@Liz- yet you're the person who is oversimplifying and distorting the truth here.

You claim you have never denied that women abuse men and boys- LIES! You accused me of lying about my abuse! Even now you try and lie about your own words which are here for anyone reading through the comments to see & refuse to apologise for your inexcusibly sick behaviour towards me!

You accuse others and myself of misogyny- the exact gender reversal of the old "man hating lesbian" slur used by chauvinists in the 1960s-1970s.

Your actions portray you as misandrist child and spousal abuse enabler!

You ask why politicians would focus so heavily on abuse on one direction, when the simple answer is that it's a politically savvy means to win votes.

You ask about why the people you deal with are predominantly women, when as I've personally experienced, the police are indifferent towards you if you're lucky as an abused man, and as many others have discovered, judges ridicule them for being victims and give female abusers a free pass, whilst battered women's shelters simply turn men away regardless of the dangers their children are in by being with their abussive mothers (which has also been found to be a key reason why men stay in abussive relationships). Heck even GetUp couldn't care less about it when I spoke to them and they're supposed to be the voice for the underdog in this country.

If you REALLY cared about eliminating the scourge of abuse, you'd recognise that due to stereotypes which are deeply ingrained within society and go back thousands of years, all that society sees in the way of abused men and abusive women is the tip of the iceberg, and you'd want the full iceberg to be seen by society, just as you would were the gender roles reversed, as opposed to ACTIVELY contributing to the social stereotypes which keep it hidden away like a social taboo!

But then that would require you to look beyond your own abuse, and you're clearly either too unhinged, or too cowardly to do that.

@Liz45, You made no comment regarding my previous post recommending recent CBS documentaries. You probably can't bring yourself to watch a guilty woman who claimed to be a victim. Yes, I think that there would be many of them in the real world.

I don't think it is all that important as to which gender is responsible for most violence. What I think is more important is which gender instigates the greatest number of domestic violence incidents. You've never told us which gender instigated most of the violence. I don't think you can tell what that is from women reporting incidences of domestic violence or results driven advocacy research commissioned by the Office for the Status of Women and the like. You are very good at citing the latter which just gives us an indication of domestic violence "light" ie. one push or a shove in the past 12months with all cohorts, in terms of relationship types and age groupings, conflated. Real violence like shootings, knifings etc hardly registers in these "one in three" surveys of little academic merit, that you like to toss at us.

It would be really appreciated if, rather than tell me that I don't like women, you raised the quality of your arguments.

1/2
@Roscop, while I am hesitant to say this as it's only likely to be viewed as an opportunity of YET ANOTHER vile misandristic diatribe by Liz45; while as a piece of the puzzle, it is important to note the likelihood of those initiating forms of abuse; we arguably need to get past the gender part of the equation, to a public campaign universally decrying all abuse as opposed to focusing on some dynamics and paying lip service to others one minute and then trivialising them the next.

You can't form a targeted program until you have enough information to make accurate estimates, and as a society, we simply don't have it.

Thanks to people like Liz45 and their rampant and vile sexism; all that's happened has been the reinforcing of the primordial gender stereotypes, rather than cutting through them.

In mainstream society, the visible cases of abuse are just the tip of the iceberg (with social conditioning so strong that even male victims and those around them cannot recognise that the victim is being abused) while on the peripheries of society, women still face the female equivalent stereotypes even after all this time.

Rather than working from an agenda of bringing things to light, sexist individuals such as Liz45 have worked from a mindset of fear and paranoia.

For example, they claim that if female abusers were acknowledged, that it would open the floodgates to fraudulent claims of abuse by spouses. This logic is faulty in 3 ways though. To begin with, it ASSumes that women are incapable of the same lies, and in turn and secondly actively moves away from a position where techniques could be perfected to detect fraudulent abuse claims while making things as comfortable as possible for someone disclosing abuse to come forward, maximising universal reporting. However thirdly, and going beyond that, it actually ignores the difficult area of mutually abusive relationships and how to deal with them.
(to be continued)

2/2 (continued)
This is just one example of how abuse politics have merely polarised along the lines of traditional gender stereotypes, rather than being focused to universally ending cycles of abuse, resulting in a situation where you don't even know how much you don't know, much less are able to properly factor it in.

Then again when you consider the women's groups behind this ideology, you can't really be surprised.

Women's groups claim that feminism is the notion that women are people, however as the arena of abuse politics clearly shows; in practice, feminism is the notion that women are empowered when a situation is opportunistic for them, but the traditional poor little helpless damsel in distress trapped in a high tower or dungeon, the moment a situation is inconvenient for them, including when they're required to be personally accountable for their actions, as Liz45 is a textbook example of.

@benk
Why is it so important for you to "prove" that men are worse than women? This issue needs to be simply a problem to be fixed, not some competition.Posted by benk, Wednesday, 5 Jan."

I don't have to "prove" anything -the stats do that! The police acknowledge this fact; hospitals A&E assert thus; national hotline telephone counselling services add further weight to this, and govts also acknowledge it.

It is impossible for you males to acknowledge,that in the main, men are more violent towards their partners than women. That men for whatever reason have the 'need' to control the very people who they profess to love and care for.

The witnesses during war times; dictatorships involving physical and sexual abuse, the acknowledgement of the UN, that the rape of citizens, particularly women and kids is an increasing 'weapon' in war. If you do not acknowledge this, than you have a very frivolous grasp on reality.

Because I allude to these realities, I'm castigated; ridiculed and called a 'radical ?' which I find most interesting.
Where were you in the 60's when women were told, that by wearing short skirts or drinking alcohol was the reason we were raped - that we contributed to our own demise.

I doubt that any of you were either alive in the 60's, or if so were either still in nappies or in primary school?

You don't remember,that in the Comm.Public Service, a woman had to resign on the day she got married. She could work in a part time capacity(while others were sick, on hols etc)but she lost her permanent full time job.I was one of those women, and as jobs for married women were scarce(we were denied govt jobs)and there were no sole parent benefits; child endowment was not like the current family allowance, finding alternate housing was different to today. No emergency housing for women with kids who were victims of abuse.

There was no Staying Home, Leaving Violence campaigns of the NSW govt that were put in place late 2010.

(cont)
@Aniseptic - Your shrillness re feminists is almost funny. How old are you? I suggest, that as I remarked earlier,you were either non-existent in the 60's or just a boy. The 60's was the beginning of feminism as we now know it(although women fought long before that time for equality - the right to vote is a major victory). Men have not had to struggle for their status in the world as women have. You make all or most of the rules to suit your goals and way of life, and for many decades, they impacted in an unjust manner on women and kids. Take child slave labour as one example? Children working in coal mines - men owned those mines, and while profits were their main priority,the lives and deaths, illnesses of kids didn't bother them! Only after the struggles of women, supported by men did this cease.

Women were denied many rights/possibilities you now take for granted. eg. I believe I was the first woman(who was employed with a regular income) in this area to take on a major retail outlet,to have my charge account in my name, without the approved signature of my husband - it took weeks/months of letter writing. My local state member brought it up in Parlt. I eventually won. A lousy sum of $100 - amazing! This is almost unthinkable now. Women can buy properties in their own name, which is great, but it had to start somewhere, and I helped start that in the 70's - my late sister did too!

Of course you can snigger and be "shrill" about feminists. All that does is reinforce the fact,that in my lifetime, it's been the men who were the most stridently opposed to women's equality who made such comments as you. Not only do you not acknowledge my reality, and that of millions of others, you obviously are not well read, probably due to lack of interest. It doesn't go well with your protestations of my "shrillness" when show your ignorance in such a blatant manner.

(cont)