About these ads

Men’s Rights Redditors angry that reality is reality. (Murder statistics edition.)

Over on the Men’s Rights subreddit, mgriff2k4 is angry that the picture to the right here showed up on his computer screen. Sorry, make that fucking angry. “Did this really just fucking pop up on my news feed?” he asks in the title of his post, adding in a comment: “sorry about the word “fucking” but im really pissed off about this.”

Why is he angry? Presumably, he assumes the statistic is untrue, and that it unfairly paints men as evil murderers.

Luckily, in this Age of the Internet it is trivially easy to find out whether statistics like this are true. It involves something called “Google.” mgriff2k4 did not bother to avail himself of this easy-to-use research tool.

But I did. In less than 5 minutes, I confirmed that this factoid is indeed true, at least according to the most recent figures on gender and homicide found on the Department of Justice’s web site, drawn from FBI data covering the years from 1976-2005. According to the FBI, 30% of women who are murdered are murdered by “intimates.” Roughly 20% are killed by husbands or ex-husbands; 10% by boyfriends or girlfriends. (In the overwhelming majority of cases the murderers are boyfriends, not girlfriends; men are ten times more likely to commit murder than women.)

While four times as many men are murdered than women, only 5% of murdered men are killed by “intimates.” Men kill women more than twice as often as women kill men. Women suffer far more serious injuries from domestic violence than men do; so it is not altogether unexpected that they are also far more likely to be murdered by intimates.

If you want to see what this means on a human level, I suggest you take a look at the excellent if depressing web site Domestic Violence Crime Watch, which links to stories in which men are the perpetrators, and in which men are the victims. There are far more of those in the former category than in the latter.

I should note that (as of this writing) one commenter in the thread also found his way to the DOJ site, and noted that men were more likely to be killed by strangers or acquaintances. But he didn’t bother to tell mkgriff2k4 that the sign in the picture was in fact accurate.

About these ads

Posted on June 29, 2012, in antifeminism, domestic violence, misogyny, MRA, oppressed men, reddit, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink. 668 Comments.

  1. @hellkell & cloudiah

    True dat. I should know better than to expect human decency from Owly.

  2. Or the inaction of not placing my life on the line to save the massah.

    Do you get how racist, in addition to plain old stupid, it is to say that while you’re exercising your free speech in your private home while enjoying a nice day off?

    Go ahead and tell me how many of those things actual, non-self-pitying-metaphor slaves got–or get–to enjoy.

  3. Have you fine ladies seen what’s included in the mandatory obamacare package? It’s like some totally fine communist/feminist work. It is brilliant. Every man will be a criminal in nothing flat. This’ll be part of your Intimate Partner Violence Screening, which’ll be part of you yearly or whatever check up.

    http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/draftrec2.htm

    So I looked at just one of the many way’s women will be checked and questioned about IPV. HITS I was able to access.

    http://www.orchd.com/violence/documents/HITS_eng.pdf

    There are 4 categories

    How often does your partner?
    Never = 1
    Rarely = 2
    Sometimes =3
    Fairly often =4
    Frequently =5

    1. Physically hurt you O O O O O
    2. Insult or talk down to you O O O O O
    3. Threaten you with harm O O O O O
    4. Scream or curse at you O O O O O

    Each item is scored from 1-5, A score of greater than 10 is considered positive.

    So for the four questions even if a woman answers never on all of them a man has a default number of “4” So from a starting position of total defferment to a woman, never talking back, never raising ones voice, never cursing. Nothing. A man is already 40% guilty. Never = 1, 4 questions = 40% on his way to 100% guilty. Pretty skeevy shit, huh?

    So say you go in for your yearly exam and you’re asked the questions. Now keep in mind it doesn’t ask or care if you started it or it was mutual, it’s just did “he” do any of the above.

    So we’ll say, as in all relationships there are rocky patches there was one fight during the year. So physical hurting is rarely, that’s a 2. You hurt him as well, but that doesn’t matter.

    Insult or talk down, you innocently answer, “sometimes” that’s a 3.

    Threaten with harm, you regail them with a tale about how he said, “sometimes I could just slap you” It was all hot air and you laughed about it. That’s a 2.

    Scream or curse at you. Well you gals were just bragging the other day about sayin fuckity, fuck, fuck. So you say yeah, whenever he gets mad he says fuck a lot. that’ll be fairly often. That’s a 4.

    2+3+2+4=11. Guilty! Guilty! Guilty! Hubby/boyfriend is going to at least anger management, maybe prison or a little cooling off in the big house. He hates you now by the way and will certainly never trust you again.

    That’s the one I could access, there’s many more of these tests on top of that. Here’s what’s going to happen. Women who are genuinely abused will answer never to all questions for fear of losing and/or angering hubby/boyfriend. A woman might flippantly say he curses all the time which is a 5 and also insults sometimes is a 3. Threat of violence and actual violence are nevers, which is still a 2, (1+1). that’s a 10. Guilty.

    Men aren’t going to know their girlfriend/wife in no way had any intention of accusing him of DV. In fact that was the farthest thing from her mind. What they will know is that they were arrested for DV and their wife/girlfriend did it. They will never trust her again, and they’ll begin to see all women as distrustful.

    How’s that law workin out for you gals now? Men are 40% guilty out of the gate. I shudder to think what the rest of the tests involve, or the line of questioning. Tell me again how feminism isn’t a hate movement. All these questionaires came from womens organizations. So where can the blame go?

  4. So I’d like to amend last night’s numbers discussion to say that the 3:2 ratio actually is completely useless, thanks to an absolutely huge amount of rounding error. Even the 2:1 we came up with is badly off; using the actual raw numbers, it’s even more than 3:1.

    It seems John is gone, but just in case, a couple things for him: first, regarding the rape stats you’ve brought up a couple times, you’re being disingenuous. You’re probably being intentionally disingenuous, but just in case you’re just parroting the MRA talking point without examining it, the problem is that you’re entirely ignoring the lifetime numbers because they don’t say what you want them to, and acting like the 12 month numbers are the only ones that are relevant. If you’d like to try to explain why that should be the case, be my guest.

    And regarding the custody thing, it is, in fact, a problem that men think they can’t get custody when they want it, and so don’t try to fight for it. If that is indeed why so few men try to get custody, it’s a real issue. But the MRM is making it worse by helping to convince those men that they don’t have a chance in the first place. As others have said, they could actually make a real difference by fighting that misconception rather than spreading it. But because the MRM is a reactionary movement against feminism, rather than an actual civil rights movement, they won’t bother because it doesn’t further their real goals.

  5. @Cliff Pervocracy
    “Go ahead and tell me how many of those things actual, non-self-pitying-metaphor slaves got–or get–to enjoy.”

    I don’t know. But neither does anyone whose alive have first hand knowlege. Do you have first hand knowlege? I’m closer to slavery than you think, ancestrywise anyway. My father, as a boy and his entire family was sold into indetured servitude to a texas farmer for five years for the boatride over from war torn Europe. My mothers side was more of the same although from WWI. As far as I know, I come from a long line of peasant farmers who were continually oppressed.

    Aaaaaaaand, I’m the only one here who isn’t a racist. The prevailing consensus here might be that it’s just ducky to ridicule white men, but that’s still racism. Also, placing ones own lineage as being untouchable to criticism is supremacy and racist.

    So you see, I come from a long line of indentured serfs. As far as I know, the most powerful ancestors I have are a bunch of failed beet farmers from some poverty stricken area of central eastern Europe working as sharecroppers for some communist usurper.

  6. @PsychoDan
    “So I’d like to amend last night’s numbers discussion to say that the 3:2 ratio actually is completely useless, thanks to an absolutely huge amount of rounding error. Even the 2:1 we came up with is badly off; using the actual raw numbers, it’s even more than 3:1.”

    Well, when one half of the population is privileged and the other half is punished that’s what’ll happen. Note my above post about IPV and Obamacare. Men are 40% guilty from the word go. Women are 0% guilty and stay that way. This will definitely be the final nail in the feminist/communist coffin for the good old USSA.

  7. Men are 40% guilty out of the gate.

    Credit where it’s due: 4/10 is 40%.

  8. Unimaginative

    “Physically hurt you; insult or talk down to you; threaten you with harm; scream or curse at you” are all abusive behaviours. They are not the same things as “total defferment to a woman, never talking back, never raising ones voice, never cursing.”

    Can you really not imagine interacting with another human being without being a complete asshole OR a complete doormat?

    What is wrong with you?

    And I’ve seen this kind of survey before. It may say a score of 10 is a sign of problems, but it probably also says something like a score of 4 is a sign of a healthy relationship.

  9. “As far as I know, I come from a long line of peasant farmers who were continually oppressed.”

    Being oppressed by poverty and being oppressed for the color of your skin are not the same thing. Imagine being discriminated against for your race, then forced to endure excrutiating poverty on top of that.

    Not every white male in the history of the world lived a privileged life atop a mountain of silk cushions, I think we all know that. But most were and are far better off than minorities, poor or not. Yes, people can be racist against whites. But whites do not have to endure institutional racism, because the institution is white. Seeing your precious privilege diminish does not equal oppression.

    I’m not even well read or an expert on race but I at least know that much.

  10. And it is possible to have an argument or disagreement with your partner without yelling, insulting them, hitting them, or threatening them. I don’t think NWO has any idea what a healthy relationship looks like, or if there even is such a thing.

  11. Each item is scored from 1-5, A score of greater than 10 is considered positive.

    So for the four questions even if a woman answers never on all of them a man has a default number of “4″ So from a starting position of total defferment to a woman, never talking back, never raising ones voice, never cursing. Nothing. A man is already 40% guilty. Never = 1, 4 questions = 40% on his way to 100% guilty. Pretty skeevy shit, huh?

    NWO, I wish you were my high school math teacher.

    …Wait, no, considering how you get about high school girls (I wore very whorish t-shirts and jeans), no, I take that back.

    I don’t know. But neither does anyone whose alive have first hand knowlege. Do you have first hand knowlege?

    Is he… is he trying to deny slavery? Is this like the Holocaust denial thing but even more… whaaa? This is some next-level shit.0

    I’m closer to slavery than you think, ancestrywise anyway. My father, as a boy and his entire family was sold into indetured servitude to a texas farmer for five years for the boatride over from war torn Europe.

    Your father was a white indentured servant in the 1940s???

    I mean, it’s not like impossible, human trafficking certainly still happens to this day, but, um. Yeah. Um.

  12. 2+3+2+4=11. Guilty! Guilty! Guilty! Hubby/boyfriend is going to at least anger management, maybe prison or a little cooling off in the big house.

    I like how NWO-land every little self-test or illustration or website about domestic violence is literally a law.

  13. Oh, and y’know, racism against black people is technically still a form of racism. I know racism against white people gets all the press, but let’s not forget the other kinds.

  14. Aaaaaaaand, I’m the only one here who isn’t a racist. The prevailing consensus here might be that it’s just ducky to ridicule white men, but that’s still racism. Also, placing ones own lineage as being untouchable to criticism is supremacy and racist.

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAH! “I’m the only one that isn’t racist because I never say racist shit about White people”!! Of course people here don’t denigrate White people as a race, but your victim complex’ll never understand that anyways.

  15. Unimaginative

    Maybe Slavey thinks that the only slaves ever were the black ones who were technically emancipated after the US civil war. Maybe he’s completely unaware of the slaves who exist in the world today.

  16. NWO has some balls to claim he’s close to slavery. NWO, you are a lying liar who lies.

  17. Owly knows how to search, he just doesn’t know how to interpret what he finds.

    Scores on the HITS questionnaire range from 4-20, but only scores greater than 10 are considered cause for concern. In other words, if you score from 4 to 10, the relationship is not identified as abusive. Just to make Owly’s brain explode, a score of 10 out of a possible 20 is 100% innocent of IPV not 50% guilty! (I know, that makes no sense, but I wanted to throw him a bone.)

    It’s a pretty rough diagnostic tool. A person could therefore report that their partner fairly often hurts them (4) AND fairly often threatens them with harm (4), but if they also report that they never insult (1) or scream (1) at them — Yahtzee! It’s not an abusive relationship. Of course normally those behaviors tend to occur in concert, which is why it is considered a reasonably effective screening test.

    What interventions are recommended when a screening indicates there MAY be abuse? The answer is in one of Owly’s links:

    Evidence from randomized trials support a variety of interventions, including counseling, home visits, referrals to community services, and mentoring support for women of childbearing age. Depending on the type of intervention, these services may be provided by clinicians, nurses, social workers, nonclinician mentors, or community workers. Counseling generally includes information on safety behaviors and community resources. In addition to counseling, home visits may include emotional support, education on problem solving strategies, and parenting support. One study used a 20-minute nurse case management protocol focusing on a safety plan, supportive care, and guided referrals. No intervention studies were identified for elderly or vulnerable adults. See below for suggestions for practice in this population.

    You know what things are NOT recommended as interventions?

    Hubby/boyfriend is going to at least anger management, maybe prison or a little cooling off in the big house.

    I do not know why this recommendation is limited to women of childbearing age, especially since it is not a costly screening. I can’t think of any reason not to extend the screening and interventions to men. Even if women suffer more serious health risks than men do from IPV, men do suffer too. Oh, but wait — Owly isn’t in favor of extending health care to men, since that would be big, bad government taking care of people. What he IS in favor of is denying it to women. My bad! Carry on.

  18. Unimaginative, don’t forget white indentured servants to texas farmers in the 1940’s like NWO’s father.

  19. @Unimaginative
    “Physically hurt you; insult or talk down to you; threaten you with harm; scream or curse at you” are all abusive behaviours. They are not the same things as “total defferment to a woman, never talking back, never raising ones voice, never cursing.”

    Several problems exist.
    1) it’s mandatory. The question is why? There’s no reason other than to stir up trouble where none existed.
    2) it’s a one way street. Only women are tested and there’s many more tests I’ve yet to even see.
    3) Since the rules are dictated by the State, what’s to stop the State from adding another line/s of questions?
    Example; Destruction of property, throws vase.
    Example; Makes light of your opinion.
    Example; Assumes authority over situations.

    A line/s of questioning have been added, yet the same criteria remains the same. Who can challenge? The rules are dictated. Now a man might be at 50%, 60% or 70% guilt out of the gate.

    Insults are not violence.
    Talking down to is not violence.
    Cursing is not violence.
    Even threats are not violence.

    By the very criteria laid out everyone of you is guilty of DV against me. Everyone of you have cursed at me frequently and talked down to me and insulted me frequently. 5 + 5 + 1 +1 = 12. If the criteria used can determine guilt of DV for people who have never even seen each other how can it ever be used to dictate actual violence?

    If no actual violence has taken place between any of us, then no violence has taken place between couples.

    There are five more sections to these question’s that will be mandatory for your yearly check up. If they’re as bad as this one, entire States will have to be turned into concentration camps to hold all the men.

  20. Argenti Aertheri

    John —

    “I’m not disputing the 150% number at all. I hope I didn’t leave that impression. My question was how equal do the numbers have to be before something becomes gender neutral. Do they have to be dead even? Let’s look at the CDC stats between rape and forced to penetrate. Let’s assume that the numbers are equal (1.27 vs 1.267) for math’s sake. We can even factor out that about 20% of the forced to penetrate is a male perpetrator (I know that genders it, but indulge me), we would get a ratio of 5:4. 55% to 45% if you’re looking at percentages of a whole. What about 40% and 60%?”

    Did you read that statistical analysis I did for Arks? The one looking at that very data and explaining why you can’t use 12-month data? Here’s an analogy, you can’t look at 12-month data and determine whether a region is polio free, the region needs to have had 0 cases of polio for a full 12 months to get a tentative “probably”, iirc it’s 5 years to be declared definitely for sure polio free — because anomalous years happen. It’d be like determining the national SAT average from the scores of one graduating class, at one school, it just doesn’t work, statistics do not generalize like that. Which is also why you have to use only “forced to penetrate” and not “rape” for the male victims — there were not enough cases of male rape in those 12-months to do statistics on. But hey, noting that we’re again excluding male rape victims because we want to talk about a specific type of male rape, let’s do some math!

    Female rape victims, 12-month data — 1,270,000 // 5.6%
    Male “made to penetrate” (rape) victims, 12-month data — 1,267,000 // 1.1%

    No, you can not fucking round, because “Rounded to the nearest thousand.” — they already did. We’ve had enough rounding errors without intentionally inducing more. Yes the raw numbers are similar, but you need to use the weighted percents because I don’t have a fucking clue what percent of the student participants were female, it appears to be many more than were male though.

    If female, chance of being raped in those 12 months = 5.6%
    If male, chance of being forced to penetrate in those 12 months = 1.1%
    If male, chance of being raped, by CDC definition, in those 12 months = 0, because the 12 month data is too small a sample.

    What were you arguing again? Something ignoring half of what the CDC said on the same page as those numbers? But let’s factor this by gender of perpetrator anyways.

    “For female rape victims, 98.1% reported only male perpetrators.”
    “For three of the other forms of sexual violence, a majority of male victims reported only female perpetrators: being made to penetrate (79.2%),”

    98.1% of 5.6% = .981 * .056 = 0.054936 = 5.5%~
    79.2% of 1.1% = .792 * .011 = 0.008712 = 0.9%~

    If female, chance of being raped in those 12 months by a man = 5.5%~
    If male, chance of being raped in those 12 months by a woman = 0.9%~

    That’s just over a 6x risk, as in, women raped by men : men raped by women = 6:1. Any other ways you’d like to try breaking the CDC data? The rate the MRM misuses these numbers I’m going to end up memorizing them.

    “Are those number close enough to say that it is a societal problem and not one related to gender or does it still have to be gender related? Since women make up 20% of murder victims, isn’t violence a men’s issue and not a women’s issue? Personally, I think it’s everyone’s issue.”

    Those numbers are made up, so no. Regarding the latter question, if you weren’t battling straw feminists, you might’ve noticed we’re generally against all violence — and certainly against the idea that men must prove themselves and never back down from a fight (that’s part of why the male homicide rate is so much higher, stupid fights getting out of control).

    Seriously, what about having nudie pics on her computer makes your ex-sister-in-law an unfit parent? Questionably fit since the kid found them, but most of us have walked in on our parents doing it, and after a brief “omgs, need eye bleach!” we’ve survived. You, as the parent, take better steps to prevent it from happening again — not really the same as if she’d, idk, set a nudie pic to the desktop background.

    NWO —

    Oi, you fail reading today.

    1. Physically hurt you O O O O O
    2. Insult or talk down to you O O O O O
    3. Threaten you with harm O O O O O
    4. Scream or curse at you O O O O O

    If I called you an asshole unworthy of the time of day, that’d be a sometimes on 4; if I drop a hammer on my foot and yell FUCK! that would not. (And no, I did not just call you an asshole, not any more than I just dropped a hammer on my foot, which I did not)

    “Hubby/boyfriend is going to at least anger management, maybe prison or a little cooling off in the big house. He hates you now by the way and will certainly never trust you again.”

    Where, pray tell, do you get the impression that this is to be used for more than offering the victim counseling? That’s what “…and provide or refer women who screen positive to intervention services.” means.

    Evidence from randomized trials support a variety of interventions, including counseling, home visits, referrals to community services, and mentoring support for women of childbearing age. Depending on the type of intervention, these services may be provided by clinicians, nurses, social workers, nonclinician mentors, or community workers. Counseling generally includes information on safety behaviors and community resources. In addition to counseling, home visits may include emotional support, education on problem solving strategies, and parenting support. One study used a 20-minute nurse case management protocol focusing on a safety plan, supportive care, and guided referrals. No intervention studies were identified for elderly or vulnerable adults. See below for suggestions for practice in this population.

    Read that, twice, then get back to me on where it even implies he’d be told, forget arrested.

    Unimaginative —

    “And I’ve seen this kind of survey before. It may say a score of 10 is a sign of problems, but it probably also says something like a score of 4 is a sign of a healthy relationship.”

    It says neither really, what it does say is —

    Results: For phase one, Cronbach’s alpha was .80 for the HITS scale. The correlation of HITS and CTS scores was .85. For phase two, the mean HITS scores for office patients and abuse victims were 6.13 and 15.15, respectively. Optimal data analysis revealed that a cut score of 10.5 on the HITS reliably differentiated respondents in the two groups. Using this cut score, 91% of patients and 96% of abuse victims were accurately classified.

    In non-geek, that means the average office patient scored 6.13, while the average abuse victim (as ID’ed with another measure) scored 15.15; and that using 10 as a cut-off score has 90%+ valid predictive value. NWO’s arguing about a 9% false positive risk ruining all men everywhere in other words.

    Shadow — “You’ll have better luck arguing with goldfish Owly if you’re looking for a blank slate for every post you make” — no he won’t, fish are subject to conditioning like most species, if he taps their tank they’ll start fearing the sit of him. (Contra, if you have treats in a neon red container, they’ll react to neon red like it’s treat time, too cute!)

    Hippodameia — “MISANDRY also seems to involve properly understanding math, as this thread’s repeatedly demonstrated.” — that appears correct, yes.

    In other news, India’s hit the 12-month polio free mark, so fingers crossed! (And Angola is 3 days shy of doing the same! Progress, it is being had)

  21. One thing I love about this blog is how often it causes me to look shit up. Unlike Owly, I actually read it.

    Indentured servitude pretty much ended in the U.S. by 1840, and was outlawed in the rest of the Americas in 1917. The Rise and Fall of Indentured Servitude in the Americas: An Economic Analysis (JSTOR)
    See also The End of European Immigrant Servitude in the United States: An Economic Analysis of Market Collapse, 1772-1835 (JSTOR)

  22. CassandraSays

    “So we’ll say, as in all relationships there are rocky patches there was one fight during the year. So physical hurting is rarely, that’s a 2. You hurt him as well, but that doesn’t matter. ”

    It really is sad that Slavey thinks that a physical fight that leads to some sort of physical pain/injury is a normal part of every relationship and can be assumed to be happening at least once a year.

  23. @cloudiah
    “I can’t think of any reason not to extend the screening and interventions to men.”

    I can. Why would I want any woman given a criminal record or possibly imprisoned for cursing, screaming or insulting? There’s a petition to do exactly that, have men screened as well. I certainly won’t sign that. It’s a joke. Imagine how easily and frequently it’ll be abused. Man/woman cheats or somehow infuriates the other party. You tell me what’ll happen.
    —————
    @Cliff Pervocracy
    “Oh, and y’know, racism against black people is technically still a form of racism.”

