Look ladies. We've had this discussion about DV a dozen fuckin' times and every time I pull out some statistics from some government or another that contradicts your preconceived and sexist notions.
Is this just gonna be a repeat of every other discussion of the disproportionality of DV cases reported by men? Or at some point are you poor misguided women going to open your ears and eyes and actually look at evidence?
If I remember correctly, the percentage of lesbian couples that report DV is comparable to the number of heterosexual couples that report it.
If we are talking about Saudi Arabia, what about the huge amount of violence perpetrated against other men on a daily basis?
Say no to violence, and lies and deception like this bullshit about women being the words victims and men being the worlds criminals.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Look ladies. We've had this discussion about DV a dozen fuckin' times and every time I pull out some statistics from some government or another that contradicts your preconceived and sexist notions.
Is this just gonna be a repeat of every other discussion of the disproportionality of DV cases reported by men? Or at some point are you poor misguided women going to open your ears and eyes and actually look at evidence?
If I remember correctly, the percentage of lesbian couples that report DV is comparable to the number of heterosexual couples that report it.
If we are talking about Saudi Arabia, what about the huge amount of violence perpetrated against other men on a daily basis?
Say no to violence, and lies and deception like this bullshit about women being the words victims and men being the worlds criminals.
Look ladies. We've had this discussion about DV a dozen fuckin' times and every time I pull out some statistics from some government or another that contradicts your preconceived and sexist notions.
Is this just gonna be a repeat of every other discussion of the disproportionality of DV cases reported by men? Or at some point are you poor misguided women going to open your ears and eyes and actually look at evidence?
If I remember correctly, the percentage of lesbian couples that report DV is comparable to the number of heterosexual couples that report it.
If we are talking about Saudi Arabia, what about the huge amount of violence perpetrated against other men on a daily basis?
Say no to violence, and lies and deception like this bullshit about women being the words victims and men being the worlds criminals.
A. Its not as if people are saying that only violence against women is bad.
Apparently it's the only kind that warrants the attention of women. Hmm.. self-centered?
B. Its been stated before by myself and others: there are specific kinds of violence (ie Rape and Domestic Violence) that disproportionaly affect women. All people want to do is draw attention to is this specific issue.
Well then maybe you've been talking to much to actually pay attention to facts.
Following your logic and going back to my past analogy:
Man, that movie Hotel Rwanda sucked because it didn't talk about Darfur or the Holocaust. Don Cheadle sucks......
Get a new line, it's a false comparison. Comparing the reality of DV to some hollywood movie is as pointless as comparing apples to oranges. Your statement has no logical argumentative value to it.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
don't believe me? all you gotta do is catch an occasional episode of cops. they DO get arrested and charged though the charges usually DO get dropped.
also:
One of the effects of stricter laws and policies directing police to treat domestic violence as serious violent crime has been skyrocketing arrest rates of women for domestic violence. In some police departments the percentage of domestic violence arrests of females has shot up to 30 to 40 percent of the arrests. What's most revealing about this massive shift toward arresting more females is the fact that conviction rates for males vs. females remains basically unchanged. Between 90 and 95 percent of domestic violence convictions continue to be convictions of males. Or looking at it from another angle, a study in San Diego found that in cases in which females were arrested for domestic violence, only 6% of those cases resulted in prosecution.
What these and many other studies strongly suggest is that the evidence in most female arrests is so flimsy or non-existent that prosecutors can't justify filing charges, or even if the prosecutor does file, the evidence doesn't stand up in court and the case is quickly dismissed. Clearly, in a significant number of these cases, the officers are mistakenly arresting the victim of domestic violence and not the perpetrator. This is also the conclusion that we and many other victim advocates around the country have come to in dealing with these cases on a day by day basis. All too often, when women are arrested for domestic violence you're dealing with a victim who has been mistakenly designated as a perpetrator.
Women's advocates around the country feel the skyrocketing arrests of females for domestic violence stems from a combination of causes. In some cases outright officer hostility against women, or officer resentment of having to treat domestic violence as serious crime, motivates the arrest. In other cases officers are failing to properly determine the dominant aggressor. In a common variation of this problem, the officer fails to correctly identify defensive wounds and as a result they are arresting women who defend themselves, especially those women who defend themselves successfully. And in another whole set of cases, there are indications that domestic violence perpetrators themselves have gotten increasingly sophisticated at turning the law on women by doing such things as calling 911 themselves or by purposely injuring themselves before police arrive.
To be sure, there are cases in which the arrest of a female for domestic violence is a legitimate arrest. But the observations of victim advocates and studies around the country indicate that in a high proportion of female arrests, it is a domestic violence victim who has been mistakenly arrested.
