Posted on 05/15/2009 6:53:11 AM PDT by FreeManDC
There is a group of activists among us who have found the perfect way to advance their statist, anti-family agenda. They ply their issue by relying on a devious mixture of exaggerations, half-truths, and bald-faced lies.
I'm referring, of course, to the domestic violence industry. DV operatives make bogus claims designed to garner ever-expanding federal funding, which in turn is used to disseminate more biased factoids that keep women in a continuous state of fear. It's a multi-billion dollar, taxpayer-financed scam, and I'm here to blow the whistle.
Last week Dear Abby devoted her column to helping a man who had been pummeled and maimed by his wife: www.uexpress.com/dearabby/?uc_full_date=20090506 . And according to a 2006 Harris poll, 55% of Americans know of a man who has been physically abused by his wife or girlfriend.
But the domestic violence industry works day and night to make you think the poll got it wrong — that abused men are a statistical rarity, and such men probably had it coming anyway.
Here's the latest example of the abuse industry's ms.-information: the Security and Financial Empowerment (SAFE) Act. The bill was recently introduced in Congress by representatives Lucille Roybal-Allard of California and Ted Poe of Texas. (The fact that Poe is a Republican shows how far the GOP has wandered from its core principles of late.)
The bill contains 33 findings — supposedly a series of verifiable facts that everyone can agree are true. But this time around, someone got very creative with the truth.
Last month RADAR, a Maryland-based watchdog group, released its analysis of the SAFE Act findings. I'll give you fair warning, this one's a doozy: www.mediaradar.org/docs/RADARanalysis-HR739Findings.pdf
The SAFE Act starts off with this chestnut: "Violence against women has been reported to be the leading cause of injury to women." That's a prime example of crackpot science. Because according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the leading causes of injury to women are unintentional falls, automobile accidents, and over-exertion.
The SAFE Act goes on to assert, "According to recent Government estimates, approximately 987,400 rapes occur annually in the United States." Want to know the real number? Only 90,427, according to the FBI.
The SAFE Act wants us to believe that "each year there are 5,300,000 non-fatal violent victimizations committed by intimate partners against women." That claim reminds us of the old Yiddish proverb about a half-truth being a whole lie. Because the same survey that reached the 5.3 million number reported a similar number of male victims of physical abuse.
For several of its claims, the SAFE Act cites research by Joan Zorza. Problem is, Zorza is not a researcher. She's a lawyer and well-known advocate for an assortment of radical feminist causes.
All in all, only 4 of the SAFE Act findings are accurate, up-to-date, and verifiable. All the rest are vague, misleading, exaggerated, or even intentionally deceptive.
There's a lot more that's wrong with the SAFE Act, including the fact that it will open the floodgates to even more false allegations of abuse (www.renewamerica.us/columns/roberts/090204) and impose a gigantic unfunded liability on American businesses (www.renewamerica.us/columns/roberts/090209 ).
So why did representatives Roybal-Allard and Poe risk bringing dishonor upon themselves by sponsoring this piece of legislative clap trap?
Ummm. Let me guess. How about money and power? Or, possibly, power and money.
After going to a "safe house" to find a secure place to stay for a time, she was "encouraged" that she "ought to give up on men and try a relationship with a female, who would be kinder."
My son-in-law was forced into "anger management counseling" and my daughter was so repulsed that she left the safe house. They did seemingly work out their "problems" for a time but ultimately (after he went back to drinking, began using marijuana and gambling) they ultimately split up.
The best technique against domestic violence by estranged partners was from a judge who, whenever he issued restraining order against a violent man, issued a second order requiring the abused woman to be armed, at her residence and when in public.
He made it very clear to them that he did not want to see them in front of him again, with different injuries. And if they could not afford a gun and ammunition, it would be provided for them by the judge himself. And they would carry one of several copies of the judge’s order, to present to anyone who questioned their right to be armed, except in a limited few places.
And, importantly, if they were found to be unarmed when out and about, they would appear before him on contempt of court charges, and do time in jail, and he meant it.
Finally, he noted that of the women he had previously issued the order to, none had again appeared before him, or had their ex-boyfriends or spouses.
Lesbians can be quite violent in their domestic relationships. Part of that is they don't need to fear being taken to jail as much as a man in a hetero relationship does.
The most interesting fact is that when it is male on female battering, the non-married "partners" top that list by a significant amount.
Consider that members of the "thug" culture are less likely to marry, and to be as thuggish to their girlfriends as they are to the rest of the world.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.