It's also a class issue, surely.

I helped a Indigenous woman the other day – she'd been beaten up *horribly* by her partner. Her back was black and blue – it looked like she's been trying to protect herself by curling up into a ball and he'd just gone her.

Another couple found her bleeding in the street, then my partner and I joined in and ended up taking her to a few different places. At one point all four of us were trying to entreat her not to return to her partner. She knew what he'd done was wrong, but clearly she's going to find it hard to actually leave him.

The difference between me and her is so vast and untraversable. The fact is, I come from a stable, unviolent family, as does my partner, and we have created a stable, unviolent family. If either of us were to turn nasty and beat up the other, there's no doubt that the innocent party would bring the full force of the law into play. Without guilt. And although we're not rich, if either of us had to leave, we could rely on an extensive network for financial and emotional support. I have so many more *resources* than this poor girl, who had to deal with her trauma publicly and had to beg for help.

I note HRS is here once again claiming he never hears women speak positively of men or boys. Once again, HRS: I AM A FEMINIST AND I LOVE MEN. To bits, in fact.

He'll ignore it, but I thought it was worth pointing out.

Turnrighthenleft

I have heard it all before, about talking to police, nurses and social workers. Nothing you say is original.

If all this violence and abuse from males towards females is so widespread, then there would definitely be some statistics available to show what % of males are violent or abusive towards women.

I have heard of a case recently where a woman has been ordered to attend a court on 3 occasions, and on 3 occasions she has failed to turn up. But the man has to keep paying her money.

There is a more extreme case currently in the US where a mother killed a son, and has been in jail for a number of years and is about to be released. But a court has now decided that when she is released, the father has to pay her over $3,000 a month in alimony. The children are living with the father and do not wish to live with the mother who murdered their brother, but the mother is not required to pay the father any child support. Instead, he has to pay her money in the form of alimony.

No matter what the situation, the man has to pay the woman money, because the man is stereotyped as being the abuser.

So that is why feminists like to stereotype both men and boys as being abusers, but are never willing to say exactly how many men or boys are abusers.

They want males stereotyped as abusers so they will be paying women money, no matter what the situation.

Botheration,
Link to an article written by a feminist that says positive things about men, and I'll read it.

I've never been able to find such an article, like I've never been able to find a woman with a black eye.

HRS: Ok, a quick five minute google:

A feminist love letter to men: http://www.ubersite.com/m/31033

Article about a feminist who's written a book defending men: http://www.mysanantonio.com/opinion/stories/MYSA112707.parkerinterview.EN.465e8a23.html

Here's a feminist blogger on why it's a fallacy that feminists hate men: http://happyfeminist.typepad.com/happyfeminist/2006/10/on_manhating_be.html

I can do more if you want, but somehow I suspect you're going to change the subject right about now.

By the way, you might also be interested in Jackson Katz: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/fashion/main.jhtml?view=DETAILS&grid=&xml=/fashion/2007/11/25/st_jacksonkatz.xml

botheration, I think you're right about the subject being changed... it would appear that unless the information is presented ina very narrow context, it won't be accepted.

HRS, I guess you can disagree with my assertion that actually comprising a study on who is 'violent' would be difficult, though I don't see how you can use that as an excuse to justify ignoring figures that show men commit more assault than women. I guess if it doesn't fit your pre-packaged concept of what you'd like to debate then you won't engage it.

Similarly, I see you dismiss the point made about ambos, social workers police and so on, saying you've heard it all before and it's not 'original.'

I don't claim that these are original, just that they're right.

Again, you're avoiding the bits that don't suit you, though on this score I don't blame you. As I see it, if you actually engage that point, in order to refute it the only options are:

a) acknowledge that yes, there is a consensus amongst these professions, but try to discredit them by claiming you somehow are more informed.

b) say that there isn't a consense from these groups, but in order to do that you'd probably need to back it or nobody will believe you.

It's probably no wonder you've heard these arguments time and time again. People keep saying them because you're not listening.

Though I see its fine for you to dismiss others anecdotes, but when you bring some court cases forward, they must be indicative of the overall situation.

I never claimed men aren't being hard done by by women, in fact I said where legislation is uneven it should be looked at. What's objectionable, is you trying to pretend we don't have a significant domestic violence problem, and trying to tell me that women aren't those who suffer the most from it.

JamesH's study may have some merit, I haven't looked at it, but the point I raised at the end of my previous post stands as a pretty big obstacle to it backing your case.

There is a struggle to form an argument that can stand a debate such as this...so the most balanced point of view slowly takes the central stage with other arguments fail on the facts/basis relied to originate from the real world we live in and...falling to the sides...

eg botheration wrote 'I helped a Indigenous woman the other day – she'd been beaten up *horribly* by her partner.'...now note male on female violence put as 'example'...fact is in aboriginal areas where access to alcohol is easy...they are all bashing each other...worked in Alice Springs hospital and sometimes you dont know where to put the sutures because of the scars on top of scars with laceration...didnt see male female difference but all reeked of alcohol...so this statement falls off as being 'premediated for effect'for ignoring all relevant facts...while hoping no one knows better...and no comments to 'i love all men to bits' but say doubt that very much...as talk is cheap...what is the walk to prove your talk youve done...besides claim to be a feminist to which i agree from the unbalanced post...

We live in a world of technological benefit derived from knowledge gained from science...fundamental essence to science is 'fact of observation'...meaning first state in its entirerity the situation first...before trying to asses and interpret... eg http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/ answers from scientist and note the language and balanced presentation...

now approaching any issue with such 'scientific' mind will certainly lead to quickly getting to that balanced point of view in any controversy as a group...and clarify all relevant material facts, issues and most importantly...identify corrupting actions clearly such as excluding material facts, false facts, beliefs without/little basis, overt/hidden agendas, use the power of 'uniform group approach' to force an view to be accepted by other individuals etc

we fundamentally struggle here because there is no reliable data/fact to go on...so first issue to tackle is why is this so...and this is where the current favoured support to feminist by government and parliament must be assessed...and to why it is so...albeit diminishing rapidly with time...and thank god

Sam

Botheration,
Unfortunately you only got 1 out of 4.

Your first article seems to be from some rather obscure blog site, and it did say something positive about men, but one of the comments to this little piece was “Unfortunately, you are a woman and I don't believe a word of it.”

The second article was written by a feminist who is complaining about all the negative stereotyping of men that has been carried out by other feminists.

The 3rd and 4th articles don’t say anything positive about men at all, and the fourth article actually portrays men as being rapists, and seems to be something straight out of 1970’s feminism.

All these articles were from the US, but I have not heard of one single feminist in the US who has complained about a system that orders a man to pay alimony to his ex-wife, who is about to be released from jail because she killed his son.

So this makes the first article extremely suspect also.

Due to the negative stereotyping of men by so many feminists in the US, the men in that country are now worth absolutely nothing, except as a source of money for women.

That is rapidly becoming the situation in this country also.

Turnrightthenleft,
You’re saying that men are violent, so I would like to know what % of men are violent.

I can tell you that less than 0.002% of men carry out a murder of a woman each year, and I can tell you that in QLD last year, less than 0.04% of men sexually abused a child.

So after having asked you twice already, I would still like to hear from you what % of men are violent or abusive towards women.

Is it 100%, or 50% or 0.05% or less.

Sam Said,
It appears that many aboriginal men and women have lost their sense of place and also their sense of value.

That is very concerning, because in a feminist world, there is no value placed on men except as a source of money for women.