I found an interesting link.

http://soundcloud.com/amfortas1/amfortas-christian-j-lying-about-domestic-violence-part-1

JamesH

Thank you for that link to Lying About Domestic Violence. It was most informative.

I started to listen to Sacred Cows in the China Shop which is also very interesting but was distracted by work. I will have to come back to it later.

Cornflower: Sounds like a good idea. Hope one of you takes it up.

JamesH: Lots of union and party worker strife at that time in England, including amongst the spouses of some of her associates. Her own spouse was some sort of journalist? I would want to know a lot more about that from authoritative sources before just believing it.

As to the "family terrorist" who uses deceit, manipulation, cunning etc - and can be overt or quiet. Sheesh. You know that abusers, just like bullies everywhere, usually blame the victim - whether it's a rapist, child molester or basher.

No matter what anyone does, they do NOT deserve to be lying in a ospital bed (or on a morgue slab) as a result of it. Also, how is it that many of the 50 -60 spousal murders a year, occur after separation. (see link below) If she was such a terrorist - why wouldn't he just let her leave? Why would he be pursuing her insisting that she stay with him and threatening harm ?

Also, you think that men are not capable of lies, deceit, manipulation etc ? No generalizations can or should be made - each case should be fully assessed AFTER ensuring safety. That's what happens when women enter refuges.

Btw she also conceded in an interview that women's violence was more internal, that they "implode", etc. The journalist said, "So it's not the same [as male violence]?" and her response was "Well it's still violence." - Sorry, but I don't think the "family terrorist" having a nervous breakdown or trying to kill herself is all that threatening to the spouse, who could always go and stay at his mother's or something. He has the physical advantage in matters of escape.

As to the tape. I only listened to the first part and there were so many inaccuracies; I really don't know why you persist.

For example the 1st figure to which he referred was about the study done by Koss. We have been over this before. Here's a link to remind you: http://www.amptoons.com/blog/archives/2004/04/30/wendy-mcelroy-on-koss-seven-mistakes-in-two-sentences/

cont'd:

Here are some links about the study in question: Note the diagram.

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/cat/4128.0

This is apparently by one of the (male) people who helped with it

<"The second pattern that can be found in the survey is that there is evidence of both desistance and escalation in partner violence. For example Table 6.7 shows that 76% of women who experienced violence by a current partner experienced it either on one occasion or ‘rarely’. A further 16.5% of this group of women experienced violence
‘sometimes’ and 7.6% experienced it ‘often’. The picture for women whose relationship was terminated is more severe with only 42.1% of the violence occurring once or ‘rarely’ during the relationship, 30% experiencing violence ‘sometimes’ and 27.8% ‘often’6. These terminated relationships also resulted in more severe violence in
terms of its nature and injury, as already discussed.">

What is important to you about this? No b/s now. What are these sites offering that you need ? If people are married, and the woman leaves -why would she need to pretend to be in danger or hurt? She can have social security; housing; welfare assistance and counselling, without having a history of DV. Did the missus leave you? Take out an AVO or something ? What's the source of your bitterness that you need to keep feeding your emotions from these rubbish sites (which, btw recycle the same rubbish and lies on lies between themselves) ?

Lastly, Sacks and his assorted minions have been around for a long time now - where are all these battered men? How is it that they have never turned up anywhere in the huge numbers that are claimed (like, we'd be talking of about 200,000 a year ? I know that I have assisted two battered men in ten years. I can't count how many women - and I don't work in DV services.

Pynchme, "Cornflower: Sounds like a good idea. Hope one of you takes it up"

Thank you for the pick-up, I take it you are referring to Men's Health Week 15-21 June 2009.

http://www.menshealthweek.com.au

A lot of women participate and encourage their menfolk of whatever age to do the same. Print and put up posters where you work and see how much interest you can generate.

I was rather surprised to find that government departments and agencies do not seem to be very active in supporting Health Week. There was no mention on the Commonwealth Department of Health and Ageing site nor on the State health departments that I looked at. The Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs didn't mention it either which is most unfortunate given the needs of indigenous men.

Nothing from Nicola Roxon, the federal Minister for Health and Ageing in the papers today, Monday June 15th, which is regrettable given that it is the first day of Men's Health Week and there has been no prior announcement by her.

Zero on the news from what I have seen.

So it looks like more has to be done from the grassroots level. So if you or other interested women and men on OLO can pitch it by spreading the word it would be all for the good.

pynchme:"If people are married, and the woman leaves -why would she need to pretend to be in danger or hurt?"

Because if she does so, she can get an enormous amount of additional State-provided assistance to victimise the former spouse. try having police called because you try to visit your child's school - that happened to me. Try being at work and having the police turn up "to investigate a complaint". that happened to me too. Try arriving to give your child a birthday present and having that 5 year-old child refuse to open the door "because Mummy says you might hurt me", with Mum hiding just out of sight. Also happened to me.

As I have said repeatedly and as the Court finally accepted, there was no violence ever perpetrated by me, just mutually raised voices in argument. No threats were made, no hand was ever raised.

On top of that there is the perception of an advantage in Family Law. Imagine how much harder it is for a father to press his case if all his resources, financial and emotional, are consumed in fighting a spurious and irrelevant DVO matter that stops him even seeing his children on no evidence except her word and be aware that the Family Court won't procedd to a hearing if there is an outstanding violence matter. In my case, it cost me 7 momths and about $6000 in out of pocket costs, not to mention lost income and stress to fight the DVO.

Then there is the fact that Legal Aid won't fund a Court matter if mediation has not already failed. Many lawyers are well aware that the best way to ensure mediation fails is to claim he was violent, which means she doesn't even have to show up, out of "fear" (also happened to me), or that he is genuinely angry at the injustice of the situation. which means the lawyer can call it off and proceed with the legal aid claim for the hearing.

How many more reasons would you like?