The Rights Of Man

BBC BIAS ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE : NO MENTION OF MALE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE VICTIMS

In May 2007, a piece appeared on the site about BBC bias in their feature of stalking (link) and this week they have surpassed themselves in their reporting on domestic violence. On both occasions the BBC systematically and purposely fails to mention male victims despite the plethora of statistics and evidence available.

On Thursday 12th July, the BBC held a Domestic Violence Day which included a news report by Alison Holt featured on the Six 'O' Clock news (link)about a new head-cam worn by police officers in Plymouth (link), the plight of Asian women (link) and also a piece entitled "I knew he was going to belt me" (link).

Where the bias comes from is that the articles do not mention male domestic violence victims at all, they only feature the statistics on female victims and also only offer links to organisations such as Refuge and Women's Aid and none to Men's Aid (link) , The Mankind Initiative (link) or the Male Advice Line (link).

There is plenty of research on male domestic violence victims including the catch-all briefing (link) featured on this site. There is no mention that:-

• Men make up 24% of domestic violence victims in the past five years
• 1 in 6 men will become victims of domestic violence in their lifetime
• There are no male-only refuges in the UK as opposed to over 470 for women.
• There are only three small charities funded mainly by donations helping male victims whilst female charities receive huge state funding
• Local authorities receive £59 million per year in government funding to support female domestic violence victims and receive nothing to support men.

Why does the national BBC news consistently ignore male domestic violence victims in their reporting? In their recent report "From See-Saw to Wagon Wheel" about impartiality (link) one of the  12 guiding principles on avoiding impartiality states:-

Impartiality involves breadth of view, and can be breached by omission. It is not necessarily to be found on the centre ground.

It seems clear that many at the BBC seem content to ignore this and continue to omit male victims and also portray only men as the perpetrators of domestic violence and only women as victims.

Editors Note:

Steve Moxon, the author of a forthcoming book - The Woman Racket, is urging everyone to complain to the BBC via the Mens Aid site - please see here (link).

For anyome wishing to complain to the BBC, please link to their complaints section here (link).

STONING A WOMAN IS WORSE THAN STONING A MAN - ACCORDING TO AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL

In an Amnesty International Report, it was revealed that a man and a woman were found guilty of adultery in Iran. Whilst stoning has been banned in Iran, the man still suffered this fate and it has not yet been decided what will happen to the women. The story is covered here (link).

The reason for the post is that the quote from Amnesty International (see below) seems to suggest that stoning is a greater punishment for a woman than a man. That's equality for you!

Amnesty International UK director Kate Allen said: "To execute anyone by stoning is barbaric and disgraceful. To execute a woman for adultery in this cruel way simply beggars belief.

"Iran should abolish the sentence of stoning once and for all."

NEW PETITION ON CSA - MAINTENANCE PAYMENTS : PLEASE SIGN

Chris Lavender has placed a new government e-petition on the CSA. I would urge all readers to sign it. The petition is available here (link).

The text is:-

We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to stop with immediate effect, the discrimination against non-resident parents who pay CSA maintenance calculated under the 'old' system.

As a non-resident parent I pay Child maintenance to the CSA which is calculated under the old system. The new system stipulates payments of 15% (for one child), 20% (for two children) and 25% (for three or more children)of net salary.

This leaves many like myself who consider it right and just to contribute to the cost of bringing up our child(ren), paying way over the percentages stated above because of calculations made under the old system.

To make matters worse, the only explanations that are given for this discrimination is that either there is a new computer system still being trialed or that the government is waiting for the 'new department' to be established. How much longer must we wait? Act now, sign my petition and let's have justice for ourselves and above all our children who also suffer when we are unable to survive ourselves on an inadequate income!

Editors Note : There are other worthwhile petitions worth signing- see here (link)

ANTI-MISANDRY SITE REVAMP

The Anti-Misandy web-site has had a revamp. It looks great (see here - link).

MARK HARRIS' BOOK SHINES LIGHT INTO THE FAMILY COURT SYSTEM THAT GOVERNMENT DO NOT WANT YOU TO KNOW

Last week was a crucial week in shining a light into the anti-male Kafka-esque family court system.

There was the case of Mr Cox, jailed against his ex-wife's wishes, for failing to pay maintenance even though he looked after his children 50% of the time (see previous post).

The other issue was the publication of a book by Mark Harris called Family Court Hell (link). In the synopsis from the Daily Mail* article (link) : "Denied access to his three children after his divorce, Mark was jailed for standing outside his house to wave them. It took ten years and 133 hearing before they were reunited." The article and book speak for themselves and proved that courts are not willing to enforce contact orders. There is a great interview with Mark broadcast on Radio 2 - Monday 25th June (link) 40 minutes in. 

Apart from the individual issue, the most telling thing is that the secrecy of the family court system is something that the government actively supports. In June, Lord Falconer, the then Lord Chancellor refused to open up the family court system to public scrutiny, despite the campaigns by family groups (link), (link), (link). 

A spokesman for high-profile Fathers4Justice said: "To have secret justice in a 21st century democracy is a disgrace and goes against everything we are supposed to believe in.

"The family courts are not just a closed shop - they are more like something out of North Korea. The way they work means parents have fewer rights than terrorists."

What seems clear that the government, obviously advised by CAFCASS (see post link)  and the feminist fundamentalist movement, feel that despite the obvious natural justice and accountability arguments, they are not interested in being scrutinsed and continue to want to play God and an anti-male God at that.

The fight still continues. 

* Good debate as well

THE MICHAEL COX COURT CASE SHOWS THE BIZARRE JUSTICE AT THE HEART OF THE CSA AND FUNDAMENTALISM

The case this week of Michael Cox, the lawyer who was jailed for 42 days for refusing to pay child support over a 12 year period shows the madness at the heart of the CSA and feminist fundamentalism.

The decision is a victory for the CSA robots (as described by a female lawyer on BBC Breakfast this week) who in their unthinking and unblinking fashion chose to push through this prosecution even though Mr Cox's former wife pleaded against it. It goes against all aspects of natural justice as Mr Cox looked after the children 50% of the time but because his wife is named as the responsible parent, the CSA ignored this.  The CSA seemed to relish this prosecution as no doubt the civil servants involved wanted to show how tough they are before they are no doubt moved to the new organisation. They will be probably get a bonus such is the life in the Kafka-esque (the law is the law, no matter how mad) world they inhabit.

It is also a victory for feminist fundamentalism. They have successfully bastardised the use of language as Mr Cox is described legally as an absent parent/father, when he obviously is not. It also is a victory for those fundamentalists who do not trust fathers and mothers to come to a mutually amicable agreement without using the CSA. Any such agreement is a defeat. The fundamentalists have used the CSA to interfere in these arrangements and give them an element of control with the father always looking to be cast as the bad guy.

The fact that everyone is involved in this case is a victim is of no consequence to the CSA or the fundamentalists. Mr Cox, his new wife, his ex-wife (who now has to give up work to look after her children 100% of the time) and obviously the children are all victims. Not just personally, but they are pawns in the battle that the fundamentalists wage.

The one lesson for couples with children who break up amicably is to avoid the CSA at all costs.

Note : The issue was well covered in the media which is a good sign because it shows how extraordinary the case was. There were some good debates in The Times (link)  and The Daily Mail (list). Other coverage is here :- (link), (link), (link), (link) and (link)

BRIEFING ON MALE VICTIMS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE / MALE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE VICTIMS

Every year, thousands of men become domestic violence victims and these male domestic violence victims find they few places to turn to. They are the forgotten victims of domestic violence.

This briefing Download male_domestic_violence_victims_briefing.pdf outlines the plight of men and has been collated over the past six months with up-to-date statistics and issues.

There is clear evidence that local authorities,the government and the Equal Opportunities Commission are purposely ignoring the plight of men leaving themselves open to a Gender Equality Duty challenge.

The Executive Summary of the briefing is outlined below.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

• Men make up 24% of domestic violence victims in the past five years

• 1 in 6 men will become victims of domestic violence in their lifetime

• There are no male-only refuges in the UK as opposed to over 470 for women. There are five women’s refuges that have at most 11 places for men.

• There are only three small charities funded mainly by donations helping male victims whilst female charities receive huge state funding

• Local authorities receive £59 million per year in government funding to support female domestic violence victims and receive nothing to support men

• Local authorities are measured by the government on the support they give to female victims but are not measured on the support they give to male victims

• Society’s view, driven by the state, the courts and the media, is that only women are victims of domestic violence.

• It is time for the government and all elements of the state to officially recognise the problem and to produce, fund and implement a nationwide strategy to help male victims

It is time for the government, local authorities, media and society to recognise that domestic violence is a social problem and that it affects men as well as women.

Male victims need help.