'Battered husbands' - still a taboo subject in Poland

You were offering to post better links and couldn't, so no it's not sufficient.


I dont doubt that you have repeatedly posted the same thing;)

Now that we have a link it has proved almost useless as it's a bibliography.

Your second link is to an organisation that displays a similar bias to those that you have repeatedly accused others of.
Links from this website (I have read some) do not promote what you claim; that there is a feminist template generally adopted by society and the media. One particular author, Murray A Straus of the University of New Hampshire states this:


And this:


pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/V75-Straus-09.pdf

I chose to read Straus's work as He is quoted liberally by others in all the links you provided.

Posting these links demonstrates that you haven't read them and you rely upon someone else telling you what they say to fit a manufactured agenda. That invalidates your position and as I said above cheapens the issue.

The feminist template is all around us. News organizations take-for-granted the false figures feminists provide in their news releases. They include such ridiculous claims that one out of four women are raped. On Father's Day, the news organizations print articles by feminists on how bad fathers are; that they are deadbeats, abusers and murderers. That doesn't happen on Mother's Day. Many other examples abound and only those with an agenda fail to notice them.


I believe he wrote that in the 1970's and has since augmented it. You must have missed the part where he stated; " ...one of the main reasons why "minor" assaults by women are such an important problem is that they put women in danger of much more severe retaliation by men."Nevertheless, he notes that women initiate violence as often as men. Additionally, he wrote;

"In the mid 1970s my colleagues and I made the disturbing discovery that women physically assaulted partners in marital, cohabiting, and dating relationships as often as men assaulted their partners. This finding caused me and my former colleague Suzanne Steinmetz to be excommunicated as feminists."


Then you understand his valid points. Picking out a comment here and there doesn't invalidate his overall premise.


I recall that this was in reference to the fact that feminism was related to Marxism and I gave you a book reading assignment that proves this fact.

Lots of good articles here, you might want to read them especially the one on your idol Betty Friedan, one of the first modern Marxist-feminists.

dvmen.org/dv-49.htm#friedan

Dont forget about false reporting when it comes to rape. Depending on source it goes up to 50% false report rate when women lie about getting raped and therefore put innocent man (if hes unlucky) in prison.

In the U.S. it has become almost fashionable to report (false) rape. In feminist circles, it is a badge of honor. Poland does not have that severe of a problem because Marxist-feminism has not taken a strong toe-hold there and the women are generally 'normal' as opposed to U.S. women who complain about virtually everything. You might want to look at the "Blog Archive" which is only a tip of the false rape epidemic here.

falserapesociety.blogspot.com

From your link


So Straus believed in 2008 that:
"There is one important and consistently reported gender difference in PV:although women engage in both minor and severe violence as often as men, the adverse effects on victims are much greater for women."

And He believed, again in 2008, that:

"Attacks by men cause more injury (both physical and psychological), more deaths, and more fear. In addition, women are more often economically trapped in a violent relationship than men because women continue to earn less than men, and because when a marriage ends women have custodial responsibility for children at least 80% of the time. The greater adverse effect on women is an extremely important difference, and it indicates the need to

continue to provide more services for female victims of PV than for male
victims."

So stop trying to refract the authors words, after all you supplied them, though indirectly.


I read the whole paper and took nothing out of context; in fact the extreme position of others that you have adopted is in no way supported by the said paper or any of the others that I have read that your link led too. It appears that by blindly following a proscribed path your reasoning went out the window.

Again I repeat, can you provide evidence for your position that a Feminist agenda dominates society in general and the Media in particular. Any links you have posted have been to Blogs or "opinion sites" or on previous occasions to "Crank" sites.

I am interested.

"Lots of people talking , few of them know, soul of a woman was created below".

you know it is not gonna happen:)

Yep, Zimmy seems to have a big chip on his shoulder, dunno what about but I also wouldn't like to know ;)

Why's that? Because he doesn't tote the party line? Dipsh/t that you are you don't realize how much truth there is to a lot of what he says. Let's see when you get into your 40's - 50's how "lovely" women treat you then. Bottomline: Women are typically head game playing users. Everything is peaches and cream when you've got your young looks and money.. when that goes, forget it. What the hell do think all those blues and country tunes are about 90% of the time?

