[an error occurred while processing this directive]
RADAR Alert: Shock and Awe Week 3: Now on to the House!
posted by Matt on 11:10 AM July 18th, 2005
RADAR Project Two weeks ago RADAR launched its Shock and Awe campaign. We asked people to contact members of the Senate Judiciary Committee and request they invite a male DV victim and other qualified experts to testify at the July 19 Committee hearings.

And it truly was Shock and Awe. Thousands of persons made phone calls and sent faxes. THANK YOU TO EVERYONE WHO RESPONDED. And we know from inside sources that they really heard us.

Click "Read more..." for more.


Shock and Awe Week 3: Now on to the House!

The other good news is that in the last two weeks, a coalition of over 15 groups – including some of the respected big guns on Capitol Hill – has come together to make VAWA a fairer law.

At this time we do not know who will actually testify at Tuesday's hearings. But we have opened many, many doors to the lobbyists who are working on behalf of our VAWA coalition, and our voice is finally being heard.

This week it's time to focus our energies on the House of Representatives. Why? Because the House Judiciary Committee plans to vote on the VAWA bill before the end of this month – and they don't even plan to hold hearings!

So let's crank it up! This is what we are asking you to do this week:

1. Find out the name of your Representative. Each district has only one Representative. To do that, go to http://www.house.gov/ and enter your zip code.

2. Go to your Representative's website and get their telephone and fax number. You may have to call the office during business hours to get the fax number.

3. Write a short letter like this and fax it ASAP. You can use this exact wording, or revise it slightly to reflect your thoughts:

RE: H.R. 2876

Dear Representative :

I am a registered voter in your district, and I'm writing about the Violence Against Women Act, H.R. 2876. According to the Department of Justice, 835,000 American men are victims of domestic violence each year. But it has been shown that VAWA-funded programs refuse to serve those men – that's called “discrimination.”

So I'm asking you to do what is fair and right, and make sure this language is added to the VAWA bill to make it non-discriminatory:

“Nothing in this statute shall be construed as prohibiting funding for programs focused on or serving male victims of domestic violence. Male victims shall be considered an underserved population.”

Thank you for your attention and help.

Sincerely,

Your name
Address
Telephone number

4. If you do not have access to a fax machine, telephone your Representative's Legislative Assistant (referred to as the “L.A.”) who is responsible for VAWA – your Representative's receptionist will give you that person's name. When you speak to the L.A., convey the same information as in this letter.

ABOVE ALL, BE RESPECTFUL AND POLITE. Coming across as angry, bitter, or threatening only reinforces the negative stereotypes, and will make it more difficult for our front-line lobbyists.

Remember, time is extremely short. We have a lot to accomplish a lot in two short weeks!

News flash! We have just learned that in the next couple days, Phyllis Schlafly will be releasing her article: "Time to Defund Feminist Pork". Look for it at http://www.humaneventsonline.com/ and then politely encourage your editor to run it in your local newspaper.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Date of RADAR Release: July 17, 2005

To track the current status of VAWA, go to http://thomas.loc.gov/ and enter the bill number: Senate bill S. 1197; House of Representatives bill H.R. 2876.

To receive RADAR Alerts, press releases, and other special announcements, sign up for the RADAR E-lert. You can sign up for the E-lert on the RADAR home page at http://www.mediaradar.org/. Your e-mail address will be kept confidential, and will not be shared with any outside organization. It's fast, easy, and keeps you in the loop.

Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting (RADAR) is a coalition of men and women working to assure media balance and accuracy in coverage of the domestic violence issue.

Men's Equality Congress: Day Two Complete | Teenage girl hangs 5 Year Old boy  >

  
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Yippie!!! The Men's Rights Movement Is Fun! (Score:2)
by Luek on 04:54 PM July 18th, 2005 EST (#1)
And it truly was Shock and Awe. Thousands of persons made phone calls and sent faxes. THANK YOU TO EVERYONE WHO RESPONDED. And we know from inside sources that they really heard us.

:-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-)
:-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-)
:-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):- ):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-)
Re:Yippie!!! The Men's Rights Movement Is Fun! (Score:0)
by Anonymous User on 06:06 PM July 18th, 2005 EST (#2)
I'm sure that these developments are sending a tremor through the other camp. Perhaps this will be a turning point in the effort against feminism. We shall see...

-Fidelbogen-
Re:Yippie!!! The Men's Rights Movement Is Fun! (Score:0)
by Anonymous User on 07:28 PM July 18th, 2005 EST (#3)
"I'm sure that these developments are sending a tremor through the other camp."

This is a rather unprofessional unsophisticated comment, but wouldn't it be great to be at one of the femi-supremacist groups next meetings. When the topic of those evil, Patriarchal Men's Rights Activists comes up, I'd love to turn on my boom box and play,

"Who let the dawgs out, Woof, Woof, Woof, Woof, Woof?" I suspect my humor would not be appreciated.

Ray

Ray
Re:Yippie!!! The Men's Rights Movement Is Fun! (Score:0)
by Anonymous User on 03:24 AM July 19th, 2005 EST (#4)
But indeed it sends a tremor. Or a flurry. Or a flutter. Or an oscillation. Or a vibration. It's sends *something*, that is certain. [Insert noun of choice]

Or perhaps they of the other camp have no need to "stonewall" at all because they're truly dense as stones to begin with (?)

Nah. That is no doubt true as regards their moral sensitivity, but not a bit true as regards their animal cunning and their base political instincts. (Everybody tune your ears to the buzz stream; catch the vibe in the coming weeks; observe the spin-doctoring.)

-Fidelbogen-
Fax To My Congress Critter (Score:2)
by Luek on 06:14 PM July 19th, 2005 EST (#5)
Here is the fax I just sent to my Representative.

Subject: Reauthorization of VAWA under H.R. 2876.
Dear Representative Gingrey,
I am a registered voter in your district, and I'm writing about the Violence Against Women Act, H.R. 2876.According to the Department of Justice, 835,000 American men are victims of domestic violence each year.
But it has been shown that VAWA-funded programs refuse to serve those men – that's called “discrimination.”
Additionally, there are 12 serious flaws in the present VAWA that should be brought to your attention.
1. Abuses the truth. A recent VAWA-funded report documented that 1.5% of women and 0.9% of men were physically or sexually assaulted by a partner in the previous year. The report further notes that one-fifth of these men - as well as two-fifths of the women -- were injured as a result of the assault. But VAWA simply ignores the facts about domestic violence. [Extent, Nature, and Consequences of Intimate Partner Violence, http://www.ncjrs.org/pdffiles1/nij/181867.pdf, p. iii-iv]
2. Blatantly discriminates against men. The title, findings, and programs of VAWA violate men's constitutional right to equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment. None of the billions of VAWA dollars have been spent to help heterosexual male victims of DV. Imagine a federal law designed to protect white victims from criminal acts, while ignoring black victims.
3. Takes children away from their fathers. VAWA allows women to make false allegations of domestic violence, and then petition for divorce and custody of the children. In some states, a father who has ever had a restraining order filed against him is automatically rendered ineligible for joint custody of his children.
4. Blurs the distinction between violent crime and a verbal argument. The National Research Council notes that "Rigorous inquiry into violence against women is precluded when scholars fail to distinguish among what constitutes an act of violence, abuse, or battering." [Advancing the Federal Research Agenda on Violence Against Women, http://books.nap.edu/catalog/10849.html, p. 26]
5. Allows unrestrained use of restraining orders. Judges typically issue restraining orders based only on the word of the woman, without obtaining hard evidence or even allowing the man to present his side of the story. And many state laws define "violence" so broadly as to allow restraining orders to be issued on the flimsiest pretext.
6. Provides perverse incentives for law enforcement agencies and prosecutors. VAWA encourages local authorities to implement policies for mandatory reporting, mandatory arrest, and "no-drop" prosecutions. A Feminist Majority Foundation report recommends that domestic violence programs should abandon such rigid and unfair practices because they often end up harming families [Safety & Justice for All: Examining the Relationship between the Women's Anti-Violence Movement and the Criminal Legal System, http://www.ms.foundation.org/user-assets/PDF/Progr am/safety_justice.pdf, pp. 12-16]
7. Pre-empts existing law enforcement programs. States currently have strong partner assault laws. And the federal Violence of Crime Act already addresses the issue of domestic violence. VAWA spends $1 billion a year to duplicate existing programs.
8. Politicizes the judiciary. VAWA provides funding for judicial education that in practice amounts to ideologically loaded rants. At one such training session judges were instructed: "Your job is not to become concerned about all the constitutional rights of the man that you're violating as you grant a restraining order. Thrown him out on the street, give him the clothes on his back and tell him, 'See ya' around.'" [http://www.ejfi.org/DV/dv-10.htm]
9. Funds ideologically based treatment programs. The National Academy of Sciences recently concluded that domestic violence programs are frequently "driven by ideology and stakeholder interests rather than by plausible theories and scientific evidence of cause." [Advancing the Federal Research Agenda on Violence Against Women, http://books.nap.edu/catalog/10849.html, p. 6]
10. Represents an over-reaching of federal power. VAWA represents unwarranted government interference into the personal relationships of intimate partners. Furthermore, the Supreme Court has condemned parts of VAWA as representing federal intrusion into an area of law that falls squarely within the domain of the states (United States v. Morrison, 2000). [http://www.oyez.org/oyez/resource/case/1261]
11. Corrupts family violence research. VAWA-funded researchers often seek to bias the outcome of their research by interviewing only women, by slanting the wording of questions, or by selectively reporting research findings. [The Controversy over Domestic Violence by Women: A Methodological, Theoretical, and Sociology of Science Analysis. http://www.menweb.org/straus21.htm]
12. Unfairly stereotypes men. VAWA funds educational programs that consistently depict men as perpetrators and women as victims of domestic violence. Most educational programs refer to the perpetrator as "him" and the victim as "her."
VAWA tramples on persons' basic human rights, undermines the family, and makes a mockery of fairness and justice. Our elected officials have a responsibility to make sure VAWA helps all victims of domestic violence.
So I'm asking you to do what is fair and right, and make sure this language is added to the VAWA bill to make it non-discriminatory:
“Nothing in this statute shall be construed as prohibiting funding for programs focused on or serving male victims of domestic violence. Male victims shall be considered an underserved population.”
It is really the height of hypocrisy to be fighting in Iraq for other people’s freedom and liberty from governmental tyranny when we have such a law as VAWA in force here.
Thank you for your attention and help.
Sincerely,


Nothing new at Judiciary Meeting (Score:1)
by nivosus on 06:51 PM July 19th, 2005 EST (#6)
Maybe I missed something--I hope I did. But, all signs from the Senate Judiciary Committee web page suggest that the committee heard the same old stuff at the hearing today. None of the guests who testified before the committee seemed to offer any insight into male victims of domestic violence. Like many of you, I hope my letters did not fall onto deaf ears; though from the looks of it the committee members were not listening.
My E-Mail and Canned Response Received (Score:2)
by Dittohd on 11:55 AM July 21st, 2005 EST (#7)

Here is the e-mail I sent my representative (Lamar Smith, TX, Dist 21) and the canned reply I received:

This letter concerns H.R. 2876, the Violence Against Women Act.

I am a registered voter in your district. According to the Department of Justice, 835,000 American men are victims of domestic violence each year. It has been shown, however, that VAWA-funded programs refuse to serve these men.

I am therefore asking you to do what is fair and right and make sure that the VAWA is changed in its entirety to include prohibitions and equal corrective actions protecting both sexes equally, making this legislation non-discriminatory between the sexes.

I hope you agree that discrimination between the sexes, in either direction, hurts us all.

Thank you.

RESPONSE

Dear Friend,

Thank you for contacting me about the Violence Against Women Act. I appreciate hearing your thoughts on this important issue.

We agree that I should continue my efforts to reduce domestic violence, deter stalking and help victims of rape, including date rape. As legislation to stop violence against women comes before the House this Congress, I will keep your views in mind.

For more information on my work in Congress, please visit the 21st District's Web site, http://lamarsmith.house.gov.

Sincerely,

Lamar Smith
Member of Congress


[an error occurred while processing this directive]