To be terrified by the Australian rugby coach setting his family on fire?

[SeasonallySnowyPeasant]

In brief: earlier today an Australian ex-rugby player was in the car with his wife and their three children, poured petrol over her and set her alight. She, he and the children all died. The parents were ending their marriage and disputing custody over the children.

It’s absolutely horrific and I just wonder why there seem to be no depths to which some men - and it almost always is men - will sink when it comes to asserting their dominance over women and children. Throwing acid over them seems to be the newest ‘thing’ over the past 3 years. Assault, rape, stalking, harassment, murder are so common as to be un-newsworthy.

It scares me. My exH was abusive and I have a non-molestation order to prevent him from continuing the abuse. At the back of my mind I worry about him taking something I do/say as pushing him too far and being seriously hurt or killed. What if he decides one day to kill our DC?

Why won’t men sort their lives out and put an end to this horrific violence?

there seems to be a huge disconnect in our society between decrying toxic masculinity but then celebrating macho men.

I do agree with that and I think we need to get rid of this popularly held view that women go for alpha males, that they (to quote Peterson) “peel off the males of the top”. It paints women as purely transactional and creates a resentment and entitlement towards women amongst men who aren’t at the top of the pyramid. It’s also totally untrue.

I’m sure if you peeled away at the culture of male killers you would find some pretty dodgy views about women. Those views are encouraged by the rise in incel culture and apologists like Peterson. I really believe men have a part to play in tackling in other men’s beliefs.

Also I think men are more likely to listen to other men not women.

I remember a guy once telling another guy in the office (after another rape in the news) that it was far more logical to tell men not women to stay at home (the latter being standard advice at the time).

I had to nod in awe and appreciation as if I’d never thought of it like that before. Because any time I myself had pointed out the irony of telling women to stay home not men I’d been labelled an angry feminist but when a man says it other men listen.

Of course the general perception that women love a 'bad boy' and imagine they can change him starts with fairytales like Beauty and the Beast and is peddled enthusiastically by Hollywood. It seems it's the men with power who love and perpetuate this idea and you can easily see how it works for men. But no, let's blame the women, as usual. 🤷🏼‍♀️

If somebody walks through a dodgy area after dark, disregarding the genuine possibility of being attacked for the simple reason that they shouldn't be, then they're a bit stupid IMO.

The problem with this argument is that while it might stop that individual woman from being raped on that occasion if she's actually able to avoid that area (and presumably those women who actually live there and for whatever reason need to go out after dark are unworthy of your consideration) it doesn't stop the rapist from being a rapist. You just end up with more and more restrictions on women's behaviour because hey, she should've known better and not done that, worn that, been there. Otherwise, we'd see clearly lower rates of rape in societies where women are less likely to be out unaccompanied.

Dungeons and dragons 'nerds' can be violent arseholes as well.

Stereotype much.

I find the 'it was her own fault what did she expect' thing really bothersome.

The person who said just report it, there have been multiple news stories here in the UK where women have been killed after multiple reports to the police.

Meanwhile women are told, including these dead ones, who were usually killed when leaving or trying to leave, well, you're a bit stupid really, aren't you.

Meanwhile women are told, including these dead ones, who were usually killed when leaving or trying to leave, well, you're a bit stupid really, aren't you.

Who said that?

I'm talking about the things I see women do, and did myself when younger, like piling into a taxi with a load of wasted strangers and going back to an afterparty with no idea of the address I was at, accepting drinks from strangers etc.

NearlyGranny
Of course the general perception that women love a 'bad boy' and imagine they can change him starts with fairytales like Beauty and the Beast and is peddled enthusiastically by Hollywood.

The Hollywood Beauty and the Beast in which Beast starts out as a cruel and selfish Prince is pretty-much entirely a Hollywood creation. The original story starts from a different point: Beast looks horrible but is in fact a good and hospitable man (and naturally a Prince, because it was written at that sort of time), of whom everyone is afraid because of his looks -- which are the result of an evil enchantment. Its moral, rather than being "the love of a good woman redeems a monster", is that "handsome is as handsome does." It's a bit of a retelling of Cupid and Psyche, really: there was nothing wrong with Cupid as a person, just his circumstances.

=
I am not being holier-than-thou or whathaveyou, but I think I may have had better spideysense or better luck when I was young than some people have; I had plenty of boyfriends and lots of dates and lovers but I never got trapped by a shit. One or two made me anxious and I quickly had no more to do with them. Perhaps it was because I was raped by a stranger when I was a child, and was incredibly determined that I would never let that happen again? I don't know. But me being lucky won't have stopped any of the men I had nothing to do with from abusing someone else, so it didn't help anyone but me in the long run, did it.

was incredibly determined that I would never let that happen again? I don't know. But me being lucky won't have stopped any of the men I had nothing to do with from abusing someone else, so it didn't help anyone but me in the long run, did it.

Taking measures to preserve your own safety isn't selfish though, as long as you aren't pushing somebody else under the bus to do so. You can only do so much to control the actions of other people (both predators and victims).

I admittedly have a pretty strong viewpoint on the matter having spent a lot of time in Johannesburg, where being reckless as a lone woman will quickly get you in deep water.

'I'm talking about the things I see women do, and did myself when younger, like piling into a taxi with a load of wasted strangers and going back to an afterparty with no idea of the address I was at, accepting drinks from strangers etc.'

This thread is about a woman and children who had petrol poured over them by her estranged husband, and were burnt to death.

You said this sort of thing wouldn't happen if women were more sensible about selecting partners and not liking 'bad boys'.

Do you have information on how this man behaved when she was dating him?

What does it have to do with going off to a party with a bunch of people you met that night?

This thread is about a woman and children who had petrol poured over them by her estranged husband, and were burnt to death.

You said this sort of thing wouldn't happen if women were more sensible about selecting partners and not liking 'bad boys'.

No, I didnt say that.

What does it have to do with going off to a party with a bunch of people you met that night?

I'm talking about taking measures to reduce risk, which is something I've had to do many times when travelling to comparatively dangerous places for work - e.g. try Afghanistan 10-15 years ago as a young white female fresh out of uni.

I am of course generalising, but it's definitely a thing that lots of women like bad boys and I think in many cases the signs would have been there but perhaps ignored due to naivety. Like my mate who thought her ex only cheated previously due to being in an unhappy relationship and wouldn't do the same to her (guess what happened).

'Here's a radical idea.

Maybe us women should stop dating arseholes and then it would be impossible to be killed by your arsehole partner/ex. '

You actually completely did say that.
Reference to bad boys was later, it's all there in black and white.

The stuff about parties is absolutely irrelevant to the topic of the thread, unless you are trying to imply that this woman was irresponsible as a teenager and this somehow links to her being murdered...

It's completely irrelevant, but then MissChardonnay is trying to backtrack so shouldn't really be surprised.

Well, strictly speaking, you couldn't be killed by an arsehole partner if you never had one. But I think you understand that my point is around not ignoring warning signs - if somebody tells you who they are, believe them.

The stuff about parties is absolutely irrelevant to the topic of the thread.

I disagree. A previous poster was clearly saying that her particular case wouldn't have happened had she not been drunk.

It's not about blaming the victim. I just think a lot of people get caught up with societal 'rights and wrongs' and what you should be allowed to do. All this fades very quickly when you're on your own, intoxicated and struggling in heels, in an unfamiliar area after dark. Your phone battery has run out and a dodgy looking guy is walking closely behind - I speak from experience here.

Speaking from experience I can tell you that women can be abusive too. Quite a revelation for you I guess, huh?

Mind boggling last couple of posts.

This man committed an appalling murder of a woman and 3 children.

But we need to consider how irresponsible and stupid women and girls are
And also, women do it to

The utter inability of some people to say well yeah this was awful without trying to distract to a different topic, blame women and girls, blame this woman, and let's talk about female abusers instead, is really quite painful to watch.

No wonder so many societies are incapable of tackling VAWG.

'All this fades very quickly when you're on your own, intoxicated and struggling in heels, in an unfamiliar area after dark'

This woman was in her car in the daytime with her children.

Stop trying to change the subject to distract from your earlier comments. Which indicated that it was her own fault for not choosing wisely. When you have no idea how he behaved in the early part of their relationship.

Thing is Chardonnay, if you had been raped in Afghanistan, however many precautions you took, some people would have blamed the rape on you, just for the fact that you were there as a 'young, white woman, fresh out of uni'.

I agree there's things we can do to be safer, but not sure that this is the thread for it.

The problem with the argument you make MissChardonnay, and the reason why it fails, is that you fail to take into account that women not doing the things you mention doesn't stop men from being rapists. The point about not dating arseholes is totally, utterly countered by the reality that because some men feel entitled to women, they will harm women when they aren't able to get the access they think they deserve. Eliot Rodger never had chance to abuse a girlfriend, so an individual woman who might have avoided dating him because she thought he was dangerous didn't die, but he just killed others instead. There is no action any individual woman can take that will stop some men from attacking women.

And again, if what you suggest actually worked, we would see lower rape rates in societies where women are less likely to do the things you mention. Rather than a redefining of what's considered reasonable and unprovocative for a woman to do.

The problem with the argument you makeMissChardonnay, and the reason why it fails, is that you fail to take into account that women not doing the things you mention doesn't stop men from being rapists.

So, by your reasoning, I should stop wearing my seatbelt as people will die in car accidents anyway.

No, because you're assuming that if you change your behaviour, you can avoid being raped. And that isn't true.

No misschardonnay, because if every car passenger fastens their seatbelts, there isn't a subset of cars who are going to go looking for passengers to run over because they feel entitled to accidents. Cars are a bit different from violent males in this way.

No, because you're assuming that if you change your behaviour, you can avoid being raped. And that isn't true.

I disagree.

If a rapist goes upstairs at a house party seeking a victim, who is most likely to get raped; the paralytic girl alone in the bedroom or the coherent one downstairs surrounded by friends?

Stop painting women as helpless victims!

Those of us who have never been raped have been lucky, it doesn't mean we're smarter or wiser or have better 'spidey senses'. We may have had near misses. I had to talk my way out of a few tight spots in my youth, largely when negotiating dark car parks on my way home from post-grad lectures after work. Yeah, that really proves I was taking stupid risks! Drunk on ambition and learning, obviously. Who did I think I was? Should have gone straight home after work before it got dark and forgotten career progression.

DD worked an evening job while doing her second degree, caught the night bus and had to navigate a dodgy area between her stop and her shared house every night. I suppose she should have abandoned her studies, run home to mum and dad and been content with her first degree.

We were lucky nothing too dire happened. That's all. If any male with 40% more upper body strength than us (that's all able-bodied adult males) and greater sprinting power (same demographic) had been determined to rape, that is what would have happened.

We had a rape happen at a secondary school I worked at many a long year ago. 14yo girl, rather young and naive even for 14, had been lured to the edge of the playing field on sports day by a sweet note where two hulking 15yo boys jumped her. They were caught in the act by the female PE teacher who I recall was disgusted with the girl and adamant she must have wanted what happened because "there's no such thing as rape". It took me a while to understand she was deep in denial because she needed to believe it could never happen to her; that she was in control.

The boys were suspended for a few days and then back in school. Girl's parents wouldn't press charges and put her through giving evidence. Female staff (no men) who threatened to strike rather than teach them were told they'd be sacked if they tried it. The boys had exams, their futures were at stake! Last I heard, the girl was still in a mental hospital.

Is the coherent one surrounded by friends allowed to go to the toilet (upstairs) on her own?

Why a paralytic girl not a paralytic boy?

Why are you assuming a boy is more likely to rape a drunk girl than look after her? But misandric, most boys are not rapists

So girls should never get drunk? And if they do and something happens it's their fault... We're in the UK which is a massive drinking culture you believe girls should not engage in the same, normal, teenage behaviours that their male counterparts do? Or do you think no one in the UK should ever get drunk... That's a bit of a pie in the sky solution if you ask me.

If everyone did stop getting drunk, rapists would simply look for victims vulnerable in other ways.

The idea that male violence is inevitable part of life is depressing. Different countries have different rates of sexual violence, due to different levels of acceptance and male entitlement in society. Saying oh there's nothing we can do is really sad. And framing women and girls not engaging with totally normal activities in society (walking after dark, going on dates, drinking with friends etc) and something happens as behaving like helpless victims is really gross tbh.