First man jailed under new domestic abuse law.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35192256

A man charged with the new coercive control law which was passed last December has been jailed for 2 years 4 months.
The new law is about control rather than violence within a relationship.

Gemma Doherty, who felt trapped in a relationship with Mohammad Anwwarr, had tried to commit suicide after months of his obsessive unreasonable behaviour.
She said she didn't mind the slaps as much as the control he had on what she ate, wore, dressed, spoke to, and  acted.

The new law which carries a maximum prison sentence of 5 years, was brought in to include such behaviours which do not amount to violence but still cause someone to fear violence will be used against them.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/brute-jailed-under-historic-ruling-8003928

Good, about time.

I agree wholeheartedly Sassy.
Mental abuse is as bad, sometimes worse than physical abuse.

A girl I know is actually going through this today!

Her ex has been blackmailing her for ages with nude pics and the fact that he knows her married sister had an affair and threatened to tell the husband.

I've told her she should go to the police for ages and the problem has gotten worse.

Late last night I persuaded her to go to the local family advice centre where a friend of mine works.
Just got word that it's been filed under Domestic Abuse and the police are now involved.

Just got a message on FB from her!
Another ex girlfriend of this scumbag has been in contact with her - and guess what?
He's been doing the same thing to her!!!!

I hope this law gives more confidence to women (and to a lesser extent men) who find themselves in a controlling relationship or ex relationship.
Good luck to your friend Eddie, the fact that he has done this to others should strengthen her case, especially if the other girl reports it too.

Syl wrote:I hope this law gives more confidence to women (and to a lesser extent men) who find themselves in a controlling relationship or ex relationship.
Good luck to your friend Eddie, the fact that he has done this to others should strengthen her case, especially  if the other girl reports it too.

Thanks Syl. She's not so much a "friend" but a girl on Facebook and I know her becasue I helped her find a placement for her autistic son.
She's a lovely quiet girl too. I'm glad she's finally made a move to stop this bullying scumbag.
I had to literally beg her to report him, that's how scared she was of his blackmails.

Arsehole.
To be honest I didn't realise that a law wasn't in place (before December) to deal with mental control like this.
It seems very inadequate to think abuse has to be physical to cause harm.

Syl wrote:I hope this law gives more confidence to women (and to a lesser extent men) who find themselves in a controlling relationship or ex relationship.
Good luck to your friend Eddie, the fact that he has done this to others should strengthen her case, especially  if the other girl reports it too.

"To a lesser extent???" You don't hope the law will help all people, in the same degree and manner? What kind of bigotry is that?

I think when we start pursuing selfish interests is when we go the way of the RW...deception, deception, deception.

Original Quill wrote:

Syl wrote:I hope this law gives more confidence to women (and to a lesser extent men) who find themselves in a controlling relationship or ex relationship.
Good luck to your friend Eddie, the fact that he has done this to others should strengthen her case, especially  if the other girl reports it too.

"To a lesser extent???"  You don't hope the law will help all people, in the same degree and manner?  What kind of bigotry is that?

I think when we start pursuing selfish interests is when we go the way of the RW...deception, deception, deception.

Read what I said again Quill.

I was talking about women being given the confidence to report these crimes ....less men suffer domestic violence of this sort....hence my comment.
Obviously once reported the crimes should be treated equally no matter who reported them.

And before some disgruntled male posts that women are as bad as men when it comes to violence in the home....flicking through various sites re domestic violence I have seen different statistics in different parts of England and Wales recording that 92% of victims are women being abused by men.....and other statistics show 40% of men compared to 60% of women suffer.

So taking both extremes into the equation it's very obvious that there are far more men dishing out domestic mental and physical abuse than there are women.

Syl wrote:And before some disgruntled male posts that women are as bad as men when it comes to violence in the home....flicking through various sites re domestic violence I have seen different statistics in different parts of England and Wales recording that 92% of victims are women being abused by men.....and other statistics show 40% of men compared to 60% of women suffer.

So taking both extremes into the equation  it's very obvious that there are far more men dishing out domestic mental and physical abuse than there are women.

THERE ARE SEVERAL REASONS why men (and children..) are under-represented in a lot of those rubbery and unsupported "statistics" being thrown around, mostly by womens'activist groups ==

* Even though more men are assaulted, and even killed (!), in genuine domestic violence incidents, many of these assaults -- not only by spouses, but also by parents, siblings, children, uncles or aunties, cousins -- are being listed as general/criminal assaults, and not 'domestic violence'';

* As there are just as many -- and most probably more -- children as women being threatened/assaulted/killed in 'domestic violence' incidents, women cannot be the majority group -- even if all male victims are excluded from the statistics, women will still comprise less than half the victims !

* Then are those men who simply won't report violence against them - whether by wives, girlfriends, boyfriends, children, parents, other family members - whether through shame, embarrassment, family "pride"..

BECAUSE violence against women and children by a significant minority of psychotic and psychopathic men is inherently worse in its results in total, campaigns being run to reduce and prevent violence against women, often seem to present women as the #1 group of victims -- when in truth, they are actually in 2nd or 3rd place..
MUCH THE SAME way that Breast Cancer campaigns have often left many people with the false impression that it must be the #1 and worst cancer (when in fact it's usually #4 or #5 in most Western countries..), so many of the Domestic Violence campaigns are invariably pushing the false idea that the great majority of victims are women -- when the true statistics simplydon't support that notion...

THIS ISN'T, THOUGH meant to in any way reduce the severity of violence by men -- as around 75-->>80% of overall offenders are male -- when the bigger picture of ALL domestic violence is looked at in its entirety..
BUT RATHER, to remind everyone that there are more victims out there then just bashed housewives.

Syl wrote:And before some disgruntled male posts that women are as bad as men when it comes to violence in the home....flicking through various sites re domestic violence I have seen different statistics in different parts of England and Wales recording that 92% of victims are women being abused by men.....and other statistics show 40% of men compared to 60% of women suffer.

So taking both extremes into the equation  it's very obvious that there are far more men dishing out domestic mental and physical abuse than there are women.

THERE ARE SEVERAL REASONS why men (and children..) are under-represented in a lot of those rubbery and unsupported "statistics" being thrown around, mostly by womens'activist groups ==

*  Even though more men are assaulted, and even killed (!), in genuine domestic violence incidents, many of these assaults -- not only by spouses, but also by parents,  siblings, children, uncles or aunties, cousins --  are being listed as general/criminal assaults, and not 'domestic violence'';

*  As there are just as many -- and most probably more -- children as women being threatened/assaulted/killed in 'domestic violence' incidents,  women cannot be the majority group -- even if all male victims are excluded from the statistics, women will still comprise less than half the victims !

* Then are those men who simply won't report violence against them - whether by wives, girlfriends, boyfriends, children, parents, other family members - whether through shame, embarrassment, family "pride"..

BECAUSE violence against women and children by a significant minority of psychotic and psychopathic men is inherently worse in its results in total, campaigns being run to reduce and prevent violence against women, often seem to present women as the #1 group of victims -- when in truth, they are actually in 2nd or 3rd place..
MUCH THE SAME way that Breast Cancer campaigns have often left many people with the false  impression that it must be the #1 and worst cancer (when in fact it's usually #4 or #5 in most Western countries..), so many of the Domestic Violence campaigns are invariably pushing the false idea that the great majority of victims are women -- when the true statistics simply don't support that notion...

THIS ISN'T, THOUGH meant to in any way reduce the severity of violence by men -- as around 75-->>80%  of overall offenders are male -- when the bigger picture of ALL domestic violence is looked at in its entirety..

BUT RATHER, to remind everyone that there are more victims out there then just bashed housewives.

I think men are likey the biggest culprits in direct violence and control through threats of violenece that women

but women are by far the worst when it comes to true psychological abuse

and ONE statistic that never makes it to the record, is the number of men who commit suicide because of that psychological abuse.....

Some women are far worse then men, when it comes to bullying and intimidation, not to mention threats of not letting the man see his children.

I think women can be very nasty.

dont i know it

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

Syl wrote:And before some disgruntled male posts that women are as bad as men when it comes to violence in the home....flicking through various sites re domestic violence I have seen different statistics in different parts of England and Wales recording that 92% of victims are women being abused by men.....and other statistics show 40% of men compared to 60% of women suffer.

So taking both extremes into the equation  it's very obvious that there are far more men dishing out domestic mental and physical abuse than there are women.

THERE ARE SEVERAL REASONS why men (and children..) are under-represented in a lot of those rubbery and unsupported "statistics" being thrown around, mostly by womens'activist groups ==

*  Even though more men are assaulted, and even killed (!), in genuine domestic violence incidents, many of these assaults -- not only by spouses, but also by parents,  siblings, children, uncles or aunties, cousins --  are being listed as general/criminal assaults, and not 'domestic violence'';

*  As there are just as many -- and most probably more -- children as women being threatened/assaulted/killed in 'domestic violence' incidents,  women cannot be the majority group -- even if all male victims are excluded from the statistics, women will still comprise less than half the victims !

* Then are those men who simply won't report violence against them - whether by wives, girlfriends, boyfriends, children, parents, other family members - whether through shame, embarrassment, family "pride"..

BECAUSE violence against women and children by a significant minority of psychotic and psychopathic men is inherently worse in its results in total, campaigns being run to reduce and prevent violence against women, often seem to present women as the #1 group of victims -- when in truth, they are actually in 2nd or 3rd place..
MUCH THE SAME way that Breast Cancer campaigns have often left many people with the false  impression that it must be the #1 and worst cancer (when in fact it's usually #4 or #5 in most Western countries..), so many of the Domestic Violence campaigns are invariably pushing the false idea that the great majority of victims are women -- when the true statistics simply  don't support that notion...

THIS ISN'T, THOUGH meant to in any way reduce the severity of violence by men -- as around 75-->>80%  of overall offenders are male -- when the bigger picture of ALL domestic violence is looked at in its entirety..

BUT RATHER, to remind everyone that there are more victims out there then just bashed housewives.

Yes I heard you the first time.

I would dispute your statement that more men are injured even killed in genuine domestic violence incidents...links please. Everything I have read states the complete opposite.
In England and Wales two women are killed every week by a current of former partner.

http://www.refuge.org.uk/get-help-now/what-is-domestic-violence/domestic-violence-the-facts/

I agree that some men wont report domestic violence against them through reasons of embarrassment or pride, but many women don't report either....through fear and shame.
I believe statistics show that on average a battered woman will receive 13 serious physical assaults before she reports the abuser.

Your last sentence, I think everyone realises that 'bashed housewives' are not the only victims.

The new law which has been acted on today has seen the first man in the UK to be jailed for 'coercive control' which is nothing to de without bashing....wives OR husbands.

eddie wrote:Some women are far worse then men, when it comes to bullying and intimidation, not to mention threats of not letting the man see his children.

I think women can be very nasty.

I don't know why threads like this always turn into men v women and who is the nastiest....I blame Quill for misinterpreting what I said earlier on.

Syl wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

"To a lesser extent???"  You don't hope the law will help all people, in the same degree and manner?  What kind of bigotry is that?

I think when we start pursuing selfish interests is when we go the way of the RW...deception, deception, deception.

