3 December 2012

"Your Court Your Safety" a booklet to help deal with domestic violence

| johnboy
Join the conversation
54

Joy Burch has launched a resource booklet to help those struggling with domestic violence survive the courts:

The booklet “Your Court Your Safety” provides guidance and information on support services to victims of domestic violence to empower and assist them.

“We know one in three Australian women will experience domestic violence in their life time.” Minister Burch said.

“The impact can be psychologically, socially, economically on women, children, families and the community as a whole in both the short and long term,

“This practical resource provides advice and support and will contribute to an increased sense of safety for women.

Join the conversation

54
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

LSWCHP said :

Mr Evil said :

Actually, I think the bigger issue is that far too many perpertrators of domestic violence get away with little more than a smack on the wrist for their actions.Wasn’t there a case in Canberra recently where some dropkick punched his partner fair in the face, and then walked away with a suspended sentence?

There was a case in Canberra 10 years ago where my dropkick wife punched me in the face (again) and eventually walked away with the majority of what I owned in the ensuing “no fault” divorce. Not that I’m bitter.

As many others have stated here, domestic violence is just violence. It shouldn’t be treated differently because of the location of the event. And gender, sexual orientation or whatever should all be removed from the treatment of the problem. Nobody should be beating or abusing other people in any way.

Yes in an ideal world that would be the case however the animal lingers below the surface and rears its ugly head far too often.If only we could all adopt the concept of do unto others there would be far more harmony but unfortunately it’s a pipe dream.

Mr Evil said :

Actually, I think the bigger issue is that far too many perpertrators of domestic violence get away with little more than a smack on the wrist for their actions.Wasn’t there a case in Canberra recently where some dropkick punched his partner fair in the face, and then walked away with a suspended sentence?

There was a case in Canberra 10 years ago where my dropkick wife punched me in the face (again) and eventually walked away with the majority of what I owned in the ensuing “no fault” divorce. Not that I’m bitter.

As many others have stated here, domestic violence is just violence. It shouldn’t be treated differently because of the location of the event. And gender, sexual orientation or whatever should all be removed from the treatment of the problem. Nobody should be beating or abusing other people in any way.

to quote Poetix:

“Um, the tone of post 49 is decidedly unpleasant.”

It continually amazes me that people can produce statistics proving that Domestic Assaults occurs in all facets of our community yet people like Kakosi still persist in denying that a male is capable of being the subject of abuse.

Kakosi, please read the results of the surveys that have been linked to in this discussion. The Canadian survey is the most comprehensive gender-neutral Domestic Violence study ever undertaken. The results not only support the oft quoted claim of 3 in 1 women will experience domestic violence in their life time, but demonstrates that the numbers are almost the same for males as well.

I will reiterate that I, and I think every person that has commented are not deriding what Ms Burch/Birch is trying to achieve, just that we need to acknowledge that the government needs to started looking at domestic assaults as a community issue, regardless of race, religion or gender.

Jim Jones said :

It’s so unfair that all my taxpayer dollars are spent on ‘birthing centres’ and ‘neonatal clinics’ that pander to women.

Men have children too, so why all the money and marketing focus on women?

It’s blatant sexism is what it is. I think gender should be left out of the equation entirely.

Exactly right Jim, good point.

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=5302756&page=1

It’s so unfair that all my taxpayer dollars are spent on ‘birthing centres’ and ‘neonatal clinics’ that pander to women.

Men have children too, so why all the money and marketing focus on women?

It’s blatant sexism is what it is. I think gender should be left out of the equation entirely.

I wish the police and government would stop calling this domestic violence – it’s men bashing, raping or torturing their wives and partners – and it’s still an accepted part of Australian society because it’s not taken seriously by the police, courts or by some people here it seems.

All this stupidity about men being victims of women seems to me an attempt to water down the real problem of women being nothing more than punching bags for any poor excuse for a man who wants to treat them that way.

dpm said :

kea said :

From a marketing perspective, the media release is text book perfect.. they have a clear understanding of their product and their target market and have begun a marketing campaign it in the most effective way they know how. Are you advising they should homogenise and waste their marketing $$ in an effort to be PC?

