Messages

16

Men and Domestic Violence / RADAR ALERT: McGill University Student Newspaper Smears RADAR

Feb 28, 2010, 05:59 PM

RADAR ALERT: McGill University Student Newspaper Smears RADAR

In December, The McGill Tribune, published by the McGill University Students' Society, printed an article (included below) that made false statements about RADAR (Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting). A few days later, the Tribune's editor promised to retract the most offensive claim.  But even with that claim retracted, the article still paints a misleading portrait of RADAR.  So he also said he might consider publishing an op-ed by RADAR to correct the other misinformation about the reasons RADAR exists.

RADAR did submit a response, but of necessity it was much longer than the Tribune's length limit for an op-ed.  That's because the information RADAR knows about is not common knowledge, so for us to simply state a position without backing it up with facts would not make a credible case.  After weeks of inquiries as to whether or not the Tribune will be publishing our response, we learned just recently that they will not.

Here's the article the Tribune will not be printing.

Why RADAR Is Needed
Mark Rosenthal Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting (RADAR)

The 12/1/2009 article www.mcgilltribune.com/media/storage/paper234/news/2009/12/01/Opinion/Off-The.Board.The.Fight.For.Mens.Rights-3842224.shtml]"OFF THE BOARD: The fight for men's rights"[/url]¹ by Carolyn Gregoire repeated claims about RADAR (Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting) from an article in Slate.com's DoubleX.  Although the DoubleX article contained more misrepresentation than fact, at least that author interviewed her subjects.  Ms. Gregiore not only failed to do that, but also added embellishments of her own, which caused the Tribune's editor to append an apology.  This article was composed to counter the misrepresentation and enlighten the Tribune's readers about what RADAR is really all about, but the Tribune has declined to publish it.

First of all, we are not a Men's Rights group, as those working against us like to claim.  As our mission statement says, RADAR is dedicated to improving the effectiveness of solutions to the problem of domestic violence.  RADAR has always been as concerned about women abused by the system as about men.  If we seem to be advocating more for men than for women, that's a reflection of the ways that DV policies are badly broken, not a reflection of our underlying philosophy.

On a personal note, I must object to the statement, "RADAR chooses to undermine the prevalence of rape and domestic violence against women." Far from wishing to deny women protection, one of my primary motivations is to see to it that no other children suffer the fate that befell my sister – a matter I've touched on in many of my compositions,² most notably "Don't Put Your Trust In Movements"³.

Due to decades of one-sided reporting on domestic violence, explaining the issues RADAR is concerned about often feels like telling someone, "Everything you know is wrong!"  In fact, DV policy in the U.S. (and Canada too) is not the solution its supporters claim.  All too often, it causes harm even as it fails to help those it purports to help.

Shelters are not the refuges from abuse that people think

Many shelters keep their beds full by taking in alcoholics and drug abusers who often place other residents at risk.  In Florida, Milaus Almore was killed by a knife-wielding shelter resident.  Shelter staff had ignored reports of earlier death threats made by the killer⁴.

In Massachusetts, Nev Moore's nightmare was not the time her husband got drunk and pushed her during an argument.  It was a year later when the Massachusetts DSS used that incident as an excuse to seize her 8-year-old daughter and coerce the mother to attend a battered women's support group under threat of permanent loss of her child.  Moore says the group's facilitators "encouraged women to stay stuck in the victim mentality"⁵, and that the primary motivation is not to help the women heal and move on with their lives, but to maximize the shelter's income.

One Ontario abuse victim describes how she and other residents were subjected to sexual advances by the staff⁶, and penalized by the staff for spurning their advances.  (Watch 33:20-36:04)Exposing the morally corrupt women's shelter industry ONE VIDEO AT A TIME!

Canadian immigration sent a Russian immigrant who was not abused to a battered women's shelter for the free food and lodging.  This woman also reports being sexually preyed upon by the shelter staff⁷. (Watch 16:46-20:15) Exposing the women's shelter industry ONE VIDEO AT A TIME!

A little girl who stayed at a battered women's shelter with her mother found the shelter itself to be a violent place⁸. (Watch 5:55-8:28) Exposing the morally corrupt women's shelter industry - one video at a time! A child's perspective.

Safeguards against false claims have been weakened to the point of virtual non-existence

In 2005, Coleen Nestler filed for a restraining order against David Letterman, claiming Letterman had used code-words, gestures, and "eye expressions" on his nationally televised show to send messages to Nestler alone. Her application⁹ asked the court to order Letterman not to "Think of me, and RELEASE ME from his mental harassment & hammering."  Despite the absurdity of the claims, Judge Daniel Sanchez granted the order.  When asked by a reporter if he might have made a mistake, he stated that he had read Nestler's application¹⁰. Sanchez is no ordinary judge. He's Chairman of the Northern New Mexico Domestic Violence Task Force¹¹.  Sanchez' actions are the model that other judges look to when deciding the appropriate way to handle an obviously absurd accusation.

In the Letterman case, the accuser was clearly out of touch with reality.  But what happens when unscrupulous people simply want the benefits the government intends for the abused. A recent New York Times article¹² headlined "Domestic Abuse Fraud: It's Rarely Suspected and Rarely Detected" reported on women who lied about having been abused in order to move to the front of the subsidized housing queue.  Without providing any evidence to back the claim, the article asserts that such cases are rare.  At the same time, the article also quotes a shelter director admitting that the system is not set up to catch people committing fraud, so they can't possibly know that cases like this are rare.  If getting a break on housing costs is enough to induce some women to lie about being abused, there can be little doubt that the many benefits intended for women who truly have been abused also induce unscrupulous non-abused women to falsely accuse innocent men.

In his article "Erring on the Side of Hidden Harm"¹³ N.J. attorney David Heleniak explains that in addition to the merits of any particular restraining order application, judges worry about the potential damage to their careers if their name should end up in the headlines because they denied a restraining order and the applicant was later harmed.  A restraining order often physically prevents children from having access to their father except under supervised visitation, an unnatural setting that clearly tells the child that their father is a dangerous person.  Princeton Sociology Professor Sara McLanahan has found that "Father absence clearly diminishes a child's prospects for success in adult life."¹⁴ So, when judges issue thousands of unnecessary restraining orders against innocent fathers, they're not "erring on the side of safety" as they claim.  They're choosing the harm that won't damage their careers over the harm that will.

Honest And Objective Scientific Research Has Been Warped To Produce Politically Desired Results

Fields of study like sociology and psychology are much more difficult to quantify than fields like physics and chemistry, making it much easier for "researchers" with an agenda to manipulate the results. Unfortunately, such manipulation is commonplace in domestic violence research.

One researcher who strives to hold himself and his field of study to a higher standard is Murray Straus, one of the world's leading authorities on family violence.  His work from the early 1970s onward is what made the study of family violence a legitimate topic for scientific research.  Straus recently published "Processes Explaining the Concealment and Distortion of Evidence on Gender Symmetry in Partner Violence"¹⁵ which lists the following ways he's seen researchers distort DV research over the past 40 years:

• Suppress Evidence
• Avoid Obtaining Data Inconsistent with the Patriarchal Dominance Theory
• Cite Only Studies That Show Male Perpetration
• Conclude That Results Support Feminist Beliefs When They Do Not
• Create "Evidence" by Citation
• Obstruct Publication of Articles and Obstruct Funding Research That Might Contradict the Idea that Male Dominance Is the Cause of Partner Violence
• Harass, Threaten, and Penalize Researchers Who Produce Evidence That Contradicts Feminist Beliefs

Straus concludes the article:

"Finally, it was painful for me as feminist to write this commentary. I have done so for two reasons. First, I am also a scientist and, for this issue, my scientific commitments overrode my feminist commitments. Perhaps even more important, I believe that the safety and well being of women requires efforts to end violence by women and the option to treat partner violence in some cases as a problem of psychopathology, or in the great majority of cases, as a family system problem."

In 1975 and 1985, Straus worked with Richard Gelles, and Suzanne Steinmetz to conduct the National Family Violence Survey for the National Institute of Health.  Gelles, now Dean of the School of Social Policy & Practice at the University of Pennsylvania, recalls¹⁶:

"The response to our finding that the rate of female-to-male family violence was equal to the rate of male-to-female violence not only produced heated scholarly criticism, but intense and long-lasting personal attacks.  All three of us received death threats.  Bomb threats were phoned in to conference centers and buildings where we were scheduled to present.  Suzanne received the brunt of the attacks - individuals wrote and called her university urging that she be denied tenure; calls were made and letters were written to government agencies urging that her grant funding be rescinded."

Univ. of British Columbia Psychology Professor Donald Dutton is world-reknowned in the field of spousal violence, and has served as an expert witness in family violence cases, including testifying for the prosecution in the O.J. Simpson trial.  In his article "Transforming a flawed policy: A call to revive psychology and science in domestic violence research and practice"¹⁷ Dutton criticizes the theory (known as the Duluth Model) that all domestic violence is a product of "patriarchal beliefs".  He writes (p. 477)

"It is unfortunate that a once pioneering model has become an impediment to effective program and criminal justice responses to domestic violence.  ... The Duluth model ... maintains that unlike the bulk of similar aggressive criminal behaviors (e.g., assault, child abuse, elder abuse), violence perpetrated toward women is influenced in no way by social marginalization or psychosocial deficits, but rather is solely a product of gender privilege."

Dutton concludes:

"Those with continued allegiance to the patriarchal view should stand back and ask themselves if their primary motivation is to advance the safety of women and families or to preserve a self-interested political stance."

Discrimination

The OFF THE BOARD article accuses RADAR of attempting "to take funding away from 'discriminatory' women's-only shelters, rather than fighting for resources for male victims of domestic violence and sexual harassment". Had the writer done her homework, she'd have discovered that people have been "fighting for resources for male victims of domestic violence" for decades, and for just as long it's been the people running the women's shelters who've been playing the role of George Wallace standing in the schoolhouse door. Since the late 1970s, women-only shelters have used their huge political clout to prevent the allocation of any resources for male victims, and have made it impossible for men in need of help to find any help.

One example of this is the experience of Pat Overberg, who ran the Valley Oasis Shelter (VOS) outside L.A. for much of the 1980s and 1990s.  In a 2002 affidavit¹⁸, she recounts the hostile and unprofessional way she was treated by directors of other shelters for the transgression of offering help to men as well as women.  VOS was the only shelter in the nation that offered help to men, so many men traveled great distances to get help. Overberg states, "During my tenure as director of VOS I was subjected to continuous abuse by other directors for sheltering battered men." At a government-sponsored fact-finding meeting, the chairwoman, who was also director of a battered women's shelter tried to silence Overberg whenever she raised the issue of the need to provide services for battered men.  And although every other issue discussed in the meeting made it into the minutes, the minutes contained no indication that the issue had even been raised.

Besides their long history of obstructing the provision of help to battered men, existing battered women's programs' insistence on believing that women can never be abusive causes them to empower such women rather than giving them appropriate treatment, thereby putting the children of abusive mothers in grave danger.

Conclusion

RADAR is concerned about serious issues.  We're hardly the caricature of intolerance that Ms. Gregoire portrays us as.  Far from it. RADAR's primary concern is that interventions are too often ineffective, inappropriate, or both.  The help offered to victims encourages them to stay stuck in a victim mentality rather than to heal.  The innocent are as likely to be penalized as the guilty.  And too many service providers are handsomely compensated for peddling snake-oil.

As our mission statement says, RADAR is dedicated to improving the effectiveness of solutions to the problem of domestic violence.

1 "OFF THE BOARD: The fight for men's rights" , Carolyn Gregoire, McGill Tribune, Dec. 1, 2009, www.mcgilltribune.com/media/storage/paper234/news/2009/12/01/Opinion/Off-The.Board.The.Fight.For.Mens.Rights-3842224.shtml]http://media.www.mcgilltribune.com/media/storage/paper234/news/2009/12/01/Opinion/Off-The.Board.The.Fight.For.Mens.Rights-3842224.shtml[/url]
2 Mark's Personal Writings, http://www.breakingthescience.org/#personal
3 "Don't Put Your Trust In Movements", http://www.breakingthescience.org/DontPutYourTrustInMovements.php
4 Florida Coalition Against Domestic Violence, Safespace, Inc. Homicide Incident, Management Review, http://web.tcpalm.com/2007/11/10/safespace.pdf
5 Inside A 'Batterers Program' for 'Abused' Women, http://www.ifeminists.net/introduction/editorials/2003/0729moore.html
6 Interview with former resident of Ontario battered women's shelter discussing being subjected to sexual advances by the shelter staff. Watch 33 min. 20 sec. to 36 min. 4 sec., www. vimeo .com/745927
7 Interview with Russian immigrant sent by Canadian immigration to a battered women's shelter for the free food and lodging discussing being sexually preyed upon by the shelter staff. Watch 16 min. 46 sec. to 20 min. 15 sec., www. vimeo .com/790290
8 Interview with young shelter resident. Watch 5 min. 55 sec. to 8 min. 28 sec., www. vimeo .com/864606
9 Colleen Nestler vs. David Letterman, Application for a Restraining Order, http://volokh.com/files/lettermanapp.pdf
10 Letterman lawyers: End Santa Fe claim, Santa Fe New Mexican, Dec. 21, 2005, http://web.archive.org/web/20060101201517/http://www.freenewmexican.com/news/36651.html
11 Judge Daniel Sanchez, State of New Mexico, First Judicial District Court, Division VII, http://firstdistrictcourt.com/Division%207.htm
12 Domestic Abuse Fraud: It's Rarely Suspected and Rarely Detected, New York Times, p. A28, October 23, 2009, http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/23/nyregion/23domestic.html
13 Erring on the Side of Hidden Harm, David Heleniak, Associated Content, March 20, 2007, http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/175557/erring_on_the_side_of_hidden_harm_the.html
14 Father Absence and the Welfare of Children, Sara McLanahan, MacArthur Research Network on the Family and the Economy, http://apps.olin.wustl.edu/macarthur/working%20papers/wp-mclanahan2.htm
15 Processes Explaining the Concealment and Distortion of Evidence on Gender Symmetry in Partner Violence, Murray Straus, European Journal of Criminal Policy Research, 2007, pp. 13:227-232, http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/V74-gender-symmetry-with-gramham-Kevan-Method%208-.pdf
16 The Missing Persons of Domestic Violence: Battered Men, Richard J Gelles, The Women's Quarterly, 1999, Independent Women's Forum, http://breakingthescience.org/RichardGelles_MissingPersonsOfDV.php
17 Transforming a flawed policy: A call to revive psychology and science in domestic violence research and practice, Donald G. Dutton & Kenneth Corvo, Aggression and Violent Behavior, 2006, pp. 457-483, http://www.mediaradar.org/docs/Dutton_Corvo-Transforming-flawed-policy.pdf
18 Affidavit of Patricia Overberg, MSW, Nov. 1, 2002, http://www.ncfmla.org/pdf/overberg.pdf



Here is the article showing how it originally appeared and the changes made after RADAR contacted the editor.

The McGill Tribune, 12/1/2009
OFF THE BOARD: The fight for men's rights
by Carolyn Gregoire

Discrimination against men has, understandably perhaps, never occupied a prominent position on the feminist agenda. Recently, however, the rise of the men's rights movement has led men's rights groups and feminists alike to call issues specific to male identity into question. A recent article on Slate's women-oriented webzine DoubleX entitled "Men's Rights Groups are Becoming Frighteningly Effective" has spurred contentious debate extending beyond the feminist blogosphere as to whether feminism should encompass issues of men's rights.

The article was triggered by the actions of men's activist group RADAR (Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting) who gathered in Washington this October to lobby against issues such as false allegations of rape and domestic violence, unrecognized domestic violence against men, and child custody rights for divorced fathers.