Read what I said again Quill.

I was talking about women being given the confidence to report these crimes....less men suffer domestic violence of this sort....hence my comment.
Obviously once reported the crimes should be treated equally no matter who reported them.

Less men report domestic violence.  Let's be more precise.



It's sugar-and-spice vs. snakes and snails.  Men are taught at an early age not to be a cry-baby.  They are taught that they are the 'tougher' gender and they are sissies if the can't take it.  They are told to 'keep quiet' about their wounds and forget about it.  

On the other hand, women are told constantly that they are the delicate ones, and that you run to mommy or daddy when anyone challenges you.  Grow into adulthood, and you have this social phenomenon, reflecting the same patterns.  It's a status crime as well as a physical assault.

True, boys are told to settle their grievances with their fists, and keep it private.  But, physical violence is also a natural extension of nagging, which is the art of women.  It is the expectation of women that they can (and are entitled to) change their man.  They whittle away with constant chatter, which in the past used to be verbal.  In today's world, with the availability of drugs (particularly cocaine and meth) and the expansion of women abusing alcohol, domestic violence has become an equal opportunity visitor.

But, like you Syl, most of the public still follows the thinking of snakes and snails vs. sugar and spice...only women can be victims.  Have you ever heard of a domestic shelter for men?  

And the criminal justice system is just as bad.  It costs twice as much to incarcerate a woman as it does a man; consequently, the one the police haul away after responding to a domestic dispute, as a matter of policy, is the man.  

Thence, who gets the record?  The male, of course.  Then those records go into making up the statistics about how it is overwhelmingly men who abuse women.  Ever seen any records that don't involve arrests?  Ever seen records on pre-arrest domestic violence?  No...because there aren't any.  Men are taught to keep it private.  Snakes and snails vs. sugar and spice.

No matter how much we think we have improved our thinking about social trends, so often we are still in the middle ages: sugar and spice vs. snakes and snails.

Well you can say sugar and spice vs snakes and snails as many times as you like Quill but I dispute most of what you say.

And we can all post pics of badly beaten up men, women and children....but there is no need really, I think we al know what physical abuse looks like.

The new law can jail someone for up to five years....no cuts, bruises, broken bones or God forbid corpses needed.

Syl wrote:Well you can say  sugar and spice vs snakes and snails as many times as you like Quill but I dispute most of what you say.

And we can all post pics of badly beaten up men, women and children....but there is no need really, I think we al know what physical abuse looks like.

The new law can jail someone for up to five years....no cuts, bruises, broken bones or God forbid corpses needed.

Of course you dispute it. It's inconvenient, but true.

Original Quill wrote:

Syl wrote:Well you can say  sugar and spice vs snakes and snails as many times as you like Quill but I dispute most of what you say.

And we can all post pics of badly beaten up men, women and children....but there is no need really, I think we al know what physical abuse looks like.

The new law can jail someone for up to five years....no cuts, bruises, broken bones or God forbid corpses needed.

Of course you dispute it.  It's inconvenient, but true.

I have never been involved in any domestic violence, my son has been in the past...so if I was going to post for convenience instead of actual FACT I would likely say the opposite.

Syl wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Of course you dispute it.  It's inconvenient, but true.

I have never been involved in any domestic violence, my son has been in the past...so if I was going to post for convenience instead of actual FACT I would likely say the opposite.

Well, I do think you are honest.  Hence, you are not falsifying facts, as others might.  Plus, how could you...the facts in this area are all skewed, because they come from arrest records.

But I do think you are responding to your own sympathies.  It's understandable...nothing can be more inconvenient than--amid the fight for women's rights in employment, pay and politics--to have the bastion of women victimness attacked.  By god, women are the weaker sex and they'll kick the shit out of anyone who denies it!  



Kidding, of course.  But we have been fighting for women's rights for 50-years, and on this issue we not only confront contrary evidence on the issue, but a trend that apparently goes regressively rightward.  But that's what happens when you take on an issue so huge as gender.  You're talking about 50% of the population.  It's not really a fight for rights as it is a social role adjustment.

Original Quill wrote:

Syl wrote:

I have never been involved in any domestic violence, my son has been in the past...so if I was going to post for convenience instead of actual FACT I would likely say the opposite.

Well, I do think you are honest.  Hence, you are not falsifying facts, as others might.  Plus, how could you...the facts in this area are all skewed, because they come from arrest records.

But I do think you are responding to your own sympathies.  It's understandable...nothing can be more inconvenient than--amid the fight for women's rights in employment, pay and politics--to have the bastion of women victimness attacked.  By god, women are the weaker sex and they'll kick the shit out of anyone who denies it!  



Kidding, of course.  But we have been fighting for women's rights for 35-years, and on this issue we not only confront contrary evidence on the issue, but a trend that apparently goes rightward.  But that's what happens when you take on an issue so huge as gender.  You're talking about 50% of the population.  It's not really a fight for rights as it is a social role adjustment.

I didn't really want this to be a male v female kind of debate though Quill. It became one mainly when I corrected your interpretation of what I had said earlier on in the thread.
The new law will surely see BOTH sexes get justice without having to be beaten to a pulp in order to see their abusive partner punished.

Now whether the majority of men would find it difficult to admit they have been in a controlling without violence relationship is yet be seen...but we can argue also that many women will keep quiet through guilt, fear, shame, embarrassment etc....in fact all the same reasons that men do.

Syl wrote:I didn't really want this to be a male v female kind of debate though Quill. It became one mainly when I corrected your interpretation of what I had said earlier on in the thread.

I wasn’t responding to your correction.  My own thoughts on this issue are de novo, and derived from long experience with the law, and what has been made known to me by authorities.  

