CHAPTER THREE

“In the man’s desire, conscious or unconscious, to identify and keep his progeny is the beginning of love. In a civilized society, he will not normally be able to claim his children if they are born to several mothers. He must choose a particular woman and submit to their sexual rhythms and social demands if he is to have offspring of his own.”

[Men and Marriage p. 14]

THE COURAGE TO RULE WITHIN A HOME

Government applied Feminism against the American male has created a mass of destruction within the American home and family similar to the effects of Tecumsa Sherman blackening major portions of the south using his ‘scorched earth’ policy during the American Civil War 1861-1865. Both American’s and Males have silently taken this upheaval with regards to this war specifically raged upon them in relative silence, yet the costs have been enormous. The results staggering.

“40% of children in fatherless homes have not seen their father for at least a year.”

[State of the Fatherhood, Father Facts

Quoted in McKenzie, October, 1997]

“40% of children in fatherless homes have not seen their fathers for more than one year. 58% have never been in their fathers homes.”

[Wade Horn, National Fatherhood Initiative]

”Although judicial pronouncements have exposed gender neutrality in terms of parental custody (McIntyre and Sussman 1995, Westfall 1994, Wyrauch & Katz 1983), the reality is that more children are living with neither parent (4%) than with father-only (3%), (69% of children are living with two parents and 24% of the children are living with mother only.”

[U.S. Bureau of the Census 1996]

What we see just by these figures alone is that 40 percent of all children in this nation have zero contact with their father. What other war or conflagration or pestilence has eradicated the father to such an extent within the American experience?? Figures such as this go beyond the realm of social engineering and in fact display the fact that a rather debilitating reality that 40 percent of this nations total children population have been left as fatherless orphans. What we are speaking to here are tragedies that align themselves beyond the level of war, famine or other national tragedies. Clearly, the scale of destruction against the American male and Family have been incredible...incomprehensible.

Strangely, this has all been done in the clear light of day, as government policy all confirmed as being “In the Best Interests of the Child.”

The statute of 1776, commonly referred to as “The Declaration of Independence,” document’s how men can easily be oppressed and more importantly, how they suffer such denigration:

“...That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpation’s, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies...”

[The Declaration of Independence—July 4, 1776.]

(Emphasis mine. RLCII)

The American Father, and more importantly American children have suffered immense losses, all by the design of Feminism along with a complicit government which has acted in direct contravention to American law, history, and custom. The catalogue of lost lives and wealth alone is incomprehensible. If the reality of our lost economic legacy and heritage every became public knowledge, there would be mass killings directed against the Elite socialist engineers who have betrayed this nation by their willful errant complicity in implementing this Socialist design against the American home and father. But Fathers are willing to suffer, if they are convinced that it will help their children. This is what the State has depended on throughout the design of this Welfare Machine, that as noted above, that ‘mankind are disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable’—they have compromised the basic sense of sacrifice and fairness ingrained within the American male in order to accomplish their more ulterior despotic designs.

American Fathers, and the Fathers Rights movement, in turning away from these realities of a 40 percent Fatherlessness figure and the insane destructive costs of pursuing the mythology of modern Feminism have disposed them and their progeny, to unconscionable suffering. While these men and groups somehow find comfort in withstanding the honor in enduring such usurpation’s and despotism, they have not met the domestic enemy amongst us—and instead of meeting that challenge, they have errantly turned away and allowed a cancer to propagate beyond proportions—by accepting it and not challenging these tyrannies. Now this domestic enemy has destroyed several generations, of mostly poor Americans; and in its feeding frenzy, is now harvesting more and more of America through the destruction of the American Father and thereby the American family.

I have met the American Fathers rights movement and have found great dedication and much consternation and even more desperation among its members. Unfortunately, we currently have a court system that has religiously dedicated itself to Anti-Americanism Feminist Social Engineering in direct contravention to American Law, Statutory Law, the Common Law and Natural Law, not to mention the basic tenants of Western Civilization. It has done so unfettered by any meaningful challenge thus far, for; in its basic design it is engineered to be predatory as it attacks each male singularly upon any petition, assertion or declaration of a wife, girlfriend, or third-party interest. From this inception of attacking each man individually with the collective force of the Federal and State Government’s as a whole, few men survive. In the best-case scenario, men who immediately lay down and comply only have hundreds of thousands of dollars stolen from them, including most certainly—the lives of their children—which will either diminish or be eradicated in front of them...for many of these men encompass the 40 percent figure above. Those who oppose this system gain no help from either the legal, Judicial or Executive authorities of the state for there is no redress by design in this present system. When this happens, the question reduces to a simply axiomatic reality: “Where do you go when the state becomes the criminal?” As Brad Rhunt asks us: “Where do you go when the Judge won’t obey your law?”

Clearly, the answer is nowhere. For both the Legislative and Executive department’s fully understand the illegalities that are being pursued here—but the fact is that the theft is too great, and they cannot stop it, nor do they wish to stop this destruction. They are addicted to their profits of which this perverse system generates.

With American President’s such as President Clinton having to establish publicly-funded “defense funds” in which to enter our own court system to fund their trials--in regards to average Fathers and Father Rights advocates it shows that the courts are abjectly hopeless--in reality; no average American can afford today’s courts. Frankly, the courts have become ground zero where the domestic enemy resides; for this is the Maginot line where the actual conflagration against American males occurs. If President’s cannot afford these courts—how can the average man?? It is from these ‘courts’, in which government is assured of harvesting thousands of American males through the Feminist sponsored ‘enrichment’ and ‘entitlement’ program’s now propagated by design by all the Legislatures, offered to women to help her abrogate the marriage contract, cash it in, and destroy the family. Both the Feminists and government are well aware of the impact of this offer, and from known demographics; County, State and Federal government budgets can be planned years in advance, because of the profligate profits garnished by this Socialist-Feminist system which it supports females. No singular man can stand up against this Monolith. No nation of men can either.

“They point out that the United States conducts more jury trials than any other nation, about 160,000 annually in state and federal courts.”

It is this realization of the Men’s movement, that indeed; they need to comprehend that law is in fact lost to them. The courts are lost to them. The hope of any justice is betrayed. Factually, there is nowhere these men can go; so the great majority “fall upon their swords” because in fact, there is no further redress within such corrupted tribunals. More importantly, the ABA trained lawyers, who are in fact; only hired “Officers of the Court” entreat men towards this destruction. They help the Judiciary more than they’d ever attempt to help their clients. They are there to help harvest men, and to exacerbate the problem, keep it alive, to groom it by Legislative act, and thereby allow both the courts and the lawyers to continually benefit from this needless conflagration. If there were a true ‘lawyer’ class residing within our system, this Socialist “Family Law” would have been Constitutionally challenged and defeated thirty years ago. The fact that it hasn’t, only proves that the American Fathers Rights movement is fighting a joined monolith of interests, ranging from the Judiciary, to the ABA, to State Legislatures, and throughout all three branches of government.

If the American court system worked as originally designed and justice were offered in these tribunals, then; there would be an immediate increase in Fatherhood applications to these courts of up to 20% to 50% in which to resist and fight this un-American monolith which is now destroying them. Presently, however; because of the courts well documented injustice, less than 1% of men ever challenge either the outright theft of their children, or the destruction of their homes. In the present court environment guilt is an assumed fact, even if they know you are innocent. What is most amazing about this figure in regards to men entering courts—is that this 1% percent is on the rise! Talk about courage within the male species!

We will control juveniles... In the early 20^th Century, juvenile courts were created to deal with the new immigrants to the United States. These courts were less concerned with justice and more concerned with social control. By the 1960’s the juvenile system was available to all levels of society, nor just poor immigrants. This ‘control’ became known for its procedural nightmares, arbitrariness and cruelty. Cases were poorly presented, inadequately prepared, and yielded decisions based on the personal opinion of a judge....

