Topics

I gotta admit, I like the ad-free browsing. The board is wider, and I'm not in hand-to-hand combat with those *$&^! pop-ups. I don't mind banners, but if I ever meet the clown who invented pop-ups, me and him and my Smith & Wesson are gonna have a short but effective little chat.

The same goes for the maggots that write those 'browser bugs' that mess with your browser. They change your homepage and pop up ads whenever you open a browser, and the new ones grey-out the settings so you can't change it back. THOSE scumbags ought to be taken out back and shot.

Me: "So, you're the guy that wrote that annoying browser bug?"

Him: "Yes, I sure did! Cool, huh?"

Me: (BLAM) (BLAM) (BLAM)

[The news story I read on Slater had the headline "Haddon Glasses Slater". Cute. If Christian Slater had hit his wife in the head with a glass, splitting her scalp open, would they have run such a dismissive headline? Would the headline have said "Slater Glasses Haddon"? NO, it would have said that he attacked causing severe injuries. There would have been no cute dismissal of his assault and battery upon her. But she can attack him and the paper hides her violence under a cutie-pie term like "Haddon Glasses Slater". ...Brent]

"The other aggressor in domestic violence"
CATHY YOUNG - 12/1/2003

LLEGATIONS of domestic violence involving celebrities are nothing new, but two such stories in the news in the past couple of months have had a relatively unusual twist: The accused perpetrators were women and the alleged victims were men.
ADVERTISEMENT
 

First, there was the lawsuit against Liza Minelli by her estranged husband, David Gest, claiming that the singer-actress had subjected him to repeated physical abuse. Then actor Christian Slater's wife, Ryan Haddon, was arrested on charges of battery after smashing a glass on her husband's head and causing a cut that required stitches. Yet despite such incidents, the public perception of domestic abuse as something that horrid men do to helpless women persists. People who have challenged this stereotype (myself included) have been called everything from anti-feminists to backlash peddlers to apologists for abusive men.

The news story I read on Slater had the headline "Haddon Glasses Slater". Cute. If Christian Slater had hit his wife in the head with a glass, splitting her scalp open, would they have run such a dismissive headline? Would the headline have said "Slater Glasses Haddon"? NO, it would have said that he attacked causing severe injuries. There would have been no cute dismissal of his assault and battery upon her. But she can attack him and the paper hides her violence under a cutie-pie term like "Haddon Glasses Slater". ...Brent



Well, now someone with strong feminist credentials challenges a lot of the conventional wisdom on domestic violence and ways to combat it, and confirms a lot of the things we dissenters have been saying for years. That someone is Linda G. Mills of New York University, a professor of law and social work and author of the new book, ''From Insult to Injury: Rethinking Our Responses to Intimate Abuse.'' Mills, 45, is a feminist who has spent a decade working on behalf of battered women. Moreover, as she reveals in her book, she herself, 20 years ago, was a battered woman -- though she would prefer the more neutral term, ''woman in an abusive relationship.''

Drawing both on research and on her own experience in the field, Mills concludes that the conventional feminist paradigm of domestic violence as a form of patriarchal oppression is woefully inadequate. It is manifestly irrelevant for abused lesbians and gay men; it also has little meaning for women of color, who do not see the men in their community as powerful oppressors. Even for white women, it is a vast oversimplification of a complex reality. ''Years of research, which mainstream feminism has glossed over or ignored, shows that when it comes to intimate abuse, women are far from powerless and seldom, if ever, just victims,'' Mills writes. ''Like men, women are frequently aggressive in intimate settings.''

''From Insult to Injury'' is full of such heresies. Thus, Mills asserts that women who stay in abusive relationships often do so not just because of ''women's socialization within a patriarchal system'' but for complicated emotional, familiar, and cultural reasons. In many cases, she says, this decision has to be respected. She claims that policies of mandatory arrest and prosecution in domestic violence cases not only disempower women -- who aren't given any say in the handling of the case -- but actually endanger them, since an arrest may trigger an escalation of further violence. She suggests that mothers' physical violence toward children, particularly male children, plays a key part in perpetuating the cycle of abuse.

