Biased VAWA Pushes Gender Supremacy, GENDER BIAS NO CURE FOR DOMESTIC VIOLENCE | |
Quote: Biased VAWA Pushes Gender Supremacy
The federal Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) is up for reauthorization in 2005. VAWA funds billions of taxpayer dollars to combat violence against women, principally domestic violence (DV). The definition of DV touted by victim advocates runs the gamut from jokes and insults to murder, with "power and control" being the overriding characteristic of the man's behavior towards the woman. Real violence is rarely at issue.
When women commit violence against men, VAWA and the DV industry go AWOL. Despite the federal government's own statistics showing nearly 40 per cent of domestic violence victims are men, VAWA persists in its monolithic response.
In the same way that some minority groups argue they cannot be racist because they aren't in power in society, gender feminists contend women cannot commit DV because they can't assert power and control over men. Any violence committed by women is, by definition, either de minimus (it could not possibly have hurt him), or self-defense (SHE is the victim of HIS abuse).
All interactions between partners are subject to this twisted logic. When the relationship sours, the woman has an easy out: "I am a victim of domestic violence and can do no wrong." VAWA supports and maintains female supremacy. It should be re-titled Victory Assured for Women Act.
VAWA's gender bias permeates law enforcement response to domestic conflict. All it takes is a woman calling 911 to summon three squad cars, teeming with police officers eager to carry out today's "tough" domestic violence laws. The centerpiece of the system is "mandatory arrest." Every domestic disturbance call must result in arrest, usually the man.
Domestic violence is whatever the man does that the woman doesn't like. Declaring he is going to file for custody of the children is a "threat." Finding out she is having an affair and demanding she stop is "abuse." Unknown to most men, such interchanges often precipitate false charges of DV. In my 17 years as a family law attorney, I have seen this pattern occur over and over.
Even when the facts clearly show the man is not an abuser (and perhaps the woman is), prosecutors refuse to drop charges. "No-drop" policies are a great publicity tool, and a way to ensure more funding. Charges that would never see the light of day if they happened between strangers on the street (accidentally bumping against someone when walking by), are routinely charged as DV "assault." (But only if the man does it to the woman; a man can be bleeding from a head wound and he won't be considered a victim).
Indiscriminate charging clogs the system with minor transgressions, yet ensures a steady stream of cases justifying more taxpayer money at budget time.
Both spouses are usually at fault when a marriage ends. Many women have discovered a surefire antidote against taking any responsibility: playing the domestic violence victim. While the husband is reading the newspaper and relaxing after work, the wife is contacting the domestic violence hotline, getting step-by-step instructions on what to say: "His abuse is escalating," "I'm fearful for my safety."
VAWA funds battered women's shelters and their misandrist staff, always ready to welcome another customer for their anti-male, anti-father and anti-family agenda. Ask a victim advocate what causes domestic violence, and she will immediately blame our "patriarchal society," ensuring that only men get the blame. One might ask what causes women to abuse children. Presumably, the patriarchy by proxy. VAWA gives short shrift to child abuse, which is most often committed by women. Indeed, VAWA earmarks a paltry $7000 per year to develop home visitation projects to look for signs of child abuse or neglect.
To assure victory in the divorce/custody case, the woman claims the man is an abuser, no matter how good a husband and father he is. Whatever wrongs he has committed, from leaving the toilet seat up to not making enough money, failure of the marriage is his fault. "No-fault" divorce laws really mean "no fault unless it's the man's fault." In other words, the Oprahization of family law.
What we really have is MAWA: Men Annoying Women Act. The man is either a relentless abuser or a hopeless wimp. Any modern man not terrified of being in a relationship with a woman has not been paying attention.
The government seems unable to define gender bias except as "bias against women." Title IX forces college sports programs to spend equal amounts of money on men's and women's sports, despite the fact that the vast majority of athletes are men. Even though 1/3 of domestic violence murder victims are male, not one dime of VAWA's largesse is devoted to prevention of violence against men.
Men are far more likely than women to be victims of violence overall, yet there's no Violence Against Men Act. Men also comprise nearly all workplace injuries and deaths, but try to find a Male Workplace Injury Prevention Act.
VAWA is not about stopping violence. It is about greedy special interests slopping at the federal trough, perpetuating gender supremacy for women. If proponents were truly concerned about helping victims, they would demand that all intervention and funding be gender neutral and gender inclusive.
The existence of male victims threatens gender feminists because it knocks the underpinnings out of their theory, that the "patriarchy" causes men to abuse women. The DV industry has succeeded in creating the "victimarchy." With VAWA in their corner, women win no matter what: victim or abuser, they can do no wrong.
|
This article is from Lisa Scott's Real Family Law. Quote: GENDER BIAS NO CURE FOR DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
October is Domestic Violence Awareness Month. Most articles and public service announcements this month focus exclusively on female victims, while at the same time stereotyping all abusers as male. Federal laws such as the Violence Against Women Act codify gender discrimination and gender profiling. Women's advocates claim that virtually all domestic violence victims are women, therefore discrimination is justified. They repeat often-cited claims such as "the number one reason women age 16 to 40 end up in the emergency room is violence," "95 per cent of domestic violence is committed by men," and "the chance of being victimized by an intimate partner is 10 times greater for a woman than a man."
Yet these "statistics" cannot be verified and are repeatedly contradicted by both government and private studies. A Centers for Disease Control (CDC) report found the leading causes of women's injury-related emergency room visits are accidental falls, motor vehicle accidents, and accidental cuts. Homicide or injury purposely inflicted by others (including strangers and intimates), was the least likely cause, exceeded even by injuries due to animal bites and venomous plants. (National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey: 1992 Emergency Department Summary).
Proof that women are not the only victims of domestic violence appears in the 1998 Justice Department report "Intimate Partner Violence." Of 1830 domestic violence murders, 510, or almost 1/3, were men. The study also indicated that males are 13 per cent less likely to report being a victim of intimate violence than females. Another 1998 Justice Department report, "Violence Against Women Survey," found that while 1,309,061 women were assaulted by an intimate partner in the prior year, 834,732 men were victims of domestic violence, 39 per cent of the total.
Extensive research concludes that men and women are almost equally likely to initiate domestic violence (e.g. Strauss and Gelles, 1975 and 1985). While women may be more severely injured when domestic violence escalates, they can and do commit serious crimes of violence against men. Women's advocates continually downplay the existence of female violence. This obscures the fact that men are at risk of being victimized, and leaves them less prepared for the potential for violence against them.
Should an important public policy debate be about which sex is the most important victim? Should a female victim be more important than a male victim? Was Melanie Edwards (murdered by her husband in a divorce/custody battle) more important than Chuck Leonard (murdered by his wife in a divorce/custody battle)? Was Gertrudes Lamson (shot and killed by her husband) more important than Donyea Jones (doused with gasoline, set afire, and burned to death by his wife)?
Many male victims are ignored or ridiculed by a system that seems to recognize only female victims. When women are the abusers, they are more often than not given a pass. Recent cases I have personal experience with involve men who have been hit, punched, gouged, choked, and threatened with weapons by their spouses. Despite reports to police, none of the women were charged with crimes.
These local cases, and their numerous national counterparts, demonstrate that domestic violence is not the sole province of male perpetrators and female victims. Yet we are constantly told that women are the only ones at risk. Had there been more education about the potential for violence by both men and women, men like Chuck Leonard and Donyea Jones may have been able to take precautions and avoid a deadly risk.
Myths and distortions about male and female violence have no place in the debate about stopping domestic violence. Despite a continual barrage of reports about how epidemic domestic violence has become, the truth is that most men and women are law-abiding citizens, loving spouses and caring parents. The 1998 Intimate Partner Violence report indicates steep declines in domestic violence against both men and women. The Justice Department numbers cited above indicate that only 1.3 per cent of women (and .9 per cent of men) are actually victimized each year. Yet domestic violence advocates promote the myth that American women live in constant terror of violence from husbands or boyfriends. It is simply irresponsible to falsely demonize fully 50 per cent of the population, further fanning the flames of gender warfare.
During Domestic Violence Awareness Month, let's not let the zeal to protect one class of victims perpetuate a bias that unfairly stereotypes an entire gender. It is noble and well-meaning to advocate for female victims. Yet denying the existence of male victims of female violence demeans and ignores these victims, puts them at further risk, and reduces the likelihood that female abusers will be held accountable for their crimes.
| This one can be found here.
~ A man needs a woman like a lion needs a stove. ~
~ Women deserve only equal opportunity, not equal outcomes. ~
~ Men are not collectively "guilty" of anything. ~
~ Never needing to be pregnant is a blessing. ~
~ Feminist ideology “men have to respect women, but women have no reason to respect men” ~
~ Everybody makes choices, and nobody should be entitled to special treatment because of those choices.
Equal results based on unequal treatment amounts to no kind of equality at all. ~
|
20th-March-2008
