#mra grants

[socialmediamarketingsingapore]

Get funded up to $100,000 per year per market with the MRA Grant for Singapore. Expand Your Business Marketing Promotion, Business Development & Market Setup overseas. Contact us today!

[bluehiveasia]

Are you interested in taking your business to the global level? Bluehive can assist you in every step of the way to obtain the MRA Grant Singapore, which can award up to $100,000 annually per market for your international business endeavors in Singapore. Get in touch with us now to discover more about our services.

[coochiequeens]

This is why I hate it when MRAs whine about the courts “favoring” the mothers

How the 'junk science' of parental alienation infiltrated American family courts and allowed accused child abusers to win custody of their kids.

This story was reported in partnership with the nonprofit newsroom Type Investigations.

In the summer of 2020, when he was 12, the boy told his therapist something he'd never told anyone else.

For years, Robert claimed, his stepdad had sexually abused him.

The therapist alerted the San Diego County child welfare agency, which launched an investigation. The county sheriff opened an inquiry, too. Thomas Winenger, the only father figure Robert had ever known, began assaulting him when he was only 7, Robert told a forensic social worker in October 2020. Winenger would pin him down, cover his mouth, and force him into acts he found "disgusting," he said. Sometimes, he said, Winenger recited Bible verses during the attacks, claiming the devil was in Robert's heart.

Robert, whom Insider is identifying by only his middle name, said that as he struggled to breathe, he fought back by hitting, punching, and kneeing his stepfather. But he said Winenger overpowered him.

By the time Robert came forward, Winenger had been named his legal father and was divorced from Robert's mother, Jill Montes, with whom he also shared two young daughters. Robert confronted Winenger with the allegations that November, and within weeks Winenger denied the claims in family court. "This NEVER HAPPENED," he asserted in a filing.

He offered an alternative explanation for Robert's disturbing claims, one that shifted the blame to Robert's mother.

Montes, Winenger contended, had engaged in a pattern of manipulation known as "parental alienation." Robert's accusations weren't evidence that he'd abused the boy, Winenger claimed. They were evidence that Montes had poisoned the children against him. The delayed timing of Robert's allegations, Winenger argued, only made them more suspicious. Montes was causing the children such grave psychological harm, he claimed in the filing, that the children should be transferred to his custody right away.

That December, Child Welfare Services substantiated Robert's allegations, calling them "credible, clear, and concise." But the family-court judge, Commissioner Patti Ratekin, withheld judgment until the following October, when the psychologist she'd appointed as a custody evaluator submitted his own report.

That report, which has been sealed by the court, appears to have convinced Ratekin that Winenger was correct.

“Ma'am, you didn't show very well in the report. You are toxic. You're poisonous. You're an alienator," Ratekin told Montes at a hearing on October 28, 2021. "I don't believe for a second" that Robert's father molested him. "Not for a second," she repeated. "I think you've put it in his head."

Ratekin acted swiftly, granting Winenger's bid for custody and ordering him to enroll Robert and his sisters in Family Bridges, a program that claims to help "alienated" children reconnect with a parent they've rejected. She barred Montes, a stay-at-home mom and home schooler, from all contact with her children for at least 90 days, a standard prerequisite for admission to the program.

"I just wanted to crumble," Montes said.

Rejected as a psychiatric disorder

Parental alienation is a fairly recent idea, conceived in the 1980s by a psychiatrist, Dr. Richard Gardner, who argued that divorcing mothers, desperate to win custody suits, were brainwashing children against their fathers. In "severe" cases, Gardner wrote, children with "parental alienation syndrome" must be removed from their mothers, transferred to the care of their fathers, and reeducated through what he called "threat therapy."

Alienation has never been accepted as a psychiatric disorder by the medical establishment. Yet today, mental-health practitioners across the United States assess and treat it, particularly those who specialize in custody cases. Many of them collaborate closely, attending the same conferences, following the same protocols, and citing the same papers. Some run reunification programs like Family Bridges; others offer family therapy or produce custody evaluations for family courts.

Influenced by these experts, many judges have given the unproven concept the force of law.

Though most custody cases settle out of court, in a small fraction parents don't come to terms. In some of these contested cases, one parent accuses the other of alienating the children. The most intense disputes arise in cases where one parent alleges spousal or child abuse and the other responds with a claim of alienation.

But alienation claims are highly gendered. Men level the accusation against women nearly six times as often as women level it against men, one study suggests. That landmark study, published in 2020, found that in cases when mothers alleged abuse and fathers responded by claiming alienation, the mothers stood a startlingly high chance of losing custody.

Occasionally, parents accused of alienation are cut off from their children altogether. Since 2000, judges have sent at least 600 children to reunification programs that recommend the temporary exile of the trusted parent, a collaborative investigation by Insider and Type Investigations revealed. While the programs suggest a "no-contact period" of 90 days, this term is routinely extended and may last years, according to an analysis of tens of thousands of pages of court papers and program records.

The treatment typically starts with a four-day workshop for children and the parent they've rejected; aftercare can add months or years. Children may be seized for the workshop by force, with no opportunity for goodbyes.

Former participants at Family Bridges and a similar program, Turning Points for Families, said they were taught that their memories were unreliable, the parent they preferred was harmful, and the parent they'd rejected was loving and safe. In some cases, participants who resisted these lessons said they were verbally threatened; at Family Bridges, a few were threatened with institutionalization. Some participants said they ended up depressed and suicidal.

Program officials say they are helping children. Lynn Steinberg, a therapist who runs a program called One Family at a Time, said in an interview that virtually all the kids she's enrolled have falsely accused a parent of abuse and that she does not accept children into her program whose abuse claims have been substantiated. Without treatment, she said, alienated children would risk being plagued by guilt, and the relationship they wrongly spurned might never heal.

In Steinberg's view, the only child abusers in the families she sees are the "alienators," who have "annihilated" a devoted parent from their children's lives.

Recently, alienation theory has faced rising criticism. Efforts to legitimize the diagnosis have been rebuffed by the American Psychiatric Association, the World Health Organization, and the American Professional Society on the Abuse of Children. And the reunification programs burst into public view last fall, when a video documented two terrified children in Santa Cruz, California, being seized for One Family at a Time. In the clip, which went viral on TikTok, a 15-year-old girl named Maya pleads and shrieks as she's picked up by the arms and legs and forced into a black SUV.

Since then, bills that would restrict reunification programs have been introduced in Sacramento and four other state capitols.

An idea takes off

When a law professor named Joan Meier founded a nonprofit to help victims of domestic violence two decades ago, she didn't expect to focus on custody disputes. But day after day, she heard from mothers with similar, troubling stories. They'd finally escaped their abusive marriages, but their exes had fought them for custody — and won. The mothers had been accused of something Meier knew little about: parental alienation.

Meier, who taught at George Washington University, ordered a stack of books by the child psychiatrist who coined the term.

Richard Gardner began writing about children of divorce in the 1970s, when a dramatic transformation was underway in family court. Under the "tender years presumption," judges had long favored women in divorce cases, typically assigning children to their mother's sole custody. But as more women entered the workforce, more men participated in child-rearing, and more couples divorced, a nascent "fathers' rights" movement emerged, demanding gender neutrality in custody proceedings. The idea appealed to many feminists, too. By the 1980s, most states had recognized joint custody in their statutes.

This left judges in a quandary when couples failed to settle. Now, aside from a vague mandate to advance the "best interest" of children, courts lacked a clear paradigm for resolving disputes. Overwhelmed, judges turned to mental-health professionals, asking them to assess each parent's fitness and recommend an optimal arrangement. Gardner, then an associate clinical professor of child psychiatry at Columbia University, was an early custody evaluator, and in 1982 he published a how-to manual.

By 1985, Gardner was arguing that some mothers, seeking to regain their advantage in court, were inducing a mental illness in their children, a condition he dubbed parental alienation syndrome. Children afflicted with the syndrome, he said, could be identified by the "campaign of denigration" they waged against their fathers, which was accompanied by "weak, frivolous, or absurd" rationalizations and a disquieting "lack of ambivalence."

Some "fanatic" mothers even manipulated children into claiming their fathers had sexually abused them, Gardner contended. When other maneuvers against a father fail, he wrote, "the sex-abuse accusation emerges as a final attempt to remove him entirely from the children's lives." Child sexual-abuse claims made during custody disputes, he claimed, "have a high likelihood of being false." To prove children are suggestible, he often invoked the wave of 1980s cases in which preschool teachers were charged with sexual abuse but later exonerated.

Gardner's theory sidestepped what Joan Meier saw as a glaring truth: Many children accused their fathers of abuse because their fathers were actually abusive. In fact, by the early 2000s a large-scale study had found that contrary to Gardner's writings, neither children nor mothers were likely to fabricate claims during custody disputes.

The remedies Gardner proposed for parental alienation syndrome were harsh. "Insight, tenderness, sympathy, empathy have no place in the treatment of PAS," he said in a 1998 address. "Here you need a therapist who is hard-nosed, who is comfortable with authoritarian, dictatorial procedures."

In a 2001 documentary, Gardner told a journalist how a mother might respond to a child reporting sexual abuse: "I don't believe you. I'm going to beat you for saying it. Don't you ever talk that way again about your father."

Juvenile detention could cure children who refused to visit their fathers, Gardner said. But the main remedy he advanced in severe cases was "the removal of the children from the mother's home and placement in the home of the father, the allegedly-hated parent." This would break what he called a "sick psychological bond."

After introducing his theory, Gardner began using it in expert testimony and promoting it to other evaluators and fathers'-rights activists. By the early 2000s, family-court judges were regularly citing parental alienation.

To address this, Meier said, she undertook a series of academic articles examining the scholarship on parental alienation. She found that the theory was based on circular reasoning and anchored almost entirely in anecdotal data.

"I still believed in that day that if you did careful, thoughtful analytic scholarship, people would read it and be persuaded by it," she said.

The scarlet 'A'

Jill Montes had always wanted a big family. In 2008, she already had a 5-year-old daughter, Paige, with a man she'd divorced, and she was finding regular work as an actor in Los Angeles. She decided to adopt an infant son, Robert.

The next year, she met Thomas Winenger, who had master's degrees in engineering and business, on eHarmony. "He wanted to talk a lot about faith and God, and that wooed me," she said. She also welcomed his interest in Robert, whom she was insecure about raising alone.

In 2011, the couple married and settled near San Diego, and Montes quit acting. Soon, she later said in a court filing, Winenger was shoving, insulting, and threatening her, often in front of the kids. He promised to change, and she hoped he could. In 2012, their first child, Claire, was born, and Eden followed in 2015. Insider is identifying Montes' children by only their middle names.

Later that year, Montes accused Winenger of dragging Paige across a room. Montes sought a restraining order, which was ultimately denied, and kicked him out. He rented a room in a house nearby, where he regularly hosted the three younger kids. Sometimes, Robert went there by himself.

Montes filed for divorce in February 2018. Under an informal agreement, the kids continued spending time at Winenger's place. But at a hearing that fall, a 10-year-old Robert testified that during an argument over his math homework, Winenger had repeatedly grabbed, shoved, and spanked him.

Montes filed a petition for a domestic-violence restraining order, which Winenger fought, saying he hadn't mistreated Robert. In the end, Ratekin, the judge presiding over the divorce, signed a "stay away" order prohibiting Winenger from contact with Robert. But it didn't address the allegation of violence. Weeks later, Winenger asked Ratekin to name him Robert's legal father, arguing that he'd helped raise the boy from toddlerhood. Ratekin ruled in his favor and ordered the custody evaluation.

In court papers he filed on July 19, 2019, the day after the evaluator was appointed, Winenger accused Montes of parental alienation.

Often, according to Meier, the dynamic of a custody case shifts radically once alienation is raised. "It's like the table turns 180 degrees and now the only bad parent in the room is the alleged alienator," she said. An abuse allegation "fades out of view," she said, and any attempts by the mother to limit the father's access are seen as suspicious. It's almost as if, like Hester Prynne in "The Scarlet Letter," she's been branded with a flaming red "A," Meier said.

Indeed, Montes soon lost ground in court.

In January 2020, Ratekin ordered Robert into the care of a therapist, Mitra Sarkhosh, who has since provided aftercare for at least one reunification program. Sarkhosh saw Robert and his father together about 20 times, charging $200 an hour. But by summer, she had halted the sessions, saying Robert's anger was "not improving."

In a report filed in court, Sarkhosh appeared to blame Montes. Living with her, Robert was "saturated with negativity about his father," she wrote. There may be a need for "new interventions." (Citing patient-confidentiality laws, Sarkhosh declined an interview request.)

Robert was relieved to be finished with Sarkhosh, Montes said. He started seeing a new therapist, and, during the first session, he told the therapist he'd been sexually abused.

On November 18, 2020, at the direction of the San Diego County Sheriff's Department, Robert called Winenger to try to elicit a confession. When that failed, the department paused its investigation, but the child welfare inquiry proceeded. On December 1, the California Health and Welfare Agency issued a report substantiating Robert's claims.

"The Agency is worried that if given the opportunity, Tom Winenger will sexually abuse [Robert] again," the report says.

Neither Winenger nor his divorce attorney, Tamatha Clemens, responded to requests for interviews or to a list of detailed questions. In a motion for custody he filed on December 8, 2020, Winenger argued that Robert's allegations had been "orchestrated" by Montes and that her alienation "will not stop until she is restrained by the court."

The welfare agency sent Ratekin its report on January 4, 2021, according to a cover sheet reviewed by Insider. But Ratekin was still awaiting the custody evaluation, which she'd assigned to a psychologist, Miguel Alvarez. In 2009, Alvarez coauthored a handbook for parents in custody disputes. While the manual spells out in detail how to prove an alienation claim, it offers no specific guidance on how to prove a claim of abuse.

According to the report, part of which Insider reviewed at a San Diego County courthouse, a personality test Alvarez administered suggested that Montes suffered from "extreme hyper-vigilance" and "persecutory fears." People with these traits, Alvarez wrote, "are often quick to anger and overreact to perceived or imagined threats."

Winenger's scores on the same test were "normal," Alvarez wrote, and his performance on psychosexual and polygraph tests was "inconsistent" with Robert's allegations of sexual abuse.

The 136-page evaluation cost Robert's parents more than $90,000, according to bills reviewed by Insider. Alvarez didn't respond to requests for comment.

Ratekin reviewed the evaluation just before the October 28, 2021 hearing. Alvarez's findings were "exactly" what she'd expected, she said. In her view, the situation called for immediate action.

She put Claire, 8, and Eden, 6, in their father's custody that day, and she sent Robert, 13, to stay with his football coach. That was for Winenger's protection, she said. Until Robert was "detoxified," she said, he'd be prone to false claims of abuse.

Ratekin suggested Family Bridges as a solution. She'd had "really good success" with the program in another case, she said, and she thought it would ease Robert's transition. Without it, the boy wouldn't "get better," she said, and his sisters stood to benefit, too.

Winenger agreed. Under an order Ratekin signed on January 3, 2022, the children would attend a Family Bridges workshop with their father from January 11 to 14 and then return to his home. Montes was barred from contact with the children for at least 90 more days. Ratekin also prohibited the children from communicating with their older sister, their maternal grandmother, and anyone else who might "interfere" with their healing.

Contact would resume at Ratekin's discretion, depending upon how well everyone was cooperating.

Insider and Type reviewed 35 cases from the past two decades in which judges removed children from their preferred parent and sent them to a reunification program. In most of these cases, the children had resisted court-ordered visits with their fathers, and judges had held mothers responsible. Many of the judges framed the no-contact period as salutary: Children would be freed from the overbearing influence of their mothers, and their mothers would be motivated to change.

A case from New Castle County, Delaware is typical.

In 2016, Judge Janell Ostroski transferred two brothers to their father's custody and ordered them into treatment at Turning Points for Families, a program in upstate New York run by a social worker, Linda Gottlieb. Both boys had told Ostroski that their father, Michael D., yelled at them frequently, court records show, though neither had alleged physical abuse. The 9-year-old, O., told Ostroski he felt unsafe at his dad's house. Ashton, 14, was refusing to go there. Insider is not using the family's full last name in order to protect O.'s identity.

Michael had pleaded guilty several years earlier to public intoxication and indecent exposure for an incident in a public park with Ashton. A court-ordered psychological evaluation found that he had alcohol dependence and narcissistic personality disorder "with antisocial features." In 2013, the state's child welfare agency found that he'd emotionally abused Ashton, then 10 years old. The report, including any denials Michael presented, is sealed. This history was all cited in court three years later, in a custody dispute between Michael and his ex-wife, Kelly D.

During that dispute, Michael accused Kelly of alienation, and a custody evaluator backed him up. The evaluator, a psychologist, determined that Michael had become "a more positively functional person" and that Kelly, a preschool teacher, was the problematic parent. Kelly "distorts the reality of events" and "conveys to others an inaccurate and menacing perception of Mr. [D.]," the psychologist wrote in a May 2016 report. (Michael did not respond to detailed requests for comment. Neither did the psychologist.)

In written rulings that barred Kelly from contact with both children, Ostroski said the boys were "well cared for" in Kelly's home but blamed her for Ashton's refusal to see Michael. "Mother has done nothing in the past year to promote the Father/son relationship," Ostroski wrote, adding, "the court is hopeful that, with the appropriate interventions, Mother can recognize her role in helping the children have a healthy relationship with their Father."

