Duked Out: Men Must Demand Change
Many questioned my position that the Duke Lacrosse rape case was a “crock†from the onset. I called the case on April 12th in my article “The Hazards of Duke: Predatory Feminismâ€.
I was very comfortable making this call. After 19 years of studying false abuse cases, I can smell a warthog long before it gets near the living room. A full recount of the case, and a timeline addenda of case events is located in the above article for those who would like a recap.
The Duke Lacrosse rape case bore all the classic hallmarks of a false case. Would anybody believe that even the most loutish college men would rape a woman in a busy college party bathroom? My college experience suggests this is an impossibility.
The Duke scandal did not happen by accident. It was an intentional slaughter of men in the feminist Colisseum brought about by federal VAWA (Violence Against Women Act) and VCA (Victims of Crime) funding. Multitudes of men are taken advantage of every day in divorces and criminal actions every day in similar fashion. The one difference: the little guys get squashed.
These programs are abundantly unconstitutional for one simple reason: they ensure that equal protection and due process are not provided at law, based solely on the sex of the victim.
Federal funds are dollar votes that bring about exactly what they fund. If federal dollars funded only prosecution of Eskimos we would see prisons full of them, and the State of Alaska would suffer all the problems associated with a lack of inhabitants. This illustrates why father-absence is such a tremendous problem in the American family, and why so many men are living in prison or on the fringes of society as “deadbeatsâ€.
Federal programs fund investigations, treatment, prosecutions, and incarceration only if the alleged victim is a female or a child. Police, psychologists, clinics, prosecutors, prisons, lawyers, and free legal services behave in strict concert with the funding. Men who are abused are on their own against the hurricane force of governmental criminal systems and media outlets who lynch men in public before looking to see if a case has any merit whatsoever.
Every day we see men released from prison after twenty years of incarceration because DNA proved their convictions were garnered by something other than fact.
Every day we see women being arrested for having sex with minors. Why do these women get automatic custody of the baby when they get pregnant? Is it not a brutal to order child support against a teen boy who was raped? Should the victim become a career servant and financier of the criminal?
Has anyone ever seen a woman arrested, prosecuted, and locked up for thirty years for lying about rape and destroying the life of a good man? Has any woman ever had to pay restitution to her victim?
Has anyone seen a woman held responsible for lying about her use of birth control in order to become an entitled single mother at the expense of marriage, husbandry, and fatherhood? There are multitudes of men served up on this platter of predatory feminist motherhood.
Men must demand respect and raise cain until we get it. We demand equal and fair treatment under the law. We demand that sexist programs be ended. Federal funding must not discriminate against men or deny them procedural due process or availability of services.
We must now grant to fathers the same right to be in the family as we have granted to women in the workplace. We will not settle for Senatorial political burial or whitewashing by the media.
No matter whether you are a liberal or conservative male or mother, a loaded gun is pointed at you or your son (respectively).
This father’s day, let us make an oath of brotherhood to speak out, to vote against any politician who either supports feminist initiatives, fails to openly support equality for men in family and society, or pretends that discrimination against men is not a problem.
We shall not donate to any charity that funds feminist programs or does not fund programs that help men. The United Way is at the top of this list.
Last, we shall not date or marry any woman who ascribes to modern liberal feminism, or who does not actively support equal rights for fathers to be in the family and to have full and equal protections under the law.
David R. Usher is President of the
American Coalition for Fathers and Children, Missouri Coalition
| More from David R. Usher
Stumble It!
June 10th, 2006 at 3:09 am
“we shall not date or marry any woman who ascribes to modern liberal feminism, or who does not actively support equal rights for fathers to be in the family and to have full and equal protections under the law.”
I agree but I think that is little protection.
Women generally are very traditional during the courtship and marriage phase. These same women can embrace feminist abuses whole heartily when it comes to the divorce phase.
Of course, a woman who is openly feminist is a terrible bet for marriage but avoiding women who are openly feminist does not insure safety.
June 10th, 2006 at 5:52 am
Snootfish, you have to get political with the women you date. If she talks about Hillary Clinton in a positive way, RUN!!!!
