NC Coalition Against Domestic Violence

NC Coalition Against Domestic Violence and Men

In doing some research the other day, I happened across the NC Coalition Against Domestic Violence (NCCADV) website and discovered some information that while not surprising, needs to be available to men and women and their families in North Carolina.

To learn more about what the NC Coalition Against Domestic Violence is NOT telling you:

If any of you have been reading my prior posts, much of the information in this one will be redundant. However, the main goal of this article will focused on putting the NC Coalition Against Domestic Violence and their staff at the top of the search engines where more North Carolina men and women and their families can learn how this organization seems more interested in gender and sexual politics than ending violence for everyone in NC. In what is literally a slap in the face to men, this coalition states the following about the causes of domestic violence on their website:

We believe that patriarchy, gender inequality, and all oppressions play a central role at the individual, institutional, and cultural levels in creating and maintaining an environment which accepts domestic violence. We believe it is vital to understand and advocate for the elimination of all forms of oppression, including, but not limited to: sexism, racism, and homophobia.

We believe it is critical to serve all domestic violence survivors, regardless of race, age, class and ethnic group, sexual orientation, gender identity, mental and physical abilities, religious and spiritual beliefs, and immigration status. We know oppression comes in all forms and leads to secondary issues for survivors; we will strive to serve all survivors of domestic violence and their respective needs.

You read that right, the NC Coalition Against Domestic Violence places it’s central reasoning for domestic violence in NC around patriarchy, gender inequality, and female oppression as the chief causes of domestic violence and places zero emphasis on stress, financial difficulty, substance abuse, marital conflict, or emotional/mental issues. Furthermore, the Coalition lists every single class of people on this planet who are survivors except men. This would indicate that they believe not one single man in NC has ever experienced being slapped, intimidated, or threatened.

Furthermore, the NC Coalition Against Domestic Violence went on to state:

We believe that through the power of our shared experiences and collective voice, we can work together to create individual, institutional, and cultural change. We will work intentionally and actively to create safe spaces for survivors of domestic violence. We believe the voice and experience of survivors must be the foundation of our work, and that the domestic violence movement can change society.

Definition of a coalition:  a pact or treaty among individuals or groups, during which they cooperate in joint action, each in their own self-interest, joining forces together for a common cause.

How can the NCCADV state that they have a coalition of men and women sharing collective voices and shared experiences if the men in their organization are patriarchal oppressors bent on gender inequality? Or, are these men too stupid to see that they are being used as tokens to make the appearance of a coalition? Or, one could argue that they are there to simply stay in the good graces of federal money the coalition gets from federal and state grants. Either way, it is super irresponsible for the NC Coalition Against Domestic Violence to interject common radical feminist words like patriarchy into the narrative of domestic violence rather than focusing on the established causes for this social ill.

In doing serious research on domestic violence, I come across many of the most hard line feminist websites that have their own cherry picked statistics on violence and even they admit to a small fraction of female perpetuated violence, but that apparently escaped the idiots at the NC Coalition Against Domestic Violence.

A Message To Women Supporters of the NC Coalition Against Domestic Violence

As stated earlier, I think it is irresponsible for male supporters of this NC coalition to support the executive staff use of the very serious issue of domestic violence in order to advance a political agenda claiming female inequality and oppression that does not exist. But there is another group of even scarier supporters at the coalition. That is women in their ranks who have sons, brothers, husbands, fathers, nephews, and male friends. If the NC Coalition Against Domestic Violence is correct, and all social ills are directly related to patriarchy and masculinity, then there are a lot of sons and husbands that just got jammed into a box as potential domestic batterers.

I can guarantee you that not everyone who gives this coalition money and support believes that all their sons and male friends are sitting around conspiring to oppress women. For those within this organization who have sons who have/will get their asses handed to them in the family courts, I hope they remember the NC Coalition Against Domestic Violence and their support for them.

I am tired of seeing domestic violence coalitions hiding behind beaten women to fund other political agendas. Domestic violence in North Carolina is a very emotional hot button topic that many professional lobbyists and politicians use to broker power and gain votes. “Do it for the children,” they say.  What they are saying is “If you don’t support what I am doing I am going to paint you a child hater and abuser in the public.” This is how they quash anyone who asks questions, holds them accountable, or attempts to open dialogue.

I refuse to be held hostage by this political play on words anymore and I am calling out the NC Coalition Against Domestic Violence staff as sexist radical feminist that have no intention on ending violence and would rather play politics with peoples lives. All victims of domestic violence in NC deserves better than what this coalition is pushing and I am sorry to see so many Men and Women throw their own gender and sons under a bus just to be part of some sexist political machine.

Additionally, I am disheartened to know that politicians in North Carolina support this coalition and give them the ability to further divide our state along gender lines. If you truly want to end domestic violence in NC, then a new coalition needs to be built – one that is bipartisan, gender neutral, identifying all domestic violence, and using statistical data from organizations that are neutral on the subject.

The NC Coalition Against Domestic Violence Needs To Hear From A Voice For Men

In my attempt to call out the NC Coalition Against Domestic Violence, I hope Women and Men who read this will reach out to the executive staff within this coalition and let them know that they are no longer safe to sit in their protected bubbles and push phoney statistics to the people of North Carolina in an effort to drive funding. It is important that we all do this even if not from NC because I will be the first to join in a fight with you against a similar organization anywhere in this world if it means furthering your activism and change on this issue. And, I suspect that the management of A Voice For Men feels the same way.

Lastly, I ask that you share this article with others on the many social networking sites like Facebook, Twitter, and Google+ in an effort to expose groups like the NC Coalition Against Domestic Violence who I believe is doing serious damage to many people, and who seem hell bent of furthering ideological agendas rather than ending violence against humanity.

You can make contact with NCCADV and Executive Director Beth Froehling HERE.

About Michael Sharron

Michael lives in Eastern NC and is new to the Men's Human Rights Movement. His contributions to AVfM will expose radical feminists in North Carolina and their attacks on Fathers and Women in Paternal Families.

Main Website
View All Posts

Support us by becoming a member

AVFM depends on readers like you to help us pay expenses related to operations and activism. If you support our mission, please subscribe today.

Join or donate

Sponsored links

  • ImNotMraBut…

    “We believe….”. Wow and faith like that gets federal funding?

    I Believe in sexism …. but oddly my faith in that coupled with proof to back up the faith, legal issues and even human rights abuse just don’t attract money! Why would that be? Do I need to grow a pair and be more dogmatic with them?

  • Michael Sharron

    What really bugs me about this coalition is that they get untold amounts of money from the state of NC and federal government for domestic violence related matters despite having the most sexist agenda I have seen in a long time. If I started some type of coalition seeking state money and said that “Medicaid Moms”, and lesbians, and whatnot was the cause of issue x I would be summarily denied. Complete double standard, complete Misandry, complete hypocrisy.

  • julie

    I don’t see the anti men in any of the words from this organisation nor it’s context. But I wouldn’t suggest you STFU for it’s real to you.

    I am white skinned (olive, but considered European) and white people are considered privileged yet I am personally NOT considered to be privileged just as some black skinned people are privileged in Africa for they also have a class system.

    I am not upset about about being an outlier – kinda like it. :)

    Likewise, there are many outliers in domestic violence, like the percentage of men who are violated by their gay partners and violent wives.

    In what way do you think this site is not including the men you represent? Would they assist gay men and heterosexual men abused by other men and wives?

    • Bewildered

      ” I don’t see the anti men in any of the words from this organisation nor it’s context. ”

      The thing is you won’t notice it if you don’t want to !

      Likewise, there are many outliers in domestic violence, like the percentage of men who are violated by their gay partners and violent wives.

      Oh! really which stats have you referred or is it your woman’s way of knowing things. BTW many outliers is a kind of contradiction of terms. If there are many ‘outliers’ then they become relevant in any statistical estimation. They can no longer be considered outliers.

      ” Would they assist gay men and heterosexual men abused by other men and wives? ”

      You tell us ! What makes you think/certain that they will ?

    • ImNotMraBut…

      Julie – I have to say that as both a gay man and someone who deal with domestic abuse and the outcomes…. you have a terribly abusive way with words, which makes you appear to be a supporter of Academic Fraud. .

      “Likewise, there are many outliers in domestic violence, like the percentage of men who are violated by their gay partners and violent wives.”

      Outliers? Darling I don’t lie out for anyone – let alone you and your prejudices.

      You also miss a few basic truths about maths. If you can count it and even try to deny it with words like Outlier you are a fool. When the measure is if a person has been subject to Domestic Abuse any person counts – shifting the goal posts by then subdividing the data set by false means to create outliars is academic fraud. You really are making yourself look bad!

    • pjanus

      It has been awhile since I’ve seen you trolling mens forums and blogs. I booked on just to down vote you – feminist troll.

  • julie

    Did I say something that wasn’t liked?
    I would prefer you ban me altogether rather than siphon my comments – this is done on a men’s site in my own country, and it’s very wrong to do IMO for I am not a thing you mould into what you want to make me out to be.

    • Peter Wright (Tawil)

      Relax, julie. No one is moderating you, so no paranoid defense is necessary. Your post got caught in an oversensitive spam filter, and i just pulled it out along with several other innocent posts that get caught there every day.

      Next time just ask what happened before accusing management here of siphoning your comments and trying to mould [sic] you into what we want.

  • Sanguifer

    “You read that right, the NC Coalition Against Domestic Violence places it’s central reasoning for domestic violence in NC around patriarchy, gender inequality, and female oppression as the chief causes of domestic violence(…)”

    _I_ read that right, but YOU apparently didn’t: It places its central reasoning for domestic violence in NC around “patriarchy, gender inequality, and __all oppressions.__”, not female oppression. Whatever You might suspect their motivations to actually be, don’t quote something literally and then deliberately twist it directly below.

    “Furthermore, the Coalition lists every single class of people on this planet who are survivors except men.”

    And there You do it again. Actually, they do list men:

    “…regardless of race, age, class and ethnic group, sexual orientation, __gender identity__, mental and physical abilities, religious and spiritual beliefs, and immigration status.”

    Last time I checked, gender identity includes “male”.

    I’m pretty sure I’m correct when I guess Your argument here would be that their statement was so carefully worded to be inclusive of men for image reasons – after all, why not claim to be fighting for men if You can get away with not actually doing it and still look good? And that may or may not be the case with the NCCADV.
    But You didn’t even claim they say one thing and mean another. You said they claim something they do not, and did so right under the literal quote, so everyone can check for themselves.

    In countless articles, the contributors here have been making us sensitive to bullshit from the feminist side. Don’t pull that shit Yourself. It gets noticed. Maybe it’s even just a honest mistake. But believe me, someone who sits on the fence WILL notice and might very well conclude that if Your zeal to decry feminists is so great as to allow this, Your cause is that less likely to be just. And I couldn’t blame him or her for that.

    • MrShadowfax42

      Since patriarchy is pretty much defined as “female oppression”, your first criticism is invalid.

      • Bewildered

        Touché ! Nothing can beat the oppression of the STATE. That is one of the few real oppressions, a majority are all PERCEIVED oppressions.

      • Sanguifer

        Except it isn’t. Patriarchy seems to be re-defined by the minute according to the agenda of the person using the word, which makes it a devil to criticise.

