If Republicans
are looking for a way to return
to their principles of limited government
and reduced federal spending, a
good place to start would be rejection
of the coming reauthorization of
the Violence Against Women Act sponsored
by Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del. It's a
mystery why Republicans continue
to put a billion dollars a year
of taxpayers' money into the hands
of radical feminists who use it
to preach their anti-marriage and
anti-male ideology, promote divorce,
corrupt the family court system,
and engage in liberal political
advocacy.
Accountability
is supposed to be the watchword
of the Bush administration, but
there's been no accountability or
oversight for the act's spending
of many billions of dollars. There
is no evidence that the Violence
Against Women Act has benefited
anyone except the radical feminists
on its payroll.
The Senate Judiciary
Committee, which is gearing up for
a battle royal over the Supreme
Court vacancy, has scheduled a hearing
on the act for mid-July. It's apparently
designed as a be-nice-to-Biden-before-the
court-fight event, since no critic
has been invited to speak.
Let's have a reality
check. The Violence Against Women
Act's gender-specific title is pejorative:
it's based on the false, unscientific,
unjust and blatantly offensive premise
that men are innately violent and
abusive toward women, making all
women victims of men.
The president
of Harvard University was publicly
pilloried for months earlier this
year for implying innate differences
between men and women. But the act
is spending a billion dollars a
year to inculcate that very notion
in the minds of men and women who
are having marital difficulties,
as well as police, prosecutors,
psychologists and family court judges.
Feminists staged
tantrums at the suggestion of innate
math-aptitude differences between
men and women, but the whole premise
of the Violence Against Women Act
is that men have an innate propensity
to violence against women. It's
not because some are bad individuals
or drunks or psychologically troubled,
but because men want to keep women
subservient in an oppressive patriarchal
society.
The Violence Against
Women Act was passed using such
bogus statistics as "a woman
is beaten every 15 seconds"
and "80 percent of fathers
who seek custody of their children
fit the profile of a batterer."
Remember the Super Bowl hoax, the
ridiculous claim that "the
biggest day of the year for violence
against women" is Super Bowl
Sunday? It's an assertion conclusively
refuted by Dr. Christina Hoff Sommers'
research.
The Violence Against
Women Act comes out of Andrea Dworkin's
tirades of hate such as, "Under
patriarchy, every woman's son is
her betrayer and also the inevitable
rapist or exploiter of another woman."
The act comes out of Gloria Steinem's
nonsense, such as "the patriarchy
requires violence or the subliminal
threat of violence in order to maintain
itself."
Here is some mischief
in act-funded activities that should
be investigated in the coming Senate
Judiciary Committee hearing.
The act refuses
to provide any help whatsoever for
male victims of domestic violence.
Let's hear from professor Martin
Fiebert of California State University
at Long Beach who compiled a bibliography
of 170 scholarly investigations,
134 empirical studies and 36 analyses,
which demonstrate that women are
almost as physically abusive toward
their partners as men.
The act encourages
women to make false allegations,
and then petition for full child
custody and a denial of all fathers'
rights to see their own children.
The act promotes
the unrestrained use of restraining
orders, which family courts issue
on the woman's say-so. This powerful
weapon (according to the Illinois
Bar Journal) is "part of the
gamesmanship of divorce" and
virtually guarantees that fathers
are expelled from the lives of their
own children.
A woman seeking
help from an act-funded center is
not offered any options except to
leave her husband, divorce him,
accuse him of being a criminal and
have her sons targeted as suspects
in future crimes. The Violence Against
Women Act ideology rejects joint
counseling, reconciliation and saving
marriages.
The act denies
that alcohol and illegal drugs are
a cause of domestic violence, a
peculiar assumption contrary to
all human experience. In fact, most
domestic violence incidents involve
those components.
The act uses a
definition of domestic violence
that blurs the difference between
violent action and run-of-the-mill
marital tiffs and arguments. Definitions
of abuse can even include minor
insults and refusing to help with
child care or housework.
The act funds
the re-education of judges and all
law enforcement personnel to teach
them feminist stereotypes about
male abusers and female victims,
how to game the system to empower
women, and how to ride roughshod
over the constitutional rights of
men.
The act forces
Soviet-style psychological re-education
on men. The accused men are not
given treatment for real problems,
but are assigned to classes where
feminists teach shame and guilt
because of a vast male conspiracy
to subjugate women.
The Violence Against
Women Act-funded centers engage
in political advocacy for feminist
legislation such as the "must-arrest"
laws even if there is no sign of
violence and even if the woman doesn't
want the man arrested, and political
advocacy against non-feminist legislation
such as shared parental rights.
It's time to stop
the act from spending any more taxpayers'
money to promote family dissolution
and fatherless children. |