Luek writes "

This is a story about hideous monster called Theresa Cross.

She murdered her 'first husband' when she was 18 and got away with it by playing the abuse excuse card in court. This was in the early 1960's! She then killed two of her daughters and plea bargained. Before she killed her two siblings she ruled her brood for years with a venomous brutality that would make Ghenghis Khan blush.

Theresa Cross is epitomizes the denial society is in when it comes to female domestic violence. For years this cretin carried on a reign of terror against her family that would never have been tolerated if she were a man."

A double post here: Matt writes "Discussed here, Note how the article
ends:

"'This is a violation of privacy, and in that way, it is very much, psychologically, like a rape,' said Patricia Saunders, director of the Graham Windham Manhattan Mental Health Center in New York."

OK, so openly accusing a man of a crime for which he is presumed innocent (supposedly) until proven guilty (as if he isn't assumed guilty by "virtue" of the mere accusation) is not a violation of his privacy-- but revealing the name of the accuser is, and if she is female and is charging him with rape, she is thus being raped again.
But what is happening to him is just fine.

I continue to be surprised, but really, why should I be?"

Hunsvotti writes "On Tuesday, July 22, 2003, radio host Tom Leykis revealed the name of the woman who has accused Kobe Bryant of rape on his nationally-syndicated radio show. Since then, there have been well over 100 media reports covering the revelation. Tom Leykis' e-mail has been flooded with hundreds of letters, many (all?) of which are displayed here. The e-mails ranged from staunch support to incredulous outrage. One woman taglined her e-mail with "Grow up you stupid bastard ......oh and watch out." Another woman wrote "...However, I do feel it unjust for a woman to accuse someone (anyone) of rape, then hide and request anonymity." The saddest part was the men who derided him for outing the accuser. Don't they realize how vulnerable they are to false accusations? Whether or not Kobe Bryant raped this girl is irrelevant - you can't drag the accused through the mud before they've even had a trial, while vehemently insisting that the accuser should have full anonymity."

Mark writes "Sean Hannity, host of the nation's 2nd most listened to talk radio show, discussed at length today the blatant double standard in the way rape accusers are treated in comparison to the accused. This was in regard to the Kobe Bryant situation. He acknowleged that while women's lives can in fact be ruined by rapes (a point that a female caller kept screaming at him), men's lives can be ruined by false accusations of rape. The majority of the callers overall (probably 60% or so) agreed with him, while about 30% or so of the women agreed. To anyone who is familiar with Hannity, this is definitely significant. He has been known to side with women in nearly every case split along gender lines. He is of the old school "men are naturally bad and women are naturally pure" train of thought. I've heard him tell his female callers to refuse to go out with any guy who doesn't pay for EVERYTHING. But, this appears to signal a potential change. At the very least, it signals an awareness. The topic will also be on tonight's Hannity & Colmes (9pm EST, FoxNews). We can contact him to thank him at hannity@foxnews.com"

CJ writes "This study reveals that minorities and men are least likely to receive warnings as opposed to tickets for speeding in a car. That there is a pattern of differential treatment between men and women is clear and it adds up to an estimated cost of $25 million a year in traffic fines and higher insurance premiums - just in MA alone. It is safe to assume that any interpretive interaction with a police officer probably yields harsher results for men, this is especially so in alleged domestic violence matters where men are always assumed guilty. The fact that intentional discrimination violates the constitution's equal protection guarantee seems to have little meaning when men are victimized by our own government.

>"

Anon User writes "Glenn Sacks discussed men, marriage and how men can be "married and happy" with men's counselor Wayne Levine, M.A., director of the West Coast Men's Center on His Side with Glenn Sacks on KRLA 870 AM in Los Angeles on Sunday, July 20.

Levine stressed the importance of men "finding their nuts"--their "nonnegotiable, unalterable terms" in their marriages, and criticized traditional marriage counseling as being bad for men. To listen to the show archive, go to His Side"

The mayor of a Spanish town has barred men (1, 2) from the outdoors on Thursday nights. Any man caught outside during the all-male curfew will be fined, and the money will be given to "groups that deal with domestic violence and equality between the sexes."

This sort of thing has been done elsewhere, I think in Bogota, Columbia, and the feminists in Boulder, Colorado, have proposed barring men from the outdoors on a regular basis.

