R0bert, Crispin Hull made the very clear and strong point about the way in which interest groups use fear as a means of social control, with the complicity of the media and of course, Governments. People like ChazP are the targets of this sort of campaign, not the instigators. Having thought on it a bit, I reckon the poor dear lives in a very scary world of bogey men and night terrors, probably worried about walking down the street in case she has to go past a man.

I hope she gets the treatment she needs to overcome her serious paranoia before it's too late and she ends up institutionalised. That surely can't be too far down the track for someone so obviously determined to be at odds with reality.

Robert - as you know well, these were the `statistics' which you provided and which I referred to in my retort:

"Just from the current DV as a gender hate crime thread.
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=12275#212093
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=12275#212181
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=12275#212729
I've done similar for years on OLO on a number of threads."

I responded - "Robert ~ the figures you quote are a gross misuse of data and statistics. Again you are trying to compare apples with pears. DV is defined in those studies as ''hitting, shoving or throwing things at you.'".

Robert states - "ChazP does make a valid point. The raw numbers don't tell us much about the nature of incidents. One of the problems with a lot of the alarmist material around which plays on perceptions of the extreme end of DV while including low end stuff as well. For the record the types of incidents described still sound like violence and the calous disregard for male victims of DV is pretty much what I've come to expect from ChazP."

Now you're off on another tack as you squirm and wriggle. You'll obviously keep digging boys, until you wear your shovels out, or your Hole of Sophistry collapses in on you. If you've left your shed doors open, I might just get another shovel for you so you can keep digging, as an act of kindness. Its the kind of caring person I am.

HITTING. SHOVING, SLAPPING
“It was reported today that in a Family Court, an ex-husband and ex-father alleged that he was HIT by his former wife during their marriage. “She swung her handbag at me, Your Honour”, he said, “and it struck me between the legs”. The ex-father also claimed that his former wife shoved him down on a couch, after he returned home drunk from the pub. “You can sleep there”, she is reported to have said. The ex-father also stated that “I’d been playing in my shed all day, and when I came into the house she threw my dinner against the wall and the dog ate it”.
The Judge, also an ex-husband and ex-father, stated, “Your endurance is beyond belief you poor man, the pain and humiliation you must have suffered while being such a good Dad, you have my every sympathy for having lived with such a violent woman”. “I’m giving you sole parental responsibility for your ex-children and she will never be allowed to see them again.”.
P.S. This is not a fairy story, it is the reality of today.
ONE WOMAN A WEEK IS KILLED IN AUSTRALIA BY A MALE PARTNER.

ChazP maybe you'd better start linking a bit earlier to what you are objecting to and perhaps being a bit more specific.

I think it's been very clear that my focus has been on the Donovan material and your misrepresentation of the findings on this tread rather than a list of links I supplied to counter yet another false claim by you.

So can I take it that the Donovan Research, 2001 material which you refered to and which shows very similar rates of children witnessing violence against parents of eiother genders (even though you were only willing to mention the violence against mothers and stepmothers) meets your criteria for the types of violence that it's appropriate to refer to?

You will find that if you have a look at the paper I referenced yesterday http://lilt.ilstu.edu/mjreese/psy290/downloads/Archer%202000.pdf it spends some time on the myths that you appear to delight in.

R0bert

Poirot

I'm thinking that ChazP and Antiseptic are soul-mates. They just haven't realised it yet.

@ ChazP & Antiseptic

Said it before will say it again, play the ball NOT the er, man. You are both as obnoxious as each other, you also have something to say, (I think) I just don't have the patience for wading through the condescension and vitriol.

@ Robert

I am never going to play with you making the rules. I choose to whom I speak and what I will say.

But Fraccy, I'm only concerned for her welfare, the poor thing.

You don't seem to have yet grasped that I only post "condescension and vitriol" in response to the same or some form of complete drivel. To those who don't do it, I'm perfectly civil.

You see, I really don't see the point in responding properly to people who think and post the way Chaz and Patricia do. They don't offer anything to a discussion besides red herrings and misinformation designed to cloud the issue. The fact that some otherwise sensible posters feel some empathy based on these irrational claims, even knowing them to be incorrect and deliberately misquoted, may give some understanding of the way in which we have allowed so much gynocentrism into our lawmaking and cultural prejudices.

The "I'm a Sista-grrl too" stuff is just a minor expression of the effect, it seems to me, but it can lead smart people off the rails if this forum is any indication.