The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > The male cloak of invisibility > Comments

The male cloak of invisibility : Comments

By Caitlin Roper, published 4/6/2014

The national dialogue surrounding men's violence against women shifts attention from male perpetrators and onto female victims.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All
...If you would like to know what a soft world it is in which we now live, this article represents a pinnacle of it! (No offence to the author here either), Its not a fault of hers!

...I grew up as a child in an army camp where domestic violence was controlled by military police, (That was interesting). If you want to know what domestic violence really was as a comparison to what it is today, that would be a good place to start.

...Things are quietening down darling!
Posted by diver dan, Wednesday, 4 June 2014 7:51:45 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Oh dear another article short on facts, big on hysteria.
Posted by Wolly B, Wednesday, 4 June 2014 8:09:25 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Interesting idea here: "We need to control people's language so we can blame male perpetrators harder."

Curious - no mention of the large number of male victims of domestic violence - men beaten or psychologically abused by female partners, no mention of male children abused by female parents or step-parents, no mention of the abusive nature of cis-sexuality over other sexualities and genders.

Why this rampant sexism?
Posted by ChrisPer, Wednesday, 4 June 2014 8:37:24 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
No real man, beats up on a woman!
Moreover, the second you resort to violence, you've lost the argument!
Blokes, you've just got to get smarter, and instead of no, no, no, say perhaps, let me think about it, why do you need it, can we really afford it, do you think we should take on some income protection insurance, given we/you seem to want to commit so much of it?
And so on!
Sometimes it takes more courage to walk away from a fight, than have one; and why would anyone in their right mind, drive away the most important/precious person in their life.
Take a walk, cool off, think things over, and when you're back in FULL control, just go back and give your lady a big hug, tell her you love her, that she is not only the most important person in your life, but your life.
Take her out sometimes, buy her a candle lit dinner and flowers, and never ever forget to thank her for the little thoughtful things she does, just for you.
The real secret to enduring happiness is people who just make a daily habit of small acts of kindness, for the most important people in their lives!
And if money is tight, get off the smokes and the booze fellas!
She's worth it!
In the final analysis, one still needs to make a "conscious decision", to let go and lose control!
Get a punching bag, if you need an outlet!
Punch, kick and scream at that!
Don't take frustration out on virtually helpless women and children; and if you can't stop kicking the dog, have it put down, at least that would be kinder!
I would give all I own and walk over cut glass for a truly loving partner!
I have plenty or enough of everything else, except the one thing that makes sense of and gives meaning to my life.
If you drive your lady away, with your fists fellas, you will regret it for the rest of your life!
Rhrosty.
Posted by Rhrosty, Wednesday, 4 June 2014 11:33:12 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
While it is clear that Caitlin as a survivor is passionate about reducing violence against women, and while everyone will agree that it is a serious issue, it would appear that she is conflating the issue into a crisis in order to draw attention to it.

Declaring violence against women as a national emergency would imply that the incidents have suddenly increased or that the number of incidents dwarfs other issues. Whilst the number of reported incidents has increased, there is no indication that the total number of incidents has increased.

Secondly, forcing the media to modify their language will increase attention for a very short while until the readers get tired of alarmist language, as they did with the regular predictions of climate change apocalypse.

Tell people how it is and tell them regularly. Appear alarmist, and you lose them forever.
Posted by Shadow Minister, Wednesday, 4 June 2014 12:06:20 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Family violence is not a gendered issue, it's a family issue, men and women are equally violent in the home when judged by the same standards of behaviour.
The one in three campaign
http://www.oneinthree.com.au/
Overview of recent family violence research findings.
http://www.oneinthree.com.au/overview/
Detailed,footnoted overview of recent family violence research findings:
http://www.oneinthree.com.au/storage/pdfs/One_in_Three_Fact_Sheet_1.pdf
Misinformation and misconceptions about Family violence:
http://www.oneinthree.com.au/misinformation/
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Wednesday, 4 June 2014 1:27:49 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
This author has described a problem that is obvious to everyone under the guise that she is trying to stop the language from being watered down. It does not matter what language the media use – what matters is that the violence stops. She wants the language to be as direct as possible in order to ram home the message with as much force that can be mustered. Does she think that will make it stop? Does she think you only have to keep drawing attention to the problem and it will magically disappear? What is the purpose of continually declaring that a problem exists? We need solutions and not descriptions.

Perhaps her behaviour is not designed to help solve the problem of men’s violence but to try and hide a personal problem that she refuses to face. When people say the same thing over and over again it is a sure sign that they are trying to convince themselves of something rather than their audience. She is trying to convince herself that women are powerless in the face of men’s aggression and it appears she spends a great deal of time doing so. The type of aggression she needs to face is not violence but emotional abuse. Women who feel emotionally powerless try to shift the blame for that powerlessness onto men. Physically men may be more powerful but emotionally there is no difference. Some women can harness their own emotional power and stand up to men when they are bullied or intimidated by non-violent aggression. Some women feel that they cannot do so but feeling weak and being weak is not the same thing. It seems to them that the only way to feel strong is to continually point out men’s faults, to decry all men based on the behaviour of some men and to get other equally weak women to join them in their crusade...
Posted by phanto, Wednesday, 4 June 2014 1:50:47 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
contd.

Women like this author feel emotionally weak and do not take responsibility for doing something about that weakness. That may be a painful journey but it is a lot less painful than trying to maintain your rage against all men who are violent. It also makes you totally ineffective in trying to help other women who are victims of violence since you are less likely to be objective when you have your own agenda to protect. When you appear to be protecting your own personal issues people stop listening to you because you have no integrity. You just dig a deeper and deeper hole for yourself where your only relationships are with those who are trying to dig faster than you. You can end up a bitter old woman who has contributed nothing of value to society.
Posted by phanto, Wednesday, 4 June 2014 1:52:28 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Rhrosty,
No real man loses his temper in the first place but it's true that some men should not be around women at all and vice versa, no doubt we've all seen domestic violence in our own extended families and we all know what to do about it. That said we can only do so much. I have a dear relative who at 30 years old is presently extricating herself from her third abusive relationship and she also grew up in an extremely violent home. So as a family we're well drilled in how to respond and how to cope but we can also see it coming, we know the type of guy she goes for and why she only chooses violent jerks, we also know how she presses their buttons to make them explode.
All we can do is try to break her fall and work on making her see that after all that's gone before she probably shouldn't be in a relationship with a man at all.

The first step to an honest public discussion is to de-couple the public discourse on family violence from ideological Feminism, Feminists should no longer be heard on this issue because they refuse to acknowledge the role of women in the cycle of family violence.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Wednesday, 4 June 2014 1:56:44 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Unbelievable ! Lies deception and more lies. The author has been well indoctrinated by the feminist establishment but is totally ignorant of the professional research on Partner violence. She would be well advised to study the finding of PASK the largest meta-study to date of partner violence as well as our own ABS Personal Safety Surveys - which clearly show violence in relationships to be far more gender symmetrical http://www.domesticviolenceresearch.org/pages/12_page_findings.htm

She might also approach Australian authorities to reintroduce reporting of the sex of perpetrators of confirmed cases of child abuse, which was stopped in the mid 90'S under feminist pressure because is confirmed finding elsewhere that women are the predominant abusers of children.

Focusing on "gender" rather then the more important contributors to violence such as upbringing ( violence begets violence for both boys and girls ), mental health issues, personality disorders, poor relationship/ communication skills, drug and alcohol abuse, unemployment, poverty etc etc will not solve the problem, indeed the trends are toward more female violence and decking male violence.

To all forms of violence everyone should say NO regardless of gender. If we are not pushing that message we will never overcome it.

I say this a victim of a womens' violence against a man and his children.
Posted by rper1959, Wednesday, 4 June 2014 2:43:35 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
funny how many argue that porn has no harmful effects until of course it becomes violence against women. What the author fails to address is that in indigeneous communitites the violence against women and children is astrononically higher than the rest of the community. It is also much higher among defacto relationships than those who are committed in marriage. And then we have Indian and African commuties (oh don't go there). To many uncomfortable facts for anything worthwhile to be done about it.

'Until we acknowledge the issue for what it is and actively address the root causes and factors that facilitate and lead to this violence, we will continue to see women and children dead '

I doubt most of the community really want to face the issues and especially the feminist movement.
Posted by runner, Wednesday, 4 June 2014 2:50:09 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Jay
The “I in 3” website is misleading. While it is true that a minority of victims of domestic violence are male, they are overwhelmingly the victims of violence by other males. As this article concerns the perpetrators of violence, the focus on men is consistent with the data.

I’m less sure about the author’s argument about the passive voice. One effect of using the active not the passive is that the subject is de-emphasised relative to the actor. So comparing:

- Man attacks woman (active)
- Woman attacked (passive)

The active can actually seem to downgrade the victim’s importance in the story.
Posted by Rhian, Wednesday, 4 June 2014 2:54:50 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
J.O.M:
Yes there is a cycle of violence, and the less powerful are attracted to perceived strength for protection, only to become victims of it?
And one never ever gets to know the real person until they've lived with them for some time! So please, don't blame the victim, but stand up for her.
My sister was in such a abusive relationship, and I camped across the road, with my 303 loaded and ready.
And guess what? The bar steward just didn't show.
Luckily in one sense, given I was just 18 and could have paid a huge prison time price.
However, it did give my sister uninterrupted time to reflect, pack her things and simply get out of that abusive relationship.
The next time I saw said "gentleman" he was at our door, begging for a fortieth chance, but scuttled like a startled rabbit, when he saw me! I just didn't buy his hale and hearty, well met act, and he knew it?
He apparently died from a heart attack aged just forty something.
Maybe he died of fright, jumping at shadows with imagined loaded guns?
However, we ourselves don't need to continue the cycle of violence, and intelligent men are the key to ending male violence against both male and female victims.
And yes, some of it is cultural and or, imported; as seeming "normal" behavior? Or, doesn't everybody do it, therefore, so should I?
Violence just begets violence, and bullies always have all sorts of ultra-convenient, she made me do it excuses, its her fault, for unacceptable stone age behavior!
Nothing makes a male bully more uncomfortable, than another male, with implacable resolve to put a stop to unacceptable behavior!
Just the resolve and unflinching steely eye contact, Along with, don't give me any of your BS excuses, I'm just not buying, is usually enough; given real bullies are also real cowards, only brave around comparatively helpless women and children!
And guess what, birds of a feather usually flock together and or, make half baked excuses for each other!
Rhrosty.
Posted by Rhrosty, Wednesday, 4 June 2014 3:44:07 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
rper 1959

'She might also approach Australian authorities to reintroduce reporting of the sex of perpetrators of confirmed cases of child abuse, which was stopped in the mid 90'S under feminist pressure because is confirmed finding elsewhere that women are the predominant abusers of children.'

It's never been stopped - by feminists or anyone else. Statistics on gender and child abuse are freely available to anyone capable of Googling.

I’ve looked at a number of those studies that supposedly show that women are the main perpetrators of child abuse. The methodology is suspect and the statistics distorted.

Although women spend on average 70-80% of the childrearing time with their children, while men spend only an average 20-30%, the studies don’t take this time imbalance into account. When that is taken into account, men’s sexual, emotional and physical abuse of children is proportionately far greater than women's.

Also, another major problem with these statistics is that they include neglect as a form of child abuse. Because women overwhelmingly make up the majority of neglect perpetrators (over 90%), mainly because they are expected to shoulder the principle burden of childrearing, that skews the average abuse statistics to make women look a lot more abusive than they are.

And on the issue of neglect, cultural norms also play a part in distorting the statistics. For example, a man who works a sixty hour week or spends most of his leisure times with his mates, routinely leaving his wife alone with the children for long, lonely stretches time, is not culturally viewed as ‘neglecting’ his children. Yet, this is a very common pattern among married men.
Posted by Killarney, Wednesday, 4 June 2014 4:56:32 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Rhian, I think you've read the one in three page wrong, it's quite specific and Feminists always twist the meaning of words.
What the Australian data and the U.S CDC data shows is that men and women are equally violent and that women are actually more likely to initiate violence ie slap, kick, punch or use an object as a weapon.
So no, the article is approaching the issue from a gender biased position, men and women are perpetrators of violence in about equal measure when judged by the same set of standards.In abusive relationships men inflict far more injuries and deaths upon women and women are far more likely to inflict violence upon children or to murder them. The disparity is in physical size and strength, perpetrator compared to victim not gender, bigger, stronger people inflict more injuries upon smaller people.
Caitlin Roper isn't even really addressing family violence statistics in her article, she's criticising the way it's reported in the media in a very nitpicking fashion and seems to be insisting that using gendered language would be more appropriate even in the face of evidence to the contrary.
Focusing reporting in the way suggested by Ms Roper only narrows and biases the dialogue on family violence, which helps nobody and only further obscures the issues, by excising women's role in the cycle of violence from the discussion we're effectively fighting with one hand behind our backs.
As I said, it's a ripple effect, it'd be a lucky person who has not had to deal with family violence in some form, it's not out of control as the Feminists would say but like drug abuse and chronic gambling its a stubborn and malignant presence in our daily lives and it effects us all in varied and often surprising ways.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Wednesday, 4 June 2014 4:59:31 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Rhrosty,
Let's say you'd given this abusive bloke a hiding?
Given the context shouldn't we count him as a victim of family violence too?
Say your sister's new partner listened to her side of the story and then tracked down the other bloke and killed him, would he be counted as a DV statistic?
I've seen well meaning third parties break under the strain of helping a female victim out of a bad situation only to have her take up with another violent sod only months later.
I've seen a good, gentle, artistic man snap and attack his girlfriend's abusive former partner after she'd goaded and basically dared him to come to their house knowing full well how violent and unstable he was.
Ripple effect mate, to put it in a macabre way (as is my wont),DV is the gift that keeps on giving.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Wednesday, 4 June 2014 5:14:19 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
jay

‘The first step to an honest public discussion is to de-couple the public discourse on family violence from ideological Feminism…’

Yes, we’d all like that, wouldn’t we? Especially as feminist ‘ideology’ is the only viewpoint that dares to speak the unspeakable – that male violence is much more than just the isolated actions of a few disturbed men.

It’s feminists who dare to remind us that male violence towards women and within families is inextricably linked to prevailing cultural messages on what it means to be a man in this society (or any society).

It’s feminists who dare to suggest that misogyny is structurally embedded within all patriarchal cultures and is the principal driving factor in men’s violence towards women and within families.

Yes, it’s best to get rid of all this feminist nonsense from public discourse, not just on family violence, but on everything. We don’t want to upset men, do we? It might make them violent.

Rhian

Why is it a 'problem' to put less media focus on the victims of gendered violence and more focus on the perpetrators? Why should the victims of such crimes be given so much media focus anyway? They've already been violated by violence - why violate them again with unwanted publicity.

When someone robs a bank, the media doesn't spend much time worrying about the poor bank. It puts the spotlight almost entirely on catching the robber.
Posted by Killarney, Wednesday, 4 June 2014 5:24:28 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I think the author is spot on here. I too read media and news articles and notice that the headlines and stories do not call it what it is. It's as if the male perpetrators are erased from most of the story leaving only questions around the victim, why was she there, what was she wearing, how much had she been drinking and why didn't she leave.

And the term "sex with child" really infuriates me. I'm glad the author has drawn the spotlight on the discrepancies in facts within journalism and hope more can be done to eradicate male violence towards women and children.

And I've signed the petition! Our government need to step up and address this epidemic!
Posted by CoralieAlison, Wednesday, 4 June 2014 5:29:43 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
@Killarney

NO ! Any abuse of children is unacceptable, making excuses for women ( by claiming that neglect is not as serious a form or abuse) and throwing about stereotypes of males as neglectful for working to support a family are also irresponsible and unhelpful.

Australian child protection statistics are reported by relationship to victim NOT gender of perpetrator. Stats across the western world are remarkably consistent. The safest place for a child is in a stable intact family and the most dangerous in a single female headed family, perpetrated by the mother or her new partner. The person least likely to abuse a child in the biological father.

Witnessing DV is known to be harmful to children and australian children are just as likely to witness their mother or stepmother hit their father of step father as visa versa.