Mills does not deny (and neither does anyone else) that male violence toward women is more likely to result in physical injuries than the reverse, and that women in abusive relationships are more likely than men to be in danger. But she argues that this is no reason to disregard female violence, which needs to be acknowledged not only out of fairness to male victims but out of concern for female victims as well: A woman who starts a physical confrontation with her male partner may well find herself severely battered. To understand and prevent male violence, Mills concludes, we must understand female violence as well, whether it's physical assault or psychological aggression.

Where do we go from here? Mills is critical of the current ''lock 'em up'' dogma; instead, she would like to see a practice of ''Intimate Abuse Circles'' in which the spouses could discuss the abuse in the presence of other family members, relatives and friends. While she stresses that batterers must be held fully accountable for their actions, she also wants to see more emphasis on healing rather than punishment.

Currently, Mills's plea for reform is unlikely to have much effect. The ideology that views men as wolves and women as lambs is too deeply entrenched, and despite some feminists' claim that the media are eager to leap on any ''antifeminist'' bandwagon, Mills' thought-provoking book has received little coverage. Her message needs to be heard by politicians, judges, prosecutors and many others. It took the ''mainstream'' feminists about 30 years to establish their monopoly on the public debate about domestic violence. Mills's book may be the first step in dismantling that monopoly.

Cathy Young is a contributing editor at Reason magazine. Her column appears regularly in the Globe.

http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/335/oped/The_other_aggressor_in_domestic_violence+.shtml

Public heaps scorn on male victims of abusive women
By Linda G. Mills

http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2003-11-30-opcom_x.htm

There has been much public snickering about David Gest's $10-million lawsuit against his estranged wife, Liza Minnelli, in which he claims she beat him. Whether the suit is rooted in truth or in greed, its existence opens the door for a public discussion about our society's disquieting and pervasive problem of abusive women.

Most people's first reaction to the term "abusive women" is disbelief. Who would believe the so-called weaker sex can be as guilty of abuse as men can be? But consider these facts: In a 1975 national survey, researchers Richard Gelles and Murray Straus found that nearly equal numbers of husbands and wives committed violent acts against each other. These findings were confirmed 10 years later and in more than 100 additional studies. So, women have a long-established record as abusers.

What clearly emerges from these studies is that abusive women get away with their sins. Abused husbands either refuse to admit they are abused — and why should they, considering the scorn heaped upon Gest? — or, in a chronic state of fear or denial, refuse to recognize or even understand that they are being abused.

A striking feature of women's violence is that it can be both physical and emotional. Suzanne Steinmetz, now a sociology professor at Indiana University, called "husband beating" the most unreported crime in the United States. According to a 1997 study of New Zealand young adults, women admitted committing severe physical aggression at three times the rate of men. Kicking and hitting with an object were typical examples of severe physical violence inflicted by women.

Emotional antagonism

Violence researcher Victoria Burbank found that women also are guilty of emotional abuse, such as locking a partner out of the house or belittling him. Those who are quick to minimize emotional abuse should know that these tactics have been found to predict physical aggression in marriage. In other words, a woman's emotional abuse can be a catalyst for a physical reaction from her partner.

The fact is that taking Gest's accusations seriously challenges our core assumption that women always are victims. In another recent high profile case, actor Christian Slater received several stitches to the back of his head after being struck with a drinking glass. According to news reports, Slater initially told the police that his wife threw the glass at him. Later, after learning about Nevada's strict domestic violence laws, he changed his story and said the glass accidentally slipped out of her hand while they were joking around.

Not as simple as it may look

The picture of a violent couple is always complicated. Although it is important to note that men tend to harm women at greater rates, what's most often occurring is a nuanced, even imperceptible dynamic between a man and woman in which they provoke each other. Minnelli's divorce papers, which were filed one day after Gest's lawsuit, claimed "cruel and unusual treatment." Five years ago, Christian Slater served 90 days in jail for slugging a girlfriend.

Sorting out exactly who is doing what to whom is a matter for a Solomon to decide. But until the American public recognizes and begins to grapple with this interwoven dynamic, the true causes of intimate abuse never will be understood nor its sad consequences adequately addressed.

Beliefs about men's and women's violence are so sacred and arouse such strong feelings that the thought of questioning them can sometimes evoke violence. After Steinmetz published her groundbreaking book, The Battered Husband Syndrome, in 1978, she was not only derided and denounced, but her children's lives also were threatened.

We must begin to revise our views on men's and women's violence, especially as it relates to the insights that a great body of research already reveals. Failing to do so will compromise all victims, men and women alike, in their efforts to gain the peace and justice that they deserve.

And lastly, perhaps it is time to stop snickering over David Gest's dilemma and begin to appreciate the sadness and complexities of his situation.

Linda G. Mills is a New York University professor of social work, an affiliated professor of lawand author of Insult to Injury: Rethinking Our Responses to Intimate Abuse.

Former Women's Studies Professor Daphne Patai
Slams Academic Feminism

Former Women's Studies professor Daphne Patai, co-author of Professing Feminism: Cautionary Tales from the Strange World of Women's Studies, slammed Women's Studies for its hatred of men and fathers on His Side with Glenn Sacks on Sunday, November 30. To listen to the show archive, click here.

Some of Patai's targets included: feminist "sexual harassment hysteria," which is used as a weapon against heterosexual males and has destroyed the livelihoods of countless falsely accused men; Women's Studies' relentless promotion of lesbianism, including one professor who says that she "hasn't done her job" if even one female student remained heterosexual at the end of a semester in her class; and a professor's belief that the role of fathers is to molest their daughters in order to train them for a lifetime of sexually servicing men.

To learn more about Daphne Patai's work, click here: http://daphnepatai.com/books.php

To learn more about how our college campuses have been turned into hostile environments for men, see Glenn's columns "Why Males Don't Go to College" (She Thinks, 11/13/02), "Hate My Father? No Ma'am!" (World Net Daily, 4/8/02), "The Best Valentine's Day Gift for College Students: Gender Reconciliation " (She Thinks, 2/13/03), and "New Study Finds Myths, Misrepresentations in Women's Studies Textbooks" (Cybercast News Service, 4/1/02).

His Side with Glenn Sacks can be heard on KMPC AM 1540 in Los Angeles at 9 PM and KKOL AM 1300 in Seattle at 11 PM every Sunday evening. To listen live via the Internet from anywhere in the world go to Listen Live. Both radio and Internet listeners are encouraged to call and participate in the show live and on the air at 1-800-770-1540. All callers will be mailed a free CD of the show in which they appeared.

To help support His Side with Glenn Sacks, click here: http://www.hisside.com/support_the_show.htm

To get CDs and cassettes of all previous and future shows, go to the His Side Store. To support the advertisers who support the show, go to His Side Advertisers. To advertise on the show, go to [email protected].

[Woman convicted of kidnapping for involvement in attempted castration]

I'm sure she just needs our support and understanding.

Woman convicted of kidnapping for involvement in attempted castration

Post Wire Services
 
November 29, 2003 -- SANTA FE, N.M. - A woman faces 18 years in prison for plotting an attack in which four of her friends assaulted and attempted to savagely castrate her ex-boyfriend.

Melissa French, 27, was convicted of kidnapping Wednesday. Her accomplices - who actually carried out the attack - took plea deals, and will serve shorter sentences.

French was not present in June 2002, when the men attacked Donald Hamilton - putting a Russian assault rifle in his mouth, and later firing between his legs.

They also carved the word "narc" in his forehead with a pocketknife. Hamilton suffered separated shoulders, stab wounds and broken bones.

French was acquitted of kidnapping Hamilton, but convicted of kidnapping his roommate, who was held down during the attack.

French's attorney said her 3-year-old daughter, who has cancer, will be dead and her 10-year-old son will be grown by the time French is freed from prison.

Aarons said French turned down a plea deal that carried a minimum four-year prison sentence.

  'After showing the men where Hamilton lived, Melissa French was dropped off at a convenience store while Hamilton was attacked', prosecutor Linda Lonsdale said.

http://www.nypost.com/news/nationalnews/43318.htm

[At that point, one of the other women told Anderson that Milburn tried to inseminate herself with the contents of discarded condoms]

Lions player wrongly accused, Duggan says

Woman to be charged with lying to cops about sex act
November 26, 2003

BY BEN SCHMITT
FREE PRESS STAFF WRITER

A 22-year-old woman charged with falsely accusing Detroit Lions player Scotty Anderson of sexually assaulting her is expected to turn herself in this morning.

Wayne County Prosecutor Michael Duggan announced the felony charge against Nicole Milburn of Detroit at a news conference Tuesday morning. Duggan said the charge stems from an incident late Sept. 17 at Anderson's Dearborn apartment.

Milburn, who danced at a former Detroit gentleman's club called the Sting, went to the apartment with two friends for a night of drinking, Duggan said.

At some point, Anderson had consensual sex with one of Milburn's friends but not with Milburn, Duggan said.

At 11 that night, Anderson said, he confronted the women about $700 in cash missing from his bedroom. At that point, one of the other women told Anderson that Milburn tried to inseminate herself with the contents of discarded condoms, Duggan said.

The reason, according to Duggan: "apparently, either to hopefully cause herself to be pregnant and have a child support claim, or potentially, as it turned out, possibly to support a rape claim."

Milburn's attorney, Paul Stablein of Royal Oak, maintained Tuesday that Anderson assaulted his client.

"It's absolutely our position that she was assaulted by Scotty Anderson, and that's why she went to the police," Stablein said.

Anderson and his 18-year-old cousin found three used condoms in Milburn's back pocket, Duggan said. They also found some of the missing money stuffed into her hair, he said.

Stablein said that, based on his information, Milburn never had any condoms in her possession.

When Anderson and his cousin demanded money back, "Ms. Milburn ran out into the hallway of the building, screaming rape," Duggan said.

Neighbors called 911 and Dearborn police responded. Police found some of the missing money hidden in Milburn's car, Duggan said.

"This is disturbing from so many perspectives," Duggan said. "We are seeing more and more people's reputations being tarnished with false felony reports. This also hurts every woman who is raped and goes through that trauma because it causes other women to pause and wonder whether they're going to be believed when they see somebody who is caught being a liar."

Duggan said the two other women who accompanied Milburn confirmed that she told them about her ruse with the condoms.

Milburn is expected to be arraigned today in Dearborn's 19th District Court. The charge carries a maximum 4-year prison term. Milburn has refused to make a statement, Duggan said.

(Lololol, like any judge will ACTUALLY put her in jail for this.....)


Anderson, a three-year member of the Lions who plays wide receiver, is out of action with an ankle injury.

In May, Anderson and his brother, Stevie, were stabbed in a parking lot outside a Houston nightclub. Scotty Anderson was stabbed in the upper left arm and Stevie Anderson, a former NFL wide receiver, received multiple stab wounds. Both have recovered.

In January 2002, Anderson was carjacked in a parking lot outside the Cajundome in Lafayette, La. Keaha Alexander, 22, was sentenced in July in Lafayette to 5 years in prison for luring Anderson to the parking lot, where others with guns waited to carjack him.

Porn Trojan floods inboxes worldwide
By Iain Thomson [25-11-2003]

"There's something about Mary ..."
 
Hundreds of reports are coming in of a new Trojan spreading around the globe by posing as home made pornographic pictures.
The email arrives with the subject line 'Re[2] Mary' and starts: "Hello my dear Mary, I have been thinking about you all night. I would like to apologize for the other night ..."

But once the 'Private.zip' attachment is opened, a Trojan called Sysbug copies a file called sysdeb32.exe to the hard drive and alters the registry settings to ensure that it is activated on start-up.

The Trojan allows remote access to the PC, but is not a virus as it does not mail itself on to other computers. The original email was spammed out worldwide last night.

"The author thinks that most men are dogs who'll look at anything for kicks," said Graham Cluley of antivirus company Sophos.

"Once activated the Trojan will allow remote access to a computer, and maybe the writer thinks the type of person who opens the attachment would have other images he might like to look at."

It's different, but I like it, especially the different views and stuff.

Spencer: Feminist lawyers put different spin on Title IX
 
Gil Spencer , Times Columnist  11/16/2003
 
Delaware County's Barclay Surrick ascended to the federal bench just in time save the West Chester University women's gymnastic team from discriminatory elimination. But if it hadn't been him it probably would have been some other federal judge. It was a pretty simple case.

After all, the legal facts were all on the side of the gymnasts.

Facing a budget shortfall of close to $100,000, WCU's athletic department was ordered to make some cuts. It could have cut the men's lacrosse team, which it did, and say, the men's basketball team, which it didn't. Instead, it cut the women's gymnastics program.

Big mistake.

Maybe Athletic Director Ed Matejkovic thought he was being even-handed by cutting one men's team and one women's team. But he should have known better.

Even though the number of male and female varsity athletes at West Chester is substantially the same, there are a lot more women attending the school than men. Today, some 61 percent of WCU's students are female. That means (if my math is correct) men now make up only 39 percent of the student body.

See the problem?

No? Well, according to a decade's old interpretation of the 1972 anti-sex discrimination act in education, known as Title IX, the gender breakdown of varsity athletes should be "proportional" to their numbers in the student body. So, if 60 percent of a student body is female, 60 percent of their varsity athletes should be female as well. Get it?

I know what you're asking. You're asking what if, on a percentage basis, fewer women than men want to go out for varsity sports?

It's a fair question. In fact, survey after survey has shown this to be true in most places.

But the courts that have heard these cases have routinely dismissed that consideration as being basically irrelevant. If the U.S. Department of Education wanted to use "proportionality" as its rule, judges weren't going to say it couldn't.

Never mind that the original law written in 1972 seemed to have prohibited exactly this sort of quota mongering when it stated:

Nothing (in this act) shall be interpreted to require any educational institution to grant preferential treatment to the members of one sex on account of an imbalance which may exist with respect to the total number or percentage of that sex participating in or receiving the benefit of any federally supported program or activity, in comparison with the total number or percentage of persons of that sex in any community, state, section, or other area.

Essentially, the feminist lawyers pushing proportionality instructed federal judges to ignore this section of the law, and the judges, judges like Barclay Surrick, meekly complied.

In the West Chester case, Surrick found that the school not only failed to comply with the proportionality test, but also failed to show a "history and continuing practice" of adding women's sports; or "fully and effectively accommodating the athletic interests and abilities" of female students.

Again, never mind that when the school cut the women's gymnastics program it added a (more cost-effective) women's golf team. And never mind too that today the school offers 11 varsity sports for women but only 9 for the men.

I called the school Friday to ask Dr. Matejkovic about all this but he was out of town. I was told he was away attending the women's soccer team's game in New York. Yesterday, I was told, he was going to attend the WCU's women's basketball tournament. He's a busy man.

Last week, he was quoted in another newspaper, "Whatever we're told to do by the judge, we'll do."

I imagine reinstating the women's gymnastics team will do for starters. That will bring the total number of varsity sports for females up to 12, a full one-third more than there are for men.

Over the past 10 years, nationally, some 400 college men's sports programs have been axed specifically so that universities could comply with this patently unfair interpretation of Title IX.

A recent commission of mostly liberal, well-meaning academic types was set up by the Bush administration to look into this ongoing slaughter. But it quickly found that standing up to feminist lawyers' well-publicized but phony claims that they were out to destroy athletic opportunities for little girls everywhere was too emotionally and politically difficult to withstand.

So until a federal judge somewhere decides to interpret the 1972 law as written instead of as twisted, slapped around and stood on its head, more rulings like Barclay Surrick's can be expected.

In any case, it's hard not to be happy for the young women on the gymnastic team. All they ever wanted to do was compete. And none of this is their fault.

But a quick question: 61 percent of WCU's student body is female. Where is the proportionality in that?

Gil Spencer's column appears Sunday, Wednesday and Friday. E-mail [email protected]
 

This is a message from a mailing list, [email protected]
======================================================================

Good People & People of Faith:

This message contains information on:

1. Murtari in Jail - Your support welcome.
2. Events in Syracuse - Your FEEDBACK.

1. Murtari in Jail - Your support welcome.
---------------------------------------------------------

As many of you already know, John Murtari is presently serving a 35
day jail sentence.  He was found guilty on 5 out of 6 counts of
trespass in a complaint filed by the US Attorney's Office.  For full
details and history, see http://www.akidsright.org/actionc_syr.  Your
support is encouraged and you are welcome to write to him in jail.
His mailing address is:

John Murtari
555 South State Street
POD 3B-41
Syracuse, NY 13202

John was very thankful that US Magistrate Judge DiBianco timed the
sentence so that John would be able to have his Christmas vacation
with his son, Domenic. He will be released on December 15th and has
plane tickets for the 17th to fly out West and pick up his son for
the holiday back in New York.

One of the goals of our NonViolent actions is to generate public
support and awareness of our cause.  Any actions any of you can take
to help increase public awareness are welcome.  Our thanks to Chuck
DeHart, whose message appears below.


2. Events in Syracuse - Your FEEDBACK.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Recent feedback regarding the ongoing NonViolent Action in Syracuse:

--- Chuck DeHart (Chuck DeHart)

> Wendy McElroy,
> (cc: Views at foxnews)

> Thanks for your article on Batman, the father's rights activist in
> London.

> Did you know it is against the law to walk in a federal building all
> by yourself with a sign with your son's picture on it and words
> requesting a meeting with your US Senator?

> Please be sure to educate yourself on the plight of Mr. John
> Murtari, estranged from his son and living in the Syracuse New York
> area. John has been arrested by the complaints of staff of
> Sen. Hillary Clinton (the so called family
> politician...bullonie!). His "crime"...carrying a picture of his
> son, all by himself, in the Syracuse federal building. His agenda,
> to have a meeting with the Senator to begin hearings on civil rights
> for families. Hillary's staff have complained about John's silent
> protest, carrying his sign, and had him arrested on several
> occasions. John just got 35 days in jail from a federal judge.

> Too many of our federal representatives see domestic law reform as a
> state issue, the same thing they did before racial and gender rights
> became a federal matter. Kids need protection from the divorce
> industry NOW!

> Get up to speed at this website:
> http://www.akidsright.org/actionc_syr/.  Read the message of love
> for our kids.  Please write more about the plight of American
> fathers engaging in civil disobedience for their kids.

--- [email protected] (Robin W.)

> My congratulations to the man who had the guts to bring some light
> into a very dark place, publicly.  While many call it insane, etc.,
> it was a plan that worked to bring some attention to this sad plight
> in our family law.  I want to add: I am a mother.  Everything you
> have protested for, stated, re: fathers, applies to my plight. It
> happens to fathers more, that I will vouch for, except in
> Sacramento, CA.  In the capital of Ca., there is such corruption you
> would not believe it.  I even started support groups--most of which
> were men.  That this happens at all, male, female, is WRONG!  There
> should be some permanently binding agreement before marriage on
> raising kids.  I had sole custody for 9 yr.., voluntarily by him,
> then he decided he wanted one. He went on an 11 year obsessed,
> vindictive, abusive campaign of PAS, slandering me, using the kids
> as tools, to the point of robbing them of mental health(they had to
> pick his way or he didn't find them worthy enough to love.  How
> healthy is it to be taught to hate, disrespect, undermine, mom? ) He
> abducted the kids, 4 times, each time getting child support thrown
> out "because they are living with him".  He then booted them out and
> they would be back living with me sans support. He has the money to
> pull an OJ---get away with murder, in his obsession to prove himself
> authoritarian and superior and punish me.  He had stated that I
> would pay for not returning to him and he kept his word.  I will
> include an article I found and my own update to a reporter who never
> did shed a light, or become involved.  Hang in there, all of
> you-----all we have is the hope that one day our fighting efforts,
> even if in Spiderman form, will allow us our God given rights to
> parent our kids Vs becoming one of walking dead.  Robin W.
> [email protected]

--- [email protected]

> I guess the Constitution should say instead that "Judges have a
> right to send people to jail if those persons petition our members
> in Congress."

--- Sondra ([email protected])

> Unfortunately, when one becomes (thinks) they are powerful, they
> want you to beg.  The game is not to beg, but, to holds one's
> dignity, an display GOD's Name, and, keep displaying his name, in
> anyway, shape, or any display.  I am sick of these so-called
> Politicians.  Thank GOD, President Bush, stood up.

--- Jahlul ([email protected])

> It does my spirit good to hear that someone is standing up for
> father's and children's rights. I am a father that has been trampled
> by the unjust system that is now in effect. It punishes the father
> and child and gives the power to the mother and whoever she is
> with. The dna of the child does not change when the mother changes
> partners. I pray that more people will follow your steadfast effort
> to balance the law in this matter. I pray that you will be
> successful in court . It will help more than yourself, millions of
> children and fathers.