dwg:"the link that Foxy so decently posted"

No worries, as I said, I don't disagree with you, but I didn't recognise the specifics.

belly:"The length some have gone to so they can kick White ribbon day."

The worst kicks have come from the dishonest White ribbon Day people themselves. Why do you think there was so little media coverage this year? The media (except the C-M obviously, but their standards aren't high) isn't prepared to uncritically regurgitate stuff from a tainted source, which the WRD campaign and Michael Flood certainly are.

Besides Belly, not a single poster here has tried to mimimise the issue of violence directed at women, merely asked for some recognition that this is not the only kind of violence and that in fact, men suffer violence at a much higher rate than women.

I know you have to be "pro-feminist" in your Union/ALP role to please the women bosses of the more powerful unions like Nurses, Teachers and PSU, not to mention the ACTU (how long before we see the next man as President or even as a candidate do you reckon) but the vast majority of your own members are men. Aren't you letting them down by pandering to the "only women deserve mention" campaign?

How many members did your union lose last year to untimely violent death?

R0bert, as always, insightful and sensible comments. The trouble of course, is that if the genderised treatment of violence is stopped, then a vast network of women's groups that derive lots of income from grants through claiming to be assisting women victims of violence will lose their claim to funding, and hence their ability to propagandise, as well as the free ride for the organisers.. They will fight tooth and nail to stop that happening. Furthermore, the violence issue is what gives them a hook with ordinary women who might otherwise simply be disinterested in the recycled Stalinist mishmash they're offering as an ideology.

Examinator, really good propaganda leaves you believing you thought it up all by yourself...

Pelican:"It is possible to advocate for men and women at the same time."

Exactly my point. By ignoring the vast majority of victims in favour of a politically-inspired minority, the WRD campaign has no credibility as a genuine effort to improve society. How many times must I say "make it inclusive and I'll support it"?

Everyone has the right to be free of violence, not just women.

CJMorgan:"I'm frightened of men"

Yes, we know little fella. Your every utterance reeks of the stench of fear and hatred. Oedipal ideations combined with "little man's syndrome" is my diagnosis. Go and "see a chap" won't you?

pynchme:"blah blah blah Menz blah blah blah Feminist blah blah blah blah blah blah"

Yeah yeah, we know, "80% of men are defective". You go grrrl.

Suzeonline:"where are their ideas to help all victims of violence?"

You've not actually been looking, have you Suzie? Are you really so threatened by a broadening of the WRD campaign to include all violence? Why? What's in it for you to exclude men from being recognised as worthy of help?

All I want is to remove the political baggage from WRD and make it a day for us all to reflect on how we might improve our society to make it a less violent place for everyone, not just the chosen few.

Antiwomen, your every utterance reeks of the stench of your fear and hatred of women. You and your equally odious acolyte Cornflower are great advertisements for your cause - not.

Have a nice day. Try and think about something other than your disdain for women and those who support WRD, won't you?

Well, I see the "ladies" have what they were after.

They can now commit premeditated murder, provided they murder a man, & lay a suitable trail, before they do it.

Great stuff.

pelican "It would be encouraging if some of the men on OLO who strongly voice support and campaigns to protect men from domestic violence would be equally concerned about women in similar situations.

I don't understand why some men are very negative in their comments about women experiencing domestic violence and anti-violence campaigns yet will cheefully and rigorously support similar programs for men"

I really don't think that has happened or that it's what any of us are advocating. The closest I can recall was grudging acceptance of the idea of parallel campaigns because of the way the current government funded.

I'd be appauled if all anti-DV campaigns were focussed on violence by women with men as victims and I suspect that Anti, James etc would feel the same.

Mostly the call has been one to address all violence or in the context of DV violence perpetrated by both genders rather than the current completly one sided view of it.

As for denigrating women, in the context of DV my impression is that most of those claims are made about responses to claims that men do so much of the DV that the other just does not matter. I see a lot of angst about anti-female comments (most of which is anti-feminist) but apart from yourself very few feminists willing to speak up about the many articles focussed on bad behaviour by males.

It seems that pointing out that some women behave badly in response to claims about men is regarded as denigrating women but articles trying to make men's behaviour the issue is not considered denigrating men.

For those attacking the men's groups - perhaps they could be a little more focussed and effective if so much effort did not need to be expended combatting those determined to attack them and men in general.

R0bert

Hasbeen: <"Well, I see the "ladies" have what they were after.
They can now commit premeditated murder, provided they murder a man, & lay a suitable trail, before they do it.
Great stuff.">

Oh?

So when was the last time a woman walked into a university and handpicked a dozen or so men to kill?

Because that was the incident that sparked a WRD committment against violence to women.

Hope you have more than one case because I can refer you to hundreds of murders of females.

- like the killing of 6 or so little girls at a tiny school.
- Or think back to the likes of Speck who raped and killed 8 nurses in one day in the 1960s ... men have been venting their aggression towards women and children for a LONG time.

Any day that you pick up the paper you're likely to read another case of a woman being raped, tortured, killed or abducted and killed.

What about the lovely 15-16 yr old Taryn Hunt, bludgeoned to death by a 29 yr old boyfriend when she wanted to end the relationship he shouldn't have been having with her in the first place. He used "sudden provocation" defence despite abusive, controlling behaviours preceding the murder.

Or Vicki Cleary - stabbed to death after she'd ended the relationship; he got 3 -4 years.
Julie Ramage - strangled after she'd left him and he claimed she'd criticized him so "sudden provocation" was his successful defence.

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,22017267-27197,00.html

- and R0bert, it's a joke that straight after Hasbeen's comment indicating complete denial of violence against women, you have the temerity to post this nonsense:

"I'd be appauled [sic] if all anti-DV campaigns were focussed on violence by women with men as victims and I suspect that Anti, James etc would feel the same."

Well I suspect they'd be delighted to bury any recognition of or opposition to mens violence against women.

The more you and your cohorts post, the more apparent it becomes to me that WRD is a vital initiative.