The Forum > Article Comments > Gender-based Approach Misses the Mark in Tackling Family Violence > Comments
Gender-based Approach Misses the Mark in Tackling Family Violence : Comments
By Roger Smith, published 25/11/2010On White Ribbon Day, we condemn violence against women. We should also condemn it against men.
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- ...
- 28
- 29
- 30
- Page 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- ...
- 77
- 78
- 79
-
- All
Posted by Antiseptic, Thursday, 16 December 2010 7:26:01 AM
| |
Antiseptic I'm in agreement with the point you are making. I might be overly sensitive to that use of wording but as a tactic it's so overused by the "I like men but most of them are viscous ignorant brute's" crowd that I'd hate for those of us pushing for a more honest approach to these issues to get as sloppy with the way things are phrased.
The old 1 in 4 women have experienced some level of violence becoming "One in 4 men bash their parners/wives." approach. http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=11280#191440 R0bert Posted by R0bert, Thursday, 16 December 2010 7:45:01 AM
| |
“The neonaticide issue is simply illuminating a part of female psychology that is rarely discussed except to accuse anyone suggesting it exists must be misogynist.”
During war time more women kill their new born babies or attempt to abort… so that must mean during wars women are compulsive liars. Family Court should watch that one… no women should be listened to in court while there is a war on. Hey watched a good Aussie film the other night. Was called "Shame". Posted by Jewely, Thursday, 16 December 2010 7:48:31 AM
| |
Jewely, the report was not about mothers killing their newborn babies during war, but in normal, affluent France during peace.
From the article:""A team of paediatricians examined the court records of known infant homicides in three regions of France between 1996 and 2000" Never let a chance to distract pass by, eh? How much did you say you were being paid to stay home and look after other people's kids again? Good lifestyle, is it? Posted by Antiseptic, Thursday, 16 December 2010 7:53:14 AM
| |
Anti quit it. I don’t look after other peoples children. Actually my life is crap and it is lying abusive women that made it that way, Ironic eh.
I’m just saying that if killing babies means they are liars (that is what you are saying isn’t it?) then during times when they kill more babies they must be even bigger liars. Posted by Jewely, Thursday, 16 December 2010 8:02:50 AM
| |
Jewely:"I’m just saying that if killing babies means they are liars (that is what you are saying isn’t it?)"
No, I'm saying that if, as the report says, some are prepared to kill their kids to prevent their lifeatyle being disrupted then it is logical to expect that some greater number would be prepared to lie to achieve a similar result or for other reasons. From the report:"''Neonaticide thus appears as a solution when an unwanted pregnancy risks creating a family scandal, or the loss of a satisfying lifestyle.''" It has nothing to do with war or whatever you're trying to get at. I'm sorry to hear your lifestyle isn't all that you wish it to be. Such is life: nor is mine. Posted by Antiseptic, Thursday, 16 December 2010 8:07:48 AM
|
I do agree with you on the dangers of generalising from extremes. I was simply pointing out that it is rational to expect that there is a spectrum of behaviour with this at the extreme. Where most women would not dream of killing their baby for lifestyle reasons, many would be prepared to commit lesser acts such as lying in court or claiming violence where none exists.
The neonaticide issue is simply illuminating a part of female psychology that is rarely discussed except to accuse anyone suggesting it exists must be misogynist.