Syl wrote:The new law will surely see BOTH sexes get justice without having to be beaten to a pulp in order to see their abusive partner punished.

And how will they get equal justice when the police are not recording the records fully and properly?  It’s natural for the authorities to jail the male; and with the arrest, there is the statistic.  A statistic that doesn’t include the number, and more importantly, the extent, of the woman’s involvement.  So, once again, we are left with a skewed picture, and the impression that this is snakes and snails attacking sugar and spice.

Syl wrote:Now whether the majority of men would find it difficult to admit they have been in a controlling without violence relationship is yet be seen...but we can argue also that many women will keep quiet through guilt, fear, shame, embarrassment etc....in fact all the same reasons that men do.

I think we are dealing with more visceral levels than that.  We are dealing here with centuries-old myths about gender roles.  “Guilt, fear, shame, embarrassment” are the language of modern psychology.  I daresay that snakes and snails and sugar and spice were symbols long before it was published in Robert Southey’s (1774–1843) manuscript.  We are dealing with attitudes that are millennia old.  That’s why your position ends up on the conservative side of this issue.

The issue is so fundamental that society is self-selecting it's own conclusion: we arrest males; we count males; and we come up with the conclusion that males are the issue. It's as if the female wasn't even involved. Hey, she was out-of-town that weekend!

Syl wrote:
Yes I heard you the first time.

I DIDN'T post twice deliberately !

IT was a shonky Internet connection wot done that !          

Syl wrote:
................
I would dispute your statement that more men are injured even killed in genuine domestic violence incidents...links please. Everything I have read states the complete opposite.
In England and Wales two women are killed every week by a current of former partner.

http://www.refuge.org.uk/get-help-now/what-is-domestic-violence/domestic-violence-the-facts/

I agree that some men wont report domestic violence against them through reasons of embarrassment or pride, but many women don't report either....through fear and shame.
I believe statistics show that on average a battered woman will receive 13 serious physical assaults before she reports the abuser.

Your last sentence, I think everyone realises that 'bashed housewives' are not the only victims.

The new law which has been acted on today has seen the first man in the UK to be jailed for 'coercive control' which is nothing to de without bashing....wives OR husbands.

I DISPUTE  your disputation...

You are still concentrating on husbands and wives  --  discounting other family members :  children (who have always outnumbered the total number of adult women..), daughters, grandmothers and aunties, and men other than  husbands and boyfriends  --  sons, fathers, grandfathers, uncles, cousins, boyfriends..

AND surprise, surprise  --  your reference is to a womens refuge organisation -- one of the very groups routinely 'cherry picking' data to fit their statistically skewed claims.

DOWN HERE,  when all relevant statistics  :  police arrests, court appearances, refuge and help service figures, ambulance callouts and hospital admissions  --  are taken into account, and adjusted for the wider genuine definition of true "domestic violence" incidents  --  it has been found that for every two women as victims assaulted in domestic violence incidents, there will equally be 3 children, and 4 men (i.e. those over 16..), when all those incidents nationwide are added up and averaged over a year !

I SEE no good reason to believe that the corresponding % figures for either Britain or the USA will be significantly or greatly different to these proportions here in Oz..        

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

Syl wrote:
Yes I heard you the first time.

I DIDN'T post twice deliberately !

IT was a shonky Internet connection wot done that !          

Syl wrote:
................
I would dispute your statement that more men are injured even killed in genuine domestic violence incidents...links please. Everything I have read states the complete opposite.
In England and Wales two women are killed every week by a current of former partner.

http://www.refuge.org.uk/get-help-now/what-is-domestic-violence/domestic-violence-the-facts/

I agree that some men wont report domestic violence against them through reasons of embarrassment or pride, but many women don't report either....through fear and shame.
I believe statistics show that on average a battered woman will receive 13 serious physical assaults before she reports the abuser.

Your last sentence, I think everyone realises that 'bashed housewives' are not the only victims.

The new law which has been acted on today has seen the first man in the UK to be jailed for 'coercive control' which is nothing to de without bashing....wives OR husbands.

I DISPUTE  your disputation...

You are still concentrating on husbands and wives  --  discounting other family members :  children (who have always outnumbered the total number of adult women..), daughters, grandmothers and aunties, and men other than  husbands and boyfriends  --  sons, fathers, grandfathers, uncles, cousins, boyfriends..

AND surprise, surprise  --  your reference is to a womens refuge organisation -- one of the very groups routinely 'cherry picking' data to fit their statistically skewed claims.

DOWN HERE,  when all relevant statistics  :  police arrests, court appearances, refuge and help service figures, ambulance callouts and hospital admissions  --  are taken into account, and adjusted for the wider genuine definition of true "domestic violence" incidents  --  it has been found that for every two women as victims assaulted in domestic violence incidents, there will equally be 3 children, and 4 men (i.e. those over 16..), when all those incidents nationwide are added up and averaged over a year !

I SEE no good reason to believe that the corresponding % figures for either Britain or the USA will be significantly or greatly different to these proportions here in Oz..        

By your reasoning men are twice as likely as women to be domestic violence victims... Could you provide a reference for your statistics?

I also asked for links...none as yet provided.

Google and other search engines have lots of statistics from various sources.
I have not seen ONE that comes anywhere near figures that show males are more likely to suffer from domestic violence.
I have provided a couple of links...obviously they are not satisfactory for people who don't like facts.
I would be happy to see others.

Lex wrote:By your reasoning men are twice as likely as women to be domestic violence victims... Could you provide a reference for your statistics?

Precisely the problem, Lex. How can you provide precise statistics when no one is collecting the data. Occasionally, when hospitals treat a battered male they will call the authorities. Only then is it reported.

