VAWA

2013-01-04T01:00:51+00:00

That is total and utter bullshit, as a quick review of the text proves. It is full of verbiage about female victimization and ignores male victimization.

HoopyFreud · 2013-01-04T01:31:56+00:00

If the VAWA covers everyone, why have straight men and gay people had so much trouble with being discriminated against by it, why does it not cover child abuse by women, why are mens shelters not funded by it, while men are not allowed to even work inside shelters that are funded by it, never mind be housed in them?

Here, you can read about some of the problems with it here, how they bias the arresting police officers to make sure its mainly men that are arrested regardless of who the main abuser is.

http://www.reddit.com/r/mensrightslinks/comments/s7tuj/legalpapershe_hit_me_too_identifying_the_primary/

oneiorosgrip · 2013-01-04T02:28:16+00:00

The Violence Against Women Act combines with other federal law to funnel federal money into an established system of discrimination and abuse; domestic abuse victim's advocacy organizations operated and administrated by feminist advocacy groups which have spent the last 40 years infiltrating and appropriating, then manipulating, and mishandling the field of abuse victim's advocacy.

This includes funding which is specifically limited (in the wording of the law) to assistance of women.
From the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance: Text limiting use of funding for Violence Against Women Formula Grants repeatedly establishes that this money is designated as a means of focusing domestic abuse advocacy on adult female victims.

Funding for this program is in Section 101 of VAWA: Stop Grant Improvements, which establishes funding for Jessica Gonzales Victim Assistants, whose job it is to advocate for women who have obtained restraining orders, and for the Crystal Judson Domestic Violence Protocol Program, which is charged with influencing law enforcement response to domestic violence allegations.

Note, as shown in the above linked image, that most of the first points in the law are written specifically from the perspective that victims of domestic violence are women. This pattern establishes the rest of the law from that perspective, steering these programs to the exclusive service of women.

That is not gender neutrality.

Further, these grants establish a financial incentive to prosecute - 25% of grant funding must be allocated for this. Offering a financial incentive to prosecute, along with the establishment of two programs designed to use advocacy to pressure law enforcement and prosecutors in favor of the accuser, creates an environment wherein the system will be predisposed to prosecute regardless of the merits of the case.

In fact, refusal to cooperate with these advocates is not a viable option for authorities, as doing so could result not only in a loss of funding, but lawsuits citing the wording of VAWA and its associated laws, and damage to the reputations of elected officials - even when they are right in their refusal. As a result, courts are seeing and have been seeing cases like this one, in which the human element of the various cogs and wheels of the justice system are literally powerless to stop a woman supported by domestic abuse advocates from abusing the justice system as a means of wreaking vengeance upon her ex-husband.

edit - fixed a link

HoopyFreud · 2013-01-04T01:19:29+00:00

Domestic Violence Programs Discriminate Against Male Victims

DavidByron · 2013-01-04T02:48:32+00:00

It uses gender-neutral language

Which tells us all you have never bothered to so much as glance at it. Not the best start is it? What exactly is your agenda here?

Why do you all think that democrats were trying to expand coverage to homosexual couples?

You just said it was gender neutral. If that was true it would already cover gay couples. Do you want to delete this post, go away and get your story straight and then come back and try it all again?

VAWA is a law written by a hate movement to attack men with. The original version made it illegal to help male victims of domestic violence as part of feminism's on-going campaign to deny the existence of all sort of male victims of sexual violence. It's a disgusting bill written by a disgusting group of people and I am betting that you are one of them.

NemosHero · 2013-01-04T02:08:38+00:00

wait wait. OP. If that's true, if the VAWA covered all people due to it's neutral language, then there was no need to edit the act to include native amiercans, immigrants, and LGBT, right? They're all covered just like how men are covered.

And thus the republicans version was the correct one, right?

rightsbot · 2013-01-04T00:42:17+00:00

Post text automatically copied here. (Why?) (Report a problem.)

Seand0r · 2013-01-13T21:11:05+00:00

I might be late to the party, but...

Isn't the name itself the first indication? It's hard to believe that VAWA pertains to both genders equally when the title of the law solely emphasizes Women. Why change the gender-neutral title of Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act in order to emphasize one specific gender?

Title	VAWA
Author	[deleted]
Upvotes	0
Comments	24
Date	January 4, 2013 12:24 AM UTC (13 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/mensrights/comments/15x494/vawa/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/vawa.1603231 https://theredarchive.com/post/1603231

Comments