Australian Politics Forum - ••• DOMESTIC VIOLENCE •••

...

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 23673
WA
Gender: male

Re: ••• DOMESTIC VIOLENCE •••
Reply #75 - Oct 1^st, 2015 at 3:28pm

Kytro wrote on Oct 1^st, 2015 at 3:16pm:

This is exactly the problem I'm getting at, making excuses for violence and threats. This is what I mean when I say domestic violence (like other violence) exists because there are elements of society that think it's acceptable.

I suspect this is going where these discussions always go - an inability to distinguish a slap on the cheek from a headstomping. Nobody thinks that's acceptable. But knowing everyone has their breaking point, and hectoring people until they get to to that point is no more acceptable. There is a very strong deterrent in place for the headstomping (the law) but there is no hectoring deterrent. That's not fair.

Kytro wrote on Oct 1^st, 2015 at 3:16pm:

Making threats

You don't need to make threats. A decent sized bloke needn't say "ima smash you" for the threat of violence to emanate from him, if he is provoked. It's just always there. Cause and effect. If you flick a light switch, it doesn't threaten to turn on, it just turns on. By the same token, if you provoke a dude too far, he might turn your lights out. That's the understanding that needs to be there. If you don't want that threat to be actualised, you don't provoke them. Simple stuff - any 4 year old boy understands this, yet it's too high a bar for grown women. Equality indeed.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Oct 1^st, 2015 at 3:41pm by ... »

In the fullness of time...

IP Logged

...

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 23673
WA
Gender: male

Re: ••• DOMESTIC VIOLENCE •••
Reply #76 - Oct 1^st, 2015 at 3:30pm

Kytro wrote on Oct 1^st, 2015 at 3:23pm:

Aussie wrote on Oct 1^st, 2015 at 3:12pm:

You argument is logical. I have never hit a female, but I have represented blokes who have. Invariably, it was never out of "Oh I'm pissed, where's me dinner, cop this bitch." There was always some level of provocation which preceded it.

That does not, and should not make it an acceptable response. If you cannot control your actions, then you need a new toolset.

All very well saying that, but in real terms, it's useless. You could tell that bikie that ran his ex off the road and stoved her head in he "needs a new toolset" but he's not going to take your advice on board.

Back to top

In the fullness of time...

IP Logged

Aussie

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 38497
Gender: male

Re: ••• DOMESTIC VIOLENCE •••
Reply #77 - Oct 1^st, 2015 at 3:31pm

Kytro wrote on Oct 1^st, 2015 at 3:23pm:

Aussie wrote on Oct 1^st, 2015 at 3:12pm:

You argument is logical. I have never hit a female, but I have represented blokes who have. Invariably, it was never out of "Oh I'm pissed, where's me dinner, cop this bitch." There was always some level of provocation which preceded it.

That does not, and should not make it an acceptable response. If you cannot control your actions, then you need a new toolset.

How come that does not apply to the provocateur? The Law will always allow provocation as a defence (provided extremes are avoided.) If someone is in your face aggressively calling you "a cxxx, lousy husband, lousy parent, lousy lay etc etc etc" you are not expected to be Jesus Christ ~ just a mere mortal.

Back to top

IP Logged

Kytro

Gold Member

Offline

Blasphemy: a victimless
crime

Posts: 3409
Adelaide
Gender: male

Re: ••• DOMESTIC VIOLENCE •••
Reply #78 - Oct 1^st, 2015 at 3:45pm

... wrote on Oct 1^st, 2015 at 3:30pm:

All very well saying that, but in real terms, it's useless. You could tell that bikie that ran his ex off the road and stoved her head in he "needs a new toolset" but he's not going to take your advice on board.

Yes, but what we can do is work towards not having so many of these people in society but reducing the casual factors.

This combined with mitigation processes can reduce the impact and amount of violence.

Back to top

IP Logged

Aussie

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 38497
Gender: male

Re: ••• DOMESTIC VIOLENCE •••
Reply #79 - Oct 1^st, 2015 at 3:49pm

Kytro wrote on Oct 1^st, 2015 at 3:45pm:

... wrote on Oct 1^st, 2015 at 3:30pm:

All very well saying that, but in real terms, it's useless. You could tell that bikie that ran his ex off the road and stoved her head in he "needs a new toolset" but he's not going to take your advice on board.

Yes, but what we can do is work towards not having so many of these people in society but reducing the casual factors.

This combined with mitigation processes can reduce the impact and amount of violence.

Oh, that sounds all very marvelous, and reminiscent of the rhetoric of decades ago. How about you put some practical meat on those Utopian bones?

