Ending Violence Against Women: Remembering Ecole Polytechnique
- Thread starter Nathalie Rose
- Start date
Let's look at this. First, note carefully the word "chronic", that means there are many more people for whom domestic violence is an acute problem, rather than a chronic problem. Is domestic violence somehow OK when it is not chronic?"Reality check: domestic violence of all kinds is a chronic problem for about 7% of women and men in Canada.
Second note carefully the phrase "women and men", in other words, the stats for women and men are being lumped together. We know that women are three times more likely than men to be the victims of domestic violence, so what's this mean? If we have 100 women and 100 men you're saying 14 of them will be victims of "chronic" domestic violence (and many more victims of acute cases of violence). Or, in other words, about 3.5 men and 10.5 women. Rounding that out that means that roughly 1 in 10 women are victims of chronic domestic violence.
That clearly, very clearly makes domestic violence the #1 source of violence that the average woman will face in her life, with 10% of them facing chronic violence, and an unstated but presumably much larger fraction facing acute cases of domestic violence. In terms of what sorts of violence are a problem, that makes violence against women pretty much the biggest problem out there.
Thanks for confirming it!
Note that it is your own number from your cited article that confirms it is a huge problem, so hard to see how you are going to quibble with it.
Your numbers are wrong. Let's go to the source, and use the correct figures:The overall homicide rate for women killed as a result of domestic violence is about 40 a year in Canada (about 20 men are killed by their intimate partners). That is a statistically trivial figure.
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-224-x/2010000/aftertoc-aprestdm2-eng.htm
"Between 2000 and 2009, there were 738 spousal homicides, representing 16% of all solved homicides and nearly half (47%) of all family-related homicides.
The 2009 spousal homicide rate remained stable for the third consecutive year. This follows nearly three decades of gradual decline.
Women continue to be more likely than men to be victims of spousal homicide. In 2009, the rate of spousal homicide against women was about three times higher than that for men."
Note that all you have to do to get to a statistically non-trivial figure is to look at a larger number of years, since the rate of spousal homicides is stable, this produces a statistically valid result over a 10 year period, such as above. And again, we see that in fact women are three times more likely than men to be victims. You can run away from this all you want--but that is an inescapable and well documented fact.
The significance of the murder rate is that it is ACCURATE. All other reports can be criticized for reporting bias--men may be less likely to call police when they are victims, and so on. But when someone is murdered the police are called, the case is thoroughly investigated, and the results are as reliable and accurate as crime statistics ever get.
It is then possible to use the murder rate to validate that you are getting sensible data elsewhere. If women are three times more likely to be murdered it is natural to expect they are three times more likely to be assaulted. In fact that is what we see:
So for example: "For example, in 2009, females who reported spousal violence were about three times more likely than males (34% versus 10% 3 ) to report that they had been sexually assaulted, beaten, choked or threatened with a gun or a knife by their partner or ex-partner in the previous 5 years."
When we see that murders are three times more likely to have female victims, and then other statistics telling us that women are three times more likely to be victims there as well, we can be certain that we have eliminated reporting bias as an explanation for the difference and that in reality the most sensible thing to believe, based on the data, is that women are three times more likely than men to be the victims of serious domestic violence.
Changing the subject a little bit, are little children more likely to be murdered by their mother or father?
BTW: To reduce or eliminate the possibility of sexual harassment in the workplace, our company has a "no hugging" policy and we no longer hold a corporate Christmas party and, yes, we all take mandatory "sensitivity" training. Unlike that grade 4 student in the U.S., it is highly unlikely that any of our staff will get suspended, for saying a woman is a "cutie".
BTW: To reduce or eliminate the possibility of sexual harassment in the workplace, our company has a "no hugging" policy and we no longer hold a corporate Christmas party and, yes, we all take mandatory "sensitivity" training. Unlike that grade 4 student in the U.S., it is highly unlikely that any of our staff will get suspended, for saying a woman is a "cutie".
According to your stats, the figure is 6% rather than 7%. Ideally, this should be zero. It is a problem. Let's reduce domestic violence where females AND males are victims because there are plenty of both.Note that it is your own number from your cited article that confirms it is a huge problem, so hard to see how you are going to quibble with it.
