Family Violence includes men too ya know!
A shocking display of discrimination has occurred over male victims of Domestic Violence receiving assistance at court in Brisbane, Australia.
State funding was given to a group to care for victims of domestic violence but instead the group has given the money back saying “We won’t work with male victims.”
“We are not prepared to compromise the integrity of our service by operating under the onerous and inappropriate conditions being imposed by the department,” Ms Spicer said.
I’d say they have already compromised integrity.
“In fact, our constitution doesn’t allow us to work with male victims,” Ms Gaunt said.
Then change the constitution.
“We have told the director-general we have to relinquish the funding because we cannot work with males and the constant interference by the department also has a lot to do with it,” Ms Spicer said.
OMG, the poor babies. They have to follow equality policies and they don’t like it.
“I really don’t know what it means for the service.”
It means someone better can get the contract.
Ms Gaunt said men were not neglected by the service, but referred to other agencies.
You can’t send abused men to anger management classes.
“Our workers are not trained to work with men”
Either your workers are trained in DV or they are not.
Can you imagine how traumatised they would be to put a male in there? It is bureaucracy gone totally insane.”
I have never seen a woman traumatised by the sight of a male. That would be funny. It would also be very frightening to think feminism went this far.
So many startling things…
One significant change was the service was to work with men, a directive that would put the service in breach of funding it also received from Legal Aid.
Let me get this straight. Legal aid are not acting inclusively? They are “assisting” victims in a deliberately exclusive manner. They will help only as long as men are excluded in other words. Can Legal Aid legitimately do this?
Wow! Deliberate, knowing, exclusion of male victims from support. I’d like to tell them that when you do that you perpetuate the victimisation of those already abused.
Can you imagine how traumatised they would be to put a male in there? It is bureaucracy gone totally insane.
The “beaurocracy” is “insane”?
I’m not mad. Everybody else is.
Comment by gwallan — Mon 2nd March 2009 @ 6:52 pm
My spelling is mad!!!!!!
“bureaucracy”
Comment by gwallan — Mon 2nd March 2009 @ 6:54 pm
If we could only raise each child to be fully independent, to be able to stand on their own two feet, to think for themselves, we’d have a society where every “Person” regardless of gender, fully appreciated the things others do for them, and the efforts involved.
Whilst Adults set examples where tasks are assumed to be male or female, we’ll never have true equality, nor will individuals ever appreciate the efforts of others, and as a result, resentment will fester and develop into the violence, grown from their own ignorance, of just how much effort each of them was making for the other.
Family and religious interference are another couple of things every person could do without, not just in the marriage, but from birth.
We need to stop screwing up the minds of our offspring, or we’ll never know happiness, let alone world peace.
We are all victims of our environment, but at some stage we need to grow up and get over that, and stop using it as an excuse for our lack of emotional control and intolerance.
Lead by example.
Comment by Robert — Mon 2nd March 2009 @ 7:25 pm
I guess the positive is that the court recognised that the male had been abused… a victory in itself! The rest is kind of same old story really… whats good for the women, cannot be available for men, cause that would be sexist!
Comment by Scott — Tue 3rd March 2009 @ 9:26 am
Neat comment. Thanks for giving it.
If only…. but then dreams are free. And we can only try for our offspring to have better.
Comment by julie — Tue 3rd March 2009 @ 5:45 pm
Funding from legal aid to help one side of the marital partnership (the woman) is nothing new. The lawyers and judges are running a child abduction and extortion racket that requires hostility towards men that pervades the whole justice and state sponsered child ‘care’ business, depriving many blameless fathers of contact with their children. As one lawyer confesses to the author in ‘Taken Into Custody’: “There are too many people making too much money for this to ever change”.
Comment by Larry — Wed 4th March 2009 @ 7:10 am
Personally i would be VERY VERY scared of the sort of women who would be in the Refuge too, as described by Erin Pizzey. If i had just been attacked by a female partner, to be amongst more OF HER ILK , i would not be able to sleep
Comment by OnceInALifeTime — Wed 4th March 2009 @ 7:59 am
My lovely ex threatened me with a knife, nearly blinded me, scratched me seriously drawing spurts of blood, stole 1000s of my money and passport, smashed down the door when i hid in the locked bedroom from her, punched me in front of my kids while i was driving, attacked me with a rock, and MANY MANY more.
But of course WOMEN ARE NEVER VIOLENT are they ?
