Banned From The Library

This page was last updated on Sunday April 13, 2003

I donated two sets of pamphlets to the Springstown library in August 1999 with the permission of a male librarian. The titles of those pamphlets are Abusive and Violent Women in Relationships - Recognizing the Signs and The Behavioral Traits of an Abusive Person and The Signs of Abuse.

In November 2000, I established a three-volume web site and named one volume The Abused Men's Area. I devoted this volume to abused men and their friends and family members. Since a six-panel pamphlet can only convey a limited amount of information, I included the URL to The Abused Men's Area volume on later pamphlets. More than three years after my original donation, two female librarians objected to my work and removed the pamphlets on November 18, 2002. More than 10,000 persons visited my web site in 2002. The two most read web pages were Abusive and Violent Women in Relationships - Recognizing the Signs and The Behavioral Traits of an Abusive Person and The Signs of Abuse.

I advocate that all people have equal social, political, legal, and economic rights. I say that all people have a private and social obligation to others and those obligations are greater than one's own selfish interests. This, my advocacy, comes from the realization that one's own conduct affects the lives of others.

When I graduated from high school in 1964, men and women could not vote until they reached twenty-one. Congress changed that in1971 through the 26^th Amendment to our Constitution.

Females who were at least eighteen years old could marry without their parent's permission, men had to be at least twenty-one. The reverse was true regarding military service. Males who were at least eighteen years old could enter the military without their parent's permission, women had to be at least twenty-one.

Our country required eighteen-year-old males to register for the military draft under the penalty of imprisonment. Refusal to accept selection by a draft board also had the penalty of imprisonment. Females were not subjected to those requirements and penalties.

Females could not apply for admission to the service academies. Nevertheless, females could earn a college degree from a private or public institution and receive a military officer's commission and succeed. An example that comes to mind is Admiral Grace Murray Hopper.

Many young females married soon after graduation from high school. Few continued their education and received a baccalaureate. Females comprised only 10 percent of the student body at the undergraduate level. That situation significantly changed in five years.

The 1960's saw the rise of feminism with the goal of removing the social and legal barriers that prevented women from sharing equality with men. Though most prejudice was age and race based in California, other states had significant social, legal, and political barriers for women. Why could not women own a business without a male partner? Why could not women engage in the same occupations as men? My contemporaries understood that marriage or motherhood did not suit some women. We believed that the rights of individuals should transcend gender differences. In that sense we were egalitarians.

However, radical feminism overtook this movement toward gender equality in rights, opportunities, and responsibilities. That offshoot became the women's liberation movement and then the women's liberation front. That title revealed the intentions of the radical feminists and "male chauvinist pig" became their rhetoric.

The rise in the numbers of abused men is a direct result of the phenomena of matriarchal privilege that has been sustained by law enforcement and the courts. Radical feminists do not represent mainstream feminism.  These groups suppress honest research, create false numbers, and create false press releases. They want to destroy the traditional family.  They complain about our so called patriarchal society and profess their self-conceived notion of male privilege.  Radical feminists say that the patriarchy is the male culture and is the male government that only benefits males at the expense of females.

The Springstown Library has two books,  Defending our Lives by Susan Murphy-Milano and When Violence Begins at Home by K. J. Wilson.  Both authors complain about our so-called patriarchal society and they want to destroy it. They are striving to establish a matriarchal society where a family consists of a woman, who has custody over the children, and at least one subservient worker.  Women treated males and lower status women badly in past matriarchal societies.

Just like other oppressive groups such as some religious sects, the Nazis, and the Communists, radical feminists conceal, destroy, or censor ideas they do not like.  Instead of embracing the truth through the labor of fact finding, they dogmatically create lies to oppress others.

I have reviewed hundreds of government documents. Most of these documents are public laws, pamphlets, papers, records, and other reports that are available to the public. The remaining documents are those that are, or have been, endorsed by government officials or agencies. Included in my studies are books, essays, and reports from the private sector.

These librarians claimed that my work was 'one-sided', and not 'clinical'.  I see their censorship as evidence of radical feminist political correctness.   These women did suppress honest research and then only after more than three years at the behest of a disgruntled woman.

Misandry is the hatred or oppression of males. The first example of misandry is that of the conduct of courts throughout this and other nations.  Several females and males did conceal exculpatory evidence of the innocence of a teenaged boy. They did not want to take the time to verify the claim of a pubescent girl who never learned right from wrong. I sought the truth and found the truth. That fact did not make me very popular. The credos "I will not lie, cheat, or steal nor tolerate those who do" stands well with me but not with the radical feminists.

The second example of misandry is California Penal Code (273.5). It begins with an apparent gender neutral definition but it wanders through a thicket of words that is beyond comprehension. Somehow through all these words the law says "That the defendant make payments to a battered woman's shelter." So the offending wife pays the very group of people that did not tell her that husband battering is wrong. Somehow, she is the victim and not he.

Ms. Ellen Alderman and Ms. Caroline Kennedy in their book, The Right to Privacy, reported that jail matrons raped women. The 1993 manual sponsored by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services entitled Child Sexual Abuse: Intervention and Treatment Issues by Kathleen Coulborn Faller presumed that men rape their own children. That presumption is on-sided. A woman could have easily produced the injuries she described. The Springstown library has a book on their open shelves that describes those unseemly acts.

The structure of our laws makes domestic violence easy to claim for a female and hard to disprove for a male. In fact, some states do not require a female to show proof of her claim. It is the same old game of she says, he says, and she is always right. Men need help and I give it.

The library did carry the California Attorney General's pamphlet that falsely portrayed men as abusers and women as victims. It included a list of resources for women.  Most of those resources receive public funding.  How one-sided can one be? My pamphlets included a small list of Internet resources for men. These resources do not receive public funding.

The California Attorney General's web site still falsely portrays men as abusers and women as victims.  In violation of the Federal Constitution, it offered no resources or help for men.  This remains true today, March 20, 2003. 

I released a pamphlet, Dealing with Misandry, in January 2002. Writing about misogyny is politically correct. Writing about misandry is not correct. Radical feminists fabricate false reports and statistics against males regarding rape and family violence.  They claim that female violence and abuse against males is insignificant and justified as self-defense. They invented the battered woman's syndrome.  Misandry is their assertion that battered man's syndrome does not exist.

In that same pamphlet I added, Child Maltreatment 1999 (The Administration on Children, Youth, and Families) is a result of data collected from each state's Child Protective Services (CPS). The data reveals that mothers are responsible for 50 percent of the physical abuse of children while fathers are responsible for 35 percent. Mothers commit nearly twice as much child maltreatment and three times as much child neglect as do fathers. The report strongly shows that in every measure of child abuse, children are safest with their fathers who have established a stable relationship with another person.

The radical feminist movement is akin to the sadistic communist oppression of the past century.  Some women simply do like my message and they censor it.  Misandry and misogyny (hatred of women) has no place in our society and in our courts but it exists through corruption and patronization. We cannot have equality and opportunity in our society when anti-male gender preference is so prevalent in our society.

Almost half the claims of domestic violence brought by women against men are false. At least 31 percent of those false claims involve a woman who uses the law wrongfully to evict their husband from his home so that she can continue her adulterous affair.

I am upholding the law of our country. The 14^th Amendment to our Constitution stipulates that "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." Where is that protection for men?

As for balance that the librarians demanded, why should I give currency to lies and a philosophy that I oppose. Ms. Mary Lindell who opposed Nazi oppression in the French Resistance is reputed to have said that there is a special place in Hell for fence sitters. You will not find me sitting on a fence.

Edward S. Nunes

End Of Page