~ archived since 2018 ~

Australian Feminist Government (Duluth Model Series Part 1)

polakfury

December 22, 2019

2 upvotes

/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FfxuVdT60w4

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB

Post Information

Title	Australian Feminist Government (Duluth Model Series Part 1)
Author	polakfury
Upvotes	2
Comments	56
Date	December 22, 2019 4:34 PM UTC (6 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/comments/ee6upq/australian_feminist_government_duluth_model/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/australian-feminist-government-duluth-model-series.1064262 https://theredarchive.com/post/1064262

Comments

[–]Strikester101 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]InitiatePenguin 4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Starts of with breaking down a hearing in the Australian Government in the pay gap. Uses a lot of hard cuts, refferring to actions not contextualized during the video. Speeds of the video over sections where the feminist is speaking and the video asserts it's wrong. Then shows a super cut of women saying the word sexism and misogyny. The video does illustrate that the paygap is not refferring to equal pay for equal work.

Then it goes to mainstream media host who says "women shouldnt be told not to walk through Parks, men should be told not to rape them" while the video overlays with a dozen or two news stories about women committing crime.

Then there's a panel where a feminist is talking about imperialist, capitalist, patriarchy and privilege. Suggests men are more violent than women. Talks about the way boys are socialized for entitlement. Suggests to be more LGBTQ. Video calls it "cancer".

Then it plays a government ad about stopping violence against women. Then a second one. The second one is really hard on the nose though. Video calls it "propaganda", suggests any government PSA would fall under propaganda. Points out the underlying information has a disclaimer about the information is not guarenteed to be accurate or providing professional advice.

That's the first 18min. All I have time for atm.

[–]SchalaZeal01 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]polakfury[S] -6 points-5 points-4 points 6 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]SchalaZeal01 3 points4 points5 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]polakfury[S] -3 points-2 points-1 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Strikester101 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[+]polakfury[S] -6 points-5 points-4 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Strikester101 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]InitiatePenguin 4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago* (82 children) | Copy Link

I don't understand this fascination with the Duluth Model. This is MGTOW YouTube account, btw. And OP has posted this all across Reddit, even T_D. (Edit: he actually enjoys posting quite a few videos on TD and calling liberals "cucks")

The Duluth experiment was in 1981 somewhere between the second and third waves of feminism.

From Wikipedia:

Critics argue that the method can be ineffective as it was developed without minority communities in mind and can fail to address root psychological or emotional causes of abuse, in addition to completely neglecting male victims and female perpetrators of abuse

We are now in the 4th wave and many feminists and particular male feminists are elevating the concerns of men.

Centered on intersectionality, the fourth wave examines the interlocking systems of power that contribute to the stratification of traditionally marginalized groups. Fourth-wave feminists ... argue that society would be more equitable if policies and practices incorporated the perspectives of all people. In addition to advocating for women, fourth-wave feminists believe that boys and men should have greater opportunities to express their emotions and feelings freely, to present themselves as they wish, and to be engaged parents to their children.

Even Ellen Pao has changed her position here's what she said about her experiment almost 20 years later:

By determining that the need or desire for power was the motivating force behind battering, we created a conceptual framework that, in fact, did not fit the lived experience of many of the men and women we were working with. The DAIP staff [...] remained undaunted by the difference in our theory and the actual experiences of those we were working with [...] It was the cases themselves that created the chink in each of our theoretical suits of armor. Speaking for myself, I found that many of the men I interviewed did not seem to articulate a desire for power over their partner. Although I relentlessly took every opportunity to point out to men in the groups that they were so motivated and merely in denial, the fact that few men ever articulated such a desire went unnoticed by me and many of my coworkers. Eventually, we realized that we were finding what we had already predetermined to find."

Who's advocating for this today? If it's still used somewhere, then advocate to get it removed. I can't go a single day in this subreddit without someone bringing up the Duluth Model. And don't know if another person who genuinely agrees it should be used.

TLDR. They did miss their mark. Let's move on. And stop defining feminism from the 80s. Nobody I know is still earnestly advocating for it.

[–]LacklustreFriend 10 points11 points12 points 6 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[–]jessemfkeeler 3 points4 points5 points 6 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]Strikester101 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]jessemfkeeler 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]Strikester101 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]jessemfkeeler 3 points4 points5 points 6 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]Strikester101 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Strikester101 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]jessemfkeeler 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Strikester101 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Strikester101 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]SchalaZeal01 3 points4 points5 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]jessemfkeeler 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Strikester101 4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]jessemfkeeler 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]thereslcjg2000left-wing male advocate 6 points7 points8 points 6 years ago* (40 children) | Copy Link

The Duluth model is apparently “the most widely-adopted approach in the world for intervening with men who batter and keeping women safer.” It has “influenced and shaped much of national and state-level policy around batterer intervention and domestic violence work because of its innovative methods and success.” (Same source) Clearly someone’s using it.

I recognize that fourth wave feminism recognizes intersectionality in theory, but a lot of people in the movement are weak at getting that point across and fail to apply the same standards to different groups of people. Yes feminism has grown since the 80s, yes it’s better now, but the problems it had back then are not totally gone.

I do agree with your points on OP and the YouTube account, though those don’t undermine the argument of the continued usage of the Duluth model.

[–]InitiatePenguin 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (39 children) | Copy Link

The Duluth model is apparently “the most widely-adopted approach in the world for intervening with men who batter and keeping women safer.”

Of course the Duluth Model themselves are going to assert that.

Yes. It has effected policy in a lot of places. But why is so much oxygen taken by saying how its bad, and demonstration that Feminism is a misandric and evil puppeteer of out government rather than finding aves where the Duluth Model is being used and changing it.

It's the lack of balance and perspective.

The amount of times I get thrown the Duluth Model during a conversation that has nothing to do with domestic violence in absurd (I understand this submission is not one of those, since it's explicitly it's focus).

But the video isn't advocating for change, or activism. At least not in the first half I managed to watch.

those don’t undermine the argument of the continued usage of the Duluth model.

I look around me and ask who is?

[–]SchalaZeal01 7 points8 points9 points 6 years ago (38 children) | Copy Link

[–]InitiatePenguin 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago* (37 children) | Copy Link

Can you help me out here?

Australia

I see that the Australian adopts UN language where "violence against women is"

any act of gender-based violence that results in, or is likely to result in, physical or psychological harm or suffering to women, including threats of such acts, coercion or arbitrary deprivation of liberty.

So they've pre-limited themselves by only talking about half of the problem. I absolutely agree that there's no reason to limit protections or enforce gendered interpretations of the law. And then later the did explicitly form a national plan around reducing violence of women using the same language

But I'm having hard time finding anything that this is in effect changing the definition of domestic violence writ-large. I'm also not finding a VAWA law for Australia at all. Although theses a gender neutral bill to pass NZ in 1995.

Can you spare a moment and link me? The American VAWA is downing my search results.

U.K.

A Commons breifing from 2018 states clearly...

1. How does the Government define domestic violence?

There is currently no statutory definition of domestic violence, although the Government has said it will include one in the forthcoming Domestic Violence and Abuse Bill – see section 5 of this briefing paper below.

However, there is a non-statutory cross-government definition. In March 2013, the Home Office extended this definition. As a result the definition includes young people aged 16 to 17 (to raise awareness that young people can be victims) and coercive or controlling behaviour.

The definition of domestic violence and abuse is:

Any incident or pattern of incidents of controlling, coercive or threatening behaviour, violence or abuse between those aged 16 or over who are or have been intimate partners or family members regardless of gender or sexuality. This can encompass but is not limited to the following types of abuse:

psychological

physical

sexual

financial

emotional

So it sounds like you're talking about a specific instance when the data was combined? In the same report they have granular data:

Some 7.5% of women and 4.4% of men

Where is that quote you made come from?

Spain

There's a language barrier here I'm finding difficult to get primary sources for...

So in Spain they do have a law that is specifically engaging with violence against women:

The Law intends to comply with the recommendations of international organizations in the sense of providing a global response to violence against women.

And therefore like Australia is pre-limiting. What I do find notable here is that you are correct that under this law the generic "gender violence" is specifically referring to violence towards women.

But that raises the question, can men be found a victim of demestic violence even if it isn't quite/unquote "gendered violence"?

If someone is saying "100% of gendered crimes affect women" is obviously intellectually lazy and is fine to call propaganda.

Would love to see if there's a particular instance where this is happening. Sounds like something that could exist within a PSA.

Overall, nothing I read mentions the Duluth Model at all. Not in reference to it's theory or practice. Such as where men are violent to excert power and control etc. And that ant exclusion of men as victims is not from the assumptions made by Duluth but rather exclusionary phrasing to address a particular issue lobbied from a particular group.

Both Duluth and these laws and commissions did come out of the "Battered Women" movement and we're largely carried by Feminists.

