Into the 21st century, Women's Advocates claim there's a need to place more emphasis upon their recognition. But, we need to look back upon the previous half century of literature. In 1994, there were staunch Feminized articles contained within Compton's Interactive Encyclopedia. A Decade earlier: The same was true for The New York Times Almanac, & nearly every Medical Journal, & Weekly News Magazine. But, it certainly didn't begin then. In 1969, World Book Encyclopedia was pressured by Women's Groups into creating their own full segment. Two years earlier, in 1967, they had successfully infiltrated Encyclopedia Britannica. Yet, a half century later, these same groups campained to "Include women in our literature". Which, of course, only serves to expand their influence. Thus, it's now become acceptable for the "National Woman's History Project" to be thoroughly taught in our schools.
On Wikipedia, many Women's Groups are thoroughly represented.
Additionally, similar trivial projects are mentioned as well. (such as, "International Women's Day", "National Women's History Project", "The Equal Rights Amendment". Etc. Etc. ----Notably: Each is given its own separate page.
But, in addition to all this, Wikipedia also included a list of individual Feminazi's. This enormous list contained 404 individual, separate names. (the number is ....Four Hundred and Four). It's another clear example of "Overkill" on their part. But aside from Women's Advocacy Groups, Feminized Propaganda can be found in the most unlikely of places.
For example: The Little Rascals was described as a group which "notably put boys and girls ..together in a group as equals. ....Something that broke New Ground".
(As a matter of fact: The Loony Toons Collection provides several speeches regarding "The achievements of Women". And, Disney's Donald Duck & Mickey Mouse collections contained speeches pertaining to sexism, and gender equality. W.T.F.?? If someone wants to buy a few classic cartoons, we're instead given a lecture by Women's Groups ! Once again, this should indicate the totalitarian mentality of Feminism. Basically, they force you to ponder their issues, as often as possible.
And, doesn't that count for anything ????? They're placing men into a position of lesser dignity. And, he's being forced to submit to her verbal authority. And, she's always given the final say over all matters. This is the real reason why Women's Groups promote self-righteous themes. It prohibits any opposition.
The below site was linked directly to Wikipedia. Including their "Donation" box, and web Store for purchasing items.
Also, based upon the small degree of information given, the members of this site are obviously obsessive (and One-track minded). You can tell, just by the numerous references to "Women". Which tends to repeat itself again and again. Additionally, there was an interesting line claiming that "Women should be put back into history".
Why on earth would they make such a remark amidst total gyneocentric material? The reason is because, Women generally try to control discussions & debates. SO, they make certain, there's no room for dissonance . In other words, she tries to make things such that, you can't possibly disagree with her.
About the NWHP
(National Women's History Project).
Month News and Events Resource Center Information
NWHP web sotre Donate
National Women's History Project, founded in 1980, is an educational nonprofit
organization. Our mission is to recognize and celebrate the diverse and
historic accomplishments of women by providing information and educational
materials and programs. ***The National Women's History Project is a 501(c)(3)
The National Women's History Project (NWHP)
* Honorees: 2009 National Women’s History Month
2009 Women's History Sponsors
* March is National Women’s History Month
in Women’s History
* Help Us Write Women Back Into History Other News:
announces our Distinguished Speakers Bureau
* Join the NWHP Team as a NWHP
* Women's History Performers & National Presenters\
There's a recurring theme which transcends any specific issue. And, it resonates throughout the Men's Movement.
Essentially, M.R.A.'s develop theories independently of one another.
We do not formulate into groups and discuss which direction we're heading toward. Amazingly, we reach the same conclusions without consenting with eachother.
And, this issue produced the same outcome. This page is devoted toward facing a specific problem: Media bias in Wikipedia.
And, unbeknown to us, there were two other Men's Sites working on the same exact issue. anti-misandry.com & men-going-their-own-way had both tackled the same exact issue. And, we had all discovered things, separately.
It's important to mention: Women's groups have an entirely different approach. They gather into large groups and jointly organize their beliefs. This explains why the same exact issues are always discussed at the same exact time. They release data to the media, and consequentially launch a widescale Woman's issue. Which is then covered by the entire news industry. SO, when a specific topic comes along, it become the mainstay. For example: if Women's Groups decided upon the issue of Domestic Violence, it would quickly reach national headlines. But, if they decided upon another issue instead, the media complies to their wishes.
Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/American Union of Men
KEEP, I don't think its vanity at all, just info. -- Old Right 15:57, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Delete. Even if the organization in question were notable, a
reader of that article still comes out with no idea what it is that the
organization does, if anything. Livajo 16:11, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)
As a side note, it also seems that an article with this name has been deleted in the past. See here. Livajo 16:15, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)
KEEP, I put the article up a few years ago as "info" and a
few of us did some work on it then. I've been busy and didn't get back
to it until a few days ago to do some more work on it. The organization
was copyrighted in 1986 and has been in the Encyclopedia of
Associations since 1991. It now hosts one of the largest discussion
groups of men's issues on the net and has a respected international
reputation for developing strategies, agendas and coalitions in the
men's movement. The respected and newly successsful international
movement "Father's 4 Justice" have utilized some of the products of our brain storming and we are associated with them. User:QIM
KEEP - I am a masculist rights activist and writer from
Melbourne, Australia. I have used Tom Smith's AUM as an important
source of gender rights information and debate for some years. The
attempt to delete information about it is probably the work of radical
feminists and their fellow travelers, many of whom will use any means
possible no matter how immoral and totalitarian to try and stifle
debate about their outmoded beliefs which lamentably are practiced by
many Western governments partly via sexist Womens' Departments funded
to the tune of millions of dollars a year. In Canada, for instance,
there is a govt-funded Women's department campaign for feminists to
'take control' of the internet. Recently the department was named in
the Canadian Parliament for trying to make male-positive reporting
illegal, monitor pro-male journalists and activists, and jail them.
This is typical of tactics used worldwide, since logic and fact alone
are not enough to allow the outdated and exaggerated lies of radical
feminism to prosper. To give in to their demands by pulling Tom Smith's
article would be the digital equivalent of book burning on the grounds
of 'political incorrectness.' The fact that AUM expresses what are
often presently minority points of view no more justifies censorship
than would an article by an author expressing opinions common amongst
his or her minority race or minority sexual preference. To do so would
be discrimination, pure and simple.- Steven Stevenson Bigbadsteve
You're calling me a feminist? Please excuse me while I go provide some colleagues with their daily entertainment, haha. -- Solitude 12:03, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Delete. Google knows about Mr. Smith's organization, but offers no
hint of him or it having any particular notability beyond aggressive
self-promotion on the internet. According to the above, however, I am
probably a tool of a vast international radical feminist conspiracy, so
my vote should probably be ignored. RadicalSubversivE 07:22, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
KEEP This article is currently thin but gives insights into
an aspect of the debate on the role of men and women in society. If
this is deleted where do you draw the line on other pressure and
advocacy groups? JPF 10:03, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Keep, this seems a sufficiently noteworthy topic and I don't believe that Wikipedia should succumb to such censorship. StuartH 12:47, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Comment. The line is drawn on notability. Positions put forward by
advocacy groups should be given in articles about that position, where
people would expect to find them, probably listing the more prominent
groups supporting that position. A prominent advocacy group is likely
to get its own article. Small advocacy groups themselves are not
especially notable. Ideas are not being censored. But non-encyclopedic
articles are dropped according to policy. Edge cases are mostly argued
here on this forum. Generally articles that appear from their manner of
presentation to be progaganda are dropped, whether feminist,
masculinist, pro-Christian, anti-Christian, pro-Bush, anti-Bush and so
forth. In theory, articles on minor organizations are dropped, no
matter what their purpose. If you want to call it censorship, then
Wikipedia does attempt to censor obviously POV articles and non-notable
information. I presume American Union of Men
also "censors" on its website, including only material that is
generally relevant to its purposes. Most people voting here so far do
not feel this article fits Wikipedia's purposes. Jallan 15:32, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Delete. I note that during the voting period, none of the
"keep" voters have improved the article. If the subject is encyclopedic
and notable, surely there are some newspaper articles that would
provide the basis for an acceptable article. The page seems to be no
more than a self-promotion, poorly conceived, non-encyclopedic,
non-salvageable. ---Rednblu 17:32, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I'm sorry that the vote has gone this way, but considering the group
think of the times and the enormous power of feminism, it's a hopeful
sign of Wikipedia's NPOV that my page got the "Keep" votes it did. Many
thanks to those who voted to "Keep". User:QIM
The term men's rights refers to freedoms
and entitlements of men and boys of all ages. These rights may or may
not be institutionalized, ignored or suppressed by law, local custom,
and behavior in a particular society. The term may also refer to an
activist movement advancing these rights. Supporters of men's rights
aim to promote the physical, economic and emotional well-being of all
men and boys, viewing this as part of human rights, civil rights, or equal rights. They are particularly concerned with issues involving family life such as family law, child custody, paternity fraud, and domestic violence.
There is no single unifying manifesto or organization which can claim
to speak for the entire movement and the term is used in various ways.
Masculism provides a counterpart to feminism
and argues against legal constructs, reforms, or entitlements which
deny men equal rights under the law on the basis of gender; there are
conservative "traditionalist", "liberal", and libertarian strands.
In the 2000s men and concerned women began to share their concerns
on the Internet, often bringing forward unheard statistics or
viewpoints. Its supporters are considered part of the Men's Movement, and often call themselves Men's Rights Activists, or MRAs. Father's rights and misuse of Domestic violence
laws are areas central to the men's rights movement. Its concerns
include health, education, employment, civil rights, legal equality and
representation, and Constitutional rights. Many supporters are particularly concerned with the effect of Sexual Harassment, Divorce, Custody, Rape and Violence Against Women Act-type laws,
on men's rights and freedoms. It is argued that these laws cause
violation of Constitutional rights such as the right to a fair trial
and the right to due process.
Affirmative Action programmes, and Title IX
of the Education Amendments of 1972 are also areas of prime concern.
One group, S.P.A.R.C., argues that these policies have a far more
discriminatory effect than is widely reported or acknowledged. 
Men's Rights Advocacy and Masculism
also promote the concept of "defending male identity". Typically MRAs
would subscribe to masculinity as strength, honor and honesty.
Prior to 1995 the men's movement was predominantly a disorganized movement that received little attention or recognition.
The American Coalition for Fathers and Children was founded in 1995 by
activists such as Stuart A. Miller, and Dianna Thompson. ACFC founded
the shared parenting
movement and organized the largest protests in the history of the men's
movement, the largest held in over 225 cities around the world on
father's day, 2001 in the "Bridges for Children" campaign.The
Coalition of Free Men, commonly known as the National Coalition of Free
Men (NCFM), was founded in 1977 and is the oldest active men's rights
organization in existence. NCFM has chapters and members throughout the
United States and in several countries. In 2008 the NCFM started doing
business as the National Coalition for Men since people often struggled
understanding the significance of the word "Free".
Like most social movements,
those concerned with men's rights comprise a wide variety of
individuals and organizations, both united and divided in various ways
on specific issues including the mistreatment of men in the media, the abortion debate, family law and false rape allegations. Some groups are formally organized or incorporated, while others are casual alliances or the work of a few individuals.
Although the vast majority of men's rights leaders and activists are
men, there are many women, including those in significant positions
within the movement. For example, Sue Price in the Australian Men's Rights Agency
has been at the forefront of activism there. Naomi Penner was a women's
rights activist in the 1960s who later helped to create the National Coalition of Free Men
in America in 1981. B.N. Saraswati founded one of the earliest Men's
right group in India. Significant books have highlighted a disparity in
the feminist movement's active support for equality when seeking
redress for women, but their lack of support for equality when men are
Although most men's rights advocates live in western countries, from
2003 onwards men's rights groups began to emerge in countries such as
Japan and India. It includes a heterogenous mix of atheistic to highly
religious individuals as well as individuals from across the left,
right, and center of the political spectrum.
Within the larger context of human rights, men's rights advocates
are concerned with many of the same general issues as proponents of women's rights, only with special attention and consideration to the less recognised role of men and boys. There are however radical Men's rights proponents who see Women's rights as the 'enemy' (and vice versa), rather than as allies in a fight against gender based discrimination of various kinds.
Male-only military conscription :
The risks to life and limb in male-only military conscription is not
compensated and hence is alleged to be gender biased against males.
As Betty Friedan has argued, there have been attempts to put the
draft on equal footing with regard to requiring the registration of
both men and women.
The Equal Right Amendment in the USA was not universally supported by
either men or women, and was eventually defeated after Phyllis Schafly
secured bi-partisan support for a campaign against the change on the
basis that women would not be drafted into the army.
In 1981 in the United States, the case Rostker v. Goldberg
alleged that the Military Selective Service Act violates the Due
Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment by requiring that men only and
not also women register with the SSS. The Supreme Court eventually
upheld the Act, stating that "the argument for registering women was
based on considerations of equity, but Congress was entitled, in the
exercise of its constitutional powers, to focus on the question of
military need, rather than 'equity.'"
A male only draft is considered by many to be unequal. In much
feminist dialogue, a draft that requires only male registrants is
considered to be rooted in benevolent or ambivalent sexism.
Current attitudes toward a draft show a change in women's ability to
participate in the military. The most recent attempt to have the draft
reinstated inside the United States, the Universal National Service Act, states that “young men and women ages 18-26 could be called to service."
While it might be considered by some a positive that women are kept
from the front lines by not being required to register for the draft
nor being allowed in front line combat, it can be argued as to whether
or not that is a privilege.
Members of the fathers' rights movement state that the outcome of
divorce is overly one-sided, divorce is initiated by mothers in more
than two-thirds of cases - especially when children are involved, and
that divorce provides advantages for women, such as automatic custody
of the children and financial benefits in the form of child support
The origins of alimony (a legal term that dates to the mid-17th century) can be traced back to the ecclesiastical courts in England Alimony laws vary by country and may not be applied in every divorce case. In some countries alimony is also available to men.
One legal precedent for male alimony in the United States was made in Orr v Orr,
where the Supreme Court invalidated Alabama's statutes by which
husbands, but not wives, were required to pay alimony upon divorce.
This statute was considered a violation of the Equal Protection Clause
of the 14th Amendment.
In the United States, the percentage of alimony recipients who were
male rose from 2.4% in (1996-2001) to 3.6% in (2002-2006) and is
expected to increase as more marriages feature a female primary earner.
In 2005, wives earned more than their husbands in 25.5% of dual-income
families, and 33% of all families where the woman worked.
Marriage strike is the name given to the phenomenon of males
refusing to marry for fear of unfair legislations [www.nomarriage.com]  and financial ramifications of divorce for the male. Divorce has been described as 'slavery for men'.
The Rutgers report — though based on a small sample — found
ten prevalent reasons for declining preference for marriage among
males. The first three : They can get sex without marriage; they
can enjoy "a wife" through cohabitation; and, they want to avoid
divorce and its financial risks.
In recent years, girls in the United States are performing much
better than boys in the same age group, in most schools and colleges. In the United States, 57% of college students are women, and the number is growing. Also, a significant majority of primary school teachers in the United Kingdom are female. 
Medical schools in the UK currently admit 2 females for each male. The
trend is similar in other industrialized countries. Male rights authors
argue that there is no meaningful action to address this in the USA,
despite recognition and action to address issues in the UK since the
Employment law is another area of concern, with such problems as unequal treatment around parental leave, retirement age, and pension entitlements. They also assert sexual harassment policies are de facto
directed against the male style of inappropriate sexual behavior in the
workplace, while ignoring the female style of inappropriate behavior in
They express anguish towards the fact that a man telling a joke or
simply referring to a co-worker by a nickname is grounds for dismissal
Spain's recent 40% requirement on boardroom members has come under
harsh criticism from the movement, while a company with 100% female
board members would be acceptable under Zapatero's new law.[who?]
"According to much-cited feminist statistics, two percent of all
reports are false.... According to a study conducted by Eugene Kanin of
Purdue University, the correct figure may rise to the 40 percent range.
Kanin examined 109 rape complaints registered in a Midwestern city from
1978 to 1987. Of these, 45 were ultimately classified by the police as
'false.' Also based on police records, Kanin determined that 50 percent
of the rapes reported at two major universities were 'false.'" 
Several examples of both confirmed and possible false rape accusations exist in the media. See 2006 Duke University lacrosse case and Kobe Bryant sexual assault case.
It is important to note that neither of the accuser's in these cases
faced consequences for their accusations after the cases were dropped.
In fact, one accuser plans to write a book and the other settled the
case for an undisclosed amount of money after changing her story
numerous times. In stark contrast lasting damage, including emotional
hardship and the stigma of being accused of rape, was done to the
accused. The media did not focus significant attention on this
disparity in consequences for the false accuser and the accused.
In the South Australian
Parliament, one MP stated "tongue-in-cheek" that men would need signed
consent from women to protect themselves from false rape allegations,
should a proposed law come into effect. She described the proposed law
as making men who are accused of rape guilty until proven innocent, and
stated, "Having to have a consensual sex contract is ridiculous but
having these laws that don't protect men's rights are also ridiculous."
Family law is an area of deep concern among men's rights groups. Members of the fathers' rights movement state that the legal system discriminates against fathers regarding issues related to child custody. These issues vary from state to state and country to country.
Health disparity concerns of men's rights movements include:
The disparity in the spending on men and women in the healthcare system. As another example, in the United Kingdom significantly more money is spent on breast cancer research than prostate cancer research.
40,000 cases of breast cancer were detected in the UK in 2000 and
claimed the lives of 13,000 women in 2002. In 2000, about 27,200 cases
of prostate cancer
were detected and claimed nearly 10,000 lives in 2002 in the UK.
Funding for prostate cancer, however, is only about a fourth of breast
cancer. Awareness for breast cancer is very prevalent in society today,
with October being Breast Cancer Awareness Month in the United States.
There is no proportionate funding for male cancer awareness or
Increasing suicide rate amongst young men, four times higher than amongst young women in the United Kingdom; (73% of all suicide deaths in the United States are white males.)
Male circumcision is the removal of the foreskin of the penis. In the United States and Israel,
circumcision has been traditionally performed at birth. Some men's
rights advocates believe that men have a right to make their own
decisions regarding such procedures. Some also believe that
circumcision, like conscription, is an example of the way in which many cultures accept violence against males. 
Another issue of concern is the anti-male bias in the media. Men's
rights activists argue that men are portrayed unfairly on television,
radio and in newspapers and magazines. They argue that not only does
the media not pay serious attention to men's rights issues but that men
are portrayed in a negative light, particularly in advertising. The lack of concern over men's issues such as higher rates of suicide
by men, decline in academic achievement among boys, and a willingness
of the press to print feminist statistics distorting the size of the
"wage gap" has led to the term "Lace Curtain" to describe feminist control over publishing and media representation of gender issues.
In Australian immigration policy a distinction is regularly made between women and children (often treated erroneously as equivalent to "family groups") and single men.
The details are subject to current debate and recently failed
legislation (August 2006) in the Australian Parliament. But for example
in one recent case, the Minister for Immigration, Senator Amanda
Vanstone, determined as follows concerning Papuan asylum seekers: "The
single men on the boat would be sent to an immigration detention
centre, but families would not be split up and would be housed in
facilities in the community". The discriminatory treatment of single women (routinely assumed to be members of some family) and single men evident in such a practice is rarely examined in the Australian media.
The term Male abortion
was coined by Melanie McCulley, a South Carolina attorney, in her 1998
article, "The Male Abortion: The Putative Father's Right to Terminate
His Interests in and Obligations to the Unborn Child," which was
published in The Journal of Law and Policy.
The theory is that when an unwed female becomes pregnant she has the
option of abortion, adoption, or parenthood; and argues, in the context
of legally recognized gender equality,
that in the earliest stages of pregnancy the father should have the
right to relinquish all future parental rights and financial
responsibility – leaving the informed mother with the same three
In 2006, the National Center for Men brought a case in the US, Dubay v. Wells (dubbed by some Roe v. Wade
for men), that argued that in the event of an unplanned pregnancy, when
an unmarried woman informs a man that she is pregnant by him, he should
have an opportunity to give up all paternity rights and
responsibilities. Supporters argue that this would allow the woman time
to make an informed decision and give men the same reproductive rights
In its dismissal of the case, the U.S. Court of Appeals (Sixth Circuit)
stated that "the Fourteenth Amendment does not deny to [the] State the
power to treat different classes of persons in different ways."
There are also those that include the father's reproductive right to
protect a pregnancy from abortion. They argue that father's should be
given equal power over an abortion decision to protect their offspring.
Critics argue that the concept of a "financial abortion" presents a
problem in and of itself. Some men and women argue the availability of
abortion should not relieve men of equal financial responsibility to a
child they helped conceive. Additionally, opponents say, in a country
such as the U.S. where government assistance is often railed
against--see welfare state--the
question remains: how does a society take care to ensure children do
not descend into poverty? And who should be on the line for the
financial support of these children?
However, "after a woman has a baby, in Michigan and elsewhere, she
has the right to give up that baby for adoption. If she exercises that
right, she cuts off her own financial responsibility to the child,
along with other parental rights and responsibilities. A man, by
contrast, may not relinquish his financial responsibility for an
unwanted child unless the biological mother shares his wish to give up
the child for adoption."
A University of Georgia study found substantial disparity in
criminal sentencing men and women received "after controlling for
extensive criminological, demographic, and socioeconomic variables".
The study found that "blacks and males are ... less likely to get no
prison term when that option is available; less likely to receive
downward departures [from the guidelines]; and more likely to receive
upward adjustments and, conditioned on having a downward departure,
receive smaller reductions than whites and females." 
In some societies there is legislated discrimination against males in provision of social security. In Australia, for example, a woman over 50 years of age may obtain a Widow Allowance
approximately equal to a pension if, after turning 40, she becomes
widowed, divorced, or merely separated from a spouse (who may be a de
facto spouse). She must have "no recent workforce experience", but she
can easily qualify for this well after the loss of her partner by going
through a period of underemployment. There is no similar allowance for
men. In Australia and the UK, some
of these discriminatory arrangements (including also women's earlier
qualification for Age Pension, etc.) are being legally phased out. The
policy of "age 65 for men, age 60 for women" remains in place in most
Western countries, however.
Members of the fathers' rights movement state that feminist
organizations invoke the specter of domestic violence as propaganda
directed against fathers and fathers' rights groups.
Male Rights protagonists point to domestic violence studies based on the Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS), which suggest that men and women act violently toward their partners in about equal percentages. They argue that men comprise a "significant portion" of the victims of domestic violence, and they call for more services to be provided for male victims of domestic violence.
Advocates cite government statistics that show that in 15% to 38% of the cases of intimate partner violence the victim is male.
Furthermore, according to a 2000 CDC/Justice study, "Approximately 23%
of the men who had lived with a man as a couple reported being raped,
physically assaulted, and/or stalked by a male cohabitant, while 7.4%
of the men who had married or lived with a woman as a couple reported
such violence by a wife or female cohabitant." 
Researchers argue that the real numbers for violence against men are
likely to be higher, since male victims may be less likely to report
abuse than female victims due to social stigmatization .
They also assert that the percentage of shelters for battered men
should make up a respective percentage of all shelters. The National
Coalition of Free Men has sued several women's shelters with the goal
of allowing battered men and their children to be admitted and to
receive assistance from shelters (see Violence against men).
Many women's shelters will assist male victims of domestic abuse but do
not house men, instead offering hotel vouchers, counseling, case
management, legal services and other support services.
Opponents accuse men's right enthusiasts of ignoring and/or
'defending' male violence. Michael Flood and Michael Kimmel argue that
studies based on the Conflict Tactics Scales (CTS) are unreliable and that men's rights advocates ignore this when they cite statistics based on CTS studies..
In response to this, it has been pointed out that the CTS is the most
widely agreed and reliable method of investigating domestic violence
because it asks both men and women the same questions, and asks them to
scale responses in an equitable way. Following revision of the CTS
scale - in response to criticism about ignoring the influence of former
(rather than current) partners - further studies based on the CTS 2
scale continue to show that women initiate violence at least as often
as men, and perpetrate serious violence as often as men..
In a study specifically examining the behaviour of former partners,
Dutton & Winstead (2006) found that women initiate revenge
behaviours more frequently than men..
Dr Ridley-Duff's review of Kimmel's and Fiebert's work triggered the
advancement of an alternative theory of male violence rooted in
socialisation of men to accept responsibility for high risk situations.
The Violence Against Women Act in America is being vehemently opposed by rights groups for discriminating against men. Similarly, laws such as 498a in India, outlawing cruelty to women by their husband or his relatives, are being fought by groups such as Save Indian Family Foundation.
Women and men often make different choices: in college major, in hours and years worked, and in what jobs to take.
Critics of the discrimination theory, including men's rights
activists, argue that these "free choice" elements are the source of
virtually all of the gender earnings gap. According to these critics,
women often choose to prioritize social and family life before their
careers, and will therefore avoid jobs that require long or inflexible
U.S. Census data from 2001 reveals childless women who have never
married earn 117 percent of their childless male counterparts, when the
comparison controls for education, hours worked and age. Furthermore,
2004 Census Bureau data shows that "a part-time working woman makes
$1.10 for every dollar made by her male counterpart."
In contrast, economists' research conducted in the 1990s found that,
even after accounting for parenthood status, education, job title, and
other factors, there was still a significant income disparity in men's
favor (Blau and Kahn 1997, Wood et al 1993).
Wages are not the only factor in determining spending power. 1984
U.S. Census Bureau data indicates "women who are heads of households
have a net worth that is 141 percent of the net worth of men who are
heads of households."
McCulley, Melanie G. (1998). The male abortion, sometimes called a
"financial abortion": the putative father's right to terminate his
interests in and obligations to the unborn child. The Journal of Law
and Policy, Vol. VII, No. 1.
^ Traister, Rebecca. (March 13, 2006). "Roe for men?." Salon.com. Retrieved December 17, 2007.
Dutton, L. B., Winstead, B. A (2006) “Predicting unwanted
pursuit: attachment, relationship satisfaction, relationship
alternatives, and break-up distress”, Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 23(4): 565-586.