Back to top

IP Logged

Kytro

Gold Member

Offline

Blasphemy: a victimless
crime

Posts: 3409
Adelaide
Gender: male

Re: ••• DOMESTIC VIOLENCE •••
Reply #80 - Oct 1^st, 2015 at 3:50pm

Aussie wrote on Oct 1^st, 2015 at 3:31pm:

How come that does not apply to the provocateur? The Law will always allow provocation as a defence (provided extremes are avoided.) If someone is in your face aggressively calling you "a cxxx, lousy husband, lousy parent, lousy lay etc etc etc" you are not expected to be Jesus Christ ~ just a mere mortal.

It certainly should apply. I do think you are mistaken about the law always allowing it, there is every chance it will be removed or reduced at some point. Probably for the wrong reasons.

This is my point about having a tool-set to deal with anger. It is possible to not respond violently to provocation, there are alternatives - you could simply leave the environment and until you are calmer.

Back to top

IP Logged

cods

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 88048

Re: ••• DOMESTIC VIOLENCE •••
Reply #81 - Oct 1^st, 2015 at 3:53pm

Aussie wrote on Oct 1^st, 2015 at 3:12pm:

... wrote on Oct 1^st, 2015 at 3:06pm:

The threat of violence is far more powerful than actual violence. But in a society that enforces the mantra "violence is NEVER acceptable" that threat has no power. It's as though one side has been disarmed.

But compounding this, is that the threat of unimaginable violence is now in her hands. If he should lose his temper for a second and lash out, no matter the extent of provocation, she can hurt him more than he could ever hurt her, via the strong arm of the state. A slap on the cheek stings for a few seconds, but a slap from the state can destroy your whole life.

While he's been disarmed, she has nuclear weapons. How can that ever work?

You argument is logical. I have never hit a female, but I have represented blokes who have. Invariably, it was never out of "Oh I'm pissed, where's me dinner, cop this bitch." There was always some level of provocation which preceded it.

REALLY... provocation...wow presumably that also means sticking up for oneself.. Roll Eyes

if a man is taken to court where he needs a solicitor...then you can bettcha he has done it more than once.....very few women take men to court for the one instance....and from what we read the female.... is usually for from being provocative its the last thing she would do to get a beating..

I would like to see how many bruises or black eyes these provoked guys ever had to be honest... because that sounds so far fetched to be even amusing...

some women are told not to even dare mention they are leaving them.. because of said reaction....

and you claim it is/was quite common

how many cases did you win for them?????

Back to top

IP Logged

Aussie

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 38497
Gender: male

Re: ••• DOMESTIC VIOLENCE •••
Reply #82 - Oct 1^st, 2015 at 3:54pm

Kytro wrote on Oct 1^st, 2015 at 3:50pm:

Aussie wrote on Oct 1^st, 2015 at 3:31pm:

How come that does not apply to the provocateur? The Law will always allow provocation as a defence (provided extremes are avoided.) If someone is in your face aggressively calling you "a cxxx, lousy husband, lousy parent, lousy lay etc etc etc" you are not expected to be Jesus Christ ~ just a mere mortal.

It certainly should apply. I do think you are mistaken about the law always allowing it, there is every chance it will be removed or reduced at some point. Probably for the wrong reasons.

This is my point about having a tool-set to deal with anger. It is possible to not respond violently to provocation, there are alternatives - you could simply leave the environment and until you are calmer.

Oh no, I am not mistaken at all. The Law does always allow provocation as a complete defence ~ provided extremes like actual death or grievous bodily harm are not present.

Quote:

...... you could simply leave the environment and until you are calmer.

You sure could Mary Poppins, but meanwhile, back in the real World....

Back to top

IP Logged

...

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 23673
WA
Gender: male

Re: ••• DOMESTIC VIOLENCE •••
Reply #83 - Oct 1^st, 2015 at 3:55pm

Kytro wrote on Oct 1^st, 2015 at 3:50pm:

It is possible to not respond violently to provocation, there are alternatives - you could simply leave the environment and until you are calmer.

Often the simplest course of action is the best.
And every time, the best course of action is the one that works.

What is so bad about giving a slap on the cheek that it must be avoided at all costs? I reckon you might have let the threat of violence become too powerful in your mind. Told you it was powerful.

Back to top

In the fullness of time...

IP Logged

Kytro

Gold Member

Offline

Blasphemy: a victimless
crime

Posts: 3409
Adelaide
Gender: male

Re: ••• DOMESTIC VIOLENCE •••
Reply #84 - Oct 1^st, 2015 at 3:56pm

Aussie wrote on Oct 1^st, 2015 at 3:49pm:

Oh, that sounds all very marvelous, and reminiscent of the rhetoric of decades ago. How about you put some practical meat on those Utopian bones?

With a great deal of work, no doubt.

It will require identifying the major factors involved in both causing violence as well as determining what causes most harm to all victims of violence.

Then providing appropriate education, and social support to lower the chance of violence and increase the chances of victims coping with the situation and recovering.

There isn't a magic wand that can fix it, but it's important to recognise that the current situation is far from ideal, and that change is desirable as opposed to it's acceptable sometimes.

It's inevitable sometimes, but acceptable, no.

Back to top

IP Logged

cods

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 88048

Re: ••• DOMESTIC VIOLENCE •••
Reply #85 - Oct 1^st, 2015 at 3:57pm

Aussie wrote on Oct 1^st, 2015 at 3:31pm:

Kytro wrote on Oct 1^st, 2015 at 3:23pm:

Aussie wrote on Oct 1^st, 2015 at 3:12pm:

You argument is logical. I have never hit a female, but I have represented blokes who have. Invariably, it was never out of "Oh I'm pissed, where's me dinner, cop this bitch." There was always some level of provocation which preceded it.

That does not, and should not make it an acceptable response. If you cannot control your actions, then you need a new toolset.

How come that does not apply to the provocateur? The Law will always allow provocation as a defence (provided extremes are avoided.) If someone is in your face aggressively calling you "a cxxx, lousy husband, lousy parent, lousy lay etc etc etc" you are not expected to be Jesus Christ ~ just a mere mortal.

so you must have won quite a few cases then.. so what happened to the aggressive wife?????....they wouldnt jail him as you claim the provocateur deserved it.. so wouldnt she at least be expected to seek counselling for anger management.. Roll Eyes

or are they sent on their merry way to carry on until their n ext appearance in court.. Roll Eyes

Back to top

IP Logged

Kytro

Gold Member

Offline

Blasphemy: a victimless
crime

Posts: 3409
Adelaide
Gender: male

Re: ••• DOMESTIC VIOLENCE •••
Reply #86 - Oct 1^st, 2015 at 4:00pm

... wrote on Oct 1^st, 2015 at 3:55pm:

Often the simplest course of action is the best.
And every time, the best course of action is the one that works.

What is so bad about giving a slap on the cheek that it must be avoided at all costs? I reckon you might have let the threat of violence become too powerful in your mind. Told you it was powerful.

Violence is a destructive force, not just physically, but emotionally as well. One shouldn't discount the psychological effects of violence.

As to directly answer your question, I can't think of any good reason to to slap someone that can't be handled in a better way.

Back to top

IP Logged

...

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 23673
WA
Gender: male

Re: ••• DOMESTIC VIOLENCE •••
Reply #87 - Oct 1^st, 2015 at 4:04pm

Kytro wrote on Oct 1^st, 2015 at 4:00pm:

... wrote on Oct 1^st, 2015 at 3:55pm:

Often the simplest course of action is the best.
And every time, the best course of action is the one that works.

What is so bad about giving a slap on the cheek that it must be avoided at all costs? I reckon you might have let the threat of violence become too powerful in your mind. Told you it was powerful.

Violence is a destructive force, not just physically, but emotionally as well. One shouldn't discount the psychological effects of violence.

As to directly answer your question, I can't think of any good reason to to slap someone that can't be handled in a better way.

Well so far your "better way" has resulted in losing your children to a crappy future, half your assets and future earnings.

Much better than inflicting a pink cheek that dissipates inside a minute.

Witness the power of the threat of violence. But I guarantee if you actually took a slap on the cheek, you'd think "is that it?"

Back to top

In the fullness of time...

IP Logged

Aussie

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 38497
Gender: male

Re: ••• DOMESTIC VIOLENCE •••
Reply #88 - Oct 1^st, 2015 at 4:04pm

Kytro wrote on Oct 1^st, 2015 at 3:56pm:

Aussie wrote on Oct 1^st, 2015 at 3:49pm:

Oh, that sounds all very marvelous, and reminiscent of the rhetoric of decades ago. How about you put some practical meat on those Utopian bones?

With a great deal of work, no doubt.

It will require identifying the major factors involved in both causing violence as well as determining what causes most harm to all victims of violence.

Then providing appropriate education, and social support to lower the chance of violence and increase the chances of victims coping with the situation and recovering.

There isn't a magic wand that can fix it, but it's important to recognise that the current situation is far from ideal, and that change is desirable as opposed to it's acceptable sometimes.

It's inevitable sometimes, but acceptable, no.

I've heard all that for decades. It is wonderful 'motherhood' stuff, and sounds terrific at seminars conducted for and by the well-intended who then go back to their jobs inside Government somewhere and forlornly dream about how to re-programme human nature.

Back to top

IP Logged

red baron Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 10204 Blue Mountains Gender:	Re: ••• DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ••• Reply #89 - Oct 1^st, 2015 at 4:08pm Physical violence against women is unacceptable unless the woman in question has herself used physical violence to require a physical response to defend one's self. Verbal abuse doesn't cut it, you can always walk away from verbal abuse.
Back to top	IP Logged