The media's invisible victims

The media's invisible victims

Barbara Kay, National Post Published: Wednesday, April 23, 2008

Heterosexual men can't catch a break from the media. When they're aggressors, they're condemned. When they're victims, they're ignored. Conversely, when women -- gay or straight -- and gay men are victims, they're pitied. And when they're aggressors, they're … hmm…also pitied.

A new study by Statistics Canada confirms what researchers in the field of domestic violence proved years ago: that partner violence amongst same-sex Canadians is significantly higher than amongst heterosexual couples. According to StatsCan, gays and lesbians experience twice the partner abuse of straight couples.

This is unwelcome news in general, of course. The media tends to promote an image of gays and lesbians as men and women who have fought for the right to love like straight people, not hate like them.

But it is particularly disconcerting to those Canadians -- most Canadians -- who have bought the myth that unprovoked domestic violence is virtually always a man-on-woman phenomenon.

Abuse of heterosexual men by their women partners is an irrefutable fact of life that for ideological reasons is rendered invisible on media radar. But no sooner were the StatsCan figures on gays released than a long gay-sympathetic feature article, "A skeleton that's still in the closet," by Erin Anderssen, appeared in The Globe and Mail.

The invisibility of heterosexual male victims I speak of shows up in the article's first comment on domestic violence: In asserting that "Canadians know full well that domestic violence is a major problem," Anderssen cites examples of a woman beaten by her boyfriend, and three children murdered by their father. To this journalist (and to be fair, to most others too), men hurting women and men killing children are what Canadians "know" about domestic violence.

What Canadians would know if the article was better researched is that men are almost equally likely to be assaulted by their female partners, and that children are statistically more likely to be abused or killed by their mothers than fathers.

Homophobia is presented as a serious social problem: "[T]here is real

concern that talking publicly about troubled relationships will only feed homophobia." Well, talking publicly (non-stop in this country) about man-on-woman violence definitely feeds misandry, but apparently there is no "real concern" about that.

In eerily familiar narratives in all but gender, Anderssen describes patterns of gay and lesbian couple violence. In one, extreme possessiveness periodically explodes into physically dangerous rage, but the victim can't bring herself to leave. In another a physically powerful, but unprotesting lover accepts episodic batterings by his smaller lover -- very much like strong but chivalrous men who stoically endure battering by women -- while in both cases the victim keeps making excuses for the batterer ("He had a rough childhood"), just as women so often do with abusive men.

These stories reinforce credible research proving that intimate-partner violence has no gender, but is rooted in individual pathology.

Anderssen first concedes, then disowns this ideologically unpalatable truth. She says, "In many ways, whatever you make of the numbers, the pattern of abuse is the same, gay or straight …" But if she'd left it at that, we'd have to admit that women are also capable of unprovoked violence.

We'd have to feel sorry for battered straight men as well as for gay men.

That would never do. So cue some -- any -- plausible excuses for gay violence: Gays drink more because they feel isolated; having HIV makes breaking up more difficult; maintaining secrecy about gayness is tough; their dads may have mocked them, so they can't form healthy relationships.

In other words, although entirely empirical conjectures, the reader is meant to understand these as "reasons" for gay-on-gay violence, while reasons other than innate control issues are never adduced for man-on-woman violence. Hadn't any straight abusive men "a rough childhood" or mocking dads? You're not likely to find out from our mainstream media.

Anderssen erroneously concludes, "there are still no shelters in Canada specifically for gay men." The truth is that there are quite a number of funded services for abused gays, including shelters and numerous counselling services, but almost none of either for abused straight men.

As ironic proof, the article is accompanied by a sidebar listing gay crisis services across Canada. Of the 10 cited, exactly one -- Wheatland Shelter in Alberta--provides funded service to straight men in domestic violence crisis.

All women and gay men represent about 60% of our population, but where domestic violence is concerned, together attract 99% of the media's sympathy and funded outreach. How long will the mainstream media's unethical double standard in reportage of domestic violence persist?

bkay@videotron.ca

The Smiley Face Serial killers this is not funny.

This parody site was set up in response to actions by Robin Steele to impersonate me. And to make a mockery of Robin's lame attempt to appear to be a Men's Rights Advocate.

Good Morning America did an interview this Morning of a CBS News Reporter (Woman) and two retired NYPD Dectectives on the trail of a Group of Organized Serial killers hunting men for over 11 years. So far at least 40 Young Athletic Men have been abducted, tortured and Murdered in 11 States and 25 Cities.

The reporters admitted that there is Gender Bias in the Case. IF this had been 40 College Coeds, who were young and pretty it would be a Major Case. But because of the Gender Bias against Men it is a low priority. Two Women in the Media admitted this truth on National TV this morning.

Now my question is simple. Will Robin Steele, her Pal Ginmar, Amanda Marcotte of Pandagon, Jessica Valenti of Feministing.com even acknowledge this?

Here is the link to this amazing Story. http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=4738621

Women have the right to be Sex Tourist, Men don't.

21/04/08 - Femail section Sun, sand, sex and stupidity: Why thousands of middle-aged women are obsessed with holiday gigolos By DIANA APPLEYARD The handsome young waiter's eyes followed Sarah as she walked across the restaurant, and she felt her heart beating faster as he leaned over to place a napkin in her lap. "At 54, I was unused to the attention of young men, especially a handsome one in his 20s," she says. "Our eyes connected as I told myself not to be silly - he couldn't possibly be interested in me. But I was wrong." Sarah Jarvis is 59 and has four grown-up children and four grandchildren. Attractive, slim and smartly dressed, she has been divorced from her lawyer husband for 15 years, and had resigned herself to a series of uninspiring dates with overweight, balding men of her own age at home in Chester. But here, on holiday with a girlfriend in the Turkish resort of Dalaman, was the promise of something very different. For Sarah was about to become one of the many thousands of British women courted by the legions of young foreign men in such tourist hotspots as Turkey, Egypt, Jamaica, the Gambia and Kenya. This summer, thousands of these middle-aged, single women will pour off the planes, to be met by countless fit, athletic-looking dark-skinned young men who will casually approach them, saying: "What a beautiful lady you are. Can I help you find your hotel?" The chance of a harmless sexual fling, or something more sinister? Writer Jeannette Belliveau, a self-confessed former "sex tourist" and author of a book called Romance On The Road, says the problem is becoming endemic and that these women are deluding themselves about the dangers such flings present. "The ultimate risk is death," she says, bluntly. "In the past two years three Western women have been killed for their money by their foreign 'toy boys'." Some of these women tourists never went home after their holiday. Barbara Scott-Jones, 61, from Leeds fell in love with Jamaica and was building a home on the island when she was found dead earlier this year. Scroll down for more... Labourer Omar Reid has been charged with her murder. Police believe Barbara had been having an affair with the 30-year-old and had just ended, or was trying to end, the affair when she was killed. The number of older women who form long-term relationships with holiday gigolos is growing year on year. Statistically, a third of all cross-cultural "marriages" end in divorce, and Jeannette says the naivety of the women involved is unbelievable. "Most of them are middle class and intelligent, which makes their behaviour even more baffling," she says. "These guys are after their money, pure and simple, and the ultimate goal is marriage so they can get a visa and move to the UK. The fact that they can fall for lines such as 'You are so gorgeous' is ridiculous." Fifty-three-year-old Jeannette, from Surrey, divorced in her early 30s. A few years later, despairing of the lack of dates in the UK, she began to travel the world and had numerous sexual encounters with young, foreign men. Today, she is married to Lamont Harvey, a historian ten years her junior. "The trouble is that for divorced or widowed women in their 40s, 50s and 60s, their male peers in the UK are either very unattractive or are looking to date much younger women. "In countries such as the Gambia and Kenya, there is both a surplus of men and the fact that women there tend to marry men at least ten years older than themselves, which is the culture. So for 18-year-old and 20-plus men, there is no one to date. "Poverty is rife. Then, over the past ten years, planeloads of mature single British women have started arriving, their handbags full of cash. They're fit, good-looking men and it didn't take them long to realise that there are rich pickings here." Sarah now realises how deluded she was during her Turkish fling. She began sleeping with Mohammed, a waiter, almost as soon as they met. "The sex was amazing," she says. "Either Mohammed was a very good actor - which is more than possible - or he genuinely enjoyed going to bed with me. "Imagine what it was like for me, a fifty-something women who felt abandoned, unloved and on the shelf, thinking no man would ever find me attractive again. Here was a beautiful young man with the most incredible, fit body, begging me to go to bed with him. "Even though alarm bells were ringing, I thought: 'Why not? What if I never get this opportunity again?' "He asked me to go for a walk with him when we were in the restaurant. My friend said 'You can't be serious', but I said: 'Why not?' And off we went. He kissed me and before I knew what was happening I was inviting him up to my hotel room." At 54, Sarah had gone through the menopause and, deciding there was no risk of pregnancy, did not use a condom. "I can now see that this was extremely foolish, as I later discovered Mohammed had slept with hundreds of women," she says. "I could have picked up a sexually transmitted disease, not to mention the threat of Aids." As they lay together, Mohammed told her he was 22. "For the rest of my holiday we spent most of the time in bed. It must have been awful for my friend, but I didn't care. I was on cloud nine. "He would look into my eyes and cry, saying: 'I want to grow old with you, and I want to take care of you for the rest of my life.' "When I left him at the airport he was in tears, making me promise to write every day and come back soon. "As soon as I got home I phoned him. He mentioned that he needed some new shoes, and could I send a small amount of cash? Still besotted and with the memory of so much happiness, I sent him money. "Gradually, the requests began to multiply. Could I send him the money for a DVD player, as he did not have one? Whenever alarm bells began to ring and I sounded a bit short with him, he made me promise to fly out and see him. "Within that year, I flew back to Turkey four times, spending a fortune not only on plane tickets, but on gifts for him." Meanwhile, back in the UK, her children were highly dubious of mum's new 'boyfriend'. "I didn't dare tell them how young he was, and played down the fact that he was a waiter," she says. "I said he was in his 30s and ran his own business. They were saying: 'Look, Mum, this guy is clearly a conman.' I told them not to interfere, that I knew what I was doing." As they lay together in Sarah's hotel bedroom Mohammed poured out all his financial woes: he was responsible for his elderly parents and was the only bread-winner in the family. "He made me feel guilty if I questioned his constant need for money," she says. For the next three years, Sarah flew to Turkey five times a year. Not only did she give Mohammed thousands of pounds, she also flew him on holiday to Istanbul and the coastal resort of Marmaris. "Sometimes we'd be walking down the street, hand in hand, and other British tourists would look at us askance," says Sarah. "But I was very defiant - they didn't realise that this was a real relationship, that we were in love." Sex tourism by British women is not a new phenomenon. As far back as the 1890s, there are recorded incidents of single British women becoming involved with dark-skinned Italian and French men on their cultural 'tours' of Europe. During the British Raj, it was not unknown for English matrons to fall prey to the darkeyed charms of young Indian men. But in the past two decades, the phenomenon has escalated. Author Jeannette says that since the 1990s, hundreds of thousands of western women have had affairs with much younger foreign men. "These are respectable middleclass women. Not all of them are unwitting victims to these sexual conmen," she says. "I have spoken to many women who fly to the Gambia or Jamaica specifically for the purpose of recreational sex." Indeed, some British women are utterly shameless about it. Nicky Jardine, 50, who has two adult daughters and runs her own headhunting business in Guildford, Surrey, goes on holidays with the intention of having sex with young foreigners. "I see nothing wrong in being a sex tourist," she says. "My working life is very stressful. Holidays are a time when I can have fun. I have dated men here, but men my age want younger women, and they are also boring. Compare them to a fit, tanned 20-year-old Egyptian!" Nicky first had sex on a holiday four years ago. She says: "I went on my own to Egypt. I didn't go looking for sex, but on the first day I became aware I was being eyed up by a very handsome young Egyptian who worked in the hotel complex. "I told myself not to be silly, but then he approached me and told me I was beautiful." Nicky invited him to her room. "It was amazing," she says. "Maybe he'd targeted lots of British women before - who cares? I wasn't looking for a long-term romance. "Of course, you have to realise that these people might be living in poverty. You could be robbed, or even kidnapped. But I felt quite safe when I was with him." Now she is settled into a pattern of wild holiday flings totally at odds with her respectable image. Indeed, many would argue that her insouciance about such promiscuity is rather demeaning. Last year, Nicky enjoyed a Caribbean cruise. "A young crew member made advances," she smiles. "We had the most amazing times in my cabin. I'd taken my mum with me, and she knew what was going on. In fact, she said: 'I wish I was 50 again!'" "I totally understand why more and more British single women like me are going on holiday looking for sex. It's the easiest thing in the world to pick up a young, handsome guy who will tell you are beautiful and make passionate love to you. All it takes is a bit of cash for presents, and I have plenty of that. "I always practise safe sex, so no one gets hurt. But I would tell women to be careful. Always use a condom and don't go off with these men. They are strangers, after all." Five years on and Sarah Jarvis no longer looks back on her holiday romance with rose-tinted glasses. "I must have spent more than £20,000 on Mohammed," she says. "On my final trip last year, I rang his mobile as usual when I arrived at the airport. There was no reply. "I drove to the hotel where he worked as a waiter, and stormed into his tiny room. He was in bed with an elderly, white woman - like me. He rang me, sobbing, saying it was all a mistake and he loved me. "Later I marched up to the woman in the hotel dining room and asked her, very calmly, what she thought she was doing. She looked at me in surprise. 'But he's my boyfriend,' she said. 'We are in love, and I have been flying backwards and forwards from the UK to see him. "I told her I had, too. She said she had promised Mohammed she would leave her husband and marry him. I said she was a fool." Sarah then told Mohammed that his lies had been exposed and ended the relationship. "Speaking to some of the hotel staff, I found out Mohammed had at least 40 white girlfriends," she says. "It must have been a real juggling act making sure we didn't all arrive at the same time. Goodness knows how much money he was making out of us all. "I know people will think: 'How could you be so stupid?' But you have to realise just how seductive it is, if you feel fat, old and ugly, to have a beautiful young man saying he cannot live without you and making love to you as if you were a stunning creature." But Sarah adds: "More than anything, I want to send out a warning to all the British women planning a holiday romance this summer: don't do it! "It will cost you thousands of pounds, and you will end up feeling ridiculous and despised. These are practised conmen - they don't think you are beautiful; they laugh at you behind your backs." Jeannette agrees. "Wise up," she says. "At the very least you will be fleeced out of hundreds, maybe thousands of pounds. In Kenya and Africa generally, Aids is endemic and you are putting yourself at serious risk. "Some of these guys are so poor they have nothing to lose, and they may turn violent. If you go off alone with them and change your mind, they may well rape you anyway. "I know I have been guilty of sex tourism in the past, but there is no way I would take those risks now, knowing what I know."

