Fathers for Life
Fatherlessness, the lack of natural fathers in children's lives
| Home | In The News | Our Blog | Contact Us | Share

Fathers for Life Site-Search

Site Map (very large file)
Table of Contents
Children—Our most valued assets?
Educating Our Children for the Global Gynarchia
Child Support
Civil Rights & Social Issues
Family Law
Destruction of Families
Divorce Issues
Domestic Violence
Gay Issues
Hate, Hoaxes and Propaganda
Help Lines for Men
Law, Justice and The Judiciary
Mail to F4L
Men's Issues
The Politics of "Sex"
Our Most Popular Pages
Email List
References - Bibliography

You are visitor

since June 19, 2001


Feminists, pro-family activists, blacklists

Incredibly, in the face of declining birth rates, escalating divorce rates and epidemic numbers of children who increasingly suffer the consequences of fatherlessness, the federal government of Canada provides $640,000 in funding to "women's" organizations for the express purpose to operate a program that will ferret out, label and eventually prosecute pro-family men, their supporters and their organizations as enemies of feminists?

In other places and other times such state-sponsored purges were launched to eradicate so-called enemies of the state, but never with the express purpose of destroying a country's economic and moral foundation, the wish to form families.

Different names, identical goals — welcome to the People's Republic of Canada.

Quoted from a message by a pro-family advocate (for obvious reasons, the originator is not identified):

This material is from the same people who would seek to prosecute and silence men and fathers for speaking out for their children and related social justice issues.

  1. The Network is also planning a lobby and media strategy to make Canadians aware of the upcoming legislative changes and their possible impact on women and children. A key element of this strategy is consideration about how to deal with "fathers' rights" activists, who continue in their attempts to convince politicians and the public at large that thousands of children in Canada are unfairly being denied relationships with their fathers because of vengeful ex-wives. [My emphasis —WHS]

  2. In particular, we are very concerned about the Bill's gender neutrality, especially given the anti-woman climate of the courts.




Custody and Access Lobby Continues

March 3, 2003

by Pamela Cross

Since the introduction of Bill C-22 in December 2002, work of OWNCCA and other feminist organizations and coalitions to ensure that changes to custody and access legislation in Canada reflect the needs of abused women and children has continued.

In Ontario, OWNCAA is preparing an analysis of the Bill for use in communities across the province and the country. The Network is also planning a lobby and media strategy to make Canadians aware of the upcoming legislative changes and their possible impact on women and children. A key element of this strategy is consideration about how to deal with "fathers' rights" activists, who continue in their attempts to convince politicians and the public at large that thousands of children in Canada are unfairly being denied relationships with their fathers because of vengeful ex-wives.

And from another source:

From: Louise Malenfant [mailto:lmalenfant@shaw.ca]

Subject: Re: Fw: Feminists, Masculinists, Blacklists

You can read the feminist paper which inspired this brouhaha at the following link, but I warn you, it is a real rant with little in the way of scholarship:


You can also read the news release, in the same month the paper above was published, providing women's groups with $640,000 to combat the masculinist presence on the web by going to the following link:


An American ifeminist Wendy McElroy wrote an american take on the project. The ifeminists URL is:


Finally, there were many columns published on the subject, including this column below which I wrote, and which was published in the Calgary Herald.

Louise Malenfant

family advocate
Parents Helping Parents


Monday, June 16, 2003, p. A12

Feminist Fury

Men's rights groups voice legitimate concerns, not hatred

Louise Malenfant
For The Calgary Herald

We have frequently been warned that absolute power corrupts absolutely [Lord Acton], and nowhere is this more evident than the strange world of Canadian feminism.

The most recent example arises in "School Success by Gender: A Catalyst for the Masculinist Discourse", a study prepared with a $75,000 grant from the federal government department, Status of Women Canada. Prepared by Laval University researchers Pierrette Bouchard, Isabelle Boily, and Marie-Claude Proulx, the study purports to scientifically examine the political discourse used to discuss gender differences in school performance. But the paper is instead a self-serving soapbox for feminists peeved at the way upstart men's rights organizations and other special-interest groups are "usurping" the language of equality and fairness.

It seems that the feminists represented by this study are convinced that they own the patent on these words and anyone else who would seek these same goals is merely a pretender of victimization.

Your government dollars at work actually solicited papers on the topic of how to combat the problem of groups other than feminists seeking equality, groups that are changing the language of debate on gender issues. The Status of Women protocol for this research notes that "rights-oriented Lobbying" designed to give voice to the "newly disadvantaged" is detracting from debating policy based on "issues of equality between men and women."

And who are these newly disadvantaged? They are listed as men, fathers, parents, children and the fetus. In other words, everyone but feminists should be discouraged from voicing their objectives, as this is taking away the ability of feminist speakers to dominate public policy discussion. And, we might add, threatening to drain dollars for "women's equality" initiatives.

The study also declares men's rights organizations found on the Internet guilty of "hate mongering" against women. It even suggests criminal charges should be filed against anyone who criticizes the feminist movement. The study is long on rhetoric and short on evidence, as it provides only two examples of this so called hate-mongering throughout the 150 pages of its diatribe.

While the study acknowledges that boys have a dropout rate from school that is 50 per cent higher than girls, and girls are more likely to graduate from post-secondary schools, the authors declare that the "masculinist" discourse blames women and mothers for this disparity. They would like to suggest that an attack on feminism is an attack on women, but that ignores the fact that a majority of Canadian women have rejected feminism, primarily because they happen to have fathers, husbands, sons and friends who just happen to be male and who just happen to be suffering from two decades of public policy dictated by the feminist elite.

Indeed, the study lumps those fighting for men's rights in the same group as "racists, pedophiles and supremacists," and they never tire of suggesting that advocates for men's rights are merely attempting to reverse the gains of feminism and bring society back to traditional patriarchal values. They dismiss concerns raised about unfair child custody laws, the male suicide rate, poor school performance by boys and all other gender issues as "tools" of the backlash against feminism.

The researchers acknowledge that male suicide rates have risen by 78 per cent and don't dispute the fact that 80 per cent of all suicides are men.

With logic that borders on the bizarre, the study argues that this great disparity is accounted for by men who are ambivalent about their homosexuality and more likely to commit suicide. In other words, most men who commit suicide must be homosexual, according to these researchers.

As for the issue of "alleged violence" perpetrated by women against men, they suggest that men are violent to maintain control, while women are usually violent to defend themselves. No mention of those women with drug, alcohol or psychiatric problems who might possibly use violence as their own means of control. In any event, these issues aren't real concerns, according to these authors, but are merely being used to create a "discourse of hate" that is characterized as violent rhetoric against women running unchecked on the Internet superhighway.

It would be funny if it weren't so frightening, especially given the seriousness with which these feminists are being taken by the federal government. In the same month this study was released (March), Status of Women Secretary of State Jean Augustine announced a grant of $640,000 to be spent over a 24-month period by an initiative called Womenspace. The dollars are earmarked to enable "equality seeking" organizations to learn how to use the internet to "influence public policy." Perhaps it is just a coincidence that more than $500,000 was handed over to the feminists in the same month this study was released, but it is hard to believe that they can call themselves "equality-seeking" organizations and maintain a straight face.

The bottom line is that the average Canadian taxpayer is funding this effort to silence and criminalize anyone who has the courage to stand up in the face of the feminist domination of public policy. It is a certainty that funding for any opposition to this juggernaut is non-existent, but ultimately, exclusion of differing voices is precisely why Status of Women Canada exists in the first place.



whiterose.gif (6796 bytes)The White Rose
Thoughts are Free

Posted 2003 07 20