CJ, Bill Henson, says he checked out a Melbourne primary school, accompanied by the principal, to find new young meat for his work.

The way I read it, Rainier, is that he said he went to the school "in search of subjects for his artwork". If he wanted to photograph meat, I imagine he'd go to a butcher's shop.

http://news.theage.com.au/national/henson-scouted-school-for-child-models-20081004-4tnh.html

But what does that have to do with this topic?

Pynchme:"when someone replies to him in the same manner he cries "foul""

You misunderstand; I am simply pointing out that under the definition of violence offered by the various anti-DV campaigns, you act violently. I've already stated that I don't consider that sort of thing to be violence. It's nice to see you agree with me. Does this mean you'll revisit your own thinking on the matter?

CJ:"Where would they get such an idea?"

Not from my posts. If you can show me where I say anything negative about women in general, rather than about specific sub-groups who merely happen to be women, I'll gladly accept your statement. Take your time...

Oh, this is hilarious!

The forum's misogynist, antiseptic, is "really" not anti women, but only "anti specific sub groups who happen to be women". This is GREAT entertainment.

There ya go women, as long as you don't believe in feminism, don't believe in gender equality, don't go to the CSA for adequate child support, don't believe in DVOs against violent men, are not manipulative in any way whatsoever, never yell and always pander to your man's needs while placing yourself and the children second, then antiseptic is not the LEAST BIT misogynistic towards you.

Yes, antiseptic the forum's resident misogynist, is GREAT entertainment.

JW - have to confess to a bit of a splutter into my coffee and a quiet giggle about that as well.

Fractelle, thanks. I hope this is not just about validation, I hope I've learn a lot since that time. I do want to try and cut the focus on gender and the misrepresentation out of discussion on the lack of control type spousal violence discussion.

Pynchme, "In the process they haven't found it necessary or desirable to minimize violence against women who live in heterosexual relationships" - I'm seriously over that slur. Some men do try and minimise violence against women, it's not something I'm doing yet you post it over and over again to try and justify minimising violence against men. It's no better than posting the worst excesses of the womens movement to cut down women with genuine grievances.

Highlighting that women are as capable of most of the spousal violence and controlling behaviours portrayed in the media is not minimising violence against women. It's trying to get men some support when they do seek help. From memory I had three different private marriage counselling services dismiss my ex's use of violence on the basis that she was smaller than me and unlikely to do real harm as well as someone from a major relationships organisation getting a lot of government business. I didn't call the police over physical violence but did call them once when my ex was in a property I was renting and being very verbally abusive and refusing to leave. They called back about an hour later to ask if I still wanted someone to come around. I was stuck feeling that if I left my property would be damaged, if I tried to remove her I'd be the one guilty of assault and the police really were very disinterested.

R0bert