National Coalition of Free Men, L.A. makes its presence know in CA’s Capitol – in Superior Court
On Thursday, members of the National Coalition of Free Men, Los Angeles flew and drove to Sacramento to attend a trial in Superior Court on Friday. Ă‚Â The lawsuit was addressing areas of California law, where it alleges California discriminates against men in domestic violence law, and in programs & services available for Mothers (but not Fathers) in CA prisons. Here is a link to a story that ran in the Capitol weekly.
http://www.capitolweekly.net/news/article.html?article_id=1246
The reporter appears to have stated some info incorrectly, but overall it appears fairly accurate.
Also, here’s an online link to the lawsuit.
http://www.mensbiz.net/subpage%20woods%20neff.html
Here’s a photo taken of a truck, belonging to one of NCFMLA’s members, as the truck was setting in front of the State Capitol on Thursday.Ă‚Â As you can see in this, and subsequentĂ‚Â photos, it was somewhat overcast on Thursday and Friday.
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h53/MRA_06/SacramentoDVtrial/P1250018a.jpg
Here’s another sign that was shown to the public and politicians in front of CA’s State Capitol.
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h53/MRA_06/SacramentoDVtrial/P1250021a.jpg
Several people from the Capitol building came up and talked about the meaning of the truck sign and the men’s issues it addressed.Ă‚Â They also took NCFMLA fliers that explained the organization’s perspective on men’s issues.
http://www.ncfmla.org/ncfmla-flyer.pdf
Friday morning, the NCFMLA member’s truck was parked in front of the Superior Court bldg. on 9th street from about 7 – 9:30 A.M. – just before the trial started.
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h53/MRA_06/SacramentoDVtrial/P1260031a.jpg
A lot of people looked at the display, and some who looked, stopped and stared curiously. Here’s what they saw from the steps leading to the Superior Court bldg.
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h53/MRA_06/SacramentoDVtrial/P1260034a.jpg
The National Coalition of Free Men was certainly presenting itself in a diplomatic and informative manner, yet trying to convey men’s issues in a realistic light. Ă‚Â Some might say the “victim card” was being played, yet many passers by appeared pleased to see men’s issues being presented so honestly and openly in California’s capitol.
The 375 miles up to Sacramento on Thursday, and 375 miles back to Los Angeles on Friday, was a whirlwind trip, but one well worth making. Ă‚Â It was a trip that most likely needs to be made again, and again, and again, ad infinitum, considering the decades that gender feminist biases have been enshrined into California’s laws.
Although the trial is still ongoing, perhaps California will begin to write a new chapter in its history (with the help of the National Coalition of Free Men, and its friends and supporters). Ă‚Â Perhaps that chapter will be one that truly enshrines gender equality and gender fairness into law, instead of the misandry that California, in recent decades, has become so infamous for.
Stumble It!
Posted in: Vox Populi | 4 views
Comments • comment feed
You guys rock. I’m very happy you’re working in my state.
January 27th, 2007
You guys rock. I am very happy you are working in my world.
January 27th, 2007
Unfortunately these guys aren’t very smart.
Perhaps public consciousness will be raised some by some of the publicity they may garner, but they aren’t really attacking anything that could make a difference on a substantive level. Emphasizing sensationalism, ham-handedness, and a sophomoric approach to law revision and litigation, they seem to be copying the methodology of the feminists.
They evidently didn’t even bother to go into the Capitol and lobby. We should put up better.
January 28th, 2007
Somewhere here the other day a post made the point that the form or style of the debate should adopt the other sides methodology, get some catchy slogans, even sophmoric ones, stick to them, NEVER go off meggae, and stubbornly refuse to go deeper in a conversation of disagreement. I saw merit in that notion, though I’d hate to see us do that exclusively.
Thanks be to these guys who are doing that work.
January 28th, 2007
Do I detect notes of jealousy and cynicism in wls1’s inaccurate, counterproductive, and potentially divisive input? …as if we MRA’s didn’t already have enough to deal with in everything that comes at us from the gender feminist agenda.
I suggest wls1 please read more thoroughly the info available at NCFM’s web site. http://www.ncfmla.org/ Lobbying is not something NCFMLA is allowed to do as it is a 501.c3 Within the framework of what it is allowed by law to do, NCFMLA makes stellar efforts.
I suggest wls1 read further to assuage his misperceptions about what Men’s Rights Activists in California are doing. http://www.cafcusa.org/aboutus.asp
Note: Mr. Angelucci, President of NCFMLA, and the council for the plaintiffs in the article above, is privately on the Advisory Committee of CAFC. Please read his bio.
NCFMLA certainly sees the value of lobbyists in Sacramento and I privately, heartily encourage wls1 (and others) to support those working for change, both in CAFC, and NCFM.
Lastly, I would like to challenge all, but especially wls1, to find how they can best into the present organizations promoting men’s issues. Get on board, or get out of the way. Do nothing, “wanna be,” critics (as the case may or may not be), who are only capable of Monday morning quarterbacking are worse than worthless. They’re worse than worthless, because some may be lead to think they can be counted on to provide assistance, but in reality they are not team players at any level.
January 28th, 2007