MANifesto: An electronic newsletter of news and opinion on gender 
issues.  February, 1996.

INDEX:
NEWS AND OPINION
I.  IT TAKES A PILLAGE
II.  KILLED BY A FALSE RAPE CHARGE
III.  SEPARATE AND UNEQUAL JUSTICE
IV.  JUNIOR DISCRIMINATION
V.  THE GOVERNOR OF ILLINOIS IS MALE
VI. WOMEN'S STUDIES: YOUR MONEY AT WORK
     JUST PLAIN OPINION
VII. WHAT FEMINISTS SAY
VIII. THE "MYTH" OF HYSTERIA?
IX. FROM CHAUVINISM TO PATRIARCHY
=================================

I. IT TAKES A PILLAGE
	Maybe you don't want to buy Hillary Rodham Clinton's new  book. But 
you're paying for it anyway.
	On her book tour to promote "It Takes A Village," Hillary is  flying 
on Air Force planes that cost more than $2,600 an *hour* to  operate. And 
she's going to twelve cities.
	HRC (Her Royal Clintonness) will reimburse taxpayers for what  a 
regular air ticket would cost. That will cover only a small  fraction of the 
cost of carting her around. You, the taxpayer will  pick up the rest.
	Hope you enjoy the book.

===============================
II. KILLED BY A FALSE RAPE CHARGE
	Eddie Polec was 16.  He was an altar boy at Philadelphia's St. 
Cecilias's Catholic Church.  He was beaten to death on the steps of that 
church in November 1994 because someone made a false rape accusation against 
him.
	Polec was attacked by several teen boys enraged when they were told 
Polec had raped one of their friends.  As they beat Polec to death, several 
girls stood around laughing, the Associated Press reported.
	Four teen boys were convicted in February 1996 of the attack.  
However, no charges have ever been filed against the girl who made the fatal 
accusation.  "Incitement to riot" charges might have been appropriate -- if 
the incident had been fomented by a male.  However, in the current climate 
of rape hysteria, even false accusations that result in death go unpunished.
	Feminists ask, "Why would she lie?"
	Answer: Because she gets away with murder.

===============================
III.  SEPARATE AND UNEQUAL JUSTICE
	Here's another example of separate and unequal justice. In  this case 
a man and woman both abandoned their unruly son in Cape  May, New Jersey, 
and moved to California. Authorities tracked them  down and charged them 
with abandonment. One parent got nine months  in jail. The other got six 
months. Guess who got the longer  sentence.
	Now how did you know it was the man? You've heard this story  before, 
right?
	But here are some other interesting facts about the case.  After a 
history of disruptive behavior, the boy had become enraged  to learn that 
the father was not his biological father. The boy,  six-feet tall and more 
than 200 pounds, then threatened to blow his  father's head off with a gun.
	Now picture this situation turned around. Suppose the boy  wasn't the 
woman's real son, and suppose he threatened to kill her.  If that was the 
case, I doubt she would have gotten any sentence at  all. (Heck, she might 
have been able to shoot him and claim a  battered woman defense.) Certainly 
she wouldn't have gotten a  *longer* sentence than her husband for 
committing the same offense.
	Moral of the story: Men's responsibilities are greater. Women  who 
fail at the same responsibilities or commit the same offenses  don't merit 
the same punishment.

==============================
IV. JUNIOR DISCRIMINATION
	Clark Clementsen of San Francisco has done hours of charitable work, 
including giving free makeovers to battered women and helping abused 
children.  He would like to join a charitable organization in his area to 
continue his activism.  But the group won't even mail him an application 
form.
	The group is the Junior League, and it's a women's group.  Their 
attitude: there are other groups he can join: why does he have to join our 
group?  "Women need an organization where they can develop leadership 
skills," says one of the pro-discrimination member of the San Jose chapter.
	(If that's so, then perhaps the Junior League also believes young men 
need all-male military academies where they can develop leadership skills.)
	(Source: USA Today, February 19, 1996, page 2A.)

