The first picture isn't representative of who is subject to the majority of psychological abuse.........which is men. It's back-to-front, totally misleading.

Undoubtedly women comprise of the greatest numbers of psychological terrorists and the most skilled practitioners of it, but despite the guise of gender neutrality in it's absurd proposal, don't expect this reality to be reflected in subsequent court actions/decisions.

although it was not clear last night if nagging would be viewed as breaking the law

Why shouldn't it be if men are to be targetted. In fact nagging as a premeditated form of 'psychological violence' is one of the more insidious variations compared with a spontaneous outburst such as shouting.

The fact is, the French government knows that if they included nagging - the courts would be full of offending women, so like every other country, they daren't offend the precious female vote - no matter how much they have to corrupt the system to achieve it.

The law is expected to cover every kind of insult including repeated rude remarks about a partner's appearance, false allegations of infidelity and threats of physical violence.

Does false allegations of infedelity include other false allegations I wonder (women often accuse infedelity to hide their own)? After all, a false allegation is the worse kind of 'psychological violence' you could possibly inflict on a person, with all it's social and legal repercussions.

Bitchy, spiteful and rude remarks seem to be the hallmark of many modern women. As for threats of physical violence, it seems women do this an awful lot 'under the radar,'....... I'll slap, punch, kick, hit you with, throw this at you...........in a minute..........if you don't....... shut up, do as I say, listen to me, stop doing that etc.

Critics said the measure was a gimmick produced in response to lobbying by feminists and would be impossible to implement.

And feminists will continue lobbying until it's fully integrated into law and then start demanding target numbers of men for punishment (the same as rape). This of course is one step closer to legislating against any kind of criticism of the sacred cow!

the french never tire of surrendering do they?
wonder how this is gonna fly in algerian muslim communities

Time for a second French revolution?

France is fucked!!!!

Quote from Zuberi

France is fucked!!!!

Obviously, any country that follows the USA in terms of legislations is screwed (also heavily applies to the UK, Sweden, Australia and other ratholes where feminism is very promminent). The only big difference is that despite 'psychological violence' being covered under VAWA, few people are actually aware of that. Now they made it very clear and well known in France that this is yet another excuse to incarcecate another.

Hehe....this kind of ruling might not be bad for men.

Quote from Feckless

Hehe....this kind of ruling might not be bad for men.

In theory yes, as women do more often make use of 'psychological violence' (and that's not just nagging :P).

It will all depend on wether the law will be practiced in a biassed way or a gender-neutral way.

Quote from Nynrah Ghost

In theory yes, as women do more often make use of 'psychological violence' (and that's not just nagging :P).

It will all depend on wether the law will be practiced in a biassed way or a gender-neutral way.

It will most certainly not be practiced in a gender neutral way. The law is in fact loaded against men. The authors of the law know full well that it is completely socialy acceptable for a woman to berate and humilliate a man and that is what they are counting on.

Oh as if a man will be listened to when he complains of his woman nagging him... they'll do as they do now while he has two black eyes and squashed gonads - laugh at him and tell him to man up.

Quote from Marx

Oh as if a man will be listened to when he complains of his woman nagging him... they'll do as they do now while he has two black eyes and squashed gonads - laugh at him and tell him to man up.

Bump !

It just might be necessary though for a new breed of rent-seeking scum. Psychologists who sit as judges.

And a new 'discipline' in Universities - forensic psychological torturer hunter.

Not listening to or agreeing with your spouse (read: wife) will be the next offense to become outlawed.

I guess the government will have to put surveillance cameras in everyone's homes. Maybe everyone can live in government compounds or in government barracks. Maybe relationships and even sex can be outlawed. Instead, we can be automatons and can reproduce only by means of artificial insemination. Babies can be "grown" in incubators.

The point is, government is the root of the problem, not women. Men, free men, used to be in charge of society. Now, the government is. Government is supposed to be controlled by citizens, not the other way around.

i am not sure why france is getting all the credit?

in Canada-things such as rolling your eyes or shrugging your shoulders at a woman are to be considered a serious threat against women and a jailable offence as u may make her "feel" uncomfortable.--yelling,was a jailable offence years ago here.

In the US, any time you go to the emergency room, the nurse will ask you if you are living with anyone that makes you feel unsafe. The last time I went, the nurse asked me that, and I said "No" but told her that the reason I was there was that I had been attacked and injured by two illegal aliens. Her response was to just laugh.

Also, children in America are asked by their pediatricians if there are any guns in the home. The government wants to keep tabs on everyone for everything.

I agree with those who say that, in theory, this could be good for men. The thing is even those who say 'but the law won't be gender-neutral, it will be bias,' still arn't seeing the full problem. Even if the law were completely gender-neutral it would still unduly target men. All laws do.

Examine Warren Farrel's piece on women who kill, specifically the twelve 'female only' defences, many of these are applicable to every law, regardless of how gender neutral its implementation is. Consider the double-standard in regards to time served when men and women commit the same crimes. Consider that there are something like four-hundred men in jail, in America, for every one woman (most men in prison for drug charges, women are not less prone to use drugs, just less prone to being held accountable) or the fact that in England they're seriously considering the idea of doing away with women's prisons entirely. There are simply deep physiological double-standards which exist for the majority of people including those who make up juries, judges, police and lawyers. Granted some crimes (like rape and sexual harassment) are pretty well designed to target men, and that seems to be their purpose; putting men in jail, but even crimes which do not have that explicit purpose still have a disproportionate effect on men, because of the general level of misandry in society, and the propensity to absolve women of responsibility for their actions.

Women will, of course, be charged on occasion for this crime, but there will always be a reason to soften or nullify their punishment. PMS, Post Natal Depression, refusal to deprive children of their mother, drugs use, drinking, stress, fatigue, etc. I mean if our society refuses to hold women accountable for literally killing their own children, or husbands what makes anyone think it will hold them accountable for being unable to control their mouths?