Guess what? Richard Gelles is supposed to be one of the speakers at that hearing. I met Gelles at the 2009 DV conference in Los Angeles which was put on by the California Alliance for Families and Children. Gelles is firmly in the "evidence trumps ideology" camp. So our voice is definitely going to be heard tomorrow.

Quote from John Dias

Guess what? Richard Gelles is supposed to be one of the speakers at that hearing. I met Gelles at the 2009 DV conference in Los Angeles which was put on by the California Alliance for Families and Children. Gelles is firmly in the "evidence trumps ideology" camp. So our voice is definitely going to be heard tomorrow.

I was wondering about him. I didn't get all of the details. I will submit the hard copy of my opinion in person there tomorrow. I have heard that means something but I don't know for sure.

Moved to priority news due to nature of thread & by request.

I obtained the PDF of Gelles' written testimony and extracted both the text and illustrations from it, making them accessible via Web page. Dr. E -- the admin over at StandYourGround.com, recorded the audio and I have taken an excerpt from the audio beginning from when Dr. Gelles begins speaking. He was not able to give his testimony because he and the other expert committee witnesses were being asked questions by the senators in a back-and-forth dialog. So you should get an idea of what Gelles preferred to say and what he was able to say.

Here's the URL:
Richard Gelles, written congressional testimony on the Violence Against Women Act, May 5, 2010

One part that got my attention is when one of the witnesses, testifying alongside Dr. Gelles, stated that last year, her DV organization in Vermont served 300 male victims with their array of general services and even gave 16 males access to their safe house. Obviously 16 in a whole year is a tiny number compared to the total number of women who were allowed to utilize their safe houses, but at least it's something. It shows (I hope) that at that particular shelter provider, males are at least not turned away as a matter of policy.

Another part that got my attention was the preposterous claim by one of the committee witnesses that VAWA has opened up access for male victims to obtain DV services. In my research into DV shelters, many of them indicate right on the home page of their Web sites that they do not provide services to male victims. Even those who do serve male victims have a tendency to show only pictures of women and children on their Web site, which sends a not-too-subtle message to male victims (intentional or not) that they are not welcome.

Rohara and JD show the way. Well done. Keep us updated chaps.

there are more and more straws blowing inthe winds of change agin this ballbreaking VAWA impost on men

The Concerned Women for America have considerable research and writing on this and related subjects at their site: Concerned Women for America - Hot Topics

Ok, I have just spent the last three days on Capitol Hill talking to people and having meetings. My feet are screaming! I had 16 meetings in two days with staffers and sypethetic chiefs.

Believe it or not most people were veryreceptive about major changes to VAWA. As you can imagine everybody knows someone who was unfairly treated due to the civil rights exesses of this legislation. People also were very receptive to the idea of amending the legislation to raise awareness of male DV victims and female perpetrators. I did not come across a single hostile person and in all but three of the 16 meetings we had they were interested in follow up material.

The important thing is that we have people talking and our points will definitely come up in dreafting sessions. This week ends with me feeling very optomistic. There were at least twenty five people lobying with us including the guys from India and several other men's children's and family groups all under the direction of Edward Bartlett, fouder of RADAR. He deserves major recognition and support for his efforts and you all should donate on his site.