In the last 7 days I've reviewed about 17 State and Federal reviews into Family Violence. The current model of response is 1. Legislation, 2. Court, 3. Civil and Criminal sanctions, 4. Funding of women's centres and behaviour change programs and 5. More reviews and funding Every State and Territory has been pumping millions into all 5 of these. And what is the result? Increased reports of domestic violence across the board. NSW reckons its 1 in 10 men that are domestic violence perps. DVNSW says that this represents only 40% of the truth. Therefore, it is closer to 1 in 4 or 25% of men are violent. Most States concur. The ABC certainly concurs. Ditto Guardian. There does seem to be a bit of a problem in NT though, I should admit. Indigenous don't seem to be able to lay off their missus, or their family in all fairness. Grog has a bit to do with it. In a little gem of a report published by WA, they concluded that '...the overuse of restraining orders..by 55%...is not...appropriate or effective'. What is clear however, outside of the common sense displayed by WA back in 2012 when the report was drafted, is that there is consensus. In order to tackle domestic violence, we need 1. more of the thing thats proved ineffective (restraining orders) and 2. re-education of men - and a good percentage at that! Finally, the demand for more $$! The authors of these state and commonwealth-wide studies, which have attracted million$ of dollars continue to advocate for the very thing that seems to have contributed to the substantive issues. And what is the issue? For a start, expanding the definitions of DV to include non-physical measures. This devalues the people that are truely victims and creates a secondary problem of essentially criminalising conduct that is not a crime, without downplaying the seriousness of this type of abuse. The issues exemplify the feminisation of the legal system because coercive control is NEVER enforced from a criminal perspective, only at the civil, implying that it doesn’t meet the threshold for what constitutes a crime, and is instead proven with ‘narrative’ “evidence” that does not meet the requirements of the traditional rules evidence. The problem is as per Briginshaw (1938) HCA that the flow-on effects of even the civil outcome are loss of rights to property and children, stigma of being a DV perpetrator, loss of confidence and ability to earn a living.

@Peter217945 @KobieThatcher @realDonaldTrump No doubt it's laughable. As is expecting a foreigner to help. It's not his fight. We are in a lunatic asylum no doubt.

I hate questions like this because it gives government ideas. It is correct that people don't often say no to tyranny. But where they do, it can get violent and bloody. There is no way of stopping tyranny without resistance. There are hardly enough jails and the executive branch would need 10 fold expansion in a 1984 style govt.

@CaseyAston2 @lporiginalg Zero correlation. The clip sucked. I'm neither good at parties or anywhere else. Humbug mf.

@ItsSimplyLivy @LilaGraceRose Pathetic men. Beta cuckery. These are the values of the valueless though.

@CaseyAston2 @lporiginalg F off. I find it creepy. It's my prerogative.

@LottyDotty8 @lporiginalg reached my quota for crying. awaiting further instructions, simp

@BadGhostTv @TheBoofuroomus @realstewpeters I'm a jew. Never read the talmud. Same with all my family. No jew I know has read it, or subscribes to it. Now what? Are we alone in that, or is what you're saying not quite true?

@tigertuffmark @45FirstLady I've seen a few ethno nationalists with the same thing going on. Also some antifa bros at a rally were trying to cover theirs up. Its going around I tell ya.

This is the response from the AG to combat domestic violence. Specifically, "coercive control". Maybe you've experienced a sh!t relationship or someone being an asshat? Sure, no doubt. But the AG's response to DV is to target conduct that does not meet the bar for a crime, yet they are going to teach police how to identify it and come up with new remedies to take kids from their homes and punish essentially, men. This is a further erosion of what constitutes responsibility and agency in people to control their own lives, and deal with the consequences of choices that they make. It is paternalism.

That's not what I meant. As in, he's not particularly clever. How much money he's given to be not so clever is beside my point, which is that the positions he takes on cultural issues are more or less right. If we are talking waste and corruption, the unaparty wins hands down. They almost all enrich themselves. And they mostly do it through causes that the left cums over. Climate esp. The corruption there is amazing. Of course donations and money in politics is on every side of the isle except a very rare few. Save Ukraine anyone? Or Aussie hospitals? Oh, we can do both? But we don't.

@CodeRedInBed @lporiginalg I don't understand why stoopid people are trying to convince me it's funny. I'm not ignorant to society's complete collapse. This sux though. Each their own

@Arthursoldman @lporiginalg Ffs f wit. You're a fake conservative. Everyone knows each to their own. You're a fkn collectivist commie "everyone must think the same". F off, but have a great day.

@salltweets Ironically, it will most likely be DOGE that defeats this out of pragmatic economic reasoning. The west is collapsing. These psychos will crawl back under the closet where they belong.

@jorymicah It's like pointing to a car engine and screaming, "look, it's the metal bits, they make it run".

@PoliBard 97%. Just the abortion thing. Of course it's you're right, but only to a point. I won't argue further. Everything else... you won't lose support over such a post. I'm sure you know that.

@TopherField I've heard the justices go into their chambers and play bullshit bingo. If the lucky dip lands on the words or actions used, they convict. I also understand that the lucky dip continues until the answer is to convict.

@Arthursoldman @lporiginalg No, the act is closet fag. Probably like you.