I have met and heard the tragic stories of many parents. PA is a function, by and large, of a custodial ex-partner, although some alienation can start while the couple is still together.

This blog is a story of experiences and observations of dysfunctional Family Law (FLAW), an arena pitting parent against parent, with children as the prize. Due to the gender bias in Family Law, that I have observed, this Blog has evolved from a focus solely on PA to one of the broader Family/Children's Rights area and the impact of Feminist mythology on Canadian Jurisprudence and the Divorce Industry.

Sunday, November 29, 2009

The Mainstream Media on Tiger, Erin, Hartman, Women More Violent

I had an email exchange with an overly sensitive feminist earlier today over the possibility that Tiger was a victim of female on male DV. She brought up the canard of effects on the child if this was openly speculated which is what usually happens in defense of women but never when it comes to the man. Here are her first quotes when the issue was raised on an email thread. "I think this is a shameful, disgusting pandering to gossip mongering. We don't know what happened. We were not there. And there are also other rumours that would explain the situation. Before we can pass any sort of judgement,) or make any sort of conjecture, we need to know, not guess. We could well become part of the American passtime (sic) of pulling people off pedastals, (sic) ruining the good reputation of not just one, but two people, and harm the kids in the process. So, let's not go there." Note the usual feminist attempts at shaming as though she were the mother of the group chastising the children. Nothing pompous or overbearing here. I retorted as I usually do when I see someone trying to shape a thread into a politically correct polemic, and this particular feminist does it with great frequency. This is my final retort to those who would feel overly sensitive to covering up what may be DV by a woman on a man. You can bet your new low carbon footprint Toyota Prius that if this were reversed everybody in the Liberal MSM would be all over it condemning Tiger and wishing him a quick trip to hell. The "what about the children" statement is used frequently by lawyers and the female support ecosystem trying to cover up abuse at the hands of the mom but it has no currency when applied to dads in the court arena. If its a dad then the bigger the false allegations the better it is to "protect the children" from the brute or so the "spin" goes. Had I listened to that when I confronted the PA of my children and not gone public they would still be very alienated from me. Those of us who have experienced female abuse and know the discounting of it by almost everyone who has not themselves been exposed to it have little patience with covering it up. On a balance of probabilities, the same mechanism used in family court, Tiger had some personal issues with his ex based on what has arisen so far by those who observed the damage to his vehicle. If they are misreporting then the information could be at fault. But logical deduction goes like this and having been there I know exactly what kind of response it could trigger if you lose focus and are distracted. Were dealing with one of the most focused and controlled male athletes in the world. These are absolutely essential qualitiesto do what he does. He is a near billionaire if not passed that point due to his ability and has a great deal to lose if word gets out he has domestic problems given he pulls in $100,000,000 per year in wins and endorsements. For this reason it is to his advantage to cover it up. It has little to do with the children. When it comes to ridiculing men for suffering DV from their partner - and those who throw the epithets to put it kindly refer to such a person as "unmanly" - then I will counterbalance any argument forcefully and quickly to dispel any myths and emphasize these are normal men put in an abnormal situation. Plug the focus and control into the equation. He smashes his Cadillac SUV into a fire hydrant and tree at less than 33 MPH adjacent to his house while leaving at 2:25 AM and he is not drinking and there are no other factors blocking his vision such as fog or rain. Perhaps he is on pain killers from an injury but it is unknown. If he was running to the pharmacy for meds for the kids then clearly it can be explained. He has chosen not to. It has been reported both rear windows were smashed by his wife with a golf club and others report one. Why? Why did she not extract him from the front passenger side or the drivers side. The wife is suddenly a para medic using a golf club as the jaws of life as one wag said. There are always two sets of keys for a vehicle in the household. How did she ultimately extract him to the point he was lying on the ground semi-conscious. He is 6'1" 180 Ibs she is somewhat smaller. Did she drag him out and if so how? How did his face get scratched and lips lacerated but no blood on the steering wheel or in the vehicle. Why would the $100,000,000 dollar man not wear a safety belt? Had this been a gender reversal with her driving things would have been "spun" quite differently. I am a crusader for equality between the genders and that includes all facets of it not some selected number. I will posit probable scenarios when a story looks fishy as this one is. Their are antecedents to the story that may or may not be true and given it is the National Enquirer involved the likelihood of untruth is high. But even if untrue the mere fact it was told this story was coming out could set off a partner and lead to a dispute. Is this just a scary coincidence or is there a correlation? I think it was DV.MJM
Sunday, November 29, 2009
The Mainstream Media on Tiger, Erin, Hartman, Women More Violent
The Mainstream Liberal Media (MSLM) appear to have decided on using Tiger's purported affair with Rachel Uchitel as the excuse for Eirn Nordegren's assualt on him. That mslm political approach is similar to exonerating Maj. Nidal Hassan because of pre-Afghan assignment stress.
Few people remember that Phil Hartman was murdered by his abusive and battering wife. She then committed suicide.
Few people know that Humphrey Bogart was battered by his first wife.
Celebrity Domestic Violence Cases: husbands battered by wives:
11 Famous Men Who Were Beaten by their Women:
The study below shows extensive evidence that women spouses are more violent than men.
A few more Tiger & Erin Woods reports: http://www.examiner.com/x-833-San-Diego-News-Examiner~y2009m11d28-Did-wife-assault-Tiger-Woods-before-crash Toronto News San Diego News Examiner Did wife assault Tiger Woods before crash? November 28, 7:36 PMSan Diego News Examiner Dave Thomas Did a fight lead to Tiger Woods' car accident early Friday morning in Florida? ... http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/2437962/tiger_woods_affair_wife_has_two_stories.html?cat=14 Tiger Woods Affair? Wife Has Two Stories About the Golf Is There Another Woman? is it Rachel Uchitel? What is the Story Behind the Tiger Woods Car Accident?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/women-are-more-violent-says-study-622388.html Women are more violent, says study The Independent, UK By Sophie Goodchild, Home Affairs Correspondent Sunday, 12 November 2000 Bruised and battered husbands have been complaining for years and now the biggest research project of its kind has proved them right. When it comes to domestic confrontation, women are more violent than men. The study, which challenges the long-standing view that women are overwhelmingly the victims of aggression, is based on an analysis of 34,000 men and women by a British academic. Women lash out more frequently than their husbands or boyfriends, concludes John Archer, professor of psychology at the University of Central Lancashire and president of the International Society for Research on Aggression. Male violence remains a more serious phenomenon: men proved more likely than women to injure their partners. Female aggression tends to involve pushing, slapping and hurling objects.* Yet men made up nearly 40 per cent of the victims in the cases that he studied - a figure much higher than previously reported. Professor Archer analysed data from 82 US and UK studies on relationship violence, dating back to 1972. He also looked at 17 studies based on victim reports from 1,140 men and women. Speaking last night, he said that female aggression was greater in westernised women because they were "economically emancipated" and therefore not afraid of ending a relationship. "Feminist writers say most of the acts against men are not important but the same people have used the same surveys to inflate the number of women who are attacked," he said. "In the past it would not even have been considered that women are violent. My view is that you must base social policy on the whole evidence." His views are supported by Dr Malcolm George, a lecturer in neuroscience at London University. In a paper to be published next year in the Journal of Men's Studies, Dr George will argue that men have been abused by their wives since Elizabethan times. He uses examples such as the actor John Wayne, beaten by his wife Conchita Martinez, and Humphrey Bogart battered by his wife Mayo Methot, as well as Abraham Lincoln whose wife Mary who broke his nose with a lump of wood. His research is backed up by historical records which show that men who were beaten by their wives were publicly humiliated in a ceremony called a "skimmington procession". The procession was named after the ladle used to skim milk during cheese making. Dr George has also unearthed a plaster frieze in Montacute House in Somerset that depicts a wife hitting her husband over the head followed by a "skimmington" ceremony. "It's a complex argument but we do get more women aggressing against male partners than men against female partners," said Dr George. "The view is that women are acting in self-defence but that is not true - 50 per cent of those who initiate aggression are women. This sends a dangerous message to men because we are saying they are not going to get any legal redress so their option instead is to hit back." Terrie Moffitt, professor of social behaviour at the Institute of Psychiatry at King's College, London, admitted that women do engage in abusive behaviour and said the Home Office should fund research into the issue in the UK. "If we ask does women's violence have consequences for their kids then the answer is 'yes'," she said. "There is also an elevated risk of children being victims of domestic violence if there is central violence between parents." However, Dr Anne Campbell, a psychologist at the University of Durham, said that women should still receive the most support because they were the greater victims of domestic violence. "The outcome of violence is that women are more damaged by it and need the bulk of resources," she said. "But women's violence has become increasingly legitimised. There is a sense now that it's OK to 'slap the bastard'."
Jeffrey Asher
FathersCan (Ottawa)

No comments: