And just continue to invent statistics to support your arguments. Thats the best way to be taken seriously.

Emma wrote on Jun 6^th, 2015 at 11:49pm:


Well it's obviously not great, but remember how I showed you that more than twice as many men are murdered as women?

Not sure you could legislate that women choose decent partners anyway.

rhino wrote on Jun 6^th, 2015 at 9:55am:



Not bs statistics, and sexual assault is far more likely to go unreported that there to be false reports made.

1 in 5 women and 1 in 20 men have experienced sexual violence since the age of 15 years (Australian Bureau of Statistics Personal Safety Survey, 2006)
1 in 3 women and 1 in 6 men will be sexually abused before the age of 16 (Fergusson & Mullen, 1999)
93 per cent of offenders are male (National Statistics - Crime & Safety Survey, 2002)
Intimate partner violence is the leading contributor of preventable death, disability and illness in Victorian women aged 15-44. It is responsible for more of the disease burden than high blood pressure, smoking or obesity (Vic Health, 2004)
1 in 6 reports to Police of rape and less than 1 in 7 reports of incest or sexual penetration of a child result in prosecution (Sexual Offences: Law & Procedure Final Report, Victorian Law Reform Commission, 2004)
Family Violence costs Australia about $8 billion per hear, a substantial proportion of which is borne by the
victims themselves (Vic Health, 2004)
14 per cent (1 in 7) of women sexually assaulted by a current partner and 16 per cent (just over 1 in 6) by
any other male reported to the Police (Australian component of International Violence Against Women Survey,2004)
80 per cent of offenders sentenced in the past 6 years received a custodial sentence. The average was 4 years 6 months - 5 years 6 months. Median was 5 years. The sentences handed down to offenders ranged from as low as 12 months to highest 20 years (Sentencing Advisory Council www.sentencingcouncil.vic.gov.au 2008)

http://www.casa.org.au/casa_pdf.php?document=statistics

If only there were some way of teaching women responsibility, without being considered "oppressive" or "patriarchal".

We teach people not to go down dark alleys where deadbeats are loitering if they don't want to get robbed - it's just common sense - yet women are actually encouraged to "follow their heart" and date the deadshit bad boys that end up killing them.

mothra wrote on Jun 7^th, 2015 at 11:20am:


Think.

If someone did get robbed cutting through a dark alley, the "blame" is still on the deadbeats, but the victim could have gone a looooong way towards minimising or eliminating that risk if they exercised some caution. 

... wrote on Jun 7^th, 2015 at 11:34am:



There is evidently much you don't know or understand about the cycle of domestic violence. Even people well trained and versed in the phenomena fall victim.

It is likened quite well to a frog being placed in a pot of cold water that is slowly brought up to the boil. The frog doesn't realise it's in danger until it's too hot to jump out.

Victims are groomed. It starts out small. Little things that slowly erode the self esteem. By the time it reaches crisis point, the victim is usually well primed.

Victim blaming is actually part of the problem, not part of the solution.

mothra wrote on Jun 7^th, 2015 at 11:47am:


Using phrases like "victim blaming" isn't part of any solution.  You leave your car doors unlocked in the ghetto, and your car gets stolen, you won't get much sympathy (if you're a bloke) yet when women make shithouse decisions, it's always "societies fault" and the whole world needs to be reinvented, rather than accept that they buggered up.

I suspect you're not interested in any solution - you're more interested in apportioning blame elsewhere than being safe and happy.