Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Topics - .

62
Main / "Man up" loses in 2010 election
Nov 03, 2010, 11:41 AM
Not that I endorse the victors in the following campaigns, but part of me feels slightly vindicated that all of the people who uttered the phrase "man up" for political gain have been defeated:

Senate:

  • Sharon Angle (R-NV), defeated by Harry Reid (D-NV) who Angle told to "man up"

  • Robin Carnahan (D-MO), defeated by Roy Blunt (R-MO), who Carnahan told to "man up"

  • Kendra Meek (D-FL), defeated and in 3rd place behind the victor Marco Rubio (R-FL) and Charlie Crist (I-FL); Meek had told Crist to "man up" and "leader up"

  • Christine O'Donnell (R-DE), defeated by Chris Coons (D-DE), after O'Donnell accused Coons of being "unmanly," adding, "Mike, this is not a bake-off -- get your man-pants on."

  • Jane Norton (R-CO), defeated by Ken Buck (R-CO) in the Republican primary, after she attacked Buck for not being "man enough" to run attack ads himself.  Incidentally, Ken Buck went on to narrowly lose the election to Michael Bennett (D-CO).


Congress:

  • Matthew Doheny (R-NY), defeated by Bill Owens (D-NY) in the 23rd Congressional District, after a local Tea Party leader demanded that Owens "man up"


Governorships:

Unlike the examples above, in which emasculation was used in a failed attempt at gaining political advantage, we saw its opposite in Arizona -- but in that case, to benefit a woman!

  • Jan Brewer (R-AZ) defeated Terry Goddard (D-AZ), after Republican supporter Sarah Palin praised Brewer for having the "cojones" that President Obama did not have because of Brewer's legislative drive in Arizona to enforce federal immigration laws.


There you have it.  Emasculation as a political tactic is a loser -- political suicide in fact, at least in 2010 -- whereas valuing masculinity may actually benefit even a female candidate.
63
Main / NY Times: "Good Girls Gone Wild"
Nov 02, 2010, 09:58 AM
Article here.  Remember 3rd-wave feminism, the wave that intended to somehow liberate women by destroying the social stigma against slutty and trampy behavior (a stigma which suppressed women's sexuality, according to the 3rd wavers)?  Well, such efforts are not working out so well.  The feminist bastion New York Times recently published the following opinion article that totally undermines both the slut-justifying goals of 3rd-wave feminism, and also the 2nd-wave feminist idea that women who benefit from their sexuality are somehow victimized.  It looks to me like it's a complete route against all varieties of feminism, no matter how you slice it.

Good Girls Gone Wild
By Frank Bruni
New York Times
October 29, 2010
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/31/fashion/31Starlet.html



It happened again this month, a familiar pop culture cycle: the provocative pose, the righteous fuss, the blushing assurance that no offense was intended. This time around it involved actresses from "Glee" in GQ magazine, tapping into their inner tramps. Not long ago it was Miley Cyrus  in Vanity Fair, giving the world a glimpse, or rather a glimmer, or really just the slightest insinuation, of her breasts.

The starlets change, the story doesn't. If a young female performer with a relatively straight-laced image wants to take full charge of her brightest future, she apparently has to do some time on the pole.

[font=Verdana]Slide Show: Teen Idols, Before and After[/font]


That was the missing acknowledgment in the hullabaloo, both genuine and disingenuous, over the "Glee" photographs, which showed Dianna Agron in a very short plaid skirt and Lea Michele in white panties, legs spread wide. These images were less shocking than predictable, part of an established gallery that includes not only Miss Cyrus but also Britney Spears, who at one point proclaimed that she was a "Slave 4 U" (and demonstrated as much with a snake), in addition to Christina Aguilera, who got down and "Dirrty," as the song was titled and spelled, in chaps and little else.

All began their careers with a preponderance of fans in the bubblegum set and traced the same celebrity arc, by which Disney tiara is exchanged for Victoria's Secret teddy and the sweet princess becomes a sweaty temptress. If she's lucky, she then proceeds quickly to some amalgam of the two, her diversifying mission accomplished. If not, she's Lindsay Lohan.

Ms. Agron and Ms. Michele came to their erotic emancipation relatively late. Both are 24, a detail worth dwelling on in light of the Parents Television Council's denunciation of the GQ photo spread as "bordering on pedophilia."

And neither is overcoming a background as candy-coated as those of Miss Cyrus, whose "Hannah Montana" sitcom played on the Disney Channel, or Ms. Spears and Ms. Aguilera, both of whom did time on the revival of the television variety show "The Mickey Mouse Club."

But "Glee" does cast its stars in a largely wholesome light, and doesn't market them in a predominantly adult way to a predominantly adult audience. The GQ shoot, by the photographer Terry Richardson, presented a fix to that.

By the time the magazine actually reached newsstands last week, the pictures had already circulated widely and prompted complaints, including one from Katie Couric, who noted that she and her teenage daughter count on "Glee" for responsible fun. And Miss Agron had already offered something of an apology, saying she didn't intend any upset.

But it's worth recalling the superficially apologetic, supposedly abashed aftermath of the 2008 Vanity Fair picture in which Miss Cyrus, then 15, was topless, though the angle didn't actually expose anything. She claimed that she'd more or less been duped; the photographer, Annie Leibovitz, dutifully said she was sorry.

And a year later, Miss Cyrus was pole-dancing -- literally, and by all appearances volitionally -- in boots and hot pants at the Teen Choice Awards.

It's all about image adjustment, about taking a pendulum positioned too far in one direction and yanking it in the other, so that it eventually winds up somewhere in between. The process has a physics all its own: G plus NC-17 equals PG-13.

And the yanking can't be too subtle. Before Miss Aguilera was "Dirrty" she was a "Genie in a Bottle," asking to be rubbed the right way, but that apparently wasn't solicitation enough. On went the chaps, the multicolored hair extensions, the eyeliner, the mascara. The purposeful strategy was spelled out by one of her musical collaborators, the songwriter Linda Perry, who told The New York Times that Miss Aguilera wanted "to show everybody that she's not some goody two-shoes."

That's to some extent what the actress Natalie Portman, fresh from studies at Harvard and "Star Wars" stints as the young queen of the planet Naboo, was doing in the role of a stripper in the Mike Nichols movie "Closer." She performed a private tease for Clive Owen -- and received an Oscar nomination.

And it's what Jodie Foster  was doing in "Taxi Driver." To counter "Freaky Friday," she played a freakishly young prostitute. And she was also nominated.

For a child actress (or singer) looking to establish maturity, flesh is the fastest and most attention-getting route. Hence the suspicion in some quarters that Vanessa Hudgens of "High School Musical" wasn't really so bothered by those nude photos that wound up on the Web.

And for their male counterparts? In a sexist world, it doesn't work quite the same way.

While Justin Timberlake, another graduate of "Mickey Mouse," proceeded to record the album "FutureSex/LoveSounds," including the hit single "SexyBack," no video put him in the sort of attire or through the kinds of gyrations that Ms. Spears and Ms. Aguilera came to know. And at the Super Bowl, it was his female sidekick who had the wardrobe malfunction. It's also interesting to note that Cory Monteith, the lone male "Glee" star to appear in the GQ spread, exposes no more flesh there than on the show. While the gals vamp, the guy is merely banging on drums.

Strumpet is just one station for a starlet intent on going the distance. Others loom. There's Unicef  ambassador or its rough equivalent, like adoptive parent of minority child. There's ostentatiously humble cameo in acclaimed television show or a tango on "Dancing with the Stars," which in that sense is "The Love Boat" of its time. If the show lasts long enough, we may well see Ms. Spears on it.

Meantime, should we be on the lookout for a lap dance from Taylor Swift?

64
Article here.  Let there be no doubt that Glenn Sacks' and Ned Holstein's organization for family law reform, known as Fathers and Families, is bar none the most effective such organization in existence.  No other organization even comes close to their effectiveness.  What you're about to read is only their latest achievements, part of a string of political victories that first began years ago when the chief lobbyist of F&F was part of the California Alliance for Families and Children (CAFC).  These guys deserve our financial support.  If you value the work that they're doing, don't just write about it.  Send money.  Send money on a monthly basis.  I send $50 a month to Fathers and Families through an automatic debit subscription payment, which is easy to do through their Web site.  Whatever you can afford, please send money!  Their political batting average justifies it, and you'll be making a substantial difference.

Can you imagine any of this occurring as recently as 5 years ago?  Back then we were barely making an impact.  These days, however, political successes are becoming routine for us.  We have the momentum on our side, my friends!  Don't let up; Fathers and Families need your support to keep going.

F & F Passes 7 Bills in 2010, as Schwarzenegger Signs 3 More F & F Bills
October 19, 2010
http://www.fathersandfamilies.org/?p=10570

This year Fathers and Families led the passage of seven different family law bills nationwide, as Governor Schwarzenegger recently signed the remaining three California F & F bills. F & F was also instrumental in helping defeat three harmful bills. The seven bills we were instrumental in passing include:

   1. Alimony Reform (CA. SB 1482): Parents who face alimony increases after their child support ends will now be able to demand a vocational examination for their ex-spouses, and judges are required to calculate alimony based on the examiner's estimate of the ex-spouse's earning capacity.

