NPR reports on mail order brides

[fencer]

[This message has been edited by fencer]

NPR “All Things Considered” had a short piece on Mail Order Brides (http://discover.npr.org/rundowns/rundown.jhtml?prgId=2&prgDate=July/3/2003 scroll down to ‘domestic violence high for mail order brides’ story)
– there’s supposedly a new federal report which claims a higher incidence of domestic violence for marriages through MOB agencies ( I think the comparison was between international marriages and MOB ones).  This is leading to proposed federal legislation to reform the MOB business similar to a state bill passed in Washington. There are the requisite horror stories of abused women which are enough to give the legislation its emotional force. Not coincidentally the abuse stories also help to cement in the public imagination the image of the men who use these services as domestic abusers.

Some of the things being worked on are to require the agencies to do criminal background checks on the men in the agencies and to give them to the women enrolled. The agency owners are saying this is an impossible hurdle and would cripple their business. (I guess the women’s advocates never considered that possibility[irony intended]).  Though I can’t see what effect it would have on agencies that are not US based.

Another  proposal is to get a criminal background check on the guy before granting a marriage visa and give it to the woman along with information (indoctrination?) on domestic abuse.

This might be old news to alot of  you. I guess the MOB business has been in the gunsights of feminists for along time. Anything that gives American men more choice in the sexual marketplace (term used broadly) will be a threat to American womens’ interests – hence the political agitation.

When I was googling for info on the House Bill number for this ‘proposed’ legislation (which I never did find by the way) I was amazed the number of times the terms “sexual trafficking in women” and “mail-order bride” was used in the same sentence. It is a powerful enough slur to prevent any legislator coming to the defense of MOB though I doubt there is much feminists can do to prevent international marriages in general.

On this Independence Day weekend Ben Franklin’s quote may be apt in this regard that it’s better to hang together than hang separately. I’m sure some of the stories on this board would  put the lie to a lot of the feminista claims if the facts were put in front of the right people.

As for me I’m a fence sitter so the issues aren’t directly relevant. Knowing my luck I’ll get off the fence at about the same time the feminocracy clamps down so hard that for an American man to get out of the country to meet foreign women will be as easy as getting across the iron curtain used to be.

[Patrick]

... in response to NPR reports on mail order brides, posted by fencer on Jul 6, 2003

I don't think you'll have anything to worry about.  If and when you decide to pursue a foreign wife, there will still be agencies to help you.  The forces at work in this country will not affect agencies run by foreigners in other countries.  The tactics the feminists are using are aimed at elimininating agencies instead of helping the ladies and the result will be that none of the information they want the ladies to get will be available to them in the future.  They can not control foreign owned agencies.

Their first move was to make it a requirement that every woman "recruited" by an agency be informed of her rights and responsibilities and the fact that this business is unregulated at the time she joins.  This is a good thing, but instead of making it part of the immigration process (sent to the woman when a visa is applied for) they made it a requirement that the agency inform her.  That means that only women who are represented by agencies owned by US citizens will be informed.  Women who use the services of foreign agencies will know nothing.  Women who simply meet US citizens in their native country by chance will be uninformed.  I believe the real intent of this regulation is to put some agencies out of business (there's a $20,000 fine per incident for agencies found to be out of compliance).

The new move to require background checks on the men could also be a good one.  It should be a requirement for spoucal or fiancee immigration with the fee being paid by the man  residing in the US.  That way every woman coming to the US through immigration via marriage/engagement would get it.  The way it's being worked is however, once again intended to be another obstacle to US owned agencies.

The feminist led legislation will most likely get rid of all US based agencies eventually.   But that will just mean more opportunity for the foreign owned agencies.  They will simply grow to accomodate the new business and prosper. Although they'd like to, there's no way these people can stop men from seeking wives overseas through agencies.   How could they differentiate between someone who met his wife through an agency and one who met by chance while in another country?

Maybe some day they'll decide to try helping the ladies instead of attacking the agencies.  To do that they need to make the information and background checks part of the immigration process.

[cancunhound]

... in response to Re: NPR reports on mail order brides, posted by Patrick on Jul 6, 2003

The problem would be if the foreign countries tried to regulate this - and what would the chance of that be is say Colombia? zero.  This shouldn't be a problem unless one chooses to pay a middleman and go with an American agency to begin with - and why would one do that?