    And show me anywhere where I’ve ever said anything against black people. You forget where I grew up princess. We all hung out together. I was lucky to be able to crawl outta that shithole know as Philadelphia about 10 or so years ago. Just cause the rest you people grew up in cracker country and all you know about the ghetto is from the communist network news doesn’t mean shit. Did you see a black person in national geographic once? What a joke you people are.
    —————
    “Your father was a white indentured servant in the 1940s???”

    That’s right princess, lot’s of people got over here that way. All you little college girls act like your so wise and worldly and educated. You live in little guilded cages immune to the sightest hardship of life. So much so that you consider a slight to your precious feelings unbearable. Oh golly, did a man you deem unworthy try to speak to you? Did a, “partner” dare to disreguard you most valued opinion. DV! DV! DV!
    —————
    You’re all so blind and stupid as you lead each other around patting yourselves on the back at your acceptance of everything that falls into your narrow, misguided, genderless utopia.

    Why not write some more policy, you’ve been doing a bang up job so far. Are there more poor or less poor? Is education better? Is anything better than it was 40 years ago? Fuck no. So every policy you gals have lobbied to have enacted were exactly the wrong thing to do. Guess what these policies are? The exact wrong thing to do. There isn’t one policy women have lobbied for that hasn’t fucked everything up. Not one damn thing.

  24. Sad and dare I say it… creepy? Because that is pretty creepy. Physically hurting people you’re in a relationship with is not cool.

  25. @Argenti Aertheri

    First off, you’re on the wrong link. That page in no way translates to the punishment, which isn’t stated what it’ll be on the HITS site. I know you believe everything the State tells you but sometimes they lie by ommision.

    If a man says to a woman, “you stupid bitch, sometimes I just feel like fucking slapping you.” It’s an insult, a curse and an implied threat, (haha). Which makes it a threefer. Items 2, 3, and 4, yet no actual violence has taken place.

    “And how often does boyfriend act like this?” The nurse asks. “Oh all the time,” she replies. Does she curse? Does she insult? Does she flippantly say she’d like to slap him? It doesn’t matter. Do you notice a slight discrepancy in the power dynamic. The woman has carte blanche to ridicule, insult, scream, curse and even hit. The man can only cower and never even raise his voice. She is backed by the guns of the State.

    A woman can never be guilty under this plan, only a man. Do you find this equitable?

  26. My relationship has rocky patches! Like sometimes we have angry words or we get sulky at each other for a couple days. Probably once or twice a year we really yell.

    Physically attacking is way the fuck beyond “rocky.”

  27. @Argenti Aertheri

    “Results: For phase one, Cronbach’s alpha was .80 for the HITS scale. The correlation of HITS and CTS scores was .85. For phase two, the mean HITS scores for office patients and abuse victims were 6.13 and 15.15, respectively. Optimal data analysis revealed that a cut score of 10.5 on the HITS reliably differentiated respondents in the two groups. Using this cut score, 91% of patients and 96% of abuse victims were accurately classified.”

    This means nothing. They dictated what constitutes their version of an, “abuse victim.” So the list they have, which they can add to at their discrection, since their making the rules, can be anything at all. Insulting someone is not abuse, it is not violence.

    Everyone of you has insulted me. Has everyone of you been violent to me? No!!!!!!!!! Insults are not violence. Curses are not violence. Raised vioces are not violence. Disagreements are not violence. Violence is violence. Hurt feelings do not constitute being a victim of violence. The only line of any relevance in that test is have you been hit. Nothing else is violence. Grow up.

  28. Given that Slavey has said (I think?) that he was engaged, he’s basically admitting he beat his fiancée here.

  29. It really is sad that Slavey thinks that a physical fight that leads to some sort of physical pain/injury is a normal part of every relationship and can be assumed to be happening at least once a year.

    Seriously. That line was jaw-dropping, even from him. What the fuck.

    NWO, I laugh at you fairly often, but this one just isn’t funny. Healthy relationships do not involve anyone hitting anyone else in anger. Not once a year. Not once a decade. Not EVER. All relationships do have “rocky patches,” but in healthy relationships, a “rocky patch” means things like saying, “you are really getting on my nerves right now,” or “I am frustrated and need some space,” or maybe even, “I’m pretty pissed off at you, and I think you’re being a jerk.” Please get help if you honestly believe a “rough patch” in a relationship can and should entail hitting your partner.

  30. Argenti Aertheri

    NWO —

    You’re particularly cranky today, can I interest you in some tea? It can be iced if it’s too damned hot for hot tea.

    “Even threats are not violence.” — they aren’t legal, and can certainly be a part of verbal abuse. DV includes verbal abuse, please try to remember that.

    “If no actual violence has taken place between any of us, then no violence has taken place between couples.”

    None of us have threatened you, and more importantly, none of us have a damned clue where you are, so we couldn’t actually harm you. And further, there’s absolutely nothing forcing you to keep commenting here — do we need to start some sort of “cannot stop trolling anonymous” or something?

    “Now a man might be at 50%, 60% or 70% guilt out of the gate.”

    It really, really, doesn’t work like that, google Beck’s Depression Inventory, now does a score of 3/4ths the cutoff mean you’re 75% depressed? No, no it doesn’t, you can’t just add percentage signs because the cutoff is 10 and 10*10=100, that’s not how percentages work. (Now, if you want to keep digging, you can probably find an analysis of all scores with graph showing the breakdown, and then see where 70% of men actually fall) Ah, a simple example, 100 is the average IQ, 70 is 70% average then? 130 is 130% average? No, both of those are 2 standard deviations from the mean, meaning about 2.1% of people have IQs <70 and another 2.1% have IQs >130. You can’t just convert the raw score into a percent.

    Would the MRM please offer a basic statistics course already? You don’t even need to teach how to find the SD, just tech what it is.

    “First off, you’re on the wrong link. That page in no way translates to the punishment, which isn’t stated what it’ll be on the HITS site. I know you believe everything the State tells you but sometimes they lie by ommision.”

    I checked both your links, there was absolutely no mention of anything happening to the partner of the surveyed. Instead, as I expected, there was talk of counseling and other such interventions for the surveyed, if the surveying produces a score consistent with abuse. You can insult me all you like, it won’t change that all that time spent sitting in psych classes learning this shit — no intervention with the abuser is going to be mandated because of the risk to the victim.

    “If a man says to a woman, “you stupid bitch, sometimes I just feel like fucking slapping you.” It’s an insult, a curse and an implied threat, (haha). Which makes it a threefer. Items 2, 3, and 4, yet no actual violence has taken place.

    “And how often does boyfriend act like this?” The nurse asks. “Oh all the time,” she replies. Does she curse? Does she insult? Does she flippantly say she’d like to slap him? It doesn’t matter. Do you notice a slight discrepancy in the power dynamic. The woman has carte blanche to ridicule, insult, scream, curse and even hit. The man can only cower and never even raise his voice. She is backed by the guns of the State. ”

    Dude, if he’s regularly screaming threats and insults, that’s verbal abuse, and she should be given tools to help her leave (eg counseling). I would question why you refuse to admit that verbal abuse is abuse, but you’re you, so I’m guessing the answer is because that wouldn’t fit within your strange worldview.

    “A woman can never be guilty under this plan, only a man. Do you find this equitable?”

    I’d like to see the surveys tested on male victims and done regularly if that testing produces reliable results. Because that’s how the scientific method works. You’ll perhaps not that with the current evidence the surveying of elderly people is not covered under the ADA as it has a d class rating.

    “I can. Why would I want any woman given a criminal record or possibly imprisoned for cursing, screaming or insulting? There’s a petition to do exactly that, have men screened as well. I certainly won’t sign that. It’s a joke. Imagine how easily and frequently it’ll be abused. Man/woman cheats or somehow infuriates the other party. You tell me what’ll happen.”

    *sigh* Great, the surveyed lied, and can now either go to counseling re: being abused, or not. That’s all the fuck that means. And where’s this petition? Assuming it’s better at science than you are, I’d sign that.

    Re: “white indentured slavery” — I’m descended from Italian coal miners NWO, you have no idea what you’re talking about. (Italian on my mother’s said, Native and various bits of European on my father’s…makes for fun family dinners, all that yummy food!)

    “Are there more poor or less poor?”

    It’s been fairly steady. (See, this is how a citation works)

    “Is education better? Is anything better than it was 40 years ago?”

    The first question is vague and undefined, so let’s pick a measure easy to research — I’ll do both literacy and HS graduation rates.

    Graduation rate is also relatively stable. And I can’t seem to find US literacy rates over time, so we’ll have to settle on reading scores. (Also stable, for white students, increasing for students of color)

    As for “is anything better” let’s try the mortality rate and lifespan data. Infant mortality and life expectancy have been decreasing, and increasing, respectively. Death rates have fallen. (And check that, life expectancy is rising fastest for white men.)

    Basically, the only thing changing for the worse is how upset NWO is.

  31. Ah, Owly, given that for everyone else in the U.S. indentured servitude ended in the 19th century, can you give us any corroborating information on your claim that in your family it ended about a century later? And how was it kept so secret?

  32. Ye gods. Doad and I maybe get into a fight that involves raised voices once or twice a year. Physical violence? Not okay! Not even once, ever!

    Also, being insulted and/or cursed at by random people on the internet =/= being insulted or cursed by a significant other or family member, you know, someone who you physically spend a lot of time with and who has a specific duty to love and respect you.

  33. Argenti Aertheri

    I’m bored, and the 3:2 or not discussion was really mathy, so I decided to dig up the data and make some charts. These are a combination of the following spreadsheets, all available here.

    htus8008t01.csv Table 1. Victims and Offenders by Demographic Group, 1980-2008
    htus8008f02.csv Figure 2. Number of homicide victims, 1950-2010
    htus8008f26.csv Figure 26. Homicides of intimates, by sex of victim, 1980-2008

    Homicides by intimates, as a percent of all homicides, by gender.
    Homicides by intimates, raw number, by gender.
    Homicides by intimates, by gender, stacked percents.

    The last one is the 3:2 ratio thing, without the failing assumptions (one caveat, they’re all using the 1980-2008 average for the gender break down, I can’t seem to find that by year).

  34. Argenti Aertheri

    Homicides by intimates, by gender, stacked percents.

    Missed a quotation mark there, whoops!

  35. CassandraSays

    Mr C and I have been together off and on for over 15 years, and not once has either of us even come close to hitting the other. Raised voices? Maybe 5 or so times in that time period (neither of us are very shouty). Arguments? Lots during some years, other years where there were no serious arguments at all.

    I have a sneaking suspicion that this is closer to what the average relationship looks like than NWOs vision of constant insults and displays of mutual contempt that lead to explosions of physical violence on an annual basis.

  36. My husband and I rarely fight. When we do, he lectures more than yells. I don’t think either one of has yelled. We never name call. But, we are still newlyweds :)

  37. Given that Slavey has said (I think?) that he was engaged, he’s basically admitting he beat his fiancée here.

    No, he’s just admitting that he threatened to beat her. And called her a stupid bitch. He is perplexed as to why she broke off their engagement. Women are just crazy, I guess.

  38. Argenti Aertheri

    How often does your partner?
    Never = 1
    Rarely = 2
    Sometimes =3
    Fairly often =4
    Frequently =5

    1. Physically hurt you O O O O O
    2. Insult or talk down to you O O O O O
    3. Threaten you with harm O O O O O
    4. Scream or curse at you O O O O O

    Let’s see, the ex-fiancee scores that dreaded 4, yet, note the ex part. The gaslighting narcissist who ended up threatening to kill me? 1, 5, 2, 2 …he was Mr. Polite while explaining how lazy I was since I didn’t fold laundry the moment I came in, while having a swearing fit about how fucking annoying it was to be spoken to when he first walked in (even if it was something like “how was your day?” or “your cat was surprisingly social earlier”). If that’s precise enough to spot a gaslighting narcissist for what he is, then yeah, it has my support.

    Lol, I guess the FWB might manage a 5, idk how “shocking to be asked assistance” would score, pretty sure asking if I really asked for assistance =/= talking down to me though. Unlike Mr. Polite, who’d have managed a nice even calm tone while telling me how useless I was to need assistance and how this proves how much better he is.

    It’s that dreaded context again!

  39. PosterformerlyknownasElizabeth

    Awww, I am still curious how John Anderson’s former sister in law’s having intimate relations with another man means that she is an unfit mother.

  40. I can. Why would I want any woman given a criminal record or possibly imprisoned for cursing, screaming or insulting? There’s a petition to do exactly that, have men screened as well.

    I know arguing with NWO is pointlessness itself, but just to vent my own spleen:
    A SCREENING QUESTIONNAIRE IS NOT A LAW!!! It is a tool for health and social work professionals to be able to find out who needs victim services. “Victim services” does not mean automatic arrest.

    If you score above the threshhold, that means a nurse takes you aside and says “you have a real problem here, what’s happening to you isn’t right, this is how to get out if you’re ready to do so.” It does not mean the man gets carted off to jail. Yelling at people, even in fucking horrible ways, continues to be entirely legal.

    And show me anywhere where I’ve ever said anything against black people. You forget where I grew up princess. We all hung out together. I was lucky to be able to crawl outta that shithole know as Philadelphia about 10 or so years ago. Just cause the rest you people grew up in cracker country and all you know about the ghetto is from the communist network news doesn’t mean shit. Did you see a black person in national geographic once? What a joke you people are.

    I think saying that anywhere black people live is the “ghetto,” that Philly is a shithole because it has black people and that you’re traumatized from having to grow up with them, and that black people belong in National Geographic is pretty fucking racist right there.

    Also my dad’s from Philly so I’ve been there many times. Not that that really proves anything significant, just, um… you don’t have a monopoly on Being-From-Philadelphia survivorship.

    Also I live in Boston, so I don’t even know what the fuck you’re getting at about “cracker country,” of course black people live here.

    That’s right princess, lot’s of people got over here that way.

    Yeah, in, like, the 1600s. Indentured servitude of white people pretty much died down around the time of the American Revolution.

    Did a, “partner” dare to disreguard you most valued opinion.

    You know that’s actually pretty bad, right? It’s not violence and no court in the land would convict based on it, but you know that despite being legal that’s actually really nasty, right?

    Partnership is supposed to be based on actually liking each other, not on making sure you only attack and abuse each other in technically legal ways. If you don’t want to hear someone’s opinions and respect their feelings, why do you even want to be around them, much less sharing your life with them?

  41. You know what, I did used to think that a relationship where one or both partners ocassionally hit each other was perfectly normal, and I’m still having to unlearn that. But anytime physical violence has come up in my relationships, I realised it’s over. There’s no real chance of having a real relationship after that.

  42. Really, NWO. You know what you sound like? This:

  43. NWO: 1) it’s mandatory. The question is why? There’s no reason other than to stir up trouble where none existed.

    What? That’s daft man. If there is no, “trouble” this test won’t find it. Even if there is, this test will miss lots of it, because abused people often represent their abuse as being, “normal behavior”.

    But the reason to look is that abuse is a problem.

    You, however, think there isn’t enough abuse in the world. This pisses you off because it will do just what it says on the packet, make abuse less socially acceptable.

    So… you say your father, and his sons, were indentured servants in the 40s, in Texas (I find this hard to credit, but I’ll take it at face value for the moment). This, you compared to slavery. And yet, you were reared in Philly, to a family which wasn’t in the sort of grinding poverty that former slaves suffered in the South; suffered for more than 100 years after their emancipation.

    And you want us to feel sorry for you; to give you a pass on your shit because? Oh right, because you are a white man and white men suffer so. Got it.

    Not gonna happen.

    First off, you’re on the wrong link. That page in no way translates to the punishment, which isn’t stated what it’ll be on the HITS site. I know you believe everything the State tells you but sometimes they lie by ommision.

    Unh hunh. This is your problem. You have no falsifiable beliefs. You KNOW there is a feminist conspiracy. You KNOW it has a secret plan to make all men criminals and slaves. The lack of details is the PROOF.

    Idiot.

    “Even threats are not violence.” — they aren’t legal, and can certainly be a part of verbal abuse. DV includes verbal abuse, please try to remember that.

    Idiot twice over. If I point a gun at you, that’s a threat. It’s a violent threat, as well as being a threat of violence. If I say, “I’m going to kill you,” while holding a gun, most jurisdictions will allow me to attack you and claim self-defense.

    You, you weaselly little shit, think that it’s perfectly acceptable for a man to leave a room (and so not be threatened) when a woman slaps him, and come back to beat her skull in with a pipe. That’s your idea of, “not abusive”.

    I can see why you wouldn’t want women to get this question set… you might have a romantic partner, and she might get asked these questions and be referred to counseling; take it, see what an abusive asshole you are.

  44. Cliff: Yeah, in, like, the 1600s. Indentured servitude of white people pretty much died down around the time of the American Revolution.

    Because Malaria and Yellow Fever made them less cost effective. They died too fast. If that hadn’t been the case it’s probably that slavery would have been a minor problem, because indentured servants cost less, up front, and created a labor-pool/market at the back end.

    It’s interesting to look at where/how slavery manifested in the US. The Mason/Dixon line was pretty much the break point. North of that line Malaria was rare. South of that it was endemic. Prior to Europeans there was no Malaria in the Americas.

  45. ShadetheDruid

    I’m wondering if Owly is conflating poor folks only paid barely enough to live on, with slavery. Which, while terrible, just isn’t the same thing.

    There’s also the possibility that it’s a massive lie, of course.

  46. Argenti Aertheri

    Shade — I think you’re half correct, I just remembered (thanks to your comment) that NWO thinks all Americans are enslaved by the NWO. He probably just means they paid income tax or some stupid shit like that >.<

  47. @Cliff Pervocracy
    “I think saying that anywhere black people live is the “ghetto,” that Philly is a shithole because it has black people and that you’re traumatized from having to grow up with them, and that black people belong in National Geographic is pretty fucking racist right there.”

    You are quite the spin sister. Only someone so mired in a hate movement could ever spin anything I’ve said into what you’ve just written to make me out to look like a racist. Pathetic. You sould be either a teacher or a policy maker, you’d fit right in. Al least a paragraph of lies to add to the book o larnin is in order. If you’re a typical example of a modern day woman, do you really need to wonder why men consider womens opinion valueless?
    —————–
    @pecunium
    “You, you weaselly little shit, think that it’s perfectly acceptable for a man to leave a room (and so not be threatened) when a woman slaps him, and come back to beat her skull in with a pipe. That’s your idea of, “not abusive”.”

    How long you gonna bleet over the MccyDs story? She didn’t leave, she jumped the counter and went after him, the other girl went aroud to the door to trap him in. The guy spent his life in prison and was trying to make a go on the outside as a cashier at MccyDs. I’m guessing his actions were a little bit colored by the life he had to endure, as oppossed to the privileged princesses who thought it was their right to punch the shit out of him.

    You’re on the losing side of this one. It took the jury no time at all to find him innocent and the privileged class guilty. Funny how the women who attacked, pressed the attack and went after an innocent man aren’t abusive. You’ve been praying at the altar too long. The abusiveness belonged exclusively to the ladies. What would your verdict have been? Lock him up? Is he a danger to society? One out of a million times the pussy pass fails and your frothing at the mouth. Give it a rest with the MccyDs story, team woman lost for once.

  48. It looks as if My Jo doesn’t have much stamina. Prevent him from the opportunity to being a gratuitously insulting little twerp and he goes home.

  49. It took the jury no time at all to find him innocent and the privileged class guilty.

    But Mr Slave, I thought feminists control all the courts. Why wasn’t he sentenced to toil in the bonbon mines for the rest of his life?

  50. NOWsalve, the simple fact that you call yourself a slave and throw around the term “massah” as part of that appropriation reveals you to be a massive fucking racist, even if we ignore everything else.

    And as excuses go, “There were black people where I grew up.” really doesn’t cut it.

  51. NWO: The jury was wrong. And your boyos in the MRM all for juries rendering verdicts contrary to the law.

    And aren’t you the one who is all up in arms that the laws aren’t what they should be? If you want to go that way, go all the way. You won’t, because you aren’t really interested in the law.

    But… if it’s reasonable and justifiable for him to leave the room to get a weapon, why isn’t it reasonable and justifiable for a woman to do the same? Why can’t a woman who has been abused for years, and knows it will continue get a club, or a knife, or a gun, and deal with her abuser the way this guy did?

    Go ahead, make the case? Tell me why juries who acquit women who make the burning bed defense aren’t correct?

    You won’t, because you don’t really believe such a claim is ever legitimate. You supported this guy not because it was self-defense, but because he beat on a woman.

    Go ahead, prove me wrong. Admit that a history of abuse justifies an act of proactive self-defense.

    I dare ya.

  52. Oh yeah… gonna tell me that me pointing a gun at you isn’t a threat? I’m not touching you. I might not even be loaded. So long as I don’t pull the trigger it’s innocent fun, right?

  53. John Anderson

    Pecunium says July 4, 2012

    “As to the question of merits in child custody cases… that was your theory. I’m not going to do your work for you. Doing one’s own work is a matter of professionalism.”

    Actually, you submitted into evidence that your interpretation of your father’s (who conveniently was a family law mediator with the suggestion that he had enough experience to rival my brother’s lawyer) stories was sufficient to rebut my brother’s lawyer’s assessment that the court system was biased against fathers. That doesn’t mean fathers couldn’t win 50% of the cases if 80% of their cases were superior.

    Qualify how your personal experience weighs into this. Unless of course you meant to write that you were totally ignorant of how the legal system works, but that persist problem you have with the English language just made it come out as I have personal experience and it tells me your brother’s lawyer was a crap lawyer. I suspect you won’t overcome your issues with logic, though.

    pecunium | July 4, 2012 at 1:17 pm

    “My dad’s a family law mediator (runs a non-profit, Eastern Tennessee). He does a lot of work in this field. As a result I get to hear a lot of stories (oh, the stories). I can say, with some level of personal experience… if that lawyer told your brother those things, your brother had a crap lawyer. Because, in the cases where a father actually seeks custody, he gets it, about fifty percent of the time.”

    So first you say that it was personal experience. Then you move the goal posts and say it’s because men win 50% of the time. The two statements together imply that through your personal experience men should win 50% of the cases based on relative strength of case and they do.

    pecunium | July 4, 2012 at 2:16 pm

    “You have made a statement of opinion (you aver certain beliefs were expressed; some of which are from outside this discussion) as such it’s incumbent on you; the person making the positive statement, to support it”

    Since you brag about your proficiency with English, I assume that this is the common feminist tactic of let’s have a discussion under different rules. I let you have an advantage for awhile. It keeps things interesting. Unless I misinterpret your position, it is.

    1. Family court laws are fair
    2. Family court laws are consistently applied without outside bias
    3. This results in the expected 50% win/lose outcome. The assumption being made was that the cases were of equal merit. This is what I’m saying you need to qualify. What were the relative strengths of the cases. You’ve proven nothing without answering that.

    pecunium | July 4, 2012 at 2:17 pm

    “The fact is, nothing hateful about men has been said.”

    So was Ruby said about men was a decent way to treat men in your opinion. I would disagree, but I guess everyone is entitled to their opinions regardless of its repugnance. Of course I’ll be charitable and allow you an out, if you admit to your problems with the English language.

    pecunium | July 4, 2012 at 2:27 pm

    “Your brother wasn’t victimised. Hell, he got what he wanted. He got it despite having an idiot for a lawyer (that, or a lazy one). So your analogy… shit squared.”

    Don’t think I ever said he was victimized, but why do all the feminists on this board just assume that a man will have counsel? Why do feminists on this board assume that a man can afford to continuously return to family court to enforce visitation?

    pecunium | July 3, 2012 at 1:50 pm

    “1: Fathers who petition for custody get it about half the time. The reason women get primary custody most of the time, is that most men don’t want it.”

    Because there could be no other reason why they wouldn’t? Implying that most fathers don’t want their children sounds pretty hateful to me. Unless there are a significant number of women who are fathers.

  54. ShadetheDruid

    Oh noes, look who’s back.

    So was Ruby said about men was a decent way to treat men in your opinion. I would disagree, but I guess everyone is entitled to their opinions regardless of its repugnance. Of course I’ll be charitable and allow you an out, if you admit to your problems with the English language.

    Except even then, Ruby doesn’t give a shit who it is. Regardless of gender, she thinks “evil people” being raped is just, and even hilarious. Ruby is a horrible person, but she doesn’t save that just for men.

    But even that’s besides the point, because trying to trap pecunium into a situation where he would have to admit he was unclear in one sentence doesn’t invalidate your continued failure to understand anything.

    And the implication that he supports Ruby’s views if he doesn’t admit he wasn’t clear is disgusting. He’s called her out on them multiple times, we all have, even when she’s making unrelated points (though, really, Ruby and any sort of valuable point parted ways a while ago).

    Stop being a disingenuous fuck and associating people with beliefs they’ve denounced just to try to one-up them.

  55. new gasbag’s completely unearned haughtiness is just fucking adorable

  56. Unimaginative

    but that persist problem you have with the English language

    ALL THE IRONY!

  57. John Anderson:

    Implying that most fathers don’t want their children sounds pretty hateful to me.

    There are many people, both men and women, who have children when they shouldn’t, who aren’t particularly fond of picking up toys, washing play-doh out of the carpet, cooking lunches, supervising homework and doing all the other endless, thankless tasks that make up so much of being a parent. These same people would gladly deal it off with someone else, while retaining the more enjoyable aspects of parenting, such as playing with kids at one’s leisure, pontificating about the facts of life or providing them with pleasures that reinforce the child’s love for the parent.

    The gender difference here is introduced by way of societal expectations. Men simply do not face the same degree of social opprobrium as women in walking away from the grinding day-to-day, not-fun part of parenting. Hell, a man can walk away from a sick wife or a disabled child for the price of leasing a Honda Civic, and still enjoy widespread sympathy. By contrast, any woman who does that faces an immense backlash. Women are expected to be children’s day-to-day caretakers no matter what. A woman who changes a diaper is regarded as merely an adequate mother; a man who changes a diaper is regarded as a freakin’ hero. Thus, a man can leave his family and his kids, but as long as he still pursues occasional visitation (which, of course, consists solely of fun activities), he is still considered a good father. A woman who does the exact same thing is considered a monster who is not fit to live.

    Based on that, yes, I would say most divorcing fathers don’t want custody, because they don’t want to deal with child care; and most importantly, because public expectations allow men — but not women — to voluntarily forgo the primary caretaker role without incurring any social cost. I am sorry, but not liking the idea of divorce simply because you want to retain a servant who will take care of “your” children, assist you in enjoying fun activities with them, and keep them out of your way when you’d rather do something else, doesn’t make you a good father OR a good husband.

    Feminists have said so repeatedly — we would really like it if men got custody half the time. But that merely flows from the fact that we would really like it if men did half the not-fun part of child care and actually wanted to do all in the event of a divorce as often as not.

  58. Jo “My dad’s a family law mediator (runs a non-profit, Eastern Tennessee). He does a lot of work in this field. As a result I get to hear a lot of stories (oh, the stories). I can say, with some level of personal experience… if that lawyer told your brother those things, your brother had a crap lawyer. Because, in the cases where a father actually seeks custody, he gets it, about fifty percent of the time.”

    No, it’s not “moving the goalposts”. Moving the goalposts is an informal logical fallacy in which previously agreed upon standards for deciding an argument are arbitrarily changed once they have been met.

    Nothing was changed after the fact. It was an argument from personal experience, supported with evidence from outside.

    It’s how I avoid doing what you did (extrapolating a whole from a sample size of n =1).

    Unless I misinterpret your position, it is.

    1. Family court laws are fair
    2. Family court laws are consistently applied without outside bias
    3. This results in the expected 50% win/lose outcome. The assumption being made was that the cases were of equal merit. This is what I’m saying you need to qualify. What were the relative strengths of the cases. You’ve proven nothing without answering that.

    You have done three things… one you have misinterpreted my argument, and two you have inserted conclusions not supported by even your misunderstanding. Third you have taken my rebuttal, and attributed it as being an argument de novo

    We are still debating your claim men are disadvantaged in the courts.

    Onwards.

    Where did I say the laws are fair?

    The unsupportable conclusion you attribute to me is all that follows from your assumptions.

    My argument was that men (such as your brother) are disadvantaged by people like his lawyer, and yourself; who argue the system is unfairly biased against men.

    That’s what I said. I said it based on men winning custody in fity percent of those cases in which they contested.

    Nothing about the law being fair, or evenly applied is implied in my statements. Your inference is false, and the pretense of being able to divine my beliefs is specious. I have, insofar as I have proven anything shown that the system favors men.

    Why? Because if we assume (arguendo) that the guiding principle of, “best interest of the child” is at play (and is the nominally guiding principle in a significant number of states, more significant if one looks at the populations served. New York and Calif. between them total almost 25 percent of the US population), then we might also assume the primary caregiver is the person most likely to represent that interest.

    Men are not the primary caregivers in anything close to fifty percent of the families in the US (If they were, this sort of conversation wouldn’t be being had). If that’s the case (are you going to dispute that?), then we have to assume that either the only cases being presented are the best of the best (which burden, again is on you to prove; since you are the one claiming the system is biased against men, and you introduced the argument), or we have to admit that men win cases when the presumptive best interests of the child lie with the mother.

    In either case, the claim you are making is disproven.

    “The fact is, nothing hateful about men has been said.”

    So was Ruby said about men was a decent way to treat men in your opinion. I would disagree, but I guess everyone is entitled to their opinions regardless of its repugnance. Of course I’ll be charitable and allow you an out, if you admit to your problems with the English language.

    Nice try, half marks for the attempt to hoist me on my petard, but… show me where I (or the commentariat in general) have said her views are acceptable to us? As a rhetorical device I was perhaps (perhaps) overbroad.

    Because you most certainly can’t, as you imply, that I hold to those beliefs. You also can’t claim I was lying, since it was a challenge to find them. You certainly can’t claim (as was implied in the comment to which I was responding, and established the context of the statement you made to which it was reply) that I, or the rest of us agree with her, not when she has but to make a single comment; on anything, and get at least one, and usually several, comment in reply telling her how much we despise her belief.

    So all marks granted are forfeit (not that half marks is close to a passing grade).

    Don’t think I ever said he was victimized,

    Really…. so

    this comment of yours doesn’t apply to him?

    So women who invite men over for a drink didn’t get raped because she did an active thing and didn’t have to invite THAT particular man in for a drink. Talk about how being alienated from your children is not as bad as rape or how men should not receive ANY sympathy when they are victimized. Talk about how men who let themselves be victimized are weak and DESERVE what they get. That’s the most reprehensible aspect of the whole debate, the implication that men who don’t fight for custody DESERVE what happens to them even if it was desperation, fear or love for their children that caused it. I’m not saying I’ll agree, but I’ll understand.

    You (directed at the majority pf people on this forum) call me an ass for discussing female victimization in theory, but rejoice and find every excuse to blame men for their own victimization in real terms.

    Your words, yesterday.

    BTW, can I get answers to my question on the use of fuck? re umpires, cops and parents? I’d hate to use it incorrectly in future.

    And now I have to leave for work. Take your time, I’ll be gone all day.

  59. @Amused
    “Feminists have said so repeatedly — we would really like it if men got custody half the time. But that merely flows from the fact that we would really like it if men did half the not-fun part of child care and actually wanted to do all in the event of a divorce as often as not.”

    Half the, “not fun part” also includes going to work to earn the wealth to support the child/children. After all, baby needs a new pair of shoes. I know thousands of men and none of them have ever said they leap up in the morning and say, “Woohoo, another day of working to an early grave!”

    When you flush baby’s potty mess down the toilet, do you know where it goes? How it get’s there? What’s done to sanitize it? There are men wallowing in shit making it all go away. When your power goes out in a thunderstorm and you call to demand the magic returns. There are men out in that driving storm to ensure that comfort making magic returns.

    Just because men aren’t doing their fair share of the direct unfun parts, doesn’t mean men aren’t doing the vast majority of indirect unfun part. Women are recognized for their unfun efforts. Men are invisible for their unfun efforts.

  60. NWO, you seem to be pretending that only men work in harsh, dirty, tiring jobs. At this point I can’t say if that’s stupidity or pure lie.

  61. When you flush baby’s potty mess down the toilet, do you know where it goes? How it get’s there? What’s done to sanitize it? There are men wallowing in shit making it all go away.

    Sanitation
    Sewage is processed by men wallowing in it until it gets clean again.

    Fractions
    Women do half the un-fun work in the world. This means that women don’t work.

  62. Unimaginative

    When you flush baby’s potty mess down the toilet, do you know where it goes? How it get’s there? What’s done to sanitize it? There are men wallowing in shit making it all go away. When your power goes out in a thunderstorm and you call to demand the magic returns. There are men out in that driving storm to ensure that comfort making magic returns.

    Just because men aren’t doing their fair share of the direct unfun parts, doesn’t mean men aren’t doing the vast majority of indirect unfun part. Women are recognized for their unfun efforts. Men are invisible for their unfun efforts.

    I know you think she doesn’t exist, but I’ve mentioned before, my sister-in-law is an electrician. (She’s mostly worked in construction before getting her instrument mechanic ticket, but my point stands.) I’m acquainted with two women who work at a sewage treatment facility. There are women garbage collectors in my city. Men are not the only ones who do shit jobs for money. Men are not the only ones taking years off their lives by working shift.

    Hating women who work in the home because YOU work at a job you don’t like is illogical, irrational, and kind of stupid.

  63. NWO: Your reply assumes facts not in evidence. Most mothers, including myself, work outside the home AND do most of the child care. Also, not every man, nor even the majority, works in dangerous or dirty jobs. As for the sanitation system — I do, in fact, know how it works. Most of it is automated, so it’s not like there are millions of men standing waste-deep in sewage, shoveling it along.

    Besides, what does this have to do with custody? Do those men who do dirty and dangerous jobs, and who single-handedly buy the baby’s shoes include those “international bankers” you’ve been going on about? Or do the “international bankers” automatically get credited for doing a dirty, life-shortening job in custody proceedings just because some other penis-havers do?

  64. thebionicmommy

    When your power goes out in a thunderstorm and you call to demand the magic returns. There are men out in that driving storm to ensure that comfort making magic returns.

    Women never work for electric companies? Women never risk their lives during storms? Wrong, I read the obituary of a female customer service rep that died at the AT&T store. When the tornado hit, she ushered a family to safety but didn’t have enough time to save herself. There are women out there just like men, chasing storms and getting warnings out to people. The storm chaser that got Joplin to sound the first sirens had his wife with him, helping him read the radar while he drove. She deserves credit, too, for saving lives.

  65. Seems like men are in kind of a catch-22 here. If men keep working at their 80-hour sewage-wallowing jobs, they won’t have time to care for young children.

    But if men quit those jobs to care for children, they won’t have the moral superiority of their terrible jobs anymore!

  66. @Unimaginative
    “Hating women who work in the home because YOU work at a job you don’t like is illogical, irrational, and kind of stupid.”

    Denying men equal custody for having no choice but to work in dirty, dangerous jobs to support their family is law. You opinion a hatred where none exists. Hatred by law is a fact.
    ————-
    @Cliff Pervocracy
    ” But if men quit those jobs to care for children, they won’t have the moral superiority of their terrible jobs anymore!”

    If moral superiority were given to men who supported their families, men would be given default custody. Women are given moral superiority by gender, she is given custody as the primary caretaker, a morally superior position.
    ————-
    @Amused
    “Most of it is automated, so it’s not like there are millions of men standing waste-deep in sewage, shoveling it along.”

    Every job I’ve had for 30 years has been in, or related to the automation of some product or another. Watching an episode or two of, “how that works,” is a far cry from reality.
    ————-
    @Kyrie
    “NWO, you seem to be pretending that only men work in harsh, dirty, tiring jobs. At this point I can’t say if that’s stupidity or pure lie.”

    An exception to the rule doesn’t change the rule. Are all black men doing fantastic because Obama is at the top of the food chain?
    ————-
    @Amused
    “Besides, what does this have to do with custody? Do those men who do dirty and dangerous jobs, and who single-handedly buy the baby’s shoes include those “international bankers” you’ve been going on about?”

    Your obsession with mentioning international bankers when addressing every comment I make is annoyingly predictable. International bankers are a conspiracy theory, they don’t exist. Happy now?

  67. Denying men equal custody for having no choice but to work in dirty, dangerous jobs to support their family is law.

    Owly, I hope you’re being careful pulling entire law books out of your ass, I wouldn’t want you to injure yourself.

  68. “Denying men equal custody for having no choice but to work in dirty, dangerous jobs to support their family is law.”

    Again, MRAs attribute economic issues n to misandry. Because women never have to work to support their families.

  69. The thing is, Owly doesn’t actually want to do anything about the economic issues. He thinks it is good and right for men to suffer in dirty, dangerous, destructive (that MGTOWers thread has me thinking in alliterative phrases) jobs — he just wants women to acknowledge that all men are heroes and that all women survive because of men’s labor.

    People who actually try to DO something about those dangerous jobs are evil communists, don’tcha know.

  70. Kendra, the bionic mommy

    Hey NWO, you never responded when I told you about Francis Perkins a woman who advocated for sick and dying men in Joplin’s lead and zinc mines. She wanted them to have safer, healthier working conditions.

    In another thread, you said it was an easy vacation to cook, clean, and take care of small children. Why don’t you become a maid or nanny so you can do what you enjoy? I know the pay is terrible and there is no prestige, but it sounds like your current job makes you so miserable, why not do something different?

    By the way, many of the pink collar professions are dirty, too. Try spending a day at a daycare during an outbreak of a stomach virus. Nursing can be very gross, too. I wouldn’t want to work at a wound care clinic draining MRSA boils for anything.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 7,471 other followers

%d bloggers like this: