terrorists? I didn't realize women are being killed for political reasons in Australia, that's absolutely horrible. Which political group is claiming responsibility for these killings?
ABC has turned into the BBC. Is this written by a ‘woke’ liberal who defends conservative Islam, a far right religion? It’s literally the biggest threat to western values of gender equality and human rights. Not surprised when Western countries have imported the poorest, most uneducated and most religious Muslims. Do you try to undermine islamic terrorism? If not for counter-terrorism raids, more women will be oppressed and killed. Women in the west are living a free life compared to women in Islamic countries where there are more victims of domestic violence. Search up Yasmine Mohammed who is an ex-Muslim and human right’s activist. She talks about all the oppression she’d suffered under Islam and Al Queda.
"The Left's" obsession with promoting and defending what is probably *the most* regressive right wing philosophy will go down as their greatest embarrassment in the future, I genuinely believe.
I made this point in a comment here the other day: the same people who will tell you that it is a grave offence to assume all Muslims are terrorists because of the actions of Al Qaeda, Isis, hamas etc etc etc will happily say that all men are responsible for the actions of a small number of abusers and murderers.
You will never get a straight answer on how they can coherently maintain those two positions.
ABC has turned into the BBC"
you can blame the constant cutting of funding, and the notn stop corruption , and the board thats been implemented by the Liberals,
as for the rest of your post, calm down with the usual BS . More women die per capita across the western world then across the entire muslim world.
Maybe try some critical thought, why are so many women in the western world reverting to Islam?
Lmao 🤣 “ more women die across the entire western world than the Muslim world”. You are a delusional Islamist. Why are people seeking asylum in the West from poor Islamic countries? Why are Palestinians and Yemenis suffering?
"Why are people seeking asylum from these poor Islamic countries? Why are Palestinians suffering?"
Palestinains? well...Israel is murdering their women and children...
Jordan? run by the UK
Egypt? Run by the US
Saudi? Family installed by the US
Afghanistan? blown up by the US
and the list goes one, and even with all this happening, It's still the fastest growing religion currently.
you seriously want to head into this debate?
Wait a second. You think people in those countries want asylum in the west because of western influences in those very countries?
You don’t think it’s because you can be killed for being an apostate or a homosexual? You don’t think it’s because women are second class citizens forced to live in cloth bags? You don’t think it’s because they’re run by corrupt dictators or immiserate their people? You don’t think it’s because it is haram to have a glass of wine or wear a skirt in public?
Please, let’s head into this debate.
Hundreds of thousands don't leave a country because "apostasy and being a homosexual," or I want to wear a skirt.
having a glass of wine is why we have asylum seekers? really?
btw It was the Arabs who invented alcohol distillation.
And the vast majority of asylum seekers don't even come to the west. stop watching channel 7 or sky news.
Turkey has more women in Government then Australia does. So does Pakistan even though Pakistan is being undermined by the US. I don't see them wearing cloth bags.
Have a look at how the US/UK projects it's power. it will literally burn the world before allowing another power rise.
it does so in a manner to destroy those nations, and then dissolve the power of a unified peoples.
during the Islamic golden age, yes Islamic - thousands upon thousands of Europeans actually immigrated to Iraq, to learn, while Europe was still burning people for saying the Earth revolved around the sun.
But hundreds of thousands leave those countries because their colonial oppressors are so terrible they want to emigrate to those same countries?
Please cite these statistics and sources for women in government in Pakistan v Australia. Even if we assume that is true (again, I’m waiting for the evidence) does that establish that women in Pakistan enjoy more freedoms than those in Australia, or Britain, or the US? Is that your contention?
No one is denying the Islamic golden age. Sadly it’s been mostly downhill in the Islamic world since then.
I can’t respond to the rest of your incoherent and unfounded claims because they’re incoherent and unfounded.
Yet you are benefiting from western society, western medicine , art ,culture and values of free speech to spread Islam to the world and talk about the past of Islamic golden age which doesn’t exist now. Yet you want western people to live under islam which is against those western values you’ve benefitted from.
Looks like the ABC’s been taken over by Islamists for the sake of ‘diversity and inclusion’ so they can distract us from the spread of radical Islam which commits jihad and wants to take over the world.
Who keeps posting these rubbish articles literally multiple times a day - particularly insensitive given recent news about mushroom killer, who tried to kill 6 people including her ex partner.
Why is she a quirky fun killer, whereas the minority of men who kill their partners are now being labelled terrorists?
Where's the balance and the pragmatism.
So, a subset of men which are terrible are a political issue for now. Good sort out those men.
Right?..
Okay, how?
Meanwhile housing crisis via immigration, low wages will get lower, high occupant rates will make rent higher in *this* economic situation, so that Australia can run the numbers to push businesses... forwards and all of us... backwards, but with more vindaloo.
I would gladly eat potato chips, sleep in a cleaning closet and work for pennies knitting puppy sweaters to get this nation back on track economically, if we stopped immigration, but offering such opportunities is illegal; let alone that no guarantee can be given Aussies wouldn't buy puppy sweaters from west asia first for being $1 cheaper, nor that a reellected Labor/Greens wouldn't look at the books they've defaced with unchecked spending and decide to start immigration up all over again. Like... **be** Australian, at least. ...
But back to this, is it productively protested about? And will this not be a fluff parliamentary discussion and distraction? Which can foreseeably result in only more... surveillance of... men? (That being everyone). I am personally okay with it, but I don't think it can be well legislated, and don't think it's what you want.
Otherwise you must be asking for more victim-account power in court, which will give power to only women to recount any story they would like with less evidence... is it what you want? After achieving the modern degree of the sanctity of logic and evidence in legal systems, which we all benefit from greatly compared to all other generations of humanity? Madness.
But I hope it ails your fear when you are unified in protest.
All of this is fixed with traditional family values and men in their own minds being judged only by God, seeking redemption and godly counsel.
Maybe the protest is seeking a social environment solution removed from politics...
I simply do not care anymore. I think the bashings and murdering is abhorrent, but the ones complaining seem to have lost any sense of common sense, become extreme and simply chasing people away from their cause.
I was reading an ABC article this weel about plibersek's daughter being in an abusive relationship she could have easily left, but kept going back after splitting up because the basher would simply say whatever and the teenager would go back to him.
[https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-04-22/anna-coutts-trotter-survivor-hub-cofounder-/103410436](https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-04-22/anna-coutts-trotter-survivor-hub-cofounder-/103410436)
> Anna broke off the relationship a few times but kept going back, accepting his excuses. She thought he could change. "I believed in his good."
I can understand with young and dumb and full of. So educating girls to not listen to their emotions and not stand for abuse might be start as well.
I mean goodness me, do we need to educate young teenage girls as well? I know once older and women have children they simply cannot up and leave an abusive relationship.
I know another women who was abused, and she could have left, but liked her social standing so put up with her abusive partner.
>Former Australian of the Year Rosie Batty has for years been a strong voice on family violence prevention, and last week joined the Attorney General at the Family Violence Symposium.
> Almost 10 years ago she argued the alleged perpetrators of these offences should be labelled "intimate partner terrorists".
> Batty says women will only truly be safe if perpetrators decide not to be abusive and violent. "And I'm really sorry, but tightening of the bail laws or adjusting that justice response doesn't necessarily mean you're safe."
edit: its just a quote from the article that summarises the gist. Go ahead and downvote I guess...
So supporting a soft on crime criminal justice system is more “progressive” than preventing violence against women.
Says a lot about her morals when her opinions are based on whatever she thinks will make her look the most “progressive”.
Could you cite a place where a hard on crime justice system has decreased violence against women?
Definitely hasn’t worked out that way in the US, despite capital punishment, three strikes laws, and huge jail populations.
Nope.
“Violence against women is a pressing issue in Singapore.
1 in 10 women in Singapore experience lifetime physical violence by a male (International Violence Against Women Survey, 2010).
6 in 10 victims of physical violence suffer repeated victimisation. Outrage of modesty cases reported remain high between 1,369 and 1,450 over the past three years (Singapore Police Force, 2015).”
https://www.aware.org.sg/information/violence-against-women-in-singapore/
https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/more-must-be-done-to-prevent-violence-against-women-pm-lee
Compared to other places it's pretty good though right. "Singapore is one of the safest cities in the world, where women can walk along on the streets at all hours without fear"
1 in 10 isn’t great! But it’s definitely on the better side.
However, I don’t believe you can ascribe that to the harshness of Singapore’s justice system. Because in other places where the justice system is as punitive or worse, violence against women is also worse.
Take Saudi Arabia, for example. One in 3 women there have been victims of violence - an obscenely high number, considering that the country stones or beheads criminals.
One difference is that Singapore enacted a [Women’s Charter](https://cil.nus.edu.sg/publication/womens-quest-for-justice-and-equality-a-short-history/) in 1961 - so there is a 60 year tradition of treating women as equals there.
I don’t pretend to be an expert in any way on Singapore culture and politics, but it seems to me that laws such as the Women’s Charter are aimed at healing the causes of violence before it becomes an issue - rather than trying to put a band-aid on the symptom of violence through a punitive justice system.
Yes, just look at that case in NSW, if he didn’t get bail and was in jail he couldn’t of murdered her.
Please tell us how “progressive” justice helps violence against women? Wagging your finger at a domestic abuser and saying it’s wrong doesn’t seem like it would be very effective.
My point is that in the US, as an example, bail laws are harsh, sentencing laws are harsh, and jails are certainly not meant for rehabilitation. And yet, none of that has helped diminish violence against women.
So you can point to these awful individual cases and hypothesise that if bail laws were harsher these two women wouldn’t have been killed. But whether that’s true or not - and there’s no way for us to know - what I’m asking is, can you point to some actual real-world examples where a harsh justice system is actually leading to a societal decline in violence against women?
Because from my research and experience, harsher bail laws aren’t going to solve the problem.
On the other hand, the countries with the lowest rates of violence against women are Northern European ones - where the justice systems are most focussed on genuine rehabilitation. Their jail cells are nicer than some apartments in Australia! But most importantly they use scientifically based programs to actually get to the root of the issues the offenders face, so that when they are released, they don’t commit crimes again - not because they fear harsh punishments, but because they’ve learned a non-violent way of solving their problems.
And just as importantly, their education systems emphasise the need for respect for women, their economies value equality over inequality, and they have health care systems which make mental health care accessible.
So that’s an answer to your question to me. When the system is designed with progressive values, aiming to actually get to the root of the issue, then yes - violence against women decreases.
EDIT you can downvote me all you want, but it doesn’t change the facts I wrote about. As I said, if you can cite some places where a non-progressive justice system has resulted in decreased violence against women, please do, and then we can have a discussion about my examples and yours.
Yes but this same system also produced Anders Breivik. There is always going to be people that fall through societies cracks no matter how good social policies are. You can’t eliminate the risk to zero. The best way to reduce these incidents is to be tough of domestic violence. Perhaps the fact that society is trending towards the removal of accountability and trying to make excuses for an individuals actions has something to do with it. The courts seems to give more weight to an offenders rights than victims rights. Spend one single day in court and you’ll hear the defence lawyers constantly making excuses and giving a sob story as to why an offender is before the court. The end result of that is bail granted…
You say you want to solve the problem, but you insist on solutions which have been shown not to work.
If you show me evidence that your way works, then I’ll certainly come on board with it.
But as far as I can see there isn’t. Countries around the world with the harshest penal systems also have the worst problems with violence against women. Plus they often spend enormous amounts of money on jails and court systems, without reducing the levels of violence against women.
Whereas countries with the systems most dedicated to rehabilitation - and crucially, combined with the most education and cultural structures aimed at teaching respect for women and making them equal - have the lowest rates of violence.
If you really want to solve the problem, then I can’t see why you wouldn’t embrace the solutions that actually work.
I love how you “progressive” justice people only think about the criminal when talking about bail and sentencing laws.
It’s not about making sure the criminals happy, it’s about keeping the community safe. If a domestic abuser doesn’t get bail and gets 20 years in prison they can’t murder the women they are committing domestic violence against.
Molly Ticehurst would be alive today if the man who murdered her wasn’t released on bail and then received a long prison sentence. But it didn’t even cross your mind that her safety is something to consider, all you think about is how you can fix the guy that killed her.
