The Latest
- Australia: “Murder accused wife weeps in court” [Men's Activism News]
- Anatomy of an injustice: here’s what can happen when prosecutors rely on the word of a rape accuser [False Rape Society]
- TN Paper Trashes Equally Shared Parenting Bill [Glenn Sacks]
- Want to see what a false rape claim can do to a man? [False Rape Society]
- BBC BANS MEN FROM PROGRAMME AUDIENCE [The Rights of Man]
- Santa Clara County Hospital Still Withholding Exculpatory Evidence in Sexual Assault Allegations [Glenn Sacks]
- Spanish researchers assert that men should feel more random guilt– just like women do [Men's Activism News]
- “That’s such a huge number, especially for a 16-year-old girl.” [Men's Activism News]
- Male/female high school dropout ratios show huge gap [Men's Activism News]
- Canada: Ex-MP calls for shared parenting [Men's Activism News]
- « More articles
Australia: “Murder accused wife weeps in court”
| Contributor: | Men's Activism News [source] | |
| Date: | March 12, 2010 |
Story here.
'An Adelaide woman has pleaded not guilty to murdering her husband by setting him alight at their Unley home in 2008.
Rajini Narayan, 45, wept in Adelaide Magistrates Court as she denied a charge of murder and another of arson.
It has been alleged she poured methylated spirits on her husband's genitals and ignited it, because of an alleged affair.
Narayan also pleaded not guilty to endangering the lives of her three children who were at home.
She will face the Supreme Court in April.'
Topics: Men's Activism News | Comments
Anatomy of an injustice: here’s what can happen when prosecutors rely on the word of a rape accuser
| Contributor: | False Rape Society [source] | |
| Date: | March 12, 2010 |
Mr. Dail's conviction was based almost entirely on the say so of a teenage girl.
Don Strickland, the attorney who prosecuted the case, said this: "I didn't have the strongest case in the world, but nor did I have the weakest." (See, it's perfectly OK to try someone for a crime that will send him away for decades without having the strongest case.) He explained that his prosecution of Dail hinged on two things -- the victim's identification and the "microscopically consistent" hair found on the rug in her room (which just meant that the hair had the same characteristics as Mr. Dail's hair).
A "prosecutor's dream" -- because she seemed so believable. Never mind if she really was telling the truth.
As for the hair: "The science of that hair match was not the greatest in the world, but in those days we didn't have DNA. It was the best we had. I thought it was better than nothing, but it turned out it wasn't."
And a pubic hair found at the scene did not match Mr. Dail.
Oh, they had other "evidence," too -- useless evidence -- a vaginal swab, but they weren't able to make an accurate determination whether the semen had come from Mr. Dail or not.
Great.
Wait, there's more. What about the police investigation? "It wasn't the greatest police work in the case. That detective was no Sherlock Holmes."
So, you had junk science with the "consistent" hair that the prosecutor now admits was the same as nothing, you had evidence that was inconsistent with Mr. Dail's involvement, you had evidence that everyone accepted showed nothing (the vaginal swab), you had a mediocre police investigation -- and you had a twelve-year-old girl who was very believable.
Ladies and gentlemen, what this case came down to is this: a twelve year old girl sent a 19-year-old man away for 18 years -- because a district attorney and the jury believed her over him. She was a better actress than Mr. Dail.
As the prosecutor said: "The girl said that he was the guy who did it. I couldn't dismiss that," Strickland said.
Read that last sentence again and again, and let it sink in. A man's liberty, his life, was completely in the hands of a twelve-year-old girl.
His life was destroyed because she turned out to be a better little actor.
And that, ladies and gentlemen, tells us that there is something very, very wrong with the system.
Topics: False Rape Society | Comments
TN Paper Trashes Equally Shared Parenting Bill
| Contributor: | Glenn Sacks [source] | |
| Date: | March 12, 2010 |
Read this article on Glenn's Web site
Topics: Glenn Sacks |
Want to see what a false rape claim can do to a man?
| Contributor: | False Rape Society [source] | |
| Date: | March 11, 2010 |
Falsely accused caterer begins battle to get back his life and cash
A WOMAN who falsely accused a Derbyshire man of rape after taking £71,500 of his cash has been ordered to pay back the entire amount.
David Wilson, 45, spent seven months in custody on remand when he was charged with several crimes, including rape, after allegations were made against him.
But four days before he was due to appear in court, he was told by police that new information had come to light and he was free to go.
Mr Wilson said that before the allegations were made, he had paid the woman £71,500.
However, just four days after the money was transferred, Mr Wilson was arrested on suspicion of committing a series of offences against the woman.
A court has now said the £71,500 should be paid back to Mr Wilson.
He said: "I just want this money back and I want everyone to know that I am completely innocent.
"Spending all that time in prison wasn't an easy thing. I have had a lot of trouble over this and have been labelled all sorts of terrible things. I have lost thousands and thousands of pounds, as well.
"Even now, after all this time, I walk down the street and people look at me differently."
Mr Wilson's nightmare began in February 2007, when he was arrested and charged with dangerous driving, assault, intimidating witnesses, sexual assault and rape.
He was taken to Leicester Prison, where he was kept for eight weeks on remand before being transferred to Nottingham Prison.
Mr Wilson, who lived in Oakerthorpe, near Alfreton, before his arrest, said that, during his time in prison, he was placed alongside rapists and paedophiles and had people spitting in his food.
While he was in prison, his two children went to stay with their grandmother. He managed to speak to them and see them occasionally but said it was hard being parted from them.
In August 2007, Mr Wilson was released on bail, on condition that he kept out of Derbyshire.
He went to stay with an aunt in Birmingham but was arrested again in the October after the person who made the original accusations against him claimed he broke the conditions.
He was sent to Birmingham's Winson Green Prison and was due to appear at Derby Crown Court on November 26 until the charges were dropped. The ordeal left him homeless, jobless and separated from his two children. Before his arrest, he ran a successful business, selling hot food from a van at football matches.
He launched a civil case to recover the money which had been taken from him and Dudley County Court ordered the woman pay it back in full. He is also seeking compensation for his ordeal and losses.
Mr Wilson said: "I am completely innocent and knew all along I was but it seemed to me that nobody really wanted to listen."
Link: http://www.thisisderbyshire.co.uk/news/Falsely-accused-caterer-begins-battle-life-cash/article-1890815-detail/article.html
Topics: False Rape Society | Comments
BBC BANS MEN FROM PROGRAMME AUDIENCE
| Contributor: | The Rights of Man [source] | |
| Date: | March 11, 2010 |
Yesterday evening the publicly funded BBC took the unprecedented step of banning men from the audience of BBC's Question Time programme as a way of "celebrating" International Women's Week (I always though it was Women's Day, but obviously there wasn't enough time to fit in all the misandry). The only men present were the host and two people on the panel, the Sun's Kelvin McKensie and the BBC's own Monty Don. Other panelists included the rather reasonable Jo Swinson of the Lib Dems, Conservative Justine Greening, and the Labour's quite hideous Carloine Flint.
Perhaps the most interesting aspect of the programme were not so much the topics discussed, but the unstated parallel that could be drawn throughout almost every single one of them. We had the Jamie Bulgar case discussed as well as the fact a man had been falsely accused of being his killer on Facebook (he has been forced into hiding and currently fears for his life). Later there was an intense discussion on the death of troops in Afghanistan due poor quality equipment being provided by the government, as well as the countless horrific injuries caused to survivors. We had mentions of the children horrifically tortured in Edlington there was an extensive discussion of the case of David Askew, a man with learning difficulties who died yesterday having being bullied over many years.
So what's the parallel between every single noteworthy discussion of the week? Well rather ironically in this era of so much supposed "violence against women" and oppression and the resulting need for women only this and that, almost every single victim of every issue discussed throughout the entire hour was male. With just one exception every UK soldier killed in Afghanistan has been male. Similarly all the domestic vicitms of violence and murder discussed were male too, and we even had the key MRA issue of false allegations given a mention on top of all that!
Clearly it's hardly surprising that so many vicitms of violence were men given the vastly greater threat of violence they their daily lives compared to women and the resulting lower life expectancy. This was however a BBC programme we're taking about and it at least shows they perhaps can't control the questions the generally public want to ask to the same extent they censor so much other output. Also it was very refreshing to see that so many decent women in the audience aren't as misandric and self-obsessed as so many of their "elected" female sisters in Parliament, and so many clearly realise and are hugely concerned about the plight of men subconsciously at the very least.
The incredibly ironic theme of male victims continued right until the end of the programme, with a discussion of all women shortlists, and a quite magnificent older women in the audience (and others) condemning them as passionately and eloquently as anything you'll see on this blog.
One of the only two notable pieces of misandry we saw on the programme in fact came from a man in Monty Don, who suggested he'd be happy to see an all female parliament with no men in it at all as it couldn't' be any worse than the current lot (though it would seem he was playing to the crowd as much as giving a genuine opinion). This of course illustrates the idiocy of banning particular groups from an audience or any institution for that matter. It was clear the pressure of the all women audience not only influenced Don's answers, but also stifled McKensie at times too (albeit to a far lesser extent).
Thus there are useful lessons for us to take from the programme. Could Don have asked for a Parliament that excluded ethnic minorities and got such a round of applause? His conduct illustrates just how misandry works in practice with sexist comments about men encouraged and going unchallenged. The make up of the event very much reflected the balance of genders one finds at the average primary school - where you have the odd token male teacher and token male parent against a sea of females. Further still, whatever anti male indiscretions occur in such an environment aren't subject to the scrutiny nor of millions watching at home on tv either and the resulting moderation of one's behaviour.
The most ill informed and sexist comment of the night came at the very end of the programme, with an audience member praising the fact men had been barred from taking part and suggesting that men could never organise their own International Men's Day as women have done. In reality there has in fact been an International Men's day for a number of years now, it's just that all the politicians we see week in week out on Question Time refuse to acknowledge and celebrate the event and the BBC are just as ignorant or dismissive of the event. If only we'd had some way for one of the many men behind International Men's Day to inform such ignorant parties of the existence of the event and it's importance? Maybe some sort of weekly nationally broadcast discussion forum, watched by millions where broadcasters, politicians and the members of the public of both sexes all come together and pool their knowledge and ideas in order to to be able to have an informed discussion of such issues?
I suppose given that gender segregation is so much on the increase these days this won't be the last time we see such misandry on the BBC. Kelvin McKensie at least stated he hoped not to see the sexist format return for anther 30 years. At the current rate the women on such a 2040 edition of Question Time will unfortunately be just as ignorant about International Men's Day as those taking part this evening.
Topics: The Rights of Man | Comments
Santa Clara County Hospital Still Withholding Exculpatory Evidence in Sexual Assault Allegations
| Contributor: | Glenn Sacks [source] | |
| Date: | March 11, 2010 |
Read this article on Glenn's Web site
Topics: Glenn Sacks |
Spanish researchers assert that men should feel more random guilt– just like women do
| Contributor: | Men's Activism News [source] | |
| Date: | March 11, 2010 |
If it gets any more ridiculous, I will be forced to fall off my chair. Read the inanity here. Excerpt:
'Kim Moldofsky can feel guilt over just about anything — her children, stray cats, her work, her husband. “I am easily guilted,” she told me, laughing.
Meanwhile, her husband, Brad, 41, remains blissfully guilt-free. “He is kind and caring but he can be more detached,” said Moldofsky, a 41-year-old “mom blogger” and social media strategist near Chicago. “Sometimes I want him to get caught up in the emotion.”
So, apparently, does a team of Spanish psychological researchers. In a reversal of Professor Henry Higgins’ plaintive cry “Why can’t a woman be more like a man?,” it suggested that when it comes to guilt, men should be more like women.
Men are guilt-deficient, suggests the study, which was published in a recent issue of The Spanish Journal of Psychology. We lack “interpersonal sensitivity,” while women suffer from destructive guilt largely imposed by society.
So women need support, while men need fixing. “This study highlights the need for educational practices and socializing agents to reduce the tendency towards anxious-aggressive guilt in women, and to promote interpersonal sensitivity in men,” write the authors of the study, which was led by Dr. Itziar Extebarria of the Unversity of the Basque Country in Spain.
...
“Empathy is wonderful,” she continued. “We can share emotions. We can feel someone else’s pain. But that comes at a cost, and that cost is the higher preponderance of anxiety and depressive disorders” in women.
On the other hand, men generally feel guilt less intensely, partly because we have a huge testosterone payload. It makes us take more chances, be more a little more callous about our actions, not spend time worrying about our decisions once they’re made. This is good, argued Sommers*. “Men may be more stoical and that may be adaptive for society. We need to have 25-30 year old men not ruminating” but building, sometimes even fighting.'
("...sometimes even fighting." Well, can't say I agree with her on that.)
Anyway, this is like saying that to make life easier for people who are bound to wheelchairs, everyone else who can walk should likewise be bound to them. Then things would be much better for everyone.
I think Kurt Vonnegut, Jr. wrote a novel that had this as a theme-- that society would in future find ways to hobble individuals based on their strengths so as to "even out" society. Those who were physically strong would have weights attached to their limbs to make them less capable of doing things, so that they were more like "everyone else". People with high IQs would have higher standards to pass to get the same jobs or would be forced to take IQ-inhibiting drugs, etc., to make them "more like other people" in the brains department, etc., etc.
Can't remember the name, but this story reminds me of that book.
---
*That's Christina Hoff Sommers they are referring to.
Topics: Men's Activism News | Comments
“That’s such a huge number, especially for a 16-year-old girl.”
| Contributor: | Men's Activism News [source] | |
| Date: | March 11, 2010 |
Sixteen-year-old girl pleads guilty to manslaughter. Presumably, if the perp had been male, 18 years for murder would not have been too much. Excerpt:
'Facing life in prison if her case went to trial, a 16-year-old girl admits she shot a man in the head after some sort of fight last June on Conkey Avenue.
Jessica Arnold was supposed to go on trial next week. The victim was Lamont Smith.
This morning, Arnold pled guilty to first-degree manslaughter. The reason being, her lawyer said, they didn't want to take the risk of going to trial. Arnold would have been tried as an adult on charges of murder and she could have faced up to life in prison if convicted.
On June 13, 2009, Arnold shot and killed 33-year-old Lamont Smith on Conkey Avenue during an argument. Arnold's attorney says there was a crowd, and that she fired in self-defense but prosecutors say that's not the case.
Arnold's attorney talked to News 10NBC about his client accepting 18 years in prison. Arnold's attorney Andre Vitale spoke with her family after the court appearance. Defense attorney Andre Vitale said, “That's such a huge number, especially for a 16-year-old girl. She's going to spend almost as long in state prison as she has alive. And it's really tough to resolve the case in that way but I really think that she has a chance after 15 years to get out and to really move on with her life.”'
Topics: Men's Activism News | Comments
Male/female high school dropout ratios show huge gap
| Contributor: | Men's Activism News [source] | |
| Date: | March 11, 2010 |
Story here. Admittedly, this is just one city, and one that has been under great educational distress for some time. But it does reflect the larger trend: girls are beating boys solidly in terms of graduation, and not by a mere couple of percentage points but by solid margins. They are also clobbering boys in terms of grade performance as well, but this is hardly news. And yet feminists still insist there is no boys' education crisis. Excerpt:
'The state education department released graduation rates this week for all high schools and school districts across New York.
Rochester's four-year graduation rate dropped from 52-percent to 46-percent. News 10 NBC wanted to know how the numbers break down for male students and female students.
The city school district today released those numbers. Fifty-two-percent of girls graduate on time while only 39-percent of boys graduate on time.
Dropout numbers are also revealing. According to state figures for the 2008-09 school year, more male students dropped out than female students. Twenty-nine-percent of girls dropped out, while 35-percent of boys did.
Rochester Mayor Bob Duffy is seeking approval in Albany for a City Hall takeover of city schools. City Hall contributes $119-million annually in property tax revenue to the schools. He has a plan to keep boys and girls in school to graduate. "I think first of all you have to meet them where they're at. And one of the things, making sure they are in school," said Duffy.'
39/52 = .75. Boys this past year in Rochester graduated from high school at 75% the rate of girls. For every 4 girls graduating, 3 boys are doing the same.
And the overall numbers are abysmal. Forty-six percent. It's unfathomable to me. I grew up in a small town where people were expected, generally, just to make it out of high school. The graduation rate was nonetheless solidly above 90%, closer to 95%, consistently across years. And you could count on two hands and two feet the number of people with degrees beyond high school in that town, population 5,000. Nonetheless, the H.S. graduation rates were that high. (I'll tell you what, too, people were very slow to get divorced when I was growing up, and despite the fact that sounds like I am referring to 1867, it was not that long ago; it was the 1970s and early '80s. You could safely assume any kid in your school had mom and dad, both living under the same roof.) Now look at what things have come to. These numbers are consistent with what I'd expect to see from a second-world country.
Topics: Men's Activism News | Comments
Canada: Ex-MP calls for shared parenting
| Contributor: | Men's Activism News [source] | |
| Date: | March 11, 2010 |
Story here. Excerpt:
'When it comes to gaining access to their kids, a growing number of divorced fathers say they've been stymied by a police and court system that reflexively views women as believable and men as violent.
It's an emotional topic that dismays many of those who work in the field of domestic violence.
But a growing number of men's groups -- and a private member's bill (C-422) that would amend the Divorce Act by instructing judges to grant equal shared parenting except in proven cases of abuse -- are advancing this view.
One man I spoke to, for instance, says his ex-wife falsely accused him of slamming a van door on her leg. And even though that assault charge was later withdrawn by the Crown attorney, the man says the allegations damaged his reputation during proceedings with a family court judge who restricted his access to his kids.
It's those kinds of situations that the fledgling London Equal Parenting Committee will explore during "an evening of awareness in relation to domestic violence" Thursday at Crouch Library.'
Topics: Men's Activism News | Comments
« Previous Articles