IMBRA – An attack against the human rights of American men
IMBRA is a legalized way to have American men supplicate to women and for American women to win the battle against undesired competition, without having to be a woman to their men.
The International Marriage Broker Regulation Act makes it a felony for an internet dating company, that primarily focuses on introducing Americans to foreigners, to allow any American to communicate with any person of foreign nationality without first subjecting that American to a criminal background check, a sex offender check and without first having the American certify any previous convictions or arrests, any previous marriages or divorces any children and all states of residence.
The law was passed after feminist groups made claims that foreign women who marry American men are subjected to higher rates of abuse than are American women.
In reality things don´t seem to be so black and white as the law would indicate.
Here is some information about the abuse of females in the US:
http://endabuse.org/resources/facts/
“For example In the year 2001, more than half a million American women (588,490 women) were victims of nonfatal violence committed by an intimate partner.”
Very difficult to believe that when American men get really pissed off they could somehow choose foreign women for the sake of violence and suddenly become that selective.
In fact, for those who like mathematics:
http://www.america.gov/st/washfile-english/2004/July/20040714182708ASesuarK3.791451e-03.html
“In 1999 the Immigration and Naturalization Service commissioned a study that found more than 200 IMBs operating around the globe, arranging between 4,000 and 6,000 marriages between American men and foreign women every year.”
So in 1999 there were “only” 4000 – 6000 marriages between American men and foreign women, and in 2001 588.490 American women were abused by American men.
Not even my dog who is very nice to me would believe this one if I would tell him.
Officially the spirit of the law is to protect foreign women against abuse but actually it is an attempt to make American men look like the abusers and the foreign girls like the poor victims. Tell me what a gold digger coming from abroad will do to the poor AFC guy after he has been forced to disclose to her even the size of his underwears.
We all know that experienced men really do not need internet companies to help them pick up women and find wives.
For the average AFC brother who is not able to simply catch a flight, land to places like Odessa, Tallin or Bogota, open girls on the street, screen them well and find the companion he is looking for – in the case he is looking for a committed relationship – this is an extremely damaging law.
We know that men who are not able to meet and screen women for being Good Girls are actually in the majority and they all under the spell of the “circle of luck.” They basically “get lucky” when they find a woman.
As experienced men we see clearly that the law puts American men to supplicate to women early on in any relationship.
From the point of view of legality it is a good thing to do whatever is needed to avoid the abuse of women and punish the perpetrators. We men of experience really do not want women to be abused.
From the point of view of human rights, however, this law is a discrimination against the basic rights of American men.
From the point of view of gender politics as an experienced man, what I say is.. American women are clearly scared of competition. The law is a political attempt to have American men supplicate to women.
This law is against the basic human rights of American men and should be abolished or changed into a law which is directed to punish the individual men who are perpetrating abuse and not men as a group.
Cheers, Franco
7 Responses to 'IMBRA – An attack against the human rights of American men'
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Ok, ok…. lol
I read about the law online, and a woman and a man can communicate and visit each other as much as they want. It’s just when seeking a fiance/marriage visa you have to go through some background checks. Also if you seek too many within a certain period, it’s disclosed to the lady you’re trying to buy..er..get with. But let’s be honest here. This is isn’t going to stop any man, “AFC” or not, from going overseas and finding a wife. When I used to work in a clothing store I remember attending to a certain couple. He was maybe 50 something and had some money to be sure. She was maybe 15-20 years his junior and had a *great* body. She was from Chile, he an American. Physically he wasn’t anything to write home about, but you know what? I guess they where happy and/or honest together. So, who cares right? lol. But I had some questions for you:
You mention American women not wanting to be a woman to their man. I’ve read your posts for a very long time and appreciate your experience and perspectives but I was confused by this. What do you mean exactly? I’m an unexperienced guy.
You say American women are afraid of competition, but is there any group of women elsewhere who aren’t? *Shrug*
Harold
31 Aug 08 at 6:36 am
IMBRA: The “MB” stands for “Marriage Broker.” This means if you charge money to help an American man to meet a foreign woman, you have committed a felony.
David
2 Sep 08 at 4:22 pm
If you help *and* you don’t disclose, am I correct?
Harold
2 Sep 08 at 6:21 pm
If I help you and you don’t disclose, I go to jail.
David
2 Sep 08 at 9:52 pm
Dear Harold,
it is in the general sense of lawfulness that laws should not be directed to “human groups” but they should regulate the behavior of “individuals.”
We cannot make laws which are directed to limit the freedom of choice of homosexuals because they are known to get more HIV infections or maybe drug abusers because they may infect people abroad.
What makes of this law a discrimination is that it is in the context of ‘‘Violence Against Women and
Department of Justice Reauthorization Act of 2005’’, Subtitle D.
This is almost direct communication and clearly sub-communication for “Men = abusers.”
Second: the limitation of personal freedom of choice cannot be based on prejudice and cannot be directed to a certain group of people.
The main provisions of IMBRA place limits on number of “K” visa petitions a man may file for his potential bride in a certain time period, and also (most importantly) require that a man discloses all his past criminal history, visa petition history, past marital and divorce history, ages of children under age 18 to the lady BEFORE he can get her contact information or otherwise communicate with her.
The agency must collect this information, then check the National Sex Offender public registry and state public registry for each man, provide all this information to the lady, and secure a signed and written consent from the lady to release her contact information to that particular man.
There are many things wrong with this law, but the most unconstitutional is to require men to disclose such personal information to somebody they have not met or even communicated with. When you see her on our website all you know about her is her first name, some bio information, and a pretty picture. Now government says that for the privilege just to say “Hi” you must disclose all this very personal information to her.
Tell me if this is not putting men to supplicate to women up front ! I really am not willing to disclose my personal marriage history to anyone unless I am willing to do it myself!
My comments:
>Ok, ok…. lol
>I read about the law online, and a woman and a man >can communicate and visit each other as much as they >want.
That´s for sure. Only Stalin would do a law to prevent men to do that.
>It’s just when seeking a fiance/marriage visa you >have to go through some background checks.
This is highly inconstitutional: it limitse the free of choice and personal freedom of a group.
>Also if you seek too many within a certain period, >it’s disclosed to the lady you’re trying to >buy..er..get with.
In my opinion an American man should be give the freedom of screening the women he meets. What if the first two women he is in contact with come out to be gold diggers or former prostitutes or maybe drug abusers?
>But let’s be honest here. This is isn’t going to >stop any man, “AFC” or not, from going overseas and >finding a wife.
An AFC man is by definition someone who is not able to go abroad and find a wife locally. I have been traveling in Russia and Baltic countries. Believe me: if an AFC guy goes there all what he will do will be sit at the bar and the local girls who have a psychological understanding better than many professional psychologists in the West will eat him alive if in contact with him.
>When I used to work in a clothing store I remember >attending to a certain couple. He was maybe 50 >something and had some money to be sure. She was >maybe 15-20 years his junior and had a *great* body. >She was from Chile, he an American. Physically he >wasn’t anything to write home about, but you know >what? I guess they where happy and/or honest >together. So, who cares right? lol. But I had some >questions for you:
>You mention American women not wanting to be a woman >to their man.
The internet is FULL of complaints about them. In my business activity I am not in touch with any other countries except US and Scandinavian countries where men are so unsatisfied about their women. Just do a search in Google with “American women” and you will see what comes out.
>I’ve read your posts for a very long time and >appreciate your experience and perspectives but I >was confused by this. What do you mean exactly? I’m >an unexperienced guy.
I was being provocative: if men are labelled as potential abusers by a law then I also have the right of giving subjective judgements.
>You say American women are afraid of competition, >but is there any group of women elsewhere who >aren’t? *Shrug*
True but it cannot be legalized by a law which limits the choice and freedom of a human group.
We are not going to make a law to keep HIV positive people from leaving the borders of their countries in the fear they could infect foreigns.
Democracy has a price.
Cheers, Franco
Harold
31 Aug 08 at 6:36 am Edit
FrancoPUA
2 Sep 08 at 10:23 pm
Thanks for the clarification. While I don’t agree with the law, my guess is that even if a guy was an AFC he would still go through this process. He would go through the background checks and screenings if he is adamant about not marry American.
Interesting comment about your travels; I was under the impression that many of these anti-(American women) sites were run by mostly bitter guys who don’t understand females and believe that there is a fantasy race of women who will accept them regardless of their numerous shortcomings. Of course, I can’t be sure. It’s good that there is a site like this were guys like me can learn these things.
Regards,
Harold
Harold
3 Sep 08 at 7:11 pm
Hey Franco,
First off I just want to say Thanks for sticking up for men against the feminists in such a controversial way.
However I would also like to let you know, in a friendly way, that the abuse statistics that you cited and the site you took them from is dishonest feminist propaganda that has nothing to do with reality.
Here is a Real site about domestic violence that you may find enlightening:
http://www.dvmen.org/
If I may also give you a friendly tip on a book worth reading that is jam-packed with real facts and figures and that stands up for men in the context of the family it`s “Father and Child Reunion” by Warren Farrell, Ph.D
And finally here is a site with links to male-friendly sites all over the world (mainly in Europe and North America though), sticking up for men`s rights:
http://es.geocities.com/mandefender/Atlas/Atlas.htm
(click on “English” at the top of the page for an automatic translation to English)
Cheers,
VikingGame
VikingGame
21 Sep 08 at 9:37 am