Ros, I am hoping that the blatent nature of this particular combination of definition and "statistic" will wake some of the doubters up. The combination is in my view indefensible - does anybody really believe that men are responsible for up to 98% of all abuse including the various types of emotional abuse within spousal relationships? Yet we have a government funded web site publishing this kind of stuff. It is an eye opener as to how far some of the extremists are willing to go and the sad fact of a culture that lets them get away with it.

I wrote to Qld Health and complained early this year and to date have only recieved an acknowledgement of my complaint and no further correspondance. I have also passed my concerns onto the Morris enquiry ("Dr Death" etc) as they appear to be looking into issues of villification and the abuse of statistics within Qld Health.

RObert, enjoying the reasonable tone of your posts. I agree with the definition ""DOMESTIC VIOLENCE is the physical, sexual, emotional or psychological abuse of trust and power between partners in a spousal relationship"" and take your point in questioning whether the male perpetrated stats are accurate.

We still have this 'madonna/whore' view of women, when in fact women are just as human as men as just as capable of inflicting pain as we are capable of demonstrating any other so-called male characteristic.

I also appreciate your use of the word 'extremists' rather than terms such as 'feminazis' and 'femocrats' which are offensive and divisive to meaningful communication. Just because one is a feminist doesn't mean that one is out to rid the world of men - far from it.

Interesting about the 'rule of thumb' which timkins dismissed as a myth - my ex use to quote this and similar before thumping into me - he really believed he had a right to hit me if I disagreed with him. I imagine that just as many men believed this 'myth' as women and used it to justify their actions.

Having less physical strength, women are more likely to resort to psychological methods of control and manipulation rather than physical intimidation, however, both methods are used by both sexes. I wish it was possible to gain some accurate information regarding the extent of DV perpetrated by both sexes. I am suspicious of stats offered by the posters who use derogatory descriptions of feminists just as I am suspicious of those who use derogatory descriptions of men.

Are the facts being manipulated? The posts to this forum would indicate that this is true. So where do we go from here?

Ringtail,
“Where do we go from here?”

Downhill I would think, if the biased surveys and draconian laws pertaining to domestic violence continue.

The domestic violence laws as presently established in states such as WA, TAS and probably in VIC in the future, are mostly based on biased and highly unethical surveys. However those laws will mean that someone can be removed from their home and their children based on allegations only, or put in jail with no bail granted unless they pass a Risk Assessment, but few people seem to know what is contained in these Risk Assessments.

This is not something out of a Kafka novel, but something that is very real and very much occurring in Australia. What it will likely mean in the future is the formation of more de facto relationships, as few males will be willing to risk their lives by getting married. The formation of often temporary de facto relationships has been the goal of feminists for many years, but the statistics of what generally occurs in de facto relationships is not often talked about by these same feminists.

So we are about to see the decline in society that will probably occur at an increasing rate.

A well known female ABC radio announcer recently said the following “I love Samuel Jackson, but I want to slap him”. If Samuel Jackson said the same about the female ABC radio announcer, he would obviously not have a career, but to my knowledge no female, (feminist or otherwise), has made a complaint about the ABC radio announcer. I think such things are now very representative of where feminism and the thinking of the modern woman is presently at

I would love to be able to hold some meaningful dialogue with you timkins, however with spurious statements like;

"The formation of often temporary de facto relationships has been the goal of feminists for many years, but the statistics of what generally occurs in de facto relationships is not often talked about by these same feminists"

I know that you will continue to push your agenda regardless of anything feminists like myself say. It is comments like the above that prompts posters to ask if you actually DO 'get out and meet people' much.

Having been married and bashed, single mother and successful and currently de facto and successful - I can only say that my experience does not match up with any of your anti feminist rant. My now teenage kids are confident and independent - I am proud of them both. BTW I have nothing against marriage - in fact I may choose to marry again some day.

I don't believe it is all downhill - with the amount of communication that we enter into these days, I believe we are experiencing painful growth and will eventually find that there is not one ideal solution for everyone - that is marriage will work for some and not others - it is not all a feminist plot. We will not be returning to the brief 50's ideal of nuclear family - I had that - married with 2 kids and I was beaten up both physically and psychologically.

So instead of blaming feminists for everything what are you doing to help other men (and women) who have suffered from DV?

I assist with a lot of volunteer work in addition to running my business - consequently I don't get much time for this forum so I like to make a point when I can.

I admit I have not read much of the study and statistical data your article contains. I don’t have time when I am working in a Women’s Shelter where 4 out of 4 women are victims of Domestic Violence. True the women we house are not always immediate victims but have found themselves homeless (often with children) because of drug, alcohol and/or mental health issues. It doesn’t take much exploratory work to find that these women did not find themselves in this life situation because they thought it a good career and could get “world to open like an oyster” to them. They were often introduced to drugs by their partners or were abused as children/young adults and chose to suppress the pain using drugs and then found themselves in dysfunctional relationships, some not recent but an “event far off in both time and in memory” but still the effects are there.
The money you mention that is poured into programs (particularly educational) are to educate the public so that when they see statistics pertaining to domestic violence they do not have images “of black eyes and bruises occurring on an appalling scale” but view it as including verbal, sexual and financial abuse. Obviously this money has been mis-spent on the closed minded. In an ideal world the legal system would be as supportive of women applying for intervention orders as you suggest. Current regulations are that women must ‘prove’ incidents of domestic violence and have at least 3 police reports against the perpetrator before the court will consider an order. Verbal abuse is not as easy to prove and takes a lot longer to heal. When a woman is granted an order the order goes out to the alleged perpetrator in the form of a summons. He is then given the opportunity to say why he does not believe the order should be in place. If he chooses to take the case to trial he can represent himself and therefore no cost is incurred

I find the example of two brothers fighting as family violence interesting, here the fight may be on an equal level but if not I am sure the law would step in to protect the weaker of the two. I agree that there are many men who are victims of domestic violence, but few are murdered by their partners in comparison to male to female homicides (sorry don’t know the stats I only watch the news and personally know 3 women murdered in the last 2 years), the rate of female to male rape is very low and few men attend the emergency room of the local hospital with injuries sustained from the assault (once again no stats just talk to people involved).
The saddest part of my job is when women enter the shelter with children in tow and one bag of belongings. More often than not the perpetrator gets to stay in the house with all the goods and the woman has to start again, she knows and we know that she is at high risk if she returns home and he leaves. Therefore more money is put into this social issue than many others and if money is denied then these victims (men and women) with children in tow are forced to live with the threat of injury daily.
Women who can afford independent private rental housing rarely access SAAP services so to claim that they are “encouraged to falsely claim they were fleeing family violence, or indeed what the nature of the "violence" was, so that they could receive priority treatment” is false and insulting of these families. They are homeless through no fault of their own, do they need to falsify a reason? Somehow they were made homeless and this sort of propaganda you are writing only re-victimises the homeless whether through DV or any other reason. Have you seen the car sticker for disabled parking ‘look at the sticker not the person’? I invite you put down your studies and statistics, surveys and pre-conceived ideas and spend some time with victims and their children.