Robin Steele

IP Address : 65.37.88.221 [ 65-37-88-221.br1.leo.pa.frontiernet.net ]
ISP : ELECTRIC LIGHTWAVE
Organization : ADSL Frontier Communications Leola PA
Location : US, United States
City : Rochester, NY -
Latitude : 43°16'93" North
Longitude : 77°61'89" West




OrgName: Frontier Communications of America, Inc.
OrgID: FRTR
Address: 180 South Clinton AVE
City: Rochester
StateProv: NY
PostalCode: 14646
Country: US

ReferralServer: rwhois://rwhois.frontiernet.net:4321

NetRange: 65.37.0.0 - 65.37.127.255
CIDR: 65.37.0.0/17
NetName: FRONTIERCOMMUNICATIONSLEGACY
NetHandle: NET-65-37-0-0-1
Parent: NET-65-0-0-0-0
NetType: Direct Allocation
NameServer: AUTH01.ROC.NY.FRONTIERNET.NET
NameServer: AUTH.LKV.MN.FRONTIERNET.NET
Comment:
RegDate: 2002-07-31
Updated: 2006-07-31

OrgAbuseHandle: ABUSE223-ARIN
OrgAbuseName: Abuse
OrgAbusePhone: +1-866-474-7662
OrgAbuseEmail: abuse@frontiernet.net

OrgTechHandle: ZF47-ARIN
OrgTechName: Frontier Communications
OrgTechPhone: 1-866-474-7662
OrgTechEmail: ipadmin@frontiernet.net

# ARIN WHOIS database, last updated 2007-12-11 19:10
# Enter ? for additional hints on searching ARIN's WHOIS database.

V-Day Comes to New Orleans

V-Day Comes to New Orleans
By Allison Kasic
Wednesday, April 9, 2008

Watch out, New Orleans: “Vagina Warriors” are headed your way. This weekend V-Day will celebrate its 10th anniversary with a two-day festival in New Orleans, or “the vagina of America,” as V-Day board member and actress Rosario Dawson called it at the luncheon announcing the festivities. Why New Orleans? V-Day’s website says, “We need to celebrate New Orleans, cherish it, protect it, just as we do our vaginas, and make sure it goes on and on.”

Celebrities, including mega-stars Katie Holmes and Oprah Winfrey, have signed on in droves to attend the vagina festival, but one wonders if they know what they are really supporting. V-Day’s mission is to end violence against women, surely a noble cause. But when you look at the activities done in the name of V-Day, it’s clear that this about more than just ending violence. On campus, V-Day groups sell vagina-shaped lollipops, chocolates, and t-shirts with slogans like “I love Vagina” and “A vagina by any other name would smell just as sweet.” They parade around campus in vagina costumes, or in the case of the George Washington University, have a four-foot-tall “living vagina” named Joan on display. If ending violence is really the aim, V-Day’s organizers have some bizarre tactics.

The New Orleans celebration is of a similar nature. The Superdome will transform into SUPERLOVE, “a place to heal, gather, celebrate and activate to change the story of women.” During the event, V-Day organizers say they will “reclaim the dome, transforming it into a place of empowerment and action.” Activities will include everything from slam poetry (a staple at leftist events), a parade, storytelling, and art to free massages, yoga, meditation, and makeovers. If you favor more blatantly political activities, you can celebrate “everyday activists doing extraordinary things” which will feature liberal political activists like CODE PINK co-founder Jodie Evans, or take in a panel on race and gender issues in post-Katrina Gulf South or discuss “the connections and parallels between our treatment of the earth and our treatment of women’s bodies.” And for those attendees who just like to boogie, Gabriella Roth will lead an “ecstatic dancing experience for all attendees.”

Of course, the event will end with a performance of The Vagina Monologues, including a new monologue to be performed by Oprah Winfrey. The Monologues have always been the centerpiece of the V-Day movement, so it’s worth taking a closer look at the play’s content. Some people are taken aback by the often vulgar nature of the play (shouting “c*nt” on stage over and over, for example), but the material is just as disturbing.

For starters, the play is extremely anti-male. Nearly all of the men featured in the play are despicable characters. The only “positive” male character is “Bob,” who enjoys staring at vaginas. It’s difficult to see how that is a redeeming quality, but in the context of the play he stands out as the most worthy male.

You might not be surprised that men are stereotyped, but women are too as they are constantly treated as sex objects. The plays message, after all, is that women’s path to empowerment is “embracing” their vaginas. They should aim to “be” their vaginas and discover themselves through sexual acts. The Monologues blatantly promote promiscuous behavior—a message that could be easily construed as socially irresponsible in an age where sexually transmitted diseases are on the rise among young people and women are especially vulnerable to STDs.

The women of New Orleans have certainly had a rough time recently with the devastating effects of Hurricane Katrina. It’s hard to see how a vagina parade or slam poetry session will help them recover, let alone stop violence against women (there are after all, other ways to hold a fundraiser). The women of New Orleans—women everywhere actually—deserve a positive message about women and relationships. And if V-Day’s past behavior is any guide, they are not capable of providing that message.

Allison Kasic is the director of R. Gaull Silberman Center for Collegiate Studies at the Independent Women's Forum.

The War On Fathers in America is justified

Damn those Men for complaining about a little Government abuse and pressure. Its good for em. It will toughen them up. Besides the Patriarchy deserves to be punished. There is no such thing as an Innocent Man. They are all Rapists, and abusers. Thank Goodness I support IMBRA. To keep evil American Men away from innocent Foreign Women.

Is There A War Against Fathers In America?
By Albert Mohler
Friday, April 4, 2008

Albert Mohler recently interviewed Stephen Baskerville. Dr. Baskerville is a professor at Patrick Henry College and author of the book, “Taken Into Custody: The War Against Fatherhood, Marriage and the Family.”

Mohler: I find fascinating the fact that you have a rather aggressive title here: you’re talking about a war against fathers, marriage and the family. There are a lot of people who, I think, are unaware of this war. Help us understand it.

Baskerville: Most people are unaware of it until they are sucked into it—usually through the family court system, divorce or some other method. Americans would be very shocked if they knew what was going on in this country under the name of divorce—“no fault divorce.”

What we call divorce has become essentially a euphemism for government officials, courts primarily, and social service agencies to invade families—to separate children from parents who have done nothing wrong; to plunder the parents for everything they have in many cases and even to criminalize the parents and jail them without trail; to turn them into criminals in ways the parents are powerless to avoid.

The overwhelming victims of this are fathers, though at times it happens to mothers as well. Usually it is not a matter of gender bias, it is a matter of power and money—of the huge machine that has grown up in the last four decades around the question of “no fault divorce,” child custody and related issues.

Mohler: Now in your work you really demonstrate how the “no fault divorce revolution” and the law has brought enormous consequences. Can you help spell those out for us? I think an awful lot of Americans, especially those who are younger, aren’t aware of how the law really has been transformed in this area.

Baskerville: That’s right. The term “no fault” understates the problem. It really is unilateral divorce—involuntary divorce. It allows one spouse to force divorce on the other without the involuntary spouse having done anything wrong. In other words, your spouse can divorce you without you having done anything legally wrong or agreeing to the divorce. In fact, it goes further than that. Maggie Gallagher … describes it as the abolition of marriage, and that is really what it is. The marriage contract is not in any way legally binding anymore. It can be broken without consequence by one spouse unilaterally—the other spouse has no choice. Divorce is simply forced on that spouse. And most often it’s the father.

Mohler: Let’s just revisit the situation before “no fault divorce.” At that time society privileged marriage as a contract above other contracts because it was understood to be more than a contract. Marriage was understood to be the basic building block of civilization. And to dissolve a marriage was understood to be an issue of such consequence that there had to be cause. I think that’s what people don’t understand. When it says “no fault” it really means “no cause.” You don’t have to have a cause now. One spouse can simply decide that he or she—and in a lot of cases it’s both—doesn’t want to be married anymore and there is nothing the other spouse can do to prevent the divorce. Isn’t that the ultimate issue here?

Baskerville: That is correct. And to be fair, though, this was happening even before “no fault divorce.” “No fault divorce” laws really just put the nails in the coffin. They just codified what was already taking place. Therefore, simply repealing “no fault divorce” and reinstating fault in divorce would not solve the problem.

The issue today has really become child custody: by shifting the battle into the area of children they turned children into political weapons. Because what happens is not only can one spouse unilaterally divorce the other, but she—and it is usually the mother—can take the children with her (or sometimes the father does it to the mother), but in most cases the mother can divorce the father, and without any grounds, take the children. She doesn’t have to give any reason. After that point the father’s contact with the children when it is not authorized by the government becomes a crime. He can be arrested for trying to see his own children without having done anything legally wrong. And this is what’s shocking: they just turned children into political weapons and political tools.

Mohler: I’ve been concerned for years about what I’ve called the divorce industrial complex. You really do a great job in your book in demonstrating how there is an entire pernicious economy based upon and encouraging and facilitating divorce.

Baskerville: It’s huge, that’s right. And what’s most important about it is this huge machine is government based. It’s not just private entrepreneurs in this case, it is government officials. It’s lawyers, it’s judges and it’s the huge social services bureaucracies … it’s a huge entourage that is not only profiting from divorce, but increasing government power over private lives in very dangerous ways.

Mohler: Professor Baskerville … you were talking about the fathers as victims of this and I think in that context that’s clearly the right way to talk about this. But ultimately, children are the victims of all of this.

Baskerville: Well, that’s exactly right. This is the main cause behind the epidemic of fatherless children—that 24 million fatherless children in this country are not that way because the fathers have abandoned their children, contrary to government and other propaganda. Overwhelmingly, it is because fathers are forcibly kept away from their children. Fathers who have done nothing wrong are forcibly separated from their children. We know that fatherlessness is the single greatest predictor of social and personal deviance among children, alcohol and substance abuse, crime and low educational attainment and yet we are told that fathers are abandoning their children. This is not true.

In addition to being one of Salem’s nationally syndicated radio talk show hosts, R. Albert Mohler, Jr. is the president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville.

It does not hurt men to go to Prison for Rape

Another Male was sadly released from Prison for serving only 23 years for a Rape he did not commit. DNA evidence cleared this man in Dallas Texas. By putting innocent Men in Prison falsely, the Feminist movement uses the Judiciary to instill fear and intimidation in American Men. Who cares if a few innocent Men are wrongly punished. Nobody will miss them anyway.

Emphasizing April as Sexual Assault Awareness month is important. Ignoring Male Victims of Sexual Abuse is entirely okay with Feminists. As Males are Violent Sexual Animals. And Boys are Future Rapists. Who must be educated in the proper interactions with Superior Females. Who are destined to rule over Males.

Boys who do not act in Feminist approved manners should be drugged into submission as ADD or ADHD. This will also intimidate the other minor males in the School system. The other Robin Steele deleted that beautiful post of hers with the Excrement. I wonder why? Could it be that Robin realizes she has zero credibility.

Could it be that Robin is promoting the abuse of a Woman who is Married and has been sexually abused as a child of 8. I guess that's perfectly acceptable with Robin. Who is now trying to hide her Libelous communications and postings.