Many women, and not only those who identify as feminists, are outraged by the measures these groups have taken. Rather than addressing the negative impact that patriarchy and gender stereotypes have on men and calling for change, RADAR chooses instead to undermine the prevalence of rape and domestic violence against women. Relying on hyperbolic claims and sensationalism - suggesting, for instance, that domestic violence laws represent "the largest regression in civil rights since the Jim Crow era" - RADAR succeeded in blocking the [strikethrough]passage[/strikethrough] expansion of several domestic violence bills, such as the Violence Against Women act. [*Correction appended] [strikethrough]It is also worth noting that many of the movement's leaders are themselves accused batterers.[/strikethrough]

Though issues of men's rights and injustice towards men deserve attention, the anti-feminist approach employed by RADAR and many other men's rights groups in battling these issues is counterproductive and alarmingly reactionary. RADAR's attempt to take funding away from "discriminatory" women's-only shelters, rather than fighting for resources for male victims of domestic violence and sexual harassment, epitomizes this ineffectual methodology.

While it's true that all human rights are men's rights and that history is essentially a men's rights movement, discrimination against men should be a feminist concern because male and female rights are inextricably intertwined. Though a patriarchal society operates for male benefit, societal standards of masculinity are also harmful to men in real ways which deserve to be acknowledged. Rigid definitions of masculinity which narrowly cast men into aggressive, machismo, bread-winning roles are damaging to men, and further, they are damaging to men in ways that are also damaging to women. Following this line of reasoning, many feminists fight for fathers' rights as a means of countering the socially sanctioned notion that nurturer or caregiver must be a female-occupied role. A central objective of the feminist movement is debunking gender stereotypes, even when they apply only to men.

Male victims of sexual harassment, domestic violence, and rape deserve to be recognized and taken seriously, mothers should not be unjustly favoured over fathers in child custody proceedings, and individuals of both genders do not deserve to be systemically limited and harmed by rigid social definitions of masculinity. Feminist concerns and men's rights are not mutually exclusive, and should meet on the common ground of seeking gender equality - the irony of it all is that we're both fighting the same battle. As feminist Gloria Anzaldua suggests, "Men, even more than women, are fettered to gender roles ... We need a new masculinity and the new man needs a movement."


Correction: The article's original version claimed that RADAR had blocked the passage of several domestic violence bills, including the Violence Against Women act. In fact, RADAR helped block the expansion of these bills. Also, the Tribune apologizes for previously claiming that many of RADAR's leaders were accused batterers.



Date of RADAR Release: March 1, 2010

R.A.D.A.R. -- Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting -- is a non-profit, non-partisan organization of men and women working to improve the effectiveness of our nation's approach to solving domestic violence.  http://www.mediaradar.org
           


Copyright (c) 2005-2010. RADAR -- Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting, Inc.
All Rights Reserved.

       

17

Men and Domestic Violence / RADAR ALERT: NOW President's Comment Goofier Than Tebow's Superbowl Ad

Feb 22, 2010, 07:37 AM

RADAR ALERT: NOW President's Comment Goofier Than Tebow's Superbowl Ad

Love him or hate him, controversial talk show host Rush Limbaugh has it right when it comes to the expanding definition of domestic violence.

During the Superbowl, University of Florida quarterback and Heisman Trophy winner Tim Tebow and his mother ran an issue ad opposing abortion. In the ad, Tebow's mother talks about how difficult her pregnancy was and how she had to be tough when Tebow suddenly tackles her.  Only then do you realize the difficult pregnancy was that of her son, Tim Tebow.

The ad attempts to be goofy and funny, in sharp contrast to the expectations of those who knew the ad was coming. The reaction of NOW president Terry O'Neill, however, was even more startling: "I am blown away at the celebration of the violence against women in it. That's what comes across to me even more strongly than the anti-abortion message. I myself am a survivor of domestic violence, and I don't find it charming. I think CBS should be ashamed of itself."

The Monday following the Superbowl, Limbaugh riffed:

"Did you see the ad, Snerdley?  What happened, if you didn't see the sound effect there, Tim Tebow tackled his own mom, looked like bam, she got tackled and then she pops back up.  The ad then directed everybody to the Focus on the Family website where the story would be explained.  So what do you think the reaction to this ad is today by the NAGs? (interruption) No.  No.  They are so livid because it glorified violence against women.  NAG President Terry O'Neill said it glorified violence against women when Tim Tebow ostensibly tackled his own mother."

"...I can't believe the NAGs.  I just can't believe the NAGs.  ... ladies and gentlemen, it was I, El Rushbo, decades ago who told you what these people really were about, who they really are, and the fact that they have never, ever represented anywhere near a majority of female thinking in the country.  But they were always propped up by the left-wing media as the spokeswomen, spokesmen, for all women.  And now they've just become a caricature – violence against women!"

Rush said something similar last year:

"Remember when the NOW gang and all these other social interest groups started asking women if they'd ever been a victim of domestic violence? They didn't like the numbers they got initially. The numbers weren't high enough for the NOW gang. So they expanded the definition to include a man shouting at them. A man shouting at them equaled domestic violence. It didn't matter if the women shouted first."

Rush's view is in agreement with RADAR's special report, "Expanding Definitions of Domestic Violence, Vanishing Rule of Law," http://www.mediaradar.org/docs/RADARreport-Vanishing-Rule-of-Law.pdf which analyzes the civil domestic violence laws in all 50 states and the District of Columbia and concludes that statutory definitions have been widened over the past decade to the point that in most states, almost any action can be viewed as "violent." It's also in agreement with attorney Lisa Scott's observation:

"Domestic violence has become whatever the man does that the woman doesn't like. Finding out she is having an affair and demanding she stop is seen as 'abuse.' This often triggers the woman to file for a restraining order, where no real evidence is required. In my 18 years of family law practice, I have seen this pattern occur over and over."

Please e-mail Rush Limbaugh at [email protected]. Congratulate him for bringing up the fact that a claim of domestic violence is often used to turn the tables when someone is losing an argument, whether it be for advantage in family court or, as in the case of the Tebow ad, public policy debate.  Use your own examples of the damage false DV claims do and ask Rush to bring up the issue again on his show.  You may also wish to send him a link to the "Expanding Definitions of Domestic Violence" report.

Thanks for your help in getting RADAR issues a public hearing.



Date of RADAR Release: Febuary 22, 2010

R.A.D.A.R. -- Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting -- is a non-profit, non-partisan organization of men and women working to improve the effectiveness of our nation's approach to solving domestic violence.  http://www.mediaradar.org
           


Copyright (c) 2005-2010. RADAR -- Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting, Inc.
All Rights Reserved.

       

18

Main / RADAR ALERT: NOW President's Comment Goofier Than Tebow's Superbowl Ad

Feb 22, 2010, 07:37 AM

RADAR ALERT: NOW President's Comment Goofier Than Tebow's Superbowl Ad

Love him or hate him, controversial talk show host Rush Limbaugh has it right when it comes to the expanding definition of domestic violence.

During the Superbowl, University of Florida quarterback and Heisman Trophy winner Tim Tebow and his mother ran an issue ad opposing abortion. In the ad, Tebow's mother talks about how difficult her pregnancy was and how she had to be tough when Tebow suddenly tackles her.  Only then do you realize the difficult pregnancy was that of her son, Tim Tebow.

The ad attempts to be goofy and funny, in sharp contrast to the expectations of those who knew the ad was coming. The reaction of NOW president Terry O'Neill, however, was even more startling: "I am blown away at the celebration of the violence against women in it. That's what comes across to me even more strongly than the anti-abortion message. I myself am a survivor of domestic violence, and I don't find it charming. I think CBS should be ashamed of itself."

The Monday following the Superbowl, Limbaugh riffed:

"Did you see the ad, Snerdley?  What happened, if you didn't see the sound effect there, Tim Tebow tackled his own mom, looked like bam, she got tackled and then she pops back up.  The ad then directed everybody to the Focus on the Family website where the story would be explained.  So what do you think the reaction to this ad is today by the NAGs? (interruption) No.  No.  They are so livid because it glorified violence against women.  NAG President Terry O'Neill said it glorified violence against women when Tim Tebow ostensibly tackled his own mother."

"...I can't believe the NAGs.  I just can't believe the NAGs.  ... ladies and gentlemen, it was I, El Rushbo, decades ago who told you what these people really were about, who they really are, and the fact that they have never, ever represented anywhere near a majority of female thinking in the country.  But they were always propped up by the left-wing media as the spokeswomen, spokesmen, for all women.  And now they've just become a caricature – violence against women!"

Rush said something similar last year:

"Remember when the NOW gang and all these other social interest groups started asking women if they'd ever been a victim of domestic violence? They didn't like the numbers they got initially. The numbers weren't high enough for the NOW gang. So they expanded the definition to include a man shouting at them. A man shouting at them equaled domestic violence. It didn't matter if the women shouted first."

Rush's view is in agreement with RADAR's special report, "Expanding Definitions of Domestic Violence, Vanishing Rule of Law," http://www.mediaradar.org/docs/RADARreport-Vanishing-Rule-of-Law.pdf which analyzes the civil domestic violence laws in all 50 states and the District of Columbia and concludes that statutory definitions have been widened over the past decade to the point that in most states, almost any action can be viewed as "violent." It's also in agreement with attorney Lisa Scott's observation:

"Domestic violence has become whatever the man does that the woman doesn't like. Finding out she is having an affair and demanding she stop is seen as 'abuse.' This often triggers the woman to file for a restraining order, where no real evidence is required. In my 18 years of family law practice, I have seen this pattern occur over and over."

Please e-mail Rush Limbaugh at [email protected]. Congratulate him for bringing up the fact that a claim of domestic violence is often used to turn the tables when someone is losing an argument, whether it be for advantage in family court or, as in the case of the Tebow ad, public policy debate.  Use your own examples of the damage false DV claims do and ask Rush to bring up the issue again on his show.  You may also wish to send him a link to the "Expanding Definitions of Domestic Violence" report.

Thanks for your help in getting RADAR issues a public hearing.



Date of RADAR Release: Febuary 22, 2010

R.A.D.A.R. -- Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting -- is a non-profit, non-partisan organization of men and women working to improve the effectiveness of our nation's approach to solving domestic violence.  http://www.mediaradar.org
           


Copyright (c) 2005-2010. RADAR -- Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting, Inc.
All Rights Reserved.

       

19

Men and Domestic Violence / RADAR ALERT: NJ Supreme Ct OKs Lowest Standard Of Proof for Restraining Orders

Feb 19, 2010, 04:32 PM

RADAR ALERT: New Jersey Supreme Court OKs Issuing Restraining Orders Based On Lowest Standard Of Proof!

Bad news!

The Supreme Court of New Jersey upheld the appellate decision in Crespo v. Crespo that found the New Jersey Prevention of Domestic Violence Act constitutional.  The Supreme Court decision is cursory.  They state initially that "The judgment of the Appellate Division is affirmed substantially for the reasons expressed in the thorough opinion by Judge Fisher."  They then quickly summarize the appellate decision.  They only add the observation that the issue of whether the Second Amendment right to own a gun applies to the States is presently pending before the United States Supreme Court, and then state that they "need not reach that point because the right to possess firearms clearly may be subject to reasonable limitations," thus implying that even if New Jersey has to respect gun rights, New Jersey taking away the gun rights of someone pursuant to the Prevention of Domestic Violence Act constitutes a reasonable limitation.

A syllabus the of the decision can be found at http://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/opinions/supreme/A2809CrespovCrespo.pdf.



Date of RADAR Release: Febuary 19, 2010

R.A.D.A.R. -- Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting -- is a non-profit, non-partisan organization of men and women working to improve the effectiveness of our nation's approach to solving domestic violence.  http://mediaradar.org
           


Copyright (c) 2005-2010. RADAR -- Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting, Inc.
All Rights Reserved.

       

20

Main / RADAR ALERT: New Jersey Supreme Court OKs Issuing Restraining Orders Based On Lowest Standard Of Pro

Feb 19, 2010, 04:30 PM

RADAR ALERT: New Jersey Supreme Court OKs Issuing Restraining Orders Based On Lowest Standard Of Proof!

Bad news!

The Supreme Court of New Jersey upheld the appellate decision in Crespo v. Crespo that found the New Jersey Prevention of Domestic Violence Act constitutional.  The Supreme Court decision is cursory.  They state initially that "The judgment of the Appellate Division is affirmed substantially for the reasons expressed in the thorough opinion by Judge Fisher."  They then quickly summarize the appellate decision.  They only add the observation that the issue of whether the Second Amendment right to own a gun applies to the States is presently pending before the United States Supreme Court, and then state that they "need not reach that point because the right to possess firearms clearly may be subject to reasonable limitations," thus implying that even if New Jersey has to respect gun rights, New Jersey taking away the gun rights of someone pursuant to the Prevention of Domestic Violence Act constitutes a reasonable limitation.

A syllabus the of the decision can be found at http://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/opinions/supreme/A2809CrespovCrespo.pdf.



Date of RADAR Release: Febuary 19, 2010

R.A.D.A.R. -- Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting -- is a non-profit, non-partisan organization of men and women working to improve the effectiveness of our nation's approach to solving domestic violence.  http://mediaradar.org
           


Copyright (c) 2005-2010. RADAR -- Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting, Inc.
All Rights Reserved.

       

21

Men and Domestic Violence / RADAR ALERT: Psychology Today Praises Murder of David Harris!

Feb 09, 2010, 07:24 PM

RADAR ALERT: Psychology Today Praises Murder of David Harris!

Fathers & Families has written an excellent protest letter to Psychology Today.

Kaja Perina

Editor-in-Chief
Psychology Today
115 E. 23rd St., 9th Floor
New York, NY 10010
212-260-7210

Dear Ms. Perina & Psychology Today:

In the shockingly irresponsible article "Sweet Revenge" (Psychology Today, January/February 2010), Regina Barreca, Ph.D. praises convicted Texas killer Clara Harris for her "great moment of revenge." The act for which Barreca praises Harris? In 2002, Harris repeatedly ran over her ex-husband David, as David's daughter Lindsey sat in the front seat of the car begging Clara Harris not to kill her father.

While Barreca praises Clara Harris, Lindsey, who loved her father and was only 16 years old at the time of the killing, publicly denounced Clara Harris for "the ultimate act of selfishness, caring only about obtaining revenge and thinking not one bit about how her horrible act was going to affect me or my brothers, Brian and Bradley. Anyone who shared my ride in the car that evening, seeing my dad's face as he was about to be hit, and experiencing the horrible feel of the car bumping over his body would understand that this murderess deserves no sympathy."

Lindsey says that Clara mistreated and neglected David, and that her father often confided in her how lonely he felt. Coupled with Clara's temper and evident capacity for violence, David had ample reason to want to get out of the relationship. Instead of letting him go, Clara killed him. Does Psychology Today feel this is praiseworthy?

Besides condoning violence, Barreca's article also reeks of gender bias. The vast majority of divorces are initiated by women, not by men, and research shows that women's decision to divorce often catches their husbands by surprise. These men don't just lose their wives, they often lose their children, too, and their rationale for feeling betrayed is often far more legitimate than Clara Harris'. Does Barreca also feel it would be "great revenge" for these men to murder their wives?

No type of marital or post-marital violence should ever be condoned, much less praised, and Psychology Today should immediately and clearly distance themselves from Barreca's reprehensible statements.

Sincerely,

Glenn Sacks, MA
Executive Director, Fathers & Families

Ned Holstein, M.D., M.S.
Founder, Chairman of the Board, Fathers & Families

We ask that you add your signature to the letter and send it to Psychology Today.  Please click here and fill out the form.

Thank you.



Date of RADAR Release: Febuary 10, 2010

R.A.D.A.R. -- Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting -- is a non-profit, non-partisan organization of men and women working to improve the effectiveness of our nation's approach to solving domestic violence.  http://www.mediaradar.org



Copyright (c) 2005-2010. RADAR -- Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting, Inc.
All Rights Reserved.

22

Main / RADAR ALERT: Psychology Today Praises Murder of David Harris!

Feb 09, 2010, 07:24 PM

RADAR ALERT: Psychology Today Praises Murder of David Harris!

Fathers & Families has written an excellent protest letter to Psychology Today.

Kaja Perina

Editor-in-Chief
Psychology Today
115 E. 23rd St., 9th Floor
New York, NY 10010
212-260-7210

Dear Ms. Perina & Psychology Today:

In the shockingly irresponsible article "Sweet Revenge" (Psychology Today, January/February 2010), Regina Barreca, Ph.D. praises convicted Texas killer Clara Harris for her "great moment of revenge." The act for which Barreca praises Harris? In 2002, Harris repeatedly ran over her ex-husband David, as David's daughter Lindsey sat in the front seat of the car begging Clara Harris not to kill her father.

While Barreca praises Clara Harris, Lindsey, who loved her father and was only 16 years old at the time of the killing, publicly denounced Clara Harris for "the ultimate act of selfishness, caring only about obtaining revenge and thinking not one bit about how her horrible act was going to affect me or my brothers, Brian and Bradley. Anyone who shared my ride in the car that evening, seeing my dad's face as he was about to be hit, and experiencing the horrible feel of the car bumping over his body would understand that this murderess deserves no sympathy."

Lindsey says that Clara mistreated and neglected David, and that her father often confided in her how lonely he felt. Coupled with Clara's temper and evident capacity for violence, David had ample reason to want to get out of the relationship. Instead of letting him go, Clara killed him. Does Psychology Today feel this is praiseworthy?

Besides condoning violence, Barreca's article also reeks of gender bias. The vast majority of divorces are initiated by women, not by men, and research shows that women's decision to divorce often catches their husbands by surprise. These men don't just lose their wives, they often lose their children, too, and their rationale for feeling betrayed is often far more legitimate than Clara Harris'. Does Barreca also feel it would be "great revenge" for these men to murder their wives?

No type of marital or post-marital violence should ever be condoned, much less praised, and Psychology Today should immediately and clearly distance themselves from Barreca's reprehensible statements.

Sincerely,

Glenn Sacks, MA
Executive Director, Fathers & Families

Ned Holstein, M.D., M.S.
Founder, Chairman of the Board, Fathers & Families

We ask that you add your signature to the letter and send it to Psychology Today.  Please click here and fill out the form.

Thank you.



Date of RADAR Release: Febuary 10, 2010

R.A.D.A.R. -- Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting -- is a non-profit, non-partisan organization of men and women working to improve the effectiveness of our nation's approach to solving domestic violence.  http://www.mediaradar.org



Copyright (c) 2005-2010. RADAR -- Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting, Inc.
All Rights Reserved.

23

Men and Domestic Violence / RADAR ALERT: Massachusetts Voters Reject Nifong-Style Prosecutor

Jan 31, 2010, 08:28 PM

RADAR ALERT: Massachusetts Voters Reject Nifong-Style Prosecutor

RADAR has issued a press release regarding the recent special election in Massachusetts. (http://mediaradar.org/press_release_20100126.php)

Even before Democratic Senate Candidate Martha Coakley was defeated by the Republican candidate, Scott Brown, political commentators were offering explanations for her loss of popularity, ranging from a bungled campaign to the idea that the Massachusetts election was a national referendum on health care reform or the Obama agenda. One explanation that deserves more attention was recently put forward by Carey Roberts at ifeminist.net. In "Prosecution of Innocent Man Seals Martha Coakley's Defeat" (http://www.ifeminists.net/e107_plugins/content/content.php?content.665), Roberts argues that Coakley's role in keeping Gerald Amirault in prison played a major role in the election of Scott Brown.

In the early 1980s, as explained in a story by Dorothy Rabinowitz that ran in the Wall Street Journal five days before the election (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704281204575003341640657862.html), Gerald Amirault had been accused of plunging "a wide-blade butcher knife into the rectum of a 4-year-old boy, which he then had trouble removing. When a teacher in the school saw him in action with the knife, she asked him what he was doing, and then told him not to do it again, a child said. On this testimony, Gerald was convicted of a rape which had, miraculously, left no mark or other injury." In 2001, when the Massachusetts Board of Pardons voted 5-0 to release him, Coakley, then District Attorney Coakley, successfully pushed for the Governor to deny commutation, which she did in 2002. Amirault spent two more years in prison before finally being paroled.

According to RADAR spokesman David Heleniak, an exciting aspect of the public's negative reaction to Coakley's handling of the Amirault case is that it seems to represent a coming together of the right and left on the issue of civil liberties...

"On both sides of the political spectrum," says Heleniak, "there's outrage at the treatment Amirault received. And there's an increasing awareness, after Nifong, that prosecutors are not necessarily the impartial champions of justice they claim to be."

The press release quotes conservative commentator Ann Coulter, self-described "traditional liberal" Mark Rosenthal, Jack Fowler at the right-wing National Review Online, and Casey Sherman at the left-leaning Huffington Post.  All express a similar sentiment, that Coakley callously put her career over the freedom of Gerald Amirault.

Please forward the press release (http://mediaradar.org/press_release_20100126.php) to any media contacts you may have.

Thanks for your help.



Date of RADAR Release: Febuary 1, 2010

R.A.D.A.R. -- Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting -- is a non-profit, non-partisan organization of men and women working to improve the effectiveness of our nation's approach to solving domestic violence.  http://mediaradar.org
   


Copyright (c) 2005-2010. RADAR -- Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting, Inc.
All Rights Reserved.

24

Main / RADAR ALERT: Massachusetts Voters Reject Nifong-Style Prosecutor

Jan 31, 2010, 08:28 PM

RADAR ALERT: Massachusetts Voters Reject Nifong-Style Prosecutor

RADAR has issued a press release regarding the recent special election in Massachusetts. (http://mediaradar.org/press_release_20100126.php)

Even before Democratic Senate Candidate Martha Coakley was defeated by the Republican candidate, Scott Brown, political commentators were offering explanations for her loss of popularity, ranging from a bungled campaign to the idea that the Massachusetts election was a national referendum on health care reform or the Obama agenda. One explanation that deserves more attention was recently put forward by Carey Roberts at ifeminist.net. In "Prosecution of Innocent Man Seals Martha Coakley's Defeat" (http://www.ifeminists.net/e107_plugins/content/content.php?content.665), Roberts argues that Coakley's role in keeping Gerald Amirault in prison played a major role in the election of Scott Brown.

In the early 1980s, as explained in a story by Dorothy Rabinowitz that ran in the Wall Street Journal five days before the election (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704281204575003341640657862.html), Gerald Amirault had been accused of plunging "a wide-blade butcher knife into the rectum of a 4-year-old boy, which he then had trouble removing. When a teacher in the school saw him in action with the knife, she asked him what he was doing, and then told him not to do it again, a child said. On this testimony, Gerald was convicted of a rape which had, miraculously, left no mark or other injury." In 2001, when the Massachusetts Board of Pardons voted 5-0 to release him, Coakley, then District Attorney Coakley, successfully pushed for the Governor to deny commutation, which she did in 2002. Amirault spent two more years in prison before finally being paroled.

According to RADAR spokesman David Heleniak, an exciting aspect of the public's negative reaction to Coakley's handling of the Amirault case is that it seems to represent a coming together of the right and left on the issue of civil liberties...

"On both sides of the political spectrum," says Heleniak, "there's outrage at the treatment Amirault received. And there's an increasing awareness, after Nifong, that prosecutors are not necessarily the impartial champions of justice they claim to be."

