Why Bother About the Domestic Violence
When members of the public imagine, in general, a male being domestically-violent
towards a female, they tend to recall the carefully-crafted propaganda images of
carefully-selected scenes of horrific violence that have been shoveled
relentlessly into their consciousness for the last three decades by a media
subjected to the malign influences of men-hating feminists. And they see the
allegedly domestically-violent male as a malevolent thug who needs to be punished.
When the public imagines, in general, a female being domestically-violent
towards a male, they see a larger human being, being pummeled ineffectively by a
smaller one, usually with 'good reason', or an absolute wimp who deserves little
in the way of respect, let alone sympathy.
Either way, the man is seen to be responsible for what happens.
Domestic violence is ALWAYS the
man's fault or the result of his 'deficiency'.
And so it is that there is little point in activists
currently wasting their time debating the relative incidences of
gender-based violence or trawling through hundreds of different statistics
purporting to shed further light on the issue.
It simply doesn't matter that much what the statistics show.
As far as the public is concerned, even where women are being violent toward
their men, it is the men who will be seen as responsible for it, or who will be
lampooned for it.
Men are laughed at and ridiculed even when
their penises are cut off.
And they can hardly be portrayed as more
vulnerable than when something like that happens.
Women are held to be responsible for virtually nothing in today's western society.
When it suits them, they portray themselves as nothing more than immature
infants to whom unfortunate things happen - usually at the behest of men.
This, they have learned from a very early stage in life, as anyone with a
large family will tell you.
In such a situation, the girls - statistically speaking - are pretty much at
the mercy of the boys; who are generally far more physical and aggressive. In
the typical skirmishes that develop between children, the girls have little hope of
tackling their male opponents successfully and they soon learn that playing the
victim (e.g. by crying) is often far more beneficial than direct opposition or
retaliation because it usually brings about the direct intervention of an adult, who can
then castigate the boys on their behalf. Further, of course, as we now know,
young girls mature much more quickly than do boys in terms of their language and
communication skills (and, hence, their manipulative skills) and it is not
surprising therefore that the little angels use these to their advantage.
And who can blame them?
The same can also be seen in the playground where little girls soon develop
far greater mastery of the art of blaming others than do the boys.
So, why waste time debating the statistics? Whatever they show, the
males will be blamed for them.
It is the causes of domestic violence and the manner in which it occurs that
need to be addressed - not the gender percentages of the perpetrators. When the topic is tackled
from this viewpoint, the feminist arguments tend to collapse hopelessly, and their
deceits become very much more visible to the general public.
... this very short piece in itself being an
example of this.
Further, here in the UK, women's groups never duck an opportunity to publicise how
aggressive and violent is the male gender - TV and Radio adverts, poster
displays, campaign leaflets, talk shows, 'documentaries' etc.
But they never actually let the cameras into their spiteful little
When was the last time, for example, that the cameras were allowed into one
of the so-called domestic-violence refuge centres for women, in order to show
the public the hordes of abused women with their broken bones and their bruises?
Why aren't they there on pubic display?
After all, they could always mask the women's identities with their camera
Why do they so obviously want to hide what
goes on inside these refuges?
Erin Pizzey, the VERY FOUNDER of the refuge movement for 'battered' women,
had the answer many years ago. This is what she said.
"Most of the women arriving at
the refuge centres were MORE violent, even toward their children, than were the
men they were supposedly escaping from."
Think about it.
If the cameras were able to portray what
the feminists claim is actually the case when it comes to domestic violence,
then the support for them and their goals would increase enormously.
So, why don't they let the cameras in? Why do they
have to keep everything hidden from view?
In my experience, it is only those who
are lying and deceiving who are at pains to conceal the objective evidence from the public.