In a national, and probably world first, the Australian state of Victoria has appointed a Parliamentary Secretary for Men's Behaviour Change after the Prime Minister declared a ‘national crisis’ of male violence against women earlier this month. The new role is intended “to make Victoria a safer place for women and children and work to end the tragedy of deaths of Victorian women at the hands of men,” said Premier Jacinta Allan in a
It seems to be another example of Australia acting as a test bed for "progressive" government overreach policies that if proven acceptable to the masses can then be rolled out to the rest of the Five Eyes nations and beyond to all Western "democracies". On visiting Australia for the first time in ages at the end of the noughties I noticed the proliferation of public information warnings on topics that would previously have been adequately covered by common sense. Some 10 years later and similar warnings were rife in the UK.
Hang on a minute... So now they know what a woman is?
They can crap on all they want but the police can't do anything about a reported assault unless it's on camera or witnessed by stranger.... So the only time they do anything is when there is a dead body.
Pre- crime? Hello thought police! Kill all men or chop their balls off.
I've got some ideas for them... They could attach social distancing collars to people that identify as men and the opposite GPS sensor to people that identify as women. Then set perimeter alarm of 1000m linked to a national police or ambulance database.
Once the device is triggered, it severs the head of both parties.
The rise in 2022-23 was another predictable cause of Covid lockdowns. Men are more than twice as likely to be killed by women. The suicide rate for men is actually 76%.
Since 1990 the murder rate for all people has greatly reduced.
If you remove the indigenous population stats Australia is one of the safest countries in the world.
A majority of murders are a result of a conflict, often drugs etc or relationship conflict. Men deal with conflict with the threat of violence and women by reputaation destruction (generalised of course).
Many male suicides are a response to such conflicts.
I make no excuse for any violence but given men also represent over 90% of workplace deaths and prison intake the "male disposibility theory" is more than a theory.
The female intimate partner homicide rate in 2022-23 was 0.32 per 100,000. This was an increase from the rate of 0.25 recorder in the previous year but the second lowest rate recorded since 1989-90.
The AIC actually released both the 2021-22 and 2022-23 data "following enhanced processes to ensure timely release.
This means the 2021-22 release has been overshadowed by 2022-23.
The rate in 2021-22 was 0.25 the same as 2020-21/ This is the equal lowest rate since 89-90.
I got all this from Jeremy Gans @jeremy_gans twitter - go to his posts of April 30th and he gives a comphrehensive rundown.
Of course I abhor domestic and family violence and believe perpetrators should be appropriately held accountable; and when considering coercive control, I do believe the problem is sadly quite pervasive (to be clear, I don't mean all men, but it's not 'the odd one', either). In an ideal world, this violence and abuse would be addressed prior to harm being done, but like many other areas, our (hypocritical) governments seem to simply claim to care about these issues in order to bring in some tangentially-related legislation designed to further surveil and control the broader population, rather than actually address the base issue. Ah, the irony.
And it is an apt point regarding the horrendous abuses this government has perpetrated against its citizens in recent years. "In light of the lack of faith in government displayed above, Richardson’s first project should be to address the behaviour of former Premier Daniel Andrews, who bullied and gaslit 6.7 million Victorians for years.", is absolutely correct, and add to that a proper investigation of the former Premier (and his wife) for their involvement in a traffic incident (and their shocking behaviour immediately after, and since) which left a child (at the time) critically injured and permanently adversely affected.
One final point, raised by one of the commenters quoted within the article, about the despicable conduct of Victoria Police, clarified as "A famous image of Victoria Police pepper spraying an elderly lady who was lying on her back, defenceless, at a Covid protest in Melbourne" - this appalling act was even worse than this sounds, as the officer didn't simply spray the woman on her back, he SHOVED her so hard she completely lost her footing and FELL onto her back, and THEN he sprayed her point-blank in the face before he CONTINUED WALKING LIKE NOTHING HAD HAPPENED (sorry, caps for emphasis, not shouting at you, Rebekah).
Oh wow I didn't know the policeman had shoved the woman to the ground first. That's gross.
And this is the thing, it's hard to swallow that these special secretary positions and such will do the trick when there's rot from the top down that hasn't been addressed, including both physical abuse and coercive control perpetrated by state actors.
Yes, he walked up to her, shoved her over, sprayed her, then simply carried on (as did his colleague, and no other police rendered assistance in the immediate aftermath). I saw the footage back when it happened in 2021 and was speechless with horror. It's excessive regardless, but it was staggering that she was walking peacefully and he wasn't trying to arrest, disarm or neutralise her. Why violently assault someone and then just walk off? I mean, why do it at all, but it was not even done in the pursuit of some greater objective, it was blantant violence for violence sake. The officers involved should absolutely be in jail; they are nothing more than common thugs.
Yep. There really aren't any words. It's still as shocking now as it was three years ago. And that's one of the more egregious instances, but there were many others.
So darn sad that we've got to this stage - in my lifetime. I'm not saying we don't need to stop DV but let's address the underlying breakdown on families & society in general. Having a woke, virtue signalling govt., wasting taxpayers money like this will do zip!
