Classic Projection and Histrionics
- A Real Example in the News -
This page was last updated on Sunday, December 02, 2012
The Opening of the Door
I often write to the Vallejo Times-Herald because it is the local paper and some people in town that like my work. However, the most important part is that I try to keep people aware that others oppose equal rights for men and women. These are the women who stole the movement toward gender equality by opposing the Equal Rights Amendment. The point that I make is that real Feminism is more than anatomy. It is about personal integrity. That is the difference between those who support freedom and those who would abolish it.
Blaming the Victim - Classical Projection
Psychological projection admits both denial and understatement but denies responsibility. So it is a defense mechanism where individuals attribute their own unacceptable behaviors and thoughts to others. So in this way, projection reduces anxiety by allowing the expression of the subconscious impulses or desires without letting the conscious mind recognize them. This is willful misattribution: The externalization of blame, guilt, or responsibility. So in a sense, this becomes minimization and then denial. In this process, a person might have thoughts of about abusing another.
Instead of dealing with these undesirable thoughts at the conscious level, the guilty party projects those feelings onto another person. In doing so, one writer proposed that the subject gains conscious vindication. This is why when Mary abuses Bob, she can obtain acquittal by claiming that Bob had abused her and that is usually how things go.
That is why there one standard for men and another for women. This double standard can destroy anyone's reputation although no conviction occurred. However, the stigma of being falsely accused remains for the rest of an innocent person's life while the perpetrator goes free. The Centers for Disease Control Survey found that in cases of one-way (not mutual) aggression, women were instigators in more than 68.8% of the cases.
Nevertheless, the mandatory arrest policy requires that the police only arrest men. That policy is not only about falsely blaming innocent men, it was also about oppressing them. That is why no court has ever consistently penalized women for lying and that is the problem. It is those bullies and liars who make false claims of abuse and rape and most of them are female. However, rewarding guilty women and punishing innocent men, still is the government’s policy.
Yellow Journalism, Scapegoating, and Recovered Memories
Yellow journalism is a type of journalism that presents little legitimate well-researched news and instead uses eye-catching headlines to sell newspapers. It simply involves the creation or the propagation of a lie and that is why we call it propaganda. So if a news organization wanted to increase its circulation, then it might just print a lie to accomplish that goal. This is exactly how these women figuratively and literally grabbed the public’s attention with their lies of abuse on Super Bowl Sunday, January 1993. The real reason for this is that The Super Bowl is one of the most widely viewed television events every year. That is why these women’s groups reported that Super Bowl Sunday is one of the worst days for women in the home. It was not, because many men and women were watching the Super Bowl and enjoying the event. So the claim that these petulant women made was false.
The ‘recovered memories’ scheme was in full tilt in the 1980's and women used them to accuse men of abuse, especially sexual child abuse. The data shows that as mandatory prosecutions had increased, the rate of false allegations of abuse also has increased. That is why false allegations remain a woman’s weapon’s of choice and prosecutors refer it that way. In their parlance, attorneys call it a slam dunk because both of them continue to retain legal immunity. Moreover, they afford women privacy in the news media while they smear men.
Since the 1970's, American newspapers had emphasized unsubstantiated stories and outright hoaxes about men. These included recovered memories and false statistics created to garner support for a newly created industry, blaming men for the acts of women. Among these acts were rape, child abuse, sexual child abuse, spousal abuse, and lying. As a result, they had conned Congress into believing that men were abusing women by ratios that exceeded one in three. This is probably why Congress had decided to provide tax-free funding to support their misandrious agenda. Moreover, men were forced into paying taxes to support those organizations whose sole goal was to deprive them of their rights, their freedom, and their property.
The mandatory male arrest doctrine was based on the flawed assumption that men were more violent than women. The problem was that subsequent studies had revealed that women were far more violent and far more abusive then anyone had previously believed. So after these researchers found that women were abusing their children and then accusing men of spousal and sexual child abuse, they disowned their flawed doctrine. However, the damage was already done and the government did nothing to make any reparations.
These draconian policies required that the police detain a man when probable cause existed that a domestic assault may have occurred, despite the evidence to the contrary. Probable cause consists of the belief that a crime has been committed and more likely than not that the male assailant had committed it. The problem was that these policies resulted in far more false arrests than for any other crime. This, in turn, had lead to mandatory prosecutions that went on without any evidence, except the unproven accusations of a female accuser.
The problem was that subsequent studies revealed that these women were far more violent and abusive than anyone had believed. Yet the evidence was in front of them and the studies ignored it. More than 90 percent of men did not beat their wives and children were far safer with their father.
Other research revealed that women were far more likely to accuse their husband of sexual child abuse. However, the real issue was not about the child but about the tax-free money that the primary custodial parent would receive. By the 1980s, DNA testing had sufficiently evolved to become a primary asset in matters determining guilt or innocence. So then women's groups resorted to yellow journalism to increase circulation and profits at the expense of innocent men. This term is still used to describe this kind of infamous bigoted reporting. Later, its meaning included the deliberate spreading of lies and ideas to help or damage another identifiable group, men.
These women wanted to change the public’s attitude toward men so that they could spread their own poison of hate through the media. The problem was that the news media encouraged this behavior by printing false accounts as if they were real and so they became substance of lies, scandals, and creative reporting. This was not the first time that the news media had propagated lies for profit. I do not expect it to be the last.
Female Shelter Workers Oppose Shelters For Men
In May 2003, a county coordinator for a rape crisis and domestic violence shelter and four staff members boycotted a meeting. They had objected to a report that appeared in a segment of '20/20', a news program carried by the ABC television network. The subject of this broadcast is that women abuse men and she objected to that fact. She said that this subject undermined her work when the county's priorities are not properly aligned with ‘our’ center (my emphasis added).
The potential rewards for a female who makes a false allegation are enormous while the risks are very small. So a woman who victimized her husband can steal his possessions, home, savings, contact with his children, and his job. Also, many employers will not hire a person with an arrest record for a violent crime though a court found that person to be factually innocent. Moreover, government agencies can require to bear the blame because he has to reveal his being arrested although he was innocent and a court has sealed or destroyed the records.
American taxpayers support the Violence Against Women Act and other woman’s domestic violence programs at a rate of one billion dollars a year. The problem is that most women’s shelters operate under the shield of privacy and so they are not accountable to the taxpayer. All they have to do is to take in a woman who merely claims abuse. According to current information, most states permit a woman to stay in a shelter without filing a complaint of abuse. So if she wants to stay longer, she has to lie.
The problem is that most states define abuse so broadly that nearly any behavior may qualify as abuse or violence. This is how most states have made it easy to claim by ignoring the evidence. For an example, very few states require DNA testing and often allow prosecutors to prevent witnesses to testify. In divorce, the mere claim of abuse and violence is sufficient to prove guilt and that is a powerful incentive to play the ‘abuse’ card.
Although judges who heard these cases and knew the claims were false, they did nothing to stop it. By doing so, they encouraged the perjury and this is why false allegations of rape and domestic violence are the tactical weapons of choice. This is why divorce attorneys call them silver bullets and slam-dunks and policy makers have as much incentive to continue the fraud as those who started it. That is why false claims entitle women to years of tax-free child support money and a range of federal subsidized benefits. That is why falsely accused men have become the chattel of women and the state.
Double Standards and the Scams
Men faced other problems such as material alterations to court documents. These are changes to the text in a legal instrument that significantly changes its legal effect, and may thus invalidate it. This is why some court officials have altered those documents after the litigant had signed them and so the abuses by women and their courthouse toadies continue. When I write about and for abused men, this is my subject and when I write about women, they are my subject. The double standard is this. Most newspapers will print the name of a man accused of domestic violence or rape but do not print the name of the woman who has accused him.
Adding to this, most law enforcement agencies will release their own or the woman’s version of the alleged event rather than providing only the facts. So others have proposed to grant anonymity to men until they have been found guilty or innocent of a crime. However, many women’s groups have objected to these proposals because they believe that maligning a man’s reputation is better than telling the truth.
Although "political correctness" dictates that a female’s unproven claim must be true, the failure to consider that she may be lying eradicates the presumption of innocence. This is especially significant because the crimes of rape and spousal abuse do not require corroborating evidence for conviction in many jurisdictions. The guilty often conjure false claims to exclude possible witnesses and the physical evidence.
So the case must hinge on the credibility of an accuser who has everything to gain and nothing to lose. This was so simple that no one had to the scene of the alleged abuse and the ‘victim’ does not have to wait. It is similar to going to the nearest court or police station and she has it her way. She gets his bank account, the house, the kids, the car and almost anything else. That is how it is done.
