Canterbury DV research 38% of victims are men
When Men Experience Violence – An Interview with Researcher Shelley Johnson
Well, I was amazed to find that of the assaults in the Canterbury region from July 2014-March 2015, 38% involved a male victim.
All the media is around males being the perpetrator and females being the victim but there are males that are victims and it’s the male victims that are not gaining support.
Hi , thanks for posting this Mr Harvey.
I’m surprised though, you said you were amazed at this.
I believe the figure is probably 60 to 70%
As is typical with these “reports” we are considered too stupid to be given the studies other findings for example the rates of female offending. Rather we are just given an opinion piece by a female seemingly inexperienced in this issue.
There seem to have been some biased studies into false rape allegations but I can’t find any info of NZ research into false allegations of domestic violence.
While rape claims are difficult to prove, Allegations of serious violence can be disproved or at least considered questionable if no injury has occoured.
The article you have linked to features an article on the site of Canturbury family violence collaboration.
Push the home button on the site and you realise that every day for them – is white ribbon day.
With Banners “SHOW YOUR AGAINST VIOLENCE TOWARDS WOMEN”.
They only feature two articles.
The one you posted and the other one includes the usual bullshit study which says — “It’s worth noting that within this type of violence, the research quoted suggested that 97% of cases involved a male perpetrator and 3% a female perpetrator (M. Johnson’s Typology, 2006, 2008).”
Now which of these two drastically contradicting statments do you think will be the one chosen by – women who decide where domestic violence funding is allocated.
I think this issue is possibly the most severe and most damaging “SCAM” constantly dished out to the NZ public.
The police and other frontline services clearly operate with this secondary study as their “model”.
While rape accusations achieve a conviction rate at less than 10%. Domestic assault is convicted 70% of the time.
I was assaulted last year at home by my former partner.
She assaulted me by hitting me , lashing me with a power cord and then a large wall mirror.
That was pretty shocking but nothing compared to what was to come.
She left the apartment still angry and went to the police where she admitted to her unprovoked physical assault but claimed that I had retaliated an described in gruesome detail that she was held down and physically brutalised with punches and kicks over and over.
An hour later I was arrested and put in a cell for 50 hours while she was physically examined at the hospital.
Where no bruises could be found and her story changed admitting she was “unsure if she had been assaulted at all”.
She knew the play. This manoeuvre is often refered to here as “the grab”. In the uk and Canada they call it “cleaning house” and in the us they call many false claims “The Silver Bullet”.
So dispite the apartment being in my name I was kicked out and all my possessions and reputation are at her disposal.
Police mimicked her statment and referred to her nine times as the victim and only to me as the “offender”.
There was no consideration that she admitted to unprovoked attack including improvised weapons.
What explanation could they possibly imagine?
Perhaps she was wearing some magic armour. ?
There was no attempt by police to consider common sence as the complainant was female a man will be arrested.
On that day and everyday as far as fairness goes- Not a single fuck was given.
It was all dismissed as police admitted they had no evidence nine months later in court and they case was never heard which of course meant the truth was not revealed. After thousands of dollars for a barrister to defend the charge I never heard the words “not guilty”.
The issue remains on police files as “unproven “.
So her violence is not questioned.
So where does they count when adding up statistics for violence in canturbury. ?
Sadly the woman has borderline personality disorder.
This is more common than schitzo and other personality disorders but is much more damaging.
A better name for it is Emotional intensity disorder.
If anyone has time to google “BPD distortion campaign ”
And click on the link by ANGIMEDIA there’s a four page article that describes just how common this is and the effect it has on the targets of abuse.
Unbiased psychiatrists estimate that this disorder alone may be responsidle for 40% of court cases regarding DV.
They also estimate that 70% of interpartender DV incedents involve a female perpetrator.
Men are taught from a young age not to hit girls and almost all carry that learning through their lives.
Women are not given the same instruction.
So in my view men are systematically processed as guilty
After accusations of DV assault more than any other crime.
They call it MAF. Of course there’s no FAM.
There are many gender spacific laws and nothing to protect us.
Next will be this burden of proof one.
So I believe we should submit this to parliament and
Say look there’s so much against us and so little fairness that we want a gender spacific law to help us.
If a man who has no previous charges of violence is known to have been attacked- he should have the right to be questioned BEFORE being arrested.
Some might say this is a small thing but as small as it is it brings attention to the vast injustices men have to deal with in courts and to the gender bias systematically dished out to boys, men and dads at the expense of thier children.
Also there’s a few thing in that article that I think are inacurate.
The woman claimed that there was no help for male DV victims. (Notice it doesn’t refer to US as survivors )
I went to canturbury men’s centre and recieved free counselling and advice and those guys did help me.
You can even get a free life coach and ongoing support.
Also there’s this site which helped me tremendously.
Thanks fellas. Enjoy your weekend.
Apologies Mr Harvey, I just realised you were quoting Shelly Johnson being AMAZED at the statistics.
I notice the very next question to her was –
Were you surprised at the number of males experiencing violence.?
To which she replied ” the agencies and people I work with are not shocked by the statistics.”
First she’s Amazed.
Then she’s not shocked.
She repeatedly blames “the media”.
Shelly – they’re not the ones arresting us.
They’re not the ones putting gender spacific laws in place to reduce the fairness.
She gives us the usual wisdom about domestic violence falling under vast categories, verbal abuse , controlling behaviours blah blah. ..
Ok Shelly so these statistics – are they based on assaults and violence or blokes complaining that her indoors is bossy.
They’re talking about VIOLENCE Shelly.
That’s the problem not women being bitches.
God this woman grates my nerves. !!
Her wisdom knows no bounds.
” Research tells us when females perpetrate violence it usually starts out as verbal abuse and controlling behavior and then escalates into physical violence.”
No shit. Really Shelly Sherlock.
Then there’s more and more drivel about verbal abuse and control and bullshit about domestic violence not being what we think it is.
