Author: Edward Bartlett

Compelled Compliance: Resisting the Istanbul Convention

Post author By Edward Bartlett
Post date January 19, 2023

Compelled Compliance: Resisting the Istanbul Convention

Sean Parker

January 19, 2023

When David Bowie as Ziggy Stardust in the early 1970s and Prince in the 80s played so entrancingly with what were then called gender roles, surely not even those astute seers of pop culture could have foreseen how thoroughly some of their young viewers and listeners might take it to heart.

Wasn’t it all just a silly phase they were going through? Tens of thousands of sex change operations later, many regretted, many not, the worlds of right and wrong, good and bad, and male and female are being gradually turned on their heads. By the back door however, because many populations resist this unmandated reframing of nature as a commercial life choice, while the ever-resourceful activists are aware there is more than one way to skin a cat. Give them control of a nation’s most popular Twitter accounts and they care not who makes its laws.

The Istanbul Convention is a document that approaches the issues of domestic violence in an extremely ideological way. The risk of the legal sanctioning of the concept of ‘third gender’ (recently rejected by Switzerland) is implicit. The definition of the term gender in the Istanbul Convention fully corresponds to the views expressed by the representatives of extreme feminism.

The agreement also emphasises that since gender roles are social constructs, they are not biologically determined. The assumptions of the theory of gender are based on classical Marxist concepts. According to many adherents to Marxism, conflict is inscribed in the very nature of historical phenomena, and determines the development of social life. Such a concept is based on the belief that social relations are based on antagonisms, with everything reduced to inter-power dynamics.

According to the Marxists, all the existing ethical, moral, legal and religious norms – referred to as the ‘superstructure‘ – serve to petrify existing socio-economic relations, known in Marxist literature as the ‘base‘. The gender theory adopted the perception of the family as a place of oppression from the ideology that forms its basis – i.e. radical feminism – especially from its ‘Second’ and ‘Third-Wave’. Genderism belongs to the broader category of neo-Marxist ideologies. From the philosophical point of view, this ideology is classified as one of the postmodern concepts.

Political activists have long known to set any aim as putatively impossible, and negotiate down from there. Now, however, the establishment is run by those who used to activate in opposition: the establishment is now the woke orthodoxy. Thus, concepts such as third gender, which the people of Scotland opposed while the Scottish National Party tried to ram it through, are introduced in cleverly worded clauses and legal loopholes, problems to sort out later, once the new progressiveness is supposedly established. This is a political tactic passed directly from the Bolsheviks to Tony Blair, stretching the baton arm across the length of the 20^th century.

Sexual assault statistics are being intentionally increased by Operation Soteria in the UK, a partnership with US for-profit Soteria Solutions, a company responsible for destroying thousands of young men’s lives in that country off the back of the ‘campus rape’ hysteria. For the past decade this has been pushed and litigated by radical feminist academics including Stanford professor Michele Dauber, currently under investigation for online harassment.

The Istanbul Convention will extend this spirit of one-eyed vitriol to the sphere of domestic violence, which thorough research tells us is promulgated in a half of cases by women, and is frequently at its most virulent in female same-sex couples. And all of the messaging is anti-male. This is societal demonisation brought on by ideological hate, going on only one direction: female to male, the consequence of fifty-plus years of rabid histrionics.

Hiding subtle, difficult to legally challenge social changes in law is essentially mendacious and undemocratic, power exercised by stealth, and in bad faith since their designers know they won’t command the support of the people who may have voted them in for very different reasons. By the time they get to vote them out, the damage is done, and the social change embedded (if still wildly unpopular). Third genderism, along with all the other anti-male domestic violence and anti-instinct moves currently threatening mainstream society, is doomed to fail due to the toxic activism of those promulgating it.

29 Recent Judicial Decisions Thwart Biden ‘Gender Agenda’

Post author By Edward Bartlett
Post date January 18, 2023

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Hain: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

29 Recent Judicial Decisions Thwart Biden ‘Gender Agenda’

WASHINGTON / January 18, 2023 – The Biden Administration has issued several policy documents that are designed to promote the so-called “gender agenda” (1). In particular, on June 23, 2022 the Department of Education proposed a new Title IX regulation that would redefine the meaning of “sex,” limit free speech, and hobble due process protections (2).

In response, over 200 organizations (3), numerous state Attorneys General (4), and dozens of federal and state lawmakers (4) have spoken out in strong opposition to the draft regulation.

Since June 23, 2022, seven judicial decisions have been issued that thwart the Biden Administration’s attempts to expand the definition of “sex,” curtail free speech, and promote gender transitioning:

State of Tennessee v. Department of Education, July 15, 2022: In response to a lawsuit by the Attorneys General of 20 states, the District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee granted a Preliminary Injunction against the Department of Education, blocking the DOE from implementing Biden’s Executive Order No. 13988, “Executive Order on Preventing and Combating Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity or Sexual Orientation.” (5)
Franciscan Alliance and Christian Medical and Dental Society v. Becerra, August 26, 2022: The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, located in New Orleans, unanimously ruled that doctors must be free to practice medicine without compulsion to perform gender-transition procedures. (6)
Speech First v. Alexander Cartwright, September 23, 2022: The District Court for the Middle District of Florida ruled against the University of Central Florida for three campus policies that served to suppress student speech. (7)
Neese v. Bercerra, October 14, 2022: The Northern District of Texas Court ruled that Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act and Title IX do not prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity. The court set aside the contrary enforcement position taken by the Department of Health and Human Services. (8)
Religious Sisters of Mercy et al v. Becerra, December 9, 2022: The Eighth Circuit Court in North Dakota overturned a rule under the Affordable Care Act, Section 1557, that would require “gender-transition procedures” be covered by health insurance plans. (9)
Adams v. School Board of St. Johns County, December 30, 2022: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit reversed the decision of the District Court, and upheld the policy of the St. Johns County School District in Florida, which denied transgender students access to the bathrooms consistent with their gender identity. (10)
B.P.J. et al v. West Virginia State Board of Education, January 5, 2023: The Southern District Court of West Virginia ruled in favor of the “Save Women’s Sports Bill,” which defines “girl” and “woman” as biologically female for the purpose of secondary school sports. (11)

Since June 23, 2022, wrongfully accused students also have triumphed in 22 due process lawsuits against the following universities: University of California, University of Idaho Law School, Dartmouth College, Dordt University, SUNY-Purchase, Brown University (two lawsuits), Purdue University, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, University of Arizona, University of Southern Florida, Western Michigan University, Prairie View A & M University, UC-Davis, Marshall University, University of Chicago, University of Connecticut, Emory University, Texas Christian University, Stonehill College, University of Wisconsin-Madison, and Siena College. (12)

SAVE urges Congress to take necessary actions to discourage attempts by the Executive Branch to advance the gender agenda.

Links:

Campus Department of Education Due Process False Allegations Free Speech Gender Identity Office for Civil Rights Press Release Sexual Assault Sexual Harassment Title IX

A ‘Naked Assault on Civil Rights:’ Congress Must Stop Attempts to Hijack Title IX and Subvert the Constitution

Post author By Edward Bartlett
Post date January 12, 2023

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Hain: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

A ‘Naked Assault on Civil Rights:’ Congress Must Stop Attempts to Hijack Title IX and Subvert the Constitution

WASHINGTON / January 12, 2023 – Title IX is the 50-year-old law that was enacted to stop sex discrimination in schools. But now, groups are attempting to use Title IX to promote a sweeping unconstitutional agenda with harmful effects on students, families, and on society.

Recent months have witnessed three attempts to make far-reaching changes to Title IX:

In June, the Department of Education proposed a new Title IX regulation that would redefine the meaning of “sex,” muzzle free speech, and decimate due process (1).
In September, 19 Democratic senators denounced the presumption of innocence in Title IX proceedings (2). The senators also called for an end to cross-examination, facilely ignoring a landmark Supreme Court decision that described cross-examination as the “‘greatest legal engine ever invented for the discovery of truth.” (3)
In December, the Students’ Access to Freedom and Educational Rights (SAFER) Act was introduced in both chambers of Congress (4). The bill proposed to make sweeping changes to campus Title IX adjudication procedures — changes that are reminiscent of practices seen in the former Soviet Union (5).

The proposals would curtail constitutionally protected free speech and due process protections, eliminate fairness in women’s sports, promote gender transitioning among under-age students, marginalize the role of parents, and exact other harmful effects. Numerous lawmakers have spoken out in opposition to these proposed changes (6).

These changes recently were described by a leading policy organization as a “naked assault on civil rights.” (7)

In response to these and other worrisome developments, House Speaker Kevin McCarthy proposed a multi-point Commitment to America (8). Five of the principles pertain to the recent attempts to reinvent Title IX:

Conduct rigorous oversight to rein in governmental abuse of power, such as an executive branch agency exceeding its legal authority by seeking to redefine the meaning of “sex” (9).
Curb wasteful spending by government agencies, such as the Department of Education (10).
Advance the Parents’ Bill of Rights (11).
Defend fairness by ensuring that only women can compete in women’s sports (12).
Uphold free speech guarantees and assure religious freedom (13).

SAVE urges members of Congress to move quickly to implement provisions of the Commitment to America and stop the Title IX take-over.

Links:

Uncategorized

The Istanbul Convention – Legislating for Internationally Ratified Misandry

Post author By Edward Bartlett
Post date January 12, 2023

The Istanbul Convention – Legislating for Internationally Ratified Misandry

‘In an astonishing example of 21^st century newspeak, the IC also insisted that discriminatory measures should not be considered to be discrimination: “Special measures that are necessary to prevent and protect women from gender-based violence shall not be considered discrimination under the terms of this Convention”’

Sean Parker

January 12, 2023

I was living and working in Istanbul in 2011, and remember the commotion surrounding the Istanbul Convention – henceforth IC – being held in the city that year. The celebration was loudest among the progressive left, mostly the university-educated and expats, and what struck me at the time was how incongruous to have such a convention held in a city in the grip of strongman president Recep Tayyip Erdogan – not well-known for his support of women’s rights (or anyone else’s rights, for that matter).

A European landmark treaty supposedly to end violence against women, the IC entered into force on 1 August 2014. The IC recognised violence against women as a violation of human rights and a form of discrimination against women, and only women. It covered various forms of gender-based violence against women, which referred to violence directed against women because they are women, or violence being claimed to disproportionately affect them.

In 2021, original IC host country Turkey withdrew from the convention after denouncing it in March 2021. The convention ceased to be effective in Turkey on 1 July 2021, following its denunciation. The main complaints related to concern about the specific ‘gender ideology’, which they argued was in direct opposition to its constitution. Other countries have also not ratified the agreement.

The European Union signed but did not ratify. The UK signed the Istanbul Convention in 2012, but it quickly became apparent that the UK’s domestic laws were not appropriate to meeting its requirements, possibly being seen as counter-intuitive. In a report published in 2015, the UK parliament’s Joint Committee on Human Rights highlighted a number of issues that needed to be resolved.

The EU Charter of Human Rights is the foundation of the policies of the European Union, and of European society itself. However a review revealed that the IC in fact represented a historic threat to the human rights of Europeans. While at the time of its signing everything seemed ‘progressive’ enough, the fact was that the IC was based merely on a social theory which ascribed domestic violence to a power imbalance between men and women that arose from supposedly ‘patriarchal’ beliefs.

This model of domestic violence has been heavily criticised as a theory that is ideologically based, rather than empirically supported. Hundreds of research findings exist that undermine the exclusivity of the gendered perspective. In an astonishing example of 21^st century Newspeak, the IC also insists that discriminatory measures should not be considered to be discrimination:

“Special measures that are necessary to prevent and protect women from gender-based violence shall not be considered discrimination under the terms of this Convention” (IC Article 4).

The IC regularly confuses the words ‘complainant’ and ‘victim’ in the manner of the mainstream media on a regular and increasing basis, thereby short-changing the defendant’s right to an impartial investigation and adjudication. There is a certain irony that a treaty that claims to advance human rights in fact serves to deny a person’s fundamental rights.

This conflation of these terms further extends the transatlantic ‘believe the victim’ policies at play throughout the 2010s and into the 2020s, only being brought to a (cultural at least) halt by the Johnny Depp-Amber Heard libel trial verdict – comprehensively finding in Depp’s favour. It was suddenly clear to the world why self-identified ‘victims’ should absolutely not automatically be believed. High profile cases such as this show how ratifying the Istanbul Convention, and its one-eyed view of allegations of domestic violence, would do nothing less than completely reverse recent positive progress in equality of the sexes.

Uncategorized

Director of Dutch Knowledge Institute for Emancipation Fired for Transgressive Behaviour

Post author By Edward Bartlett
Post date January 10, 2023

Director of Dutch Knowledge Institute for Emancipation Fired for Transgressive Behaviour

Robert van de Griend

Netherlands, Volkskrant News

30 December 2022

Kaouthar Darmoni has been fired as director of Atria, the Dutch knowledge institute for emancipation and women’s history in Amsterdam. She has seriously misbehaved in several areas, according to an external investigation by Hoffmann Bedrijfsrecherche, the conclusions of which are in the hands of de Volkskrant.

Library of Atria on the Vijzelstraat in Amsterdam. Image Joris van Gennip

Darmoni is said to have been guilty of “(sexual) transgressive and intimidating behavior” towards subordinates at Atria, a leading institute that has been committed to equal treatment of men and women since 1935. She is also said to have dealt with employees’ employment rights with ‘dishonesty’.

The conclusions, which are shared in an e-mail from the Supervisory Board of Atria with the (former) employees who participated in the Hoffmann investigation, are extra sensitive because Atria itself advises governments and companies on creating a safe working environment. and combating transgressive behaviour.

The findings also show that Darmoni, who had been a director at Atria since October 2019 and made frequent appearances in the media and the speaker circuit, manipulated the outcome of an employee satisfaction survey. She is said to have removed the “cries for help” expressed by almost half of the staff from the results and thus concealed them from the supervisory board.

In addition, Darmoni, who was born in Tunisia and studied in France, would have told untruths about her education and work experience. Hoffmann speaks of ‘deceit and/or error’.

Based on these conclusions, Atria’s supervisory board nullified Darmoni’s employment contract in early December.

‘Led around the garden’

The investigation into Darmoni was initiated in July after employees expressed their dissatisfaction with her to Atria’s confidential adviser. Since then, Darmoni has not been working, saying she was ill. In the e-mail about the findings of the Hoffmann investigation, which includes the complaints of 23 employees, the Supervisory Board (RvT) writes: can continue.” And: “Although the Supervisory Board was also fooled by Ms. Darmoni for many months and even from the outset, the Supervisory Board regrets that the supervisory system did not function properly on several occasions.”

Three former employees of Atria, with whom de Volkskrant spoke, who worked in different departments of the institute, endorse Hoffmann’s findings.

Independently of each other, they characterize Darmoni as ‘exhibitional’ and ‘uninhibited’. She is said to have seized the opportunity to undress herself on several occasions and to have stood “in her bra or her thong” on the work floor. She would also have kissed employees on the back of the head without being asked. The fact that Darmoni started the weekly meeting on Monday morning with belly dancing as standard – something she herself has said in interviews – was also seen as inappropriate by the former employees.

“We all had to participate in belly dancing,” says Nicky, who, like the two other former employees, only wants to be in the newspaper with a fictitious name for fear of reprisals. “Most of us hated that. Sometimes Kaouthar pressed her breasts or buttocks against you while dancing. If anyone said anything about her behavior, she would laugh at you squarely.”

Culture of fear

According to the former employees, who also shared their experiences with Darmoni with the Hoffmann researchers, there was a “culture of fear” among the dismissed director. Members of staff who criticized her substantive course or management style were systematically publicly insulted, bullied or put aside.

“If you fell out of favor with Kaouthar, you ended up before the tribunal,” says Charlie. “She would turn other colleagues against you or start yelling at you in front of everyone. We had a constant fear: who is going to be next?”

Ex-employee Sam says: “All the time I worked with Kaouthar I didn’t dare ask her a critical question.”

The former employees also say that under the responsibility of Darmoni, the Atria building was filled with cameras that recorded images and sound. Although this was presented as a measure to prevent theft by construction workers, in practice the cameras would also have been used to keep an eye on the staff. “We have been called to account several times about something that was observed through those cameras,” says Sam. “This has been repeatedly raised because it violates the privacy law. But nothing was ever done with it.”

Signals already in 2020

The departed employees are satisfied with the outcome of the Hoffmann investigation, but are also critical of the role of Atria’s supervisory board. They should have intervened much earlier, they think, because there had been signs for some time that Darmoni was displaying misconduct. “Our works council already sounded the alarm in 2020,” says Charlie.

The high turnover of staff at Atria should also have been an indication for the supervisory board, according to the former employees. In 2020 and 2021, a total of 34 people left, according to the institute’s annual reports, out of a workforce of about 33.

The three former employees with whom de Volkskrant spoke, criticize the fact that the supervisory board wants to give as little publicity as possible to Darmoni’s forced dismissal. In the e-mail about the findings of the Hoffmann investigation, the Supervisory Board writes that it is better to keep a low profile in the media. That would be ‘in [the] interest of Atria, the (former) employees and the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science as a subsidy provider’ and ‘to protect the victims of the transgressive behaviour’.

Nicky: ‘I understand that the Supervisory Board wants to safeguard the reputation of Atria and the subsidy from the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science (Education, Culture and Science, ed.). That is also important, because a lot of people are doing good work there. But if you keep Kaouthar’s misbehavior quiet, she will soon be in a high position somewhere else and making victims there too.”

Mediation

When asked, the Supervisory Board informs de Volkskrant that a mediation process with Darmoni had already been initiated prior to the Hoffmann investigation, after ‘serious reports’ had been received about her in December 2021. That trajectory would have been ‘aborted’ by Darmoni in February.

The Supervisory Board does not want to comment on other questions: “We are currently in the legal process. As long as this is still ongoing, Atria will not make any announcements about the matter due to due care, in the interest of all involved.

Kaouthar Darmoni tells de Volkskrant that she will challenge her dismissal in court. She calls the grounds for her forced departure “incorrect” and a “mix of fabrications”. She says she has not seen Hoffmann’s research report.

“I have seen the questions that the Hoffmann researchers have put to the Atria employees. This results in a completely incorrect picture. The opinion of employees who are positive and have objected to the insinuating question posed by the researchers has not been included.’

Furthermore, Darmoni does not want to respond to Hoffmann’s conclusions and the statements of the three former employees with whom de Volkskrant has spoken. “My focus is now completely on this summary proceedings.”

Partly due to her flamboyant appearance, her predilection for belly dancing and her openness about her sexuality, Darmoni has been a welcome guest in television programs, magazines and newspapers in recent years. In March of this year, she talked about her tendency to embrace female employees in an interview with Volkskrant Magazine: ‘Even before the pandemic broke out, I was sometimes warned: be careful with touching, it is transgressive behaviour. Some of the women at Atria found it a little scary at first, but then they loved it.”

Source: https://www.volkskrant.nl/nieuws-achtergrond/directeur-van-kennisinstituut-voor-emancipatie-ontslagen-wegens-grensoverschrijdend-gedrag~b633fe15/

Istanbul Convention

Istanbul Convention, Gender, and State Silence

Post author By Edward Bartlett
Post date December 30, 2022

Istanbul Convention, Gender, and State Silence

David Walsh

December 30, 2022

The Istanbul Convention is back in the news. On Wednesday, the Swiss government rejected the idea of introducing a third-gender or no-gender option for official records (1). The promotion of gender ideology is a key element of the hotly debated Istanbul Convention.

Due to the refusal of six states to ratify the IC, the EU Commission is preparing to adopt a Directive which would be legally binding on member states. It has drafted a document which is now in the process of being considered by the Parliament, after which it will be put before the EU Council for final implementation (2).

This will bring to a head once again the sovereignty issue: Whether national law or EU law takes precedence when there is a conflict.

It unexpectedly brings together two issues important to the EU: Hate speech laws (3) and gender ideology, which Bulgaria identified as an element of the Convention.

It is likely that the Directive will require citizens who criticise gender ideology to be charged under hate speech laws.

In Bulgaria, the Constitutional Court declared the Convention incompatible with the Fundamental Law due to its understanding of gender as a fluid construct, dependent on subjective feelings (4).

And all of this is proceeding with almost no discussion. Indeed, the citizens of most member states are entirely unaware that this is happening behind their backs, so little of these deliberations is making it into the media. Normally the EU Parliament gets little attention in national media, but in recent weeks, a corruption scandal has engulfed the Parliament and a vice-president is now in jail together with several associates, a scandal at the worst possible moment (5).