Don't be a damn stooge your whole life.

Never listen to them :/


The same as now I guess. But I doubt I would ever get involved with some person like that. If I did, then bye bye missy.

Geeez, grow some balls.

HHAHAHAA.. yeah baby. And I'm going to be drinking beer side saddle on a unicorn this afternoon.

You go do that ;)

And while you do that, check if the unicorn has some man plums for ya ;)

It would be a surprise but something tells my you are right:)
It did fill a slow day at work.


Ah..........you are missing a lot :(

....and with you it still hasn't sunk in that women initiate domestic violence as often as men.


You mean like when feminists with the help of the media propagate that women are victims and men are oppressors?


One may not agree with the blogs in question but it doesn't necessarily invalidate the information or the facts when they are true. As to "Crank" outlets, the Feibert studies were done by divergent groups of professionals with no ax to grind.

Here is what Bernard Goldberg, a CBS correspondent at the time said about journalists.
"When it comes to gender issues, journalists generally have suspended all their usual skepticism. We accept at face value whatever women's groups say. Why? because women have sold themselves to us as an oppressed group and any oppressed group gets a free ride in the press. I don't blalme feminist for telling us half-truths and sometimes even complete fabrication. I do blame my colleagues in the press for forgetting their skepticism."

Of course the feminist perspective in the media is all around us, so much so that people are accustomed to its 'normality'. How many stupid anti-male tv (and radio) ads will it take for that sort of misandry to sink in? I cannot count the amount of ads featuring dumb husbands and their smart wives in advertising or the dozens of sitcoms where the man is always the jerk who in alleged humorous ways is always being lectured by his wife. If the genders were reversed, the protests and howls of "sexism" would be louder than an atom bomb. It is "politically incorrect" to show women in the same way that men are portrayed.

There are too many newspaper stories for me to list as well. When the New York Times featured one of their many 'gender stories' with the headline; Men: Are women better off with them or without them?" you know that a similar article about women was "politically taboo". ... and on it goes.

The above are mere 'tips of icebergs' but a rational reader can already feel the chill.


See previous post.

(Media continued)
Some time ago, author David Thomas wrote a book, "Not Guilty" in which he counted New York Times articles that featured stories/articles about men or women. For the year he counted 104 articles for men and 679 for women. This sort of percentage is not untypical when it comes to male and female coverage in the papers, but I enjoy using the very liberal New York Times as an example because it is 'the newspaper' that other journalists rely on for acceptable news.

Except for Fox News, the tv anchors and journalists in the other major stations are liberal thus presenting the stories they 'feel' are important. (at least two surveys of reporters have been taken and both found that at least 85% of the journalists and anchors admitted to be liberal). So the 'tone' of their features is slanted. Even Fox News hires too many blond reporters and tolerates their occassional male-bashing.

As to books, the latest estimate is that since Betty Freidans groundbreaking book in 1963, there have been some 30,000 plus books on feminism not to mention many more articles and specialty pieces in magazines. General people-type magazines are also dominated by women and womens' articles.

Speaking of another form of media; there are too many misandric movies and it would take several pages to go through them. But recent genres include the new action movies. It is now fashionable to see some 100 lb woman beat up 250 lb men, often dozens of them. Amazing how such skinny muscles are superior to mens'. Of course, these are pretend flicks but I've run into women who actually believe such non realities

Populist talk shows like "The View" are dominated by liberal-feminists and in general they too have a jaundiced gender perspective. Again, all this and much more has been accepted because it has grown little-by-little until it has become all pervasive. Of course the frog doesn't know it's slowly being boiled either.

Now, all this is fine except for one rather important aspect. Lets stop bending over backwards and really treat women as equals.

Is Polish media as bad as that in the U.S.?

(As a quick aside, most men will find that if they really treat women as equals that women don't like it. Feminists demand mens' equality while keeping all their traditional benefits thus giving men nothing while continuing to demand more and more (except to be coal miners, or hazmat divers, or long-haul truckers, etc. after all, they might break a nail).

Battered husbands..yeah, I know one. He is my brother-in-law. My sister is such a nasty b&tch...lol. But he is a 'dupa' not a man. His problem.

My point you idiot, is that women just get on with it...It has nothing to do with revenge, some women just wont put up with abusive men so they hit back, as for women that hit men..Men are free to walk away..


No, Im not the one who is stuipd. I understand what abuse is, but didnt you forget the third? It can also be sexual, thats why women suffer from repeated rape by their wonderful husbands/partners. You say that case law is sexist? What country are you from? Because in the UK ABH is a crime regardless of a persons gender.


Not particularly, reading pathetic threads like this tends to put me off somewhat.


Okay fatty, why dont you go and play on the nearest motorway, I seem to remember that video you made of you distressing your wife, that's a kind of mental abuse, wouldn't you agree?

Rape by husbands?

Maybe you have some problem with reading but this thread is about women who abuse men, not about abused women who defend themselves.


Walk away? Now that would be cowardice. So are they free to hit back?


Sexual abuse falls under both mental and physical category.


It doesnt really matter. Fact is, abused women are favoured in court. Man has a lot harder time proving that he has been abused, and even harder time getting support. Law doesnt treat both sexes equally therefore its sexist.


Yet you fail to comprehend that man can be victim to mental abuse. To make it worse you say get punched or scratched, they're whining. You talk about abused men with disdain, almost as if they should just take it and keep quiet. Like they do something wrong by whining about being abused...

Yes Southern rape happens between two people when one person is not consenting, doesnt matter if they are married or not..rape is rape.


Actually it has it own category, its called "sexual abuse", mental abuse and physical abuse are two different things.

medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/physical+abuse

physical abuse any act resulting in a nonaccidental physical injury.
psychoactive substance abuse substance a.
sexual abuse assault or other crime of a sexual nature, which need not be physical. Actsof a sexual nature are considered abuse if performed with minors or nonconsenting adults.

substance abuse use of a substance that modifies mood or behavior in a manner characterized by a maladaptive pattern of use. See also substance dependence, under dependence.

Mental abuse

Definition
Harming a person through emotional abuse, sometimes called mental abuse, means there is a consistent and chronic pattern of maltreatment that is causing significant distress. Mental abuse interferes with a person's ability to develop healthy and stable patterns of relating to others

ehow.com/facts_5426400_definition-mental-abuse.html


I know what the thread is about, I was giving my point of view as a woman, same as Zimmy does as a man on threads about women.


Whats cowardice about removing yourself from an abusive relationship? No need to hit back, just move yourself out of harms way.


The law in your country is different to the law in mine. In the eyes of the law, a person committing a crime is punished regardless of their gender.


I understand that a "person" can be a victim of all kinds of abuse.

You sound like a bit of a whiner...May I suggest you take some self-defense classes and join a running club, so when the girls at school pick on you, you can either stick up for yourself or run away fast enough that they cant catch you!

You didnt answer my question. Is man free to hit back woman?
As for cowardice...Not solved problems tend to come back. Running away isnt always the best option, and isnt always possibility.


Would you call a woman who complains about being abused or treated unfairly a 'whiner'? Why is it only women who get right to complain?

Zimmy
So you cannot produce evidence :(

Two of your random points caught my eye:


All the rest are not.


Now that was funny, and smart of you not to "genderdise"(sic) the issue.

My brother in law is dominated by his wife who is a nasty bitsch. She forbids him various things, e.g., take some food from the fridge or shelves, and when he disobeyed, she hit him and went totally crazy, hollering all around.

Now the beatings have stopped because he learnt to give way to have peace and quiet at home, but I can see how unhappy he is. He is thinking about divorce but they have two children and he knows that she will do anything to seperate them from the father after the divorce. She is even able to accuse him of molesting their sons.

His life is really miserable because he has to give her all money he earns and she complains it is not enough though she gets 100 zlotys daily.

But nobody forced him to marry her. It was his own choice.

I am really sorry guys but people get married too recklessly and whatever wrong happens to their marriage could be predicted. It is enough to use little intelligence to realise that a partner may be a pain in the ass one day.

As far as media goes the evidence is all around you in advertising, sitcoms and news features. That doesn't need explanation, only a thinking brain. You remind me of the man who never saw the ocean. When he was first thrown into the Atlantic, he said, "why is there water everywhere?"


That was a less than intelligent reply. Of course all the rest were not feminist male-bashing.
There are books on every subject. The point is to compare feminist anti male books with men writing anti female books. You aren't that dense.....


That's the major problem. Men don't initiate divorce as often as women do because they realize how unfair the court systems are. Men don't want to lost their kids. Women are not as inhibited to file for divorce because the loss of children is not something that concerns them. Unless they are druggies or some kind of provable troublemaker, they'll get the kids, even if they are the violent ones during marriage.


There has been a mini marriage strike in the U.S. as men have become more aware of the unfairness in marriage. (Paul McCartney, next time make a pre-nupt, better yet, don't get married).

dontmarry.wordpress.com

Just bored with the constant harping about Feminist domination.

I dont condone any violence, but if a person has to restrain a person to stop them causing them harm, then yes restraining is fine.

Solving what? If you are with an abusive person, there's no point in trying resolve it, these kind of people never change...Walking away and leaving them to it..is the best option, why compromise your own safety?


As I have said, women have suffered abuse for years, in this day and age, women have more support and its easier for them to leave abusive men, some women chose not to, so yes I would call these women stupid, women who generally stay with abusive partners rarely complain about the abuse, becuase its part of their life and they have little or no self-respect or self-confidence, they accept the abuse. If a man decides to stay and get abused by his wife then he's stupid and if he complains about the abuse, he's a whiner.


He was dressed up as a girl by his mother from a young age and made to watch "what ever happened to baby Jane" this was bound to have an affect on him sooner or later :(

that's pathology...

You didnt answer my question. I asked if hitting back is fine, not restraining.

No person chooses to stay in an abusive relationship, you talk out of your arse as always, they stay our of fear, and fear for their children. It is the same for men, you have no concept at all of this. otherwise you would not make such a childish comment. You are obviously not married and OBVIOUSLY do not have children, otherwise you would have not made such a stupid statement.

no...

That's not quite true although feminists would like you to believe that. There is a difference between some thug attacking a woman violently, threatening her and then raping her and a woman who regrets having sex the next morning and thus calling that rape. The definition of rape has been so expanded by feminist organizations that it can mean almost anything now.


You asked me the questions and I gave you examples. It's noticeable that you failed to disprove my media comments which are obvious even to the most casual observer.


Yes, yes, we've been hearing that tired old song for forty years now. It's been the domestic violence card played over and over 'ad infinitum'. It's only when someone like me attempts to balance this refrain with objective analysis that feminists like you and manginas like Barney go ballistic. How dare men attempt that sacred 'victim status' platform that only women should have?


When the shoes on the other foot, misandrists like Amathyst always try to wiggle or spin their way out. People like her have not evolved sufficiently to be able to overview the full condition(s) of humanity, not just the sex they happened to be born into. They only see their race, religion, or in her case, gender as the center point of their beliefs. At least PGTX was honest enough with her answer which of course happens to be the correct one.


You do a grave injustice to a woman you do not know.

Back to "Battered husbands" in Poland:

"Men hardly ever report abuse because they are ashamed of being beaten or humiliated by a woman. It is against a stereotype of a strong, tough man," says Prof. Dariusz Dolinski from the Warsaw School of Social Sciences and Humanities. Men are also afraid that police will not believe them if they report that domestic violence was directed towards them.

Often, as in the U.S. when a battered man finally does call the police, as frequently as not, they arrest him anyway because he is the male. Feminists have no problem with this and even deny that men are ever abused.