Looks like self serving humour and quotes.

If anybody else is having trouble with feminism, yes it's tricky to get a meaningful definition but there seems to be more consistently agreed rules around feminist research which might help for a little self test.

One article on it is here http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/974/2124 - at a guess agreement with the ideas in that article will be a pretty good self test of alignment with feminism.

In the real world the problem is that very subjective research designed to help women is presented as though it was objective research.

We get this years body count of women but no mention of the men who have died at the hands of an intimate partner during the same period. We get catch phrases about protecting women and children as though women were not one of the risk factors facing children.

We get told about mens greater strength but see no focus on womens generally greater skill with words and other areas where women may generally hold an upper hand in confrontations with a partner.

I think for most of us the problem is not women being something other than a doormat, it's the pathetic play to special treatment whilst dishing it out that really gets up the nose.

Now it must be just about time for someone to point out that there are so few women on OLO because men don't treat them with enough special courtesy.

R0bert

Yes indeed...the real reason why all those men bash and/or kill all those other men, women and children in their own homes, and out on the streets, is because those elusive 'feminists' made them do it!
Yes, those damned feminists are just the cause of everything bad in society ....oh please, give us a break!

RObert,

"Now it must be just about time for someone to point out that there are so few women on OLO because men don't treat them with enough special courtesy."

Yes,..it's interesting that that aspect was the first thing Graham brought up in our first private conversation.

I believe there are plenty of reason's that many women can't be bothered with OLO.

One of them is because of the very slanted discourse that often passes for debate around here..like this on the subject of domestic violence against women and the PM's call to respect them:

"It is about greed.

Feminist academics especially have a vested interest in continuing to control the discourse that has served them so well for decades.

Feminism is educated middle class (usually white) women protecting and extending their entitlement. But they always were entitled.

That is why there was an immediate, concerted, very ruthless campaign against the proposed male studies course at the University of Adelaide>"

I've never inhabited "women's sites" so I'm not familiar with the sort of banter that goes on there....but I suspect they'd get short shrift if they attempted to unload any of it here.

There are plenty of women commentators on twitter - and they seem to hold their own as far as " men [not] treating them with enough special courtesy." They give as good as they get on twitter - so I'm surmising it's not "special courtesy" they're after, but ordinary respectful conversation.

RObert,

"Looks like self serving humour and quotes."

That First Dog strip will tell you everything pertinent about the present state of DV in this country...it's telling of you to dismiss it as "self serving humour".

Here it is again:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/picture/2015/sep/30/news-corp-columnist-pancetta-mandibles-has-an-answer-for-everything-about-domestic-violence?CMP=share_btn_tw

it's pretty clear to some of us here, RObert - for all your huffing and puffing and inclinations to pretend you're trying to be balanced, that your own relationship baggage orchestrates your approach to this subject.

Your only aim appears to be to shut down conversation on the 80% of victims of DV in which country which are women.

Poirot:

“it's pretty clear to some of us here, RObert - for all your huffing and puffing and inclinations to pretend you're trying to be balanced, that your own relationship baggage orchestrates your approach to this subject.”

Would you care to name some names that agree with you? I for one do not agree with you and do not like the implication that there is any suggestion I might be included in the ‘some of us’.

That is a pretty nasty thing to say and a desperate attempt to silence RObert by casting aspersions on his personal life. That is the kind aggression that women resort to in domestic violence situations and a perfect example of what has been posted about the different methods men and women use to hurt others.

It is about the desire to hurt and not the method you use. Men and women have equal desire to hurt and that is the crux of the issue. Until women acknowledge that they too want to hurt then they will never understand domestic violence.

//Your only aim appears to be to shut down conversation on the 80% of victims of DV in which country which are women.//

Well that's a bit rich, seeing as your only aim appears to be to shut down conversation on the 25% of victims of DV in this country which are men.

I'm quite happy to disagree with you respectfully. I'm generally only rude to posters who make appallingly stupid remarks, and whilst I may disagree with your comments they don't fall into that category. But respectfully, you are barking up the wrong tree. Domestic violence is a terrible crime regardless of the gender of the perpetrator/victim. It isn't more terrible when women are the victim OR vice versa.