so that dirt cannot collect under them. As far as I know, fingers come into more contact with contaminants than the penis.

Since then, there have been many other excuses that take turns defending circumcision, and even today medical professionals are still debating the supposed benefits that include an implication of preventing STDs and penile cancer. Yet, the American Academy of Pediatrics has stated since the 1970’s that there is “no valid medical indication for circumcision”

Still others hold to the old assumed facts. In the face of professionals making opposite claims one can either study everything there is to be studied, or resort to common sense: If 85% of the world has natural genitals, and they don’t end up needing modification, perhaps what’s natural is safe. After all, women have many more folds of skin “down there” and we seem to do OK. Even in the face of an infection or other problems, the solution is NEVER amputation. There isn’t after all, a single body part that is free from an occasional problem. We don’t cut off our toes to prevent getting an ingrown toenail!

Circumcision is also extremely painful and inflicts damage; that’s what they WON’T tell you. The foreskin in infancy is attached to the head of the penis with a membrane called synechia that is similar to the membrane attaching your fingernail to your finger. The foreskin must therefore be torn from the head of the penis before it can be amputated. This would be like shoving a blunt metal probe under your fingernail.

The complications of circumcision arise from the risk of taking too much skin or accidentally cutting off other structures like shaft tissue or the glans (penis head), there’s a risk of infection and hemorrhage, as well as issues arising after the circumcision like skin bridges and chordee (bent penis). There have been many unfortunate instances where the infant suffers a loss of the entire penis or even death.

Though it isn’t well known, the foreskin is an essential part of the penis. The foreskin of an infant protects the glans from abrasion, and contains a tight ring of tissue at the end that keeps fecal matter and other debris from coming in contact with the urethral opening. Later in life, after the glans and foreskin separate, the gliding motion of the foreskin aids in smooth sexual intercourse. The average foreskin is also innervated with 10 to 20 thousand sexually responsive nerve endings.

Finally, we must consider the moral implications of removing a part of someone’s genitals by force. Whose body is it? Who should decide? Who has the right to remove a part of your genitals without asking? No one? Well, how nice for you. In the United States, female minors are protected from any kind of genital cutting by federal law, regardless of race or religion. According to the 14th amendment, everyone deserves equal protection under the law regardless of race, religion or SEX.

Most women in the United States have no experience with an intact penis. There is an underlying belief that it’s ‘gross’ or ‘dirty’. We generally don’t know that it has a function, and are told that circumcision is a good thing. Even as knowledge that circumcision isn’t medically necessary spreads and becomes more commonplace, we are still circumcising. Why? As a woman it is our instinct and our conscious desire to protect our children from any harm. Aside from our ignorance about the subject, what could be so strong that it is able to override this natural tendency? The reasons are the things that hold us down in other situations: the pressure to socially conform, avoiding conflict by allowing denial, and the inability to assert ourselves.

The need to be “normal” is a natural human instinct. That’s why teasing and ostracism are so effective. No one wants to feel like they’ve stepped over the boundaries of taboo. For many women, being seen as different is an unacceptable risk and she will conform to the perceived ‘norm’ to avoid it. Society used to punish those who were different with very severe consequences including death. Living in a more sophisticated and civilized society we no longer face anything as extreme as physical harm for stepping out of the norm, but the weight of social expectation is still too much for some women to handle. “That’s not the American way”, “He’ll be the only boy on the block”, “My parents won’t agree” or “I don’t want to be different” are things that she may worry about. It takes a confident and empowered woman to let go of any concerns about what others will think, or the desire to be like everyone else, in favor of doing what’s right. In fact, in these changing times the rate of circumcision is as low as 30% on the west coast, and possibly only 60% nationwide and dropping. Worrying about being different is becoming less of an issue for women and young boys. Not to mention that most of the world does not routinely circumcise male infants. Boys are more likely to face teasing from peers about things that are obvious at first sight, like clothes, or weight, and we accept this as a normal part of growing up.
A good way to avoid thinking about an uncomfortable topic, or having to make a tough decision is to simply ignore it, or believe something that allows you to dismiss it. This is generally something common with people who are stuck in a negative situation that cannot be changed, so that they don’t have to feel bad. Women who have already had their son circumcised would have to admit they were wrong if they accepted that circumcision is damaging or unnecessary. This plays a large role in circumcisions’ perpetuation. We don’t want to admit that we could have hurt our children, so we may even take it as far, in our subconscious defense, as insisting that it’s necessary and that it continue to prove we were right.