June 10th, 2006 at 7:11 am
“Women generally are very traditional during the courtship and marriage phase. These same women can embrace feminist abuses whole heartily when it comes to the divorce phase.”
Hear, hear! It happened to me. My ex-wife’s well-hidden feminist agenda did not surface until AFTER we were married. Prior to that, her agenda was to snag a husband. Funny how some women will subordinate their feminism to more traditional goals, until they get their hooks in you. Then lookout!
June 10th, 2006 at 8:42 am
I would very much like to see men everywhere demanding equal treatment under law but I don’t know how to make it happen. Until they personally face a guilt based on gender stereotype tribulation of their own of one sort or another they rely heavily on the assumption that only the guilty-of-something are prosecuted or get screwed out of fundamental justice under color of law. The feminists, judges, lawyers, legislators, and prosecutors carrying out feminist jurisprudence know this, and heavily rely upon it. In fact, that’s how things got so bad, such that a man railroaded through the gender-based justice system is dumbfounded by the astonishing corruption when he knows the truth of a given situation.
There are many women who look for a husband with the intention of divorcing him. In other words, they aren’t looking for a husband, they are looking for an ex-husband, somebody to have sex with for a while then bilk him for cash using children as mutilated beggars. This is the modern version of a whore, and the pay is easily better for much less work. Worst of all these are increasingly the ones who are raising our children.
Paternity fraud is a key weapon in the arsenal of crimes for which women know they will never be prosecuted because they are female. But across all spectrums of vaginas-get-out-of-jail-free crimes, the one that seems to be consistent is perjury. Its as if all laws are written and all courts operate under the premise that women never lie. When a woman lies under oath and a man contradicts her with the truth, it is still the man who is more likely to be prosecuted for perjury. I was threatened by a judge with prosecution for perjury, but when it turned out she was the one that was lying under oath the matter was dropped immediately.
But even those women who enter marriage or a relationship with good intentions can be swayed over to the dark side. The incentives for women to cash in on feminist jurisprudence have been steadily mounting over decades. This is what we see feminists prodding legislators, judges, and prosecutors with every day, i.e. an increase in incentives for women to abandon basic decency, most likely taught to them by their father, and cash in on gender based justice. Not only are the incentives on the rise, and the risk of getting prosecuted on the decline, but the moral fabric of society is constantly under attack so that there is no longer any right and wrong, only what you can get away with and how to do it. Getting fathers out of the picture to instill basic decency towards men in their daighters only adds to the brewing storm.
Even the pretense of equal treatment under law as it is written is increasingly abandoned. Take a close look at VAWA and rape laws and one can hardly disagree, at least without lying about it. If not for their own sake for the sake of their sons, and daughters, men, and women, are going to have to demand change, because the special interest groups today are so entrenched in gender based justice that no other force can surmount them.
June 10th, 2006 at 9:57 am
Dc father you are right! But I need to add the system is a fraud and it openly discriminates against fathers and men. And women do behave legally,socially and morally irresponsible. yes.. all true.
I should add this, there is change coming. I hope it is by lawful and civilized means, but if not them men with guns will have to go in and remove the cancer eating away at our society.
We will see the “terrorist” who run the family court system taken out. It would not hurt my feeling to see the bastards hanging from a telephone pole, or see some them by put to death in the most painful fashion imaginable. They deserve it!!
My only concern is for us to get that far, then a whole lot of innocent people are likely to suffer. Sure the evil bastards will pay, but the price would be very high. I would much prefer we have change through peaceful and civilized ways.
As to how to accomplish this, study history!
The various civil right movements in history all have some common elements.
First they fough back using “real Law” , yes the U.S. Constitution. We don’t live under the constitution anymore. All courts (ie equity tribunals) operate under UCC Uniform Commercial Code. This is a “financial system” ie about money! No surprize them huh! We have to attack them bastards using “remedy” ( ie loop holes) under this code they use. These “remedies are in the code because the constitution requires them to be there. The tax protester have been using it for years and it does work. I believe we can cut off the money, power and control utilizing this method. It is risky, but hells bells we are all two steps away from the slammer at any given moment any way! So we have nothing to loose.
The second thing we must do is to all help each other. Wether it is practical things, like getting someone a job, helping them clean up their credit or simply reempowering them.This helps alot. The one thing it really does is effectively combat the feeling of helplessness.
The third thing is to find a symbol of our movement. You know, like that little red ribbon all the “in people” wear to “raise awareness” about AIDS. Something that when people see it they say ” oh there one of those poor Noncustodial Parents, who the state has stolen their children and is robbing them blind with childsupport” We must do something to help them.I know that sound real corny, but stranger things have happened.
I hope before I depart the mortal coil, to see these change occur. To one day know that this God awful Kidnapping and Extortion racket is nothing more than some pages in a history book.
That the only “misery” it will cause, it that some college kid has to take a semester course in something likely to be called ” The Great Failed Social Engineering experiment”( all the while wonder how anybody ever let something so evil every happen.)
June 10th, 2006 at 11:36 am
Everyone here does an excelent job of describing the problem.
The Antipeonage Act is the solution.
Everyone, scream for the enforcement of the Peonage Law!
June 10th, 2006 at 3:00 pm
Women generally are very traditional during the courtship and marriage phase. These same women can embrace feminist abuses whole heartily when it comes to the divorce phase.
Hello Snootfish.
I think it’s important to distinguish what “traditional” really means. Women are usually “traditional” when it means men buying them things, being passive/aggressive, looking at men for money, etc. But few women are not and for obvious reasons.
But _truly_ traditional women, on the other hand, serve men as well as expecting men to take care of them. They insist upon maybe making a picnic lunch rather than just have him take them out all the time (and they don’t just do this after they’ve been together for months and she wants to go on the record as contributing to the relationship) A truly traditional woman will overlook a man’s faults or look at things from the long point of view rather than harping at him. She’ll focus on saving money rather than judging him for his ability to blow it to impress her. In other words, she is considerate of him which, in American feminist terms, makes her a “doormat”.
June 10th, 2006 at 3:03 pm
Hear, hear! It happened to me. My ex-wife’s well-hidden feminist agenda did not surface until AFTER we were married. Prior to that, her agenda was to snag a husband. Funny how some women will subordinate their feminism to more traditional goals, until they get their hooks in you. Then lookout!
Hello Felix,
I’m curious: How well did she hide it? Did you discuss politics? Did you ask her to make some homemade dinners rather than have you take her out to dinner?
I found it quite trivial to illuminate women who were out to exploit men: Just say no to them.
June 10th, 2006 at 3:52 pm
I found it quite trivial to illuminate women who were out to exploit men: Just say no to them.
Absolutely dead on. Funny how simple it really is. Tell them “No”, and their true nature will show. They can hide it for a while, if they’re good, none of them can hide it forever.
June 10th, 2006 at 5:49 pm
If you are going to demand that men have equal child custody rights and men shouldn’t have to pay more child support then women, then you have to give up all those other ideas about wanting a traditional woman who will “serve” you. You can’t have it both ways. You have to recognize that divorce courts favor women, because of sexist ideas that women are better suited to raise the children and that men are best suited to earn the money to pay for the child support. It may not be fair, but you have to realize that decisions in divorce courts are just reflecting sexist ideas about gender roles.
If you want a traditional marriage with traditional gender roles and a subservient wife, then you are perpetuating the sexist attitudes that are reflected in divorce settlement courts. You either strive for gender equality or you don’t. You can’t demend gender equality after the divorce, but also demand traditional gender roles during the marriage. You can’t have it both ways. Personally I always demand that any woman who I date treat me as her equal. We pay equally for dates (unless it a special occasion like her birthday). I make it clear that I consider her as much of a breadwinner as I am. Of course there is never true equality in any relationship, but if you establish this as the general principal, then you will run into less of these problems later on.
