This article is definitely written from the "It's men's fault but women are blamed. Waaaaa!" perspective. Nevertheless, it presents some interesting points about what seems to be the Japanese equivalent of American men's Marriage Strike. The odd thing to me is that it implies that Japanese men have turned away from sex, whereas the US has a hearty hook-up scene. Maybe Japanese men just prefer to spank the bishop while preserving their integrity and sanity.

ahhkaboom writes "An older version of present domestic violence accusations is: White Slavery.

Wikipedia defines this as a moral panic in late 19th century and early 20th century United States, where there was a perception that abduction of (white) girls into forced prostitution was a danger to every young woman.

In this moral panic, the selected scapegoats were Chinese immigrants (known as Yellow peril), who were stereotyped and demonized as white slavers (eg: Thoroughly Modern Millie)."

Ed. note: Note the off-site link at the bottom of the entry leading to here, discussing the current scare regarding "trafficking in women" by one Jo Doezema.

Anonymous User writes "In her new book Women Who Make The World Worse and How Their Radical Feminist Assault Is Ruining Our Schools, Families, Military and Sports, author Kate O'Beirne has shown the courage to expose the plan, name the perpetrators and give fair warning to all who will listen. All concerned men and women should buy, and read this book to show the publishing world that there is a market for any authors willing, and courageous enough to stand up and say to the man haters "we have all had enough"."

Well, not really... take a look:

http://www.offthechain.us/

Apparently loose lips sink more than ships... even minor wisecracks with any implications of sexual tension made by a man in uniform is enough to get him into a military court. Ms. Parker addresses the latest excess of the militarized-P.C.-world here.

mens_issues writes "Note the latest gem from ABCNews.com called "Retired Husband Syndrome." The reference to wanting to toss one's husband out the window is apparently OK in this article - with the roles reversed it would be "domestic violence."

The demeaning article can be found here.

Steve"

Ed. note: A recent MANN post on the divorce boom wating to break in Japan is found here.

Anonymous User writes "I suppose this law applies even to men that are not sexually active.
Also, carrying a condom is not the same as USING a condom, but this point is naturally lost on the stupid people behind this law."

Thanks to Marc A. for pointing out this op-ed in the Boston Globe written by Cathy Young.

Click "Read more..." to read the article.

bandersnatch writes "From CNet News -- Annoying someone via the Internet is now a federal crime. It's no joke. Last Thursday, President Bush signed into law a prohibition on posting annoying Web messages or sending annoying e-mail messages without disclosing your true identity. In other words, it's OK to flame someone on a mailing list or in a blog as long as you do it under your real name. Thank Congress for small favors, I guess. This ridiculous prohibition, which would likely imperil much of Usenet, is buried in the so-called Violence Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act. Criminal penalties include stiff fines and two years in prison. "The use of the word 'annoy' is particularly problematic," says Marv Johnson, legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union. "What's annoying to one person may not be annoying to someone else." A new federal law states that when you annoy someone on the Internet, you must disclose your identity. Wow, just wow. Talk about your rights ending where her feelings begin."

DocDamage writes "As reported in this article, N.O.W. wants Penn St. coach Joe Paterno to resign over comment he made regarding allegations of sexual assault made against AJ Nicholson. Paterno claims his comments were taken out of context, and having read the article, the comments are so garbled that there is obviously a considerable quantity of context required to make sense of the remarks.

Wouldn't it be nice if NOW were to wait for a conviction before acting as if the accused was guilty?"

zerostress writes "According to this article, a prostate cancer test used to screen tens of thousands of men every year may be dangerously flawed. This test does not detect early form of cancer and cause many false positive result, bringing on unnecessary anxieties and surgeries."

Rand T. writes "Interesting story at the New-York Post:

If you need a name and password to log in, you can use http://www.bugmenot.com/"

Click "Read more..." to read the Post article; bugmenot's userid/passwords are often hit-and-miss. :(

Roy writes "The press reports that on 5 January 2006 President Bush signed VAWA endorsing a 20% increase in the billions of dollars funding this primary legal assault against men. "The act, which expired in September, helps children exposed to violence, trains health care workers on how to support victims of abuse and encourages men to teach youngsters that violence is wrong. The extension includes new provisions on health care, early intervention and outreach to American Indian women." Note there is no mention of "gender-neutrality" in any of the press coverage. Link here."

When PBS executives issued their whitewash of Breaking the Silence four days before Christmas, they figured that all the controversy would die down and things would soon get back to normal. [http://www.pbs.org/aboutpbs/news/20051221_breakingthesilence.html]

Because the very next day, PBS ombudsman Michael Getler
appeared on the PBS MacNeil-Lehrer report. He pointed
out that the documentary did not interview even a single father, and again criticized Breaking the Silence for being
“quite a one-sided presentation.”

Click "Read more..." for more

Anonymous User writes "Convicted of child abuse, the judge suspends the sentence because the child may blame himself if his mother goes to jail!!

What do women have to do to their kids to be punished as a man would be?"