Monday, 23 February 2015

The Aus. ABC - the National (state-funded) Feminist Broadcaster?




The bias on the ABC is pretty impressive, i will say. I remember when Boko Haram was targeting boys, they would always report is as "children killed". When they kidnapped girls, they emphasised it was girls being targeted. If the people killed were men, they were reported as 'people'; when it was women, well that deserved special mention.

Then Boko Haram went back to slaughtering boys - and the ABC just reported them as "children".

Same with the incident in Pakistan from memory.

They HATE the idea of people having compassion for a male. Any situation where a male might be worse off - the masculinity is removed from the victim. Any situation where it's a male perp - it's emphasised.

For example, lesbian Domestic Violence occurs at higher rates than straight (which in turn is higher than gay). Most DV in straight couples is reciprocated (they hit each other in a unconscious mutual pact of destruction) and female initiated. I don't think the ABC has mentioned that ONCE.

I used to send little letters pointing out the bias, but I never got a response; I'm sure they just put me on a blacklist.

Men are bigger overall, and can hit harder, which is why they end up harming their partners more often even in cases of mutual violence - but consider this: if a short man hits a tall man, should the tall man stand there being a punching bag or hit back? If a woman hits a man, why are the rules different?


http://pb.rcpsych.org/content/35/1/33.1

"One study found that in the same sample of couples 28% of the women, but only 19% of their male partners, reported that their relationships were violent, suggesting underreporting in a third of men...

 Large epidemiological studies have demonstrated that domestic violence is most commonly reciprocal and that when only one partner is violent there is an excess of violent women.

Whitaker et al,2 in a study of 14 000 young US couples aged 18-28 years, found that 24% of relationships had some violence and half of those were reciprocally violent.

In 70% of the non-reciprocally violent relationships women were the perpetrators of violence.

Reciprocal violence appears to be particularly dangerous, leading to the highest rate of injury (31.4%). This may be because reciprocal violence is more likely to escalate."

Feminists will openly boast about their violence towards males.

http://jezebel.com/294383/have-you-ever-beat-up-a-boyfriend-cause-uh-we-have

Consider this: there were no charges laid despite confessions in a public forum of a pattern of violence, and incitement to others to commit violence. When I point out to feminists that other feminists don't condemn this, I'm informed "they aren't true Scotsmen".

Look at the changes to consent laws that have made it that if a man shares  drink with a woman, and they both have sex, then the man can be imprisoned and destroyed on her whim as a rapist - despite her urgings to mutual pleasure being recorded or even witnessed!

In that light, I don't doubt that feminists ultimate goal is to make violence a crime only when it is committed by males. They achieved partial success with this worldwide through the Duluth Model, and VAWA put it into law to some extent via the 'Primary Aggressor Laws' - but there are still pocket of resistant.

Look at the uproar when the NSW police showed one ad on facebook with a male victim of female violence. Only one, out of the hundreds they have shown the other way around.

It was deemed UNACCEPTABLE.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/male-victims-of-domestic-violence-police-facebook-post-stirs-debate-on-controversial-issue/story-fni0cx12-1227189639460




Photography by Konrad Sieroń. Konrad Sieroń is a young generation advertising photographer from Poland. More at http://designyoutrust.com/2013/05/domestic-violence-against-man/

His main website is www.konradsieron.com

1 comment:

  1. "There you go with the anti-women ranting AGAIN. "

    Quoting statistics is 'anti-woman'? Maybe it's your idiocy I'm opposed to - not half the bloody human population.


    "First condoning rape"

    Bullshit.

    " now condoning domestic violence against women"

    What utter crap. Opposing DV against men is somehow promoting it towards women?

    Seriously?

    Tell me you don't have any males in your life, because if you think trying to protect them against violence is a crime against YOUR INTERESTS, then I can't see any innocent explanation.

    Are you afraid they might seek help? That YOU might be the one to be called before a judge?




    " the vast majority of men would agree than a man hitting a woman is worse because they are physically vulnerable in comparison"

    Which results in men being bashed up AND FEELING ASHAMED TO BOOT.

    Jesus bloody Christ.

    " Nearly all men see women as their equals"

    Do they? Because that's not what the rest of your precious Sisterhood says. Heck, I'd say your polling methods need a little refinement - but whatevs.



    " it's just deluded pigs like you "

    Or diseased-brained sows like you...


    "in the stupid and unnecessary "men's rights movement""

    Hey, you just claimed almost all men think women are their equals - and yet you need an equality movement called feminism... to protect you... from the men who think they're your equals?

    You haven't quite thought this one through.


    " (lmao) "

    What is this, the 90s?

    "who are determined to fight against us achieving equality"

    Name one action by an MRA organisation against equality. I'll wait.

    Any day now.

    Just have to name one.

    (*whittles away, whistling Wagner*)

    "It must just kill you that there are more female university students than males..."

    Well, that's out of nowhere - but i guess a logical train of thought is not something we can expect in your case.

    Are you saying that having one group privileged above another is good? Huh. Yay, equality?

    Oh right - it's only bad if it disadvantages women - when it's advantaging women, that's your idea of equality?!

    You know those female students get special funds, special scholarships etc etc to prop them up? So tell me - why DOES tax payer funding need to go to privilege a group that AS YOU POINTED OUT is already advantaged?

    Your movement seems to have read Animal Farm and decided that the Pig were right - and while all animals are equal - some are more equal than others - the ones with vaginas, of course.

    ReplyDelete

Please try to avoid logical fallacies!