And as likely as not, the authorities do not wish to be bothered with third-party reports. He's a man...wassa matter, is he some sort of pussy who can't take it? Cops are just like most...less work makes life easier.

Syl says it best:

Syl wrote:Google and other search engines have lots of statistics from various sources.
I have not seen ONE that comes anywhere near figures that show males are more likely to suffer from domestic violence.

Your lucky to see one that even reflects men. Every survey is intent on confirming the Mother Goose tales about gender roles. Yet we feel no hesitancy, notwithstanding the obvious invalidity of the data.

Use any search engine for info about domestic abuse against men and you will find many.
The first one I came to...

http://www.nhs.uk/Livewell/abuse/Pages/domestic-violence-against-men.aspx

There are also several phone numbers included in that link for men to ring to get help and advice which covers different types of abuse.

You are insisting that reports re abuse against men are not taken seriously....I am saying they are, but still all the evidence proves that many more women are abused by men than vice versa.

You are saying men don't report abuse, many women don't either,  obviously if they don't report it  they cant be included  in the statistics.

Original Quill wrote:

Lex wrote:By your reasoning men are twice as likely as women to be domestic violence victims... Could you provide a reference for your statistics?

Precisely the problem, Lex. How can you provide precise statistics when no one is collecting the data. Occasionally, when hospitals treat a battered male they will call the authorities. Only then is it reported.

And as likely as not, the authorities do not wish to be bothered with third-party reports. He's a man...wassa matter, is he some sort of pussy who can't take it? Cops are just like most...less work makes life easier.

Syl says it best:

Syl wrote:Google and other search engines have lots of statistics from various sources.
I have not seen ONE that comes anywhere near figures that show males are more likely to suffer from domestic violence.

Your lucky to see one that even reflects men. Every survey is intent on confirming the Mother Goose tales about gender roles. Yet we feel no hesitancy, notwithstanding the obvious invalidity of the data.

Wolfie stated "it's been found" that for every two women subjected to domestic violence there'll be four men victims. I'm simply asking him to link to the source from which he quotes his statistics.

Syl wrote:You are saying men don't report abuse,

Yes, and so much more.

Authorities systematically arrest males over females in domestic dispute cases, because it costs half as much to house males in jails.  Thence, males are much more heavily represented in the statistics gathered.

Hospitals may or may not report male domestic abuse cases.  Very often they are responding to the men, who request not to be reported (even tho that's mostly illegal).

Police who respond are like those who respond to the under-aged boys who are molested by female school teachers:  Hey, boy...gettin' a little nookie at a young age, eh?  It's a joke to them.  In the case of battered men, the guy looks a mess but what kind of sissy complains? It's unmanly.

If we would treat this like every other crime, it would be much better.  But we--everybody from the cops to the victims--try to live out the fairy tales surrounding the issue: girls are supposed to be sugar and spice and everything nice; men are supposed to be snakes and snails and puppy dog tails.  Males as victims are routinely discounted in this society.

It's an ironic twist on the same sexism that we see in inequitable pay scales and professional promotions.  There, men are favored because of the fairy tale that men are better producers and stronger pushers.  

Well, similarly in domestic cases, men are disfavored to be victims.  That's a female's role.

I'm happy to report that I don't live in the kind of world you do Quill.

I do agree about the pay scale...but that's a different topic.

Re the way you see men being victimised by the police if they do report abuse...
I mentioned my son was in a bad relationship once...she had anger issues and would lash out. One day she lost her temper...worked herself up and it was she who called the police. My son called us and told us what had happened, we went round...he was covered in welts and scratches, not a mark on her.
Police came...talked to both, and asked my son if he wished to press charges...he didn't, for no other reason than he could shrug it off, end the relationship and move on.

Just as many do...including women.

Just to add...I am not unsympathetic to any man who is being abused either mentally or physically....they deserve the same sort of care and help an abused woman does.

I just don't agree with Quill and Wolfies assumptions that concerning domestic violence more men get abused than women, and when they do there is little help for them.

Syl wrote:I'm happy to report that I don't live in the kind of world you do Quill.

I do agree about the pay scale...but that's a different topic.

Hahaha...you just contradicted yourself in two sentences. You don't live in a sexist world, but, um, on second thought...you do live in a sexist world. You're playing the duplicity game that everyone wants to play when it comes to discrimination: hang on to the old world when it favors you; otherwise, join the revolution and raise hell. It's all about whose ox is gored.

Syl wrote:Re the way you see men being victimised by the police if they do report abuse...
I mentioned my son was in a bad relationship once...she had anger issues and would lash out. One day she lost her temper...worked herself up and it was she who called the police. My son called us and told us what had happened, we went round...he was covered in welts and scratches, not a mark on her.
Police came...talked to both, and asked my son if he wished to press charges...he didn't, for no other reason than he could shrug it off, end the relationship and move on.

Yes, many policemen are being educated to the problem.

As a former Asst. Attorney General I was a part of that movement. A part of my work was to go around the state to visit police forces, prison guards and DPS departments, etc., and give day-long lectures on how gender discrimination intersects their everyday work. Because gender is involved, somehow, in so many crimes, a substantial part of my work was enlightening them as to how to cast off old wives tales as they applied the law.

Police are today much more ready to arrest women, if they have concrete evidence (such as bruises, cuts and such--but keep in mind, the female body bruises much more easily, due to the substantially greater layer of subcutaneous fat, so even that is misleading).

But even if we can educate police, we have the same problem with juries. Unless there is physical evidence to back it up, juries are much more willing to view females--especially caucasian females--as victims. Once again, it's the general gender bias, sometimes working for us, sometimes against us.*

*By contrast, it's much harder to convince a jury that a female was discriminated in her workplace. So many jurors think the woman should be home in the kitchen, anyway.

@lex wrote:

.......................

... by your reasoning men are twice as likely as women to be domestic violence victims... Could you provide a reference for your statistics?

ARE YOU illiterate ?

OR just plain stupid...

IF you had read all that I had written above you would also have noticed that I that I said that the majority of offenders were also males -- I even highlighted that part..

Nothing to do with my reasoning...
And everything to do with actually looking at the facts..
Apparently something you are incapable of doing for yourself ?

SO, tell us then -- why you don't consider the following "domestic violence/abuse/harm/neglect" :

Father bashing children,
Mother bashing children,
Parents severely emotionally/psychologically abusing children,
Children bashing parents, abusing/neglecting elderly parents and/or grandparents,
Separated/excluded fathers committing suicide;
Siblings seriously bashing/abusing other children,
Parents or siblings torturing animals/killing in front of young children;
Children being attacked by uncles, aunties, cousins, grandparents,
Abuse/assaults by gay partners..
And the list goes on...

OR IS IT, simply that your world is so small, and your experience so limited, that you are only prepared to accept husbands and wives bashing the crap out of one anothet as genuine "domestic violence"..

OR MAYBE your one of those denialists who keeps on claiming that all of those above classes are eithet not "domestic violence", or that the claims are "myths" -- so that you can keep on pushing the deliberate mistruth that women make up "60%" of the victims ?

IN WHICH CASE, that approach suggests that the "domestic violence" problem is only around half of what the total real world figures will show -- a misguided approach that helps no-one by downplaying the seriousness of the issue -- but only helps to empower that little coterie of women who actually organise the more militant man-hating kind of activist groups..


AND, as I've also mentioned -- the stat's I use are taken from police, ambulance, hospitals, and courts ''official" figures -- as well as various victims groups -- in my part of the world...

Original Quill wrote:

Syl wrote:I'm happy to report that I don't live in the kind of world you do Quill.

I do agree about the pay scale...but that's a different topic.

Hahaha...you just contradicted yourself in two sentences.     You don't live in a sexist world, but, um, on second thought...you do live in a sexist world.  You're playing the duplicity game that everyone wants to play when it comes to discrimination: hang on to the old world when it favors you; otherwise, join the revolution and raise hell.    It's all about whose ox is gored.

Syl wrote:Re the way you see men being victimised by the police if they do report abuse...
I mentioned my son was in a bad relationship once...she had anger issues and would lash out. One day she lost her temper...worked herself up and it was she who called the police. My son called us and told us what had happened, we went round...he was covered in welts and scratches, not a mark on her.
Police came...talked to both, and asked my son if he wished to press charges...he didn't, for no other reason than he could shrug it off, end the relationship and move on.

Yes, many policemen are being educated to the problem.  

As a former Asst. Attorney General I was a part of that movement.  A part of my work was to go around the state to visit police forces, prison guards and DPS departments, etc.,  and give day-long lectures on how gender discrimination intersects their everyday work.  Because gender is involved, somehow, in so many crimes, a substantial part of my work was enlightening them as to how to cast off old wives tales as they applied the law.

Police are today much more ready to arrest women, if they have concrete evidence (such as bruises, cuts and such--but keep in mind, the female body bruises much more easily, due to the substantially greater layer of subcutaneous fat, so even that is misleading).

But even if we can educate police, we have the same problem with juries.  Unless there is physical evidence to back it up, juries are much more willing to view females--especially caucasian females--as victims.  Once again, it's the general gender bias, sometimes working for us, sometimes against us.*

*By contrast, it's much harder to convince a jury that a female was discriminated in her workplace.  So many jurors think the woman should be home in the kitchen, anyway.

I have never said we don't live in a sexist world.
When it comes to wages, careers, promotions, even  low wage jobs....often sexism comes into play....like I said that's a different subject and not the one we are discussing here.

To the other points...The new law that has now passed here needs NO physical evidence, thats the big difference, mental abuse and the FEAR of being physically harmed is enough to send the abuser down for up to 5 years.

I cant agree about juries thinking a woman should be home in the kitchen....which decade are you talking about? If that's how the American public view women I think the differences between your country and mine are a lot more divided than Ben thinks in his other thread.

Syl wrote:I also asked for links...none as yet provided.

Google and other search engines have lots of statistics from various sources.
I have not seen ONE that comes anywhere near figures that show males are more likely to suffer from domestic violence.
I have provided a couple of links...obviously they are not satisfactory for people who don't like facts.
I would be happy to see others.

YOU'RE an idiot...
And a liar..     And lazy to boot.

Your only references so far are from militant womens groups..

Surprise, surprise -- you pick groups that support your own narrow and bigotted agendas..


http://www.theguardian.com/society/2010/sep/05/men-victims-domestic-violence7  

http://www.oneinthree.com.au/malevictims/

http://www.hiddenhurt.co.uk/male_victims_of_domestic_violence.html

http://www.smh.com.au/comment/the-hermit/qa-domestic-violence-program-ignored-male-victims-20150224-13o5l0.html

http://divorcesupport.about.com/od/abusiverelationships/a/male_abuse.htm

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_violence_against_men

http://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/adult-health/in-depth/domestic-violence-against-men/art-20045149

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/male-victims-of-domestic-violence-police-facebook-post-stirs-debate-on-controversial-issue/news-story/e30ea75f29797e961164188d6cd51cf1

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/male-domestic-violence-victim-i-never-imagined-something-like-this-would-happen-to-me-10105586.html

http://www.mintpressnews.com/woman-aggressor-unspoken-truth-domestic-violence/196746/

I'm not sure about this. The divorce laws already deal with "unreasonable behaviour", and threats of violence are already against the law.

