Unconstitutional VAWA Law Upheld By A Propaganda Ploy
April 13, 2005
by Carey Roberts
What do you get when you mix equal parts of gender myth, a casual disregard of Constitutional protections, and old fashioned political pork? VAWA – the Violence Against Women Act -- that’s what.
For the past decade, Americans have been subjected to the relentless message, There’s no excuse for domestic violence against a woman.
OK, but what about Piper Rountree who was convicted six weeks ago for the ambush-slaying of her former husband, University of Richmond professor Frederic Jablin? Are cases of female-on-male violence so rare as to be an amusing oddity in the newspaper obituary columns?
Here’s the shocker: Women are just as likely as men to commit domestic violence against their intimate partners.
Chances are you’ve been heard the Urban Legend that follows the predictable line, male = abuser, female = victim. So I’m going to repeat my statement, this time with emphasis: Research shows that women are equally likely to commit partner aggression against their boyfriends, husbands, and ex-husbands.
We’re not talking about a handful of studies. Over 100 research reports have shown this to be true -- you can see for yourself by visiting this website:
https://web.archive.org/web/20050311084103/www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm
Here’s how attorney Linda Kelly recently put it: “men and women commit violence at similar rates.” Psychologist John Archer reached an even stronger conclusion in his article in the Psychological Bulletin: “Women were slightly more likely than men to use one or more acts of physical aggression.”
It’s not a casual toss of a pillow or a playful jab at the chops. According to Dr. Archer, 38% of all persons who suffer domestic violence injuries are male.
So why don’t we read about these cases of female-on-male violence more often in the newspapers? Because men are far less likely to report the incident to the police – nine times less likely, according to one landmark study.
To understand the DV urban legend, we need to go back to 1991, when senator Joe Biden of Delaware introduced VAWA for the first time. But many in Congress were opposed to Biden’s bill because it ignored key provisions of the United States Constitution.
First, the proposed law flaunted the intent of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteen Amendment. Knowing that men are equally likely to be victims of domestic violence, how could anyone in good conscience propose a law that would confer greater protections and services, but only for women?
Second, Biden’s proposed bill violated the principle of federalism enshrined in the Tenth Amendment, and thus infringed on state sovereignty.
Not surprisingly, Biden’s bill was soon relegated to the legislative deep-freeze. That didn’t please the rad-fems. So someone came up with the idea of a publicity stunt.
In January 1993, a daring group of women called a press conference in Pasadena, California. Sheila Kuhn Kuehl of the California Women’s Law Center made the statement that would provide the boost the feminists were desperately looking for: Super Bowl Sunday was the “biggest day of the year for violence against women.”
That stunning claim quickly appeared on Good Morning America, in the Boston Globe, and elsewhere. The Oakland Tribune would report the Super Bowl causes men to “explode like mad linemen, leaving girlfriends, wives, and children beaten.” How’s that for dispassionate news reporting?
Some remained unconvinced, however, including reporter Ken Ringle of the Washington Post. In his article “Debunking the 'Day of Dread' for Women,” Ringle showed the feminist claim was a preposterous fraud. But Ringle’s expose’ came too late -- the genie was out of the bottle.
The Super Bowl Hoax, as it was later dubbed, no doubt will become a classic in the propaganda textbooks. And it clearly did succeed in triggering a surge of letters and phone calls to Congress. The following year the Violence Against Women Act was signed into law by President Clinton.
Less than five months from now on September 30, VAWA is set to expire. That means the Sisterhood’s billion-dollar-a-year gravy-train will dry up. Renewal legislation has not yet been introduced, apparently because the Republican majority hasn’t warmed up to the idea of dishing out mega-bucks to the GOP’s avowed political foes.
As the clock ticks down to September 30, the rad-fems are beginning to panic. Armageddon-Day strategy memos are circulating on the Internet. Decisive action soon will be needed to galvanize public support.
Get ready for a reprise of the Super Bowl Hoax.
VAWA was perhaps one of the most damaging pieces of legislation to America. It can be argued the weight and toll of this Act for splitting up families often through false and purjured affidavits was used as the blueprint for expanding it's usage in the War on Terrorism. Sounds crazy? Not if you read the laws for domestic abuse, which are not utilized around physical abuse, but the vast majority of cases are unprovable 'fear' crimes. The divorce industry is now a trillion dollar extortion racket. There are so many facets to this, that to be unfortunate enough to experience it, it is as if falling into an alternate twilight world. It's a shock-and-awe experience to divorcing fathers. One facet of this is revealed by asking the facetious question: What do you get when you mix equal parts of gender myth, a casual disregard of Constitutional protections, and old fashioned political pork? VAWA – the Violence Against Women Act -- that’s what. VAWA permits women to have offices in the very court building where these custody tribunals are held. Advocates for the battered women’s shelter, who are often male hating militant lesbians, promote the filing of such domestic abuse complaints. Yes, I am not making this up. They are given charge of filling out ex-parte orders that are essentially restraining orders against the father. These centers, supported by public money, serve primarily to promote the expulsion of men from their homes without due process of law. This is the first step in taking children away from the father and granting of custody to the State approved guardian-ward; the mother. These centers also serve to promote abortion, divorce, and the prevention of reconciliation between husband and wife.
The affidavit forms have become entirely automated for women to file and be processed. All a female needs to claim is that she “fears for her safety.” An ensuing exparte order will be signed by a judge or administrative officer to remove the accused male from his home and prohibiting further contact with his wife and children. A “fear” crime is ambiguous and extremely difficult to be vindicated of. Evidence for physical abuse is not required and the only female rationale needed is being fearful of the male. It is estimated that sixty-six percent of all domestic abuse charges are false.1 Incarceration is quite common for the male. After his release, he is always expelled from his own home and ordered not to return. A magistrate will hear the case, but he will not be able to return to his house unless she allows him too. Not since prior to the signing of the Magna Carta in 1215 AD, which guaranteed a sovereign citizen’s right not to be ordered from their home, have such police powers been carried out. Tens of thousands of innocent men have been thrown out of their homes and onto the streets, unsheltered, often on perjured affidavits. Nobody is ever prosecuted for these perjured affidavits, even where the proof is abundant.
Sheila Kuehl, not Kuhn. Same as the L.A. County supervisor and council member who voted for renewed lockdowns on restaurants because of the danger to the public on the same day she dined out at a fancy Santa Monica restaurant.
A quick glance at her Wikipedia indicates she's as deep a commie as Jane Fonda, and for just as long.
This was a typo in the article then. Are you sure it's the same person? Thanks for edit and correct spelling if it is.
NP. I recognized the name. A diligent DS worker, planting the early seeds of destruction in a once-great state.
Okay corrected it.
Feminazi agenda running hot...also attempting to revitalize ERA by bypassing the expiration of 40 years. Virginia legislature passed approval last year (pre Youngkin) and claimed to be an additional state.
The feminazi organization is controlled by globalist actors. Feminism masquerades as a woman's issue, but isn't really at all, but rather promotes anti-family, anti-reproduction, and anti-children behavior used to trick women in delaying having children. The biological clock ticks and each year passing fertility rates decrease. As evidence of this, look at how NOW and other feminist organizations defend cross-dressers playing in girl sports. That isn't representing woman's rights.
It's been a while since I dug into the facts, but there are many such myths, including the "women earn 63 cents for every dollar a man makes" which was also proven to be based on an ad hoc, blatant lie.
For those interested, Warren Farrell has a body of work around this topic, and there used to be (maybe still exists?) a website called HisSide.org founded by Glenn Sacks, a gifted writer and investigator on the topic. He retired, as I think he was mob- harassed with lawfare and other tactics. The organization may have folded (the two groups teamed up for a while) into the Massachusetts Parents Rights organization (I'm probably off on the name because it's so general), which has done a lot of grass roots organizing for fathers' rights.
I remember Glenn Sacks and being on his mailing list. It's been a long while since I last heard anything from Glenn Sacks.... and vaguely I do recall that he was retiring. I'm not familiar with Warren Farrell though..... As I said, it's been a while. With all the tragedies I saw in this horror show, I became overwhelmed after awhile. Nothing seemed to change. It was a massive Juggernaut that no one could make a dent in. In time, after friends and acquaintances came and went, I moved on too. My recollection of the stories told were utter astonishment.
I am pretty sure it is already illegal to commit violence against any person.
You're facetiously speaking....... How to define a "fear crime"? Evidence for physical abuse is not required and the only female rationale needed is being fearful of the male to trigger domestic abuse laws. As part of domestic abuse law is "terroristic threats", which legally means to threaten, directly or indirectly or otherwise "cause serious public inconvenience", or in a reckless disregard of the risk of "causing such terror or inconvenience". A “fear” crime is ambiguous and extremely difficult to be vindicated of. It is estimated that 66% of all domestic abuse charges are false.1 Incarceration is quite common for the male. Beware, serious inconveniencing of your girl friend or spouse are grounds to criminalize.
Yes, but it is not enforced equally. VAWA and mandatory arrest policies ensure that women who lie about it are protected while men do not receive those protections. While there are true anecdotes with the genders reversed, the data shows the true picture.
I heard they are working on an updated version that will be called the "Va-Jay-Jay" law...