Against Flood: End.

Good morning!

This is the last installment in a series.

We left off last time with the fact that, while marriage is the best living arrangement for men, women, and children, feminists and their backers have conspired to destroy it [1][2].

Now that this fact has been established, let's continue on with the essay as written by Mr. Michael Flood.

Mr. Flood writes:

Secondly, CTS studies [measuring Domestic Violence against Men by women] such as Headey et.al's treat violent acts out of context. They only count violent acts. They do not tell us whether the acts were in self-defence. They do not distinguish between offensive and defensive acts. They do not tell us whether they were a single incident, or part of a pattern of violence.


They do not tell us whether the act was intended to hurt the other person; a joking kick or a slapped hand are counted the same as a violent kick or blow to the face. Most CTS studies do not tell us whether the victim was injured, or how badly [Dobash et al, 1992]. These studies only look at violence in one year, and they don't consider the history of the violence in the relationship. And, obviously, the murder of partners and ex-partners cannot be measured by self-report surveys.

In previous installments, the majority of these criticisms of CTS studies have been overwhelmingly debunked.

And once again, as mentioned earlier, since there is NO excuse for Domestic Abuse, Everything that our author has noted can easily apply to people of both sexes. For example, Men and women wrestle and playfight. Men and women smack each other on the ass or other areas of the body from time to time. Men and women playfully threaten one another with symbolic acts of "violence." Indeed, some people go so far as to incorporate spanking and other forms of "violence" into their lifestyles.

So to say that we should look into the mitigating circumstances of women’s violence, and yet not consider the same circumstances with respect to male violence, is SEXIST at best. Any and all of these objections to the CTS studies that our author brings up could sway the numbers to indicate a greater amount of female or male incidents of "Domestic Violence."

More dangerously, this whole debate of "Man Bad, woman good," and the feminist ideology that attempts to paint an entire class of people as villains and abusers muddies the waters to the point where we as a society unnecessarily, and unconstitutionally interfere in the lives and the relationships of innocent people, and yet let the truly needful victims of REAL violence go unserved [3][4][5].

On the matter of self-defense, I agree that every person has the absolute right, as well as duty to protect oneself from physical harm. A man has every right to defend himself against any aggressor, male or female, using reasonable force to neutralize any assault on his person.

It should be plain by now that I don't believe in Chivalry. If some woman gets it in her head to attack me (which has happened before, by the way) like a man, then she had better be prepared to get BEAT DOWN like a man. Fair is fair, and I don't discriminate!

So then, it becomes even clearer that Mr. Flood's objections have in no way disproved the fact that women BEAT, BATTER, AND ABUSE ON PAR WITH MEN.

Mr Flood continues:

Headey et.al's survey did ask about injuries, and they found that men are as likely as women to be victims of domestic assaults that lead to injury and pain (and the need for medical attention). They note that this runs counter to medical and police records, that this is the finding in which they have least confidence, and that these issues need further research [Headey et.al, 1999: 60-61].

I believe that our author is saying that it is doubtful that men need medical attention for the injuries they receive at the hands of their angry female partners.

Oh really?

Get a load of this (courtesy of the Good men at Battered Men.com):

Annals of Emergency Medicine
Official Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians
August 1997 volume 30 number 2
Copyright © by the American College of Emergency Physicians

Domestic Violence in an Inner-City ED
Amy A Ernst, MD*, Todd G Nick, PhD‡, Steven J Weiss, MD*, Debra Houry§, Trevor Mills, MD

Study objective: To determine the prevalence of domestic violence (DV) for male and female ED patients and to determine the demographics of DV.

Methods: The study design was a descriptive written survey of adults. We used the Index of Spouse Abuse (ISA), a previously validated survey tool. The study was set in an inner-city ED with approximately 75,000 patients annually, most of them indigent. Patients 18 years or older who were able to give consent were included. Patients were excluded if they had a language barrier, were a prisoner, or had never had a partner. All patients presenting during 31 randomly selected 4-hour shifts during July 1995 were considered for the study. DV was defined as either physical or nonphysical on the basis of ISA scoring. The prevalence was determined for present (in the preceding year) and past (more than 1 year ago) abuse.

Four violence parameters were calculated for patients who had a partner at the time of presentation: present physical, present nonphysical, past physical, and past nonphysical. Only the “past” parameters were calculated for patients who had had a partner in the past but had no partner at the time of presentation. We used the chi2 test to determine individually significant predictors of the four parameters. Logistic-regression models were constructed to determine the significant predictors of DV. Associations among the present physical, present nonphysical, past physical, and past nonphysical abuse categories were determined with McNemar’s test.

Results: We enrolled 516 patients, 233 men and 283 women. On the basis of ISA scoring, 14% of men and 22% of women had experienced past nonphysical violence (P=.02, men versus women), and 28% of men and 33% of women had experienced past physical violence (P=.35).

Of the 157 men and 207 women with partners at the time of presentation, 11% of men and 15% of women reported present nonphysical violence (P=.20), and 20% men and 19% of women reported present physical violence (P=.71). Using logistic-regression models, we determined that women experienced significantly more past and present nonphysical violence but not physical violence than men.

For all four parameters, the victim’s suicidal ideation and alcohol use were independently associated with DV. The victim’s family history was strongly associated with past abuse. Using McNemar’s test, we found that physical and nonphysical abuse were correlated in the past and present.

Conclusion: Using a validated scale, we found that the prevalences of physical DV for men and women are high and that they are not statistically different in this population. Using chi2 testing, we found that women had experienced significantly more past nonphysical violence than men; using logistic regression we found that they experienced significantly more nonphysical violence (both past and present) than men. DV was frequently associated with suicidal ideation, alcohol use, and family history of violence.

My my.

Another Flood argument has been flushed down the drain!!

A NON CTS study has found that Men and women visit the emergency room at VERY SIMILAR RATES; ALMOST EQUAL.

Flood continues:

Most CTS studies also ignore the issue of fear and intimidation. Headey et.al's survey did ask about threats and intimidation, and it was here that they found the only statistically significant gender difference in domestic violence in the survey. More women (7.6 percent) than men (4 percent) said they felt "frightened and intimidated" [Headey et.al, 1999: 59].

Well of course they do! Some women are very good at telling people what they want to hear.

Consider:

A Measure of Court Response to Requests for Protection, is an interesting read.

We find on page 172 of the report that:

An Abuse Prevention Order (M.G.L. c. 209A) is a Massachusetts’ civil court order designed to protect victims of domestic violence. Although a civil order, its violation is a criminal offense, punishable by 2.5 years in prison. The research found male and female defendants in these cases known to the court were almost equally abusive.

The second part, presented here, measures the court’s response to these same allegations. By measuring how the court responds to similar male and female allegations, gender differences in that response is determined.

Examination of living and parenting status is also conducted and compared to the effect of gender on court response to see if living status, parenting status, or gender has the greatest effect.

Massachusetts’ domestic violence victims can first request protection from abuse at an Ex Parte Hearing before a district court judge. The defendant is usually
not present during this hearing and therefore does not have the opportunity to defend him or herself…

… The Measure of Court Response report, on page 174 tells us:

Table II. Court Response at Ex Parte Hearing by Gender

Male plaintiff
Response (N = 44)
Deny: 11
Defer: 23
Grant: 66

Female plaintiff
(%) (N=238) (%)p
Deny: 5
Defer: 5 .0003
Grant: 91 .00006

Note. df = 1; p: probability according to Fisher’s Exact Test (two-tail),
ns: not significant.

The numbers tell us some interesting things here.

The sample sizes, 44 for men and 238 for women, affirms that women overwhelmingly file for restraining orders more than men do, even though men and women abuse at the same rates.

Based on these numbers, once again we find that women file (238/44=5.4) for these orders five times more than men do. Why?

Secondly, we find that women are granted their orders 91% of the time!

Why?...

Could it be some women speak the magic words, “I’m in fear” in order to gain an advantage of some kind? Could it be a reasonable assumption that women have been literally brainwashed into automatically playing the fear card in order to gain attention and sympathy?

Please see here:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/baskerville/baskerville10.html
http://www.mediaradar.org/docs/RADARreport-VAWA-Restraining-Orders.pdf
http://kumogakure.blogspot.com/2007/04/comments-about-media-radar-part-ii.html

Now I’m not saying that all women are lying about being in fear. In incidents of serious, non-consensual, injurious violence, I am quite sure they feel fear then, like any normal human being would.

I'm only saying that the truthfulness of this kind of statement is questionable based on the well documented cases of the “fear factor” being invoked against men in order to seek vengeance, obtain some form of advantage, or bolster a campaign of character assassination: kind of like the Girl who cried Wolf.

And on the other side of the coin, a man who openly admits his fear of his woman is labeled as a weak, pussy, punk ass bitch, by men and women alike. So it would be natural to speculate that when men are asked these kinds of questions on DV surveys, some might, for the sake of their pride, answer in the negative, which could also help explain the discrepancy between men and women in response to the fear question.

Hell, I know I would be "fearful" if my wife told me that she was going to call the Boyz and have my black ass put in jail. Maybe these surveys aren't asking the right questions!

Speaking of discrepancies, they become more understandable when we realize that, as the Kemetians would say:

Words are not truth, only truth is truth.

And the truth about partner violence lies somewhere in the middle of two extreme points of view, as it usually is in most cases. The fatal flaw of people like Flood is that by taking the extreme view that all violence is Male sponsored in nature, he and others like him have directly and indirectly contributed to the creation of laws and policies that actually harms the people that they are trying to protect, and causes all manner of unexpected consequences.

As it's been said, some people know just enough to get themselves into trouble!

But, I digress.

Flood writes that:

Rather than seeing domestic violence as referring only to physical acts such as hitting or pushing, we need to recognise that verbal, psychological and emotional abuse is an important aspect of domestic violence.

Hmmm...

Mr. Flood is making this TOO easy for me! Someday, I really have to thank him.

Because, it's interesting that Michael would mention the verbal, psychological and emotional aspects of aggression. Because you see, it seems that women are VERY good at such things:

PHYSICAL, VERBAL, AND INDIRECT AGGRESSION

There are good reasons to doubt whether it is meaningful at all to debate whether one sex is more or less aggressive than another. One has to take into account the type of conflict. Firstly, is it a matter of aggression between groups, or of interpersonal aggression within a group, or within a family. Secondly, the sex of the opponent is of critical importance: male-male, female-female, and male-female encounters should clearly be distinguished from each other. With respect to interpersonal aggression, same sex encounters are, for instance much more frequent than between-sex encounters (Bjorkqvist and Niemela, 1992; Burbank, 1987).

If we limit aggression to physical strategies only, then it is certainly true that males are more aggressive than females, at least in Western societies. But, as anthropological studies have shown, such as research by Fry (1988, 1990, 1992) and Cook (1992), it is not a universal truth. It does not hold for all cultures.

As far as domestic violence is concerned, the well-known study by Straus, Gelles, and Steinmetz (1974) found no sex difference in the amount of violence by husband and wife, in a North American study. Severe physical injury was, however, more often reported as a consequence of male violence. It should perhaps be noted that husbands and wives were not compared with respect to the severity of mental injury and pain induced in their conflicts.

There is no reason to believe that females should be less hostile and less prone to get into conflicts than males. But being physically weaker, they simply have to develop other means than physical ones in order to reach successful results. Accordingly, one should not expect women to develop and use exactly the same strategies for attaining their goals as men do. If strategies for aggression and conflict resolution are learned, not innate, then women are likely to learn different methods than men. Important aspects are power and capacity, not only physical, but also verbal, and social. Human beings have nonphysical powers which are far beyond those of any other animal. Accordingly, human aggression has faces and forms, inconceivable within the realm of animal aggression. Extrapolations from animal studies are, therefore, misleading…

… According to this theory, aggressive behavior tends to appear in the above mentioned order: 1) direct physical, 2) direct verbal, and 3) indirect aggression. Indirect aggression was by them defined as social manipulation as mentioned above: The target is attacked, not directly, but circuitously, and the aggressor can thereby remain unidentified and avoid counterattack.

Bjorkqvist, Lagerspetz, and Kaukiainen (1992) showed that indirect aggression increases drastically at about the age of 11, especially among girls. However, also among boys, the mean level of physical aggression decreases during late adolescence, to be replaced mainly by verbal, but also indirect means of aggression...

Canadian Children's Rights Council notes that:

In her recent work, Dr. Nikki Crick of the University of Minnesota has challenged the assumption that girls are not aggressive (Crick, 1996; Crick & Grotpeter, 1995; Grotpeter & Crick, 1996). Dr. Crick argues that girls have not been found to be aggressive in previous studies because researchers have been looking at the wrong kind of aggression.

Most of the previous research, as well as interventions with aggressive, peer-rejected children, define aggression as either physical or verbal behavior intended to hurt another person. Crick believes that girls, in general, do not engage in this type of aggression against their peers. They do, however, employ relational aggression. Relational aggression is behavior specifically intended to hurt another child's friendships or feelings of inclusion in a peer group.

An example of relational aggression would be a child spreading hurtful rumors about another child so that other children are less inclined to be friendly toward her. Or, a child might retaliate against another child by not including her in the play group. Relational aggression, then, is deliberate manipulation on the part of a child to damage another child's peer relationships.

Crick's work with elementary school children has demonstrated that the degree of aggressiveness exhibited by girls has been underestimated, mainly because it is difficult to measure. Clearly, when one child hits another, that child is behaving in an overtly aggressive way. In contrast, how do you tell when one child has started a rumor about another?...

Blackwell Synergy gives us the following:

The Myth of Female Passivity: Thirty Years of Revelations about Female Aggression

Authors: Richardson, Deborah South
Descriptors: Females; Aggression; Gender Differences; Interpersonal Relationship

Source: Psychology of Women Quarterly, v29 n3 p238-247 Sep 2005
Peer-Reviewed: Yes

Abstract: This article reviews an extensive program of research that has examined gender differences in aggressive behavior. Early research in the aggression laboratory that was designed to explain why females were nonaggressive actually revealed that females did respond to provocation and that they could not accurately be depicted as passive individuals. Subsequent studies that examined both indirect and direct aggression revealed that women were at least as likely as men to employ indirect aggressive strategies and that the nature of relationship is a better determinant of aggressive action than gender. Directly relevant to the theme of this volume, the later research revealed that males and females reported equally high levels of direct aggression in interaction with romantic partners.

Did anyone catch all that??

Women are just as, or more aggressive than men, but in a hidden, circumspect, and cunning manner. They retaliate against slights both real and imagined. Once again, we see that women beat, batter, and abuse on par with men, and this "abuse" is both MENTAL AND PHYSICAL.

So it would seem that if we did include these non-physical aspects into the CTS system, the percentage of female domestic abuse aggressors would undoubtedly be much higher than what numerous studies have already reported.

But more importantly, this goes to show that some women are more than willing to USE AND MISUSE the system in order to get what they want, and to punish those men who have "wronged" them.

HAVE WE ALREADY FORGOTTEN THE PROVERB, HELL HATH NO FURY LIKE A WOMAN SCORNED?

THIS IS WHY our Constitution protects the rights of the accused from BASELESS allegations of any kind, especially when Life, Liberty, and PROPERTY (and yes, children are property of their parents according to the Common Law) are involved.

This is why we, in most cases, DEMAND proof, testimony, and evidence before we allow the State to play God and ruin people's lives. Because justice based on tearjerking and he said/she said is no justice at all.

And, most of all, THIS IS WHY I HAVE REJECTED FEMINISM AND ALL OF ITS TEACHINGS. It is beyond obvious that this "Smart Dumb Muthafucker" has his knickers in a twist; spouting off feminist bullshit that is half-baked, half-assed, half-cocked, erroneous, dangerous, and tragically flawed.

Dangerous for men, dangerous for children, but also dangerous for women. Because, as I've said previously, this warped line of philosophy that Mr. Flood advances can just as easily be used to STRIP WOMEN OF THEIR NATURAL RIGHTS TO THEIR CHILDREN. Government is a wild animal, who can turn on its owner at any time.

Just because feminists have successfully used the justice system to advance their goals today, doesn't mean that a new campaign of persecution against women can't happen tomorrow.

So women need to be very careful about advancing false theories such as the Flood thesis; because these campaigns are laying the philosophical groundwork for the government to come in and protect children from "women's violence."

But I digress, again.

I know this has been a long post, but I need to hit you with one more fun fact, that will put the nail in the coffin of this lamentable and strange essay by one Mr. Michael Flood:

However, surveys such as the one by Headey et.al are likely to miss a second important form of domestic violence, what Johnson calls "patriarchal terrorism". This represents some husbands' practice of a terroristic control of their wives. It involves the systematic use of not only violence, but economic subordination, threats, isolation and other control tactics [Johnson, 1995: 284]. This violence is patriarchal because it is based in patriarchal ideas of male ownership and control of their female partners. This second form of domestic violence involves much more frequent violence (although the men using this can also control their wives using other tactics), the violence is more severe, and it is very likely to escalate over time.

Ummmmmm.... no. Don’t think so.

While it may be that some violence is motivated by a man wanting to dominate his partner, to say that all violence is based on the "Patriarchy," or even that MOST violence is motivated by similar concerns, is dead wrong.

Again, it should be noted that some couples do seek to determine who wears the pants in the relationship. In most cases, this assignment of roles is negotiated ahead of time, and does not lead to non-consensual, injurious, life threatening violence, because the MAJORITY of relationships are non violent. If someone doesn't like someone, they break up, they divorce, they separate. They don't stalk, break and enter, and murder in the vast majority of cases.

Some people DO negotiate and agree upon specific roles, which may include corporal punishment methods if a partner violates the rules of said relationship. In these cases, care is taken to insure that the submissive partner is not seriously injured.

Finally, some people unilaterally impose their will upon their partners. They do not obtain consent to do what they do. They are angry, reckless, and out of control. They inflict pain and injury indiscriminately. These people may escalate their violence in order to keep the unwilling victim in line.

Now these are the folks that, when they violate perfectly good laws such as battery, assault, breaking and entering, stalking, murder and attempted murder, and the like, should be arrested if probable cause is present, they should receive a fair trial with equal protection and due process of law, and if found guilty by a jury of their peers, suffer the consequences thereof.

These people are the ones who need treatment and counseling, and their victims need the same, as some people become addicted to the pain and the torment they receive.

At no time, however, should we cast blame on an entire class of people, nor should we pass laws that infringe on the natural rights of people, nor should we be dismantling the most effective and wealth producing institution ever known to Man; the married family.

Now then, it should be noted that even when men are NOT present in a relationship, incidents of violence among females (lesbians in this case) are still comparable to violence among (gay) men. Hence, women are fully capable of violence against their intimate partners, and labeling the “Patriarchy” as the root cause of domestic violence is complete and utter BULLSHIT.

According to the American Bar Association:

Same-Sex Violence

Domestic violence occurs within same-sex relationships as it does in heterosexual relationships. The acronym LGBT is often used and stands for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender.

• 11% of lesbians reported violence by their female partner and 15% of gay men who had lived with a male partner reported being victimized by a male partner.

Patricia Tjaden, Symposium on Integrating Responses to Domestic Violence: Extent and Nature of Intimate Partner Violence as measured by the National Violence Against Women Survey, 47 Loy. L. Rev. 41, 54 (2003).

• 11% of lesbians reported violence by their female partner and 15% of gay men who had lived with a male partner reported being victimized by a male partner.

Patricia Tjaden, Symposium on Integrating Responses to Domestic Violence: Extent and Nature of Intimate Partner Violence as measured by the National Violence Against Women Survey, 47 Loy. L. Rev. 41, 54 (2003).

• One survey found that same-sex cohabitants reported significantly more intimate partner violence than did opposite-sex cohabitants. Among women, 39.2% of the same-sex cohabitants and 21.7 of the opposite- sex cohabitants reported being raped, physically assaulted, and/or stalked by a marital/cohabiting partner at some time in their lifetime.

Patricia Tjaden & Nancy Thoennes, U.S. Dep't of Just., NCJ 181867, Extent, Nature, and Consequences of Intimate Partner Violence: Findings from the National Violence Against Women Survey, at 30 (2000), available at
www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/pubs-sum/181867.htm

Now then, according to the ABA, women are more at risk from OTHER WOMEN THAN THEY ARE FROM MEN. This shouldn't be surprising however; as feminist women (some of whom are lesbian) have been doing great harm to more traditionally minded, feminine women for decades now.

According to Aardvarc.org:

Myths: Violence is a male biological trait. When women fight, no one gets seriously hurt. Lesbians don't abuse their spouses. The truth revealed in Janice Ristock's groundbreaking book is that lesbian relationships sometimes do turn violent.

Based on interviews with more than one hundred lesbians who have suffered abuse and seventy-five case workers, No More Secrets is the first in-depth account of this startling phenomenon. Although one in four gay and lesbian couples are affected by domestic violence, the problem has remained hidden for several reasons. First is the fear of homophobic backlash should lesbian violence be acknowledged.

More significantly, Ristock argues, the lesbian feminist culture has readily adopted the idea that men are more violent than women in order to validate lesbian relationships. Recognizing abuse among lesbians would undermine the cemented belief that domestic abuse is an expression of patriarchy and gender bias. The definitive book on the subject, No More Secrets combines extensive research on the nature of lesbian battering with close-up analysis that will change our understanding of crimes of intimacy in heterosexual and homosexual couples alike. By giving voice to the victims, Ristock helps women to address violence by breaking silences, sharing secrets, and naming the forms of abuse.

And finally, according to MUSC.edu:

Lesbian Partner Violence Fact Sheet

Suzana Rose, Ph.D.
National Violence Against Women Prevention Research Center
University of Missouri at St. Louis

What is lesbian partner violence?

Partner violence in lesbian (and gay) relationships recently has been identified as an important social problem. Partner or domestic violence among lesbians has been defined as including physical, sexual and psychological abuse, although researchers have most often studied physical violence.

How common is lesbian partner violence?

About 17-45% of lesbians report having been the victim of a least one act of physical violence perpetrated by a lesbian partner (1,5,6,13). Types of physical abuse named by more than 10% of participants in one study included:

Disrupting other’s eating or sleeping habits

Pushing or shoving, driving recklessly to punish, and slapping, kicking, hitting, or biting (11).

Sexual abuse by a woman partner has been reported by up to 50% of lesbians (12).

Psychological abuse has been reported as occurring at least one time by 24% to 90% of lesbians (1,5,6,11,14).

For serious students, here is a long list of research that deals with same sex violence. In addition, one can search the "Research on Domestic Violence Against Males" sidebar, hosted by the Noble DVstats.com website, that appears on this very blog.

Now there is more to the Flood essay, but I will stop here.

It should be plain to all that domestic violence is NOT a male dominated pastime; that women do indeed BEAT, BATTER, AND ABUSE on par with men, and that women are even crueler to each other than men are to women, based on the evidence cited above.

Indeed, men have their own problems, besides being portrayed as monsters and patriarchal abusers, as rape and violence against men is much higher than most people would care to imagine [6][7]. The least that society could do is to acknowledge that being a man is a tough job, and more often than not, a thankless one.

The overall goal of this series was to prove to myself that the evidence is clear and convincing that feminism is a driver of violence, that domestic violence victims can be of either sex, be it equally or a figure very similar, and that feminist men like Mr. Flood are indeed full of hot air.

I believe I have done so.

Ultimately though, while studies and research are helpful for measuring the scope of the violence problem, it only proves what people in real life already know, that human beings, of all races, sexes, orientations and such, have the potential to do violence. It is my firm belief that feminism, and the larger ideologies to which it is beholden, are DRIVING the violence, the frustration, and the despair that both men and women seem to be feeling about everything these days.

With regards to the issue of intimate partner violence:

The best solution to this entire Domestic Violence problem has two fangs.

Number one:

Domestic violence cannot be ended until effective treatment and counseling programs, devised by medical professionals, are implemented to cure both batter and victim of the sickness of violence, strife, and conflict. This program needs to be sex-neutral, and it should address the fundamental failings that all human beings, regardless of sex, are susceptible to.

We need spiritual and medical systems that enable people to elevate their minds and their souls above the need to dominate and control other human beings against their will, and will encourage and enable people of all stripes to follow the road of justice, truth, and righteousness. On a longer term basis, we need to encourage a healthy marriage culture (monogamous or polygamous), because the safest and best living arrangement for men, women and children to be in is the married family.

Number two:

Repeal all of these unconstitutional, unlawful, and irrational domestic violence, child custody, no fault divorce and other feminist inspired statues, and bring back our classical American traditions of fault based divorce, the bill of rights that protect parents, male and female, from the reach and power of tyrannical and abusive governments, local, state, and federal;

Enact a presumption of shared custody in the event of divorce, guarantee, for both men and women alike, rock solid due process of law and equal protection under the law for both parents in all proceedings, civil or criminal, and the presumption that both parents in any family related proceedings such as domestic violence, child abuse, or any other crime or tort, are innocent until proven guilty in a jury trial of their peers, as the jury system is the ultimate check on government tyranny.

The feminists said that “the personal is the political.” What we must do then, is to eliminate all vestiges of feminism from our legal and social systems, and replace them with a spirit of justice, truth, compassion, fairness, and accountability.

Only if and when these things are done will men and women alike be secure enough to express true and genuine love and commitment again. Only by the careful and deliberate delivery of true justice will both parties (most of the time anyway) respect and honor the decisions that family and other courts hand down.

There will be a minimum of fighting, strife and violence because all can see that all of their rights and responsibilities have been carefully weighed in judgment. No one will be able to accuse the other side of special favoritism, because the rights of parents will be secure at all steps of any legal proceedings, civil or criminal.

Unless is this done, and liberty is guaranteed for all, expect the ideological divide to widen, and the relations between the sexes to sour even more than they are today. But the first step to re-establishing justice is to recognize that no class of humanity is “better” or “more violent.”

Only with the realization that humanity itself is flawed, and that all people are entitled to EQUAL rights, and not SPECIAL rights, can true freedom be maintained. No house divided against itself can long endure, and neither can a nation who can’t even have man and woman live in peace, as God intended.

The clock is ticking, and we don't have much time before events force us to make very unpleasant decisions.

Kumo out.