Society/Culture Domestic Violence

[Procrastinator35]

Yeah this is the attitude, victim blaming, particularly when it comes to men.

Did the women in question acquire those pictures illegally?....I've not heard that.

If you're a celebrity or an AFL footy player (Much the same thing in OZ), then sending nudes to strange women is more than naive....It's beyond stupid.

 

[Lethality]

Did the women in question acquire those pictures illegally?....I've not heard that.

I don't think they have to be obtained illegally for it to be illegal to distribute them.

If you're a celebrity or an AFL footy player (Much the same thing in OZ), then sending nudes to strange women is more than naive....It's beyond stupid.

So is visiting a violent ex-boyfriend at night. It doesn't diminish the crime.

 

[Procrastinator35]

I don't think they have to be obtained illegally for it to be illegal to distribute them.

So is visiting a violent ex-boyfriend at night. It doesn't diminish the crime.

Swan & Cloke were victims of their own making & stupidity.....Does that excuse the women's opportunistic behavior in looking to score a quick buck out of their fame & embarrassment?....No

But again...You send nudes to strangers you don't know a thing about, then expect the unexpected or worse.

What possesses blokes to want to flash their tackle at strange women is beyond me....Must be a new mating ritual I'm not familiar with....But calling the flashers 'victims' is - for want of a better word - a stretch.

 

[Lethality]

What possesses blokes to want to flash their tackle at strange women is beyond me....

They weren't strangers. Women and men sext their images all the time, both to partners or others. The culpability usually lies with the people who then go on and share the images or even sell them.

 

[domus]

The only person who objected that I saw were Clementine Ford, and also some lawyers said they would be able to prosecute under new sex crime laws.

I normally disagree with Clementine Ford, however she went up in my estimation for at least applying her views somewhat consistently on this occasion.

That woman will never go up in my estimation. She is as hateful a bigot as I have ever known.

 

[domus]

Swan & Cloke were victims of their own making & stupidity.....Does that excuse the women's opportunistic behavior in looking to score a quick buck out of their fame & embarrassment?....No

But again...You send nudes to strangers you don't know a thing about, then expect the unexpected or worse.

What possesses blokes to want to flash their tackle at strange women is beyond me....Must be a new mating ritual I'm not familiar with....But calling the flashers 'victims' is - for want of a better word - a stretch.

That is not the point. When women share nude pics and they are exposed it is the men who share the pics who are called out for being low life scum. When it happens to men the major focus is the idiocy of the men for sending nude pics to a woman. Do you see an inconsistency here?

 

[perthblue]

Swan & Cloke were victims of their own making & stupidity.....Does that excuse the women's opportunistic behavior in looking to score a quick buck out of their fame & embarrassment?....No

But again...You send nudes to strangers you don't know a thing about, then expect the unexpected or worse.

What possesses blokes to want to flash their tackle at strange women is beyond me....Must be a new mating ritual I'm not familiar with....But calling the flashers 'victims' is - for want of a better word - a stretch.

it is not something I am personally interested in, but people send nudes to each other all the time, men and women,in both casual flings and long term relationships. it is just a thing that happens. that you call equate it to 'flashing' 'strange women' just shows your naivety, and it is honestly pretty appalling that you blame the blokes, who were engaging in this common practice, for being victims when these women betrayed them and broke the law.

 

[Procrastinator35]

it is not something I am personally interested in, but people send nudes to each other all the time, men and women,in both casual flings and long term relationships. it is just a thing that happens. that you call equate it to 'flashing' 'strange women' just shows your naivety, and it is honestly pretty appalling that you blame the blokes, who were engaging in this common practice, for being victims when these women betrayed them and broke the law.

Not really my generation I guess....I never grew up with camera phones & the internet & no one of my acquaintance that I know of, indulges in this kind of behavior....Strange times indeed when this is considered 'normal'.

 

[Chief]

Just came across this on reddit and don't think it has been posted here..

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3175099/#!po=56.7961





Over 40% of DV agencies and over 32% of DV hotlines accused males seeking help of actually being the abuser. That is seriously ******.

You aren't reading that correctly.

Those numbers are the respondents who reported problems, not the proportion of agencies.

Unfortunately the MO of too many people is to attack the idea that violence against women is a big issue that requires as many resources and as much publicity as it gets.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[fleabitten]

You aren't reading that correctly.

Those numbers are the respondents who reported problems, not the proportion of agencies.

Not sure about that.

"Some of the men were accused of being the batterer in the relationship: This happened to men seeking help from DV agencies (40.2%), DV hotlines (32.2%) and online resources (18.9%). Over 25% of those using an online resource reported that they were given a phone number for help which turned out to be the number for a batterer’s program. "

A bit ambiguous I guess, but the last sentence is clearly saying over 25% of those using the resource, not 25% of those reporting problems. Given that, the other percentages seem reasonable (i.e. that a lower figure of 18.9% were directly accused of being the abuser rather than just referred to treatment for abusers). Maybe I'm wrong, but table 3 seems pretty clear to me.

Unfortunately the MO of too many people is to attack the idea that violence against women is a big issue that requires as many resources and as much publicity as it gets.

Is this relevant to my post? How is a complaint about how abused men are treated an attack on "violence against women" campaigns?

 

[Chief]

Not sure about that.

"Some of the men were accused of being the batterer in the relationship: This happened to men seeking help from DV agencies (40.2%), DV hotlines (32.2%) and online resources (18.9%). Over 25% of those using an online resource reported that they were given a phone number for help which turned out to be the number for a batterer’s program. "

A bit ambiguous I guess, but the last sentence is clearly saying over 25% of those using the resource, not 25% of those reporting problems. Given that, the other percentages seem reasonable (i.e. that a lower figure of 18.9% were directly accused of being the abuser rather than just referred to treatment for abusers). Maybe I'm wrong, but table 3 seems pretty clear to me.



Is this relevant to my post? How is a complaint about how abused men are treated an attack on "violence against women" campaigns?

We need to read this stuff properly.

Applying these numbers incorrectly isn't going to lead to any sort of enlightenment.

For instance I don't see how they could say 25% of people using the resource, but if they think they have a representative sample they could say that.

Now - it was one online resource that was giving out this contact. Did they follow up with that? If it was on purpose, have they defended this? If not, was it corrected?


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[fleabitten]

We need to read this stuff properly.

Applying these numbers incorrectly isn't going to lead to any sort of enlightenment.

For instance I don't see how they could say 25% of people using the resource, but if they think they have a representative sample they could say that.

Now - it was one online resource that was giving out this contact. Did they follow up with that? If it was on purpose, have they defended this? If not, was it corrected?

If you have issues with the research, The National Center for Biotechnology Information can probably answer your questions better than I can. Judging from the recommendations made by their researchers, they seem like a reasonable lot.

1. An increase in training about the diversity of IPV victims for members of the DV service system and all helping professionals who might come into contact with IPV victims.
2. A re-examination by faculty in the social sciences who prepare future social service practitioners concerning their family violence curricula. Education should include the common experiences of all IPV victims, regardless of victim and perpetrator gender, and the important role that frontline staff plays in validating those experiences and providing services to all who need assistance.
3. A re-examination by police departments with regard to how they handle incidents of IPV and how police officers respond when victims do not meet our gendered notions of the dynamics of IPV.
4. Screening of all clients for abusive experiences. Any client, male or female, who indicates that s/he is the target of aggressive behaviors should receive information on getting help for IPV.
5. Public education concerning IPV and outreach materials for potential victims be gender-inclusive, because previous research shows that men are often not the recipient of outreach materials concerning IPV victimization (Hines and Douglas 2011a, b).
6. Future research examining the effectiveness of any of the training, screening, and public education techniques already recommended in this study.
7. Future research on men who sustain partner violence from their female and male partners, especially to examine other potential correlates or consequences of IPV, such as other types of mental health problems and an examination of potential physical health problems.
8. Future research on how female-perpetrated IPV may have an impact on a family system, especially children who live in these households.

Unfortunately the MO of too many people is to attack the idea that women's violence against men is an issue that requires some resources and some publicity.

 

[Chief]

If you have issues with the research, The National Center for Biotechnology Information can probably answer your questions better than I can. Judging from the recommendations made by their researchers, they seem like a reasonable lot.

