It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Feminism: Destroying the Male and Female Relationship

page: 38
85
<< 35  36  37    39  40  41 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 11 2010 @ 10:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jenna
For being beaten? No. For being the beater? I'd expect it. Men are statistically more likely to be the abuser, thus the reason they are looked at first.


Actually the numbers are very close, and they're obviously skewed because Men are much less likely to report being abused (I would not want my wife in jail even if she beat the he ll out of me AND I'd probably be the one to go to jail anyway so why on EARTH would I report it)?


Originally posted by Jenna
And as I've said several times, it is entirely possible for women to be the perpetrators of abuse and rape against men. They can and do get arrested and convicted for it when it's reported and proven.


Proven? Surely you jest... here a man can be arrested simply because his girlfriend calls and says "He made me think he might hurt me." Even if he did nothing of the sort, he very well may go to jail. The legal definition of abuse is based on the feelings of the "victim." If they feel threatened, it's abuse.

edit on 11-11-2010 by SevenBeans because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 11 2010 @ 10:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jenna
reply to post by SevenBeans
And yet my personal experience tells me otherwise considering a literally see people willingly sign away their parental rights frequently. Obviously you can't just walk away and leave a child completely alone with no one to take care of them. (Well, you could but not legally.) Obviously someone else will be required to take care of the child. That's just common sense. It does not negate my point, my post, or the laws existing that allow parents to sign away their rights.


You're presenting it as if any parent who doesn't want to support a child doesn't have to and that's complete hogwash (and I expect you know that). Only a very tiny percentage of people are able to do this and generally the other parent has to agree (and ussually it still isn't allowed). Virtually the only time that it's allowed is when the child is being adopted by someone else (new husband, wife etc.).



posted on Nov, 11 2010 @ 11:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by SevenBeans
Actually the numbers are very close, and they're obviously skewed because Men are much less likely to report being abused (I would not want my wife in jail even if she beat the he ll out of me AND I'd probably be the one to go to jail anyway so why on EARTH would I report it)?


If you're abused and don't even try to report it, it's your own fault. No one should put up with it whether they are male or female. I wouldn't want my husband in jail either, but you can bet that's where he'd be sitting if he started beating on me. Just as I'd expect to be sitting there if I were beating on him. That's how it works. The law doesn't care what you have between your legs.


Victims in intimate partner violence cases were generally female (86%), while defendants were generally male (86%) (table 1). The majority of IPV cases (84%) involved a male defendant and a female victim. Twelve percent of cases involved a female defendant and a male victim (not shown in table). In 4% of IPV cases, the defendant and victim were of the same gender.



Demographic characteristics of intimate partner violence victims and
defendants in 16 large counties, May 2002
Percent of intimate partner violence—

Gender Victims Defendants
Male 14.0% 86.3%
Female 86.0 13.7

Both of the above came from pages 1 and 2 of this Bureau of Justice report.

Perhaps if more men were willing to report it, we wouldn't be having this conversation.


Proven? Surely you jest... here a man can be arrested simply because his girlfriend calls and says "He made me think he might hurt me." Even if he did nothing of the sort, he very well may go to jail. The legal definition of abuse is based on the feelings of the "victim." If they feel threatened, it's abuse.


People only get convicted of things when their guilt is proven beyond a reasonable doubt, so yes proven. It doesn't have to be proven for someone to be arrested. And oddly enough, the legal definition of abuse has nothing to do with "feelings of the victim".


abuse vt
1 : to put to a use other than the one intended: as
a : to put to a bad or unfair use [abusing the powers of office]
b : to put to improper or excessive use [ narcotics]
2 a : to inflict physical or emotional mistreatment or injury on (as one's child) purposely or through negligence or neglect and often on a regular basis
b : to engage in sexual activity with (a child under an age specified by statute)
3 : to attack harshly with words [ a police officer] [ a debtor]
abus·er n

abuse n
1 : improper, unfair, or excessive use [ of authority] [drug ]
2 a : the infliction of physical or emotional injury
;also
: the crime of inflicting such injury see also battered child syndrome battered woman's syndrome compare cruelty neglect
b : sexual abuse
3 : a verbal attack (as on a police officer in the performance of his or her duty)
;also
: the crime of making such an attack

Dictionary at Findlaw.com.

What you're thinking of is assault, which is indeed the crime of threatening or attempting to inflict bodily harm on someone else.



posted on Nov, 11 2010 @ 12:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jenna
If you're abused and don't even try to report it, it's your own fault. No one should put up with it whether they are male or female. I wouldn't want my husband in jail either, but you can bet that's where he'd be sitting if he started beating on me. Just as I'd expect to be sitting there if I were beating on him. That's how it works. The law doesn't care what you have between your legs.


Hello?! That's the POINT, it DOES matter what you have between your legs, if a girl hits me and I call the police, chances are that I will be the one going to jail.

DUH!


Originally posted by Jenna

Victims in intimate partner violence cases were generally female (86%), while defendants were generally male (86%) (table 1). The majority of IPV cases (84%) involved a male defendant and a female victim. Twelve percent of cases involved a female defendant and a male victim (not shown in table).


WOW, I can't IMAGINE why that would be lol.


Originally posted by Jenna

Perhaps if more men were willing to report it, we wouldn't be having this conversation.


If more Men reported it than more Men would go to jail, and the stats would be even more skewed.

Don't worry though, it works to your genders benefit so just disregard.


Originally posted by Jenna

People only get convicted of things when their guilt is proven beyond a reasonable doubt, so yes proven. It doesn't have to be proven for someone to be arrested. And oddly enough, the legal definition of abuse has nothing to do with "feelings of the victim".


It's generally a civil matter, that standard doesn't apply.

Would you like me to quote the statute in my state? Here you can read about every state -
www.childwelfare.gov...

My brother told his wife he wanted a divorce and she proceeded to get a protection from abuse order against him based on complete and utter lies. He was kicked out of his house (which he owned before even meeting her), lost all contact with his kids, lost his car, lost EVERYTHING. Absolutely nothing had to be proven (beyond a doubt or otherwise).







edit on 11-11-2010 by SevenBeans because: (no reason given)

edit on 11-11-2010 by SevenBeans because: (no reason given)

edit on 11-11-2010 by SevenBeans because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 11 2010 @ 01:01 PM
link   

If you're abused and don't even try to report it, it's your own fault.


Tell that to women pre-1960. Feminists defended them when they didn't defend themselves, now they tell them its their fault... because of what is between their legs. The difference is that if a woman had reported it in the 60s things would have happened in her favor. Today's reality has it that if the man reported the abuse, and the police came, the woman could easily just say "He was beating me" and he will be arrested instead.



posted on Nov, 11 2010 @ 01:14 PM
link   
Could be feminism...

Could be any number of things destroying the relationship
between a man and his woman,
a woman and her man.

I think if you are the type to have problems,
male or female,
you are going to have problems,
and not necessarily because your mate is a miso or a femo.

Another problem we may not have considered is a health issue...
Might just be low t

I see commercials for this treatable condition on television
and always reminded of this thread
the heartbreak and broken relationships that are chalked up to feminism...
(or extra e) that could have been saved.

... it might just be low t.



posted on Nov, 11 2010 @ 01:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jenna
If you're abused and don't even try to report it, it's your own fault. No one should put up with it whether they are male or female. I wouldn't want my husband in jail either, but you can bet that's where he'd be sitting if he started beating on me. Just as I'd expect to be sitting there if I were beating on him. That's how it works. The law doesn't care what you have between your legs.


Ths is a pathetic and uncaring view. A man cannot report abuse becuase if/when he does then he is going to be the one going to prison. In the UK the law is an automatic arrest, without evidence needed, simply by a woman accusing a man of abuse. The other way around it doesn't work, a man cannot have a woman arrested without evidence and of course if a female abuser is being accused and they know the law will protect them then all she does is turn around and accuse him. That puts her victim nicely in line.

Women get protected, men get arrested.



posted on Nov, 11 2010 @ 01:29 PM
link   
reply to post by AzoriaCorp
 


............oh BOO HOO........macho and chauvist-type men just can't stand the fact that women should be allowed to live their OWN lives....and do what they want in the work world!!

Let's face it, folks, it all boils down to the fragile male EGO not getting his way all the time.....

If the shoe was on the other foot, there'd have been 'masculinism' CENTURIES ago....

so get over it!!!!!!!



posted on Nov, 11 2010 @ 01:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by BG43214
reply to post by AzoriaCorp
 


............oh BOO HOO........macho and chauvist-type men just can't stand the fact that women should be allowed to live their OWN lives....and do what they want in the work world!!


I have never had anything to do with females, but i have had everything under the sun made up about me by them to see my life destroyed.

Not one single thing did i do to any female in my life and you should see the vendeta i had to put up with.

Your female gender just needs to make up anything if a male does not talk to them in a pub, and goto the police and the police will hound the male till the day he dies. Thats the world we live in.

What about males that do nothing to your gender. Your gender virtually murdered my life without me doing one single thing to them, and i have spent the last 18 years paying for your lies and crazy ideas about males that all must women, lol.

Amazing how no one talks up for males, and how many males are in prison without doing anything to females, as i have never done anything to them, and thats where i would be today if they got what they wanted.

Are males that are not interested in females allowed to work, oh no males are supposed to love females coming near them, and are supposed to allow work place haressment by them, oh no your male you cannot speak out and if you do your fired, lol.

There is not one male on planet earth that has had more crimes organised against him than me, by the female gender and there hate. I bet not one single male has had to put up with all the crimes i have had to deal with, being organised by your gender, so i should know, what a female is like when they are in wanting to murder you mode. Females can do anything they want to you period, and the police and gov will be out there desperate to kill you and destroy you.

Funny how no one speaks about crimes the females do to males is it. It is just amels are not allowed to talk about what females do.

Next time a man does not talk to you in a pub, goto the police and make up absolutely horrendous stuff about him, and the police will beleive you. Go on you sound like a female that has hate for males, and would love that.
edit on 11/11/2010 by andy1033 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 11 2010 @ 02:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by BG43214
reply to post by AzoriaCorp
 


............oh BOO HOO........macho and chauvist-type men just can't stand the fact that women should be allowed to live their OWN lives....and do what they want in the work world!!

Let's face it, folks, it all boils down to the fragile male EGO not getting his way all the time.....


And this is what Men get when they "whine" about bias against them... pretty pathetic.

"You were kicked in the face by a Woman and thrown in jail when you called the police... oh poor whittle baby, boohoohoo. Get over it."

edit on 11-11-2010 by SevenBeans because: (no reason given)

edit on 11-11-2010 by SevenBeans because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 11 2010 @ 02:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by AzoriaCorp
www.henrymakow.com...

I went back to the OP as the thread is getting stuck on violence.


Feminism brainwashed young women to see husbands as oppressors and family as bondage. There was no longer any reason to restrict sex to love and marriage.


Well women are not as stupid as the op thinks. I see women dating men and marrying them in the cities of Miami, New jersey band NY. I also see a similar thing in the UK as well as Spain earlier this year.

There is no reason to restrict sex to love and marriage as this has never been the case. The author is going back to a mythical era perhaps in the 1950s which was a glorious period for some Americans.


A woman's career used to be wife and mother. She consecrated her sexuality for the man she loved, the father of her children, her protector and provider.


Again the golden time is evoked. Who the Hell can afford a stay at home wife. As a stay at home Dad my career suffered. The economic rreally is such that we either need both incomes to stay afloat financially or we need the security of having significant savings because the idiots wish to reduce the welfare.

“Women today are more focused on college and careers that if the right man walked into their life, they would easily brush him aside in pursuit of their own interests in financial support, in an attempt to sustain her perception of freedom and independence in life and from men.”

Yes it is called choice. We all have it I have declined to take relationships further because I have choice which I as a man can exercise.


In the past, men had to prove their love and commitment before they could have sex. As a result, women were cherished and given a lifelong role (mother, wife) that satisfied their deepest emotional needs.


Simple not true! Is the author a man? He needs to get out more. At leat the OP understands hence his comment on sexual opportunists.

Yes it is a fear of rape made even more galling as there is always the canard of women asking for it.

Funny I see teenagers having girls as platonic friends more so than when I was a teenager in the glorious 70s!


"David Popenoe, a Rutgers sociologist who co-authored the study, is concerned that the downward trend will continue. 'I'm worried most because of the teenagers', Popenoe said. 'With the breakdown of the family, peer culture, which includes popu culture, has gotten stronger. Nothing could be more anti-marriage than much of the popular culture."

quote].[/


To blame a declining political movment like feminism is very hateful. I suggest the decline in marriage is due to the sheer cost? The try before you buy mentality and the whole bridezilla phenomenon which is female but far from feminist. I also believe that divorce leeds to the once bitten twice shy syndrome.

People need to choose their partners very carefully and avoid the hype.



posted on Nov, 11 2010 @ 08:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Jenna
 


Ok let me try and break this down.

First yes those are the laws on the book in those 2 states, no where does it say that there is no more child support. No where. Whats more is it is a petion that can and most often is denied because it is not in the "best interest of the child. I have went through this with my youngest son and his biological father in Colorado. If the child is in a postion to be adopted and is adopted then child support stops, but only then.

Next as for selective service. Your and mine personal thoughts on whether selective service is needed does not matter, not one bit. Fact of the matter is right now in all of the US, men have to register or deal with harsh penalties, women do not. Once again regardless on what you or I feel about the law its on the books and enforced.

Jenna for the most part in two parent households who puts in the most hours at work? Which parent then spends the most time "caregiving" That is the way it is, and probably will continue. Not to mention maternity leave, a woman who gives birth gets up to 8 weeks (i believe and she should) by law for maternity leave, how much leave does a father get. Say a couple have a child and decide to get divorced shortly after it is born. The man has only 2 weeks of leave from work (and is lucky to get that) so he goes back to work at the beginning of 3 weeks. The mother still has another 5 weeks to go, and they decide to divorce at 5 weeks. Now who has more "caregiving" time with the child? Regardless of the man's feelings on going back to work that early he has to and as a result spends less caregiving time at home. So the mother gets default custody according to your logic. And exactly it should be the child life happens and every responsible parent has to make a balance between professional and personal lives. But regarldess that child still deserves to have the necessities of life. Because one parent works harder to pay for those necessities of life does not make their parenting any less worthy than the one who physically "cares" for it, nor does that mean that parent doesn't want to be the one to physicaly care for the child.

Now for the rest please site your sources. I can show you study after study showing that men and women are perpetrators about equal amount of times. So if that is the case should men always be looked at first? No because the gender feminist "propoganda" that is how it appears. And yes in recent years it has gotten better but for the most part men are looked at first no matter what.



posted on Nov, 11 2010 @ 09:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Jenna
 


And as I have said before would you want to risk reporting it, if you could have your kids taken away? lose your house, be arrested for being a victim just for being a man or being laughed at and ridiculed or being told to "man up" she can't hurt you?. it happens all the time if you want I can post some stories inculding one where the wife was beating the husband, was on video tape he didnt touch her once, but was arrested, no matter what he told the cops they would not believe him. It wasn't until the neighbors who saw and recorded everything went to the cops and told them he did not do anything wrong was she arrested.

Since you posted the link , I will post various other studies that say around 50 %



posted on Nov, 12 2010 @ 03:05 AM
link   
reply to post by mayertuck
 


here is a link with the studies i posted in the other thread:

www.abovetopsecret.com...


Originally posted by mayertuck

Originally posted by mayertuck
reply to post by tiger5
 


Later I will find the stats for you. latest study has both genders about even in commiting dv.



Since I am being lazy today, here is a link with over 250 studies on the issue.

www.csulb.edu...

Also in case you are intersted here is a link to a group that tracks domestic violence reporting media, the "gender groups" reporting etc. From what I can tell they are non-biased on the issue. Their website is www.mediaradr.org.

Here is one of their articles dealing with the "myths" of domestic violence:

www.mediaradar.org...





posted on Nov, 12 2010 @ 06:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by SevenBeans
Hello?! That's the POINT, it DOES matter what you have between your legs, if a girl hits me and I call the police, chances are that I will be the one going to jail.


Not necessarily, and the belief that the man is always at fault or will be taken to jail seriously needs to change. I'm just as capable of hitting a man as he is of hitting me. Might not cause as much damage, but it's still possible. As I said the law itself doesn't care what you have between your legs. Laws in this country aren't written to punish solely one sex or the other, it's society that needs to catch up.


WOW, I can't IMAGINE why that would be lol.


Laugh if you like, men have historically been more aggressive and more likely to abuse their partner than women. An unfortunate side-effect of laws intended to protect abused women from their abusers is that law enforcement began taking a harder stance against perpetrators who are men than against those who are women. It is, however, slowly changing. The more that men report it when they are the victims of abuse, the quicker it will get back to being equal on both sides.


If more Men reported it than more Men would go to jail, and the stats would be even more skewed.

Don't worry though, it works to your genders benefit so just disregard.


If more men reported it, society would have to face the fact that women aren't the only one's who get abused.

Oh, yippee for us. What absolutely cracks me up is that throughout this entire thread and others, some of you guys have done nothing but complain about how everything is unequal even when it's not. When we finally turn to a topic where there actually is an unequal treatment between the sexes, and I'm arguing for things to be more equal, I'm still wrong. That's just hilarious.


Would you like me to quote the statute in my state? Here you can read about every state -
www.childwelfare.gov...



These statutes typically are found in domestic relations laws but also may be found in family or social services laws, and they provide a means for victims of domestic violence to obtain civil orders of protection and other protective services.

Domestic violence can be defined as "attempting to cause or causing bodily injury to a family or household member or placing a family or household member by threat of force in fear of imminent physical harm."


From your source. Nowhere in that does it say "male on female violence", "protection from male abusers", or anything even remotely similar. It applies to both sexes.


My brother told his wife he wanted a divorce and she proceeded to get a protection from abuse order against him based on complete and utter lies. He was kicked out of his house (which he owned before even meeting her), lost all contact with his kids, lost his car, lost EVERYTHING. Absolutely nothing had to be proven (beyond a doubt or otherwise).


And that would be one of the things I'm arguing against here. Women should not be permitted to milk the system like that. Your brother was unfortunate enough to be with a poor excuse for a woman who would rather destroy someone else than try to be a decent human being.



posted on Nov, 12 2010 @ 06:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Brood
Feminists defended them when they didn't defend themselves, now they tell them its their fault... because of what is between their legs.


I have no idea what you're talking about..


The difference is that if a woman had reported it in the 60s things would have happened in her favor. Today's reality has it that if the man reported the abuse, and the police came, the woman could easily just say "He was beating me" and he will be arrested instead.


And that would be the fault of law enforcement, not the law. Quite a few states now have primary aggressor laws that require the police to figure out who is the primary aggressor prior to making an arrest. So if I was beating you off and on and you hit me back one day, I'm the one that should be taken to jail.

New York, for example:

Officers are not required to arrest both or all parties. However, the "primary physical aggressor" shall be arrested. The primary physical aggressor is not necessarily the person who was first to use force. During the officer's investigation to determine who was the primary physical aggressor, the officer shall consider the following:

1. the comparative severity of any injuries inflicted by and between the parties;
2. whether any such person has made threats of future harm against another party or another family or household member;
3. whether any such person has a prior history of domestic violence that the officer can reasonably ascertain;
Note - When investigating this factor at the scene, the following sources of information may be available: agency records, NYSPIN Registry of Orders of Protection, criminal history, prior acts of violence against others, reports of other officer(s) responding to address for past incidents and statements of neighbors or others in the residence.
4. whether any such person acted defensively to protect himself or herself or a third person from injury.

Source



posted on Nov, 12 2010 @ 06:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984
Ths is a pathetic and uncaring view.


I'm sure it seems that way. There are so many resources available for someone who is getting abused, however, that there really isn't much excuse for not reporting it anymore. The only exceptions to that would be if you're kept prisoner with no telephone or internet access and no access to the outside world.


A man cannot report abuse becuase if/when he does then he is going to be the one going to prison. In the UK the law is an automatic arrest, without evidence needed, simply by a woman accusing a man of abuse. The other way around it doesn't work, a man cannot have a woman arrested without evidence and of course if a female abuser is being accused and they know the law will protect them then all she does is turn around and accuse him. That puts her victim nicely in line.


Keep in mind that when I make a statement about laws, I'm referring to laws in the US. That is what I'm used to, what I know, and what applies to me. I don't always think to check or refer to laws in other countries because I'm not subject to them, nor would it be reasonable to expect me to check the law of every country before posting something relevant to the US. And as we'd agreed previously, many laws in the UK are patently unfair between the sexes and should be changed.



posted on Nov, 12 2010 @ 07:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jenna
Not necessarily, and the belief that the man is always at fault or will be taken to jail seriously needs to change. I'm just as capable of hitting a man as he is of hitting me. Might not cause as much damage, but it's still possible. As I said the law itself doesn't care what you have between your legs. Laws in this country aren't written to punish solely one sex or the other, it's society that needs to catch up.


Right, but that's what we're talking about, reality. The reality is that if a Woman hurts me and I call the police, I'm the one who will most likely go to jail.


Originally posted by Jenna
An unfortunate side-effect of laws intended to protect abused women from their abusers is that law enforcement began taking a harder stance against perpetrators who are men than against those who are women. It is, however, slowly changing. The more that men report it when they are the victims of abuse, the quicker it will get back to being equal on both sides.


Actually they've taken a harder stance against MEN period, including men that are victims rather than perpetrators. And once again, when Men report it THEY ARE GENERALLY THE ONES WHO GO TO JAIL, so it will look like another case of male on female violence (further skewing the stats and reinforcing the false notion that the vast majority of domestic violence is male on female).


Originally posted by Jenna
If more men reported it, society would have to face the fact that women aren't the only one's who get abused.


See above. It's no secret (there are tons of studies showing that female on male abuse is a common occurence). Feminist groups have intentionally created the female as victim/male as brute, mentality.


Originally posted by Jenna
What absolutely cracks me up is that throughout this entire thread and others, some of you guys have done nothing but complain about how everything is unequal even when it's not. When we finally turn to a topic where there actually is an unequal treatment between the sexes, and I'm arguing for things to be more equal, I'm still wrong. That's just hilarious.


Not sure what you mean.


Originally posted by Jenna
And that would be one of the things I'm arguing against here. Women should not be permitted to milk the system like that. Your brother was unfortunate enough to be with a poor excuse for a woman who would rather destroy someone else than try to be a decent human being.


Glad to hear it. It isn't a rare occurence, it happens all the time. If a Woman is willing to lie she can destroy a Man's life. It's that simple.
edit on 12-11-2010 by SevenBeans because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 12 2010 @ 07:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jenna
I'm sure it seems that way. There are so many resources available for someone who is getting abused, however, that there really isn't much excuse for not reporting it anymore.


For Women there are lots of resources. For Men there is generally jail, losing their kids, getting kicked out of their house etc. etc. etc. (but they have no excuse for not reporting it). Okay...

edit on 12-11-2010 by SevenBeans because: (no reason given)

edit on 12-11-2010 by SevenBeans because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 12 2010 @ 01:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jenna
I'm sure it seems that way. There are so many resources available for someone who is getting abused, however, that there really isn't much excuse for not reporting it anymore. The only exceptions to that would be if you're kept prisoner with no telephone or internet access and no access to the outside world.


If a man reports abuse then he will end up going to prison, so yes there are very good reasons why men wouldn't report it. You can sit there are say otherwise but i wonder if you would happily be the martyr, come forward, go to prison and then try and argue your wife was abusing you (if you were male i mean).

I brought up earlier i was attacked by a girlfriend who had a knife. She was later diagnosed as psychotic but i never reported this because if i had then i would have been instantly arrested, because all she would need to do is turn around and accuse me of being the abuser. I later found out she had a track record of hitting boyfriends i also found none of them had reported it either.

Maybe you won't understand this Jenna, most women won't because they don't understand the position men are in when it comes to things like this. If we get abused and report, then we go to prison, the statistics reflect another male abuser, feminists stand up and call us brutes and the government funds womens charities. It's a sad cycle.


Originally posted by Jenna
Keep in mind that when I make a statement about laws, I'm referring to laws in the US. That is what I'm used to, what I know, and what applies to me. I don't always think to check or refer to laws in other countries because I'm not subject to them, nor would it be reasonable to expect me to check the law of every country before posting something relevant to the US. And as we'd agreed previously, many laws in the UK are patently unfair between the sexes and should be changed.


The USA deals with domestic violence in the same way it would appear. They will assume the man is the instigator and the woman is defending herself. The saddest part is what a conviction of domestic violence can do to a mans life.

1. He becomes a social pariah.
2. Employment can become very difficult and indeed impossible in some areas.
3. He will often find trouble with housing in certain areas.

There are more points but i won't bother going further. But lets be clear, feminism was a good thing to make sure women were granted the same legal protections and opportunities as men. I am really fine with this. Where i take issues is that feminism has now gone further, painted men as brutes, given all the cards to women in regards to children, harrassment, divorce, domestic violence and other such areas and when a man dares to point this out he is labelled a chauvinist.

It's simply dishonest, unfair and disgusting.



new topics

top topics



 
85
<< 35  36  37    39  40  41 >>

log in

join