This was not Slate.com's finest hour. One thing this article could never be accused of is objective reporting.
On Nov. 5th, the very same day the Double X article appeared, Salon.com's Broadsheet published an article by Judy Berman entitled "'Men's rights' groups go mainstream" <http://www.mediaradar.org/alert20091123.php#sdendnote3sym> 3 that adds no new information, and simply seems to be an effort to repeat the Double X article to Salon's readers.
"More than a quarter-century ago, British feminist philosopher Janet Radcliffe Richards wrote, 'No feminist whose concern for women stems from a concern for justice in general can ever legitimately allow her only interest to be the advantage of women.' Joyce's article is a stark example of feminism as exclusive concern with women and their perceived advantage, rather than justice or truth."
In "Journalistic Misrepresentation at Slate's New Woman-Oriented Publication 'Double X'" <http://www.mediaradar.org/alert20091123.php#sdendnote5sym> 5, RADAR's Mark Rosenthal explained how the article had misrepresented his comments and also took issue with the article's characterization of Murray Straus as someone "who has written extensively on female violence," saying:
"The characterization of Straus as someone who has written extensively on female violence is like characterizing Susan B. Anthony as someone who wrote extensively on temperance - true but misleading because of what it leaves out. Straus has devoted his professional career to the study of all forms of family violence - parent-to-child, child-to-parent, sibling-to-sibling, as well as partner violence in all its configurations - male-to-female, female-to-male, and mutual. He has never focused exclusively on female violence."
"The articles discuss various aspects and actors in the [men's and fathers] movement, and also quote and misquote me. ... I specifically, repeatedly, and emphatically told Joyce that any linkage between the men's & fathers' movements' grievances and Sodini is not my view, but I guess she was determined to jam it in there anyway."
Mahatma Gandhi is reputed to have said: "First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win." The joint Slate/Salon attack pieces are a good indication that we're well past stage 1. Congratulation to all RADAR supporters and allies for getting us this far. Let's keep it up!
R.A.D.A.R. - Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting - is a non-profit, non-partisan organization of men and women working to improve the effectiveness of our nation's approach to solving domestic violence. http://www.mediaradar.org
A recent United Nations report advocates giving mandatory instruction in masturbation to children as young as 5. "Sexuality education is part of the duty of care of education and health authorities and institutions," according to the U.N.
Entitled "International Guidelines on Sexuality Education," the document is published by the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization, or UNESCO. The entire document is a manifesto for governments to assume control over the "sexual education" of children, to inculcate in them politically correct ideas about sex and sexual politics, and to undermine and marginalize their parents.
Stephen Baskerville, PhD Associate Professor of Government Patrick Henry College 1 Patrick Henry Circle Purcellville, Virginia 20132
Available from Cumberland House Publishing:
Taken Into Custody: The War Against Fathers, Marriage, and the Family STEPHEN BASKERVILLE, PhD
"This book is a tremendous and much-needed report on how family courts and government policies are harming children." -- Phyllis Schlafly, President, Eagle Forum
Order today at Amazon's special price of $16.47 (regular price $24.95). For more than 80 articles and studies in mainstream publications on the abuses of the divorce industry, see www.stephenbaskerville.net.
Dangerous Rise of Sexual Politics Islamic radicalism may be
creating a “clash of civilizations,” but sexual radicalism is undermining the
social foundation of all civilization.
By Stephen Baskerville, Ph.D.*
*Stephen Baskerville teaches
political science at Patrick Henry College. He is the author of Taken Into
Custody: The War Against Fathers, Marriage, and the Family (Cumberland
“All politics is on one level sexual politics.”
— George Gilder,
decades into the boldest social experiment ever undertaken in the Western
democracies, the full impact of what was once quaintly known as “women’s
liberation” is at last becoming clear. The political class of both the Left and
Right have colluded to limit the debate to a series of innocuous controversies:
job discrimination, equal pay, affirmative action. Only abortion has any depth,
and that debate has been mired in stalemate.
