There could be another heading: The (Female) Elephant in Child Abuse.

Child abuse is very much under-reported, however from what is already known, it is at endemic proportions in Australia and the incidence is growing.

Sadly, most child abuse affects the most defenseless of children, those below five years old. Women are responsible for the lion's share of child abuse.

Then again, has the author ever had cause to look at the reported incidence of domestic abuse of lesbians?

I really don't see any point in demonising one sex as the author has done, however if that is where she gets her kicks she should realise there could be two sides.

1) nearly (less than) 80% is not "almost all", it would be described as "most" or "the majority"- "almost all" is usually reserved for over 95%.

2) The gender differences are probably not used so much, because as a statistic it's pretty useless, except for sociologists, criminologists and psychologists studying gender differences. For the general public it's like saying that "almost all" cyclones happen in far North Queensland. The general reaction is "well duh", but can you do about it? Crime may well be prevented by targeting youth and young men in particular (well duh), but that particular statistic would still be unlikely to change.

The author also failed to point out the numbers of convicted individuals who also have drug and alcohol problems.

I wonder why it is that men are more likely to have drug and alcohol problems? Than women.

Yep men live shorter lives than women. Wonder why?

Men are much more likely to commit suicide than women. Wonder why?

Gee I wonder if it that inherited male power and privilege is the cause?

So men are now elephants?

I think the ethics of a feminist is to continuously malign the male gender, and to never say anything positive about the male gender.

Fact:- Most prisoners are male.

Fact:- Very few males are prisoners.

Fact:- Nearly all industry, art, science and government has been developed by males.

Fact:- Nearly every invention has been invented by a male, nearly all food is grown by a male, nearly every buildings has been built by a male.

But what do males get in return from feminists.

Not a lot, except continuous negativity. Is this all a feminist can do.

the writer is correct- this is an important matter, worthy of serious discussion. unfortunately, she is wasting her time addressing an australian audience. they can't do anything about it. they can't do anything about anything, in fact.

she should be addressing the appropriate minister, cap in hand, saying "please sir, can i have more?"

that is the australian way, the way of the subject: humble, obsequious, and impotent.

A very welcome article. However, a couple of points …

Firstly, the confused way in which the author uses the term ‘political correctness’ here shows that it is starting to become a rhetorical problem. One of the first casualties in the backlash against feminism (c.1990) was the substitution of the term ‘gender’ for ‘women’ (or ‘men’) in public and academic debate. Although the author is right in attempting to wrest back the terms ‘men’ and ‘women’ (or ‘male’ and female’) as a means of clearing the fog that has gathered around gender debates, it’s confusing for her to call the process that led to this state of affairs ‘political correctness’.

The term ‘political correctness’ was actually a right-wing reactionary term created to both replace and demonise the former umbrella term ‘anti-discrimination’. As feminism was at the forefront of the anti-discrimination movement (along with multiculturalism and anti-racism), to use the term ‘political correctness’ in the context of this article inadvertently blames the women’s movement for the negative consequences of the very backlash that was designed to demonise its achievements.

(I’ve noticed recently that some writers are starting to use the term ‘neo-political correctness’ to describe the culture wars process of using the PC label to stifle debates on discrimination against women and minorities. Perhaps this term could have been used here instead.)

Secondly, any genuine analysis of the differences in levels of violence between the genders can not get very far while the current antagonism against feminism remains to poison the well of public debate. Feminists were very good at highlighting the dominance of masculine over feminine values in society – particularly the glorification of war, sport and business and the devaluation of domesticity, co-operation and caring – as being at the heart of the high levels of violence among men. It’s unfortunate that the male-controlled media preferred to focus its attention on a lot of rubbish about bra-burning, man-hating, and family-busting rather than what feminist theory was really trying to say.