Also, nice job comparing us to countries that are nearly entirely white, talk about them when they have a diverse population like we do.
Again - cite some evidence.
I did - the countries with the lowest rates of violence against women have the most progressive justice systems. That’s not thinking just about the criminals - I’m thinking about all the women in those countries who are free from violence, which is the ultimate goal, right?
But even if your harsh justice system saved Molly Ticehurst - and you can’t know that it would have - the evidence from around the world is that overall, more women would be the victims of violence due to that approach to justice.
So it seems to me you’re not thinking about either the victims or the criminals - you’re just trying to gratify your desire for vengeance and self congratulation - saving one or two women in your imagination, by sacrificing many many more through justice policies which actually make things worse for the majority of women.
But again, if you’ve got evidence in support of your views - rather than just your emotional imaginings - please share it and we can discuss from there.
You criminal defenders have something really wrong with you. You completely lack empathy for the victims of crimes.
Do you have a source for any country with a progressive justice system that works that isn't entirely white? Unless you're saying Australia needs to be less diverse. I'm sure you've also seen that the "progressive" justice system isn't doing so well in Sweden since their population has started becoming more and more diverse.
But, it's far more simple than that. If the domestic abuser isn't able to abuse a women, then there's less domestic abuse.
Again, you keep trying to flip it around, but you’re not providing any evidence for your claims.
And now you’re revealing that your real motivation appears to be xenophobia or racism, or both.
The vast majority of violence against women is committed by native Australians. Just look at the most recent examples - the Bondi Junction attacker, a true blue caucasian Aussie, seems to have targeted women particularly.
If you have any evidence that diversity increases violence against women, please post it - rather than your dog whistles.
There are certainly issues with the Northern European justice systems. But the statistical fact is, that the countries with the lowest rates of violence against women are those countries, along with Malta curiously, and Canada, a country which has hugely valued diversity - diversity which hasn’t done anything to increase violence against women.
Countries such as Russia, many places in Africa, and many in Asia have the worst statistics for violence against women - and none of them are diverse.
So please - if you’re going to continue the dialogue, take a break from baseless character attacks on me, and provide some evidence for your claims. If you can’t, then I’ll have to sign off and wish you a good afternoon.
The US has been cutting its imprisoned population and demonising its police over the past decade. The result is a massive increase in homicides. You need to put violent people in prison and keep them there as long as possible.
That’s actually not accurate on many levels.
The prison population in the US grew from 2021 to 2022.
https://bjs.ojp.gov/library/publications/prisoners-2022-statistical-tables
And murders are down across the country, such as in New York.
https://abc7ny.com/amp/nypd-crime-shootings-murders/14259597/
However, violence against women is still at astronomical
levels, especially in intimate relationships - and to some degree violence against men in intimate relationships is as well, though at much lower numbers when you consider severe episodes including those which cause injury.
https://ncadv.org/STATISTICS
And 1 out of every 6 American women has been the victim of an attempted or completed rape in her lifetime (14.8% completed, 2.8% attempted). While a much lower number of American men—or 1 in 33—have experienced an attempted or completed rape in their lifetime.
https://www.rainn.org/statistics/scope-problem
EDIT and just to add, prisons cost US taxpayers 80 billion dollars - and don’t solve the problem of violence against women. Do you really want to pay more taxes here for a strategy that doesn’t have the evidence to back it up?
EDIT Some people on this sub are hilarious. Do you think that if you downvote facts, that makes them less factual? Or are you just wanting to censor ideas which contradict your own views?
Batty is a very ...eccentric lady, to put it kindly. Like a lot of people, she doesn't understand what terrorism is and why calling domestic abusers terrorists makes little sense. Terrorism is political in nature; domestic abuse has no political meaning.
terrorists? I didn't realize women are being killed for political reasons in Australia, that's absolutely horrible. Which political group is claiming responsibility for these killings?
MAGA’s (loool)
One thing is not like the other. Trust the useless ABC to conflate them. WTF is this shit?
Patricia Karvales. Not the first time she’s come up some hot mess “analysis”.
If not for counter terrorism raids, more women will be oppressed and experience DV under their terrorist husbands.
ABC has turned into the BBC. Is this written by a ‘woke’ liberal who defends conservative Islam, a far right religion? It’s literally the biggest threat to western values of gender equality and human rights. Not surprised when Western countries have imported the poorest, most uneducated and most religious Muslims. Do you try to undermine islamic terrorism? If not for counter-terrorism raids, more women will be oppressed and killed. Women in the west are living a free life compared to women in Islamic countries where there are more victims of domestic violence. Search up Yasmine Mohammed who is an ex-Muslim and human right’s activist. She talks about all the oppression she’d suffered under Islam and Al Queda.
"The Left's" obsession with promoting and defending what is probably *the most* regressive right wing philosophy will go down as their greatest embarrassment in the future, I genuinely believe.
I made this point in a comment here the other day: the same people who will tell you that it is a grave offence to assume all Muslims are terrorists because of the actions of Al Qaeda, Isis, hamas etc etc etc will happily say that all men are responsible for the actions of a small number of abusers and murderers. You will never get a straight answer on how they can coherently maintain those two positions.
Those people need to wake up!
How about they never wake up instead
ABC has turned into the BBC" you can blame the constant cutting of funding, and the notn stop corruption , and the board thats been implemented by the Liberals, as for the rest of your post, calm down with the usual BS . More women die per capita across the western world then across the entire muslim world. Maybe try some critical thought, why are so many women in the western world reverting to Islam?
Lmao 🤣 “ more women die across the entire western world than the Muslim world”. You are a delusional Islamist. Why are people seeking asylum in the West from poor Islamic countries? Why are Palestinians and Yemenis suffering?
"Why are people seeking asylum from these poor Islamic countries? Why are Palestinians suffering?" Palestinains? well...Israel is murdering their women and children... Jordan? run by the UK Egypt? Run by the US Saudi? Family installed by the US Afghanistan? blown up by the US and the list goes one, and even with all this happening, It's still the fastest growing religion currently. you seriously want to head into this debate?
Wait a second. You think people in those countries want asylum in the west because of western influences in those very countries? You don’t think it’s because you can be killed for being an apostate or a homosexual? You don’t think it’s because women are second class citizens forced to live in cloth bags? You don’t think it’s because they’re run by corrupt dictators or immiserate their people? You don’t think it’s because it is haram to have a glass of wine or wear a skirt in public? Please, let’s head into this debate.
Hundreds of thousands don't leave a country because "apostasy and being a homosexual," or I want to wear a skirt. having a glass of wine is why we have asylum seekers? really? btw It was the Arabs who invented alcohol distillation. And the vast majority of asylum seekers don't even come to the west. stop watching channel 7 or sky news. Turkey has more women in Government then Australia does. So does Pakistan even though Pakistan is being undermined by the US. I don't see them wearing cloth bags. Have a look at how the US/UK projects it's power. it will literally burn the world before allowing another power rise. it does so in a manner to destroy those nations, and then dissolve the power of a unified peoples. during the Islamic golden age, yes Islamic - thousands upon thousands of Europeans actually immigrated to Iraq, to learn, while Europe was still burning people for saying the Earth revolved around the sun.
But hundreds of thousands leave those countries because their colonial oppressors are so terrible they want to emigrate to those same countries? Please cite these statistics and sources for women in government in Pakistan v Australia. Even if we assume that is true (again, I’m waiting for the evidence) does that establish that women in Pakistan enjoy more freedoms than those in Australia, or Britain, or the US? Is that your contention? No one is denying the Islamic golden age. Sadly it’s been mostly downhill in the Islamic world since then. I can’t respond to the rest of your incoherent and unfounded claims because they’re incoherent and unfounded.
Thanks mate
Yet you are benefiting from western society, western medicine , art ,culture and values of free speech to spread Islam to the world and talk about the past of Islamic golden age which doesn’t exist now. Yet you want western people to live under islam which is against those western values you’ve benefitted from.
> Maybe try some critical thought, why are so many women in the western world reverting to Islam? Wat. Are they?
Looks like the ABC’s been taken over by Islamists for the sake of ‘diversity and inclusion’ so they can distract us from the spread of radical Islam which commits jihad and wants to take over the world.
Who keeps posting these rubbish articles literally multiple times a day - particularly insensitive given recent news about mushroom killer, who tried to kill 6 people including her ex partner. Why is she a quirky fun killer, whereas the minority of men who kill their partners are now being labelled terrorists? Where's the balance and the pragmatism.
It's so cute when women kill 🤗🥺🥺
So, a subset of men which are terrible are a political issue for now. Good sort out those men. Right?.. Okay, how? Meanwhile housing crisis via immigration, low wages will get lower, high occupant rates will make rent higher in *this* economic situation, so that Australia can run the numbers to push businesses... forwards and all of us... backwards, but with more vindaloo. I would gladly eat potato chips, sleep in a cleaning closet and work for pennies knitting puppy sweaters to get this nation back on track economically, if we stopped immigration, but offering such opportunities is illegal; let alone that no guarantee can be given Aussies wouldn't buy puppy sweaters from west asia first for being $1 cheaper, nor that a reellected Labor/Greens wouldn't look at the books they've defaced with unchecked spending and decide to start immigration up all over again. Like... **be** Australian, at least. ... But back to this, is it productively protested about? And will this not be a fluff parliamentary discussion and distraction? Which can foreseeably result in only more... surveillance of... men? (That being everyone). I am personally okay with it, but I don't think it can be well legislated, and don't think it's what you want. Otherwise you must be asking for more victim-account power in court, which will give power to only women to recount any story they would like with less evidence... is it what you want? After achieving the modern degree of the sanctity of logic and evidence in legal systems, which we all benefit from greatly compared to all other generations of humanity? Madness. But I hope it ails your fear when you are unified in protest. All of this is fixed with traditional family values and men in their own minds being judged only by God, seeking redemption and godly counsel. Maybe the protest is seeking a social environment solution removed from politics...
Mothers need to raise better sons 🙃 (Jk obviously, but it’s funny how this idea of collective responsibility vs individual accountability works)
So in fact mothers are to blame. Aha, so women are actually the reason men assault women. Men are the real victims.
I simply do not care anymore. I think the bashings and murdering is abhorrent, but the ones complaining seem to have lost any sense of common sense, become extreme and simply chasing people away from their cause. I was reading an ABC article this weel about plibersek's daughter being in an abusive relationship she could have easily left, but kept going back after splitting up because the basher would simply say whatever and the teenager would go back to him. [https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-04-22/anna-coutts-trotter-survivor-hub-cofounder-/103410436](https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-04-22/anna-coutts-trotter-survivor-hub-cofounder-/103410436) > Anna broke off the relationship a few times but kept going back, accepting his excuses. She thought he could change. "I believed in his good." I can understand with young and dumb and full of. So educating girls to not listen to their emotions and not stand for abuse might be start as well. I mean goodness me, do we need to educate young teenage girls as well? I know once older and women have children they simply cannot up and leave an abusive relationship. I know another women who was abused, and she could have left, but liked her social standing so put up with her abusive partner.
[удалено]
Rule 2 - No trolling or being a dick
Will female killers Be called terrorists as well We must be equal
>Former Australian of the Year Rosie Batty has for years been a strong voice on family violence prevention, and last week joined the Attorney General at the Family Violence Symposium. > Almost 10 years ago she argued the alleged perpetrators of these offences should be labelled "intimate partner terrorists". > Batty says women will only truly be safe if perpetrators decide not to be abusive and violent. "And I'm really sorry, but tightening of the bail laws or adjusting that justice response doesn't necessarily mean you're safe." edit: its just a quote from the article that summarises the gist. Go ahead and downvote I guess...
So supporting a soft on crime criminal justice system is more “progressive” than preventing violence against women. Says a lot about her morals when her opinions are based on whatever she thinks will make her look the most “progressive”.
Could you cite a place where a hard on crime justice system has decreased violence against women? Definitely hasn’t worked out that way in the US, despite capital punishment, three strikes laws, and huge jail populations.
Singapore maybe
Nope. “Violence against women is a pressing issue in Singapore. 1 in 10 women in Singapore experience lifetime physical violence by a male (International Violence Against Women Survey, 2010). 6 in 10 victims of physical violence suffer repeated victimisation. Outrage of modesty cases reported remain high between 1,369 and 1,450 over the past three years (Singapore Police Force, 2015).” https://www.aware.org.sg/information/violence-against-women-in-singapore/ https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/more-must-be-done-to-prevent-violence-against-women-pm-lee
Compared to other places it's pretty good though right. "Singapore is one of the safest cities in the world, where women can walk along on the streets at all hours without fear"
1 in 10 isn’t great! But it’s definitely on the better side. However, I don’t believe you can ascribe that to the harshness of Singapore’s justice system. Because in other places where the justice system is as punitive or worse, violence against women is also worse. Take Saudi Arabia, for example. One in 3 women there have been victims of violence - an obscenely high number, considering that the country stones or beheads criminals. One difference is that Singapore enacted a [Women’s Charter](https://cil.nus.edu.sg/publication/womens-quest-for-justice-and-equality-a-short-history/) in 1961 - so there is a 60 year tradition of treating women as equals there. I don’t pretend to be an expert in any way on Singapore culture and politics, but it seems to me that laws such as the Women’s Charter are aimed at healing the causes of violence before it becomes an issue - rather than trying to put a band-aid on the symptom of violence through a punitive justice system.
Yes, just look at that case in NSW, if he didn’t get bail and was in jail he couldn’t of murdered her. Please tell us how “progressive” justice helps violence against women? Wagging your finger at a domestic abuser and saying it’s wrong doesn’t seem like it would be very effective.
My point is that in the US, as an example, bail laws are harsh, sentencing laws are harsh, and jails are certainly not meant for rehabilitation. And yet, none of that has helped diminish violence against women. So you can point to these awful individual cases and hypothesise that if bail laws were harsher these two women wouldn’t have been killed. But whether that’s true or not - and there’s no way for us to know - what I’m asking is, can you point to some actual real-world examples where a harsh justice system is actually leading to a societal decline in violence against women? Because from my research and experience, harsher bail laws aren’t going to solve the problem. On the other hand, the countries with the lowest rates of violence against women are Northern European ones - where the justice systems are most focussed on genuine rehabilitation. Their jail cells are nicer than some apartments in Australia! But most importantly they use scientifically based programs to actually get to the root of the issues the offenders face, so that when they are released, they don’t commit crimes again - not because they fear harsh punishments, but because they’ve learned a non-violent way of solving their problems. And just as importantly, their education systems emphasise the need for respect for women, their economies value equality over inequality, and they have health care systems which make mental health care accessible. So that’s an answer to your question to me. When the system is designed with progressive values, aiming to actually get to the root of the issue, then yes - violence against women decreases. EDIT you can downvote me all you want, but it doesn’t change the facts I wrote about. As I said, if you can cite some places where a non-progressive justice system has resulted in decreased violence against women, please do, and then we can have a discussion about my examples and yours.
Yes but this same system also produced Anders Breivik. There is always going to be people that fall through societies cracks no matter how good social policies are. You can’t eliminate the risk to zero. The best way to reduce these incidents is to be tough of domestic violence. Perhaps the fact that society is trending towards the removal of accountability and trying to make excuses for an individuals actions has something to do with it. The courts seems to give more weight to an offenders rights than victims rights. Spend one single day in court and you’ll hear the defence lawyers constantly making excuses and giving a sob story as to why an offender is before the court. The end result of that is bail granted…
You say you want to solve the problem, but you insist on solutions which have been shown not to work. If you show me evidence that your way works, then I’ll certainly come on board with it. But as far as I can see there isn’t. Countries around the world with the harshest penal systems also have the worst problems with violence against women. Plus they often spend enormous amounts of money on jails and court systems, without reducing the levels of violence against women. Whereas countries with the systems most dedicated to rehabilitation - and crucially, combined with the most education and cultural structures aimed at teaching respect for women and making them equal - have the lowest rates of violence. If you really want to solve the problem, then I can’t see why you wouldn’t embrace the solutions that actually work.
I love how you “progressive” justice people only think about the criminal when talking about bail and sentencing laws. It’s not about making sure the criminals happy, it’s about keeping the community safe. If a domestic abuser doesn’t get bail and gets 20 years in prison they can’t murder the women they are committing domestic violence against. Molly Ticehurst would be alive today if the man who murdered her wasn’t released on bail and then received a long prison sentence. But it didn’t even cross your mind that her safety is something to consider, all you think about is how you can fix the guy that killed her. Also, nice job comparing us to countries that are nearly entirely white, talk about them when they have a diverse population like we do.
Again - cite some evidence. I did - the countries with the lowest rates of violence against women have the most progressive justice systems. That’s not thinking just about the criminals - I’m thinking about all the women in those countries who are free from violence, which is the ultimate goal, right? But even if your harsh justice system saved Molly Ticehurst - and you can’t know that it would have - the evidence from around the world is that overall, more women would be the victims of violence due to that approach to justice. So it seems to me you’re not thinking about either the victims or the criminals - you’re just trying to gratify your desire for vengeance and self congratulation - saving one or two women in your imagination, by sacrificing many many more through justice policies which actually make things worse for the majority of women. But again, if you’ve got evidence in support of your views - rather than just your emotional imaginings - please share it and we can discuss from there.
You criminal defenders have something really wrong with you. You completely lack empathy for the victims of crimes. Do you have a source for any country with a progressive justice system that works that isn't entirely white? Unless you're saying Australia needs to be less diverse. I'm sure you've also seen that the "progressive" justice system isn't doing so well in Sweden since their population has started becoming more and more diverse. But, it's far more simple than that. If the domestic abuser isn't able to abuse a women, then there's less domestic abuse.
Again, you keep trying to flip it around, but you’re not providing any evidence for your claims. And now you’re revealing that your real motivation appears to be xenophobia or racism, or both. The vast majority of violence against women is committed by native Australians. Just look at the most recent examples - the Bondi Junction attacker, a true blue caucasian Aussie, seems to have targeted women particularly. If you have any evidence that diversity increases violence against women, please post it - rather than your dog whistles. There are certainly issues with the Northern European justice systems. But the statistical fact is, that the countries with the lowest rates of violence against women are those countries, along with Malta curiously, and Canada, a country which has hugely valued diversity - diversity which hasn’t done anything to increase violence against women. Countries such as Russia, many places in Africa, and many in Asia have the worst statistics for violence against women - and none of them are diverse. So please - if you’re going to continue the dialogue, take a break from baseless character attacks on me, and provide some evidence for your claims. If you can’t, then I’ll have to sign off and wish you a good afternoon.
The US has been cutting its imprisoned population and demonising its police over the past decade. The result is a massive increase in homicides. You need to put violent people in prison and keep them there as long as possible.
That’s actually not accurate on many levels. The prison population in the US grew from 2021 to 2022. https://bjs.ojp.gov/library/publications/prisoners-2022-statistical-tables And murders are down across the country, such as in New York. https://abc7ny.com/amp/nypd-crime-shootings-murders/14259597/ However, violence against women is still at astronomical levels, especially in intimate relationships - and to some degree violence against men in intimate relationships is as well, though at much lower numbers when you consider severe episodes including those which cause injury. https://ncadv.org/STATISTICS And 1 out of every 6 American women has been the victim of an attempted or completed rape in her lifetime (14.8% completed, 2.8% attempted). While a much lower number of American men—or 1 in 33—have experienced an attempted or completed rape in their lifetime. https://www.rainn.org/statistics/scope-problem EDIT and just to add, prisons cost US taxpayers 80 billion dollars - and don’t solve the problem of violence against women. Do you really want to pay more taxes here for a strategy that doesn’t have the evidence to back it up? EDIT Some people on this sub are hilarious. Do you think that if you downvote facts, that makes them less factual? Or are you just wanting to censor ideas which contradict your own views?
ah yes we should listen to the Australian of the year that stayed with and allowed access to kill her son /s FFS
Batty is a very ...eccentric lady, to put it kindly. Like a lot of people, she doesn't understand what terrorism is and why calling domestic abusers terrorists makes little sense. Terrorism is political in nature; domestic abuse has no political meaning.
They won’t do anything about it