So the reason that some women lie about rape or abuse is that they know that the state will never prosecute them. While penalties for perjury exist, the state never enforces them to protect men. Moreover, in some jurisdictions, a female has to admit that she lied about her false accusation before state can exonerate the defendant. So another matter arises. Filing a false report of rape or spousal abuse is only a misdemeanor in many states and very few states prosecute women who had lied.
The Shield Laws
A shield law limits what a defendant may ask about the behavior of a purported female victim unless those questions are relevant and essential for a fair trial. Most of the time, a female purports that she is the victim and so the shield laws are often used to prevent a male from receiving a fair trial. So she is really not a victim but an accuser with no evidence. Sometimes legislatures design these statutes to keep juries from hearing very convincing evidence about a female’s guilt or a male’ innocence. The reasoning is that such evidence is so inflammatory that a wrongly accused defendant (male) would have an overwhelming advantage in court. The other reasoning is that some courts do not want to hear evidence that would smear a female’s reputation though it is true. This has kept juries from hearing evidence about the innocence of the accused and the guilt of the accuser.
For an example, a woman had falsely claimed that someone raped her many years ago. Now she claims that another man raped her, but that evidence might not be admissible in court. The reason for this is that each case must stand on its own merits. So if she waited until the evidence had dissipated then and has waited until evidence had dissipated now, that too might also be inadmissable. Moreover, if she had written about her passion and her desires, those messages could be inadmissible because they too were about her sexual conduct. How does anyone perceive a woman who initiated sexual intercourse then claimed rape? If her sexual conduct was that of a woman who falsely claimed rape in the past, how does anyone prove that she had not consented now? If she did not consent, would not a man simply conclude that interlude and would not this be the end of it?
Some women want to feel that they are no longer in control and they see this as a rejection when she believes that only she the right of refusal. Egocentrism is an important characteristic in matters of false allegations of abuse or rape. This is why some women use false allegations to satisfy their own urges of personal conquest. This is why the shield laws are causing more harm by concealing this truth.
Before the 1980's, a rape defendant could do very little to prove his innocence. In fact, a mere accusation was often sufficient to prove rape unless he had believable witnesses that would testify otherwise. Yet the problem was that a woman could make up a story that the accused raped her and he would have no witnesses for his defense.
So the evidence for the defense should be the passage of time because the exclusion of the facts would violate the defendant’s constitutional rights. In the same vein, a man could do to prove his innocence of spousal abuse. He had to have believable witnesses that would testify. The problem was that no one wanted to become ‘involved’. Moreover, the states had enacted illegal mandatory arrest laws so that she could steal his property and ruin his reputation.
So it did not make any difference that he was a model citizen and beyond reproach for his entire life. The mere lie of his wife could send him to jail without evidence or cause. So why would anyone want to employ a man, no matter how competent, if had a criminal record? This is why no laws truly protect men from false claims made by women. In effect, the making of a false allegation by a female is not a crime because unspoken laws give them the right to lie. That is what the shield laws have done.
The Continuing Fraud
I do not always expect everyone to support my view but I do expect to find them strongly supporting freedom. So each of us should pause and reflect on this question, what has the Violence Against Women Act done for everyone of this nation? It has done little and has measurably failed. According to its supporters, the state does not prosecute 90% of all family violence defendants. This is a lie because a person cannot be a defendant unless the state is prosecuting them.
So they wrote the Violence Against Women Act such that women can never be defendants. This is a result of the mandatory arrest rules against men. Moreover, a man cannot obtain a restraining order against his wife until she gets one against him. So it is gender preference and not the facts that drive the process. If she refuses to appear, the prosecutors will treat her as a victim and not what she really is. She is a creature who preys on others to satisfy her lust for self-gratification.
The VAWA programs have been ineffective in reducing partner abuse and placed those women at a greater risk of violence. So the supporters of the VAWA decided to falsify the numbers by substituting their own statistics. This became evident when their totals exceeded 100 percent. Of course their most striking statistic included men who were dead.
In 2005, the Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing on the Reauthorization of the VAWA. When they discovered that the most knowledgeable experts in the world would likely attend, the committee membership decided to prevent them from testifying. Most people did not know that the committee diverted more money to the VAWA. So the question I would ask is this, does this make anyone safer today than before? It did not and it does not.
There is No Penalty for Women who Lie
The domestic violence industry falsely claims that 95 percent of the victims are women when in fact, these women are more likely to lie. Moreover, we pay them to do so. A billion dollars a year or more is a large amount of money and the spin-offs are lucrative. That is why they arrest male victims of domestic abuse and denied the services that they deserve. The result was that men were considered guilty until proven innocent and no one was rushing to find truth. Billions of dollars have been spent on the Violence Against Women Act but nothing has really changed for the better. Guess who campaigned for that law? From personal experience, I know that women are far more likely to lie because the state rarely prosecutes them.
More recent studies (2010) have shown that women who watch other women abuse men become sexually aroused by it. The experts call this sadism, in which they obtain gratification through the infliction of mental cruelty and physical pain. So as a group, these women are more likely to initiate abuse and are just as likely to lie about it. The reason for this is that these women are addicted to the sexual thrill that is the core of their behavior. So it is no surprise that a survey sponsored by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) revealed that 71 percent of the instigators of violence were women.
However when men report these incidents, they are ones whom the police must arrest while their abusive wife or partner goes free. So the taxpayers had paid more than twenty billion dollars to arrest and jail the wrong people and the cost to these victims is far more than that. It is immeasurable and the law is ass backwards.
This section, 'No Penalty for Women who Lie', was sent to the editor of the Vallejo Times-Herald on or about March 8, 2012 and it was published on or about Thursday, March 22, 2012. The following is Ms. Heize's letter in reply.
On domestic violence, get some information before ranting Posted: 03/26/2012 01:00:40 AM PDT
Edward Nunes' rant about domestic violence ("Biased against men," March 22) was appalling and uninformed. He claims that some women in abusive relationships "are addicted to the thrill and that is the core of their behavior." That he fails to mention is WHY that might be true: Growing up in a home where the father or mother's boyfriend or family friends abuse the mother, thus creating an environment in which the girl grows up to believe that abuse is normal -- landing her in abusive relationships when she's older.
Instead he insinuates that some women in abusive relationships seek that thrill just because! Sure, most women in abusive relationships might lie about the abuse, but only to cover up the fact that they are the victims -- not because they might have initiated it! And just because Mr. Nunes can't personally see how the Violence Against Women Act has changed anything doesn't mean it hasn't. And since there IS an Act titled such, that proves that most of the victims are women -- 95 percent can also be considered MOST. Should Mr. Nunes feel another rant coming on, I suggest he better inform himself of the issue before spouting off another letter just to get a rise out of someone.
The capital letters in Ms. Heize's letter are hers alone and I'm told that they are used to express anger. So this is what I found on the Internet. It seems that writing in all capital letters usually means that the author is emphasizing what they are trying to convey. So, if someone typed "Go AWAY! ," people would understand that the writer was putting considerable emphasis on that thought and so it means what it says. However when people type using capital letters exclusively, or very frequently, LIKE THIS, PEOPLE INTERPRET IT AS THOUGH YOU WERE YELLING, SINCE EVERY WORD IS EMPHASIZED. So typing in all caps is an email version of yelling at someone. So who is ranting now? Histrionics is an exaggerated behavior intended to attract attention and ranting is often associated with one or more personality disorders..
No one knows what causes this disorder but it possibly linked to egocentrism (narcissism). However, the use of histrionics is a learned behavior that is based on one's own sense of superiority. This is why these individuals often try take credit for another person's achievements. When they fail to receive the recognition that they believe that they had earned, they over dramatize and blame others for their disappointment. Symptoms include:
My letter, No Penalty for Women Who Lie, was first published Thursday, March 22, 2012. The Vallejo Times-Herald usually takes about two weeks to evaluate and publish a writer's letter to the editor. However, this time, it took only four days to publish Ms. Heize's letter. Perhaps it was just a slow period and not much to print. Then again, the stated policy of the Times-Herald is that they will not publish letters that are libelous, racist, or containing personal attacks. Unfortunately, that policy does not exclude those letters that are misandrious and do contain personal attacks. That is just my observation.
The Last Word
When I established my website in 1999, the Springstowne Library had added
several books to their collection that encouraged women to falsely accuse their
husband of abuse. Moreover, these books provided specific directions on
how to do it. The problem was that if this became widely known, many women
who had falsely claimed abuse could have been arrested and tried for perjury,
but that didn’t happen.
This letter was published by the Times-Herald on Saturday, April 7, 2012.
Edward Steven Nunes