|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I sent an e-mail to Annika Flansburg, who is the press officer for this particular campaign.
Her addy is:
aflensburg@amnesty.org
I would suggest everyone write to her and educate her on the real numbers. (I seriously doubt that she'll respond though.) I suspect they don't really want to end ALL domestic violence. They probably only care for the victims if they're female.
"Existence exists. A is A." -Ayn Rand
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:51 PM March 6th, 2004 EST (#5)
|
|
|
|
|
Is there a group/website that lists human rights violations of just boys/men or that fairly lists violations regardless of gender. Amnesty international does a good job ,well, up until now and I'm just wondering who I should be supporting now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:14 PM March 6th, 2004 EST (#2)
|
|
|
|
|
What's missing in this story that ran yesterday? Amnesty International appears to present a very biased approach to the facts in my opinion.
(click) Amnesty International
Here is how Females voted on the war in Iraq in the Senate: Yes - 9, No - 4
(click) Senators
Here is how Females voted on the war in Iraq in the Assembly: Yes - 23, No - 35
(click) Representatives
It appears female elected representatives have no problem sending men to fight and die in wars at rates disproportionate to their representation in society. Where is Title IX now to level this playing field??? Why are men relegated to the glass cellar of war in such numbers??? Why can a man not even get a student loan in college unless he has registered with Selective Service, further hurting his chances for success in college??? I would also consider being sent to war for years a definite impediment to completing a college education.
I was unable to find the vote for the war in Afghanistan, but I seem to recall that many more females voted for that war, yet it is men who are killed and wounded in combat at a rate of approximately 98% to women's 2%.
My main question remains: Why send so many men to combat, then blame only men for all violence in our society as women's studies and women's commissions do?
There is systematic sexist hostility against men rampant in America today, in government, and in many organizations pretending to be charities.
Sincerely, Ray
I apologize for using "Vote No War" as a quick information source for the congressional record instead of digging deeper. Regardless of whether you oppose or favor the war, the issue as I see it is, "War discrrimates horribly against average men."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:25 PM March 6th, 2004 EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
The American economy is a house built on a foundation of oil. If we owned all the oil in the world that we try to control, perhaps our world politics and subsequent societal issues would be neater, but we do not.
Have the people at Amnesty International sold there cars, and now do their laundry by hand? Have they sworn off all electricity, or are they just too comfortably complacent in hypocritically denying their contributions to foreign oil dependency? At some point all Americans have become a nation whose motto is more, "In Oil We Trust," than "In God We Trust." I admit to my, and America’s, reliance on foreign oil, and the ugly politics that goes with it. I wish that it were not so, but it is.
Are many of the worlds wars fought over competition for limited resources? Yes, even though other excuses are often used. It's easy to look at the few powerful men in high places who control the masses through their vast powers, then say they are all men so all men are the problem, but it is a lie!
It is obvious from the rampant corruptness we see in the fundamental feminist's agenda that they are no better at avoiding the corrupting influence of power than men are. Meanwhile, the average Jane Doe tries to find her balance in our brave new world, while John Doe marches off to war, then takes more shots when Johnny comes marching home again. For the average Western man today he is in the target zone from moment of his birth, until the day he dies. There is no greater indicator of his oppression than death, and it is men who are most disproportionately going to there graves in an untimely manner, not women as Amnesty International so deceptively tries to indicate is the case
Ray
(click) Cannon Fodder
(click) Oppression
(Please do not scroll up the page of the linked items. All the info I am trying to convey is only as the page comes up initially.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:33 PM March 6th, 2004 EST (#4)
|
|
|
|
|
Ickny Ickny Ickny Zuuupung Zoooomboing Naminaminah!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:54 PM March 6th, 2004 EST (#7)
|
|
|
|
|
"Ickny Ickny Ickny Zuuupung Zoooomboing Naminaminah!
Translation from troll language into English:
"Agh, you've struck a nerve. Now all can see what flaming fools we fundamental feminists and our ilk are!"
Thanks troll, as long as your upset, that's a sure indicator we're right on target.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 04:01 PM March 6th, 2004 EST (#8)
|
|
|
|
|
Amenstiy International appears to be nothing more than "Nasty Gender Nonsense."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 04:16 PM March 6th, 2004 EST (#9)
|
|
|
|
|
>"Ickny Ickny Ickny Zuuupung Zoooomboing Naminaminah!
I've got two words for you; 'HEAVY MEDICATION'!
and lots of it, joker.
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ni!
