Kytro wrote on Oct 2
nd, 2015 at 9:20am:
[quote author=The_Grappler link=1443653228/150#150 date=1443693098]'domestic violence' is a created component of the artificial drive by government to cause a division between men and women and thus destroy the fundamental building block of our kind of society - the family.
Domestic violence is created when family members are violent towards each other. How is the government making families attack each other?
You've missed the last 30-40 years, haven't you? Governments have installed legislation that permits one party to attack the other on the basis of a feeling using the instruments of the State. That's two strikes before you even start.Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Oct 1
st, 2015 at 7:51pm:
It is an escalating issue for the simple reason that it is media driven, and has been based, by the same governments for their own ends, on a faulty premise in several ways.
One such way is the hijacking of the word 'violence' and its killing and then re-birth as an entirely different thing from what it was.
Words change over time, one might as well complain that 'gay' no longer primarily means happy.
No real relevance there - the real issue is that 'violence' as per the social science re-naming has come to mean anything one side feels, but does not apply to the other side - with both sides being arbitrarily allocated roles in this farce.Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Oct 1
st, 2015 at 7:51pm:
Another is the perpetuation of the myth that 'domestic violence' ONLY includes men v women.
Which of course it isn't It includes all violence between family members. The insistence of men v women shows how archaic some attitudes still are.
Spot on.Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Oct 1
st, 2015 at 7:51pm:
These two factors have significantly contributed to the input into an equation of 'violence' as described in (1) above - by the simple expedients of simultaneously using the instruments of the State to attack men, thus generating a response, and by encouraging women to cry 'violence' at any time for any reason, thus creating the opportunity for the State to intervene violently, and thus escalating what is, in the very vast majority of situations, NOT violence at all into a generalised melee` of violence at whim, retaliatory violence, and State institutionalised violence.
There will always be some people who try to use the law to gain advantage in this way, but it is by far a minority of the cases. While it's important to get to truth, that shouldn't be used as a method to dismiss the vast majority of situations.
The truth is simple - while ever the 'definition' of 'domestic violence' remains 'whatever the complainant feels' - and that is deemed sufficient for the violent intervention of the State - there can never be any diminution in Violence overall - only an escalation with each step.Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Oct 1
st, 2015 at 7:51pm:
In this never-ending descent into Hell there is no answer as long as government/State itself continues to promote and encourage violence between men and women.
It doesn't help, no. It's also somewhat unavoidable, but it should be minimised.
A better approach, in my view, would be to remove the insulting and stigmatising term 'violence' from applications for AVOs etc. That is a nonsense when over 95% of call-outs to NSW police over DV in 2011-12 resulted in no charges, and most accusations of 'violence' as put forward for the rubber stamp AVO etc are no such thing, but are themselves inflammatory. Violence needs to be carefully defined - not just used as a catch-all for every situation, and as a useful re-defined tool to enable government to act where it has no real right. That is why I advocate a first step as being a careful re-phrasing of this 'legislation' so as to properly define actions.Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Oct 1
st, 2015 at 7:51pm:
As for the killings that are going on - the State views these as 'acceptable casualties' in what it deems to be a 'social revolution' - which is, rather, a 'bloody coup' by that State.
Are you suggesting the state staged these killings?
I am saying that in the Hitlerite and Stalinist and Pol Pot-ist style of thinking - that of 'RealPolitik' - governments with an agenda genuinely view people injured and harmed terribly as 'acceptable casualties'. You see that every day with government policies - raising the pension age injures many = acceptable casualties in the greater good - FTAs without genuine mutual trade injure many = acceptable casualties in the greater good.Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Oct 1
st, 2015 at 7:51pm:
Attacking and insulting mostly innocent men is a surefire way of guaranteeing retaliation in one way or another, as does attacking their home, hearth and family - which is precisely what the State is doing with this current 'domestic violence' regime. Men are hard-wired that way - so the direct impact of an unwarranted intervention using violence by the State in ALL ordinary men - is one of first rejection, and then retaliation.
Insults are not a valid reason to act with violence. We rise above of basic biological drives on a daily basis.
[/q