I am really surprised that a recent victim hasn't been mentioned yet: a high profile male who, according to some reports, was attacked by his wife weilding a weapon. He fled the house rather than trying to defend himself - which is the best way for a male to deal with this, but the woman keeps attacking him with the weapon.

Who you may ask?

Tiger Woods.

But let us see how this story panned out: first part was we were told that he had a car accident near his home very early one morning. Sounds innocent enough - then we hear about cuts on his face - not the usual injuries from a low speed car accident in a large SUV. Al;cohol was not involved. So here we have a top sportsman who, whilst sober, cannot drive very far.

Then another story comes out - it is alleged that he was being assaulted by his wife with a golf club - that she continues to try to attack as he drives away, belting the car. In his desperation he is distracted and prangs the car and his wife goes at him with the golf club through the windscreen.

Then the story changes: as we all know men don't get assaulted by women - so firstly he refuses to talk to the police (would he have been believed?). Then a statement is issued where he blames himself.

All so very typical of male victim behaviour. Deny Deny Deny

Dougthebear, the above story you told is only a rumour so far.

Another rumour we are told is that while Mrs. Tiger remains at home in USA looking after their toddler and a newborn baby, Mr. Tiger goes to work in Australia and has his lover staying on the same floor with him at his hotel.

How very convenient for him. How very upsetting for a new mother, to be betrayed by the father of her new baby. It should not have (allegedly) descended to violence of course, but I can understand why she was feeling a bit angry at Mr. Tiger, can't you?

I also can't help but wonder what Mr.Tiger would have done to her if the shoe was on the other foot?

All pure speculation at this time, of course

Ah, so blame the husband - he deserved it for alleged infelidelities.

I was wondering how long it would take for someone to bring that up as a justification for domestic violence against males.

So a suspicion of an affair is sufficient reason for a woman to use a weapon on her husband in your mind Suzi? Is that what you were saying?

Think about that for a moment.

Here are two links discussing the move to re-educate (only) boys about domestic violence.

http://glennsacks.com/blog/?p=4409
http://mensnewsdaily.com/sexandmetro/2009/11/26/beware-boys-the-female-taliban-is-coming-for-you/

Suzeonline,
"How very convenient for him. How very upsetting for a new mother, to be betrayed by the father of her new baby. It should not have (allegedly) descended to violence of course, but I can understand why she was feeling a bit angry at Mr. Tiger, can't you?

So you can understand violence committed by a woman with a weapon on a man?

Can you then understand a man that fights to bring his child home from care, that child has been both physically abused and psychologically abused, taken from his father by absolute bullsh/t, that father learning the law and reading and understanding John Bowlby, probably the most eminient that has lived in the field of attachment and bonding,seeing your child wasting physically, crying for his parents until he makes himself physically sick,had an axe, shovel, rake,rocks all thrown at the father, and the mother using the excuse that it is because she is losing it because of the loss of our son, buying a home to bring the child to while the mother and her boyfriend scam to take that home from the father,the mother sleeping with anyone that would give her drugs, my boss, my step-brother,etc etc

The father finally breaks

Assault occassioning bodily harm, carries 7 years gaol, Torture carries 14 years gaol which do you consider is then recognised as the more serious crime?

Give this bloody gender war a miss why don't everyone and clean up all violence it is not acceptable for women to use weapons or psychological torture on a male

Women break so do Men

Equality for all is required

Thanks from
Dave

Why do you say all violence is wrong but only use examples of women, the allegedly bashing a car in another country -why dont we stay right here in OZ? Women on drugs? Absolutely awful. Does hurting her help - and am well aware of the paucity of mental health & services. Women bruise if you hold them off? Do you simply disregard the plight of women (by your own figures 2/3 being beaten by men who also drive erratically, drunk, drugged, who threaten to kill and do - pets, plants, people, sabotage cars - whatever. (Not ignoring violent women, but why are you so blinkered?) I'm also sceptical about the 1/3 figure - perhaps possibly like the '5 men a day campaign alleging men were driven to suicide by Family Courts' when the figures were inflated - and if it was one a day that was too many, but why exaggerate? Why? cos it sounds good? It gets attention, Who cares, so long as we get what we want? But what is it you want, violence to stop, services for men, or just to bag out women? Of course men need good services, but you have to develop them - the womens ones have been around for only 35 of the past 200 years and are falling far short of need.

It also seems to me that the rabid personal hatred of all things female are reframed as 'feminist' or feminazi. Is that to control the discussion and beat any other view?