(btw i never retaliated, you just freeze when a woman attacks you)
Comment by OnceInALifeTime — Wed 4th March 2009 @ 8:04 am
You don’t find female assaults male in the Crimes Act people.
Comment by dad4justice — Wed 4th March 2009 @ 7:36 pm
@OnceInALifeTime,
You are lucky if she did not serve you with a protection order (via Women’s Refuge)
because that is much much worse.
Gutted at how family court treats, humiliates, degrades kiwi males.
We must be many enough to organize now and then demonstrations in front of all the family court around new zealand.
I pick up my children a Barnardos and see all these resigned blokes who are there to see their children under supervision, all playing nice with a system that renders them pea-nuts.
I see this large bloke, a builder may be, who the moment he enters Barnardos, his toddler boy of may be one year, stops crying and happy to be in his dads arms while the Barnardos volunteer work
er is relivied of the dads arrival. The toddler never stops crying until his dad arrives.
I think to myself, how is it this dad is subjected to supervision when obviously a strong bond
links him to his boy. Why are people are so resigned and do nothing to denounce this devilish system that hurts men, abuses children and does no good to women.
Comment by tren Christchurch — Thu 5th March 2009 @ 6:00 pm
she did, of course, but this thread was about female violence, she said the standard “she was scared” line, and i was out of the house, like thousands of others in NZ
It is all about government raising money, all this SHIT Tren, money to pay for growing pensions for MPs, judges, they are ensuring that their income is maximised
Comment by OnceInALifeTime — Fri 6th March 2009 @ 10:51 am
I read somewhere once that 60% of all the women in the UK’s first wimmins refuge admitted to being violent or accepting responsibility for the situation. In the UK there are 2,000,000 reported incidents of female to male domestic violence. Imagine what the real figure is. While ever we remain apathetic to the double standards faced in life, we will never move forward. No human being should be in a relationship that ends in violence male or female. No person is more important than the other purely because of their genitals. No gender should be patronised by having a minister dedicated to it. No TV company should be able to make comedy from violence towards men whilst abhorring any notion of male to female violence. It’s time MEN grew up and spoke out against this kind of behaviour. To do so shows you are a real man and not a stereotype apathetic man that this kind of woman expects. Its high time you dropped the double standards. Bring your kids up to respect each other. Ensue girls are brought up to respect boys like boys are girls. I have seen countless times with my own eyes apathetic parents whilst a daughter is bashing a son. This went on on many of my visits until one day, the lad turned to hit the girl. Deserved as it is human to protect yourself. The parents screamed at him in horror. A good lessen for the daughter. I always refer to ‘feminists’ only ever open their fat mouths when it is safe to do so. Seemingly, they keep them firmly shut when it suits.
Comment by Masculist UK — Sat 7th March 2009 @ 9:02 pm
My ex went ape shit once and attacked me in public. I still don’t know why. She attacked her girl friend first but her girl friend fought back so then she attacked me. I just stood there and took it so her brother stepped in and blocked her. Maybe she was jealous but we hadn’t been flirting or anything so I don’t know. She was a control freak and in time I came to learn that she didn’t need any real reason to explode. Someone called the police but she calmed down and I took her home before they arrived.
I lived with her for years walking on egg shells. I never have hit a woman and never would so I just learnt to live with it. Years later when we broke off and she wanted sole care of the kids, she accused me of being violent towards her! Being such a non-violent person and sometime victim that was a really low blow. I discussed raising her violence towards me with my lawyer but I got the very accurate advice that if I did that the Family Court would stop me from seeing the kids and it would be twisted around so she would been seen as the victim.
Comment by Dave — Tue 10th March 2009 @ 1:31 pm
Woman tries to bite officer after dogs taken
10/03/2009 11:04:07
Hamilton police got more than they bargained for last night when they went to assist Dog Control.
Dog control officers had gone to impound three dogs but the 26-year-old female owner refused to give up her pets.
The woman jumped into the dog control vehicle with the animals and was arrested when she refused to get out. She is accused of pushing one police officer and trying to bite another several times on the way back to the Hamilton Central Police Station.
The woman is facing a variety of disorder and assault charges.
Comment by Dave — Tue 10th March 2009 @ 1:32 pm
Four dogs actually!!
Comment by Vince — Wed 11th March 2009 @ 7:07 am
Exactly the same things has happened to thousands of us Dave, you didn’t mention any Protection Orders. All we men can do is to pick a non-psycho lady. I bet she was an attractive, charming woman like mine too, i have read lots of books about bad women and their characteristics. Men are naive when they are young when it concerns women. We just pick the most attractive , and ignore our gut instincts about their terrible behavious, thinking that they “will change”, BUT THEY NEVER do.
I have read the most wonderful book for men about bad women, “Venus the dark side”.
I am now quite content to be all by myself, if any future women exhibit bad behavious MEN MUST LEARN TO DUMP THEM PDQ
Ps i hope that you have found peace after the legally sanctioned emotional terrorism that you have through
Comment by OnceInALifeTime — Wed 11th March 2009 @ 7:39 am
Here is a Tui moment:
Waikato times, 18/3/09
Partner denies assault
By AARON LEAMAN – Waikato Times Last updated 13:00 18/03/2009 Share Print Text Size Relevant offers The long-term partner of a high-profile Hamilton woman has appeared in court charged with her assault.
The 50-year-old man, who can’t be named because it would identify the complainant, yesterday pleaded not guilty to a charge of assaulting a woman, following a depositions hearing at the Hamilton District Court.
The woman, who has been granted name and occupation suppression, said her partner assaulted her following an argument on November 29 last year.
The pair had been together for almost four years.
The court heard that after a heated discussion at the complainant’s home, the man left and walked to his address.
The complainant followed him, asking they resolve their dispute.
At his home, the woman said she kicked the man’s front door after he slammed it in her face.
Her kick caused a small shallow dent.
The complainant said her partner came outside swearing before grabbing her.
“The next thing I knew I was on the ground,” the woman said.
She suffered a bruised hip and a wound to her foot.
The wound required about six follow-up visits to a medical clinic after it became infected.
Under cross-examination, the woman said she continued to have contact with the accused after the alleged assault and did not rule out a future relationship.
However, until the court matter was resolved she wouldn’t commit publicly to a relationship.
Community Magistrate Pat Ferguson committed the man for trial and ordered that his bail conditions include not to associate with the complainant.
So it is OK when a man walks away from an argument for the woman to follow.
So it is OK for a woman to kick a man’s door doing damage.
But it is not OK for a man to defend himself.
And it is OK to expect the man to trust her again.
I suggest this has the makings of a Tui billboard
I wonder if the non association order also applies to the female?
Comment by Alastair — Wed 18th March 2009 @ 3:50 pm
This is for the non-believers.
Just watched a show called Jail (same as Cops but in jail!) Anyway a woman is in jail cause she bet her husband up, and is violent towards the mainly female jail officers, and has to be restrained. They then ask her these questions and had this conversation.
“who called the Police?”
“My Husband!”
“Where did you get that bruise? (On her foot!) Did your husband do it?” (Leading question much?)
“Yes”
“does he do this to you often?”
“Yes”
“It’s ok, you’re safe now. You’re a strong woman who doesn’t deserve this.”
THe female guard then walks out of the cell and talks to the camera…
“When are women like this going to leave abusive men?”
So a woman goes to jail for beating her husband and gets sympathy when the officers lead the questions towards her being the one that’s abused.
Feminists/women can deny this sort of thing all they want but this was on tv! I’d love to know what happened with it.
I also watched an episode of Cops where this guy was arrested at his house for supposedly molesting a female colleague. He is allowed to ph his wife and when he does you hear her say “What? Don’t worry I am on my way” When she gets there she loses it with him and screams at him and asks “How could you have done this? I know her and she wouldn’t lie!” He is obviously shocked and is in tears by the time he gets put in the back of the police car. My wife and I watched this and were so shocked. The woman was obviously in cahoots with this woman. The poor guy.
Comment by Scott — Sun 29th March 2009 @ 11:05 am
I found this at AbsoluteAstronomy.com:
“While feminist groups and scholars have proven that domestic violence against women is indeed a social problem worthy of attention, some argue that there is conclusive data that domestic violence against men is a social problem also worthy of attention. Each year there are over 3.2 million cases of men being assaulted by their intimate partner. Far more men than women are arrested for domestic violence. However, in many cases of reciprocal violence, only the man is arrested.
A new 2007-2008 study is being conducted by researchers at Clark University in Worcester, Massachusetts, in the United States, a private teaching and research institution founded in 1887 by the industrialist Jonas Clark and Bridgewater State College, a public liberal arts college located in Bridgewater, Massachusetts, that seeks to describe the experiences and health of men who have sustained partner violence in the past year.”
Trust me, feminist mothers of sons wouldn’t want their sons to be victims either. Would those of you who are fathers ever wish it upon their daughters?