   2. Child Custody Protection for Military Parents (CA. AB 2416): Creates a rebuttable presumption that upon a servicemember's return from deployment, child custody and visitation orders will revert to the original order. Allows judges to award a deployed parent's parenting time to grandparents or stepparents so that deployed parents can't have their contact with their children severed by the custodial parent. This also helps to maintain and nurture children's bonds with their deployed parent's family.

   3. Child Custody/Visitation Reform (CA. SB 1188): Will help prevent family court litigants from using a parent's disability as a way to deprive them of child custody or visitation.

   4 & 5. Protection Against Family Court Financial Abuses (Arizona HB 2358 & Indiana HB 1165) F & F helped pass bills in both Arizona and Indiana which protected disabled veterans from family court financial abuses. Both bills were inspired by and modeled on SB 285, a bill we helped pass in California in 2009.

   6. Child Support Reform (CA. SB 580) The high cost of medical care is a burden for everybody, but the healthcare obligations family court judges throw onto noncustodial parents can be devastating. SB 580 will ensure that noncustodial parents aren't saddled with an unreasonably high percentage of their children's medical care costs.

   7. Child Support Reform (CA. SB 1355) Many young fathers who were incarcerated for nonviolent offenses face crushing child support debts which accrued (at 10% interest) while they were behind bars. These debts make it difficult for them to play a meaningful role in their children's lives. This bill suspends child support from accruing while the obligor is institutionalized.

Legislative work isn't just about passing good bills--it's also about defeating harmful ones. There is a nationwide reactionary backlash against recognition of Parental Alienation, and California is the battleground where it is being fought. The California National Organization for Women and the powerful, well-funded Center for Judicial Excellence in Northern California are leading the backlash, and Fathers and Families has been at the forefront of fighting it. Bills F & F helped defeat this year include:

   1. Parental Alienation in Family Court (CA. AB 612): AB 612 would have prevented target parents of Parental Alienation from even uttering the words "Parental Alienation" in family court, and custody evaluators and mediators would have been prohibited from citing alienation.

   2. Custody Evaluators and Parental Alienation (CA. AB 2475): A complicated bill but the bottom line is that it would have led to child custody evaluators and mediators being punished for making findings of Parental Alienation.

   3. Children and Medical Care (MA  HB 930): Fathers & Families opposed and testified against HB 930, a bill supported by the Massachusetts Women's Bar Association that would have further marginalized noncustodial parents in relation to their children's medical needs.

As good as 2010 has been, 2011 will be better. We have an ambitious, exciting legislative agenda for 2011 on which we will soon be soliciting member input. The Fathers & Families model works. We want you to be a part of it-to get involved, please click here.

Together with you in the love of our children,

Glenn Sacks, MA
Executive Director, Fathers and Families

Ned Holstein, M.D., M.S.
Founder, Chairman of the Board, Fathers and Families
65
Article here.  How's this for a father-son project?  A great dad and his young son worked together on a project to send an iPhone into outer space, carried there by a weather balloon.  The entire journey was filmed by the iPhone, including the descent following the explosion of the balloon in space.  They used the iPhone's GPS capability to retrieve it, and uploaded the entire video of both the ascent and descent here:

Homemade Spacecraft

Now THAT'S a great dad!

I am astounded that even in space, the proximity to the earth's atmosphere was still close enough to carry sounds.  You can actually hear the sounds of the iPhone jostling around, you can hear the wind on the ascent and descent, and you can even hear the sound of the weather balloon when it pops, initiating the descent.

JD
67
Main / Tech support (funny)
Oct 14, 2010, 09:36 PM


Found here.  How many people can relate to this?   :greener:
68
Article here.  California's Democratic gubernatorial candidate, Jerry Brown, was unintentionally recorded when a phone call did not disconnect as expected and Brown was caught in an unscripted moment saying that his Republican opponent, Meg Whitman, was in the pocket of employee unions for police and firefighters.  A Brown aide is heard on the recording referring to Whitman as a "whore," and in the recording Brown does not challenge him for saying it.  So now the Brown campaign is all apologetic, and the Whitman campaign is claiming that all women should be offended at the use of such an offensive, misogynistic slur.  Looks like Whitman has found the wedge to distract people from the illegal immigrant scandal, which (incidentally) also involved a woman -- the housekeeper -- who was selling out her integrity through a lawsuit, seeking money.

Gotta love California.

Jerry Brown and Meg Whitman could be burned by 'whore' pension remark
October 8, 2010
By John Wildermuth
San Francisco Chronicle
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/nov05election/detail?entry_id=74156&tsp=1

Politicians already are wary of the "hot" mike, a seemingly dead microphone that can broadcast their private conversations to a waiting world.

Well, Jerry Brown didn't realize there's also such a thing as a hot telephone, which is why his campaign for governor is frantically apologizing for an accidentally recorded phone message that caught an aide suggesting Meg Whitman is a "whore," for allegedly cutting a deal with a law enforcement union.

It appears that when Brown called the Los Angeles Police Protective League early last month and left a voice mail asking for their endorsement, the attorney general didn't do a real good job of hanging up the phone. Which meant that the answering machine in Los Angeles dutifully continued recording as Brown treated his aides to a private tirade against the union and Whitman.

"... I have been warned if I crack down on pensions ... they'll go to Whitman and that's where they'll go because they know Whitman will give 'em, will cut them a deal, but I won't," an obviously angry Brown said on the tape, which the police union sent to Los Angeles media outlets Thursday.

That's when what appears to be a second voice suggests, "What about saying she's a whore?"

"Well, I'm going to use that," Brown said. "It proves you've cut a deal to protect the pensions."

While insisting it wasn't Brown who cast the slur against Whitman, campaign officials were quick to say "sorry about that."

"This was a jumbled and often inaudible recording of a private conversation," Steven Glazer, Brown's campaign manager, said in a statement. "We apologize to Ms. Whitman and anyone who may have been offended."

But Whitman's people weren't willing to let Brown off easily, especially when they suspect his campaign was behind last week's well-publicized revelation that she had employed an undocumented worker from Mexico as a housekeeper for nine years.

"The use of the term 'whore' is an insult to both Meg Whitman and to the women of California," said Sarah Pompei, a campaign spokeswoman. "This is an appalling and unforgivable smear against Meg Whitman. At the very least Mr. Brown tacitly approved this despicable slur and he himself may have used the term at least once on this recording."

The last thing Brown needs is a reputation for running a frat-boy style campaign shop where people have no problem tossing out slurs against women when they think no one -- that is, female voters -- is listening.

Women make up about 53 percent of the likely voters in California and typically can be trusted to lean toward Democratic candidates. But a Field Poll last month showed Brown and Whitman locked in a 41-41 dead heat, both among all likely voters and among women. Brown needs to pump up his female support to win in November and this isn't going to help.

On the other hand, Whitman has been slamming Brown as a lapdog for the state's public employee unions and painting herself as the one candidate who can save California financial future by cracking down on those overpaid -- and over-pensioned -- union sorts.

But the same diatribe that led to the "whore" insult also had Brown, in that private, unscripted moment, saying he was going to lose an important endorsement because he wasn't willing to give a special pension break to a law enforcement union. More importantly, it didn't show him backing away from his stand, even if it cost him the endorsement.

Last month, however, Whitman said that her plan for a reduced, two-tier pension system for government workers wouldn't apply to police officers or firefighters, which helped her win the endorsement of the California Statewide Law Enforcement Association -- and the Los Angeles police union.

If Whitman wants to force a political showdown over Brown's slur, the attorney general could be the one inviting the television cameras.
69
Why Some People Have Issues With Men: Misandry
Misandry is not in everyone's dictionary but it's out there.
October 6, 2010
by Anthony Synnott, Ph.D.
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/rethinking-men/201010/why-some-people-have-issues-men-misandry


Anthony Synnott, Ph.D. is a professor of sociology at Concordia University in Montreal.
more...


The word misandry may not be in everyone's computer dictionary, but the reality is out there. A reality without a name, however, is largely invisible.

We are all familiar with misogyny: the hatred of women. This has been well-researched for decades. We are less familiar with misandry: the hatred of men, or more broadly, the hatred, fear, anger and contempt of men. It is worth some consideration, especially since misandry is by no means restricted to women. Indeed some of the most male-negative people out there are men.

There are several levels, dimensions and causes of misandry which we need to separate, though they tend to be all stirred up and muddled together in any given discussion.

1. Reality: First we must acknowledge that misandry is partly reality-based to the degree that it is in part a reaction to misogyny, and to the real or perceived oppression of women by men. It's Newtonian physics and the Marxist dialectic: the harder you hit your head against the wall, the harder it hits you back. Misogyny generates misandry.

