Decriminilizing domestic violence

[JesusFightClub]

Normally hate commenting on this topic but I endorse fully what deelam and Kelya said.

I had a close (female) family member who was murdered by her (male) partner in a way I don't want to describe on this board. To this day the torment and destruction to our family is indescribable. It is not the same, though all DV is horrible. But show me the amount of men put in their graves by women and the amount of women put in their graves by men. I do not think the numbers will be the same.

[Sola]

You know, every day I get up, read FJ and become increasingly more thankful that I live in the UK.

This shit wants exposing. Surely the US has a national DV organisation which could expose this fuckwittery.

[FlorenceHamilton]

This fits perfectly into the Tea Party agenda. They scream and yell about being true to the constitution, but the agenda is far more insidious. It is about tearing the fabric if this country down to the barest of bones and replacing all the missing pieces with Biblical law.

Domestic violence is predominently against women and there is a subtext that part of the goal of the far right is to push women back into subjugation. Yes, men are sometimes also victims of DV. Removing the civil misdemeanor penalties will ultimately benefit these men as well (unless they are gay, in which case both partners will be put to death). The penalty for a woman to abuse a man will be Biblically criminal and death will be the punishment. Women will need to find a way to be more pleasing to their violent spouses because that is the way of the god.

These people are looking for a simple, airtight solution to complex problems. The whole fundamentalist thing is delusional. They think that pretending that the complex, varied, frustrating and dangerous world can be made safe an perfect is by creating this little fantasy bubble of perfect faith. These people are perpetual children. Like Peter Pan, they thing that if you just believe hard enough, you can make the bad people go away. And they will dehumanize and kill people to make them go away.

These folks are trying to push us back to the dark ages. The middle class is the enemy. There are privileged people who make all the rules and enjoy all of the advantages. And the rest of us who will serve them. Under penalty of biblical law. They are beating their children into a zombie-like state so that they have no ability to question or reason authority.

Protecting people from DV is part of the Liberal agenda. It is an outgrowth of Feminism and of Gay rights and of shining a light on something people do not wish to see. Make violence toward a man by his wife a crinimal offense and eliminate the misdemeanor for the women and the gays. Fits perfectly.

[debrand]

This honestly frightens me. It wasn't that long ago that it was considered impossible for men to rape their wives. Are people going to decide it is cheaper to allow spousal rape?

[Alecto]

Normally hate commenting on this topic but I endorse fully what deelam and Kelya said.

I had a close (female) family member who was murdered by her (male) partner in a way I don't want to describe on this board. To this day the torment and destruction to our family is indescribable. It is not the same, though all DV is horrible. But show me the amount of men put in their graves by women and the amount of women put in their graves by men. I do not think the numbers will be the same.

According to one study by the US Department of Justice, the numbers in spousal murder are a lot closer than you would think - 59% men versus 41% women.

http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/ascii/SPOUSFAC.TXT

[Patsy]

Among the defendants in the study, 59% were husbands and 41% were wives, including common-law and separated spouses, but not divorced couples.

In 44% of wife defendant cases, there was evidence the husband had assaulted the wife at the time of the killing. In 10% of husband defendant cases, evidence was present that the wife had assaulted the husband prior to the killing. Assaulted wives were convicted (by either guilty plea or trial verdict) 56% of the time. The comparable conviction rate for unprovoked wives was 86%; for unprovoked husbands, 88%.

"In many instances in which wives were charged with killing their husbands, the husband had assaulted the wife, and the wife then killed in self-defense," noted one of the report's authors, Patrick A. Langan, Senior Statistician at BJS. "That might explain why wives had a lower conviction rate than did husbands."

But I do find the 41% and 10% statistics surprising. I'm in a different area, but I daresay there would be some similarities here. For what it's worth, my perceptions of domestic violence and murder are not only based on common ideas and the media, so I'm not just going 'but on TV all the wives are perfect victims', or whatever. I hope this doesn't come out as victim blaming, but I do wonder, based on my own experience, if some number of that 10% were involved in cases of constant chaos and mutual abuse? ... I really don't know how to say that without sounding victim blaming, so I apologise in advance. All I can say is that again, that would be far more in line with my own experience.

