that a rise in female violence is directly linked to increasing levels of female dominance in a relationship. (The same is true for males.) Thus it is factors such as dominance by one partner over another, alcohol and drug abuse, stress, which lead to domestic violence, not the base nature of males.

Shakira Hussein's excellent recent article http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=5095, links the perceived alienation of some 2nd generation Muslim male immigrants, to a seemingly pathological hatred of women. This could also shed light on the disgraceful actions in the DVD which inspired Moody's article. Whether they were 5th generation Anglo or 2nd generation muslim, could we not view this episode as the actions of alienated young men? But feminist theory blinkers us to this possibility, and thus hinders possible remedies to dealing with the problem of male violence against women.

Surely there are many men, young and old, to whom the concept of "The Patriarchy" is completely foreign. I often feel myself asking, "what has "The Patriarchy" ever done for me. The notion of masculinity itself is under attack, (and it's not just blokes saying this- Melanie Phillips makes this point, and the comments of CountryGal, OZgirl and CornFlower on this forum are refreshing to see.) There's nothing wrong with socializing society into accepting equality of the sexes and teaching men "do not hit women." But with the aforementioned feminist theories regarding the nature of masculinity underpinning this socialization, the self hate it inflicts on men does more harm than good.

Finally, (and sorry if my use of the English language is making me sound like a total ponce,) although it's not femo-bashing, it does appear that many of these dv/gender debates do seem to end up with just a few of us (male and female) talking amongst ourselves. We're presenting a lot of double-posts, but a common response to being in a losing position on this forum seems to be to just ignore one's opponent. Come on people, take us on. This is a debate forum, not a self-help forum for battered men...

dozer, " but a common response to being in a losing position on this forum seems to be to just ignore one's opponent".

Good point, I've posted links and key statistics from the Abused Child Trust and other seemingly independant sources on these forums on numerous ocasions and I've not seen a single poster respond to the stats.

They either ignore them and continue on with claims of overwhelming genderisation in the perpetration of child abuse or just go silent. None have ever attempted to tell me why those stats don't reflect the reality of our society.

Likewise with the results of the study I referenced on DV earlier in this thread. The full article explains their collection methodology and the steps they have taken to exclude bias in the sampling. The authors admit they came up with a different result than what was expected. They question their own findings on the level of injury experienced.

Again nobody has posted a critique that showed why the results can be ignored, I don't recall any poster pushing that line that DV is overwhelmingly genderised ever responding to the research or the key findings (or retracting earlier comments).

Some peoples myths are indeed hard to kill.

R0bert

I think it is about time to begin to summarise and close up this debate.

What has it all been about?

Mr Moodie, a Vic MP, the Health Minister, facing re-election in a month's time wanted to test the waters on the issue of violence against women (VAW) as a primary plank for his party's re-election. In fact, he's choreographed the release of a report, "Two steps forward and one step back", mentioned, to coincide with the launch of the election - last weekend every news journal in Australia ran reports of this "research", and I do use that term extremely loosely.

Next, is the coincidence of the Vic state elections coinciding with "White Ribbon Day", which he honestly pointed out in his article. This, of course is NO coincidence, but a convenient duality. And that's what this article by Moodie is really all about. To test the waters about man/woman hatred and how that would relate to votes in the box for his pro-VAW policies.

Let me tell you that mightily pleased I have been by the posts that I have read above. They have shown that the issue Moodie wants to run on is nothing but a bald-faced lie and you the posters of the comments above have told him so. I feel confident that whilst "White Ribbon Day" will feature prominently on ALP re-election day, they won't be pushing it as much as they would have done had you good people not spoken your mind. A win for the people.

There is so much more to discuss about this issue and the article scribed by Moodie and its relationship to policies, but time and space limit my voice.

I'd just like to thank those who have spoken openly and frankly about their life experiences, which have clearly been painful episodes in their lives, so the rest of us can garner a picture of reality - not something it would seem that Moodie and his researcher, Flood, would like us to know.

To all I thank you for your honesty and decency.

One of the great ommissions in this debate has been verbal and emotional abuse which is often claimed, including by women, to be the most damaging types of abuse.

I was interested to get figures on these types of abuse from the ABS as their Personal Safety Survey did canvass these issues. Unfortunately the only figures made freely available by the ABS are those on Physical and Sexual Assault where men are the dominant perpetrators.

I suspect that as a Women's Group was funding a large part of this survey that they have deemed that figures on emotional types of abuse be not included in the Summary. I suspect that women engage in this 'most damaging type of abuse' much more frequently than men and Women's Groups do not want this kind of information getting out as it puts paid to the idea that violence against women is the only real problem in Family Violence.

I realize that this is only speculation but it is not speculation by choice. I would love for those figures to be released and if anyone has access to those figures I would call on them to post them here - if someone wants to end the speculation, it is very easy - release the figures!

"One of the great ommissions in this debate has been verbal and emotional abuse which is often claimed, including by women, to be the most damaging types of abuse."

Posted by Rob513264, Saturday, 4 November 2006 3:28:57 AM

I saw an article which stated basically that one of the strongest indicators for domestic violence (physical) was an emotional abusive, manipulative wife.

It may not be politically correct and I think alot of people avoid saying this, even though it seems to rather obvious. I have known bullies who will taunt and ridicule the victim and then cry innocent when the victim retaliates with physical violence.

JamesH, there is still no excuse for retaliatory violence. Instead men need to learn not to play that particular game: to take measures to protect themselves by having a good grounding by having good affirming mates, or, and this may be heretical, by having female friends / workmates / sisters etc, or by getting affirmation through a supportive faith community (church etc) or even, if appropriate, by attending a 12 step program such as al-anon, CODA or slaa or similar (there has to be some underlying reason why an otherwise functional man stays with an abusive woman).

I only got through my arts degree in my mid forties with the support of an wonderful Internet woman friend. We were both having problems, so for four years we communicated nearly daily: if you are being torn down at home, you need to get built up somehow, from somewhere else.

Another thing that men have to learn is to detach: to recognise that if a woman is verbally abusive then that is her problem. Striking back in any way shape or form only demeans us as males. Instead we must keep acting with love, if only as a way of helping us feel good about ourselves.

Lastly, detachment, whether physical, by going to another room, or by going for a walk, perhaps spending the night somewhere else, and considering leaving, if you can. This can be difficult if the violence is also against children and a man may try to stay to shield the kids.

Remember, if a woman gets violent, call the police: If she gets physically out of control: call the police. Any attempt to restrain her, except in self defence or to prevent her from self harm is assault. If she chooses, for example, to destroy the TV then let her - but call the police: Better a destroyed TV than you being charged and having a criminal record.