Addressing the #MeToo narrative of "underreported sexual assaults" and "only 2% of sexual assault claims are false"

I found even the title of this chart to be misleading. 

This morning, I read an article from The Economist entitled, "After a year of #MeToo, American opinion has shifted against victims." The very title implies every accuser is a "victim." The article laments the growing skepticism against people making high-profile accusations:

"Yet surveys suggest that this year-long storm of allegations, confessions and firings has actually made Americans more sceptical about sexual harassment... The share of American adults responding that men who sexually harassed women at work 20 years ago should keep their jobs has risen from 28% to 36%. The proportion who think that women who complain about sexual harassment cause more problems than they solve has grown from 29% to 31%. And 18% of Americans now think that false accusations of sexual assault are a bigger problem than attacks that go unreported or unpunished, compared with 13% in November last year."

The article adds the following statement: "According to the National Sexual Violence Resource Centre, an American non-profit organisation, 63% of sexual assaults are not reported to police, whereas between 2% and 10% of assault cases are falsely reported."

This statement is very misleading. Below is my comment left on the website. If anything, we have overestimated underreporting while minimizing the number of false accusations. This discussion is worthy of a complete analysis on my main site, but for now, I wanted to share a few thought on this subject.

*****

The statement about 63% of rapes/ sexual assaults going unreported while only 2%-10% of sex assault claims are false is an intentionally misleading statement by the victim advocate cult.

The claim that 63% of sexual assaults/ rapes go unreported is a bold conclusion stemming from the National Crime Victimization Survey. The NCVS is a “self-report study” that includes “attempted” as well as “completed” acts, including “verbal threats.” The study relies on the survey taker, not a trained law enforcement official, to determine whether an act is an “unreported crime.” It is completely up to the survey taker to determine an act is a "crime."

But what are "attempts" and "verbal threats"? Some feminists feel looking at a woman too long is "stare rape." If a woman goes to a bar and gets drunk, she can decide if her subsequent sexual acts are consensual or not. There were feminist discussions considering whether a guy who was about his feelings about his lover just to engage in intercourse or who cheated on them during a relationship was rape.   A woman made headlines recently for accusing a child of "sexual assault" after his backpack brushed against her backside. Had there not been security cameras and witnesses, she would have been accounted this alleged one in five women.

The NCVS understands it has limitations: “The estimates of rape/sexual assault are based on a small number of cases reported to the survey. Therefore, small absolute changes and fluctuations in the rates of victimization can result in large year-to-year percentage change estimates. For 2010, the estimate of rape or sexual assault is based on 57 unweighted cases compared to 36 unweighted cases in 2009." That is 57 "unreported cases" out of sample size of nearly 71000 people: In 2010, 40974 households and 73283 individuals age 12 and older were interviewed for the NCVS. Each household was interviewed twice during the year. The response rate was 92.3% of households and 87.5% of eligible individuals." Still, the survey strongly suggests the amount of under-reporting may be over-reported. (2010 NCVS summary)

The NCVS claims of underreporting dropped from 63.7% to 50% in the 2000s but has climbed to 67% in recent years. No doubt the campus rape scare and MeToo claims play roles in this, but with those movements came false claims. Remember the Jackie UVA case in Rolling Stone? Then Janice Dickinson admitted she lied about Bill Cosby harassing her to sell memoirs. Now we have the Kavanaugh case. While Ms. Ford stated certain memories of an assault were "indelible in the hippocampus," so were the memories of many people who made widespread claims of the 1980s and 1990s about satanic pedophiles and child sacrifices in daycare centers across America. Only problem was those claims were proven false, just as a fair number of these claims today are found to be without merit.

But even if only 2% and 10% of sexual assault claims are false, that means there are between 18,080 and 90,400 falsely accused people forced to register as "sex offenders" right now.

We used to have something in this country called "innocent until proven guilty." We've seen that concept under attack by campus sex assault accusations leading to college inquisitions in which presumed innocence was a foreign concept. We're now seeing the consequences of those actions. And now we see the MeToo Movement calling for similar inquisitions. Well, for every action is an equal and opposite reaction. MeToo is past due for a backlash, and the Kavanaugh hearings have become the Jackie UVA of the MeToo movement.

-- Derek Logue of OnceFallen

Feminist Hypocrisy: Even the common definition of "Feminism" is misleading

I do not consider myself a "Feminist." I believe even the definition of Feminism that our culture bandies around is inaccurate. Wikipedia defines Feminism like this:

"Feminism is a collection of movements and ideologies which share a common stated aim: to define, establish, and defend equal political, economic, cultural, and social rights for women."

That isn't Feminism, that is equality. There is indeed such a thing as "Masculinism," which Wikipedia defines in the following way:

"Masculism (or masculinism) is political, cultural, and economic movements which aim to establish and defend political, economic, and social rights and participation in society for men and boys."

Thus, if you believe that both sexes should be treated equally in every aspect of life, you are a Masculinist-Feminist. How can you be two things that are polar opposites of each other? Or, to quote Wikipedia once more, "In this regard, [Masculinism] is the counterpart of feminism, which seeks to achieve the same goals but from a contradistinct viewpoint."

I'm focusing on one key point in my morning rant. You see, I have a few associates who identify themselves as "Feminists." One day, one of them suggested I was a Feminist because I believe in equality (but interestingly enough, she did not say I was a "Masculinist"). It is a bit absurd to me, because I'm by no means a Feminist.

I do indeed believe in equality. As a criminal justice legal reformist, I would love to see equality between the sexes in sentencing policies. In fact, I'd love to see women sentenced the same way as men. When I see a story of a "hot (female) teacher" caught having sex with a student, the teacher gets a light sentence, and society tends not to label this female teacher as a "predator" or "pedophile." We don't take female sex offenders seriously at all. In fact, just Google "hottest female sex offenders," and you'll find 19 lists before you find a single article criticizing the fact we HAVE hottest female sex offender lists. (It is worth noting on the criticism article, a link to a Change.org petition for outraged readers was given-- it obtained a whopping 142 signatures. So much for the outrage.)

Here is an actual statement from one of these "hottest female sex offender lists:"

First off, I don’t see anything wrong with female sex offenders. The only time where it would be wrong is if the boy is under the age of 12 or 13. Otherwise female sex offenders or female rapists are oxymorons. (I never used oxymoron in a sentence before, I hope I’m using it right). Women can’t force themselves on young men because even at the young age of 12 and 13 boys have more strength than women. That’s a fact, Google it. Now this doesn’t take into account the scrawny little emo kids of today, they can definitely be raped by a woman, but any normal looking boy can’t. Furthermore any boy that age would welcome being “raped” by their teachers. Shit, personally if my 8th grade science teacher, Ms. Metler forced herself on me, I would lay back and pretend to struggle while she weakly pinned me down and let her “rape” the shit out of me. Secondly, to all the “victims” who told the police, what the fuck were you thinking? Tell your friends instead. Post that shit on your facebook, be proud of yourself. What the hell is wrong with you? And what the hell is wrong with the” victims” fathers? You fathers should not be telling the authorities and getting these women in trouble. You should be high fiving your sons and asking them if you can get a piece of that ass, on back to school night.

It should go without saying that if the gender was reversed in our scenario (male teacher), we want to "bury this pervert under the jail," the male teacher is generally given stiffer penalties and we refer to this man as a "monster, pedophile, and pervert." I could not find a "hottest male sex offender list. I doubt you'll find a male sex offender who received a lenient sentence because he was "too pretty for prison."

It is also worth noting that even Feminist researchers found that female sex offenders get lesser penalties than male sex offenders. These actually seemed somewhat surprised by their findings, as the study was based off a Feminist concept called the "evil woman hypothesis," which argues that sentencing may be harsher for women who are committing crimes that are outside there gender roles. They set out to determine whether the "evil woman" hypothesis is true but merely confirmed a fact easily observed by our culture-- female sex offenders are simply not taken as seriously as male sex offenders.

However, the Feminist researchers could not accept the fact, so instead of simply admitting the criminal justice system treats women more lenient as a whole, they attribute it to the "chivalry hypothesis:"

Women are not sentenced any more harshly than men, and in fact, it appears as if the criminal justice system actually treats women more leniently than men. Although there is no support in the current study for the evil woman hypothesis, it can be argued that the current study reveals evidence lending support to the chivalry hypothesis. […] This leads to the supposition that women, regardless of the departure from social and gender norms committed in concurrence with the offense for which they are being sentenced, continue to be viewed as individuals who should be protected by the justice system. 

In other words, blame the "Patriarchy."

No matter how you cut it, women are not treated equally in the criminal justice system. So where is the outrage, and where are the hordes of Tumblrinas, SJWs, and online feminist rage goddesses condemning the practice of an unequal criminal justice system where one gender is given preference over another? Where? Seriously, where are they, because I've been looking for them for a while, and I'm usually good at finding things.

I'm all for equality, rather than an -ism. Isms as applied to people are schisms and divisions, after all. I am all for equal sentencing between men and women. Lets give women the same sentences, the same threats of murder and castration, and the same stigma as the men. Or, lets sentence men equally as lenient when a "hot male" teacher has sex with a student, or any similar situation that would be considered "statutory rape." Whichever way you choose, be it lesser or harsher punishment, I say we should at least make it equal for the sexes. Which, according to the Feminist definition of Feminism, supposedly makes me a "Feminist" (imagine me literally rolling on the floor laughing when I wrote this, because I actually did).

Seriously, that definition should really be revised.

False rape culture is part of rape culture, too: Lauren Nelson and her 15 minutes of shame

Lauren the false-rape denier Nelson

A few weeks ago, some random blogger received her 15 minutes of virtual fame by writing an article on so-called "rape culture." It is always a hot button and sensitive topic for Feminists in particular, because this has been a long-standing cash cow for the Feminist agenda. But it wasn't so much that Lauren Nelson put her own crazy spin on the topic IN THIS ARTICLE, she felt the need to write a followup article called "Why I Won’t Publish Your Comments About False Rape Accusations," which is the more likely reason a blog at the far reaches of the internet universe jumped to the top 100,000 in the Alexa rankings (though that spike is short-lived and will return to the 17,000,000th place ranking soon enough).

