All feminist research is based on questioning for desired conclusion, ignoring results they don't like and pure lies!
I have known Dr. James Nuzzo for many years and have always been impressed by his honest and scrupulous evidence-based research. True to form, feminist academics would not debate or engage with him; instead, they conspired to terminate his appointment at Edith Cowan University in Australia because they were “appalled” and “embarrassed” by his work.
Outstanding investigate work, Tom, and great presentation of all the different bits and pieces - from the media coverage to the data tables to the actual questions that the study's participants answered.
The data spin from feminists in Australia is appalling. Below are two other cases that I have detailed at The Nuzzo Letter:
UNSW’s Data Spin on Men’s Sexual Interest in Children
Dear James, what is Justice when such publicly funded authors false-witness with the intension of destroying the reputation of men to increase the already unjust negative attitude of men and fathers. To actively instill men-fear in young children, self-loathing and rejection of personal self in boys?
I was victimized and abused with this kind of evil growing up and the self-loathing was so deep I didn't realize it until I fell in love with a woman that loved me, when my love became realized to me, my self-loathing exploded into suddenly ending the relationship with her because I loved her too much to let her love me or have me in her life. I drank heavily for a week and how I lived on is a kind of miracle.
Over time I realized the self-loathing harmed every family and other relationships, and still likely does. Unable to love - especially myself. How much self-harm and abuse from others did I suffer? ..
.. well, enough that I could hang every one of those authors that refuses to repent after some significant attempts to inform them of not only the harms to others and themselves but the damage to society, to truth, to justice, to proper order, to duty to others, to love, to Joy, ...
--
I didn't read the entire study, but it's likely the women pedophile and women abuse of teenagers was likely absent.
The Juvenile Detention Reality — The Most Suppressed Data
The single most significant suppressed finding in the entire landscape of institutional child sexual abuse is the Bureau of Justice Statistics data on juvenile detention facilities.
The BJS 2008-09 National Survey of Youth in Custody, conducted across 195 juvenile detention facilities representing 26,550 adjudicated youth, found that 80% of the sexual abuse reported by youth was perpetrated by facility staff — and that 95% of all youth reporting staff sexual misconduct said they were victimized by female staff members. The detained population was 91% male.
A subsequent analysis of data from 2007 to 2018 confirmed the pattern: of more than 13,000 allegations of sexual abuse reported across facilities during that period, 7,272 were attributed to staff. Of the staff-perpetrated incidents, 75% involved female staff and male youth. The consequence for perpetrators: in most substantiated cases, staff were allowed to resign quietly, with no public record of misconduct.
Let that data sit for a moment. In the institutions housing the most vulnerable male youth in American society — predominantly young men from fatherless and impoverished backgrounds, confined by the state under the state’s explicit care obligation — the primary perpetrators of sexual abuse are female staff. Three quarters of staff-perpetrated sexual abuse involves women abusing boys. And the institutional response is quiet resignation with no public record.
This is the same institutional culture that has built elaborate zero-tolerance machinery for male-on-female workplace harassment, mandatory reporting requirements for suspected abuse in schools, and federal conduct codes for researchers accused of sexual misconduct. The asymmetry is total: maximum accountability infrastructure for male accused in professional settings, quiet resignation and record suppression for female perpetrators of child sexual abuse in state-run juvenile detention facilities.
The media coverage of this BJS data — published in federal government reports, available to any journalist — has been essentially nonexistent compared to the coverage of Catholic clerical abuse. There is no documentary about female juvenile detention staff who sexually abuse captive male youth. There is no sustained cultural narrative. There is no equivalent of the Guidepost Solutions investigation, the grand jury reports, the papal accountability hearings. The victims are male, the perpetrators are female, and the institutional response is silence. In the framework this essay documents, this is not a coincidence.
