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

Why women attack men

Filed under: General — Julie @ 2:10 pm Tue 28th March 2006

When a man rejects a woman or has an affair that she finds out about, the woman feels the only way of handling it is to get revenge and hit back in any way possible to hurt the man. Even using the children. Why? Because that’s the only power she thinks she has left.

When a woman leaves a man the same outcome applies. She feels she is not being respected and/or loved so she fulfils her needs somewhere else whether with another man, work, etc. In her mind the man is at fault and should pay for the children etc.

Women think when relationships break up that they have been wrong done by. In both scenarios the man has to fight back so that he doesn’t lose everything including the children. The more he fights, the more he feeds her. The more he fights the harder she hits. It becomes a one on one fight like in a boxing ring except the bell never rings. She has to win.

Now, when a husband and wife split up mutually, agree equally to break up they generally work out who gets what and how the children will be raised. They don’t need the courts, admin reviews and the rest.

This makes sense that the ultimate solution is for both sides to come together and agree how things will be done regarding the children etc. The female won’t make the first move. The male must. He must put aside his pride and basically put on a mask with matching facial expressions and body language. Females pick up easy on body language.

Males have alot more power than they seem to give themselves credit for. He can have her eating out of his palm if he wanted to. I would think it would be worth a try to win her over instead of paying $40,000 + to lawyers and spending so much time in Admin Reviews.

Of course all this is easier said than done but very possible.


  1. I dug the dark depths of females brains to get this so please be respectful.

    Comment by julie — Tue 28th March 2006 @ 2:13 pm

  2. Sorry Julie, I have to take issue with your statement:

    The female won’t make the first move.

    For the majority of men who I have met at Men’s Centre North Shore it was indeed the woman who made the first move: typically a Domestic Protection Order. This pretty much puts an end to any possibility of a sensible negotiated solution as you outline.

    Unfortunately, for some woman the temptation to use the Domestic Violence Act as a weapon is too great to resist. It’s kind of like leaving loaded guns was lying around. This kind of violence has a fair bit of social sanction and even outright encouragement from some sectors.

    Of course many couples (thankfully including myself and my first wife) manage to put the children’s interests ahead of their own and negotiate a parenting plan which works reasonably well for everybody.

    If the government was to promote shared parenting and mediation as a way of resolving disputes, many more families might get through separation without too much major trauma.

    With so many influential people having their reputations and careers invested in the current adversarial system, the most likely outcome is that government will redouble its efforts to implement the tired old family breakup responses that are so clearly failing.

    Comment by JohnP — Tue 28th March 2006 @ 2:56 pm

  3. John, I mean’t that the woman will not make the first move to fix the problem. Of course she will make first move to bring trouble on the man.

    Comment by julie — Tue 28th March 2006 @ 3:40 pm

  4. Is this for real?
    Women only fight in the Family Court, because of the men?
    Men are entirely responsible for women fighting (back, and only back) in all matters regarding marital breakdown.
    Finally, now I know and understand.

    Comment by Al D Rado — Tue 28th March 2006 @ 4:35 pm

  5. John,

    Spot on. The focus has to be on shared parenting based on equal parental rights and responsibilities. This produces the best outcome for our kids.

    I would add that parenting time is only one facet of this. For example C’s mum was taken to hospital unexpectedly, I picked him up and he stayed with me while the matter was resolved.

    For the next 3 weeks he clung to his mum, he would come and see me and spend time with me but would not settle to stay the night.

    I could have read the riot act – we agreed to him staying…..- but he was a scared little boy afraid his mum would die. As parents we talked it through and worked out a solution that saw him staying with mum more time and not with me as scheduled in our negotiated agreement between parents.

    That was best for him at the time. Now hes back in the “normal” routine.

    I am fortunate, C’s mum values my parenting because C needs and has a right to both parents. Yes we have disagreements, but we try to behave as adults and work them through for his benifit.



