Domestic Violence-Time For a Change ~ Professor Don Dutton, UBC

Dr. Dutton is one of Canada's leading researchers into IPV and one of the few in North America who have not been made into eunuchs by the feminist hives in Academia and elsewhere who believe only men are abusers and all women victims of the patriarchy.MJM

Domestic Violence-Time For a Change 
Professor Don Dutton

15th February 2010

What do Chris Brown, Ike Turner, and OJ Simpson have in common? They are all famous men who beat their wives. Chris Brown's case got maximum exposure on Oprah, Ike Turner was vilified in a movie, OJ got all day/every day coverage at his murder trial. Our ability to remember them as examples of "wife beaters" is called the availability heuristic- we develop these associations largely from high profile media events. Since an availability heuristic- the examples of domestic violence we can call to mind-shapes our beliefs and judgments about an issue like domestic violence, the question is raised whether these media examples are representative of typical domestic violence. The answer is that they are not. They mis- represent domestic violence in three ways by making the perpetrators appear to always be black, male and acting alone.

Reality bites- when large sample victim surveys that ask about domestic violence are done, a very different picture emerges. In the first place, domestic violence is not more common in black relationships than white or other racial groups. Perhaps more surprisingly, the stereotype of the male as a bully and the female as hapless victim is not supported by the data. Surveys from 1989 to 2007 keep finding the same thing; the most common form of domestic violence is two -way- both partners assault each other at about the same level of severity. Women are hurt somewhat more but only somewhat- men get hurt too for the obvious reason that everyday weapons get used, knives, frying pans, and boiling water, amongst other things.


Here's another big surprise- "husband battering" (where the woman used severe violence against a non-violent man) is about three times more common as wife battering. A recent large sample survey by the Center for Disease Control in Atlanta found this but it had been found before and Canadian surveys by Stats Can also find a relative equality in domestic violence perpetration. The media does treat violence towards men differently- the killing of NFL Quarterback Steve MacNair by his girlfriend was hardly covered at all, same with the death of Cincinnati Bengals receiver Chris Henry, the killing of London Ontario Police Detective Dave Lucio by his girlfriend Kelly Johnson (also a police officer) was similarly brushed aside.


The most famous example of media misandry was Wayne Bobbit whose wife castrated him. He became a running joke for late night comedians. Imagine this happening with the genders reversed. Controlled studies find that the same action is viewed differently by research subjects when the genders of the perpetrator and victim are varied. If a man does it (for example- asks his wife where she has been) it abuse or control. If a woman does it it's not. When the first shelter for battered men was set up in New Hampshire , the men reported that when they had called local shelters to ask for help they were told that they were the real batterers. All of these men had been injured. These results are found whether the research subjects are the general public or professional psychologists. When a spousal homicide occurs, the media asks the head of a local shelter why it happens. She will inevitably describe it as another example of violence towards women.


When Marc Lepine killed women in a mass shooting in Montreal , it was presented as an example of male violence towards women. When Denis Lortie shot up the Quebec Assembly the year before, he was simply a madman. The truth is, they were both psychotic. The gender paradigm that shapes our views on domestic violence is pervasive and affects everything from police responses to custody decisions in family court. The problem is the scientific data do not support these beliefs- they were just a political theory that was wrong when it was written and is even more askew in the present. Time for a change!


Professor Don Dutton

University of British Columbia

http://www.drdondutton.com/

Letter to British Columbia Ministers regarding their inaccurate views on Domestic Violence

From: Mike Murphy

Date: 11 February 2010 11:26

Subject: Domestic Violence

To: SG.Minister@gov.bc.ca, HSD.Minister@gov.bc.ca, MCF.Minister@gov.bc.ca

Cc: >

Dear Ministers:

I had the opportunity to review your response to S.M. with respect to the various services offered to your citizens with respect to Intimate Partner Violence and most importantly the rationale.

You proffer the usual feminist answer that is in every DV shelter operating manual and comes out of the pseudo psychological premise from the Duluth Power and Control Wheel with no basis in real science and I quote, " The Ministry does fund specific Violence Against Women programs in recognition of the gendered nature of domestic violence, which acknowledges that domestic violence is a power-based crime in which, most often, the male in an intimate relationship exercises power and control over the female."

I am very disappointed to see in the 21st century a government actually using this false premise as an excuse for not providing similar services to men. Given the research in place which clearly shows quite the opposite of what you describe, and outlined below, it is time to stop the sexist discrimination and provide equivalent services where warranted.  Men and women react differently to DV and men, despite taking a financial, physical and psychological battering, are guilty before all, as you show above and do not report the abuse to anyone in most cases. If they call the Police they are likely going to be the one arrested for the very reason you described. They largely internalize it unless a volunteer support group exists to provide assistance.

You also quote police reported statistics which do not give the real picture of actual occurrences of IPV.  In fact if DV is gendered how to you account for the upwards of 50% violence between Lesbian couples which is much higher than heterosexual couples?  You may wish to consult with Professor Don Dutton at UBC on matters relating to IPV between heterosexual  and Lesbian couples. He is on your doorstep and a well respected leader in the discipline who can bring some sense to your sexist policies.

You have also, as most feminists do, cherry picked your information from one source while leaving out anything that gives rise to DV being mutual, being initiated more by females than males, and showing it impacts 7% of women and 6% of men. Family violence in Canada: A statistical profile, 2005. An estimated 7% of women and 6% of men representing 653,000 women and 546,000 men in a current or previous spousal relationship encountered spousal violence during the five years up to and including 2004, according to a comprehensive Statistics Canada report on family violence.

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/Daily/English/050714/d050714a.htm

Males are the largest victims of violence in Canada according to the most recent Homicide Stats. Canadian Homicide Stats 2008

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/091028/dq091028a-eng.htm

Total 611, 465 men 146 female
Rate of homicides with firearms has increased 24% since 2002. Handgun use on increase (gangs don't register their weapons)
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 (27.4%)men

Many DV homicides of men are not classified as such and this number is higher than 27.4%. Some police Departments actually suppress calling a homicide as DV even when it is patently obvious. See this article in the National Post on the London Police Chief Faulkner who falsified his 2007 reports by omission.  Its clear he has an agenda and uses the same mantra as does your government. See this column in the National Post http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2010/01/28/barbara-kay-london-ontario-police-statistics-on-domestic-violence-show-classic-signs-of-abuse.aspx and this one in the London Free Press. http://www.lfpress.com/comment/columnists/herman_goodden/2010/02/05/12762196.html

There are hundreds of studies showing the mutuality of IPV and I direct you to a small sample as follows:

Male victims of domestic violence have been seriously neglected in public policy, outreach and services. But they are not rare. They’re less likely to report it, which makes oft-cited crime data (DoJ, etc.) unreliable especially for men.

Prevalence and Injuries

Virtually all empirical survey data shows women initiate domestic violence at least as often as men in heterosexual relationships and that men suffer one-third of physical injuries from domestic violence. Over 200 of these studies (and growing), using various methodologies, are summarized by Professor Martin Fiebert at

http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm

Harvard Medical School and the American Psychiatric Association both recently announced a major national study in the U.S. that found half of heterosexual domestic violence is reciprocal and that: "Regarding perpetration of violence, more women than men (25 percent versus 11 percent) were responsible. In fact, 71 percent of the instigators in nonreciprocal partner violence were women."

http://pn.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/42/15/31-a

http://www.patienteducationcenter.org/aspx/HealthELibrary/HealthETopic.aspx?cid=M0907d

The study also found: "As for physical injury due to intimate partner violence, it was more likely to occur when the violence was reciprocal than nonreciprocal. And while injury was more likely when violence was perpetrated by men, in relationships with reciprocal violence it was the men who were injured more often (25 percent of the time) than were women (20 percent of the time)."

A recent 32-nation study by the University of New Hampshire found women are as violent and as controlling as men in dating relationships worldwide.

http://www.unh.edu/news/cj_nr/2006/may/em_060519male.cfm?type=n

To make my point clearer that Domestic Violence is not gendered I supply some information from Australia and the USA on child killing and abuse where you will find the female, particularly the single mom, takes the lead role.  This information may provide some ideological dissonance and perhaps hurt your sensibilities but it is time for the feminine benign artifice  bubble to be burst. It is hurting men and boys, children and indeed women who are viewed by many as an underclass of victims needing government intervention at all levels of their development leaving the impression they are unable to function equally to men without such assistance..

You may wish to view the child abuse information with a view toward public policy for child protection. There is a move afoot to align the Violence Against Women (VAW)  sector with the child protection services and this clearly is not good public policy given the woman is the most likely to harm or kill the children. There is a definite conflict of a child's best interests involved.

There are no valid peer reviewed studies or government surveys of recent date showing the rates of abuse by dads are equal to mothers. In fact a recent Australian study shows mothers themselves and mothers in concert with a non-biological boyfriend/partner are far and away the highest cause of death of their children. Mothers killed 11 alone, with a partner not the biological father 5, dads 5.  That’s a 16-5 ratio toward mothers.

Kids are safer with Dads

The Australian Institute of Criminology has reviewed the most recent child homicide statistics from its National Homicide Monitoring Program. The new data shows that during 2006-07, eleven child homicides were perpetrated by a mother, while five perpetrators were fathers, and another five were de-facto partners of the mother who lived with the child. Importantly, no child victims were killed by a complete stranger during this period.

You can go here for the USA stats showing by far Mothers are the greatest killers and abusers of their children. http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/stats_research/index.htm

2006,  is outlined below:

Some data on child abuse from Child Maltreatment 2006, a report by the Federal Administration for Children & Families...

Figure 4-2 Perpetrator Relationships of Child Fatalities, 2006

Child Maltreatment 2006

Perpetrator Relationships of Child Fatalities, 2006

This pie chart indicates that 27.4 percent of child fatalities were perpetrated by the mother acting alone. Such non-parental perpetrators as daycare providers, foster parents, or residential facility staff were responsible for 14.6 percent of fatalities.


Leaving aside killings by non-parents or by mothers and fathers acting together, mothers committed a significantly greater number of the parental murders of children.



 

Figure 3-5 Victims by Perpetrator Relationship, 2006

Victims by Perpetrator Relationship, 2006
 
This pie chart shows that 39.9 percent of child victims were maltreated by their mothers acting alone; another 17.6 percent were maltreated by their fathers acting alone; 17.8 percent were abused by both their mother and father. Victims abused by a nonparental perpetrator accounted for 10.0 percent.


Until DV is treated as a family problem rather than a female victim/male perpetrator we cannot expect much to change. It has been going on for a very long time with no end in site. Resources need to be spent on trying to salvage a family caught in the trauma of disputes holistically rather than all women are victims. I often wonder if that had been available to my family whether things would have worked out differently. How about a court process requiring all family members into counseling and if the alleged perpetrator does not respond in a timely manner then the criminal process kicks in? Australia's Family Centres are a good example. 

We know the downstream impacts of the current process with destroyed families, criminal records, loss of jobs, poverty, and increased social problems of children in single family homes. In fact children learn from their parents and the cycle becomes multi-generational. If such a system existed early warnings, as part of an education process, would allow the victimized spouse or child to seek counsel and have the family brought into a healthy counselling process before things got out of hand. It would be far more proactive and preventative. Before it becomes a police action we should look for other alternatives which will decrease the current stresses on police services to deal with the problems. Note I say family not a single gender. A process involving the family that is non-threatening may reduce the fear factor of a non-working spouse, male or female (recall I was the stay-at-home dad in my case) and have them make the move earlier with a chance to salvage the relationship and family.

As long as you stick to this Duluth Wheel psycho-babble of male power and coercion taxpayers money is not being spent in a wise fashion.

Mike Murphy
682 Old Garden River Road
Sault Ste. Marie ON  P6A 6J8

> February 10, 2010

Mr. S. M.

