Tuesday, December 29, 2009

Empowerment through education

Best of Luck with this continuing venture from London to Chatham Dave. Your passion for change has and will continue to assistant men and women who are bewildered by the archaic, expensive, dysfunctional, and gender biased Family Law System.  It's major beneficiaries are  lawyers, whose pockets get lined with cash on the backs of our children's financial legacies and keeps incompetent Family Law Judges employed to perform negative social engineering on our children.MJM


Not All Dads are Deadbeats

BOB BOUGHNER

The Daily News


A free educational workshop sponsored by Not All Dads are Deadbeats (NADAD) will take place Tuesday at the Chatham Central Public Library.

Dave Flook of Chatham, founder and president of the organization, stressed it is not just a men's organization - "it's an equal parenting group.''

Flook, who recently moved to Chatham from London to be closer to his daughter, said there is a huge demand in Chatham-Kent for services offered by his group, which is designed to help those affected by divorce and separation.

"We are a community oriented support group for proud parents who have been systematically removed from their children by the Canadian family court system,'' he said.
Flook said Tuesday's hands-on, interactive workshop will be the first of many educational events scheduled throughout 2010.

He said the workshops are focused on providing the practical skills needed to combat court injustice.

"They also offer real world solutions to the growing problems of gender bias in the courts, radical feminist agendas and government and institutional corruption.

"Tuesday's event will be an interactive workshop and participation in the proceedings will be strongly encouraged,'' he said.

A former professor of graphic design at Fanshawe College, Flook is in the process of establishing a web design studio in Chatham.

Flook said he created NADAD to reach out to others who have had their roles as fathers revoked by the state.

"There is no reward for complacency,'' he said. "Our children need us now to fight for them and to ensure they do not become fatherless.''

The workshop takes place from 6 p.m. to 9 p.m. Tuesday at the Chatham library, 120 Queen St., Chatham.


bboughner@chathamdailynews.ca.


Monday, December 28, 2009

Sean Goldman: Will Custody Fight Over Boy Leave Scars?

Finally Mr. Goldman has his son home. Justice has prevailed but with a cost of time. Time is always the enemy in cases involving youngsters being poisoned by a form of emotional and physical alienation.  The son needs time to get used to his dad and paternal family before letting the grand parents in Brazil any where near him. They may love the child but abused him emotionally for a long period of time and deserve no special privileges.

In due course Mr. Goldman will know when the time is appropriate for his son to see his maternal grandparents, initially under supervision.MJM



As David Goldman Wins His Son, Some Experts Fear for 9-Year-Old's Psychological Well-Being

By DAN CHILDS
ABC News Medical Unit

Dec. 24, 2009—

The court case is over, and the ruling has been delivered. But as the drama in the case of Sean Goldman continues, some child development experts fear the pressures of the international custody battle could take a toll on the 9-year-old's psychological well being.
In an interview last week with ABC News correspondent Jeffrey Kofman, New Jersey father David Goldman said that the psychological trauma his son may have suffered during this lengthy, highly-publicized case is upsetting.

"There's a lot of things going through my mind," Goldman told Kofman. "My son's well being, and how he is. And all this pressure that's being put on him is upsetting and very sad."
Goldman also said that he felt his son was being psychologically abused by his deceased wife's family in Brazil.

"He can't live with this pressure," he told Kofman. "He spoke -- he already had spoken loud and clear to the Brazilian judicial system, to the Brazilian courts, to three appointed Brazilian court psychologists who evaluated him... He is being abused by those who are holding him."
While Sean Goldman's case is the latest high-profile custody battle to capture the nation's attention, it is far from the first. In 1999, there was the case of Elian Gonzales, the 6-year-old boy from Cuba whose custody saga became an international crisis.


And then there was the 2004 case involving former Playboy model Bridget Marks, who was locked in a high-profile court fight with millionaire casino executive John Aylsworth over the custody of their twin daughters, Amber and Scarlet. The girls were four years old at the time.


Today, Marks has custody of both girls. And she said she believes custody battles of this nature can have a real impact on the kids involved.

"I think it's harder on the children, because they don't have any control," she said, adding that her girls, now 10, are now both well-adjusted and are top performers in school.
"They do remember everything, but it's not something that we talk about because things now are amicable and quiet," she said. "I don't see any impact now."

Helping a Child Through a Tough Transition

Marks said that her children do see a court-appointed therapist  important, she said, since "the child has to have a neutral place where they can talk about their feelings."

"The adult has to put themselves aside and put the interests of the child ahead of their own.
"They have to realize that there's a human being involved here and they can't go in with a 'take no prisoners' or 'scorched earth' mentality."

It is a sentiment with which child development experts agreed.


"Of utmost importance is the need to protect this boy from feeling pulled between allegiances," said Rahil Briggs, director of Montefiore's Healthy Steps Program at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine's department of pediatrics in New York. "The adults in his life must work to put their own negative feelings aside and help this boy navigate his conflicting emotions related to loyalty, identity, and family member roles.

"While long-term psychological effects of this protracted battle are inevitable, the adults in his life have a very clear choice in terms of the way they handle the future: with his best interests and well-being in mind, or with other, more negative and self-centered goals."

Maintaining Relationships Important, Psychology Experts Say

The five-year, protracted custody case between David Goldman and the family of his deceased wife has left hurt feelings on both sides.

"I am concerned that this boy has to not only readjust to his dad and a new homeland and a new environment, but he also has to say goodbye to people who truly love him and people that he has been very close to," Dr. Harold S. Koplewicz, Director at Nathan S. Kline Institute for Psychiatric Research, told ABC News. "I also am concerned that when you have such a bitter separation and divorce as his parents have had that it is very possible that this boy has heard many negative things about his father.

"It is going to take a while for him to readjust, and his father is going to have to be very patient in order to help."


Family therapist Terry Real told "Good Morning America" this morning that Sean is probably feeling fear at the moment and it could take him months or even years to adjust to his new life.

"He simply has no idea what he is getting into. It is going to be about love, love love," Real said, adding that David Goldman must accept the process his son is going through and be there for him.

Still, psychological experts said it would be best for him if he maintained relationships with both sides of his family.

"It is important to realize that this boy has attachments to both families -- his family in the U.S. and his family in Brazil," said Judith Myers-Walls, an associate professor and extension specialist at Purdue University's department of Child Development and Family Studies in West Lafayette, Ind. "As is the case in any instance of family disruption, there will be loss and grieving no matter what decisions are made."

Myers-Walls said that no matter how the case ends, the trauma of the process is inevitable. In addition to being separated from his father for five years, the boy has experienced the death of his mother and the constant conflict of a custody battle that has lasted for most of his life.

"This is not a sudden crisis in the middle of a steady and calm condition," she said, adding that international media attention may not help. "Hopefully, the families can remove themselves from the public eye and make decisions with the needs of the parents, children, and grandparents in mind without worrying about stirring up more international incidents."

Hope for a Normal Life?

The ultimate impact of the international custody battle on Sean Goldman may not be known for years. But Myers-Walls said there are steps the adults in the case may be able to take to make things better.

"This battle will have long-term effects if the adults do not come to peace with the decisions in some way," she said. "He is constantly caught in the middle as they express distrust, anger, and frustration with each other while he has attachments to all of them.

"The custody battle always will be a part of who he is, but that part could be interesting and growth-producing or it could be an oddity and destructive."

Koplewicz agreed. "I think we can only hope that going forward, people involved with this case will behave more adult-like, because that is what has to happen for this child's mental health."

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:"...men 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. ✆
to    gmail.com
Andrew Hanon ,
mailbag@edmsun.com
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
Editor-in-chief
Edmonton Sun

 From: Dr. Don Dutton

Sent: December 27, 2009 11:54 PM
To: 'Jose.Rodriguez@sunmedia.ca'
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.

LACK OF SPACE
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.

ECONOMIC PRESSURE

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. 

ANDREW.HANON@SUNMEDIA.CA

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."

