Paul, it was Ms Batty that initiated the campaign against Bettina Arndt. Equally what has Ms Batty done to warrant the title of "Australian of the year" that Bettina has not achieved? Ms Batty has made it her mission to support women and children affected by family violence and trauma, and campaign on the issues. [Her assumption is only men are involved in causing domestic violence.] She has now closed the charity set up in Luke's name.

Both issues need attention and must be dealt with in our community. One third of domestic violence is perpetrated by women. Arndt is a champion of male victims of domestic violence who have been abused by women and she has said that the "real picture" of domestic violence is "where our official evidence shows at least a third of the victims are male".

Paul, you did it again.
You have exposed yourself and your hypocrisy.
You just wasted a whole posting attacking the messenger but not the message.
I'm sorry mate, you have again shot yourself in the foot.
I tell you what, critique my comments and tell me where I erred, and I will be happy to engage with you in debating the topic.
BUT seeing as how, I'm NOT the topic, I'm sorry, your last posting is moot, and therefore irrelevant.
Try again only this time pick on my comments and see how you go.

This is painful.

ALTRAV said; I am extremely curious as to what I have said that you dis-agree with.

sick and twisted females, sluts, stupid parents, maggot daughters,
bimbo's, stupid brain, feminazi, maggots, slut, nasty little weasels.

All from your diatribe of nonsense, it comes from your minds eye. You rant and rave calling sexual assault, and victims of domestic violence, sluts and maggots, and you expect agreement. Well buster you have another thing coming. No compassion what so ever for the victims, those really hurting, women and children who suffer at the hands of the violent, the depraved, the perverted etc. Have YOU ever done jail time? If not why not!

So, I've just read through all this and Paul, I must say that that I am disappointed not to find even one quote of what this person "Bettina" has said.

Whilst plainly on one side of the debate there are many who are offended by some of the things she has allegedly said, on the other there are those who clearly understand that the "Statue of Justice" has two arms, not one, as has unfortunately become the nature of the legal mechanism in matters of "Domestic Violence," amongst others. (I'll come back to that)

How is it that you expect anybody to form a reasonable view on this if you don't start with the facts?

If you were to present this to a court, they would most certainly not be interested in opinion, supposition, conjecture or the pejorative, but rather they want to know what you know from your own senses, at least in the first instance.

What is it that your ears heard this person say exactly that leads you to conclude that she has been unreasonably derogatory and or insensitive towards genuine victims of crime?

I am, and I expect others are too, genuinely interested to know.

We could of course go and read something of what she says online ourselves but I would suggest that any decent topic thread has to include in its basis a least some mention of the primary facts, wouldn't you agree?

And in some ways, by not doing this, you do in effect work for the so-called social commentators as a debate deficient in the facts has a greater chance of generating controversy as a whole, as the storm becomes bigger in an attempt to equalize the opposite poles, which is one arrow in the available strategies of one who seeks to generate a larger audience. As distinct from a clinical, surgical, unbiased review of the matter.

ALTRAV, hang in there mate. Whilst you may not be able to adequately describe the nature of the injustice embedded in the system to the satisfaction of all posters, you do at least have some awareness that there is injustice. And that's to your credit in my view.

And when you choose to deploy "colourful" language in the manner in which you do, it does merely suggest to me that you have strong feelings and convictions about the matter. And I have no problem with that.

However, having said that, you need to recognise that many of the poor muggles in this place (and at large) have been socialised to the extent that they turn away from anything that they consider to be inapropriate. Often times, even one swear word and they will not even consider the facts that you are attempting to convey and will turn away.

Of course, they are cut from the same mold as the many who turned a blind eye to child abuse, being more concerned that an aggrieved parent was uttering verbal abuse than allegations of some form of assault against one of their staff members.

And some of the so-called "men of violence" can rightly say,

"By our blood are your lands kept safe."

rEPRUSu, thanks for your kind words of encouragement.
You are quite right about my temperament and use of the written word.
I am a pragmatic, objective person, so I hope you can understand that I do not wear fools lightly, if at all.
I tolerate the so called left on this forum because otherwise it would be a very boring and pointless forum if everyone agreed with each other, but, having said that, because I lag in the comedy and sarcasm dept, I don't 'get' the quips and jabs and so I find the authors childish, churlish, and totally and completely out of touch, to the point of almost displaying signs of emotional and mental incompetence, somewhat similar to someone suffering from Asperger's.
But I still soldier on in the off chance that I might be able to enlighten them, if not completely, but enough for them to start questioning their mis-guided, mis-informed stance on the matter being discussed.
Before I continue, I must explain that because I have seen more than my share of injustices by the system, (the judiciary, law enforcement) and men that were innocent because the truth came out later, convicted of a wrong doing, when they should not have been, if someone had bothered to look deeper or do any background checks.
Had they bothered, the truth would have surfaced and an injustice would not have been done.
So I never take things at face value, as it appears many, mostly from the left, who are all too quick to accuse and abuse, solely based on an unsubstantiated say so of some third party/parties or mediums.
I am THAT person who says, "hang on a minute, why did it come to this, what REALLY happened"?
I hope this goes a little way to explain my actions (or words) and the reasoning behind my language and attitude.