No HRS, I'm having trouble finding a feminist document that says things about the male gender that you'll accept.

Botheration put forward plenty, but you found various reasons to discount them all.

I was absolutely incredulous when you discounted an article because it didn't say anything positive about men, stating:
"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."

In every case, you've been presented with evidence pointing to the fact that men are more violent than women.

You have never provided anything to back your case. Instead, you just reclassify the situation to suit your view, while demanding others put in the time and effort to provide things, which you then discount and shift the ball.

I never said I believed violent men were a majority, but you kept asking for statistics I don't believe exist, for very clear reasons of classification which I've already explained.

The argument I was making was that men are more physically violent than women. I put forward statistics to prove that, but you never addressed them.

In fact, when you go to any of the police statistics around the country, this is repeated in all of them. It's a stark reality, but again, you just won't engage.

In fact, you've provided nothing except anecdotes throughout this entire post, so I see no reason to continue engaging, when you simply reframe the debate so it suits you and ignore the parts that don't, calling them a range of things, from 'regurgitation' to 'unoriginal' yet you don't provide any backing for your views.

"Liz,
I have not said anything insulting or abusive about you. In fact I have said elsewhere that you are a democratic, non-feminist and articulate teacher, and this can be easily seen by your posts."

I worry about you HRS.

I know that you won't tell us of your personal circumstances (except that you are a father, and I think we can assume you had an acrimonious break-up). But what are you driving at with your posts? What kind of world do you want to see? Do you think feminism should be undone? If so, to what extent? Do you have any practical ideas about how you could work to improve boys education and the other problems you see in society?

I understand that you dislike me and the other "feminists" (male and female) on these forums. But can't we get past that, and start discussing how improvements could be made?

And HRS - you say "I've said many insulting and abusive things about you."

Damned if I'm going to stand by and let you beat your breast about how you've been abused, when it's just that your posts are being put under scrutiny.

I dispute that I've been abusive, and I'll state outright that I think your claims on this score are indicative of an attitude of victimhood.

That whole farce that I'd insulted you with 'ilk' is just one example. An example that every poster has rejected as being a farce and you've not provided any backing to your claims that it is an insult.
In fact, unless you can prove that contrary to what everybody has said, ilk is actually an insult, I think it's you who has been insulting me by misleading what I've been saying.

Lets review what I have said:

a) you have an axe to grind against women.

-I stand by this assertion. All your posts are indicative of this.
Actually, I think the way you twisted my words and said that I've called you a woman hater is more insulting, but hey.

b) you hate feminists.

-HRS: "feminism is a cult that describes the male gender as being an abuser no matter what the situation"

Pretty conclusive.

c) That your posts show you're quick to assume the mantle of victim.

-Exhibit a: the things I'm raising in this post.

d) That you shift the subject when it doesn't suit.

-The police DV statistics I provided... thought about them yet, or are you still waiting until something more suitable comes along? Or is this comment unoriginal?

e) I said you and your "ilk."

-Found anything at all to confirm this is an insult hmm? Somehow, like many of your other claims, I doubt it.
I've seen that word often and never spotted the connotations you claim.

f) Your pursuit of feminists turns people off mens rights groups.

-The responses in this thread have been indicative of this. This is genuine advice, not an insult.

Turnrightthenleft,
You still haven’t given the ACTUAL NUMBERS or % of males who are violent, and you still haven’t provided a feminist document that says something positive about the male gender.

The latter should not be so difficult, as so many feminist spend so much money that comes initially from men.

HRS,

research published by Jordan I. Kosberg wrote in an article titled "Heterosexual Males: A Group Forgotten by the Profession of Social Work."

Of the studies Mr. Kosberg found about men, half were about homosexuals and most of the rest were about men categorized as abusers, absent fathers, AIDS victims, prisoners or homeless.

"Most males are not delinquent, neglectful, abusers, AIDS victims or gay," Mr. Kosberg wrote. Yet in the last 10 years, "just a handful of studies at best" addressed "normative issues" of males.

This creates an "unfair and untrue" stereotype of heterosexual males, Mr. Kosberg concluded. It also handicaps social workers, leaving them ill-prepared to handle the needs of men related to adolescence, fatherhood, employment, marriage, divorce and aging.
http://www.fact.on.ca/news/news0301/wt030108.htm

http://web.archive.org/web/20050310221633/www.nojustice.info/Statistics/ManufactureOfDVStatisticsPartI.htm
"This type of data often comes from police or hospital reports, surveys, etc. It can then be further refined through rating, averaging, or other numerical manipulations to provide additional information, trends, etc. to the researcher. Qualitative research is typically more open-ended, such as in-person interviews with study participants that allow them to report freely on an event or idea. Answers to qualitative questions can be coded or analyzed for trends, unique situations or commonalties and generally result in an interpretation of the information.

Researchers are told that they need to ask:

Do the results corroborate the study methodology and participant responses?

The package is an excellent example of how selective use of estimated, but not validated, statistics are used to give misleading information without actually telling a lie. Only by looking deeper into the complete reports and comparing the various research methodologies against each other can one get some glimpse of reality. However, considering the calculated oversupply of "research" reports, which often merely duplicate each other, no one individual has the time to go through them all and thus we are inclined to accept the abstracts which are presented to us from an advocacy perspective. "

TRTL one problem with police reports is that they only record reports made to police, they do not measure the actual incidence of violence.

I have yet to see any author, poster or blogger on this site who denies the reality of female-initiated domestic violence. Hence I feel the continual high-jacking of threads to re-hash this issue intrusive, non-instructive, time-wasting and pointless.

However, it seems to me that it is at least possible that part of the problem arises from two seperate issues that are being conflated here:1) male violence towards woman...across the board 2) domestic violence ...as a seperate issue.

Yes of course society should take a stand against violence of any kind and perpetrated by anyone, male or female. The most physical damage results from male-driven violence - both towards women and towards other men. As TRTL points out, this fact is unsavoury but hardly arguable. Therefore at present there are a preponderance of articles addressing possible cause and probable results and generating many studies, much discussion and the implementing of programmes to provide damage limitation.

Domestic violence is another frightening, disruptive and serious social ill that is being urgently addressed. I am honestly surprised at the continued statements by certain posters that it is "impossible" to find studies or literature on this issue which addresses the growing phenomenon of female culpability: I personally have never had any difficulty accessing sites or interviewing people who are engaged with female-initiated domestic violence.

Now,HRS (and your ilk) if you are really interested in this subject go to pubpages.unh.edu/-mas2/CTS21.pdp which discusses in great detail studies of female initiated domestic violence, the probable causes for the disparity in statistical reporting,the way in which statistical polls vary and why.. and many other issues on which one would imagine you would be eager to find data.

PS Robert
If you haven't read it already I think perhaps you'd find this an interesting link, too.