Would it be fair to say that some women do voluntarily submit to being beaten while others do not?

In that case, it becomes an issue of doing our best to distinguish between the two, then acting on the most sincere balance of probabilities.

But we need to tread very carefully here, because who is to judge without bias whether a person accepts their situation voluntarily or not?

As individuals, we have every right to judge and employ non-violent means against the perpetrators, such as boycotting those who beat their wives and avoid employing them or providing them with goods and services, etc.

The state, however, may only use its coercive powers in self-defence of those who wish to be defended by it, or at most, in defence of those who are unable to communicate when on the balance of probabilities it is sincerely believed that they would have sought the state's help if they could.

Beating a woman is not in any ways healthy or a good act. I see no reason why a man could beat his wife in any ground of offense.

I am not sure we should be discussing this topic at all. Wasn,t family violence a un world wide initiative. To bring violence to the surface and condemn it for what it is. I don,t remember any proviso,s that consensual violence is ok.

This is all about one group giving their approval for consensual violence. Can violence have classifications. Or should their concerns be passed on to the United Nations for approval or not.

As a single nation we are stepping into dirty work by even giving the subject air time.
The proposition is bigger than any one single country to contemplate.

Look, if these silly Muslim woman are OK with being knocked about, who are we to worry about it. I don't care at all, actually. I do care about normal, non-Muslim women but, if they don't report it, nothing can be done about it.

Conspicuous compassion about domestic violence has become damn boring. Police, hampered by gutless courts, can't stop out-in-the-open public violence. Nothing can be done about domestic violence, much of which is known by only the victim and the perpetrator. And, a recent report reveals that there are as many female assailant as there are male assailants.

So, male or female, if you are being assaulted, fight back, report it; do something, because nobody else can do it for you.

Come on Tuesday and new topics.

Dear Doog,

«Can violence have classifications»?

Yes!

Violence can be dissected in several ways.

1)
Physical violence
Verbal violence
Thought violence

2)
My violence, which is my duty to eradicate.
Others' violence, which is not my duty to eradicate.

3)
Unprovoked violence, which should always be avoided.
Violence in self-defence, which though less than ideal, is generally acceptable.
Violence in defence of others who agreed to come under my care, which is commendable for certain classes of people.
Violence in defence of others who have not agreed to come under my care, where permission to respond violently on behalf of the offended must be sought first.
Violence in defence of others who do not wish to come under my care, which should be avoided.

That is where our out of date system is falling down. You are reciting a minefield of litigation and courtroom inaction. And not the fault of the judge.