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

Fathers for Life Site-Search

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

You are visitor

since June 19, 2001


The Princess at the Window 

Gender Equality on the Job?

Excerpts from THE PRINCESS AT THE WINDOW (Penguin) Donna Laframboise, pp.108,109  

     Incidentally, some of those high-paying jobs that poorly educated young men have been spending large numbers of their waking hours performing are also unpleasant, dangerous ones. In the United States, men accounted for 94 percent of occupational fatalities during the 1980s. According to 1993 Canadian data, 96 percent of those killed on the job were male, while men suffered three times as many non-fatal injuries at work as women did. (37) In The Myth of Male Power, Warren Farrell points out that young men are twenty-tour times more likely to be killed while performing farm labour than young women are, and he notes: "The more a worker's beat requires exposure to sleet and the heat, the more likely is the worker to be a man: ditch digging, previously the work of chain gangs of prisoners, was protested as exploitative of prisoners."(38)
     Feminists rarely acknowledge factors such as these when they complain that women are still concentrated in pink-collar ghettos. Nor do they acknowledge that the expectation on the part of many women that they will marry a man who earns more money than they do gives them the flexibility to pursue career options that are less lucrative but perhaps more appealing. Given a choice between repairing hydro lines outdoors or supervising children in a daycare centre for less than half the pay, many women choose to do the latter. Says Farrell:

 We frequently hear that women are segregated into  low-paying dead-end jobs in poor work environments such as factories. But when The Jobs Related Almanac ranked 250 jobs from best to worst based on a combination of salary, stress, work environment, outlook, security, and physical demands, they found that twenty-four of the twenty-five worst jobs were almost-all-male jobs. Some examples: truck driver, sheet-metal worker, roofer, boiler-maker, lumberjack, carpenter, construction worker or foreman, construction machinery operator, foot-ball player, welder, millwright, ironworker. All of these "worst jobs" have one thing in common: 95 to 100 percent men. [original italics] (39)


 37 (US) National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Fatal Injuries to Workers in the  US  1980-1989: A decade of surveillance, Aug. 1993, p.4.  Statistics Canada, Work Injuries: 1991-1993, Dec. 1994, p. 13.  Gender breakdown regarding 1993 fatalities secured through a private telephone conversation with Statistics Canada's Labour Division.

 38  Warren Farrell, The Myth of Male Power (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1993) pp. 110 and 118.

 39  Ibid., p. 105.

The following quotes Donna Laframboise, from the same book, on military draft, p.112

     Perhaps the most telling example of how comfortable feminists are with sexist double standards that operate in our favour is the military one. In the United States, young men are still required, by law, to register for the draft when they reach the age of eighteen. Those who refuse to do so may be jailed for up to five years and fined Up to $250,000. They can be restricted from holding government jobs and, in some states, are prohibited from attending certain schools or receiving student loans.(46)

46 Warren Farrell, The Myth of Male Power (New York: Simon & Schuster,1993), p. 135.

The following quotes Donna Laframboise, from the same book, on the feminists' distortion and falsification of statistics on page 115 she states:  

     In Revolution From Within, Gloria Steinem tells her readers that "about 150,000 females die of anorexia each year" in the United States. Steinem cites Naomi Wolf's The Beauty Myth as her source for this information, and, indeed, Wolf's book does provide this figure. She says it comes from the American Anorexia and Bulimia Association. But rather than quoting their literature directly, Wolf herself has found the statistic in another book. Wolf does go to the trouble of telling us, though, that number means that "more die of anorexia in the United States each year than died in ten years of civil war in Beirut." Beirut, she says, was front-page news. In her view, the fact that a disease that's claiming the lives of so many young women isn't consistently on the front pages of our newspapers is just one more indication of how indifferent our society is to female well-being.(48)
    Wolf devotes an entire chapter to the issue, referring to "emaciated bodies starved not by nature but by men." She compares anorexia to a famine in the Netherlands during WorId War II and to the Holocaust. At one point, she says: "Women must claim anorexia as political damage done to a social order that considers our destruction insignificant because of what we are---less. We should identify it as Jews identify the death camps...." Wolf argues that a woman's body  can't tell the difference between being anorexic living "in an affluent suburb" and being a concentration camp inmate. That may be. But in addition to exploiting the deaths of Holocaust victims in a scandalous manner, this is about as meaningful as saying that your body can't tell the difference between performing manual labor in a coal mine for pay and working there as an indentured slave. It signifies nothing.(49)
    The real story, though, is that nowhere near 150,000 women die from anorexia and bulimia in the United States every year. Many women may suffer from these diseases, but I the most obvious reason why the front page of your morning paper doesn't tell you that women are dropping like flies is because they are not.
    Christina Hoff Sommers is a philosophy professor and the author of Who Stole Feminism? Having learned in driver's ed that a total of 50,000 Americans are killed in automobile accidents every year, she found the 150,000 anorexia figure rather high. She contacted the Anorexia and Bulimia Association in order to double-check it and was told the organization had been grossly misquoted. As it turns out, a 1985 newsletter released by the group had reported that there were between 150,000 and 200,000 sufferers in all of the United States. In fact, American government figures show that only 54 women died of anorexia and bulimia combined in 1991.(50)
    Nevertheless, the myth has taken on a life of its own. In April 1992, for instance, Ann Landers told her readers that "[e]very year, 150,000 American women die from complications associated with anorexia and bulimia." Ann got this information from yet another book. Since then the bogus statistic has also begun turning up in college texts. (51) [See also Anorexia Nervosa — Changing Ideal of Beauty or insane Obsession?]
    Unfortunately this isn't the only example of inflated claims that exaggerate female victimization.  In January 1993, Time magazine reported that a March of Dimes study had identified wife battering as a major cause of birth defects. The idea that some men batter even their pregnant spouses is  a particularly grotesque one and is commonly included in violence statistics, but this particular allegation took things even farther than ever before. Over the next few months, these same "study" results made their way into various newspaper articles. However, when the March of Dimes was contacted by Sommers, it said no such document existed. According to her, the chain of events went like this:

 [The Time magazine journalist] had relied on information given her by the San Francisco Family Violence Prevention Fund, which in turn had obtained it from Sarah Buel, a founder of  the domestic violence advocacy project at Harvard Law School who now heads a domestic abuse project in Massachusetts. Ms. Buel had obtained it from Caroline Whitehead, a maternal nurse and child care specialist in Raleigh, North Carolina.

    Whitehead told Sommers the whole thing was the result of a misunderstanding. While introducing Buel as a speaker at a 1989 conference, Whitehead referred to a March of Dimes protocol aimed at screening pregnant women for domestic abuse. Buel apparently misheard
    Whitehead and afterwards began disseminating the birth defects myth both verbally and in writing, without bothering to track down a copy of the alleged document. Nearly a year after printing the false information, Time magazine published a retraction. Observes Sommers:

     Unfortunately, the anorexia and the March of Dimes study" are typical of the quality of information we are getting on many women's issues from feminist researchers, women's advocates, and journalists... When they engage in exaggeration, oversimplification, and obfuscations the feminist researchers may be no different from other such advocacy groups as the National Rifle Association or the tobacco industry. But when the NRA does a "study that shows...," or the tobacco industry finds "data that suggest...," journalists are on their guard. They check their sources and seek dissenting opinions.(52)

On page 119 of the same book Donna Laframboise states: 

     On other occasions, only women are polled about violence and abuse. If we don't ask men the same questions we aren't able to say for certain whether these experiences are common to all human beings. And indeed, when researchers do go to the trouble (and expense) of asking both sexes about matters such as sexual harassment and domestic abuse, they are often surprised to find the sexes have more in common than many people-particularly feminists-suppose. But data suggesting similarities doesn't always make it into the public arena.
    In late 1991, for example, the Ontario minister responsible for women's issues, Marion Boyd, announced Wife Assault Prevention Month and disclosed details of an $858,000 ad campaign that featured the slogan: "WIFE ASSAULT; IT lS A CRIME. THERE'S NO EXCUSE."
    She also took the opportunity to inform the provincial legislature of an alarming statistic. According to the minister:  

 Research shows that one in five men living with a  woman admits to using violence against her. This  violence takes many forms, including slapping,  throwing objects at her, beating her up, threatening  her with a knife or gun and even using weapons against her.

This information came from a study conducted by a University of Calgary sociologist named Eugene Lupri. The portion that dealt with violence committed by males appeared in a Canadian journal and did, indeed, appear to confirm the minister's remark. Part two of the study, involving female violence, apparently couldn't find a Canadian publisher. It eventually saw the light of day in a German publication. In the words of David Lees, the Journalist who tracked it down:  

...[it] contains nothing that should surprise anyone, male or female, who has survived--or clings to--a troubled relationship or who takes the saddened view that we should be better people than we are. It documents the probability that both sexes evolved on the same planet and bring to their affairs the same disagreeable tendencies. Violence in the home, in other words, observes no gender boundary. (59)

For clarity's sake I've summarized the results as follows:

Admitted to: Wives Husbands
threatening to hit or throw something at their partner >15.9% >9.1%
pushing, grabbing or shoving their partner >13.1 >11.9
slapping their partner >7.6 >5.0
hitting or trying to hit their partner >9.0 >5.4
kicking, biting, or hitting their partner with a fist >6.3 >6.4
threatening their partner with a gun or knife >3.6 >2.1
using a gun or knife against their partner >.8 >.5

Some people admitted to doing things that fell into more than one category, but when the dust finally settled it was determined that 17.8 percent of the men and 23.3 percent of the women among the 1,530 people surveyed admitted to behaving in a "violent" manner toward their spouses.(60)
    The irony, of course, is that a government concerned about the violence taking place in Canadian homes spent the better part of a million dollars on an ad campaign that targeted only wife assault. Indeed, according to the very research it chose to cite, the ads should have been targeting female violence if, for some reason, it was necessary to single out one gender.


48 Naomi Wolf, The Beauty Myth (Toronto: Vintage Books, 1990), pp. 181-82.

49 Ibid., pp.207-08 and 194-95.

50 Christina Hoff Sommers, Who Stole Feminism? (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1994),pp. 11- 12.

51 Ibid., p.12 and Ann Landers appearing in Toronto Star, 29 April 1992, p. D12.

52 Ibid., pp. 13-15.

59 David Lees, "The War Against Men," Toronto Life, Dec. 1992, pp. 47, 99-100. See also Eugene Lupri, "Male Violence in the Home," Canadian Social Trends, Statistics Canada 1989, pp. 19-21.

60 Ibid., pp. 47, 99-100.

Marion Boyd's fudging of the truth is not a secret.  It is well known.  Nevertheless, like all government-sponsored propaganda campaigns, even though it is an elaborate lie it is now widely and universally accepted as a fact.  Here is another account of Marion Boyd's fudging of the truth:

Neo Nazis and other overt hate groups are amateurs. THE HATE MONGERS explains how some elements of the women's movement use lies and hate to make big money for themselves, and how they harm our culture and our economy.


See also:

1999 11 04
2001 02 09 (format changes)