Both men and women are capable of and do perpetrate violence agains partners and children. To frame it as a predominantly gender issue ignores the vast amount of research and misses opportunities to alter outcomes. All it achieved is the idealogical imperative of feminist to cast men generally as villains and women generally as blameless victims, inhabitants of the real world know the situation is far more complex and nuanced than that.
Posted by rper1959, Wednesday, 4 June 2014 6:24:04 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
According the the ABS, women are more than 3 times more likely than men to suffer physical violence from a partner, and 10 times more likely to suffer sexual abuse from a partner:

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/4906.0Chapter7002012

Killarney,
I agree that victims of crime can suffer from media attention, but the convention in headlines is to use the passive voice to exclude the less important charaters in a story. Newspapers reported "Kennedy shot", not "Oswald may have shot Kennedy". Use of the active voice may be taken to mean the perpetrator is more significant than the victim.
Posted by Rhian, Wednesday, 4 June 2014 6:40:49 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Thank you for your article Caitlin.

This is also an issue I have been interested in for a long time. I used to know a woman who was a victim of DV and I know it is an issue that affects the entire community, but I also knew someone who worked as an interpreter and I know the issue is prevalent in migrant communities as well.

I suggest one of the reasons why there is so little media "discussion about why some men beat, rape, abuse and murder" women is a strong reluctance to talk about anything that might include race or racial profiling. This is feeling I get from reading your article too. While I accept that the prevalence of DV affects the entire community and that the form of DV may differ between different ethnic communities, nevertheless I also detect a strong reluctance to even raise people's cultural backgrounds as an issue for discussion.

The issue of DV was one of the main issues I was thinking about in relation to recent discussions over changes to the Racial Discrimination Act. Currently I understand there is an investigator in Victoria trying to secure funding to investigate the issue. If she is allowed to do her job she is very likely to cover issues that will cause offence to some ethnic communities uncomfortable with their cultural practises becoming subject to public scrutiny.

I think there is a real risk of that study being compromised by an overriding concern not to cause offence. That would make the report worse than useless because it will only focus on people willing to acknowledge that the problem exists.

"If we as a society are to move towards eradicating men's violence against women, we must first name the problem accurately."

That is my concern too Caitlin.
Posted by Farquhar, Wednesday, 4 June 2014 7:36:12 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
rper1959

I was neither 'making excuses for women' nor claiming neglect is not as serious a form of abuse (although that’s debatable). I was pointing out the problems in a methodology that muddies the statistics on neglect and abuse, and ignores the time-imbalance factor, to make it look as if women are doing most of the sexual, emotional and physical abuse of children, when it’s actually men.

And I did not say that working to support a family is neglectful. I said that working 60-HOUR WEEKS is neglectful. Yet, as a culture, we view this kind of child neglect in men (and increasingly, women) as admirable. For some time now, governments have proactively pursued policies designed to make those lucky enough to be employed work much longer and much harder. And you only need to look at the commentary on any OLO article to do with work and unemployment to see how deeply embedded this workaholic attitude is in a lot of men, who are proud to brag about all the back-breaking labour they’ve performed and the long hours they’ve worked over the course of their lives – without ever asking themselves if it was all that necessary or how their wives and kids felt about it.

When the problem of fathers having insufficient time with their children is brought up, it's almost always in the context of divorce and separation (i.e. blame the woman), not the culture's screwed-up attitudes to work. Men who choose work that routinely takes them away from their families for long stretches at a time (e.g. the military, mining, professional sport, executive management, political life) are never factored into the problem.

Also, the massive gender imbalance in the statistics on child neglect clearly point to the fact that women must shoulder a grossly imbalanced burden of child rearing, often without respite from its mind-numbing loneliness and stress (especially women in low-income brackets). If there is one domestic violence problem that is being brushed under the carpet, it’s that.
Posted by Killarney, Wednesday, 4 June 2014 9:02:38 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
<"If we as a society are to move towards eradicating men's violence against women, we must <first name the problem accurately."

<That is my concern too Caitlin.
<Posted by Farquhar, Wednesday, 4 June 2014 7:36:12 PM

Firstly, why is concentrating on one half of the problem/issue going to fix it?

Sadly this becomes very murky, issues of mental illness and compliance with medication is a huge issue. As is drug and alcohol addiction and related violence associated with these addictive behaviours.

To end violence against women, then a holistic approach needs to be undertaken that includes all forms of violence not only against women, but men as well. Otherwise all it is, is a piece meal approach that will never solve the issue.

We have had at least 6 decades or 60 years of domestic violence awareness and intervention, so the question is, why have not the interventions/treatment programs of the last 60 years worked?
Posted by Wolly B, Wednesday, 4 June 2014 10:40:27 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
WollyB "We have had at least 6 decades or 60 years of domestic violence awareness and intervention, so the question is, why have not the interventions/treatment programs of the last 60 years worked?"

Because men have never owned the issue.
And you are right, because until men agree they ARE the main perpetrators of violence against other men, and women, then nothing will change.

This author writes a very raw, truthful article that made me sad.
What some men (especially on this forum) don't realise is that most women are not out to 'get' men at all. They ('feminist or not) merely want men to see that the continuing attitude of superiority and ownership that some men continue to feel about women just fuel the domestic violence against women.

And no, it does not just involve lower socio-economic groups or some particular racial groups, domestic violence involves ALL of us.

I agree that we should be talking more freely about the gender of both perpetrator and victims of domestic violence in media reports. Why not?
Posted by Suseonline, Thursday, 5 June 2014 2:19:11 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Another really good article on domestic violence ...from a man's point of view...is this one:
http://www.mamamia.com.au/domestic-violence-2/charlie-pickering-chat-priorities/#KIeIFYQX8du7XRUs.97
Posted by Suseonline, Thursday, 5 June 2014 2:24:12 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
What is the point of constantly re-iterating the obvious fact that men are violent towards women? There is no argument about that. How does it change that fact by pointing out that women too are violent towards men and towards children? Why does it matter who is the more violent gender when one act of violence is one too many? Why do people persist in trying to paint a picture of ‘badness’ about one gender or the other? What does it achieve for society?

I think people do it because they want to point out that they too have issues with what they perceive to be the badness in the opposite sex which affects them in their personal relationships. They feel insecure in those relationships and want to blame the other party. They try to make themselves feel less insecure by hitching themselves to a group made up of people who also have the same insecurities. They hope that such a ghetto mentality will help them deny the fact that they need to confront those insecurities. It becomes like a drug where you have to attach yourself more and more to the group and you lose all perspective – it dominates your life.

If they were truly looking for answers to the problem of men’s violence then they would go to a place where they are actually working to find answers and offer their opinions there. If they think misogynist attitudes are to blame then they would join an active group who aim to eradicate such attitudes. If they think men need support in dealing with their anger then they would join a men’s group that helps men in that way. If they really cared about the problem then they would take action but if they only cared about themselves they would be looking for a mob to join.

Entering discussions like this in the hope that they will find some way of avoiding their insecurities is just a cry for help.
Posted by phanto, Thursday, 5 June 2014 10:58:48 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Killarney,
How can men take ownership of domestic violence? More to the point why should we?
Policing violent offenders is the responsibility of the state and it's impossible for us non violent men to take any action beyond reporting what we see and hear otherwise we will be the ones in handcuffs.
Watch this, this is how the vast majority of men behave when a woman is threatened and look how it ends;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CseiHw8R0yA
Do you honestly think that men talk about hitting their wives in social settings or that we would cover for someone who did?
Men regard those who are violent with women and kids as the lowest of the low and some of us will not hesitate to inflict a severe beating upon them to teach them a lesson, that's the reason no wife beater with his wits about him is going to let it be known what goes on in his home behind closed doors.
You're brainwashed with this idea of "Patriarchy', this conspiracy theory where men work as a bloc and cover for each other, it doesn't happen. In my whole life I've encountered only one man who admitted to hitting his wife and it was in the context of his whining in the smoko room on site about spending a night in the cells after she'd called the Police. Straight away someone said "What did you expect? You DON'T hit a woman.You should have just walked out on her" and the offender was shamed, bowed his head and ate his lunch in silence.
The other point to be made is that say this conspiracy theory about "Patriarchy" was true, why would we let wife beaters or any other criminal for that matter into our exclusive club? The incompetent,weaklings, bullies and cowards don't last long among virtuous men, we can't stand to be around them and it's for that reason that we can't really keep an eye on thugs and criminals, they're not typically part of our world unless they're exceptionally good at hiding their traits and covering their tracks.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Thursday, 5 June 2014 3:12:29 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
A good article by Erin Pizzey