The Destruction: The beginnings of a “witch Hunt” started as “pass through” reporting was mandated for all professionals, to create a steady stream of rumors to feed these agencies. It was in this way that they crusading mentality of the Social Scientists turned the child protections agencies into the largest peacetime weapon ever created to destroy family relationships.

Continues.... The federally funded agency expansion, coupled with the original abuse in the juvenile courts, form “The System” of today. The System where all of the denial of rights in juvenile courts (poorly prepared cases, no right to counsel in some instances, no due process, no equal protection of the laws, no right to confront and cross-examine hostile witnesses especially mental health professionals) are overshadowed by the efficiency of family destruction done by the agencies.

Therefore, the present American Fathers Right movement is completely fractionalized due to the fact, that they can come to no consensus as to how to attack these criminal courts. This is because they cannot recognize that the courts are only a well-engineered trap. They don’t work—and they are not supposed to work. They are there to deny Fathers their rights, and to destroy families and to profit from that planned destruction. They presently violate their most basic legal foundational tenants. They are there to factually impose Social Engineering against the American society. They are a based on a no-win scenario. Thereby, any Father or Fathers Rights group trying to impress fairness, law or even justice upon this system is destined to lose, by the courts own design! Any Father or Fathers Rights group even thinking that they are going to somehow communicate any ‘logic,’ or ‘sense’ into this system is severely deluding themselves. This is a planned destruction by a criminal court system with no apparent reasonable redress. History has documented such Judicial criminal aberrance before. The following documentation may seem all to apparent and real to many fathers whom have suffered such immense injustice at the hands of ‘our’ Judiciary:

“Judges and members of the legal profession were so eager to purge their institutions and their country of Jewish influence that they, beginning already in the first few months of Nazi governance, often outran the legal mandates that the regime promulgated. In October 1933, one Berlin court upheld the dismissal of a Jew from administering an estate, ruling that the people’s pervasive hatred of Jews “made it seem inadvisable to retain a Jew in office, even in the absence of a special law to this effect.” Earlier that year, in July, another Berlin court provided a more sweeping justification for judges taking such initiative in the battle against Jewry. According to Die Juristischie Wachenschrift, the most important German legal periodical, the court, writing with obvious approval, pointed out “that a revolutionary legislature [the Nazis had been in office but six months] naturally leaves loopholes which ought to be filled by the Court in applying the principles of the National Socialist Weltanschauung.” The German judiciary—almost all of whom had taken the bench during Weimar and therefore were, at least formally, not “Nazi judges”—was composed of such ardent racial antisemites that leading Nazis (bound to the belief that the eliminationist program should be legally governed) chastised judges for having violated the law in their rampant eliminationist ardor. Interior Minister Wilhelm Frick similarly tried to reign in all those under his jurisdiction, including many holdovers from Weimar, from extending the eliminationist measures beyond the laws that the regimes had made. The judiciary’s extensive contribution to the persecution of the Jews during the Nazi period reveals its members to have been zealous implementers and initiators of eliminationist measures. The judges composed a group that was obviously bristling with anti-Jewish hatred during Weimar, and then, when Hitler took power, was freed to act upon these beliefs. In this sense, the judges, all their education and training in law notwithstanding, were like so many other groups in Germany. With the judges, this transformation is simply that much more glaring.”

[Hitler’s Willing Executioners, Ordinary Germans and the Holocaust, Daniel Jonah Goldhagen, Borzio Book, Published by Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., @1996, Distributed by Random House Inc. New York, p.97]

NO FATHER CAN PRESENTLY ENTER THE AMERICAN JUDICIAL SYSTEM. It is a Chinese Finger trap—only there to ensnare him, to destroy him, to compromise his interests, to destroy him, and thereby; American law. I have indeed suffered such arrogant realization of this fact by one Brad Rhunt of the Butte County Investigative District Attorney’s office in Oroville, California. In a phone call with me he at one point asked me: “Where do you go when the Judges won’t obey your law?” Clearly this was a direct affront to reason and to justice, and to every Father in America—not just me. Clearly, what was being said here by someone within the system itself, was where can you really go now for either law or justice, if the Judges don’t obey it anymore? This is the exact paradigm the Jews of WWII faced front of the Weimar Republic courts and this is exactly what all Fathers face in front of our contemporary court systems. Mr. Brad Rhunt was making this exact point obvious to me, that there wasn’t law available anywhere, that really I couldn’t go in today’s courtrooms....but that I should ‘just give up.’ This is the subliminal message that has been overtly impressed upon all men’s minds, and to which all courts have succumbed to. This message has been received loud and clear as most men, on the order of 99% of them, do not even attempt to engage with this criminal system. (This in itself is proof that our system of government no longer works.) No longer do we find the courts which defended the home and marriage by defending the father as we saw in Chapter two under the case Fanning v. Fanning. No longer do we have courts that provide simple justice “as though the heavens would fall.” If we did, the American judicial system as we know it, as well as Welfare as we know it—would completely collapse...for they all know where their “daily bread” comes from. They fully know and understand that they are harvesting the American male: for profit.

"The public welfare demands that constitutional cases must be decided according to the terms of the Constitution itself, and not according to judges' views of fairness, reasonableness, or justice. I have no fear of constitutional amendments properly adopted, but I do fear the rewriting of the Constitution by judges under the guise of interpretation."

Columbia University's Charpentier Lectures 1968

Hugo Black - U.S. Supreme Court Justice

From this it is no wonder that the American Fathers Rights movement is fractionalized for we have nowhere to go for justice. This fact—is a direct indictment of our present Judiciary—no father, nor any Fathers Rights organization, should enter these courts—it only exacerbates their intrinsic corruption. As Lord Coke noted earlier, when the maxim of law fails in regards to who is Lord and Tenant of a property; “for that by infringing of a maxim, not only a general prejudice to many, but in the end a publike uncertainty and confusion to all would follow.” Clearly—how can they begin a movement when there is no foundation for success of the movement except anarchy and confusion within the present court systems? Where there is no redress?!? Government no longer obeys American law that allow the Father as the head of household or in which protect the home and family. It doesn’t even follow it’s own tenants and maxims! No wonder why the Fathers Rights movement is confused! Judges have abandoned a premiere function of not only obeying their own laws, but making sure that the other two Branches have not overstepped their authority, nor—even allow the people themselves to exceed such limits.

“Armed with the power of declaring the laws to be unconstitutional, the American magistrate perpetually interferes in political affairs. He cannot force the people to make laws, but at least he can oblige it not to disobey its own enactments, nor to act inconsistently with its own principles.”

Of course, the Judiciary has become criminally errant in this responsibility. Although this was done without a single vote, and although the American public has no real knowledge of what is really going on, ‘our’ courts are doing the exact opposite to what our American Law and heritage really is. Of course, if you didn’t know, this is all being done “In the Best Interests of the Child.” Yet, conversely, the Fathers Rights movement has no idea upon what platform to rally. As the cite above indicates, the American Judiciary is treating Fathers the same way that the Nazi’s treated the Jews in 1939. Where could the Jews go for justice? How did they get ‘Law’ applied to their lives?

Factually, they didn’t. There is a cogent plan to civilly kill all Fathers, just as there was a cogent plan to annihilate the Jews, and take away all there rights and especially their property. Remember, support of the father is support of the family, which is support of rugged individualism thereby the American free form of government. There clearly is no money in this for Socialist infrastructures who like Ms. Hillary Rodham-Clinton, cannot tolerate Sovereign self-expression and independent success. Remove the father and you immediately revert to a Feminist Matriarchal structure of the “Village” which will have all the support and infrastructure ready, willing and able to capture, control and most importantly, eternally manage their respective markets of Family, Support Services and Prisons. Conversely, place the Father back into the Family, as head of the family—and suddenly; a lot of Welfare program’s simply disappear. Frankly, there is no wealth to be gained by supporting Fatherhood, for with stability, with order, with a secure home and family—you don’t need the greatest part of these Feminist Welfare Programs.