Watch Cops? Eh, no citations provided for the rest of this nonsense. Watching TV show Cops is not going to clear anything up. Do some real research.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
1.. Again, I am a man. Many men are concerned about violence towards women.
2. Isn't that what you do?
3. How is the analogy not apt? You're complaining that concern about domestic violence towards women is sexist because it draws attention away from other kinds of violence, which is exactly like someone complaining about a movie that talks about genocide in one region as opposed to another. My point is just because you draw attention to one particular issue doesn't necessarily mean you don't care about other related issues. And guess what, the subject of an analogy isn't important its the substance. If my girlfriend buys apples one week and they go rotten and she buys oranges the next week and they go bad is it not apropos for me to say "man, these oranges are as rotten as those apples"? Somebody needs to take a freshman logic class.
Apparently it's the only kind that warrants the attention of women. Hmm.. self-centered?
Well then maybe you've been talking to much to actually pay attention to facts.
Get a new line, it's a false comparison. Comparing the reality of DV to some hollywood movie is as pointless as comparing apples to oranges. Your statement has no logical argumentative value to it.
Look ladies. We've had this discussion about DV a dozen fuckin' times and every time I pull out some statistics from some government or another that contradicts your preconceived and sexist notions.
Is this just gonna be a repeat of every other discussion of the disproportionality of DV cases reported by men? Or at some point are you poor misguided women going to open your ears and eyes and actually look at evidence?
If I remember correctly, the percentage of lesbian couples that report DV is comparable to the number of heterosexual couples that report it.
If we are talking about Saudi Arabia, what about the huge amount of violence perpetrated against other men on a daily basis?
Say no to violence, and lies and deception like this bullshit about women being the words victims and men being the worlds criminals.
Ahnimus, everyone knows men have to put up with violence as well, whether from other men or women but this is about saying No to violence to women in less civilised countries than us.
I'm finding it very hard not to bite my tounge on this one, bud.
1.. Again, I am a man. Many men are concerned about violence towards women.
2. Isn't that what you do?
3. How is the analogy not apt? You're complaining that concern about domestic violence towards women is sexist because it draws attention away from other kinds of violence, which is exactly like someone complaining about a movie that talks about genocide in one region as opposed to another. My point is just because you draw attention to one particular issue doesn't necessarily mean you don't care about other related issues. And guess what, the subject of an analogy isn't important its the substance. If my girlfriend buys apples one week and they go rotten and she buys oranges the next week and they go bad is it not apropos for me to say "man, these oranges are as rotten as those apples"? Somebody needs to take a freshman logic class.
It may be analogous in some convoluted way. However, all genocide and all violence is bad. I'm not looking at the holocaust as the worst genocide ever, because it wasn't, and the occurance of the holocaust doesn't degrade the severity of Rwanda. It would be dumb to say "Stop the genocide of Jews" while an equal amount of Rwanda's people are being massacred. "Stop genocide", why do we need to dissect and compartmentalise violence?
Now, the logic is fallacious in this way. This thread has separated humans into two distinct groups, men and women, which aren't as distinct as the thread presupposes. There is an equal amount of violent aggression perpetrated by both groups towards each other and members of their own so-called group. This is a drastically different scenario from genocide. Genocide involves two groups distinguished by race, religion or creed. It would not be a genocide if a group of Jews were trying to kill other Jews, would it? In-group hostility is what it's called, not genocide, and in-group hostility is precisely what appears in domestic violence reports. Furthermore, if the people of Rwanda were trying to exterminate Jews and Jews were trying to exterminate the people of Rwanda, that would be a war. Or perhaps a two-way genocide by some perverse definition of the term genocide. The two things Domestic Violence and Genocide are different in almost every way. There is no orchestrated plan to exterminate women, and Loraina Bobbit acted alone when she cut off her husband's penis. With Domestic Violence there is no conspiracy, there are no groups, they are dispersed and unconnected incidences of violence that are perpetrated by both men and women against both men and women. Lesbian DV would be analogous to a Jew killing a Jew using your genocide analogy, and that just won't happen or it wouldn't be considered genocide.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
9:07 a.m., Jan. 4, 2006--Nicole spotted her ex-husband in a shopping mall, and the two began arguing about a Christmas present he had promised their daughter but had never given her. She accused him of spending his money on beer rather than on their child.
“He shoved me, hard, and knocked me down, so when he shoved me again, I just hit him,” Nicole said. During their marriage, she added, “He hit me a lot. I hit him back, but actually I can’t hurt him. He’s bigger than me. I can only sting him ... get him away from me so I could leave.”
