Cont.

When the topic of domestic violence is raised many women and exhibit anger as if their rights were being denied. In my opinion the anger belongs to the relationship with their peers whom they perceive to be denying them their rights to enter and leave relationships on their own terms. The inability to resolve that anger often leads to aggressive outbursts towards innocent bystanders such as members of this forum who are simply expressing opinions on the subject.

Unless women resolve that anger they will remain in abusive relationships and continue to become bitter and aggressive towards outsiders. Discussions about domestic violence will go round in circles because we are not all talking about the same issue.

Much of what I have said can also pertain to some men in relationships but I do not think there is anywhere near the same level of emotional blackmail to remain in relationships as there is for women.

There is only one good reason to remain in a relationship and that is because you love your partner and they love you. Forcing them to remain in a relationship because it is your ‘right’ or forcing them to behave peacefully because it is your ‘right’ will never produce a loving relationship. When someone ‘loves’ because they have to then it is not love at all and who would want to be in that type of relationship?

Pynchme,

I have known men who are extremely violent towards other men, but are pussy cats when women are involved, in other words they tolerant for example a woman calling them names, where if a bloke said that to them, they would lash out.

I have seen them pull other blokes in line if they felt these blokes were being disrepectful towards a woman.

Unfortunately like a report in todays paper about DV being more prevelant after news years eve, strongly suggests that alcohol pays a big part in violence.

One thing I do know is that males experience a high level of acquired brain injury which can change personality. To my knowledge there has been no research into the link between acquired brain injury and violence. One case I do know about the male ended up killing his step father.

Pynchme, I've stayed out of this thread for some time as it seems for the most part to have done the usual drop into trading insults but I'd like to take up some of the points in your post.

1/ Not having been party to a the bad boy thing from either side I can't comment with any authority but my impression is that the appeal of bad boys goes a lot further than claims of man wanting to change. I think the idea of adventure and excitement is part of it. The women I've heard talk about it are not talking about reforming bad boy's, they are talking about how sexy they find the tough rebel image.
2.1/ The traditional male role in the home is different to that outside. Outside the male is supposed to be competing to get the most for his family. In the the home he is supposed to be the protector and provider. It's not a "tremendous leap in logic" rather taking into consideration of the impact of traditional roles and that those roles still impact on us.
2.2/ I doubt that physical strength has much to do with the actual leaving. The strength might help protect against physical reprisal (if it can be used without being treated as the abuser). It does not protect against other forms of reprisal nor against socialisation about "deserting" a partner.
2.3/ Men who leave are often threatened. They are threatened with loss of access to children, they are threatened with loss of financial security. They are sometimes threatened with accusations of being an abuser. Those threats are followed through with in too many cases.

TBC
R0bert

Part 2

2.4/ I don't think any of the men here are claiming that women physically injure male partners at the same rate as the reverse. They lack the strength to do serious harm as easily. That does not mean that they don't hit as often, it does not mean they don't initiate violence. You might consider the impact of female emotional violence against males and the body count of deceased men who take their own lives when discussing the numbers of deceased. It's not clear cut and I don't think that the difference in female suicide rates is all about ineffective methods.
4/ I'm in agreement with leaving but having had an abusive partner I'm also aware that spousal relationships are not the same as being a housemate. Housemates have rarely made a long term committment which they feel bound to abide by even if the other party is breaching it. Housemates who leave don't generally risk having to hand over almost everything they value to the other party.

I think the idea of rights has different meanings to different people and that may be part of the different reactions to the comment about rights. I don't see that society can guarantee anybody a relationship of any kind. We can encourage behaviours and attitudes which support respectful and loving relationships. We can provide legal support to allow people to exit a damaging relationship. We can prosecute offenders. We can't though enforce what type of relationships people will find themselves in.

R0bert

Hmmm, I think I agree with phanto really. What he says is controversial and un-PC, and deliberately and unfairly misrepresented by pynchme, but I cant fault his logic.

pynchme,

'they appeal to the woman by showing her some sort of vulnerability as in, "If I was just loved enough by somebody I could be different... "'

That is the no.1 most popular theme of most soapies consumed in the masses by women. I actually find it offensive to men; Women the devine, selfless loving beings saving the brutish males from their destructive selves by the power of female love. (Just watch 'Home and Away')

I've read a few of these types of topics and I can identify a few consistant themes...

1. The male posters want some recognition that women should have some responsibility assigned for their behaviour in domestic disputes that are violent. This seems as a response to the DV campaigns depicting low level violence and controlling behaviour by men (only men) as a problem.

2. Women react as if said male posters are 'silencing' or 'hiding' male domestic violence or asserting equal rates of high level violence exist.

The debates would be simpler if they either talked about high level violence (perpertrated more often by males), or domestic violence as a whole, which has been shown to be pretty gender-equal I think.

As James said,

'Firstly as I said the definition of DV is expanded from just physical violence, to include behaviours such as emotional manipulation etc, and as you have just shown SJF once the definition has been expanded, you then fall back onto the position of physical violence.'

This happens far too often.

BTW: I see a lot of the anguish in these debates indicative of how men and women relate. A lot of female posters are offended at the lack of empathy, validation, or emotional engagement by the male posters about DV against women and the personal experiences related by female posters. Common gripes about male calousness and bullying abound. The silence on the male posters part in response to personal accounts and emotive arguments is taken as a lack of empathy (I think wrongly).

Some male posters have related their experiences and received validation and empathy from the female posters. The reverse rarely happens.

BUT, the male posters rarely if ever show any empathy or bother to 'validate' each others personal experiences either. In fact, even after 'oh you poor thing, that really must have been horrible' from the female posters as a response to a male poster's personal experience, there is little if any acknowledgement from the male posters of the female validation. Perhaps because it's not wanted or sought? I suspect it is expected if not sought from the female posters.

It seems the male posters here just relate to people in a different way to the female posters. Hardly surprising. Both 'sides' should take this into account, and neither side is 'wrong' in their way of communicating. Male posters could be more sensitive, female posters could be less sensitive.

So it's surprising it's the female posters complaining of bullying and ganging up when the males really debate more independently than the female posters, who empathise with each others personal accounts, more directly compliment and encourage each others points, and egg each other on with 'atta girl', 'thankyou for your posts' etc.