Home > Issues > the Law > Feminist Lawyers and Judges

The Black Ribbon Campaign

Empowering Men:

fighting feminist lies


Feminist Lawyers and Judges

Copyright: David A. Smith & Peter D. Zohrab 2003

Home Page Articles about Issues 1000 links
alt.mens-rights FAQ Sex, Lies & Feminism Quotations
Male-Friendly Lawyers, Psychologists & Paralegals Email us ! Site-map


The Canadian Bar Association has called, on the occasion of International Women's Day, for the Canadian Government and public to recognize "the horrors endured by some 200,000 young Asian women who were forced into slavery to satisfy the sexual needs of Japanese soldiers during the Second World War." We agree that this issue should be raised by pressure-groups and governments. But what has the female-dominated Canadian Bar Association done to publicize the much greater horrors which were endured by much greater numbers of men in the Second World War ?

No legal organisation with the status of the Canadian Bar Association ever deplores the fact that it was men who suffered these horrors. On the contrary, the fact that they were men is glossed over as much as possible in Feminist-dominated Western societies, and terms such as "soldiers" "men and women", or "people" are used wherever there is a risk that men might attract sympathy as men. This happened, for example, when the New Zealand Chief Justice (a woman) gave a speech on ANZAC Day 2003 (Anzac Day is New Zealand's armed forces memorial day).

It would be decent of the Canadian Bar Association if they were to celebrate International Men's Day by acknowledging male victims of wars, and also other male victims, such as victims of suicide, who are also predominantly male. (See: http://fathersforlife.org/menbroke.htm). This is especially so because many male suicides are the result of the anti-male judicial system. See the page: "The case against Canadian Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin" for evidence as to how ingrained anti-male bias is in the Canadian "justice" system.

The history of Feminism is the history of hypocrisy. For example, Feminists never demand that women be conscripted into the front line in wartime. They use the excuse that men "don't want them there." If there is anything that is obvious about Feminism it is that Feminists never give two hoots whether men agree with their demands or not-- they just keep on making their demands until men eventually agree to them. So if Feminists have been uncharacteristically paying attention to what men want, it is obviously just an excuse to avoid getting the sort of equality that they don't want to have.

Feminist lawyers and judges have enough naivety to enable them to believe the Feminist ideology that they have been indoctucated with, and they enjoy the extra power and authority that that ideology imbues them with. Western societies are like courtrooms where Feminism is the prosecution and men -- the defendants -- have no defence counsel.

We are all judges and jurors in the Court of public opinion, so to speak, but only one side of the case gets stated. Because of the lack of organized Masculist resistance, Feminists are allowed to plead both sides of an argument in different contexts:

For example, they say they need a Women's Room at Victoria University of Wellington (New Zealand), so that women can breast-feed in private -- but one Male Feminist journalist on Radio New Zealand thought it was so obvious that a female Parliamentarian in Australia should be allowed to breast-feed her baby in Parliament's Debating Chamber that he didn't even bother to hide his prejudice from listeners! The point is that some men might be embarrassed by bare breasts in public, and some men might not -- but it is not up to women to decide by themselves that they need privacy for breast-feeding in one context, but that they should be allowed to breast-feed in public in another context !

The fact that Feminism is the ruling ideology in Western countries means that it is open to Feminists in authority to exploit and abuse the positions that they hold in order to carry out Feminist propagandising. Few will dare to criticize such behaviour, and their criticisms are likely to fall on deaf ears and/or result in significant censure. The Canadian Bar Association should be barred from making sexist, pro-women pronouncements, because they further undermine the perceived and actual gender-neutrality of the Canadian Justice System.

For further information, see the pages:



http://www.lbduk.org/In%20Memory.htm and





Peter Douglas Zohrab

Latest Update

27 July 2015