For those of you who don't know, I am forced into a domestic violence prevention program. Well, today I had my first session. It was as I expected, a feminist dream come true.
The rule of thumb was trotted out. (I couldn't remember how that was debunked. If someone could help me I'd appreciate it.)
The .68 on the dollar wage gap myth was there. I argued this and the men were rather impressed and emboldened. The facilitators were not.
Male priveledge was hammered down my throat.
The oppression of women was compared to the Jews, Blacks, etc. :shock:
I argued as many points as I could, but the facilitators eventually started ignoring my arguments and talking over me.
I'm going to try and scan my "homework" so you can see how warped this program is, and I'll keep you up to date every week if anyone is interested.
I did ask "Why are there no women in this group." and they replied they have female only groups, but don't mix the two.
:twisted:
Oh, and by the way. I get to pay $480 for the priveledge of attending this mandatory program. Isn't that nice?
Oh, and by the way. I get to pay $480 for the priveledge of attending this mandatory program. Isn't that nice?
Yeah? :wink:
Well i got to pay $250 for an after separation "parenting" course.
3 "anger management" courses @ $100 a pop.
And still haven't seen my kid in two years (Dec 13 2002)
I'm begining to wonder if the "anger management" courses where worth the money. :shock: :evil:
Assault - Please do scan them. Feel free to email them to me and I will put them up on the web and we can all have a look at them here.
What did the wage gap have to do with what they were trying to teach? Were they just trying to make a case for women being victims?
http://www.debunker.com/texts/ruleofthumb.html
The "Rule of Thumb for Wife-Beating" Hoax
Feminists often make that claim that the "rule of thumb" used to mean that it was legal to beat your wife with a rod, so long as that rod were no thicker than the husband's thumb. Thus, one constantly runs into assertions like this:
someone might want to be careful using "rule of thumb" in a sarcastic way. my criminal law teacher at UCLA noted that rule of thumb started in England for punishing wives who cheated on their husbands. the rule was that the rod used to beat them could not be thicker than one's thumb(!).
However, Christina Hoff Sommers documents how the link between the phrase "rule of thumb"
and wifebeating is a feminist-inspired myth of recent vintage.
In her book "Who Stole Feminism" (NY: Simon & Schuster, 1994, p. 203) Sommers writes:
...The 'rule of thumb' story is an example of revisionist history that feminists happily fell into believing. It reinforces their perspective on society, and they tell it as a way of winning converts to their angry creed...
The 'rule of thumb', however, turns out to be an excellent example of what may be called a feminist fiction. Is is not to be found in William Blackstone's treatise on English common law. On the contrary, British law since the 1700s and our American laws predating the Revolution prohibit wife beating, though there have been periods and places in which the prohibition was only indifferently enforced.
That the phrase did not even originate in legal practice could have been ascertained by any fact-checker who took the trouble to look it up in the Oxford English Dictionary, which notes that the term has been used metaphorically for at least three hundred years to refer to any method of measurement or technique of estimation derived from experience rather than science.
According to Canadian folklorist Philip Hiscock, "The real explanation of 'rule of thumb' is that it derives from wood workers... who knew their trade so well they rarely or never fell back on the use of such things as rulers. instead, they would measure things by, for example, the length of their thumbs." Hiscock adds that the phrase came into metaphorical use by the late seventeenth century. Hiscock could not track the source of the idea that the term derives from a principle governing wife beating, but he believes it is an example of 'modern folklore' and compares it to other 'back-formed explanations.' such as the claim asparagus comes from 'sparrow-grass' or that 'ring around the rosy' is about the plague.
We shall see that Hiscock's hunch was correct, but we must begin by exonerating William Blackstone (1723-1780), the Englishman who codified centuries of legal customs and practices into the elegant and clearly organized tome known as Commentaries on the Laws of England. The Commentaries, a classic of legal literature, became the basis for the development of American law. The so-called rule of thumb as a guideline for wife-beating does not occur in Blackstone's compendium, although he does refer to an ancient law that permitted "domestic chastisement"....
In America, there have been laws against wife beating since before the Revolution. By 1870, it was illegal in almost every state; but even before then, wife-beaters were arrested and punished for assault and battery. The historian and feminist Elizabeth Pleck observes in a scholarly article entitled "Wife-Battering in Nineteenth-Century America":
It has often been claimed that wife-beating in nineteenth-century America was legal... Actually, though, several states passed statutes legally prohibiting wife-beating; and at least one statute even predates the American Revolution. The Massachusetts Bay Colony prohibited wife-beating as early as 1655. The edict states: "No man shall strike his wife nor any woman her husband on penalty of such fine not exceeding ten pounds for one offense, or such corporal punishment as the County shall determine."
[Pleck] points out that punishments for wife-beaters could be severe: according to an 1882 Maryland statute, the culprit could receive forty lashes at the whipping post; in Delaware, the number was thirty. In New Mexico, fines ranging from $225 to $1000 were levied, or sentences of one to five years in prison imposed. For most of our history, in fact, wife-beating has been considered a sin comparable to to thievery or adultery. Religious groups -- especially Protestant groups such as Quakers, Methodists, and Baptists -- punished, shunned, and excommunicated wife-beaters. Husbands, brothers, and neighbors often took vengence against the batterer. Vigilante parties sometimes abducted wife-beaters and whipped them.
Just how did the false account originate, and how did it achieve authority and currency? As with many myths, there is a small core of fact surrounded by an accretion of error. In the course of rendering rulings on cases before them, two Southern judges had alluded to an 'ancient law' according to which a man could beat his wife as long as the implement was not wider than his thumb. The judges, one from North Carolina and one from Mississippi, did not accept the authority of the 'ancient law.' The North Carolina judge refered to it as 'barbarism,' and both judges found the husband in the case in question guilty of wife abuse. Nevertheless, their rulings seemed to tolerate the notion that men had a measure of latitude in physically chastising their wives. Fortunately, as Pleck takes pains to remind us, they were not representative of judicial opinion in the rest of the country.
In 1976, Del Martin, a coordinator of the N.O.W. Task Force on Battered Women, came across a reference to the two judges and their remarks. Neither judge had used the phrase "rule of thumb," but a thumb had been mentioned, and Ms. Martin took note of it:
Our law, based upon the old English common-law doctrines, explicitly permitted wife-beating for correctional purposes. However, certain restrictions did exist... For instance, the common-law doctrine had been modified to allow the husband "the right to whip his wife, provided that he used a switch no bigger than his thumb" -- a rule of thumb, so to speak.
Ms. Martin had not claimed that the term "rule of thumb" originated from common law. Before long, however, the "ancient law" alluded to by two obscure Southern judges was being treated as an unchallenged principle of both British and American law, and journalists and academics alike were bandying the notion about. Feminist Terry Davidson, in an article entitled "Wife Beating: A Recurring Phenomenon Throughout History," claims that "one of the reasons nineteenth century British wives were dealt with so harshly by their husbands and by their legal system was the 'rule of thumb'" and castigates Blackstone himself. "Blackstone saw nothing unreasonable about the wife-beating law. In fact, he believed it to be quite moderate."
These interpretive errors were given added authority by a group of scholars and lawyers who, in 1982, prepared a report on wife abuse for the United States Commission on Civil Rights, Under the Rule of Thumb: Battered Women and the Administration of Justice -- A Report of the United States Commission on Civil Rights_. On the second page, they note: "American law is built upon the British common law that condoned wife beating and even prescribed the weapon to be used. This 'rule of thumb' stipulated that a man could only beat his wife with a 'rod not thicker than his thumb.'" It went on to speak of Blackstone as the jurist who "greatly influenced the making of the law in the American colonies [and who] commented on the 'rule of thumb,'" justifying the rule by noting that "the law thought it reasonable to intrust [the husband] with this power of... chastisement, in the same moderation that a man is allowed to correct his apprentices or children."
The publication of the report established the feminist fable about the origins of the term in popular lore, and the misogyny of Blackstone and "our law" as "fact." Misstatements about the "rule of thumb" still appear in the popular press.
That same 1993 Time magazine article that popularized the nonexistent March of Dimes study on domestic violence and birth defects and reported that "between 22% and 35% of all visits by females to emergency rooms are for injuries from domestic assaults" also cited new York University law professor Holly Maguigan: "We talk about the notion of the rule of thumb, forgetting that it had to do with the restriction on a man's right to use a weapon against his wife: he couldn't use a rod that was larger than his thumb." Professor Maguigan's law students would do well to check their Blackstone.
Thanks Gonzo. :)
Yes, Dr. Evil. They just wanted to shame the men and I was amazed how much of the dribble some of them men believed and were spouting back. The rule of thumb question was answered by a college student who spewed out the feminist myth. :roll:
Assault,
Beware man! You have been sentenced into the feminazi "Duluth Model" Twilight Zone!
Did they introduce the "Duluth Wheel" model yet?
Google "Duluth Model" and you'll soon see what you're in for in the next six months of "treatment!"
If you have not yet obtained a written document defining what you need to do to "graduate" from this Gulag, ask for it immediately. Specifically, ask for the "program completion criteria" and how you're being evaluated.
Review the paperwork you signed in detail when you entered "the program." Did it contain specific information about what you need to do to meet the program's requirements for discharge?
Most importantly, DO NOT trust the counselor/therapists running the program.
And note -- every time you mention a "fact" or express an honest "opinion," you will be placing your future in jeopardy.
You sir, are now in the front line combat with FemiNazi Special Forces!
The .68 on the dollar wage gap myth was there. I argued this and the men were rather impressed and emboldened. The facilitators were not.
Heh. I'd loved to have been in that group too. Imagine if by the end of the program you've convinced more of the men there about how biased and unfair the system is, than the feminazis have managed to convince that they are monsters ruled by their dicks?
Maybe we should start putting together little teams of MRA's to infiltrate such courses to dispel som eof the myths?
Hi Assault
I'm not sure if this is helpful to you, but I have often pointed out on my site that it is pointless - and hopeless - trying to convince people that domestic violence towards men is just as prevalent as towards women.
e.g. see ...
http://www.angryharry.com/esphonelines.htm
http://www.angryharry.com/esWouldYouSignThisContract.htm
Anyway.
About three months ago I found myself in the position of having to counter the claims of a college lecturer who was rambling on about domestic violence in the typical feminazi fashion, and instead of countering the statistics (which I never bother to do any more) I started out by explaining to her that domestic violence towards women was going to get much worse and that the rise in men's activism was shortly going to set back the 'position' of women by 1000 years if women were not careful because men were not going to allow themselves to be demonised any longer and that there was a growing backlash on the way.
As such, the conversation was **immediately** steered towards the growing men's movement's response to domestic violence issues and, thence, on to other issues concerning the 'undermining' of western men and their countries - and, how, as a consequence, western women were heading for a fall whichever way the cookie crumbled.
One further result of this tactic was that others who were listening to the conversation were alerted to the growing men's movement and, needless to say, I managed to mention angryharry as a source that they might wish to consult!
Harry
Session #2
It started off with more feminist propoganda, and I couldn't bite my tongue anymore, so I began debating with the instructors again.
I argued the "Rule of thumb" myth.
I argued that women have been shown to be more prone to domestic violence than men. The instructors laughed at me and said "I see 95% of the cases being perpetrated by men in the courts! How can you say that?"
I pointed out the social pressures on men regarding dv and the stigma, but they were dismmissive. I then told them about the case studies I have proving my point, and they snickered and asked me to bring them in next time. The funny thing was; Queens University just released a study two weeks ago in our local paper stating that they found women to be more violent than men! Some of the guys informed the instructors about this article that was front page news, and guess what?
They change the subject.
They went on and on about emotional abuse and when I pointed out that my wife displayed all of their "abusive" behaviours except violence, while I did not, the instructor then said "But were you really intimidated and frightened by her?" To which I replied "Not physically, but I've learned that my self esteem was destroyed and I had no idea who I was"
They changed subjects again.
They then asked why at least 90% of crime was comiited by men, and I countered that I had studied this phenomenon in college criminology. It boils down to male chivalry and judges and prosecutors handing lenient or no sentences out at all to women.
The instructors wouldn't answer my rebuttals directly, but when cornered, they would change the subject and try to confuse me and then other men. An example is when I pointed out the chivalry aspect of the criminal justice system, the male instructor said "Doesn't that prove male priveledge? Doesn't that prove that men are more powerful and thus take on the job of protecting women?"
It went on and on ad naseum. :roll:
On a side note, many of the men were very happy with my points and were in agreement. The only problem I have is that some of the REAL ABUSERS, were latching onto my arguments to excuse thier behaviour. I had to make a point and say that I in NO WAY condone physical abuse.
I also pointed out that domestic violence against men in the media in considered funny and entertaining. The male instructor conceded that point, finally.
I then asked that whole group of men "Who here has been kicked in the groin by a female sometime in thier life?" The whole group nodded in agreement, and the female instructor was squirming in her seat.
I said "Do you realize there is a disease called Perone's disease which is a curvature of the penis from blunt force trauma? In other words, so many men have been physically attacked in thier groin that it has a disease named after it!! But wait, I thought on men could be violent? No answer.
I told the instructor I was angry and upset with the pro-feminist bent of this program. I was sick and tired of hearing these myths and shaming tactics that have no place in this program other than to demean men.
There was general agreement from the men, and one man said "Yeah, it's like some sort of propganda!" 8) :lol:
Awesome!!!! Way to go~!
I don't usually cheerlead, but...
...give that man the Platinum Balls Award.
Nice job, Assault!
How long do you have left?
Any idea whats next weeks lesson? (aka dig up some stats first....:))
:daman:
I hope you continue to make the counselor's lives miserable.
I hope they wake up in the middle of the night in cold sweats dreading another session with you.
Keep after 'em.
Thanks guys, I have 14 more glorious weeks of this garbage. They've cancelled next weeks session because of Christmas, so it will be a couple of weeks before I have anything more.
I saw my probation officer today, and she asked what I thought of the program, so I told her the truth. The only thing she said was "Even the male instructor is putting out this anti-male stuff?"
When I replied "Yes.", she sort of shrugged and continued on. :?
I also told her that another thing I hate about this program is thier big push on denial. If I don't admit I beat my wife daily or abused her in some crazed mental torture, I am in denial. You can't tell the truth because they don't care about helping these men, they just want to push thier agenda.
I also told her I don't belong in this program because I am not like most of the other men. I didn't beat my wife up all the time or intimidate her. There was on open hand slap after 17 years of MY sacrifice and hardwork was being discarded like it was nothing.
I told her that it happened out of anger and betrayal, since this was my ex-wives second time I'd caught her with another man, and she was throwing it in my face at the time by saying things such as "Yea, I was out with Chris and I sucked him off all night long!" etc, etc, etc. She then topped that off with, "I'm taking the kids and you're going to be left with nothing", so I snapped and gave her ONE slap across the face.
Even the female police officer who came to the house couldn't find any marks, and couldn't talk to my drunk and beligerent ex-wife. I remember her coming outside and saying to her male partner "She's jabbering on about something and I'm sick of listening to her. I don't see any marks or anything, and she's drunk. "
I left that night and the next day went and researched dv at the library on my own, and then made an appointment with a psychiatrist, because I felt so badly about what I'd done. By the time I was done with him, the doctor was convinced I would never do that again, and even called my ex-wife in to allay any fears about that she might have.
I told my probation officer to contrast that with the guy who's saying there was blood all over the walls in his house, or the guy who longs for the days when people minded thier own business about family affairs. These guys are habitual abusers, and it disgusts me to be there with them.
http://news.google.co.uk/nwshp?gl=uk&ned=uk&ie=UTF-8&hl=en&ncl=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/4113961.stm
http://news.google.co.uk/nwshp?gl=uk&ned=uk&ie=UTF-8&hl=en&ncl=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/4113961.stm
What's your point?
More propoganda.
Don't worry mate I got 30 days in prison for what you did and she was meant to be my counsellor.
More propoganda.
Don't worry mate I got 30 days in prison for what you did and she was meant to be my counsellor.
Damn......sorry about that. :shock:
Don't worry mate I got 30 days in prison for what you did and she was meant to be my counsellor.
I got ninety days for beating the crap out af a guy who was beating his girlfriend. She said I hit her when she was on my back trying to stop me from hurting her lover (or whatever the fuck he was).
Weird system of justice we got here, Eh?
Hang in there Assault.
It sounds like you're in a real catch 22. Anything you say in your defence will be used to call you an abuser in denial. If you roll over like a good dog and agree with everything they are pushing you are an abuser but no longer in denial. No win.
If I were in your situation I would probably not fight them so much for fear of not completing the program. What are the consequences for you if they fail you? Do you have to keep repeating the program or will they inflict a different punishment on you?
Hang in there Assault.
It sounds like you're in a real catch 22. Anything you say in your defence will be used to call you an abuser in denial. If you roll over like a good dog and agree with everything they are pushing you are an abuser but no longer in denial. No win.
If I were in your situation I would probably not fight them so much for fear of not completing the program. What are the consequences for you if they fail you? Do you have to keep repeating the program or will they inflict a different punishment on you?
They keep hammering us with the fact that if we don't complete the program, we can be revoked and sent to jail.
I suspect if I fail, they will just have me repeat it. :roll:
I can't relate to your situation but I know this. *Never* admit to anything that you didn't do to make things convenient. This is the same tactic they use with so-called child abusers. "Admit it or you will never see your children again." Once they capitulate the admission is used to terminate parental rights.
Assault - I wouldn't have done anything different than you did in that situation. I know me. My thoughts would have become murderous.
Simply point out to the "instructor" that you could have done what Clara Harris did, but instead exercised considerable restraint.
Assault,
If the gestapo DV counselors running your "treament" program follow the typical script, you will soon be "invited" to a private conference with them.
You will be accused of "not being open to the curriculum," "fomenting male collusion," and other crimes against DV political correctness.
I would advise that you decline any such conversation unless you have a tape recorder or a lawyer in attendance.
Make no mistake, the DV counselors see you as a subversive element who can sabotage the entire male-bashing "shame-and-blame" ordeal they have planned for their court-mandated male guests.
Just like the Duluth Wheel proposes, it's all about "power and control." The worst abusers are now in control of DV "treatment" programs.
The male counselors are especially psychotic... watch out for them!
If you want to really create a panic, at the next group session ask this question -- "Does any man here know how he's being evaluated by our therapists, what we need to do to successfully complete this program, and have you received any written feedback about your progress-to-date?"
Also, you should identify the provincial licensing authority that has oversight of licensed professional counselors, such as those profiting by abusing men in this DV "treatment" charade.
In the U.S., every state has a Bureau of Professional Regulation, and they are required by law to investigate complaints of "client abuse" by counselors and mental health professionals. This public service is free.
You can lodge a complaint against the perpetrators of abuse who are running this Duluth Model Gulag.
Be advised that at any time you can be "terminated" from the program and that none of the sessions you have completed will count for squat. The counselors can also seek to revoke your probation, and seek a court order to jail you. They can also increase the length of your time in the Twilight Zone, mandating "special" treatment for you. They can order you to get psychological testing.... the list is extensive.
If you intend to continue your campaign of honorable dissent and resistance, you would do well to talk to your lawyer now, because retribution is surely in your future.
You have entered the Kingdom of the Blind, where the sighted man gets his eyes gouged out.
I respect your "stones," and advise based on direct experience of a similar trip through the DV world of the bizarre.
Assault,
If the gestapo DV counselors running your "treament" program follow the typical script, you will soon be "invited" to a private conference with them.
You will be accused of "not being open to the curriculum," "fomenting male collusion," and other crimes against DV political correctness.
I would advise that you decline any such conversation unless you have a tape recorder or a lawyer in attendance.
Absolutly, accept, make an appointment, and bring a lawer! Have your lawer make a note for the record if the invitation to private conferance is declined or refused AFTER legal intervention becomes obvious.
EDIT: Even better, bring your PO too!
Thanks for the tips and insights guys, I would never have thought of having my lawyer or probation officer come to the inevitable "meeting" which will probably be in the near future.
8)
Here's just a little more ammunition, Assault, for your kamakazi mission.
The whole DV "counseling" field is a huge legal grey zone. It's actually called "psycho-dynamic education," because the licensed professional counselor feminazi predators who profit from this scam industry are very aware that they can be prosecuted for violating laws and regulations governing "mental health" services.
Technically, a DV program for batterers is considered "mental health" assistance.
That means the licensed counselors are subject to laws, professional ethics, and state/provincial regulations about how they treat a "client."
Typically, counselors violate all of these if they are abusive, unethical, cause harm, or are negligent in their counseling practices.
I scared the shit out of the DV fascists running the Gulag I enjoyed for six months, by filing a formal complaint that went all the way to review for prosecution, though I failed to get their licenses revoked.
When I placed an ad in the newspaper saying their counseling service was going out of business, things got rather interesting! :evil:
Watch your back man!
One of the problems is that the DV workers are often not licensed and are often women who have histories of having been battered. This is a worst case scenario. The "Counselors" are often in much greater need of help than those being counseled. Great idea Roy to lodge complaints. Also important what you have said about the danger to Assault to take this sort of approach. They will take revenge whenever they can and I am surprised that they have yet to label Assault a "troublemaker" and "resistent." Keep an eye on them trying to turn the others against you if they can. Sounds like you may have thwarted that tactic. Don't be fooled, these people see you as a big problem and will use whatever they can to disable you.
Use caution.
I must say I am truly enjoying your reports. It might be interesting to take a hard copy of the Fiebert Bibliograhy with you next time. I bet that would be a popular little piece of paper. All of those abstracts of peer reviewed research that shows that women are violent. Oh they would love that one.
Dr. E.,
Thanks for pointing out that DV "counselors" need not be professionally licensed.
In my state, anybody can take approx. 50 hours of feminist DV workshop instruction, do an eight week "internship" in a feminist DV program, and then become "certified" to lead a DV treatment program.
Still, many licensed professional counselors doing mental health and family therapy have cashed in on the reliable income from the DV abuse industry and VAWA grants.
By my math, this is one of the best routes to financial independence available today, as the average per 1-2 hour DV counseling group session with 12 -30 men costs about $60 per individual.
Four sessions a week at that rate will net you nearly six-figures a year.
And you don't even need a sales and recruitment team, because the blackrobes in the Family Courts are referring a steady stream of new client/victims.
As Peter Tosh ( of Bob Marley and the Wailers fame) said --- beware the shitstem!
If the gestapo DV counselors running your "treament" program follow the typical script, you will soon be "invited" to a private conference with them.
You will be accused of "not being open to the curriculum," "fomenting male collusion," and other crimes against DV political correctness.
This terminology is practically identical to the KGB's political profiling used to incarcerate millions during the Soviet era;
"fomenting male collusion"= counter-revolutionary
"not being open to the curriculum," collectivist vs individualist or politically incorrect.
Im astonished that there isnt a greater backlash against this kind of subversion. Sobering how history recapitulates.
One of the problems is that the DV workers are often not licensed and are often women who have histories of having been battered. This is a worst case scenario. The "Counselors" are often in much greater need of help than those being counseled. .
It's funny you should mention that. I was talking to my girlfriend (who incidently, was a REAL victim of dv) about this the other night. She's a behavioural therapist and when I mentioned I got the feeling the female "counsellor" was a victim of dv, my girlfriend suggested that this was a huge conflict of interest, and the counsellor probably has her own issues she needs to deal with.
The scenario I envision with this counsellor is that she was a victim, and is now going to show us men, by hammering feminist dogma down our throats. I wonder if that could be grounds for a complaint should the need arise?
You have 14 more weeks of opportunities to wake people up.
I suggest that you invite everyone in your class to go out for a beer with you so you can fill them in on so much more.
Also invite them here.
Anyways, if you are concerned about some of the other men being real abusers you can refer them to Erin Pizzey's work. She is a healer and she may help those men overcome their proneness to violence and the fact that they are attracted to women who are prone to violence either by being abusive or being abused.
Not all is lost with this men, or women for that matter.
Learning how to love was what Erin Pizzey was all about. A good woman and one that should be celebrated by other women.
I also meant to say good for you. This is exactly what I am talking about. Speak to whoever will listen.
I am in advertising and I hear day in and day out that the best form of advertising is by word of mouth. Remember this.
Also try and be positive. Correction does much, Encouragement does more. This way you won't get depressed. I say this to all, not just you because many activists become burnouts with all the negativity in the movement, especially with people who wont listen like your "brainwashers" er uhm councilors.
Well, I'm not sure what to say about tonights program. There wasn't a single bit of feminist propoganda coming from the instructors! They simply stuck with the program and introduced thier theories. No male bashing!! 8)
I handed the instructor a 21 page report of 156 clinical studies which stated that women were just as , if not more, prone to domestic violence than men. I said "Remember 2 weeks ago when you said you had never seen 1 case study that stated women were more violent than men? Well, here are 156 of them, and I didn't even include the recent ones from Queens University."
He said "Oh, thank you" and then I left. I'll see if he says anything about them next week.
Assault,
Fantastic!
Do NOT let your guard down.
Do NOT assume you have been "let off the hook."
Perhaps you should attend the next session and see if any response to your information given to the counselors happens.
Take a "stealth" strategy for a couple weeks and observe.
You are the program's "trojan horse...." they (the counselors) are trying to figure out how to "handle" your little private conspiracy.
Beware man!
Great job Assault. Roy is right though, keep your guard up.
These people are trained to slice and dice folks like you who call attention to the hypocrisy of their ways. I have read manuals for therapists who train the group leaders and they are very specific about this. In their eyes you are a distraction from the reality of your abusive nature and are simply trying to avoid taking responsibility for being the insensitive and brutally aggressive male that you are. It is odd that they are actually listening to you and this definitely goes against the Duluth model books. These training manuals take it a step farther and literally teach the group leaders to not allow any of the men to focus on their pain and suffering. It is a distraction! I am not making this up! Yet with women who are violent the entire focus is on her previous abuse and how it has shaped her to be violent. They try to get the ladies talking about it!
Have you ever seen such bigotry? It's mind boggling.
Great job Assault. Roy is right though, keep your guard up.
These people are trained to slice and dice folks like you who call attention to the hypocrisy of their ways. I have read manuals for therapists who train the group leaders and they are very specific about this. In their eyes you are a distraction from the reality of your abusive nature and are simply trying to avoid taking responsibility for being the insensitive and brutally aggressive male that you are. It is odd that they are actually listening to you and this definitely goes against the Duluth model books. These training manuals take it a step farther and literally teach the group leaders to not allow any of the men to focus on their pain and suffering. It is a distraction! I am not making this up! Yet with women who are violent the entire focus is on her previous abuse and how it has shaped her to be violent. They try to get the ladies talking about it!
Have you ever seen such bigotry? It's mind boggling.
I'd be interested in reading some of that stuff. Any titles? The same issues come up in the court ordered variety of drug/alcohol rehabilitation programs and other institutional theory.
Keep us informed man. I aint posting much on this thread but I'm readin' it all.
Steven
.......my girlfriend (who incidently, was a REAL victim of dv)
At the risk of "being the asshole", How do you know this?
You saw it transpire.
You were the cause.
You saw it happen.
She told you.
Her mom told you.
"He" told you.
Signed
Just Curious.
.......my girlfriend (who incidently, was a REAL victim of dv)
At the risk of "being the asshole", How do you know this?
You saw it transpire.
You were the cause.
You saw it happen.
She told you.
Her mom told you.
"He" told you.
Signed
Just Curious.
That's actually a good question, and one I've asked myself. Was she in FACT a victim of dv or did she use dv as a silver bullet during her divorce?
I was told by her, and unfortunately, I don't have any other sources available right now. I don't think I should ask her family outright, but I may in time.
What makes me believe her are a few things;
1) There are women/men who really are abused. So, I tend to give people the benefit of the doubt.
2) When she left her ex-husband after 6 months of marriage, she didn't chase him for child support or any other financial support. She simply wanted to get away from him.
3) Her "story" rings true to me. She doesn't describe it as some horrible ordeal, but as something she had to put up with. And her little details seem convincing, such as, she could tell by the way he was walking toward the front door whether or not he was going to beat her.
4) She describes other people (neighbours, his boss, friends) becoming involved in getting her out. I never believe that dv happens in a vacuum and that NOBODY knows what's going on.
5) Her attitude towards women. We have discussed issues brought up on this site many times, and she has said things such as "I can tell a real dv from a fake anyday. These women at the bar who are screaming and taunting thier men, while saying things like "C'mon HIT ME!", have never really been hit by a man. I can tell you that you do NOT say to the 200lb man who punches you in the face "hit me". Because you know he will do it in a second and it will be full force"
She becomes quite vocal and angry when she hears women talk about dv, and using it as a tool to falsely accuse men.
But ultimately, I don't know 100% if she's a dv victim, it's just the sense I get. I don't think you can ever really know unless you do some sort of investigation.
Good question, and I understand the concern. 8)
Cap'n - Sorry I missed your post. The name of the book that I was quoting is
Education Groups for Men who Batter: The Duluth Model (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0826179908/qid=1104936964/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/102-0727276-0155321?v=glance&s=books) by Ellen Pence and Michael Paymar. It is a tough read. They label violence as masculine, talk about male privilege and of course frame DV as a power and control issue that transcends other little details like drug use, alcohol use, borderline personality disorder etc. If it wasn't so dangerous it would be funny!
Great job Assault. Roy is right though, keep your guard up.
These people are trained to slice and dice folks like you who call attention to the hypocrisy of their ways. I have read manuals for therapists who train the group leaders and they are very specific about this. In their eyes you are a distraction from the reality of your abusive nature and are simply trying to avoid taking responsibility for being the insensitive and brutally aggressive male that you are. It is odd that they are actually listening to you and this definitely goes against the Duluth model books. These training manuals take it a step farther and literally teach the group leaders to not allow any of the men to focus on their pain and suffering. It is a distraction! I am not making this up! Yet with women who are violent the entire focus is on her previous abuse and how it has shaped her to be violent. They try to get the ladies talking about it!
Have you ever seen such bigotry? It's mind boggling.
I'd be interested in reading some of that stuff. Any titles? The same issues come up in the court ordered variety of drug/alcohol rehabilitation programs and other institutional theory.
Hey Doc,
Why don't you write an Amazon review of the book. You know something to counterbalance the five star review now on the site.
Good idea Q. Will do.
E
Assault,
I think your thought out and considered opinion are well done.
You DON'T know, but you have balanced the facts, her account, and your own experience.
This is a logical approach.
Steven
Thanks for the response Assault.
I can see that you are indeed an intelligent dood, and even though you probably dont need it, I was just "watchin yer back" by questioning that assurance.
Assault, I am a bit confused. Are you on this program due to what happened with the girlfriend you with now who you say has been involved in DV before?
Apologies if I missed something.
Assault, I am a bit confused. Are you on this program due to what happened with the girlfriend you with now who you say has been involved in DV before?
Apologies if I missed something.
No this was because of a situation with his cheating ex-wife.
I was just "watchin yer back" by questioning that assurance.
I know, and I appreciate it. 8)
Capt. DMO asked -- I'd be interested in reading some of that stuff. Any titles? The same issues come up in the court ordered variety of drug/alcohol rehabilitation programs and other institutional theory.
Dr. E. beat me to the punch! (DV pun intended...)
The Pence and Paymar book is THE BIBLE of feminist Duluth-model programs for (is there any other kind?) MALE "batterers."
It even includes a complete week-by-week outline for the brainwashing indoctrination "treatment" that court-referred men will be subjected to. Scripture and verse. (Including how to detect and defeat "male collusion and bonding..." among the captives! No kidding!)
The subtext of the so-called psycho-dynamic educational program is thoroughly Marxist-feminism a la vintage 1970's women's lib.... recall this is the era that the Duluth MN. model appeared.
It has not advanced since then, and is stuck in rad-fem demensia, by intent and design.
Virtually any DV "treatment" program that a man might be so unfortunate to attend will be based on a single premise --- (paraphrasing Pence & Paymar) "men are socialized in a Patriarchal society to believe in their inalienable right to exert power and control over women.... and their natural (indeed inevitable) tendency to batter their female partners is a consequence of this socialization..."
Or, more simply put -- Men BAD... Women VICTIMS.
While I agree with Dr. E. that's it's a painful read, I would argue that's it perhaps an essential one for any man who wants to understand what the men's movement is up against.
You cannot fully appreciate the extent to which men have been demonized until you enjoyed this kind of screed (direct quote from the DV BIBLE) --
Throughout this curriculum we use male pronouns to refer to batterers and female pronouns to refer to those who are battered. Dealing with gay and lesbian battering is beyond the scope of this book. We use gender-specific terms not only because the curriculum is for men who batter, but because battering is not a gender-neutral issue.
In intimate heterosexual relationships where violence is occurring, the primary aggressors are typically men, and the victims are women. Every source of data, from police reports to hospital emergency rooms, from counseling centers to divorce courts, points to an enormous gender disparity in who is initating the violence, who is more physically harmed, and who is seeking safety from the violence.
And now, here's just a little taste of the feminist-Pavlovian formula they have in mind to "socially reconstruct" masculinity --
At the core of this curriculum is the attempt to structure a process by which each man can examine his actions in light of his concept of himself as a man. That examination demands a reflective process that distinguishes between what is in his nature and what is socially constructed. The things that are socially constructed can be changed. Each belief he holds can be traced back to his experiences in his family of origin, his neighborhood, his peer group in school, his military service, his fraternities or other male groups, and to his exposure to the media and its countless images of what it means to be a man. These experiences shape his response to a basic question asked men in the groups over and over again: "Why do you want a woman in your life?"
At last, a good question.
Throughout this curriculum we use male pronouns to refer to batterers and female pronouns to refer to those who are battered. Dealing with gay and lesbian battering is beyond the scope of this book.
Ever notice that ever ready set of Buzz Words:
is beyond the scope of this book
Or beyond the "scope" of the study, or paper, or thesis, or [whatever]?
They NEVER seem to "get around" to looking at these other groups.
And as Roy posted (great post w/lots of detail - total tip o' the hat on the work!) this has been around since the **70's**. To emphasize that, and to underscore the passage of time, some of US were not around in the 70's!! (Ok, I was - shaddp!)
So, ****30**** years later these Duluth "experts" have NEVER revisited their work or expanded the scope of their studies.
Not once.
(just helping others to make good rebuttal posts for later)
Oh, and this applies to the "1 in 4 rape" myth - almost 20 years
And to the often revisited but only with "new math" : $.79 on the dollar myth.
Keep it in mind: whenever you hear "beyond the scope" in gender studies it has a preset conclusion.
Steven
Roy - You read that thing? More power to ya. It's a tough read but you are right to point out that it is extremely instructive of the essence of the feminist manner of thinking.
Here's a long post I wrote after reading the book that has some quotes from the book:
The Duluth model was created in Duluth Minnesota as a result of a group of activists gathering after a particularly gruesome murder of a woman by her husband. They put their heads together and came up with a group of ideas about how to keep that sort of incident from ever happening again. They developed a model that saw the world of violence in a socio-political context where, as the initial tragedy had shown, men wielded power over women in a violent fashion. Since that time the Duluth Model has become the theoretical framework of choice in the domestic violence industry. In some situations I am sure it is a very good fit, however, in many I am sure it is not. As we shall see the Duluth Model has no connection to any reputable theory of behavioral change and exhibits a major failing in its inability to differentiate any potential clients who might be better served by a different type of treatment. It is a truly "One size fits all" approach to the complex world of domestic violence. It's primary focus (resulting from it's original precipitating incident) is on the power and control of men over women. Recent research (http://standyourground.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=138)[/b] however has proven that domestic violence is not a male-only endeavor. Women have been shown to initiate violence in relationships at a rate higher than that of males and research also indicates that women incur about 62% of the domestic violence injuries while men incur 38%. These studies have confirmed that domestic violence is surely not a simple male on female problem. They have shown that 25% of domestic violence is initiated without provocation by women, 25% by men, and 50% simply a brawl between the two parties. With numbers like these it is patently clear that a model that is based solely on a man's violence towards women sees only half the problem and leaves its proponents with a spurious picture of the real world of domestic violence. The Duluth model is profoundly outdated, inappropriate and inadequate to help victims of domestic violence.
Let's have a quick look at the assumptions that underlie the rhetoric of the Duluth Model.
The Duluth model makes some serious assumptions about men. The first assumption is that all men are trained by our culture to dominate women. Here's a quote from Education Groups for Men Who Batter: The Duluth Model by Pence and Paymar: "Men in particular are taught these tactics in both their families of origin and through their experiences in a culture that teaches men to dominate" This quote is not directed at some men, it is directed at all men. It reveals the Duluth's profound bias against men. It literally assumes that all men are taught both in their families and in their culture to be dominant towards women. While this is undoubtedly true in the original murder that brought forth the Duluth model and in some instances of domestic violence today it is surely not true of all men. It also leaves no explanation or understanding for instances when women are the perpetrators. I think that most men would tell you that they were not taught to dominate women in their families of origin. They would likely tell you that they were taught just the opposite: not to batter women but to respect, care for, and protect them. My estimation is that most men were taught one of the worst things you can do is to hit a girl. Most men have probably never hit a girl or a woman though most men have probably been hit more than once by a woman. I would bet that this is the experience of millions of men in this culture but the Duluth Model frames all men as dominators and abusers in waiting.
This model believes that men have set things up from the beginning to be in their favor. That men across the board have stacked the deck to put themselves on top and women on the bottom. Here is a quote: "The historic oppression and continued subjugation of women in most cultures occurs because men have defined almost every facet of their societies, thereby perpetuating a sexist belief system and institutionalizing male privilege." This model believes that men have intentionally created a system that favors themselves and is intentionally hurtful to women. They go on to assume that domestic violence is a logical extension of this by having men use violence to enforce this advantage. This may be true for a handful of men but it is certainly not true of all men. The implication is that all men are consciously seeking advantage over the women in their lives. I question the veracity of this and also would like to point out that a presumption such as this can only be antagonistic towards the very group that they seek to help.
The next assumption is that battering of women by men is commonplace. This book claims that 50% of men batter their wives at some time in their marriage. In a nutshell that means that if you are a male either you or your next door neighbor are wife beaters. Is it you or your next door neighbor? They go on to say that one out of four men use some type of physical violence against their spouse during the course of a given year. These are obvious exaggerations and distortions of the truth. Domestic violence is bad enough without having to exaggerate the statistics. A common ploy to inflate statistics is to water down the definition of abuse to such extremes that the statistic simply doesn't mean a thing. There is a factoid that is popular on the internet and in domestic violence literature that states that every 15 seconds a woman is battered. What you are not told is that using these same overblown definitions of abuse that a man would be battered every 14 seconds! The Duluth model exposes its inherent sexism and once again gives us only one side of things. Statistics like this are not useful in helping people understand the truth of domestic violence. There is no reason to exaggerate something so horrid, but that is what the Duluth model proponents do.
It is disturbing to me that the Duluth model discourages therapy and makes the assumption that a man's violence is not related to drugs, psychopathology, previous abuse, impulse control, communications, alcoholism, or other difficulties. The Duluth Model book states: "These factors are contributors or modifiers of a mans' behavior but they do not cause (emphasis mine) his violence." The cause according to them is the socio-political elements inherent in a man's socially constructed "dominance." This is what they see as the enemy and what needs to be eliminated. They see psychopathology, drugs, previous childhood abuse, and other problems as distractions and urge their group leaders to not allow the participants in their programs to focus on any of these "distractions". While they know that the majority of these men have been abused as children they urge the group leaders "To keep the group focused on the issues of violence, abuse, control, and change." This might be likened to a patient coming to the emergency room with profuse bleeding, a broken leg, and a bloody lip and receiving treatment for only the profuse bleeding and having all other symptoms ignored as "distractions." Present day psychotherapy is in agreement over very few things, but one is that when you treat a person with difficulties you must treat the whole person, not just one part. Duluth intentionally treats only one part.
The Duluth model seems to take a very archaic approach to healing: force the client to order his reality in the way you want and hope that change may occur. The energy is put into keeping the client "on topic", that is, the topic of their own dominating behaviors. Then there seems to be a magical jump from this into the "hoped for" behavior change. It's as if the model is saying "If we can keep this man focused on his dominant behaviors sooner or later he will change." There doesn't seem to be any explanation for this hoped for transformation nor any way to measure the outcome of the expected change. The Duluth model seems to be more a way of thinking into which the clients must become indoctrinated rather than a theoretical healing framework. The clients are forced to puppet back in the groups the words that harmonize with the group leaders ideas. If they can do this it seems to be taken as a confirmation that change is taking place. This of course is a dangerous assumption.
We have noted that the Duluth model fails to see the man as a whole, it assumes that the status quo of masculine behavior is to intentionally keep his woman down, and assumes that he is trained by his family and his culture to be dominant and violent. These are all indicators of a profound anti-male bias in this model The underlying and unspoken message is clear: Men bad, women good. Men perpetrators, women victims. How can we expect a system to help people through a crisis if it carries such judgement and bias? The vilification of one gender and the passive glorification of the other is blatantly sexist. I know of no other psychological model that pre-judges its potential clients prior to treatment. That's preposterous. Perhaps this is a result of the Duluth model being originally linked to a heinous crime and therefore is naturally linked more to punishment than to healing. It reads more like an indictment than a path toward healing. Sexist theories have no place in government funded programs.
It seems clear to me that this model is inadequate and needs to be replaced. It maintains a profound and consistent bias against men, lacks a connection with any accepted form of behavioral change, leaves no explanation or treatment for female violence, and lacks any capacity to adjust treatment based on individual difference. It seems to be more a biased and sexist way of thinking that is masquerading as a change agent. The time has come to find more functional and balanced alternatives.
Doc E,
I hope this isn't the review for Amazon; Amazon's policy is that the review can't be longer than the book. :wink: Think pithy and incisive rather than expansive and comprehensivem, a haiku rather than an essay.
I think the review has to be under 200 (300? 400? 500?) words in length. But after your review, there's no reason why a couple of us might not chime in with points you couldn't cover (in the guise of reviews).
Dr. E.,
Not only did I read it ("Education Groups for Men Who Batter: The Duluth Model, Ellen Pence & Michael Paymar), but I re-read it with a yellow highlighter, and then read it again with a RED pen to make all my own critical notes in the margins!
Yes, I'm a bit obsessive when it comes to understanding the enemy's delusional thinking.
As you, and many others who post on SYG understand, the demonization of men that is at the center of the Domestic Violence Industry is perhaps the last "running-on-empty" fuel that Feminism Inc. has left.
They need all the lies they can muster to get VAWA reauthorized, to suck a few more billions of taxpayer dollars to continue their hate movement.
(Think last month's Washington Post series on the myth of pregnant female homicide was a coincidence?)
Unless MRA's become more aware of how the ideology of the domestic violence charade plays out in the halls of Congress where the money is handed out, we will be re-reading Pence & Paymar when we are shuttled off to the feminist-managed euthanasia parlors in every town.
Recall "Soylent Green" the movie?
Arthur G. Robinson's final role! As he was injected with a lethal dose of LSD, his character enjoyed a widescreen spectacle of all the world's delights.... seashores, landscapes, sunsets...
I suspect that the more liberal iFeminists would include some soft-core porn in the final montage....
Quasimodo - I think the recommendatoin is that the reviews be less than 300 words but they can be much longer. I wasn't planning on writing a michener...maybe I will copy and paste the review in here before I post it so we can all edit it a bit. Might be interesting.
Roy - Looks like we share a desire to understand our enemy. I have been trying to find a book lately...I heard a while back either here or on MANN someone talking about a feminist writer who was admitting that the fems had intentionally ignored male victims and female violence in the early days of DV in order to promote their agenda. Do you know which book that was from?? I'd love to have a quote. Anyone know?
Doc E, my bad.
The books I usually check out have shorter reviews. You can certainly get happy on the reviews. Especially when reviewing fiction like the Duluth Model.
I haven't read the book but it sounds like the sort of thing that Erin Pizzey in her publication "Prone to Violence".
http://www.bennett.com/ptv/index.shtml
Is this the actual publication you are refering to?
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0826179908/qid=1105111939/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/002-4291093-7689606?v=glance&s=books&n=507846
Looks like there's only one review.
What's odd here is that I actually saw a woman on the old MS boards (very feminist) who said that she was interning in a woman's shelter - AND SHE WAS AFRAID OF MANY OF THE WOMEN THERE.
That's pretty much Erin Pizzey's statement. There's something going on when women that are represented as "pure victims" are aggressive as hell. And feminists want to say that the eternally-suffering woman victim only, finally responds in "self-defense". I just don't believe it. Some women ARE aggressive as hell. And that says something that a whole lot of them are concentrated in a women's shelter.
Dr. E.,
I'm fairly sure that Erin Pizzey's "Prone to Violence" is the source you're looking for --- she described a kind of "addicted-to-battery" syndrome in women, and criticized the early women's shelters (in the U.K.) for encouraging a very small population of "battered" women to keep coming back to the shelters.... so they could inflate their "victim" statistics and seek greater government financial support.
Interestingly, Ellen Pence has co-authored a recent book that supposedly reflects on and "advances" the Duluth Model DV ---
Coordinating Community Responses to Domestic Violence : Lessons from Duluth and Beyond (SAGE Series on Violence against Women) by Melanie F. Shepard (Editor), Ellen L. Pence (Editor)
This book provides a comprehensive guide to the development of a coordinated community response to domestic violence based on the internationally known "Duluth Model." Drawing from the experiences of practitioners, scholars, and researchers in the field, this book provides rich insights into the complexities and challenges of addressing domestic violence. Eight key components of a successful community intervention project are addressed in separate chapters:
- Developing policies and protocols
- Enhancing networking among service providers
- Building monitoring and tracking systems
- Developing a supportive infrastructure for victims
- Providing sanctions and rehabilitation opportunities
- Addressing the needs of children
- Evaluating the effectiveness of community response
Other chapters discuss types of violence that have been most difficult to address in providing a community response, the use of violence by women, and marital rape. Replication and adaptation in different countries (England, Australia, and New Zealand) are the focus of two chapters that lend an international perspective. This book provides the answers about what is indeed the "Duluth Model." (Amazon.com book description.)
Since this tome is a $45 buy, and since the table of contents looks like a recipe for further advancing the Duluth GULAG, I've not yet donated my funds to actually read it.
If you look it up on Amazon.com and get into the "look inside this book" links (very limited), you can read a few pages of the introduction.
I suppose the idea that they're addressing female violence is shocking enough... though it's probably a menu of feminist justifications and deceits.
Anybody have an e-mail address for Ms. Pence?
Roy, thanks for the title and the tip that amazon offers excerpts. Anytime they offer excerpts you can search the book for phrases like "female violence" and it will take you to the pages that mention that phrase. In order to read that page and the two before and after you need to have an amazon account with a credit card active. Once you have that you can read as much as you want.
Our ms pence offers us a hefty chunk of the book as she explains away women's violence. Now let's see, first she says that historically women have been oppressed and men have been encouraged by the culture to be violent so that means that you shouldn't be so hard on these violent women! Next she says that a woman's behavior may be violence but it is NOT BATTERING! LOL! She basically says that not only are the men not afraid of her but she also is only doing this to stop this terrible man from battering her! Yes folks, it's always his fault. Period. On and on she goes. It's pretty humorous how she can explain away a woman's violence yet be so harsh towards a mans. Oh yeah, she also says that with women we need to take into account alcohol and past abuse. Two major no-nos in their duluth crapola model.
pence book on amazon (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0761911243/ref=sib_rdr_dp/002-5110404-1833633?%5Fencoding=UTF8&no=283155&me=ATVPDKIKX0DER&st=books)
I don't think it was Erin Pizzey that made the quote. It was a rad fem who was profembot in the 70's as things were being turned over to the fems. It may be in "fire with fire."
E
Dr Evil:
Is this what you are looking for?
http://www.dvmen.org/dv-42.htm
From The Personal To The Political by Erin Pizzey
"In 1977 congresswoman Lindy Boggs and Congressman Newton-Steer invited me to a luncheon of honour on Capitol Hill. I realized by now that what I was going to say was going to make me deeply unpopular. Everyone who came to meet me always assumed quite wrongly that I was a 'feminist.' I was nothing of the sort. I have always disbelieved in 'ists' of any sort and the only way I am willing to define myself is as "a lover of God in all his aspects."
By the end of my speech everyone at the table was avoiding me and I faired no better at the Press Club in Washington. The expression on the faces of the hard-bitten women journalists was a source of amusement to me. Many of my speaking engagements were cancelled, especially in New York and Boston. I spent a hilarious night with another member of staff in a communal lesbian household of professors in Anne Arbor but I was very glad indeed to be hosted in another city by a sweet young wife and mother.
I could see then that the feminist movement everywhere had hijacked the whole issue of domestic violence to fulfil their political ambitions and to fill their pockets. By now feminists in America and other countries were redrafting the law. "
Julian! Thanks for that link. That took me to the Brownmiller book which was the source of the quote. It's a quote of Yolanda Bako an early shelter activist on page 272:
At the Brooklyn shelter we saw stuff that was way above our abilities to handle. We took in substance abusing battered women, schizophrenic battered women, battered women who were working as prostitutes, battered women who were hitting their kids. If you'd ask them about that they'd say "How do you expect me to get my kids to behave?" At the shelter I had women who had lifetime carreers of being abused by many people and were also abusing their own children. I remember one woman who had five children, each one with a different abusive spouse and she was pregnant with her sixth. I had to strangle myself not to say anything negative. The way you get funding and church donations is to talk about pure victims. If you talk about the impurity of the victim the sympathy vanishes. At this time I was thinking I could change the world, but the truth is that the shelter was not this collective sisterhood that we had hoped.
I think this is the one though as I remember the other quote specifically mentioned female violence against men. Cloese enough.
I'm fairly certain that at some point Erin Pizzey said something along the lines that when she opened her first shelter back whenever, that a lot of the women she was supporting were just as violent if not more so than the men they were fleeing from.
You are right. Pizzey talks alot about female violence. I was specifically interested in a quote from a feminist who had said that the DV movement had intentionally ignored female violence (and male victims) in order to insure their funding.
The above quote comes close. I do remember the phrase "pure victims."
Thought this was worth a read:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_violence
Anyone can edit this is they feel something needs to be added/deleted etc.
It's been quite a while since we've heard from Assault as to how he's doing in the DV Gulag....
Is he in jail? Has he been gagged? Or, maybe he's leading the weekly seminar with all those evil Perpetrators of Patriarchy?
Check in bro'!
It's been quite a while since we've heard from Assault as to how he's doing in the DV Gulag....
Is he in jail? Has he been gagged? Or, maybe he's leading the weekly seminar with all those evil Perpetrators of Patriarchy?
Check in bro'!
Ha ha!! Sorry, I've just been a little busy since Monday.
The instructors didn't mention anything about the 156 studies I brought in to him. Although, he did make a point to single me out over the evening by "quizzing" me to see if I had completed thier little homework packages.
I think they assume I'm thier idea of a "typical batterer", so when I return thier questions with intelligent and meaningful responses, i think it dissapoints them to some degree.
I've started to play little games with them because I'm bored. One of the assignments was to chart "What changes are you making". in relation to your interpersonal relationships.
last week I made it a point to tell the instructor I thought he did a good job, by not spewing anymore man hating rhetoric and feminist propoganda.
So in my home work, I replied.
"In using postive reinforcement and pro active information sharing with Mike (One of the instructors), I'm hoping to change his negative behaviour toward the men in this group while at the same time respecting his feelings and not undermining his authority.
I felt that my approach gave us both an opportunity for a win-win situation."There wasn't much male bashing again. I'm wondering if they got my message? :?:
"In using postive reinforcement and pro active information sharing with Mike (One of the instructors), I'm hoping to change his negative behaviour toward the men in this group while at the same time respecting his feelings and not undermining his authority.
I felt that my approach gave us both an opportunity for a win-win situation."
NICE fucking answer man! NICE!!!
Proud of you buddy.
Don't let em bait you into any angry responses or play any games on you. Keep you cool
And DO keep reporting to us what happens. We're here for ya.
If it gets heavy you got a whole BBS who will make a project out of you and write them letters and maybe we can write about it in MND if they try fucking you over.
These rats thrive in secrecy. We shine some light on them if they fuck with you and it'll get their attention.
Imagine bringing in an article with their NAMES in it and telling them how you will do their program, but if they play with you that you can get their names published in pro-male publications.
Might just scare the shit out of em.
It's a "nuke" of a card to play and only if it gets hairy or if it seems they are gonna fry you ... but you do have that option.
First off we can write to them .. if that fails .. nuke em
But again .. ONLY if you're about to get seriously screwed.
We're with you.
Steven
Oh, Assault...
Plz don't think I'm "egging you on" or anything.
because I'm not.
It's totally YOUR life and I bet you just want to do the program and get on with your life.
That's my hope too.
My "over zealous" post was just to let you know that you're not alone.
Before you became and MRA you didn't know that. Now you have some of the most well read and active MRAs who will help you.
Between SYG, Men's Activism, and our other contacts you can count on us to put pressure on them IF YOU SAY SO (and NOT before) if things get ugly.
Keep you head high man. You aint on your own!!
Steven
Thanks Steven, I appreciate the support. From you and everyone else. 8)
Assault wisely spoke:
"In using postive reinforcement and pro active information sharing with Mike (One of the instructors), I'm hoping to change his negative behaviour toward the men in this group while at the same time respecting his feelings and not undermining his authority.
I felt that my approach gave us both an opportunity for a win-win situation."
Oh that is great! You have found a way to tell them that they hate men but have done so in a positive manner that can't be criticised!! That's a classic Assault! Great stuff. You are beating the shit out of them at their own game. I bet they can't wait for you to graduate! LOL!!
That is awesome! Good work, man.
'
[email protected]'
Ref: The hidden victims 06/01/05
http://new.edp24.co.uk/search/story.aspx?brand=EDPOnline&category=News&itemid=NOED05%20Jan%202005%2019:52:54:880&tBrand=EDPOnline&tCategory=search&archive=0
Dear Emily
Thank you for writing the article referenced it makes a change to see that someone has had the intelligence to consider the often silent gender in this matter.
I was just wondering though: I am under the impression that the Police obtain most of their training from groups like Women's Aid which I think believe in an ideology of patriarchy.
This appears to mean that any woman committing an act of violence against a man is acceptable because the woman is fighting a perceived enemy.
They also consider same sex violence in a relationship to be different.
I also put a scenario to Women's Aid many moons ago now where I wrote to them about a young boy who was slashed with a carving knife by his Mother. I wanted to know where the now man could get counselling. Part of the response that I got back was that the Father was to blame because he must have abused the Mother in some way and therefore the she must be the true victim. I don't recall the Father ever being mentioned by myself. There was no help available by the way.
Perpetrator programmes run by the probation Service are based on a methodology called the Duluth model. They are designed for men and as far as i know, at no point will they allow a participant to consider past experiences of abuse suffered unless I suspect it was at the hands of a man. Again somewhere in the background will be groups like Women's Aid who I am certain endorse this sort of programme.
To call this a double standard is an understatement and to put it bluntly I feel the Domestic Violence industry because of it's need to be hypocritical might possibly be running some kind of fraud on society.
I thought you might like to read this article http://www.mensnewsdaily.com/archive/m-n/mcelroy/2005/mcelroy011305.htm
And if you do need further research material can I suggest you get in touch with the owner of the site www.angryharry.com
Regards
Julian
I'm going to write a short thank you note to this Emily person while at work. I'll type it up in MS word, E-mail it to my home, and forward it to her when I get home.
We need to encourage journalists like her!
Steven
[edited to add]
Nice find Julian ... thanks for the link/article!!
Assault,
You're the MAN!
Your response to the DV counselors question about "what changes you're making..." (note that this is a thinly veiled invitation to confess your guilt) was brilliant.
Of course you realize that the "therapists" have a method to evaluate the men in group and determine whether they are "successfully" completing the program's requirements. These are usually secret. (Also, they are required to report on your "progress" to your probation officer, and you have the right to obtain copies of these reports.)
What follows is a typical Program Completion Criteria list. Your counselors may be using some variation on this Duluth Model matrix:
Each item is ranked 1,2,3,4 -
1 = poor: rarely or never meets criteria
2 = Needs improvement: meets criteria less than half the time
3 = Acceptable: Meets criteria the majority of the time
4 = Good: Meets criteria almost all the time
#1 - Participant actively participates in group. Attends on time, sober, attentive, makes appropriate eye contact, exhibits respectful manner.
# 2- Demonstrates an understanding of the benefits of an egalitarian relationship. (Indicators - does homework, self-reports, victim contacts.)
#3 - Takes responsibility for his abusive behavior and its consequences. (Indicators - no minimizing, blaming, or excusing; identifies how he contributes to the problem.)
# 4 - Demonstrates knowledge about and understanding of abuse. (Indicators - homework, discussion of concepts, using learned vocabulary; identifies forms of abuse he has used.)
#5 - Uses skills and techniques learned in group, both within group and by self report about conduct outside of group. (Indicators - reveals feelings, fears, struggles, self doubts; no evasions, sarcasm, defensiveness; takes conscious steps to avoid violence; uses time-outs, self-talk, conflict resolution; aware of beliefs, emotions, behaviors that lead to violence; acknowledges his own power and control needs.)
#6 - Completes all program requirements. (Indicators - homework, required number of weeks attendance, pays all fees.)
#7 - Demonstrates use of respectful language regarding his partner and women. (Indicators - use of partner's first name, no sexist language, name-calling, stereotypes.)
#8 - No non-confidential reports of any recent violent behavior or abusive behaviors. (Indicators - self-explanatory.)
#9 - Has followed through on necessary mental health and substance abuse assessments and treatments. (Indicators - reports from service providers.)
NOTE the extremely subjective nature of the criteria in # 5 especially. This provides counselors with lots of leeway for coercion and playing head-games with you. If they ever come at you and suggest that you're not "open" or not "sharing" enough.... this is likely the area they'll use as their psycho-babble weapon of choice.
As others have advised, never lose your composure... because even the demonstration of moderate "anger" can give them grounds to cook your goose!
Looking forward to your next installment.... :wink:
Ha ha, Roy! Those evaluation standards are pretty much exactly the ones I was given!!
I've already pointed out that the requirements are too subjective and littered with touchy/feely speak. The instructors just said that these are the requirements and I'm welcome to ignore them.
Like I've said from the beginning, they are communists. Their lingo is exactly the same shit that happened in Universities all across China in the 40's and Russia. Sure the terms are a little different but it's the same thing meaning for meaning. All they've done is genderized it.
The real reason it continues is because they make so much cash off of it they prefer to believe the lie. IT comes down to money.
I wonder if you are getting some recruits from your course, Assault? Hope so.
Hey Dan!
(Re. your back-to-back posts...) How can they be both communists and profit-minded capitalist feminazis?
Maybe a more accurate label would be gender-fascists, since fascists historically have been anti-communist but have adopted similar methods of coercion and tyranny.
I've observed that the typical Duluth Model DV "counselors" would be right at home in the Red Guard under Mao's "cultural revolution" in China.
Or, equally able to fit into the Soviet Gulag of psychological terrorism that was part of the USSR's apparatus of civil control during the Stalin era.
But our DV Industry has a very sophisticated American spin... no actual torture, no forced labor....
In this land of the once-free, men accused/convicted of "emotional abuse" enjoy six-to-twelve months of mindless, manipulative, misandrist, twisted psycho-babble that seeks above all else "a confession."
The entire curriculum is about forcing men to deny what they know to be true ....
Women have power, women can abuse, women may be violent, women are capable of making choices and taking responsibility...
In the typical DV "batterer's program," there is only one cardinal rule...
Do NOT allow any man to ever speak the actual truth.
Hey Dan!
Hey Roy! :D
(Re. your back-to-back posts...) How can they be both communists and profit-minded capitalist feminazis?
Because the 'tactic' that is being employed is to make people financially dependant on meeting those ends, even if it means their own destruction.
However the main flaw in my post is that I do not very well describe what I think "communism" is. I for one believe that communism is something that is cooked up by monopolists ie world bankers etc...
Maybe a more accurate label would be gender-fascists, since fascists historically have been anti-communist but have adopted similar methods of coercion and tyranny.
Yes, in fact it my indeed be a more accurate label.
Here is the order. First it is Feminism, which turns to Socialism, which sometimes falls into Communism, but always does decend into Fascism.
In my books Fascism is not 'anti-communist' even if Hitler and Mussolinni claimed to fight it. Mussolinni was the editor of his college communist newspaper. He was very well versed in communism. He simply road this trend by belting out feminism first, then socialism, the straight to fascism skipping communism. Hitler did the exact same thing.
If Russia ever was communist it wasn't for long. Russia at one time employed such practicesess as abortion, birth control and clogging up women in government. The birth rate fell so low Russia headed for colapse. In the end they outlawed the very principles that got them the power in the first place ie abortion etc... and single motherhood.
So it is my opinion that feminism is a total charade to colapse the system in order to enforce totalist rule.
China of course as you mentioned earlier had made "wife abuse" a capital offense. Yes, you guys going to jail, or brainwashing seminars probably would have been executed. Most likely after you gave a public confession.
The "Confession" is very key in the process. IT was then there and it is here now. Look for it to excelerate in future. Not only is it important among perpetrators/alleged, but it is also important among victims/alleged.
In the feminist camps it's all about the confession of victimhood. Personal is political etc...
But our DV Industry has a very sophisticated American spin... no actual torture, no forced labor....
Yet. And yes, it is very sophisticated.
In this land of the once-free, men accused/convicted of "emotional abuse" enjoy six-to-twelve months of mindless, manipulative, misandrist, twisted psycho-babble that seeks above all else "a confession."
The entire curriculum is about forcing men to deny what they know to be true ....
Very good!
Women have power, women can abuse, women may be violent, women are capable of making choices and taking responsibility...
My belief is that it will excellerate to include women. What they need to do is lay down the foundation to make it genderless. Especially with their 'population control' tactics.
In the typical DV "batterer's program," there is only one cardinal rule...
Do NOT allow any man to ever speak the actual truth.
In fact the cardinal rule is genderless. They do not want anyone to ever speak the actual truth. Man or woman.
The feminists are caught up in so many self-contradictions that it becomes an act of self-abuse to try to figure it all out.
Of course, modern feminism borrowed from Marxism the basic concept of class warfare and morphed it into a contest of "proletariat" (victim) women against (oppressors) "ruling class" men.
Thus, the Evil Patriarchy = the Corrupt Capitalist Rulers.
But, all this breaks down quickly into foolishness at the level of personal relationships.
So, the "gender wars" we now enjoy come right back to the feminazis' insistence that "the personal is political."
It's difficult to "sleep with the enemy..." and keep your ideology intact!
The feminists are caught up in so many self-contradictions that it becomes an act of self-abuse to try to figure it all out.
Of course, modern feminism borrowed from Marxism the basic concept of class warfare and morphed it into a contest of "proletariat" (victim) women against (oppressors) "ruling class" men.
Thus, the Evil Patriarchy = the Corrupt Capitalist Rulers.
But, all this breaks down quickly into foolishness at the level of personal relationships.
So, the "gender wars" we now enjoy come right back to the feminazis' insistence that "the personal is political."
It's difficult to "sleep with the enemy..." and keep your ideology intact!
Yes. But don't forget some of the statements made my automanufacturer's CEO's. I think it was the guy from Honda said. " The more we demonize men the more cars we sell to women".
Something to that effect.
Yes. But don't forget some of the statements made my automanufacturer's CEO's. I think it was the guy from Honda said. " The more we demonize men the more cars we sell to women".
Something to that effect.
Hear Hear!
I say-Of all the politics,journalism, academia, blogosphere, science, based observation and claims, the most accurate designation of realistic behavior shall be established by advertising industry research.
These people have to take-well, anything- and in spite of what may(or may not) be considered politicly correct, feel good, emotional, exciting, humanitarian, child friendly, unbiased, ecological, or trendy on any given day, and turn it into cash.
To do this there must be a very concise awareness of the issues concerning "the product" so that it may be spun into gold. Personal opinion and agenda are detrimental to success.
Quite often, if I want reliable information, I'll go to a source that is expert in how to beat a system (and not sequestered)rather than the source that attempts to establish it.
There really isn't much to report after last nights session. I heven't recieved any of my homework back yet, so I don't know how they reacted to it.
They have been staying on point with the skills required to pass the program, and have made a point of saying a few times, they aren't here to shame us or rub our noses in the fact that we are at this program.
We start relating our personal stories next week, which could be trouble, since they use the police reports as a guide to see if you're lying or admitting everything. We'll see I guess.
The men's "personal stories" session should provide some insight into the counselors' actual politics and possible biases.
If they were trained in any of the Duluth Model systems, they will be "on guard" for "male collusion..."
That typically means that a man who adds too much context about the female partner's ways of being abusive, or tries to "deny or minimize" his own inherent use of "male privilege", will be silenced or subtly coerced into telling a dishonest PC-correct version of his story.
Assault, I gotta wonder whether your counselors understand that their program is now being "monitored" by MRA's on this (and other) sites?
The fact they told you that you could ignore the program completion criteria would get my antennae up on high alert.
Maybe they've decided to give you a pass, figuring that there won't be many more like you (men with actual principles) coming along to mess up their profit mill.
I've met a few honest DV counselors -- both women and men -- and they are all having to fight against the accepted Duluth Model norm and the feminist-dominated state oversight agencies that run the DV Industry.
If your program's counselors fit this profile, they deserve some respect.
The fact they told you that you could ignore the program completion criteria would get my antennae up on high alert.
What they meant by that was I could not participate to thier satisfaction and fail, thereby possibly facing jail.
And you're totally on point about the stories. That is exactly what they've been doing so far.
We start relating our personal stories next week, which could be trouble, since they use the police reports as a guide to see if you're lying or admitting everything. We'll see I guess.
Hmm, In My Humble Opinion.
So you've gone through the "you don't have to go along with this but here are the concequences stage.
Now your headed for the "We want to hear confession and remorse, we have the official papers right here" stage. It seems to me that the legal issue is not resolved and ANYTHING said can still come back and bite you in the ass at any time.
Good luck, it's your call how to play it. You've certainly shown a knack for constraint without caving.
Assault,
If you have not already investigated other DV programs that you might transfer into with credit for the sessions you've already completed, this might be a good time to make some calls.
You might be able to locate an alternative group run by more objective counselors.
Here's the background essentials that you'll likely witness at the next "men's story-telling" session.
Excerpts from a lengthy section of the Duluth Model "Bible" - Pence & Paymer's "Education Groups for Men Who Batter."
(Counselor's Role Four - TO MAINTAIN AN ATMOSPHERE THAT CHALLENGES RATHER THAN COLLUDES)
One of the most common problems a facilitator encounters in educational groups is the participant's denial or minimization of the extent and effects of their violence and controlling behavior.
Some men feel ashamed and tell only part of the story, some try to justify their actions, and a few simply don't care that they have been abusive and violent. Whatever the reasons, most abusers deny or minimize their behavior. That is why it it vitally important for the facilitator to confront these statements whenever they occur. The following are common examples of minimization and denial:
• I lost control.
• I just snapped.
• She pushed too far.
• She bruised easily.
• I only threatened her.
• She pushed my buttons.
• What about her violence?
• I didn't really hurt her.
• I got hooked by her.
• I sort of grabbed her.
• Then things got heated.
• We had a little tussle.
• Things got out of control.
• I was only defending myself.
• I suppose she was afraid of me.
• I'm here because the court sent me.
• I never really beat her up or anything.
• I only slapped (grabbed, pushed, etc.) her.
When any participant makes minimizing and denying statements like these, he should be confronted in a respectful manner. In preparing for leading a group, it is helpful for the facilitator to determine how each of the preceding statements minimizes or denies behavior. It is also helpful to make a list of all the ways men do this. This exercise is ideally done with battered women or shelter workers, who are often the mnost perceptive in recognizing minimizing or denying statements.
...
Another problem is the participant blaming someone else, usually his partner, for his behavior. A man may tell stories about how awful, irresponsible, crazy, or violent his partner is to rationalize his own battering behavior. Participants must be repeatedly reminded that regardless of their partner's actions, they have no right to be violent or abusive.
...If the participant is going to change, he must accept responsibility for his violence. If he is not willing to do some self-examination, he is probably not ready to change.
One man should not be allowed to hold the whole group back. If a man is continually denying or minimizing his violence, the police report and the order for protection affidavit in his file may provide the evidence necessary to confront him on his denial, minimizing, or blaming.
The participants are in the group because they have battered. If a man continues to deny this, the facilitator may refer him back to the men's program coordinator, who will send him back to the court for noncompliance or refer him to a special group designed for resistant and disruptive men. (pgs. 77 -81)
Just typing this feminazi bile has raised my blood pressure. I believe the DV Industry's "Secret Papers" are the truest illumination of feminism.
You could substitute a few words referring to men in this text and it would read like a Gestapo orientation manual for the extermination camps, or a staff training handout for the Soviet psyc-hospital Gulags... maybe even a flier for client management at Abu Ghraib.
Don't underestimate the treachery of the DV "therapists" who subscribe to these ideas and regimes of coercion.
Well, I don't know where to start to describe last nights session. I'm so livid I can barely think straight.
I've been targeted as a woman hating angry man. The instructors basically over-rode anything I said with snide remarks and twisted all my answers.
I stated I was angry with the inequity in the court system, and the instructor went on a long rant about how I don't "get it". I was wrong.
I tried to explain that I know I was wrong to slap my wife one time across the neck/face, but I can still be angry with a system that is corrupt and infested by special interest groups.
I tried to argue that the zero tolerance policy is wrong and destroys families and men's live needlessly. I tried to explain that grabbing someone by the arm is not the same as the guy who walks in everyday and beats the shit out of his wife because the macaroni is cold or something.
Once again, I was told I'm trying to justify abuse. It just kept going on and on. I was trying to make a point that the system is broken, but they kept saying I didn't get it, and I was justifying abuse.
They were using wierd examples that were out of context to confuse the situation such as "Well let's say you're walking down the street and you just walk up to a random woman and hold her arm for a few seconds and then let go. That's wrong isn't it? Shouldn't you be arrested for touching her?"
I tried to explain that thier context was all wrong, and that grabbing a stranger and holding onto your wife's arm during an argument are two different things. Once again, I was justifying.
Then we got on the topic of woman abusing men, which they were very skeptical about and snide. I asked what they thought of the 156 studies I brought in saying women were more prone to violence in relationships?
The instructor says "I can go to Queens university and ask my friend to find 100's of studies that say the exact opposite."
I replied "Well, one of those studies I cited was from Queens, so maybe your friend has already done the study and the results aren't what you would like."
Instructor: My point is that stats can say anything you want them to say!!
Me: So, let me get this straight. My stats are wrong and skewed, but YOUR stats which you constantly throw in our faces are correct?!!??!
He just ignored me and moved on.
Then we started in on the stories, and I made the statement that I don't feel comfortable with the situation because the instructors are sitting there with the police reports, etc and if we omit anything , they already said this would be construed as denying.
I pointed out that I don't know what's in the police reports and I can assure you I disagree with most of thier content.
I also stated that this process is extremely subjective and akin to communist kgb tactics where one must admit thier percieved wrongdoings and spew the proper doctrine.
I said I admit to slapping my ex wife, but I will NEVER admit to stalking her, beating her, harassing her, being a child abuser, drug addict, alcoholic, etc, etc. I just will not do it.
I said I had witnesses during these incidents to prove my innocence but no one wanted to hear my story or hear from the witnesses. I also stated I plead guilty to all of it because I was threatened by the crown/judge that if I didn't plead, he would make it very hard on me.
I was scared and confused. I had never been in trouble with the law before and my life was being destroyed around me. I just wanted it to be over so I agreed. Now I wish I had said "Fuck YOU, I want a trial!"
The instructors said I was being difficult again. :roll:
I apologize if I'm venting and rambling on here, but I'm just so pissed off and tired of fighting with the system.
I'm really considering just "playing the game" and going along with thier bullshit just to save my sanity.
I'm very tired and depressed by this whole 2 years. It just seems like a David and Goliath scenario and I don't think I'm strong enough to fight anymore. I'm also not sure if it's personally worth it.
:x
Assault, I am reading your story in horror. I'm only on page 2 and I'm already getting very upset. I do have some comments on parallels between your experience vs. mine in the psych hospital, but I'm not sure you would welcome them.
So just please know I feel for you.
Assault, I am reading your story in horror. I'm only on page 2 and I'm already getting very upset. I do have some comments on parallels between your experience vs. mine in the psych hospital, but I'm not sure you would welcome them.
So just please know I feel for you.
You can say whatever you want. I don't mind...I may not agree, but I don't mind. That's what this board is for.
And thank you :D
Hey Assault buddy,
I will not pretend to understand being in a DV class, but I certainly will say that I know about arguing with someone whose ideology is not only that of a "true believer", but do remember, these people's LIVES (Paycheck, validity to their theories, testimony given in court) are wrapped up in this.
FIrst off, go ahead and vent man. I know the feeling. Mine was shorter lived and I didn't post about it until years later, so I'm not sure I'd be bearing up much better.
If you want to continue to "fight", be very careful, but I, for one, won't for one second condemn you for "going with the flow" to get through this.
I mean, sure, we're all cheering you on and suggesting bold tactics and ready arguments, but then, it's not our lives and legal future on the line. It's like encouraging a buddy to keep swinging in a fight while standing on the sidelines while he takes the shots to his head and body.
If you want to maintain calm and keep answering them, then I'll support that. If you want to "play the system", I'll support that too.
I can't post much, as I am just home to change for P.T., so I hope my short message lets you know:
1) Vent buddy, it's SUPPOSED to wear you down, and (trust this) they are TRYING to get a rise out of you.
2) I don't care if you came in with a VIDEO TAPE of your Ex hitting you 10 times and one of you slapping her. They'd STILL play the party line. Face it, they WON'T hear you. (again, it's their whole LIVES wrapped up in this shit)
3) It's YOUR life. Whatever decision you make I'm sure you'll get a lot of support.
Be strong, don't let it control you.
When I imagine the woman who falsely accused me of rape, even after all these years, and I start to get worked up about it there is one thought that backs me off of my anger:
---That sociopathic bitch has probably just blown it off with a "well, he deserved it", laughed about it, or forgot about.
--- My point is do you want those smug assholes being IN your life and having that power over you when you're at home?
Well, I also ask God for help with my forgiveness and growth .... but that's just me.
We're with you buddy.
Steven
Assault hang in there, do whatever it takes to pass the course so you can get on with your life.
This is the first time you have been in one of these courses - the guys running it on the other hand do it for a living. You can't convert them and they won't let you win. They would love to hang you with your own words and nail your skin to the wall as an example.
My advice would be to maintain your cool at all times no matter how they provoke you. Fuck it, break down in tears blubbering about how you can't take it anymore. Maybe that will be enough to satisfy them. Just keep it together until you pass.
Good luck.
This is the first time you have been in one of these courses - the guys running it on the other hand do it for a living.
BINGO
That's the heart of the matter. They're doing it for money. They don't give a rat's ass about battered women, and they sure as hell don't give a rat's ass about battered men. They care about receiving their next paycheck.
Jesus. I'm so sorry, Assault.
I can't believe the fuckwits who are using these gulag tactics in the name of protecting women. I don't need your fucking protection, thank you. And, even more, I don't want to be protected if it means someone else suffers.
Grrr...
Assault, man... welcome to the Twilight Zone. I wish I could say that what you're experiencing and feeling in the DV Gulag is special and unique.
Unfortunately it's all fully scripted and part of the feminazi game to break you down and "confess" your evil maleness. They run these plays on hundreds of thousands of men every year.
I would suggest that as a psychological survival tactic at this point, given that they won't ever let you win, and you are being targeted as "defiant," that you put on some teflon mental armor and not get baited by their abuse and head-games.
Of course you do realize you are being abused by so-called "helping professionals" who are very likely licensed as mental health therapists, but they have sold their souls and (legally required) ethics for the easy DV scam and endless flowing profits from extorting men.
You might be able to locate another program with less vile counselors who would give you credit for the sessions you've completed. Your probation officer should have a list of all the DV programs in your area.
The counselors are playing a typical passive-aggressive game with you when they state that "you don't get it."
You might ask them, in writing, to define specifically what you need to do to demonstrate that you do indeed "get it;" and also ask for any specific actions you need to take to "remediate" your deficiencies.
Expect them to tell you they don't do written feedback, but they would be happy to have a conference with you. In which case, insist that you have their consent to audio tape it on your personal recorder.
Another pose you might adopt at this point is to just "go along to get along" and say whatever BS they want just to survive the next few sessions and escape the circus of mirrors.
Every man in the room will automatically know what you're doing, given that you've already established your street cred as a dissenting voice.
If you are feeling like they are going to kick you out or invoke special penalties, you might consider having a meeting with the counselors with your attorney present, to define what you need to do to "graduate."
Assault you made the same error in judgment that I did --- assuming that education, logic, research, and idealism might sway these vampires into considering the deficiencies in their approach.
But because they are evil and they know it, you now must pay for observing that "the emperor has no clothes."
I spent some interesting week-ends in jail for my "willful disregard," and I'm thankful that my still-intact 20-foot jumpshot impressed the southside thugs I roomed with to cut a little white bwoy some slack! :lol:
Assault,
I would add more, but as you can see everyone here is on your side and no one has said one word about judging you if you decide to "go along".
I will add to one person's comment that dovetailed with mine:
Imagine if there was a VAMA instead of a VAWA program. Do you doubt for one minute that all the stats, one sided much practiced tactics, and programs would NOT be targeting women with the same mental extemism?
No, it's about them getting the paycheck. Sure, some, maybe many are "true believers", but if *poof* overnight the money and programs only targeted women these "professionals" would change sides to save their jobs.
Their whole lives are wrapped up in this. It's not like their about to suddenly have an epiphiny, jump up, and declare that the entire system is wrong.
Again, we're with you bro. Sorry we can't be there in person.
Steven
I spent some interesting week-ends in jail for my "willful disregard," and I'm thankful that my still-intact 20-foot jumpshot impressed the southside thugs I roomed with to cut a little white bwoy some slack! :lol:
This just keeps getting better and better. Not only can a man get in trouble for an open hand *slap* part of the punishment could end up being sexual torture in jail. Which is, of course, of no interest to guys like Hugo since... men do it to themselves.
I don't think I can articulate how pissed off I am that all this is happening
in my name.
Well, on the bright side, it was the best "southside" b-ball I've enjoyed in twenty years!
(If you have to ask, you don't know the court rules. Actually, there are no rules....)
Interestingly, most of players were Jamaican faux-Rastas from Chi-town busted for their ummmm.... religious devotions.
Must be why most of the games only tallied to 10 points, then start over with another round of finesse bone brutality.
Gives a whole new meaning to undomesticated violence.
Assault - We are with you buddy. Don't let the bastards get you down. Roy was right on the money when he said:
I would suggest that as a psychological survival tactic at this point, given that they won't ever let you win, and you are being targeted as "defiant," that you put on some teflon mental armor and not get baited by their abuse and head-games.
They are now starting to play by the feminist book that tells them to not let any problem you have or any extenuating circumstance to get in the way of your taking "full responsibility." If you were a group of women this would be bass akwards and they would be swooning all over you asking about the last time you were abused....but it's not. You get no break and no nuttin. These folks are taught to not allow a man to focus on anything other than his "responsibilty." All past abuse or extenuating circumstances, depression, addiction, etc. is seen as a distraction and/or an excuse. In a nutshell these folks are frauds who are trained to shame you until you can't move. They are taught that this will help "break" you and give you a chance to end your abusive ways.
They should be sued. Maybe someday.
Dr. E.,
Good advice for a comrade in the crosshairs.
If you think the Dr. Hugo's of the world (male academic feminazis) are a tad bit twisted, you really haven't fully considered the depths of male depravity until you've met a few male Duluth Model DV counselors!
John Wayne Gacy with a counseling credential comes to mind....
Don't go there....
If you want to continue to "fight", be very careful, but I, for one, won't for one second condemn you for "going with the flow" to get through this.
FWIW, I second that. From my experience during voluntary psych hospital admissions (not nearly the same as what you are experiencing, but parallels can be drawn, particularly between the types of persons running these things), if you resist you will be labeled "non-compliant" and "in denial", as you have already noted. But that's where the comparison ends. In the psych hospital, all that usually happened to me was ostracism from the "group" (not a bad thing, considering the group in most cases consisted of hysterical females trying to outdo one another with claims of abuse who took a dim view of anyone who even slightly arched her eyebrow over the sometimes ludicrous allegations). Oh, and I couldn't get my smoke break or go down to the cafeteria. :shock: They always threatened to throw me out, too, because I was resistant to therapy. "Therapy", of course, was conjuring up memories of abuse, whether or not they existed and rewards were given to those who obliged.
Again, I realize your experience is only slightly similar to mine, but I do understand the emotions associated with suppressing one's real feelings and views when surrounded by those who think their knowledge of your emotions and experiences are always dead on target.
Sometimes one has to just suck it up while on the "inside" and continue the fight from the "outside".
Your instructors will be slapping one another on the back, heartily congratulating themselves on your miraculous turnaround all due, of course, to their extraordinary efforts and superior wisdom. Should you decide to go along with the program, please be prepared to be held up to others as a model participant, and to face the disappointment of some of the men who previously were looking to you for some semblance of sanity in an insane enviroment.
Good luck, whatever you do. Hang in there.
Thanks everybody. I appreciate the support. I'm not sure what I'm going to do yet. Although, I know myself pretty well and I know I will have an EXTREMELY hard time just going along.
We'll have to see, I guess.
It's things like these that make me wish that someone would send in an agent with a wire or camera just to get proof of what abuses go on in these so-called classes. :evil:
You hang in there - you've got all of us to vent to!
Assault - Ever watch Hogan's Heroes? You are Hogan and they are Schulz and Klink. :yes:
I said I had witnesses during these incidents to prove my innocence but no one wanted to hear my story or hear from the witnesses. I also stated I plead guilty to all of it because I was threatened by the crown/judge that if I didn't plead, he would make it very hard on me.
I was scared and confused. I had never been in trouble with the law before and my life was being destroyed around me. I just wanted it to be over so I agreed. Now I wish I had said "Fuck YOU, I want a trial!"
Assault, in Jan 2001, I was arrested for DV against my (now ex-)wife (bi-polar alcoholic from violent family, for context). Although I was the one who called the police, and I was the one with torn clothing and choking marks, I was arrested on my wife's say-so and put in jail. Like you, I was told by my public "defender" that if I didn't plead guilty, I would have to stay in jail until the trial a month hence (a total lie), and that if I pled guilty, I would only have to go to anger mgmt classes and then it would be out of my hair and I would never have to be worried about it again.
So what choice, as the sole provider and breadwinner for my family, do you think I made? Exactly, the one you made.
So here's the consequences for me, following my successful completion of the AM program, as my DV conviction follows me around:
* I cannot do the volunteer work I used to do with children and teens, because I am a risk for abusing or molesting them
* I cannot become a teacher (one of my goals for years now) because I cannot pass the fingerprint clearance
* I cannot own a gun, even though that right is guaranteed to me
* It is on my record permanently, and stains my life in many other ways.
Unlike you, when I entered the AM program, I had no idea what I was in for. I had only joined a battered husbands support group a couple months prior to the arrest, and it was what led me to MRA issues. As I learned more and more about the lies I was being fed in the anger management class, I began to argue with the instructors, though I certainly was on much shakier ground that you are or than I would be now. The point they made was that I was guilty. I was an abuser, and I had better get used to it, and even if what I was saying was true, I had better learn to "follow their rules".
In addition, I was sentenced to AA meetings and drunk driving classes (I wasn't driving, and my ex was the one who was drunk - go figure). What I eventually did was just shut up and learn that (a) I wasn't the alcoholic, and (b) I wasn't the abuser. I wish I had your courage and was able to speak up more, but after a while I just gave up.
At the same time, of course, I was trying to work things out with my wife, which was it's own fun... I would come home and talk to her about what they were telling us about how to communicate, and how to avoid the violence spikes, and she would say, "Shut up with your fucking psycho-babble or I'll fucking clock you."
So much for that, huh.
Anyway, just wanted to post this to say that you aren't alone in going through this; many of us have been there, and that you are doing a great job for yourself, maybe you'll knock some sense into the instructors' heads (doubtful) and you'll probably open some eyes. And yes, I know how you feel about being in there with the real abusers, some of them were stone cold scary MFs!
Oh, on a side note, they had a class for violent women at the place where I went as well. And I spoke with my instructor about it. He said he never taught it, only his wife did, because they had to create a safe place for the women. They totally went on the party line that the women were only violent in self-defense.
Keep the faith, bruthah!!!
[edited to add this] P.S. I agree that sometimes ya gotta put your head down and play silent and dumb to get your pass. I totally feel for you, man... Do what you have to do to get away from this and then move on and make changes later. My best to you.
Assault,
You work in prisons right? (ok, ok, rhetorical question)
You must have met or known of a guy or three who was in and it was pretty well known he was most likely innocent.
I know guards and prisoners don't exactly hang out and chat (a close relative of mine spent a few years in the gray bar hotel ), but if that guy ended up alone with you ....
You saw he had to participate in certain programs to get a favorable parole hearing and to get out ....
I mean, you of all people know any system, beauacracy, or gov't institution built upon a certain "truth" is not going to take resistance well.
What would you tell that guy? Play the system and get out and get on with your life, right?
Dude, I'd GO with you to these meetings if we were geographically close (no, they wouldn't allow me in, I know) and I'd just be quiet and be a witness.
Hell yes you want to fight, but sometimes fighting is best done by passive means.
We teach our guys, during preparations to be a P.O.W., to be passive. It's hard, but we just want them to survive until we can come and get em.
Is there anyway you can wear a wire while in these meetings?
Can you GET the police reports? THAT would be a big help!
Sorry this post meandered, but it's early hear and I'm just "jotting stuff down" as a I wake up.
Steven
You should get your experience published.
I was reflecting about Assault's experiences in the DV Gulag today.
From past personal experience in a similar Duluth Model program, I can still recall my shock and rage at being subjected to and witnessing the emotional and psychological "assaults" against men that occur routinely in these "psycho-dynamic education" charades.
The thing that becomes clear almost immediately upon being "invited" by the court to be a participant in one of these programs (for six-to-twelve very expensive months) is that the core intent is to "shame and blame" men.
Ignoring all credible social science about the complexity of family/intimate partner conflict, the Duluth demagogues will permit only one certain explanation for domestic violence --- the assumed innate privilege of male "power and control" over women bestowed on all men by the Evil Patriarchy.
Any man who attempts to tell his actual story, to paint "shades of gray" in his partner relationship dynamics, or worse, to suggest that women may be violent, may abuse, may have some accountability --- well, that man will be told he is "minimizing and denying," he is "colluding," he is "acting out in anger," he "doesn't get it."
And please, put all your insidious MRA stats and studies in the trash can labeled "male delusions."
What's also undeniable about these batterer's treatment programs is that far too many counselors are dysfunctional "wounded healers" - individuals who have not worked through their own gender and relationship issues.
The worst of the worst of this nasty breed can only be described as sadistic predators. Most of them are self-loathing men who project unto their captive clients all their deepest fears and anger about women, and they delight in playing vicious head-games and various "power and control" schemes.
I suspect there is a significant population of true sociopaths (Google DSM-IV) to be found among the ranks of DV counselors.
I'm pretty sure that even the comparatively few ethical DV counselors know they are selling snake oil and that their "treatment" has no validity. That's one of the reasons that very few DV programs do any serious outcomes analysis. They typically describe their programs as successful if the guy doesn't ever show up again, or if his relationship with the "abused" female ends.
So, Assault, if you've ever wanted to have a successful acting career, now might be the time to practice the arts of deception during your weekly Twilight Zone sessions. For your own sanity, try to view yourself as a character in a very bizarre movie, do your best sweet Johnny Depp impression (the female counselor will love you if you can pull this off...), and realize that your authentic personal identity never actually enters the room.
Courage, bro!
Assault,
I know it's been said before, but we're all standing behind you. Play the game and move on man. You may not change the minds of the bloodsuckers running that "Spanish Inquisition" but you may have already planted the bug in the ear of the other men in the room. In some way you have already made a difference.
In some way you have already made a difference.
Damned good point DB! Well said and absolutely correct.
Last night basically turned into a bitch fest, because there was a guy who was very loud and obnoxious who is one of those guys who HAS to be right. So the whole night was basically him and a few other guys arguing with the instructors. :twisted:
One of the arguments was about an experience one of the men (we'll call him The client) had this week. He was playing outdoor hockey with some friends at a park against some other guys who just happened to be there. Well, the game got heated and one of the players started punching this client in the face! The client knew he couldn't fight back because he would be arrested again and his probation would be revoked.
Although, we understood that with a prior violent conviction, he would be arrested without question no matter what, we were arguing the unfairness and implausable notion that this program advocates; which was for the client to get beaten up, and then walk away and call the police.
Someone brought up our previous Prime Minister Jean Chretien, and his famous choking of the protester. The instructors announced that this was self defence because he's the Prime minister and no-one could know what the protesters intentions were.
I said that it was blatant hypocrisy that the rules apply for some of us and not the others. I said according to this program "assault is assault", so according to the legal defintion of assault Chretien assaulted that protester.
The argument went on and on for 2 hours until the men in the room started looking at me and I just rolled my eyes and said to some of them "You can't convince them that your argument had ANY validity. Just play the game."
On a side note....I fully understand and agree that if some idiot gets near a world leader, he/she should be seen as a serious threat and handled accordingly. The rub was the instructor saying that the before-mentioned client had to take a beating when Chretien just jad a protester yelling at him and this poor guy had some jerk punching him in the face repeatedly. I'm sorry, but I find actual physical violence to be more of a threat that unsavory dialogue. :roll:
Dr. Evil...I'm not able to scan right now, but I can find the websites of some of the materials of this program. Interestingly enough, the more shameful and spiteful materials don't have a website link.
here are some;
http://www.doniheeconsulting.nb.ca/choice.htm
http://www.ranchcreek.com/advocates/pcwheel.htm (this is a link to the "Power and control wheel"
http://www.ranchcreek.com/advocates/ewheel.htm And the "Equality wheel"
[/url]
Assault,
I humbly suggest you consider the "rope-a-dope" strategy at this point.
At least during the most recent group session you were not the explicit target of the DV counselor's rancor and abuse.
Let some of the others in the room take some heat, show some backbone, make some points.
Let's be practical, and think long-range. Your goal is just to survive and GET OUT!
You've already correctly understood that nothing you or any other "client" does will enlighten or even disturb the licensed psychopaths running this charade.
Fine.
You can still meet your own standards of ethics and integrity by taking all this in as a vital learning experience, without sacrificing your liberty, and then become one hell of a better-informed men's rights advocate!
And, take some ironic satisfaction in knowing that all the lies you're witnessing will make you a much more dangerous MRA in the future.
Of old the skilled first made themselves invincible to await the enemy's vincibility.
Invincibility lies in oneself.
Vincibility lies in the enemy.
Thus the skilled can make themselves invincible.
They cannot cause the enemy's vincibility.
Thus it is said - "Victory can be known. It cannot be made."
(Sun Tzu - The Art of War.)
An excellent brief and readable refutation of the Duluth Model by Edward Dunning, Ph.D. --
Deconstructing Duluth
Edward Dunning
http://www.familytx.org/research/articles/deconstructingduluth.html
Roy Wrote:I humbly suggest you consider the "rope-a-dope" strategy at this point.
Roy's probably right. Just finish the program get your certificate of completion ... then run like a thief in the night. You can do more and better activism against these terrible programs after you get out.
My server crashed yesterday just when I started posting those links....sorry for the delay.....here are the rest.
http://www.breakoutofthebox.com/circle.htm
http://www.stevecolwell.com/7habits.html
http://www.profitadvisors.com/win-win.shtml They pretty much use everything on this site
http://www.thenetteam.net/abused.html
http://www.thenetteam.net/abused.html
A very subjective list here. I get the impression that any emotion at all could be considered abuse. :?
I've been thinking about this and have come to the conclusion that this may be our way to mortally would - if not outright kill - the feminist movement once and for all.
Consider that much of the funding for so-called "domestic violence services" actually is siphoned off to other projects that all loosely work together to promote and advance "feminism" as we know it today. What would happen if not only the funding dried-up, but if we could actually bankrupt many of these organizations? I think that would effectively destroy the feminist infrastructure and thus the movement itself. And I think I have a plan on how to do it:
Let's look at the cases against the tobacco companies as a model. The crux of the cases were that 1) the companies colluded with each other to hide the real facts for their own financial gain, and 2) smokers were harmed by this collusion and misrepresentation of the truth. The same is happening in the realm of the DV industry: 1) Feminists have been colluding to hide the truth about DV, and 2) men like Assault, et al., have been directly harmed by this. I think that the parallels are very close and that a good energetic team of attorneys could formulate a major class-action lawsuit against the many, many organizations involved in the DV industry. I think that like the tobacco suits, they could use RICO to prosecute and probably win based on the precedent set by those victories. And while we may not be able to get the entities in government, but I'd we sure as hell could take on the NGOs and other non-governmental ones.
Any enterprising lawyers out there ready to take this on and shut these people down, and perhaps make a tidy sum in the process? :grin:
I've been thinking about this and have come to the conclusion that this may be our way to mortally would - if not outright kill - the feminist movement once and for all.
Consider that much of the funding for so-called "domestic violence services" actually is siphoned off to other projects that all loosely work together to promote and advance "feminism" as we know it today. What would happen if not only the funding dried-up, but if we could actually bankrupt many of these organizations? I think that would effectively destroy the feminist infrastructure and thus the movement itself. And I think I have a plan on how to do it:
Let's look at the cases against the tobacco companies as a model. The crux of the cases were that 1) the companies colluded with each other to hide the real facts for their own financial gain, and 2) smokers were harmed by this collusion and misrepresentation of the truth. The same is happening in the realm of the DV industry: 1) Feminists have been colluding to hide the truth about DV, and 2) men like Assault, et al., have been directly harmed by this. I think that the parallels are very close and that a good energetic team of attorneys could formulate a major class-action lawsuit against the many, many organizations involved in the DV industry. I think that like the tobacco suits, they could use RICO to prosecute and probably win based on the precedent set by those victories. And while we may not be able to get the entities in government, but I'd we sure as hell could take on the NGOs and other non-governmental ones.
Any enterprising lawyers out there ready to take this on and shut these people down, and perhaps make a tidy sum in the process? :grin:
That is certainly an interesting idea, and one I had thought about already. The problem would be financial harship for a guy like me....I simply couldn't afford the fight...but maybe someone with either power or money will take up this cause someday.
Hey Assault,
Just looking at one site and gonna dissect it here for your benefit.
Answering the following questions will help you to determine whether or not you are in an emotionally abusive love relationship. A "YES" answer to even half of these questions indicates that you are in an emotionally abusive love relationship.
Ok, let's see how objective versus subjective this is. Also, let's see how often (if ever) they as the respondant if THEY do these actions.
Do you feel like a child in the relationship, having to ask permission and apologizing for your behavior? Do you feel powerless and "less than" your lover or mate?
First off notice how they link behavior to behavior so that if the woman even has to apologize for inappropriate behavior he's "abusive". And how often does one spouse need to "inform" the other spouse as to their whereabouts and what they are doing. I'm SO SURE if I were to tell my wife: "Going out, back later" all the time she would
rightfully be suspicious of my activities as I am not keeping her informed.
Have you stopped seeing your friends and family? Does your lover or husband criticize your friends and family members? Did he complain so much when you saw them in the past that you finally stopped seeing them altogether so you wouldn't have to argue with him about it? Are you ashamed to see your friends or family because of your mate's abusive behavior, and because you're embarrassed at having put up with so much from him?
Sheesh, so if you criticize her family or friends you're an abuser. And, NAW, women never cause scenes in front of family or friends. NEVER.
Do you believe that you are to blame for your husband's or lover's problems? Do you feel you are mostly responsible for the problems with the relationship?
Now the first sentence could be ok, as long as it had qualifiers. But the second one is a "get out of jail free" as far as the woman having ANY responsibility as to the relationships.
Does your mate try to take advantage of you sexually or make unreasonable sexual demands on you?
I can go with this one. As long as it asks the woman the same thing. And of course it needs to be asked if the woman uses denial of sex as a manipulation tool. Otherwise it's only asking 1/2 of the problem.
Does your lover's personality change when he drinks alcohol?
Ok, are they kidding?! Just about EVERYONE's personality changes slightly when intoxicated. But of course, the subjective precept is that men change negatively, women don't change or only become "giggly and tipsy". Nah, there are no mean drunks out there who are female.
Does your mate use "HUMOR" to put you down or degrade you?
You have got to be fucking kidding me. No, women NEVER cut up, character assassinate, humiliate, or put down their men. And NEVER in public. Never.
Does he lack the ability to laugh at himself?
Does she? Did he "not notice" how her dress fit, or that she was getting fat and needs emotional support, or that some harmless comment made in front of friends made her fume? And when she "wasn't laughing at herself" was it HER fault?
Notice the connections and dissonence between that question and the one directly above it. Man = bad / woman=good. IN BOTH SITUATIONS.
Does he find it hard to apologize or to admit when he is wrong? Does he make excuses for his bahavior or always blame others for his actions?
Oh Barf in a dog's bowl! No, women ALWAYS apologize when wrong, NEVER make excuses for their behavior, and/or blame others (or you - or PMS) for their actions. Never.
Does he usually get his way in deciding when and where the two of you will go?
Does she? Is that abuse? Women never nag a guy about things. And of course if HE makes the decision as to where to go and what to do, and it works out badly .... does she BLAME HIM. Unless it works out, then it was "their" decision. Got it.
Does he control or disapprove of your spending but seem to have no problem spending on himself?
Boy, is THIS subjective. And, let's not forget that women spend 80% of the consumer dollars. God forbid that when that $$$ is spent the man should have the temerity to open his mouth and voice an opinion.
Then, it's called abuse.
[emphasis mine]
GIVE ME A FUCKING BREAK.
(See Assault! We're with ya buddy)
Steven
LS --
Answering the following questions will help you to determine whether or not you are in an emotionally abusive love relationship.
All of the examples you listed are straight out of the feminist Duluth Model, and are employed to demonstrate strategies of "male power and control."
All the language is gendered to make sure that men are always the perpetrators, and women always the victims.
Notice that Rule #1 (though hidden) is that women shall never be held accountable, shown to be able to make choices, or described in any way except as passive, innocent victims of male aggression.
What I've long found interesting about the feminist-ideological dogma about domestic violence is that its proponents have an infantile and silly concept of
power.
They refuse to recognize or deal with all the various forms of power that women enjoy and use (emotional, psychological, sexual, financial, legal, and yes, even physical) -- because to admit that women have power gives the lie to the whole charade of victimology.
The concept of
emotional abuse has been so diluted and trivialized that the act of
with-holding or limiting anything a woman wants becomes a form of abuse. The kinds of experiences that Assault is having right now in weekly DV group can drive one to the brink of madness, because it's an
Alice Through the Looking Glass topsy-turvy world where the counselors function as the enforcers of a fictional reality.
If you're ever facing the trip down the DV Rabbit Hole, it's best if you can view it as anthropology, a kind of field trip to a strange and bizarre feminist wacko sub-culture.... then it can be interesting, even humorous in a twisted way.
Paraphrased from http://www.thenetteam.net/abused.html
1. Is your mate older, larger, and stronger and does he make more money than you do?
2. Has your mate ever made a negative comment about a family member or friend of yours, and do you spend less time with your old friends and family now that you're not single anymore?
3. Have you made up problems in your relationship and failed to convince your mate that they're real?
4. Has your mate ever asked for something sexually that you said 'no' to?
5. Has your mate ever had a drink?
6. Has your mate ever made a bad joke you found offensive?
7. Have you ever made a bad joke your mate found offensive?
8. Does your mate apologize when you think he's wrong?
9. Do you play the 'what do you want to do tonight' game with your mate, and are you ever unhappy with what you do?
10. Does he always spend enough money on you?
Paraphrased from http://www.thenetteam.net/abused.html
1. Is your mate older, larger, and stronger and does he make more money than you do?
2. Has your mate ever made a negative comment about a family member or friend of yours, and do you spend less time with your old friends and family now that you're not single anymore?
3. Have you made up problems in your relationship and failed to convince your mate that they're real?
4. Has your mate ever asked for something sexually that you said 'no' to?
5. Has your mate ever had a drink?
6. Has your mate ever made a bad joke you found offensive?
7. Have you ever made a bad joke your mate found offensive?
8. Does your mate apologize when you think he's wrong?
9. Do you play the 'what do you want to do tonight' game with your mate, and are you ever unhappy with what you do?
10. Does he always spend enough money on you?
Omigod,
how can that be real!
-Do you feel like a child in the relationship, having to ask permission and apologizing for your behavior? Do you feel powerless and "less than" your lover or mate?
No
-Have you stopped seeing your friends and family? Does your lover or husband criticize your friends and family members? Did he complain so much when you saw them in the past that you finally stopped seeing them altogether so you wouldn't have to argue with him about it? Are you ashamed to see your friends or family because of your mate's abusive behavior, and because you're embarrassed at having put up with so much from him?
-Do you believe that you are to blame for your husband's or lover's problems? Do you feel you are mostly responsible for the problems with the relationship?
-Does your mate try to take advantage of you sexually or make unreasonable sexual demands on you?
*Yes, I find him wanting to have intercourse with me, his wife,
at all, completely unreasonable :lol: *
-Does your lover's personality change when he drinks alcohol?
*who is the same drunk, as they are sober???!!!!*
-Does your mate use "HUMOR" to put you down or degrade you?
-Does he lack the ability to laugh at himself?
-Does he find it hard to apologize or to admit when he is wrong? Does he make excuses for his bahavior or always blame others for his actions?
-Does he usually get his way in deciding when and where the two of you will go?
-Does he control or disapprove of your spending but seem to have no problem spending on himself?
- A "YES" answer to even half of these questions indicates that you are in an emotionally abusive love relationship.
:lol:
Thinking if this are the actual rule of measure
Husband and I are abusing the hell
Out of each other.
Hachu,
Yes, it
IS shocking what they consider "
violence", and how it is ONLY applied to men and
NEVER women.
This is the stuff we MRAs are seeking to change. These kinds of definitions are regularly used by women to exercise power, to cover their own abusive behavior, and as a divorce advantage.
Now, don't mistake MRAs (Men's / Father's Rights Advocates - us!) as to thinking we excuse or condone EITHER gender's violence, but we want the definitions to be gender neutral, for services to be equally available, and for the "only men abuse/only women are victims" stereotypes and mythic statistics to stop being put out as gospel.
Below is a link to a show many of us listen to. This episode is about 1/2 the way down and titled:
May 30, 2004
Darkness at Noon: Soviet-Style Re-education in
State Mandated 'Batterers' Classes
Here is a link to the page: Link to Glenn's DV Show (http://www.hisside.com/show_archive_2004.htm)
Very early in the show (2 Minutes and 25 Seconds to be exact - I prelistened to make it easier on you :D ) Glenn reads DIRECTLY from a DV shelter's handbook as to the definitions of DV (Domestic Violence).
You think WE shocked you with the above article? Listen to the show and see what ya think.
It's an entertaining show,
Glenn is very supportive of women, but just wants men to get a fair shake in the legal system, to get equal services, and to expose what goes on in DV shelters in their current form.
I sincerely hope you take the time to listen.
Respectfully,
Steven
This one listens to Glenn's archived radio broadcast at work.
Have been doing this for the past 3 weeks.
Via the miracle of Quicktime.
Ok, just trying to be helpful.
Steven
Ok, just trying to be helpful.
Steven
no problemo :D
Fezzik reworded the list to make it much different than it was originally. While his reworded version sounds terrible, and woman may actually be interpreting the first as his version, the original version was more reasonable. He provides a link to the original.
While I hate lists like this, I think it is pretty misleading to put words in other peoples mouths, which is what Fezzik did.
Hello Assault,
Although a late introduction, I have read every post regarding this extremely frustating ongoing story if only I could inject into your "mandatory contradictory femi-nazi indoctrinational nightmare" and help out! for what it's worth I would bro whatever the personal cost!
I have a little realisation of a "dictatorial power run amok" via friend's and family locked up on "trumped up charge's" later to be famously embarrassingly disproved/released.
Any dysfunctional apparatus of goverment (british goverment for example) who without presumptive cognitive mean's of legal discourse fall extremely short of the constraint's of legal parameter's.
However if you originate from Irish extraction you are fair game to the vicious sectarianism of 10 Downing street, held without valid legal reason indefinitely --- subject to torture mentally and physically sometime's 24/7 for decade's.
Only this week "ASSHOLE" Tony Blair uk primeminister said sorry to the birmingham six for their (British goverment's) wrongful incarceration of them.
Sorry to rant on but the point! Well as opposed to other's here offering advice mine is to keep up the opposition no matter what --- ok you might at worse suffer some punishment that's what opposer's of any tyranny must expect and endure, they thrive on fear!
In today's society There will be initially a extreme disproportionate exultation of perceived slight's transgression's of "deemed" sexual discrimanation, harassment, assault, attempted rape and rape in society's gaze --- and you as the Male are alway's guilty by Default - regardless of incontrovertible evidence (yes still ongoing)
However once personal sacrifice and the fortitude of MRAS endeavour --- a political/societal result will sprout from the ember's of the destructive remnant's of the "gender war's" and maybe a true vision of equality can take strong root's
However today's corrupt goverment can never be guardian of what it is to be equal man or woman, BAD CALL! We need a Oliver Cromwell exacting as a true parliamentarian I for one wouldn't cringe at the prospect of Tony Blair receiving the same punishment as Charles l.
BTW I made a original -- more in depth post but I lost it in the posting --- Had to start again -- Hope I kinda made my round about point -- I wish you well assault and be strong bro!
Profound --
In today's society There will be initially a extreme disproportionate exultation of perceived slight's transgression's of "deemed" sexual discrimanation...
Roughly translated, forgiving grammar, and incoherence ---
Following your script, Assault gets to go to jail for your rhetorical excess.
From what I've read of his posts, he's got way too many streetsmarts to fall for this nonsense.
Find other martyrs...
Start with yourSELF bro!
Although I appreciate the sentiment Profound, I'm afraid Roy is right on this.
I'm still a young man with an great career ahead of me that I'm not willing to just callously throw away. I feel like a bit of a coward and traitor for doing it, but I think it might be best for me to keep my head low for the rest of this program/indoctrination and just try to survive.
I think I'm more effective doing what I've been doing for the past 1.5 years rather than become a MRA kamikaze pilot. Along with being a correctional officer, I'm also an ex professional fighter and I own a gym teaching other pro fighters, where I've really opened the eyes of the other men who train there and have seen first hand my experiences.
Fezzik reworded the list to make it much different than it was originally. While his reworded version sounds terrible, and woman may actually be interpreting the first as his version, the original version was more reasonable. He provides a link to the original.
While I hate lists like this, I think it is pretty misleading to put words in other peoples mouths, which is what Fezzik did.
If you'll look at what I wrote, I said explicity that I was paraphrasing the source. That was my interpretation of those questions. I did not put words in someone else's mouth.
That is fine, you still reworded the questions, which made them much different than they were. Paraphrasing is keeping hte smae intentions, which you did not. While I can very well see the original list being too subjective in it's wording, if one was taking it in the purpose it was intended then they would make someone emotionally abusive.
"Do you feel like a child in the relationship, having to ask permission and apologizing for your behavior? Do you feel powerless and "less than" your lover or mate?"
Now if someone was taking this test on their own they could say well I have to ask before spending $1000 so I must be abused. And that would be BS.
But if this test were given orally, and the test giver was good, they would weed out those types of answers as negative, and you would be left with someone who has to ask permission to go get a gallon of milk, or someone who has to apologize for putting out the 'wrong' placemats or folding the towels 'wrong'. I think that implied threat must be there, that if you do not apologize that something bad might happen, like she may trash your car or throw an ashtray at you.
The test should also be gender nuetral. I think if this test were gender nuetral you wouldn't have such a problem with it.
While I can see this test being rendered pretty useless by the lack of standards in giving it, and it's bias, I do not think that the list is meaningless. I worry when someone can dismiss an entire problem so easily.
What would you consider good changes to this list?
I would add under threat of harm to each of those, and also make the wording gender nuetral.
I would add examples of what was and was not abuse. (Ie the $1000 vs a $2.95 gal of milk.)
Good analogies TBQ.
(just tossing in my 2 cents)
Steven
So, last night was my turn to tell my story to the group. After I was done some of the guys said things like "Holy shit, you have an amazing amount of patience!" "I think I would have killed her!" etc.
The instructors didn't say much because I didn't give them much room to wiggle. For example, when I said I had breached my probation by calling her house, the instructor jumped all over that.
I explained that I was told by the judge that I could contact my children at any time since I was the primary caregiver for a month while she was off partying and living with her boyfriend.
Then I said I breached again by e-mailing my ex about the childrens issues ie, money, visits, etc. The instructor jumped on me again, until I pointed out that I keep all correspondence saved on my computer and I have dozens of e-mails where she contacted me first and asked for money, etc. When I would refuse she would threaten to call the police and have me arrested.
I then said my final breach of probation was when I went to a house party and she crashed it with her friends. I left and went to a bar. She followed and saw me talking to other women and became angry. I left the bar and called the police on her because I no longer trusted her at all. The police contacted her and she convinced them to arrest me again.
The instructors just gave up by this time and said "Well the slap you gave her was wrong." To which I agreed.
I also stated that the judge in my case is cited on record as looking at me and saying "I think I know what's going on here Mr. Wynne"
Unfortunately, I had already pled guilty to everything just to end the nightmare.
I also told them I had been approached by some police officers and the dispatcher who happened to take my ex wifes calls and they told me they felt so bad for me, because they knew she was lying but there was nothing they could do.
I finished off by saying I thought this course and the process in which it was being run was unethical, subjective and intent on shaming men. I said the instructors told us they would be looking at the police and court reports and if we didn't "confess all" they would look at this as denying. I said the only thing I agree with in those reports is the one slap I gave my ex wife. She accused me of being an alcoholic, drug addict, steroid abuser, child abuser, thief, and a violent criminal. I told the instructors I will never confess to these things....ever. I don't care how you punish me for not supplicating to your demands for penance on these isssues, I will not do it.
When I was done, I heard a couple "Wow's!" and a "Damn." from the men. The instructor just said "Ok." and then basically ended the session a half hour early. :twisted:
That is fine, you still reworded the questions, which made them much different than they were. Paraphrasing is keeping hte smae intentions, which you did not. While I can very well see the original list being too subjective in it's wording, if one was taking it in the purpose it was intended then they would make someone emotionally abusive.
"Do you feel like a child in the relationship, having to ask permission and apologizing for your behavior? Do you feel powerless and "less than" your lover or mate?"
That depends on what you believe was the orginal intention of the test and it's wording. I read the test and believed that it was designed to make any woman answer 'yes' or 'maybe' to some very fuzzy questions in order to reach the pre-determined conclusion that they're being abused.
Do you feel like a chlid in the relationship?I am a large man, my wife is a medium to small woman. I am a couple of years older than my wife, I make substantially more money than she does, we live in the house I bought before we wed, and we live largely on my income. I expect my wife has noticed one or all of these facts. I do not believe any of them make me a bad person, a bad husband or an abuser.
... having to ask permission and apologizing for your behavior?Part of a committed relationship is being aware and responding to the wishes of your partner. Does my wife ask me before making decisions she would have made on her own when she was single? Absolutely. Do I do the same in return? Yes. Are there times when her answer and mine are different? Certainly. Does any of that make me an abuser?
Do you feel powerless and "less than" your lover or mate?Are there times when my wife's mood dominates or overwhelms my own? Are there times when I feel vulnerable to her? Are there times when how important she is to me is frightening? Yes, yes, and yes. Is it beyond imagining that she has the same feelings about me? Does the fact that we're that into each other make me an abuser?
My read of these questions is that anyone who answers them truthfully will be shocked to find out they've been abused. I think that was the intention of the questions.
When I was done, I heard a couple "Wow's!" and a "Damn." from the men. The instructor just said "Ok." and then basically ended the session a half hour early.
_________________
That was great. You had a lot of courage to stand up and say the things you did. Sometimes all it takes it to hear one person stand up for themselves to turn the tide. It sounds like the instructor knew that too, and ended before anyone else could speak.
I know it doesn't mean much , but I am very proud of you. That took guts to go in there and be honest.
Assault,
When you decided to speak YOUR TRUTH you challenged the feminist DV counselors to find a way to define your truth-telling as "minimization and denial."
Do not misunderstand.
YOU have engaged their special interest.
The fact that you admitted to regretting a single slap is your exit plan...
What these Duluth zombies don't seem to understand is that it is rationally possible to admit one's responsibility for a bad action, and still not buy into the whole Evil Male Privilege crap.
So, if men are supposed to be responsible for their choices/actions (and I guess civilization has benefited from this "patriarchal" sin...) ---
how come women have no "equal" obligations?
From reading your posts, I think you're playing a smart, and ethical game.
My only concern (if were in your shoes... and I have been...) would be to know specifically whether they can pull the rug out from under your feet at the last minute.
In other words, are they "passing" you at this point in the program?
And, how do you KNOW?
Delete
quote="Roy"]Profound --
In today's society There will be initially a extreme disproportionate exultation of perceived slight's transgression's of "deemed" sexual discrimanation...
Roughly translated, forgiving grammar, and incoherence ---
Following your script, Assault gets to go to jail for your rhetorical excess.
From what I've read of his posts, he's got way too many streetsmarts to fall for this nonsense.
Find other martyrs...
Start with yourSELF bro![/quote]
Roy said:
Roughly translated, forgiving grammar, and incoherence ---
Hmm, extreme exaggerated contrivance mostly derived from a "insular" cultural self serving BLINKERED perpetual perspective.
Roy said:
Following your script, Assault gets to go to jail for your rhetorical excess.
No, my "perceived" excess he take's cultural interpretational support from me and other's to ensure a personal resolve (in part) -- as far as that is possible within the constuct's and constraint's of today's misandrist infrastructure of the judicial and court system.
The longer we MRAS indulge in "infighting" suit's the misandric enemy no end, that is their end goal --- something to which I will not ENGAGE, my effort's are the promotion of all thing's male!
Roy said:
Find other martyrs...
Start with yourSELF bro![/quote]
Well yes I and my extended family are indeed speaking from personal and family perspective of almost 25 year's of british fascist govermental intrusion and oppression, our family collective of "miscarriage's of justice exceed's 100 year's so please don't lecture me!
Roy said:
forgiving grammar, and incoherence
Please be so good as to explain your illusional "empirical" derivance exempt of reality. Pray tell!
Grandiloquence - now there's a big word :)
grandiloquence - definition from gcide
Grandiloquence \Gran*dil"o*quence\, n.
The use of lofty words or phrases; bombast; -- usually in a
bad sense.
[1913 Webster]
The sin of grandiloquence or tall talking. --Thackeray,
[1913 Webster]
grandiloquence - definition from wn
grandiloquence
n : high flown style; excessive use of verbal ornamentation
[syn: grandiosity, magniloquence, rhetoric]
Profound 1 ---
Have you heard of verbs?
They are words that go between the subject and the predicate.
Basically, they permit sense to be made when writing.
While I find your posts interesting from an anti-grammatical perspective, I just can't make any sense of what you t-y-p-e.
I know there's thought behind the l-e-t-t-e-r-s....
Could you please rearrange them so I can grasp what you're saying?
Grandiloquence - now there's a big word
Now your just being catty.
Sorry for the attack, not meant personally.
Although I appreciate the sentiment Profound, I'm afraid Roy is right on this.
I'm still a young man with an great career ahead of me that I'm not willing to just callously throw away. I feel like a bit of a coward and traitor for doing it, but I think it might be best for me to keep my head low for the rest of this program/indoctrination and just try to survive.
I think I'm more effective doing what I've been doing for the past 1.5 years rather than become a MRA kamikaze pilot. Along with being a correctional officer, I'm also an ex professional fighter and I own a gym teaching other pro fighters, where I've really opened the eyes of the other men who train there and have seen first hand my experiences.
Word of mouth is the best form of advertising. Keep it up!
However I strongly believe that women are not at fault spcifically; our entire society has been misinformed, both men and women. You're councilors for example.
Ergo the mistakes being made and the suffering being dispensed for the profit of these organizations.
The truth has to come out. But Love and respect for all humans should always be essential part of our goals.
Hopefully you will be able to forgive your ex-wife. A hard thing to do especially since kids keep you two entwined.
Dan L. --
However I strongly believe that women are not at fault spcifically;
Accordingly, are they "fault-less?"
What role does individual/female responsibility play in correcting the acknowledged injustices against men that feminism has conspired to inflict on both/all? genders?
Of course you concede that feminism unconditionally/unspecifically
finds all men at fault?So, under what logic does the female species/individual women get a "pass?"
Is this "stealth chivalry" poking its nose under the tent yet again?
Dear Assault,
I am astounded by your bravery. As for me -- I would have given up much more easily. All my campaign for mens rights in UNH got me absolutely no official trouble. I even advertized in school newspaper.
But when a pro-feminist man asked me to stop in strong terms (he did not explicitly threten me) I stopped.
Dear Assault,
I am astounded by your bravery.
I'm not so sure it's bravery, as much as sick and tired of being treated as a second class citizen.
Thanks though.
Last night was just more stories from other men. A couple of them tried to deny what they had done, but it was pointed out that they did in fact assault thier partner.
The only interesting thing that happened was the instructor pointed out that in our local paper a woman had been charged with assaulting her boyfriend. The paper made a point of emphasising that the woman was a stripper in order to make her sub human.
He then looked at me and said "See, women DO get charged with assault just like men, but it's because men do it so much more often that we see men in the courts, etc." and he smiled. :roll:
I replied; "Well, I'm pretty much done arguing with you about this type of misandry because you will never convince me otherwise, and apparently I can't convince you either, no matter how much evidence I present to back up my arguments. If you can find one instance of the reverse, then the injustices men face today are fine by you."
He just looked at me for a second, and then continued on.
Later on, one of the men asked where the instructors get thier qualifications and where is the materials based from.
The female instructor replied "We take some from a program created in Duluth, and other places"
I commented "The Duluth model is disgusting in its bigotry. The basic premise is Men are bad, Women are good, no matter what."
She looked at me and said "Well....er...yeah..the Duluth model is a little anti-male, but that's why we use material from other sources as well."
Assault: I think this is what is called a "character-building experience"! Well done for your handling of the re-education camp. I look forward to hearing if they let you graduate or find a way to crush you underfoot for your insolence.
In an early part of the thread you mentioned a DV study in your local area that had just come out. Do you have a reference on it? I am updating my Partner Violence Index and I am looking for legitimate DV studies conducted since 2000.
Good luck, my prayers are with you.
Regards
Ric
Assault,
You are the Chessmaster of the DV Twilight Zone! (A game few have played well....)
You have adopted exactly the right strategy in being honest but no longer hyper-confrontational towards the so-called "counselors."
DO NOT regress and give them "bait" to go after you.
Clearly you and every man in the room understands that these licensed "helping professionals" cannot be trusted, right?
And you have only spoken YOUR TRUTHS.
Keep your focus, take pride in knowing that you are going to use the "knowledge" they have unintentionally provided.
You are still in the "shitstem," (Peter Tosh) --- but remember...
" a weak heart drop!"
(Translation from Jamaican patois --- "Cowards always fail.")
Hey Assault,
Keep goin' buddy. Slow and steady. You're sound like you've "plateau"'d in this thing, where you were initially angry (rightfully so!), a little scared (same!), and incensed at the injustice (totally been there bro!) ......
Now, you're settling in for the long marathon. Just keep your pace, and get through it.
We're with ya. Be well friend.
Steven
Profound 1 ---
Have you heard of verbs?
They are words that go between the subject and the predicate.
Basically, they permit sense to be made when writing.
While I find your posts interesting from an anti-grammatical perspective, I just can't make any sense of what you t-y-p-e.
I know there's thought behind the l-e-t-t-e-r-s....
Could you please rearrange them so I can grasp what you're saying?
In an early part of the thread you mentioned a DV study in your local area that had just come out. Do you have a reference on it? I am updating my Partner Violence Index and I am looking for legitimate DV studies conducted since 2000.
I tried looking for it online, but I couldn't find any mention of it anywhere.....hmmm....interesting.
It was in the Kingston Whig Standard newspaper, and the study was done by Queen's University, I believe between September and December of 2004, if that helps you at all. Maybe you'll have better luck than I did at tracking it down.
Dear Assault,
I am astounded by your bravery.
I'm not so sure it's bravery, as much as sick and tired of being treated as a second class citizen.
Thanks though.
We all are. But very few are brave.
You are unhappy because you have to endure sixteen hours of indoctrination. Your male therapist has to endure it
8 hours every day for years. And to be used by feminists to punish other men.
But he is too cowardly to speak up against those who subject him to mental torture. And here comes Assault to remind him one more time of his shame.
Hey Assault, where did your avatar pic go? I miss it :(
Hey TBQ,
Wipe that drool from the corner of your mouth!
:twisted:
Steven
:oops:
:oops:
SOoooo.
Dave knows about this????
(wonder what his response might be)?
Hey Assault, where did your avatar pic go? I miss it :(
I was asked to take it down, repeatedly, so I did.
SOoooo.
Dave knows about this????
(wonder what his response might be)?
If a man/woman is secure with themselves, it won't matter if thier spouse looks at pictures.
Only insecure little boys/girls whine and throw a tantrum because thier spouse has the ability to look at another human being and say "Gee, that's an attractive person."
I will tell you what, Daksdaddy, when my husband stops appreciating good looking women I will stop appreciating good looking men. Of course you will have to come poke out his eyeballs first, but hey, what's a few eyeballs among friends! 8)
If you are coming to the men's conference in DC you can ask him yourself. I will do my best not to leap apon Assault and ravage him on the spot, will that make you feel better? :D
So who wanted it taken down?
The last meeting was just more stories from the men. One of the men's stories was heartbreaking and he started crying. I felt so bad for him. His decisions allowed his ex to control him, but the things she's doing to him and his son are criminal and disgusting. :cry:
The instructor and I had another little spat because he said he felt that "some" of us weren't getting the fact that our current thinking is dangerous and could get us in trouble in the future. He was looking at me during this speech, so I explained the difference between submitting to liberal politically correct rhetoric, and standing up for my beliefs.
I told him I have the ability to see where I went wrong (by slapping my ex wife), but I can still be extremely angry at the justice system, social workers, and women in general for letting this go on without question.
On a side note, I can't figure this program out. One minute they're quoting the Duluth model anti male feminist crap, then they turn around and give the men some usefull information that if implemented, could really give them the power to change thier lives.
The instructor even mentioned that this course is contraversial in Canada because the other social workers, etc run thiers in a strict browbeating manner, forcing the men into submission. Very strange. :?
Well, I am very very interested in finding out more about these programs. Institutional psychological torture of men is one of the greatest violation of our rights. Yet on all MR sites I read so little about it -- Assault's was the most detailed account. Where can I find more info?
Assault -- I told him I have the ability to see where I went wrong (by slapping my ex wife), but I can still be extremely angry at the justice system, social workers, and women in general for letting this go on without question.
On a side note, I can't figure this program out. One minute they're quoting the Duluth model anti male feminist crap, then they turn around and give the men some usefull information that if implemented, could really give them the power to change thier lives.
Your first observation above really drives Duluth Model counselors crazy, because it's too logical. It suggests that persons of either (any?) gender can accept responsibility for improper behavior, without buying into the whole false-feminist-ideology (Evil Patriarchy one-size-fits-all explanation for DV) that is at the core of their "helping" practice.
One you assert that people can both accept responsibility and reject simpleminded explanations, you're well beyond their programmed ability to respond sensibly.
Not the least because, that opens the door to questioning what WOMEN'S
ACCOUNTABILITY might be, and whether women should be considered to be adults with choices and actual obligations accordingly. (The Victimhood Myth forbids this line of inquiry...)
Your second remark about the apparent schizophrenia of the counselors is 100% correct.
Because they are (typically) "wounded healers" with tons of unresolved issues about their own gender and intimate partner experiences, they are walking examples of deeply conflicted people who really should not be allowed to try to "help," let alone "educate" anyone, anytime.
They want to be admired, respected, and given credibility as "enlightened" professionals. Unfortunately, they realize (dimly) that they are predators in a bankrupt scam racketeering industry.
Your insight about using the DV "treatment" to provide men with some useful techniques and knowledge is also revealing.
You used the word "power" ... as in, helping men obtain it.
Not power "over" women; rather "power" to realize better self-control, better self-understanding, better relationships with women.
Now,
why do you suppose this goal -- to actually "empower" men, to have better relationships with women -- might be fundamentally against the actual
modus operandi of the DV Industry?
Have you ever come across a parasite that seeks to extinguish its host?
Have you ever met a "healer" who truly wants to heal the inflicted?
The counselors who are "helping you" depend for their very income on NOT helping you!
But, you already know that.
And,
they know you know.
Assault, watch your back... play the charade out with finesse ... and, most crucially, GET 100% OUT!
A very insightful post Roy. You continue to impress! 8)
Have you ever met a "healer" who truly wants to heal the inflicted?
Having spent time in psych hospitals being treated for depression and over-drinking, I can attest to the fact that I have only met one health care professional who seemed to care about the patients. To the rest, we were just a means to an end: a paycheck. One woman counsellor actually told us one morning, "I don't want any of your shit today; I'm not in a good mood".
WTF? It's her job to help us, not tell us to shut the hell up.
Assault, there are definite parallels between your experience and mine.
Assault,
Roy is right.
And this is my own belief system: it seems of all the programs you could have entered, God put you in one that won't drive you over the edge or one that won't dent the steel that is our your heart.
I know I've said this before, but I'll say it shamelessly again: we're with you buddy.
When I told everyone I was getting a divorce I had some kind man, this guy who I had nothing to offer, YOU, PM me and offer the kindest words and an offer of being a friend.
That's right, on "the street", in front of everyone, I say it:
This man helped me. I was frustrated, needed to vent, I was getting overwhelmed. Some guy named "Assault" (no non-handles given) PM'd me and offered of himself.
How coud I not say something about that? Could any of you?
I do this because, in my job, like yours, I DEPEND on my team. Without them I can be only marginally effective. Well, corny or not, we're your team. Right here man. Steven Beene is "Assault"'s friend and hope that, in some small measure, that our words can be useful.
Sue me for being corny, but fuck it, he offered his hand to me .. can any of us do less?
I thank you for that, and in the same token, hope we (me?) can do the same for you.
I'm right here buddy. We all are.
with abiding respect, and the warmest friendship,
Steven
While I am not as eloquent as Beene, I echo his sentiments. We are here for you Assault. You are doing a phenominal job in an impossible situation, and you have my respect and support.
Jen
Dan L. --However I strongly believe that women are not at fault spcifically;
Accordingly, are they "fault-less?"
What role does individual/female responsibility play in correcting the acknowledged injustices against men that feminism has conspired to inflict on both/all? genders?
It is my opinion that it is the male and has always been males who are the liberators of enslavement. This modern form of enslavement is no different. The males have liberated females historically. The tyranny we face is the tyranny of the system. Much like the "Empire" in Star Wars. The machine if yu will.
The "Battle of the Sexes" is a hoax and one designed to divide us.
Of course you concede that feminism unconditionally/unspecifically finds all men at fault?
Yes
So, under what logic does the female species/individual women get a "pass?"
Your assumption is that you think all women are feminists and no men participate in misandry. You are wrong.
Feminism by analogy is as genderless as nazism, communism, socialism, liberalism, conservatism etc.....
The core of the movement merely hides like a virus on a host gaining ground. Like most viruses it destroys the host and moves on. Feminism is just that virus. It hides behind the veil of "For women" when in fact it is really for itself. Men defend it thinking it's for women, women defend it because they think it's for themselves. They are wrong. However the social engineers know better and utilize this to their advantage not society's.
Man women fight against feminism, they just don't get the voice. Much like the men's movement.
Is this "stealth chivalry" poking its nose under the tent yet again?
Imagine a philosophy that convinces women to cut of their breasts and rip out their uteruses in order to be "normal" , "equal".
If I am chivilrous it is a good thing. Even to my own detriment. Nobody fights feminism more than me on a person to person basis to both men adn women. I still maintain that I am protecting women, and believe that I am.
When I told everyone I was getting a divorce I had some kind man, this guy who I had nothing to offer, YOU, PM me and offer the kindest words and an offer of being a friend.
Steven
Now you've done it! You've shattered the image I've been cultivating as a heartless mean bastard!! :lol:
I'm glad I was able to help buddy! 8)
While I am not as eloquent as Beene, I echo his sentiments. We are here for you Assault. You are doing a phenominal job in an impossible situation, and you have my respect and support.
Jen
Thanks BQ. I appreciate everyone's support more than you know.
Quote: (Roy) -- So, under what logic does the female species/individual women get a "pass?"
(Dan Lynch) -- Your assumption is that you think all women are feminists and no men participate in misandry. You are wrong.
Actually, my assumption is that the next-to-the-most dangerous feminists are the non-declared, ordinary non-radicalized females who say nothing, do nothing, and yet enjoy all the privileges-without-obligations that the "sisterhood" provides.
The most dangerous feminists are men who hold positions of political and legal influence and who are quite comfortable with being bought and sold by N.O.W., VAWA, and all the attendant feminist coercion.
(D.L.) -- If I am chivilrous it is a good thing. Even to my own detriment. Nobody fights feminism more than me on a person to person basis to both men adn women. I still maintain that I am protecting women, and believe that I am.
This is an interesting argument. That by being chivalrous one might both fight feminism and protect women.
I'd like to hear more about this strategy.
Especially the "to my detriment" angle...
I've perhaps uncritically assumed that men's rights and actual gender equality would overcome either women or men having to accept detrimental (individually harmful, disempowering) postures.
Chivalry historically was about a particular kind of contract, or "exchange" between genders. It was in fact about distributing power.
It's more or less accepted that the social-economic conditions that made chivalry a functional system for both women and men have been destroyed by industrialism, feminism, and the adaptation of human desire.
My current argument would be that for a man to extend/
impose chivalry towards women is equivalent to treating them as infants.
I guess I assumed women's liberation sought above all else full adulthood, with all its perplexing consequences.
I've been wrong before...
Dan Lynch has long since claimed that more chivalry is the answer.
Uhhhmm, I don't think so.
As near as I can make some sense of D.L.'s argument, it seems that he sees in chivalry a kind of unique male power... a power that "looks out" for women and at the same time elevates men as protectors and heroes.
The problem with this line of thought is that chivalry insults both women and men, because it is a system based on deceits and lies.
Just to name the biggest myth -- chivalry depended for its very existence on the financial supremacy of men. (The chivalrous knights, barrons, dukes et.al. were landed gentry who controlled their fiefdoms as small nation-states, within which women, children, vassals, and peasants scrapped out an existence... often a comparatively decent one, under the boot of a benevolent master.)
It's not necessary to go into details to prove that today's economy has destroyed any possibility of actual chivalry... though the term "wage-slave" should suffice.
If men want to continue to pine away for the good old days of chivalry, in the form of "good mannners" and "supposed princess brides..."
That's fine.
The feminist legal system has a dismissive label for fools ---
"DEFENDANT... MALE."
Actually, my assumption is that the next-to-the-most dangerous feminists are the non-declared, ordinary non-radicalized females who say nothing, do nothing, and yet enjoy all the privileges-without-obligations that the "sisterhood" provides.
Okay. YOu are right. Many women do this. However, most women, and most of society have been misled. They have been intentionally misled to boot. They have been misled about key factors such as dv, rape and other tidbits. Their reaction to the media and it's propaganda I believe to be justifiable. It is the propaganda that is at fault. Wouldn't you say?
The most dangerous feminists are men who hold positions of political and legal influence and who are quite comfortable with being bought and sold by N.O.W., VAWA, and all the attendant feminist coercion.
They are dangerous, but not the most dangerous. The ones that go with the flow are not as bad as the ones who set up the system (unless those are the ones you are talking about)
This is an interesting argument. That by being chivalrous one might both fight feminism and protect women.
Since I think that feminism is actually designed to hurt women, I don't think it is that wrong.
They call it "feminism" it doesn't mean it's "feminism".
It's like this, the Nazis claimed they were all about Germany and if you spoke out against the Nazis but claimed to be for germany it was a contradictory statement. I dissagree. Anyone who fought against Nazism did the right thing in regards to protecting germany.
Feminism is nothing more than the same old tricks with a new name. It has nothing more to do with women than a virus has to do with its host.
Especially the "to my detriment" angle...
I take risks, I put myself out there and risk riducule. My intellegense level is probably closer to the one percentile ratio among people. So I come across as a space alien talking some bizarr language.
Chivalry historically was about a particular kind of contract, or "exchange" between genders. It was in fact about distributing power.
and slut still means 'dirty housewife'.
More later when I have time.
I skipped the program last night. I just wasn't in the mood to listen to thier bullshit. :lol:
Can you do that?
My question exactly.
Steven
Can you do that?
You're not supposed to, and they constantly threaten that they will revoke your probation if you miss classes, but I have a good excuse built in from the start.
You see, I'm a member of the prison SWAT team and I told them at the beginning of the program that if my phone goes off, I have to leave no matter what. I explained that my cell phone doesn't ring because my friends call, it only rings when there are problems at work and that means they need my help.
The instructor just looked at me kind of dumbfounded.
I said this isn't a game, it's serious business when that phone goes off. So I'll probably be missing a class or two.
He replied "Um...ok....just bring in a note from your boss stating why you had to leave."
I laughed and replied "If you think the warden of a federal institution is going to write YOU a note explaining why she activated one her Emergency Response Team members, you've got another thing coming.
I'll let you in on something. When I was in court for this bullshit, she came to the courtroom to hear what was going on. She left halfway through because she couldn't take the lies anymore. She also placed a little phone call to the prosecuting attorney and the judge giving her opinion to both.
Then to top it off, her bosses at National Headquarters gave her an order to suspend me indefinately without pay until the outcome of the trial was determined. They then told her if I was found guilty, I should be fired.
Do you know what this woman did? She told her superiors to go fuck themselves and said I was HER employee and she'd be damned if she was going to fire me over a bunch of lies!
So, I don't think she's going to be writing a note for you...ever. And she'll more than likely place a few phone calls wondering why some social worker is interfereing with one of her elite officers during a crisis at a Federal Institution."
He just looked at me for a while and said "Ok, we'll worry about that when the time comes I guess." Or some other nonsense. :lol:
So, I'll just tell him I was busy. :wink:
On a side note. I gained insurmountable respect for that woman (my boss) because of the way she handled my case. When other employees badmouth her, I pipe up and defend her to them. I tell them she has more balls than most men I know. 8)
It is always easy to run rings around stupid people (folowers of received wisdom are usualy dim.) Unfortunately these people have power over you so please be careful.
There is nothing worse than the revenge of stupid people on the inteligent. They are without mercy.
Assault,
The "agreement" documents you signed when you entered the DV program will state how many sessions you can miss.
Typically it is two absences; however ---
If you were sick (perhaps suffering nervous exhaustion from work and the prospect of yet another two hours of "helpfulness" from your counselors, for example...) ---
Then you should call them and leave a message as to why your situation prevented your attendance.
(Please, do not use -- "the woman who filed charges against me threatened me to never attend another session.... or else. That's a No-No.)
100% attendance is never required.
I'm sure there have been other clients who have missed a session or two.
Whatever. I'll bet the discussion suffered from your absence! :lol:
But do call and tell them you were indisposed, and regret your absence.
Deeply.
Your best Johnny Depp impression.
But do call and tell them you were indisposed, and regret your absence.
Deeply.
Your best Johnny Depp impression.
Ok, Thanks. :lol:
An agent provocateur (plural: agents provocateurs) is a person assigned to provoke unrest, violence, debate, or argument by or within a group while acting as a member of the group but covertly representing the interests of another. In general, agents provocateurs seek to secretly disrupt a group's activities from within the group.
Assault, do you work in Kingston?
Not much happened in today's session, just more stories. Some of the men did make some VERY poor choices in life. Hopefully, they learned something and can spot these terrible women that they had relationships with in the future. Also, I hope they can see they are worth more than being some hags slave.
I just snuck ina few crossword puzzles and hid them behind a book in order to pass the time. 3 more weeks left....than God! :roll:
Assault,
Very smart strategy man!
Not a "cross word" from the already self-proclaimed rebel/heretic in the room.
When you get your "pass" in three weeks, you can write up your analysis and reflections of the experience for all your supporters here at SYG.
I'm thankful you wisely decided against the kamakazi program you were considering a few weeks ago. (Sepuku is not especially honorable in our culture... we prefer to live to fight another day.)
Every man introduced to the kind of DV psycho-babble you've had to endure goes through that "I'll show 'em" phase.
And you still will.
It would be especially interesting to read your observations about the other men in the program, and their reported experiences.
Do you view them as powerful, misogynistic, oppressive predators? Typical batterers?
(As your therapists must...)
Or, have you suspected that there's a whole lot more going on in the gender-power game that sentenced all these men to the useless DV Gulag?
Have you observed any benefits, other than the desire to never return to DV "school?"
I think you should consider writing an essay, if not a book.
You have the chops!
When you get your "pass" in three weeks, you can write up your analysis and reflections of the experience for all your supporters here at SYG.
Here's a thought: Assault, you should see if you can get some kind of publishing deal and write about your experiences in the Duluth-Model brainwashing sessions. Title it so that it will grab the DV industry's attention:
On the Inside: An Insider's Experiences in the Duluth-Model Propaganda Machine or something like that. Then give every detail you can remember about what went on in the program, and give rebuttals to what the instructors tried to force into everyone's heads.
Granted, you might have a hard time finding someone to publish such a book, but you might luck out and find someone willing to publish it.
Assault,
Or, have you suspected that there's a whole lot more going on in the gender-power game that sentenced all these men to the useless DV Gulag?
Have you observed any benefits, other than the desire to never return to DV "school?"
It's quite eye opening to see the many shades of gray in these situations. And the fact that women have woken up to the treatment men recieve by the courts and have no problems using that against them. There are some of these guys I feel very sorry for.
I was also amazed at the amount of times I heard the phrase "I tried to change to make her happy, but it didn't matter."
I just want to scream at these men "You don't have to change for these women!" They sound so sad and confused. They're unsure why the love of thier lives is doing this to them seemingly without a care.
Then there are the plain stupid men who's partners cheated and had some other guys kid. These men apologize to thier women for not living up thier expectations and accept the bastard child as thier own. Only later to be used for child support and told they can't see these children because they're not really thiers! :shock:
But don't get me wrong. There are a few guys in there who are VIOLENT criminals. They abused thier women daily for no reason other than to cover thier own insecurities and failures. These guys are truly disgusting.
I've seen some benefits of THIS program when they stop attacking men and putting women on a pedestal. There are some real relationship skills learned here, that if applied, could really empower these men and change thier lives.
Write it up Assault and we will publish it here. We can have a separate page for it. You could use much of what you wrote on this thread and pull out highlights. Just let me know if you are interested. It would be great to be able to refer people to it to help them learn about the misandry that goes on in the duluth torture track.
Dr. E. & Assault....
I might add a verse/comment or two based on my own illuminating voyage through the DV Twilight Zone. (Believe me, I took notes and have transcripts!)
What I most admire about Assault, and frankly, what makes him truly dangerous as a voice for men's rights, is that he continues to learn quickly, with discipline, like a samurai, and he is balanced and ethical in his comments.
That cannot be taught.
It is a quality of character.
Excellent Roy. Great to have you and Assault put something together. You all put together the headings and text and I will do the rest unless you want to do the html?
The facilitator didn't show up for the class today, so we just signed in and left. Blessed peace. 8)
Assault :
wanna come talk about some of the stuff, they put u guys through in these classes on my show ,when we do the domestic violence program ?
top stuff :D
Assault :
wanna come talk about some of the stuff, they put u guys through in these classes on my show ,when we do the domestic violence program ?
I don't think I would do a very good job, sorry. I'm not a very engaging or fluent public speaker. :roll:
Well....it's official! I passed the feminist indoctrination program and am now a reformed and humbled member of the evil patriarchy! :lol:
On our last class the instructors brought in pizza and told us this last class was just an informal chat session. People were talking about the Pope, baseball, etc. I asked if we were going to be doing anything on the last day or were we just going to waste 2 hours of my life sitting here talking about crap I don't care about.
I was told that the course was over, but that I should stay and have some pizza and socialize. I said "I'm not your friend. If we're not doing anything mandatory, I'd like to go."
Then myself and a few of the other guys left. :twisted:
Well....it's official! I passed the feminist indoctrination program and am now a reformed and humbled member of the evil patriarchy! :lol:
On our last class the instructors brought in pizza and told us this last class was just an informal chat session. People were talking about the Pope, baseball, etc. I asked if we were going to be doing anything on the last day or were we just going to waste 2 hours of my life sitting here talking about crap I don't care about.
I was told that the course was over, but that I should stay and have some pizza and socialize. I said "I'm not your friend. If we're not doing anything mandatory, I'd like to go."
Then myself and a few of the other guys left. :twisted:
But do you now love Big Sister?
I ask this because the question arises - did it really "change" anything? Or did it just shovel some of your money into the pockets of a company who lobbied for the law?
But do you now love Big Sister?
I ask this because the question arises - did it really "change" anything? Or did it just shovel some of your money into the pockets of a company who lobbied for the law?
No, it changed nothing. Simply because I wasn't an "abuser" in the first place. Secondly, I took all this psycho-babble, feel-good, bullshit in college and I knew what was coming anyway. I knew how to just play the game and coast through when I needed to.
But hey, as long as the Ontario government has even more of my money, I guess it's all good, right? :?
But do you now love Big Sister?
I ask this because the question arises - did it really "change" anything? Or did it just shovel some of your money into the pockets of a company who lobbied for the law?
No, it changed nothing. Simply because I wasn't an "abuser" in the first place. Secondly, I took all this psycho-babble, feel-good, bullshit in college and I knew what was coming anyway. I knew how to just play the game and coast through when I needed to.
But hey, as long as the Ontario government has even more of my money, I guess it's all good, right? :?
You'd think it'd be a bit more humane if they just took your money and were done with it. Gotta love our gubbamint! :roll:
The system creates the imbalance intentionally. They do this to generate industry.
I am a trained family mediator. I have watched videos for professionals in the legal area made by the Justice system.
The reason this happens is because they know it makes them money.
My opinion is that if men get pissed off and kill these son of bitches, ie judges, cops, lawyers, councilors, wives etc... it's an act of desperation or self defense. Even rebellion. And justifiably so. It's basically becoming a civil war.
Assault,
I would never have courage to speak as you do. Congratulations.
Assault,
I appreciated your sharing with us.
I was having another "debate" with my mother in front of my sisters and their husbands while I was visiting last. I brought up you as an example of the false allegations thing and they immediately dismissed it as either lies or an abberation. I don't know why I didn't think of it before but I had a moment of pure inspiration. I just started listing off names. The list included my biological father, my sister's father, my sister's ex-beau, two close friends of the family, two of the fathers my Mom watches kids for, my uncle, my step-brother,and a cousin's husband. Each one had been accused of some sort of abuse and they KNEW they were lies. The conversation ended right there. I don't know if any lights went on but you could see the gears turning.
So I was thinking, most of us probably know a few people at least who have been falsely accused. When you are trying to convince people you are more than just casually aquainted with and they say false allegations just aren't that common... start whipping those names out!
Congratulations for getting out of it. At some point I was afraid that they would consider you insufficiently reformed and sentence you to additional brainwashing.
In fact, maybe, consistently and aggressively exposing their propaganda may also be a way out of the system. If presenting undesirable facts shreds their propaganda it may be unlikely that they want to have you present anymore.
Assault,
I appreciated your sharing with us.
I was having another "debate" with my mother in front of my sisters and their husbands while I was visiting last. I brought up you as an example of the false allegations thing and they immediately dismissed it as either lies or an abberation.
Alpha male, I'd just like to clear something up so there is no confusion and you aren't supporting me under false pretenses.
I DID slap my ex-wife one time across the face. I am guilty of doing that, and I have never denied it. When the police showed up I walked right up to them and said "I slapped her across the face." In court I said the same thing.
What I was falsely accused of was stalking her, her best friend, abusing our children, being a drug addict, an alcoholic, and a violent ex professional fighter/elite ERT member who beats people up for kicks. There were other ridiculous allegations, but I can't remember them right now.
So, although I appreciate the support, I am guilty of that one slap in 17 years of hell and mental abuse I suffered. Like my psychiatrist said to me after I went to him in shame of what I'd done; "Assault, you can only push someone so far before they snap. It sounds bad, but under the circumstances, she was lucky to just get a slap across the face"
My girlfriend brought up an interesting point to me a while back. She suggested that my ex wife WANTED me to hit her. She suggested that my ex knew the jig was up and I was going to throw her ass out, so she kept pushing me and pushing me so she would have leverage in our divorce.
Now that I think of it, she may be right. I don't know. :?
Congratulations for getting out of it. At some point I was afraid that they would consider you insufficiently reformed and sentence you to additional brainwashing.
In fact, maybe, consistently and aggressively exposing their propaganda may also be a way out of the system. If presenting undesirable facts shreds their propaganda it may be unlikely that they want to have you present anymore.
I was worried I may have gone too far a couple of times as well. I thought for sure, I would be failed.
I think maybe they were tired of having me argue thier propganda with logic and facts. :twisted:
Assault!
Great news!
Well, you mastered the Gulag and escaped with your integrity intact!
In a fairer world, you would be receiving a Master's degree cum laude from the MRA On-Line University, with a major in Anti-Feminist Studies.
With respect, you suggested that "nothing's changed..."
This may be true in terms of your values and beliefs and your refusal to buy into the Duluth Model BS.
But you have in fact changed.
You now possess a far deeper understanding of what men are up against.
And the quality of your writing and personal expression has won many fans.
Use the tyranny you have just survived to become an even more dangerously effective, if always ethical Assault.
The fools made you stronger man.
They never grasp that.... :wink:
What I was falsely accused of was stalking her, her best friend, abusing our children, being a drug addict, an alcoholic, and a violent ex professional fighter/elite ERT member who beats people up for kicks. There were other ridiculous allegations, but I can't remember them right now.
False allegations are false allegations. You shouldn't be prosecuted for assassinating the president when you nicked a 6-pack of beer.
I said it before, my thoughts would have been murderous. I think you showed a great deal of restraint all thing considered.
You're a better man than I am, Gunga Din.
My girlfriend brought up an interesting point to me a while back. She suggested that my ex wife WANTED me to hit her. She suggested that my ex knew the jig was up and I was going to throw her ass out, so she kept pushing me and pushing me so she would have leverage in our divorce.
That's more than just a minor point.
I would say, "of COURSE it's that way - if she lives with you, she knows just what buttons to push and how far to manipulate you."
I talked once to a divorced woman who admitted to me that she hepped the guy up, and then stood in front of the door when he wanted to get out to cool down. She didn't do it for police purposes, just to lay guilt and shame on him when he finally pushed her out of the way to get out and away from her. If these women want to create a situation, they certainly can - just block your exit, and then push all the buttons they have. I slept with friends of yours - who were a lot better, you're a total loser, a lot of other men would support me better ... blah, blah. Details depend on your personal situation, I don't know what buttons do it to you on a general message board. But the joke is, even I could guess with particular men because of how they post here - and I'm not even a woman living with you who wants to manipulate you. Especially if they're sitting at home watching Oprah - they've got plenty of time to figure you out.
Here's the hidden secret: A lot of women know just how far they can go and what will happen. They also know that they are going to be the victim.
Boys can read maps and girls can read chaps. And the immoral, using women know just how far to take it, and how to get their advantage out of it.
The solution for men is to have impeccable behavior, and when you realize that a woman is like this, just take it at the moment. And then get out. Unfortunately, most men aren't impeccable in their behavior and they get manipulated.
I'm not talking about the feminist wet-dream of a man who comes home every day and then razor-straps his wife for hours because his dinner was 5 minutes late. But ... frankly ... do you personally know men like that? They must exist, somewhere, but most men I know are human beings.
I only know one of those, Galt. IMO they are extremely rare and as far as I can tell they abuse the kids too. Those are the kind of things that always get out eventually but usually long after the abuse occurs, the type of things you hear once in a while like a girl who was chained to a toilet for 6 years by her parents. Or the four starving foster boys in Jersey. Or the Nussbaum thing. The one I know delivered years of sick abuse to his wife and five kids, but of course no one knew until much later and it all came out.
I don't really believe the feminist version of an abuser exists except in these very rare cases. IMO there are varying degrees of domestic abuse and blame ranging from the manipulating woman blocking exits and letting loose with the verbal abuse in order to get him to hit her, to mutual abuse, to men who slap or even punch their wives, to women who throw heavy objects and rake their nails across their sleeping husband's backs and face. Probably there are as many abusive women as there are men.
Some women do try to get you to hit them, but it's best to stay away from them once you realize that. It can't go anywhere good, for either of you.
Or the Nussbaum thing.
My memory (in "the Nussbaum thing") was that the man was sentenced to many years in prison. I know that Hedda Nussbaum was not in jail, because she even appeared on Larry King.
But quite a few allegations have come to light recently that Ms. Nussbaum was also instrumental in the crimes, in fact maybe to a degree not envisioned by the prosecution originally. I leave you to your own Internet web search.
Women get away with quite a bit, just by being women. I think that's a true statement. Another example would be to look at the Starkweather murders in the late 1950s (admittedly a time when women were ONLY pure ...). He got the electric chair, and she got a few years in prison, and is working (last I heard) as a nurse in East Lansing, Michigan. Although it later came out that Charles was a nit-wit who just did what she told him to do (like murder her parents, among many other people ...).
Anyway. Sugar and spice and all that. But cover your back.
OK - Caril Fugate is her name. Yeah, type that one into Google.
Hope you get nursing care by her if you ever go to Michigan. LOL
Yeah I was afraid putting Nussbaum in there would sidetrack things because she was granted immunity in exchange for testimony. There are rare cases of monstrous men who do terrible things for a long time and victimize people. That was the original question, as to whether the feminist vision exists. Certainly it doesn't exist except in very rare cases.
What is google going to show me there? Should I really do it? :D
There is no question that there are some monstrous men on this planet. That's not in dispute.
I also think that running a car into a lake with your two sons strapped in the back, in the knowledge they would drown, so you can leave your husband for a rich man is also monstrous. Or drowning 5 children, one slowly after the other, in the bathtub. Both of those were recent (last several years) media cases.
But I wonder about the general, "fits-all" approach of the current legal system. I DON'T think that most men are monsters. That seems to be the underlying thought in the general legal paradigm.
What is google going to show me there? Should I really do it? :D
LOL
No, don't bother, it's a given what's going to pop up.
I really didn't Google her, it just took me a minute to remember her name. The Starkweather case has bothered me for a long time, as well as the Gary Dotson case in Chicago. There are lots of cases in which women are shielded with this presumption of purity and innocence.
Don't forget Diane Downs, if you're going there. She didn't put the car in the water because despite wanting to get rid of the kids, she didn't want to lose the car. So she just shot them. Monsters, all.
I think, I pray, that monsters of both sexes are as rare as dentures on chickens and that most are just human with varying degrees of goodness and badness.
Yeah I was afraid putting Nussbaum in there would sidetrack things because she was granted immunity in exchange for testimony.
Well, it wasn't your best argument.
I only pick apart things that I can hit. You also made some good points.
It's probably a fair statement to say that very few people, if informed, would support the view of domestic violence that feminism and the Duluth Model have imposed on society.
Women themselves fully understand the means and mechanisms of their power over men.
Women themselves know fully well that they initiate "little" slaps, kicks, and other (sometimes not-so-little forms of) physical aggression against men.
Women themselves know fully well that they have an incredible advantage over men in the arts of emotional, psychological, and sexual coercion and relationship power-playing....
Women themselves know fully well that the legal system provides them with special privileges, exemptions, and weapons to use against men.
Women know, well and fully, that if they were to speak out publicly against these discriminatory and unjustified forms of "power and control," they would then have to give up some of their advantage in the gender wars.
Why do women not speak out then?
Many reasons come to mind. But the one that trumps all the rest is that, generally, it is against their nature.
Why would you ever accuse a fox of being "un-foxlike" for devouring the henhouse? A coyote for killing the family poodle? A wolf for taking a rancher's calf?
Predation takes many forms.
All ruthlessly honest.
Some even very pretty...
Now now, let's not bash WOMEN per se,
Most women I know, when I tell of the abuses (from the various stories posted here and MND) think that feminism has completely run amok.
Now, as to their ACTIVISM, sure, it's not a lot. But, in fairness, neither is most men's as they are ignorant or under the delusion that "it can't happen to them".
Good news on the personal front: One of the guys in my unit, a full timer (I got out of the regular Army and am now a full time Guard member - best of both worlds!) was talking to me today. Yadda yadda yadda - anywho, I told him about Glenn's show, and he specificially asked me for a link, and seemed quite interested in listening.
Guys, I feel your frustration, but the times, as they say, they-are-a-changin'. It'll be 5-15 years before we see anything substantial. I know that's frustrating, but think of your sons and your daughters growing up w/out all the baggage this current generation has.
It's not the time to bash women. Heck, some of our MOST fervent supporters ARE women. And, truth be told, they tend to be better organizers than us individualist male types.
Let's look at the long view and keep up the work in telling our stories to friends and co-workers so that they become educated and interested.
Another personal victory: My buddy has had problems with his 16 year old male child Jeremy. Jeremy has discovered the joys and powers of victimology. After taking a swing at his dad (His dad is built like a fire plug, is VERY physically aware/in-tune, and has "infantry" written all over him), dad flattened him. So Jeremy calls the police (actually he walked the 150-200 meters to the police) and tells them that "daddy abused me". Ya know who was the first person called for advice? ME. As a man who knows (admittedly a self-taught layman!) the "system" I advised my collegue and his wife on what to do. They are doing it.
So, let's not bash the women TOO much fellas. Many (Typhonm Contrary et al) are wonderful and knowlegable supporters.
I hope everyone has a GREAT weekend and hope to see many of you at the MRC (Men's Rights Congress)
Steven
LS -- Heck, some of our MOST fervent supporters ARE women.
Please list specific names and/or women's organizations supporting men's rights.
I'm quite sure the SYG server won't crash from the volume of data. :oops:
I think I pretty much agree with you here, Roy.
I find it strange how men are quite often described in the media as "sexual predators" and "preying on young women". It seems to me that if someone lays a trap to catch a bear, then they are the real predator, not the bear. Women are truly wolves in sheeps clothing. And their disguise is flawless. That's enough of the wildlife metaphors...
All around us, we are good at recognising true predators and who sits on top of the food chain. I think that this concept is generally realised in every arena except relations between the sexes (I was tempted to say "gender relations" but "gender" is part artificial construct, part euphemism, part obfuscation, part political correctness, part denial and all bollocks - I will strive to use it as little possible).
As for women speaking out against discrimination, I think it's obvious that this will never happen. With very few exceptions, the women that do speak out, do so only to clarify the details of how they want to benefit from feminism. It's like: "We're not like those other feminist women - we don't want every advantage. Just this, this and this." Gee, thanks.
If positions were reversed, however, I believe that men would speak out. The proof of this is the existence of feminism - often supported by men due to their innate sense of fairness even in the absence of any real discrimination against women! You know that you are a truly honourable sort, if you take it at someone's word that they are disadvantaged even when all evidence points to the contrary.