This kid was horsing around on the play ground, during recess, and touched another boy on the groin or thigh while playing tag. There were apparently no reported witnesses, there is uncertainty whether anyone actually complained, but somehow Ms. Taylor knew about the incident and dinged the boy for sexual assault.

When I was that age our school principle, Mr. Norton, would catch four of five of us playing “Squirrel”, line us up along a hallway wall, and give us a few whacks on the ass with a wooden pointer which on occasion broke. I still recall the SWOOOSH it made cutting through the air on the way to its intended target. Those resisting habilitation ended up in his office bent over his desk to receive a few thunderous thwacks of Baby Harvey, Harvey, Grandpa Harvey, or Momma Harvey, the latter of the four being the biggest, baddest, butt-burning paddle in our entire young universe.

Each of the Harvey family was cut from stout Alaskan birch, lovingly carved into what looked like a beaver tail with a handle. The tails were wrapped in black electrical tape with a bunch of holes drilled through to prevent the air from slowing them down when swung.

A THWACK was heard from one end of the school to the other. Total silence blanketed grades one through six as each pupil, teacher, and kitchen worker counted “THWACK, THWACK, THWACK…THWACK” (the last THWACK, after a pause for apology or prayer, for the questionably repentant.

A parent’s permission was required in advance, the Harvey’s were never used in anger, and Mr. Norton was the best principle anyone could ever have. He cared about kids and would have never done anything to scar a child for life unlike Ms. Taylor and the paper trail she started for the young man she irresponsibly accused of sexual assault. Maybe if Ms. Taylor had known Mr. Norton she would better appreciate education, except in them days only boys got thwacked – some things never change.

For the rest of the story see: A Touch During Recess, and Reaction Is Swift

January 30th, 2012

Tom Martin v LSE’s Gender Institute: Update

Tom Martin’s sex discrimination lawsuit against Europe’s largest gender studies department at The London School of Economics (LSE) has been delayed, a hearing now rescheduled for March 13th. Tom has given an interview for a programme on satellite news channel Press TV on ‘the future of feminism’, which awaits broadcast, and also, has recently been invited to take part in a debate at University College London (UCL), on the prevalence of misandry in academia and society, a date not yet set. Tom invites all other press and media to contact him directly: sexismbusters@hotmail.com.

Tom thanks all 120 people from 9 countries who have now donated a total of £4013.25 to the legal fighting fund so far, and asks supporters to keep the donations coming in and the momentum going, by subscribing on twitter, Facebook and YouTube, and spreading the word in any other way they can for what could be a long, difficult, but ultimately game-changing awareness-raising and legal campaign.

 NCFM NOTE: Stay tuned. Something similar may be developing at the University of Montana… please support Tom’s effort, he’s making the world a better place for all of us.

Alimony: another form of indentured servitude with little prospect of freedom

The letter about alimony below appeared in The South Florida Sun-Sentinel on Thursday February 2, 2012 and is followed by the articles to which it responded.

 Alimony laws are archaic

Re: “Report: Should alimony laws be changed?” on Jan. 25:

Why permanent alimony? Why should any state have laws granting alimony for life? For a law to continue, there must be a sound reason for its continuation.

A case can be made for short-term rehabilitative alimony for education or job training. However, in 2012 where women surpass men in education, occupation and income, no case can be made for unpredictable permanent alimony awards made by judges on the basis of unfathomable reasons.

So why do these archaic laws continue? In the cited USA TODAY article, the only advocates for continuing permanent alimony are members of the divorce industry who personally profit from the legal conflicts surrounding permanent alimony. Enriching the divorce industry is no reason to keep permanent alimony.

The money would be better spent on those who come first and deserve better — the children of divorce.

Gordon E. Finley, Florida International University, Miami

 Report: Should alimony laws be changed?

USA Today is following the Sun Sentinel in reporting on the movement to change alimony laws with the Florida Legislature considering a bill in the current session. Advocates for changes in the law want alimony not to be necessarily permanent if the former spouse receiving the checks, usually the wife, does not remarry. They argue that the lifelong payments can place an unfair burden on the paying ex-, usually a man.

In its story, USA Today profiles a Florida disabled doctor with Alzheimer’s still paying alimony to his ex-wife, a still working professor who declined to talk to a reporter. The doctor’s current wife argues that the money could be better spent providing more medical care to her husband.

 Should alimony laws be changed?

Michael Morgan only groans as his wife bathes his body, shaves his face and gently kisses his lips.

.A retired physician diagnosed with Alzheimer’s disease 14 years ago, Morgan, 72, no longer walks or talks. His wife and full-time caregiver, Linda Morgan, makes sure he’s fed and clothed, and that $25,200 in annual alimony is handed over to his ex-wife, a college professor he divorced in 1997.

“What’s sad is that this man who can’t get out of bed is paying a woman who is working,” says Linda Morgan, 61, of Lehigh Acres, Fla.

Linda Morgan is part of a growing movement pushing for changes to alimony laws in several states… click here to read the rest of the USToday article.

see “Issues” for more about discrimination against men

Another Veteran victim of Family Court and unjust alimony. Click on picture for FOX video.

How many male wounded warriors sacrificed to protect our freedoms just to have our government take away theirs by stealing their disability checks to pay alimony?

Like many veterans, Scott Cameron, a decorated Vietnam a permanently disabled and unemployed wounded warrior, was ordered to pay his ex-wife $500 alimony from his military disability checks. In protest he returned his Purple Heart medal.

Scott said, “My ex-wife didn’t serve in Vietnam, I did. She wasn’t forced to killed people, I was. She wasn’t the one severely wounded, I was. She didn’t experience the pain I did. She doesn’t have the disfiguring scars I do. She doesn’t have to take the long list of medications I do, and she will probably out live me because of all of this. My ex-wife is not entitled to any of my combat related disability benefits. My veteran’s disability compensation belongs to me, and only me, and no one is going to take it from me,” said Scott Cameron of Duluth, Minnesota.

