Mark Latham had a lot to say about domestic violence this morning — and not one word about the Patriarchy (sob!)
In a rather limp-wristed article excerpted below, Gary Nunn has a lot to say about domestic violence but has only a feminist understanding of it. His explanations apply to all men but only a small minority of men engage in domestic violence. So his explanation fails. He says domestic violence is caused by gender inequality. So how come most of those "unequal" males don't bash women?
Domestic violence has real psychological and sociological causes but that does not mean we can do much to prevent it. Most of the time it is an expression of an inadequate personality in the man concerned but inadequate personalities rarely lead to domestic violence so any attempt to predict and prevent it will have little success.
And using domestic violence to slam men in general is absurd. It penalizes many innocent men. But Gary Nunn does not care about that. He goes by the old Leftist thinking: "You've got to break eggs to make an omelette". Stalin's purge of the Kulaks would be OK by him, it seems.
Fortunately his squawks about the "patriarchy" are so old hat that nobody will take any notice of him. He has nothing useful or original to say. Leftists will like the hate in his writings, that is all. He is a freelance writer so hate apparently sells well
Latham is right to say that domestic violence is most rife in Aboriginal communities. I have seen with my own eyes how Aboriginal men treat their women. Has Gary Nunn? So there is the one place where preventive measures might succeed. A greater police presence in Aboriginal communities could give endangered women an escape hatch. But there's no evidence that Gary cares about them
I feel the same way about Mark Latham that Labor probably does: I can’t believe he’s been one of us and wish he’d just go away. By one of us, I mean men. Decent men. He doesn’t deserve that title.
Today, he has said that domestic violence isn’t about patriarchy or toxic masculinity, it’s about socio-economics.
This myth he’s peddling is not just wilfully ignorant but downright dangerous.
Violence against women is driven by one thing, and one thing primarily: gender inequality.
It is absolutely about toxic masculinity and patriarchy. Of course Latham will claim it isn’t. He’s a patriarch and a toxic male.
The necessary social context for violence against women to occur happens within a toxic patriarchy — where men’s control of decision-making limits women’s independence.
Where disrespect towards women and male peer relations emphasise aggression.
Where a condoning or normalising of violence against women and stereotyped constructions of masculinity and femininity set all the awful conditions for violence to happen.
In his interview, he said, “The demonisation of men is out of control. Fair minded men think it has gone way too far.”
Can every fair-minded man in Australia start by calling this out, please? Do you really want this man to speak for you? It shouldn’t just be left solely to women to — time and again — respond to this vitriolic stirring.
What is out of control is the domestic violence problem in this country. On average, one woman a week is murdered by her current or former partner and one in three Australian women have experienced physical violence since the age of 15. That’s what you call gone way too far, Mark.
In terms of the socio-economic factors that, he claims, trump the patriarchal and toxic ones, Latham claims that, “Statistics actually show for every middle class man involved in a family or domestic dispute, there are 10 in a public housing estate and 25 in a remote indigenous community — so if you want to look at where the problem is heavily concentrated, it’s not about patriarchy or toxic masculinity, it’s about a socio economic factor and it’s in indigenous communities.”
This is more complex than Latham would have us believe. Socio-economic factors do play a role: those “middle class men” are inflicting violence on women who are less visible in the system. Women with greater access to resources like money, a job, support from friends and family, are more able to escape escalating family violence earlier.
The ones who can’t are the women with no income (often due to male financial control), the women who pack out the full-to-the-brim refuges.
Jacqui Watt, CEO of No to Violence, told news.com.au: “Anyone can be affected by the impacts of family violence, as gender inequality affects all women and children, not only a pocket of people living in low-socio economic areas.
YES ALL MEN
I’m the only male on the Walkley Our Watch 2019 Fellowship, devised to improve the media coverage of violence against women in Australia.
I don’t feel demonised. I feel galvanised. I’ll call out the Lathams wherever and whenever they pop up, and I encourage other men to join me. Yes. All men.