Attacks On Father's Groups By Feminist Organizations Such As Status of Women (SOW) To Be Funded By The Federal Government with Tax Payers money.
It seems the Canadian Government is funding Radical Feminist groups, to attack all "Pro Fathers Web Sites" for Hate Crimes, as well as Men who speak out about abused men and abused children around the world. These include web sites in the United States, Canada, and over seas. The dubious claim is that these websites promote hate crimes, with the help of foreign governments and the UN and secret Canadian government agency's putting out lists on Canadians.
The report called "School Success by Gender, A Catalyst for the Masculinist Discourse," by Pierrette Bouchard, Isabelle Boily, and Marie-Claude Proulx, says that the research investigates the advocacy discourse focusing on boys and men during the decade between 1990 and 2000, as reported in the Canadian and international press.
They claim that their objective is to explain the dynamics of this discourse, using the school drop-out theme, which is their field of research, in order to identify other themes that authors link together: suicide, child custody, violence perpetrated by women, etc.
The research is based on articles published in Canadian, French, American and Australian daily newspapers and mass circulation Canadian magazines. The analysis reveals an ideology that questions women’s rights and discredits feminism.
The report goes on further to say that as a result of the new issues raised by masculinists, a number of general recommendations for protecting the gains that women have made. They stress the urgency for women to “take ownership” of the Internet.
There is also a need to ensure closer monitoring of hate-mongering sites to determine whether legal action should be taken. It is important as well to disseminate egalitarian messages and to support studies that provide a context for problems, such as alleged violence by women.
The Status of Women Canada, and Gender Feminist Groups, are feeling the heat it appears. They are seeking to suppress the voices of dissent from the gender feminist political agenda. Deborah Sinclair at the Hadley inquest made a comment about seeking funding to find out why the media was covering men's issues....it appears that this is it. Nothing is new here as the feminists consider that the male member of the family is the "insignificant sperm donor as feminist Hester Lester did in BC"
They also suggest that whenever possible, the release of gendered data be accompanied by contextual analyses." and they list the groups. Their hit list include Canadian groups as well other many others in many different countries
Anyone who wants a copy of the hit list should send a E-mail to the web master of Fathers Canada. Anyone who got the book or report of the federal government they produced will also find the hit list printed there.
This is just the Canadian list. It also appears that they are going on an international attack as well.
In a report from "Real Woman, one of the first perceptible cracks in the feminist myths that have held a stranglehold over family law in Canada has finally appeared.
A Joint Committee of the Senate and House of Commons held hearings across the country last year on this important issue of custody and access of children following a divorce. The Committee ignored the feminist myths that men are dangerous and abusive and that mothers should properly have sole custody of the children.
When the issue as first raised in the House Of Commons, the question bought forth was, "well what's the advantage of a divorce if the parents have to share custody?" The feminist attitude toward children is not one of a humanistic value, but that children are objects that can be murdered at pre birth, or more a less parasites that get in the way of a divorce or can be used by woman, many who are vindictive leeches, to gain large sums of money, "for the sake of the child."
In its report, released on December 9, 1998, the feminists were shocked by recommendations that there should be shared parenting following the divorce so that a child will have involvement from both parents. At present, the mother customarily is given custody with the father, usually having access to his child or visitation rights -- such rights being carried out depending upon the mother's inclination.
The report also recommended a mandatory 90 day notice if one parent wishes to move away from the former spouse and that support payments would be adjusted to facilitate continued visits.
Another recommendation was that there be compulsory mediation for parents at the time of the divorce in order to develop a suitable child sharing plan. This latter recommendation has worked very well in some jurisdictions in the US and in the province of Alberta.
It appears that organizations such as SOW are loosing the argument on parental control as the socialist era in Canada is drawing to a close. Thus they use the last bastion of "hate mongering," in order to oppress freedom of speech.
The socialized liberals, so monopolize the market place of opinion because of their domination of the media, the arts, and schools, that they have come to believe that their pet theories regarding social engineering have no legitimate intellectual competition, so they just declare other viewpoints off limits.
You see we must be careful not to offend them, with the principles of truth, lest it affects their self esteem. The socialists would have you believe that self esteem is more important, than actually doing something to earn it.
It would be interesting if there was ever any convictions handed down. as a result.
Mark Hansel Author the web site called: " Fathers Canada
The Story, "Attacks On Father's Groups By Feminist Organizations Such As Status of Women (SOW) To Be Funded By The Federal Government" appeared Monday May 26th on "The Right Point Web Site." The Story finally made National News of Friday.
This story tells us of how the federal government is using your money to pay feminists to watch web sites such as this one and BC Fathers
The latest issue that has the bra-burners panti-hose in a knought is custody rights. It seems that the feminiazies want the exclusive right to with hold the children from the fathers all together.
There are cases where it's not in the best interest of children to be with their fathers. But these conditions can be obtained by a court order, where the evidence proves that conclusively, beyond a doubt, not just any old so-called sworn affidavit where the woman can lie about the father.
As it is affidavits are written statements made by a person who swears that he or she is telling the truth. In an application for interim custody, both parents make an affidavit explaining to the judge why he or she would be the best person to have interim custody. Their lawyers would go to court with these affidavits and have a hearing before a judge. The judge will then make an order of interim custody, saying which parent will have the children living with him or her and which parent will have rights of access.
Neil Boyd, a professor at Simon Fraser University, where he teaches courses related to law, crime and criminal justice policy, book "The New McCarthyism", talks about the threats posed by radical feminism.
Mr. Boyd, writes that, for more than a decade the destructive, untenable and dishonest ideology of radical feminism has flourished in North America. In our courtrooms and boardrooms radical feminism has gone largely unchallenged, offering a view of male-female relations that has poisoned work environments, embraced an unthinking rigidity in sexuality, undermined family stability, and wrongly transformed the rules of sexual conduct.
In this provocative book criminologist Neil Boyd argues that a small band of female extremists has been remarkably successful in reworking both the rules of sexual conduct and our notions of fairness and equality within the frameworks of criminal and family law – and in undermining a longstanding and socially valuable feminism.
The law and everyday practice have been altered in ways that threaten free speech, bring a code of puritanism to male-female relationships, alter our common sense understandings of sexual consent, infantilize women, increase female dependency, and jeopardize the stability of gender relations within our culture.