Yes, those were the days, my friends. Those were the days…
Cause we were young, and sure to have our way.
Now, who’s up for a rousing chorus of, “Ochie Chorniye”?
I’m sorry to hear you thought your time was wasted. I found Wendy McElroy passionate, eloquent, fair-minded and intelligent. Not your kind of feminist?
Karen Straughan is a woman who started a blog under the psuedonym girlwriteswhat. She moved on from that to posting videos on YouTube. From what I can tell, she’s moved on to public speaking now.
Google her name or girlwriteswhat, and you’ll find her.
Years ago, feminists pushed for “mandatory arrest” policies in domestic violence cases. They thought too many people were getting away with intimate partner violence. They were right, but not in the way they thought. Police started arresting women, where previously they’d have left without making an arrest.
Now they’re pushing for “primary aggressor” policies, where:
Instead of looking at the evidence, police must consider “The height and weight of the parties”; “Which party has the potential to seriously injure the other party”; and “Whether a party has a fearful demeanor.”
So men, if your girlfriend hits you, try lose a lot of height and weight and strength before the police show up, and look as fearful as possible.
According to your own cite:
To determine the predominant aggressor, police must consider:
[ul]
[li]Offensive and defensive injuries[/li][li] The seriousness of injuries received by each party[/li][li] Threats made by a party against the other or a family member or a pet[/li][li] Whether a party acted in self-defense or in the defense of another[/li][li] The height and weight of the parties[/li][li] Which party has the potential to seriously injure the other party[/li][li] Any history of domestic violence between the parties[/li][li] Prior convictions of assault[/li][li] Orders for protection that have been filed by a party[/li][li] Whether a party has a fearful demeanor[/li][li] Whether a party has a controlling demeanor[/li][li] Witness statements[/li][/ul]
In addition:
“Police must consider whether the injuries and the evidence corroborate the statements made by each party and by witnesses.”
“The determination of the predominant aggressor, and the reasons for that determination, must be included in the police report.”
Since you are a lawyer, surely you can explain why the police should not consider any of these things as part of their investigation, and how that is not considered evidence.
Wouldn’t the police need to consider the same evidence to determine if the primary aggressor is a woman?
What alternative are you suggesting?
I found Wedny McElroy fair minded while a little angry. Jessica (Trigger Warning) Valenti was annoying but not entirely wrong.
Both women described themselves as feminist. Which only serves to show that it’s a spectrum with opposing views on both ends.
Here’s my problem with your OP and one you still have not addressed:
Rape/Sexual Assault is a criminal issue. I assume as an attorney you do not disagree. Why are you attempting to politicize it as a feminist issue and then paint the majority of feminist with the same broad brush of misandry?
Nothing.
Not exactly. I’m generally not a judgmental person. We are forced to make decisions early in life, with little real-world experience. As we mature and grow and gain real-world knowledge and learn more about ourselves, often our priorities and preferences change. Plus what we were taught we were getting into may not be what we were told it was. If someone trains to be a doctor and decides later to stay at home with his or her kids, I’m not going to judge them.
No.
No. I’m saying everyone who has children makes sacrifices. And I’ll add that those sacrifices are often rewarded, many times over.
It’s my opinion that children benefit from close relationships with their parents - preferably both of them. But time spent with children is time not spent at work. That’s just how life works.
I don’t know if you have children, how old they are, or how much time they spend with their parents. In general, I’m not in the habit of judging what other people do with their children. It’s my opinion, though, that children benefit from spending time with their parents. Hypothetically, if two people have 60 hr a week jobs, they’re not spending much time with their children. That’s just how math works.
You can define it however you like. My point is that time spent working is time spent away from your children.
Being in two places at once is impossible. But not irrelevant.
I am lucky to have been born in a 1st world country. All of us were. And generally, we take it for granted - that’s just human nature. People take for granted what they already have. It sounds like you were fortunate to come here too. Where are you from?
Seems to me, LinusK, that you lead a fairly charmed life. White, educated, financially stable, first world problems, etc…
Yet, you keep grinding that axe against feminists? What’s your specific beef with them? Can you climb off that cross and express your objections in your own words, counselor?
Definitely male DV victims experience severe discrimination.
From the same study:
Which is not to say that IPV incidents against men by women don’t occure. They absolutely do. But that’s not what the OP is about and that’s not what anyone has tried to deny. Are you saying that feminists are saying that women are the only victims of IPV?
Each feminist like everyone else has her/his opinion of the issue. I am not an expert on their opinions.
I am just saying that men do face many forms of discrimination.
And what’s with that anyway? 99% of men are physical way stronger than the woman they’re in a relationship with. If a girl started to get violent on me in a way which could described as anything resembling abuse, I’d slap her till she stopped or at the very least physically restrain her. That’d be easy, not because I’m superman or anything, but because girls are fucking weak. I literally weight 2x the one I’m with now and I’m only average at 186cm/85kg, so no Klitschko or anything. 99% of women ought to be no more a threat to the average man than a 10yo child is.
I suspect it’s because from what I’ve read on various forums, that you in the USA have a tendency to escalate really fast and involve the police in ridiculously trifling matters. It’s not domestic violence if a girl lash out a bit in frustration or shove you a bit, when both you and her are fully aware that she’d never be able to really hurt you in any way. Using the police to settle marital scores is really a very bad idea.
It really is a bad idea, yet it happens all the time.
And if you were in the US - and I don’t know where you live - you’d be making a very bad mistake if you did “slap her till she stopped.”
If the police came, for whatever reason, you’d be going to jail.
Here are some of the consequences you’d face - and this is before getting any kind of trial:
[ul]
[li]Jail (and yes, jail really sucks)[/li]
[li]Bond: cost is variable. Could be as much as $5000, or as little as $40.[/li]
[li]Defense attorney: again, variable. Let’s say $1000 - $5000.[/li]
[li]Automatic protective order (ordinarily, it prevents you from going back to your own home)[/li]
[li]GPS: ~ $350/mo. It’s an electronic ankle bracelet, that needs to be continually charged. It’s 24/7, bulky and hard to hide.[/li]
[li]Mandatory classes: Batterer’s Intervention programs can last up to 52 weeks, and cost $1000+[/li]
[li]Losing your job: depending on your job, missing work (because you’re in jail) can get you fired. Alternatively, if your employer out you’ve been arrested for domestic violence, you could be fired.[/li][/ul]
Again, those are consequences you face before trial.
Well I’m in Europe, and it’d be self defense in the case I lined up. Don’t really throw people for jail for such cases anyway, at least in Denmark. But it has never happened because I’ve never had a woman hit me with the intent to do actual damage. And I’ve never heard of anybody else it happened to either. As far as I know, it’s not really a thing which happens to a statistical relevant degree, but I could of course be mistaken. I’m more confused how it would take place in the first place, a girl half your size, weaker, slower and physical fragile. The only scenario where she could harm you is if you let her and why would you – or of course if weapons were involved, but then we’re in a whole other territory. So anyway, that’s the reason I’d think those stats are not reflecting things as they happen in the real world.
I met a Russian guy in Spain the other month. He had been married to an American girl. They had a row, don’t know, but wouldn’t be surprised if he’d hit her – because Russian. And she called the police, which was perhaps quite reasonable. But the mindboggling thing was that she fully expected them to patch up and go on as a couple as if nothing of particular importance had happened. How does that even compute? You call the police on your husband – in which world is this something you can come back from and not an absolute last choice and a complete deal breaker?
Makes about as much sense as hitting your wife, and expecting her to come back to you.
Yes well that’s stupid of her but happens all the time. I just kinda suspect that Americans have a rather alien and difficult to understand relationship with the police and juridical system and such, which screws up stats made on the basis of police reports.
US laws are an order of magnitude harsher then European laws. They are as harsh as Soviet laws under Stalin.
In USA a woman can abuse a man because in most cases a man would not risk a legal penalty for defending himself.
I also question the idea that because women are on average physically less strong than men that they are somehow weak (ie: that a woman couldn’t possibly be a threat to a man). I grew up on a farm and my female relatives and friends were perfectly capable of contributing to hard physical farmwork. And no they weren’t ‘butch’ (not that there’s anything wrong with that), just average people.