RADAR ALERT: Almost Anything Now Counts as Domestic “Violence,” Report Finds

Submitted by Matt on Fri, 2006-09-08 03:24

Last December TV talk show host David Letterman found himself named in a restraining order. The order was granted at the request of Colleen Nestler of Santa Fe, New Mexico. Nestler alleged that for the past 11 years Mr. Letterman had been sending her “thoughts of love” in the form of mental telepathic messages and televised facial gestures.

According to a RADAR Special Report (.pdf file) issued today, Letterman’s actions indeed represent domestic “violence,” at least according to the laws of New Mexico. In that state, domestic violence is defined as “Any incident by a household member against another household member resulting in ... severe emotional distress ... [or] harassment.”

The law states “cohabitation is not necessary to be deemed a household member.” Any “person with whom the petitioner has had a continuing personal relationship” is a “household member.” So Nestler’s decade-long telepathic relationship with Letterman made him a member of her household, even though he had never heard of her.

RADAR’s report, “Expanding Definitions of Domestic Violence, Vanishing Rule of Law” analyzes the civil domestic violence laws in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The report concludes that statutory definitions have been widened over the past decade to the point that in most states, almost any action can be viewed as “violent.”

“Domestic violence has become whatever the man does that the woman doesn’t like,” notes RADAR Steering Committee member Lisa Scott of Washington State. “Finding out she is having an affair and demanding she stop is seen as ‘abuse.’ This often triggers the woman to file for a restraining order, where no real evidence is required. In my 18 years of family law practice, I have seen this pattern occur over and over.”

Each year 2-3 million restraining orders are issued in the United States. Half of all restraining orders are issued without even an allegation of physical abuse. In 85% of cases, it is the husband or boyfriend who the target of the order.

Most orders are issued on an ex parte basis, which precludes the defendant from being present to give his side of the story. Restraining orders require the defendant to vacate the house and restrict contact with his children.

“Expanding Definitions of Domestic Violence, Vanishing Rule of Law” can be viewed at http://www.mediaradar.org/docs/VAWA-Restraining-Orders.pdf.

We are asking people to share the report with media representatives, state legislators, and judges. Reporters are being asked to write articles that explain the problems of our current domestic violence system; lawmakers should roll back overly-broad definitions of abuse; and judges should demand higher standards of proof before issuing restraining orders.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Date of RADAR Release: September 6, 2006

Register now for the National Family Law Reform Conference, to be held September 15-16 in Alexandria, Virginia (near Washington, DC). The conference will address the crisis of family law, including biased family courts, false allegations of domestic violence, child abuse, and much more. For more information: http://www.acfc.org/site/Calendar?view=Detail&id=100021

R.A.D.A.R. – Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting – is a network of concerned men and women working to assure that the problem of domestic violence is treated in a balanced and effective manner.
http://www.mediaradar.org/.

Like0 Dislike0

Comments

Another fine use of taxpayer dollars.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by blaze4metal on Fri, 2006-09-08 15:37

There's a direct connection between legal definitions of domestic violence, capricious use of restraining orders against men, and the radical feminist ideology that dominates the DV Industry -- the Duluth Model.

The link just below is to the Duluth "Power and Control Wheel." It illustrates the mandated, standard definitions of domestic "violence" used in DV batterer's intervention counseling for men.

Domestic VIOLENCE includes -

* Threatening to leave her
* Making her afraid by using looks, actions, gestures
* Making her ask for money; giving her an allowance
* Acting like "the master of the castle"
* Being the one who defines male and female roles
* Putting her down
* Making her feel bad about herself
* Playing mind games

(See Duluth P&C Wheel at --

http://www.duluth-model.org/documents/PhyVio.pdf

This partly explains why - "Once the law defines almost any interpersonal maladjustment as "domestic violence," the courts then establish procedures to expedite the issuance of these orders... merely claiming a "fear" of violence is considered grounds for issuance of the order."

Note that none of the alleged acts of violence from the Duluth P&C Wheel involve even the least act of physical aggression, let alone "violence."

Also, in most states, "battery" is defined as "an act of a provocative or insulting nature."

Once again, no physical contact, aggression, or violent action is required to meet this test of having committed an act of legal "battery."

The RADAR piece accurately illustrates how the entire law in deomstic violence has shifted radically into a "guilty until proven innocent" model where the subjective impressions of a "victim" are all that's required to bring the full weight of the State against a man - depriving him of home, kids, income, free movement, and all due process rights.

Taking into account the examples above and the lop-sided gender bias in the courts, I would propose to men that it is in fact impossible today to cohabit with a female without being at severe personal risk and 24 x 7 jeopardy of losing your property, kids, career, financial assets, and liberty.

Marriage strike? What a mystery!

(What a bunch of wussie-poopies indeed!)

BTW - Has anybody heard from Thundercloud lately?

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Roy on Fri, 2006-09-08 21:17

On the page of a woman's shelter of the Arbeiterwohlfahrt ("Worker's Welfare") here, listing occurances of domestic violence, this point could be found: "He's driving too fast".
AFAIK, even though it was ridiculed by MRAs, it remained there to this day. If someone needs more info to prove this is not only an American thing (it does get exported, but NOT the discussion in society), get back to me.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by n.j. on Sat, 2006-09-09 03:14

The feminist concept that the state has the obligation to micro-manage peoples domestic lives by eradicating so-called domestic violence is in my opinion reminiscent of the state going after witches centuries ago.

Men (who were also persecuted for witchcraft in those times) are now exclusively the new witches. Just mere accusations of domestic violence against a man sets off a chain of state oppression that destroys lives. Once accused he has the impossible task of proving himself innocent. Everybody here knows all about the horror stories so I will skip that unpleasantness.

In sum, it is the manifestation of the state gone insane! We can thank rad-feminism and the sycophantic groveling males who are critical in making this medieval oppression work for destroying centuries of progressive civilized thought that eradicated the superstitions and bigotry that ruined too many lives in the past and lifted us out of the dark ages.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Luek on Sat, 2006-09-09 12:42

The law states “cohabitation is not necessary to be deemed a household member.” Any “person with whom the petitioner has had a continuing personal relationship” is a “household member.”

This is a fucking joke,right? Yes it is but it is an unfunny one,a very unfunny one. This just proves the feminist intention to go after men any way they can.

Radical feminism cures chivalry

Some people tell me I need help
Some people can fuck off and go to hell

Debate and defeat

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by masculist man on Sat, 2006-09-09 13:01

I was also wondering about Thundercloud. A few weeks ago, he posted that his internet line to his house was to be worked on, and that therefore he wouldn't be posting for a while. I haven't heard a peep out of him since. Hoka hey!

The use of this Duluth model sounds to me like a serious logical fallacy. What seems to be the mentality, is that if a man engages in even one or two of the behaviours listed, he suddenly becomes part of this wheel. Of course there is also severely faulty logic in applying the model only to men.

The more I think of it, we have entered a period of facism. Feminists and their supporters use coercion and even death threats; propaganda, and invention or manipulation of statistics; silencing or punishing of critics; taking advantage of the general public's ignorance of the issues involved (such as domestic violence); causing laws to be created which are in their own interests; and other similiraties. It is becoming a very scary time. Most people don't know what Orwell was getting at, or they don't understand his method, so they think comparing the present age with his terrifying vision is ridiculous. It is not.
I am therefore content to just sit in my house all day and play around on the computer (I don't have to work to support myself). As long as I have a couple of relatives and friends who are not weirdos, I am ok.

-Axolotl

-Axolotl

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by axolotl on Sun, 2006-09-10 02:15

I always thought that Thundercloud had figured out how to use smoke signals as a sort of Indian wireless 'Net connection and so I never considered that he'd be "off-line" for so long!

You'd think one of his girlfriends could log off eHarmony.com long enough to let the brother check in here.

Seriously, I hope he's OK.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Roy on Sun, 2006-09-10 14:56