Why I refuse to support women’s refuges.
There are some women who are beaten by their partners, spouses, boyfriends. These women tend to live in fear. But the definition of abuse is now so broad to be sarcastic.
Women’s Refuge says a law change to put economic abuse – such as excessive control over the purse strings – on a par with violent abuse will help to counter the view that only physical abuse amounts to domestic violence.”Economic abuse” will be included in the definition of domestic violence in major reforms to the Family Court which will go before Parliament for the first time today.Examples of economic abuse include restricting access to money, extorting or spending someone else’s money, or preventing someone from working.
This has got me quietly furious.
- Men get hit as much as women. Not mentioned.
- Women use economic tactics against men all the time, less so in NZ (though it happens around child support) but much more in the US, where you can lose your licence to practice your profession and be jailed if you do not pay child support.
- There is an assumption within the women’s movement that kids are better with their Mum. Not always the case — as a solo Dad, if the kids had been better with their Mum I would have supported that. The kids live with me because I’m better at parenting than she is — and that is happening half the time when cases get to court in NZ now.
What the women’s refuge forget is that the ability to modify behaviour relies on force. Men are quite aware of this, In fact, one of the reasons that young men are avoiding marriage and older men are not dating is that the risk of being accused of “abuse” is so great that it is simply. too. risky.
This is sex huckstering. Like race huckstering, it relies on calling the other — in this case all men, evil, the other, the one that you should be scared of.
And that is a fascist tactic. I may be a Tory, but I do not support fascists. Our freedom was won in blood. Do not let it slip away for feelings or the chimera of safety.