CJ writes "DNA clears another man who was sent to jail based upon false allegations. False allegations have ruined many a mans life, and until the US courts become unbiased and require proof, not the current "she said" evidence, things will always be bad. This is true for domestic violence allegations and sexual crimes. Innocent people have to be protected, otherwise there is no justice. It has become a "witch hunt" for men in the courts of the US. Middlesex MA District Attorney Martha Coakley said "There is not much you can say to someone who has unfortunately been at the wrong end of an imperfect system."

http://www.boston.com/news/daily/03/maher.htm"

Freebird writes "This article should be required reading for all those women who endlessly whine "Where are all the decent men??" while harboring their hatred and bitterness against the same. We all should get a few nods and chuckles out of this one. It is good to see more and more people, women no less, waking up to what we have been saying for years. Happy reading!"

ppmnow writes "The following link, gives a seminal perspective on the coming fall of the Burk inadequacy."

I will host this week's MANN chat, Wednesday
night (4/2), starting at 9:30 PM Eastern Time, at the href="http://www.mensactivism.org/chat.shtml">usual location. The
topic for this chat will be "Is Single-sex Education Better for
Boys?"  Recent href="http://www.mensactivism.org/article.pl?sid=03/03/31/2247200&mode=threaded">research
in the UK suggests that boys may learn better in some single-sex
classes.  Advocates for single-sex education argue that it helps
students get better grades, be more confident in class, and improve
their school attendance and behavior.  Opponents of single-sex
education worry that single-sex education deprives boys and girls of
the opportunity to learn how to interact with one another. Got an
opinion about this?  Come to the chat, quaff a cold beverage, and
mouth off.  Hope to see you there.

Now this article is a un-expected one, with a title like this: No shame in women choosing dough over the regular Joe Tina Arndt seems to be saying go for the money over the man, after making the case that most guys can't compete with the welfare state when it comes to women, she even goes on to say "So perhaps it is nurturing instincts that drive women to go for the money. No shame in that." And I thought she was on our side. Can't say I'm surprised.

Here's part 2 of the series continuing with The Gap In The Gender Gap and let's just say there's quite a bit of heresy to go around this time. This one should get the comments rolling....

Brett Carlson writes "This site is for men everywhere whose lives have been affected by Lifetime TV. Husbands Against Lifetime Tv"

This href="http://news.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/03/30/ncoed30.xml">article
reports new research in the UK that indicates that single-sex classes in
some subjects may help boys to learn better.  Apparently, the
experimental single-sex classes helped both boys and girls to obtain
better grades, raise their confidence, increase their rates of
attendance, and improve their behavior in school.  While the idea
of single-sex classes and schools is understandably controversial, the
approach seems to have merit.  I was privileged to attend an
all-boys high school, and I must say that the experience is one of the
great treasures of my life.  I hope other students will have the
opportunity at least to explore the benefits of single-sex classes so
that they can perform better in school.

The question in this article posed by Dorothy Anne Seese is Giving Women the Vote:
A mistake that wounded America? there's alot to comment on here,
and I don't really the room or the time to do so. Oh yeah, have a look around the site to see who runs it, you should get an ironic laugh out of it.

Now here's un-expected surprise of an article, I could tell you what's said, but I think you want the fun of finding out yourself, so click the link for a refeshing perspective.

John Gardiner takes an interesting look at Oprah's prank team over at Oxygen, pointing out the hypocrisy involved, It's a great read. Don't just take my word for it, Have a look....

Mitch Dean writes "Milwaukee Journal 02/26/03

This is an article About a fourteen year old girl who alledegly solicited her boyfriend to kill her Grandmother for the sum of $100.00 or else she would break up with him.The grandmother was informed of the attempted plot by a freind of the girl.The girls defense attorney says he will establish that it was all joke.This defense does not surprise me.Our culture would be more comfortable believing a female of any age incapable of such treachery.The story should be tracked just to see the outcome and treatment by the legal system to further demonstrate inequity in charges and sentencing between male and female juviniles."

In his latest column, men's issues columnist and radio talk show host Glenn Sacks defends men and masculinity against the anti-male attacks of misandrist femninist Dr. Helen Caldecott. Of Sacks' grandfather, a decorated World War I veteran, Sacks writes:
"This magnificent man (and the millions like him) is not your punching bag, Ms. Caldecott. He's not a bloodthirsty warmonger, or an oppressor, or a patriarch, or an abuser, or any other of the dozens of repulsive canards which feminists have used to vilify men over the past three decades"

" Feminists should be speaking out for human rights, not just women's rights." writes Cathy Young. In this article Cathy assails feminist diatribe as a pathetic waste. Even in this article it seems that the atrocities against men by Saddam is downplayed. But it does show the equation overall to women. Cathy still nails it. Human rights for all!

Brightwriter writes "We fathers have been duped. Pregnant women are told not to lift anything weighing over 20 pounds, but my (pregnant) wife's obstetrician could give no rationale for that edict when we asked what (bad) would happen if she did so. The obstetrician said prospective studies were unethical, and that's that. Problem: a pregnant woman with a child already born will lift him/her often, obstetrician edict or no. Anything more likely to go wrong if it is not a first pregnancy (and the mother often lifts a pre-existing child)? I think not, else where is the evidence? This myth needs formal challenge in the medical community. I am a doctor."