Friday, December 30, 2011

Let's take a look at right wing feminism

Right wing feminism is just as highly misandric as its leftist counterpart is. Let's look at Concerned Women For America,on its homepage is a link to the Beverly Lahaye Institute. What does this organization advocate? Well,john school for one:click here. They are anti-porn as well as other things:click here. The best way to sum them up is "anti-male". They are just as anti-male as their leftist sisters are.

Bachmann plays the gender card

A couple of nights ago I was watching The Factor,O'Reilly was out so there was a guest host. They did an interview with GOP presidential candidate Senator Michele Bachmann (Minn.) in which she states that the nation needs a strong woman to lead and she even compared herself to former Prime Minister Margret Thatcher.  Does this mean that if she is elected she will snub the British,trivilizing their concerns like Thatcher did to us when we wanted to go into Grenada? Bachmann did a Palin move,positioning herself as a right wing feminist. This is a move that could come around to hurt her,just as Palin lost male support the same thing will happen to Bachmann.  Bachmann is even supported by the Concerned Women of America or CWA which just the right wing version of NOW. CWA's chairwoman Penny Nance joined with Bill Bennett,author of the highly misndric book,The Book of Man.

Nance made the following statement to shame men who refuse to be disposable puppets and cannon fodder for bitches like her and mangina sell outs like Bennett. Here is what she said:

This dismissal is easy to evaluate. Penny Nance – the CEO of “Concerned Women of America” said in an interview on Fox News “ Concerned women for America is the nation’s largest public policy organization and we love men. We support men and we’re rooting for them – we think they’re an essential part of the American family. However we want them to feel the pressure to achieve , to put down the remote, to go find a job, to get their education, to build their faith and character” (emphasis mine) … “so walk away from the remote and get busy guys.”

As told by John The Other

Source: click here

In another embarassment to the Bachmann camp one of her staff members defected to the Ron Paul camp,a male staff member,he probably sensed the approaching misandry and left. I don't blame him as I would have too.

When you voting in caucusses and primaries it would be in men's best interest to remember the CWA/Bachmann conncection and voting against it would be in everyman's best interest.

Saturday, December 24, 2011

Fight for the future by opposing censorship today

I received this from Fight For The Future:

Happy Holidays -- we have some great news to share.

We've just won two huge battles in the fight against Internet censorship -- everything you are doing is working! First off, the House of Representatives failed to move SOPA out of committee! Why? Because their offices got swamped with phone calls and overwhelmed by the snowballing opposition. Thank you for helping make that happen.
Second, in response to the boycott of GoDaddy, the web hosting company just made a public announcement that it's dropping its support of SOPA. Amazing what you have made happen.
Please join us in holding GoDaddy accountable, until they drop any and all efforts to support not just SOPA, but also its Senate cousin, PIPA. The boycott already worked to get GoDaddy to change their position on SOPA, now we urgently need to hear from GoDaddy about PIPA too.
So what's next?
The PIPA bill is still alive and strong in the Senate, and could be voted on in January. Like SOPA, it threatens free speech, innovation, and the basic structure of the Internet.
Thank you for all that you do -- it is working!
Tiffiniy & Phil
Fight for the Future
P.S. Please use these links to ask your friends to hit GoDaddy where it hurts, by pledging to join the boycott too:

Fight For The Future:click here

Sounds like something we can all do and that is stand up to censorship by saying no to companies that engage or encourage it. Do you want to be told when to talk,whom to talk to or what you are allowed to hear? Do you like the idea of someone else deciding what's best for you? If not then get on board today by signing that petition.

We won

The protest against Verizon is over,we won. Under pressure Verizon conceded and removed the anti-male message from their Verizon Foundation website. The protest was successful because all of us,especially those front soldier protestors,were willing to get in Verizon's face and tell them that we are opposed to their misandry. This is proof that men's issues are viable politically and that standing together we can accomplish great things. Don't let anyone tell you different. If they do they are either misinformed or worse,lying to you.

Wednesday, December 21, 2011

From Agent Orange

Agent Orange files released

December 21, 2011
Robert O'Hara
Featured, News Updates Agent Orange files released

Washington December 21, (AVfM News) Today the files collected by Agent Orange, an MRA who infiltrated a private forum on the Radfem Hub website have been released to the public.

Since AVFM, Antimisandry and What Men are Saying About Women released stories regarding the leaking of threads at Radfem Hub and subsequently the identification of many of the posters readers, both feminists and MRAs alike, have been anxiously awaiting the promised complete files of screen shots and associated materials collected by Agent Orange. Shortly after the news broke Reddit was on fire with comments in a thread called “mensrights announces their plan to release the private information of RadFem Hub posters,” in which Radfem sympathizers accused Agent Orange of enticing terrorism and violence against the Radfem Hub posters by releasing their personal information.

There have even been threats to get the FBI involved even though there is nothing personal about a Facebook or Linkedin profiles. To date, AVFM has not been contacted by the FBI or any other law enforcement agency.

Radfem Hub and other major sources for feminist news and commentary have remained curiously silent on the matter. There is no mention of the release either on Radfem, Jezebel, Feministe or Feministing as might have been expected considering the comments on Reddit. It is assumed, however that much attention has been paid amongst the feminist community to this story and its developments.

With the publication of the Radfem Data it is expected that more identities will be revealed and also that MRAs and other interested parties in the broader press will write about the postings and the implications for the public perception of feminism.

Here is the link for all the published data:

Agent Orange Files

Source:click here

Sexual abuse by women

male victim of female sexual violence

Teenage girls who admit to sexually abusing others are more likely to indulge in victim-blaming and to be preoccupied by sex than their peers who aren’t sexual offenders, a new study finds.

The findings are similar to what is seen in men, researchers report in the December issue of The Journal of Sexual Medicine.

Female sex offenders are less common than male sex offenders, but women who sexually abuse are under-studied, said lead researcher Cecilia Kjellgren of the department of child and adolescent psychiatry at Lund University.

"People have a tendency to neglect the fact of females who sexually offend," Kjellgren told LiveScience. "Young people who have been sexually abused by a female, they don't get the same attention." [6 Gender Myths Busted]

Studying sexual offenses

Kjellgren and her colleagues wanted to move beyond the small, clinical samples of female sexual offenders that have been the main source of information about this group. In 2003 and 2004, they surveyed third-year high-school students in cities in Norway and Sweden, gathering anonymous responses from 5,059 young women between the ages of 17 and 20.

The students completed the surveys during school hours, answering questions about alcohol consumption, drug use, sexual behavior, their relationships with their parents and certain attitudes, including their acceptance of gender stereotypes and their belief in "rape myths." Rape myths are common but false beliefs about rape, Kjellgren said, such as "many guys think sex is more exciting if the girl resists his advances," and "a girl who follows a guy home after the first date implies that she is willing to have sex."

The students also reported whether they had "ever talked someone into, used pressure or forced somebody to masturbate them, have oral or anal sex, or sexual intercourse." This was defined as coercive sex, which falls under the umbrella of sexual abuse. Gender of the victim was not specified.

Sexual coercion

Of the 4,363 female students who completed enough of the survey to be included in the study, 0.8 percent admitted to coercing someone into sexual activity. Only the Swedish data allowed a gender-to-gender comparison, Kjellgren said. In the Swedish subset, of the 124 students who said they'd coerced someone sexually, 23 were female and 101 were male.

Among those teens, "females constitute one-fifth of the total of sexually coercive young people," Kjellgren said. That number was higher than seen in studies on sexual abuse incidents reported to the police or social services, she said, where women make up about 1 percent of sex offenders.

"It's really a small tip of the iceberg that is reported to authorities," Kjellgren said.

The researchers compared the characteristics of the sex offender females with those of girls who had nonsexual behavior problems, such as aggressive behavior, to find out whether there were any risk factors specific to sex offenses. Several turned up.

For both young men and women, those who reported more preoccupation with sex and sexual thoughts were more likely to have coerced someone sexually, the researchers found. Another risk factor was acceptance of rape myths — even though those myths typically cast men as aggressors and women as victims. Kjellgren suspects that the victim-blaming inherent in these myths helps justify sexual coercion no matter the genders.

"When you do something wrong, you turn to excuses," she said. "Those rape myths work for you in a sense. They help you find excuses."

Violent pornography

Having friends who watched a lot of violent pornography was also associated with being a female sex offender, Kjellgren found, though the girls' own rates of watching violent porn was not. That could be because the girls are hiding their own porn-viewing habits under the veil of their friends, Kjellgren said.

"It's easier to tell on the questionnaire when it comes to friends, not to yourself," she said.

The study doesn't prove, however, that violent porn in a social circle causes sexual assault, as there are too many variables to be sure of such a connection. For one thing, porn-watching was common across all young people, Kjellgren said, not just behaviorally troubled youth.

"It could be different factors all influenced by each other," she said. "To watch a lot of porn, that could get you sexually occupied, or you could be very sexually occupied and you turn to lots of porn."

Sexual abusers also reported worse parental care, more aggression and alcohol consumption and more sexual partners than teens who didn't show any behavioral issues. They had also been victims of sexual assault themselves more frequently. However, sexually abusive teens did not show higher level of any of these factors than non-sexually abusive but otherwise troubled teenagers, so these risk factors were not specific to sexual abuse.

Kjellgren said that while the studies were on Scandinavian teens, she would expect to see similar results in other countries. Two U.S. surveys in 1996 and 1997 found that 0.8 percent and 1.3 percent of female ninth- and 12th-grade girls had ever forced someone to have sex.

The estimates in this study are likely conservative, Kjellgren said, as about 10 percent of Swedish youth have dropped out of school by the third year of high school. That's a relatively small drop-out rate compared with other nations, she said, but the 10 percent of kids who do drop out — and thus weren't included in this survey — are more likely to be troubled, and are more likely to be both victims and perpetrators of sexual abuse.

"I think this study just encourages us in Sweden and in other parts of the world to do further research on young people who sexually offend," Kjellgren said. "For a few individuals, this can be a starting point for being abusive more than once in life."

You can follow LiveScience senior writer Stephanie Pappas on Twitter @sipappas.Follow LiveScience for the latest in science news and discoveries on Twitter @livescience and on Facebook.

Source:click here

It seems that women have become what they despised in men. What was it that feminist groups demanded from male rapists,that a certain type of operation be peformed so they can't do this again? Well if it's good enough for men then it's good enough for women. Women demanded equality and here it is,enjoy.

Tuesday, December 20, 2011

Canadian MRA stands up to misandrists

Earl Silverman with former Alberta Premier Ed Stalmach

Men’s abuse advocate takes lack of Alberta resources for victims to Human Rights Commission

Earl Silverman says abuse by women deserves greater recognition

Earl Silverman, seen here with former Alberta Premier Ed Stelmach, says he suffered physical abuse during marriage.

By Christopher Walsh, editor

The province has ignored male victims of domestic violence and does not provide adequate resources for men looking to escape violent domestic situations, says a men’s rights advocate who’s heading to court to fight the issue.

Earl Silverman, who first launched a complaint against the province with the Human Rights Commission back in 2006, will appear before a judge at a judicial review Wednesday at 10 a.m. in Calgary Court of Queen’s Bench to hear if his complaint will come before the commission.

“All I know is there are male victims of domestic violence,” said Silverman. “There are not the same support services available to men as there are for women.

“We have explored the needs of women for such a long time, at the expense of ignoring men. At what point do we say we can put that on hold and start looking at men now?”

Silverman himself is a male victim of female perpetrated domestic violence, finally forced to leave his wife 20 years ago to get away from the abuse. Since that time, Silverman has started a helpline for men because there were no similar resources at the time and a few years ago, he opened the Men’s Alternative Safe House or MASH, to give men a shelter to escape violent domestic situations. Neither operation has been recognized by the provincial government to date.

The issue of male victims of domestic violence is still one of those dirty, little secrets amongst polite society, Silverman says.

“Men are not really provided with an option of asking for help,” he said. “Number one, men are not victims. Victim is sort of reserved for women. I want men to be recognized …[The groups involved] don’t want to admit there’s a problem. ”

Andrea Silverstone, co-chair of the Calgary Domestic Violence Committee and director of Peer Support Services for Abused Women, says while recent Statistics Canada numbers show only a .4 per cent difference in the perpetration of domestic violence between men and women, the actual day-to-day dealing of male victims remains quite low.

“Probably about 92 to 93 per cent of my practice are women who have experienced domestic violence and about 7 to 8 per cent are men who have experienced domestic violence. It definitely is a stark contrast,” Silverstone said.

“I’m not saying it’s not an issue. It’s for sure an issue, it’s just not an issue to the same degree that women claim family violence is an issue, or there’s not the same amount of men who need those supports and resources. But I’m saying for the number of men who need those supports and resources, I think that there is adequate resources in Calgary.”

Aaron Korneychuk, the interim male domestic abuse coordinator with the Calgary Counselling Centre says from what he’s seen, 20 per cent of all domestic abuse cases the centre handles involve male victims.

“But that’s not including unreported cases that I think increases the numbers on both sides for male and female victims,” he said. “It’s a big enough issue that needs more attention brought to it.”

Korneychuk added part of the problem with male victims of domestic violence is the social stigma men feel for admitting they have been assaulted.

“A lot of people don’t come out and say I’m a male victim…. I do think that there are men out there who are in abusive situations and they’re not getting the services they need,” he said. “Whether that could be from shame, from guilt, from just not thinking that there’s any services out there. The more men that come forward, the more that we’re gonna be able to expand these services.”

A spokeswoman with Alberta Human Services would not comment on the upcoming court case, but says there are now services for men to access if they find themselves in violent domestic situations.

“We certainly believe they need to access services just the same as any other victim,” said Christina Bruce. “We need to be providing that support, absolutely. And we do have a number of [services].”

Those services include a provincially-mandated helpline for all victims of domestic violence, online and print resources and a family violence facility in Strathmore that does permit men to take a bed in the co-ed shelter.

Bruce says the province’s statistics show a “fairly close” rate of female to male perpetrators of domestic violence.

“It is an emerging issue for sure and something that’s coming to light,” she said.

“There’s a bed for men but that’s only if a woman isn’t using it,” Silverman said. “There aren’t the support services there that are available to women. They are putting the processes together according to their previous agenda which is only to support women.”

Silverman added he has not seen much movement by the province or local service groups to fully address the ‘emerging issue’ of male victims of domestic violence.

“If that was so, I would imagine that Alberta Children’s Services would, rather than go to the judicial review and argue against me, they would say OK we agree. I have not seen any movement on the issue.”

Silverman’s first complaint to the Alberta Human Rights Commission was rejected and his subsequent appeal to the commissioner was denied in a written response, stating there was no demonstrative need for more services for abused men.

The judicial review on Wednesday will examine the facts of the case and determine how the commission came to their conclusion to deny hearing Silverman’s complaint.

“There are services, but it’s nowhere near as comprehensive as what the women’s shelters provide women,” Silverman said. “They may have one or two services, but that is not demonstrative of what men’s needs are. They don’t know what men’s needs are.

“They say they have support services, which is different than treatment. Treatment typically is anger management. They need support, whatever that may look like. And that’s not available for them right now. Men do it in a different way than women do it but it’s been put together all by women.”

Source:click here

Let's all wish Earl the best of luck and kick those feminazi's asses. I hope Earl is going to bring a can of whip-ass to cause a little damage. Hell,bring a case to make sure they stay down. Go Earl.

Congress is pulling a fast one

I received the following from Demand Progress:

Some annoying news: As was widely reported last Friday, all indications were that the House Judiciary Committee would delay its vote on SOPA for a few weeks. Now it looks like they might vote this week, if Congress stays in session:

PCMAG: "SOPA vote might happen this week after all"

ACTIVIST POST: "Congress tries to pull a fast one"

You've all been amazing as we've worked to spread word about SOPA, convinced more and more lawmakers to oppose it, and dragged out the hearing for a week -- that's pretty much unheard of.

But we need to ask you to pick up the phone once more:

Will you call Speaker of the House John Boehner and Majority Leader Eric Cantor and ask them to reign in Judiciary Chairman Lamar Smith?

Speaker John Boehner: (202) 225-6205 (Email Contact)

Majority Leader Eric Cantor: (202) 225-2815 (Email Contact)

Please be polite, but firm. You can work off of this script:

I'm calling because Judiciary Chairman Lamar Smith is pushing the Stop Online Piracy Act even though it will kill jobs, undermine cybersecurity, stifle free speech, and give comfort to totalitarian regimes that want to censor the Internet. And they're doing it all to prop up a few Hollywood bigwigs.

His hearings are turning into a circus that's embarrassing for our country and for the House of Representatives. Please ask him to back down and hold real hearings on this legislation before rushing it through his committee.

These powerful leaders control what will be voted on by the full House, and we need to put them on notice.

And you can use these links to ask your friends to join the effort and email and call their lawmakers about the Internet censorship bills, or just ask them to visit

The price of freedom is eternal vigilance and when needed activism. We'll we need the activism part right now so call and/or send email to the above to rein in Lamar Smith and his evil quest to censor the net.


Received the following from Damand Progress:

That was close -- after threatening to hold a vote this week, the House Judiciary Committee just cancelled tomorrow's hearing on SOPA!

WASHINGTON POST: The House Judiciary Committee confirmed Tuesday that it will delay continuing debate on the Stop Online Piracy Act until after Congress returns from its winter recess.

In January of one year ago it looked like Internet censorship legislation could pass in a matter of months. But then Demand Progress members stepped in: We've pushed the legislation back a full year, and now it's on the ropes.

Demand Progress is doing everything in our power to make sure that our members' voices are heard in the halls of power.

We've organized press conferences on Capitol Hill, hosted policy briefings. We've delivered countless petitions to Congress, and met with the White House as they consider whether to oppose SOPA and its Senate cousin, the PROTECT IP Act.

We've repeatedly been slammed by the Chamber of Commerce, the Motion Picture Assocaition of America, and other censorship proponents -- proving the importance of our work and the righteousness of our cause.

Most importantly, we've driven hundreds of thousands of constituent contacts to Congress -- And helped lead an unprecedented coalition of activist groups, websites, and tech firms which together have helped more than 3 million people send anti-censorship emails and make anti-censorship phone calls to Congress and the White House.

But the fight isn't over yet: The Senate is still threatening to hold a vote in January, and we need to make sure we're in a position to keep pushing back. We've proved that our voices make a real difference, but we can't afford to let up one bit.

Thanks so so much,

The Demand Progress team

PS: We know we've been sending a ton of emails over the last few weeks -- we promise it'll calm down a bit over the next couple of weeks, now that the most immediate threat is behind us.

No problem because as I have said before the price of freedom is eternal vigilance. I'd rather do this than have someone else decide what I can and cannot view or listen too. Maybe as a child I had others make my decisions for me but as an adult I'll be damned if I'll let that happen.

Press coverage of the Verizon protest

The Verizon Protestors:ACTIVISTS among activists

The following is from the Santa Monica Daily Press:

About a week ago I received an invitation to a protest. Seems like I'm getting more invites to protests than parties this year, what with the Occupy hordes trying to get more people involved in various events. I find it ironic that now in my mid-40s, a time when I'm supposed to be driving a Corvette and dating 20-year-olds, I'm being asked to participate in the types of events that I skipped in my 20s.

One of the invitations I received was from Marc Angelucci, vice president of the National Coalition For Men. He was organizing an action Saturday in front of the Verizon store located at the corner of Wilshire Boulevard and 16th Street. This was not some protest about the outrageous and deceitful sales tactics of a corporation — well, actually it kind of was. Verizon, in conjunction with the National Domestic Violence Hotline, produced an outrageous and deceitful video about domestic violence.

Domestic violence is a major hot topic. Emotions run exceedingly high, and people on all sides of the issue have very strong, deeply entrenched opinions about the causes, the treatments, and the ongoing damage it does to families, especially children.

I come from a family where there was a lot of domestic violence. As I like to say, the "Friday Night Fights" in our house were actually in our house. If the laws then were like they were today, I'm pretty certain I would have grown up in foster care, as more and more children do today.

So when the invite came from the National Coalition For Men to attend a protest "against Verizon's sexist, anti-father ads that depict all domestic violence as committed by men and fathers against women, and that says among children who witness it, the girls grow up to be victims while the boys grow up to be abusers," I had to attend.

What I found was a group of nine men, two boys and two women of mixed races and religions, who were holding signs that read "Stop Denying Domestic Violence Batters Men" and "Verizon Vilifies Fathers" and "Why Wont The Domestic Violence Industry Recognize Women Who Batter Men?" and "Honk 4 Dad's Rights" — which caused a ton of supportive honking, even by a Verizon FiOS van!

