Categories
Domestic Violence Law Enforcement Murdered and Missing Sexual Assault Violence Against Women Act

PBS’ ‘Bring Her Home’ Betrays the Truth, Ignores Missing and Murdered Indian Men

PBS’ ‘Bring Her Home’ Betrays the Truth, Ignores Missing and Murdered Indian Men

Rebecca Stewart

March 17, 2022

Imagine Danokoo Hoaglen were your 16-year-old boy who went missing in Montana almost a year ago and you’ve heard nothing since. He’s just gone. Finding him, or any morsel of information on what happened, would be your most important mission.

Hoaglen is one of more than a thousand missing Native Americans, like Jonathan Kent of the Chickasaw Nation in Oklahoma, who disappeared in December at age 15; or Willis Derendoff, age 34, missing without a trace since November 2020. It’s a relative’s worst nightmare, not knowing what happened or where a loved one is.

Whether that person is a son or a daughter makes no difference in the level of strife and determination for finding help and bringing that person home. Whether that’s a son or a daughter should make no difference in the level of help that’s offered from the community.

FBI statistics on the plight of Murdered and Missing Indigenous People (MMIP) are detailed in a report from the National Crime and Information Center. In 2020 there were 918 missing indigenous men and boys and 578 missing women and girls. In addition, the Centers for Disease Control reports105 Indian men and 34 Indian women are murdered each year.

Knowing that 75% of murdered Indians are males, it is puzzling and frustrating to notice that most of the media coverage and political attention highlights only the struggle in the female indigenous population. In fact, a soon-to-be-released PBS documentary titled “Bring Her Home,” focuses only on the plight of women and girls, and provides zero mention of the statistical fact that men and boys make up the majority of missing and murdered indigenous people. Instead, men are spoken of as perpetrators with the comment that society must “reteach men how to be in a relationship with women.” This generalized misrepresentation damages the truth of the process and sadly, stagnates progress for the entirety of indigenous society.

PBS backed up its apparent feminist agenda with a discussion panel on March 15, previewing the “Bring Her Home” premiere. While the panelists were supporting a cause that deserves discussion, they only escalated the one-sided analysis that’s gained the exclusive hashtag #MMIW, in which W (for Women) replaces P (for People). Murdered and Missing Indigenous Women locks out any mention that males are victims of the same problem.

Panel members plead their case that we need to “build systems of justice that help us all;” “we are all responsible to each other;” “how do we not harm each other further;” and “we are all on the same team.” That hint at inclusivity, however, was destroyed with phrases like “holding men who are abusers accountable in our community,” and “we have to look at these men and what’s wrong with them.” No mention was made of the men and boys who are victims of the exact same problems, let alone to a greater extent.

Pushing the hot button of blaming men for a problem that actually affects males at a much higher rate runs contrary to finding solutions based on facts. Wouldn’t the process of solving this common problem work better by including every indigenous victim, rather than ignoring the existence of the majority of them? Native American women and girls deserve truth in this process, too. Every fact must be included to arrive at true solutions when it comes to Native Americans, as a whole, suffering from this murdered and missing epidemic.

Categories
Campus Department of Education Office for Civil Rights Press Release Title IX

Lawmakers Urged to Cut Funding for Universities that Refuse to End Sex-Discriminatory Programs

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Stewart: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

Lawmakers Urged to Cut Funding for Universities that Refuse to End Sex-Discriminatory Programs

WASHINGTON / March 7, 2022 – The federal Title IX law bans sex discrimination in schools. Defying this decades-old law, hundreds of universities currently offer programs that discriminate against male students. SAVE calls on lawmakers to cut funding for institutions that refuse to end programs that engage in sex-discrimination.

These discriminatory programs address issues such as computer coding; science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM); and leadership development. Literally hundreds of colleges around the country are known to offer such illegal offerings. Listings of schools with discriminatory programs (1) and scholarships (2) are available online.

As a rule, universities do not offer corresponding programs designed to address areas for which men are under-represented, such as the behavioral sciences, nursing, or teaching. Nor do they sponsor programs designed to rectify the lagging number of male enrollments in colleges.

In the Teamsters v. United States decision, the Supreme Court ruled that discrimination is not limited to explicit statements like “no male students allowed,” but also can include “actual practices” such as how the program is publicized and “recruitment techniques.” (3) But ignoring this milestone decision, many colleges have responded to discrimination complaints by making “fig leaf” adjustments to program descriptions.

For example, Arizona State University offers a program called “Girls in Tech.” In response to a recent complaint, the school added a legal disclaimer that “Girls in Tech is open to all, regardless of race, color, national origin, or sex.” But male students are unlikely to apply to a program with such a gender-biased title.

James Madison University in Virginia offers a program titled, “madiSTEM” that is described as a “STEM Conference Designed for Girls in Grades 6-8.” Responding to a complaint, the university added the legal disclaimer, “Open to all students, grades 6-8,” but did not change the program description.

The most egregious offender appears to be Stanford University. A recent complaint filed with the federal Office for Civil Rights lists a total of 33 discriminatory programs sponsored by the school. A partial list of the programs includes: Girls Teaching Girls to Code, Girls Code @Stanford, VMware Woman’s Leadership Program, Girls Engineering the Future, Women in STEM, and many more (4).

Sex-discriminatory policies may arise from an undercurrent of anti-male sentiment on college campuses (5). State lawmakers have already begun to place budget cuts on schools that sponsor programs based on social ideologies. (6-7)

SAVE urges state lawmakers to impose a 10% appropriations reduction on “woke” universities that continue to flaunt anti-sex discrimination mandates.

Links:

  1. https://www.scribd.com/document/562611176/Complaint-List-2022
  2. https://www.saveservices.org/equity/scholarships/
  3. https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/431/324.html
  4. https://www.thecollegefix.com/nearly-three-dozen-stanford-programs-discriminate-against-males-complaint-alleges/
  5. https://www.intellectualconservative.com/articles/experts-say-it-s-time-to-address-colleges-neglect-of-male-students-by-attacking-masculinity
  6. https://www.highereddive.com/news/idaho-lawmakers-cut-25m-in-funding-for-social-justice-education-at-3-publ/599613/
  7. https://thehill.com/changing-america/respect/diversity-inclusion/596131-wyoming-senate-votes-to-end-funding-for
Categories
Campus Press Release Title IX

Colleges Lag in Opening Discriminatory Scholarships and Programs to Male Students

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Stewart: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

Colleges Lag in Opening Discriminatory Scholarships and Programs to Male Students. Stanford U. Appears to Be the Worst Offender.

WASHINGTON / March 1, 2022 – Despite recent progress, hundreds of universities continue to offer scholarships and programs that discriminate against male students. SAVE calls on administrators to promptly remove all vestiges of sexism and discrimination at their schools.

Although the Title IX law bans sex discrimination in schools, many institutions have established female-only scholarships and programs that flaunt the federal mandate. For example, the University of Missouri at Columbia offers 70 scholarships for female students, and only one scholarship for male students (1). This imbalance likely contributes to the fact that female enrollments at the school outnumber males: 17,214 versus 13,875 students (2).

Since 2018, SAVE has filed Title IX complaints against over 200 institutions, including the University of Missouri. Virtually all of the resolutions to date have been favorable to SAVE. Colleges that have agreed to terminate their discriminatory scholarships include the University of Massachusetts System, Northeastern University, Texas A&M, American River College in California, and others.

But many complaints are still unresolved. Currently, 152 OCR investigations of sex-discriminatory scholarships remain open (3).

Regarding sex-discriminatory programs, the Office for Civil Rights website currently lists 118 open investigations of such activities (4).

The most egregious offender appears to be Stanford University. An OCR complaint lists a total of 33 discriminatory programs sponsored by the school. A partial list of the programs includes: Girls Teaching Girls to Code, Girls Code @Stanford, VMware Woman’s Leadership Program, Girls Engineering the Future, Women in STEM, and many more (5).

A recent article suggests that sex-discriminatory policies may arise from an undercurrent of anti-male sentiment on college campuses (6). In Teamsters v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled that discrimination is not limited to direct signs that people will see (like “no male students allowed”), but can also include “actual practices” such as how the opportunity is publicized and “recruitment techniques.” (7)

Links:

  1. https://www.saveservices.org/equity/scholarships/
  2. https://www.collegefactual.com/colleges/university-of-missouri-columbia/student-life/diversity/#:~:text=There%20are%20approximately%2016%2C481%20female%20students%20and%2013%2C533%20male%20students%20at%20Mizzou
  3. https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/investigations/open-investigations/tix.html
  4. https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/investigations/open-investigations/tix.html
  5. https://www.thecollegefix.com/nearly-three-dozen-stanford-programs-discriminate-against-males-complaint-alleges/
  6. https://www.intellectualconservative.com/articles/experts-say-it-s-time-to-address-colleges-neglect-of-male-students-by-attacking-masculinity
  7. https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/431/324.html