2. History: Misandry is also based in history, or herstory, or a misreading of history. Most of the major villains of the last century have been male: Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Idi Amin, Charles Taylor, Ceaucescu, Slobodan Milosevic, Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden. But the misreading of history is three-fold. First, their villainy was a matter of power not gender. Second, women with absolute power have sometimes been absolute villains too. Third, we cannot ignore the male heroes, including those who fought against the tyrants and eventually deposed them, or died trying. It is poor scholarship and short-term politics to portray men as solely villains and to ignore the evil women (no names mentioned) and the good men.

3. Today: About 90% of all murders in North America are committed by men. The Top 10 on the FBI Most Wanted List are usually all male. Most of the corporate CEOs and CFOs arrested recently from Enron to Bernie Madoff have been men; Martha Stewart was a lowly exception. So there seem to be real grounds for misandry. But this is the Cyclops syndrome: to see with only one eye, in only one dimension and only half of reality (as with #2 above). Cyclops people stereotype the male by the actions of a minority, define the exceptions as the rule, ignore the majority, and ignore too the minority of female villains for a cleaner, clearer (supposedly) picture. Most murderers are male but most males are not murderers, and some women are. This is not rocket science. But misandry is less about reality than politics.

4. Personal: Some misandry is likely to be grounded, like misogyny, in bitter personal experiences. Many women say that that they have had unpleasant personal experiences with men: fathers, brothers, lovers, co-workers, bosses etc. But I suppose that we have all been hurt by members of the opposite sex, and by members of our own sex too; however, to extrapolate from a minority to the general is surely unfortunate, even if understandable.

How prevalent misandry and misogyny are today in Euro-America is not clear. I have not found any gender attitude survey statistics. It is also not clear whether misandry is grounded more in historical understanding or personal experience or gender politics; but certainly misandry is deep-rooted in our culture.

5. Political Demonization: This new sexism, reverse sexism, is widespread in feminist and pro-feminist literature - or propaganda, one might say, - but largely ignored. One does not criticize feminism! But a fair number of feminists have criticized men in sexist terms. Marilyn French called men "the enemy." Germaine Greer wrote that that: "women have no idea how much men hate them." Betty Friedan, amazingly, referred to suburban domestic life as a "comfortable concentration camp" for women, and to their husbands a SS prison guards. Rosalind Miles described men as "the death sex." Valerie Solanas wrote "The SCUM Manifesto", the Society for Cutting Up Men, and Robin Morgan obligingly publicized this hate literature. Alice Walker's "The Color Purple" won the Pulitzer and is totally misandric, as are the best-sellers by Terry MacMillan. The movies were also were also very popular among women. Misandry sells. Why these black women should demonize black men, compounding sexism and racism, I don't know. It just reinforces racism.

6. Angelization: The political demonization of men is complemented by the angelization of women in a moral bi-polar totally sexist evaluation of gender: women/good and men/bad. Elizabeth Cady Stanton stated in 1848: "In my opinion, he [man] is infinitely women's inferior in every moral virtue." Maria Montessori: "Perhaps...the reign of women is approaching, when the enigma of her anthropological superiority will be deciphered. Woman was always the custodian of human sentiment, morality and honor." And as I noted earlier, it is not just women who are male-negative. The anthropologist Ashley Montagu explained that: "Woman is the creator and fosterer of life; man has been the mechanizer and destroyer of life...Women love the human race; men behave as if they were, on the whole, hostile to it...It is the function of women to teach men how to be human." His emphasis. Women as human: men as subhuman, again. Then again, Ellen Sirleaf Johnson, the President of Liberia, was asked recently: "Do you think Africa will be peaceful and war-free if it has more women in leadership positions?" She replied in classic male-negative vein. "I have no doubt of that...[women have]
a sensitivity to human-kind. Maybe it comes from being a mother" (Time 11 May 09:6).

7. War: Misandry escalated in the 1990s.The battle of the sexes became the war against women. Susan Faludi subtitled "Backlash: The Undeclared War against American Women." It was mostly about media criticism of feminism - the "war" was sheer hyperbole - but it won another Pulitzer. Marilyn French went further and wrote "The War against Women." In Canada after Marc Lepine killed 14 women in a school shooting, the federally funded Committee on the Status of Women submitted a report entitled "The War against Women" citing the 117 women murdered in the previous year but ignoring double that number of men murdered in that same year. Misandry again, ignoring male victims for political purposes, and the downstream consequences for men and women have to be serious....as in:

8. Law: The homicidal war against men kills mostly men. Men are the principal victims of homicide. But never mind reality. Politics is all. The U.S. government passed the "Violence against Women Act in 1994, and this was followed soon afterwards by similar legislation in Canada. Forget the far greater violence against men and, especially in the States, black men, and in Canada First Nations men. There is a massive disjunction between legislation and need, thanks in part to our double standards and the Cyclops syndrome of selective perception...and also the failure of men to "man up." It is not only the Criminal Justice system which discriminates against men, so does the health system, the education system and the welfare system. It is all consequential to this same misandry. (see references below)

9. Popular Culture: Misandry is now institutionalized in popular culture. Joke books, fridge magnets, T-shirts, coffee mugs, newspaper cartoons, TV sitcoms all deride all men all the time. There is no equal opportunity contempt, which in some respects is probably a good thing, but one wonders about the need for contempt. T-shirts say: "Women Rule. Men Drool" and "Boys are smelly. Throw rocks at them." - an advocacy of violence which would be unconscionable were the sexes reversed. "Dead Men Don't Rape." Nor do most living men, of course. "So many men. So little ammunition." "What do you call a man with half a brain? Gifted." And so it continues. One joke book is titled "Men and other Reptiles" and another is "101 Reasons why a cat is better than a man." The consequences of such male-negativity are not clear, but such negative affirmations seem likely to have, and to have had over the decades, a negative impact on both sexes: self-loathing and/or a resistance-generated misogyny among men, and contempt for men among women.

10. The Media: Our sit-coms portray men as bumbling fools and idiots and usually overweight, with the women as sensible, together and attractive. Everybody might love Raymond, but he's an idiot. The same idiots are re-played every night: Beavis and Butthead, Trailer Park Boys, The Simpsons, Home Improvement...We may laugh at such sexism, not recognizing it as such, but we do not laugh at racism nor sezist misogyny. To appropriate Jean Kilbourne's film on advertisements that objectified women, they are "killing us softly." We are all constantly being bombarded with messages that men are stupid and it would be surprising if we were not internalizing them. Sit-coms may be comedies but watching them is like going to school: we learn the values and attitudes being taught.

11. High Culture: Sit-coms might be defined as low culture, but misandry is everywhere. Dr. Phil (Ph.D.) put on a show recently: "What's Wrong with Men?" and he found some pretty miserable specimens of manhood to destroy and despise in public, almost entirely a female public. But surely equity demands equal time for "What's Wrong with Women?" He has had some pretty miserable specimens on his show occasionally. But no. This is misandry for fun and profit. Equity might also demand a show: "In Praise of Men!" But no.
Similarly Time Magazine published these jewels from their journalists: "we have plenty of examples of...economies in which women do all the arduous work while men sit around smoking and pontificating in coffee houses and barber shops" (Caldwell, 24.8.09:23); and another is talking about the new fMRI machines which scan brain activity: "it may be that boys are cads because they are not wired to be the other way" Cloud, 17 July 2009). So brain functions are morally bad for males, cads all, but good for women: angels all. And both these journalists are men.

12. Sexism: Michael Kimmel, who owns Men's Studies in the States, is particularly misandric, opening his book "Manhood in America" (1996) with a long list of male villains - not a hero, hard working man, good father, Nobel Peace Prize winner, not a useful Newton, Darwin, Freud, Einstein, Gandhi, Mandela, King, Carnegie Medal winner in sight. It's amazing. Then in "Men's Lives" he adds more villains and this suggestion: "Perhaps we should slap a warning label on penises across the land. WARNING: OPERATING THIS INSTRUMENT CAN BE DANGEROUS TO YOUR AND OTHERS' HEALTH" (2004:565. His emphasis). One wonders if he is wearing this label on his own penis. Does he practice what he preaches? Oh well. But such is the "scholarship" on men these days: dehumanizing.
More: two of the more misandric and dehumanizing observations are the University of Toronto, which hosts the Institute for Women and Gender. Hmm. A number of other universities demonstrate the same misandry. And in March 2009 I received an invitation to attend the Canadian Conference on the Prevention of Domestic Homicides; but it was hosted by the Centre for Research and Education on Violence against Women and Children - no mention of men except by implication as committing all the violence but never the victim. Back to the binaries again: men bad, women good; and no awareness that women commit about 10% of all homicides, and 15-25% of the domestic homicides and that (Canadian) mothers commit the majority of domestic homicides of children under 12.

To conclude: misandry is everywhere, culturally acceptable, even normative, largely invisible, taught directly and indirectly by men and women, blind to reality, very damaging and dangerous to men and women in different ways and de-humanizing. This post is to help make it visible and to deal with it - as we have dealt with, or tried to deal with, misogyny, racism and homophobia.