Nicole, who with her former husband was arrested for the fight in the mall, is typical of many of the women interviewed by Susan L. Miller for her new book, Victims as Offenders: The Paradox of Women’s Violence in Relationships. Miller, professor of sociology and criminal justice at UD, said her research has found that law-enforcement policies designed to protect victims of domestic violence are instead often making their situations worse.
“When I started this research, I was totally shocked to find that victims were being arrested as often as they are,” Miller said. “It was really eye-opening to me, and it was fascinating as a policy issue. It seemed to be an example of a policy that was implemented to be beneficial but that turned out to have unintended and harmful consequences.”
So-called mandatory arrest policies, which gained nationwide popularity in the mid-1980s, were seen as a way for police to treat domestic violence more seriously, as they would in an assault by a stranger, and to act more aggressively in protecting victims. Previously, police often separated a couple--perhaps telling the man to leave the house for the night--but did not necessarily make an arrest, especially in cases where the victim hadn’t been seriously injured. That procedure came under criticism, however, particularly after some high-profile cases in which perpetrators returned home after police left and committed more serious assaults or even homicides. New policies, designed not only to protect victims from further violence but also to protect police departments from lawsuits, encourage officers to make arrests.
Unfortunately, Miller said, officers often arrest both parties, even when there are important differences in their behavior, the injuries inflicted and the situation that led up to the violence.
Since mandatory arrest policies became widespread, the number of women arrested on domestic violence charges in the United States has grown substantially, but Miller said her research indicates that much of the increase is due to the policies and not to a real change in women’s behavior.
“There are certainly some violent women, but it’s a myth that women are as aggressive or almost as aggressive as men and that there are as many male victims of domestic violence,” she said. “That really has been discredited by all scholars who have studied the issue.”
In contrast, she said, her research on women arrested in domestic violence cases and required to attend a treatment program found three general categories: generalized violent behavior, in which the women frequently used violence in domestic and other situations, which accounted for only about 5 percent of those arrested; frustration response behavior, which often followed a history of being a domestic violence victim and accounted for about 30 percent of the group; and defensive behavior, in which the women were trying to protect themselves or their children, accounting for about 65 percent of the women.
“If a woman’s using violence because she’s afraid for her kids or herself, that’s not the kind of aggressive, controlling pattern of violence that we often see men engage in,” Miller said. “To arrest both parties, regardless of the context, isn’t solving the problem.”
In such “dual arrest” cases, police often charge the woman with a less serious offense than her partner--based on the circumstances and on the extent of each person’s injuries--but Miller said the very fact of being arrested can have long-lasting and detrimental effects on women in that situation. Because they may not be facing jail time and because they are usually desperate to get back home to their children, women often forgo having an attorney and plead guilty to an offense that will place them on probation, Miller said.
“But, she’ll still have a criminal record, and that can have some very negative consequences,” she said. “If she violates her probation, she can be rearrested and locked up. She might lose her public housing or her job, and she can be required to attend a domestic violence treatment program that takes times away from her job or her children. And, the fact that she’s been arrested and the threat of having her arrested again can be used against her by her partner as just another way he has of controlling her.”
In fact, she said, men familiar with the police policy sometimes manipulate the system by exaggerating or even causing their own injuries in order to have their partner arrested.
Even the treatment program the researchers observed, which had a victims’ perspective and gave the participants useful information and support, was unfair to most of the women because they were required by court order to attend, Miller said.
Working with undergraduate and graduate research assistants, she gathered data through three channels. The research team interviewed a variety of professionals who work with domestic violence, including social workers, police and other law-enforcement officials and emergency shelter operators. The research assistants also rode along with police officers from different departments and in different types of communities, and Miller and graduate assistant Michelle Meloy sat in on all the meetings of three 12-week programs for women who had been arrested.
Observing police officers as they answered domestic violence calls showed some significant differences among departments, Miller said. While some officers seemed “almost robotic” in their decision to arrest both parties, she said, others had been trained and encouraged to determine which party was the “primary aggressor.”
“Identifying the primary aggressor makes a dramatic difference in the outcome, and some departments are clearly better at this,” Miller said. “They consider the context and sort out the circumstances of an incident.” As a result, she said, women who were actually victims who resisted their partners’ aggression were less likely to be identified as criminals and arrested.
“I would never say that police should go back to the way things were handled before mandatory arrest policies began, but I would like to see police trained to identify a primary aggressor, to look not just at the outcome but also the factors that led up to it,” she said. “I hope this research opens people’s eyes to the problem so that we can work on refining mandatory arrest policies.”