        I know there are people out there that genuinely believe patriarchy to be a systemic overvaluation of maleness and undervaluation of femaleness, and that opression of both sides is a result (a.k.a. “patriarchy hurts men too”, but I wanted to avoid dropping the phrase immediately), making the criticism quite valid indeed.

    • Howard Gordan

      Gender identity is how one perceives him/herself- it is mainly a statement targeting discrimination against transgenders. If they meant no discrimination against men, then they would have just said gender, not gender identity. Also, if this group is so interested in stopping DV perpetrated by men and women, why is this on the front page?: “We know that most domestic violence is committed by men, and is one form of violence against women” when study after study shows DV is perpetrated somewhat evenly by women and men?
      And why does any DV group have to make this a competition as to who beats who more? I don’t recall any group advocating to end work-related injuries beating the drum over how most injuries are incurred by men. I don’t recall veteran support groups continually highlighting most maimed and killed on the battlefield being men when it comes to assistance for veterans. The only reason this specific issue is trumped up as to being gender-specific (which it’s not) is to vilify men at all costs and to continue the radical feminist goal of portraying men as perpetrator and women as victim – to continue their extreme gender ideological position.

      • Sanguifer

        If they just said gender, they’d probably be accused of omiting transgender people. I take it the statement was constructed to be as inclusive as possible.

        As I also stated, I have no doubt there is ample reason to believe the agenda is very different. I was merely stating that if the article is going to quote something, then tell us it says something that is not actually evident in the quote, it’s doing itself more harm than if a quote was omitted altogether. If I see a claim without citation, I might go “Hm, do they really? I should research that.” If I see a claim directly refuted by citation – however superficially – I’m likely to go “This guy is full of shit” instead. I assumed an activist page would rather like to avoid new readers having that kind of reaction. ESPECIALLY if, as it seems to be, the site provides lots of unused quotes that could have instead been used to prove the point.

    • ImNotMraBut…

      Oh Sanguifer – you are so easily caught out in the Smoke and Mirrors and you just fell into the Tank Trap of the “Gender Identity” Thought-terminating cliché. It’s such a war zone and you are a Self Inflicted Casualty!

      How do they identify a 12 year old boy and how does that agree with their claims of non discrimination on grounds of age? Think of it as a Thought Experiment – Schrödinger’s Twelve Year Old’s Penis.

      No cyanide, no quantum decay and no need for a box or meowing kitten even, just a family with a 12 year old boy child standing outside that Refuge and Shelter from abuse – and his penis the big big issue which means No Place at the Inn … go sleep in your car, or under the overpass. That is No Joke!

      Why is a 12 year old’s penis so threatening and doesn’t banning him and his family from accessing Domestic Abuse/Violence refuges/shelters due to his penis not act as Age Discrimination….??????. It could even be multifunctional abuse on grounds of sex, age, socio-economic status and more.

      What a pity that the Supposed massive and expansive deceleration of who is not subject to discrimination failed to mention the 12 year old boy and his Prejudiced Pecker!

      Some people think that the issue is silly because they believe they own their own identity… but in the Smokey and Flashy world of feminism that is what they allow you to think whilst they demands and even takes control – control of your identity and the identity of others.

      “Gender Identity” the Thought-terminating cliché!

      So many don’t grasp what is meant by it, so they take any meaning they can such as “Gender” = “Sex” and assume they known what it means … thereby having any thought in their head terminated and people agree to be subject to mind control – It’s that insidious, and in fact that easy.

      People don’t get dragged kicking and screaming to join cults, they walk in, sit down and accept the situation. You have done just that! You made the words fit the reality you wanted and you failed to analyse and check what was being pushed at you. You swallowed it Hook, Line and Stinker. Cult membership is so easy to obtain.

      Playing with words and cognitive dissonance is as old as the hills. It’s a factor of Bullying that perception gets played with – and that people targeted have to use many words to de-construct the actions and misdirections of the Bully.

      People like snappy sound bites – they are lazy and don’t analyse what they have just agreed to swallow. When you have to listen to lots of words or just swallow a sound bite, people swallow and join the easy mind set which allows them to be social with others of Like Mind! So warm and Fuzzy being in a group of Like(?) Minded(?) people.

      Don’t believe that to be true? Just look at that Cult of Happy Valley with High Priest Paterno. They all bought into it freely with the peachy paternal flavoured cool-aid.

      So many miss a more basic question and that is why is it necessary for anyone to have a Gender Identity?

      Whoops – did that reality pass some by? Did that question taste harsh and make some choke on the Sound Bites?

      When did that insidious idea of “Gender Identity” start to enter supposed mainstream reality – you have to have a gender identity and you can even be judged on something you known nothing about?

      Odd that – when did you agree to have a gender identity and have groups being allowed to infringe your civil liberties and freedoms? When and how did the gender identity meme get fixed in the field of IPV and Domestic Abuse/Violence and when and how did it get shifted to deny the realities of all citizens over the false reality propagated by the few?

      That has my human Rights Head Boiling around the concept of Right To A Fair Trial. How do you asses a gender identify and legislate for it when the Construct of gender Identify has no valid proof.

      It’s easy to verify sex due to biology – sexuality gets pretty clear too when folks start getting down with their genitals of desire and getting off on it – but Gender ….. there is no Biological basis for it, no Medical basis for it, no Psychological basis for it … just a theoretical basis coming from Sociology, Politics and the Infamous Pseudo Academic field of Gender Studies.

      There is no fixed definition of gender let alone a fixed definition of gender identity … so one has to wonder why anyone would give it credence and focus upon it when it has as much value as Penis Envy in academia and the real world.

      Put Two Words together and check validity of meaning – Penis Envy? Flat Earth? Rape Culture? Gender Identity?

      Now it become clear why they cry “We believe…” because it’s about cult and faith and not reality or academic rigour.

