Women as an identifiable group under attack: Part 2

Interesting blog writings on this study's findings

Sabotaging birth control - sinister new face of sexual violence

Quote:

Washington, Jan 25 (IANS) Researchers have unmasked a new yet sinister face of sexual violence against young women and teenage girls.

Male partners force them into pregnancy by damaging condoms and sabotaging birth control efforts, acts linked with physical or sexual violence, known as 'reproductive coercion,' says a new study by a University of California-Davis (UC-D) team.

"What this study shows is that reproductive coercion likely explains why unintended pregnancies are far more common among abused women and teens," said Jay Silverman, study co-author and associate professor at the Harvard School of public health.

and then this one really lays it out

Quote:

It's sometimes assumed that unmarried teenagers and young women become pregnant because they don't use contraception or because they want a baby. But the authors of a new study say there's another reason. Some women are coerced into pregnancy by their boyfriends. Young women even report that their boyfriends sabotage birth control to get them pregnant.

Researchers at UC Davis conducted a survey of 1,300 young women at five reproductive health clinics in Northern California. The women ranged in age from 16 to 29. They were asked questions about birth-control sabotage, pregnancy coercion and partner violence. The study found that one in five women said they had experienced pregnancy coercion and 15% had experienced birth-control sabotage. More than half had experienced physical or sexual violence from an intimate partner. The researchers concluded that the rate of unintended pregnancy was double among women who experienced reproductive coercion and partner violence. The study is published online today in the journal Contraception.

"This study highlights an under-recognized phenomenon where male partners actively attempt to promote pregnancy against the will of their female partners," Elizabeth Miller, a co-author of the study, said in a news release.

"What this study shows is that reproductive coercion likely explains why unintended pregnancies are far more common among abused women and teens," Jay Silverman, a co-author of the study and a professor at Harvard School of Public Health, said in a news release.

Rates of unintended pregnancy might decline if more young women learned to recognize, avoid or leave abusive relationships or were given the skills and support to do so.

And there i believe ghislaine lays part of your answer in red....

And then in the USA women are getting hit with a double whammy after experiencing forced pregnancy....and other acts of violence.

Quote:

mothers who have had custody of their children denied
to them, simply because they allege abuse on the part of their abusive
ex-husbands.  These moms are punished by a court system that gives custody
to batterers instead of to battered women, or to child molesters instead of
to the mothers who are trying to protect them.

Barry Goldstein is the primary author of the statement below from NOMAS'
Child Custody Task Group...on the Web at

http://www.nomas.org/node/222 .

Request to Men's Organizations and Allies for Support of Protective Child
Custody (with Spanish translation below and French translation in next
message)

Male supremacist groups ("Father's Rights") have caused unspeakable harm to
our country and to our children by encouraging abusive fathers, often with
little past involvement with their children, to seek custody as a tactic to
pressure a mother to return or to punish her for leaving. "Shared
parenting", "friendly parent", involvement of both parents and other
concepts that seem fair and benevolent have instead been used to manipulate
courts and legislatures to help abusive fathers. For instance, women are
routinely denied custody of their children after being classified as
"unfriendly" for asserting that the husband has abused them or their
children.

Parental Alienation Syndrome (sometimes disguised by use of other names for
the discredited practice) is an unscientific theory that is used to prevent
investigation of children's reports of their father's abuse. Unscrupulous
professionals use it as a way to make money while ignoring the destructive
impact on children's lives. Male supremacists debase the discussion of child
custody issues by personal attacks and attempts to substitute repeated lies
for information based on scientific research. NOMAS condemns the male
supremacist tactics and instead supports the work of protective mothers to
make safety of children the highest priority of custody courts.

Male supremacists do not speak for the vast majority of men and fathers. We
invite organizations of men opposed to men's violence against women and
exploitation of children to join us in speaking out in support of protective
mothers and for reforms in the custody court system so that children will no
longer be sent to live with abusers or separated from safe, protective
mothers.

This thread contains comments that are another good example of attacks that come disguised as info and fact but are not.

Stargazer, am not going to get into this with you, so I will only say this:

Susan has made that spurious and false accusation here before, and it is not abolitionists who are harming women,  and killing them, it is MEN, aka Johns, and no one else, other than perhaps pimps and procurers.

As such, making such false claims is an attack upon women who view things differently than she does. And frankly I am not going to put up with it and let it go unchallenged.

Snert you are not actually in this thread and forum are you, making grossly uninformed comments like that and indicating you read the article without comprehension?

Heads up, first of all the union would not be making a move without significant evidence it is a broadly occurring activity amongst their membership. And the article itself indicates a common place activity.

Secondly, I was a home care nurse for a very long time, and I lost count of the Canadian male patients, who thought they should get some sort of sexual jollies  from an attending nurse or caregiver.

That is not even mentioning the husbands of women patients who also sought the same thing.

Being met at the door with an open housecoat sporting a hard on, or a flaccid penis hoping for one, was not an unusual circumstance. Many nurses walked away and refused to go back, and I do not blame them for doing so. But personally, I usually just laughed and walked on by, or told them to put it away before it got hurt and it never usually happened again, as I did not believe their wives should be deprived of needed care because of their husband's idiocy.

If it was a male patient, I, like the other nurses would walk away, and  they were told by supervisors that if they kept it up, they would not be getting care. Some nurses and caregivers that I knew over the years even quit their jobs over the trauma of it. And one just quietly realized why.

Thirdly, even working in a hospital setting nurses are solicated sexually, I could not imagine how bad it would be if primary focus on the male penis was even greater than it is.

Pull them up Stargazer, however I am not waiting for it, as you can't....and it is not been me who has been flying off the handle, as you call it.

And just a heads up to you, if the majority of men, on the so called left,  were actual allies and interested in women's equity, we would have achieved it by now.

As such, I am not looking for allies, where there quite clearly aren't many, when all pretense has been put aside.

etd to put the missing m in

Not that I even looked at 1 of the links, but if such is the case, then it is spreading of hate against an identifiable group.

And I like the "fakebook"  slang name, it seems appropriate.

Unionist wrote:

Here's the problem - the definition of "identifiable group" in Sections 318 and 319 of the Criminal Code:

Quote:

(4) In this section, “identifiable group” means any section of the public distinguished by colour, race, religion, ethnic origin or sexual orientation.

Someone should research why the entire gang of buffoons known as Parliament decided to exclude advocating murder of women, the disabled, etc. from this provision.

Yes am aware of that, and the reasons why the exclusion, status quo is always so acceptable....especially forpatriarchy and privilege

Guess there is not enough children for the Catholic clergy to rape and brutalize.....and it so wonderful that men feel they can make comments on women's human rights.

Apparently cutting your little girls throat, wide open is deserved punishment for bad behaviour.

As that is what the step father did after having an argument with "his wife" about discipline. And indeed he was "stoic" after he did so. wtf?????

Quote:

Peter James Wilson, 29, was arrested Sunday evening in Hoodsport, Wash. on the Olympic Peninsula after police arrived at a two-storey rented vacation cabin to discover the little girl dead. Her throat had been slashed.

Police say a "stoic" Wilson was sitting on a swing in the gazebo next to the cabin when emergency crews arrived shortly after 6 p.m.

According to a statement released by the Mason County Sheriff's Office, Wilson later told a detective he killed his stepdaughter with a knife he found on the kitchen counter after fighting with his wife about disciplining the children.

The statement alleges Wilson told his wife "not to worry" and that he would "take care of things" before leading Clare to the lower floor of the cabin.

Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/Stepfather+charged+after+Abbotsford+girl+found+dead+with+throat/3214638/story.html#ixzz0sHXdUytD