Ahnimus, everyone knows men have to put up with violence as well, whether from other men or women but this is about saying No to violence to women in less civilised countries than us.
I'm finding it very hard not to bite my tounge on this one, bud.
Ok, let me go find some violence being perpetrated against women in some other country and then when I find it I will shout "No!"
What's the point of that?
Next time a suicide bomber blows up a building, I'll only shout "No!" if women are injured in the attack.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
9:07 a.m., Jan. 4, 2006--Nicole spotted her ex-husband in a shopping mall, and the two began arguing about a Christmas present he had promised their daughter but had never given her. She accused him of spending his money on beer rather than on their child.
“He shoved me, hard, and knocked me down, so when he shoved me again, I just hit him,” Nicole said. During their marriage, she added, “He hit me a lot. I hit him back, but actually I can’t hurt him. He’s bigger than me. I can only sting him ... get him away from me so I could leave.”
Nicole, who with her former husband was arrested for the fight in the mall, is typical of many of the women interviewed by Susan L. Miller for her new book, Victims as Offenders: The Paradox of Women’s Violence in Relationships. Miller, professor of sociology and criminal justice at UD, said her research has found that law-enforcement policies designed to protect victims of domestic violence are instead often making their situations worse.
“When I started this research, I was totally shocked to find that victims were being arrested as often as they are,” Miller said. “It was really eye-opening to me, and it was fascinating as a policy issue. It seemed to be an example of a policy that was implemented to be beneficial but that turned out to have unintended and harmful consequences.”
So-called mandatory arrest policies, which gained nationwide popularity in the mid-1980s, were seen as a way for police to treat domestic violence more seriously, as they would in an assault by a stranger, and to act more aggressively in protecting victims. Previously, police often separated a couple--perhaps telling the man to leave the house for the night--but did not necessarily make an arrest, especially in cases where the victim hadn’t been seriously injured. That procedure came under criticism, however, particularly after some high-profile cases in which perpetrators returned home after police left and committed more serious assaults or even homicides. New policies, designed not only to protect victims from further violence but also to protect police departments from lawsuits, encourage officers to make arrests.
Unfortunately, Miller said, officers often arrest both parties, even when there are important differences in their behavior, the injuries inflicted and the situation that led up to the violence.
Since mandatory arrest policies became widespread, the number of women arrested on domestic violence charges in the United States has grown substantially, but Miller said her research indicates that much of the increase is due to the policies and not to a real change in women’s behavior.
“There are certainly some violent women, but it’s a myth that women are as aggressive or almost as aggressive as men and that there are as many male victims of domestic violence,” she said. “That really has been discredited by all scholars who have studied the issue.”
In contrast, she said, her research on women arrested in domestic violence cases and required to attend a treatment program found three general categories: generalized violent behavior, in which the women frequently used violence in domestic and other situations, which accounted for only about 5 percent of those arrested; frustration response behavior, which often followed a history of being a domestic violence victim and accounted for about 30 percent of the group; and defensive behavior, in which the women were trying to protect themselves or their children, accounting for about 65 percent of the women.
“If a woman’s using violence because she’s afraid for her kids or herself, that’s not the kind of aggressive, controlling pattern of violence that we often see men engage in,” Miller said. “To arrest both parties, regardless of the context, isn’t solving the problem.”
In such “dual arrest” cases, police often charge the woman with a less serious offense than her partner--based on the circumstances and on the extent of each person’s injuries--but Miller said the very fact of being arrested can have long-lasting and detrimental effects on women in that situation. Because they may not be facing jail time and because they are usually desperate to get back home to their children, women often forgo having an attorney and plead guilty to an offense that will place them on probation, Miller said.
“But, she’ll still have a criminal record, and that can have some very negative consequences,” she said. “If she violates her probation, she can be rearrested and locked up. She might lose her public housing or her job, and she can be required to attend a domestic violence treatment program that takes times away from her job or her children. And, the fact that she’s been arrested and the threat of having her arrested again can be used against her by her partner as just another way he has of controlling her.”
In fact, she said, men familiar with the police policy sometimes manipulate the system by exaggerating or even causing their own injuries in order to have their partner arrested.
Even the treatment program the researchers observed, which had a victims’ perspective and gave the participants useful information and support, was unfair to most of the women because they were required by court order to attend, Miller said.
Working with undergraduate and graduate research assistants, she gathered data through three channels. The research team interviewed a variety of professionals who work with domestic violence, including social workers, police and other law-enforcement officials and emergency shelter operators. The research assistants also rode along with police officers from different departments and in different types of communities, and Miller and graduate assistant Michelle Meloy sat in on all the meetings of three 12-week programs for women who had been arrested.
