|
|
|
|
|
by dlmetcalf
3633 days ago
|
|
> "And you know something? \"So what\"? So what if women get this one in their favour? Who really gives a fuck? " Maybe the rest of the family of kids who women bludgeoned to death, burnt alive, cut into pieces, stuffed down drains etc (all recent cases here). Maybe also the guys who've been stabbed a few too many times, hit in the back of the head with frying pans, etc. p.s. Hospital record audits show extremely similar injuries for both genders from DV in Australia, with the exception that men present with more lacerations (because women use weapons more) and women present with slightly more bruising (because men rarely present unless life threatening). The only likely exception to that is Aboriginal communities, with somewhat different traditional gender roles (women at significantly higher risk) than the wider population and more commonly impacted by poverty, drugs & alcohol etc. |
|
I'm just going to quote myself here. You're both arguing from outliers and arguing from emotion.
Hell, fuck it. You win. The anti-DV campaign should stop because it's not completely even-handed. Fuck those infants beaten to death because their dads can't hear the footy. We should close down all the battered women's shelters as well. Those beaten humans with broken bones in their face are clearly benefitting at the expense of us males. Never mind that we can use success with anti-DV for women as a springboard for anti-DV for men, getting it into the public dialogue.
After all, if we can't help everyone, then we shouldn't help anyone. Absolutely no step of the way shouldn't ever be even-handed. That would be unfair.