Insider and Type sent questions about parental alienation and its remedies to Ostroski, Ratekin, and 19 other judges who've ordered the programs. Only Ratekin responded, and she declined to speak about the Winenger case because it is still pending. Nor would she answer general questions. "I am definitely not an expert in this area," she wrote, "nor do I feel qualified to answer questions about the issue or programs." 

'A moratorium on the past'

In her January 2022 ruling, Ratekin authorized Winenger to hire a transport company to drive Robert and his sisters to the Family Bridges workshop, which would take place at a hotel a few hours outside San Diego. There, the children and Winenger met Randy Rand, who founded Family Bridges in the early 2000s, and a woman the children knew only as "Chris."

In 2009, Rand deactivated his psychology license after the California Board of Psychology found he'd committed professional violations including "dishonesty," "repeated negligent acts," and "gross negligence." Since then, he's accompanied at workshops by at least one other clinician. Rand isn't the only alienation expert to face sanctions from a state licensing board. Two other psychologists who've led Family Bridges workshops, Jane Shatz of California and Joann Murphey of Texas, have been sanctioned — Shatz after an allegation of negligence and Murphey after a finding that she failed to respond promptly to a subpoena. Both Alvarez, the custody evaluator in Robert's case, and Steinberg, who runs the program where a judge sent the girl in the viral TikTok, have been cited by California regulators for improper recordkeeping. Steinberg said her citation was the result of a series of meritless complaints by an "alienating parent."

Family Bridges workshops are held at hotels around the country and tend to cost parents more than $25,000, receipts show. In 2016, for example, one family from Seattle paid more than $27,000 to Family Bridges and another $3,500 to spend three nights at a Sheraton in Southern California. Since the children had opposed the intervention, a company was hired to transport them for an additional $8,300.

Once they arrive at Family Bridges, children quickly learn the rules, program documents show, including a policy called "a moratorium on the past." As Murphey, the Texas psychologist, testified in 2018, "There's no talking about 'You did this back when.'" Instead, she explained, "this is a new family, this is a new paradigm, we are starting off in a healthy way."

Ally Toyos was a 16-year-old in Kansas when she was taken from her mother five years ago. In an interview, she said she and her then 14-year-old sister tried defying the Family Bridges moratorium, telling Rand and his colleagues that their dad had abused them. (Toyos' mother said a court order prevented her from speaking with the press; Toyos' father didn't reply to interview requests.) Threats ensued, Toyos said. The girls were told that if they didn't comply, they could be separated, sent to wilderness camps, committed to psychiatric facilities, and cut off from their mom for the rest of their childhoods, according to Toyos.

Much of the Family Bridges workshop involves watching and discussing videos, program documents show. One of them, "Welcome Back, Pluto," tells the fictional story of a petulant teen who scorns her father. "If you're alienated, like Emily, you might get mad when others don't take your complaints seriously," a female narrator says. In time, however, Emily "learned to see things more clearly." She realized her complaints were "exaggerated," the narrator explains, and "sounded just like her mother's."

According to the video, which was scripted by Richard Warshak, a psychologist who helped develop Family Bridges, some children who steadfastly reject a parent "suffer for the rest of their lives."

Other materials warn children against trusting their memories. Toyos, whose workshop took place at the C'mon Inn in Bozeman, Montana, said she was shown a 2013 TED Talk by Elizabeth Loftus, a psychologist who developed the idea that memory is malleable and who has served as a defense witness in high-profile trials, including Harvey Weinstein's. Memories are often contaminated by outside influences, Loftus warns in the talk, which leads to false accusations that can ruin lives.

Insider and Type spoke with or reviewed statements by 17 youths ordered into Family Bridges, Turning Points, or other reunification programs. Their accounts of the workshops were broadly similar. Hannah Rodriguez, then a 16-year-old living in Tampa, Florida, said her workshop, in 2016, was held at Linda Gottlieb's home in New York's Hudson Valley. Gottlieb, the author of a book on parental alienation syndrome, had founded Turning Points about two years earlier. Rodriguez said Gottlieb's office was right off the living room, where her husband spent his time in a recliner. Every day, Rodriguez could see him and hear his TV shows, she said.

Rodriguez, Toyos, and several other former participants said the workshops plunged them into depression.

In spring 2022, one 13-year-old girl got so distressed during a session with Gottlieb at a hotel that she banged on a wall and screamed for help, court papers show. Someone called the police, who brought her to a hospital for a psychiatric evaluation. "I just want my mom," the girl said, according to hospital records, but under the court order she couldn't call her. She was held at the hospital for three days.

In a written statement that Montes said he later dictated to her, Robert said he became suicidal. "The only thing that stopped me from throwing myself off the balcony was the 24/7 surveillance," the statement reads. "I never thought so many people would be that horrible, controlling, and manipulative towards little kids."

At the end of the workshop, Robert went home with Winenger and had "horrible, weird depressive anxiety episodes," according to the statement. In early February, he was admitted to the psychiatric ward of a children's hospital, according to court records.

Repeated emails to Rand were met with an auto-response saying he was "on sabbatical." The psychologist managing Family Bridges in his absence, Yvonne Parnell, declined interview requests, as did Gottlieb. Gottlieb forwarded Insider's queries to a lawyer, Brian Ludmer, but Ludmer said he couldn't speak for her. Neither Parnell nor Gottlieb replied to detailed written questions.

Lynn Steinberg said her program One Family at a Time, based in Los Angeles, has treated some 50 families over the past eight years. A family therapist, she's the author of "You're Not Crazy: Overcoming Parent/Child Alienation." She was the only program director who agreed to talk.

She said she begins each workshop by listening to the children and taking down every accusation they make; she then works to achieve "an agreement between parent and child." After those conversations, she said, the children are dramatically transformed. They apologize and cry, she said; they kiss and embrace the parent they'd rejected, even sitting in the parent's lap. They're eager to make up for lost time, she said, and can't wait to see long-lost kin.

Daniel Barrozo, of Chino, California, said Steinberg's workshop was a "tremendous help" to him and his daughter in 2021. Steinberg successfully challenged his daughter's misperceptions about him, he said. When Steinberg asked her what he'd done wrong and what she hated about him, his daughter simply looked down and cried, he said. "The whole time, she had nothing to say, because Mom was the one speaking for her," he said. Now, he said, his relationship with his daughter is stronger than ever.

Steinberg said her own mother alienated her from her father, a realization she reached only after his death. She called her ex-husband an alienator, too, saying her adult daughters reject her to this day. She regrets that they didn't get help from a program like hers.

Left untreated, alienated children "fail at relationships" and risk developing eating disorders, drug addiction, depression, gender dysphoria, and other ills, Steinberg said, citing her clinical experience.

But an increasing number of scholars are criticizing the programs. Jean Mercer, an emeritus professor of psychology at Stockton University, is the author of recent papers on parental alienation. One examined six reunification programs, including Family Bridges and Turning Points, and found that the research evidence supporting the effectiveness of the programs "has few strengths and many weaknesses." For another paper, Mercer reviewed the scholarship on the programs and statements from five youths who'd attended them. She found that the programs "may contain elements of psychological abuse."

Another study, by Michael Saini of the University of Toronto, examined 58 empirical papers on alienation and its treatments and found the body of research "methodologically weak." While some divorcing parents exhibited "alienating behaviors" and some children rejected a parent, the nexus between those phenomena hadn't been proved, Saini found. Moreover, he found the studies hadn't shown that interventions worked.

Following the workshop, the programs commonly assign children to a specially trained aftercare therapist. Meanwhile, the exiled parent undergoes reeducation.

Insider obtained audio of a call last year between Gottlieb and the mother of a 14-year-old girl and a 12-year-old boy in Turning Points. "I think what you did is criminal," says Gottlieb, who, like Steinberg, has publicly stated that her own mother alienated her from her father. There was "no reason" the children shouldn't have a relationship with their father, Gottlieb says in the recording, and "you have failed miserably to require it."

"That's alienation," she says. "That is what you are guilty of, and it's child abuse." For the children's sake, the woman must "make amends," Gottlieb says. Otherwise, "I will recommend extending the no-contact period until they're 18."

Insider and Type interviewed 12 mothers whose children were sent to Turning Points, many of whom said Gottlieb rebuked them over the phone and in emails. Most said they were required to write letters to the kids praising their fathers and submit them to Gottlieb for approval.

In early November 2016, Gottlieb told Kelly D. — Ashton and O.'s mother — that her letters contained superfluous details and secret messages and needed to be redone. In the end, Kelly submitted several drafts for each of her sons, all of which Gottlieb rejected.

"She sets a bar," Kelly said. "You try to reach the bar. She sets the bar higher."

Judge Ostroski had ordered Kelly to find a therapist "acceptable to Ms. Gottlieb" who would help her support Michael's relationship with the children. From a list provided by the Delaware Family Court, Kelly chose a psychologist, William Northey. But Gottlieb warned in an email, "I cannot approve him before I speak with him about his specialized knowledge of alienation."

The conversation went poorly. Gottlieb considered Northey unacceptable, she later testified, and Northey found fault with Gottlieb, too. He sent her a letter, reviewed by Insider, criticizing her for calling Kelly a "sociopath" and for using the phrase "parental alienation syndrome," which, he wrote, "is not a recognized diagnostic term."

Meanwhile, Gottlieb was making demands of Ashton and O. Shortly after they returned from New York, according to an email to both parents obtained by Insider, Gottlieb determined that they needed to transfer schools immediately, as their current schools had "actively undermined" their relationship with their dad.

She sought custody of O., too. But in September 2020, Ostroski found that Kelly still hadn't been properly treated for her alienating tendencies and denied her petition.

For now, even visits were too risky, Ostroski concluded.

"Ashton's behavior of running away from Father and refusing to now see Father supports Gottlieb's prediction that, if the children are returned to Mother before she addresses her alienating behavior, they will revert to their prior behaviors when they were refusing to see Father and all of the work that has been done over the past 4 years will be wasted," Ostroski wrote in the ruling.

'Junk science'

In June 2010, more than a thousand mental-health practitioners, lawyers, and judges gathered at the Sheraton in downtown Denver for the annual conference of the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts, which unites players in the child-custody field from around the world. The theme that year was "Traversing the Trail of Alienation," and over four days the condition was discussed in more than 30 sessions. Participants could learn how to spot an alienating parent, when it was best to defy a child's wishes, and what might help an alienated child heal.

The event signified a remarkable embrace of an idea whose author had been consumed by scandal and tragedy just a short time earlier.

In the late 1990s, critics of Gardner's dealt a powerful blow to his credibility by unearthing writings in which he'd defended pedophilia.

"Sexual activities between an adult and a child are an ancient tradition," he wrote in a 1992 book.

As a product of Western culture, he viewed pedophilia as reprehensible, he wrote, but it may not be "psychologically detrimental" in other cultures. The following year, in a journal article, Gardner argued that from an evolutionary standpoint, children benefited from being "drawn into sexual encounters," since these experiences steered them toward early reproduction. "The Draconian punishments meted out to pedophilics go far beyond what I consider to be the gravity of the crime," he wrote in 1991 in "Sex Abuse Hysteria: Salem Witch Trials Revisited."

In May 2003, at age 72, Gardner dosed himself with painkillers and stabbed himself to death. His son told reporters he was driven to suicide by chronic pain that had recently worsened.

In the assessments of his life that followed, Gardner's work was lambasted by prominent psychiatrists, including Dr. Paul Fink, a past president of the American Psychiatric Association. "This is junk science," Fink told Newsday in July 2003. "He invented a concept and talked about it as if it were proven science. It's not."

The theory could have died with Gardner. Instead, it gained ground.

In 2001, Richard Warshak, a clinical professor of psychology at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, published "Divorce Poison: Protecting the Parent/Child Bond From a Vindictive Ex." The book, released by HarperCollins, brought parental alienation theory to a wider audience — and made it more palatable. Unlike Gardner, Warshak spoke of alienation in gender-neutral terms, saying many fathers were programmers, too, and he likened the no-contact period between children and their preferred parent to study abroad.

Warshak started leading workshops for Family Bridges around 2005 and eventually became its unofficial spokesman, a role in which he excelled. In 2010, he appeared in "Welcome Back, Pluto" and published an influential article about Family Bridges in the AFCC journal.

In that study, Warshak reported on outcomes for the 23 children he'd worked with in the program so far. During the four-day workshop, 22 of them recovered a "positive relationship" with their rejected parent, he observed, including recalcitrant teens.

After the workshop, however, four children regressed, Warshak wrote, following what he called "premature" contact with their preferred parent. The program worked best, he said, when this contact was blocked "for an extended period of time." Warshak didn't respond to interview requests.

Meanwhile, another Gardner successor, Dr. William Bernet, a professor of psychiatry at Vanderbilt University, was working to push alienation theory forward. He submitted a proposal to the American Psychiatric Association to include "parental alienation disorder" in the next version of its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, or DSM, and authored a scholarly article making the case for inclusion. He submitted a similar application to the World Health Organization, which was revising its International Classification of Diseases.

Bernet declined a request for an interview. But in a 2010 book, he wrote that since alienation scholarship had advanced in the wake of Gardner's death, "there is no need now to dwell on the details of what Richard Gardner did or said or wrote."

At the AFCC's conference in Denver in June 2010, Warshak was given a platform to discuss his Family Bridges paper, as was Bernet, to describe his DSM bid. Other presenters staked out a more moderate stance, arguing that while alienation was a pervasive problem, there was insufficient research to support construing it as a mental illness or ordering extreme interventions.

A few alienation opponents presented, including Joan Meier. But she said she flew home to Washington in tears.

"Everywhere I turned, alienation was the coin of the realm," she said.

She set out to design a study that would document how women who alleged abuse were treated in family courts nationwide — especially when alienation was raised. The Justice Department supported the project with a grant of $500,000.

In 2013, the new edition of the DSM was released with no mention of parental alienation. And in 2020, the World Health Organization ruled that parental alienation was "not a health care term" and lacked "evidence-based" treatments.

Bernet and his colleagues simply regrouped. In court, they started calling alienation a "dynamic" or a "phenomenon" rather than an illness, which appeared to satisfy some judges. And Bernet incorporated the nonprofit Parental Alienation Study Group, a coalition of parents, lawyers, and therapists who collaborated on cases and research. Rand, Gottlieb, and Steinberg joined, along with hundreds of other mental-health practitioners involved in custody work. Many, like Steinberg and Gottlieb, claimed to have experienced alienation themselves.

Meier assembled her own research team, comprising a statistician, three social scientists, and two assistants, to conduct her large-scale study. In January 2020, just weeks before the WHO decision, the results were published in the Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law.

The stark findings shocked even her.

Most trial-court rulings in custody cases are unpublished, but Meier's team identified 15,000 rulings involving abuse or alienation that were published electronically from 2005 to 2014. After winnowing that dataset to cases in which the only parties were two warring parents — not, for example, a child welfare agency — the team was left with 4,300 rulings. There were nearly 2,200 cases in which a mother had accused her ex of spousal or child abuse, and in 10% of these, the father had fought back with an alienation claim.

In general, judges were hesitant to credit mothers' abuse claims. When alienation wasn't raised, judges credited these claims 41% of the time, Meier found, and 26% of the time, mothers lost primary custody.

For the 222 mothers whose spouses accused them of alienation, the picture was even grimmer. Women who alleged abuse and whose husbands accused them of alienation lost custody half the time — twice as often as women who weren't accused of alienation.

To Meier, one of the study's most staggering findings was how rarely mothers branded with the scarlet "A" were believed. In cases where mothers alleged child physical abuse and fathers cross-claimed alienation, judges credited mothers a mere 18% of the time, she found. And in the 51 cases where mothers alleged child sexual abuse and fathers claimed alienation, all but one mother was disbelieved.

For a father accused of child molestation, Meier concluded, "alienation is a complete trump card."

'The whole world is watching'

In January 2022, three months after losing her children, Montes chanced upon a sickening discovery.

In a cloud storage account she'd once shared with Winenger, she said, she found thousands of his photos and videos, including explicit images of their three shared children. She loaded them onto a thumb drive for the San Diego County Sheriff's Department, whose investigation into Winenger had never closed.

Within days, Winenger was arrested. He was soon charged with 19 felonies, including possession of child pornography and 14 counts of committing forcible lewd acts against a child, Robert.

He pleaded not guilty and was released on bail, his access to the children suspended. Because of the no-contact order he'd previously obtained against Montes, the children landed in a county shelter. Winenger's defense attorney, Patrick Clancy, declined to comment on Winenger's behalf, saying he doesn't try his cases in the press.

Suddenly, the custody dispute was transferred to juvenile dependency court, which meant Ratekin was no longer presiding. The new judge ordered the kids into their mother's care while the case was pending. On February 18, they came home.

At first, Montes said, the two youngest children were so scared of being taken again that they couldn't sleep in their rooms. She set up a big mattress on her bedroom floor.

Meanwhile, Joan Meier was using her research to make inroads with policymakers.

She'd worked with colleagues to draft a federal law that would incentivize states to protect children from abusers during custody disputes. They named the bill Kayden's Law, after a girl in Pennsylvania whose father murdered her during a court-ordered visit. During negotiations over reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act, the child's congressional representative, Brian Fitzpatrick, got Kayden's Law in.

The legislation, signed into law on March 15, 2022, sets aside up to $5 million a year for grants to states if, among other measures, they mandate training for custody judges on abuse and trauma and prohibit them from ordering treatments that cut children off from a parent to whom they are attached. If enough states comply, the law could spell the end of the reunification programs.

Last summer, California was the first state to consider such a bill. It was introduced by state Sen. Susan Rubio of Los Angeles County, a survivor of domestic violence herself, after she heard from mothers who'd been accused of alienation and children who'd been sent to reunification programs.

Rubio's bill set off a battle that has since spread to statehouses around the country. Steinberg, the alienation therapist from Los Angeles, was a vocal opponent, arguing that men would be rendered powerless against false accusations. She was joined by fathers' rights groups and by the Parental Alienation Study Group, which was simultaneously pushing hard to discredit Meier's study. (Two prominent members of the group authored a studyconcluding that her findings could not be replicated, which Meier then rebutted.) After Rubio's bill passed the assembly unanimously last August, she was forced to withdraw it in the face of intense opposition from state judges over the training mandate.

Then, last October, the momentum shifted. That's when Maya, the 15-year-old from Santa Cruz, told a custody judge that her mother had abused her and her brother. The judge, Rebecca Connolly, didn't believe her and ordered the children into Steinberg's program, cutting off contact with their father. The graphic video of the children being seized on October 20 was quickly viewed millions of times.

In response to an interview request, an officer of the Santa Cruz County Superior Court said Connolly could not speak about pending cases. Maya's mother has denied the abuse claims in court. Her lawyer, Heidi Simonson, declined an interview, citing court orders pertaining to "privacy and confidentiality."

On the heels of the viral video, a coalition of activists — many of them mothers accused of alienation — organized protests around the country. The first took place October 28 outside the courthouse where Maya had just testified. Standing on concrete risers and facing the building, a pack of Maya's friends demanded her return. "The whole world is watching!" they shouted. Protests also erupted in Michigan, Kansas, and Utah.

Rubio introduced a new bill, with modified judicial training requirements, in February. A similar bill passed both chambers of the Colorado legislature in April. One in Montana died in committee; its sponsor, Sen. Theresa Manzella, said she was up against a "deliberate distribution of misinformation" by opponents, including attorneys who use parental alienation as a legal tactic.

Montes said she's "cautiously optimistic" about Winenger's criminal trial, set to begin in June, and she hopes for an imminent victory in her custody case. Five years of legal bills have left her in debt and on food stamps, she said, but she considers herself lucky all the same. Almost every day, she talks to mothers who remain severed from their children.

Mothers like Kelly D., whose children were sent to Linda Gottlieb's reunification program in New York.

Kelly last saw her younger son, O., early on a Monday morning. It was a warm, sunny day, and she dropped him off at his best friend's house so they could shoot baskets before school. She hugged him, told him she loved him, and said she'd pick him up in the afternoon. Then she drove to court for a hearing.

That was six years, six months, and 24 days ago.

The reporting for this story is part of a forthcoming documentary from Insider, Retro Report, and Type Investigations.

If you are experiencing domestic abuse, you can call the National Domestic Violence hotline at 1-800-799-7233.

Read the original article on Insider

[gothhabiba]

can i ask for you to elaborate on your issue(s) with those 'male positivity' posts? is it with the whole sentiment, or just with the "you're allowed to be angry" part? i agree w "you're allowed to be angry" being an oblivious at best statement. but i don't see any issue with the first two statements themselves (the "OP says..." and "commenter says...")

yeah so I already talked about some of this in the tags to those posts but sure, let's get into it.

OP says "if you’re a boy with a mental illness, a boy with a disability, a boy with a history of abuse, a boy who has an eating disorder, a boy with trauma, I need you to know that you are not a burden, that you don’t need to 'harden up', that you shouldn’t just have to 'get over it,' and that you are very brave" commenter says "once I transitioned I saw the change in people being like ‘Oh you poor thing I hope you’re coping alright’ to ‘Just get over it and man up’. Men, you’re allowed to suffer."

the implication of the original post is that men with these issues are told to 'toughen up' or 'get over it,' and conversely that women are not. the commenter then makes this subtext explicit by outright saying that people reacted more sympathetically to his trauma when they read him as a woman than when they read him as a man (at which point they switched to "just get over it"). the OP responds favourably to this addition, proving that the subtext "women don't experience this" was in fact subtext that they intended to be there.

I hope I don't have to explain how utterly absurd it is to claim that women have it easier in this regard, or that their emotions are granted more leeway or sympathy in any meaningfully systematic way. that is just MRA logic.

of course people's ideas about suffering, endurance, trauma, & emotion are gendered! people really do say things about how boys and men should just toughen up and not cry, &c. &c. MRAs, like a lot of other reactionary groups (like TERFs and SWERFs, or antisemites / white supremacists / conspiracy theorists who understand that something's not right with the economy but end up blaming 'minorities' instead of capitalists), take an idea with some truth in it somewhere, but twist it around into a conclusion that the idea in question does not entail on its own (here, "women are allowed to express emotion and garner sympathy by doing so") in a way that leads to resentment, disdain, & hatred for a marginalised group.

so, if it's true that (negative) emotion is thought of as a feminine weakness, why doesn't that translate to women being "allowed" to experience and express emotion, while men are not? for one thing, race has a lot to do with this—the myth of the Black "superwoman," for example, praises Black women for being (read: expects them to be) "tough," "strong," "brave," endless wellsprings of emotional / physical / financial support for others while requiring and receiving no support themselves. the assertion that women receive sympathy for their suffering thus reveals a serious ignorance of Black feminist thought on the part of the person making it.

for another thing, displays of emotion (mostly "negative" emotion, such as sadness) being thought of as primarily feminine means that women have to take especial care to avoid them in many circumstances, not that they're able to freely indulge in them! women's supposed heightened emotionality means that they're less likely to be thought of as capable of serious work, less likely to be promoted or hired, more likely to be financially and professionally penalised for any time they do display any negative emotion (or, rather, the other way around—the myth of women's heightened emotionality is used as an excuse to suppress women's earning potential & make them financially dependent on, and thus exploitable by, men).

on an interpersonal level, you're highly likely as a woman (and especially as a woman of colour) to have fairly mild displays of emotion be interpreted as hysteria, extreme anger, irrationality, volatility. you're highly likely to have your allegations of abuse disbelieved.

on an institutional level, you're highly likely to receive disdain and contempt if you engage in disordered eating habits or try to seek help for them, to have a request for help denied or neglected (disordered eating is just, sort of, what women do). you're also more likely to have a request for help turn into involuntary institutionalisation or psychiatric abuse (a lot of work has been done on the relationship between psychiatry and gender).

also on an institutional level, you are less likely to be believed about the pain you are in as a disabled, chronically ill, or otherwise sick woman (again, especially a woman of colour). you are less likely to receive medical care. you are less likely to have anyone give a shit about the pain you're in, since women are so emotional and melodramatic that you are probably exaggerating, and anyway, being in pain is just sort of women's natural state. you are certainly very unlikely to get any kind of medical care if you're a middle-class cisgender white (read: desirable) woman of 'childbearing age' & the extreme pain that you're in would require risk to your fertility to treat.

there's so much more I could go into here. the basic idea is that properly analysing the relationship between emotion, communication, trauma, abuse, race, class, gender, and the uses of rhetoric that references any of the above (e.g. "boys don't cry") is an enormous undertaking. any claim that implies that women (which women?) wholesale receive more sympathy than men (which men?) do for abuse or other pain that they experience, or that they are more free to express that pain, is both inconsistent with reality on a base level, and incredibly irresponsible. the fact (if it's even true) that "girls" are punished less for crying than "boys" does not a whole picture make.

and, like, think about it. we're living in a patriarchy wherein women are expected to care for and sympathise with men, to forgive men for varied wrongdoings in the family & in romantic relationships, to coddle them in order to avoid or appease their anger, to perform (depending on their class position) various kinds of domestic labour and social / planning work for men without recompense, acknowledgement, or thanks (because knowing how to do and plan housework is just, like, women's natural state of being)—a system where the family and the home faciliate and cover for mass amounts of traumatisation and abuse, including sexual abuse, of girls and women—a system wherein trans women are highly likely to be traumatised and yet disciplined out of expressions of anger or upset under threat of social exile—a system wherein cisgender women cannot be allowed to become too wary of or angry at men (read: too unwilling to continue marrying them and performing a significant role in the social reproduction of their class). how on earth could such a system also enable (rather than allowing for occasional escape valves for, but mostly seeking to supress or transform) women's free expression of upset, sadness, trauma, anger...?

this is the same kind of logic that leads people to believe and spread nonsense such as "people believe women who come forward about being abused and not men," which is just demonstrably inconsistent with everything that we can observe about reality.

