Nel's Novelties
2004-01-29 21:27:04 UTC
Why No Real Action Concerning Men's Rights?
I have been studying the issues concerning the tremendous gender bias in
family law for a little over a year. Some of the things reported clearly
seem to violate constitutional safeguards such as the Fifth and Fourteenth
Amendments. Yet there appear to be no broad challenges such as class action
suits. The events reported such as debtors prisons for father's that fall
behind in child support payments, restraining orders issued based on hear
say or no evidence at all, men forced to make child support payments for
children DNA proves are not theirs,women allowed to violate visitation
rights without fear of legal sanctions, women allowed to move children away
from their fathers and the list goes on and on... are illegal.
Based on my analysis I believe that there are many more stakeholders,
persons and institutions, that benefit from the current situation than most
people recognize.
How Did It Come To This?
The current situation is based on political concessions given to special
interest groups that could either deliver money or votes to politicians. For
the support of radical women's organizations politicians enacted legislative
measures that ran rough shod over the Bill of Rights and the Constitution
concerning fair treatment of men.
To support their dubious legislation, specially designed surveys and
research was conducted to give the correct answers, that is the answers
needed, to push the legislation. In areas where the bogus studies conflicted
with numerous other studies the words: "... needs more study..." are used to
offer a false sense of credibility and a way out if the methods of the
research and analysis were ever to come to light.
These words "... needs more study..." are frequently used today whenever
statistics or studies present material on woman-on-male violence. These very
words appear more than once in the National Violence Against Women Survey
concerning the reported conflicts with other studies concerning domestic and
lesbian violence findings, for example.
Rewards For Towing The Line
Once the legislation is enacted it required a system of rewards and
sanctions to make the rank and file: judges, prosecutors, and police
officers, enforce it. These reinforcements are in the form of financial
rewards in federal funds available to specifically arrest and prosecute men.
Once the financial rewards were in place sanctions quickly followed as local
governments, ever concerned with revenue, rewarded those that were willing
and able to get this federal funding.
Police officers that arrested only men in domestic violence disputes,
regardless of how flimsy the evidence, are rewarded with higher status and
pay.
Prosecutors that prosecute men in certain areas, fairly or not, received
federal funds. Those that did not, got naught. The legal system became about
the numbers. Prosecutors were judged by their convictions and subsequent
revenue stream -- justice no longer mattered. Evidence was unnecessary and
irrelevant, it could be ignored or falsified. To further help get the
numbers, the prosecution could be dragged out, helped by the federal
funding, to force the victim to plea bargain as his resources were depleted.
Judges just went along with the flow in order to avoid political sanctions.
To further grease the wheels of "justice" provisions were enacted to allow
the man to be stripped of his assets and thereby deny him the resources he
needs to defend himself.
Now the system was self reinforcing with positive feedback in the form of
financial rewards for those that towed the party line.
Now Come The Parasitic Stakeholders
Once the gender biased system was in place it provided a snowball effect in
that arrest and conviction statistics could be used to inflate the apparent
need for domestic nonviolence programs, women's abuse shelters, child
support collection agencies, rape centers, etc.... already established by
legislation and aided by government funds. Then there came to be a virtual
panoply of specialized groups in whose interest it is desirable to keep the
status quo concerning men's rights. Some of the stakeholders are often
ignored or overlooked.
Family law attorneys also benefited from the artificially inflated need for
their services.
District attorneys, as mentioned before, are kept busy and supplied with
funds.
Child support collection consultants and agencies placed themselves into
the money flow and collected their "fair" share, often at the expense of the
children they were suppose to help. In addition, some of these agencies
collected fees from state governments greater than the total collected from
the so-called deadbeat fathers in that state.
Columnist, on the side of men's rights, are constantly fed with injustices
to report. Columnist on the other side of the issue, can critique the men's
rights columnist's articles.
Men's and father's rights groups can begin establishing their support and
power base from the men unfairly treated by the system.
Radical women's groups, on the other hand, that established their power
through establishing the victim mentality, can also point to the bogus
statistics to keep the victim concept alive.
Politicians, always hungry for votes and money, can cater to the radical
women's groups for both. The women's groups get support, in turn, through
government funding that has been provided by the politicians. A you scratch
my back I scratch yours system. Ironically, a percentage of this government
funding was paid for by the taxes of the men that are being prosecuted by a
gender biased system.
The really dangerous part of the equation is that the concessions to the
radical women's groups can never be enough. In order to maintain their power
base they must continually reinforce the perception of women being victims
of men. Therefore, no concessions can ever be enough. Because if all
possible concessions were made, the victim mentality might disappear and,
along with it, the groups power base. So it must be preserved at all costs.
Arguments are made using symbolic language rather than facts to support the
perpetual need for more concessions. This is where a false statement is used
to symbolically represent women's victimization at the hands of the
patriarchy. One example of this is Patricia Ireland's, former head of NOW,
claiming that research supported that many birth defects were due to
physical abuse of pregnant women by men. No such research existed. There are
many more examples of false symbolic statements from the radical women's
groups, too many to cite here.
Keep in mind, that the people most interested in keeping the system as is,
regardless of which side they are on, are those currently profiting with
things just as they are. Could this be why there has been so little, if any,
progress made concerning men's rights?
Suggestions On What Men Need To Do:
Foremost is make the issues concerning men's equal rights visible to the
general public. Unfortunately, most men, most people for that matter, are
unaware how corrupt the system is until they are caught up in it. Although
there are valiant efforts made by some journalist in this area, I think that
the majority of the population is ignorant or complacent concerning this
matter.
Next, a frontal attack needs to be launched. That is class action suits on
behalf of men as a whole need to be funded and executed. And, I'm not
talking about just against the biased legal system. When one of these
hate-mongering radical feminist gets up and spews her lying bile there
should be an international men's organization ready to take her to court. A
precedence should be set where a person can be sued for liable against a
distinct class. I think an argument could be made that these type of
statements are designed to spread hate and deny men of status and their
rights. Moreover, they have no other purpose since these statements only
focus on propagating negative perceptions of men.
Now these efforts will take funding. But men are already paying a heavy
price when you tally up all the groups that are feeding off their misery
directly or indirectly through taxes. At least we could, perhaps, get a
return on our investment and make some real progress in achieving men's
rights.
This entrenched system will be hard to dismantle and left to its own things
will only get worse. Currently men are an excellent source of revenue for
all the stakeholders mentioned. They won't give up easily.
Moreover, if direct action is not taken, I fear the men's movement could
degenerate to the same state as the women's movement, victims of the their
own victim's mentality, where leaders of the group actively work against the
real interest of the group members to preserve their profit and power.
I think we need to ask ourselves, are we really getting anywhere doing what
we are doing now?
I have been studying the issues concerning the tremendous gender bias in
family law for a little over a year. Some of the things reported clearly
seem to violate constitutional safeguards such as the Fifth and Fourteenth
Amendments. Yet there appear to be no broad challenges such as class action
suits. The events reported such as debtors prisons for father's that fall
behind in child support payments, restraining orders issued based on hear
say or no evidence at all, men forced to make child support payments for
children DNA proves are not theirs,women allowed to violate visitation
rights without fear of legal sanctions, women allowed to move children away
from their fathers and the list goes on and on... are illegal.
Based on my analysis I believe that there are many more stakeholders,
persons and institutions, that benefit from the current situation than most
people recognize.
How Did It Come To This?
The current situation is based on political concessions given to special
interest groups that could either deliver money or votes to politicians. For
the support of radical women's organizations politicians enacted legislative
measures that ran rough shod over the Bill of Rights and the Constitution
concerning fair treatment of men.
To support their dubious legislation, specially designed surveys and
research was conducted to give the correct answers, that is the answers
needed, to push the legislation. In areas where the bogus studies conflicted
with numerous other studies the words: "... needs more study..." are used to
offer a false sense of credibility and a way out if the methods of the
research and analysis were ever to come to light.
These words "... needs more study..." are frequently used today whenever
statistics or studies present material on woman-on-male violence. These very
words appear more than once in the National Violence Against Women Survey
concerning the reported conflicts with other studies concerning domestic and
lesbian violence findings, for example.
Rewards For Towing The Line
Once the legislation is enacted it required a system of rewards and
sanctions to make the rank and file: judges, prosecutors, and police
officers, enforce it. These reinforcements are in the form of financial
rewards in federal funds available to specifically arrest and prosecute men.
Once the financial rewards were in place sanctions quickly followed as local
governments, ever concerned with revenue, rewarded those that were willing
and able to get this federal funding.
Police officers that arrested only men in domestic violence disputes,
regardless of how flimsy the evidence, are rewarded with higher status and
pay.
Prosecutors that prosecute men in certain areas, fairly or not, received
federal funds. Those that did not, got naught. The legal system became about
the numbers. Prosecutors were judged by their convictions and subsequent
revenue stream -- justice no longer mattered. Evidence was unnecessary and
irrelevant, it could be ignored or falsified. To further help get the
numbers, the prosecution could be dragged out, helped by the federal
funding, to force the victim to plea bargain as his resources were depleted.
Judges just went along with the flow in order to avoid political sanctions.
To further grease the wheels of "justice" provisions were enacted to allow
the man to be stripped of his assets and thereby deny him the resources he
needs to defend himself.
Now the system was self reinforcing with positive feedback in the form of
financial rewards for those that towed the party line.
Now Come The Parasitic Stakeholders
Once the gender biased system was in place it provided a snowball effect in
that arrest and conviction statistics could be used to inflate the apparent
need for domestic nonviolence programs, women's abuse shelters, child
support collection agencies, rape centers, etc.... already established by
legislation and aided by government funds. Then there came to be a virtual
panoply of specialized groups in whose interest it is desirable to keep the
status quo concerning men's rights. Some of the stakeholders are often
ignored or overlooked.
Family law attorneys also benefited from the artificially inflated need for
their services.
District attorneys, as mentioned before, are kept busy and supplied with
funds.
Child support collection consultants and agencies placed themselves into
the money flow and collected their "fair" share, often at the expense of the
children they were suppose to help. In addition, some of these agencies
collected fees from state governments greater than the total collected from
the so-called deadbeat fathers in that state.
Columnist, on the side of men's rights, are constantly fed with injustices
to report. Columnist on the other side of the issue, can critique the men's
rights columnist's articles.
Men's and father's rights groups can begin establishing their support and
power base from the men unfairly treated by the system.
Radical women's groups, on the other hand, that established their power
through establishing the victim mentality, can also point to the bogus
statistics to keep the victim concept alive.
Politicians, always hungry for votes and money, can cater to the radical
women's groups for both. The women's groups get support, in turn, through
government funding that has been provided by the politicians. A you scratch
my back I scratch yours system. Ironically, a percentage of this government
funding was paid for by the taxes of the men that are being prosecuted by a
gender biased system.
The really dangerous part of the equation is that the concessions to the
radical women's groups can never be enough. In order to maintain their power
base they must continually reinforce the perception of women being victims
of men. Therefore, no concessions can ever be enough. Because if all
possible concessions were made, the victim mentality might disappear and,
along with it, the groups power base. So it must be preserved at all costs.
Arguments are made using symbolic language rather than facts to support the
perpetual need for more concessions. This is where a false statement is used
to symbolically represent women's victimization at the hands of the
patriarchy. One example of this is Patricia Ireland's, former head of NOW,
claiming that research supported that many birth defects were due to
physical abuse of pregnant women by men. No such research existed. There are
many more examples of false symbolic statements from the radical women's
groups, too many to cite here.
Keep in mind, that the people most interested in keeping the system as is,
regardless of which side they are on, are those currently profiting with
things just as they are. Could this be why there has been so little, if any,
progress made concerning men's rights?
Suggestions On What Men Need To Do:
Foremost is make the issues concerning men's equal rights visible to the
general public. Unfortunately, most men, most people for that matter, are
unaware how corrupt the system is until they are caught up in it. Although
there are valiant efforts made by some journalist in this area, I think that
the majority of the population is ignorant or complacent concerning this
matter.
Next, a frontal attack needs to be launched. That is class action suits on
behalf of men as a whole need to be funded and executed. And, I'm not
talking about just against the biased legal system. When one of these
hate-mongering radical feminist gets up and spews her lying bile there
should be an international men's organization ready to take her to court. A
precedence should be set where a person can be sued for liable against a
distinct class. I think an argument could be made that these type of
statements are designed to spread hate and deny men of status and their
rights. Moreover, they have no other purpose since these statements only
focus on propagating negative perceptions of men.
Now these efforts will take funding. But men are already paying a heavy
price when you tally up all the groups that are feeding off their misery
directly or indirectly through taxes. At least we could, perhaps, get a
return on our investment and make some real progress in achieving men's
rights.
This entrenched system will be hard to dismantle and left to its own things
will only get worse. Currently men are an excellent source of revenue for
all the stakeholders mentioned. They won't give up easily.
Moreover, if direct action is not taken, I fear the men's movement could
degenerate to the same state as the women's movement, victims of the their
own victim's mentality, where leaders of the group actively work against the
real interest of the group members to preserve their profit and power.
I think we need to ask ourselves, are we really getting anywhere doing what
we are doing now?
--
Nel's Novelties
Novelty Products Promoting Men's Rights
Web Site: http://www.cafeshops.com/nelsnovelties
Email: ***@comcast.net
--
Nel's Novelties
Novelty Products Promoting Men's Rights
Web Site: http://www.cafeshops.com/nelsnovelties
Email: ***@comcast.net
--