|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am very glad to see an article written that does not specify the gender of the victims or abusers. I hope this is the first in a (slow I'm sure) trend. As the media begins to use more gender neutral terminology, people will not be so closed minded to accepting that either sex can be abused.
Basically, I think people get a subconcious block by reading man beats woman all the time. As articles like this start to pop up, that block will not develop.
I suspect that the material being passed out to aid workers will be gender specific (that's been my experience at least), but this isn't something that is going to change overnight. It's just good to see one fair article written.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 11:48 AM October 1st, 2004 EST (#2)
|
|
|
|
|
Though the article is written in gender-neutral language (like most of the laws), from the people the writer spoke to, to the latent danger to children (implicitly with the mother), to the whole idea of fleeing to shelters off-limits to their abusers, the author seems to point a finger at male abusers without naming the sex. Almost like speaking in code.
Unexamined in the article is the idea that maybe claiming DV is the quickest a woman with kids can get into a good shelter (maybe with the husband's connivance). Also the disagreement on how to spend the insurance money while leading to separation or divorce, also leads to false DV charges.
The article worries me in that certain gender stereotypes are so inculcated in the public's mind that fem writers no longer have to mention gender in an article to get the sough after response.
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