1. An increase in training about the diversity of IPV victims for members of the DV service system and all helping professionals who might come into contact with IPV victims.
2. A re-examination by faculty in the social sciences who prepare future social service practitioners concerning their family violence curricula. Education should include the common experiences of all IPV victims, regardless of victim and perpetrator gender, and the important role that frontline staff plays in validating those experiences and providing services to all who need assistance.
3. A re-examination by police departments with regard to how they handle incidents of IPV and how police officers respond when victims do not meet our gendered notions of the dynamics of IPV.
4. Screening of all clients for abusive experiences. Any client, male or female, who indicates that s/he is the target of aggressive behaviors should receive information on getting help for IPV.
5. Public education concerning IPV and outreach materials for potential victims be gender-inclusive, because previous research shows that men are often not the recipient of outreach materials concerning IPV victimization (Hines and Douglas 2011a, b).
6. Future research examining the effectiveness of any of the training, screening, and public education techniques already recommended in this study.
7. Future research on men who sustain partner violence from their female and male partners, especially to examine other potential correlates or consequences of IPV, such as other types of mental health problems and an examination of potential physical health problems.
8. Future research on how female-perpetrated IPV may have an impact on a family system, especially children who live in these households.

Unfortunately the MO of too many people is to attack the idea that women's violence against men is an issue that requires some resources and some publicity.

It does have resources. Why keep denying this?

There seems to be some fantasy that women get more resources than they need and men get none.

Neither is true.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[fleabitten]

It does have resources. Why keep denying this?

There seems to be some fantasy that women get more resources than they need and men get none.

Neither is true.

Where did I claim either of those things were true? Saying that men's services and awareness of male victims are woefully inadequate is not the same as saying women's services are overfunded. It's funny that you came in talking about how some people just want to "attack the idea that violence against women is a big issue" when we weren't even talking about violence against women. It's people like you who want to attack the idea that men sometimes need help as well, that getting help can be difficult and that it can even make matters worse for them.

 

[Chief]

I read between the lines on a lot of stuff posted by some people.

There is usually a pattern across threads too.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[fleabitten]

Ahh. Must be a handy superpower, knowing what people truly mean to say when they are not saying it all.

 

[Chief]

Ahh. Must be a handy superpower, knowing what people truly mean to say when they are not saying it all.

When you see some people (not you in particular) posting as if there is a male v female zero sum game going on, you get pretty skeptical about anything they post.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[fleabitten]

When you see some people (not you in particular) posting as if there is a male v female zero sum game going on, you get pretty skeptical about anything they post.

Isn't that pretty much exactly what you just did? We were talking about the inadequacy of men's services and you took that as an attack on women.

 

[Chief]

Isn't that pretty much exactly what you just did? We were talking about the inadequacy of men's services and you took that as an attack on women.

As I said: reading between the lines on some people's posts. If you didn't have that in mind when you posted, then all good.

 

[domus]

It doesn't make her position 'disgusting'? It just means you don't agree with her position. Why the outrage? Crickey.

Why the outrage? If only a few more people would feel outraged by the fact that a woman with enormous power and influence chooses to ignore an entire gender even though she is purportedly striving to protect and support victims of family violence. On what grounds is this not outrageous? It is affecting lives in the most horrific manner. I have acquaintances who have been stabbed or battered by their female partners and they have received no support be it from the police who tell them to "man up" or our government who refuses to acknowledge their existence. There are no safe houses or shelters for these men to go to and there are no places a man can take his children to escape an abusive partner.

Perhaps the civil rights activists should have simply said they disagreed with the position taken by the KKK.

 

[romeohwho]

Stealing a post from BORK

"I will paint this picture clearly just so people can see how bad it is.

I will start with the three most prominent organisations related to this area.

White Ribbon.
https://www.whiteribbon.org.au/



Okay no ****s given about children but at least they are transparent about it and not using children as emotive rhetorical tools to further their cause like these next organisations. Pity about them eliminating lesbians who suffer intimate partner violence at higher rates than heterosexual women from their cause.

Next up OurWATCH.
https://www.ourwatch.org.au/Who-We-Are/Our-Purpose

Hey looks like they care about children.. Lets look at their statistics pages on violence against women and "their" children.
https://www.ourwatch.org.au/Understanding-Violence/Facts-and-figures



Wow I guess violence against children is not even a thing considering they do not include a single statistic about them even though their organisations name actually stands for Women And Their CHildren.

What you actually see here is an organisation that only cares about children to the extent that they can advance the cause of women. Not unlike this next organisation/campaign run by Rosie Batty.
http://www.neveralone.com.au/



Okay so violence against children actually isn't a thing they are just victims through seeing violence against women.

Lets see some of the goals of this campaign.


