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 > Vigilante justice: feminism's latest attack on human rights > Comments

Vigilante justice: feminism's latest attack on human rights : Comments

By Adam Blanch, published 22/8/2014

Mr Clark has initiated laws that will allow those who have obtained an apprehended violence order against another person to 'name and shame' that person in the press.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 12
  7. 13
  8. 14
  9. All
The AVO has become an instrument of choice, to enforce a nihilistic delusion that the past never was!
Posted by diver dan, Friday, 22 August 2014 9:17:08 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
This is an excellent article which shows compassion for all human beings who suffer. This is in stark contrast to the feminist lobby who would want these laws enacted.

You never see in feminist propaganda any hint of compassion or understanding of the human condition – even for other women. Their concern is not about protecting women or easing their suffering it is about revenge against men. The women who are victims of domestic violence are not human beings in pain but merely ammunition and statistics for their fight to declare men inferior and sadly deficient in relation to women. They are so full of their own rage that they are not even able to care effectively for the women they claim to be fighting for.

If they cared about women they would be doing everything in their power to help and educate women about relationships with men. They would help women to understand the unconscious factors that attract them to men who are more likely than not to become violent. They would help them not to be caught up in the neurosis of romantic love. They would teach them to understand and notice aggression which is always a pre-cursor to violence and to take measures before it gets out of hand. They would show them how it is more important for a woman to be emotionally and financially independent than it is to have babies to appease their peers and family who can emotionally manipulate them into putting such independence at risk. They would help women long before it ever came down to the point of violence.

But this is not what they want. Many want women to be bashed – the more the merrier as far as they are concerned. Women who agree with these laws are playing right into their hands. They are not solving their own problems, for they will surely enter similar relationships, they are only solving the problems of radical feminists who need them as ‘human shields’ in the bitter fight against the enemy.
Posted by phanto, Friday, 22 August 2014 10:39:29 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
Luckily not all Family Crt judges are stupid, or feministoids.
I was a victim of a false AVO, and the FC judge involved ordered it cancelled, and threatened my ex' with prosecution if she attempted such again.
I eventually got custody of our three littlies too, God bless that judge!
Also luckily, many young women these days can see through the Feminist Miasma and are rejecting it wholesale, that fact gives me hope for the future.
Someone once said.."God protect me from all the 'ists of this world", and I couldn't agree more, nothing good ends with 'ist, in general anyway.
Posted by G'dayBruce, Friday, 22 August 2014 10:40:44 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
For all the prominence given to domestic violence, there appears to be very few convictions.

The local newspaper just has the usual convictions of drink driving, theft and other misdemeanours day after day, and maybe once a year there is something about assault in a house.

My only advice to any man is to record any type of abuse from the woman, and that includes name calling, shouting, put downs, ridicule and any type of hit, slap, kick or physical harm carried out by the woman towards him or his children.

They can make a record of it in a diary or on devices such as a mobile phone.
Posted by Incomuicardo, Friday, 22 August 2014 10:55:11 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
...Beware, this is more news from above: Lo, for those seated in the halls of wealth power and fame, breathe down the infamous path from towers of ivory, a fire so hot, onto the worthless hordes, the flames of discord!
Husband shall rise against wife, and children against parents, neighbour against neighbour; and all shall fall before the sword of the King!
Posted by diver dan, Friday, 22 August 2014 11:25:47 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
Given only 4% of males tend to violence as their first or only response?
I for one would like to see those restrained by an AVO, have their names published!
In a purpose created name and shame file!
And those with a preexisting file, obliged to move to another city! No ifs, buts or maybes!
If that means, one or two among hundreds of thousands are falsely accused, then let the courts and justice dealt with that.
With mandatory penalties being, loss of custodial rights, loss of shared property and so on, if and where a false claim can be proven?
And as such, would severely limit any such false claims.
I've absolutely no time for thugs who beat up on women.
There's just no need for it; but particularly, when TLC will get you far further, as will small acts of kindness!
Love is like a red red rose.
It needs to be cared for properly, to just grow and grow and flourish.
And if that's not you pal, just stay single; or just get out of the closet, you bad tempered bitch!
Rhrosty.
Posted by Rhrosty, Friday, 22 August 2014 12:43:57 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 would be hesitant to name and shame all people who have had an AVO taken out on them...men or women...unless they have been convicted of assault in a court of law.

I agree with the conclusion of this author, that we need to work at breaking the cycle of violence through generations of families by giving much more resources to mental health teams and facilities.

I doubt this Government would agree with spending this money though, so AVO's are really the only small amount of protection (if you can call it that) that threatened people can do for themselves.

We have to remember that it is not only victims of domestic violence that use AVO's, but also other community members like neighbors, teachers etc that need them to help alert others to violence threatened against them.

Until we have the proper resources to handle violent people who threaten others, what can frightened people do in the interim to try and keep safe?
Posted by Suseonline, Friday, 22 August 2014 1:19:15 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 author's conclusion is correct.

On most occasions domestic violence is near impossible to prove, because it's usually done behind closed doors, out of sight, and without direct witnesses to the assaults.
Posted by AdrianD, Friday, 22 August 2014 1:36:11 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
You are a real idiot diver dan with your stupid one liners cause you have nothing of interest to say about. Perhaps you are a really a girl which makes me think why you are a fool with nothing to say.
Posted by misanthrope, Friday, 22 August 2014 3:41:29 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
The journalism profession has been fighting for this for a long time, and rightly so. All other crimes are able to be talked and written about publicly, except crimes of family, intimate and domestic violence. And despite all the loud protesting and well-funded giggle research of male rights groups, victims of these crimes are overwhelmingly women and children.

And let’s face it, guys! Do you HONESTLY think that a professional journalist is going to take any interest at all in some vengeful suburban harpie framing her innocent ex, so she can get the house, the kids and the bank account? I think journalists have better things to do.
Posted by Killarney, Friday, 22 August 2014 6:32:34 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
Ho ho ho misanthropy: and you ....you are an imposter! Surely nobody could be so stupid, with less to say than diver dan!
Posted by diver dan, Friday, 22 August 2014 9:04:20 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
Domestic male upon female physical violence, has traditionally been one of the 'hidden' crimes. Only in the past 3 decades or so has the public light been on this domestic violence, and every time it is shined it becomes more obvious the problem is endemic across all sections of society. However, much of society is still in denial.
Posted by AdrianD, Friday, 22 August 2014 9:20:57 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
AdrianD

'On most occasions domestic violence is near impossible to prove, because it's usually done behind closed doors, out of sight, and without direct witnesses to the assaults.'

Most crimes happen 'behind closed doors' or in a public place where no witnesses are present - murder, robbery, assault, rape, embezzlement. That doesn't stop the law enforcement and legal professions from mounting a case to prove the guilt of the perpetrator, or from journalists being able to write about the case.

Don't kid yourself. The 'special' legal statuus of family, domestic and intimate violence has nothing to do with being 'behind closed doors'. It's a carry-over from much more patriarchal times, when a man's home was his castle and anything he chose to do there was HIS business and outside of the law.
Posted by Killarney, Friday, 22 August 2014 9:24:54 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
Excellent article. Great to see more articles appearing and calling out feminists on the damage they are doing to our society.

The thing I can't understand is why feminists always want to name and shame men but then never want women who are proved to have made a false allegation equally named. Feminists want us to a) assume that women NEVER lie (when on average women are better liers than men) but b) if they are proved to have lied then be treated as some sort or minor who can't take responsibility for their actions.

At lease if they were consistent and treated men and women as equals then we could take them seriously. The sad fact is that feminists see women as much more important than men. We men are fools who took women at their word when they said they wanted equality.
Posted by dane, Saturday, 23 August 2014 12:06:57 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, those other crimes leave a 'trail'; even rape can leave a trail, but lesser so -- pregnancy,disease.

Domestic violence is often very different indeed, as usually only 2 people are involved in the crime, the perpetrator and the victim. That's it --- behind closed doors, no paper trail, no accomplices, no computer records, a controlled victim, a scared victim.

Azzhole men have gotten away with bashing their wives for centuries. These days it's harder for them to succeed in their crime, but succeed many of them do. Society still has a very, very, very long way to go regarding physical domestic violence perpetrated by some cowardly men upon women.
Posted by AdrianD, Saturday, 23 August 2014 12:33:51 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
Whilst I personally believe men who attack women are the lowest of the low, second only to those who attack children, I get quite annoyed at those who seem to think that it's not a two-way street, women are just as guilty, and they have a track record of using emotional abuse too, far beyond what most males are even capable of. Add to that the FACT that women are responsible for the majority of child deaths and injuries in the home and it makes their "victim" status highly dubious, to say the least.
A woman assaults her husband and it's a big joke all round, with little sympathy or support for the bloke. If however she complains about HIM, for even the slightest thing, the machine flies into action, dropping on him and falling all over to assist the woman, that's just a fact. False complaints are rife, but rarely discussed, and almost never punished.
If a woman torments and abuses her husband continuously there's little he can do, but if he loses it and strikes her, well, his goose is cooked, no matter the provocation. However, if SHE commits any acts of violence then every little thing he's said or done for years is considered relevant and a mitigating factor, it's almost automatically HIS fault.
Fair?
Balanced?
Hardly.
Posted by G'dayBruce, Saturday, 23 August 2014 8:49:54 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 I wonder is if woman who have lied to Police and found out should be named and shamed in public? It happens often.
Posted by runner, Saturday, 23 August 2014 10:37:42 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
...On the subject of the AVO(apprehended violence order ( nsw))! An often misunderstood reality of this instrument of control, is the AVO is issued by the police themselves!
The police will either initiate the application by issuing an interim order, or the victim may request the Police to initiate the AVO.The interim order will in turn be submitted to the court for further action by the magistrate. It is at this point the AVO may be challenged. ( and should always be challenged )!

...So it is plain here to see, the game play is between the police and the victim! But having said this, I was involved with a case in the last few weeks where the women victim of violence was understating her medical condition to the medical authorities and the police, through fear of repercussions from the violent partner, who attempted to strangle the woman, and some members of his family who were willing to act on his behalf!

...It is also the role of the police to determine the degree of threat to the victim and decide if ( in this case she), needed the extra protection of a placing into a women's refuge centre: Again the role of the police is essential to secure the safety of the victim.

...It is not a personal decision of the victim of violence alone to choose to use an AVO for personal protection; but it is still a game which can be played successfully if the impending victim wishes to provoke a situation or reaction from another party to further their own cause!
Posted by diver dan, Saturday, 23 August 2014 12:28:20 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
Not an easy topic. Some bullet point for consideration
- People charged with other crimes often get named publicly. Many of the arguments that apply here also apply to other allegations.
- In DV accusations the accuser and accused may both have a significant financial and persnal stake in the outcome regardless of the truth of what happened
- Its not just feminists who have driven the gendered lies around DV, those who cling to whatever passes for traditional models of the family also promote many of the same gendered views.
- Many of the benefits of false allegations are there regardless of naming and shaming, the bigger issue is to remove the motivations for false allegations while protecting those genuninely abused from futher harm as far as practical. I'm nervous about penalties for false allegations for a number of reasons. Hard to prove, a hindrance to people with a genuine but hard to prove complaint makingnthat complaint (and the habit of the law in going to far).
- Killarneys ongoing passion for feminist DV research has been done to death, her mocking of research that actually looks at numbers rather than promoting findings that comply with feminist dogma is an unpleasant and dishonest tactic and I think she is enough into the topic to understand that.
- Often tools put in place to help victims in the family space seem to be manipulated by the actual abusers and are not sufficiently resourced and monitored to achieve the intended outcomes.

R0bert
Posted by R0bert, Saturday, 23 August 2014 2:19:44 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
Strangely, find myself mostly agreeing with Killarney!
Who pretty much says it all!
Rhrosty.
Posted by Rhrosty, Saturday, 23 August 2014 5:48:07 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
RObert is right in that it isn't only women's or men's interest groups who have a stake in commenting on domestic violence issues, but also churches and other more traditional organizations.

As Killarney rightly stated "It's a carry-over from much more patriarchal times, when a man's home was his castle and anything he chose to do there was HIS business and outside of the law."
Some radical community groups and church groups put great emphasis on the man being the "boss" in his home (because some religious book written by men said it is so) and thus don't want any new laws around that could challenge that unwritten law.

I don't agree with the assertion that it was the women and children who 'pushed' the man to hit them, and thus not really his fault. What rubbish!
If a woman is bashed and the man seems unhurt, then a police charge against the man should be laid, and vise versa too of course.

What get's me is that if a random man or woman is found bashed on the street alone, then a full investigation is commenced with police all over it, and usually someone is found to be guilty and is charged , and it's all over the papers.

If a woman is found bashed in her home, it is usually assumed first off that it is someone she knows, and it doesn't seem to be as serious for the police investigation and unless she dies we don't hear about it in the papers.

Why is that?
Is the woman bashed on the street by a stranger any less hurt than the one bashed by someone she knows at home?
We have a long way to go before both men and women can feel more safe in their own homes...
Posted by Suseonline, Saturday, 23 August 2014 7:13:14 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
It's simple really,

If you have a restraining order against you,be it
either male or female, then simply restain yourself
from going near the ex-partner or if that is not possible
because of access to children etc. then refrain from
any violent acts or stalking towards your partner.

No problemo! Thanks Arnie.
Posted by CHERFUL, Saturday, 23 August 2014 8:41:59 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
Hearing Bill Shorten have to face the media about being accussed of rape is poetic justic. I wonder why we haven't heard the 'women dont lie about things like this' brigade now?
Posted by dane, Saturday, 23 August 2014 9:16:51 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
Dane, we haven't been told what actually happened in that case have we?
How do you know she lied?

Maybe it couldn't be proved ....like the case of the PM punching the wall on both sides of a woman's head at Uni all those years ago?

Some people lie, and that's a fact, but gender has nothing to do with that...
Posted by Suseonline, Sunday, 24 August 2014 12:35:17 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 PM punching the wall on both sides of a woman's head at Uni all those years ago?
Suseonline,
Who was that PM ?
Posted by individual, Sunday, 24 August 2014 8:59:17 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
Suzie highlights an interesting point.

We now have both a PM and opposition leader who have been accused of acts against other people that can't be proven. Abbott has also had a false paternity claim against him, I suspect not a deliberate lie but certainly some very relevant information was withheld in the making of that claim (the mother having more than one sexual partner during the relevant period of time).

I'm undecided of the truth of either claim but try to respect the principle of innocence unless proven guilty (even if I might hold some personal views about the type of people they are).

I do wonder if having experienced those claims either will be more careful to protect the rights of those not convicted of a crime than they might otherwise be. I suspect not, time will tell.

R0bert
Posted by R0bert, Sunday, 24 August 2014 9:19:46 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
It gets a bit boring blaming feminists for all and sundry ills and am puzzled as to why feminists need to be blamed for domestic violence being unacceptable and women speaking up about it.

That aside, I agree that naming and shaming a person publicly who has an AVO against them is not a good thing. It would inflame an already dangerous situation. Not only men get AVO's and not only men in a domestic setting.

I can only assume that this seems to give the appearance to be doing something about the dreadful fact that about 1 woman a week is killed by a partner or ex. Not to mention the number who suffer physical injuries. We get panicky whenever 1 person is taken by a shark and go out shooting and killing sharks who is just doing what it does in it's own natural habit! The issue with physical violence, domestic or otherwise is overwhelmingly perpetuated by men and as the author of the article points out does not appear out of nowhere, but is the result of multiple factors.

Men are even more often the victim of violence at the hands of other men than women. There, as a feminist I'm standing up for all the boys and men suffering physical harm and death at the hands of other men. The men don't seem to be doing this for themselves. Don't blame women. It's even more of a men's issue.
Posted by yvonne, Sunday, 24 August 2014 9:20:12 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
It's equally plausible that we glimpse the "hidden hand" of traditionalist Liberals at play here as that of Feminists, in many respects conservatives are more dogmatic about gender issues than the Left.
You're just as likely to hear some variant of the "toxic masculinity" meme being spouted by some Neocon blowhard as a Radfem.
Feminism is premised on achieving female supremacy, traditionalism is based around a belief in innate female superiority, the differences are trivial, Feminism is just "scientific traditionalism" if you will.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Sunday, 24 August 2014 11:12:38 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
Women's Lib was a timely and necessary movement, and it achieved much of it's goals.
However, as with all human affairs, once power was achieved there were those who got stuck in the propaganda, enjoyed the exercise of that power and cannot now accept that the war is over, all that's left is tidying up the details.
Hence we are now faced with the "Femnazis", the man-hating extreme edge of that once purposeful movement, and since their narrative is a total self-justifying illusion there can be no satisfying them, ever.
Personally I blame the Media. If they would exercise a little common sense then the femnazi's wouldn't get the coverage they do and we could all relax and enjoy the benefits that the women's movement brought to us all, men included.
Posted by G'dayBruce, Sunday, 24 August 2014 12:01:05 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
Bruce, there is a small element of socalled feminazi's, but as with all movements, or philosophies, there are some who have other personal issues that then gets conflated.

Like with Christianity, for instance. In spite of the Runners, or the disgusting stuff that comes out of the leadership of the Catholic church, would you equate all Christians, or even all Catholics, with what a very few do and say?

It is truly appalling that this very important issue raised by the author descends into a anti-feminist rant. It is NOT about feminism. Or any other ism for that matter. It is about violence and how violent men are products of their environments. They weren't born that way.
Posted by yvonne, Sunday, 24 August 2014 12:54:48 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
Ahhh Yvonne, weren't they though?
Violence is a natural part of our genetic heritage, and some are more inclined that way than most, it's just the luck of the draw, like red hair or blue eyes. It's a part of the feminist narrative that violence is learned, not natural, and that is simply wrong. Like xenophobia, some not PC things are a leftover from our primitive antecedents and inescapable. We can, and should, learn to circumvent these drives, it's not overly difficult with enough care and attention, but to deny them is foolish, one need only watch babies and toddlers to see them in action.
I also think you've misinterpreted what the original article was about too, it was indeed about feminism and it's excesses, hence the title:"Vigilante justice: Feminism's latest attack on human rights". Domestic violence was only the current "field of play", if you will.
Too, I agree, I don't judge all women's advocates by the extremists, some of them are eminently sensible and reasonable people but it's the extremists who get the media attention and who also act as drivers in the field, unfortunately.
Posted by G'dayBruce, Sunday, 24 August 2014 1:29:34 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 one in three women are the subject of violence in the home then why do women enter into relationships with men at all? Those would seem to be pretty bad odds when you think about it. What is on offer would have to be overwhelmingly worth having to take such a poor risk. Surely if you truly cared about yourself then you would not take that risk.

Women do not have power over men. They cannot make them stop being violent. They can stop them by naming and shaming. They cannot stop them by constantly presenting statistics. They cannot stop them by appealing to non-violent men to step in and take control. They are truly powerless to do anything effective about what others ultimately do in the privacy of the home where it cannot be proven.

Women are not powerless over their own choices. They can decide where they make their home and with whom and if they decide to maintain a home with someone who is violent then they have to take responsibility for their choices. You cannot be a victim of domestic violence without a domestic situation.

The real problem seems to be that women are not free to make those choices. They are under enormous pressure from an early age to be with a man, to live the fairytale and live in wedded bliss. This kind of pressure and propaganda fills the media to saturation point. You only have to observe how reality romance shows take control of their audience. Despite their growing financial independence women seem to have less emotional independence than ever before. Then there is the pressure to have children as part of the dream – this automatically limits their life choices for the next twenty years. They make choices which put themselves at risk of not being able to easily escape violent domestic situations.

cont.
Posted by phanto, Sunday, 24 August 2014 1:45:49 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
cont.

Nearly all of this pressure comes from other women. Women who control women’s magazines and chat shows feed of this pressure all the time. Even more so are they under emotional pressure from their own mothers, family members and peers to put themselves in a position where they are out of control. Despite women’s liberation women are not liberated – they are prisoners of other women. This is domestic abuse on a grand scale - the emotional blackmail of women by other women. No amount of man blaming will free them from this kind of a prison.

Sure there are exceptions to this general picture but obviously not enough if one in three women are victims of domestic violence. Many women will proclaim that they are not under such pressure but how can you tell unless you have been tested?

If women were to stand up to other women they may earn more respect, admiration and genuine love from men because they would exhibit values that are attractive. Men are not fodder for the romantically-drugged fairytales of women – they are human beings who should be attracted to the best that women have to offer. Men are not always attracted to women for the right reasons either but that is their problem to solve. When women learn to take responsibility, gain emotional independence and order their values then good men will want to be with them for all the right reasons and then a genuinely beautiful relationship might flourish
Posted by phanto, Sunday, 24 August 2014 1:48:25 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
Bruce
There's no need to be objective about Feminism, it was never a valid criticism of society and society has never stood in the way of women who want to work and accrue assets of their own.
What Feminism seeks is power without responsibility, income without work and privilege without accountability.
Bear in mind also that as many men as women are Feminists, many male Feminists behave in exactly the same way as the women (and will go that step further and dish out physical violence on behalf of their belief system).
Notice that feminism only starts to assert itself in a particular field or institution when there's easy money to be made?
It's called rent seeking, when Australian rules football was poorly organised, the players all had to have jobs outside footy to make a living and the VFL was basically broke the feminists couldn't have cared less about it.
When the AFL became profitable and the TV rights brought in big money all of a sudden the status of women in the field became an issue and the diversity "experts" started to edge their way in.
Same with the military, when soldiers were poorly paid, when the services were badly resourced and had no overt political role to play nobody gave a monkey's about "sexism". Now that billions are being poured into the forces and the ADF exists primarily as a propaganda tool of the state where lucrative careers can be made and post military roles in the public service are available the diversity "experts" and feminists are elbowing their way in.

"Diversity" follows the money, if there's not a drink in it for them they're not interested.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Sunday, 24 August 2014 3:05:38 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
Bruce, whether violence is in the genetic makeup or not is really a moot point. Doesn't mean it needs expression. In actual fact, it doesn't make sense to turn against your own. Maybe somebody you consider an enemy outside your tribe, but your own?

Phanto, wouldn't it be great if women would just stand up and name and shame these men? Having had some experience with domestic violence I know it is not that easy. Indeed, when leaving the relationship is the most dangerous period for a woman.

I disagree it's because women are controlling women. The women magazines in this country are a mystery to me. Owned by men and bought by women. They contain the stupidest of stuff. Just like this ludicrous anti-feminist trope some, especially young silly girls, are touting at the moment. All think they can't be anything except if they are wanted by a 'man'.
Posted by yvonne, Sunday, 24 August 2014 3:15:11 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
What I want to know is exactly WHO are these elusive radical feminists that are apparently calling all the shots in our country ?
They must have a hell of a lot of control if they can influence the predominantly male political and law systems!

When discussing women 'asking' for violence because they 'choose' to stay with violent men, I was wondering what the anti-feminists make of male on male violence - in the home or on the streets?

I suppose these male victims 'ask for it' as well?
If not, why not?
Posted by Suseonline, Sunday, 24 August 2014 4:17:03 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
Suse.
The term Feminism as a pejorative lets the Right/conservatives off the hook, a better description is gynocentrism because it covers everyone from the Radfem to the Islamic hardliner.
Everyone currently in public life is a gynocentrist, the test is whether they place the needs of women and children over the well being of the nation as a whole and all politicans hold or at least publicly support this point of view.
All political parties also advocate paying women to do nothing and hiring women just because of their gender based on the 'wage gap' fallacy, it goes from human rights rent seekers like Jillian Triggs to Abbott and his paid parental leave scheme.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Sunday, 24 August 2014 4:43:58 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
Suseonline,

Most people would not think lying about hitting a wall and rape were the same thing. Being accused of hitting a wall did, as intended, hurt Abbott politically. A rape accusation is much more serious. It can result in a lengthy jail sentence, will put the accussed under enormous stress and will not only destroy people politically but personally too. Just as intended.

The laws are now so stacked against men that it was only Shorten's prominence as Opposition Leader that made the police look at actual evidence. For the rest of us men, the mere accusation would destroy our life. This is exactly the point the author was getting at. Our rights have been so eroded that now the mere accusation destroys lives. We are not afforded the right of innocence until proven guilty.

Maybe both genders lie but it's not men who accuse women of rape from decades past so that the woman is labelled a criminal, her current relationship put under enormous pressure or destroyed, friends lost, thousands of dollars lost in legal fees and even time spent in jail.
All the power is in women's hands. And let's be honest here. When men feel aggrieved from a relationship breakdown, they are more likely to react physically. But if they hit their ex they will feel the full force of the law and community opprobrium. However, when women are aggrieved (not that a woman has ever felt aggrieved after a break-up!) they don't hit out but may make false accusations as revenge. The law fully supports them and offers no sanctions for false accusations. So maybe both genders lie but only one gender suffers.

I guess that is what feminists would call 'equality'.

Yet apparently we have a 'patriarchy'! Gutless men who allow themselves to be treated as a lot less than equal all in the name of equality.
Posted by dane, Sunday, 24 August 2014 5:30:37 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 of Melbourne,

+1

Apparently at that Radfem website there are even women who advocate for the 'management' of the number of males in society.
Posted by dane, Sunday, 24 August 2014 5:33:07 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
I wonder where all these down trodden & battered women are.

As a kid I watched my father & my mates fathers come home, with unopened pay packets, [remember pay packets] give them to the wife, & have their "pocket money" handed back to them. I never saw any women with bruises.

Today I see many men who have little input into when to have, or how many kids, where to live, the choice of house or furniture, with perhaps the car being their only actual choice.

I do not see many men who object to this, they appear perfectly happy to let the little lady have most say in these things.

What I do find strange, after a breakup, mostly precipitated by the lady, these almost domineering ladies become desperate to find another man, if they don't already have one.

It is hard to understand these ladies who have run just about everything to do with a family appear to be unable to exist alone, but it is very common. It is even harder to understand the drop kick men that many of them attach themselves to, very quickly.

My feeling is that women have always needed strong men for protection, that it has become instinctual for them to gravitate to strong men today.

Ducks for cover.
Posted by Hasbeen, Sunday, 24 August 2014 5:48:08 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
Gee Dane, I don't know many of all these poor hard done by men in my community!
You must live amongst different men to the ones I know.

Having worked in many hospitals and as a community nurse over the years, maybe I have seen many other people in their own environment and after their personal 'arguments' than you have?
I see just as many downtrodden women as I do men.

For every woman who may have made up rape allegations, I wouldn't mind betting there are five who were raped and the man got away with it.
A woman who is raped has at least the same emotional trauma that a wrongful rape charge has on a man, if not more, so let's not be too quick to judge women as being the ones who cause all problems shall we?

There is no feminist 'conspiracy' out there to try and take the 'power' away from men in this very much still a man's world.
There is only paranoid men wanting even more power for themselves that push this bizarre notion...
Posted by Suseonline, Sunday, 24 August 2014 6:59:27 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
Suseonline

I had to work on Saturday and Sunday (filling in).

I worked with about 12 other men, and most of these men have been working 80 hour weeks.

They have been working 12 to 13 hour days, 7 days a week for 2 months, and had another 3 months to go before the contract finishes.

I am wondering why there was no violence amongst the men.

According to feminist theory (or feminist propaganda), about 4 out of the 12 men should have been violent, but 4 were not violent, and in fact, 0 men were violent.

Considering what the men were doing, which was dirty and demanding work laying underground cable, and considering their very long work days with never any break, the men should have been at each others throats by now, but 0 men were.

So I am wondering why men suddenly turn into violent beings when they get home (according to feminist propaganda), but seem so placid at work?
Posted by Incomuicardo, Sunday, 24 August 2014 7:33:46 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
Strewth, so many feminist stereotypes here, I'd need a thousand words just to begin responding to them!
Firstly, if the feminist narrative hasn't been influencing everything then why are the laws the way they now are? Men sure as heck didn't dream them up and force them on us, did they?
As for "not expressing violence", the ability to do that must be learned, it doesn't come naturally, and since it's instinctive and usually emotional the logic of it is largely irrelevant.
The "patriarchy" so beloved of feminists is a thing of the past, and only women can allow themselves to be ruled by men, if they don't want that then there are already ample ways for them to not have to suffer, far more than there are avenues for men to free themselves from abusive situations.
As pointed out, between the laws and the media any man accused is faced with proving his innocence, and even if he can, very difficult to achieve, the mud still sticks, it makes a mockery of the presumption of innocence.
Also, yes, women, despite common sense or experience, ARE attracted to violent and domineering men, that too is genetic, we've all seen it in action, time after time, despite all the education and denials.
Oh stuff this, I'm starting a thread on this, it should appear tomorrow.
I note too the disparagement above of women who choose a traditional role, instead of trying to be faux men as the feminists desire.
Posted by G'dayBruce, Sunday, 24 August 2014 7:53:12 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
Gee, Susie, if we are going to go by personal experience, I don't know about all these 'raped' and 'DV victims' either.

I guess I don't work in the DV/Rape industry so I only know normal people. And I don't know a single woman who has been raped and the only victims of DV I know are men. Once upon a time there was a stigma about rape and so there may have been a hidden problem but those days are long gone. Victim status is now something to be proud of.

We all know the types who are drawn to this victim milieu. They are often depressed, single woman on benefits who go from one troubled relationship to the next. Sometimes they have a gambling or drug/alcohol problem and so making a rape/DV claim just makes them, well, a victim. It absolves them of all personal responsibility. We could test this theory about Shorten's accusor but, alas, accusors can make any claim secure in the knowledge their names and personal histories will never be revealed. We will never know.

I know Schadenfreude is not an emotion to be proud of, but I couldn't help smiling when Shorten had to come clean about this accusation. Imagine Bill, one of the 'good people' who has spent his whole live advocating for the 'equality' and 'rights' of woman, now being accused of rape. Great stuff.

I suspect that for every one real rape claim there are five malicious claims made to make-up for hurt feelings. Just ask Bill.
Posted by dane, Sunday, 24 August 2014 8:22:25 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
Suse.
Wrong, Feminists don't take power away from men, they enter into power sharing arrangements with the powerful in society, the state, big business etc.
Feminists work with the state and vested interests to keep men from "doing anything stupid", like organising effective political parties or trade unions.
The powerful elements of society love having women on staff because they're more obedient than men and less likely to strike or demand better treatment.
As I said,male Feminists are the enforcers, they're the guys in the black hoodies and balaclavas who turn out to bash anyone who challenges Feminism:
http://files.schuminweb.com/life-and-times/2007/j27/full-size/011.jpg
The activists like the ones in the photo aren't challenging the real power in society, they're attacking "patriarchy" ie anyone who disagrees with Feminism for any reason.
Suse, I think you're just out of touch with the real world, Feminism no longer represents what you think it does, the reason it's being protested so vigorously is that the new generation are utterly obnoxious people like Chanty Binx,Suey Park,Miriam Weeks and Anita Sarkeesian.
These are the daughters and proteges of the fourth wave and they're completely unhinged and unreasonable.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Sunday, 24 August 2014 8:26:16 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 same tired old arguments, time and time again, this gets really boring.

We have the feminist concrete thinkers, who believe every one else should bend to will and beliefs.

We have the individuals who try to make inflammatory statements and use sophistry to try and win their point of view.

So really it pretty pointless waste of time trying to point out errors of feminism and some feminists.

In reality it appears that they just want to continue the stats quo. So never really putting into place measures that just might be really effective and achieve their so called desired outcomes.
Posted by Wolly B, Sunday, 24 August 2014 9:30:19 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 Of Mars

Well if women like Anita Sarkeesian are ‘obnoxious’ (as opposed to silent, submissive and seductive – the way men designed them to be), what does that make the Neanderthal YouTube War that has been waging against her for the last three years? A war that includes creative, imaginative stuff like online games where your reward for progressing to the next level is the privilege to gang-rape her onscreen.

This campaign became so TOXIC and BESTIAL that even diehard anti-feminist male gamers started yelling STOP! Not because they didn’t agree with the rampant vitriol being waged against her ad nauseum, but because they were concerned that it might make them look bad and turn her into a feminist martyr.

Oh, dear. Defending male innocence has its drawbacks.

In fact, it has gotten so bad and even dangerous, that not only has she had to disable the comments on all her videos, even videos by other people who are supportive of her work have had to disable their comments.

I won’t put up any links, but for anyone who wants to check out this sick, sick campaign just go to YouTube and type Anita Sarkeesian.

WARNING! It ain’t pretty. And keep a bucket handy.

R0bert

Wow! You have my undying admiration. Your latest little side-swipe at me takes passive-aggressiveness and bullying-by-proxy to the level of an art form
Posted by Killarney, Monday, 25 August 2014 12:18:34 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
Killarney, BS and I think you know that. You opened with a mocking and dishonest attack on research that has tried to give a more realistic portrayal of DV numbers than the stuff you prefer. I think you know enough on the topic to know how dishonest (other than through the lens of marxist concepts of power) what passes as feminist research is on the topic, especially the way the numbers are portrayed in public. What you are doing is a tired old game that has a lot more interest in feminist political agendas than in reducing actual DV or other social ills.

Odd, in other areas you often make some good points but on gender issues you are so stuck in your polarised views that I'm left wondering what drives that in you.

We are all human, all in this together with good an bad on both sides of whatever passes for a gender divide. The pretense of some long term and on going male oppression of women is a handy lie but its not the reality of most peoples lives.

R0bert
Posted by R0bert, Monday, 25 August 2014 5:36:27 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
As I read this article, it seems there is no intention to name and shame anybody who has an AVO taken out against them.

Only if they breach it.

Get a grip.

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Monday, 25 August 2014 8:13:48 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
Phanto, and a few others!
Blaming the victim again!?
It's all her fault, she should have chosen someone not given to violence!
Wow, first you want to transfer all the blame to her, she was too pretty, too seductive, too easy; etc/etc, ad nuseum; then you want her to be a, she should have known, mind reader as well!?
Get real, a real man would have stood up for her, not joined the queue throwing the allegorical stones!
Real men don't beat up on their wives! EVER! No ifs, buts or maybes!
Sometimes it takes more courage to walk away from a fight, than to have one!
And if you can't do that, buy a punching bag and take it all out on that! And if you can't do that; walk away, understanding, that its over!
Better that than to become a recidivist, incorrigible, excuse making bar steward, who's first and only response is violence!
Women and children are just not punching bags; [or sand bags,] and violence only ever begets more violence; and or, permanently damaged kids growing up in a poisonous, terrifying environment, where they think that this HORSE MANURE is normal!
And then we wonder why there's bullying at schools!
Rhrosty.
Posted by Rhrosty, Monday, 25 August 2014 9:54:13 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
Rhosty:
Of course women are to blame for the partners they choose. Are they being forced into relationships? As far as I can see they all have freedom of choice and if they do not then they have bigger problems than domestic violence to worry about. Women choose their relationships – what happens after that is a separate issue altogether. No one is suggesting men are not to blame for their own violence and putting the issues together is simply a way of trying to emotionally manipulate the discussion. This a form of aggression.

If I was considering a relationship with someone it is exactly that type of aggression I would be very wary about. You do not have to be a mind reader to know that someone who manipulates, resorts to sarcasm, shouts, swears, belittles, tries to induce guilt where none is appropriate and patronises people is someone with a desire to hurt other people. These are all evident in just the above post. Violence is only one way to destroy people
Posted by phanto, Monday, 25 August 2014 10:58:16 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
Thanks Phanto,

I've been sceptical about the very notion of misogynism - how could men not like women ? - but you've demonstrated that it is possible, and perhaps more pervasive than I thought.

Do you have a photo ? If I ever go into a front-bar, I'll be careful to give you a wide berth.

To repeat, Clark's initiative is not to name and shame people on ACOs, but those scumbags (I think that's the technical term?) who breach AVOs.

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Monday, 25 August 2014 11:35:33 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
Loudmouth:
Who said I was a man? Or are you too intent on insulting me to consider anything else? That need to hurt others in order to try and feel good about yourself is the very thing that soon translates into violence. I would steer clear of you in a bar too. I may only be misogynist but you are highly likely to be violent.
Posted by phanto, Monday, 25 August 2014 12:19:03 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
Joe from the quote in the article "of any offender who has been charged with (emphasis added) or convicted of contravening the notice or order and the identity of the adult victim". Its not a proven breach but being charged with a breach. In other aras of law I'd have quite a bit more confidence in the link between guilt and charges whilst still holding to a general preference for an assumption of innocence unless proven guilty. Not so much around anything in the family law arena.

My impression is of multiple layers of procedural weakness in the granting of and enforcement of AVO's combined with what is some times a significant vested interest in the outcome for those able to manipulate the system effectively that has little to do with personal safety.

Its a messy area, there are thugs around who those unfortunate enough to have formed relationships with in the past need protection from but I do think that perception is overplayed as a tactic by some to help political aims.

We should be very cautious in my view of any government initiates which weaken the protections that so much of our legal system is built on to the advantage of people who may have a lot to gain by manipulating the system without significant safeguards being put in place to prevent that manipulation.

R0bert
Posted by R0bert, Monday, 25 August 2014 12:36:48 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
Suseonline, "I see just as many downtrodden women as I do men"

I don't know that anyone in Australia is 'downtrodden'. However some do seek victim status for the benefits and others promote it to keep their well-remunerated careers in the victim industry that was set up by Gough Whitlam. Gough was trying to help, but Labor soon discovered there were votes in legitimising victimhood and maintaining it for a growing mob of rent-seeking private professionals, public bureaucrats and NGOs, even if it resulted in the bucket of taxpayers' money leaking like a sieve.

However I do believe that most women have done very poorly out of feminism because it was always the greedy educated middle class feminists who were running the show and directing policy for their own secondary gain.

I have said in previous threads on the subject that feminists do not recognise the normal, natural and largely chosen transitions that most women go through in life and nor do they (feminists) accept any choice for women but the careerism as a professional that educated middle class women see and have as their right.

To give an example, city planning is of no interest to a middle class feminist, who would rather advise PMs like Abbott towards spreading the fabulous maternity leave conditions enjoyed by public servants. However city planning is of crucial concern to most women of all ages and for real, differing and obvious reasons. The forever whining and selfish middle class feminists have their cars provided by their employer and would abhor the very though of public transport and handling dependents, young and old, in a modern shopping centre. It is rather obvious that over-population destroys the lifestyle of most women, but again the feminists don't give a whit about that either. However they do resent any limitation of the victim and entitlement industries where many have their well-paid careers.
Posted by onthebeach, Monday, 25 August 2014 2:16:32 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
Hi Phanto,

I didn't intentionally suggest that you were a real man :)

I apologise for hurting your feelings. I like people generally, women and men, so you don't have any fears.

Point taken, RoBErT, about merely being 'charged' with breaching an AVO, although to 'name and shame' someone before they have been found guilty and shot, may also be breach of the law, don't you think ?

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Monday, 25 August 2014 2:25:07 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
Loudmouth:
Hiding behind sarcasm is a very cowardly way to apologise. Why are you apologising anyway? My feelings are my problem so if you had no intention of doing harm then what is the point of apologising. It is totally irrational, undignified and lacking in self-respect.
Posted by phanto, Monday, 25 August 2014 3:33:38 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
Phanto,

How do you know I'm not a sheila ?

I apologised for hurting your feelings, not for hurting you in corpore. I wouldn't do that :)

BTT: I have no problem with 'naming and shaming' a person who has breached an AVO, male or female: presumably, given the usual emotional history on both sides, such a breach would quite likely have moved quickly to shouts, threats and perhaps actual violence and the terrorising of children. People shouldn't have to put up with that.

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Monday, 25 August 2014 4:32:02 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
Suse, I wish the men on this thread were not so quick to dismiss what is happening and instead of ridiculing women and having a go at feminism would instead say that real men would never injure a woman.

I'm angry that the author of this article conflated violence with feminism. It is a disgusting bit of dogwhistling.

If none of you have ever bashed a woman, or raped a woman, than it is not about you. The fact is there are a number of men who do just that.

Like Suse I've worked in large public hospitals since 1976. And yes this is personal experience, but the fact is, I've looked after women in Intensive care (!) beaten up by men. AND I've looked after men beaten up by other men. I've never had to look after a man injured by a woman.

It is a fact, the numbers are for anybody to check up, One woman on average DIES EACH WEEK at the hands of a man, her partner or an ex. Do men ever die at the hands of his intimate female partner? Yes, but very few. You read it in the paper whenever it happens, because it is so unusual.

Physical violence against women is a serious problem. It is not because of feminism. It is because there are men out there who think they can beat their wives. They have ALWAYS been there. My mother is 83, well before feminism, she's glad that women can now speak out about this.

It is great that none of the men on this forum would ever lay a hand on a woman and find it hard to believe that this does happen. I can guarantee you that you do know a man who does just that, but you might never know. For all sorts of reasons a woman might not report this, and believe me, it is not related to a paypacket or having or not having charge of that or liking 'bad boys'.
Posted by yvonne, Monday, 25 August 2014 7:32:14 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
Yvonne, there is no point tackling the 'good 'ol boys' on this forum with any sort of truth, because they don't want to hear it.

Men have been bashing their intimate partners and other men, long before, and after, feminism was ever thought of.

As usual I will reiterate that it isn't ALL men who are violent, and women can be violent as well of course, but we don't see the same number of deaths and physical injuries amongst the male domestic violence victims as we do the females.

That is a fact, and the medical and law professions know this fact is correct.
Any other rubbish spouted by people who just don't know the facts should be viewed with suspicion....
Posted by Suseonline, Monday, 25 August 2014 8:44:54 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
yvonne, " instead say that real men would never injure a woman"

But real men are fallable human beings, the vast majority will not initiate violence and most will not hit back for a long time even if subject to violence from a woman. All other things being equal I'll support the statement but all to often its a cop out for bullies and I don't support it as a way of attacking men who have not coped well with a bully who initates violence against them.

One of the aspects of this that is frustating is the determination of some women to demand men make those kind of statements but fail over and over again to apply the same standards to women who hide behind their gender to initiate violence believing themselves safe from receiving in kind. To apply the same standards women who will use gendered stereotupes and well meaning laws to destoy an ex. To apply the same standards to women who aras where they may have advantage over men in brutal ways.

Women do not directly kill as many male intimate (or former) partners as men kill but have you ever considered the role female bullying may play in the vastly higher rates of male suicide and other factors which effect men far more than women. At a guess you have probably treated males who have been injured by female intimate partners, the social stigma around it is such that few men can admit to that without fear of massive consequences to themselves.

Both genders have their bullies and thugs, the focus on the exteme end of direct violence whilst ignoring other ways of hurting people, the use of statistics based around assumptions about power in the home and a range of other tactics of the gender warriors just perpetuate the problems. The focus needs to come off gender and onto reducing the pressures that add to violence in all its forms and the difficulties people have effectively escaping from a bully.

R0bert
Posted by R0bert, Monday, 25 August 2014 10:26:24 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
RObert "At a guess you have probably treated males who have been injured by female intimate partners, the social stigma around it is such that few men can admit to that without fear of massive consequences to themselves."

If they are supposedly too embarrassed to say that their partner bashed them, then how on earth would you or the other boys know about the rate of incidents?

The fact remains that I and all other nurses and medical staff HAVE actually seen and treated many bashed women, both inside hospitals and in their own homes.
I am damn sure they didn't lie about who did it.

I have seen their loving partners come in and visit (watch?) them back in the days when the police couldn't charge them without the woman's say so, and they almost never had a mark on them!
I hated those smarmy men with a passion.
I could tell you a multitude of awful stories, but I can't legally.

I realise there are some very violent women out there, and I know they can goad their men to violence just the same as any man, but severe (any!) injuries or death is not a suitable 'punishment' for any amount of 'lip'.

A dead woman, killed by her intimate partner, should cause at least as much angst in our society as a young man who is killed by a one punch murder.......but it doesn't, does it?
Posted by Suseonline, Monday, 25 August 2014 11:30:59 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
Suseonline, "A dead woman, killed by her intimate partner, should cause at least as much angst in our society as a young man who is killed by a one punch murder.......but it doesn't, does it?"

Horses' apples.

That is some ritual you have going, where you continually surface to repeat the same old stuff, usually false dilemmas, to wind up RObert and others. They always rise to the occasion to repeat what they have said before. Then at some stage you turn around to again say you are unconvinced so 'pppffffftttt' rhubarb to them.

Feminists need DV (rape culture too) because there are heaps of jobs, careers and thousands of professional consultancy hours in it, sucking millions out of the bucket of taxpayers' dollars every year. Middle class feminists have had a jolly good run out of it, as have the professionals and bureaucrats in the other victim industries, but young taxpayers cannot afford to pay for it.

Not now that young workers have the burden of an aging population,

and

they are stumping up for the infrastructure and Centrelink benefits for the continuing over-supply of migrants

and

they do not have the benefit and predictability of permanent, full-time jobs for life (as enjoyed by those educated, middle class feminists for instance)

and

younger workers are being required to provide for their own old age.
Posted by onthebeach, Tuesday, 26 August 2014 1:37:54 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
I love how woman feel they can determine who a 'real man' is. This goes along with the belittling 'boys' jibe. It often comes from people who work in the female dominated victim industries. If women don't have some men around to settle them down, this sort of snarkiness often raises its ugly head.

Maybe we should give Suzie and the other 'girls' some advice?

How about:
- real women don't regret sex after the fact and then make up rape claims
- real women have every law in the world to protect them against DV so real women don't stay in abusive relationships and then blame the man
- real women don't make children suffer for their own hurt by poisoning their relationships with their fathers
- real women put the well being of their children first

We will never convince the likes the Susie and co. to treat men as human beings with the same rights as women. The fact is they are female chauvinists.

I at least take solice in Bill Shorten's suffering. After thousands and thousands of men have suffered false accusations (especially in custody disputes) due to laws watered down by gutless men like him, it was just so nice to see the chickens come home to roost.

Susie, you might have worked in hospitals but have you worked on the streets where 95% of homeless people are men? Or in morgues where 70-80% of suicides victims are men? Or the single men's hostels where men have lost everything to the ex? Or in drug and alcohol rehabilitation where the vast majority are men, many of whom lost everything after a relationship breakdown?

You say you know there is a lot of domestic violence because you work in a hospital. What next? We'll have barmen telling us there are lots of drunks, or highway patrol officers telling us there is a lot of speeding.

Maybe if we just started with:
-real women take responsibility for their own actions, we might be able to get somewhere.
Posted by dane, Tuesday, 26 August 2014 4:02:23 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
"If they are supposedly too embarrassed to say that their partner bashed them, then how on earth would you or the other boys know about the rate of incidents?"

Not just embarrassed, fear that if they try and address it in any way it will be turned back on them and result in massive harm in all areas of their lives. We have been over and over how we would know, looking at the rsearch that actually asks both genders about their experience of giving and receiving violence.

Also a bit of other men being more likely to talk about their own experiences from a violent spouse with men who are willing to hear it than they might be generally but that aspect is prettty subjective as is the experience of nurses with strong views on gender violence. You also probably don't get to find out how many times some of those women you treat hit their partner before he retailiated.

As I keep pointing out and you have acknowledged previously its not a nice simple divide of good gender, bad gender. Give either side open slather at an aspect of power over the other and some will abuse it.

I detest the way these threads get so polarised and combative and don't do well with responding in that space. I'd like to see all non consentual violence and abuse stopped, regardless of the gender of the perpetator or the tools used.

I'm strongly of the view that trying to make DV about men by feminists (and some others) is a big part of the failure to get the rates down more than we have. Core issues are not being addressed, sometimes contributing factors are made worse for the sake of political agendas.

R0bert
Posted by R0bert, Tuesday, 26 August 2014 6:10:09 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
Thanks Dane, that's fascoinating:

"Susie, you might have worked in hospitals but have you worked on the streets where 95% of homeless people are men? Or in morgues where 70-80% of suicides victims are men? Or the single men's hostels where men have lost everything to the ex? Or in drug and alcohol rehabilitation where the vast majority are men, many of whom lost everything after a relationship breakdown?"

Yeah, we don't hear about the women who have forced men out of their houses, or women who have driven men to suicide, or women who have forced drugs on their menfolk, and even forced alcohol on their menfolk - I can hardly believe it, it's so cruel !

And why don't we ever hear about this ?!

Possibly because it doesn't happen.

If you assert, you prove. An assertion without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Tuesday, 26 August 2014 9:22:08 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 said Loudmouth.
No one can 'force' someone else to think the way they do.
Suicide and homelessness are caused largely by mental health issues, and are not gender related.

Dane, as a community nurse I have and do work with homeless people too.
Have you?
One thing is for sure, the often claimed childhood sex abuse and mental illness generally caused their drug or alcohol abuse, and led to their relationship breakdowns and homelessness.
But you would know that already of course?

As for personal experiences, a relative of mine is just going through an awful divorce where her husband verbally threatened her all through the past 3 years of her marriage.
She has lost most of the money she put into the marriage and he has come out with most of the marital assets, because she was too scared to fight for equal shares.

So don't tell me it is a woman's world.
Posted by Suseonline, Tuesday, 26 August 2014 10:11:57 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'm strongly of the view that trying to make DV about men by feminists (and some others) is a big part of the failure to get the rates down more than we have"

Don't feminists keep enlarging the definition to increase the numbers? However quite apart from that, genderising violence has a number of negative outcomes, the most obvious being that taxpayers' money is being wasted on feminist inspired (and again genderised) 'treatments' that are ineffectual in addressing the contributing causes. Nothing like researcher error for producing garbage that wastes money. Although those who are milking the public purse wouldn't see it that way.

I could take the easy example to point out that in by far the greatest majority of cases the children who grow up to see violence as their preferred solution were raised by women. What modelling in the home has produced that and what can be done about it? Remembering that alcohol and drug abuse, and child neglect are likely culprits in that sorry modelling.

I could also mention that the preferred shaming of men is unnecessarily generalised and could produce negative behaviour including self harm in boys and youth. Its use would have slim effect on the offenders anyhow, but the strategy serves another purpose, to justify and prop up those consultancies and careers of educated middle class feminists.

However my concerns are rooted in far more fundamental matters, such as the splitting and wastage of available taxpayers' money. Quite obviously there should be federally coordinated independent national research into violence. Also, the feminist inspired 'solutions' (that are not solutions at all) make worse and could never improve, the existing problems in coordination of health and others social programs among the levels of government and with private suppliers.
Posted by onthebeach, Tuesday, 26 August 2014 10:23:36 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
Suseonline, "So don't tell me it is a woman's world"

Apparently it isn't a men's world either.

Violence is violence. It is all abhorrent.

<More than 40% of domestic violence victims are male, report reveals
Campaign group Parity claims assaults by wives and girlfriends are often ignored by police and media
..
Data from Home Office statistical bulletins and the British Crime Survey show that men made up about 40% of domestic violence victims each year between 2004-05 and 2008-09, the last year for which figures are available. In 2006-07 men made up 43.4% of all those who had suffered partner abuse in the previous year, which rose to 45.5% in 2007-08 but fell to 37.7% in 2008-09.

Similar or slightly larger numbers of men were subjected to severe force in an incident with their partner, according to the same documents. The figure stood at 48.6% in 2006-07, 48.3% the next year and 37.5% in 2008-09, Home Office statistics show.

The 2008-09 bulletin states: "More than one in four women (28%) and around one in six men (16%) had experienced domestic abuse since the age of 16. These figures are equivalent to an estimated 4.5 million female victims of domestic abuse and 2.6 million male victims."

In addition, "6% of women and 4% of men reported having experienced domestic abuse in the past year, equivalent to an estimated one million female victims of domestic abuse and 600,000 male victims".
..
The number of women prosecuted for domestic violence rose from 1,575 in 2004-05 to 4,266 in 2008-09. "Both men and women can be victims and we know that men feel under immense pressure to keep up the pretence that everything is OK," said Alex Neil, the housing and communities minister in the Scottish parliament. "Domestic abuse against a man is just as abhorrent as when a woman is the victim.">
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2010/sep/05/men-victims-domestic-violence
Posted by onthebeach, Tuesday, 26 August 2014 11:05:55 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
It's so depressing to read some of the comments. And it's so depressing to have so many blaming women. Women bully men to the point were they can't help themselves and therefore beat a woman. Why didn't he leave if she was so awful? That's what women get to hear all the time. Why didn't you leave him when he was so violent? Children are brought up in violent homes headed by women. Women cause men to commit suicide. The homeless men are there because of women.

No wonder they deserve to die at the rate of 1 a week and be hospitalized. Women, and feminists in particular, brought this on themselves.

What do some of you propose? If a woman gets injured presume she's guilty and very probably deserved it and she should just suck it up, behave, or move out?

And feminists get blamed for making one gender (men) bad and the other good.

But as Suse pointed out, let one boy stroll around late at night on the street after drinking minding his own business get killed by one punch, meted out by another MALE, who also has been drinking and all hell breaks loose and draconian laws are instantly enacted.

Men don't like getting killed by men, neither do women.

I started this thread by saying I didn't think naming and shaming is a good idea. My experience is that domestic violence has quite a number of factors, primarily, but not only, a man being exposed to violence in his childhood. Reading the anti women diatribe, and that's all it is, I've changed my mind. Forget the AVO, just go straight for telling and shaming. To everybody. Until he moves out and on and goes for his counselling sessions with this article's author where he can get reinforcement about all these evil manipulative women driving him to violence, he could still be peacefully at home, but for the evil feminists turning his woman, not to mention the law, against him.
Posted by yvonne, Tuesday, 26 August 2014 3:43:43 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 attempts to keep the focus on the violence of men in domestic relationships is simply a way of diverting attention from the culpability of women in choosing to enter domestic relationships in the first place. Violence between any two persons in society is a problem – it does not matter where or how that violence exists. We have structures in place to protect people from violence. If, however, you can avoid that violence and you choose not to then you cannot blame the society for failure to protect you. Society, laws and police are there to protect you when you cannot protect yourself.

Every day we are told that one in three women will be victims of domestic violence and yet women continue to enter into a situation where they have a 30 per cent chance of being beaten up. No one forces them into this situation. Any human being man or woman who enters any situation which they do not have to enter knowing full well that they have a one in three chance of being injured is a complete fool and shows a lack of self-respect.

Many women say they had no way of knowing that the man would become violent. They do know – they are told relentlessly that it happens to one in three. It is a gamble and you have to take responsibility for your own actions when you gamble. If you lose your money at the casino you cannot claim that you did not know it could happen. You cannot shift responsibility by blaming the reality of gambling.

Women can simply fix the problem of men’s violence by refusing to enter into domestic relationships with them but that is not the fix they want. They do not want a solution to the problem because there is one right under their noses which they refuse to take up. It is time for women to put up or shut up.

Cont.
Posted by phanto, Tuesday, 26 August 2014 4:35:09 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
Cont.

If you choose to enter into a situation where you are likely to be beaten up and have no recourse to the law because it upholds the burden of proof then you are entirely culpable for that choice. It is not what women say but what they do that really matters. If you have a way out of a problem and you refuse to take that way then you obviously want to be in domestic relationships for all the wrong reasons.

It is that reality which women do not want to have to face. They do not want to admit that they enter domestic relationships for all the wrong reasons. For romance, security, children, the fairy tale, to please their parents, to ease the peer pressure from their ‘friends’. There are dozens of similar reasons but none of them good ones. There is only one good reason and that is because you love the person you decide to create a domestic situation with.

When a woman enters into a relationship for the right reason she will not want to deny that she entered the relationship knowing full well that there was a 30 per cent chance of being a victim of violence. If she is a victim of violence she will not blame the nature of the relationship or the other person in it. She will not blame the reality of the gamble she took. She will take full responsibility for her choices and accept that she lost. She will extricate herself as best she can from a situation that has turned bad. She will cut her losses and run. She will not try and deny that she lost by blaming her partner’s behaviour since his unpredictability is a big part of the gamble. It is like blaming the deck of cards because they did not fall the way you would have liked.

The answer to the problem is very simple and if you do not want to solve the problem then stop going on about it.
Posted by phanto, Tuesday, 26 August 2014 4:38:23 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
yvonne and Suseonline,

You both rely on your own experience and observation, discarding all facts that run contrary to your world view which, if you only thought about it, holds women in contempt as eternal victims.

What do you say about the bald fact of those UK numbers though? What about these facts?

<Data from Home Office statistical bulletins and the British Crime Survey show that men made up about 40% of domestic violence victims each year between 2004-05 and 2008-09, the last year for which figures are available. In 2006-07 men made up 43.4% of all those who had suffered partner abuse in the previous year, which rose to 45.5% in 2007-08 but fell to 37.7% in 2008-09.

Similar or slightly larger numbers of men were subjected to severe force in an incident with their partner, according to the same documents. The figure stood at 48.6% in 2006-07, 48.3% the next year and 37.5% in 2008-09, Home Office statistics show.

The 2008-09 bulletin states: "More than one in four women (28%) and around one in six men (16%) had experienced domestic abuse since the age of 16. These figures are equivalent to an estimated 4.5 million female victims of domestic abuse and 2.6 million male victims."

In addition, "6% of women and 4% of men reported having experienced domestic abuse in the past year, equivalent to an estimated one million female victims of domestic abuse and 600,000 male victims".>
[see my post above, onthebeach, Tuesday, 26 August 2014 11:05:55 AM]

Suseonline,

Referring directly to your often repeated claim that neither you nor other community nurses ever encounter violence that is woman->woman, woman->child or woman->man, have you ever considered you are probably part of the problem that enlightened health services are trying to address? Here is an example from a modern health service, the Mayo Clinic and I would be interested in your views on it,

<Domestic violence against men: Know the signs
http://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-living/adult-health/in-depth/domestic-violence-against-men/art-20045149?pg=1
Posted by onthebeach, Tuesday, 26 August 2014 5:21:17 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
"No one can 'force' someone else to think the way they do."

The word 'force' is correct in the strict sense of the word but then if that was the criteria for addressing an issue not much would warrent addressing.

What we should look at is the role certain factors play in outcomes, if bullying rarely effects its victims because they cannot be forced to think a certain way then Suzie has a point. If not then it's a dodge to avoid the issue.

http://www.workplacebullying.org/individuals/impact/mental-health-harm/ "Sometimes, the violence is turned inward. When the "way out" seems unattainable and no alternatives can be imagined, some people contemplate suicide."

Apparently some people think that womens mental health is impaced by a partners behaviour
http://www.health.vic.gov.au/vwhp/downloads/vichealth_violence%20_%20summary.pdf "Among these, violence against women, particularly that occurring in the context of an intimate relationship, emerged as an especially common phenomenon having serious mental health impacts."

The list could go on and on. Anybody who genuinely thinks that bullying and excessive power wielded on an ongoing basis by someone keen to hurt won't generally have an impact on mental health should be championing the dismantling of a lot of government programs built around the idea that bullying does generally do harm regardless of some peoples ability to rise above it.

Simple summary - if you hand to much power to one party to hurt the other (backed all to often by the government) and hurt them on almost every front a percentage will not cope. If their plight is dismissed because they were not together enough in the first place then the bar is being set pretty high.

Men who lose most of their involvement in their kids lives from an ex's manipulation, who have their reputations tarnished through lies and who also lose most of their hope for rebuilding their life through punitive financial arrangements also backed by the government have been bullied big time.

R0bert
Posted by R0bert, Tuesday, 26 August 2014 5:32:14 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
Wow, you blokes seem to have trouble getting on with women :)

Question, otb, although I suspect that Suse can answer it a lot better: from your experience, would men who have been battered be as injured, and require as much emergency treatment, as women who have been battered ?

If only we could look into the future, but most of us enter a relationship with stars in our eyes, not believing that the One WE Love could ever mistreat us. If you are ever in that situation, I'm sure you will be able to appreciate that.

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Tuesday, 26 August 2014 6:52:53 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
on the beach

Yaay! That good ol' British Crime Survey that gets trotted out virtually every time some fanatical backlasher wants to 'prove' that women are just as/almost as/even more violent than men.

Despite the awfully authoritative sounding title, the survey is based merely on recall methodology (which I prefer to call giggle research), or to quote Wiki:

'The survey seeks to measure the amount of crime in England and Wales by asking around 50,000 people aged 16 and over ... living in private households, about the crimes they have experienced in the last year.'

The key phrasing here is that they are asked to recall an incident. When being used to assess domestic violence, the obvious major flaws in this are that it makes no distinction between defensive and offensive violence or gender disparities in physical strength, and ignores gender prejudices and bias. But it’s these very flaws that make it extremely attractive to the backlash industry (aka Men's Rights Movement).

Those irrefutable ‘facts’ that you keep referring to are not facts at all, but an accumulation of subjective memories.

R0bert

Please don’t bother to respond to this by writing yet another condescending concern-troll post to this forum about how I am so incapable and/or unwilling to accept any research that does not fit my extremist feminist dogma.

Unless anyone can prove to me that recall methodology is a scientifically sound research method, I’ll continue to dismiss it as giggle research.

So, calm down. Take deep breaths and go make yourself a cup of tea.
Posted by Killarney, Tuesday, 26 August 2014 6:58:42 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
"Unless anyone can prove to me that recall methodology is a scientifically sound research method, I’ll continue to dismiss it as giggle research."

I doubt anyone could prove to Killarney that the earth was basically a sphere if it contradicted feminist dogma.

No problems with recall type research when it conducted by women for women and does not ask about violence they may have perpetated. No problems with altering the figures to suit dogma, no problems with a whole host of dodgy research methods used to prop up feminist findings about DV but any excuse to dismiss research that actually tries to find the facts.

No giggles in this, real people of both genders get hurt while the Killarneys of the world play their vile gender war games.

Joe, have you ever asked the same question of women raising concerns about the mens movement or the female version of the kind of issues men are raising here? I doubt it, are you one of those who does not think that women are as capable as men when it comes to thinking and need some special protections? Thats how your comments on this tread are looking to me.

R0bert
Posted by R0bert, Tuesday, 26 August 2014 7:20:59 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
Joe I guess the men who have been murdered in premeditated cold blood, can't answer your questions. Those who have had a penis cut off while sleeping probably don't want to.

Those slowly poisoned, children & men , probably weren't aware of it until too late. They may have been of course. Remember Churchill telling lady Astor I think it was, that if she were his wife, he would drink the poisoned coffee. A blessed escape for some I suppose.

In fact I think that more women indulge in premeditated murder or serious harm, in totally cold blood, than men ever do. This is much more vicious than actions in the heat of the moment. I also think cleaning the toilet with someone elses tooth brush is a purely feminine action.

Our feminists will probably have some concocted excuse for this behavior, but really there is none in this day.

The worst thing is the feminists have set the conditions for these murderesses to claim domestic violence, & get away with straight cold blooded murder.

I don't think either sex can claim moral superiority.
Posted by Hasbeen, Tuesday, 26 August 2014 9:14:49 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
Thanks Killarney, you have it all covered for OTB's 'stats'.
Nothing anyone can say will change the minds of misogynists like him though.

As I have said many times before, I am only interested in Australian crime statistics, and they tell us that vastly more numbers of women and men are killed and badly injured by other men than they are by women.

It goes without saying that any sane person would look to dealing with the main perpetrators of violence in our society before moving on to the other perpetrators.

Once we have stopped the killing of women by their 'intimate' partners every week of the year, then maybe we can start looking at the wider picture of domestic violence.
Murder is murder.....it is far more serious than all other forms of domestic violence.
Posted by Suseonline, Tuesday, 26 August 2014 9:39:57 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 would like to ask the women in this discussion exactly what they hope to achieve by being involved. It seems to me that their only contribution is to keep re-iterating the facts over and over again that men are violent towards women. Statistics, personal anecdotes and studies are presented which all state the same thing. Men are violent towards women and it is their responsibility to stop this. It is nothing more than nagging. Constantly pointing out the problem and laying the blame solely at the feet of men. Well all that is a given. Men are violent towards women and their behaviour is their responsibility. What does it profit anyone to keep going on and on about it?

Surely if their concern for women was genuine they would be doing everything in their power to discourage women from entering into situations that are inherently dangerous for them. They would be agitating for the removal of TV shows like the Bachelor which glamorises domestic bliss when in reality domestic relationships are the very places where women have a 30 per cent chance of being beaten. Who in their right mind would not find such a show deeply objectionable? Why aren’t these women going to schools and warning girls not to enter such a dangerous situation? Why are they not picketing and protesting outside the offices of women’s magazines who are constantly encouraging women to enter and maintain domestic situations with men. All their energy should be going into protecting women not into blaming men. Blaming achieves absolutely nothing.

Perhaps they are not so interested in the welfare of women and their real motivation is to appease some personal need by blaming men. It is the act of blaming itself that seems to provide some perverse pleasure for them. Could it be that they are not interested in the question of domestic violence at all but just want to jump on any bandwagon that gives them the opportunity to join with a mob that has a desperate need to convince themselves of the fundamental badness of men?
Posted by phanto, Wednesday, 27 August 2014 10:58:11 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
Hi Phanto,

Perhaps an answer to your questions is: that many women like men, and vice versa. We give each other the benefit of the doubt, particularly before any sign of brutality manifests itself. Not many people can know, before they enter into a long-term relationship, whether or not they might be one of the 30 % minority who have their dreams betrayed.

Was that your best shot ? That women complain too much about being beaten ? Why don't they just shut up and put up with it ? After all, kids and all, they've got themselves into a predicament that is too inconvenient for most men to do anything about, so they've got only themselves to blame ? Is that it ?

Phanto, keep your partner away from sharp objects, especially at night :)

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Wednesday, 27 August 2014 11:07:58 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
<Perhaps they are not so interested in the welfare of women and their real motivation is to <appease some personal need by blaming men.
< a desperate need to convince themselves of the fundamental badness of men?
<Posted by phanto, Wednesday, 27 August 2014 10:58:11 AM

Sounds pretty true to me.

The point is most people say they want DV that results in physical injury or death to stop, which is fair enough.

Sadly though a whole number of issues tend not to be addressed and get put under the umbrella of DV or IPV

Issues like mental illness, drug and alcohol abuse. From what I understand is that men make the largest percentage of psychopaths. However it could be that female psychopaths are better at not being detected. Not to mention acquired brain injury.

It is not unknown for people who are experiencing mania or psychosis to injury or kill someone. Yet this data gets included into the umbrella of DV/IPV. There are a number of media stories about families trying to get a family member to be treated, only to be turned away by the services, and tragically someone ends up getting killed.

Older people who are suffering from dementia can be violent and cause physical injury.

So in reality it is not so simple to address this issue, and we still haven't moved very far and refuse to examine interpersonal dynamics and how these dynamics may contribute to the escalation to physical violence.

What's the point of punishing some one after they have committed an offence, would it be much better for everyone if the offence had not been committed in the first place?
Posted by Wolly B, Wednesday, 27 August 2014 3:33:23 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
Hi Wolly B,

"What's the point of punishing some one after they have committed an offence, would it be much better for everyone if the offence had not been committed in the first place?"

Good point, but this is perhaps why a breach of an AVO needs to be considered an offence worth 'naming and shaming' - it may perhaps indicate a willingness to disregard the law (after all, an AVO is 'the law') and escalate a situation. As you say, better to get in first and nip it in the bud than to let it go on to something worse the next time.

Cheers,

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Wednesday, 27 August 2014 4:50:40 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
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 12
  7. 13
  8. 14
  9. All

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