I have met and heard the tragic stories of many parents. PA is a function, by and large, of a custodial ex-partner, although some alienation can start while the couple is still together.

This blog is a story of experiences and observations of dysfunctional Family Law (FLAW), an arena pitting parent against parent, with children as the prize. Due to the gender bias in Family Law, that I have observed, this Blog has evolved from a focus solely on PA to one of the broader Family/Children's Rights area and the impact of Feminist mythology on Canadian Jurisprudence and the Divorce Industry.

Thursday, January 29, 2009

Barbara Kay, Nunavut Minister is Stripped by Big Sister of his Cabinet Post for Telling the Truth

My comments to Barbara's column are on the National Post site and below:
Jan 29 2009 3:38 PM

The Premiere is playing petty politics over this and ought not to discourage her Ministers from thinking outside the box. Some concerned father's rights activists have called the Premier's office to express their concern.

Having formerly lived in the NWT and the Yukon I have first hand observations that petty politics can sometimes overrule cogent and reasonable discussion. It appears to be the same in this case.

We need to stop treating DV as a single gender issue, in that the female is the victim, and deal with it at a very early stage where the parties can get help at the earliest stage possible. The stats clearly show, as Barbara has indicated, DV is initiated in equal quantities by either gender but there is absolutely no tax supported help for men who are battered and abused. We exist.

In my current province of Ontario alone $208,000,000.00 is spent on women and a large part of that is for the DV Industry yet the problems remain. You've got to ask why? I may do just that in a Human Rights Complaint by early February.

Posted: January 29, 2009, 2:24 PM by Jonathan Kay

Louis Tapardjuk, until a few days ago Justice minister of Nunavut, has just been relocated to a very high-end dog house. His new kennelmates are all male public figures, such as Larry Summers, former president of Harvard University, who dared to utter certain statements that, although true and, to any objective observer, in no way hurtful to anyone, set the tumbrils in motion that would soon carry them off to the political guillotine.

What did Mr Tapardjuk say that cost him his portfolio? Why, Mr Tapardchuk had the temerity to suggest that domestic violence is sometimes initiated by women. He casually remarked in an e-mail - not even meant for anyone's eyes but his senior staff - that women who start domestic disputes should share the blame where violence is involved: "Often the man is charged [with domestic violence] even though the conflict may have been initiated by the female partner."

Aiiiieeee! Heresy! Poor Mr Tapardchuk apparently forgot or may even be ignorant of the fact that no public figure is allowed to suggest that women are ever, ever the initiators of domestic violence. Women are always, always the victims. Of course this credo, that domestic violence is a one-way-street wherein all violence against women is unprovoked, and all violence against men self-defensive, is a complete myth, a myth that has been busted over and over again, most credibly - one would imagine - by our own Statistics Canada, whose findings in their official reports on domestic violence dovetail with all other peer-reviewed studies: Domestic violence is about one-quarter male-initiated, one quarter female-initiated and half reciprocal.

But what has truth got to do with it, when ideology rules the roost, a roost where even the lonely crowing cock of Fact is lost in the angry cackling of a battery of rooster-bashing hens? Mr Tapardchuk fell victim to the cackling hen who runs the Nunavut roost, Premier Eva Aariak, who announced in a news release January 24 that "the comments [Mr Tapardchuk] made about violence or the cause of violence was offensive." She added, rather ominously, "I believe he has learned from his mistake."

You'll note that she didn't say the "mistake" had anything to do with the truth of his remark, only that actually saying it is offensive. Like poor old beleaguered Larry Summers, who was mobbed by Harvard's formidable feminist Furies, and who apologized more abjectly than any Soviet-era show trial victim for suggesting - truthfully - that women's abilities at the high end of maths and sciences are statistically lesser than men's, Mr Tapardchuk's apology wasn't enough. He had to be purged as a warning to other politicians who will now think more than twice about voicing the proven fact that women are as capable of irrational and unprovoked anger as men.

Mr Tapardchuk has accepted his fate stoically and says he will concentrate on other ministerial portfolios. To ensure that such rogue departures from the party line do not happen in future, Ms Aariak announced, "I will be assuming the portfolio of Justice immediately." The portfolio of Injustice is more like it. If feminists want women to be taken seriously in politics, they should be in the front lines in denouncing Ms Aariak's arrogant, baseless ill-treatment of her Justice minister. She may not have struck Mr Tapardchuk physically, but this is certainly one of the most blatant "battered politician" cases I have ever seen.

No comments: