How did I not make this list?
June 8, 2003
By TED BYFIELD -- Edmonton Sun
It was distressing to learn last week that a federal agency is keeping a blacklist of newspaper writers in Canada who have written anti-feminist articles. It was far more distressing to learn that my name was not on the list.
It was a relief, of course, to see that the Report news magazines, which I founded and edited for many years, made it onto a companion list of publications known to have printed articles that contained anti-feminist information.
But then the Vancouver Sun and Province and the Calgary Herald were also named. The Edmonton Journal was not, indicating that it has never once printed anything that could be perceived as anti-feminist, a lily-white record.
Neither were any of The Sun newspapers mentioned, implying, I suspect, that the federal agency regards them as somehow beyond hope anyway, or not sufficiently intellectual to merit attention.
In fact, looking over the list, I notice that no writer is named from any of the Prairie or Atlantic provinces. This is no doubt why I have been overlooked. I do not actually live in Real Canada. What we of the lesser provinces think doesn't concern the government.
The agency involved is Status of Women Canada. It is apparently very concerned about the "masculinist" movement, a counter to the feminist movement, and it is studying masculinist articles in the media with a view to possible charges under the hate crimes law.
The masculinists are organizing to bring changes in divorce laws and child custody which, say the masculinists, are blatantly prejudicial against men. There are also dubious articles being written about the education of boys, says the government Web site.
Some "conservative" groups are urging "a return to basic values, i.e. to make boys understand the real meaning of discipline and duty." All this, it explains, is aimed at restoring the patriarchal system. In other words, it's clearly subversive and must be watched.
Moreover, to even make such suggestions, in the federal view, raises the distinct possibility that women are being hated. So the government is naturally developing a list of suspects.
Now, some of the people on this list I don't think deserve to be there. For example, Douglas Todd of the Vancouver Sun would seem to me a liberal among liberals. And Judy Steed of the Toronto Star? Come now, surely she's not straying into masculinism.
However, you can never be sure. The supposedly dependable liberals are, in the government's eye, the very people who need watching. Just as the Communist Party in Soviet Russia used to keep an eagle eye on all public commentary, which was of course restricted to party-liners, for traces of "deviationism," even so our government patrols the media for those who waver.
However, this whole process is patently discriminatory. To cavalierly write off the Prairies and Atlantic Canada as unworthy of attention, to overlook an anti-feminist from the very appearance of the movement such as myself, is appalling. Perhaps I should be considering charges under the hate crimes law.
Anyway, let me put myself on the record: I believe and have frequently said that the feminist movement has done much to destroy the family unit in Canada. It's clear they have no idea whatever of what they will replace it with, except perhaps eventually letting all children be raised by the state. The immediate consequence is increasing social disintegration which might, of course, be precisely what they're aiming at.
I also believe the feminist movement has sown misery and discord in tens of thousands of families, vastly expanded the phenomenon of female poverty, and removed essential paternal influence in the raising of children. I think it is directly responsible for the murder of some 100,000 unborn children a year whose absence from the workforce has made necessary some very dubious immigration policies.
My own impression of most active feminists (not all) is that they are frustrated bullies. They are wholly self-absorbed and generally hate men.
They are also getting very old. Fewer and fewer younger women, I notice, seem afflicted with this disability.
Now surely this qualifies me for the list, even if I do live in Alberta.
Catherine Ford, Shadia Drury, June Callwood - please help me out here and bring this to the attention of the proper Ottawa authorities.
Letters to the editor should be sent to letters@edm.sunpub.com.
http://www.canoe.ca/Columnists/byfield.html
COMMENT FROM BC FATHERS
To: Ted Byfield
Edmonton Sun
From BC Fathers
Dear Editor;
Regarding the article "How did I not make this list? By TED BYFIELD" in the Edmonton Sun:
As "public enemy #1" on the SOW and federal government hitlist, I can somewhat relate to Mr. Byfield's chagrin at being omitted. Mr. Byfield has
been an anti-feminist for almost as long as I have, and probably deserved at least an honorable mention.
While there is seem any discernable logic behind SOW's choosing of certain groups and certain people for inclusion on the federal government website, it does appear that those people who were singled out in the report for 'special' treatment have maintained websites for some time that are devoted to the cause of getting a fair shake for fathers.
You see, it isn't enough to simply be "anti-feminist", because being anti-feminist is too easy - anyone of average intelligence or higher is anti-feminist. To get the Ottawa feminist political establishment really
riled up, it is necessary to suggest that perhaps men and fathers might be
suffering some amount of government-sanctioned discrimination and possibly even injustice. This, I think, explains why some nominally liberal or even pro-feminist people were included. Believe it or not, there are some feminists who are beginning to understand that Canadian familes are being attacked by the government, through discrimination against fathers. This heresy among feminists is what the Ottawa feminist political establishment is most-afraid of and wants to stop cold.
BC FATHERS
http://www.fathers.bc.ca