Retaking respect for Men and Boys — yes, there is an idea here!
Trudy W. Schuett

of course repeal of VAWA would be first on my list. It is a major funding source for feminist indoctrination activities. As Ron Collins has pointed out, the various grantees and VAWA-established agencies have frequently been questioned on their management of funds. This is not even to mention the clear sexist nature of the operations, or their near-total lack of effectiveness.

Well-done, and thank you for the acknowledgement.

Here is the link to the official DOJ website page where a list of its Office on Violence Against Women (OVW) grantees is shown state-by-state:

Anyone taking an interest must understand, however, that these agencies shown are only the tip of the iceberg which is the OVW grants complex. You will observe that many of the listed organizations are called something-something “coalitions”; this points to a means of dispersing these grant funds to far more “member” agencies across a given State, which are not in fact listed above. Whether these sub-grantees are even accountable to DOJ (or to anyone) at all, is an open question. It is all but impossible even to find out who and where they are.

This is where the follow-the-money trail becomes murky and nearly impossible to track. (Call any one of these agencies listed above and start asking these questions, and expect some evasive non-reply of a “who wants to know?” nature.) VAWA grantees are given such wide berth on the distribution of funds, not only through the coalitional system but also by means of an extensive capacity to hire “contractors” and “consultants” at the discretion of the Board of Directors and Executive Director of each grant recipient.

Boards and their Executive Directors tend to represent a revolving door of continual personnel turnover, many agencies will be found to have “acting directors” and/or near-absentee Board memberships; plus, positions such as a Treasurer or a Chief Financial Officer often go unfilled for long periods, such duties being covered haphazardly by other personnel or by contract. Even those few audits (8–12 reports per year, over a grants system involving thousands of agencies) done annually by DOJ’s Inspector General’s Office (OIG) rarely manage to discover any more than the most general nature of financial activities. What they do discover, almost always reveals an audited agency’s fiscal history as so egregious as to be criminal*, which it would be in any other realm of non-profit organizations.

Types of grants include:

Note here, that the only information provided is not meant for any public oversight or accountability purposes, rather it is simply a starting point for NPOs which may be interested in applying for a specific type of grant. What each grant type actually authorizes or how any subsequent funds are to be managed, is far more difficult to track down. The information here is identical to that given on another page of the DOJ’s website, a generic and laughably broad outline describing the grants in the most general terms.

Each grant upon issuance is meant to be accountable to OVW through a lengthy bibliography of guidelines and regulations, but as with all things government, the elephant in that room is how anyone actually might be able to enforce them, or even to discover any wrongdoing in the first place.

One would think, that any such government-sponsored system involving private citizens handed public funds for the asking, would be subject to some sort of legislative oversight.

Think again.

The VAWA grants system utilizes a little staff of twenty-odd (usually all-female) bureaucrats housed at a college in Maine, whose sole function seems to be to assemble data from grantees across the US, “clean” it (their term), and themselves compose what passes as “Reports to Congress”.

Given that VAWA-MEI is an OVW grant recipient itself, that its staff is all female, women whose careers are no doubt dedicated to this lofty mission of “eradicating vioelnce against women”, and presumably more than friendly to the ideals of what this money is supposed to be meant to achieve, one can only conclude that these “reports to Congress” are of a “smooth sailing, nothing to see here” nature, as whatever relevant committees and sub-committees in either House or Senate remain smugly oblivious (and indifferent) to what really goes on with all those billions.

And, as we saw during the 111th and 112th Congressional sessions, any legislator who dares raise his or her head to ask the hard questions about specific agencies and expenditures, is blacklisted all over the web and accused out in the streets of “war on women.”

The reign of terror that is VAWA, reigns most powerfully within the halls of officialdom itself.

VAWA is the Sacred Cow of Feminist Policymaking, the one legitimate achievement which feminism can point to and claim credit for in terms of lawmaking (Roe v Wade was a Supreme Court ruling, while the ERA, well, went the way of the ERA, and the Nineteenth Amendment long ago had been signed and ratified by all men), and as such, no one dares raise questions on whether its also being a cash-cow for a nationwide grant fraud syndicate is any kind of benefit to the nation’s women.

When our author here mentions

“the clear sexist nature of the operations, or their near-total lack of effectiveness”

she makes what I think was unwittingly a double-entendre:

the atmosphere of clear female-favoring sexism under which the entire nation now lives not only in government but in the private sector as well, IS more than any other outcome, the effectiveness of VAWA.

Consider: nobody really knows what the Violence Against Women Act actually is or does, but everyone male in any position of authority damn sure knows there is one, hanging right over their heads.

It is a reign of terror, in the sense that VAWA’s very existence at least symbolically demonstrates that all any woman need do in order to silence and discredit, and professionally or legally harm, any man, is to accuse him of any version of “violence against women”, which in today’s hyper-sensitive climate on all things gender, could be just about anything.

Proving that he is guilty is never a requirement: the accusation itself is the proof, and what VAWA stands for as a nationwide system, is an availability of resources, support and pre-determined sympathies, for any woman accusing any man of anything.

Just the efforts in Congress in 2011–2012 to examine its operations diligently before re-authorizing it (the so-called “war on women” amounted to a series of boring committee meetings looking at receipts), serve to show what happens when anyone tasked with making OVW’s grantees accountable actually undertakes to do so.

*footnote: the link provided here is for the second-to-latest OVW/OIG audit report, indicating over $2.3 million unaccounted for, from one grantee. This author can assure you, having read every one of these dozens of reports going back to 1998, that this (and most of those already published within 2017) is an absolutely typical result, and neither in terms of either the gross amounts in “dollar-related findings” or of the openly reckless nature of the misappropriations, by any means the worst.

Like what you read? Give Ron Collins a round of applause.

From a quick cheer to a standing ovation, clap to show how much you enjoyed this story.