==============================
V. THE GOVERNOR OF ILLINOIS IS MALE
	You hear feminists talk about how women are disadvantage  because men 
hold a disproportionate amount of power. You hear them  rattle off the 
statistics: men make up blah-blah percent of the  corporate boards, hold 
yada-yada percent of public office, etc. The  insinuation is that because a 
man holds the office, it must be to  the disadvantage of women (or at least 
feminists).
	But consider the governor of Illinois, Jim Edgar. He's a white  male 
Republican. Must be a patriarchal oppressor, right?
	In a way, yes. He is very patriarchal in his outlook, in that  he 
believes that children belong with women and that women's lives  must be 
protected.
	While in office, Edgar has received requests for clemency from  six 
men on death row. He has turned down every one. But Edgar  recently gave 
clemency to a woman on death row. The woman had not  even asked for it.
	In explaining his decision, he said gender was not a factor.  But he 
said that in this sort of decision, he'd have to look himself  in the mirror 
in the morning. Apparently that would be very hard for  him if he sent a 
woman to her death. No mirror problems when he  sends a man to his death, 
though.
	One of the men he sent to death had a record remarkably  similar to 
that of the woman he spared. Both had killed two people.  They both killed a 
child, went to prison for it, got out and killed  again. In fact, the woman
killed within four months of getting out.
	But the man got execution, the woman got victimhood status and  a 
reprieve.  The man had been severely abused by his stepmother while a child. 
 It didn't gain him clemency.
	Consider also that Gov. Edgar is extremely anti-father. He has  sided 
against the real father in every disputed custody case that  has occurred in 
Illinois. Most notably in one famous case, Gov.  Edgar was outraged that 
the father of Baby Richard got custody of  his own child!
	Contrary to feminist rhetoric, having a man in a position of  power is 
not always to the advantage of men.

=====================================
VI. WOMEN'S STUDIES: YOUR MONEY AT WORK
	Tim Egan, a reporter for The New York Times in Seattle,  reported in 
1988 about a business major named Pete Schaub at the  University of 
Washington who enrolled in a course called  "Introduction to Women's 
Studies" taught by Donna Langston and  Dana-Michele Brown. On the first day 
of class, he and the class were  told that traditional American families are 
dysfunctional. Students  who said *their* families were quite functional 
were shouted down by  the teaching assistants with cries, in unison, of 
"Denial! Denial!"  A few days later. Prof. Langston brought guest speakers 
in to talk  about masturbation. "They said you don't need a man," Schaub 
told  Egan. "They proceeded to show how to masturbate with a feather  
duster, and they had dildos right there." When Prof. Brown said  statistics 
showed lesbians could raise children better than married  couples, Schaub 
went up after class and quietly asked for her  source. Prof. Brown dismissed 
him and his question. "Why are you  challenging me?" she said. "Get away 
from me. Just leave me alone."  A member of the class called Schaub "a 
chauvinist goddamn bastard."  The next day, his professor had two campus 
police officers there to  enforce her order banning Schaub from her class. 
Schaub protested  the ban. Weeks later, the administration said he could go 
back to class. But Associate Dean James Nason advised him to drop the  
course.
	I haven't seen open public criticism of this trend outside academe.
	Gays and lesbians have pre-empted criticism from outside  academe 
(principally from the media, including the world of book  publishing) 
because they've been able to define any opposition as a  disease called 
"homophobia."
	-- From "Homosexuality, A Freedom Too Far," Charles W.  
Socarides, M.D., Adam Margrave Books, Phoenix, Ariz., page 249.
=====================================
COMMENTARY:

VII. WHAT FEMINISTS SAY:
	If a man sleeps with a woman and has second thoughts about it  later 
on, they call it "fear of commitment."
   If a woman sleeps with a man and has second thoughts about it  later on, 
they call it "date rape."
   
   If a man gets drunk and sleeps with a woman, they hold him  responsible 
for his actions.
   If a woman gets drunk and sleeps with a man, they hold him  responsible 
for her actions.
   
   When men judge women based on their looks, they call it  "lookism," 
"sexism" and "oppression."
   When women judge men based on their looks and their salaries, they call 
it "dating."
   
   When a man says "You have to sleep with me to be an employee,"  they call 
it sexual harassment.
   When a lesbian says "You have to sleep with me to be a  feminist,"  they 
call it "body de-colonization" and "political lesbianism."
   
   When a man says "some feminists hate men," he is engaging in  stereotypes 
and bashing.
   When a feminist says "all men are potential rapists," she is  raising 
issues.
   
   When feminists lie about rape, sexual harassment, domestic  violence, 
anorexia and bulimia, they are nonetheless educating the  public about 
legitimate issues.
   When you point out that feminists lie about rape, sexual  harassment, 
domestic violence, anorexia and bulimia, you are guilty  of backlash.
   
   When you ask why physical standards should be lowered so women  can join 
the military, they say that it ensures equality.
   When you ask why only men are forced to register with the selective 
service and only men can be forced into combat against their will, they'll 
say that you are the one who starts all the  wars.
   
   When you say that men should not be discriminated against, they  will 
tell you that you hold all the power and privileges.
   When you say that you don't feel that way, they will point out  rich men 
you don't even know.
   When you say that women in your work place have equal pay and  equal 
numbers and no longer deserve special breaks and special 
promotions, they will cite some statistics from someplace else.
    
   If you say you are afraid of a violent woman, they will laugh at  you and 
send you away without help.
   If you protect yourself from a violent woman, they will say that  
violence against women is always wrong, no matter what.
  
   If a woman accuses a Republican nominee of sexual harassment,  they say 
"Why would she lie?"
   If several women accuse a Democratic president of sexual  harassment, 
they say "She probably lied."
   
   If they want access to a predominantly male organization, club,  or 
school, they say that "diversity" is good.
   If they want to keep men out of a predominantly female  organization, 
club, or school, they say segregation is good.
   
   When a woman accuses a man of child abuse during a divorce or  custody 
battle, they say "Believe the children."
   When the children themselves say they weren't abused, they don't believe 
the children.
   
   When a woman cannot support her children, they say we should  raise taxes 
on everyone to set up more programs to help her.
   When a man cannot support his children, they says "Revoke the  deadbeat's 
license and throw him in jail."
   
   When a man denies his children support money, they say he should  be 
punished.
   When a woman denies her children a relationship with a warm and  loving 
father, by thwarting his visitation rights, they say it's a  
"non-traditional family."
   
   When an unwed father wants custody of his child, they say "Think  of the 
best interests of the children."
   When a mother wants custody of her child, they say "Don't punish  a woman 
just because she works."

	If a man starts a statement with "All women are ..." he is  using a 
stereotype.
	If a feminist starts a statement with "All men are ..." she is  using 
a metaphor.

================================
VIII. THE "MYTH" OF HYSTERIA?
PART ONE: SATANIC PANIC: In the early 1980s, bizarre accusations by  a 
handful of women spurred a nationwide panic that day-care centers  were 
infiltrated by child molesters who practiced "ritual abuse" and  worshiped 
the devil.  The McMartin Preschool case was launched by a  woman later 
diagnosed as paranoid schizophrenic.  A similar panic  was launched in Kern 
County, California, by a woman already  diagnosed as delusional.
	In saner times, their accusations might have been debunked.   But they 
fell on fertile ground among social workers of the day.   Many of these 
social workers had feminist sympathies and had  investigated incest and rape 
cases.  Documentation and their own  writings show that ritual abuse 
believers think that virtually any  accusation must be true.  They also 
believe any denial -- including  children themselves denying they were 
molested -- is a sign of being  "in denial."
	The social workers perfected techniques for getting children  to agree 
to accusations made by delusional adults.  Videotapes of  their interviews 
with children show that they endlessly badgered,  bullied and ridiculed the 
children until the kids began parroting  whatever charges the social workers 
wanted them to make.  These  videos show how flawed and leading the 
interviews are, and have  become the best evidence used by the *defense.*
	But before it was learned just how coercive and leading these  
techniques were, a nationwide panic sprang up.  Parents joined in,  seeing 
ordinary things such as diaper rash and bed-wetting to be  signs of "ritual 
abuse." Thousands of innocent people have been  accused and dragged through 
humiliating trials.  Many innocent  people are serving life sentences.  And 
"ritual abuse"  investigations are enthusiastically supported by many 
leading  feminists, including Gloria Steinem.
	One interesting fact to note.  Among parents stampeded into  seeing 
signs of ritual abuse, women are the overwhelming majority.  
(Source: "Satan's Silence," by Debbie Nathan and Michael Snedeker.)
	PART TWO: WITCH HUNT: In Salem, Massachusetts, 20 men and  women were 
executed during a witchcraft panic sparked by the bizarre  accusations of 
three young females.
	PART THREE: FALSE MEMORY SYNDROME: Paralleling the rise of the  
Satanic Panic is the popularity of a questionable therapy called  "Recovered 
Memory Therapy." Its practitioners claim that severe  abuse is forgotten 
almost as soon as it occurs.  They say that girls  can be raped every week, 
from infancy to young adulthood, and not  even realize it.  To "recover" 
memories of abuse, they subject their  patients to mind-altering drugs, 
hypnosis, cult-like isolation from  society, searches for "body memories" 
and other questionable and  dangerous techniques.  Scientific tests show 
these techniques can  create false memories.  In fact, Recovered Memory 
techniques are  even used by some people to recover "memories" of previous 
lives or  being abducted by flying saucers.  However, many therapists 
convince  their patients that they have been raped and abused by their  
parents.  This leads to thousands of false charges that have sent  innocent 
people to prison, destroyed families, and driven some  patients and accused 
parents to suicide.  Despite its questionable  nature and destructive 
outcome, recovered memory therapy is  enthusiastically supported by many 
leading feminists, including  Gloria Steinem.
	And one interesting fact to note.  Some men recover false  memories.  
But the overwhelming majority of patients recovering  false memories are 
women.  (Source: "Making Monsters" by Richard  Ofshe and Ethan Watters, and 
"The Myth of Repressed Memory" by  Elizabeth Loftus and Katherine Ketcham.)
	PART FOUR: MULTIPLE PERSONALITY DISORDER: The 1980s also saw an 
explosion in the diagnosis of "multiple personalities." The usual  pattern 
is that a doctor who believes in multiple personalities will  tell a 
confused and vulnerable patient that she has other  personalities she isn't 
aware of.  The patient is told she must let  these "alters" out or she will 
never get well.  Mind-numbing drugs  and coercive therapies are used on 
those who don't comply.  And  therapists often use recovered memory therapy 
to uncover "memories"  of other personalities.  The diagnosis is coming 
under increasing  skepticism in the psychiatric community, especially 
because so many  "alters" develop memories of satanic cults and past lives.
	One interesting fact to note: while some men are diagnosed as  
multiple personalities, the overwhelming majority of those who act  out 
multiple personalities are women. (Source: "Making Monsters" by  Richard 
Ofshe and Ethan Watters.)
	PART FIVE: MUNCHAUSEN'S SYNDROME: In this bizarre  psychological 
malady, patients will deliberately pretend to suffer  serious injury or 
trauma in order to gain attention from friends,  strangers, doctors and 
others.  Some have shaved their heads and  gone on starvation diets to mimic 
the effects of cancer.  Some  undergo surgeries they don't need. Others will 
tell people shocking  tales of personal tragedy and loss that turn out to be 
untrue.  The  dupe neighbors and social workers into lavishing them with 
comfort  and sympathy.
	One interesting fact to note: the overwhelming majority of  patients 
with Munchausen's Syndrome are women.  (Source: Patient or  Pretender? by 
Marc D.  Feldman, M.D., and Charles V. Ford, M.D.)
	PART SIX: MUNCHAUSEN'S SYNDROME BY PROXY: In a related  condition, 
patients use someone else as the victim in order to  attract sympathy for 
themselves.  This often involves a mother who  might give a child low doses 
of poison in order to rush the child to  the hospital and be seen and 
admired as a caring mother.  Others  will partially smother their babies in 
order to revive them.  Before  they are found out, these women often are 
admired as strong,  courageous women endlessly devoted to a sick child.  
They thrive on  this image and torture the child repeatedly in order to bask 
in the acclaim.
	One interesting fact to note: the overwhelming majority of  patients 
with Munchausen's Syndrome by Proxy are women.  (Source:  Patient or 
Pretender? by Marc D.  Feldman, M.D., and Charles V.  Ford, M.D.)
	DATING THE RAPIST: The Date Rape crusade has led to an  interesting 
phenomenon.  Some women are coming to believe that they  were "raped" by men 
they later willingly dated again.  They come to  believe, after the fact, 
that sexual encounters they willingly and  consciously agreed to were really 
"rape."
	One interesting fact to note: virtually all of the people who  can be 
convinced that a consensual sexual encounter was "rape" are  women.
	EPILOGUE: In Women's Studies courses across the nation,  professors 
are teaching that women have a special "women's way of  knowing."  This 
special way of knowing does not have to depend on  linear thinking, on 
proof, empirical research, evidence,  reproducible results, verification or 
documentation.  It doesn't  depend on anything except a woman believing that 
a certain thing is  so.  Each year, thousands of more Women's Studies 
graduates go out  into the word trained in the doctrine that reality is 
simply what a  woman thinks it is.
	Welcome to Salem.  The trials are about to begin.

===============================
IX.   FROM CHAUVINISM TO PATRIARCHY:
   In the old days, feminists used to accuse men of "male  chauvinism" and 
call them "male chauvinist pigs." Today the "in"  term is "patriarchy."
   Why the switch? One possible reason is that the accusation of  chauvinism 
can cut both ways. "Chauvinism" means a fanatical  devotion to a cause, 
nation, etc., or unreasoning devotion to one's  race, gender, etc., with
contempt for other races, genders, and so  on. Certainly many of today's 
feminists are chauvinistic about their  gender and display contempt for men. 
Feminists accusing men of  chauvinism was often a case of the pot calling 
the kettle black.    Accusing someone of chauvinism carries with it the 
implied  judgment that chauvinism is wrong. And if chauvinism is wrong,  
feminists would have to explain why they tolerate or engage in  feminist 
chauvinism.
   Switching to "patriarchy" gets around these problems.  "Patriarchy" is a 
gender-specific accusation.
   Moreover, "chauvinism" might be simply an individual trait. But  the 
accusation of "patriarchy" is broadly leveled against entire  societies or 
groups. It gives feminists a way to accuse every man in  any given culture 
of the "offense" of being part of the patriarchy.    It also gives feminist 
a way to blame men for the sins and  omissions of women. You can point out 
that female rulers like  Catherine the Great were as militarist, imperialist 
or bloodthirsty  as any male ruler. But feminist will reply that such women 
were  working within a "patriarchal" system. So even though they were  
absolute monarchs with the power of life and death over their  subjects, the 
tyranny committed by women is pinned on men.   (On the other hand, any 
historical woman who did something that  feminists admire is not considered 
part of any patriarchal system.  She is called a pioneer, an early feminist, 
etc.)
   Patriarchy can even be used to blame men for child abuse and  child 
murder committed by women. One feminist recently made this  claim when the 
subject of child abuse came up. She simply said that  abusive mothers were 
powerless women living in a patriarchal system.  (Never mind that, in 
relation to the children, the mothers were the  ones with all the power.)
    We know how childhood abuse can lead to later violence. Look at  how 
women treated children traditionally, and then ask yourself who  "starts all 
the wars."

=============================
MANifesto is a monthly newsletter containing news and opinion for  people 
interested in gender equality and gender stereotypes. If you  would like to 
have MANifesto e-mailed to you, send the message  "subscribe MANifesto" to 
[email protected]
=============================


Hosted by www.Geocities.ws

1