It seems aboriginal male attitude is the major first order factor causing violence to aboriginal women. It seems pointless to address second order factors until the first is acknowledged and addressed. Usually in modelling, first order effects are ten times more important than second order effects. So no matter what you do, the first order effect will dominate the outcome.

Paul wrote: You have not mentioned "other factors", what are those "other factors"?"

Much earlier in the thread I wrote..."I'm not saying the government shouldn't, wouldn't or couldn't do all the things the reports authors recommend. More refuges - sure. Better police training- OK. More police-always good. Gaoling offenders - of course."

All of this goes over Paul's head. The point, which he'll never understand, let alone accept, is that all of these things are necessary but not sufficient. In the wider community, it is accepted that just providing 'after-the-event' help is needed but not enough. That is why we see campaigns to try to get parents to teach their boys to respect women and to combat misogyny. But for reasons that ought to be obvious, we don't see that in the aboriginal community - the most misogynistic of all cultures.

Well it ought to be obvious but clearly not to the likes of Foxy and Paul.

Foxy seems offended at the suggestion that she doesn't care about the aboriginal female victims. I didn't make that accusation. But I did make the accusation that she cares less about the victims than she does about protecting aboriginal culture from criticism

"Violence against women is not part of traditional
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures.
Many Aboriginal, Torres Strait Islander writers,
point out that in pre-colonial times violence
was strictly regulated and controlled and
customary laws and lore were highly respectful and
protective of women".

This is something that was taken from the links
given earlier in this discussion. Any arguments against
this information should be taken up with them or
alternatively visits to state libraries, and Australian
museums might help clarify things. As would reading
and research on the subject.

There's so much information currently available. We should
not have to resort to personal attacks on people merely
providing information.

cont'd ...

http://ourwatch.org.au/news/opinion-the-long-tail-of-colonisation

http://australianmuseum/learn/first-nations/unsettled/surviving-genocide/missions-reserves-stations/

My apologies. Here's the second link again:

http://australian.museum/learn/first-nations/unsettled/surviving-genocide/missions-reserves-stations/

The Australian Museum has so much information and so many sites.
However it is very distressing - and not easy to read.

""Violence against women is not part of traditional
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures."

Yes Foxy, we get that you rolly-trolly want that to be true. But all the evidence shows it to be mere fantasy. I've listed some of that evidence above and in many other threads over the years. Archaeological evidence shows that aboriginal women suffered disproportion bone and skull fractures as compared to men when, given the prevalence of warfare, the reverse would be expected. We know that aboriginal women were little more than chattels and treated as such by their male partners/owners.

The archaeological evidence is clear although it is systematically being destroyed to try to hide the truth. There is little doubt that a Foxy of the 22nd century will be able to say that everything in aboriginal society was sweetness and light with all evidence to the contrary long since memory-holed.

But unfortunately for the Foxy of the 21st century, evidence remains king and therefore the only way to claim there was no violence against pre-colonial women is to firmly stick your head in the ground. As with Paul who wants others to do research prove his unresearched opinions, Foxy just tells people to go look it up for themselves in the hope that her fantasies might be supported.

Well if you go to a museum to research this make sure you look up works by Colin Pardoe, Mark Allen ('Violence and warfare among hunter-gatherers'), Keely (' War before civilization: The myth of the peaceful savage') , S Webb (' Prehistoric stress in Australian Aborigines: A paleopathological study of hunter-gathering population') all of which completely and unequivocally refute Foxy's fantasies.

Oh and as always, read the works of the early explorers and convict escapees who lived with unassimilated tribes, to see what the real pre-colonial society was like.

Or, as I'm sure Foxy will do, just continue to stamp your feet and claim you don't want it to be so.