Posted on 11/25/2011 9:32:12 AM PST by Cardhu
Today is the International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women. The phrase "violence against women" calls for comment. It names the victims but not the perpetrators. The fact that men are mainly responsible for violent and health-harming behaviours, not only against women and children but also against each other, is so taken for granted that it slips beneath the radar of commentators and policymakers.
Take the riots of August this year. As the suspects were charged, considerable detail was published by the Ministry of Justice. The press focused on the age, ethnicity, neighbourhood and employment status of offenders. Yet by far the most dramatic divergence the statistics revealed was gender: 92% of the first 466 defendants were male. Something yet more significant went unremarked: of the 124 individuals charged with offences involving violence, all were male.
When information on a further 1,715 people charged with rioting offences was issued by the MoJ a month later, the focus was on the fact that 73% of the defendants had a previous caution or conviction. Few noted that the MoJ had chosen to focus only on male rioters; females were absent from these "average" recidivists. What we saw was a palpable concern with the youth, class and race of rioters but a lack of analysis of the key fact the statistics illustrate: the culpability, and cost, of masculinity. As so often, masculine antisocial behaviour was just the wallpaper.
In 1959 the social scientist and policy activist Barbara Wootton looked at the crime statistics and remarked that "if men behaved like women, the courts would be idle and the prisons empty". Half a century later the British Crime Survey and police crime figures bear her out. In 2009-10, men were perpetrators in 91% of all violent incidents in England and Wales.
(Excerpt) Read more at guardian.co.uk ...
This is a blatant lie. When it comes to abuse of children and the elderly, women are the by far the greatest number of abusers. This is not a function of the sex but a function of the fact they are normally the care givers and have much more contact time with children and elderly parents
This is a blatant lie. When it comes to abuse of children and the elderly, women are the by far the greatest number of abusers. This is not a function of the sex but a function of the fact they are normally the care givers and have much more contact time with children and elderly parents
Men get raped in divorce courts every day.
You are correct. Look at any credible study on domestic violence. They find that about half of the violence is by men, about half by women. Now as far as crimes against strangers, young men are predominant.
There seems to be no in between.
“men are mainly responsible for violent and health-harming behaviors”
Apparently the authoresses have never watched a women’s prison movie.
What I wonder is how many women are ‘let go’ because of their gender. Or just told not to do ‘it’ anymore and go home.
I’ve seen it first hand myself, and that attitude is still prevalent because of gender based roles over the millenia. Feminists and their enablers are still trying to change society to reflect their own warped point of view. The side-effect of this is that many males are deprived of forceful male role-models and their un-social behaviors just amplify the feminists views of males.
I thought this was a given. Testosterone levels are higher in males. The judgement centers of the brain do not fully develop until age 25. What is so hard to understand? That is why traditionaly, young men are harnessed to the military - their hormones make them naturally agressive and they can follow orders without questioning.
Nor lived next door to a pair of lesbians.
Remember the bullshit from the 90's when college freshmen men had to sit with evil looking feminazis and listen to themselves being told they were "all potential rapists?"
Some poor saps even believed it.
Also, how much male violence is caused by women, either the woman saying "That #^%#! disrespected me! You take care of it or sleep on the couch!" or having the attitude that a man who doesn't bring in income (by whatever means necessary) doesn't get laid.
“The case we are making is that certain widespread masculine traits and behaviours are dangerous and costly both to individuals and society. They are amenable to purposeful change.”
The authors make no case and no proposals.
The sole purpose of the article is for two snotty, self-important, gender-righteous bitches to bash males and - by inference - present females as superior in every regard mentioned.
Women are not harmed by truly masculine men who know that one of their top 5 responsibilities in life is to be good to and for women.
Women are harmed by falsely masculine men who are too selfish and immature to think of anyone but themselves.
I had luch at juvenile hall a few days back and happened to sit with their therapist. He said that much of his therapy is around impulse and emotional self-control. For many of these violent youth, there is no filter or decisional pause between raw emotion and action.
He uses an experiential type of horse therapy to train them to control their emotional expression in actions. (As a prey animal, horses are very sensitive to human emotional states. Learning to read horse reactions can key into individual emotional states.)
I would observe that during my lifetime, many of the external societal rules and inhibitions that used to be in place, have been removed. The lines are not as clear as to what is appropriate behavior. The fact that domestic violence appears to be intergenerational - abused children grow up to be abusers, definitely blurs the lines further.
I cannot buy your argument that the woman “caused” the violence. Individuals are responsible for the actions they take. Mature adults have a choice as to how they act. If there is so little filter mechanism left, then they should try anger management courses or therapy or get out of the relationship.
A three-year-old boy was examining his testicles while taking a bath.
Mom” he asked, “are these my brains?”
“Not yet,” she replied.
The failure of masculinity costs much more.
Instead of defining masculinity as impulse control over strong emotions and refocus of energy into creativity; instead of encouraging the development of physical strength and controlling it to show tenderness and gentleness; instead of harnessing the natural urge to protect our mate and family into making a living to provide for them, we could adopt the Talliban way. Men could coverup and lockup the “cause” of their impulses trying to externally control them, instead of themselves.
Man-haters such as these will not be happy until all men and boys have had their genitals chopped off. So sick of the war agains masculinity.
Repeat that, HALF of domestic violence is by women.
But men get hauled off in a heartbeat without any question, the cops are obligated to do it.
Men having any spine or principles at all are branded as brutes and that folks is one of the many reasons we had a fag for president.
We have played to a feminist agenda and political correctness instead of supporting responsibility, integrity and principle. Some of it began with going light on criminals and then that escalated to the protection society and nanny state we have now.
Do you have some research links about half the dv stats? I cannot find any.
http://www.metafilter.com/82659/Domestic-Violence-Women-Abusers-On-The-Rise
http://www.oregoncounseling.org/Handouts/DomesticViolenceMen.htm
The only worthwhile link is the last one. Lots of citations. Some seem sto be same sex couples but overall men and women dv seems to be running at 50%
You're right about women "causing" violence from others. I'll re-phrase it as "encouraged" or "provided an incentive".
Example: wife's friend has an adult daughter. Daughter and her boyfriend were at a party at neighbor's place. Boyfriend decides he's tired (and had enough beers) and goes back to their apartment to sleep -- she sticks around. She gets into an argument with one of the guys there, gets physical, he slaps her. She goes back to the apartment, wakes boyfriend, screaming at him that so-and-so had attacked her. He goes back to the party, drunk and half awake, gets into fight with the other guy, pulls knife, cuts other guy, gets arrested.
The boy friend did the violence, but it was the girl who dragged him into the fight. I've seen this sort of thing happen more than once, where the woman starts an argument and then demands the man "protect her honor". I've read quite a few news reports about violence that got started due to women demanding men deal with people who "disrespected" them.
As far as the other thing, men getting involved in crime because women are attracted to "gangstas" with cash more than honest janitors, do you really dispute it happens?
I was in a relationship with a woman who thought that a good opening line in an argument was to take a swing at my face with the palm of her hand. Or, dig her finger nails into my wrists or shoulders and try to kick me in the nuts at the same time.
Unfortunately for her, I was a bit of a boxer in college and she never landed a clean blow on me and I was way too smart to put her face down like she deserved because in our town it didn’t matter what the facts were, the man ended up in the patrol car in cuffs.
So it gave me great pleasure when my new girlfriend who was captain of her high school basketball team, a 180’s bowler, could line drive a softball to the fence, and had four mean assed older brothers, settled the score with her. One does not usually want to condone violence, but when the old gal yanked the passenger door of my car open and pulled the new girl out of the car by the hair, I just knew it would end well. Several witnesses saw her do it and when they were putting her in the ambulance, all I remember was the cop saying: “lady, if she presses charges its YOU I am going to arrest, not her.”
What she found was that while most women, upon being hit, would decide "that's it, I'm leaving" and go. Others would keep going back to the men who battered them. What Pizzey discovered was that, among this latter group, there were women who were addicted to the adrenaline rush they got from being around violent situations. While some men might satisfy their need for an adrenaline rush by sky-diving or other dangerous activities, these women would get it by seeing how close to the edge they could provoke men.
Your son?
I have been on our local Child Abuse prevention council for years. Children under five who are abused or neglected have brains that do not physically develop normally. Many are hyper-vigilant. Also, when Mom is addicted (particularly meth) and not bonding (attachement disorder) with or attending to their physical needs, they cry and act out more to get the same attention a normal child would get with much less demand.
Yeh, it really messes them up for the rest of their lives.
Look at page 8 of this presentation and you can see the physical impact of abuse on a child’s brain: http://childtrauma.org/images/stories/docs/nmt_core_slides_2011.pdf
http://teacher.scholastic.com/professional/bruceperry/index.htm
And in doing so, squander the sublimation of libido to which Freud and others attributed the advance of civilization. Which is exactly what it appears islam has done.
I don't doubt at all that the men and women who grow up in a messed up environment are messed up. It doesn't alter my original point that women instigate a lot of the violence, by one means or another.
And I will disagree with you. A man can always say no. He does have choices.
sorry, that was not meant for you PapaBear
So is the author suggesting we need to arrest more women? Or let most of the men go? There’s obviously a bias in the arrest pattern. The bobbies must me gender profiling.
In modern society, males are berated from an early age to suppress their masculinity. They are taught that anything of a male nature is evil and must be suppressed.
But they cannot keep their nature bottled up, and it will eventually boil over as rage. We wonder why we suddenly blow up over some minor thing like the kids spilling milk or over some comment from our wives.
I’ve seen this with boys who are not allowed to play with toy guns or toy swords. They are the most aggressive children in the neighborhood, perpetually angry.
I've found that playing first-person shooter games relaxes me, and provides a safe outlet for annoyance.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.