For those with the decision still in front of them, it may be easier to simply believe what we’ve always heard, and skip the argument altogether. Many simply don’t want to know the truth, because it would complicate their situation. Accepting myth at face value and denying yourself knowledge is like locking your own chains. It is allowing someone else to make your decisions for you. Being empowered means having the strength and the courage to stand against oppression, even if it comes from inside your own self. Refusing to deny is a difficult quality to obtain, because the one you’re fighting is yourself.

When a baby boy is born, or sometime before, a woman is faced with the question “will the baby be circumcised?” She must then deal with many pressures. If the baby’s father was circumcised, he may want the same for the child. Because it is an issue concerning the penis, a woman may feel that the decision isn’t hers to make, and even though she may not want to allow it, she will defer to the father. Perhaps the doctor has said that it is necessary. In the United States we trust that our doctors know all and are infallible. It may seem rude or insulting to go against what her doctor has suggested. Who supposes to know more than a doctor?

Even a woman’s faith may be questioned if circumcision is perceived as a religious necessity. She doesn’t want to appear as though she is going against her religion. All of these pressures may make a woman feel as though it’s not her place to interfere with the issue of circumcision, and she finds it difficult to assert herself feeling less than empowered. However, a mothers’ first job is to protect, because infants cannot speak for themselves, so circumcision most certainly is her business. Taking a stand against your mate, doctor, or religious peers is without a doubt a challenge. Again it takes a woman with strength and courage to overcome such situations.

An empowered woman is educated, refuses to believe myth, is strong, moral, and she stands up for herself and the defenseless; it takes all of these things to say no to circumcision. For those empowered women who aren’t faced with making this particular decision, they will have the same qualities: refuse to continue to be a catalyst for the perpetuation of a harmful practice against the defenseless.

References & further information:

John Harvey Kellog, Treatment for Self-Abuse and Its Effects, Plain Facts for Old and Young, Burlington, Iowa: P. Segner & Co. 1888, p. 295

W.G.Steele, MD. Importance of Circumcision. Medical World,Vol. 20 (1902): pp.518-519.

American Academy of Pediatrics, Committee on Fetus and Newborn. Standards and Recommendation for Hospital Care of Newborn Infants. 5th ed. Evanston, IL: American Academy of Pediatrics, 1971:110.

For the AAPs’ most recent circumcision policy statement, visit aap.org
Deibert GA. The separation of the prepuce in the human penis. Anat Rec 1933;57:387-399

For a comprehensive list of articles documenting circumcision risks and damage, visit cirp.org/library/complications
Doctors Re-examine Circumcision by Thomas J. Ritter, M.D. and George C. Denniston, M.D. 2002

Cold, C, Taylor, J, “The Prepuce,” BJU International 83, Suppl. 1, (1999): 34-44.

Sex as Nature Intended It by Kristen O’Hara with Jeffrey O’Hara. 2001

See also:
• jewishcircumcision.org
• acts15.org
• quran.org
• circumcisionquotes.com

WESTERN NORTH CAROLINA WOMAN
is a publication of INFINITE CIRCLES, INC.

PO BOX 1332 • MARS HILL NC 28754 • 828-689-2988

Web Design by HANDWOVEN WEBS
Celebrating the Spirit of Place in Western North Carolina

posted in Men's Rights - 0 replies

Paternity Leave

2005-07-26T23:11:30Z

Hi Guys, I've just joined the tribe, and I already have something to put forward to ya.

I was reading this interesting article on the BBC about a month ago and once again some of our Nordic counterparts seem to be ahead of us in terms of rights.

In Denmark and Iceland, fathers can take up to 3 months, maybe more, paid paternity leave. It is extremely important in my views that fathers get to spend time with their young children. It also shows that people are happier at their workplace. Also important to note is the decline in divorce rate. In this day and age, I think governments should be trying to cut the divorce rate as much as they possibly can. Not only that, fathers can bond with their children and not have to think about the economic consequences of taking time of work.

