If it were thought by the female concerned, that anyone would have acted on behalf of the male , or that he himself could, this incident would have never happened.

In my sons case, his wine cask drinking beloved destroyed his car, his bass and amp, and the rest of his possessions, while he stood passively by, too smart to attempt to defend his possessions or himself. Based upon his fundamental understanding of how society would have frowned upon him for doing so.

This is the underlying fact here, "she did it on the basis of probabilities, she took advantage of the situation to express herself violently, publicly, and motivated most likely by vengeance.

The difference in male to male conflict is that both parties have equal rights, this being the primary deterrent for such behaviours as restitution by violence publicly. Most matters of conflict in male relationships are settled one way or another, in private.

In a world of warrior princesses promoted in film, television, business and news media, the tendency for the female to initiate this type of behaviour will increase.

Finally, you could consider this whole thing an isolated case, and just get on with life.

However I have a daughter that I think believes, that she can safely be the only female in a crowd, due to her capacity as a modern woman. This view of hers depends entirely upon when you were born, and how much television you have watched.

Her safety in reality would be entirely dependent upon the attitudes of her male company.

When I was young there were bullies, but there were also alpha males that bullied the bullies, for being bullies. Such behaviour today is rare and discouraged in males, whilst females behaving badly publicly is encouraged, it's the backbone of reality TV, even sold as if role reversal equals freedom if you like.

And not a bullie basher in sight.

RObert thinker 2 very well put.
I want to intrude with yet another truth.
Men hide the fact the missus hits them.
Just as they would be expected to.
And thinker 2 you got it right, very much so.
SOME too many, women know they can get away with it and do it.
Still proud to have served this country's best union, I remember the reward only the very best officials get.
It is worth far more than gold, TRUST, members who trust take you out the back of the lunch shed to ask, to tell about the things not even related to work.
Women, like men, can be dreadful, and do bash thieve from and betray husbands.
Met one of those mates/ex members Tuesday, in the underground car park big shopping center.
Both happy to see one another we spoke,for more than an hour, right there.
As we left we both noted we had never in our life thought another breed lived there.
Drug sales thefts from cars domestic violence , it all took place and women as much as men involved.

Thinker2:"When I was young there were bullies, but there were also alpha males that bullied the bullies, for being bullies. Such behaviour today is rare and discouraged in males, whilst females behaving badly publicly is encouraged,"

That's a very perceptive point. At no time in my life can I recall a man being permitted to even verbally abuse a woman without somebody intervening in some way, even if it's just to say "pull your head in or I'll call the cops". I can't ever recall a public beating and humiliation of this nature being inflicted by a man on a woman, even in some of the less-salubrious parts of the city, but it's become increasingly common for young women to feel completely free to act out their immediate emotional response with physical violence directed at men.

TV does not exist in isolation. Journalism has become an overwhelmingly female trade.

From http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m6836/is_1_45/ai_n25034009/

"In Australia, the ratio of female to male graduates applying for journalist positions is now about six to one (Plane, 1996); in the state of South Australia approximately 85% of journalism graduates are female. Recent census data indicated that there were 10,317 working journalists in Australia, 57.9% male and 42.1% female."

Given the 6:1 disparity in new hires, that will very rapidly lead to an overwhelmingly feminised profession, just as in all of the other professions except science and engineering. Overall the tertiary education sector comprises roughly 2 female students for every male, leaving men in the trades, where they have little public voice. In addition, part of nearly every journalism course is a unit (or several units) on gender that are informed exclusively by an unchallenged feminist ideological perspective. On top of that, there is a very active feminist lobby that is quick to make its displeasure felt at anything offered by media that doesn't actively reinforce the preferred feminist stereotypes. The Press Council and the Anti-Discrimination commission receive lots of complaints about even seemingly-trivial challenges to that stereotype.

[cont]

In that enviroment it's not surprising that even intelligent people like Pericles might start holding unexamined assumptions as eternal verities. What hope does the average person with no capacity to reason critically have of resisting, let alone those who like the idea of men being second-class citizens?

The not-unexpected result of all this is that violence by women is rising fast. According to the ABS it's rising at around 150% a year, based on conviction rates, which is probably a low estimate, given the reluctance of people to intervene in female assaults on males. I have no doubt that the incident mentioned would have resulted in a male assailant being given a custodial sentence, but it would never have been heard of if Mr Waterstreet had not seen fit to raise the matter.

What has been lost is the concept of the quid pro quo. Feminism has trained women that they have a right to be treated better than men and that men have an obligation to treat them well, but it has not inculcated any sense of a concomitant obligation on women to behave in a manner that justifies that preferential treatment, or to treat men well. Men have the fear of the law and social opprobrium to stay their hand, while women have no need to consider consequences at all. Even if they are charged, they will very rarely be given anything more than a slap on the wrist and most walk completely free, having claimed to be depressed, or i some other way unable to be responsible for their actions.

The whole point of feminism has been to remove any quid pro quo of any kind for women. It is axiomatic that women are entitled to do as they wish and to suggest otherwise is to invite all sorts of personally insulting invective.

Mr Waterstreet himself was the target of a couple of posts here for raising the topic and of course I was roundly abused for even suggesting that this woman's violence was unacceptable.

Antiseptic two well informed posts I agree with every word.
I in fact think many more will in years ahead.
Well informed can not avoid the changes in female behavior.
A definite need to be in control and to be treated as special is there.
And no longer is it just the male destroying relationships.
I can not leave without reminding of those very funny beer adds.
The bloke talking woman.
We laugh because it is true, of many women, and too big men like the one shown.
Some men have even been stabbed by the wife, more than once, yet if it was the man?

I'm heading away for a few day's. Not sure if I'll be on line or not.

Have fun.

R0bert