Get PJ Media on your Apple

Dr. Helen

Domestic Violence Industry: Cowing Men into Submission?

July 28th, 2013 - 5:05 am

Dalrock on domestic violence: …. “the problem is domestic violence advocacy is seldom about simply protecting actual victims of abuse, and almost always involves a naked attempt by feminists to cow men (especially husbands) into submission, just as feminists have done with divorce.”

Comments are closed.

All Comments   (10)
All Comments   (10)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
Anyone catch that George Zimmerman's wife filed abuse charges against him? Didn't see that coming--not.
46 weeks ago
46 weeks ago Link To Comment
My ex-'s clever strategy is to create hurdles for me to jump (to see my son) that she doesn't think I'll jump. For example, while separated, she refused to let me see my son except between 7:30 a.m. and 10:00 a.m. on Tuesday and Thursday. I'm a ceo who lived 70 miles away, and good luck with the Washington Beltway at rush hour. She assumed that, like most people, ha-ha, he'll have to go to work and can't get to Baltimore anyway at rush hour.

But I did it. I just left at 5 or 5:30 and worked for a spell in a Starbucks before picking up my son.

Since I jumped the hurdle, she accused me of threatening her and scaring the child. Since accusations are not vetted, I had to hire a witness. So each Tuesday and Thursday I hired a PI for 3.5 hours so that a 15 second handoff would be witnessed.

Next she called the police four times to report threatening and endangering behavior, after dropping my son at my house. So the cops would come to the house at 11 p.m. and demand access. I finally asked them why they took these calls from a woman who had dropped off her son, and provided no evidence or detail on the threatening behavior. That made them mad, as did my refusal to let them into the house on their phony 'exigent circumstances' rhetoric.

She then moved to NYC. The court said I could see my son if I got a house within 50 miles of NYC. So I did. I used it 6 days per month. Guess the expense, on top of missed work and travel etc. So then the ex- said, "If I'd known you were going to comply with the Order I wouldn't have agreed to it." But I complied, still saw my son, I jumped that hurdle too.

My son then told his mother in February that he wanted to spend more time with me. He told his mother that she shouldn't interrupt our nightly phone conversations. So the ex- told his school that I beat and abandoned my son when he was with me. She told the police that I threatened her and frightened the child whenever we had a handoff. I am banned from the school, NY ACS has me in their database (though they refused to meet with me and my son), my ex- has not permitted visitation in six months, and my lawyer explains that I merely need to file a complaint to 'show cause', which I have already done in three proceedings in two states, each of which cost about $250K. My lawyer is not sure which state I should do this in (the one that supposedly controls my divorce, or NYS, because now it is 'ambiguous' where the nexus is. My lawyer is the #1 divorce lawyer in VA and used to be a close friend.)

I haven't seen my son in six months. At the moment he appears to be in Asia. Who's the criminal here? Obviously, it is I. I left a woman.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
I do have empathy, BuenaVista, and frankly, that sounds like how a lot of women operate. They don't outright block, they simply set up surrounding "issues" that are plausibly deniable. Your ex-wife doesn't even sound very good at it (not that it matters to family court), because her plausible deniability needs work.

But if you are telling the truth about attorney's fees, you are getting ripped off. Especially for no results.
52 weeks ago
52 weeks ago Link To Comment
Actually Bababaran, I'm fairly experienced in corporate litigation matters (I am a software entrepreneur) and what I have learned about family law, that others may or may not wish to credit, is that if one party wishes to practice attrition warfare via litigation, it *will* go on forever. This is essentially what a big company does to a little company if the big company gets caught stealing IP or the like. The entity with greater resources uses the court system as a blunt intstrument. AT&T once told a friend's company: "Yes, you caught us, but you are about to enter unending litigation. We will never let this litigation end. How would you like to drop your claims against us, and we work out some sort of deal?"

The ex- is an investment banker and has resources. The court will not tell her or any other woman who makes claims and counter-claims to stop. Everything will be litigated. Any accusation by the woman, about anything, is one that will be prosecuted or litigated. That is the foundation of this article's story: domestic violence is does not require violence for a woman to drop the police and child services people on the man in her life. There is no punishment for misusing the police, family court, or children's services infrastructure to punish a man.

So I'm glad that your divorce litigation expenses were low. I learned that if I so much as attempted to enforce my visitation order I would be in deposition on unrelated matters and in trial for months, and I have been. One of the venues, incidentally, was Maryland, an ERA state. I learned that a man has equal custody rights in Maryland -- if a woman says it's okay and the judge decides to follow the law. Most judges do not follow the law, in regard to legislated equality between parents, and most women who are in punishment mode certainly weaponize their children.

Set aside my own experience if you wish. Look up the divorce litigation practiced by Tom Stemberg's (Staples founder) ex-. She's been relitigating her divorce since the 1980's. For the past 10 years she's been litigating essentially to get more money from him ... to continue litigating. She's spent $millions. She's bankrupted herself. She even litigated against Romney during the campaign -- she attempted to intimidate Romney into helping her punish her ex- -- for a 25-year-old divorce that she initiated. If a woman wants to use the court system to harass and damage financially the ex-husband, the court will never say "enough." All she needs to do is claim some form of injury. And then another one. And then another one. If a child is involved, all she needs to do is MSU (make stuff up).

So anyone getting divorced had best figure out if the ex- is one of these litigants. I know that I badly underestimated mine, in regard to her appetite for conflict and willingness to spend money.

I post this in detail, incidentally, not to earn "empathy" points. Empathy is for losers, coffee is for closers. I'm one of America's advantaged: I'm educated, liquid, and advantaged by my professional work. I got my clock cleaned, and still am. But I'll recover. What about a guy making $80K a year? Men need to know how the current system will dismember them financially and emotionally if they have children with the wrong woman. Women need to know why men like me will never -- ever -- again subject themselves to marriage, and marriage and family were more important to me than work. The former is an impossibility, the latter is a broken dream I avoid thinking about. Guys like me used to be respected for our productivity and loyalty to family and community. Now we're just used. It's all happened since 1970. My bad for being a sap, for calling myself a feminist, and for thinking that the virtues my father and every other man in my family, going back generations, practiced yet enjoy currency.
52 weeks ago
52 weeks ago Link To Comment
My ex-wife was able to get an Emergency Order of Protection against me because I called her a "fat ass" and because she falsely accused me of threatening to commit suicide. The judge did not grant the pig's wish to have me removed from the house so she spent the next week trying to draw me into the house to instigate a "Must Arrest" situation. I did not fall into her trap despite he calling and begging me to come home because the "children missed me" among other lures. I reported her repeated attempts to the police but they did not care. I stayed away and the EOP was dropped when I agreed to vacate. There were no charges ever brought and I was never allowed to defend myself against her false accusations. Although I avoided arrest, getting me out of the house was essentially all the pig had to do to steal custody from me. I spoke to a representative of the District Attorney and told them the story. They said if they prosecuted people for making false accusations that that would be all that they did.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
There's a monetary incentive to arrest men, and only men, for DV. There's a huge advantage in family court to claim the man is, or *might* be a violent sexual deviant.

False claims are not punished, so there's no reason not to make the claim. From her (and her attorney's) perspective, there's no downside. The worst that can happen is that nothing happens.

From personal experience - the police can arrive on scene and witness a woman committing the assault in the front yard, and the man will *still* be the primary suspect. They're there to cuff and stuff, and get it over with, and the "Must Arrest" and "Presumed aggressor" policies (and the money that results) means that the dude gets arrested (tho sometimes, pointing out the open and bleeding bite wound clears things up). It doesn't matter who's drunk and belligerent. Whats worse, is that when she's released, the person who called to say the jail is releasing the 'suspect' and is providing a courtesy call to see if the 'victim' would like a protective order, the refuse (and laugh) when they realize who's who.

It's a big joke to the police. And just like speeding or drunk driving, this has become a revenue stream - anything that disrupts or distracts from that isn't handled. Due process is tossed out the window.

Quoting from a city attorney, Lynn Carter: "It's just not cost-effective to prosecute a woman for making false allegations."
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Christina Hoff Summers discussed this in her ground-breaking book 'Who Stole Feminism'. I'm paraphrasing here but she says 'the domestic violence industry tries to make sure everyone believes the average male is a morally deficient monster'.


1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Check out what qualifies as "abuse" these days-

http://www.womeninneedtx.com/id4.html

"make you ask for money" - Bill, can I have $20 to go buy laundry detergent, you abusive pig?

"refuse to give you money" - Honey, you have 40 pairs of shoes already. I'm not giving you money to buy more. = ABUSE!

"Make all the decisions" - This is a double-bind. Many women expect men to take the lead at all times, and will consider him lower than her if he lets her take the lead.

"Threaten to break up with you" - Sarah, this is the 2nd time I've caught you in public with your ex-boyfriend. If I see you do that again, I'm breaking up with you. = ABUSER!

1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
the greatest irony here is that restraining orders (and basically all DV law) only really works on law abiding men. that is to say, innocent men who are under the threat of a false accusation.

women living with a real abuser are too afraid/enamored with their abuser to ever risk police involvement. otoh, women are exceptionally likely to abuse their own SO without fear of reprisal or punishment.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
That is the truth right there.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
View All