"An analysis of census data by consumer research firm Reach Advisors found that women between the ages of 22 and 30, without children, had bigger paychecks in 2008 than their male peers in 47 of the 50 largest U.S. cities. Their wages were 8 percent higher, on average, but varied considerably from one city to the next." 1.
"But now there's evidence that the ship may finally be turning around: according to a new analysis of 2,000 communities by a market research company, in 147 out of 150 of the biggest cities in the U.S., the median full-time salaries of young women are 8% higher than those of the guys in their peer group." 2.
"Women who have never had a child earn 113 percent of what men earn.----Among unmarried college-educated men and women between 40 and 64, men earn nearly 15 percent less." 3.
Fortune Magazine asserts that American women own 65% of the wealth in the USA. 4..
"Senior women 50 and older control $19 trillion and own more than three-forths of the nation's financial wealth. -MassMutual Financial Group-2007" 5.
"Women control about $19 trillion of wealth, including earned and inherited assets, which accounts for more than three-quarters of our nation's financial resources." 6.
"A new study from Continuum's Women Children Group and supported by data from the World Bank speaks to the power of pink.
The study claims that women now control 65% of global spending and more than 80% of U.S. spending.
By 2014, the World Bank predicts that the global income of women will grow by more than $5 trillion.
The story warns of the perils of ignoring female consumers who control $20 trillion in consumer spending. They make the final decision for buying 91% of home purchases, 65 % of the new cars, and 66% of computers." 7.
"Although women are a majority of the workforce, perhaps as many as 80 per cent of the jobs lost (in the past recession) were held by men.---- A recent study found that 55 percent of men 18 to 24 are living in their parents homes as are 13 percent of men 25 to 34 compared to 8 percent of women." 8.
As stated before in the chapter on Government and Feminism: "Through laws,customs, and feminist dogma, if a male demonstrates any of these (male) virtues, American women can and will destroy him by lying about abuse, rape, verbal haranguing, anything; and, he can be arrested, prosecuted, and maliciously convicted of a crime. This is the case even if she has a historical pattern of lying because the "system" does not want to take any chances."
Women, through other laws, customs, and feminist dogma have the means and motive to discriminate against men who exhibit the male virtues.
The men's rights movement now, generally, accepts the proposition that women, at least American women,especially target men who exhibit the traditional male virtues for discrimination and oppression.
The result of the aforementioned, is that women, in the workforce, tend to only tolerate weak, base, and effeminate men in the same.
As stated in the chapter entitled: "Biology and Gender": " Using brain mapping, it was shown that men have more than 6 times the amount of gray matter related to general intelligences than women ,and women have nearly 10 times as much white matter related to intelligence than men." 9.
"Gray matter is responsible for processing information in the brain and white matter "represents the connections between these processing center according to the study.
These differences might explain why men " excel in tasks requiring more local processing like mathematics-while women tend to excel at integrating and assimilating information." 10.
"There is a mean difference in mean IQ (in favor of men) of about 5 points. The further you go up the distribution the more skewed it becomes. There are twice as many men with an IQ of 120 plus as there are women. There are 30 times the number of men with an IQ of 170-plus as there are women." 11.
"IQ stands for intelligence quotient. Supposedly, it is a score that tells one how "bright" a person is compared to other people. The average IQ is by definition 100; scores above 100 indicate a higher than average IQ and scores below 100 indicate a lower than average IQ. Theoretically, scores can range any amount below or above 100; but in practice they do not meaningfully go much below 50 or above 150. Half of the population have IQ's of between 90 and 110 while twenty five percent have higher IQ's and twenty five percent have lower IQ's." 12.
Our political-economic-legal system, through overt,covert, informal,and legal mean, gives preferential treatment to women and minorities who tend to have, on average, significantly lower I.Q.'s than Caucasian men.
Both legal and illegal immigration to the U.S.A. tend to promulgate immigration to the U.S.A. of individuals of lower I.Q.'s who, because the great majority of the same are minorities and/or women receive preferential treatment by law and custom in education, employment, and otherwise over American citizens, mainly Caucasian men (and some Asian groups) who have higher IQ's on average.
This book concentrates, however, on gender issues.
The effect of discriminating against Caucasian men (and some Asian groups) in employment, education, and otherwise, in the favor of women (and others) is, therefore, to decrease the true intelligence level of the workforce with the concomitant decrease in the educational,skill, knowledge, maturity level of the general work force. The wealth and prosperity of nations has been directly correlated to the average I.Q. in a nation. The natural economic result of the aforementioned discrimination against Caucasian men (and some Asian groups) has been a decline or stagnation in real incomes for Americans, increases in the poverty rate, a decrease in economic security for all Americans, and, of course, a decrease in the wealth and prosperity of the U.S.A. as a nation and for American citizens in particular.
'Yet ironically, America is making yet more efforts to exacerbate anti-male sexism in our economy. Last year, President Obama created a well-funded Council on Women and Girls but rejected one on men and boys.--- In Obama's April 6, 2012 speech at the White House Forum on Women and the Economy, he reiterated that he wants to focus yet more on women: " (I) look forward to continuing the important work we are doing to promote the interests of women." 13.
Long Quote
"The 77 cents-on-the-dollar statistic is calculated in a manner that is biased against men. For example, while among all physicians, men earn more than women, men are more likely to be in specialties requiring longer training, high-stress, and irregular hours, for example, surgery and cardiology. In contrast, women are more likely to be pediatricians. Despite that bias, across all careers, surveys report that childless women under 30 make more than men. More than 90 percent of workplace deaths, military deaths, and severe workplace injuries (e.g., amputations, black lung disease) occur to men. Such dangerous work justifies higher pay for men. Visit American workplaces, especially major corporations, and you'll find anti-men practices are not only tolerated but routinely imposed by employers. Women, but not men, are encouraged to form committees and caucuses to advance their sex's causes in the workplace, often at men's expense. Examples: 1. Mentor programs for women only 2. Special training for women only 3. Fast-track-to-executive position for women only". 14.
End of long Quote
Long Quote
Dr. Warren Warren Farrell in his book, Why Men Earn More, uncovered numerous reason for the pay gap. Inclusive of the same are: " Men overwhelmingly dominate jobs that 1. are in an unpleasant environment (sanitation v. child care); 2. required harder-to-attain skills (physics vs. philosophy); 3. require longer work hours; 3. demand financial risk (entrepreneur vs. teaching); 4. an inconvenient (i.e., relocation); and, 5, are hazardous (construction vs. librarian)." "Due to the simple laws of supply and demand, these occupations pay more and contribute immensely to the pay gap. But again, government statistics completely neglect occupation-making a raw comparison of all working men and women instead (e.g., the female receptionist is lumped in with the $ 21,000/hr Lebron James and little-guy Michael Moore). "Wage gap statistics also do not account for time commitment. On average, women work far less than men because they choose to have much more balance in their lives. A study by the Center for Policy Alternatives and Lifetime Television found that nearly 85 percent of women took advantage of flexible work arrangements offered by their employers. And, a decade after graduating college, 39 percent of women leave the work force or work part-time, versus 3 percent of men. Aside from the obvious benefits of working longer, workers who average 44 or more hours per week earn approximately 100 percent more than workers who average 40 hours.
This is particularly significant, as it touches on the glass ceiling myth. Now, normally the burden of proof is placed on the accusers, but not so with progressives' ad hominem attacks--making honest debate virtually impossible. ----June O'Neill, former direct of the CBO (Congressional Budget Office), argues that if you take out the effects of marriage and child rearing, essentially, there is no earnings gap.
Also commemorating "Women's Equality Day" was Bill Singler on the Huffington Post. Although Singler never quite explains why, he does not buy into the "choice" argument and derides a Chamber of Commerce blog for supposing otherwise, even resorting to capitalism and family values to propagate the wage gap myth. Contrary to the "bedrock of American capitalism," he claims that these choices are often "forced upon women." (Isn't "choice" supposed to be a major platform of the Democratic Party?)
Columnist Marty Nemko speaks to this anecdotal fallacy:
Steven Rhoades, author of the new book, Taking Sex Differences Seriously, cites study after study indicating that the main reason most women want ample family time is their biological drive to have children and be the primary family caregiver. Feminist activists argue that is social conditioning by the "male hegemony." But if that were true, then why do women take on most family care giving in every society from Iceland to New Guinea, in every era from ancient times to today, and in all political contexts from communist to capitalist? Women's desire to prioritize family care giving is mainly biological predisposition, not cultural brainwashing."
(American Thinker, September 18, 2010, The Wage Gap Myth, by Anthony Kang) President Barack Obama has certainly done his part to exploit the wage gap; he most recently endorsed the Paycheck Fairness Act, calling it a "commonsense bill." Daniel Fisher of Forbes and James Sherk from the Heritage Foundation illustrate why the act is anything but. Guess who stands to gain the most from the act? You got it -- big government and trial lawyers.
In another recent Huffington Post article, the ACLU's Deborah J. Vagins literally equates the Paycheck Fairness Act to the suffrage movement, labeling it "the next milestone in the fight for equal rights." Vagins concludes, "I feel compelled to ask: how long must women wait for equality? I hope my question is answered, as it once was 90 years ago, with a landmark achievement in equal rights." 15.
End of Long Quote
The right to vote,which, for women, has resulted in the economic discrimination against men and for women described in this chapter because women make up the electoral majority in our "winner take all", "gerrymandered" and "bought" form of political electoral representation which is , in essence, a tyrannical feminist majority.
Long Quote
"Apparently Dr. Farrell is equally compelled and moved by the right to vote. Making note of the military's draft and combat policies, Farrell harshly denounces these diminutive minds: "Women are the only group who get the right to vote without responsibility. Only adolescents expect rights without responsibilities. Adults know they go together." Note: Farrell was a three-time board member of NOW.
To further illustrate the lunacy surrounding the purported wage gap, let's flip the situation on its head. If right-wingers adopted the left wing's politics of victimhood, entitlement, divisiveness, and envy, if right-wing males were like left-wing females, if the media were an echo chamber of conservative bias, and if universities were ground zero for right-wing indoctrination, one could easily be led to believe there is a very real and systemic pattern of gender discrimination against males. Consider:
1. Women who have never had a child earn 113 percent of what men earn. 2. There are some 80 fields where women earn more than men. 3. About 80 percent of the jobs lost in the last recession were lost by men. 4. Males are exponentially more likely to become incarcerated or homeless. 5. Males disproportionately sacrifice much of their prime years in service of the military. 6. The male-to-female ratio on college campuses is now about 40/60. 7. Approximately 93 percent of workplace fatalities are men. 8. Among unmarried college-educated men and women between 40 and 64, men earn nearly 15 percent less. " 16.
End of Long Quote
In an article, written by Krystal Steinmetz, entitled: "Young Men Earn Much Less Now Than in 1973" which appeared in the online MoneyTalksNews on May 13, 2014, describes the dramatic decline in American men's median income since 1973. The body of this article states: "Young American Men Earn Much Less Now Than in 1973.Men’s median income is on the decline. It’s depressing, but true. Cheryl Russell of the New Strategist Press writes that, according to Census information, men ages 25 to 34 actually earn less than they did 40 years ago. Among all American men, ages 15 and older, median income peaked in 2000, at $37,791. After adjusting for inflation, men’s median income fell 10 percent from 2000 to 2012, to $33,904. While a 10 percent drop in income sounds terrible, it gets worse when you break it down by age groups, Russell said. Check out these sad statistics for the percentage change in men’s median income from the year it peaked to 2012 (adjusted for inflation): Ages 25-34. Down 27 percent. Peaked in 1973. Ages 35-44. Down 19 percent. Peaked in 1973. Ages 45-54. Down 17 percent. Peaked in 1999. Ages 55-64. Down 13 percent. Peaked in 2003. Russell said: The median income of men aged 25 to 34 has plunged since 1973, falling from $46,598 to $34,113 after adjusting for inflation — a loss of $12,485. Men aged 35 to 44 have lost $10,345 since their peak. Men aged 45 to 54 have lost $9,762, and men aged 55 to 64 have lost $6,407." 17.
The following is a partial quote from a Wikipedia article entitled "Male Unemployment":
"The 2008–2012 global recession has been called a "mancession" because of the disproportionate number of men who lost their jobs as compared to women. This gender gap became wide in the United States in 2009, when 10.5% of men in the labor force were unemployed, compared with 8% of women. Three quarters of the jobs lost in the recession in the U.S. were held by men." 18.
Long Quote
"Given these facts, it wouldn't be very hard to convince a young, apolitical, and impressionable college student, like I was, that all males are helpless victims, would it? Any blind ideologue can nitpick a few facts here and there to fit her agenda, and all anybody can do is debunk one disgusting, unsubstantiated myth at a time. Says Dr. Farrell, "My research indicates that, overall, when men and women do precisely the same work, women now get paid as much, or more than men."
"Women need men like a fish needs a bicycle, "strong" and "independent" feminists like to say. How any group so helplessly dependent on the patriarchal teat of Uncle Sam can claim to be "strong" and "independent" is laughable at best. As the wage gap myth clearly demonstrates, the biggest irony of it all is the fact that modern-day feminists are the very antithesis." 19.
End of Long Quote
Given the aforementioned, the following is an appropriate and pertinent quote from William Shakespeare's play, "Richard III" (Act V. scene iii):
"King Richard III: Give me another horse,—bind up my wounds,—Have mercy, Jesu!—Soft! I did but dream.—O coward conscience, how dost thou afflict me!—The lights burn blue.—It is now dead midnight.Cold fearful drops stand on my trembling flesh.What, do I fear myself? there's none else by:Richard loves Richard; that is, I am I.Is there a murderer here? No;—yes, I am:Then fly. What, from myself? Great reason why,—Lest I revenge. What,—myself upon myself!Alack, I love myself. Wherefore? for any good That I myself have done unto myself?O, no! alas, I rather hate myself For hateful deeds committed by myself!I am a villain: yet I lie, I am not.Fool, of thyself speak well:—fool, do not flatter.My conscience hath a thousand several tongues,And every tongue brings in a several tale,And every tale condemns me for a villain. Perjury, perjury, in the high'st degree;Murder, stern murder, in the dir'st degree;All several sins, all us'd in each degree,Throng to the bar, crying all "Guilty! guilty!"I shall despair. There is no creature loves me;And if I die no soul will pity me:And wherefore should they,—since that I myself Find in myself no pity to myself?Methought the souls of all that I had murder'd Came to my tent; and every one did threat To-morrow's vengeance on the head of Richard." 20.
Friday, November 7, 2014
Foreign Brides
Why Do American Men Prefer Foreign Women?
Long Quote
Here are a few quotes that are responsive to this question: "Now you understand why US men prefer foreign born women: THEY TREAT US BETTER, RESPECT US, APPRECIATE THAT AFFECTION WE SHOW THEM, AND ACKNOWLEDGE OUR EFFORTS TO PROVIDE A BETTER LIFE."
"A huge percentage of American women are selfish, flighty, insecure, needy and psychotic, and quite capable of concealing those traits during the dating phase."
"White 'career' American chicks are the bottom of the barrel marriage-wise".
"Foreign women from South America, Eastern Europe, and Asia are at the top. Only guys who travel (in other words, guys who are successful and ambitious enough to travel a lot) find these. But they never, ever go back."
"Foreign-born women living in the US are the next best. They get married early...they are highly sought after by American guys for their wifely skills (hell, any woman who has ANY ability to be a wife is better than your average American chick, who knows NOTHING about being a wife).
"Bottom of the barrel---white American chicks Yecch".
"Here's a story: I knew a guy who was Hungarian (parents emigrated) who tried for 15 years to find a half-decent woman to marry. He's a doctor, by the way. Finally, after 8 psycho-weirdo US chicks, he went back to the 'old country' to find a wife The people there were lining the women up for him to meet...he's a rich American guy....they are considered the best husbands in the world."
"He found this lovely wife. She's a total gem, and he's happy as hell. 2 kids. Happy ever after."-------
" I was absolutely blown away by the quality of women on my trip to Eastern Europe. Classy, cultured, traditional values, how could you ask for more?"
"Popular Myth: Western men looking for foreign wives are only seeking subservient slaves."
" Truth: Most Western men today are evolved and modern and truly believe in the 50/50 system. Most Western men are dismayed by the lack of sincerity of Western women. I can do my own laundry and cooking thank you!"
"Foreign women are comfortable in their femininity. As a male, I am attracted to this. And I love her with all my heart."
"I believe that American women have priced themselves out of the marketplace. Too needy, too many head games, too easy to divorce."
"Not many foreign men want American wives either."
"American women-highest maintenance (I've never heard of a foreign bride demanding her husband buy expensive house cars). Fattest in the world. Most likely to cheat. Highest rate of divorce (60^-US; 20%-US-foreign marriages). Largest payout in divorce court. Bitchiest. Most likely to nag constantly. Most likely to believe in feminism and "equality". Most likely to hate men. Spend least amount of time with her children. Worst at cooking and cleaning. fucked & chucked by tons of guys before tricking you into marriage."
"Three reasons to marry an American woman:
1. You actually believe BBW=big BEAUTIFUL wife.
2. You believe nagging is essential for personal growth.
3. You really look forward to the day your BBW divorces you and you gladly fork over 50% of your hard earned assets, plus child support and alimony. Then,after that, you have to figure out how to live on 20% of your income."
Some further quotes:
" I can not date white American women anymore. I was in the navy:and, I have seen the light. Women from other countries just look better and treat you better too! I didn't pay for shit when I was overseas and I pay up the wazoo here. Any rational person can figure it out from here."
"American women are high-maintenance prima donnas with attitudes. I'd take a foreign born Russian or Latina woman any day. They are much nicer and normally MUCH SMARTER than most American women-plus they don't watch Rose and Ricci Lake- they go to the library or perform outside activities."
"Dating or being married to an American women is like driving a beat-up Ford Escort. If you are only used to driving a beat-up Ford Escort, then you have no idea what it feels like when you drive a Bentley or Ferrari. You need to at least test-drive a Ferrari, so you'll have a reference point on what a real car feels like." 1.
