Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The 16 Days Campaign.

Options
12467

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    Nevyn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 43,045 ✭✭✭✭Nevyn


    Seriously fúck you all, shíte like this is why these topics are still taboo, and women don't talk about it. Having to go to the garda about partner abuse and into the family court for a safety order is extremely hard, I know it is I have had to do it.

    No matter how strong, smart, informed you are it can still happen that one day you can't breathe from shock and pain and the person who said they loved you is the one who has done this.

    It was even more humiliating as I had volunteered in two women's aid shelters before and had said I would never put myself in such a situation. There was no warning and it never happened again but once is once too much.

    Yes get over the fact that 1 n 5 men may be abusers they are human they make mistakes, striking a person once is all that is needed for that to be the case in physical terms and that man may NEVER do it again but it can and does happen. And yes women can be abusers but it is men who are sent conflicting messages about what being a man is.

    And STOP talking shíte about safety orders and barring orders being for men only, that's utter bollix.
    ANYONE can have one issued against them, if the numbers are low against women then it's cos men are not
    biting the bullet and going to get them against their female abusers.

    Yes in cases where there are children in the family and the women is the main care giver for the sake of the kids
    if the are not in danger it will be suggested that the man leave the house but that is to do with the kids, and
    if those genders were reversed and it was a stay at home Dad who was abused and got a safey order then the exact same would apply.

    and if the mods of this fora want to ban me for personal abuse I don't give a fúck and will welcome no longer reading this misdirecting drivel which is all about not addressing the topic but picking in holes to try and undermine how serious this is.


  • Options
    #93
    g'em
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,819 ✭✭✭✭g'em


    It's an emotive topic, there'd be something wrong if tempers didn't fray and emotions didn't run high.

    Still, rules is rules. Thaed banned for 2 days.


  • Options
    #94
    Dragan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,497 ✭✭✭✭Dragan


    panda100 wrote: »
    Unfortunatly the only debate that has been provoked on this thread, as per usual on serious topics in the Ladies lounge, is the validaity of the statistics available be that on sexual assualt/domestic violence/or any other type of injustice that predominantly affects one gender.

    If someone wants to come onto a forum that i am perfectly entitled to read and post on and tell me that of my male friends 20% of them are abusers of woman then i WILL question them.

    Especially when they are provided without sources.

    Then we have completed contradictory figures from the www.amen.ie website. Questions need to be asked because someone is wrong.

    It's actually insulting the way the issue of abuse gets treated here, several things have been said in the past that i have taken as being direct insults, much in the same way the Ladies who post here take issue with gross generalisations of woman.


  • Options
    #95
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #96
    panda100
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,551 ✭✭✭panda100


    CDfm wrote: »
    The point I made about the Womens Aid programme being in DENIAL is that as an organisation it fails to acknowledge that women are perpetrators and that women actively engage in Domestic Violence. Its a myth that they (womens Aid) represent all victims of domestic violence- they only represent women - they do not represent men, children or elderly victims of women..

    I could accuse AMEN of having an anti women agenda but I'm not going to demean AMEN for providing a service to battered men. They do invaluble work in Ireland and like womens Aid run as a charitable organisation helping abused members of our community.
    It doesnt make sense for womens Aid to help children or men as well because there are other organsiations such as Childline and AMEN who deal with them. Its a charity that runs on limited resources and can only train a specific number of women each year to man the helplines etc.



    Anyway As I said before, Im not going into absolutely ridiculous arguments here on statistics. If women Aid said they helped 11,000 women alone in 2002then I am going to believe them and fully support the work they do in Ireland. This doesnt mean Im anti men, this doesnt mean I somehow relish in the fact that men get hit by their wives too. I dont.
    I dont think its 'natural' for human beings to hit each other. I think domestic violence is caused by the heirachial system we live in which worships power. But who wants to discuss the real causes of domestic violence. A discussion on who gets hit more, men or women, is a lot more proactive :rolleyes:


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    The Sweeper
    Registered Users Posts: 10,658 ✭✭✭✭The Sweeper


    9 out of 10 internet arguments are about statistics and not the issues at hand.

    Less statistic nit picking please, it's been done to death on this thread.

    If you have a point to make regarding the more relevant subjects covered by this thread, please, feel free to make it.

    As long as it's not "Well I believe you'll actually find out that 2.08% of left handed men only hit their girlfriends on a Tuesday that coincides with cup final day".


