Here's what I think Michael Flood ignores:

Women are more likely to commit major physical abuse of their children than are men: 56.8 percent to 43.2 percent. [Source: Fire With Fire, by feminist Naomi Wolf, p. 221, hardcover]

Women are more likely to kill their children than are men: 55 percent to 45 percent. [Source: “Women and Violent Crime,” a paper by Prof. Rita J. Simon, Department of Justice, Law and Society and Washington College of Law, American University, Washington, D.C]

Women commit almost all of the murders of newborns. In Dade County, Fla., between 1956 and 1986, according to the June 1990 Journal of Interpersonal Violence 5:2, mothers accounted for 86 percent of newborn deaths. [Source: "When She Was Bad", by Patricia Pearson, p. 255, note 71.] (According to the Dept. of Health and Human Services, in 2003, nearly 60 percent of child abusers and neglect perpetrators were female.)

Thus, if women, without provocation, batter and kill children, whom they've supposedly been socialized to love, they can, without provocation, batter and kill men, whom they've been socialized -- by the media, feminist literature, and VAWA-type legislation -- to distrust, fear, and hate.

If feminists such as Michael Flood don't take women's violence and abuse as seriously as they take men's, why should men take women's opinions as seriously as they take men's? After all, according to ideological feminists' own -- and correct -- definition of hate crimes, an act of violence is merely an opinion acted out, a view transformed into behavior.

See "An Open Letter to the Judiciary Committees on the Violence Against Women Act" at http://tinyurl.com/czeulo

MaleMatters, it seems to me that all your 'statistics' are about American incidences? Do they have the same Family Court laws in America as they do in Australia?
If not, then I fail to see what relevance they have in this debate about changing the Family Court laws here in Australia.

What I don't understand about this current gender-based fight about who is more violent than who in Family Court matters, is why a predominantly male Government would apparently change the laws to the detriment of Fathers?

Aren't there just as many vocal, militant, misogynistic men's groups out there as there are feminist women's groups?
Why, unless the evidence is overwhelming, isn't this Government listening to the Men's groups then?

As someone who has worked in many family homes in the community over many years, I have failed to notice this terrible female against all-else violence that is being advocated by some men's groups.

I am not suggesting that it doesn't exist, as I have certainly seen some violent women, but their numbers pale into insignificance, and the injuries they get from men are far more serious, and in greater numbers, when perpetrated by men.

The most terrible injuries I have seen with male patients have been from male on male violence- both in and out of the home.

The Family Court must be given even stronger powers in keeping children safe from anyone out to harm them, regardless of gender.
The problems that come before the family court system must be dealt with on a case by case basis, with no blanket statement that is supposed to cover all scenarios.

Regarding statements made by Michael Flood as usual he is cherry picking through the data and forgets for example the campaign put out by the Office of the Status of Women in 1986 claiming that one in three women had experience of domestic violence but it forgot to say that in half the cases it was as perpetrator. Back then DV included all family violence including against children, the weakest and most vulnerable members of a family. Now we have been trained to equate it, at best with partner to partner violence or more commonly violence against women but of course not by women

Suzie much as I hate to fuel the fires a big part of the problem is the issue that vanna is constantly on about.

The government tends to get it's research via gender studies departments and others who see their role as advocacy rather than genuine research. I think vanna takes it too far in attacking almost all educators but in relation to the gender studies groups a lot of people don't seem to be able or willing to make the connection.

There are men involved in that as well, some may just be driven by ideology, others by a desire to keep their jobs and some I'd have to suspect some by a big dose of self loathing.

I don't think that there is any good reason to think either gender won't make choices which disadvantage others of their own gender especially if they think that they are safe themselves.

Our predominately male governments have sent enough men off to war over the years and made other choices which mostly harm men. Women seem to have been at the forefront of applying pressure to other women to comply with restrictive life choices, in cultures where FGM is practised I get the impression that it's mostly done and encouraged by older women.

It's acknowledged that men are stronger and when things get to extremes women are more likely to suffer greater physical harm, on the other hand women tend to have better verbal skills and a lot more men suicide than women.

Do you think it's an accident that the Australia Say's No campaign failed to have any examples of violence by women in a multi-million dollar campaign despite some very vocal complaints?

R0bert

suzieonline does not see the relevance of American statistics to Australian FL changes.

For a start our societies are fairly homogeneous, the American Way is pretty similar to Oz, and the statistics pretty similar.

But then tell us why suzie, do you at length talk about your experience with adult victims of violence? The changes are mooted to be to protect CHILDREN whose parents are divorced or separated, who will no longer be, with rare criminal exceptions, violent to the other.

Where is the evidence of partner-abusers routinely abusing their children? Of the correlation? Of course some do, but some, particularly women, are only violent towards their children and these are the ones that should be denied residency.

My biological father was a terrible man who beat my mother mercilessly (we left when I was 10, or I would have, I hope, killed him when I was big enough), yet he was patient and loving towards the 4 children - he spanked me just once, a most deserved punishment which made me realise the wrongness of lying and I never did again.

Given that women are still the primary caregivers of young children and I do not believe that one sex is any 'better' than the other, I am not surprised that statistically, children suffer more at the hands of women.

What I do not understand is why more men aren't doing their utmost to prevent the violence they are more likely to experience at the hands of other men. Instead we have these articles that appear intent on maligning women in order to give all responsibility of childcare to men.

I say do it. Take over the bulk of child care guys.