R0bert

<<< I could be wrong, if anyone cares to point out that they have never got personal about Antiseptic but cop abuse from him I'll willingly reconsider. >>>

Please read Antiseptic's latest post above in response to my latest post. I rest my case.

As for your claim that Flood attacks men's groups ruthlessly, until men's groups start to look at marital issues in their entirety and place some of their focus on male behaviour as well as female, then I'm sure he will continue to do so.

I have never denied that your experience, R0bert, was appalling, your ex sounds like a very controlling, manipulative woman. If anything, surely that experience would increase your empathy for women who experience the same. Until recently, women were expected to be obedient to their husband's - it was even a part of marital vows. That has changed, however, for some men, their status is threatened by having to treat women as equals. Had women been the dominant sex for eons, as were men, I am sure that they would be kicking and screaming at their perceived loss of power as many men are doing now. I don't believe that either sex is particularly more moral than the other. Human history shows that no dominant institution ever acquiesces quietly and with dignity.

As has been noted time and time again, our law courts are still dominated by men, most of our laws are still set by men: men who still have the traditional idea that women are the primary care-givers in our community and, in fact, women still are. For that to change, men will have to prove themselves as just as capable care-givers and to be vocal about it. However, vilifying women in general; single mothers in particular, doesn't convey the empathy, compassion and understanding that is required for good parenting.

It is not other women you have to convince, while the balance of power remains as it is; with men. Therefore, it is other men who require both convincing and to take positive action: against all abuse and exploitation.

pynchme,

1. 'The Menz sites have been minimizing that attributable to men -'

As the womens sites maximise violence attributable to men, which in effect minimises any violence attributed to women. R0bert's link to one of your posts shows a whole post where you minimise female violence, even to the level of attributing different motives.

'Womens violence seemed to be a form of resistance to being controlled or subdued. Mens violence seemed to intend to exert control and dominance.'

That sums your attitude up totally. Men; The abusive gender. Women; Sometimes violent but only because of the abusive gender.

3. 'Perpetrators of each sex need different approaches '

Yes we know all about that. Women need to be helped, men need to be punished and denied access to their children.

4. 'While women are portrayed (incorrectly) as the main source of family violence it detracts from efforts to reduce violence overall. Focusing on female violence is a smoke screen that isn't offering any information at all about how men can be less violent.'

Focussing on male violence is a smokescreen to deny any women are violent, and offers no information about preventing violent domestic disputes in which the majority involve both partners being violent.

'the main source'. Huh! I think most blokes on here would be happy with 'a source' being acknowledged. As it stands, any talk of DV is solely on a male=abuser female=victim dichotomy. Something you are very keen to hold on to. One wonders why. Sure you can admit personally you accept female violence, but your attitude is to hinder at any turn, any discussion of any responsibility for women in violent domestic disputes.

In fact you label anyone who disagrees with this dichotomy as a closet abuser.

'possibly from fellows who have attracted AVOs already. '

Severin

I still maintain that the choice of a cheerleader was deliberate. I was asked for an opinion, so I attempted to explain what I read. This was never meant to sound like a justification.

I also said that this type of porn should be condemned, but that choice of language is important. As a bloke, I find matter of fact type explanations and suggested solutions much more convincing than "let me show you how nice I am by acting as horrified as humanly possible." Language that implies that everything is men's fault also alienates us, in the same way that you aren't receptive to messages that imply that everything is the fault of women.

"There is no denying female violence from any of the female posters here, however, this is being treated in the many support services that women have established for themselves."

No, women tend to be told "don't blame yourself, it's all his fault." By condemming him, the speaker makes themself look good by supporting the "victim" and distancing themself from the actions of the "villan." It does nothing to solve the problem. Both participants need help in learning the exact same conflict resolution skills, so they can recognise the other person's attempts to keep things civil. Both participants need to be asked what is more important, the problem or the relationship?

'They epitomise the sort of woman who might be seen as arrogant and needing to be brought back to earth. This type of woman has never appeared concerned by the feelings of those men who she sees as "beneath" her.'

Sh1t benk, you've got me agreeing with fractelle. You really piss me off. 'this type of women'?

The chick just waves pom poms around man. All I can say is.. Wow! Maybe these 'men' should show her a thing or two and bring her back down to earth aye?

With regards to the article (which benk seems intent on validating)...

THIS IS WHAT PORNOGRAPHY LOOKS LIKE
Nup. This is the image you are using to represent all pornography.

THIS IS WHAT QUALITY EROTIC FILM ENTERTAINMENT FOR THE COUPLES MARKET LOOKS LIKE
Nope. Amateur porn showing willing partners seems to be the most popular choice for couples. ie reality TV porn.

What you describe is about as 'quality' as McDonalds. American accented, faked 'oooh oooh', repetitive boring cycle through positions, featuring an ugly bloke licking his lips while having sex 'on' a fake tanned, fake boobed, died blond, shaved, anal bleached 'woman' isn't considered 'quality' with anyone I know.

WHY HAS THE FEMINIST CRITIQUE OF PORNOGRAPHY BEEN ATTACKED SO STRENUOUSLY?
Because it relies on the misrepresentations you use as described above.

'I am not telling women how to feel or what to do. I am not accusing them of having false consciousness or being dupes of patriarchy.'

Nope, you're telling men how/what they do/should feel accusing them of having false consciousness or being dupes of patriarchy.

'your own sense of unease about masculinity. You feel it; I know you do.'

I feel no sense of unease about my masculinity. I feel a lot of unease about your skewed representation of masculinity.

'I don’t hate men. I don’t hate myself. '

That's definitely not what comes across mate.

benk: Thanks for your comments; I really appreciate it and your frankness. I think I get where you're coming from. Tell me if I understand it properly:

When you referred to bringing the cheerleader type down a peg or two (to paraphrase) - you were offering me a glimpse at the mental process of someone in some stage of arousal? I think I get that - not because it's thought to be 'right' (not by you I am presuming) but by a bloke at some point in the viewing. Like, maybe, a nerd who sees a cheerleader as the unattainable female because she is so picky about the blokes who flock around her?

The porn, if he identifies with the fellows somewhat, allows him to live in an illusory world for a little while where he is the one handing out the contempt.

Do I understand it properly? Can you just set me straight if I haven't grasped the right meaning.

(Severin - hey girlfriend! I don't think Benko was speaking first person - just giving an insight.)

Benk: <"Both participants need to be asked what is more important, the problem or the relationship?">

No, not once someone has been hurt physically. The risk is too great, plus people who are in a relationship where they are frightened of the other are too intimidated to accomplish much in family therapy.

There are cases of someone speaking in a therapy session then getting seriously punished later for speaking out.

Family therapy only has a chance after the abusee is safe and the violence has stopped. It's at that point that people can make decisions about whether they want to give the relationship another go (maybe with therapy if both agree that they want to do it).