Observing police officers as they answered domestic violence calls showed some significant differences among departments, Miller said. While some officers seemed “almost robotic” in their decision to arrest both parties, she said, others had been trained and encouraged to determine which party was the “primary aggressor.”
“Identifying the primary aggressor makes a dramatic difference in the outcome, and some departments are clearly better at this,” Miller said. “They consider the context and sort out the circumstances of an incident.” As a result, she said, women who were actually victims who resisted their partners’ aggression were less likely to be identified as criminals and arrested.
“I would never say that police should go back to the way things were handled before mandatory arrest policies began, but I would like to see police trained to identify a primary aggressor, to look not just at the outcome but also the factors that led up to it,” she said. “I hope this research opens people’s eyes to the problem so that we can work on refining mandatory arrest policies.”
What is this? An example? Why are you shying away from statistics?
The same problem lies here as it does in the appeal to the Cops program. It's a selective sample group, with biased observers.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
What is this? An example? Why are you shying away from statistics?
The same problem lies here as it does in the appeal to the Cops program. It's a selective sample group, with biased observers.
both of the links I gave you give stats. if you think that women are just as violent against men as men are to women in DV cases then show me the stats on DV convictions? (not arrests, convictions)
but I'm sure that you know more about the issue than a Professor at the University of Delaware that wrote a book about it? i mean it was written by a WOMAN therefore she can't possibly know more about the subject than YOU, huh?
but I'm sure that you know more about the issue than a Professor at the University of Delaware that wrote a book about it? i mean it was written by a WOMAN therefore she can't possibly know more about the subject than YOU, huh?
Give up, he's hopeless. Sometimes people can't understand that the same thing happening in a different context is notable.
Yea, so, bottom line. Men and women are equally as aggressive. Women are more covertly aggressive and are more violent in 11 catagories, including knives and other weapons. Women are more likely to stab you in your sleep, whereas men are more likely to use fists in the heat of anger. Women are more likely to plan their attack with a deadly weapon.
Btw, the US doj statistics blow ass, since they seem to only track violence against women. I'm having a hard time finding neutral stats in the US.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
both of the links I gave you give stats. if you think that women are just as violent against men as men are to women in DV cases then show me the stats on DV convictions? (not arrests, convictions)
but I'm sure that you know more about the issue than a Professor at the University of Delaware that wrote a book about it? i mean it was written by a WOMAN therefore she can't possibly know more about the subject than YOU, huh?
I'm not interested in reading a shitload of rhetoric to get to the facts. I go directly to the facts.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
I forgot that the only "neutral" stats are the ones that support your opinion.
No, they are stats that actually record DV where men were victims. Don't be an asshole, asshole.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
both of the links I gave you give stats. if you think that women are just as violent against men as men are to women in DV cases then show me the stats on DV convictions? (not arrests, convictions)
but I'm sure that you know more about the issue than a Professor at the University of Delaware that wrote a book about it? i mean it was written by a WOMAN therefore she can't possibly know more about the subject than YOU, huh?
Just convictions? Why? What do you think the chances are that a woman is going to be convicted of beating her husband? The justice system is not just. As I mentioned before, a friend of mine was attacked by his wife, and even though she admitted to it and took responsibility, my friend was also convicted and he didn't do a damn thing. Why? because of this false belief that people like you keep spouting from your ignorant and ill-informed mouths.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Except that you place an inordinant amount of faith in incorrect or bogus stats.
Prove they are bogus, all you ever do is talk out of your ass.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
As I mentioned before, a friend of mine was attacked by his wife, and even though she admitted to it and took responsibility, my friend was also convicted and he didn't do a damn thing.
Anecdotal evidence. Do you think that everyone in the world is ignorant and uninformed except for you, or just people that disagree with you?
I'm sorry, I can tell that people who have a different opinion than you hold threaten your fragile little ego. I'll stop immediately.
Good. Give up the pointless rhetoric. I'm not interested in your false arguments and narrow minded view of reality.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Anecdotal evidence. Do you think that everyone in the world is ignorant and uninformed except for you, or just people that disagree with you?
It's good enough evidence to cast some doubt on the statistics of convictions and not reports. Men aren't likely to even report their wives beating them. Our society laughs at it. StatsCan estimates that only 15% of men report DV against them.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Oh and Ryan? If you want to be taken seriously. If you legitimately wanted us to see your point of view regarding violence about men, then how about approaching it in a positive and informative and NON AGRESSIVE way?
Perhaps if you stopped NEGATING, didn't make inflammatory statements and did just stick with facts and used a different style to communicate on this issue you might get a lot further. I mean isn't that what you want? To bring attention to the issue of violence against men? Or is it just another opportunity for you to attack or hone your debate skills?
Either way, I'd be much more receptive to your thoughts and ideas if I didn't constantly feel like my own were being ridiculed and negated.
Participating in a petition to help bring awareness and stop violence against women is not a bad thing. If you feel that men should also be afforded this kind of awareness then perhaps try to be more inclusive and positive? Because the way you usually come at this just leaves me cold and I don't think I'm alone there.
Yea, so, bottom line. Men and women are equally as aggressive. Women are more covertly aggressive and are more violent in 11 catagories, including knives and other weapons. Women are more likely to stab you in your sleep, whereas men are more likely to use fists in the heat of anger. Women are more likely to plan their attack with a deadly weapon.
Btw, the US doj statistics blow ass, since they seem to only track violence against women. I'm having a hard time finding neutral stats in the US.
dude, i happen to know that in B.C. (and probably the rest of Canada) if there's evidence that the victim fought back she also gets arrested for DV, just as in the links I previously posted. and if she's arrested depite her being the victim and not the aggressor that would show up as a DV case.
the stats you posted above DO NOT show who was the intial aggressor in those cases and they DO NOT show conviction rates for DV
Comments
Is this just gonna be a repeat of every other discussion of the disproportionality of DV cases reported by men? Or at some point are you poor misguided women going to open your ears and eyes and actually look at evidence?
If I remember correctly, the percentage of lesbian couples that report DV is comparable to the number of heterosexual couples that report it.
If we are talking about Saudi Arabia, what about the huge amount of violence perpetrated against other men on a daily basis?
Say no to violence, and lies and deception like this bullshit about women being the words victims and men being the worlds criminals.
please read post #60. thank you
angels share laughter
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
Apparently it's the only kind that warrants the attention of women. Hmm.. self-centered?
Well then maybe you've been talking to much to actually pay attention to facts.
Get a new line, it's a false comparison. Comparing the reality of DV to some hollywood movie is as pointless as comparing apples to oranges. Your statement has no logical argumentative value to it.
Watch Cops? Eh, no citations provided for the rest of this nonsense. Watching TV show Cops is not going to clear anything up. Do some real research.
2. Isn't that what you do?
3. How is the analogy not apt? You're complaining that concern about domestic violence towards women is sexist because it draws attention away from other kinds of violence, which is exactly like someone complaining about a movie that talks about genocide in one region as opposed to another. My point is just because you draw attention to one particular issue doesn't necessarily mean you don't care about other related issues. And guess what, the subject of an analogy isn't important its the substance. If my girlfriend buys apples one week and they go rotten and she buys oranges the next week and they go bad is it not apropos for me to say "man, these oranges are as rotten as those apples"? Somebody needs to take a freshman logic class.
yeah because they never show people being arrested on Cops. :rolleyes: I hardly ever watch that show and have seen DV victims being arrested.
oooh i forgot to post the the link. sue me http://www.justicewomen.com/tips_dv_victims.html
angels share laughter
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
You should read ALL my posts before you comment.
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
Pushing him away was futile anyway.
He was stronger. And any attempts by me to even try to remove myself from the situation would only enrage him further.
So I guess the only thing I could do was what I did do and just take it like a man. :rolleyes:
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
I'm finding it very hard not to bite my tounge on this one, bud.
It may be analogous in some convoluted way. However, all genocide and all violence is bad. I'm not looking at the holocaust as the worst genocide ever, because it wasn't, and the occurance of the holocaust doesn't degrade the severity of Rwanda. It would be dumb to say "Stop the genocide of Jews" while an equal amount of Rwanda's people are being massacred. "Stop genocide", why do we need to dissect and compartmentalise violence?
Now, the logic is fallacious in this way. This thread has separated humans into two distinct groups, men and women, which aren't as distinct as the thread presupposes. There is an equal amount of violent aggression perpetrated by both groups towards each other and members of their own so-called group. This is a drastically different scenario from genocide. Genocide involves two groups distinguished by race, religion or creed. It would not be a genocide if a group of Jews were trying to kill other Jews, would it? In-group hostility is what it's called, not genocide, and in-group hostility is precisely what appears in domestic violence reports. Furthermore, if the people of Rwanda were trying to exterminate Jews and Jews were trying to exterminate the people of Rwanda, that would be a war. Or perhaps a two-way genocide by some perverse definition of the term genocide. The two things Domestic Violence and Genocide are different in almost every way. There is no orchestrated plan to exterminate women, and Loraina Bobbit acted alone when she cut off her husband's penis. With Domestic Violence there is no conspiracy, there are no groups, they are dispersed and unconnected incidences of violence that are perpetrated by both men and women against both men and women. Lesbian DV would be analogous to a Jew killing a Jew using your genocide analogy, and that just won't happen or it wouldn't be considered genocide.
if the previous link I posted isn't enough for you here's another. http://www.udel.edu/PR/UDaily/2006/jan/smiller010406.html
9:07 a.m., Jan. 4, 2006--Nicole spotted her ex-husband in a shopping mall, and the two began arguing about a Christmas present he had promised their daughter but had never given her. She accused him of spending his money on beer rather than on their child.
