Jonathan writes "This is a short article highlighting the fact that for once, the UK Labour Government is removing a useless layer of bureaucracy, the Women's Unit. Unfortunately, despite accepting the fact that it was an embarrassment, derided by both men and women, they are still going to press ahead with positive discrimination for women in Government. This will be achieved by installing far more women ministers in the next Government, irrespective of ability. Click here for the link."

Trudy W Schuett writes "Trudy W. Schuett has left the Liberator, a print men's issues magazine, citing personal reasons. She intends to continue supporting the men's movement through other projects, such as The Moms for Dad's Rights Yahoo Club, The Men in Crisis Prayer Circle, and a projected book co-authored with AZFather's Rights Org member David Hamu. She will also begin publication of a bi-weekly e-zine called, The DesertLight Journal. The DesertLight Journal will focus on the issues of domestic violence and divorce/child custody, and the people and groups behind these issues. The DesertLight Journal will encourage new writers, and will often feature essays and articles written by former contributors to the now-defunct Themestream.com."

Marc Angelucci writes "Wired News printed an article on how NOW is creating controlled internet forums to avoid the "misogynist talk," "hate" and "verbal abuse" they allegedly receive in their internet forums. If some people were rude in the NOW forums, they should not be. But I have seen NOW take down messages from David Byron and others that were very polite attempts to engage in meaningful dialogue on the issues. NOW is telling half-truths and falsehoods as usual to justify their aversion to debate. If NOW wants to create controlled environments with no controversy for purposes of supportive discussion, that is wonderful. But if they are doing it just to avoid debate, which is very apparent, then they should be honest about it rather than lying and male-bashing to justify their cowardice. And the media should give balanced coverage of it by getting both sides of the story, which they did not. You can write a letter to the Wired News editor here newsfeedback@wired.com."

David Byron writes "An article by the Boston Globe entitled, "On campuses, fewer rallying for feminism" records a turn out of only about 40 women when Patricia Ireland, president of NOW, came to the all-female college at Wellesley. The article briefly discusses the reasons for the dwindling interest in feminism. As you can guess men are partly to blame, even at an all woman college!"

Anonymous User writes "In a recent issue of the American Journal of Psychiatry, a study was done to examine whether one gender or the other reported exposure to a greater number of life stresses, or reported greater likelihood of depression in response to stress. Thus, the authors examine the "cost of caring" hypothesis, in which women are thought to be more prone to depression because they have a greater emotional investment in their social networks. Results: Men were more likely to report stresses such as occupational problems, job loss, legal problems, and being robbed. Women were more likely to report stresses from conflict, crisis, or illness in their support network. Results were seen as consistent with gender role expectations. There was no indication that women experienced more stresses or were more sensitive to stress. An abstract of the article can be found here."

frank h submitted this link from Reason Magazine and writes "I haven't read this yet; I just found it. But as I go to colleges with my daughter, I see the diminished opportunities for men in collegiate sports: the programs just aren't there. Yet the effort and expense the colleges go to in populating women's teams is unbelievable. Mediocre girls who clearly aren't as enthralled by sport are being offered full scholarships just to show up. The poor ratings and ticket sales of the WNBA should be an example. The right answer is clear: each candidate athlete ought to have the same chance of being EXCLUDED. That way, athletics would be funded on real student interest, not political correctness."

Both frank h and Sergei Hoff himself wrote in to inform me of Hoff's latest column in Toogood Reports. The article is a scathing criticism of compromising military standards for the sake of allowing women into combat positions in the U.S. armed forces. The issue is, of course, very controversial from a men's rights standpoint. On the one hand, our freedom could be at risk if we don't have a military which is anything less than the best, but many of us also see male-only military enrollment as evidence that men's lives are less important and as a gender we are "disposable" in wars. This is a conflict that I have yet to resolve for myself.

For my third article in my men's issues column for the UNH school newspaper, The New Hampshire, I wrote about a challenging topic - advocating the rights of men accused of rape and sexual harassment. I mentioned the news about Columbia University's draconian sex discipline code, and explained how men are routinely denounced when accused of a sex crime, even when few people know what the facts of the case really are. Read the article here.

Thomas Golden from Webhealing.com submitted this story from the Washington Post. It's about rape awareness groups that have shifted focus from blaming men and putting them on the defensive to encouraging men to empathize with women who are raped and viewing men as "helpers" who can work to stop rape. However, the approaches described in the article still portray men as the empowered group and strive to "reconstruct" masculinity. It also uses examples of male rape not to raise awareness of this neglected issue, but to try to "put men in women's shoes" to understand what rape is like for women. Despite the fact I still see the campaign as implicitly anti-male, women's groups have largely attacked the program for promoting male-only groups of activists and not coming down hard enough on men. Go figure.

Marc Angelucci writes "In the April, 2001 issue of Reader's Digest there is an article [not available on-line] entitled "Pay-Up Time for Deadbeat Dads." The article completely ignores reality, such as that fathers have a better record of paying court-ordered child support than mothers do, or that, of non-custodial dads without employment problems and who have access to their children, over 80% pay in full and only 5% don't pay at all. (Sanford Braver, "Divorced Dads.") Instead it presents things in the same one-sided, misandrist manner that the average major media article typically does. You can write a letter to the editor here."

Men's Health America has upped the ante in the debate about gender health research disparities that adversely affect men. We reported on the debate which is ongoing with the Society for Women's Health Research. Now, MHA has issued a press release to help thrust this debate into the public spotlight. Seeing that the facts are easily researchable and that we have the truth on our side, this was a very wise thing to do. You can read the press release by clicking "Read More" below...

frank h submitted this link to a Chicago Tribune article about a civil lawsuit being filed by a man upset that women receive discounts routinely at night clubs. He's claiming that it's sex discrimination along the same lines that women have won lawsuits about the different pricing of haircuts or dry cleaning for men and women. The article ends with a somewhat ironic statement that the man filing suit "would rather spend the extra money I'm charged at the door to buy women drinks at the bar." I guess while he's against businesses discriminating against men, he doesn't mind cultural discrimination against men. (!)

Hey, we've been running this web poll for a few months now, and I was wondering if anyone had any ideas about a new poll to run. Either e-mail them to me at scott@mensactivism.org or post them as a comment to this message. Thanks!

Marc Angelucci writes "Here is a great article in the New Times LA about Jeffrey Grant, who spent months in prison on rape convictions that were later overturned by DNA evidence. Grant won a $1.7 million judgment against the city as a result. Justin Brooks of the Innocence Project says that, of the cases in which the Project uses DNA to prove that a convicted person is innocent, 85% were convictions based on eyewitness testimony."

The Washington Post is reporting that the testimony of Sexual Assault Nurse Examiners (SANEs) can no longer be considered scientific evidence in rape trials in Fairfax County, VA. These nurses examine the victim immediately after an alleged rape and can supposedly tell whether sex was consentual or not. One defense attortney quoted in the article said: "It turns out our SANE nurses here have taken their conclusions far beyond what the research says." A deputy's attorney also noted, "when consent is the ultimate issue, experts shouldn't be allowed to testify either way...It's for the jury to decide." I'm inclined to agree.