[wizard]

... in response to Re: NPR reports on mail order brides, posted by Patrick on Jul 6, 2003

Like most legislation, this one seeks to bolster the popularity of the sponsor while reducing our rights are US citizens... This one seeks popular support by touting that it will "protect" the unsuspecting foreign women from unscrupulous men, i.e. you and me... Who is going to protect US from the unscrupulous AW???

The only thing it will accomplish is a reduction in US tax revenues from US Marriage agencies as these companies will not stop operation, but simply move off-shore... This has become a very popular tactic among large US corporations seeking to reduce their US Tax exposure on revenues...

My company has contracts with a large public corporation that USED to be based in the US... Now it's officially based in the Cayman Islands, but the world HQ is still in the US... Imagine that!!! They save millions a year in tax revenue, not to mention avoiding the bureaucratic BS shovelled out by the US government every year...

[Michael B]

... in response to NPR reports on mail order brides, posted by fencer on Jul 6, 2003

That NPR does a story the same weekend that this story comes out? I think NOT.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20030705/ap_on_re_us/mail_order_brides_2

and look at the responses, why some people are saying the men are losers and the women are whores...imagine that.

Also see the thread 'The Beginning' on the Asian board. (and if you're really brave [or just like to look at ugly women] check out the links to the sites of those 3 Washington state legislators who seem to be walking point for this stuff.

[JR n Atl]

... in response to NPR reports on mail order brides, posted by fencer on Jul 6, 2003

As we say in academe, "Your references, please."

The study mentioned by Mr. Cooper in the NPR piece is not new. It's been public since 1999 and I'll be charitable and say that NPR didn't give you the whole story. But you probably knew that already. Here are a couple of the relevant excerpts from the INS report to Congress of the results of the study.

----------------------
From the main body of the report:

4) Domestic Abuse in Mail-Order Marriages

Most of the data advanced on this topic are anecdotal. The Department of Justice does not distinguish foreign-born persons from U.S.-born persons in its crime statistics on domestic violence. The Commonwealth Fund estimated in 1993 that 7 percent of American women who are married or living with someone are physically abused in a year's time, and it is usually assumed by experts that the incidence is higher in mail-order marriages. The argument that immigrant women in mail-order marriages are more at risk of abuse seems plausible, given the discrepancy in power between a USC or LPR and his immigrant spouse.

From Appendix A:

Abuse

According to "The Health Care Response to Domestic Violence" (anon. 1994), "Within the last year 7 percent of American women (3.9 million) who are married or are living with someone as a couple were physically abused, and 37 percent (20.7 million) were verbally or emotionally abused by their spouse or partner."

While no national figures exist on abuse of alien wives, there is every reason to believe that the incidence is higher in this population than for the nation as a whole. Authorities agree that abuse in these marriages can be expected based on the men's desire for a submissive wife and the women's desire for a better life. At some point, after the alien bride has had time to adjust to the new environment, to make new friends, and to become comfortable with the language, her new independence and his domination are bound to conflict. The problem, according to Mila Glodava (Glodava and Onizuka, 1994) and Uma Narayan (Narayan, 1995), is largely due to the men's unrealistic expectations. While many state a desire for a submissive wife, they find that such dependence becomes a burden. To provide some relief, the husband seeks ways (friends, activities) that will get the wife "out of the house" on occasion. The resulting independence then angers the husband who manifests the anger on the wife, who may have only been guilty of trying to please her husband.

------------------------

The upshot is that no hard evidence exists to support the notion that the rate of domestice violence is any higher in marriages obtained through "MOB" agencies than in the population as a whole. You can decide for yourselves what the motivations might be for painting the picture otherwise.

Additionally, something that the NPR piece fails to mention but that is outlined in the report is the incidence of fraud perpetrated by women (green card sharks) whose only motivation is immigrating to America.

Here are links to the report and appendixes for those who are interested:

http://www.immigration.gov/graphics/aboutus/repsstudies/Mobrept.htm
http://www.immigration.gov/graphics/aboutus/repsstudies/Mobappa.htm
http://www.immigration.gov/graphics/aboutus/repsstudies/Mobappb.htm

JR

[Jeff S]

... in response to And here's what the study really says., posted by JR n Atl on Jul 6, 2003

More than half of all 'severe' domestic violence is committed by women against their husbands or boyfriends. [1]

Extrapolating from a 1985 survey of more than six thousand couples, the authors estimate that 1.8 million females are the victims of severe domestic violence each year (with injuries suffered by one in ten), but so were about 2.1 million men. [2]