If, as you seem to have been stating, it is solely a resource for female victims (see #4, #7 and #12 etc) then, no, I’d say they don’t have their MR text book perfect. But, as I have been trying to say, to do so they would simply have to change the title to:
“New resource to empower the *female* victims of domestic violence”
Then they’d be hitting their target market perfectly, and people would probably be less confused.

However, if it is just a basic copy of the NSW ‘Your Court, Your Safety’ booklet, then I think you’ll find that overall, the booklet *is* quite gender-neutral.
http://www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/lawlink/cpd/ll_cpd.nsf/vwFiles/Domestic_Violence_Booklet_Web_version.pdf/%24file/Domestic_Violence_Booklet_Web_version.pdf
(really, their writing style covers all victims, IMO)…

This would then mean their MR title etc is fine, but your comments that it’s OK that male victims are excluded would be the thing that is incorrect? So basically, if the ACT version is a ~copy of the NSW booklet, you could have simply responded at #4, #7 and #12 that ‘Yes, the booklet caters for all victims, regardless of gender etc.’ and everyone would have been happy, i’m guessing. Has anyone read the new ACT booklet?

The media release said the document was produced and published through the 2010-11 ACT Women’s grant..
Perhaps take it up with them.

Having been on the receiving end of financial and psychological abuse, I am glad to hear that there are more services in place, for anyone, not just women. I have definitely felt a shift in culture from 8 years ago to now, and even though we are still in the system, it feels like the system is better equipped to support us through the next phase.. the level of understanding and empathy from the people I have to deal with today makes a huge impact on self esteem, dignity, etc had things been like this back then, I would have lived a very different 8 years… and this is still to do with the same person btw.. 8 years on and he STILL plays dirty tricks.. still atempts to perpetrate abuse.. can’t help himself.. and the scary thing the sociopath walks among you.. could be sitting in the next stall…. o_O

IrishPete said :

…Balancing, or perhaps unbalancing, this are that the injuries received by women victims of DV tend to be more serious than the injuries received by men. Whether this is just because, on average, men are bigger and stronger, or because men’s violence is “deliberately worse” [is up for debate],…
IP

I think it is more due to physiology than any inherent cruelty or viciousness on the part of male offenders. I recall reading somewhere that woman perpetrators of DV are more likely to use a knife or other weapon on their partner, presumably to compensate for their (generally) smaller physiques.

Note that the ABS statistics someone quoted earlier are Recorded Crime – for a crime to be recorded, the victim has to report it to police, and police have to take it seriously and record it..

Surveys tend to show a slightly different picture from recorded crime – for all types of crime, but here we’re discussing domestic violence.

From memory (and it’s a memory with some specialist knowledge in this area), research shows men and women are equally likely to be victims of domestic violence. Balancing, or perhaps unbalancing, this are that the injuries received by women victims of DV tend to be more serious than the injuries received by men. Whether this is just because, on average, men are bigger and stronger, or because men’s violence is “deliberately worse”, I don’t think the research can answer that question yet.

And I can’t recall whether the research has anything to say about the frequency of the violence. So it’s possible that one third of men are victims of DV in the lifetime, and one third of women, but women are victims more frequently, (*e.g. as an extreme example, those women who are victims have an average of 10 ssault in their lifetime but the men only one).

IP

kea said :

From a marketing perspective, the media release is text book perfect.. they have a clear understanding of their product and their target market and have begun a marketing campaign it in the most effective way they know how. Are you advising they should homogenise and waste their marketing $$ in an effort to be PC?

If, as you seem to have been stating, it is solely a resource for female victims (see #4, #7 and #12 etc) then, no, I’d say they don’t have their MR text book perfect. But, as I have been trying to say, to do so they would simply have to change the title to:
“New resource to empower the *female* victims of domestic violence”
Then they’d be hitting their target market perfectly, and people would probably be less confused.

However, if it is just a basic copy of the NSW ‘Your Court, Your Safety’ booklet, then I think you’ll find that overall, the booklet *is* quite gender-neutral.
http://www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/lawlink/cpd/ll_cpd.nsf/vwFiles/Domestic_Violence_Booklet_Web_version.pdf/%24file/Domestic_Violence_Booklet_Web_version.pdf
(really, their writing style covers all victims, IMO)…

This would then mean their MR title etc is fine, but your comments that it’s OK that male victims are excluded would be the thing that is incorrect? So basically, if the ACT version is a ~copy of the NSW booklet, you could have simply responded at #4, #7 and #12 that ‘Yes, the booklet caters for all victims, regardless of gender etc.’ and everyone would have been happy, i’m guessing. Has anyone read the new ACT booklet?

kea said :

From a marketing perspective, the media release is text book perfect.. they have a clear understanding of their product and their target market and have begun a marketing campaign it in the most effective way they know how. Are you advising they should homogenise and waste their marketing $$ in an effort to be PC?

Kea, in answer to your question Yes, that is what any reasonable person would expect. Does the statement make any less impact when read as:

The booklet “Your Court Your Safety” provides guidance and information on support services to victims of domestic violence to empower and assist them.
“We know one in three Australians will experience domestic violence in their life time.” Minister Burch said.
“The impact can be psychologically, socially, economically on families and the community as a whole in both the short and long term,
“This practical resource provides advice and support and will contribute to an increased sense of safety for everybody.

what_the said :

Men are also more likely to be victims of a homocide by about a 70% on average.

I think you’ll find that the number of female victims of homicide is much higher than reported, it’s just that many of the murdered women are too afraid to come forward and report it to police.

From a marketing perspective, the media release is text book perfect.. they have a clear understanding of their product and their target market and have begun a marketing campaign it in the most effective way they know how. Are you advising they should homogenise and waste their marketing $$ in an effort to be PC?

Shhhhhh! There are also people in the LGBTQI community who perpetrate and/or suffer domestic violence. Maybe it’s too simplistic to focus on gender, and to revert to the gender binary. If its not about gender, then what??? Hmmmmmm, power maybe? But don’t tell anyone. If we start looking at the truth we might actually work our way towards a resolution.

Binary thinking and/or generalisations certainly preserve the old brain power tho…

poetix said :

Apparently my middle name was chosen by my mother to remember a friend who died of a blood clot in her brain after being beaten by her (the friend’s) husband.

So I suppose I’m just trying to ensure that women like that are not forgotten. She was about thirty, I believe.

So, to think this through, because of your middle name history, you’re OK with pulling up some people for their ‘unplesant tone’, but are OK with others with an equally unplesant tone going for it? Gotcha. I can see how that will help! 😉
I also have to say I don’t think anyone mentioned we should forget female (or any) victims here?
(BTW, i’m reading this thread from a neutral (i.e. boring, logical) point of view. You may have noticed I’ve never mentioned that males have to be included (though I suggested to stop these arguments you could *remove* gender from the discussion. Once again, I didn’t say I insisted on this – it could just be an option to stop these arguments, that’s all). Overall, I’ve just tried to point out some inconsistencies as I see them). Perhaps I’m crap at that! Anyway….

Mr Evil said :

Actually, I think the bigger issue is that far too many perpertrators of domestic violence get away with little more than a smack on the wrist for their actions.Wasn’t there a case in Canberra recently where some dropkick punched his partner fair in the face, and then walked away with a suspended sentence?

+1. The courts obviously don’t take domestic violence and/or assault seriously, so what exactly are we supposed to do – deal with it ourselves?

Interesting figures from the ABS in their 10 year study on violence:
http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/364A0B6034360F15CA257A150018FC34?opendocument

In New South Wales, South Australia and the Australian Capital Territory, males were more likely than females to be victims of assault.
In New South Wales, 55% (39,307) of assault victims were male and 45% (31,760) of assault victims were female.
In South Australia, 53% (8,577) of assault victims were male and 47% (7,666) of assault victims were female.
In the Australian Capital Territory, 57% (1,263) of assault victims were male and 43% (958) of assault victims were female.

In contrast, in Western Australia and the Northern Territory, females were more likely to be victims of assault compared to male victims of assault.

In Western Australia, 51% (10,968) of assault victims were female and 49% (10,446) of assault victims were male.
In the Northern Territory, 64% (4,314) of assault victims were female and 35% (2,322) of assault victims were male.

I think the point being made in this thread is that if we’re pretty much equally being subjected to violence then shouldn’t we be equally addressing the issue no matter what gender.

Men are also more likely to be victims of a homocide by about a 70% on average.

Women are extremely more likely to be a victim of a sexaul assualt 80-90%.

So if there was a focus on women and sexual assualt I’m pretty sure no-one here would have a problem. However when the problem of assualt is equal and while males are more likely to be murdered, it’s no real suprise that men would be asking why the focus on female assault when the figures indicate equal victimization.

chewy14 said :

poetix said :

Um, the tone of 30, 31and 32 is decidedly unpleasant.

I would say that murder is assault writ large, and more men than woman are murdered. By other men. There are very few murders committed by women. The last ABS stats I saw (and homicide stats are very hard to fudge!) had women committing about 20% of all homicides (manslaughter and murder). Sorry, can’t be bothered searching for them now; do it yourself if you’re interested. A bath is calling.

There is a particular problem with men and violence. The problem is that they’re simply more effective at it. I don’t think that is ever likely to change.

The violence of women tends to be more petty, and is often directed at children. All this is making me depressed, so it’s definitely bath time.

What do you think of the tone of #29 then? I think its far more unpleasant than anything I’ve written.
Did you actually have any issue with the points made?

And why are you focusing on murder? This thread is about domestic violence of which murder would be a miniscule component. Particularly when you include things like psychological and financial abuse which is now considered to be domestic violence.

Apparently my middle name was chosen by my mother to remember a friend who died of a blood clot in her brain after being beaten by her (the friend’s) husband.

So I suppose I’m just trying to ensure that women like that are not forgotten. She was about thirty, I believe.

poetix said :

Um, the tone of 30, 31and 32 is decidedly unpleasant.

I would say that murder is assault writ large, and more men than woman are murdered. By other men. There are very few murders committed by women. The last ABS stats I saw (and homicide stats are very hard to fudge!) had women committing about 20% of all homicides (manslaughter and murder). Sorry, can’t be bothered searching for them now; do it yourself if you’re interested. A bath is calling.

There is a particular problem with men and violence. The problem is that they’re simply more effective at it. I don’t think that is ever likely to change.

The violence of women tends to be more petty, and is often directed at children. All this is making me depressed, so it’s definitely bath time.

What do you think of the tone of #29 then? I think its far more unpleasant than anything I’ve written.
Did you actually have any issue with the points made?

And why are you focusing on murder? This thread is about domestic violence of which murder would be a miniscule component. Particularly when you include things like psychological and financial abuse which is now considered to be domestic violence.

If women just learned to do what they’re told………

Actually, I think the bigger issue is that far too many perpertrators of domestic violence get away with little more than a smack on the wrist for their actions.Wasn’t there a case in Canberra recently where some dropkick punched his partner fair in the face, and then walked away with a suspended sentence?

Anyway, maybe Birch/Berch/Burtch/Burch could spend more time attacking the problem from that angle, rather than signing off on a booklet that will be absolutely useless in many cases.

And on another point; how many men and women return to violent partners even though they know what they are like; either because they feel they might be able to change them, or because they feel they have nowhere else to go?

Um, the tone of 30, 31and 32 is decidedly unpleasant.

I would say that murder is assault writ large, and more men than woman are murdered. By other men. There are very few murders committed by women. The last ABS stats I saw (and homicide stats are very hard to fudge!) had women committing about 20% of all homicides (manslaughter and murder). Sorry, can’t be bothered searching for them now; do it yourself if you’re interested. A bath is calling.

There is a particular problem with men and violence. The problem is that they’re simply more effective at it. I don’t think that is ever likely to change.

