Post your tales here.  I reckon the worm has turned.  Some people are using these Laws as a deliberate weapon quite strategically.

Why not post yours, El Turdo marrón apestoso.

Gordon wrote on Feb 10^th, 2019 at 2:44pm:

Why not post yours, El Turdo marrón apestoso.

Sorry to disappoint, I have none, other than those I know of professionally and what I have read since I retired.

I have a ripper of a professional tale, but I'll keep it in reserve for later.

Cool thread, Turdo.

Since 1992 - that's twenty seven years too late for reality-based comment on this insanity that has devoured men, women, children and families, let alone social structures, and has been encouraged and permitted to grow and grow with a never-ending 'upgrading' of 'definitions' of 'violence' - but only one way - until it no longer has any credibility - which it never had anyway ever, since it is a clear breach of the Rule of Law....

As I've said many times before - the current one-sided and frankly insane approach to this essential non-issue - non-issue because it does not address violence but only the claimed remote distant possibility of violence and in doing so is itself violence writ large against a selected segment of the community, a direct breach of human rights law, as well as a direct attack on legal and civil rights with the clear intent of establishing feminist/gynocratic control over society and all relationships within it - is not only creating, but is in fact, a gender war organised, promoted and encouraged by governments.

In this way, this approach is no better than some dark African neo-dictatorship that seeks to establish hegemony of one tribe over another...... (hello)...

As a result - the worms are turning - the incident in Glen Innes is just one... but there are countless undercurrents of retaliation that go on.... and will escalate until this stupidly organised non-issue is properly handled and resolved.

2019 - Year Of Decision!  Wait until the Labor Party - the party of the feminists - gets its hands on the controls, and the violence against men in this semi-declared war escalates once again.... then see what happens when these children seeking to endlessly push the boundaries of reality and of law are brought up sharply.

Feminists, like politicians and countless other self-interest groups, perpetually seek to extend and push the boundaries to suit themselves.... and it must and will be stopped some time soon - before it destroys this nation.

I'll post one, seeing as it's such a touchy subject and so many seem too afraid to be honest nowadays.

This one was initially relayed to me by the mother of one of my daughters friends.
Her brother had been through a messy divorce with her now ex sister in law. During the process her brother was accused of sexual misconduct towards his 2 year old daughter and her mother. There were of course all the usual "it's a lie" type of responses and denial. The immediate temporary control measure to ensure the child's safety was for the authorities to temporarily rescind the fathers unsupervised access whilst the matter was investigated. For 6 months as the various lawyers argued and the matter was moved through various stages, the father had no access to his daughter without supervision and the daughter could obviously no longer stay with her dad. The child showed constant signs of distress during the process. After 6 months the authorities determined there was no case to answer and pre-allegation custody arrangements were re-enforced. Now here is the area many members of the public have no true understanding of. These decisions can be appealed numerous times, through various avenues. The allegations were repeated again and the decision appealed before the father even got one night with his daughter to feed her and put her into her own bed in his house as the daughter continually asked to be allowed to do (this I witnessed myself at a later date at our school)

Once again the authorities, bound by the necessity to ensure the child's safety rescinded the fathers access. The whole process was repeated, with numerous lawyers and experts involved before finally a second decision was handed down roughly 7 months later that found no case to answer. By now the daughter had become as aware as is possible at that age that her own mother was responsible for stopping her from seeing her dad. The daughter was showing further signs of early age depression. It had now been a year since she had been able to stay with her daddy. The daughter spent one night at her dads in her own bed at his place before another appeal was launched, this time through a different layer of the legal system. After a few weeks of legal arguments, lawyers, threats and once again family case worker involvement it was again determined that in the interests of ensuring the child's safety the fathers access would have to be rescinded again until a final determination. This new appeal carried on for a further 6 months of continual lawyer meetings,case work meetings, court dates etc before finally the truth come out via an email discovered between the mother and her father. It was all about money. Eventually a slip up happened as thankfully sometimes does in these cases and an email offer to the father to drop all the allegations was made in exchange for payment of $250,000.00!!! The father and daughter had now been separated for over 1 1/2 years.

I have at times been witness to some of this and met the daughter twice on visits to our school with her father and his sister (my daughters friends mother), each time during the one or two week periods between appeals. I was able to do a little digging to verify the goings on and of course had many discussions with the fathers sister over it all. At one point this pro feminist mother who I knew very well was crying in disbelief at how the system allowed women to completely destroy and lie with no hint of repercussion legally. It's amazing how so many people remain so ill informed or misinformed by a now degraded, unintelligent, agenda driven media and blind to realities until their own lives are affected. I reminded her she had a young son herself who could at any stage face the same type of actions in the future.

I have now changed schools and my daughter and this woman's daughter have drifted off in different directions meaning I don't have a current "status report" but not once during the process was there even a hint of suggestion or thought entertained by any authorities regarding what the mother involved may be actually doing, despite the continual protestations of the innocent. I'll warrant that in the interests of the child continuing to have the benefit of what the system prioritises unfairly over all other things (mother-child relationships), no charges are laid against the mother and nothing will happen to her. The father meanwhile has been completely destroyed and some may perhaps have the intelligence to imagine what was said about him in the community once accused.

The very fact that such things are even possible tell me the system is broken. This is not something happening outside or circumnavigating the system. This is actually using the system as it is currently constructed, to destroy a man. "The system seems structured to always believe the mother above and beyond the father, no matter what". This was quoted to me by the mother and sister mentioned above. It appears to be supported throughout family services by a seemingly indoctrinated, almost entirely female representation in every department. Humour yourself and do a quick search for family/divorce lawyers in your area, anywhere in Australia and count the male to female ratio. The entire system seems to now have become some kind of feminist, misandrist, refuge, legally set up by mostly short sighted, imbecilic excuses for intelligentsia, spat out by today's abhorrently lower standard universities.

Concerned, married father

Aussie wrote on Feb 10^th, 2019 at 2:37pm:

Post your tales here.  I reckon the worm has turned.  Some people are using these Laws as a deliberate weapon quite strategically.

They have for years. There was even many years ago(1980's) a bunch of cases that relied on false memories and leading questions by the inquisitors in S.Aust. I believe from memory the invention of the process was started in the UK. It's a long time ago so I don't remember the details but might be able to find something. It destroyed families, devastated men. If the worm is turning, it's not before time.

when it comes to the family court Women have most of the power...and many women abuse that power...

it sadly isnt news....As has been proved with many cases over the years  many fathers do and still do sexually abuse their children....it isnt made up..sorry to say its very much a fact of life..

and proving it isnt true,  can be long and arduous not forgetting COSTLY

like all laws or rules  there are always some who abuse them.. I agree there has to be penalties for lying to the courts when its discovered to be all lies...the father or parent accused wrongly should be compensated...

the only way to stop this on going problem   is to come down hard.......

if a father is proven guilty he does jail time.....

if hes proven innocent  he gets nothing.. >:(

goosescat  your post says it was a 2 yr old.....so did her mum have her examined did she put her through that without proof   where did her proof come from?.... too many questions by far...

Most in here and most out there could tell tales.  The reality is -- when you look at the system and before the system and how it's all gamed -- most humans are unfit to raise and possibly even to produce, children

Most dangers confronting and destroying children lie in the hands of adults

Imagine being young Isaac stretched out on the rock, his father holding him down, a knife in his hand.  Would Isaac ever again feel safe?  Safe within grasping distance of his father?  But who thinks of Isaac when they read or hear that story?  I've never seen anyone comment on the PTSD suffered by Isaac, his lifelong distrust and anxiety.  Because Isaac was just a kid, someone his father was prepared to slaughter.  People talk about Abraham's love of God, his willingness to give his all to his God and how that God, satisfied of Abraham's love and obedience, allowed Isaac to live

The endless rampant breeding is in obedience to Nature.  Nature demands we replace ourselves before we die.  And we're not special.  Rats, cockroaches, weeds and disease all breed more of themselves in obedience to the biological imperative

Sex is the hook.  Humans enjoy sex. Sex produces children. Children put a damper on humans' enjoyment of life.  Adult and child humans bicker and fight.  Adult fights result in separation and divorce.  Separation and divorce result in adult humans resorting to childlike behaviours and nastiness. Children are used as pawns and weapons. Human courts attempt to mediate in the intended interests of the child.  The most effective adult-fighter succeeds in perverting intended justice because the arbitrators of the system are themselves mere humans required to carry out rules within the system which were drafted by again, mere flawed humans.  It's all we have to offer

Sterilisation of the vast majority of humans would be a step in the right direction, imo. But of course those who profit financially from mass consumerism would not be in favour.  And they sway government policies

Childless individuals are said to be amongst the most and least happy.  Those most happy never attend family courts. They have vastly increased opportunities to travel, socialise, indulge in interests and hobbies, home ownership, etc.  Those least happy enjoy those same benefits but say they feel unfulfilled without offspring. As they do not have offspring, they're in the same position as an able bodied individual claiming to 'miss' the opportunity to wear prosthetic limbs

Children are a crutch.  They are the 'hobby' some people have because it's never occurred to them to do anything else with their life.  They reach adulthood and reproduce.  Some do a half-decent job of that, others make a mess of it.  They emerge in middle age or older and believe they've 'contributed'.  All many of them have actually done, in fact, is put their replacement on the ground before dying.  They've done nothing more intelligent or noble than has the dandelion.  But we don't concern ourselves with generation after the next of rats or dandelions.  Instead, we produce endless generations of cannon fodder, consumers and creatures who will mindlessly do the same as ourselves, i.e., produce the next generation before we die

It's past time for some serious discussion about our need to produce ever more of ourselves.  The chaos playing out in homes and family courts worldwide will only increase as long as anyone on this planet is left free to reproduce.  Children damaged in passage by adults and courts will, in many instances, go on to repeat the folly

cods wrote on Feb 11^th, 2019 at 6:23am:

when it comes to the family court Women have most of the power...and many women abuse that power... it sadly isnt news....As has been proved with many cases over the years  many fathers do and still do sexually abuse their children....it isnt made up..sorry to say its very much a fact of life.. and proving it isnt true,  can be long and arduous not forgetting COSTLY like all laws or rules  there are always some who abuse them.. I agree there has to be penalties for lying to the courts when its discovered to be all lies...the father or parent accused wrongly should be compensated... the only way to stop this on going problem   is to come down hard....... if a father is proven guilty he does jail time..... if hes proven innocent  he gets nothing.. >:( goosescat  your post says it was a 2 yr old.....so did her mum have her examined did she put her through that without proof   where did her proof come from?.... too many questions by far...

"As has been proved with many some cases often within clearly prescribed social groups cases over the years  many fathers do and still do sexually abuse their children..."

Your flippant use of the word 'many' casts a false impression on this issue.

"if a father is proven guilty he does jail time.....

if hes proven innocent he gets nothing.. " (but huge lawyer's bills) ....mum, on the other hand, gets it free, often through the domestic violence advocacy service - which ONLY funds women, not men - another abuse of legal and civil rights

Guilt or innocence proven by what standard?  The clear intent, as I pointed out in my submission to the 'nsw law reform commission' in 1992, of creating these (non/anti) laws to 'protect' women, was to attack the basic rule of law which required proof beyond any reasonable doubt, and steadily replace that standard with the lesser one of (alleged) 'balance of probabilities'. This is what has taken place in any proceedings involving a women accusing a man.  The 'judge/magistrate' REGARDLESS OF THE VALUE OF THE ALLEGATIONS AS PROVEN BY EVIDENCE still feels 'uneasy' about giving full innocence and will in most cases continue to place restrictions on the man, simply because there 'might' be something in it.