  • Options
    #98
    CDfm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,649 ✭✭✭✭CDfm


    panda100 wrote: »
    I could accuse AMEN of having an anti women agenda but I'm not going to demean AMEN for providing a service to battered men. They do invaluble work in Ireland and like womens Aid run as a charitable organisation helping abused members of our community.
    It doesnt make sense for womens Aid to help children or men as well because there are other organsiations such as Childline and AMEN who deal with them. Its a charity that runs on limited resources and can only train a specific number of women each year to man the helplines etc.



    Anyway As I said before, Im not going into absolutely ridiculous arguments here on statistics. If women Aid said they helped 11,000 women alone in 2002then I am going to believe them and fully support the work they do in Ireland. This doesnt mean Im anti men, this doesnt mean I somehow relish in the fact that men get hit by their wives too. I dont.
    I dont think its 'natural' for human beings to hit each other. I think domestic violence is caused by the heirachial system we live in which worships power. But who wants to discuss the real causes of domestic violence. A discussion on who gets hit more, men or women, is a lot more proactive :rolleyes:
    Domestic Violence is always wrong.

    If you have a lobby group getting 99% of state funding on domestic violence and spending it just to promote an aghenda that women are the only victims well thats just truthiness http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truthiness
    . That is some of of what they put out there as fact is not backed up by evidence.Think of it.

    The founder of Womens Aid in the UK Erin Pizzey regularily speaks about hijacking of the issue by militant feminists with an anti-man aghenda- here is her blog

    http://www.sossandra.org/author/erin

    Domestic Violence is always wrong and should not be a gender issue. I dont have a problem with the work they do for female victims.

    It is an emotive issue- but to somehow say victims of womens violence are catered for by other groups as a kind of a get out clause is fairly appalling.

    I just dont get it that you have a problem with it.


  • Options
    #99
    tallaght01
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,778 ✭✭✭tallaght01


    I also think it's fair enough to point out that those who are complaining about the stats being questioned are doing a total disservice to their cause.

    One of my duties in Australia has been the on-call "abuse doctor". this basically involves going to see any kids brought into A+E who the staff there think have been abused. I did that job until about 2 months ago. It was horrific at times. I had many sleepless nights about it.

    I'm very passionate about getting to the root of domestic violence, as I've seen the horrific, and occasonally fatal, consequences. Children's and women's abuse tends to be interlinked.

    But when everyone is clambering for resources that are finite, then SOMEONE has to look at the issue logically. Domestic violence is often stomach churning. But so is people trafficking, child prostitution, homelessness etc.

    If, for example, child prostitution affects 10% of kids, and domestic violence affects 0.5%, then you have to allocate resources appropriately. That's not belittling anyone's suffering. That's just the way it is.

    The first thing I always do when charities hit me with stats (especially those as unlikely as 1 in 5 men being abusers) is question their validity.

    When they're all competing for money from the same pot, we owe it to every cause to make sure we have some idea of the actual scale of the problem.

    Charities are notorious for carrying out poor research. But, in fairness, they shouldn't have to. The fact that there has been no decent research into domestic violence in Ireland in the last 10 years says more about our government than it does about womens groups.

    It's also a bit harsh to ban thaed, is it not? People who are affected by the issue are bound to get a bit emotional. I'd be surprised if anyone here took offence.


  • Options
    #100
    metrovelvet
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭metrovelvet


    CDfm wrote: »
    I find it interesting that you cant just come out and say domestic violence is wrong in all its forms and thats what the message should be.

    There are mechanisms and facilities for a male abuser to be put out of the home but they are not used for female abusers.

    Whats the problem with saying women are abusers too and i cant see why you are compelled to defend them and come up with excuses why it shouldnt be so.

    Because what you and I are talking about is NOT the morality behind domestic violence but you are complaining that WomensAID dont advocate for the male victims. I am saying that because there are different issues involved it is a good thing that there are different agencies that deal with it.

    Where did I defend female abusers? You are now creating fictions and lying about what I said.

    Also -people are leaaving out that domestic violence is not just about hitting but about a whole system and cycle of abuse. This bickering about the stats is pushing out the possibility for a real discussion about what it is and what people can do about it.


  • Options
    #101
    metrovelvet
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭metrovelvet


    tallaght01 wrote: »
    It's also a bit harsh to ban thaed, is it not? People who are affected by the issue are bound to get a bit emotional. I'd be surprised if anyone here took offence.

    Em... do you not find this a bit ironic here given the context of the last couple of pages of this thread? [I do agree with you though, I don't think she should be banned.]


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    tallaght01
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,778 ✭✭✭tallaght01


    metrovelvet wrote: »
    This bickering about the stats is pushing out the possibility for a real discussion about what it is and what people can do about it.

    That would be a very good point, except that a whole load of bullet point stats were used as the starting point for the discussion.


  • Options
    #103
    tallaght01
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,778 ✭✭✭tallaght01


    metrovelvet wrote: »
    Em... do you not find this a bit ironic here given the context of the last couple of pages of this thread? [I do agree with you though, I don't think she should be banned.]

    I have no idea where the irony lies, to be honest.


  • Options
    #104
    CDfm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,649 ✭✭✭✭CDfm


    tallaght01 wrote: »
    I have no idea where the irony lies, to be honest.
    Its 10,000 spoons when all you need is a knife


  • Options
    #105
    CDfm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,649 ✭✭✭✭CDfm


    metrovelvet wrote: »
    Em... do you not find this a bit ironic here given the context of the last couple of pages of this thread? [I do agree with you though, I don't think she should be banned.]

    I too cant see any irony in domestic violence issues.

    I think many peoples concerns are that in some areas -despite the good work they do- some groups like Womens Aid are unethical in their handling of domestic violence issues. Its like we have got 99% of state funding so F@*# everyone else - thats very arrogant.

    BTW - I agree Thaedydal should not be banned - she is very thoughful and her outburst is ok as it affected her.


  • Options
    #106
    metrovelvet
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭metrovelvet


    CDfm wrote: »
    Its 10,000 spoons when all you need is a knife

    That is bad luck, not irony. The irony was not in domestic violence issues. The irony was in excusing Thaed for using abusive language in a thread which evolved into a bitching session by some male posters, including you, about how women can be abusive to but get let off the hook for it.


  • Options
    #107
    g'em
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,819 ✭✭✭✭g'em


    Thaed asked to be banned. And ftr her post was reported for abuse so obviously some found it offensive.

    Please don't argue Mod decisions in-thread, contact us privately or take it to the appropriate forum.


  • Options
    #108
    metrovelvet
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭metrovelvet


    CDfm wrote: »
    I too cant see any irony in domestic violence issues.

    I think many peoples concerns are that in some areas -despite the good work they do- some groups like Womens Aid are unethical in their handling of domestic violence issues. Its like we have got 99% of state funding so F@*# everyone else - thats very arrogant.

    BTW - I agree Thaedydal should not be banned - she is very thoughful and her outburst is ok as it affected her.

    Women's groups have been very organised and more on the ball, that is why they get the funding. Mens groups are about 30 years behind. But they are starting to get their acts together so give it time.

    I would agree with you that ideology and funding are often interlinked and sometimes unjustly so. TBH I dont know enough about the methods that WA employes but do on principal agree that there should be different groups, ie child abuse, female abuse and male abuse as there are different dynamics and problems for each.


  • Options
    #109
    tallaght01
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,778 ✭✭✭tallaght01


    metrovelvet wrote: »
    Women's groups have been very organised and more on the ball, that is why they get the funding. .


    And therein, quite honestly, lies a huge part of the problem.


  • Options
    #110
    CDfm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,649 ✭✭✭✭CDfm


    metrovelvet wrote: »
    That is bad luck, not irony. The irony was not in domestic violence issues. The irony was in excusing Thaed for using abusive language in a thread which evolved into a bitching session by some male posters, including you, about how women can be abusive to but get let off the hook for it.

    No - its definately Ironic -watch the video

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8v9yUVgrmPY

    In fact - Thaedydal is very sympathetic on lots of issues including any issues of abuse or partner issues irrespective of gender.I dont think you should use her 2 day ban to introduce any kind of aghenda.

    All we are saying is that the gender based model of domestic violence is wrong and that you also have women perpetrators . In some way - you think its acceptable.


  • Options
    #111
    metrovelvet
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭metrovelvet


    CDfm wrote: »
    No - its definately Ironic -watch the video

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8v9yUVgrmPY

    No thanks.
    CDfm wrote: »
    In fact - Thaedydal is very sympathetic on lots of issues including any issues of abuse or partner issues irrespective of gender.I dont think you should use her 2 day ban to introduce any kind of aghenda.

    Excuse me? WTF are you fantasizing about now?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    JC 2K3
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,794 ✭✭✭JC 2K3


    metrovelvet wrote: »
    Also -people are leaaving out that domestic violence is not just about hitting but about a whole system and cycle of abuse. This bickering about the stats is pushing out the possibility for a real discussion about what it is and what people can do about it.
    So why don't they inform people about the issues as opposed to putting out sensationalised, skewed statistics?

    Even reading through the literature on the site, there's no well written, objective overview or explanation of the nature of domestic abuse against women, just a load of sensationalism. For example, why it is necessary to have numerous lists of all the ways that it is possible to abuse a woman is beyond me....

    One statistic they listed stuck in my mind:
    In all of the resolved cases [of domestic homicide against women], 99% of perpetrators were men
    http://www.womensaid.ie/pages/what/campaigning/1608/dvfm.pdf

    I'm not sure what the reason for including this stat is. Is it to convey the fact that lesbian partners are less likely to abuse? Or simply that lesbian partners who abuse are less likely to murder? Or maybe that they're better at covering it up? Or is it just a misandristic jibe?

    From reading the site, the impression I get of Women's Aid is that while they've done and are doing a hell of a lot of good work, they are slightly stuck in the past, sensationalist and extremist. Sadly, with relation to anything, it's extremist groups which tend to be the most organised and active.


  • Options
    #113
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #114
    Mikel
    Closed Accounts Posts: 863 ✭✭✭Mikel


    If you don't want an argument over statistics then don't base your point on a load of statistics.
    This is a huge generalisation, but these threads seem to descend into the same thing because,well, they're started by women.

    Then in general (but not exclusively, and I'm making an assumption here because i don't know who's male or female) the men show up and start picking the stats apart.

    This is equated in the women's minds with demeaning or justifying or whatever and so they come out with statements like 'domestic violence is wrong' or 'rape is wrong'.

    The men say they weren't saying otherwise and they too think it's wrong and don't like the implication that they think it's right.

    The women then say it doesn't matter about the stats
    The men then say 'Why did you base your argument on stats then?'

    And then the original poster who has possibly been abused/beaten/raped shows up and freaks because the thread has been derailed.

    Maybe I'm wrong but I can think of probably three threads on domestic violence and one on drink spiking that went this way.
    Any maybe I'm off with my generalisations, but it just reminds me of so many arguments I've had with women over the years.

    To be honest though, starting a thread with a barrage of statistics which can't be justified is asking for trouble. The thing is, it was probably a press release which means that when the story appears in the paper, in lot of peoples minds a similar thing will happen.

    From what I read, groups like WA and the RCC are more focused on their big statistic and 'sending out a message' than on addressing their issue.
    But it also seems like they won't be happy until they widen their definitions enough that the number is 100% of women.
    (Bear in mind there are militant feminists who think that is the correct figure)

    This approach leads to resistance, in my case like I said earlier, the thought occurs that you could easily have the finger pointed at you next.

    Personally I think WA need to change their approach, and address the problem in such a way that they are more likely to make progress.
    Maybe even get a man in charge, that's not baiting anyone I'm very serious.

    They should address the issue in a more functional way, which I'm sure is difficult for something so emotive and something they may have experienced at first hand.

    Apologies for all the generalisations


  • Options
    #115
    panda100
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,551 ✭✭✭panda100


    CDfm wrote: »
    All we are saying is that the gender based model of domestic violence is wrong and that you also have women perpetrators

    I dont think anyone on here ever refuted this point, but this is the ladies lounge and so of course we're going to look at it from a female slant. Though I dont think there is many female contributers to this thread anymore :(
    tallaght01 wrote: »
    I'm very passionate about getting to the root of domestic violence, as I've seen the horrific, and occasonally fatal, consequences. Children's and women's abuse tends to be interlinked.

    Domestic violence is often stomach churning. But so is people trafficking, child prostitution, homelessness etc.

    The one thing that all these things have in common is Money.

    Domestic Violence mainly affects women from lower socio-economic backgrounds. Prostiution, trafficking, homelesness also all affect those who live in poverty.
    We must see the pattern here and realise that we live in a wholly unequal society. A society where there is huge inequalities of wealth and power.

    Until we get rid of this economic and political system that breeds Inequality,poverty and violence i.e Capitalism we will never eradicate society of these injustices which are all fundamently caused by money or lack of.

    Perhaps Im wrong and more 'charity' handouts will somehow eradicate the world from domestic violence. For me, It deosnt matter how much funding these groups get, its not going to change the reality of the situation anyway. It will just mean more support for victims but no real answers. Poverty will still exist and so will all the inequalities that come with it.


  • Options
    #116
    panda100
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,551 ✭✭✭panda100


    Mikel wrote: »
    But it also seems like they won't be happy until they widen their definitions enough that the number is 100% of women.
    (Bear in mind there are militant feminists who think that is the correct figure)

    Thats ridiculous. No actual Feminist thinks that 100% of women are beaten up by their partners. And putting the word 'militant' in front of the word feminist is just as stupid as calling us 'feminazis'.

