Ill-informed commentsbased on gender bias do not assist in addressing the issue of human violence. Sadly, they compound the problem.

R0bert

@Jocelynne

In the 21 years since your book was last updated there has been a great deal of research that contests your perspective.

I don't wish to be impolite, but you have invited the question: given this 21 year lapse in your published research, who exactly is ill informed in this debate?

Disagreeing with your perspective does not equate to ignorance on the topic.

As the DV statistics have not significantly decreased after decades of attempts to address the issue from the sex/gender perspective, perhaps you can explain why we should continue to use this this failed framework?

And perhaps you can also tell us the grounds on which you dismiss all the research that apparently does not comply with your opinion
Jennifer.

Vanka <"Studies undertaken into "who started it" usually show the woman as starting the conflict, up to about 70% of the time"

Where DO you get these little gems from Vanka?
I am almost certain that when the cops are called to a domestic violence situation, both aggrieved parties will blame the other won't they?
Who on earth can say who is telling the truth if there were no witnesses?
I think the cops just work on the problem of who is bashed the most, and take it from there...

Oh well, that settles it all doesn't it then?

The woman yells at him, or belittles him or even (shock, horror!) throws something at him (all for no reason of course- except maybe the dreaded PMS or menopause?), and so he 'snaps' and beats the c##p out of her...

Does the punishment fit the crime do you think?

Well that means SHE is responsible for his violent behaviour then does it? That means it is ALL caused by women then?

Ok then, if, as we have been told on this thread, we have all these men suffering in silence after being beaten by women, should we then turn around the above assumptions and say that the MEN 'caused' these women to be violent towards them?
If not, why not?

What a load of crock!

Domestic violence is certainly seen as a gender hate crime by many contributors to this thread anyway.

SSuzeonline: Domestic violence is certainly seen as a gender hate crime by many contributors to this thread anyway"

erm, only if by "many" you mean "one" and by "contributors", you mean "poorly informed, ntellectually dishonest apron-string clingers desperate to derail the discussion by claiming superior knowledge of a subject based on nothing more that their own outdated opinion and a desire to get their discredited book mentioned"

Glad we got that sorted...

rstuart, the point that vanna makes is a good one, although as a polemicist he's perhaps lacking a certain zip. It goes to the general debasement of the humanities as a field of genuine intellectual endeavour, I suspect as a direct result of the massive influx of (mostly female) students over the past 30-40 years, as well as the compulsory nature of gender-studies units for any humanities student and many of those in the harder subject areas.

There are some who have tried to buck the trend, perhaps most notably Prof John Macdonald and Dr Michael Wood of the Uni of Western Sydney, while Dr Elizabeth Celi is a strong voice for proper recognition of the damage being done to men by the toxic version of Feminism that has become entrenched as 70s feminists find themselves having stayed in the public service long enough to have risen to near the top and hence they have authority, even if they lack capability.

The thing that I find really interesting in all this discussion is that it's all about the aftermath of violent incidents. In my experience, which includes no physical violence,but lots of loud arguments, it takes 2 to tango. If one party is not interested in an argument then there will be no argument. If a relationship fails this basic test then really, it should be examined and probably abandoned. If it doesn't, then there is no problem. The question then becomes, how do we increase the number of relationships that pass that test?

Antiseptic –welcome back.
This forum was so much the poorer for your absence.
Looking forward to reading more of your incisive and entertaining posts.
Cheers!

I beleive that instead of the simple portrayal of power and control that there is perhaps a much more complicated process involved.

It is easy to see the overt behaviours, and physical injuries, it is not so easy to the underlying covert behaviours.

In law the defense of the battered woman syndrome is well and truly accepted, where a woman can kill her husband and be found not guilty on the grounds of having experience DV. It would appear that this does not need to be substantiated.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/crime/la-me-accused-20110626,0,6630763,full.story

Whilst the above link is about one case only and it would be unfair to extrapolate that to all instances, it does demonstrate the lengths certain people are prepared and willing to go to.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-accused-20110628,0,4711694,full.story

It would also be unfair to say that this applies to all cases, but the above story does demonstrate the need to be very careful with apparent evidence.