—
Female Perpetrators of Child Sexual Abuse — The General Pattern
The juvenile detention data is a particularly stark instance of a broader pattern that the research documents and the public discourse suppresses. Recent empirical studies indicate that between 5% and 20% of child sexual abuse is perpetrated by female offenders. A 2010 analysis of the National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System found that of 66,765 substantiated child sexual abuse cases, 20.9% had females as the primary perpetrator. Perpetrators were four and a half times more likely to be female if the perpetrator was the child’s biological parent.
Studies of male university students found that of those who reported childhood sexual abuse, approximately 78% in two independent samples specified a female perpetrator. The comparison between official report-based prevalence figures and victimization survey data reveals a systematic gap — sexual offenses against children committed by women appear to be substantially underreported and inadequately prosecuted.
The institutional response to female perpetrators of child sexual abuse parallels the institutional response to female perpetrators of workplace mobbing: minimal accountability, suppressed documentation, no sustained public narrative, and research that consistently notes the underreporting problem without generating the institutional machinery that would address it.
At first when I started reading their studies (thinking they were, well, scientific) I was surprised to see dishonesty and assumed those researchers were delusional. After a while I was more surprised when a feminist paper was not based on lies and dishonesty.
Yes, seriously. You will find the same in almost every feminist paper, and it just slides by. No-one pushes back, questions it or challenges it. It's as if they have no sense of integrity and honesty.
There most certainly is push-back. A large part of the MRM do exactly that. The problem, as we all find, is that lies that have travelled around the world three times before we have a chance to dig out the failings in the claims are what carries the day. The Feminist UN puts out lies to support all the locally produced lies; feminist media regurgitate the hate; feminist politicians (which is most of them, even if they don't realise it) support the prevailing narrative that 'everyone' believes.
But please don't think nobody pushes back. Join us in pushing back. So long as the silent majority stay silent, they will be discriminated against and blamed for everything that is their enemies' doing.
Sadly, I think this flawed research, drawing false conclusions, is increasingly common. This is in part because of the calibre of researchers and their ideological motivation. Universities and institutions are no longer filled with the brightest and best, seeking after truth.
This fraudulent study was done with an intentional evil design. It's purpose is to distort future algorithm searches, propagandize by bold headline claims and sound bytes and to teach AI. AI scans all these fraudulent algorithm articles and produces it's answers from it. Turning lies into perceived truth. Evil.
Thank you for analyzing this. Beyond the results shaped by the inflamatory wording of the questions, its one thing to say yes to violence with a pen and pencil while sipping coffee, and another in a real situation with actual human beings. So there is also that factor.
Recently at a dinner party, "my mother was quite emancipated".
What does this actually mean though?
She did her own thing?
She was hog tied to the bed and got free?
She was forced by life's circumstances to find a job and earn money?
Why does it all have to be like it is some mysterious mystical behaviour that they achieve what they want in life, rather than just someone who pushed hard or worked hard for what they wanted and go it!
Men have to push and work hard too!!
Or did I miss the memo from the Patriarchy that said, 'because you are a white male, we want to help you achieve your goals for this life."
Maybe one day we will stop glorifying everything and just accept it as a process called life.
I am still waiting for my Patriarchy Card that allows me to the life of milk and honey. I want to join all you other men in your lives of ease and privilege! Why should I be the only man to have to work, to struggle to pay my own fees, not to have instant recognition for all I do? Let me in to The Patricarchy™! I want my privileges!
Saying this to someone who promotes the Patriarchy or any other ideology that promotes such idea; example: privilege.
In Tom's article: Feminist Buzzwords as Attack Drones
He says: These words do more than describe. They arrive with the verdict already loaded.
I am hoping that I find the courage to say, next time this comes up: can you tell me which privileges I have that you don't! or something in this line ...
If you ask "which privileges do men have" any indoctrinated feminist will have an answer. She will give you an answer comparing the most well-off men on the planet to the poorest and most miserable woman in the planet. You will simply be putting yourself in defence and losing, as you cannot refute feminist nonsense.
Making fun of the idea works better. If you fear pulling it off properly and want to be factual ask "what law in this country disadvantages women over men?" If you've done your homework, you will know the laws that work the other way (every country has them) and will know how to counter the idea that inability to kill another person is not against a woman's right.
Or you can state that feminism requires the belief on oppression by men, open feminism and criticism of men disproves that men oppress women, therefore women are not oppressed and feminism must be wrong.
“Women often make sexual assault accusations as a way of getting back at men.”
48.6 percent of the men agreed.
“Women going through custody battles often make up or exaggerate claims of domestic violence in order to improve their case.”
51.2 percent of the men agreed.
Ironically both of these data indicate men are in denial about the true nature of feminism and women because the informed and correct answer to these FACTUAL questions about the conduct of women should be 100% as both statements are demonstrably true. Whether the correct RESPONSE to this would be to use violence is an entirely different questions.
If one had asked similar questions,
"In Islam men are entitled to use violence against women who make false sexual assault accusations."
"In Islam men are entitled to use violence against women who exaggerate claims of domestic violence in order to improve their case."
"In Islam a husband is entitled to sex from his wife and may use violence to get it from her against her will."
All would speak to the INTENT to use violence against women and all would be demonstrably TRUE statements because Islam not only permits such conduct, it even includes qualifiers on the level of violence allowed to be used. Yet none of those would speak to whether men believe such violence SHOULD be permitted.
The original questions actually warrant asking questions about the conduct of feminist women.
Given that women going through custody battles often make up or exaggerate claims of domestic violence in order to improve their case, what is the proper societal response to this harmful conduct?
Given that women often make sexual assault accusations as a way of getting back at men, what is the proper societal response to this harmful conduct?
Islam answers these questions by the testimony of women being set equal to half that of a man.
In Western society, sets the burden of proof on such allegations on the accuser (i.e. woman).
Neither society imposes violence against women as the proper response. Ironically feminists oppose both of these responses to the misconduct of women...which suggests they actually support such antisocial conduct. This would make a strong argument FOR using strong measures, including violence, as a means to stop the harm WOMEN are causing to society.
Interesting how the feminist authors of this study fail to see how an honest assessment of their work might actually end up saying that the 5% who justify violence against women may be on to something....
Media seems to love sensational stories regardless of their veracity. Horrible when social science studies are interrupted loosely to mean such definitive negative nonsense. Gender studies programs need their research money so this is how they keep their jobs.
Feminism is an irrational ideology. It is not facts or truth that matter, but perceived “truths.” What is true is whatever serves the cause.
And when irrationalists take over the university chairs, reason abandons the universities. Today’s academia reminds me of Goya’s etching, “The Sleep of Reason Produces Monsters.”
There is a lovely theory defined as "conservation of outrage" theory, which does what it says. It strives to push the narrative far beyond what may have been an initially reasonable consideration into a different realm.
Tom, your critique would seem to show this theory in action
All feminist research is based on questioning for desired conclusion, ignoring results they don't like and pure lies!
I have known Dr. James Nuzzo for many years and have always been impressed by his honest and scrupulous evidence-based research. True to form, feminist academics would not debate or engage with him; instead, they conspired to terminate his appointment at Edith Cowan University in Australia because they were “appalled” and “embarrassed” by his work.
https://substack.com/@fiamengofile/note/c-159799487?utm_source=feed-email-digest
Outstanding investigate work, Tom, and great presentation of all the different bits and pieces - from the media coverage to the data tables to the actual questions that the study's participants answered.
The data spin from feminists in Australia is appalling. Below are two other cases that I have detailed at The Nuzzo Letter:
UNSW’s Data Spin on Men’s Sexual Interest in Children
https://jameslnuzzo.substack.com/p/unsws-data-spin
The Australia Institute’s Biased Reporting on “Medical Misogyny"
https://jameslnuzzo.substack.com/p/the-australia-institutes-biased-reporting
Thanks Jim. Coming from my favorite researcher that is appreciated! Thanks for the links. Good stuff. I remember the one on children. What a mess.
Dear James, what is Justice when such publicly funded authors false-witness with the intension of destroying the reputation of men to increase the already unjust negative attitude of men and fathers. To actively instill men-fear in young children, self-loathing and rejection of personal self in boys?
I was victimized and abused with this kind of evil growing up and the self-loathing was so deep I didn't realize it until I fell in love with a woman that loved me, when my love became realized to me, my self-loathing exploded into suddenly ending the relationship with her because I loved her too much to let her love me or have me in her life. I drank heavily for a week and how I lived on is a kind of miracle.
Over time I realized the self-loathing harmed every family and other relationships, and still likely does. Unable to love - especially myself. How much self-harm and abuse from others did I suffer? ..
.. well, enough that I could hang every one of those authors that refuses to repent after some significant attempts to inform them of not only the harms to others and themselves but the damage to society, to truth, to justice, to proper order, to duty to others, to love, to Joy, ...
--
I didn't read the entire study, but it's likely the women pedophile and women abuse of teenagers was likely absent.
Here is a bit from my article ".. The Invisible Weapon, Covert Aggression, Institutional Blindness, and the Architecture of Male Destruction", https://stevenwork.substack.com/p/multiverse-journal-index-number-2242, archive: https://archive.is/SWAtj
the data is from the USA, but should be similar results there
---------------------- quote -------------------------
The Juvenile Detention Reality — The Most Suppressed Data
The single most significant suppressed finding in the entire landscape of institutional child sexual abuse is the Bureau of Justice Statistics data on juvenile detention facilities.
The BJS 2008-09 National Survey of Youth in Custody, conducted across 195 juvenile detention facilities representing 26,550 adjudicated youth, found that 80% of the sexual abuse reported by youth was perpetrated by facility staff — and that 95% of all youth reporting staff sexual misconduct said they were victimized by female staff members. The detained population was 91% male.
A subsequent analysis of data from 2007 to 2018 confirmed the pattern: of more than 13,000 allegations of sexual abuse reported across facilities during that period, 7,272 were attributed to staff. Of the staff-perpetrated incidents, 75% involved female staff and male youth. The consequence for perpetrators: in most substantiated cases, staff were allowed to resign quietly, with no public record of misconduct.
Let that data sit for a moment. In the institutions housing the most vulnerable male youth in American society — predominantly young men from fatherless and impoverished backgrounds, confined by the state under the state’s explicit care obligation — the primary perpetrators of sexual abuse are female staff. Three quarters of staff-perpetrated sexual abuse involves women abusing boys. And the institutional response is quiet resignation with no public record.
This is the same institutional culture that has built elaborate zero-tolerance machinery for male-on-female workplace harassment, mandatory reporting requirements for suspected abuse in schools, and federal conduct codes for researchers accused of sexual misconduct. The asymmetry is total: maximum accountability infrastructure for male accused in professional settings, quiet resignation and record suppression for female perpetrators of child sexual abuse in state-run juvenile detention facilities.
The media coverage of this BJS data — published in federal government reports, available to any journalist — has been essentially nonexistent compared to the coverage of Catholic clerical abuse. There is no documentary about female juvenile detention staff who sexually abuse captive male youth. There is no sustained cultural narrative. There is no equivalent of the Guidepost Solutions investigation, the grand jury reports, the papal accountability hearings. The victims are male, the perpetrators are female, and the institutional response is silence. In the framework this essay documents, this is not a coincidence.
—
Female Perpetrators of Child Sexual Abuse — The General Pattern
The juvenile detention data is a particularly stark instance of a broader pattern that the research documents and the public discourse suppresses. Recent empirical studies indicate that between 5% and 20% of child sexual abuse is perpetrated by female offenders. A 2010 analysis of the National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System found that of 66,765 substantiated child sexual abuse cases, 20.9% had females as the primary perpetrator. Perpetrators were four and a half times more likely to be female if the perpetrator was the child’s biological parent.
Studies of male university students found that of those who reported childhood sexual abuse, approximately 78% in two independent samples specified a female perpetrator. The comparison between official report-based prevalence figures and victimization survey data reveals a systematic gap — sexual offenses against children committed by women appear to be substantially underreported and inadequately prosecuted.
The institutional response to female perpetrators of child sexual abuse parallels the institutional response to female perpetrators of workplace mobbing: minimal accountability, suppressed documentation, no sustained public narrative, and research that consistently notes the underreporting problem without generating the institutional machinery that would address it.
—
Another relevant article: ".. Killing the Rescuer: How the Protector Class of Western Civilization Was Framed, Unpriced, and Deterred.", https://stevenwork.substack.com/p/multiverse-journal-index-number-2244, archived: https://archive.is/avIz0
May this find us all ever closer to God, and His Justice.
God Bless., Steve
This is feminist science.
At first when I started reading their studies (thinking they were, well, scientific) I was surprised to see dishonesty and assumed those researchers were delusional. After a while I was more surprised when a feminist paper was not based on lies and dishonesty.
Yes, seriously. You will find the same in almost every feminist paper, and it just slides by. No-one pushes back, questions it or challenges it. It's as if they have no sense of integrity and honesty.
There most certainly is push-back. A large part of the MRM do exactly that. The problem, as we all find, is that lies that have travelled around the world three times before we have a chance to dig out the failings in the claims are what carries the day. The Feminist UN puts out lies to support all the locally produced lies; feminist media regurgitate the hate; feminist politicians (which is most of them, even if they don't realise it) support the prevailing narrative that 'everyone' believes.
But please don't think nobody pushes back. Join us in pushing back. So long as the silent majority stay silent, they will be discriminated against and blamed for everything that is their enemies' doing.
Great article Tom. Here in lieth the Feminist strategy at its core.
If the evidence does not support the narrative, change the evidence.
It is academic fraud and any piece of public policy that has turned into laws based on this type of research should be declared ultra vires.
Indeed!
Sadly, I think this flawed research, drawing false conclusions, is increasingly common. This is in part because of the calibre of researchers and their ideological motivation. Universities and institutions are no longer filled with the brightest and best, seeking after truth.
This fraudulent study was done with an intentional evil design. It's purpose is to distort future algorithm searches, propagandize by bold headline claims and sound bytes and to teach AI. AI scans all these fraudulent algorithm articles and produces it's answers from it. Turning lies into perceived truth. Evil.
Holy moly, this level of propaganda still boggles the mind.
Totally agree.
More junk science.
Thank you for exposing this nonsense, Tom.
Thank you for analyzing this. Beyond the results shaped by the inflamatory wording of the questions, its one thing to say yes to violence with a pen and pencil while sipping coffee, and another in a real situation with actual human beings. So there is also that factor.
So true.
The use of language!!!
Recently at a dinner party, "my mother was quite emancipated".
What does this actually mean though?
She did her own thing?
She was hog tied to the bed and got free?
She was forced by life's circumstances to find a job and earn money?
Why does it all have to be like it is some mysterious mystical behaviour that they achieve what they want in life, rather than just someone who pushed hard or worked hard for what they wanted and go it!
Men have to push and work hard too!!
Or did I miss the memo from the Patriarchy that said, 'because you are a white male, we want to help you achieve your goals for this life."
Maybe one day we will stop glorifying everything and just accept it as a process called life.
I am still waiting for my Patriarchy Card that allows me to the life of milk and honey. I want to join all you other men in your lives of ease and privilege! Why should I be the only man to have to work, to struggle to pay my own fees, not to have instant recognition for all I do? Let me in to The Patricarchy™! I want my privileges!
Saying this to someone who promotes the Patriarchy or any other ideology that promotes such idea; example: privilege.
In Tom's article: Feminist Buzzwords as Attack Drones
He says: These words do more than describe. They arrive with the verdict already loaded.
I am hoping that I find the courage to say, next time this comes up: can you tell me which privileges I have that you don't! or something in this line ...
If you ask "which privileges do men have" any indoctrinated feminist will have an answer. She will give you an answer comparing the most well-off men on the planet to the poorest and most miserable woman in the planet. You will simply be putting yourself in defence and losing, as you cannot refute feminist nonsense.
Making fun of the idea works better. If you fear pulling it off properly and want to be factual ask "what law in this country disadvantages women over men?" If you've done your homework, you will know the laws that work the other way (every country has them) and will know how to counter the idea that inability to kill another person is not against a woman's right.
Or you can state that feminism requires the belief on oppression by men, open feminism and criticism of men disproves that men oppress women, therefore women are not oppressed and feminism must be wrong.
thank you for the advice.
I will see what happens if I challenge any of these people..
“Women often make sexual assault accusations as a way of getting back at men.”
48.6 percent of the men agreed.
“Women going through custody battles often make up or exaggerate claims of domestic violence in order to improve their case.”
51.2 percent of the men agreed.
Ironically both of these data indicate men are in denial about the true nature of feminism and women because the informed and correct answer to these FACTUAL questions about the conduct of women should be 100% as both statements are demonstrably true. Whether the correct RESPONSE to this would be to use violence is an entirely different questions.
If one had asked similar questions,
"In Islam men are entitled to use violence against women who make false sexual assault accusations."
"In Islam men are entitled to use violence against women who exaggerate claims of domestic violence in order to improve their case."
"In Islam a husband is entitled to sex from his wife and may use violence to get it from her against her will."
All would speak to the INTENT to use violence against women and all would be demonstrably TRUE statements because Islam not only permits such conduct, it even includes qualifiers on the level of violence allowed to be used. Yet none of those would speak to whether men believe such violence SHOULD be permitted.
The original questions actually warrant asking questions about the conduct of feminist women.
Given that women going through custody battles often make up or exaggerate claims of domestic violence in order to improve their case, what is the proper societal response to this harmful conduct?
Given that women often make sexual assault accusations as a way of getting back at men, what is the proper societal response to this harmful conduct?
Islam answers these questions by the testimony of women being set equal to half that of a man.
In Western society, sets the burden of proof on such allegations on the accuser (i.e. woman).
Neither society imposes violence against women as the proper response. Ironically feminists oppose both of these responses to the misconduct of women...which suggests they actually support such antisocial conduct. This would make a strong argument FOR using strong measures, including violence, as a means to stop the harm WOMEN are causing to society.
Interesting how the feminist authors of this study fail to see how an honest assessment of their work might actually end up saying that the 5% who justify violence against women may be on to something....
Media seems to love sensational stories regardless of their veracity. Horrible when social science studies are interrupted loosely to mean such definitive negative nonsense. Gender studies programs need their research money so this is how they keep their jobs.
Its what feminism has caused by bullying and deliberately destroying men rights.
Feminism is an irrational ideology. It is not facts or truth that matter, but perceived “truths.” What is true is whatever serves the cause.
And when irrationalists take over the university chairs, reason abandons the universities. Today’s academia reminds me of Goya’s etching, “The Sleep of Reason Produces Monsters.”
Yes. and the saddest part is so many people believe it...
There is a lovely theory defined as "conservation of outrage" theory, which does what it says. It strives to push the narrative far beyond what may have been an initially reasonable consideration into a different realm.
Tom, your critique would seem to show this theory in action
Thanks Alan. i have never heard of conservation of outrage. Will have to check it out. Thanks.
How feminists corrupt DV research
https://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/how-feminists-corrupt-dv-research/