This editorial in Harvard University's Harvard Crimson laments the modern face of feminism, pointing out that while the movement once had a noble cause--equality--it is now simply a means for women to paint themselves as victims. The author also points out that modern feminism results in discrimination against men by women. It's an interesting read, and there's a bonus: the author is female.

There is an important article posted to the Men's Health America mailing list that includes some statistics about suicide. Sadly, suicide for men overall has gone up for men and down for women between 1970 and 1998, and most disturbingly is a significant increase in sucides by men over the age of 50. Please check out this posting and keep it for reference.

Kingsley Morse, Jr. sent me an e-mail about a new law proposed in the New Hampshire legislature. HB1301 would prohibit married couples from obtaining no-fault divorces if they have any children under the age of 18. I'm curious, what do readers think of this? It certainly seems like a great way to reduce the ability of selfish parents to harm their children through the process of divorcing, but if they're that selfish to begin with, are they really better off staying together? Another question that popped into my mind is, could this give rise to more false accusations against men by encouraging women to use this route to get out of an unsatisfactory marriage? I'm a bit lukewarm on this one, though I do support the intentions of the bill.

Foster's Daily Democrat ran a story about my domestic violence awareness project at UNH. Sean Goodwin did a decent overall job reporting on it but I feel the article reads very choppy and is somewhat confusing. Dr. Murray Straus is quoted extensively in it, and was an excellent source to help balance the article out. I just wish they could have made it clearer that I'm insisting that the sociology studies show that men and women abuse each other at about equal rates, which isn't clear at all from the article, and was the main point of my press release.

Neil Steyskal writes "Dear Abby's column today is about a violent woman. It's interesting that she didn't tell the writer to call the police and get away from his wife fast."

DanCurry writes "Glenn Sacks will be on the Dan Curry show
Saturday, October 20th starting at 2PM Pacific Time.
Glenn is the only regularly published Columnist in the US who writes about gender issues from a
perspective unapologetically sympathetic to men.
We will be discussing some of his recent articles, including
Domestic Violence: A Two-Way Street and more. You can submit questions prior to the show or
in realtime via this form. As always,
you can set the pace for future shows by suggesting a guest."

In some very encouraging news, a man from Wales (UK) will receive a check for 30k pounds, plus interest, after paying child support for seven years for a child that he never fathered. He discovered this fact after taking a DNA paternity test. Gerard Bradbury decided to take the test as the CS payments began to become "crippling" to him. Bradbury said, "I don't begrudge the child a penny but I hate being taken for a fool. The last few years have been a nightmare. But now at last I can get on with my life." This was noted as the second time in Britain that a man was able to stop paying child support when backed by a DNA test. You can read the BBC story at this link.

Not PC sent in Paul Craig Roberts' latest article from TownHall.com. In it, Roberts talks about the ways "propaganda has crowded out truth" in domestic violence awareness, with companies such as Philip Morris sponsoring one-sided advertisements "designed to arouse anger at men." Roberts also brings up the Super Bowl Sunday DV myth, which I think serves as an excellent example of how the media goes overboard when trying to report on sensational news (especially the kind that denigrates men at the same time).

Marc Angelucci writes "Governor Davis of California just vetoed SB 700, a California bill that would give special child visitation rights to "Any female prisoner serving a term of imprisonment subject to Section 3041 who has not had a release date" but not to males in a
similar situation. Davis vetoed the bill for reasons mostly having to do with security. He did mention that it excludes males, but then he cites the problem as one of "costly litigation" rather than civil rights. Again, men don't *really* have rights. Here is all he says on the discrimination: 'Of additional concern is that by permitting specified female prisoners, but not similarly classified males, to have family visits, could lead to costly litigation due to its gender-specific provisions.' Thanks Governor Davis. Sort of."

frank h writes "This article is an important commentary on the destruction of maleness at the hands of feminists that comes at a critical time, when we now begin to resurrect our recognition of the value of machismo and testosterone in the towers of the WTC and the mountains of Afghanistan. An unspoken message here is that the feminists have done real damage to the military and that maybe it's time for the dismantling of the Pentagon's Defense Advisory Committee on Women in the Services (DACOWITS)." Thanks also to Neil Steyskal for submitting this story.

Need I say more? DLJ number 14 is out, and can be read at the usual spot. The focus again is on domestic violence, including a summary I wrote about Day 1 of my DV awareness project at UNH. Enjoy!

This story in the Detriot Free Press highlights a major flaw in the sexual offenders registry system used all over this country: it can stigmatize men as rapists or pedophiles, even if their actions weren't consistent with those crimes. He was 16, wanting to be one of the guys, playing truth or dare. The dare: touch a girl's breast during a football game at Hazel Park High School last year. He did. As a result, the boy will be branded as a sex criminal until the year 2024.

Neil Steyskal sent in this report by The Heritage Foundation. Krista Kafer writes that the Women's Educational Equity Act is currently wasting taxpayer dollars that could be used to help economically disadvantaged children, which are currently the ones in most need of more educational resources. In the process, Kafer debunks the myth that "schools shortchange girls," and points out many areas where boys are doing very poorly. The report seems targeted to lawmakers, and includes important graphs and statistical information.

Glenn Sacks, one of the only regularly published male columnists who writes about gender issues from a perspective unapologetically sympathetic to men, is at it again. This time he has an editorial which made it into the Los Angeles Daily Journal and the San Francisco Daily Journal, with an article similarly themed to his Daily Bruin one on the truth about domestic violence. This is particularly significant since the two newspapers are targeted to and read by legal professionals, including lawyers and judges. Since I don't have links to his story on either of those two newspapers, you can read it on his web site here. All I can say is, go Glenn!

Wendy McElroy's latest column on Fox News explores the irony of a Canadian anti-free speech feminist's recent anti-American speech. Her own government, which sponsors her with Canadian tax dollars, is now attempting to distance itself from her. According to McElroy, this woman has for years claimed that free speech is a white male plot to oppress women, and that women could only obtain power by suppressing free speech.