Latest Posts

The introduction of the "Violence against Women" programs has been something that feminists have dreamt up in order to introduce anti-male laws around the world. As usual, feminists and their enablers will use falsified information and any other method they can find in order to convince the law makers, if we can refer to them in that fashion, to change existing laws in order to discriminate against man and boy, while at the same time ensuring their own positions, paid for by taxpayers, are protected and guaranteed..
The hypocrisy that feminists have and continue to introduce is demonstrated once again by the author of this article. The researchers, professors and doctors are the radicals who produced the misandric  material are the same women who attended the SCUM Manifesto Conference in Perth, Western Australia in 2011. Those same women who were scheming and planning about removing half of the earth's population, blowing up the Men's Sheds and throwing little male toddlers thru windows while they are closed should indicate their inhumane nature..
They are the "NEW" breed of fanatical feminists that control that hegemony and decide future policies  and actions. They are also mostly lesbians, which does not come as any surprise considering their vitriol and malice towards all males..
Behind all this and included in their sullied actions and behaviour, we have the Gillard Government who have turned a blind eye to the recommendations these radicals want to introduce into parliament and make law. The Gillard Government demonstrates again what their intentions are for half of the Australian Population. More bigotry, discrimination and bias..

Fraud in Australia’s plan to reduce violence against women

The 2009 Australian project a ‘Time for Action: The National Council’s Plan for Australia to Reduce Violence against Women and their Children, 2009-2021′, was approved for implementation by the Council of Australian Governments (COAG). The Plan, which is split into several parts, puts forth recommendations for new legislation, changes to judicial processes, requests for funding and ideas for domestic programs targeted at reducing domestic and sexual violence against women. The advisory council has some powers to implement programs through the Office of Women among other agencies, but much of what the government funded program calls for requires approval by Parliament.
The entire premise of the National Plan was underpinned by the belief in this statement:“While a small proportion of men are victims of domestic violence and sexual assault, the majority of people who experience this kind of violence are women in a home, at the hands of men they know.”[27-pg1] But a quick examination of the statistics and data shows a much different picture to the rather sweeping indictment of Australian men the National Council paints.
Indeed, The Plan never addresses the topic of violence that women commit towards men or towards children, nor does it accurately state the facts as they are in Australia.
The Data and Statistics
The National Council’s plan is put forth as a direct response to several academic papers and various activists around Australia, which purport data and statistics that claim to show an epidemic of men’s violence against women. However, the National Council readily admits its data on actual incidences of domestic violence and sexual assault is poor, sporadic and in some cases inaccurate. Nevertheless, the council makes most of their recommendations based on the conclusions of  several academic papers and studies, and rarely address any comprehensive analysis of their own. Indeed, The Plan never addresses the topic of violence that women commit towards men or towards children, nor does it accurately state the facts as they are in Australia.

“Data relating to violence against women and their children in Australia is poor. Data on services sought by, and provided to, victims is not readily available, and the way in which information is reported is generally inconsistent and does not allow for a comprehensive understanding of violence against women. Variations in data estimates across Australia are affected by differences in what is captured, counted and reported across States and Territories.
There are also personal and institutional barriers in decision making within and across systems that reduce the extent to which sexual assault and domestic and family violence is disclosed and reported. This affects the capacity of data to accurately reflect the real numbers of women and children who experience this violence. The difficulty [is] in measuring the true extent of sexual assault and domestic [violence].”[1-pg47]
 What The Plan lacks in substantial comparative statistical data, it makes up for with hyperbolic references to various academic publications which they imply contain extremely compelling data. However, when direct statistical data is mentioned, it is at best an out-of-context use of very some basic data; and at worst a deliberate obfuscation of the full picture of domestic violence. Here is an example of one statistic The Plan mentions over and over again in several of its various publications: 
Violence in relationships remains high in our communities, and most would agree that unless the unequal power relations between women and men are more meaningfully addressed, the incidence will not change. Around one in three Australian women experience physical violence, and almost one in five experiences sexual violence over their lifetime.“[1-pg59]
What they don’t mention is this “1 in 3″ (or 29%) stat isn’t just domestic violence, or even violence men perpetrate against women – it’s all forms of violence women experience. Furthermore, it’s only violence that occurs after the age of 15, which we will examine in a later article, is yet another obfuscation of statistical data. The exact same data set from which the National Council used, shows that over 41% of Australian men experience violence in their lifetime’,(12% more than women)as men are much more likely to be the victims of violence than women.
This conduct, citing research as though it supports claims it does not, was identified and coined with the term, Creating “Evidence” by Citation by internationally recognized expert on domestic violence research Dr. Murray Straus, in his paper entitled “Processes Explaining the Concealment and Distortion of Evidence on Gender Symmetry in Partner Violence, 2007,” which identifies various methods employed by unscrupulous activists and academicians to further assertions that are not supported by valid research.
Here is the complete data from the same Australian Bureau of Statistics(ABS)  source, which shows a larger picture of data on violence for both women and men.[7]
Violence experienced since the age of 15:
  • 29% (2,243,600) of women experienced physical assault
  • 41% (3,031,800) of men experienced physical assault
  • 17% (1,293,100) of women experienced sexual assault
  • 4.8% (362,400) of men experienced sexual assault
In the 12 month data prior to the ABS survey:
  • 4.7% (363,000) of women experienced physical violence
  • 10% (779,800) of men experienced physical violence
  • 1.6% (126,100) of women experienced sexual violence
  • 0.6% (46,700) of men experienced sexual violence
Of these numbers:
  • 79,500 men experienced physical assault by a female perpetrator
  • 195,300 women experienced physical assault by a male perpetrator
What does The Plan have to say about violence against men?
“While a small proportion of men are victims of domestic violence and sexual assault, the majority of people who experience this kind of violence are women in a home, at the hands of men they know. Men are more likely to be the victims of violence from strangers and in public, so different strategies are required to address these different types of violence.”[3-pg1]
        77% of men (60,900) who experienced physical assault by a female which occurred in a home
        64% of women (125,100) who experienced physical assault by a male which occurred in a home
Even if the ABS data is correct, which does not include abuse to children under the age of 15, who are abused at much higher rates by their mother than their father, men constituting one-third of all domestic abuse victims is not a “small proportion” in any sense of the meaning. In the prior 12 months to the survey for sexual assault, men experienced 27% of the incidents of sexual violence; again, not a “small proportion.” The question must be asked why a well funded government study on domestic violence doesn’t even begin to address the victimization of men when they do account for significant portion of domestic violence victims? According to the council:
“Enhanced community awareness and education programs are needed to change violence-supportive attitudes. These initiatives must be always based on the notion of gender equality and the need to shift men’s consciousness from one of privilege to one of mutuality. They need to make men question their own economic, social, and political power over women.“[1-pg47]

Does the National Council believe that the violence men endure is not as important as the violence women endure?
“Attitudes and beliefs about gender are learned, and society often teaches deeply held sexist views.  
Evidence shows that communities increase the risk of violence against women when they allow norms that support men’s controlling attitudes and behaviour over women, or attitudes that support the notion of male privilege. 

These norms include:”“macho” constructions of masculinityideas that “a woman’s place is in the home”notions that men should “wear the pants” as heads of the household and wage-earnersstandards that segregate male drinking and encourage excessive orbinge drinkingstandards that create peer pressure to conform to these ideas of masculinity and male behaviour[1-pg39]
These definitions of what it means to be a man are from Professor Michael Flood, a person who posed as a member of the father’s rights group Fathers4Equality, and used the groups resources unethically and fraudulently.  He sent distasteful and offensive letters to every member of the Australian federal parliament, in an effort to discredit and undermine the group’s efforts and reputation.[24][25][26] But more to the point, these stereotypes which Flood lists as the underlying cause of male violence are shallow and arguably paint an extremely biased and inaccurate picture of the vast variations of masculinity definitions that vary greatly from person to person. But let’s look at the basic statistics of men in Australia in terms of health, education and welfare when compared to women, to see the statistical evidence of “male privilege. 

Men Live on average 5 years less than women - (in 2007-2009 men had a 40.9% chance of surviving to age 85 years compared with women’s 57.3% chance)[20] 

Men accounted for 93% of workplace fatalities in Australia in 2009-2010[21] 

Men die of suicide at 3 times the rate of women ( 2008 Men 16 and women 5 per 100,000 population)[19] 

At least 1 in 3 victims of family or domestic violence is a Man[7] 

Men are more frequently victims of violent assault (3.9 %  man compared to 2.4 %  women)[7] 

Men are more frequently threatened with violent assault ( 5.0 %  men compared to 3.5% women)[7] 

Men’s enrollment in post secondary education for 2010 is 43.8%, women’s enrollment is at 56.2% [18] 

Men are more than twice as likely to be victims of homicide (1.8 victims per 100,000 population) than women (0.8 victims per 100,000 population)[22] 

The imprisonment rate for men in June 2009 was 13 times the rate for women(329 prisoners per 100,000 male adults versus 25 prisoners per 100,000 female adults)[23]

Men seem to be on the disadvantaged side of many basic areas of concern for any Australian citizen. It’s no secret that in the Western world, men have been falling behind for sometime now, which many would argue is due in large part to the emphasis on placing the needs of women above men. Moreover, the entire premise of this National Council’s Plan is predicated on the belief that men are overwhelmingly the perpetrators of domestic violence. Their own data refutes that claim, and furthermore, several significant studies have been done that show domestic violence is perpetrated equally between men and women. [15][16][17] The statistics of domestic violence from the United States, Canada and United Kingdom shows domestic violence is perpetrated equally between men and women. 

(There is additional information that has not been released yet, which will show an attempt by several employees of the AIWH and ABS to change, hide or ignore data relating to domestic violence towards men and children.) 

Since the main underlying argument for such an enormous government undertaking is faulty, misleading and in many cases dishonest, what are the real motivations for the study and its findings? After close examination of the National Council’s drastic recommendations of  judicial and legislative changes, which call for ‘gendered civil and criminal laws’ meant to enact a type of gender profiling against men, holding them to a lower standard of proof for incidents of domestic violence and sexual assault, one can only wonder how such a biased and bigoted study made it past the desks of some of Australia’s most prominent politicians without any protest.

I think many Australian men may be curious to ask if Prime Minister Julia Gillard knows the real facts about domestic violence and sexual assault, and if she is aware of the horrendous amounts of civil rights violations, against half their population, that the National Council’s plan so adamantly call for.  Sadly, it now appears that hatred and bigotry are becoming government policy in Australia 


(1)The Plan
    (8) Angus G & Hall G (1996). Child Abuse and Neglect Australia 1994-1995. Canberra: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare Series; no 16)
    (9) Tomison A (1996). “Protecting Children: Updating The National Picture” in Child Abuse and Neglect Australia 1994-1995, Child Welfare Series No.16, Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, AGPS, Canberra
    (10) Broadbent A & Bentley R (1997). Child Abuse and Neglect Australia 1995-1996. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare Catalogue No CWS 1. Canberra: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (Child Welfare Series No 17)
    (12) Fitzroy 2003 – ‘The violence of women: Making sense of child abuse perpetrated by mothers’ Australian Institute of Family Studies
    (15) Headey, B., Scott, D., & de Vaus, D. (1999). Domestic violence in Australia: Are Women and Men Equally Violent? Australian Social Monitor 2:57-62
    (16) Dutton D. G. (2007). Female Intimate Partner Violence and Developmental Trajectories of Abusive Families. International Journal of Men’s Health, 6, 54-71
    (17) Archer J (2000). Sex Differences in Physically Aggressive Acts between Heterosexual Partners: A Meta-Analytic Review. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 651-680
    (24)  Flood, M. (1998) ‘Mens’ Movements’, Community Quaterly, 46.
    (25)  Flood, M. and Pease, B. (2006) The Factors Influencing Community Attitudes in Relation to Violence Against Women: A Critical Review of the Literature, Melbourne: Victorian Health Promotion Foundation.
    Written by Kyle Lovett
    Kyle Lovett has been studying, practicing and blogging about Zen Buddhism for the last 5 years, and has just started to write about Men’s Rights issues. He works in technology field in Washington DC and has a wonderful 10 year old son. He is also the blog master of The Reformed Buddhist.