'Online Misogyny' Set To Be Outlawed

[Chekhov]

14 minutes ago, Delayed said:

Yep it's so annoying not being able to grope your partner and then smack them about a bit without any consequences.

Snowflakes 

Snowflakes on strawmen presumably ?

[Chekhov]

57 minutes ago, Mister M said:

I read that on average 2 women are killed each week by violent partners in the UK, and 3 die each week by suicide - suspected as a consequence of domestic abuse. That's awful.

I'll take it at face value that more men are killed each week. But it's not either or. The police are able to have a strategy of tackling domestic violence, and violence against men for what ever reason.

I guess the link with child abuse is made because in a domestic situation, children maybe present, and see one of their parents being repeatedly hit and punched. That must be an awful thing for the child to see, and a burden placed on them. I don't know off hand, but I'm sure there will be research looking at the long term impact on a child of witnessing their parent being terrorised in this way. 

With regards to a register of domestic abusers. If there is evidence that people who do this, keep repeating the same pattern of behaviour then there needs to be one kept. It's not about gloating, it's just a necessary evil. But I'm clear that the responsibility for this lies with the perpetrator of the abuse.

A register for all people found guilty of domestic abuse, just out of interest where do you think this should stop ? I sincerely believe that sooner or later pretty much everyone will have to have a DBS check or similar and the results will be available to anyone, It will happen, sooner or later.

And what is your definition of domestic abuse anyway ? I mean domestic abuse severe enough for someone to be put on a register for it ?

Whatever it is I suspect that if this ever gets started that definition will be watered down as time goes on.

Just out of interest, if we are talking about behaviour that ruins relationships, severely affects peoples' mental health and harms children, are we also to have a register of serial philanderers ?

Edited February 21, 2023 by Chekhov

[Mister M]

24 minutes ago, Chekhov said:

A register for all people found guilty of domestic abuse, just out of interest where do you think this should stop ? I sincerely believe that sooner or later pretty much everyone will have to have a DBS check or similar and the results will be available to anyone, It will happen, sooner or later.

And what is your definition of domestic abuse anyway ? I mean domestic abuse severe enough for someone to be put on a register for it ?

Whatever it is I suspect that if this ever gets started that definition will be watered down as time goes on.

Just out of interest, if we are talking about behaviour that ruins relationships, severely affects peoples' mental health and harms children, are we also to have a register of serial philanderers ?

I think it should stop there, unless there's a compelling reason why another group in society who are a danger to others should be put on it.

As for my definition, "I mean domestic abuse severe enough for someone to be put on a register for it ?" Yes, though I think parliament should debate it & discuss how it would operate obviously.

Serial philanderers, no I wouldn't have them on a list as they are not breaking the law.

 

Is there a reason why you wouldn't have people who perpetrate domestic violence on a register, as happens with sex offenders? This concern for people's civil liberties and people's rights is very touching; but people also have rights to be safe online, not to be inappropriately groped or to be battered by someone who says they love them.

Edited February 21, 2023 by Mister M

[Chekhov]

13 hours ago, Mister M said:

Serial philanderers, no I wouldn't have them on a list as they are not breaking the law.

I have to say, in some ways, I think serial philanderers, particularly if they have kids, are worse because they are doing it behind the backs of their partners, the scumbags.

Whilst nobody could condone serious "domestic abuse" the partner can at least decide what they want to do.

 

13 hours ago, Mister M said:

Is there a reason why you wouldn't have people who perpetrate domestic violence on a register, as happens with sex offenders?

When it comes to sex offenders I think you have to split off paedos from the rest. They, assuming the case is proven beyond doubt, should be on a register, but I think the case for the others is less strong. Why is it any different from any form of violence ? And there are loads of pretty violent people out there,

Edited February 22, 2023 by Chekhov

[Mister M]

7 minutes ago, Chekhov said:

I have to say, in some ways, I think serial philanderers, particularly if they have kids, are worse because they are doing it behind the backs of these partners. Whilst nobody could condone serious "domestic abuse" the partner can at least decide what they want to do.

Many victims of domestic violence say the opposite. The consequences of battering a partner often goes with emotional abuse and manipulation, and of dragging the down the victims self worth to the point where they think they wont be believed, or somehow "they deserve it", or are to blame for it, or they won't cope on their own. 

I think this is one of the pernicious effects of abuse is the long term impact it can have on the victims.

And the partner can't decide what she wants to do if the other partner kills them. As I said - 2 women are killed each week by their violent partners.

 

Edited February 21, 2023 by Mister M

[Chekhov]

2 minutes ago, Mister M said:

Many victims of domestic violence say the opposite. The consequences of battering a partner often goes with emotional abuse and manipulation, and of dragging the down the victims self worth to the point where they think they wont be believed, or somehow "they deserve it", or are to blame for it, or they won't cope on their own. 

I think this is one of the pernicious effects of abuse is the long term impact it can have on the victims.

There should be more accommodation available to make it easier for any battered partner to leave. But, at the end of the day, if a woman, or a man, decides that, on balance they want to stay with the partner one cannot force them to leave. There is such a thing as personal choice and personal responsibility. The state should not be running every part of our lives "because it knows best how to keep us safe". I will avoid the obvious, and totally relevant, reference to you know what......

[Mister M]

7 minutes ago, Chekhov said:

There should be more accommodation available to make it easier for any battered partner to leave. But, at the end of the day, if a woman, or a man, decides that, on balance they want to stay with the partner one cannot force them to leave. There is such a thing as personal choice and personal responsibility. The state should not be running every part of our lives "because it knows best how to keep us safe". I will avoid the obvious, and totally relevant, reference to you know what......

There is such a thing as personal choice. But there is also the reality of grooming, of manipulation and the psychological impact of domestic violence. Which, IIRC is already recognised in law - so the police can press charges against the violent partner even of the victim doesn't want them to be prosecuted.

 

Not sure why you brought personal responsibility into the discussion. Yes the perpetrator is guilty and should show personal responsibility by leaving the victim alone and getting themselves some help. Are the victims somehow personally responsible?

 

Having basic laws to protect us isn't "The state should not be running every part of our lives". 

If it can't even protect vulnerable people from abuse, then we might as well model ourselves on Somalia. Even Liz Truss, the IEA and the rest of the selfish libertarian cultists don't believe that.

Edited February 21, 2023 by Mister M

[Chekhov]

On 21/02/2023 at 19:53, Mister M said:

Not sure why you brought personal responsibility into the discussion. Yes the perpetrator is guilty and should show personal responsibility by leaving the victim alone and getting themselves some help. Are the victims somehow personally responsible?

People have freedom of action, they can leave the partner, though, as I said, the state shoud help them do that if they want or need to do so.

You're going to come back at me with the "vulnerable people" argument now. Well the state should try to protectect "vulnerable people" but not by  making it a lowest common denominator policy, i.e. everyone has to be treated like this because a small percentage of peopel are "vulnerable".

BTW, if people really are very vulnerable should they be living on their own anyway ?

 

The bottom line is I cannot imagine there are many people who regard "domestic abuse" * as seriously as terrorism or child abuse, or even burglary, I certainly do not.

 

* I'd like a defintion of that actually, particularly as, apparently, trying to grope somone's butt (or boob) during a snog is now "sexual abuse".

Edited February 24, 2023 by Chekhov

[HeHasRisen]

2 minutes ago, Chekhov said:

Peopel [sic] have freedom of action, they can leave the partner, though

As easy as that, is it?

 

[Mister M]

15 minutes ago, Chekhov said:

People have freedom of action, they can leave the partner, though, as I said, the state shoud help them do that if they want or need to do so.

You're going to come back at me with the "vulnerable people" argument now. Well the state should try to protectect "vulnerable people" but not by  making it a lowest common denominator policy, i.e. everyone has to be treated like this because a small percentage of peopel are "vulnerable".

BTW, if people really are very vulnerable should they be living on their own anyway ?

 

The bottom line is I cannot imagine there are many people who regard "domestic abuse" * as seriously as terrorism or child abuse, or even burglary, I certainly do not.

 

* I'd like a defintion of that actually, particularly as, apparently, trying to grope somone's butt (or boob) during a snog is now "sexual abuse".

Not everyone is treated as though they are vulnerable. 

The police have changed their practice a few years ago to prosecuting people who beat their partners, because there is recognition that coercive control goes with the territory. 

I would argue if someone is in a situation of being on the recieving end of that kind of abuse, yes they are vulnerable, and I'm glad the police have changed their procedures. 

As for a register of domestic abusers. Good. If police know that someone has a pattern of beating their partners / spouses then there should be a register. The only people to blame for this are people who use their fists.

When i say vulnerable - I mean those who are being controlled, and whose self worth is so low, they believe that they're responsible for being beaten up

Edited February 24, 2023 by Mister M