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

Syl wrote:I also asked for links...none as yet provided.

Google and other search engines have lots of statistics from various sources.
I have not seen ONE that comes anywhere near figures that show males are more likely to suffer from domestic violence.
I have provided a couple of links...obviously they are not satisfactory for people who don't like facts.
I would be happy to see others.

YOU'RE an idiot...
And a liar..     And lazy to boot.

Your only references so far are from militant womens groups..

Surprise, surprise -- you pick groups that support your own narrow and bigotted agendas..


http://www.theguardian.com/society/2010/sep/05/men-victims-domestic-violence7  

http://www.oneinthree.com.au/malevictims/

http://www.hiddenhurt.co.uk/male_victims_of_domestic_violence.html

http://www.smh.com.au/comment/the-hermit/qa-domestic-violence-program-ignored-male-victims-20150224-13o5l0.html

http://divorcesupport.about.com/od/abusiverelationships/a/male_abuse.htm

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_violence_against_men

http://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/adult-health/in-depth/domestic-violence-against-men/art-20045149

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/male-victims-of-domestic-violence-police-facebook-post-stirs-debate-on-controversial-issue/news-story/e30ea75f29797e961164188d6cd51cf1

I read your first sentence and decided to ignore the rest.
People can have opposing views without resorting to the childish name calling, .... so put simply I cant be arsed reading whatever you have to say on this thread.

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

Syl wrote:I also asked for links...none as yet provided.

Google and other search engines have lots of statistics from various sources.
I have not seen ONE that comes anywhere near figures that show males are more likely to suffer from domestic violence.
I have provided a couple of links...obviously they are not satisfactory for people who don't like facts.
I would be happy to see others.

YOU'RE an idiot...
And a liar..     And lazy to boot.

Your only references so far are from militant womens groups..

Surprise, surprise -- you pick groups that support your own narrow and bigotted agendas..


http://www.theguardian.com/society/2010/sep/05/men-victims-domestic-violence7  

http://www.oneinthree.com.au/malevictims/

http://www.hiddenhurt.co.uk/male_victims_of_domestic_violence.html

http://www.smh.com.au/comment/the-hermit/qa-domestic-violence-program-ignored-male-victims-20150224-13o5l0.html

http://divorcesupport.about.com/od/abusiverelationships/a/male_abuse.htm

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_violence_against_men

http://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/adult-health/in-depth/domestic-violence-against-men/art-20045149

"One in Three" seem to be an anti-feminist group with an agenda to
a) deny any gender asymmetry exists in domestic violence and
b) Portray anyone who points out women may well be victims of DV in greater numbers as being sexist against men.

I'm not sure they are reliable.

LAST WEEK "Syl" exposed herself as the obnoxious racist bigot she is..

WITH Her stupidly ignorant and deliberately closeminded and obtuse attacks against men on here, she now shows us that she is as big a sexist fool, as she is a racist and fascist twat..

@lex wrote:

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:


YOU'RE an idiot...
And a liar..     And lazy to boot.

Your only references so far are from militant womens groups..

Surprise, surprise -- you pick groups that support your own narrow and bigotted agendas..


http://www.theguardian.com/society/2010/sep/05/men-victims-domestic-violence7  

http://www.oneinthree.com.au/malevictims/

http://www.hiddenhurt.co.uk/male_victims_of_domestic_violence.html

http://www.smh.com.au/comment/the-hermit/qa-domestic-violence-program-ignored-male-victims-20150224-13o5l0.html

http://divorcesupport.about.com/od/abusiverelationships/a/male_abuse.htm

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_violence_against_men

http://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/adult-health/in-depth/domestic-violence-against-men/art-20045149

"One in Three" seem to be an anti-feminist group with an agenda to
a) deny any gender asymmetry exists in domestic violence and
b) Portray anyone who points out women may well be victims of DV in greater numbers as being sexist against men.

I'm not sure they are reliable.

THERE ARE groups on both sides of the discussion that look as if they are equally unreliable.

THAT'S WHY I've kept looking for more..

Syl wrote:....like I said that's a different subject and not the one we are discussing here.

Denial is a river in East Africa.  You admit that sexism exists, but you have no idea where it comes from???

It comes from attitudes and and beliefs.  Beliefs in gender roles create expectations, some of which have consequences in the real world.  For example, belief that a woman is good for only two things: cooking and pregnancy, which means that she is not as good as an employee, and should be paid 70% of what a man earns.

Belief that males are always the rough, tumble, masters of the world means that they cannot be hurt, but they should be left in charge of the world.

Belief that males are the masters of the world means that they couldn't be victims.

If males can't be victims, they can't be counted as abused in domestic violence situations.  But that's all right.  You keep believing in those falsified statistics and I'll keep voting against equal pay measures for women.  It's two sides of the same coin.  We'll both be happy and content that we are right.

SYL'S idiotic attacks on here today only go to prove one thing...


"She can't stand the truth !"

Original Quill wrote:

Syl wrote:....like I said that's a different subject and not the one we are discussing here.

Denial is a river in East Africa.  You admit that sexism exists, but you have no idea where it comes from???

It comes from attitudes and and beliefs.  Beliefs in gender roles create expectations, some of which have consequences in the real world.  For example, belief that a woman is good for only two things: cooking and pregnancy, which means that she is not as good as an employee, and should be paid 70% of what a man earns.

Belief that males are always the rough, tumble, masters of the world means that they cannot be hurt, but they should be left in charge of the world.

Belief that males are the masters of the world means that they couldn't be victims.

If males can't be victims, they can't be counted as abused in domestic violence situations.  But that's all right.  You keep believing in those falsified statistics and I'll keep voting against equal pay measures for women.  It's two sides of the same coin.  We'll both be happy and content that we are right.

Idon't think Syl has said anything like men can't be victims of domestic violence Quill.

Original Quill wrote:

Syl wrote:....like I said that's a different subject and not the one we are discussing here.

Denial is a river in East Africa.  You admit that sexism exists, but you have no idea where it comes from???

It comes from attitudes and and beliefs.  Beliefs in gender roles create expectations, some of which have consequences in the real world.  For example, belief that a woman is good for only two things: cooking and pregnancy, which means that she is not as good as an employee, and should be paid 70% of what a man earns.

Belief that males are always the rough, tumble, masters of the world means that they cannot be hurt, but they should be left in charge of the world.

Belief that males are the masters of the world means that they couldn't be victims.

If males can't be victims, they can't be counted as abused in domestic violence situations.  But that's all right.  You keep believing in those falsified statistics and I'll keep voting against equal pay measures for women.  It's two sides of the same coin.  We'll both be happy and content that we are right.

Shall we stick to the topic Quill.....sexism in the work place and old fashioned beliefs that women are only good for two things are mere distractions you seem to want to introduce to prop up your argument.

Are you actually reading what I am writing?

I don't dispute that men can be victims of domestic abuse, I am disputing your stance that there is no help for them they are disbelieved, they don't report it and if they do there are no records to show because REAL MEN should put up and shut up.

@lex wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Denial is a river in East Africa.  You admit that sexism exists, but you have no idea where it comes from???

It comes from attitudes and and beliefs.  Beliefs in gender roles create expectations, some of which have consequences in the real world.  For example, belief that a woman is good for only two things: cooking and pregnancy, which means that she is not as good as an employee, and should be paid 70% of what a man earns.

Belief that males are always the rough, tumble, masters of the world means that they cannot be hurt, but they should be left in charge of the world.

Belief that males are the masters of the world means that they couldn't be victims.

If males can't be victims, they can't be counted as abused in domestic violence situations.  But that's all right.  You keep believing in those falsified statistics and I'll keep voting against equal pay measures for women.  It's two sides of the same coin.  We'll both be happy and content that we are right.

Idon't think Syl has said anything like men can't be victims of domestic violence Quill.

No I haven't @lex, thanks for actually reading what I have posted.

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

@lex wrote:

"One in Three" seem to be an anti-feminist group with an agenda to
a) deny any gender asymmetry exists in domestic violence and
b) Portray anyone who points out women may well be victims of DV in greater numbers as being sexist against men.

I'm not sure they are reliable.

THERE ARE groups on both sides of the discussion that look as if they are equally unreliable.

THAT'S WHY I've kept looking for more..

You stated 4 men are domestic violence victims for every 2 women... How so?

@lex wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Denial is a river in East Africa.  You admit that sexism exists, but you have no idea where it comes from???

It comes from attitudes and and beliefs.  Beliefs in gender roles create expectations, some of which have consequences in the real world.  For example, belief that a woman is good for only two things: cooking and pregnancy, which means that she is not as good as an employee, and should be paid 70% of what a man earns.

Belief that males are always the rough, tumble, masters of the world means that they cannot be hurt, but they should be left in charge of the world.

Belief that males are the masters of the world means that they couldn't be victims.

If males can't be victims, they can't be counted as abused in domestic violence situations.  But that's all right.  You keep believing in those falsified statistics and I'll keep voting against equal pay measures for women.  It's two sides of the same coin.  We'll both be happy and content that we are right.

Idon't think Syl has said anything like men can't be victims of domestic violence Quill.

You haven't been paying attention. What we are talking about is the statistical array, not the individual case. We both agree that men can "be victims of domestic violence." But they are not counted.

Certain filtration factors take place in the real world, which skew the numbers. That is the subject. By filtration, I mean factors that block men from being counted in statistical summaries--simply put, more women are counted than men.

The greatest filtration factor is sexism as a cultural norm. Sexism determines social roles, and one important social role that men are filtered out of is victim status. It is inconsistent with our modern culture for men to be considered victims.

What you can't see, you don't count. Because we begin with the expectation that men cannot be victims, we force them into roles...and we end up confirming our own myths, but not reality.

One obvious filtration device is known to the inner circle, but not to the general public: when the police confront a domestic violence situation, the practical solution is to separate the combatants. The easiest way to separate the combatants to jail one of them. Because of sexist expectations, it costs half as much to incarcerate a male as a female; ergo: males are arrested in domestic violence situations in much greater proportion than females.

All statistical summaries are based upon arrest records because (1) arrest is the first point at which the situation is controlled; and (2) only in a controlled environment you can record details. So, a simple issue of practical economics, having nothing to do with the subject, ends up creating a huge gender bias in the statistics. No statistics in this area can be relied upon, until and unless we find some pre-arrest criminal organization, willing to tender valid statistics. Arrest is the first, and greatest filtration of statistics in this area.

Other filtration devices include: the expectation that the woman is always the gentler sex; that woman are frail, and would never engage in violence; that women are compliant, and never argue; that women do not drink alcohol and do not take drugs; and, that women are non-violent.

Then there is the huge normative barrier that, even if a woman engages in violence, it is unmanly for the man to blame the woman. This is coupled with a similar normative expectation, that it is shameful to a man that he was injured in a violent confrontation with a woman. It is unmanly to be a victim, even if it is the fault of someone else. This leads to fewer men volunteering information about the confrontation...another filter.

Keep in mind, this whole panoply of values and expectations is shared by the police, authorities, and eventually, by juries. So the whole world is engaged in the bias, owing to sexism.