Conventional wisdom says 'Man should never raise a hand to a woman', and if he does its automatically his fault.

But if one investigates domestic violence and starts from the position of 'violence' or 'violence against women' then they have already cut themself off from solutions.

If you have already made the ascertation that its all the mans fault, (by focusing on the act of violence itself) then you aren't able to truly seeing things for what they are.

If you want to GET REAL on this issue, you have to go back to the beginning.

To the time when these 2 people were truly in love.
When they were attracted to one another.
When they respected one another.
When they cared about each others feelings.
When they saw potential in each other and a future.
When they accepted each other.

What happened between then and the point in which someone raised a hand?
How did this loving caring person whom his partner trusted become so angry, violent, insenstitive and heartless?

Maybe the signs were already there that the relationship had already run its course.
Maybe the best before date had already come and gone and the two should have already gone their separate ways.
It can be hard to make the right decisions at the time, usually seen more clearly in hindsight.

My theory is 'Men lash out when they feel challenged or backed into a corner' - as most people will.

- The Big Question -
What made the man feel 'backed into a corner' that they felt the need to lash out?
- This should be the focus of understanding domestic violence.

Men can have difficulties understanding women on an emotional level, and women can act in all sorts of underhanded ways when their needs aren't being met.

Things can spiral out of control.

Life's a journey of learning for everyone, some just haven't reached the minimum required standard of understanding from experience just yet, and I think we all need to have a few failed relationships in order to learn how to get it right.

Thanks for that link Foxy, the debate needs a level of sensibility which unfortunately once again the forums 'Usual Suspects' will want to tern it into some kind of race hate debate. Domestic violence in indigenous communities is at an unacceptable level, in fact one instance of DV in society is one instance too many.
Josephine Cashman the chairwoman of the Community Safety Committee of the Prime Minister's Indigenous Advisory Council has made a strong statement on the need for courts to take the issue seriously when handing down sentences. For too long as a society we have played down domestic violence as being simply part of life for some, the "she needs a slap now and then to show her who's boss, and keep her in line." that should never ever have been acceptable, but unfortunate it was accepted by law enforcement, courts and society in general. Its high time we tackle the issue head on, and do something constructive to eradicate the scourge, and hopefully Turnbull is now introducing some right thinking into the debate which the Abbott government seemed to lack, even though Abbott himself appeared to be well meaning on the issue. The $100m is a move in the right direction to show the government is serious about tackling domestic violence, Turnbull has received universal praise for his governments initiative.

Real men don't belt women and real women don't manipulate and act like witches in denying fathers rights to children.

Paul1405,

You say it is 'race hate' to challenge the leftist political correctness that would have Aboriginal women and girls accorded the same protection and justice of the laws that are enjoyed by the remainder of the Australian population?

http://tinyurl.com/rape-of-ten-yr-old

It is not 'men' generically speaking who molest, rape and beat girls and women, it is offenders who break the law. Of course policy and the allocation of taxpayer money should be guided by evidence and targeted. To do otherwise would be to waste taxpayer $$ on the legion of academics, public servants and private 'consultants' who swing from the taxpayer's teat.

It is also quite appropriate for the public to demand of government that it is always proactive in ensuring that toxic political systems, values and traditions are not imported into Australia as occurred in Rotherham and other centres in the UK. -Where the (UK)Labour Party and political correctness were implicated in the protection of Kashmiri offenders and over years of serious criminal acts.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/415251/lessons-rotherham-daniel-allott-jordan-allott-ben-allen

It has been admitted previously by the federal government that there are lapses and even corruption in immigration administration. The public have yet to be advised of what remedial treatments and action the government proposes to take.

Sorry, my

"You say it is 'race hate' to challenge the leftist political correctness that would have Aboriginal women and girls accorded the same protection and justice of the laws that are enjoyed by the remainder of the Australian population?"

should be,

"You say it is 'race hate' to challenge the leftist political correctness that would NOT have Aboriginal women and girls accorded the same protection and justice of the laws that are enjoyed by the remainder of the Australian population?

As an aside, this 'campaign' against domestic violence which has caused the ABC and Fairfax to drool over Turnbull is actually an Abbott policy that was due to be released the week Turnbull and Bishop knifed Abbott in the back. Not that the thing has a hope of success, of course. It's just another feel-good, empty gesture that's going to cost a mint, and bore everyone with that Battey woman who's only 'expertise' is to be a victim and be ludicrously awarded Australian of the Year for being a victim. We encourage victimhood in this country, as we laud as 'brave' any Tom, Dick or Harry who has their terminal illness advertised on Today Tonight.