| |
Dear Professor Fergusson,
Your university writes at http://www.chmeds.ac.nz:80/newsevents/media_release/2006/dom_violence.htm
as follows:
'Professor Fergussion says we need to understand why
studies of community samples such as the CHDS
usually show an absence of gender differences in domestic violence,
whereas other sources dealing with severe violence, such as Women’s
Refuge or police complaints, report a predominance of male perpetrators.
“The best way of doing this is to study a large sample to examine
the frequency of common couple violence involving mutual assaults
and the frequency of more severe forms of domestic violence,”
he says.'
That is completely wrong-headed!
The history of the issue of Domestic Violence is that it was relatively
obscure until the Feminists latched on it
as a major aspect of women's supposed oppression by men. So what we
have is two more-or-less disconnected threads in the area of Domestic
Violence discourse and "research:"
- Feminists who are only interested in using
it as a means of demonstrating women's supposed oppression by men;
- Relatively objective researchers who are intrested in it primarily
as a field of research, like any other.
In this context, it is vital to understand how mickey-mouse and politicised
Western universities and judicial systems are:
- Some universities openly boast about how
they have "mainstreamed" Feminism,
without doing anything so mildly intelligent as
defining "Feminism". Universities that do not go so
far in their utterances are almost as biased in practice. This means
that pro-male research and teaching has
to occur under the radar, and anti-male "research" and teaching
is trumpeted as some sort of moral triumph. Because "Feminism"
is undefined, low-brain, high-lies research flourishes -- as long as
it is anti-male. As an almost perpetual student, I have routinely been
able to find lecturers (in departments of Law
and Psychology) who are prepared to say
(and to repeat) utterances such as "Domestic Violence is a Women's
Issue" or "More men than women commit domestic violence,"
without being able to support that statement with any evidence, when
challenged.
- The judicial system is being brainwashed by anti-male lies. A Judicial
Seminar on Gender Equity took place in Rotorua in May 1997, where the
term "Gender Equity" was not even defined,
and occurred in the title of only one paper -- and even that was just
an introduction to research on judges' attitudes! Bear
in mind that one of the main activities of working judges is defining
terms!! The reason for this gross, mass incompetence by our judges
is that "Gender Equity" is just a slogan covering
a rag-bag wish-list of political issues that Feminists want to brainwash
judges about. That brainwashing is now continuing in the context of
the Gender Equity section of the curriculum of the Institute
of Judicial Studies.
So the best way of understanding
why studies of community samples such as the CHDS usually show an
absence of gender differences in domestic violence, whereas other
sources dealing with severe violence, such as Women’s Refuge
or police complaints, report a predominance of male perpetrators is
to understand that Television New Zealand
is full of lying
scum, that Radio
New Zealand is full of lying
scum, that the Institute
of Judicial Studies is full of lying
scum, that the
universities are full of lying
scum, that the
Ministry of Justice is full of lying
scum, and that Police
Headquarters is full of lying
scum.
|