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

Tuesday, December 22, 2009

Apology to a Sociology Student








Mike Adams

Tuesday, December 22, 2009

Dear Dr. Adams:

I just wanted to thank you for making this  semester the best I've had yet at UNCW.  I loved not only the content of the class but also your teaching style, which is the most effective that I have sat under as a student.  But most importantly to me, I didn't find myself squirming in my seat, as I have in other classes when certain political comments are made attacking the minority conservative Christian population on our campus.  You are truly the best professor I have had to date, and likely the best I will ever have.  And for that, I wanted to extend my sincere thanks, and ask you to keep doing what you are doing.  I only wish that everyone could have a class with you.
Thank you so much, for everything,

(Name Withheld)

Dear (Name Withheld):

Thank you very much for your kind remarks. I also want to thank you for sending some of your favorite quotes preserved last semester in the notes from your Introduction to Sociology course. I have cut and pasted (below) some of the angry remarks. They are followed by my own (hopefully) humorous rebuttals. As conservatives, we must always respond to liberal anger with humor. I would suggest posting these remarks on www.CampusReform.org to warn other conservatives about what they will encounter in SOC 105:
       
“Everybody else (other countries) looks at us (USA) like we all own guns and   still live like ‘the wild west’ with people just always walking around with holsters. I guess so with all those concealed carry permits you can just go get.”

It is extremely important for you to understand why your sociology professor does not support laws allowing for the issuance of concealed weapons permits. These laws have been shown to lower violent crime rates including rape. Sociology professors are aware that there have been many – the exact number is fifteen – refereed studies showing that concealed weapons permits reduce violence towards both men and women. However, feminists (like your sociology professor) committed themselves to a radical Marxist ideology long before these studies were ever published. They did so because Marxism cannot succeed in an armed society.

When the data began to show that concealed weapons permits protect both men and women from violence she (your professor) had a decision to make: 1) Would she commit herself to protecting women from rape, or 2) Would she commit herself to protecting her ideology from criticism. She chose the latter. This shows what sociology is and is not. It is a morally bankrupt discipline. It is not a science.

          “I've been trying to get the term "freshman" changed to "first-year".     ‘freshman’ is such a gendered term.”

I believe there should be a new course called SOC 123 “The Sociology of Irrelevance.” This would be followed by an advanced course called SOC 456 “The Irrelevance of Sociology.” That feminist sociologists actually spend class time fighting against the use of terms such as “freshman,” “mankind,” and “manhole” mandates (woman-dates?) only one conclusion: There is nothing of real importance left for the feminist movement to accomplish in this country.

That conclusion is warranted because America is the best place in the world for a woman to live and work. If feminist sociologists wish to become relevant again they should turn their attention to important issues such as the abuse of women in the name of Islam. Unfortunately, most (nearly all) feminists lack the moral courage to do so.
          “The really right-wingers are afraid of ‘losing their country.’ What does that     mean? It means they're afraid of losing the white, Christian, conservative dominance.”
The bigotry of such a statement is very easy to dissect. In the 1960s, Christianity – the religion that was the basis for the abolition of slavery – was, once again, at the forefront of the civil rights movement. The idea that Christianity is somehow intertwined with white dominance can be rebutted effectively with the following observation: Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Christian.

Martin was not Jewish. He was not an atheist. He was not an agnostic. He was a member of the most liberating religion in our world’s history.

          ”It is sad that we subject little boys to running around playing with toy AK-     47's.”

Here, your professor shows her ignorance of firearms. Little boys in America generally run around playing with toy M-16s – the weapon used to combat Marxist regimes. AK-47s are the weapons used to advance her ideology of Marxism. They can be found on Russian playgrounds. They can also be found in the hands of little Muslims all across the world. But those aren’t toys in the hands of Muslim children. They are real. And they are meant to be used to kill Jews. A Jewish professor needs to be aware of these crucial distinctions.

          “Nowhere in the constitution does it say we're capitalist, just democratic.”

Nowhere in the constitution does it say “partial birth abortion” or “homosexual sodomy.” I would urge you to give her a copy of that important document as a “holiday” gift.
        “(Regarding a picture of her standing in front of the Marx Memorial) - I was      going to send it out as Christmas cards, but I thought it was a bit much.”
I disagree with your professor. I’m giving out NRA memberships this year as Christmas gifts. I want to know who all of my communist friends are. A picture of someone standing in front of a Marx Memorial lets me know she’s a communist and should be given a life membership in the NRA. I can think of no better way to fight communism this Christmas than signing Marxists up for the NRA against their will. After all, they have been trying all year to give us national health care memberships against our will.

          “Women should have to pay less tuition since their education pays out less in the end.”

Actually, the statistic saying women earn only 77% of what a man makes is misleading – oops!, I mean, MS-leading. That pay differential is accounted for by women who choose to stay out of the workforce to have children. Your professor is not angry about persistent sex discrimination in the workplace. That would be the same as hating unicorns. The object of her hatred simply does not exist. She is angry at women who choose to stay at home and have children.

If anything, white, Christian conservatives should have to pay less in tuition when they take classes from angry sociologists. Based upon your experience, you deserve a full refund.


Copyright © 2009 Salem Web Network. All Rights Reserved.

http://townhall.com/columnists/MikeAdams/2009/12/22/apology_to_a_sociology_student

The "War on Christmas" is basically over ~ but the war on dads continues unabated

Some observations I made on the Politically Correct of the left "War on Christmas" column in the National Post.

Christopher Beam: The "War on Christmas" is basically over
Posted: December 22, 2009, 2:30 PM by NP Editor


While U.S. President Barack Obama has decided to send 30,000 additional troops to Afghanistan, he has overseen a precipitous de-escalation on another front: the war on Christmas.


The debates that have raged in years past — “Merry Christmas” or “Happy Holidays”? “Christmas tree” or “holiday tree”? — have largely quieted down in 2009. While it’s impossible to quantify, there are plenty of pseudo scientific indicators to suggest that, yes, the war on Christmas, with or without quotation marks, is over. Or at least in ceasefire...




by MikeMurphy

Dec 22 2009
5:02 PM



Political Correctness (PC) would have us dab all truth with a cotton ball of opaque misery rendering it to obscurity. 

I am an agnostic. 

I hold all religions with an equal mix of peculiar  bewilderment and scorn for their patently absurd claims of being the only way to whatever version of Nirvana  lies at the end of life as we know it.  The latter is the probable cause of a vast amount of discord in the world throughout history.

Worst of all, however, is the dogma  of PC. It is a scourge created by the left to cover their inability to face challenges and search for blandness in the futile effort to have every body feel inclusive and get along.

Having said that I was raised in a country of nominal secularity that has as its foundation a belief in the birth of their God child, Jesus. It is a large part of the culture of this nation and for me it is not a celebration of a particular God but one that comprises a spirit of giving. In other words the meaning transcends a particular religion and becomes part of what we should ascribe to as humans.  When you have children to share this spirit with you know exactly what I am saying. 

Santa Claus is a pretty secular icon that descended from Christianity. He is actually, to paraphrase John Lennon who discussed the Beatles celebrity, more popular than the Christian God, at least amongst children and marketers.

I was blessed by having children who, like me as a child, got very excited over Christmas and what Santa might bring. I recall the mornings before 6 AM when I could hear their excited whispers emanating from the living room at the carefully wrapped gifts lying under the tree. 

These were precious memories and led to teachable moments about gift giving and how it was often better to give than receive. They may not realize that lesson until they have children or have an event that coincides with what was taught to reinforce the notion but it does add value to being human in a non-religious way that is consistent with some of the more benevolent teachings of many religions.

Christmas is a time to celebrate our culture and heritage in addition to a major religious grouping called Christianity. It is a wonderful period that should be celebrated for its spirit and for those of that religious group its religious beginnings. There is nothing wrong with the spirit it represents.

There is everything right with Christmas as a time for reflection and family, the latter the greatest gift of all. Family is our genetic heritage, which we created ourselves. We live on for eternity through them even when we pass away. Perhaps that is our metaphoric eternal life.


Family Courts, however, a part of our government, practice another form of political correctness by marginalizing a parent, in most cases the dad, having them become a visitor in their children's lives. This is done for a variety of reasons most of which have nothing to do with reality but everything to do with social engineering and a new form of patriarchy where the government (nanny state) becomes the new parent and guardian of the mom to satisfy the will of a form of victim feminism,  a scourge that puts fathers in the category of drone, whose only role is apparently the person who has the ability to provide economic support.