Select to expand quoteholy guacamole said..Kamikuza said..The reality is, men are overwhelmingly the victims of violence. holy guacamole said..
No it's far from OK Little John. No one's saying it's OK.
The point is, despite the isolated examples of free women murdering partners, former partners and children, the vast majority of alleged murder perpetrators are men.
This is not my personal view, it's the reality.
How you choose to interpret that reality, is your choice.
Now as an opinion, versus the facts, I reckon Bettina Arndt is a disgrace.
She's not disseminating some well considered wisdom, just more vitriol about her paranoid right wing beliefs that "we're all out to get those evil men" and that "the men are the true victims".
Yes, at the hands of other alleged male perpetrators by a case factor of 10:1. Your point was again? That women were doing the bulk of murders or we should ignore the gaping disparity by gender?
Fact is, 59 women were murdered in Australia last year by a male partner or former partner. How many men?
You want to use language carefully, but it doesn't match up with the reality on the ground.
Now it's murder. You just keep shifting those goals posts don't you.
Here's the first result from a google: 2018/19-38 murder victims, including 15 women and 14 men.
My point is people are suffering and it appears it's more important to split hairs over which gender should shoulder all the blame.
It's a stupid game to play. No matter how politically important it's thought to be.
Select to expand quoteKamikuza said..holy guacamole said..Kamikuza said..The reality is, men are overwhelmingly the victims of violence. holy guacamole said..
No it's far from OK Little John. No one's saying it's OK.
The point is, despite the isolated examples of free women murdering partners, former partners and children, the vast majority of alleged murder perpetrators are men.
This is not my personal view, it's the reality.
How you choose to interpret that reality, is your choice.
Now as an opinion, versus the facts, I reckon Bettina Arndt is a disgrace.
She's not disseminating some well considered wisdom, just more vitriol about her paranoid right wing beliefs that "we're all out to get those evil men" and that "the men are the true victims".
Yes, at the hands of other alleged male perpetrators by a case factor of 10:1. Your point was again? That women were doing the bulk of murders or we should ignore the gaping disparity by gender?
Fact is, 59 women were murdered in Australia last year by a male partner or former partner. How many men?
You want to use language carefully, but it doesn't match up with the reality on the ground.
Now it's murder. You just keep shifting those goals posts don't you.
Here's the first result from a google: 2018/19-38 murder victims, including 15 women and 14 men.
My point is people are suffering and it appears it's more important to split hairs over which gender should shoulder all the blame.
It's a stupid game to play. No matter how politically important it's thought to be.
What a shame, trying to pass off the numbers for violence.........as domestic violence. that's a low act.....but not unexpected
Select to expand quoteholy guacamole said..Little Jon said..No women commit violence just as much as men, there are studies on this stuff. Shifu said..
I'd add this follow on quote too - very succinct:
"They repeat memorised myths designed to foment the "angry dads" of the community into a voting bloc and demobilise any political leadership for cultural change. These myths are: that good blokes "pushed too far" almost haplessly murder their partners (they don't), that the family court is a feminist cabal that orchestrates cruelty to men (it isn't) and that men are subjected to female violence at comparable levels as women are by men (they aren't, not remotely)."
Victim blaming is a national sport in this country.
And don't forget the stats are very distorted by the Duluth model. Under the Duluth model if women attacks a man, the man is still recorded as the perpetrator and the woman the victim, hence the stats and hence why I agree victim blaming of men is a national sport.
Violence is a big range of behaviours. How does it lead to murdering your entire family though?
From what we know, Baxter was offered a reasonable settlement just before murdering his entire family. Does that sound like he was "driven too far", or was he just aN aggressive, out of control murderer?
Nonetheless.... in Australia, how many women were murdered last year by a partner of former partner compared to men? Let's see these "studies" and stats on DV murders.
Scroll down to Table 1 on page 6 which shows 52% of filicide offenders are male and 48% female from the Australian Institute of Criminology.
aic.gov.au/publications/cfi/cfi057
Select to expand quoteMain said..FormulaNova said..holy guacamole said..
Who knows? Without a coronial inquest done, just as a guess I would say the answer is just as likely to be 42.