Now to voice my opinion...
Having women able to control the men who are sent to war is comparible to the HORROR of men being able to choose abortion over garnished wages for the rest of their lives. The standard argument I've heard personally is "it's a woman's body, the man has no right to choose!". Well, in the case of 18 year old boys being sent to die, I suppose that's NOT the man's bodies we're dealing with. That just a crash test dummie, apparently.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:13 PM March 7th, 2004 EST (#21)
|
|
|
|
|
Okay, I'm getting confused.
First someone posts "Icky icky zuuboing", or what ever, Now you start your post with "Ni!"
Is this some new trend I haven't heard of, makeing wierd noises on the internet?
I said it before, I'll say it again; ...'the Hell...?
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 02:18 PM March 7th, 2004 EST (#23)
|
|
|
|
|
Okay, I get it now.
I remember that movie, I saw it way back when I was in college. (Holy Grail)
The Knights who say "Ni!"
I'd just forgotten that shtick. I remember I did laugh alot, So it must have been funny.
So now that that little mystery is solved, I still have to ask, What the hell?
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dear Annika Flensburg:
It is good of you to devote time to putting an end to the horrors of domestic abuse, but I must say that I am saddened to see that your campaign only seeks to assist approximately 50% of the victims.
Dozens of studies indicate that men and women INITIATE domestic violence against one another at approximately equal rates, and yet it seems that only "violence against women" causes a blip on the international radar screen. Focusing on "violence against women" is no different from focusing on "redheads who are HIV+" or "left-handed people who are sexually harassed". Violence against women and violence against men are not two different causes vying for our attention; they are subsets of the same awful problem. NO ONE, no matter how big or small, no matter how strong or not-so-strong, should ever be abused. When will your website reflect this?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Also notice that Amnesty International has obsolutely nothing whatsoever to say about Male Genital Mutilation on their website, but they've got literally TONS of stuff to say about FGM.
I did a search for MGM, and came up with no hits. I did a search for FGM, and came up with dozens and dozens of hits.
Apparently they turn a blind eye to all the little boys out there who are mutilated. I mean, hey, little boys don't count, do they? Who cares if they have a part of their body cut off without their consent?
"Existence exists. A is A." -Ayn Rand
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dear Ms.Flansburg,
Your organization frames the issue of domestic violence as if it is predominantly a male upon female phenomena. That couldn't be further from the truth!
You heard me. Now, I'll tell you a secret:
(Women commit more than men. Shhh.)
Why do most find the assertion that women commit more domestic violence than men, hard to believe; contrary to all they "know?" It is certainly contrary to Public Opinion and Conventional Wisdom, so someone is up to something. Who is making which claim based on what?
Aren't a third of women beaten or raped by their mate? Don't men commit 90 percent of domestic violence? You don't mean to suggest that anyone's been misleading us or that the media has been in the least careless, allowing us to believe things that are patently false and provably wrong?
It is a shock to most. There is a very large gap between public perception and what is known about domestic violence from scholarly research. Such gaps are usually a symptom of political manipulation, and that makes it possible that innocent people are being persecuted for the selfish interests of a few. So you have to get curious. What is the truth and why don't we know? Who would tell us?
Here's a small, typical sample of the actual research:
In 1992, 1.9% of women were the victim of severe assault by their mate. 4.5% of men were the victims of the same. Murray Straus, Glenda Kantor, "Change in Spouse Assault Rates from 1975 to 1992," presented at the 13th World Congress of Sociology, July 19, 1994.
Female victims of spousal assault: 4.8%. Male victims: 10.0%. Brinkerhoff & Lupri, Canadian Journal of Sociology, 1989.
Female victims of spousal assault: 3.8%. Male victims: 4.6%. Kalmuss, "The Intergenerational Transmission of Marital Aggression," Journal of Marriage and the Family, Vol. 46, pp. 11 - 19, 1984.
Women report initiating more violence with non-violent partners (22%) than do men (17%). Bookwala, Frieze, Smith, Ryan, "Predictors of Dating Violence: A Multivariate Analysis," Violence and Victims, Vol. 7, pp. 297 - 311, 1992.
25% of both male and female spouses experience some form of overall violence (mild to severe). But wives committed an 11.3% incidence rate of severe violence, while men initiated only 5.8%. Russell & Hulson, "Physical and Psychological Abuse of Heterosexual Partners," Personality and Individual Differences, Vol. 13, pp. 457 - 473, 1992.
It suggests a wide gap from what we've heard. But since we believe and hear what we want to, this can hardly be a conspiracy. When you discover the gaps between myth and reality the question becomes: Why have we WANTED to believe the reverse of the truth? Why have we all been so anxious to believe that men are all monsters and women have a sudden, overwhelming need for extra protection?
The Truth about DV
In contrast to the myths:
Psychologist Martin Fiebert, Ph.D., may not have compiled an annotated bibliography of all the academic studies of domestic violence ever done in the world over the last 15 years, but he's come close. It includes almost all studies in the US, and the most significant ones from other countries. The research reveals that female on male domestic violence is as common as male on female. Plus, women abuse their children at a rate clearly in excess as do fathers.
http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm
Rev. Sam Sewell and his wife Rev. Bunny of Family Resources & Research, FL, who have worked in family violence for decades and founded women's shelters, became so incensed by the gap between public perception and reality that they published an extensive and authoritative document on the Web, calling for other workers in this area to counter the lies.
http://www.menweb.org/batsewel.htm
The Family Research Laboratory at the University of New Hampshire has spent over 25 years defining and performing research into all forms of family violence. Many of their papers can be found on their website.
http://www.unh.edu/frl/
Erin Pizzey founded the world's first women's refuge in London over 30 years ago. In a July, 1998 article for "The Observer" she says that of the first 100 women who came, at least 62 were as violent as their husbands. She wrote:
"Not only did they admit their violence in the mutual abuse that took place in their homes, but the women were abusive to their children. The purpose of the refuge was not to make political gain out of personal suffering, but to seek to discover the causes of domestic violence and to create therapeutic programs that would educate violence-prone parents to learn to eradicate their violent behavior. Unfortunately, at this time the feminist movement — hungry for recognition and for funding — was able to hijack the domestic violence movement and promptly set about disseminating dubious research material and disinformation."
But the US Violence Against Women Act explicitly denies funding to any agency that suggests or probes for contribution to the violence on the part of the female. Female = victim. It also denies funding for programs for battered men. Programs for men are to simply shame and blame the men and to teach them respect for women.
I trust that in the name of justice and to fully serve all, that your organization cease disseminating misinformation, and instead approach the issue of domestic violence in a fully factual and honest manner. The solid research is readily available. The myths and lies that have dominated this subject have been spread far too much and far too long. Isn't it time that the truth be told, and isn't it time that the whole of domestic violence be confronted and fully addressed?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 05:18 PM March 6th, 2004 EST (#12)
|
|
|
|
|
Kal.
Exelent letter!
If she is a person of any degree of reason, perhaps Ms. Flansburg will get the message.
We can only HOPE that the truth about DV will sink in to her and that perhaps she, like the rest of us will do her part to get that truth out to the public.
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kal, wow! That is great info. Nice job.
The Biscuit Queen
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notice the SOURCES for her info:
The U.N. feminist organizations.
I'm not sure if A.I. (Amnesty International) is being duped, but I doubt it. I was part of this in college. The leaders are pretty savy and deal with lying dictators and false propaganda from all around the world
I think the feminazis in the U.N. have gotten their hooks into A.I. Why else would the U.N. stats be the ones predominently used?
Steven
Guerilla Gender Warfare is just Hate Speech in polite text
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 06:56 PM March 6th, 2004 EST (#14)
|
|
|
|
|
"I think the feminazis in the U.N. have gotten their hooks into A.I. Why else would the U.N. stats be the ones predominently used?"
Judging by what I have seen of their activity in Los Angeles, I would say they are firmly entrenched in fundamental feminist ideology.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Judging by what I have seen of their activity in Los Angeles, I would say they are firmly entrenched in fundamental feminist ideology.
Which is exactly why we'll probably never get any responses to our e-mails. The standard feminists tactic is to ignore challenges to their orthodoxy.
That's what Rita Smith of the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence does, she simply ignores inquiries about the real numbers. (She actually told me via e-mail that she would not respond to any more of my e-mails.)
That's what the Family Violence Prevention Fund does. They completely ignore my e-mails to them regarding the true numbers.
That's what the administrator of the local shelter does. After I e-mailed her lots of info regarding the statistics, she refuses to answer.
Typical. I doubt Amnesty International will do any different. They'll just pretend like we're not even here.
"Existence exists. A is A." -Ayn Rand
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I e-mailed the NOW about paternity fraud (the California Chapter opposed AB 2240; so much for the fight against injustice) and never got a response. Just because they don't respond doesn't mean we cannot continue e-mailing them.
