The Baltimore County Court failed me as a man after my wife has made numerous threats to kill me because I want a divorce because of her abuse over the years. The system is so bias against men and I is sad that a standard has been set that men can't be the victim of domestic violence especially here in Baltimore County Maryland. The courts have failed me I a true male victim who needed help.
Divorce laws, rape laws, alimony issues, child support, everything is against men and when men fight back or demand equal rights they are quickly labelled as "sexist, rape apologist, chauvinistic, double standard" people. Not only are these laws unfair to men, anyone who even questions it is regarded as a sexist.
The full form of VAWA is Violence Against Women Act. The word Women itself, clearly shows that ONLY women are victims of Domestic Violence and NOT men. This is not true. Women and men make up roughly proportional victims of domestic violence. Using the word Women, does NOT automatically imply that it takes care of men too. The act should have been named something like Violence Against People Act (VAPA) or Violence Against Humans Act (VAHA), if it wants to imply GENDER NEUTRALITY to all its victims.
This law discriminates against men. It enables women who falsely accuse men of violence to be supported by offices that provide free legal representation, and women are never prosecuted for making false accusations. States have an interest in promoting a high number of domestic violence cases citing women as victims because federal money is received to support such departments.
As Man is responsible for his family a man corrects his children for acting wrong. A woman and a man sometimes disagree. Sometimes we all have fight for what is right and sometimes we have to correct each other. Yet though this is a natural part of nature it has become illegal. Even in matters that are not violent at all. If the police are involved even if the woman is wrong the man goes to jail violence or not and that is unfair to men 100%. There is no degree to the law your striped naked of your right pay a heavy fee and are forced to leave the home by a plea of guilty that is usually coerced by jail. Your not allowed to call mobile phones from jail phones that removes you 90% of people who could bail you out to make a case. The court is usually unwilling to allow you PR bonding in DV Cases. So your only recourse is to take an unfair plea bargain and your plea of guilty will set you free pay 3,000 and 2 years of probation. The alternative if not guilty is to throw the one you love to the dogs. It is 100% unfair to men. There needs to be a sliding scale I have no problem if a man physically beats his woman(bruising blood) and the case is truly a domestic violence to see him sit some time in jail. But for yelling come on even non violent contact should be permitted. I physically do worse things to my wife in bed. But by the law this even is illegal. It just goes to far in the wrong direction and women that truly need the protection of the court are just not getting the help they need. I can attest to this fact as being a victim of the court. I have to leave my spouse because a 2nd time can't happen to me I don't have a history of DV or Alcoholism but I am treated as though I do. Not One Violent act on my record and I am 50 years old. I can't trust her to restrain her urge to call the police because even once would mean a second offense. And the one who truly is hurt by this unfair law is my son now has to live with separated parents and that is not because I don't want to be with her ( I do truly love her ) but it is caused directly by this law being unfair toward men, to us all, to our children, and to the American way of life. It must be stopped.
This does nothing to resolve the core issues of domestic violence. In fact, it perpetuates it by giving female criminals legal immunity to their crimes of domestic violence.
What we need is an act that delegates the appropriate DV support services to ALL people regardless of sex, sexual orientation, race, class, or age.
Objective studies and statistics show men are as likely to be victims of DV by wives/girlfriends yet there is no support or aid allowed for heterosexual male DV victims. Also VAWA has multiple unconstitutional parts that violate basic rights, mostly of men (violations of 1st, 4th and 10th amendments). All states have jurisdiction over crime laws and don't need direction from the federal government. My opinion is that it was designed to allow women to legally hurt men. I believe it would more effective to work at the state level to make fairer laws that cover everyone equally (anti-discriminatory) and make the prosecution of false accusers mandatory.
By setting up a law that creates powerful, financial incentives and apriori legal conditions that benefit women only, one cannot make the argument that it doesn't disproportionately and negatively affect men. Protection from violence in domestic partnerships should be gender neutral, and it should cover all forms of sexual assault -including prison rape.
Having this law is as simpleminded as equating prison sentences with baseball, 3-strikes you're out rules. Now we have a law based on the fairy tale that girls are made from sugar and spice and everything nice. Those in favor of the law, and who understand the effects of the way it creates an automatic, and financial legal, power imbalance are simply in favor of setting up legal structures that benefit women over men in court. They aren't interested in impartial justice.
Yes because the VAWA suggest ALL men are perpetrators and should be treated as such even the woman is the abuser. Local police are trained that if there is violence in a relationship then the man is at fault, no matter what. This act should be changed to The Domestic Violence act. This covers both men AND women when violence occurs in a relationship, period. This act also suggests that violence only effects women and not men.
No one disputes women are victims of domestic violence, but no one cares about men who are victims of domestic violence, because abused men don't count, and those men who are abused are second class men for not being able to handle it. This isn't gender equality, not at all. It seems as if only women "need" protection from men, because men are inherently evil; men don't need protection from women, because women are sweet and perfect. That's complete nonsense. But women who complain are brave, men who complain are wimps. How is that fair to men? But being fair to both genders equally is not important these days.
As realitychecker had stated, there is no act against violence in men. Just because mostly men commit crimes against women, does not mean men as a whole does not get abused, at all. Both sexes may be abused, equally. Society does not see men as victims of anything, which is absurd.
There is no Violence Against Men act. Violence against men is a reality, thousands of men suffer abuse on a daily basis and it is women who perpetrate this. Women can be just as abusive. How can it be fair that women have more protection than men against violence from the opposite sex?
The act is worded for women because it is men who are the perpetrators of nearly all such violence against women. The act is not unfair to men, it simply seeks to punish those men who break the law, who commit violence against women, and who do not conform to society's law abiding standards.
No, the Violence Against Women act is not unfair to men. Nineteen years ago, the Violence Against Women act was created to protect women, especially those women in domestic violence situations. Since the act has been in effect, scores of women have immensely benefited from the act's many and varied provisions.
The Violence Against Women Act has been law ever since 1994, when President Clinton signed it into law. Congress reauthorized it twice with bipartisan support. It has been the law of the land for almost 20 years now, and there hasn't been any major problem experienced by men. The current opposition to reauthorizing it seems to be more about conservative partisan politics than what the law does or does not do.