Is Misandry increasing in America?

[sanskrit]

In that case, the police is putting the man in jail to protect him, not to punish him. He probably appreciates the safe haven. It would seem more fair if they sent the woman to jail, though, haha.

 

Yeah, it's really haha funny to go to jail and be "protected" that way. Have you ever been to jail? I have. There's nothing funny or jokey about it. You think it would be better to take the actual offender to jail instead of the victim? That's charitable of you. The attitude expressed in the quote from you above is blatant misandry, sorry to say.

 

True. However, that type of thing ended a long time ago

 

No, not really. A 100 year period is not much human historical time actually. The American Revolution was a good belwether point for modern improvements in human rights, growth of the middle class and capitalism fueled technology, 1787 - today is only 220 years later, 5-10% of recorded human history, only 1% of non recorded history. So depending how you look at it, 95% of human history has been pretty grim for all people other than the tiny privilged few. For example, average men had the vote for about .5% or less of human history longer than women. The reason I bring this up is that one of the most pervasive misandrist tenets is that men have been oppressing and abusing women for thousands of years.

 

Hm, I've always heard that women made less.

 

Yes, of course you have heard that because it is repeated constantly, despite there being no factual basis, that's what this thread is about, the fact that misandry is pervasive. Bad things are made up and said about men to justify political action that is unduly sexist and favorable towards women.

 

Have you ever heard that domestic violence against women increases during the super bowl (men beat women over sports)? Completely fabricated statistic, no source or foundation for it whatsoever.

 

Have you ever heard that domestic violence is the top cause of death among women (lots of men are beating women)? It isn't even close, completely fabricated.

 

Have you heard there is a glass ceiling? that women can't achieve positions of power as easily? (men are holding women back) Total fabrication. Women jump off the corporate ladder quite voluntarily before the top is reached, despite companies begging them to continue. Women are regularly promoted over more qualified men as a matter of fact due to this form of misandry.

 

About the hazardous work, women often aren't allowed to do that work because they don't have the physical strength needed

 

Not true, there are usually no restrictions other than for soldiers. Women choose not to do those more dangerous, higher paying jobs and choose to do less dangerous jobs. Police and firefighter physical fitness tests are compromised so women can pass them, endangering us all, so there is generally no impediment to women doing any job other than out and out combat. Modern technology has removed brute strength requirements from dangerous jobs, they are still dangerous though.

 

It's not completely fair, but I'm sure the police are taking no chances, and want to be sure there isn't a dangerous person running around loose. Once the man is proven to be innocent, he is released.

 

Which person is more dangerous, the rapist? or the false accuser who puts innocent men in danger of being raped themselves in jail and devalues the victims of real rapes? As far as being released, what if he is poor and is wrongfully convicted? He must register as a sex offender for life after a long prison term. Reread the article, the defendant came inches away from being railroaded into a false conviction. False rape claims are especially prevalent in the military, and have ruined many innocent soldier's lives, not just men's but their wives' and families' lives also. Reread the comments to the third linked source within and at the top of the blog post I linked for a shock.

 

Why do you think that is, that men don't get as much medical care paid for by taxes?

 

Men are not as malleable a voting bloc as women are. Most misandry is politically based in an attempt to win women's votes.

[BruceLeroy]

Hahahaaa. I think the older gens are funny! So women are able to be truely equal now and its got old school dudes wondering what their selling points are if women can do all they can do. Sounds lots like you're only feeling good about yorself if you have something over your GF or wife. Well don't that mean you didn't have some amazing ability in the first place? Your only as amazing by comparison if your chick isn't your equal. Way to shortchange yourself just to build your ego. Its like imagining yourself as a genius because you married a ditz with no jobs skills or education.

I'm glad chicks are able to be more like me. I stand to get someone I don't have to work overtime to make up for what they cant do. I stand to get to know my kids and not be this deep voice I only hear late in the evening when they do something worng. If I 'm stressed on the job, she will get it cuz she has been there too. And the coversation won't get old so fast because of some huge mismatch in education. Dumb lazy chicks are boring.

[sanskrit]

And even then statistics can be manipulated as Sanskrit posts indicates.

 

Since you mention my post, was there something of substance you had to say? or just a baseless claim that I am manipulating statistics?

[Taramere]

Have you ever heard that domestic violence is the top cause of death among women (lots of men are beating women)? It isn't even close, completely fabricated.

 

I have never heard that. At a guess I would have thought cancer was the top killler of both men and women in the West. Googling it, globally HIV is the top killer.

 

Regarding domestic violence, here's an excerpt from wiki which gives appropriate links to peer reviewed articles

 

 

Women are much more likely to be murdered by an intimate partner. Among the persons killed by an intimate partner, about three quarters are female, and about a quarter are male: in 1999, in the US, 1,218 women and 424 men were killed by an intimate partner, regardless of which partner started the violence and of the gender of the partner. In the US, in 2005, 1181 females and 329 males were killed by their intimate partners.

 

Dr. Martin Fiebert, from the Department of Psychology of California State University, has compiled an annotated bibliography of research relating to spousal abuse by women on men. This bibliography examines 275 scholarly investigations: 214 empirical studies and 61 reviews and/or analyses, which demonstrate that women are as physically aggressive, or more aggressive, than men in their relationships with their spouses or male partners. The aggregate sample size in the reviewed studies exceeds 365,000.

 

However, in a review of the research Michael Kimmel found that violence is instrumental in maintaining control and that more than 90 percent of "systematic, persistent, and injurious" violence is perpetrated by men. He points out that most of the empirical studies that Fiebert reviewed used the same empirical measure of family conflict, i.e., the Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS) as the sole measure of domestic violence and that many of the studies noted by Fiebert discussed samples composed entirely of single people younger than 30, and not married couples. Kimmel argues that among various other flaws, the CTS is particularly vulnerable to reporting bias because it depends on asking people to accurately remember and report what happened during the past year. However, men tend to under-estimate their use of violence, while women tend to over-estimate their use of violence. Simultaneously men tend to over-estimate their partners use of violence while women tend to under-estimate their partners use of violence. Thus, men will likely over-estimate their victimization, while women tend to underestimate theirs

 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_violence

From what you say, this info contrasts with yours. Where does your info come from?

Edited September 27, 2010 by Taramere

[sanskrit]

I think though that men should be pleased that nowadays, the law does protect and help many women from being hurt by men. That is a good thing yes?

 

So "men, though you are the victims of 50% of domestic violence, you should be happy that the law protects women but not you? You should be happy that there are abuse shelters all over the place for women but not you? You should be happy that your tax dollars fund all sorts of domestic violence programs for women but not you?"

 

That's misandry, exactly the topic of this thread.

 

"Women, even though you don't have the vote, you should be happy that your husband has it. That is a good thing yes?"

 

When people hear that women do 50% of domestic violence, they assume it's a little, weak woman beating aimlessly with her fists on a big man's chest until he grabs her hands, like in the movies. That's the movies.

 

It's actually women sticking a knife in a man's back, shooting him with a gun, hitting him over the head with a blunt instrument, and most surprisingly, beating and physically abusing her own children. The incidence of female child abuse is skyrocketing, yet the issue is framed as only something men do. That's misandry.

 

The man's position is hopeless because if he protects himself or retaliates, he immediately becomes the guilty party and her the victim. The women who practice domestic violence aren't completely stupid, they KNOW this and USE it to continue their crimes.

 

It's not a cute little wife lashing out ineffectively at the "big strong man." Female on male and child domestic violence is a very real societal issue that remains completely hidden due to pervasive cultural misandry.

[sanskrit]

Googling it, globally HIV is the top killer.

 

Heart disease, cancer, stroke and accidents are the primary causes of death in the U.S. in that order.

 

Regarding domestic violence, here's an excerpt from wiki which gives appropriate links to peer reviewed articles

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_violence

From what you say, this info contrasts with yours. Where does your info come from?

 

Thank you! You couldn't have picked a better source of evidence of pervasive, growing misandry in the U.S. with respect to the domestic violence issue than the wiki article you chose to cite.

 

The contentiousness on that page and the comment page in and of itself is misandry. Why? Because regardless of the quibbling about the actual percentage of "who hits who" most in the cited passage, the domestic violence issue is couched in the public eye as completely a man on woman issue. Not only does this dishonesty characterize men as always the violent aggressors unduly, and women as always the victims, but the fact that respondents in the article apparently don't care that men are being abused if it deflects even a tiny bit of attention from a "women's issue" is plain shocking.

 

Instead of admitting there is bias in the way the issue is presented in society, and attempting to address the issue honestly as a danger to both genders, the obvious goal is to keep domestic violence as a women's issue and utterly ignore male victims in seeking remedies to the problem, regardless of whether the actual percentage is 50/50, 60/40, etc. That is the very essence of misandry in two ways by painting men as more violent compared to women unfairly, and denying male victims the help they need.

 

The male suicide rate (4x women) and reduced lifespan (7-10 years) start to make sense to those who ask "why do men kill themselves more and die younger?" when the truth comes out about domestic violence misandry and other cultural misandry. In an environment in which boys are told they are violent and inferior in elementary schools, then rubbished in the media generally for the rest of their lives, life-ruining false rape accusations are rampant, and men are excluded from issues such as domestic violence for political reasons, is it any wonder they kill themselves more and die younger?

 

To address your question directly, the comprehensive Fiebert bibliography of hundreds of studies is one source that my statistic came from. It's right there in the passage you cite. CDC studies are another and the Gelles/Straus/Steinmetz research, the definitive research in the field, is another.

 

http://www.dvmen.org/dv-35.htm

 

Interestingly, when Gelles, Straus and Steinmetz, highly respected University of Pennsylvania researchers, presented their findings that women were arguably as domestically violent as men, they were subject to numerous death threats and other violent threats. I guess these threats came from "harmless" little women who were going to come to their offices and beat weakly on their chests until they died laughing, right?

 

Everyone who is interested in the thread topic should read the entirety of the wiki page on domestic violence together with the comment page. It is the best evidence of pervasive cultural misandry in the U.S. mentioned in this thread so far.

[Taramere]

Heart disease, cancer, stroke and accidents are the primary causes of death in the U.S. in that order.

 

 

 

Thank you! You couldn't have picked a better source of evidence of pervasive, growing misandry in the U.S. with respect to the domestic violence issue than the wiki article you chose to cite.

 

The contentiousness on that page and the comment page in and of itself is misandry. Why? Because regardless of the quibbling about the actual percentage of "who hits who" most in the cited passage, the domestic violence issue is couched in the public eye as completely a man on woman issue. Not only does this dishonesty characterize men as always the violent aggressors unduly, and women as always the victims, but the fact that respondents in the article apparently don't care that men are being abused if it deflects even a tiny bit of attention from a "women's issue" is plain shocking.

 

Instead of admitting there is bias in the way the issue is presented in society, and attempting to address the issue honestly as a danger to both genders, the obvious goal is to keep domestic violence as a women's issue and utterly ignore male victims in seeking remedies to the problem, regardless of whether the actual percentage is 50/50, 60/40, etc. That is the very essence of misandry in two ways by painting men as more violent compared to women unfairly, and denying male victims the help they need.

 

The male suicide rate (4x women) and reduced lifespan (7-10 years) start to make sense to those who ask "why do men kill themselves more and die younger?" when the truth comes out about domestic violence misandry and other cultural misandry. In an environment in which boys are told they are violent and inferior in elementary schools, then rubbished in the media generally for the rest of their lives, life-ruining false rape accusations are rampant, and men are excluded from issues such as domestic violence for political reasons, is it any wonder they kill themselves more and die younger?

 

To address your question directly, the comprehensive Fiebert bibliography of hundreds of studies is one source that my statistic came from. It's right there in the passage you cite. CDC studies are another and the Gelles/Straus/Steinmetz research, the definitive research in the field, is another.

 

http://www.dvmen.org/dv-35.htm

 

Interestingly, when Gelles, Straus and Steinmetz, highly respected University of Pennsylvania researchers, presented their findings that women were arguably as domestically violent as men, they were subject to numerous death threats and other violent threats. I guess these threats came from "harmless" little women who were going to come to their offices and beat weakly on their chests until they died laughing, right?

 

Everyone who is interested in the thread topic should read the entirety of the wiki page on domestic violence together with the comment page. It is the best evidence of pervasive cultural misandry in the U.S. mentioned in this thread so far.

 

What were you in prison for, if you don't mind me asking? If you don't want to answer that's fine...but does the fact that you received a sentence for something relate to your general belief that men are treated unjustly in comparison to women?

Edited September 27, 2010 by Taramere

[sanskrit]

What were you in prison for, if you don't mind me asking?

 

Jail, a large jail in a large city, but still not a prison, and I don't mind you asking at all, but am not willing to discuss it here and it isn't topical to the thread anyway, i.e. not for domestic violence or any violence or anything related to this thread. As most rational adults, I am quite capable of separating my beliefs from my personal experience.

[flying]

Everyone who is interested in the thread topic should read the entirety of the wiki page on domestic violence together with the comment page. It is the best evidence of pervasive cultural misandry in the U.S. mentioned in this thread so far.

 

For completeness, it's also worth reading this detailed examination of the well-known flaws in that paper by Gelles, Straus and Steinmetz that you cited:

 

http://www.nomas.org/node/107

 

This essay also describes the flaws of the Conflict Tactics Scale, which is used in much of Straus' work.

 

Might as well be thoroughly informed, yes?

[Knittress]

 

The male suicide rate (4x women) and reduced lifespan (7-10 years) start to make sense to those who ask "why do men kill themselves more and die younger?" when the truth comes out about domestic violence misandry and other cultural misandry. In an environment in which boys are told they are violent and inferior in elementary schools, then rubbished in the media generally for the rest of their lives, life-ruining false rape accusations are rampant, and men are excluded from issues such as domestic violence for political reasons, is it any wonder they kill themselves more and die younger?

 

I'm not going to bother hunting for quotes for some internet message board, which might be a bad call since you seem dead set on this. Why? Just like the feminazi equivalent, I don't see how a person's life can be enriched by looking for malice in every quarter. But... ok.

 

it's not that men have a 'reduced lifespan,' its because women generally outlive men. Everywhere. Not just in America. There are probably a few reasons for this, but one is that testosterone tends to wear a body out quicker. As for suicide? While guys are generally more 'successful' multiple times more women make the attempt. I really don't see how you can get a 'clear' picture how either of these things relates to an uptick in man-hate. Especially since both of these things are not new trends.

 

I get the idea that YOU have somehow absorbed and idea that you're inferior and it doesn't have much at all to do with what society says about maleness. It sounds like you're trying to displace your bad feelings about yourself to society at large. In my opinion.

Edited September 27, 2010 by Knittress

[sanskrit]

...

 

The point is not that there are opposing points of view, but the facts that:

 

1) continuing to couch the domestic violence issue strictly as man on woman is misandrist, and

 

2) continuing to deny men the aid provided by sexist laws, social programs and federal funding that apply only to women is misandrist.

[sanskrit]

I get the idea that YOU have somehow absorbed and idea that you're inferior and it doesn't have much at all to do with what society says about maleness. It sounds like you're trying to displace your bad feelings about yourself to society at large. In my opinion.

 

I'm relatively new here, but noticed that a moderator posted that the above type of posting would not be allowed in this thread. I'm not interested in getting into a flame war with you, so until you can manage to post without insulting me personally, will be ignoring your posts.

[GooseChaser]

Yeah, it's really haha funny to go to jail and be "protected" that way. Have you ever been to jail? I have. There's nothing funny or jokey about it. You think it would be better to take the actual offender to jail instead of the victim? That's charitable of you. The attitude expressed in the quote from you above is blatant misandry, sorry to say.

That's right, abuse isn't funny. If it protects the victim and it's their only option, the jail is doing the victim by having them be accepted by voluntary request. It's like a church providing sanctuary. A woman could go to the jail and request the same sanctuary. Anyway, I'm sure non- prisoners are treated better and given better quarters and (possibly) food.

 

Misandry? Please, keep twisting my words. There is nothing of the sort. Well, maybe a little, but let's not blow this up into something it isn't.

 

 

No, not really. A 100 year period is not much human historical time actually. The American Revolution was a good belwether point for modern improvements in human rights, growth of the middle class and capitalism fueled technology, 1787 - today is only 220 years later, 5-10% of recorded human history, only 1% of non recorded history. So depending how you look at it, 95% of human history has been pretty grim for all people other than the tiny privilged few. For example, average men had the vote for about .5% or less of human history longer than women. The reason I bring this up is that one of the most pervasive misandrist tenets is that men have been oppressing and abusing women for thousands of years.

100 years is a few generations. It is a long time from a human's perspective. Of course, it is much less time in the perspective of world history. I don't deny that things are getting better for women in society.

 

 

Yes, of course you have heard that because it is repeated constantly, despite there being no factual basis, that's what this thread is about, the fact that misandry is pervasive. Bad things are made up and said about men to justify political action that is unduly sexist and favorable towards women.