End of Long Quote
The International Marriage Broker Regulation Act
"The International Marriage Broker Regulation Act of 2005 (Subtitle D of Title VIII (Sec.831-834) of United States Public Law 109-162)(IMBRA is an attachment to The Violence Against Women Act signed by President Bush on January 5, 2006), or IMBRA , is a controversial United States federal statute that requires background checks for all marriage visa sponsors and limits serial visa applications. Additionally, the law requires background checks for all persons wanting to receive contact information, something that is necessary in order to communicate. The impetus for its introduction were two cases (including the Susanna Blackwell case in 1995 and the Anastasia King case in 2000) in which foreign women had been abused and eventually murdered by men who had used a K-1 fiancee visa issued by the US State Department to bring them to the United States. In the King case, the husband had physically abused a previous foreign bride before murdering Anastasia. King had met Anastasia through his own advertisement in a Moscow newspaper (not through an "international marriage broker"). In the Blackwell case, the husband had a clean record, therefore IMBRA would not have prevented her murder. It was intended to stop abuse of "mail order brides" by prospective husbands with criminal histories. At the same time, there are thousands of international marriages between Americans and foreigners without problem." 2.
"Many immigrant spouses agree to become one largely to gain U.S. citizenship. However, the citizenship is conditional on remaining married for at least three years, creating an imbalance of power. There have been a number of documented cases of husbands using this advantage to abuse both mentally and physically their wife, knowing that their wife can be sent home at their whim humantrafficking.org estimated that " many more are believed to go unreported.". Even when one eventually leaves-whether to return home or after sufficient time has passed to get a divorce but stay a citizen, some of these husbands would continue to get new mail order brides. No system originally existed to track such serial visa applicants with a history of abuse." 3.
Long Quote
Criticism of IMBRA The murders described above which were the impetus of this law, occurred after a couple was already married, however IMBRA regulates communication before anyone has gotten married (or may never be getting married to a foreigner). There is not a single documented case or prosecution of an American abusing a foreigner before marriage who has used an international pen pal service.
Critics of this law contend that its purpose to protect women depends upon the honesty of the IMB client in revealing any criminal history. There is no background check performed except the national sex offender data base. As such, any US client who has a criminal history may simply lie and fail to report it to the IMB.
Several international introduction services (the mail order bride industry) challenged the constitutionality of IMBRA, but the statute was upheld by a federal court in 2007. Free speech and identity theft concerns have also been raised.
Wendy McElroy wrote that " there is no reason to believe that violence against 'mail-order brides' is higher than against women in general. No evidence supports the criminalization of every American man who looks overseas for a wife." 4.
End of Long Quote
Long Quote
"An international broker cannot provide contact or general information on a foreign woman to an American man unless that broker first collects and discloses to the woman the following information about the man: 1. Every state of residence since the age of 18. 2. Current or previous marriages as well as how and when they terminated. 3. Information on children under 18. 4. Any arrest or conviction related to controlled substances, alcohol or prostitution, making no distinction on arrests not leading to conviction. 5. Any court orders, including temporary restraining orders which are notoriously easy to procure. 6. Any arrest or conviction for crimes ranging from "homicide" to "child neglect". 7. Any arrest or conviction for "similar activity in violation of Federal, State or local criminal law" without specifying what "similar" means.
U.S. law will provide foreign women with extensive government information on American suitors which is not similarly offered to American women. Nor should it be.
Contacting a women for romantic purposes--internationally or domestically--is not a crime. Those who do so are not a priori criminals who must prove themselves innocent before being allowed an email exchange.
How many American men will be impacted by the IMBRA?
According to Rep. Larsen, between 8,000 and 12,000 American men find foreign wives through for-profit brokers each year. Presumably, a considerably higher number attempt but fail to find a wife who successfully emigrates." 5.
End of Long Quote
Long Quote
" But no solid foundation of data underlies Sen. Cantwell's (U.S. Senator from Washington State) claim of a "growing epidemic of domestic abuse among couples who meet through a broker." There is no reason to believe that violence against mail-order brides is higher than against women in general. No evidence supports the criminalization of every American man who looks overseas for a wife.
And, yet, such men are easy targets. Men who seek wives abroad often explicitly state that women here are not worth marrying because they are too independent, ruined by feminism, or 'fill in the pejorative blank.' If some of those ideal wives subsequently say "goodby" at the first glimpse of a green card, I can't muster sympathy.
What I do sympathize with, however, are the privacy rights of people who are considered guilty until proven innocent. This is especially true when a government violates the privacy of its own citizens to benefit foreign individuals.
What view of the American man does IMBRA broadcast to the world? American men are so predatory and violent that the U.S. government must protect foreign women by providing police checks before allowing the men to say "hello".
The "Ugly American" has become an article of Federal Law, supported by Congress." 6.
End of Long Quote
Key Provisions of International Marriage Broker Regulation Act:
Long Quote
" 1. Marketing of Children Prohibited IMBs may not provide personal contact information, photographs, or other information about anyone under the age of 18 to any individual or entity (Section 833 (d)(1))
2. Duty to Disclose Criminal and Marital History and Obtain Written Consent Before a (for a fee) IMB may provide a foreign national client's personal contact information to a United States client, the IMB must:
1. search sex offender public registries for information regarding the United States client;
2. collect certain criminal and marital background information through documentation or an attestation from the United States client;
3. provide to the foreign national client any records retrieved from the sex offender public registry search and the background information in her primary language;
4. provide to the foreign national client a government-prepared information pamphlet about the legal rights and resources available to the U.S. to immigrant victims of domestic violence and other crimes;
and;
5. obtain the foreign national client's signed, written consent to the release of her information to the United States client. (Sections 833 (d)(2) and (3))
3. Penalty for Misuse of Information. Any person who knowingly misuses any information obtained by an IMB (i.e. uses that information for any unauthorized purpose other than IMBRA's required disclosures) is subject to a fine or imprisonment of no more than 1 year, or both, in addition to other possible penalties that may be imposed under federal or state law.(Sections 833 (d)(3)(C))
4. Penalties for Other Violations/Nonpreemption An IMB is subject to a civil penalty of $ 5,000-$ 25,000 per violation or attempted violation of its obligations under IMBRA, and criminal penalties for not more than five years in prison. This is in addition to other possible penalties and remedies that may be provided for under federal or state law. (Sections 833 (d)(5) and (6)).
5. Definition of an International Marriage Broker "International Marriage Broker" is defined as an entity (whether or not U.S.-based) that charges fees for providing matchmaking services or social referrals between U.S. citizens/permanent residents and foreign nationals. This definition also exempts non-profit religious or cultural matchmaking services, and dating services that do match U.S. citizens/residents with aliens as their principal business and that charge comparable rates and offer comparable services to all clients, regardless of gender or country of citizenship.
6. Informational Pamphlet about Legal Rights and Resources IMBRA requires that U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), in consultation with the Departments of State (DOS) and Justice (DOJ) and nongovernmental organizations with specialized expertise, to develop a pamphlet for foreign fiance(e)s and spouses about the K visa immigration process, the legal rights and resources available to immigrant victims of domestic violence and other crimes, the illegality of marriage fraud (i.e., knowingly entering a marriage solely to obtain an immigration benefit) and U.S. legal obligations regarding child support. The pamphlet will also include a warning concerning the potential use of K visas by U.S. citizens with a history of violence, whose acts may not have resulted in a criminal record; as well as a notification regarding IMBs' obligation to disclose U.S. clients' violent criminal records.
7. Criminal Background Information Disclosed to Foreign Fiance(e) or Spouse IMBRA requires U.S. citizens petitioning to sponsor K visas to disclose convictions for a list of violent crimes on the " I-129F" petition form that they file with the DHS, including convictions for domestic violence and assault & battery, as well as convictions for elder abuse, child abuse or neglect, and stalking; and multiple (three or more) convictions related to alcohol/controlled substances. DHS must provide to DOS a copy of the petitioner's I-129F petition form, together with any criminal background information (including information on protection orders) that DHS has gather on the petitioner under existing authority.DOS must provide these materials to the foreign fiance(e) or spouse . The U.S. consular officer conducting the K visa interview overseas must inform the foreign fiance(e) or spouse that this information may not be complete, and ask her (1) whether an IMB facilitated her relationship with the petitioner and, if so, which one and (2) whether the IMB complied with IMBRA b providing her with the required disclosures and information. (Sections 832(a), 833(a)(5), and 833(b)(1))
8. Limits Place on How Many and How Often Fiance(e) Visa Petitions May be Filed; Petitioners with Violent Criminal Records Barred from Serial Sponsorship IMBRA limits a US petitioner's sponsorship of K1 (fiance(e)) visas to 2 total, with no less than 2 years between the filing of the last approved petition and the current petition. A petitioner may seek a discretionary waiver of these limits from DHS. However, DHS cannot ordinarily waive the limits if the U.S. petitioner has a record of violent criminal offenses. (Section 832(a)(1)) " 7.
End of Long Quote
Long Quote
Green Card Marriages A green card is the way immigrants from other countries become a permanent resident of the United States. According to the United States Census Bureau "Every year over 450,000 United States citizens marry foreign-born individuals and petition for them to obtain permanent residency (Green Card) in the United States. In 2003, 184,741 immigrants were admitted to the U.S. as spouses of U.S. citizens. The applicant must already be married. There are conditional requirements in order to obtain a green card through the marriage process. The prospect must have a conditional green card. This becomes permanent after approval by the government. The candidate may then apply for United States citizenship. A conditional residence green card is given to applicants who are being processed for permanent residence in the United States because they are married to a U.S. citizen. It is valid for two years. At the end of this time period, if the card holder does not change the status of their residency, they will be put on "out of status." Legal action by the government may follow. There are different procedures based on whether the applicant is already a U.S. citizen or if the applicant is an immigrant. The marriage must also be legal in, if appropriate, the emigrant's country.
Immigration Marriage Fraud Amendments of 1986 A public law was passed to deter marriage fraud among immigrants. The major stipulation is that if the immigrant is married for less than two years, they are classified as conditional immigrants. The two year period is not from the time they get married, but from the time that residency is granted. In order to remove this classification the immigrants must apply for U.S. Citizenship ninety days before the second-year anniversary of still being considered conditional.
There are several reasons why the conditional immigration status can be terminated. Those include divorce, marriage is not valid, or the couple failed to petition the Immigration Service to remove the classification of conditional residency. If the Immigration Service suspects that an alien has created a fraudulent marriage, the immigrant is subject to removal from the United States The marriage must be fraudulent at its inception and can be determined by several factors. The several factors are the conduct of the parties before and after the marriage are relevant and the bride's and groom's intention of establishing a life together. The validity must be given by the couple by showing insurance policies, property, leases, income tax, bank accounts, etc. The final decision is determined by if the sole purpose of the marriage was to gain benefits for the immigrant. The punishment for fraud is a large monetary penalty, possibility of never becoming a permanent resident of the United States, and jail time for the spouse. These Amendment Acts cover spouses, children of spouses, and K-1 visa fiances.
Intersection of Immigration Law and Family Law Immigrants who use the reason of family ties to gain entry into the United States are required to document financial arrangements. The sponsor of a related immigrant must guarantee financial support to the family. These guarantees form a contract between a sponsor and the federal government. It requires the sponsor to support the immigrant relative at a level equivalent to 125% of the poverty line for his or her household size. A beneficiary of the contract, the immigrant, or the Federal Government may sue for the promised support in the event the sponsor does not fulfill the obligations of the contract. The sponsor is also liable for the prevailing party's legal expenses.
Divorce does not end the sponsor's obligation to provide the support deemed by the contract. The only ways to terminate the obligation are for the immigrant spouse to become a U.S. citizen, the immigrant spouse has worked forty Social Security Act eligible quarters (10 years), the immigrant spouse is no longer considered a permanent alien and has left the U.S., the immigrant spouse obtained an ability to adjust their status, or the immigrant spouse dies. A sponsor's death also cuts off the obligation, but not in regards to any support the sponsor already owes which will be paid out of the sponsor's estate." 8.
End of Long Quote
Long Quote
Mail-Order Bride A mail-order bride is a woman who lists herself in catalogs (online or otherwise)and is selected by men for marriage. In nineteenth-century America, mail-order brides came from well-developed areas in the East to marry men in Western frontier lands. In the twentieth Century, the trend was towards women living in developing countries seeking men in more developed countries. In the twenty-first Century, the trend is now based primarily on internet-based meeting places which do not per se qualify as mail order bride services. The majority of women listed in the twentieth-century and twenty-first century services are from Southeast Asia, countries of the former Soviet Union and (to a lesser extent) from Latin America. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, large numbers of eastern European women have advertised themselves in such a way, primarily from Russia, Belarus, Ukraine and Moldova. Men who list themselves in such publications are referred to as "mail-order husbands". Mail-order husbands come from primarily (in alphabetical order) Australia, Canada, Germany, Japan, Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan, United Kingdom and the United States." 9.
End of Long Quote
Long Quote
"International marriage agency
Mail-order brides work with "international marriage agencies."
An international marriage agency (also called an international introduction agency or international marriage broker) is a business that endeavors to introduce men and women of different countries for the purpose of marriage, dating or correspondence. Many of these marriage agencies are based near women in developing countries (such as Ukraine,Russia,Colombia,Brazil,China, Thailand and the Philippines). International marriage agencies encourage women to register for their services and facilitate communication and meetings with men from the developed regions of North America, Western Europe, South Korea, Japan, Taiwan, Australia and New Zealand. This network of smaller international marriage agencies is often affiliated with web-based international dating sites that are able to market their services on a larger scale, in compliance with regulations such as the International Marriage Broker Regulation Act. International dating sites provide a wide variety of online communication, including instant messaging, email letters, webcam-based chat, phone translation, virtual gifts, live games, and mobile-based chat. ----
Services offered by marriage agencies typically include:
1. Introductions
2. Translation of correspondence between clients not speaking a common language
3. Excursions, in which a man is introduced to several women interested in marriage " 10.
End of Long Quote
Long Quote
Mail order brides: motivations,situations, and stories
"Eastern Europe Women in Russia,Ukraine,Belarus, and other Eastern European countries are common Caucasian mail-order bride candidates. Russian and other East European women are sometimes considered more attractive than West European and American women in appearance, dress and behavior.
Economic and social conditions for women in Russia are a motivational factor in finding foreign arrangements. ----Finding a foreign husband gives a women a chance to leave her country and find better economic opportunities. Marriage is a substantial part of Russian culture with 22 years being the age at which a woman is considered an "old maid." With 4,138,273 more women than men from the ages of 15 to 64, marriage opportunities are slim at home and worsened by the life expectancy differences between men (64.3 years) and women (73.17 years). In testimony before the United States Senate, Professor Donna Hughes said that two thirds of Ukrainian women interviewed wanted to live abroad; and, this rose to 97% in the resort city of Yalta.
Asia Many international brides come from developing countries in Asia. The countries the women come from are faced with unemployment, malnutrition and inflation. Those who marry foreign men tend to be better educated than most women from their country or their husbands. However, economic factors are not the only driving factor for women in Asia to enter the mail-order industry. Filipino women often enter the mail-order industry in the hope of marrying abroad and then sponsoring their family for immigration. In some case, women are recruited on their physical appearance with an emphasis placed on youth and virginity. This is found among boutique agencies most of which cater to wealthy men from other Asian nations.
Australia Since 2003, the Australian Federal Government's resolve to decrease what was deemed "inappropriate immigration" by then Prime Minister John Howard has gained momentum. Initial reactions to the program were mixed. However, during the January 2004 visit to Eastern Europe by Australian Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs Philip Ruddock, Australian-Russian relationships were strengthened while both nations committed to a timetable for reductions in Russian human trafficking into Australia. The Australian public further embraced its government's new policies following the media frenzy of the Jana Klintoukh case. This case first exploded into the public's view when current-events program Today Tonight aired footage of a young Russian-born Australian, claiming she was imported via an Internet site and was used as a sexual slave by her "husband" while being confined to his Sydney home.
Belarus In 2005, President Alexander Lukashenko attempted to regulate "marriage agencies" in Belarus and make it difficult for them to operate. He believed that Western men were draining his country of women of child-bearing age. However, as most agencies are being run from outside Belarus (either in Russia, European countries or the United States), he has been unable to stop (or otherwise regulate) this activity.
Canada Canadian immigration laws have traditionally been similar to (but slightly less restrictive than) their US counterparts; for instance, not requiring the Canadian citizen to prove minimum-income requirements (as has been a long-standing requirement of United States immigration laws). While there is still no formal requirement for a minimum salary, the sponsor must provide evidence of income in the form of their most recent T4 Income printout from the Canadian Revenue Agency as an attachment to their IMM 5481 Sponsorship Evaluation. Until recently (2001), Canada's immigration policy designated mail-order brides under the "family class" to refer to spouses and dependents and "fiancé(e)" class for those intending to marry, with only limited recognition of externally-married opposite-sex "common law" relationships; same-sex partners were processed as independent immigrants or under a discretionary provision for "humane and compassionate" considerations. In 2002, the Canadian Immigration Law was completely revised. One of the major changes was conjugal-partner sponsorship, available for any two people (including same sex couples) who have had conjugal relations together for at least one year. Canadian immigration authorities frown upon conjugal-partners sponsorship for heterosexual couples, and now require the couple to marry before a visa is granted (unless serious reason can be demonstrated why the couple is not yet married).
Colombia This South American country is attracting more mail-order bride agencies in recent years, including ColombianSweethearts, ColombianCupid and AmoLatina] As well, online dating agencies such as Match.com have developed a presence in Colombia. According to immigration statistics from the U.S. Homeland Security, Colombia has ranked in the top 10 of countries since 1999 from which fiancées have emigrated for the United States. As well, the number of Colombians being admitted to the U.S. between 1999 and 2008 using fiancé visas (including children) has increased 321 percent. A dissertation by Jasney E. Cogua-Lopez, “Through the Prisms of Gender and Power: Agency in International Courtship between Colombian Women and American Men,” suggests various reasons for this growth, including continuing cultural inequality between the sexes despite equality being codified in the country’s laws ( honor killings were not made completely illegal until 1980). Because of the large number of Colombians wishing to leave their country by marrying foreigners, a black market for marriages to foreigners has developed, with some people allegedly paying as much as 20 million pesos ($100,000 US) to illegal groups. According to Colombia Decrees No. 2668/88 and 1556/89, passed in 1988, foreigners are allowed to marry nationals in the country provided they supply the proper paperwork, including a birth certificate and proof that both parties are not already married. A notary is required, but because the laws are open to interpretation, the requirements can vary from notary to notary.
Philippines The Philippines prohibits the business of organizing or facilitating marriages between Filipinas and foreign men. The Philippine congress enacted Republic Act 6955 (the Anti-Mail-Order Bride Law) in 1990 as a result of stories in the local media about Filipinas being abused by their foreign husbands. Because of this, Filipinas often use "reverse publications" – publications in which men advertise themselves – to contact foreign men for marriage to Filipina women.