I’m so sick of this shit.
You wanna play that game lady.
Fine , lets see what Wikipedia says about violence.
First it lists some figures we can look at.
“Globally , violence resulted in the death of 1.28 million people in 2013.
Of those – 405 thousand were homicide.
31 thousand died in wars.
842 thousand were SUICIDE !!!!!!
Of which 80% are males.
Yet we don’t descriminates against women seeking help for suicide by putting all availabe resources in the hands of men.
Nor do we exclude women from debating the solutions because they’re not the ones most affected.
While people like Shelly like to rave on and on about the psycological harm and the control and so fourth.
Included in these definitions of violence is “deprivation”.
This is what the real problem men face is.
Deprivation of rights.
Try this one Shelly.
A bloke rings up the cops and says ” the missus has been bossing me around ” she made a big fuss when I wanted to go fishing and then hid the plug on the beer fridge and gets abusive when I want things to go my way. ”
“Stay on the line sir, we have a waggon on the way”
There’s a good one for tooheys.
Blokes don’t report trivial shit- Shelly.
And when we do report violence by a partner there’s an awfully good chance of us being arrested ourselves.
Also it’s NOT social stigma that prevents us from calling police on our violent women.
Largly its that we don’t want to get them in trouble and we consider our private lives our own fucking business.
Feminist claim to be born with a wonderful inner calculator and they can tell us that just 2% of rape victims are telling fibs.
The police say 50-60 some even say 80 but it’s the feminists who are believed by those that have the power to rule over men’s lives.
I question their intent when compliling these statistics as it seems firstly the figure they want to exhibit is chosen and evidence is removed and criterior reduced until they get their number.
Also I question the demographic criteria in the surveys. Which is usually all they consider basing facts on – Surveys.
A parallel example might be this.:
Question 100 people outside the zoo that have just spent the day feeding peanuts to elephants and ask them ” do you think animals should be kept in captivity to study them.
Then ask the same question to another hundred people on safari watching elephants in the wild and see the difference.
Now we have an unwanted tounge kiss defined as rape and minor harrasment in the home defined as violence what chance do we have of ever establishing truth or facts about sexual assault or DV. Moreover what chance do we have of reducing serious violent crime if we can’t differentiate between minor incidental disputes that all couples go through and serious Violence.
Some say that the aim of feminism is not to reduce crime at all but to feather the nests of the thousands of lawyers and advocates and social workers etc.
Look at the gay marriage craze that’s sweeping the planet.
Country’s are queing up to be the next to introduce it.
Is it really because all the lawyers in these country’s suddenly care about gay and lesbian rights to legal matrimony. Or is it because they’ve all figured out that same sex relationships typically last half as long as heterosexual ones and there will be rich pickings in divorce courts.
As citizens of nz we are blessed with a navy and an army and an air – port. And customs and bio security all just to keep us safe. But any man can lose his home, belongings, reputation and be locked up 24/7 for years based on little more than a vindictive nasty lie from a woman – either to cover up her actions or possibly she’s just -scorned.
Yet there’s almost never any punishment or even disuasion for women repeating these lies again and again.
Police hold records of alledged perpetrators.
They don’t hold records on “ladies who report wrongdoing”.
So no where in the vast billions spent employing geniuses like Shelly to tell us what “violence” is – shall it ever be written that FALSE ALLEGATIONS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE -is domestic violence.
Well expressed, Voices!
What is good for the gander, is good for the goose ?????????
So, how do the actions of the political parties stack up against all of these concerns?
Corruption and failure to accept accountability drive many wrongs, as they leave vulnerable people unprotected.
Criminal activity is not gender specific. For every genuine complaint by a female of abuse there are at least three false allegations. Not only does that hurt the genuine victims it also results in many innocent males being imprisoned. The current SERCO mess at Mt Eden is forcing Key’s criminal cohorts to face up to some unpleasant realities they have hidden from voters for years and the corruption in Justice and Police and Courts portfolios needs urgent public scrutiny. As long as KEY is in charge nothing will change.
This is a bit more info on the same report.
Jono (#5): Unfortunately, the National government is not being forced to take responsibility for harm to prisoners because it has contracted out that responsibility and conveniently placed it at arm’s length. All we will see is National blaming Serco. The state is given powers by government to imprison people yet nobody in government will now be held accountable for abuse and harm to those prisoners. In the case of Mt Eden this is especially bad because it’s a remand facility and many of the inmates will be found to be innocent of the crimes they are charged with and therefore have been unjustly imprisoned in the first place. The key government now palms off accountability on Serco and will make a show of manufacturing an image that it is a stern headmaster punishing the errant contractor (but without jeopardizing its privatization agenda). What should be happening is the minister responsible for Corrections being punished for failing to ensure fundamental human-rights obligations towards prisoners were maintained. The contracting out of such responsibility is a scandal.
# 7. Agree 100%. Privatization is abdication of responsibility. Point the finger at the “contractor” not me, is the rationale.
Oh, women never make false allegations. Yeah right.
Investigation into kidnapped girls called off
Actually, they weren’t girls but 18yo and 19yo women. The media likes to refer to young women as girls to reduce their perceived culpability or to increase their perceived vulnerability. Otherwise, it’s demeaning and an attempt to use ‘power and control’ if we were to call women ‘girls’.
But it’s all ok because police reminded these two young women of their responsibilities. Yeah, take that you two young women!
Voices back from the bush (#1):
We would like to quote your paragraphs about the domestic assault you experienced and the police handling of it, in a submission we are making to the Human Rights Commission. Are you ok with that?
Yes thankyou I would like that very much.
I would be happy to post to you details if it helps – Including police report and full police disclosure. Would that be of any help. ? What else can I include. ?
I complained to independent police complaints but got brushed off immediately.
Getting very tangential to the topic of this thread, but here’s another example of the media’s use of the term ‘girl’, in this case referring to a ‘young girl’ who tragically died after being hit by a car in a hit and run. The victim was in fact a 14yo who was out with friends at 3:35am. The media’s ideologically driven use of language is certainly not the fault of this teenager or her family, and my sympathy is extended to her family, friends and community for their terrible loss.
Thanks Voices. Nothing further will be required at present. The account is a good example, one of many, of how male victims of domestic violence are often treated.
Its evident that the SAME concerns affect both men and women – mums and dads in varying degrees – we must always refuse to engage in Gender debates as that divides us all on the concerns which are destroying us all as PARENTS.
I have tried to list the concerns we ALL SHARE as focus points – if you agree add your name to the list in the comments section for this can become the petition.
If you have suggestions and points we can add to the Parents Positive change demands – then please do so.
I disagree with your comments Hornet.
You say “we must always refuse to engage in gender debates”.
I believe the opposite is true – that debating gender issues is the only way we can expose the unfairness men have to deal with on a daily basis.
Have you even read the thread and the comments in this post.
While your cruisade is a good one and I largly agree with your views.
You should not consider yourself so presisly wise that you fell you should come down to the bottom of this page to tell us what we should and shouldn’t debate.
Voices from the BUSH – I have been commenting on here for a long long time – and the same things get hashed over and over again = and NOTHING changes – so what I am suggesting is we ALL set some targets and stay focused on them……
As for my comments on removing GENDER debate – you must look deeper at what is happening to MEN and WOMEN – to keep us in constant CONFLICT is EXACTLY what the system wants – for then we waste our energy attacking each other while these same concerns REMAIN……so you understand this??
Give you another example – have a look at the disgusting concerns being raised in the USA with PLANNED PARENTING – Selling BABY parts …..and in NZ we have Mothers not being told that their children have ben whisked of and had children aborted – over 1000 young girls since 2004 have had kids aborted without the parents knowledge – add to this the other concern where some RACES are being targeted for these FORCED abortions – which in many cases leaves young women unable to have children in the future…..is this deliberate – there have been many instances throughout history where certain races have been targeted for GENOCIDE………without WOMEN none of us would be here – or did we forget that biology somewhere down the track…????
I agree MEN are deliberately deprived of time with their kids – ( ive had ten years of it ) and why is that?? Because without the protections offered by a FATHER the system creates kids who are VULNERABLE and open to being abused……which is exactly what we have seen happen – look at Child Support services in the UK are being exposed for offering up kids to Pedophile rings and made available for sick perverts in power – yes MEN are moved for a reason………but to beat this epidemic we have to get our heads around the fact we have to unite as PARENTS – and that means agreeing with Mothers on some issues – some common ground…..
Divided we fall – its an age old game thats been played out for centuries and sadly some still do not learn the lesson……
As an example that some women are energetically and positively following an approach of supporting women and men victims, see Emily Blincoe’s submission to Parliament:
Inquiry into the funding of specialist sexual violence social services – Emily Blincoe
So I wish to support Hornet’s exhortation to actively seek common ground in these issues. Emily’s good example is one that we should be following.
A couple of things:
Abuse can be emotional, every male knows that. The mother says she has been subjected to emotional abuse.
Ok. Every father who makes an application to the family court for a level of access which is directed or partially directed by the court must then follow it up with a DV application on the basis that they have been emotionally abused by the mother with holding the access recently applied for then directed by or partially directed by the court. We are being emotionally abused by these women by them with holding access to our children. This should be done as a matter of course, ideally the court will realise the folly of listening to claptrap about emotional abuse from both fathers and mothers.
Physical abuse of children.
The natural father is rarely the purpetrator, it’s mummy’s new boyfriend, uncle or general shit head. Fathers are generally protective towards their children, daughters especially. Given that we have the worst child abuse statics in the OECD you would thing that the wisest one in the Family Court would say; but wait before we crush this guy we could think of the children, we could actually help to lower our child abuse statics by having the natural father a big part of the children’s lives that way there will be a level of protection for the children and a peer of eyes from dad.
NZ could advertise globally as a great holiday destination for child abusers; low natural,father involvement with children, no shared c are as a matter of course so that abuse can go undetected for longer, high percentage of natural fathers given up and gone , unenforced parenting orders so that abuse can go on for longer undetected.
@Paul The Family Court is not a gender-neutral house of natural justice – just applying for access is questioning the mother’s authority and judgement.
That is an abuse!
This phrasing suggests that this is the fault of fathers.
In New Zealand there are unusual restrictions on fathers participating in their children’s lives, and many fathers are required to participate in their children’s lives in an unnatural way to comply with legal requirements, or feminist conditions.
There has been a mass exodus of men from New Zealand. In the worst affected areas the ratio is 87:100
Dear Downunder, in my crude biassed opinion, you are too polite and gentlemanly about the quality of the familycaught$.
I see them as relationship vandals, rather than protectors of people in any way vulnerable.
So what? At the end of the day, they are NZ’s single largest social problem, the driver of huge damage to large numbers of children and families. Sure, perverse aspects of social policies do much harm too, but the biggest single problem lies in the damaging decisions from familycaught$.
The people who pay them and fail to supervise them must be idiot$? That is, I and you.
Changes to the Building Act may have cost over $20 billion. Chickenshit compared to the damage by familycaught$.
Of course it was very low quality legislation that allowed both to proceed.
It was failure to supervise existing legislation, that allowed them both to continue doing damage.
Legal workers scraped profit off at every corner, in the same way that we should scrape them off our society.
It was the legal workers who drafted and conceived the legislation, in Parliament. Conflict of interest – too right!
So, set your sights on these individuals…….
Murray Bacon, you are too polite and gentlemanly, calling these people legal workers.
No, legal workers work in the open, hoping that they might set a precedent in a renowned court case.
No, these are bigoted fanatics that work in secret, because they don’t want to have to explain their belief system.
No beliefs, just take. In other words, on the take!
I’m getting the sense of a common Yorkshire ancestor here Murray Bacon.
They have already done the advertising stuff.
For many years I had to go to Auckland airport to pick up and drop off my child for court ordered visits.
Welcoming visitors on their exit from the airport was a very large over the road advertising sign.
It said ‘welcome to the Women’s Republic of NZ’
Report from MSD
The scale and nature of family violence in New Zealand: A review and evaluation of knowledge
From page 6
‘On a combined measure, 26% of ‘ever partnered’ women and 18% of ‘ever partnered’ men reported experiencing some violence. ‘Last year’ risks were 3% for women and 2% for men,’
This indicates DV at 41% victims are male, same as the 38% figure from this page title.
From page 7
‘The cohort studies have found that verbal aggression is the most frequent form of IPV, for which women seem to be more often responsible.’
‘Nonetheless, some work based on the New Zealand cohorts has found that women and men are equally likely to be perpetrators and victims of violence in intimate relationships. Both perspectives have support in overseas studies.’
From page 8
‘Female students report higher levels of victimisation than males, but they also admit to more transgressions than men.’
This report shows how much entities like Women’s Refuge, blatantly make false statements in the community, on their website, and in the media about DV.
The studies you mention come from;
Dunedin Longitudinal study – Dunedin Multidisciplinary and Development Study led by Prof’s Richie Poulton and Phil Silva
Christchurch Health and Development Study of Prof Ferguson et al.
The student data comes from the doctoral thesis of Kirsten Robertson.
Unfortunately the Family Court has never been able to view this objective data as suiting the paradigm they work from. Hence they take an even more dismissive approach than MSD do in their literature review.
Referring to the original post-“interview with Shelly Johnson”.-
I have already made some comments but I’d like to list some more points about male victims of DV that our “researcher” is seemingly oblivious to.
Firstly the 38% statistic that she claims “AMAZED” her.
This is no different to previous statistics and similar to international figures so why would a researcher be so amazed?
Then she mentions her “stand out findings” which is to say that there is no support for male victims- which more or less implies that she thought there was “mens refuge”.?
Shelly says” when you talk about domestic violence, they think about physical or sexual abuse”.
By suggesting repeatedly that violence against men takes many forms, Shelly attempts to diminish the impact of physical harm by suggesting that verbal harm and coercive control and blackmailing are just as bad as physical assault. Shelly blames the media (five times).
This “Domestic Violence” “REDEFINED”- is a smokescreen.
What would domestic violence statistic would look like if removal of fathers was considered “child abuse”.
What if false allegations “to destroy a mans life” were considered a bad thing and included as DV?
What if circumcision was considered abuse rather than “correction” etc.
Men don’t need DV “redefined” we need it correctly defined.
There is a massive distinction between the findings of women who are paid researchers talking about men’s issues and the issues that men generally discuss here in the forums.
Shelly say’s that we need support so we can be healthy in relationships, healthy fathers and healthy husbands.
It seems Shelly thinks were all victims of mental health problems not violence.
” if we supported our men better in terms of mental and social needs I think that would go some way to addressing these issues”.
When its “battered women” being discussed we get horror stories but violence against men is “issues in relationships”.
Of course these are just Shelly’s -initial findings- her full report will take some time.
Shelly mentions Sophie Elliot but there’s no mention of any male victims of violence.
Shelly doesn’t mention that she has ever met a male victim of violence or that she has any intention of interviewing one.
I wrote to the Sophie Elliot foundation last year- asking if they knew of any help available for male victims of violence.
I received a kind response from Leslie Elliot which included these words:
“As the mother of Sophie I am particularly sensitive to ‘male assaults female’ situations as Im sure you will understand. I have two older sons, one who long after his sister died he found himself in an abusive relationship- this time female assaults male. I could not believe it after what we had been through and this girl knew that.He was in his thirties so was not a young man. It was awful and I couldn’t help him either.
He was in Australia at the time so not like I was on the spot. It was very upsetting, he was distraught at times. Thank goodness he got out safely.”
Shelly says we need a John Kirwin. She thinks of him because she relates to violence against males to stem from mental health issues of males.
A Leslie Elliot or a Rose Batty Perhaps.
A male victim speaking about DV.? Lets explain this all over again just for Shelly.
There’s only two types of males that are allowed to speak publicly on matters of domestic violence.
The first Is the “White Night” HERO”s that feminists tell us are ‘REAL MEN’.
These guys think they will get more pussy (or more peace) if they are seen to be proactively “calling out” for harsh penalties for accused men.
They believe this will reduce their chances of becoming an accused man (or a victim of violence) if they just believe whatever feminists tell them and follow along with the song to separate themselves from the majority of women bashers at large.
They therefore go along with the script “violence is a male problem but only women can say what should be done about it”. their job is to support the women and L I S T E N to them and then regurgitate what’s thrown down their throats when required. Male victims are not considered, White Nights attempt to gain respect and entitlement, by pretending to “feel” the enlightenment- instead of considering ANY facts about DV.
They do as they are told in feminist obedience class and so they can be seen as neutered puppies too well trained to do any harm.
The second type of male that’s allowed to speak on matters of violence is the other type of “brave Hero”. Men that have been bashing women and children their whole lives.? Then decided to stop and become a women and children’s advocate.
They have tattoo’s on their knuckles and tell horror stories about the things they have done to people and they usually claim that they thought that violence was the only way they knew how to show their love. Feminist’s love these guys.. These men are the women refuge favourite mascots and they are paraded at meetings like tamed gorilla’s.
The most valuble of these men of course are the ones that also tell why they got the knuckle tattoo’s and blame their fathers for propagated violence.
Gasps and sighs at the meetings “…but nods of approval”!.
So we have the ‘Pitiful men’ and the “Remorseful men” these are the only two types of men that are allowed to speak about domestic violence. Male victims of violence are not to be heard.
It is considered better that we don’t know much about these strange wimp’s that don’t know how to “stand up” to their domineering (but strong) women.
Male victims are perceived as timid cardigan wearing odd types, spoon collectors with odd habits that annoy their wives so much that they have to be kept in line with the “chuckle” rolling pin… They number about 8-12 nationally and sneak out after dusk to swap spoons and have a cry together. They don’t leave or complain because patriarchally induced- social indoctrinated fear of what the neighbours might think, ie “what is someone suspected he wasn’t a “real man”. “stigma” is ALWAYS blamed when in reality there’s a very slight chance a male victim will be considered by police to be a victim, its unlikely police would want to punish the woman even if they know she is violent and there is a very good chance that the male will be arrested and taken away- simply because the police are told they are not arresting enough men.
So 38% is not enough victims to notice or to report on but that’s not just the problem Shelly.
The problem is the amount of women that use violence against men and children.
Yes lesbians also experience inter-partner DV but that not really a men’s issue Shelly.
I don’t need a crystal ball to assume that Shelley’s final report will not offer any solutions in the form of ideas that may reduce violence from women- clearly that is not her plan.
Take ten people that might be violent and put six of them outside and don’t let them back in until they are “trained” and not going to hit anyone.
The other four need no training because they are the minority so they can go on being violent and it wont matter because the other 6 can’t (or better not) hit them back. Also its made quite clear to the “four’ that they will be the only ones listened to by police if there is any dispute- we will just take their word for it. If things don’t go smoothly we just reduce the rights and criminalise the six for longer.
This is the current, proposed solution to domestic violence. It doesn’t work, never will work and that’s just the way they like it.
The more abuse the more need for “researchers”, social worker, lawyers, counsellors ETC.
My personal belief is that most male victims of violence are more concerned about the lack of rights they experience than the rolling pins.
Its not “how they assault us” with abuse,and threats sometimes punches and weapons..
Its simply that after there has been an altercation we are always the ones removed from the situation, charged and considered guilty, losing our children without any thought that we might be good people who are experiencing difficultly and deserving of being listened to.
Most Men who experience inter-partner violence (in my opinion) usually have a much greater problem with systematic gender bias they experience (by police and courts) than the violence itself.
I formed this opinion because I have read a great many stories from male victims about the violence they received by the hand of a women, it always seems to be the bias that is recounted as the greater personal damage caused.
Yet shelly from dept of internal affairs – a researcher- can never speak of these concerns.
‘voices back from the bush’: Great piece! A lot of good analysis in which you have listened to the voices of male victims, a rare situation.
So much good thinking and writing is being published here on MENZ Issues recently. Thanks to all those donating their time, effort, vigilance and intelligence.
Kim Hill on National Radio this morning referred (in passing) to the ‘gender war’. The feminists are starting to realize that men are stepping up to the front lines.
It is a shame that the readership of MENZ Issues is still quite small and it doesn’t seem that journalists pick anything up here, unlike the feminist sites that frequently get used as the basis for (false, exaggerated, silly) stories. That may change as journalists recognize there is a tidal change developing in public attitude, more and more people becoming intolerant of the bs propaganda. As this progresses, the feminists will come back with increasingly ugly and violent efforts against us in order to shut down the threat to their bubble.
Although the readership at Menz is small, there is no other place in nz that domestic violence is talked about from a men’s perspective more often or more thoroughly.
Male victims of violence researchers like Shelly Johnson or anyone for that matter only have to google “nz male victims” or any related topic and they will land right here.
Shelly Johnson only has to google her own name to arrive at this .org page.
If she has no intention of researching actual victims stories and she doesn’t use the internet then I am confused as to what a researcher actually does -research.
Its frustrating that she so refers to mental health issues with such significance. If the roles were reversed and it was a male researcher commenting on violence against women, and said –
“If we supported our women better in terms of their mental and social needs I think that would go some way to addressing these concerns.”
He would be shouted out of town, accused of victim blaming -or worse.
Shelly says ‘the Sophie Elliot story is really prominent here” she is referring to the education programme, Shelly says its for teenagers but its not. Its just for girls.
Although to their credit they have done their best to provide a measure of gender balance and they even encourage females NOT to be violent.(probably a NZ first)
Perhaps Shelly might recommend a similar programme for young males ?
Maybe men will be invited to construct it contents? “yeah right”
Interestingly Shelly has ‘highlighted’ that 89% of deaths related to elder abuse have a male victim.
Unlike our feminist opponents – no man would suggest from these figures that we should have any less regard for older female homicide victims. Its because we believe that a victim is a victim -no matter who they are or how many others there are of their kind. (Its called -‘equality’, its not just FOR women- its for ‘human-beings’.)
Hon Amy Adams MP for Selwyn has ‘launched’ a discussion paper !
According to – ‘the paper’ ‘New Zealand has the highest reported rate of intimate partner violence in the developed world’.
Yet we are to believe that our 8 billion dollar problem is that violence goes unreported too much.
Amy Adams says “there’s no silver bullet”.
Everyone is wringing their hands from mike Hoskin to the salvation army.
No one can believe that the “no means no’, and “the its not ok”,and all the thousands of posters and adds and billboards that have cost so much- have not reduced domestic violence at all.
Even people who couldn’t care less about victims of violence are wanting to know what the hells going on with their money!
Feminists claim that there’s thousands of women and children scurrying around every night, seeking shelter from terrorising men , lets use their word – ‘fleeing’. I think its actually just leaves, I’ve looked! I’ve also seen the way they cook the rest of their figures and I just don’t believe them. I do believe there’s thousands of men every year that are evicted from their homes and family’s. And as no man can fairly defend himself in this country they plead guilty because they don’t qualify for legal aid and they cant afford barristers.(every NZ man IS an island)
NZ was the first country to give women the vote and it should be the first country to give men rights when its all gone too far.
Removing fathers from their children is proven to reduce the children’s chances of a stable, violence free upbringing. Children are more at risk from being killed by their mothers than anyone else and less likely to be hurt or killed by their fathers than anyone else. These are the facts.
MEN are protectors of children and unless there’s absolute proof -(more than just a scorned woman’s say so) Fathers MUST NOT be taken away from their children.
Its not just a fathers right, a child’s right , its an EQUAL most important aspect of healthy development for children.
– Its also downright cruel because children love their dads and they need them.
We know that women are violent at least as often as men are- yet everyone wants to be flatlanders about it.
There are no saints in this. In any relationship there will be some conflict, that’s just relationships. Those that cant accept that should go and live in a bedsit and shut the fuck up.
The belief that women have no responsibility for assaulting a man just because men usually can hit harder and women bruise more easily only perpetrates more violence and encourages more conflict.
We are told (only by women’s refuge) that the national crisis is that there’s not enough reported crime- when we have the highest rate in the world? (they say ‘developed’ world.. perhaps the family courts are really busy in Somalia and Nigeria,… who knew eh.. and who knew ‘Our’ women’s refuge was able to calculate- unreported crimes in developing country’s?? these girls sure are clever alright.)
Women’s refuge claim that there’s all these women afraid to ‘come forward’ Bullshit !
Lets look at why not all violence is reported:
1.Many people keep Weed in the house and they don’t want to be arrested and incriminated for it.
2. Many people have had less than satisfactory dealings with police in the past and consider that the less you see of them the better.
3.Many people hate lawyers and even if they qualify for legal aid will have to turn up to hearings and have a minor event blown into such a dramatic episode that might take a year or more and they have better things to do.
4.Many people rely on natural justice and believe in that because they or their friends have seen that our family court is a ‘court of law’ not a ‘court of justice’. They would rather put up with abuse from a partner than be bedazzled with bullshit rhetoric.
5. Many people are “private people’ who don’t consider that 2 years imprisonment is a suitable punishment for the minor occurrence that happened at home and they love their significant partners and prefer forgiveness and understanding rather that state imposed sanctioning of their family members.
(As a child I was smacked by both of my parents and I’m bloody pleased they weren’t both taken from me.)
I’ve got a little fishing tip for Amy Adams mp.
There’s many just like you who have been here with the same rod and tackle.
If you keep throwing your line out in one place but you just keep losing your bait on the rocks, its not worth putting more hooks on and casting in the same place all day.
Its better to look elsewhere for a place you might have some success.
Because we all know there’s a fine line between catching fish and standing on the shore looking like an idiot.
Best of luck.
Although the readership at Menz is small.
Don’t worry, butterflies cause hurricane’s
I’d like to make a Correction to the Comment I Made @ 29.
I Said that Amy Adams MP’s paper claimed that NZ has the highest rate of reported domestic violence in the developed world.
I should have said that Amy’s paper claimed that NZ has the highest rate of ‘unreported’ domestic violence.
I wont post the link to the ‘sauce’ but If you google- news search “There’s no silver bullet” you will find the correct statement.
I have recently been reminded that words are important (especially when quoting others)-
and as comments on this site are a public record I thought I’d better correct myself.
There’s a few other corrections I could add like spelling Mike Hosking’s name wrong and I also could’ve left the f word out.
Emotions run high for me about this issue at times, and in future I will try to convey my thoughts more carefully without the need for profanity.
Amy Adams’ paper on page 4 states “New Zealand has the highest reported rate of intimate partner violence in the developed world”.
This claim is probably not true, as is the case with most feminist propaganda fed to us. However, if it is true or nearly true, it probably does not entirely represent the intended ‘shock, horror’ story. There may be a contribution from Maori and Pacific populations to actual higher rates of partner violence, but higher figures will mainly result from reporting differences overall. New Zealanders and especially women in NZ will more readily report intimate partner violence than in other countries. NZ has heavily feminist public broadcasting and media generally, does not tend to have race-based immigrant areas in cities, and has a tradition of relatively equal treatment by police. Many other developed nations have areas that police tend to neglect or to treat in such a manner that most people there would not bother calling them except in extreme circumstances. Even Australia has both Aboriginal regions and immigrant suburbs where people simply would not call the police for minor slaps etc from partners.
Of course, a large contribution to our reported rate of intimate partner violence will result from false allegations inspired by NZ’s family laws that provide such advantage without risk to lying women and that will treat women’s allegations with less than cursory scrutiny (not so for men).
This is a link to a movie called “Men don’t tell”.
Its been linked to before on menz.org back in 1998 by John Potter.
Wikipedia provides enough hints of controversy to inspire curiosity :
“The film stars Peter Strauss and Judeth Light, After the original airing, the film was never broadcast on over-the -air television because it incurred the wrath of several womens groups.It was never released on VHS or DVD. It was seen 18.3 million homes ranking third among the weeks prime time broadcast.
It shows that the lack of reported violence my males is not so much an issue of shame,disgrace,stigma as we are so commonly told but silence(& violence) prevails because men are simply not believed by frontline services.
It wont come as any surprise to male victims of female assault but I’ve included the link just in case researchers like Shelly Johnson one day have a look around for themselves rather than just collating data from agencies within a gender bias government.
Men’s Suicidal life.
And here it comes.. A NEW WAY TO COMBAT DOMESTIC VIOLENCE.
The unique Zero tolerance initiative combines “SPECIALISED POLICE UNITS”, trained counsellors and a dedicated domestic violence court.
“similar” courts are to be trialled in Australia starting with QLD and VIC.
“What happens in court is extraordinary” sells reporter Melissa Doyle.
IN RETURN FOR A GUILTY PLEA- The judge offers offenders a suspended sentence dependent on them “successfully” completing a SIX MONTH batterers intervention and prevention programme.
The men avoid long sentences but if they fail to complete the intense counselling and anger management sessions -they go to prison.
Apparently they get 94% not reoffending..???
Of course there’s no estimates of how many of these men were innocent to start with.
There’s no mention of any violent females completing any of these programmes.
But why would there be the need when you have “specially trained” police to collect men.
And what of the men that plead not guilty ? or will they just do away with that option altogether ?
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE – ……”’Redefined””….
Special Courts of injustice, any male accused had better plead guilty because he will be found guilty anyway regardless of evidence or lack thereof and regardless of the extent to which he may also have been the victim of the female’s violence. Then he is forced into a state indoctrination program forcing him to agree with feminist ideology. If he dares not to attend or not to agree, then it’s off to prison.
We may as well live under Islamic State. They do much the same thing in the same Kangaroo Court fashion, the only real difference being that they kill people who dare to disagree with them rather than imprison them. Even that difference isn’t as great as it may seem because the feminist western system will cause male suicides.
Forced treatment is such a major crime against human rights, whether it’s medical treatment or mind control treatment.
Some comments from a seasoned male suicide counsellor at the Central London Samritans, that, ” Dr Martin Seager – see’s a danger in approaches to help men that, in essence, tell them to act more like women. The core of that approach is that it goes against evolutionary biology.” “The way I look at it, if men have evolved as fathers, protectors and survivors, they are gong to feel that life is worth living- to the extent they can provide and protect’.
For many men, it seems there’s no reason for existence after this.
Mad cows disease.
As he calls the police to report her violence she starts cutting herself.
This ones a little diferent. The woman shoots her husband dead then shoots her son with the same gun 20 years later.
This article is about the effect of inter-partner violence, ie violence against females on babies less than a year old.
I think this is from one of these DV ‘redefined’ Professional doctors.
“Removing a child from an unhealthy environment will not by itself reverse the negative impacts – it is important that both mother and child work with a professional to mend the breakdown of relationship,” Dr Daubney said.
This is a joke surely.
“Both mother and child work with a professional to mend the relationship”. ???
Dr Daubney – you are insane. !
The father on the bus goes off to caught$. Off to caught$…
Still in Australia but it feels like the ditch is draining.
Have a look at this load of drivel.
Apparently police make too many inappropriate comments to victims. “Who hit who ” perhaps.
It seems that Victims can be “so” unsure when put on the stand that judges get confused and in some cases might consider the man is not at fault.
This won’t do.
According to Daphne Haneman:
“It is good to see the taskforce has proposed “alternative evidence procedures for victims of domestic and family violence”.
So there it is. “Alternative evidence procedures”.
Evidence – “Redefined”!
I forgot to post the link to the last one
Here it is.
Has anyone ever seen any stat’s for the rate of conviction for NZ police domestic violence offences.?
I expect not…perhaps this is why?
The IPCA is often regarded as more of a lapdog than a true watchdog of the police. Can we trust it to deal with police incompetence and maliciousness? There are signs the authority is changing, under the more assertive leadership of Judge Sir David Carruthers. Recent investigations have been more forthright and critical.
Nonetheless, there continue to be good reasons for doubting that the authority keeps the police honest. Its teeth simply aren’t very sharp – for example, the IPCA can’t even initiate its own investigations. It can’t bring charges against police or enforce any recommendations. In fact, the police sometimes just thumb their noses at IPCA recommendations. And the IPCA’s process can be incredibly slow – it took four years to issue its report on a complaint about the police breaking a man’s neck.
For about 90 per cent of complaints, the authority relies on the police to investigate itself. If Police Association representative Greg O’Connor is anything to go by, public complaints are not taken entirely seriously.
O’Connor has described complaints as “frivolous” and made by “perennial complainers”. Perhaps most concerning, investigators employed by the IPCA tend to be ex-police, which makes their independence questionable.
from NZ herald 23/4/15.
This famous award winning feminist who grew up on a farm amid mud, sweat and tears made the big time in the 1970’s.
Domestic Violence against male figures has been appealing and popular ever since.
Partner Violence as Female-specific in Aetiology Steve Moxon in New Male Studies Journal
This article gives an evolutionary biology approach.
#46 Thanks Murray
The link is a treasure trove of great information.
Excellent examination of politics driven propaganda.
Required reading for those interested in Identity Politics.
Great examination of sexual, genetic, environmental, behaviours in relationships.
#46 from link
‘PV (partner violence) clearly would have to be regarded as a female-on-male phenomenon; the male on-female direction being an aberration. With the difference in degree so extreme, then it would appear that only female-perpetrated PV should be considered aetiologically as PV per se’
Quick, ring Amy Adams, before she does more damage with her feminist lies.
Male domestic violence does not exist.
It’s an aberration.
IE in people’s imagination as being true.
White Ribbon should have the link on its website.
False rape accuser gets 2 1/2 years !!
The falsly accused explained losing employment , unable to eat or sleep. The horror of being falsly accused !!
But you know they don’t report this stuff and two and a half years for a false rape claim. ????
One of us must be fuckin dreaming right. ?
No it’s actually true but your right to disbelieve it.
Ps , best we keep this between us as penalising false accusers might not prevent other false rape victims speaking out. ? Logical eh?
Voices (#49): Well, it’s not really that surprising because in this case it was a male who was found to made false accusations against a female. You will hardly ever see females being charged with false accusations and the odd time they are they never receive a significant punishment, but in the rare case that a male does it he is charged, convicted and imprisoned.
Fake domestic assault. Most of the regulars here know this happens regularly to NZ men. There’s almost never any media speak or publication.
It’s not kind to suggest or acknowledge that women tell fibs.
Indoctrination to feminist ideology has taught us that. They have a phrase that describes this dissention.’ Hate speech.’
Yet if you want to bag men? You really should write a book as the world should know how you feel. No facts required..
This is the reality of the same situation mentioned above.
I dedicate this post to researcher SHELLY JOHNSON.
And I challenge her to find any difference between what’s happening in the USA and the experiences of NZ men.https://sites.google.com/site/nodakwc/domestic-violence-scam
This is the probably the most informative article I’ve found for male victims of DV accusations. There is no NZ info available.
Here’s a thought Shelly Johnson..
Mabye we could teach young male school leavers about these dangers?..
can anyone explain what this is all about?
Is Shelley Johnson a “man” or a “woman”, or do I have a problem for asking?
What is wrong with men, that women are doing all of this type of work?
Im down here and know some canturbury men’s centre guys. I’ll be trying to get a meeting and find out.
My question is what is she doing here?
And isn’t finding results before asking for facts kind of like putting the man Before the Barrow?
I guess this male victims stuff is awfully complicated. Gonna need lots of agencies input eh. Then theyll say they spent so much on combatting violence against males.
Not a whisper about violent females. That would be a bit rude eh.
Hmmm, just looking at some of the domestic violence sites in Oz. I typed in the words domestic violence which you’d think is a gender neutral term right?? But it all refers to male violence against women. Apparently men and children don’t get abused which is nice. The funniest part though was under the heading of “Financial Abuse” Apparently some women in Victoria have husbands who control all the household money and don’t allow wifey any cash for herself. So what do you call Child Support when the poor financially drained paying father has no money left for food or mortgage or rent payments. Is this not a form of financial abuse?? the hypocrisy is staggering and would make a good script for a black comedy if it wasn’t so sad.
Dear – Had enough,
I’ve followed your threads on menz and regret that i’ve been able to help you understand your situation with exchange rate bullshit etc.
Yes this is apt for black comedy and perhaps the blackest.
Or maybe a board game like monopoly where players are confronted with all of the pitfalls that men experience from circumcision to divorce through to where you and I remain now.
Imagine the riots.
Im sorry no one was able to advise you better regarding your situation, next year all ‘outside of the box’ proposals should be better considered to bring light.
Your not alone in being “had enough’.
Just suggest a title..
The script is pre-written.
Protecting Women and Children from Family Violence
Australia and New Zealand Police Commissioners
– Police have always had a bit of a reputation for being a bit slow. Not the dogs though…
The Policing Principles to Protect Women and Children from Family Violence are guided by the values expressed in the [Australian] National Plan to Reduce Violence against Women and their Children 2010 – 2022.
The very first principle that the police present says “..protecting the safety of everyone, regardless of their age, gender..”, yet the title includes women and not men!
I hope police do read their document. Maybe, eventually, they might work out what they are trying to do?
The cops over here aren’t too bright Murray but you’d think that they would have picked that one up. The day when we accord equal rights to everyone will be a great leap forward I think but until then, as Napoleon the pig said:— “All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others”
Keynote address to UN Human Rights Council
by Amy Adams 15 MARCH, 2016
Under the section Women’s Rights, she mentions violence against women (and not violence done by women or to men).
Under Family Violence there is no mention of men victims of domestic violence, or offering men victims any type of support or protecting their relationships with children. However, her speech doesn’t come across as an anti-male rave. So, is that an improvement on the past Ministers of Justice, or not?
At least she hasn’t been jailed for fraud… like The Right Honourable Sir Douglas Graham, who brought in the DV Act.
Great work finding and sharing this speech Murray. No, it’s not an improvement but an appalling example of our minister fundamentally misrepresenting a key area she is involved in. To speak as though ‘family violence’ is completely and only violence towards ‘women and children’ is inexcusable. Her office has had the benefit of some very good submissions that provide an accurate picture of what family violence is, and for the minister to ignore fact in favour of fiction is unacceptable.
Unfortunately, the UN has long been a male-bashing organization that laps up this stuff. However, Ms Adams would have received as much or more respect by speaking about family violence in a balanced and accurate way.
Ministry for men,
Kiora, I’ve been wondering what’s happened to this report promised at the top of the page.
Please can you make enquiries.
All we got was Shelly Johnston’s initial findings.
The link @ comment number 54 used to link to a page that describes how Shelly was working with Canterbury Mens Centre and how she would be asking for information from men affected by violence etc.Interviewing male victims etc.
That link is now to page 404.
Donald from CMC said it wasn’t true that she was working with them and I’ve had no reply to my enquiries from Canturbury violence collaboration,- the publishers of her initial findings.
Uncle Google hasn’t heard of her and I can’t find any contact info elsewhere.
Its important to me because I was a victim of female violence in Canturbury during the timeframe studied.
Oh except it wasn’t recorded quite like that so I didn’t make the 38%.
MY accusers statment to police reads ‘He wouldn’t answer me and this made extremely angry, there was some swearing between us and he told me to fuck off, This made me even angrier so I hit him in the head.”
But there was no record of female violence.
50 hours in a cell then made homeless charged with maf.
Just unlucky I guess.
‘Voices’: We would suggest you contact the ‘Canterbury Family Violence Collaboration’ under whose heading the interview with Ms Johnson was published. Their contact page is here.
Good luck, we look forward to the report too!
65, yes I’ve contacted them for information from the same ‘contact us’ page but had no reply as I mentioned.
They don’t supply an email or any other address just the ‘ contact us’ box which doesn’t allow for any record of the enquiry sent unfortunatly.
No response again from the Canturbury family violence Collaboration.
But I did get a reply from the Dept of internal affairs.
“Shelley Johnson is not currently employed at DIA, nor can we find any record of her here.”
It’s not looking too good for completion of this report.
I left a message with Louie from the justice dept’s human rights page.
The report promised at the top of this page will not be completed.
Shelly Johnson had a relationship breakup and issues with sick children (according to Donald from CMC) and was unable to forward any further research after her initial findings.
This is unfortunate for her and also for male victims of DV, as it seems that on all issues from DV to asbestos piosoning- the opinion of one woman is considerered more newsworthy than that of ten thousand men.
So our comments above will see no light and this page is just more wasted hope and megabytes.
Donald from CMC has released a new report from his research.
Its entitled “mind the gap”.
Perhaps JP, you could post this report and update Canturbury male victims page.
Download the report here:
Mind the Gap: What those in the field say about male victims of family violence [775 KB PDF]
by Donald Pettitt, Manager Canterbury Men’s Centre.