Yes I am sure your organisation really does want to hold the perpetrators of violence against children responsible*

*As long as they are the right gender.

Now here is the one seeming campaign focused on stopping violence against children in Australia.

https://polishedman.com/


https://polishedman.com/page/about#about-whymen


There are four categories of child abuse in Australia. This includes physical abuse, emotional abuse, sexual abuse, and neglect. This campaign justifies its gender targeting by cherry picking the one area where men are over represented. It should be noted the cases of sexual abuse are smaller in number than the other 3 categories.

Source: AIHW (2016, p. 76)

There was even government national plan that used the misleading "women and their children" rhetoric.
https://www.dss.gov.au/women/progra...ce-against-women-and-their-children-2010-2022


Quite simply the denial of the abuse of children by women by all the major stakeholders in Australia is nothing short of disgusting. Their seems to be a concentrated protection of a narrative that women can only be victims not capable of violence even at the expense of children. Because women are the majority carers of children in Australia the majority of abused children are recipients of that abuse from women. To ignore the majority of child abuse victims in this country to protect a narrative is nothing short of shocking. I really hope this country grows up on this issue. Children are the ones who are suffering from this deliberate ignorance."

EDITED to show the quotes within the post to provide proper context.

Yep, all dreadful. Of course, seeing as your concerns are for the children, you are presumably outraged at the area of greatest damage to children. Given that the numbers of domestic violence towards women is by far the greatest, then the numbers of children exposed to acts of violence, including loss of the mother is surely highest in this area. On top of that the child is left without any parent if the father takes the mother's life, not to mention the traumatic impact that living with and witnessing dv at the hands of their father has on the child. So, if this can be reduced surely that gives us the best chance for a significantly higher number of children to be safe.

 

[cartwright]

Yep, all dreadful. Of course, seeing as your concerns are for the children, you are presumably outraged at the area of greatest damage to children. Given that the numbers of domestic violence towards women is by far the greatest, then the numbers of children exposed to acts of violence, including loss of the mother is surely highest in this area. On top of that the child is left without any parent if the father takes the mother's life, not to mention the traumatic impact that living with and witnessing dv at the hands of their father has on the child. So, if this can be reduced surely that gives us the best chance for a significantly higher number of children to be safe.

The last time I checked this, the stats were 55% of women seeking shelter did so with children.
Pausing to think that shelters are over flowing, and those in need turned away...
Reflects this is a real issue.
Unless of course you're a loon who thinks the government funds these things for "feminism"

 

[ABSOLUTE MADMAN]

Yep, all dreadful. Of course, seeing as your concerns are for the children, you are presumably outraged at the area of greatest damage to children. Given that the numbers of domestic violence towards women is by far the greatest, then the numbers of children exposed to acts of violence, including loss of the mother is surely highest in this area. On top of that the child is left without any parent if the father takes the mother's life, not to mention the traumatic impact that living with and witnessing dv at the hands of their father has on the child. So, if this can be reduced surely that gives us the best chance for a significantly higher number of children to be safe.

So you just pulled the same s**t that the BORK post pointed out of focusing on women's needs ahead of children and tried finding some random reasoning for it. FFS. The majority of child abuse victims in Australia are the victim of a female perpetrator. A child that lives with both it's biological mother and biological father is per capita many times less likely to be abused than a child living with a single biological mother.

You are clutching an non existent straws if you think seeing violence committed against women(terrible thing) is the "area of greatest damage to children".

Just another person finding an excuse to put women's needs ahead of children.

I would also note that children who have been the victims of abuse are more likely to become abusers later in life. Of course a common sense approach that would benefit children now and both men and women in the future by facing less potential abusive intimate partners who were victims of abuse as children, is not as important as maintaining the false narrative.

 

[ABSOLUTE MADMAN]

The last time I checked this, the stats were 55% of women seeking shelter did so with children.
Pausing to think that shelters are over flowing, and those in need turned away...
Reflects this is a real issue.
Unless of course you're a loon who thinks the government funds these things for "feminism"

Can you justify the continuous ignoring of the abuse of children by women (which accounts for the majority of child abuse victims) in the quoting of the BORK post above?

 

[Chief]

Stealing a post from BORK

"I will paint this picture clearly just so people can see how bad it is.

I will start with the three most prominent organisations related to this area.

White Ribbon.
https://www.whiteribbon.org.au/



Okay no ****s given about children

Stopped there. Do better.