Why did your man get violent?
It will be a real interesting day when a woman runs a course of what women do wrong.
I work as a men’s behavioural change practitioner.
In the group, we talk about how it’s the ‘pattern of coercive control’ rather than the violence itself that actually causes the most damage to women’s lives, and it’s important to us to get participants to take that really seriously. Instead of allowing them to focus on a singular incident and its smokescreens (for example, ‘she was provoking me’, ‘I’d had too much to drink’, ‘I’m just really stressed’), we aim to restructure what it means when we talk about domestic or family violence – that it’s actually about a spectrum of abuse that’s occurred, with the physical violence itself being only a small part of that. It’s about looking at the root behaviour rather than just the surface visibility.
There’s something else interesting here.
Notice the credit – ‘as told to Clementine Ford’.
One could comment on the article in great details, and challenge the anti male bias that permeates every sentence. I guess we just need to accept that men are inherently abusive and violent. Women are invariably defenceless victims. If we could just remove all men out of the equation, domestic bliss and happiness will prevail everywhere, and the entire femi-run dv industry could simply pack up and go home.
Drawing this are recent calls to automatically GPS tag (ankle bracelet) all men declared recipients of the lifelong DPO award, I guess its time to finally take the bull by the horns, and GPS tag all males at birth (they’re only going to grow up violent and abusive anyway), and commence behavioural modification techniques from before they can crawl. Oh and lets teach baby girls from an equally early age that they will always be right, never at fault, never violent etc.
Oops sorry – we’re doing that bit already.
Let’s do the flip-side.
Some bloke does a course on why women are failing. (He’s so good at it he has women referred to him.)
Now that he’s got the answers about dysfunctional women, he does an interview with Clementine Ford, and this is how it was told to her …
… Yeah Right.
As the research shows, couple violence is perpetrated by both men and women, but in our western society we have selectively refused to recognise the violent methods used by women. These methods include emotional disengagement; using sexuality as a weapon; isolating a man from his friends and family; undermining a man’s relationships and social standing though calculated slander and innuendo; exploiting and overworking a man as the main breadwinner; turning his children against him.
In addition, individual women don’t need to use violence, (although according to the research they do this as well) because as a group they have constructed a society which oppresses and violates men, using societal devices such as the Family Court, Protection Orders; Custody laws; Maintenance payments; the almost automatic right to keep the family home; etc etc.
In addition, women have an enormous powerbase, by being the CEO of the family and the family homes, determining what people will eat, say, do etc etc. Many men are simply boarders in their own house.
Finally, women fight using language, and most physical domestic violence is the end result of sustained emotional and language based abuse and harassment.
So, please give us a break from framing women as victims only. Of course there are scores of men who are violent and abusive, but so are women. By presenting this one sided narrative, the cultural abuse of men will simply get worse.
Yes like it or like it not women are much better with the tongue/language to harass men, women tend to be better at constructing an argument and this harassment can so easily provoke an unwanted response. It is similar to the situation a teacher sees on many days, by and large if boys argue there is a bit of blood at most and very soon that is it; when girls argue there can be text messages, whispers and gossip for a long time. One only has to be aware of the suicides provoked by whispers etc to realise how serious the situation can be. The only answer for blokes is to walk away and cool down. Sometimes females can be physically aggressive, more so recently among teenagers. My ex wife 20 or more years ago gave me quite a bruised [cauliflower], what could I do about it? Answer nothing.
This is typical stuff from ‘stopping violence’ facilitators. Exactly the same might be written by some woman who runs them in New Zealand. Let’s look at some features.
Firstly, it’s based on the ‘male power and control’ myth. There is no scientific basis for this as an explanation for most domestic violence, but most of these zealots are wedded to the notion. They start with that belief and after that anything that doesn’t fit with it they either ignore or try to turn around to make it fit. So this particular misandrist says
What she is really saying is “All men are controlling so we can tell anyone coming to this group claiming they weren’t violent at all (e.g. they were falsely accused, their partner was more violent than they were, the protection order was used as a weapon, or anything else that’s not an admission of bad maleness), that they are sure to have used ‘power and control tactics’ and that makes them violent anyway so they had better confess to that or they will get a bad report back to Court.” This nonsense ignores the fact that all people try to maintain a degree of power and control in relationships and there is no good evidence that men do so more than women.
There are much more accurate explanations for domestic violence than ‘male power and control’, which may be relevant in about 5% of domestic violence situations but even then interventions based on that explanation have low effectiveness. Emotionally focused therapy, based on attachment theory and the fight-or-flight response, provides a much more useful model.