[lectorel]

Fiction fragment of the moment: DCxDP, liminal edition

An extract from the pamphlet The Anti-Ecto and You

[ . . .

What is a liminal?

liminal (noun)

A person, animal, or object which has transitory or contradictory elements inherent to its nature.

Someone or something which exists on a threshold between two mutually incompatible states.

That which has been touched by death, but still lives.

Why does it matter?

Because a few years ago, the federal government of the United States issued a series of regulations, colloquially known as the Anti-Ecto Acts, which classify most liminals as legally non-persons, enjoying none of the protections granted to metas, aliens, or clones under the Metahuman Rights Act

That can’t possibly be legal

It is. In fact, the Metahuman Rights Act itself is the basis of many of the Anti-Ecto Acts most troubling laws. Within the MRA, sections 3a through 3j, legal definitions of several common metahuman abilities are set. These include duplication of self and others, external manifestations of power, mental projections, and possession.

The AEA are built upon these legal definitions. Liminals, by the terms of the MRA, are postmortem power expressions, a meta ability effect which did not cease with the death of the metahuman.

How? Why?

The most common way to identify and external power expression is Ichor Radiography, which measures what percentage of a structure is only locally, instead of universally, real.

. . . ]

[ftmtftm]

Hey!

I enjoy following trans guys on here because they tend to talk about masculinity in complex and interesting ways without tending to fall into MRA type pitfalls that are a lot harder to avoid in a space like Reddit. My question with that as a cis(ish) guy is always like...do you...want solidarity from cis guys on stuff like this?

Given that tumblr is kinda unique among social media spaces in that the norm is posters who are either women or queer, I don't see a lot of conversations between cis and trans guys for me to go off of as a norm. Y'all seem way more busy dealing with (what must be very tiring) discourse with women about whether being dudes automatically rounds trans men up to being oppressors.

Like, the defense I usually see mounted against that very simplistic mentality is--as you've said a fair bit and I would absolutely agree with--that patriarchal society doesn't give a fuck how you identify and short of someone who's managed to "pass" going completely stealth, there isn't even the option of being granted a very contingent male privilege. 

Building off of that response I tend to go further and say "Yeah, and I mean, even if you were a cis dude, the hurdle isn't suddenly over if you're assumed to be biologically male, broad swaths of male privilege are contingent on performing hegemonic masculinity. If you don't, won't, or can't play that role, you're just trading being viewed as a failed woman for being viewed as a failed man. And again, that's only if you're someone who can "pass" and who is willing to go stealth in the first place."

But I don't know if me saying that would be recieved as...helping? Considering me saying "yeah, dudes aren't suddenly welcomed with open arms if they have a "he/him" pin and some stubble, there are absolutely core social advantages compared to women, but there are also punishments for failing to adhere to patriarchal standards that some men will be constantly incurring" causes a knee-jerk "THATS MRA BULLSHIT" response in the average tumblr user, which you seem to have to deal with plenty even when you're just quoting bell hooks or something.

So yeah, don't know if chiming in on the experience of grappling with hegemonic masculinity is like... helpful solidarity or muddying the waters? But I figured I'd offer at least.

Oh this is a very fascinating ask because in many ways I'm inclined to say yes absolutely, it can be incredibly helpful. There are some ideas presented here I'm a little hesitant about and I think it can be situational because of that. Ultimately though it is probably more dependent on your own personal threshold for dealing with bullshit than anything else to be frank.

Like I was just saying in response to a previous ask - some of the most productive conversations I've had personally about gender were actually with an older, disabled, cis man who was my coworker. The social perception of his gender was really dependent on his age as a man in his 60's, his class as a blue collar maintenance man, and the disabilities he had due to life circumstances and his lifetime of physical labor. This was also, socially, at odds with the fact that he was a poet and an artist and a deeply emotionally aware/intelligent person - which goes against a lot of Patriarchal expectations for men. The Patriarchy doesn't really give a shit about the emotionally in touch, disabled, working class, maintenance poet because he is not an asset to maintaining system.

So I do think there is absolutely space for solidarity between trans men and cis men in that regard! There is always more that joins us than divides us. Always.

I do think, however, that it might be smart to gain more experience - of any kind - outside of online discourse before entering into specifically online conversations (though I'm also guilty of jumping into this one too sometimes I'm not gonna lie).

When I say "experience of any kind" I really mean it though. Be that life experience, academic experience, interpersonal experiences, etc. I would just start with talking to people about their lives and engaging with their lived experiences and also letting them engage with yours!

I think here in this specific conversation on Male Privilege cis men hold a dual positionality of both people impacted by the same systems and as allies. To specfically be a stronger ally is to spend a lot of time learning before speaking yourself - while also never forgetting that the learning is never "over" - in my opinion.

Like, that's expressly why I took a break from writing about gender theory for a few years to explicitly spend time just reading racial theory so I could be a better ally as a White person and understand the ways in which White Supremacy both uplifts and harms me and the social positions I hold due to my race. I'm currently spending a lot of time reading intersex theory, but not directly involving myself too much, for the same reason. It's a similar concept here but with gender and Patriarchy.

I do also want to make sure it's very clearly stated that this conversation isn't really a binary "men arguing with women and vice versa" issue - despite it often being framed that way. Many of the people who have been the harshest towards me personally have actually been other trans men and nonbinary people and less so women. At least in this particular conversation, as I've also dealt with my fair share of TERFs/Radfems but that's unrelated to the convo on trans men and male privilege.

All in all it sounds like you're on a relatively solid path though. The solidarity and allyship is nearly always appreciated - especially when offered in good faith and with the intent of growth. I'd still really, genuinely recommend taking kind of a circular path outside of online discourse into academia (institutionally or on your own!!) or ground work or something like that before coming back around into engaging with the internet directly if you're able to though! It does wonders for the brain and helps give you more space to examine potential biases in safer environments than Tumblr or Reddit imo.

[moon-pepper]

I think a big part of why MRA/misandry/transandrophobia rhetoric has entrenched itself so thoroughly in spaces that were pointedly feminist a decade ago is because a lot of people just don't know how to square "men are an oppressor class" with the fact that they, y'know, are men and/or are attracted to men.

It's similar to how white people tend to be incapable of conceptualizing "yes, white people the world over benefit directly from white supremacy and colonial imperialism even if they aren't especially privileged on the individual level" -- so instead we get extremely frenetic about it and come up with asinine arguments about things like white poverty and lack of public transit funding to try and absolve ourselves of guilt. Don't you see? We suffer too! Our lives aren't perfect, so how can you say we're privileged?

The idea that we live in a world where men are, as a class, privileged and elevated over women means that there's an inherent level of guilt that comes with being a man (especially, I would imagine, when you're deliberately transitioning to manhood). That makes men feel bad, especially when they realize that guilt doesn't grant any power to tear down the system causing it -- so it becomes a lot easier to simply look for explanations that don't come with guilty feelings. Cue a million different logical leaps about how men are oppressed too because of gay men, or men of color, or disabled men, or men who want to be emotionally vulnerable but they can't because emotions are for girls, or whatever.

You can see that guilt best reflected in the classic archetype of the Sensitive Male Feminist: a guy who espouses feminism in a way that revolves around ragging on himself, a guy who claims to understand misogyny but then continually engages in it anyway, a guy who eagerly supports women in words but rarely in practice. A guy who understands patriarchy only as a guilt that he needs to remove from his person rather than a system that he needs to actively push back against. A guy who makes women's issues about him.

What matters isn't combating a form of systemic prejudice. It's finding an angle to claim that it hurts you too so you can claim victimhood and not have to care anymore.

[frigid666]

read about the news here and here. the main details of this developing story:

maryland judge andrew wilkinson had presided over a divorce and custody case between the suspect, 59-year-old pedro argote, and his unnamed estranged wife on thursday, october 19, 2023. wilkinson was later found in critical condition on his driveway at around 8 pm of the same day, having been shot multiple times. he was transported to the hospital but did not survive his injuries. he leaves behind his wife and son.

after argote failed to show up to the legal hearing on october 19, wilkinson awarded "absolute divorce" from argote as well as sole custody of the ex-couple's four children (all under the age of 16) to the unnamed woman.

wilkinson also awarded the woman sole legal possession of the family home. argote was forbidden from entering the home and was set to pay $1120 a month for child support.

court records show that the woman had filed a domestic abuse petition against argote, citing mental and financial abuse, threats, physical abuse against one of the couple's daughters, stalking, and intimidation in 2022. this petition was dropped for "unknown" reasons.

police records show that the sheriff's office has been called to the family residence two times within the last couple of years due to argote's verbal assaults (likely including threats) against the woman and their children. argote was never arrested and had no criminal record in their county of residence, despite these encounters with the police.

argote had been the one to initially file for divorce against his now ex-wife in 2022, citing her alleged neglect of and failure to properly homeschool the children. this prompted the woman to file a counterclaim as well as a request for a protective order against argote for herself and their children. the latter was spurred by his ownership of at least two firearms, which he used for intimidation of the family, and his efforts to stalk and monitor them through the home security system and text message apps.

the woman was granted the protective order, and argote was ordered to surrender his firearms, however the woman herself later recanted her request for the protective order.

wilkinson's judgements over the case included his opinion: "the father [argote] engages in absolute control over mother, the children, their finances, and their lives"

argote is currently on the run, believed to be traveling using the family car.

the main motive for the killing of judge wilkinson is believed to be revenge for his favorable ruling to argote's now ex-wife.

this story is likely to be twisted by the mra/redpill community and its sympathizers as an example of men being screwed over and pushed to the extreme by a "misandrist" justice system that favors women. argote's documented abuse of his family will be downplayed, and the fact that he didn't even bother to show up to the legal hearing will be excluded from their retellings. never mind that judge wilkinson was a registered republican circuit judge and unlikely to be sympathetic to feminism....

it seems like every one of these xy's who commits a mass shooting or some other violent crime has a record of domestic violence against a female partner or (internet) history of misogyny. these domestic abusers are dangerous to their entire communities. their capacity for violence is often not limited to a domestic setting, so they need to be responded to as such.

i hope the woman (and her children) are in a safe environment right now. argote is extremely dangerous and is likely to try to target her in retaliation for the outcome of their legal battle. he had tried to get ahead of her by filing for divorce first and using darvo to make her look like the villain in their family. luckily, it didn't work. he is a true abuser; he is purposefully dragging out this ordeal so he can maximize the suffering his ex-wife and the children experience since he legally did not get his way. he has also robbed an unrelated child of his father out of pure spite. i hope he is apprehended soon so they can begin to heal from this traumatic process.

[fite-club]

I remember researching, in a fit of anger, TMRA things on the MRA subreddit, and seeing several posts claiming that transmascs had detransitioned not because of their realizing they weren't trans, but because they didn't immediately get the power over women and respect from them that they felt was deserved. like, not all in a bunch, but several.

and then I look onto this website and others where trans men are claiming that because they can't, say, baselessly accuse a trans woman of being a sex criminal or that because they're not passing people don't treat them as cis men, or any other number of things, paired with hatemail sent to trans women speaking out against it that says "I bet you think we'll just detransition", it does raise my eyebrows.

maybe one step could be uncoupling their idea of their own masculinity and their need to be superior. but I'm just a stupid bitch woman, what do I know.

(none of this at ALL is meant to be directed at you or assuming your views, btw)

yeah you see examples of that mindset on this very website when trans guys act pissed that they can’t access the level of male privilege that cis men can. like these dudes actively deny that they have any privilege whatsoever over transfems because they (bitterly, seemingly) point to cis men as being granted privileges they aren’t. but that doesn’t position them at the same level of transfems, it just places them below cis people. but that doesn’t stop these guys from saying shit like “um, how DARE you accuse me of benefiting from male privilege when i face transphobia every day” as if those things “cancel out” like that

[socialmediamarketingsingapore]

Unlocking Business Growth with the EDG Grant in Singapore

In the fast-paced business landscape of Singapore, growth and innovation are paramount. The Enterprise Development Grant (EDG) in Singapore stands out as a key enabler for companies seeking to expand and evolve. This grant, complemented by the Market Overseas Grant, offers businesses the opportunity to scale new heights and explore international markets.

Understanding the EDG Grant Singapore

The EDG Grant Singapore is designed to support Singaporean companies in three core areas: innovation and productivity, market access, and core function capability development. This grant aims to assist businesses in upgrading their capabilities, innovating processes, and expanding their market reach. By subsidizing up to 50% of qualifying project costs, the EDG Grant offers a substantial financial impetus for businesses to embark on transformational projects.

For businesses looking to sharpen their competitive edge, the EDG Grant Singapore serves as a valuable resource. Whether it's adopting new technologies, streamlining operational processes, or venturing into new markets, the EDG Grant provides the necessary support to turn these goals into reality.

Expanding Horizons with the Market Overseas Grant

Complementing the EDG Grant is the Market Overseas Grant, which specifically focuses on helping Singaporean companies expand their global footprint. This grant supports activities such as market entry, market research, and the establishment of overseas business networks.

Integrating the Market Overseas Grant with the EDG Grant Singapore creates a powerful combination for businesses. While the EDG Grant fortifies internal capabilities, the Market Overseas Grant provides the means to apply these strengthened capabilities in a global context, thereby maximizing growth potential.

The Impact of the EDG Grant Singapore

The EDG Grant Singapore has had a significant impact on various businesses across multiple industries. Companies have used this grant to enhance their product offerings, adopt cutting-edge technologies, and enter new markets with confidence. The grant not only provides financial assistance but also serves as a catalyst for innovation and expansion.

Businesses leveraging the EDG Grant have reported improvements in efficiency, increased revenue, and expanded market share both locally and internationally. The grant has been instrumental in helping businesses pivot during challenging times, such as during economic downturns or industry shifts.

Why Businesses Should Tap into the EDG and Market Overseas Grants

For Singaporean businesses aiming for growth and global expansion, tapping into the EDG Grant Singapore and the Market Overseas Grant is a strategic decision. These grants not only alleviate financial burdens but also encourage businesses to pursue ambitious projects that might otherwise be deemed too risky or costly.

Working with a grant consultant can further streamline the application process for these grants. Consultants can provide valuable insights into eligibility criteria, project scope, and application procedures, ensuring that businesses maximize their chances of grant approval.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the EDG Grant Singapore, along with the Market Overseas Grant, presents a formidable opportunity for Singaporean businesses to scale, innovate, and reach global markets. These grants are pivotal in fostering a vibrant business ecosystem in Singapore, encouraging companies to pursue growth, innovation, and international success.

Contact Us

Bluehiveasia

Website:- https://www.bluehiveasia.com/

Email:- projects@bluehiveasia.com

Address:- 60 Paya Lebar Road #09-25, Paya Lebar Square Singapore 409051

Phone No: +65 6100 4148

[bluehiveasia]

Looking to tap into the benefits of the EDG Grant in Singapore? Bluehive, a certified management consultancy, is here to assist your SME in unleashing its potential. Our team of experienced professionals will provide guidance through the application process and create a tailored plan to improve your business capabilities with access to up to 50% ESG funding and an additional 10% SFEC funding support. Let us help you maximize your growth potential today.

[beingharsh]

new MRA strain where they think t prescriptions should grant them prima nocta

[originalleftist]

Even though the frenzy has mostly died down, and public opinion has shifted somewhat, Amber Heard's image remains poisoned by the trials and the associated hate campaign against her.

Just as an example, I typed "amber heard" into the search bar on Youtube. Here, in order, are the top 14 prompts it gave me:

amber heard

amber heard kate moss

amber heard johnny depp

amber heard my dog stepped on a bee

amber heard cross examination

amber heard interview

amber heard now

amber heard mentions kate moss

amber heard kiss

amber heard testimony

amber heard aquaman 2

amber heard lawyer gets owned

amber heard trial

amber heard johnny depp funny moments

See the problem? 14 prompts, and of those, 9 directly reference her abuser, the abuse, or the trial, and 3 of those are overtly derogatory/demeaning to her or her legal team.

A grand total of ONE references her work as an actor, in 11th place on the list, and then only her most recent film.

Actually search "amber heard" and view the search results, and it's even worse. Of the videos (not counting shorts) that come up, 6 of the top 10 are, just by glancing at the thumbnail/caption, overtly hostile and derogatory to her/her legal team, 3 pretty clearly are (ie using photos of her chosen to appear ugly or hostile, asserting that Aquaman 2 "failed"), and the last one appears to be an SNL skit about the Virginia trial. Of the shorts, 2 or 3 out of the first 8 visible are overtly negative, and at least 6 reference the trial or other scandals/controversies.

Granted most places I've seen aren't as bad as Youtube, Youtube is the absolute bottom of the barrel for hate content on social media, a recent study by the Anti-Defamation League actually found it was the worst offender for monetizing hate over Facebook and Musk's Twitter. But still.

If you are a random person who searches her name on Youtube, nearly everything you see about her will be about the Virginia trial or related controversy, most of it overtly demeaning/vilifying her. You have to actively look to find anything positive about her or her work or any other aspect of her life, and even then, you WILL have to trawl through a lot of MRA/Alt. Reich-ish content designed to illicit feelings of hatred, disgust, and contempt toward her, and often toward women and abuse survivors generally. If you are someone who didn't follow the trial, or a young person in a few years who was too young to remember it, and you look her name up, these are the first things you'll likely see, and your first impression of her. Everything else about her life- her dozens of film and television roles, her other relationships, her extensive activism and charitable work, is obscured. And any future work that she does will likely be difficult to promote, because it'll get quickly buried in all this shit (I am reminded of Steven Bannon's infamous remark describing his media tactics, "flood the zone with shit", and much of the hate campaign against Heard is very much in his style). And that will follow her for years- to some extent, probably, forever.

And somehow, that's not the saddest part about all of this. The saddest part is that she has a young daughter who, if not already, will soon be old enough to go on social media, or talk to people who have, and find out exactly what much of the world says about her mother, and by association her. Lovely.

And to be honest I feel guilty even posting about it any more, because even by posting about it to call it out, I'm still contributing to the fact that so much of the content on social media about her is about the abuse and trial, that that's still defining how her whole life is perceived, and I know that, and I know that she probably doesn't want to be defined by that forever. Which is part of why I've tried to consciously shift in recent months to posting more about the rest of her life and work, and less about the trials and the witch-hunt.

But sometimes I do still feel the urge to point at this shit and say "What the fuck?"

[menalez]

Women HAVE the same exact rights as men:

education with so many scholarships/grants given for simply being female, property ownership, career choice, marriage/divorce choice with benefits for child custody for simply being female, voting, running for office

You have equality. You are not oppressed. It is not the “patriarchy's” fault for your unfortunate experience. You are not the blunt of a discrimination conspiracy theory—you’re simply blame shifting. If you come across discrimination TAKE ACTION. You have the legal right. You can’t be stopped, as you are not oppressed.

You are only hindering yourself. No one is controlling your destiny except for you. So, stop simplifying your façade of an enemy—men—into a straw man argument. It’s detrimental to an already rising male suicide rate. It’s detrimental to your own success. You will gain nothing by continuing a first-amendment-silencing movement. 

for one, im from bahrain and these msgs are so stupid because they assume there's only one country in the world ever. which is ridiculous.

scholarships and grants are given to women on the basis of sex because there is bias in the education sector. women are paid less. women do not have reproductive rights in a lot of the west. women are not even allowed to get voluntary procedures done like tube tying in a lot of the west. women are not let to get their uterus removed if its causing them significant health issues bc their fertility is placed above their quality of life. women often face harsher punishments for killing their abusers than their male abusers receive for killing them. women are raped at high rates and sexually abused at extremely high rates too, and the law tends to side with their rapists & abusers over them. sectors dominated by women often devalue by virtue of women's work being devalued. in various jobs, women risk being fired or not even hired to begin with because they do not wear makeup or heels-- a standard that is not placed on men because men's work is prioritised over their looks. as for being in leadership positions, women are less likely to put in leadership positions because of misogyny where it is assumed that women are more emotional, less logical, and less fit to be leaders, despite these assumptions being baseless. when men actually want to get custody, theyre more likely to get it than women (and despite that, the myth that women have privilege over men in this regard persists becaus men get to control the narrative):

these are just a few examples off the top of my head.

if you think male suicide rates (which often also counts men who partake in murder-suicides... such victims!) are somehow the fault of women wanting better, then you're an idiot. women are far more likely to attempt suicide and have mental health problems:

MRAs, if you want to convince a middle eastern woman that misogyny is a thing of the past based on your assumptions of women's rights in the west, at least ensure your arguments are logically sound.

[derek6196]

*Attention: Business owners, Entrepreneurs and Bosses,*

(Singaporean Companies)

* Are you seeking to expand your business overseas?

* Would you like to work with a group of like-minded business owners to venture abroad together?

* Would you like to be received warmly and cordially by a group of business owners when you visit their country?

* Would you like the business mission trip to be subsidized by the Singapore government?

If so, visit www.kashacademy.com/mra/derekwongkokhoong to find out more.

We have organized hundreds of business mission trips and matched numerous companies with their partners in other countries. These companies have subsequently scaled their businesses regionally.

The *Market Readiness Assistance (MRA) grant* is here to support you in expanding your market presence, both locally and internationally. Whether you’re looking to break into new markets, develop your brand, or enhance your business capabilities, the MRA grant provides the financial support you need to succeed.

*Your benefits*

* Financial Support: Get up to 50% funding for eligible costs, including market research, brand development, and marketing activities.

* Expand Your Reach: Access new markets with confidence, backed by expert support and resources.

* Enhance Your Brand: Strengthen your brand identity and stand out in a competitive market.

* Drive Growth: Equip your business with the tools and strategies to scale and succeed.

Ready to get started? Contact us by submitting your details in the contact form at the bottom of the website (www.kashacademy.com/mra/#derekwongkokhoong) now to learn how the MRA grant can help your business unlock the doors to new possibilities!

Our friendly qualified consultant will then contact you for a free consultation call.

[vsservicesllc19]

Unlocking Business Potential with Singapore Business Grants and SME Grants

In today's competitive business landscape, securing financial support is crucial for growth and innovation. This article explores the benefits of Singapore Business Grants and SME Grants, highlighting how they can help businesses thrive.

Understanding Singapore Business Grants

Singapore Business Grants are designed to support companies in various sectors. These grants provide financial assistance for adopting new technologies, enhancing capabilities, and driving growth. They are particularly beneficial for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) looking to scale up their operations.

The Singapore government offers several types of business grants. These include the Productivity Solutions Grant (PSG), the Enterprise Development Grant (EDG), and the Market Readiness Assistance (MRA) Grant. Each grant targets specific areas of business development, ensuring that companies receive the support they need.

Key Benefits of Singapore Business Grants

Business grants in Singapore offer numerous benefits. First, they provide financial relief, reducing the burden of costs associated with business expansion. Second, they encourage innovation by funding technology adoption and process improvements. Third, they enhance competitiveness by enabling businesses to invest in new capabilities and market expansion.

How to Apply for Singapore Business Grants

Applying for Singapore Business Grants is straightforward. Businesses must first identify the grants that suit their needs. Next, they should prepare a detailed proposal outlining their plans and expected outcomes. Finally, they submit their application through the relevant government portals. Once approved, they can start implementing their projects with financial support.

Exploring SME Grants

SME Grants are specifically tailored to support small and medium-sized enterprises. These grants help SMEs overcome challenges such as limited resources and market competition. By providing financial aid, SME Grants enable businesses to invest in growth and innovation.

SME Grants cover various aspects of business development. These include technology adoption, capability development, and market expansion. By leveraging these grants, SMEs can enhance their operations, improve productivity, and achieve sustainable growth.

Advantages of SME Grants

SME Grants offer several key advantages. First, they provide essential funding for growth initiatives, reducing financial constraints. Second, they promote innovation by supporting technology upgrades and process improvements. Third, they help businesses expand their market presence, both locally and internationally.

How to Apply for SME Grants

Applying for SME Grants involves a few simple steps. First, businesses must identify the specific grants that align with their goals. Next, they need to prepare a comprehensive proposal detailing their project plans and expected benefits. Finally, they submit their application for review. Upon approval, they can begin their projects with the necessary financial backing.

Combining Singapore Business Grants and SME Grants for Maximum Impact

Businesses can maximize their growth potential by combining Singapore Business Grants and SME Grants. This approach allows companies to access a broader range of financial support, covering various aspects of their operations.

For instance, a company might use the Productivity Solutions Grant (PSG) to adopt new technology. Simultaneously, they can leverage the Enterprise Development Grant (EDG) for capability development. This combination ensures comprehensive support for their growth initiatives.

Success Stories: Leveraging Business and SME Grants

Many businesses have successfully leveraged Singapore Business Grants and SME Grants to achieve remarkable growth. For example, a local manufacturing company used the PSG to implement automation technology. This upgrade improved their productivity and reduced operational costs. Additionally, they secured the EDG to enhance their export capabilities, expanding their market reach.

Another success story involves a retail business that utilized the MRA Grant to explore overseas markets. This grant covered market research and overseas promotion costs, enabling the business to establish a presence in new regions. These examples highlight the transformative impact of business and SME grants on companies' growth trajectories.

Conclusion

Leveraging Singapore Business Grants and SME Grants is essential for businesses aiming to grow and innovate. These grants provide financial support, encourage technology adoption, and enhance competitiveness. By understanding the benefits and application processes, businesses can unlock their full potential and achieve sustainable growth. Explore the opportunities offered by these grants today and take the first step towards a brighter future for your business.