Follow related website bookmark from Reddit:
FAQ SUGGESTION: "Antimale Legislation Roundup" cleanup
**ANTIMALE LEGISLATION ROUNDUP** **LOSS OF DUE PROCESS:** By directive of the US Department of Education: A rape accusation need not meet the legal standard of 'proof beyond a reasonable doubt' to end the accused's college career: - The U.S. Department of Education?s Office for Civil Rights has lowered the standards required to determine the outcome of a sexual discrimination or harassment case. The [DEAR COLLEAGUE LETTER](http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/letters/colleague-201104.pdf), April 2011, requires a preponderance of the evidence standard (satisfied if there is greater than 50 percent chance that the proposition is true) to resolve complaints of sex discrimination. - [Federal Rule of Evidence 413: Similar Crimes in Sexual Assault Cases](http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_413): (a) Permitted Uses. In a criminal case in which a defendant is accused of a sexual assault, the court may admit evidence that the defendant committed any other sexual assault. The evidence may be considered on any matter to which it is relevant. Joe Biden (author of VAWA) describes the terms: >[Under these rules, t]he prosecutor, instead of just having to deal with that witness and those facts, is able to go out and find anybody who is willing to say, 'By the way, when he was 21 years old when we were parked in the car he physically molested me,' without any proof of anything. Now, the people who might . . . have been around to prove that that was not the case, the couple you double dated with in the front seat of the car, are dead. But you have a witness, the one person sitting there, who says, 'But that happened to me 25 years ago.'" 140 Cong.Record S12,261 (August 22, 1994). Biden declared that he had "a moral, intellectual, and practical aversion" to this rule.? Related articles: [False Rape Society- ?Title IX Sexual Assault Directive Has Just Made College Even Less Friendly for Males?](http://falserapesociety.blogspot.com/2011/04/title-ix-sexual-assault-directive-has.html) [False Rape Society- ?College Women Not Charged For Underage Drinking So Long As They Cry Rape?](http://falserapesociety.blogspot.com/2011/04/college-women-not-charged-for-underage.html) [False Rape Society- ?The Proposed SaVE Act Tosses Your Son's Rights Onto a Scrapheap of Indifference?](http://falserapesociety.blogspot.com/2011/04/proposed-save-act-tosses-your-sons.html) [Opencongress.org- PROPOSED Campus SaVE Act](http://www.opencongress.org/bill/112-s834/show) [Open Market.org- ?Education Department Changes Burden of Proof in Sexual Harassment Cases Under Title IX?](http://www.openmarket.org/2011/04/11/education-department-changes-burden-of-proof-in-sexual-harassment-cases-under-title-ix/) [Human-Stupidity- ?Rape Laws: dismantling of due process explained step by step?](http://human-stupidity.com/stupid-dogma/teenage-sexuality/rape-laws-no-due-process) [UND Refuses to Reopen Case of Expelled Student](http://www.wdaz.com/event/article/id/6963/) **REPRESENTATION AT POLLS** By 2004, Women outnumbered men at the polls by a difference of several million. [Source](http://www.cawp.rutgers.edu/research/topics/documents/genderdiff.pdf) **BULLYING** Heterosexual, white males who are bullied (by other white males for being overweight, for example) may be denied an investigation by the DOJ. The Educational Opportunities Section of the DOJ Civil Rights Division is only statutorily authorized to initiate suits under Title IV of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Equal Educational Opportunities Act of 1974, and the Americans with Disabilities Act. Related articles: [?DOJ to white male bullying victims: Tough Luck?](http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/watercooler/2011/mar/18/doj-white-male-bullying-victims-tough-luck/) **CHILD SUPPORT** [Title IV-D](http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/chapter-7/subchapter-IV/part-D) requires that a father be named if a woman who applies for welfare has kids, or the mother loses benefits. When benefits for free-loaders are about to be lost, they have no problem putting the name of a father down - right or wrong. - The Injustice by Default [article](http://reason.com/archives/2004/02/01/injustice-by-default) about child support legislation shows how easy it is to fraudulently name a random man as the father, and the difficulty he meets in acquitting himself of the ensuing debt, even when dna clearly shows that he's not the father. - The [Bradley Amendment](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Amendment) requires state courts to prohibit retroactive reduction of child support obligations. - Doug Dante's article [here](http://www.scribd.com/doc/630611/A-Quick-Summary-of-Title-IVD-Funding-and-Incentives) points out the laws involved in the federal subsidies