Number of UK women convicted of domestic abuse doubles

[thir]

I think we are talking about abuse of men by women, generally, and at this point in particular, whether women use mental abuse in preference to physical abuse in contrast with men who would tend to abuse a woman physically.

I still do not think so - one dead a day...

Of course it all depends on how you define mental abuse. Would you like to take a go at that? it might clarify things.

The suggestion that mental injury always accompanies physical injury in cases of domestic abuse seems to be an attempt to lessen the seriousness of these crimes by women by elevating the crimes of men (ie, male abusers cause a double injury, female abusers only one).

With all due respect, that sounds weird. You cannot deny that being hit by a partner or parent will not leave scars.
It is not a competition.

We were also considering whether a female abuser would take advantage of her sex to avoid punishment by putting the blame on her victim.

And that is a theory with so far nothing to back it up, unless you have personal or near-personal experience.

'women' are not like this, and 'men' are not like that. We are individuals.

[MMI]

I still do not think so - one dead a day...

If one dead man a day, then three or four dead women a day. Men are more physically violent.

Of course it all depends on how you define mental abuse. Would you like to take a go at that? it might clarify things.

Why do I feel I'm being patronised? Ah! You're trying to put me in my place verbally.

But I'll have a go. Forgive me if I explain it badly. Abuse, whether physical or mental is about control. Women (who learn to express themselves verbally, and "use their head) can easily diminish a man by commenting on the size of his penis or refusing to argue with someone so ill-equipped to do so. I have witnessed such exchanges in different circumstances, and have seen males (deservedly) driven away pursued by hoots of derision by females; but if women use these methods to deter unwanted advances, then so, too, will a manipulative, controlling, woman who wants to keep her partner under her thumb.

She might deny him sex and jeer at him for his inability to satisfy her. Worse, she might take other lovers and flaunt her escapades in front of him. She might "show him up" by embarrasing him in front of his boss, or friends, family, or children ... anything she thinks will keep her in control.

You don't think a female abuser would try to avoid punishment by blaming her victim, knowing she is more likely to be believed than he is? I've no evidence, but I'm afraid I do.

With all due respect, that sounds weird. You cannot deny that being hit by a partner or parent will not leave scars.
It is not a competition.

.

You feel men are now competing to be the most victimised? No. Men are asking that they not be automatically blamed unless and until it is shown they are at fault. And this goes beyond the question of domestic abuse.

women' are not like this, and 'men' are not like that. We are individuals.

Not so. There are definite male tendencies and definite female tendencies. And not all female tendencies are nice ones.

[thir]

Quote Originally Posted by thir View Post
Of course it all depends on how you define mental abuse. Would you like to take a go at that? it might clarify things.

Why do I feel I'm being patronised? Ah! You're trying to put me in my place verbally.

Please tell me you are joking!

But I'll have a go. Forgive me if I explain it badly. Abuse, whether physical or mental is about control.

Hm. I am not so sure that it is neccesarily always so. I think some people simply really do loose their temper
or are simply just jerks. (M/K) I do not think it is always premeditated.

Women (who learn to express themselves verbally, and "use their head)

But what about all the males who live on their verbal skills, like sales persons, politicians and so on? Authors?

can easily diminish a man by commenting on the size of his penis or refusing to argue with someone so ill-equipped to do so.

And so do males often comment on women's looks...why do you think so many women feel that they can only be a succes if they look good?

I have witnessed such exchanges in different circumstances, and have seen males (deservedly) driven away pursued by hoots of derision by females;

Deservedly?..do you mean there was no other way to get rid of them? Because it can be like that. But otherwise I personally think a polite question deserves a polite answer.

but if women use these methods to deter unwanted advances, then so, too, will a manipulative, controlling, woman who wants to keep her partner under her thumb.

Ok maybe I am being slow on the uptake here, but would such behaviour not cause people to run screaming in the opposite direction?

She might deny him sex and jeer at him for his inability to satisfy her. Worse, she might take other lovers and flaunt her escapades in front of him. She might "show him up" by embarrasing him in front of his boss, or friends, family, or children ... anything she thinks will keep her in control.

Ok I admit I cannot see how that keeps that person in control. I would think people would get out of such a relationship as soon as can be - but I do see now what exactly you mean by abuse, thank you. And this is not meant patronizing in any way, I assure you.

You don't think a female abuser would try to avoid punishment by blaming her victim, knowing she is more likely to be believed than he is? I've no evidence, but I'm afraid I do.

Ok, I can only say I hope you are wrong!

Quote Originally Posted by thir View Post
With all due respect, that sounds weird. You cannot deny that being hit by a partner or parent will not leave scars.
It is not a competition.
.

You feel men are now competing to be the most victimised?
No. Men are asking that they not be automatically blamed unless and until it is shown they are at fault. And this goes beyond the question of domestic abuse.

Is that not what we all ask?


Quote Originally Posted by thir View Post
women' are not like this, and 'men' are not like that. We are individuals.
Not so. There are definite male tendencies and definite female tendencies. And not all female tendencies are nice ones.

I cannot see it as so simple, if only because the gender roles are so different from culture to culture.
But of course we are all both good and bad.

If one dead man a day, then three or four dead women a day. Men are more physically violent.



Why do I feel I'm being patronised? Ah! You're trying to put me in my place verbally.

But I'll have a go. Forgive me if I explain it badly. Abuse, whether physical or mental is about control. Women (who learn to express themselves verbally, and "use their head) can easily diminish a man by commenting on the size of his penis or refusing to argue with someone so ill-equipped to do so. I have witnessed such exchanges in different circumstances, and have seen males (deservedly) driven away pursued by hoots of derision by females; but if women use these methods to deter unwanted advances, then so, too, will a manipulative, controlling, woman who wants to keep her partner under her thumb.

She might deny him sex and jeer at him for his inability to satisfy her. Worse, she might take other lovers and flaunt her escapades in front of him. She might "show him up" by embarrasing him in front of his boss, or friends, family, or children ... anything she thinks will keep her in control.

You don't think a female abuser would try to avoid punishment by blaming her victim, knowing she is more likely to be believed than he is? I've no evidence, but I'm afraid I do.




.

You feel men are now competing to be the most victimised? No. Men are asking that they not be automatically blamed unless and until it is shown they are at fault. And this goes beyond the question of domestic abuse.




Not so. There are definite male tendencies and definite female tendencies. And not all female tendencies are nice ones.

[thir]

Quote Originally Posted by thir View Post
Of course it all depends on how you define mental abuse. Would you like to take a go at that? it might clarify things.

Why do I feel I'm being patronised? Ah! You're trying to put me in my place verbally.

Please tell me you are joking!

But I'll have a go. Forgive me if I explain it badly. Abuse, whether physical or mental is about control.

Hm. I am not so sure that it is neccesarily always so. I think some people simply really do loose their temper
or are simply just jerks. (M/K) I do not think it is always premeditated.

Women (who learn to express themselves verbally, and "use their head)

But what about all the males who live on their verbal skills, like sales persons, politicians and so on? Authors?

can easily diminish a man by commenting on the size of his penis or refusing to argue with someone so ill-equipped to do so.

And so do males often comment on women's looks...why do you think so many women feel that they can only be a succes if they look good?

I have witnessed such exchanges in different circumstances, and have seen males (deservedly) driven away pursued by hoots of derision by females;

Deservedly?..do you mean there was no other way to get rid of them? Because it can be like that. But otherwise I personally think a polite question deserves a polite answer.

but if women use these methods to deter unwanted advances, then so, too, will a manipulative, controlling, woman who wants to keep her partner under her thumb.

Ok maybe I am being slow on the uptake here, but would such behaviour not cause people to run screaming in the opposite direction?

She might deny him sex and jeer at him for his inability to satisfy her. Worse, she might take other lovers and flaunt her escapades in front of him. She might "show him up" by embarrasing him in front of his boss, or friends, family, or children ... anything she thinks will keep her in control.

Ok I admit I cannot see how that keeps that person in control. I would think people would get out of such a relationship as soon as can be - but I do see now what exactly you mean by abuse, thank you. And this is not meant patronizing in any way, I assure you.

You don't think a female abuser would try to avoid punishment by blaming her victim, knowing she is more likely to be believed than he is? I've no evidence, but I'm afraid I do.

Ok, I can only say I hope you are wrong!

Quote Originally Posted by thir View Post
With all due respect, that sounds weird. You cannot deny that being hit by a partner or parent will not leave scars.
It is not a competition.
.

You feel men are now competing to be the most victimised?
No. Men are asking that they not be automatically blamed unless and until it is shown they are at fault. And this goes beyond the question of domestic abuse.

Is that not what we all ask?


Quote Originally Posted by thir View Post
women' are not like this, and 'men' are not like that. We are individuals.
Not so. There are definite male tendencies and definite female tendencies. And not all female tendencies are nice ones.

I cannot see it as so simple, if only because the gender roles are so different from culture to culture.
But of course we are all both good and bad.

[MMI]

The first point to make here, I think, is that there is a significant body of opinion that domestic abuse is about control. Sure, the abuse only happens when the abuser loses his temper, but what causes him to do that? I suggest it happens when things aren't going the way he wants, and to regain the upper hand, he has to resort to violence. I suspect it is rarely premeditated, but it is very definitely predictable.

Next, with regard to men who live on their verbal skills, I would suggest they are exceptional because they have probably developed and nurtured those skills beyond normal levels. Let me say right now that both men and women are very skilled communicators, but they communicate in different ways: males primarily to impart factual or analytical information, while women's discussions would tend to deal with people's interaction and relationships. Few people depend on verbal skills for their livelihoods, but, rather they rely upon their other skills: their medical training, their manual dexterity, their analytical abilities, etc. depending upon what they do. Farmers, for example, or train drivers don't require verbal skills, but do require other abilities. Doctors, barristers are highly trained, but their medical or legal knowledge is what they are valued for, not their ability to express themselves (granted, a doctor with a good bed-side manner or a lawyer who can present the best case in court on the facts before him is likely to have an advantage, but the best is merely a sample of the whole). Politicians, who supposedly live on their verbal skills, need say only what they are told to say. In a society which is only 50 years away from the time when most males were the sole breadwinners in a family and most women were housewives, even occupations that did require verbal skill were male dominated for want of anyone else to do the job, but that is changing: there are more and more female doctors as a proportion of all doctors, and more and more women are entering, and succeeding in, the legal profession, necessarily at the expense of their male colleagues. Whereas at one time, the number of female students in tertiary education was barely 5%, it now comfortably exceeds 50%, and the proportion is still rising. In Britain, the most unemployable group of people is the young male, many of whom have left school unable to read, completely without qualifications, and almost all without hope. The reason no-one notices is that they have no advocates and cannot or will not argue for recognition and special treatment themselves. It is easier for them to sink into a life of crime and violence.

The success of feminism in changing society, on the other hand is due primarily to persuasion by eloquent argument and appeals to justice and people's sense of fair play. The protests where bras were burnt were dramatic and memorable, but the real success was due to well-presented appeals to reason.

I make this point not to blame women for men's shortcomings, but to explain that, although men can communicate, women do it better. Therefore, to return to the theme of the thread, women are better able - if they are so inclined - to use verbal (and therefore mental) forms of abuse than men are.



You ask me why I think women feel that they can only be a success if they look good. In reply I would answer,

(1) women have the monopoly on beauty. A man who is "beautiful" will be regarded as odd, to say the least. How often do you hear that all the good-looking men are gay? Remember, irony is just an unusual way of looking at the truth.

As George Orwell once outrageously said, Women can easily make a living based on their looks - even homely girls, if they want to. Not so easy for men;

(2) women dress for other women, not for men. They measure how good they look not so much by how men react to what they wear, but by whether other women approve of disapprove of their clothes/style.

(3) it is a myth perpetuated by militant feminists that men want all women to come to the office naked and to blow them without even asking. Only the straight guys do! OK - that's a joke, but men do not want to be distracted by women who are inappropriately dressed at work. They actually want to get on with their jobs. If women feel uncomfortable about that, the fault is not men's.


Now, the sad thing about abusive relationships is that the victim invariably blames himself. Perhaps he believes what he is told, that he is worthless, ineffectual, incompetent. Perhaps he believes he deserves to be blamed and punished. Perhaps he still values the relationship and will endure the abuse because he is afraid he will lose his partner if he does not. Rarely does he want to leave, and will only do so when there is no alternative. Research shows that female victims who leave their partners will have endured years of abuse and many attacks before they decide to leave. Frequently they only do so when the situation has reached a peak and their lives could be at risk. I am not aware of any comparable information relating to male victims, but the point is, victims rarely leave their abusers unless they have no alternative.

[MMI]

The first point to make here, I think, is that there is a significant body of opinion that domestic abuse is about control. Sure, the abuse only happens when the abuser loses his temper, but what causes him to do that? I suggest it happens when things aren't going the way he wants, and to regain the upper hand, he has to resort to violence. I suspect it is rarely premeditated, but it is very definitely predictable.

Next, with regard to men who live on their verbal skills, I would suggest they are exceptional because they have probably developed and nurtured those skills beyond normal levels. Let me say right now that both men and women are very skilled communicators, but they communicate in different ways: males primarily to impart factual or analytical information, while women's discussions would tend to deal with people's interaction and relationships. Few people depend on verbal skills for their livelihoods, but, rather they rely upon their other skills: their medical training, their manual dexterity, their analytical abilities, etc. depending upon what they do. Farmers, for example, or train drivers don't require verbal skills, but do require other abilities. Doctors, barristers are highly trained, but their medical or legal knowledge is what they are valued for, not their ability to express themselves (granted, a doctor with a good bed-side manner or a lawyer who can present the best case in court on the facts before him is likely to have an advantage, but the best is merely a sample of the whole). Politicians, who supposedly live on their verbal skills, need say only what they are told to say. In a society which is only 50 years away from the time when most males were the sole breadwinners in a family and most women were housewives, even occupations that did require verbal skill were male dominated for want of anyone else to do the job, but that is changing: there are more and more female doctors as a proportion of all doctors, and more and more women are entering, and succeeding in, the legal profession, necessarily at the expense of their male colleagues. Whereas at one time, the number of female students in tertiary education was barely 5%, it now comfortably exceeds 50%, and the proportion is still rising. In Britain, the most unemployable group of people is the young male, many of whom have left school unable to read, completely without qualifications, and almost all without hope. The reason no-one notices is that they have no advocates and cannot or will not argue for recognition and special treatment themselves. It is easier for them to sink into a life of crime and violence.

The success of feminism in changing society, on the other hand is due primarily to persuasion by eloquent argument and appeals to justice and people's sense of fair play. The protests where bras were burnt were dramatic and memorable, but the real success was due to well-presented appeals to reason.

I make this point not to blame women for men's shortcomings, but to explain that, although men can communicate, women do it better. Therefore, to return to the theme of the thread, women are better able - if they are so inclined - to use verbal (and therefore mental) forms of abuse than men are.



You ask me why I think women feel that they can only be a success if they look good. In reply I would answer,

(1) women have the monopoly on beauty. A man who is "beautiful" will be regarded as odd, to say the least. How often do you hear that all the good-looking men are gay? Remember, irony is just an unusual way of looking at the truth.

As George Orwell once outrageously said, Women can easily make a living based on their looks - even homely girls, if they want to. Not so easy for men;

(2) women dress for other women, not for men. They measure how good they look not so much by how men react to what they wear, but by whether other women approve of disapprove of their clothes/style.

(3) it is a myth perpetuated by militant feminists that men want all women to come to the office naked and to blow them without even asking. Only the straight guys do! OK - that's a joke, but men do not want to be distracted by women who are inappropriately dressed at work. They actually want to get on with their jobs. If women feel uncomfortable about that, the fault is not men's.


Now, the sad thing about abusive relationships is that the victim invariably blames himself. Perhaps he believes what he is told, that he is worthless, ineffectual, incompetent. Perhaps he believes he deserves to be blamed and punished. Perhaps he still values the relationship and will endure the abuse because he is afraid he will lose his partner if he does not. Rarely does he want to leave, and will only do so when there is no alternative. Research shows that female victims who leave their partners will have endured years of abuse and many attacks before they decide to leave. Frequently they only do so when the situation has reached a peak and their lives could be at risk. I am not aware of any comparable information relating to male victims, but the point is, victims rarely leave their abusers unless they have no alternative.