[MonkeyMomma]

My deep thoughts:

1) Intimate partner violence is overwhelmingly a crime perpetrated by men against women, using violence as a tool in order to keep women "in their place." When I worked in a shelter, I saw this narrative over and over again, enough to convince me that there is a distinctly misogynistic (woman-hating) characteristic to it. And the fact that Topeka is even considering decriminalizing it shows that the city council is unashamed in its woman-hating.

2) That being said, there ARE men who suffer intimate partner violence. And there is a distinct lack of resources to help them. The anti-violence community MUST respond to this. It was terrible to work a DV line and have a man call, scared for himself and his kids, and to be at a complete loss for resources. Part of this is the nature of the funding (the Violence Against Women Act was a massive step forward and must be protected, but I would like to see more resources for ALL victims of intimate partner violence). This includes victims of same-sex intimate partner violence, who also often face a lack of resources. HOWEVER, this does not detract from the fact that the vast majority of intimate partner violence is male-on-female violence.

3) Yes, I'm in on pillaging Topeka if this nonsense passes.

[BlackHawk]

Right we can't mention ANY men who might be the victims of ANYTHING because a certain set of men are assholes. We can't mention ANY men who've been raped, beaten, victims of ANYTHING because THEY DON'T COUNT!!! This is why people think feminism is bad... because the feminist who scream the loudest are the ones who say this shit.

ANYONE can be a victim of dv. What Kansas is doing is playing into the tea party hands and honestly is sad for the people who live there. I hope and wish that something gets done about this.

(Edited to fix a word mistake (but to because))

[Alecto]

This includes victims of same-sex intimate partner violence, who also often face a lack of resources.

There are almost NO resources for same sex DV situations, especially in states where "roommate" isn't covered under DV laws. Many women in same sex violent relationships are forced to lie about the gender of their partner to shelters in order to get help.

The prevalence of domestic violence among Gay and Lesbian couples is approximately 25 - 33%.

Barnes, It's Just a Quarrel', American Bar Association Journal, February 1998, p. 25.

Battering among Lesbians crosses age, race, class, lifestyle and socio-economic lines.

Lobel, ed., Naming the Violence: Speaking Out About Lesbian Battering, 183 (1986).

Each year, between 50,000 and 100,000 Lesbian women and as many as 500,000 Gay men are battered.

Murphy, Queer Justice: Equal Protection for Victims of Same-Sex Domestic Violence, 30 Valparaiso University Law Review. 335 (1995).

While same-sex battering mirrors heterosexual battering both in type and prevalence, its victims receive fewer protections.

Barnes, It's Just a Quarrel', American Bar Association Journal, February 1998, p. 24.

Seven states define domestic violence in a way that specifically excludes same-sex victims. States with sodomy laws basically require same-sex victims to confess to a crime in order to prove they are in a domestic relationship.

Barnes, It's Just a Quarrel', American Bar Association Journal, February 1998, p. 24.

[emmiedahl]

I have heard of areas with a large gay population setting up domestic violence programs just for gay men because the beaten partner has nowhere to go; they are not female and cannot get services at the local women's shelter. I lived in a women's shelter as a child for a few months, so I can tell you that this is a good idea because the women there were very cagey about men in general. All the staff were female for a reason.

I think the real issue here is not the decriminalization of misdemeanors; it is that domestic violence is a misdemeanor at all!!! A misdemeanor is like petty theft or shoplifting or having some weed in your purse; attacking a family member is much more serious.

dh and I were discussing this and we thought it might be a good idea to lighten up on nonviolent misdemeanors. Like, who cares if someone has a small amount of marijuana? And in misdemeanor DUI cases, the person involved was clearly not deterred by the possibility of arrest. But assault is different, we have the right to be protected from people beating us!

To the person who is glad they live in the UK: be glad you live in the UK and you aren't Muslim, considering that this is going on: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/commen ... 749183.ece

[Swamptribe]

Just because men are less often the victims of domestic violence does not make them less worthy of protection and understanding. To even suggest that because they are a minority they are to be dismissed is horrifying. Dehumanizing the victims because the are male is disgusting. ANY victim of domestic violence deserves equal protection under the law and by society.

[deelaem]

Having known a male victim who was as stuck as any female I disagree. Domestic violence is never OK, whether the victim is male or female, the perp male or female. It exists in the heterosexual world and the gay/lesbian world. It's never OK.

Oh dear, you've got me laughing my ass off here! Of course you know a male victim, because as we all know you always know someone who does something that applies to your point. However, anecdotal evidence does not an argument make.

LynnKaboom, I'd love to see that kind of righteous anger directed at the actual perpetrators of violence against women. :roll:

[emmiedahl]

I think many people have known male victims of domestic violence. I have. This is not imo anecdata, but relevant collective experience.

[Boogalou]

If they're decriminalizing all misdemeanors, then that means shoplifting is technically legal.

WHO WANTS TO GO ON A STUFF-STEALING SPREE IN TOPEKA?!

Actually, that means a lot of stuff is technically legal, not just domestic violence and shoplifting. What about driving over the speed limit? And littering? And a whole bunch of other things I can't think of at the moment?

That's a good idea. After the spree you can sell all the stuff on the black market and give the money to city council or whoever is in charge of this shit to start prosecuting domestic violence again.

At some point raising taxes has to be a better option than cutting services. THIS is that point.

[Deleted03]

I did not say anything in Lina'S thread first coz I had decided to stop responding but because I am one of those feminists who thinks that feminists have to stop focusing only on women. Because we don'T address men's problems - domestic violence, suicide, drop out of school, etc - in a feminist way we leave the door wide open for masculinist people or VF and cie to come in and give their own meaning to what is happenning.

For me this is just part of understanding gender roles and stop always focusing on victimization. Because we'Re so focused on that we can't recognize other victims and that's just problematic.

But that is a debate (emerging one) in feminist circles, not all feminist agree at all, and Ive been given crap about my positions too.

[CanadianHippie]

I think many people have known male victims of domestic violence. I have. This is not imo anecdata, but relevant collective experience.

This. NurseNell may not be the most palatable of individuals, but in this case she makes a good point.

[Alecto]

This. NurseNell may not be the most palatable of individuals, but in this case she makes a good point.

I think the "Half a million gay men are abused" cited statistic I posted earlier isn't anecdotal...

And I agree, this is not a "think of the poor men" but addressing a very serious issue, and it would be better to address it from a positive, pro-feminist POV than to allow misogynistic groups to co-opt it for their own gains.

[CanadianHippie]

I think the "Half a million gay men are abused" cited statistic I posted earlier isn't anecdotal...

And I agree, this is not a "think of the poor men" but addressing a very serious issue, and it would be better to address it from a positive, pro-feminist POV than to allow misogynistic groups to co-opt it for their own gains.

And better than letting those same misogynistic groups go around shouting "See the feminists don't think violence against men is important enough, they said so right here! 'Who cares about the male victims when there are female victims out there!'"

And you're right, actual stats aren't anecdotal. But the other side being discussed here, those people generally brush off those stats by saying "still there are more women".

[Austin]

I'm betting we can all agree that domestic violence in all its forms and demographics of victims is horrible and should be stopped and that de-criminalizing it or refusing to prosecute it is a REALLY bad idea.

[Deleted03]

and also there are many women in lesbian couples that are victim of domestic violence and because of a certain heteronormativity of services for domestic violence, can't find enough help for them (and then you also have to see that the groups that do provide help actually have no idea about other cultural groups and only cater to white middle class lesbians - true experience).

and I'm for the shop lifting! :P and then we're not paying stupid elected people who could not care less about those that can't afford a personal bodyguard 24/7!

[CanadianHippie]

I'm betting we can all agree that domestic violence in all its forms and demographics of victims is horrible and should be stopped and that de-criminalizing it or refusing to prosecute it is a REALLY bad idea.

That's what I'm telling myself... If only because I don't like to admit there are people out there who don't think domestic violence is bad.

[JesusFightClub]

I'm betting we can all agree that domestic violence in all its forms and demographics of victims is horrible and should be stopped and that de-criminalizing it or refusing to prosecute it is a REALLY bad idea.

Yes, totally this.

The one thing I asked specifically however (not to you directly of course) was how many women are in their graves due to men attacking them and how many men are in their graves due to women attacking them. I am prepared to bet there's a huge differential and it's not women killing men.

All victims of domestic violence need help and support. But pretending the aggressors aren't mostly men isn't actually helpful. There's a huge difference between saying that and saying male victims should get no help or shouldn't be mentioned.

I thought Deelaem's point was not "who cares about men" but "this crime disproportionally affects women, do we have to say that men suffer too in order to be taken seriously?"

When my relative died at the hands of her partner, her wounds were extremely serious and extensive with the exception of her face which was also attacked but recognisable. The cops were kind and swaddled her in a sheet.

The horror of this is indescribable and one of my main goals for life now is to campaign for greater awareness.If your partner hits you just once, they will again. My relative had been hit before and she still kept thinking she could fix him. Until the day she died in agony.

Sorry for ranting on, Austin! I totally agree with you. I just feel the need to say two things...one, it is mostly men who kill women, and two, DV is a horror there are not words for no matter who is responsible.

[Austin]

Rant away! :D

I listen to CNN while I'm getting ready in the morning, and there was talk this morning about breast cancer and how breast cancer strikes women more, but men get breast cancer, too, and then went on to describe the ways that men should be checking for this.

I thought about that when I started reading this post. Both genders can get breast cancer and we should be working and researching to eradicate it in everyone, even though most breast cancer sufferers are women.

Now I'm just using this as a general analogy. I have not googled the statistics, as that is not really the point. My point is that when a horrible thing afflicts people of either gender, we should, as a society, stand against it in all its forms.

[BlackHawk]

All victims of domestic violence need help and support. But pretending the aggressors aren't mostly men isn't actually helpful. There's a huge difference between saying that and saying male victims should get no help or shouldn't be mentioned.

I thought Deelaem's point was not "who cares about men" but "this crime disproportionally affects women, do we have to say that men suffer too in order to be taken seriously?"

The article snipet posted did not say WOMEN WOMEN WOMEN... the snipet spoke about DV victims. To state a man can experience DV as well does not make the claim more valid or less valid. It seems that any type of crime only matters if it is against women. And to even state a man CAN have the crime committed against him throws people in a tizzy. No one is saying that women are not the statistically higher victims of dv. No one is saying that women don't matter. But to throw something out like "Men can be victimized too" does not make you anti woman. It makes you anti dv.

Why is no one blowing up that some people around here have no sympathy for a dv victim period? Male or female? Why is that not an issue? How is that any different than me, as a man, saying I have no sympathy for a woman who has been attacked? It's not. Human's should care about humans, period. If I posted on here saying that women have thousands of options to remove themselves from a DV situation and men have none, thus I have no sympathy for women victims, how would you respond to me? Because women have options men don't have in some cases, the most notable is a place to go when it happens.

But I don't say that. Why? Because to me it doesn't matter. DV is a crime that should not be a misdemeanor for anyone. Violence against another human being should be criminalized, I don't care who was the attacker or who was the victim.

(edited to add in the word IS in a sentence.)

[JesusFightClub]

Um, who here has "no sympathy for a DV victim period"?

As for teh wimmens and their thousands of options compared to poor oppressed men, DV victims have really complicated mindsets. My relative grew up seeing her dad beating her mum and then when her dad left, her brother took on the mum beating role. When she was beaten in her turn, that was normal for her. The partner who beat her and eventually killed her had witnessed his father beat his mother for most of his childhood.

Like you can just walk away if you have a pair of tits and it is a completely uncomplicated decision.