As well as being ignorant about research-supported models for explaining domestic violence, this woman is ignorant about basic facts concerning domestic violence. She says
The intended meaning of this statement is simply not true. Although domestic violence does happen across all classes, it happens a lot more in poorer groups, some races and some subcultures such as gangs. Violence is much more likely in some professions and economic classes. (Her actual statement is typical of mindless feminist slogans that make little sense, in that ‘the perpetration of violence’ is not an entity that can discriminate.)
This woman’s arrogance, sense of entitlement and desire for power and control herself is clear when she says:
So she expects a group of men to bow down to her knowledge about men without skepticism, and if they show more faith in another man to know about men she interprets this as ‘male privilege’. Great. Then she uses a disrespectful, condescending, manipulative ploy commonly used by feminists in the form of ‘If you don’t respond as I wish then it must mean you are violent”. This kind of reasoning was also used by the witch-hunt inquisitors.
Her knowledge about the topic she is addressing is poor and inaccurate anyway, so she can’t expect to earn the men’s respect based on that.
Her patronizing contempt for men is clear in such comments as
Of course, she wouldn’t know true gender equality if she fell over it. Her assumption that all men are violent even if they aren’t, and her participation in (and profit from) a system in which police and courts will blame men and give men protection orders etc even if it was only the woman who was violent, both show that she’s quite happy with gender discrimination. Like most feminists, her idea of gender equality is that men should not have anything more advantageous than women get but it’s fine for women to have all manner of special treatment and privileges that men don’t get.
Her idea of gender equality is as follows:
Yeah, go girl. Actually, this woman (and thousands like her) should never be allowed anywhere near work with men, especially vulnerable men caught up in relationship conflict and facing a male-blaming system of unfairness towards them.
By the time men get to see a “behavioural change practitioner” they have probably been forced to by the courts. In this situation they will say that they agree with everything she says and humiliate themselves to avoid being pummelled even worse by the law. The whole process becomes pointless, but it stokes the ego of the practitioner who believes she is doing noble deeds and saving society from male evildoers. Oh and she gets paid handsomely for her trouble.
By the way people, check out the web site where this article came from. Lots of feminist articles like “Male partner pregnancy-controlling behaviour: the emerging crisis point of violence against women“, another article that argues it’s ok for women to call each other girls but not ok for men to do so, alongside thoughtful articles such as “Where we’ll be shopping on cyber Monday” and “Would you dye your (arm)pits bright blue?”. There is a video they seem to find hilarious that involves some woman called Mindy Kaling verbally attacking and trying to humiliate her ex partner and ‘winning this breakup’ by boasting that she’s done a lot better than he did since they separated. Oh, isn’t it funny when women use emotional violence towards men!
On second thoughts, don’t bother checking it out (unless you like wasting your time and increasing your disrespect).
The article seems to fit this description:
Propaganda is a form of communication aimed towards influencing the attitude of a population toward some cause or position
Propaganda is information that is not impartial and used primarily to influence an audience and further an agenda, often by presenting facts selectively (thus possibly lying by omission) to encourage a particular synthesis, or using loaded messages to produce an emotional rather than rational response to the information presented. Propaganda can be used as a form of ideological or commercial warfare. (Source Wikipedia)
Coronation Street presently has a good portrayal of a man DV victim – garage mechanic Tyrone. He is occasionally being violently assaulted by the mother of his child Kirsty, who is an ex-policewoman. The story has been developing slowly for a couple of months. It also clearly shows how his support options are dangerous to him and his relationship with his baby daughter.
Some story lines in Coro Street have been poorly characterised, but the majority of social issues portrayals are of documentary quality.
Maybe some mass education is very slowly happening?
@Murray So, if it was better quality and everyone watched it – this would be a WMI (weapon of mass instruction)
More powerful than a hydrogen bomb exploding in every living room, but taking 25 years instead of 2 microseconds to unleash it’s fury.
By then, public awareness has over swung and done too much harm. At that point, our slow society will start to lurch uncontrollably back in the other direction, again mangling as many lives.
I was complimenting Coro Street in the main, not criticising it.
Maybe the only topic I would have liked it to cover, that it hasn’t touched, is parental child neglect. (Boys From The Black Stuff covered covered challenges that poor parents face, but was adult rather than child focussed.}
I guess dynamics of child neglect just isn’t entertainment, good enough to carry advertisements? European film, including english, does look at the gritty, challenging parts of life.
Different world to USA flash trash, where it mainly uneducates…… Some USA film has similar value, it is just that it is diluted into so much escapism, denial and unreality. I need escapes too, but not all of the time.
Themes in media do have powerful impacts back into society and we neglect them at our peril. It isn’t just violence and sex that we need to be concerned about, but gender relationships, respect, empathy, care. MoMa has already drawn a lot of attention to these issues and more is needed.
Helping boys to understand girl’s lives and girl’s to understand boy’s lives… The need for re-negotiation has never been higher, but are we effectively helping our children to be able to do this?
#1 Your vagina is not a car: Clementine Ford at TEDxSouthBankWomen
Best watched on a dreamy, wet day, when there isn’t much else to do……..
#1 The antidote for boredom? Or is it the antidote for Clementine Ford?
TEDxSF – Nicole Daedone – Orgasm: The Cure for Hunger in the Western Woman
From the intro to Clementine Ford’s talk:
Ford’s credibility can be gauged from the following sentence in the first few minutes:
As long as false allegations of rape, which are very common, do not get the same sanctions as rape, men will continue to live in a culture which oppresses them. By keeping rape on the front pages, but the false allegations out of the news, a gradient of injustice has been created which is used to marginalise and asset strip countless of innocent men. Custody, child support, jobs, promotion opportunities are some of the benefits which accrue by keeping this injustice going. I am not sure why protagonists of this process should be on this site? They get plenty of space in the main new media.
I take it you are suggesting that replicating the news on this site is something we shouldn’t be doing.
The reason we do this (IMO) is that we can express views which are not expressed in the media – journalists seldom seek out a balancing opinion when it’s a feminist situation.
That in turn allows visitors to the site to see alternative opinions rather than a position that they might have a preconceived label for.
The discussion is important.
No, I am not suggesting that we should not discuss it. What I am suggesting we should discuss and talk about the alternative viewpoints, rather than just regurgitate the dominant feminist perspectives, which are simply everywhere. Otherwise, why subscribe to this forum ?
Probably the best way to do that is put up a post so we can see what you mean.
See the contribute section – top right of the screen.
I have already done so. Sexuality can either be channelled / fulfilled or used in an ethical or unethical way. If we examine how sexuality is used against men or women, and how so many men and women are damaged by this misuse, then we can start talking about an alternative framing of ethics and sexuality. By simply focussing on how some men abuse sexuality and harm women, we continue to have starting point which focusses on one aspect only.
Can you give me the link to the post you are talking about and I will add it to your comment.
This was my comment
As long as false allegations of rape, which are very common, do not get the same sanctions as rape, men will continue to live in a culture which oppresses them. By keeping rape on the front pages, but the false allegations out of the news, a gradient of injustice has been created which is used to marginalise and asset strip countless of innocent men. Custody, child support, jobs, promotion opportunities are some of the benefits which accrue by keeping this injustice going.
If we had a front page article, about how a man was destroyed by a false rape allegation, and how the woman responsible was sent to jail for 5 years because of this, (including her name, her pictures etc,etc then we would get an awareness of how sexuality can be misused by both genders.
What is needed for men to start openly discussing how to create a more equitable society for both their sons and daughters. Otherwise where will it actually end?That is what I presume this discussion site is about.
Women, men, and children come to Barrow from all walks of life, with all kinds of head trauma. But Zieman says the care offered to homeless survivors of intimate partner violence is especially meaningful.
“Most of these women, and men, have never had someone sit down and listen to them,” she says. “And they’ve certainly never had a doctor give 30 to 45 minutes and sit there and explain to them what a brain injury is, and why they have the symptoms they have.”
Medical specialty groups have offered clinician education about detecting signs of partner violence for decades. The US Preventive Services Task Force is in the process of updating its 2013 recommendation advising clinicians to screen women of childbearing age and refer those who screen positive to ongoing support services.
But some experts say what’s lacking is attention to the long-term consequences of being hit, punched, or kicked in the head over and over. Concussion and chronic traumatic encephalitis (CTE) among professional football players who take continual hits to the head have grabbed headlines, but for survivors of partner violence—some who’ve been hit every day for years—brain injuries have essentially gone unnoticed.
The National Football League reported that players sustained 244 concussions in 2016. In comparison, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data gathered from 2010 to 2012 showed that nearly 15.3 million people in the United States said a partner had abused them during the previous year. An estimated 30% to 74% of survivors have sustained a brain injury, but experts say the high proportion who endure multiple head injuries face the most severe consequences.
“It’s these repetitive concussive and subconcussive brain injuries that they’re sustaining that ultimately seem to result in extremely bad outcomes 8, 10, 15 years later,” says Eve Valera, PhD, an assistant professor of psychology at Harvard Medical School in Boston who has used functional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and other technologies to examine brain abnormalities in women with traumatic brain injury (TBI) stemming from partner abuse.