Remember how blacks used to be barred from the outdoors unless they were accompanied by an owner?

Warble has recently brought it to my attention that men are going to jail for refusing to pay child support to children that are not theirs. Resisting the tyranny of the state. I urge writers from men's news daily, journalists or activists alike to see what can be done about this. Is it possible to get interviews from some of the men who have gone to jail? For an investigative reporter this is a good story because a special note should be made of these men. Im sure there is more on this topic that I have overlooked. At the very least a mention on men's news daily. If anyone has a link on this issue I can use please send it to the admin email. It is the type of news that mainstream steers from, but it is news.

locksley2k writes "The Long Island newspaper, Newsday, ran this article today acknowledging the exsistence of the health care crsis for men in this country.

Of course the author had to make a comment on the tired argument of who's the weaker sex question and a snide remark that concludes men are dying for the same reason they don't ask for directions.
However the problem is being recognized and that's what counts.Then again part of the problem is us, if men in general show more intrest in their own health the rest will follow."

Here's Fred's take on marrying in the US today. I suspect he'd say something similar about marriage in much of the rest of the English speaking world. (Note the exception of Singapore.)

warble writes ""In a 5-0 decision, the court said even a fit father with joint custody and liberal visitation rights does not have an automatic right to know the whereabouts of his child....Cynthia Sacharow accused him [her husband] of domestic violence because he repeatedly called her pager. She said he was harassing and stalking her, acts considered domestic violence under New Jersey law...." Gees. This basically says it all. A father can be fit, reputable, have visitation rights and it can be lost if he calls an x-wife's pager too many times in an attempt to visit a child. To qualify all a woman must do in New Jersey is call the police and report to a domestic violence (DV) shelter. If anybody still doubts that DV shelters are actually family destructions units they must be out-of-their-friggin minds!"

Do men have to wage a Marxist Class(gender) War in order to get fair treatment? Hitler's brand of marxist class war consisted of bloated statistics, vile political cartoons, insinuating and biased "scientific research" studies among other things. Pretty much like many of the feminist research models we see today. I am asking, is it necessary for men's rights groups to 'lie', to inflate statistics, to create a manufactured reality and to drive home dramatic overtones that paralize society with distrust and division in order to advance our agenda, just in order to be heard and considered? Its a 'at what length will we go to acheive our goal' sort of thought. Will we retain respect and dignaty with our objectives? A special thanks to Wendy McElroy, Trudy Schuett, Dianna Thompson and Christina Hoff Sommers for thier relentless efforts for the co-operative love of both sexes.

Chuck Jones writes "The Bush Education Department last Friday affirmed the use of destructive gender quotas in enforcing Title IX in school athletics. These quotas result in eliminating thousands of opportunities for male wrestlers, swimmers, etc., Recently on a 60 Minutes special, a male athlete who loved wrestling all his life but was suddenly told that he couldn't play because he was male, said "I pray that I have daughters because that's the only way they'll have any opportunities to play."

Please follow the URL to take action today and show your disapproval of this cave-in to the quota-advocate gender feminists.

URL: here"

Mangesh writes "Indian Supreme Court has ruled that different retirement age for male and female flight attendants in Air India does not violate the Indian constitution. Currently, the retirement age is 58 and 50 respectively. This was challenged on the ground that it is based on gender discrimination and therefore violates article 14 of the constitution. Feminists have demanded a review of the verdict. You can find a sample article at here. The law on DV in India discriminates against men but feminists have never taken up the issue. If a man subjects his wife to cruelty, he can go to jail for upto 3 years, and cruelty is defined in the most general manner as "any wilful act which is likely to drive her to kill herself or causes or is likely to cause grave danger to her life, limb or health (whether physical or mental)". A woman subjecting her husband to cruelty is not a crime at all!"

mcc99 writes "See: The Washington Times they got our name not quite right - but if you search on the name given in Google, you'll find us!"

amperro writes "July 8 CBS ran an episode of "Judging Amy" about a woman suing her husband for more child support, and then reveals that he isn't the real father! Then Judge Amy Gray threatens to put HIM (not her!) in jail! Frankly, if we are to win the war on paternity fraud, we need to call for the prosecution and imprisonment of the mothers, rather than just relief from child support orders."