Your link wont play for me. Just me?

I would hope the "feminist" Lucinda, criticized some real Men’s Rights Groups and not the straw variety.

It's legislation that gives one group in society special privileges while further minimizing the male victims plight.

It's the removal of our civil rights we are arrested on accusation not evidence.

It is a tool for female abusers to futher victimize their male victims, many reports of abused men being arrested when the cops show up.

Violence against people was already a crime.

She brought up these points?

Oh, come the fuck on, Hujo.

There are male victims of domestic violence. There are lots of male victims. You know what they aren't, though? They're not frequently victims of women.

I work for a DV/SA agency that works

While I believe that men are biologically more violent than women, this isn't even close to the the main cause of systemic domestic violence. If you're assaulted by your wife, are you fairly sure that your'e qualified for another job? Did you have to quit your job when you had kids and haven't held one since? Would reporting be a hard decision for you? Would reporting cause you to end up homeless? If the answers to these questions are "no", then you don't have the same barriers to reporting as my clients and should therefore shut the fuck up.

The DV portion of VAWA is so important because it takes into account the barriers to reporting that DV necessarily has. You don't see that because you're either (a) a perpetrator or (b) a dick.

Yes gat MEN do need protection vaWa doesn't really include them either.

If you were a male victim of domestic violence you would not face the same stigma?

Would you not face more.

Try telling your boss your black eye and stitches are because your wife threw a glass at you and you couldn't make it to work because the police thru you in jail, or your broken arm being your coming out at the office.

We see how a women specific bill is inherently the wrong way to deal with this societal problem that effects men, women and children.

I should add that many straight male victims do not report it. I suspect because more men are unaware there are places for them to go, or that they are even being abused.

Programs like VAWA that minimize the same criminal actions being taken against any male, gay or straight in our society, play a part in this lack of reporting and support for the other half of the population.

Hujo? VAWA does cover gay male victims of domestic violence, as well as straight male victims of domestic violence. Do you know how I know? The agency I work for serves male victims of domestic violence.

I realize there aren't a great deal of agencies that do this -- we're one of the few rural agencies that do -- but most metro areas have at least one agency that offers services to men. Get your facts straight.

Spare me the smear campighn as i said its that there is less and men are not as aware.

The very title of vawa excludes them this is why the bill is flawed.

It would be like murder against women or theft against women.

I just think PEOPLE deserve equal consideration and no victim deserves to feel like there assult was less important or less of a crime.

Yes Vawa does make men feel that way.

But they are just men so it is a non issue to society.

Feminist only want equal rights for women, not for men.

VAWA doesn't cover gay men, straight men, boys, or anyone male! That's why boys as young as 12 are turned away from domestic violence centers nationwide. Feminist argue that all men, even men as young as 12, are the reasons why domestic violence centers exist. Totally ignoring the fact the most domestic violence are committed by women/moms against boys/sons.

I don't think you should come here and tell us Feminists what we think.

I don't necessarily believe that MOST abuse is perpetrated by women to boys, but I'm sure there is some. Everyone knows that abuse is cyclical and stopping the abuse of women means stopping the abuse of all male children.

I agree that the name of the act sounds exclusive of men. I don't know enough about the act to know whether men or children are covered, but I certainly agree that they should be.

We should be working together because it is also true, that if there are all of these abusive women out there, they too are victims of abuse.

I can also believe that there is a stigma that keeps men from reporting domestic violence. It has taken a concerted effort to try to remove the stigma for women and the same sort of effort should be directed towards men.

"Your arm was broken by a girl?" ha, ha, ha.

We shouldn't be on opposite sides of this issue. We just want the abuse to stop.

Jane-Everyone knows that abuse is cyclical and stopping the abuse of women means stopping the abuse of all male children.

Is it that you believe the only reason a woman would abuse a child is because a man is abusing her?

Loved the rest of your post! :)

Loved the rest of your post! :)

Jane-Everyone knows that abuse is cyclical and stopping the abuse of women means stopping the abuse of all male children.

Is it that you believe the only reason a woman would abuse a child is because a man is abusing her?

Loved the rest of your post! :)

No Hugo, I mean that abusers, both male and female, are generally victims of abuse themselves. This very likely happened when they were children, though it could be concurrent.

They are being taught that there are two kinds of people those who abuse and those who are abused. What would you choose?

"I mean that abusers, both male and female, are generally victims of abuse themselves."

You are correct, This is why VAWA is ineffective in dealing with the problem, and why as a society we must get DV in the relm of humanities and out of the one sided pro women relm of gender politics.

Your previous post says it best, we all want it to stop for everyone, the way we have been adressing the problem has stagnated men and children and left them in the dark.

Time for change.

Hujo? Tell me what you think VAWA does. Do you have any actual, substantiative criticisms of it, or do you just not like the name?

Second, Nice Guy, you're absolutely wrong. I do some of the per-client billing for our VAWA grant, and I am currently billing a gay male client to VAWA, not to mention the three teenage boys currently staying in our shelter. VAWA does not discriminate based on gender.

Let me addres something that's a common critcism -- something that Nice Guy mentioned.

VAWA-funded programs usually allow boys over twelve. I'm not aware of one in the state where I work that does otherwise, although I'm not familiar with every program in my state. The reason that some programs don't is that there are certain, specific problems with allowing teen boys in the shelter; problems we've had at the program where I work.

Keeping someone under your thumb -- especially if you're conducting a long-term pattern of criminal behavior against them -- is a full-time job. Abusers will often enlist their sons to help out: many of them have learned everything they know about how to relate to women from their fathers. And while I know that most men learn some pretty fucked-up things about how to relate to women in their lifetimes, this is nothing -- really nothing -- compared to the fucked-up attitudes that boys growing up in households with abusive fathers learn.

We're not just talking about potential abuse of the mother, although there's that. We run a shelter, not a sealed compound. The security we have is confidentiality, and little other than that. If one of our clients' kids flips out, we get the same response time as everyone else.

There's a danger there for our staff, and our staff has been physically assaulted in the past -- especially since we have an all-female shelter staff, and our clients' kids have been raised in an environment where they've learned that violence against women is okay. We serve male teens because it's the right thing to do, but if you're a cash-strapped organization that doesn't feel it can trust the cops to be there on time, that's a policy I'd take a good, hard look at before enacting.

-- ACS

Your post says it all Andreas.
Women are victims men are criminals and we can't help 'em.

DV has no buisness in gender politics.

Hujo, fighting DV does have a place in the real world, and being that the real world is full of gender politics, they're two things that are necessarily going to mix. Enforcing misogyny is as much gender politics as fighting it is. Rather than responding to the practical and sometimes gender-based obstacles that appear when you try and help victims of domestic violence in this real world with screwed-up ideas about gender, you're rejecting any observations that don't fit in with your theoretical structure of the world. The fact that your theory is different than the theory you percieve feminists as pushing doesn't make it correct. Helping people isn't about gender parity or revenge, whether against feminists or misogynists. There are people who are actually out on the front lines helping people get out of abusive relationships and abusive households, and they are advocating on the behalf of actual people and not a vision of how the world should work. If you have a problem with that allegiance, you're going to have to expect the collateral damage in the pursuit of your theory to take it personally.

hi
the great problem with this type of legislation is the need for feminists to contradict themselves.IE
,men and woman are equels and must be treated as equels at all times.
then there is this....the female experience and perceptions are different to those of males and therefor females must be treated differently.
well which one is it ??????

the womens movement is the most destructive thing that could ever happen to a civilized nation. these "mistreated" "women" waited until all the physical work ended and then jumped on the feminist bandwagon. males are dead by the millions from having fought for all of us. God Bless the men of the USA for giving their lives for such selfish and superficial females. abort a nd kill your babies in the name of freedom. please God forgive our peoples for having allowed this to happen!