So, the Fathers Rights movement is fractionalized because of no pragmatic foundation at law that any court will recognize, respect or obey anymore. Presently, the movement is divided between “Joint Custody” and “Patriarchy” camps. At no time can they accommodate their disparate belief systems within the movement for each are diametrically opposed. As Lord Coke earlier noted, no Lord or Tenant can occupy the same land—so too it is with “Joint Custody” and the “Patriarchal” factions within the Fathers Rights movement. No two parents can own a single child. Only one must rule. When the Father is thrown out of his function, then; the State will rule. In our past history the Father just didn’t rule his home, he established the basic tapestry of the political boundaries of this nation. From this, marriages were stable, homes safe, and children were safely secured. Today, the woman rules basely with a vengeance within today’s court system. She marries the state, and from this social anarchy reigns. This has factually caused family breakdown, exploding divorce rates and a panoply of attendant social pathologies which have destroyed millions upon millions of children: generationally...plus, it has overthrown our system of governance in the process.

In the Fathers Rights movement, the Joint Custody portion of the movement is best demonstrated by the term “gut feeling.” These people feel that 50/50 “Joint Custody” will solve the problems for fathers in the Fathers Rights movement if the courts just ‘get it right.’. If not that, then at least it will solve their own problems. Many aligned with this camp think by “their gut feelings” and adhere to joint custody because they ‘feel’ it is fair and equal. They want to have the courts disperse justice in an equal fashion, and they want more access and rights to their property, and children. There mindset is liked with the reasoning of the Feminists and the Courts: that of ‘being fair’ and ‘equal’. Clearly many have to agree with them, fairness and equality appear to be good, and upon separation or divorce the mandate that things will be run fairly by an impartial court system is the culmination of an intelligent solution to a very tough problem. Many people who advocate such joint custody are intelligent, caring people, who spend much time and effort helping others in support of their issue, and they also spend much time and effort trying to amend they system as best they can. They have also convinced themselves, that indeed, “even if” the Patriarchy camp is right and America must return to a system of Full Patriarchy, and that truly is the proper solution to the Fathers Rights community problem; that government will never allow such a proper solution again...Patriarchy is dead because government wants it dead.

I have met and like many of these people and have struck up steadfast friendships and relationships with them. It is hard to tell these people with such visceral “gut feelings” that they are completely wrong.

In Los Angeles in the summer of 1998 I met with a group of fathers belonging to this philosophy. I listened intently to one eclectic gentleman named John Smith, a member of ANCPR who indicated that we had to get the fathers rights movement disparate factions together and support Joint Custody, as it was in reality—the only sane solution. His reasoning was eloquent and persuasive, citing many knowledgeable experiences about the social pathology and abuse that was hitting our children. When I pressed him as to why the Patriarchal solution wouldn’t work, he indicated that it offered no real solution to the wife-beating issue and child abuse issues that men perpetrated against defenseless wives and children. This of course is the main fracture within the Fathers Rights movement—everyone cares about the abusive, out-of-control parent.

I had heard this classical defense all before and was smiling when I asked him “where do you get your facts and figures?” “Where does the scientific data state that men are abusers within the home?” He vacillated a bit, then; after a while as I continued to push, he reluctantly admitted that he didn’t know. “I have a gut feeling about all this,” he finally said in exasperation, explaining.

I knew he had a gut feeling. Most all fathers and most all American’s have a gut feeling from this and it comes from the incessant indoctrination by the propaganda machine of today’s media. The public whom is abjectly ignorant of Fathers Rights and the true sense of this issue also has “a gut feeling.” But all these “gut feelings” are categorically wrong. I then cited him the facts:

Abuse figures show that most women are responsible for domestic violence in the home, for instance, Research from the Child Protective Services shows that abuses by state were: 67% mothers, 33% fathers in Virginia; 70% mothers, 30% fathers in New Jersey; 68% mothers, 32% fathers in Texas; 62% mothers, 38% fathers in Minnesota; and 67% mothers, 33% fathers in Alaska. In comparative studies such as the 1994 study by the Toronto Institute for the Prevention of Child Abuse, a study of child maltreatment showed that 49% were abused by mothers and 31% were abused by fathers. These are well known statistic’s throughout the University community and State Agencies handling children and child abuse, although the general public is stunned and factually cannot believe these figures when they are presented to them. For example:

“In September 1989, a Social Service Officer in Milwaukee County, by the name Terrence Cooley, wrote an inter-office communication titled “ADFC Child Abuse Information,” a copy of which found its way into the editorial office of The Family in America pointing out that of the 1,050 cases of child abuse and neglect in that county, an astonishing 83 percent occurred in households receiving Aid to Families with Dependent Children (read: Single Female-Headed households.)

[The Garbage Generation, Dr. Daniel Amneus, Primrose Press, Alhambra CA 1991, p. 86]

After citing the facts in this issue, John was quite stunned. Most people are. I then at that instant realized that for the Fathers Rights movement to succeed, it needed to become informed and know it’s own product. Without that solid scientific foundation, we would be kept adrift from each other in a sea of “gut feelings” most of which would be wrong. Clearly, we cannot build this movement from mythology or gut feelings. We are factually going up against the most powerful nations upon earth. Each father who resists this persecution and despotism applied by government isn’t just fighting a traffic ticket or a simple misdemeanor. Each father is singularly going up against his District Attorney, the court, the Legislature, the County, the State, 49 other States, the Federal Governments, the Department of Health and Human Services and the IRS all enjoined together in an organized crime syndicate enjoined with Feminism and special interests who are severely interested in stealing from each and every other Father (and ultimately his progeny) in this nation. The State’s economies, power and ‘black budgets’ are directly linked to he ‘the Father,’ and they are willing to civilly kill the father or worse in which to force him to submit and become a lifelong slave to them. In the scope of this realization of the outright war that is being applied against Fatherhood, the Fathers Rights movement cannot be 90% correct. We have to join at the scientific level of the facts and figures of what is really happening in regards to the home and family. Once that happens, all segments of the Fathers Rights movement can join together—because there is agreement upon the truth. From this platform of agreed facts and figures, we can comity and thereby become a viable force.

This will not be a hard endeavor for the Father’s Rights community because the empirical facts and figures in relation to this subject are clearly on our side. (Pick up any newspaper and watch the daily documentation of this Feminist war rage throughout our nation which I will document in Chapter X.) Not only that, we not only have the moral high ground in regards to this issue, but we also have the organic law and social Constitutional compact on our side. Upon these solid foundations the Fathers Rights movement can coalesce, however; clearly, Fathers must know their product in which to join and then force change upon this issue. Presently, ignorance, supposition, and outright silence are the worst enemies to our cause. We all vacillate in a sea of “gut feelings.”

Finally, it is upon the erudition of the Fathers Rights movement of the facts and figures that have demarcated this plague that the Feminist have imposed against society that should intellectually bring the Fathers Rights movement into the Patriarchal camp. I say ‘should’ respecting the divergent opinions of others, but I also say it pragmatically as a System’s Engineer. My study of this issue coincides with what I believe human civilization decided upon 5000 years ago in which to solve this problem: Patriarchy. Western Civilization followed this route, the English established this lawful heritage, and Colonial America embraced it. This thing they chose, established and developed was Patriarchy. More than that, every Father should be factually noting that we already are in a state of “Joint Custody” within the American court system!!! Clearly, we can see that this does not work; it hasn’t worked; nor will it ever work. That “Joint Custody” in fact, failed miserably... It is in fact, a Pandora’s box that once opened, does not equally share the children, in exact accordance with Lord Cokes’ Lord/Tenant observation: no two people can own the same property. With joint custody, you are asking the criminal wolves to guard the sheep again. The second you open that Pandora’s Box, you corrupt the world with the harpies of anarchy and special interests which will descend upon “Joint Custody” within the family and pervert it again, and again, and again, into its present form of pestilence. Those that doubt that fact, and those that doubt the courts ability to ‘get it right’ need only to reread Lord Cokes’ passage above and to study and recognize our past history in this regard. Implement Joint Custody in this nation, and you will eternally have growing empires of courts—which will continually devolve this nation and drag it into complete devolution. Do this, and you eternally overthrow the promise of American freedom and liberty, and thereby, eternally enslave man and society to failure.