      One of the favourite tricks of so many die hard feminists is to play with language – in fact from a Marxists position it’s a central tool to Thought Reform and Propaganda. Create language which acts as a Thought-terminating cliché.

      Notice any patterns here? How even the tone of the words in combination (Rape Culture, Gender Identity, Domestic Violence) they all have what linguists recognise as a Dying Fall – when spoken the vocal tone naturally drops.

      Odd isn’t it that In nature and though-out Psycholinguistics a Dying Fall is recognised as communicating negative information.

      A neutral tone is neutral or affirmative, a rising tone signals the Interrogative and the dying fall the negative.

      The Object with the higher tone is seen as valuable and the lower element as negative – So the word gender gets power and identity is negated.

      Odd that – the concept of gender is in flux, but it’s give the positive edge and the concrete concept of identity that gets negated. … nice Dissonance if you don’t get caught and people refuse the Entrapment.

      Try this one for size – Bad Boy – the Bad has the power the boy got negated. and then try Good Girl … did that have a dying fall? Try Bad Girl and compare the weight of dropping tone the Incline of the Dying fall.

      It’s one hell of a Privilege to have a situation where when language gets linked to the sex of the object intonation alters to the advantage of the female and the detriment of the male. That it is embedded at a cultural, sociological and even biological level is irrelevant – It’s still One Hell of a privilege and it gets used mercilessly. So many just don’t even notice that Wall of linguistic privilege and the way it gets used or rather – Abused.

      So many Feminist derived and used terms are all linked to Misdirection, sexism and about polarising against one group. How Marxist can you get with the Bourgeois and the good old Proles. Unhappy people always identify with the underdog – so feminism has been playing to the choir and using emotional manipulation techniques for decades… gather the unhappy ones, tell them they have reason to be unhappy – make it a big struggle and all about power and abuse … and then you have a latent army waiting to fight. Then apply Trigger words and terms and see them fight … even in an empty room.

      So please do be careful of them Tank Traps – and it’s amazing that they even put up signs and people still drive right into them.

      “We believe that patriarchy…” … “We believe .. critical … regardless of ….Gender Identity”

      Anyone that is identified as masculine in gender is a manifestation of the Patriarchy and as such must NOT be helped…. so a penis rules you out. It’s one hell of a shock to so many women seeking help with Domestic abuse to discover that the penis of their 12 year old child is such a threat that a whole family is denied access because of that Gender Identity politics and antisocial consequences.

      I’m tired of having to advise women in domestically abusive environments that they have to act early because their boy child’s penis will trip them up later. I’m not advising on how to get help – I’m being obliged to advise on how not to be negated further and subjected to others political abusive ways.

      It’s even worse telling them they have no route out of their situation because their child is 12+ and that means Closed Doors and no right to have a Fucked UP Life due to penis prejudice which kinks in at 12.

      Many do believe that Playing Politics with a 12 years old child’s penis is extremely abusive and Disgusting… and gender Identity does not get a look in! The Disgust tramples it and treats it with the contempt due to it. I just wish there was a far bigger set of boots Jumping up and down on that Gender Identity meme and crushing it in to the mud.

      It is Proclaimed – “We believe it is vital to understand and advocate for the elimination of all forms of oppression, including, but not limited to: sexism, racism, and homophobia.”.. but there they miss out the age issue and the 12 year old boys penis that the Big Girls find so very very threatening!

      How is it not sexism to ban males from refuges/shelters? How is it not Homophobia to not provide access to gay male victims of abuse … and their children.

      Smoke and Mirrors – playing with words to Gull those who welcome falling into the Tank Traps whilst riding along on the Thought-terminating clichés.

      Imagine the outcry if it was 12 years old girls being banned from help due to the presence of a cliterous? But abuse a male child and it’s all fine and dandy… provided you have the right words on your web page to Terminate any Thinking that connects to reality!

      How wonderful for the 12 year old boy to find out that the rest of his life he is to be viewed as just a Cliche because the big girls control some words and he’s made monster and negated because he comes from a home where abuse has occurred. Such a Positive message for the future, don’t you think.

      And lets not forget the biggest issue for that 12 year old boy when it;s him and his father escaping abuse and violence and not only does the child get negated, but he see’s just how little value men have in a society run by Big Girls who have issues with penis 12 years and up!

      Sanguifer – you really would benefit from studying how Cults and Mind Control works on many levels, because you are at risk of not being in control of your own reality, let alone reality that surrounds you…. so next time you see the word combination “gender identity” imagine a tank trap and you in it.

      I can assure you it will change not just your world but the whole universe … and it could even save a 12 year old from being used and to abused. There is the whole mine-field of the Sexist and Politicised world of IPV, Domestic abuse and Linguistic – Political Violence all mixed up with that word Feminism.

      Right you can switch off now and go back to drone mode – and to help those seeking immersion back into the mire of Thought Reformed Feminism… just chant “Two Tubes Good, One Tube Bad” over and over!

      The internet is so full of Electric Sheep!

      • Sanguifer

        There is something to be said about making a point in a concise manner to get it across. Was all that necessary? ’cause by my reading, about 75% of it wasn’t. But thanks for being so patronizing, mr. shepherd. Of course, I’m incapable of doing my own thinking. It’s impossible that I simply just don’t agree.

        …even when I do agree, apparently. “People like snappy sound bites – they are lazy and don’t analyse what they have just agreed to swallow.” I did just that. I analysed what I was presented to swallow, and concluded that it reeked of bullshit. And I stand firmly by my notion that the greatest respect I could pay to the contributers to this site is not going “You go, gir… errr, guy!”, but actually point out what I perceive to be mistakes, so that they can be corrected. Even when I know quite well that what You’d probably call a herd of “Electric Sheep” will be ready to downvote 😉

        • erwin


          This place is kind of a circlejerk. They generate some good, though often editorialised, content usually. Often they get a little carried away because, like feminists, they view the world trough a lens of victemhood, unfortunately this is considered inappropriate for men in our cultural context. People go over the top sometimes because their suffering goes unackowledged, and that makes you see things that aren’t there sometimes. Understand that some people here have been trough a lot. That does not always allow people to make an unemotional, rational argument. That is the condition of a human mind. Although it is more appropritate for them/us/men in general to feel discriminated against or even completely disregarded as a human being, I wish they would be a little more sober about many things.

          However, I disagree with you that the NCCADV is an inappropriate target. Gender identitity can be anyone of either sex that considers itself to be male of female. But as indicated, sex is not mentioned. This in combination with the word “patriarchy” and claiming statistics in “favor” (for the title of victem at least) of women perfectly fits the profile. Patriachy put men in a position of power and responsibility, leaving women with the victemhood-perk by objectifying themselves.

          Now, what I find most objectionable is that by, from my personal observation, people in comments here often claim random statistics without source. This website desperately needs a librairy with only scientific, peer-reviewed articles and official statistics from neutral sources. Those provide solid proof of a fact which is ambiguous, and cannot be brought down by framing the debate or ad-hom arguments. Unlike links to blogs and documentaries.

    • Booyah

      with all due respect to you and your valid point. Under recognition of “patriarchy” any man that is abused is classed as having done something to make him worthy of recieving that abuse. Women literally get away with murder under this assumption. So to see it acknowledged on a domestic violence support website where an abused man will already be arrested if he calls the police OR retaliates as a matter of due course in that country (USA) is a very disturbing issue in the rights of men. While your call is correct it avoids all the nuances.

      If it was in Australia he could be jailed for domestic abuse for ignoring her while she beats the crud out of him. Could be worse…..

      • Sanguifer

        I do not doubt that that could be the reality of it. I was pointing out that the article did not do a good job representing that.

        Look, the article could have been about Flat-Earth Society for all I care, if there is a quote in there, and the resulting commentary does not adequately adress the quote or misconstructs what is said in the quote, it’s wrong. Even if everyone knows the earth is round. Otherwise, what is the use of journalism? Let us just all assume everyone is out there to get us, because Feminist Opression. Because Matriarchy. Because False Rape Accuse Culture.

        Dunno about You, but I want to avoid becoming what I’m fighting.

  • Suzanne McCarley

    Keep saying it.

  • Ray


    You said it. I thought it.

    After this article made a valid criticism about the lame feminist claim that “patriarchy…” “…play a central role at the individual, institutional, and cultural levels in creating and maintaining an environment which accepts domestic violence,” it kind of went off the rails with unsubstantiated claims.

    If the other claims are true, present the evidence. This article did not do that. With all due respect to all parties, how did this article get published at AVfM?

    • Michael Sharron

      Ray, I make my claim because I have been through every page on this coalitions website, have you?

      I see in their main menu under programs, then diversity, I see pages for “Immigrant Outreach”, “LGBT Communities”, “Communities of Color”, and “People with disabilities” – all very much needed programs.

      I see not one single page mentioning anything about Men suffering from Domestic Violence. Add the word patriarchy in to the mix and I stand by my assertion and stance that the NC Coalition Against Domestic Violence is playing gender and sexual politics.

      Furthermore, I live in this State and am aware of many of the NCCADV’s other lobby efforts and outreach. Are you?

      Combine all this with gender feminists attempting to end the growing shared parenting movement with position statements from NOW that uses Domestic Violence to discourage politicians from advancing shared parenting and containing very similar words, I stand by my article.

      • dhanu

        Everyone is aware how the DV industry works and perpetuates the female victimhood. That is their bread and butter. No doubt what you wrote is, practically, the reality. However, except the word “patriarchy”, all other words used by the coalition are gender-neutral. So, if one wants to reflect their real and hideous meaning, one should do it by presenting the context. For example, while the coalition refers to “all oppression”, the word “patriarchy” implicitly assumes it’s just “female oppression” (because by definition, males cannot be oppressed under patriarchy). Without stating something like that, concerns like the ones presented above by some readers are bound to emerge. Just my 2 cents. Thanks :)

        • ImNotMraBut…

          Just 2 cents? Stop undervaluing yourself – that’s just feminist kool-aid! P^)

      • Ray

        Their domestic violence info page looks pretty loaded with gender bias. I think some of those examples would have made your case stronger?

        Here are a couple of the most glaring biases, IMO.

        “About 1 in 3 American women have been physically or sexually abused by a husband or boyfriend at some point in their lives. (Commonwealth Fund, Health Concerns Across a Woman’s Lifespan: the Commonwealth Fund 1998 Survey of Women’s Health, 1999)”

        Why don’t they list the rates for women abusing men? It is certainly very significant.

        Credible research overwhelmingly shows that the ratio of domestic violence is at least 50/50 between women & men. According to one study by researchers who work at the CDC, in 70 percent of domestic violence incidents, where the domestic violence is not mutual, it’s women who initiate the domestic violence.

        Also from their site,

        “40% to 60% of men who abuse women also abuse children. (American Psychological Association, Violence and the Family, 1996)”

        And why, oh why, don’t they talk about the single largest group killing kids by neglect and abuse, according to HHS – biological moms?

        According to the U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services and DOJ statistics, more kids are killed by neglect and abuse in a year (1,460 in 2005), than all the female intimate partner homicides in a year (1,181 in 2005).
        And mothers are the single largest group of kid killers. They have a rate twice that of fathers, yet the taxpayer funded (gender feminist run) domestic violence industry would have us believe that women don’t egregiously batter men too. They’re lying!
        As shown by HHS statistics, the age range for those child homicides is about ten times narrower than that for female intimate partner homicide, making that rate of child homicide far more concentrated.
        Yet funding to prevent those child homicides is minimal, compared to the billions that go to the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA).

      • Ray

        I’m sorry, I should have been more constructive. Their domestic violence info page is very gender biased. They have written it more like the opinion section in a newspaper, rather than an honest info page. I tried to post a refutation of a couple of their biases in a previous post, but I think it was too long and I had too many links in it. It must have not made it through this site’s filters.

        From their info page,

        “About 1 in 3 American women have been physically or sexually abused by a husband or boyfriend at some point in their lives. (Commonwealth Fund,”

        As presented that’s a half-truth at best. What about men?
        Scroll down to the d.v. section for stats presenting the other half of the truth – the part where women are battering men.

        Also from their site:

        “40% to 60% of men who abuse women also abuse children. (American Psychological Association, Violence and the Family, 1996)”

        That’s really hypocritical, considering who the single largest piece of the kid killer pie chart is for kids killed by neglect and abuse – mothers.
        Scroll down to the d.v. section for links to HHS stats.

        • Ray

          There’s lots of good stats on this site to refute their feminist propaganda.

          • Bewildered

            Lol! that is why he asked you if you had read all the pages!

            “Ray, I make my claim because I have been through every page on this coalitions website, have you? “

          • Ray

            @ Bewildered:

            Yep, been through it. And my original claim (and others) stands that this article did a poor job of refuting the feminist propaganda that’s there – NOT that there’s not an abundance of feminist propaganda there to be refuted.

        • ImNotMraBut…

          Ray I admire your tenacity – but to the brains washed out and hung out to dry, your clarity is not relevant.

          I’ve looked often at the issue of why women and society in general fail to respond to the issue of child murder and the bias of Women being the murders.

          It’s quite simple really. It comes down to people being selfish and looking after number 1. people hate being controlled overtly so any expression of power is met with hostility. Adults are not children so the risk of being murdered as a child is not relevant … just throw the issue under the bus, it has no value to the selfish.

          Women don’t want to address it because selfishly making themselves look bad lowers the opportunity to express power. Men all too often play along because they get laid.

          The people whom ignore such facts as maternal murder rates and just move on self identify as selfish and antisocial. Debating with them has little value as they are defended in favour of their wish to not be subjected to power, their desire to express power… and above all else the getting laid thing tends to drive them forward.

          I Just ask them why they deny reality in favour of their own genitals and a bit of genital pleasure. It just keeps things in perspective and shows where differing priorities lie… and even who they will lie with for advantage.

      • Sanguifer

        It’s unfortunate that You stand by it.

        Again, we are not saying that what You just said is not correct. Ray here presents a lot of stuff that could have went into Your article, and if it did, I wouldn’t have said a word.

        However, again, if the site is about “2+2=5″ and You point it out, but to do so, You quote statements where there is just no mention of skewed mathematics, yet go on to present it as if there was…

        You say “I make my claim because I have been through every page on this coalitions website, have you?” – no, I haven’t. If I wanted to, I could. Everyone could. But then, what use would Your article be? Your argument is “I’ve read it, so just believe me”? Really? That’s a bad argument. You’re writing an article about NCCADV to potentially uninformed readers. We rely on You to inform us about it. And apparently, You did the work, You did dig through the site, and You did find evidence that supports Your claims.

        Present it!

        If they say 2+2=5, quote them on where they say it.

        Otherwise, it’s just not much different than the feminists saying “But everybody KNOWS 1 in 3 women…”

        I hope I could finally get my point across adequately.

      • erwin

        I think you should expand your article with the info in this comment. Good addition.

  • Dopesauce42

    About 1, 2, and 6 on your list; to the degree that they are realistically possible they cannot be done without an organized revolutionary movement to support those undertaking such actions. We need to build this movement while remembering that a ‘starve the state’ strategy void of any organized threat to the system other than ‘starving’ it will not achieve the goal. We need a revolution for real democracy. We need to phrase things in these terms. If dollars equal votes than we already lost. A minority of the population owns the majority of wealth. Most people want a better world, but since dollars are votes the minority who are filthy rich and who don’t want a better world end up winning. We don’t control the economy, they do. We do however control our decision to begin Thinking About Revolution and taking the very real, though very baby steps, to get there.

    Thinking About Revolution:

  • Andy Bob

    “We believe that patriarchy, gender inequality, and all oppression[s] play a central role at the individual, institutional, and cultural levels in creating and maintaining an environment which accepts domestic violence.”

    This outrageous claim makes it clear that the NCCADV lays the blame for domestic violence at the feet of men – all men – and only men.

    This is an egregious lie and Mr Sharron has issued a sharp – and very eloquent – rebuke to them for continuing to institutionalize this misandric myth. Male victims of female-perpetrated IPV are summarily dismissed.

    Some commenters seem puzzled by the term ‘gender identity’. Allow me to explain: it does not mean men and women. It is PC-speak for gay and transfolk. Using this term makes clear that their sphere of concern for IPV victims is strictly limited to certain kinds of men. The term is meant to exclude straight men without appearing to do so. I suppose the rad-fem bigots felt compelled to throw the men on the committee a bone – and they caught it.

    Sit Boo Boo.

    As an aside, I have no idea what homophobia has to do with attempting to explain the causes of IPV, but the fact that it is highlighted suggests that the NCCADV is more concerned with politicizing the issue instead of making any genuine effort to get to grips with the real causes, and thus, seeking real solutions.

    This is the central point of Mr Sharron’s superb article, and he is entirely correct in condemning it. It seems that some of us need to keep in mind that these hucksters are becoming adept at disguising their misandric bigotry. Thankfully, we have perceptive people, like Michael Sharron, who can see right through it and call them on it.

    Well done, sir. I am standing with you and your article.

    • The Unforgiven

      I suspected as much, the tell tale sign is there belief of patriarchy theory and there use of the term gender identity, which means everything but hetero male.

      I have dealt with this kind of shit from feminist run organizations, they act like there nice to get you in the door, then they twist it around to make it sound like some how the abuser was the real victim, doesn’t matter how young you were or how fucked up of a sicko she was, there only interested in pushing an agenda that excuses her actions.

      Feminist are only interested in brainwashing the vulnerable with there ideology, there not interested in helping anyone but themselves.

      Don’t fall for there PC talk, I have been noticing that feminist have been getting increasingly PC about men and even acting like they’ve been for mens rights all along, its nothing but a ruse, they will talk the talk until we go away, then they will be back to there old tricks.

      • Booyah

        Wholeheartedly agree. When I ran away from home and an abusive mother at 15 I naively trusted the govt dept at the time to deal with the situation fairly when they asked me to come in. As I was underage I felt somewhat compelled to do so. However since I was male and the abuser was female all they wanted to do was send me back home with her. If I’d been a daughter and shed been a father I suspect that at the very, very least they might have wanted my opinion. As it turned out I had no chance to speak except directly in front of my abuser and they literally did not want to know. I learnt my lesson and never ever went near DCW (now FACS) again. I did not return home as they asked but made accepting noises to get out of their office never to return again. That was 20 years ago and I would think that things would have only gotten uglier in that time. If you are not a number that fits in the statistics THEY wish to stack they simply do not want to know. Its that simple and its utterly outrageous.

    • JinnBottle

      Beautifully analyzed, Andy. Thanx for your courage and intelligence applied to this important Comment.

    • Sanguifer

      “Some commenters seem puzzled by the term ‘gender identity’. Allow me to explain: it does not mean men and women. It is PC-speak for gay and transfolk. ”

      If that is the case, then apparently they include neither men NOR women. As they do not explicitly mention women in the quote either. Nice try, but no.


      I am getting increasingly weary of this adaptation of victimhood from the other side. I refuse to assume misandry where I do not explicitly see it. If we condemn the abandoning of In dubio pro reo when it comes to, say, rape accusations, it would be highly hypocritical not to apply it in other circumstances. Innocent until proven guilty.

      • ImNotMraBut…

        You’re getting weary? Boy Oh Boy.

        So, you as the First Party and telling others as the Second Party how a Third Party uses the term “Gender Identify” by reference to a Fourth Party Source?

        … and the dish ran away with the spoon!

        Sorry – you would actually need to get the Third Party, in this case NCCADV, to tell the world what they mean by “gender identity” and why they use it – what is included and what excluded … and then it may be possible to have anything like a solid conception. If they say This source is what we use that is valid – you doing it may be valid to you, but it don’t work for so many others.

        As I pointed out (even if you didn’t like my style) people play games with words for political reasons – and people who have a grasp of how words get used politically by both act of commission and omission see that gaps and point to them. You seem to fill the gaps in, which is your choice, but it does not negate the issue or playing with meaning and reality through the use – misuse – even abuse of words.

  • Robert Sides

    Okay. Fine. Another state-funded misandric outfit is profiting from male pain. So what? Will the MRM DO anything about it?

    What good is it to constantly collect grievances if they are never addressed? The group Anonymous, when it picks a target, ACTS. What do MRAs do?

    We should pick a target (a la the University of Toronto) and FTSU. Being nice and polite just encourages more abuse.

    Paul or someone representing AVFM should write an op-ed piece for a major NC paper and/or to NC colleges and universities.

    If we don’t yet have a massive army, we still can act like a guerrilla band. But that means ACTING. A group of fighters who never fight are a knitting club.

    If one female soldierette is within a thousand miles of a million male combat grunts, we hear about our “brave men and women.” But when HALF of all adult DV (and most of the abuse/neglect of children) is committed by females… we hear that only women bleed and only men make them.

    That is, whenever there’s glory to bask in, feminists insist women get half… even when they contribute janeshit. But when there’s MUTUAL inglory, fembots insist only males are responsible.

    And men let them get away with it.

    Guys remaining silent empowers misandry. That’s why we’re in this mess: a whole lotta men did zip for 30-50 years, letting feminists lies spread. They’re STILL doing that, enabling their own demise.

    HINT: Writing about NC’s bias against men online is NOT fighting back. It’s just reiterating, for the umpteenth time, the obvious: men are under attack.


    After Pearl Harbor was attacked, did America limits its response for the next 50 years to writing about how “unfair” it was?

    Geesh! Did fluoride take the fight out of guys?

    And don’t tell me “media” ignores men’s issues. They don’t. The MRM ignores media. Like I’ve said, after 35-50 years not one men’s group has an effective media taskforce.

    Talk-shows and “pundit TV” are ravenous for controversy. So what men’s group feeds said shows?


    The men’s movement is like a feminist who never leaves her house, never picks up a phone, yet bellyaches that IBM isn’t knocking on her door with hiring papers to sign.

    Sure, it’s fun to create youtube clips. But it’s better to appear on national TV and build cred. Politicians aren’t going to take seriously videos of “menz haz probs.”

    Years ago, local men’s groups endlessly griped about big mean media not paying attention to their “issues.” A female member finally got fed up and showed them…TWICE… how to get attention. She set up meetings with state reps that was covered by radio and TV crews. Hell, my little speech even made it out nationally on NPR. The pols, knowing they were on the hot-seat, invited the men’s groups to visit their offices. And the woman encouraged the guys to do what she’d done.

    Of course they did neither.

    Just like now, they refused to master the use of mass media.

    When I hear guys complain about the lack of media coverage I treat it like DV. That is, men are half the problem. If guys don’t see their kids, half the reason stares back at them from mirrors. Their passivity devolved into learned helpless, allowing feminists to do whatever they want.

    • Booyah

      Rome wasnt built in a day and the MSM will never be our friends while women are responsible for spending 80% of disposable income. I look at it as forward progress is good progress. I respect your right to feel differently. Something is better than nothing and the movement is clearly growing and is starting to have a noticeable effect outside its own sphere. The MSM is going to be the last on board, we just have to deal with that sadly. One thing we can do is cut off the “blood” money to women by not falling in the traps clearly illustrated here or giving them all the purse strings. Thats all I have on that one off the top of my head im sorry. This will start to divert men back to an economic demographic worth considering important and marketable too and increase the worth of our opinions in commercially funded media.

    • ImNotMraBut…

      Robert – why don’t you write the position paper?

      It’s easy to say that someone else should act, when it’s individuals deciding to act themselves which brings the biggest change!

      You also have a very polarised mindset that fails to grasp the subtly of issues and even how people really are – and that fixity tends to get both thinking and people under such levels of tension that they break.

    • Carlos

      I have seen, and experienced, men try, and fail, to get media exposure for issues that would be deemed newsworthy if they happened to a woman and I have also seen men try and succeed only to have the biased reporting do them more harm than good.

      To clarify though, I’m not sure if you are referring to men generally, including male victims, or are limiting your comments to men who would advocate for male victims.

      I may be a bit cynical, but I don’t trust the MSM to not spin the story in such a way that the male victim becomes the perp and the female perp becomes the victim. Because of this I hesitate to encourage men to seek media coverage for the problems they encounter where they are the politically incorrect victims of women.

      MSM bias aside, female victims get put on a pedestal and receive support and sympathy. Male victims get contempt and ridicule. Is it any wonder many don’t wish to pursue media attention and public recognition of their victim status?

  • napocapo69

    About DV paranoia and State Ethic.
    On the 28th of March one of the main news in Italy has been the outrage of feminists for an adverstising campaign running in Naples (South of Italy).
    The reason? An adverstising company was publicizing a cleaning product with this:×312.jpg (have a look)

    The picture, indeed, is a noir play where the person in foreground has a rag while in the background there is a person laying down. The slogan plays “it cleans everything” (in Italian, “elimina tutto”) alluding to the possibility of removing the evidences of a crime.
    It may not suit everyone taste, anyway today this kind of noir jokes are dangerous.
    The problem was that the person in foreground was a man and the body in background, likely, a woman.
    The feminist minister (Fornero) of “Equal Opportunities” (everyone knows what equal opportunities means) exploded “because that was an incentive to foster violence against women and it also violated women dignity”; then she imposed immediate removal of such posters. And along with that the most shining feminist women of the left parties (just for sake of honesty, so please no partisan debate) such as “Sesa Amici”, “Susanna Cenni”, “Stefania Covello”, “Titti Di Salvo”, “Nerina Dirindin”, “Donatella Ferranti”, “Maria Grazia Gatti”, “Rita Ghedini”, “Donata Lenzi” e “Raffaella Mariani”, and also Mara Carfagna (from a right wing party) previous minister of “Equal Opportunities”, joined the chorus.

    What a shame! The living condition of Italian women must be really terrible, as anyone who visited Italy can testify.

    A few hours after the ourtrage, and just few minutes before the aviation could start bombing Naples area, the advertsing company replied stating that they did not understand what was going on and that anyway there was also another poster….this one:–620×420.jpg (have a look)

    Same stuff, only with the roles reverted (actually in this case there is even less space for imagination).

    From violence hysteria to ridicule.

    Anyway I understand them; after the DV awareness day on the 14/2 and the Rape Day on the 8/3 it was already 20 days that none was reminding the Nation how women are objectified/raped/killed/beated by the horrible men.

    Addiction is serious stuff.

    • ImNotMraBut…

      Cosa grande gioa. Una brutta figura e asino d’asino.

      Actually when you go digging and checking it turns out the image of the woman was being used on line to advertise two weeks before the image of the man was released…. so why did it take two weeks for Italian feminist Politicians to notice and issues with advertisers using Domestic Murder and clean up as a USP?

      It seems that Women murdering men and covering it up sells – but men doing the same is sinful and not to be allowed. Oh the power of Mama in Italian Culture.

      Are these politicians by any chance the daughters of Silvio Berlusconi?

  • MGTOW-man

    I wrote them.

    Thank you for the message, the link to their site, the activism, the sacrifices, and all you do for men and boys.

    In the future, the boys will ask of all men living, what did YOU do to try and help stop hatred of males and the advancement of female superiority at the expense of males? Your head, Mr. Sharron, will NOT be hung in shame.

  • MGTOW-man

    Robert, why do I get the feeling nothing I, or we, can say will have impact on you?

    We all share your pain in wondering how and when our movement will take a stronger hold.

    But it takes a lot of money. What the feminists do not have in money, they make up with duped men helping them at their confused whim.

    What do you expect us to do? March!

    Well, I for one, would think that is a great idea, but how many will refrain?

    To make a long story short, do not become so impatient.

    Even in the paraphrased words of that horrible Saul Alinsky, “Change doesn’t come overnight, but is slow to embed” .

    Any attempt to try and accomplish “overnight success” through radical visibility will prove fatal because it can and will be used against us in ways that we have yet to be shocked.

    I would like to suggest we take a leap forward however, to find ways and resources to be more proactive in getting our messages here into the minds of more men and boys. If we do not change the boys for the better, and soon!, the feminists are wasting no time doing it for themselves, to our detriment. We want, or should want that territory.

    Everyone, lets think, how can we get our messages to the boys—to truth-soak them and get them to change from towing the same old clinging-to-losing line?