Well you need to be a little bit careful. Sometime emotional abuse is due to people preying on and perpetuating victimhood. Even though it is not physical violence it is a control freak behaviour pattern. The most liberating relationship is one that sets you free, not enslaves you in anyway.

Foxy,
The link you posted is an extremely good read and about all I would do is quote the last 2 paragraphs as this says it all forgetting about the stats because of the non-reporting aspect and after downloading and printing and discussing in the mens group that I have been in today this is what was finally agreed

"Reducing violence requires recognising the primacy of these contextual factors. Approaches to prevention and treatment – as with child and elder abuse – should operate at multiple levels, addressing those contextual and personal factors that research consistently identifies as being implicated. The subordination of such a comprehensive approach to a "gendered" explanation means we are not effective in offering services to women - or men - who are at risk of violence.

The media has a responsibility to report fairly and accurately over the next fortnight. Violence is a community problem: labelling it a gender problem does not help to reduce it. We call on all Australians to set aside the next 16 days to consider all victims of violence, no matter what their gender, age, ethnicity or sexuality. We also seek the involvement of the entire community, including government, NGOs, and men's and women's groups, in the establishment of a new national broad anti-violence campaign."

Appreciations from me and group
Dave

Dear Anti,

I think that a great deal of the problem
is the fact that domestic violence groups
are notorious for protecting their turf
and their funding.

Many studies have been done that recognize
that physical aggression by both males and
females exists but they fail to comment
any further. As I read on one website
recently, "the tone of these reports is
manifestly anti-male and designed to exaggerate
violence against girls, minimise or ignore
violence against boys in order to secure funding
to run programs in schools and universities to
teach young men to respect young women."

That's well and good, but what about similar
programs for women? Who teaches them to respect
men - especially when they come from dysfunctional
families? Education should be inclusive - and aimed
at all young people. As Examinator pointed out -
sex or gender should not be part of the equation.

As the website stated:

"Violence against men, women, and children is
preventable, providing it is tackled the right way,
not as it occurs now."

Well I think that any active involvement by men or whole communities in combating any sort of violence is a good thing.

I'll be most interested in hearing what strategies for action are proposed.

CJ

Why would the campaigns be separate? All of the data and anecdotal evidence suggests that unidirectional violence is quite rare. The more common scenario is that a couple have an arguement, both of them say and do a few things that they shouldn't and it escilates out of control.

Teaching both members of the relationship to resolve conflicts peacefully would reduce the likelihood that either would be hurt. Therefore, stopping women from attacking men is a key part of eliminating violence against women and vice-versa.

Men are currently very strongly encouraged to take responsibility for their actions and make changes. We need to look at the social pressures that prevent women from doing the same.

Foxy

What a pleasure it has been to read your posts in this thread.

The political event that is White Ribbon Day is an abomination directed against men and boys. One can only imagine the outcry if a similar event with the obligatory oath taking was directed at women for the neglect and abuse of children:

My Oath - All Aussie women should swear:

I swear:
never to neglect and abuse children,
never to excuse neglect and abuse against children, and
never to remain silent about neglect and abuse against children.
This is my oath.

Can anyone imagine Australia's 25th Governor-General, Her Excellency Ms Quentin Bryce AC signing her oath while her partner His Excellency Mr Michael Bryce AM AE watched on approvingly (knowing that the grandchildren were safely being held by the State in a safe house somewhere in case Quentin refused to sign)?

The biological, psychological and sociological contributors to violence and other anti-social behaviour are complex. Politicians know that the answer will never be found in dumping a load of emotional baggage on normal, law-abiding people, while exhorting them to go out and convert others (which WRD is all about). What is needed is national scientific cooperation and funding to study the causes and political commitment, sans duck-shoving, to take national action. Unfortunately we do not have any statesmen or stateswomen to show leadership, tell the truth and take the hard decisions.