Sunday, December 27, 2009

Edmonton Sun thinks there is a "Pandemic of Abuse" in Edmonton and Alberta

A response I made to a piece of Edmonton Sun propaganda in all likelihood parroting a press release by misandrist Jan Reimer in Alberta follows this short note introducing the column. The article by a not very  gifted so called journalist by the name of Andrew Hanon is after a retort by the Edmonton/Calgary Sun  Editor-In-Chief, Jose Rodriguez, who has it would appear, been fully indoctrinated into the feminist mythology of man bad - woman benign despite the evidence of gender symmetry his paper has received. Dr. Don Dutton also sent a short email to Rodriguez with his joint paper co-authored by Kenneth Corvo, "Transforming a flawed policy: A call to revive psychology and science in domestic violence research and practice"

Rodriguez says there is no agenda by his paper but the email, in and of itself, belies this as a mendacious utterance. His newspaper has been given the facts on the relative equality of gender violence and he makes no apology for the propaganda based headline of a pandemic. But then he is one of the leaders of the MSM and this is the kind of misandry we have been getting and what we can expect down the road. Due diligence in research is not what we are about he is saying only the mythology of women as victim matters. Journalism as we knew it dealing with facts and research serves second place to Press Releases full of mendacity and hatred towards men.

Rodriguez represents the new journalism, especially in the shrinking market for print daily newspapers complete with Liberal bias and shockingly low standards  passed on to the reporters. There is no shame when it comes to the last vestige of bigotry in western democracies and that is bias, discrimination and lack of sagacity directed toward white males. This white male isn't going to stand for such outright venom  lacking truth and I would recommend a boycott of both papers managed by this Editor-In-Chief. If all white males stopped buying them what would that do to sales. Some how I don't think the feminists will take up the slack.MJM

Edmonton Sun 
Suite 250 
4990-92 Avenue 
Edmonton, Alberta 
T6B 3A1

Dear Andrew:

I'm just a tad interested in how you came to be writing the marketing of the month article for Jan Reimer's Shelter Industry. Would you do the same thing for any men's groups who are taking tax payer money and creating safe places for men and their children  from their abusive partners.  Sorry -  I forgot there are none to speak of right across Canada - let alone in Edmonton.  Your assignment editor may know Reimer and didn't give you any choices.

Your paper even wrote Reimer's headline about a pandemic just to sensationalize it some more to grab attention. It's slick marketing by Reimer and the Edmonton  Sun becomes co-opted as part of her apparatchik to further propagandize the myth of female fragility and victimhood at the hands of the patriarchy.  Her press release must have provided the meat for the story as surely your editor would not go out and beat the bushes for such a headline unless she is best buddies with her.

What you have unwittingly done is become a vehicle for misandry, and that is what the Reimer's of this billion dollar industry nation wide wish. They survive on the  sympathy, gullibility, and complicity of many including the MSM, politicians, and the judiciary.

Why do I use the term Propaganda for which a common definition is: "The systematic propagation of a doctrine or cause or of information reflecting the views and interests of those advocating such a doctrine or cause."

The DV shelter Industry is the heartbeat of 3rd wave feminism whose ideology and doctrine revolves around women being victims of the Patriarchy (that's you and all other men) and the patriarchy innately and with malice wants to subjugate, control, coerce and abuse women.  In its simplest terms men are bad - women are benign.

A feminist you may have heard of said this:" bash women because they enjoy it; they torture women as they might torture an animal or pull the wings off flies." Germaine Greer, The Whole Woman, Knopf, 1999. 

You are saying to yourself - but I'm not a bad man - and you may indeed be right but not according to Reimer and her doctrine. Maybe your boss thinks of you as part of the patriarchy even though she is senior to you. After all the  Editor-in-Chief may be a man.  The DV Shelter is the temple of the ideology of Victim Feminism. It is where the flesh and blood martyrs of the cause of feminism exist just as Jihadists are portrayed as the martyrs of the ideology of radical Islam.  They are sacred and inviolable within the doctrine and you are being used to propagate the myth of this martyrdom. For some feminists it is as holy as any religion and the end justifies the means even if truth is a victim.

The facts are otherwise, however, and the Edmonton Sun is quite guilty of publishing untruths and that clearly does not help its credibility.  Lets first take your headline " Pandemic of abuse". There is no pandemic of any sort. DV has been on the decline for some years according to Stats Can and many other studies domestically and Internationally in westernized democracies.  In fact that may be why Reimer drags out the "immigrant" issue. In many cultures - not ours - women are treated as inferior. That is not DV as we know it but a cultural abyss imported to this country.  "Honour" killings are part of this imported cultural malaise and not DV as we know it as family members including fathers, brothers, sisters and mothers may be responsible for these abusive cultural practices depending on who broke the cultural code. I think you remember the drowning of 4 women in Ontario not long ago and the suspects are a father, mother and brother. A true Patriarchy does exist in many of these religions and cultures and feminists should work on this to enhance the health and well being of females subject to systemic discrimination, diminution, and  physical abuse including homicide.

Total 611, 465 men 146 female
Rate of homicides with firearms have increased 24% since 2002. Handgun use on increase (gang related)
Women victims 24% - lowest proportion ever
Men Victims 76%
Both the rate of females killed (0.87 per 100,000 population), as well as the proportion
(24%), were the lowest since 1961
62 spousal homicides - no change from 2007
Lowest rate in 40 years  45 women 17 men

In terms of putting the spousal homicide rates in perspective per million couples we are looking at approximately 999,998 and 999,992 female and male spouses respectively do not kill each other.  This is not a gender problem or a pandemic.  Note that 76% of all victims are men. There is not one tax supported DV shelter for men and their children in Canada. There are 569 for females.  Did you know there are about 1,600 shelters in the USA (2005) some serving men and women (CA and WV by court mandate in the past 2 years). Do the math between two countries with populations in a 1/10th ratio and look at the relative number in Canada as comparison. Does Canada have more than 10% of the total USA Shelters?  Why do you think that exists? Better marketing and more violence in Canada or just more gullible politicians and organizations ready to look chivalrous?

Whats the definition of Pandemic in common usage in Canada: "Epidemic ---> over a wide geographic area and affecting a large proportion of the population" not unlike H1N1.

But according to Stats Can not only does it not fit this status the problem is declining as follows:

An estimated 7% of women and 6% of men in a current or previous spousal relationship encountered spousal violence during the five years up to and including 2004, according to a comprehensive new report on family violence.
right click the chart to save it.

7% of women and 6% of men do not a pandemic make and that was a decline from 1999.

Check out the stats on Lesbian Domestic Violence to bring into perspective that women are not benign and innocent. Their violence is at least 4 times higher than hetero couples in most reputable studies. In recent large scale studies it shows women instigating abuse against their male partner in 70% of cases. Lucky for these women most men don't reciprocate as we are socialized to not hit females. Some of us, however,  have no choice if the weapon the woman uses could kill us.

Reimer is quoted with respect to increases to calls regarding DV  "...whenever the economy changes -- up or down -- we see an increase.."  Can you not see how absurd that statement is and what evidence aside from her assertion is given. Anecdotaly there is speculation that calls could increase when there is an economic tailspin and there may be legitimate studies but when the economy is getting better (up) DV calls are similarly going to rise? You are like a parrot when it comes to this persons utterances.

When you decide to put on your cynic's hat, which all good reporters and editors should have, ask Reimer why they require non-disclosure agreements from all clients and why the shelters are not subject to both independent  public financial and operational audits by respective governments who dole out 100's of millions of dollars a year.  Ask how many women are actually there for violence (ostensibly the reason they exist), and how many for other reasons. Chances are only 10% of residents at any given time are there because of physical abuse.  More and more the shelters are gateways out of marriages so mom can get a "leg up" on custody. Judges are as gullible as journalists it would appear!  Also, ask if they allow boys 12 and over to stay with their moms?

I could go on at great length with debunking your assertions made at the behest of Reimer but this is enough. I have much more for you if you truly want to get the truth. Feel free to contact me and you can also read my response to you on my blogs. Just Google "Mike Murphy Pandemic of Abuse" or better yet yourself with the same term.

The very sad part of this scam by Reimer is there are many women and men truly battered and in need of help. I speak from the experience of a man shamed by the financial, emotional, and physical abuse by a woman and this shame is why you hardly ever hear of female perpetrated abuse on men.MJM

fromJose Rodriguez
sender timeSent at 21:21 (GMT-05:00). Current time there: 00:01. ✆
Andrew Hanon ,
ccDonna Harker ,
Nicole Bergot
date27 December 2009 21:21
subjectRe: Pandemic of abuse Victims of domestic violence being turned away by packed city shelters

hide details 21:21 (2 hours ago)

Mike, thanks for the email but all the stats you point to do not change the fact the majority of abuse victims in domestic situations are women and children and NOT men. Yes, there are men who are victims of domestic abuse but that's not what this story was about.

Denouncing abuse against women to highlight the small percentage of men who are victims is irresponsible. I guarantee you there is no agenda on the part of Andrew Hanon or our newspaper. Unfortunately, I don't believe I can say the same for you. Happy 2010.

Jose Rodriguez
Edmonton Sun

 From: Dr. Don Dutton

Sent: December 27, 2009 11:54 PM
To: ''
Subject: DV stats
The recent complaint against your writer Hanon has come to my attention--unfortunately you are quite wrong about dv stats--the largest study ever conducted (by John Archer)- examining about 130,000 cases, found women were more likely to perpetrate dv than were men. Also surveys from 1989 to the present find women to be more frequent aggressors- this includes the large sample CDC study conducted in 2007. I attach a review of other research- those of us who do DV research are astounded at the mis-information in the general public--and newspaper editors especially need to get the facts straight and should spend some time reviewing this literature--it is not at all the way women's advocates present it.

Dr. Don Dutton
Department of Psychology
University of British Columbia.

Edmonton Sun

Pandemic of abuse

Victims of domestic violence being turned away by packed city shelters

Last Updated: 23rd December 2009, 3:49am

Chantal is one of the lucky ones.

When she needed to escape an abusive marriage, there was room for her at a women's shelter.

Tragically, that's not always the case. Alberta, one of Canada's spousal-abuse capitals, has disgracefully few sanctuaries for battered wives and traumatized children.

When Chantal's husband erupted into a violent, drunken rampage, police couldn't find anywhere in the city that had room for Chantal and her two small children.
Finally, they found an opening at a shelter outside the city.

"I don't know what I would have done if they hadn't found that place for us," says Chantal, who spoke on condition her real name not be used. "I couldn't stay with family because he would have found us and started harassing them. They would have been in danger, too."
That was a few years ago. Police and women's advocates say that nowadays it's even harder to find a safe haven that isn't already full.

In 2009, Edmonton police will be called to 7,000 domestic violence complaints, a 16% increase over last year.

That's nearly 600 each month, or 20 every day.

"It's a pandemic," acknowledges Jan Reimer of the Alberta Council of Women's Shelters, who says she isn't surprised by the sudden jump.

Former Edmonton mayor Reimer says it's so bad that nearly every day women get turned away from local shelters because they're already full. Shelter workers try to help them find other safe accommodations.

The Edmonton Police Commission was told that in the first 11 months of 2009, city cops responded to 6,500 domestic calls.

For the full 12 months of 2008, the total was approximately 6,000 calls.


Reimer said there could be a lot of reasons behind the spike, including the extreme financial pressure on families because of the weak economy.

"It seems that whenever the economy changes -- up or down -- we see an increase," she says.

It could also be that more immigrant families are reporting domestic abuse as they get to know Canadian laws, she says.

Or it could be recent changes to the way family violence is reported, Reimer adds.
According to a recent Statistics Canada report, Alberta has the second-highest rate of spousal violence of any province, at 415 cases per 100,000 women.

Only Saskatchewan's, at 536 per 100,000, was higher.

But at the same time, Alberta women trying to escape abusive relationships get less help than women in most other provinces.

StatsCan says that there are only 50 women's shelters across the entire province. Most are funded partly by the government and partly by private donations.

Contrast that with B.C., which has 110 shelters, more than twice as many as Alberta.
Sgt. Tony Simioni, head of the city cops' union, calls domestic disturbances "the bread and butter of police work."

"On any given evening shift, you can expect to answer one or two of these calls," he says. "And there's always been a shortage of shelter space. I've had to take women all the way to Camrose or put them up in hotel rooms, anything to find them a safe place."

"Intimate partner conflicts," Simioni says, are considered the most unpredictable, volatile and dangerous situations police can find themselves in.

If it's that risky for the police, just imagine what it's like for the victims. 


Another Dad Dead by Suicide thanks to Family Law and its Matriarchal Maternalistic Discrimination

Fathers' and Children's Equality (FACE), New Jersey

by Jeff Golden

 It grieves me deeply to report this:

About two weeks ago, I received a call from Chris Wise of Hammonton NJ.  He had been referred to us by an attorney-friend of ours who gave him my cell phone number.  He told me he and his girlfriend had an almost two month old son.  Both parents are in their early 30s, they lived together in his house throughout the pregnancy, he is disabled and not working, and his mother and brother also live in his house.  The girlfriend and her mother were telling him they were going to take away the baby, never let him see the baby again, and take away from him everything he has.

There's nothing unusual about threats like that.  We handle them all the time.  Personally, I don't like to give too much information on a first call.  What I tell about fathers' rights is probably exactly the opposite of what they have always believed and what they will be told by police, lawyers, court personnel, DYFS, etc.  I prefer people to come to a meeting where a whole room-full of people will reassure them that what we say is true.

I asked Chris if anyone had been to court yet for anything.  They had not.  I explained to Chris that at their first time in court, one of the parents will leave with less parental rights than s/he came in with, but until they go to court both parents had equal rights.  I asked where the baby was right then.  Chris said the mother was about to return to work from maternity leave, and she had made arrangements to move in with some strange older woman she will be working with.  I suggested that won't last long because this stranger won't like a crying infant interfering with her household routine.  I asked why the mother didn't go to her parents' home.  She couldn't.  Her parents are divorced.  Her mother and step-father live in a little one bedroom apartment, they both smoke, and they have dogs.  She had no contact with her real father until quite recently, and he also did not have proper accommodations for a new-born.

I reminded Chris of the adage "possession is nine tenths of the law," and told him that whoever had possession of the baby on that day they first go to court will have a very good chance of keeping him.  "But," said Chris, "I don't want to take the baby away from his mother."  Of course not ...  you WANT her to have liberal visitation.  But remember, she already told you that if she gets custody she doesn't want you to ever see the child again.  Are you capable of taking care of the baby and doing everything that child needs?  "Yes."  Who do you want to have custody?

I asked Chris if he thought it would be possible for him to get possession of the baby without breaching the peace.  He very confidently answered "Sure!"  I asked how he could be so sure of that, and where and how would he do it?  He said the mother was bringing the baby back to his house that evening, and they were all going to sleep in his house that night!  Under these circumstances I couldn't make Chris wait for our next meeting; he needed help NOW! 

I told Chris there were two things he needed to know:  First we discussed the domestic violence law.  I emailed him a copy of the statute, listing all the acts that are considered to be domestic violence in New Jersey.  I pointed out that whoever gets a domestic violence restraining order against the other can also automatically get custody, and that "domestic violence" does not necessarily have to have anything to do with violence.  I told him if he is holding the baby and won't release him to her, and she commits an act of domestic violence to get him away from you, especially with your mother and brother as witnesses or if she leaves marks on you, you can get a restraining order against her and get custody of the child.

Second, what happens if there is no domestic violence, but she calls the police and says "He won't give me my baby?"  When the police arrive, the first thing they will do is ask to see the custody order.  When they find there is no order, both of you will have equal rights.  Still, to smooth things out, the police might say to you something like "Why don't you just be a nice guy and give her the baby? You can go down to family court and straighten it all out."  JUST SAY NO!  Remember, possession is nine tenths of the law, and when you go into family court that first time YOU want to have possession.

Chris called me the next morning.  It was a very cold day -- low 20s.  The mother was getting ready to take the baby out.  She wasn't going to her co-worker's house.  She was going to some other friend's house where she and the baby would sleep on air-mattresses on the floor until she could get into her friend's house.  She wouldn't identify the friend or where she would be.  I reminded Chris to get possession of the baby without breaching the peace, and what to say if and when the police arrived.

Chris DID get possession without breaching the peace.  Mom was lying on the bed with the baby. Chris said "Let me just kiss him goodbye," took the baby from her and would not let go of him.  Mom called the police.  Chris called the police too.  "The mother wants to take the baby out somewhere in the cold where they're going to sleep on an air mattress."  Two police officers arrived, one male and one female.  The male officer spoke with the mother in the bedroom and the female officer spoke with Chris.  They asked about a custody order and found there was none.  The officers told both parents they could not force the father to give the baby to the mother!  The mother said she would leave, but she wanted to come back for her personal property.  The female officer recommended to Chris that he not allow the mother back into his house.  Instead he should pack up all of her stuff and leave it on the porch for her.

Chris called me later to let me know what happened.  GREAT, I said, now YOU have possession of the baby!  "No," he said, "something else happened too. Before she left, while the police were here, she asked to have a private conversation with me. We went into the bedroom together. She said she wanted to take the baby to her father's house, and I said OK. She and the baby are gone."  Well, I said, we'll either have to get possession again, or it will just be a little more difficult for you on that first day in family court.

We had a FACE meeting on Monday evening.  I sent Chris a meeting schedule, asked him to come to this meeting, and gave him directions.  I called him again Monday to remind him, and left a phone message.  He didn't show up. 

That's it, I thought.  I scared another one away.  I've said it before, but now I'm really NEVER again going to give a lot of advice on the phone.  Regardless of urgency, they've got to come to a meeting first.

Chris's mother left a message on my phone this morning.  "Mr. Golden, I don't quite know how to say this, but I didn't want to leave you hanging.  Christopher took his own life."  I couldn't believe what I was hearing.  I had to replay it a few times, then I called her.

On Monday, Chris left the house to go to a doctor appointment and then go to family court.  He called his mother later and told her he was in Atlantic City, about 15 minutes away from both.  That was the last she heard from him.  On Wednesday she got a call from the Port Authority police.  Chris' truck was found at the Ben Franklin bridge.  They had video of him entering a parking area at the base of the bridge.  They don't know how long he was there.  He left his wallet, cell phone and keys in his truck, along with a note, and then he apparently went up on the bridge.  They also had video of someone going over the side of the bridge.

Why did this happen?  Chris' custody situation wasn't too bad ... yet.  He had let defeat get snatched from the jaws of victory in his first skirmish, but, I told him, that would just make things a little more difficult.  I never met him face-to-face, but Chris was a very soft-spoken guy.  At times during our conversations, I thought he was hyperventilating.  His child's mother was herself an adult child of Parental Alienation Syndrome who was not allowed a parent-child relationship with her own father, and was now being coached by her PAS-inflicting mother.  Maybe he just didn't want to face the conflict that he knew was coming.  Now fatherlessness will go one generation further in that family.

There is one thing I regret never having had an opportunity to discuss with Chris.  He wasn't far enough into the process yet to understand it.  As one FACE member was known to say: "If things ever get so bad that you consider taking your own life, don't let it be a total waste. Take a judge or a lawyer with you."

Fathers' and Children's Equality (FACE)
Cinnaminson NJ