I don't know about the US, but in Canada, as far as I know, the only way fathers can take time off is if they use their annual leave. For a country that prides itself on human rights, I hope Canada (as well as other countries) changes its laws to make it easier for fathers to be fathers, and hopefully curb divorce rates.

Article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4629631.stm

posted in Men's Rights - 1 reply

Penile Sensitivity Study Needs Intact Men

2005-07-12T18:23:37Z

The researchers are still seeking men to participate in the study. I know they are particularly short of supply of intact/noncircumcised men. If that's you, your participation in the study is NEEDED! Thanks!
---

A Penile Sensitivity Touch-Test Evaluation will be conducted in San
Francisco from July 30 to August 14, 2005. Its purpose is to produce
the first quantitative map of penile sensitivity. Testing is
non-invasive and takes about an hour.

For information, or to participate, please call:

415-488-9883 weekdays 8am - 7pm

415-710-4297 weeknights 7pm - 9pm, and weekends 10am-6pm

Study sponsor is a national non-profit 501(C)3 educational
organization.

posted in Men's Rights - 0 replies

Wage Gap Myth - Exposed on 20/20

2005-06-07T20:14:20Z

http://abcnews.go.com/2020/GiveMeABreak/story?id=797045&page=1

A great article on the Wage Gap Myth from the latest episode of 20/20. Apparently the story on TV was more in depth, but I didn't hear about it until after it had aired. Oh well.

Anyone read Farrell's latest book, the one featured in the article? If so, what did you think of it?

posted in Men's Rights - 10 replies

Holy Effin Cow, Need to laugh? Or cry?

2005-06-06T18:26:40Z

http://www.kcstar.com/item/pages/local.pat,local/3acd030e.927,.html

A prominent female state senator has said that she does not support the 19th Amendment, which guarantees women the right to vote, and that if it were being considered today she would vote against it.

Although she does vote, O'Connor said in two subsequent interviews with The Kansas City Star that if men had been protecting the best interests of women, then women would not be forced to cast ballots and serve in the state legislature. Instead, they could stay home, raise families and tend to domestic duties, she said.

Asked if she supports the 19th Amendment, the Republican lawmaker responded: "I'm an old-fashioned woman. Men should take care of women, and if men were taking care of women (today) we wouldn't have to vote.

"I'm sorry women have not been taken more care of," she said. "We have gotten the short end of the stick."

posted in Men's Rights - 4 replies

POLL - moderator?

2005-06-06T06:12:02Z

I created this little tribe back when I had a different account, and thus, was moderator here for a long time. I lost my old account, and with it my moderator status here. I'd like it back. And that's where the poll comes in.

Tribe needs a vote to put in a new moderator. So I'm throwing my hat into the ring and putting it to a vote. If you're a member of this tribe, please vote.

A) I vote for Evan as moderator.
B) I vote for ______ as moderator. (please fill in the blank)
C) I vote for no moderator. (don't you wish you could vote for this in US elections?)

posted in Men's Rights - 9 replies

Strange Notions

2005-05-28T02:49:49Z

Here is the problem as I see it with most of the issues involving people across the world in terms of male/female rights. This happens everywhere, and this thread was a response to something said in the "cutting" thread, about female circumsion being a horrible act, etc...

These issues may be important (certainly much more horrible to us, people not living in the culture) but the people in the countries who have these "rights" problems have much greater problems to worry about.

Women's rights groups went around screaming about Burkas in Afghanistan and the middle east, but they did nothing to speak out against the Afghani tradition of taking young boys as lovers, or their lack of electricity, and the fact that just going to the well you could be killed by a hidden cluster bomb.

In these countries where female circumsion is going on no one has barely any rights at all, even the men. They drink water with shit in it, literally. The average life expectancy is 35. Don't you think they have a hard enough time just surving, let alone dealing with these other issues?

Women politicans from America recently went to Iraq to help out women candidates and promote women's rights (even though Iraq has been the most western of Arab countries when it comes to women's rights. Women have been able to hold positions of power there for a while) But lo-and-behold, they discovered that those women candidates, in fact all of the candidates, had other things to worry about... like getting blown up!

