On Sat, 3 Jan 2009 18:37:22 +0100, "Dusty" wrote:

Dang, I was hoping it was me this year. Oh well, better luck next year.

Anyway, congratulations!!
----------------------------------------------------

http://mensnewsdaily.com/2008/12/30/...orrectness-is/

Carey Roberts

Drum Roll! The Winner of the 2008 Award for Political Incorrectness is.
2008-12-30

It's that time of the year - Christmas carols, shiny-wrapped presents,
surprise visits by long-lost in-laws. And of course, our announcement of the
annual Award for Political Incorrectness.

Previous winners of this highly-sought after prize include California
governor Arnold Schwarzenegger who took up the dicey issue of paternity
fraud; columnist Phyllis Schlafly ("Shame on members of Congress who lack
the courage to stand up to feminist outrages."); and Mark Inglis, the
double-amputee who conquered Mt. Everest.

Last year's unanimous winners were Dave Evans, Reade Seligmann, and Collin
Finnerty, the former Duke lacrosse players who bravely overcame a firestorm
of rape hysteria unconscionably fanned by the media and university
activists.

Let's open the envelope for 2008.

This year's award goes to an unassuming university professor who has devoted
his career to the understanding and remedy of family violence. He has
received funding from the National Institutes of Health and was elected
president of the National Council on Family Relations and the Eastern
Sociological Society. Needless to say, his resumé is lengthy and impressive.

When he began his research in the 1970s, the public was well-acquainted with
the stereotype of beer-swilling men who bullied their wives. That was the
good professor's assumption, as well. But when he published his research
findings in 1975, everyone was amazed - women were just as likely as men to
engage in partner violence.

When he did follow-up surveys over the following 20 years, the gender-equal
results confirmed his original research. More surprising, when other
researchers studied homosexual relationships, they found lesbians had the
highest rates of partner aggression.

There was a problem, but not with the research itself.

The burgeoning feminist movement had staked out the domestic violence issue
as its cri de coeur. The feminists had ginned up their own theory: Domestic
violence is a hate crime perpetrated against women. Gloria Steinem said it
best: "The patriarchy requires violence or the subliminal threat of violence
in order to maintain itself."

But what if all the research paints a completely different picture, showing
heterosexual women are equally likely to aggress, and the highest rates of
battering are found among lesbians? Obviously the hate crime theory goes out
the window, and Steinem's breathless claim seems pretty far-fetched, as
well.

So what's a good feminist to do about the good professor's research? Well,
why not start a whispering campaign? Anything for the cause of female
empowerment, right?

So feminists at his university organized telephone ring accusing him of
being a misogynist. He was picketed repeatedly. At the University of
Massachusetts, a group of shouting and stomping women prevented him from
delivering a guest lecture. (Yes, these are the same women who claim to be
working for a more peaceful and tolerant society.)

In Canada, Pat Marshall, chairwoman of the Commission on Violence Against
Women, made this charge to a reporter about her meeting with the professor's
wife: "I have never met a woman who looked so victimized." But when the
writer called the woman, she said she had never been struck. Marshall was
later forced to apologize.

When the professor was elected president of the Society for the Study of
Social Problems, a group of feminists stood up and walked out as he began
his presidential address. And the threats continue to this day - recently
one of his PhD students was told she would never find a job if she did her
doctoral research with him.

In the face of such opposition, many academics would go into another line of
research, or begin to skew their data to be politically acceptable. But he
would have none of that. Rather than being cowed by the threats, he opted to
expose the motivations behind the attacks.

In one interview, he charged the criticisms of his work are "justifications
of violence by women in the guise of feminism. This is a betrayal of the
feminist ideal of a nonviolent world."

Then we went on to shed the light of truth their tactics.

Writing last year in the European Journal of Criminal Policy and Research,
he cast the spotlight on how feminist academics conceal, deny, and distort
the evidence. Then he detailed the ways in which feminists have corrupted
the research on female-perpetrated abuse, even scheming to obstruct research
funds that might identify female offenders. Finally he took aim at
researchers who have "let their ideological commitments overrule their
scientific commitments."

Interested persons can read this no-holds-barred paper he
http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/V74-ge...ethod%208-.pdf .

Congratulations, Dr. Murray Straus, director of the Family Research
Laboratory at the University of New Hampshire. You are the winner of the
2008 Award for Political Incorrectness.

For more information about this, see a piece by Wendy McElroy at
http://www.ifeminists.com/introducti...2002/1112.html. As
is, I think, brought out in Christina Hoff Sommers's book "Who Stole
Feminism?" Straus -- as one of the very few people researching this
issue -- was the darling of the feminists until his research produced
results they didn't like.