I'm fucking sick of male violence

Nothing is done about male violence because the vast majority of people in power are male and they absolutely do not want to be inconvenienced or controlled in any way. Really what should happen is that men's behaviour is very carefully monitored and that every single accusation against them is taken seriously. But that would lead to some 'innocent' men landing in annoying situations so they don't want that. They are quite happy, however, for women to be warned to stay at home and for women to live in fear because that doesn't inconvenience them. Hence posters telling women to be afraid and to restrict their movements. Cos hey it's just women and who gives a fuck about them eh?

Men act like the men who commit head acts are an aberration and nothing to do with them!

But they aren't. I saw that story early on via Facebook and couldn't read it all. It will be on my mind for a very long time. It is unimaginable to any normal human being, male or female, to commit an act like that. I'm male and I don't believe I'm guilty through association or that I should be rounded on for having the same anatomy as this monster.

Don't get me wrong in all too aware of the violence committed by men but responding to that sentence specifically I think anyone who is innocent of wrongdoing will quite obviously feel the guilty are nothing to do with them.

Other men? People outside the relationship? As I said in my previous posts the signs are often there in other ways and other situations.

It did not stop the same happening to me.

No, I appreciate that and it's awful and that's why I keep emphasising "society wide". Because police reaction has to be uniformly excellent to make it work, services need to be in place and well funded and social attitudes generally would have to evolve further.

This is the first time I've specifically considered the "male violence" narrative in terms of policy and the more I think about it, the more evangelical I feel. Not that there's likely to be any money or political will for it.

making them responsible for their actions. Making scapegoats, criminals and losers of them is going to be far more effective.

You have to identify them first. Who will bring them to official attention, if not women?

We are half of the global population, if every woman stood up and said no more, we are not going to take violence against us any more. It stops now. We are going to act as one against this abuse. I wonder how men would act?

To stop violence against us and our children, that is what it would take, a global woman's action. A loud voice spoken by 3.5 billion women.

But we are not at that point, women themselves excuse the men for acts of violence, by making excuses and enabling the pattern to continue. A famous footballer rapes a child, that child must have been leading him on. The child that is beaten by the father, the must have provoked him. The child that is found pregnant by her abusive brother, she deserves to be stoned to death and so on.

Until women are united in their stance, we have not a hope in hells chance to change things.

I don't think anyone is advocating that women don't leave abusive relationships, just that it doesn't necessarily stop the man continuing to be violent either towards them or other women and children. Putting the emphasis on women leaving puts the responsibility on a victims shoulders. Shoulders that are already burdened with the effects of abuse. Removing abusers, making them responsible for their actions. Making scapegoats, criminals and losers of them is going to be far more effective.

It stops me from getting kicked, punched and raped

It did not stop the same happening to me.

There is evidence that there is correlation between DV and terrorism though, Dervel.

Do you really believe a bloke who has punch ups at the pub/football match keeps his hands in his pockets at home? Do you think if he doesn't have respect for fellow men he'll have respect for the women and children in his life?

When I see some men get angry I fear for their partners and children. The violence, contempt and sense of entitlement is there in their face. That isn't switched off when they go home. Violence doesn't suddenly occur. These men feel entitled to punch and abuse and they are likely to feel less entitled towards other men rather than women.

Just following a train of thought here so it may come out garbled. Violence is often framed as a one off. Male violence in particular. An unexpected loss of temper. But is it really? Isn't it more an underlying attitude that does show itself in other red flags? Like systematic abusers show their hands in subtle ways. In fact aren't violent men no matter we they are violent towards far far more likely to be abusive people generally in their relationships (not just sexual relationships either)?

None of that is going to stop men from being violent Serf.

It stops me from getting kicked, punched and raped @ImAFurchester

I have had zero incidents of being kicked punched or raped since I left EXH 17 years ago.

I left because I felt strongly entitled to live somewhere where I WASN'T kicked punched or raped by anyone I lived with.

It could stop a lot more women from getting kicked, punched and raped, if they felt similarly entitled.

It could protect their children fm being murdered.

I think we can teach that sense of entitlement to a whole generation of women at a time.

And I think that a less then 100% success rate isn't a reason not to.

I agree OP.

I will never be able to get my head around violence to a child.

It WOULD be, if it's what was happening, but it isn't. I

That's why I'm advocating putting the Freedom project into schools.

None of that is going to stop men from being violent Serf.

I don't think women being assertive in relationships will stop the kind of man that murders women and children from being violent*

I didn't mean assertive within the relationship. I meant assertive about making decisions for themselves, women actively choosing the lives they want, not feeling it's wrong to be alone and not feeling they need "reasons to leave" that pass muster with some invisible jury.*
*
.

Quentin you've misunderstood me and it's not fair to lump in what I said with the other points when I'm arguing against the other points! I was trying to say that the violence imho is there whether women are assertive or not. By focussing on how women behave in relationships the violence will just pass to another group as the violence has not been addressed, it's just hoped to change the target of the violence. I am not saying dv is ok as it stops violence spilling out into the community.

I like the idea of a register. Like the sex offenders register. Or a national database.

But in the simplest terms, isn't reducing risk, reducing male access to victims, still a huge step forward?

It WOULD be, if it's what was happening, but it isn't. I endured years of getting the shit kicked out of me by my XH but because I never called the police until the last time and he wasn't convicted, according to the law it never happened. Therefore I have to send my son to him once a fortnight because it's his "right" as a father. I specified that he was never, ever to use physical discipline with my son, and he never has, but the fact remains that my son and I were failed by the very system that should have protected us

I think I'm a bit confused.

I don't think women being assertive in relationships will stop the kind of man that murders women and children from being violent. His violence may be deflected from the women and children he has access to from his current romantic relationships to elsewhere. I don't think it will cease to exist due to women's behaviour changing.

I think there's massive issues around how society is very laid back around dv and child abuse. I think things are changing but far too slowly. Perhaps in generations if children are not growing up in abusive homes there will be less adult violence. I think this can be addressed but women's behaviour is one small part. It's always what women do that is picked apart.

Furchester indeed. Or in the cases of Shana Grice and Alice Ruggles (to name but two recent horrific cases) they could have taken the reports from the women seriously. Both reported their ex-boyfriends for harassment, stalking etc and were palmed off (I think in the case of Shana Grice she was even warned for wasting police time and for Alice Ruggles she was asked what she wanted the police to do about it the second occasion she reported an offence). It's appalling the police forces in each of these cases (and many more) were oblivious to the signs of an abusive man and didn't seem bothered.

Male violence as a concept is recognised by feminists everywhere. We see the common denominator as women being considered inferior because it correlates with all other aspects of feminism - knowing that women are second class and men are entitled.

When other people look at male violence the concept is undermined. Because they see the killing of a child as having a different motivation to the killing of a girlfriend. Domestic violence as being different to a punch-up in the pub. Many people have a sneaking sympathy for a man who beats up a 'rival', for instance. Terrorism is never seen as having any relationship to a football match brawl.

So the first thing is to get an understanding that all these threads have the common denominator of 'violence committed by men'.

I can very easily see an advertising campaign.

A man pictured behind bars. Set back, his visiting wife with a black eye, her arm around their son. The son is staring at his father, the woman is glancing at her son. The caption reads 'Boys will be boys'.

freddy

Well to take the case of Robert Trigg for example, they could have prevented him from killing his second victim had they bothered to investigate the murder of his first properly.

I don't know why people get so defensive of the police. They do great work in many areas, and I certainly know some officers who are excellent advocates for female victims of DV. Unfortunately this is nowhere near as widespread as it needs to be, and yet again the reason for that comes down to the fact society as a whole refuses to see male violence as an issue of importance.

I haven't just pulled that from thin air. That is the case.

I don't think, en masse, men will ever concede us anything @HandbagKrabby

We have to be unapologetic about seizing our space and our choices.

But in the simplest terms, isn't reducing risk, reducing male access to victims, still a huge step forward?

It's a good thing for sure, the problem is it's very difficult to tackle while society overall is still permissive of violent men. Heck, it can't even bring itself to admit the problem is men!!

Sadly you cannot guarantee the police will protect you, it's a lottery

Of course you can't. Barring putting a police officer in every single household on a 24/7 Rota how can that be achieved?

I think drink driving from a societal point of view is a good analogy. I do know a surprising amount of people though that still feel ok with pushing the boundary of the drink drive limit.

I think for me, it's the jumping to what women can do as the first action that frustrates me. Most women I know spend a lot of their lives appeasing others because they've been taught to and they feel it keeps them safe and I'd put myself in that category too. Learning assertiveness, self esteem and being ok on your own are not bad things to learn, I'd just like equivalent work on the side of men too