How is the VAWA fair?

Question

"It isn't a stereotype that men perpetrate the violence in Africa. It's a fact"

You cite Africa and in this case I do not have adequate knowledge to contest that claim. However, I think we both know that rights of any description for women there are non-existent so I don't see how this is particularly relevant to my question. (I assumed we were discussing the U.S of A)

Answer 1

This law was created to protect women from things such as bride burning!  As of now I am not sure nor have I ever seen any cases of women burning men to get more money from their families or anything else.  Have you?   So what do the men need protection against?  I think as time goes by and if the women of these countries become violent towards men in some sad statement of retaliation or the pendulum swinging the other way the laws will be changed to protect men.

As for the police officers some of them (most of them) will always be jack nuts because they were before they became cops and no laws can change that.  Most cops in my opinion are power controlling you know whats who break the law all the time and decide to enforce it on others when they see fit.

Answer 2

Here's the language of the act I feel is just cause for making the issue a "womans issue."

"The new legislation would authorize more than $200 million annually in foreign assistance for international programs that prevent violence, support health programs and survivor services, encourage legal accountability, change public attitudes, promote access to economic opportunity projects and education, and address violence against women in humanitarian situations. It aims to prevent domestic and sexual violence, including “honor” killings, bride burnings, genital cutting, mass rapes in war, and more.

To deal with situations like the Darfur and the Democratic Republic of Congo, it would require the Secretary of State to identify critical outbreaks of violence against women and girls in armed conflict and develop emergency measures to respond to these outbreaks. These measures would include efforts by the United States government to protect women and girls, to urge all parties in the conflict to protect women and girls, and to facilitate prosecution of perpetrators."

The acts that are being particularly condemned are acts committed against women. In these particular countries, while violence is sometimes enacted upon men (by other men) it is generally women and their children who suffer vastly more.

It isn't a stereotype that men perpetrate the violence in Africa. It's a fact.

Answer 3

In a way it's killing by legalities...take away the job,

spouse, housing, dignity, etc.  I can't see too many misandrists answering this one...what can they possibly say except to change the subject and attack you/men (always attack but never answer the questions...)  

Me thinks the lawyers wrote this one up to create more $$$$.

Answer 4

Take it from me, you're going to get "straw manned," as you put it, no matter what you say as soon as you start questioning something like this.  

VAWA can help men, but isn't really set up to do that at all.  Don't believe me?  Read this.  This comes straight from the US Department of Justice.

http://www.ovw.usdoj.gov/regulations.htm

Notice the word "women" used very, very often here.

Kendrick beat me to it I see.

Anyway, no matter what the law is written like, the enforcement is far from gender-neutral.

Answer 5

Violence Against WOMEN act has gender neutral language? That absolutely hilarious. They didn't even add in children until 2005.

"The Office on Violence Against Women (OVW), a component of the U.S. Department of Justice, provides national leadership in developing the nation's capacity to reduce violence against women through the implementation of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) and subsequent legislation." ( http://www.ovw.usdoj.gov/ovw-fs.htm#fs-g... )

This is actually from the government agency that implements this act. Don't listen to any of yahoo's quasi's who are saying that the actual government program itself is lying about the act. Everything there is about women. Their mission statement is about women, their website is about women, the name of the act is about women.... the entire thing is about women. (but was changed in 2005 to include children).

Here is what the program that gets the grants http://www.ovw.usdoj.gov/stop_grant_desc... ... it's all about women as victims.

It just goes on and on. Again, they didn't even add children in until 2005.

Answer 6

If you are concerned with the law enforcement officers' interpretation of VAWA more than the wording of VAWA itself,  you need to address  the education system that prepares people to become police officers.  That's your target audience....police officers....you're just spinning your wheels here.

ETA:   Do you think the title alone is influencing the enforcement officers' decisions in applying it?  

Because the law itself can be applied to ANYONE who is a victim of DV.   Do you personally know any male vicitms who were denied the benefits outlined in VAWA?

Here is the document, for reference:

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/...

Answer 7

Why are laws supposed to be fair ? Maybe the women who designed VAWA did not want to be fair, ever thought of that ?

Answer 8

Amendments made to the laws has made it gender neutral in application.  I know thats hard for you to understand but laws can change.

But it will most often be applied to males because in the US -85% of domestic violence victims are women.   For lots of years DV was thought of as a private issue and men were given latitude to abuse their wives.

EDIT:

If you have time today look at the Charleston WV Gazette and  the Na'lisha Gravely murder.   There is video of her boyfriend shooting her at a Taco Bell!  

I saw the same week as this case highlighted - a story of a woman arrested for battery for assault of her husband at a bus stop was featured.    Police here are not targeting men or discounting that they are victims.  Men do need to come forward.  

In one case here a woman was arrested for running over her boyfriend-   but he was also arrested at the hospital because she was trying to flee from his abuse, she had obvious injuries and needed treatment, and he was trying to stop her.    

I would be glad to continue this via email-

Answer 9

Calling the Violence Against Women Act instead of the Violence Against People Act is making the bias in this law about as plain as you can get. Sure the wording is gender neutral, but because the feminist movement has worked so hard to demonize men as always the perpetrator and never the victim the law is totally on the side of women and against men.

Linda Kelly, a professor of law (i.e. not a phony Women's Studies professor) has detailed how the feminist movement have gone to extremes to suppress the wealth of evidence that proves that women and men commit domestic violence at equal rates http://www.law.fsu.edu/journals/lawrevie...

She quotes Suzanne Steinmetz, one of the authors of a study that feminists didn't want to reach the public. Steinmetz said: "In an attempt to keep me from speaking... at an American Civil Liberties Union conference... [the ACLU] were told if they allowed me to speak the place would be bombed" (p.112).

Because feminists have successfully suppressed evidence that men are victims of domestic violence just as much as women we live in a world where a man is simply not believed if he says his wife hit him. In fact if a man complains that he is a victim of domestic violence he simply draws suspicion on himself and risks being jailed for being a wife batterer!

Another part of the unfairness of VAWA is that the term 'domestic violence' has been expanded (a typical feminist tactic) to include psychological distress, so that a man can be jailed even if his wife is merely *afraid* that he will harm her.

"Former president of the Massachusetts Bar Association, Elaine Epstein, said, “...allegations of abuse are now used for tactical advantage.”

http://www.onlinelawyersource.com/news/f...

How is VAWA fair? Sorry not to be able to tell you this!

Edit

@ Kendrick: Thanks for correcting me re gender neutral language. In fact the wording of the act is very careful to avoid saying that women are the only victims of domestic violence. Or at least it is like this up to page 34, after which women are almost exclusively referred to as the victims. Throughout the 176 page document men are mentioned only as either batterers or people who might report someone else's domestic violence. However it mentions: "The Comptroller General shall conduct a study to establish the extent to which men, women, youth, and children are victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking and the availability to all victims of shelter, counseling, legal representation, and other services commonly provided to victims of domestic violence". It also says that "research does not yet exist to support the effectiveness of screening men" but whether the screening is for being the victim or perpetrator of domestic violence is unclear. In any case we all know what happens to research that shows how frequently men are victims - they never see the light of day. Given that there is plenty of research to show that men are as often the victims as women, its cold comfort that men get barely a glimmer of hope in a 176 page legal document.

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/...