- promoting a clearer understanding of men's experience -


MENZ.org.nz Logo First visit to MENZ.org.nz? Here's our introduction page.
MENZ ISSUES

MENZ Issues: news and discussion about New Zealand men, fathers, family law, divorce, courts, protests, gender politics, and male health.

Sun 25th November 2012

25% chance of being a victim of Domestic Violence Crimes!

Filed under: Domestic Violence,General — OMG! you're f%^^&*($@#! @ 8:22 am

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/7994731/Family-violence-at-horrendous-levels
Yay! Domestic Violence is New Zealand’s growth industry! Women and children have a 25% chance of being injured, killed, assaulted or abducted in DV incidents in New Zealand! And that makes no mention whatsoever of victims who do not suffer one of these golden four physical violances – those that have no injuries etc.
Now, you ask me, how do I derive a 25% risk of being a victim of DV?

Well it’s all maths. 77,521 incidents over 20 months = 46,512 per annum. Fast forward over 20 years, and that’s 930,252 incidents.
We have a population of 4.5million, and have some 60,000 births a year, and 30,000 deaths a year.
Over 20 years, that means some 5.1M residents. Yeah, I know, I didn’t account for immigration / emigration. But bear with me.
Over that 20 years, we have roughtly 960,000 children under 16 right now, and all those 1.2M births over the next 20 years, means 2.16M children. Half of the rest must be women (@ now)
That totals 3.63M women and children (and the other 1.47M = men).
Now, we all know that DV is a male issue. Men are the perpetratros. Women and children are the victims.
Ergo, each woman and child, 3.63M of them, over 930,252 incidents, means they all have on average a 25.6268% chance of being a victim.
The actual figures will be much, much higher, as each child of each woman is a double count as children are automatically victims of violence against women.
And each man, on average, has a 63.2824% chance of being the perpetrator.

Great reading! But what can we deduce?
First, this article declares 5 investigations per hour,i.e. every 12 minutes. Much lower than the ‘family violence incident every 6.5 minutes that Women’s Refuge normally claim.
Secondly, according to the article, these figures are impart due to an increase in reporting of DV, and also a general increase in occurence of DV. That means all the publicity, fund raising, state funding, anti-violence marches etc aren’t working, as men are apparently simply getting more violent.
Third, This article declares 9 or the 27 murders as a result of DV last year, were women. The rest were eithger children or men. How many men? we don’t know. How man children at the hands of women? we don’t know. But the implication is 18 children, all at the hands of men. That’s bullkshit. Refer to lists of victims provided by Hans Laven from time to time. Conveniently, this article masks the number of male fatalities, and certainly makes no mention whatsoever of the incidence of woman perpetrators – female violence, whether it be against other women, children or men.

But what really, is the point of this article?
Well as soon as Labour’s women’s affairs spokeswoman Sue Moroney steps in, the issue turns to funding. Apparently Minister of Women’s Affairs Jo Goodhew was “clearly failing”and The Ministry of Social Development’s funding is reducing and consequently – despite increased reporting, You can probably make an assessment that family violence is on the increase.
We’ve all heard about the proposal to include economic abuse in the chareable offences of DV in the near future. That’ll lead to identifying still more victims of DV. Fodder for Family Court, and – wait for it – men getting evicted from their homes because they dared stand against their partners having free reign to spend man’s hard-earning income on whatever they want.
And I guess there’ll be a whole flurry of Women’s Refuge calling for yet more increased funding next year. If we onl;y increase the efforts to stamp out DV everywhere, we can do it! Only thing is, clearly, that philosophy hasn’t worked yet, given all the advertising and publicilty, and all the powers given to police and family court to protect women and children the length and breadth of NZ, hasn’t yet resulted in any decline in the reported incidence of the great evil DV yet.
Except of course, the entire Woman’s Refuge / DV industry simply grows ever-bigger. Jobs for the girls.

Now, don’t get me wrong. I think violence is unacceptable. Noone deserves to be killed, injured, abducted or sexually assaulted (or any other crime).
But what does concern me is the clear implication, supported by the generous referrals by especially Ms. Goodhew clearly indicate the PC crap that still only focuses on women. The absence of explicit references and statistics clearly alludes to men as the violators.
And even if men do perpetrate the majority of Policy criminal inquiries related to DV, lets then start discussing the overall philosophy of our beloved police to ignore, inimise and belittle DV against men! You try rining the police and reporting that your wife is hitting you! At best, they might turn , nbut then, chances are, they’ll promptly remove YOU from the family home!

68 Responses to “25% chance of being a victim of Domestic Violence Crimes!”

  1. OMG! you're f%^^&*($@#! says:

    Call for clarity on family violence statisticsFigures released to Stuff under the Official Information Act showed police investigated 86,722 cases of domestic violence last year – 2049 more than in 2010. 86,722 incidents in 2011, = one every 6.06 minutes.
    40,024 were for actual offences and the rest were recorded as “non-offence investigations”. That’s one every 13.13 minutes, near-enough 5 an hour.

  2. OMG! you're f%^^&*($@#! says:

    Each DV incident costs NZ nearly $150,000!!!!
    “But, judging by analyses from Britain and Australia, a cost of$13 billion a year … was estimated for New Zealand. ” I guess that covers the entire DV industry!
    Now, Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in New Zealand was worth 142.48 billion US dollars in 2010. Say 178B NZD. At 13B for DV, that’s 7.3% of our country’s entire economy!

    Tell you what! Pay me $150,000 each year, and I guarantee I’ll never commit a DV incident!

  3. Shinhee Yi says:

    Another Male bashing news aye?

    I will never going to support white ribbon till media publish about Women perpetrator equally as men.

    This white ribbon movement at this stage to me is organization made up of bunch of Women aim to Demonize man.

  4. OMG! you're f%^^&*($@#! says:

    Apparently Women’s Refuge receive some 3,504,000 calls a year!!!!! That’s one every 9 seconds.
    Going back to my previous figures that there is some 1.47M women in this country, each woman is making 2.38 calls each year, to Woman’s Refuge.
    First, why are those 3.5M victims not all also calling Police, given Police only have some 86,722 calls?
    Or, alternative, with only 46,512 DV offences (death, injury, sexual assault, abduction etc) each year, why are they all calling Woman’s Refuge on average 75 times each?????

  5. Hans Laven says:

    OMG: your reference to “the absence of specific references and statistics” is central here. I would not trust claims made by Women’s Refuge or indeed the dv industry more broadly. For example, they have repeatedly jumped on the Super Bowl bandwagon to make unevidenced claims of increased dv during big sports matches that police have then contradicted by reporting no increase. I would definitely need to see evidence for 3.5 million calls per year, and of course whatever the true number of calls a good proportion of them will be routine, administrative, calls regarding cases already in their system etc.

    The article you refer us to is sexist in the extreme, referring only to the need to keep women safe and disregarding male victims. The total number of dv cases ‘investigated’ will have included a large proportion involving male victims (e.g. a brother attacking another brother), many calls from the same parties over a period of time, many trivial calls with some family member wanting to stop a heated argument or to punish a family member for some disapproved-of behaviour such as drinking or drug taking, many dishonest calls made by spouses planning to trash their children’s family units and to set things up so as to ensure a higher proportion of ‘relationship property’ comes their way and the nanny state will take especially good care of them.

    We should note however that the extrapolated calculation given in your post was done by yourself, not anyone in the dv industry.

  6. hornet says:

    Right on HANS – the refuge “INDUSTRY” wants more visitors – to bolster funding – there were some other statistics posted here recently which showed a DECLINE in the numbers of Violence/protection orders being issued…..

    Some common themes here – Family court – CS, and every other INDUSTRY which have prospered and GROWN over the years – refusing to deal with the causes of conflict = refusing to actually protect children – because if they did BUSINESS would stop.

  7. hornet says:

    Time PARENTS united to expose this fraud = its nothing more than that – we all share common experiences which prove this INDUSTRY is NOT DELIVERING, not at all in any of the areas it is supposed to.

    I have govt papers and recommendations going back ten years – detailing many factors which would improve service delivery and results for kids and parents – and they have DONE nothing in ten years- no all we see is MORE PENALTY, HIGHER legal costs and no one wanting to actually resolve anything – great business for a very few.

    It refuses to deal with actual conflict, preferring to allow horrible behavior to flourish, and conflict to escalate – all because this is now a very huge BUSINESS. A protected business which unless PARENTS wake up, will only get worse and continue to grow – further harming good kids, and good parents.

  8. OMG! you're f%^^&*($@#! says:

    My point is really one of this: 46,512 (aveaged) DV incidents (chargeable offence) over the last year; 86,722 (police) DV callouts; $13Billion cost to NZ;
    This industry is [apparently] HUGE. If you take the higher Police figures @ 86K callouts per annum, that means nearly HALF of all women and children will suffer a DV incident in their lifetime!!!! [we’re only introducing about 60K new people to NZ by birth each year). Long term – they will ALL suffer DV. Either that, or a good number of them are suffering repeatedly. Or a few are suffering a hell of a lot DV.
    This is LUDICROUS! The figures don’t add up.
    Is the DV indistry failing, that women victims are going back out there to suffer repeatedly?
    Are all men so violent (and the femi industry would probably conclude that they are).
    Men, you all know probably at least 20 or 30 relatively close mates. How many of them are guilty of acts resulting in police call-outs? Of none, you say. How do they keep it so quiet?
    By the stats, at least half, if not most, of them (over the last 20 years) are!
    No??? So where are all the perpetrators?

  9. OMG! you're f%^^&*($@#! says:

    i mean, 86K reports to Police, yet apparently 3.5M calls to Women’s Refuge… Why exactly, given all the advertising and campaigns, are still only 2.5% of all supposed victims calling Police?
    More funding, anyone?

  10. Scott B says:

    Is there a link to where it says how many calls per year they get? Can’t find it. Thanks.

  11. Scott B says:

    Men, you all know probably at least 20 or 30 relatively close mates. How many of them are guilty of acts resulting in police call-outs? Of none, you say. How do they keep it so quiet?
    By the stats, at least half, if not most, of them (over the last 20 years) are!
    No??? So where are all the perpetrators?

    An excellent question.

  12. OMG! you're f%^^&*($@#! says:

    To Scott #10 “That’s one every 9 seconds.” has the link.

  13. Scott B says:

    Hmmm still can’t find where is says that sorry. Can you please provide a link to where it says exactly that? Not trying to be a pain sorry, just really can’t find it, and am interested to see it.

    Also in the article…

    “Society, she says, always blames the woman.” Really? What society?

    “She’s lied in court to protect him before, and now has a perjury conviction.” So we’re meant to believe her?????????

  14. OMG! you're f%^^&*($@#! says:

    In the p[iture in the article @ # 13, is clearly the statement “9 average number of seconds between calls to womans refuge nationwide”. Straight maths = 6.6666 per minute = 400 per hour = 9600 per day = 3504000 per year.

  15. hornet says:

    not sure if anyone here read Rodney Hides article in the Sunday herald today – concerning – Women more likely to kill there children – statistically proven fact = and he then goes on to comment about how govt is punishing GOOD parents = and allowing the bad ones to flourish – he focuses more on the cases of extreme violence, drugs and alcohol – related harm to kids, but what he needs to know is that GOOD PARENTS are being equally punished at the hands of the current system who protect those parents who are psychologically harming kids, through alienation and bad behavior designed to encourage alienation – he mentions how so many good parents are paying huge sums to support a currently very biases system – its an interesting comment to see from a politician, ex politician – at a time when we are all now more informed as to the SHAM Child Support system and how it is destroying good kids, and good parents, and destroying good families.

  16. Scott B says:

    15. yes you’re right, I didn’t look at the picture, only read the text, no wonder ctrl f didn’t bring any results. Thanks.

  17. Ford says:

    there was an item on campbell live the other night about a guy who wrote a book after his daughter was killed by her hubby…the whole item only portreyed women as victims of DV..one sided media garbage

  18. Scott B says:

    Good article Hornet

  19. Scott B says:

    19 what a shocker. Not surprising though, sadly.

  20. hornet says:

    While I am not advocating any political preferences – not sure I like any politicians at the moment = because they NEVER ACTUALLY FIX ANYTHING FOR THE BETTER – I will write Mr Hide a letter – detailing the situation as we see it, and see how he responds. Will keep you posted as to his response.

  21. OMG! you're f%^^&*($@#! says:

    This whole issue isn’t political. Except to the extent that Ms. Clark & her Clarkettes helped build the DV industry. Neither party is actually responsible for, nor has any working answers to the real violence going on in society.
    equally though, neither party is doing anything constructive to dismantle the $13B DV industry …

  22. OMG! you're f%^^&*($@#! says:

    With Women’s Refuge receiing some 3.504M calls every year, roughly 2.38 calls for each woman in this country; and with the average age expectancy for women born last year detemined at being a tad over 90 yearzs, does that mean that for their 74 years over age 16, each woman in NZ can expect to ring WF a horrendous 176 times each?????

  23. Scott B says:

    24 well actually it must be much much higher than that, seeing as we always are hearing about so much abuse going unreported. Plus all of the women who don’t call the line and suffer in silence. (All using feminist logic of course)

  24. hornet says:

    OMG – I get your point on the number of calls claimed to be received to W- refuge – higher numbers – exaggerated even – helps with funding – there is NO incentive for this pat of the industry to see a reduction in DV calls. The same applies to other aspects of this industry – it is being built around either claiming funding for something they dont want to see stop, or by increasing business by refusing to deal with causes = to the detriment of children and parents, which supports the leveraging of penalties and the creation of debt, to increase borrowing – a horrible business which must be stopped in its tracks.

    If all this Family court, Child Support, Domestic Violence is NOT political – then what is it – tell me why the system actively encourages Bad Parental behavior towards CHILDREN, – encouraged by refusing to deal with the perpetrators at any level,

    why does the system refuse to encourage a parent to have time with there own children after separation – rather than deliberately assisting the direct alienation of a parent from their own children, which only increases conflict and DV = and

    why are we all having our kids used to leverage vast sums in Child support – demands being made over and above what parents actually earn as income – using this fabricated debt to leverage more borrowing……if its not political, then what is it??

    Parents need to understand – all aspects of this game they have created for us to play , is self serving – if you deprive parents of time with there kids, you create and increase conflict, which then supports the DV industry, then force parents to pay more than they earn as income, and you increase the penalty , debt industry, against which they can leverage more borrowing – all horrible stuff. But that is the reality of this system.

    I know of NO OTHER business in the private sector – which gets away with NOT Providing a service, but charging a fortune for this service – which they do not want ever deliver on – other than the justice and Child support industries.

  25. OMG! you're f%^^&*($@#! says:

    Hornet. This post isn’t about debating the political origins, causes or solutions to the entire issue of DV. This thread is purely to take the stat-spinners to task over the ludiocrity of their claims.
    Perhaps you’d like to start another thread?

  26. Ford says:

    i also notice on tv one news they mention white ribbon day and stopping violence against women..like women dont abuse men

  27. OMG! you're f%^^&*($@#! says:

    Actually, I wonder if Women’s Refuge will amend their seriously misleading advertising. That same article from WF in Nelson claims 14 women killed by a family member every year. NZ Police figures are Six women were killed in 2008, rising to 14 in 2009 and falling to nine last year.
    For Women’s Refuge to take one year’s figures – the highest in the last 3 years, and then proclaim that figure for every year, is blatently dishonest. It is a lie.

  28. hornet says:

    OMG – just making the point – this is all inter-related .

  29. Ford says:

    #15.women scream abuse at the drop of a hat..they scream threatening behavior even if you kook at them the wrong way…and if they are not believed they scream abuse again

  30. Ford says:

    #29..thats women for you..take the extreme most exaggerated option

  31. OMG! you're f%^^&*($@#! says:

    Hornet – I agree it’s all interrelated; but if a thread hs to cover everything, it ends up covering nothing. It is easier to tear shreds into a newspaer report in one standing, than to get lost in the wider debate.

  32. OMG! you're f%^^&*($@#! says:

    @ Ford # 31 – hahaha. In that case we should be surprised it’s only 3.5M calls to women’s refuge!

  33. Ford says:

    what i read on here and other sites..i have now started posting on tv1 and campbell lives facebook pages

  34. Ford says:

    #34..its seems men are so busy abusing women they dont have time to do anything else ..too busy abusing women to hold down a full time job..no time to sleep..busy busy busy..my x went to womens refuge but i know for a fact it was all manipulated drama queen..woe is me..im a victim crap…now ive always been told if its happened to me im not the only one so i wonder how much of the stats are made up rubbish..a very high % id say

  35. OMG! you're f%^^&*($@#! says:

    Maybe at 3.5M calls a year, women are calling up everytime their man doesn’t let them get their way.
    ‘my man won’t let me spend all his income on myself! I’ve been abused [economically]! boo hoo help me!’

  36. Ford says:

    women are like cops..neither of them like being told NO

  37. OMG! you're f%^^&*($@#! says:

    Actually, I wonder if WF are recieving 3.5M calls a year, how many more are going unanswered?

  38. Scott B says:

    How many people work there to answer a call every 9 seconds?

  39. Ford says:

    #40..i wonder how long the average call is

  40. Scott B says:

    Well you know how women like to talk! 😉

  41. Ford says:

    lol..was thinking the same thing

  42. Ford says:

    if the majority actually told the truth the calls would be very short indeed or not made in the first place..the number would be more like 3.5 calls

  43. Black Pete says:

    How many people work there?? none of them!

  44. Ford says:

    1 woman makes a call to WF and then there are probably 10 follow up calls to see how shes going

  45. Black Pete says:

    Actually, with so many calls to Women’s Refuse, 1 every 9 seconds, and the well established fact that no woman has ever been able to tell her *sob* life story *sob* in anything less than 3 bottles of wine duration, each call plunges the Refuge’s hotlines further and further into backlog.
    At leaset that explains why some women take twenty or more years to lodge a complaint (usually just after she leaves her man, and lodges for full possession of their joint home and custody of the kids)!!!!
    OMG he hit me! six years ago! I’m so traumatised I need a Protection Order!!!!

  46. Black Pete says:

    Hardest photo in the world to take … woman with a glass of wine, not repeating her life story ….

  47. OMG! you're f%^^&*($@#! says:

    13,937 women & 11,014 children (total 24,951) needed the help of Women’s Refuge in 2011.
    I guess that means each of those 11,014 women each called the Refuge 251 times each!!!!!
    Maybe the Refuge lines were so busy, their calls went unanswered the first 250 times?

  48. Black Pete says:

    True quote from Woman’s Refuge own website: 60% of Women’s Refuge clients are 36 years old.
    Guess 36 is a very dangerous age for women!

  49. Ford says:

    #47..they cant complain until they have depleted his bank accounts and maxed his credit cards and most only leave when they can make the best financial advantage

    i did anger management once..well twice but a stat they bandied around was from the time she has decided to leave it take a femnale 7 yers on average to walk out the door…it probably takes her that long to steal and save from the grocery money..save that up to organize a flat/house and work out the best time to make her move

  50. OMG! you're f%^^&*($@#! says:

    hahaha
    I didn’t pick up on that one. But here’s what I was looking for:

    Women’s Refuge receives just over 60,000 calls to its Crisisline every year. This means we answer a crisis or information call every nine minutes, every day.

    SO. The Women’s Refuge in the little piccie (quoted as source: Women’s Refuge / Ministry of Justice) openly publish that a call is received every 9 seconds – 3,504,000 calls a year; but Women’s Refuge website declare only one call every 9 minutes – or 58,400 calls a year.
    Maybe they need more funding so they can learn some basic maths, and not engage in grossly misleading, emotionally manipulative advertising?

  51. Ford says:

    #52..looks like the person that quoted the stats changed the word ‘minute’ for the word ‘seconds’..probably a female

  52. Ford says:

    ’40 % of the children WR deal with are under 5’…thats because they go where mum goes..they dont really know whats going on..just want to be with mum.. then she can also use them to exagerate her plight

  53. OMG! you're f%^^&*($@#! says:

    agreed. But when you go public with whet we all know is emotionally manipulative – emotional blackmail, designed to guilt us all into supporting and funding their cause, you’ve got to make damned certain you’re correct in your stats.
    btw. Isn’t making you feel guilty a recognised form of DV? Or is that only the case when you make a female feel guilty?

  54. OMG! you're f%^^&*($@#! says:

    And if women’s refuge stats are true, and we’ve just seen quite clearly that they aren’t always, and if Police stats are real, and if police receive 86,722 calls a year, of which 46,512 are the golden four including injury / assault etc, and women’s refuge claim only 18% of people report their DV to the Police, meaning there are really circa 481,788 incidents a year, then, out of that 481K incidents, how come WF only helped 13,937 women & 11,014 children in 2011?
    13,937 out of 481,788 = 2.8% of DV victims helped by WF, at an average 4.19calls each? Or was it 251 calls each? Hard to tell with conflicting stats.
    Man – such a mission for WF – to find those other 467,851 hapless victims.
    Remember too – that DV costs NZ $13B a year, and since WF only help 2.8% of the victims, imagine the payback if they could onbly get more funding from the government, to start tracking those victims down.
    Beats me why we need to extend the definition of DV to include economic abuse, in order to create more victims, when there’s so many out there, just waiting to be discovered.
    Or maybe they just can’t get through to WF, given the obvious phone jams with 1 call every 9 seconds???

  55. hornet says:

    #33 – OMG – could also be the case that all these separate THREADS disperse into the ether, track off on diverse tangents and never actually come together to sort this system out. Divided we are all fked. United in debate on a common Collective subject
    which brings together all the systems failings and untruths –

    – we can then actually demonstrate how corrupt the ENTIRE system is and gather strength in numbers to change it.

    Ill keep mentioning – UNITY – between parents ( separated or not – father and mother together to help there kids ) because the system thrives on keeping us all divided – and just loves to see us all discussing the minute failings of each part in isolation.

    Divide and Rule.

  56. OMG! you're f%^^&*($@#! says:

    Actually, Hornet, they ARE altogether in one place. This whole forum. They don’t need to be in every thread.

  57. hornet says:

    Couple of links to explain the problem for us all – which is why this system is in such bad shape = To survive currently – it MUST increase debt – and leverage more from the people – anyway it can.

    I know OMG, its not Directly relevant to the WR call centre thread – but indirectly, it defines what is happening with the entire system – it MUST INCREASE DEBT – because there is no other way to avoid going under. The system promotes the reason = We need to borrow more $$$$ to fund these services – whether we actually need to or not – is not relevant -( ie exaggerate figures to highlight a need ) – its all a sham to excuse more DEBT Borrowing.

    It further explains why our Child Support system has to leverage borrowing against massive debt ( most of which is artificially inflated because most of the debt is PENALTIES incurred against excessive demands over and above what people actually earn as income )

    The first video explains simply why there is so much debt globally and how it happened back in 2008.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQaMtGSfmpw

    The second video describes what will eventually happen when the system can no longer borrow to pay down debt.

    Borrowing just to pay off interest while NOT reducing debt and taking more and more from the public has a limited life span.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1OruYXUMJc&feature=plcp

  58. Ford says:

    #59..i hope im still around to watch the system come crashing down..im gonna love it

  59. Down Under says:

    Unfortunately this is very predictable. Every once and a while a journalist will come out pro-male in the media – which we have seen a bit of lately – as noted and responded to by MOMA. This provokes the usual statistical-trash/male-bash reaction from the whimin’s-industry via the media.

    These people seem to be engulfed in the belief that their end justifies the means however their warped sense of reality doesn’t allow them to see that their self-satisfying righteous-indignation does nothing to alleviate the problem they are pretending they can solve. So, on we go in this cycle of media madness.

  60. Bruce S says:

    @Too Tired #62 – Keep up will you!! Toxicology tests will be required first to determine if she was on some fertility enhancer or other psychological / mind altering substance; you know the stuff that adversely affects the the behavior of otherwise demure, sweet, kind and benevolent XX chromosome carriers. Seems there’s always an excuse for this type of behavior as long as you’re XX positive.

