First man jailed under new domestic abuse law.

by Syl Fri May 20, 2016 1:22 pm

First topic message reminder :

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

by @lex Sat May 21, 2016 8:17 pm

Quill: You claim men are arrested for domestic violence in significantly greater numbers not because they commit domestic violence in significantly greater numbers but because men are cheaper to jail than women.... Where is your evidence?

by Cass Sun May 22, 2016 1:29 am

@lex wrote:Quill: You claim men are arrested for domestic violence in significantly greater numbers not because they commit domestic violence in significantly greater numbers but because men are cheaper to jail than women.... Where is your evidence?

Hey you x

and yes Quill, I too would be interested in evidence of that statement?

by Original Quill Sun May 22, 2016 5:32 am

@lex wrote:Quill: You claim men are arrested for domestic violence in significantly greater numbers not because they commit domestic violence in significantly greater numbers but because men are cheaper to jail than women.... Where is your evidence?

It's consciously set up that way. You just have to look to the practices. Anyone in the court system knows that it costs twice as much to incarcerate females as males. Women have to have more guards, smaller groups and more expensive facilities. Now, anyone on the prosecutor's side knows they pay attention to costs. This results in directives: arrest the male.

All of this is common knowledge. It's when they put two and two together that they see that it means the statistics about domestic violence are skewed. The criminal justice system is full of these surprises.

I'd be interested to know if there are any statistics of domestic violence, pre-arrest. I'd particularly like to know how they gather such data...if they do. Like: knocks on door.

MAN: Hullo, how many times has your husband/boyfriend beaten you this month?

WOMAN: GTF outta here, you pervert! First man jailed under new domestic abuse law. - Page 2 1794926327

First man jailed under new domestic abuse law. - Page 2 1794926327

by @lex Sun May 22, 2016 1:51 pm

Original Quill wrote:
@lex wrote:Quill: You claim men are arrested for domestic violence in significantly greater numbers not because they commit domestic violence in significantly greater numbers but because men are cheaper to jail than women.... Where is your evidence?

It's consciously set up that way. You just have to look to the practices. Anyone in the court system knows that it costs twice as much to incarcerate females as males. Women have to have more guards, smaller groups and more expensive facilities. Now, anyone on the prosecutor's side knows they pay attention to costs. This results in directives: arrest the male.

All of this is common knowledge. It's when they put two and two together that they see that it means the statistics about domestic violence are skewed. The criminal justice system is full of these surprises.

I'd be interested to know if there are any statistics of domestic violence, pre-arrest. I'd particularly like to know how they gather such data...if they do. Like: knocks on door.

MAN: Hullo, how many times has your husband/boyfriend beaten you this month?

WOMAN: GTF outta here, you pervert!

84% of spousal abuse victims and 86% of partner abuse victims are women, according to the US Department of Justice.

by Miffs2 Sun May 22, 2016 2:09 pm

Ah, the old it's so because I said so.
Can't speak to US or Australia but in the UK far more women are victims of domestic abuse than men.
Yes some men are victims and as I think Edd said, this can often be around child contact.
Victims of DV male and female are often loathe to report. Some women will endure upto 35 episodes of violence and 70 of other abuse before reporting. There is more statistical evidence regarding women but now more men report more evidence is becoming available.
Men that report fall into 3 broad categories.
Men who have been subject to prolonged abuse at the hands of a female. Men who have been attacked by their victim when said victim 'snaps' and retaliates. The third group is the really worrying one, men who false report in order to find out what support and advice their victim will be given. This info is then further used against their victim. There are certain procedures and protocols we use when a male reports in order to safeguard against that.
Bear in mind DV is not just between husband and wife or partners, it can be with anyone you have an intimate or familial connection.

by Original Quill Sun May 22, 2016 4:24 pm

@lex wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

It's consciously set up that way. You just have to look to the practices. Anyone in the court system knows that it costs twice as much to incarcerate females as males. Women have to have more guards, smaller groups and more expensive facilities. Now, anyone on the prosecutor's side knows they pay attention to costs. This results in directives: arrest the male.

All of this is common knowledge. It's when they put two and two together that they see that it means the statistics about domestic violence are skewed. The criminal justice system is full of these surprises.

I'd be interested to know if there are any statistics of domestic violence, pre-arrest. I'd particularly like to know how they gather such data...if they do. Like: knocks on door.

MAN: Hullo, how many times has your husband/boyfriend beaten you this month?

WOMAN: GTF outta here, you pervert!

84% of spousal abuse victims and 86% of partner abuse victims are women, according to the US Department of Justice.

So you are going to guarantee that those are pre-arrest statistics? Otherwise, you;'re bullshitting. Why not just admit to the fact that there's a flaw in the data collection in this issue. You might be right; others might be right. All we can say is, we don't know.

What you're really reacting to is that the flaw in the statistical argument puts into question your conclusions. You have to walk back part of your argument, and you don't like that. Well, that's tough. Those of us who have dealt with scientific conclusions being undercut take scientific corrigibility for granted; after all, that's how we found out the earth wasn't flat.