Nah, the guy ran a gym, and steroids are too easy for some of these guys to 'improve', so I would say the answer is closer to 90%.
All without evidence, I think this is probably part of the problem.
He didn't look like he was on steroids. crossfit guys typically not wanting to get big!
Steroids don't have to make you big. Those guys still have to train. Its not like they take steroids and accidentaly get huge.
Either kids have learned great nutrition and training techniques, or steroid use has become much more commonplace. It must be so tempting to get bigger than the normal way.
Select to expand quoteFormulaNova said..Main said..FormulaNova said..holy guacamole said..
Who knows? Without a coronial inquest done, just as a guess I would say the answer is just as likely to be 42.
Nah, the guy ran a gym, and steroids are too easy for some of these guys to 'improve', so I would say the answer is closer to 90%.
All without evidence, I think this is probably part of the problem.
He didn't look like he was on steroids. crossfit guys typically not wanting to get big!
Steroids don't have to make you big. Those guys still have to train. Its not like they take steroids and accidentaly get huge.
Either kids have learned great nutrition and training techniques, or steroid use has become much more commonplace. It must be so tempting to get bigger than the normal way.
If you go to the gym enough you can spot the guys on roids by their body shapes. I'm just saying he doesn't look like he's juiced - just looks like a regular long term gym goer.... maybe I'm wrong but he doesn't have the look.
Select to expand quoteKamikuza said..Now it's murder. You just keep shifting those goals posts don't you.holy guacamole said..Kamikuza said..The reality is, men are overwhelmingly the victims of violence. holy guacamole said..
No it's far from OK Little John. No one's saying it's OK.
The point is, despite the isolated examples of free women murdering partners, former partners and children, the vast majority of alleged murder perpetrators are men.
This is not my personal view, it's the reality.
How you choose to interpret that reality, is your choice.
Now as an opinion, versus the facts, I reckon Bettina Arndt is a disgrace.
She's not disseminating some well considered wisdom, just more vitriol about her paranoid right wing beliefs that "we're all out to get those evil men" and that "the men are the true victims".
Yes, at the hands of other alleged male perpetrators by a case factor of 10:1. Your point was again? That women were doing the bulk of murders or we should ignore the gaping disparity by gender?
Fact is, 59 women were murdered in Australia last year by a male partner or former partner. How many men?
You want to use language carefully, but it doesn't match up with the reality on the ground.
Here's the first result from a google: 2018/19-38 murder victims, including 15 women and 14 men.
My point is people are suffering and it appears it's more important to split hairs over which gender should shoulder all the blame.
It's a stupid game to play. No matter how politically important it's thought to be.
Oh dear....You expanded this to "violence". I was always referring to DV murders, which is what this topic is about.
So, I responded to your claim that men are overwhelmingly the victims of violence (yeah, overwhelmingly at the hands of other violent men) and then you claimed I was "Shifting the goalposts" !?
What about coercive control in domestic situations? Scotland has legislation about this to bring about change in the pattern of coercive control.
Sticking to the pointy end of the subject, last year in Australia 59 women were murdered by former partners or partners last year.
How many men were murdered by former partners last year?
Answer a simple question. Please.
How many women does it take to wall paper a room. .?
Depends how thin you slice them
Select to expand quotetheDoctor said..
How many women does it take to wall paper a room. .?
Depends how thin you slice them
There you have it Kamikuza....he's "just joking of course".
Select to expand quoteKamikuza said..68(female DV murder victims) and 25 (male DV murder victims). More than a third of the victims are male.
Well at least get the ratio right mate. That's not more than a third. It's only a touch over a quarter.
So approx. 3:1 perpetrators male/female. Do we ignore this statistic and "carry on"?
Select to expand quoteholy guacamole said..Kamikuza said..68(female DV murder victims) and 25 (male DV murder victims). More than a third of the victims are male.
Well at least get the ratio right mate. That's not more than a third. It's only a touch over a quarter.
So approx. 3:1 perpetrators male/female. Do we ignore this statistic and "carry on"?
Suddenly accuracy in language is important.
What do you suggest we do? Ignore the male and children victims (inconvenient, they are) and do what exactly? Continue pointing fingers?
Select to expand quoteMain said..FormulaNova said..Main said..FormulaNova said..holy guacamole said..
Who knows? Without a coronial inquest done, just as a guess I would say the answer is just as likely to be 42.
Nah, the guy ran a gym, and steroids are too easy for some of these guys to 'improve', so I would say the answer is closer to 90%.
All without evidence, I think this is probably part of the problem.
He didn't look like he was on steroids. crossfit guys typically not wanting to get big!
Steroids don't have to make you big. Those guys still have to train. Its not like they take steroids and accidentaly get huge.
Either kids have learned great nutrition and training techniques, or steroid use has become much more commonplace. It must be so tempting to get bigger than the normal way.
If you go to the gym enough you can spot the guys on roids by their body shapes. I'm just saying he doesn't look like he's juiced - just looks like a regular long term gym goer.... maybe I'm wrong but he doesn't have the look.
He was a rugby league guy................Do I need to say anymore!? I'm half joking.....but some of those fellas don't seem to have very good relations with women. Actually they don't seem to have very good relationships with humans.
Select to expand quoteKamikuza said..holy guacamole said..Kamikuza said..68(female DV murder victims) and 25 (male DV murder victims). More than a third of the victims are male.
Well at least get the ratio right mate. That's not more than a third. It's only a touch over a quarter.
So approx. 3:1 perpetrators male/female. Do we ignore this statistic and "carry on"?
Suddenly accuracy in language is important.
What do you suggest we do? Ignore the male and children victims (inconvenient, they are) and do what exactly? Continue pointing fingers?
It doesn't help to make assumptions about what I think should be done. I think that's half the issue with these topics, people make too many assumptions about motives.
But since you finally ask, like any problem or issue, we usually look at how we can target our resources effectively. So if there's a large number of DV murders being committed by men then surely we need to more effectively target our resources toward helping men? Men need slightly different things to women, surely...
Select to expand quoteholy guacamole said..Kamikuza said..holy guacamole said..Kamikuza said..68(female DV murder victims) and 25 (male DV murder victims). More than a third of the victims are male.
Well at least get the ratio right mate. That's not more than a third. It's only a touch over a quarter.
So approx. 3:1 perpetrators male/female. Do we ignore this statistic and "carry on"?
Suddenly accuracy in language is important.
What do you suggest we do? Ignore the male and children victims (inconvenient, they are) and do what exactly? Continue pointing fingers?
It doesn't help to make assumptions about what I think should be done. I think that's half the issue with these topics, people make too many assumptions about motives.
But since you finally ask, like any problem or issue, we usually look at how we can target our resources effectively. So if there's a large number of DV murders being committed by men then surely we need to more effectively target our resources toward helping men? Men need slightly different things to women, surely...
That would be acknowledging that men and women are different at some fundamental level, like say ... a biological level. Are you sure you want to open that can of worms?
Why not target resources at helping everyone? The fact that women also commit exactly these crimes ought to tell you that there's a common denominator at work that needs to be addressed first, before we start tailoring resource distribution to finesse the details.
Of course, suggesting that people can be helped implies there's external factors that influence individuals...
Select to expand quoteKamikuza said..holy guacamole said..Kamikuza said..holy guacamole said..Kamikuza said..68(female DV murder victims) and 25 (male DV murder victims). More than a third of the victims are male.
Well at least get the ratio right mate. That's not more than a third. It's only a touch over a quarter.
So approx. 3:1 perpetrators male/female. Do we ignore this statistic and "carry on"?
Suddenly accuracy in language is important.
What do you suggest we do? Ignore the male and children victims (inconvenient, they are) and do what exactly? Continue pointing fingers?
It doesn't help to make assumptions about what I think should be done. I think that's half the issue with these topics, people make too many assumptions about motives.
But since you finally ask, like any problem or issue, we usually look at how we can target our resources effectively. So if there's a large number of DV murders being committed by men then surely we need to more effectively target our resources toward helping men? Men need slightly different things to women, surely...
That would be acknowledging that men and women are different at some fundamental level, like say ... a biological level. Are you sure you want to open that can of worms?
Why not target resources at helping everyone? The fact that women also commit exactly these crimes ought to tell you that there's a common denominator at work that needs to be addressed first, before we start tailoring resource distribution to finesse the details.
Of course, suggesting that people can be helped implies there's external factors that influence individuals...
FFS, why do you think it's ok to use the DV issue as a wedge to catch out the leftards.......it's really sickening.......you may have worms in your brain.
Select to expand quotelog man said..Kamikuza said..holy guacamole said..Kamikuza said..holy guacamole said..Kamikuza said..68(female DV murder victims) and 25 (male DV murder victims). More than a third of the victims are male.
Well at least get the ratio right mate. That's not more than a third. It's only a touch over a quarter.
So approx. 3:1 perpetrators male/female. Do we ignore this statistic and "carry on"?
Suddenly accuracy in language is important.
What do you suggest we do? Ignore the male and children victims (inconvenient, they are) and do what exactly? Continue pointing fingers?
It doesn't help to make assumptions about what I think should be done. I think that's half the issue with these topics, people make too many assumptions about motives.
But since you finally ask, like any problem or issue, we usually look at how we can target our resources effectively. So if there's a large number of DV murders being committed by men then surely we need to more effectively target our resources toward helping men? Men need slightly different things to women, surely...
That would be acknowledging that men and women are different at some fundamental level, like say ... a biological level. Are you sure you want to open that can of worms?
Why not target resources at helping everyone? The fact that women also commit exactly these crimes ought to tell you that there's a common denominator at work that needs to be addressed first, before we start tailoring resource distribution to finesse the details.
Of course, suggesting that people can be helped implies there's external factors that influence individuals...
FFS, why do you think it's ok to use the DV issue as a wedge to catch out the leftards.......it's really sickening.......you may have worms in your brain.
Oh FFS why do you think it's ok to use any issue as a wedge to turn it into a partisan political pissing contest? It's really sickening, especially considering how little you actually care about the issues or the victims.
Select to expand quoteKamikuza said..log man said..Kamikuza said..holy guacamole said..Kamikuza said..holy guacamole said..Kamikuza said..68(female DV murder victims) and 25 (male DV murder victims). More than a third of the victims are male.
Well at least get the ratio right mate. That's not more than a third. It's only a touch over a quarter.
So approx. 3:1 perpetrators male/female. Do we ignore this statistic and "carry on"?
Suddenly accuracy in language is important.
What do you suggest we do? Ignore the male and children victims (inconvenient, they are) and do what exactly? Continue pointing fingers?
It doesn't help to make assumptions about what I think should be done. I think that's half the issue with these topics, people make too many assumptions about motives.
But since you finally ask, like any problem or issue, we usually look at how we can target our resources effectively. So if there's a large number of DV murders being committed by men then surely we need to more effectively target our resources toward helping men? Men need slightly different things to women, surely...
That would be acknowledging that men and women are different at some fundamental level, like say ... a biological level. Are you sure you want to open that can of worms?
Why not target resources at helping everyone? The fact that women also commit exactly these crimes ought to tell you that there's a common denominator at work that needs to be addressed first, before we start tailoring resource distribution to finesse the details.
Of course, suggesting that people can be helped implies there's external factors that influence individuals...
FFS, why do you think it's ok to use the DV issue as a wedge to catch out the leftards.......it's really sickening.......you may have worms in your brain.
Oh FFS why do you think it's ok to use any issue as a wedge to turn it into a partisan political pissing contest? It's really sickening, especially considering how little you actually care about the issues or the victims.
hey, i'm not the one that's being deceptive with the figures. i'm just pointing out you're being slippery......and you don't like it.
Select to expand quotelog man said..Kamikuza said..log man said..Kamikuza said..holy guacamole said..Kamikuza said..holy guacamole said..Kamikuza said..68(female DV murder victims) and 25 (male DV murder victims). More than a third of the victims are male.
Well at least get the ratio right mate. That's not more than a third. It's only a touch over a quarter.
So approx. 3:1 perpetrators male/female. Do we ignore this statistic and "carry on"?
Suddenly accuracy in language is important.
