Les violences faites aux femmes, c'est l'affaire de TOUS!

I think another thing North American woman have to look into is the treatment of other woman in other societies. If we do not care about their rights and support their freedoms then in time it may well be our rights that are affected.

I think because we do currently have liberty in our society, we should do what we can to see that other woman have the same. It's all too easy for someone to walk in and take away those freedoms from woman, as we have seen happen in some countries around the world.

Why is it that the views of these fathers are painted as disorderly? Typical. Somehow I doubt that those in attendance at the fundraiser were open to any view that could include fathers as victims not only of domestic violence, but also of family court injustices.

Violence against women is indeed everyones business...but so is violence against men. We have thirty years of peer reviewed research that incicates the victims of domestic violence are at least 36% males and probably more.
Still we have the domestic violence industry, the media, academia, and government that are unable or unwilling to hear that domestic violence impacts both men and women and so we see the sort of shortsightedness from the note above where the writer enamors herself with women as victims and attempts to shame the men who were trying to call attention to their plight. What we need in today's world are politicians who are able to see clearly through the brainwashing and not swallow the pedestrian misinformation that has been spoon fed to almost everyone. All people deserve to be treated with dignity and respect. At this point it is only the women who find this sort of treatment from the DV industry.

The writer asks why the men didn't join the conference. I would guess that the reason is that the conference has consciously avoided offering any workshops, speeches, or even information on male victims of domestic violence. The underlying framework of the entire DV industry is the "Duluth Model" which is well known to claim women are victims and happily blames controlling men for the bulk of the problem. When you have such a prejudiced theoretical underpinning how can you possibly be expected to offer compassion for all? You can't. Please go back and ask those conference folks if they do anything for men who are victims of DV. Better yet, simply ask them what the percentage of male victims is and then ask them what the percentage of public service announcements they have done for men. My guess is they will tell you less than 5% in answer to the first question and then will hem and haw about the second question since they have NEVER done a psa for men who are victims even though they admit that men are 5% of the victims. Scratch and sniff.

I've never understood why men assault & kill women & kids. Maybe it's because the only emotion men are supposed to express is anger.

... Miss Jean, Please ask yourself a question, and have the courage to answer it truthfully.

Do you find it funny when in a movie you see a man been struck by a women? Do you find acceptable that in publicity, when we need someone to laugh at, it is next to always a man ? Have you any idea how the discrimination called "Positive affirmation" affect a man life. Do you know about the Joliette Prison for Women ? Do you choose to be ignorant of the dual standard of ruling in court, and in life in general.

In everyday life, it is common knowledge that women have the right to physically attack man, real man as they say, must take the beating because he always deserve it ! Is this normal.

In all my relationship, i have always been the one receiving violence from women, and women always used violence on me, as a way to force me to do things i didn't wanted to do. But hey... i guess i should have called the police. Once the lady land owner came to my place to treaten me, and i did call the police. Guess what... the police told me that she was a women, and tried to have me remove my accusations. I didn't, but at the end, it make no differences. She went free and the charged has been dropped.

The fact is, Women are perfect, they never lie, they never hurt anyone, they are PERFECT... or do they ?

I have to agree with a number of the other people who posted here about women's violence against men being ignored -- and women's violence against children, for that matter.

It's really unfortunate that our governments institutionalize and subsidize sexist attitudes toward men, especially when we know the facts...

According to Statistics Canada, Family Violence in Canada: A Statistical Profile 2005:

“Rates of spousal violence by a current or previous partner in the 5 year period were 7% for women and 6% for men, representing an estimated 653,000 women and 546,000 men. While there was no statistically significant change in the level of spousal violence against men since 1999 (7% versus 6%), there was a small but statistically significant decline for women during this period (8% versus 7%).”

There are over 300 shelters available to women, and zero available to men. What do men do when they are being abused by women? Where do men go with their children if mommy has a screw loose?

