Tboy, to be honest I am not really that interested in the rest of the world. When compared to many countries Australia is a very very safe country.

Whilst what you say about male prisoners is true. Go back to the start of this forum. It was not about male violence.

Secondly making judgements and applying todays standards and values to the past leads to some very distorted views and perceptions. Back in the hunter gatherer days, the ability to survive was paramount and certain skills were need to be able to do this. The majority of us modern humans would not survive very long in a hunter gatherer situation.(the above is an example of what is known as values conflict)

It is about why do we demonize men who are honest about their sexual needs.
http://www.alternet.org/sex/148291/why_do_we_demonize_men_who_are_honest_about_their_sexual_needs/

TBOY... oops..I suddenly see it.

"Male propensity for physical violence is the reason why they are demonised."

This might come as a shock.. but 'male-ness' involves the warrior spirit and "newsflash" the violence that most men are capable of is to PROTECT both themselves and the weaker sex (females) from OTHER males who would do them harm.

Isn't reality a bummer ? :)

Tboy, the subject of male violence has been done to death.

However I suspect that a number of factors are at play in the MODERN WORLD, lack of education, poverty, drug and alcohol abuse, and acquired brain injury not to mention mental illness, diagnosed and undiagnosed. Oh and I forgot psychopaths.

In Australia our prisons have become defacto mental institutions.

Anyway it is a bit of a red herring discussing male violence, when the majority males are not violent or currently not in prison and are never likely to be.

So too extraplote that the actions of a few apply to a whole gender is sexism to the extreme.

JamesH, he didn't extrapolate that the actions of a few are the actions of a whole gender. Maybe you should have tried to 'accurately' present what he said, in the interests of fairness and good debate. And then you compound your error by a false sexism accusation based on your error. James it's not a very productive way to debate, using misinterpretation and personal attack.

It seems that in his opinion one reason why men are demonized overall is because the gender has bad PR caused by the bad actions of the ones who are violent. That's certainly a very valid view and needs to be 'intelligently' addressed I feel. It's a fact of life that the actions of minorities within majorities often tarnish the reputation of the group as a whole, and the actions of the minority of violent and aggressive men definitely tarnish the reputation of the gender in many peoples' view. Now before you start calling me sexist as well ( I'm male by the way) this does NOT mean that I'm saying ALL men are violent. It means that I'm offering one reason as to why men are demonized; actually I'm just agreeing with the other guy

James in your second sentence in your first post you yourself bring up the subject of violence. Sex and violence often go hand in hand in sexual crimes.

Using name calling "sexism in the extreme" won't work for you buddy.

All my comments in my previous post, and this post, relate to sexual violence and why men as a whole are demonised because of it.

You also said I made "judgements". No I didn't. I did not "apply" today's standards to the past. I said male violence (meaning sexual violence) was a problem in the past, and that it's a problem now. Surely you can't deny that. Everything I wrote was fact and not opinion, you seem to ignore that I never said, or implied, that all men were, or are, violent. Male violence is not a red herring in this discussion as you claim. I offered it as a reason why men are demonised. I think it's the main reason why men are demonised, be they actively violent men or passively innocent men or anything in between. I liked the example of "minorities and majorities" given by rudy, I think that explains it reasonably well. I invite you to comment on rudy's minorities and majorities statement.

<Male propensity for physical violence is the reason why they are demonised.> Tboy

Maybe I misinterpretated that phrase, but it does say 'male propensity for physical violence'.

But demonizing a whole gender on the actions of a few, is that not extrapolation? It is taking the bad behaviour of some and applying it to a whole male gender.

Propensity 'an inclination or natural tendency to behave in a certain way'.

Please refer again to the first part of this forum, it is about why do we demonize men who are honest about their sexual needs!

If you want to discuss violence, then make your own forum!