1/2
@Liz here we go again, playing the victim to cover up for your disgusting behaviour!

Here's the cold hard reality- you accused me of lying about being raped and the victim of other forms of abuse at the hands of women and when I called you out on it, only to have you diminish things by turning things into a pissing contest!

Now you have the GAUL to claim that being called out for actions which you and your ilk would take to the streets over if the gender roles were reversed and the event was public enough; that it somehow makes you a perpetual victim. You're truly sick in the head.

Here's the thing which you cannot seem to get your depraved and miniscule mind around- had you treated all abuse as equally abhorrent as opposed to just claiming you do one minute and then invalidating it the moment the abuser/victim dynamics are "inconvenient" for you, then you would be receiving a very different response from me.

However when you act like a radical islamic cleric claiming justifying rape on the grounds of stereotypes, then you'll be treated just like they would be in that situation by you and your ilk were the gender roles reversed! But hey I guess you feminuts (and no that's not a typo- it's an abbreviation for (radical) feminist nutcase) only want equality when it suits you and doesn't involve personal accountability, don't you? Afterall, to people like you, the ends always justify the means.

(to be continued)

2/2 (continued)
You claim that the case put forward for abused men being treated like a joke is absurd, yet as recent cases show, judges criticise police for "failing to tell men to man up" when they come across cases of non-reciprocal male-on-female domestic violence where the child witnessing it was brought to tears by the attack such as in a case recently presided over by Justice (oh the irony of that title in cases like this) Conlon, or likewise, recently where a woman was found to have abused her children to the point where they were driven her children to self harm, was awarded sole custody by Justice Austin, even after he personally acknowledged the extent of the abuse.

Noone here is denying that the crimes you mention don't happen (however you would clearly deny incidents like women setting men alight after dousing them with petrol, throwing things in anger or threatening them with knives, considering that you accused me of lying about my own abuse)- the difference is that the legal system has been proven time and time again to vilify male victims and give women abusers a free pass.

But then we've already established that your notion of justice is grounded in vile sexism and misandry.

Liz45:"Why would the Rudd Govt put millions into combatting DV? "

Because it's an easy vote-buyer. It gets support from hysterics like you and women generally, who've been conditioned by years of Feminist indoctrination to believe they're more "special" than men and hence deserve "special" treatment.

It's nothing more than squeaky-wheelism.

Liz45:"Why would the NSW Govt put several million into the Staying Home, Leaving Violence program initiated last year?"

See above. You might also like to look into the "Duluth Model" of DV intervention which is designed solely around relieving police of any decision-making in domestic disputes.

Once again, weak-minded, but with a great deal of authoriatarianism overlayed.

Liz45:"Why would the Illawarra Police Command have two women full time to accompany women to court etc"

Do they have a couple of police to accompany male victims as well? If not, I'd call that simple discrimination and a misdirection of resources aimed at pandering to a vcal minority of noisy, troublemaking women activists. Once again, weak-minded pandering to the weak of mind.

Liz45:"Why would the NSW govt join the other states/territories and undertake, that all crimes of violence that occurred in the past would be studied to ensure, that inaction or some other reason/s led to their murders?"

Huh? Did you forget your meds dear? I did try to make sense of this, but it's beyond me, I'm proud to say. Are you suggesting that studying pastcases is something unusual and special? I suppose in your world, any effort to look at genuine data is pretty special, so perhaps that IS what yu're suggesting...

BTW, all the real data shows that women and men are about equally as violent toward each other. It's when kids are involved that women become especially worrisome.

In the paper this morning, it seems that the recent fire in Melbourne that killed a woman and 3 children wa sa murder-suicide. No doubt you'll find some way to pretend that those kids don't really count. After all, it's onlt "violence by men against women and their children" that's real violence in your sick world.

Liz45 and her ilk like to paint a simple picture of the totally innocent battered wife and the brutal husband. As many of us who are well versed in the subject of domestic violence know, relationship dynamics is usually heaps more complicated.

I recommend to all people interested in this subject that they should have a look at a couple of recent CBS documentaries covering the trials of women who murdered their husbands and the dynamics of their relationships:

1. Fatal Choice: A doctor's wife claims self-defense after she kills her millionaire husband. Was he worth more dead than alive? Peter Van Sant reports.

2. Shootout at the Hills: A husband terrorizes his wife and kids. There's money, abuse and murder. Did he deserve to die? Richard Schlesinger reports.

Notice that only one jurist out of two panels of jurists supported the battered wife defense.

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/48hours/full_episodes/?tag=bc#ixzz1AfxxFOTT

@Roscop@Antiseptic - You're continually asking me to look at myself, the facts blah blah blah, while never putting these tests on yourselves. You do not like women. You do not believe, that in all areas of violence (around the world)men are overwhelmingly responsible. I have never said that I agree with any violence. I have never said that women aren't violent, or that women don't hurt their kids, but in the area of domestic violence, including homicides,the overwhelming male sex are the perpetrators.

Why would the police as a whole service put so much of their resources into the area of DV? (got nothing better to do?) Why the AG's of each state and territory, and of course the Federal AG? Why put millions of dollars into the area of protecting women and kids, and the new body in NSW (I believe it exists in other states too)to re-examine every homicide in the past, even every death that may have appeared to be suicide or 'misadventure', and to look at them as possible DV homicides.

Why do you only read the few reports(frequently from overseas)that support your biased view? Why not read the reports that scrutinize the assertions in those you mention - eg. responses by Michael Flood who has years of experience in this field.

You all choose to completely ignore sexual violence. You just don't want to face the fact, that the perpetrators are males - overwhelmingly!

You also don't want to face the fact, that yes, men do suffer violence more than women, but the majority of the perps involved are strangers in a social setting - such as clubs, pubs etc!

The only people who ridicule and demean me are blokes! Notice that? Must tell you something.

There's a book called, 'But He Says He Loves Me' written by a Psychologist who's counselled both the victims and the perpetrators.
http://www.girl.com.au/but-he-says-he-loves-me.htm
I suggest you visit this website. The author was on Tony Delroy's Nightlife a couple of years ago. She is a woman with a vast experience. It offers an interesting insight into the thinking processes of these men who have a need to dominate their intimate partner.

I've spoken to many people who counsel victims of DV and none of them speak like you do. They're out there in a hands on capacity, and obviously have a different reality to yours. In my personal experience with friends and strangers, the truth is as what is assumed by govts etc. They are not as hateful as you people are.

You do not speak the truth. You do not know my truth/s. You do not have the right to use your maleness to denigrate and abuse. Yes, you've had a bad experience in the Family Law court or whatever, but that doesn't give you the right to arrogantly assume, that every woman who says she was/is abused is being 'shrill' or whatever!

By this action, you just remove any right to legitimacy - you are no better than those who perpetrate other forms of abuse! You contradict your bonifides with your arrogance and misogynist views!