 

Have you ever heard that domestic violence against women increases during the super bowl (men beat women over sports)? Completely fabricated statistic, no source or foundation for it whatsoever.

 

Have you ever heard that domestic violence is the top cause of death among women (lots of men are beating women)? It isn't even close, completely fabricated.

 

Have you heard there is a glass ceiling? that women can't achieve positions of power as easily? (men are holding women back) Total fabrication. Women jump off the corporate ladder quite voluntarily before the top is reached, despite companies begging them to continue. Women are regularly promoted over more qualified men as a matter of fact due to this form of misandry.

I have never heard that domestic violence is the top cause of death among women, or that violence increases during the Super Bowl. (It could make some sense about the Super Bowl thing because some of them would be abusing alcohol.) It's good to hear that that is false, though!

 

One good reason that women often don't go as far career-wise as men is because many choose to have children, and that restricts them as far as how far they can work in a job, because they often have most of the responsibility of raising their children, though of course their husbands help a lot!

 

 

Not true, there are usually no restrictions other than for soldiers. Women choose not to do those more dangerous, higher paying jobs and choose to do less dangerous jobs. Police and firefighter physical fitness tests are compromised so women can pass them, endangering us all, so there is generally no impediment to women doing any job other than out and out combat. Modern technology has removed brute strength requirements from dangerous jobs, they are still dangerous though.

One thing I do know for a fact is that there is a MUCH smaller percentage of women than men who are firemen. Jobs like that require a lot of strength, and many women simply don't qualify. It is good that those jobs are available to them in the right conditions, at least, as long as they prove their skill and competence at the position. I'm sure most people would prefer less dangerous jobs, if they could achieve that. No one wants to be in terrible danger as a matter of course.

 

 

Which person is more dangerous, the rapist? or the false accuser who puts innocent men in danger of being raped themselves in jail and devalues the victims of real rapes? As far as being released, what if he is poor and is wrongfully convicted? He must register as a sex offender for life after a long prison term. Reread the article, the defendant came inches away from being railroaded into a false conviction. False rape claims are especially prevalent in the military, and have ruined many innocent soldier's lives, not just men's but their wives' and families' lives also. Reread the comments to the third linked source within and at the top of the blog post I linked for a shock.

Both are dangerous, but the police puts a high priority on arresting people who are highly violent and a danger to society. They want safety for the community. No police department WANTS to convict someone falsely, especially for very serious crimes. That is why they try to find very convincing evidence to support the claim. The justice system is not perfect and has flaws, which they are always trying to identify, work on, and eliminate. If you have suggestions, you can always send them to your local police force or court.

 

 

Men are not as malleable a voting bloc as women are. Most misandry is politically based in an attempt to win women's votes.

That's a good point. Women are a very significant part of the voting population; after all, they are 50% of the world.

[sanskrit]

That's right, abuse isn't funny. If it protects the victim and it's their only option, the jail is doing the victim by having them be accepted by voluntary request.

 

Maybe I wasn't clear, the cops come and automatically blame the man and lock him up even when he is the victim, it's not that he is asking for protection. I took offense at the quoted portion of your post because it seemed to trivialize the process of going to jail, a very serious, brutal process that men often experience wrongly because of cultural misandry.

 

I have never heard that domestic violence is the top cause of death among women, or that violence increases during the Super Bowl.

 

These were examples from some years back. The reason I cite them is that they come from Christina Hoff Sommers work in identifying misandry and seeking a feminist stance that doesn't promote misandry. If you want to read a fair version of feminism, read her books or even the wiki page about her.

 

One good reason that women often don't go as far career-wise as men is because many choose to have children, and that restricts them as far as how far they can work in a job, because they often have most of the responsibility of raising their children, though of course their husbands help a lot!

 

Agreed, but the point is that by perpetually touting wage gaps and glass ceilings that don't exist, men are disadvantaged in competing for jobs. That's misandry.

 

No one wants to be in terrible danger as a matter of course.

 

Yes, and that's exactly why many of those dangerous jobs pay more. Long haul trucking, for example, pays pretty well, and some women do it, but not many. Ignoring factors like work danger in claiming wage gaps wrongfully disadvantages men in the marketplace and that is misandry.

 

 

No police department WANTS to convict someone falsely, especially for very serious crimes. That is why they try to find very convincing evidence to support the claim. The justice system is not perfect and has flaws, which they are always trying to identify, work on, and eliminate. If you have suggestions, you can always send them to your local police force or court.

 

You need to do some more reading about the U.S. criminal justice process. Police, prosecutors and judges are not the benign forces in our culture you seem to think they are, especially where denying men's rights is concerned over the last 40 years. Police seek the easiest solution, not the just one, and prosecutors routinely seek to pad conviction rates, not seek justice. The real world is not at all like TV in this respect.

[elaina]

"men, though you are the victims of 50% of domestic violence, you should be happy that the law protects women but not you?

 

Sanskrit,

 

Where did I say the above please? Do not put words in my mouth. That's very rude.

 

The point I was trying to make is that long time ago, women were not protected or helped by the law if they were victims of physical abuse. Now, they are being protected and helped. Do you not think that is a good thing, or do you think that is a bad thing?

 

You should be happy that there are abuse shelters all over the place for women but not you? You should be happy that your tax dollars fund all sorts of domestic violence programs for women but not you?"

 

If you call a domestic violence number and say, "Hi I'm a man who is being abused by my partner and need help." They will help you. A friend of mine works at a women's shelter and has made arrangements for men in abusive situations before. They don't say "No you're a man so we can't help you." They don't allow men to stay with the women at the women's shelter, but they do put them up in a hotel or make other arrangements for them.

That's misandry, exactly the topic of this thread.

 

"Women, even though you don't have the vote, you should be happy that your husband has it. That is a good thing yes?"

 

Where in the world did I say that? Are you trying to put words in my mouth again?

 

When people hear that women do 50% of domestic violence, they assume it's a little, weak woman beating aimlessly with her fists on a big man's chest until he grabs her hands, like in the movies. That's the movies.

 

It's actually women sticking a knife in a man's back, shooting him with a gun, hitting him over the head with a blunt instrument, and most surprisingly, beating and physically abusing her own children. The incidence of female child abuse is skyrocketing, yet the issue is framed as only something men do. That's misandry.

 

The man's position is hopeless because if he protects himself or retaliates, he immediately becomes the guilty party and her the victim. The women who practice domestic violence aren't completely stupid, they KNOW this and USE it to continue their crimes.

 

That's why videotaping is a good thing to do. If you, as a man, feel threatened at any way by your partner, have a video tape nearby and use it. That is evidence... seeing a woman scream obscenities and throw things caught on tape will protect the man in court, because her own actions will speak against her. Her own face accuses her. Do you see what I mean please?

 

It's not a cute little wife lashing out ineffectively at the "big strong man." Female on male and child domestic violence is a very real societal issue that remains completely hidden due to pervasive cultural misandry

 

If you read my posts thoroughly, that is why I said that the man should not try to restrain her unless she is hurting a child or someone else. He should get away and get coverage on tape in order to present to court.

 

When a woman is hurting a child, her partner can restrain her in order to protect the child. If the woman gets hurt by being restrained, too bad. The child's safety is paramount. No woman or man should ever hurt a child.

[sanskrit]

I wasn't putting words in your mouth, merely making comparisons using the same reasoning.

[Untouchable_Fire]

The point I was trying to make is that long time ago, women were not protected or helped by the law if they were victims of physical abuse. Now, they are being protected and helped. Do you not think that is a good thing, or do you think that is a bad thing?

 

It's a really good thing, and if it takes men 50-100 years to catch up, then so be it.

 

I've had GF's slap, punch, kick, throw things... ect. I've never felt it was a big deal. I don't get afraid of them, and I think their overall ability to hurt me physically is very low.

 

The one thing that irritates me is that if a woman gets up in my face yelling and screaming, responding in kind is considered threatening and verbally abusive.

 

I've occasionally had the feeling from some women... especially when I was younger... that they were trying to get me to hit them. Like trying to bait me into it. Luckily, I don't date that kind of girl anymore.

[elaina]

I wasn't putting words in your mouth, merely making comparisons using the same reasoning.

 

I don't think you understand my reasoning, and did not appreciate your "". Hopefully nobody will think I wrote such a thing but hopefully people will look back to what I wrote and not just assume you were quoting me when you weren't.

[elaina]

It's a really good thing,

 

Thanks Untouchable Fire

 

and if it takes men 50-100 years to catch up, then so be it.

 

I don't know if you're being sarcastic about that or not, but hopefully it won't take that long. Yeah it is bad that the law can be unfair and doesn't see both sides a lot.

 

I've had GF's slap, punch, kick, throw things... ect. I've never felt it was a big deal. I don't get afraid of them, and I think their overall ability to hurt me physically is very low.

 

I've never done the above, but I did push and scratch with my fingernails one guy before.. but he just thought it was funny. I didn't think it was funny though and got even madder at him. We broke up, which was good.

 

The one thing that irritates me is that if a woman gets up in my face yelling and screaming, responding in kind is considered threatening and verbally abusive.

 

Agreed and understood

 

I've occasionally had the feeling from some women... especially when I was younger... that they were trying to get me to hit them. Like trying to bait me into it. Luckily, I don't date that kind of girl anymore.

 

That's possible, sad to say.

[Bogo123]

 

 

Actually... from what I've experienced. If your GF or wife cheats on you... it's your fault.

 

Its hilarious watching Cheaters. When the guy gets caught he says he's sorry. When the girl gets caught its "you were never there for me! If you were being a real man this wouldn't have happened!"

 

[brainygirl]

In most professions women make less money simply because they work fewer hours.

 

I am pretty sure that on a per hour basis, women still make less.

I don't understand why I should pay MORE to see a female doctor just because she only works 20 hours a week... and wants to make as much as a 50hr per week male physician.

 

Not what I meant, and I doubt that any doctor works only 20 hours a week.

Also... I've seen guys face weight discrimination in the workplace. It's ubiquitous because health insurances charge just as much for obese men as women.

 

Women who are markedly overweight, but otherwise well qualified, have difficulty with being offered jobs and don't not earn as much as a slim woman in a comparable position. The same cannot be said for over weight men. Health insurance rates will be higher for any group considered a greater risk, but women tend to pay more.

 

 

I think most women feel the same as you... until they decide it's not love anymore. At that point she usually tries to get as much money as possible from you and there seems to be no guilt about being completely ruthless.

 

 

I can't speak to that. I just wanted my name back when I left my ex-husband. I know that in situations where the couple has been together a long time and she's put her own career or education on hold to support his, it seems fair for him to provide for her long enough that she can get herself in a livable situation. It also makes sense for fathers to support their children.

Do you think golddigger types are some rare and impossible to understand type of woman?

 

They want the same things you do. They are willing to take money from one guy who has it... so they can move on with someone they love.

 

 

Sounds like a heck of a lot more trouble and drama than any sane person needs in their life.

 

But... if you can get that from a guy you love... and then make a guy you don't love pay you money. Why not?

 

Self respect. Basic decency.

 

Actually... from what I've experienced. If your GF or wife cheats on you... it's your fault.

 

I don't think that's the case, people are responsible for their own choices and an adult who blames another for their actions is wrong in the head. I really don't think this is as wide-spread as you make it out to be.

[Woggle]

Its hilarious watching Cheaters. When the guy gets caught he says he's sorry. When the girl gets caught its "you were never there for me! If you were being a real man this wouldn't have happened!"

 

 

I never watch that show but somehow things always get spun to be the man's fault.

[sanskrit]

I don't think you understand my reasoning, and did not appreciate your "". Hopefully nobody will think I wrote such a thing but hopefully people will look back to what I wrote and not just assume you were quoting me when you weren't.

 

I understood your reasoning. Why should a man be expected to take proactive steps to avoid a "guilty until proven guilty" scenario though?

 

Your answer is that men using the normal "battered women's" channels doesn't work. The whole of the domestic violence gov funded infrastructure is aimed at women and men are excluded. This is why sexist laws are being overturned and soon VAWA will be also. A man can't go and check into a women's shelter, it is not allowed.

 

Your answer to videotape might work, but probably won't, as it's takes some massive cojones to take out and use a phone camera in the face of someone with a knife or gun, or have eyes in the back of one's head to take a camera out and start filming before getting hit, but that's all irrelevant to the topic, and that doesn't address it at all, does it? This thread is not a "how to handle domestic violence" thread, is it?

 

Quotation marks are used for many things on forums (see above in this post for example), if I was going to attempt to quote you, I would have made a quote block as I have in many other posts in this thread (see my exchanges with goose chaser for example). I don't think anyone in their right minds would look at what I posted as quoting you, and would see my line of argument plainly.