Meet Erin Pizzey: Founder of the first Domestic Violence Shelter

Just to establish a little about her:

Erin Patria Margaret Pizzey (born 19 February 1939) is an English family care activist and a novelist. She became internationally famous for having started one of the first women's refuges (called women's shelters in Canada and the U.S.) in the modern world, Chiswick Women's Aid, in 1971, the organisation known today as Refuge.

SOURCE

And she has something to say that might surprise you.
I'll let you hear it from her:

Well, hey, I actually was surprised. That's refreshing.

a reply to: Mr Headshot

And the information that gained her death threats, protests, and in the end her feeling the need to flee from England was that her research found that a great deal of domestic violence is reciprical.....

She is so right.

I used to work on the edges of women shelters and found most were run by men hating women.

Not surprisingly, the answer Politicians had, was to throw money at the problem. Some of these women became extremely rich in the process, siphoning funds from the shelters for their own use.

They were very crafty about it as well.

These shelters would try and instil on their clients the motto, all men are (insert favorite hate term) and set about breaking up families on the basis that all men were good for was as sperm donors and that 'problem' only needed science to come up with a solution.

They did a great deal of damage to our society.

As money eventually dried up amid a backlash of investigations of fraud, many of these women ended up working in Government Welfare Departments.

They and their legacy continue to rip families apart to this day and I have seen the misuse of their powers time and time again. They are still there and they have power now, as Government agents.

A quick look at the Legislation for these departments will show that they cannot be prosecuted personally, ie, they are protected by legislation.

It is not history, it is current and they abuse more children than they save.

But, IT IS FOR THE CHILDREN.

P

a reply to: pheonix358

Speaking from experience, at least as far as the American court system, it's more about the cash than the children.
But, I see no reason for it to be different anywhere else.
Greed does seem to have become a global pandemic after all.

On a note pertaining to the OP.
It's funny how the parasites and loons tend to find their way into and polute well meaning social change movements.
And turn them into nightmares that calls for equality in name only.

What really bothers me, is that if you speak against them, you're viewed as against equality.
Even by more moderate and usually reasonable folk.

a reply to: HarbingerOfShadows

I must admit to being gobsmacked! I suspect many of us had no idea about her having to quit the UK under threats from women.

However I still feel for the women who are abused in relationships and families, and also for the young boys that predators go for, so I feel we still have a long way to go before people can feel truly safe in their own homes.

She is right though about some men, who hate the anger when expressed by a woman, but I don't feel the interview addressed that section that feel they were destroyed by their mothers so turn to hate any woman and especially those they persuade into relationships and having families with. Violence is always the perogative of the physically stronger and that is usually the man.

originally posted by: Shiloh7
a reply to: HarbingerOfShadows
However I still feel for the women who are abused in relationships and families, and also for the young boys that predators go for, so I feel we still have a long way to go before people can feel truly safe in their own homes.

I'm not sure Erin Pizzey says that anyone shouldn't care about these things. I disagree about some of the things Pizzey says, but the person seems to have lots of sympathy for all involved.

but I don't feel the interview addressed that section that feel they were destroyed by their mothers so turn to hate any woman and especially those they persuade into relationships and having families with. Violence is always the perogative of the physically stronger and that is usually the man.

You will find that's because Erin Pizzey doesn't subscribe to the theories you're talking about. Pizzey believes that often the women in relationships are just as violent as men in their own ways, and sometimes contribute to those situations occurring again and again.

In general, Pizzey is far more likely to believe in a hatred of men and boys than an institutionalized hatred of women. Pizzey believes that broken families are far more destructive to boys than they are for women in general etc ... hope that's useful in some way.

a reply to: Shiloh7

Well, she wanted to open "refuges" *as they're called over there* for both sexes.
And recieved tons of flak for it and was blocked from doing it.
A great deal of her research came from her time running these shelters.

Due to the fact she was largely cut off from the other half of the equation by the fact she was blocked from realising the full extent of what she wanted to do.
It's natural her ideas would be incomplete.

About these, so called, "Man hating woman shelters." I, for one, am glad that someone is finally standing up to the Phallic Malady.

But really, how dare someone insinuate that sometimes things happen to a person and that, when they do, that person may be partially to blame. How dare her. The nerve.

#heterocage

a reply to: Mr Headshot

It's almost like they aren't the eternal up until now victims they want to believe they are.

I actually lived in a women's homeless shelter for a while. After learning how many women ended up there, and what had been done to them by the men in their lives was enough to make anyone a man-hater. However, I never saw any radical feminist elements or attempts to recruit anyone, despite the fact that this place would have been a ripe harvesting ground for such ideologies. It was actually a surprise, too, given that Seattle is not only a very left leaning city, but also has a large college population.

These women really didn't need training in how to hate men, as they had ample reasons already. What would have been productive and beneficial instead would be teaching them how to protect themselves not just physically, but financially, medically, emotionally, and mentally, something I haven't seen feminist groups do much of lately. That would be far more useful than standing around holding signs and screaming their fool heads off.

a reply to: Skadi_the_Evil_Elf

That isnt what she is saying though.
What she is saying is that the premise, women as victims, men as victimizers, is not wholly and completely correct.
That it's a multifaceted problem.
At least, according to her research and life experiences.

Ample reasons already to hate men?
I could think of one damn good reason not to hate "men".
Not all men could or would treat them poorly.
It would be like saying a man is perfectly justified in believing all women are gold diggers because his experience was so.

originally posted by: HarbingerOfShadows
a reply to: Skadi_the_Evil_Elf

Ample reasons already to hate men?
I could think of one damn good reason not to hate "men".
Not all men could or would treat them poorly.

No, not all men would. However, in their cases, all men had caused harm to them in one serious form or another, and that is enough for them.

My point is that feminists are not benefiting the women victims by fueling the hate that already exists. Instead, they should be teaching these women how to live independently on all levels, and how to live happy, fulfilling lives free of men, period. These women did not need to be reminded daily of what bastards men can be, as they are living results. All it causes them to do is dwell on their suffering. Instead, feminists should leave the "evil man" completely out of the picture, and instead, focus on empowering and teaching women how to completely take care of themselves financially, physically, medically, emotionally, socially, and spiritually.

It would be like saying a man is perfectly justified in believing all women are gold diggers because his experience was so.

He certainly would be justified in hating women if all the women he had known used him, abused him, and tried to kill or maim him. I would suggest such an individual cut out all social contact with females, and take care of himself. Focus on learning to care for himself and fulfill all his own needs, or find other healthy outlets for them.

a reply to: Skadi_the_Evil_Elf

My point is that feminists are not benefiting the women victims by fueling the hate that already exists.

And what does that have to do with what I was saying?

And even then, the attitude that women are victims, men are victimizers is quite damaging to "victims".
It fosters a victim's mentality, which is bad.
Psychology establishes that:
Strategies to Deal with a Victim Mentality@Psychology Today

Which I might add is central to feminism, you know "patriarchy theory" and etc.
The view that women are oppressed by the societal restrictions placed upon them by men.
Sounds awfully a lot like victim mentality to me.

Victim mentality affects people from all walks of life and we have all at some point used the victim role to our advantage. However, the victim mentality is a chronic issue that becomes a person’s main way to see and interact with the world. They really do believe they are victims of something or someone.

Victim mentality: How to identify it and what to do to help

And I would argue that misogyny and misandry/"man hating" *since so many glance over the fact that is what misandry means* should not be "understandable" under any means.
The mere fact that we are talking about wide swaths of humanity argue strongly against such broadbrush generalizations.