The primary aggressor. This is who law officials are trained to take into custody on a standard domestic violence disturbance. How exactly is the primary aggressor defined? According to the Violence Against Women Act, which happens to be the blueprint law enforcement departments use when handling a domestic violence case, the primary aggressor is the person with the most height, weight, and physical strength while the primary victim, an appropriate title for the one not being arrested is the person who will most likely need protection. Basically, if one can read in between the mile wide lines of this law, the main party that law officials are instructed to arrest upon arrival to the disturbance are men since most men are physically stronger than women.
A quick glance at this double standard operating procedure would not raise too many eyebrows among the general public. How could it? Men do indeed develop in such a way that the average man could do a large amount of damage to the average woman given a physical confrontation. This fact alone is what will run through the majority of minds when the issue of domestic violence is brought to their attention. However, the law is usually never so cut and dry or black and white when it comes to the imprisonment of the general public. There must be more to the nature of domestic violence cases that would make such an obvious gender oriented arrest mandate make sense, right? There indeed is more to the issue of domestic violence that explains the existence of the primary aggressor law, however, the facts do not shine a favorable light upon the law, let alone give it any justification.
Throughout the distant past and recent history, men have been regarded as the warriors of their nations, the fighters, and the soldiers while women have almost always retained the title of the weaker or fairer sex. It was always a societal norm to view men as the aggressive half of the population and women as the caregivers and child raisers. Whether this has actually been the norm or not, one can only turn to history texts and artifacts to know. However, this powerful stereotype has carried over into the developed world of western societies and has been the tool of those seeking to gain financial and political support at the expense of men’s freedom. This group that has run away with the knuckle dragging violent beast stereotype that men have held for centuries is feminism.
Feminists could not twist and control this stereotype on their own, however. The second half of the equation that would doom men to suffer unwanted violence and imprisonment would not have been possible without the help of the men who have and continue to suffer. Why would men who listened to a mob of hateful women who claim men are wife and child beating abusers allow this hatred to be formulated into a civil rights violating law? The answer is simple. The answer is chivalry. Chivalry has represented the heroics and selflessness men can posses at their best, and the blind idiocy they can posses at their worst. The only reward chivalry has ever brought men, past and present, has been the protection of women, good or evil. It is the innate instinct a man feels when he sees a woman trapped in a burning building, or attacked by a criminal. It is an innate instinct to save the damsel in distress no matter the cost, even if that cost happens to be his life. Women and children first has been the official in some instances and unofficial code men have followed since before the dark ages.
This once admirable code that men have begun to ignore lost its luster near the turn of the new millennium when the Violence Against Women act, created by Vice President Joe Biden and the feminists he caters to, was put forth into common law. The idea of chivalry is imbedded within the act. However, perversion and corruption of the once noble notion has seeped its way into the act’s pages as well. During Biden’s childhood, as he himself states, his sister beat him routinely at his parents’ approval. Biden was taught that no matter where or indeed how hard he was hit, no matter if it was with his attacker’s bare hands or a blunt object; he should never retaliate or defend himself if that attacker happened to be a woman. Biden laughs at the beatings he suffered, proudly saying that in his house, if his sister was hit, severe punishment would ensue, even if she struck first. Biden was taught that men do not hit women, no matter what. The Vice President carried this rule with him and with his feminist supporters, penned the pages of an act that would soon see millions of men routinely behind bars for simply defending themselves against a female attacker.
Many men and women today still feel that domestic violence is primarily an act committed by males against females. This fact is understandable when one measures the general public’s concern with laws and politics. Most people truly want to live and let live, keeping the government and complications of who does what out of their lives. The Violence Against Women Act took men and women by storm granting privilege and restricting rights at the stroke of a pen. Now men are sitting in prison thinking to themselves, why? It is true that many men today are still taught that hitting women is taboo yet there is a time, even with an innate instinct for chivalry, when enough is enough. However, when men reach their limit their reward is not being satisfied with the knowledge that they defended themselves and or their children. There is no reward at all, only punishment, only prison.
The final defense that feminists put forth when the discrimination of VAWA is brought up is that the majority of domestic violence is committed by men. That somewhere around 95% of all domestic violence is committed by men. This is of course a bold faced lie, a fallacy that feminists have been eager to spread through public service announcements, billboard ads, pamphlets, websites, and of course word to mouth when protesting in the streets.
The truth, as always is a lot simpler than a near global scale lie shrouded in suppressed and fabricated facts. Domestic violence between heterosexual intimate partner relationships is nearly equal. Several studies were conducted concerning the issue. One such study was conducted by members of the Center for Disease Control.
The findings of this study concluded that within heterosexual intimate partner relationships 24% experienced some violence, half of which was committed by both men and women. The other half, in which violence was committed by only men and their partners did not hit back, was 30%. The violence committed by women where men did not hit back was 70%. Several other studies conclude similar results. What do these results illustrate? They illustrate something the truth always does, something simple, some humans are violent. VAWA was created and sits upon a mountain of lies that has allowed feminists to collect money and political support for decades unchecked and unchallenged in any discriminatory actions they take. As mentioned before in previous posts, two state domestic violence organizations run by feminists have been sued by human interest groups and men’s rights organizations with hopes of correcting the injustices feminism has infected society with. Reviewing the evidence revealed that those in charge of these shelters believed that only women are victims of domestic violence, even when the facts that this is not the case was right in front of them. It was also revealed that the only employees working in these shelters were sworn in and hired only if they too believed that men were the only perpetrators of domestic violence. This evidence prompted an open and shut case that prompted a change to the discriminatory policies that had too many men and men with children turned away when in need of help.
The audacities of feminist claims go deeper than the demonization of men, however. It is well known among those who study it, that violence among gay and lesbian couples is increasing well beyond that of heterosexual relationships. However, if you were to look anywhere for a common advertisement urging for an end to domestic violence the only image you would see is either a man towering over a frightened woman or a small boy with the words “when I grow up, I will beat my wife” next to his smiling face. The first thought that comes to the minds of the majority of western populations when domestic violence is brought up is a man beating a woman. The thought of a woman being violent never reaches the surface and feminists seem to want to keep things that way. Help for the very real female victims of lesbians who commit domestic violence and gay men who suffer at the hands of their partners will have to take a back seat until feminists have made the laws for heterosexuals so one sided that a man can be sent to prison for simply touching his partner when she is in a bad mood.
I know that one of the main focuses of the men and women within the men’s rights movement and several advocates within the humanist movement is their advocacy for a Violence Against People Act. Once upon a time, we were all waiting for feminists to jump on board the equality train. However, even with the sudden, and in the opinions of many, timely and convenient rise of so called moderate feminists, the derailing of the bigoted Violence Against Women Act and its primarily arrest the aggressive man law is coming and humanists have saved a nice warm place for it amongst the rest of the trash born of hate movements…file 13.