South Korea The New York Times reports, "Every month, hundreds of South Korean men fly to Vietnam, the Philippines, Mongolia, Nepal and Uzbekistan on special trips". Although these marriages can be successful, in some cases immigrant wives are mistreated, misunderstood and separated from their Korean husbands. One method men use when choosing young girls as wives is "Like a judge in a beauty pageant, the man interviews the women, many of them 20 years younger than he, and makes a choice". The British newspaper The Independent reports, "Last year it was reported that more than 40,000 Vietnamese women have married South Korean men and migrated there." Cambodian women are also popular with Korean men seeking foreign brides, but in March 2010 the Cambodian government banned marriages to South Korean men. The Korea Times reports that every year, thousands of Korean men sign up for matches with Filipina brides through agencies and by mail order. Based on data from the Korean government, there are 6,191 Filipinas in South Korea who are married to Koreans. After contacting a mail-order agency, the majority of Filipina mail-order brides met their husbands by attending "show-ups," a meeting in which a group of Filipino women are brought to meet a Korean man who is looking for a wife. At the show-up, the Korean man picks a prospective wife from among the group, and in a matter of days they are married. An anthropological study on Filipina wives and Korean men by professor Kim Min-jung of the Department of Cultural Anthropology at Kangwon National University found that these Korean men find it difficult to marry Korean women, so they look for girls in poorer countries with difficult economic circumstances The Korean men feel that because of the difficult circumstances from which the Filipina women come, cultural differences and the language barrier, they "will not run away". Further, she said, Korean men characterize Southeast Asian women as friendly, hardworking (due to agrarian backgrounds), "docile and obedient, able to speak English, and are familiar with Korean patriarchal culture". A recent study by matchmaking firm Bien-Aller polled 274 single South Korean men through its website concerning motivations for marrying non-Korean women and found that men choose foreign brides primarily for one of four reasons. "According to the poll, 32.1 percent of the men said they felt the biggest benefit of marrying foreign women is their lack of interest in their groom's educational background and financial or social status. The next best reason was their belief that foreign brides would be submissive (23 percent), make their lives more comfortable (15.3 percent), and that the men would not have to get stressed about their in-laws (13.8 percent)."
Violence Against Foreign Brides in South Korea There have been several murders of mail-order brides in South Korea. "On May 24, 2011, a South Korean man stabbed his Vietnamese wife to death while the couple’s 19-day-old baby lay next to her. The man, a farmer, had been matched up with his foreign bride through a broker. In 2010, another Vietnamese woman was killed by her husband a week after they were married. In 2008, a Vietnamese woman jumped from an apartment building to her death after being abused by her husband and mother-in-law." In November 2009, Philippine Ambassador to South Korea Luis Cruz warned Filipina women against marrying Korean men. He said in recent months that the Philippine Embassy in Seoul has received complaints from Filipino wives of abuses committed by their Korean husbands that caused separation, divorce and abandonment. As language and cultural differences become an issue, the Filipina women are regarded as commodities bought for a price.
Turkmenistan On June 4, 2001 Turkmenistan President Saparmurat Niyazov (also known as Turkmenbashi) authorized a decree that required foreigners to pay a $50,000 fee to marry a Turkmen citizen (regardless of how they met), and to live in the country and own property for one year. Authorities indicated that the law was designed to protect women from being duped into abusive relationships. In June 2005, Niyazov scrapped the $50,000 and the property-owning requirements.
United States Due to stringent U.S. immigration laws, there have been adaptations of the law and immigration process to provide regulation over immigration flow into the country, and protection for brides once they arrive. “In 1996, Congress passed the Illegal Immigration Reform and Responsibility Act.. Section 652 of this legislation specifically addresses the mail-order bride industry.” Congress found the following: There is a substantial ‘‘mail-order bride’’ business in the United States. With approximately 200 companies, an estimated 2,000 to 3,500 men in the United States find wives through mail-order-bride catalogs each year. However, there are no official statistics available on the number of mail-order brides entering the United States each year. The companies engaged in the mail-order-bride business earn substantial profits. On January 6, 2006, President George W. Bush signed the "International Marriage Broker Regulation Act of 2005" ( IMBRA) as part of the H.R. 3402: Violence Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act of 2005. The requirements of the law are controversial, and some commentators have claimed that it presumes that American men are abusers. In enacting IMBRA, Congress was responding to claims by the Tahirih Justice Center (TJC), a woman's advocacy group, that mail-order brides were susceptible to domestic abuse because they are unfamiliar with the laws, language and customs of their new home. The TJC insisted that special legislation was needed to protect them. The TJC asked Congress to consider several notable cases mentioned in the Congressional Record. Critics of IMBRA claim that the TJC failed to ask Congress to consider the relative amount of abuse between mail-order-bride couples and other couples (including the thousands of spousal murders that occurred in the US over the past 15 years). Two federal lawsuits (European Connections Tours v. Gonzales, N.D. Ga. 2006; AODA v. Gonzales, S.D. Ohio 2006) sought to challenge IMBRA on constitutional grounds. The AODA case was terminated when the plaintiffs withdrew their claim. The European Connections case ended when the judge ruled against the plaintiff, finding the law constitutional regarding a dating company. On March 26, 2007, U.S. District Judge Clarence Cooper dismissed with prejudice a suit for injunctive relief filed by European Connections, agreeing with Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and TJC that IMBRA is a constitutional exercise of Congressional authority to regulate for-profit dating websites and agencies where the primary focus is on introducing Americans to foreigners. Additionally, the federal court specifically found that: "the rates of domestic violence against immigrant women are much higher than those of the U.S. population". The judge also compared background checks on American men to background checks on handgun buyers by stating, "However, just as the requirement to provide background information as a prerequisite to purchasing a firearm has not put gun manufacturers out of business, there is no reason to believe that IMBs will be driven by the marketplace by IMBRA".
Violence against mail-order-brides in the United States In September 2003, 26-year-old Ukrainian engineer and mail-order bride, Alla Barney, bled to death on the floor of her car after her American husband, Lester Barney, 58, slashed her throat in front of the couple’s four-year-old son Daniel. Lester fled with Daniel from the scene in the parking lot of the boy’s day-care center. After an Amber Alert was triggered, he turned Daniel over to a friend and was taken into custody by police. Alla had been granted a restraining order against Lester a few months before, and had been given temporary custody of Daniel. Anastasia King, a young woman from Kyrgyzstan, was found strangled and buried in a shallow grave in Washington State in December 2000. At age 18, Anastasia received an email from a 38-year-old Seattle man, Indle King, from a mail-order-bride website. He flew to her country, and they were married soon after. Two years later, after considerable strife, Indle wanted another bride. He was allegedly unwilling to pay for a divorce, so he ordered a tenant in their Washington home to kill Anastasia. Weighing nearly 300 pounds, her husband pinned Anastasia down while the tenant strangled her with a necktie. Both were convicted of murder. King’s previous wife (whom he had also met through an IMB) had a domestic violence protection order issued against him, and left him because he was abusive. Nina Reiser was a Russian-born and -trained obstetrician and gynaecologist. She was murdered by her husband Hans Reiser, a businessman and computer programmer whom she met after placing an ad in a mail-order bride catalog. She had a restraining order against him during their divorce proceedings. Nina was reported missing on September 5, 2006. That month Hans was detained by Oakland police due to suspicions surrounding the disappearance of his wife, and was later arrested for suspected murder. On April 28, 2008 Hans Reiser was found guilty of first-degree murder, and was sentenced to 15 years to life in prison. On July 7, 2008 Hans led Oakland police to his wife's remains with an agreement to be charged with second-degree murder instead.
Violence against mail-order husbands by mail-order brides in The United States In 2002 Tessie Buhawe Spotts (a native of the Philippines) was charged with the poisoning murder of her husband, Alfred Spotts, in Newberry, South Carolina. The couple met through an international magazine advertisement.
Legal matters for mail-order brides in the United States Marriage agencies are legal in almost all countries. On Jan 6, 2006, the United States Congress enacted H.R. 3402: Violence Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act of 2005. This law requires certain actions prior to selling a foreign woman's address to a US citizen or resident, including:
The man must complete a questionnaire on his criminal and marital background.
The seller must obtain the man's record from the National Sex Offenders Public Registry database.
The questionnaire and record must be translated into the woman's native language and provided to her.
The woman must certify that she agrees to permit communication.
A lifetime limit of two (2) fiancé(e) visas is imposed, with a waiver required for the approval of any subsequent fiancée visa.
Visa regulations
In order to bring a spouse into the United States, Form I-130 must be filed (an immigrant petition on behalf of a relative). After that, a K-3/K-4 V-1/V-2 Entry Visa for Spouse must be filed. The Immigration and Nationalization Service advises that “in some cases, it may be to a couple's advantage to pursue a K-1 fiancee visa before getting married. In other cases, applicants may find that it is more cost effective to get married abroad and then apply for an immigrant visa overseas. In many cases, the K-1 visa application process takes just as long as the immigrant visa process”. Couples must remain together at least two years. “Despite well over 2,000 mail-order marriages a year, there is no information on the amount of mail-order brides entering the US. The purpose of this law is two-fold: to protect the safety of mail-order brides and to prevent fraud”. 11.
End of Long Quote
Long Quote
RULES TO FOLLOW TO AVOID INTERNATIONAL MARRIAGE AND DATING SCAMS
" 1. DO NOT sent money to any girl you have never met, are not in love with, or engaged to.
2. If you find yourself about to send money to a foreign girl you haven't met, are not in love with and not engaged to, PLEASE REVIEW RULE NUMBER 1!! Foreign women DO NOT EVER fall in love through correspondence and DO NOT EVER come to visit a total stranger on a tourist visa.
3. DO NOT send money to any girl you are writing to for internet support. (Depending on the agency's specific policies, it may be necessary to pay THE AGENCY for correspondence services like Express Mail or translations BUT always do so having researched the agency with reliable referrals.)
4. DO NOT expect to buy a girl's love with expensive gifts or cash. Too many young girls join agencies to get in on the kind of cash their girl friends have gotten from a foreign boy friend. Too may foreign men shell out thousands of dollars to foreign super-model wannabes thinking their working their way toward a lifetime of " I Dream of Jeannie" only to get dumped completely before the first kiss. DO give modest gifts, flowers, candy etc. to her and her family once you've met and fallen in love. My idea of a modest gift is anything up to $ 100. Cosmetics, clothing, small jewelry, nice wine, Godiva chocolate.
5. DO NOT buy your girl a cell phone, home computer or English lessons unless engaged.
6. DO wait until you girl's arrival in this country before you buy an expensive engagement ring. It should be fine to present you foreign fiancee with a modest engagement ring before her arrival in your country.
7. DO realize most scamming foreign women couldn't care less about foreign citizenship in your country. If they're not in this for a husband, they're probably in it for the money. The one's looking for a husband will ask you for love, attention, friendship, support, kisses, hugs and intimacy. The one's looking for money will ask you for-well, MONEY!! Again, remember-when we become engaged, married and beyond our foreign women will be able to spend money on necessary things (foreign women are really quite frugal you'll find) and on the occasional toy for their child or gift for their family back home. If you are smart and want your girl to be happy-DO NOT try to restrict your foreign bride to some kind of allowance you wouldn't give your 12 year old. BAD IDEA!
8. DO NOT expect any foreign girl to come here and visit you before you have met, courted, fallen in love and become engaged. Know you will ultimately have to get on the plane and go yourself if you are going to find HER!
9. DO NOT FALL IN LOVE WITH OR FILE A FIANCEE VISA FOR ANY WOMAN WHO HAS NOT DEMONSTRATED A TRUE ATTRACTION AND HEALTHY AFFECTION FOR YOU.
10. IF YOU SUSPECT YOU ARE BEING SCAMMED, DO AN INTERNET SEARCH FOR YOUR FOREIGN GIRL'S NAME TO SEE IF ANY OTHER MEN HAVE POSTED INFORMATION ABOUT HER. VISIT ANTI-SCAM SITES AND/OR READ RECOMMENDED BOOKS ON THE TOPIC TO INCREASE YOUR AWARENESS OF POSSIBLE RED FLAG BEHAVIORS." 12.
End of Long Quote
Long Quote
Here are a few quotes that are responsive to this question: "Now you understand why US men prefer foreign born women: THEY TREAT US BETTER, RESPECT US, APPRECIATE THAT AFFECTION WE SHOW THEM, AND ACKNOWLEDGE OUR EFFORTS TO PROVIDE A BETTER LIFE."
"A huge percentage of American women are selfish, flighty, insecure, needy and psychotic, and quite capable of concealing those traits during the dating phase."
"White 'career' American chicks are the bottom of the barrel marriage-wise".
"Foreign women from South America, Eastern Europe, and Asia are at the top. Only guys who travel (in other words, guys who are successful and ambitious enough to travel a lot) find these. But they never, ever go back."
"Foreign-born women living in the US are the next best. They get married early...they are highly sought after by American guys for their wifely skills (hell, any woman who has ANY ability to be a wife is better than your average American chick, who knows NOTHING about being a wife).
"Bottom of the barrel---white American chicks Yecch".
"Here's a story: I knew a guy who was Hungarian (parents emigrated) who tried for 15 years to find a half-decent woman to marry. He's a doctor, by the way. Finally, after 8 psycho-weirdo US chicks, he went back to the 'old country' to find a wife The people there were lining the women up for him to meet...he's a rich American guy....they are considered the best husbands in the world."
"He found this lovely wife. She's a total gem, and he's happy as hell. 2 kids. Happy ever after."-------
" I was absolutely blown away by the quality of women on my trip to Eastern Europe. Classy, cultured, traditional values, how could you ask for more?"
"Popular Myth: Western men looking for foreign wives are only seeking subservient slaves."
" Truth: Most Western men today are evolved and modern and truly believe in the 50/50 system. Most Western men are dismayed by the lack of sincerity of Western women. I can do my own laundry and cooking thank you!"
"Foreign women are comfortable in their femininity. As a male, I am attracted to this. And I love her with all my heart."
"I believe that American women have priced themselves out of the marketplace. Too needy, too many head games, too easy to divorce."
"Not many foreign men want American wives either."
"American women-highest maintenance (I've never heard of a foreign bride demanding her husband buy expensive house cars). Fattest in the world. Most likely to cheat. Highest rate of divorce (60^-US; 20%-US-foreign marriages). Largest payout in divorce court. Bitchiest. Most likely to nag constantly. Most likely to believe in feminism and "equality". Most likely to hate men. Spend least amount of time with her children. Worst at cooking and cleaning. fucked & chucked by tons of guys before tricking you into marriage."
"Three reasons to marry an American woman:
1. You actually believe BBW=big BEAUTIFUL wife.
2. You believe nagging is essential for personal growth.
3. You really look forward to the day your BBW divorces you and you gladly fork over 50% of your hard earned assets, plus child support and alimony. Then,after that, you have to figure out how to live on 20% of your income."
Some further quotes:
" I can not date white American women anymore. I was in the navy:and, I have seen the light. Women from other countries just look better and treat you better too! I didn't pay for shit when I was overseas and I pay up the wazoo here. Any rational person can figure it out from here."
"American women are high-maintenance prima donnas with attitudes. I'd take a foreign born Russian or Latina woman any day. They are much nicer and normally MUCH SMARTER than most American women-plus they don't watch Rose and Ricci Lake- they go to the library or perform outside activities."
"Dating or being married to an American women is like driving a beat-up Ford Escort. If you are only used to driving a beat-up Ford Escort, then you have no idea what it feels like when you drive a Bentley or Ferrari. You need to at least test-drive a Ferrari, so you'll have a reference point on what a real car feels like." 1.
End of Long Quote
The International Marriage Broker Regulation Act
"The International Marriage Broker Regulation Act of 2005 (Subtitle D of Title VIII (Sec.831-834) of United States Public Law 109-162)(IMBRA is an attachment to The Violence Against Women Act signed by President Bush on January 5, 2006), or IMBRA , is a controversial United States federal statute that requires background checks for all marriage visa sponsors and limits serial visa applications. Additionally, the law requires background checks for all persons wanting to receive contact information, something that is necessary in order to communicate. The impetus for its introduction were two cases (including the Susanna Blackwell case in 1995 and the Anastasia King case in 2000) in which foreign women had been abused and eventually murdered by men who had used a K-1 fiancee visa issued by the US State Department to bring them to the United States. In the King case, the husband had physically abused a previous foreign bride before murdering Anastasia. King had met Anastasia through his own advertisement in a Moscow newspaper (not through an "international marriage broker"). In the Blackwell case, the husband had a clean record, therefore IMBRA would not have prevented her murder. It was intended to stop abuse of "mail order brides" by prospective husbands with criminal histories. At the same time, there are thousands of international marriages between Americans and foreigners without problem." 2.
"Many immigrant spouses agree to become one largely to gain U.S. citizenship. However, the citizenship is conditional on remaining married for at least three years, creating an imbalance of power. There have been a number of documented cases of husbands using this advantage to abuse both mentally and physically their wife, knowing that their wife can be sent home at their whim humantrafficking.org estimated that " many more are believed to go unreported.". Even when one eventually leaves-whether to return home or after sufficient time has passed to get a divorce but stay a citizen, some of these husbands would continue to get new mail order brides. No system originally existed to track such serial visa applicants with a history of abuse." 3.
Long Quote
Criticism of IMBRA The murders described above which were the impetus of this law, occurred after a couple was already married, however IMBRA regulates communication before anyone has gotten married (or may never be getting married to a foreigner). There is not a single documented case or prosecution of an American abusing a foreigner before marriage who has used an international pen pal service.
Critics of this law contend that its purpose to protect women depends upon the honesty of the IMB client in revealing any criminal history. There is no background check performed except the national sex offender data base. As such, any US client who has a criminal history may simply lie and fail to report it to the IMB.
Several international introduction services (the mail order bride industry) challenged the constitutionality of IMBRA, but the statute was upheld by a federal court in 2007. Free speech and identity theft concerns have also been raised.
Wendy McElroy wrote that " there is no reason to believe that violence against 'mail-order brides' is higher than against women in general. No evidence supports the criminalization of every American man who looks overseas for a wife." 4.
End of Long Quote
Long Quote
"An international broker cannot provide contact or general information on a foreign woman to an American man unless that broker first collects and discloses to the woman the following information about the man: 1. Every state of residence since the age of 18. 2. Current or previous marriages as well as how and when they terminated. 3. Information on children under 18. 4. Any arrest or conviction related to controlled substances, alcohol or prostitution, making no distinction on arrests not leading to conviction. 5. Any court orders, including temporary restraining orders which are notoriously easy to procure. 6. Any arrest or conviction for crimes ranging from "homicide" to "child neglect". 7. Any arrest or conviction for "similar activity in violation of Federal, State or local criminal law" without specifying what "similar" means.
U.S. law will provide foreign women with extensive government information on American suitors which is not similarly offered to American women. Nor should it be.
Contacting a women for romantic purposes--internationally or domestically--is not a crime. Those who do so are not a priori criminals who must prove themselves innocent before being allowed an email exchange.
How many American men will be impacted by the IMBRA?
According to Rep. Larsen, between 8,000 and 12,000 American men find foreign wives through for-profit brokers each year. Presumably, a considerably higher number attempt but fail to find a wife who successfully emigrates." 5.
End of Long Quote
Long Quote
" But no solid foundation of data underlies Sen. Cantwell's (U.S. Senator from Washington State) claim of a "growing epidemic of domestic abuse among couples who meet through a broker." There is no reason to believe that violence against mail-order brides is higher than against women in general. No evidence supports the criminalization of every American man who looks overseas for a wife.
And, yet, such men are easy targets. Men who seek wives abroad often explicitly state that women here are not worth marrying because they are too independent, ruined by feminism, or 'fill in the pejorative blank.' If some of those ideal wives subsequently say "goodby" at the first glimpse of a green card, I can't muster sympathy.
What I do sympathize with, however, are the privacy rights of people who are considered guilty until proven innocent. This is especially true when a government violates the privacy of its own citizens to benefit foreign individuals.
What view of the American man does IMBRA broadcast to the world? American men are so predatory and violent that the U.S. government must protect foreign women by providing police checks before allowing the men to say "hello".
The "Ugly American" has become an article of Federal Law, supported by Congress." 6.
End of Long Quote
Key Provisions of International Marriage Broker Regulation Act:
Long Quote
" 1. Marketing of Children Prohibited IMBs may not provide personal contact information, photographs, or other information about anyone under the age of 18 to any individual or entity (Section 833 (d)(1))
2. Duty to Disclose Criminal and Marital History and Obtain Written Consent Before a (for a fee) IMB may provide a foreign national client's personal contact information to a United States client, the IMB must:
1. search sex offender public registries for information regarding the United States client;
2. collect certain criminal and marital background information through documentation or an attestation from the United States client;
3. provide to the foreign national client any records retrieved from the sex offender public registry search and the background information in her primary language;
4. provide to the foreign national client a government-prepared information pamphlet about the legal rights and resources available to the U.S. to immigrant victims of domestic violence and other crimes;
and;
5. obtain the foreign national client's signed, written consent to the release of her information to the United States client. (Sections 833 (d)(2) and (3))
3. Penalty for Misuse of Information. Any person who knowingly misuses any information obtained by an IMB (i.e. uses that information for any unauthorized purpose other than IMBRA's required disclosures) is subject to a fine or imprisonment of no more than 1 year, or both, in addition to other possible penalties that may be imposed under federal or state law.(Sections 833 (d)(3)(C))
4. Penalties for Other Violations/Nonpreemption An IMB is subject to a civil penalty of $ 5,000-$ 25,000 per violation or attempted violation of its obligations under IMBRA, and criminal penalties for not more than five years in prison. This is in addition to other possible penalties and remedies that may be provided for under federal or state law. (Sections 833 (d)(5) and (6)).
5. Definition of an International Marriage Broker "International Marriage Broker" is defined as an entity (whether or not U.S.-based) that charges fees for providing matchmaking services or social referrals between U.S. citizens/permanent residents and foreign nationals. This definition also exempts non-profit religious or cultural matchmaking services, and dating services that do match U.S. citizens/residents with aliens as their principal business and that charge comparable rates and offer comparable services to all clients, regardless of gender or country of citizenship.
6. Informational Pamphlet about Legal Rights and Resources IMBRA requires that U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), in consultation with the Departments of State (DOS) and Justice (DOJ) and nongovernmental organizations with specialized expertise, to develop a pamphlet for foreign fiance(e)s and spouses about the K visa immigration process, the legal rights and resources available to immigrant victims of domestic violence and other crimes, the illegality of marriage fraud (i.e., knowingly entering a marriage solely to obtain an immigration benefit) and U.S. legal obligations regarding child support. The pamphlet will also include a warning concerning the potential use of K visas by U.S. citizens with a history of violence, whose acts may not have resulted in a criminal record; as well as a notification regarding IMBs' obligation to disclose U.S. clients' violent criminal records.
7. Criminal Background Information Disclosed to Foreign Fiance(e) or Spouse IMBRA requires U.S. citizens petitioning to sponsor K visas to disclose convictions for a list of violent crimes on the " I-129F" petition form that they file with the DHS, including convictions for domestic violence and assault & battery, as well as convictions for elder abuse, child abuse or neglect, and stalking; and multiple (three or more) convictions related to alcohol/controlled substances. DHS must provide to DOS a copy of the petitioner's I-129F petition form, together with any criminal background information (including information on protection orders) that DHS has gather on the petitioner under existing authority.DOS must provide these materials to the foreign fiance(e) or spouse . The U.S. consular officer conducting the K visa interview overseas must inform the foreign fiance(e) or spouse that this information may not be complete, and ask her (1) whether an IMB facilitated her relationship with the petitioner and, if so, which one and (2) whether the IMB complied with IMBRA b providing her with the required disclosures and information. (Sections 832(a), 833(a)(5), and 833(b)(1))
8. Limits Place on How Many and How Often Fiance(e) Visa Petitions May be Filed; Petitioners with Violent Criminal Records Barred from Serial Sponsorship IMBRA limits a US petitioner's sponsorship of K1 (fiance(e)) visas to 2 total, with no less than 2 years between the filing of the last approved petition and the current petition. A petitioner may seek a discretionary waiver of these limits from DHS. However, DHS cannot ordinarily waive the limits if the U.S. petitioner has a record of violent criminal offenses. (Section 832(a)(1)) " 7.
End of Long Quote
Long Quote
Green Card Marriages A green card is the way immigrants from other countries become a permanent resident of the United States. According to the United States Census Bureau "Every year over 450,000 United States citizens marry foreign-born individuals and petition for them to obtain permanent residency (Green Card) in the United States. In 2003, 184,741 immigrants were admitted to the U.S. as spouses of U.S. citizens. The applicant must already be married. There are conditional requirements in order to obtain a green card through the marriage process. The prospect must have a conditional green card. This becomes permanent after approval by the government. The candidate may then apply for United States citizenship. A conditional residence green card is given to applicants who are being processed for permanent residence in the United States because they are married to a U.S. citizen. It is valid for two years. At the end of this time period, if the card holder does not change the status of their residency, they will be put on "out of status." Legal action by the government may follow. There are different procedures based on whether the applicant is already a U.S. citizen or if the applicant is an immigrant. The marriage must also be legal in, if appropriate, the emigrant's country.
Immigration Marriage Fraud Amendments of 1986 A public law was passed to deter marriage fraud among immigrants. The major stipulation is that if the immigrant is married for less than two years, they are classified as conditional immigrants. The two year period is not from the time they get married, but from the time that residency is granted. In order to remove this classification the immigrants must apply for U.S. Citizenship ninety days before the second-year anniversary of still being considered conditional.
There are several reasons why the conditional immigration status can be terminated. Those include divorce, marriage is not valid, or the couple failed to petition the Immigration Service to remove the classification of conditional residency. If the Immigration Service suspects that an alien has created a fraudulent marriage, the immigrant is subject to removal from the United States The marriage must be fraudulent at its inception and can be determined by several factors. The several factors are the conduct of the parties before and after the marriage are relevant and the bride's and groom's intention of establishing a life together. The validity must be given by the couple by showing insurance policies, property, leases, income tax, bank accounts, etc. The final decision is determined by if the sole purpose of the marriage was to gain benefits for the immigrant. The punishment for fraud is a large monetary penalty, possibility of never becoming a permanent resident of the United States, and jail time for the spouse. These Amendment Acts cover spouses, children of spouses, and K-1 visa fiances.
Intersection of Immigration Law and Family Law Immigrants who use the reason of family ties to gain entry into the United States are required to document financial arrangements. The sponsor of a related immigrant must guarantee financial support to the family. These guarantees form a contract between a sponsor and the federal government. It requires the sponsor to support the immigrant relative at a level equivalent to 125% of the poverty line for his or her household size. A beneficiary of the contract, the immigrant, or the Federal Government may sue for the promised support in the event the sponsor does not fulfill the obligations of the contract. The sponsor is also liable for the prevailing party's legal expenses.
Divorce does not end the sponsor's obligation to provide the support deemed by the contract. The only ways to terminate the obligation are for the immigrant spouse to become a U.S. citizen, the immigrant spouse has worked forty Social Security Act eligible quarters (10 years), the immigrant spouse is no longer considered a permanent alien and has left the U.S., the immigrant spouse obtained an ability to adjust their status, or the immigrant spouse dies. A sponsor's death also cuts off the obligation, but not in regards to any support the sponsor already owes which will be paid out of the sponsor's estate." 8.
End of Long Quote
Long Quote
Mail-Order Bride A mail-order bride is a woman who lists herself in catalogs (online or otherwise)and is selected by men for marriage. In nineteenth-century America, mail-order brides came from well-developed areas in the East to marry men in Western frontier lands. In the twentieth Century, the trend was towards women living in developing countries seeking men in more developed countries. In the twenty-first Century, the trend is now based primarily on internet-based meeting places which do not per se qualify as mail order bride services. The majority of women listed in the twentieth-century and twenty-first century services are from Southeast Asia, countries of the former Soviet Union and (to a lesser extent) from Latin America. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, large numbers of eastern European women have advertised themselves in such a way, primarily from Russia, Belarus, Ukraine and Moldova. Men who list themselves in such publications are referred to as "mail-order husbands". Mail-order husbands come from primarily (in alphabetical order) Australia, Canada, Germany, Japan, Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan, United Kingdom and the United States." 9.
End of Long Quote
Long Quote
"International marriage agency
Mail-order brides work with "international marriage agencies."
An international marriage agency (also called an international introduction agency or international marriage broker) is a business that endeavors to introduce men and women of different countries for the purpose of marriage, dating or correspondence. Many of these marriage agencies are based near women in developing countries (such as Ukraine,Russia,Colombia,Brazil,China, Thailand and the Philippines). International marriage agencies encourage women to register for their services and facilitate communication and meetings with men from the developed regions of North America, Western Europe, South Korea, Japan, Taiwan, Australia and New Zealand. This network of smaller international marriage agencies is often affiliated with web-based international dating sites that are able to market their services on a larger scale, in compliance with regulations such as the International Marriage Broker Regulation Act. International dating sites provide a wide variety of online communication, including instant messaging, email letters, webcam-based chat, phone translation, virtual gifts, live games, and mobile-based chat. ----
Services offered by marriage agencies typically include:
1. Introductions
2. Translation of correspondence between clients not speaking a common language
3. Excursions, in which a man is introduced to several women interested in marriage " 10.
End of Long Quote
Long Quote
Mail order brides: motivations,situations, and stories
"Eastern Europe Women in Russia,Ukraine,Belarus, and other Eastern European countries are common Caucasian mail-order bride candidates. Russian and other East European women are sometimes considered more attractive than West European and American women in appearance, dress and behavior.
Economic and social conditions for women in Russia are a motivational factor in finding foreign arrangements. ----Finding a foreign husband gives a women a chance to leave her country and find better economic opportunities. Marriage is a substantial part of Russian culture with 22 years being the age at which a woman is considered an "old maid." With 4,138,273 more women than men from the ages of 15 to 64, marriage opportunities are slim at home and worsened by the life expectancy differences between men (64.3 years) and women (73.17 years). In testimony before the United States Senate, Professor Donna Hughes said that two thirds of Ukrainian women interviewed wanted to live abroad; and, this rose to 97% in the resort city of Yalta.
Asia Many international brides come from developing countries in Asia. The countries the women come from are faced with unemployment, malnutrition and inflation. Those who marry foreign men tend to be better educated than most women from their country or their husbands. However, economic factors are not the only driving factor for women in Asia to enter the mail-order industry. Filipino women often enter the mail-order industry in the hope of marrying abroad and then sponsoring their family for immigration. In some case, women are recruited on their physical appearance with an emphasis placed on youth and virginity. This is found among boutique agencies most of which cater to wealthy men from other Asian nations.
Australia Since 2003, the Australian Federal Government's resolve to decrease what was deemed "inappropriate immigration" by then Prime Minister John Howard has gained momentum. Initial reactions to the program were mixed. However, during the January 2004 visit to Eastern Europe by Australian Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs Philip Ruddock, Australian-Russian relationships were strengthened while both nations committed to a timetable for reductions in Russian human trafficking into Australia. The Australian public further embraced its government's new policies following the media frenzy of the Jana Klintoukh case. This case first exploded into the public's view when current-events program Today Tonight aired footage of a young Russian-born Australian, claiming she was imported via an Internet site and was used as a sexual slave by her "husband" while being confined to his Sydney home.
Belarus In 2005, President Alexander Lukashenko attempted to regulate "marriage agencies" in Belarus and make it difficult for them to operate. He believed that Western men were draining his country of women of child-bearing age. However, as most agencies are being run from outside Belarus (either in Russia, European countries or the United States), he has been unable to stop (or otherwise regulate) this activity.
Canada Canadian immigration laws have traditionally been similar to (but slightly less restrictive than) their US counterparts; for instance, not requiring the Canadian citizen to prove minimum-income requirements (as has been a long-standing requirement of United States immigration laws). While there is still no formal requirement for a minimum salary, the sponsor must provide evidence of income in the form of their most recent T4 Income printout from the Canadian Revenue Agency as an attachment to their IMM 5481 Sponsorship Evaluation. Until recently (2001), Canada's immigration policy designated mail-order brides under the "family class" to refer to spouses and dependents and "fiancé(e)" class for those intending to marry, with only limited recognition of externally-married opposite-sex "common law" relationships; same-sex partners were processed as independent immigrants or under a discretionary provision for "humane and compassionate" considerations. In 2002, the Canadian Immigration Law was completely revised. One of the major changes was conjugal-partner sponsorship, available for any two people (including same sex couples) who have had conjugal relations together for at least one year. Canadian immigration authorities frown upon conjugal-partners sponsorship for heterosexual couples, and now require the couple to marry before a visa is granted (unless serious reason can be demonstrated why the couple is not yet married).
Colombia This South American country is attracting more mail-order bride agencies in recent years, including ColombianSweethearts, ColombianCupid and AmoLatina] As well, online dating agencies such as Match.com have developed a presence in Colombia. According to immigration statistics from the U.S. Homeland Security, Colombia has ranked in the top 10 of countries since 1999 from which fiancées have emigrated for the United States. As well, the number of Colombians being admitted to the U.S. between 1999 and 2008 using fiancé visas (including children) has increased 321 percent. A dissertation by Jasney E. Cogua-Lopez, “Through the Prisms of Gender and Power: Agency in International Courtship between Colombian Women and American Men,” suggests various reasons for this growth, including continuing cultural inequality between the sexes despite equality being codified in the country’s laws ( honor killings were not made completely illegal until 1980). Because of the large number of Colombians wishing to leave their country by marrying foreigners, a black market for marriages to foreigners has developed, with some people allegedly paying as much as 20 million pesos ($100,000 US) to illegal groups. According to Colombia Decrees No. 2668/88 and 1556/89, passed in 1988, foreigners are allowed to marry nationals in the country provided they supply the proper paperwork, including a birth certificate and proof that both parties are not already married. A notary is required, but because the laws are open to interpretation, the requirements can vary from notary to notary.
Philippines The Philippines prohibits the business of organizing or facilitating marriages between Filipinas and foreign men. The Philippine congress enacted Republic Act 6955 (the Anti-Mail-Order Bride Law) in 1990 as a result of stories in the local media about Filipinas being abused by their foreign husbands. Because of this, Filipinas often use "reverse publications" – publications in which men advertise themselves – to contact foreign men for marriage to Filipina women.
South Korea The New York Times reports, "Every month, hundreds of South Korean men fly to Vietnam, the Philippines, Mongolia, Nepal and Uzbekistan on special trips". Although these marriages can be successful, in some cases immigrant wives are mistreated, misunderstood and separated from their Korean husbands. One method men use when choosing young girls as wives is "Like a judge in a beauty pageant, the man interviews the women, many of them 20 years younger than he, and makes a choice". The British newspaper The Independent reports, "Last year it was reported that more than 40,000 Vietnamese women have married South Korean men and migrated there." Cambodian women are also popular with Korean men seeking foreign brides, but in March 2010 the Cambodian government banned marriages to South Korean men. The Korea Times reports that every year, thousands of Korean men sign up for matches with Filipina brides through agencies and by mail order. Based on data from the Korean government, there are 6,191 Filipinas in South Korea who are married to Koreans. After contacting a mail-order agency, the majority of Filipina mail-order brides met their husbands by attending "show-ups," a meeting in which a group of Filipino women are brought to meet a Korean man who is looking for a wife. At the show-up, the Korean man picks a prospective wife from among the group, and in a matter of days they are married. An anthropological study on Filipina wives and Korean men by professor Kim Min-jung of the Department of Cultural Anthropology at Kangwon National University found that these Korean men find it difficult to marry Korean women, so they look for girls in poorer countries with difficult economic circumstances The Korean men feel that because of the difficult circumstances from which the Filipina women come, cultural differences and the language barrier, they "will not run away". Further, she said, Korean men characterize Southeast Asian women as friendly, hardworking (due to agrarian backgrounds), "docile and obedient, able to speak English, and are familiar with Korean patriarchal culture". A recent study by matchmaking firm Bien-Aller polled 274 single South Korean men through its website concerning motivations for marrying non-Korean women and found that men choose foreign brides primarily for one of four reasons. "According to the poll, 32.1 percent of the men said they felt the biggest benefit of marrying foreign women is their lack of interest in their groom's educational background and financial or social status. The next best reason was their belief that foreign brides would be submissive (23 percent), make their lives more comfortable (15.3 percent), and that the men would not have to get stressed about their in-laws (13.8 percent)."
Violence Against Foreign Brides in South Korea There have been several murders of mail-order brides in South Korea. "On May 24, 2011, a South Korean man stabbed his Vietnamese wife to death while the couple’s 19-day-old baby lay next to her. The man, a farmer, had been matched up with his foreign bride through a broker. In 2010, another Vietnamese woman was killed by her husband a week after they were married. In 2008, a Vietnamese woman jumped from an apartment building to her death after being abused by her husband and mother-in-law." In November 2009, Philippine Ambassador to South Korea Luis Cruz warned Filipina women against marrying Korean men. He said in recent months that the Philippine Embassy in Seoul has received complaints from Filipino wives of abuses committed by their Korean husbands that caused separation, divorce and abandonment. As language and cultural differences become an issue, the Filipina women are regarded as commodities bought for a price.
Turkmenistan On June 4, 2001 Turkmenistan President Saparmurat Niyazov (also known as Turkmenbashi) authorized a decree that required foreigners to pay a $50,000 fee to marry a Turkmen citizen (regardless of how they met), and to live in the country and own property for one year. Authorities indicated that the law was designed to protect women from being duped into abusive relationships. In June 2005, Niyazov scrapped the $50,000 and the property-owning requirements.
United States Due to stringent U.S. immigration laws, there have been adaptations of the law and immigration process to provide regulation over immigration flow into the country, and protection for brides once they arrive. “In 1996, Congress passed the Illegal Immigration Reform and Responsibility Act.. Section 652 of this legislation specifically addresses the mail-order bride industry.” Congress found the following: There is a substantial ‘‘mail-order bride’’ business in the United States. With approximately 200 companies, an estimated 2,000 to 3,500 men in the United States find wives through mail-order-bride catalogs each year. However, there are no official statistics available on the number of mail-order brides entering the United States each year. The companies engaged in the mail-order-bride business earn substantial profits. On January 6, 2006, President George W. Bush signed the "International Marriage Broker Regulation Act of 2005" ( IMBRA) as part of the H.R. 3402: Violence Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act of 2005. The requirements of the law are controversial, and some commentators have claimed that it presumes that American men are abusers. In enacting IMBRA, Congress was responding to claims by the Tahirih Justice Center (TJC), a woman's advocacy group, that mail-order brides were susceptible to domestic abuse because they are unfamiliar with the laws, language and customs of their new home. The TJC insisted that special legislation was needed to protect them. The TJC asked Congress to consider several notable cases mentioned in the Congressional Record. Critics of IMBRA claim that the TJC failed to ask Congress to consider the relative amount of abuse between mail-order-bride couples and other couples (including the thousands of spousal murders that occurred in the US over the past 15 years). Two federal lawsuits (European Connections Tours v. Gonzales, N.D. Ga. 2006; AODA v. Gonzales, S.D. Ohio 2006) sought to challenge IMBRA on constitutional grounds. The AODA case was terminated when the plaintiffs withdrew their claim. The European Connections case ended when the judge ruled against the plaintiff, finding the law constitutional regarding a dating company. On March 26, 2007, U.S. District Judge Clarence Cooper dismissed with prejudice a suit for injunctive relief filed by European Connections, agreeing with Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and TJC that IMBRA is a constitutional exercise of Congressional authority to regulate for-profit dating websites and agencies where the primary focus is on introducing Americans to foreigners. Additionally, the federal court specifically found that: "the rates of domestic violence against immigrant women are much higher than those of the U.S. population". The judge also compared background checks on American men to background checks on handgun buyers by stating, "However, just as the requirement to provide background information as a prerequisite to purchasing a firearm has not put gun manufacturers out of business, there is no reason to believe that IMBs will be driven by the marketplace by IMBRA".
Violence against mail-order-brides in the United States In September 2003, 26-year-old Ukrainian engineer and mail-order bride, Alla Barney, bled to death on the floor of her car after her American husband, Lester Barney, 58, slashed her throat in front of the couple’s four-year-old son Daniel. Lester fled with Daniel from the scene in the parking lot of the boy’s day-care center. After an Amber Alert was triggered, he turned Daniel over to a friend and was taken into custody by police. Alla had been granted a restraining order against Lester a few months before, and had been given temporary custody of Daniel. Anastasia King, a young woman from Kyrgyzstan, was found strangled and buried in a shallow grave in Washington State in December 2000. At age 18, Anastasia received an email from a 38-year-old Seattle man, Indle King, from a mail-order-bride website. He flew to her country, and they were married soon after. Two years later, after considerable strife, Indle wanted another bride. He was allegedly unwilling to pay for a divorce, so he ordered a tenant in their Washington home to kill Anastasia. Weighing nearly 300 pounds, her husband pinned Anastasia down while the tenant strangled her with a necktie. Both were convicted of murder. King’s previous wife (whom he had also met through an IMB) had a domestic violence protection order issued against him, and left him because he was abusive. Nina Reiser was a Russian-born and -trained obstetrician and gynaecologist. She was murdered by her husband Hans Reiser, a businessman and computer programmer whom she met after placing an ad in a mail-order bride catalog. She had a restraining order against him during their divorce proceedings. Nina was reported missing on September 5, 2006. That month Hans was detained by Oakland police due to suspicions surrounding the disappearance of his wife, and was later arrested for suspected murder. On April 28, 2008 Hans Reiser was found guilty of first-degree murder, and was sentenced to 15 years to life in prison. On July 7, 2008 Hans led Oakland police to his wife's remains with an agreement to be charged with second-degree murder instead.
Violence against mail-order husbands by mail-order brides in The United States In 2002 Tessie Buhawe Spotts (a native of the Philippines) was charged with the poisoning murder of her husband, Alfred Spotts, in Newberry, South Carolina. The couple met through an international magazine advertisement.
Legal matters for mail-order brides in the United States Marriage agencies are legal in almost all countries. On Jan 6, 2006, the United States Congress enacted H.R. 3402: Violence Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act of 2005. This law requires certain actions prior to selling a foreign woman's address to a US citizen or resident, including:
The man must complete a questionnaire on his criminal and marital background.
The seller must obtain the man's record from the National Sex Offenders Public Registry database.
The questionnaire and record must be translated into the woman's native language and provided to her.
The woman must certify that she agrees to permit communication.
A lifetime limit of two (2) fiancé(e) visas is imposed, with a waiver required for the approval of any subsequent fiancée visa.
Visa regulations
In order to bring a spouse into the United States, Form I-130 must be filed (an immigrant petition on behalf of a relative). After that, a K-3/K-4 V-1/V-2 Entry Visa for Spouse must be filed. The Immigration and Nationalization Service advises that “in some cases, it may be to a couple's advantage to pursue a K-1 fiancee visa before getting married. In other cases, applicants may find that it is more cost effective to get married abroad and then apply for an immigrant visa overseas. In many cases, the K-1 visa application process takes just as long as the immigrant visa process”. Couples must remain together at least two years. “Despite well over 2,000 mail-order marriages a year, there is no information on the amount of mail-order brides entering the US. The purpose of this law is two-fold: to protect the safety of mail-order brides and to prevent fraud”. 11.
End of Long Quote
Long Quote
RULES TO FOLLOW TO AVOID INTERNATIONAL MARRIAGE AND DATING SCAMS
" 1. DO NOT sent money to any girl you have never met, are not in love with, or engaged to.
2. If you find yourself about to send money to a foreign girl you haven't met, are not in love with and not engaged to, PLEASE REVIEW RULE NUMBER 1!! Foreign women DO NOT EVER fall in love through correspondence and DO NOT EVER come to visit a total stranger on a tourist visa.
3. DO NOT send money to any girl you are writing to for internet support. (Depending on the agency's specific policies, it may be necessary to pay THE AGENCY for correspondence services like Express Mail or translations BUT always do so having researched the agency with reliable referrals.)
4. DO NOT expect to buy a girl's love with expensive gifts or cash. Too many young girls join agencies to get in on the kind of cash their girl friends have gotten from a foreign boy friend. Too may foreign men shell out thousands of dollars to foreign super-model wannabes thinking their working their way toward a lifetime of " I Dream of Jeannie" only to get dumped completely before the first kiss. DO give modest gifts, flowers, candy etc. to her and her family once you've met and fallen in love. My idea of a modest gift is anything up to $ 100. Cosmetics, clothing, small jewelry, nice wine, Godiva chocolate.
5. DO NOT buy your girl a cell phone, home computer or English lessons unless engaged.
6. DO wait until you girl's arrival in this country before you buy an expensive engagement ring. It should be fine to present you foreign fiancee with a modest engagement ring before her arrival in your country.
7. DO realize most scamming foreign women couldn't care less about foreign citizenship in your country. If they're not in this for a husband, they're probably in it for the money. The one's looking for a husband will ask you for love, attention, friendship, support, kisses, hugs and intimacy. The one's looking for money will ask you for-well, MONEY!! Again, remember-when we become engaged, married and beyond our foreign women will be able to spend money on necessary things (foreign women are really quite frugal you'll find) and on the occasional toy for their child or gift for their family back home. If you are smart and want your girl to be happy-DO NOT try to restrict your foreign bride to some kind of allowance you wouldn't give your 12 year old. BAD IDEA!
8. DO NOT expect any foreign girl to come here and visit you before you have met, courted, fallen in love and become engaged. Know you will ultimately have to get on the plane and go yourself if you are going to find HER!
9. DO NOT FALL IN LOVE WITH OR FILE A FIANCEE VISA FOR ANY WOMAN WHO HAS NOT DEMONSTRATED A TRUE ATTRACTION AND HEALTHY AFFECTION FOR YOU.
10. IF YOU SUSPECT YOU ARE BEING SCAMMED, DO AN INTERNET SEARCH FOR YOUR FOREIGN GIRL'S NAME TO SEE IF ANY OTHER MEN HAVE POSTED INFORMATION ABOUT HER. VISIT ANTI-SCAM SITES AND/OR READ RECOMMENDED BOOKS ON THE TOPIC TO INCREASE YOUR AWARENESS OF POSSIBLE RED FLAG BEHAVIORS." 12.
End of Long Quote
Saturday, November 1, 2014
Feminism's Effect on The Educational System
Feminist legislation and dogma, for the past 50 years, has created an educational system which has destroyed the male culture, defamed men in general and in particular, and emasculated the American male.
" Women now receive almost 58 percent of bachelor's degrees. This is why many colleges admit men with qualifications inferior to those of women applicants-which is one reason men have higher dropout rates. In law, medical, and doctoral programs, women are the majorities;or, if the trend continue, will be." 1.
As stated before in the chapter on Government and Feminism: "Through laws,customs, and feminist dogma, if a male demonstrates any of these (male) virtues, American women can and will destroy him by lying about abuse, rape, verbal haranguing, anything; and, he can be arrested, prosecuted, and maliciously convicted of a crime. This is the case even if she has a historical pattern of lying because the "system" does not want to take any chances." 2.
The educational environment has become very hostile towards men, especially men who exhibit the traditional male virtues.
That assertion seems somewhat preposterous doesn't it? However, in light of the straightforward feminist dogma asserting that men should be feminized concomitant with the the "Cultural Marxist" means and ends associated with feminism, this assertion is based upon fact and practice within the social, cultural, political, legal, and economic framework of the USA and other nations. Women, through other laws, customs, and feminist dogma have the means and motive to discriminate against men in the educational system who exhibit the male virtues.
The result of the aforementioned, is that women, in the educational workforce, tend to only tolerate weak, base, effeminate, and feminist men in the same. There is an achievement gap between boys and girls at all levels of the education system as well as a lack of male role models available in the education system.
A proposed White House Council on Boys and Men (http://whitehouseboysmen.org/blog)(a counterpart to the existing council on women), would address the growing gap in high school graduation, college graduation and advanced degree achievement in the US education system where the number of boys obtaining a complete education has steadily declined since 1981. 3.
" But Patai goes much further in her critique of women's studies, arguing that women's studies is not an academic discipline at all but the academic arm of an political movement- what we, once again, call a respectably academic from for ideological feminism. Not surprisingly, many reviewers in women's studies have attacked her. In responding to them, she has been required to repeat her initial premise over and over again. 'Women's studies is quite explicitly feminism in action in an academic setting--- [Courses are far too often... not about women's contributions but about women's victimization---These issues typically are not presented as problems to be studied from many points of view but rather as problems to be exposed by feminist ideology.] The bottom line to me is that far too often women's studies classrooms convey attitudes to be endorsed by the students rather than substantive knowledge. " 4.
The following is a long partial quote from Robert H. Bork's book , " Slouching Towards Gomorrah " : Radical Feminism vs. Education
"There are now more than 600 undergraduate and several dozen graduate programs in Women's Studies in American colleges and universities. At first sight that might seem odd since so much of feminism is utterly inconsistent with intellectual seriousness. In many universities today, however, intellectual integrity comes in a distant second to political correctness. It is thus only an apparent paradox that institutions which, because of their professed devotion to reason and knowledge, should be feminism's sworn enemies are instead the centers of its power.
There are also, of course, programs in African-American Studies, Hispanic Studies, Gay and Lesbian Studies, and more. Nothing could make clearer the politicization of higher education. These so-called disciplines vie with one another in claiming victimhood, but feminism is by far the strongest and most imperialistic, its influence suffusing the most traditional academic departments and university administrations. Feminists are revising and radicalizing textbooks and curricula in the humanities and the social sciences. They have a major say in faculty recruitment. Feminists increasingly control what is taught in high schools and elementary schools as well. Speech codes and "sensitivity" training severely limit what can be said on campus. The feminists have not only done harm to the intellectual function of universities and schools, they have made campuses extremely unpleasant, especially for white males, who are subject to harassment and demands that they toe the feminist cultural and political line.
The incongruity of feminism as an academic subject is heightened by another development. Though most feminists reject the idea of differences between men and women, more recently a coterie has appeared that insists upon, and celebrates just such difference. These women claim that rationality, sometimes called "linear thinking," is a coercive tool of the oppressive patriarchy. That may be because they have noticed that evidence and logic are running heavily against the no-difference position. It is necessary, therefore, to identify evidence and logic with the enemy and to exalt intuitive and emotional "women's ways of knowing." These "difference feminists" claim to perceive all of reality through the "sex/gender lens." Judging from their reports of what they see, that must be like peering at the world through the thick glass of a bottle bottom.