Comment by achurch001 — Sun 29th March 2009 @ 9:48 pm
Having been assaulted by my X wife, had my door smashed, then refused a protection order, and inspite of my bloodied head where a phone was smashed over it, have been advised by the police that there was insufficient evidence for a charge of assault to procede. I have known for many years that female violence was a reality.
Thanks for that piece Angie, I can assure you that the situation is similar in NZ.
While the DVA is gender neutral, the police, district court, and family court certainly are not.
You may like to refer to the longditudinal study performed by Otago University, and work at Canturbury University.
Comment by Alastair — Sun 29th March 2009 @ 11:25 pm
“Trust me, feminist mothers of sons wouldn’t want their sons to be victims either. Would those of you who are fathers ever wish it upon their daughters?”
Why should anyone trust you when you make such inane comments? No reasonable person approves of partner violence, and this has been true for long before the state’s relatively recent intervention into domestic life.
The irony is the state has blundered about in domestic life so clumsily that for many it has worsened the situation. Violent and abusive women now have free hands to treat their partners however they wish, with no fear of action from the police – even if the police do intervene, these same women can expect no more than a few hours community work for the very worst of offences.
The entire DV campaign as directed by government has been deliberately engineered by feminists to target men and give women a free pass. Some may attribute this to women’s innate defensiveness and general inability to admit to wrongdoing (and you appear to be a prime example), but to the more cynical it could be construed as an attempt to create an officer class out of the female sex.
Mantras like ‘never under any situation hit a women’, without any enthusiasm for condemning striking others in general, implies that there are situations when it’s fine to hit men (and what do you know, that’s exactly what’s happening – men are reporting it everywhere, and one only need turn on the TV to see women striking men in dramas night after night, and being presented in a positive light).
Until you show yourself capable of any critical analysis of any specific woman’s behaviour, or of feminism in general, then you’re not telling anyone here anything they haven’t already endured for most of their lives. You may consider this an unreasonable request – after all, we men have been too ready in the past to admit our errors and concede the faults leveled at us, and look where it got us.
Comment by Rob Case — Mon 30th March 2009 @ 10:32 am
i reported my violent wife to the police, they completely ignored my complaint after 5 minutes, interviewed her for half an hour, she said a pack of lies about me “trying to strangle her”, and the outcome was that she came out with a load of information about what to do in case I attack her. She punched me in the side of the head while i was driving with my kids in the back. The great cop at Kapiti police station said that “In NZ only men do domestic violence”.
THE COPS ARE JUST ON THE SIDE OF THE WOMEN, IT WILL TAKE A CASE LIKE THE FALSE RAPE ALLEGATION EVERY WEEK BEFORE THESE BOYS IN BLUE stop taking side based on gender
Comment by martin swash — Tue 31st March 2009 @ 9:27 am
Alastair says “No reasonable person approves of partner violence” … that’s only been in the last fifty years – old habits die hard. And it is still approved of and legal, even encouraged in many parts of the world. Also I wouldn’t rely too much on TV dramas to reflect what is actually happening in society. What I would suggest is taking note of which products are being advertised during thos e dramas.
Comment by achurch001 — Tue 31st March 2009 @ 6:20 pm
Angie,
Can you point to where I said “No reasonable person approves of partner violence”
The point is that until we get over the “Perpetrator” “Victim” mentality.
Contrary to your apparant belief it is almost unheard of for an instance of family violence to occur in isolation or come out of the blue.
The solution is to work with the family, including children.
Comment by Alastair — Tue 31st March 2009 @ 6:33 pm
Well said Martin. There is evidence of what you say, catc is so are lawyers and the courts.
Comment by Alastair — Tue 31st March 2009 @ 6:34 pm
Apologies Alastair – that was Rob Case’s comment.
Comment by achurch001 — Wed 1st April 2009 @ 5:00 pm
Totally accepted Angela.
There has only ever been one perfect person who walked this earth. He got nailed for his efforts about 2000 years ago.
Comment by Alastair — Wed 1st April 2009 @ 5:59 pm
Western literature, for over two centuries, has consistently characterised its heros as those who do not strike their partners, and the villains have been the wife/husband beaters.
For specific examples, I refer you to Dickens’s “Oliver Twist”, where Bill Sykes’s evil nature was exemplified by his beating of Nancy, and “Great Expectations”, where the cruelty of Pip’s sister was evidenced by her beatings and abuse of her husband Joe Gargery.
Even the subject of marital rape was featured in Galsworthy’s “Man of Property” published in 1906. It’s clear that at this time, husbands who insisted on their conjugal rights against their wife’s wishes were considered the lowest of men and shunned by other men if it became known.
The notion that men routinely disciplined their wives in the recent past is largely a feminist fabrication made believable by the absence of legislation regulating domestic life at that time. What’s all too frequently ignored is that people’s behaviour was strongly regulated by other means, mainly social censure and the heterogeneity of moral beliefs.
It’s almost certain that whatever morals prevail in other cultures today, however badly we may think women are being treated, most men are being treated far worse. This seems to be the most consistent general observation one can make about gender across all cultures and all times.
Steve Moxon goes into this aspect of culture in much depth in his recent book “The Women Racket”.
Comment by Rob Case — Wed 1st April 2009 @ 7:00 pm
Correction to the above comment – it should have read “homogeneity of moral beliefs”.
Comment by Rob Case — Wed 1st April 2009 @ 7:27 pm
To all the spies watching this
TELL YOUR SUPERIORS THAT ALL WE WANT IS JUSTICE, YOU ARE ABUSING MEN and it is causing much more problems and violence, IT IS YOU THAT IS THE CAUSE OF ALL THIS, you have abused good men and good fathers with your secret courts and injustice, you have abused our children , the state is doing this for the money,
ALL YOU MALE SPIES AND COPS ARE OPEN TO THIS TOO, IT AFFECTS YOU TOO
Comment by martin swash — Thu 2nd April 2009 @ 7:19 am
your salaries and pensions are pittances compared with the million dollar pensions of judges, MPs, top brass, it is these people who are the reason behind our injustice and the state’s need for more and more cash, you are just the cogs, the pawns acting for these people, our situation that you are reading about, ONE DAY IT MAY BE YOU
Comment by martin swash — Thu 2nd April 2009 @ 7:25 am
I so relate to your post Alastair i to have suffered as u have from a ex partner
then now find myself under the thumb of a protection order for by my last
partner for things ive said without ever laying a finger on her
What a just system huh I was never a angry person till served a protection order
I am what the system has now made me. One pissed of male
Comment by ted — Thu 2nd April 2009 @ 2:11 pm
A bit off topic but I think government workers actually don’t get paid enough. I mean we begrudge having to pay money for people to try to run the world but are quite happy to have entertainers (actors, sportspeople, etc) earning a heck of a lot more and never complain. Anyway, 10% of the world’s population control 90% of its wealth.
Comment by achurch001 — Thu 2nd April 2009 @ 8:30 pm
Silly Silly incorrect Comment , you are obviously one of the spies
Comment by a listener — Thu 2nd April 2009 @ 9:07 pm
In general I agree with Angie except, the phrase “Government Worker” is a contradiction of terms.
Of course Angie is one of the spies, why do you think I gain so much pleasure from baiting her. Also she is a “Social worker” (Another contradiction of terms) ergo, she cannot be trusted. Worse she is female – Even worse!
Comment by Alastair — Thu 2nd April 2009 @ 9:38 pm
I’ll ask again achurch001 why are you on here?
Comment by Scott — Thu 2nd April 2009 @ 10:48 pm
Scott,
It is simple, to annoy us. Don’t get to serious. Laugh her off. What was one of the first things Hitler did/ He got rid of his commedians. What was one of Britians strengths, it’s commedians, remember Tommy Handley (ITMA)
Comment by Alastair — Thu 2nd April 2009 @ 10:56 pm
Well actually I’m part German and part English. And part Irish and Belgian. You know about the guy who was half English and half Irish right? Yeah, he went out and blew up his own car. Don’t be so stupid – I’m not a spy. I’m getting ideas for my next screenplay – “What Men Want”.
With regards to the government workers, the theory is if you reward them well and RESPECT them then they will do a better job. Hmm, sounds like … treating them like human beings. Or, if you don’t like what they’re doing, and you feel so strongly about it, why don’t you all apply for government jobs – stop moaning about it and do something to help change it.
Comment by achurch001 — Fri 3rd April 2009 @ 9:43 pm
Omg ! You are absolutely correct !
I never realized this before. This explains alot !
Crimes Act 1961 No 43 (as at 03 April 2009), Public Act
194: Assault on a child, or by a male on a female
Every one is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 2 years who–
(a) assaults any child under the age of 14 years; or
(b) being a male, assaults any female.
Ok; who do I need to lobby about this ?
Comment by John (doe) — Sun 14th June 2009 @ 3:29 am