Instead of stomping your foot and banging your head against the wall, go back to work and find a way to gather clean data. Police arrest records are tainted because of simple criminal justice economics: extraneous factors are corrupting the picture. So, the simple answer is to cleanse the data. How do we gather unprejudiced data?

by Original Quill Sun May 22, 2016 4:50 pm

Nems wrote:Ah, the old it's so because I said so.

Nems, it's not me that is ruining your neat little argument. It's the fact that we have no clear data on the issue.

Because prejudicial factors go into arrest records, the studies that are based upon arrests are corrupted. I could die tomorrow and you'd still have this problem.

You are an insider in this business. Does a professional carpenter work with imperfect tools? Instead of beating your head against the wall, why don't you go to work to find a source of uninfected data?

by Guest Sun May 22, 2016 5:06 pm

@lex wrote:Quill: You claim men are arrested for domestic violence in significantly greater numbers not because they commit domestic violence in significantly greater numbers but because men are cheaper to jail than women.... Where is your evidence?

If we've nothing but our acquired knowledge ...given that Quill has worked in the legal field and 'I' as well as many of us have not, do we allow him some latitude for statements that have no link/proof and just his 'common knowledge?' First man jailed under new domestic abuse law. - Page 2 2190311264

First man jailed under new domestic abuse law. - Page 2 2190311264

Original Quill Stated > 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.

Or do we sit those POV's aside and stay debating the issue at hand and only 'nit-pick' the actual links and data that we have at our disposal?
For instance; I know in this rural area of America ...the gender most often to respond to any crime/domestic violence will be a ♂ law enforcement officer and since our small rural community detention centers are not equipped with ♀ jailors the ♂ in the domestic abuse responded call 'WILL' be the one most likely to be hauled in for the evening/day. That's just the way it is out here; there's no polite way to allow a ♂ law enforcement officer to pat down a women prior to putting her into a 'lock-up' for the night/day.

BTW - out here in rural America ...we just became an 'ON - LINE' reporting data base 8 years ago; prior to that it was all done by hand in old ledger books and if you think that this was the 'uncommon' ▬ nooooo, that would be the NORM for so many poor/rural areas that can't afford a computerized data based system and keep it upgraded with the latest technology.

But to continue with the debate; could we stick to data that we have proof of and not the 'what-if's' that we can only conjecture about confused

Just asking, because this is my reading material and it gets quite annoying when nothing but asinine attacks keep interrupting my reading pleasure First man jailed under new domestic abuse law. - Page 2 202592697

First man jailed under new domestic abuse law. - Page 2 202592697

First man jailed under new domestic abuse law. - Page 2 3239900740

by Victorismyhero Sun May 22, 2016 5:10 pm

Miffs2 wrote:Ah, the old it's so because I said so.
Can't speak to US or Australia but in the UK far more women are victims of domestic abuse than men.
Yes some men are victims and as I think Edd said, this can often be around child contact.
Victims of DV male and female are often loathe to report. Some women will endure upto 35 episodes of violence and 70 of other abuse before reporting. There is more statistical evidence regarding women but now more men report more evidence is becoming available.
Men that report fall into 3 broad categories.
Men who have been subject to prolonged abuse at the hands of a female. Men who have been attacked by their victim when said victim 'snaps' and retaliates. The third group is the really worrying one, men who false report in order to find out what support and advice their victim will be given. This info is then further used against their victim. There are certain procedures and protocols we use when a male reports in order to safeguard against that.
Bear in mind DV is not just between husband and wife or partners, it can be with anyone you have an intimate or familial connection.

and women dont do that????

and what about those females that report being abused...as a way of abusing their partner

lets face it...even IF things are marginally better for men now....(and I suspect it is only marginally) ....if a woman reports abuse the bloke will be hauled off and locked up "on suspicion"

and of course all his mates and his employer etc will be privy to this.....one way or another.....

and YET...still...today...if the man reports abuse ...he will be forced under threat of arrest to leave the family home (since the world considers "mothers" better than "fathers..) putting HIM in a bad position when it comes to future arrangements....

by Miffs2 Sun May 22, 2016 6:35 pm

Lord Foul wrote:
Miffs2 wrote:Ah, the old it's so because I said so.
Can't speak to US or Australia but in the UK far more women are victims of domestic abuse than men.
Yes some men are victims and as I think Edd said, this can often be around child contact.
Victims of DV male and female are often loathe to report. Some women will endure upto 35 episodes of violence and 70 of other abuse before reporting. There is more statistical evidence regarding women but now more men report more evidence is becoming available.
Men that report fall into 3 broad categories.
Men who have been subject to prolonged abuse at the hands of a female. Men who have been attacked by their victim when said victim 'snaps' and retaliates. The third group is the really worrying one, men who false report in order to find out what support and advice their victim will be given. This info is then further used against their victim. There are certain procedures and protocols we use when a male reports in order to safeguard against that.
Bear in mind DV is not just between husband and wife or partners, it can be with anyone you have an intimate or familial connection.

and women dont do that????

and what about those females that report being abused...as a way of abusing their partner

lets face it...even IF things are marginally better for men now....(and I suspect it is only marginally) ....if a woman reports abuse the bloke will be hauled off and locked up "on suspicion"

and of course all his mates and his employer etc will be privy to this.....one way or another.....

and YET...still...today...if the man reports abuse ...he will be forced under threat of arrest to leave the family home (since the world considers "mothers" better than "fathers..) putting HIM in a bad position when it comes to future arrangements....

