Of course CM doesn't believe in marital rape

[thoughtful]

{L_MESSAGE_HIDDEN}:

Y'know, we may have done a service to that family.

I am concerned about his making it harder for his wife to get help. But sadly, I imagine ArmoireAsshole would find a way to isolate his wife no matter where they were geographically, with his mind games.

But, if what he says is true, and the new house, if there is one, is larger, has a dedicated workspace for him that spares the rest of them hearing noise and breathing fumes, and has a bedroom for each child, maybe his reaction to us has done them some good.

[usmcmom]

I think it's really cute that Robert is the only commenter on Lori's post, which is a giant quote of....Robert's words. Someone really likes himself.

amanhiswife · 4 hours ago

Just in case you have men reading who are in a similar circumstance, with their wife abusing them I think it's important to suggest the following. First, you are not alone. While in the US arrests for domestic violence are 90% men, there seems to be large bias in the law enforcement and legal system because almost every study done (and there are many) shows that abuse is almost evenly split between the sexes. In general though all the same principals apply except for the fact that you have the added burden of proof. Most folks will believe a woman if she says she is being abused, however, I have known instances where the wife even admits she is the abuser and folks do not believe it. Let alone when she will not be honest about it. You need to understand that you will need proof most likely, and bruises and blood will probably not do, let alone in cases of psychological abuse. Audio and visual if it can be obtained (and even then sometimes law enforcement won't view it).

Lastly, no matter the risk if your children are in danger you need to take the risk & remove them and yourself from the home. However, it's even more important that there be compelling evidence if they are unsafe with their mother because without it it's likely they will end up with their mother and legally required to stay away.

In abuse situations, women have size going against them. Men have public opinion and law enforcement bias going against them. Both situations are sad, but realities that must be dealt with.

Robert, please provide sources for the "many" studies you mention in your ramblings comment.

Also, please tell us where you received your degree and in which human services field you majored. Counseling? Social Work? Marriage and Family Therapy? Child Development?

I happen to have a Bachelors in Social Work from an accredited four year university. Maybe we can swap stories. Or, you can just tell us why you are so incredibly eager to paint men as victims and minimize the victimization of women. If only your wife had been able to take your advice when she so desperately needed to escape you, her abuser...

[AllisonWndrland]

I would love to see these studies he claims exist. Having Ken pull some statistics out of his ass for him don't equate to actual studies, but I bet they try.

[polecat]

While I think that CM is FoS with his insinuations that more men than women are abused, the fact is that male IPV is not uncommon. Unfortunately, thanks to social attitudes and gendered stereotypes, men who are being abused are far less likely to reach out and get the help they need. One out of 14 men is believed to have suffered at the hands of an intimate partner (both male and female).

http://www.ncadv.org/files/MaleVictims.pdf

TW: descriptions of IPV

{L_MESSAGE_HIDDEN}:

I grew up watching my mom abuse my dad. Often. She threw things at him, clawed his face and head and would hit him with whatever objects were near at hand. He appeared many mornings after a fight with bruises and bloody gashes. These were not retaliatory attacks -- iow, she wasn't doing it in self-defense. Her attacks were unprovoked. She bit him on his shoulder so hard once that she broke through the skin and took a chunk of flesh with her. Once when he threatened to call the police, she hurtled herself down the stairs to "prove" that he was abusive, too. He never once reported any of it. Why? Because how foolish would a 6'3" man look claiming his little 5'6" wife was beating him (his reasoning, not mine)? It was emasculating, in his opinion and particularly in the patriarchal IFB world, and he simply wouldn't do it. He still denies ever having been abused, and he only grudgingly acknowledges that my sister and I were abused.

I do chafe a bit when I "hear" a dismissive or disbelieving tone when it comes to female-on-male IPV simply because of my own personal experiences (and by "hear," I mean my perception of what the writer is saying not necessarily that people really ARE minimizing or mocking it -- tone can be hard to read). I realize that yes, most people are far more familiar with the opposite scenario, but that doesn't mean there aren't hundreds of thousands of men out there being abused by their wives/husbands/girlfriends/boyfriends. Statistics indicate that more than three-quarters of a million men are abused every year. Men often have more personal resources and therefore more ability to get out of an abusive relationship, but as anyone who has ever been abused knows, it can still be difficult as hell to get out even when you DO have the money to do it thanks to the complex emotional aspects of this kind of dysfunction.

And even after all that, I still think that CM is an ignorant, abusive asshat who is just spouting off the standard MRA lines without any actual knowledge on the subject.

Edited for clarity

[usmcmom]

While I think that CM is FoS with his insinuations that more men than women are abused, the fact is that male IPV is not uncommon. Unfortunately, thanks to social attitudes and gendered stereotypes, men who are being abused are far less likely to reach out and get the help they need. One out of 14 men is believed to have suffered at the hands of an intimate partner (both male and female).

http://www.ncadv.org/files/MaleVictims.pdf

TW: descriptions of IPV

{L_MESSAGE_HIDDEN}:

I grew up watching my mom abuse my dad. Often. She threw things at him, clawed his face and head and would hit him with whatever objects were near at hand. He appeared many mornings after a fight with bruises and bloody gashes. These were not retaliatory attacks -- iow, she wasn't doing it in self-defense. Her attacks were unprovoked. She bit him on his shoulder so hard once that she broke through the skin and took a chunk of flesh with her. Once when he threatened to call the police, she hurtled herself down the stairs to "prove" that he was abusive, too. He never once reported any of it. Why? Because how foolish would a 6'3" man look claiming his little 5'6" wife was beating him (his reasoning, not mine)? It was emasculating, in his opinion and particularly in the patriarchal IFB world, and he simply wouldn't do it. He still denies ever having been abused, and he only grudgingly acknowledges that my sister and I were abused.

I do chafe a bit when I "hear" a dismissive or disbelieving tone when it comes to female-on-male IPV simply because of my own personal experiences (and by "hear," I mean my perception of what the writer is saying not necessarily that people really ARE minimizing or mocking it -- tone can be hard to read). I realize that yes, most people are far more familiar with the opposite scenario, but that doesn't mean there aren't hundreds of thousands of men out there being abused by their wives/husbands/girlfriends/boyfriends. Statistics indicate that more than three-quarters of a million men are abused every year. Men often have more personal resources and therefore more ability to get out of an abusive relationship, but as anyone who has ever been abused knows, it can still be difficult as hell to get out even when you DO have the money to do it thanks to the complex emotional aspects of this kind of dysfunction.

And even after all that, I still think that CM is an ignorant, abusive asshat who is just spouting off the standard MRA lines without any actual knowledge on the subject.

Edited for clarity

My apologies. I, in no way, meant to minimize the severity of ANY abuse, whether the male or the female is the victim. I am aware that men can be the victim of all kinds of abuse.

My frustration with Robert is that he wrote an entire post in which he claims to address the reality of spousal abuse against women, yet HE, in my opinion, minimizes the problem by basically saying "but remember, men are victims too;" basically negating his whole post.

I hope that makes sense.

[polecat]

My apologies. I, in no way, meant to minimize the severity of ANY abuse, whether the male or the female is the victim. I am aware that men can be the victim of all kinds of abuse.

My frustration with Robert is that he wrote an entire post in which he claims to address the reality of spousal abuse against women, yet HE, in my opinion, minimizes the problem by basically saying "but remember, men are victims too;" basically negating his whole post.

I hope that makes sense.

No, I didn't necessarily think you were. As I said, my perception can sometimes be off -- it's a sensitive spot.

That said, I find CM's comment and Lori's response to his comment utterly absurd especially given how she reacts when someone dares to mention that men aren't the only ones with "difficult" partners. "My blog is for women only!" But she doesn't correct CM. :roll:

I apologize if I made my post sound accusatory. It wasn't meant to be.

[usmcmom]

No, I didn't necessarily think you were. As I said, my perception can sometimes be off -- it's a sensitive spot.

That said, I find CM's comment and Lori's response to his comment utterly absurd especially given how she reacts when someone dares to mention that men aren't the only ones with "difficult" partners. "My blog is for women only!" But she doesn't correct CM. :roll:

I apologize if I made my post sound accusatory. It wasn't meant to be.

Nah - not accusatory. I just wanted to be safe and apologize because I can see where my post might have come off as a little flippant.

You are right about Lori. Anybody else would have had their hand smacked for being off topic. It's funny how they are all so hesitant to believe a woman is being abused but when the great cabinet man (uneducated though he may be) speaks....well, it's a different story. It's a little disturbing how they massage each others' egos.

[lawfulevil]

It's a little disturbing how they massage each others' egos.

It's inexcusable, is what it is, when we already know that handjobs don't count. Quit massaging each other's egos on the internet, Ken/CM, and go right to the source. We know you want to, and it's apparently Alright By Jesus. :wanker: :wanker:

[docmom]

Question for cabinet boy: If a man is impotent, is he required to seek all available medical and surgical remedies so that he can fulfill his marital obligations and if he can't be fixed what recourse does his wife have? My recollection is that the verses so often quoted by CB and Ken mention that men have an obligation to their wives sexually as well as wives to husbands.

[Curious]

One of the very first cases I worked on was a DV murder where the pregnant girlfriend (or wife, I forget which it's been a long time now) stabbed the boyfriend (or husband) to death in self-defense because he was abusing her.

One of my tasks was to call this huge list of people and try and get background on them as a couple/find potential folks to be witnesses.

We couldn't find anyone that ever saw/heard/etc the guy doing anything even remotely mean to the woman. It was all about her being horrible to him. By all accounts he was a really nice, hard-working guy. She had another child from a previous relationship and he took care of that child like she was his own.

We lost the case. A jury couldn't believe that a tiny, pregnant 5'3" woman could be the abuser of a 6'something" guy. He HAD to have been doing something to make her stab him that night, as far as they were concerned.

It was a really sad case.

[lawfulevil]

Government: As scripture teaches, we believe you are to obey the rulers and the government. We are to pay taxes and obey laws.

As long as it's convenient, anyway. When it's not, why renew your contractor's license?

I wonder if the IRS would like to talk to Cabinetman...

[usmcmom]

Question for cabinet boy: If a man is impotent, is he required to seek all available medical and surgical remedies so that he can fulfill his marital obligations and if he can't be fixed what recourse does his wife have? My recollection is that the verses so often quoted by CB and Ken mention that men have an obligation to their wives sexually as well as wives to husbands.

I've wondered about a similar scenario. What if a wife tries to initiate sex with her husband and he turns her down? Is a submissive wife allowed to ask again or must she accept "no" for an answer? When does submission trump meeting each others' sexual needs?

I know Klorien would call this an EXCEPTION; but it's a situation that is bound to happen quite a bit, I think; especially since many men who believe in submissive marriages have only their own interests in mind. I can see this kind of man turning his wife down simply to show her who's in charge.

[lawfulevil]

I actually do think he's fudging his taxes. Amanda's scrapbooking room looks like quite a bit of disposable income to me, in fits and starts at least, since I'm somewhat familiar with what this stuff costs even on good sale/deep discount. We had an entire aisle of it in the discount store I was a manager for, and it still wasn't what I'd call cheap at 75-90% off what they'd want at a boutique scrapbooking store, which is where Amanda goes. I've been to one, whew. He's willing to break the law about his contractor's license, which probably slows business, so I'm VERY sure he's willing to lie on his taxes. I bet those couple horses are there because he's declared his property a "farm". I bet he's lying about his income on top of that. A couple horses doth not a farming business make. That's a "hobby farm", and they DON'T COUNT. I know his land isn't appreciating enough, so that's not gonna fly.

I also think, given the fee for re-registration of a contractor's license in his state ($113 for two years, which is like 1.5 scrapbooking shopping trips) that the reason he hasn't renewed it, despite this being hella illegal, is that you're required to carry not just a $6000 bond, but $250k in insurance. It's not the cost of the renewal, for sure. If his insurance has been filed on before, that could be quite a bit of money a month, and it's even more money if you haven't been continuously covered. $250k in coverage can be pretty cheap if all you do is sell hair stuff and soaps at craft fairs (some of 'em require that much insurance), but it can also be INCREDIBLY expensive. Power tools, long driving distances, high cost of materials, project times, and general sue-happiness of the customers (he keeps bragging about working on 'luxury' houses) tell me his insurance would be pricy to begin with. Robert's general laziness and sloppiness tell me his insurance has probably been filed on before. That adds up to lots and lots of money he's unwilling to part with.

For now, Bob, only for now. Just wait til the L&I finds out! Those fines will add up fast. They've got a $thousand reasons to just come have a look at you! And, Bob? L&I's wrath will be a walk in the park compared to the IRS. But don't worry, Alcatraz is a museum now, they'll probably just send you to Lompoc or Leavenworth.

[RosyDaisy]

Oops....nevermind

[jerkit]

FUFJ: cm says in the most recent post that he "doesn't need a contractors license."

*waves again to robert*

[Loveday]

He's totes not reading here. :snooty:

[ViolaSebastian]

Maybe the woman who asked Lori about whether or not she should approach her husband about his desire to cheat on his taxes is Griddle Giggles... :think:

[church_of_dog]

FUFJ: cm says in the most recent post that he "doesn't need a contractors license."

*waves again to robert*

as for the whole contractor's license thing:

{L_MESSAGE_HIDDEN}:

I got nuthin, just messin' with him, trying to lure him to sign in to read... :lol: :whistle:

[Grimalkin]

He's totes not reading here. :snooty:

Maybe not, he is super duper speshul, and smart, and the all powerful OZ!

If he said he doesn't, I believe him, honest I do. He just really is THAT good, he can anticipate what we are going to say.

[lawfulevil]

Mmmhmm. Sure you don't, Cabinetman.

Am I the only one here rolling my eyes at how proud he is of having basically no qualifications? Not to mention his godawful kitchen cabinets. Well, the shoemaker's children, I guess. Potato chips >>> nice cabinets for Amanda.

And why DID you stop working in "luxury" homes, CM? I notice you didn't rebut my insurance musings.

ETA: It kind of defeats the point of tracking people by IP and scrubbing their posts and beating your chest about what a dominant leader manly man with a dominant leader manly blog you are if you and your entire cohort are just going to tromp through FJ and read what I said and whine about it. You might as well just allow open posting again. Dumbass.

[StellaMarie]

Question for cabinet boy: If a man is impotent, is he required to seek all available medical and surgical remedies so that he can fulfill his marital obligations and if he can't be fixed what recourse does his wife have? My recollection is that the verses so often quoted by CB and Ken mention that men have an obligation to their wives sexually as well as wives to husbands.

Well, docmom, 53% percent of so-called impotent men have un-submissive shrews for wives. The remaining 47% are married to women who don't rate a 5 or better on the attractiveness scale.

You're welcome. :lol: