Friday, August 09, 2013

More reasons to oppose the White Ribbon campaign

The White Ribbon campaign wants to oppose domestic violence - an admirable aim. Unfortunately it is run on the basis of a particular ideology, one which makes these claims:
  • that domestic violence is gendered: that it is to be understood as violence committed by men against women
  • that domestic violence is systemic: that it is part of the norms of a traditional society and is to be found amongst all groups of men and is widely prevalent in society
  • that a society can rid itself of violence by dismantling traditional gender roles, traditional social norms and by creating a new equal, non-hierarchical and non-patriarchal society
The campaign has now been picked up by the Melbourne City Council. The Lord Mayor, Robert Doyle, has therefore exaggerated the prevalence of domestic violence by making this claim:
We know that one in three women has experienced violence. We also know that it is the single biggest cause of premature death among women aged 15-44.

You would think that he would stop and think for a moment before making such outlandish claims. There are women killed by domestic violence but the numbers involved are very small compared to the deaths of young women from car accidents, suicide and cancer. The Lord Mayor is simply repeating a rogue statistic that is never challenged because it is politically useful to those pushing a particular cause.

The Melbourne City Council has also committed itself to creating:
alternative models of masculinity for men and boys in the media and advertising

Do we really want feminist ideologues to be in charge of creating "alternative models of masculinity"? And do we really want to allow the slander against men to remain unchallenged, the slanderous claim that traditional masculinity is oriented toward violence against women rather than the physical protection of women?

And then there's this:
The We Need to Talk strategy, to go before a council meeting on Tuesday, argues that men's violence against women is an expression of "gendered power, that is, the power that men...have over women and children".

Here we have the assumption that men have power at the expense of women and children - even to the extent of the physical harm of women and children.  If you really believed this to be true, then you would have to set out to bring men down in society. You would see expressions of male authority in society in a negative light, as a source of oppression and injustice.

So even though fighting domestic violence is a worthy cause we should have nothing to do with the White Ribbon campaign. We should instead support those who wish to combat all forms of domestic violence (including violence committed by women) and who are willing to admit that there is a statistical link between such violence and poverty, unemployment, mental illness and alcohol and drug abuse.


  1. In my own experience (in Scotland), violence against women by men certainly does exist, but it seems to be much more common amongst people of a lower social class.

    I practically haven't heard of it amongst middle class people, but the men who are most likely to be violent against women are the same ones that drink too much, use drugs, swear all the time, live on benefits, and that kind of thing. The ones that meet the "ned" / "chav" stereotypes found in the UK. I don't know if similar equivalent people of lower social class exist in Australia but I would imagine there must be something similar.

  2. So actually, the worst white men out there are allowing the politically correct feminists to castigate ALL men as a consequence of their behaviour. Their behaviour provides the left with ammunition to use against men, and against right-wing ideas and traditionalism.

    Do such men care?

    No, they don't care about anything except getting their next fix of whatever it is they get off on.

    That's the problem: within Western societies there does tend to exist a white underclass, who have the tendency to be ignored by others but have the potential to bring things down for everyone else.

    The women of this white underclass are notable for remarkably high rates of single motherhood.

  3. A friend who deals with domestic violence, told me that women were just as prone to violence on men, as men were on women.

    The difference being that men are ashamed to report it. They were also unlikely to defend themselves with force, for fear of legal retribution.

    The biggest problem with this initiative is that it is gong to be run by government, one way or other. That effectively means that not only will it fail, but make the situation much worse, and at great cost.

    In the meantime, it means well paid jobs for the sisterhood.


  4. Anon
    That is true.

    Several police members I work with confirmed that most of the violence was committed by people on the dole and specific ethnic groups, particularly Maoris, Samoans and Middle Easteners.

  5. There has been research confirming the link between domestic violence and membership of a social underclass. For instance, when it comes to women who are killed by their partners we get the following statistics:

    James and Carcach (1998) suggest that almost 85 per cent of victims, and a little over 90 per cent of offenders, belong to what can be described as an underclass in Australian society.

    This underclass was defined by neither the male nor the female being in employment.

    In other words, in the vast majority of cases the worst domestic violence takes place amongst an underclass in which neither the male nor the female is employed.

  6. What about the Nordic countries? They have a higher amount of domestic violence and they are almost homogeneously middle-class.
    One of the reasons is drinking alcohol.

  7. This comment has been removed by the author.

  8. You have made heroic efforts to chart the moralities and ideologies of the liberal system, but what is producing these liberal policies, what kind of system is behind it all? These two links provide answers. Damon Vrabel is Harvard educated and ex-Wall Street insider, and Catherine Austin Fitts is ex-finance industry and government insider:

  9. Under our media regulation policies the fact that you have been speaking out against woman's rights and promoting mysgony is grounds to ensure that editors and contributors of this blog are banned. By ensuring that climate denialsim and homophobic views are silenced we can ensure that the white noise is silenced so that the real facts can be shown to the public

  10. Sarah Bath is an Australian Green.

    She has an interesting attitude to freedom of speech.

  11. Quotes dedicated to Sarah Bath:

    "There was a concerted effort on the part of a small clique of elite scientists at the UN and in supporting institutions, governments and universities to concoct the climate change "consensus" to pressure governments and public opinion into supporting the political, economic and social agenda of elites.
    This small group of scientists have for years been influential in driving the worldwide alarm over global warming ... not least through the role they play at the heart of the UN's Intergovernmental 'Panel on Climate Change'."
    R. Warren Anderson and Dan Gainor

    "The Rockefeller faction in the Anglo-American world began to prepare the Global Warming fraud - a fairy tale that oil from transportation vehicles or from coal fired plant emissions of CO2 are the cause of the gradual warming of the earth."
    F. William Engdahl

    "There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth."
    petition signed by 31,000 Scientists, including over 9,000 PhDs

    "CO2 emissions make absolutely no difference one way or the other every scientist knows this, but it doesn't pay to say so."
    Dr. Kunihiko, Chancellor of Japan's Institute of Science and Technology

    "Accurate temperature records have been kept only since the end of the 19th Century, shortly after the world left the Little Ice Age. So while recorded temperatures are increasing, they are not the warmest ever. A 2003 study by Harvard and the Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics determined that the 20th century is neither the warmest century nor the century with the most extreme weather of the past 1,000 years. ... America and Europe had escaped a 500-year period of cooling, called the Little Ice Age, around 1850."
    R. Warren Anderson and Dan Gainor

    "Scientists who dissent from the [global warming] alarmism have seen their grant funds disappear, their work derided, and themselves labeled as industry stooges, scientific hacks or worse. Consequently, lies about climate change gain credence even when they fly in the face of the science that supposedly is their basis."
    MIT meteorologist Richard S. Lindzen

    Continued ...

  12. Part 2

    "Print news media have warned of four separate climate changes in slightly more than 100 years ­ global cooling, warming, cooling again, and, perhaps not so finally, warming.Some current warming stories combine the concepts and claim the next ice age will be triggered by rising temperatures .
    Recent global warming reports have continued that trend, morphing into a hybrid of both theories. News media that once touted the threat of "global warming" have moved on to the more flexible term "climate change."
    The effect of the idea of "climate change" means that any major climate event can be blamed on global warming, supposedly driven by mankind."
    R. Warren Anderson and Dan Gainor

    "The suggestion that future hazardous climate events could in any way be mitigated by the control of carbon dioxide emissions is absurdity in the extreme."
    William Kivninmonth, Emeritus head of Australia's National Climate Centre

    "Compared to solar magnetic fields, the carbon dioxide production has as much influence on climate as a flea has on the weight of an elephant."
    Dr. Oliver K Manuel, University of Missouri

    "The hypothesis of current global warming resulting from the increased emission of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere is a myth. Humans are not responsible for the increase in the global surface temperature of 1 degree F = O.56 degree centigrade during the last century and one should explain this increase by the natural forces heating the atmosphere ... the anthropogenic impact on the global temperature is negligible."
    O.G.Sorokhtin, G.V. Chilinger and L.F. Khilyuk ­ all PhD's and published authors in Earth Sciences

    "Increase of carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere is not the cause of global warming which has a solar origin. There exists no reliable scientific evidence that anthropogenic increase of the carbon dioxide concentration has caused current global warming or can lead to catastrophic changes of the Earth climate in the visible future. Anthropogenic global warming is a Great Myth."
    Habibullo I. Abdussamatov , Head of the Space Research Laboratory of the Russian Academies of Sciences' Pulkovo Observatory

    "I am convinced that the current alarm over carbon dioxide is mistaken. Fears about man-made global warming are unwarranted and are not based on good science ... I had the privilege of being fired by Al Gore, since I refused to go along with his alarmism."
    Dr. William Happer, former director of the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Energy under the first President Bush in July of 1991

  13. Some more quotes dedicated to Sarah Bath:

    "The figures at the helm of each and every one of the major environmental foundations such as the World Wildlife Fund, the Heritage Trust, the Nature Conservancy, the National Wildlife Federation, The Sierra Club, the World Wilderness Congress, Conservation International, and the Center for Earth Resource Analysis, are key members of the elite political organizations, including the Royal Institute of International Affairs, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Bilderberg Group, the Club of Rome, and the Trilateral Commission)."
    Larry Abraham with Franklin Sanders in their book "The Greening: The Environmentalists' Drive for Global Power"

    "The WWF [World Wildlife Fund] was established in 1961... Thirty years later, the WWF controls 10% of the world's surface."
    Dutch Attorney J. Wilgers

    "Global environmentalism requires global planning, global regulation. and inevitably, global bureaucrats."
    Wall Street Journal, November 8, 1989

    "The environmental issue has clearly been selected as the major policy initiative to be developed... It might be possible to enhance the environmental threat, or even to invent a fake issue if an appropriate real one could not be found. ... The global elites genuinely believe they are the destined elite worthy to rule the world. Environmentalism is merely the rally, ragged rationalization designed to hoodwink the world into accepting their rule."
    Larry Abraham with Franklin Sanders in their book "The Greening: The Environmentalists' Drive for Global Power"

  14. Mark,
    Sarah Bath and her ilk just can't help themselves. Their constant need to silence those with whom they disagree simply shows the extreme nature of their policies.

    Don't despair. I once thought exactly as you did. Then I grew up.
    There is hope for you too.


  15. Anon,

    I think you're right. Their policies can only be successful if they are unchallenged. Sarah Bath seems to instinctively recognise this and she is therefore hell bent on silencing what she calls the "white noise."

    I don't think she'll find this easy. If it were just we traditionalists then a censorship campaign could possibly work. But there are lots of independent voices out there, especially amongst activist young men, who don't like the idea of internet censorship. I suspect the weight of numbers right now is against Sarah.

  16. Sarah doesn't stand a chance. You could never censor the internet. All hell would break loose. Riots and so forth. Free speech online is so ingrained now that taking it away would be like poking a tiger in the eye with a sharp stick.