🚀 go-pugleaf

EllenSmith wrote:
> 
> klaatu <root@earthops.org> wrote:
> 
> >>>Rex wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> jack@threeindians.com wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> >http://justice2.usdoj.gov/vawo/
> >>>>
> >>>> Wow Jack.  You mean there is an actual office of the DOJ called the
> >>>> "Violence Against Women Office".
> >>>>
> >>>> I did not know this, until I visited the URL.
> >>>>
> >>>> This seems to be much more sexist than a simple law.  I didn't realize
> >>>> the scope of it before.
> 
> >>>In the words of Orwell, "all animals are equal... but some are more
> >>>equal than others".
> 
> >>>I remember seeing some factoid sourced from some law-enforcement
> >>>statistic sheet, which said something to the effect that husband-abuse
> >>>is at least as common as wife-abuse, however men being men they were a
> >>>lot less likely to file official complaints, or even to discuss it with
> >>>other men or see physicians about it.
> 
> excuse me? what does "men being men" mean?

We men have our own little gender-culture psychological hangups. Men are
much less likely to see a doctor, unless there is an injury or illness
that is perceived as immediately life-threatening. That's a stats-fact.
2/3rds of ofice visits to doctors are by women. Unless of course you
want to follow the line of argument that women are just so much weaker
than men? Didn't think you would.

Don't forget that being labelled as a "sissy" (not gay, just being "a
sob sister", to wit a weak complaining little thing) is still a pretty
bad label to be hung on a guy.

> >>>The difference being that as a rule men who abuse women and the women
> >>>who let them abuse them seem to be locked in some weird psychological
> >>>thingy, whereas the women who abuse men more often simply got tired of
> >>>being pushed around and gave hubby the midnight-frying-pan-treatment.
> >>>(as in: z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z <bonk!>).

> a real psychological thing? Are you a psychologist perhaps?

Far from it. but I long ago stopped counting the number of women I had
known who were in destructive relationships, who would come crying to
their peers about how jonny done beat 'em something awful (black eyes
and all) and then by the time midnight rolled around, they were in about
8 out of ten cases knocking the bed against the walls to the generic
disgust of their neighbors and friends, who like as not would themselves
play out the same stupid scene sometime in the near future.

And oddly enough, most of the guys I ever knew who were abused
themselves were basically the guys who evidently learned form this that
the way to get a night of the best sex in months was to beat the wife.
Evidently the wife finally realized that she was sending the wrong
message and gave them the midnight frying pan treatment.


> >>>But I must say that devoting an entire office of the Department of
> >>>Justice exclusively to violence against women, it's absurd. It'll stop
> >>>being absurd, if only by comparison, when they also have an office for
> >>>henpecked men.
> 
> uh huh. You don't like women very much do ya?

My like or dislike of women has nothing to do with the sexism and
absurdity of having a Federal office which only prosecutes violence
against women.

I don't suggest that this office nor the underlying laws be abolished,
but instead of Violence Against Women, it shold more likely be Violence
Against Spouses or Violence Against Significant Others.

what's good for the goose is good for the gander you know, they're both
fowl. 

> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Rex
> >>>> rex@intr.net

<snips>

-- 
Be kind to your       | When the going gets weird the weird turn pro.
neighbors even though | http://www.clark.net/pub/klaatu/
they be transgenic    | Now. chock full of uninteresting links.
chimerae.             |-- Genesis 19:1-13 - Hebrews 13:2 -- 
---- INCOMING! http://www.clark.net/pub/klaatu/incoming.html ---------
"Sarah Connor?" All UseNet and BitNet postings are copyrighted.