I'm not keen on quoting Wikipedia, but it has a decent definition of "Rape Culture:"

Rape culture is a concept used to describe a culture in which rape and sexual violence are common and in which prevalent attitudes, norms, practices, and media normalize, excuse, tolerate, or even condone rape...Although the concept of rape culture is a generally accepted theory in feminist academia, there is disagreement over what defines a rape culture and to what degree a given society meets the criteria to be considered a rape culture.

It is long acknowledged that "rape culture" is a Feminist catchphrase. It has long been used to shift the balance in courts to the point accusations of rape are accepted without collaborating evidence to support it. In today's society, an accusation pretty much guarantees conviction in at least the court of public opinion. One look at the comment section in any news article where a person is arrested and charged with a sex crime would reveal that much.

So why is the concept of FALSE RAPE ALLEGATIONS so repugnant to Feminists? The main answer is because anything that serves as a counterbalance to their inflated claims about the prevalence of rape in our society. Christina Hoff Summers, a well-known critic of the Feminist movement, has already exposed many myths propagated by Feminists, including the GENDER PAY GAP MYTH and the famous ONE IN FOUR WOMEN ARE RAPED MYTH. But that's a story for a different day. My focus is on Nelson's blatant disregard for false allegations.

Nelson attempts to justify her denial of false rape discussion by minimizing false rape cases. Nelson makes the following claim:

"First off, the idea that false accusations are a significant problem in rape is patently untrue. For this point, we turn to data." The problem is, Nelson refuses to even mention the studies or link to them, while offering her opinion as to why they are false. Lets look at her reasons.

1. "The sample sizes are painfully small. 1,300 participants is on the high end, while some had as few as 18. Not exactly representative." If sample size is an issue here, the same can be said for the studies that rape culture proponents claim. Many of the outlandish claims have come from relatively small sample sizes. Even the Koss survey (aka, the Ms. Study, so consider the source), the much-heralded study that Feminists use for the 1-in-4-women-are-raped myth, used a sample size of only three thousand. Many research conclusions are across the board use relatively small sample sizes, so the same principles apply to rape studies.

2. "The data is inconsistent. Even when it’s the FBI analyzing larger pools of data on crimes committed, false accusations are largely measured according to police report labels such as 'no crime' or 'unfounded.' The problem with these labels is that they do not translate into a false accusation." And by the same token, the few studies that address the under-reporting claims have relatively broad definitions of rape AND attempted rape. Christina Hoff Summers' critique of the Koss study reveals that the definition included having sex while intoxicated. So if you woke up next to who you thought was George Clooney but looked more like George Costanza the next day, and you regret your choice of partners, that fell under Koss's definition of rape.

Even the National Crime Victimization Survey uses "attempted rapes" under "unreported rapes." And, as I mentioned in my Sex Offender Myths Fact Guide (under Myth #9), even the NCVS admits their sample size is relatively small, and the estimate of underreporting; the NVS found 57 "unreported cases" out of sample size of nearly 71,000 people. To even rely on the NCVS then is a bit of a misnomer.

3. "The data is also only reflective of reports of a man raping a vagina with his penis. Until early 2012, the federal definition of rape excluded such crimes as female rape of male, same sex rape, digital rape, anal rape, oral rape or rape with a foreign object (they also exclude incest for some reason). The most recent data you’ll find is 2011. That means the available data on reported cases is so far from complete, it’s not even funny." And yet the NCVS includes not only completed rapes and attempted rapes (which I just described in the last paragraph). Nelson blatantly ignores this fact. Of course, the Koss/ Ms. study used pretty much the same criteria as the criteria Nelson study.

4. "The data is plagued by rape culture. The studies most frequently cited by those stumping on behalf of the falsely accused have been the subject of criticism in subsequent studies for failing to qualitatively evaluate the methodologies of the case categorizations. Many found that police officers frequently used subjective judgment calls in dismissing cases as unfounded. Other studies found direct evidence of bias in such dismissals when studied in the field." And what is the basis for this claim? Nelson does not offer any evidence to support this claim whatsoever. Who are the "many" who can verify what Nelson said? Who knows. Where are these studies that found bias? Nelson leaves it up to you to find them. I guess she didn't feel like sending us to fringe Feminist sites as the source. That's be like getting smoking stats from Joe Camel.

5. "In studies where data was not provided but gathered in the field, the methodologies used for determining a false report were suspect (and that’s putting it nicely)." She offers no further elaboration. It is merely opinion. Of course, ever study has limitations. Read any scholarly journal and you will see the researchers discuss limitations. Sample size, methodology, focus of the study, the goals of the researchers, and the reliance of laymen to interpret expert matters of law influences any study like this. Nelson's arguments are just as valid when used against her.

Now we reach the point where her logic takes a strange turn. Nelson starts out with 8% of known rape cases as false allegations, purportedly from the FBI. Then she claims that according to the FBI, only 37% of rape cases are reported. But she does not post a link to the FBI study; she posts a link to the CONTROVERSIAL and INACCURATE Enliven Project Meme that was passed around earlier this year (and thoroughly dissected and found to be bogus). In fact, I ranted about this same meme earlier this year. So Nelson is not even using an original rant. (As an aside, the 2010 NCVS numbers state only 50% of sex crimes go unreported, going by the same criteria as the previous studies.) It is like quoting a friend of a friend who heard it from Faux News. The Enliven Project meme got much of their info from RAINN, a victim industry advocate.