    If you know a feminist and she/he told you that all men beat their partners, then he/ she is not a feminist.


  • Options
    #117
    tallaght01
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,778 ✭✭✭tallaght01


    panda100 wrote: »
    I dont think anyone on here ever refuted this point, but this is the ladies lounge and so of course we're going to look at it from a female slant. Though I dont think there is many female contributers to this thread anymore :(



    The one thing that all these things have in common is Money.

    Domestic Violence mainly affects women from lower socio-economic backgrounds. Prostiution, trafficking, homelesness also all affect those who live in poverty.
    We must see the pattern here and realise that we live in a wholly unequal society. A society where there is huge inequalities of wealth and power.

    Until we get rid of this economic and political system that breeds Inequality,poverty and violence i.e Capitalism we will never eradicate society of these injustices which are all fundamently caused by money or lack of.

    Perhaps Im wrong and more 'charity' handouts will somehow eradicate the world from domestic violence. For me, It deosnt matter how much funding these groups get, its not going to change the reality of the situation anyway. It will just mean more support for victims but no real answers. Poverty will still exist and so will all the inequalities that come with it.


    I absoloutely agree that socio-economic issues are the cause of many of the world's problems. I bang on about this ALL the time.

    BUT, blaming capitalism isn't really realistic because:

    a) There is no evidence that capitalism is linked with domestic violance

    b) Many countries that have never embraced free market economics, or have ambraced it in a tokenistic way, have shocking records with regard to womens rights/domestic violence.

    c) Whilst being inadequate, the biggest capitalist nations are probably the best at dealing with domestic violence, aswell as collecting data on domestinc violence.


  • Options
    #118
    JC 2K3
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,794 ✭✭✭JC 2K3


    panda100 wrote: »
    Until we get rid of this economic and political system that breeds Inequality,poverty and violence i.e Capitalism we will never eradicate society of these injustices which are all fundamently caused by money or lack of.
    I don't see how domestic violence or gender inequality have anything to do with capitalism... I would link it much more to social conditioning and social structures, which aren't intrinsically linked to capitalism.


  • Options
    #119
    metrovelvet
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭metrovelvet


    Money is not the problem. The people who raise their hands to another, or a gun, or a knife, or poison, or pots and pans, or whatever, are the problem, as is the justice system.


  • Options
    #120
    cuckoo
    Registered Users Posts: 1,945 ✭✭✭cuckoo


    Mikel wrote: »

    Apologies for all the generalisations

    Mikel, 'it's easier to beg forgiveness...etc'.

    Can we try and swing this discussion around a bit? There's been some good points made, and i now understand where some posters are coming from in questioning stats.

    So, what more could be done in Irish society to stop domestic violence (of all types)?

    Are there any education programs in schools? Relationship education? Does the civics course for junior cert cover anything about it?

    I think that there's something about Irish people in that we have a tendency to want our business to be kept private, there's no Jerry Springer type show on the telly here because we'd be mortified to think that the neighbours knew the intimate details of our lives. Radio phone in shows are about as far as we'll go in sharing with the nation - because radio gives a sense of privacy, we aren't showing our faces.

    This places a burden on teachers, guards, doctors, nurses - the people who have to be alert to the signs of abuse as the rest of us are unwilling to pay attention, for fear that we'd be 'intruding'.

    I'm wondering this because years ago my mother was taking a few of us to the GP for sore throats. A few days previously she had walked into a door (no, really, i'm being serious, my parents' marriage had its ups and downs but no domestic abuse) and had a massive black eye. She had been out and about in the community, and nobody had said a word to her about it. Not one. The doctor took one look at her, sent us out with lollipops to the waiting room and (very sensitively my mother told me years later) asked her about the black eye, how things were at home, etc.

    Should we try and move towards a society where we're more questioning about what's going on in the relationships of people we know?

    We've managed to change our attitudes to drink driving dramatically in a generation - what do we need to do so we stop thinking of domestic violence as a private problem within a relationship/marriage?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #121
    metrovelvet
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭metrovelvet


    ^ There's a huge resistence for anyone to step into family matters for a start.

    Secondly, the emergency services need improving. About 10 years ago, I was in an apartment in DUblin and it was late one Friday night. I would say about 11pm. I heard the woman upstairs getting a beating and her screaming. I phoned 999. It rang out. I phoned again. It rang out. I phoned and after a few rings someone picked up. I told them what I was hearing. Two guards showed up at 4:30 am.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement