|
Angry Harry
Blog
Page3
Guide To The Truth About Feminism
Recent comments from some emails - mostly from
men - which can be viewed in full
here. ...
"I cannot thank you enough."
"I stumbled upon your web site yesterday. I read as much as I could in 24 hours of your pages."
"I want to offer you my sincere thanks."
"I would just like to say that you are indeed a hero. "
"Your articles and site in general have changed my life."
"I have been reading your articles for hours ..."
"Firstly let me congratulate you on a truly wonderful site."
"I must say there aren't many sites that I regularly visit but yours certainly will be one of
them, ..."
"It is terrific to happen upon your website."
"I just wanted to say thank you for making your brilliant website."
"I think I'm in love!" (from a woman)
"I love you. That is all. I love you!!!!" (from a man!)
"Your site is brilliant. It gives me hours of entertainment."
"You are worth your weight in gold."
"Love your site, I visit it on a regular basis for relief, inspiration and for the sake of my own
sanity in a world gone mad."
"I ventured onto your site ... it's
ABSOLUTELY BRILLIANT, and has kept me enthralled for hours!"
"I love the site, and agree with about 98% of what you post."
"I have been reading your site for a while now – and it is the best thing ever."
"you are doing a fabulous job in exposing the lies that silly sods like me have swallowed for
years."
"Every single day I am sending thousands of youngsters to your site."
"I have to say it old man, but you are brilliant."
What a Piece of Sh*t is Man
The Trojan Horses Of Feminism
Fools
And Feminists
Women -
Weak and Pathetic?
Were Women Oppressed in the West?
The
NSPCC Needs To Be Stopped
Rape Baloney
Harriet
Harman Sucks
Are you an
intelligent person who believes that feminism is about 'equality'? If so, then
please just take five minutes of your time to read the piece Equality Between Men and Women Is Not Achievable
and you will see that feminism is nothing of the sort. Far from it. It is one of
the most malicious and destructive ideologies imaginable. Apply your
intelligence for just five minutes, and you will surely see the truth about feminism
for yourself.
| |
|
10/09/03
Teenagers Rebel
James Le Fanu
Daily
Telegraph
It doesn't mean they were sexually abused.
The child psychiatrist Dr John Eastgate may
have been cleared of professional misconduct by the GMC, but the
account of how a troubled teenager came to believe she had been sexually abused,
first by an eminent doctor and then by three others - including her father -
sent shivers down the spine.
The significance of the GMC's ruling extends
far beyond its likely effect on Dr Eastgate's future as a psychiatrist - and
ends up touching everybody's lives. During the proceedings, professorial
colleagues from Great Ormond Street Hospital and the Tavistock Clinic argued
that his conduct fell within the boundaries of legitimate clinical practice.
And if that is what they believe, it raises
disturbing questions about mainstream NHS psychiatric practice. These issues
have so far been concealed from public view and so require some clarification.
The worst parental nightmare must be that a
much loved and loving child should, on reaching adolescence, suddenly go off the
rails. It can, as many parents know only too well, happen to anyone. These can
be difficult times when the instinctive desire to rebel against parental
authority produces an evasive and hostile pattern of behaviour that, in
technical jargon, is known as the "adolescent adjustment reaction".
Most parents, with patience and perseverance,
somehow manage to ride it out in the hope that, sooner or later, their child's
behaviour will improve. But when such problems are compounded by others - eating
disorders, drug abuse or self-harm, there is little alternative than to seek
professional psychiatric help.
There is initially a honeymoon period, with
the reassurance of feeling that one's child is in safe hands and receiving
appropriate treatment. But the hoped-for improvement does not materialise. The
families may learn instead that their daughter has been sexually abused and that
this serious allegation has already been acted on without their knowledge. Worse
still, they find the focus of accusation shifting to themselves. Their ordeal
has begun.
That, in brief outline, was the sequence of
events immediately following Miss A's admission to Dr Eastgate's unit. Over the
following months, her mental and physical condition continued to deteriorate.
Her father, whom she had wildly accused of sexual abuse, along with two others,
was served with a court order preventing any contact with his daughter.
Repeated attempts at obtaining a second
opinion or transfer to another unit were denied. Miss A was eventually taken
into foster care, after which she made a rapid recovery before finally being
reunited with her family after three-and-a-half years, acknowledging that all
her allegations had been unfounded.
The GMC's disciplinary committee then found
that Dr Eastgate's conduct in the interview with Miss A "was inappropriate
and unprofessional because it was likely immediately to strengthen her
impression that she might have been improperly touched at medical
examination". The judgment, furthermore, brought to public attention just
how common the subsequent pattern of events turned out to be.
Late last year, forensic examiner and
consultant gynaecologist Mary Pillai, writing in the journal Medicine, Science
and Law, reported no fewer than 17 similar cases from adolescents' psychiatric
units across the country. In every instance she gives, there was no
corroborative evidence of the child's allegations, and, while "a robust
alternative explanation" was available, it was not pursued.
"The ramifications were widespread harm
to all involved," she concludes, "but the falsely believed teenagers
suffered the most, with a dramatic deterioration in their mental condition. The
cases with the worst prognosis were those where all contact with the family had
been severed."
The notion that psychiatrists can view with
equanimity this chilling pattern of events, seeing it as part of the therapeutic
process, seems too incredible to be true. But, as psychiatrist Janet Bokes of St
George's Hospital in London points out, it is an almost inevitable consequence
of a very influential "belief system" that has come to permeate
psychiatric thinking.
The first priority in psychiatry - as in
medicine generally - is to try to define what might be the cause of the child's
problem if there is to be any hope of treating it effectively. This is not easy,
as many factors may be involved, not only family tensions and surging hormones,
but also depression, hypomania or some other form of mental illness. Not
surprisingly, the process of sorting it out can be complex, requiring
considerable experience in clinical judgment.
But then, about 15 years ago, some
psychiatrists started to claim that the fundamental cause of teenagers'
psychiatric problems was actually much more straightforward than had previously
been supposed - it had just been ignored or overlooked. They had been sexually
abused.
They may have been reluctant to disclose this
or may even have forgotten about it altogether, but whatever the problem -
perhaps an eating disorder such as anorexia or repeated attempts at self-harm -
the chances were that sexual abuse lay at the heart of it.
And if that was the case, then clearly every
attempt had to be made to encourage the patient to disclose the identity of the
abuser. Only then, as Dr Bokes describes, do the protagonists of this false
"belief system" maintain that it becomes possible to "free the
patient from the pathologising effect of their past, so that they can lose their
symptoms and move forward".
But that, as has been noted, is precisely what
may not happen. The teenager's mental condition can deteriorate and, in the
process, the child can be estranged from the only disinterested source of
support in her distress - her family. This process is further compounded by the
adversarial legal proceedings and the police investigations of the allegations
which so undermine the parents' morale that they, too, become seriously mentally
distressed.
The person who emerges with most credit from
this saga is Miss A's father, a doughty opponent who, at considerable personal
and financial cost to himself, overcame the many obstacles placed in his path,
before finally bringing Dr Eastgate to the GMC's council chamber. It must be
hoped that this case might inspire the medical profession to bring the litany of
false belief cases to a belated end.
|
| |
The so-called 'oppression' of
women ...




click a picture
Western men die some five years earlier than
women. They suffer more from nearly every medical disease and ailment that there is.
And yet, far more money is spent by governments on women's health than on men's
health. Men are also nowadays educationally disadvantaged significantly compared to
women; with the curriculum, the teaching methods and the resources being
designed to cater far more for women and girls than for men and boys. Men make up 80% of the homeless. There are more of them in
social service care-homes as
boys. They are many times more likely to be wrongfully arrested, wrongfully imprisoned, mugged, assaulted or murdered. They are 5 times more likely to lose their
children when families break down, 4 times more likely to lose their homes, 4 times more likely to commit suicide,
20 times more likely to be killed or injured at work, 20 times more likely to be
imprisoned, and, probably, more than 100 times more likely to be demeaned, denigrated and ridiculed by the
mainstream media. Men also pay much more in taxes than women but receive far
less in benefits from the government.
In other words, when compared to women, men are
significantly disadvantaged when it comes to their health, their lifespans, their homes, their
children, their education, their families, the tax burden, the law, the benefit
system, and even when it comes to their
own personal
safety.
They are nowadays also being heavily discriminated against in the work
place.
How is it possible, therefore, that women are being 'oppressed' more than men?
In what areas?
Where?
|