Dustin Martin

[#gosaintas]

BM, you're post is offensive to all victims of violence, particularly men. If that post is the best example of what you can contribute to the debate, I suggest you remain silent on the issue. That's the way, isn't it? Abuse and ridicule people. That'll bring them around to your way of thinking for sure. Come to work with me, examine the wreckage that is wrought by your harmless and innocent sisters and then comment.

As for your laughable suggestion about refuges, again I invite you to come with me to te various boarding houses, psych. wards, prisons and yes, refuge/shelters, inhabited by men because there is simply nowhere else to go, or no one to represent them. We can also hit the streets, where the people who make their homes there, are overwhelmingly male. PM me privately and I'll organise a "tour" of the consequences of violence by women on men and children. I'm sure some of my brothers and clients would be most interested to have you espouse your enlightened views to them. A parlour game? Yep, death, suicide, broken lives. All a parlour game. It would be to you. Two posters have actually shared their pain with us and all you can do is heap scorn on them.

You wouldn't realise it, but you make my point for me. Your attitude is part of the problem. Thankyou. Talk to victims of crime. They all agree that the greatest evil is not inflicted by the perpetrator. It is the indifference and scorn of the bystander that hurts the most. I know you love getting a rise out of people and take delight in lobbing grenades into arguments, but I sincerely hope you've made a very poor and misguided attempt at humour or irony.

The way your post is written, littered as it is with typos and nonsensical phrases, indicates you may be affected by substances or overcome with misguided anger. The real concern on this issue is your post. I'm happy to assist you in whatever way you feel necessary, even if that's just you telling me to not bother you. That would be my pleasure.

Lol love the projection.

Listen you and the others on here have skewed and hijacked the conversation and argument then play the victim.
When there is a thread about a male being attacked by a female, I will post on that.

And yes you and you hijacking males on this thread have turned it into a parlour game. I find your victim. mentality appalling.
I will also tell my sister who was bashed unconcious by her first husband to suck it up because some bloke on an Internet forum said it happens to men as well.

I find your post and attitude offensive. A white male trying to take the focus from the issue at hand.

As for critiquing about typos etc. Shows your lack of an argument. I do a lot of this from my phone so live with it.

Any word on all those men's refuges compared to women. Any stats on which sex perputaters most crimes.

Oh and apparently we can't mention children or sex crimes because they are inconvenient to the argument.

God what an attitude you people have.

Blah blah blah - oh the outrage of an internet warrior

[Bunk_Moreland]

BM, you're post is offensive to all victims of violence, particularly men. If that post is the best example of what you can contribute to the debate, I suggest you remain silent on the issue. That's the way, isn't it? Abuse and ridicule people. That'll bring them around to your way of thinking for sure. Come to work with me, examine the wreckage that is wrought by your harmless and innocent sisters and then comment.

As for your laughable suggestion about refuges, again I invite you to come with me to te various boarding houses, psych. wards, prisons and yes, refuge/shelters, inhabited by men because there is simply nowhere else to go, or no one to represent them. We can also hit the streets, where the people who make their homes there, are overwhelmingly male. PM me privately and I'll organise a "tour" of the consequences of violence by women on men and children. I'm sure some of my brothers and clients would be most interested to have you espouse your enlightened views to them. A parlour game? Yep, death, suicide, broken lives. All a parlour game. It would be to you. Two posters have actually shared their pain with us and all you can do is heap scorn on them.

You wouldn't realise it, but you make my point for me. Your attitude is part of the problem. Thankyou. Talk to victims of crime. They all agree that the greatest evil is not inflicted by the perpetrator. It is the indifference and scorn of the bystander that hurts the most. I know you love getting a rise out of people and take delight in lobbing grenades into arguments, but I sincerely hope you've made a very poor and misguided attempt at humour or irony.

The way your post is written, littered as it is with typos and nonsensical phrases, indicates you may be affected by substances or overcome with misguided anger. The real concern on this issue is your post. I'm happy to assist you in whatever way you feel necessary, even if that's just you telling me to not bother you. That would be my pleasure.

Lol love the projection.

Listen you and the others on here have skewed and hijacked the conversation and argument then play the victim.
When there is a thread about a male being attacked by a female, I will post on that.

And yes you and you hijacking males on this thread have turned it into a parlour game. I find your victim. mentality appalling.
I will also tell my sister who was bashed unconcious by her first husband to suck it up because some bloke on an Internet forum said it happens to men as well.

I find your post and attitude offensive. A white male trying to take the focus from the issue at hand.

As for critiquing about typos etc. Shows your lack of an argument. I do a lot of this from my phone so live with it.

Any word on all those men's refuges compared to women. Any stats on which sex perputaters most crimes.

Oh and apparently we can't mention children or sex crimes because they are inconvenient to the argument.

God what an attitude you people have.

Blah blah blah - oh the outrage of an internet warrior

Brilliant input. Now go back to your core competency of Geary hating.

Cabbage

[Dis Believer]

So no stats on men's shelters compared to women's and which sex perpetuates all this violence?

I answered that - there are no such shelters for male victims of violence, or sexual assault. I also already answered the other question, males commit the majority of violence.

Question. Do you respect women and their right not to be victims of violence?

Just a Yes or no answer. No yes buts...

Yes I do.

As part of my view on the world, I respect people and their right to live their lives in peace and free from violence.

But I have a question for you - why do you feel the need to insist on politicising violence on the basis of gender? Does it make you feel righteous? Does it make you feel more moral than others?

Why is it that you do not hold forth with a diatribe ranting against violence in our community, why are you so hell-bent on making sure the discussion is limited only to a particular subset of victims and a particular subset of perpetrators?

I saw this whole Martin thing as yet another drunken/stoned footballer behaving poorly towards another member of our community. I had/have no doubts that his behaviour would be identical irrespective of the characteristics of the person that spoke to him. He did not behave badly because she is a woman and he is a man, he behaved badly because he is "Dusty Martin, star AFL footballer" and feels entitled and bulletproof, due to how he has been conditioned as a result of a lifetime of sycophants and hangers on pissing in his pocket and giving him endless "get out of jail free" opportunities. That plus he is an Olympic standard bogan............

[markp]

Every form of violence inevitably has it's own subset of issues, causes, contributing factors , perhaps solutions and strategies of addressing.

Should we not focus on and talk about ice because harm is caused by other drugs too?

This is a case of alleged violence by a man against a woman.

If people want to discuss it as such with all its surrounding and particular issues then they should be allowed to without being told in at times a vile and resentful way that they shouldn't.

[dragit]

If people want to discuss it as such with all its surrounding and particular issues then they should be allowed to without being told in at times a vile and resentful way that they shouldn't.

Pretty rich coming from you…

Anyone who dare discuss this actual incident outside of condemning Martin has been accused of the most disgusting attitudes towards women, condoning violence and victim blaming.

Bringing Jill Meagher into the debate is just despicable.

[White Winmar]

And I would say the people least likely to be entirely objective here (and understandably so) are people with painful and traumatic experiences on one side of the ledger or the other.

All I've been doing is fending off absurd assertions (in some instances), and reminding that this is a case of (alleged) violence by a man against a woman, so a discussion of it as such is entirely reasonable.

I agree with most of what you're saying Mark.
There's no justification for Martin's behaviour.
Men perpetrate far and away the majority of physical violence.
Women have every right and are totally justified in calling men to account on it and men need to show up as men, own it and take steps in their own lives to eliminate it.

But.....I also feel that any attempt to broaden the discussion into how violence effects both genders is being invalidated by you - and Bunk as well - on the grounds that doing so somehow minimises the impact of violence on women. I don't think this is the case. I agree with you that there are still plenty of men who deny violence against women and a deep and broad cultural shift is needed. AND.......a deep and broad cultural shift is needed about violence full stop, regardless of gender.
Fixing the problem needs an inclusive solution, not more finger pointing and blame.

Thank you St. Byron. Couldn't have put it any better.

[markp]

If people want to discuss it as such with all its surrounding and particular issues then they should be allowed to without being told in at times a vile and resentful way that they shouldn't.

Pretty rich coming from you…

Anyone who dare discuss this actual incident outside of condemning Martin has been accused of the most disgusting attitudes towards women, condoning violence and victim blaming.

Bringing Jill Meagher into the debate is just despicable.

Yeah because victim blaming is not a thing.

Because questioning and casting doubt over the woman's account without knowing the full story (or account even) is a great look.

Because saying she acted poorly and put herself in danger (without knowing how she acted or why) can in no way be compared to incidences such as Jill Meagher's murder, when that's what some people did then too.

So really you can keep your hurt feelings and your faux outrage at my 'despicable' act of daring to mention a murdered woman's name.

But thanks for dropping back in late.

[asiu]

... and part of that process ,
is allowing communication
(without the 'sword' being picked up)

Heart mind and mind mind both have their relevant perspectives

[White Winmar]

BM, you're post is offensive to all victims of violence, particularly men. If that post is the best example of what you can contribute to the debate, I suggest you remain silent on the issue. That's the way, isn't it? Abuse and ridicule people. That'll bring them around to your way of thinking for sure. Come to work with me, examine the wreckage that is wrought by your harmless and innocent sisters and then comment.

As for your laughable suggestion about refuges, again I invite you to come with me to te various boarding houses, psych. wards, prisons and yes, refuge/shelters, inhabited by men because there is simply nowhere else to go, or no one to represent them. We can also hit the streets, where the people who make their homes there, are overwhelmingly male. PM me privately and I'll organise a "tour" of the consequences of violence by women on men and children. I'm sure some of my brothers and clients would be most interested to have you espouse your enlightened views to them. A parlour game? Yep, death, suicide, broken lives. All a parlour game. It would be to you. Two posters have actually shared their pain with us and all you can do is heap scorn on them.

You wouldn't realise it, but you make my point for me. Your attitude is part of the problem. Thankyou. Talk to victims of crime. They all agree that the greatest evil is not inflicted by the perpetrator. It is the indifference and scorn of the bystander that hurts the most. I know you love getting a rise out of people and take delight in lobbing grenades into arguments, but I sincerely hope you've made a very poor and misguided attempt at humour or irony.

The way your post is written, littered as it is with typos and nonsensical phrases, indicates you may be affected by substances or overcome with misguided anger. The real concern on this issue is your post. I'm happy to assist you in whatever way you feel necessary, even if that's just you telling me to not bother you. That would be my pleasure.

Lol love the projection.

Listen you and the others on here have skewed and hijacked the conversation and argument then play the victim.
When there is a thread about a male being attacked by a female, I will post on that.

And yes you and you hijacking males on this thread have turned it into a parlour game. I find your victim. mentality appalling.
I will also tell my sister who was bashed unconcious by her first husband to suck it up because some bloke on an Internet forum said it happens to men as well.

I find your post and attitude offensive. A white male trying to take the focus from the issue at hand.

As for critiquing about typos etc. Shows your lack of an argument. I do a lot of this from my phone so live with it.

Any word on all those men's refuges compared to women. Any stats on which sex perputaters most crimes.

Oh and apparently we can't mention children or sex crimes because they are inconvenient to the argument.

God what an attitude you people have.

Blah blah blah - oh the outrage of an internet warrior

Brilliant input. Now go back to your core competency of Geary hating.

Cabbage

My "attitude" includes a large part of my life helping all victims of violence. I've put my "attitude" to practical use in helping women, children and men. You are just an abuser. It is reflected in your posting style. I understand your pain because of your sister. I've been on the receiving end of serious violence by a women. From my mother flogging me into unconsciousness with a metal dog chain when I was 10 years old, to my darling ex-wife fracturing my skull and nose on our second anniversary. They are just the highlights. I could go on. As a Homicide detective, I brought to justice killers who did the following. A man who shot his wife in front of their three year old daughter, then stapled an Intervention Order to her chest. Investigated and arrested the killer of Katie Ven Der Hoogte, a 9 year old girl who was twice shot in the head with a nail gun by her estranged father. I investigated and arrested the killer of Sheree Beasley, a six year old who was raped and murdered by a Church elder. I've also investigated deaths of men, killed by women, but I won't bore you with all the details. PM me if you're interested. I now support men who have been traumatised by violence against them, by women. I think I know who has the attitude problem.

[dragit]

If people want to discuss it as such with all its surrounding and particular issues then they should be allowed to without being told in at times a vile and resentful way that they shouldn't.

Pretty rich coming from you…

Anyone who dare discuss this actual incident outside of condemning Martin has been accused of the most disgusting attitudes towards women, condoning violence and victim blaming.

Bringing Jill Meagher into the debate is just despicable.

Yeah because victim blaming is not a thing.

Because questioning and casting doubt over the woman's account without knowing the full story (or account even) is a great look.

Because saying she acted poorly and put herself in danger (without knowing how she acted or why) can in no way be compared to incidences such as Jill Meagher's murder, when that's what some people did then too.

So really you can keep your hurt feelings and your faux outrage at my 'despicable' act of daring to mention a murdered woman's name.

But thanks for dropping back in late.

Okay, so… "If people want to discuss it as such with all its surrounding and particular issues then they should be allowed to without being told in at times a vile and resentful way that they shouldn't."

Unless they want to talk about the "victim" in the altercation.

It really is the crux of this whole thread, good stuff.

[markp]

If people want to discuss it as such with all its surrounding and particular issues then they should be allowed to without being told in at times a vile and resentful way that they shouldn't.

Pretty rich coming from you…

Anyone who dare discuss this actual incident outside of condemning Martin has been accused of the most disgusting attitudes towards women, condoning violence and victim blaming.

Bringing Jill Meagher into the debate is just despicable.

Yeah because victim blaming is not a thing.

Because questioning and casting doubt over the woman's account without knowing the full story (or account even) is a great look.

Because saying she acted poorly and put herself in danger (without knowing how she acted or why) can in no way be compared to incidences such as Jill Meagher's murder, when that's what some people did then too.

So really you can keep your hurt feelings and your faux outrage at my 'despicable' act of daring to mention a murdered woman's name.

But thanks for dropping back in late.

Okay, so… "If people want to discuss it as such with all its surrounding and particular issues then they should be allowed to without being told in at times a vile and resentful way that they shouldn't."

Unless they want to talk about the "victim" in the altercation.

It really is the crux of this whole thread, good stuff.

Oh sorry I thought that was discussing it.

I thought I said at the time you can post and think whatever you like and people can respond in kind.

In fact I even thought that's what was happening now.

I'm saying by all means talk about male issues but don't denigrate or be vile about people who choose to view it as an example male on female violence.

But I'm sorry that you're so obviously still upset by our earlier discussion.

[dragit]

I wasn't there, you weren't there.

Oh sorry, I thought this was you trying to end the discussion on page 2… so I found it interesting that on page 17 you were bleating about people having the right to discuss it.

Apologies for disrupting your crusade against male violence by bringing up the original topic.

[markp]

I wasn't there, you weren't there.

Oh sorry, I thought this was you trying to end the discussion on page 2… so I found it interesting that on page 17 you were bleating about people having the right to discuss it.

Apologies for disrupting your crusade against male violence by bringing up the original topic.

Is that supposed to be a damning quote?

I'm not sure how.

Wasn't it in the context of saying its wrong to seek to discredit the account and actions of the alleged victim without all the facts?

'End the discussion', 'bleating', 'crusade'... Ok.

Again, I've obviously really upset you, and I'm sorry.

[ripplug66]

Can I join in?

[dragit]

I wasn't there, you weren't there.

Oh sorry, I thought this was you trying to end the discussion on page 2… so I found it interesting that on page 17 you were bleating about people having the right to discuss it.

Apologies for disrupting your crusade against male violence by bringing up the original topic.

Is that supposed to be a damning quote?

I'm not sure how.

Wasn't it in the context of saying its wrong to seek to discredit the account and actions of the alleged victim without all the facts?

'End the discussion', 'bleating', 'crusade'... Ok.

Again, I've obviously really upset you, and I'm sorry.

Don't apologise, I'm not upset… just find it amusing that you are asking for tolerance in discussion after diligently trying to quash discussion around what this thread is meant to be about.

'Not knowing all the facts' hasn't stopped the exploration of the history of male violence.

[kosifantutti]

Can I join in?

No.

[markp]

I wasn't there, you weren't there.

Oh sorry, I thought this was you trying to end the discussion on page 2… so I found it interesting that on page 17 you were bleating about people having the right to discuss it.

Apologies for disrupting your crusade against male violence by bringing up the original topic.

Is that supposed to be a damning quote?

I'm not sure how.

Wasn't it in the context of saying its wrong to seek to discredit the account and actions of the alleged victim without all the facts?

'End the discussion', 'bleating', 'crusade'... Ok.

Again, I've obviously really upset you, and I'm sorry.

Don't apologise, I'm not upset… just find it amusing that you are asking for tolerance in discussion after diligently trying to quash discussion around what this thread is meant to be about.

'Not knowing all the facts' hasn't stopped the exploration of the history of male violence.

Yup because pointing out someone is desparaging the account and actions of the alleged victim minus all the facts is the same as trying to end a discussion.

And if you're not upset you're certainly being rather surly for someone who is not upset.

[ripplug66]

Can I join in?

No.

Ok. You aren't green anymore. You don't threaten me at all.

[markp]

Can I join in?

No.

He just did, and you're not a mod in green anymore.

[ripplug66]

Can I join in?

No.

He just did, and you're not a mod in green anymore.

Beat you to it.

[markp]

Can I join in?

No.

He just did, and you're not a mod in green anymore.

Beat you to it.

I had to find the emoticon.

[Dis Believer]

Can I join in?

Why - do you hate women too?

Apparently the rest of us do.

Actually there was a nice little change in language that was implemented in order to direct people's thinking in the desired direction. There was a time when people with bigoted thinking based on gender were referred to as "sexist". Bu the problem there is that anyone can be sexist - male or female. Instead now the common use is "misogynist" - advantages - it only applies to males, with females as the victim, and as a bonus, anyone labelled has moved from being a bigot (a little undesirable, but someone to be pitied) to now being a "HATER" of women, with all the evil personality traits implied by the use of the word hate, and with no redeeming qualities.

So now if you disagree with the orthodoxy and dogma of third wave feminist sheeple, you can immediately move to being questioned about why you hate women............nice.

[dragit]

Apologies for surliness.

Probably stems from feeling like people are deliberately misinterpreting my posts and then labeling me with appalling attitudes.

FWIW I too have had the misfortune of experiencing domestic violence within my immediate family, so I do feel aggrieved when people suggest that I somehow condone it or perpetuate victim blaming.

That said, I do find some of "what we know" about this womans actions interesting and worthy of discussion… none of which could possibly justify Martin's behavior.

[The_Merchant]

If people want to discuss it as such with all its surrounding and particular issues then they should be allowed to without being told in at times a vile and resentful way that they shouldn't.

Pretty rich coming from you…

Anyone who dare discuss this actual incident outside of condemning Martin has been accused of the most disgusting attitudes towards women, condoning violence and victim blaming.

Bringing Jill Meagher into the debate is just despicable.

Yeah because victim blaming is not a thing.

Because questioning and casting doubt over the woman's account without knowing the full story (or account even) is a great look.

Because saying she acted poorly and put herself in danger (without knowing how she acted or why) can in no way be compared to incidences such as Jill Meagher's murder, when that's what some people did then too.

So really you can keep your hurt feelings and your faux outrage at my 'despicable' act of daring to mention a murdered woman's name.

But thanks for dropping back in late.

Where have people (outside of some widely condemned posts by a particular poster) said that she "acted poorly"? How can you discuss an incident without discussing what lead up to the incident. This whole thread has gone on and on because someone dared mention any causative factors and you and a couple of other posters proceeded to bully them endlessly. It was you who brought gender into it and continue to denigrate and stereotype people because of their gender.

How dare we describe this as alcohol fuelled violence, even though it obviously is. Domestic violence is obviously a massive issue in society but although sharing some causative factors such as alcohol and possibly drugs, this was not a domestic violence incident. The murder of Jill meagher only has one thing in common with this incident, gender. It has been bred into us since an early age that women's and children's lives are more important than a mans life.

No one has suggested that she deserved martins response and that she shouldn't have done what she did. They have mearly suggested that they may have approached the situation differently, and you and a couple of other posters have bullied them endlessly for daring to have an opinion.

[markp]

Apologies for surliness.

Probably stems from feeling like people are deliberately misinterpreting my posts and then labeling me with appalling attitudes.

FWIW I too have had the misfortune of experiencing domestic violence within my immediate family, so I do feel aggrieved when people suggest that I somehow condone it or perpetuate victim blaming.

That said, I do find some of "what we know" about this womans actions interesting and worthy of discussion… none of which could possibly justify Martin's behavior.

It's a slightly provocative subject... Just slightly!

I don't take things said in the heat of a debate here to heart (for long anyway) or into the real world and I hope that's true of what I say to others.

I think what you may say in context to those physically around you and what you post on a forum or other social media are entirely different contexts and can much easier be taken out of context.

I was never suggesting you're a heartless prick, just perhaps that such comments are a slippery slope.

Cheers.