738 spousal homicides over a 10 year period is approx 70 spousal homicides per year. So rather than 60 the editor should have said 70.Your numbers are wrong. Let's go to the source, and use the correct figures:
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-224-x/2010000/aftertoc-aprestdm2-eng.htm
"Between 2000 and 2009, there were 738 spousal homicides, representing 16% of all solved homicides and nearly half (47%) of all family-related homicides.
The 2009 spousal homicide rate remained stable for the third consecutive year. This follows nearly three decades of gradual decline.
Women continue to be more likely than men to be victims of spousal homicide. In 2009, the rate of spousal homicide against women was about three times higher than that for men."
It's still trivial IMO. I mean that in a statistical sense. Homicides are not a trivial matter.Note that all you have to do to get to a statistically non-trivial figure is to look at a larger number of years, since the rate of spousal homicides is stable, this produces a statistically valid result over a 10 year period, such as above
The significance of the murder rate is that it is ACCURATE. All other reports can be criticized for reporting bias--men may be less likely to call police when they are victims, and so on. But when someone is murdered the police are called, the case is thoroughly investigated, and the results are as reliable and accurate as crime statistics ever get.
Last edited:
Google "Woodgreen Red Door Family Shelter" or any other worthwhile similar charity in your local 'hood (and DONATE!). While some will miss the point of this post and go off the rails quickly, others will understand and get the meaning.
Appreciated the reminder, Nat. I'll explain the reference to the "handle" another time.
D
Appreciated the reminder, Nat. I'll explain the reference to the "handle" another time.
D
are you calling her unattractive?Changing the subject a little bit, are little children more likely to be murdered by their mother or father?
BTW: To reduce or eliminate the possibility of sexual harassment in the workplace, our company has a "no hugging" policy and we no longer hold a corporate Christmas party and, yes, we all take mandatory "sensitivity" training. Unlike that grade 4 student in the U.S., it is highly unlikely that any of our staff will get suspended, for saying a woman is a "cutie".
Crikey,
Some real misogynists here.
I understand the concept being annoyed that there isn`t enough attention paid to men`s problems. However, to deny that women face violence at the hands of men or to belittle it... WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH YOU.
DOn`t you have a mother who you love. If you didn`t, don`t you wish you did. Don`t you want a woman to love who feels safe and secure everywhere she goes and lives without fear.
Talk to women from time to time and learn about their fear. Don`t stick your head in the sand.
Fuckwits everywhere. Seriously...
Some real misogynists here.
I understand the concept being annoyed that there isn`t enough attention paid to men`s problems. However, to deny that women face violence at the hands of men or to belittle it... WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH YOU.
DOn`t you have a mother who you love. If you didn`t, don`t you wish you did. Don`t you want a woman to love who feels safe and secure everywhere she goes and lives without fear.
Talk to women from time to time and learn about their fear. Don`t stick your head in the sand.
Fuckwits everywhere. Seriously...
The homicide statistic, because it is so accurately reported, corroborates that the ratio of domestic violence is 3 to 1 against women.It's still trivial IMO. I mean that in a statistical sense. Homicides are not a trivial matter.
When we then go and look at the all too common case of domestic assault, and also see that it is 3 to 1 against women, we know that's not some sort of "reporting problem" distortion that under-reports assaults on men--because the ratio has been validated by the accurate homicide stat.
If it's anywhere near 1 in 10 women who are living with chronic violence that is a fucking enormous problem, and from the statistics, it appears to be something like that.
If anybody is being mistreated in this country it's men.I hope that everyone takes a moment to remeber the women we have lost, consider their own misogyny, question the pervasive misogyny in our society (the wage gap, sexual harassment, sexist portrayals of women), and most importantly speaks out against these injustices in any way possible.
I remember seeing the statistics re happiness and women were happier than men until they hit like 45 or 50 which clearly correlates with women's vaginas losing value with time. While vaginas still have value, men are there to serve it and to keep women happy.
Where by "mistreated" you clearly mean something different than "assaulted and murdered". What exactly you think this mistreatment of men is, that is worse than being violently assaulted or murdered, is a little fuzzy to me.If anybody is being mistreated in this country it's men.
I would not know where to start. We live in a country where a handjob is considered to be a sexual act worth paying for. Where if you want to live with a foreign woman, you need to marry her and wait for a year for the paperwork to be processed. Where there is a special expression 'sausage fest' because men outnumber women in clubs 4:1. It's a country of vagina worshipping. And it ain't gonna get any better.Where by "mistreated" you clearly mean something different than "assaulted and murdered". What exactly you think this mistreatment of men is, that is worse than being violently assaulted or murdered, is a little fuzzy to me.
So your idea of hardship is lack of free handjobs and that if you want to import a wife it takes some paperwork.... And you consider this worse than being physically beaten or killed???I would not know where to start. We live in a country where a handjob is considered to be a sexual act worth paying for. Where if you want to live with a foreign woman, you need to marry her and wait for a year for the paperwork to be processed. Where there is a special expression 'sausage fest' because men outnumber women in clubs 4:1. It's a country of vagina worshipping. And it ain't gonna get any better.
But generally I agree with the post above. WTF. You have a seriously skewed perspective.
I initially visited this thread, with some sympathy to the idea that the montreal massacre has been used for political gain inappropriately- with the idea that lepine was some nutcase that makes up 0.00000001% of the population. What an education. I now realize that many of those views that nutcase espoused are quite prevalent. Now im not saying that anyone here is going to act on those views by buying a (registered) automatic rifle and shooting a bunch of people. But those who hold up lepine as the most extreme example of a systemic problem of men who feel they have been hard done by at the hands of feminists may have a case.
It has been reported several times that 90%+ cases of domestic violence has been instigated by the women -- but man usually gets charged and the statistic is down played because "men are so much stronger and can do more damage"The homicide statistic, because it is so accurately reported, corroborates that the ratio of domestic violence is 3 to 1 against women.
When we then go and look at the all too common case of domestic assault, and also see that it is 3 to 1 against women, we know that's not some sort of "reporting problem" distortion that under-reports assaults on men--because the ratio has been validated by the accurate homicide stat.
If it's anywhere near 1 in 10 women who are living with chronic violence that is a fucking enormous problem, and from the statistics, it appears to be something like that.
And I have first hand knowledge of the lies women tell about being abused!!
it's not lack of free handjobs, it's that in many countries handjob would not be considered a sex act worth paying for or even engaging in. Try selling handjobs in Columbia or Russia (where coincidentally women are beautiful and feminine). People paying for handjobs = men on their knees.So your idea of hardship is lack of free handjobs and that if you want to import a wife it takes some paperwork.... And you consider this worse than being physically beaten or killed???
But generally I agree with the post above. WTF. You have a seriously skewed perspective.
re: "if you want to import a wife it takes some paperwork" - it requires more than paperwork, it requires her to not live with you in Canada for a year! You, Canadian citizen, and your newly-wed wife MUST live apart for a year (unless you want to move overseas with her). Because feminists worry about foreign women being imported and abused.
Even USA with their hypocrisy doesn't have this bullshit law that caters to foreigners over Americans.
I've read studies that its 50/50 with regards to who causes domestic violence with the genders.It has been reported several times that 90%+ cases of domestic violence has been instigated by the women -- but man usually gets charged and the statistic is down played because "men are so much stronger and can do more damage"
And I have first hand knowledge of the lies women tell about being abused!!
The arrest reports are overwhelming male for multiple reasons - 1) women are more willing to report their spouse to police, 2) men are ashamed to report they were assaulted by their wife, 3) bias in society that men are less moral than women, 4) men escalate the situation, instead of immediately leaving the premises and calling the police.
"It has been reported", where? It doesn't jibe with the fact that women are three times more likely to be murdered. Sounds like blaming the victim to me!It has been reported several times that 90%+ cases of domestic violence has been instigated by the women
"Yeah I murdered her, but the whiny bitch deserved it."
it was reported in a Toronto Star series on spousal violence a couple of years ago. Not blaming any one just trying to set the facts straight."It has been reported", where? It doesn't jibe with the fact that women are three times more likely to be murdered. Sounds like blaming the victim to me!
"Yeah I murdered her, but the whiny bitch deserved it."
If its self defence gone too far is it still murder? The kind of comment you made is nonsense and is a stupid attempt to hide the true facts
it's not murder if the shooter is a womanit was reported in a Toronto Star series on spousal violence a couple of years ago. Not blaming any one just trying to set the facts straight.
If its self defence gone too far is it still murder? The kind of comment you made is nonsense and is a stupid attempt to hide the true facts
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R._v._Lavallee
http://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/1990/1990canlii95/1990canlii95.html
