Aussie wrote on Nov 25^th, 2015 at 10:57pm:


Unlike you, the resident cab dribbling driver, I actually do know what I'm talking about.

Perhaps you ought to read the entire contents of the link you hastily googled in yet another futile attempt to dupe those around you and appear knowledgeable.

Tip : Focus on the concluding paragraph of the 1st section in your link.


"Interim or final ADVOs will only be issued by a magistrate."

Quote:


During your recent holiday, you obviously did not waste a great deal of time reflecting on the consequences of posting personal abuse here.  I know what the whole Article says Lisa Jones.  I made my comment and I linked the article for one purpose only......to prevent people who read here from being mislead by material posted by yourself which is simply totally untrue.  Now, get back to the issue.  This specific matter has been dealt with.

Aussie wrote on Nov 25^th, 2015 at 11:11pm:


What holiday you ignorant master baiting nong?

No time for holidays here...unlike you, I've got a busy REAL LIFE.

No off you go..... go google yourself something else to learn and link...but make sure you actually bother to read the contents of your links...or else others will do what I just did....they'll make you look like the insufferable fool you really are.

Ok....outta here.

Lisa Jones wrote on Nov 25^th, 2015 at 11:14pm:



I am also surprised... NOT...!!!!!!

The attitudes shown by Scooter and Co provide a perfect example of the culture that sees 2 women a week , this yr,  killed by current or former partners.
( and lets not talk about the children suffering as well.)

You insinuate and even outright state that DOMESTIC VIOLENCE is a normal state of affairs.! That reports exaggerate this out of proportion. !! COMPARED TO WHAT ?
YOU guys are classic...  and it is very sad. Time to wake up and realise that you cannot abuse you family with impunity any longer.  ( FINGERS CROSSED)  .

It is not acceptable.. blokes have got to learn they do not run the world... and they do not OWN their so-called 'loved ones'.

SHAME ON YOU for your abhorrent opinions...

SHAME ON YOU.

Because DV (and child abuse by the way) was not reported 40 years ago, some think that an increase in reporting is just that...

Curious logic.

The increase in reporting is of itself misleading, it was the original acceptance that we have a social problem that lead to reporting being available.

Now, since there was no reporting previously, then we can't actually say empirically the problem has gotten better or worse - there is no comparative data. Therefore, the only thing we can truly say is that we (society) have a significant problem with violent behaviour in general and, disturbingly, we have a number of the population who seemingly think that it's ok to inflict said violence against woman and children.

I don't think we are any where near resolving said problems either.

As challenging as it might be for many, I honestly think we need to take gender out of the solution focus. I am not trying to dismiss the seriousness of male on female (and or child) physical abuse here, but, there are increasing statistics that demonstrate quite clearly that there are no exclusions as to who can be a victim at any given time. Further, the behaviours defined as abusive are, quite clearly, able to be demonstrated by men, women and (some) children...

A sub culture is slowly building underneath our current practices for addressing issues of violence - the us v them culture (whether it be man vs woman, old vs young, adult vs child etc). It seems we are, in effect, picking exactly the wrong fight with exactly the wrong people.

Further, since we are experiencing entrenched behaviour in many instances there is not going to be an instant fix that is all touchy feely good... That's just not going to happen.

It seems to me that we (society) need to decide exactly how and when we are prepared to use, accept and rely on violent behaviour, or, conversely if we are not. I for one have often advocated including Martial Arts into the school curriculum. Not because it will make people more violent, it will improve their chances of coping far more when low lives decide to act violently towards them though.

Sad but true, violence is a part of our nature - human nature, some have better self regulation than others, as such, all should be prepared for individuals at times to "let it all hang out" very inappropriately and be equipped to help themselves.

Presently, I think anti violence, child protection etc etc etc, certainly mean well, but are inneffective, entirely because of the adversarial us vs them nature of the debate.

I don't agree with men hitting woman, woman hitting woman, women hitting men, men or women hitting children, controlling behaviours, mental/emotional abuse, over reacting to a heated discussion, manipulation and the list goes on, BUT I totally accept there is a chance they are choices that ANY of us can make at any given moment if we are presented with the right amount of triggers for us to consider it ok to negatively impact on another individuals life...

Yes, indeed it is complicated - that is the life and society that WE have created, accepted and continue to support.

So, two individual stories are the basis for an entire position?

There's the problem right there actually, this debate is being argued from the perspective of individual positions rather than interests...

Is violent behaviour in OUR (all of us) best interests?

aquascoot wrote on Nov 26^th, 2015 at 6:49am:


Feel free to scroll the page up just a tad...

aquascoot wrote on Nov 26^th, 2015 at 7:35am:


No worries, I figured that might have been the case.

aquascoot wrote on Nov 26^th, 2015 at 7:35am:


They haven't yet. I don't think it is all that nuanced to be honest either. Bottom line is, broadly ALL of us say violence is not appropriate, however, we seem to be drawing lines based on irrelevancies like gender, age, jobs etc etc... That's the problem though, once a scatter gun approach is used then guilty and innocent and victims will be hit. Nothing nuanced in that, just observing how the system is presently.

aquascoot wrote on Nov 26^th, 2015 at 7:35am:


I see that as an opportunity to engage in debate.

The short answer would be no, then the explanation would clarify. Now you mention a poster here directly, one whom I have conversed with about this issue and she has not attacked me, called for allies or been anything other than respectful. I think the hint there is that, even when disagreeing we have BOTH demonstrated respect.

aquascoot wrote on Nov 26^th, 2015 at 7:35am:


No I disagree. The message is being kept "dumb" and off the actual message intentionally by those who would manipulate the clear flaws in our current approaches to further their own ends in perpetrating violence and abuse...

By the way, there are some very successful Big Mac Munching Call of Duty players - it just depends on what you define as success.

Oh, and gamers are often not known to have short attention spans - just saying. You might not agree with, like or be titillated by what they put their attention towards, but that does not for one moment mean they do not pay attention...