4. Men will tolerate more pain than women. They are more likely to “grin and bear it.” And again, many are ashamed to seek medical help for abuse.
5. Unless a woman uses a weapon (and many do), a woman usually does not have the strength of a man to inflict serious injury by abuse.
That initself suggests to me that the problem with abused men is not as big as the other way around. Men simply have a greater ability to inflict serious physical harm than women do. We are stronger. If a woman hit me, I might not hit back. But if she continued to hit, and hit and hit and hit, I certainly would put a stop to it.
However, I do agree with you that the community lack in skills when dealing with men on particulary emotional issues. While women often have support groups, men are supposed to stick things through. Men are not supposed to show emotions (unless watching sports). A raped man might very possibly suffer anonymously. A woman might too, but it’s still more ok for women to acknowledge that they have been raped. I don’t think that there are any quick fixes to these things. I do believe that men generation by generation tend to get ‘softer’, thus perhaps gradually making it easier for men to be picked up my support groups and such...
The funny thing is that everybody is claiming equality in between men and women, it’s a joke!
I’ve seen enough in this thread to know who wears the pants in your house.
Pfft!
So, back to what you said, do you believe that abusive husbands are common?
Well very hard to say, given that we never find out about most of it.
‘Not rare’, I think we can be safe in saying that.
See, this is the problem with liberal debate. You are NOT safe in that statement, unless you can come up with stats/proof.
I think I have my new signature. How in the hell can you even know that you don’t find out about most of it, when you don’t find out about most of it? How can you use the word most? Could it actually be some?
I thought that you were smarter than using Bartink double speak.
I’ve seen enough in this thread to know who wears the pants in your house.
Pfft!
So, back to what you said, do you believe that abusive husbands are common?
Well very hard to say, given that we never find out about most of it.
‘Not rare’, I think we can be safe in saying that.
See, this is the problem with liberal debate. You are NOT safe in that statement, unless you can come up with stats/proof.
I think I have my new signature. How in the hell can you even know that you don’t find out about most of it, when you don’t find out about most of it? How can you use the word most? Could it actually be some?
I thought that you were smarter than using Bartink double speak.
What is ‘liberal debate’ and what have stats/proof have to do with it?
Well, we can probably agree that family violence is reported far more than it ever has been. I’m willing to bet the majority of it is never reported though (which is how it becomes ‘known’). E.g. 5% may have been reported 30 years ago, but now the figure might be 15%. Of course the real numbers might be slightly different to those round numbers, but I’d wager that I’d be in the ballpark.
Actually, I just found this:
Most family violence is not reported to agencies. NZ Police estimate they see only 18% of all violence within homes.
In terms of how prevalent it is - New Zealand is a small country and yet the above report says that in 1995 there were 32,108 reported incidences. So yeah, I’m on very safe ground to say that it’s ‘not rare’, or even ‘very common’. If only 18% is reported, that’s 178,377 incidents.
NZ has 1,344,267 households
source: http://www2.stats.govt.nz/domino/external/pasfull/pasfull.nsf/0/4c2567ef00247c6acc256cc1007079ef/$FILE/Table%2036.xls
So yes, ‘very common’ would be accuate.
I use NZ there so as not to appear bias against the US (as that always finds it way into the discussion at some point).
However, here is a rather telling stat from the US:
In terms of whether men or women are more violent towards the opposite sex in the home:
US research found that women were seven to ten times more likely to be seriously injured by partner violence than
men.
from: Loseke, D. & Kurz, D. (2005). Men’s violence toward women is the serious social problem. Loseke, D., Gelles, R. & Cavanaugh, M. (eds.). Current controversies
on family violence. Thousand Oaks, Sage.
via downloadable 4 page report at
http://www.nzfvc.org.nz/PublicationDetails.aspx?publication=14144
Yeah yeah, classic Moorewatch tactic: assert something positive in order to set up a situation where you can threaten to take it away:
- “You’re in danger of losing your credibility here”
- “I thought you were smart”
Yeah yeah, classic Moorewatch tactic: assert something positive in order to set up a situation where you can threaten to take it away:
- “You’re in danger of losing your credibility here”
- “I thought you were smart”
So lets use the Thinkers favorite wangle instead: uh, first we need to define the term “violence”....
My coworker this morning told me about a video on a porn website he’d stumbled across in which two girls shat in a sundae dish and proceeded to eat it rather gleefully.
So lets use the Thinkers favorite wangle instead: uh, first we need to define the term “violence”.....
True, much better not to define the terms when having a discussion/debate. If only people could talk at cross-purposes even more than they do already.
My coworker this morning told me about a video on a porn website he’d stumbled across in which two girls shat in a sundae dish and proceeded to eat it rather gleefully
My co-worker told me to have a good weekend. I responded in kind.
Anyone else got any interesting Friday co-worker discussion stories? This is the thread for it.
So lets use the Thinkers favorite wangle instead: uh, first we need to define the term “violence”.....
True, much better not to define the terms when having a discussion/debate. If only people could talk at cross-purposes even more than they do already.
My coworker this morning told me about a video on a porn website he’d stumbled across in which two girls shat in a sundae dish and proceeded to eat it rather gleefully
My co-worker told me to have a good weekend. I responded in kind.
Anyone else got any interesting Friday co-worker discussion stories? This is the thread for it.
So lets use the Thinkers favorite wangle instead: uh, first we need to define the term “violence”.....
True, much better not to define the terms when having a discussion/debate. If only people could talk at cross-purposes even more than they do already.
My coworker this morning told me about a video on a porn website he’d stumbled across in which two girls shat in a sundae dish and proceeded to eat it rather gleefully
My co-worker told me to have a good weekend. I responded in kind.
Anyone else got any interesting Friday co-worker discussion stories? This is the thread for it.
My coworker this morning told me about a video on a porn website he’d stumbled across in which two girls shat in a sundae dish and proceeded to eat it rather gleefully
My co-worker told me to have a good weekend. I responded in kind.
Anyone else got any interesting Friday co-worker discussion stories? This is the thread for it.
Unlike many a global citizen, I somehow just can’t feel for and know the hearts of the people of, say, Iraqi from the comfort of my home or vacation motel room via the Internet. I like to go get a first hand eye witness impression of the action. I checked out what a daisychain looks, sounds and smells like after I was told that gay men are my equals i.e. just like me.
I did however, so far, just check out the site my coworker had mentioned. I’d seen girls do mouth-to-mouth and butt-to-mouth and vomit on each other for, what else but, their own sexual pleasure, so I checked out the new levels of enlightenment women have reached to become equals with men via the Internet.
Sure enough, men and women are pretty much alike these days, and thats just enlightening. I feel a buzz from all the sexy input and innovation, it could be I’m starting to feel for the Iraqi, too, as they are our equals too.
I’ve seen enough in this thread to know who wears the pants in your house.
Pfft!
So, back to what you said, do you believe that abusive husbands are common?
Well very hard to say, given that we never find out about most of it.
‘Not rare’, I think we can be safe in saying that.
See, this is the problem with liberal debate. You are NOT safe in that statement, unless you can come up with stats/proof.
I think I have my new signature. How in the hell can you even know that you don’t find out about most of it, when you don’t find out about most of it? How can you use the word most? Could it actually be some?
I thought that you were smarter than using Bartink double speak.
What is ‘liberal debate’ and what have stats/proof have to do with it?
Well, we can probably agree that family violence is reported far more than it ever has been. I’m willing to bet the majority of it is never reported though (which is how it becomes ‘known’). E.g. 5% may have been reported 30 years ago, but now the figure might be 15%. Of course the real numbers might be slightly different to those round numbers, but I’d wager that I’d be in the ballpark.
Actually, I just found this:
Most family violence is not reported to agencies. NZ Police estimate they see only 18% of all violence within homes.
In terms of how prevalent it is - New Zealand is a small country and yet the above report says that in 1995 there were 32,108 reported incidences. So yeah, I’m on very safe ground to say that it’s ‘not rare’, or even ‘very common’. If only 18% is reported, that’s 178,377 incidents.
NZ has 1,344,267 households
source: http://www2.stats.govt.nz/domino/external/pasfull/pasfull.nsf/0/4c2567ef00247c6acc256cc1007079ef/$FILE/Table%2036.xls
So yes, ‘very common’ would be accuate.
I use NZ there so as not to appear bias against the US (as that always finds it way into the discussion at some point).
However, here is a rather telling stat from the US:
In terms of whether men or women are more violent towards the opposite sex in the home:
US research found that women were seven to ten times more likely to be seriously injured by partner violence than
men.
from: Loseke, D. & Kurz, D. (2005). Men’s violence toward women is the serious social problem. Loseke, D., Gelles, R. & Cavanaugh, M. (eds.). Current controversies
on family violence. Thousand Oaks, Sage.
via downloadable 4 page report at
http://www.nzfvc.org.nz/PublicationDetails.aspx?publication=14144
Yeah yeah, classic Moorewatch tactic: assert something positive in order to set up a situation where you can threaten to take it away:
- “You’re in danger of losing your credibility here”
- “I thought you were smart”
Come on french connection, don’t tell me I just wasted my time there......
I’ve seen enough in this thread to know who wears the pants in your house.
Pfft!
So, back to what you said, do you believe that abusive husbands are common?
Well very hard to say, given that we never find out about most of it.
‘Not rare’, I think we can be safe in saying that.
See, this is the problem with liberal debate. You are NOT safe in that statement, unless you can come up with stats/proof.
I think I have my new signature. How in the hell can you even know that you don’t find out about most of it, when you don’t find out about most of it? How can you use the word most? Could it actually be some?
I thought that you were smarter than using Bartink double speak.
What is ‘liberal debate’ and what have stats/proof have to do with it?
Well, we can probably agree that family violence is reported far more than it ever has been. I’m willing to bet the majority of it is never reported though (which is how it becomes ‘known’). E.g. 5% may have been reported 30 years ago, but now the figure might be 15%. Of course the real numbers might be slightly different to those round numbers, but I’d wager that I’d be in the ballpark.
Actually, I just found this:
Most family violence is not reported to agencies. NZ Police estimate they see only 18% of all violence within homes.
In terms of how prevalent it is - New Zealand is a small country and yet the above report says that in 1995 there were 32,108 reported incidences. So yeah, I’m on very safe ground to say that it’s ‘not rare’, or even ‘very common’. If only 18% is reported, that’s 178,377 incidents.
NZ has 1,344,267 households
source: http://www2.stats.govt.nz/domino/external/pasfull/pasfull.nsf/0/4c2567ef00247c6acc256cc1007079ef/$FILE/Table%2036.xls
So yes, ‘very common’ would be accuate.
I use NZ there so as not to appear bias against the US (as that always finds it way into the discussion at some point).
However, here is a rather telling stat from the US:
In terms of whether men or women are more violent towards the opposite sex in the home:
US research found that women were seven to ten times more likely to be seriously injured by partner violence than
men.
from: Loseke, D. & Kurz, D. (2005). Men’s violence toward women is the serious social problem. Loseke, D., Gelles, R. & Cavanaugh, M. (eds.). Current controversies
on family violence. Thousand Oaks, Sage.
via downloadable 4 page report at
http://www.nzfvc.org.nz/PublicationDetails.aspx?publication=14144
Yeah yeah, classic Moorewatch tactic: assert something positive in order to set up a situation where you can threaten to take it away:
- “You’re in danger of losing your credibility here”
- “I thought you were smart”
Come on french connection, don’t tell me I just wasted my time there......
Not to worry my little Kiwi, I’ll get to it… ;) It’s just that I’ve had things of more difficult things to do, like cutting my toenails....
Ok I think it’s medication time for everyone in this thread.
Not all of us can afford ours, beings how we don’t have free healthcare.
But it is pretty to neat to witness how all kind of chemicals make them Euros all placid, peaceful and thoughtful, the way nature intended us all to be.