E-mail:

Dear Mr. M:

I am responding to your January 7, 2010 e-mail regarding your thoughts on the government’s funding of domestic violence programs.  I would like to take this opportunity to clarify the services available for both men and women in British Columbia who are the victims of domestic violence.

The majority of Ministry programs and services for victims of crime in British Columbia serve all victims of violence, including both men and women.  In fact, all but seven of the Ministry’s Victim Service Programs are mandated to serve both men and women.  Three victim service programs serve only men and four serve only women.  Similarly, the Ministry’s Crime Victim Assistance Program provides medical and dental expenses, counselling services, protective measures, income support and other benefits to assist all eligible victims of crime and their families to recover from the impacts of crime.  In the same manner, the Victim Safety Unit provides notification services to victims of crime regarding the custody status of an accused or offender including releases from custody and information about conditions that must be followed when in the community.  This service is available to both men and women who register with the unit.

The Ministry also funds VictimLINK, a toll-free, province-wide 24/7 multilingual help and information line that provides emergency crisis support for all victims of family and sexual violence.  Our Victim Court Support Program provides enhanced support to victims in the criminal court process including emotional support, court updates, information, orientation, accompaniment, and referrals to victims/witnesses and their families.  Additionally, the Ministry funded Children Who Witness Abuse Programs which provide counselling for children aged 3 to 18 who have witnessed abuse, threats, or violence in the home to help these children and their adult caregivers heal from the trauma and learn about healthy relationships.  This program serves boys, girls, and caregivers of either sex.

The Ministry does fund specific Violence Against Women programs in recognition of the gendered nature of domestic violence, which acknowledges that domestic violence is a power-based crime in which, most often, the male in an intimate relationship exercises power and control over the female.  For this reason, our Stopping the Violence Counselling Programs and Outreach and Multicultural Outreach Services exclusively serve women.

The reality is that the majority of victims of police-reported spousal violence are females, accounting for 83 per cent of victims in 2007 (Statistics Canada. Family Violence in Canada: A Statistical Profile 2009, p. 5).  Women are also more likely than men to be victims of spousal homicide.  In 2007, almost 4 times as many women were killed by a current or former spouse as men (Statistics Canada. Family Violence in Canada: A Statistical Profile 2009, p. 6).  In domestic violence situations, women are twice as likely as men to be injured, three times more likely to fear for their lives, twice as likely to suffer serious injury and six times as likely to seek medical attention (Statistics Canada. Measuring Violence Against Women: Statistical Trends 2006, p. 19).  For all of these reasons, we do fund specific services for women but for the Ministry as a whole, the majority of our programs and services for victims of violence are for both men and women.

I would like to personally thank you for writing to get clarity on the types of programs and services available for victims of domestic violence and for the important work you do in the area of law enforcement.  Working together we can ensure safer homes and communities for all British Columbians impacted by violence. 

Thank you once again for writing.

Yours truly,

Kash Heed

Solicitor General

pc:     The Honourable Rich Coleman

        The Honourable Mary Polak

Women Who Beat Their Men - Every 38 seconds a man is being abused at the hands of a woman!

This is unfortunately far too common but the MSM just ignores it. In the past short while we have seen Chris Brown get clubbed with a stiletto heal (who got charged?), Tiger Woods with a 9 iron to the head, and Mary K. Blige the hypocrite who started a DV shelter for women only punch out her hubby at a night club. None of these women were charged but look what happened to Charlie Sheen and his wife has recanted.Coming up on Thursday this week.MJM

// added January 02, 2010 // 21 comments // 333 views

Thursday, January 7th

Domestic abuse takes a surprising turn. In the past, men have been the ones under fire for being abusive in relationships. Now, as more and more victims of domestic abuse are speaking out, a new trend in the violence is surfacing. We're talking to women who've admitted to hitting, punching, even kicking (in stilettos) their boyfriends and husbands. Tyra also talks to a newlywed bride whose sex life is dwindling because of her husband's weight gain.

http://current.com/items/91819300_women-who-beat-their-men-every-38-seconds-a-man-is-being-abused-at-the-hands-of-a-woman.htm?xid=45
http://tyrashow.warnerbros.com/thisweek/?adid=010410_thisweek_thursday
http://tyrashow.warnerbros.com/videos/playerds.html?=/promos/010710_5023r_video 

It may show up here later if missed http://www.dipity.com/timeline/Tyra-Banks-Show-Full-Episodes

Deb Matthews Feminist Minister for Women in Ontario Government plays Gender Card on Domestic Violence

I had a pleasant and informative discussion today with the local DV shelter "Women in Crisis" 705-759-1230, to ensure they still only provided direct services of a bed, food and counselling to women. This was confirmed by a very helpful person who gave me the name Raphael. I may have that wrong as she spoke with an accent but whose English was very good. She gave me references to social housing, 705-946-2077, Crisis Services, 705-759-3803, and Vincents Place, 222 Albert Street East, 705-253-2770 which is an overnight mission style place providing shelter for men over 18 down on their luck and does not specialize in abuse cases, nor do they take children. The crisis line, which I understand is also available for any one to call, but they do not specialize in battering or abuse of spouses, particularly men.

My goal has been for several years to find an equivalent service for men that provides tax supported emergency and reasonable term housing, food, and counselling for an abused man and his children. There is none in Sault Ste. Marie today as I experienced in 2006 when I first called local agencies.

This is unfortunate as I could have used this counselling a very long time ago. Had it been available perhaps it could have saved my marriage and my children a great deal of grief. I will re-commence the completion of my Human Rights Complaint once the decision on my custody battle with the ex is known.

Keep in mind an equal or greater proportion of DV related to sexual assault, robbery, bodily harm, discharging a firearm with intent, criminal negligence causing bodily harm, criminal harassment, and uttering threats, occurs after separation/divorce, not during the marriage. Eight (8)% of major assault and 40% of common assault also occurs after separation. (Stats Canada, 2008 report on Family Violence in Canada).

But look at this chart from a Stats Can Social Survey in 2005 looking at the trends to 2004. It clearly shows the rates of spousal violence after separation, shown in blue, are higher by a wide margin. The social surveys draw information from a much broader sample than police reports and so I would conclude these DV shelters may well be part of a bigger problem that causes a greater degree of conflict after separation. This is not rocket science and it will not be one source but can I point you in a direction. DV shelters, family court judges ( a 9-1 ratio in awarding physical custody to moms), marginalizing men and using them as revenue spigots. An ecosystem designed to feed the female appetite for victimization (did I mention people like Patricia Tossell at Ontario works) - see Chapter 17 (http://parentalalienationcanada.blogspot.com/2007/09/chapter-17-interference-by-city-of.html) for my exchange of information with her and her legal/administrative cohorts at the City of Sault Ste. Marie). Feminists or their sympathizers working in agencies like the CAS who don't solve problems and purport to know the right "maternal" way to do things, feminist sympathizers at other agencies who receive tax dollars for supervised access and who ostensibly deal with the mental health of children but would rather spend money on lawyers to try and intimidate dads who seek information on their children. Did I mention many lawyers who say they only have the best interest of children in mind but as soon as your money runs out they are gone. The best interest of the Lawyer and the revenue lining their pockets is all that matters to most of them. Did I also mention that 75% of divorces in Canada are initiated by women! Do you start to get a better image of the deck and how it is stacked.































Also in the report and in my letter to Matthews is the 2006 table 4.1, page 43, from the same Stats Can 2008 report on the most recent spousal homicide numbers for 2006.

Male deaths 22 up from 12 in 2005, 56 Female deaths down 6 from 2005 and the rate per million spouses of 2.6 for men and 6.3 for women.

Turn those numbers around because they are based on 1,000,000 spouses, and as Dr. Dutton points out, you get 999,997.4 women do not kill their partners and 999,993.7 men do not kill their female partners. Does this warrant $208,000,000.00 for women's issues and not a cent for men. It is pretty clear what the value of the gender of men is to the Liberal Government of Ontario and they will not even fund prostate cancer tests for men unless he already has symptoms. Women, on the other hand, can get all kinds of tests done free of charge including breast xrays. The patriarchy and feminists in government obviously like "boobs." As these data include common law spouses where a greater degree of DV and homicide occur all data available clearly point to the safest place for men, women and children is in a marriage. Yet these shelters are doing exactly the opposite and counselling women to "empower" themselves into single motherhood with all its attendant negative social outcomes, especially for children.

A new paradigm for DV is needed that involves all parties who are affected by it in the family.

This same Stats Can report also indicates fathers as the most likely to kill their children. These numbers cannot be believed. The compilers of these statistics refuse to break the category of males into biological fathers, boyfriends, step fathers, and other male. They categorize all of the above as "father" including foster parent. This is sexist and discriminatory bias and ought to stop. Australia used to do this as well but they changed and the data clearly shows biological fathers as the least likely to kill their children and biological mothers alone and with their boyfriends/new partners as most likely. U.S. government data over many years shows likewise and can be viewed here. http://parentalalienationcanada.blogspot.com/2008/10/mothers-commit-vast-majority-of.html. There is a link to the U.S. government site if the reader wishes to see the data there although it is harder to find and view over several years.

Politicians like Matthews play into the hands of the proponents in the DV Industry and their cheerleaders in the bureaucracy, who do not reduce friction but through their vilification of men, which can be viewed as a form of misandry, and through the junk science (psycho-educational model) of the Duluth wheel, exacerbate the friction. Matthews brags about her $208,000,000.00 for women but what if investigations found she was complicit in creating a furtherance of violence after separation by funding male denigration? Minister's come and go but the entrenched ongoing government of public servants are the fuel that keeps the engines of male vilification in operation, not only with the current government, but between governments. Walter Fox, in the lengthier video below, also notes this phenomena. Having once worked in public service over many different governments of different political ideologies I have seen and experienced it first hand.

The entrenched and ideologically predisposed Civil Servants no doubt will feel threatened by any change in the status quo and will likely resort to dirty tricks as my HRC moves forward. Some of this can be monitored by those within the government who disagree and I will rely on their feedback as well as electronically including their IT department who can easily trace where they are going with computers or wi-fi networks and what they are doing on the tax payers "dime." Since my letter was sent to Matthews a great deal of electronic activity on the internet has started with email exchanges and even Blackberry's getting involved at both the Provincial and Federal level. The Federal DOJ is interested in the activity according to my sources. I will watch and check with great interest and some bemusement at the hysteria. I am advised also that some of the people in these agencies can resort to dirty tricks and out right lies. Keeping the matter in the public eye is important so a reasoned debate can occur and perhaps draw out of the woodwork the entrenched bias within the permanent government of bureaucrats and their minions in the political classes. If you think Minister's rule the day - well - you might get disabused of that notion depending on the mass of strength a certain ideology has with the public service. That men are abusers and women benign is well entrenched and job tenure relies on it staying thus for many.


The indoctrination the women receive at these shelters, even if no violence has occurred, teaches the women how to best "screw" their partner. Many women who go to these shelters suffer no violence at all but if they say they do they are believed. Many are drug addicts needing a place to "rest" for a week or two. These are some of the most violent of women and will do anything to get a "fix." The 2008 report from Stats Can noted above confirmed 74% of the residents of these refuges were there due to "reported" abuse. (pge. 15) This, of course, means a minimum of 26% were there for other reasons using tax payers dollars. What is 26% of $208,000,000.00 dollars? I would posit the 74% figure is high because women are encouraged before they even go to say they have been abused because that opens even more doors, assuring custody, child support, perhaps spousal support, government cheques, tax credits, legal aid, the house frequently and control of the assets on occasion. In other words the system is set up to transfer wealth from the man to the wife very quickly if all advice is followed including a restraining order.

They are counselled, based on junk science, to leave the marriage and be empowered and they are promised "we" will get you social housing, welfare, and help you find a job, Additionally, with the help of other public servants in the welfare department of the Oxy Moronically named Ontario Works, like Patricia Tossell, a self styled expert on violence against women, defend your right to lie about your male ex and write letters to the lawyer the shelter recommends you get defaming the male spouse. I say with a certain degree of accuracy that Tossell will have not likely ever have written such a letter on behalf of a male client trying to get social housing and welfare. Tossell has had her own public marital difficulties in court records available on the internet and even though she was trained as a lawyer she doesn't appear to be able to practice law as a stand alone profession. She is in indeed one of the ideologues I speak of above.

The shelter staff require the clients to sign non-disclosure agreements for a very good reason. They do not want their indoctrination methods made public or become fodder for lawsuits although one is now in progress in Oklahoma which is being watched with great interest. Many clients follow through using this advice in a variety of ways, sometimes hiring unscrupulous lawyers as their hired gun, and get legal aid money through your tax dollars from Ontario Legal Aid under the aegis of the Attorney General of Ontario, sometimes with disastrous results. This legal aid bill will become attached as a lien to your property (house) and will likely be in the neighbourhood of $25,000.00 if the divorce is contested. This would have paid for a good deal of post secondary education for a child if done in the local community. In this case, as with most others, it will line the pockets of a lawyer to make payments on his many accouterments including the BMW or Lexus - or was that a Mercedes. That is only one of the bills. The man will pay a like amount if he does not represent himself.

The politicians, in the name of Matthews, Bentley, McQuinty and it might appear at the Federal level with Minister of Justice Nicholson, based on his remarks in Ireland as he pandered to the Canadian Bar Association, are sometimes unsuspecting dupes but often are willfully blind to what is going on due to their own Political Correctness (PC). This PC is - men are abusers - women are benign - the Patriarchy oppresses women and the nanny state (the proxy patriarch) needs to act as their guardian. Its as though these women have never reached adulthood and cannot find their way in the world without hand holding.

If you recall Bentley at a press conference wearing his white ribbon as a result of investigations after Katelyn Sampson, a young girl, was killed at the hands of two drug addicted female prostitutes, one her natural mother, preening before the press like a male peacock. Guess who he was pandering to and guess who he used as advisers. The centerpiece of his recommendations arising from the killing of a little girl through the acts of two women was to criminalize more men through the use of restraining orders. Every one of his advisers, thanked on his web site, were those with a vested interest in the outcome including shelter industry people. Not one father's or men's group was approached or involved. There is no bias in the office of the Province's Chief legal officer, no politicization of justice or pandering to vested interests is there? It's an almost incestuous relationship between those who receive tax dollars as beneficiaries and the political/bureaucratic classes. The feedback/response loop is of a closed system unable to see the big picture and, more to the point, who don't want to see it.

I find it interesting that those of us who know much about the scourge that true Intimate Partner Violence is and its impact, particularly on children who observe it, who may not be large in physical stature, who may be handicapped (I know what this is like), do not go looking for fights, know how to avoid physical confrontation, may have a rudimentary knowledge of self defense, but may still get "battered" emotionally, financially and occasionally physically don't develop the victim persona in the manner promulgated by Matthews and her acolytes. It can be a self fulfilling prophecy. Men do, however, deserve to be helped when needed and not suffer discrimination simply because we are a different gender.

View the videos at the end to get an impartial view of the kinds of observations made by people, some formerly involved in the shelter movement, about this vocal minority of tax supported vilifiers of men.

Although not directly a target in this Human rights complaint this is just one example of the discrimination shown by Matthews and her colleague AG Bentley. Bentley was involved in the launch of this initiative as he is responsible, supposedly at arms length, for the administration of justice in this province. The administration of justice is heavily politicized and discriminatory.

There is nothing wrong with educating citizens on Family Law but the mindset of these people is men must know all about it and women not. Here is a quote by Matthews on the launch of the Family Law Education for Women (FLEW).

“The Family Law Education for Women campaign is unique in Ontario. It builds on Ontario’s commitment to protect and support vulnerable women in our province” said Deb Matthews, Minister Responsible for Women’s Issues. “There is one family law for all Ontarians and women deserve to know their legal rights so they can fully benefit from the law and make informed decisions.”

Note she describes vulnerable women but its target is all women and not one man. This is an earlier quote in the same press release.

On December 10, 2008, International Human Rights Day, Family Law Education for Women (FLEW) will unveil a public education campaign called “All Women. One Family Law” to ensure that Ontario women know their legal rights under Ontario family law. FLEW is a public legal education project funded by the Ontario government to develop materials that will inform women’s decisions about family law issues.

Note it describes All Women. The press release is here. http://smr.newswire.ca/en/flew/all-women-one-family-law The FLEW website is here. http://www.onefamilylaw.ca/ Does any one see the irony in the name "One Family Law" The term Family used to describe a mom a dad and children if any. Not any more according to the Province of Ontario - it describes only women.

For those men, beaten down by the misandry of all this feminist rhetoric, let me remind you of what it is men do for human kind, in its darkest hours, and how all of us - not feminized to think twice about these things - will risk our lives and die for others. This is the tail end of one of the best descriptions of heroism by anyone flowing from the 9/1/1 disaster but this is written by a woman, Christie Blatchford, then with the National Post of Canada. For the whole article go here. http://f4j-soo.blogspot.com/2008_09_11_archive.html


Always keep in mind - you would do this too as many of our forefathers have done in fighting wars and oppression for these same women who now cry abuse at the hands of all men and who do not think twice about lying about it. These men, and women who have adapted to these difficult tasks, however, may be required to do this any day they are called upon.

"The raw physical courage of all those who had raced to the scene and headed into the very towers that they, of all people, with their knowledge of structures and the sort of damage that a fireball could inflict upon skyscrapers, would best know were at risk of collapse, was enormous; their collective selflessness, putting women, children and civilians before themselves, utterly astonishing.

I am old enough to remember what some call the "feminization" of these very organizations, and the military, that began all over North America.

As the rhetoric went then, integrating women into these places would be good for the men, would gentle their inherent violence and risk-taking, temper the soaring levels of testosterone, somehow better the culture.

The truth is, it did nothing of the sort. If anything, the women who became firefighters and police and soldiers took their cues from the men. And in the end, there remains such comfort in this, in knowing that, push come to shove, should you find yourself in crisis, in a burning building or a car crash, the ground treacherous and shifting beneath your sandal-shod feet either literally or metaphorically, a burly figure will be coming for you, and he will be driven enough to find you and strong enough to lift you up and away.

There is nothing to better here. There never was."

MJM

Michael J. Murphy
Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario P6A 6J8
email: mike.murphy@nospam.ca

Hon. Deb Matthews
Minister Responsible for Women's Issues
14th Floor 56 Wellesley St W
Toronto ON
M5S 2S3 via fax 416-212-7431 and email dmatthews.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org

My Dear Minister Matthews:

I was made aware today you and the Liberal Government will be keeping a gender based perspective on IPV. I am very disappointed with this decision and understand you will be speaking about it at the Durham Region’s Intimate Relationship Violence Empowerment Network 4^th annual forum in Whitby, ON, October 2/09.

Given the Liberal government will be taking this official stance despite the science showing IPV is mutual and close to equal, is initiated by females more often than males - as high as 70% in some studies, males are injured and killed as well as females, that children are murdered and maltreated more often by their mothers in Canada, the U.S.A. and Australia I can only conclude your government puts a premium on being female and discounts males. That is unconstitutional!

I would respectfully request a copy of the Minister's speech as part of my research into preparing a Human Rights Complaint against the Attorney General, Ms. Matthews, Premier McQuinty, and the local DV shelter who refuses to support battered men.

In addition I note most of the members of the Council who advised the Minister on this decision have a vested interest in the status quo as they are indeed recipients of tax payers money. I also note one of the speakers at this forum is an academic from the UOIT, Molly Dragiewicz. This Professor is a noted feminist ideologue and a recipient of your largesse in obtaining contracts to produce information forming the basis for your conclusions to keeping the status quo. She too has a vested interest in this approach as it is less threatening to getting contracts from your $208,000,000.00 allotment of tax payer's money targeted exclusively for women. Was this contract and others awarded to Dragiewicz, and her colleague at UOIT, sole sourced or was there a tender involved? I would like to know your policy generally and specifically with the one that has led to your official announcement of using a gender based approach.

Let's do a little math using Barbara Kay's figures given as a rebuttal to your assertions on a National Post story in December 2008. In 2006 there were 605 murders in Canada and 78 were spousal homicides. Women numbered 56 - 6 fewer than 2005 but males jumped 12 to a total of 21. You spend $208 million on women annually according to your response to Ms. Kay below – none is allocated specifically for men. For every female death you have $3,714,286 available and, of course, none for males. I use the larger figure to demonstrate the apparent willful blindness of your government. You have indicated women die more often, are injured more often, 6 times more likely to seek medical attention etc. Some of these figures had no attribution and they are suspect as men do not report their injuries very often (between 10 & 17%), the higher figure from StatsCan and so the female numbers become less comparable even if they have scientific credibility.

Not all spousal homicides are reported as such. Women are devilishly clever at killing their spouses and sometimes these killings are reported as something other than DV. Just in your riding we saw a murder/suicide by a female police officer who killed her partner then herself. This was not classified as a spousal homicide but should have been. If a new boyfriend is coerced into killing the husband, if a contractor is used, if undetectable methods are employed, or if it just plain appears as accidental it will not appear as a spousal killing. I would further want you to understand that there could be as many as 2,000 deaths of men by suicide per year due to family court marginalization (children are awarded to mom in a 9-1 ratio and dad becomes an ATM) plus false accusations of rape or violence that ruin men's lives. That is a serious number. All deaths are tragic but I believe the pendulum has swung way too far to the left giving your government a truly feminist oriented agenda at the expense of males.

You have also used cherry picked Coroner's reports showing, and I quote, females were the victims in 95% of domestic violence fatality cases. See the official numbers above.

Guess who gets involved on these death review committees with the Coroner. Yes, a representative sample of the same tax supported people you are speaking to on October 2, 2009 multiplied Province wide. Do you see where this is going? You have a beholding group of people operating DV shelters who are never audited, either financially or operationally, who make clients sign "non disclosure agreements, (why is that?) who make out reports to send to the government recording the "official" numbers of women helped but, as a rational human being, who can believe them if they aren't independently audited. I also make note they provide no services to battered men, and yes we do exist. Your government is already beset with scandals is this another one in its infancy?

Your response to Barbara Kay follows:

Re: Fed On Myths, Preying On Men, Barbara Kay, Dec. 6.

It's important to address Barbara Kay's assertions that were raised on such a significant and solemn occasion, the National Day of Remembrance and Action on Violence Against Women. In response to her statement that "emotion, not reason or facts, drives the domestic violence industry", there are facts to support that domestic violence is not gender-neutral.

According to Statistics Canada, women experience more severe forms of violence, more often, than men. Women are twice as likely as men to be injured as a result of spousal violence, six times more likely to seek medical attention and three times more likely to fear for their lives.
And according to the Chief Coroner's Domestic Violence Death Review Committee, females were the victims in 95% of domestic violence fatality cases. That means women were victims in 19 of every 20 domestic violence deaths. That's not gender-neutral.

Our response must, and does, recognize this reality. With our community partners, we support women and their children escaping violent situations. Each year, our government invests more than $208-million in services that support and protect women from violence, including our $87-million Domestic Violence Action Plan.

Stopping domestic violence is everyone's business. And its existence is not to be trivialized and distorted.

Deb Matthews, Minister Responsible for Women's Issues, Toronto.
National Post
Published: Thursday, December 11, 2008


Professor Don Dutton of UBC also supplied a response to your comments as follows:

Another view on domestic violence
Saturday, December 13, 2008
http://www.nationalpost.com/story.html?id=1071290

Re: Women's Issues Minister Responds, letter, Dec. 11.

This letter from the Ontario Minister for Women Issues is typical of the misleading information that plagues Canadian policy on domestic violence. Partner homicide is extremely rare, and the Ontario Death Review Committee cherry-picked cases that would support the Ministry's view of domestic violence. The Ontario cases are ones that the committee decided were domestic violence, and do not include all cases of homicide, as the system selects out female precipitated homicides as "manslaughter" or lesser charges.

When one compares the committee's finding -- that 95% of partner homicides are male perpetrated -- with actual research, the picture changes dramatically. An analysis of all U. S. partner homicides from 1976 to 2001 reveals a 2:1 (female victim: male victim) ratio for 50,000+ partner homicides. Canadian data show a spousal homicide ratio from 1974 to 1990 to be about 3:1 (female victim: male victim) -- and this translates to eight husbands killing their wives (out of one million couples) and 2.3 women killing their husbands.

Put somewhat differently, 999,992 men and 999,997.7 per million women do not kill their spouse -- I would say that is not then a gender issue. If such a miniscule group of either gender kills, then something else beside gender must be involved. Government ministries that repeatedly misrepresent domestic violence statistics to perpetuate their existence do no favours to taxpayers, be they male or female.

Don Dutton,
professor of psychology,
University of British Columbia,
Vancouver

Domestic Violence is a serious issue but it will not get resolved using the gender based approach. How can it when only one side of an issue is dealt with rather than the whole. Just imagine if Doctors only looked at one possible scenario of many to heal us. In any problem solving exercise a wide array of possibilities is examined. To ignore 50% of the problem, be that a male or female, is to throw good money after bad. Your government spends a great deal of money on only women's issues. Where are the results?

I look forward to your governments defence of my Human Rights Complaint and I also hope this debate will be very public, as it should be. I will issue press releases when I am ready to send it in to the OHRC. The complaint will be personal, representing only me, but the results may have a benefit for all men in this province, and if the dominoes fall, eventually all battered men across Canada.

Do you want to be the Minister and Government defending a one sided single gender approach, forced into submission by your own HRC, as California was by a court verdict last year, or will you change your policy and treat men and DV with equality?

Yours truly


Mike Murphy
cc Dalton McQuinty, Premier of Ontario, David Orazietti, MPP, Sault Ste. Marie, ON, Chris Bentley, Attorney General, Ontario,

Roger Galloway, former MP with 4 children and 3 sons, never divorced, discusses the scourge of tax supported feminism and SOW Canada.


Feminist mischief within Canada's Justice System - Former Parliamentarian Roger Galloway speaks out - Never before seen footage! from Canada Court Watch on Vimeo.








October 27, 2008

Senator Ann Cools speaks to members of the Toronto Police Services on the subject of domestic violence and fraudulent information statistics being promoted by women shelter advocates.

Senator Ann Cools speaks to members of the Toronto Police Services on the subject of domestic violence and fraudulent information statistics being promoted by women shelter advocates.

Category: Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

Ann Cools domestic violence

Toronto criminal defence lawyer, Mr. Walter Fox speaks before Toronto Police Services on the topic of how government funded women shelter advocates in Ontario have effectively bypassed the democratic process using inquests to make their own hidden agenda the law in Ontario.

Ontario's zero tolerance policies and practices that have come about as a result of these inquests have effectively labeled men in Ontario as monsters not worthy of equal treatment under the law.




Ontario Lawyer speaks about flawed domestic violence inquests and fraudulent women's shelter community groups from Canada Court Watch on Vimeo.







This is Walter Fox discussing the Hadley Inquest with more detail than the previous one above.


The Untold Story and Gender Politics behind Ontario's Hadley Murder-Suicide Inquest from Canada Court Watch on Vimeo.

Myths about Domestic Violence

October 27, 2008

Senator Ann Cools speaks to members of the Toronto Police Services on the subject of domestic violence and fraudulent information statistics being promoted by women shelter advocates.

Senator Ann Cools speaks to members of the Toronto Police Services on the subject of domestic violence and fraudulent information statistics being promoted by women shelter advocates.

Category: Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

Ann Cools domestic violence

Toronto criminal defence lawyer, Mr. Walter Fox speaks before Toronto Police Services on the topic of how government funded women shelter advocates in Ontario have effectively bypassed the democratic process using inquests to make their own hidden agenda the law in Ontario.

Ontario's zero tolerance policies and practices that have come about as a result of these inquests have effectively labeled men in Ontario as monsters not worthy of equal treatment under the law.

Ontario Lawyer speaks about flawed domestic violence inquests and fraudulent women's shelter community groups from Canada Court Watch on Vimeo.

Police allege East Kingston woman framed ex-husband

Here's a good one folks. Poor thing is all sweet and innocent but then they all think that way. Its call beiing delusional. MJM

Charges claim Ruggiero sent threatening messages to herself

Photo 1 of 1 | Zoom Photo +

Kristin Ruggiero Photo courtesy of Coast Guard

By Beth LaMontagne Hall

newsletter@seacoastonline.com

July 17, 2009 6:00 AM

Kristin Ruggiero of East Kingston went to the media last year seeking help with an ongoing domestic violence case against her ex-husband.

Ruggiero told a television reporter she was so terrified of her ex-husband she couldn't sleep at night.

In an interview with the Exeter News-Letter, Ruggiero said he was posing as other people over the phone in an attempt to find out where she lived.

Now police allege that before she began her media campaign Ruggiero, 33, attempted to set up her ex-husband by sending a series of threatening text messages to herself from a cell phone she had falsely registered under his name.

According to a police affidavit, Ruggiero filed a complaint with East Kingston police claiming her ex-husband, Jeffrey Ruggiero, 39, sent her 12 text messages in May 2008, in violation of a protective order. Some of the messages were pleas to get back together, she claimed. Others were expletive-laced insults.

East Kingston Police Chief Richard Simpson prepared an arrest warrant, but Jeffrey Ruggiero asked the chief to take another look at the evidence, records show. Simpson decided to dig deeper and obtained records from the phone used to send the threatening messages.

According to the affidavit, police tracked where and when the phone was used. They discovered a call made in California was six-tenths of a mile from where Kristin Ruggiero was staying at the time.

Another call, placed from Nashville, Tenn., lined up with the date and time Kristin Ruggiero had flown into the city, the affidavit states.