It seems like we need to do better at keeping language gender neutral to ensure equal protection but it's not clear to me (and you might be right with Spain) that men are being defined out of being victims in those countries. But rather special initiatives are happening solely for women because they were lobbied by women.

[–]SchalaZeal01 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (36 children) | Copy Link

But I'm having hard time finding anything that this is in effect changing the definition of domestic violence writ-large. I'm also not finding a VAWA law for Australia at all. Although theses a gender neutral bill to pass NZ in 1995.

It's the American VAWA. You said 4th wave feminists, not Australian feminists. I get examples where I can. I'm certain Canada is just as bad, but there isn't sexism in the name or law like for the US, UK or Australia. Just in shelter, funding, policy and actual response for Canada.

Overall, nothing I read mentions the Duluth Model at all. Not in reference to it's theory or practice.

They don't need to call it that way. They can have 1) only batterer programs for men 2) only victim services for women (Australia's government site notably has services for female victims, and the male section is exclusively for batterers) 3) refer to the power and control wheel and say its gendered 4) say women only batter in self-defense 5) have policies to "arrest the biggest threat" going by height, weight and ability to do physical damage (ie arrest the male)

[–]Egalitarianwhistle 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]LacklustreFriend 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (23 children) | Copy Link

[–]Egalitarianwhistle 4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]InitiatePenguin -1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link

Same language as Duluth, same gendered theory as Duluth, same discrimination of male victims as Duluth, but they don't use the word Duluth so they have nothing in common right?

Excuse me for not being a scholar in domestic abuse. I am neither a proponent of the Duluth Model, gender exclusive legislation, nor a card carrying feminist. Most of these events are decades removed, since before my birth.

But when I ask for help that I don't see the point that's being made in accused of being dishonest and bad faithed. I demonstrably clear with my engagement since this sub was founded that I am willing to have an open and honest conversation with you folk here. I'm called sexist from /SamHanes/, accused if erasing victims by /Elfman/ yet get /EgalitarianWhistles/ "grudging respect".

All of you are here because you're tired if being mislabeled as misogynists from people wary of your former communities and wary of echochambers. Then to a user who has shown nothing but willing engagement and have nothing but the best wishes for this community but want to call be bad faithed and disengenious.

Engage or don't. I'm here to hear from you, since you can't talk about the things you want to in Men'slib. Give me a break.

[–]LacklustreFriend 6 points7 points8 points 6 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link

If you're not familiar with Duluth or related concepts, then why are you making arguments about 4th wavers not using it or what countries are using it? Why are you telling us to "move on" from Duluth if you don't know what you're talking about? You're not asking for help, you're making arguments and claims. The Duluth model is not decades removed, it is an active and ongoing theory and policy.

The Duluth model is also known as the Domestic Abuse Intervention Project/Program, and many organisations will use some version of that name. The power control wheel is a resource/theory derived from the Duluth model that is incredibly wide spread, and is specifically gendered. Power control wheel is a good starting point to see how wide spread this theory of DV is.

Engage or don't

I replied to your original comment, you didn't respond.

I'm here to hear from you, since you can't talk about the things you want to in Men'slib

Why not? You're a mod there, why don't you just allow these conversations? Do the other moderators know that you're not a card carrying feminist?

[–]InitiatePenguin 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

then why are you making arguments about 4th wavers not using it

Because of the insistence that the entirety of Feminism is behind it. And in particular to OPs videos which is trying to illustrate them as puppetteers of worldwide governments.

or what countries are using it?

I'm trying to understand how they are. So I looked up the things that were mentioned.

Why are you telling us to "move on" from Duluth

Because as O said it seems to occupy a disproportionate oint of the oxygen. That it's used as a general anti-feminist rallying cry about how feminists are misandric and hate men. It shouldn't be a surprise to someone that hasn't done years of research into the Duluth Method would equally be surprised by the universal ire shown by anti-feminists.

As I've said, show me places still using it and work towards change and solutions. Not just complain about feminists.

you don't know what you're talking about?

I can tell you that any of the feminists I talk to, and especially the younger ones, have moved on. And the only ones still concerned are anti-feminists. Even the author of the expiriment has shown it to be misguided. And it's efficacy debunked. There's no argument left to be had but people insist on bringing it up at every moments notice to why feminism is evil.

You're not asking for help, you're making arguments and claims

You made quotes and references to stats I was unable to find in the laws you mentioned about Spain, UK and Australia, so I was asking for where your point comes from given those sources.

