Domestic Violence Double Standard and the University of Michigan.

The University of Michigan recently completed a study on domestic violence. The school's researchers want to identify potential domestic abusers during routine health care visits. Their study endorsed feminist views toward domestic violence. Abusers are strictly male.

The school's report claims one in five American men are guilty of intimate partner violence (IPV). The researchers said "When people think of men who abuse their partners, they often think of violent people who they have never come across, or people they have only heard about in the news. However, our study showed one out of every five men in the U.S. reported physical violence toward an intimate partner. It's likely that we've all met these men in our daily environment. This is an issue that cuts across all communities, regardless of race, income, or any other demographics." The researchers continued "Most of our efforts to prevent intimate partner violence have focused on screening and improving outcomes for women who are victims, because their health and well-being is our priority. Very little work, however, has been done on how to identify male perpetrators". "Our research shows that male perpetrators of intimate partner violence seek routine medical services... This suggest we may be missing an important opportunity in the primary care setting to identify their aggressive behavior and potentially intervene".

The University's definition of IPV included pushing, grabbing, shoving, throwing something and slapping. The school's report appeared in the American Board of Family Medicine and was promoted by large liberal progressive websites such as Thinkprogress and Salon.

The idea abusers are always male is a sexist double standard. Its pure feminism. Several studies have already disproven this fallacy.

In June 2014, a study led by Dr. Elizabeth Bates, University of Cumbria, concluded women were slightly more likely than men to be the perpetrators of IPV.  The report also stated "in our sample, 7% of men and 11% of women were categorized as intimate terrorists" over the last 12 months. Dr. Bates said "{Our} study found that women demonstrated a desire to control their partners and were more likely to use physical aggression than men". In May 2007, an IPV study published in the American Journal of Public Health, by researchers from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention concluded "In nonreciprocally violent relationships, women were the perpetrators in more than 70% of the cases." In September 2000, an IPV study conducted by Professor John Archer, University of Central Lancashire, and  published in the National Institutes of Health, concluded "women were slightly more likely than men to use one or more acts of physical aggression" against their partners. Additionally, the study concluded women use such acts more frequently than men. Similar to Michigan’s standards, all three investigations included pushing, grabbing, shoving, throwing objects and slapping as forms of IPV.

Despite this research, there is a persistent double standard in America concerning domestic abuse. Women are treated as an aristocratic class. The media, academia and the judicial system give them special privileges and protections to commit acts of abuse against others.

Michigan's report is simply another example of America's feminist double standard concerning domestic violence.


September 30, 2014

Feminist Politicians Continue War Against Male College Students

Feminist Politicians are continuing their war against male college students with their proposed Campus Accountability and Safety Act (CASA).

CASA  will regulate sexual assault investigations on US campuses. The Act requires all publicly funded universities to: investigate alleged campus rapes, designate Confidential Advisors for every student claiming she was raped and conduct annual sexual assault surveys of undergraduates. Federal funds shall be withheld from any University not complying with CASA. Additionally, non complying schools shall also be heavily fined possibly in excess of one million dollars. The US Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights shall keep all fines it collects from schools. CASA labels accusing students as victims. It gives accused students no advisor. They are on their own. The Act assumes accused students are guilty unless proven otherwise. Guilty students are removed from campus.

CASA's main sponsors, feminist Senators Kirsten Gillibrand (New York) and Claire McCaskill (Missiouri), fraudulently claim 1 in 5 college women are sexually assaulted. Thus, according to these politicians, hundreds of thousands of male undergraduates are rapists.  Groundless suspensions and expulsions have already occurred across US campuses. For example, Xavier University  expelled Dez Wells for sexual assault. However, after listening to evidence, a Grand jury refused to indict him. The prosecutor doubted the assault occurred and hospital examination showed no trauma on the woman's body. Columbia University suspended an unidentified man for at least 1 year when a sexual assault complaint was filed against him 5 months after the incident occurred. The man claims the female undergraduate was upset he started dating one of her friends.

CASA will allow colleges to legally mass produce these types of campus removals.

Rape is a crime. Schools are not criminal investigation institutions. THEY ARE EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS. Their purpose is to EDUCATE. Rape should be investigated by criminal investigation institutions NOT schools. Both Gillibrand and McCaskill are vehemently opposed to such a policy. If police rather than schools handle alleged sexual assault crimes, the feminist senators will be unable to achieve their goal of the mass removal of male undergraduates from higher education.

The impetus for this mass removal is a 2010 study by the research firm Reach Advisors. The study discovered single women aged 22-30 outearn their male counterparts in most American cities. Reach Advisors cited college education as the main reason for the gender pay gap. Significantly more women than men earn degrees. By creating CASA, feminist politicians hope thousands of male undergraduates can be prevented from obtaining degrees. Less men with degrees means more high paying skilled jobs go to educated women.

Feminist already control large sections of American education. They have created programs such as The National Girls Collaborative Project, Women in Mathematics and The EDGE Program. All promote learning solely among girls. They have designed reading classes in lower education emphasizing various character's feelings and emotions so that they appeal to girls and disinterest boys. They have obtained financing from companies such as Exxon, Caterpillar and Intel for girls only educational coursework and resources. They have received funding from National Science Foundation (a federal agency) for their organization Girls Incorporated. One function of Girls Inc. is distributing university scholarships with the stipulation the receiving student cannot be male. Thru the American Association of University Women, these female chauvinists have written school conduct codes resulting in boys as young as 6 being suspended for alleged sexual assault. With the addition of CASA, feminist can significantly hinder men's education from grade school thru college.

Gillibrand and McCaskill have vowed to make their proposal into law. Currently, these Senators (both Democrats) have some bipartisan support. Senators Marco Rubio (R), Kelly Ayotte (R), Richard Blumenthal (D), Chuck Grassley (R), Dean Heller (R), and Mark Warner (D) have stated they support the proposal. This bipartisan support shows men voting on the basis of a politician's party affiliation are being fools. What matters is a politician's  feminist affiliation. Vote against any politician affiliating themselves with feminism. CASA is feminism.

September 2, 2014

Women Are More Controlling Than Men In Relationships

A recent British study concluded females are more prone than males to be controlling and aggressive in relationships.

Psychologists at the University of Cumbria questioned 706 young women and 398 young men about their behavior in relationships.  They were asked about their physical aggression and controlling behavior toward sexual partners and friends. The psychologists discovered women were more likely to be  verbally and physically aggressive toward men than vice versa. Women were also shown to engage in greater levels of controlling behavior than men. This type of behavior is understood by psychologists to be a predictor of physical aggression in both sexes. The findings also revealed just as many females as males could be classified as abusive.

Lead researcher, Dr Elizabeth Bates said "This study found that women demonstrated a desire to control their partners and were more likely to use physical aggression than men." She also stated ‘"The stereotypical popular view is still one of dominant control by men. That does occur but research over the last ten to 15 years has highlighted the fact that women are controlling and aggressive in relationships too.’"

Previous studies, particularly in feminist America, explained controlling behavior in relationships as male violence towards women arising from patriarchal values. The British study shatters that feminist myth.  Dr Bates stated "This [study] suggests that IPV [intimate partner violence] may not be motivated by patriarchal values and needs to be studied within the context of other forms of aggression, which has potential implications for interventions."

Dr Bates' last statement shakes the very foundation of feminism. Her statement means that rather than judging people on the basis of their gender they should be judged on the basis of their actions.

In America, this would require a rethinking of institutions such as domestic abuse shelters and the family court system. These entities currently follow feminist philosophical guidelines. They judge people on the basis of feminist gender stereotypes. Thus, men are denied access to domestic abuse shelters because they are seen as violent rapists. Conversely, women are viewed as good & virtuous. Men are also denied equality in the family court system because courts believe any marital problems are the husband's fault. Wives are viewed as innocent. Additionally, popular women's websites such as Lulu operate on feminist principles. Lulu's creators, Alison Schwartz & Alexandra Chong, believe only males cause relationship problems.  Their website's philosophy is only males act selfish or violent. Females are seen as honest, selfless and righteous. Thus, the website allows dating  reviews only of men. Schwartz and Chong deem the rating of women as unnecessary since female characteristics are all good.

The feminist idea of all women being benevolent and selfless is obsolete. The British relationship study shows feminist gender stereotypes were based on sexism not scientific fact. People should be judged on the basis of their actions not gender.



July 30, 2014