Meanwhile, beneath the political
radar screen, the real consequences are finally emerging: a massive
restructuring of the social order, demographic trends that threaten the very
survival of Western civilization, and perhaps least noticed, an exponential
growth in the size and power of the state — the state at its most bureaucratic
Feminism has now positioned itself as
the vanguard of the Left, shifting the political discourse from the economic and
racial to the social and increasingly the sexual. What was once a socialistic
assault on property and enterprise has become a social and sexual attack on the
family, marriage, and masculinity. This marks a truly new kind of politics, the
most personal and thus potentially the most total politics ever devised: the
politics of private life and sexual relations.
All the information in our messages is FREE for reuse as you
desire. Subscribe/unsubscribe info at
People & People of Faith,
This message is about goals and our
willingness to be clear about what we believe. As part of some FEEDBACK I got
a great thought worth re-using from Richard Heybroek (email@example.com):
".. without hope
there is no purpose, without the golden vision there is no sense of
Martin Luther King (MLK) day is tomorrow. Many of us remember
him and the first efforts to break segregation in the South. The
famous boycott of the Birmingham Bus system which had forced blacks to sit
in the back. Actually, they had to sit behind a certain row. Even if
the back of the bus was full and there weren't any whites -- they
still had to stand. http://www.AKidsRight.Org/civil_back.htm
don't know that the first goal of the group when negotiating with the white
City Fathers was this: Just allow the blacks to fill in from the back of the
bus and the whites to fill in from the front, so all seats get filled. To ask
for equal seating would have been "too radical", they needed to "take it
Thank goodness the City Father's rejected even that humble request
-- and the rest is history. WHAT ABOUT US? Here are a few thoughts you may
(or may not) agree with:
--- Alec Baldwin/ACFC President (Mike McCormick)
interviewed on CNN (Dec 2008) - http://www.ACFC.org/
I believe 50/50 custody should be the default position for men who WANT &
EARN 50/50 custody ... West VA has a very important law where custody is
allocated based on how the parenting duties were divided during the
marriage... I don't want anyone to automatically get custody, I want
QUALIFIED men who want it..." -- Baldwin
"... shared parenting is the
solution ... presumption in law that we aren't going to favor either
parent... [combative parents] they need communication skills training ..." --
"I believe that
the default position of every family court in this country should be
fifty-fifty physical custody of the couple's children. The only exceptions
should be those commonly held objections that include spousal and/or child
abuse, drug and/or alcohol abuse..., or a parent's inability to provide a
home for children for any number of economic or emotional
ultimately it is the very nature of parenthood to declare to the world: "Your
opinions about my children are of no consequence. You do not love my
children, and you are not responsible for them. If your opinions about what
is best for my children turn out to be wrong, it is my children and I who
must live with the consequences, not you.
I am not required to
conform to your opinions about what is best for my children, and I am not
answerable to you for how I raise them."'
A Proposed Foundation ( http://www.NationalPLC.Org/
) --------------------------------------------------- Take
a look at what we hope is a clear (and brief) definition of family rights. If
they 'sound like a good vision' to you please join a growing social network
of like-minded people working for reform, The National Parent's Leadership
Council (link above).
* BOTH biological parents have a right to know they
have a child.
* BOTH parents are presumed FIT & EQUAL (in terms of
both physical and * legal custody of their children). If anyone (a spouse,
relative, or * Child Protective "services") wishes to challenge that, you
have a * right to speedy trial, counsel, and the protection of a
criminal * jury and a unanimous verdict. The "state" needs to prove you were
a * demonstrated serious and intentional threat to your child's safety *
and acted with malintent.
* A child has a right to EQUAL contact with
BOTH parents. A child does * NOT have a right to pick a preferred parent. A
child does NOT have a * right to parents who always act in the child's best
How do you think it works in the real
world? -------------------------------------------- Think
about how you would reply to these? You have the opportunity to answer the
same questions (for Membership) at the NationalPLC.Org web site. I
welcome your comments on a BLOG setup to address these items: http://www.NationalPLC.Org/blogs/scenarios/
A male is involved in a short-term relationship with someone and they then
drift apart. She told him she was sterile. Should the male be notified if a
child is born?
2. A female is involved in a short-term relationship with
someone who is a doctor, their OB-GYN, and then drift apart still
good friends. During a later 'medical procedure' with this same doctor
he 'takes' an extra egg from her and uses it to implant his sterile
wife. Should she be notified if a child is born?
3. Parent parks car
to run into 7-11 to get groceries (less than 5 minutes), leave sleeping child
in locked car. Should they have to justify their actions in a child
protective services investigation?
4. One parent works a 50 hour week,
never goes to school events, lets TV take care of the kids, feeds them fast
food (objectively, a very POOR parent). The other parent is highly involved
with the kids, loves to spend time with them (objectively, a very GOOD
parent). Should we give MORE time to the good parent after a
5. When a high-conflict divorce occurs and both parents appear
fit with no allegations of abuse... A mediator in conjunction with
a custody evaluation with objective criteria should make the
final determination regarding a proper parenting schedule.
6. We have
a 16 year old child who is a junior in high school. Time has been EQUAL
between the parents, but the child does not like being with one of the
parents (who objectively does have poor parenting skills).
wants to spend much more time living with the good parent who objectively
appears to understand how to better deal with a teenager and they have close
bond. Should this be allowed?
7. Within an EQUAL parenting schedule, the
child eventually wants to get involved in an extra-curricular activity that
would reduce time with one parent. Teachers & counselors agree the
activity would be excellent for the child. Should a forced schedule change be
8. A parent is stopped, with the kids in the car, for DWI. There
was no accident. Should these be a good reason for either Social Services
or the other parent to argue this parent should have their contact
with the kids put under some type of court control/limitation?
clear incident of domestic violence occurred between the parents. One parent
gave a severe slap right to the face of the other during a heated argument.
There are no incidents of either parent harming the kids. Should we allow
this parent to still be considered FIT and have EQUAL contact with the
Touchstone is a prestigious and influential magazine
of Christian thought. So this article, headlined on the cover, is an important
event. It could not have come at a better time, with the possibility of Taken
Into Custody going out of print. Please use this article to get media attention,
particularly in the Christian media, which is what we need more than
outpouring of support over Taken Into Custody has been very gratifying and
successful. Yesterday the book rocketed up above the 5,000 Amazon rating and was
#1 in several catgories. This article should assist in getting a reprieve for
TIC. Please send it to your church leaders and members, media, local officials,
and other opinion leaders.
Thanks once again to all. May God bless you
and your families this Christmas and New Year.
magazine, January/February 2009
Feature Divorced from
Reality "We're from the Government, and We're Here to End Your
by Stephen Baskerville
The decline of the family has
now reached critical and truly dangerous proportions. Family breakdown touches
virtually every family and every American. It is not only the major source of
social instability in the Western world today but also seriously threatens civic
freedom and constitutional government.
G. K. Chesterton once observed
that the family serves as the principal check on government power, and he
suggested that someday the family and the state would confront one another. That
day has arrived.
Baskerville, PhD Associate Professor of Government Patrick Henry
College 1 Patrick Henry Circle Purcellville, Virginia 20132
Cumberland House Publishing:
Taken Into Custody: The War Against Fathers,
Marriage, and the Family STEPHEN BASKERVILLE, PhD
"This book is a
tremendous and much-needed report on how family courts and government policies
are harming children." -- Phyllis Schlafly, President, Eagle Forum
today at Amazon's special price of $16.47 (regular price $24.95). For more
than 80 articles and studies in mainstream publications on the abuses of the
divorce industry, see