The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Picking sides can make you a man > Comments

Picking sides can make you a man : Comments

By Kevin Maher, published 25/11/2011

Domestic violence: Men being not violent and not silent.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. All
I must have led a fortunate life because I have never seen a man hit a woman. I can't comprehend how men, obviously stronger , can hit women at all.

But I find it worrying that we are using footballers as people to speak out against violence.
There have been many examples of footballers publicly shamed and disgraced because of violent behaviour to women and abuse of various kinds.

[There are of course many examples of violence to males, usually from other males, with a kid punched to death today, apparently, in Sydney.]

Recently I met a woman whose sister is in police work in Sydney. She says there is hardly a well-known footballer that you could name, whose name has not been associated with bad behaviour to women.

Couldn't we find some other men to denounce violence and have more credibility? Teachers... athletes.... tradesmen..businessmen? The idea of footballers as role models (whatever on earth that means) constantly bemuses me.

If we need "role models" for being a man, the best person to start with is usually our own fathers.

This campaign might make people feel good. That's fine. I wonder what a hard assessment of its effectiveness would say.
Violence to women is despicable, but we need to think of better ways of stopping it
Posted by Bronte, Friday, 25 November 2011 7:40:54 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Professional footballers, may have missed out on a lot of education because they have been contracted to a club at a young age, they certainly are not roll models. Men that fisically hit women are weak, and need to be dealt with by law. I can-not imagine such aggression, that would make you want to hit a woman.
Posted by 579, Friday, 25 November 2011 8:03:44 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I won't be wearing a white ribbon or swearing. Not that I disagree with the stated goals, rather that the representation of DV and violence in general has been deliberately skewed along gender lines and the effects of that skewing is perpetuating violence not ending it.

I've picked my side and it's against the corrupt lies that underpin most of the rhetoric of these campaigns.

Lets speak out against all violence regardless of the gender, size, age, ethnicity etc of either the perpetrator or the victim.

The promotion of gendered anti-violence campaigns serves to prolong the situations where much of the violence is at it's worst, where there is mutual violence.

R0bert
Posted by R0bert, Friday, 25 November 2011 8:26:49 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
R0bert, sound words about what is nothing more than an avenue for self-promotion for those with little else to promote.

O'Keefe has a history of public drunkenness, Flood has a history of deliberate dishonesty, the organisation as a whole has a history of publishing dishonest and flawed "research" with no fact-checking, provided it is based on the message that "all men are violent".

What a great group...
Posted by Antiseptic, Friday, 25 November 2011 9:20:55 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Picking sides just shows you are an idiot.

Telling the truth as it really is, shows you are a man.

It would have been nice to find some here.
Posted by Hasbeen, Friday, 25 November 2011 12:30:48 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hasbeen So what is the truth.
Posted by 579, Friday, 25 November 2011 12:45:18 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Please yourself man, but if I see some couple having a domestic in the street, I'm not going to intervene. Last time I did that I got a gob-full from the chick and the guy. In fact the guy used 'violence' to stop the chick swinging a few punches my way.

All in all, campaigns like this are disingenuous. They amount to nothing more than empty sloganeering, and sexism in the paternalistic way in which they promote men as the protectors of women, not so far from the keepers of women. They're for the exhibitionist and for bandwagon riders, career feminists and people looking for some good PR. Mathew Newton will probably join in with bells on.

They appeal to the 'white knight' to 'be a man', and aggressively or violently confront phsychos. Sure you'll get the disclaimer about doing it safely, or ringing the police, but what they're really appealing to is for men to be the paternalistic protectors of women.
The sub-text is indisputably of proving your manly masculinty, in fact I'd argue it's an explicit challenge. Indeed there is also the implied challenge to prove your bona-fides as a non-abuser, with the implication that you must differentiate yourself from some default position of an abuser just because you're male.

I find it offensive.

I await the campaign encouraging all Muslims to wear a red ribbon to fight against terrorism!

As a man, I don't respond to emotional manipulation and dishonesty such as this. That's MY manly masculinity. My responsibilites begin and end with people I care about, not no-hoper pikeys and drunks and their personal domestic disputes.

And that's to say nothing of the abuse of statistics that all lobby groups, foundations, and all causes these days employ for thier Machiavellian aims. Honesty goes out the window as a prerequisite for all such campaigns. I believe the misinformation and bias actually inhibit any real efforts to finding lasting solutions.

I would be remiss if I didn't continue my annual tradition of linking to this hilarious piece by Jack

http://blogs.news.com.au/jackmarxlive/index.php/news/comments/cross_fingers_day/desc/
Posted by Houellebecq, Friday, 25 November 2011 1:50:43 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Most intelligent men I have spoken to support the White Ribbon campaign, and I have been pleased at how many men I have seen today actually wearing the white ribbon.

These men are strong men who are willing to stand up and be counted, even though the guys who still don't believe there is a problem will be having a go at them.

It makes me feel that there is hope for a civilised society after all.

We would never have had to start a violence against women campaign unless there was an obvious problem in our society with violence against women.

I abhor violence of any kind, but at least if two men decide to go at it with each other, they are on a much more even keel than a man against a woman.

We all know there are violent women in our society, but I haven't seen many men's shelters around our communities...
Posted by Suseonline, Friday, 25 November 2011 11:16:28 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Great, the fake "suzeonline" is back.

Here's a quote from a WRD puffpice that pretty much sums up the whole effort:

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/these-girls-can-teach-boys-a-thing-or-two-20111125-1nz7z.html

"Dean Camm, 13, said White Ribbon Day was needed ''because men disrespect women'' - not that he's seen it except on television or in news reports."

Remember Senator Mason? "There is absolutely no excuse for domestic violence or sexual abuse of any kind against women, or children, or in some instances, against men."

I wonder if the good Senator has "ever seen it except on television"?
Posted by Antiseptic, Saturday, 26 November 2011 4:07:37 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I just looked up the White Ribbon Day home page

http://www.whiteribbon.org.au/updates

Every single "event" is for the public service! Hardly surprising: the APS is approximately 68% women.

Meanwhile, in the real world, men are still not being abusive to women, jst as they weren't last night, except in the poorest and most desperate of homes. Never mind, "pass the scones Marjorie, isn't it lovely to have a morning off?"

What a bunch of self-serving tossers.
Posted by Antiseptic, Saturday, 26 November 2011 4:58:33 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Domestic violence towards anyone is abhorrent. I wish domestic violence on the whole was the target of the campaign. I tried to educate myself a fraction about this campaign as I do with most that demand something from me. I was horrified to find this on their website. Sorry about the spacing etc, was cut directly.

What about violence against men?
While this campaign focuses on violence against
women, it is important to acknowledge that men
too are often the victims of violence. Many of the
victims of murder, manslaughter, and serious
physical assaults are male.
Men are much less likely than women to be
subject to violent incidents in the home and are
more likely to be assaulted in public places.
Violence against men is far more likely to be by
strangers and far less likely to involve partners or
ex-partners. Of all the violence men experience,
far less is represented by domestic violence (less
than 1 percent, versus one-third of violent
incidents against women).
6
Boys and men are most at risk of physical harm, injury and death
from other boys and men, but small numbers are
subject to violence by women.
This kit focuses on the prevention of violence
against women and takes for granted that all
forms of violence are unacceptable and supports
efforts to end it.

So, support it? I'm curious about the 1% as well because of the very reason women are represented more so in the stats. Men and women function differently. Emotional bullying is just as devastating as physical. Guarantee that goes largely unreported.
Posted by StG, Saturday, 26 November 2011 7:57:58 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Oh come on Antiseptic (I'm not trying to be 'fake' actually, and if I was, I would have used a more different name!), everyone knows that domestic violence occurs at all levels in society. It is just more obvious in lower socio-economic areas.

The more 'intelligent' abusers know to keep the bruising on their victims hidden, and their victims are less likely to go and get help because they are far less likely to be believed if he is a lawyer, doctor, business man, judge, policeman etc.

It is only after the inevitable really serious injury or death occurs to the woman, that the long term abuse becomes known.
Posted by Suseonline, Saturday, 26 November 2011 10:50:09 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
So, people in lower socio-economic circles aren't as intelligent as ones who aren't?

Riiight. Thinking there's no point in even venturing in to that one.
Posted by StG, Saturday, 26 November 2011 11:30:18 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"The Macquarie Scorpions Rugby League Club was involved in the “Let’s Tackle Domestic Violence” campaign run by the NSW Government and the NSW Country Rugby League."

Unfortunately, they're still a pack of ill-mannered bogans - I have been the victim of vicious, unprovoked personal abuse by Macqaurie Scorpions players attending a team function at my local club. But I guess that doesn't matter, because I have a penis.

Mr. Maher would do far better to run a campaign teaching his players to act like civilised human beings, and have them sign a code of conduct relating to the elimination of thuggery and bullying - to all people, regardless of their gender.

Otherwise, he is just allowing the ugly mentality which gives rise to DV to flourish in his players - and without a change in attitude, a meaningful change in behaviour is unlikely to follow.
Posted by The Acolyte Rizla, Saturday, 26 November 2011 11:36:46 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
No StG, that's not what I meant at all.
Did you not notice how I wrote the word 'intelligent' in my sentence?
It was a sarcastic way of saying that no-one who commits domestic violence could ever be intelligent really.

At least I am not suggesting that domestic violence is really only committed by the 'lower' classes of men, and therefore not really a widespread 'male' problem...
Posted by Suseonline, Saturday, 26 November 2011 11:59:13 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Men fisically abused by women, it's a bit hard to visualize. I have doubts if they would be in the all male category. Some men have obscure sexism, maybe they would be more susceptible to abuse by women. It a matter of who wears the pants, i suppose.
Posted by 579, Saturday, 26 November 2011 11:59:47 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"It a matter of who wears the pants", or who wears the skirt ;)

There are a whole bunch of way's of viewing abuse and shifting definitions is part of the problem especially when you are dealing with the non-physical forms of abuse. Often it seems to get down to what people believe about power in relationship's.

As Anti point's out DV (and various other crimes) are much more prevalent in relation to factors other than gender such as poverty, substance abuse, mental health issues etc. DV can happen in all sorts of homes just as anyone can get lung cancer but there are reasons why we focus on smoking rather than gender for lung cancer prevention.

There is a very worthwhile meta-analytical review into DV research which I've referenced previously. http://lilt.ilstu.edu/mjreese/psy290/downloads/Archer%202000.pdf

For those who actually want to understand why different studies give different results.

"Meta-analyses of sex differences in physical aggression to heterosexual partners and in its physical consequences are reported. Women were slightly more likely (d = -.05) than men to use one or more act of physical aggression and to use such acts more frequently. Men were more likely (d =. 15) to inflict an injury, and overall, 62% of those injured by a partner were women."

It's largely US based although it does try to touch on material from outside the USA.

Another reference from the paper (put as an possibility, not the only one) "Family conflict researchers typically study representative samples of married, cohabiting, or dating couples, whereas feminist researchers typically study samples selected for high levels of partner violence by men, such as women from refuges or violent men on treatment programs."

R0bert
Posted by R0bert, Saturday, 26 November 2011 12:31:17 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
There are too many women and too many children on this planet.

Nature WILL conspire to redress this ugly imbalance and rather soon as we approach 8 billion souls on a resources shrunken globe.

Misogyny? No! Its just NATURE, to be impartially studied without being embroiled. Its 'slow-mo' analysis of the human race disappearing up its own rear-end. It's suggesting improvements to hidden and vested-interest IMBALANCES in gender conditioning. In trying to balance the scales-of-justice, one cannot be too concerned about appearing biased. Not everyone believes in JUSTICE.

Anti-male DV reform is a side issue that intentionally boosts corporate sales of comfort-food, pretty clothes and make-believe make ups for women who are depressed that they have to LIE, deceive and betray about high libidos in order to trap male financial supporters.

The only fault in men is that they are so sexually INSECURE they can't walk away and leave women to their own demise - with no-one for endless loneliness to blame but their own stupid selves.

Governments should redress this insecurity with broader prostitution reforms that could lower costs to consumers while increasing health and security concerns. Governments must first pledge to serve bona-fide citizens rather than "grass is greener" GST paying immigrants who currently are the overwhelming beneficiaries of 'Hindu-Barry', O'Farrellesque & Swannette taxation and infrastructure reforms.

The marketing ploy to divide and conquer men over a very weak DV issue is a betrqayal of men & an outrage. All men are capable of defeating this tyranny if taught the reality of relationships rather than reading about it in BS TV adds and on the back of bloody buses. Advertising companies should be pummelled as hard as cigarette companies when TRUTH is at stake >"Women in this add are NOT interested in SEX, only money, power and expensive FOOD!"

A man needs a woman like a slave needs a grinding stone to push around & A woman needs a man like a crocodile(backed by endless advertising and political regulations) needs the thrill of a death-roll.

Like Fish needs bicycles? The propaganda!

Wake up dudes! And get yourself FREE
Posted by KAEP, Saturday, 26 November 2011 2:33:17 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Suseonline, DV IS largely committed by the "lower classes". There are no doubt violent men and women living in the richest suburbs, but just as the burglary squad is likely to be much busier in the poorest suburbs, so is the DV squad.

Pretending otherwise is purely for the purpose of gender politics.

As I said, all the events publicised by the WRD people are for people just like you - women who work in public institutions. Obviously their audience targetting is working a treat.

579, I know a young man who has 3 children to a wife who has a big problem with temper, especially when she can't get her dose of marijuana, which she uses very heavily. He hits her to stop her hitting the kids, who cop the rough edge of it. I gave him a hand a couple of days ago to patch some 5 holes that she punched in the wall in the kitchen, with her sitting in the lounge room saying things like "make sure you do a good effin' job" and the kids ordered to "keep ya effin' mouths shut ya little carnts". I asked him why he puts up with it and all he could say was "what else can I do? If I get DOCS involved they'll take the kids". DOCS have told him this and as he grew up in care he's terriified of having it happen to the kids. He doesn't drink or do drugs, although he used to and he's doing what he can to keep the family functioning as best it can.

Frankly, I don't think he'd be too impressed to be told he's not a real man, no matter how well that might play with the WRD crowd, where there's nary a real man to be seen, just a bunch of self-serving exhibitionists all trying to get their bit of free publicity.
Posted by Antiseptic, Saturday, 26 November 2011 3:06:04 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I do not see why he can not get help for the female without being worried about the dse. She is a drug addict, and has an anger problem. Two separate conditions, any one can have an illness , Tell him to show some leadership and get her some help. By not doing any thing he is aiding her condition.
Posted by 579, Saturday, 26 November 2011 3:19:16 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
He can't get help, because the DOCS have already told him that if she is taken out of the picture the kids will be taken into care. He grew up in care and has no support network and has a criminal record for violence as a result of one of the barneys with her. It would take more than he is capable of to prevent that happening

She already receives treatment which she doesn't comply with. He can't do anything about that either, since DOCS have made her treatment a condition of the family remaining intact. He and her parents do what they can to prevent the worst of the dramas with the kids and she's not a bad person if she has her pot. It's only when supplies run out that she has problems.

Frankly, if I were you I'd just shut my gob rather than cramming more of those size 12s covered in dog muck into it.
Posted by Antiseptic, Saturday, 26 November 2011 3:31:02 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Antiseptic,

"DOCS have already told him that if she is taken out of the picture the kids will be taken into care"

I call bullshyt. DOCS are not going to swoop in and confiscate the children of a dysfunctional couple just because the less functional half shoots through - DOCS are generally pretty reluctant to put children into State care, and they'd definitely need a better reason than that.
Posted by The Acolyte Rizla, Sunday, 27 November 2011 12:12:47 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The kids have already had one episode in care. You'd best give those size 12s back to 579: they're no more likely to fit into your gob than his.
Posted by Antiseptic, Sunday, 27 November 2011 4:33:49 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
antiseptic,

I love the '579' comment - 'show some leadership'. So after 50 years of disempowering men, it's a man's responsibility when his wife has a drug and alcohol problem?

We will never have equality because no one ever asks women to take responsibility for their own actions.

Both of these, white ribbon/all men are wife beaters day stories posted on OLO were from many years ago. This writer tells of something that happened 60 YEARS AGO. Does that tell us something? I'll say it again, 60 YEARS AGO. The DV lobby is really digging deep now.
Posted by dane, Sunday, 27 November 2011 11:47:39 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Anti. What did i say to get that remark for. If this man was any good at all he would sort her out. She apparently needs help. And you are just as bad as him for covering for him. She takes it out on the kids, i would be putting her away for that alone. You are aiding criminal actions.
Posted by 579, Sunday, 27 November 2011 11:50:51 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
He's doing his best to manage the problem as best he can, with DOCS and her family involved. DOCS are of the view that he could not cope on his own if she was not part of the family and none of the family wants her going anywhere either, so they work around it.

Your comments deserved my remark because they were shallow, blamed him for her situation and were about as helpful as any other kind of heckling. It's very easy to be absolutist and that's precisely what's wrong with so much of the rhetoric around both family violence and family law more generally.

Not much need for thinking if everything is set out in little square boxes labelled "victim" and "perpetrator".
Posted by Antiseptic, Sunday, 27 November 2011 1:07:51 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
It appears that no one is going to try and defend the 99% claim.
That would be a difficult proposition.

To sumarise, DV is not a male problem, it's a human problem. LIke child abuse both gender commit it not on the basis of their gender but much more so by factors such as substance abuse, poverty, mental illness etc. It can happen away from those factors just as lung cancer can happen to those who've never smoked but it's much less likely.

Women get hurt more because they are not generally as physically strong as males. Males suicide at far higher rates than women so maybe we don't stand up to emotional abuse as well, if so it does not prove that we are always the innocent party.

Continuing to target only male violence against women does not break cycles of violence where the female initiates the violence and it creates false perceptions that hurt men in other area's such as family law disputes.

It's unlikely that we will make much further progress in reducing family violence until that violence is recognised as a human problem rather than a male problem.

Those who want the violence to continue can wear their white ribbon's, they can swear but I won't be joining them in the lies and spin.

R0bert
Posted by R0bert, Tuesday, 29 November 2011 6:24:16 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy