|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I was wondering about that myself... even though it was a silly article at the time, it's even sillier in light of the last 10 years of mounting evidence to the contrary.
Dave K - A Radical Moderate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Did MANN administration take over 9 years to get this one posted?"
Yes, though in MANN's defence most of that time was spent waiting for someone to submit it. ;)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
that stat is irrelvent due to the fact that the perfered weapon of death among wives is poison which is needlessly hard to detect and is often confused with many other things
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Correct. And add on to that the fact that women tend to hire someone else to murder their husbands and even when they are convicted of this they are not counted statistically as murderers of their husbands.
Mens Rights 2004 Congress
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday January 28, @07:49AM EST (#12)
|
|
|
|
|
Also add on men driven to suicide after sustained verbal and emotional abuse. This feminazi article says 5% of victims are men. OK, then 5% of funding for domestic violence shelters should go to men. Currently, it isn't even a fraction of this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Tuesday January 27, @10:08PM EST (#4)
|
|
|
|
|
Start with the fact that the police and judges are trained by militant feminist trainers who present the most bigoted, sexist view of domestic violence imaginable (feminist model). Then go on to the fact that militant feminist trainers tell the police and judges that they get very upset when they see more than 7% women getting arrested for domestic violence (quotas), and you begin to see the true nature of domestic violence law in Feminazi America.
Given the billions and billions of dollars that feminist are given to train police and judges, train domestic violence advocates, have shelters for women, have feminist advocates gather statistics at those shelters, one must look at where an article is coming from when it is presented.
Men take a horrible beating under domestic violence law, because they are often battered by the law after they are battered by their wives and partners. There is nothing short of a feminist campaign of hate against men systematically established through the domestic violence industry.
There are many people in the domestic violence industry today who should be in jail for fraud, when you look at the numbers they fabricate just to get the money to run thier hate agenda against men.
Martin Feibert of Cal State Long Beach has a bibliography of studies showing a far different conclusion from the feminist one. When studies are done objectively, and truthfully, and do not follow bigotted feminist criteria, we see clear evidence that men comprise about half of the victims of domestic violence.
In a Meta-Analysis (a study of all studies) is was concluded that men are battered as frequently as women. Yes, men often do not report their injuries, and yes, weapons are often used by females to increase the injury against men. Cars, guns, knives, bookstands, baseball bats, hot water, or anything that is easily at hand are aimed or thrown at the man when a woman loses control and goes into a rage against a man. It is a lie that this is often done in self-defense. The truth is violence against men by women is often done out of anger. One place where women have never had a problem leveling the playing field has been in the area of domestic violence.
America labors under a tremendous bigotry against men in the area of domestic violence, and the 75% suicide rate of men shows that men have horribly insufficient places to seek help, when they need it.
Domestic violence murders of men are rarely categorized as that, when women kill men. Welcome to Feminazi America, where to be a man is to be the politically correct target of all the hate, abuse, and domestic violence that women can muster, while your government turns a blind and does nothing but lie about it.
Sincerely, Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Tuesday January 27, @10:13PM EST (#6)
|
|
|
|
|
Recently in San Diego, California Attorney General Bill Lochyer convened a Task Force to look at current conditions regarding the subject of domestic violence. Here is an email I sent to that Task Force:
Ray
=================================================
"The continuing systematic denial of heterosexual males as victims of domestic violence by the domestic violence industry revictimizes myself and all other male victims. We are further traumatized when we see abhorrent pseudo-scientific methodologies (used by domestic violence industry social scientists) to conjure up fallacious factoids and statistics that are then used to support inhuman domestic violence laws.
Law enforcement is trained by gender biased, feminists advocates to rationalize domestic violence incidents so they comply with the self-fulfilling prophecy that all men are batterers and all women are victims. Relevant evidence that women are batterers and men are victims is routinely ignored. Thereby, numerous male victims and their children are cheated when violent females are excused and innocent men are arrested. Considering the inordinate amount of time the domestic violence industry has dedicated to addressing violent male partners, and the lack of time they have dedicated to confronting violent female partners, time at domestic violence task force conferences should more constructively be spent concentrating on what violent women can do to end their violence against men.
Years from now, future generations will know the whole truth about domestic violence. They will know how the domestic violence industry politicized the dynamics of domestic violence, then used it as a weapon to demonize men and destroy their lives. Through the sharpened vision of 20/20 hind sight they will justly despise the domestic violence industry of today for the behavior of the misandrist hate mongers who comprised it.
The good men of California and America may suffer for a long time under the cruel batterings of the feminist agenda’s pet programs such as “domestic violence,” but in the end the whole truth will be known, no matter how much you restrict input from battered heterosexual males. Please include these comments in your official record of task force proceedings. They apply to all four categories that will be addressed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Correct. Battered men have no one to go to for support. There are very few programs available that offer services for battered men. I have heard of battered men calling the shelters and being told that they can't help them and offering no alternative. Actually I have also heard of one shelter that accused the man of being a perp and castigated him for faking being a victim!
The bottom line is that a man's pain is taboo in our culture. Men aren't stupid and realize that there is nowhere that their pain is welcome. We have learned to deal with it ourselves and not expect anyone to help us. Simply put, we are not dumb enough to go out in public and emote openly.
When there aren't any services and your pain is taboo you learn to not let others know about problems like DV and being beaten by your wife. There are plenty of stories of hospital personnel or police employees making fun of a man who claims he is the victim of DV. That's pretty good motivation to never bring that up again!
This is why men don't go to the ER and tell the doc that their wives hit them with a fireplace poker and why they don't file charges with the local police. Since men don't file charges and don't alert the hospital er's about the true nature of their injuries this skews the data on hospital and police reports to an extreme degree. Guess where the feminists get all of their data about DV? You guessed it! Hospital and Police reports. It tells them just what they want to hear, "Women are 97% of the victims and men are the sole perpetrators."
Researchers like Gelles, Straus, and Archer tell a very different story. A story that says that men are at least 38% of the victims of serious injury from DV and that women are more often the original initiators of the violence.
Mens Rights 2004 Congress
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Tuesday January 27, @10:59PM EST (#7)
|
|
|
|
|
Just a few statistics to mull over while we all think about this:
1) Child Abuse:
Approximately 903,000 children were victims of abuse and neglect during 2001. Official, child abuse perpetrator statistics in 2001 show that approximately 60 percent of the perpetrators were women and 40 percent were men. (see http://nccanch.acf.hhs.gov/topics/overview/facts.c fm)
Of course, these are only the official statistics. Presumably the actual numbers of child abusers is larger, but how the gender-mix of abusers would change if we could identify all of them is unclear. I am not familiar with the epidemiological studies that try to estimate this.
2) Domestic Partner Abuse:
Here the statistics are puzzling (at least to me) because the epidemiological studies strongly contradict official crime statistics. This, like above, stems (at least in part) by the under-reporting of these crimes by the victims.
The official crime statistics show that: The number violent crimes by intimate partners against women experienced about 588,490 such crimes in 2001. In 2001 the number of violent crimes against men by an intimate parner was
reposrt to be an estimated 103,220 victimizations. (see http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/ipv01.htm) Assuming that heterosexual parnters dominate, this leads to the conclusion that male assaults on females outnumber the inverse by about 6 to 1.
The epidemiologic studies, however, are designed to address under-reporting (victims that don't report the crime, I don't know how the researchers do this). The American Medical Association examined the U.S. epidemiological data on this subject and reported that: The result of the re-analysis is that the overall rate of violence by wives was 124 per 1000 compared to 122 per 1000 for men. The rate of minor violence by wives was 78 per 1000, compared to 72 per 1000 for men. Finally, the rate of severe violence by wives was 46 per 1000, compared to 50 per 1000 by husbands. None of the differences was statistically significant. (see http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/article/2036-2559. html). This suggests that domestic assault is practiced (rougly) equally by the two genders.
Of course, one could add to the above statistics, but I have rum out of steam (for the moment). At any rate, I think that one can look at the above and form at least three natural conclusions:
1) Any attempt to label one gender as "bad" and the other as "good" is motivated more by personal prejudices than by impersonal facts.
2) The sheer magnitude of domestic violence, including child abuse, is depressing and a daunting challenge.
3) In a nation of 300 million people (the U.S.), the above numbers suggest that well over 90% of women and men do not abuse anyone. Perhaps we should (at least occasionally) celebrate that.
Best Regards-----Doug Wells
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Tuesday January 27, @11:11PM EST (#8)
|
|
|
|
|
In a nation of 300 million people (the U.S.), the above numbers suggest that well over 90% of women and men do not abuse anyone.
The men in that 90% just haven't met a feminist domestic violence advocate, who can conjure domestic violence out of thin air.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First, to Doug W., thank you for an excellent summary of relevant DV research. Every man concerned with this crisis should print your post.
Unfortunately, Ray is more on point that on the ground and in the field where the gender war is being prosecuted, no man stands a chance.
When an angry, abusive, about-to-file-the-divorce-papers female calls 911 and states - "I'm afraid of him..." (often upon counsel of her lawyer who knows a false allegation of DV is a major trump card in upcoming court and custody battles...) -- the dude is toast.
The DV goon squad arrives, the guy is cuffed, the Restraining Order is automatic, and the weight of the State Feminazi Apparatus takes over.
No due process. No "innocent until proven guilty." No access to his kids, his home, his property.
He will experience the true reality of the criminalized-by-virtue-of-his-chromosomes tyranny that is now the "law of the land."
Every interaction with a female is now an invitation to forfeit your liberty.
I wish it wasn't so.
I also wish for world peace and an end to silicon boob-jobs!
"It's a terrible thing ... living in fear."
- Roy: hunted replicant, Blade Runner
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In handing out my literature about abused men from Stop Abuse For Everyone, I have gone to several public libraries, who cooperated in letting me put them in the "free handouts" section. Every so often I'll be in one of them and there will be a few missing. Not ALL of them, as this could possibly indicate sabotage, but some of them. Perhaps people took one as a joke, or to try to refute its claims, but I really think they're reaching people.
Further, I went to the DV counseling office in my county because (encouragingly) their own brochure says right on the cover that "anyone can be a victim, regardless of sex, gender, race..." and so forth. I rang their doorbell and asked the woman if she'd take some safe4all brochures, and she said, "Yes, we do serve men here." I went just north to the next county up and told her of my dealings with the other place, and she said, "Yes, so do we."
Perhaps it's just hit-or-miss. I think certain DV centers are fair and others are grossly unfair. I think some police departments still arrest the man, no matter what, but many others have been trying to treat everyone fairly, unlike "FAIR". I've heard a story or two of a woman hurting her husband, calling 911 to have him arrested, and, yes, being shocked to learn that she would be the one going to jail (sent there often by female cops, in fact).
So keep up the good work and get the awareness out and we will see good results.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday January 28, @04:54PM EST (#20)
|
|
|
|
|
Some more good news is establishment of first refuges for battered men in Britain. I don't know where I first saw this story, maybe it was on mensactivism already . Anyway, the link is
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,690 3,1111153,00.html
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday January 28, @08:58PM EST (#21)
|
|
|
|
|
Actually,it was on angryharry.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
. . .significantly responsible for the promulgation of the myth about domestic violence increasing on the day of the Superbowl?
Hrm.
Ack!
Non Illegitimi Carborundum, and KOT!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
try this article at angryharry.com
Heres a quote from what I consider the hardest hitting portion of the article:
Batered men face a tragic apathy. Their one option is to call the police and hope that a jurisdiction will abide by a mandatory or presumptive arrest statute. However, when the police do carry out an arrest when a male has been beaten, they tend to engage in the practice of ”dual arrest” and arrest both parties.
Battered men who flee their attackers find that the act of fleeing results in the men losing physical and even legal custody of their children. Those men who stay are thought to be ”wimps,” at best and ”perps” at worst, since if they stay, it is believed they are the true abusers in the home.
Thirty years ago battered women had no place to go and no place to turn for help and assistance. Today, there are places to go—more than 1,800 shelters, and many agencies to which to turn. For men, there still is not place to go and no one to whom to turn. On occasion a shelter for battered men is created, but it rarely lasts—first because it lacks on-going funding, and second because the shelter probably does not meet the needs of male victims. Men, who retain their children in order to try to protect them from abusive mothers, often find themselves arrested for ”child kidnapping.”
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I sent the following to Jim Naureckas (jnaureckas@fair.org) at FAIR:
"Jim,
You have an article on your Web site entitled "Battered Men? Battered Facts." It dates from 1994. In light of more recent research and more enlightened consideration of the reality of domestic violence in the U.S. this article is so dated that it's assertions are incorrect, even ludicrous. By way of quick reference, I point you to this Web page: http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm that cites almost 150 investigations with an aggregate sample size of over 100,000. This bibliography grows every year, and while many choose to ignore it, no one can "debunk" it.
You compromise your own credibility and the credibility of your entire organization by keeping it up there.
Frank H
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday January 28, @02:11PM EST (#17)
|
|
|
|
|
Frank:
That was excellent.
Thank You,
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, I appreciate that, Ray, but the guy replied to me and clearly he holds on to the feminist dogma of "female victim, male perpetrator."
Probably wasn't worth my time, but if the guy got a storm of emails, then he might quietly accede.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Go to FAIR's web site at www.fair.org and do a keyword search on "domestic violence."
You will get a list of 374 articles and newsblurbs.
I challenge you to find a single article that is not feminist screed, complete with biased statistical distortions and misandrist bile.
I gave up after the first couple hundred, so maybe there's one in there somewhere that might demonstrate "fairness and accuracy" in coverage of domestic violence...
"It's a terrible thing ... living in fear."
- Roy: hunted replicant, Blade Runner
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, I kind of presumed that would be the case, so I really did little to follow up. Does anyone know their funding source? Might be interesting to send a jab in their direction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Thursday January 29, @10:50PM EST (#23)
|
|
|
|
|
The argument about the conflict tactics scale (CTS) and self defense is a huge smokescreen. Dr. David Fontes, who directs the Employee Assistance Center for the California Department of Social Services (his bio is at http://www.safe4all.org/speakers.html), wrote an excellent analysis that refutes this argument completely. It's available at http://www.safe4all.org/essays/vtbreak.pdf
The feminists have used CTS based data for decades to cite figures on female victims. But as soon as it also shows high numbers of male victims, they suddenly have a problem with the CTS. They argue that it does not ask the reasons why the person struck, and from there they argue that when women hit in self defense it counts as though they committed domestic violence. Of course, that is true of men too who hit in self defense. And as Gelles points out, there is research that did ask about context and self defense. The research found that about 10 percent of the violent women and about 15 percent of the violent men were hitting in self defense. It found that the reasons men and women commit DV are very much the same. The most common reason cited by them was "to get through to them," followed by reasons such as impulse problems, alcohol, drugs, jealosy, etc. This study at Cal State University also looks at motives. http://www.batteredmen.com/fiebertg.htm 1,000 college women were interviewed. 30 percent admitted being violent toward their male partners. The top reasons were NOT self defense but reasons such as "my boyfriend was not listening to me." Richard Gelles also refutes the conflict tactics scale / self defense argument in this excellent article at http://www.ncfmla.org/resources/gelles/RichardGell esArticle.htm in which he describes the history of the cover up of the data. The research that does say women hit in self defense is generally coming from pre-selected samples rather than randomized samples. For example they will ask women at shelters whether they hit their partner and if so, why. Of course most of them will say it was for reasons other than self defense. And shelters don't include all the women who hit for reasons other than self defense but never needed to go to a shelter.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