One of the protesters had a copy of the video on his iPhone and I was able to watch the ad. In it the stereotypes of an abusive father and victim mother and child were portrayed in an artsy, animated manner that would be very attractive to young, impressionable children's minds. I was appalled when I watched it because of its portrayal of the cycle of violence. Woman/girl as victim and man/boy as abuser.

The utter lack of balance, of an acknowledgment that women can be abusers also, saddened me because I grew up in a house where the woman was as much as an aggressor as the man. I know from personal experience that a woman is just as capable of domestic violence. I learned how to knife fight from my mom, not my dad. I learned how to shred a person's ego not in law school but from listening to my mom do it to my father. She would regularly call him a coward, then berate him when he got physical with her. It was a no-win situation. She would taunt and terrorize him and then fall back on her status as a woman as why he should not defend himself.

I regularly see the same thing today in my family law practice. Men who have been taunted and terrorized by their wives or girlfriends to the point of breaking, and when they eventually do, they are considered to be the abuser. If I say, "it is their own fault," most people agree with me, "a man should never hit a woman," but few are those who will stop and reconsider their logic, and realize that it is a form of "blaming the victim" when I say that. If a man has been pushed to the point of abuse, then he is the first victim in an abusive relationship. It's just that the abuse a woman perpetrates often leaves no visible marks.

Men are rarely considered to be victims in abusive households yet the Domestic Violence Protection Act considers "disturbing the peace" of the other occupant as a basis for a restraining order removing someone from their house with almost no notice. Which is how abusive women start with men, because men are likely to "just take it" or risk being called a coward by others, especially the police, who regularly ignore the pleas of men for help because they are not bleeding.

Most shelters wouldn't take men, which is why the coalition states in their press release they "had to sue the state of California for its widespread discrimination against male victims." The lawsuit resulted in an appellate decision holding that "domestic violence is a serious problem for both women and men," that excluding male victims "carries with it the baggage of sexual stereotypes," and that it is unconstitutional to exclude male victims of domestic violence from the statutory funding provisions or from state-funded services.

I applaud the coalition for their protest on Saturday and for forcing Verizon and the National Domestic Violence Hotline to remove a damaging video, and shedding light on a topic that too few people want to discuss honestly and openly.

David Pisarra is a family law attorney focusing on father's rights and men's Issues in the Santa Monica firm of Pisarra & Grist. He can be reached at or (310) 664-9969.

I'm glad the media is covering our issues and in helping getting them out there. Hats off to the Santa Monica Daily Press for covering this and publishing it.

More from Save Services

Earlier this month SAVE learned about the Verizon Foundation's Monster video, which only portrayed men and boys as abusive monsters, and only women and girls as victims.

Persons got mad, got up, and took action. Thousands of persons wrote emails, sent impassioned letters, and made phone calls. Some distributed flyers at Verizon stores or organized demonstrations.

Our efforts paid off...Verizon removed the video!

But the Verizon Foundation still features false DV information on its website. Verizon still has egg on its face:

But we need to give credit where credit is due. Congratulations to all for contributing to our Verizon Video Victory!



Teri Stoddard, Program Director
Stop Abusive and Violent Environments

This is good news,great work everyone especially those that went to the stores and handed out flyers. For those of you who were there in person you have the respect of all because you are our front line soldiers who are the true heroes in this fight.

Saturday, December 17, 2011

The Verizon protest continues

From Edward Bartlett of Save Services at Men's Issues Online:

We're now half-way through our 7 days of the Most Massive Protest our Movement has Ever Staged.

Events have been staged in Florida, New York, California, Maryland, Wisconsin, and elsewhere. So grab your Santa hat and a handful of flyers -- click here -- and head out to your local Verizon store.

Be sure to take a couple photos on your smart-phone and email them to so we can post them here.

This is the last weekend before the Christmas holidays…the weather is going to be good in most parts of the country….let's do it for our kids!

This is great and if you are able to get to a Verizon store and protest their bigoted stance against men then by all means print out a few flyers and pass them around as well. If you are Verizon customer you may want to send in a flyer when you make your payments,that'll probably get their attention too.

Friday, December 16, 2011

Fighting back against PROTECT IP

I received this from Demand Progress:

Huge Victory In House -- Let's Slam The Senate

Holy moly. We did it -- at least for now. The House Judiciary Committee looked certain to vote for the Stop Online Piracy Act today. Instead, because of the work of so many rank-and-file Internet users, the bill's lead sponsor acknowledged that our concerns are legitimate, and adjourned the committee without holding a vote!

Here's Wired's take:

The House Judiciary Committee considering whether to send the Stop Online Piracy Act to the House floor abruptly adjourned Friday with no new vote date set – a surprise given that the bill looked certain to pass out of committee today.

It's amazing work: Politicians are, for the first time, having to contend with the Internet as a political force -- and we might actually win.

But now we need to focus attention back on the Senate, where Marjority Leader Harry Reid says the PROTECT IP Act will be the first bill he calls for a vote next year.

Will you let him and your Senators know that they need to stop pushing this legislation? It's an election year, and they don't want to do any heavy lifting. Pushing hard now could get them to back down altogether.

Just fill out the form at right to email Reid and your Senators.

This is great news and it shows we've made great strides but there is more work to do and we can do it so if internet freedom is something you love send those emails today.

Thursday, December 15, 2011

More on Verizon

Thanks to all of your calls, emails, and protests across the country, Verizon has taken down the Monster video. The gender-biased video portrayed men as abusive monsters, boys as potential abusive monsters, and only women and girls as victims.

Activists across the United States and Canada went to their local Verizon stores to raise awareness about the video. Read about one California protest here: click here

Unfortunately, Verizon remains a hotbed of gender-biased misinformation, such as its Pinocchio-like claim that 'domestic violence is the single greatest cause of injury to women ages 15-44': click here

We are asking on you to continue to call, email and protest at Verizon stores until this information is replaced with balanced information.

Print out copies of the new flyer: click here. Then pass it out to customers as they enter the store, and make sure you give one to the manager and other store employees.



Teri Stoddard, Program Director

Stop Abusive and Violent Environments

Save Services

A regular reader of this blog and Verizon customer told me he was going to print out the flyer and send it in with his payment. Let's see what happens.

SOPA going down to the wire

I received the following from Demand Progress:

Want a window into the minds of our opponents? Former Senator Chris Dodd -- head of the Motion Picture Association of America -- says that China censors its Internet, so we can too:

"When the Chinese told Google that they had to block sites or they couldn't do [business] in their country, they managed to figure out how to block sites."

These are the voices our lawmakers listen to. If we're going to win, we need to drown them out before TOMORROW's committee vote on SOPA.

Our goals for the week are one call per congressmember per minute -- and one million emails: Please click here to make a call or send an email, or do both right away -- it'll really only take a couple of minutes.

It's do-or-die time: The House Judiciary Committee will likely pass the Stop Online Piracy Act TOMORROW, Thursday. Once the bill moves out of committee, the House can pass it at any time.

If you've already made a call, please use our "censor anything" tool to urge your friends to contact Congress:

We want to make sure people understand what the Internet could be like if SOPA passes, so we're asking millions of people to protest censorship as part of our #CensorshipEverywhere campaign -- use our tool to censor parts of your own posts to Facebook, Twitter, blogs, and anything and everything else.

To uncensor it, your friends will need to contact their lawmakers and ask them to oppose SOPA.

The most important thing this week is that EVERYONE join the protests in some way. If all of us drive our audiences to make phone calls, we're unstoppable. We need to jam Congress's inboxes and melt their phone lines if we're going to stop SOPA.

Let's make those calls and/or write those emails to preserve our internet freedoms. I'm not a big fan of the Chinese government and I don't believe we need to emulated them. If you feel the same way call and/or email today.

Tuesday, December 13, 2011

Don't sacrifice your rights for the war on terror

I received this from Campaign For Liberty:

You and I both know that freedom is not free. Its price cannot be measured in dollars - and its defense requires eternal vigilance.

On December 1, the U.S. Senate passed S. 1867, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), by a vote of 93-7.

A slightly different NDAA, H.R. 1540, had already passed the U.S. House in May, and it has been reconciled with the Senate version in a closed session of a Joint Conference Committee.

The NDAA is passed annually to specify the budget and expenditures for the U.S. Department of Defense, but this year's version would essentially strip American Citizens of due process - protections that used to set us apart from despotic nations.

The Senate version of the NDAA declares the homeland to be part of the battlefield in the "War on Terror."

In simple terms, Sections 1031 and 1032 of S. 1867 allow American citizens to be detained indefinitely - without charges or trial - until the War on Terror is declared over.

There has been some recent confusion over what exactly the Senate bill actually stipulates.

In fact, when you call your representative and BOTH of your senators, as I'm about to ask you to do, the staff will probably give you one of two canned responses:

1.) "The Feinstein amendment #1456, which passed on Dec. 1 (by a vote of 99-1), says that no provision of Sec. 1031 can be taken to "affect existing law or authorities, relating to the detention of United States citizens."

In reality, this was added nearly unanimously at the last minute to appease those of us rightly opposed to these detention provisions. In the Congressional Record that day, there are arguments from Senators Lindsey Graham and Carl Levin, both of whom supported this amendment, stating they believe the President and Congress already have the authority to detain American Citizens, since the Supreme Court hasn't yet ruled otherwise. This is not the case, but it explains why the bill's main supporters did not oppose the Feinstein amendment.

2.) "It already exempts American Citizens. You should know that Sec. 1032 actually states: "The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States."

Don't fall for their cleverly chosen legislative language.

A careful reading of the suspect sections bears out that, while there is no requirement to detain an American citizen, the act thereof is not explicitly prohibited. By extension, it is actually permitted.

As if the above is not bad enough, the power to determine which American citizens will be indefinitely detained without charges or trial will be left to the President alone.

I'm certain you would agree that something as important as overturning longstanding American jurisprudence deserves to be the subject of a vigorous debate in a public forum.

But, late last week, the House, by an overwhelming majority (406-17), passed a motion that allowed this Joint Committee to meet in secret.

Last night, the House and Senate conferees emerged without having changed the offending detainee provisions of the NDAA.

And the section numbers (formerly 1031 and 1032) have been changed to 1021 and 1022.

A vote on the conference report could come as early as this Wednesday in the House of Representatives!

So I need your members of Congress to know where you stand immediately!

It is imperative you contact your representative and both of your senators today to urge them to vote NO on the NDAA (H.R. 1540/S. 1867) Conference Report unless Secs. 1021 and 1022 are removed or modified to explicitly exclude all U.S. citizens and lawful resident aliens.

