Los Angeles, CA–
“There’s a mini-controversy brewing in the advertising world over the sometimes-stereotypical portrayal of fathers in TV ads. Most notably, fathers’ rights advocate Glenn Sacks almost succeeded in derailing a bid by Arnold, Boston, to win the Volvo account. Sacks complained that a previous Arnold ad for Fidelity Investments showed a father in a negative light. Arnold has since won the account and Sacks said he has no issues with the agency’s ads for Volvo.
“ We’ve done several protests against ads which portray men and fathers as clowns–see Campaign Against Anti-Father Verizon Commercial, Campaign Against Anti-Male Advertising, Campaign Against Detroit News ‘Get Her a Gift or She”ll Give You a Black Eye” Ad and Portable On Demand Storage Decides to Remove Anti-Male Ad in Face of Protests. The Volvo/Arnold campaign referenced above was the brainchild of advertising guru Richard Smaglick of www.fathersandhusbands.org, and he worked with me on the campaign. Brandweek Magazine is a weekly marketing trade publication, one of the largest in the advertising world. In November, Brandweek editor Todd Wasserman discussed the problem of ‘Dad as Idiot’ advertising in his column The Surviving Dads Of Ads (11/12/07), writing, “It”s hard to argue that guys like Sacks don”t have a point”. He discussed several of the anti-male ads we cover on this blog, as well as some of our campaigns against anti-male advertising. After the article came out, our readers flooded the magazine with letters, 12 of which were printed–to read some of them and learn more, see my blog post Brandweek Prints Dozen Letters Criticizing Anti-Male Advertising. Later the Washington Times interviewed Wasserman and published an article on the subject of father-bashing in TV advertising. The Times wrote: “Todd Wasserman knew he had touched a nerve when he saw the enormous number of responses from readers…The dad-as-buffoon and the anti-father imagery seemingly permeated advertising and marketing campaigns, which continually use stereotypes about men to get cheap laughs, he observed…The letters poured in. ‘I don’t think we ever got so much reaction,’ said Mr. Wasserman…the more people I talked to, the more it seemed a lot of people felt that way.'” Today Brandweek came out with a new article on the Spike network’s True Dads series and the issue of how men and fathers are portrayed on television. They write: “The Spike network, home to Ultimate Fighting Championship and Steven Segal movies, is channeling that testosterone-fueled lineage to cater to that frequently mocked demo: dads. “The idea is proving to be an advertiser magnet, with Red Lobster recently inking a first-time deal for True Dads, an on-air series of spots that show dads spending time with their kids. Call it the slightly softer side of Spike.” We’ll be talking more about Spike’s “True Dads” campaign soon. If readers would like to write a Letter to the Editor of Brandweek and express their views about the way men and fathers are portrayed within the advertising industry, go to feedback@brandweek.com. One quibble–when Richard and I did the Volvo campaign, we weren’t unhappy over one previous Arnold Worldwide ad, as Brandweek indicates, but several ads. Some of them can be seen on our campaign page here. Also, as I’ve explained many times, the problem is usually not this particular ad or that one, but instead a consistent pattern of portraying men negatively. To learn more about the problems with the way men are portrayed in advertising, click here. The Biz: Spike Takes Break From Bond Marathons To Laud Fathers Brandweek Magazine February 25, 2008 The Spike network, home to Ultimate Fighting Championship and Steven Segal movies, is channeling that testosterone-fueled lineage to cater to that frequently mocked demo: dads. The idea is proving to be an advertiser magnet, with Red Lobster recently inking a first-time deal for True Dads, an on-air series of spots that show dads spending time with their kids. Call it the slightly softer side of Spike. A number of sponsors, including Jeep, T-Mobile and Pizza Hut, already have linked with True Dads, which the network now sells as part of its upfront presentations to advertisers. The Darden Restaurants-owned Red Lobster chain’s brand will be featured in the new co-branded spots starting next month. The program is an example of the ways in which cable channels are getting increasingly creative in order to snag ad dollars and give marketers face time outside of traditional ad pods. Broadcast networks are inching further into that territory, but the looser cable environment seems to favor the risk-taking necessary for the campaigns to work. Spike has embedded advertisers into unscripted series, such as Toyota’s inclusion in Pros vs. Joes. Those deals often wind up spilling over to single-marketer commercial breaks, on-air contests and other attention-grabbing gimmicks. Spike has a history of packaging its shows, from its wrestling and movie nights to late night sports and reality. The network created a micro-miniseries for Mountain Dew, 45-second segments, to run in Thursday night’s TNA Impact, a series that’s a little mixed martial arts and a lot of theatricality. On the horizon for ad partners: live commercials. “The market demands it right now,” said Chris Rapp, Spike’s vp-integrated marketing, “and putting short-form content on the air gets viewers more engaged in the brand and in our network.” True Dads works like this: when an advertiser wants to participate, Spike’s internal creative team comes up with a concept for linking the theme of dads and kids with the brand’s message. With input from the marketer, the team puts together a custom-made co-branded spot, usually 30 seconds, that airs throughout Spike’s schedule. Advertisers have bought into the program for weeks or months at a stretch. The Red Lobster spot features a father and his son on a fishing trip that turns out to be not too successful. They have to eat something, so their seafood craving is satisfied at Red Lobster. The family-friendly campaign, emphasizing the “fresh” theme of the restaurant chain’s current mantra, happens to coincide nicely with Lent, a time when fish consumption is up. Spike has done similar work for Dunkin’ Donuts, T-Mobile and Dominos. Those brands have been woven into vignettes called The CSI Guys, a parody of the popular CSI series. The stars of that short-form programming might use a victim’s cell phone to call for pizza, for instance. The marketers always have approval of the spots, but rarely want to tone down the irreverence. “We position ourselves as the voice for guys,” Rapp said, “and advertisers look to us to figure out ways to connect with that audience in the language they speak.” True Dads comes as there’s a mini-controversy brewing in the advertising world over the sometimes-stereotypical portrayal of fathers in TV ads. Most notably, fathers’ rights advocate Glenn Sacks almost succeeded in derailing a bid by Arnold, Boston, to win the Volvo account. Sacks complained that a previous Arnold ad for Fidelity Investments showed a father in a negative light. Arnold has since won the account and Sacks said he has no issues with the agency’s ads for Volvo.
New York–“She wanted to kill them. I let the court know that. But they took only one side…I loved them. I’ve been fighting for them.”
Note that the woman, apparently a violent lunatic who allegedly had sent her ex threatening letters and set fire to his car, was granted an order of protection. Now, despite the fathers’ repeated warnings to social workers, the kids are dead.
But at least they didn’t give dad custody…
See the story below are also click here to learn more.
‘Nassau County killed’ them, boys’ father cries
BY OREN YANIV and JANE H. FURSE
NY DAILY NEWS
February 25th 2008
The grieving father of two boys allegedly killed by their disturbed mother said social workers failed to heed his warnings they were in danger.
“Nassau County killed these kids,” said Innocent Demesyeux, 28, who claimed county authorities ignored his pleas to protect Michael, 5, and Innocent Jr., 18 months, from their “violent” mother, Leatrice Brewer, 27.
Demesyeux, an ambulette driver who has been estranged from Brewer since 2004 and was locked in a custody battle with her, said he warned authorities she had threatened to kill the children as recently as last week.
“She wanted to kill them,” Demesyeux told the Daily News. “I let the court know that. But they took only one side.”
He said Brewer called him on Wednesday or Thursday sounding “crazier than normal,” claiming people on MTV were talking to her and saying “they were making fun of her on TV and that this Spanish woman put voodoo on her.”
A custody hearing was scheduled for today in Mineola Family Court, and fear of losing custody also may have caused Brewer to “snap,” said Desmesyeux.
He said Brewer’s violent behavior – including threatening letters and a 2004 incident in which she burned his car – has been going on for years.
Although she petitioned the court for an order of protection against him, he said she continued to be obsessed with spending time with him – resulting in the birth of Innocent Jr. 18 months ago.
“She basically was playing mind games,” he said, saying that during her call last week, “she told me she wanted me to come over” even though she had an order of protection.
“I loved them,” Desmesyeux said numbly. “I’ve been fighting for them.”
Sacramento, CA–Background: The historic, one-of-a-kind conference “From Ideology to Inclusion: Evidence-Based Policy and Intervention in Domestic Violence” was held in Sacramento, California February 15-16 and was a major success. The conference was sponsored by the California Alliance for Families and Children and featured leading domestic violence authorities from around the world.
Many of these researchers are part of the National Family Violence Legislative Resource Center, which is challenging the domestic violence establishment’s stranglehold on the issue. The NFVLRC promotes gender-natural, research-based DV policies.
I have been and will continue to detail the conference and some of the research that was presented there in this blog–to learn more, click here.
One of the presenters at the conference was Claudia Ann Dias, MSC, JD, who provides education and training in the fields of substance abuse, family violence, cultural awareness, sexual harassment and communications skills to both public and private sectors. She has been featured on 20/20 and Oprah for her work with male and female family violence perpetrators.
For many years the feminist “Duluth’ model has been the dominant paradigm within the domestic violence establishment and in domestic violence treatment. According to John Hamel, LCSW, a court-certified batterer treatment provider and author of the book Gender-Inclusive Treatment of Intimate Partner Abuse, “In the Duluth theoretical framework, domestic violence is caused by a patriarchal society that sanctions violence by men against their female partners. Women are assumed to be either victims or, when they are found to aggress against their male partners, to be doing so in self-defense.”
Claudia Dias (pictured, photo by Kevin Graft) explained that it is mandated, apparently by the state of California, that she have the Duluth Domestic Violence Power & Control Wheel (pictured above) prominently displayed in the office or center where she provides batterers’ treatment classes. Dias is a critic of the Duluth model. She says that she gets around this problem in the following manner: she prominently displays the Duluth Domestic Violence Power & Control Wheel with one minor modification — she has a circle and a line going through it.
Sacramento, CA–Background: I’ve been detailing the historic, one-of-a-kind conference “From Ideology to Inclusion: Evidence-Based Policy and Intervention in Domestic Violence” (held in Sacramento, California February 15-16)–to learn more, click here.
In my recent blog post DV Conference Report #3: 12-Year-Old Boys in Abusive Families Aren’t Allowed to Go to Shelters with Their Mothers, but Instead Go to Foster Care, I discussed domestic violence shelters’ policies of excluding all males ages 12 or older from going to the shelters with their mothers. I wrote:
“One morning during the conference, I had breakfast with two remarkable ladies, Erin Pizzey (pictured) and Patricia Overberg. Pizzey founded the first battered women’s shelter in the world in 1971, and Overberg was the first battered women’s shelter director in California to admit male victims of domestic violence to a shelter. As bad as things are, both of them told me things which were amazing and horrifying. Pizzey told the following story:
“A woman was being abused by her violent husband and sought shelter. She had three children, two young ones and a 12-year-old boy. She wanted to go to a battered women’s shelter and, of course, take her children with her. However, the feminists who run the battered women’s shelters in England have a policy that no boys aged 12 or older are allowed into the shelters.
“The woman was presented with the equivalent of Sophie’s Choice. Either she could return to her violent husband, and risk both herself and her children, or she could submit to the feminist policy. She chose the latter. Rather than allow the boy to stay with his mother and his siblings in the battered women’s shelter, the boy instead had to wait in the police station, while his mother and siblings went off to the shelter. The English equivalent of child protective services was called, and the boy was picked up and placed in foster care!
“Overberg told me the same thing happens in California and in much of the United States.”
Evan Stark is a prominent feminist advocate for domestic violence victims and the author of Coercive Control: How Men Entrap Women in Personal Life (Interpersonal Violence) and numerous other DV books. Stark took issue with Pizzey’s criticisms of battered women’s shelters’ policy of excluding boys ages 12 or older from being with their mothers at the shelters. Stark wrote:
“The issue Pizzey raises, of young men not being able to come to a shelter with their moms, has been a serious problem since the beginning of the shelter movement. The reason for this policy, which you don’t mention, is that many shelters take younger women, including girls in their teens, and the boys in families are often older than some of the females in the facility and there are no provisions to monitor their behavior– violent or sexual.
“At Chiswick, Pizzey didn’t admit boys to the shelter, either, but housed them in a separate building. She could do this because she had a large grant from a private company to buy the houses. But most shelters in England, as here, run on a shoestring budget and, in England, were located in Housing Estates (equivalent to our housing projects) and had no separate space for male children.
“Today, many shelters in England use free-standing apartments rather than houses and have no restrictions on male youth coming with their mothers. You are shocked that some of these boys have to go to foster care. But, as you rightly point out, this is often preferable (and is temporary) to staying in a home where all families members are exposed to the man’s violence.”
Pizzey saw Stark’s comments and was not pleased. She has asked me to post her response:
“I am outraged at the inference that boys have never been able to go into shelters in America or refuges in England because the shelter/refuge can’t monitor the boys’ sexual or violent behaviour. Why does this man think that the boys will be violent or sexual towards the girls/young women in the shelter? This shows an appallingly biased mindset.
“Of course some of the girls and some of the boys will be violent and sexual, but it is the job of the shelter/refuge to work with those children just like they should work with some of the women in the shelter/refuges to help them learn appropriate behaviour.
“It is untrue to say that my refuge did not take boys into the central refuge. I made it quite clear that the boys could, if they wished, live in the boy’s project. Many boys chose to stay with their mothers.
“Chiswick was a therapeutic community and everyone within the community worked to see that we treated each other with respect and love. The problem with the shelters/refuges is that most of them are hostels and their purpose is to fund the feminist movements so they exclude young boys because they are the potential enemy.”
Sacramento, CA–
Background: The historic, one-of-a-kind conference “From Ideology to Inclusion: Evidence-Based Policy and Intervention in Domestic Violence” was held in Sacramento, California February 15-16 and was a major success. The conference was sponsored by the California Alliance for Families and Children and featured leading domestic violence authorities from around the world.
Many of these researchers are part of the National Family Violence Legislative Resource Center, which is challenging the domestic violence establishment’s stranglehold on the issue. The NFVLRC promotes gender-natural, research-based DV policies.
I have been and will continue to detail the conference and some of the research that was presented there in this blog–to learn more, click here.
Dr. Donald Dutton is one of the premier domestic violence authorities in the world. He co-founded the Assaultive Husbands Project in 1979 and has published more than 100 papers and books, including the Domestic Assault of Women, The Batterer: A Psychological Profile, The Abusive Personality, and his latest work, Rethinking Domestic Violence. Dr. Dutton can be reached at dondutton@shaw.ca.
One of the issues Dr. Dutton discussed at the conference is domestic violence between lesbians. This is an important and relevant issue, of course, in part because it provides a look at Intimate Partner Violence without the pervasive assumption that the violence in families is almost always caused by men. It also allows us to examine Intimate Partner Violence outside of the feminist Duluth model, which says that it is men who commit IPV, and they do so as part of their role in the patriarchy.
Dutton cited one study of 1,100 lesbian or bisexual women who are in abusive lesbian relationships. The study, which was conducted in Phoenix, found that the women were more likely to have experienced violence in their previous relationships with women than in their previous relationships with men.
Dutton explained that in general research shows that domestic violence is more common in lesbian relationships than in heterosexual relationships.
New England–Leaving aside the fact that I’m tired of listening to New England Patriots fans hype their team and whine about their Super Bowl loss, I think the RADAR press release below has some good things to say.
I don’t claim to know what happened between Patriots star wide receiver Randy Moss and Rachelle Washington, who filed a domestic violence restraining order against him. However, the fact that she apparently was having financial problems and allegedly “demanded a $500,000 payment” and “threatened to reveal ‘lots of dirt’ about Moss if the money was not paid” makes one suspicious. (Moss is pictured above making a catch for the Patriots against the Buffalo Bills.)
Randy Moss’ “Trial by Rumor” and the Patriot’s Super Bowl Loss
Just as the New England Patriots were looking to cap off a perfect season, Patriots wide receiver Randy Moss was hit with a claim of “serious injury.” The allegation made by Rachelle Washington over an alleged altercation on January 6, 2008.
Washington is an old paramour of Moss’s who was unemployed and behind in her rent payments. Reports suggest that Washington had a soft-tissue injury to her finger, but how it occurred remains a mystery. Hospital X-rays were negative.
A temporary restraining order was quickly entered against Moss. According to Moss’ agent, attorney David K. McGill demanded a $500,000 payment and threatened to reveal “lots of dirt” about Moss if the money was not paid by January 11th. McGill has refused interviews and has not explained the specifics of the allegations.
Jane Doe, Inc., the Massachusetts Coalition Against Domestic Violence, demanded the benching of Randy Moss for the AFC Championship game, pending a January 28th hearing. Jane Doe claimed, without evidence, that this is the “common protocol” used by employers. The January 28th hearing was postponed by agreement of the parties until March.
In a January 17th interview, a distraught Moss said the woman was hurt by accident and called the allegation “false.”
According to the Boston Globe, Moss was “mad at this situation of extortion.” He claimed Washington was seeking “six figures” to keep the alleged battery “hushed.”
For the season, Moss easily led the Patriots with 1,493 yards and an average of 15.2 yards per pass. But the pressure on Moss appeared to have caused a profound effect on his game performance.
For the AFC championship, “Randy Moss was a non-factor for the second straight game and the highest-scoring team in NFL history sputtered all afternoon,” according to the Associated Press report.
Two weeks later, Moss headed to Super Bowl XLII with a “black cloud” hanging over his head:
“I brought it to Coach and said, ‘Look, Coach, I’m being threatened to do something that I have no idea of what I need to be doing.'”
During the Super Bowl, Moss caught only one pass. The stunned Patriots lost 17-14 to the New York Giants.
Had Moss not been distracted by the allegation of partner violence, Super Bowl XLII might well have turned out differently.
Sports fans must call for sensible reforms of domestic violence laws. We cannot permit extortion and trial-by-rumor to destroy the careers of athletes and to sway the outcomes of games.
We urge you to call your local radio sports shows and write letters to your local newspapers emphasizing that:
There is no evidence to date that Randy Moss abused Rachelle Washington.
The combination of pressures on Randy Moss impaired his focus and playability for Super Bowl XLII.
The outcome of Super Bowl XLII may have been thrown by the domestic violence industry.
“What has he done to wear so many scars? Has he changed the course of rivers? Has he polluted the moon and stars?”–Bob Dylan
Houston, TX–Background: I’ve covered the Clara Harris “Murder by Mercedes” case extensively, both in the Houston Chronicle, on the radio, and in this blog. As I’ve previously noted, Clara Harris repeatedly ran over David Harris as David’s daughter sat in the front seat, begging Clara not to kill her father.
In my co-authored column Suppose roles had been reversed in Harris case–Murdered dad deserves sympathy being shown Clara (Houston Chronicle, 1/27/07), I explained:
“Harris, her attorneys and her supporters have been largely successful in concealing the true nature of Clara’s crime. Whereas Clara has successfully portrayed herself as the innocent victim of a philandering husband, in reality David Harris was killed while trying to exit a bad and possibly abusive marriage. Clara’s defenders also ignore the fact that considerable evidence was presented that Clara–who played the crying, betrayed wife–was also having an affair at the end of their marriage.
“While many see the Clara Harris case as one of love and betrayal, it is in fact a garden-variety domestic homicide. Clara Harris is no better than high-profile wife-killer Scott Peterson. Perhaps Clara is even worse — at least Peterson spared us the crocodile tears.”
To learn more about the case, see my columns In Defense of David Harris (LewRockwell.com, 3/4/03) and Convicted Murderess Can Get Custody but Decent Fathers Can’t (Houston Chronicle, 9/19/03), or click here.
I’ve previously noted the way the media has disparaged David Harris despite the fact that he was by all accounts a good father and a decent man. At the time of the civil trial in January 2007, I wrote:
“Of the 354 news stories covering the wrongful death trial that are indexed on Google News, 233 refer to David Harris as Clara Harris” ‘cheating husband.’ Not one mentions the phrase ‘domestic violence.'”
Were the genders reversed, would we see headlines saying “Man Kills Cheating Wife”? I doubt it.
Now that Harris is back in the news (she’s suing her criminal defense attorney–to learn more, see my blog post ‘Murder by Mercedes’ Killer Clara Harris Whining Again), we once again see the bias on domestic violence. As evidenced by the screen shot above, most news outlets’ headlines are again disparaging and dehumanizing David Harris by referring to him simply as “Cheating Spouse.”
Interested readers might contact these news outlets and ask them to change “Cheating Spouse” to read “Husband.”
Sacramento, CA–Background: The historic, one-of-a-kind conference “From Ideology to Inclusion: Evidence-Based Policy and Intervention in Domestic Violence” was held in Sacramento, California February 15-16 and was a major success. The conference was sponsored by the California Alliance for Families and Children and featured leading domestic violence authorities from around the world.
Many of these researchers are part of the National Family Violence Legislative Resource Center, which is challenging the domestic violence establishment’s stranglehold on the issue. The NFVLRC promotes gender-natural, research-based DV policies.
I have been and will continue to detail the conference and some of the research that was presented there in this blog–to learn more, click here.
The current domestic violence system often mistreats the women it purports to protect. Laura P., who spoke at the conference, is one example.
Laura says that a few years ago there was an unfortunate incident between her and her husband which the police blew way out of proportion. According to Laura, her husband was struggling to control their large, strong dog who was in the entryway to their house. Her husband lost his cool with the dog, and began treating it very roughly in order to control it.
Laura kicked her husband in order to get him to stop doing this. He pushed her away and she fell down. Both of them soon calmed down, and were able to get the dog under control. However, Laura realized that she had a cut on her face from when her husband had pushed her, apparently because of her glasses.
She asked a family friend to come over and watch their three kids, while her husband took her to the hospital. At the hospital she made the mistake of explaining what had happened, and the police soon arrived. Even though the incident was of low-level, mutual violence, and Laura’s husband didn’t initiate it, the police arrested him.
As we’ve discussed, many if not most jurisdictions have “no drop” prosecution policies when it comes to domestic violence. The result is that many cases of trivial, mutual, or nonexistent “violence” are prosecuted as if they are crimes. (To learn more, see my co-authored column Simpson Case Led to Harmful Domestic Violence Policies, Riverside Press-Enterprise, 12/5/06).
Laura protested against what was being done to her husband. She says that she is a strong, independent woman who loves her husband very much. While neither of them are proud of their role in the incident, they want to be left alone to pursue their lives.
Laura takes responsibility for her part in the incident, and does not see herself as a victim. After the police arrested her husband, she says that from that point on “nobody believed me — the police, the judge, the victim advocate who is supposed to be there to help me, even our own attorney.” The victim advocate believed that even her husband’s one act of low-level, mutual violence demands a divorce, and that there is “no hope.”
Laura says that her husband has been on probation for the last three years, and they are hoping that in May it will end, so they can have their normal lives back. She says:
“I never felt like a victim until I dealt with the police”
Russia–Beating up on divorced (“deadbeat”) dads makes great politics in the United States, and apparently Russian presidential candidate Dmitry Medvedev (pictured) has figured it out. United Press International says:
“Medvedev has also gone hunting for votes with the forensic skill of a U.S. campaign strategist. He has targeted the women’s vote by promising to increase child benefits so that the mother of a second child will get a state handout of more than $12,000, and alimony payments will be increased sharply.
“While American strategists talk of ‘soccer moms,’ Medvedev is appealing to the ‘divorced moms.’ One Russian child in three is being raised by a divorced mother, but only 12 percent of divorced men pay alimony.”
I take it that alimony in Russia largely means child support, as opposed to the US where the two are differentiated. Given Russia’s problems with alcoholism and domestic violence, I’m not going to uncritically defend Russian divorced dads, but I strongly suspect that many of those who aren’t paying their alimony are poor or unemployed.
During Putin’s eight years in office, the Russian economy has done well, largely due to record high prices for oil, gas, and its other natural resources. But the country still has much poverty and a weak manufacturing base. Moreover, many of the marriages in question fell apart during the disastrous 1990s, when even the official poverty rate was 30%.
As I’ve noted many times, research clearly shows that most American deadbeat dads are poor. I don’t imagine it’s any different in Russia.
I also question that “only 12 percent of divorced men [in Russia] pay alimony.” I don’t know where that statistic comes from, but I strongly suspect that it was arrived at simply by doing surveys of divorced women without asking divorced dads. American research shows that divorced women underestimate the amount of child support/alimony they receive, while divorced fathers overstate it. To get an accurate figure, you need to ask both.
BTW, for those who think that it’s only feminists or the left who bash dads or are responsible for the family court horrors dads face, I would add that Medvedev hardly fits that description.
The story is below.
Walker’s World: Putin’s heir and rival
Feb. 20, 2008
By MARTIN WALKER, UPI
WASHINGTON, Feb. 20 (UPI) — Russia’s presidential election is just two weeks away, and the Kremlin’s own candidate Dmitry Medvedev has been campaigning almost like a liberal.
“Freedom is better than the absence of freedom. This is the quintessence of the whole experience of humanity. I mean freedom in all its manifestations: individual freedom, economic freedom and, finally, the freedom of self-expression,” he told an economics forum in Krasnoyarsk, Siberia.
“Freedom is the soul of everything,” Medvedev went on. “Everything will be dead without freedom. I want everybody to abide by laws, but the laws should not be intended for slaves. Freedom is inseparable from the actual recognition by the people of the power of law. Freedom does not bring about chaos. It creates respect for the system existing in a country. The supremacy of law should become one of our basic values.”
“We should cross out infringement on law from the list of habits our citizens live by and see to it that legal infractions stop enriching some people and depraving others,” Medvedev said and went on to call for more media freedoms: “We must defend the real independence of mass media that provide the agencies of power with feedback signals from society.”
This is striking rhetoric, coming from President Vladimir Putin’s handpicked successor. But how much power will Medvedev really have, now that Putin is to become his prime minister? And Putin has also noted that he will not be hanging Medvedev’s presidential portrait in his own Kremlin office.
Putin’s entire Kremlin team, many of them old comrades from the KGB, looks as if they will be remaining in place. Medvedev comes from another part of Putin’s life, when he was working for the liberal, post-soviet mayor of St. Petersburg, Anatoly Sobchak. Medvedev, a young law student, was Putin’s assistant. Westernized and idealist, he once agonized about where he could rake up 200 rubles to buy a bootleg of Pink Floyd’s album “The Wall.”
Santa Rosa, CA–“Liddell, 61, said ongoing financial issues resulting from her 2006 divorce were prompting her move out of California, where her ex-husband is legally entitled to a substantial portion of her retirement benefits.
‘As long as I stay in the state of California, it continues to accrue,’ she said. ‘It’s surprising.’
Liddell, who earns about $175,000 annually, said she has not yet sought another job but does not plan to retire.
Liddell married Ron Liddell in 1986; they separated in 2004. She filed for divorce from the retired Air Force major in 2005.’
There aren’t many details provided here and maybe what the woman in question is doing is justified, but I do know one thing–if a prominent man were quitting his job and leaving the state in order to avoid sharing his retirement benefits with his wife, the article would not be nearly this sympathetic.
Thanks to readers Steve and Scott for sending it.
Santa Rosa school chief quits due to divorce
Liddell says financial implications prompting her to move out of state
By KERRY BENEFIELD
Santa Rosa Press Democrat, 2/20/08
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT Santa Rosa schools chief Sharon Liddell on Tuesday announced her resignation, saying financial issues related to her divorce two years ago were forcing her to move out of state.
The resignation is effective June 30.
Liddell’s departure was announced to about 70 school district employees after a brief closed-door meeting with the Santa Rosa School Board.
“She has had an amazing impact on our district,” board member Frank Pugh said after the announcement.
Liddell, 61, said ongoing financial issues resulting from her 2006 divorce were prompting her move out of California, where her ex-husband is legally entitled to a substantial portion of her retirement benefits.
“As long as I stay in the state of California, it continues to accrue,” she said. “It’s surprising.”
Liddell, who earns about $175,000 annually, said she has not yet sought another job but does not plan to retire.
Liddell married Ron Liddell in 1986; they separated in 2004. She filed for divorce from the retired Air Force major in 2005.
She notified the school board five months ago that her divorce attorney had recommended that she leave California. Board members said they sought various solutions, but none was feasible.
“This is the worst of all situations, where both parties don’t want it to happen,” board member Bill Carle said. “It’s really frustrating, and it’s a new one for me.”
Read the full article here.