Cont'd

The facts are simply this:

Domestic Violence happens; to about 70% of women committed by men and 30% of men committed by women.

In overall violence, streets, pubs, sports ground etc violence is predominately male against male.

No doubt R0bert, you want the violent women to take responsibility for their actions, so do I, but what I see here (not from you) but there is a concerted effort by Antiseptic et al to paint male violence into a corner - an unacknowledged 'elephant in the room' and I would like to know why.

Why have my posts been derided?
I am a capable and succinct writer, a lot of my work has been producing analytical and comprehensive reports when I was employed in the public sector. I know claims that my writing is illogical is simply name calling - bully tactics.

I can only conclude that my posts and that of other female posters are being treated like this in order to silence us. Do you have another explanation for the hostility spouted by these men?

R0bert do you experience a similar hostility from women when you discuss your abuse? If so, does this make you feel you are not taken seriously or that you are not being listened to - silenced in fact?

Antiseptic
Why do you not want to acknowledge that domestic violence against women and children occurs and is a huge cost for our society?

I am not saying 'all men are bad' - and I never have. I have had and still do have a number of wonderful supportive men in my life.

Antiseptic - What do YOU want?

Fractelle:"don't know now whether what I say will set of a stream of abuse such as the above."

Yet again, show me where I have "abused" you, which would be a fact, rather than a projection onto me of your own emotional response to my words.

It seems to me that all of the collective hen-pecking I've been the subject of comes down to the fact that I'm not a "gentleman", rather than anything substantive I've had to say. You, to your credit, have at least had sufficient courage to address me directly, even if you were actually responding to your own perceptions rather than my words.

Fractelle:"women who have had the courage to speak out about their experiences and being told that we are trying to belittle the male experience. This is very dishonest"

Yes, it is dishonest to make the claim you do in this quote. Who has said that? Specific instance, thanks, because the only ones I can recall claiming their experience is "belittled" are some of the women. To that end, the same people have tried to limit the discussion entirely to domestic violence when far more men are victims of violence in general, sometimes from women. If DV is a serious issue, then the far larger class of male violence victims surely deserve at least as much attention.

This topic was based on Rudd's absolute statement that violence against women is unacceptable under any circumstance. Why are you so desperate to avoid the same message being given in relation to men?

Fractelle:"a concerted effort by Antiseptic et al to paint male violence into a corner"

Show me examples. While you're looking, you'll come across lots of posts in which I acknowledge men are the more common offenders.

Fractelle:"Why do you not want to acknowledge that domestic violence against women and children occurs and is a huge cost for our society?"

When have I done that? Why do you not want to acknowledge far more men are victms of violence than women and children?

I invite all the people who antiseptic is attacking to read my post on another topic, here's a link to it:
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=2162&page=11
My post is near the bottom of the page in the link.

It shows antiseptic has real problems with women and will stoop to personal accusation, "phony" personal accusation.

He needs help, and he needs it badly.

I think any comments he makes about women, on any topic, should be taken in the context of his behaviour here. He can't be taken seriously.

SallyG says:

"I checked every single post written by JW since he's been on this OLO website. I guess antiseptic wasn't expecting anybody to take the time check up on him.

Yes, [Antiseptic] made it up." [The claim that JW had posted at Friday, 29 August 2008 2:18:41 AM, and the quote.]

The only entry in JW's posting history for Friday 29 August 2008 is this:

" 29/08/2008 2:08:20 AM Hear, hear SallyG and AJPhilips. You have both shown there's more than one side to the..."

The totality of that post of JW's is:

"Hear, hear SallyG and AJPhilips.

You have both shown there's more than one side to the topic of ADHD, and I welcome your intelligent and well thought out contributions, based on your personal experiences and knowledge. Thank you.
Posted by JW, Friday, 29 August 2008 2:08:20 AM"

By contrast, Antiseptic's claimed quote from JW is:

JW:"Note his false implication that I'm a "woman ""

JW:"My husband and I have always done our own thing when it comes to eating. He's quite um...large, while I'm pretty skinny. I keep telling him he'll die young while I'll live to a happy and healthy old age, but he doesn't want to listen. What is it about men and the way so many of them neglect their health? Maybe it's a chromosome abnormality."

Well done, SallyG. I comment because this is a classic illustration of the advantage shaded colour backgrounding to quotes would be to honest discussion. The backgrounding would only be provided by the OLO site software if a user was actually selecting real text from a post to quote. Fractelle, from memory, proposed that in her Technical Support topic 'THE “What We Have Here, is a Failure to Communicate” POLL', one quarter back.

Fractelle: "I am a capable and succinct writer, ..."

Too right. And a very tenacious debater. I otherwise have little to contribute to this discussion, DV being outside my experience. Courageous posting, Fractelle.

Apparently Bronwyn replied to the same post Anti has been castigated for making up...

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=2081#44058

The actual post is missing, but Bronwyn's reply remains.

Who gives a toss really though, I was just interested how some people could bother to look through 100s of posts to attack someone. I think it shows a lot more about the searchers than anti. (I remembered the topic so just happened to look there out of interest.)

CJ will be pleased to hear I wont be returning under this or any other name this time, I just keep getting the emails when this topic is updated, and fell into temptation. The goings on above is further reinforcement for me to stay away.

There are at least 3 replies to the post of JW's that has been removed. One by GrahamY and two by Bronwyn. JW is a liar and SallyG is either a sock puppet, or knowingly assisting her in her lie. How embarrassing for them to be so inept.

Forrest Gump, I'll take that apology now, thanks.

I don't expect any of you will show the guts to apologise the way Country Gal did when she was shown to be wrong about one of my posts. It speaks volumes for the cowardly nature of the pack.