Yet Scott’s disability compensation is protected by well established federal law, which civil courts routinely violate. The law, in; USC, Title 38, § 5301., says,  “Nonassignability and exempt status of benefits, (a) (1) Payments of benefits due or to become due under any law administered by the Secretary shall not be assignable except to the extent specifically authorized by law, and such payments made to, or on account of, a beneficiary shall be exempt from taxation, shall be exempt from the claim of creditors, and shall not be liable to attachment, levy, or seizure by or under any legal or equitable process whatever, either before or after receipt by the beneficiary.”

For more information about this hideous and illegal judicial practice see WWW.AREA5301.NET, the website for Operation Firing For Effect’s AREA 5301, operated by a group of disabled veterans opposed to being illegally robbed by the civil courts.

NCFM has over the years received numerous inquiries concerning this malfeasance which disparately impacts male military veterans and is another of many forms of gender discrimination against men.

However, for you veterans, though not directly on point, it is our understanding that if you get a letter from the Veteran’s Administration concerning your disability, and in that letter it clearly states that your disability is “needs based”, then your checks cannot be attached for payment of child support. You should check with your Veteran’s counselor or attorney to make sure this is correct and to get the exact phraseology that prevents civil courts from grabbing you disability checks.

And, situations like this don’t speak well of the women who take advantage of our wounded warriors or our legislators who refuse to protect them fro such abuse. Print this article and send copies  your legislators. Ask them what they are doing to correct such miscarriages of justice.

by John Van Doorn

Previously, San Diego NCFM members circulated petitions to place judges on the ballot as unopposed candidates in a write-in election.

Apparently, those efforts have unsettled the members of the Judicial Council to the point where they prompted the Legislature to sponsor legislation to do an end run around our right to have duly elected judges.

The new law would increase the number of required signatures from 100 to 0.1% of the eligible voters of a county, bounded by a minimum of 100 signatures and a maximum of 600  (AB-1335, passed by the legislature in 2010 but was vetoed by then Gov. Schwarzenneggar).

http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=200920100AB1335&search_keywords=8203

Another attempt was made in the new legislative session (AB-362), this time successfully. The law was passed by the legislature and signed into law by Gov. Brown in September 2011.

http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201120120AB362&search_keywords=8203

Besides increasing the number of signatures required in larger counties, for each judicial office petitioned, the new law also requires a candidate to file write-in candidacy papers (Elections Code 8600) wherein someone acknowledges they are running for that judicial seat) and further, in the case of a petition for Superior Court judge, that individual must file an affidavit (Elections Code 13.5) with the Registrar attesting to their qualifications to be sworn in as a judicial officer (Cal. Constitution, Acticle VI, Section 15).

The California Constitution requires that judges be elected! So with this new law, how is this accomplished?

When judicial vacancies occur, the law allows the governor to appoint a temporary judge, but an election is to be held at the next election to fill that judicial seat. And when the next election rolls around, no one dares challenge the presently seated and temporarily appointed judge (no doubt due to judicial intimidation) and for some reason, no public election is ever held, not even to affirm the temporarily appointed judge.

No one in their right mind would call this an election? It is nothing more than a political machination to circumvent the California constitution, a machination promulgated by those entrusted to protect our rights rather than violate them.

Of course, on those rare occasions when a judge announces his/her intent to vacate a seat at the right time, we do get a real election and lawyers then dare (or dare I say, are ‘welcomed’ by the Judiciary) run for the seat, at least those vetted for political correctness and party loyalty are “welcome”, others are annoyances to the System.

As things presently sit, the overwhelming majority of our sitting judges have never seen their name printed on a ballot, and more importantly, citizens never were allowed their Constitutional right to state whether the majority of our ‘empowered’ judges should be there in the first place; that is, generally speaking appointed judges become permanent judges by default and the citizens of California seldom if ever actually have a choice on election day.

So if the non-legal community of the State of California (everyone except lawyers and judges) wants to see a judge replaced, what recourse do they have? In the case of Appellate and Supreme Court justices, they come up for an affirmation vote every 12 years, so no problem there. But a superior court judge?

There is no process to place trial court level judges up for an affirmation vote every 6 years, and I believe there is no provision for a recall petition such as we have for the Appellate and Supreme Court levels. A member of the general public’s only option is to go to law school (3 years, $200,000+), pass the State Bar (another year or more), and serve ten or more years as an attorney. Does this sound like a Constitutional hurdle through which we would want most of us to pass in order to execute our right to vote? Of course not, and to think otherwise is absurd.

In short, this change in the law has made the office of a California Superior Court judge a life-long entitlement and not an elected position. Our elections code has been molested. Californians are basically denied our constitutional right to elect our trial level judges; a denial contrived by and political operatives and stakeholders who benefit from their corruption of our judicial system.

Which leads to a final question.

Assuming for a minute, that the California Constitution really requires that a judicial officer be elected to office, in the common understanding and interpretation of the word (i.e., their name is placed on a public ballot and they receive a majority of the vote of the public). Are those judges who never faced such an election (and our subsequent combined voice of approval) truly empowered by the State to carry out the will of the people through judgments and sentences? What of the criminal who is incarcerated on Order of a judicial officer who never faced an election of his/her peers, and therefore, under the Constitution, was sentenced by a ‘judicial officer’ not legally empowered to impose the Will of the State?

It seems to me that if the Rule of law is still in effect in this state, that these people presently incarcerated were never offered a fair trial and by virtue of being incarcerated, are presently having their Rights violated. It could be time to open the prison doors as a result of the Judiciary’s desire to improperly assign certain rights to themselves (actually withhold certain unalienable rights, the right to vote, from the Public)?

Comments anyone? I want to write an op-ed piece for the Capital Weekly and would appreciate your comments.

Thanks!

John Van Doorn

NCFM San Diego Chapter Board Member

Some of the universal health issues that men and boys in all countries around the globe face include lower life expectancy, difficulty accessing mental health services, educational disadvantages, lack of male role models and tolerance of violence against men and boys.

To help us focus our collective minds upon helping men and boys live longer, happier, healthier lives, the five key challenges that the International Men’s Day team is inviting men and women all over the world to address are:

1. IMPROVING MEN’S LIFE EXPECTANCY:

From the moment a boy is born he can expect to live a shorter life than his female counterparts in all but four countries on the planet. There is also a huge gap in life expectancy between rich and poor countries with men in Mozambique reaching an average age of 38 while in Iceland, Israel and Switzerland men live twice as long until the age of 80. There are also huge gaps in life expectancy within countries, with men born in the poorest parts of the United Kingdom, for example, dying 10 years sooner than their fellow countrymen in the wealthiest parts of the capital city. Boys are not genetically programmed to die young so our first challenge this International Men’s Day is to ask countries taking part to consider how we can help all men and boys live longer, happier, healthier lives – no matter how poor they are and no matter what country they are born in.

2. HELPING MEN GET HELP:

Every year poor mental health drives over three quarters of a million people to commit suicide – and around two thirds of them are males. Men and boys all over the world can find it more difficult to access help for mental and emotional health problems and most prison populations include a significant number of men with mental health issues. This International Men’s Day we are asking participating countries to consider how we can help more men and boys get the help and support they need and to take action on behalf of the hundreds of thousands of men who will take their own lives this year.

3. IMPROVING BOYS’ EDUCATION:

Poor education is linked to poor health outcomes later in life so improving boys’ education will also help men and boys live longer, happier healthier lives. This International Men’s Day we are asking people to explore why boys in richer countries are underperforming girls and also less likely to be in education, and why tens of millions of boys in poorer countries are still not completing a primary education? How can we address truancy and poor literacy rates which leave boys prone to adult unemployment, substance abuse, obesity, depression and poverty? What action can we take to focus on boys’ education in a way that closes the gap between girls and boys, addresses the gaps between rich boys and poor boys, and helps us to improve the long-term health and wellbeing of all men and boys.

4. TACKLING TOLERANCE OF VIOLENCE AGAINST MEN AND BOYS:

Violence has a major impact on men’s health all over the world. Every year over half a million people die from violence and 83% of them are men and boys. The same proportion of the global burden of disease (ill-health, disability or early death) from violence is borne by boys and men. Yet while there are now a number of deserved global campaigns to tackle violence against women and girls, there are no such campaigns to help men and boys. Why are we so tolerant of violence and abuse against boys and men and why do we still tolerate a world where we send boys and young men to fight wars on behalf of the adults in power? This International Men’s Day we are asking for actions we can take to help men and boys live in a less violent world and challenge our collective global tolerance of violence against men and boys.

5: PROMOTING FATHERS AND MALE ROLE MODELS

Fathers and male role models play a vital role in helping boys make a healthy, happy and positive transition from boyhood to manhood. How can we give boys a right to family life that gives them an equal opportunity to know and experience both their father and mother and ensure that their role as a future father is equal to girls’ role as future mothers? Giving boys a range of positive life choices in terms of family, work and leisure can help us reduce the number of boys whose choices are limited and end up poor, illiterate, unemployed, homeless, imprisoned and isolated. This International Men’s Day we are asking what actions we can take to give all boys access to a variety of male role models and ensure their country’s laws and practices give them an equal right to fatherhood, with all the support they need to be the best fathers they can be.

Addressing each of these challenges will help us to help men and boys all over the world to live longer, happier, healthier lives, which is why we are inviting supporters of International Men’s Day to join us in taking on one of more of these five key challenges in 2012.

Schedule and event in your community for International Men’s Day!

http://ncfm.org/category/issues/

By Yamiche Alcindor, USA TODAY

SHOULD ALIMONY LAWS BE CHANGED?

Michael Morgan only groans as his wife bathes his body, shaves his face and gently kisses his lips.

A retired physician diagnosed with Alzheimer’s disease 14 years ago, Morgan, 72, no longer walks or talks. His wife and full-time caregiver, Linda Morgan, makes sure he’s fed and clothed, and that $25,200 in annual alimony is handed over to his ex-wife, a college professor he divorced in 1997.

“What’s sad is that this man who can’t get out of bed is paying a woman who is working,” says Linda Morgan, 61, of Lehigh Acres, Fla.

Linda Morgan is part of a growing movement pushing for changes to alimony laws in several states.

Massachusetts led the way, revamping its law last fall. The new alimony law creates different types of alimony with varying durations, depending on length of marriage and the finances of each spouse. The law also allows those paying alimony to modify their terms later and calls for ending payments if a recipient has a live-in mate or, in most cases, when the payer reaches retirement age.

In Florida, a similar bill is moving through legislative committees. In New Jersey, a state senator introduced a bill this month to study alimony laws. In Connecticut, advocates for changing the law have hired a lawyer to write a bill. And activists in Virginia, Arkansas, South Carolina and North Carolina are organizing online.

“I see this wave going across the country,” says Steve Hitner, who started Massachusetts Alimony Reform in 2006 and is a consultant to other state efforts. “Most people who are stuck with these outrageous alimony payments think they got a bad rap, but in fact it was bad law.”

Read the rest of the article here: http://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/basics/story/2012-01-05/alimony-law-reform/52642100/1 then leave a comment please. USA today is the second largest paper in the country and this is a great opportunity to help push for alimony legislation reforms…

ALIMONY LAWS MUST BE CHANGED!

]]> http://ncfm.org/2012/01/uncategorized/should-alimony-laws-be-changed/feed/ 0 http://ncfm.org/2012/01/uncategorized/loving-men/ http://ncfm.org/2012/01/uncategorized/loving-men/#comments Thu, 19 Jan 2012 21:39:28 +0000 NCFM http://ncfm.org/?p=5907 by Kristal D. Garcia aka Vivica Liqueur

Tim Goldich, the author ‘Loving Men, Respecting Women: The Future of Gender Politics‘, expresses how there is an overall lack of love for Men.  I agree.

I’m not a perfect person I too fall into the bitterness rut of post relationship exasperation which escalates into gender projection and angry goodbye emails. The important part of that is to continue through and realize it is a completion process instead of lingering on the gender blame game that often follows those endings. That would be a brief explanation as to my personal process.  Even through this I return to and retain my total love for Men.

The heart space I hold for Men seems to have a very strong base in LISTENING. Our society has  long ago stopped-if they ever really started-listening to Men. From the magazines fed to teenage girls on ‘what a Man wants’ [which were never from a Man's perspective except in occasional controlled and guided excerpt] to the blatant television commercials depicting Men as incompetent and unimportant, Men have been misconceived, unheard and slandered. Apparently this has been deemed as humorous and permissible- I say enough. It is our responsibility to evolve past gender identity and see the power ineach other.  This isn’t a matter of who can do what fastest, hardest; prettiest it is a matter of responding with the heart, power and compassion we all possess. One gender does not have to be deemed weak
for the other to acknowledge its power.  As Woman rises to remember her strengths it is important that Men are remembered as equal.

As a woman I acknowledge you.  My lovers, my brothers, my fathers, my friends I hear you.  I love you, I see you and I welcome your knowledge. I receive you as my equal and am unafraid of what I do not know or at times understand. I expect only what is authentic for you to share.  The core of you is the same as the core of me.  Remember always that you are loved, important, powerful and beautiful.  May we face each other in awe, love, understanding and respect always.

Vivica

“Neither of the men knew about my subterfuge. I imagine both will be furious when they read this piece. I still have days now when I wished the sperm-theft had worked; that I had a daughter or son my husband felt  compelled to visit”

Anyone who meets me, or reads what I write, would think I don’t like children and never wanted to be a mother. Indeed, for most of my adult life, having a child was the furthest thing from my mind.

I wanted a career, freedom, a nice house and to keep my figure. As a feminist, I looked down on mumsy types.

But when I was in my late 30s, I decided that if I didn’t get pregnant soon then it might never happen. I had also reached a point in my life where I wanted to settle down with a man, and though my boyfriend at that time was wildly unsuitable, I thought that I could change him.

Shall I list the ways in which we were a mismatch? He lived with his parents before he moved in with me, and earned very little money. I was working on a newspaper and was fiercely ambitious. He was laid-back, I am not. I was ready for a baby, he wasn’t.

And yet I wanted to hang on to Trevor. I thought that if we split up I might not get a replacement boyfriend in time to use my rapidly dwindling egg supply.

Trevor had never given me what I wanted from a relationship. At first, he wouldn’t even have sex with me. Then, finally, when he moved into my flat (probably more out of a desire to be able to walk to work than any real love for me) we started a physical relationship.

He was still very cautious, though. He refused to believe I was on the Pill, and insisted we use a condom for every moment of our intimate contact.

‘I don’t trust you,’ he said, muttering something about women claiming to want a career, but underneath wanting to start a family…

Thus far no country has agreed to sponsor out convention, though the Swedes were kind enough to tell us they declined; which, was certainly expected considering Sweden is thought to be the most feminized country on the planet.

The NCFM convention is modeled after United Nations Convention for the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination against Women. The United States is the only civilized country holding out on signing the convention for women. For those of you who follow the current administration’s catering to the power feminist elite, the failure of the United States to sign the convention for women is remarkable.

Mr. Augustsson is fluent in several languages and he wrote the cover letters in the the appropriate language as able. Click here for a sample cover letter . The convention NCFM submitted follows:

Convention on the Elimination
of All Forms of Discrimination
against Men

 Reaffirming the goals set out in the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women,

Re-noting that the Charter of the United Nations reaffirms faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women,

Re-noting that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights affirms the principle of the inadmissibility of discrimination and proclaims that all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights and that everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth therein, without distinction of any kind, including distinction based on sex,

Noting that both men and women have faced sex discrimination throughout history, only in different ways,

Further noting that like women, men have also been the victims of harmful stereotypes,

Realizing that there will never be equality between men and women unless equality for men is also established,

Emphasizing that discrimination against men persists,

Further emphasizing that discrimination against men is just as wrong as discrimination against women,

Understanding that societies need both men and women and that men and women need each other,

Further understanding that most men are honest, decent citizens and are not criminals, rapists, pedophiles, or violent in general,

Underscoring that consenting sexuality between adults is a normal and healthy part of human existence that is to be celebrated and that attacking it is counter-productive to bringing about equality between men and women,

Determined to bring about equality for men as well as women and, in doing so, create a better world for everyone,

Have agreed on the following:

                                                                 Part I

Article 1

1. States Parties which recognize the 8^th of March as International Women’s Day are requested to recognize the 19^th of November as International Men’s Day.
2. States Parties which recognize an official Mothers’ Day are requested to either recognize a Fathers’ Day or to convert Mothers’ Day into Parents’ Day.
3. The existence of a Veterans’ Day, though laudable, shall not be considered as an equivalent to a Men’s Day.

Article 2

States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to eliminate discrimination against men with regards to military service obligations and ensuring that all military service obligations apply equally to women as well as men, in particular:

(a)  Either repealing or rewriting to equally include women all military service laws which apply exclusively to men or even mainly to men, including laws whose implementation have been officially suspended;

(b)  Either repealing or rewriting to equally including women all constitutional references to conscription which apply exclusively to men or even mostly to men, including such references which are not currently being enforced by law;

(c)  Either repealing or expanding to equally include women any registration obligations regarding a potential future draft should such registration requirements apply exclusively or even mainly to men;

(d)  Officially pardoning all men who failed to perform military service obligations, including registration failures, if such obligations applied at the time exclusively or even mainly to men;

(e)  Passing legislation making it illegal to discriminate against men who failed to perform military service obligations (including registration obligations) which applied exclusively or even mainly to men in all areas, including but not limited to employment (both public and private sector), holding elected office, receiving grants and other scholarships, and receiving any other form of public assistance and/or benefits.

Article 3 

1. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that the lives of men are considered equally as valuable as the lives of women.
2. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that men have just as much right to be evacuated from war zones as women have (an exception can be made in cases of pregnant women and nursing mothers).
3. While reserving priority space on lifeboats for children over adults would still be permissible, men must be given equal priority as women with regards to being evacuated from ships (an exception can be made in cases of pregnant women and nursing mothers).
4. Men shall be evacuated from all other dangerous situations with equal priority as women (an exception can be made in cases of pregnant women and nursing mothers).

Article 4

1. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that men’s health is given equal priority to women’s health, including in such areas as state funding for medical research.  An exception can be made in instances in which a State Party wishes to spend more research money on behalf of the sex with a lower life expectancy.
2. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that all social welfare services treat men equally with women and are just as available to men as they are to women.

Article 5

States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that blood feuds, especially those which apply to all male members of the family or any other group rather than merely towards the alleged culprit of the perceived injustice, be fully eradicated by fully prosecuting all of those responsible for perpetrating blood feuds.

Article 6 

1. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that the genital integrity of minor boys is respected equally to that of minor girls and that no form of genital cutting should occur on anyone, male or female, under the age of 18, or on any adult without the complete and total consent of that adult absent pressure from others.
2. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that any painful rite of passage ceremonies, especially those involving the cutting of the body, be eliminated.

                                                                Part II

Article 7

States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that men and women are charged the same rates of taxation, as there is no justification whatsoever for charging one sex more taxes than the other.

Article 8

States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that all age requirements, in both the public and private spheres, apply equally to men as well as women, including but not limited to retirement ages, minimum ages for withdrawing from pension funds, minimum ages for collecting state benefits for the elderly, minimum ages for marriage, and minimum ages for entrance into business establishments.

Article 9

1. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that immigration policies apply equally to women as well as to men.
2. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that all visa policies apply equally to women as well as to men in all respects, including visa application forms.
3. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that fathers have the same rights of conferring citizenship on their children as mothers have.

                                                                Part III

Article 10

1. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that society never loses sight of due process and that the rights of the accused, no matter how horrendous the accusations, are respected in all manners, including for such crimes as rape, pedophilia, and domestic violence.
2. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that perpetrators of false accusations of all crimes, including rape, pedophilia, and domestic violence, are prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

Article 11

States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that male victims of domestic violence are acknowledged by the state in that:

(a)    All the same resources available to female victims of domestic violence be equally available to male victims;

(b)   The perpetrators of domestic violence against men, be they male or female, be prosecuted just as vigorously as the perpetrators of domestic violence against women are prosecuted.

Article 12 

1. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that the law is enforced equally towards both female perpetrators as well as towards male perpetrators and that male perpetrators are not treated any more harshly than female perpetrators.
2. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that incarcerated men receive the same privileges granted to incarcerated women, included visitation rights with regards to the prisoners’ children.

  Article 13

States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that policies, in both the public and private spheres (including but not limited to seating polices on airplanes), are neither written nor enforced in a manner that views all men as potential batters, pedophiles, or rapists.

Article 14

States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that pedophilia laws designed to protect minors are not used to prosecute them, in particular:

(a)    For taking and sending lewd pictures of themselves;

(b)   For  engaging in sexual acts with each other provided that both minors are close enough in age to each other.

Article 15

States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that sex offender registries only include the names of perpetrators, both male and female, who are genuine threats to the community for such crimes as rape and pedophilia, and exclude the names of those convicted of crimes that are not a genuine threat to the safety of the community.

Article 16 

States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to eliminate discrimination against men regarding safety policies, including in particular but not limited to:

(a)    Taxis shall not offer any discounts to women;

(b)   Subways and trains shall not have women only sections;

(c)    Institutions shall not be permitted to offer transportation to women only;

(d)   Women shall not have the right to carry any weapons or any other forms of protection if men are not also permitted to carry such weapons.

(e)    Parking spaces shall not be reserved for women only (an exception can be made in cases of pregnant women).

                                                                Part IV

Article 17

States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to eliminate all stereotypes and one-sided expectations regarding courtship and dating.

Article 18

1. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that sexual harassment policies do not create an even more hostile environment, and that openness with sexuality is goal that society should have and that that should not be seen as an example of sexual harassment.
2. The label of sexual harassment is to be reserved exclusively for truly egregious behavior in which the perpetrator intended to create an uncomfortable atmosphere and was fully aware that his or her actions were doing so.
3. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to eliminate discrimination against men, both in the public and private sphere, regarding mandatory sexual harassment training seminars which are only required of men, as such a requirement constitutes discrimination against men.
4. Establishments, both public and private, which wish to eliminate their sexual harassment polices altogether shall not be discouraged from doing so.

Article 19

States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that sex workers are treated with the full dignity and respect which they deserve, including

(a)    A complete legalization and regulation of the sex trade amongst adults;

(b)   Recognizing that consenting adults are entitled to engage in acts of sexuality with each other, even if consent was only granted for the want of money;

(c)    Ensuring that the sex trade does not lead to human trafficking.

Article 20

1. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure the sanctity of marriage and that no policies be adopted to either discourage marriage or encourage divorce.
2. The existence of alimony payments is to be discouraged and kept to an absolute minimum.

Article 21

States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to recognize the important role that fathers play in the upbringing of children, and that no policies are adopted which discourage fatherhood.

Article 22

States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to eliminate discrimination against divorced men and non-custodial fathers, in particular:

(a)    Claims made by fathers to child custody must be fully respected;

(b)   Visitations granted to non-custodial fathers must be fully respected and mothers who disregard them must be held accountable and should perhaps have their custody revoked;

(c)    Child support payments are to be for the exclusive benefit of the children in question and not the custodial parent

(d)   Child support payments must never be set at unreasonable levels and adjustments must be made for fathers who lose their jobs or who have taken a pay cut;

(e)    Single fathers, including minors, should not be required to complete any parenting courses prior to gaining custody if the mother has no such requirement.

(f)    A man who have been found not to be the father of a child shall be allowed to terminate all custodial obligations, including financial ones, if he so chooses.

                                                                Part V

Article 23

States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to eliminate discrimination against men with regards to education, in particular, the awarding of scholarships or other grants for study.

Article 24

1. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that any affirmative action programs, both in the public and private spheres and in both education and employment, be ended as soon as they are no longer needed.
2. States Parties which have minimum quotas for women in any given field, both public and private, must have the same minimum quotas in place for men.
3. States Parties which do not wish to bring about equality through affirmative action shall not be required to do so.

     Article 25

States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that men are freely permitted to hold jobs that have traditionally been viewed as female, and that such men are fully accepted by society.

Article 26

1. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to eliminate any harmful stereotypes against men who are stay-at-home-fathers and househusbands.
2. States Parties shall recognize that within the family, it is the children who are of paramount importance and that it is better for children to have one parent, either the father or mother, at home rather than being in a daycare center.
3. State Parties shall encourage employers to offer fathers more flexibility with regards to working hours and leave of absences from work
4. State Parties shall encourage employers to be equally accepting of fathers who leave the workforce for a number of years as they are of such mothers.

Article 27 

States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to eliminate discrimination against men by prohibiting business establishments from refusing to serve men, such establishments include but are not limited to hotels, restaurants, gymnasiums, and taxis.

Article 28

States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to eliminate discrimination against men with regards to the prices charged by business establishments in that men must always, including even in cases of special promotions, be charged the same prices as women in all sectors of the economy, including but not limited to, insurance, food and drink, admission fees, and airplane tickets.

By Phil Cook

There is a well-orchestrated government-backed effort underway to allow women who participate in any sexual activity with a man to charge him with sexual assault or rape – whenever they choose to do so. Every man, married or dating, is at risk.

This unprecedented attack on dating teenage boys and all men began with an April 2011 Department of Education directive. The directive was issued without prior notice or opportunity for public comment: “[I]n order for a school’s grievance procedures to be consistent with Title IX standards, the school must use a preponderance of the evidence standard (i.e., it is more likely than not that sexual harassment or violence occurred).”

In October 2011, Caleb Warner was allowed to return to the University of North Dakota after being victimized by the university’s low standard of evidence. The accuser had filed claims of sexual assault with both the University and the municipal police department. Two investigations resulted — the university’s according to the preponderance standard, and the police’s according to the usual “clear and convincing” standard — and they could not have turned out more differently.

Warner was found guilty by his university and banned from campus after a swift investigation. Meanwhile local police reviewed the very same evidence, determined that Warner’s accuser was lying, and charged her with filing a false report.

Don’t think it could happen to any male you know attending college? Think again. Vice President Joe Biden has launched an active campaign in support of the Department of Education’s new directive.

The character Val in the Marilyn French novel, “The Women’s Room,” said, “All men are rapists.”  If the definitions are broadened sufficiently, it becomes true. This might be seen as the somewhat laughable assertions of a radical feminist fringe, but the U.S. government is acting on their behalf.

It’s no coincidence that the FBI has recently changed its definition of what rape is. The previous definition was in place for eighty years: “The carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will” The Uniform Crime Report Subcommittee has changed that definition to: “penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.”

Has she had a drink or two of alcohol or used a drug? Then she’s “incapable of consent” even if she voluntarily became inebriated.

Los Angeles attorney and NCFM Vice President Marc Angelucci says, “Think about what the new definition of “rape” means. Every exploratory “hands-on” teenager in the back seat of a car or on a sofa in the parents’ basement is now at risk of being branded a “rapist”.  They kiss. His hand touches (“penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part”).  She does nothing (“without the consent” means he has the burden to get consent; she doesn’t have to express lack of consent). He stops touching.  Too late. The hand committed rape and the only question is whether she will press charges. By changing the definition at the FBI data collection level, all jurisdictions will come under pressure to change their underlying statutes to make the crime fit the Federal definition.”

Philip W. Cook is a board member of Stop Abusive and Violent Environments (SAVE), www.saveservices.org and the author of the forthcoming book, When Women Sexually Abuse Men-The Hidden Side of Rape, Sexual Assault, Stalking and Harassment (Summer 2012-Praeger).   He is the author of Abused Men-The Hidden Side of Domestic Violence (Praeger-2^nd edition 2009).

NCFM Advisor Gordon E. Finley, Ph.D.

Men falling behind

http://jacksonville.com/opinion/letters-readers/2012-01-05/story/letters-readers-we-re-protected

A recent article described dads who stay at home. The driver is that today’s men and fathers have received less education, have poorer jobs and earn less income than women and mothers.

A half-century ago, men earned about 60 percent of all advanced degrees while today men earn only about 40 percent of all advanced degrees. This male educational loss translates into fewer good jobs open to men and at lower pay grades.

So, while yes, there is “choice” for fathers to become stay-at-home dads, it must be noted that this is the same “choice” that mothers faced a half century ago when fathers had higher educations and occupations than mothers.

The lower-earning spouse takes on the child care while the higher earning spouse works.

Bottom line: It’s choice, but the choice is economically driven and reflects today’s educational, occupational and economic losses by men.

Gordon E. Finley, Florida International University,

Miami

Stay-at-home dads by choice – and loving it

They’re stay-at-home dads, by choice, and loving it, though it may not be as easy a task as some think.

Updated: December 29, 2011 – 12:33am

John Law is a former lobbyist who is staying home with his daughter, Katharine, 2. Last week, Katharine and her dad played in the backyard of their Mandarin home.

BRUCE LIPSKY/The Times-Union

Gregg Keefer holds his 3-year-old daughter Zoe Porter-Keefer on Dec. 21 in Jacksonville. Keefer and his wife, Christel Porter-Keefer, decided that it made financial sense for Gregg to be a stay-at-home father.

December 29, 2011 – 12:09amStay-at-home dads by choice – and loving itPaul E. Gregg III doesn’t go many places without Paul E. Gregg IV, who goes by his middle name of Emerson and turns 2 on Friday.

They ride together on a bike to the ocean near their Jacksonville Beach house. They chat with the neighbors. With Emerson as a conversation-starter, they must know everyone for 10 blocks on every side of them. And when Paul makes coffee, Emerson is right there making it with him.

John Law, 37, a former lobbyist in Tallahassee spends most of his daylight hours with his 2-year-old daughter, Katharine. They do errands near their house in Mandarin. He makes lunch, plays with Katharine, puts her down for a nap. He does cleaning, cooking, laundry, cuts the grass, takes out the garbage.

Gregg and Law are former working men, each married to working women, who are now stay-at-home dads. By choice.

“It’s been really cool to shut my phone down. It’s been awesome,” Gregg said.

Read the rest of the article here: http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2011-12-29/story/stay-home-dads-choice-and-loving-it#ixzz1hy99gSlZ

She shows how the feminist assumption that “men had it easier and were in control throughout history” is dead wrong. On the contrary, the history of gender relations has been one of “disposable males,” who died earlier, did the dirty work, went to war, and gave up everything to put women and children first. She shows how an ethos of male disposibility was the norm until recently, for survival needs. Every woman was important to traditonal communities because she could prolong life through giving birth, and community survival was often in question. A much smaller number of men, on the other hand, are necessary to do the reproductive work, creating an imbalance resolved through male disposablilty. But the world has changed, and it is no longer necessary to place such value on female life and to consider males so disposable. Read the rest and see the video here: http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread790754/pg1

TRANSITIONS

OUR HISTORY (STILL) IN THE MAKING

by Francis Baumli, Ph.D.

     As archivist for back issues of Transitions, my role in The National Coalition for Men is, I daresay, highly crucial precisely because Transitions is the tactile part of belonging to NCFM. It is the part you can hold in your hands, assuring yourself that this is what you belong to. NCFM, through Transitions, brings members together in a forum for discussion, reporting on what our local groups are doing, while printing major articles that challenge our society and inspire members to confront society’s prejudices against men. The result is that the history of Transitions is now an important reflection of who we have been and who we are; thus, Transitions is both our repository and our vehicle. It recounts our struggles, documents our successes, and it even expresses our lighter side—the joy we take in our new-found roles, the pleasure our successes give us, and the fact that we are not without a sense of humor in dealing with that eternal struggle between men and women.

Back issues of Transitions (a considerable, though not complete, inventory) are available to anyone, free of charge, simply by contacting Francis Baumli, Ph.D. at: sudbaum@sbcglobal.net and stating what you want. This is only one of the many services NCFM provides through its charter as an educational institution.

What is curious for me is the fact that I have probably responded to more requests for back issues of Transitions in the last year than I have responded to in the last eight years. What does this mean? Perhaps our society, at a slow, reluctant, but inevitable pace, is moving in the direction of a new attitude toward men. People are curious about men, and they find that they are edified when they read Transitions. Also, not infrequently, they are moved to write about us because, for the common person, our perspective is a new one. (Old for us, yes; but new for the uninitiated, which includes too many people out there in our society.) The result is that I get requests for back issues of Transitions from the oddest places, but then when I put all these requests together, I see a pattern and I realize that these requests are not so odd after all. They reflect the fact that people are interested in reading about, or writing about, something that is new to them. For example, a woman in Australia working on a Master’s thesis, requested issues of Transitions dealing with false accusation in rape. She preferred this topic over the topic suggested by her advisor, which involved one more tiresome (and overdone) analysis of how Australia was colonized by the British. An entire class in women’s studies, at the University of Pennsylvania, was studying gender issues and several members of that class wanted back issues for a variety of topics. One young woman, with whom I had considerable follow-up, produced a stellar article on men’s feelings about an abortion that happens against their will. An Optimist Club wanted articles about men’s groups that do not call themselves men’s liberation groups, and very soon several Optimist Clubs from around the country were requesting issues of Transitions which do deal specifically with men’s liberation. A huge number of men want to know about their rights as parents. A considerable number of women want information on how to help their sons, brothers, or current husbands deal with false accusations of rape. A fellow working on a Ph.D. in history at the University of Chicago, not wanting to do one more pedantic dissertation about how the Industrial Revolution shaped Chicago, is instead interested in how new attitudes about fathering are reshaping civic policies that pertain to paternity leave for fathers.

In other words, our history is catching up with us. Or, said in a different way, our society is finally catching up with us. And if many of the back issues of Transitions are now quite old, unfortunately, the topics those issues deal with remain all too relevant. Men are still shackled by many of the same old gender constraints, and so our struggle continues. In this sense, if Transitions has recorded the history of our past, then it also presents the agenda we still need to work on.

Now, after 50 years of listening to feminists blaming men, their rhetoric has become a monotonous mantra of boring, predictable, and highly suspect clichés. The public is curious to know what other perspectives there are on gender issues, and in Transitions they are finding the information they want. Of course, not every reader is pleased with what our perspective is. For some readers it is too radical, for some it is an uncomfortable mirror, and for a few we are the enemy. But I do believe “the times they are a’ changing,” and for most, even if they read our views with some degree of caution, this caution does not amount to skepticism or rejection. Rather, spending time with Transitions occasions curiosity, discussion, scholarship, and (not infrequently) increased interest.

This means that Transitions, the repository for our history, makes that history come alive again. As a newsletter, Transitions deserves continued publication and readership. Back issues must continue to be available for readers whether they be cautious, curious, or eager. And, what now is especially good news, through the truly herculean efforts of our president, Harry Crouch, back issues of Transitions are being put into PDF files and will be available for reading at our website. Our history thus will be more easily available for those who prefer electronic access, and it will be more cheaply available because there will not be the expense of mailing out back issues of Transitions. Moreover, since the day will come when the “hard copies” of those back issues of Transitions have all been given away, these back issues will nevertheless remain perpetually available in their electronic form.

The National Coalition for Men has been the most consistently vigorous men’s rights organization in the history of the men’s movement. Its newsletter, Transitions, has often been more than a newsletter—its scope, influence, and sheer heft have given it the character of a journal. It has been our voice for over three decades now, and that voice will not fall silent. We remain available in hard print, available in PDF files at The National Coalition for Men website, and Transitions also is available in Xerox form at the Changing Men Collections at Michigan State University in East Lansing. You can go to their website at: http://specialcollections.lib.msu.edu/ and you will be amazed at how much of our history is available: including pamphlets about conferences, special publications, even recordings of our lecture series!  Summarily stated, our history is readily accessible and can be studied by anyone who wishes to review it. It also is true that the history of NCFM will never quite succeed at being history since the agenda of liberating men, and raising society’s awareness about men, is a process that, now begun, will persist into what always is the present and the future—precisely because of the momentum already given it by the National Coalition for Men.

___________________________________________________________

NCFM NOTE: Six complete editions available for review here: Transitions . Over 120 back issues of Transitions are available to active members of NCFM. A member is “active” is their dues are paid and current. You can join Online here . Transitions is without question one of the world’s greatest collections of writing about the rights of men; or, the absence thereof.

President, NCFM Los Angeles Chapter

In his 12/24/2011 article, AP reporter Jim Salter writes, “Unprovoked attacks at heart of ‘Knockout King’”

According to the article, Knockout King is a new crime trend, where an attacker who is part of a group just begins punching a victim.

“The rules of the game are as simple as they are brutal. A group – usually young men or even boys as young as 12, and teenage girls in some cases – chooses a lead attacker, then seeks out a victim,” said Satler.   Elsewhere in the article, “It’s adolescent and early adults, largely male, showing how tough they are. It’s done to show off,” said Scott Decker, Arizona State criminologist.

After clearly identifying the predominant gender of the perpetrators of this crime, Satler goes on to allege that the victims are “chosen at random,” but is that really the case?  Apparently not.  All four examples of “beating victims” given in Satler’s article are clearly male, and according to past federal crime reports, approximately seventy eight percent of homicides are male: http://tinyurl.com/77o2yq5 . Why is it so important for this AP reporter to point out the predominate gender of the perpetrators as male, while failing to point out the predominate gender of the victims as male?

In a lecture given by Jackson Katz several years back to UCLA women’s studies students, and others (paraphrasing), “It’s a sign of male privilege that women are afraid to walk alone at night, while men aren’t.”  Given that seventy eight percent of homicides are male, according to federal crime reporting. Is it a responsible thing to be telling males that their lack of fear, while walking alone at night, is a “male privilege??”  If men aren’t afraid to walk alone at night, they should be, and reporting like Sattler’s (neglecting to accurately/honestly cite male victimhood), and statements like Katz’s, (implying males are privileged, because they have no fear to walk alone at night), appear badly misinformed at the least.

Has a “politically correct” innuendo that males as a group don’t matter (unless casting them only as violent perpetrators, or privileged Patriarchs) become an acceptable bias that’s enshrined in educational facilities, journalistic publications, and beyond?   Such stereotyping of males as a group is neither honest, nor acceptable, in an American society that purports to extend equal protection to “all” as the benchmark of justice.

Hate crime laws extend special protection to groups of people based on characteristics like gender.  State hate crime laws vary, but current statutes permit federal prosecution of hate crimes committed on the basis of a person’s protected characteristics – including their gender.  Given a pattern that shows males as the overwhelming targets of “Knockout King” violence, these offenses should be honestly reported as overwhelmingly targeting men, and they should be prosecuted, as hate crimes committed against men.

Katz references supporting paraphrase used above:

http://tinyurl.com/85r6x8z

http://tinyurl.com/75rqyfn

Other Katz references:

http://www.jacksonkatz.com/news.html

http://tinyurl.com/79xybxc

SEE http://ncfm.org/2011/05/issues/anti-male-media-bias for more about bias against men in the media