Eyeinthesky, I wasn't aware we were discussing infanticide?
I commented on domestic violence posters etc- domestic violence is defined under Australian law as being violence committed by a heterosexual partner icluding intimidation, serious harrassment, physical harm,indecent behaviour and damage to property, or threats to do these actions.

The information I found is from the Australian Government site and the Medical Journal of Australia and is collected by police files and medical evidence.

According to police files, women are 8 times more likely to be injured by their partners in domestic violence situations.

According to medical records, women present to hospitals after being injured by their partners in far greater numbers than that of men.

Where did you find your' statistics? Maybe on a militant anti-female website such as on the trashy facebook sites?

Unless we are all on the same page with domestic violence issues, nothing will ever change. Or maybe men are happy with the current statistics?

suzeonline, "domestic violence is defined under Australian law as being violence committed by a heterosexual partner"

Only heterosexuals? See here:

http://www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/lawlink/vaw/dvguidelines.nsf/pages/definitions

Antiseptic,

I think you should consider taking your child out and placing him in an all-boys' school.

If he hasn't got sisters then I'm not sure if it would be the best option, but if he has sisters and his mother living with him, and so relates easily to women in the home, then I think putting boys in all-boys' schools is now a much better option.

All-boys' schools tend to have a higher percentage of male teachers and of course the whole ethos of the school revolves around getting the best out of the boys, rather than seeing them as some type of defective girl.

In mixed schools its always the girls who are more compliant and so get to go to lunch first, get their books firsts etc. They have female teachers who read books females like, do topics of interest to females and who see rough and ready 'boy' behaviour as disruptive. Consequently, boys will find themselves punished more often and less often rewarded. Their self-esteem will not be developed as well as it could be.

They will learn from an early age that girls are more important. So unless there are no significant females in his life, I think it would be better to put him in a school where he is valued for who he is rather than for the gender he is not.

Hi Cornflower, I got that particular definition from the 'Medical Journal of Australia' website--see link below.

http://www.mja.com.au/public/issues/173_07_021000/hegarty/hegarty.html

Now that I look at it again, maybe it should read heterosexual or homosexual partners?
Of course there is domestic violence in many different families in Australia.
Maybe when they were collecting this data at medical facilities arround Australia, they were only assessing male versus female partner violence in the home?

Cheers, Sue.

Warwick Marsh, writing about "Fatherhood and the love revolution," made me think how fathers are changed by their children. We know that kids learn a lot from their dads but what does a father learn from his child?
One can learn patience. We can experience anew the joys of nature, the taste of shrimp, the ambling of an ant. Curiosity is a valuable lesson; it keeps us forever learning. A father can learn the puppy-like enthusiasm of a child - and the happiness that accompanies it.
We learn to rock the boat once in a while, to push the envelope, to refuse complacency. Oh, yes, passion and desire are valuable lessons; to cry, to laugh. Just as a child learns to accept 'No' for an answer, we must learn to accept it as well. Sometimes life doesn't go our way; we must accept it and move on.
A wise father will learn how to listen, how to offer compassion, how to accept the unintentional insults of a developing child. In so doing, he will learn maturity and responsibility.
Reflecting on these things, I realize a new meaning to Gerard Manley Hopkins' poem, "The Child is Father to the Man."*
On this, the 100th anniversary of Fathers Day, I wish all the best to all fathers - and their fathers. May the learning never cease.
Don, the 14%er
*
The Child Is Father To the Man - Gerard Manley Hopkins (1918)
“The child is father to the man.”
How can he be? The words are wild.
Suck any sense from that who can:
“The child is father to the man.”
No; what the poet did write ran,
“The man is father to the child.”
“The child is father to the man!”
How can he be? The words are wild!

suzeonline:"Surely there must be some women you feel positive about in your life? "

Of course there are. Must I preface every post with "I think most women are fine"?

As anyone with more brain cells than a Pomeranian (and that obviously includes you) would know from reading my posts, I see a problem with the inherently discriminatory nature of modern feminism and the hugely dishonest nature of many of the self-servers that espouse it.

Feminism was initially a movement deiven by well-off wives of well-off men and feminists have always had a sense of elitism about themselves. As SJF said:"if society doesn't like it, that's society's problem, not feminism's".

It's a small cognitive leap from "we're special" to "they're scum" and far too much feminist thought is based on the idea that men are essentially low-life brutes who need to be controlled for the benefit of the more refined women (and "their" children), especially the elites who know what's best for us all. If anybody questions any part of that, they're obviously not properly indoctrinated, or reactionary, or simply a would be patriarch who can never be tolerated by the barren "matriarchs" who keep the Trotskyite "revolutioary" flame burning brightly, if smokily.

Suzeonline:"all these 'nasty' women have male relatives"

And many of them spend all their time slagging off the men in their lives. Female violence against men has increased by over 400% in the past few years according to the NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics, largely as a response to the various feminist ad campaigns that make clear the feminist view that a woman is never to blame for being violent toward a man while men have been trained that if they raise a hand to protect themselves, they'll probably be charged.

Suzeonline:"If we are seeing posters about domestic violence depicting men, or broken windows depicting men as burglars, then it is because the bulk (but NOT ALL) of these crimes are perpetrated by men! Nothing more and nothing less."

I recommend the following article from the ANZ Journal of Criminology.

[cont]