cont'd

Btw - my personal opinion is that we will probably see more physical violence by women. The reason I think that is that as women are socialized to be more expressive and less demure, some are going to emulate some of the worst aspects of the dominant culture. They will see how power is used by those who hold it; and do same.

Maybe then the terms of the disagreement won't be one sex against another; but violent people versus non-violent...

Oh, and another thought. If men are victimized at the rates they claim, why is it that they never raised this before ? When did their victimization begin ?

Anyway, check back when I can - bye for now.

Pynchme, so you admit that feminism encourages violence against men. Thanks I've noted this.

pynchme, you talk some sense here, especially about increasing violence by women which I notice lately in the news and I see as a natural progression of equality. With regards to violence by men against men, it's not news as it's widely recognised. With regard to shelters, no man would be interested in further humiliation as society already assumes he is weak and pathetic for not being able to 'control his missus'.

But you have yet to answer these questions....

How is exclusively concentrating on domestic violence against women create a better outcome for women than concentrating on all domestic violence?

In the (however few in your opinion) situations where the cycle of violence is instigated and/or escalated by the female partner, leading to a male reaction which injures the female, doesn't education of these risks to the woman resulting from female behaviour in a relationship help reduce violence against women?

Do you not think it demonises all men to talk of this 'insidious' 'epidemic' of violence against women by men, and puts all men in the position of reds under the bed, or paedophiles (Which are everywhere. Any man with a camera at a beach, or any male in any job with contact with children is under suspicion). All these things add up to portray men, exclusively, in a very negative light. Society's most hated and most under suspicion. Sure the form is on the board, but these acts are not exclusively male, and the victims are not exclusively female.

I fear for young boys being brought up in this biassed view of what it is to be male. Slugs and snails vs Sugar and spice can be a very self-fulfilling prophecy.

No Steel,

I've hypothesized that as constraints are lifted, some women will follow the path by which many men define themselves - of solving problems with violence and retaliation.

Personally I would rather we all learn better ways of being; but so many men won't come to the party.

So, if so many men (and some women) admire traditional male attributes and behaviours - and you are not calling for those values to change - is there any reason why women shouldn't do the same?

Ok Suspect,

The whole point is that nobody should be "controling his missus", nor she him, in the first place. It isn't something to admire.

If men were really suffering from the effects of DV, they'd just be grateful to find refuge, safety and escape. If there were large numbers of male victims of DV, surely they'd want to get to safety for the sake of the children.

Focusing on DV for women helps. 1) If we deal with DV happening to women, at least we are focused where the effects are worst. 2) Let's say that there are as many victims of each sex (though why that's important I don't know) - what has the dominant (ie: patriarchal) society ever done about it? Nobody got busy until women started organizing shelters and whatnot. Even now, why are you not all busy building mens lodges, where they can get some respite from their abusive partners.

No it doesn't demonize all men to talk of violence. The men who commit violence need to be demonized.It doesn't demonize all men; it demonizes men who act violently and possibly, those who support their actions by failing to call it what it is.

I'm married; have a wonderful son and many male relatives and friends that I treasure. Do you think I would want to demonize them?
I'm sorry if you feel that everyone is typing all men including yourself as a paedo or a basher. However, the thing to do is what - tell everyone to shut up and put up with the actions of bashers and paedos?

Or is it better for men to condemn such behaviours loudly and clearly; and refuse to buy into the sort of masculinity that makes exploitation of the weak and vulnerable AOK.

You could, as other men have done, claim a masculinity that disowns exploitation and bullying.

Pynchme, I don't think CTS is perfect but I've not seen any indication that there is anything that comes near it for getting a grasp of the numbers involved.

1/ I don't want the worst effects of DV excluded but all to often DV descriptions are about all sorts of behaviour (unwanted questioning, control of finances, friends etc) combined with comments that it's primarily men who do DV. When the problems with that are demonstrated it then drops back to the extreme end. Rudd's statement which prompted this thread was in relation to any level of violence and that should apply to us all regardless of our gender.
2/ Shove for shove it will be a combination of capability and intent. Someone who has lost control or who thinks that they are fighting for their life might use full strength but capability does not always imply a choice to use it. Given that most male to female DV does not involve serious injury or death it's a safe bet that most people are not using everything they've got (thankfully).
3/ I don't believe that it's in the face of all available evidence so I can't go with that. As for the rest, I've been in the position of not being able to get any support to halk my ex's use of physical violence and so often the idea that men do more DV is used to avoid any attempt to tell women not to hit that it seems the only way to get violence against men by women taken seriously is to highlight the rates by women. I really don't care who hits more but I do care that all violence is condemmed. Also the idea of men being more violent than women in the home has been used quite extensively by some of the mums groups to try and avoid changes in family law that give dads better access to their kids, the old "protecting women and children" slogan.

To be continued

R0bert