“He shoved me, hard, and knocked me down, so when he shoved me again, I just hit him,” Nicole said. During their marriage, she added, “He hit me a lot. I hit him back, but actually I can’t hurt him. He’s bigger than me. I can only sting him ... get him away from me so I could leave.”
Nicole, who with her former husband was arrested for the fight in the mall, is typical of many of the women interviewed by Susan L. Miller for her new book, Victims as Offenders: The Paradox of Women’s Violence in Relationships. Miller, professor of sociology and criminal justice at UD, said her research has found that law-enforcement policies designed to protect victims of domestic violence are instead often making their situations worse.
“When I started this research, I was totally shocked to find that victims were being arrested as often as they are,” Miller said. “It was really eye-opening to me, and it was fascinating as a policy issue. It seemed to be an example of a policy that was implemented to be beneficial but that turned out to have unintended and harmful consequences.”
So-called mandatory arrest policies, which gained nationwide popularity in the mid-1980s, were seen as a way for police to treat domestic violence more seriously, as they would in an assault by a stranger, and to act more aggressively in protecting victims. Previously, police often separated a couple--perhaps telling the man to leave the house for the night--but did not necessarily make an arrest, especially in cases where the victim hadn’t been seriously injured. That procedure came under criticism, however, particularly after some high-profile cases in which perpetrators returned home after police left and committed more serious assaults or even homicides. New policies, designed not only to protect victims from further violence but also to protect police departments from lawsuits, encourage officers to make arrests.
Unfortunately, Miller said, officers often arrest both parties, even when there are important differences in their behavior, the injuries inflicted and the situation that led up to the violence.
Since mandatory arrest policies became widespread, the number of women arrested on domestic violence charges in the United States has grown substantially, but Miller said her research indicates that much of the increase is due to the policies and not to a real change in women’s behavior.
“There are certainly some violent women, but it’s a myth that women are as aggressive or almost as aggressive as men and that there are as many male victims of domestic violence,” she said. “That really has been discredited by all scholars who have studied the issue.”
In contrast, she said, her research on women arrested in domestic violence cases and required to attend a treatment program found three general categories: generalized violent behavior, in which the women frequently used violence in domestic and other situations, which accounted for only about 5 percent of those arrested; frustration response behavior, which often followed a history of being a domestic violence victim and accounted for about 30 percent of the group; and defensive behavior, in which the women were trying to protect themselves or their children, accounting for about 65 percent of the women.
“If a woman’s using violence because she’s afraid for her kids or herself, that’s not the kind of aggressive, controlling pattern of violence that we often see men engage in,” Miller said. “To arrest both parties, regardless of the context, isn’t solving the problem.”
In such “dual arrest” cases, police often charge the woman with a less serious offense than her partner--based on the circumstances and on the extent of each person’s injuries--but Miller said the very fact of being arrested can have long-lasting and detrimental effects on women in that situation. Because they may not be facing jail time and because they are usually desperate to get back home to their children, women often forgo having an attorney and plead guilty to an offense that will place them on probation, Miller said.
“But, she’ll still have a criminal record, and that can have some very negative consequences,” she said. “If she violates her probation, she can be rearrested and locked up. She might lose her public housing or her job, and she can be required to attend a domestic violence treatment program that takes times away from her job or her children. And, the fact that she’s been arrested and the threat of having her arrested again can be used against her by her partner as just another way he has of controlling her.”
In fact, she said, men familiar with the police policy sometimes manipulate the system by exaggerating or even causing their own injuries in order to have their partner arrested.
Even the treatment program the researchers observed, which had a victims’ perspective and gave the participants useful information and support, was unfair to most of the women because they were required by court order to attend, Miller said.
Working with undergraduate and graduate research assistants, she gathered data through three channels. The research team interviewed a variety of professionals who work with domestic violence, including social workers, police and other law-enforcement officials and emergency shelter operators. The research assistants also rode along with police officers from different departments and in different types of communities, and Miller and graduate assistant Michelle Meloy sat in on all the meetings of three 12-week programs for women who had been arrested.