Based on this evidence, Ruggiero was indicted last month on 12 felony counts of falsifying evidence and one misdemeanor count of filing a false report.

She is scheduled to appear in Rockingham County Superior Court next month.

Simpson and Assistant County Attorney Jerome Blanchard, who is handling the case, both refused to comment until after the trial.

In a phone interview on Tuesday, Kristin Ruggiero denied the charges against her, dismissed the evidence presented by police as blatantly false and said she is looking forward to her day in court.

"I would like to go to trial tomorrow," she said. "I just want to prove myself. I want this to end. I want to move forward."

This indictment is the latest in an ongoing legal battle between the couple.

Jeffrey Ruggiero, who is stationed with the United States Coast Guard in Charleston, S.C., was convicted in Exeter District Court on April 30, 2008, on charges of criminal threatening, distributing obscene material and violating a protective order. According to Exeter prosecutor Heather Newell, Jeffrey Ruggiero appealed and these three charges were dropped in a negotiated deal.

Seeing her husband held accountable for these charges became somewhat of a crusade for Ruggiero last summer and her story appeared in various news outlets and blogs. She also appealed to a litany of public officials, including the New Hampshire Attorney General's Office and the Coast Guard, who she accused of protecting her husband.

In light of her past efforts to speak out against domestic violence, Kristin Ruggiero said these new charges have been difficult.

"It feels horrible," Ruggiero said. "I'm being accused of something I've worked so hard to get away from."

http://m.seacoastonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090717/NEWS/907170330/-1/WAP06&template=wapart&m_section=

In the UK ~ Amy gives the judge a twirl to 'prove' she didn't punch dancer

Yes Amy you are so innocent - a superlative victim who has already shown your 5' 2" impaired height is no barrier to beating up your male mate who is even bigger and stronger than this female. It looks like you got a break this time but as a paraphrase to the lyrics to a song by the 3 degrees go "when will we see you again."MJM

Amy Winehouse leaves Westminster Magistrates' Court in London yesterday in her ballet shoes. Photo: REUTERS/TOBY MELVILLE

By Steve Bird

Friday July 24 2009

AMY WINEHOUSE twirled in front of a judge and showed him her pink ballet shoes in an attempt to prove that she was a mere 5ft 2in tall and could not have punched a fan.

In one of her most bizarre public performances yet, the Grammy Award-winning singer insisted that she had not attacked Sherene Flash moments after being asked to pose for a photograph at a charity ball.

Instead, Ms Winehouse (25) claimed that Ms Flash, who is 5ft 7in tall and was wearing high-heeled boots, was drunk and being rude as she towered above her.

"Ms Flash came over and put her arm around me. She lent down. She's taller than me. I had flat shoes on," she said.

Asked what shoes she was wearing, Ms Winehouse jumped up from the witness box at Westminster Magistrates' Court and twirled in front of District Judge Timothy Workman to show her footwear.

"I'm probably 5ft 2in to 3in tall," she said before rearranging her 8in-high black beehive and adding: "But my hair does make a difference."

Smiled

She continued: "I had shoes on like this. In fact, these are the very shoes I had on that night. Look, they don't even have a sole. They don't have a heel."

After the judge reassured her that he was fully aware of what flat shoes were, she returned to the witness box, straightened her grey pinstripe mini-skirt suit, sat down and smiled.

The prosecution claims that she acted with "deliberate and unjustifiable violence" towards Ms Flash, a dancer who, like Ms Winehouse, had performed at the Prince's Trust charity ball in Mayfair, Central London, last September.

Other dancers have told the court Ms Winehouse appeared to be either drunk or high on drugs during the altercation.

Ms Flash said that after her performance she had been "tipsy" on champagne and had gone to Ms Winehouse's dressing room and politely asked her to pose for a photograph with her friend, Kiaran Connolly, who, by his own admission, was "hammered" on drink.

Ms Flash said: "She punched me forcefully in my right eye. She used a fist, her right one. I started crying with shock. I couldn't open my eye for a while."

A recording of Ms Flash's 999 call was played to the court. Asked by the operator who had assaulted her, she replied: "Amy Winehouse, of all f***ing people." She said that she was left with a headache and a scratch to her eye.

Ms Winehouse said that she felt scared of Ms Flash, who had ignored her offer to pose for a picture once she had seen a friend out of the venue.

"She kneeled down to try to pose next to me. Her friend came round in front. I said, 'Do I get a choice? Hello?' I wanted her away from me. It was like, 'Leave me. I'm scared of you.'

"I said I would be back in two minutes. It's just then she lent down all over me and put her face next to mine. It's just rude. My bodyguard was keeping an eye on what was going on. He stepped in. It was like, 'Let that girl be, she's drunk'."

Ms Winehouse denied hitting the dancer with a clenched fist, insisting that any injury was accidental. She added that she was worried that the woman was trying to sell her story to a tabloid newspaper. She added: "People are just rude or just mad these days. Or people can't handle drink."

Ms Winehouse denies common assault. The trial continues.

- Steve Bird

http://www.independent.ie/entertainment/news-gossip/amy-gives-the-judge-a-twirl-to-prove-she-didnt-punch-dancer-1838182.html?from=dailynews

Winehouse found not guilty of assaulting dancer

• Share
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Google
  • Stumble Upon
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
• Print
• Email
• Text Size
  • Normal
  • Large
  • Extra Large

Amy Winehouse has been found not guilty of assault. Photo: Getty Images

Friday July 24 2009

British singer Amy Winehouse has been found not guilty of assaulting a dancer at a charity ball in London.

The 25-year-old was accused of hitting burlesque dancer Sherene Flash in the face while backstage at the Prince's Trust Ball last September.

Winehouse denied assaulting the dancer and had insisted she was intimidated and scared by the drunken Miss Flash, who was demanding a photograph with the star.

The court heard the dancer had refused to wait for a few minutes after Winehouse agreed to the request and the singer had pushed her away.

http://www.independent.ie/breaking-news/world-news/europe/winehouse-found-not-guilty-of-assaulting-dancer-1839503.html