Andrew writes "Boston Globe columnist and nationally-syndicated feminist spokeswoman Ellen Goodman presents the politically-correct view of the recent Boston DNA case wherein the Massachusetts Court ruled that a man must continue to support a child not his: as usual when a situation reveals the fundamental fallacies of feminism, it seems we just can't make up our dithering minds. Maybe what the woman did was not on the up-and-up, but think of the child! This heartless man wants to abandon her (men are all alike)! Clearly, Goodman would rather the secret had remained forever hidden; why am I not surprised? The feminist attitude toward children is interesting: on the one hand, a woman has an absolute "right to choose" to kill her children should she find them inconvenient; on the other she can get away with massive fraud by citing a child's 'best interest.' Heads she wins, tails you lose."

Michael P. Wright writes "Ever wonder why David Boren, with two years
remaining on his term, gave up one of the most
powerful seats in the U.S. Senate in order to
take the much lesser job of president of the
University of Oklahoma? His surprise resignation
took place not long after Queer Nation activist
Michael Petrelis began to accuse him of sexually
harassing his male staff members. I independently
investigated Petrelis' claims. Go here for my
findings. My article has numerous references
which can be investigated by others."

In Canada, The Cross Gender Monitoring Project has recommended that male prison guards be removed from women's prisons, for the protection of women's privacy concerns. While the problems of sexual harassment by the staff of the prisons was investigated, it was found that male prison guards were rarely involved in these cases. But in 1993 the Canadian Supreme Court also decided that male inmates who objected to female prison guards frisking them were not important, since ""Imprisonment necessarily entails surveillance, searching and scrutiny. A prison cell is expected to be exposed and to require observation." In other words, when men commit crimes, they lose their right to privacy." Donna Laframboise examines this double standard in her National Post column. Thanks to Rand for the link.

Not PC (there he is again!) sent me this story from the Sydney Morning Herald about new legislation aimed at promoting "responsible fatherhood." While the bill is of course aimed at increasing child support payment compliance, the dialogue surrounding the bill confronts the problem of fatherlessness publicly. "Senator Bayh said 17 million American children were living without a father today, up from 5 million in 1960. Fatherlessness was the most profound problem Americans faced, he said. It cost the Federal Government billions of dollars each year because it led to juvenile violence, teenage pregnancy and failure at school."

The Men's Activism News Network hit a milestone yesterday, May 3, by serving over 1,000 pages to visitors in a single 24-hour period. To be specific, there were 1,009 Page Hits. Site traffic has increased consistently since the site was started in late May 2000, and I'd like to thank each and every one of you who visits the site, submits news or posts comments. A special thanks also to Adam, my co-administrator, and also Not PC, who has probably submitted more news than any other user so far. You folks are terrific!!!

Kevin Thompson, Chairman of the Coalition to Preserve Families, writes "CPF is working to place the Child and Family Protection Act on California's March 2002 ballot. This initiative will improve juvenile dependency courts by 1) introducing the right to have a jury hear allegations of abuse, 2) requiring a speedy hearing, 3) removing the requirement for absolute confidentiality, and 4) promoting a preference for placement with relatives when a child is removed from the home. We need your help! For more information, see our web site at www.CoalitionToPreserveFamilies.org."

Trudy Schuett stumbled across a Yahoo! e-mail list called Ex-husband_is_now_my_slave . Check out the description of the list, which currently has over 350 members: "A serious and supportive discussion forum for divorced or legally separated women to discuss how they have used divorce, child support, alimony and the courts to make their ex-husbands their financial slaves. Also how ex-wives have used the psychology of divorce to turn their ex-husbands into servants and slaves for their own amusement and enrichment. A forum for women to share their success stories in humiliating and bankrupting ex-husbands--and then moving on, with their ex's money, to better relationships with more attractive men. Humiliation. Revenge. Female power. Female financial domination. No doubt about it: For many women, divorce can be the road to the easy life--and wealth and riches. And the beauty of it all is that it's all done at the expense of your ex, who now is your financial slave. This list is about placing your ex in psychological and financial bondage. Discuss the tactics--and laugh about it--here." Incredible. I'm speechless.

frank h submitted this AP story from Excite News, about a woman who shot her husband four times in the head as he slept to get a portion of his $11M fortune. Ron Rudin must have had some inkling that this could occur, because "he had signed a secret directive in 1991 saying that if he died violently, anyone found responsible would be cut out of his estate." Regardless, he is now dead and she is awaiting sentencing having been found guilty of murder.

