[an error occurred while processing this directive]
Domestic abuse role reversal
posted by Matt on 10:43 AM May 12th, 2006
Domestic Violence Marc A. writes "Good article here. Excerpt:

'"It's becoming less taboo for male victims to come forward," she said, "and there certainly is a need to provide similar services to them."

There could be a legal need as well. Herma Hill Kay, a Boalt Hall law professor who specializes in anti-discrimination law, said federal court decisions and state law suggest that excluding male victims from funding may violate the law.

"Equal protection under the law sounds like a cliché," said David Woods, who claims he was denied a restraining order against his wife and mocked by police when he reported being hit. "But wouldn't it be nice for someone who never got it."'"

<  Duke Update: Defense Witness Arrested | The Female Discount?  >

  
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
"MAY be discrimination"??? (Score:1)
by Thundercloud on 11:49 AM May 12th, 2006 EST (#1)
Of course it's discrimination to not provide the same services for men as women in DV cases.
To treat one group as better or more valuable than another IS the very definition of discrimination. The Constitution and the Bill of rights are pretty clear on things like that.
I'm grateful that Ms Hill sees the light, but every flippin' law professor in the land should see this type of discrimination for what it is and become active to rectify the problem.

I mean it's simply the proverbial 'no brainer' and we've only been hollering about it for more than 20 years. It takes THAT long for at least ONE law professor to figure this out.
Ai-yha...!

  Thundercloud.
  "Hoka hey!"

Separate but not even Equal under CA law... (Score:1)
by MR on 01:53 PM May 12th, 2006 EST (#2)
"The state law that governs the DHS grant program defines domestic violence as "the infliction or threat of physical harm against past or present adult or adolescent female intimate partners and shall include physical, sexual and psychological abuse against the woman."

Updating the law

A bill by state Assemblywoman Rebecca Cohn, D-Campbell, would expand that program for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender victims. It would leave the definition of domestic violence intact."

How completely bigoted and hateful can CA elected representatives be against men??? This goes right along with separate restrooms, separate drinking fountains, back of the bus, etc.


The article was just crumbs (Score:1)
by Hunchback on 07:35 PM May 12th, 2006 EST (#3)
I don't find the article that great. It is a measure of just how much men are maligned that any piece that mentions the male victims of domestic violence at all is lauded by us as a step forward.

The article itself quoted a whole lot more feminist dogma than our point of view, even if it did acknowledge the limitations of crime statistics. It mentioned that men have similar victim numbers but are less severely injured, an observation that leads me to believe that the author had to have been aware of the Fiebert meta-analysis.

Sorry fellas, but I'm not breaking out the champagne until I read an article in the MSM (mainstream media) that actually cites the Fiebert study by name.

[an error occurred while processing this directive]