  61. Too Tired says:

    The one that gets me angry most is changing the charges based on sex, for a man it’s called ‘rape’, for a women its ‘sex in special relationship’

    Never listen to stats there is always something missing from the equation.

  62. Annie says:

    I used to believe in all the crap that I read here until I found myself on the receiving end of my husband’s abuse, not physical abuse,it was more mental abuse and mind game playing. I stood by him through thick and thin when he was put through IRD’s child support thrashing, but now when I look back on those times when we were struggling to exist, he was still smoking 2 packets of cigarettes a day.But it was me, his third wife who had to go without and support him for years. He has just wasted $33,000 in 9 months and he didn’t even have the money to pay his child support of just $71 last month because he’d blown all his money away on cigarettes and cell phone and cyber sex.
    You men sling off about womens refuges but you don’t seem to be concerned about the men who punch their wives in the stomach when they are pregnant.

  63. Happy Larry says:

    Are you saying, Annie, that your ex spent $33,000 of his money on “cigarettes and cell phone and cyber sex”? Were you earning money too? why your concern about what he spent his income on? Were you not earning? Why not? Was he suppose to support you?
    Women’s Refuge is quite clear that man controlling his partner’s spending (ie her income) is domestic violence. What you earn is yours to choose to spend, including the right to decide how much to ‘contribute’ to joint household finances. Surely then, what he spends his income on, is his choice?
    Before you jump in, no, I most certainly don’t agree with men punching their pregnant partners in the stomach. Get the bastards arrested and jailed; that is what they deserve. Is that your experience? If not, why raise it?
    Mind games and other psych crap? You state he did this to you. Sorry to hear of your experience, but if you read this site extensively, what men experience is that in just about every case before the family court, if women can’t establich real [physical] violence, then they invariably allege psychological abuse. So, um, forgive me, but by what established standard were you psychologically abused?
    You supported him whilst he squandered his income ($33K after tax, which means probably $40,000 pre-tax income) on vices. Sorry to hear that. Let me share my views with you. If I had a partner like that, we wouldn’t remain one month under the same roof.
    But if his income was indeed – at least – $40,000 per year, how did he get assessed for “years” at CS of $71 per month?
    $33,00 per year – about $90 per day – seems a little distorted against his declared income, because there is basically no way on earth anyone with that kind of disposable income should be paying next to nothing on CS. That’s my personal view too – men need to pay a realistic amount of CS. To be fair, what is realistic is a little negotiable – and certainly needs to consider realistically how many nights a year their children are in their own care.

    Sorry Annie, all I really read into your comment is that you too feel in some way betrayed or shafted by your ex, and now altogether vindictive and acrimonious about your “years”-long relationship, and now he too, like the generaly anti-male concendud, is another allegedely just another deadbeat violent abuser.
    And that is exactly the myth this site ultimately seeks to challenge and dispell.

  64. Too Tired says:

    I have to say that I too am against all forms of abuse against anyone, but I seek these sites to discuss my own problems, with my peers eg men who have been hurt. I think this site needs a ‘my story’ addition.

    Misery loves company and it’s (for whatever reason) comforting to hear I’m not the only one IRD are screwing etc.

  65. Happy Larry says:

    Too Tired #62. Just wait – the judge will eventually find her not guilty, that he somehow ‘provoked’ her into her actions (she had finally ‘snapped’; that he was indeed the violent partner (her word only), and consequently, she had endured “years”of “mental abuse and mind game playing”. He probably had spent all his income on – oh no need to spell it out. You know where I’m headed with this one …

Leave a Reply

Please note that comments which do not conform with the rules of this site are likely to be removed. They should be on-topic for the page they are on. Discussions about moderation are specifically forbidden. All spam will be deleted within a few hours and blacklisted on the stopforumspam database.

Since May 2016 this site is cached. Comments will not appear immediately unless you are logged in. Please do not make multiple attempts.

« »

Powered by WordPress

Skip to toolbar