Do not judge an organization by its name. If Amnesty International called itself Freedom for Murderers, would you take them seriously? By the same reasoning the National Organization for Women will not call itself the National Organization of Man Haters. If you check their website, you will find they do far more bashing of President Bush and his judicial picks than providing resources for women's benefit, like health and educational advice, or information about starting a business or owning a home.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 02:06 AM March 7th, 2004 EST (#17)
|
|
|
|
|
Lot's of things I do in my activism depend on how much time I get to do things. I'm sure that's the case with other folks too. After meeting with friends in my local activist men's group tonight and having a great Thai dinner I've had a chance to reflect on things accomplished and things left to do, things that have been successful, and things not quite so successful.
I left the meeting this evening feeling a new sense of direction. I look forward to a little down time to rest and recharge the old batteries. What's the plan? Simple, XXXX XXXXX XXXX XXXXXX XXXX. I'm just a little piece of the overall plan, and it's nice to see others who are stepping up and "carrying the ball."
I'm not too concerned if we go into a period of inactivity on the surface and people think we have faded and gone away, then one day, when we're ready, Bada Bing, Bada Bang, Bada, Boom, we're back all nice and legal and proper. ...and what were we doing all that time we were gone? Planning, organizing, documenting.
If there are groups in our society who want to pursue an anti-male agenda, then the more male victims they manufacture will only be that many more males who will inevitably bring them to account for their misandry.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 04:47 AM March 7th, 2004 EST (#18)
|
|
|
|
|
Amnesty International, along with Doctors Without Borders, are the two charity organizations that have managed to retain my respect. While administrators for other charities rake in the dough and push questionable "issues," I always had the feeling that these two groups tell it as it is, and work honestly to better the world.
Alas, my list of charities to respect may soon drop to one.
Garth
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 08:09 AM March 7th, 2004 EST (#19)
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry to bust your bubble, but Amnesty International is well-known in Latin America as a terrorist-loving, communist-biased organization.
When in my country soldiers, policemen and public officers were murdered, they were silent. When we captured their murderers, they went into a rage demanding their freedom and human rights.
There was even the case when, after a battle, there was this gravely wounded policeman and a slightly-hurt terrorist. Their plane was the only available at the place (a remote village in the middle of the jungle). Guess what? They evacuated the terrorist to a hospital (accompanied by one of their representatives, to defend him against arrest), and denied (yes, DENIED) emergency evacuation for the wounded policeman.
P.S. I'm anonymous because even if I'm registered, the system keeps telling me that i'm not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Before there was even a "women's studies" department in any university, and the relative handfull of feminist students who attended mostly took their degrees in sociology, I noticed that many also took degrees in "library sciences"which I thought was innocuous enough until I started seeing a pattern in what was disappearing from library bookshelves. Feminazis have always sought steering wheel positions so that they can take on the role of self appointed "gauleiter" (gauleitress?).
Any attempts you make in trying to persuade this person of the unreasonability of her position by e-mail are a complete waste of time and effort and an exercise in casting your pearls before swine.
"Gauleiter" was the German term for "political officer"or "cadre" under the Nazis. I recall reading the memoirs of one such German "gauleiter" who was a journalist, who was assigned to a U-boat crew. On their first trip to sea with him, as soon as the boat was out of sight of land, the crew grabbed him and dragged him up on deck and threw him into the cold North Atlantic. The Chief Petty Officer then informed him that if he thought he was going to get away with bullying them as if they were a bunch of Jews or Communists then he was in for a long swim and that all of his collegue predecessors had been "swept overboard in rough weather". He looked to the Captain (who was standing at the conning tower) for help, but the captain merely played a recording by Edith Piaf (which was banned)on the PA system. He behaved himself on that trip.
Until we have the strength and solidarity to serve it up to the gauleiters like this we are going to be treated like we are in an occupied country and you might as well get used to it.
My experience is that if you hurt the funding of the agency that they work for and make it no secret why...the powers that be in these agencies start to find that pet Feminazi Gauleiters are a luxury they cannot afford.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 10:56 PM March 7th, 2004 EST (#28)
|
|
|
|
|
I reckon these thought police similarly control the bookshops.
Hotspur.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:10 AM March 8th, 2004 EST (#29)
|
|
|
|
|
"I reckon these thought police similarly control the bookshops."
From what I have read it is not easy to get a book from the male perspective published. Perhaps the market isn't that strong once the books get to the bookstores, although I have seen the amount of books available on men's issues grow in the last five years.
Women have women's studies programs on college campuses to make feminist books required readings, while a lot of men get rob in the courts and can't even afford to buy a book.
I guess those reasons are why this site, Glenn's Sacks radio show, NCFM, MND and other male perspective sites are so important in getting the word out to disenfranchised men.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You've said a mouthfull in a very few words Ray and yet I do not think it is nearly as bleak as you might think. I remember when the NADAR hit and books by Andrea Dworkin and Shere Hite were in all the bookstores...my most recent browse of my local bookstore found nary a one on the shelves and they generally get scorned at garage sales. The male equivalent books rarely do well simply because it is not in the nature and character of men to politcally target the women in their live as feminists assert. You will not meet a more militant masculinist than me and yet I have never purchased or read a masculinist book. On many occassions I have been encouraged by collegues to write one but I think it would be a terrible waste of effort. What would be much more powerful would be to tell our story in the form of a novel that would make a great and entertaining screen play...but I don't think I have the talent for that. Speaking as a karate coach my advise on the subject of masculinist political theory treatesies and polemics is this...DO NOT FEEL OBLIGED TO HIT THE ENEMY IN THE SAME MANNER THE ENEMY HAS HIT YOU...think of something more effective. And really...we have no need to preach to a choir of males. Get like minded women into the act and get them to duke it out with the feminazi witches...when all is said and done I have no problem whatsoever with being ruled by women...as long as they love and value me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I used to be an AI member but noticed their misandrist ways emerge a few years back. Hoping it was just a brief trend, it has turned out to be a long-term thing. I support the goals of AI: end of torture, human rights, etc.... but for all people, not just female ones.
This kind of thing, hooking human rights with women's "rights" issues indelibly, is one major way that feminists have turned the matter of human rights into the matter of "women's rights". It also causes most people to have to make a decision about supporting groups like AI that ostensibly exist to defend human rights and not supporting them. By not doing so you or somoene else asks you(rself): "Don't you support human rights?" Of course your answer is "Well, yes," followed immediately by "Then why don't you support AI??"
The answer is that AI has stopped being a human rights organization and turned into a women's rights (and privileges) organization that pays lip service to a few other things occasionally. But while every now and then they mention Africa's boy soldiers, they are quick to frame it in terms of how it affects women and girls. I have yet to see an AI campaign launched post-1980s that addresses even in a sideways fashion the rights of men and how they are abused throughout the world, not just in criminal law senses but in every other sense which most of us recognize.
So my final decision was to stop supporting AI until they stop ignoring men's rights issues. After all, in order for them to be a human rights organization, they have to support all humans' rights-- not just the female ones.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 09:55 PM March 7th, 2004 EST (#27)
|
|
|
|
|
"After all, in order for them to be a human rights organization, they have to support all humans' rights-- not just the female ones.
I actually was seeking support for some Men's Issues about a year ago, and sought out a local chapter that was meeting at a United Methodist church near me. I checked them out on the web assuming they cared about all people, but changed my mind after encountering the bias I found there.
What good is a human rights group that fails to recognize, and take a stand against, the human right’s abuses that militant feminist organizations commit against men?
I remember too when A.I. in its early years brought attention to the brutal mistreatment of human beings throughout the world, but as far as I'm concerned, given the fact they now propagandize in the vernacular of gender feminists, they appear to a large degree to have become that which they opposed.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is a disturbing story. You don't often hear about the rape of men/boys although I'm sure it goes on all around the world.
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ ID=37387
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There is a space between the underscore and the I. Remove that and the link will work. It is extremely distressing to read this article.
The Biscuit Queen
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 09:29 PM March 11th, 2004 EST (#34)
|
|
|
|
|
Here is another post for the article which may be easier to access.
http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/Printable.asp?ID= 12512
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dear Amnesty International, I am one of untold millions of oppressed prisoner of conscience female victims(Domesticly incarcerated in my own home of course).
My despicable Patriarchial despot has committed the following crimes in contravention of International Law :- (please check mark appropriate offence(s))
(1) Forced me to wear a brassier....
(2) Would not give me an orgasm.....
(3) Spoiled my appetite (anorexia)....
(4) Makes me puke (bulemia)......
(5) Earns more money than I do...
(6) Considers me not beautiful because of obesity.....
(7) Refuses to explore homosexual alternatives...
(8) Is indifferent to my menstural cramps and other social injustices I must face....
Brothers please feel free to add to this list and let's submit IT to Amnesty International
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