The violence of women tends to be more petty, and is often directed at children. All this is making me depressed, so it’s definitely bath time.

PeachesNcream said :

I’ve been noticing a bunch of whining men seeking out forums and articles addressing DV to publicise their perceptions of male oppression but what undermines those actions is that in general, men, having been caught with their hand in the cookie jar holding a fist full of the finest choc-chip now cry “but look at her…she has crumbs under her fingernails!” Pathetic. Nor does posting imaginary statistics over and over help your cause or change the fact that in general, men are by nature aggressive and men are responsible for the vast majority of violence in society, hence have a much larger prison population. Women, in general, are not physically aggressive thus suffer the most as targets of men’s hateful violence. And those of you men who come to forums like this to weep about inequality come across as demanding that your emotional hurts be recognised and addressed because they are more important than anyone elses. Bad luck. The government allocates funding to the area of greatest proven need so that they get more bang for their buck. Services addressing DV prevention for women will get priority until that problem is solved. So help yourselves by lecturing violent men about stopping their campaigns of abuse against everybody else then there will be resources available to deal with the much smaller problem of women who routinely beat/injure/maim/kill men.

(False flag).

PeachesNcream said :

I’ve been noticing a bunch of whining men seeking out forums and articles addressing DV to publicise their perceptions of male oppression but what undermines those actions is that in general, men, having been caught with their hand in the cookie jar holding a fist full of the finest choc-chip now cry “but look at her…she has crumbs under her fingernails!” Pathetic. Nor does posting imaginary statistics over and over help your cause or change the fact that in general, men are by nature aggressive and men are responsible for the vast majority of violence in society, hence have a much larger prison population. Women, in general, are not physically aggressive thus suffer the most as targets of men’s hateful violence. And those of you men who come to forums like this to weep about inequality come across as demanding that your emotional hurts be recognised and addressed because they are more important than anyone elses. Bad luck. The government allocates funding to the area of greatest proven need so that they get more bang for their buck. Services addressing DV prevention for women will get priority until that problem is solved. So help yourselves by lecturing violent men about stopping their campaigns of abuse against everybody else then there will be resources available to deal with the much smaller problem of women who routinely beat/injure/maim/kill men.

Will you be teaching Misandry 101 next semester too?

PeachesNcream said :

waaaaaahhhhh

Speaking of whining, you were trying to be ironic no?

I don’t think anyone is saying that resources and priority shouldn’t be given to those most in need, rather they are saying that the other problems are treated as if they dont exist at all. Based on the constant messages provided by stories such as this, it would be hard to argue against that notion.

It’s like some people think that if any woman is shown to be violent and/or not a victim then it defeats their cause of trying to help victims of DV, when it does no such thing.

There’s no need to focus on gender, we should treat all cases on their merits and need for help.

Now excuse me, I must be off. Being a man I’ve got to get my daily quota of violence in.

PeachesNcream said :

TL/DR

P&C, for the sake of all humanity, please take you medication.

I actually though we were having a quite rational discussion regarding this issue, please try and keep it that way.

I fully support what Ms Burch is trying to achieve, but I also believe that the issue of domestic violence will never be resolved until the government started looking at domestic assaults as a community issue, regardless of race, religion or gender.

PeachesNcream6:22 pm 04 Dec 12

I’ve been noticing a bunch of whining men seeking out forums and articles addressing DV to publicise their perceptions of male oppression but what undermines those actions is that in general, men, having been caught with their hand in the cookie jar holding a fist full of the finest choc-chip now cry “but look at her…she has crumbs under her fingernails!” Pathetic. Nor does posting imaginary statistics over and over help your cause or change the fact that in general, men are by nature aggressive and men are responsible for the vast majority of violence in society, hence have a much larger prison population. Women, in general, are not physically aggressive thus suffer the most as targets of men’s hateful violence. And those of you men who come to forums like this to weep about inequality come across as demanding that your emotional hurts be recognised and addressed because they are more important than anyone elses. Bad luck. The government allocates funding to the area of greatest proven need so that they get more bang for their buck. Services addressing DV prevention for women will get priority until that problem is solved. So help yourselves by lecturing violent men about stopping their campaigns of abuse against everybody else then there will be resources available to deal with the much smaller problem of women who routinely beat/injure/maim/kill men.

kea said :

If we could just get one thing straight first….

Its not Domestic Violence ..its Assault with Grievous Bodily Harm..

Take it somewhere else, kea. If I were to insult my wife or withhold finances from her, is it still assault with grievous bodily harm? No – but I would still be a d!ckhead for doing it. For the record, my wife controls the household finances, swears like a trooper, and punches like a bloke. She is freakin awesome.

Diggety said :

milkman said :

Why couldn’t we just focus on domestic violence however it occurs, including against men and children?

+1

+ another. One in three men are also likely to be subjected to domestic violence at some point in their lives too. As are one in three children. This publication does f*ck all to bridge the gender gap or address the social issues surrounding domestic violence. Imagine the outrage if this publication were aimed at any men who are subjected to domestic violence? It absolutely should have been written as gender neutral – just like domestic violence itself.

I think perhaps the point someone was trying to make earlier was a good one. Whenever the conversation on here mentions Domestic Violence against women lots of people jump up and down and say ‘what about violence against men’. This is like saying complaining about a conversation about violence against older people not also being about younger people. It might be important, but it is not what the conversation is about!
Having said that I can hear that some of you feel that mentioning domestic violence as only a women’s problem demeans your experience and pain. And that is true. The problem is that women who experience domestic violence and see a thread like this which read primarily as a complaint against ‘feminists’ as if they are somehow the cause of the violence – demeans their pain and suffering.
What we need to do is find a way to hold the perpetrators of violence responsible without men blaming all women (including feminists) and women blaming all men.
Despite all of us wishing it was not so, the reality is that women are more likely to be seriously injured or killed by a spouse or partner, than a man. This is why leaflets like this come out. We all need to take it seriously.

LSWCHP I am sorry for the crap you been dealt in life.

milkman said :

Why couldn’t we just focus on domestic violence however it occurs, including against men and children?

+1

kea said :

This makes as much sense as talking about services for the elderly then the thread getting hijacked by people concerned for the youth.. it doesn’t mean that the party that went unmentioned is less deserving… it’s just, that’s not what we’re talking about at the moment.

Hahahaha!
What I was getting at is your comment ‘“Minister for Women” was a dead giveaway’ wasn’t really a ‘dead giveaway’.
1) JB title ‘“Your Court Your Safety” a booklet to help deal with domestic violence’ says nothing about women only,
2) The title of the booklet ‘Your Court Your Safety’ says nothing about women only etc etc.
Then, when someone queried it you said ‘“Minister for Women” was a dead giveaway’. Well, if we were to read the fine print that she is minister for women (along with a few other portfolios) and were to automatically know when we first read it that it was about domestic violence for against women only, that’s a bit harsh! Hahahaha!
That’s why I pointed out she is also the minister for other ‘groups’ in the population – that may or may not also be subject to domestic violence. Couldn’t we then have also assumed it was something for them? That makes sense to me! That’s all….

poetix said :

Textbook playing the woman, not the ball…Detracts from the rest of the comment.

Now back to puns and moths, if at all possible.

Sorry, agressive was the wrong choice of words – I wasn’t trying to be a smartarse! I was just suggesting that all of kea’s comments and replies up till that point (starting at #1) had been a tad angry/defensive, IMO. Let’s all calm down here. No one is endorsing violence.

err…ladies? Domestic violence doesnt just impact women. guys are not always the perpetrators. And if you think the ‘statistics’ are true, think again. The majority of blokes are reluctant to report it, as generally authorities take the side of the woman (no matter what is said) and the victim becomes the accused.

So perhaps leave your misandry at the door please.

Masquara said :

m00nee said :

Actually Ikea, spousal abuse is actually not a female only issue as some womens groups would have people believe. Studies have shown the level of domestic assaults against males range between 33% and 47%. In plain english, one-in-three to one-in-two.

http://www.oneinthree.com.au/overview/
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-224-x/85-224-x2010000-eng.pdf

It’s about time that the government started looking at domestic assaults as a community issue, regardless of race, religion or gender.

You’re quoting VERY selectively – those figures of yours assume that a “push” is the equivalent of a sexual assault at gunpoint?

A direct quote from Ms Burch’s source of information which:

“Domestic Violence occurs when a family member uses violent and/or abusive behaviour to control another family member or members.

Domestic Violence can include physical, verbal, emotional, economic or sexual abuse. For example: hitting, kicking, punching, choking, damaging property, yelling, insults, threats, bullying, withholding and controlling finances, unwanted sexual acts, forced sex.”

http://www.dvcs.org.au/domesticviolence.html

Domestic violence is violence towards another person and should not be tolerated, regardless,

Masquara said :

[You’re quoting VERY selectively – those figures of yours assume that a “push” is the equivalent of a sexual assault at gunpoint?

And which scenario do you think would be more common?

Why couldn’t we just focus on domestic violence however it occurs, including against men and children?

m00nee said :

Actually Ikea, spousal abuse is actually not a female only issue as some womens groups would have people believe. Studies have shown the level of domestic assaults against males range between 33% and 47%. In plain english, one-in-three to one-in-two.

http://www.oneinthree.com.au/overview/
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-224-x/85-224-x2010000-eng.pdf

It’s about time that the government started looking at domestic assaults as a community issue, regardless of race, religion or gender.

You’re quoting VERY selectively – those figures of yours assume that a “push” is the equivalent of a sexual assault at gunpoint?

kea said :

If we could just get one thing straight first….

Its not Domestic Violence ..its Assault with Grievous Bodily Harm..

The new definitions also include verbal, psychological and financial abuse so its not necessarily physical assault.

dpm said :

kea said :

“Minister for Women” was a dead giveaway

You seem a tad agressive to some simple comments/queries.
Perhaps if the blurb said: ‘New resource empowers *female* victims of domestic violence’, and ‘The booklet “Your Court Your Safety” provides guidance and information on support services to *female* victims of domestic violence to empower and assist them.’ etc etc…
No one is saying women aren’t way more likely to experience voilence, but it’s also true that it isn’t exclusively women who are on the receiving end.
I mean surely it wouldn’t have been too hard to make it more gender-neutral (except for maybe the stats) so people would have no reason to query/complain in the first place?
P.S She’s also the minister for ‘disability, children and young people’…..

This makes as much sense as talking about services for the elderly then the thread getting hijacked by people concerned for the youth.. it doesn’t mean that the party that went unmentioned is less deserving… it’s just, that’s not what we’re talking about at the moment.

m00nee said :

kea said :

p1 said :

Do we need to exclude men who might be suffering from domestic violence from a program campaign like this?

Right now the system is skewed in favour of the perpetrator due the nature of “domestic violence”.. this is a service for the victims.. of which the majority tend to be women.. I suppose when the stats are up at “1 in 3 men are experiencing domestic violence” the program will shift their focus accordingly..

Actually Ikea, spousal abuse is actually not a female only issue as some womens groups would have people believe. Studies have shown the level of domestic assaults against males range between 33% and 47%. In plain english, one-in-three to one-in-two.

http://www.oneinthree.com.au/overview/
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-224-x/85-224-x2010000-eng.pdf

It’s about time that the government started looking at domestic assaults as a community issue, regardless of race, religion or gender.

You beat me to it.

I’m a man, and my now thankfully ex wife assaulted me quite violently on several occasion with fists, feet and implements including a glass on one occasion. I even have a scar to prove it.

I know from speaking to other men that I’m not alone. So while it’s true that spousal assault is usually directed at women, it definitely goes the other way as well, and it annoys the hell out of me to have my experience marginalised to the point of being erased.

m00nee said :

Actually Ikea,…
….

Her user name is not Ikea.

dpm said :

kea said :

“Minister for Women” was a dead giveaway

You seem a tad agressive to some simple comments/queries.
…..

Textbook playing the woman, not the ball…Detracts from the rest of the comment.

Now back to puns and moths, if at all possible.

kea said :

“Minister for Women” was a dead giveaway

You seem a tad agressive to some simple comments/queries.
Perhaps if the blurb said: ‘New resource empowers *female* victims of domestic violence’, and ‘The booklet “Your Court Your Safety” provides guidance and information on support services to *female* victims of domestic violence to empower and assist them.’ etc etc…
No one is saying women aren’t way more likely to experience voilence, but it’s also true that it isn’t exclusively women who are on the receiving end.
I mean surely it wouldn’t have been too hard to make it more gender-neutral (except for maybe the stats) so people would have no reason to query/complain in the first place?
P.S She’s also the minister for ‘disability, children and young people’…..

kea said :

p1 said :

Do we need to exclude men who might be suffering from domestic violence from a program campaign like this?

Right now the system is skewed in favour of the perpetrator due the nature of “domestic violence”.. this is a service for the victims.. of which the majority tend to be women.. I suppose when the stats are up at “1 in 3 men are experiencing domestic violence” the program will shift their focus accordingly..

Actually Ikea, spousal abuse is actually not a female only issue as some womens groups would have people believe. Studies have shown the level of domestic assaults against males range between 33% and 47%. In plain english, one-in-three to one-in-two.

http://www.oneinthree.com.au/overview/
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-224-x/85-224-x2010000-eng.pdf

It’s about time that the government started looking at domestic assaults as a community issue, regardless of race, religion or gender.

“Minister for Women” was a dead giveaway

kea said :

Diggety said :

Just women?

Do we have to right all wrongs against men before we can address the wrongs against women?

No. Nobody suggested that.

kea said :

p1 said :

Do we need to exclude men who might be suffering from domestic violence from a program campaign like this?

Right now the system is skewed in favour of the perpetrator due the nature of “domestic violence”.. this is a service for the victims.. of which the majority tend to be women.. I suppose when the stats are up at “1 in 3 men are experiencing domestic violence” the program will shift their focus accordingly..

Everything you say is perfectly correct. But nothing you say is a reason to word the media release in such a way that is exclude a group which is a minority amongst a marginalised group.

I totally agree with you that the “domestic violence” label only seems to make it okay to consider it differently to “real/bad/normal violence” that other people suffer.

p1 said :

kea said :

Diggety said :

Just women?

Do we have to right all wrongs against men before we can address the wrongs against women?

Do we need to exclude men who might be suffering from domestic violence from a program campaign like this?

Men don’t suffer the same problems as the women have you not listened to the raving feminists? And no I don’t condone domestic violence against any one.

kea is right, we need to look at this for what is actually is – ASSAULT. Not cover it up with BS names. If you assault another person you can be charged and jailed. If you commit DV, well you can be returned to you house in less than 24 hours with no dramas.

The sooner abuse on partners, spouses and children is taken more seriously the sooner these losers will be held accountable for their actions.

p1 said :

Do we need to exclude men who might be suffering from domestic violence from a program campaign like this?

Right now the system is skewed in favour of the perpetrator due the nature of “domestic violence”.. this is a service for the victims.. of which the majority tend to be women.. I suppose when the stats are up at “1 in 3 men are experiencing domestic violence” the program will shift their focus accordingly..

kea said :

Diggety said :

Just women?

Do we have to right all wrongs against men before we can address the wrongs against women?

Do we need to exclude men who might be suffering from domestic violence from a program campaign like this?

This may be a valuable resource, but I have to say that I think the title is awful. When I read ‘Your court’ I immediately thought of the expression ‘the ball’s in your court’ which is a way of saying ‘take responsibility for what’s happening to you’. Almost pull up your socks. Why not just ‘Your safety: a legal guide for victims of domestic violence’?

You don’t always need something that sounds like an ad.

Diggety said :

Just women?

Do we have to right all wrongs against men before we can address the wrongs against women?

Just women?

So Domestic is ok?

If we could just get one thing straight first….

Its not Domestic Violence ..its Assault with Grievous Bodily Harm..

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.