That Bitch Book - Love it or Hate it -but have you read it

CDfm

Almost 2 years ago Mary Cleary who founded Amen the mens rights groups launched a book called "That Bitch" and opened a challenge to the orthodox view on the dynamics of same sex relationships.

Violence, sex , lyin and cheatin -the book has it all -except women are in the driving seat and that women are the agressors using everything from the bedroom to the family law courts as weapons.

The premise of the book is that men and women abuse in equal measure except that with the rise of feminism women have some extra weapons at their dispossal. She describes a type of home terrorist whose victims are not only men but children.She says this is known and domestic violence statistics etc seem to back her up.

Now she doesnt claim all women are like this but goes on to say that men have to protect themselves from those who are. The book is a self help for men who come in contact with them.

These are women the feminist movement would rather you dont know about.

Are its critics wrong and is La Cleary onto something. Many feminist groups as this Irish Independent Review points out questioned the need for the book and you can read the review here http://www.independent.ie/national-news/bitch-book-has-women-up-in-arms-1092514.html /.

The advertising blurb said "Read this book before you marry her" and thats the challenge.I can see the title "That Bitch" could be see as perjoritive but is it a book you could recommend to a friend or brother even with relationship problems.

Would a woman recommend it or buy it for someone who they felt might need it.

So have you read it and how true is it.To see what the controversy was about the book has its own website with plenty of free stuff and downloads here http://www.thatbitchbook.com/

johnnyskeleton

It's true that women can commit just as much if not more acts of domestic abuse as men.

However, I don't feel the need to read a book about it. Of the people who are not aware of this, I think the only ones who would read such a book are those who have experienced domestic abuse and are looking for an outlet.

It strikes me as a sort of male Female Eunoch - a no doubt popular but ultimately vacuous look at gender roles which some people will consider brilliant but most intelligent people will realise is not worth the paper its written on.

Interesting though that all this comes from someone called Mary.

I haven't read it, and i have no plan to read it. Its common sense to assume that women have the same capacity for dishonesty, anger, ignorance, etc that men have. Just as some men mess things up, so too do women. /Shrugs. I don't need a book to tell me that, and I think most men will know it also. While society has painted women as being little angels and victims of male abuse, we've all seen women take the aggressive role in the past. Either through our own personal relationships, the relationships of our friends, or just seeing womens actions on a Saturday night on the town.

While women feel the need to advertise most men as being bastards, I don't think men as a whole would be bothered to spend the time doing the same. Although I suppose times are changing.

CDfm

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

It's true that women can commit just as much if not more acts of domestic abuse as men.

Alas Lady Macbeth is seen as a positive role model by the Womens movement in Ireland.

Deleted User wrote: »

While women feel the need to advertise most men as being bastards, I don't think men as a whole would be bothered to spend the time doing the same. Although I suppose times are changing.

Is this practical if the "gender" stereoptype gets used for legislation and in practice in family law judgements and apportioning family assets to women in the case of marriage breakdown.

Great arguments for paternity rights are slow coming forward from the Womens movement.

Maybe men have to spend the time dealing with the new reality.

Wibbs

I agree entirely that no gender has the currency of being dangerous bastards and I'm sure you could retitle that book with few enough changes editorially on the inside to That Bitch/Bastard Book. However I do think that publicly most would give more women the benefit of the doubt. That can extend into the legal system too.

Deleted User wrote: »

/Shrugs. I don't need a book to tell me that, and I think most men will know it also.

This is the part that I wouldn't be too sure of. I can think of any number of men who have little or no clue about women in general, never mind emotionally dangerous ones. This includes a few "ladies men" I know too. Oh sure they can get women, but beyond that are remarkably innocent of how some women may act, especially the passive aggressive ones. Now if you get a guy who has little experience of women and goes for the first one that gives him attention you can ramp that right up.

I've been damned lucky in having close women mates for many many years and through them have seen how some women are and act and manipulate men. These mates would see it far quicker than me in the early days. I was warned off certain women, or asked to be bloody careful and I thought the women in question were great at the time. Turned out they were more right than wrong in those examples. In one case they damned near saved my sanity and my wallet.

I know guys who have married women like that, had kids with women like that(when they didn't want to) and been taken to the cleaners. I've seen guys lose houses, access to their children, end up in bedsits broke etc. Now there are always two sides to any story, but in the examples I've known the balance was in the guys favour. In one case I was initially more friendly with the woman and didn't even like the guy, but experience changed that. I still didn't like the guy, but her? A nasty shabby human being and no mistake.

I personally feel men and women are as much the same in 90% of things. The area I am utterly convinced they differ in approach is in the reproductive/dating arena(obviously as an average). When that's healthy, well it's great and adds not subtracts from the experience for both sides, but when it's unhealthy that difference can throw the other gender for a loop.

So in the end I think many men out there do need some help in spotting the nutjobs and the manipulators.

metrovelvet

CDfm wrote: »

Alas Lady Macbeth is seen as a positive role model by the Womens movement in Ireland.



Is this practical if the "gender" stereoptype gets used for legislation and in practice in family law judgements and apportioning family assets to women in the case of marriage breakdown.

Great arguments for paternity rights are slow coming forward from the Womens movement.

Maybe men have to spend the time dealing with the new reality.

I have never heard of Lady M being a positive role model anywhere. Can you provide some sort of back up for that? Though I will say that I find the poster girl for Irish feminism, that horrifying image, the name of that in IRish I cant remember, quite disturbing, for a multitude of reasons.

But back to your book. You know these kind of things irritate me because they are so reductive. While I do think that the destructive force in women should be acknowledged, her rage, her fire, the destroyer archetypally is far more interesting, and helpful to us all, far moreso than what you have linked.

CDfm

metrovelvet wrote: »

I have never heard of Lady M being a positive role model anywhere.

Well Macbeth is on the LC Paper 2 so I was just teasing - it was either link her to that or Clearasil MacBeth Act 5 Sc 1

Lady M :Out, damn'd spot! out, I say!—One; two: why, then
'tis time to do't.

But back to your book...... While I do think that the destructive force in women should be acknowledged, her rage, her fire, the destroyer archetypally is far more interesting, and helpful to us all, far moreso than what you have linked.

In what way. Can you explain?

Is this the home terrorist or something else and is it positive?

The Corinthian

That both genders are capable of malignant behaviour is not anything that anyone denies. The problem is in how this reality is dealt with in Western society.

A century of feminism has essentially changed how we view the sexes. Women are oppressed, men are oppressors. Abuse is something perpetrated by men, never women. And so on and so forth.

As a result, it is socially acceptable to assume that the man is at fault in most disputes, or that (at worst) the woman was justified by her behaviour and ultimately a victim.

Such books are both good and bad. The good is in that they do a lot to break this stereotype. It's no longer as readily assumed that the woman is the victim or the man the perpetrator as it once was. Their crimes are not justified. They are not entitled to behave as they do. This message is slowly but surely getting through, and as it does the law is changing with it.

The bad is that it can feed fire to a lot of misogynists out there. There are a lot of men out there who have, for lack of a better word, been royally fücked over by women, and the temptation is to tar all women with the same brush. I can understand this tendency, but it is sad and wrong, but the only way that this negative aspect can be combated is that more women abandon the partisan approach so as to demonstrate that it is not a question of men and women, but bad and good people.

CDfm

The Corinthian wrote: »

That both genders are capable of malignant behaviour is not anything that anyone denies.

As a result, it is socially acceptable to assume that the man is at fault in most disputes, or that (at worst) the woman was justified by her behaviour and ultimately a victim.

Correction. The Man is always at fault in all disputes.

Accept that and you wont go far wrong.

The Corinthian

CDfm wrote: »

Correction. The Man is always at fault in all disputes.

In a round about way yes, because even when it is blatantly evident that the woman is at fault, you will get someone arguing that they were somehow 'pushed' into it or otherwise justified.

Nevyn

Both genders suffer from sterotyping and the idea that either one is more agressive or manipulating is wrong.

metrovelvet

Cdfm-

I thought you wouldve been above this sort of thing.

Ok. For centuries, we have pinned the women as evil manipulators, it is all over our literature, Eve for example.

Then the 1960s came along and feminists tried to tell us that every man was a potential rapist. Some even went as far to say that wearing a skirt or being heterosexual was practising internalized oppression. When I went to college victim politics was de regeur. I think I was better off without the conciousness raising because it never even occurred to me that I was not an equal until the liberals told me I wasnt.

Anyhow cdfm, I have a brother, I have a son. This isnt the material i would use. My son will be exposed to the greeks and grimms so he can hone his instincts in detecting evil in anyone. It would be too dangerous to assume half the population is pure as snow.

metrovelvet

Who are the victims who dont report the crime? Men.

Who are the people who dont take the report seriously? The guardi. Mostly men.

Who are the legislators? Men.

Who are the sentence makers and enforcers? Men.

You cant blame the women for everything ya know.

But dont forget, its only recently that women were protected. It wasnt until my school allowed girls in that the priests stopped beating the boys.

CDfm

metrovelvet wrote: »

Cdfm-

I thought you wouldve been above this sort of thing.

Ok. For centuries, we have pinned the women as evil manipulators, it is all over our literature, Eve for example.

Then the 1960s came along and feminists tried to tell us that every man was a potential rapist. Some even went as far to say that wearing a skirt or being heterosexual was practising internalized oppression. When I went to college victim politics was de regeur. I think I was better off without the conciousness raising because it never even occurred to me that I was not an equal until the liberals told me I wasnt.

Anyhow cdfm, I have a brother, I have a son. This isnt the material i would use. My son will be exposed to the greeks and grimms so he can hone his instincts in detecting evil in anyone. It would be too dangerous to assume half the population is pure as snow.

The comment was a bit tongue in cheek - and I came accross the book in the context of a past relationship.

In my current relationship it is'nt really relevant.

But we are not talking about Adam & Eve, Aesops Fables or the Brothers Grimm are we & thats not the subject matter of the book.

Have you read the book?

metrovelvet

No I havent read the book nor will I. In the little time I have to read, I need to be damn sure the book is a good one. Ont thing that puts me off is that the title itself is abusive so it immediately loses credibility. Sorry.

However, what surprises me about your choice here is that you seem to be so against gender politics and yet here you validate them.

We all have the monster within us, it is no news to me that women can be manipulative and violent, but its no news to me that men can be either.

Hell hath no fury right?

How does this book distinguish female abuse from male? Does it claim there is a difference?

Wibbs

I would say the main difference is that many men don't think women are like that. They're actually being chauvinistic of course. The "ahh women are nice fluffy princess creatures" idea.

Now you can say that women have been seen as manipulators in our culture, but I think a lot of men don't feel that' the case with the woman in their lives.

IMHO many men can often be very black and white. They're either the "all women are heartless bitches" types or the "all women are wonderful nurturing caring" types. Both equally daft and stereotypical. The latter type is more likely to get one of the manipulators IME. The stereotypical "nice guy".

Both stem from neither type actually understanding women as people, especially when it comes to dating/reproductive strategies for want of a better word.

As I said IMHO men and women are pretty much the same in pretty much every way than that. There are diffs there though. Some quite big diffs. Sometimes at cross purposes too. Both genders manipulators will use their own angle and diffs and if their opposite gender, man or woman doesn't understand or realise that, then they can get into trouble.

I just think the book is an extreme swing the other way. Somwhere in the middle would be more useful.

metrovelvet

Wibbs wrote: »

I would say the main difference is that many men don't think women are like that. They're actually being chauvinistic of course. The "ahh women are nice fluffy princess creatures" idea.



l.

I agree. There is/was a widely held belief that women are not capable of badness because they are not capable full stop, as they are not centers of agency.

CDfm

metrovelvet wrote: »

No I havent read the book nor will I
..... I need to be damn sure the book is a good one.

Thanks for being honest about it.

Ont thing that puts me off is that the title itself is abusive so it immediately loses credibility. Sorry.

Ah cmon Metro - you mean to tell me that you have never once in your life refered to another woman as a bitch. Ever???

Its a phrase women use all the time and refusing to read a book because of the title is silly. There is an American Version Venus the Dark Side for those who judge a book by its cover - but it got no media attention.

http://www.venusthedarkside.com/

However, what surprises me about your choice here is that you seem to be so against gender politics and yet here you validate them.
We all have the monster within us, it is no news to me that women can be manipulative and violent, but its no news to me that men can be either.

How does this book distinguish female abuse from male? Does it claim there is a difference?

This is not a theory or gender politics book but a manual for men in abusive relationships. So let me refine the question -if a male friend or relative of yours was being abused by his female partner would you suggest they read the book.

Coincidentally - the idea for this thread came when I suggested to a female poster in PI that she looked at the website and downloads as a method to deal with her situation. She was being manipulated and found it helpful.So I didnt start this thread as a gender politics thread.

metrovelvet wrote: »

I agree. There is/was a widely held belief that women are not capable of badness because they are not capable full stop, as they are not centers of agency.

But you must agree that the womens movement do not acknowledge the issue leading to a female bias in media coverage, criminal prosectution and state resourses spent in the area.

So people like me who support feminism as a social movement find ourselves excluded by its political objectives as a political movement.

I imagine thats why books like When She Was Bad are almost underground literature
http://www.amazon.com/When-She-Was-Bad-Innocence/dp/0670859257

NickNolte

Men and women are capable of being bitches/bastards in equal measure. In many cases, it will come down to how a person is brought up and the values and integrity that their parents instilled in them from a young age.

I certainly think that capitalism, say the emergence of the Irish economy in recent decades, has made people (both men and women) increasingly greedy, self-centered and narcissistic.

I think that this book is perfectly healthy to a large degree. As long as people accept that it only refers to a minority of women. There's nothing wrong with making single men, who may be a little naive, aware of the tell tale signs so that they don't end up with a manipulative, nasty women. Likewise the follow up book might be a good exercise in teaching women how to avoid abusive, nasty men.

The only thing that I find disingenuous about Mary Cleary's assertions is that she claims the book will help bitchy, dangerous women and maybe make them aware of what they're doing and make them want to change. I think that's a pile of crap to be honest. Women who are like that are like that because... well they're like that. If a woman is a bitch by nature, she's not going to read a book like that, recognise herself or her behaviours from it and decide to change. You need something a lot more life-changing than a book to transform a horrible person into a good person.

CDfm

Wibbs wrote: »

I just think the book is an extreme swing the other way. Somwhere in the middle would be more useful.

NickNolte wrote: »

The only thing that I find disingenuous about Mary Cleary's assertions is that she claims the book will help bitchy, dangerous women and maybe make them aware of what they're doing and make them want to change. I think that's a pile of crap to be honest. Women who are like that are like that because... well they're like that. If a woman is a bitch by nature, she's not going to read a book like that, recognise herself or her behaviours from it and decide to change. You need something a lot more life-changing than a book to transform a horrible person into a good person.

Well dont forget Mary Cleary is a feminist.

NickNolte

CDfm wrote: »

Well dont forget Mary Cleary is a feminist.

I don't really think that matter in the context of what I was saying to be honest. If she's a feminist then it should help her cause by berating these type of women.

CDfm

NickNolte wrote: »

I don't really think that matter in the context of what I was saying to be honest. If she's a feminist then it should help her cause by berating these type of women.

Well thats a bit off the feminist political message and would probably label La Cleary as a "rebel feminist".

She does challenge the mainstream feminist campaigns in Ireland especially Domestic Violence campaigns and has done so for 12 years.

NickNolte

CDfm wrote: »

Well thats a bit off the feminist political message and would probably label La Cleary as a "rebel feminist".

It would strike me that she's a *real* feminist who doesn't think women are all infallable or incapable of wrong deeds. If feminist groups are up in arms because Cleary has decided to warn men to stay away from a certain type of woman then they're idiots.

CDfm

NickNolte wrote: »

It would strike me that she's a *real* feminist who doesn't think women are all infallable or incapable of wrong deeds. If feminist groups are up in arms because Cleary has decided to warn men to stay away from a certain type of woman then they're idiots.

Just take this issue the 16 Day Campaign which is the cornerstone of Womens Aids fund raising. It recieves 99% of all state grant aid on domestic violence and this means that excludes male victims child victims of female abuse and this has political support.


Now to consider that men and women abuse each other in equal numbers is to say by definition that Domestic Violence Policy & Family Law Practice & Social Policy in Ireland is wrong.So where would that leave high profile supporters like Deirdre Clune should she come out and admit that the DV model she supports is wrong.

http://deirdreclune.ie/justice-law-reform/womens-aid-campaign-highlights-violence-against-women


What are people to say -well we agree that domestic violence is wrong but were lied to about who the perpetrators were.

Thats a bit off topic as this really is about the book but it outlines how the domestic violence has become so gender based.

metrovelvet

Cdfm-

If someone,man or woman abused my son, chances are Id flip so badly that id end up a case study in Clearys next addition. If it were a male friend getting abused, id probably suggest a therapist and a lawyer.

We all know men who hate their exs more than they love their kids and therefore have nothing to do with their kids. We all know women who are the same and end up destroying their kids.

We all know nice people who get abused by nasties, some like it and some cant see a way out.

I dont know what this book wants to achieve.

CDfm

metrovelvet wrote: »

Cdfm-

If someone,man or woman abused my son, chances are Id flip so badly that id end up a case study in Clearys next addition. If it were a male friend getting abused, id probably suggest a therapist and a lawyer.

We all know nice people who get abused by nasties, some like it and some cant see a way out.

Can you see how this looks Metro - you can see it as wrong if it happened your boy and would feel the need to act. What if she had used the current legislation and had him put out of his home legally etc.

Social policy should protect the weak and not leave them open to abuse and you need money for lawyers or therapists.

Books and a manual like this at least are accessable and readable and thats why they are needed.

metrovelvet

CDfm wrote: »

Can you see how this looks Metro - you can see it as wrong if it happened your boy and would feel the need to act. What if she had used the current legislation and had him put out of his home legally etc.

Social policy should protect the weak and not leave them open to abuse and you need money for lawyers or therapists.

Books and a manual like this at least are accessable and readable and thats why they are needed.

Of course the person who is getting abused has to leave. Unfair but who ever said life was fair?

They have to leave for their safety. You can force someone out of a home they own.

The Corinthian

CDfm wrote: »

Books and a manual like this at least are accessable and readable and thats why they are needed.

There is a phenomenal amount of denial about this subject, by both men and women. We all know it happens in theory, but we tend to push it out of our minds and concentrate on the romcom myth of love and relationships.

Women's rights are presently far better catered to ultimately because men do not complain. We grumble about laws that are blatantly prejudiced against us, but seldom do much else. Men's groups simply are not organized and at best cover one or two issues that are specific to those involved - certainly they don't make anywhere near the same effort to receive public funding as women's groups, and when such funding rejected they grumble and do little else.

It strikes me as bizarre that no men's rights group has used a lawyer to go through the books to pick out all of these laws, some of which (as was recently demonstrated with the Roscommon incest case) are offensively sexist, as the educational value to the public of such discrimination is frankly a no-brainier.

metrovelvet

CDfm wrote: »

Social policy should protect the weak and not leave them open to abuse

The weak? When is the world ever going to acknowledge a man as weak? Isnt that part of the problem?

I kind of get what you are on about though. I suppose I take for granted all the things that are written for women to warn them off bad guys or bad nice guys who are even worse imo. The warnings have been out there however, in myths and fable, but I suppose what you like about this is the immediacy of it, the pop culture of it?

NickNolte

metrovelvet wrote: »

the pop culture of it?

I suppose the usefulness of it for more naive men more than anything else.

CDfm

metrovelvet wrote: »

Of course the person who is getting abused has to leave. Unfair but who ever said life was fair?

They have to leave for their safety. You can force someone out of a home they own.

I cant believe you are posting this stuff. Yet you say if it was your boy you would take extreme action.

metrovelvet wrote: »

The weak? When is the world ever going to acknowledge a man as weak? Isnt that part of the problem?

I kind of get what you are on about though. I suppose I take for granted all the things that are written for women to warn them off bad guys or bad nice guys who are even worse imo. The warnings have been out there however, in myths and fable, but I suppose what you like about this is the immediacy of it, the pop culture of it?

The warnings in myths and culture are totally different to how the law operates.

In the current system the nice guys get treated like bad guys. That can't be right or acceptable but as you can see its only one generation from affecting you.

Its not really about the pop culture but its the reality of it and it acknowledges what happens.

Just take this link on Why is Domestic Violence Against Males Irrelevant to Amnesty International

http://www.amen.ie/articles/230503.htm

It makes you think thats why you need the book.

metrovelvet

CDfm wrote: »

I cant believe you are posting this stuff. Yet you say if it was your boy you would take extreme action.



The warnings in myths and culture are totally different to how the law operates.

In the current system the nice guys get treated like bad guys. That can't be right or acceptable but as you can see its only one generation from affecting you.

Its not really about the pop culture but its the reality of it and it acknowledges what happens.

Just take this link on Why is Domestic Violence Against Males Irrelevant to Amnesty International

http://www.amen.ie/articles/230503.htm

It makes you think thats why you need the book.

I said I could be driven to the same actions the book condemns, not that i would definetely. And it would be the wrong road to take. But i would most certainly tell anyone in a domestic abuse situation they have to leave.

Im not an amnesty fan and I wont get into why here but they are dealing with violence against women on a whole different and international scale, think India, the middle east, china etc.

And many would argue the law doesnt protect women either. Or kids.

CDfm

metrovelvet wrote: »

I said I could be driven to the same actions the book condemns, not that i would definetely. And it would be the wrong road to take. But i would most certainly tell anyone in a domestic abuse situation they have to leave.

And where would they go.

There are no shelters for abused men in Ireland and the shelters for Women which are run by Womens Aid have 50% occupancy by Travelers and thats excluding others with other social or addiction problems.

Women can get emergency accomadation from the Health Service/Local authority.But a mans options are the Homeless Shelters. Thats public policy.

I wouldnt tell anyone to leave in Ireland -certainly not a bloke.

So do you still agree that there is no need for a manual on dealing with relationships like this.

Isnt it funny that the same book is being sold on Diva Direct the Lesbian Website -it makes you think that there are domestic violence/abuse issues there too.

http://www.divadirect.co.uk/default-mainmenu-3-mptid-5-ptid-170-detail-45957.htm

So what would you propose there?

Im not an amnesty fan and I wont get into why here but they are dealing with violence against women on a whole different and international scale, think India, the middle east, china etc.

Ah - but the point is that they dont acknowledge abuse against men.

And we are talking about their Irish policy where 99% of the budget of the state budget for women victims of abuse.

metrovelvet

CDfm wrote: »

And where would they go.

There are no shelters for abused men in Ireland and the shelters for Women which are run by Womens Aid have 50% occupancy by Travelers and thats excluding others with other social or addiction problems.

Women can get emergency accomadation from the Health Service/Local authority.But a mans options are the Homeless Shelters. Thats public policy.

I wouldnt tell anyone to leave in Ireland -certainly not a bloke.

So do you still agree that there is no need for a manual on dealing with relationships like this.

Isnt it funny that the same book is being sold on Diva Direct the Lesbian Website -it makes you think that there are domestic violence/abuse issues there too.

http://www.divadirect.co.uk/default-mainmenu-3-mptid-5-ptid-170-detail-45957.htm

So what would you propose there?



Ah - but the point is that they dont acknowledge abuse against men.

And we are talking about their Irish policy where 99% of the budget of the state budget for women victims of abuse.

There are many many places in Ireland where there are no shelters for women either. As much as you could claim this it's baised towards women you could also claim its biased toward Dublin.

Of course there is domestic abuse in some lesbian relationships, as there could be in any relationship.

So you would tell the victim to stay where they are? Why would you do that?

Can you please clarify this from your link?
An Undisputable Fact

AI can not document a single scientific empirical study or report anywhere in the world that can document women suffer more violence than men. In each and every nation in the world, unbiased data clearly documents that far more men then women are assaulted, beaten, and murdered. Can't deny it, so AI simply ignores it.

Im sorry. I find this very hard to believe. That is places in the middle east, india and china [where little baby girls are regulary murdered] or africa [where they are raped] that more men and boys are beated and murdered. And if that statement is true, that more men are assualted and beaten, is it not by other men [such as the military, police, priests, teachers or other authorities?].

CDfm

metrovelvet wrote: »

There are many many places in Ireland where there are no shelters for women either. As much as you could claim this it's baised towards women you could also claim its biased toward Dublin.

So you would tell the victim to stay where they are? Why would you do that?

Male victims have 2 options either to stay put or go to a homeless shelter.

Can you please clarify this from your link?
An Undisputable Fact

Its not my link I am just passing on the information on the need for such a book.

AI can not document a single scientific empirical study or report anywhere in the world that can document women suffer more violence than men. In each and every nation in the world, unbiased data clearly documents that far more men then women are assaulted, beaten, and murdered. Can't deny it, so AI simply ignores it.

Im sorry. I find this very hard to believe. That is places in the middle east, india and china [where little baby girls are regulary murdered] or africa [where they are raped] that more men and boys are beated and murdered. And if that statement is true, that more men are assualted and beaten, is it not by other men [such as the military, police, priests, teachers or other authorities?].

This is an Irish site so the issues I am discussing from an Irish perspective & this discussion is about a book where women are the abusers of men and children.

I am not saying the data is untrue but saying that AI should not be putting out gender specific & biased information.

Anyway - you see no need for the book so why are you still posting.The natural extension of your argument of course is that when your son is an adult -if he has an abusive partner -he and not she should move out.

metrovelvet

CDfm wrote: »

Male victims have 2 options either to stay put or go to a homeless shelter.


Its not my link I am just passing on the information on the need for such a book.

But the book acknowledges women as perpetrators, not men as victims of violence, which is what the link emphasizes.

CDfm wrote: »

This is an Irish site so the issues I am discussing from an Irish perspective & this discussion is about a book where women are the abusers of men and children.

Then why are you bringing up amnesty international and a link which does not talk about women as perpetrators. You are confusing the topic.

CDfm wrote: »

I am not saying the data is untrue but saying that AI should not be putting out gender specific & biased information.

But its ok for you to do it?

CDfm wrote: »

Anyway - you see no need for the book so why are you still posting.The natural extension of your argument of course is that when your son is an adult -if he has an abusive partner -he and not she should move out.

My apologies cdfm, I didnt realise this thread was exclusive to advocates of the book. And yes, if my son has an abusive partner he absolutely should move out. Why stick around for more.

CDfm

metrovelvet wrote: »

But the book acknowledges women as perpetrators, not men as victims of violence, which is what the link emphasizes.

Then why are you bringing up amnesty international and a link which does not talk about women as perpetrators. You are confusing the topic.

AI used to be a quality mark for injustice and it used to be if you cant trust its publicity machine then who can you trust.

But its ok for you to do it?

I didnt write the book

My apologies cdfm, I didnt realise this thread was exclusive to advocates of the book. And yes, if my son has an abusive partner he absolutely should move out. Why stick around for more

You are not wavering Metro so you agree with my previous post #9

Correction. The Man is always at fault in all disputes.

Accept that and you wont go far wrong.

metrovelvet

^ I would not tell him to leave because he is wrong but because he is in danger. And anyone who knows anything about domestic abuse knows its a whole system of abuse not an isolatec act here and there. So the only way to make the right healthy choices, get your head and heart back into emotional and physical safety is to get out of the kitchen.

You may think fighting fire with fire works, but sometimes it just creates more fire.

You cannot rely on the powers that be, be it the law or organisations to protect you. We know this.

CDfm

Wow -thats a bit fatalistic.

Domestic Violence is always wrong irrespective of the gender,age, sexual orientation or relationship of the parties. Its always wrong.

This is something we should all be able to agree on.