Also related to this story is this one:

Here at C4L, we've been getting a wide range of questions from our members about what happened in the Senate during the fight over S. 1867, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), and what the current status of the bill is.

Legislative battles are often fast-paced fights where details are changing minute-to-minute. Unfortunately, the internet doesn't always help clear things up because many political reporters who think they have a grasp of what is occurring, don't, and they unintentionally mislead people. To help clear things up, we'll start with the most recent, and work our way back, then finish up with where the bill is now.

To begin, the Senate passed the NDAA on Thursday Dec. 1, by a vote of 93-7. This is not the end of the fight. The House passed a different version, H.R. 1540, near the end of May. Both versions will now end up in a joint House/Senate conference where differences will be hammered out, but more on that at the end.

On Friday, Dec. 2nd, C4L's Vice President, Matt Hawes sent around an email describing an amendment to S. 1867 that would have allowed the military to keep an individual locked up even after they had been tried and found NOT GUILTY until after the conclusion of the "War on Terror." Senator Paul helped defeat the amendment, S.A. 1274, by a vote of 41-59, just by calling for a roll call vote on Thursday night.

What you won't see from looking at the roll call vote on S.A. 1274, is that Senators Carl Levin, John McCain, and members of both parties had agreed to allow the amendment to pass by voice vote, but when forced to record Yea or Nay next to their name, the majority voted against it.

Next, we move back to last Thursday afternoons vote on Senate Amendments (S.A.) 1125 & 1126. Campaign for Liberty urged a "YES" vote on both of these amendments.

S.A. 1125 would have clarified that military requirement to detain individuals only applies to those captured overseas by adding the word "abroad" after "captured" in Section 1032 of S. 1867. This amendment failed by a vote of 45-55.

S.A. 1126 would have amended Section 1031 of S. 1867 to clearly state that the authority to detain individuals does not confer any authority of the military to detain American citizens without trial until the end of hostilities. This amendment also failed by a vote of 45-55.

Now, it's important to make something very clear here. We've received a number of messages from well-intentioned folks who contacted us saying something like, "But, Section 1032 already says it doesn't apply to U.S. Citizens, you're making a fight where there isn't one and really just being used as pawns in the ACLU's liberal agenda..."

I cannot stress this enough (nor can I express how many times I responded to it by email, phone, and private message) -- don't be fooled by Section 1032, Subsection (b) on "Applicability to United States Citizens and Lawful Resident Aliens."

Despite what a straight-forward reading of the text would appear to say, that the "requirement to detain a person" does not apply to U.S. Citizens and Lawful Resident Aliens this is just cleverly worded political-speak to deceive the American people. Just because they aren't "required" doesn't mean they aren't allowed.

With all that cleared up (hopefully clear as glass rather than mud) let's look at where we're at now.

The National Defense Authorization Act, (H.R. 1540/S. 1867) is now in a conference committee squaring the differences between the House and the Senate version. The House passed a motion that allows them to hold the meetings for this important conference committee behind closed doors. Arguments pertaining to something as important as overturning the Posse Comitatus Act and Habeus Corpus deserve to be heard in a public forum.

Click here to see a list of House & Senate Conferees. If your representative or senator is one of those listed, please contact them immediately at 202-224-3121 and urge them not to sign the conference report unless the language of Sec. 1031 & 1032 is removed or modified to explicitly exclude all U.S. Citizens and lawful resident aliens.

A vote on the conference report could come as early as this Thursday in the House of Representatives. It is imperative you contact your representative and both of your senators today to urge them to vote no on the NDAA Conference Report unless Sec. 1031 & 1032 are removed or the offending sections are modified in such a way as to prohibit the application to U.S. Citizens and lawful resident aliens.

Source:click here

Let's contact our elected leaders by clicking here and let them know to make the modifications to safeguard U.S. citizen's rights. The more of us they hear from the better so email them today.

Down to the wire

I received the following from Demand Progress:

It's do-or-die time: The House Judiciary Committee will likely pass the Stop Online Piracy Act THIS Thursday. Once the bill moves out of committee, the House can pass it at any time.

BUT, if we're able to kill it at this stage it'll probably never recover.

That's why we need your help this week: We want to make sure people understand what the Internet could be like if SOPA passes, so we're asking millions of people to protest censorship as part of our #CensorshipEverywhere campaign -- use our tool to censor parts of your own posts to Facebook, Twitter, blogs, and anything and everything else.

Click here to use our #CensorshipEverywhere tool to send a "censored" message to your friends -- to "uncensor" it, they'll need to contact Congress too.

The most important thing this week is that EVERYONE join the protests in some way. If all of us drive our audiences to make phonecalls, we're unstoppable. We need to jam Congress's inboxes and melt their phone lines if we're going to stop SOPA.

Our goals for the week are one call per congressmember per minute -- and one million emails: Please click here to censor your posts and then make a call or send an email, or do both right away -- it'll really only take a couple of minutes.

SOPA threatens the livelihood of the best parts of the Internet, and the best companies that use the Internet. More than 70 representatives from leading tech firms -- like Tumblr, Foursquare, Etsy, Kickstarter and Reddit -- and advocacy groups from across the political spectrum participated in a meeting to coordinate action against SOPA.

It was an inspirational meeting, and we're all going all-in to kill this legislation. We need to do everything we can to stop it in committee -- and everything we do this week sends a strong message to lawmakers: voters do not want this bill.

Please be part of the effort: Click here to call or email your member of the House of Reps right away. We need to flood them with contacts well before the vote this week.

Join us and be a hero for Internet freedom and free speech.

To contact your Congressperson click here

This is great because if we can kill this bill in committee it'll be a lot easier. If Internet censorship infuriates you then contact your Congressperson today and protest SOPA. These are your freedoms so you may want to protect them so send in those emails.

Sunday, December 11, 2011

Vote for the Family Of Men

Canadian MRA Earl Silverman has a great idea on how to get the word out about Men's Rights issues. I''ll let Earl take it from here:

Please vote for Family of Men!!

By going to the web site and voting for FoM we will receive, if we win,
one year of free advertising in Coffee News; this is a way of spreading
the word. You can vote once a day, please support the effort.

You do not have to put your phone number; as it is not a requirement.
You do not have to worry about privacy; it is an outgoing message only
from within their web site.

"Your Message" I vote for Family of Men Support Society to win the 1
year of free advertising.

You can help your cause by voting for Family of Men.


You can vote by going to their web page and fill out the message form in
the "contact" link; below is what it looks like but you have to access
it from the web site directly from the link below.

click here to vote

Source:click here

This is great. If Earl wins he can advertise the Men's Rights Cause for free and get the message out there that we exist and that like minded men don't have to be on their own,that there are those that not only agree with them but are actively fighting to safeguard or get back those rights unjustly taken from them. A lot can happen in a month let alone a year and a year of the MRM being told to the people and letting them see the truth can seriously damage the fematrix.

Friday, December 9, 2011

Be cautious my Canadian brothers

We are all being watched
“I am not placing you under arrest, but I have some questions and I am going to read you your rights.”

That was the first thing the prominent Canadian MRA, whom we must now refer to as Mr. X, was told when he walked into the police investigators office. He had been phoned at work the day before by police officials, who told X that an allegation had been made against him that involved the MRM, stockpiling weapons and threats to do harm. They asked him to come in to “answer some questions.”

Those questions were largely about his personal life and beliefs, focusing on whether he was a violence prone individual. There were questions about the MRM and MRA’s, and it became clear to him during the course of the interview that significant prior effort had been invested by police officials into studying his beliefs as well as the overall mentality of those in the movement.

He admits to being a little rattled. Making threats of violence of any kind is a very serious matter in Canada. And something like this coming nearly to the day on the anniversary of the “Montreal Massacre,” was a bit more chilling. December 6 marks the day that Marc Lepine murdered fourteen women and wounded ten women and four men at the École Polytechnique, an engineering school affiliated with the University of Montréal.

Anyone, and this includes police officials, who has read Mr. X’s blog articles or watched his YouTube videos, knows him to be a level headed, intellectual sort, not given to violence. But it is clear that someone reported otherwise to Canadian law enforcement. The question remains why, but that is likely to never be answered because he was not made privy to where the complaint originated.

He was informed, according to my conversation with him last night, that he was not a suspect and the police found nothing in his writings that caused them concern. They were, in effect, following up on a complaint and after speaking with him determined there was no need for further inquiry. So they said.

But even in the best case scenario, there is an object lesson in the thick of this that must be addressed. The men’s movement is a growing phenomenon. We are, as were we destined to do, starting to scare some people. That is what happens when insight meets ignorance. Those who cling to the status quo, in this case feminist governance, get uncomfortable. They react. Over react. Although over reaction may be the wrong word. These people were full of hate and lies long before anyone started speaking back.

It is possible that this was orchestrated, that more than one person conspired to set our associate up for trouble. It is also possible that this was one reactive person acting on their own. Again, we will never know.

But we do know enough to know that for MRA’s, especially those that live in Canada, that there is a need, not for panic, but for caution.

We are documenting the fact that these events transpired for the sake of public record. If other MRA’s are called in and questioned in similar circumstances we will document that as well. On the outside chance that we are seeing the police manipulated into some sort of ideological McCarthyism, we want to document it as it happens.

Regarding AVfM, there have been times when I have banned people from this site for making even non serious suggestions of violence. I have gotten complaints and nasty emails for doing so. Now you know at least one reason why I felt it was necessary.

Personally, I would be flabbergasted to know there are any MRA’s out there that would take their beliefs and use them as an excuse for violence. And truth tell, I am more than happy with their being removed from our ranks, and even from society, if they are out there.

The only weapon we ever needed is the truth, and I do believe that we can see through Mr.X’s unfortunate experience, that the truth is indeed a potent weapon that causes irrational reactions from the very people we would identify as the problem.

But a word of caution. As we know all too well, lies are powerful weapons, too. They can take a terrible toll in terms of lost reputation, as even lost freedom. Unfortunate then that our stock and trade is in dealing with liars. We see people like David Futrelle and others trying to cast us as pro-violence in any way they possibly can, often treating the truth and integrity like minor obstacles to their ambitions.

So, the question becomes, how are we going to react to what has happened here? The answer is that we are going to move ahead full steam. We won’t slither into private forums with our beliefs. That is the province of those we oppose, as you will soon see detailed on the pages of this site like never before.

Just like Mr. X, the people at AVfM are simply telling the truth and looking for justice. There is no need to slow down or change course. But these events remind us that on whatever level you can imagine, there are those that would do most anything to shut us up. Or, as we have said around here before, we are getting flak, so we must be over the target.

But, it is official now, people. They are watching us. We must remain aware of that, even though it changes nothing that we do. AVfM will continue to enforce its no violence policy, just as we have from the day we launched. And we will continue to confront hateful ideologues, corrupt public officials and the plague of misandry wherever we find it and FTSU.

Sometimes the ride will get bumpy, so we are all better off to strap in securely.

Written by
Paul Elam

Source:click here

I'm sure we are making an impact in Canada along with the rest of western societies and there are those that will resist us,resist us even to the point of censorship and/or violence. We have the truth on our side,that is more than our enemies have and with the truth we can show the world who is telling the truth. I guess taking into consideration what Canadian MRA Earl Silverman is putting the Human (Women's) Rights Commission through and according to Earl he is having a blast putting the feminazis through this then yes,feminazis and other defenders of evil have a lot to be afraid of.

VAWA supporter attacks MRA

Lisalyn R. Jacobs

U.S. Senate, Dr. Phil and FemPork from Ben Vonderheide on Vimeo.

Video source:click here

Her name is Lisalyn R. Jacobs.

Aaahh,here we have an example of the peaceful nature of women as demonstrated by this one woman. That is if you can call this a "woman" when in fact "she?" looks more like a transsexual linebacker. If she were a steroid user I wouldn't be surprised. Think she will be arrested for assault and battery? I don't know,stranger things have happened. Seriously,Daddy Justice didn't need to go through this shit and she should be arrested and have the book thrown at her. Let's hope that happens.

(UPDATE: The following is from the A Voice For Men:

When feminists attack
Some mornings, going through my email is just part of my usual routine. Then, other mornings, like today, someone sends an email that elicits a huge smile and just makes my whole day.

Ben Vonderheide aka Daddy Justice, is a relentless men’s and father’s rights activist. He and his video camera have been holding corrupt public officials and the corrupt family court system and its minions accountable for almost a decade.

Mr. Vonderheide’s fight began 8 years ago when his ex made false allegations of abuse against him in an effort to separate him from his child. He fought back and won and now he is fighting the good fight for countless other men and their children.

In July 2011, the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) was up for renewal in the U.S. Senate. Dr. Phil McGraw and other mucky-mucks in the $4 billion dollar plus Women’s Domestic Violence industry offered up their usual misinformation, lies and inaccurate statistics in order to have the act renewed.

After Dr. Phil lied spoke to the Senate, Mr. Vonderheide was waiting for him in the hallway with his camera.

Dr. Phil ignored Mr. Vonderheide, but other hearing participants did not.

The woman who assaults Mr. Vonderheide in the above video is Lisalyn R. Jacobs. Ms. Jacobs is the current vice president for government relations of Legal Momentum, NOW attorney and one of the individuals responsible for implementing the highly discriminatory and unconstitutional VAWA legislation. Here is Ms. Jacobs’ bio from the Legal Momentum website:

Lisalyn R. Jacobs

Lisalyn R. Jacobs joined Legal Momentum as vice president for government relations in March of 2003. She began her legal career at the National Partnership for Women and Families under the auspices of Georgetown’s Women’s Law & Public Policy Fellowship. Following three years in private practice, she joined the Office of Policy Development of the U.S. Justice Department in 1995 and worked on a number of issues including implementation of the Violence Against Women Act, the welfare reform law, judicial nominations. and affirmative action.

She also served as Chief of Staff of the Civil Rights Division, as well as Special Counsel to the Director of the Violence Against Women Office. In May of 2000, she left DOJ and for nearly three years was a civil and human rights consultant on issues ranging from capital punishment to affirmative action, and international human rights. She has testified before congressional committees at both the state and federal levels.

On December 5, 2011, Lisalyn R. Jacobs was charged and arraigned for assaulting Ben Vonderheide (Daddy Justice) outside the U.S. Senate VAWA hearing in Washington, D.C.

One would think that an individual who is against violence, who has devoted most of her adult professional life to ending violence and promoting human rights, would know better than to assault another human being in the corridors of the United States Senate for doing nothing more than filming her and asking her questions in an effort to hold her accountable for her very public beliefs and role in creating discriminatory and unconstitutional legislature.

Ms. Jacobs believes violence against women and girls is wrong. Her actions, however, seem to indicate that female perpetrated violence against men is right and acceptable and the Orwellian belief that some humans are more equal than others.

I could go on and on about what a hypocrite Ms. Jacobs appears to be. I could point out how a violent female offender shouldn’t be allowed to participate in any discussions or policy-making about the violence of men and the protection of women. I could say all these things and more.

Instead, I think I’ll go back to enjoying my schadenfreude-gasm at seeing this kind of hypocrisy exposed.

Hillary Clinton is anti-censorship when it comes to the net

It's official;hell just froze over. It appears that Hillary Clinton and I are in agreement that internet freedom is a right to be enjoyed by all American adults. Here is what I mean,from Demand Progress:

We Agree With Sec Of State: "If The Internet's Not Broke, Don't Fix It"

We sure weren't expecting it: Yesterday Secretary of State Hillary Clinton gave a truly visionary speech about Internet freedom -- about the human right to a free Internet.

It culminated in these profound words about how governments should engage with the Internet: "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."

Some forces in the Obama administration support Internet freedom. Others want to ram through the Internet censorship bills backed by Hollywood, Big Pharma, and the Chamber of Commerce. As our government considers instituting its own Internet censorship regime, we need to support those who stand with us. Let Clinton -- and her boss, Obama -- know that we stand with her sentiments: They need to keep the Internet free.

Will you sign our petition to Clinton and Obama? You'll generate an email to the White House that says this:

PETITION TO PRESIDENT OBAMA AND SEC OF STATE CLINTON: Secretary Clinton's remarks on Internet freedom were prescient and profound. We need to stand by her sentiments: If the Internet's not broke, don't fix. Please ensure continued Internet freedom by opposing the PROTECT IP Act and the Stop Online Piracy Act.

Please just fill out the form at right to support Secretary Clinton.

Also sign the petition while you are there to safeguard your rights. Also the House is going to vote on SOPA next week so you can call or email your congressperson and let them know you want SOPA torpedoed as soon as possible. You can contact them here.

From Demand Progress

Call To Tell Your Representative To Oppose Censorship Bill!

Internet censorship legislation is scheduled for vote in the House next week: Please fill out the form at bottom and we'll give you your reprentative's name and phone number and a short call script.

The Stop Online Piracy Act would ruin so much of what's best about the Internet: It will give the government and corporations new powers to block Americans' access to sites that are accused of copyright infringement, force sites like YouTube to go to new lengths to police users' contributions, and put people in prison for streaming certain content online. To learn more about SOPA, please click here.

Just fill out the form below to call your representative and urge him or her to oppose Internet censorship.

You can call or email your representative and let them know you oppose SOPA and that you want them to as well.

Thursday, December 8, 2011

NCFM to teach Verizon a lesson

NCFM protest on Dec. 10, 2:00 PM outside Verizon

Los Angeles – 12/4/11 – The National Coalition For Men (NCFM) Los Angeles chapter will be protesting and handing out flyers on Saturday, 12/10/11 at 2:00 PM outside Verizon at 2530 Wilshire Blvd., Santa Monica, corner of Wilshire & 26th St., against Verizon’s sexist, anti-father ads that depict all domestic violence as committed by men and fathers against women, and that says among children who witness it, the girls grow up to be victims while the boys grow up to be abusers. See it here:click here

The following flyer will be distributed, which was created by SAVE, a national organization that is organizing similar protests nationwide this week against the Verizon ad: click here

NCFM and SAVE have asked Verizon to withdraw or change the sexist ad, but they refused, and in response they cite crime data showing far more women than men are victims.

To begin with, when we mention soldiers in Iraq, we say “men and women” regardless of the fact that over 90% of them are men. That’s to make sure the minority are not excluded. Why aren’t domestic violence victims given the same respect? There is a 40-year history of the National Domestic Violence Hotline (NDVH), which co-sponsored this ad, addressing this issue in a way that leaves male victims and their children invisible as usual. NCFM had to sue the State of California for its widespread discrimination against male victims. The lawsuit resulted in an appellate decision holding that “domestic violence is a serious problem for both women and men,” that excluding male victims “carries with it the baggage of sexual stereotypes,” and that it is unconstitutional to exclude male victims of domestic violence from the statutory funding provisions or from state-funded services. Woods v. Horton (2008) 167 Cal.App.4th 658. News-Enterprise, “Court Rules Domestic Violence Programs Must Be Open to Men” (10/15/08) click here

And the crime data they cite is not accurate. The police data shows about 25% of police calls now come from men. But since men are less likely to report it, the oft-cited crime data from the Department of Justice is not reliable. By contrast, virtually all of the randomized surveys show women initiate DV at least as often as men, and men suffer 1/3 of the physical injuries, as Cal State University Professor Martin Fiebert shows in his online bibliography at click here. For example: Science Daily, “Male And Female Adolescents Equally Victims Of Physical Dating Violence, Study Shows” (11/12/07) click here

A 32-nation study by the University of New Hampshire found women are as violent and controlling as men in dating relationships worldwide. See: click here and click here

The Centers for Disease Control recently funded a major study of heterosexual relationships throughout the U.S. and found: “Almost 24% of all relationships had some violence, and half (49.7%) of those were reciprocally violent. In nonreciprocally violent relationships, women were the perpetrators in more than 70% of the cases,” and both sexes suffered significant injuries. See: click here

The same study also found: “More women than men (25% versus 11%) were responsible. In fact, 71 percent of the instigators in nonreciprocal partner violence were women” and “while injury was more likely when violence was perpetrated by men, in relationships with reciprocal violence it was the men who were injured more often (25% of the time) than were women (20% of the time).” See here

When children witness either parent hit the other, regardless of how severe or minor, it becomes a model for them to follow. Domestic violence is an intergenerational cycle, and we’ll never stop that cycle without being honest about it rather than covering up half of it out of political correctness.

If you believe in treating people fairly and with respect please join us Saturday and help up educate Verizon of those concepts, concepts Verizon apparently has rejected from their company culture.

Marc E. Angelucci, Esq.
Vice President
National Coalition For Men

Source:click here

This is great. If you are in the LA area and want to help out the men's rights cause then go to this protest and get your voice heard. Show the MRA brothers solidarity as they take on the hydra known as "misandry" and hopefully prevail.

Thursday, December 1, 2011

Legislation would give miltary the right to patrol the streets

I received the following from Demand Progress about the military doing police functions:

Ask Obama To Veto Indefinite Military Detention of AMERICAN CITIZENS

An unimaginable violation of due process: The Senate just voted to allow the military to detain American citizens indefinitely -- without even charging them with a crime -- if they are said to be suspected of terrorism.

As Senator Dianne Feinstein put it, "Congress is essentially authorizing the indefinite imprisonment of American citizens, without charge" if the bill passes as it's currently written.

Thankfully, President Obama has threatened to veto the bill, noting that:

Applying this military custody requirement to individuals inside the United States, as some Members of Congress have suggested is their intention, would raise serious and unsettled legal questions and would be inconsistent with the fundamental American principle that our military does not patrol our streets.

Obama will only have a few days to make up his mind: Will you urge him to make good on his veto threat? Just fill out the form at right.

PETITION TO PRESIDENT OBAMA: We urge you to stand by your threat to veto the new National Defense Authorization Act. Allowing indefinite military detention of American citizens -- without even being charged -- is an unfathomable violation of due process.

Please sign on at right to urge Obama to veto the legislation -- doing so will generate an email to the White House.

It looks like our Consitutional rights are on the chopping block again and we have a petition to sign to let's get to it. If military checkpoints are un-American to you then by all means sign this petition.

Wednesday, November 30, 2011

SAVE takes on Verizon

The Verizon Foundation has produced a frightening video titled Monsters. The video's perverse message can be summed up in this slide: "She's afraid of her dad."

The video revels in powerful yet destructive stereotypes: fathers as abusers, wives as victims, and young boys as future abusers. The video tells the impressionable viewer:

"The child who lives with domestic violence... is afraid of the monster just down the hall," a girl's voiceover intones, while frightening images of a hunchbacked monster-dad flit across the screen: click here

To be honest this video is not just biased, it's awful. Tell Verizon (politely) to clean up its act.

Contact Bob Varettoni, Executive Director of Media Relations:
•Telephone: (908) 559-6388

Please call today - thanks!



Teri Stoddard, Program Director

Stop Abusive and Violent Environments

It's really bullshit that Verizon did this and we should definitely give Verizon a piece of our mind on this issue by letting them know a video like this is unacceptable.

Monday, November 28, 2011

The good and the bad at Demand Progress

I received the following from Demand Progress:

Great news: 100,000 people have asked Senator Wyden to read their names during his filibuster of the dreaded PROTECT IP Act.

Worse news: This legislation could come to a vote as soon as later this week.

But the nastier we make this prospective filibuster look, the better the chance that Senate leadership won't even call for a vote.

Will you help us muster more troops? Please consider posting a link to on your blog or website, and share it with your friends:

Here's the message Senator Wyden's office issued to Demand Progress a few days ago, asking for more support from Internet users:

The filibuster affords senators an opportunity to stand up for what they believe in and there are few things I believe in more than ensuring that every American has a voice and an opportunity to get ahead.

Right now, the Internet gives every American that voice while making it possible for every entrepreneur, thinker and innovator to compete alongside the biggest and most moneyed interests.

It is my hope that -- with your help – my colleagues in Congress will realize that a free and open Internet is something that we as Americans should celebrate and not allow those special moneyed interests to quash.

It is my hope that – with your help – my colleagues in Congress will realize that PIPA/SOPA are the wrong way to protect intellectual property because the price they exact on the Internet is too high.

With your help, I believe we can get that word out and prevent these misguided bills from every reaching the House and Senate floor, but if they do reach the floor you can count on me to stand up and make our voices heard.

Let's make it clear to the Senator that we have his back, and that we plan to stand with him on the floor of the Senate.

I believe they are talking about this. If you haven't signed the petition then please do so.

Thursday, November 24, 2011

A Thankgiving message from SAVE

I received the following from SAVE:

During this season of gratitude we realize that all of the things SAVE is thankful for are due to your efforts.

We want you to know how much we appreciate your calls and emails to legislators. We want to thank you for your generous donations. And we want to honor all of the volunteers who have joined the Domestic Violence Legislative Project (DVLP), the Countering Abuse Misinformation Project (CAMP), and Campaign 2012.

Your many calls and emails have already improved Senator Leahy's discussion draft of VAWA. Your generous donations have allowed us to distribute press releases, give dozens of radio interviews, and sponsor two public events in the last year, Hoax! and False Allegation Awareness Summit. Every one of your gifts, from $5 on up make a difference.

I want to take this moment to give a heartfelt "thank you" to each and every one of you who have committed yourselves to our success by joining the DVLP, CAMP, and Campaign 2012.

Your many calls and emails have already improved Senator Leahy's discussion draft of VAWA. Your generous donations have allowed us to distribute press releases, give dozens of radio interviews, and sponsor two public events in the last year, Hoax! and False Allegation Awareness Summit. Every one of your gifts, from $5 on up make a difference.

I want to take this moment to give a heartfelt "thank you" to each and every one of you who have committed yourselves to our success by joining the DVLP, CAMP, and Campaign 2012.

Each month I am amazed by the number of people who join our DVLP conference calls. I love reading the articles, letters to the editor and op-eds written by our CAMP crew. And I get a kick out of seeing photos of Campaign 2012 members wearing their t-shirts and hearing how the public reacts.

Know that you are a valuable part of SAVE. We do.

Know that you can make a already have, and together we will continue to do so!



Teri Stoddard, Program Director

Stop Abusive and Violent Environments

When it comes to the MRM I am thankful that we have turned things around and that we're making the feminazis take us seriously. I am thankful for the work Paul Elam is doing and how working together we can combat institutionalized misandry. Yes there is more work to be done but we should take time out and look back at what we've accomplished and be proud of it.

Tuesday, November 22, 2011

Identify the SCUM members and get paid $1,000.00

You read right,that is $1,000.00 American money to whoever can provide the facts we request. That is why I'm joining in with A Voice For Men in promoting this message so we can shine the light of truth to make the cockroaches scurry about but afford them no hiding places. Not anymore.

She and her friends did the following:

Our second culprit is this woman:

Here is where she is guilty of bigotry:

If you know of the identities of the profiled women then contact A Voice For Men immediately. One more outed misandric bigot is one less that can hide behind an anonymous label.

Monday, November 21, 2011

Oppose blacklist bill in the Senate and get officially recognized

The above video is from Senator Ron Wyden who like the rest of us is opposed to internet censorship and he has promised to vigorously oppose this bill he will even filabuster if necessary. Wyden will read the names of those of us who are opposed to this bill into congressional records (that's a million + BTW) recording our opposition to this bill. Sign the petition to let your Senators know where you stand on this issue. Sign that petition today.

Sunday, November 20, 2011

The TSA is 10 years old and still groping

I received the following from Campaign For Liberty:

Everyone’s “favorite” bureaucracy is growing up.

Today marks 10 years since the TSA’s creation.

And if I could make a birthday wish on their behalf...

... it would be that this is the last holiday season we have to put up with their poking, groping, and scanning.

In what should be “the most wonderful time of the year,” the path home for many Americans begins with a long wait at the airport – and dealing with people who think a government ID gives them the right to put their hands where they don’t belong.

Remember the joyous, exciting holiday travel of yesteryear?

“Over the river and through the woods…”

Well, no one will be writing Christmas carols about modern holiday travel – though we may hear some blues about how miserable the experience can be.

Since its inception, perhaps no other agency has been more flagrant in its violations of our civil liberties and as flippant toward Americans’ constitutionally protected rights as the TSA.

As you may remember, in March of 2009, a C4L staffer found himself temporarily detained and interrogated by the TSA after attempting to fly back after our first Regional Conference with the event’s proceeds in his carry-on.

It’s not illegal to fly with cash and checks on domestic flights, but these agents made it their business – something the TSA does far too often to too many people.

Since that time, the situation has only gotten worse.

For the past year, the TSA has been installing potentially dangerous backscatter imaging machines across the country to perform virtual strip searches on airline passengers.

This leaves passengers the “option” of either being scanned and possibly exposed to dangerous radiation or enduring the very public humiliation of receiving one of their infamous “pat-downs.”

When the policy was first implemented, Senator Claire McCaskill downplayed the invasive groping that makes up one of the TSA’s “enhanced pat-downs,” referring to them as “love pats.”

The senator apparently no longer feels that way (after selling her private jet), and she recently complained about their invasiveness to TSA Administrator John Pistole.

"I try to avoid a pat-down at all costs," McCaskill told Pistole. "There are many times women put their hands on me in a way that if it was your daughter or your sister or your wife, you would be upset."

And as people continue to make their mistreatment and abuse at the TSA’s hands public by sharing their stories online, more members of Congress are beginning to take notice.

Others, unfortunately, still don’t see the bigger picture.

Without immediately reining in the unaccountable TSA and eliminating their procedures of scanning and groping passengers at the airports, I’m afraid the situation will only continue to get worse.

In the past, we’ve warned about the TSA’s plans to expand its scanning beyond our nation’s airports – to our highways, train stations, and bus stops.

Unfortunately, this is already happening.

Last month in Tennessee, the TSA’s VIPR teams were deployed to conduct random searches of vehicles on the highways.

This has to stop.

And you and I are the ones who can fight back.

Members of Congress may think this issue has blown over, but it’s up to Campaign for Liberty to remind them that we’re more outraged than ever at what’s taking place every day in our airports.

Please, as soon as you can on Monday, call Congress at 202-224-3121 and demand they rein in their Frankenstein creation.

Don’t let them sell you a bill of goods, either.

They can force the TSA to abandon their policies of scanning passengers (in what amounts to a virtual strip search) or groping them (in a manner that would constitute sexual assault were it coming from a regular individual).

Ultimately, Congress should abolish the TSA altogether and return the responsibility for security to the private sector.

Just like other federal government overreaches, the TSA believes telling us this is necessary for “our safety” allows it to do whatever it wants, including shredding our Fourth Amendment rights.

We must expose this lie, and I hope we’ll have your help to do so.

The responsibility for airline security lies with the airline industry in the first place.

Since 9/11, only alert passengers and flight crews have thwarted additional terrorist attacks on airplanes, not the TSA!

Tell Congress to pass appropriate, common-sense legislation like H.R. 2438, the “American Traveler Dignity Act,” and to cut off funding for the maintenance of existing scanners and implementation of new ones.

Even the European Union has banned the use of these scanners because of the possible health risks!

So please, reach out to Congress as soon as you can on Monday at 202-224-3121 and urge them to rein in the TSA by outlawing their scanning and groping.

Or you can email them,just look them up here. Perhaps emailing the Senate will help too. No harm in trying to so let's do it.

Throw out the cake and presents because this is one birthday that SHOULDN'T be celebrated.

Ever since the Senator sold her private jet and has to fly commercial along with the rest of us peons she's had a change of heart and is now complaining. But Senator I thought those were just "love pats" (which would make them sexual harassment and sexual assault) and now they're "violations of our bodies". I guess things are different when the queen is forced to live under her own rules.

Chivalry:nature vs nuture

I've heard the argument that men are hard-wired to be chivalrous toward women thus protecting them but I wondering if that is all bunk. If being chivalrous is hard-wired such as breathing is then why do MRA's exist? If the preceding is fact it would be impossible to be an MRA because men would not be able to resist being chivalrous anymore than they can resist breathing. Also take into consideration it is women who condition the young boy to grow up to embrace chivalry,often through repeated reinforcement. When the young boy cannot or will not acquiesces to their demands then they shame him to make him comply and it is through their shaming that they reinforce chivalry. The conclusion we come to is that chivalry is a form of subservience rather than a form of power. We may look at the man guarding the woman (white knighting) and conclude that since he is physically stronger he has the power. What very few people do is realize that the woman in question may have used manipulation (reward/shame) tap his "protect women" programming that was propagated to him when he was a child. So let's take a look at it again: the man is guarding the woman and some will say he has the power. Others will say she goaded a stranger to fight her battles for her and she has the power. Who really has the power: the overt or the covert? Let me put it this way: Who has the most chance of getting injured or kill?  Who has the best chance of walking away without a scratch? That should tell you who has the  power.

Friday, November 18, 2011

Feminist plans for men

Any questions?

The blacklist bill is close to being toast

I received the following from Demand Progress and it's good news. Enjoy.

More Than 700k Have Acted: Let's Finish Strong

It's been a show of force like no other: More than 700k anti-censorship contacts have been delivered to Congress so far this week, as the Blacklsit Bill gets heard in committee.

What an amazing day -- let's top it off with one more push. Please send one more message to Congress -- even if you already have -- touting our numbers and telling them they need to back down. Let's make it clear that the Internet has risen up, and won't back down until Congress heeds our calls.

Please just use the form at right to send one more message to Congress.

The Stop Online Piracy Act would ruin so much of what's best about the Internet: It will give the government and corporations new powers to block Americans' access to sites that are accused of copyright infringement, force sites like YouTube to go to new lengths to police users' contributions, and put people in prison for streaming certain content online.

Just use the form at right to send one more message to Congress to help us finish strong today.

And please use the links below to ask your friends to join -- and if you ahve a website, please link back to our petition page.

With both parties against this bill it is sure to die. You,me,we did it and I want everyone out there to celebrate. But before you celebrate fill out the petition and let them know that we are serious about preserving our freedoms and that we won't allow them to be taken from us.

Thursday, November 17, 2011

The death of due process at Brown University

The following comes from John The Other from a A Voice For Men in which he talks about the death of due process at Brown University. I guess Brown views its female population as pure angels that must be protected from its male population which it views as sex crazed fiends who unable to control their impulses:

Brown University is a private, Ivy League university located in Providence, Rhode Island. It’s also where the school’s faculty and administration have endorsed the eradication of due process – and where the school’s newspaper, the Brown Daily Herald printed the following statement.

“You need to check your behavior carefully before you enter into a relationship with a woman. There will be no due process if you are accused of rape. The woman’s version of what happened will always be accepted over the man’s account.”[1]

Do I need to keep writing, or is that enough?

For context, I’ve included the fifth and sixth amendments of the Bill of Rights.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

Do not skip over those two short paragraphs. Please don’t simply bypass them, because without them, the only redress of accusation, injury or grievance devolves to the use of force, the jurisprudence of a mob, or a vendetta.

The ideology driving the “thinking” at universities like Brown has gone beyond being a parody of itself and has crossed deep into the territory of Kantian nightmare.

I hesitate to call this feminism – although I know it is that victim cult taken to a logical extreme by blind progression without opposition. What I don’t hesitate to call it is stupid, hate-driven bigotry on par with the set-of-mind which led in recent history to late-night lynchings. It is the most craven abdication of ethics by academicians, and were it not happening now, a parody containing such events would be rejected as too absurd.

I have written many times that human society, in the absence of a viable system for nonviolent redress of grievance – such as the due process of law – will always adapt an alternative system of redress. The simplest such alternative being retributive violence. Im am surely not uniquely prescient to see this. Academicians at institutions like Brown University cannot possibly be so stupid they fail to grasp this simple concept.

For the moment, I will setting predictions of upheaval aside. A student, or parent who reads the words published by the Brown Daily Herald, and sees the school as anything but a free-fire zone where young lives are destroyed must be equally stupid.

“There will be no due process if you are accused of rape. The woman’s version of what happened will always be accepted over the man’s account.”

A university is a business, it sells a service. The students of a university are the customers. They’re the ones who buy the university’s product.

Male students : you have just been told that a business you pay, that you are customers of – this business will cheerfully ignore the law. That this business will constitute its own laws along lines of sexual ideology, and that you have no rights should you ever be accused of by any female customer of the business.

There will be no due process if you are accused of rape.

Brown University used to be a private, Ivy League university located in Providence, Rhode Island. Now it is a private fiefdom run along the lines of a female supremacist victim cult. If you are male, and you attend this school, then you may simply be too stupid to help, and your life’s purpose may be to serve as a warning to others.

you are culpable.

If you are female, and you attend this school, and you say nothing, and do nothing, and sit quietly as your institute of higher learning pursues the policies of sexual apartheid, you are culpable.

Following the lead set at Brown University, the future is not a feminist utopia of women carried in gilded thrones on the backs of chained men. Utopian dreams are always false. What’s coming has the shape of a mad-max future of wastelands, and universal application of the warlord model of local government. Unfortunately, before we arrive at any outcome so sunny, cities will burn, and bodies will litter the streets. This is not a threat, nor a promise. Despite what detractors of men’s rights writing in general, and my writing in particular say, I have no sympathy for violence. America has been the most prosperous and affluent cultures in history, and when the great dream becomes the failed state, it will be very ugly indeed.

But don’t worry ladies, that bad outcome could be as much as 50 years away. Lots of time for somebody else to solve the problem.

Back in the present, graduates of Ivy League schools tend to a degree of pride on the subject of their alma matter, and even now – this is justified. Post baccalaureate degrees can be a draining program of lost sleep and hard work. However, there’s not much of altruism in attaining academic credentials, people do this for their own benefit, as they should.

I had intended to include and then examine a quotation from the Russian novelist Tolstoy.

“All that is required for evil to prosper is for good men to do nothing”

The Russian didn’t say so, but his good men includes good women. I’m not convinced either animal exists, except as defined in each moment by their acts. However, in the context of animals doing nothing, there’s reason to examine the pride of an ivy league graduate, whose framed papers adorn their office wall.

Humans tend to be obtuse when faced by their own inaction – so Ill state this again in explicit terms. If you are a female student or staff of Brown University, and you benefit from a female-favouring climate while your alma mater discards the human rights of men, you are culpable. It will not be forgotten.

The Russian was famously verbose in his work, but I’ll leave just one more comment of his.

I sit on a man’s back, choking him, and making him carry me, and yet assure myself and others that I am very sorry for him and wish to ease his lot by any means possible, except getting off his back.


Source:click here

Brown University President Ruth Simmons

Did Brown Force Out An Innocent Freshman, Or Let A Rapist Go Free?
ERIC TUCKER | 05/31/10 01:48 PM |

PROVIDENCE, R.I. — William McCormick III crossed the wrought-iron gates of Brown University on a full scholarship, a champion wrestler from Wisconsin who expected four years at an Ivy League institution known for educating generations of bright and enterprising minds.

He lasted mere weeks.

In September 2006, he was accused of stalking, harassing and ultimately raping a female acquaintance – allegations he says are false. The accuser was a third-generation legacy student who, when first reporting trouble with McCormick, also mentioned that her father was an "alum and a big supporter of Brown."

The day after the rape allegations were made, McCormick was called into a meeting with administrators, barred from campus and put on a flight home pending a disciplinary hearing.

The following month, McCormick was gone for good.

Before the hearing, he signed a confidential agreement – under pressure, he says, from a lawyer for the accuser's family – in which he agreed to withdraw from Brown. In exchange, the accuser agreed to let the matter drop.

A Brown administrator agreed to reflect on his transcript that he had withdrawn for "medical reasons" but also told him he was ineligible for readmission, even though he had never been found responsible for rape. McCormick transferred to Bucknell University, which says he's a student in good standing.

The school allowed the matter to be closed through a private contract instead of a traditional fact-finding hearing that could have vindicated McCormick or established that an assault had actually occurred. The arrangement was meant to provide a tidy outcome to a dispute fraught with emotion and wildly divergent accounts.

Brown insists it acted properly. But a federal lawsuit from McCormick and e-mails reviewed by The Associated Press raise messy questions about the handling of the case.

The lawsuit alleges that administrators failed to adequately investigate the accusations, and permitted a blameless student to be railroaded from campus to placate a major donor.

There is another possibility, though – that Brown administrators deemed the allegations credible but allowed the complaint to be quietly disposed of, freeing someone accused of rape to wipe the slate clean as he transferred to another school.


Will McCormick is, by all accounts, a physically imposing man.

Six-foot-five, more than 250 pounds and a force on the wrestling mat, he went 43-0 and was a state champion in his senior year at Milwaukee's Heritage Christian School. He was bulky but also bookish, more focused on making the honor roll than on partying or flirting with girls, recalled teammate J.P. Janik.

The Waukesha, Wis., native was accepted early decision at Brown. Among his early residence hall acquaintances was a freshman from an affluent, suburban New York City background – an accomplished student who in high school helped establish a charity. Her father was in finance, a Brown alumnus and generous donor to and fundraiser for the school.

The AP generally does not identify people who say they were sexually assaulted, and is not naming the family to avoid identifying the woman.

His lawyer says the relationship was friendly, though not romantic. It soured quickly.

On Sept. 5, 2006, the first day of classes and one week after orientation, the woman and her roommate approached their resident adviser – a fellow student – to complain that McCormick was acting "creepy" and following her around. At 2 the next morning, the adviser spoke with Carla Hansen, an associate dean of student life.

The young woman said McCormick was telling people they were dating when they weren't, calling her up to 20 times a day and once punched a wall in anger and made a threatening remark – "I could have hurt you" – after seeing her hug another guy, Hansen wrote administrators in a Sept. 6 e-mail recapping the allegations.

In court papers, McCormick's lawyer, J. Scott Kilpatrick, calls the accusations "exaggerations and half-truths" without responding to specific allegations. McCormick, himself, refused to be interviewed for this story.

The student spoke with Hansen later in the morning of Sept. 6, refusing to name her alleged stalker for fear of getting him into trouble. She also referenced her father, though it's unclear why.

"She said that her father was an alum and a big supporter of Brown, and that she wanted to love Brown, too, and did not want to have anything bad happen to this other student," Hansen wrote in the e-mail.

Conversations between Hansen, the accuser and the resident adviser continued throughout the day.

The student spoke that afternoon with a campus victim rights' advocate, and later that evening, asked to temporarily drop the matter so she could study and attend a friend's birthday party.

That night, she spoke to her father, who urged her to identify her alleged stalker – which she did. At 10 p.m., the father also called the home of Brown administrator Russell Carey, according to an e-mail from Carey.

The following day, McCormick was formally barred from contacting her. She was directed to avoid him, as well.

Soon new problems arose.

A Sept. 13 e-mail to administrators from the student's resident adviser accuses McCormick of having violated the no-contact order by visiting the woman's room and trying to speak with her.

But for the first time, the e-mail – sent to various administrators – also describes an encounter the woman said had occurred on Sept. 6. the day after she first complained to her RA.

On that evening, she said, William McCormick entered her room as her friends were at dinner. As she tried to study, she said, he forced her onto the bed, pushed her up against a wall, tore through her boxer shorts and raped her.

She complained of bruising and sore ribs.

After word of the e-mail circulated, Michael Burch, the then-assistant wrestling coach who acted as McCormick's adviser throughout the process, was told by the head coach to pick McCormick up at his dorm and host him for the night.

Burch served him a glass of orange juice, told him they would straighten out the matter in the morning and gave up his bed so McCormick – who would tell Burch he was never even alone in the same room with the woman – could rest for what figured to be a difficult day ahead.

"I remember walking by my room and just seeing him laying in my bed, with his eyes wide open and staring at the ceiling," Burch said. "He was really scared, really terrified."

On Sept. 14, Burch accompanied McCormick to a meeting with administrators, where he was told he was accused of "sexual misconduct" – on top of earlier harassment charges. A letter from Margaret Klawunn, dean of student life, said he was barred from campus, effective immediately and until further notice.

"This action has been taken for your best interests and that of the community," Klawunn wrote.

Brown administrators involved in the case either didn't return messages or declined comment.

University spokeswoman Marisa Quinn wouldn't discuss specifics but cited Brown policy allowing for students to be immediately suspended if they're considered a danger. She said the university is obligated to act when there's evidence of potential harm to a student.

Brown says students are presumed not responsible for disciplinary violations until their hearing. But Burch said McCormick was denied a chance to explain himself. An administrator pulled out a plane ticket, and Burch accompanied McCormick in a van to the airport.

He was put on a plane to Wisconsin.


Brown faced national scrutiny nearly 15 years ago in its handling of another sexual dispute that roiled the campus.

Two students had sex after a party. The female student, a freshman, later said she was too drunk to consent and accused the young man of rape. She spoke out at a rally, while his supporters said he was unfairly branded a rapist over unsubstantiated allegations. Critics accused the Brown disciplinary process of bias against men.

The accused student was put on probation and temporarily left school, later suing his accuser and Brown and reaching a confidential settlement.

Accusations of sexual assault on college campuses, historically, pose thorny issues for administrators. The accuser and accused can present irreconcilable versions; alleged victims often don't want to involve police or pursue a campus complaint; and a civil disciplinary hearing can be an ill-suited forum for dealing with criminal accusations.

In McCormick's case, Brown considered the allegations credible enough to immediately suspend him but says it followed the accuser's wishes in not calling the police. Though college administrators say they routinely defer to self-identified victims on involving law enforcement, the judge hearing McCormick's lawsuit said he was troubled police weren't called.

"The thought that with all of the people involved in this matter at different levels, a determination is made to not tell law enforcement, even the Brown Police – I'm having trouble getting that," U.S. District Judge William Smith said at an April hearing.

Brown, like most colleges, affords disciplinary hearings for students accused of campus violations. But the agreement McCormick reached with his accuser short-circuited the traditional disciplinary process.

Gary Pavela, academic integrity director at Syracuse University who consults with colleges on disciplinary issues, says such agreements shouldn't be the end of an accusation. He said regardless of police involvement, and even independent of the wishes of the accuser and the accused, universities must get to the bottom of sexual assault allegations to determine if a crime occurred on campus or, conversely, if a student has been falsely accused.

A hearing could even be conducted after a student has left campus.

A college's philosophy, Pavela said, should be, "Once you brought it to our attention, we're going to investigate it as best as we can even if you don't pursue it."

Not necessarily, says Scott Coffina, a Philadelphia lawyer who advises colleges on campus security issues, arguing that there's no need to hold a hearing for an accused student after he or she leaves and when the accuser no longer wants to press the issue. "If they're gone, there's not really a case to bring."

Burch, the coach and adviser, began preparing for McCormick's hearing after McCormick left campus. He requested the accuser's phone logs to see how she spent the day and evening of the alleged rape, but says he never got them.

He asked for a police report, but there was none.

In one e-mail, he complained he wasn't allowed to see the boxer shorts the accuser said she was wearing during the alleged rape and that he couldn't take DNA testing or fingerprints. An administrator said the boxers wouldn't be entered as evidence – but that references to them were fair game at the hearing.

As the month progressed, Burch said he and the McCormicks grew concerned that McCormick wouldn't get a fair shake, convinced the accuser's father had the ear of the administration. The father, as an alumnus, donor and parent, has over time "been periodically in contact with Brown administrators," a lawyer for the university wrote in court papers.

E-mails from Burch reflect growing frustration, even anger, with the process, as he accused administrators of stonewalling efforts to gather evidence and of failing to help make McCormick's classmates available for questioning.

"I am doing my best to advocate for a student who has been put at a tremendous disadvantage in this hearing process responding to charges that carry with it the possibility of a life sentence in prison. I trust you understand how William and his family must be feeling at this time," Burch wrote in a Sept. 28 e-mail to administrators.

Afraid the accuser might seek criminal charges if he returned to campus, or that he might be labeled a rapist or denied a proper defense at a disciplinary hearing, McCormick sought alternatives.

His family's attention turned toward an arrangement, negotiated between the accuser's lawyer and their own attorney, that would close the case and permit McCormick to withdraw while maintaining his innocence.

The agreement presented to McCormick required him to leave school immediately.

He would agree not to return to Providence for as long as she lived there – unless it was for a wrestling competition with whatever new college he planned to attend.

She would agree to drop the matter.

Both would agree not to speak disparagingly of each other or discuss the deal outside their families.

McCormick signed the contract even as he wavered on the terms. He wrote his lawyer, Walter Stone, on Oct. 4 – the day he signed the contract in Wisconsin – to express reservations.

"This is a huge decision for me to make, and I need more time to consider, reconsider, and then go over everything again to make sure that I make the best possible decision regarding this matter," he wrote.

"There has been an awful lot of pressure put on me throughout this whole process, and for once, I would like to have the full perspective to properly make a decision of my own."

The message was forwarded to Joseph Cavanagh, the lawyer for the accuser's family, who replied the next day that it would be "unconscionable" for McCormick to attempt to renege on the deal.

He said the disciplinary hearing would proceed without a signed agreement, then in a follow-up e-mail, made what the McCormicks interpreted as a thinly veiled threat of possible criminal charges.

"The resolution we worked out would be exactly what he would need to give him the best chance to move forward with his life," Cavanagh wrote Stone. "I can only hope that you are able to persuade him and his family of what a mistake this is. As you well know, the Brown disciplinary matter is the least of his possible perils."

The contract was returned for the accuser's signature.

Cavanagh has declined to comment, other than to say that his client maintains she was raped.

Around the same time, Burch asked administrators if they had sent McCormick, who suffers from seizures, paperwork for his requested medical leave.

A Brown administrator, Robert Samuels, replied: "My understanding is that there is an agreement being made between the parties involved that supercedes (sic) any and all other processes."

On Oct. 18, McCormick wrote Brown to withdraw for medical reasons "due to the stresses caused me while I was a student at Brown." He said he would not return, a condition of the contract with his accuser.

Though colleges generally allow students withdrawing for medical reasons to return when their condition improves, McCormick was not offered that opportunity.

"Given the circumstances of your initial separation from the University," replied Klawunn, the dean of student life, "you will not be eligible for readmission to the University. Per your request we will have your transcript reflect that you withdrew for medical reasons with an effective date of Oct. 13, 2006."


William McCormick enrolled in 2007 at Bucknell, where he wrestled until being sidelined by injuries. An English major, he just completed his junior year.

Federal education privacy laws permit but do not require disclosure of disciplinary information about transfer students to their new school.

Bucknell Dean of Students Susan Hopp said she has no record Brown notified Bucknell of the rape allegations.

Bucknell wrestling coach Dan Wirnsberger said he didn't know the circumstances behind McCormick's departure until he received a vague anonymous phone call during McCormick's first year from someone opining as to what might have happened. Even then, Wirnsberger said, he made only minimal inquiry.

"He just said, `It's a personal, private matter that I'd like to keep personal and private,'" Wirnsberger recalled. "And I said, 'I totally respect that.'"

McCormick sued last fall, before the three-year statute of limitations expired, alleging the school failed to follow its own disciplinary policies, bent to the influences of a donor and failed to conduct an investigation that could have vindicated him.

Brown President Ruth Simmons told AP the allegations are "utter poppycock" but declined further comment.

A judge in April whittled the case down considerably, dismissing individual Brown administrators from the case, but left in claims of breach of contract, negligence and intentional infliction of emotional distress against the university. The accuser, a member of Brown's 2010 graduating class, and her father also remain defendants.

Nearly four years after McCormick left Brown under the cloud of rape allegations, the lawsuit represents an opportunity for him to start clearing his name, his lawyer, Kilpatrick, wrote in court papers. Though of course the case never would have come to light if McCormick had not made it public.

"The public," Kilpatrick wrote, "has the right to know about this case."


Eric Tucker is a writer for The Associated Press, based in Providence, R.I. He can be reached at features(at)

Source:click here