Mom interesting I am aware of women false reporting to get legal aid, not so sure about information gathering in order to further control a partner.
If a man reports being the victim he will not be hauled off and locked up. If there are children present and neither party is headed to hospital or custody, he may be asked to go elsewhere to let parties calm down and avoid further distress to the children.
I am not aware of any circumstances in which the police tell his mates or employer not even in he said she said situations.

by Victorismyhero Sun May 22, 2016 6:39 pm

Miffs2 wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:
Miffs2 wrote:Ah, the old it's so because I said so.
Can't speak to US or Australia but in the UK far more women are victims of domestic abuse than men.
Yes some men are victims and as I think Edd said, this can often be around child contact.
Victims of DV male and female are often loathe to report. Some women will endure upto 35 episodes of violence and 70 of other abuse before reporting. There is more statistical evidence regarding women but now more men report more evidence is becoming available.
Men that report fall into 3 broad categories.
Men who have been subject to prolonged abuse at the hands of a female. Men who have been attacked by their victim when said victim 'snaps' and retaliates. The third group is the really worrying one, men who false report in order to find out what support and advice their victim will be given. This info is then further used against their victim. There are certain procedures and protocols we use when a male reports in order to safeguard against that.
Bear in mind DV is not just between husband and wife or partners, it can be with anyone you have an intimate or familial connection.

and women dont do that????

and what about those females that report being abused...as a way of abusing their partner

lets face it...even IF things are marginally better for men now....(and I suspect it is only marginally) ....if a woman reports abuse the bloke will be hauled off and locked up "on suspicion"

and of course all his mates and his employer etc will be privy to this.....one way or another.....

and YET...still...today...if the man reports abuse ...he will be forced under threat of arrest to leave the family home (since the world considers "mothers" better than "fathers..) putting HIM in a bad position when it comes to future arrangements....
Mom interesting I am aware of women false reporting to get legal aid, not so sure about information gathering in order to further control a partner.
If a man reports being the victim he will not be hauled off and locked up. If there are children present and neither party is headed to hospital or custody, he may be asked to go elsewhere to let parties calm down and avoid further distress to the children.

EXACTLY.....why isnt it the woman...who is in this case the guilty one..."asked to go elsewhere" to cool off...and moreover...IF the male says no I wont...what happens...yep you got it...arrested on "sus" or "behaviour liable to cause" or whatevr excuse the cops can find.....

I am not aware of any circumstances in which the police tell his mates or employer not even in he said she said situations.

by Original Quill Sun May 22, 2016 6:50 pm

Victor wrote:EXACTLY.....why isnt it the woman...who is in this case the guilty one..."asked to go elsewhere" to cool off...and moreover...IF the male says no I wont...what happens...yep you got it...arrested on "sus" or "behaviour liable to cause" or whatevr excuse the cops can find.....

Further on that, this is why we see this phenomenon as just another reflection of sexism in other walks of life. Follow the argument: 1) because the woman must care for the children; 2) because the man is the breadwinner; 3) because women are nurturers, and men are pushers.

It all dovetails in, to perfection. It's the old self-fulfilling prophecy: we place women in the position of vulnerables, and lo, we come to the conclusion that they are victims. Surprise, surprise.

by Miffs2 Sun May 22, 2016 7:00 pm

Lord Foul wrote:
Miffs2 wrote:
Mom interesting I am aware of women false reporting to get legal aid, not so sure about information gathering in order to further control a partner.
If a man reports being the victim he will not be hauled off and locked up. If there are children present and neither party is headed to hospital or custody, he may be asked to go elsewhere to let parties calm down and avoid further distress to the children.

EXACTLY.....why isnt it the woman...who is in this case the guilty one..."asked to go elsewhere" to cool off...and moreover...IF the male says no I wont...what happens...yep you got it...arrested on "sus" or "behaviour liable to cause" or whatevr excuse the cops can find.....

I am not aware of any circumstances in which the police tell his mates or employer not even in he said she said situations.

Because, rightly or wrongly the police will do what they think is in the best interests of any children. At the scene the police will record the demeanour, sobriety, previous record and attitude and do what they feel best. Far from perfect I agree, but much better than it used to be. Did you see Home Secretary speech to police federation? She thinks there is still a way to go with regard to DV, shame her bastard government have decimated the funding.

by Original Quill Sun May 22, 2016 7:19 pm

Nems wrote:At the scene the police will record the demeanour, sobriety, previous record and attitude and do what they feel best.

Seriously?? The police are not on-call psychotherapists, or even medical doctors. And it's not as if they have an 'either-or' decision to make. The only decision they are making is, do we haul the male away or do we not.

They'll do exactly what is easiest for them. Stick to the old patterns, they'll tell themselves: Separate the two, haul away the male, and voila the children problem goes away. (Do you think for a moment they wish to see a, Police Separate Mother and Children story next day in the papers?)

And there's your record of arrests.

by @lex Sun May 22, 2016 8:03 pm

Original Quill wrote:
@lex wrote:

84% of spousal abuse victims and 86% of partner abuse victims are women, according to the US Department of Justice.

So you are going to guarantee that those are pre-arrest statistics? Otherwise, you;'re bullshitting. Why not just admit to the fact that there's a flaw in the data collection in this issue. You might be right; others might be right. All we can say is, we don't know.

What you're really reacting to is that the flaw in the statistical argument puts into question your conclusions. You have to walk back part of your argument, and you don't like that. Well, that's tough. Those of us who have dealt with scientific conclusions being undercut take scientific corrigibility for granted; after all, that's how we found out the earth wasn't flat.

Instead of stomping your foot and banging your head against the wall, go back to work and find a way to gather clean data. Police arrest records are tainted because of simple criminal justice economics: extraneous factors are corrupting the picture. So, the simple answer is to cleanse the data. How do we gather unprejudiced data?

The Bureau of Justice Statistics was sourcing from the well respected National Crime Victimization Survey. The American Bar Association quotes the "84% of spousal abuse victims are women" (based on data collated 1998 - 2002 ) statistic on their website specifically as a reference for legal practioners.

by Miffs2 Sun May 22, 2016 8:35 pm

R

Original Quill wrote:
Nems wrote:At the scene the police will record the demeanour, sobriety, previous record and attitude and do what they feel best.

Seriously?? The police are not on-call psychotherapists, or even medical doctors. And it's not as if they have an 'either-or' decision to make. The only decision they are making is, do we haul the male away or do we not.

They'll do exactly what is easiest for them. Stick to the old patterns, they'll tell themselves: Separate the two, haul away the male, and voila the children problem goes away. (Do you think for a moment they wish to see a, Police Separate Mother and Children story next day in the papers?)

And there's your record of arrests.

No. They will do a CARDA RIC, or in the area I work we have our own, devised by Dr Kerry Nixon, it's called a MERiT.

by Victorismyhero Sun May 22, 2016 8:49 pm

I doubt it miffs...cops are busy humans

far easier to say "oi mate piss off or we'll lock you up for the night...or a couple of days"

by Miffs2 Sun May 22, 2016 8:56 pm

Lord Foul wrote:I doubt it miffs...cops are busy humans

far easier to say "oi mate piss off or we'll lock you up for the night...or a couple of days"

Well ours do. Because what they score determines what happens next.

by Victorismyhero Sun May 22, 2016 9:04 pm

well...I dunno...I'd have to see it in action...my gut feeling is that they would carry out this (risk assesment? ) and STILL chuck the bloke out...even though HE is the one "at risk"

since (in their minds) if he's out he's no longer at risk (damn niusance that he is)

and all's quiet on the western front once again....

I doubt some how it would go down the lines of chuck the woman out cos she is what is putting him at risk....
(got to think of the kids...and we all know women are better than men with kids....)

by Major Sun May 22, 2016 9:06 pm

I hope he suffers violence in jail, the rotten bas****.
Broken glass in food is one punishment .

by Tommy Monk Sun May 22, 2016 10:08 pm

There are loads of examples of how men are subjected to controlling behaviour of women... and non compliance results in a range of emotional and psychological punishments being inflicted...

by 'Wolfie Mon May 23, 2016 4:57 am

@lex wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

So you are going to guarantee that those are pre-arrest statistics? Otherwise, you;'re bullshitting. Why not just admit to the fact that there's a flaw in the data collection in this issue. You might be right; others might be right. All we can say is, we don't know.

What you're really reacting to is that the flaw in the statistical argument puts into question your conclusions. You have to walk back part of your argument, and you don't like that. Well, that's tough. Those of us who have dealt with scientific conclusions being undercut take scientific corrigibility for granted; after all, that's how we found out the earth wasn't flat.

Instead of stomping your foot and banging your head against the wall, go back to work and find a way to gather clean data. Police arrest records are tainted because of simple criminal justice economics: extraneous factors are corrupting the picture. So, the simple answer is to cleanse the data. How do we gather unprejudiced data?
The Bureau of Justice Statistics was sourcing from the well respected National Crime Victimization Survey. The American Bar Association quotes the "84% of spousal abuse victims are women" (based on data collated 1998 - 2002 ) statistic on their website specifically as a reference for legal practioners.

THERE YOU GO, again.., @lex

DELIBERATELY "cherrypicking" your data !!!

"Spousal abuse" isn't the equialent of Domestic Violence, but only ONE subset :

What about :

* Child Abuse; or
* Emotional and psychological abuse;
* Material neglect, especially of children;
* Abuse/assault by boyfriends and girlfriends, and defactos..
* Abuse/assaults by other family members; ???

BY DISCOUNTING other sectors of the total 'Domestic violence' picture, you are deliberately following Syl's misandrist tactics of inflating the size of one problem (as bad as it is..) to then claim that theoverall problem is somehow lesser, but your pet "bashed wife" portion is all that should be considered.

84% of reported "spousal assaults" doesn't equal 84% of thr total picture == no matter how hard you and Syl' want it to appear so !!! Suspect

by Original Quill Mon May 23, 2016 5:41 am

@lex wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

So you are going to guarantee that those are pre-arrest statistics? Otherwise, you;'re bullshitting. Why not just admit to the fact that there's a flaw in the data collection in this issue. You might be right; others might be right. All we can say is, we don't know.

What you're really reacting to is that the flaw in the statistical argument puts into question your conclusions. You have to walk back part of your argument, and you don't like that. Well, that's tough. Those of us who have dealt with scientific conclusions being undercut take scientific corrigibility for granted; after all, that's how we found out the earth wasn't flat.

Instead of stomping your foot and banging your head against the wall, go back to work and find a way to gather clean data. Police arrest records are tainted because of simple criminal justice economics: extraneous factors are corrupting the picture. So, the simple answer is to cleanse the data. How do we gather unprejudiced data?
The Bureau of Justice Statistics was sourcing from the well respected National Crime Victimization Survey. The American Bar Association quotes the "84% of spousal abuse victims are women" (based on data collated 1998 - 2002 ) statistic on their website specifically as a reference for legal practioners.

You are just trying to polish bullshit, Lex. What is "well respected", anyway? If you need to add that something is "well-respected," it likely means you don't have any confidence yourself, doesn't it? You are just grabbing onto anything that sounds official. The American Bar Association is even less reliable. As a member, I can give you first hand testimony...the American Bar Association is a social/political organization.

Instead trying to polish your source, why not follow my suggestion and determine if they are not just quoting arrest data. From there, use your own head to make up your mind. Arrest data are just a reflection of the patterns and practices of the police forces, which are driven by practical, not equitable considerations. When you know that economics is driving the data you are observing, then the data are impure.

by Original Quill Mon May 23, 2016 6:04 am

Lord Foul wrote:I doubt it miffs...cops are busy humans

far easier to say "oi mate piss off or we'll lock you up for the night...or a couple of days"

And that's exactly what they do. These guys aren't college graduates...some are, but most aren't. They aren't concerned about statistics, nor are they particularly bothered by unfairness. They have a twofold mission: 1) keep the peace; and 2) assist in the trial and punishment of wrongdoers. They daily deal with disruption and violence, and they don't stop to have quaint discussions about inequities.

If there is any practical problem with keeping the peace, they will make a simple decision to take the man in. It's less expensive, and less disruptive to their (the police) routine. Arrest is a tool they have, and it can be used simply to separate the pair. They don't care how it's counted; it's not their job, mon.

However, rest assured the person taken into custody is going to have a record. And that's what is counted in these so-called surveys.

by Miffs2 Mon May 23, 2016 9:30 am

Ask any serving police officer and they will tell you they are social workers carers counsellors psychiatrists mediators safeguarders and first aiders as well as police officers.

by Syl Mon May 23, 2016 12:20 pm

Amazing how all the statistics, collected data and official reports from respected organisations is all bullshit according to some.

I hoped at the start this wouldn't be a thread about men v women, but a topic about the new law, the first man in the UK to be jailed under it, and how it may affect future cases of none violent domestic abuse.

Seems to me a minority of people have an agenda to attempt (and fail) to discredit everyone else's imput (based on fact not fiction) if it doesn't match their own. Rolling Eyes

by Raggamuffin Mon May 23, 2016 12:28 pm

Syl wrote:Amazing how all the statistics, collected data and official reports from respected organisations is all bullshit according to some.

I hoped at the start this wouldn't be a thread about men v women, but a topic about the new law, the first man in the UK to be jailed under it, and how it may affect future cases of none violent domestic abuse.

Seems to me a minority of people have an agenda to attempt (and fail) to discredit everyone else's imput (based on fact not fiction) if it doesn't match their own.

So what about women who use children to get what they want? They might threaten to chuck their husband out and not let him see his children if she doesn't do what he wants. That would fall within this law would it not?

by Syl Mon May 23, 2016 12:44 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Syl wrote:Amazing how all the statistics, collected data and official reports from respected organisations is all bullshit according to some.

I hoped at the start this wouldn't be a thread about men v women, but a topic about the new law, the first man in the UK to be jailed under it, and how it may affect future cases of none violent domestic abuse.

Seems to me a minority of people have an agenda to attempt (and fail) to discredit everyone else's imput (based on fact not fiction) if it doesn't match their own.

So what about women who use children to get what they want? They might threaten to chuck their husband out and not let him see his children if she doesn't do what he wants. That would fall within this law would it not?

I think people who use their children to get back at the spouse are the lowest of the low. Women often do have the upper hand where children are concerned because courts usually favour the mother in custody battles.
Family courts usually deal with parental disputes over children, maybe this new law could be used if all else failed.

by Raggamuffin Mon May 23, 2016 12:53 pm

Syl wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

So what about women who use children to get what they want? They might threaten to chuck their husband out and not let him see his children if she doesn't do what he wants. That would fall within this law would it not?

I think people who use their children to get back at the spouse are the lowest of the low. Women often do have the upper hand where children are concerned because courts usually favour the mother in custody battles.
Family courts usually deal with parental disputes over children, maybe this new law could be used if all else failed.

I don't mean if the man has left or he's been chucked out. I mean a woman who threatens that kind of thing. That's abuse and blackmail isn't it? Why should the same law not apply to her?

by Syl Mon May 23, 2016 1:01 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Syl wrote:

I think people who use their children to get back at the spouse are the lowest of the low. Women often do have the upper hand where children are concerned because courts usually favour the mother in custody battles.
Family courts usually deal with parental disputes over children, maybe this new law could be used if all else failed.

I don't mean if the man has left or he's been chucked out. I mean a woman who threatens that kind of thing. That's abuse and blackmail isn't it? Why should the same law not apply to her?

I don't see why it shouldn't.
"The new law makes it illegal for someone to exercise coercive control over their partner. It has new powers allowing the police to prosecute those who are guilty of psychological and emotional abuse"

Being threatened that you will be parted from your children could definitely be included in that I would have thought.

by Miffs2 Mon May 23, 2016 1:11 pm

Syl wrote:Amazing how all the statistics, collected data and official reports from respected organisations is all bullshit according to some.

I hoped at the start this wouldn't be a thread about men v women, but a topic about the new law, the first man in the UK to be jailed under it, and how it may affect future cases of none violent domestic abuse.

Seems to me a minority of people have an agenda to attempt (and fail) to discredit everyone else's imput (based on fact not fiction) if it doesn't match their own.

Some people suffer from when I'm right I'm right and when I'm wrong I'm right.

The jailing of this man is landmark. Domestic abuse involving psychological, sexual, social , financial abuse and control is damn hard to evidence. Often the victim doesn't realise what is occurring is abuse.

by Syl Mon May 23, 2016 1:18 pm

Miffs2 wrote:
Syl wrote:Amazing how all the statistics, collected data and official reports from respected organisations is all bullshit according to some.

I hoped at the start this wouldn't be a thread about men v women, but a topic about the new law, the first man in the UK to be jailed under it, and how it may affect future cases of none violent domestic abuse.

Seems to me a minority of people have an agenda to attempt (and fail) to discredit everyone else's imput (based on fact not fiction) if it doesn't match their own.
Some people suffer from when I'm right I'm right and when I'm wrong I'm right.

The jailing of this man is landmark. Domestic abuse involving psychological, sexual, social , financial abuse and control is damn hard to evidence. Often the victim doesn't realise what is occurring is abuse.

That's true, it can be a very gradual thing, when someones confidence has been drained often the victim feels they are to blame.

by Miffs2 Mon May 23, 2016 4:01 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Nems wrote:Ah, the old it's so because I said so.

Nems, it's not me that is ruining your neat little argument. It's the fact that we have no clear data on the issue.

Because prejudicial factors go into arrest records, the studies that are based upon arrests are corrupted. I could die tomorrow and you'd still have this problem.

You are an insider in this business. Does a professional carpenter work with imperfect tools? Instead of beating your head against the wall, why don't you go to work to find a source of uninfected data?

I'm not arguing. I'm stating what I know to be true. Not academic studies or some far flung hypothesis but what actually happens. Why should I need data? The victim, not a statistic, never a study, but a reality that some get to blow smoke out their arse pontificating whilst those of us at the coal face just get on with it.

by Miffs2 Mon May 23, 2016 4:04 pm

H

Syl wrote:
Miffs2 wrote:
Some people suffer from when I'm right I'm right and when I'm wrong I'm right.

The jailing of this man is landmark. Domestic abuse involving psychological, sexual, social , financial abuse and control is damn hard to evidence. Often the victim doesn't realise what is occurring is abuse.

That's true, it can be a very gradual thing, when someones confidence has been drained often the victim feels they are to blame.

They often do, try getting across definition of abuse to some people.
That being ...if you have ever done or not done something because of worrying about the reaction of another.

by Original Quill Mon May 23, 2016 4:33 pm

Miffs2 wrote:Ask any serving police officer and they will tell you they are social workers carers counsellors psychiatrists mediators safeguarders and first aiders as well as police officers.

And comedians, insurance salesmen, and grocery store clerks. Sure, all things to all people.

But first and foremost, they are human beings, not supermen. They are subject to the same human foibles we all are. They work under pressure. So they are given procedures to follow. They are regimented and follow orders. One order is to incarcerate the male whenever there is a choice in a domestic dispute.

When the mission is keeping the peace, as opposed to earmarking someone for legal prosecution, they follow that order. When all that is required is separating combating spouses--even if the primary antagonist is the female--the option is to incarcerate the male because, overall, it keeps expenses down.

All it means is that this little quirk in law enforcement procedure plays havoc with numerary record keeping, and in particular gender statistics regarding domestic violence. For the most part that is ignored because budgets are more important than equity--particularly when it's merely to keep the peace. But it's important to keep that in mind when using these surveys for future planning.

Someone would be doing a great service if we could could count the disputes before the police get involved (pre-arrest).

by Original Quill Mon May 23, 2016 4:38 pm

Syl wrote:Amazing how all the statistics, collected data and official reports from respected organisations is all bullshit according to some.

Amazing how the earth was once considered flat, too. It's called progress.

All of science is corrigible, or we would have long ago closed down universities and patent offices.

by Original Quill Mon May 23, 2016 4:39 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Syl wrote:Amazing how all the statistics, collected data and official reports from respected organisations is all bullshit according to some.

I hoped at the start this wouldn't be a thread about men v women, but a topic about the new law, the first man in the UK to be jailed under it, and how it may affect future cases of none violent domestic abuse.

Seems to me a minority of people have an agenda to attempt (and fail) to discredit everyone else's imput (based on fact not fiction) if it doesn't match their own.

So what about women who use children to get what they want? They might threaten to chuck their husband out and not let him see his children if she doesn't do what he wants. That would fall within this law would it not?

More likely, that would fall within the jurisdiction of civil law courts.

by Original Quill Mon May 23, 2016 4:52 pm

Miffs2 wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

Nems, it's not me that is ruining your neat little argument. It's the fact that we have no clear data on the issue.

Because prejudicial factors go into arrest records, the studies that are based upon arrests are corrupted. I could die tomorrow and you'd still have this problem.

You are an insider in this business. Does a professional carpenter work with imperfect tools? Instead of beating your head against the wall, why don't you go to work to find a source of uninfected data?
I'm not arguing. I'm stating what I know to be true. Not academic studies or some far flung hypothesis but what actually happens. Why should I need data? The victim, not a statistic, never a study, but a reality that some get to blow smoke out their arse pontificating whilst those of us at the coal face just get on with it.

Don't be silly, Nems. If you are not arguing that more men commit domestic violence than women, that your whole position falls through. Those are studies, so you certainly are using them to ground your views, not to mention your work.

Even if you are solely using your work experience involving domestic violence, then you must be relying upon police, who bring people to you. Those police have just made a decision...the same decision as to who goes to jail and who does not.

If you want to argue the individual case, then don't make general statements based upon gender. Don't summarize over who is doing what. But that is not at all what you are doing.

by Raggamuffin Mon May 23, 2016 4:57 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

So what about women who use children to get what they want? They might threaten to chuck their husband out and not let him see his children if she doesn't do what he wants. That would fall within this law would it not?

More likely, that would fall within the jurisdiction of civil law courts.

Why is it not as bad as what the man did? No sexism here please.

There's no point going to a civil court over a few threats is there?

by Original Quill Mon May 23, 2016 5:41 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

More likely, that would fall within the jurisdiction of civil law courts.

Why is it not as bad as what the man did? No sexism here please.

There's no point going to a civil court over a few threats is there?

The simple answer is there is no criminal law against it. Disputes over children are handled by the custody courts, and those are in the civil division. They have their own rules against use of children as chips in the dispute. Of course these courts interact with criminal matters, but those are sorted out according to kinds of cases (assault vs. visitation, etc.).

Sexism is not a law, but a sentiment or motive behind certain laws and/or practices. Anti-sexism is a sentiment that opposes needless gender preferences for one gender or the other. Gender preferences variously favor one sex or the other: women get preferential treatment in custody matters; men get preferential treatment in employment. The issues are so wide-ranging that the whole topic defies the traditional 'conservative'/'liberal' labels.

In domestic dispute matters, men are presumed to be stronger and more assertive, while women are thought to be demure and nurturing, and so police practices are slanted toward treating men more institutionally, and leaving children with the mother, undisturbed in the institutional sense. These are gender biases. So sexism plays a part in these domestic dispute cases. When you start relying on these surveys, you are incorporating these sexist biases into your thinking.

That's the only way in which the subject has come up.

by Raggamuffin Mon May 23, 2016 6:38 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

Why is it not as bad as what the man did? No sexism here please.

There's no point going to a civil court over a few threats is there?

The simple answer is there is no criminal law against it. Disputes over children are handled by the custody courts, and those are in the civil division. They have their own rules against use of children as chips in the dispute. Of course these courts interact with criminal matters, but those are sorted out according to kinds of cases (assault vs. visitation, etc.).

Sexism is not a law, but a sentiment or motive behind certain laws and/or practices. Anti-sexism is a sentiment that opposes needless gender preferences for one gender or the other. Gender preferences variously favor one sex or the other: women get preferential treatment in custody matters; men get preferential treatment in employment. The issues are so wide-ranging that the whole topic defies the traditional 'conservative'/'liberal' labels.

In domestic dispute matters, men are presumed to be stronger and more assertive, while women are thought to be demure and nurturing, and so police practices are slanted toward treating men more institutionally, and leaving children with the mother, undisturbed in the institutional sense. These are gender biases. So sexism plays a part in these domestic dispute cases. When you start relying on these surveys, you are incorporating these sexist biases into your thinking.

That's the only way in which the subject has come up.

I think you missed the point Quill, but never mind.

by Tommy Monk Mon May 23, 2016 6:48 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Syl wrote:

I think people who use their children to get back at the spouse are the lowest of the low. Women often do have the upper hand where children are concerned because courts usually favour the mother in custody battles.
Family courts usually deal with parental disputes over children, maybe this new law could be used if all else failed.

I don't mean if the man has left or he's been chucked out. I mean a woman who threatens that kind of thing. That's abuse and blackmail isn't it? Why should the same law not apply to her?

That's what I was getting at earlier... if the man doesn't do as the woman wants then he gets a range of punishment... including 'the silent treatment', general hostility or attitude, making arguments out of nothing, nasty comments etc... can even come home to find door locked and all your clothes thrown out into the garden etc... and a whole lot more!

In the op it was claimed the man would tell her what to wear... although I would think that it would probably be more of a request not to wear some things that he may think look a bit too sexy/skimpy/revealing etc for general work wear or going to the shops etc... but women do this sort of thing too... it's not uncommon for a man to get dressed in something of his own choosing only to have the Mrs strike him with a look of horror and the comment 'oh... you're not wearing that are you...!?'... (with the looming unspoken threat of one or more of the punishments listed above)... and for her to then suggest that she should 'help' him find something more 'suitable' (of her choosing) to wear!!!

And it's also not uncommon for a woman to take charge of the mans whole wardrobe!!!

Also... a man would often like to go somewhere or do something of his own choosing for his own enjoyment, like meet up with a friend and have a couple of beers up the pub or go to play golf or go to a football match etc... all of which require permission from the woman... or else (refer again to the examples of punishments above)...

lol!

by Tommy Monk Mon May 23, 2016 6:50 pm

Syl wrote:
Miffs2 wrote:
Some people suffer from when I'm right I'm right and when I'm wrong I'm right.

The jailing of this man is landmark. Domestic abuse involving psychological, sexual, social , financial abuse and control is damn hard to evidence. Often the victim doesn't realise what is occurring is abuse.

That's true, it can be a very gradual thing, when someones confidence has been drained often the victim feels they are to blame.

Yes!!!

Women do this to men all the time!!!

by Syl Mon May 23, 2016 6:54 pm

Are you suggesting that being hen pecked is the same as being totally dominated to the point of attempting to commit suicide because your partner is so dominating and controlling you lose all sense of yourself?

by Syl Mon May 23, 2016 6:56 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:
Syl wrote:

That's true, it can be a very gradual thing, when someones confidence has been drained often the victim feels they are to blame.

Yes!!!

Women do this to men all the time!!!

Some women do....some men do....is this being once more turned into a male v female argument again?

by Tommy Monk Mon May 23, 2016 7:12 pm

Are you saying the behaviour from women that I highlighted is not controlling/dominating...!?

Men suffer greatly from this!!!

by Syl Mon May 23, 2016 7:28 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:

Are you saying the behaviour from women that I highlighted is not controlling/dominating...!?

Men suffer greatly from this!!!

Without doubt some women are controlling dominating harridens.
The extent that they control and dominate, and the psychological and emotional torment that causes to the victim will no doubt affect the way reported cases are treated.
But just because your partner is bossy and you go along with it for a quiet life is hardly grounds to cite 'coercive control'.

Divorce or separation is still an option for most people. This new law could help people who don't feel they have that option through repercussions of what the abuser may do.

by Tommy Monk Mon May 23, 2016 7:50 pm

Men suffer psychological and emotional damage... their confidence and self esteem is eroded over time... leaving them feeling totally undermined, insecure, worthless etc... this emotional destruction makes them weak and incapable of mustering up the courage and strength needed to escape!!!

by Syl Mon May 23, 2016 7:53 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:Men suffer psychological and emotional damage... their confidence and self esteem is eroded over time... leaving them feeling totally undermined, insecure, worthless etc... this emotional destruction makes them weak and incapable of mustering up the courage and strength needed to escape!!!

And who on here has said they don't?

by Tommy Monk Mon May 23, 2016 7:55 pm

Who on here has said that they do...?

by Sponsored content