Tuesday, December 2, 2008
The Ladies After a Debate with a Co-Worker About Whether Domestic Violence or Random Violence is More Tragic
Posted by Erica C. Barnett on Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 5:07 PM
... in which I argued that domestic violence is, because it's often hidden, rarely prosecuted, and poorly addressed by local government (King County, for example, just decided to close its domestic violence unit), I came across these images which I'd like to share with you. They're currently running on Dallas buses (and driving men's rights activists crazy).
I like them. Ads about domestic violence should kick you in the teeth.
1
At the risk of being accused as sexist... can't both DV and random violence be equally tragic? I'm pretty sure I'd be crying my eyes out and puking until I shit my pants if someone close to me was a victim of either. I know that doesn't fit the political point you're trying to make, but for fuck's sake...
2
Ouch.
3
Domestic violence also tends to occur repeatedly.
4
Random violence is prosecuted even less often, if I had to guess. Still, fuck men's rights activists, at least the ads are getting noticed.
5
Do ads like this work?
6
Both domestic violence and random violence are tragic. Why is this being made into some kind of contest? What is gained by labeling one type of violence more tragic than another?
7
Seriously...both are tragic.
8
I'm with Lionel. The net result of both is horrible--I don't know if you can say one or the other is more tragic. I lost a close friend and one time partner to a random act of violence--when I first heard about it I feared it was someone she was dating because random acts are comparatively rare. I don't think I felt less gutted when I found out it was a stranger.
9
@6 - Agreed. Here's to hoping say... the parents of Shannon Harp aren't reading the SLOG.
10
@5: yes, they do. Familyplace.org's hotline is inundated with calls.
The "men's rights" idiot is doing what he always does, which is piggyback onto someone else's problem to attract attention to his own. Fuck him.
I agree that domestic violence is more tragic, because victims of random violence still have their families to support them. If it's your father or your husband attacking you, a fundamental trust has been broken, and in a way your own life is attacking you.
The "men's rights" idiot is doing what he always does, which is piggyback onto someone else's problem to attract attention to his own. Fuck him.
I agree that domestic violence is more tragic, because victims of random violence still have their families to support them. If it's your father or your husband attacking you, a fundamental trust has been broken, and in a way your own life is attacking you.
11
Women can be abusers, too.
12
#11 - And commonly are, but I don't feel the ads suggest otherwise. They're just illustrating two very common scenarios.
13
seeing these, my hand involuntarily went to my mouth, because i have a lifelong habit of pulling my lip when i'm freaked out about something. we were all smiling kids once- where do we go wrong? these need to be in washington. i love them.
14
what parents would let their son be in that last ad?
15
In 2006, Mechele Linehan, a suburban Washington state wife and mother with a master's degree, found herself charged in a decade-old Alaska murder case.
In the mid-1990s, Mechele was making ends meet as an exotic dancer at "The Great Alaskan Bush Company," where she not only made lots of money, but also attracted the attention of several men who wanted to marry her.
Prosecutors charge a million dollar life insurance policy was motive for Mechele to have one of those men killed.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/03/0…
In the mid-1990s, Mechele was making ends meet as an exotic dancer at "The Great Alaskan Bush Company," where she not only made lots of money, but also attracted the attention of several men who wanted to marry her.
Prosecutors charge a million dollar life insurance policy was motive for Mechele to have one of those men killed.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/03/0…
16
Awww, they're so cute.
Domestic violence is ADORABLE!
Domestic violence is ADORABLE!
17
ALL VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMYN IS TRAGIC MEN WITH THEIR BIG DICK VIOLENCE DESERVE ANYTHING THAT HAPPENS TO THEM CASTRATE THE LITTLE BOY BEFORE HE GROWS UP TO HURT WOMYN!!!!
18
"Men's rights activist" = Raging asshole
19
Really? these are 'kick in the teeth' and causing an uproar? They suck, because they are sooooooo inoffensive.
20
@11 & 12: What are the statistics of women abusing men? Something like 2% of all abusers? So doesn't it make sense to target anti-DV ads at the 98% of people who do the abusing?
21
All violence is violence. What the fuck was the point of debating which is worse?
It's MOOT.
It's MOOT.
22
'men's rights activist'? really? what kind of stupid wimp needs to be an activist for men's rights? men already have everything a reasonable person could demand, and then some. if these dudes are being oppressed it's because they're fucking losers.
although, the guy's name is glenn sacks. if i had a really bad porno name i might be bitter too, i guess.
on a serious note, violence is violence, but domestic violence does have the added sting of broken trust. not that it matters in the end.
although, the guy's name is glenn sacks. if i had a really bad porno name i might be bitter too, i guess.
on a serious note, violence is violence, but domestic violence does have the added sting of broken trust. not that it matters in the end.
23
Really, what's offensive here is picking worse kinds of violence, like it's the Hulk vs. Spiderman or something.
24
you really think it's offensive levide? i mean sure, it's academic and pointless, but offensive?
25
'Offensive' may be a little strong, but I tend to doubt any victims of either would see the utility in the pursuit.
26
How nice. Yet another ad campaign depicting women as defenseless victims and men as raging monsters - even as children. I'm sure we'll see these banners posted all over Seattle.
Women good. Men bad. Can't be said often enough.
/that was sarcasm, idiots.
Women good. Men bad. Can't be said often enough.
/that was sarcasm, idiots.
27
First of all, in what form of reality do your commenters have the right to call "Men’s rights advocate Glenn Sacks" an ANTI-FEMINIST, or a LOSER? Just because he stands up for the possibility that men can be GOOD MEN, not just batterers, rapists and defilers, just because of their gender?
How wrong do you have to be, before folks here recognize your incredible anti-male bias? the headline on your link attracted me because it was SO WRONG, and folks here are too self-blinded to even see that.
I'm a 6-foot-5, 285-pound, broad-shouldered, bearded male. Many, many women cross the street to avoid me, because I'm so obviously likely to be a hazard. The fact that I mentor youth, successfully raised six foster kids, helped raise hundreds of thousands of dollars for charities and have been a community leader for over half of my life really has nothing to do with their attitudes.
The theme here just keeps perpetuating the idea that no man should be trusted, ever. We're all just this side of homicidal maniacs, and if women can "tame" us (drive us apart and isolate us), then we'll stop being such a problem.
Your foolish, short-sighted attitude is what is driving males of different generations apart. It's a fantasy that women have:
If you can just force a fully-female attitude upon male youth while driving away good, honorable and wise males, then surely our young men will grow up to be women with penises! Doesn't work that way, because we are wired differently. Males need good, positive male role-models too. This attitude of yours is a STRONG contributor to our society's youth in crisis.
So, following your logic, by my saying something on the topic, I'm automatically an "anti-feminist"? Based upon the hideous bias in your comments, I'm guessing yes. If so, I feel sorry for you. You are too twisted up to recognize a good man when we are all around you. They have therapy for that nowadays.
More...
How wrong do you have to be, before folks here recognize your incredible anti-male bias? the headline on your link attracted me because it was SO WRONG, and folks here are too self-blinded to even see that.
I'm a 6-foot-5, 285-pound, broad-shouldered, bearded male. Many, many women cross the street to avoid me, because I'm so obviously likely to be a hazard. The fact that I mentor youth, successfully raised six foster kids, helped raise hundreds of thousands of dollars for charities and have been a community leader for over half of my life really has nothing to do with their attitudes.
The theme here just keeps perpetuating the idea that no man should be trusted, ever. We're all just this side of homicidal maniacs, and if women can "tame" us (drive us apart and isolate us), then we'll stop being such a problem.
Your foolish, short-sighted attitude is what is driving males of different generations apart. It's a fantasy that women have:
If you can just force a fully-female attitude upon male youth while driving away good, honorable and wise males, then surely our young men will grow up to be women with penises! Doesn't work that way, because we are wired differently. Males need good, positive male role-models too. This attitude of yours is a STRONG contributor to our society's youth in crisis.
So, following your logic, by my saying something on the topic, I'm automatically an "anti-feminist"? Based upon the hideous bias in your comments, I'm guessing yes. If so, I feel sorry for you. You are too twisted up to recognize a good man when we are all around you. They have therapy for that nowadays.
28
Those ads are horrible.
Women and girls are not the only ones subjected to domestic violence, and it's bullshit propaganda and asshole-ish opinions like some of those exampled here that create the need for men's rights activists. I can trust that everyone's familiar with the idea that kids who were bullied at a young age are more likely to bully others later on in life than those who weren't-- what about young men who were subjected to domestic violence at a young age, subjected to ads like this, then left without a support group and laughed at for thinking they have the right to one?