For references, please see my "Re-Thinking Men: Heroes Villains and Victims" (London: Ashgate, 2009); and especially the major works by Paul Nathanson and Katherine Young "Spreading Misandry" "Legalizing Misandry" and "Sanctifying Misandry"(Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 2001, 2006, 2010).
70
Blog post here, news article here.  A man who had video-recorded a traffic stop was charged with violating the anti-wiretapping laws of the state of Maryland, despite the fact that those very laws permit both audio and video recording of people who have no reasonable expectation of privacy.  What is more non-private than an officer engaged in public business, handing out a traffic violation in broad daylight on the side of the road (an interaction that itself is being recorded by a camera in the officer's vehicle)?  Nevertheless, the local prosecutor thought it was best to send a message to the public that no officer may be subject to the public scrutiny of recorded video.  Fortunately, a judge just threw out these ridiculous charges.  

This is a relevant issue for men's advocates, because it's increasingly clear that many of the charges that men face occur during the throes of a divorce or a cohabitation-turned-sour, and are often completely unsubstantiated, with the subjective view of the female accuser as the only evidence to support them.  Recording technology can provide a valuable tool for men who are vulnerable to false allegations.  I highly recommend the informative blog Photography Is Not a Crime, which tracks the movement by brave activists to challenge overzealous and/or corrupt law enforcement and security personnel.  These personnel need to be challenged whenever they try to intimidate the public into abdicating their legal right to expose State-perpetrated injustices through recorded footage.

Motorcyclist wins taping case against state police
By Peter Hermann
September 27, 2010
Baltimore Sun
http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/crime/blog/2010/09/motorcyclist_wins_taping_case.html

A Harford County Circuit Court judge ruled this afternoon that a motorcyclist who was arrested for videotaping his traffic stop by a Maryland State Trooper was within his rights to record the confrontation.

Judge Emory A Pitt Jr. tossed all the charges filed against Anthony Graber, leaving only speeding and other traffic violations, and most likely sparing him a trial that had been scheduled for Oct. 12. The judge ruled that Maryland's wire tap law allows recording of both voice and sound in areas where privacy cannot be expected. He ruled that a police officer on a traffic stop has no expectation of privacy.

"Those of us who are public officials and are entrusted with the power of the state are ultimately accountable to the public," the judge wrote. "When we exercise that power in public fora, we should not expect our actions to be shielded from public observation."

Motorcycle traffic violation - Cop pulls out gun
71
Main / Movie Review: The Black Stallion
Sep 27, 2010, 12:08 PM
I have a Netflix subscription which lets me stream movies to my TV through the XBox, so it's really convenient.  Recently I used my Netflix account to watch the movie The Black Stallion (1979), and was so impressed by what I saw.  There is nothing feminist about this movie, and it effectively depicts every message that we men's advocates yearn to see on the big screen:


  • Positive portrayal of fathers -- At the beginning of the film, Alec's (the main character's) father obviously loves him, and protects him as the ship that they're on starts sinking.

  • Positive portrayal of masculine ideals -- As Alec washes ashore a deserted island, his toughness and resilience are displayed as he finds ways of surviving, despite the emotional pain he feels from losing his father and from his isolation on the island.

  • Positive portrayal of male bonding -- The black stallion, a horse who also survived the ship's sinking, provides Alec with a means of rescue from drowning.  The horse, an Arabian stallion, is wild and immensely strong.  Although an animal, he represents the spirit of freedom and strength in men that is often constrained by various obligations and burdens.  Alec forges a close bond of trust with him on the island, rescuing the stallion from entanglement in some ropes, and later feeding him.  The horse also tramples a Cobra that was about to strike Alec in the face as he was awakening from his sleep on the sand.  Alec later rides the horse, even though it is untamed and dangerous.  Nowhere is it implied that a feminine influence is taming a masculine beast, which is typical of modern cinematic attempts to portray masculine characters; rather, two males albeit of different species learn to depend upon and trust each other.

  • Positive portrayal of male mentoring -- Subsequent to the rescue of Alec and the horse from the island, Mickey Rooney plays an old but accomplished horse trainer, who not only finds and cares for the stallion on his ranch but also becomes a grandfatherly mentor for Alec.  He teaches Alec how to ride a horse (in the context of racing it), and the bond of trust between them also grows strong.  They commit themselves to preparing Alec and the horse to enter a race, and together keep the secret that the wild stallion is unregistered and that Alec is too young to race him.

  • Positive portrayal of mothers -- Although Alec's mother initially refuses to let him ride the stallion in the race, by listening to him describe the closeness of his bond with the horse and how he literally owes the horse his life (having been rescued by it to the island), Alec's mother changes her mind.  She grants her son permission to pursue his dream of racing the horse that saved him.  Although she would have been just as good of a mother even if she had refused him (and certainly protective in doing so), the point of highlighting her openness is that she supported and listened to him rather than patronizing him.  In addition, Alec's mother shows absolutely no indication that she ever disrespected his father (who drowned with the sunken ship at the beginning of the movie).  She respects Alec, his father, Alec's grandfatherly mentor, and even whispers a quiet "thank you" to the stallion for rescuing Alec from drowning.



The Black Stallion is an incredibly male-positive movie.  Words can't adequately express how moved I felt by watching it.  The kind of films that we see these days don't really tap into those male-positive feelings at all, and instead portray masculinity in a prepackaged, uninspiring and often diminutive fashion.  The Black Stallion is a rare gem in male-positive movies.

Here is the first hour or so:

Part 1:
The Black Stallion (1979) pt 1

Part 2:
The Black Stallion (1979) pt 2

Part 3:
black stallion (1979) pt 3

Part 4:
The Black Stallion (1979) pt 4

Part 5:
The Black Stallion (1979) pt 5
73
My Chemical Romance: Battling Depression With a Dangerous Treatment
When Jill Ajao's libido wilted and she felt stressed-out and depressed, a doctor prescribed a hormone cocktail that seemed like a miracle cure. She felt amazingly good--until she wrecked her marriage, lost her job, and almost ended up in jail.
September 21, 2010
By Ann Bauer
Elle Magazine
http://www.elle.com/Beauty/Health-Fitness/Battling-Drepession-With-a-Dangerous-Treatment/My-Chemical-Romance



Jill was raised in Mendota Heights, Minnesota, an affluent suburb of the Twin Cities. Her parents were divorced when she was 12, and her mother married her junior high school principal the year Jill was in seventh grade. "Tell me that wouldn't make your adolescence suck," she says with a grin.

Jill was a good student. At 18, she went to Cornell College, in Mount Vernon, Iowa, where she met D., the man she would eventually marry. (D. declined to be interviewed for this story and asked that we not use his name.) D. was a senior majoring in philosophy and was descended from wealthy landowners in West Africa; he was worldly and serious, almost "regal," Jill says. She was a brash, smart Midwestern girl. They'd both landed in the middle of Iowa because they wanted a rural school without distractions. Soon, they were studying together every night, and she changed her major to his.

She proposed in April 1985, a month before the end of her sophomore year. She was willing to move to his native country, she told him. She'd become a traditional subservient African wife. D. refused, on all counts. But the following year, he enrolled in a master's program in nutrition at the University of Iowa--just 21 miles from Cornell College--and their romance continued. Eventually, they moved to Minnesota ­together. He started a doctoral degree in food science, and she enrolled in a clinical psychology program. They married in 1994.

"Those first three years without children were great," Jill says. "We had good friends. We bought a little condo, and things were easy."

It was after their first child was born, in 1997, that Jill says "the big divide" began.

"He pretty much left the child rearing up to me," she says, "and I had some strong ideas. The Montessori approach was very important to me, and that put me in direct conflict with D. He was more about strict discipline. I wanted my child to develop an internal locus of control. But D. didn't want his children to be American brats--lippy and outspoken. He believed in spanking. I absolutely did not."

Despite their differences and the fact that Jill fell into a deep funk after she gave birth (which she now thinks was due to post­partum depression), the couple went on to have two more children within three years. D. said he couldn't work on his dissertation when they were around; he accused Jill of being lax in her discipline. Tired of being the only one to get up with the kids at night, Jill retaliated by hauling an extra mattress into their bedroom and establishing a family bed. "D. came home that night and said, 'You cannot just do this to me. It's a whole philosophy shift.' " Her voice goes low, like a man's. "He said it would be like him taking another wife and bringing her home with him. But I told him, 'If she's going to cook and clean and help me take care of babies, bring her on.' "

Even after D. got a good corporate job and finished his doctorate in 2000, and after they moved to a larger house in 2002, Jill insisted they share a bedroom with the children. D. began sleeping on the couch. They'd bought a dilapidated Victorian, near where Garrison Keillor lives, with the intention of fixing it up, but nothing ever got done. Insulation leaked from the walls; the oven and stove top broke but were never repaired or replaced. D. didn't want to spend the money, and Jill, working part-time in private practice, couldn't pay for the fixes herself.

Meanwhile, Jill was gaining weight. She was depressed and having trouble sleeping. She didn't want to have sex. Her ­primary care physician diagnosed low ­thyroid, ­depression, insomnia, and anxiety, and referred her to an endocrinologist who treated her with a combination of antidepressants (Effexor and trazodone), anti-anxiety and hypo­thyroid medications (Ativan and Synthroid), and a sleeping pill. But her problems continued.