There are momentous issues at stake as the Bulgarian Constitutional Court determined; the focus on gender ideology has infuriated EU officials and brought accusations of disinformation (6).

Not all EU countries have provided for gender self-identification; in some places such as Ireland, it was imported by stealth and the pitfalls of this legislation are now becoming clearer as is the introduction of gender ideology in primary schools.

And so the Commission continues on the well-established path of keeping citizens in the dark, a pattern of behaviour well known as the “democratic deficit.”

When the Istanbul Convention was first introduced for individual states to ratify, a cloak of secrecy surrounded it.

In neither Ireland or England, was it put before citizens (6); no experts teased out its implications, no legal minds were asked to predict its consequences into the future or whether its provisions would be for good or ill. Consequently very few people are aware of its ramifications.

It all smacks of an attitude towards the public of “we know what is good for you.” And that attitude continues today.

References

(1) Switzerland rejects idea of a third-gender option in official records.https://www.euronews.com/2022/12/21/switzerland-rejects-idea-of-a-third-gender-option-in-official-records

(2) Draft Report EU Parliament Oct 26 2022: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/CJ01-PR-737351_EN.pdf

(3) https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_20_2068 which was released in Nov 2020, describes how “hate speech” will be added to the list of “EU crimes”: the Commission will present an initiative in 2021 to extend the list of ‘EU crimes’ to include hate crime and hate speech, including when targeted at LGBTIQ people.”

(4) https://www.novinite.com/articles/191318/The+Constitutional+Court+Decided%3A+The+Istanbul+Convention+is+Against+the+Bulgarian+Constitution

(5) https://www.independent.ie/opinion/comment/qatargate-curtain-rises-on-act-one-of-what-could-be-worst-scandal-the-eu-has-ever-known-42227410.html

(6) Draft Report EU Parliament Oct 26, 2022: Par 11 https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/CJ01-PR-737351_EN.pdf

(7) https://theconversation.com/what-the-uk-ratifying-the-istanbul-convention-on-gendered-violence-means-for-women-and-girls-193166 Oct 26, 2022

Domestic Violence Law & Justice Legal

Why Are Young Women Becoming More Violent?

Post author By Edward Bartlett
Post date December 28, 2022

Why Are Young Women Becoming More Violent?

SAVE

December 28, 2022

These three stories about domestic assaults appeared in a single day on December 27, 2022:

Criminologists have known for more than 30 years that young women are rapidly becoming more violent. To illustrate the phenomenon, here’s a story from 2006, at which point the trend was already more than a decade old:

Are US Girls Becoming More Violent?

July 2006

Adolescent U.S. girls are being arrested in record numbers. … [N]ational arrest statistics for simple and aggravated assaults by girls have been on the rise for more than a decade. The FBI’s Uniform Crime Reports note the female percentage of total juvenile assault arrests jumped from 21 percent to 32 percent between 1990 and 2003. And the U.S. female juvenile assault rate rose from about 200 for every 100,000 girls to 750 between 1980 and 2003.

Some analysts trace the surge in the number of girls arrested to increased pressures—from the breakdowns of family, church, community, and school—that have increased their propensity for violence. Other analysts reason that girls are more likely to act out or lash out due to changing gender-role expectations: Greater female freedom and assertiveness have masculinized female behavior and are expressed in an imitation of male machismo competitiveness. And violence by girls is also pervasive in much of today’s entertainment. (Even in a recent Harry Potter movie, a girl character—Hermione Granger—hits a boy, only to say afterwards: “Boy, that felt good.”)

The trend is all the more remarkable because, until 2020, the crime rate for every other demographic group had been declining for more than 20 years. Young women were the only demographic group that showed an increase in violent crime. Here’s a story from early 2020:

Female fugitives: Why is ‘pink-collar crime’ on the rise?

The Guardian, Jan 6, 2020

Men commit more crimes than women do. A lot more. This holds true over time and across cultures. In America, the incarceration capital of the world (more than 2 million detainees), males comprise 93% of the prison population. Men also account for 73% of all arrests and 80% of those charged with violent crimes. This disparity between the sexes is particularly stark when it comes to murder: 90% of the time, the ones who do the killing are men.

All these numbers add up to what criminologists call the “gender gap”. But read enough academic journals and government crime reports, and some curious facts emerge: while crime rates in the western world have steadily declined over the past three decades, the number of young women being convicted for violent crimes in some western countries has increased significantly; law enforcement records indicate the opposite is true for their male counterparts. In other words, the gender gap is closing.

In some UK cities, the number of female arrests increased by 50% from 2015 to 2016. That’s more than a blip. A 2017 report by the Institute For Criminal Policy Research at Birkbeck, University of London came up with this sobering data point: the global female prison population has surged by more than half since the turn of the century, while the male prison population increased by just a fifth over that same period. Women and girls may account for only 7% of all incarcerated people today, but their numbers are now growing at a much faster rate than at any time in recorded history.

Going Easy on Female Offenders

Criminologists advance several different theories for the increase in violent crime by young females, including the substantial disparity in criminal justice outcomes for women compared to men. Young female perpetrators understand they are much less likely to be prosecuted than similarly-situated male offenders. And, even if prosecuted, are likely to receive substantially lower sentences than similarly-situated male offenders. In other words, young women are becoming more violent, at least in part, because they believe they can get away with it.

Numerous studies confirm this sex bias. Here’s a small sample of these studies:

Sonja B. Starr, Estimating Gender Disparities in Federal Criminal Cases, U. of Mich. Law School, Law and Econ. Res. Paper Ser., Paper No. 12-018 (Aug. 2012). After controlling for the arrest offense, criminal history and other variables, “men receive 63 percent longer sentences on average than women” and “women are . . . twice as likely to avoid incarceration if convicted.”
Byungbae Kim, Xia Wang and Hyunjung Cheon, Examining the Impact of Ecological Contexts on Gender Disparity in Federal Sentencing, 36 Justice Qtrly 466 (2018).
Emma E. Fridel, Leniency for Lethal Ladies: Using the Actor–Partner Interdependence Model to Examine Gender-Based Sentencing Disparities, 23 Homicide Stud. 319 (2019). “Women were less likely to receive the harshest possible punishment, regardless of their partner’s gender. These findings provide support for the female leniency effect, suggesting that gender bias continues to influence sentencing decisions for homicide.”
Henry J. Muller, Sarah L. Desmarais and John M. Hamel, Do Judicial Responses to Restraining Order Requests Discriminate Against Male Victims of Domestic Violence? 24 J. Fam. Viol. 625 (2009). Study of domestic violence restraining orders found that “judges were almost 13 times more likely to grant a TRO requested by a female plaintiff against her male intimate partner, than a TRO requested by a male plaintiff against his female partner.”.
Chris Johnson, Nebraska Must Address Gender Bias. (December 14, 2016). “According to the largest-ever review of domestic violence research, women and men abuse their partners at comparable rates. The Partner Abuse State of Knowledge project found 28.3 percent of women perpetrated domestic violence compared with 21.6 percent of men.”

Sex bias in the criminal system arises from the actions of police officers, prosecutors, and judges, and well as from the misconceptions of lawmakers and the public at large. It’s time to stop these egregious violations of the Equal Protection provision of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Campus Department of Education Due Process Free Speech Investigations Legal Press Release Sexual Harassment Title IX

Mass Opposition to Students’ Access to Freedom and Educational Rights (SAFER) Act

Post author By Edward Bartlett
Post date December 20, 2022

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Hain: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

Mass Opposition to Students’ Access to Freedom and Educational Rights (SAFER) Act

WASHINGTON / December 20, 2022 – The Students’ Access to Freedom and Educational Rights (SAFER) Act, recently introduced in the Senate (S. 5158) and House of Representatives (H.R. 9387), has ignited a wave of opposition.

The SAFER bill would dramatically broaden the meaning of “sexual harassment” to include virtually all conduct that is viewed as “unwelcome.” The bill would expand the definition of “sex,” thereby allowing for the participation of biological males in women’s sporting events. The Act would also remove key due process protections for the accused, such as the right to an impartial investigation, thereby undermining the presumption of innocence (1).

A SAVE public opinion survey, conducted in June by YouGov, revealed the following (2):

57% of Americans oppose revamping the Supreme Court’s definition of “sexual harassment.”
63% of Americans oppose changing the definition of “sex” to include “gender identity.”
71% of Americans oppose transgender participation in women’s sports.
87% of Americans want to retain the presumption of innocence in college disciplinary proceedings.

Accordingly, two statements were issued by groups during the past week that expressed strong opposition to the SAFER Act:

One Call to Action highlighted the fact that in recent months, two federal courts have issued decisions that nixed expanded definitions of “sex.” (3)
The Heritage Foundation charged, “There is no scientific or legal basis that supports changing ‘sex’ to ‘sexual orientation and gender identity’ in Title IX. Such a change threatens everyone’s freedoms, removes important due process protections for students in higher education, and puts girls and women in danger of physical harm.” (4)

In addition, an editorial revealed that 83% of college students currently report self-censoring their speech to avoid criticism. By expanding the definition of sexual harassment, the SAFER bill would dramatically worsen campus restrictions on free speech (5).

Co-sponsors of the SAFER Act are urged to withdraw their support for the SAFER Act bill and reaffirm their oath of office to “uphold and defend” the U.S. Constitution, including the First and Fourteenth Amendments.

Links:

Campus Due Process False Allegations Investigations Press Release Sexual Assault Sexual Harassment Trauma Informed

Rigged: SAFER Act Bears Eerie Resemblance to Soviet-Era Legal System

Post author By Edward Bartlett
Post date December 15, 2022

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Stewart: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

Rigged: SAFER Act Bears Eerie Resemblance to Soviet-Era Legal System

WASHINGTON / December 15, 2022 — The Students’ Access to Freedom and Educational Rights (SAFER) Act (1) was recently introduced in the Senate (S. 5158) and House of Representatives (H.R. 9387). The bill proposes to make numerous changes to campus Title IX adjudication procedures that would tilt the process in favor of the complainant. The changes are reminiscent of practices often seen in the former Soviet Union.

In the Soviet Union, Lavrentiy Beria, head of Stalin’s secret police, often boasted, “Show me the man, and I’ll show you the crime.” Similarly, the SAFER Act would provide complainants a broad array of supports and protections, leaving accused persons to their own devices. (Section 205)

In the Soviet Union, “all aspects of the Soviet legal system were effectively subordinate to the leadership of the Soviet Communist Party,” according to University of Illinois law professor Peter Maggs (2). On college campuses, ideologically committed Title IX coordinators wield enormous control over the processing of complaints. Under SAFER, their power would further expand to have a say over “teaching practices, textbooks, and curricula.” (Section 206)

In the Soviet Union, false allegations were rampant. Similarly, 40-50% of sexual assault allegations on American college campuses are known to be unfounded (3). Ironically, the SAFER Act would discourage a school from disciplining a person who makes a false allegation. (Section 205)

In the Soviet Union, investigators would slant their methods in order to reach a predetermined conclusion of guilt. Under the SAFER Act, campus investigators would be mandated to use “trauma-informed interview techniques” — methods that would further tilt what already is a biased Title IX process (4). (Section 205)

In the Soviet Union, “there was severe pressure from the party hierarchy to secure a 100 percent conviction rate, with the result that thereafter there were almost no acquittals.” (2) In the United States, Oberlin College once boasted it had a 100% conviction rate for Title IX cases (5).

As if to underscore the irrelevance of the SAFER bill, in three separate decisions this past week, federal judges issued rulings that illustrate the due process deficiencies of campus “kangaroo courts:”

The First Circuit Court of Appeals overturned a lower court decision, and ruled against Stonehill College of Massachusetts for its deeply flawed adjudication methods (6).
Judge Reed O’Connor issued a ruling against Texas Christian University, finding that TCU had instructed that exculpatory evidence for the man was “not to [be] consider[ed],” “discussed or referenced” by the Title IX panel (7).
The District Court of Western Wisconsin ruled against the University of Wisconsin-Madison for various procedural errors against a male student that constituted sex discrimination (8).

SAVE urges lawmakers to oppose the SAFER Act.

Links:

Domestic Violence

Not only Women, But Also Men Can Become Victims of Violence (Lithuanian)

Post author By Edward Bartlett
Post date December 13, 2022

Smurto aukomis tampa ne tik moterys, bet ir vyrai

Stengiamasi žaisti „į vienus vartus“

B.van der Weg-Bražiūnienė atkreipė dėmesį ir į tai, kad visą praėjusią savaitę daugelyje pasaulio šalių, bet tik ne Lietuvoje, vyko Tarptautinei vyrų dienai (pažymima lapkričio 19 d.) skirti renginiai.

„Toks dėmesys – ne atsitiktinis, o tampriai susijęs su stebimu vyrų demonizavimu ir jų teisių menkinimu. Todėl daugybė organizacijų iš viso pasaulio kvietė į 3-ąjį iš eilės Globalinį stebėjimą – savaitę trunkančią Tarptautinės vyrų dienos šventę. Ypatingai šiais metais stengtasi akcentuoti smurto prieš vyrus šeimose problematiką“, – pasakojo visuomenininkė.

Pasak jos, situaciją dar labiau blogina tai, kad problemą stengiamasi ignoruoti.

„Jungtinių Tautų socialinių, humanitarinių ir kultūrinių klausimų komitetas svarsto dokumentą „Smurtas prieš moteris ir merginas, jo priežastys ir pasekmės“. Deja, A/77/136 ataskaita yra tokia ydinga, kad Tarptautinis prievartos ir smurto artimoje aplinkoje aljansas (Domestic Abuse and Violence International Alliance, sutr.DAVIA) , kuris šiuo metu apjungia 68 organizacijas iš 28 pasaulio šalių, ragina komitetą atšaukti tolesnį svarstymą. Priešingu atveju kyla pavojus, kad bus diskredituojamos teisėtos pastangos spręsti klimato kaitos, COVID ir realias smurto šeimoje problemas. DAVIA atlikta JT dokumento analizė atskleidė tokius jo trūkumus: 1. Mokslinio patikimumo stoka dėl netinkamo ir netikslaus pagrindinių teiginių šaltinio; 2. Teiginys, kad „Tyrimai parodė, jog per klimatines katastrofas moterys miršta 14 kartų dažniau negu vyrai yra nepatikimas, neįtikėtinas ir nepriklausomų apžvalgininkų apibūdintas kaip „zombių statistika“; 3. Klaidingai tvirtinama, kad COVID „neproporcingai“ paveikia moteris ir mergaites; policijos pranešimai, nusikalstamumo statistika ir kolegų peržiūrimi tyrimai rodo, kad pandemijos metu smurtas šeimoje nepadidėjo; 4. Mirtingumo, susijusio su badu, tyrimų neįtraukimas. Orveliška manipuliacija, padedanti eliminuoti nuolat pasikartojantį didesnį vyrų mirtingumą stichinių nelaimių atvejais; 5. Nesugebėjimas pripažinti fakto, kad moterys taip pat dažnai smurtauja šeimoje; 6. Vyrų-smurto aukų nuasmeninimas yra taktika, seniai asocijuojama su totalitariniais režimais. Trumpiau tariant, minėtas JT dokumentas, DAVIA nuomone, yra ideologijos triumfas prieš mokslą“, – niūrią realybę įvardino B.van der Weg-Bražiūnienė.

Ji patikslino, kad DAVIA siekė pabrėžti didžiulį, dabar JT komiteto svarstomų pasiūlymų šališkumą, o aljanso parengta ataskaita yra laisvai prieinama internete.

„Reaguodamos į tai tarptautinės organizacijos visame pasaulyje penktadienį, lapkričio 18 d., minėjo Tarptautinę kovos su smurtu prieš vyrus dieną. Tą pačią dieną Tarptautinis prievartos ir smurto artimoje aplinkoje aljansas surengė tarptautinę spaudos konferenciją, kurioje pasisakė DAVIA prezidentas Edward E. Bartlett, knygų apie moterų smurtą prieš vyrus autorė Ann Silvers, su Tėvų atstūmimo problema dirbanti Jan James, Stambulo konvencijos kritikas, politikos studijų profesorius Stephenas Baskerville, Indijos vyrų forumo atstovas Anirban Sinha ir kiti.

Lietuvoje irgi liūdna

Ne vienerius metus su tėvų atstūmimo problematika dirbanti ir aktyviai įvairių organizacijų veikloje dalyvaujanti B.van der Weg-Bražiūnienė įvertino ir Lietuvos situaciją.

„Tyrimai rodo, kad būtent lyčių stereotipai ir nuostatos, kokiais asmenybės bruožais turi pasižymėti viena ar kita lytis, gali lemti tai, jog Lietuvoje vyrų savižudybių yra net keturis kartus daugiau, nei moterų. Dar 2006 m. Rita Žukauskienė savo knygoje „Kriminalinio elgesio psichologija“ rašė: „smurtauti ir būti auka gali ir vyras, ir moteris. Intymių partnerių smurtas yra gana plačiai paplitęs Šiaurės Amerikos visuomenėje. Daugelis pagalbos tarnybų intervencinių programų orientuotos reaguoti į smurtą, kurį patiria moterys iš savo sutuoktinių arba partnerių, ir dažniausiai smurtas tarp partnerių sutuoktinių suprantamas kaip vyro smurtas, o ne priešingai. Vis dėlto kai kurių autorių tyrimai, atlikti daugiausia JAV, rodo, kad moterys taip pat taiko smurtą prieš savo vyrus, o kai kurie autoriai pažymi, jog moterys labiau nei vyrai linkę smurtauti prieš savo intymų partnerį“, – čia prieš tai minėtos knygos ištrauką pacitavo visuomenininkė.

Pasak jos, tokias prielaidas patvirtino ir vėlesniais metais atliktos analizės.

Daugiau negu 343 mokslinių tyrimų, atliktų 40 šalių smurto artimoje aplinkoje tema, kompiliacija patvirtina, jog: „moterys yra fiziškai agresyvios, kaip ir vyrai (ar daugiau) santykiuose su savo sutuoktiniais ar priešingos lyties partneriais“ (šaltinis: Martin Fiebert „Nuorodos, nagrinėjančios moterų išpuolius prieš savo sutuoktinius ar vyrus“, 2014 m.). Nepaisant to, feministinės organizacijos nesiremia mokslinių tyrimų išvadomis, bet naudoja pranešimų apie smurtą policijai suvestines. Kaip žinia, vyrai dėl patirto šeimoje smurto skundžiasi dažniausiai tik tada, kai jis tampa fiziškai pavojingas, ką patvirtinta ir 2020 Lietuvoje atliktas tyrimas (https://www.specializuotospagalboscentras.lt/tyrimai/), – toliau situaciją vertino visuomenininkė. Dar tebėra gajus berniukų auklėjimas principu, jog vyrams nedera reikšti savo jausmų ar laikyti savęs aukomis. Persmelkiantys įsitikinimai ar stereotipai apie tai, kad vyrai yra smurtautojai, o moterys – aukos, tvyro kaip slogus smogas mūsų visuomenėje. Dėl to vyrai nedrįsta skųstis, neieško pagalbos, ką, deja, ne kiekvienas psichologiškai atlaiko. Prievarta prieš vyrus dažnai traktuojama kaip ne tokia rimta arba iš vis nereikšminga.

Vyrai, kaip žinia, dažnai smurtą patiria skyrybų metu, kai, siekiant didesnės dalies užgyvento turto ar išimtinai vaikų globos, jie yra nepagrįstai apkaltinami smurtu. Kol vyksta tyrimas, vyrai negali pareiti į savo nuosavus namus, matytis su vaikais. Praktika rodo, kad dažnai tokių atveju metu vaikai yra nuteikinėjami prieš tėčius, todėl galime kalbėti ir apie psichologinį smurtą prieš vaiką. Vėliau tas, dažniausiai, išsivysto į tėvų atstūmimą. Aišku, moterys taip pat susiduria su tėvų atstūmimu, bet vyrai dėl to nukenčia 4-6 kartus dažniau.

Be to, kaltinimams smurtu nepasitvirtinus, dažniausiai melagingai apkaltinusieji lieka nenubausti. Įdomu, ar statistikoje išlieka nepasitvirtinę pranešimai apie „patirtą“ smurtą. Ar kas susimąstė, kokį psichologines pasekmes patiria nekaltai apkaltintas žmogus?

Pasak B.van der Weg-Bražiūnienės, reikia suprasti, kad smurtas neturi lyties, todėl atpildo privalo susilaukti visi smurtautojai.