It's a perversion of our legal system and a direct attack on civil and legal rights, and while that approach has always pervaded our 'legal' system to the detriment of the accused, this nonsense  set of 'laws' has served to cement that abuse in place.  Anyone who cannot see the dire consequences for any society allegedly governed by the rule of law is blind.

Have to agree that sanctions must be in place to punish those who deliberately lie, and full costs to the accused must be covered along with compensation for distress.

Then the child/children should be compensated for that abuse as well.  :-[

ADDS:-  For PZ - my two children, one boy, one girl, are replacement only.... wouldn't be without them and we are companions... both are at genius level and both have a solid work ethic and solid values in life......

I'd prefer that they continue as opposed to the loser groups, snobbish as that sounds... clearly some people should never be parents, but they will shag.....

grap I think I made it clear   a few things need to be done...

you seem to under estimate the damage done BY A FATHER when he molests his child....boy or girl...

not only that quite often the mother turns a blind eye.

so its a double edged sword for them....

who will pay the children compensation?????>.


not the tax payer surely  thats hardly justice  and thats what they need... REAL JUSTICE

nothing will give them back their childhood....

I too believe sterilising should be looked at....male and female  they do not deserve to be parents....they are monsters disguised as human..I find them totally unacceptable...

cods wrote on Feb 11^th, 2019 at 10:25am:

grap I think I made it clear   a few things need to be done... you seem to under estimate the damage done BY A FATHER when he molests his child....boy or girl... not only that quite often the mother turns a blind eye. so its a double edged sword for them.... who will pay the children compensation?????>. not the tax payer surely  thats hardly justice  and thats what they need... REAL JUSTICE nothing will give them back their childhood.... I too believe sterilising should be looked at....male and female  they do not deserve to be parents....they are monsters disguised as human..I find them totally unacceptable...

It was your use of the word 'many' that was misleading in the context of the discussion, since it indicated that MANY men did this kind of thing, when that is not the case ... it has nothing to do with any discussion of the impact on any children so abused, which was not the subject.  If anyone knows the impact on children of abuse and neglect - it is me..... you theoreticians don't count ...

It was your use of the word 'many



so you have more knowledge of what is happening behind closed doors right now??

what is your belief MANY means?...just a few /  not all that many/could be worse.....

just wondering grap...I cannot think of anythign worse than having your childhood ripped out of you by the very person who should be protecting you.....

every day there is an event somewhere where they are reminded of their past and what they had to deal with.....from as I say the person they should be turning too for protection..... >:( >:(

this has bloody everything to do with DOMESTIC VIOLENCE>.. and more..

if you were sexually abused as a child you have my deepest sympathy    I would never ever  put it in a box all by itself.....which appears to be what you are saying.....

which to my way of thinking is either blaming the child   or at least putting half the blame on them......

I find your argument   pretty shallow to be honest..

cods wrote on Feb 11^th, 2019 at 10:42am:

It was your use of the word 'many so you have more knowledge of what is happening behind closed doors right now?? what is your belief MANY means?...just a few /  not all that many/could be worse..... just wondering grap...I cannot think of anythign worse than having your childhood ripped out of you by the very person who should be protecting you..... every day there is an event somewhere where they are reminded of their past and what they had to deal with.....from as I say the person they should be turning too for protection..... >:( >:( this has bloody everything to do with DOMESTIC VIOLENCE>.. and more.. if you were sexually abused as a child you have my deepest sympathy    I would never ever  put it in a box all by itself.....which appears to be what you are saying..... which to my way of thinking is either blaming the child   or at least putting half the blame on them...... I find your argument   pretty shallow to be honest..

And you do?

Jesus, cods - just say that using 'many' was a mistake and gave a false impression... we know that some do... many don't... and most certainly most don't... just pointing out the false impression that can be given by careless use of words... and as a side note - how such misuse falls into the realm of propaganda and aids and abets falsehoods being purveyed as truth.

Your 'blaming the child' comment is utter nonsense.... nothing in what I posted even begins to suggest any such thing... you need to mix more with people who hold more than one side of questions.. leave that 'training' behind and get in touch with reality and stop sp0outing propaganda phrases and attempting shaming at every turn.

You could easily be mistaken for a feminist.... though I know your heart is in the right place - do try to get your mind to follow it...


I was not sexually abused as a child - my sisters were and I had no knowledge of it until later... and not by their father.... we were all neglected and the boys physically abused.

A friend of my niece was compelled to stay at her father's place on a set number of weekends.  Her parents were divorced. The father lived on an island close to Sydney city, which I mention simply as an explanation as to why the girl couldn't just leap on a bus home

Was told but can't remember the girl's age, but think it was between age 11 and 12

Her father sexually abused her to the extent of rape.  The girl confided in my niece who in turn told her own parents who didn't know what, if anything, they should try to do.  That the abused child would be forced to recount her experience to several within child protection services and court was obvious.  The mother would need to be informed.  And the father would most likely deny it.  End result would be further trauma for the child.  My in-laws did not want to become embroiled.  I would have done.  They chose not to -- their choice and a pretty common one, no doubt.  They moved interstate not long afterwards.  I have no idea what happened to that child as I wasn't told about it until much later

Female neighbour of several years was a nut-case, an alcoholic and very poor parent. People condemned her, others tried to help her (lost cause) and others attempted to get her husband involved (not interested, long distance truckie)

At the heart of the neighbour's problems was her incestuous father who had also, if she's to be believed (and her emotional rendition of the event was disturbing and persuasive) murdered her mother in the stockyards of a country town

That the neighbour needed help was obvious to even a casual observer, based on her behaviours.  She self medicated using alcohol.  She had an unhealthy and obvious, fascination with sex, all sorts of sex including bestiality.  She'd transferred this to her daughter at least who had a precocious interest in sex when even five and six. She became the local bike in her very early teens and an unwed mother by fifteen, after which she went on to have more illegitimate children

The neighbour's allegedly incestuous father invited himself to stay in her home.  She was repulsed by him but said she couldn't very well tell her father he was not welcome

A family I knew well was in chaos after one of the grandchildren, girl aged six, told her mother that her father's father (paternal grandfather) had been molesting her

It resulted in a family meeting. The grandfather had four children who each had several children, so up to a dozen children at risk

At first, the parents of the children were outraged with their father.  Outrage is good, but what were the repercussions for the entire family?  Two of the parents held government positions in Victorian country towns.  What would it cost them if the matter were reported to authorities?  Loss of job/career, loss of face and reputation, ongoing gossip within the community and surrounds, possible media reports, all the kids ostracised at school and elsewhere, on ongoing basis

Sympathy for the child, and outrage, swiftly subsided.  A solution was devised.  The grandmother and grandfather would retire & move, which they did, to coastal Queensland, far away.  Before taking up residence in their new town, the grandmother and grandfather went overseas for a few months

Two of their children, who were parents to grandchildren, moved up near their parents soon afterwards.  The father of the allegedly abused child left his wife and family and also moved up close to his parents' new home

The mother of the allegedly abused child was a weak, timid woman.  She soon remarried, providing her four children with a stepfather.  Few years later, her second marriage having been dissolved, she and three of her children ALSO moved to Queensland, as had her first husband and his parents, etc.

The allegedly abused child was effectively disowned.  Was ostracised by the entire extended family and described as a liar.  In a few years, that entire extended family were reunited in Queensland, leaving the abused girl behind in Victoria.  I do not know what became of her

The grandmother knew full well, as did her adult children, that her husband, the grandfather, was a dominant, conceited alcoholic.  The grandmother confided to me that he beat her up in her old age because he could not maintain an erection.  I once had a heated argument with him about censorship.  He exulted in society's increasing acceptance of various sexual perversions and permissiveness.  He was treated as if he were the ideal tv grandfather.  When he finally died, his children and grandchildren continued the deceit in glowing tributes to him.  His wife was hospitalised with a series of strokes prior to his death.  Clearly she had told her sons about her husband's physical abuse and preoccupation with sex into his 80s, because they apparently warned their father. All too late

So, merely three tales of destruction wrought by child sex abuse which becomes a generational issue according to researchers

Sex abuse makes poor parents of the victim.  How can a parent who was sexually abused as a child raise their own children with healthy attitudes to relationships, boundaries and sexuality? 

Sexual abuse claims more than the original victims

The escalating addiction to child-porn contributes to an already disturbing societal problem.  Child-porn is lucrative.  The children who are featured in child-porn are increasingly cited as being the pornographer's own children/stepchildren

Who has a solution?

.
What would happen if the government ran something similar to the 'Yes' vote re: gay marriage?  A poll, an open-enquiry, inviting all Australians to say -- perhaps anonymously -- if they'd been sexually molested up to age, say, 16, with an additional box to tick if the molester/rapist had been a parent/parent figure.  To give researchers, government bodies and others some idea as to how common the problem is

Currently, figures are arrived at through reported instances and even those figures are alarming.  Research estimates that at least half such incidents remain unreported

Aussie wrote on Feb 10^th, 2019 at 2:59pm:

Gordon wrote on Feb 10th, 2019 at 2:44pm: Why not post yours, El Turdo marrón apestoso. Sorry to disappoint, I have none, other than those I know of professionally and what I have read since I retired. I have a ripper of a professional tale, but I'll keep it in reserve for later.

I'll keep mine in reserve for later too.
I'm ready to do my Ali counter-punch on Aussie after he unloads his 'tale' on everyone.

Did I just put forth an act of violence onto Aussie if he posted 'his tale' later?
Well, now - I guess when it does indeed come to the El Turdo marrón apestoso - he is automatically 'guilty as charged' and deserves everything he gets coming to him by a vast 'majority' of Members here. Or would he like to put it to a Poll?  :-?
The thing about Aussie is, that he is no 'Ex-Lawyer' anymore.
He's just a 'Scammer' now (the 'Criminal' of the Court).
Embracing the new technology of the Net to further his cause for power and wealth.

Jasin wrote on Feb 11^th, 2019 at 12:14pm:

Aussie wrote on Feb 10th, 2019 at 2:59pm: Gordon wrote on Feb 10th, 2019 at 2:44pm: Why not post yours, El Turdo marrón apestoso. Sorry to disappoint, I have none, other than those I know of professionally and what I have read since I retired. I have a ripper of a professional tale, but I'll keep it in reserve for later. I'll keep mine in reserve for later too. I'm ready to do my Ali counter-punch on Aussie after he unloads his 'tale' on everyone. Did I just put forth an act of violence onto Aussie if he posted 'his tale' later? Well, now - I guess when it does indeed come to the El Turdo marrón apestoso - he is automatically 'guilty as charged' and deserves everything he gets coming to him by a vast 'majority' of Members here. Or would he like to put it to a Poll?  :-? The thing about Aussie is, that he is no 'Ex-Lawyer' anymore. He's just a 'Scammer' now (the 'Criminal' of the Court). Embracing the new technology of the Net to further his cause for power and wealth.

Better still - let's not make it personal in any way... BTW - Aussie lambasted me for my pious attitude and high horse etc yesterday for suggesting that we do the same - so feel free to join in.. it's all water off a duck's back to me...

Let's leave the personal spite out of it...  8-)

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Feb 11^th, 2019 at 12:43pm:

Jasin wrote on Feb 11th, 2019 at 12:14pm: Aussie wrote on Feb 10th, 2019 at 2:59pm: Gordon wrote on Feb 10th, 2019 at 2:44pm: Why not post yours, El Turdo marrón apestoso. Sorry to disappoint, I have none, other than those I know of professionally and what I have read since I retired. I have a ripper of a professional tale, but I'll keep it in reserve for later. I'll keep mine in reserve for later too. I'm ready to do my Ali counter-punch on Aussie after he unloads his 'tale' on everyone. Did I just put forth an act of violence onto Aussie if he posted 'his tale' later? Well, now - I guess when it does indeed come to the El Turdo marrón apestoso - he is automatically 'guilty as charged' and deserves everything he gets coming to him by a vast 'majority' of Members here. Or would he like to put it to a Poll?  :-? The thing about Aussie is, that he is no 'Ex-Lawyer' anymore. He's just a 'Scammer' now (the 'Criminal' of the Court). Embracing the new technology of the Net to further his cause for power and wealth. Better still - let's not make it personal in any way... BTW - Aussie lambasted me for my pious attitude and high horse etc yesterday for suggesting that we do the same - so feel free to join in.. it's all water off a duck's back to me... Let's leave the personal spite out of it...  8-)

For you most honorable Ye Grappler.
I will forfeit my above post in this Topic.

.
Imagine how different the world would be if diks, from the outset, had been located in the middle of guys'  backs

PZ547 wrote on Feb 11^th, 2019 at 12:53pm:

. Imagine how different the world would be if diks, from the outset, had been located in the middle of guys'  backs

Women of the world would be saying to us "Giddy Up!" and taking us all for the ride of our lives!

PZ547 wrote on Feb 11^th, 2019 at 12:53pm:

. Imagine how different the world would be if diks, from the outset, had been located in the middle of guys'  backs

https://e3.365dm.com/18/06/768x432/skynews-trump-kim-korea-summit_4333933.jpg

https://media.newyorker.com/photos/5b202bd351be6127672ad304/master/w_727,c_limit/Osnos-TrumpKimSummit.jpg

You got a problem with PEACEFUL SOLUTIONS?
Eh, Peckerhead?
You are such social suckback!  ::)

Jasin wrote on Feb 11^th, 2019 at 12:47pm:

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Feb 11th, 2019 at 12:43pm: Jasin wrote on Feb 11th, 2019 at 12:14pm: Aussie wrote on Feb 10th, 2019 at 2:59pm: Gordon wrote on Feb 10th, 2019 at 2:44pm: Why not post yours, El Turdo marrón apestoso. Sorry to disappoint, I have none, other than those I know of professionally and what I have read since I retired. I have a ripper of a professional tale, but I'll keep it in reserve for later. I'll keep mine in reserve for later too. I'm ready to do my Ali counter-punch on Aussie after he unloads his 'tale' on everyone. Did I just put forth an act of violence onto Aussie if he posted 'his tale' later? Well, now - I guess when it does indeed come to the El Turdo marrón apestoso - he is automatically 'guilty as charged' and deserves everything he gets coming to him by a vast 'majority' of Members here. Or would he like to put it to a Poll?  :-? The thing about Aussie is, that he is no 'Ex-Lawyer' anymore. He's just a 'Scammer' now (the 'Criminal' of the Court). Embracing the new technology of the Net to further his cause for power and wealth. Better still - let's not make it personal in any way... BTW - Aussie lambasted me for my pious attitude and high horse etc yesterday for suggesting that we do the same - so feel free to join in.. it's all water off a duck's back to me... Let's leave the personal spite out of it...  8-) For you most honorable Ye Grappler. I will forfeit my above post in this Topic.

I knew there was a heart of gold in there............. yesterday I sort of defended Greg, and Aussie went for me... oh, well... too much backplay going on....

"Interference with the player off the ball.... fifteen yard penalty.. first down..."

The OP didn't provide links or really any indication of what we were intended to draw from it, although it seems it touches on DV laws -- domestic violence

Ok. In Qld, until 1988 I believe, it was open slather for violent offenders in the home

Another neighbour, second marriage, working mother, five kids in all.  Three of his and two of hers

Once she married him, he changed. He was no longer forced to pick his kids up from school, do the grocery route, make the dinner, supervise homework, take kids to extracurricular activities, etc.  All that fell on the second wife

He arrived home late and drunk as had become his habit. He enjoyed turning up his stereo to full pelt and too bad about homework or younger kids being in bed

She protested by retreating.  He went looking for her. He was angry with someone or something which had occurred at the club/pub and had taken it home as had already become evident

Worried about escalation, she gathered the kids and prepared to take them to a motel nearby for the night.  He wrenched her hands and fingers until she was forced to release her car's keys.  He smashed the phone (dial-up) when she tried to call for help

More to drink and he tried to snap her forearm over his knee, talking to himself, 'Why isn't this working? It's supposed to break '.  He told the kids he'd been trained how to break arms in the Army Reserve. He was apparently chuckling to himself.  Kids were white faced in shock. The woman told them throughout that it was ok, don't worry, because it 'wasn't really hurting'

The kids started screaming.  He took off -- bit more to drink.  One of the kids ran to a neighbour to call the police

Police sauntered up, two of them.  No hurry.  Took the husband aside and asked what gives.  He was swigging a stubbie, laughed it off, said it was nothing, just she was a pain and he'd shouted a bit

Cops entered the house.  Woman was there, plus neighbour and the kids, half hiding behind stuff.  One cop bailed up the woman, said the husband had claimed it was nothing and all her fault.  Woman read the coppers mood straight away as did neighbour

Woman said, 'Look at me.  Tell me it's nothing'.  Her work outfit looked as if she'd been in an accident -- buttons torn off, one shoe missing, hair ripped out, etc.  Her throat and chest were still red raw. The unbroken arm at that point showed no injury -- she didn't even mention it

Cop on his own now while the other one was chatting amiably with the husband out on the lawn.  Cop inside the house assumed he was judge and jury.  Demanded of the woman, 'What did you do to make him turn on you?' or words to that effect.  Woman replied, ' I was here when he got home'.  Cop took another tack -- 'Why do you reckon he did it ?'.  She replied, 'Because he enjoys it'.

Cops weren't satisfied. They seemed to like the husband and didn't like the wife and didn't appear to want to do anything.  So they asked which of the kids were the husband's biological children. And from those, they chose the youngest and least likely to provide a coherent account about her own father.  But the little girl surprised everyone by telling the cops exactly what had happened, including the attempted arm-snapping and said everything had been fine and peaceful until Dad came home

Cops were not pleased.  Told the wife in an unfriendly voice that they'd be taking her husband away to cool down for the night.  Off they went with the husband

Woman and the kids were still shaky and in shock, especially the little ones who'd been in bed when it started.  So the woman suggested they make some pikelets, which cheered them up

Ten minutes later, just when they were beginning to relax a bit, they heard the sound of a car in the driveway.  Headlights.  The husband and father was staggering drunkenly towards the house.  Terrified, the woman's neighbour ran to her own house and phoned the police to say the husband had returned and was growling, drunk, was pointing into the house and the gathered wife and kids and looked 'evil'.  Weren't the police supposed to have taken him away for the night, she asked.  Police voice down the phone dismissed her concerns and snapped that they had better things to do than run back and forth to the house all night -- so 'just don't annoy him'.

Fortunately, the husband had caught a taxi back to his house to get his own car.  He took off in his own car minutes later.  Next day, he pretended to his family and neighbours alike that nothing had happened. He just brass-necked it through.  Police never followed up

It wasn't until 1988, apparently, that police in Qld were required to remove violent domestic offenders.  Until then, cops usually told women and kids there was 'nothing we can do' -- until copious bloodshed and at least a body resulted

Now there are claims that DV laws are being gamed and no doubt they are.  But there's a long way to go before the gaming catches up with the inequality which was sanctioned for hundreds of years prior

.
Good one Greg  ;D

It would be all right if we were talking only about genuinely violent offenders - we are not when we are discussing 'domestic violence laws' - even though far too many assume that because of the title, this means violence has taken place.

Genuinely violent offenders were, as I wrote to the nsw law reform commission in 1992, already subject to laws of assault, and any 'law' that claimed to be a preventative for violence - i.e. one that acted on the vague possibility that violence may occur but had not done so - was illegal and was itself an act of violence.

That is the root cause of the escalating violence between women and men..... and pushing it harder will not alter that, only create more violence.

You cannot achieve peace in the Pacific by bombing Pearl Harbour.   ::)

Now the subject was the way some people use these 'laws' to gain advantage - that they are permitted and even encouraged to do so is cruel and unconscionable, and the only solution is to abolish these 'laws' and create new ones that accurately reflect realities and give genuinely equal treatment to all parties - as Law demands.

PZ547 wrote on Feb 11^th, 2019 at 1:28pm:

Now there are claims that DV laws are being gamed and no doubt they are.  But there's a long way to go before the gaming catches up with the inequality which was sanctioned for hundreds of years prior

I've bee hunting around this DV issue a bit as it seems to be I find myself somewhat surrounded nowadays by broken families of one sort or another. If we want to get into sheer absolute numbers of real DV cases as you seem intent on then you might want to do some real genuine analysis rather then continue to propagate that which has been fed by the mainstream media.
For starters the numbers of actual DV cases in relationships is not as portrayed. Australia's own government puts the estimate at around 15%. Too high no doubt, but the way it is portrayed in the media right now it seems forgotten that the corresponding reality is that 85% of all relationships are fine in this area. It seems currently that the popular position to uphold and propagate is that ALL men are evil and violate women, that is simply an utter untruth.
In the USA the government figures state roughly 25% of divorces list intimate partner violence as reason for initiating divorce. (Allen DW, Brinig M. Anticipated and unanticipated legal changes: The case of joint parenting. Unpublished manuscript, February 2007. Table 7, Column 2)
Roughly 70% of these are deemed to be unnecessary or false (Johnston J et al. Allegations and substantiations of abuse in custody-disputing families.Family Court Review, Vol. 43, No. 2.)
Foster BP. Analyzing the cost and effectiveness of governmental policies. Cost Management, Vol. 22, No. 3.)
Do some figures in your head and work out just how many real cases of DV actually exist in real figures. Also note that real figures show there are more made up reported DV cases then actual reported DV cases. That's what 70 percent of DV allegations being found to be unnecessary or false means.
The list goes on and on once you start looking but these true figures are not disseminated in the media or to the generally ignorant uninformed public who think they know something but actually have no real idea.
Now I'm a married man with a young daughter and believe the blokes who revert to this type of stuff can be strung up as far I'm concerned HOWEVER. I am sick and tired of being told everywhere I look that men are evil, women "bashers" who need to be struck down in some way as some sort of payback. Comments like yours above are a classic example of the way it filters through all sections of the community. Stating to the effect we don't need to worry about the innocent falsely accused as it doesn't make up for the years of those not held to account,is absolutely disgusting in my view. It is no different to saying well they abused you so abuse them back, because we all know two wrongs make a right >:(
I could rattle off just as many personal cases of friends and relatives I happen to know right now who have been destroyed by either proven or suspected false allegations of violence. Not the least of which include the 10 year old and 8 year old daughters of a family friend I have been asked to provide a stable, "good" male influence for and are here right now at the suggestion of case workers as they are struggling terribly and longing for a father I actually believe has been falsely accused of DV. Or the friends who have donated over twenty years of their lives to fostering more then twenty severly abused children, removed from proven violent, incapable or incarcerated parents, who have just completed the year from hell due to now legally proven false allegations from one of their own adopted daughters. Unfortunately this girl had a terrible start to life (drug addict mother) and despite my friends best efforts including eventual adoption and years of treatment ended up in a bikie drug den owing lots of money. She reverted to accusing her foster dad of sexual impropriety to extort money from her own step dad. She even got the bikies to assist her and threaten her step dad before it all came out.  It was sheer hell but of course they stood resilient until the truth was discovered. The male had to actually leave his own house and own "paternal" kids for a year as they were deemed at risk as well during the whole ordeal. Absolutely soul destroying for everyone, not to mention the exposed young kids to the whole farce and sheer maliciousness of it all. The system allows this.
I can raise more cases believe me. The system is absolutely broken. There has been an assumption during its creation by complete imbecile intelligentsia that somehow women are not as capable as  men when it comes to taking advantage of others or scheming and manipulating. What a sexist diatribe that is. Women have always been as capable as men in this area. Even social sciences suggest women are far better at it actually as the skill has been needed, developed and wielded by an otherwise physically weaker mate.
The system is most certainly terminal as it stands. There are so many laws and regulations in place it seems impossible the west could find a way back to some semblance of equal ACCOUNTABILITY  in this area. Especially when there are ever growing numbers of under educated, lower IQ individuals laying claim to some semblance of expertise and knowledge in the area disseminating the current apparent man hate throughout the west in general.

I can raise more cases believe me. The system is absolutely broken. There has been an assumption during its creation by complete imbecile intelligentsia that somehow women are not as capable as  men when it comes to taking advantage of others or scheming and manipulating. What a sexist diatribe that is. Women have always been as capable as men in this area. Even social sciences suggest women are far better at it actually as the skill has been needed, developed and wielded by an otherwise physically weaker mate.
The system is most certainly terminal as it stands. There are so many laws and regulations in place it seems impossible the west could find a way back to some semblance of equal ACCOUNTABILITY  in this area. Especially when there are ever growing numbers of under educated, lower IQ individuals laying claim to some semblance of expertise and knowledge in the area disseminating the current apparent man hate throughout the west in general.



of course you can goosecat.. most of us can even today men are being released from jail after many years  when they have suddenly been found NOT GUILTY.. this happens quite often.....are you suggesting we do not jail people now incase as time goes by they may be proved to be innocent....

where do you draw a line....a father has been accused by either child or another adult.....

would you suggest we leave the father in the family home until .. A VERDICT! someone has decided someone is lying..

how would you protect the father and the children???...

I have already said we need penalties for women who abuse the law and make false claims  and yes it should be harsh.....

but as well you know   not all accusations are LIES.      

cods wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 5:30am:

I can raise more cases believe me. The system is absolutely broken. There has been an assumption during its creation by complete imbecile intelligentsia that somehow women are not as capable as  men when it comes to taking advantage of others or scheming and manipulating. What a sexist diatribe that is. Women have always been as capable as men in this area. Even social sciences suggest women are far better at it actually as the skill has been needed, developed and wielded by an otherwise physically weaker mate. The system is most certainly terminal as it stands. There are so many laws and regulations in place it seems impossible the west could find a way back to some semblance of equal ACCOUNTABILITY  in this area. Especially when there are ever growing numbers of under educated, lower IQ individuals laying claim to some semblance of expertise and knowledge in the area disseminating the current apparent man hate throughout the west in general. of course you can goosecat.. most of us can even today men are being released from jail after many years  when they have suddenly been found NOT GUILTY.. this happens quite often.....are you suggesting we do not jail people now incase as time goes by they may be proved to be innocent.... where do you draw a line....a father has been accused by either child or another adult..... would you suggest we leave the father in the family home until .. A VERDICT! someone has decided someone is lying.. how would you protect the father and the children???... I have already said we need penalties for women who abuse the law and make false claims  and yes it should be harsh..... but as well you know   not all accusations are LIES.

Yes, cods - you are on the Light Side here... can anyone imagine the pain a man goes through from being accused of such things, and from being torn from his children?  Savagery at its very lowest, and should be punished by law, not just:- 'Oh, well ...  (wait for it)...... girls will be girls and bitch about blokes!"

These bastard courts are encouraging women to do these things and get away with it, and don't try to tell me it's not part of The Agenda.

When somewhere around 10% are clinical nutters - how do you ever arrive at truth?  Then there are the ones who chase 'bad boys' and then have 'issues' for life.... avoid like the plague ANY woman who tells you tales of how horrible her hubby (or equivalent) was, especially when they are clear drug users etc, either past or present.... they live in an insane world and are insane.

Look at the strand on whether or not reality is optional these days... in the Land of Liars even kids learn how to lie in the approved way using the right words - I've seen it.  Now someone tell me the schools have nothing to do with it.... and The Agenda.

War on Men has to be stopped - I tweeted that to Shorten and got heaps of thumbs-ups.. often from women.

If the mother of my child suddenly turned on me and created a heap of lies to aid her war against me (Propaganda to the child) - then I would not 'fight' her on her game plan.

I would deny, put up my wall - but not attack back.
In time, I would leave it to my child to grow and find out the truth for herself. Coming to know that I did not attack the mother back in the first place and just defended my self against her false accusations.
If the Daughter does not 'come around' when an adult - then so be it. Such is life and why 'hang around' like a criminal, on the subject?  :-? ::) :P

Deleted

Again, you are not looking at the issues surrounding domestic violence 'laws' - you are missing the forest for the trees.... we can all see and describe trees....

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 10:36pm:

Again, you are not looking at the issues surrounding domestic violence 'laws' - you are missing the forest for the trees.... we can all see and describe trees....

Ok. Fair enough.  I'm going to delete it and my other posts in this thread.  Give me a minute ...

.
No, I could only delete the most recent

In part, you wrote this:
As I've said many times before - the current one-sided and frankly insane approach to this essential non-issue - non-issue because it does not address violence but only the claimed remote distant possibility of violence and in doing so is itself violence writ large against a selected segment of the community, a direct breach of human rights law, as well as a direct attack on legal and civil rights with the clear intent of establishing feminist/gynocratic control over society and all relationships within it - is not only creating, but is in fact, a gender war organised, promoted and encouraged by governments.


Ok, take your time and explain what you meant by the above.  Maybe examples would help

Until I hear further from you, I'll tell you what your post sounds like to me

It sounds as if you've either fallen foul of DV laws, or someone close to you has

Sounds as if you've spent a lot of time in men's power forums

Sounds as if you're very angry that women are in positions of power, in government and therefore in the community

Sounds as if you do not believe men should be held to account, especially by women with the power to incarcerate or otherwise punish men for bashing, raping, bullying women and kids

You said elsewhere that you've turned 70, so no doubt you came from an era when men were not held accountable and in fact the bashing, raping, bullying etc. of women and kids by men was standard behaviour -- was accepted -- was dismissed by authorities

Now men are being held accountable, you believe their punishment is tantamount to a 'gender war'.  And because there are more women in government, you believe it's a gender war being waged by feminists

Ok. As a 70 year old, you would have been mid to late 20s when no-fault divorce laws were introducted back in the mid-70s

and back then, the new family-courts were empowered to instruct newly divorced men to provide financially for their children.  It outraged men and a few family court judges were blown up and had other attempts made on their lives by men who were outraged when told that yes, their wives could legally divorce them and also, the father must support his children at set amounts.  Men were outraged.  And they couldn't lay the blame at the feet of feminists, because these were other men -- men with specific authority and qualifications, etc. -- who were telling men to support their own flesh and blood and to get over the fact the missus had had a gutful of being bashed and expected to raise a family on the smell of an oily rag

What did a lot of men do?  They denied earning a wage.  They refused to financially support their kids and in the main did not.  Which forced other men -- married, single, fathers and the childless -- to support the kids of recalcitrant fathers

Those deadbeat dads as they're known, were raised in an age where women were considered second-class citizens.  They were sacked from their jobs when the men came home from war. If they managed to retain a job, they were paid half that of men. They were beaten and raped and blamed for 'provoking' the man to beat them and 'inviting' rape by their attire.  The only thing a married woman could take with her if she left a brutal spouse was a sewing machine.  Look it up. It  had to be real bad for a woman to venture into the world with half a dozen kids and a sewing machine to feed them all.  Men had women over the barrel and everyone knew that.  Very few if any women in parliament.  Men were tin gods and believed that was right and that it should continue.  Boys were favoured and educated. Girls were fit to be married-off and had to leave school and start putting a glory-box together.  Men considered it their right to gamble, drink, smoke and visit brothels.  Women had to ask permission to buy a piece of fabric or new hat and had to get the old man in a good mood to wangle some money out of him to pay for kids' school needs, shoes, etc. or new curtains.  These days, they call those bad old days, the era of the patriarchy. And men were not writing off in protest as you say you have in relation to DV laws


Men are still bitching about being required to financially contribute to their own children's support as dozens of men's rights sites attest.  They're very inventive about the wrongs they claim women and 'feminists' are inflicting upon poor men.  Those poor men claim they can't afford to support their past kids because they have a new wife and kids to support.  Well, maybe they should petition parliament to have their first lot of kids killed?  Is it the kids' fault their old man liked to throw his fists around after the grog to which he believes he's entitled?  Or maybe if their bitch first wife had just had the sense to shut up and cop it, there wouldn't have been a divorce.  Because men aren't ready to accept responsibility. And those in authority and empowered to garnish their wages or imprison them for domestic violence are ball-breaking, lesbian feminists who need pulling into line, apparently

Of course there will be manipulation and abuse of DV laws, in the same way it exists in relation to all laws.  How about plea deals and early parole -- did you write off and inform the legal system they were contravening human-rights? 

.
And I'm continuing:

Let's dispense once and for all with the notion that women are required to be superior to men in terms of morality, integrity, etc.

because it's unrealistic.  It's said that men have a black/white impression of women, known as the Madonna/Whore syndrome

men give themselves leave to be all over the spectrum, however.  If they're the male version of the female Whore, the man is known as a Jack the Lad, a Ladies Man, and other admiring descriptions

well, there are female equivalents.  There are female Square Bears and Female Players.  And they come in all shapes and sizes, most inspire lust. And they end up marrying and in most cases, produce children

Maybe the woman is bored with home and kids and sleeps around.  Maybe her spouse is lousy in bed, stingy with money, unemployed, a mummy's boy, neurotic, has paedophilliac tendencies or a strong liking for his best friend Stewart.  Whatever the case, the woman doesn't give a damn if the marriage survives. And when it ends, she wants the kids.  Maybe the reason she wants the kids is entirely mercenary

OR, maybe the reason the husband fights for the kids is the fact jobs are real hard to find and he's only working two days a week and the government handout for three kids seems like a lot of money

So off they go to court to fight for those little pots of gold ... the kids.  And in order to win, maybe that slutty wife of his claims he, the spouse/partner cannot be trusted to have those kids because she, wifey, has seen paedo material on his phone before he deleted it and threw the phone in an incinerator

or maybe he or she claims the other parent was abusive to the kids.  And perhaps one or more of the kids was coached/threatened to go along with that

Who would want to be the judge?  So yes, BS works and the system is abused and the losing parent complains and drives themself and friends/family, appeals courts etc, nuts

What's the solution?  There isn't one.  Humans are what they are for better or worse.  Judges same. Dirty tricks abound. Injustice happens 24/7.  It destroys lives.  But we're not going to dump the system.  It will carry on, maybe tweaked here and there

When male family court judges were required to arbitrate, they were threatened daily by angry men and often angry women

Now women are entering the halls of power, they're required to pass judgement.  Which is reasonable, don't you feel, considering women comprise slightly more than 50% of the world's population

Men's complaints to DV courts was that their wife 'abused' them verbally.  How many times? They replied well, once when I'd stayed out all night, then another -- year later -- when I said something that annoyed her.  But it WAS abuse.  It gave me depression.  Ask my doctor

Some men claim they were physically abused -- slaps, pinches, even punches.  And note -- where are the editorials and firm denunciation by wigged judges deciding the man 'provoked' and 'invited' it the way women were and are blamed.  Have you seen the blame heaped online on the Israeli girl who was raped, tortured and murdered last month?  It was 'her fault' apparently, for getting off the train at that point (and never mind she lived on campus). It was 'her fault' for walking from the train to campus (was she supposed to sleep in a ditch all night as a way of avoiding any random rapist who might be around? 

So if a woman loves a man sufficiently to bear his child, to carry it around in her body for nine months and endure what is often a very painful birthing experience -- is she supposed to surrender that child to the man when he tells the court he'd be the better parent, could provide it greater opportunities, greater lifestyle, etc.?  And if he backs it up by claiming the girl he so efficiently disillusioned that she left him is now guilty of 'abuse' of the child, either physically, mentally, emotionally or sexually -- is that not manipulation and abuse of the process?  And if his motives are solely financially based insofar as he would rather stick pins in his eyes before he'd pay one cent of child support, or perhaps he feels he's entitled to taxpayer money in the form of govt. child support -- is that not abuse and manipulation of the system?  Because we didnt' come down in the last shower and yes -- men are as adept at manipulation and blatant lying as are women

So sure, the system is being gamed every day and we are all losers as result, because some of those 'pawn' kids carry the scars, and very often they become problems for society and once again, society is compelled to devise systems to remedy and repair that -- and again, more manipulation and abuse of the system

Do women approach matters differently to men?  Sometimes, not always.  Do women entrusted with power and authority abuse their position?  As often as men, no doubt.  Is that a surprise and if so, why?  Once again, women comprise slightly more than half of the world's population


so why not call them 'human' instead of the divisive 'feminists' -- because surely there's a male equivalent for the word 'feminist'?  What is it?  What was it all those years when women were receiving half men's pay for the same work?  What did they call that?  When cops refused to intervene in 'domestics' -- what did they call that? 

All's fair in love and war.  Isn't that the case? Isn't that what we're told? And isn't it 'war' in family courts and DV cases?  Why the surprise if women learned how to fight like men?

In part, you wrote this:
As I've said many times before - the current one-sided and frankly insane approach to this essential non-issue - non-issue because it does not address violence but only the claimed remote distant possibility of violence and in doing so is itself violence writ large against a selected segment of the community, a direct breach of human rights law, as well as a direct attack on legal and civil rights with the clear intent of establishing feminist/gynocratic control over society and all relationships within it - is not only creating, but is in fact, a gender war organised, promoted and encouraged by governments.


DV laws, as opposed to actual incidents of violence, DO NOT ADDRESS VIOLENCE.  they address a 'complaint' based on a 'feeling', and suffer from an utter lack of requirement for proof, and are intended to PREVENT violence - NOT PUNISH IT.

An act of violence was always punishable under existing law, and this is NOT CRIMINAL law - it is CIVIL law (allegedly), which means it has NOTHING to do with punishing a person, and nor should it.

You, like far too many others, have been lured into the false belief that because the title of these ILLEGAL laws contains the word 'violence' -they are addressing violence, when they are doing no such thing.  They are addressing complaints and whining based on a zero standard of proof, and are far too often supporting, condoning and encouraging a control over relationships by one side without any consideration for the rights and entitlements of the other - in an allegedly adult relationship.

How hard  is that?

NOT HARD AT ALL.  Now get with the program - support abolition of this current nonsense, wherein the State has arrogated unto itself some 'right' to unmitigated violence in some fantasy social program - and work for a better solution before a full scale war breaks out, and the casualty rate from this insanity rises beyond any reason.

First of all - REMOVE THE WORD 'VIOLENCE' from dealing with these things and replace it with 'Dispute.

Secondly - make it even-handed and two-sided.

Thirdly - deal with FACTS and not purported 'feelings'.

What the hell is wrong with you people?  Do you somehow imagine it is perfectly all right for a man to be attacked by the forces of law, dragged into a court to have no right of response to some flimsy allegations of possible violence, and even be sent to prison for the same thing and on the same values?

If every time a woman disagreed with a man in the house etc, she was dragged before a court and sanctioned by that court on his complaint ONLY, and was sent to prison for any repeat 'offence' - what would be your reaction?

Again - what the hell is wrong with you people?  Do you suffer from some strange beleif that because somewhere in the distant past some sheila was actually bashed by a bloke, that all men even remotely suspected of the vague possibility of such a thing should be dragged into court and sanctioned without means of defence?

This is like the idiots who run around and crow that since men had it so good for so long, it's perfectly all right to rob them of rights, oppportunities, livelihoods and everything else  to 'balance' mythical past wrongs. 

It is also like the idiots who run around preaching that since the White man did so much to Indigenes, any White man they dislike should cop some punishment such as removal of land bought and owned for generations, be turfed out of home, and hand it all over to some group who may or may not have any relation to the original group who claim to have suffered.

You are, frankly, sick and twisted individuals in a very sick and increasingly sick country.

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Feb 12^th, 2019 at 7:40am:

cods wrote on Feb 12th, 2019 at 5:30am: I can raise more cases believe me. The system is absolutely broken. There has been an assumption during its creation by complete imbecile intelligentsia that somehow women are not as capable as  men when it comes to taking advantage of others or scheming and manipulating. What a sexist diatribe that is. Women have always been as capable as men in this area. Even social sciences suggest women are far better at it actually as the skill has been needed, developed and wielded by an otherwise physically weaker mate. The system is most certainly terminal as it stands. There are so many laws and regulations in place it seems impossible the west could find a way back to some semblance of equal ACCOUNTABILITY  in this area. Especially when there are ever growing numbers of under educated, lower IQ individuals laying claim to some semblance of expertise and knowledge in the area disseminating the current apparent man hate throughout the west in general. of course you can goosecat.. most of us can even today men are being released from jail after many years  when they have suddenly been found NOT GUILTY.. this happens quite often.....are you suggesting we do not jail people now incase as time goes by they may be proved to be innocent.... where do you draw a line....a father has been accused by either child or another adult..... would you suggest we leave the father in the family home until .. A VERDICT! someone has decided someone is lying.. how would you protect the father and the children???... I have already said we need penalties for women who abuse the law and make false claims  and yes it should be harsh..... but as well you know   not all accusations are LIES.       Yes, cods - you are on the Light Side here... can anyone imagine the pain a man goes through from being accused of such things, and from being torn from his children?  Savagery at its very lowest, and should be punished by law, not just:- 'Oh, well ...  (wait for it)...... girls will be girls and bitch about blokes!" These bastard courts are encouraging women to do these things and get away with it, and don't try to tell me it's not part of The Agenda. When somewhere around 10% are clinical nutters - how do you ever arrive at truth?  Then there are the ones who chase 'bad boys' and then have 'issues' for life.... avoid like the plague ANY woman who tells you tales of how horrible her hubby (or equivalent) was, especially when they are clear drug users etc, either past or present.... they live in an insane world and are insane. Look at the strand on whether or not reality is optional these days... in the Land of Liars even kids learn how to lie in the approved way using the right words - I've seen it.  Now someone tell me the schools have nothing to do with it.... and The Agenda. War on Men has to be stopped - I tweeted that to Shorten and got heaps of thumbs-ups.. often from women.

the war on men   for the sake of ward  I agree...


the same goes for the war on women..

you had not a nice experience with a women... and that has definitely played a part in your attacks on all women...

you dont like men being classified as ALL MEN.....neither do I.. nor do I like women being classified as ALL WOMEN.....which is how it comes across in your posts....

the law has no SEX attached to it..it all comes down to who is believed.... when the family court gets involved it is all emotional.... the dv part is usually over....it now comes down to compromise....

at the end of the day   your arguments are all about the adults......in a lot of cases the law is there to protect the children..

thats what you need to look at...

Jesus, cods - I don't 'attack' women - I attack stupid governments etc that permit and actively encourage this sort of insanity to flourish.

Ask any woman I know... I'm the sweetest and most gentle person you could meet and am incredibly loyal and supportive and always ready to help and do things for them.

As such - like most men - I (and they) deserve far better treatment.

Like so many others - YOU need to sort out the difference between attacking falsely based issues and attacking people.

As I said - you and PZ - start looking at the forest and not the trees...

I suppose next you will be supporting any move to instantly lock up any man 'accused' under these  allegedly civil 'laws'.... pure insanity.

Stop blaming the real victim.

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Feb 13^th, 2019 at 8:46am:

Jesus, cods - I don't 'attack' women - I attack stupid governments etc that permit and actively encourage this sort of insanity to flourish. Ask any woman I know... I'm the sweetest and most gentle person you could meet and am incredibly loyal and supportive and always ready to help and do things for them. As such - like most men - I (and they) deserve far better treatment. Like so many others - YOU need to sort out the difference between attacking falsely based issues and attacking people. As I said - you and PZ - start looking at the forest and not the trees... I suppose next you will be supporting any move to instantly lock up any man 'accused' under these  allegedly civil 'laws'.... pure insanity. Stop blaming the real victim.

you do attack women   and you do blame them   constantly....

I give up    no one accepts what they do or say on here..

I am over it..

"when the family court gets involved it is all emotional.... the dv part is usually over...."

No - it is not.. often the 'family' court is just the beginning of complaints that never saw the light of day previously, and the 'family' court is hopelessly biased against men.

PZ's facile comment that just because a woman gave birth means she should keep the hostages, is nonsense - and any decision should be based purely on a factual rendition of which parent would make the better carer.. and even then, it should be shared parenting and not one way.

Until fair dealing on FACTS is the norm, there will never be a resolution to this war declared by government on men, and it is government that bears the responsibility for the rising casualties, especially with a labor government setting fair to increase the violence against men in the forlorn hope that such a move will prevent violence....

Sure - when the sun rises in the West.  All such a move will achieve is more abused, radicalised and polarised men who WILL respond at an escalating rate TO THE VIOLENCE HANDED TO THEM FOR LITTLE TO NO REASON.

Now wake up and think for a change, you people.

... and a deathly silence fell over the bloodied field as a blood-red sun sank below the horizon........

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Feb 13^th, 2019 at 8:54am:

"when the family court gets involved it is all emotional.... the dv part is usually over...." No - it is not.. often the 'family' court is just the beginning of complaints that never saw the light of day previously, and the 'family' court is hopelessly biased against men. PZ's facile comment that just because a woman gave birth means she should keep the hostages, is nonsense - and any decision should be based purely on a factual rendition of which parent would make the better carer.. and even then, it should be shared parenting and not one way. Until fair dealing on FACTS is the norm, there will never be a resolution to this war declared by government on men, and it is government that bears the responsibility for the rising casualties, especially with a labor government setting fair to increase the violence against men in the forlorn hope that such a move will prevent violence.... Sure - when the sun rises in the West.  All such a move will achieve is more abused, radicalised and polarised men who WILL respond at an escalating rate TO THE VIOLENCE HANDED TO THEM FOR LITTLE TO NO REASON. Now wake up and think for a change, you people.

I only have one or two storied about the family court system.... and so far its been pretty equal.....and yes in both cases the female was the baddy...demanding and spiteful....but she was put in her place  by the court system.....you make a huge thing about the court   yet its thanks to people thats where they end up.....

if people put their children first there would be no need for a FAMILY COURT...to tell them what to do....

the court is there as a last resort.....you act is if its compulsory....

but you only want people who agree with you?? ::) ::)

cods wrote on Feb 13^th, 2019 at 9:45am:

but you only want people who agree with you?? ::) ::)

Don't care - as long as they stick to facts.... and the facts are that 'domestic violence laws' are civil actions intended to prevent violence - and yet they are themselves violence and often the first act of real violence that starts the chain...

And the issue is that far too many are gaming these laws to gain advantage in family and other courts..... this must cease and be replaced with facts alone, not claimed 'feelings'.

While we're on the subject of validating feelings - let's validate and empower that bloke in Glen Innes who felt so bad about it that he felt the need to shoot two cops.... equality all the way, eh?  If feelings are all that counts, the world is your oyster, and nothing is wrong or illegal.  :-/

cods wrote on Feb 13^th, 2019 at 9:44am:

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Feb 13th, 2019 at 8:54am: "when the family court gets involved it is all emotional.... the dv part is usually over...." No - it is not.. often the 'family' court is just the beginning of complaints that never saw the light of day previously, and the 'family' court is hopelessly biased against men. PZ's facile comment that just because a woman gave birth means she should keep the hostages, is nonsense - and any decision should be based purely on a factual rendition of which parent would make the better carer.. and even then, it should be shared parenting and not one way. Until fair dealing on FACTS is the norm, there will never be a resolution to this war declared by government on men, and it is government that bears the responsibility for the rising casualties, especially with a labor government setting fair to increase the violence against men in the forlorn hope that such a move will prevent violence.... Sure - when the sun rises in the West.  All such a move will achieve is more abused, radicalised and polarised men who WILL respond at an escalating rate TO THE VIOLENCE HANDED TO THEM FOR LITTLE TO NO REASON. Now wake up and think for a change, you people. I only have one or two storied about the family court system.... and so far its been pretty equal.....and yes in both cases the female was the baddy...demanding and spiteful....but she was put in her place  by the court system.....you make a huge thing about the court   yet its thanks to people thats where they end up..... if people put their children first there would be no need for a FAMILY COURT...to tell them what to do.... the court is there as a last resort.....you act is if its compulsory....

When women initiate nearly 90% of divorce/separation proceedings - mostly for reasons totally unrelated to violence - perhaps steps need to be taken to prevent this kind of behaviour on their part... let's introduce a rule that the person who wishes to abandon/break the family relationship is the one to leave the family home and start again, and must leave the family intact at its home with the person who wishes to retain the family relationship.  The person wishing to leave can then visit and pay child support.... but the FAMILY must remain intact in its home with the one who wishes to preserve that family - NOT the one intent on destroying it for selfish reasons.

ALL claims of 'family violence' must be fully assessed on PROVABLE facts, not on someone's 'feelings' that they allege they have.  Alleging violence is NOT a civil action, nor is imprisoning someone on the basis of someone else's claimed 'feelings'.

Which 'court' are you saying is a 'last resort'?  An application under the current false 'dv' (anti) laws is readily available on no evidence, let alone proof, and is upheld by the same lack of standard, on any whim, in other words....

And you say this is not violence against the one accused?

.
Just my opinion based on what you've said, Grappler, but you need to keep away from those men's rights groups.  You're incapable of seeing anything other than what you want to see

further, don't tell me what to do or how to think

and -- you may believe you're the final word
-- but you're far from it

you sound toxic

and extremely misogynistic

do you realise how you come across?

PZ547 wrote on Feb 13^th, 2019 at 10:36am:

. Just my opinion based on what you've said, Grappler, but you need to keep away from those men's rights groups.  You're incapable of seeing anything other than what you want to see further, don't tell me what to do or how to think and -- you may believe you're the final word -- but you're far from it you sound toxic and extremely misogynistic do you realise how you come across?

I'm a Men's Rights Group of one - I don't go anywhere near them... they are not yet sufficiently radicalised and they tend to believe that reason and decency will prevail in a knife fight.

My view is that you and countless others should steer clear of the propaganda and the mainstream media bullshit on these issues,and seek to fully understand them. 

Less than 5% of callouts to police to attend 'family violence incidents' result in a charge.... yet somehow the courts are permitted to sanction ONE side of any dispute without reference to facts, and purely on the wish of the whiner, who may be motivated by any number of things, but certainly scarcely ever by reason.

Anyone who cannot see the dire consequences for the Rule of Law inherent in such things is blind.... and will one day pay the cost in some way.

Where you bin, Laden?

Quoting Grappler: 

Quote:

Less than 5% of callouts to police to attend 'family violence incidents' result in a charge.... yet somehow the courts are permitted to sanction ONE side of any dispute without reference to facts, and purely on the wish of the whiner, who may be motivated by any number of things, but certainly scarcely ever by reason

You say:
'Less than 5% of callouts to police to attend family violence incidents result in a charge'

You say: 
'Courts are permitted to sanction ONE side of any dispute ...'  and then you carry on with your personal interpretation as to the motives of the individual complaining about DV

Lot of definitions for 'sanction'
I'm going to accept first off the rank i.e., 'threat. threat of penalty'

Then we try to put the DV situation into some sort of perspective

As of 2016:

Quote:

Australian police dealt with a domestic violence matter every 2 minutes

Also in 2016:

Quote:

Australian police deal with 5000 domestic violence matter a week

and it adds that domestic violence matters in 2016 were 'up' 7% in that year, so obviously 7% more than the year previous

I don't have figures for 2018 -- look them up if you like

Obviously, those sanctioned and or charged for domestic violence offences were NOT put off by saturation advertising or public exposure -- ignored it in fact -- resulting in an increase in DV incidents by 7% in one year

If we multiply 5000 DV incidents per week by 52 weeks, it amounts to 260,000 DV incident per year from a population of roughly 25 million, a good proportion of whom are children

Then we have this, also from 2016:


Quote:

Police union warns officers are at 'breaking point' — May 29, 2018 - A 2016 Productivity Commission report puts police numbers at more than 70,000, with NSW representing the largest share, at more than 19,000 officers. That is around 200 officers per 100,000 people

.

Let's see that again:

200 officers per 100,000 people

to attend to murders
attempted murders
robberies
assorted violence
rapes
traffic
etc

In addition to attending crimes, officers are required to investigate all the above, compile documentation, etc.


Ok. Minnie phones the police to say Mickey is drunk, drugged, aggressive, has been threatening to take an axe to her. She's out on the lawn with the kids and neighbours, too scared to go inside her home

Police arrive, having just scraped two people off the bitumen after a two car accident which required them to shut down the road, observe removal of vehicles, etc.

They haven't had time to grab a drink of water, haven't eaten for hours, it's hot, other callouts are queued up

They call out to Mickey. He's in the garage, pissed, surly, mouthing off at Minnie and the neighbours. He's secreted the axe in the back yard.  He's done this sort of thing before

The cops ask Mickey if he has any weapons. Has he used drugs today. Denial. He stinks of grog. Claims 'she' threatened him first and used up his last ten dollars

Cops have an urgent callout. They give Mickey a warning then go out to Minnie who says he's gonna really do it one day.  Take him away, she tells the cops.  Cops reply that Mickey has been warned and has agreed to cut it out.  Any more problems, ring it through and someone will come out and speak to him again.  Minnie tells them they'll be responsible if Mickey kills her and the kids. What do I have to do to get through to you guys?  Cops get back in the patrol car and head out

If Minnie and Mickey go to court down the line, exhausted, overworked, understaffed officials will be required to listen (as they do all day) to he-said, she-said.  Cops are hearing it 'every two minutes -- 260,000 times a year.  One cop for every 500 Aussies


TV crime-shows deal with ONE incident during a 30 min or 60 min episode
Cops are dealing with an incident every two minutes

Police and DV courts are attempting to arbitrate and prevent violent offences which are stacking up around the clock. They do not have the resources to treat each incident as if it was a lengthy tv episode

Males commit the majority of DV offences.  Women and children are overwhelmingly the victims.  The statistics are stark

It's up to males to turn those stats around instead of waffling on about 'feminists' or, like you, claiming women shouldn't petition for divorce and then men wouldn't resort to so much domestic violence

PZ547 wrote on Feb 13^th, 2019 at 1:51pm:

Quoting Grappler:  Quote: Less than 5% of callouts to police to attend 'family violence incidents' result in a charge.... yet somehow the courts are permitted to sanction ONE side of any dispute without reference to facts, and purely on the wish of the whiner, who may be motivated by any number of things, but certainly scarcely ever by reason You say: 'Less than 5% of callouts to police to attend family violence incidents result in a charge' You say:  'Courts are permitted to sanction ONE side of any dispute ...'  and then you carry on with your personal interpretation as to the motives of the individual complaining about DV Lot of definitions for 'sanction' I'm going to accept first off the rank i.e., 'threat. threat of penalty' Then we try to put the DV situation into some sort of perspective As of 2016: [quote]Australian police dealt with a domestic violence matter every 2 minutes

Also in 2016:

Quote:

Australian police deal with 5000 domestic violence matter a week

and it adds that domestic violence matters in 2016 were 'up' 7% in that year, so obviously 7% more than the year previous

I don't have figures for 2018 -- look them up if you like

Obviously, those sanctioned and or charged for domestic violence offences were NOT put off by saturation advertising or public exposure -- ignored it in fact -- resulting in an increase in DV incidents by 7% in one year

If we multiply 5000 DV incidents per week by 52 weeks, it amounts to 260,000 DV incident per year from a population of roughly 25 million, a good proportion of whom are children

Then we have this, also from 2016:


Quote:

Police union warns officers are at 'breaking point' — May 29, 2018 - A 2016 Productivity Commission report puts police numbers at more than 70,000, with NSW representing the largest share, at more than 19,000 officers. That is around 200 officers per 100,000 people

.

Let's see that again:

200 officers per 100,000 people

to attend to murders
attempted murders
robberies
assorted violence
rapes
traffic
etc



[/quote]

You choose to overlook the point that 'dv laws' are NOT about violence - they are about complaints.  Since they do not encompass any genuine offence from the outset - under no circumstances should anyone be sent to prison over them.

There are other laws that handle that.

You talk rubbish about divorce - near 90% of such things are initiated by women for reasons having nothing to do with violence - then the system is often gamed to give them advantage.  The fact that such things can happen at all is sufficient reason to abolish these nonsenses.

You do NOT 'arbitrate and prevent' ANYTHING by slapping one person with the direct violence of dragging them into a court and handing them a sanction without reason while whole-heartedly accepting anything said by the other.  In that case you are the CAUSE of the problem - not its solution - and no amount of bullying and bullshit will alter that reality.

Keep thinking... you cannot win this by waffling on about some mythical Mickey pissed in the garage - that is NOT what normally occurs in these things.

Women initiate 62% of DV incidents, far more often than men using weapons such as knives etc - and suffer 62% of the injuries as a result.  Simply saying that men are bigger etc does not take away from women the responsibility to not behave like a child, and for her own actions.  To do so is often to blame the victim for defending self.

Go look up what passes for 'domestic violence' - but ONLY when it is claimed by women.  Essentially it is anything at all, without reference to facts.

Start by removing the word VIOLENCE from the equation unless and until a GENUINE act of violence has occurred.  There's a good start.  Even the use of such hyperbole is an incitement to use violence to resolve any complaint, no matter how trivial, and this kind of abuse of language has to be stopped NOW.

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Feb 13^th, 2019 at 2:15pm:

PZ547 wrote on Feb 13th, 2019 at 1:51pm: Quoting Grappler:  Quote: Less than 5% of callouts to police to attend 'family violence incidents' result in a charge.... yet somehow the courts are permitted to sanction ONE side of any dispute without reference to facts, and purely on the wish of the whiner, who may be motivated by any number of things, but certainly scarcely ever by reason You say: 'Less than 5% of callouts to police to attend family violence incidents result in a charge' You say:  'Courts are permitted to sanction ONE side of any dispute ...'  and then you carry on with your personal interpretation as to the motives of the individual complaining about DV Lot of definitions for 'sanction' I'm going to accept first off the rank i.e., 'threat. threat of penalty' Then we try to put the DV situation into some sort of perspective As of 2016: [quote]Australian police dealt with a domestic violence matter every 2 minutes Also in 2016: [quote]Australian police deal with 5000 domestic violence matter a week

and it adds that domestic violence matters in 2016 were 'up' 7% in that year, so obviously 7% more than the year previous

I don't have figures for 2018 -- look them up if you like

Obviously, those sanctioned and or charged for domestic violence offences were NOT put off by saturation advertising or public exposure -- ignored it in fact -- resulting in an increase in DV incidents by 7% in one year

If we multiply 5000 DV incidents per week by 52 weeks, it amounts to 260,000 DV incident per year from a population of roughly 25 million, a good proportion of whom are children

Then we have this, also from 2016:


Quote:

Police union warns officers are at 'breaking point' — May 29, 2018 - A 2016 Productivity Commission report puts police numbers at more than 70,000, with NSW representing the largest share, at more than 19,000 officers. That is around 200 officers per 100,000 people

.

Let's see that again:

200 officers per 100,000 people

to attend to murders
attempted murders
robberies
assorted violence
rapes
traffic
etc



[/quote]

You choose to overlook the point that 'dv laws' are NOT about violence - they are about complaints.  Since they do not encompass any genuine offence from the outset - under no circumstances should anyone be sent to prison over them.

There are other laws that handle that.

You talk rubbish about divorce - near 90% of such things are initiated by women for reasons having nothing to do with violence - then the system is often gamed to give them advantage.  The fact that such things can happen at all is sufficient reason to abolish these nonsenses.

You do NOT 'arbitrate and prevent' ANYTHING by slapping one person with the direct violence of dragging them into a court and handing them a sanction without reason while whole-heaertedly accdepting anyt  In that case you are the CAUSE of the problem - not its solution - and no amount of bullying and bullshit will alter that reality.

Keep thinking... you cannot win this by waffling on about some mythical Mickey pissed in the garage - that is NOT what normally occurs in these things.

Women initiate 62% of DV incidents, far more often than men using weapons such as knives etc - and suffer 62% of the injuries as a result.  Simply saying that men are bigger etc does not take away from women the responsibility to not behave like a child, and for her own actions.  To do so is often to blame the victim for defending self.

Go look up what passes for 'domestic violence' - but ONLY when it is claimed by women.  Essentially it is anything at all, without reference to facts.[/quote]


You're not worth the time or effort

You cannot be reasoned with

Keep pushing your barrow.  It will finish you off if you're not careful

All the way through, you damn women, blame women.  That's not logical

Just face it -- because it comes through everything you write very clearly -- you have it in for women.  You're like the self-righteous parent for whom the entire school and teachers are wrong for holding precious little Johnny to account

News reports tell the story.  And people read them.  You, however, obviously interpret evidence differently to everyone else


Ok. Sit and stew in it

No laws will change due to your biased input

It obviously enrages you when some bully comes home to dish it out to his wife, kids, parents, same sex partner, dog, etc. and is held to account

Strange he managed to control his rage at work, on the highway or in public transport on the way home

managed to control his rage when in the pub and surrounded by guys who'd delight in pushing his head in

managed to control his rage when waving to neighbours or phoning his parents

But 'lost control' at the sight of his wife, kids, partner -- the captive audience behind the front door

suddenly it's the wife, kids, dog which 'provoked' him

heard it hundreds of times. We all have

If DV laws weren't necessary, they wouldn't exist.  No one wants to listen to that poo or deal with it all day

anyway, off you go, tilting at windmills

'Radicalise' those mens groups.  Maybe they'll all take off their shirts and carry placards

Have a go at reversing divorce law too, while you're at it.  Get those women back in line

No, PZ - it is YOU who cannot be reasoned with.

You simply will NOT accept that the very vast majority of callouts for 'family violence' INVOLVE NO VIOLENCE, and should never even be called that, since to do so predisposes cops to arrive loaded for bear and actually create a situation.  Then it is the actions of courts in applying wrongful 'dv orders' at the drop of a hat which IS an act of violence, and is a root cause of further problems.  You simply cannot go about abusing people's rights and abusing them personally without getting a response.

Put simply you have no right to call  a disagreement between two alleged adults 'violence' by one side.  No right whatsoever... and the use of such language is inflammatory and is pure propaganda.

I've told you fools over and over - you do not resolve the issues of violence by using and even initiating violence to solve it...

Get over yourselves and this insane set of non-laws - and get used to the idea that the State has NO right to intervene without proper licence - i.e when a GENUINE act has occurred.

It is YOU who are carrying on this war... not those like me who are trying to stop it and prevent it getting worse due to the actions of those seeking to bully others on the basis of unsupported allegations.

Alphabet/numbers......do you know how the DV things works from the practical real life POV, including that of the Cops who get assigned to go to a House from where a complaint has been made?

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Feb 13^th, 2019 at 2:45pm:

No, PZ - it is YOU who cannot be reasoned with. You simply will NOT accept that the very vast majority of callouts for 'family violence' INVOLVE NO VIOLENCE, and should never even be called that, since to do so predisposes cops to arrive loaded for bear and actually create a situation.  Then it is the actions of courts in applying wrongful 'dv orders' at the drop of a hat which IS an act of violence, and is a root cause of further problems.  You simply cannot go about abusing people's rights and abusing them personally without getting a response. Put simply you have no right to call  a disagreement between two alleged adults 'violence' by one side.  No right whatsoever... and the use of such language is inflammatory and is pure propaganda. I've told you fools over and over - you do not resolve the issues of violence by using and even initiating violence to solve it... Get over yourselves and this insane set of non-laws - and get used to the idea that the State has NO right to intervene without proper licence - i.e when a GENUINE act has occurred. It is YOU who are carrying on this war... not those like me who are trying to stop it and prevent it getting worse due to the actions of those seeking to bully others on the basis of unsupported allegations

and that would be the most UNREASONABLE reply I have read in a long while.... ;D ;D ;D

I think I have already said... dont reply unless you agree with grap..

or he will get unreasonable and abusive..


Quote:

I've told you fools over and over - you do not resolve the issues of violence by using and even initiating violence to solve it...

followed by this...


Quote:

It is YOU who are carrying on this war... not those like me who are trying to stop it and prevent it getting worse due to the actions of those seeking to bully others on the basis of unsupported allegations[/qu

ote]




can you at least tell us FOOLS... where you get your figures from regarding this statement...


Quote:

You simply will NOT accept that the very vast majority of callouts for 'family violence' INVOLVE NO VIOLENCE,

how do you come to that conclusion?

I didn't start it, cods... and my facts remain untouched.....

You also need to learn to read and to think straight past the bullshit you are handed.

Starting by leaving out the word 'violence' in discussion of simple disputes is a good start....

A genuine resolution by a 'court' of a family dispute would be to order both sides to keep the peace.. not one, and the ONLY time the term 'violence' should be used is when there IS violence - not when someone says : "No - you can't have the credit card!"

That last is the kind of nonsense and insanity that the feminists have foisted upon us as 'domestic violence' by man only - but never women.

Easy to come by the figures, cods - read the papers.... or google it.

Bullying one side will never resolve the non-issue of that one side possibly bullying in the future... and it is NOT acceptable to say that men are always the bullies in disagreements.

Keep on your way - there will be more casualties until you wake up and see it straight.

Ask yourselves a simple question - would that bloke in Glen Innes have shot those cops if he thought that any complaint would be handled fairly and on the facts?

And FYI - I blame the State for even considering these stupid non-laws that dictate that a person can be attacked by the State without having committed any offence.

Women who abuse it are at fault - I do not blame all women as some of you seek to say in order to cover the weakness of your position... the old blame game rather than addressing facts....

PZ - your calculations are wrong - solid figures are available and are occasionally posted in the papers, and you should NEVER assume that men are always the abusers.... women abuse children far more than men do.

Stop the war on men.

Perhaps you could explain to the audience exactly how my reply is 'unreasonable', and how what it is in response to is not unreasonable - and precisely how I've 'abused' anyone?

If everything I say is based on facts and figures - there is nothing 'unreasonable' about it.... unless I've called someone something dire - there is no abuse.

Your kind of thinking, cods, is precisely why this issue is so out of control, and will only get worse.

I cannot deal with people who are totally unreasonable, and who will not accept that simply labeling something as 'violence' does not make it violence, and in no way offers the State any 'right' to intervene with violence.+

"newspaper reports tell the story".....

Really?  Where you bin, Laden?  They tell the 'approved line' on the story and play to a gullible audience that wants to hear drama - there is no drama in 'woman punches/kicks/abuses man' and everyone laughs, but plenty in 'man punches woman'- you claim they must be right if they support the 'woman always victim' nonsense - yet you refuse to give credence to news reports that only 5% or so of call-outs result in any charge - and even then those charges are not stated and could be anything at all including, and most likely - The Aboriginal Trifecta of 'abusive words', 'assault police' and 'resist arrest'.

There is no point trying to discuss anything to do with family violence on this forum. Grappler simply destory any chance at communication.

I've tried many times over the years.

He is utterly unreasonable and any salient point he has is completely lost in his fanaticism.

I've simply given up.

mothra wrote on Feb 13^th, 2019 at 6:50pm:

There is no point trying to discuss anything to do with family violence on this forum. Grappler simply destory any chance at communication. I've tried many times over the years. He is utterly unreasonable and any salient point he has is completely lost in his fanaticism. I've simply given up.

What you mistake for 'fanaticism' is merely having to respond to dead-headed comments and refute nonsense put forward instead of argument.... since some are so fanatical in their defence of the current catastrophe that they simply argue and argue endlessly without refuting anything I say.

It is my view that those who oppose what I put forward with facts and reasoning are unreasonable..... since they do not present any facts in response, nor do they ever respond to the issues I raise, but just endlessly repeat the approved line, which has been shown to be a total failure.. and a very harmful one.

Now if you have anything positive to add to the discussion - by all means - go ahead..... but don't whine when I respond.... and do try to stay away from the trees and look at the forest  .. ::)  ::)  ::)

mothra wrote on Feb 13^th, 2019 at 6:50pm:

There is no point trying to discuss anything to do with family violence on this forum. Grappler simply destory any chance at communication. I've tried many times over the years. He is utterly unreasonable and any salient point he has is completely lost in his fanaticism. I've simply given up.

I would be interested in your take on family violence Moth, But maybe we could start with the abridged version

Do YOU, for example, mothra, feel that it is only right that the intervention of police and a court, both acts of violence BTW, is suitable as a response to a simple disagreement or a non-violent argument?

Do you accept that the intent of 'domestic violence laws' is to PREVENT violence - not BE violence opr to respond to ACTUAL violence, and is a civil action which in itself conveys no confirmation of any violence having occurred?

Do you accept that ceaseless propaganda and endless expansion of the 'definition' of 'violence' in that context, always one way, has created a false feeling that every such case involves actual violence?  If that is the case, there is no need for 'domestic violence laws' that claim to PREVENT violence, is there, and thus no avenue for this ceaseless propaganda?

Do you understand anything real about what 'domestic violence laws' are supposed to be - or are you - like so very many - hopelessly mired in the idea that they are attacking ACTUAL violence rather than 'preventing' violence from occurring?  95% of police call-outs say differently.

Can any of you effectively answer these questions without seeking to attack the messenger of peace?

BigP wrote on Feb 13^th, 2019 at 7:03pm:

mothra wrote on Feb 13th, 2019 at 6:50pm: There is no point trying to discuss anything to do with family violence on this forum. Grappler simply destory any chance at communication. I've tried many times over the years. He is utterly unreasonable and any salient point he has is completely lost in his fanaticism. I've simply given up. I would be interested in your take on family violence Moth, But maybe we could start with the abridged version

Do you wish to discuss actual family violence - or 'domestic violence laws'?  Do you understand the difference?

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Feb 13^th, 2019 at 7:04pm:

BigP wrote on Feb 13th, 2019 at 7:03pm: mothra wrote on Feb 13th, 2019 at 6:50pm: There is no point trying to discuss anything to do with family violence on this forum. Grappler simply destory any chance at communication. I've tried many times over the years. He is utterly unreasonable and any salient point he has is completely lost in his fanaticism. I've simply given up. I would be interested in your take on family violence Moth, But maybe we could start with the abridged version Do you wish to discuss actual family violence - or 'domestic violence laws'?  Do you understand the difference?

If you weren't such a simple minded fool i would be quite happy to discuss it with you lol

BigP wrote on Feb 13^th, 2019 at 7:06pm:

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Feb 13th, 2019 at 7:04pm: BigP wrote on Feb 13th, 2019 at 7:03pm: mothra wrote on Feb 13th, 2019 at 6:50pm: There is no point trying to discuss anything to do with family violence on this forum. Grappler simply destory any chance at communication. I've tried many times over the years. He is utterly unreasonable and any salient point he has is completely lost in his fanaticism. I've simply given up. I would be interested in your take on family violence Moth, But maybe we could start with the abridged version Do you wish to discuss actual family violence - or 'domestic violence laws'?  Do you understand the difference? If you weren't such a simple minded fool i would be quite happy to discuss it with you lol

Show yourself to be a simple-minded fool there - can't give one reasonable answer.

Perhaps you need to grow up first..... try sticking to the subject and answer the questions ... though I know you can't, sock-o.

BigP wrote on Feb 13^th, 2019 at 7:03pm:

mothra wrote on Feb 13th, 2019 at 6:50pm: There is no point trying to discuss anything to do with family violence on this forum. Grappler simply destory any chance at communication. I've tried many times over the years. He is utterly unreasonable and any salient point he has is completely lost in his fanaticism. I've simply given up. I would be interested in your take on family violence Moth, But maybe we could start with the abridged version

In what respect?

The title is:-  People 'gaming' the domestic violence Laws.

I'd be interested to hear views on that subject for a change.... instead of having to argue with the deaf and blind over facts.

mothra wrote on Feb 13^th, 2019 at 7:10pm:

BigP wrote on Feb 13th, 2019 at 7:03pm: mothra wrote on Feb 13th, 2019 at 6:50pm: There is no point trying to discuss anything to do with family violence on this forum. Grappler simply destory any chance at communication. I've tried many times over the years. He is utterly unreasonable and any salient point he has is completely lost in his fanaticism. I've simply given up. I would be interested in your take on family violence Moth, But maybe we could start with the abridged version In what respect?

mothra wrote on Feb 13^th, 2019 at 7:10pm:

BigP wrote on Feb 13th, 2019 at 7:03pm: mothra wrote on Feb 13th, 2019 at 6:50pm: There is no point trying to discuss anything to do with family violence on this forum. Grappler simply destory any chance at communication. I've tried many times over the years. He is utterly unreasonable and any salient point he has is completely lost in his fanaticism. I've simply given up. I would be interested in your take on family violence Moth, But maybe we could start with the abridged version In what respect?

In what ever respect you were interested in pursuing

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Feb 13^th, 2019 at 7:11pm:

The title is:-  People 'gaming' the domestic violence Laws. I'd be interested to hear views on that subject for a change.... instead of having to argue with the deaf and blind over facts.

Can you not see, are you not able to feel, Open your soul to your lord and he will heal you ,,


NAMASTE  :'(

BigP wrote on Feb 13^th, 2019 at 7:19pm:

mothra wrote on Feb 13th, 2019 at 7:10pm: BigP wrote on Feb 13th, 2019 at 7:03pm: mothra wrote on Feb 13th, 2019 at 6:50pm: There is no point trying to discuss anything to do with family violence on this forum. Grappler simply destory any chance at communication. I've tried many times over the years. He is utterly unreasonable and any salient point he has is completely lost in his fanaticism. I've simply given up. I would be interested in your take on family violence Moth, But maybe we could start with the abridged version In what respect? In what ever respect you were interested in pursuing

It's an incredibly complex issue that a great deal could be said about.

Again, i see no point pursuing it on this forum. Grappler simply makes discourse on this issue impossible.

I only popped in to give a bit of a sympathetic nod to those who walk where i have gone before.

BigP wrote on Feb 13^th, 2019 at 7:22pm:

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Feb 13th, 2019 at 7:11pm: The title is:-  People 'gaming' the domestic violence Laws. I'd be interested to hear views on that subject for a change.... instead of having to argue with the deaf and blind over facts. Can you not see, are you not able to feel, Open your soul to your lord and he will heal you ,, NAMASTE  :'(

You are totally lost - you must first work out the very vast difference between violence and law, and the allegedly civil action 'domestic violence laws'... as I said long ago - the very use of the term 'violence' in the title has created a totally false impression of what these (non) laws are really about - they claim to be PREVENTING violence - not punishing it.  There are REAL laws to do that....

Then you must find out how these (non) laws have been perverted to mean, in the eye of the gullible, punishment for violence when they are no such thing, and how they have been further perverted by a never-ending extension of the 'definition' of violence within relationships by a massively self-interested group - a group interested only in absolute control over relationships and thus of families and thus of society, which operates around and for families.

That group has caused endless harm to men and their children, and to women, and now and increasingly into the future, to the authorities who are handed the job of walking a tight-rope between reality and unreality, fact and (alleged) feeling, and most often failing.

Then you must offer a reasonable alternative to the current (non) laws and the disastrous way in which this issue has been approached and handled.

I am the messenger of peace and reason .. I seek a reduction in the violence starting with removing that false use of that word in the title - we must take things one at a time when dealing with simpletons in government - where do you stand?

mothra wrote on Feb 13^th, 2019 at 7:25pm:

BigP wrote on Feb 13th, 2019 at 7:19pm: mothra wrote on Feb 13th, 2019 at 7:10pm: BigP wrote on Feb 13th, 2019 at 7:03pm: mothra wrote on Feb 13th, 2019 at 6:50pm: There is no point trying to discuss anything to do with family violence on this forum. Grappler simply destory any chance at communication. I've tried many times over the years. He is utterly unreasonable and any salient point he has is completely lost in his fanaticism. I've simply given up. I would be interested in your take on family violence Moth, But maybe we could start with the abridged version In what respect? In what ever respect you were interested in pursuing It's an incredibly complex issue that a great deal could be said about. Again, i see no point pursuing it on this forum. Grappler simply makes discourse on this issue impossible. I only popped in to give a bit of a sympathetic nod to those who walk where i have gone before.

You simply cannot answer the questions... hardly my fault... why not try sometime? 

The subject matter here is:- People 'gaming' the domestic violence Laws.

Any views on that part of this complex issue?  It is in fact you and your kind who make discourse impossible, since you will not even begin to address the basics first, which desperately need to be settled and defined properly.  It is you and your kind who force me to argue endlessly over realities which you will not accept in your usual 'emotive' 'feeling' way, as opposed to addressing the issues.... and when you endlessly get lost looking at the trees of single isolated incidents as if they are the totality of the issue, rather than looking at the forest for the cures.

Don't blame me for your shortcomings...

The stories I have involve women USING those Laws to their personal advantage....not for protection at all.  I.e........gaming.

**sighs**  I think I'm going to have to run tutorials on this subject.......

Perpetually bogged down in anecdotes and single tree episodes of basically the genuinely violent kind - always obscures the realities.... and leads many to the assumption that it's all about violence.... which it never was.... it's about control ....

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Feb 13^th, 2019 at 8:27pm:

**sighs**  I think I'm going to have to run tutorials on this subject....... Perpetually bogged down in anecdotes and single tree episodes of basically the genuinely violent kind - always obscures the realities.... and leads many to the assumption that it's all about violence.... which it never was.... it's about control ....

Nah...I say it is about power, handed by legislation to women and presents an easy way out for the Cops so they can get on with their shift, fill out a few forms, and some bloke just lost his home for several weeks before the judicial system catches up with the summary Cop action, precipitated by a woman who knows how it works, and games it.

Grappler.......I reckon you have some broader issue which I am not meaning to address, and have zero qualification to address.

Aussie wrote on Feb 13^th, 2019 at 8:45pm:

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Feb 13th, 2019 at 8:27pm: **sighs**  I think I'm going to have to run tutorials on this subject....... Perpetually bogged down in anecdotes and single tree episodes of basically the genuinely violent kind - always obscures the realities.... and leads many to the assumption that it's all about violence.... which it never was.... it's about control .... Nah...I say it is about power, handed by legislation to women and presents an easy way out for the Cops so they can get on with their shift, fill out a few forms, and some bloke just lost his home for several weeks before the judicial system catches up with the summary Cop action, precipitated by a woman who knows how it works, and games it. Grappler.......I reckon you have some broader issue which I am not meaning to address, and have zero qualification to address.

My broader issue is that I know truth from lies....