In the summer of 2005, Jill read a book by Suzanne Somers called The Sexy Years. Though intended for menopausal and post-menopausal women, it addressed every­thing Jill had been experiencing: moodiness, insomnia, vaginal dryness, low libido. The answer, Somers wrote, was bioidenticals.

Bioidentical hormones are therapies that makers claim are purer and more molecularly similar to natural human hormones than standard FDA-approved drugs. They are mixed by specially licensed pharmacies instead of drug companies, with the intent of matching the particular blend of hormones to a patient's specific symptoms and needs.

In November, Jill made an appointment at the Midwest Institute of Urology, a sexual health clinic in nearby Edina. After she was given a series of blood tests, Jill was informed that she had low levels of free testosterone (in her bloodstream) and TTe (total testosterone), as well as readings low in progesterone and high in estradiol (the major form of estrogen)--though her medical records show that her levels fell within the normal range. On the basis of her symptoms, Jill was diagnosed with "estrogen dominance" and "andro­gen [aka testosterone] insufficiency." The clinic's only physician--osteopath/urologist Lyle Lundblad, MD, who Jill says never actually examined her--prescribed a course of progesterone followed by a tes­to­sterone cream, applied daily. (Lundblad ­refused to comment for this story despite Jill's willingness to sign a medical release.)

The therapy seemed to take effect within a month. "I no longer had PMS symptoms," Jill recalls. "There was this general calmness, and my pasta cravings, which had been huge, were gone."

In February, after she'd been on the hormone regimen for a few months, Jill went back to Midwest Urology for a checkup. ­According to notes on her records from February 9, 2006, Jill's insomnia and depression were lifting. Her libido had ­improved but "could be better yet." ­Strangely, how­ever, blood tests indicated that Jill's testosterone level had actually dropped from 46.1 nano­grams per deciliter (ng/dl) to less than 20.

"I was told, 'You need to take more,' " Jill says. "The testosterone wasn't being picked up by my body for some reason. So I was told to double the dose."

Within a month, Jill felt completely cured. Alert and powerful. For the first time in years, she and D. were making love several times a week.

Testosterone is often considered the male sex hormone, but it's critical for healthy functioning in both sexes. More generally referred to as an androgen, testosterone ­influences libido, helps regulate muscle mass and mood, and is a building block for estrogen, the hormone that promotes the development and vigor of the ­female reproductive organs. In fact, con­trary to popular opinion, women produce more testosterone than estrogen throughout most of their lives.

The testosterone reading on Jill's original blood test fell squarely within the target range for her age. "An initial level of 46.1 ng/dl is solidly normal," says Vin Tangpri­cha, MD, an associate professor of medicine in the division of endocrinology, meta­bolism, and lipids at Emory University. "I don't think you can say her symptoms were due to low testosterone."

Jill says she began experiencing a few unwanted side effects--hair growth on her thighs where she rubbed the cream, and a gruff, masculine voice. And, for the first time in nearly a decade of parenting, she found herself screaming at her kids. (Other risks of high levels of testosterone in women include birth defects, developmental damage to children in close proximity, and ­possibly liver toxicity, cancer, and high blood pressure.)

On August 8, 2006, records from Midwest Urology show, Jill's testosterone level had hit a staggering 1,600 ng/dl--about twice that of an average man. (Says Tangpricha, "There is no reason a woman should have a level that high unless she's undergoing gender reassignment to ­become a man or taking drugs illegally for sports.") Jill says she told clinicians about her side effects, yet notes from Midwest Urology dated the same day say, "Patient denies chest pain, palpitations, edema, acne, hair growth, lower voice." (The Minnesota Board of Medical Practice had cited Lundblad in 1996 for "having failed to maintain complete and accurate documentation of his recommendations, prescribing rationale, evaluations, and examinations in patients' medical records"; his unrestricted license had been restored four years later, in 2000.)

The notes from Midwest Urology also say that Jill was told to discontinue the testo­sterone cream for two weeks and "call for ­future recommendations." Her next appoint­ment was set six months out. When she called as directed, she says she was told to resume ­using the cream every two to three days. She did so, despite having misgivings. "It was hard to stop," Jill admits, "because it felt so good."

Back on the cream, she ignored the pesky hair growth and attributed her explosive temper to chaos at home: three young children on summer vacation and a crumbling house. Midway through July, in an ­attempt to quell her constant aggravation, she ­began mixing frozen daiquiris in the early afternoon. By fall, a new symptom had arisen. "There was this weird hypersexual­ity," she says. "I'd get on a bus and see a cute young guy and think, I have to have that."

For the first time in her life, Jill says, she was surfing the Web looking at porno­graphy. The more extreme the better. "This was completely out of character for me," she insists. "My husband had a bunch of Hustler magazines in our closet. I had always told him how much that bothered me. But now I was looking at even harder-core stuff."

It was while visiting an X-rated site on her laptop (she'd stepped out of a psychology conference she was attending because she couldn't concentrate) that Jill saw a pop-up ad for a service called Adult FriendFinder. She enrolled. That was Saturday, October 21.

By Tuesday morning, she had traded several e-mails with a man who called himself Jeff. Using the screen name Peyton, Jill wrote: "The submissiveness--just a need I've always had, perhaps--to be told what to do--but this has more to do with ­being able to honestly tell my husband (and ­myself) that I have not had an affair.... I'm serious, it has to be rape--like, I say I'm not interested, but you force me anyway."

That afternoon, Jeff came to the office building where Jill worked. They met at a bar on the main floor, where they talked and drank. Then they went to her ­office, where she performed oral sex on him and he tied her up, beat her with a rolled-up magazine, and sodomized her, among other things.

Her first note to him, four hours after this encounter, began, "I don't ever want to see you again and I want you to meet me ­tonight after my kids go to sleep." The second, sent near midnight, said, "Today was fabulous and I can't stop thinking about it. I really liked the fisting thing. As well as covering my mouth, spanking, pulling my hair--still think you need to be more forceful."

Reading her e-mails now, Jill is struck by her wild ambivalence. "I went home to my children and worked very hard at blocking it all out," she says. "I contacted him to say that it was overwhelming and I don't want to see you again...but maybe I do."

On Wednesday, she awoke with intense abdominal pain. She was determined to work, to see her clients and forget about what had happened, but she felt she had to go home ­after she became incontinent and soiled her clothes.

By Thursday, Jill was panicked. Her gastrointestinal symptoms were getting worse, and she knew she needed medical attention, but she didn't know how to explain her condition to doctors. "Also, it dawned on me that this man could come back," she says. "He knew where I worked, and by this time he knew my real name; it was right on the office door. I became very anxious. I thought maybe he put something inside of me that was causing all the pain. I was a lot more impulsive than I normally am. I picked up the phone and called the police."

There are no widely accepted medical guidelines for prescribing testosterone to women to increase sexual desire, and it's not approved for that use by the Food and Drug Administration. In fact, in 2006 the Endocrine Society, an international professional group for clinicians who specialize in hormone disorders, advised against ever diagnosing androgen deficiency in women, citing a lack of data about safety, as well as the impact of varying levels of testosterone on sexual and other functions.

That said, plenty of doctors prescribe the hormone to women off-label--and many are critical of the Endocrine Society's position. "This is a very conservative organization, and they issued this decision out of bias and fear," says Abdulmaged Traish, PhD, a professor of biochemistry at Boston University and the director for the school's Laboratory for Sexual Medicine Research. "They just closed the door on women's sexual function, which is ­really unfair." The FDA has estimated that in 2007 some 25,000 women used the most common formula, AndroGel, off-label.

Yet even physicians who recommend testosterone are confused about how and why it works (or doesn't). "I see women...who have no response to hormones and manage to boost their love lives with exercise, therapy, books, or lingerie," San Francisco family practitioner Daphne Miller, MD, recently wrote in The Washington Post. "Equally perplexing are those with rock-bottom testosterone levels who are off-the-charts randy."

Just as hotly debated is whether testosterone supplements can trigger antisocial behavior, sexual or otherwise. The conventional wisdom, of course, is that it can, and Nanette Santoro, MD, vice president of clinical science for the Endocrine Society, says she isn't shocked by what happened to Jill. "This is a person who would ordinarily have low levels of testosterone but was exposed to sky-high levels," she says. "She did not go through a normal male puberty, which might have given her some time to cope with the rise in testosterone. It's the abruptness with which you give it that causes significant issues such as hostility and sexual aggression."

Traish, however, believes the hormone's "dangerous" reputation is unfounded. It stems from ancient times, he contends, when castration was used to make animals (and occasionally men) more docile and, more recently, from reports of " 'roid rage" among athletes taking massive amounts of steroids (synthetic androgens). And psychology professor Eli Coleman, PhD, director of the program in human sexuality at the University of Minnesota, agrees: "It is myth­ology that compulsive sexual behavior is produced by excessive hormones. One can suppress sexual desire by suppressing testosterone--but not the other way around." He compares taking extra testos­terone to extra vitamins: If you have scurvy, supplementing with vitamin C will cure you, but if you have enough vitamin C, adding it to your diet has no impact.

While anecdotal cases of testosterone-induced madness are easy to find--a 1997 safety surveillance study reviewed 863 "adverse reaction" reports among women taking testosterone and found that 1.7 percent of them were based on "aggressive behavior, aggressive feelings, rage/angry outbursts, and physical attacks and regretful feelings"--large, controlled studies generally have not been able to detect any pattern. T. Byram Karasu, MD, a professor of psychiatry at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine and author of the text On Sexuality, says that research shows extra testosterone may cause people to "feel more sexual and aggressive," but that doesn't translate into behavior change. A 2009 study in Maturitas, the journal of the European Menopause and Andropause Society, for instance, noted "an increase in mean hostility scores" among women using a combination of estro­gen and a testosterone patch, but went on to say that "behavioral changes [had] not been ­observed or reported."

"A person's commitment, morality, mar­ital status, and judgment can supersede one's testosterone level," Karasu says. "The cortical layer of the brain has the ability to override impulse in civilized human beings."

But no matter what their position on testosterone use in women, a preponderance of medical experts are highly skeptical of bioidentical hormone treatments or oppose them outright. The term itself, they say, is misleading. While Somers and company argue that bioidenticals are "natural" and safe, all hormone treatments are manipulated in a lab to get the finished product. What troubles doctors most, however, is that the pharmacists who mix the bioidenticals aren't regulated by the FDA or any other body. "With bioidentical hormones, you have no idea what's inside," Traish says.

Jill's police report of the rape was a confusing mess. First, she claimed that Jeff was a new ­patient who'd made an emergency appoint­ment, entered the office in an agitated state, and raped her. But when detectives examined the building's security tape, it showed the two of them walking down the hall, chatting amiably.

The man was very nervous, Jill countered, so she'd actually met him at the front door. Police took her at her word, cropped her out of the video, and sent it to every tele­vision station in the Twin ­Cities. A couple of days after Jill called the police, "Jeff's" police sketch was all over the news.

"There was a hammer under her couch with evidence that it had been used in a really brutal way" in a sex act, said Sergeant Paul Schnell, who acted as lead investigator on the case for the Saint Paul police. "She was describing a middle-of-the-day stranger rape. Our number one objective was to find the person who did this and get him off the streets."

However, when officers interviewed staff from the bar downstairs from Jill's office
the following day, they heard a very different story. Jill and Jeff had been there together, and she'd consumed two Long Island iced teas. Under questioning, Jill also admitted to purchasing $425 worth of S&M
equipment and triple-X movies the weekend before. She suggested Jeff might have seen her and followed her back to her office. But when police visited the adult store to check through security tapes, they discovered Jill had returned the day after she was attacked to return a defective vibrator.

"It was unusual in my mind for someone to go into a sex store the day after a rape," Schnell said. "But human beings do weird, human things. This simply wasn't evidence that a sexual assault didn't occur."

In the meantime, a week after she'd contacted the police, Jill e-mailed Jeff to say she was sorry. She was working hard to protect his identity and her own "wonderful life."She offered to speak with an attorney he'd hired and tell him the whole story. And she did so, meeting Strauss--the man who'd later describe her as disheveled and inarticulate--at a restaurant.

More than two months into the investigation, after police had served a costly and embarrassing search warrant on a fellow psychologist with whom she'd once had a dispute, Jill admitted to Sergeant Schnell that she'd contacted Jeff online. But she ­insisted that her purpose had been to ­create a sex­ual fantasy for her husband. Jeff was a "consultant," like a wedding planner, she said. Only, when he arrived to advise her, he raped her instead.

On February 7, 2007, just as police were nearing the truth, Jill wrote to Jeff again: "I need to apologize--really had a freak-out experience and messed up quite a bit. I'm sorry. Wondering if I could ever see you again? You could take your anger out on me--I'm sure I would enjoy it." She signed this message with a winking emoticon.

According to Midwest ­Urology's records, during this period Jill continued to take testosterone (at a lower dosage, 1/8 teaspoon two or three times per week), and her blood level was 430 ng/dl--still several times higher than the normal female range.

On February 23, the Saint Paul police, who had tracked down Jeff through his Internet service provider (using the e-mail address Jill gave them to support her consultant story), executed a search warrant and found a man Schnell described as an "ordinary midlevel professional guy in the suburbs," whose wife had just left for work. "We knocked on the door and he opened it and said, 'I told my attorney we should just call you,'  " Schnell recalls. "The guy was relieved because for five months every time he saw a squad car or heard a siren, he thought we were coming."

Jeff handed the officers a stack of printed e-mails from Jill proving she'd solicited him ­before and ­after the events of October 24. While they read, he called his lawyer, who invited Schnell to his office, where he listened to the tape in which Jill confessed to every detail of her crime.

The Saint Paul police had spent nearly four months and literally thousands of man-hours on Jill Ajao's false rape case.

"There are so many things I look back on and think, Good Lord, Jill, where was your head?" She shakes her head, earrings tinkling, and picks up her cup, peering in as if the answer might be ­inside. "I've gone over this so many times. Why did I initially say this guy was a client of mine? Why did I call the police? Oh my God! Had I been in my right mind, I never would have done these things. But, of course, if I'd been in my right mind, I wouldn't have been in the situation at all."

It was the testosterone that made her impulsive and irrational, she says. It had still been in her system, still influencing her behavior, during the months she was lying and trying to reignite a relationship with the man she'd accused of rape. Such was the argument used by her attorney, Jerod Peterson, when he tried to plea-bargain after she was charged with falsely reporting a crime.

Police and the Saint Paul city attorney's office had agonized over whether to even file charges. "We were very aware of the chilling effect this could have," Schnell says. "We didn't want to reinforce those perverse social beliefs about rape allegations--that many of them are false. Because our data shows this simply isn't true."

In the end, however, Schnell and former Saint Paul city attorney John Choi decided they owed it to the public. "This was a high-profile case that triggered a chain of events and caused the police to allocate a great number of resources," Choi says. "We felt it was important to make sure that the ­offender would be held accountable."

According to the Minnesota Board of Psycho­logy, Jill's license was suspended in October 2008 for violation of ethics; fraudulent, deceptive, or dishonest conduct; severe mental or physical illness; and impaired objectivity. She was ordered not to practice, to abstain completely from "alcohol, testosterone, and all other mood-­altering chemicals" and referred to the state's Health Professionals Services Program (HPSP), which monitors health care professionals with illnesses that might impact their ability to practice.

Today, Jill is under the care of a team that ­consists of an endocrinologist, a primary care physician, a psychiatrist, and a psychotherapist, all connected to HPSP. Jill says she doesn't mind not drinking and she's happy to comply with the random drug screenings. But she's angry at a system that will not allow her to work. It would've been reasonable, she concedes, for the board to put her on some kind of temporary administrative leave, similar to what is done when police officers are involved in a shooting. "But I don't believe I ever hurt any of my clients," she says. "I think the biggest harm that was done to them was when I was forced to abruptly quit practicing."

Now Jill lives in a small house near her former home. She and D. went to marriage counseling for a year following the revelations, but ultimately, Jill says, he couldn't forgive her--for her infidelity or for the humiliation he suffered. "My husband didn't understand the addiction and ­depression part of it," she says sadly. "I don't think he could trust me anymore. Whereas if I had become ­addicted to heroin instead of testosterone, he probably could have dealt with that."

The couple divorced in 2008. Jill has their three children Mondays, Wednesdays, and ­every other weekend. The children have remained largely ­unaware of the saga aside from their ­parents' ­divorce. Jill now supports herself with the money from the settlement and ­attends classes to keep her psychology credentials current, cares for her ailing mother, and helps out at her kids' schools.

She regrets the end of her marriage, and she cries when she talks about D. "He's a good man. I was totally in love with him, and I hurt him a lot. I miss him terribly. I miss the friendship we had." But just moments later, she brightens. "One really good thing came out of this: I love living alone."

Finally, I have to ask: Do you really think testosterone was to blame for what happened, or were you just reacting to your extreme discontent with your husband? If you'd never taken the drug, would you still be married to D.?

Jill pauses, stares into space. For the first time since we met, she looks uncertain. "Without the testosterone, I believe I would have tolerated things for a long time," she says. "I was unhappy, yes. But I think many of the problems in our marriage were solvable. There was a snippiness about us, a disconnect, definitely a loss of affection. And yet, I'd never had a fantasy about a romantic relationship on the side. Then came this drug."

She opens her hands wide. "Every regular sexual thought would just keep expanding. And I just couldn't push those thoughts away."
74
Article here.  More and more people are noticing the blatantly anti-male attitudes in popular culture these days, especially in television sitcoms.  My hat is off to the author, Pam Meister:



Hollywood Feminism: Women Smart, Men Dumb
by  Pam Meister
Big Hollywood
September 16, 2010
http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/pmeister/2010/09/16/hollywood-feminism-women-smart-men-dumb/

"Feminism is a Crock - and Other True Stories." That's the title for a book I'd like to write someday. The reason I say feminism is a crock is because it has morphed from "equal rights for all" to "women are better than men, and if you disagree you're a sexist pig who should be castrated." It's also morphed into a sexual free-for-all: what used to be sauce for the gander (and those ganders were usually considered cads) is now sauce for the goose. This image is being perpetuated by pop culture and entertainment, and women are more and more frequently being portrayed as strong through their sexuality, not through their actual accomplishments. Is this the standard to which we want our daughters to aspire?



Early feminists fought against the centuries-old image of a "woman on a pedestal." Gloria Steinem (she of the "a woman without a man is like a fish without a bicycle" who in later years ended up getting married anyway) once said, "A pedestal is as much a prison as any small, confined space." I suppose a bra is also a small, confined space, which might explain the bra burnings of the 1960s. But the early feminists had a point - to a point. If a woman wants to be put on a pedestal and admired and adored, fine. But if she doesn't, she should have the right to do with her life as she chooses. She should be free to pursue any vocation for which she is qualified, either as a single or married woman, children or no children.

But one of the problems with the new feminism was the annoying little fact that children could get in the way of this brave new world. Having to either stay at home with the little tykes or find daycare for them - not to mention all of the discomfort and disfiguration that comes with pregnancy itself - sure put a damper on Gloria Steinem's idea of a "liberated woman" being "one who has sex before marriage and a job after." Unbridled sex does, after all, have consequences. And so, according to historian Elaine Tyler May, birth control was "an important tool to gain control over their lives."

May touts the contributions of Margaret Sanger, whose group eventually became known as Planned Parenthood, conveniently ignoring - as many do - Sanger's devotion to eugenics. Sanger spoke of sterilizing those "unfit" to contribute to the gene pool, a group which included not only blacks and other ethnic minorities but, according to  Sanger associate Dr. Harry Laughlin, the "shiftless, ignorant, and worthless class of antisocial whites of the South." What a classy group of people.


Margaret Sanger: eugenicist and racist.


Don't get me wrong. I'm not against safe, legitimate birth control methods. But when tooting the horn of the likes of Margaret Sanger, we need to be honest about what really drove her pursuit of birth control for women, just as we should be honest about what drives the abortion mills of Planned Parenthood - profit. And quelle surprise - Planned Parenthood as we know it really came into its own in the 1960s.

In a nutshell: True feminists of the time felt that you could only be a feminist if you rebelled against the natural workings of your body and eschewed marriage and motherhood  for a "higher cause." There are still many of the old guard around today. But the times, they are a changin'.

Fast forward to 2010. Many would say the fight for equal rights has pretty much been won. Girls can dream of going to college and becoming airline pilots, electrical and biological engineers, teachers, doctors - the list is almost endless. In fact, more women graduate with college degrees than men - perhaps due in part to more focus being put on girls than boys in school to "make up for" previous inequality and also what is being called the feminization of society (what Rush Limbaugh calls "chickification").

And for years, the entertainment industry has done its part for the last 20 or 30 years by portraying men as bumbling but lovable fools who wouldn't be where they are if it weren't for the very attractive, smart-as-a-whip women they somehow managed to marry. Television's Home Improvement and King of Queens are two of the more recent examples. And, of course, commercials like this one. So even if the woman did commit the sin of marrying, she always had the redeeming quality of having the upper hand in just about any situation.


Dopey husband, brilliant wife.


Earlier, I said that unbridled sex without birth control or easy access to abortion has the consequence of pregnancy and childbirth. Today, unbridled sex with birth control and easy access to abortion combined with an increasingly "anything goes" attitude in society and pop culture gets girls who have as their role models the like of Paris Hilton, the Kardashian sisters, Snooki from MTV's Jersey Shore and various other "celebrities." Their claim to fame is not similar to being the first woman to fly solo across the Atlantic Ocean or receiving the Nobel Prize for pioneering work in radiation, but for on-camera antics like tanning, catfights, and puking after binge drinking, and having their "sex tapes" released to the press for quick and easy profit. Too many are the next target of the creator of the Girls Gone Wild video series, which shows images of drunken girls taking off their tops and making out with one another.

We also have the likes of Lady Gaga, who makes Madonna look like a choir girl - almost. And those who begin their careers as wholesome young things (Britney and Jamie Lynn Spears, Christina Aguilera, Lindsey Lohan, Miley Cyrus) often decide that "growing up" must mean "giving out" - figuratively speaking in some cases, not so figuratively in others.

As the mother of two girls, one just starting college this year and the other starting high school, I find these so-called role models severely lacking.

Writing for Macleans, Anne Kingston also notes this disturbing trend. As those she interviews see it, the fight for women's equality is not over but has taken a giant step backward because of something called "enlightened sexism": where women are not only "empowered" by overtly flaunting their sexuality, but are also obsessed with getting married.

Certainly this new trend in the entertainment media, which exploits this so-called sexual empowerment for fun and profit, is partially to blame. But what about the parents? Where are they?

Sure there are the mothers quoted in Anne Kingston's article who are upset about this trashy turn of events. Unfortunately, there are plenty of others who are pushing the trend. I was in TJ Maxx some time ago and heard two women talking, excited because the store was finally carrying the tacky Juicy Couture clothing line. Yet I had to wonder - were they excited because they could buy it for their children or were they excited for themselves? Just a couple of weeks ago, I saw an older, heavyset woman at the mall who was with a boy who looked like he might be her grandson. She was wearing a tight t-shirt with the word Juicy across the front and it was painfully obvious that she wasn't wearing a bra. Nothing like mutton dressed like lamb a la Absolutely Fabulous.

Blech.


What's funny on TV is scary in real life.


Then there's the recent story about skinny jeans for toddlers. Why anyone would put their two- or three-year-old in an item of clothing usually connected with sexuality is beyond me. But then we have shows like TLC's Toddlers & Tiaras, where some think "beauty pageant stage parents make Jon and Kate Gosselin look like Ward and June Cleaver." There are notorious stage parents like Dina Lohan, who has done her best to launch her own career on the back of her daughter, nearly sucking her dry.

Double blech.

My take? The left tried its hand at social engineering in the name of equality - but rather than focusing on equal rights in education and the workplace,  ended up giving women the same "rights" as men in the arena of sex with no consequences. Religion and morality were for squares, no matter what Huey Lewis might have said. Yet it has backfired. Girls still like to look pretty and still like to attract boys. However, now they don't have to worry about public stigma for public misbehavior. A girl who would once be labeled a skank for certain behavior is now celebrated. Be famous for being a no-talent party girl with an expanding rap sheet! No need to "settle with a man just to have that child." Go back to the creep who used your face for a punching bag. Turn yourself into a literal caricature through plastic surgery. You deserve it.

You've come a long way, baby. Here's hoping you can find your way home again.
75
Article here.  A father who wanted to attend a class for parents and their children -- a class named "Mommy and Me" -- was denied access on the basis that because the class participants had to pay for admission it was somehow justified to screen out fathers.  I suppose by that reasoning that if the class was free, then they would feel compelled to admit fathers to it (I wouldn't hold my breath on that, though).  In any case, I am pleasantly surprised to see such a pro-father article on the usually feminist-oriented (and therefore usually anti-father) Huffington Post.

Comments on this article over at the Huffington Post are currently wide open.  Let's chime in and let our voices be heard.  We spend a lot of time invalidating the bad; now let's take this opportunity to validate the good.

Let's Get Rid of 'Mommy and Me' (VIDEO)
By Dana H. Glazer
Huffington Post
September 14, 2010
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dana-h-glazer/lets-get-rid-of-mommy-and_b_709404.html

I took my eldest son to get his hair cut the other day and noticed on the door to the salon an advertisement for a local "Mommy and Me" class. The flier included an illustration of a mother holding her toddler. There was no mention of dads and other caregivers being welcome as well.

Harmless, right?

When it comes to father's rights, I am certainly not a militant. Nor am I the type of person who takes offense at every little thing. However, when I read a flier for a toddler activity that only emphasizes motherhood, do I, as a dad, feel excluded?

You bet.

Do people intend to be exclusionary? Sometimes they do and sometimes they just haven't thought enough about what they are doing, as evidenced below:



There's a famous quote by Gloria Steinem that I think is worth repeating here: "Women are not going to be equal outside the home until men are equal in it." There's certainly been a lot of growth in terms of how the genders work together, but there's still a great deal of resistance from all sides. As a society, we still hold too tightly to old stereotypes of what moms and dads should be doing -- even when reality dictates we should be more open.

When it comes to childcare, it really is up to women to allow men into what has previously been their domain and a great place to start is to get rid of the moniker "Mommy and Me." So, if you are connected with such a class, consider getting the name changed to one that is more welcoming, like "Toddler Time" or "Toddler and Me" -- names that include not only dads but grandparents and other caregivers as well. It's small changes like this that, over the long run, will help alter attitudes and perceptions about our roles as men and women in our society.

Dana H. Glazer is the award-winning director of the feature length documentary The Evolution of Dad. To learn more about the project, please visit www.evolutionofdad.com.
77
Article here.  It's not a DV shelter for men, but rather a shelter for men who have essentially been evicted from their homes by their wives (and probably also by the State).  It's also not free ($166 USD per week), but they make it a point to foster camaraderie between the male residents by limiting the numbers of residents living in a given facility, and they also provide rooms for the children of fathers to stay in order to foster an uninterrupted relationship.  What impresses me is that they are recognizing that male pain exists and are also identifying the cause of that pain -- family breakup, an outcome sought by wives 80 percent of the time according to this article.

Swiss pioneer shelter for newly separated husbands
By Barbara Prevel
Reuters
September 10, 2010
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100909/od_nm/us_fathers_shelter_odd

GENEVA (Reuters) - A trickle of newly separated Swiss fathers looking for shelter and help after marital breakdown have been finding a warm bed and a sympathetic ear from a pilot project on the shores of Lake Zurich.

Protestant pastor Andreas Cabalzar has founded Switzerland's first shelter for newly separated fathers in the Swiss village of Erlenbach, not far from Geneva.

Unique in Switzerland, the project has seen the numbers of applications to stay in the house increasing every week.

"80 percent of the time it is the wife asking for a divorce and the children stay in the family home while the father leaves with his suitcases and becomes more vulnerable," Cabalzar told Reuters.

The project began in September 2009 when four men visited Cabalzar to ask for help after separating from their wives. After leaving home, the men initially needed temporary shelter and a place to reflect on their situations.

"At the first moment everybody needs a roof and a bed and no man is prepared for this step," Cabalzar told Reuters.

He said the problem pervades all sections of society and that he sees men from all walks of life hit by the problem.

"In such a reality people are suffering," he said.

Cabalzar offers the men a home as well as psychological and religious support if requested.

Guests pay around 170 Swiss Francs ($166) per week to stay. The house can welcome three newly separated fathers at a time. There are also two bedrooms set aside for children to help the fathers maintain contact with their children.

"No more than three newly separated fathers can stay as it gives a very good synergy. They speak and help each other, it makes a good self-help group," Cabalzar told Reuters.

Cabalzar is now looking at getting more houses. Some men stay a few days, others a few weeks but he makes sure that any stay is as short as possible.

A former equities trader, Cabalzar is seeking independent financing for more houses within his parish to help separated fathers to rebuild their lives while maintaining contact with their children in the early stages of family break-up.

STAYING IN TOUCH WITH THEIR CHILDREN

"After two years of separation too many children do not have any contact with their fathers," Cabalzar told Reuters.

His goal is to make sure that they are no blockages and that the relationship with the parents stays as normal as possible.

He works closely with marriage councilors, lawyers and psychologists to keep an open dialogue between the parents and ensure an ongoing positive relationship between the father, the mother and the children.

"There is a commitment to the children and a reliable relationship must be kept. The children need to have a positive picture of their parents," he said.

Before his shelter project Cabalzar had worked with young and unemployed adults where he saw how important it is for children to have both parents around them.

After two years on this project he started to think of the problems around him and what marriage is in our society with a 50 percent divorce rate in the Zurich region.

He said the popular image of the nuclear family remains frozen in time, a nostalgic notion that has more in common with our grandparents' generation than the frenetic economic realities of the modern world where home life for both parents often takes a back seat to the demands of work.

"The image of work in our world does not seem to be compatible with the family life that our grandparents had."

(Editing by Paul Casciato)
78
Article here.  Looks like when the public purse is threatened (by a man), the full force and weight of law enforcement are brought to bear upon suspected violators.  But when women commit paternity fraud by lying about the father (claiming that the father is her husband when in fact it's her other secret lover), and she makes such a claim under penalty of perjury, do we see such swift retribution against her by the State?  No.  The reason why the government came down hard on this man, who allegedly swindled the taxpayers of public funds, is that a defrauded non-father's lost money is not of any concern to the government.  But steal from the government?  Well, that's serious!

French arrest "father" of 55 children in suspect benefits scam
Reuters
September 10, 2010
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100910/od_uk_nm/oukoe_uk_france_fraud

PARIS (Reuters) - A Paris man who registered 55 children by 55 different mothers faces up to 10 years in jail and fines for suspected paternity fraud and for helping to obtain residency under false pretences, police said on Friday.

The 54 year-old of African origin, who authorities did not identify, was arrested in his two-room flat in Paris during a police raid which yielded documents showing more than 50 people were registered as living at that address.

Police suspect the man was involved in a social benefits scam which could have been costing the state over 1 million euros ($1.27 million) annually in claims by the mothers.

"At the moment 42 women have been identified and each claim that the man is the biological father of their child," Paris police said in a statement.

Authorities said the man claimed he met the women at bars, night spots and occasionally during visits to their home countries, including Senegal, Cameroon and Mali.

For a fee of 150 to 200 euros, he registered the children and their mothers with French authorities, enabling them to obtain residency permits and claim social benefits.

Some of the mothers told authorities they had received up to about 7,500 euros on various monthly allowances.

"Investigations are on-going and an investigating magistrate will decide whether DNA tests have to be administered to determine the children's paternity," a police spokesman said.

(Reporting by Bate Felix, editing by Paul Casciato)
79
Article here.  Sweet Schadenfreude!  I bet Gonzo gets a laugh out of this (as do I).

:occasion18:


Boxer aide arrested for marijuana possession in Senate building
September 8, 2010
by Jason Kobely
http://www.news10.net/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=94629&provider=top

WASHINGTON (AP) -- An aide to Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer has been arrested on charges that he brought marijuana into a Senate office building.

The office of the California Democrat said Wednesday that 43-year-old Marcus Stanley has resigned as an economics adviser to Boxer.

A summary report provided by the U.S. Capitol Police alleges that an officer saw a man enter a Senate building on Tuesday and remove from his pocket a green leafy substance that later tested positive for the chemical compound in marijuana.

Capitol Police Sgt. Kimberly Schneider confirmed that police arrested Stanley.

A spokesman for Boxer says the senator accepted Stanley's resignation because his actions, in the spokesman's words, "were wrong and unacceptable."
80
Video here, article here.   Sacramento Kings former basketball pro Matt Barnes was arrested yesterday afternoon for domestic violence.  But unlike many other men falsely accused of domestic violence, this man is not falling on his sword.  He is straight-up telling the world that he is the victim -- not "a" victim, but the victim.  In a text message to a TV news anchor (which was read on the video above), he pointed out that 9 out of 10 times in a domestic violence call the man, not the woman, is arrested.  Good for him for standing up for himself. The police themselves acknowledge that they noticed injuries on him, and yet arrested only him, on the pretext that he was the "dominant aggressor."  Although details on the injuries are currently unknown, it is a known fact that in California where the arrest occurred, a man who puts up his arms to protect himself from a woman's attacks can be accused of assault merely by having defensive wounds on his arms (wounds which are interpreted by police as offensive, rather than defensive, in nature).  

The arraignment (the court hearing in which formal criminal charges are publicly filed) will be held on Monday, September 13, in Sacramento.  I live in Sacramento.

Matt Barnes, former Sacramento King, arrested for domestic violence
September 9, 2010
By Jason Kobely
News10 Sacramento
http://www.news10.net/news/article.aspx?storyid=94658&provider=top&catid=188

FAIR OAKS, CA - Former Sacramento Kings forward Matt Barnes told News10's Bryan May "I was the victim but still got arrested" after police say he was involved in a physical fight with his girlfriend Wednesday at the couple's Fair Oaks home, according to a Sacramento County Sheriff's spokesman.

Deputies responded to a 911 call from the home on the 8100 block of Sunset Avenue in Fair Oaks around 4:15 p.m. Wednesday, Sacramento County Sheriff's Sgt. Tim Curran said.

Investigators determined the two had been involved in a "physical confrontation" and that Barnes prevented the woman from talking with 911 operators, Curran said.

Curran said Barnes, 30, was arrested after deputies spoke with Barnes and the woman who Barnes "lived with and with whom he had a dating relationship."

Both Barnes and the woman had visible injuries, according to the deputies.

Barnes was booked into the Sacramento County Main Jail on the felony charges of domestic violence and maliciously obstructing the use of a telephone line, Curran said.

Barnes posted $50,000 bond and was released just after 9:30 p.m. He was scheduled to be arraigned Monday.

Barnes responded to a text message from News10's Bryan May late Wednesday, texting, "U know any domestic violence situation 9 outa 10 times the man gets arrested. That's the case here I was the victim but still got arrested. No matter what I say people are gonna think what they want..."

Barnes continued his defense on his Twitter page Wednesday night, tweeting, "DON'T LET YOUR EARS WITNESS, WHAT YOUR EYES DIDN'T SEE!!!"

Barnes, who grew up in Sacramento and attended Del Campo High School, has played for nine NBA teams, including a stint with the Kings from 2004 to 2005. Barnes recently signed a two-year, $3.6 million with the Los Angeles Lakers last month.