Observing police officers as they answered domestic violence calls showed some significant differences among departments, Miller said. While some officers seemed “almost robotic” in their decision to arrest both parties, she said, others had been trained and encouraged to determine which party was the “primary aggressor.”
“Identifying the primary aggressor makes a dramatic difference in the outcome, and some departments are clearly better at this,” Miller said. “They consider the context and sort out the circumstances of an incident.” As a result, she said, women who were actually victims who resisted their partners’ aggression were less likely to be identified as criminals and arrested.
“I would never say that police should go back to the way things were handled before mandatory arrest policies began, but I would like to see police trained to identify a primary aggressor, to look not just at the outcome but also the factors that led up to it,” she said. “I hope this research opens people’s eyes to the problem so that we can work on refining mandatory arrest policies.”
angels share laughter
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
Ok, let me go find some violence being perpetrated against women in some other country and then when I find it I will shout "No!"
What's the point of that?
Next time a suicide bomber blows up a building, I'll only shout "No!" if women are injured in the attack.
What is this? An example? Why are you shying away from statistics?
The same problem lies here as it does in the appeal to the Cops program. It's a selective sample group, with biased observers.
both of the links I gave you give stats. if you think that women are just as violent against men as men are to women in DV cases then show me the stats on DV convictions? (not arrests, convictions)
but I'm sure that you know more about the issue than a Professor at the University of Delaware that wrote a book about it? i mean it was written by a WOMAN therefore she can't possibly know more about the subject than YOU, huh?
angels share laughter
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
Give up, he's hopeless. Sometimes people can't understand that the same thing happening in a different context is notable.
Total reported cases of DV by gender.
Women - 690
Men - 549
Total reported to police by gender
Women - 256 (37%)
Men - 82 (15%)
Reported to police by someone else
Women - 57 (22%)
Men - 41 (50%)
Yea, so, bottom line. Men and women are equally as aggressive. Women are more covertly aggressive and are more violent in 11 catagories, including knives and other weapons. Women are more likely to stab you in your sleep, whereas men are more likely to use fists in the heat of anger. Women are more likely to plan their attack with a deadly weapon.
Btw, the US doj statistics blow ass, since they seem to only track violence against women. I'm having a hard time finding neutral stats in the US.
http://www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/85-224-XIE/0000085-224-XIE.pdf
I forgot that the only "neutral" stats are the ones that support your opinion.
I'm not interested in reading a shitload of rhetoric to get to the facts. I go directly to the facts.
No, they are stats that actually record DV where men were victims. Don't be an asshole, asshole.
Except that you place an inordinant amount of faith in incorrect or bogus stats.
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
Just convictions? Why? What do you think the chances are that a woman is going to be convicted of beating her husband? The justice system is not just. As I mentioned before, a friend of mine was attacked by his wife, and even though she admitted to it and took responsibility, my friend was also convicted and he didn't do a damn thing. Why? because of this false belief that people like you keep spouting from your ignorant and ill-informed mouths.
Prove they are bogus, all you ever do is talk out of your ass.
Anecdotal evidence. Do you think that everyone in the world is ignorant and uninformed except for you, or just people that disagree with you?
Good. Give up the pointless rhetoric. I'm not interested in your false arguments and narrow minded view of reality.
Most ironic thing I've read all week.
It's good enough evidence to cast some doubt on the statistics of convictions and not reports. Men aren't likely to even report their wives beating them. Our society laughs at it. StatsCan estimates that only 15% of men report DV against them.
Perhaps if you stopped NEGATING, didn't make inflammatory statements and did just stick with facts and used a different style to communicate on this issue you might get a lot further. I mean isn't that what you want? To bring attention to the issue of violence against men? Or is it just another opportunity for you to attack or hone your debate skills?
Either way, I'd be much more receptive to your thoughts and ideas if I didn't constantly feel like my own were being ridiculed and negated.
Participating in a petition to help bring awareness and stop violence against women is not a bad thing. If you feel that men should also be afforded this kind of awareness then perhaps try to be more inclusive and positive? Because the way you usually come at this just leaves me cold and I don't think I'm alone there.
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
dude, i happen to know that in B.C. (and probably the rest of Canada) if there's evidence that the victim fought back she also gets arrested for DV, just as in the links I previously posted. and if she's arrested depite her being the victim and not the aggressor that would show up as a DV case.
the stats you posted above DO NOT show who was the intial aggressor in those cases and they DO NOT show conviction rates for DV
angels share laughter
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~