If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Liza and David...
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
Okay, I know that the personal relationship of two "famous" people isn;t something that you'd usually find in the Politics Forum, but I have noted something which I thought you be brought up here.
Namely the issue of how the media reports spousal abuse, when it relates to female on male violence.
Now, I'm not going to prejudge what happened within the marriage because I have no evidence either way. We really don't know if Liza really did beat him or not.
But that really isn't the issue here.
Listening to many of the reports of the claims, and having read several newspaper columns, I get the impression that people see this as something to laugh about.
Is that just because of individuals in this case, or does it ref;ect an approach to this subject in general.
For example, when was the last time you heard (or read) someone suggesting that if his wife looked like that, he have hit her harder - as they have with David Guest?
I know that the guy looks a little weird, and the marriage was doomed from the start (hell, the man collects Judy Garland memorabilia so having her daughter was surely the ultimate in collectables) but does that really justify the laughter with which his claims are reported?
What if he is right, and she did abuse him, does that mean that it is acceptable to laugh at spousal abuse, so long as the victim is male?
Namely the issue of how the media reports spousal abuse, when it relates to female on male violence.
Now, I'm not going to prejudge what happened within the marriage because I have no evidence either way. We really don't know if Liza really did beat him or not.
But that really isn't the issue here.
Listening to many of the reports of the claims, and having read several newspaper columns, I get the impression that people see this as something to laugh about.
Is that just because of individuals in this case, or does it ref;ect an approach to this subject in general.
For example, when was the last time you heard (or read) someone suggesting that if his wife looked like that, he have hit her harder - as they have with David Guest?
I know that the guy looks a little weird, and the marriage was doomed from the start (hell, the man collects Judy Garland memorabilia so having her daughter was surely the ultimate in collectables) but does that really justify the laughter with which his claims are reported?
What if he is right, and she did abuse him, does that mean that it is acceptable to laugh at spousal abuse, so long as the victim is male?
0
Comments
However, when someone hits you, it's not the physical pain which hurts you most, it's the horrible feeling that someone who is supposed to love you can do this to you.
The image of the henpecked husband is quite an enduring stereotype, but that can also amount to abuse. And look at how the media portray that situation - the man is a joke.
So MoK, I think it is the situation in general and not just this relationship that provokes hilarity, because of a lack of coherent reference points to take it seriously. Are there any domestic violence support groups for men?
PMSL!! Cheeky monkey. She is being all coy....
Or something
Of course female on male abuse isnt taken seriously, because all this hoo-hah about domestic violence always seems to centre around the fact that the man shouldnt hit the woman because hes STRONGER. Not that violence is bad, not that spouses shouldnt eb having a violent relationship, but the fact that the man will hurt the woman because he is stronger.
Attitudes to domestic violence are tooted in the dark ages still. Chauvinism rules- men shouldnt hit women because women cant fight back. Yeah right.
I mostly agree with this statement. But I would substitute the word doesn't for shouldn't.