Michael Flood
A recent research project claimed to find that men and women are equally likely to be the perpetrators of domestic violence [Headey, Scott and de Vaus, 1999]. Studies such as these have been taken up by anti-feminist men to claim that 'husband battering' is widespread. In the article below, Michael outlines a critique of such claims.
Men in fathers' rights groups and men's rights groups have been claiming very loudly for a while now that domestic violence is a gender-equal or gender-neutral phenomenon - that men and women assault each other at equal rates and with equal effects. They claim that an epidemic of husband-battering is being ignored if not silenced.
To substantiate their claims, men's rights and fathers' rights groups draw on a body of American studies which use a particular methodology for measuring violence. This is the Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS), developed and used by Murray Straus, Richard Gelles, Suzanne Steinmetz and others [Steinmetz, 1977/78; Steinmetz & Lucca, 1988; Straus et.al, 1980, Straus & Gelles, 1986, 1990]...
It appears that this blogger is annoyed at the existance of the Men's Rights Movement. Looks like we are getting under some feminist skin gents!!
Stop by and say hello to our little friend will ya?
Never fear, I plan on debunking our newest opponent. Shouldn't be too hard, but if any of you guys would like to participate... be my guest!
Kumogakure.
![[Most Recent Quotes from www.kitco.com]](http://www.kitconet.com/charts/metals/silver/t24_ag_en_usoz_2.gif)
![[Most Recent Exchange Rate from www.kitco.com]](http://www.weblinks247.com/exrate/24hr-jpy-small.gif)
20 comments:
Hello there.
I'm not annoyed at the existence of the mens rights movement. I think that there's a lot of things mens rights groups can do, and are doing that are excellent.
Encouraging men to seek help when they're being abused, creating shelters for the purpose, helping suicidal men etc.
These are all great things that I heartily approve of.
What I'm not so peachy-keen on is antifeminism.
Just letting y'all know.
Celleycel,
Welcome.
You stated, "What I'm not so peachy-keen on is antifeminism."
I understand what you are saying but, unfortunately, I am definitely anti-feminist, for numerous reasons, all of which can be found on this here blog.
Feminism is an evil hate movement that derives many of its ideas from MALE thinkers throughout history. It's stated goals are to destroy marriage, family, and culture.
It seeks ultimately, to impose a platonic tyrannical state that will end the freedoms of both sexes, male and female alike.
Not to mention that this movement slanders my honor as a man.
And so, I MUST oppose feminism.
While you state that you are for mens shelters and such, the fact of the matter is that feminism, which has seeped into all aspects of our society, law, and culture, is the CAUSE of our troubles.
So then, I must oppose the message that you are trying to advocate: that feminism is something good, wholesome, or necessary.
Do make yourself at home, and look around while you are here.
Thanks.
No sense trying to argue with a mangina about how he is a mangina, Kumo.
As for Celly:
Encouraging men to seek help when they're being abused, creating shelters for the purpose, helping suicidal men etc.
These are all great things that I heartily approve of.
Screw that. Men don't need domestic abuse shelters AT ALL.
What Men need are a complete reversal of the laws and judicial bias that give women carte blanche to get away with abuse.
If women got arrested and convicted of domestic violence just as easily and quickly as men often do (even in cases of blatant lying about abuse), women would no longer have this sense of entitlement to the double standards of domestic aggression.
Right now, it is a common societal norm to look upon abusive men as total scum (and truly abusive men are scum), but women are encouraged, recognized and congratulated for acting violently towards men.
Men don't need a shelter to be protected from abusive women. We need a shelter from the law that encourages women to get away with abusive behavior in the first place!
Straus has already dealt with arguments against CTS and the way feminists frame issues to suit their purposes.
Flood is a little smarter in setting up straw men than your average feminist cookie but that only means that he is very likely intellectually dishonest rather than ignorant.
Speak Libertarian!
How was the UK? It's been a while since I've had a proper English pint!!
I will debunk this article because:
a) It's a challenge
b) I want to make sure that I'm knowledgeable. If these people are right and I'm wrong, I need to know that.
It will at least help me to put together a goodly amount of material so I can post it here, and always have it at the ready just in case I need to access it real fast.
But I whole heartedly agree. At the end of the day, its not about who's abusing who more... it's about innocent until proven guilty. It's about the restoration of my constitutional rights, and its about punishing the guilty and freeing the innocent, be they male or female.
We don't need shelters. We need the government to stay out of our business. There is no excuse for the government to meddle in our affairs on the word of marxist feminist mangina pyschobable alone.
Kumo,
Dav!
What's up buddy??
Thanks for the link! I will be sure to add this stuff to the final debunking.
We need a little opposition to keep us on our toes.
I'm good, Kumo and I hope the same goes for you too.
Ron Paul is drawing in big time cash these days, as you know. Hope that continues. Tom Leykis leans libertarian and I hope that he pumps in some big time dough to the aged wonder.
Ah Kumo, I had a great time. Had more than my share of pints of Scottish and British Ales, and more than a few pints of Guiness at the Guiness brewhouse in Dublin...not to mention drams of Scotland's finest single malts!
As for Ron Paul...he is getting more and more traction. Hopefully he will at least have the "howard dean" effect on the republicans (prior to the "Aaaaaaaarrrrrrrgggggggghhhhhh!" of course!) and at least set a lot of legitimate points of debate for the GOP when the General Election roles around.
Gents,
Ron Paul is the truth. It's my opinion that it's either RP or die... enough said!
Alright comrades, back to tha grind!
Be easy.
Men need to be controlled and the best person for that job is Hillary Clinton. When she is president again your hate blogs will finally come down. You will grow up one way or the other.
Good luck with that outraged.
Anyone who tries to shut me down will see me in Court, as I sue the pants off of them for infringing on my first amendment right to free speech.
You have a nice day!
That's right O.F. When Hillary is president again hate blogs like this will have no place in our society. Let them have their fun now but come November 08 it's over and Ron Paul will go packing back to Texas with his frat brother Bush.
That's two.
Hillary Rodham, nor anyone else for that matter, will censor this blog or any other while there is such a thing as a constitution in this country.
This only goes to show how immature you feminists really are. If you took the time to search through this blog, you will find plenty of feminist "hate speech" against men, non-feminist women, and children too.
On top of this, you KNOW you and your sisters are in the wrong... that's why you want to censor this blog, and not refute it with evidence and quality research.
The truth hurts, and you and your feminist cohort's very lame responses prove that the truth is on our side.
You have a good night!
And stick around and watch your precious little anti anti feminist blog get refuted all to hell.
Kumo.
Hillary can't control her own husband, let alone 150 million men. By the way, where were the feminists when Monica was choking on Bill's chicken? That musta happened on one of their 'ladies days'.
Like most other female wannabes, she demonstrates that the real meaning of female independence is to ride on a man's coattails.
If Hitlary wins, she will be proof positive that women in power haven't got a clue about the way to run a country.
Well, she doesn't even know how to rule her own life.
What a sorry excuse of a human being she is.
Bingo!
The thought of Hitlary running anything successfully is laughable.
Although it would be fun to put her in office long enough to watch the country crash and burn under her watch...
on second thought, NO ONE in their right mind would vote for that Sea Hag!
Except loony feminists of course.
The Hate Bill has already passed and it is just a matter of time before President Hillary signs it into law. Blogs like these will be a thing of the past. Gone the way of the whites only water fountains.
If Hitlary signs the hate bill, then may I assume that she will put every femmoroid in jail? And for how long?
Doubtful.
You shouldn't be so confident... the winds of politics change rather unexpectedly.
The Congress may have passed such foolish legislation, but it will be vetoed. If, God forbid, Hillary Clinton is to be elected and signs the bill, if they try to shut this blog down, I will be among the first to sue in Federal court, as this law violates my 1st Amendment right to free speech.
And I won't be the only one: many other groups will sue as well, and place great pressure on the government to repeal this law.
And, failing that, I have saved ALL my material. I will throw up website after website, blog after blog, and I will continue to get the word out that feminism is an EVIL, TOTALITARIAN hate movement.
Can't shut me up, aiight?
The truth cometh.
And, now that our feminist friends have threatened nothing but censorship, and have done nothing to prove their claims, this post is closed for comments.
Feel free to comment as you like on future posts... but the iron law of this blog is a simple one.
If you don't like what I've written, attack the message, not the messenger. Continued threats and off topic postings will be deleted.
Thanks!
Post a Comment