I have been following the discussion following on from redlogix post on DV. The broken post and men dominate discussion post.
I thought RL post brave and honest and an invitation to explore a dark underside to our beautiful country.
This opportunity was lost when it turned into a bun fight.
Offence can only be offered.
I value most contributors here, either being informed or forgiving as they know not what they do.
As with all communities you are gonna get folk that are harder to like and that is one of the strengths of this site.
I actually like Red for the most part so honestly for me it’s the politics not a personality thing.
If any man wants to write about domestic violence issues from a male perspective I will welcome that if they can do so without running MRA-like lines or trying to undermine women or feminism. If they want to run those lines then they need to be prepared for a fight, because women are having to deal with that stuff at the cutting edge in ways that many people here are unaware of, and there are real world consequences for women from what Red was saying. Until that awareness changes it will always be a conflict.
btw, I didn’t see it as a bun fight and I’ve been in quite a few gender convos on ts in the past. I saw a whole lot of people step up in Red’s thread and disagree clearly and with good political argument. Haven’t read much of Tracey’s thread yet though.
Men’s Rights Activists. A political movement which focuses on some issues that affect men but does so in the context of attacking and undermining feminism and women. It tends to reject political analysis of systemic oppression and instead tries to make out that men aren’t affored privilege and power by the patriarchal systems that we live in.
For example, the idea that domestic violence isn’t gendered, that men get beaten too, therefore domestic violence is a human violence issue, not a male violence issue. It ignores the reasons why by far the most domestic violence is done by men against women, and the reasons underlying that that are societal and structural. It sets up strawmen such as the idea that domestic violence is gendered comes from feminists thinking all men are violent or somehow bad, when in fact feminism doesn’t say that. It then uses those strawmen to push theories that don’t hold men accountable as a class.
that men get beaten too, therefore domestic violence is a human violence issue, not a male violence issue.
Logically that does not follow. Or do feminists not consider men to be human?
It ignores the reasons why by far the most domestic violence is done by men against women
Not a strong statement given the many, many studies that confirm women perpetrate all manner of abuse and violence, and it is probably more due to a weakness of limb than purity of heart that holds them back from achieving equally bad statistics with men.
But I can see why this framing is important to you and I’m not going to disrespect that.
and the reasons underlying that that are societal and structural.
Not much quibble on that in general. Agreed.
It sets up strawmen such as the idea that domestic violence is gendered comes from feminists thinking all men are violent or somehow bad
OK so not all men are abusers.
It then uses those strawmen to push theories that don’t hold men accountable as a class.
But now we all are and you’re going to punish us all for it.
At least that is how I read it; maybe you’d care to clarify?
“Not a strong statement given the many, many studies that confirm women perpetrate all manner of abuse and violence, and it is probably more due to a weakness of limb than purity of heart that holds them back from achieving equally bad statistics with men.”
is where your problem lies.
Or perhaps this particular bit “and it is probably more”
and remember the above was in response to
“It ignores the reasons why by far the most domestic violence is done by men against women”
You cannot see the “by far” qualifier – you are blinded to it – perhaps by the abuse you suffered or maybe some other reason but the qualifier is there imo so that debate CAN occur not as a poke to get you to retaliate – which is how I interpret your response to weka’s sentence.
Can you understand what I am saying?
Can you see that I am NOT attacking you?
Can you see that your response was disproportionate to the sentence that you responded to?
Can you see how that could escalate the intensity or heat of the discussion?
That is just one example – I ask you to seriously consider your emotions around this, your judgments about yourself and others, and what you want to achieve from this.
I wrote it Xanthe so believe me I don’t need to read it again. Sure it may not be dialogue (I could argue that but I’ll accept it), but it came from a place of compassion and genuine desire on my part to add something positive to the situation. Is that violence to you?
Marty ” Can you see that your response was disproportionate to the sentence that you responded to?
Can you see how that could escalate the intensity or heat of the discussion?”
Because you find the reasonable suggestion that we look for the underlieing drivers of domestic violence rather than treating it as a male problem ….. uncomfortable and challenging
you attack and place the blame for that attack on the way he presented the suggestion.
That is both disingenuous and a form of violence
As you well know!
I have considerable experience of bullying. I know it when it happens
Spot on marty, the quailifier is the thing that makes the position inclusive.
Red, in the past week I’ve made a few comments as to why I won’t engage on the content of your post or comments. I’ll add another one. Every step of the way I have seen you misuse and IMO willfully misinterpret other people’s arguments. Here is a classic example that is very easy to see. You just selectively misquoted me. That alone will stop me from talking to you on the content.
Unlike most responses I get, I went to the trouble of carefully requoting your comment, pretty much sentence by sentence so as it was clear what I was talking about and the dialog might flow better.
Then I made a response to pretty much ALL of what you said. I was lot less selective about it than most people are. The bit I mostly left out was your first para because I didn’t have any issue with it. Ironically enough it wasn’t until you used the MRA acronym in a comment to me a while back did I even know what it was either.
So I went and took a look and while there are some interesting ideas there, there’s also a lot that isn’t attractive at all. Unlike what you seem to think I’m no fan of the MRA scene because they seem locked into a confrontational mode of action that’s a complete dead end.
But now you are unhappy because you feel I willfully misquoted you. Geeze how do you think I feel after the shitstorm of misrepresentation and unmitigated personal abuse I’ve been on the wrong end the past few days? Really … I don’t ask that question rhetorically.
I repeat; “At least that is how I read it; maybe you’d care to clarify?”
Red, you selectively quoted me. I’ve then told you that you’ve mis quoted me. Are you trying to tell me that I don’t know what my own comment meant and intended?
You cannot see the “by far” qualifier – you are blinded to it
Actually, it seems to be you who is blinded by it. Studies show that women and men commit similar amounts of violence and abuse. The violence by men causes far more physical damage than that done by women and so we hear more of it but that doesn’t mean that violence by women doesn’t happen at close to the same rate.
My response to that is for men to start being active around solving the issues of violence against them without trying to undo the work that women have done. It’s actually not that hard an approach. The problem comes when men want to deny the structural issues that exist because of the patriarchal system (or whatever we want to call it) and how that system privileges people differently. I get that men don’t want to be blamed, but that’s a different thing than saying that each gender is just as violent as the other. The dynamics are different and I think the one thing we can assume here is that women see violence as a different thing than what you are suggesting, so there is a power struggle right there. Because women have been working on violence within a system that automaticaly affords them less power, they’re not going to respond well to yet another attempt to disempower them.
It may just be better(more) communication but it seems that violence (from all sources) is increasing.
It is tempting to draw a correlation with the increasing economic inequality that is occuring
Ie is the underlieing driver of all violence is economic violence
(Not saying it is or isnt , just seeing if this model gives useful insight that could help prevent or forwarn of instances of violence)
Draco, there are only a few hundred female prisoners in NZ, at a reasonable guess there are in the region of 20 times as many men in jail. That doesn’t marry up with your similar levels of violence thing.
‘Women are as likely to perpetrate domestic violence as men’. This one came up in the recent BBC documentary about ‘The Rise of Female Violence’, though to its marginal credit, the beeb only claimed this for ‘low level domestic violence’. First of all, we shouldn’t assume that if women perpetrate domestic violence, it’s always against men — some women have relationships with people of other genders too (and we don’t celebrate violence in those relationships either, especially as there is a real dearth of specialist service provision for survivors of domestic violence who are LGBTQ— which are also in fact the services that men experiencing domestic violence are most likely to need [1]). Furthermore, when women do commit ‘low level domestic violence’, it’s usually either self-defence or ‘co-violence’ — women are sole perpetrators in less than 4% of reported incidents [2]. This leads on to the next myth that needs to be debunked.
I find it interesting that men want to argue that women are as violent as men just in a less violent way. Which just comes across as self-serving mansplaining. I’m open the conversation happening in a different way, but given the whole point about power and how it gets given and used I’m not settling for a conversation where men come in and say Labour does it too.
The authors of the American CTS studies stress that no matter what the rate of violence or who initiates the violence, women are 7 to 10 times more likely to be injured in acts of intimate violence than are men [Orman, 1998]. Husbands have higher rates of the most dangerous and injurious forms of violence, their violent acts are repeated more often, they are less likely to fear for their own safety, and women are financially and socially locked into marriage to a much greater extent than men. In fact, Straus expresses his concern that “the statistics are likely to be misused by misogynists and apologists for male violence” [cited in Orman, 1998].
I’m far less interested in exhanging internet links than I am in having a real conversation about violence. I don’t see this happening and that’s because of how Red framed it at the start.
Yes, which people are convicted does give an insight into who commits violence in this land. We do not have a dirty secret of abuse equivalent to the scale of the Catholic Church but committed by mothers, aunties and sisters in this country. Unless you can show me that we do?
@ maui
The fact there are far more male prisoners than female prisoners is irrelevant. Men tend to commit more physical and sex-related violence and it is reflected in the prison rate. Women on the other hand tend to use other means of violence and intimidation that are harder to prove because they are often carried out in a clandestine manner. And even when some form of direct physical violence is present, it is often the male victim who ends up being treated like the suspect. As a result there is far less reporting of violent acts by women against men.
Anne, that sounds like a story to me. Equally I can tell you a story that women don’t go to the police to report the abuse they and their kids suffer. Now which story sounds more like real life to you? And which is more relevant to exposing domestic violence in NZ. Where are the reformed female abusers who are sharing their story to the public because it needs some sunlight?
Thank-you for insulting me maui. I don’t make up stories. I suggest you read Draco below who has linked to what I am sure is peer removed research.
You have attempted to conflate one issue with another in order to prove a point – whatever precisely it may be. We are talking in general terms about the level of violence perpetrated by men and woman alike. If you are not prepared to accept that men can be equally victims of violence too then that is an indictment on your closed mind. The terrible abuse some women and children have been forced to suffer – often over long periods of time – is not being refuted by anyone here. All some of us are trying to point out is that women can also inflict serious damage to their partners. Indeed they can inflict serious damage on other individuals too which is something I can testify to.
For your information it took me 10 years to recover from what was done to me. I had to start from scratch… rebuild my life… my confidence and self esteem… and the hardest lesson of all was learning to trust people again.
Thanks to all of you who stand up for reason and honesty.
It will prevail eventually
Those locked into their self serving prejudice ….. i hope you can find grace somewhere, in the meanwhile i really hope no one lets you anywhere near any potential domestic conflict. You potentially can cause real harm.
I should let DtB answer for himself, but the answer to your question seems to be embedded in his comment already:
he violence by men causes far more physical damage than that done by women and so we hear more of it
Also even when women do cause serious harm, it’s rarely reported. Many men on the wrong end of it don’t even begin to frame it as abuse. And when we do, it’s often not taken seriously, we run a high risk of being falsely accused as perpetrators and get no serious support.
To repeat, yes men are stronger and cause more damage. Everyone fully expects that at least 70% of the serious damage and harm will be done by men. But I maintain that discrepancy more a consequence of biology than sociology. (Maybe there lies the crux of our disagreement.)
The term ‘patriarchy’ while useful at one time has become another barrier. As many people have already said, in the bigger picture patriarchy harms men almost as much as it does women. It’s more about social hierarchy, gross inequality and unjust exploitation than it is about gender. It forms the basis of the greed based, unconstrained capitalism that oppresses virtually all of humanity in pretty much equal measure.
Again feminism has a LOT of interesting and vital things to say about patriarchy, but decoupling the concept from gender might well lower the barrier to more people accepting it. Maybe we need a new word for it.
Quick synopsis of the clip: Turangi midwife sees 50% of client mothers in domestic violence situations. So taking this into account, from your world view this would mean pregnant women instigating attacks from their partners. Or solely pregnant women being the ones inflicting damage on their male partners. I can’t reconcile that I’m sorry, and I can’t think of anyone I know in real life who would make those assumptions either.
I can’t do the video, but your synopsis doesn’t surprise me. Pregnancy is a time of heightened emotions for both partners, that often catalyses both the best and worst for each of them.
In my experience (and it’s only from a sample of one) pregnancy stimulates some very deep and primitive instincts in the mother. Unless you are prepared for them, or at least are confident enough as a man to deal with them, they can be very confronting. Cause can never stand in for excuse, but it’s exactly the kind of thing I have in mind when I’m taking about the need to understand root causes better.
Men too react in many subtle and unconscious ways to their partner being pregnant; and most of us are completely unprepared for these intense feelings. So it does not surprise me at all that pregnancy is a time of increased risk of violence. Personally I can think of few things sadder than a young pregnant mother beaten and hurt by her partner … and mostly for reasons that are probably quite avoidable.
But of course most women are not pregnant all their lives; which in real life is time enough.
What that video says is that there is something going on in very economically depressed Turangi which the health and law enforcement authorities need to get to the bottom of.
The health authorities are very much aware of the issue, have people who know about the issues on the ground (like midwives) and reformed male abusers and they do campaigns on addressing the issue. A pity there’s a sub section of society who have alternate theories on what the health issue is, a bit like the beliefs of climate deniers I might add.
Research showing that women are often aggressors in domestic violence has been causing controversy for almost 40 years, ever since the 1975 National Family Violence Survey by sociologists Murray Straus and Richard Gelles of the Family Research Laboratory at the University of New Hampshire found that women were just as likely as men to report hitting a spouse and men were just as likely as women to report getting hit. The researchers initially assumed that, at least in cases of mutual violence, the women were defending themselves or retaliating. But when subsequent surveys asked who struck first, it turned out that women were as likely as men to initiate violence—a finding confirmed by more than 200 studies of intimate violence. In a 2010 review essay in the journal Partner Abuse, Straus concludes that women’s motives for domestic violence are often similar to men’s, ranging from anger to coercive control.
I should have been more clear and said similar amounts of domestic violence.
And then there’s this bit:
For the most part, feminists’ reactions to reports of female violence toward men have ranged from dismissal to outright hostility. Straus chronicles a troubling history of attempts to suppress research on the subject, including intimidation of heretical scholars of both sexes and tendentious interpretation of the data to portray women’s violence as defensive. In the early 1990s, when laws mandating arrest in domestic violence resulted in a spike of dual arrests and arrests of women, battered women’s advocates complained that the laws were “backfiring on victims,” claiming that women were being punished for lashing back at their abusers. Several years ago in Maryland, the director and several staffers of a local domestic violence crisis center walked out of a meeting in protest of the showing of a news segment about male victims of family violence. Women who have written about female violence, such as Patricia Pearson, author of the 1997 book When She Was Bad: Violent Women and the Myth of Innocence, have often been accused of colluding with an anti-female backlash.
Can I ask for clarification weka? Specifically on this bit “…the idea that domestic violence isn’t gendered, that men get beaten too, therefore domestic violence is a human violence issue, not a male violence issue”
Are you claiming that if one was to say that domestic violence is a human violence issue, that just by saying that, political analysis of systemic oppression is ‘rubbished’? Or are you meaning to say that it can and sometimes is used in that way?
I think that MRA-like arguments I have read say that it’s not a gender issue/ it’s a human issue as part and parcel of trying to negate the idea that the patriarchal system is a real thing that affects men and women differently (they also seem to be doing the same kind of strawman thing there by saying that feminism claims that the analyses of the patriarchy mean that women think men are all to blame, at which point its very hard not to start rolling ones eyes).
So yes, if someone wants to discuss domestic violence within the context of how humans are violent in general, that’s not a problem. But if they want to mistate feminist theory and then try and use that to support their position and undermine feminism, I say fuck off. Or if they want to misuse research, statistics and analyses of social dymanics, same thing.
gsays and weka – I’ve been enjoying (not sure that’s the right word – stimulated maybe – perhaps “reminded” and “activated” might be more correct ) by the Broken and Men Dominate discussions ), and I appreciated Red Logix’s comments – even if they were being offered in a context which might not have been appropriate.
We all have our different life experiences – some are more painful than others – and what I have learned thru those, is that you can never tell what someone else has been through, even if they’re looking and sounding okay. So – along with an understanding that not everyone can express themselves as well as they’d like, then maybe a degree of tolerance is required.
This sounds ideal, but is very difficult to put into practice. And somehow its easier to be dismissive of people on The Standard and other blogs, and on Facebook, rather than face-to-face in real life. I’m not very good at it, either.
Shit – I hope this doesn’t sound patronising . From an older age point-of-view. Not meant to be.
Just saying – these have been stimulating discussions, and they’ve brought up a lot of memories – good and bad.
And I wanted to comment on the anonymity thing as well – I started out on The Standard being anonymous. But – I’m now old enough (getting towards ancient), not sure if I’m tough enough – but decided it didn’t matter any more – so became the real me.
But I’m sure the real me is a lot nicer in writing, than the REAL me is !
hi jenny, i have been extremely fortunate not to have been a victim of violence.
i also have been close to some folk who have been in extremely unhealthy relationships, ranging from the psychological ‘water on a rock’ type abuse through to the serious hospitalizing because of assault.
it is hard to act, to act appropriately and effectively without isolating the victim further from support.
especially with the smaller incidents, the precurser events.
re pseudonyms, i picked this tag when i started commenting as, to my eyes, back then most folk on ts had them.
i find if someone is a dick or trolling, i just ignore them.
also want to add, i like the more vigorous moderating. stopping distracters and trolls.
i like dissenting opinions as it makes me look closer at what i believe, but some of these folks are more diversionary.
Hi Jenny, I also found the discussions stimulating and I’m heartened by the fact that they were more civil than usual.
I suppose I’m still wondering if some people don’t fully get what the objection to Red’s post was. Yes it was the context. But it’s also the politics. It’s brave of him to tell his personal story. I have no problem with anyone doing that and I know that most feminists not only support survivors of all genders using their experiences to talk about their politics, but that most feminists have men in their lives and so value men as a class.
What I have a problem with is Red’s politics around gender and violence, and his subsequent arguments that are essentially anti-feminist and underming of the politics of oppression that explains so much of women’s experiences. I have had quite a few conversations with him now over the years about this and I no longer have any tolerance for what he does. He is able to explain himself reasonably well so I don’t think this is an issue of him not being understood. I think it’s an issue of many people rejecting his basic premises (eg the biology arguments, tha idea that domestic violence isn’t gendered, his very poor understanding of what feminism is and does). Those basic premises get criticised and then he tries to defend them, and in amongst all that his story gets mixed up. But the story of what happened to him isn’t the problem, it’s how he is using that to inform his politics that is.
I will always support people to be able to talk about their experiences. But you are right, I have zero tolerance for people then using those to underpin some pretty abhorrent politics esp where those politics actively harm others. I’m not dismissive of Red (him and I have talked all sort of politics over the years), but I am now pretty dismissive of his gender politics. Much of that is due to the fact that it is such a waste of time and a huge distraction to have to argue about things that are fundamentall agin to progressive politics. We have urgent gender issues to work on, many of us have been working on them for a very long time, and the kinds of ideas that Red is pushing are part of a bigger agenda to undermine women and many of the gains made in recent decades.
” But the story of what happened to him isn’t the problem, it’s how he is using that to inform his politics that is.”
Thanks Weka for the clarification re Red L and his gender politics – I hadn’t registered his previous comments on those issues – maybe I just misssed them because of other interesting discussions going on elsewhere.
I don’t think we’ve had any of those big gender discussions for a quite a while. In the past they’ve been ugly, so it was good to see this one relatively straight forward.
” Much of that is due to the fact that it is such a waste of time and a huge distraction to have to argue about things that are fundamentall agin to progressive politics. ”
This neatly sums up why “progressive politics” is stalled, meanwhile we all career to distruction.
The inevitable outcome of the use of factionalisation as a campaigning tool is that you create a pool of voters that vote against you.
When you entwine that with environmental and fairness issues you do real harm.
Its sad
Ok i am settling on naive
If you are unaware of the factionalisation of the “progressive parties” and the inevitable result large scale voter turn off then i dont see how i am going to convince you.
really? .. you really dont get this?
Positive discrimination is an oxymoron, discrimination is wrong whatever the cause
I know it, you know it, and a majority of voters know it
So i guess you will tell me it isn’t happening? But if it looks like a duck , quacks like a duck, and craps everywhere , most people will see a duck.
That is not in any way to detract from the realities of the many and increasing inequalities we live with. just to make the point that a just cause dosn’t make wrong right and you do more harm than good if you act like it does!
“If you are unaware of the factionalisation of the “progressive parties” and the inevitable result large scale voter turn off then i dont see how i am going to convince you.”
I’m simply asking you to explain what YOU mean by those things, so there can be clear communication. I could guess what you mean, but honestly, if you can’t be bothered with communicating well I don’t see why I should either.
I don’t understand your comments either, Xanthe, re factionalisation of left parties. Can you clarify what you mean by this word – factionalisation please, and how does it occur ?
Perhaps an example would help.
Hi jenny
the purpose of governance is to find the best solutions for all, the purpose of elections or appointments either in government or within political parties is to appoint those who will best serve all.
Factionalisation occurs when candidates present as representing the interest of some demographic (gender, race, age, religion, idiology, whatever) and those demographs vote for the candidate that will best further the interest of that demograph.
It seems harmless enought but it is actually an unethical abuse of the democratic process, a bit around the edges does little harm, when it becomes the dominant feature of party or government the purpose of government and democracy is lost
that is quite significantly were the “progressive parties” are at
anti-feminist and underming of the politics of oppression that explains so much of women’s experiences.
I agree that my view does not line up with the usual feminist conventions. Although to be quite plain, feminism itself seems to have so many interpretations it’s not simple to conform to one linear narrative anymore.
Having said that, I’ll paraphrase what I’ve said before, that feminism has played a vital role in identifying and making visible the issue of dv. In that sense I’m hardly ‘anti-feminist’ … or whatever that is supposed to mean.
Really my view boils down to this. By placing most of it’s focus on the visible story of male violence on women and children the standard feminist narrative has become a hindrance to progress. I point to the flat-lining statistics that seem to be as bad as ever they were. We aren’t making progress and I think we need to look closer at the reasons why.
It is plain as day that the so called ‘gender wars’ have factionalised men and women against each other. That isn’t my doing, it’s just obvious after a few passes around the net. I think that is a hindrance. We will only solve this problem if men and women trust each other and help each other through this.
My approach is to treat the underlying root causes of intimate partner violence as a gender neutral, human problem that is aimed at understanding the drivers of behaviour and avoids blame.
And I think I can mostly say I’ve never been openly dismissive of your views weka. Not like you are now.
“In that sense I’m hardly ‘anti-feminist’ … or whatever that is supposed to mean.”
That’s right, you don’t know what I, as a feminist, mean. And until you are willing to take the time to learn that, I’m not longer willing to debate content with you on this topic.
“And I think I can mostly say I’ve never been openly dismissive of your views weka. Not like you are now.”
Maybe, but my memory over multiple conversations is that you routinely avoided dealing directly with the arguments pointing out the problems in what you are presenting. So it’s not as overt, but your dismissal is still there. And it’s horrible to debate with. I’ve reach my limit, so I’m making my dismissal overt.
As I’ve said, I have very good reasons for not engaging in debating the content of your post or comments. I’m not the only one that feels like it’s a waste of time and/or a big distraction.
Weka, I agree that RL did politicise his post and use some unfortunate stereotypes, but the thing that did strike me about the whole thread was the fact that males in abusive relationships are just told to get out of the relationship, that is your only option. Imagine if that is the only advice we gave females in abusive relationships, it’s simply not that easy.
There is no refuge available for men, retaliation is not and should never be an option and to my knowledge there are no support groups available to abused men. In fact, NZ’s Domestic Violence support groups openly exclude and even blame men:
“Every year, Shine directly helps thousands of adult and child victims of domestic abuse to be safer, and we motivate hundreds of men that hurt their families to change their behaviour” http://www.2shine.org.nz/how-shine-helps/shine-services
“Women’s Refuge is a key national organisation working to end domestic violence towards women and children” https://womensrefuge.org.nz/
Ad offered a useful statistic in the first comment of RL’s post:
“In the four years from 2009 to 2012, 76% of intimate partner violence-related deaths were perpetrated by men, 24% were perpetrated by women: http://areyouok.org.nz/family-violence/statistics/”
Without trying to politicise the issue further, how do you see a way forward if we are not willing to look at the issue in a gender neutral way? Do we just accept that a quarter of intimate partner violence-related deaths are caused by men not getting out of the relationship in time?
This has ended up being a lot more confrontational than I originally set out to be. Please don’t take any of this as an attack on you, or as trying to diminish the work that AreYouOk and Womens Refuge do. I am simply trying to point out that while RL may have made some unfortunate statements in his post, his story equally needed to be told and the taboo of female-against-male domestic violence does need to be addressed.
Just to clarify a little further Bob. When I mention the topic of female on male abuse (which only some of which is physical) … I’m absolutely not trying to make any kind of Labour did it too argument. One form of abuse in no sense diminishes any other.
And it was my experience that the underlying causes of dv are shared by both genders, and this shapes my approach to the topic.
“Weka, I agree that RL did politicise his post and use some unfortunate stereotypes, but the thing that did strike me about the whole thread was the fact that males in abusive relationships are just told to get out of the relationship, that is your only option. Imagine if that is the only advice we gave females in abusive relationships, it’s simply not that easy.”
Women do still get told that. In the past they got told that a lot. The reason they have more options today is because they organised.
There is no refuge available for men, retaliation is not and should never be an option and to my knowledge there are no support groups available to abused men.
The reason why women have services is because they organised. We didn’t get them handed to us on a plate. We got together under pretty difficult circumstances and created those services ourselves until others like the govt were willing to step in and help too. We are still hugely underfunded relative to many other aspects of NZ society, including ones that men not only benefit from but control the funding for.
In fact, NZ’s Domestic Violence support groups openly exclude and even blame men:
“Every year, Shine directly helps thousands of adult and child victims of domestic abuse to be safer, and we motivate hundreds of men that hurt their families to change their behaviour”
Yes, men need to be held accountable for when they hurt other people. What does that have to do with men who are victims?
Ad offered a useful statistic in the first comment of RL’s post:
“In the four years from 2009 to 2012, 76% of intimate partner violence-related deaths were perpetrated by men, 24% were perpetrated by women: http://areyouok.org.nz/family-violence/statistics/”
I won’t look at links or stats that Red provides without a very good reason, because I reject his basic premise. All other times I have looked at arguments that say lots of women abuse men, it’s led to some pretty dodgy, already refuted research. I’m not going to waste my time because I don’t trust Red’s judgement on this. If someone whose gender politics I respect posts somethign I will look at it.
Without trying to politicise the issue further, how do you see a way forward if we are not willing to look at the issue in a gender neutral way?
We’re already making progress. This is one of Red’s basic premises that I reject (that we haven’t achieved anything useful).
Do we just accept that a quarter of intimate partner violence-related deaths are caused by men not getting out of the relationship in time?
ok, now I’m confused. Are you talking about men who abuse, or men who are being abused, or men who are both? Or what? It would help if you were clearer. I get that the situations are complex, and we need to take time to communicate clearly what we mean.
This has ended up being a lot more confrontational than I originally set out to be. Please don’t take any of this as an attack on you, or as trying to diminish the work that AreYouOk and Womens Refuge do. I am simply trying to point out that while RL may have made some unfortunate statements in his post, his story equally needed to be told and the taboo of female-against-male domestic violence does need to be addressed.
I actually don’t care what Red wrote in his post, because I’ve seen it all before. It’s not just that he makes unfortunately statements, it’s that his politics are based on premises that many progressive people reject, and he is aligning himself with groups that are actively harming feminism, women and society.
And let’s be clear here. He also is promoting a false dichotomy between the existing situation as he perceives it ie that seeing domestic violence as gendered is harming men and inhibiting change, and the idea that we can only do wright by men by abandoning that. It comes across as feminism is wrong about this and we need to look at men’s needs by underming what they are doing. It’s just bullshit. And it’s a serious problem here on the left because I don’t see any feminists supporting what he says (so if you want to ask where we would go, trying figuring out how to move somewhere after you have just said that feminism is wrong).
Here’s what I would respect,
Domestic violence overwhemingly affects women and is perpetrated by men, so we need to look at how women can be protected and men can be expected to change.
In addition to that, there are men who are being harmed by women, and we need to look at why that is happening, and protect them and get those women to change too.
In addition to that, humans don’t fit neatly into binary gender or heterosexuality, so we need to pay attention to those cultures and what their needs are around violence.
All of the above is an inclusive model. Feminism will support men organising to address violence against them. They won’t support that if it’s being done by underming feminism.
(aside, because this apparently needs spelling out, “Feminism will…” is me shorthanding and generalising as a way of not writing a novel. Like every other progressive movement, there are many expressions of feminism and many ways that feminists are active and see themselves. That’s not a problem).
Edit, I’ll also say that there is no taboo from me on talking about domestic violence against men, nor from most feminists I know. There is appropriate time and place, but in general, most feminism wants men to be well too. I would welcome posts and discussion about this topic on ts. I won’t tolerate that being done in a regressive and repressive MRA-like way. There are other, constructive ways to approach this. Red isn’t the one to do it.
It’s important to look further behind the statistics quoted above (e.g. 24% of intimate partner violence-related (IPV) deaths were perpetrated by women against men), which tend to underestimate the magnitude and effect of domestic violence perpetrated against women.
From the report provided on the areyouok website, when examining the deaths according to domestic violence history within the relationship, 93% of all the IPV deaths involved female primary victims, and 96% involved male predominant aggressors (page 41 of the report).
Of the deaths perpetrated by women, 83% were classified “Female primary victim/suspected primary victim kills male predominant aggressor”, and 17% as “Female predominant aggressor kills male/female primary victim”.
So, in most cases women perpetrating IPV deaths were primary victims themselves.
Also, just want to say thank you to Weka for your insightful and considerate comments regarding IPV and all gender-related subjects! This is a hard area to read as a lurker, let alone comment on, but so important, so I really appreciate that you continue to fight the fight.
I’m hugely appreciative of what you’ve just posted re the report.
And thanks for the thanks and the reminder of what this is like to be reading. This is why I don’t want to respond to Reds content, it just keeps a politically damaging conversation going. Walking away now.
I also appreciate the effort Weka has put into her comments, patiently trying to educate and explain in the face of some incredible levels of ignorance and misogyny.
I expect it from the right but find it very hard to accept it from the left. Unfortunately my idea of left seemingly does not match many of those commenting on the Standard who claim to be left but still have racist and sexist attitudes that they are not willing to confront.
That’s the weka who says that RL’s judgement on this issue is untrustworthy and that the facts that RL provides aren’t worth following up because they’re probably dodgy?
I suppose RL could be a greater man and not take that shit personally. But it sounds pretty damn personal.
That’s not quite what I said though CV, so there is another example of misrepresenting my position. Here’s what I actually said,
I won’t look at links or stats that Red provides without a very good reason, because I reject his basic premise. All other times I have looked at arguments that say lots of women abuse men, it’s led to some pretty dodgy, already refuted research. I’m not going to waste my time because I don’t trust Red’s judgement on this. If someone whose gender politics I respect posts somethign I will look at it.
I have given analysis over time of why I won’t engage with Red’s content on this topic. That included me saying that I don’t trust his sources because of my experience of arguing with him about this in the past. Other’s a free to follow up his links and make their own decisions.
You don’t like my critique of his politics, fair enough. But I haven’t been abusive. In fact I would day that this whole round of gender politics on ts has been remarkably free from abuse.
There is nothing wrong with me or anyone critiquing Red’s position. We do that on ts every day, why not in this situation?
Every study done in this area has been controversial. And when you drill into the details what you find is that there are essentially three kinds of interaction:
1. One partner inflicts one way abuse on the other
2. One partner initiates, the other responds in self-defence
3. Both parties pretty much go at it hammer and tongs equally
This complicates how we view the situation a lot. When you add in verbal abuse and humiliation it gets even more complex.
which tend to underestimate the magnitude and effect of domestic violence perpetrated against women.
Again no-one wants to minimise the fact that male violence causes more harm. I’ll keep saying this over and over because pixels are free and I can type fast. Your point is redundant, I’ve already emphatically stated it many, many times and yet no-one seems capable of noticing this.
So, in most cases women perpetrating IPV deaths were primary victims themselves.
Yet interestingly when men perpetrate IPV deaths absolutely no defense of provocation or any justification is ever permitted.
But certainly where deaths are concerned, men are the by far the dominant perpetrators, no argument … yet crucially it is not 100%. Women too murder their partners. Same-sex partner violence is also thought to be rising.
This is proof that violence is not totally determined by the fact of gender alone. Abuse occurs on a spectrum, and while males unquestionably dominate the worst end of it, there is no evidence to suggest that women are exempt from their share of it either.
Therefore there must be an underlying root cause that is common to all human experience.
And that just proves – nothing. In fact, it’s moving the goal post from domestic violence to deaths caused by domestic violence. Different category, different measure.
Ummmm, if someone moved the goal posts ’twasnt me – I used the same evidence from the report quoted by Bob, so not sure where this critique comes from.
What I think it illustrates is that you need to have a more indepth knowledge of the figure you are quoting, otherwise you can do more harm than good.
I won’t look at links or stats that Red provides without a very good reason, because I reject his basic premise. All other times I have looked at arguments that say lots of women abuse men, it’s led to some pretty dodgy, already refuted research. I’m not going to waste my time because I don’t trust Red’s judgement on this. If someone whose gender politics I respect posts somethign I will look at it.
You’ve got a smart guy, RL, who has personal experience with DV as a victim, and who is willing to engage with you and with other commentators on TS in an articulate way.
But you know what, fuck that, he’s clearly not trustworthy on this issue because he says things which confront the mental model you’ve built up around DV, and because you believe that your own basic premise is solid enough that you can dismiss him as you already have the answers that you want.
So his entire input and life experience gets *POOOF* invalidated in a single moment – and my input too even though I personally know how violent Kiwi women can be.
Instead, you’ll just create your own definition and own paradigm of what DV affecting males is all about, and the rest of us simply get to buy into it or not.
Well, good luck with that, because both RL and I know that while you, and some of the other women who are commenting on this issue have some of the most important answers and insights, you still only own a fraction of what is required.
All of the above is an inclusive model. Feminism will support men organising to address violence against them. They won’t support that if it’s being done by underming feminism…There is appropriate time and place, but in general, most feminism wants men to be well too. I would welcome posts and discussion about this topic on ts.
The concept that men need or want the support of feminists or feminism in order to change themselves for the better, or that feminists or feminism has any validity in determining or defining what is good for men, or that feminists or feminism can describe what men are lacking and then act to help change the well being of men, is utterly unacceptable.
It is as ridiculous and outrageous as suggesting that women need the support, approval and contribution of men in order to change and improve who they are.
The concept that men need or want the support of feminists or feminism in order to change themselves for the better, or that feminists or feminism has any validity in determining or defining what is good for men, or that feminists or feminism can describe what men are lacking and then act to help change the well being of men, is utterly unacceptable.
Poppycock. This the third time of writing? How can you be a man in this world and not be a feminist?
Also. No-one has berated or challenged reds account of his experience of DV. What is challenged is the deficiency of understanding he exhibits with reference to the underlying drivers of DV. I mean, fuck, he takes the most valuable frame of reference – patriarchy – and just flat out dismisses it. Having dismissed that whole analytical framework out of hand, he then turns to studies and figures, a lot of which are twisted (and discredited) stats produced by overtly misogynistic fucktards to back his assertion that females and males are on some kind of level playing field when it comes to violence. We ain’t!
And that, just in case your entertaining the idea, isn’t me hating on men or projecting any type of self loathing. But I do despise that set of social norms that have grown up and that can be said to reside with the concept of patriarchy. And I despise the way that culture impacts on men and women both directly and indirectly or via intermediaries.
I don’t pretend to know the numbers on this. But I’d be curious to know how many women who abuse their partners were themselves previously subjected to abuse. Because misdirected revenge that springs from events in previous relationships or situations is cause for using the framework of patriarchy to understand why some women are abusing their partners…it’s not a reason to throw the framework away on the grounds that it doesn’t seem to apply to the here and now of a given abusive situation.
mean, fuck, he takes the most valuable frame of reference – patriarchy – and just flat out dismisses it. Having dismissed that whole analytical framework out of hand,
Really?
Well if its such a valuable and powerful frame of reference, then let’s see the highly insightful and effective paths forward that this awesome analytical framework gives our towns and neighbourhoods about DV.
At least with a Marxian analytical framework, the workers are shown real ways out that they can do for themselves.
Its a long thread Bill you may have missed when I said this above at 4:11pm
The term ‘patriarchy’ while useful at one time has become another barrier. As many people have already said, in the bigger picture patriarchy harms men almost as much as it does women. It’s more about social hierarchy, gross inequality and unjust exploitation than it is about gender. It forms the basis of the greed based, unconstrained capitalism that oppresses virtually all of humanity in pretty much equal measure.
Again as I said, feminism has had a LOT of vital and interesting things to say about patriarchy. Really.
But when you read someone like Jared Diamond who neatly traces the origin of it back to the invention of agriculture, the need to defend territory, the need for disposable males as soldiers, the need to control female breeding to have plenty of replacements, the resulting intensification of hierarchy and inequality, economic models based on slavery and exploitation … it all looks more and more like class war than gender war.
Now of course historically feminism has a proud heritage of righting legal and structural inequality that was an inherent part of the slave/serf economies. But in a society where all women can vote, go to work in any job of their choosing, enter any relationship they want, and leave it at their choosing, enter into any legal contract, start any business they want, travel and live pretty much as they wish …. the idea this is a brutal repressive and literal patriarchy doesn’t quite live up to the label any more.
What instead feminism now confronts is male behaviour. And is now unhappy that men have all gotten with the program. What many men feel, but struggle to articulate is a sense that “what you are calling ‘patriarchy’ smells pretty much like the shit I have to put up with everyday myself”. As I said before; patriarchy harms most men almost as much as most women.
Now crucially this does NOT dismiss the experience of patriarchy as women experience it. But it does suggest a better way to reframe it so as both genders get it.
Jared Diamond – I’ve read some of his stuff – is in the same boat as any other person looking to the past and trying to figure it out. They are stuck within current frameworks of reference and so, in the end, can only tell stories. Now, some of those stories might seem more plausible than others, but all of them are chock full of projections from the here and now into an unknown and largely unknowable past.
Red, if you’re looking to pit an economic understanding against a gender understanding, then seriously, go and read this excellent post from a wee while back by ‘stargazer’.
he then turns to studies and figures, a lot of which are twisted (and discredited) stats produced by overtly misogynistic fucktards to back his assertion that females and males are on some kind of level playing field when it comes to violence.
What a load of fucken bollocks.
When study after study shows the same thing then you pretty have to take it as a given. And, no, those studies have not been discredited.
Hi Bill – your comments above make a lot of sense. Pity the guys who are reading them cannot take them on board.
Patriachy does seem to me to be a valid framework to use in this discussion.
It is as ridiculous and outrageous as suggesting that women need the support, approval and contribution of men in order to change and improve who they are.
Yes. When the feminists demanded the right to define what was important to them, to frame gender issues entirely on their terms, they forgot that men might equally demand the same right as well.
Of course their response was ‘well you are all the bad guys so you don’t get that right’. And we said ‘well actually we AREN’T all the bad guys’
And the women reply “we never said that, we just want to hold all men accountable as a class for the actions of a few’. And so it goes.
Then the MRA types said ‘fuck you, we’re going to determine our own narrative anyway’. The women screamed ‘misogynists!’ and on it goes.
Oh well … I’ll finish here by repeating something I said above; that in the end the path through this shitstorm will only be found when both genders start trusting each other again. And then helping each other to be be the best we can.
I’ll put it this way. We all know that men cause more harm. It’s largely a fact of our greater strength and crap socialisation in an intrinsically violent society.
But tell a man that his greater strength is a gift, tell him it is his duty to use if safely, tell him it makes him a better man to be responsible for using this gift wisely … then you have a framework most men will respond to.
And then ask yourself, who is that most men will listen to most, that they will do almost anything to please, if not the women in their lives they mostly want nothing more than to love and cherish?
Yes. When the feminists demanded the right to define what was important to them, to frame gender issues entirely on their terms, they forgot that men might equally demand the same right as well.
Red. What’s with this ‘the feminists’? Do you really think that feminist thought and understanding is the exclusive preserve of women? I mean, my experience of patriarchy is substantially different to that of women, but it’s not separate.
Of course their response was ‘well you are all the bad guys so you don’t get that right’. And we said ‘well actually we AREN’T all the bad guys’
I only ever met one woman who called herself for being a feminist who hated men…I was the only man in a room of about a dozen feminists at the time. And you know what? The feminists in the room didn’t want a bar of it. (That was in a house the evening before a day of feminist workshops many years back in England…mostly anarcho feminists from memory, pretty light on the liberal feminist front and I only wound up being in that house by accident).
And the women reply “we never said that, we just want to hold all men accountable as a class for the actions of a few’. And so it goes.
I’ve never had a feminist attempt to hold me accountable for the actions of others (with the one isolated exception I’ve mentioned above)
Then the MRA types said ‘fuck you, we’re going to determine our own narrative anyway’. The women screamed ‘misogynists!’ and on it goes.
So the MRA types basically justify their shit off the back of their pre-existing prejudice.
Oh well … I’ll finish here by repeating something I said above; that in the end the path through this shitstorm will only be found when both genders start trusting each other again. And then helping each other to be be the best we can.
Again. I’ve never (with that one exception) found distrust – in relation to what we’re discussing – to be any kind of an issue.
I’ll put it this way. We all know that men cause more harm. It’s largely a fact of our greater strength and crap socialisation in an intrinsically violent society.
If society is intrinsically violent then it follows that no configuration of humanity can be anything but violent – and that’s simply not true. there are reasons why this society is violent. But you’re apparently loathe to analyse it.
But tell a man that his greater strength is a gift, tell him it is his duty to use if safely, tell him it makes him a better man to be responsible for using this gift wisely … then you have a framework most men will respond to.
Hail the almighty? Really??
And then ask yourself, who is that most men will listen to most, that they will do almost anything to please, if not the women in their lives they mostly want nothing more than to love and cherish?
And they all lived happily ever after in a patriarchal wonderland. Fan-fucking-tastic.
I already read Weka’s comment earlier. You might have noted I asked her to clarify one small part – which she did. She was giving a rundown of MRA stuff….not a run down of men’s attitudes. Is that where you went off track?
Well, what kind of response do you expect to an appeal for supposed superiority be acknowledged, accepted as truth and encouraged/rewarded? I wasn’t sneering at you. I was being contemptuous of the idea you were peddling. Look. If you happen to have a partner who is consensually submissive in aspects of your relationship, then all power to you both. But you can’t put that expectation or that template ‘out there’ as though it should be a norm and not expect some ‘less than enthusiastic’ responses.
“I’ve never had a feminist attempt to hold me accountable for the actions of others”
Try reading weka up above.
here’s what I said,
It then uses those strawmen to push theories that don’t hold men accountable as a class.
That means that men as a class are accountable for the privilges that their class is afforded. In the context of this conversation it also means that men as a class need to step up and change male violence, not because all individual men are responsible for the actions of other individual men, but because men are the ones that can change their own culture as a whole.
Nothing, I repeat nothing, in what I have said suggests that Bill is responsible for another general man’s violence. IMO he does have a responsibility to take action against male violence in general, and I see him doing that in this thread.
Likewise I will hold Pākehā as a class accountable for racism in NZ. Or the non-disabled accountable for the shit that disabled people have to go through just to live their lives. Not because non-disabled people are bad, but because they have power that disabled people don’t.
So, yet another example of your failure to even understand the basic arguments made by feminism, and to misrepresent my views. On and on it goes. Your views on feminism are so twisted from what feminists believe and you continue to assert that your views of feminism are more valid than those of feminists. It makes sense then that you insist that I don’t know what I mean elsewhere in the thread. There’s no way past that.
IMO he does have a responsibility to take action against male violence in general, and I see him doing that in this thread.
I’ve absolutely zero problem or argument when you frame it like that.
But still nothing said about women taking responsibility against female violence in general. Yes it’s less physically damaging and way less visible, but it emotionally it’s every bit as harmful.
Feminists have spent a lot of energy and got a LOT of oxygen demanding men take responsibility to change; yet the slightest hint from men that maybe women might want to examine their own camp too, gets viciously shouted down.
As for the rest of your comment, it’s patronising and condescending. All you do is tell me how ignorant and twisted I am, making the issue personal rather than adding to the conversation. You barely manage to omit the word misogynist. It’s typical of the bile feminist direct towards men and it’s taking you nowhere.
@Bill
Look. If you happen to have a partner who is consensually submissive in aspects of your relationship, then all power to you both.
Again the grotesque misrepresentation. It’s truly amazing what people will project. Actually my partner is a successful and capable business person in her own right and is naturally assertive and bossy when it suits her. She’s much better at organising people than I am, and has fine strong opinions of her own. It is why I love her.
But while you sneer, the fact remains, regardless of any imaginary templates you want to make up, almost no-one enters into an intimate relationship with a picture in their mind of hitting, kicking, beating or killing this person they love. No-one (apart from maybe the psychopaths) walk down the traditional marriage aisle in the hope that one day they can get to kick the shit out the person they are about to be joined with.
So when it does all end up in hospital, refuge or court surely it is worth asking ‘what went so badly wrong?’
In all this debate it is so easy to lose sight of this truth, that most people, most of the time are fundamentally good. And when they are not … it is more often the stuff of tragedy than malice.
That’s it from me. I’m sick of seeing my name on the sidebar for the time being and I’ve other things to get on with.
“the taboo of female-against-male domestic violence does need to be addressed”.
Yes – I would agree Bill, but isn’t it time that men took up that issue for themselves – just as women in the past have taken up the issue of domestic violence and worked to bring it out into the open, and to provide safe shelters for those women and children it affects.
Edit – I see that Weka above answers this in more detail.
Hi all, I would like to suggest that part of the tension in this discussion is that we have a head and a heart debating and in that, it can be hard to see common ground
I applaud your approach gsays and several decades ago i would have said the same.
In my experience those who set themselves up as saviours of the victim’s often gain a sense of personal entltlement and feel justified in using unethical means to get what they are convinced is owing to them, This manefests in dishonest and manipulative communication as was the case here. It is a form of violence and does create tension. In a domestic setting it is domestic violence. They themselves are convinced that because they are doing it for the victims is must be OK
Quite frankly I dont know how to get through to them. The only times i have observed a meaningful change from this behaviour is if they are by circumstance required to accept responsibility for some harm they have caused, but generally it can be blamed on the oppressors so it dosnt happen often. Thus are despots made from the best of intentions.
Oh wow so good, http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=11637631 Raybon Kan “Meanwhile, in another romantic comedy, Fairfax and NZME seem to be dating. So one media firm was eyeing up another, yet the media were caught by surprise. What do we expect? The media were in a lock-up watching The Bachelor.”
It therefore seems important to renew the discussion of what we want: to think through not just what we are against, but what we are fighting for (and hence who ‘we’ are), and to consider what might be plausibly achieved in present circumstances.
I just read your recently suggested link about “commonism”. A very good read but I terribly missed one hugely important aspect or dimension, which seems to be left out of most socio-political discourse. Possibly the very last sentence hides a suggestion of a hint …
Incognito
Right I will have another look at that commonism piece and see what the dots you leave behind you refer to.
As to the quote above, yes to thinking about what we are fighting for (and it is a fight, not a skirmish against the powerful-money-materialism-crazed and their naive bunnies in the headlights, and is likely to be a fight to the death – of people elsewhere, or closer – our vulnerable towns and supply systems, our extended families, us, our known planet – which will become the place of the ants which I think have the life systems to survive in places).
But thinking who ‘we’ are. There isn’t time to think, argue and analyse that in depth. The ‘we’ have to be the people who will step forward and do something of value in building capacity, sustainable, friendly community and retaining as much kindness as possible, despite ever harsher conditions. Those who self-select to act, must seek out other people who can combine thinking, reflecting, comradeship and action and together work for worthy practical positive outcomes. The others are just, literally, time-wasters. In The Day of the Triffids, those who wake in the morning after the night-sky show, are blind and shocked and feel their way along the walls to the downstairs lobby hoping for help and guidance, and mill round in circles there.
That is what is happening here in the world right now, we can see but we can’t process intellectually what we see and so won’t take any steps to defray the disaster to come. What a future. Dire. And we are aboard the Titanic. Some survived from that – and one of them was in the company that built it. But it wasn’t his fault was it? The problem was over-confidence, hubris on everyones part, especially captain and crew. A very human failing. Perhaps that is why the human race is failing.
I will certainly have to re-read it again as it was rather long & dense at such a late time at night.
I think you’re probably right about everything you wrote although I personally dislike using ‘military’ terminology. I prefer to see it as (part of) “the human struggle” (Darwinian) to figure out who we are, what is the purpose (meaning) of life, and all those other pesky little questions that won’t go away 😉
The only thing I’d argue about is the tension between acting (now) and thinking (later). IMO we’re destined to do (repeat) the same things (mistakes, or, in your words “mill round in circles”) if we rely on short-term or so-called fast thinking (à la Kahneman). The human condition requires holistic approaches, which also means that actingthinking have to be(come) complementary rather than separate steps in the process.
Popper made a similar argument, I believe, when he discussed (piecemeal) social engineering and planning & politics: small steps with feedback loops along the way and continuous adjustment. That said, I’m not sure that his methodology/philosophy is applicable to major social crises. He contrasted this with Utopian engineering, which he was less keen on, to say the least … Perhaps that’s more like the urgent action that you’re referring to?
Do we need good or better leaders, self-selecting activists and/or thinkers, or do we try something completely different and new?
From a liberal framework it dangerous to say that because men commit more severe family violence that we should have rules or campaigns that single them out. Because if you can do that how do you deal with the significant differences in statistics between cultural groups and socioeconomic levels?
And from a pragmatic framework we currently have a situation where male – female violence is basically unacceptable (most people will actively intervene, which is good) and female to male violence is largely acceptable (at least slaps and some punches – almost no one would intervene). This means a little effort to discourage F-M assaults could have a large effect while M-F assaults are the sort of thing that considerable social pressure has not been able to weed out.
And of course those that see violence are likely to be more violent so reducing this has other benefits.
It's hard times try to make a livingYou wake up every morning in the unforgivingOut there somewhere in the cityThere's people living lives without mercy or pityI feel good, yeah I'm feeling fineI feel better then I have for the longest timeI think these pills have been good for meI ...
In 1974, the US Supreme Court issued its decision in United States v. Nixon, finding that the President was not a King, but was subject to the law and was required to turn over the evidence of his wrongdoing to the courts. It was a landmark decision for the rule ...
Every day now just seems to bring in more fresh meat for the grinder.In their relentlessly ideological drive to cut back on the “excessive bloat” (as they see it) of the previous Labour-led government, on the mountains of evidence accumulated in such a short period of time do not ...
This is a re-post from Yale Climate Connections by Megan Valére SosouMarket gardening site of the Itchèléré de Itagui agricultural cooperative in Dassa-Zoumè (Image credit: Megan Valère Sossou) For the residents of Dassa-Zoumè, a city in the West African country of Benin, choosing between drinking water and having enough ...
Buzz from the Beehive Melissa Lee – as may be discerned from the screenshot above – has not been demoted for doing something seriously wrong as Minister of ...
Morning in London Mother hugs beloved daughter outside the converted shoe factory in which she is living.Afternoon in London Travelling writer takes himself and his wrist down to A&E, just to be sure. Read more ...
Mike Grimshaw writes – The recent announcement of the University Advisory Group, chaired by Sir Peter Gluckman, makes very clear where the Government’s focus and priorities lie. The remit of the Advisory Group is that Group members will consider challenges and opportunities for improvement in the university sector including: ...
Eric Crampton writes – The Reserve Bank of New Zealand desperately wants to find reasons to have workstreams in climate change. It makes little sense. They’ve run another stress test on the banks looking to see if they could find a prudential regulation case. They couldn’t. They ...
Rob MacCullough writes – Pundits from the left and the right are arguing that National’s Fast Track Bill that is designed to speed up infrastructure decisions could end up becoming mired in a cesspool of corruption. Political commentator ...
Looking at the headlines this morning it’s hard to feel anything other than pessimistic about the future of humanity.Note that I’m not speaking about the future of mankind, but the survival of our humanity. The values that we believe in seem to be ebbing away, by the day.Perhaps every generation ...
Swabbing mixed breed baby chicks to test for avian influenzaUh oh. Bird flu – often deadly to humans – is not only being transmitted from infected birds to dairy cows, but is now travelling between dairy cows. As of last Friday, Bloomberg News reports, there were 32 American dairy herds ...
On February 14, 2023 we announced our Rebuttal Update Project. This included an ask for feedback about the added "At a glance" section in the updated basic rebuttal versions. This weekly blog post series highlights this new section of one of the updated basic rebuttal versions and serves as a ...
What is it with the mining industry? Its not enough for them to pillage the earth - they apparently can't even be bothered getting resource consent to do so: The proponent behind a major mine near the Clutha River had already been undertaking activity in the area without a ...
Photo # 1 I am a huge fan of Singapore’s approach to housing, as described here two years ago by copying and pasting from The ConversationWhat Singapore has that Australia does not is a public housing developer, the Housing Development Board, which puts new dwellings on public and reclaimed land, ...
Buzz from the Beehive Reactions to news of the government’s readiness to make urgent changes to “the resource management system” through a Bill to amend the Resource Management Act (RMA) suggest a balanced approach is being taken. The Taxpayers’ Union says the proposed changes don’t go far enough. Greenpeace says ...
I’m starting to wonder if Anna Burns-Francis might be the best political interviewer we’ve got. That might sound unlikely to you, it came as a bit of a surprise to me.Jack Tame can be excellent, but has some pretty average days. I like Rebecca Wright on Newshub, she asks good ...
Chris Trotter writes – Willie Jackson is said to be planning a “media summit” to discuss “the state of the media and how to protect Fourth Estate Journalism”. Not only does the Editor of The Daily Blog, Martyn Bradbury, think this is a good idea, but he has also ...
Graeme Edgeler writes – This morning [April 21], the Wellington High Court is hearing a judicial review brought by Hon. Karen Chhour, the Minister for Children, against a decision of the Waitangi Tribunal. This is unusual, judicial reviews are much more likely to brought against ministers, rather than ...
Both of Parliament’s watchdogs have now ripped into the Government’s Fast-track Approvals Bill. Photo: Lynn Grieveson / The KākāMy pick of the six newsey things to know from Aotearoa’s political economy and beyond on the morning of Tuesday, April 23 are:The Lead: The Auditor General,John Ryan, has joined the ...
This is a re-post from Yale Climate Connections by Sarah SpengemanPeople wait to board an electric bus in Pune, India. (Image credit: courtesy of ITDP) Public transportation riders in Pune, India, love the city’s new electric buses so much they will actually skip an older diesel bus that ...
The infrastructure industry yesterday issued a “hurry up” message to the Government, telling it to get cracking on developing a pipeline of infrastructure projects.The hiatus around the change of Government has seen some major projects cancelled and others delayed, and there is uncertainty about what will happen with the new ...
Hi,Over the weekend I revisited a podcast I really adore, Dead Eyes. It’s about a guy who got fired from Band of Brothers over two decades ago because Tom Hanks said he had “dead eyes”.If you don’t recall — 2001’s Band of Brothers was part of the emerging trend of ...
Buzz from the Beehive The 180 or so recipients of letters from the Government telling them how to submit infrastructure projects for “fast track” consideration includes some whose project applications previously have been rejected by the courts. News media were quick to feature these in their reports after RMA Reform Minister Chris ...
It would not be a desirable way to start your holiday by breaking your back, your head, or your wrist, but on our first hour in Singapore I gave it a try.We were chatting, last week, before we started a meeting of Hazel’s Enviro Trust, about the things that can ...
Calling all journalists, academics, planners, lawyers, political activists, environmentalists, and other members of the public who believe that the relationships between vested interests and politicians need to be scrutinised. We need to work together to make sure that the new Fast-Track Approvals Bill – currently being pushed through by the ...
Feel worried. Shane Jones and a couple of his Cabinet colleagues are about to be granted the power to override any and all objections to projects like dams, mines, roads etc even if: said projects will harm biodiversity, increase global warming and cause other environmental harms, and even if ...
Bryce Edwards writes- The ability of the private sector to quickly establish major new projects making use of the urban and natural environment is to be supercharged by the new National-led Government. Yesterday it introduced to Parliament one of its most significant reforms, the Fast Track Approvals Bill. ...
Michael Bassett writes – If you think there is a move afoot by the radical Maori fringe of New Zealand society to create a parallel system of government to the one that we elect at our triennial elections, you aren’t wrong. Over the last few days we have ...
Without a corresponding drop in interest rates, it’s doubtful any changes to the CCCFA will unleash a massive rush of home buyers. Photo: Lynn GrievesonTL;DR: The six things that stood out to me in Aotearoa’s political economy around housing, poverty and climate on Monday, April 22 included:The Government making a ...
Sunday was a lazy day. I started watching Jack Tame on Q&A, the interviews are usually good for something to write about. Saying the things that the politicians won’t, but are quite possibly thinking. Things that are true and need to be extracted from between the lines.As you might know ...
In our Weekly Roundup last week we covered news from Auckland Transport that the WX1 Western Express is going to get an upgrade next year with double decker electric buses. As part of the announcement, AT also said “Since we introduced the WX1 Western Express last November we have seen ...
TL;DR: The six key events to watch in Aotearoa-NZ’s political economy in the week to April 29 include:PM Christopher Luxon is scheduled to hold a post-Cabinet news conference at 4 pm today. Stats NZ releases its statutory report on Census 2023 tomorrow.Finance Minister Nicola Willis delivers a pre-Budget speech at ...
A listing of 29 news and opinion articles we found interesting and shared on social media during the past week: Sun, April 14, 2024 thru Sat, April 20, 2024. Story of the week Our story of the week hinges on these words from the abstract of a fresh academic ...
The ability of the private sector to quickly establish major new projects making use of the urban and natural environment is to be supercharged by the new National-led Government. Yesterday it introduced to Parliament one of its most significant reforms, the Fast Track Approvals Bill. The Government says this will ...
This is a column to say thank you. So many of have been in touch since Mum died to say so many kind and thoughtful things. You’re wonderful, all of you. You’ve asked how we’re doing, how Dad’s doing. A little more realisation each day, of the irretrievable finality of ...
Identifying the engine type in your car is crucial for various reasons, including maintenance, repairs, and performance upgrades. Knowing the specific engine model allows you to access detailed technical information, locate compatible parts, and make informed decisions about modifications. This comprehensive guide will provide you with a step-by-step approach to ...
Introduction: The allure of racing is undeniable. The thrill of speed, the roar of engines, and the exhilaration of competition all contribute to the allure of this adrenaline-driven sport. For those who yearn to experience the pinnacle of racing, becoming a race car driver is the ultimate dream. However, the ...
Introduction Automobiles have become ubiquitous in modern society, serving as a primary mode of transportation and a symbol of economic growth and personal mobility. With countless vehicles traversing roads and highways worldwide, it begs the question: how many cars are there in the world? Determining the precise number is a ...
Maintaining a safe and reliable vehicle requires regular inspections. Whether it’s a routine maintenance checkup or a safety inspection, knowing how long the process will take can help you plan your day accordingly. This article delves into the factors that influence the duration of a car inspection and provides an ...
Mazda Motor Corporation, commonly known as Mazda, is a Japanese multinational automaker headquartered in Fuchu, Aki District, Hiroshima Prefecture, Japan. The company was founded in 1920 as the Toyo Cork Kogyo Co., Ltd., and began producing vehicles in 1931. Mazda is primarily known for its production of passenger cars, but ...
Your car battery is an essential component that provides power to start your engine, operate your electrical systems, and store energy. Over time, batteries can weaken and lose their ability to hold a charge, which can lead to starting problems, power failures, and other issues. Replacing your battery before it ...
In most states, you cannot register a car without a valid driver’s license. However, there are a few exceptions to this rule. Exceptions to the RuleIf you are under 18 years old: In some states, you can register a car in your name even if you do not ...
Mazda, a Japanese automotive manufacturer with a rich history of innovation and engineering excellence, has emerged as a formidable player in the global car market. Known for its reputation of producing high-quality, fuel-efficient, and driver-oriented vehicles, Mazda has consistently garnered praise from industry experts and consumers alike. In this article, ...
Struts are an essential part of a car’s suspension system. They are responsible for supporting the weight of the car and damping the oscillations of the springs. Struts are typically made of steel or aluminum and are filled with hydraulic fluid. How Do Struts Work? Struts work by transferring the ...
Car registration is a mandatory process that all vehicle owners must complete annually. This process involves registering your car with the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) and paying an associated fee. The registration process ensures that your vehicle is properly licensed and insured, and helps law enforcement and other authorities ...
Zoom is a video conferencing service that allows you to share your screen, webcam, and audio with other participants. In addition to sharing your own audio, you can also share the audio from your computer with other participants. This can be useful for playing music, sharing presentations with audio, or ...
Building your own computer can be a rewarding and cost-effective way to get a high-performance machine tailored to your specific needs. However, it also requires careful planning and execution, and one of the most important factors to consider is the time it will take. The exact time it takes to ...
Sleep mode is a power-saving state that allows your computer to quickly resume operation without having to boot up from scratch. This can be useful if you need to step away from your computer for a short period of time but don’t want to shut it down completely. There are ...
Introduction Computer-Assisted Translation (CAT) has revolutionized the field of translation by harnessing the power of technology to assist human translators in their work. This innovative approach combines specialized software with human expertise to improve the efficiency, accuracy, and consistency of translations. In this comprehensive article, we will delve into the ...
In today’s digital age, mobile devices have become an indispensable part of our daily lives. Among the vast array of portable computing options available, iPads and tablet computers stand out as two prominent contenders. While both offer similar functionalities, there are subtle yet significant differences between these two devices. This ...
A computer is an electronic device that can be programmed to carry out a set of instructions. The basic components of a computer are the processor, memory, storage, input devices, and output devices. The Processor The processor, also known as the central processing unit (CPU), is the brain of the ...
Voice Memos is a convenient app on your iPhone that allows you to quickly record and store audio snippets. These recordings can be useful for a variety of purposes, such as taking notes, capturing ideas, or recording interviews. While you can listen to your voice memos on your iPhone, you ...
Laptop screens are essential for interacting with our devices and accessing information. However, when lines appear on the screen, it can be frustrating and disrupt productivity. Understanding the underlying causes of these lines is crucial for finding effective solutions. Types of Screen Lines Horizontal lines: Also known as scan ...
Right-clicking is a common and essential computer operation that allows users to access additional options and settings. While most desktop computers have dedicated right-click buttons on their mice, laptops often do not have these buttons due to space limitations. This article will provide a comprehensive guide on how to right-click ...
Powering up and shutting down your ASUS laptop is an essential task for any laptop user. Locating the power button can sometimes be a hassle, especially if you’re new to ASUS laptops. This article will provide a comprehensive guide on where to find the power button on different ASUS laptop ...
Dell laptops are renowned for their reliability, performance, and versatility. Whether you’re a student, a professional, or just someone who needs a reliable computing device, a Dell laptop can meet your needs. However, if you’re new to Dell laptops, you may be wondering how to get started. In this comprehensive ...
Two-thirds of the country think that “New Zealand’s economy is rigged to advantage the rich and powerful”. They also believe that “New Zealand needs a strong leader to take the country back from the rich and powerful”. These are just two of a handful of stunning new survey results released ...
In today’s digital world, screenshots have become an indispensable tool for communication and documentation. Whether you need to capture an important email, preserve a website page, or share an error message, screenshots allow you to quickly and easily preserve digital information. If you’re an Asus laptop user, there are several ...
A factory reset restores your Gateway laptop to its original factory settings, erasing all data, apps, and personalizations. This can be necessary to resolve software issues, remove viruses, or prepare your laptop for sale or transfer. Here’s a step-by-step guide on how to factory reset your Gateway laptop: Method 1: ...
“You talking about me?”The neoliberal denigration of the past was nowhere more unrelenting than in its depiction of the public service. The Post Office and the Railways were held up as being both irremediably inefficient and scandalously over-manned. Playwright Roger Hall’s “Glide Time” caricatures were presented as accurate depictions of ...
Roger Partridge writes – When the Coalition Government took office last October, it inherited a country on a precipice. With persistent inflation, decades of insipid productivity growth and crises in healthcare, education, housing and law and order, it is no exaggeration to suggest New Zealand’s first-world status was ...
Rob MacCulloch writes – In 2022, the Curriculum Centre at the Ministry of Education employed 308 staff, according to an Official Information Request. Earlier this week it was announced 202 of those staff were being cut. When you look up “The New Zealand Curriculum” on the Ministry of ...
Chris Bishop’s bill has stirred up a hornets nest of opposition. Photo: Lynn Grieveson for The KākāTL;DR: The six things that stood out to me in Aotearoa’s political economy around housing, poverty and climate from the last day included:A crescendo of opposition to the Government’s Fast Track Approvals Bill is ...
Monday left me brokenTuesday, I was through with hopingWednesday, my empty arms were openThursday, waiting for love, waiting for loveThe end of another week that left many of us asking WTF? What on earth has NZ gotten itself into and how on earth could people have voluntarily signed up for ...
Hello! Here comes the Saturday edition of More Than A Feilding, catching you up on the past week’s editions.State of humanity, 20242024, it feels, keeps presenting us with ever more challenges, ever more dismay.Do you give up yet? It seems to ask.No? How about this? Or this?How about this?Full story Share ...
Determining the hardest sport in the world is a subjective matter, as the difficulty level can vary depending on individual abilities, physical attributes, and experience. However, based on various factors including physical demands, technical skills, mental fortitude, and overall accomplishment, here is an exploration of some of the most challenging ...
The allure of sport transcends age, culture, and geographical boundaries. It captivates hearts, ignites passions, and provides unparalleled entertainment. Behind the spectacle, however, lies a fascinating world of financial investment and expenditure. Among the vast array of competitive pursuits, one question looms large: which sport carries the hefty title of ...
Introduction Pickleball, a rapidly growing paddle sport, has captured the hearts and imaginations of millions around the world. Its blend of tennis, badminton, and table tennis elements has made it a favorite among players of all ages and skill levels. As the sport’s popularity continues to surge, the question on ...
Abstract: Soccer, the global phenomenon captivating millions worldwide, has a rich history that spans centuries. Its origins trace back to ancient civilizations, but the modern version we know and love emerged through a complex interplay of cultural influences and innovations. This article delves into the fascinating journey of soccer’s evolution, ...
Our two-tiered system for veterans’ support is out of step with our closest partners, and all parties in Parliament should work together to fix it, Labour veterans’ affairs spokesperson Greg O’Connor said. ...
Stripping two Ministers of their portfolios just six months into the job shows Christopher Luxon’s management style is lacking, Labour Leader Chris Hipkins said. ...
It appears Nicola Willis is about to pull the rug out from under the feet of local communities still dealing with the aftermath of last year’s severe weather, and local councils relying on funding to build back from these disasters. ...
The Government is making short-sighted changes to the Resource Management Act (RMA) that will take away environmental protection in favour of short-term profits, Labour’s environment spokesperson Rachel Brooking said today. ...
Labour welcomes the release of the report into the North Island weather events and looks forward to working with the Government to ensure that New Zealand is as prepared as it can be for the next natural disaster. ...
The Labour Party has called for the New Zealand Government to recognise Palestine, as a material step towards progressing the two-State solution needed to achieve a lasting peace in the region. ...
Some of our country’s most important work, stopping the sexual exploitation of children and violent extremism could go along with staff on the frontline at ports and airports. ...
The Government’s Fast Track Approvals Bill will give projects such as new coal mines a ‘get out of jail free’ card to wreak havoc on the environment, Labour Leader Chris Hipkins said today. ...
Cuts to frontline hospital staff are not only a broken election promise, it shows the reckless tax cuts have well and truly hit the frontline of the health system, says Labour Health spokesperson Ayesha Verrall. ...
The Green Party has joined the call for public submissions on the fast-track legislation to be extended after the Ombudsman forced the Government to release the list of organisations invited to apply just hours before submissions close. ...
New Zealand’s good work at reducing climate emissions for three years in a row will be undone by the National government’s lack of ambition and scrapping programmes that were making a difference, Labour Party climate spokesperson Megan Woods said today. ...
More essential jobs could be on the chopping block, this time Ministry of Education staff on the school lunches team are set to find out whether they're in line to lose their jobs. ...
The Government is trying to bring in a law that will allow Ministers to cut corners and kill off native species, Labour environment spokesperson Rachel Brooking said. ...
Cancelling urgently needed new Cook Strait ferries and hiking the cost of public transport for many Kiwis so that National can announce the prospect of another tunnel for Wellington is not making good choices, Labour Transport Spokesperson Tangi Utikere said. ...
A laundry list of additional costs for Tāmaki Makarau Auckland shows the Minister for the city is not delivering for the people who live there, says Labour Auckland Issues spokesperson Shanan Halbert. ...
The Green Party has today launched a step-by-step guide to help New Zealanders make their voice heard on the Government’s democracy dodging and anti-environment fast track legislation. ...
The National Government’s proposed changes to the Residential Tenancies Act will mean tenants can be turfed from their homes by landlords with little notice, Labour housing spokesperson Kieran McAnulty said. ...
Green Party co-leader Marama Davidson is calling on all parties to support a common-sense change that’s great for the planet and great for consumers after her member’s bill was drawn from the ballot today. ...
A significant milestone has been reached in the fight to strike an anti-Pasifika and unfair law from the country’s books after Teanau Tuiono’s members’ bill passed its first reading. ...
New Zealand has today missed the opportunity to uphold the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment, says James Shaw after his member’s bill was voted down in its first reading. ...
Today’s advice from the Climate Change Commission paints a sobering reality of the challenge we face in combating climate change, especially in light of recent Government policy announcements. ...
Minister for Disability Issues Penny Simmonds appears to have delayed a report back to Cabinet on the progress New Zealand is making against international obligations for disabled New Zealanders. ...
The Government’s newly announced review of methane emissions reduction targets hints at its desire to delay Aotearoa New Zealand’s urgent transition to a climate safe future, the Green Party said. ...
The Government must commit to the Maitai School building project for students with high and complex needs, to ensure disabled students from the top of the South Island have somewhere to learn. ...
Paul Goldsmith will take on responsibility for the Media and Communications portfolio, while Louise Upston will pick up the Disability Issues portfolio, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon announced today. “Our Government is relentlessly focused on getting New Zealand back on track. As issues change in prominence, I plan to adjust Ministerial ...
Recreational catch limits will be reduced in areas of Fiordland and the Chatham Islands to help keep those fisheries healthy and sustainable, Oceans and Fisheries Minister Shane Jones says. The lower recreational daily catch limits for a range of finfish and shellfish species caught in the Fiordland Marine Area and ...
Energy Minister Simeon Brown has welcomed an important milestone in New Zealand’s hydrogen future, with the opening of the country’s first network of hydrogen refuelling stations in Wiri. “I want to congratulate the team at Hiringa Energy and its partners K one W one (K1W1), Mitsui & Co New Zealand ...
The coalition Government is delivering on its commitment to improve resource management laws and give greater certainty to consent applicants, with a Bill to amend the Resource Management Act (RMA) expected to be introduced to Parliament next month. RMA Reform Minister Chris Bishop has today outlined the first RMA Amendment ...
Overseas models for regulating the oil and gas sector, including their decommissioning regimes, are being carefully scrutinised as a potential template for New Zealand’s own sector, Resources Minister Shane Jones says. The Coalition Government is focused on rebuilding investor confidence in New Zealand’s energy sector as it looks to strengthen ...
Emergency Management and Recovery Minister Mark Mitchell has today released the Report of the Government Inquiry into the response to the North Island Severe Weather Events. “The report shows that New Zealand’s emergency management system is not fit-for-purpose and there are some significant gaps we need to address,” Mr Mitchell ...
Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith is today travelling to Europe where he’ll update the United Nations Human Rights Council on the Government’s work to restore law and order. “Attending the Universal Periodic Review in Geneva provides us with an opportunity to present New Zealand’s human rights progress, priorities, and challenges, while ...
Associate Agriculture Minister, Mark Patterson, formally reopened the world’s largest wool processing facility today in Awatoto, Napier, following a $50 million rebuild and refurbishment project. “The reopening of this facility will significantly lift the economic opportunities available to New Zealand’s wool sector, which already accounts for 20 per cent of ...
Hon Andrew Bayly, Minister for Small Business and Manufacturing At the Southland Otago Regional Engineering Collective (SOREC) Summit, 18 April, Dunedin Ngā mihi nui, Ko Andrew Bayly aho, Ko Whanganui aho Good Afternoon and thank you for inviting me to open your summit today. I am delighted ...
The Government is delivering on its commitment to bring back the Three Strikes legislation, Associate Justice Minister Nicole McKee announced today. “Our Government is committed to restoring law and order and enforcing appropriate consequences on criminals. We are making it clear that repeat serious violent or sexual offending is not ...
Foreign Minister Winston Peters has today announced four new diplomatic appointments for New Zealand’s overseas missions. “Our diplomats have a vital role in maintaining and protecting New Zealand’s interests around the world,” Mr Peters says. “I am pleased to announce the appointment of these senior diplomats from the ...
New Zealand is contributing NZ$7 million to support communities affected by severe food insecurity and other urgent humanitarian needs in Ethiopia and Somalia, Foreign Minister Rt Hon Winston Peters announced today. “Over 21 million people are in need of humanitarian assistance across Ethiopia, with a further 6.9 million people ...
Minister for Arts, Culture and Heritage Paul Goldsmith is congratulating Mataaho Collective for winning the Golden Lion for best participant in the main exhibition at the Venice Biennale. "Congratulations to the Mataaho Collective for winning one of the world's most prestigious art prizes at the Venice Biennale. “It is good ...
The Government is reforming financial services to improve access to home loans and other lending, and strengthen customer protections, Commerce and Consumer Affairs Minister Andrew Bayly and Housing Minister Chris Bishop announced today. “Our coalition Government is committed to rebuilding the economy and making life simpler by cutting red tape. We are ...
“China remains a strong commercial opportunity for Kiwi exporters as Chinese businesses and consumers continue to value our high-quality safe produce,” Trade and Agriculture Minister Todd McClay says. Mr McClay has returned to New Zealand following visits to Beijing, Harbin and Shanghai where he met ministers, governors and mayors and engaged in trade and agricultural events with the New ...
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has completed a successful trip to Singapore, Thailand and the Philippines, deepening relationships and capitalising on opportunities. Mr Luxon was accompanied by a business delegation and says the choice of countries represents the priority the New Zealand Government places on South East Asia, and our relationships in ...
New Zealand is demonstrating its commitment to reducing global greenhouse emissions, and supporting clean energy transition in South East Asia, through a contribution of NZ$41 million (US$25 million) in climate finance to the Asian Development Bank (ADB)-led Energy Transition Mechanism (ETM). Prime Minister Christopher Luxon and Climate Change Minister Simon Watts announced ...
The Government is today releasing a list of organisations who received letters about the Fast-track applications process, says RMA Reform Minister Chris Bishop. “Recently Ministers and agencies have received a series of OIA requests for a list of organisations to whom I wrote with information on applying to have a ...
Attorney-General Judith Collins today announced the appointment of Wellington Barrister David Jonathan Boldt as a Judge of the High Court, and the Honourable Justice Matthew Palmer as a Judge of the Court of Appeal. Justice Boldt graduated with an LLB from Victoria University of Wellington in 1990, and also holds ...
Education Minister Erica Stanford will lead the New Zealand delegation at the 2024 International Summit on the Teaching Profession (ISTP) held in Singapore. The delegation includes representatives from the Post Primary Teachers’ Association (PPTA) Te Wehengarua and the New Zealand Educational Institute (NZEI) Te Riu Roa. The summit is co-hosted ...
A stopbank upgrade project in Tairawhiti partly funded by the Government has increased flood resilience for around 7000ha of residential and horticultural land so far, Regional Development Minister Shane Jones says. Mr Jones today attended a dawn service in Gisborne to mark the end of the first stage of the ...
Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters will represent the Government at Anzac Day commemorations on the Gallipoli Peninsula next week and engage with senior representatives of the Turkish government in Istanbul. “The Gallipoli campaign is a defining event in our history. It will be a privilege to share the occasion ...
Science, Innovation and Technology and Defence Minister Judith Collins will next week attend the OECD Science and Technology Ministerial conference in Paris and Anzac Day commemorations in Belgium. “Science, innovation and technology have a major role to play in rebuilding our economy and achieving better health, environmental and social outcomes ...
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon held a bilateral meeting today with the President of the Philippines, Ferdinand Marcos Jr. The Prime Minister was accompanied by MP Paulo Garcia, the first Filipino to be elected to a legislature outside the Philippines. During today’s meeting, Prime Minister Luxon and President Marcos Jr discussed opportunities to ...
The Government has announced that $20 million in funding will be made available to Westport to fund much needed flood protection around the town. This measure will significantly improve the resilience of the community, says Local Government Minister Simeon Brown. “The Westport community has already been allocated almost $3 million ...
The Government is proud to support the first ever Repco Supercars Championship event in Taupō as up to 70,000 motorsport fans attend the Taupō International Motorsport Park this weekend, says Economic Development Minister Melissa Lee. “Anticipation for the ITM Taupō Super400 is huge, with tickets and accommodation selling out weeks ...
Local Government Minister Simeon Brown has announced an increase to the Rates Rebate Scheme, putting money back into the pockets of low-income homeowners. “The coalition Government is committed to bringing down the cost of living for New Zealanders. That includes targeted support for those Kiwis who are doing things tough, such ...
The Coalition Government is investing in a project to boost survival rates of New Zealand mussels and grow the industry, Oceans and Fisheries Minister Shane Jones has announced. “This project seeks to increase the resilience of our mussels and significantly boost the sector’s productivity,” Mr Jones says. “The project - ...
Benefit figures released today underscore the importance of the Government’s plan to rebuild the economy and have 50,000 fewer people on Jobseeker Support, Social Development and Employment Minister Louise Upston says. “Benefit numbers are still significantly higher than when National was last in government, when there was about 70,000 fewer ...
The Government’s commitment to doubling New Zealand’s renewable energy capacity is backed by new data showing that clean energy has helped the country reach its lowest annual gross emissions since 1999, Climate Change Minister Simon Watts says. New Zealand’s latest Greenhouse Gas Inventory (1990-2022) published today, shows gross emissions fell ...
The Government is bringing the earthquake-prone building review forward, with work to start immediately, and extending the deadline for remediations by four years, Building and Construction Minister Chris Penk says. “Our Government is focused on rebuilding the economy. A key part of our plan is to cut red tape that ...
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon and his Thai counterpart, Prime Minister Srettha Thavisin, have today agreed that New Zealand and the Kingdom of Thailand will upgrade the bilateral relationship to a Strategic Partnership by 2026. “New Zealand and Thailand have a lot to offer each other. We have a strong mutual desire to build ...
RMA Reform Minister Chris Bishop and Transport Minister Simeon Brown have today announced the Coalition Government’s intention to extend port coastal permits for a further 20 years, providing port operators with certainty to continue their operations. “The introduction of the Resource Management Act in 1991 required ports to obtain coastal ...
Today’s announcement that inflation is down to 4 per cent is encouraging news for Kiwis, but there is more work to be done - underlining the importance of the Government’s plan to get the economy back on track, acting Finance Minister Chris Bishop says. “Inflation is now at 4 per ...
Refreshed health guidance released today will help parents and schools make informed decisions about whether their child needs to be in school, addressing one of the key issues affecting school attendance, says Associate Education Minister David Seymour. In recent years, consistently across all school terms, short-term illness or medical reasons ...
Oceans and Fisheries Minister Shane Jones is streamlining high-level oceans management while maintaining a focus on supporting the sector’s role in the export-led recovery of the economy. “I am working to realise the untapped potential of our fishing and aquaculture sector. To achieve that we need to be smarter with ...
Associate Agriculture Minister Mark Patterson is speaking at the International Wool Textile Organisation Congress in Adelaide, promoting New Zealand wool, and outlining the coalition Government’s support for the revitalisation the sector. "New Zealand’s wool exports reached $400 million in the year to 30 June 2023, and the coalition Government ...
The Government is making legislative changes to make it easier for new early learning services to be established, and for existing services to operate, Associate Education Minister David Seymour says. The changes involve repealing the network approval provisions that apply when someone wants to establish a new early learning service, ...
Changes to the Resource Management Act will align consenting for coal mining to other forms of mining to reduce barriers that are holding back economic development, Resources Minister Shane Jones says. “The inconsistent treatment of coal mining compared with other extractive activities is burdensome red tape that fails to acknowledge ...
Trade, Agriculture and Forestry Minister Todd McClay has concluded productive discussions with ministerial counterparts in Beijing today, in support of the New Zealand-China trade and economic relationship. “My meeting with Commerce Minister Wang Wentao reaffirmed the complementary nature of the bilateral trade relationship, with our Free Trade Agreement at its ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kathryn Willis, Postdoctoral Researcher, CSIRO Xavier Boulenger/Shutterstock In the two decades to 2019, global plastic production doubled. By 2040, plastic manufacturing and processing could consume as much as 20% of global oil production and use up 15% of the annual carbon ...
With our collective remembrance, and steadfast belief in our common humanity, we strengthen our hope and resolve to do what we can to foster dialogue and understanding, and to heal divisions in our pursuit of peace. ...
Principal reasons for the opposition is the loss of the public’s democratic right to have “a fair say” and the vital need for a government free from corruption, said Casey Cravens of Dunedin, president of the New Zealand Federation of Freshwater ...
Never mind the scoreboard – in the 2000 Bledisloe Cup decider, the real trans-Tasman battle was won before kickoff.First published in 2016. The dawn of the new millennium was a dark time for the All Blacks. Their final game pre-Y2K was a 22-18 loss to South Africa in the ...
I’m on the wrong side of 40, I never pursued creative work and now my job is killing my soul. Help! Want Hera’s help? Email your problem to helpme@thespinoff.co.nzDear Hera,May I start with the least original conversation opener you’re likely to hear around the motu at the moment, particularly in Wellington: ...
“Never again - No AUKUS” was the message of the wreath laid at this morning’s national ANZAC Day commemorative service at Pukeahu National War Memorial Park this morning by the Stop AUKUS group. ...
Until this month, Auckland swimmer Hazel Ouwehand had never met a qualifying time in an Olympic event for a New Zealand team, even as a junior. Now she’s very likely off to the Paris Olympics after swimming well under the qualifying standard in the 100m butterfly twice – both in ...
While Anzac Day has experienced a resurgence in recent years, our other day of remembrance has slowly faded from view.The Sunday Essay is made possible thanks to the support of Creative New Zealand. Original illustrations by Hope McConnell.First published in 2022.The high school’s head girl and ...
Australian and New Zealand volunteers fought together in the Waikato War, yet still its place in the Anzac tradition is unacknowledged by our defence forces or Returned Services Association.First published in 2018.When I was a boy cub I attended Anzac Day services in the South Auckland suburb of ...
A poem by Wellington writer Tayi Tibble.Hoki Mai She kisses him goodbye with her eyes still wet and alight from their last swim in the Awatere river. At the train station celebration, she leads the Kapa Haka but her voice keeps breaking under and over itself like waves. ...
A poem from Bill Manhire’s 2017 book of verse Some Things to Place in a Coffin.My World War I Poem Inside each trench, the sound of prayer. Inside each prayer, the sound of digging. Image courtesy of Auckland War Memorial Museum. ...
There are three books I have wolfed down in one sitting over the last two years. Colleen Maria Lenihan’s gorgeous and sad debut Kōhine, Noelle McCarthy’s memoir Grand about becoming her mother and then unbecoming her, and now Hine Toa, a staunch yet gentle self-portrait by living legend Ngāhuia te ...
Loading…(function(i,s,o,g,r,a,m){var ql=document.querySelectorAll('A[quiz],DIV[quiz],A[data-quiz],DIV[data-quiz]'); if(ql){if(ql.length){for(var k=0;k<ql.length;k++){ql[k].id='quiz-embed-'+k;ql[k].href="javascript:var i=document.getElementById('quiz-embed-"+k+"');try{qz.startQuiz(i)}catch(e){i.start=1;i.style.cursor='wait';i.style.opacity='0.5'};void(0);"}}};i['QP']=r;i[r]=i[r]||function(){(i[r].q=i[r].q||[]).push(arguments)},i[r].l=1*new Date();a=s.createElement(o),m=s.getElementsByTagName(o)[0];a.async=1;a.src=g;m.parentNode.insertBefore(a,m)})(window,document,'script','https://take.quiz-maker.com/3012/CDN/quiz-embed-v1.js','qp'); Got a good quiz question?Send Newsroom your questions. The post Newsroom daily quiz, Thursday 25 April appeared first on Newsroom. ...
Asia Pacific Report Students and activist staff at Australia’s University of Sydney (USyd) have set up a Gaza solidarity encampment in support of Palestinians and similar student-led protests in the United States. The camp was pitched as mass graves, crippled hospitals, thousands of civilian deaths and the near-total destruction of ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By James B. Dorey, Lecturer in Biological Sciences, University of Wollongong Australian teddy bear bees are cute and fluffy, but get a look at that massive (unbarbed) stinger! James Dorey Photography Most of us have been stung by a bee and we ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jen Roberts, Senior Lecturer, School of Humanities and Social Inquiry, University of Wollongong Aussie~mobs/FlickrVictor Farr, a private in the 1st Infantry Battalion, was among the first to land at Anzac Cove just before dawn on April 25 1915. Victor Farr ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Gregory Moore, Senior Research Associate, School of Ecosystem and Forest Sciences, The University of Melbourne Gregory Moore I had the good fortune to care for the sugar gum at The University of Melbourne’s Burnley Gardens in Victoria where I worked for ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Hawkins, Senior Lecturer, Canberra School of Politics, Economics and Society, University of Canberra BagzhanSadvakassov/Upsplash, CC BY-SA Australia’s inflation rate has fallen for the fifth successive quarter, and it’s now less than half of what it was back in late 2022. ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rachel Ong ViforJ, ARC Future Fellow & Professor of Economics, Curtin University Just when we think the price of rentals could not get any worse, this week’s Rental Affordability Snapshot by Anglicare has revealed low-income Australians are facing a housing crisis like ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Meighen McCrae, Associate Professor of Strategic & Defence Studies, Australian National University American and Australian stretcher bearers working together near the front line during the Battle of Hamel in 1918.Australian War Memorial While the AUKUS alliance is new, the Australian-American partnership ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tracey Holmes, Professorial Fellow in Sport, University of Canberra When the news broke last weekend that 23 Chinese swimmers had tested positive to a banned drug in early 2021 and were allowed to compete at the Tokyo Olympic Games six months later ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Cally Jetta, Senior Lecturer and Academic Lead; College for First Nations, University of Southern Queensland Australian War MemorialAboriginal and Torres Strait Islander readers are advised this article contains names and images of deceased people, as well as sensitive historical information ...
RNZ News Melissa Lee has been ousted from New Zealand’s coalition cabinet and stripped of the Media portfolio, and Penny Simmonds has lost the Disability Issues portfolio in a reshuffle. Climate Change and Revenue Minister Simon Watts will take Lee’s spot in cabinet. Simmonds was a minister outside of cabinet. ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David Lindenmayer, Professor, Fenner School of Environment and Society, Australian National University laurello/Shutterstock Some reports and popular books, such as Bill Gammage’s Biggest Estate on Earth, have argued that extensive areas of Australia’s forests were kept open through frequent burning by ...
Analysis - Christopher Luxon framing the demotion of two ministers as the portfolios getting "too complex" is a charitable way of saying they weren't up to the job. ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra With Jim Chalmers’s third budget on May 14, Australians will be looking for some more cost-of-living relief – beyond the tax cuts – although they have been warned extra measures will be modest. As ...
Analysis: Melissa Lee has lost the media portfolio and her spot in Cabinet after multiple failed attempts to find solutions for a media industry in crisis. On Wednesday, the Prime Minister announced Lee would be losing her spot in Cabinet along with her media and communications ministerial portfolio. The job ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Simon Wilmot, Senior Lecturer, Film, Deakin University Among the many Australian who served during the second world war, there is a small group of people whose stories remain largely untold. These are the Muslim men and women who, while small in number, ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kelly Saunders, PhD Candidate, University of Canberra There has been much analysis and praise of Justice Michael Lee’s recent judgement in Bruce Lehrmann’s defamation case against Channel Ten. Many people were openly relieved to read Lee’s “forensic” and “nuanced” application of law ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kathy Gibbs, Program Director for the Bachelor of Education, Griffith University zEdward_Indy/Shutterstock Around one in 20 people has attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). It’s one of the most common neurodevelopmental disorders in childhood and often continues into adulthood. ADHD is diagnosed ...
The Fairer Future coalition of anti-poverty groups say Whaikaha must be properly funded going forward, and that to argue that poor financial management of the new Ministry is a red herring by the Prime Minister. ...
The Taxpayers’ Union is today congratulating Hon. Paul Goldsmith on his appointment as Minister for Media and Communications and urges him to rule out state intervention in the private media sector. ...
Asia Pacific Report The West Papuan resistance OPM leader has condemned Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and US President Joe Biden, accusing their countries of “six decades of treachery” over Papuan independence. The open letter was released today by OPM chairman Jeffrey P Bomanak on the eve of ANZAC Day ...
Welcome to The Spinoff Books Confessional, in which we get to know the reading habits and quirks of New Zealanders at large. This week: writer and one of Time Magazine’s 100 most influential people of 2024, Lauren Groff.The book I wish I’d writtenIf I wish I’d written a ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David Fechner, Research Fellow, Social Marketing, Griffith University mavo/Shutterstock Imagine having dinner at a restaurant. The menu offers plant-based meat alternatives made mostly from vegetables, mushrooms, legumes and wheat that mimic meat in taste, texture and smell. Despite being given that ...
“Three Strikes is a dead-end policy proposed by a dead-end government. The Three Strikes law ignores the causes of crime, instead just brutalising people already crushed by the cost of living.” ...
By Don Wiseman, RNZ Pacific senior journalist An Australian-born judge in Kiribati could well face deportation later this week after a tribunal ruling that he should be removed from his post. The tribunal’s report has just been tabled in the Kiribati Parliament and is due to be debated by MPs ...
With its clear mandate for police use, political nuances, and nuanced public trust, Denmark's insights provide valuable considerations for Australia and New Zealand. ...
Books editor Claire Mabey reviews poet Louise Wallace’s debut novel. A famous poet once said to me that he’s always suspicious when a poet publishes a novel. I never really understood why but maybe it’s something to do with cheating on your first form. Louise Wallace is a poet. She’s ...
For a few months at the turn of the millennium, TrueBliss burned bright as the biggest pop stars in the country. Alex Casey chats to two superfans who still hold the flame. During a humble backyard wedding in Nelson, 1999, one of the cordially invited guests had to excuse themselves ...
How will the recent wave of job cuts impact ethnic diversity in the media? In November last year, I was working a very busy day in the newsroom of a large online news site, interviewing whānau about their concerns over the imminent closure of one of the few puna reo ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ruth Knight, Researcher, Queensland University of Technology Have you ever felt sick at work? Perhaps you had food poisoning or the flu. Your belly hurt, or you felt tired, making it hard to concentrate and be productive. How likely would you be ...
Despite heavy criticism and an ongoing select committee process, the Police Minister says the Government will forge ahead with a ban on gang patches. ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sam Whiting, Lecturer – Creative Industries, University of South Australia Shutterstock Everyone has a favourite band, or a favourite composer, or a favourite song. There is some music which speaks to you, deeply; and other music which might be the current ...
A new survey says ‘outlook not great’ for those charged with building infrastructure, while RMA changes delight farmers and depress environmentalists, writes Anna Rawhiti-Connell in this excerpt from The Bulletin, The Spinoff’s morning news round-up. To receive The Bulletin in full each weekday, sign up here. First RMA changes announced ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Olli Hellmann, Associate Professor of Political Science, University of Waikato Getty Images When New Zealanders commemorate Anzac Day on April 25, it’s not only to honour the soldiers who lost their lives in World War I and subsequent conflicts, but also ...
A leaked document shows the Canterbury/Waitaha arm of health agency Te Whatu Ora is scurrying to save $13.3 million by July. The “financial sustainability target”, which was “allocated” to Waitaha, is consistent with what’s happening in other districts, says Sarah Dalton, executive director of the Association of Salaried Medical Specialists. ...
A look at the state of the previous government’s affordable housing scheme, and what could come next.Remind me: What’s KiwiBuild again?First announced in 2012, KiwiBuild was a flagship policy of the Labour Party heading into both its 2014 and 2017 election campaigns. With Jacinda Ardern as prime minister, ...
Labour in opposition will be shocked to learn which party had six years in power but squandered any chance to make real change. Grant Robertson’s valedictory speech was a predictably entertaining trip down memory lane. The acid-tongued incoming Otago University chancellor administered a sick burn to the coalition government. He ...
The following interview with former Green Party MP Sue Kedgley came about because she features in the new memoir Hine Toa by activist Ngāhuia te Awekōtuku; the two knew each other at the University of Auckland in the early 70s, when they were both took on leadership roles in the ...
Taiwan’s semiconductor industry is seen some as its ‘silicon shield’ against invasion – but how will overseas expansion affect that protection? The post The state of Taiwan’s silicon shield appeared first on Newsroom. ...
There’s relief for building owners bending under the weight of earthquake strengthening rules – and costs – that came into force seven years ago. Building and Construction Minister Chris Penk has announced a scheduled 2027 review of the earthquake-prone building regulations will now start this year. Owners will also get ...
Opinion: It has been announced that nine percent of roles at Oranga Tamariki will be disestablished, presumably to help fund the tax cuts promised by the coalition Government. I am reminded of the graphics used to illustrate pandemic events, where five thousand people are standing in a field and then ...
After more than two sleepless days, running through savage terrain, Greig Hamilton didn’t know if he was going to finish one of the most gruelling psychological assaults in sport. He was metres away from the finish line, a yellow gate made famous in a Netflix documentary; a race he’d dreamed ...
Loading…(function(i,s,o,g,r,a,m){var ql=document.querySelectorAll('A[quiz],DIV[quiz],A[data-quiz],DIV[data-quiz]'); if(ql){if(ql.length){for(var k=0;k<ql.length;k++){ql[k].id='quiz-embed-'+k;ql[k].href="javascript:var i=document.getElementById('quiz-embed-"+k+"');try{qz.startQuiz(i)}catch(e){i.start=1;i.style.cursor='wait';i.style.opacity='0.5'};void(0);"}}};i['QP']=r;i[r]=i[r]||function(){(i[r].q=i[r].q||[]).push(arguments)},i[r].l=1*new Date();a=s.createElement(o),m=s.getElementsByTagName(o)[0];a.async=1;a.src=g;m.parentNode.insertBefore(a,m)})(window,document,'script','https://take.quiz-maker.com/3012/CDN/quiz-embed-v1.js','qp'); Got a good quiz question?Send Newsroom your questions. The post Newsroom daily quiz, Wednesday 24 April appeared first on Newsroom. ...
“Who said; cuts to company tax will benefit workers?” (Dawe is unable to even say the phrase with a straight face).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0fLoZpj0qb0
Genius.
Our Jude would make a great maggie t.
Don’t you mean Maggo t?
Minister For Corruption & Oravida scores a 10
I have been following the discussion following on from redlogix post on DV. The broken post and men dominate discussion post.
I thought RL post brave and honest and an invitation to explore a dark underside to our beautiful country.
This opportunity was lost when it turned into a bun fight.
Offence can only be offered.
I value most contributors here, either being informed or forgiving as they know not what they do.
As with all communities you are gonna get folk that are harder to like and that is one of the strengths of this site.
Hi gsays,
I actually like Red for the most part so honestly for me it’s the politics not a personality thing.
If any man wants to write about domestic violence issues from a male perspective I will welcome that if they can do so without running MRA-like lines or trying to undermine women or feminism. If they want to run those lines then they need to be prepared for a fight, because women are having to deal with that stuff at the cutting edge in ways that many people here are unaware of, and there are real world consequences for women from what Red was saying. Until that awareness changes it will always be a conflict.
btw, I didn’t see it as a bun fight and I’ve been in quite a few gender convos on ts in the past. I saw a whole lot of people step up in Red’s thread and disagree clearly and with good political argument. Haven’t read much of Tracey’s thread yet though.
hi weka, normally i get acronyms, but i havent worked out what mra is, could you please enlighten me?
Men’s Rights Activists. A political movement which focuses on some issues that affect men but does so in the context of attacking and undermining feminism and women. It tends to reject political analysis of systemic oppression and instead tries to make out that men aren’t affored privilege and power by the patriarchal systems that we live in.
For example, the idea that domestic violence isn’t gendered, that men get beaten too, therefore domestic violence is a human violence issue, not a male violence issue. It ignores the reasons why by far the most domestic violence is done by men against women, and the reasons underlying that that are societal and structural. It sets up strawmen such as the idea that domestic violence is gendered comes from feminists thinking all men are violent or somehow bad, when in fact feminism doesn’t say that. It then uses those strawmen to push theories that don’t hold men accountable as a class.
thanks, plenty to mull over there.
Great explanation weka – thanks
that men get beaten too, therefore domestic violence is a human violence issue, not a male violence issue.
Logically that does not follow. Or do feminists not consider men to be human?
It ignores the reasons why by far the most domestic violence is done by men against women
Not a strong statement given the many, many studies that confirm women perpetrate all manner of abuse and violence, and it is probably more due to a weakness of limb than purity of heart that holds them back from achieving equally bad statistics with men.
But I can see why this framing is important to you and I’m not going to disrespect that.
and the reasons underlying that that are societal and structural.
Not much quibble on that in general. Agreed.
It sets up strawmen such as the idea that domestic violence is gendered comes from feminists thinking all men are violent or somehow bad
OK so not all men are abusers.
It then uses those strawmen to push theories that don’t hold men accountable as a class.
But now we all are and you’re going to punish us all for it.
At least that is how I read it; maybe you’d care to clarify?
imo red this
“Not a strong statement given the many, many studies that confirm women perpetrate all manner of abuse and violence, and it is probably more due to a weakness of limb than purity of heart that holds them back from achieving equally bad statistics with men.”
is where your problem lies.
Or perhaps this particular bit “and it is probably more”
and remember the above was in response to
“It ignores the reasons why by far the most domestic violence is done by men against women”
You cannot see the “by far” qualifier – you are blinded to it – perhaps by the abuse you suffered or maybe some other reason but the qualifier is there imo so that debate CAN occur not as a poke to get you to retaliate – which is how I interpret your response to weka’s sentence.
Can you understand what I am saying?
Can you see that I am NOT attacking you?
Can you see that your response was disproportionate to the sentence that you responded to?
Can you see how that could escalate the intensity or heat of the discussion?
That is just one example – I ask you to seriously consider your emotions around this, your judgments about yourself and others, and what you want to achieve from this.
marty….. This is in its own little way an example of violence, and so the circle remains unbroken
Can you elaborate on what you mean please Xanthe – I cannot see how what I wrote is an example of violence
Read it again.
Is it dialogue?
I wrote it Xanthe so believe me I don’t need to read it again. Sure it may not be dialogue (I could argue that but I’ll accept it), but it came from a place of compassion and genuine desire on my part to add something positive to the situation. Is that violence to you?
Read it again
I did ask for further explanation and you don’t want to do that – that’s cool, I love self selection.
Marty ” Can you see that your response was disproportionate to the sentence that you responded to?
Can you see how that could escalate the intensity or heat of the discussion?”
Because you find the reasonable suggestion that we look for the underlieing drivers of domestic violence rather than treating it as a male problem ….. uncomfortable and challenging
you attack and place the blame for that attack on the way he presented the suggestion.
That is both disingenuous and a form of violence
As you well know!
I have considerable experience of bullying. I know it when it happens
No – it wasn’t a form of violence, marty mars. Anything but. It was a reasoned response to a somewhat convoluted statement by Red L.
Spot on marty, the quailifier is the thing that makes the position inclusive.
Red, in the past week I’ve made a few comments as to why I won’t engage on the content of your post or comments. I’ll add another one. Every step of the way I have seen you misuse and IMO willfully misinterpret other people’s arguments. Here is a classic example that is very easy to see. You just selectively misquoted me. That alone will stop me from talking to you on the content.
weka…. And this
You still seem to be having trouble explaining what you mean.
I say exactly what i mean . And you know quite well what i am saying.
I do not enter into what i consider disingenuous dialogue,
own it .
Good, that will save me some bother.
Unlike most responses I get, I went to the trouble of carefully requoting your comment, pretty much sentence by sentence so as it was clear what I was talking about and the dialog might flow better.
Then I made a response to pretty much ALL of what you said. I was lot less selective about it than most people are. The bit I mostly left out was your first para because I didn’t have any issue with it. Ironically enough it wasn’t until you used the MRA acronym in a comment to me a while back did I even know what it was either.
So I went and took a look and while there are some interesting ideas there, there’s also a lot that isn’t attractive at all. Unlike what you seem to think I’m no fan of the MRA scene because they seem locked into a confrontational mode of action that’s a complete dead end.
But now you are unhappy because you feel I willfully misquoted you. Geeze how do you think I feel after the shitstorm of misrepresentation and unmitigated personal abuse I’ve been on the wrong end the past few days? Really … I don’t ask that question rhetorically.
I repeat; “At least that is how I read it; maybe you’d care to clarify?”
Red, you selectively quoted me. I’ve then told you that you’ve mis quoted me. Are you trying to tell me that I don’t know what my own comment meant and intended?
Seems a reasonable assumption
I quoted you quite extensively and only left out the bit I largely agreed with.
Are you trying to tell me that I don’t know what my own comment meant and intended?
In the past whenever I’ve tried saying something like that it’s been comprehensively scorned and shat all over. Intentions being apparently worthless.
Actually, it seems to be you who is blinded by it. Studies show that women and men commit similar amounts of violence and abuse. The violence by men causes far more physical damage than that done by women and so we hear more of it but that doesn’t mean that violence by women doesn’t happen at close to the same rate.
My response to that is for men to start being active around solving the issues of violence against them without trying to undo the work that women have done. It’s actually not that hard an approach. The problem comes when men want to deny the structural issues that exist because of the patriarchal system (or whatever we want to call it) and how that system privileges people differently. I get that men don’t want to be blamed, but that’s a different thing than saying that each gender is just as violent as the other. The dynamics are different and I think the one thing we can assume here is that women see violence as a different thing than what you are suggesting, so there is a power struggle right there. Because women have been working on violence within a system that automaticaly affords them less power, they’re not going to respond well to yet another attempt to disempower them.
It may just be better(more) communication but it seems that violence (from all sources) is increasing.
It is tempting to draw a correlation with the increasing economic inequality that is occuring
Ie is the underlieing driver of all violence is economic violence
(Not saying it is or isnt , just seeing if this model gives useful insight that could help prevent or forwarn of instances of violence)
Draco, there are only a few hundred female prisoners in NZ, at a reasonable guess there are in the region of 20 times as many men in jail. That doesn’t marry up with your similar levels of violence thing.
Then there is this,
‘Women are as likely to perpetrate domestic violence as men’. This one came up in the recent BBC documentary about ‘The Rise of Female Violence’, though to its marginal credit, the beeb only claimed this for ‘low level domestic violence’. First of all, we shouldn’t assume that if women perpetrate domestic violence, it’s always against men — some women have relationships with people of other genders too (and we don’t celebrate violence in those relationships either, especially as there is a real dearth of specialist service provision for survivors of domestic violence who are LGBTQ— which are also in fact the services that men experiencing domestic violence are most likely to need [1]). Furthermore, when women do commit ‘low level domestic violence’, it’s usually either self-defence or ‘co-violence’ — women are sole perpetrators in less than 4% of reported incidents [2]. This leads on to the next myth that needs to be debunked.
http://www.sistersuncut.org/2015/11/17/domestic-violence-and-gender-or-what-about-the-men-5-myths-debunked/
I find it interesting that men want to argue that women are as violent as men just in a less violent way. Which just comes across as self-serving mansplaining. I’m open the conversation happening in a different way, but given the whole point about power and how it gets given and used I’m not settling for a conversation where men come in and say Labour does it too.
The authors of the American CTS studies stress that no matter what the rate of violence or who initiates the violence, women are 7 to 10 times more likely to be injured in acts of intimate violence than are men [Orman, 1998]. Husbands have higher rates of the most dangerous and injurious forms of violence, their violent acts are repeated more often, they are less likely to fear for their own safety, and women are financially and socially locked into marriage to a much greater extent than men. In fact, Straus expresses his concern that “the statistics are likely to be misused by misogynists and apologists for male violence” [cited in Orman, 1998].
http://www.xyonline.net/content/claims-about-husband-battering
Etc etc etc.
I’m far less interested in exhanging internet links than I am in having a real conversation about violence. I don’t see this happening and that’s because of how Red framed it at the start.
Are you suggesting that rates of incarceration give meaningful data on offending?
I am dubious
Yes, which people are convicted does give an insight into who commits violence in this land. We do not have a dirty secret of abuse equivalent to the scale of the Catholic Church but committed by mothers, aunties and sisters in this country. Unless you can show me that we do?
@ maui
The fact there are far more male prisoners than female prisoners is irrelevant. Men tend to commit more physical and sex-related violence and it is reflected in the prison rate. Women on the other hand tend to use other means of violence and intimidation that are harder to prove because they are often carried out in a clandestine manner. And even when some form of direct physical violence is present, it is often the male victim who ends up being treated like the suspect. As a result there is far less reporting of violent acts by women against men.
Anne, that sounds like a story to me. Equally I can tell you a story that women don’t go to the police to report the abuse they and their kids suffer. Now which story sounds more like real life to you? And which is more relevant to exposing domestic violence in NZ. Where are the reformed female abusers who are sharing their story to the public because it needs some sunlight?
Thank-you for insulting me maui. I don’t make up stories. I suggest you read Draco below who has linked to what I am sure is peer removed research.
You have attempted to conflate one issue with another in order to prove a point – whatever precisely it may be. We are talking in general terms about the level of violence perpetrated by men and woman alike. If you are not prepared to accept that men can be equally victims of violence too then that is an indictment on your closed mind. The terrible abuse some women and children have been forced to suffer – often over long periods of time – is not being refuted by anyone here. All some of us are trying to point out is that women can also inflict serious damage to their partners. Indeed they can inflict serious damage on other individuals too which is something I can testify to.
For your information it took me 10 years to recover from what was done to me. I had to start from scratch… rebuild my life… my confidence and self esteem… and the hardest lesson of all was learning to trust people again.
Just returned. Dammit, ‘removed’ in first paragraph is meant to be ‘approved’.
Lesson: don’t comment unless you have time.
Thanks to all of you who stand up for reason and honesty.
It will prevail eventually
Those locked into their self serving prejudice ….. i hope you can find grace somewhere, in the meanwhile i really hope no one lets you anywhere near any potential domestic conflict. You potentially can cause real harm.
I should let DtB answer for himself, but the answer to your question seems to be embedded in his comment already:
he violence by men causes far more physical damage than that done by women and so we hear more of it
Also even when women do cause serious harm, it’s rarely reported. Many men on the wrong end of it don’t even begin to frame it as abuse. And when we do, it’s often not taken seriously, we run a high risk of being falsely accused as perpetrators and get no serious support.
To repeat, yes men are stronger and cause more damage. Everyone fully expects that at least 70% of the serious damage and harm will be done by men. But I maintain that discrepancy more a consequence of biology than sociology. (Maybe there lies the crux of our disagreement.)
The term ‘patriarchy’ while useful at one time has become another barrier. As many people have already said, in the bigger picture patriarchy harms men almost as much as it does women. It’s more about social hierarchy, gross inequality and unjust exploitation than it is about gender. It forms the basis of the greed based, unconstrained capitalism that oppresses virtually all of humanity in pretty much equal measure.
Again feminism has a LOT of interesting and vital things to say about patriarchy, but decoupling the concept from gender might well lower the barrier to more people accepting it. Maybe we need a new word for it.
Not sure if you can watch this 10 min video from where you are, but this is real life. http://www.tv3.co.nz/THE-HUI-The-Hui-Ep3-Part-2/tabid/3692/articleID/126275/Default.aspx
Quick synopsis of the clip: Turangi midwife sees 50% of client mothers in domestic violence situations. So taking this into account, from your world view this would mean pregnant women instigating attacks from their partners. Or solely pregnant women being the ones inflicting damage on their male partners. I can’t reconcile that I’m sorry, and I can’t think of anyone I know in real life who would make those assumptions either.
I can’t do the video, but your synopsis doesn’t surprise me. Pregnancy is a time of heightened emotions for both partners, that often catalyses both the best and worst for each of them.
In my experience (and it’s only from a sample of one) pregnancy stimulates some very deep and primitive instincts in the mother. Unless you are prepared for them, or at least are confident enough as a man to deal with them, they can be very confronting. Cause can never stand in for excuse, but it’s exactly the kind of thing I have in mind when I’m taking about the need to understand root causes better.
Men too react in many subtle and unconscious ways to their partner being pregnant; and most of us are completely unprepared for these intense feelings. So it does not surprise me at all that pregnancy is a time of increased risk of violence. Personally I can think of few things sadder than a young pregnant mother beaten and hurt by her partner … and mostly for reasons that are probably quite avoidable.
But of course most women are not pregnant all their lives; which in real life is time enough.
What that video says is that there is something going on in very economically depressed Turangi which the health and law enforcement authorities need to get to the bottom of.
The health authorities are very much aware of the issue, have people who know about the issues on the ground (like midwives) and reformed male abusers and they do campaigns on addressing the issue. A pity there’s a sub section of society who have alternate theories on what the health issue is, a bit like the beliefs of climate deniers I might add.
The Surprising Truth About Women and Violence
I should have been more clear and said similar amounts of domestic violence.
And then there’s this bit:
it seems but it isn’t – thank you for your concern draco
No, you actually are blinded by your biases.
If you say so I shall give it due consideration.
Can I ask for clarification weka? Specifically on this bit “…the idea that domestic violence isn’t gendered, that men get beaten too, therefore domestic violence is a human violence issue, not a male violence issue”
Are you claiming that if one was to say that domestic violence is a human violence issue, that just by saying that, political analysis of systemic oppression is ‘rubbished’? Or are you meaning to say that it can and sometimes is used in that way?
I think that MRA-like arguments I have read say that it’s not a gender issue/ it’s a human issue as part and parcel of trying to negate the idea that the patriarchal system is a real thing that affects men and women differently (they also seem to be doing the same kind of strawman thing there by saying that feminism claims that the analyses of the patriarchy mean that women think men are all to blame, at which point its very hard not to start rolling ones eyes).
So yes, if someone wants to discuss domestic violence within the context of how humans are violent in general, that’s not a problem. But if they want to mistate feminist theory and then try and use that to support their position and undermine feminism, I say fuck off. Or if they want to misuse research, statistics and analyses of social dymanics, same thing.
Thanks.
gsays and weka – I’ve been enjoying (not sure that’s the right word – stimulated maybe – perhaps “reminded” and “activated” might be more correct ) by the Broken and Men Dominate discussions ), and I appreciated Red Logix’s comments – even if they were being offered in a context which might not have been appropriate.
We all have our different life experiences – some are more painful than others – and what I have learned thru those, is that you can never tell what someone else has been through, even if they’re looking and sounding okay. So – along with an understanding that not everyone can express themselves as well as they’d like, then maybe a degree of tolerance is required.
This sounds ideal, but is very difficult to put into practice. And somehow its easier to be dismissive of people on The Standard and other blogs, and on Facebook, rather than face-to-face in real life. I’m not very good at it, either.
Shit – I hope this doesn’t sound patronising . From an older age point-of-view. Not meant to be.
Just saying – these have been stimulating discussions, and they’ve brought up a lot of memories – good and bad.
And I wanted to comment on the anonymity thing as well – I started out on The Standard being anonymous. But – I’m now old enough (getting towards ancient), not sure if I’m tough enough – but decided it didn’t matter any more – so became the real me.
But I’m sure the real me is a lot nicer in writing, than the REAL me is !
hi jenny, i have been extremely fortunate not to have been a victim of violence.
i also have been close to some folk who have been in extremely unhealthy relationships, ranging from the psychological ‘water on a rock’ type abuse through to the serious hospitalizing because of assault.
it is hard to act, to act appropriately and effectively without isolating the victim further from support.
especially with the smaller incidents, the precurser events.
re pseudonyms, i picked this tag when i started commenting as, to my eyes, back then most folk on ts had them.
i find if someone is a dick or trolling, i just ignore them.
also want to add, i like the more vigorous moderating. stopping distracters and trolls.
i like dissenting opinions as it makes me look closer at what i believe, but some of these folks are more diversionary.
Hi Jenny, I also found the discussions stimulating and I’m heartened by the fact that they were more civil than usual.
I suppose I’m still wondering if some people don’t fully get what the objection to Red’s post was. Yes it was the context. But it’s also the politics. It’s brave of him to tell his personal story. I have no problem with anyone doing that and I know that most feminists not only support survivors of all genders using their experiences to talk about their politics, but that most feminists have men in their lives and so value men as a class.
What I have a problem with is Red’s politics around gender and violence, and his subsequent arguments that are essentially anti-feminist and underming of the politics of oppression that explains so much of women’s experiences. I have had quite a few conversations with him now over the years about this and I no longer have any tolerance for what he does. He is able to explain himself reasonably well so I don’t think this is an issue of him not being understood. I think it’s an issue of many people rejecting his basic premises (eg the biology arguments, tha idea that domestic violence isn’t gendered, his very poor understanding of what feminism is and does). Those basic premises get criticised and then he tries to defend them, and in amongst all that his story gets mixed up. But the story of what happened to him isn’t the problem, it’s how he is using that to inform his politics that is.
I will always support people to be able to talk about their experiences. But you are right, I have zero tolerance for people then using those to underpin some pretty abhorrent politics esp where those politics actively harm others. I’m not dismissive of Red (him and I have talked all sort of politics over the years), but I am now pretty dismissive of his gender politics. Much of that is due to the fact that it is such a waste of time and a huge distraction to have to argue about things that are fundamentall agin to progressive politics. We have urgent gender issues to work on, many of us have been working on them for a very long time, and the kinds of ideas that Red is pushing are part of a bigger agenda to undermine women and many of the gains made in recent decades.
” But the story of what happened to him isn’t the problem, it’s how he is using that to inform his politics that is.”
Thanks Weka for the clarification re Red L and his gender politics – I hadn’t registered his previous comments on those issues – maybe I just misssed them because of other interesting discussions going on elsewhere.
I don’t think we’ve had any of those big gender discussions for a quite a while. In the past they’ve been ugly, so it was good to see this one relatively straight forward.
” Much of that is due to the fact that it is such a waste of time and a huge distraction to have to argue about things that are fundamentall agin to progressive politics. ”
This neatly sums up why “progressive politics” is stalled, meanwhile we all career to distruction.
The inevitable outcome of the use of factionalisation as a campaigning tool is that you create a pool of voters that vote against you.
When you entwine that with environmental and fairness issues you do real harm.
Its sad
Who uses factionalism as a campaigning tool?
Are you being disingenuous or niave ?
Anyway there is a higher proportion of female sociopaths in positions of power then 20 years ago so it was worth the harm done
Personally i strive for less sociopathic bullys overall
“Are you being disingenuous or niave ?”
Neither. I’m asking you to explain a political point you just made so that I don’t have to waste time trying to second guess. Are you going to?
Ok i am settling on naive
If you are unaware of the factionalisation of the “progressive parties” and the inevitable result large scale voter turn off then i dont see how i am going to convince you.
really? .. you really dont get this?
Positive discrimination is an oxymoron, discrimination is wrong whatever the cause
I know it, you know it, and a majority of voters know it
So i guess you will tell me it isn’t happening? But if it looks like a duck , quacks like a duck, and craps everywhere , most people will see a duck.
That is not in any way to detract from the realities of the many and increasing inequalities we live with. just to make the point that a just cause dosn’t make wrong right and you do more harm than good if you act like it does!
“If you are unaware of the factionalisation of the “progressive parties” and the inevitable result large scale voter turn off then i dont see how i am going to convince you.”
I’m simply asking you to explain what YOU mean by those things, so there can be clear communication. I could guess what you mean, but honestly, if you can’t be bothered with communicating well I don’t see why I should either.
I don’t understand your comments either, Xanthe, re factionalisation of left parties. Can you clarify what you mean by this word – factionalisation please, and how does it occur ?
Perhaps an example would help.
Hi jenny
the purpose of governance is to find the best solutions for all, the purpose of elections or appointments either in government or within political parties is to appoint those who will best serve all.
Factionalisation occurs when candidates present as representing the interest of some demographic (gender, race, age, religion, idiology, whatever) and those demographs vote for the candidate that will best further the interest of that demograph.
It seems harmless enought but it is actually an unethical abuse of the democratic process, a bit around the edges does little harm, when it becomes the dominant feature of party or government the purpose of government and democracy is lost
that is quite significantly were the “progressive parties” are at
Obviously thats Just the short version
anti-feminist and underming of the politics of oppression that explains so much of women’s experiences.
I agree that my view does not line up with the usual feminist conventions. Although to be quite plain, feminism itself seems to have so many interpretations it’s not simple to conform to one linear narrative anymore.
Having said that, I’ll paraphrase what I’ve said before, that feminism has played a vital role in identifying and making visible the issue of dv. In that sense I’m hardly ‘anti-feminist’ … or whatever that is supposed to mean.
Really my view boils down to this. By placing most of it’s focus on the visible story of male violence on women and children the standard feminist narrative has become a hindrance to progress. I point to the flat-lining statistics that seem to be as bad as ever they were. We aren’t making progress and I think we need to look closer at the reasons why.
It is plain as day that the so called ‘gender wars’ have factionalised men and women against each other. That isn’t my doing, it’s just obvious after a few passes around the net. I think that is a hindrance. We will only solve this problem if men and women trust each other and help each other through this.
My approach is to treat the underlying root causes of intimate partner violence as a gender neutral, human problem that is aimed at understanding the drivers of behaviour and avoids blame.
And I think I can mostly say I’ve never been openly dismissive of your views weka. Not like you are now.
“In that sense I’m hardly ‘anti-feminist’ … or whatever that is supposed to mean.”
That’s right, you don’t know what I, as a feminist, mean. And until you are willing to take the time to learn that, I’m not longer willing to debate content with you on this topic.
“And I think I can mostly say I’ve never been openly dismissive of your views weka. Not like you are now.”
Maybe, but my memory over multiple conversations is that you routinely avoided dealing directly with the arguments pointing out the problems in what you are presenting. So it’s not as overt, but your dismissal is still there. And it’s horrible to debate with. I’ve reach my limit, so I’m making my dismissal overt.
As I’ve said, I have very good reasons for not engaging in debating the content of your post or comments. I’m not the only one that feels like it’s a waste of time and/or a big distraction.
Weka, I agree that RL did politicise his post and use some unfortunate stereotypes, but the thing that did strike me about the whole thread was the fact that males in abusive relationships are just told to get out of the relationship, that is your only option. Imagine if that is the only advice we gave females in abusive relationships, it’s simply not that easy.
There is no refuge available for men, retaliation is not and should never be an option and to my knowledge there are no support groups available to abused men. In fact, NZ’s Domestic Violence support groups openly exclude and even blame men:
“Every year, Shine directly helps thousands of adult and child victims of domestic abuse to be safer, and we motivate hundreds of men that hurt their families to change their behaviour”
http://www.2shine.org.nz/how-shine-helps/shine-services
“Women’s Refuge is a key national organisation working to end domestic violence towards women and children”
https://womensrefuge.org.nz/
Ad offered a useful statistic in the first comment of RL’s post:
“In the four years from 2009 to 2012, 76% of intimate partner violence-related deaths were perpetrated by men, 24% were perpetrated by women:
http://areyouok.org.nz/family-violence/statistics/”
Without trying to politicise the issue further, how do you see a way forward if we are not willing to look at the issue in a gender neutral way? Do we just accept that a quarter of intimate partner violence-related deaths are caused by men not getting out of the relationship in time?
This has ended up being a lot more confrontational than I originally set out to be. Please don’t take any of this as an attack on you, or as trying to diminish the work that AreYouOk and Womens Refuge do. I am simply trying to point out that while RL may have made some unfortunate statements in his post, his story equally needed to be told and the taboo of female-against-male domestic violence does need to be addressed.
Just to clarify a little further Bob. When I mention the topic of female on male abuse (which only some of which is physical) … I’m absolutely not trying to make any kind of Labour did it too argument. One form of abuse in no sense diminishes any other.
And it was my experience that the underlying causes of dv are shared by both genders, and this shapes my approach to the topic.
Nah. Deleted. Can’t be bothered.
“Weka, I agree that RL did politicise his post and use some unfortunate stereotypes, but the thing that did strike me about the whole thread was the fact that males in abusive relationships are just told to get out of the relationship, that is your only option. Imagine if that is the only advice we gave females in abusive relationships, it’s simply not that easy.”
Women do still get told that. In the past they got told that a lot. The reason they have more options today is because they organised.
There is no refuge available for men, retaliation is not and should never be an option and to my knowledge there are no support groups available to abused men.
The reason why women have services is because they organised. We didn’t get them handed to us on a plate. We got together under pretty difficult circumstances and created those services ourselves until others like the govt were willing to step in and help too. We are still hugely underfunded relative to many other aspects of NZ society, including ones that men not only benefit from but control the funding for.
In fact, NZ’s Domestic Violence support groups openly exclude and even blame men:
“Every year, Shine directly helps thousands of adult and child victims of domestic abuse to be safer, and we motivate hundreds of men that hurt their families to change their behaviour”
Yes, men need to be held accountable for when they hurt other people. What does that have to do with men who are victims?
Ad offered a useful statistic in the first comment of RL’s post:
“In the four years from 2009 to 2012, 76% of intimate partner violence-related deaths were perpetrated by men, 24% were perpetrated by women:
http://areyouok.org.nz/family-violence/statistics/”
I won’t look at links or stats that Red provides without a very good reason, because I reject his basic premise. All other times I have looked at arguments that say lots of women abuse men, it’s led to some pretty dodgy, already refuted research. I’m not going to waste my time because I don’t trust Red’s judgement on this. If someone whose gender politics I respect posts somethign I will look at it.
Without trying to politicise the issue further, how do you see a way forward if we are not willing to look at the issue in a gender neutral way?
We’re already making progress. This is one of Red’s basic premises that I reject (that we haven’t achieved anything useful).
Do we just accept that a quarter of intimate partner violence-related deaths are caused by men not getting out of the relationship in time?
ok, now I’m confused. Are you talking about men who abuse, or men who are being abused, or men who are both? Or what? It would help if you were clearer. I get that the situations are complex, and we need to take time to communicate clearly what we mean.
This has ended up being a lot more confrontational than I originally set out to be. Please don’t take any of this as an attack on you, or as trying to diminish the work that AreYouOk and Womens Refuge do. I am simply trying to point out that while RL may have made some unfortunate statements in his post, his story equally needed to be told and the taboo of female-against-male domestic violence does need to be addressed.
I actually don’t care what Red wrote in his post, because I’ve seen it all before. It’s not just that he makes unfortunately statements, it’s that his politics are based on premises that many progressive people reject, and he is aligning himself with groups that are actively harming feminism, women and society.
And let’s be clear here. He also is promoting a false dichotomy between the existing situation as he perceives it ie that seeing domestic violence as gendered is harming men and inhibiting change, and the idea that we can only do wright by men by abandoning that. It comes across as feminism is wrong about this and we need to look at men’s needs by underming what they are doing. It’s just bullshit. And it’s a serious problem here on the left because I don’t see any feminists supporting what he says (so if you want to ask where we would go, trying figuring out how to move somewhere after you have just said that feminism is wrong).
Here’s what I would respect,
Domestic violence overwhemingly affects women and is perpetrated by men, so we need to look at how women can be protected and men can be expected to change.
In addition to that, there are men who are being harmed by women, and we need to look at why that is happening, and protect them and get those women to change too.
In addition to that, humans don’t fit neatly into binary gender or heterosexuality, so we need to pay attention to those cultures and what their needs are around violence.
All of the above is an inclusive model. Feminism will support men organising to address violence against them. They won’t support that if it’s being done by underming feminism.
(aside, because this apparently needs spelling out, “Feminism will…” is me shorthanding and generalising as a way of not writing a novel. Like every other progressive movement, there are many expressions of feminism and many ways that feminists are active and see themselves. That’s not a problem).
Edit, I’ll also say that there is no taboo from me on talking about domestic violence against men, nor from most feminists I know. There is appropriate time and place, but in general, most feminism wants men to be well too. I would welcome posts and discussion about this topic on ts. I won’t tolerate that being done in a regressive and repressive MRA-like way. There are other, constructive ways to approach this. Red isn’t the one to do it.
How sad,
Just for the record I strongly endorse redlogix’s approach and am shocked by weka’s refusal to consider it.
Disappointed
It’s important to look further behind the statistics quoted above (e.g. 24% of intimate partner violence-related (IPV) deaths were perpetrated by women against men), which tend to underestimate the magnitude and effect of domestic violence perpetrated against women.
From the report provided on the areyouok website, when examining the deaths according to domestic violence history within the relationship, 93% of all the IPV deaths involved female primary victims, and 96% involved male predominant aggressors (page 41 of the report).
Of the deaths perpetrated by women, 83% were classified “Female primary victim/suspected primary victim kills male predominant aggressor”, and 17% as “Female predominant aggressor kills male/female primary victim”.
So, in most cases women perpetrating IPV deaths were primary victims themselves.
Also, just want to say thank you to Weka for your insightful and considerate comments regarding IPV and all gender-related subjects! This is a hard area to read as a lurker, let alone comment on, but so important, so I really appreciate that you continue to fight the fight.
I’m hugely appreciative of what you’ve just posted re the report.
And thanks for the thanks and the reminder of what this is like to be reading. This is why I don’t want to respond to Reds content, it just keeps a politically damaging conversation going. Walking away now.
+1 Jcm.
I also appreciate the effort Weka has put into her comments, patiently trying to educate and explain in the face of some incredible levels of ignorance and misogyny.
I expect it from the right but find it very hard to accept it from the left. Unfortunately my idea of left seemingly does not match many of those commenting on the Standard who claim to be left but still have racist and sexist attitudes that they are not willing to confront.
All the personal abuse on this thread has come from who?
Not my idea of the left either.
Certainly not from Weka.
That’s the weka who says that RL’s judgement on this issue is untrustworthy and that the facts that RL provides aren’t worth following up because they’re probably dodgy?
I suppose RL could be a greater man and not take that shit personally. But it sounds pretty damn personal.
That’s not quite what I said though CV, so there is another example of misrepresenting my position. Here’s what I actually said,
I won’t look at links or stats that Red provides without a very good reason, because I reject his basic premise. All other times I have looked at arguments that say lots of women abuse men, it’s led to some pretty dodgy, already refuted research. I’m not going to waste my time because I don’t trust Red’s judgement on this. If someone whose gender politics I respect posts somethign I will look at it.
I have given analysis over time of why I won’t engage with Red’s content on this topic. That included me saying that I don’t trust his sources because of my experience of arguing with him about this in the past. Other’s a free to follow up his links and make their own decisions.
You don’t like my critique of his politics, fair enough. But I haven’t been abusive. In fact I would day that this whole round of gender politics on ts has been remarkably free from abuse.
There is nothing wrong with me or anyone critiquing Red’s position. We do that on ts every day, why not in this situation?
@jcm
Every study done in this area has been controversial. And when you drill into the details what you find is that there are essentially three kinds of interaction:
1. One partner inflicts one way abuse on the other
2. One partner initiates, the other responds in self-defence
3. Both parties pretty much go at it hammer and tongs equally
This complicates how we view the situation a lot. When you add in verbal abuse and humiliation it gets even more complex.
which tend to underestimate the magnitude and effect of domestic violence perpetrated against women.
Again no-one wants to minimise the fact that male violence causes more harm. I’ll keep saying this over and over because pixels are free and I can type fast. Your point is redundant, I’ve already emphatically stated it many, many times and yet no-one seems capable of noticing this.
So, in most cases women perpetrating IPV deaths were primary victims themselves.
Yet interestingly when men perpetrate IPV deaths absolutely no defense of provocation or any justification is ever permitted.
But certainly where deaths are concerned, men are the by far the dominant perpetrators, no argument … yet crucially it is not 100%. Women too murder their partners. Same-sex partner violence is also thought to be rising.
This is proof that violence is not totally determined by the fact of gender alone. Abuse occurs on a spectrum, and while males unquestionably dominate the worst end of it, there is no evidence to suggest that women are exempt from their share of it either.
Therefore there must be an underlying root cause that is common to all human experience.
And that just proves – nothing. In fact, it’s moving the goal post from domestic violence to deaths caused by domestic violence. Different category, different measure.
Ummmm, if someone moved the goal posts ’twasnt me – I used the same evidence from the report quoted by Bob, so not sure where this critique comes from.
What I think it illustrates is that you need to have a more indepth knowledge of the figure you are quoting, otherwise you can do more harm than good.
You’ve got a smart guy, RL, who has personal experience with DV as a victim, and who is willing to engage with you and with other commentators on TS in an articulate way.
But you know what, fuck that, he’s clearly not trustworthy on this issue because he says things which confront the mental model you’ve built up around DV, and because you believe that your own basic premise is solid enough that you can dismiss him as you already have the answers that you want.
So his entire input and life experience gets *POOOF* invalidated in a single moment – and my input too even though I personally know how violent Kiwi women can be.
Instead, you’ll just create your own definition and own paradigm of what DV affecting males is all about, and the rest of us simply get to buy into it or not.
Well, good luck with that, because both RL and I know that while you, and some of the other women who are commenting on this issue have some of the most important answers and insights, you still only own a fraction of what is required.
The concept that men need or want the support of feminists or feminism in order to change themselves for the better, or that feminists or feminism has any validity in determining or defining what is good for men, or that feminists or feminism can describe what men are lacking and then act to help change the well being of men, is utterly unacceptable.
It is as ridiculous and outrageous as suggesting that women need the support, approval and contribution of men in order to change and improve who they are.
Poppycock. This the third time of writing? How can you be a man in this world and not be a feminist?
Also. No-one has berated or challenged reds account of his experience of DV. What is challenged is the deficiency of understanding he exhibits with reference to the underlying drivers of DV. I mean, fuck, he takes the most valuable frame of reference – patriarchy – and just flat out dismisses it. Having dismissed that whole analytical framework out of hand, he then turns to studies and figures, a lot of which are twisted (and discredited) stats produced by overtly misogynistic fucktards to back his assertion that females and males are on some kind of level playing field when it comes to violence. We ain’t!
And that, just in case your entertaining the idea, isn’t me hating on men or projecting any type of self loathing. But I do despise that set of social norms that have grown up and that can be said to reside with the concept of patriarchy. And I despise the way that culture impacts on men and women both directly and indirectly or via intermediaries.
I don’t pretend to know the numbers on this. But I’d be curious to know how many women who abuse their partners were themselves previously subjected to abuse. Because misdirected revenge that springs from events in previous relationships or situations is cause for using the framework of patriarchy to understand why some women are abusing their partners…it’s not a reason to throw the framework away on the grounds that it doesn’t seem to apply to the here and now of a given abusive situation.
Really?
Well if its such a valuable and powerful frame of reference, then let’s see the highly insightful and effective paths forward that this awesome analytical framework gives our towns and neighbourhoods about DV.
At least with a Marxian analytical framework, the workers are shown real ways out that they can do for themselves.
Its a long thread Bill you may have missed when I said this above at 4:11pm
The term ‘patriarchy’ while useful at one time has become another barrier. As many people have already said, in the bigger picture patriarchy harms men almost as much as it does women. It’s more about social hierarchy, gross inequality and unjust exploitation than it is about gender. It forms the basis of the greed based, unconstrained capitalism that oppresses virtually all of humanity in pretty much equal measure.
Again as I said, feminism has had a LOT of vital and interesting things to say about patriarchy. Really.
But when you read someone like Jared Diamond who neatly traces the origin of it back to the invention of agriculture, the need to defend territory, the need for disposable males as soldiers, the need to control female breeding to have plenty of replacements, the resulting intensification of hierarchy and inequality, economic models based on slavery and exploitation … it all looks more and more like class war than gender war.
Now of course historically feminism has a proud heritage of righting legal and structural inequality that was an inherent part of the slave/serf economies. But in a society where all women can vote, go to work in any job of their choosing, enter any relationship they want, and leave it at their choosing, enter into any legal contract, start any business they want, travel and live pretty much as they wish …. the idea this is a brutal repressive and literal patriarchy doesn’t quite live up to the label any more.
What instead feminism now confronts is male behaviour. And is now unhappy that men have all gotten with the program. What many men feel, but struggle to articulate is a sense that “what you are calling ‘patriarchy’ smells pretty much like the shit I have to put up with everyday myself”. As I said before; patriarchy harms most men almost as much as most women.
Now crucially this does NOT dismiss the experience of patriarchy as women experience it. But it does suggest a better way to reframe it so as both genders get it.
Jared Diamond – I’ve read some of his stuff – is in the same boat as any other person looking to the past and trying to figure it out. They are stuck within current frameworks of reference and so, in the end, can only tell stories. Now, some of those stories might seem more plausible than others, but all of them are chock full of projections from the here and now into an unknown and largely unknowable past.
Red, if you’re looking to pit an economic understanding against a gender understanding, then seriously, go and read this excellent post from a wee while back by ‘stargazer’.
http://thestandard.org.nz/intersections/
What a load of fucken bollocks.
When study after study shows the same thing then you pretty have to take it as a given. And, no, those studies have not been discredited.
You’re right Draco. I should, of course, have written “stats and figures”, not studies and figures.
Hi Bill – your comments above make a lot of sense. Pity the guys who are reading them cannot take them on board.
Patriachy does seem to me to be a valid framework to use in this discussion.
It is as ridiculous and outrageous as suggesting that women need the support, approval and contribution of men in order to change and improve who they are.
Yes. When the feminists demanded the right to define what was important to them, to frame gender issues entirely on their terms, they forgot that men might equally demand the same right as well.
Of course their response was ‘well you are all the bad guys so you don’t get that right’. And we said ‘well actually we AREN’T all the bad guys’
And the women reply “we never said that, we just want to hold all men accountable as a class for the actions of a few’. And so it goes.
Then the MRA types said ‘fuck you, we’re going to determine our own narrative anyway’. The women screamed ‘misogynists!’ and on it goes.
Oh well … I’ll finish here by repeating something I said above; that in the end the path through this shitstorm will only be found when both genders start trusting each other again. And then helping each other to be be the best we can.
I’ll put it this way. We all know that men cause more harm. It’s largely a fact of our greater strength and crap socialisation in an intrinsically violent society.
But tell a man that his greater strength is a gift, tell him it is his duty to use if safely, tell him it makes him a better man to be responsible for using this gift wisely … then you have a framework most men will respond to.
And then ask yourself, who is that most men will listen to most, that they will do almost anything to please, if not the women in their lives they mostly want nothing more than to love and cherish?
Yes. When the feminists demanded the right to define what was important to them, to frame gender issues entirely on their terms, they forgot that men might equally demand the same right as well.
Red. What’s with this ‘the feminists’? Do you really think that feminist thought and understanding is the exclusive preserve of women? I mean, my experience of patriarchy is substantially different to that of women, but it’s not separate.
Of course their response was ‘well you are all the bad guys so you don’t get that right’. And we said ‘well actually we AREN’T all the bad guys’
I only ever met one woman who called herself for being a feminist who hated men…I was the only man in a room of about a dozen feminists at the time. And you know what? The feminists in the room didn’t want a bar of it. (That was in a house the evening before a day of feminist workshops many years back in England…mostly anarcho feminists from memory, pretty light on the liberal feminist front and I only wound up being in that house by accident).
And the women reply “we never said that, we just want to hold all men accountable as a class for the actions of a few’. And so it goes.
I’ve never had a feminist attempt to hold me accountable for the actions of others (with the one isolated exception I’ve mentioned above)
Then the MRA types said ‘fuck you, we’re going to determine our own narrative anyway’. The women screamed ‘misogynists!’ and on it goes.
So the MRA types basically justify their shit off the back of their pre-existing prejudice.
Oh well … I’ll finish here by repeating something I said above; that in the end the path through this shitstorm will only be found when both genders start trusting each other again. And then helping each other to be be the best we can.
Again. I’ve never (with that one exception) found distrust – in relation to what we’re discussing – to be any kind of an issue.
I’ll put it this way. We all know that men cause more harm. It’s largely a fact of our greater strength and crap socialisation in an intrinsically violent society.
If society is intrinsically violent then it follows that no configuration of humanity can be anything but violent – and that’s simply not true. there are reasons why this society is violent. But you’re apparently loathe to analyse it.
But tell a man that his greater strength is a gift, tell him it is his duty to use if safely, tell him it makes him a better man to be responsible for using this gift wisely … then you have a framework most men will respond to.
Hail the almighty? Really??
And then ask yourself, who is that most men will listen to most, that they will do almost anything to please, if not the women in their lives they mostly want nothing more than to love and cherish?
And they all lived happily ever after in a patriarchal wonderland. Fan-fucking-tastic.
Do you really think that feminist thought and understanding is the exclusive preserve of women?
It is according to many of the comments I’ve read here. But that isn’t an answer to what you quoted anyhow.
I’ve never had a feminist attempt to hold me accountable for the actions of others
Try reading weka up above.
http://thestandard.org.nz/daily-review-12052016/#comment-1173238
Last sentence. Maybe I misread it.
But you’re apparently loathe to analyse it.
See above @7:48pm. Acknowledge it’s only a very scratchy attempt, but loath? No.
Hail the almighty? Really??
And they all lived happily ever after in a patriarchal wonderland. Fantastic.
Again the overt sneering and personal abuse is coming from who?
Frankly what are you expecting from me when you behave like this?
I already read Weka’s comment earlier. You might have noted I asked her to clarify one small part – which she did. She was giving a rundown of MRA stuff….not a run down of men’s attitudes. Is that where you went off track?
Well, what kind of response do you expect to an appeal for supposed superiority be acknowledged, accepted as truth and encouraged/rewarded? I wasn’t sneering at you. I was being contemptuous of the idea you were peddling. Look. If you happen to have a partner who is consensually submissive in aspects of your relationship, then all power to you both. But you can’t put that expectation or that template ‘out there’ as though it should be a norm and not expect some ‘less than enthusiastic’ responses.
“I’ve never had a feminist attempt to hold me accountable for the actions of others”
Try reading weka up above.
here’s what I said,
It then uses those strawmen to push theories that don’t hold men accountable as a class.
That means that men as a class are accountable for the privilges that their class is afforded. In the context of this conversation it also means that men as a class need to step up and change male violence, not because all individual men are responsible for the actions of other individual men, but because men are the ones that can change their own culture as a whole.
Nothing, I repeat nothing, in what I have said suggests that Bill is responsible for another general man’s violence. IMO he does have a responsibility to take action against male violence in general, and I see him doing that in this thread.
Likewise I will hold Pākehā as a class accountable for racism in NZ. Or the non-disabled accountable for the shit that disabled people have to go through just to live their lives. Not because non-disabled people are bad, but because they have power that disabled people don’t.
So, yet another example of your failure to even understand the basic arguments made by feminism, and to misrepresent my views. On and on it goes. Your views on feminism are so twisted from what feminists believe and you continue to assert that your views of feminism are more valid than those of feminists. It makes sense then that you insist that I don’t know what I mean elsewhere in the thread. There’s no way past that.
@weka
IMO he does have a responsibility to take action against male violence in general, and I see him doing that in this thread.
I’ve absolutely zero problem or argument when you frame it like that.
But still nothing said about women taking responsibility against female violence in general. Yes it’s less physically damaging and way less visible, but it emotionally it’s every bit as harmful.
Feminists have spent a lot of energy and got a LOT of oxygen demanding men take responsibility to change; yet the slightest hint from men that maybe women might want to examine their own camp too, gets viciously shouted down.
As for the rest of your comment, it’s patronising and condescending. All you do is tell me how ignorant and twisted I am, making the issue personal rather than adding to the conversation. You barely manage to omit the word misogynist. It’s typical of the bile feminist direct towards men and it’s taking you nowhere.
@Bill
Look. If you happen to have a partner who is consensually submissive in aspects of your relationship, then all power to you both.
Again the grotesque misrepresentation. It’s truly amazing what people will project. Actually my partner is a successful and capable business person in her own right and is naturally assertive and bossy when it suits her. She’s much better at organising people than I am, and has fine strong opinions of her own. It is why I love her.
But while you sneer, the fact remains, regardless of any imaginary templates you want to make up, almost no-one enters into an intimate relationship with a picture in their mind of hitting, kicking, beating or killing this person they love. No-one (apart from maybe the psychopaths) walk down the traditional marriage aisle in the hope that one day they can get to kick the shit out the person they are about to be joined with.
So when it does all end up in hospital, refuge or court surely it is worth asking ‘what went so badly wrong?’
In all this debate it is so easy to lose sight of this truth, that most people, most of the time are fundamentally good. And when they are not … it is more often the stuff of tragedy than malice.
That’s it from me. I’m sick of seeing my name on the sidebar for the time being and I’ve other things to get on with.
“the taboo of female-against-male domestic violence does need to be addressed”.
Yes – I would agree Bill, but isn’t it time that men took up that issue for themselves – just as women in the past have taken up the issue of domestic violence and worked to bring it out into the open, and to provide safe shelters for those women and children it affects.
Edit – I see that Weka above answers this in more detail.
I didn’t write that quote you’re attributing to me. Anyway…
okay. scanned back through the comments. Bob wrote that.
jenny explainations of factionalism above, we ran out of levels for reply
Hi all, I would like to suggest that part of the tension in this discussion is that we have a head and a heart debating and in that, it can be hard to see common ground
I applaud your approach gsays and several decades ago i would have said the same.
In my experience those who set themselves up as saviours of the victim’s often gain a sense of personal entltlement and feel justified in using unethical means to get what they are convinced is owing to them, This manefests in dishonest and manipulative communication as was the case here. It is a form of violence and does create tension. In a domestic setting it is domestic violence. They themselves are convinced that because they are doing it for the victims is must be OK
Quite frankly I dont know how to get through to them. The only times i have observed a meaningful change from this behaviour is if they are by circumstance required to accept responsibility for some harm they have caused, but generally it can be blamed on the oppressors so it dosnt happen often. Thus are despots made from the best of intentions.
That bag being flaunted by Judith was on Sale at the Warehouse I think. $20.50
So what?
So you and her shouldn’t frequent the same shopping malls James.
James, if true it’s actually a big plus for Judith Collins. Surprising.
I thought you were taking the piss ianmac but you were being literal?
Just kidding Colonial Viper.
My photo under the heading “gullible.”
Its crocodile.
Ironic as she talks a croc of s…
Oh wow so good, http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=11637631 Raybon Kan “Meanwhile, in another romantic comedy, Fairfax and NZME seem to be dating. So one media firm was eyeing up another, yet the media were caught by surprise. What do we expect? The media were in a lock-up watching The Bachelor.”
Well I can skip most of this stuff. Same old, same old. The difference between the sexes and violence and bad behaviour etc. 105 comments!
Did anyone write about anything else on here? I haven’t time to look and see if there is any original thought or amusing satire.
I just read your recently suggested link about “commonism”. A very good read but I terribly missed one hugely important aspect or dimension, which seems to be left out of most socio-political discourse. Possibly the very last sentence hides a suggestion of a hint …
Incognito
Right I will have another look at that commonism piece and see what the dots you leave behind you refer to.
As to the quote above, yes to thinking about what we are fighting for (and it is a fight, not a skirmish against the powerful-money-materialism-crazed and their naive bunnies in the headlights, and is likely to be a fight to the death – of people elsewhere, or closer – our vulnerable towns and supply systems, our extended families, us, our known planet – which will become the place of the ants which I think have the life systems to survive in places).
But thinking who ‘we’ are. There isn’t time to think, argue and analyse that in depth. The ‘we’ have to be the people who will step forward and do something of value in building capacity, sustainable, friendly community and retaining as much kindness as possible, despite ever harsher conditions. Those who self-select to act, must seek out other people who can combine thinking, reflecting, comradeship and action and together work for worthy practical positive outcomes. The others are just, literally, time-wasters. In The Day of the Triffids, those who wake in the morning after the night-sky show, are blind and shocked and feel their way along the walls to the downstairs lobby hoping for help and guidance, and mill round in circles there.
That is what is happening here in the world right now, we can see but we can’t process intellectually what we see and so won’t take any steps to defray the disaster to come. What a future. Dire. And we are aboard the Titanic. Some survived from that – and one of them was in the company that built it. But it wasn’t his fault was it? The problem was over-confidence, hubris on everyones part, especially captain and crew. A very human failing. Perhaps that is why the human race is failing.
Thanks greywarshark.
I will certainly have to re-read it again as it was rather long & dense at such a late time at night.
I think you’re probably right about everything you wrote although I personally dislike using ‘military’ terminology. I prefer to see it as (part of) “the human struggle” (Darwinian) to figure out who we are, what is the purpose (meaning) of life, and all those other pesky little questions that won’t go away 😉
The only thing I’d argue about is the tension between acting (now) and thinking (later). IMO we’re destined to do (repeat) the same things (mistakes, or, in your words “mill round in circles”) if we rely on short-term or so-called fast thinking (à la Kahneman). The human condition requires holistic approaches, which also means that actingthinking have to be(come) complementary rather than separate steps in the process.
Popper made a similar argument, I believe, when he discussed (piecemeal) social engineering and planning & politics: small steps with feedback loops along the way and continuous adjustment. That said, I’m not sure that his methodology/philosophy is applicable to major social crises. He contrasted this with Utopian engineering, which he was less keen on, to say the least … Perhaps that’s more like the urgent action that you’re referring to?
Do we need good or better leaders, self-selecting activists and/or thinkers, or do we try something completely different and new?
From a liberal framework it dangerous to say that because men commit more severe family violence that we should have rules or campaigns that single them out. Because if you can do that how do you deal with the significant differences in statistics between cultural groups and socioeconomic levels?
And from a pragmatic framework we currently have a situation where male – female violence is basically unacceptable (most people will actively intervene, which is good) and female to male violence is largely acceptable (at least slaps and some punches – almost no one would intervene). This means a little effort to discourage F-M assaults could have a large effect while M-F assaults are the sort of thing that considerable social pressure has not been able to weed out.
And of course those that see violence are likely to be more violent so reducing this has other benefits.