shivers,

'motivators for use of abusive behaviour'

Rehhh he he he heallly. Nothing stinks more of deliberate bias and double standards than comments like that.

I give this 'oneinthree' lot about as much credence as the White Ribbon lot's cherry picking and distortion.

Let's just forget about all the hyperbole and 'raising awareness' crap, and start again with the undeniable and instinctively true assumptions that.

Men and women have equally propensity for violence/aggression/manipulation.
Men are often stronger and do more serious damage, though women can use weapons.
Any solution to domestic violence should encompass both the man and women in the relationship, avoid abuser-victim dichotomy and gender stereotyping, and avoid simplistic assumptions to the emotional power balance in relationships.

Daviy,

'The mix is of no importance. If there is violence against a person then there is violence. The sex of the perpetrator or victim does not matter.

... Women may receive injures more often that men because physical factors but when did physical injury become the sole focus?'

Spot on. And why wait until someone dies, surely concentrating on the use of aggression and abuse by both men and women in relationships would be more effective. I think 80% of violence in relationships both partners are violent, depending on what stats you want to cherry-pick.

James answers you below though...

James,

'firstly the definition of domestic violence, is expanded, and then the argument falls back onto who is most at risk of being murdered.'

suzeonline,

'I can understand why she was feeling a bit angry at Mr. Tiger, can't you?'
Reverse that and put it on the Strayla says no campaign I think. Good work! Pure speculation indeed but very revealing on how quick you come to excuse violence by a woman.

shivers,

Is Suze's speculation one of those more valid female 'motivators'?

Cotter,

In all you wrote you have espoused the same old feminist mantra that has been used against men for the past 35 years.

By the way, women did very little to get all the services that were introduced to serve them, back in the 1970s.
These services along with No Fault Divorce, were introduced into every western nation on earth in the same era. If you don't believe me, Google the timelines of events.

I have read this thread from start to finish and I have not seen anyone here bagging women as you put it. The truth is, people like you have not just bagged men, but vilified men for nearly 40 years.

There was one other female on this forum who made stupid comments about getting help if we are abused. This is the typically insulting verbal diarrhoea men have to endure from arrogant women who have no idea of what exists out there or doesn't exist and they don't care either.
There is not one service in the whole of Aus. that is specifically for abused men and/or their children. There are NO police who will deal appropriately with a violent woman and no govt worker or politician who will believe it or address it.

Men have been fighting for these services for years and no govt will do the right thing, because they fear the backlash from the radical influences within govt who demand that there be no services for men.

You women have to get off the 'poor me' band wagon. Stop making excuses for why women are violent. The majority of violent women are not insane, but do it deliberately and premeditatedly and they must be punished as harshly as the men currently are.

Stop saying women are as good as men, but when they do something wrong, it's because they are weaker and easily driven to it by horrible men.
That is a lie and a coppout. You can't have it both ways!

Assault is Assault!
We need to have all assault and false allegations, dealt with harshly and the perpetrators imprisoned.

I have found two basic models of feminism amongst women I have met. The 'Gloria Stienham' model that goes 'there are problems in our society that need to be fixed.' And I agree that there are problems, many problems, that need to be fixed.

The other is the 'Germaine Greer' model that goes along the lines that 'You hate me because you are a male chauvinist pig.' To which my usual answer is along the lines 'up yours sister.' Thus proving that I really do hate her and I really am a male chauvinist pig. This form of feminism has done women a great disservice.

To all the Germaine Greer's out there, you are irrelevant to this argument. It will get us nowhere pandering to your twisted reality. To all the Gloria Stienham's out there, the sexualisation of domestic violence is a problem that needs to be fixed. The fixing of this problem is for every ones benefit.

I hope we can move on from the debate on feminism and start looking for answers. At the moment I can see none, but that does not mean there are not any.

A first step in addressing family violence is to recognise that it happens. For men this has been a difficult issue.

The next step is to be clear that voilence is not an appropriate way to sort out difficulties and that there are better and more rewarding ways.

Most important of all is that we, as individuals and collectively, need to speak out against all forms of violence, particularly that in the family.

Is there any time when violence is acceptable with your loved ones?

I don't believe it when men state that 'she made me hit her cos she just wouldn't shut up' or some such bs. Nor do i believe women who state that 'he made me do it, he is such a ...'. I have also heard that it is not IF a man hits, its WHEN. What a lot of rot, for all the men and women who are violent there are more who are not.

I do believe that women can get bruises from men holding thier wrists to stop the woman from hitting/scratching, and I believe the police also are aware of it.

One of my main concerns is that not enough men are comfortable enough to talk to thier friends (and perhaps not enough men are comfortable to hear) about being in a violent relationship for fear of ridicule.

So lastly, I would like to suggest that if the topic is raised more often by those who care, more men and women might be able to seek the help they deserve. Ask your mates outright if you are concerned about them, it might make all the difference

Cotters suggestion that men need to develope their own services, is a typical separatist attitude. Why do we need to have separate services for men and women.

It would be like having separate public transport services for men and women.

To tackle the issue of violence, we need a holistic approach, not an approach that serves to aleinate men and women from each other.

<Do you experience insomnia, nightmares, fatigue, nausea, aches and pains, and an underlying sense of dread? Do you feel like you’re always waiting for the other shoe to drop? Is it difficult for you to trust others because you’re worried they’ll hurt you? Do you frequently feel ashamed, guilty, and worthless? Are you involved with an abusive, narcissistic or borderline woman?>
http://mensnewsdaily.com/2009/11/30/betrayal-trauma-how-men-are-affected-by-abusive-women/

Perhaps the main reason for women to resist making treatment of DV more holistic, is that they will be confronted about their own destructive behaviour.

Sure not all women will engage in such behaviour, just as not all men behave in an abusive way towards women.

But some people engage in exactly the same type of behaviour, that they accuse the male posters here of doing.

Cotter. In answer to your statement 30/11/09 " that to say the system is anti-male is an absurdity". I suggest you look at the tens of millions of dollars that the government is pouring into combatting violence against women and children and look at the zero dollars that is being put into combatting violence against men. I hope your mathematical ability is better than your eyesight.If as you admit many men are suffering in it why isn't money being put into it.
SUZI. Only late last year a woman here in south australia set fire to her husbands genitals and burnt him to death along with their house and almost killed their children in the process because she believed he was unfaithful.Her defence was to say that "his penis belongs to me". And this is NOT speculation. Go figure.