What do you suggest we do? Ignore the male and children victims (inconvenient, they are) and do what exactly? Continue pointing fingers?
It doesn't help to make assumptions about what I think should be done. I think that's half the issue with these topics, people make too many assumptions about motives.
But since you finally ask, like any problem or issue, we usually look at how we can target our resources effectively. So if there's a large number of DV murders being committed by men then surely we need to more effectively target our resources toward helping men? Men need slightly different things to women, surely...
That would be acknowledging that men and women are different at some fundamental level, like say ... a biological level. Are you sure you want to open that can of worms?
Why not target resources at helping everyone? The fact that women also commit exactly these crimes ought to tell you that there's a common denominator at work that needs to be addressed first, before we start tailoring resource distribution to finesse the details.
Of course, suggesting that people can be helped implies there's external factors that influence individuals...
FFS, why do you think it's ok to use the DV issue as a wedge to catch out the leftards.......it's really sickening.......you may have worms in your brain.
Oh FFS why do you think it's ok to use any issue as a wedge to turn it into a partisan political pissing contest? It's really sickening, especially considering how little you actually care about the issues or the victims.
hey, i'm not the one that's being deceptive with the figures. i'm just pointing out you're being slippery......and you don't like it.
I provide links to the original sources of statistics when I can find then, or pages that appear to have no political agenda, paste quotes from the sources and indicate my editing... and admit when I make typing or other errors.
Where do you feel I'm being slippery?
Select to expand quoteholy guacamole said..Kamikuza said..Now it's murder. You just keep shifting those goals posts don't you.holy guacamole said..Kamikuza said..The reality is, men are overwhelmingly the victims of violence. holy guacamole said..
No it's far from OK Little John. No one's saying it's OK.
The point is, despite the isolated examples of free women murdering partners, former partners and children, the vast majority of alleged murder perpetrators are men.
This is not my personal view, it's the reality.
How you choose to interpret that reality, is your choice.
Now as an opinion, versus the facts, I reckon Bettina Arndt is a disgrace.
She's not disseminating some well considered wisdom, just more vitriol about her paranoid right wing beliefs that "we're all out to get those evil men" and that "the men are the true victims".
Yes, at the hands of other alleged male perpetrators by a case factor of 10:1. Your point was again? That women were doing the bulk of murders or we should ignore the gaping disparity by gender?
Fact is, 59 women were murdered in Australia last year by a male partner or former partner. How many men?
You want to use language carefully, but it doesn't match up with the reality on the ground.
Here's the first result from a google: 2018/19-38 murder victims, including 15 women and 14 men.
My point is people are suffering and it appears it's more important to split hairs over which gender should shoulder all the blame.
It's a stupid game to play. No matter how politically important it's thought to be.
Oh dear....You expanded this to "violence". I was always referring to DV murders, which is what this topic is about.
So, I responded to your claim that men are overwhelmingly the victims of violence (yeah, overwhelmingly at the hands of other violent men) and then you claimed I was "Shifting the goalposts" !?
What about coercive control in domestic situations? Scotland has legislation about this to bring about change in the pattern of coercive control.
Sticking to the pointy end of the subject, last year in Australia 59 women were murdered by former partners or partners last year.
How many men were murdered by former partners last year?
Answer a simple question. Please.
Arguments about stats aside, what are you saying with this argument? If more victims are women the males should be ignored is what the DV industry is doing. This is why we need Pauline Hanson to give an alternate view
Back to the stats are heavily biased if the cairns women is categorised as mental disorder and rosie batty's not, hence DVAA stats are more acurate
www.facebook.com/notes/domestic-violence-awareness-australia/australias-most-accurate-and-reliable-domestic-violence-count/2579345932293214/
Violence in western society is all pervasive and is an integral part of our culture.
Trying to segregate it out and deal with it as domestic violence or filial violence or animal violence is crap.
Whilst violence is culturally accepted it will manifest in all forms.
It just so happens that physically weaker life forms that are unable to protect themselves effectively are more likely to be on the receiving end.
Select to expand quotehilly said..
But how many men are seriously injured or killed by women?
I don't know hilly, but I do know that one poor bloke was (allegedly) murdered by his 'former partner' early on Saturday morning about 400 mtrs from where I sit. She has since been bailed after being charged with 4 counts of breaching an AVO. Not a peep out of the mainland media or anti-domestic violence mob about this latest (avoidable) tragedy.
Even a Google search of the name of the victim "Jari Wise" fails to locate any media interest in this young guys violent death.
There is other information out there but mainstream media is dominated by feminist and left wing bias.
www.familylawexpress.com.au/family-law-news/children/childabuse/women-more-violent-and-controlling-than-men-various-studies-find/2366/?fbclid=IwAR2ky0mtl31QDFX9-4lfVt9O4RgbPjT3UAiCqT8UgnsAs_omMxrpj9p4hus
Select to expand quoteLittle Jon said..There is other information out there but mainstream media is dominated by feminist and left wing bias.
www.familylawexpress.com.au/family-law-news/children/childabuse/women-more-violent-and-controlling-than-men-various-studies-find/2366/?fbclid=IwAR2ky0mtl31QDFX9-4lfVt9O4RgbPjT3UAiCqT8UgnsAs_omMxrpj9p4hus
Isn't the mainstream media dominated largely by Newscorp and Channel 9?
Wasn't aware they are left wing feminists....
Oh yeah sorry Little Jon, I forgot for a second that you think Pauline Hanson's on the money, even though she thinks the Port Arthur massacre was a government inside job. Where would Straya be without level headed people like Pauline? Gawd only knows.
Hey I know it's a little off topic but....maybe a woman actually did Port Arthur? Was that in the non-leftist press that we all missed?
Select to expand quotejapie said..
Violence in western society is all pervasive and is an integral part of our culture.
Trying to segregate it out and deal with it as domestic violence or filial violence or animal violence is crap.
Whilst violence is culturally accepted it will manifest in all forms.
It just so happens that physically weaker life forms that are unable to protect themselves effectively are more likely to be on the receiving end.
I really like this comment.
I would never raise my voice at my wife because it's violent, but I yell at my kids to get them to behave, even though it's not in anger I'm effectively teaching them violence. I bought a book about how to raise kids without yelling but it just doesn't work
Was there not a case in Queensland a few back where a mother killed all her kids. From memory there was a lot of them.
No mention she was a monster. The questions afterwards were what pushed her in to it.
Then in the U.S many years ago I remember reading a mother putting the head of her kid under the back wheel and running over her.
She claimed she was under stress at the time and was given a suspended jail sentence.
Select to expand quotepetermac33 said..
Was there not a case in Queensland a few back where a mother killed all her kids. From memory there was a lot of them.
No mention she was a monster. The questions afterwards were what pushed her in to it.
Then in the U.S many years ago I remember reading a mother putting the head of her kid under the back wheel and running over her.
She claimed she was under stress at the time and was given a suspended jail sentence.
There's heaps of times women have done harm to their kids and or husband but generally the media, courts and society take a softer approach to the subject and are more likely to accept the question of the cause. It's called gender bias and it's rife.
Australian Brotherhood of Fathers is a good place to visit or get in contact with for free legal advice or reference to what the court process is like especially for fathers. Their Facebook page is full of info on what courts and the DV process has done to people in first hand accounts. It needs to change.
Select to expand quote
LJ, that is utterly mis-characterising the study. The 70% figure refers ONLY to "nonreciprocally violent relationships". It does NOT say that 70% of DV overall is caused by women.
You also ignored the fact that the study said that "men were more likely to inflict injury than were women". The study also noted that "findings in the literature at large (confirm) that women are more likely to be injured by partner violence than are men".
The women who committed violence (which could include threats or pushing) were more likely to do so when their male partner was also violent towards them.
Earlier, you claimed that one killing of a guy did not make the news - that was simply and utterly wrong and yet you failed to admit it. You have also failed to come up with evidence for many of your earlier claims, when asked for proof. You've got no room to claim the high ground when you make misleading and incorrect statements. If you were right you could speak truthfully and convince people. When you don't speak truthfully it implies that you are wrong or at the least, utterly unconvincing.