Gender roles are being redefined and it makes many men very uncomfortable, but we also gain from it. Now it is more acceptable for men to want to take care of their kids, just as it is more acceptable for women to want to have careers. I think this is a positive development. Unfortunately it is very hard to have equality in divorce settlements and many other legal areas which deal with gender. For instance, one parent has to get custody of the kids, for the simple reason that kids have to have a relatively stable home life and attend the same school year around. Maybe there are feminist judges out there, but I think it is a much greater problem that most judges expect women and men to conform to traditional gender roles, so the women almost always gets the kids and the house in a custody battle, and the man has the obligation to provide for them after the divorce.
Personally I don’t want a “traditional” woman. I want a woman who is my equal, not someone who will “serve” me. I have dated several women who consider themselves feminists and I have always found that they are easier to deal with when in a disagreement. They think it is total bullshit for a woman to use gender to justify why I should do something for her.
Feminism is protrayed in places like this as “man hating” and an effort by women to oppress men. Maybe, some women treat feminism in this way, but the feminists that I have known don’t see feminism as being against men. They see it as an effort to transform gender relations so men and women are more equal and they direct as much criticism toward women as men. Yes, they can spout all kinds of statistics about how men have more power and money than women, but they also are extremely self-critical and constantly questioning their own behavior and willing to listen to criticism about what women do. If you don’t think feminists are self-critical, just go and look at what they write.
I went to a talk by Gloria Steniem, but the only people who wanted to seriously discuss and criticize Steniem were feminist friends of mine. And I had a whole list of criticisms of her talk, but I couldn’t have a real discussion about my criticisms with most people. My male friends would listen to my criticisms and say, “yeah, Steniem is full of shit and leave it at that.” They just wanted to dismiss her without really thinking about it. My feminist friends were really interested in what I had to say about Steniem and where I thought she was wrong. Some of them accused me of being sexist, but they also recognized a valid argument and tried to sit and work through the ideas rather than just take an oppositional stance without reasoning to back it up.
June 10th, 2006 at 5:57 pm
“Hear, hear! It happened to me. My ex-wife’s well-hidden feminist agenda did not surface until AFTER we were married. Prior to that, her agenda was to snag a husband.”
This sounds fabricated – an “attention getting” post. Any man is able to detect his future wife’s political and social views before marriage. No woman is a perfect traditional wife and then suddenly flips to being a clone of Andrea Dworkin.
June 10th, 2006 at 9:12 pm
“…to find a symbol of our movement”
Indeed Robert, let’s find one: not to do against them what they have done to us, rather to stand up against injustice we have to suffer as men.
The war raged by the feminists against men had many casualties – too many. It’s time to put a stop to this atrocities.
Others have used ribbons. How about using the same for now (unless someone has a better idea), except for a different color, of course. What would be a color that best represent our movement?
How about deep dark blue ribbon? Why? First, it (deep dark blue) could represents the deep sadness we feel for all those abused by the system set up by the feminists. Second, it could also represent the underlying strength we have: that we are not bent on revenge, but on making things better for all people. Third, it would represent the need for wisdom (among other things) required to be successful.
June 11th, 2006 at 11:29 am
Men keep these words and treasure them. Keep these instructions and live. Bind them to your wrist; write them in your mind. Say to this wisdom, “You are my sister,” and call insight your best friend.
I have observed men dating women. And suddenly, the woman meets him dressed as a wife. She gives attention and sex. She seizes him and says, ‘I do until death.â€
With much seduction she persuades him, with her smooth talk she compels him to buy her dinners, a wedding, jewelry, the nicer car, and a home, but with her money she buys for herself clothes and shoes.
All at once he follows her to divorce court. With the government on her side, he stands little chance, as an ox goes to slaughter or as a fish rushed into a net. He does not know that it will cost him peace, kids, property, maybe jail time, and eighteen years of up to 60% of his income.
Listen and be attentive. Do not allow your heart turn aside to her ways, do not stray into her path for many a victim she laid low, and all her slain are a mighty throng.
Adapted from Proverbs 7 written by one the smartest guys, Solomon.
June 11th, 2006 at 12:07 pm
All,
Regarding rejection of feminists as dating and marriage material: All men must do this. However, given the way the system works, it will not be foolproof. Men can greatly reduce their chances of divorce and being taken advantage of in illegitimacy by making sure she is not a feminist. Even the “dating mask” cannot cover this entirely:
1.** When she has a bad day, if its always your fault even if you had nothing to do with it, that is dysfunctional, and flows straight into the femininist mindset. A healhy woman is responsible for her feelings. She will simply tell you she had a bad day, so you can handle things appropriately.
2.** A responsible woman will have more good days that bad days. When she is having a string of bad days, she won’t blame it on you (unless of course it is due to something you actually did).
3.** A non-feminist woman won’t be involved in any radical feminist initiatives, such as promoting abortion, same sex marriage, V-day, or radical womens campus activities such as SASS. A healthy woman won’t get within a thousand yards of these activities, and will in fact oppose them strongly.
4.** Try throwing a copy of Warren Farrell’s book “Myth of Male Power” on the table, and see what she does with it. If she says its a bunch of hooey, or refuses to read it, run!
5.** With responsible women, the intellect presides over emotions (sanity = I/E). The dysfunctional woman often does not behave sanely (insanity = E/I). This woman is unable to bring herself to reality, and becomes a basket case over things that are relatively minor, projecting her discomfort, feelings, or behavior on to others. Note: One is either acting sanely, or not. If one is not acting sanely, that person is by definitinon not sane). She is a woman who will become a feminist when convenient in marriage.
6.** A non-radical-feminist truly understands the value of having a husband, is vocal about not becoming pregnant out of wedlock.
7.** A non-radical-feminist prefers music that speaks to healthy relationships between men and women, and does not like the Dixie Chicks or any other music that expresses hate of men.
10.** If she does not know what “normal” is, she is not ready for a healthy relationship. “Normal” is not something you can make happen. It is what happens when you get everything that is “not normal” out of your life. Everyone knows what “not normal” means, but many are unwilling to apply this to themselves.
11.** If she is “addicted to excitement”, she is not ready for a healthy relationship. There are many excitement addictions, including drinking, drugs, partying, fighting, sex, affairs, and gambling. When one is addicted to excitement, a healthy relationship is boring, and that person will do something to make things exciting again, which of course destroys the relationship.
13.** If her game is “beat me, beat me, it hurts so good”, or “I am queen, kneel before me”, or “I am helpless, please save me”, she is not ready for a healthy relationship and wouldn’t know what to do with one if it landed in her lap.
14.** Misery is an optional illness. If she enjoys wallowing in misery or victimhood, and keeps playing the old agonies as if they happened today, there is no chance of a healthy relationship.
15.** See how she treats her former boyfriend or marital partner. If she treats him like a dog, and he isn’t one, you are probably next.
16.** See how she treats her mother and/or father. If the family is constantly battling and bickering over nothing, where “self esteem is procured at the expense of others”, that predicts an unhealthy marital future with her.
17**. How does her mother treat her father? If she treats him like dirt and is not a jerk, you might be the dirt bag for the next generation.
18.** If she has children, how does she treat them? If she always talks down to them, yells at them, calls them names, tells them that they “are stupid” or can’t measure up, they are probably the stand-in for the next husband.
19.** If she has a dog, how does she treat it? If the dog cowers or runs or is afraid of her, she probably has a dark side you haven’t met yet.
20. You must honestly apply all the above to yourself.
21.** Before you are ready to look for a healthy woman, you have to be ready for one. If you find yourself consistently attracted to sick chicks, you have to change your game. Until you do, you won’t be attracted to healthy women, and they won’t be attracted to you either. An extensive and brutally-honest inventory of yourself is necessary — perhaps with professional assistance — to change yourself. This is not fun to do, but the rewards are awesome for those willing to take the journey and do it honestly and forthrightly.
Everyone must understand that the real problem men face is that radical feminism entitles dysfunctional attitutudes and behavior of women (men are always held responsible for theirs). If you know how to avoid dysfunctional women, and prepare yourself for a healthy relationship with a healthy woman, you greatly reduce your risk of social destruction.
There is an excellent booklet titled “Powerplays”, by Brenda Schaeffer. This is a necessary tool for everyone who truly desires to achieve their goal. It was published by Hazelden, but is now out of print. It is only about 15 pages, but there is no other tool so useful that I have seen in 20 years of helping men and women in divorce/custody/marital decisions. You might be able to find it on Ebay.
Please note: I am not a psychologist. But I do have psychologists using the above. Items marked with double-asterisks are original work for which I retain the rights and copyrights to for purposes of book publication and any for-profit activity.
June 11th, 2006 at 4:34 pm
Nice Feminist sighting
If you are going to demand that men have equal child custody rights and men shouldn’t have to pay more child support then women, then you have to give up all those other ideas about wanting a traditional woman who will “serve†you. You can’t have it both ways.
Why not? Just let the man have custody, not take any child-support from the woman, and it all works out doesn’t it? I think that’s how it was in the old days. The modern “woman takes all” notion is a product of hyper-chivalry, not “sexism”.
I tried the “demand equality” stance as well but found that it was difficult since most women really weren’t up to it and only went along for some other agenda (such as them not being terribly attractive, etc.) They turned out to be INCREDIBLY emotionally unstable.
Now it is more acceptable for men to want to take care of their kids, just as it is more acceptable for women to want to have careers.
What cool aid have you been drinking? It’s always been “acceptable” for men to take care of kids PROVIDED they still brought home the mullah in addition. If you think gender roles are now more flexible for men, really put it to the test. Ask a young woman to financially support you NOW in such a role and see what she says. Of course, feminists in their youth will say they don’t see anything wrong with that, but that’s like me saying I don’t see anything wrong with cleaning the kitchen. Now getting me to do it on the other hand…
Personally I don’t want a “traditional†woman. I want a woman who is my equal, not someone who will “serve†me. I have dated several women who consider themselves feminists and I have always found that they are easier to deal with when in a disagreement. They think it is total bullshit for a woman to use gender to justify why I should do something for her.
So you claim to know nice feminists. I think this is possible provided the man, as I said, doesn’t say the dreaded “no” word to women on issues that are very important to her. Have you demanded the women to pick up the tab for the first date? How about the notion of women earning a job on ability, not on a quota? In other words, they’re easy to get along with provided you still pick up most of the slack and don’t ask for anything them to break a serious sweat. Once you ask them to give up the victim-status Scarlett OHara role, LOOK OUT!
Many normal American women have a feminist attitude (this is the notion the world revolves around pleasing them and that they are a victim no matter what they do). That’s pretty messed up. Feminists range from the man-hating butch dyke to the seemingly nice lipstick feminists you met who want to put on a nice face (literally and figuratively) which requires them to make a few token gestures but nothing serious.
I knew a few women like this during the 90’s. They made it a point to pay for the first date but then began to play games like “forgetting their wallet” when going out on dates. They quietly let their feminist values slide and went back to “traditionalism”.
Good luck with such women.
June 11th, 2006 at 10:22 pm
If women were natural leaders, then, in the past 6,000 years, they would have led hundreds civilizations. Established a country led by women for women. Can you name one?
Leadership or greatness can not be oppressed for 6,000 years.
Instead, today our government establishes equal opportunity laws to threaten a natural tendency.
Women and men are not equal.
http://www.ladiesagainstfeminism.com/
http://www.savethemales.ca/archives-subject.html
http://wms2.streamhoster.com/mhrudov/wm9_600kbit_WillSheBuyYouDinner.wmv
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=24&chapter=1&version=47
June 27th, 2006 at 9:52 pm
“Yes, they can spout all kinds of statistics about how men have more power and money than women, but they also are extremely self-critical and constantly questioning their own behavior and willing to listen to criticism about what women do.”
Bullshit. More subtle feminazi propoganda.
Gentlemen, dating is fine, only if it’s followed by sportsex. So make a special point of respecting the liberation and independence of american women by just having sex-based relationships with nothing more.
However, if you really, really have the desire to marry, expatriate to a civilized non-western country. It’s the only safe way.
Let the feminazis marry each other, and their cats.