A random survey of 2,143 American homes uncovered the fact that severe abuse was committed equally by men and women. [3]

One study of inner city child abuse found that 49% of all child abuse is committed by single parent mothers. [4]

Natural mothers are the perpetrators of:

   * 93% of physical neglect of children
   * 86% of educational neglect
   * 78% of emotional neglect
   * 60% of physical abuse, and
   * 55% of emotional abuse [5]

A Bureau of Justice report found that Mothers (55%) are more likely than fathers (45%) to murder their children. [6]

According to the government's own figures, females kill 31 times as many children as natural fathers. [7]

Females comprise 78% of the perpetrators of fatal child abuse (child murder). [8]

As disturbing as these statistics are, even more disturbing is the fact that they are virtually unknown. Only recently has any attention at all been focused on the issue of female batterers.

As psychologist Judith Shervin writes, "Women must share responsibility for their behavior and contributions to domestic violence."

These contributions are far bigger than feminists and the media are willing to admit.

Dr. Martin Fiebert, (1997) professor of Psychology at the California State University of Long Beach, listed 94 empirical studies that support the position that men and women are assaulting their intimate partners at nearly the same rate. When all the evidence is weighed, the only reasonable conclusion is that men and women commit spousal abuse against each other at nearly equal rates. [9]

References:

1. Research by M. Strauss & R. Gelles as reported in "Women Are Responsible Too", Judith Shervin, Ph.D. & Jim Sniechowski, Ph.D., LA Times. 6/21/94.

2. From the National Family Violence Survey (1975, 1985, 1992) developed by M. Strauss & R. Gelles, and funded by the National Institute of Mental Health.

3. 1980 study by Murray Straus, Richard Gelles, and Suzanne Steinmetz.

4. A study of child abuse in Lansing, Michigan. Joan Ditson and Sharon Shay in Child Abuse and Neglect, Volume 8. 1984.

5. Data from the Third National Incidence Study of Child Abuse and Neglect (NIS-3) from DHHS, and also from the Bureau of Justice Statistics report entitled "Child Victimizers and Their Victims".

6. Bureau of Justice, "Murder in Families", NCJ-143498.

7. (From item 5, the Third National Incidence Study of Child Abuse and Neglect (NIS-3)

8. Ibid.

9. Martin S. Fiebert, Cal State Univ., http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm

[Brazilophile]

... in response to Facts You Probably Haven't Heard:, posted by Jeff S on Jul 8, 2003

I worked with someone last year on the relationship between substance abuse and intimate partner violence.  I learned that in terms of killings or near killings, women commit more violence against men than men against women.  The argument is that these are "self-defense" or "end of her rope" killings.  For non-lethal violence men commit more against women than women against men.

Between a third to a half of domestic violence involves alcohol or drugs on the man's part.  In about 20% of the time, the woman victim is also drunk or high.  

It has been known for a long time that women abuse chldren more than men for the sole reason that women care for children to a much greater extent than men.  Now my concern is what are the comparable figures for Latin women.  If I am looking for a Latina to start a family with, what AW do to their children is not very relevant.

[Cali vet]

... in response to NPR reports on mail order brides, posted by fencer on Jul 6, 2003

I don't know the facts on this but I've heard that claiming "domestic abuse" allows a newly arrived wife to get her green card right away instead of waiting out the normal process. From some stories I've heard it seems that word of this has gotten out to the "sharks" so your parenthetical reference to indoctrination raises a scarey prospect.

[Pete E]

... in response to Re: NPR reports on mail order brides, posted by Cali vet on Jul 6, 2003

A newly arrived wife gets her green card automatically,she will get it in the mail in 4-8 weeks.
What the "abuse" angle refers to is her getting her permanent residency.She comes in as a temporary permanent resident.21 months later you file to make her permanent.The husband signs the application and they wil check you out to see if they think your marriage is legitimate,10 miniute of questions satisfied them in our case.If you have split up the wife can file on her own.She can claim "good intention"
or domestic abuse.They will want to see proof,like Police reports,but if she can prove it she's in.How she shows "good intention" I'm not sure.But if she gets a good lawyer in this area she an probably stay unless she did something blatant or left the marriage real soon.

Pete

[Brazilophile]

... in response to Re: NPR reports on mail order brides, posted by Cali vet on Jul 6, 2003

It is precisely that "incentive" for falsely claiming "domestic abuse" that is distorting the data for that "report".  The conclusions of that report are biased due to the fradulent claims of abuse in order to gain permanent US residency.