Feminists profile all men as potential murderers


What does this sound like to you?

From the Brisbane Times:

…during the period of separation, every man must be put on a program with mental health checks and scrutinised for signs of violence to ensure he is making the transition safely and not a risk to women, children or themselves.

“This won’t please everyone but we have tried to put support around women and it’s not working,” she says. “We must target individual men.”

What would it involve? A law forcing every separating couple to register this development with police? The practicalities would be difficult and Nancarrow admits it’s a radical idea but this is an indication of her desperation.

The fact is, we have good indicators of which men will kill women. They’ve been violent in their relationships before. They may have attempted strangulation. There may have been an apprehended violence order.

This is Orwellian because an AVO is the system already in place to supposedly prevent people from hurting each other when they break up. But AVO’s and Apprehended Domestic Violence Orders get broken all the time. What is being proposed in the wake of the murders committed by Rowan Baxter is simply another layer of paper protection. The only way to prevent murder is to imprison every single person in the country and put them in solitary confinement.

That may be what they have in mind. At least for the men:

Separation is the most dangerous time for a woman. Despite those indicators, Nancarrow suggests there should be universal screening. Anything to prevent another woman, another child, from murder at their partner’s, their father’s, hands. She cites encouraging early results from the Bourke Justice Reinvestment trial, where such monitoring occurs.

Every man. Universal screening. You break up, if you’re male you have to convince the authorities you’re not a murderer. This idea is diabolically stupid. I cannot think of a better way to cause mass murder on an industrial scale. If you want an example of pushing men too far, there’s your example. Of course, any suggestion this this is a thing is quickly being made verboten.

From the Age:

Queensland Police Service detective Mark Thompson drew widespread criticism after questioning whether the horrific murders were an act of domestic violence or of a “husband being driven too far.”

Ms Arndt, who is well known for her “not all men” commentary, praised the Queensland police for “keeping an open mind and awaiting proper evidence, including the possibility that Rowan Baxter might have been driven too far”.

She went on to say: “But note the misplaced outrage. How dare police deviate from the feminist script of seeking excuses… and explanations when women stab their partners to death, or drive their children into dams but immediately judging a man in these circumstances as simply representing the evil violence that is in all men.”

Her comments were too much for Kew MP Tim Smith, who on Saturday penned a letter to chairman of the Order of Australia Shane Stone, requesting Ms Arndt’s award be cancelled.

Feminists are pushing the narrative on domestic violence and if you publicly oppose this narrative you will be driven from public life, if you’re lucky. Having followed this sort of thing for a while, I expected to see one of the usual suspects pop up. Sure enough:

It’s a tough one, changing the mindset. Michael Flood, associate professor in the law faculty at Queensland University of Technology, has researched masculinity for decades. He says: “We must rewrite societal definitions of manhood, away from power and entitlement and towards compassion and nurturance.”

They have been “rewriting societal definitions of manhood” for decades. It is why today’s generation of men are so angry and confused, and why men like Adam Piggott are so important. Yet domestic violence and murder still occurs. You have only two options here. Admit that your analysis is flawed or double down.

Naturally, it’s only one option, and there’s your problem.

Domestic violence is not, to use the language of Cultural Marxists, “gendered”. The feminist narrative is that up to half of women experience domestic violence across their lifetime, men commit the vast majority of domestic violence, we do so because masculinity is evil, and we live in a patriarchal capitalist system which reinforces and perpetuates this violence. The feminist solution to domestic violence is to destroy the system.

This deliberately obscures the fact that feminists already control the system, and they prevent the truth about domestic violence form entering the mainstream. Men and women commit domestic violence more or less equally. Statistics regarding domestic violence against women are inflated by surveys which lump non-violent and violent abuse into the same category. Thus if you were to ask men if they had experienced controlling behaviour at the hands of a woman, you would get similar results.

More men than women are murdered every year. Women receive lighter penalties for violence and are receive less social stigma for it. Men are generally socialised out of violent behaviour and are becoming more submissive, while women are empowered to exhibit controlling and violent behaviour.

Men can do more damage to women because we are bigger and can hit harder. Women make up for this by using weapons. Women commit most acts of filicide.  Again, women generally receive lighter penalties.

Feminsim does immense damage to women while claiming to represent them. Erin Pizzey started the first women’s shelter in England in 1971, and her research revealed that many women become addicted to violence and that much domestic violence is mutual. The shelters were quickly overrun with radical feminists and a massive domestic violence industrial complex has since spread throughout the West.

The end result of all this is that women are far more likely to die as a result of domestic violence than men. This is a direct result of feminists controlling the narrative on domestic violence and failing to account for the actions of both men and women. The murders committed by Rowan Baxter were appalling and he may very well prove to be a psychopath. His actions are being used to tar all men, and will only increase the numbers of men and women who die at each others’ hands.

Ultimately the feminist, Cultural Marxist, globohomo system must fall so that truth and genuine enquiry can return to the norm. Our actions should thus be directed toward creating systems of community, employment and survival which are independent of the current unsustainable system.