Mine neither Joe.
I admire you for taking the road less travelled on this subject, as far as male contributors to this forum are concerned.
We know the truth, and that is all that matters.

Those opposed to practical support for male victims of DV regardless of the gender of the perpetrator seem to live in denial of the evidence. They "know" the truth in their minds and won't let inconvenient evidence change the truths they hold to tone self evident. The research demonstrating that violent DV is not significantly gendered is very clear. I do accept Joes point that in some sections of the community that may not be the case.

Those who cling to a highly gendered view of DV don't appear to be willing to debate based on the evidence.

The stereotypes around DV must meet some needs but basing community and government response on those stereotypes perpetuates the problem than reduce it.

R0bert

OTB,

Oh dear, that slide away from topic:

' ... more Australian males (8.7%) will experienced violence than Australian females (5.3%).'

And who are the vast majority of the perpetrators of that violence ? Are you suggesting that most of those perpetrators are women ?

Come on, you know that isn't the case :) Just be honest about it.

In everyday life in Australia, power still rests with men rather than women. We're usually physically stronger, on balance we are in a stronger financial position by virtue of the simple fact that it's women who tend to stay at home raising the kids.

OF COURSE, the courts usually find in favour of women when the assets get divided up, and since they have usually looked after the kids, they tend to get the kids and the house.

Is that what most of you blokes are griping about ?

Move on. Get a life. Get another life if you have to.

Joe
www.firstsources.info

@Loudmouth Joe, @Poirot, @Suseonline

Actually the quote "If civilization had been left in female hands, we would still be living in grass huts."...are words that come from the mouth of a woman...Professor Camille Paglia...so stick that one up your jumpers.

@Suseonline, "as far as male contributors to this forum are concerned.
We know the truth, and that is all that matters."

I am a male on this forum, what untruth have I told? What have I said that does not matter? Have I said anything to insult women?

@Loudmouth, "OF COURSE, the courts usually find in favour of women when the assets get divided up, and since they have usually looked after the kids, they tend to get the kids and the house.
Is that what most of you blokes are griping about ?
Move on. Get a life. Get another life if you have to."

Loudmouth are you in favour of women running off with another man and telling lies in restricted divorce court proceedings and getting the kids?
Do you think men have no right to complain or receive justice in such circumstances?

Do you think a father or mother should just move on without the only children he/she has in this world?

By you saying "Get another life. Get another life if you have to", are you suggesting suicide?

Roskop,

Nicely off-topic but anyway ....

Actually, it's likely that without the initiative of women (we'll get to that), we would all still be hunter-gatherers, squatting on our bare arses around smoky fires and stealing each other's women.

The most important revolution in human history, the Agricultural Revolution of 10-12,000 years ago, was very likely brought on by women hand-feeding semi-tame stock animals, on noticing that 'grass' seeds that they had gathered and given to stock sprung up around the pens in which they held those animals, mainly goats, sheep) while the men were off playing with their dogs.

From those initiatives, we have inherited farming, grass huts, towns, cities, trade, number and weight systems, alphabets, States, etc.

Or perhaps you would prefer to still sit around some piddly fire, waiting for food to drop out of the sky, thanks to the elders ?

Joe
www.firstsources.info