'Same sex couples can be violent'

Same sex couples ARE violent, simple as that. Violence is person specific, and not gender specific as the rabid femo-nazis would have us believe.

Cody,
We shouldn't call them Nazis, for all their perceived faults Hitler & Co really were on a mission to transform European society, Ideological Feminism, is just fraud, rent seeking and a lot of the time outright extortion and blackmail with menaces.
As we see with Rhrosty's post Feminists take the spaces formed by a lack of supporting evidence for their claims and fill it with what amounts to a bunch of old wives tales and conspiracy theories.
Feminists don't represent women, or even the views of women, they represent a form of racketeering dressed up in a veneer of respectability, like Cosa Nostra running a soup kitchen for the poor.

In the context of this article I find this news report interesting http://www.couriermail.com.au/questnews/west/reports-of-sex-offences-almost-double-over-the-last-year-in-brisbanes-innerwestern-suburbs/story-fni9r1r4-1226917345400.

In it the police call on men not to take advantage of drunken women for sex. When I first heard it on the radio my instinctive reaction was to wonder why it was not twinned with a call for women not to take advantage of drunken men. If both parties are under the influence it's a bit hard to say that either was taking advantage of the other, unless you're acting on the basis of a stereotype.

Things may have changed since I did much clubbing, but it always seemed to be the case that the men had more to drink than the women, so more likely that a man's thinking was even more impaired than a woman's.

Yes it's an interesting question Graham.
When is a man too intoxicated to consent to sex or to be held responsible for his actions?
Arousal doesn't mean consent and the failure or inability of one party to say no in a sexually charged situation isn't usually available as a defense in court.
There's been some interesting work on the role of intoxication in male-male violence and it seems to indicate high levels of impairment arising form only moderate consumption. It might sound obvious but young men in particular experience a narrowing of their field of vision even when only moderately drunk, they are unable to process sounds as normal nor properly interpret speech and body language, I've not seen any work on the effects of intoxication upon women but you'd expect something similar.
The obvious message to both young men and women is just don't get so drunk when you go out on the town and if you're specifically going out looking to get laid maybe not drinking at all is the best policy.

Firstly Adam congratulations on a this article.

Bronte, "One in three women will be abused". What possible evidence can be produced to prove something that hasn't happened?>

This figure was arrived at, by expanding the definition of domestic violence and including 'one instances" such as being hit once, rather that the accepted thing about repeated behaviour.

The expanded definition included things like psychological abuse, such as manipulation, but then by tying the one in three, with talk about physical violence, this attempt is then to associate the one in three women will experience physical violence resulting as Rhosty puts it broken bones, smashed teeth ect,

When in actual fact women who have their bones broken and teeth smash will make up around 1% of the female population in Australia (excluding native australian camps).

If one goes to central australia then the figures are mucher higher.

There was a project about a decade ago, where I think they wanted to catch the data on how many women who presented to ED's were victims of domestic violence.

Don't know the results of that research project as to my knowledge the results have not been published.

Usually the media would be all over it.