Belgium to open its first shelter for battered men

I have reinstated this post, which I had removed for the duration of the election period so as not to dilute the core message of my campaign, because a question about this topic arose at the Stoke Climsland hustings last night.

DomesticViolence-against-men2-300x240

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Questions to ask (of both Belgium and the UK), are:

1. How many refuge places are there that are allocated on a first-come-first-served basis, or a priority-of-need basis, without discrimination against either sex? If we can have unisex toilets in this day and age, why on earth do we need ladies and gents shelters for refugees from domestic violence?

2. In the light of the Public Sector Equality Duty, how can it possibly be lawful (in the UK, or Belgium), for a public authority to direct public funding towards organisations that openly practise sex discrimination (by earmarking refuge places as being for one sex only)?

Women’s refuges, as a matter of policy, foster poor relations between men and women. This is an inevitable affect of isolating victims of domestic violence from the opposite sex. It is the deliberate segregation of the sexes at a time of crisis for each refugee, when he or she is in greatest danger of extrapolating his or her personal disappointment with the particular member of the opposite sex who used to batter him or her, into a general misogyny or misandry, as the case may be.

The solution to the shortage of refuge places that are available to battered men, and (often) their battered children, is NOT for “men’s” groups to create refuges that exclude women, and to apply for public sector funding.  That is an absurd non-solution (often suggested with some sarcasm) that merely perpetuates an artificial pseudo-problem that feeds off the real and serious problem of domestic violence.

Rather, the solution is to starve of funds, and to prosecute or to encourage victims to sue, refuges run by “women’s” groups that exclude men in equal need of refuge; to prosecute or to sue them for sex discrimination. Market forces will force those sexist organisations running shelters to become non-sexist. or to sell their businesses on to others who are willing to operate those businesses in a non-sexist manner.

Probably the worst thing that one can do for many a refugee from an abusive relationship with a former intimate partner of the opposite sex, is to place them into an environment in which they never meet another member of the opposite sex socially, and especially where they never meet members of the opposite sex who are themselves refugees from domestic violence. This is likely to warp their perceptions, causing them to become entrenched in an erroneous belief system that the cause of domestic violence isn’t violent people of either sex, but rather an entire violent sex, about one half of the world’s population. This is likely to delay, or prevent permanently, their recovery.

New-Twitter-Bird-LogoFollow @John_Allman

HalfTheProblem

Postscript, I wish to thank, publicly, Erin Pizzey, the founder of the first refuge for victims of intimate partner violence in the UK, for her brief words of encouragement recently.

See also: Masculism, Feminism and the Euro Tunnel

Advertisements

4 Comments

Filed under Family Rights, Feminism, Law, Men's Rights, Political

4 responses to “Belgium to open its first shelter for battered men

  1. Yes l am in favour of your observations. However linking the need of the “abused” to therapeutic mediation with the aggressor is a reconciliation which will fundamentally resolve the disjunct misunderstanding of misogyny and or misandry.

    Yes l can affirm the psychological pheromone synchrony whether male or female which will reinforce hatred of the opposite sex which can develop possible psychoses without as the mentioned necessary therapy.

    Refuges are a respite and purely this. Strange that even our UK Constabularies admit 6/10 women and 4.5/10 men have been domestically abused. H’mmm then why are there so few male refuges? Why because women are more physically-domestically abused and men psychologically-financially domestically (not always) abused. One is a material abuse, the other is non material….There is no need for the protection of walls in the latter.

    • Thank you for your comment.

      “women are more physically-domestically abused and men psychologically-financially domestically (not always) abused. One is a material abuse, the other is non material….There is no need for the protection of walls in the latter.”

      That’s not what the research shows.

      • Paul Longhurst

        There are quite a lot of refuges for men in this country.

        • I have not found any refuge that will allow a father to flee there, with his children, from his violent wife or other female intimate partner. If such facilities exist, “quite a lot” of them you say, then, for the sake of any reader with that need, would you please be kind enough to supply some contact details for these refuges for men?

          You are rather missing the point, I feel. I am arguing that refuges for the victims of family violence should not discriminate against men or women. I don’t regard it as a solution to the problem that many refuges discriminate against men, that there are (you say) “quite a lot of refuges for men in this country”, i.e. refuges that discriminate against women. I do not think that either discrimination is right. I believe that none of the publicly-funded provision of refuge accommodation for parents and their children fleeing from domestic violence, should discriminate, against men (i.e. fathers) or against women (i.e. mothers).

          An additional problem is that certain refuges that are only for women, including mothers with children, discriminate against mother’s who have teenaged sons. It is as though the management are deliberately trying to create an artificial environment in which female victims of violent male intimate partners, and mothers of children who are victims of violent fathers, are isolated from adult and even adolescent males, even their own sons. I cannot think of a noble and sane motive for deliberately seeking to house women fleeing from violent men, in an environment like that. Can you?

Likes, follows and comments cheer me up!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s