California Court Finds Clue

Any person familiar with the facts of domestic violence realizes that men and women are equally likely to be victims, as a 2007 study conducted by the Harvard Medical School reported. In fact, in 70% of cases of unilateral violence, women are the aggressors. Another peer-reviewed study in the American Journal of Public Health confirms this.

Overall, 24% of heterosexual relationships report some degree of violence. Within that group, 50% of all domestic violence is reciprocal; and in cases of reciprocal violence, the woman is usually the first to strike, and the man is more likely to be physically injured. In cases of unilateral violence, 70% are initiated by women, and 30% by men; though, due to men’s greater physical strength, women sustain 6% more injuries.

The point here is that study after study confirms that domestic violence isn’t a one-way street — it is “equal opportunity” for both sexes, with women being more likely than men to be the initiators of violence. This is a simple fact. Deal with it.

Meanwhile, back at the special-interest ranch, Radical Feminists — whose technique for social deconstruction depends upon inculcating victim-mentality in women while providing female supremacist rights to women over men — have spent decades procuring special (rather than equal) rights for women with regard to domestic violence.

No place is this more evident than in so-called “battered women’s shelters,” from which men of any sort, even men who are victims rather than perpetrators of violence, are categorically excluded.

In fact, such shelters are so incredibly hostile to members of the male sex that, when a woman with children flees to a shelter, she is allowed to keep her female children with her while male children must be placed in foster care.

The legislation that enables and funds these centers, in many cases, is sex-specific with men being categorically denied help or facilities of any sort.

Today, after decades of injustice, California’s Third District Court of Appeals ruled, in Woods v. Shewry, that ” … The gender classifications in Health and Safety Code section 124250 and Penal Code section 13823.15, that provide state funding of domestic violence programs that offer services only to women and their children, but not to men, violate equal protection.”
The lawyer who won this case, Marc Angelluci stated: “We’ve been through the daisy wheel of judicial activism on this issue. Now the courts have finally addressed the injustice, but the struggle is not over. Many taxpayer-funded programs, especially in Los Angeles, still deny men services such as counseling, advocacy, shelter or hotel vouchers, which is endangering their children.”

While Attorney Angelluci has made a dent in the system for Californians; grave injustices of this sort are extremely common all across the country.

According to self-identified Individualist Feminist Wendy McElroy, the incredible legal bias against men in this country is leading to a very large unstated strike by men against marriage and reproduction.

Some black folks are fond of the saying “no justice, no peace; know justice, know peace.” It really says a lot. It turns out that the massive infrastructure that has been set up against men in this country has a similar, and even more sinister effect; and it could be spelled out like this: “no justice, no babies.”

This is much more sinister than the implied threat of violence in the popular African American slogan; because there is a certain apocalyptic quality to the fact that “no babies = no future.”