Ken Lucero from Albuquerque, NM sends news that a local men's rights group in that area is growing and that they're working to become an official chapter of NCFM by early 2003. They meet every Thursday at 1 PM at the Bennigan's restaurant on Louisiana St. in Albuquerque. If you'd like to attend the meetings, just show up or contact ken at kenrlucero@juno.com for more info.

RPB659 writes "Hi Guys,
While I visit this site often, this is my first time posting anything. Remember those offensive stickers that were at Ames Department stores? Well, they're back. This time they are at Big Y grocery stores. For those of you that never heard of them, it's a chain of grocery stores in Western Massachusetts. It's run by the D'Amour family. I'm sure we can get them to remove the stickers in the same manner that Ames did." Excellent idea - but we need more info. Are the stickers being sold on the shelves, or at vending machines like they were at Ames? And can anyone find contact info for Big Y so we can write to them?

Peter Allemano from the NYC chapter of NCFM informed me that a panel on domestic violence against men is being held by the Queens Women's Network, to listen to the needs of male victims of domestic violence. The QWM sponsors a service center for DV victims and does a lot of outreach programs in the borough of Queens. This is a rare opportunity for both sides to come together on an important dialogue, and they are currently looking for speakers that can participate on the panel. They already are including Stanley Green, also a member of NCFM and a co-founder of Stop Abuse for Everyone. This is possibly the first public discussion on DV against men (straight, bi, or gay) being held in NYC. The forum will be held on October 17, and if you can make it to be a panelist or simply want to see the event in person, please contact Peter at PAllemano@cravath.com. I have to say, the fact that events like this are happening at all is a very encouraging sign.

In Massachusetts, there is a candidate for governor whose main campaign platform is men's rights. Her name is Barbara Johnson, also a well-known attorney in the state, and her web site can be found here. Her campaign will be an interesting one to study to see what kinds of response she gets from the voters. I know there are some fairly active father's rights groups in MA and she could get a significant showing. If you'd like to help her campaign out, please contact her.

warble writes "It is my pleasure to announce that the California Senate has just passed a narrowed version of AB2240. During the hearing there was overwhelming concern expressed that the bill doesn't go far enough. This is excellent because it demonstrates that next year we will have support for an expanded version of the bill. Nevertheless, the opposition is already setting their sights on further damaging the bill so that women can freely and knowingly defraud men in paternity matters. Currently, the bill only addresses those instances where a default paternity judgment was entered by the state. It was amazing to see the opposition try to argue that men should continue to experience discrimination in paternity matters. These feminists that oppose men's rights, literally argue that a woman should be able to determine the father of the child and exclude men from any consideration. In my opinion, the most bigoted arguments came from Kuehl and Bowen. In both cases, they were making men out like they are evil womanizers that get innocent victims pregnant. What they want is for women to be able to assign any man with paternity if the woman believes it is in the best interest of the child. Obviously, these anti-male bigots are very dangerous and seek to further criminalize men. We cannot afford to relax our efforts in California. I have the transcripts on order from the Senate. When they arrive I will transcribe them so that we can educate the public how they argue in favor of institutionalized discrimination against men. I listened to the testimony live today and believe the final vote was 28 in favor and 4 opposed. Yes! Now we need to bombard Governor Davis with letters in support of AB2240." The the Read More section for contact info.

Prof. Richard Felson from Penn State has just released a book, Violence and Gender Reexamined, published by the American Psychological Association. Some interesting excerpts from the jacket reviews are: "Violence and Gender Reexamined challenges one of western culture’s most deeply held assumptions: That violence against women is different from violence against men. In this elegantly argued and well-researched book, author Richard Felson argues that this type of violence is rarely the result of sexism or hatred against women. The author cites research suggesting that the motives for violence against women are similar to the motives for violence against men: To gain control or retribution and to promote or defend self-image. These motives play a role in almost all violence, regardless of gender. Using a comparative method to determine how violence against women differs from violence against men, he illustrates not only that violence against women is less frequent than violence against men but also that our culture and legal system treat it more harshly." This definitely looks like an interesting book!

Dan Lynch writes "This article from INEWS, which I found on Men's News Daily, must have Clarence Darrow rolling in his grave. The system wants to "fast track" domestic violence cases in order to gain a quick resolve. What's happening is defendants are not gaining the advice they need from their lawyers in what may be their first time in jail. The consequences can be staggering for the uninformed. The article also goes on to show concern for the approx. 24% arrest rate of women in these situations, when (according to women's groups) it should only be about 5%, according to DoJ findings. It also goes on to describe women's advocates who are concerned with women pleading guilty just to get out to their kids. If this isn't looked into, what will eventually happen is men will not receive effective legal counsel but women will. Another budding sign of 'unequal protection under the law'."

Serge sent in an article from the BBC that discusses the fact that in the U.S, there are currently more black men in prison than there are in college. This disturbing trend is one more reason why men's rights issues cut accross racial boundaries, and if anything, are even more critical for minority men to fight for.

Dave in California writes "In the September 2002 issue of Reader's Digest, page 69, there is an article by Julia Child. Her husband Paul is her most unforgettable character! Just think of it guys, here is a woman that has the guts to publicly thank a man for being a great guy, and a lover of good food that guided her into her life's work! Why does this happen so rarely? Why is it so difficult for a woman to acknowledge the goodness in a man and the help rendered? Men thank their wives all the time for help rendered, even if the help does not directly affect what he has done. Unfortunately the Reader's Digest web site does not show this article. You will have to see the magazine to read it."

Many of you will recall Stanford Assoc. Prof. Carol Delaney's short letter in the San Fransisco Chronicle blaming men for child abductions and abuse. While a flurry of letters was sent in after that letter, both to Stanford and to the Chronicle, Keith Thompson wrote an excellent editorial on the subject that was printed today in the SFC. His discussion of how violence is unfairly seen as masculine and all of the evidence that refutes this notion is excellent. Read it here.

Mic hunter sent in an announcement for the 10th International Conference for Male Survivors of Sexual Abuse, which will be held in Minneapolis from Sept. 18-21 this year. Read More below for details. And if you'd like to help organize the conference, be sure to e-mail Mic for more info.

warble writes "This article, A father's role is more than just conceiving a child, presents an interesting and very important variation of the C4M argument. Here a woman is found to have cancer and has some of her eggs harvested. Then she has them fertilized and frozen using the sperm of her lover. In this case the eggs are external to the woman's body so she must share a bilateral choice with the man. Not surprisingly, after the break-up, the man wants the embryos destroyed as a matter of his personal choice. Yet the woman is arguing that she should be considered to be continuously pregnant because she cannot conceive naturally. If this woman wins this legal battle, it will have profound implications in the C4M arena. Clearly, a man must be considered more than a sperm donor in this context and given the right to have a choice over his body. If the woman is granted the right to destroy the man's choice, he may potentially loose his right to be free from burdensome child support obligations. We need to be following this case very closely due to the implications in C4M right. Any ruling from this case will have a major influence on future C4M issues."

frank h writes "According to this story, in April 1996 former U.S. Navy Lt. Carey Dunai Lohrenz was one of the first two women trained to fly the F-14 Tomcat. In 1995, the Center for Military Readiness published a special report entitled "CMR Special Report: Double Standards in Naval Aviation Training." The 20-page report, backed by 104 pages of training records and related documents, exposed a pattern of low scores and major errors in the F-14 training of both women that may have contributed to the tragic death of Kara Hultgreen. Lohrenz was removed from carrier aviation in May 1995, due to flawed flying techniques that her superiors described as "unsafe, undisciplined, and unpredictable." With the help of attorney Susan Barnes, a feminist activist, Lohrenz blamed Elaine Donnelly, former member of the Defense Advisory Committee on Women in the Services (DACOWITS), for causing her to wash out by publishing the report. The courts responded by dismissing Lohrenz’s action "with prejudice," which means (as I understand it) that the plaintiff cannot re-file the suit elsewhere."

Though I don't fully share the sanguine mood expressed in this essay, the writer presents an interesting take on the fruits of radical feminism. With technology rendering men and women unnecessary to each other for the purpose of reproduction, radical feminism may ultimately hurt women more than men.

From the seeds of anti-male hate, will men ultimately enjoy a harvest of freedom?

Luek writes "I just got this reminder in my e-mail and thought I would pass it along. Prostate cancer kills as many men per year as breast cancer kills women. But prostate cancer research gets only a small fraction of the funding that breast cancer research gets. This would be a good political point to pass along to your congress person this election year." The web site is www.pcaw.org, which has tons of links about prostate cancer. Please check it out, and consider doing some prostate cancer advocacy this month.