Did the police and Judges of the Antebellum South “get it right”: when they enslaved blacks? How about a century and a half later when Martin Luther King sat in prison after prison for doing something as sublime as “Standing in a Bus station”? How about the workers in the early 20^th century who struck for better pay and working conditions, such simple things as clean water and a cool place to work, did the courts “get it right then? How about the Japanese whose major crime was being Japanese during WWII? No...courts, police, and government’s don’t ‘get it right’—they are the main malefactors to our problem. They are—the wolves. Our history and the domain of history is replete in demonstrating that Judges and Judiciary are all too easily corruptible, and in the first analysis, they are the main inspiration and implementers of tyranny and injustice. (In direct contravention to their office and their oath of office and the Constitution, which by the way—a fifth grader could comprehend, implement and easily follow). The Fathers Rights movement must have the courage to see and analyze the past, and more importantly, to call a spade a spade and mark the truth as it sets. Clearly, we can get no help from either the Judiciary or the Bar Association of America—the facts show they are in fact—the largest part of our problem and must be dealt with accordingly. They are obeying law just as much as the Judges did in the Weimar regime during WWII. In fact, if they ‘did get it right’ this would have never been a problem in the first place, and millions of men and children wouldn’t be suffering because of it!

From this foundation, we must recognize that if we and the courts are in a perverse state of “joint custody’ already—then, under this domain, we cannot expect “joint custody” ever to help the fathers movement, even if judges do ‘get it right’. But, lets pretend for the moment, just for discussion here; that they did ‘get it right’ and this society obtained an amazingly fair court system that did not persecute or destroy fathers upon separation or divorce. In fact, the whole United States had a purely 50/50 distribution of children upon this issue. The underlying plague of divorce, crime, drugs, teenage suicide and the panorama of social pathologies that are killing our children and burdening our society would still be there—still coming from the Single Female Headed Households. Because the woman would still have an avenue to destroy and compromise the family: to cash it in, as we all recognize they are presently doing. So, “Joint Custody” in its failure to address that fundamental issue, cannot ever be an answer, for the pathology in creation of the Single Female Headed Household has to be clearly stopped, and eradicated from this society. For it is the Single Female whom is the engine that creates these panoply of Government services, because of the fact that she needs state provided subsidy to exist!

More importantly, the economic drain against society, our individual homes, our children and communities would still be there. Again, the feminist plague would be alive and well. The worst thing however, is that upon the full implementation of the Joint Custody Fathers Rights faction, the father would still not rule within the home, which—would allow the most virulent portion of this feminist plague to exist; and that it the portion that destroys the home in the first place: missing Fathers. Fathers have a proper place and function within the home and “Joint Custody” never acknowledges this function, and thereby, denies fatherhood in the first instance. Because “Joint Custody” enjoins with the “freedom” to allow women to destroy the home and the marriage—this condition factually removes the reality of function in regards to males. Allow people the anarchy of “freedom” to keep divorce rates high, and you thereby destroy the true function of men within our society.

Again, know the product of what I am speaking of here. We are speaking of a Feminist system that is diametrically opposed to America and Free societies; of individualism and Free Enterprise. We are speaking of a system that as a cancer attacks the society silently from within, singularly home by home, and like cancer attacking a body, a single cell at a time by attacking and disenfranchising the FATHER. Feminism is that cancer: the destruction is logarithmically cumulative. We are speaking of a system that is diametrically opposed, and at war with Western Civilization.

If the Joint Custody Fathers Rights movement obtains and realizes all its dreams, the underlying pathologies still remain. In the final analysis, nothing really changes. However; what is most disappointing is that under this scenario of the Joint Custody movement winning outright the Patriarchal Fathers Rights movement is doomed. We get nothing from such an association for our agenda is to simply rule and control our own homes, which is our proper place and birthright. We are not willing to share this God given natural right—as apparently the Joint Custody Fathers Rights coalition are willing to do so. We are Fathers and are mandated to assume that responsibility, above and beyond any such de facto belief system such as Parens Patriæ is a supreme doctrine over that of the rights of the individual father.

This courage to rule within ones own home is uniquely American, and was developed and supported throughout Western Civilization. This of course contributed to a great extent to the burgeoning prosperity and individual wealth within the American society. In subsequent chapters we shall catalogue this success in which to show the strength of this philosophy.

However conversely considering the outcome, of an alliance between the Joint Custody coalition and the Patriarchal faction, in which to follow our Patriarchal agenda, the Fathers Rights movement would quickly assume a national coalition and stature that would outstrip all prior social movements within this nation. Simply stated that upon the realization of Full Patriarchy, the Joint Custody coalition realizes everything they want and more, for the fact is that Joint Custody would be the lowest common denominator or the worst thing that could happen to any Father upon separation or divorce under Patriarchy. But instead of the Court, government and Feminists controlling the division of property and labour, it would be the father openly and willingly contracting away his rights point by point under a Patriarchal system. He would do this by consent, in contravention to the present system’s application of coercion and fraud by the court systems enforcement of fraud by way of inducement. Presently, under the present system, the father contracts away his right by default at birth, or by silent judicial notice—unknown to even the most scrupulous father. But again, under a Patriarchal archetype, upon separation or divorce the Father most certainly would control everything, keeping his children, his Family, and property—disbursing nothing out to foreign derogatory influences. For the father as Lord Coke notes, would be Lord over his own land (his children in this case).

Under this construct, welfare and divorce, along with Feminism and the Plague it has set upon this culture—would quickly--and simply collapse. But again, Fathers who did want Joint Custody could easily contract away their rights. Fathers that did want Full Custody would also obtain their rights which they cannot do under the present corrupt system; and this is what we must think of here. Presently, these fathers are completely betrayed by the present malicious system, and also those who would implement “Joint Custody” which would also abrogate such fathers interests.

Clearly, such an alliance would bring together both groups for each coalition’s effort to implement Patriarchy by default would concurrently assure Joint Custody for those who chose to contract away such rights. Even in this scenario, the benefits would be immense for most certainly—upon this paradigm shift of the controlling Father, (not the Judge), the interface to the systems of the courts and legalese would be streamlined by at least 90%--due to the fact that divorce and destruction of the family would no longer be big business for them. Simply put, they wouldn’t want to deal with it because there would be no money in it.

So under this alliance, if the Fathers Rights movement joined forces under the banner of Patriarchy, all could win. If however, this alliance is reversed to where Patriarch’s worked to implement “Joint Custody” (which the courts, government and feminists already say we have), then upon that effort, upon any victory—the Patriarch Fathers Rights movement would receive no benefit from that association and they would be left with nothing.

The biggest success if Patriarchy were reestablished in this society, would be in the Reinstitution of the American nuclear family which undeniably has been under outright attack for the past 50 years. This is the real underlying benefit to such an alliance, for in the final analysis, because there no longer is any economic incentive to destroy the family, divorce rates would most certainly revert back to pre-1950 level or approximately 10 to 15 percent. Currently divorce rates are at 63 percent or higher, for second marriages, the divorce rate is an astonishing 75 percent!

One of the main purposes of this book, is to allow the Fathers Rights movement a platform to “know it’s product” of the many facts and figures in relation to many issues which most well meaning Fathers Rights advocates are totally ignorant of. The second purpose of this book is to inspire a movement of men, who, contrary to contemporary public doctrine, will defy Government and Feminists and simply: stand-up and be men to assume their rightful position within the home and family.

The main purpose of this book is to education, and to formulate a viable Fathers Rights movement, and to give voice to men and women who have been destroyed by this system. We must have the courage to rule within our own homes, and more importantly, we must learn the tolerance to allow other fathers to do the same.

IN THE BEGINNING

“In a study published in 1861, Johann Bachofen claimed that the mother was the original focus of civilization. Since then, considerable research in the fields of anthropology, psychology, myth and ritual, and archaeological excavations, have vastly increased our knowledge of the role played by the female in early cultures and early notions of deity. Some have argued that the word was once inhabited by a matriarchal culture, and that later, perhaps around 5000-6000BC, there occurred a shift towards Patriarchy. Certainty the symbol of the nature Goddess is of very great antiquity. The symbol of the cosmos as a ‘world egg’ occurs in various forms. Yet later, after the emergence of distinct God figures, there is considerable evidence for the prevalence of the female God in many ancient societies.

One fact glaring in regards to the men’s movement is that we don’t know where we came from. I distinctly remember as a child reading the National Geographic magazine about tribes and ancient cultures across the planet. One of the first things I wondered was that “How in 1960 can they still be living in the stone age? Why haven’t they invented houses? Running water? TV? Why are they still suck in mud huts hunting with bows?” Clearly in a child’s mind this problem is perplexing. As a Patriarchal influence in the Fathers Rights movement I can tell you that analysis of this problem and more importantly, the answer; should become a mantra to every living male across the planet if they understood the real implications of this question. Simply put, the answer to that childhood question is answered above. “Something” happened to mankind approximately 5000 to 6000 years ago...that something just happens to be perhaps the most benign, yet powerful human invention ever created: Patriarchy.

Like fire, like the wheel, like nuclear technologies, Patriarchy was mankind’s greatest invention. Unlike the aborigines and other latent tribal cultures that graced the covers of National Geographic and Scientific American, Patriarchy forced men to harness the power of sex for the good of himself and mankind, which in turn developed a highly advanced Western Civilization. Such a small thing seems incongruous at face value, but upon contemplation—that base discovery harnessed a society and created something never seen before in the prior 250,000 years of mankind...and that was...the two-parent nuclear family.

Ozzie and Harriet, Fred and Wilma, Mary and Joseph...even Fred McMurray as Father Knows Best...this was the ‘invention’ that released man from the stasis and quagmire of Matriarchy and created a system to where he could assume his rightful role (as well as the woman) both working towards become a family. This was a quantum development from the previous 250,000 years where tribal cultures held mankind either in devolution or a complete stalemate. “The creation of patriarchy was an evolutionary development, just as the destruction of patriarchy now taking place is a de-evolutionary development. The War Against Patriarchy is especially dangerous because nobody seems aware of what’s going on, aware of the strategy, tactics and weapons being used, of what men need to do if patriarchy is to be saved.” [Case for Father Custody, p. 76]

Eugen Weber a professor of anthropology at U.C.L.A. marks this delineation of civilization which he notes occurred approximately 5000 years ago. He notes that all gods up to that time were female, and that the cultures were Matriarchal and Matrilineal in nature. They were ‘Tribal’ and as such, were in a state of constant war. If one tribe saw that another had a surplus of horses, for instance, it would attack that tribe and steal their horses. Surplusage it appeared, was the key to creating civilization, without it—there could be no time for art, mathematics, engineering and many of the higher order developments of civilizations. More importantly under Matriarchy, surplusage could not be held in a Tribal society, because someone would always steal it. It was up to this point where a social transformation first arose to whence the first “Seed-Kings” were seen in religious ceremonies. It was these “Seed-Kings” Weber declares, which were the proto-formation of all modern European Kings. At this approximate 5000 year demarcation point, in conjunction with the “Seed Kings”, Male religious Gods appeared—pushing out the Female religions of the time. From this Neo-Patriarchal structure a new stability was created, war dwindled, and because of this stability—man could establish and retain his surplusage. From the accumulation of surplusage we see the first formations of modern Western civilization start to take root and grow.

“When little was known about the Kinds of the first two dynasties—and even less about pre-dynastic period—what appeared as a sudden cultural advance at the beginning of the First Dynasty was described by some scholars as the incursion of a new “master race” into Egypt. Supporters of this hypothesis pointed to carvings such as the ceremonial slate palettes found at Abydos, the ‘painted tomb’ at Nekhen, and the appearance of people traditionally known as the ‘Followers of Horace’ as evidence for their claim.”

Clearly, this was the establishment of Patriarchy. Ancient societies apparently made a cogent decision to select Patriarchy over Matriarchy. We can see the reasons for this in anthropological writings:

“The tribe was like a larger family in those days. There might have been a headman, who would have been the boldest of the hunters, but little if any system of government. The women did all the work, and looked after the children, and meant more to them than the Father, whose place was with the hunters. So much was this case that the custom grew up in savage races of tracing the descent of the mothers side,” p.55

This is a classic definition of a tribal construct. No father, just hunter-gatherers, no motivation for males, children kept with Single Mother Households, in other words: the “Tribe.” You almost see this same exact construct in the American big city ghetto’s where feminism has hit hardest.

“’Our inner cities,” [Vice President Dan Quayle] said, “are filled with children having children, with people who have not been able to take advantage of educational opportunities with people dependent on drugs or the narcotic of welfare.”

I made a special point of expressing concern over how “If a Single Mother raising her children in the ghetto has to worry about drive-by shootings, drug deals, or whether her children will join gangs and die violently, her difficult task becomes impossible.” That remark came pages before the single sentence that would create the ral ideological firestorm of my Vice Presidency: “It doesn’t help matters,” I said, “when prime-time has Murphy Brown--a character who supposedly epitomizes today’s intelligent, highly paid, professional woman—mocking the importance of Fathers by bearing a child alone and calling it just another ‘Lifestyle Choice’.”

This is anything but a lifestyle choice. It is a direct assault on the American form of Governance, by an alternate socialist system that is willing to feed off the past fruits and wealth of what our society built. The Feminists and socialists will use this nations vast resources and wealth in which to try and see if they can get the institution of socialism ‘right.’ Russia couldn’t do it, so they are willing to sacrifice this complete wealth of this nation and use whatever they need in which to accomplish their goals. The only cost that has to be incurred in which to accomplish this is the complete subjugation and economic destruction of the American Male. This of course, goes hand in hand with their plan.

Indeed, all we have to do is to compare these inner city ghetto matriarchal structures, which inhabit our poor, and which government feeds off of, and builds empires from. Here is a description of what most tribal societies encompass:

The basic social unit was matriarchal. The large family made up of children, parents, grandparents, cousins, uncles, and aunts, and deference to the oldest woman in the family, who settled most disputes and exerted most authority. An Indian child took on the name of his mother, a practical procedure in a society where the chase and warpath of ten brought death to the males. Child bearing women of the privileged families nominated the civil sachems, and they also had a voice in deciding matters of supreme importance to the tribe. All real property, both land and huts, belonged to the women. Compensation for a woman’s life required twice the amount of wampum as that for a male’s, convincing evidence of the high regard with which females were held.

If this sounds remotely familiar, it should...for we have been breeding and designing this exact model here in the United States through the implementation of feminism over the past 50 years. It is the ghetto model we now experience today. Here is one parents nightmare, and a brief glimpse into our future as the present situation appears to force her to submit to this condition:

Leon Valley Elementary

7111 Huebner Road

San Antonio, Texas 78249

PH: (210) 706-7385

Fax: (210) 706-7391

http://www.northside.isd.tenet.edu/valleyww/index.htm

Dear SIR:

Or is the accurate address really Madam? It seems I have been engaged in a type of game with the Northside Independent School District for a little over 2 years now. I dislike games. I especially do not like games regarding our son's education.

In the spring of 1997, I contacted the District office for information about enrolling our son in school in the fall. I was told he had to be 4 years old on Sept 1st in order to start Pre-K. I can accept that. Our son has the misfortune of being born a few days late, so I waited. I requested information about the curriculum, to be told I need to ask the school directly.

In the spring of 1998, I again contacted the District for information about enrolling our 4-Year-old son In Pre-K in the fall, and was told to contact Leon Valley Elementary (LVE), directly. I asked the district about the curriculum our son would be taught and if I could obtain copies. The district sloughed me off and directed me to the individual school, ignoring my request again. Am I to believe that the districts have no

idea what their schools are doing? The nice lady I spoke with at LVE informed me that "No, your son does NOT qualify for Pre-K" that fall, because he SPOKE ENGLISH! Nothing had ever been mentioned until this point that our son was to be discriminated against because he is AMERICAN. The nice lady at LVE was kind enough to BRAG that they do not JUST teach ENGLISH to the poor unfortunates that do not speak it, which sounds unconstitutional to my non-legal mind.

In the summer of 1998, I again contacted LVE to see if our son could start Kindergarten. Our son again had the misfortune of being born a few days too late for the Sept. 1st cut off. I had nurses and caseworkers from a home health agency contact the district to see if possibly there could be an exception because of a second surgery I was required to under go. The answer was that nothing could be done, that no assistance from

the school or the district could or would be made. I can accept that.

I cannot accept what happened this spring when I once again contacted the NISD! I know our son would be eligible for school this fall. Yet no one can provide me with information about his curriculum. Am I supposed to believe that the districts are so unconcerned about "education" of our son that they still have no idea what is being taught in their schools? The horrendous results posted on your own web site from the schools within your district suggest that this is the case-that your motto is "Let's NOT teach the children -let's just lower the standards."

When I contacted the LVE to obtain information, I was met with the most blatant anti-male bias I have witnessed in my life-and this is bias against a BOY! The lady I spoke with could not accept that we have a son, not a daughter. When she rattled off the list of items needed for registration on April 13th, 1999, after being corrected regarding the sex

of our son, it was "Her Social Security Card", "Her proof of residence", "Her shot records", and "Her original birth certificate". It did no good to correct this woman after each item and inform her I have a son, as she continued on with her biased list for a female child and never once corrected herself. She seemed incapable of saying "his", or apologizing for her anti-male attitude. Bringing HIS original birth certificate would be difficult, since we were caught in the flood of Oct 1998, and she asked if "SHE was born here", I stated "NO, HE was born here". She suggested bringing a duplicate of "HER birth certificate" and I asked what good a duplicate of "HIS birth certificate" would accomplish when I was just told I had to have an original.

Maybe this seems trivial and petty to you, but if you had sons, you would probably agree that it is, at the least, frustrating for them to constantly refer to HIM as HER! This is clear anti-male bias, and our son hasn't even started school yet. How will he be treated when his parents aren't around to observe?

Upon inquiring about how many male teachers there were for kindergarten, I was informed there were none. I inquired about how many male teachers there were in the entire school, and she seemed proud to report they have a MALE PE Teacher, and 2 male para professionals, "but they are ONLY assistants".

It is not an idle observation that schools like NISD are doing so poorly because of such attitudes and the lack of competent men teachers. The evidence abounds that the flight of male teachers from education coincides precisely with America's fall to the lowest country in the world in most test scores! (See Attached Graph) It is a little bit clearer how we manage to spend so much to get so little. What America has done to its citizens with this feminized education is criminal--it is beyond reprehensible. (Stats can be found to back this up here http://fathers.ourfamily.com/satincome.htm).

Our 5-year-old son will not work for many years & child sweatshops and child labor was outlawed years ago. He is thus not required to show HIS (not her) social security card to enroll in school. Even if you planned to pay him wages, we as his parents will deal with whatever taxes might be required of a minor child. Requiring a child to show a social security card, to receive an education, is a naked attempt by a government agency to systematically number and dehumanize its citizens. In an identical fashion to Hitler and his concentration camps, where children were branded

with numbers just before they were gassed or shot. Fortunately, Texas courts have ruled that social security cards are not national Ids and cannot be used for any purpose other than social security.

We must presume that the reason children are required to have a social security card for school, is in direct correlation with the implementation of the STW (School-To-Work) program. Where this is a blatant attempt of the government to take over control of our children, it is a topic all in itself best left to another time. However, let it be noted we strongly oppose this program.

As his parents, we teach our child every single day to treat others with respect. The blatant anti-male bias witnessed in the past few days is abundant evidence that our schools spend too much money, yet can't teach our children. You seem to believe that parents will just accept their own tax dollars being used to fund anti-male bias against our own sons-essentially funding the destruction of their futures? But it is clearer than ever why parents who home school provide a far greater education for their sons than they could ever hope to obtain in Public School. My experience with your school supports the just-released study on home schooling, which proved test scores and social development for home schooled children, are superior to that of public schools. With the anti-male biased attitude I have experienced, we will provide a home schooling curriculum, which meets the basic education goals of reading, spelling, grammar, math, and good citizenship, in a bona fide manner.

Your web site reports that only 4% of your teachers are men, which is much lower than the national average of 25%. It is an utter disgrace that America's educators believe that education is so unimportant that only a quarter of its teachers are men. How can boys learn about masculinity, respect for the opposite sex, "workplace discrimination", when they start out witnessing the worst form of anti-male bias imaginable right in their own classrooms, hour after hour, day after day? They might not know that all of the countries, which score considerably higher than the US in international tests, have considerably higher percentages of men teachers, but we adults do. We also know that all of those other countries which score as low as ours also have a low percentage of male teachers, http://fathers.ourfamily.com/educate2.htm.

We hereby request the following:

1. The precise curriculum you plan to use to teach our son.

2. The affirmative plan you will implement to hire enough men to achieve 50% men teachers in the district.

3. A letter from you describing how you plan to correct the chronic anti-male bias described above.

4. Assurance that our tax dollars will be handled responsibly enough that at least half of our son's education will be with men teachers.

5. Standard test scores for the district and a method for tracking their improvement as more men teachers are hired.

6. Your assurance that anti-male bias against both boys and men is a violation of your official policy, and will be eradicated now.

This letter has been distributed to the NISD, LVE, the Texas Education Agency, Internet discussion groups, Governors of every state, Senators of each state, the 1 million Signatories to the Fathers' Manifesto, and other people who should care about the decline of our public schools.

Sincerely,

Lynda Griffin

5612 El Verde Rd

San Antonio, TX 78238

A disgruntled Parent who is fed up with feminism and anti-male bias in education and who guarantees you she will do something about it!

Clearly we can see the anger this woman has in regards to the intentional impressed devolution of feminism intruding into her home and family. However, the Fathers rights community must recognize, that conversely, it is they; the recognition and creation of father as the head of household which created civilized society in the first place! Although humanity first construct was ‘the natural state’ which held mankind in a virtual stasis for a quarter million years of matriarchy, it was the advent of the father, and the two parent family, which made humanity ‘civilized.’

The first Englishman who showed more than superficial familiarity with Aristotle’s derivation of the entire social order from the primitive household was Sir Thomas Smith, one of the leading diplomats of Elizabethan England. Smith saw in the household the first commonwealth, which he regarded as a private aristocracy. After acknowledging his debt to Aristotle, he said:

So, in the house and familie is the first and more naturall (but private) appearances of one of the best kindes of a common wealth, that is called Aristocratia where a few and best doe governe, and where not one alwaies: but sometimes and in some thing one, and sometime and in some thing another doth beare the rule....The house I call here the man, the woman, their children, their servaunts bond and free, and all other things, which are reckoned in their possession, as long as all these remaine togeather one, yet this cannot be called Aristocratia, but Metaphorice, for it is but an house, and a little sparke resembling as it were that government.

The government of the household transcended these private bounds through sheer expansion; in the process, the private, metaphorical aristocracy became a monarchy. When a household grew too large for efficient rule, and the children married and desired partial independence, they were sent out by their parents ‘to roote towards the making of a new stocke, and thereupon another house or familie’. Eventually, this multiplication of households became ‘a streete or village’, and they in turn ‘joyned together [into] a citie or borough’. When ‘by common and mutual consent for their conservation’, several of these units were rled ‘by that one and first father of them all, it was called a nation or kingdome’. This development, Smith reasoned, was the ‘most natural beginning and source...of all civil societies’, which were originally held together by the natural inclination of men to obey their ancestors: ‘For so long as the great grandfather was alive and was able to rule, it was unnaturall for any of his sonnes or offspring to strive with him for the superioritie, or to go about to governe or any wise to dishonour him from whom he had received life and being.’

[The Authoritiarian Family and Political Attitudes in 17^th Century England, Patriarchalism in Political Thought, by Gordon J. Schochet, © 1988, Transaction Books, New Brunswick (U.S.A.) and London (U.K.), Transaction Books, Rutgers—The State University, New Brunswick, New Jersey 08903, ISBN 0-88738-695-4, pp. 50-51.]

We are not only in fact the impetus for civilization, we are the guardians of civilization. Patriarchy, is the structured establishment of political rule of a society from the home, to the village, city, and nation itself. The father, is in fact, the fountainhead of law, and justice, just as the Kings of England held that title, it systematically evolved from the ‘invention’ of the male lead, two-parent nuclear family which accrued order, stability and thereby wealth so that civilization could take hold, and thereby flourish.

Indeed, humanity has recorded the dichotomy that rages between tribalism (the natural state) and Patriarchy (the ordered ‘civilized’ state):

WHEN ENVIRONMENT IS DECISIVE Lest anyone doubt that environment matters in the development of intelligence, consider the rare and bizarre cases in which a child is hidden away in a locked room by a demented adult or breaks free of human contact altogether and runs wild. From the even rarer cases that are investigated and told with care and accuracy, we know that if the isolation from human society lasts for years, rather than for just months, the children are intellectually stunted for life. Such was, for example, the experience of the "Wild Boy of Aveyron," discovered in southern France soon after the Revolution and the establishment of the first French Republic, like an invitation to confirm Rousseau's vision of the noble savage. The 12 or 13-year-old boy had been found running naked in the woods, mute, wild, and evidently out of contact with humanity for most of his life. But, as it turned out, neither he, nor the others like him that we know about, resemble Rousseau's noble savage in the least. Most of them never learn to speak properly or to become independent adults. They rarely learn to meet even the lowest standards of personal hygiene or conduct. They seem unable to become fully human despite heroic efforts to restore them to society. From these rare cases we can draw a hopeful conclusion: If the ordinary human environment is so essential for bestowing human intelligence, we should be able to create extraordinary environments to raise it further.

[The Bell Curve, Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life, by Richard J. Herrnstein and Charles Murray, c 1994, Free Press Paperbacks, A Division of Simon & Schuster Inc., 1230 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10020, ISBN0-684-82429-9; p. 410]

Mankind clearly needs Patriarchy more than it needs Matriarchy which is exemplified through the raging sexual anarchy it impresses across any society. Tribes are tribes due to the fact, as shown above, that they adhere to female kinship system. In a highly technological society such as ours, clearly, the choice must be delineated to Patriarchy, which of course is exactly the opposite of what our present government is supporting.

KEEPING FEMINISM ALIVE AT ALL COSTS

As we have seen, feminism has fulminated gender-wars, with the hate group of Feminists, combining with Government and the media to portray men in a continued bad light. Through Television, Radio, and the Print Media, a virtual Orwellian “People-Speak” of incessant media propaganda denigrating the Father. This is planned. As presently, through the Radical Feminist vast power base, they have embedded those select persons throughout the mainstream media, television and even the movie industry, and they have implemented policies which now groom everything of which you see to make sure it aligns with the new Feminist social order and standards.

“In the fall of 1996, GLAAD (Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation) asked me to be its entertainment media director, a position I happily accepted. This new job has allowed me to link my activism with my knowledge of the entertainment industry. I work with entertainment industry professionals as an adviser/consultant on projects with gay and lesbian characters or themes. For instance, when Ellen was planning its coming-out episodes, I consulted with the writers and producers of the show, including Ellen Degeneres herself. I helped to make the scripts more realistic by clarifying gay issues and situations. (I also had a cameo on the show, portraying s social worker at a gay and lesbian community center.)

I work with such shows as Hard Copy and Entertainment Tonight on a regular basis. Any time they do a story that contains a gay issue, they consult with me on the best way to present the information. Recently, I worked with Universal Pictures and producer Sean Daniels on the film The Jackal. The studio executives were worried because in test screenings audiences had cheered during a scene in which a gay man was murdered. I worked with the filmmakers on editing the scene in a way that made it clear why the Jackal character killed the man, eliminating any possible homophobic motives. I also worked with Jack Valenti, the head of the ratings board, and the producers of As Good as It Gets. The word fag was used in the trailer by Jack Nicholson’s character, and Valenti thought it might be offensive.

You most certainly, will not see more traditional values impressed upon this new revolutionary Feminist order, for in this new established mind set, you won’t get the opportunity to ever see such opposing views aired.. From this they have established and indoctrinated a scapegoat within a society: the American male; and from this they have created their bogeyman, as they cannot accomplish their agenda with out him. Similar institution of hate propaganda is well documented throughout history. Every society which has established these construct’s of a Alpha class of elite’s over a Beta class of Plebiscite’s has ultimately collapsed within the boundaries of their own hatred.

The Murder of Marriage

The murder of marriage is a particular atrocity because it was mostly the act of a small and narrow elite. As difficult as it is to believe, the historical record is fairly clear: In the early seventies marriage was radically transformed and the traditional marriage commitment outlawed in a way that has endangered the economic and emotional well-being of millions of women and children, largely to please lawyers.

In 1966, before the no-fault revolution, only 13 percent of Americans believed divorce laws were too strict. As Harvard professor of law Mary Ann Glendon notes, “Discontent with fault-based divorce seems to have been felt more acutely by mental-health professionals and academics than by the citizenry in general.” It was not an anguished public, chained by marriage vows, that demanded divorce as a right. The revolution was made by the determined whine of lawyers, judges, psychiatrists, marriage counselors, academics, and goo-goo-eyed reformers who objected to, of all things, the amount of hypocrisy contained in the law.

Indeed, this is clearly reflected in contemporary times, by the present collusion between the specialized triumvirate of elite whom engineered this failure: the Feminists, Government and Media. This Specialized triumvirate has profiled men in not only a bad light, but with hatred imbued in their messages. In virtually each and every News Story, the man is held responsible for anything the woman either commits or alleges. Only one side is documented: usually the woman’s side. In stories where the Father is driven (and he is externally driven, he would never dream of doing this by himself, essentially; he is forced to do it—because there is in fact, no alternatives to this system) insane and murders his family and/or children; the only thing said on behalf of the man is: “he was experiencing a divorce/separation”…and that is it.

Nowhere do you see women held up to such visceral contempt. In no News story, do you hear explanations, or facts and figures in which may support the man’s side. Indeed, as in the case of the man who drove a tank on national TV in Los Angeles, and who crushed cars in a maniacal way, to vent his frustration against this system; NO news station had the guts to inform the American public that this was a father who was driven insane by this system, and his intentions were to drive this tank to Family Court to crush that building. Indeed; inexplicably, the American public watches such dynamic images—yet—the media surprisingly never tells the real story as to ‘why’ these things happen.

Yet, when this special triumvirate applies it’s propaganda against the Father, only one thing is presented to the national viewing audience, and that is; how can we penalize Fathers even more? From this spin and Propaganda, the national public has no idea what the true facts and figures are in regards to this issue. Thereby; when Government passes even more strict and reprehensible laws against fathers, the plebecite can only agree, due to the fact this special triumvirate allows no other viewpoints to enter the discussion.

In fact, even within the hallowed halls of Government, these issues are parsed in only the Feminist light of reason. Any Father’s Right’s organizations are not even allowed to be part of the mainstream discussion, in fact; are barred from entering the room or joining in. Thereby, it is no surprise that laws get more and more heinous to where Fathers are the most persecuted segment of the American Population. Under this bulwark of the special triumvirate no segment of the population can escape or even endure. This perhaps shows why Fathers (as well as mothers) go insane and kill their families and children when posed with this Government applied terrorism.

They fully intend to implement this terrorism at all costs. Indeed, in the foundations of early feminism we but caught a glimpse of this ugly hypocrisy:

"The third women's rights convention in the United States was held 19-20 April 1850 at the Second Baptist Church in Salem, Ohio...the convention had a particular characteristic: it was officiated entirely by women. "Never did men so suffer. They implored just to say a word; but no; the President was inflexible--no man should be heard." The women leaders even refused men the right to vote or sit on the platform.

[Women's Progress in America, by Elizabeth Frost-Knappman, @1994 ABC-CLIO, Inc., 130 Cremona Drive, P.O. Box 1911, Santa Barbara, CA 93116-1911, ISBN 0-87436-667-4; pp. 265.]

Indeed, this evil lineage is much more malevolent today than it ever was in the 1850s. Where they used Patriarchy’s inherent fairness to gain a political platform, presently, Radical Feminists, the Courts, and especially the media themselves are attempting at all costs to hide their ugliness and failures. Indeed, this goes along with Eugen Weber’s corollary that Tribalism “is in a constant state of war.”

Not a dollar. Not a nickel. Not a penny. I can paraphrase [the Judge’s] remarks but not the venom in his voice as he snarled that Frank was a junkie, whore, thief....

That evening, my two-year-old son Joey cried out. As I rocked him, I thought of those services. DCFS’s files reported that between the ages of two and four, Frank and his sister lived with foster parents who locked them in a basement and tossed in baby food for them to eat. When Frank was four, DCFS figures something was wrong and removed the children. The kids went through several other foster homes in the next year or so. His mother dropped out of the picture. His father, a Vietnam veteran, had committed suicide. Frank only had his sister. When Frank was six, DCFS took her away from him.

Frank shook his head but could not or would not articulate [his grief over the judgement.] That night, as I held my now sleeping son and stroked his head, I knew. I knew that from the time [Frank] was Joey’s age he had cried out and wept and pleaded until he was empty. And what about those who should have heard his cries, whom we pay to hear his cries, and should have helped? They called him a junkie and a whore.

I went back to bed but could not sleep. I got up, went to my desk , and wrote essentially what you have just read. The next day I sent it to the Chicago Tribune. A few days later an editor phoned. He liked the article and wanted to publish it. But he wanted a DCFS response. I agreed.

Several days later I was told that the director of the DCFS and several of his top aides would attend the next conference with Judge Rovner. At the conference the officials were all smiles while their lawyer grimaced in the background.

Would I consider settling?

Of course.

Then the director turned to the judge. They would give Frank a very substantial sum, more than the private agency. But there were two stipulations. First, I could never publish exactly what the settlement was. Second, I had to withdraw the article from the Tribune. I accepted.

The agency, like any government bureaucracy, would not mind years of litigation and even a substantial adverse judgement. After all, taxpayers would support both the litigation and the judgement. But one word of adverse publicity? That strikes at the heart and soul of the bureaucracy and cannot be tolerated. Confidences must be protected.

Again, this exactly demonstrates the extent that these people will ruin others lives. Note that Mr. Murphy above, fully understands the principle that these new Feminist Elite within the government sector do not care how much money they enslave you to. Why should they care? YOU are funding this constant state of war. Because to them, it’s all infinite debt to them—they pay no penalties for their treason’s. Therefore, they have established a machine that will go to any lengths to incarcerate you, enslave you, take you to court on the most frivolous of legal issues—as long as they get paid for it and as long as they keep all such conflagrations absolutely secret from the national plebecite. This is something we have noted also. These courts do not fear anything. We can research the most ardently backed constitutional law imaginable, and these criminal Judges will use their “discretion” and destroy any legal arguments or even law. But you get a camera and do this same exact thing when he knows now his treason will be aired publicly, and he will fear you. He will suddenly ‘uphold the law,’ and perhaps, even make a dramatic point about it to boot.

Therefore, we have a system here, that profits from its own misconduct and criminal malfeasance’s, and the only way any citizen can really get back at these people is by publishing or putting such information out to the general populace.

Again, the main body of the populace has absolutely no idea what is going on in these courts, nor what the real intent of these family courts are doing. Start to get the majority of the public educated to the facts that the present feminist system is really dedicated to destroying the Father, and the home and Family—and thereby; government officials can mine and harvest the destruction of that family—then, you’d have a massive revolution on your hands because even the most intellectually challenged among us can recognize what they are doing is criminal.

Therefore, the Fathers Rights community has to recognize that this system is never going to help them. There is no redress. That the fact that it is government’s fault that most men are poor, through failed economic policies and failed social experiments, that most men become lost to their own children, and that they sole purpose is to apply the Feminist Model of destruction against the home and family. Going back to these people and trying to ask for help is like the sheep asking the wolf to comfort his wounds.

The Feminists, Government, and the ruling Elite regime, fully understands the fact that they are trying to destroy men. They understand that destroying men, is their daily bread. For this is how they really make money. The system is designed to be Bearish, and to feed off of failure, usually off the most poor and destitute among us. They have designed a system that can make more money off of a poor person by incarcerating them into jail, than; by allowing him the freedom to just be poor. Their mythology pretends that they can help these people though a never-ending choice of government programs—which of course, does more harm than good. We used to be a society to where the poor ‘pulled’ themselves out of poverty. Now, as the Black underclass has empirically shown this nation—we have poor stuck in the conditional state of the “New Underclass” of the Welfare society:

Part of the American genius has been that, at every level of society, people can improve their own lot. We have no caste system, no class requirements, no regulated professions, no barriers to entry.

[Newt Gingrich, To Renew America, ©1997, by New Gingrich, Harper Collins Publishers, 10 East 53^rd Street, New York, NY 10022, ISBN 0-06-017336-X, p. 41.]

Of course, this is no longer true. We do have people’s intentionally ‘stuck’ within the Welfare Underclass, who by design, are captured within its web. Like the well designed Chinese Finger Torture trap novelty, people (mostly Fathers) can get into this system: but by no means can they ever get out.

Again, once this point is brought into the light of the day, so that all people can see this fraud, like Mr. Murphy notes above, they quickly quash and buy-off such information. The present system will be happy to drag you through 20 years in court, and whistle a happy tune all the way, screaming that they are ‘defending’ women and children, all the while they get enriched from the taxpayers infinite monies. But dare to let out one peep what is going on, and they will do extraordinary things to keep the true facts and figures quiet.

They have to keep Feminism going at all costs.

This is why the Fathers Rights community has to sit down, learn their product; and then after such system’s analysis, to recognize what works and what doesn’t. They also have to label who is their friend, and who is their enemies. Any Father even remotely thinking these courts, Lawyers or Judges are anywhere remotely, fair, or legal—has a rather shocking truth to discover. These are not our courts of law—they are in fact anti-law establishments, only there to assure your destruction. They are the Chinese Finger Torture...and these courts...were designed that way—in direct contravention to American Law. They are in fact, our enemy. This perversion which now is a cancer to the Fathers Rights movement, and society itself, will effect law throughout the panorama of the American experience. What American’s discount in law, in allowing District Attorney’s to criminally attack “Deadbeat Dads” will most certainly, haunt them and future generations of Americans--who will find defunct, corrupt courtrooms and Judges, whose only interest will be power, money and monopoly.

Directly because of Feminism, our American court system is now completely broke. This is not only an unseen disaster, which most American’s are not even aware of, it has become a national crisis, which has placed every single American in jeopardy, for the want of a true and just court system as was originally designed by our Founding Fathers for this government.

They exist no longer.

GO TO CHAPTER 04