    Comment by Scrap_The_CSA — Tue 28th March 2006 @ 4:39 pm

  6. Julie, unfortunately one needs to have trust in order to negotiate with another party. If that party has lied consistently in order to punish you then there is no more trust. I trusted 3 more times after we separated and it cost me dearly as she continued to betray that trust to injure me.

    From your description of, I assume a typical female minds, reaction to separation, I would think that it should be mandatory for all Mothers (children’s protection in mind) to take counselling before custody matters are considered.

    I always considered my wife to be suffering from mental illness (post natal depression) and was more angry and disappointed with a system that is more interested in sticking the knife into me than helping her recover. I might add that I have spent over $150,000 and matters are still not settled….or should I say that she is not yet well.

    Comment by triassic — Tue 28th March 2006 @ 5:55 pm

  7. will agree with you triassic as i too have come across women who actually will pretend to honor any agreement but when it comes down to action… they like to find excuses and backoff just for the hell of it.

    Alos further to Julie’s article about affairs.. to give fiar weight there are more women into it then men… however the moment a man does it.. the woman raises a storm to get even. If a man gets angry because of being cuckolded then he is accused of being” domestically violent’ and “abusive” etc.. when it was the female that went ahead with the affair… doomed if you do… doomed if you don’t… any comments??

    Comment by star — Tue 28th March 2006 @ 7:21 pm

  8. After being through a messy divorce myself, after being abused by my wife and made to look bad in the eyes of my friends and family, I can fully relate to the views put foward about women attacking men. Due to what came down to little more then a personality clash, I have lost everything that was my world. Women who attack men is somehow seen as being acceptable, or people ‘understand’ why it happens. I have never raised my hand to my wife to this day, the stereotypes of domestic violence have put a stranghold on my life.

    Comment by Michael Dawson — Tue 28th March 2006 @ 9:40 pm

  9. Yes, I can see you ex took a toll on you, Michael.

    You looked far better before you met her ….

    Comment by Al D Rado — Tue 28th March 2006 @ 10:00 pm

  10. if one watches the TV… a images of mother ad child is promoted.. there are no images of father and child… ever wonder why? Also you can come across a lot of adverts where woman is physically violent to a man but this is blown away in a light hearted humor which further promotes the idea that it is okay for a woman to hit a man but when it is vice versa… horror and shock. etc are the reactions.

    Comment by star — Tue 28th March 2006 @ 10:21 pm

  11. if one watches the TV… a images of mother ad child is promoted.. there are no images of father and child… ever wonder why? Also you can come across a lot of adverts where woman is physically violent to a man but this is blown away in a light hearted humor which further promotes the idea that it is okay for a woman to hit a man but when it is vice versa… horror and shock. etc are the reactions.

    Comment by starr — Tue 28th March 2006 @ 10:24 pm

  12. Julie,
    What makes you think that on top of defending ourselves from abusive, violent women (aided and abetted by socialist-feminist institutions, lace curtain media and the divorce industry generally) that men also want to be women’s shrinks?

    I think you’ve overlooked how difficult it usually is for men to have to defend themselves from women, who those same men are powerfully conditioned to themselves defend in the first place instead.
    It’s a dizzying and complete 180 degree turn around believe me.

    So I am uneasy with your suggestion that men need to work at understanding women whilst they’re thus in a state of stress and confusion themselves.

    On the contrary I’d claim that as much as it’s men’s job to try and empathise….




    Please take this message back to those

    ‘dark depths of female brains’ you say you dug stuff out of.

    Comment by Stephen — Wed 29th March 2006 @ 3:42 am

  13. I am personally aware men are in a terrible situation regarding women attacking men. Yes, I agree women need to learn to make themsleves rational. Everyone has to take responsibility for their own actions. But we are not living in a perfect world.

    Comment by julie — Wed 29th March 2006 @ 7:53 am

  14. the world doesn’t need to be perfect, it needs to be fair. women who react to the irretrievable breakdown of the relationship with anger, hatred, revenge and vitriole and proceed to take advantage of a system plainly unfairly skewed in their favour should sound the alarm bells in every sector, from the family court to legal aid services, and from cyfs to the father’s family.
    these are the immature and selfish examples of womanhood who fail to recognise the importance of the father and paternal family to a dangerous degree.
    these are the women who raise the next generation of immature and selfish people who fill the pockets of those who benefit so richly from their shenanigans, and the workloads of those whose time is so desperately needed for the genuinely aggrieved.

    Comment by miss mug — Wed 29th March 2006 @ 12:36 pm

  15. It’s great to have another females point of view. It would be nice to have things fair and I think that is why new laws get put in place. Unfortunately they always seem to get exploited.

    And that is from both sexes.

    Comment by julie — Wed 29th March 2006 @ 2:21 pm

  16. Sorry but from my point of view this post is a joke. The man to make the first move, well I tired that. When and if the whole divorce thing happened to me I wanted to do it differently from what my parents did, they ended up fighting over every last knife and fork it cost them over $20,000 each 30years ago. So instead I walked away from everything, house, car, affects, money the lot. Up to the point of divorce my total legal bill was $167. So I thought I had done the right thing, I even did as much as I could to help her out with house maintaince etc etc.
    But.. it was never enough. I have over the past 14 years been through more Admin reviews and legal fights than I ever wish to remember. So while holding out an olive branch may seem like a good idea when one is thinking with a rational head… You will only be screwed in the end, my opinion of course.


    Comment by SNMP — Wed 29th March 2006 @ 7:34 pm

  17. Fair enough SNMP. The joke part is in the second half? I realise that now that I have read the comments given. I think star put it well. You’re damned if you do and your damned if you don’t. So I am prepared to accept that the only changes possible are through the government as JohnP stated.

    Comment by julie — Wed 29th March 2006 @ 10:26 pm

  18. > Triassic, I like your posts and comments. I am sorry for not expressing that sometimes on the blog.

    Regarding your comment, I and friends of mine would love to help you but we can only help with the expertise of ordinary women. You are right in saying women should see counsellors before they start fighting a male through court with legal aid support. I tell women things they don’t like to hear and I tell them they need counselling. You can imagine that they don’t agree for in their eyes the male needs the counselling. But then I do empathise for days.

    Unfortunately, counselling has its own flaws and counsellors are held accountable for their actions. If they dare speak their mind they lose their jobs and also their careers which they have worked so hard for.

    But I think you are very much on the right track for if the Government put strong officers in place for assisting break-ups as they do regarding child support officers we would have less attacking and more resolving.

    I don’t know alot about post natal depression even though apparently I have had it. When my second child was born I thought and felt he was going to die. It put a barrier between me and my child. Because I never knew, I have had to live with these feelings. It didn’t come to light until I spoke to someone as to why, when I see babies I think about killing them. I cannot hold a baby because I can’t help thinking about dropping them. I don’t tell the mothers as I know I would never do it. (Sometimes you are in positions that you are the only one around to care for a baby).I imagine the consequences in my head. You can just imagine how freaked out I feel because I even save ants, spiders ans flies. So, you can imagine that I will not have another child. All I want is to be OK when my children have children.

    It is so nice to hear that you care about this.

    Comment by julie — Thu 30th March 2006 @ 1:11 pm

  19. By the way Triassic, this is the only time I have openly spoke about my experience. No-one knows close to me but now 300 people know.

    Comment by julie — Thu 30th March 2006 @ 1:17 pm

  20. “Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned”.

    Regardless of whatever provocation, I am not responsible for any woman’s actions.

    I am responsible for my own actions, regardless of provocation.

    That women fight in Family Court is their choice.
    They can choose not to.
    The same holds true for men.

    When a child is taken from a mother, we all expect the mother to fight, to defend her cub.

    The same applies to men.

    That is why Family Court is so confrontational.

    Comment by Al D Rado — Thu 30th March 2006 @ 6:46 pm

  21. I am glad to hear you say that Al D Rado because it is not men’s fault. It is just how a woman thinks. But don’t you think, and I know you are probably the hardest person I should challenge, the taping of female conversation makes things worse?

    Comment by julie — Thu 30th March 2006 @ 7:27 pm

  22. I will willingly endose anyone taking whatever legal means they need to take to disprove false allegations levelled at them in Family Court.

    To suggest taping interactions with your ex might only make things worse is to suggest that woman’s violence is justified by man’s actions.

    Is this what you actually believe?

    If not, then what relevence has taping any conversation got to do with why some women are violent?

    Comment by Al D Rado — Thu 30th March 2006 @ 9:51 pm

  23. Al D Rado, does it make a positive difference? If anyone taped me and produced it even just to me let alone a friend who told me or a court, I would never, ever, ever talk to that person again. And I am sure everyone in the court would empathise with me. I would have the children meet you outside the door or have a third person talk to you. I would change my phone number and put the number you ring on answer phone and have a third person contact you back. Is that what is happening already? And I am not the type of person to destroy another.

    But then I would be afraid to take you on because I would think, “Oh my God, this person knows what he is doing so I better be careful (and real)”. Does that happen? What does happen?

    Comment by julie — Thu 30th March 2006 @ 10:17 pm

  24. I will willingly endose anyone taking whatever legal means they need to take to disprove false allegations levelled at them in Family Court.

    To suggest taping interactions with your ex might only make things worse is to suggest that woman’s violence is justified by man’s actions.

    Is this what you actually believe?

    If not, then what relevence has taping any conversation got to do with why some women are violent?

    Comment by Al D Rado — Thu 30th March 2006 @ 10:38 pm

  25. Al D Rado, whats up? I asked you a (well 3) questions and you came back to me with something totally different. Are you being brainwashed? No, I think you are too smart for that. I am curious as to what happens when you tape someone. I just want to know the consequences. Please tell me.

    Comment by julie — Thu 30th March 2006 @ 10:47 pm

  26. I don’t really care who answers my question. But you guys are the only people who can answer. I am not going to tell others to tape conversations until I know the consequences. Am I asking a question that is too hard to answer? And I do think it is relevant to “Why women attack men.” Does it fuel women or does it stop them? What does it do? Maybe the judges and lawyers take it into consideration. I’d appreciate knowing.

    Comment by julie — Thu 30th March 2006 @ 11:29 pm

  27. Julie,
    What taping a woman does to her is it records her voice.
    THEN WHAT SHE CHOOSES TO THINK ABOUT THAT produces any number of different emotional reactions.
    So the answer to your query is in women’s heads, not men’s, therefore no point badgering guys for the answer IMO.
    I’m with Al on this one too. Unfortunately there are some women who need to be recorded in order to be called to account for thier dirty tricks.

    Comment by Stephen — Fri 31st March 2006 @ 2:29 am

  28. The real question, Julie, is why do some men feel they must protect themselves.

    When women stop laying blame for ALL ills in a relationship gone sour, and using men as an excuse for their own violent behaviour, then maybe men will no longer be on the back foot when it comes to protecting themselves through non-violent means.

    You yourself have communicated three points of violence in this thread.
    (1) You have essentially laid the blame for women being violent in Family Court procedings, on men.
    (2) You have played emotionally manipulative games, with your statements generally designed to put yourself down, and power us up.
    (3) You have again laid the blame for women’s actions in regard to how they might react if they knew ws protecting himself through electronic means, at the feet of men.

    If you dispute any of these, I merely invite you to familiarise yourself with definitions of violence touted by any Living Without Violence organisation, or the Women’s Refuge.

    You can’t have it both ways.
    If men are fully responsible for their violent actions (and I believe they are), regardless of provocation, then so are women.

    End of story, no ifs, no buts.

    Comment by Al D Rado — Fri 31st March 2006 @ 6:04 pm

  29. […] you want to get your Husband, Wife, Boyfriend and Girlfriend back , Contact Robinsonbuckler11@ gmail. com […]

    Comment by Lisa H — Sun 17th January 2021 @ 4:16 am

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment

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.

This site is cached. Comments will not appear immediately unless you are logged in. Please do not make multiple attempts.

Skip to toolbar