Thus, we now have what Patai and Koertge call "TOTAL REJ (total rejection) feminists" whose creed is that "Our culture, including all that we are taught in schools and universities, is so infused with patriarchal thinking that it must be torn up root and branch if genuine change is to occur. Everything must go - even the allegedly universal disciplines of logic, mathematics, and science, and the intellectual values of objectivity, clarity, and precision on which the former depend. If acceptance of logic and standards of evidentiary proof are causing radical feminists to lose arguments, it is clear that they must be discarded if the feminist enterprise is not to be abandoned. But if logic and evidence are jettisoned, it follows that all of the disciplines built up on logic and evidence cannot remain intact. In the place of these oppressive disciplines and values there are to be constructed feminist alternative versions. Nobody seems to have the faintest idea, for example, what a feminist physics would look like, but the total rejectionists are sure one is out there somewhere. It seems to be assumed that a feminist physics, though different, would work as well as the version we now have. Feminist rocket scientists, apparently, could place satellites in orbit without using any of the laws of motion that are now employed. Needless to say, there is so far not a single axiom or proposition of feminist science that explains or predicts anything or is capable of being tested empirically. When that unhappy fact is brought to a feminist's attention, the reply is often that the patriarchy has had over 3,000 years to build its mathematics, logic, and science whereas women have just started. Thus, the absence of anything but oratory about the wrong-headedness of science as it is must not be viewed as an embarrassment. But there is no shortage of oratory. Anne Wilson Schaef, for example, denounces what she calls the "White Male System" (WMS) of rationality. Schaef says this system consists of four myths. First, the WMS is the only system that exists. Second, the WMS is innately superior. Third, the WMS knows and understands everything. Fourth, the WMS believes that it is possible to be totally logical, rational, and objective. To be sure, no one with any sense has ever claimed anything like all this. The virtue of the scientific method is precisely that mistakes made are corrected by others and that one investigator's results must be replicable by others in order to be accepted. The people involved do not think they are totally logical, rational, and objective. They know that no human is. Radical feminist inanities about science, rationality, linear thinking, etc., rest on the allegation that knowledge and modes of reasoning are socially constructed; that is, that there are no objective truths and no single valid method of reasoning. That is a very convenient position for someone making irrational assertions. It would be rather difficult to hold an intelligent, or even an intelligible, discussion with someone holding that position, and it would be impossible to win an argument with her. That, of course, is the point of the exercise. Take women's studies themselves. On the evidence proffered by Sommers, Patai and Koertge, and others, women's studies programs and courses are abysmal swamps of irrational dogma and hatred. The feminist classroom is an arena for emotions rather than intellect or analysis. Agreement with the ideology is mandatory. A feminist professor can have enormous influence with immature young women in a forum where there are no intellectual constraints. In such a classroom emotion and opinion rule. The students are expected to recount personal experiences of suffering and oppression. Since feminists insist that the oppression of women by men is universal and unrelenting, a failure to have instances ready at hand for recitation is taken as insufficient understanding of the subject. The students are at an age when, male or female, they are uncertain about life, susceptible to absolutisms, and easy to persuade that they are being treated badly. The result is that young women pour out their emotions in uncontrolled fashion. It is dangerous to inflame young women's capacities for anger and self-pity; severe emotional harm can be done. In some classes, the woman may state in advance that she does not want any of her testimony repeated outside the classroom and the others agree to honor that request. No respectable academic discipline would keep classroom discussions secret. Feminist bias in scholarship seems indomitable. The sociologist Steven Goldberg states that on numerous occasions Margaret Mead denied in writing that her research disproved the existence of sex differences. Indeed, in reviewing Goldberg's book, The Inevitability of Patriarchy, Mead wrote: "It is true, as Professor Goldberg points out, that all the claims so glibly made about societies ruled by women are nonsense. We have no reason to believe that they ever existed.... Men have always been the leaders in public affairs and the final authorities at home." But when Goldberg examined introductory sociology books, he found that thirty-six of thirty-eight began their sex-roles chapters with a discussion of Mead's work as demonstrating the environmental nature of male and female behavior. These books misrepresented Mead because "[t]hey, like the discipline whose work they represent, have an ideological commitment to denying that masculine and feminine behaviors and emotions are rooted in male and female physiologies and that all social systems conform to the limits imposed by this reality. "Feminists are transforming mainstream college curricula, they claim, in order to "make knowledge broader," but also to fight against prejudice. "There is," said a professor attending a National Women's Studies Association conference, "a correlation between groups excluded from the curriculum and hate violence aimed at groups." She said most "inclusion" work has focused on blacks, Hispanics, Asian-Americans, and American Indians. But in order to "fight the hatreds and 'isms' in the world, we have to include education about more groups than those four." Other groups whose achievements should be taught, she said, include lesbians, gays, bisexuals, and transsexuals, and issues of social class and disability should be included. "Some argue that there are different cultures of disability, like deaf culture. "Students subjected to propaganda in the name of history will graduate with no clear comprehension of what took place and what was important. Students whose instruction is in fighting "isms" and giving recognition to different sexual groups and cultures of disability are unlikely to graduate with any knowledge that would qualify them for positions other than as sensitivity counselors. As part of their campaign to convert higher education into a propaganda tool, feminists are deforming literary studies by seeking to discover classical allusions to feminism. George Will recorded a few of the choicer items: Shakespeare's "Tempest" reflects the imperialistic rape of the Third World. Emily Dickinson's poetic references to peas and flower buds are encoded messages of feminist rage, exulting clitoral masturbation to protest the prison of patriarchal sex roles. Jane Austen's supposed serenity masks boiling fury about male domination, expressed in the nastiness of minor characters who are "really" not minor. In "Wuthering Heights," Emily Bronte, a subtle subversive, has Catherine bitten by a male bull-dog. Melville's white whale? Probably a penis. Grab a harpoon. Radical feminists, then, are contributing more than their share to the dumbing of America. And not just America. Oxford University Press has announced Ideologies of Desire, "a startling new series in the cultural study of sex, gender, sexuality and power: redefining the meaning of erotics and politics!" The Press informs us that sex is not a matter of physiology but of culture. "The aim of the series is to illuminate both the play of desire in the workings of ideology and the play of ideological forces in the formation of sexual experiences - and, ultimately, to map more precisely the available avenues of cultural resistance to the contemporary institutional and discursive regulation of sex." That the object of these courses is to indoctrinate students with an all-inclusive condemnation of American or Western culture is shown by the frequent expansion of the feminist accusation from the victimization of females to a charge of general oppression. One feminist professor argues, "All students suffer when the more volatile issues central to feminist analysis ... [such as] racism, poverty, incest and rape, battering, lesbianism, and reproductive freedom ... are dropped from a woman's studies course." It seems odd at first glance, given this wide-ranging list of complaints, that the programs are not changed from women's studies to oppression studies. Perhaps it is not so odd, however. If faculty representing all of the oppressed were brought in, feminists might lose control of the curriculum and the funds. Yet it is in keeping with feminism's revolutionary neo-Marxism that the movement attacks bourgeois culture on many fronts.As one might suspect from their hostility to men, marriage, and family, radical feminists are very much in favor of lesbianism. This involves more than the demand that lesbianism be accepted by society as just another "lifestyle." They want not only lawful lesbian marriages but "reproductive rights" for lesbians. That means the right to bear children through artificial insemination and the right to adopt one's lesbian partner's child. Since sperm is sold freely in the United States, much more freely than in other nations, there are lesbian couples raising children. It takes little imagination to know how the children will be indoctrinated.In its effort to transform the curriculum. A National Women's Studies Association conference, attended by about 700 administrators, teachers, and students, gave major consideration to including lesbian issues in feminist programs. The Lesbian Caucus was one of the largest contingents at the conference. Among the Presentations were "Teaching Queer: Incorporating Gay and Lesbian Perspectives Into Introductory Courses"; "War on Lesbians"; "Lesbian Perspectives on/in Literature"; "Lesbian Theory in Poetry"; and "Dykeotomy." Not surprisingly, there is in women's studies programs a good deal of proselytizing for lesbianism. At the University of Washington, a women's studies instructor showed the class how to masturbate, stating that "the preferable tool is a tongue, a woman's tongue." The objectives of radical feminists are not confined to the recruitment of converts through women's studies programs alone. Their aims are imperialistic. The feminist influence has spread to other departments and graduate schools. It is most visible to outsiders in the process of faculty recruitment, where preference is given to women and minorities. A young man I know went to the American Association of Law Schools convention in Washington, the traditional market for those desiring teaching jobs. He entered the hotel and passed a room marked "Women's Hospitality Room." Through the open door he saw young women having Danishes and coffee and chatting amicably with one another. Next he came to the "Minorities Hospitality Room," and observed the same activities. He walked on and discovered that there was no hospitality room he could enter. He and the other white males stood around the lobby until the interviewing began. The same young man, possessed of splendid records at both Harvard College and Law School, and a clerk to a court of appeals judge and to Justice Anthony Kennedy, the sort of credentials law schools used to hunger for in their teaching applicants, applied for a position at the law school of the University of Texas. He was, however, in competition with a Mexican-American lesbian who had graduated well below the middle of her law school class. She got the job. A memorandum from a member of the appointments committee explained to the faculty that she should be hired because "She does appeal to three constituent groups." The point is not merely that white males are being subjected to sexual and racial discrimination in higher education, though that is certainly an outrage. The point is also that faculties are lowering their standards in hiring in order to be politically correct. That necessarily lowers the quality of education they offer their students and the standards of scholarly publication. A friend of mine, a law school professor, resigned from his schools appointments committee because the conversations he had with applicants likely to be hired were inferior in intellectual content to the conversations he had with his students. Radical feminist insistence upon seeing slights, harassment, and male victimization of women everywhere has made campuses, workplaces, and society less comfortable places. The eagerness of radical feminists to see insult in every male action, coupled (if one dare use that word) with the spinelessness of the supposedly oppressive patriarchy, has led to so much discomfort and loss of freedom. Some of women's complaints are merely funny, though they do reveal a mindset: A young woman at the University of Pennsylvania who wore a short skirt complained of a "mini-rape" because a young man walked past her and said, "Nice legs." At the University of Maryland, some female students posted the names of male students selected at random, young men about whom they knew nothing, under the heading "Potential Rapists." The message was that all men are potential rapists, though the men actually named probably did not find much comfort in that. Far more serious are the accusations of actual rape when nothing of the sort occurred. A female student came to a male student's quarters with her toothbrush, planning to stay the night. The next morning she was seen having a peaceable breakfast with the man. Later she charged him with rape; and, he was briefly held in jail. Accusations of date rape are flung freely by women who consented and later changed their minds about what they did. Universities have capitulated by creating rape-prevention and sexual harassment workshops that offer virulently anti-male propaganda. It is little wonder that young men are uncertain about themselves and their relationship with women and, perhaps for self-protection, perhaps because they have been brainwashed, tend usually to take the women's side of issues. Male faculty also feel the lash of feminist anger. The use of "insensitive" language in the classroom often results in formal complaints being filed, followed by a hearing notable for its lack of the rudiments of due process, and then suspension or a requirement of submitting to sensitivity training. Required sensitivity training is a humiliating experience, whether it is imposed by a university or, as is increasingly frequent, by a corporation. (Corporations are heavily into diversity training, apparently in part because federal regulators pressure them.) Nor is it usually possible for the professor or employee to retain his dignity by refusing to accept such coercion. That would bring dismissal, after which no other employment is likely to be available other universities or businesses will be reluctant to hire someone found guilty of insensitivity to women. The feminists at the new organization will be alerted and will object to the man's employment. Who would want to hire the possibility, indeed the certainty, of more trouble with feminists? Sensitivity training is often required even of people who have not displayed "insensitivity." Cornell's training session for resident advisers featured an X-rated homosexual movie. Pictures were taken of the advisers' reactions to detect homophobic squeamishness. Thus, entering freshmen in colleges are increasingly subjected to sessions indoctrinating them in the correct attitudes not only to women but to homosexuals and members of minority groups. The object is thought control. As a reader of Measure (a publication of the University Center for Rational Alternatives, an organization dedicated to preserving the traditional virtues of scholarship and teaching in universities) said of compulsory training dictated by the Department of Education: "[It] is not enough for citizens to obey the law, they must be reeducated to love Big Brother." Often feminist complaints seem to reflect less a feeling of real outrage than a desire to provoke a confrontation and to intimidate. Radical feminists today, like the radical students of the Sixties, have discovered that they have the power to make the Establishment cringe and back down, and so their demands escalate. At Penn State University, a female English professor had to move her class into the arts building because of lack of space elsewhere. Hanging in the classroom were five museum reproductions: Goya's "The Naked Maja" a depiction of the crucifixion, a Madonna and child, the portrait of a youth, and a pastoral scene. Some male students snickered at the nude. Instead of ignoring them, telling them to grow up, or taking the picture down, the professor formally demanded that the administration remove it, thus forcing the school to take an official position. After lengthy negotiations which included considering the suggestion of a "diversity expert" to hang a painting of a nude male, the administration removed the picture. A spokeswoman for the Womyn's Concerns Committee said that "these older paintings served as a type of pornography - Playboy wasn't around back then." She added: "I don't think our society is capable of dealing with paintings such as these." Society had dealt comfortably with Goya's masterpiece for well over a century, until a feminist chose to make a major issue of it. Not the least of the feminists' sins is their mangling of the language. "Womyn" or "wimmin" for "women," just to avoid the hated letters M-E-N, is an atrocity. But it is not much better to go to a restaurant and be informed that your "waitperson" will be with you shortly. So ideologically crazed are some feminist academics that their seminars are now called "ovulars." So alienating are the messages of the women's studies programs that Professor Sommers writes that she would like to see some of the more extreme institutions (e.g., Wellesley College, Mount Holyoke, Smith, Mills, and the University of Minnesota) put warning labels on the first page of their bulletins: We will help your daughter discover the extent to which she has been in complicity with the patriarchy. We will encourage her to reconstruct herself through dialogue with us. She may become enraged and chronically offended. She will very likely reject the religious and moral codes you raised her with. She may well distance herself from family and friends. She may change her appearance, and even her sexual orientation. She may end up hating you (her father) and pitying you (her mother). After she has completed her reeducation with us, you will certainly be out tens of thousands of dollars and very possibly be out one daughter as well. To that warning label Sommers might have added "You are also likely to have a badly educated daughter." The young women who are lured into women's studies should be spared what they obtain there: total immersion in a false world view coupled to a fourth-rate education. While other students are studying history, mathematics, science, languages, and similarly useful disciplines, those in women's studies programs are working on acquiring belligerent attitudes and misinformation. Instead of preparing students for the world, the programs impose severe handicaps upon them. Robert Nisbet offers the "affecting story" of a young woman who majored at her university in eco-feminism, and graduated with honors. She went to Washington, D.C., a city richly endowed with lobbies for ecology and feminism. Because of her dual degree, she assumed that a well-paying job would be waiting. "But even ecological and feminist lobbies require people who can read, write, count, and in general ratiocinate; she thus became one of the large number of genteel unemployables." When later in life the products of radical feminist education fail to achieve as they had hoped, they will undoubtedly blame the patriarchal system by which, they have been taught, they and all other women are oppressed. In compensation for providing poor educations, then, the women's studies programs offer their victims a ready-made, all-purpose alibi. They, and we, will be paying the price for years to come." 5.
" In response to a question about whom she would consider fit to teach women's studies, Patai notes that this field: ' was created to be the "academic arm of the women's movement," and this phrase is still repeated again and again in the mission statements of various programs. I don't believe it's appropriate for a secular university to have a program committed to a particular ideology. To the extent that women's studies is feminism [as distinct from being about feminism], it is, in my view, academically illegitimate. The study of women, our history, gender roles, etc., on the other hand, are all entirely legitimate and important subjects. Once can be a feminist, as I am, and not a supporter of women's studies or of feminist activism [specifically] in education. ' " 6.
Continuation of the Feminist Attack on the Scientific Method Some of the following are quotes which demonstrate and provide examples of how feminism is attacking the scientific method: " Most of those who attack science know little or nothing about it. Nonetheless, postmodernists now question either the existence of objective reality or the ability of anyone to see it, This present a very attractive opportunity for some advocates of women or other "subaltern" groups being oppressed by the lingering academic shades of "dead white males." Why would feminists, in particular, want to undermine the search for objective reality? Some of them do not, of course, because they rely on the search for objective truth to prove their claims about the victimization of women. Others do, though, in order to bypass messy disputes over those claims. If they can show inherent bias against women in research under the established rules, which are based on the possibility of knowing at least something objective about the external world, then they can dismiss politically or ideologically inconvenient complexity and ambiguity without further ado. At the same time, they can fill the void with research based on rules of their own. Not rules that openly foster objectivity, to be sure, but ones that openly foster subjectivity. Once the subjective "voice" of women (or minorities) has been established as a new standard, of course, no dissonant "voices" need to be taken seriously; women can presumably "know" things by virtue of being women and affirming their own subjectivity, things that men cannot know by insisting on the ostensibly universal standard of objectivity." 7.
"Affirmative action did the rest, because the influx of women tended to favor fields in what became a "pink collar ghetto". But how could it have been otherwise? Those already established in academia explicitly and vehemently denied the most fundamental principles of scholarship. None of [Talcott] Parsons's norms are acceptable: logic is a patriarchal device for browbeating nonlinear thinking; since all knowledge is contextual, the search for generality is a form of imperialism; empirical validity must be tempered by moral and political appraisals. Communality of a nonhierarchical sort is acceptable, but the rest of [Robert] Merton's norms must go; a humane community would be based on trust, not skepticism; universalism should be replaced by a standpoint theory, which says that reports are always to be understood as a product of the culture, gender, ethnicity, class of the observer who made them; no activity can be or should be disinterested. Quite the contrary, a commitment to correct political and social goals should be encouraged" 8.
"These strictures make no scientific sense. Nor, adds Koertge, do they make political sense for women and their allies. 'What a pity, if in the name of liberating women, feminists should now encourage women and members of various ethnic groups to stay comfortably within the habits of thought that conform to traditional gender and cultural stereotypes. One of the joys of liberal education in either the arts or sciences is the challenge to learn how to think differently. How patronizing to tell young women that the ways of logic, statistics, and mathematics are not women's ways-that all they need do is stay connected." 9.
"Donna Haraway, for example, describes the "dominant" epistemology-presumably that of men alone- in terms of objectivity, value neutrality, and pure inquiry. She describes feminist epistemology-that of women- as subjective, value laden, and (in effect) purely political. Like good post modernists, she keeps asking questions that begin with "whose." Whose knowledge have we accepted so far? Whose evidence? Whose interpretation? Whose interests are at stake? These, say academics in women's studies, are the most important epistemological (and therefore political) questions that feminists can ask. And the answer is always the same cynical one: that of whatever group has the most power. For ideological feminists, that answer is a euphemistic reference to men (at least white men). -----Objectivity implies universality. If something is objectively true, after all, it must be true for all people. Subjectivity, on the other hand, implies particularity. Something might be true for some people but not for others, say, or true in some circumstances but not others. But feminist ideologues, despite their lip service to postmodernist relativism, identify universality objectively with men and particularity objectively with women. Never mind that this confirms the old misogynistic stereotype of women as irrational beings or that is contradicts the ostensible disdain of women for objectivity." 10.
Further Facts,Quotes, and Arguments with Regard to Feminism's Adverse Affect on the Educational System The following is a partial quote from an article entitled "Discrimination against Boys in Education (and Elsewhere)" by Roger E. Olson:
"People have challenged my claim that boys suffer discrimination in society, but researchers are now confirming it beyond doubt or dispute. Still, educators in particular are not developing programs aimed specifically at boys to help them succeed in an environment geared for girls. One journalist, commenting on a British study about “Gender Expectations and Stereotype Threat” suggests that so much attention has been devoted to girls over the past twenty to thirty years that it’s difficult to make the shift to boys now that girls are surpassing boys at every level of education.
Most recently, Christina Hoff Sommers, a vocal advocate for boys, wrote an opinion column in the New York Times (February 2, 2013) entitled “The Boys at the Back.” (It’s easily found by Googling the title and author’s name.) According to her, a study published this week in the Journal of Human Resources proves that teachers grade girls more leniently and boys more harshly when they achieve exactly the same results on tests. “The study’s authors analyzed data from more than 5,800 students from kindergarten through fifth grade and found that boys across all racial groups and in all major subject areas received lower grades than their test scores would have predicted.” “If the teachers had not accounted for classroom behavior, the boys’ grades, like the girls’, would have matched their test scores.” In other words, in that squishy realm of subjective judgment involved in all grading, teachers punish boys for being boys and reward girls for being girls." 11.
Beginning of Long Quote:
" According to Canadian teacher Brian Simpson, the education system in the West has been taken over by feminists who preach a daily diet of hate, violence and discrimination against males despite pretenses of "tolerance", "non violence", and "inclusiveness." Mr. Simpson also noted that it was common to find girls wearing anti-male clothing with slogans such as "Boys Are Stupid, Throw Rocks at Them" and " I Like Boys Who Are Sensitive and Cry, When I Hit Them." He found it particularly disturbing that this misandrist behavior was encouraged by female teaching staff. Mr. Simpson has been teaching for 20 years as a supply teacher and has taught on over 1000 class rooms across Canada. He also stated stated that he had been in classrooms where videos were shown blaming all date violence on males. No sexual female-to-male violence was mentioned and women were referred to as "men's property." Once the videos had been shown, the girls overflowed anti-male hate sentiments and the boys were afraid to speak on any matter. Since women are responsible for more Domestic Violence, this is particularly disturbing. Brian Simpson also stated that the education system was dominated by female staff and that men were routinely discriminated against for employment with no recourse to authorities. He also found that when he was an education student that being involved in teaching was to be immersed in femininity-wall to wall women, everywhere; the students, the teaching staff and the curriculum. After many other unsettling experiences, including showing children feminist promoted videos that encouraged lesbianism, he decided to voice his concerns. When he did so, he was met with verbal threats and abuse. This is a severe problem all over the Western world; and, boys in education are paying a heavy price for the one sides female perspective from which things are taught. The URL link to Brian Simpson's story is: http://rense.com/general81/vdt.htm.
The female inspired teaching curriculums don't take into account the difference between boys and girls which can often leave boys feeling unwanted, bored and just not interested in school work. In childhood it's also important to have role models, people we can look up to and aim to one be like. As there are so few men in teaching, boys simply don't get the role models they need. Female teachers, who are often quite fearful of natural male behaviors, oppress and punish boys for the ways they naturally behave.
Feminism is particularly prevalent in colleges and universities and may account for more women now attending university than men. Women's studies along with other social sciences are extremely feminist in nature and often drive what few men sign up for these courses, out. Many teachers proudly call themselves feminists and socialists and spread hatred for men and boys in the education system.
Recently there has been a case in the United Kingdom in which a male student is bringing a damages claim against his university Gender Studies department. He was forced to withdraw from his studies due to the persistently anti-male nature of the course. His legal claim is based on the Sex Discrimination law, Breach of Contract, Misrepresentation and Misleading Advertising. The university's promotional literature did not warn him of the one sided ant-male learning that would form the bulk of the curriculum. The university's own regulations forbid discriminatory learning materials and practices. Should this student be successful, he could potentially improve the education and treatment of many other young men. (http://www.misandryreview.com/the-rights-of-man/2011/04/27/in-the-name-of-equality-can-you-support-a-law-suit-against-a-london-university/)
"Indeed, my own experience of college was one of discrimination and anti-male hatred. I was subjected to a radical feminist teacher who eventually failed one of my exams by purposely neglecting to mark it and then not passing along my appeal. When I found out what she had done, I took the issue to the Dean and she was reprimanded for discriminating against me. As I was the only male on this particular course, she saw fit to spew lies and hatred about men; and, rarely did a class go by when she did not mention the words "penis" and "castration". But, however bad my own experience was, I certainly am not the only male to come up against this kind of hate preaching in education. There are numerous examples to be found all over North America and Europe.
Arguably, we need to have stricter regulations to prevent women from disadvantaging boys in education. We, also, need to loosen the hold that they have on teaching and encourage more men to seek careers in this area. Most importantly, we must nurture male behaviors like competitiveness and allow boys to express themselves more freely without fear that they may be doing something wrong. All children learn better when we make education fun; and, this is even more true for boys; and, is one way which we can keep them focused on their learning. Colleges and Universities must also employ a higher standard of female teacher and, perhaps, introduce a "men's studies" course, in which young men are encouraged to learn about themselves from the male perspective. Hate preaching is a crime and punishable with a prison sentence so feminists in education must be held accountable for their actions and, also, punished as anyone else would be for preaching hatred. There are a few notable women who are aware of the situation in our education systems but when they try to address the issue, they are met with the same verbal and physical violence as men are. In Christina Hoff Sommer's book, "The War Against Boys", she discusses the myth of short changed girls and exposes the flaws of feminist teaching which are often done with little research or no research at all. She described how boys are " routinely regarded as protosexists , potential harassers and perpetrators of gender inequality, and how they live under a cloud of censure." She also takes note of how women based their feminist theories on distorted research and skewed data. Although I don't always agree with her conclusions and theories, Sommer's book hits the nail on the head by exposing the way boys are disadvantaged in education and how the education system in the United States is not designed for most boys, how their boisterousness is seen as unnatural and the disturbing fact that boys are unnecessarily medicated for their natural behaviors."
Boys are overwhelmingly diagnosed with ADHD and prescribed medication, but more likely there is nothing wrong with them and we are simply medicating them for being boys. Over all the male gender can be seen as oppressed." 12.
End of Long Quote
The following is a partial quote from "Twenty Four Indicators of Systemic Discrimination Against Men" " 16. SECONDARY EDUCATION: Even though zero percent of American 12th grade girls were able to correctly answer basic math and physics questions, less than one quarter of America's secondary and elementary school teachers are men. 17. HIGHER EDUCATION: There are more than 200 all-female colleges for women and now not one single all-male college for men. 5.8% fewer men than women are enrolled in 4 year colleges, even though two thirds of those who score higher than 550 in SAT Math are males. In 1993 only 44.5% of college enrollment were men, and that figure has declined since then. Only 45.8% of of bachelor's degrees were conferred to men in 1992, even though 98.2% of the top fiftieth percentile of the GRE are men, and ZERO PERCENT of American high school girls correctly answered 28 out of 67 TIMSS advanced math questions. Only 38.4% of private 4 year college students were men as of 1990, and this figure has declined since then." 13.
The following are quotes from an on line article by Janice Shaw Crouse entitled: "The Crisis of the Disappearing Educated Male",published June 2, 2009, appearing in the on line edition of the Concerned Women for America:
Beginning of Long Quote
" Over the past couple of decades, the male-female ratio on campuses has been changing dramatically. Women outnumber men by a 4-3 ratio on college campuses. Men currently make up only 43 percent of college graduates.In short, many today acknowledge that there is a crisis of the disappearing educated male.-------
According to USA Today, "currently 135 women receive bachelor's degrees for every 100 men." That imbalance, according to figures from the U.S. Department of Education, "is expected to widen in the coming years."
The negative implications are enormous. It will be harder for men to succeed, and the loss of educated men in the workplace will be incalculable. We are already seeing huge social gaps between educated women and the uneducated, immature and/or irresponsible men that constitute the marriage prospects available to them. That gap is showing up in the declining marriage rates as well as in the divorce rates. As Christina Hoff Sommers said in her book, The War Against Boys: How Misguided Feminism is Harming our Young Men, the fact that "women are significantly more literate, significantly more educated than their male counterparts" is likely to create a "lot of social problems;" the lack of well-educated men does not "bode well" for anyone.
Is it any wonder that men are avoiding today's college campuses? Hostility toward men and masculinity begins in daycare and increases each year thereafter. Sexual harassment training and policies have created an uncertain environment, if not a hostile one, where men have to watch their every word and action lest it be misunderstood or misinterpreted. Some experts criticize a campus "worldview that sees things only in terms of oppressors and the oppressed." Typically, the few campus men's studies programs are designed to push an anti-masculinity agenda.------ Actually, the solution is much simpler: create an environment starting in kindergarten that teaches children to respect masculine traits. To do otherwise is to discriminate against our sons and brothers." 14.
End of Long Quote
" Women now receive almost 58 percent of bachelor's degrees. This is why many colleges admit men with qualifications inferior to those of women applicants-which is one reason men have higher dropout rates. In law, medical, and doctoral programs, women are the majorities;or, if the trend continue, will be." 1.
As stated before in the chapter on Government and Feminism: "Through laws,customs, and feminist dogma, if a male demonstrates any of these (male) virtues, American women can and will destroy him by lying about abuse, rape, verbal haranguing, anything; and, he can be arrested, prosecuted, and maliciously convicted of a crime. This is the case even if she has a historical pattern of lying because the "system" does not want to take any chances." 2.
The educational environment has become very hostile towards men, especially men who exhibit the traditional male virtues.
That assertion seems somewhat preposterous doesn't it? However, in light of the straightforward feminist dogma asserting that men should be feminized concomitant with the the "Cultural Marxist" means and ends associated with feminism, this assertion is based upon fact and practice within the social, cultural, political, legal, and economic framework of the USA and other nations. Women, through other laws, customs, and feminist dogma have the means and motive to discriminate against men in the educational system who exhibit the male virtues.
The result of the aforementioned, is that women, in the educational workforce, tend to only tolerate weak, base, effeminate, and feminist men in the same. There is an achievement gap between boys and girls at all levels of the education system as well as a lack of male role models available in the education system.
A proposed White House Council on Boys and Men (http://whitehouseboysmen.org/blog)(a counterpart to the existing council on women), would address the growing gap in high school graduation, college graduation and advanced degree achievement in the US education system where the number of boys obtaining a complete education has steadily declined since 1981. 3.
" But Patai goes much further in her critique of women's studies, arguing that women's studies is not an academic discipline at all but the academic arm of an political movement- what we, once again, call a respectably academic from for ideological feminism. Not surprisingly, many reviewers in women's studies have attacked her. In responding to them, she has been required to repeat her initial premise over and over again. 'Women's studies is quite explicitly feminism in action in an academic setting--- [Courses are far too often... not about women's contributions but about women's victimization---These issues typically are not presented as problems to be studied from many points of view but rather as problems to be exposed by feminist ideology.] The bottom line to me is that far too often women's studies classrooms convey attitudes to be endorsed by the students rather than substantive knowledge. " 4.
The following is a long partial quote from Robert H. Bork's book , " Slouching Towards Gomorrah " : Radical Feminism vs. Education
"There are now more than 600 undergraduate and several dozen graduate programs in Women's Studies in American colleges and universities. At first sight that might seem odd since so much of feminism is utterly inconsistent with intellectual seriousness. In many universities today, however, intellectual integrity comes in a distant second to political correctness. It is thus only an apparent paradox that institutions which, because of their professed devotion to reason and knowledge, should be feminism's sworn enemies are instead the centers of its power.
There are also, of course, programs in African-American Studies, Hispanic Studies, Gay and Lesbian Studies, and more. Nothing could make clearer the politicization of higher education. These so-called disciplines vie with one another in claiming victimhood, but feminism is by far the strongest and most imperialistic, its influence suffusing the most traditional academic departments and university administrations. Feminists are revising and radicalizing textbooks and curricula in the humanities and the social sciences. They have a major say in faculty recruitment. Feminists increasingly control what is taught in high schools and elementary schools as well. Speech codes and "sensitivity" training severely limit what can be said on campus. The feminists have not only done harm to the intellectual function of universities and schools, they have made campuses extremely unpleasant, especially for white males, who are subject to harassment and demands that they toe the feminist cultural and political line.
The incongruity of feminism as an academic subject is heightened by another development. Though most feminists reject the idea of differences between men and women, more recently a coterie has appeared that insists upon, and celebrates just such difference. These women claim that rationality, sometimes called "linear thinking," is a coercive tool of the oppressive patriarchy. That may be because they have noticed that evidence and logic are running heavily against the no-difference position. It is necessary, therefore, to identify evidence and logic with the enemy and to exalt intuitive and emotional "women's ways of knowing." These "difference feminists" claim to perceive all of reality through the "sex/gender lens." Judging from their reports of what they see, that must be like peering at the world through the thick glass of a bottle bottom.
Thus, we now have what Patai and Koertge call "TOTAL REJ (total rejection) feminists" whose creed is that "Our culture, including all that we are taught in schools and universities, is so infused with patriarchal thinking that it must be torn up root and branch if genuine change is to occur. Everything must go - even the allegedly universal disciplines of logic, mathematics, and science, and the intellectual values of objectivity, clarity, and precision on which the former depend. If acceptance of logic and standards of evidentiary proof are causing radical feminists to lose arguments, it is clear that they must be discarded if the feminist enterprise is not to be abandoned. But if logic and evidence are jettisoned, it follows that all of the disciplines built up on logic and evidence cannot remain intact. In the place of these oppressive disciplines and values there are to be constructed feminist alternative versions. Nobody seems to have the faintest idea, for example, what a feminist physics would look like, but the total rejectionists are sure one is out there somewhere. It seems to be assumed that a feminist physics, though different, would work as well as the version we now have. Feminist rocket scientists, apparently, could place satellites in orbit without using any of the laws of motion that are now employed. Needless to say, there is so far not a single axiom or proposition of feminist science that explains or predicts anything or is capable of being tested empirically. When that unhappy fact is brought to a feminist's attention, the reply is often that the patriarchy has had over 3,000 years to build its mathematics, logic, and science whereas women have just started. Thus, the absence of anything but oratory about the wrong-headedness of science as it is must not be viewed as an embarrassment. But there is no shortage of oratory. Anne Wilson Schaef, for example, denounces what she calls the "White Male System" (WMS) of rationality. Schaef says this system consists of four myths. First, the WMS is the only system that exists. Second, the WMS is innately superior. Third, the WMS knows and understands everything. Fourth, the WMS believes that it is possible to be totally logical, rational, and objective. To be sure, no one with any sense has ever claimed anything like all this. The virtue of the scientific method is precisely that mistakes made are corrected by others and that one investigator's results must be replicable by others in order to be accepted. The people involved do not think they are totally logical, rational, and objective. They know that no human is. Radical feminist inanities about science, rationality, linear thinking, etc., rest on the allegation that knowledge and modes of reasoning are socially constructed; that is, that there are no objective truths and no single valid method of reasoning. That is a very convenient position for someone making irrational assertions. It would be rather difficult to hold an intelligent, or even an intelligible, discussion with someone holding that position, and it would be impossible to win an argument with her. That, of course, is the point of the exercise. Take women's studies themselves. On the evidence proffered by Sommers, Patai and Koertge, and others, women's studies programs and courses are abysmal swamps of irrational dogma and hatred. The feminist classroom is an arena for emotions rather than intellect or analysis. Agreement with the ideology is mandatory. A feminist professor can have enormous influence with immature young women in a forum where there are no intellectual constraints. In such a classroom emotion and opinion rule. The students are expected to recount personal experiences of suffering and oppression. Since feminists insist that the oppression of women by men is universal and unrelenting, a failure to have instances ready at hand for recitation is taken as insufficient understanding of the subject. The students are at an age when, male or female, they are uncertain about life, susceptible to absolutisms, and easy to persuade that they are being treated badly. The result is that young women pour out their emotions in uncontrolled fashion. It is dangerous to inflame young women's capacities for anger and self-pity; severe emotional harm can be done. In some classes, the woman may state in advance that she does not want any of her testimony repeated outside the classroom and the others agree to honor that request. No respectable academic discipline would keep classroom discussions secret. Feminist bias in scholarship seems indomitable. The sociologist Steven Goldberg states that on numerous occasions Margaret Mead denied in writing that her research disproved the existence of sex differences. Indeed, in reviewing Goldberg's book, The Inevitability of Patriarchy, Mead wrote: "It is true, as Professor Goldberg points out, that all the claims so glibly made about societies ruled by women are nonsense. We have no reason to believe that they ever existed.... Men have always been the leaders in public affairs and the final authorities at home." But when Goldberg examined introductory sociology books, he found that thirty-six of thirty-eight began their sex-roles chapters with a discussion of Mead's work as demonstrating the environmental nature of male and female behavior. These books misrepresented Mead because "[t]hey, like the discipline whose work they represent, have an ideological commitment to denying that masculine and feminine behaviors and emotions are rooted in male and female physiologies and that all social systems conform to the limits imposed by this reality. "Feminists are transforming mainstream college curricula, they claim, in order to "make knowledge broader," but also to fight against prejudice. "There is," said a professor attending a National Women's Studies Association conference, "a correlation between groups excluded from the curriculum and hate violence aimed at groups." She said most "inclusion" work has focused on blacks, Hispanics, Asian-Americans, and American Indians. But in order to "fight the hatreds and 'isms' in the world, we have to include education about more groups than those four." Other groups whose achievements should be taught, she said, include lesbians, gays, bisexuals, and transsexuals, and issues of social class and disability should be included. "Some argue that there are different cultures of disability, like deaf culture. "Students subjected to propaganda in the name of history will graduate with no clear comprehension of what took place and what was important. Students whose instruction is in fighting "isms" and giving recognition to different sexual groups and cultures of disability are unlikely to graduate with any knowledge that would qualify them for positions other than as sensitivity counselors. As part of their campaign to convert higher education into a propaganda tool, feminists are deforming literary studies by seeking to discover classical allusions to feminism. George Will recorded a few of the choicer items: Shakespeare's "Tempest" reflects the imperialistic rape of the Third World. Emily Dickinson's poetic references to peas and flower buds are encoded messages of feminist rage, exulting clitoral masturbation to protest the prison of patriarchal sex roles. Jane Austen's supposed serenity masks boiling fury about male domination, expressed in the nastiness of minor characters who are "really" not minor. In "Wuthering Heights," Emily Bronte, a subtle subversive, has Catherine bitten by a male bull-dog. Melville's white whale? Probably a penis. Grab a harpoon. Radical feminists, then, are contributing more than their share to the dumbing of America. And not just America. Oxford University Press has announced Ideologies of Desire, "a startling new series in the cultural study of sex, gender, sexuality and power: redefining the meaning of erotics and politics!" The Press informs us that sex is not a matter of physiology but of culture. "The aim of the series is to illuminate both the play of desire in the workings of ideology and the play of ideological forces in the formation of sexual experiences - and, ultimately, to map more precisely the available avenues of cultural resistance to the contemporary institutional and discursive regulation of sex." That the object of these courses is to indoctrinate students with an all-inclusive condemnation of American or Western culture is shown by the frequent expansion of the feminist accusation from the victimization of females to a charge of general oppression. One feminist professor argues, "All students suffer when the more volatile issues central to feminist analysis ... [such as] racism, poverty, incest and rape, battering, lesbianism, and reproductive freedom ... are dropped from a woman's studies course." It seems odd at first glance, given this wide-ranging list of complaints, that the programs are not changed from women's studies to oppression studies. Perhaps it is not so odd, however. If faculty representing all of the oppressed were brought in, feminists might lose control of the curriculum and the funds. Yet it is in keeping with feminism's revolutionary neo-Marxism that the movement attacks bourgeois culture on many fronts.As one might suspect from their hostility to men, marriage, and family, radical feminists are very much in favor of lesbianism. This involves more than the demand that lesbianism be accepted by society as just another "lifestyle." They want not only lawful lesbian marriages but "reproductive rights" for lesbians. That means the right to bear children through artificial insemination and the right to adopt one's lesbian partner's child. Since sperm is sold freely in the United States, much more freely than in other nations, there are lesbian couples raising children. It takes little imagination to know how the children will be indoctrinated.In its effort to transform the curriculum. A National Women's Studies Association conference, attended by about 700 administrators, teachers, and students, gave major consideration to including lesbian issues in feminist programs. The Lesbian Caucus was one of the largest contingents at the conference. Among the Presentations were "Teaching Queer: Incorporating Gay and Lesbian Perspectives Into Introductory Courses"; "War on Lesbians"; "Lesbian Perspectives on/in Literature"; "Lesbian Theory in Poetry"; and "Dykeotomy." Not surprisingly, there is in women's studies programs a good deal of proselytizing for lesbianism. At the University of Washington, a women's studies instructor showed the class how to masturbate, stating that "the preferable tool is a tongue, a woman's tongue." The objectives of radical feminists are not confined to the recruitment of converts through women's studies programs alone. Their aims are imperialistic. The feminist influence has spread to other departments and graduate schools. It is most visible to outsiders in the process of faculty recruitment, where preference is given to women and minorities. A young man I know went to the American Association of Law Schools convention in Washington, the traditional market for those desiring teaching jobs. He entered the hotel and passed a room marked "Women's Hospitality Room." Through the open door he saw young women having Danishes and coffee and chatting amicably with one another. Next he came to the "Minorities Hospitality Room," and observed the same activities. He walked on and discovered that there was no hospitality room he could enter. He and the other white males stood around the lobby until the interviewing began. The same young man, possessed of splendid records at both Harvard College and Law School, and a clerk to a court of appeals judge and to Justice Anthony Kennedy, the sort of credentials law schools used to hunger for in their teaching applicants, applied for a position at the law school of the University of Texas. He was, however, in competition with a Mexican-American lesbian who had graduated well below the middle of her law school class. She got the job. A memorandum from a member of the appointments committee explained to the faculty that she should be hired because "She does appeal to three constituent groups." The point is not merely that white males are being subjected to sexual and racial discrimination in higher education, though that is certainly an outrage. The point is also that faculties are lowering their standards in hiring in order to be politically correct. That necessarily lowers the quality of education they offer their students and the standards of scholarly publication. A friend of mine, a law school professor, resigned from his schools appointments committee because the conversations he had with applicants likely to be hired were inferior in intellectual content to the conversations he had with his students. Radical feminist insistence upon seeing slights, harassment, and male victimization of women everywhere has made campuses, workplaces, and society less comfortable places. The eagerness of radical feminists to see insult in every male action, coupled (if one dare use that word) with the spinelessness of the supposedly oppressive patriarchy, has led to so much discomfort and loss of freedom. Some of women's complaints are merely funny, though they do reveal a mindset: A young woman at the University of Pennsylvania who wore a short skirt complained of a "mini-rape" because a young man walked past her and said, "Nice legs." At the University of Maryland, some female students posted the names of male students selected at random, young men about whom they knew nothing, under the heading "Potential Rapists." The message was that all men are potential rapists, though the men actually named probably did not find much comfort in that. Far more serious are the accusations of actual rape when nothing of the sort occurred. A female student came to a male student's quarters with her toothbrush, planning to stay the night. The next morning she was seen having a peaceable breakfast with the man. Later she charged him with rape; and, he was briefly held in jail. Accusations of date rape are flung freely by women who consented and later changed their minds about what they did. Universities have capitulated by creating rape-prevention and sexual harassment workshops that offer virulently anti-male propaganda. It is little wonder that young men are uncertain about themselves and their relationship with women and, perhaps for self-protection, perhaps because they have been brainwashed, tend usually to take the women's side of issues. Male faculty also feel the lash of feminist anger. The use of "insensitive" language in the classroom often results in formal complaints being filed, followed by a hearing notable for its lack of the rudiments of due process, and then suspension or a requirement of submitting to sensitivity training. Required sensitivity training is a humiliating experience, whether it is imposed by a university or, as is increasingly frequent, by a corporation. (Corporations are heavily into diversity training, apparently in part because federal regulators pressure them.) Nor is it usually possible for the professor or employee to retain his dignity by refusing to accept such coercion. That would bring dismissal, after which no other employment is likely to be available other universities or businesses will be reluctant to hire someone found guilty of insensitivity to women. The feminists at the new organization will be alerted and will object to the man's employment. Who would want to hire the possibility, indeed the certainty, of more trouble with feminists? Sensitivity training is often required even of people who have not displayed "insensitivity." Cornell's training session for resident advisers featured an X-rated homosexual movie. Pictures were taken of the advisers' reactions to detect homophobic squeamishness. Thus, entering freshmen in colleges are increasingly subjected to sessions indoctrinating them in the correct attitudes not only to women but to homosexuals and members of minority groups. The object is thought control. As a reader of Measure (a publication of the University Center for Rational Alternatives, an organization dedicated to preserving the traditional virtues of scholarship and teaching in universities) said of compulsory training dictated by the Department of Education: "[It] is not enough for citizens to obey the law, they must be reeducated to love Big Brother." Often feminist complaints seem to reflect less a feeling of real outrage than a desire to provoke a confrontation and to intimidate. Radical feminists today, like the radical students of the Sixties, have discovered that they have the power to make the Establishment cringe and back down, and so their demands escalate. At Penn State University, a female English professor had to move her class into the arts building because of lack of space elsewhere. Hanging in the classroom were five museum reproductions: Goya's "The Naked Maja" a depiction of the crucifixion, a Madonna and child, the portrait of a youth, and a pastoral scene. Some male students snickered at the nude. Instead of ignoring them, telling them to grow up, or taking the picture down, the professor formally demanded that the administration remove it, thus forcing the school to take an official position. After lengthy negotiations which included considering the suggestion of a "diversity expert" to hang a painting of a nude male, the administration removed the picture. A spokeswoman for the Womyn's Concerns Committee said that "these older paintings served as a type of pornography - Playboy wasn't around back then." She added: "I don't think our society is capable of dealing with paintings such as these." Society had dealt comfortably with Goya's masterpiece for well over a century, until a feminist chose to make a major issue of it. Not the least of the feminists' sins is their mangling of the language. "Womyn" or "wimmin" for "women," just to avoid the hated letters M-E-N, is an atrocity. But it is not much better to go to a restaurant and be informed that your "waitperson" will be with you shortly. So ideologically crazed are some feminist academics that their seminars are now called "ovulars." So alienating are the messages of the women's studies programs that Professor Sommers writes that she would like to see some of the more extreme institutions (e.g., Wellesley College, Mount Holyoke, Smith, Mills, and the University of Minnesota) put warning labels on the first page of their bulletins: We will help your daughter discover the extent to which she has been in complicity with the patriarchy. We will encourage her to reconstruct herself through dialogue with us. She may become enraged and chronically offended. She will very likely reject the religious and moral codes you raised her with. She may well distance herself from family and friends. She may change her appearance, and even her sexual orientation. She may end up hating you (her father) and pitying you (her mother). After she has completed her reeducation with us, you will certainly be out tens of thousands of dollars and very possibly be out one daughter as well. To that warning label Sommers might have added "You are also likely to have a badly educated daughter." The young women who are lured into women's studies should be spared what they obtain there: total immersion in a false world view coupled to a fourth-rate education. While other students are studying history, mathematics, science, languages, and similarly useful disciplines, those in women's studies programs are working on acquiring belligerent attitudes and misinformation. Instead of preparing students for the world, the programs impose severe handicaps upon them. Robert Nisbet offers the "affecting story" of a young woman who majored at her university in eco-feminism, and graduated with honors. She went to Washington, D.C., a city richly endowed with lobbies for ecology and feminism. Because of her dual degree, she assumed that a well-paying job would be waiting. "But even ecological and feminist lobbies require people who can read, write, count, and in general ratiocinate; she thus became one of the large number of genteel unemployables." When later in life the products of radical feminist education fail to achieve as they had hoped, they will undoubtedly blame the patriarchal system by which, they have been taught, they and all other women are oppressed. In compensation for providing poor educations, then, the women's studies programs offer their victims a ready-made, all-purpose alibi. They, and we, will be paying the price for years to come." 5.
" In response to a question about whom she would consider fit to teach women's studies, Patai notes that this field: ' was created to be the "academic arm of the women's movement," and this phrase is still repeated again and again in the mission statements of various programs. I don't believe it's appropriate for a secular university to have a program committed to a particular ideology. To the extent that women's studies is feminism [as distinct from being about feminism], it is, in my view, academically illegitimate. The study of women, our history, gender roles, etc., on the other hand, are all entirely legitimate and important subjects. Once can be a feminist, as I am, and not a supporter of women's studies or of feminist activism [specifically] in education. ' " 6.
Continuation of the Feminist Attack on the Scientific Method Some of the following are quotes which demonstrate and provide examples of how feminism is attacking the scientific method: " Most of those who attack science know little or nothing about it. Nonetheless, postmodernists now question either the existence of objective reality or the ability of anyone to see it, This present a very attractive opportunity for some advocates of women or other "subaltern" groups being oppressed by the lingering academic shades of "dead white males." Why would feminists, in particular, want to undermine the search for objective reality? Some of them do not, of course, because they rely on the search for objective truth to prove their claims about the victimization of women. Others do, though, in order to bypass messy disputes over those claims. If they can show inherent bias against women in research under the established rules, which are based on the possibility of knowing at least something objective about the external world, then they can dismiss politically or ideologically inconvenient complexity and ambiguity without further ado. At the same time, they can fill the void with research based on rules of their own. Not rules that openly foster objectivity, to be sure, but ones that openly foster subjectivity. Once the subjective "voice" of women (or minorities) has been established as a new standard, of course, no dissonant "voices" need to be taken seriously; women can presumably "know" things by virtue of being women and affirming their own subjectivity, things that men cannot know by insisting on the ostensibly universal standard of objectivity." 7.
"Affirmative action did the rest, because the influx of women tended to favor fields in what became a "pink collar ghetto". But how could it have been otherwise? Those already established in academia explicitly and vehemently denied the most fundamental principles of scholarship. None of [Talcott] Parsons's norms are acceptable: logic is a patriarchal device for browbeating nonlinear thinking; since all knowledge is contextual, the search for generality is a form of imperialism; empirical validity must be tempered by moral and political appraisals. Communality of a nonhierarchical sort is acceptable, but the rest of [Robert] Merton's norms must go; a humane community would be based on trust, not skepticism; universalism should be replaced by a standpoint theory, which says that reports are always to be understood as a product of the culture, gender, ethnicity, class of the observer who made them; no activity can be or should be disinterested. Quite the contrary, a commitment to correct political and social goals should be encouraged" 8.
"These strictures make no scientific sense. Nor, adds Koertge, do they make political sense for women and their allies. 'What a pity, if in the name of liberating women, feminists should now encourage women and members of various ethnic groups to stay comfortably within the habits of thought that conform to traditional gender and cultural stereotypes. One of the joys of liberal education in either the arts or sciences is the challenge to learn how to think differently. How patronizing to tell young women that the ways of logic, statistics, and mathematics are not women's ways-that all they need do is stay connected." 9.
"Donna Haraway, for example, describes the "dominant" epistemology-presumably that of men alone- in terms of objectivity, value neutrality, and pure inquiry. She describes feminist epistemology-that of women- as subjective, value laden, and (in effect) purely political. Like good post modernists, she keeps asking questions that begin with "whose." Whose knowledge have we accepted so far? Whose evidence? Whose interpretation? Whose interests are at stake? These, say academics in women's studies, are the most important epistemological (and therefore political) questions that feminists can ask. And the answer is always the same cynical one: that of whatever group has the most power. For ideological feminists, that answer is a euphemistic reference to men (at least white men). -----Objectivity implies universality. If something is objectively true, after all, it must be true for all people. Subjectivity, on the other hand, implies particularity. Something might be true for some people but not for others, say, or true in some circumstances but not others. But feminist ideologues, despite their lip service to postmodernist relativism, identify universality objectively with men and particularity objectively with women. Never mind that this confirms the old misogynistic stereotype of women as irrational beings or that is contradicts the ostensible disdain of women for objectivity." 10.
Further Facts,Quotes, and Arguments with Regard to Feminism's Adverse Affect on the Educational System The following is a partial quote from an article entitled "Discrimination against Boys in Education (and Elsewhere)" by Roger E. Olson:
"People have challenged my claim that boys suffer discrimination in society, but researchers are now confirming it beyond doubt or dispute. Still, educators in particular are not developing programs aimed specifically at boys to help them succeed in an environment geared for girls. One journalist, commenting on a British study about “Gender Expectations and Stereotype Threat” suggests that so much attention has been devoted to girls over the past twenty to thirty years that it’s difficult to make the shift to boys now that girls are surpassing boys at every level of education.
Most recently, Christina Hoff Sommers, a vocal advocate for boys, wrote an opinion column in the New York Times (February 2, 2013) entitled “The Boys at the Back.” (It’s easily found by Googling the title and author’s name.) According to her, a study published this week in the Journal of Human Resources proves that teachers grade girls more leniently and boys more harshly when they achieve exactly the same results on tests. “The study’s authors analyzed data from more than 5,800 students from kindergarten through fifth grade and found that boys across all racial groups and in all major subject areas received lower grades than their test scores would have predicted.” “If the teachers had not accounted for classroom behavior, the boys’ grades, like the girls’, would have matched their test scores.” In other words, in that squishy realm of subjective judgment involved in all grading, teachers punish boys for being boys and reward girls for being girls." 11.
Beginning of Long Quote:
" According to Canadian teacher Brian Simpson, the education system in the West has been taken over by feminists who preach a daily diet of hate, violence and discrimination against males despite pretenses of "tolerance", "non violence", and "inclusiveness." Mr. Simpson also noted that it was common to find girls wearing anti-male clothing with slogans such as "Boys Are Stupid, Throw Rocks at Them" and " I Like Boys Who Are Sensitive and Cry, When I Hit Them." He found it particularly disturbing that this misandrist behavior was encouraged by female teaching staff. Mr. Simpson has been teaching for 20 years as a supply teacher and has taught on over 1000 class rooms across Canada. He also stated stated that he had been in classrooms where videos were shown blaming all date violence on males. No sexual female-to-male violence was mentioned and women were referred to as "men's property." Once the videos had been shown, the girls overflowed anti-male hate sentiments and the boys were afraid to speak on any matter. Since women are responsible for more Domestic Violence, this is particularly disturbing. Brian Simpson also stated that the education system was dominated by female staff and that men were routinely discriminated against for employment with no recourse to authorities. He also found that when he was an education student that being involved in teaching was to be immersed in femininity-wall to wall women, everywhere; the students, the teaching staff and the curriculum. After many other unsettling experiences, including showing children feminist promoted videos that encouraged lesbianism, he decided to voice his concerns. When he did so, he was met with verbal threats and abuse. This is a severe problem all over the Western world; and, boys in education are paying a heavy price for the one sides female perspective from which things are taught. The URL link to Brian Simpson's story is: http://rense.com/general81/vdt.htm.
The female inspired teaching curriculums don't take into account the difference between boys and girls which can often leave boys feeling unwanted, bored and just not interested in school work. In childhood it's also important to have role models, people we can look up to and aim to one be like. As there are so few men in teaching, boys simply don't get the role models they need. Female teachers, who are often quite fearful of natural male behaviors, oppress and punish boys for the ways they naturally behave.
Feminism is particularly prevalent in colleges and universities and may account for more women now attending university than men. Women's studies along with other social sciences are extremely feminist in nature and often drive what few men sign up for these courses, out. Many teachers proudly call themselves feminists and socialists and spread hatred for men and boys in the education system.
Recently there has been a case in the United Kingdom in which a male student is bringing a damages claim against his university Gender Studies department. He was forced to withdraw from his studies due to the persistently anti-male nature of the course. His legal claim is based on the Sex Discrimination law, Breach of Contract, Misrepresentation and Misleading Advertising. The university's promotional literature did not warn him of the one sided ant-male learning that would form the bulk of the curriculum. The university's own regulations forbid discriminatory learning materials and practices. Should this student be successful, he could potentially improve the education and treatment of many other young men. (http://www.misandryreview.com/the-rights-of-man/2011/04/27/in-the-name-of-equality-can-you-support-a-law-suit-against-a-london-university/)
"Indeed, my own experience of college was one of discrimination and anti-male hatred. I was subjected to a radical feminist teacher who eventually failed one of my exams by purposely neglecting to mark it and then not passing along my appeal. When I found out what she had done, I took the issue to the Dean and she was reprimanded for discriminating against me. As I was the only male on this particular course, she saw fit to spew lies and hatred about men; and, rarely did a class go by when she did not mention the words "penis" and "castration". But, however bad my own experience was, I certainly am not the only male to come up against this kind of hate preaching in education. There are numerous examples to be found all over North America and Europe.
Arguably, we need to have stricter regulations to prevent women from disadvantaging boys in education. We, also, need to loosen the hold that they have on teaching and encourage more men to seek careers in this area. Most importantly, we must nurture male behaviors like competitiveness and allow boys to express themselves more freely without fear that they may be doing something wrong. All children learn better when we make education fun; and, this is even more true for boys; and, is one way which we can keep them focused on their learning. Colleges and Universities must also employ a higher standard of female teacher and, perhaps, introduce a "men's studies" course, in which young men are encouraged to learn about themselves from the male perspective. Hate preaching is a crime and punishable with a prison sentence so feminists in education must be held accountable for their actions and, also, punished as anyone else would be for preaching hatred. There are a few notable women who are aware of the situation in our education systems but when they try to address the issue, they are met with the same verbal and physical violence as men are. In Christina Hoff Sommer's book, "The War Against Boys", she discusses the myth of short changed girls and exposes the flaws of feminist teaching which are often done with little research or no research at all. She described how boys are " routinely regarded as protosexists , potential harassers and perpetrators of gender inequality, and how they live under a cloud of censure." She also takes note of how women based their feminist theories on distorted research and skewed data. Although I don't always agree with her conclusions and theories, Sommer's book hits the nail on the head by exposing the way boys are disadvantaged in education and how the education system in the United States is not designed for most boys, how their boisterousness is seen as unnatural and the disturbing fact that boys are unnecessarily medicated for their natural behaviors."
Boys are overwhelmingly diagnosed with ADHD and prescribed medication, but more likely there is nothing wrong with them and we are simply medicating them for being boys. Over all the male gender can be seen as oppressed." 12.
End of Long Quote
The following is a partial quote from "Twenty Four Indicators of Systemic Discrimination Against Men" " 16. SECONDARY EDUCATION: Even though zero percent of American 12th grade girls were able to correctly answer basic math and physics questions, less than one quarter of America's secondary and elementary school teachers are men. 17. HIGHER EDUCATION: There are more than 200 all-female colleges for women and now not one single all-male college for men. 5.8% fewer men than women are enrolled in 4 year colleges, even though two thirds of those who score higher than 550 in SAT Math are males. In 1993 only 44.5% of college enrollment were men, and that figure has declined since then. Only 45.8% of of bachelor's degrees were conferred to men in 1992, even though 98.2% of the top fiftieth percentile of the GRE are men, and ZERO PERCENT of American high school girls correctly answered 28 out of 67 TIMSS advanced math questions. Only 38.4% of private 4 year college students were men as of 1990, and this figure has declined since then." 13.
The following are quotes from an on line article by Janice Shaw Crouse entitled: "The Crisis of the Disappearing Educated Male",published June 2, 2009, appearing in the on line edition of the Concerned Women for America:
Beginning of Long Quote
" Over the past couple of decades, the male-female ratio on campuses has been changing dramatically. Women outnumber men by a 4-3 ratio on college campuses. Men currently make up only 43 percent of college graduates.In short, many today acknowledge that there is a crisis of the disappearing educated male.-------
According to USA Today, "currently 135 women receive bachelor's degrees for every 100 men." That imbalance, according to figures from the U.S. Department of Education, "is expected to widen in the coming years."
The negative implications are enormous. It will be harder for men to succeed, and the loss of educated men in the workplace will be incalculable. We are already seeing huge social gaps between educated women and the uneducated, immature and/or irresponsible men that constitute the marriage prospects available to them. That gap is showing up in the declining marriage rates as well as in the divorce rates. As Christina Hoff Sommers said in her book, The War Against Boys: How Misguided Feminism is Harming our Young Men, the fact that "women are significantly more literate, significantly more educated than their male counterparts" is likely to create a "lot of social problems;" the lack of well-educated men does not "bode well" for anyone.
Is it any wonder that men are avoiding today's college campuses? Hostility toward men and masculinity begins in daycare and increases each year thereafter. Sexual harassment training and policies have created an uncertain environment, if not a hostile one, where men have to watch their every word and action lest it be misunderstood or misinterpreted. Some experts criticize a campus "worldview that sees things only in terms of oppressors and the oppressed." Typically, the few campus men's studies programs are designed to push an anti-masculinity agenda.------ Actually, the solution is much simpler: create an environment starting in kindergarten that teaches children to respect masculine traits. To do otherwise is to discriminate against our sons and brothers." 14.
End of Long Quote
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)