The senators from the US came with campaign buttons and stickers for the female candidates! $#$%&

That's how divorced these issues are from the reality of the situation. We can stand back and say "that one thing is horrible", but their whole situation in life is horrible!

I've always seen this tribe as one promoting equal protection for both sexes, but slanted in the direction of men to highlight that side of things. The problems in those societies where these outrageous abuses against women that feminists are always yelling about are commited in societies that are horrible for everyone, not just women. I think some people's failure to understand that is at the heart of the issue

posted in Men's Rights - 13 replies

NEW Anticircumcision Tribe

2005-05-13T02:43:29Z

There's a new anti-circumcision activism (Intactivism) tribe just getting started. If you are interested in helping end circumcision, please join this tribe, meet others who want to DO something about this, let's plan, and make some change!
http://intactivism.tribe.net

posted in Men's Rights - 0 replies

2003 National Discharge Survey :)

2005-03-15T17:52:33Z

I'm just going to copy and paste it from my email. I did not do the number crunching. That credit goes to someone else.

""I very quickly crunched some of the numbers and it looks
like the 2003 circumcision rate was 55.9%!!! That is down from 60.1%
in 2002, a change of 4.2%! This is the biggest percent change in 10
years and obviously the lowest circumcision rate in 50 years
according to the NHDS.

2003 CHANGE (2002)
Circumcised 55.9% -4.2% 60.1%
Intact 44.1% 4.2% 39.9%

The circumcision rates dropped in all 4 US regions:
2003
REGION---- CIRC'D CHANGE (2002)
NE Region 64.7% -4.2% 68.9%
MW Region 77.8% -3.2% 81.0%
S Region 57.8% -6.2% 64.0%
W Region 31.4% -1.2% 32.6%

Rates dropped among both whites and blacks
2003
RACE-- CIRC'D CHANGE (2002)
White 58.0% -6.0% 64.0%
Black 62.4% -7.4% 69.8%""

""Just to give a little perspective, the 4.2% drop means that about
85,000 fewer babies were circumcised in 2003.""

""The
circumcision rates listed on the CDC's website ONLY lists infant
circumcisions from the black and white ethnic groups even though it
says "All Races". This artifically raised the numbers by about 4
percent.

www.cdc.gov/nchs/product...bs/pubd/hestats/circumcisions/circ
umcisions.htm
""

www.cdc.gov/nchs/about/m.../hdasd/nhds.htm ftp.cdc.gov/pub/Health_S...stics/NCHS/Datasets/NHDS/
ftp.cdc.gov/pub/Health_S...stics/NCHS/Dataset_Documentation/NH
DS/

posted in Men's Rights - 1 reply

cutting

2005-03-09T00:43:58Z

circumcision debate y'all might be interested in

http://bangalore.tribe.net/thread/a94c14b4-1fba-4a3b-860f-04c86316ee4f?tribeid=9041b71f-8809-4ddf-adc8-d95bddd62133&r=10503

posted in Men's Rights - 23 replies

I really hate Tom Leykos

2005-03-02T19:14:30Z

Seriously I do. But I used to love him, straight up til a scrambled egg mcmuffin joke. Now I'll make my fiancees like miserable the entire time Tom stays on til he changes it. I'd rather listen to rap. And that's saying something.

Anyway the other day in the car, I had been particularly grumpy all day so I decided to leave it alone and give him some peace why he listened to the guy I hate. And some caller to the show brought up how his friend couldn't get a vasectomy without his wifes permission. Then of course he and Tom went off about how unfair and horrible it was. The vagina being in control and all.

Then I got pissed yelled my own anger that they were forgetting to mention that a WOMAN after a pregnancy prevention tube tying as a rule gets told no unless she has TWO KIDS and HER HUSBANDS permission. And my fiancee changed the station. He hates when I go on tangents over anything, how did such a laid back guy end up with a volcano anyway?

I know this, because when I was 18 I tried to get one. :D
I never wanted kids. My son was a surprise, I love him til I can't love anymore, but it never would have been a deliberate choice to conceive for me. And I really am not the personality type to be 80 and mooning over the kids I didn't have.

So, who here thinks this is a MEN'S issue? Being denied a vasectomy without his wifes permission? I think this is definitaly an issue for both sexes, because this particular unfairness goes both ways.

Oh yeah, my dad got a vasectomy without my mothers permission. And let me tell ya, filling me in on the details when I was 7 wasn't a good idea, I told ALL his friends he was "neutered" everytime babies were mentioned. So there's a hint for all you men with children who may be tempted to answer the "will I get anymore little brothers or sisters" question. :D Lie.

posted in Men's Rights - 11 replies

Feminist Myths About Super Bowl Sunday

2005-02-14T18:50:21Z

In honor of the Super Bowl, I thought I'd post this debunk of a common feminist manbashing myth surrounding this particular day of the year. The below is from the Snopes.com urban legend debunking site.

Claim: More women are victims of domestic violence on Super Bowl Sunday than on any other day of the year.

Status: False.

Origins: The claim that Super Bowl Sunday is "the biggest day of the year for violence against women" demonstrates how easily an idea congruous with what people want to believe can be implanted in the public consciousness and anointed as "fact" even when it has been fabricated out of whole cloth.

Full article here:
http://www.snopes.com/crime/statistics/superbowl.asp

posted in Men's Rights - 7 replies

Paternity Fraud - radio show

2005-02-08T22:23:15Z

Interesting episode of "His Side" with Glenn Sacks where he talks about the issue of paternity fraud.

Listen here on MP3:
http://www.s94342673.onlinehome.us/hs_audio/hs_8_8_04_mp3.mp3

The first 5 minutes and 50 seconds are about anti-male advertising. The remainder of the program is about paternity fraud.

posted in Men's Rights - 0 replies

Registered Sex Offenders Databases

2005-02-07T10:57:10Z

These databases cover most of the country. The CA database provides photos and exact addresses for sex offenders (there are 5 on my block - all covicted of sex with children under 14, 4 of them with force).

Question - since these men have already been convicted and either released or paroled, is it an invasion of their privacy and rights to post this information?

http://www.klaaskids.org/pg-legmeg2.htm

posted in Men's Rights - 53 replies

Protest on the Court Rooftops

2005-01-19T22:04:51Z

http://home.peoplepc.com/psp/newsstory.asp?cat=strange&id=20050117/41eb4650_3ca6_1552620050117-1403123465

Man in Batman Suit Climbs Onto Court Roof

Monday, January 17, 2005

AMSTERDAM, Netherlands - A man in a Batman suit spent several hours on a rooftop balcony atop a courthouse in the Dutch city of Utrecht on Monday, protesting the treatment of fathers in divorce cases.

Police initially said they planned to ignore the man, a member of the group Fathers for Justice, until he came down.

But police spokeswoman Wendy Alberse said the man, whose name was not released, struck a deal to surrender peacefully. Police offered him a ladder and he climbed through a window to safety, she said.

"He won't be charged, and he has promised not to do it again," Alberse said.

Dave Ellison, a spokesman for the group Fathers for Justice, said the man's identity could not be revealed but tha his first name was Andrew.

Ellison said months of planning went into the stunt, intended to draw attention to the plight of Dutch fathers who have been barred from visiting their children after a divorce.

In September, a member of the group's British wing, wearing a Batman suit, climbed onto a balcony at Buckingham Palace, Queen Elizabeth II's London residence.

posted in Men's Rights - 4 replies

Testosterone

2005-01-19T18:05:50Z

Hey all, new woman in the tribe.

This is a SUPER interesting episode of my favorite radio show. Click the link for a synopsis and streaming. I really hope that the other ladies here will listen too - fascinating things to hear.

http://www.thislife.org/pages/descriptions/02/220.html

If you listen, I hope you'll post your thoughts. It prompted a good discussion between my boyfriend and me.

posted in Men's Rights - 12 replies

This website is great

2005-01-13T20:02:17Z

..and humerous

http://niceguy.dearingfilm.com/index.php

posted in Men's Rights - 0 replies

Military Draft

2005-01-08T18:29:53Z

So how do you feel about the possiblity (probability) that the draft will be reinstated?

posted in Men's Rights - 15 replies

healing tribe for women-men's presence encouraged!

2004-12-25T05:22:03Z

http://womenswholeness.tribe.net/

posted in Men's Rights - 6 replies