I'm a 22 year-old female and I know more young men than women who have suffered from domestic and sexual abuse. Violence is violence, and it is horrible no matter what way it is inflicted upon either gender.
Women and girls are not the only ones subjected to domestic violence, and it's bullshit propaganda and asshole-ish opinions like some of those exampled here that create the need for men's rights activists. I can trust that everyone's familiar with the idea that kids who were bullied at a young age are more likely to bully others later on in life than those who weren't-- what about young men who were subjected to domestic violence at a young age, subjected to ads like this, then left without a support group and laughed at for thinking they have the right to one?
I'm a 22 year-old female and I know more young men than women who have suffered from domestic and sexual abuse. Violence is violence, and it is horrible no matter what way it is inflicted upon either gender.
29
@20: "What are the statistics of women abusing men?"
Don't know. What percentage of guys are married?
Don't know. What percentage of guys are married?
30
I'm still blown away by the phrase "men's rights' advocates".
31
#20 I think they could afford to do more ads that include Mommies beating sons or husbands and other forms of abuse. There aren't just two forms of abuse.
That said, I agree it's an effective campaign and if I had children I wouldn't want them to be in them. Remember when Joey appeared in that V.D. ad?
That said, I agree it's an effective campaign and if I had children I wouldn't want them to be in them. Remember when Joey appeared in that V.D. ad?
32
We don't hear much about men's rights for the same reason that we don't have a "men's history month."
33
@27: you are a great guy, very possibly a saint. You do everything right. Congratulations!
However: if you and I were alone, walking toward each other, on the same side of the street, I too -- a 5-foot-6, 130-pound, bookish woman -- would also definitely be wary. Because guess what? You don't have an enormous neon sign over your head telling me you're a wonderful human being who wouldn't hurt a fly. And you are bigger than me.
And yeah, I tell myself that you are probably a nice guy -- statistically speaking, nice guys are more common than psychotic sociopaths or even garden-variety thugs -- but the fact remains that there is an element of chance in this encounter that limits the amount of information I have about you to what I can glean from immediate observation.
And I only have (as they say) this one life to live, and it comes with a huge dose of healthy social paranoia and a terribly overactive imagination, and if crossing the street has even the slightest chance of keeping me more alive than not crossing the street I will cross that street every time. Because not a day goes by where I wouldn't prefer to be paranoid and alive than brave and dead, even if it risks offending a total stranger (hey, that's the name of this magazine!).
Absolutely, we should trust men. Many of us do. I have one of my own I even let bring me drinks I haven't watched him pour. But don't ask me to extend that trust to every man, everywhere.
Tell you what: you stop getting mad at strange women who cross the road because your manly size makes them nervous, and I'll stop getting irritated by random people who assume I can cook because I'm a woman. Deal?
However: if you and I were alone, walking toward each other, on the same side of the street, I too -- a 5-foot-6, 130-pound, bookish woman -- would also definitely be wary. Because guess what? You don't have an enormous neon sign over your head telling me you're a wonderful human being who wouldn't hurt a fly. And you are bigger than me.
And yeah, I tell myself that you are probably a nice guy -- statistically speaking, nice guys are more common than psychotic sociopaths or even garden-variety thugs -- but the fact remains that there is an element of chance in this encounter that limits the amount of information I have about you to what I can glean from immediate observation.
And I only have (as they say) this one life to live, and it comes with a huge dose of healthy social paranoia and a terribly overactive imagination, and if crossing the street has even the slightest chance of keeping me more alive than not crossing the street I will cross that street every time. Because not a day goes by where I wouldn't prefer to be paranoid and alive than brave and dead, even if it risks offending a total stranger (hey, that's the name of this magazine!).
Absolutely, we should trust men. Many of us do. I have one of my own I even let bring me drinks I haven't watched him pour. But don't ask me to extend that trust to every man, everywhere.
Tell you what: you stop getting mad at strange women who cross the road because your manly size makes them nervous, and I'll stop getting irritated by random people who assume I can cook because I'm a woman. Deal?
34
Puppies are cuter! No, wait, kitties are!
35
@27 There are good men. Why are you taking this so personally?
"If you can just force a fully-female attitude upon male youth while driving away good, honorable and wise males, then surely our young men will grow up to be women with penises!"
I have no intention and am not raising my son this way. I want him to know there is violence. It's brutal and horrible. He has choices about how he deals with his anger. This includes my daughter as well.
Instead of directing your anger at Erica, direct it at organizations and programs that do not do enough to support youth or their parents or whoever is supposed to be taking care of them. Are you familiar with the program, Boys to Men?
"If you can just force a fully-female attitude upon male youth while driving away good, honorable and wise males, then surely our young men will grow up to be women with penises!"
I have no intention and am not raising my son this way. I want him to know there is violence. It's brutal and horrible. He has choices about how he deals with his anger. This includes my daughter as well.
Instead of directing your anger at Erica, direct it at organizations and programs that do not do enough to support youth or their parents or whoever is supposed to be taking care of them. Are you familiar with the program, Boys to Men?
36
I'm working on a new ad of a cute little girl and next to her it says, "I was killed by my daddy, he's on death row now. If mommy killed me, she would have gotten sympathy from the courts and media and would have served a couple years before being back out on the streets."
37
@27--you do sound like a good guy, and I think most slog readers understand that the average guy isn't a monster. Although I can't imagine that I'd cross the street to avoid you, people (men and women alike) have different security issues. It's nothing personal about you; rather it's personal for them. You can't know what's going on in someone's head--the life experience, neuroses, etc, that play into whehter they feel safe or not. you don't know who was mugged last week on that street corner, who is having a bad day, or who just wants to cross the street for another reason. And it's presumptuous to assume that they're just man-haters.
If you look at the actual text of the ads, they don't perpetuate the myth "no man can be trusted, ever." The ads are actually focused on one issue--the fact that kids who are raised in the setting of domestic violence are more likely to grow up to be in dv relationships. The ads are focused on breaking the cycle, which is something we should all think is a good idea.
If you look at the actual text of the ads, they don't perpetuate the myth "no man can be trusted, ever." The ads are actually focused on one issue--the fact that kids who are raised in the setting of domestic violence are more likely to grow up to be in dv relationships. The ads are focused on breaking the cycle, which is something we should all think is a good idea.
38
Male on Male DV and Female on Male DV is under reported.
Among surveys only reporting from women: Non-reciprocal (she started it) Female to Male DV has a higher rate of occurrence than non-reciprocal Male to Female DV.
In reciprocal DV, it is more likely that the female will be injured, and also more likely only the male will be charged with a crime.
Yeah, these are cool ads. Yeah, they need to add a view that address female initiated DV.
I, a male, have been the victim of assault by my (former) female partner in front of my child (from a different partner). She went out of our life ASAP. The only lasting effect I hope this has is that my kid learns to get rid of abusive people from her life.
Among surveys only reporting from women: Non-reciprocal (she started it) Female to Male DV has a higher rate of occurrence than non-reciprocal Male to Female DV.
In reciprocal DV, it is more likely that the female will be injured, and also more likely only the male will be charged with a crime.
Yeah, these are cool ads. Yeah, they need to add a view that address female initiated DV.
I, a male, have been the victim of assault by my (former) female partner in front of my child (from a different partner). She went out of our life ASAP. The only lasting effect I hope this has is that my kid learns to get rid of abusive people from her life.
39
Nice work Gidge, you hit the nail on the head. The ads are about a specific cause and effect issue and the breaking of that cycle; nothing more nothing less. All previous and later comments are moot!
40
This ad is stupid. I like that it is a white boy and a black girl. Let's see the statistics for white, latino, black, asian domestic violence before putting out a lame subtly implied race ad making these innocent kids into unwitting advocates.
41
@35 "Why are you taking this so personally?" I'm not the gentleman who posted before, but I'm delighted to field the question.
Can you even imagine asking that question of a black person, or a woman, or a gay person? Why is bigotry against men the last form that's socially acceptable?
Why do I take it personally? Because bigotry is always wrong. Always. It's never right. Even when it's directed against big strong men (who are only a whisker away from becoming rapists and wife beaters).
Can you even imagine asking that question of a black person, or a woman, or a gay person? Why is bigotry against men the last form that's socially acceptable?
Why do I take it personally? Because bigotry is always wrong. Always. It's never right. Even when it's directed against big strong men (who are only a whisker away from becoming rapists and wife beaters).
42
Is ECB bickering over what kind of violence is worse? Grow the fuck up.
Maybe we should focus on – hey I don't know – addressing the causes of violence instead of cheesy ads that turn awareness into a quasi-marketing campaign.
Maybe we should focus on – hey I don't know – addressing the causes of violence instead of cheesy ads that turn awareness into a quasi-marketing campaign.
43
Right ECB, misandry is never valid.
44
#35 - Funny how you never mentioned any adult males helping your son learn how to be a good man of the community. You're doing it all yourself, (I'm guessing, based on your response), and I betcha, oh, I betcha that you aren't intending any men to come within a few miles of your son to "pollute" the thinking that you're stuffing into your son's head.
If so, you're a big part of the problem, because you simply can't trust. You're surrounded with FEARFEARFEAR messages (Rape! Murder! Molestation! Everywhere! Yikes!) every day, and you're eating them up like pie, and teaching your fears to the next generation. It's a horrid cycle.
The first step to recovery is to acknowledge the harm that we do when we laugh at "Men's Right's Activists" and "Men's History Month" and "Father's Rights." Ho, ho! So ridiculous! Let's throw rocks! Gosh, how we do hate men! Or, no, we don't HATE 'em, but we can't allow them anywhere near our young 'uns. It's only natural and proper. Everybody knows that.
And our sons stand by and witness our hostility and lack of trust. Every day, all around, ubiquitous. It's a killing, isolating message, and you can see all around you how well we've progressed because of it.
If so, you're a big part of the problem, because you simply can't trust. You're surrounded with FEARFEARFEAR messages (Rape! Murder! Molestation! Everywhere! Yikes!) every day, and you're eating them up like pie, and teaching your fears to the next generation. It's a horrid cycle.
The first step to recovery is to acknowledge the harm that we do when we laugh at "Men's Right's Activists" and "Men's History Month" and "Father's Rights." Ho, ho! So ridiculous! Let's throw rocks! Gosh, how we do hate men! Or, no, we don't HATE 'em, but we can't allow them anywhere near our young 'uns. It's only natural and proper. Everybody knows that.
And our sons stand by and witness our hostility and lack of trust. Every day, all around, ubiquitous. It's a killing, isolating message, and you can see all around you how well we've progressed because of it.
45
Which is more tragic? What a fucked up question.
46
No, they are not equally tragic. Random violence is like the weather -- unpredictable and horrible, yes, but ... well ... random.
Domestic violence on the other hand comes with intent, and because it is not random, is preventable.
Lung cancer by smoking is more tragic than a knot of cancer in your lung that had nothing to do with your choices and your history.
Surely someone can throw the definition of tragic in here?
And there's no such thing as fucked up questions. Only fucked up paths that get us to asking them.
Domestic violence on the other hand comes with intent, and because it is not random, is preventable.
Lung cancer by smoking is more tragic than a knot of cancer in your lung that had nothing to do with your choices and your history.
Surely someone can throw the definition of tragic in here?
And there's no such thing as fucked up questions. Only fucked up paths that get us to asking them.
47
@42 How can you address the causes of violence if you don't understand what they are? And how can you know what those causes are if you are unwilling to ponder the question of which is worse, which makes you wonder, well, what's the difference?
Man, why are people so touchy tonight?
Man, why are people so touchy tonight?
48
@44--wow.
It seems like you've gone way past the subject of the post, but I think the actual discussion of the ad campaign is more interesting. I agree that it would be ideal to have an ad that acknowledges other forms of domestic violence (if you go to their website, there's actually a 3rd one that is gender-neutral with regard to who the abuser is). But the fact is that they probably had limited resources and depending on how widespread they are, people may only see one version anyway. What would you have them do--have some hermaphrodite kid on the ad? The ads were aimed at the Dallas market, where apparently 90% of reported DV victims are women.
It seems like you've gone way past the subject of the post, but I think the actual discussion of the ad campaign is more interesting. I agree that it would be ideal to have an ad that acknowledges other forms of domestic violence (if you go to their website, there's actually a 3rd one that is gender-neutral with regard to who the abuser is). But the fact is that they probably had limited resources and depending on how widespread they are, people may only see one version anyway. What would you have them do--have some hermaphrodite kid on the ad? The ads were aimed at the Dallas market, where apparently 90% of reported DV victims are women.
49
@ a way earlier comment, 44% of domestic violence homicides are a female suspect murdering their male spouse so watch your assumptions.
@ ECB.... watch your assumptions too! DV assaults are almost always prosecuted even without a cooperating victim, that almost never happens in stranger violence. AND most serious DV assaults were proceeded by multiple telltale incidents where the victim did not take action. I understand the factors of fear and intimidation but a victim who has refused to seek help is on a whole different level than one who never saw it coming.
also @ ECB... KCSO is not phasing out DV investigations [and if you have paid any attention at all you know this is true], they are phasing out a specialty unit. In the future they will be referring those same cases to 'multi-purpose' detectives.... ones who investigate rape, fraud, etc. as opposed to those who only investigate DV cases. If they were phasing out cars that could only be used in certain districts in favor of ones that could go anywhere in the world for the same price you would be cheering them on.
Way to sensationalize!
... ECB deletes the comment critical toward her in 3-2-1....
@ ECB.... watch your assumptions too! DV assaults are almost always prosecuted even without a cooperating victim, that almost never happens in stranger violence. AND most serious DV assaults were proceeded by multiple telltale incidents where the victim did not take action. I understand the factors of fear and intimidation but a victim who has refused to seek help is on a whole different level than one who never saw it coming.
also @ ECB... KCSO is not phasing out DV investigations [and if you have paid any attention at all you know this is true], they are phasing out a specialty unit. In the future they will be referring those same cases to 'multi-purpose' detectives.... ones who investigate rape, fraud, etc. as opposed to those who only investigate DV cases. If they were phasing out cars that could only be used in certain districts in favor of ones that could go anywhere in the world for the same price you would be cheering them on.
Way to sensationalize!
... ECB deletes the comment critical toward her in 3-2-1....
50
Tony Lindsey. I am married to my children's father.
"and I betcha, oh, I betcha that you aren't intending any men to come within a few miles of your son to "pollute" the thinking that you're stuffing into your son's head."
Part of parenting children includes supporting them and giving them space to take in what happens in their world. Positive or negative. In regard to any "pollution" that may get stuffed into our children's heads, in my judgement that would be where the parent provides the understanding and lesson if needed.
@41 Bigotry is always wrong. Always.
"and I betcha, oh, I betcha that you aren't intending any men to come within a few miles of your son to "pollute" the thinking that you're stuffing into your son's head."
Part of parenting children includes supporting them and giving them space to take in what happens in their world. Positive or negative. In regard to any "pollution" that may get stuffed into our children's heads, in my judgement that would be where the parent provides the understanding and lesson if needed.
@41 Bigotry is always wrong. Always.
51
I think the ads are good. I also think they leave out the fact that wives and mothers can just as easily be abusive. I think they single out men as the only abusers out there. I think that's a mistake. Am I offended by it? Meh... I really don't care enough about it one way or another. If you beat your husband, wife, hetero-boyfriend, hetero-girlfriend, homo-boyfriend, homo-girlfriend, or significant other, you're an asshole. If you let your husband, wife, hetero-boyfriend, hetero-girlfriend, homo-boyfriend, homo-girlfriend, or significant other beat you, you're a moron (NonPC, perhaps, but still true). And if you beat a kid, whether you're a man or woman, you need to be beaten to death yourself. Simple.
But I do think they could do a better job of pointing out it's not just heterosexual men who can be abusive pricks. There's enough homosexual men and women being beaten by their partners, and enough kids suffering emotional and physical abuse by their mother, that the ads seem a little shortsighted to me.
But I do think they could do a better job of pointing out it's not just heterosexual men who can be abusive pricks. There's enough homosexual men and women being beaten by their partners, and enough kids suffering emotional and physical abuse by their mother, that the ads seem a little shortsighted to me.
52
Hot topic for commentsm here's one more -
Don't forget, the cycle of abuse is the abused cum abuser - and perhaps that's the reason King County is closing it's DVU.
Abuse of any sort is not acceptable. (period) - bringing government into the cycle is tyranny (my apologies to Richard Sanders)
Don't forget, the cycle of abuse is the abused cum abuser - and perhaps that's the reason King County is closing it's DVU.
Abuse of any sort is not acceptable. (period) - bringing government into the cycle is tyranny (my apologies to Richard Sanders)
53
They're both tragic, but domestic violence is a betrayal of love and trust. It's a crime against the humanity of the victim. I'd have to say only violence toward children is more reprehensible.
54
Did you attend the candlelight vigil last night for the woman who was stabbed to death SIXTY FUCKING TIMES by her husband in Othello on Sunday (orphaning her three daughters)? I wonder how much Slog coverage the murder would have received if it was a gay person stabbed to death SIXTY FUCKING TIMES for being gay, instead of say, for being the wife and mother of your fuckings kids?
55
I was a former prosecutor, and my experience is that there are many female perps as male. Cops and prosecutors hate dealing with this cases for a number of reasons. One is that the victims will go right back to the perp. I did probably ten DV cases and lost every one of them. 1/2 I lost because the subpoenaed victim didn't show up to trial. A couple I lost because, OMG, the female admitted on the stand that she hit him first. Male victims never cooperate.
I thought the problem of the uncooperative victim could be ameliorated if the cops would take lots of pictures of the evidence of the assault. And going out and arresting the victims to bring them to court and MAKE them testify.
But cops don't want to take the time and effort to build a case when they could be easily busting someone for smoking pot or something.
A lot of cops and prosecutors are way to homophobic to deal with male on male violence.
But I think the biggest problem is that you can do more time in prison from smoking some weed than beating the fuck out of a spouse. And I hold cops, the useless courts, and prosecutors guilty of that problem.
I thought the problem of the uncooperative victim could be ameliorated if the cops would take lots of pictures of the evidence of the assault. And going out and arresting the victims to bring them to court and MAKE them testify.
But cops don't want to take the time and effort to build a case when they could be easily busting someone for smoking pot or something.
A lot of cops and prosecutors are way to homophobic to deal with male on male violence.
But I think the biggest problem is that you can do more time in prison from smoking some weed than beating the fuck out of a spouse. And I hold cops, the useless courts, and prosecutors guilty of that problem.
56
so tony lindsey, when i said that 'men's rights advocates' were losers, your comments are what i had in mind. you are apparently this giant guy, who, while walking down the street, has nothing to worry about. that is a privilege not everyone has, particularly women half your size. they live their lives with their backs against the wall if you will. and yet you have your panties all in a bunch because you think they aren't treating you fairly when they take basic and reasonable precautions for their safety. what do you want, for them to show you more respect and put themselves in an uncomfortable position just to prove they don't 'hate men'? because you're so fucking oppressed, boo fucking hoo for you.
well dude, the fact is that your rights are not in danger, nor are my rights or the rights of any other men out there. and by the way, pointing out that domestic violence more commonly affects women doesn't impact anyones 'rights' at all. you have every social privilege, yet you're demanding more form those who don't, thus essentially kicking those less fortunate than you while their down. so, yeah, that to me is my idea of a wimp and a loser. try putting yourself in other people's shoes, taking the world from their perspective without the benefit of your advantages in life.
well dude, the fact is that your rights are not in danger, nor are my rights or the rights of any other men out there. and by the way, pointing out that domestic violence more commonly affects women doesn't impact anyones 'rights' at all. you have every social privilege, yet you're demanding more form those who don't, thus essentially kicking those less fortunate than you while their down. so, yeah, that to me is my idea of a wimp and a loser. try putting yourself in other people's shoes, taking the world from their perspective without the benefit of your advantages in life.
57
I AGREE WITH SIXTY FUCKING TIMES THE SLOG IS NOT WOMYN CENTRIC AND IS TOO CONCERNED WITH HOMOSEXUALS FUCK MEN AND THEIR BIG DICK VIOLENCE THEY CAN ALL FUCK OFF MY VAGINA IS MY OWNE IF A GAY MAN GETS STABBED WHO CARES I WOULD ONLY CRY IF IT WAS A WOMYN!
58
why run the oppression olympics? they are both bad.
and what information do you have to prove that DV is "rarely prosecuted"? looked at any stats at all? i don't think that anyone in the DV community in King co. would agree with you.
and what information do you have to prove that DV is "rarely prosecuted"? looked at any stats at all? i don't think that anyone in the DV community in King co. would agree with you.
59
I agree with @41. Acting as though it's rational to fear a man like @27 just because he's tall and broad shouldered is absurd. Or are the @33 "5-foot-6, 130-pound, bookish" women of the world constantly threatened on the street and I'm just not aware of it?
60
asking which is more tragic is the wrong question. even most of the discussion here isn't comparing or contrasting what is tragic about each. nor does deciding which is more tragic translate to a policy for dealing with the problems, or preventing the problems, or whatever the issues at hand are.
discussing which is more tragic is both open-ended and highly relative to the specific case. asking which is more of a problem, or which should get more attention from the law, or some specific question about policies might make this discussion more focused.
and, just for internets fun, @55, i don't believe you were a prosecutor.
discussing which is more tragic is both open-ended and highly relative to the specific case. asking which is more of a problem, or which should get more attention from the law, or some specific question about policies might make this discussion more focused.
and, just for internets fun, @55, i don't believe you were a prosecutor.
61
All violence is bad. But waaaaay more women have to deal with domestic violence.
In most situations, the man feels he has to show dominance somehow. In extraordinary (and disturbingly common) cases, that usually includes isolating the woman of everything - friends, family, happiness, freedom... seriously. Why do you think LMN exists?
In most situations, the man feels he has to show dominance somehow. In extraordinary (and disturbingly common) cases, that usually includes isolating the woman of everything - friends, family, happiness, freedom... seriously. Why do you think LMN exists?
62
Your home is supposed to be a safe haven. Your parents are supposed to protect you. Your spouse is supposed to cherish you. Domestic violence is a basic violation of the trust that *should* underlie any familial relationship. And no, I don't live in Pollyanna fairyland; I was beat like an old rug as a kid. But just because most familial relationships are damaged, doesn't mean that's the way they should be.
And how people get from the idea that everyone should be protected from violence in their home to "everyone hates men!" is beyond me. That's a hell of a leap.
(Oh, and yes, women hit and verbally abuse men and children too. They just are much less likely to cause serious injury, with the exception of the women who finally snap and kill their abusive partners. And women who kill their children/spouses serve FAR more prison time, on average, than men who do the same - look it up. Juries seem to think it's a violation of "basic feminine nature" and punish it more severely.)
How often have you heard of an ex-wife killing her ex-husband and her children, because he had the temerity to leave her? Every time it happens, it gets all kinds of sensationalistic publicity - because it's rare. But a man killing his estranged wife and children happens so often it's completely unremarkable.
And how people get from the idea that everyone should be protected from violence in their home to "everyone hates men!" is beyond me. That's a hell of a leap.
(Oh, and yes, women hit and verbally abuse men and children too. They just are much less likely to cause serious injury, with the exception of the women who finally snap and kill their abusive partners. And women who kill their children/spouses serve FAR more prison time, on average, than men who do the same - look it up. Juries seem to think it's a violation of "basic feminine nature" and punish it more severely.)
How often have you heard of an ex-wife killing her ex-husband and her children, because he had the temerity to leave her? Every time it happens, it gets all kinds of sensationalistic publicity - because it's rare. But a man killing his estranged wife and children happens so often it's completely unremarkable.
63
@61: You're talking about domestic violence situations right? It sort of sounds like you're discussing all relationships.
64
@63 When you look at situations of domestic violence, it usually comes in tandem with some if not all of those things. I write from experience.
65
@64: I just couldn't tell if you were saying ALL relationships were violent.
I agree with you that domestic violence can take many forms -- not just overt violence, but control, manipulation and other attempts at dominance.
I agree with you that domestic violence can take many forms -- not just overt violence, but control, manipulation and other attempts at dominance.
66
#20 - why the fuck are you asking me? I was agreeing with that the ads portray the issue most correctly. Also, if you don't know, young men are VERY often the victims of domestic violence, being it violence at the hands of their mothers, or sexual assault. That's not exactly the issue here, but you asked.
Why is anyone even arguing, they're just trying to get a message out. Some of these responses almost drive me into wanting to read Paglia for chrissake.
Why is anyone even arguing, they're just trying to get a message out. Some of these responses almost drive me into wanting to read Paglia for chrissake.
67
@49 - "44% of domestic violence homicides are a female suspect murdering their male spouse" is not true. For accurate statistics based on factual research, check the Washington State Domestic Violence Fatal…
68
Let me try that link again . . . The Washington State Domestic Violence Fatality Review can be found here: http://tiny.cc/zpFpu
Most Commented on Slog
-
Fort Worth Police Chief: That Faggot Had It Coming by Dan Savage
-
Defense Of Marriage Asshole by Dan Savage
-
Delightful Damage by Charles Mudede
-
Palin to Step Down as Governor by Lindy West
-
I'm Pretty Busy Murdering Arthouse Cinema With My Bare Hands at the Moment... by Lindy West
-
Summer In The City by Dan Savage
-
Re: Palin to Step Down as Governor by Eli Sanders
-
Shirt Lifter by Dan Savage
-
Wailin' For Palin by Paul Constant
-
The Blame Game 2 by Dan Savage
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (68) RSS