Glenn Sacks writes, "NOW launched an assault today on the Fathers' Rights movement with the publication of its new "Family Court Report 2002." Many fathers' rights groups are named in the report, including the ACFC and the NCFC. The John Knight/Fathers Manifesto fiasco is used against us, as well as the Warren Farrell/incest nonsense. It's getting a lot of publicity here. I suggest you download and take a good look at the report--if we do not fight this it will serve to kill much of the progress we have made in educating the public on anti-father family court discrimination."

The Washington Post reports on the continuing decline of male enrollment in US colleges and universities. It's interesting that they admit that the problem can no longer be "shrugged off." One has to question the sincerity of many of the people who are currently examining this crisis. There are still a few areas where women don't outnumber men and Jocelyn Samuels, vice president of the National Women's Law Center, states, "The job is not yet done." Also, note that the article does not mention the hardships that this development portends for men. Rather it comments on the fact that "the lack of marriable men is a hot topic of conversation among black women. They can't see it now, but that is going to happen for white women in the future."

Tonight, Sunday the 23rd, 9:00 p.m. EDT, join the free online ifeminists/mensactivism chat where Trudy Schuett, father's rights activist, and Wendy McElroy will discuss their participation in the path-breaking counter-NOW conference on June 21st. Trudy's speech during the conference has been transcribed and can be read here.

BusterB writes "The audacity of the Ontario court is astounding. The judges' claim (unanimous no less) is that the law as it stands clearly gives mothers the final say on whether to even acknowledge the father on the birth certificate, let alone name the child. There may be a Supreme Court appeal, but the Ontario court is held in high regard in Canada. Well, at least there was a dissenting opinion in the B.C. court, but notice that it was just a "dissenting opinion," not a victory for fathers. This is the same "justice" system that has struck down laws right, left, and centre when those laws infringe on the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Someone explain to me just exactly why kiddie porn distributors' Charter rights are more important than fathers' Charter rights? Go figure."

Dan-Lynch writes "I saw this article on Men's News Daily. I think the topic of how father's are portrayed on television is worth discussing, as television is probably accredited to influencing in large our views and opinions. If the television industry standardizes the father's role we should definitely question the images that are projected."

warble writes "Currently, the CA Senate Committee of Judiciary is working on AB2240 (Stop Paternity Fraud). They are clearly friendlier to our side of the argument when compared to the Assembly Committee of Judiciary. For example, they have amended the act to permit a male victim of paternity fraud to receive compensation for damages....from the bio dad. Unfortunately, the female is still able to get a generous income from child support if she defrauds a wealthy man. Worse, the judiciary has absolute discretion in choosing to hear a DNA case. That means that the majority of victims will be ignored. This level of discretion needs to be removed. Also, they need to be encouraged to modify the declaration of paternity form. This will allow the mother to have an option of checking a box for being uncertain. There is also the option of the state requiring every male to have a DNA test to prove paternity. Now is the time to write to the committee with your suggestions for amendments. Don't wait because they are moving on this bill now. The contact information for the judiciary can be found here: Senate Committee of Judiciary. Write to them now - today - and let them know this fight is not over and that we want justice!"

The NCFM conference happening today (Friday, 2/21) will in fact be broadcast live on the internet. Raymond Cuttill from the Men's Hour is sponsoring the broadcast, which should begin at 7 PM Central Time and can be listened to via this Live365.com link (note that the link probably won't work until that time). Check it out!

Mark writes "While this editorial, from the Vancouver Sun, seems to have a slight slant towards women, it takes an interesting look at some of the issues around spousal abuse, including the use of it as a tool in divorce and custody, and socio-economic issues. While it looks at these things in the light of the current political state of British Columbia, a lot of what is said can be viewed quite broadly."

I thought I'd break this news, it's pretty cool. The NCFM-sponsored forum which will be happening on Friday in St. Paul is probably going to be broadcast live on the internet. I'm not sure if it will be just audio or both audio + video, but I promise to deliver details on how to tune in on the broadcast as soon as I hear further details from Ray Cuttill. Since this forum is intended to coincide with the N.O.W. conference going on in the same city that day, this event could have some very significant effects if the media gives it good coverage. Update: Check out the Men's Hour site for updates as the time gets closer to the event.

CJ sent in this Boston Globe article and writes "Women's sports advocates admonish the wrestling coaches and their supporters for targeting the wrong group with their lawsuit. They say it's bloated football programs that eat up the athletic budgets, not the new softball or women's soccer programs. Yet these same "advocates" fail to recognize that men's programs are getting cut despite student interest and participation levels in order to meet Title IX requirements. Also, there are more programs than just wrestling that have been cut. Like at UNH, the baseball program was cut while students were actively involved to meet this ridiculous sexist standard."

Luek writes "Here is a key area where the femmunists maintain their social agenda at the expense of men's rights. They are the force presently behind the logjam in getting Bushes Federal judgeships nominated by the Senate. It would behoove us to contact our Senators to let them know that the the femmunists are no longer the only game in town and this is an election year. Tell them to support pro men's rights judges. You need to get those letters, e-mails and faxes to your Senators out now!"

This is just an announcement that the New Zealand Equality Party has now changed it's name to the New Zealand Equality Education Foundation, to help focus more on their purpose of educational outreach about gender equality. If you're interested in more info about this group, contact Peter Zorhab at zohrab@xtra.co.nz.

CJ sent us this Boston Globe article and writes "Last March actress Jane Fonda announced that she was donating $12.5 million to Harvard University to fund a Center on Gender and Education. Now, many say that Fonda is displeased at the pace with which Harvard has made use of her gift and is seriously considering withholding the $6 million balance."

crescentluna submitted this story and writes "Apparently at the World Food Summit the idea of giving women equal property rights as men will end world hunger. Not quite sure if this is an issue for men's rights, it might be just the article but it doesn't seem to show any direct evidence between increased women's property rights and less instances of hunger, and this whole talk of 'if today children continue to be fed, it is because of women' is a little one-sided."

Tonight, Sunday the 16th, at 9:00 p.m. EDT join Wendy McElroy and "Mason" in the free ifeminists/mensactivism chat room to discuss the realities of the pornography industry. Wendy has done a lot of research in this area and this is a rare opportunity to speak with "Mason", who I assume is a person who works or has worked in pornography. Is pornography really exploitation of women? Men? Join this chat and find out.