I just sent DOGE the following email. Followers of The Nuzzo Letter can also email them using a modified version of my email. Also, feel free to share the graphs on social media.
Hello DOGE,
I am a dual US-Australian citizen and men’s health researcher. Recently, I published a piece on the amount of money that the United States (and other member states of the United Nations) sends to UN Women. UN Women is an agency within the UN that is guided by intersectional feminist philosophy and thus expresses significant political and gender biases. It is not an ideologically neutral agency.
Each year, the U.S. government sends UN Women $15M to $20M of taxpayer money. Between 2011 and 2023, the U.S. government sent UN Women $205M. See the graphed data at the link below (and attached jpeg file). The data were extracted from annual budgets published online by UN Women.
I would like to recommend that DOGE investigate whether funding of UN Women aligns with the goals of the U.S. given the agency's political bias. Moreover, the UN does not have an equivalent organization concerned with the well-being of boys and men.
Please let me know if you have any questions. Please feel free to share the link and graphs on social media.
Thank you, James, nice letter. In my previous letter to them, I let them know that both VAWA and the Women’s Health Act violated the Equal Protection Clause, and were therefore unconstitutional.
Belgium sends about $5M per year to UN Women. The total amount that Belgium sent to UN Women between 2011 and 2023 was about $70M. I suspect Belgium residents could use that money more wisely for local/domestic purposes.
Damn. They get a lot of money. It's hard to imagine the sorts of things we could do for men with even 1/10th of that.
I think it would be a good idea to report this fraud, waste and abuse, that also violates the Equal Protection Clause, to DOGE: doge@mail.house. gov
I just sent DOGE the following email. Followers of The Nuzzo Letter can also email them using a modified version of my email. Also, feel free to share the graphs on social media.
Hello DOGE,
I am a dual US-Australian citizen and men’s health researcher. Recently, I published a piece on the amount of money that the United States (and other member states of the United Nations) sends to UN Women. UN Women is an agency within the UN that is guided by intersectional feminist philosophy and thus expresses significant political and gender biases. It is not an ideologically neutral agency.
Each year, the U.S. government sends UN Women $15M to $20M of taxpayer money. Between 2011 and 2023, the U.S. government sent UN Women $205M. See the graphed data at the link below (and attached jpeg file). The data were extracted from annual budgets published online by UN Women.
https://jameslnuzzo.substack.com/p/un-women-funding-sources
I would like to recommend that DOGE investigate whether funding of UN Women aligns with the goals of the U.S. given the agency's political bias. Moreover, the UN does not have an equivalent organization concerned with the well-being of boys and men.
Please let me know if you have any questions. Please feel free to share the link and graphs on social media.
Kind regards,
James L. Nuzzo, PhD
Thank you, James, nice letter. In my previous letter to them, I let them know that both VAWA and the Women’s Health Act violated the Equal Protection Clause, and were therefore unconstitutional.
The feminists funding is way bigger than I could have imagined.
No wonder they are so strong and persistent.
Men need to organize and stop this nonsense.
I'll write my country and ask why there is no equal money spend on male stuff.
What country are you located in?
Belgium; no big contributor to UN but also a small country so way to much money goes to women only stuff.
And laws become worse and worse.
I don't see much moving here yet to stop it.
But every group opposing "the reality" started as a minority.
Belgium sends about $5M per year to UN Women. The total amount that Belgium sent to UN Women between 2011 and 2023 was about $70M. I suspect Belgium residents could use that money more wisely for local/domestic purposes.
I'm going to guess it's just another "charitable" slush fund.