I don't research men!

Two days ago the Australian Parliament made an apology to victims of sexual harassment in Parliament House as a result of the Jenkins Inquiry. But who would have known that 43% of complainants were actually male? It was only women sitting as victims in the public gallery, the newspapers didn't mention the males, and the report specifically said that there was a "boys' club" culture of "bullying, sexual harassment and sexual assault".

Grace Tame, in her fire and brimstone speech for her presentation at the National Press club today, said;

I am not just an advocate for women. I am an advocate for all survivors of child sexual abuse, many of whom are male.

We must preserve that nuance, every nuance, in our discussions. We cannot forget our boys, and we cannot forget out men - not only as welcome, equal participants in this ongoing conversation, and without ignoring many negative patriarchal customs - we cannot forget our boys and men who are fellow survivors of abuse.

About two or three years after 1984 (George Orwell), it was a quiet weekend at work and I was listening to a radio station, that may have been ABC radio or 2WG.

The announcer mentioned that phone-in research was being conducted to collect data about domestic violence in the South Australian city of Adelaide. People who had experience domestic violence were asked to ring a contact number where researchers would ask them questions and collect data about their experience. He then mention that a male person rang the research number, to report his experiences only to be told;

"We are not collecting data from men!" Or something similar.

Bettina Arndt in her article "Scandalous deceit of parliament and the public" demonstrates the failure of government services to collect accurate data, that reflects the reality accurately. She wrote;

This week's intriguing story reveals how grossly inaccurate data was promoted and correct statistics suppressed whilst the media and feminist parliamentarians scared the public into believing there was good reason to push through dangerous affirmative consent laws.

However this is not the first time that this has happened. Many decades ago Lenore Weitzman published a report that stated; "Men's standard of living rose 42 percent after divorce, while women's declined by 73 percent. The media couldn't get enough of this exciting news. " Investigative reporters accepted her claim uncritically and it wasn't until Arizona State University psychologist Sanford Braver decide to investigate her findings was it discovered that her findings were false.

This is also strongly mirrored in Bettina's article where she writes about the efforts of Greg Andresen to uncover the truth about misleading statistics he wrote to NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research (BOCSAR)

"December 6 the Law Reform Commission finally published an extensive correction on their website, admitting they'd totally stuffed it. (Note – their correction is immensely confusing. If you plan to study it closely first read this guide, otherwise it will do your head in.) " Bettina Arndt. My the question is? Did they deliberately publish a convoluted, obtuse correction to hide the facts.

A time line of events demonstrate that BOSCAR and the Law Reform Commission prolonged making the corrections to their data and findings until after the legislation on consent passed through the NSW parliament. "By September 21 the Commission acknowledged that BOCSAR was preparing a response to Greg's enquiry – a tacit admission that they knew they had got it wrong. " .Then on October 18th "We suspect to have it finalised this week" BOSCAR, then again on November 18, a BOSCAR analyst claimed there had been some complex issues.