“Why me, Why me,” is an oft repeated phrase by people who have been the victims of hate crime, or maybe just a crime in general. Such victimized individuals often struggle to overcome their own disbelief at the dehumanizing horror that has just happened to them? It is truly a terrible thing to be hated, just for being born who you are.

In California, “Why me,” is a phrase that has been spoken before, and it is a phrase that is still being spoken to this day by many men, women, and children in "The Golden State." In a desire to govern righteously California has been involved in some of the most egregious human rights violations in the history of America. One would think they would learn from their history.

A little over a year ago, then Governor Gray Davis, and Attorney General Bill Lochyer issued formal apologies to California sterilization victims and their families. “Our hearts are heavy for the pain caused by eugenics.” Davis said. “It was a sad and regrettable chapter in the state’s history, and it is one that must never be repeated.” In more than 30 states, over 60,000 Americans were sterilized by the abhorrent pseudoscience known as eugenics. California in it’s zeal sterilized 1/3 of those 60,000 Americans.

Outreach Magazine, May 2003 covered the events surrounding the apology:

Who could argue against that indeed. Today in it’s zeal to accomplish many of those same goals it appears California is finding new groups of people to demonize, vilify, criminalize, and persecute. On school campuses and in court rooms across the state male behavior, especially heterosexual male behavior, is the target of choice for the new politically correct pseudsciences advocated by California’s gender feminist politicians and social scientists.

But I get ahead of myself, how you may ask could I ever intimate that an enlightened progressive state like California could have ever engaged in bigotry and discrimination? How could I dare to intimate that, “The Golden State" continues to this date to be a bastion of bigotry and discrimination against targeted groups of people? Hasn’t California always been at the forefront of America’s tolerance for diverse views, and compassion for all peoples?

The following excerpt Forced Sterilization Once Seen as Path to a Better World is from an article in the Los Angeles Times, by Mike Anton, July 16, 2003, and speaks for itself regarding a shameful chapter in California history:

If the story ended there, we could all gladly close the page on this subject as just being the result of a backward era, when people and governments were less enlightened. We could chock the whole thing up to prejudice and naive experimentation done in a scientifically, and politically, immature time, but sadly the story doesn’t end there.

Sometimes history does repeat itself, especially when politicians forget or ignore, “lessons from history hiding in plain sight.” It seems "The Golden State," California, is still preoccupied with social experimentation, that affects human sexuality, in ways it has no fundamental right to. It appears social scientists and unscrupulous politicians (frauds) are out to gain power and control by perpetrating new pseudoscientific atrocities on fellow human beings, just because they are born male, or heterosexual.

Given that California has 31 Women’s Commissions and hundreds, if not thousands of Women’s Studies classes, while having none for men, it is no wonder that men in California today suffer under sexist and hostile environments in their workplaces: in their schools and colleges, in their government, and yes even in their homes and churches. Let us not fail to mention the huge numbers of homeless men, that comprise the majority of the homeless population, that have no official government health office as women do. Additionally only one token domestic violence shelter serves the needs of the male population, while services for women are endless compared to those available for battered men. The disparity in services is so flagrantly discriminatory as to be scandalous beyond belief, but the liberal media of California fails to notice, or just doesn’t care.

School, being the main source of learning in children’s, and young adult’s lives, are one of the most heavily inculcated areas, where males and heterosexuals face the onerous oppression of the state’s gender feminist indoctrination ministry. Males and heterosexuals targeted for indoctrination have little or no choice about what it is they choose to hear, or believe. California prides itself in its politically correct laws, and in its tight regulation of things that might smack of hate crime. California Penal Code 415.5 states in part,

One CA university further interprets this section of the penal code by adding to their policy statement,

I find no fault with controlling hateful speech in schools, that offends the rights of groups of people based on their beliefs, but wonder why the rights and perceptions of males and heterosexuals are being ignored. Although the above statement of policy may on first glance seem all inclusive, the wording in the last sentence “past and continuing discrimination” may be troubling to males in particular as California’s politically correct institutions and curriculums do not recognize “males” as ever having been discriminated against as a group, rather it views them as privileged, patriarchal and oppressors. Therefore, it seems to me that males, especially heterosexual males have become the politically correct target of choice, for hateful discrimination, in many areas of California society and government. Many areas of America, suffer under similar circumstances as well.

I find it highly hypocritical, that in this era of rampant political correctness, espousing equal rights and tolerance for all, Women’s Studies departments on California campuses are allowed to flagrantly put poster size publications up that say, “What can men do to stop their violence against women,” thereby impugning and persecuting innocent men, while totally excusing the violence that women commit. No one appears worried about that prejudicial stigmatizing of all males for the behavior of some, or the hatefulness that is committed against men as a group by such prejudiced speech. It is true that 93% of the prison population is male, yet there are millions of good men, who have never been violent against women. They are prejudicially impugned by this hateful statement. There are still others who are battered men who look at such a statement and are revictimized. They can only wonder, “What about all the violent women who batter their men?” “What about me?” “Why me?”

Within the prison population, minority men comprise the majority of men incarcerated, and within that demographic of minority men, black men comprise the largest percentage imprisoned, yet you do not see posted, “What can black men do to stop their violence against women,” just “What can men do to stop their violence against women?” Clearly the sexist bigots on California's campuses have some sensitivity to overt acts of discrimination involving race, but not to overt acts of discrimination involving members of the male sex. Such misandric examples of discrimination are not isolated on the campuses of California’s colleges and universities. I find all of the aforementioned prejudices to be despicable and intolerant, and deserving of scorn.

Clearly, college men are subjected to the vilifying propaganda of gender feminist Women’s Studies programs, but that is hardly the beginning of the vilification of maleness and heterosexuality. In 1999 Assembly Bill 537, authored by State Senator Sheila Kuehl was passed, and signed into law by then Governor Gray Davis. It’s effect has been slowly sinking into the California consciousness as it has been implemented in schools across the state, including elementary schools .

In a pamphlet titled, “School Safety and Violence Prevention For Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, & Transgendered Students,” and prepared by the California Safe Schools Commission they explain AB537 through a question and answer dialogue. I find it telling that Heterosexuals are excluded from the title of that bulletin, but not surprising. In another bulletin, Question & Answer Guide On California’s Parental Opt Out Statutes, Q & A #7 reads thusly:

Once again we see California's elected representative, Sheila Kuehl, pushing the gender feminist concept that gender is socially constructed, and not something one is born into. I find that opinion to be largely antithetical to the case history presented by Wendy McElroy in her recent article at Men's News Daily titled, Death By Theory . Further support to Wendy’s article may be found in the book by Dr. Steven E. Rhoads titled, Taking Sex Differences Seriously. On Pp’s. 2 & 3 Dr. Rhoads talks about other failed experiments (all boys) where “efforts” made to socially construct (reassign) gender (most including going to the extreme of surgery on sexual areas) failed miserably.

Very recently, three brave school board members at Westminster School District refused to recognize California’s transgender rule in their school district. School trustees in Westminster won’t recognize transgender rule. School trustee Judy Ahrens believes, “...the Department of Education’s mandate that the Westminster School District update its anti-discrimination policy is a threat to students’ values and education.” The Westminster School District faces losing millions of dollars in government funding as a result of it actions. By the time male students reach the liberal, intellectual gulags of California’s college’s and universities, they should be well accustomed to the heterosexual bashing/male bashing rhetoric of California’s educational system, and find Women’s Studies' heterosexual/male bashing propaganda, disseminated about the campus, to be no surprise.

Clearly, no individual or group of individuals should ever be discriminated against for any reason, but one has to ask, one has to wonder why, “When conflicting values, or principals, or interpretations are in clear evidence, why is only one side allowed to be presented, why is only one side of a conflicted issue allowed to be not discriminated against?” I find such bias in our educational system, where open and objective thinking is considered paramount, to be very disconcerting

Governor Schwarzenegger would be wise to note the historical predisposition of elected representatives and social scientists in this state, his state, to vilify selected groups of people, and target them for persecution.

Political correctness is running amok in our society, and government, and it is high time for our new Governor to reign it in as it regards the demonization of all things male or heterosexual. While Governor Schwarzenegger is at it, I believe it would be appropriate for him as Governor of California to issue an apology to all the innocent people that abhorrent, gender feminist pseudoscience, and government, have targeted, and hurt by playing God with people’s humanity and sexuality. History has repeated itself indeed, only now it is definitely “Herstory” as much as “History.”

Ray Blumhorst