The press release quotes conservative commentator Ann Coulter, self-described "traditional liberal" Mark Rosenthal, Jack Fowler at the right-wing National Review Online, and Casey Sherman at the left-leaning Huffington Post.  All express a similar sentiment, that Coakley callously put her career over the freedom of Gerald Amirault.

Please forward the press release (http://mediaradar.org/press_release_20100126.php) to any media contacts you may have.

Thanks for your help.



Date of RADAR Release: Febuary 1, 2010

R.A.D.A.R. -- Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting -- is a non-profit, non-partisan organization of men and women working to improve the effectiveness of our nation's approach to solving domestic violence.  http://mediaradar.org
   


Copyright (c) 2005-2010. RADAR -- Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting, Inc.
All Rights Reserved.

25

Men and Domestic Violence / RADAR ALERT: Oral Argument in Crespo to be Webcast Jan. 6

Jan 04, 2010, 11:01 PM

RADAR ALERT: Oral Argument in Crespo to be Webcast Jan. 6

Oral arguments in the Crespo case will be webcast live at 12:00 noon, Eastern Standard Time, on Wednesday, January 6, 2010.

The webcast can be viewed at http://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/webcast/index.htm.

The court's schedule for the day is at http://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/webcast/op100106.htm.



Date of RADAR Release: January 4, 2010

R.A.D.A.R. -- Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting -- is a non-profit, non-partisan organization of men and women working to improve the effectiveness of our nation's approach to solving domestic violence.  http://www.mediaradar.org



Copyright (c) 2005-2010. RADAR -- Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting, Inc.
All Rights Reserved.

26

Main / RADAR ALERT: Oral Argument in Crespo to be Webcast Jan. 6

Jan 04, 2010, 11:01 PM

RADAR ALERT: Oral Argument in Crespo to be Webcast Jan. 6

Oral arguments in the Crespo case will be webcast live at 12:00 noon, Eastern Standard Time, on Wednesday, January 6, 2010.

The webcast can be viewed at http://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/webcast/index.htm.

The court's schedule for the day is at http://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/webcast/op100106.htm.



Date of RADAR Release: January 4, 2010

R.A.D.A.R. -- Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting -- is a non-profit, non-partisan organization of men and women working to improve the effectiveness of our nation's approach to solving domestic violence.  http://www.mediaradar.org



Copyright (c) 2005-2010. RADAR -- Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting, Inc.
All Rights Reserved.

27

Men and Domestic Violence / RADAR ALERT: Tell the OVW to Obey President Obama's Scientific Integrity Directi

Jan 04, 2010, 10:56 PM

RADAR ALERT: Tell the OVW to Obey President Obama's Scientific Integrity Directive

On March 9, 2009, President Obama issued a directive on scientific integrity http://www.mediaradar.org/docs/ObamaScientificIntegrityMemo.pdf, in which he said:

"The public must be able to trust the science and scientific process informing public policy decisions.  Political officials should not suppress or alter scientific or technological findings and conclusions."

In late November Catherine Pierce, Acting Director of the Office on Violence Against Women published a memo (see below) in which she suppressed all information about victimization of males and all information about perpetration of domestic violence by females.  Pierce's memo was the subject of RADAR's Dec. 2, 2009 press release. (http://www.mediaradar.org/press_release_20091202.php)

In his directive, President Obama also said:

"By this memorandum, I assign to the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy (Director) the responsibility for ensuring the highest level of integrity in all aspects of the executive branch's involvement with scientific and technological processes."

Today, RADAR is asking you to kick off the New Year by notifying Dr. John Holdren, Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, of the violation of scientific integrity by the Acting Director of the OVW and requesting that Dr. Holdren instruct the OVW that under President Obama's scientific integrity policy, any future communication that fails to emphasize the scientific result that women's physical aggression against their husbands and boyfriends is at least equal to that of men constitutes suppression of scientific findings, and thus puts the OVW in violation of President Obama's directive.  Please also send a copy of your letter to Catherine Pierce.

When you contact Dr. Holdren, please emphasize the following points:

 

   
• President Obama's mandate to you is to ensure the highest level of integrity in all aspects of the executive branch's involvement with scientific processes.  The "soft" sciences like sociology and psychology are no less science than the "hard" sciences like physics and chemistry, however it's much easier for the unscrupulous to manipulate research results in the "soft" sciences.
       
  
     
  • Often the manipulation is accomplished via subtle techniques.  Prof. Murray Straus, one of the world's leading family violence researchers, lists the following techniques he's seen used by less-than-honest domestic violence researchers in his paper "Processes Explaining the Concealment and Distortion of Evidence on Gender Symmetry in Partner Violence" (http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/V74-gender-symmetry-with-gramham-Kevan-Method%208-.pdf).
        
    
    
          
    • suppressing evidence,
    
          
    • designing studies so as to avoid obtaining data that will call the desired result into question,
    
          
    • citing only studies that show the desired result,
    
          
    • concluding that results support the desired interpretation when they do not,
    
          
    • creating "evidence" by citation,
    
          
    • obstructing publication of articles and obstructing funding of research that might reach undesired results,
    
          
    • harassing, threatening, and penalizing researchers who produce undesired results
    
        
    
       
  
     
  • Sometimes outright falsification of data occurs, as in the recently reported case of former UC Davis employee Jennifer Beeman who, according to the Sacramento Bee, "grossly inflated the number of forcible sexual offenses in three years of mandatory reports to the federal government." (http://www.sacbee.com/topstories/story/2431619.html) The Sacramento Bee also reports that Beeman claimed hundreds of "incidents of violence against women" in applications for violence prevention grants, and that UC Davis' grant from the Federal Office on Violence Against Women was nearly $1 million for the year 2007 alone. (http://www.sacbee.com/ourregion/story/2290047.html)
  
       
  
     

   
• A huge body of sound scientific research, compiled into an annotated bibliography by California State University Psychology Professor Martin Fiebert, demonstrates that women's physical aggression against their husbands and boyfriends equals or exceeds that of men. (http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm)  Fieberts bibliography includes 271 scholarly investigations with an aggregate sample size exceeding 365,000.


   
• Researchers at the CDC have found that, contrary to popular belief, in half of all couples in which domestic violence occurs, the violence is reciprocal. (http://ajph.aphapublications.org/cgi/content/abstract/97/5/941) Even more surprising to those whose information about domestic violence comes from Hollywood stereotypes, CDC researchers found that among violent couples in which the violence is one-way rather than reciprocal, women were the sole perpetrators in more than 70% of the cases.


   
• Director Pierce's memo announces that the Office on Violence Against Women intends to "to spark a national conversation" about violence against women and focusing only on ways to end violence against women and girls, which she asserts "pervades every community in America".  In the absence of an equally prominent statement that scientific research indicates that women's physical aggression against their husbands and boyfriends is at least equal to that of men, Pierce's memo constitutes a gross violation of Obama's directive that "Political officials should not suppress or alter scientific or technological findings and conclusions," and as a result the public cannot trust the process informing decisions on domestic violence policy.


   
• National policies for dealing with social ills that are based on bad science cause harm to every individual in the country.  Thus, it is imperative that, in carrying out President Obama's mandate, you see to it that social science research and results are held to the same standards of scientific objectivity that you'd apply to any of the hard sciences.

 

The contact information is:

John Holdren, Director

Office of Science and Technology Policy
Executive Office of the President
725 17th Street Room 5228
Washington, DC 20502
Email: [email protected], Patricia McLaughlin, Executive Asst. to Dr. Holdren

Catherine Pierce, Acting Director
Office on Violence Against Women
800 K Street, N.W., Suite 920
Washington, D.C. 20530
Email: [email protected]

OVW Acting Director Pierce's Memo
http://www.ovw.usdoj.gov/director-nov09msg.htm

Dear Friends,

Congratulations on another successful Domestic Violence Awareness Month!  I enjoyed hearing about the many exciting events that took place around the country.  On October 19, the Department of Justice commemorated the month to honor the work of advocates and communities around the country who protect and serve survivors.  Attorney General Eric Holder, Deputy Attorney General David Ogden, and Associate Attorney General Tom Perrelli, and I were joined by representatives from organizations that work to end domestic violence and survivors and advocates who generously shared their stories.  You can view videos from the event on the new Department of Justice Blog: http://blogs.usdoj.gov/blog/archives/category/ovaw.

December 3: It's Time to Talk!

Fifteen years after the Violence Against Women Act was enacted, much has been accomplished, but the work is far from finished. On December 3, Liz Claiborne, Inc. will sponsor It's Time to Talk Day, dedicated to ensuring that Americans speak up about domestic, sexual and teen dating violence and to spark a national conversation about violence against women and teen dating abuse.  The Department of Justice will also dedicate this day to talk about ways to end the violence against women and girls that pervades every community in America. We encourage you to stand with us on December 3 because it's time to talk to our colleagues, friends, and our family. Please let us know if you are planning any events in your community on this day and we will highlight them on our website.  OVW developed a toolkit of resources for the 15th Anniversary of the Violence Against Women Act and the official It's Time to Talk website has additional information.

Fiscal Year 2010 Solicitations

I know many of you will be interested to learn that OVW will release solicitations for proposals for Fiscal Year 2010 grant programs beginning mid-December.  All solicitations will be posted on OVW's website: http://www.ovw.usdoj.gov/open-solicitations.htm.  You may subscribe to instant updates on new solicitations by signing up for the EGov Delivery Option: http://www.justice.gov/govdelivery/subscribe.html?code=USDOJ_59.

We also encourage everyone to review carefully "Information for Applicants" in each solicitation which includes the first-ever OVW Grant Program Reference Guide. This important resource includes eligibility requirements for all OVW programs, solicitation timelines, budget caps and project periods, information about how to apply, required application content, grant writing tips, sample budgets, and much more!  Please review the guidebook carefully and thoroughly as you prepare for the 2010 application process.

As 2009 comes to a close and the holidays approach, I want to give thanks to everyone in the field for your efforts every day on behalf of survivors.  It is a joy to do this work with devoted men and women committed to changing the status quo.  In looking forward to December 3rd and 2010, we will continue our efforts until we see a day where men, women, and children are considered sacred in a world without violence.

Happy Thanksgiving and, again, with gratitude,

    Catherine Pierce
    Acting Director



Date of RADAR Release: January 4, 2010

R.A.D.A.R. -- Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting -- is a non-profit, non-partisan organization of men and women working to improve the effectiveness of our nation's approach to solving domestic violence.  http://www.mediaradar.org
   


Copyright (c) 2005-2010. RADAR -- Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

28

Main / RADAR ALERT: Tell the OVW to Obey President Obama's Scientific Integrity Directi

Jan 04, 2010, 10:56 PM

RADAR ALERT: Tell the OVW to Obey President Obama's Scientific Integrity Directive

On March 9, 2009, President Obama issued a directive on scientific integrity http://www.mediaradar.org/docs/ObamaScientificIntegrityMemo.pdf, in which he said:

"The public must be able to trust the science and scientific process informing public policy decisions.  Political officials should not suppress or alter scientific or technological findings and conclusions."

In late November Catherine Pierce, Acting Director of the Office on Violence Against Women published a memo (see below) in which she suppressed all information about victimization of males and all information about perpetration of domestic violence by females.  Pierce's memo was the subject of RADAR's Dec. 2, 2009 press release. (http://www.mediaradar.org/press_release_20091202.php)

In his directive, President Obama also said:

"By this memorandum, I assign to the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy (Director) the responsibility for ensuring the highest level of integrity in all aspects of the executive branch's involvement with scientific and technological processes."

Today, RADAR is asking you to kick off the New Year by notifying Dr. John Holdren, Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, of the violation of scientific integrity by the Acting Director of the OVW and requesting that Dr. Holdren instruct the OVW that under President Obama's scientific integrity policy, any future communication that fails to emphasize the scientific result that women's physical aggression against their husbands and boyfriends is at least equal to that of men constitutes suppression of scientific findings, and thus puts the OVW in violation of President Obama's directive.  Please also send a copy of your letter to Catherine Pierce.

When you contact Dr. Holdren, please emphasize the following points:

 

   
• President Obama's mandate to you is to ensure the highest level of integrity in all aspects of the executive branch's involvement with scientific processes.  The "soft" sciences like sociology and psychology are no less science than the "hard" sciences like physics and chemistry, however it's much easier for the unscrupulous to manipulate research results in the "soft" sciences.
       
  
     
  • Often the manipulation is accomplished via subtle techniques.  Prof. Murray Straus, one of the world's leading family violence researchers, lists the following techniques he's seen used by less-than-honest domestic violence researchers in his paper "Processes Explaining the Concealment and Distortion of Evidence on Gender Symmetry in Partner Violence" (http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/V74-gender-symmetry-with-gramham-Kevan-Method%208-.pdf).
        
    
    
          
    • suppressing evidence,
    
          
    • designing studies so as to avoid obtaining data that will call the desired result into question,
    
          
    • citing only studies that show the desired result,
    
          
    • concluding that results support the desired interpretation when they do not,
    
          
    • creating "evidence" by citation,
    
          
    • obstructing publication of articles and obstructing funding of research that might reach undesired results,
    
          
    • harassing, threatening, and penalizing researchers who produce undesired results
    
        
    
       
  
     
  • Sometimes outright falsification of data occurs, as in the recently reported case of former UC Davis employee Jennifer Beeman who, according to the Sacramento Bee, "grossly inflated the number of forcible sexual offenses in three years of mandatory reports to the federal government." (http://www.sacbee.com/topstories/story/2431619.html) The Sacramento Bee also reports that Beeman claimed hundreds of "incidents of violence against women" in applications for violence prevention grants, and that UC Davis' grant from the Federal Office on Violence Against Women was nearly $1 million for the year 2007 alone. (http://www.sacbee.com/ourregion/story/2290047.html)
  
       
  
     

   
• A huge body of sound scientific research, compiled into an annotated bibliography by California State University Psychology Professor Martin Fiebert, demonstrates that women's physical aggression against their husbands and boyfriends equals or exceeds that of men. (http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm)  Fieberts bibliography includes 271 scholarly investigations with an aggregate sample size exceeding 365,000.


   
• Researchers at the CDC have found that, contrary to popular belief, in half of all couples in which domestic violence occurs, the violence is reciprocal. (http://ajph.aphapublications.org/cgi/content/abstract/97/5/941) Even more surprising to those whose information about domestic violence comes from Hollywood stereotypes, CDC researchers found that among violent couples in which the violence is one-way rather than reciprocal, women were the sole perpetrators in more than 70% of the cases.


   
• Director Pierce's memo announces that the Office on Violence Against Women intends to "to spark a national conversation" about violence against women and focusing only on ways to end violence against women and girls, which she asserts "pervades every community in America".  In the absence of an equally prominent statement that scientific research indicates that women's physical aggression against their husbands and boyfriends is at least equal to that of men, Pierce's memo constitutes a gross violation of Obama's directive that "Political officials should not suppress or alter scientific or technological findings and conclusions," and as a result the public cannot trust the process informing decisions on domestic violence policy.


   
• National policies for dealing with social ills that are based on bad science cause harm to every individual in the country.  Thus, it is imperative that, in carrying out President Obama's mandate, you see to it that social science research and results are held to the same standards of scientific objectivity that you'd apply to any of the hard sciences.

 

The contact information is:

John Holdren, Director

Office of Science and Technology Policy
Executive Office of the President
725 17th Street Room 5228
Washington, DC 20502
Email: [email protected], Patricia McLaughlin, Executive Asst. to Dr. Holdren

Catherine Pierce, Acting Director
Office on Violence Against Women
800 K Street, N.W., Suite 920
Washington, D.C. 20530
Email: [email protected]

OVW Acting Director Pierce's Memo
http://www.ovw.usdoj.gov/director-nov09msg.htm

Dear Friends,

Congratulations on another successful Domestic Violence Awareness Month!  I enjoyed hearing about the many exciting events that took place around the country.  On October 19, the Department of Justice commemorated the month to honor the work of advocates and communities around the country who protect and serve survivors.  Attorney General Eric Holder, Deputy Attorney General David Ogden, and Associate Attorney General Tom Perrelli, and I were joined by representatives from organizations that work to end domestic violence and survivors and advocates who generously shared their stories.  You can view videos from the event on the new Department of Justice Blog: http://blogs.usdoj.gov/blog/archives/category/ovaw.

December 3: It's Time to Talk!

Fifteen years after the Violence Against Women Act was enacted, much has been accomplished, but the work is far from finished. On December 3, Liz Claiborne, Inc. will sponsor It's Time to Talk Day, dedicated to ensuring that Americans speak up about domestic, sexual and teen dating violence and to spark a national conversation about violence against women and teen dating abuse.  The Department of Justice will also dedicate this day to talk about ways to end the violence against women and girls that pervades every community in America. We encourage you to stand with us on December 3 because it's time to talk to our colleagues, friends, and our family. Please let us know if you are planning any events in your community on this day and we will highlight them on our website.  OVW developed a toolkit of resources for the 15th Anniversary of the Violence Against Women Act and the official It's Time to Talk website has additional information.

Fiscal Year 2010 Solicitations

I know many of you will be interested to learn that OVW will release solicitations for proposals for Fiscal Year 2010 grant programs beginning mid-December.  All solicitations will be posted on OVW's website: http://www.ovw.usdoj.gov/open-solicitations.htm.  You may subscribe to instant updates on new solicitations by signing up for the EGov Delivery Option: http://www.justice.gov/govdelivery/subscribe.html?code=USDOJ_59.

We also encourage everyone to review carefully "Information for Applicants" in each solicitation which includes the first-ever OVW Grant Program Reference Guide. This important resource includes eligibility requirements for all OVW programs, solicitation timelines, budget caps and project periods, information about how to apply, required application content, grant writing tips, sample budgets, and much more!  Please review the guidebook carefully and thoroughly as you prepare for the 2010 application process.

As 2009 comes to a close and the holidays approach, I want to give thanks to everyone in the field for your efforts every day on behalf of survivors.  It is a joy to do this work with devoted men and women committed to changing the status quo.  In looking forward to December 3rd and 2010, we will continue our efforts until we see a day where men, women, and children are considered sacred in a world without violence.

Happy Thanksgiving and, again, with gratitude,

    Catherine Pierce
    Acting Director



Date of RADAR Release: January 4, 2010

R.A.D.A.R. -- Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting -- is a non-profit, non-partisan organization of men and women working to improve the effectiveness of our nation's approach to solving domestic violence.  http://www.mediaradar.org
   


Copyright (c) 2005-2010. RADAR -- Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

29

Men and Domestic Violence / RADAR ALERT: Mainstream Media Suppresses Stories Of Violence By Women

Dec 31, 2009, 07:32 AM

RADAR ALERT: Mainstream Media Suppresses Stories Of Violence By Women

When Rhianna hit Chris Brown in the head with her stiletto heels while he was behind the wheel trying not to lose control of the car and Brown overreacted¹, what did mainstream media report?  They showed us Rhianna's injuries, but were totally silent about what part Rhianna's temper played in the altercation.

When Tiger Woods' wife attacked him with a golf club², the mainstream media ignored his wife's violence.  Hardly any of the mainstream media reported that the Florida Highway Patrol described Woods' injuries as "serious".³  Instead they waited for more stories about Woods' affairs to come out so they could spin it as a tale of Woods' infidelities rather than about female-perpetrated domestic violence.

Now we have the case of Mary J. Blige, a woman who purports to be concerned about domestic violence, so much so that she has provided part of the funding for a domestic violence shelter named in her honor⁴.  But her comment, "Women from all walks of life, not just women from poverty-stricken areas," makes it clear that only female victims will be helped by her shelter.  And her actions make it clear that she believes that as a female she enjoys the privilege of using violence whenever any male displeases her.  On Christmas Eve, the New York Post reported that she punched her husband in the face, drawing blood, because she thought he was flirting with a waitress.⁵  How has the rest of the mainstream media covered her hypocrisy?  The silence has been deafening!

Matt over at Mensactivism.org has assembled a list of mainstream media contact information and composed a sample letter.  We urge you to visit http://news.mensactivism.org/node/14488 and respond as the spirit moves you.

Happy New Year everyone!  Here's looking forward to creating a more enlightened world in the coming year.



1 http://poponthepop.com/2009/03/09/tmz-confirms-what-we-already-told-you-rihanna-hit-chris-brown-first

2 http://furmanbisher.wordpress.com/2009/12/26/updated-inside-story-on-tiger-woods

3 http://www.vancouverite.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/woods.jpg

4 http://hiphop.popcrunch.com/mary-j-blige-domestic-violence-shelter-mary-j-blige-center-for-women

5 http://www.nypost.com/p/pagesix/blige_hauls_off_on_husband_o32W7IKFja08UXzRipJiHI



Date of RADAR Release: December 31, 2009

R.A.D.A.R. -- Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting -- is a non-profit, non-partisan organization of men and women working to improve the effectiveness of our nation's approach to solving domestic violence.  http://www.mediaradar.org



Copyright (c) 2005-2009. RADAR -- Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting, Inc.
All Rights Reserved.

30

Main / RADAR ALERT: Mainstream Media Suppresses Stories Of Violence By Women

Dec 31, 2009, 07:32 AM

RADAR ALERT: Mainstream Media Suppresses Stories Of Violence By Women

When Rhianna hit Chris Brown in the head with her stiletto heels while he was behind the wheel trying not to lose control of the car and Brown overreacted¹, what did mainstream media report?  They showed us Rhianna's injuries, but were totally silent about what part Rhianna's temper played in the altercation.

When Tiger Woods' wife attacked him with a golf club², the mainstream media ignored his wife's violence.  Hardly any of the mainstream media reported that the Florida Highway Patrol described Woods' injuries as "serious".³  Instead they waited for more stories about Woods' affairs to come out so they could spin it as a tale of Woods' infidelities rather than about female-perpetrated domestic violence.

Now we have the case of Mary J. Blige, a woman who purports to be concerned about domestic violence, so much so that she has provided part of the funding for a domestic violence shelter named in her honor⁴.  But her comment, "Women from all walks of life, not just women from poverty-stricken areas," makes it clear that only female victims will be helped by her shelter.  And her actions make it clear that she believes that as a female she enjoys the privilege of using violence whenever any male displeases her.  On Christmas Eve, the New York Post reported that she punched her husband in the face, drawing blood, because she thought he was flirting with a waitress.⁵  How has the rest of the mainstream media covered her hypocrisy?  The silence has been deafening!

Matt over at Mensactivism.org has assembled a list of mainstream media contact information and composed a sample letter.  We urge you to visit http://news.mensactivism.org/node/14488 and respond as the spirit moves you.

Happy New Year everyone!  Here's looking forward to creating a more enlightened world in the coming year.



1 http://poponthepop.com/2009/03/09/tmz-confirms-what-we-already-told-you-rihanna-hit-chris-brown-first

2 http://furmanbisher.wordpress.com/2009/12/26/updated-inside-story-on-tiger-woods

3 http://www.vancouverite.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/woods.jpg

4 http://hiphop.popcrunch.com/mary-j-blige-domestic-violence-shelter-mary-j-blige-center-for-women

5 http://www.nypost.com/p/pagesix/blige_hauls_off_on_husband_o32W7IKFja08UXzRipJiHI



Date of RADAR Release: December 31, 2009

R.A.D.A.R. -- Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting -- is a non-profit, non-partisan organization of men and women working to improve the effectiveness of our nation's approach to solving domestic violence.  http://www.mediaradar.org



Copyright (c) 2005-2009. RADAR -- Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting, Inc.
All Rights Reserved.