WOMEN AS CARING PARTNERS-
Regardless of the UN statistics pointing to women being overwhelmingly victims of IPSV or of domestic violence at the hands of men (this phenomenon having been attributed to the aggressive dominance of men over women under the blanket term of traditional "patriarchal societies" and to toxic masculinities), fathers / men victims of IPSV or of domestic violence ( apparently / officially around 10% to 15% of the global population who are victims of IPSV or of domestic violence are men) are, on the other hand, making themselves more heard.
Men , including fathers, are getting to be more articulate, in spite of having been labelled as being emotionally illiterate and unexpressive.
The case is even being made that judicial systems, especially Family Courts, around the world are gender-biased in favour of mothers, and that fathers experience institutionalised violence.
One would have expected that under patriarchal societies men would have benefited from the brotherly protection of men against violence from women, but strangely enough this has not been generally the case traditionally. So ...it looks like that the current response from men is a delayed one, and may amplify. It may even be a reaction to the mainstream, current dominant feminist discourses or narratives. It may in the near future imply a rethink on the allocation of resources to address IPSV and domestic violence," TOUTE PROPORTION RESPECTEE ".
If silence is not an option for women , so it is it should equally not be for men.. Violence is violence , whoever be the perpetrator. The role of women in perpetrating or generating IPSV or domestic violence , or just violence , may be increasingly the subject of research. Is it a self-protective reaction against patriarchal dominance, a sort of defence mechanism to protect the integrity of the self? Is it a consequence of underlying existential or psycho-behavioural pathologies resulting from childhood trauma? Is violence inherited from intergenerational, dysfunctional family systems ? How do men and women learn to become violent ? Who sows the seeds of violence in the minds of both genders? And how and when are these seeds sown? Hypotheses are being formulated and tested.
When we speak of IPSV or of Domestic Violence we are speaking essentially of well-scoped and well-defined phenomena, and of a defined population of perpetrators and of victims, irrespective of the degree and severity of the violence. We are here essentially speaking of pathological states of being or of behaviour, admittedly to varying degrees of severity on a case-by-case basis. In this context , psychological trauma experienced in early childhood for multiple reasons, including the separation of the newly-born baby from the mother, have a lasting negative impact on brain development. Under such conditions, healthy interpersonal communication is impaired , listening skills and the ability to be rational , calm and empathetic are impaired. Learning abilities are impaired. Non-violent communication is impaired. Blindness takes over.
The huge challenge would to restore these positive abilities and qualities, restore positive power and sanity in the minds of perpetrators of violence and victims of violence, and restore / reinstate healthy communication lines. Change the mental softwares. This is a journey of unlearning and learning, a deprogramming and reprogramming of the mind. This was one of the themes hinted at during the recent intervention of the APD on Radio Cool FM.
Women as caring partners is as relevant to society as Men as caring partners.
I could simply point to the fathers’ rights fringe groups, with their misogynist rants and close ties to the men’s rights movement, to make the case that the movement is not only anti-feminist but anti-women.
But even the more moderate groups within the fathers’ rights movement
engage in a backlash against feminism when they attempt to discredit
the experiences of female victims of intimate partner violence and roll
back legal protections for all victims of domestic and sexual violence.
Self-proclaimed fathers’ rights activists minimize the well-documented prevalence and severity of domestic violence against women, accusing domestic violence advocates of promoting false allegations that alienate children from their parents.
Many fathers’ rights activists argue that women perpetuate as much, if not more, violence against intimate partners and that most domestic violence is mutual, ignoring or discounting all research to the contrary. They accuse programs that serve battered women of discrimination on the basis of sex, even to the point of bringing (unsuccessful) lawsuits against them on equal protection claims.
They respond to the higher rates of homicide and serious injury committed against women by intimate partners by blaming victims, advocates and court systems, rather than the actual perpetrators of violence. Many even lobbied against the reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act.
The utilization of equality and civil rights language does not change the underlying call for the reinstatement of patriarchy in the fathers’ rights movement. Harkening back to a time when men had near absolute control over children as property, activists advocate for male property rights that trump both the best interests of children and the safety of battered mothers.
Source:The New York Times--Room for debate.
Regardless of the UN statistics pointing to women being overwhelmingly victims of IPSV or of domestic violence at the hands of men (this phenomenon having been attributed to the aggressive dominance of men over women under the blanket term of traditional "patriarchal societies" and to toxic masculinities), fathers / men victims of IPSV or of domestic violence ( apparently / officially around 10% to 15% of the global population who are victims of IPSV or of domestic violence are men) are, on the other hand, making themselves more heard.
Men , including fathers, are getting to be more articulate, in spite of having been labelled as being emotionally illiterate and unexpressive.
The case is even being made that judicial systems, especially Family Courts, around the world are gender-biased in favour of mothers, and that fathers experience institutionalised violence.
One would have expected that under patriarchal societies men would have benefited from the brotherly protection of men against violence from women, but strangely enough this has not been generally the case traditionally. So ...it looks like that the current response from men is a delayed one, and may amplify. It may even be a reaction to the mainstream, current dominant feminist discourses or narratives. It may in the near future imply a rethink on the allocation of resources to address IPSV and domestic violence," TOUTE PROPORTION RESPECTEE ".
If silence is not an option for women , so it is it should equally not be for men.. Violence is violence , whoever be the perpetrator. The role of women in perpetrating or generating IPSV or domestic violence , or just violence , may be increasingly the subject of research. Is it a self-protective reaction against patriarchal dominance, a sort of defence mechanism to protect the integrity of the self? Is it a consequence of underlying existential or psycho-behavioural pathologies resulting from childhood trauma? Is violence inherited from intergenerational, dysfunctional family systems ? How do men and women learn to become violent ? Who sows the seeds of violence in the minds of both genders? And how and when are these seeds sown? Hypotheses are being formulated and tested.
When we speak of IPSV or of Domestic Violence we are speaking essentially of well-scoped and well-defined phenomena, and of a defined population of perpetrators and of victims, irrespective of the degree and severity of the violence. We are here essentially speaking of pathological states of being or of behaviour, admittedly to varying degrees of severity on a case-by-case basis. In this context , psychological trauma experienced in early childhood for multiple reasons, including the separation of the newly-born baby from the mother, have a lasting negative impact on brain development. Under such conditions, healthy interpersonal communication is impaired , listening skills and the ability to be rational , calm and empathetic are impaired. Learning abilities are impaired. Non-violent communication is impaired. Blindness takes over.
The huge challenge would to restore these positive abilities and qualities, restore positive power and sanity in the minds of perpetrators of violence and victims of violence, and restore / reinstate healthy communication lines. Change the mental softwares. This is a journey of unlearning and learning, a deprogramming and reprogramming of the mind. This was one of the themes hinted at during the recent intervention of the APD on Radio Cool FM.
Women as caring partners is as relevant to society as Men as caring partners.
The Fathers’ Rights Movement Undermines Victims of Domestic Violence
Kelly Behre
is a visiting associate professor of law at West Virginia University
and the incoming director of the Family Protection and Legal Assistance
Clinic at the University of California, Davis.
Updated June 13, 2014, 3:33 PM
A social movement that promotes equal rights for men who want
to parent their children is essentially feminist. But the current
fathers’ rights movement is not.
I could simply point to the fathers’ rights fringe groups, with their misogynist rants and close ties to the men’s rights movement, to make the case that the movement is not only anti-feminist but anti-women.
The fathers' rights movement is characterized by thinly veiled misogyny.
Self-proclaimed fathers’ rights activists minimize the well-documented prevalence and severity of domestic violence against women, accusing domestic violence advocates of promoting false allegations that alienate children from their parents.
Many fathers’ rights activists argue that women perpetuate as much, if not more, violence against intimate partners and that most domestic violence is mutual, ignoring or discounting all research to the contrary. They accuse programs that serve battered women of discrimination on the basis of sex, even to the point of bringing (unsuccessful) lawsuits against them on equal protection claims.
They respond to the higher rates of homicide and serious injury committed against women by intimate partners by blaming victims, advocates and court systems, rather than the actual perpetrators of violence. Many even lobbied against the reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act.
The utilization of equality and civil rights language does not change the underlying call for the reinstatement of patriarchy in the fathers’ rights movement. Harkening back to a time when men had near absolute control over children as property, activists advocate for male property rights that trump both the best interests of children and the safety of battered mothers.
Source:The New York Times--Room for debate.
