Roscop,

"Give us a break Jules. Huge sums of taxpayer dollars have been spent by femocrats and the DV industry assiduously refining the definition of domestic violence so that it covers every imaginable behaviour which displeases a woman...."

Says the guy who set about "refining" my tale of my mother's experiences by inquiring if when had any evidence to show the beatings were "more than very soft".

It's fascinating that for a period, and spanning more than half a century, that women have had legal recourse to escape what essentially had been their lot to endure for most of human history.

That troglodytes like Roscop refer to women attempting to protect themselves and their children as "femocrats and the DV industry" displays outright contempt for DV victims.

I don't for a moment consider that the likes of Roscop, judging by his pure scorn, gives two hoots about female victims - or is in any way interested in an holistic approach to domestic violence.

Poirot can you see the appalling ethical standards adopted by the those referred to in the following passages written by a woman:

"Campaigns such as Destroy the Joint’s Counting Women project insist on making domestic violence a gender issue. It claims 66 women are victims this year, with the implication these are all “intimate partner” homicides, perpetrated by males.

In fact, only about half of the homicides cited could be classified as having a male partner or ex-partner identified as the killer.

Some of the 66 victims were killed by women, by sisters, daughters, a female neighbour or, in one case, a female ex-lover of the victim’s husband, as well as by brothers, fathers, and sons, strangers, acquaintances and persons unknown.

Domestic violence is a serious enough without exaggerating.

The activists cherrypick facts to support their dogma, rather than using statistics to better target scarce resources to help the most vulnerable victims, and to address the root causes of domestic violence."

"But these are not facts the man-bashing femi-fascists who control the domestic violence industry want to hear."

So that's the work of the people you are making out are of high virtue in protecting women and their children.

MGTOW level 1 looks better every day.

Roscop,

Lol!...Miranda Devine - the well known Murdoch hack and hysterical right-wing zealot!"

The fanatical ranter who terms female DV victims as "unsuitable"?

The waffler who spurts forth "femi-fascist!" whenever she sneezes?

"But these are not facts the man-bashing femi-fascists who control the domestic violence industry want to hear."

Straight from the rancid pen of Miranda Devine - the woman-bashing, mascu-fascist, attention seeking, domestic violence troll.

Next....

There are more women than men graduating from Western universities. Biological science and social sciences, and psychology straddles both, have been inundated with women undergraduates, post graduates, lecturers and professors for many years, employment in the relevant fields reflects that trend,

BUT,

it takes a woman journalist, Miranda Devine, to courageously stand up and point the finger at some of the deliberate lies that pervade and become 'truths' through frequent repeating in the media. Half-truths and outright lies, 'factoids' to support a feminist paradigm that embarrasses young women and is only spruiked by educated middle class white already entitled women who have been riding the gravy train for their whole career and NGOs with a vested interest too in sucking from the guvvy teat.

A Prime Minister, who if he hasn't been given poor briefing, is cynically toeing the line of feminist political correctness. Either way Turnbull is very casual with 10 million of taxpayers dollars. It is not his money, so any amount is cheap to buy support, or at least less criticism, from the 'Progressive' ABC and other taxpayer paid for lobbyists.

Either way, it is NO good for public policy and the real victims, for instance indigenous, will see no improvement. The money will be extracted by the bureaucratic, legal and NGOs, all fleas on fleas and precious little if any will ever translate into timely, practical, necessary interventions and counselling at the grass roots, where tye cycle of violence needs to be broken.

Now, will some real scientists step forward to assist psychology and the social sciences and the university schools that seem to have forever lost their way and are producing so much sloppy, junk research and reports to win more research dollars?

To think that psychology presumes to call itself a science.

Roscop, "Give us a break Jules. Huge sums of taxpayer dollars have been spent by femocrats and the DV industry assiduously refining the definition of domestic violence so that it covers every imaginable behaviour which displeases a woman...."

Why is that addressed to me? I will never seek refining the meaning of violence to be anything other than violence, which means assault and which is precisely defined in legislation all over Australia. On this thread it's mainly the basher lobby that is busy refining the definition of violence beyond assault to refer to non-violent behaviour which displeases a basher enough provoke a bashing. Check the posts!

Some basher lobbyists are pleading that it is wrong to imprison a basher for too long.

OK, how about legislating that any judge, magistrate or parole board do-gooder, whose decisions cause a basher’s release to facilitate further bashing, is to be personally liable for financially crippling damages?

Nup, wouldn’t do? The bottom line for the basher lobby is to allow bashers to be at large where they can go on bashing.

Jules,

"Check the posts!" If you can't point me to the specific statements you are referring to, I'm not going to bother.

I don't know what other posters think, but to me most of what you say is a whole lot of gibberish especially when you keep on talking about this self-coined phrase "basher lobby"...not a clue what you're talking about there.