Working with Violent Women
http://www.avoiceformen.com/women/working-with-violent-women/

I think an article by Erin Pizzey who founded womens shelters would trump Pickering any time.
Posted by Wolly B, Thursday, 5 June 2014 11:15:03 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The Psychology of Female Violence

"Despite advances in gender equality, contemporary society still evidences denial of female violence."

http://www.jaapl.org/content/40/3/442.full
Posted by Wolly B, Thursday, 5 June 2014 11:17:42 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
phanto, I've avoided this one so far but have regularly entered them in the past. It's not an abstract topic, perceptions of a gendered nature to family violence have consequences in the real world which I like to think forms some of the motivation for participation.

I don't know how much if anything has changed for those needing support with a physically violent female spouse but when I was still with my ex it was pretty much impossible to get any support to try and get her to stop escalating conflicts to the point of violence. Professionals stated that she is smaller than you so won't really hurt you and accepted a variety of excuses for initiating violence in a way that just reinforced her belief that she could use violence without censure.

Then you head to the family law system where perveptions about violence impact on child residency, financial outcomes etc.

Its a debate of very dishonest methods where the DV is described in the broadest terms (including verbal, emotional, financial etc) amidst claims that its overwhelmingly perpetrated by men.

When you look at the numbers based on actions rather than feminist intepretation men cause more serious physical harm to women than visa versa (although I do wonder how that figure would look if we understood the causes of the far higher male suicide rate better) and men initiate, ore sexual violence than women. Women initiate slightly more of the violence in the home, rates for child harm in single parent lead homes were similar (for the proportion of kids in those homes) when those figures used to be published.

There are a lot of lies and deception in the way family violence is portrayed, some as part of a broader gender agenda and I think from other because they are extrapolating from some experience near to them.

Family violence can occur in any part of society however issues normally associated with disadvantage or mental health play a far bigger role ad predictors for family violence than gender.

R0bert
Posted by R0bert, Friday, 6 June 2014 5:52:09 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Robert : I agree with what you say that there are injustices in the system that need to be addressed. Many of these injustices exist because many of the people who make judgements have been bullied and intimidated by the very mob mentality that I described. This is not unique to the question of DV but permeates courts in many issues affecting society. The answer is to have stronger judges that are not affected by the emotional manipulation of those who are not concerned about violence but are only interested in pushing their own personal agenda of avoiding their insecurities.

If the mob can be shown for what it truly is then hopefully it will disperse and its influence will cease. Society should not change because it is bullied and intimidated into change by people hitching themselves to a cause just for their own neurotic reasons. Society should change because it is reasonable and just to do so
Posted by phanto, Friday, 6 June 2014 9:31:31 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Robert,WollyB
Yeah but with Feminists like Charlie Pickering what you say is more important than what you do, as long as you're repeating the right phrases in the right order you're "active" in the fight against social ills.
I recall that some of the old Christian Temperance Union pamphlets from the early 1900's are available online via the National Library, when you read them the continuity of thought and the practical politics has mostly carried through to White Ribbon and the other Hipster "activist" networks.
We reactionaries call all these pundits, Tracey Spicer,Charlie Pickering, Clementine Ford and their ilk the "New Church Ladies", it's just a public competition among stuffy, self important prudes and squares to outdo each other in their displays of political correctness.
Maybe now Caitlin Roper will be invited to join the doyens and matrons of polite society, the idiotic,Twittering awareness raisers of the "hashtag wars".
http://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/facebook/000/754/874/382.png
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Friday, 6 June 2014 9:47:34 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Well done, Caitlin. Goebbels could hardly have done better! At least one third of domestic violence is committed by women against men - nearly all academic studies show this.

Until we start to oppose partner abuse regardless of the victim's gender we are just going backwards as a society.