The power control wheel is a resource/theory derived from the Duluth model

I know this. I'm asking where in those laws they refer to this as the basis of their understanding domestic violence. I see both emergent from the battered women phenomenon and feminism in general but not that the Duluth Model is educating policy decisions made in the new millennia and that it's language is appearing in modern legislation. All I'd like to see is an example of that. And then I'll be an advocate against it.

Engage or don't

I replied to your original comment, you didn't respond.

I've been talking to you and Schla all night. What I'm saying is you can stop at any point. But accusing me of being dishonest when I've spent all day trying to have a conversation is ridiculous. Nobody here likes how adversarial the conversation is. We all agree on the issues.

You're a mod there, why don't you just allow these conversations?

Because those aren't the conversations we want to have. And aren't obligated to have them. Your criticisms are noted but they are decisions we chose to make, see how many submissions are about feminism here? That's what you'll get.

I've listed on a few ocassions here why MensLib sets up strict moderation policies and what the Ups and Downs of those are for the folks here at LWMA, bit instead MensLib is ousted as "false flag" against men. I can dig for those comments if you're interested, I'm not going type them out again.

Do the other moderators know that you're not a card carrying feminist?

As I've said before. MensLib is not Male Feminism. Majority of mods do not identify as feminist, and many I couldn't even guess because it really is beside the point. We have no affiliation with Feminist subreddits, we are not gender studies students or professors. It wouldn't matter if someone is a card carry member or not.

[–]InitiatePenguin 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]SchalaZeal01 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]InitiatePenguin 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]SchalaZeal01 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]SchalaZeal01 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

[–]InitiatePenguin 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

Your blue text is about men being allowed to cry and such. Not about going back on their making the DV support system extremely slanted

No, but it's illustrating a pretty large shift on the overall attitude of previous Feminist streaks. And I feel it's pretty fair to say there aren't 4th wave feminists out there advocating for the Duluth Model - even if it's not in the blue text. In general men's issues, and explicitly male Feminists are able to work together more in the 4th wave. And that they are interested in those perspectives.

Yes, some still see the health of men as only a means to stop violence against women. But there others who don't, and speak loudly on the matter.

They'd rather be forced to close than accept male victims sometimes.

I'd be interested in seeing something other than news stories or annecdotes in this front. There is in some regards a lot more difficulty for male victims. And there are places that are even exclusively for women - that is their perogative. But most places either through a support network and professional relationships find a place for the victim to go. Some times simply putting up the money for the man to stay in a motel. But that can only happen if they have the money.

I do see more often though that the places which do offer services to both to offer more beds to women than men. Which is in part due to the lack of utilization of these services by men. And that's why when someone points out DV is 50/50 and the beds are 80/20 or 90/10 doesn't hold as fair criticism.

The point still being is they still try to help men too.

[–]SchalaZeal01 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

No, but it's illustrating a pretty large shift on the overall attitude of previous Feminist streaks. And I feel it's pretty fair to say there aren't 4th wave feminists out there advocating for the Duluth Model

Come on, VAWA changed from gender neutral in wording, to completely sexist, in the 90s, and its still that way in 2019, with no change in sight.

Yes, some still see the health of men as only a means to stop violence against women. But there others who don't, and speak loudly on the matter.

Not sure what health you talk about. I'm saying services don't care about male victims. That they even erased them from definitions of victims.

Which is in part due to the lack of utilization of these services by men.

Laughably false. How could they even know its a service they can use? It sure isn't advertised ANYWHERE. DV is publicized everywhere, and even under rocks, as something that happens pretty much only to women, that you have to teach 'respect' to men about women. It's anecdotic to even find ANY acknowledgement of male victims, and even rarer when its against female perpetrators. And it sure isn't in shelter advertisement.

40% of male victims who call hotlines and such, get referred to batterer services. It's inconceivable to those services that men can be victims of women, at the root.

The point still being is they still try to help men too.

Nope, they do their damndest to do the least possible, ideally nothing, for male victims. That Philips lady in the UK is a prime example.

[–]InitiatePenguin 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]SchalaZeal01 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]InitiatePenguin 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]SchalaZeal01 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]InitiatePenguin 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]SchalaZeal01 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]thereslcjg2000left-wing male advocate 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]SchalaZeal01 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]InitiatePenguin 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]polakfury[S] 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]InitiatePenguin 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]polakfury[S] 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]InitiatePenguin 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link