This is not the usual way in which to open an article, but I am doing it anyway. In March and May of this year I published three articles on the topic of Domestic Violence and did so in the hopes of being able to balance out the sociopathic feminist anti-male agenda which seeks to demonize males - unless they are gay of course. Those articles were:
Children's Deaths Don't Matter to Domestic Violence Activists
May 12, 2015
Female domestic violence deaths equated with 0.00001% of males between the ages of 25 and 54, whilst the number of children at risk was ten thousand times higher and the number of deaths in one state alone was Nine times higher. When you start quoting statistics like these, you begin to understand the undue influence that the 'fundamentalist and sociopathic feminists' have on society at large. Nothing is placed in perspective. As Bettina Arndt pointed out in her 2007 article, the founder of Britain's first women's refuge claimed that the women's movement was hijacked by women promoting anti-male propaganda.
The Myth of Violence: The Fallen State of Humankind
May 12, 2015
When it comes to Sexual abuse, the vast majority of offenders are Male - and they are usually members of the family or extremely close and trusted friends. Interestingly enough, Biological fathers rate quite low as threats to their children, whilst step-fathers and mother's boyfriends rate high. When it comes to domestic violence, husbands and wives are racing neck and neck to win those stakes and when it comes to other forms of abuse (emotional abuse/ physical abuse), Women generally take the cake - something that the Feminists don't like hearing about at all.
Quentin Bryce, Domestic Violence, Sociopathology and Statistics
March 22, 2015
If activist ideologues are going to paint the male citizenry as 'violent,' then I think it behooves them to be transparent when it comes to the statistics which support their claim. "Why the implied focus on men?" "Can we have the stats on female-to-female violence as well?" "How do the two sets of figures stack up?" What percentage of male-to-female violence is perpetrated by criminals or immigrants holding to the concepts of honor killings? We live in a very politicized era in which activist agendas are basically 'fundamentalist theologies' which appeal to sociopaths -- people who consider their own self-interest the most important aspect of any action and behavior and who completely disregard the possible harm they can cause other people.
I opened this article by citing the headers to these three articles on Domestic Violence because I came across an article today at msn news in Australia, in which Warwick Marsh, the founder of fatherhood foundation Dads4Kids, is quoted as saying:
"There's a whole bunch of research that shows when children have an involved father, they're a lot less likely to be violent"
"A statistical reality, as unfortunate as it is, is that more mothers kill children than fathers"
He was one of several people interviewed for a Father's Day article on Domestic Violence and I was pleased to see that Mr. Marsh's comments were included. The article commenced by saying that Father's Day was being used by an Anti-domestic violence campaigner to encourage men to reflect on their role in discouraging family violence. This lady's ex-partner killed their child. The lady in question is of course concerned for the safety of children in households in which the father is violent, but as my articles above state and as stated by Mr. Marsh, the domestic violence agenda which is typically anti-male, generally only concentrates on male perpetrators.
The article concluded with comments from a State Premier. These comments include:
"Violence against women is fundamentally a men's issue and it's for men to reflect on the role that they play in the world and in particular in their relationships"
"We know that at the heart of violence against women is this notion of men controlling women, and that involves you having a really deep look at your relationship."
These statements are absolutely spot on, but what he said and how his comments are read in the community are quite different. He was specifically referring to Male-on-Female violence. He did not say "Men are responsible for Domestic Violence" which is exactly how the community at large will have read the comments.
He also said that it was important for men to step up and challenge issues surrounding family violence.
It is important when it comes to any agenda, that we the people are given the actual facts, not sociopathic agendas, and it is equally important that we approach all information we receive in a careful, balanced and judicial way.
Many divorced women do their best to keep their ex-partners out of their childrens' lives, but as Mr. March stated, "There's a whole bunch of research that shows when children have an involved father, they're a lot less likely to be violent."
Children are not pawns to be used in divorce or as weapons to assault ex-partners. They are human beings who need balanced care and love.
As pointed out by Mr. Marsh in the msn.com article and as I reported in my articles above, biological fathers are not a significant threat to their own children. The most significant threat comes from the mother's new partner. And when it comes to male on female domestic violence in which the female partner is killed, in Australia, in one state alone, the child death rate was nine times higher than the national female spouse death rate.
My intent here is not to dismiss facts, or diminish the importance of any particular social agenda, but in order to promote justice, statistical facts must take precedence over politically motivated activist agendas.
So what are the facts about domestic violence?
- More Children die at the hands of Mothers than Fathers.
- Most Males responsible for violence toward children are step-fathers and mother's boyfriends.
- Significantly more children die from violence and accidental/preventable deaths than women killed by their husbands.
- Of the number of violent people in heterosexual relations, approximately half of them are women (some stats say more.)
Activist agendas prefer to demonize men and excuse women whilst highlighting only those facts which make newsworthy headlines. Media will run with any story if it will make money for them (see The Media Myth of Australian Racism listed below), and sociopaths are equally self-interested. They care not a whit about the overall picture or balanced reporting. They are only interested in promoting themselves and their agendas.
It is time for society to stop being duped by political and other agendas, and take the time to research all the available facts from more than one (particularly self-interested) source.
Prominent Sydney lawyer should get a grip on herself.
by R.P. BenDedek
August 6, 2015
You can't claim to be a victim of aggression when it was you yourself who deliberately provoked the attack. Of course in PC terminology the victim may do anything AT ALL and remain innocent as long as they are the ones who come out all bloodied. Democracy is democracy or it is not. If the counter-protestors have a right to protest, why is it that they claim that Reclaim Australia does not have such a right. I suggest that the prominent lawyer grab a dictionary and look up the word incitement. Reclaim Australia in the exercise of its rights and privileges may act like a red rag to a bull, but when the bull charges, it does so by because it has been trained to do so. So who is training the PC counter protestors? Living in the People's Republic of China as I do and have done for a dozen years, I have heard many accusations made against the government of this country in relation to its 'control' of the population. I wonder how many Chinese people here would love to have the same right Australians do to protest their government's policies and I wonder how many of them would approve of the anti-democratic movement now flourishing in Australia under the politically correct banner of 'Anti-Racism.' So what is the end goal for the Counter-protestors - Australian Democracy or Chinese Communism?
The Media Myth of Australian Racism
by R.P. BenDedek
August 6, 2015
Are Australians racist or are they becoming racist because they are constantly and falsely accused in their own country of being racist. Now despite the fact that both these events were shown not to be connected to racism, the local media, determined not to let the truth stand in the way of a good story, have continued to dump false guilt onto the public and the world at large...In virtually every instance, the attacker is drunk, and the event takes place in the early hours of the morning when not too many people are around. With Indians now accounting for 70% of drivers, the percentage rate of 'Indians' being attacked is a foregone conclusion. Were they Vietnamese, Chinese, Americans, or Englishmen, the percentage of attacks on Taxi drivers would remain the same. The final note on the report as listed above, is that half of the attackers have been juveniles. This is an indictment on the way in which our kids are being raised, not an indictment of racism. But interestingly enough, no figures were provided in relation to how many 'non Indians' are attacked per month in Australia.
The Real Reason Why I Cannot Support RECLAIM Australia
by R.P. BenDedek
April 11, 2015
As an Australian I get tired of that tired old line constantly appearing in both domestic and foreign press claiming that Australia is a racist country. As the counter protestors have clearly demonstrated, the Australian people have risen up to declare that they are not racist and that they will not permit racism in Australia. In China, where I have been living and working for the past decade, there is an actual law to punish people whose words and actions are designed to destroy the social harmony of the nation. Now whilst it behooves all people in a secular democratic society to permit people to think and believe what they like, (for to do otherwise would be totalitarianism) we cannot allow minority groups to create social disharmony, division, sectarian violence and perhaps ultimately - civil war.
R.P.BenDedek (pseudonym) is the Author of 'The King's Calendar: The Secret of Qumran' (www.kingscalendar.com), and a guest columnist at Magic City Morning Star News. He is also the Editor of the 'Writers Journal' at Kingscalendar.com. An Australian, he has been teaching Conversational English in China since 2003.
Writers Journal Kingscalendar
"The King's Calendar" is a chronological study of the historical books of the Bible (Kings and Chronicles), Josephus, Seder Olam Rabbah, and the (Essene) Damascus Document of The Dead Sea Scrolls