Say 'no' to domestic violence - all violence! Why can't you agree with that, Caitlin?
Posted by rogindon, Friday, 6 June 2014 8:08:03 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
<Until we start to oppose partner abuse regardless of the victim's gender we are just going backwards as a society.
Say 'no' to domestic violence - all violence! Why can't you agree with that, Caitlin?>

That seems reasonable enough.
Posted by onthebeach, Friday, 6 June 2014 11:47:41 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Erin Pizzey - Toronto Domestic Violence Symposium 2014
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gK1BhS_Ynqg#t=517
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Sunday, 8 June 2014 9:15:15 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The mansplaining is strong in this comment section. Of course a woman talking about the fact that the language we use to describe male violence against women IS in fact weakened turns into some personal defect within her. That's just men not wanting to shine a light on male violence for what reason I don't know. Collective guilt? What they don't realize is every time they try changing the topic to something else or attack the woman that wrote this piece, they are showing women that they don't care and want the status quo.

This is why I am very accurate about my language on my blog.

Male violence against women and children is a huge problem. It doesn't need to get larger than it already is to be the huge issue that it is.

When men blame the author they make me wonder if there's something inherently wrong with men. You do it to yourselves guys.
Posted by HouseMouse, Tuesday, 17 June 2014 7:41:19 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
HouseMouse can we then ask what is wrong with you that you refuse to acknowledge more than half of all DV hiding behind a false feminist construct. That you ignore the majority of substantiated child abuse and neglect to only focus on that proportion committed by men (and for the record I think women do the majority of that because they do more care, not because they are naturally more abusive).

The problem lies with those of you determined to make family violence about gender rather than addressing the reality that its about a whole bunch of issues and gender is not one of them.

So what is wrong with you that you want to make DV and child abuse about men?

R0bert
Posted by R0bert, Tuesday, 17 June 2014 7:49:59 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
HouseMouse,

You have some cheek putting the hat out for donations on your site. At the same time you disrespect the taxpayers, mainly male according to your mantras, who put you through that expensive education you waste.

Seagulls who fly in, circle and poop on everyone then fly off again are not so well regarded. That would apply in your neck of the woods too no doubt.

You refuse equality for men and boys and blame them. Especially with boys your sort are setting a (negative) self-fulfilling prophesy in train. That is so sad and unnecessary. The Pygmalion Effect works both ways. You may not be able to change yourself, but others will be interested,

The Pygmalion Effect
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTghEXKNj7g&feature=kp

Get a job. Women can do anything, remember? So go out and do just that, get a job in anything where you can put something positive back into the society that has supported you and doubtless still continues to do so.

You are lucky to get that advice, because most people simply wouldn't bother with you after encountering your offensive labelling and boasting.
Posted by onthebeach, Tuesday, 17 June 2014 10:01:51 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Once again the mansplainers attack me personally.

MRA says: 'You have some cheek putting the hat out for donations on your site. At the same time you disrespect the taxpayers, mainly male according to your mantras, who put you through that expensive education you waste.'

Who says I wasted my education? You? Please dude. I don't have to justify myself to you.

MRA says: You refuse equality for men and boys and blame them. Especially with boys your sort are setting a (negative) self-fulfilling prophesy in train.

Men already have equality and rights.

MRA says: Get a job. Women can do anything, remember? So go out and do just that, get a job in anything where you can put something positive back into the society that has supported you and doubtless still continues to do so.

I do have a job. I've put more back into society than any MRA will ever do.

MRA says: You are lucky to get that advice, because most people simply wouldn't bother with you after encountering your offensive labelling and boasting.

I'm lucky that a mansplainer gave me 'advice'? LOL

Address the article and the ideas within it. The more you personally attack me and the author you look like a jacka$$
Posted by HouseMouse, Wednesday, 18 June 2014 9:09:50 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
HouseMouse, not surprising that you seem to be happy with what appear to me to be quite substantial double standards.

You have used terms that appear to be intended to be derogatory regarding posts by males which don't support your position eg "mansplaining" and your attempts to claim that a desire to have all DV treated seriously is somehow not caring about women. Your inference that those who care about all DV and not just thensubset you ar concerned about have something wrong with them is also derogatory.

Given your points seemed to be directed at comments made by onthebeach I might also point out that onthebeach is a human being, not some generic mra. He neither speaks for the various mra's nor should he be the targe for the contempt you appear to have for those groups.

R0bert
Posted by R0bert, Wednesday, 18 June 2014 9:57:43 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy