Are Men War Mongers?

Even when she temporarily strays away from animal rights ever so slightly, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals chief ignoramus Ingrid Newkirk still manages to spread falsehoods and nonsense wherever she goes. This week, Bruce Friedrich posted an article by Newkirk, “Violence at home,” to an animal rights news list. Within the first three paragraphs, Newkirk manages to make three demonstrably false claims about violence and the September 11, 2001 terrorist attack on the United States.

Newkirk opens her article by writing,

Is it a conicidence that, in the wake of the attacks on Washington and New York, most men speak of retaliation while most women express an urge to return to peace?

No, Ingrid, it is not a coincidence, its a complete falsehood. Zogby International interviewed 1,018 likely voters September 14-16, asking them, “Would you support or oppose an all-out war against countries which harbor or aid terrorists?”

Of those polled, 78.9 percent of men and 71.0 percent of women said they would support such an all-out war. When asked, “Do you agree or disagree that such a war would be worht it even if it involved substnatial American casualties?” 77.0 percent of men said they agree,d while 64.8 percent of women did as well.

The number of men and women who outright oppose such a war on terrorism are almost identical. Only 16.1 percent of men said they opposed an all-out war on terrorism, while 18.7 percent of women said they opposed such a war.

Apparently when Newkirk writes that “most women express an urge to return to peace,” she’s talking about her and her 5 closest friends, rather than the general female population of the United States.

Newkirk then goes on to describe a speech by Colman McCarthy. Newkirk writes,

At the Washington Center for Teach Peace, Professor Colman McCarthy has fretted over the fact that, year after year, his female studnets are always more open than his male students to the concept of peace. A Georgetown law student thought she had the answer. “Women want to know about nonviolence more than men because we are more victimized by violence than men. And, victims always want solutions quicker.”

This is pure nonsense. Aside from rapes that occur outside of prison, the overwhelming victims of violent acts are men. The risk of being the victim of an assault, murder or other act of violence is much higher for men than it is for women.

Finally, Newkirk repeats an oft-repeated but completely fake factoid.

The leading cause of injury to women is being beatne at home. Some women have more fear walking into their homes than walking out of them.

This claim is one of those factoids that appears commonly in domestic violence literature, almost always, as in Newkirk’s case, unattributed. This is because both Justice Department and Centers for Disease Control studies suggest that about 1 percent of women’s injuries are caused by their male partners.

Source:

Violence at home. Ingrid Newkirk, September 21, 2001.

Share

WorldNetDaily, Anti-Abortion Groups Wants Redbook to Spread Junk Science

Some anti-abortion groups are not happy with the September 2001 issue of Redbook. In an article, “Seven cancer facts you need to know,” Redbook raises the issue of whether a woman’s risk of cancer is affected by having an abortion. The article dismisses the claim as a “persistent rumor” that is not based on sound science.

Writing for WorldNetDaily.Com, Diana Lynne outlines what she apparently believes is a widespread conspiracy to hide from women the very real cancer risks from abortion. Lynne points to 28 studies published since 1957 linking abortion with breast cancer.

Those studies certainly exist, but Lynne leaves out an important point — none of them find statistically significant links between breast cancer and abortion. Most of the studies only include very small numbers of women, and typically only find increased risks of cancer in the 20 to 40 percent range.

That level of increased risk might sound impressive, but in epidemiological terms it is all but insignificant. Epidemiological methods simply aren’t able to reliably measure such very small levels of increased risk. If a large study found that women had a 100 percent or 200 percent increased risk, then there might be cause for concern and further research, but a 20 to 40 percent increase in such small studies is essentially the same as saying there is no link at all.

Meanwhile, Lynne reports that in north Dakota, a lawsuit is going to trial in which the plaintiff is trying to force the Red River Women’s clinic to inform women about studies linking breast cancer and abortion. The sad thing is that this might succeed since there is a long history in both the media and courts of treating such small increased risk levels as if they are capable of reliably implying causation (much of the research claiming that cell phones might cause brain cancer, for example, is based on similarly low levels of increased risk).

Source:

Redbook magazine ‘bending the truth’? Diana Lynne, WorldNetDaily.Com, September 11, 2001.

Share

When It Comes to the Treatment of Women, Pakistan Not Much Better Than Afghanistan

After the 9/11 terrorist attack, the United States government began openly and privately courting Pakistan for obvious strategic reasons. According to an MSNBC report,

Afghanistan’s neighbor, Pakistan, also has incentives to cooperate. For siding with the U.S. against the Taliban and bin Laden, Islamabad stands to get as much as $3 billion in debt relief, emergency aid for refugees and the removal of sanctions that were imposed when they tested nuclear weapons and staged a military coup. That would enable Pakistan to also get military aid, including spare parts for its F-16’s, Tow missiles and armed personnel carriers.

Before we climb into bed with Pakistan, however, lets remember that Pakistan shares many of the features that President George W. Bush so eloquently noted plague Afghanistan, especially in the way its legal system treats women.

Two years after General Zia-ul-Haq took power in Pakistan in 1977, Pakistan’s criminal code was modified with what are called the Hudood Ordinances. These encapsulate some of the anti-female attitudes that are so derided in Afghanistan.

In Pakistan, extra-marital sex is illegal and the age of majority for women is 16 or the onset of puberty, whichever comes first. In practice what this means is that if a 30-year-old man has sex with a 12-year-old girl, rather than prosecute that as statutory rape, Pakistani authorities will in fact go after the 12-year-old girl as well. There are a couple dozen girls 12 and up in Pakistani prisons due to precisely such charges.

And unbelievably the girl cannot even testify in her own defense at such a trial. As a 1999 State Department report on Pakistan noted,

Likewise, the testimony of women, Muslim or non-Muslim, is not admissible in cases involving Hadd punishments. Thus, if a Muslim man rapes a Muslim woman in the presence of several women, he cannot be convicted under the Hudood ordinances because women cannot testify. Similarly, if a Muslim man rapes a woman in the presence of non-Muslim men and women, he cannot be convicted because women and non-Muslim men cannot testify.

And these folks are going to be our new allies?

Sources:

U.S. Department of State Report on International Religious Freedom for 1999: Pakistan. Bureau for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, Washington DC, September 9, 1999.

Share

Fred Couples Designs Men-Only Golf Course

Professional golfer Fred Couples became embroiled in controversy in August after it was revealed that he is helping to design a golf course for the Southern Dunes Golf Course near Maricopa, Arizona. The club, intended for avid low-handicap golfers, will be men-only.

The club will be completely member-owned; once all of the 500 or so memberships are sold, the members literally own the club. Because this makes the golf club completely private and not open to the general public, this means that any sexual discrimination lawsuit against the club would have a huge mountain to climb.

Kathleen Ferraro, director of the women’s studies program at Arizona State University, told the Associated press, “I find it rather shocking that there are still such bastions of intolerance.”

But Brian Curley, a partner in the firm designing the club, points out, there are plenty of women’s only athletic clubs which no one ever accuses of being “bastions of intolerance.” Surely if there is nothing wrong for women to desire to join athletic clubs that only admit other women as members, it is a bit hard to understand what the problem would be with a men’s only private athletic club.

Source:

Couples helping to design men-only course. The Associated Press, August 23, 2001.

Share

Acid Attacks on Women in Pakistan

Time Asia recently published a horrifying account of a young Pakistani woman who left her husband and was subjected to an apparently all too common punishment — her husband doused her upper body in acid, severely disfiguring her.

Writer Hannah Bloch describes how Fakhra Yunas rose from rather humble beginnings to marry the son of a wealthy politician. But after several years of unhappy marriage in which she claims he regularly beat her, she left him to live with her mother.

In April, while Fakhra was napping at her motheouse, her husband entered the house, pushed her mple, Bloch reports that “the acid burned the hair off Fakhra’s head, fused her lips, blinded one eye, obliterated her left ear and melted her breasts.”

As with Honor Killings in some countries, such acid attacks are apparently rarely prosecuted. In fact, when Fakhra tried to obtain a passport to travel outside Pakistan for reconstructive surgery, she was initially refused on grounds that the story might harm Pakistan’s reputation abroad. And, so far, Fakhra’s husband has faced no punishment for his actions.

Source:

The evil that men do. Hannah Bloch, Time Asia, August 20-27, 2001.

Share