15/01/03 

Feminists are nasty things. 

Esther Vilar wrote her book, The Manipulated Man, in 1972. In 1998 she wrote that, "violent threats have not ceased to this date." In other words, for over 25 years has Esther Vilar been subjected to the nastiness and vindictiveness of feminist women simply because she spoke up on behalf of men.

And this has been the experience of many WOMEN who have tried to expose feminists and feminism for what they really are.

And this is why politicians and the media are so terrified of offending feminists and women's groups. 

These are mostly made up of a particularly revolting and hostile bunch of women who are quite prepared to use the most odious of tactics in order to keep alive and further their hatred of all things male.

Here is what Erin Pizzey - the very founder of the Refuge Centres for Battered Women - has to say. All through my career, as a journalist, a writer and a social reformer, I have been hounded and bullied by feminist women and their coat-trailing 'new men.'

And this is what recently happened to Professor Christina Hoff Sommers ...

From: Christina Sommers

I enclose a statement I wrote about the event.

Statement by Christina Hoff Sommers regarding participation in a Health and Human Services program "Boy Talk : A Dialogue About the Health and Well Being of Boys in America"

On November 1, 2001 I served as an invited panelist at a program sponsored by the Center for Substance Abuse Prevention (CSAP) at Heath and Human Services (HHS). The program was entitled "Boy Talk: A Dialogue About the Heath and Well Being of Boys in America." Before I describe the ugly treatment to which I was subjected, I shall describe my background.

I am a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. I have written a well-received book on boys (The War Against Boys Simon & Schuster, 2000). The book was excerpted for a cover story in The Atlantic Monthly and was selected as a "notable book of the year" by The New York Times. So, now I am frequently invited to speak about boys at conferences around the country. In the past year, I have delivered a keynote address at International Coalition of Boys Schools, read a paper at a scholarly conference on boys at Morehouse College, and addressed audiences at dozens of schools and colleges. Without exception, audiences and panels have hitherto been courteous and civil. The HHS panel on November 1st was very much the exception. Here is what happened.

My panel "What is Being Done for Boys?" convened at 1:30. The first speaker was Joe Ereneta, a young man from San Francisco who works for Lyric, a group that offers help to gay and lesbian youths, bisexual and transgendered youth. He was followed by Marvin Eisner from the Urban Institute who gave a talk that was well-structured and contained information critical to any successful program for boys. Eisner emphasized the importance of evidence-based programs and the necessity of rigorous follow-up evaluation. The focus on evidence and outcomes seemed to exasperate some members of the HHS staff. In the middle of his talk, he was interrupted by an HHS official, Ms. Luisa Pollard, who criticized him for being off the point. Her objection was lengthy and somewhat incoherent. Mr. Eisner was flustered and never able to finish.

Now it was my turn. I cited research showing that boys were at greater risk than girls for academic failure and for drug and alcohol disabilities. But I cautioned HHS to be careful in its remedies. There is no good evidence that gender-specific drug and alcohol programs are better than gender-neutral programs. HHS has invested millions of dollars in a highly dubious program called "Girl Power!" The new program for boys ( "Boy Talk") looks very much like Girl Power!. It was my intention to suggest that the HHS officials first do some careful studies of Girl Power! before replicating it for boys. But before I could explain these concerns, I was cut off by Ms. Linda Bass, another HHS official. (She is Acting Branch Chief in the Public Education Branch of the Center for Substance Abuse and Prevention. ) She called out from her chair that I had not been invited there to talk about "Girl Power!" She instructed me to move on and to leave that subject alone. I politely explained to her and the audience that if HHS was launching a program for boys modeled on "Girl Power!" it was essential that the Girl Power! be evaluated for effectiveness. A furious Ms. Bass insisted again that I drop the subject. I was ordered not to talk about Girl Power! I was startled by her behavior and her efforts to muzzle me. It soon proved impossible to finish the comments I had been invited to present.

Ms. Bass and her associate Mr. Kevin Teal (a member of the CSAP "Communication team" at HHS ) immediately called for a break. They rushed out of the room and caucused intensely for 15 minutes. I was then informed that my question and answer period was canceled. We would proceed to a "facilitated discussion" led by Mr. Teal. I asked Mr. Teal if we could take a vote to see if the audience would allow me to have a question and answer period. He did not think that was a good idea. "You can leave," said the less polite Ms. Bass.

But, I decided not to leave.This was, after all, a government-sponsored conference. I was an invited participant, author of a book on boys. All the audience members were there to share their expertise and views with HHS officials to help them with the "Boy Talk" campaign.

Mr. Teal soon lost control of the "facilitated discussion." It disintegrated into an all-out attack on social science. Several audience members attacked me and Marvin Eisen for paying so much attention to data. "You can prove anything with statistics," said one participant. Many in the room roared with approval for this insight.

I am a philosophy professor and I rarely walk away from an argument. I was troubled by the rampant ant-intellectualism in the room and I said so. I made some attempts to defend scientific methodology. If you want to help at-risk children, you need to be sure that the methods you are using are effective. This invited more opprobrium, more denunciations. Professor Jay Wade of the Department of Psychology at Fordham University delighted many in the audience when he said Shut the F*** up bitch." Miss Bass and Mr. Teal, who were officially in charge of the proceedings, did and said nothing to protect a speaker they had invited from this kind of abusive attack.

One member of the audience, Greg Orfalea , a public affairs specialist at HHS, had finally had had enough. He stood up and told the enraged professor from New York that it was inappropriate to speak to anyone in that manner. He also chastised his colleagues at CSAP for treating a guest so rudely.

I decided it was time to leave. Civil discussion was impossible. But, before I left, I stopped at the desk in the back of the room where a woman was taping the event. I requested that she send me a copy of the tape. Ms. Bass rushed over and told me that I could not have a copy and that CSAP had not decided how they were going to use it. (I now have a copy and a written transcript)

Something is seriously wrong at in the CSAP division at Heath and Human Services. I hope that someone in a position of responsibility will demand to a copy of the tape, listen to it and do something to restore some badly needed professionalism and common courtesy. No government official should be allowed to behave the way these HHS officials behaved to me.

Christina

(Also see Silencing Sommers Stanley Kurtz - 5 min)

Also see Slap That Face - Beatrix Campbell to see how just one feminist destroys the lives of so many people - in my view.

Angry Wimmin O’Beirne has hit a nerve, and now these same angry women are trying to sink the book. Their tactic is an apparent smear campaign on Amazon.com. Charlotte Hays

Attacking The Researchers When we reported the results of the Second National Family Violence Survey the personal attacks continued and the professional critiques simply ignored methodological revisions to the measurement instrument. This round of personal attacks was much more insidious—in particular, it was alleged that Murray had abused his wife. This is a rather typical critique in the field of family violence—men whose research results are contrary to political correctness are labeled ”perps.”

Hello:

I'd like to add my comments to the discussion of lesbian violence, DV in general as well as respond to feedback on the Susan Thread.....

When my own research on female perpetrated violence first came out (1992), the feminists jumped all over me with criticisms. They took offence at my reporting that there are just as many women who use physically abusive tactics as they are men. Because I was also a woman, they had a particularly difficult time dealing with me and my findings. They saw me as a defender of men and as a traitor to women. When they tried to argue that men are "inherently" violent and that any discussion of women's violence was another attempt by the "male proletariat" to further subjugate women, I countered with the research on lesbian abuse which reports that rates of reported abuse in this population are equivalent to those found among heterosexual couples.

The feminists then used a different line of defence by arguing that women's abuse toward men was purely in self defence. That too became problematic when I reported my research finding that more than 85% of women who had used abusive tactics reported that it was for reasons other than self defence.

Back in 1990's, the feminist organizations were an extremely powerful lobby. Through their efforts they shaped public perception and were successful in securing considerable funding to advance their positions and run women's shelters throughout the U.S. and Canada. However, investigations showed that the research put out by feminist led groups was methodologically unsound and/or biased and that shelters were either inflating their occupancy rates and/or they were filling their beds with women who were not abuse victims, but were new immigrants/refugees in need of housing.