That's a good point. Addressing values as a whole society might be more constructive than labelling men as the problem, then trying to 'fix' them. Obviously notwithstanding that violent offenders should be dealt with by the law, and women need safe spaces and services should they be in fear of violence. One of the reasons Self ID laws are a problem - which I wish now that I'd mentioned above, because it does present a clear contradiction from a government saying they want to protect women.
I see it as another level of "dumbing down" the political discourse.
To compare the current crop of "politicians" to those of the past- great orators with towering intellects and impressive educations contrasting with Allan, Andrews, Albanese, Bowen et al, is like asking a group of chimps to run the Apollo moon landing missions.
The oversimplification of every aspect of life is the sine qua non of the modern authoritarian left.
Good point, though I am scratching to find any recent examples of authoritarianism on the conservative side of politics. True conservativism is the antithesis os authoritarianism.
I’m thinking of the image pictured here, with authoritarianism vs libertarianism in the vertical axis, and liberalism vs conservatism on the horizontal axis https://arxiv.org/html/2401.13656v1
I wonder if any of this elaborate fight against male violence will have any practical outcomes, such as building suitable shelters for the women affected? I doubt it.
Nor will there be any reference to the increased stress caused to both women and men by rises in cost of living, lack of affordable housing, lack of privacy, fear porn, stupid rules for us to follow, debts, climate change nonsense, etc. etc.
Aussie writer Stephen Reason suggests there is another agenda behind this .... "Our WEF-captured Australian Government is attempting to use the device of "violent men" to impose “age-assurance technologies” to surveil and censor, and to remove all anonymity from the internet."
Heard that the reports of female on female domestic violence has increased dramatically but it is not being acknowledged as if throws the narrative into disarray
How many petty channels can Govts manufacture to ensure more public servants Assistants for this chief or other boss but what exactly is it that needs to be done Job given to chosen person to execute the task so why aid is required. If the person not capable of doing it why give them the job
New jobs created in QLD under Anna P were almost always public service manufactured ones No surprise that Campbell Newman sacked so many on taking office This job employment created many channels for departments to wallow through & network survives still begging for a cull
"Secretary for Men's Behaviour Change" has a distinctly Orwellian ring to it. To be policed by thought control, no doubt. More progressive insanity.
It seems to be another example of Australia acting as a test bed for "progressive" government overreach policies that if proven acceptable to the masses can then be rolled out to the rest of the Five Eyes nations and beyond to all Western "democracies". On visiting Australia for the first time in ages at the end of the noughties I noticed the proliferation of public information warnings on topics that would previously have been adequately covered by common sense. Some 10 years later and similar warnings were rife in the UK.
Ha bang on!
"...I noticed the proliferation of public information warnings on topics that would previously have been adequately covered by common sense"
Hang on a minute... So now they know what a woman is?
They can crap on all they want but the police can't do anything about a reported assault unless it's on camera or witnessed by stranger.... So the only time they do anything is when there is a dead body.
Pre- crime? Hello thought police! Kill all men or chop their balls off.
Education? Don't make me cry.
Well I should have mentioned the Self-ID laws because of course, they think a woman is whoever says they are a woman.
If only ducks could speak!
I've got some ideas for them... They could attach social distancing collars to people that identify as men and the opposite GPS sensor to people that identify as women. Then set perimeter alarm of 1000m linked to a national police or ambulance database.
Once the device is triggered, it severs the head of both parties.
Problem sol ved.
The rise in 2022-23 was another predictable cause of Covid lockdowns. Men are more than twice as likely to be killed by women. The suicide rate for men is actually 76%.
Since 1990 the murder rate for all people has greatly reduced.
If you remove the indigenous population stats Australia is one of the safest countries in the world.
A majority of murders are a result of a conflict, often drugs etc or relationship conflict. Men deal with conflict with the threat of violence and women by reputaation destruction (generalised of course).
Many male suicides are a response to such conflicts.
I make no excuse for any violence but given men also represent over 90% of workplace deaths and prison intake the "male disposibility theory" is more than a theory.
I meant "Men are more than twice as likely to be killed THAN a women" as they account for over 2 thirds of total deaths by murder.
"Since 1990 the murder rate for all people has greatly reduced." could you link me to a source for this?
The female intimate partner homicide rate in 2022-23 was 0.32 per 100,000. This was an increase from the rate of 0.25 recorder in the previous year but the second lowest rate recorded since 1989-90.
The AIC actually released both the 2021-22 and 2022-23 data "following enhanced processes to ensure timely release.
This means the 2021-22 release has been overshadowed by 2022-23.
The rate in 2021-22 was 0.25 the same as 2020-21/ This is the equal lowest rate since 89-90.
I got all this from Jeremy Gans @jeremy_gans twitter - go to his posts of April 30th and he gives a comphrehensive rundown.
Thanks good insights!
https://www.aic.gov.au/sites/default/files/2024-04/sr45_homicide_in_australia_2021-22.pdf
Thanks
see reply to your last comment - added info
Of course I abhor domestic and family violence and believe perpetrators should be appropriately held accountable; and when considering coercive control, I do believe the problem is sadly quite pervasive (to be clear, I don't mean all men, but it's not 'the odd one', either). In an ideal world, this violence and abuse would be addressed prior to harm being done, but like many other areas, our (hypocritical) governments seem to simply claim to care about these issues in order to bring in some tangentially-related legislation designed to further surveil and control the broader population, rather than actually address the base issue. Ah, the irony.
And it is an apt point regarding the horrendous abuses this government has perpetrated against its citizens in recent years. "In light of the lack of faith in government displayed above, Richardson’s first project should be to address the behaviour of former Premier Daniel Andrews, who bullied and gaslit 6.7 million Victorians for years.", is absolutely correct, and add to that a proper investigation of the former Premier (and his wife) for their involvement in a traffic incident (and their shocking behaviour immediately after, and since) which left a child (at the time) critically injured and permanently adversely affected.
One final point, raised by one of the commenters quoted within the article, about the despicable conduct of Victoria Police, clarified as "A famous image of Victoria Police pepper spraying an elderly lady who was lying on her back, defenceless, at a Covid protest in Melbourne" - this appalling act was even worse than this sounds, as the officer didn't simply spray the woman on her back, he SHOVED her so hard she completely lost her footing and FELL onto her back, and THEN he sprayed her point-blank in the face before he CONTINUED WALKING LIKE NOTHING HAD HAPPENED (sorry, caps for emphasis, not shouting at you, Rebekah).
Oh wow I didn't know the policeman had shoved the woman to the ground first. That's gross.
And this is the thing, it's hard to swallow that these special secretary positions and such will do the trick when there's rot from the top down that hasn't been addressed, including both physical abuse and coercive control perpetrated by state actors.
Yes, he walked up to her, shoved her over, sprayed her, then simply carried on (as did his colleague, and no other police rendered assistance in the immediate aftermath). I saw the footage back when it happened in 2021 and was speechless with horror. It's excessive regardless, but it was staggering that she was walking peacefully and he wasn't trying to arrest, disarm or neutralise her. Why violently assault someone and then just walk off? I mean, why do it at all, but it was not even done in the pursuit of some greater objective, it was blantant violence for violence sake. The officers involved should absolutely be in jail; they are nothing more than common thugs.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YP1AFRJ3asI
And yes, you are absolutely right. The double standard would be laughable if not so serious.
WOW
Yep. There really aren't any words. It's still as shocking now as it was three years ago. And that's one of the more egregious instances, but there were many others.
So darn sad that we've got to this stage - in my lifetime. I'm not saying we don't need to stop DV but let's address the underlying breakdown on families & society in general. Having a woke, virtue signalling govt., wasting taxpayers money like this will do zip!
That's a good point. Addressing values as a whole society might be more constructive than labelling men as the problem, then trying to 'fix' them. Obviously notwithstanding that violent offenders should be dealt with by the law, and women need safe spaces and services should they be in fear of violence. One of the reasons Self ID laws are a problem - which I wish now that I'd mentioned above, because it does present a clear contradiction from a government saying they want to protect women.
I see it as another level of "dumbing down" the political discourse.
To compare the current crop of "politicians" to those of the past- great orators with towering intellects and impressive educations contrasting with Allan, Andrews, Albanese, Bowen et al, is like asking a group of chimps to run the Apollo moon landing missions.
The oversimplification of every aspect of life is the sine qua non of the modern authoritarian left.
Just the authoritarian left or also the authoritarian right? Seems to be an authoritarian trait in general?
Good point, though I am scratching to find any recent examples of authoritarianism on the conservative side of politics. True conservativism is the antithesis os authoritarianism.
I’m thinking of the image pictured here, with authoritarianism vs libertarianism in the vertical axis, and liberalism vs conservatism on the horizontal axis https://arxiv.org/html/2401.13656v1
I wonder if any of this elaborate fight against male violence will have any practical outcomes, such as building suitable shelters for the women affected? I doubt it.
Nor will there be any reference to the increased stress caused to both women and men by rises in cost of living, lack of affordable housing, lack of privacy, fear porn, stupid rules for us to follow, debts, climate change nonsense, etc. etc.
💯
Aussie writer Stephen Reason suggests there is another agenda behind this .... "Our WEF-captured Australian Government is attempting to use the device of "violent men" to impose “age-assurance technologies” to surveil and censor, and to remove all anonymity from the internet."
https://stephenreason.substack.com/p/blaming-male-violence-to-censor-the
Secretary 😁
Heard that the reports of female on female domestic violence has increased dramatically but it is not being acknowledged as if throws the narrative into disarray
Yes the reporting has been very narrow with little to know context.
How many petty channels can Govts manufacture to ensure more public servants Assistants for this chief or other boss but what exactly is it that needs to be done Job given to chosen person to execute the task so why aid is required. If the person not capable of doing it why give them the job
I remember reading that the public service wage bill soared under Dan Andrews as the bureaucracy bloated out.
New jobs created in QLD under Anna P were almost always public service manufactured ones No surprise that Campbell Newman sacked so many on taking office This job employment created many channels for departments to wallow through & network survives still begging for a cull