The Backlash! - May 1995

Headline News

Girls from the hood?

C-Span, April 9, 1995 - The National Organization for Women held its Women's Issues Rally in Washington, D.C., today, to give the girls a chance to strut their stuff. And drop their drawers in public.

Said Alexis Baptist, NOW Young Feminist Award Winner, "We here, we understand that you only get what you organize to take, and the 250,000 of us here are prepared to take whatever we need by any means necessary." Hitler would have been proud!

In The True Believer, Eric Hoffer's analysis of social movements, he emphasizes how fanatics dehumanize their enemies to justify their murder and oppression. The chorus from a song by the feminist group, Luscious Jackson, provided a textbook example of this: "Hey, energy sucker, I'm a goddess, not your mother...You're soulless." Women are divine? Men are bestial leeches? What's next, furnaces?

AAUW propaganda

Mercury News, April 18, 1995 - As if Christina Hoff Sommers never exposed the AAUW's assertion of a link between girls' self-esteem and education as fraud, Lori Eickmann parrots their big lie. Again.

"Schools may be cheating our daughters, but so are parents. ... It's been three years since the release of the landmark study How Schools Shortchange Girls, by the American Association of University Women (AAUW) and Wellesley College's Center for Research on Women. The report raised consciousness about how schools routinely squelch girls' academic performance and self-esteem."

Eickmann ignores that the AAUW's own study indicated that black children, whose average academic and career performance lag far behind whites, have far higher self-esteem.

Fatherless America

Mercury News, April 22, 1995 - David Blankenhorn is causing quite a fuss with his new book, Fatherless America: Confronting Our Most Urgent Social Problem. Particularly with New Rage women.

"Marriage was always a better deal for men, and you're not going to get women back unless you change that," complained one feminist attorney. Like civilization hasn't benefited women.

Regardless, Martha Albertson Fineman, who runs the Feminism and Legal Theory Project at Columbia University Law School in New York, sees the problem as one of economics, rather than sexual politics. A jobs problem.

Considering that feminist led Human Resource departments across the nation are giving hiring priority to women, that the unemployment rate for men has been higher than women's for most of the past 10 years, and that most of the homeless are men, the numbers seem to support affirmative action for men.

Who's got the power?

To the Contrary, PBS, April 23, 1995 - "Is the empowerment of women the key to improving our global environment? Since women give birth to our next generation and control family resources, is focusing on the average woman an obvious step?"

Answers Stuart Miller, "Yes they do control the resources and the most valuable family resource is the children. As they control them, they control all of the other resources, too... including the father's access to their love. (Obviously, their access to his love, too.)"

Where's the beef?

U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Washington, D.C., January 30, 1994 - "A study of violence against women shows that two-thirds of these attacks were committed by someone the victim knew - such as a husband, boyfriend, other family member or acquaintance - a much higher figure than for men."

Where is all of this violence be taking place? In middle class suburbs? Rural farming communities? On TV?

"Females who lived in central cities were twice as likely to be raped as were women who lived in suburban or rural areas. Inner-city women were also more than twice as likely to be robbed as were suburban women and four times more likely than rural women."

Lower income, inner city populations?

"Women with family incomes of less than $10,000 were five times more likely to be attacked by an intimate than were women with family incomes of $30,000 or more."

So, since the average family income is more than $20,000 per year, we're talking about a minority. Why, then, do pop-feminists use these statistics to portray all men as violent and all women as their victims?

Shalala attacks dads...again

U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, Washington, D.C., April 26, 1995 - The U.S. Department of Health & Human Services announced today at a 9:30 a.m. press conference in their report "A Nation's Shame: Fatal Child Abuse and Neglect in the United States," that "Most physical abuse fatalities are caused by enraged or extremely stressed fathers or other male caretakers..."

Isn't the blatant falsification of statistics against men and fathers in particular, based on the sex of the parent akin to a hate-crime?

The Department of Justice in it's report of July, 1994 "Murder in Families" stated that when children are murdered, 61% of the time it is by the MOTHER and 15% of the time it is by the father. The balance of the time it is usually by the mother's boyfriend or new husband.

Put your daughters to work day?

Herald Statesman, April 27, 1995 - "On the surface, this looks like a very good program," said Anthony Nazzaro, a Dobbs Ferry resident and a member of Americans for Gender Equality, about the Ms. Foundation's program, "Take Your Daughters to Work Day." "But it's almost like saying, 'It's OK to discriminate against any class for one day?'" Nazzaro said. "They're denying the boys that same career experience."

"Boys have been socialized that they will work. They have role models at the top of every profession," said Jill Savitt, a spokeswoman for the Ms. Foundation. "This is something special for daughters."

So, why all the fuss?

Representatives of Ms. reportedly also said that Ms. is for the advancement of women, not men, and if someone else wants to organize a day for the boys, that's okay with them, but that's not what Ms. is for.

Fair enough. And I'm sure the women at Ms. will also understand if all men devote all of their resources to advancing only men. After all, if Ms. doesn't actively support equal opportunity, then should we?

Murder, she wrote?

Salt Lake Tribune, May 2, 1995 - The mother kills their only son, court sentences her to 1 to 15 years in prison, the father divorces her and moves to another state, the court orders him to pay her $100 per month alimony. The plot for a popular TV Show? No, this story is too strange for fiction.

When Carrol and Ok Kum Burns' marriage began to sour, she (Ok) stabbed their 3-year-old son Joshua to death with a steak knife.

She went to prison, and Carol moved to Wichita, Kansas. Now, a recent court order will force him to pay the woman who killed his son $100 a month alimony check.

According to her attorney, Nelda Bishop, Ok Kum Burns is entitled to alimony to cover her prison expenses and build a savings fund for life after prison. Second District Judge Glen Dawson agreed.

Justice is, indeed, blind.

[ HOME ] [ BACK ]
The Backlash! is a feature of Shameless Men Press

Send Editorial Comments to The Backlash!

Please report all problems to The Web Master