Constance, it isn't just testosterone that causes aggression dear.
If it was, then you wouldn't be as aggressive as you are...
Of course, I'm not to know if you are male or female.

Thanks for the links above Poirot.
I think I have said all I want to say on this subject, so I will see you all on another thread.

pelican, "the facts are that men are still more likely to perpetrate violence"

No, that doesn't coincide with the article nor the posts before yours, excepting for Suseonline's personal opinion, predictable as it was.

How do you dispel the evidence to the contrary in the article and in respondents' posts? For instance, what evidence do you have to dismiss what Erin Pizzey says? Jay of Melbourne's post refers,
Erin Pizzey interviewed by Dean Esmay
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhqVQCyNEGg

It is all very right proffering avuncular advice along the lines of 'Never you mind Dears', but even leaving the rather obvious unfairness to men aside, there remains the problem that the victims of violent women will continue to be unrecognised and unsupported. Many of whom can confidently be expected to be children (and incidents are seen often enough in shopping centres with women berating and belting children in public), and it is most likely that such violence is accompanied by child neglect.

What prevents a campaign against violence? Why are you opposed to that? These are questions that must have been asked many times on this forum. I am wondering why the rather obvious recommendation is not taken up.

several times over the years I havce been berated by feminist for stereo typing on OLO. Reality is that many of them are very quick to stereotype and demonise. While men obviously commit more physical violence because as a general rule are stronger, woman are known to manipulate much more than men. Many women working in offices with other woman will tell you the abuse they receive is far worse than any physical abuse they have ever received. Maybe we need a Woman prayer for those woman against manipulating men. Of course none of the OLO woman would be guilty of that would they?

Pelican, its a lot more than being irked. These very deliberately gendered campaigns have real practical consequences. They are quite deliberately gendered to promote a particular view of DV which has flow on effects in a number of areas.

I've been in the situation of having professionals who should have known better dismiss my ex's violence on the basis that she was smaller than me and unlikely to do 'real' harm. No one would tell her it was a real issue and she needed to stop. I was taunted by my ex with the claim that because she was a woman I could never ever hit back. I did once in one fight, two light slaps after being punched yet again and in desperation at tying to find a way to stop being hit. A dumb move, a doctor was consulted to record non-existant bruises, most of the people we knew were rung and informed that I'd hit her (no mention of her regularly hitting me).

When the issue of her violence did to come up I had to fightbthe perception that I probably deserved it, its never OK for a man to hit a woman but if a woman hits a man then she is deemed to be fighting back - thats part of the mantra.

I strongly believe that these gendered campaigns have very little to do with any interest in rducing violence, rather they are part of a broader attack on men and masculinity. Not all the supporters work on that basis but the ongoing and systematic refusal to address in any way female initiated or mutual violence should tell enough of a story to get anyone who cars thinking.

The switch from claims about the proportions of a very broadly defined DV committed by men to serious injury stats (or personal observation) when challenged on the details should be telling. Mens traditionally defined roles inside the home and outside are different, in the home we are supposed to protect, outside compete.

R0bert

How about a pink ribbon version? The recent murder in Coffs Harbour of the 21 year old by her female "flatmate" is surely Domestic Violence?

Suse,
You seem to have run out of puff dear, the last resort of the Feminist is always tears, "You're being so aggressvive, I don't feel safe in this space, can someone please remove this person?"

Constance,
The way domestic violence statistics are presented by the Feminists is always skewed, when they want to show women in the best possible light they use only the figures on cases of actual bodily harm which have occurred in relationships, that of course appears to show women as overwhelmingly victims and men as primary aggressors.
The problem is though that the feminists are tripped up by their own overly broad definition of partner violence which covers everything from the man sending the woman to Coventry all the way to murder, so the full spectrum of emotional, sexual, financial and physical manipulation. When you apply those standards equally, as do the MRA's then you get about a 50/50 split along gender lines, when you add in child abuse and abuse of the elderly then Men and Boys appear to be over represented as victims and women as aggresors.
The Feminists only use the image of spousal abuse because it provides those politically useful ABH figures but "domestic" violence occurs across all age groups and in all familial relationships with the very young and the elderly at elevated risk of abuse and exploitation.