Louise Malenfant sent in this news article from the Winnipeg Free Press about a father who was falsely accused of sexually assaulting his daughter. He received a $20,000 settlement from the Winnipeg Child and Family Services. Louise herself, as head of Parents Helping Parents, is involved in reforming overzealous social services groups when they routinely trump the civil liberties of parents, particularly fathers. She was quoted heavily in this article. Update: The link has now been fixed.

Rick Neagle from FACT (Fathers Are Capable Too) wanted to announce that there will be a one-day workshop on June 3, 2001, for divorced/separated fathers and non-custodial mothers, their supporters, and people who work with or provide services to divorced parents. Warren Farrell will be participating, and preregistration is required. Click here to download an info flyer in MS Word Format, or contact Rick at rickneagle@hotmail.com. If you already know you want to register, just go to this site and sign up.

Not PC sent in this link to a NewsMax story on the importance of fathers. The article touches on a wide range of subjects, including the rise of illegitimacy, father's influence on their children's academic success, the problems facing urban black families, reasons why we currently have so many children without regular contact with their dads. The article isn't entirely pro-male, but covers both sides of the issue, closing with "Many "deadbeat" fathers are actually "dead broke," Rep. Carson said. Carson said she knows it's not all men's fault. Some mothers accept child support but refuse to grant fathers access to their children, she said, and some women drive a wedge between children and their fathers."

Andrew submitted this story from the Washington Post. It gives a very thorough introduction to the Independent Women's Forum and what the group is involved in, and how it has come a long way in the public profile. Mention was made that IWF has a $1.3M annual budget, something that no men's group can claim, so I think that as an organization which is publicly challenging anti-male feminism, it is something we might do well to learn from.

Jim Castelli submitted this link to Jeff Jacoby's Boston Globe editorial and writes, "Jacoby reacts to the MA Supreme Court's decision forcing a young man to support a child he has been deceived into believing was his. Mr. Jacoby writes: "And what burden, you might wonder, does the law place on women? A burden to tell the truth when asked to identify a child's father? A burden not to trick a young man into forfeiting tens of thousands of dollars that he doesn't owe? A burden not to deceive the courts? Nope, none of the above. To judge from the court's opinion, a woman like Cheryl's mother is under no obligation at all....In the court's view he is not a wronged man with a compelling plea for relief. He is an ATM machine.""

My latest article for the UNH school newspaper, The New Hampshire, has been printed. I must admit there was a bit of a struggle to get them to print this article, and it was assumed that my challenging of the "1 in 4" rape statistic was simply wrong, despite the fact that I included my source in the article. I ended up having to show up in person with photocopied sections of Who Stole Feminism? to demonstrate that I had the facts straight, and then they agreed to print the article. But that, of course, was after a week's delay. The on-line editor for the paper has left, so the article isn't on TNH's web site, but you can read it by clicking "Read More" below. Enjoy!

Not PC submitted a link to this story from the Oregon Live, regarding a recent OR Supreme Court Ruling that divorced parents can be forced to pay college expenses for their children, even though married couples are not required by law to do the same. The judge even admitted that it was discrimination, but discrimination with a "rational basis." I guess it must be "rational" to extend the "divorced-father-as-wallet" metaphor for as long as possible. And if you combine this with MA's recent Supreme Court ruling, you'd even get non-bio fathers to pay for their non-bio children's college expenses! This is surely the pinnacle of "rationality"...