Article says: "If boys will be boys, men will beat women"

Combat dangerous femi agit-prop with the facts!!

Get more people involved and raise awareness!!
Buy a bumper sticker off mensactivism.. and help raise awareness every day!!

All I have seen is the abstract.
Would like the report, if possible.

oregon dad

If I had a top ten list for the most assine articles, this would certainly make my list. Pure Misandry!

Some one tell Frank Ochberg (castrated male slave) to shut the hell up!

Whats worse, misandry from a man or woman? Sometimes I wonder.

..........

"Boys should be raised like girls" Gloria Steinem

We need every gentlemen affiliated with the MRA movement to expose such bullshit!

anthony

p.s.

I'm looking for the article, but get ready for this one. Apparently some at MSNBC feel Hillary is being "victimized" by political attacks from Giuliani.

Note to Rudy: Show some chivalry, your speaking about a Woman!

"The sun isn't yellow, its chicken!"...Bob Dylan

Subject line: "sounds like Cochran has issues with her own genes.."

Body of email: "Mainly, she habitually spreads hate by telling outright lies (for example, the bogus 95% figure).

"The truth? There are over 200 scholarly studies that show that women are at least as physically agressive as men in their intimate relationships with partners: http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm

"(no, it's not self-defense. That's not what "physically agressive" means.)"
--[my name and city]

-ax

axolotl is a soldier in our battle!

"The sun isn't yellow, its chicken: Bob Dylan

1) Bogus CDC study (2005 press release):

click here

Notice the study doesn't mention the fact, that women are more likely than men, and encouraged by the police, to seek care for their injuries (see below for more detail on this). It also pretends that the "true impact" of DV is money spent on injuries. Note that the article is written by a woman.

2) More accurate CDC study done in 2007 (abstract - American Journal of Public Health):

click here

3) Maybe someone can find the full 2007 study results on CDC website:

CDC home page

I myself was unsuccessful, but I only spent about 15 minutes searching for it.

However, here's another study which suggests that the CDC can't even agree with itself:

Intimate Partner Violence study

In fact, there are many studies on their site which seem to conflict with each other.

Here's a dandy of a statistic from the above study: "IPV accounted for 20% of nonfatal violence against women in 2001 and 3% against men (Rennison 2003)"

Yeah, no kidding..since men are the great preponderance of victims of almost all other forms of violence (gangs, drug-related, etc. etc.)

Here's another statement from the same article: "Most IPV incidents are not reported to the police. About 20% of IPV rapes or sexual assaults, 25% of physical assaults, and 50% of stalkings directed toward women are reported. Even fewer IPV incidents against men are reported (Tjaden and Thoennes 2000a). "

In other places/studies, they seem to admit that violence against men is more likely under-reported than that against women. Yet, I notice in virtually all these study abstracts, which are what the public gets to see, that the language used indicates that the focus is on violence against women. Old stereotypes die hard.

In sum, the CDC should be lauded for presenting data that is closer to the truth, but they need to step away from being politically correct, and need to stop succumbing to pressure from feminists, to give us a completely accurate picture of what is going on..instead of using language, and presenting their numbers in such a way, that results from a bias in favor of women.

-ax

Tom

Here is my comment to citypulse@lansingcitypulse.com ,
"Gretchen Cochran needs to spend time with school girls to realize that
the bullying and violence that is implied as belonging only to boys, is
actually as prevalent amongst girls.
The same goes for female violence and control towards men.
It is not OK for either sex to be violent, and to deny such, is ignore
the cross gender global nature of the problem.
Please don't demonize boys!"

Here is their reply,
Thank you.
We're going to address issues of female-on-male violence in a cover story
next month.
Berl

Seems like some editorial balance will prevail, lets keep an eye out for the "female on male" article!

Thank you Maurice and everyone else who wrote! I believe they are intending to do a story due to the letters they're receiving. Don't know that for sure but I believe so. THANKS!!!

I've observed, since being a member of this board (approx. 3 years), that whenever an article pops up that gets a lot of men writing in to complain, and the media says they will do a more balanced story (or a story to balance what is previously written), that in EVERY SINGLE CASE, this is what happens:
The new story is more balanced, but contains apologist language (to women/feminists), and/or the story still puts undue focus on violence towards women. It is literally IMPOSSIBLE for the MSM to do a story on violence against men (or anything else against men), that is written in the same spirit and is as exclusive, as an article about women victims.

Most members of the press are peoply with a "deadly duo" of attributes: they 1)are inherently unethical, otherwise they would be in a different business; and 2)they are interested in only one thing, lining their pockets, and thus will go to any length necessary to avoid pissing the wrong people off (women and feminists in this case) - a group which comprises such a large part of their readership (or viewership), and could thus jeopardize their circulation or popularity.

-ax

Maurice..Thank you sir for taking action!!!

Putting her down, making her feel bad about herself, calling her fat, leaving the seat up...