One Nation leader Pauline Hanson has rejected claims she downplayed domestic violence following a recent radio interview in which she described it as a "two-way street."

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-07-22/pauline-hanson-domestic-violence-two-way-street/106945146

According to Australian lifetime prevalence figures (since age 15), around 1 in 4 women (23%) and 1 in 14 men (7.3%) have experienced violence by an intimate partner.

During the interview, Pauline Hanson said that couples are under significant pressure and that these pressures can contribute to what happens within a household. She also said that if someone does not feel safe at home, they should not remain in that situation and leave.

Her comments though have drawn criticism from domestic violence experts, support services and other politicians. Some argue that leaving an abusive relationship is far more complex than simply deciding to go, particularly during Australia's housing shortage, with limited access to safe and affordable accommodation for those affected by domestic violence.

Independent MP Zali Steggall has also described the comments as "appalling and dangerous", stating there is no excuse for domestic violence. I think many people would agree on that principle, myself one of them.

Do you think Pauline Hanson's comments are reasonable regardless or has she overstepped the mark?

Hi NathanJ,

I'm not the one to defend Pauline Hanson, I see her as totally unsuitable for Australia. But in this case, I view her comments as well meaning, but out of touch with reality, and somewhat apologetic for the perpetrators of DV, particularly men. There is not a family in Australia, which has not been touched by DV in some way. The cause is the breakdown in intimate relationships, but not all such breakdowns result in DV. It can also be caused by one partner having a violent personality, resulting in behavioural problems. Not all perpetrators are the classic "wife beater" type, resulting in physical violence, there are other kinds of violence, and most cases of DV don't result in the extreme outcome of murder.

What steps a person can take, when confronted with their situation, the answer is not a simple "leave" and all will be well answer, its far more complex than that, Hanson seems not to understand the complexity of the problem, again making her unsuitable as a law maker, and she is also incapable of showing empathy for the victims of DV.

I think that respect is a two-way street, and so is conflict and either or both parties may be the cause of it.

What do you think Nathan? You always ask questions. Never make a statement. Don't have a mind of your own? Too timid to express an opinion?

Of course, you don't have to answer. Nor do people have to answer your insipid questions.

Man up. Have your own opinions. Send Hanson an email. Tell her what you think if you are so interested in a few words she uttered among the millions that she and other politicians are always putting out.

By the way. Hanson's comments are not "controversial" because they haven't caused public debate, opposing views or disagreement.

Most people wouldn't be aware of what she said, or care if they did. They are too busy keeping their heads above water to be listened to anything that doesn't directly affect them, including the droning on of politicians who have effed their lives up.

Kel Richards, language-expert and political commentator, believes the Right and Left struggle has been replaced by the ‘People vs The Authority’ (News 24 today) - since Reform in the UK and One Nation in Australia. There is a chasm between people and institutions who exercise power.

This seems to fit in with the common belief of the existence of the “uniparty” in Australia - not much difference between them, interested only in power.

Until recently, we have been fooled into thinking that those in power were “more or less” on our side.

But now, the version of Australia that those authorities want is different from the one that ordinary Australians want.

The big fat NO to the Albanese racist referendum was the start. The non-Labor side of the uniparty went against it only when they sensed that NO was likely. It was all down to the people, not the authorities. The SA and Vic authorities have since forced something like the federal abomination onto the people without asking them; thus widening the gap between them and the people.

Richards has declared Pauline Hanson to be the “face of the people” in the struggle against the authorities. The polls seem to indicate that that might be the case.

People “dominated by common sense”, not by ideology, are ignoring the mainstream media (a branch of the authorities); they don't care who Pauline Hanson spoke to in the UK; they don't care if she doesn't turn up in the Senate when the media thinks she should (probably does a lot more good away from it); they don't care if she gets a plane and other help from Gina Rinehart.

And, the people don't care if Hanson's comments on domestic violence are disliked by the Teals or anonymous posters.

She speaks for people the authorities are not interested in.