aimed at maximizing child support payments. Follow the money: The Federal Government provides financial incentives to states' efforts to maximize the number of CS payers and the amount they are forced to pay. - Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott's site forwards the assumption that [noncustodial parents are fathers](http://i.imgur.com/NX6pu.jpg) - A woman is entitled to sue the father of her child for child support even if conception occurred as a result of a criminal act, like statutory rape, committed by the woman- [Hermesmann v. Seyer](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermesmann_v._Seyer) Related articles: [?IT'S TEN O'CLOCK: DO YOU KNOW WHERE YOUR SPERM ARE? TOWARD A STRICT LIABILITY THEORY OF PARENTAGE?](http://www.supportguidelines.com/articles/art199903.html) [Paternity: Innocence Is Now a Defense](http://www.lewrockwell.com/mcelroy/mcelroy30.html) **DOMESTIC VIOLENCE** - The Violence Against Women Act. Recently the [DOJ](http://www.justice.gov/olc/2010/vawa-opinion-04272010.pdf) made a statement that VAWA applies to men and women, however, in practice, women have legal and social advantages in seeking protection that men do not. In the [Violence Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act of 2005](http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-109hr3402enr/pdf/BILLS-109hr3402enr.pdf), Congress specifically provided grant condition ?(8) Nonexclusivity?Nothing in this title shall be con- strued to prohibit male victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking from receiving benefits and services under this title. [Read FAQ on Stop Formula Grants](http://www.ovw.usdoj.gov/docs/FAQ_FINAL_nov_21_07.pdf) Though we've seen that in practice, this promise of gender neutrality is seldom realized: Implications for Prosecutors Prosecutors should be alert to gender bias in the response of local law enforcement agencies and re-screen cases if the percentage of female suspects accused of abusing male victims exceeds that commonly found across the nation. (Research basis: Multiple studies of abusers and their victims brought to the attention of the criminal justice system [including civil protective orders] confirm the gender ratio as opposed to studies focusing on non-intimate and family conflict.) [Source: NIJ](http://www.nij.gov/topics/crime/intimate-partner-violence/practical-implications-research/ch3/gender.htm) Here is the 2009 California Health and Safety code [124250](http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/cacode/HSC/1/d106/2/6/s124250) which defined domestic violence as something that happens only to females, only [recently was amended](http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=200920100SB273&search_keywords=124250) to reflect gender neutrality (win!) [Facts on domestic violence](http://ejfi.org/PDF/Facts-Domestic%20violence.pdf), and [what happens when 911 is called](http://www.dvmen.org/dv-6.htm). According to a 2010 report, [Expanding Definitions of Domestic Violence?](http://www.saveservices.org/downloads/SAVE-Expanding-Definitions-of-DV.pdf), 63% of states include emotional distress in their statutory definition of domestic violence. That means any person who claims to be ?fearful? ? no evidence necessary ? is entitled to a protective order and the generous cornucopia of bennies that comes with it. House and Senate resolutions [H.RES 590](http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-110hres590ih/pdf/BILLS-110hres590ih.pdf) and [S.RES 373](http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-111sres373is/pdf/BILLS-111sres373is.pdf) support the goals and ideals (including that women are at higher risk of DV) of National Domestic Violence Awareness Month and Designating the month of February 2010 as ??National Teen Dating Violence Awareness and Prevention Month??, respectively. Related articles: [?Yippee we?re all abusers now!?](http://dailycaller.com/2010/12/07/yippee-were-all-abusers-now/) **HEALTH CARE** [Obamacare](http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-111hr3590enr/pdf/BILLS-111hr3590enr.pdf) gave women more consideration "because it was politically expedient", according to Hadley Heath, health care policy analyst at the Independent Women?s Forum. Related articles: [?Does Obamacare discriminate against men??](http://dailycaller.com/2010/12/10/does-obamacare-discriminate-against-men/) [The difference in funding levels by the Canadian government for male vs. female homeless & healthcare initiatives](http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/i2qf6/crosspost_from_roney_and_requality_someone_on/) **SEXUALITY** [The FBI recently changed their definition of rape:](http://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/attorney-general-eric-holder-announces-revisions-to-the-uniform-crime-reports-definition-of-rape) The revised definition includes any gender of victim or perpetrator. more