Ms Jean, if you're wondering why the men felt that they needed to stay outside, it's probably because they know where the government stands on violence against men. Based on government web sites like these, we are constantly reminded that only women need to be protected and only men are perpetrators in domestic violence situations and that no other view will be tolerated.

Those men, had they spoken up inside of the conference, would have been heckled at the very least, and I suspect much worse at the most. They never would have been given a voice or a chance to be heard in that venue.

If a guy like me who has never been through a divorce feels this way, how do you think those guys outside felt? What do you think it's like being them, after losing your children, after having been through a system that beats you down and takes on these attitudes? Experiencing how your life is changed forever because of institutionalized biases?

If you want to break down barriers and open dialogue, let everyone's voices be heard on an equal footing. Don't belittle or criticize those who try to have a voice. Just because they didn't speak to you in your choice of venue, it doesn't mean that they didn't have something important to say.

I have to agree with a number of the other people who posted here about women's violence against men being ignored -- and women's violence against children, for that matter.

It's really unfortunate that our governments institutionalize and subsidize sexist attitudes toward men, especially when we know the facts...

According to Statistics Canada, Family Violence in Canada: A Statistical Profile 2005:

“Rates of spousal violence by a current or previous partner in the 5 year period were 7% for women and 6% for men, representing an estimated 653,000 women and 546,000 men. While there was no statistically significant change in the level of spousal violence against men since 1999 (7% versus 6%), there was a small but statistically significant decline for women during this period (8% versus 7%).”

In spite of that, the federal Department of Justice Canada only focuses on violence against women: http://canada.justice.gc.ca/en/ps/fm/familyvfs.html

... and the provincial government funds programs that specifically only discuss women as victims and men as perpetrators…

http://www.citizenship.gov.on.ca/owd/english/news/b220606-2.htm

There are over 300 shelters available to women, and zero available to men. What do men do when they are being abused by women?

Ms Jean, if you're wondering why the men felt that they needed to stay outside, it's probably because they know where the government stands on violence against men. Based on government web sites like these, we are constantly reminded that only women need to be protected and only men are perpetrators in domestic violence situations and that no other view will be tolerated.

Those men, had they spoken up inside of the conference, would have been heckled at the very least, and I suspect much worse at the most. They never would have been given a voice or a chance to be heard in that venue.

If you want to break down barriers and open dialogue, let everyone's voices be heard on an equal footing. Don't belittle or criticize those who try to have a voice. Just because they didn't speak to you in your choice of venue, it doesn't mean that they didn't have something important to say.

Dr. E.
Your type of comment is exactly why these men were protesting. You are spouting a completely one sided oppinion; and that oppinion is extremely biased. Just as our honoured Head of State's is. Study after study internationally has found that women assault men just as much as men assault women. (Women are more likely to use weapons in an assault; men are more likely to grab and choke.) Not only that, but women assault and kill children more frequently than men. Hard to swallow, I know; but look it up. I'm not making this up.

The men protesting definitely had a case to make; especially given the officiality that Ms. Jean's office brings to gatherings like this one. If Ms. Jean would care to address equal concerns for violence against men and boys; or at the very least towards violence in general to include all Canadians or people, then I would feel differently. But she didn't, she hasn't, and one can only guess that she never will.

I am glad to see you acknowledge the men protesting at the conference protesting about the focus on DV against women.

It is the continual focus on violence against women that emboldens so many women to be violent against their families. My ex used this media focus as justification for violence against our (female!) child and me. There were only 2 hospital visits for me, our child experienced mild concussion without medical attention, social services refused to consider professional report of this or school referral for maternal abuse because it conflicts with the prevailing dominance of the politically correct view of no female violence. This justification was also used within the relationship therapy we explored, justification for the therapist screaming and shouting at me, the victim of domestic violence. Having been trained as a therapist, this therapy had no relationship to any therapeutic theories I have heard of, only to the 'politically correct" view that only women are DV victims.

Were you to openly acknowledge that women are more often the aggressors, perhaps we could then start moving towards a solution to this issue, as I expect that much of the male 'violence' is either self defence, or miss-reporting of DV incidents within the inept family law authorities. Perhaps the best start for your understanding is to look to a bibliography of peer reviewed research on DV, peer reviewed research tends not to be hampered by political correctness, aiming at a more accurate view of the world. This growing bibliography is at:
http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm
and is maintained by an academic, giving a good chance it reflects reality!

Your excellency,

Statistics Canada has send the same message since 1999. Victims 50% men 50% women. When will your office shift and begin conferences focusing on violence against people? I salute the courageous men who protested that day, and continue to hope for on going protests regarding custody access issues and violence against people.

In 1980 my mother was beated to her death my her ex. He served three years and we are serving life without a mother, sister, aunt, grandma and great grandmother.
Betty

Alen said:

"Dr. E.
Your type of comment is exactly why these men were protesting. You are spouting a completely one sided oppinion; and that oppinion is extremely biased."

Extremely biased? Alen please go back and read my comment again. We are agreeing that violence against men is unrecognized and basically taboo. Perhaps you have me confused with another poster?

In my post I had originally left the url for the Fiebert Bibliography which lists the peer reviewed studies showing that women and men are close to being equal in their participation in domestic violence. The moderator seems to have removed the url. For anyone wishing to see the link just google the word "fiebert" and the top result will be the bibliograpy which shows abstracts for well over 100 studies on violence in men and women. It is a real eye opener.

Seems the discussion has fallen into the trap of us vs. them . Same old ,same old. Human rights is the issue- all humans. It is a fact that women and children worldwide, are more frequently assaulted- overwhelmingly so- . Or- do some believe that Amnesty International and the World Health Organization (for example) are also - biased ???And- all the men who work there-and all the men researchers -doctors-all the men who collect and publish the facts - -
If males are equally abused- don't they count as a human rights issue too ? Seems a bit circular- to argue that it is women who are - not as abused ?????? A major communication problem here !

I believe, after reading the GG feelings on this blog, that the protestors deserved more of a personal response other than the brush-off received.

The GG is making her agenda very clear to the Canadian public. The GG is a representitive of the Crown in a Constitutional Democracy, whereby as an agent of the Crown she is to uphold the Canadian Constitution, including the 'equality' provisions of the Charter. How then is it that the GG soley advocates violence against women, completey ignoring violence against men as if it doesnt even exist.

Let me guess, of course she doesn't know that women equally abuse men, afterall there is only hundreds of studies which prove this fact and hundreds of articles which project it. So, I can see how she wouldn't know, especially if she only received her information from gender specific sources.

Does it sadden the GG that there is not one government funded mens shelter in Canada.

Those tears that she sheds, are they for Canadian society as a whole or just for the women?

Your excellency, do you recognize violence against men? If not what do you base your decision on?

Yup, I'm using my real name.

Dear Excellency;

I am the National Director of the group you encountered outside the event you speak of in Montreal. Although the Quebec group is not officially associated with our National Group, we are all working toward the same purpose.

I reside in New Westminster, British Columbia.

In invite you or your staff to contact me next time you are in Beautiful British Columbia. I would like about 1/2 hour of your time to discuss the issues raised in this Blog, and in the conference which you attended in Montreal. I pledge solemly that we will take none of our typical actions in relation to our meeting. All I would ask is that a Joint Press Release agreeable to both parties be distributed shortly after our meeting.

I look forward to hearing from you and your staff.

Hal LEGERE, National Director
Fathers-4-Justice (Canada)

Sorry, Dr E.

You're right, I meant Ron's comment.

I don't see how anyone can seriously claim to be concerned about violence in relationships, when they deliberately put on a pair of blinkers before they start to look at the issue. To ignore violence against men - yes, and children too - and to focus exclusively on women, is to demonstrate your own ignorance and prejudice, and to forfeit any claim to fairness. How on earth can perpetrators and victims fit so neatly into gender stereotypes?

I urge everyone to read the Fiebert bibliography referred to in previous comments. It's long - my copy runs to 23 printed pages - but I dare you to read it from beginning to end. It will be the best hour or two's time you are ever likely to spend. In fact if you don't read it, you have no claim to any proper knowledge on the subject. It's a MUST-DO. And if, after reading, you don't jettison your prejudices and look at domestic and relationship violence in a more factual light in future, then you either don't understand English or you have just not been paying attention. READ IT!

The GG was taking a more internationlist approach to this subject (Athanasie Mukarwego, etc.), not a strictly American or Canadian view. Is the contention here that female violence against males in heavily patriarchal African tribal societies, such as that referenced by the GG, and particularly in wartime, is about the same as male violence against females there in those circumstances?

The Fiebert bibliography deals with studies within the U.S., where admittedly, the violence by men against women, and by women against men, seem to more or less balance off, according to the stats, & StatsCan data for Canada parallel these American studies in that regard. These societies are much more feminized than those of Rwanda, Uganda, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, etc., so that isn't too surprising. The patriarchalism of the U.S. and Canada has been considerably muted over the past 50 or more years -- even more than in Europe, I suspect.

I think violence by men against women and children is more serious than violence by women against men and children, given men's generally superior physical strength. In any case, why can't we all just get along? lol. If a man or woman is angry with an intimate partner, hey, just leave him or her; there's no need to hit, bludgeon, stab or shoot. I think the GG would agree.

She did get one side of the problem right: Reduce & stop violence against women & kids. I'll forgive her for not referencing us men, especially as she was the keynoter at an international conference on violence against women specifically. Maybe the guys should organize an international conference on violence against men, invite Michaelle to be the keynoter & hear what she has to say. lol.

I have been punched in the face.
I have had to make excuses for my fat lip at work, and too my friends.
I have been made to feel guilty for not wanting to have sex.
I have been denied sleep as a result.
I have been pushed and screamed at.
I have been isolated from my friends and family.
I have been told when I could go to bed.
I have had no control over my own finances.
I have been belittled and humiliated.
I am a man.
Now in the throws of a divorce
I am financially crippled
My children I only see twice a month
My reputation has been soiled
They want to be with me on an equal basis, as I want to be with them.
They ask for this every time I see them.
They have been neglected, left alone, put in harms way and are often left dirty.
When I see them I clean them trim their nails, and tell them how much I love them.
This is all documented but is allowed to continue.
I do not have a criminal record.
I hold two College diplomas and I have been a hands on father since they day my children came into this world.
I want nothing more than to sped equal time with my children.
However I am a male.

I would suggest we look at why violent tendencies emerge? What is the root cause?
It is dangerous to make a proverbial boogie man. We must learn to accept the dark in us all to fix the root problem. As a society we should be looking to end violence toward humanity not just women. Accept that violence is a human trait. We would be much closer to finding a solution. What if your web site was trying to end violence against white women? Do you see the barriers I have created by one sentence? It saddens me that this truth escapes the leaders of our great country. It saddens me that because of my sex I am denied the same rights and privileges as others. It saddens me that my children will grow up with an emotional void in their hearts that only I could fill. It saddens me to know that my daughters will be prone to acts of violence, and teenage pregnancy at a much higher rate because I am not allowed to be around. It saddens me to watch this cycle repeat itself again and again in Canada.
As Governor General if you had a chance to make things right, even if it shook the foundation of you belief system, would you be strong enough to act?

Violence against women is an important issue as well as violence in general. I support your trip to Haiti and the nonviolent development of democracy there. I'm also concerned about violence within our own communities especially our youth. Congratulations on this forum. That is the first step.

Dennis Watson

The us versus them argument is spinning its wheels again. I thought more of us had evolved as a society, and were able to recognize a human rights problem that affects everyone- and so few are discussing children- . Boring.Can anyone suggest some solutions to lessening the violence in our society- ? Can anyone express support for those who already have possible solutions ? Anyone can whine- it is really easy.Of course- anyone- except the murder victims. Why hasn't a so-called men's group published their own list of murder victims at the hands of a mother ? All things being equal- the list should be as long - -there is such a list in Quebec- of mothers and children killed by males.

Michelle Jean, you talk with such clarity and certainty when you tell the tales of women being raped by hundreds of men during wartime in foreign countries as if you saw it yourself, but when it comes to your own male subjects and their calls that violence has no gender you belittle their voices. The men “believing, courts tend to give more weight to mothers testimonies than to fathers.”

I’m sorry to hear Ms. Jean that you were “saddened that these men had not chosen to join their voices and point of view to those of the participants gathered inside who were calling for the breaking down of barriers, and for dialogue and respect between men and women.” But they weren’t invited. The barriers were set up to insure that the dialogue was run exclusively by women, and for women. Only one man was invited, Mr. Rondeau, who’s 2004 report on the male condition was ignored, just like the parliamentary joint committee’s report from ’98.

Watch our media: slaps, kicks, murders, throwing things and yelling are seen as acceptable actions by women if they’re directed at men. I watched Sandra O hammer a man’s face and skull in the movie “Sideways”, hospitalized the guy, nobody batted an eyelash at it. Violence against men is accepted while violence against women is intolerable.

ABC News ran a story about protecting women in the armed services; did you know that the ratio for male to female deaths in the Canadian armed services for active soldiers is 40 to 1 in the US armed services its more than 80 to 1 (2800+ dead men to 35 dead women). Are women better at dodging bullets or are their laws that put the life value of women above that of men?

You talk about “Breaking the silence” and “opening up dialogue” then put your money where your mouth is and give Fathers-4-Justice a call. You might learn something if you choose to listen.

Sincerely
Daniel Bonin

Ron had said earlier: "I think violence by men against women and children is more serious than violence by women against men and children, given men's generally superior physical strength."

This is a common misconception. The Archer meta analysis pubished in Psycholgical Bulletin tells us that men are actually 38% of the SERIOUSLY INJURED VICTIMS of domestic violence. The research tells us that women compensate for their lack of strength by using weapons and the element of surprise. Think of Clara Harris and Lorena Bobbitt. Both used weapons and the element of surprise. Bobbitt attacking during the man's sleep with a knife and Harris using her car to "surprise" and kill her husband.

It is important to note that the public reaction to both Harris and Bobbitt was similar. Bobbitt's violence was turned into jokes and Harris's violence was turned into a made for TV movie that astonishingly framed her murder of her husband as something she did "for her family." There is a huge cultural bias in acknowledging the violence of women and our legislators are just as guilty as the pedestrians on the street who see women as innocent victims.

Things are slowly changing as evidenced by the recent admission by the president of the APA that men and women are more equal in their violent behavior than most have ever imagined.

Bonjour madame la GG. Je félicite votre initiative d'ouvrir un bloGG sur ce sujet. Ça démontre votre ouverture. Malheureusement, vous allez réalisé que la réalité du Canada en matière de violence est toute différente de celle qui baigne votre imagination.

Le fait est que comme la plupart des canadiens et canadiennes vous avez été brainwasher pendant plus de 20 ans sur la situation réelle. Une propagande montée à l'échelle des pays occidentaux à été mené sans contestation. La réalité qu'on vous présente ici peut sembler choquante car elle contrevient à vos opinions acquises mais elle est bien la réalité que subit la population canadienne aujourd'hui.

La violence faites aux femmes, bien sûr qu'il y en a. Mais la propagande de la violence faite aux femmes n'existe que pour assurer la suprématie d'extrémistes sexiste, une sorte d'hystérie collective de victimisation féministe dont l'avantage majeur est de favorisé la prétendue victime au détriment du soit disant violent, l'autre pôle de l'humanité, l'homme, le mâle.

Vous devriez vous informé sur les lois et politique qui ont été misent en place et qui bafouent complètement la chartre des droits et libertés. Or cette chartre représente la garantie du gouvernement canadien de respecter la protection du Roi d'Angleterre envers son sujet, le citoyen. Cette chartre est bafouée aujourd'hui, notamment par les politique en matière de violence domestique qui écarte justement l'article sur l'égalité des sexe... La chartre n'est plus respectée à partir du moment où elle est bafouée par le législateur.

C'est bien votre rôle principale que de faire respecter la chartre madame la GG.

Je vous souhaite de prendre conscience de tout ceci et surtout d'écouté les vrais victime du sexisme dans notre beau Canada: ils perdent accès à leurs enfants, les enfants perdent accès à leurs parents et leurs famille étendue, ils sont financièrement réduit à l'esclavage, on les met en prison sur des mensonges, le code criminel n'est plus respecté (méfait public; considéré innocent jusqu'à preuve du contraire; nécessité de la preuve).

J'était présent à cette manifestation devant l'hotel DoubleTree à Montréal.

Au cours des 9 dernières années, on m'a enlevé mes trois enfants, j'ai été ruiné, banni, humilié, méprisé, on a bafoué mes droits (autorité parentale, pensions alimentaires démesurées) et ceux de mes enfants tel que défini par la convention internationale de La Haye et on a refusé d'entendre mes preuves en cours.

Je suis grimpé sur le pont jacques Cartier au nom de Fathers-4-Justice et je demande maintenant un jury dans le procès criminel qu'on me fait pour cette action d'alerte publique face à l'injustice.

On demande une enquête sur l'administration de la justice au niveau familial au Canada, mais les intérêts de ceux qui profitent de l’industrie du divorce et leurs pouvoirs sont tels qu’il est pratiquement impossible de se faire entendre.

Vous souhaitez exporter les droits des femmes tels que nous les connaissons ici au Canada… c’est la destruction de la société que vous exporterez, car c’est bien le résultat des politiques dans lesquelles le Canada est engagé depuis déjà 15 ans.

Those men outside the conference that the Governor General dismissed: this is what they were talking about.

Here's a video that will open your eyes. It shows, in vivid detail, what the posters above are talking about, and show how men and women are treated different by the justice system.

http://antimisandry.com/media/bb-bb.wmv

Note to moderators: This does not violate any of the netiquette rules and is well within the scope of this conversation. I hope you'll have the courage to post this, even though it may not agree with the Governor General's published point of view.

While I recognize that violence against men is a problem, to a certain extent, I do have to agree with Her Honour's point. We need to pull together. The conference wasn't about prejudice in divorce cases, the conference was about all of the women that are dying in this world because of their gender. And I think that really is the main issue. How many of us remember the Montreal Massacre? All those women who died simply because they were women. How many of us take the time to stop on December 6th and remember.
Violence against men is a problem, but so is violence against women. And if we're arguing with each other, nothing is ever going to get solved. Instead, we should pull together, men and women, to solve both. I'd be happy to support Fathers-4-Justice, and I'd like to see them wearing white ribbons on the sixth of December.

If it's a international convention on violence against women, then it makes sense to me that women's issues would be the ones discussed there. Particularly at an international conference: domestic violence against males seems to be a primarily western-centric issue. Perhaps an international convention on violence against women isn't the best place to be raising issues where men are mistreated; but on the other hand, maybe that's an indication of a need that should be addressed. I don't think men need any sort of validation in order to discuss these issues, and suggest that it might even be more productive to host their own forums rather than seek out that validation at a women's conference. (In fact, I'd be worried that discussion of men's issues at a women's conference would trivialize the discussion of women's issues, since in my personal experience the introduction of men's issues into a women's forum tends to refocus the discussion on those issues rather than the women's issues originally intended to be discussed.)

This is not at all meant to imply that male victims of domestic violence are any less important than female victims - only to point out that in terms of productivity, a separate conference dealing with, perhaps, a non-gender specific view of domestic violence might be more productive than demanding male integration into a safe space for discussion of women's issues.