Yes Todd, the figures are damning in todays society, or in any society and a situation that many men find untenable. So, what can men do to remove this blight?

I invite other men to add to the list.

We can start when our boys are much younger to teach respect for their sisters,their mothers and all other women.
We can teach our boys to hug and let them know its OK to cry.
We can teach them emotions and how to talk about their hurts and desires.

At school we can value all boys efforts, not just those who play footy, but those who choose the Clarinet.
Much research has been done by Peter West and others at UWS into how we can best educate boys at school, we need the government to take up the suggestions.

We need more male teachers, more male role models, more male exemplers, and more male counsellors who can reach out to men who are hurting and have no other way to show it other than violently.

I understand those figures produced about Victorian women have been totally debunked, and in fact domestic violence was found to be one of the least reasons a woman was likely to die.

It is amazing that I have never once in my entire life seen a woman with a black eye, and I can’t even remember the last time I saw a woman with a bruise.

I went to a shopping centre a few days ago, and there must have been 100’s of women there, but none with a black eye.

I went to an arts festival a few weeks ago, and there must have been 1000’s of women there, but none with a black eye.

I have been to major sporting events, and there must have been 10,000’s of women there, but none with a black eye.

But I have heard that new legislation being proposed for VIC is that someone accusing someone else of domestic violence cannot be cross examined. You can cross examine someone for murder, but not for domestic violence, thereby allowing perjury to become the norm.

It is also odd how a women is twice as likely to be injured in the workplace from another woman than from a man.

But its all because of those “men”. Never in history have “men” ever done anything for “women and their children”.

“Men” are bad, and “women and their children” are good

It's vital that men have mates who aren't afraid to tell them that it's *not* okay to lash out, violently or even with verbal abuse and put-downs, at their partners or children.

Men need mates who will tell them with conviction that women are neither inferior nor playthings, and who will actively stand in their way if they begin to treat a woman this way.

It's okay for men to play *with* women, but only on the basis that they're on the same team.

So who do we believe, the CEO of VicHealth or HRS?

As usual with HRS's bleatings about women in this forum, there is no supporting evidence for his claims, beyond his own evidently very skewed experience.

Women aren't frequently victims of domestic violence in Australia? Get real, HRS.

"In spite of this a study by the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation in 2004 was disturbing.

The report found that violence by men against their partner was the leading contributor to preventable death, disability and illness in Victorian women. The study was of women aged from 15 to 44 and across all cultural groups.

Male violence against women causes more health problems in this age group than smoking and obesity."

At the very least I am intrigued to have a closer look at this study and how they derived the above figures, because intuitively it seems quite erroneous.

http://www.fact.on.ca/Info/dom/heady99.htm

"Our first hypothesis is that men are significantly more likely to physically assault their partners than vice-versa. Table 1 gives the percentage of respondents who report that they were assaulted in each of several ways in the last twelve months.

Men and women report approximately equal rates of being assaulted by their partner, for all three types of assault we asked about. These results are in line with American data, which also show no significant differences.(9)"

http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/170018.pdf
" About 27 percent of women and 34 percent of men among the Dunedin study members reported they had been physically abused by their partner. About 37 percent of women and 22 percent of men said they had perpetrated the violence."

also relevant

"Other studies have shown that although partner violence behaviors are similar across genders, consequences differ. Women are much more likely to be physically injured by men than men are to be physically harmed by women. The Dunedin study findings show that although women report perpetrating physical violence, the personal characteristics of male perpetrators are much more deviant."

and

"The researchers speculate that knowledge about the consequences of partner violence might explain this difference. Most men know that if they hit their partner, she is likely to be injured, the police may be called, and the police are now likely to act swiftly against male perpetrators. As a result, young men whose self control is compromised by enormous social stress, mental illness, or intoxication will be most likely to risk the consequences of hitting their partner. However women know that they are unlikely to injure their partner, he is unlikely to call for help, and the police are unlikely to intervene. Thus, there is little to deter an angry young woman from hitting her partner."

http://www.abusedchildtrust.com.au/facts.htm#3
Who perpetrates child abuse?
27% two parent (natural families)
23% two parent (other families)
37% single female parent families
5% single male parent families

R0bert