Regardless, using this logic, Nelson divides 8% by 37% and now false allegations are 3% of the total rape cases. She's not satisfied with these numbers, mainly because the numbers are still too high for her liking. So she invites us to think "hypothetically."


"Still not fantastic, I’ll admit, but far from justifiable as an interruption to important discourse. Still, I’m not satisfied with leaving it at that. Let’s talk hypothetically.

Let’s give the police the benefit of the doubt, and assume that their frequency of subjective dismissal justifies an adjustment down in the false reporting rate to 7%. There’s enough out there to justify a stronger cut, but we’ll be conservative.

And let’s say that, with only 37% of rapes being reported and sexual violence education woefully lacking, the amount of “unfounded” cases labeled as such due to lack of evidence to take it to trial –  as women shower, dispose of clothing, and so forth post attack - brings false accusation rate down again to 6%.

And lets assume – given that only 9% of cases ever go to trial and only 3% of rapists will ever spend a day in jail - that rape culture factors such as dress, former sexual encounters, use of alcohol, and so forth, account for enough perceived potential for reasonable doubt to derail an additional portion of those “unfounded” cases bringing down the rate once more to 4% (and that’s being generous).

I know this is all conjecture. It’s an exercise. Stay with me."

So at this point, even Lauren Nelson admits this entire exercise is a smoking pile of horse shit. But I wish to take just a moment to return to the under-reporting myth. Because under-reporting is truly an unknown factor (simply put, we have no way of knowing how many claimed unreported crimes exist or are indeed crimes), we can claim any number greater than 0% and less than 100%. Rape Culture proponents will claim numbers as high as the upper 90s, as suggested by the Enliven Project Meme. I already noted the NCVS, which is rather generous with its definition of rape and attempted rape, finds low numbers of under-reporting in a very large sample size. Nelson tries to argue this is "rape culture," but her argument falls flat.

If there is such a thing as rape culture, then there is also such a thing as False Rape Culture. Lauren Nelson makes the same arguments as many other false rape deniers. The justification is "It makes victims feel as though they won’t be believed if they do come forward." I find that hard to believe. After all, rarely do false accusers face incarceration, and in the very rare event a false accuser is convicted, they are rarely punished.

When a false rape accuser gets off with no penalties, THAT IS FALSE RAPE CULTURE.

Lauren Nelson: "If you want to comment about false rape accusations, it won’t be on this blog."

When Lauren Nelson denies and minimizes the harm of false rape accusations and states she will not allow anyone to discuss it on her blog, THAT IS FALSE RAPE CULTURE.

When a person finally gains an appeal due to faulty and contradictory evidence at trial, and a victim industry profiteer like Laura Ahearn accuses him of still being guilty and denying the chance he may be innocent, that is FALSE RAPE CULTURE.

When TV Analyst Wendy Murphy famously proclaims "I never, ever met a false rape claim, by the way. My own statistics speak to the truth," and maintains this position after watching the Duke Lacrosse case turn into an indictment against overzealous prosecutor William Nifong (and still put this crazy lady on the air), that is FALSE RAPE CULTURE.

When it takes 11 false allegation cases before a woman serves time for ruining lives, that is FALSE RAPE CULTURE.

When people serve decades behind bars and after being exonerated, and 2 of every five of them doesn't get any compensation for losing many years of their lives, that is FALSE RAPE CULTURE.

There is always more than one aspect of any issue. Feminists, and people like Lauren Nelson, would have you believe that acknowledging its existence is some kind of power issue, like rape. So denying their argument is basically tantamount to raping them. What faulty logic!

We have seen the power of false allegations that came as the result of overzealous prosecutors and awareness campaigns in the very recent past. Remember the Satanic Ritual Abuse cases of the mid 1980s-early 1990s? Bakersfield? McMartin? Little Rascals Day Care? Even the "West Memphis Three" (which were recently allowed release after taking an Alford plea, which prevents them from suing the state for wrongful imprisonment)? Or the many stories we hear of individuals serving years for crimes they didn't commit, released after DNA tests exonerated them or the accuser finally admits she lied?

False Rape Allegations and the culture that fails to address it should be as much a part of the conversation as rape culture discussions. It takes an honest approach from all sides, and denying one side only distorts the overall picture. There are brutal rapes, cases where the circumstances are not clear, cases where a rape occurred and the wrong man is imprisoned, and cases where someone flat-out lies about rape. This is all a part of the overall picture of rape False Rape Culture is very real, and will be around long after Lauren Nelson slinks back into obscurity.

Occupy Extremist Feminism (Feminazism)

In my previous article, I released an article slamming both the Boston Globe and a group of extremist Feminists called the "Occupy Boston Women's Caucus" for targeting folks who have served their sentences. So now they have posted their proposal to the Occupy Boston assembly online. Lets look at it, shall we?

OB Proposal on Sa...

Occupy Boston had an encampment, and issues of sexual misconduct were present, including the presence of persons with a reported history of serious sexual crimes. Though we are no longer encamped, these concerns remain. Our intent with this proposal is to protect our community and not to vilify individuals.

Sexual Assault Awareness Proposal

1.         If an Occupy Boston activist finds that another Occupy Boston activist is a Level 3 Sex Offender they are encouraged to inform the Sexual Assault Awareness (SAA) working group with documentation from the Sexual Offender Registry Board.

2.        SAA would then ask the individual to voluntarily leave the movement for one week. They will announce that they will return to GA within a one week period and research any publicly available details of the individual in question in the intervening time.

3.        SAA will present their results at the previously announced time and ask the GA whether or not the individual in question should be allowed to stay. The question will be put to a modified proposal process, where SAA will answer questions, take points of information, hear supports and concerns from any parties (including the individual in question), and then ask the GA for a direct vote.

If 75% of the GA votes to allow the individual to stay, they can remain a member of Occupy Boston. If not, they will no longer be considered a community member. If necessary, SAA will contact the accused and relay the results of the vote.

5.        Should the offender be asked by the GA to leave and choose not to voluntarily leave, or later shows up at any public Occupy Boston events, an announcement will be made at the next General Assembly by SAA making the community aware of this.

6.  This proposal, like all proposals, is a living document and can be added to, subtracted from or amended at any time with subsequent proposals.

[a]Anonymous:

My question is where did this SAA group come from? Who is spearheading it? This is nicole btw, I would love to participate in it- but I have never heard of it before which sends up alarms for me.

---

SarahBarneyDesigns:

We have to start it.  I will participate and I will make outreach calls and

emails to the groups needed to make this work.  We have two weeks,

according to the prop, to get it started.  This came from two people's

amendments and I think this will work better than depending on various

working groups already established.

S

[b]SarahBarneyDesigns:

I just sent the proposal to our legal team email (as listed on the wiki) and asked for any feedback and specifically about being left open for discriminatory lawsuits.  The flip side to that is that this is questioning if a level 3 is violating their probation to start with by participating in community events with children present.  I've been trying to research what the boundaries of that are but haven't been too successful.  I also asked legal for help in that.  One specific person I know is level 3 lived at Dewey Square and actively participated in demonstrations when school groups visited.  I believe this is a gross probation violation.

I also agree with sticking with primary resources, but I think having backup from independent groups (i.e., non-government possibly victim advocate groups?) is also a good idea.

Gunner, I'm leaning towards not addresses that in the proposal.  I don't know how I feel about it and I think that addressing just the physical aspect is a good start.  If anyone would like to make an amendment and present it later in addition, I'm fine with that.  I'm just not comfortable speaking on a specific standpoint when I'm not sure my feelings on it.

[c]gunnerscott:

what about participating via online? Could be the alternative to in person participation?

[d]dcheeno:

OK, I have a few different comments.  I'm not sure where's the best place to put them, so I decided that this "comment stream" would work.

First, I think that this proposal does a great job of addressing the concerns that many of us share, and I'm glad that this is being done.

I think that it would be best to stick to "primary sources," if that makes sense.  So rather than using the massresources.org site or the sexcriminaldefense.com site, it may be best to use the definitions for a Level 3 sex offender as directly provided by MA laws: http://www.malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleII/Chapter6/Section178K

Another concern that I have is a bit more difficult to address.  By relying on the definitions of a level 3 sex offender and by using the fact that at least one member of OB is a sex offender based on her registry entry, would we be in violation of the sentence that is plastered on every registry entry: "Information shall not be used to commit a crime or to engage in illegal discrimination or harassments of an offender?"  By relying on the registry entry as our primary way of singling out this individual, does this proposal cross the line of "discrimination" if we shun registered sex offenders?  Again, I agree that this proposal, or something like it, is necessary to protect our community, but I also want to make sure that we don't somehow end up opening ourselves up to a civil rights lawsuit by doing this.  Perhaps we should have a discussion with the Legal WG before this proposal is presented?

Finally, just logistically: Is Safety still an active WG?  I ask this because I honestly don't know--I've seen plenty of Safety folks around, but I'm not sure if they're still organized as a WG.

The very first sentence is already confusing enough to the average reader. The article states "issues of sexual misconduct were present, including the presence of persons with a reported history of serious sexual crimes", which obviously implies correlation between the two. That is obviously NOT true. The Occupiers were only made aware of the presence of a so-called "Tier 3" sex offender after the Boston Herald rag slammed the Boston Globe for featuring a registrant in a story about love found at the Occupy movement (already covered in my last article). But because the Extremist Feminists have infiltrated the Occupy movement, this became a point of contention for these extremists.

In a nutshell, this is what they proposed--If they found out you're a registrant, you'll be booted out for a week so people who freely admit they don't have much knowledge on such things will prod your personal life, then make a decision on your worthiness based upon your label alone. This is what discrimination looks like! Thankfully the proposal was blocked, which pissed the Feminazis off so much they left.

At least one comment on the proposal recognized the registry's disclaimer that states the info CANNOT BE USED TO HARASS A REGISTRANT. What they proposed obviously violates that rule.

So now they have a Care2 Petition up where they are complaining while distorting the facts even more. I can't imagine why they would bother at this point:

Issues of sexual misconduct have been present in Occupy Boston, including sexual assault of Occupy Boston members and the presence of persons with a documented history of serious sexual crimes. Individuals active in the Occupy Boston community attempted to address some of these concerns with the Sexual Assault Awareness proposal, which, after four, long contentious General Assemblies, was blocked without reaching a vote.

This block was a culmination of actions and events at Occupy Boston that have made women in particular and marginalized groups in general feel progressively less and less welcome. We the undersigned, while supporting the stated goals of Occupy Boston and the larger Occupy movement, strongly condemn the actions of Occupy Boston's General Assembly (GA) on Sunday, January 8 2012 and ask that Occupy Boston take immediate steps to address those actions and prevent further damage to our community.

Here we go, the "If you don't cave in to our demands you're a woman hater" argument. The irony is that registrants already feel marginalized and less and less welcome thanks in large part to this women's caucus.

Without going into detail (which you can read in full if you want by clicking the link) they accuse Paul Shannon of RSOL of hijacking the GA, even calling him a "rape apologist" in the process (no doubt after reading vigilante blogs as a cheap substitute for actual research). Ironically, Occupiers have been up in arms over having their personal info published, yet they targeted Shannon and referred to him in a negative fashion. Those who walked out consider themselves to be the backbone of the local movement. To me, it sounds like the quote from Animal farm where some people are more equal than others. As with many hypersensitive people, they feel their voices were not being heard enough. TRANSLATION-- they were not allowed to dominate the meeting.

Well let's look at the GA "minutes" for that day in question. Lets see what Paul Shannon did that was so offensive.

1919: Paul Shannon stands up to block. He is concerned about the path that this type of decision takes us. His understanding (says he is not an expert) is that level 3 choosing process is illegitimate, that many level 3s are not actually a threat. Also concerned that proposal only addresses classification, not behavior. We’re saying that the US CJ system is messed up, but not on this. It’s messed up here, too. Human Rights Watch and other groups have shown that offender registries do not keep people safe. Main objection is that this approach is the opposite of what OB is about.

Oh My God! Paul Shannon had the audacity to give people THE TRUTH. I know, who wants to hear the truth huh? So the Women's Caucus complained that Shannon violated some rule about autonomy, as if being an activist is the same as running some huge special interest like say, a Women's Caucus with an extremist agenda. That's more like the pot calling the Kettle black. I'm curious if I would be considered a "profession activist" had I been there because I damned sure would have raised the exact same questions. Now, I haven't exactly been a supporter of RSOL over the years and we really don't see eye to eye on a lot of things, but for once I'm in agreement with Paul Shannon.

Feminism, as with any ISM, does not support equality. Many complain of stuff like rape culture and patriarchy, but much of society favors women, ESPECIALLY the "Justice System."

1. Women have the advantage in the courts-- battered woman's syndrome, rape shield laws, defenses based upon hormonal changes from pregnancy/menopause/PMS/etc., advantages in custody battles
2. There is a double standard in sentencing guidelines, mainly based upon gender views (women seen as having psychological issues/ unmet emotional needs, where all men are seen as predatory)
3. Acts of misandry are seen as entertainment or condoned, as in the recent case of the woman who cut her husband's penis off and threw it in a garbage disposal; after all, the man MUST'VE done something to deserve this, huh? If someone cut off a woman's breast, would anyone find that funny?

Again, no ISM has ever brought equality. If we must "Occupy" anything at all, we should be begin with knowledge. Occupy your mind with the facts. Blind hatred as propagated by extreme feminists have destroyed innocent lives, from the McMartin trial to the 9 year old child on the registry. Truth and Equality are not ISMs.

Feminists blaming the victim and engaging in victim bashing? No, it must be my imagination.

what they really mean--You cannot Occupy Wall Street unless you emasculate yourself.

Occupy this, Boston Globe!

Question: If you vote against allowing certain disenfranchised members of society, like RSOs, from being part of the Occupy Movement, what word describes that action? Answer: Hypocrisy.

The media has been romanticized far too much in our society-- the ethical journalist that stops at nothing to get to the facts, telling society the truth instead of what we want to hear. We all know that's bullshit, thanks in large part to the efforts of Faux News and the Howling Ladies Network. With traditional paper-print news media becoming a thing of the past, the few that remain are becoming no different than their TV counterparts.

It all began with a simple feed-good story-- two young lovers who met at Occupy Boston. Aw, how adorable, right? That was, until the gossip-rag posing as a real newspaper The Boston Herald decided to dig up dirt on the featured Occupy couple. It was a gossip-hound's dream--the man in the article was on the public registry and was homeless, the likely result of being on the registry. The Herald took it a step further, contacting the girlfriend and the reporter, who stated it was not an issue, but then took it to a supervisor. The Herald than states:

Jennifer Peter, the Globe’s deputy managing editor for local news, said the paper wouldn’t have run the piece if they’d known Stitham was a sex offender. “We were unaware of his status and would have opted not to do the story had we known,” Peter said in an email last night.

The Poynter Institute Blog (in Florida of all places) wrote another piece on the Globe article, and Craig Silverman does make an interesting point:

So it seems that what the Globe is saying is that, given Stitham’s history, it wouldn’t have written a love story about this couple. Knowing the criminal history ahead of time would have killed the romantic story, but could have led to another narrative. 

So let me get this straight, a person is not allowed to be in love because he is on the list? I guess I should add falling in love to the list I created that registrants are not allowed to do, in addition to the new proposals that keep Registrants from participating in rehab programs funded by federal grants or to lose the benefit of tax breaks for those few people hiring them in Florida. Thank you, Boston Herald!

Of course, it is not enough for the Boston media to drag some poor guy through the mire, the Occupy Boston movement is dividing over whether or not to allow Tier 3 sex offenders to be a part of the movement. It is disappointing to see a movement so fragmented over the disenfranchisement and a system funded by political corruption, but unfortunately there is also a strong extreme feminist (aka Feminazi) presence in the Occupy Movement, and quite frankly, it is alienating many men. Below are comments from women in an Occupy Boston GA as told by the Boston Phoenix:

So on December 27, an Occupier named Sarah Barney brought a proposal to the GA to ban sex offenders. Her proposal generally states that if a member of Occupy Boston is found to be a level-three sex offender (a person convicted of a sexual crime whom the court deems to be at especially high risk for reoffending), the Safety working group would ask them to leave for one week, during which time the GA would vote on whether the accused should be asked to leave Occupy Boston permanently. For Barney, a mother who often brought her five-year-old son to Occupy Boston, the issue was larger than the mutual-aid proposal. "It stemmed from one specific incident, finding out that someone who lived at Dewey Square had gone to jail for nine years for two counts of sexual assault and rape of children under the age of 16," said Barney. Some of people at the GA were opposed to restricting anyone from Occupy Boston based on the state's sex-offender standards. Even Barney said she can agree with these concerns, to an extent. "I do understand where they're coming from," she said. "I don't think the American justice system or the police departments work effectively, and a lot of people get through the cracks. If you're a certain race or economic status, you get away with a lot more. That's one of the reasons I'm at Occupy Boston." That's why Barney limited the proposal to level-three sex offenders. "It's pretty hard to be labeled 'level three' unless you've gone someplace pretty dark, pretty violent, pretty bad," she said.... 

Whether or not Shannon had disclosed his affiliation, Occupy Boston's system of direct democracy means that even a person who had rarely attended Occupy events in the past could come to an assembly and "kidnap it," as Women's Caucus member Ren Jender described it to me the next evening.... "A lot of us have been surprised that for a progressive community, how in line [Occupy Boston] is with the mainstream as far as not taking women seriously, tolerating harassment of women, both verbal and physical," said Jender, who was among the walk-outs. "This is something that has been brewing for a while. . . . Things really are not changing. Once one problem is gone . . . another one appears."

"As it went on, it became really painfully obvious how broken things are and how far we have to go to repair them," Women's Caucus member Ariadne Ross said the next morning. "By the end of the night I was feeling worse than when we started." "The community doesn't have a good way for dealing, through the process, with blocks of that nature," said Ross. "Is it really consensus if eight or nine people can thwart what seemed like the strong will of the whole of Occupy Boston? No, I don't think so. "[It's] the culture of misogyny that prevails in our society at large," she added. "Like it or not, we're a microcosm of that society."

The Feminists are alienating disenfranchised men in general but the propaganda is acidic to say the least. I hate to see this happen but the movement is in too much trouble now to alienate even more members. The bottom line--this event should never have happened. Boy meets girl, they get married, cute story, end of story. Instead we have a shameful even that creates a black cloud over an entire movement.

Below is the Women's Caucus "Womyn's Statement":

The following statement was read by members of the Occupy Boston Women’s Caucus during the General Assembly on Saturday, November 18:

We, the women of Occupy Boston, are here to tell you that two months is far too long to have occupied without a feminist perspective.

Downwardly-mobile middle-class white men are finally realizing what women and people of color have known for too long. Capitalism is destructive. Capitalism oppresses and exploits. If you’re not talking about sexism and racism, you’re not talking about economic justice.

“A few bad apples” can’t exist without a community that condones their attitudes and behaviors. Oppressive language and behavior are an effort to limit our participation and silence our voice.

We chose to disrupt the GA because those with privilege have avoided spaces devoted to anti-oppression, when they are the ones who most need to hear this.

As the 99%, we must actively break down the systems which divide us.

Women have historically been the spine of social justice. We are the 52%, without us, revolution is impossible.

Well, all I can say is they should look at their fellow Occupiers in Portland, OR, that other town with a large liberal crowd on the other side of the country, and learn from them. Says a woman in Portland:

"It doesn't concern me, ‘cause I lived in Southeast Portland where there's one in every corner and every house anyways," Julianne Dunn says. "You never know when you could be attacked wherever you're at. So you have to be aware of your surroundings."

Meh, big deal she says. My fingers are raised and waving in approval. One more for good measure:

"He's registering as the law requires and he's paid his debt to society," said mother Jennifer Alexander, who stopped by the camp with her family on Monday. "There are plenty of registered sex offenders all over these surrounding blocks. It's not a new thing for this area or Portland." 

Live and learn. Portland gets it. Boston doesn't.

THE BOSTON HALL OF SHAME

The Boston Globe, for adding the disclaimer

Boston Herald: Only a step up from the Boston Strangler. This is the best thing you can to a copy of the Boston Herald. Well, besides bird cage liner or toilet tissue.

Jessica Heslam: I don't know which is more yellow-- her hair or her journalism

All this "Womyn" business is dividing the movement. And the 52% bit? I thought this was Boston, NOT South Park.

Way to represent the Women's Caucus, Ren Jenders. I always thought it was Stimpy that was the idiot.

Womyn: "We are the 52%!" Well, since there are only 48% of us who are men, someone either has to double up on the guys or get left out in the cold. These must have been the latter.

Extreme Feminism, aka "Feminazis": Because there is nothing Equal about "Isms"

Legal misandry: The true silent epidemic

Domestic violence laws are controversial in many ways, primarily because of the low standards required and the gender discrimination against men. Men are already seen as potential predators by many victim's groups. It is socially acceptable to cast men as potential predators. Child victim advocate John Walsh even advocates not hiring male babysitters because men are all potential pedophiles in his eyes. Maybe he just feels that way because he has battled sexual addiction over the years. No one questions that belief, and as a result, men must face uphill battles in defending outlandish accusations of abuse of any kind in court, be it sexual abuse of a child or against a protection order against a woman.

Our society has been inundated with Radical Feminist propaganda for many years. Popular culture has romanticized the concept of vigilantism against "abusive men" in movies like the Feminist film Thelma and Louise and Sleeping with the Enemy, and in songs like Janie's Got a Gun by Aerosmyth. Lorena Bobbitt was exalted by Feminist groups and other extremist "domestic violence advocates." Just type in the word "battered" in Google and the first results to come back include "battered woman's syndrome," "battered wife's syndrome," and "battered woman." There is a "battered men/ husband's syndrome," but to be honest, even I am surprised anyone has ever coined the term, and I doubt this has ever been used as a defense in court (the technical term is "Battered Person's Syndrome," but again, the term is generally applied to women). Do not not forget the discrepancy in sentencing for men and women are significantly different as well, with women getting shorter sentences for similar crimes as men.

There is probably no greater discrepancy in the gender gap in the area of domestic relations. Allow me to introduce a perfect illustration. Lets say you've been in a relationship for so many years to a woman who has a clinical diagnosis of Borderline Personality Disorder, Major Depression, has paranoia, and a family history of schizophrenia. She believes all men are indeed brutish, violent, and prone to cheat. As the man in this relationship you are subject to interrogations, invasive searches, and constant surveillance without ever giving the woman a reason to believe you are a womanizer or abuser. You are "walking on eggshells" as your every action becomes suspect. If a woman that isn't wrapped up like a Muslim wife in public, she would go on tirades about the perceived trashiness of the woman and accusations of lust for the woman of loose morals are directed at you. You reach a point in your relationship where you want out because you are tired of feeling like you are the subject of an FBI investigation rather than a loving hubby/ boyfriend/ fiancee.

When you two break up, she calls the police on you and makes a wild accusation. The police hassle you but they don't arrest you because you did nothing wrong (but as they see it, they "haven't caught you"). You pack up her things and leave them at her place in neat little boxes. A few days later you get a knock at the door; it is a sheriff's deputy handing you a restraining order. You feel a sinking feeling in your chest as you are treated like you just murdered someone. In 2 weeks you go before a judge and plead your innocence. The "ex" paints a picture of you as some kind of "monster," and the female judge accepts her on her word only. The judge rules against you. You have no defense. You are a man, after all.

How many times has this scenario played out in court? There is no telling. Men are the "stronger" sex, after all. Men do not report domestic violence against them because of many reasons, including a fear of a 911 call turning against him, fear (mostly of being accused of being abusive himself), societal disbelief, and shame. You can even say it seems like a joke, the thought of a big, burly guy whipped by a 5'3 woman. The cultural belief favors the woman, and many women know it. As a result, arrests of female abusers are rare.

There is another element of abuse that is not considered, though is often used in defense of women abused by men. Women tend to be more emotionally and psychologically abusive (though some were physical). Some women abuse their men through the legal system that favors women in domestic laws as well. It is far too easy to traumatize a man through a false allegation in the domestic civil courts, where only a "preponderance of the evidence" (a low standard of proof suggesting the allegation is "more likely than not" something happened) is the standard by which you are labeled and condemned. It is hard to prove psychological abuse, and as a man it seems the standard is unconsciously raised to "Beyond a Reasonable Doubt."

I have experienced firsthand the impact of psychological and emotional abuse from a woman. It is essentially the same as "Asymmetrical Warfare." Asymmetric warfare, in a nutshell, is the use of tactics to compensate for being the weaker force in a war, like Guerrilla Warfare or terrorism. A series of small scale attacks compromise the will of a larger force. perhaps the term "war of the sexes" has merit. I have suffered the long term effects of abuse, but as a man, I really have nowhere to turn. There are no "battered men's shelters," no assistance programs for men displaced by leaving his abuser, or even a support network. Equality is a myth.

Radical Feminists have been called "Feminazis." In light of many things they have stated publicly, I can see why Radical Feminism is seen with such disdain, yet their views are accepted in culture and the courts. It is not about "equality" of the sexes, it is a matter of usurping power. Ironically, Radical Feminists become the very evil they are claiming to fight. The symbol of the justice system is a scale, not a pendulum. Equality is a balance, but the Radical Feminists Courts are a pendulum. It takes more men willing to speak out against their abusers. We must not continue to suffer in silence.