Accused murderess Jodi Arias has been engaging in some victim-blaming in court today. Actually, I’m not sure whether victim blaming is the right term. She’s claiming that she is the victim, accusing Travis Alexander of rape, pedophilia, domestic violence and perversion. He was so deranged, she is arguing, that he had to be knifed and shot while he was taking a shower. Arias’ accusations are typical for divorcing wives, only she’s justifying murder rather than theft and betrayal — it’s a script that plays out in courthouses across the United States every working day.
If a man who had killed his wife made those kinds of charges it would only earn him a faster trip to the execution chamber.
But there’s another important issue here for us to consider. What if Jodi Arias had tried to kill Mr. Alexander, but failed? What if Travis Alexander managed to overpower Arias and knock her to the ground with a right cross? What if, instead of first seeing Mr. Alexander as a butchered corpse, the first contact had been with an agitated, blood-spattered man with a gun standing over a beaten, crying woman?
Even if Alexander accused her of attempted murder, would he have escaped arrest under VAWA? “Primary aggressor” laws are designed to guarantee that the physically stronger party (almost always the man) is usually the one arrested. There is a contrived logic in the factors used in primary arrest policies that will typically implicate the man.
Here are some examples (from Dept. of Justice):
-Comparable size, strength of the parties
-Who has access to or control of resources
-The person least likely to be afraid
-The person most likely to inflict injury
-Who has the history of help-seeking behaviors
-Who has access to or threatened use of weapons
In the last case, an exception is made for women who use weapons:
“A discrepancy in size or strength might help explain why a woman might grab an object to throw at her batterer while her batterer uses his bare hands.”
In other words, if a man uses a weapon he’s the primary aggressor; if a woman uses a weapon, the man is also the primary aggressor. It’s a very convenient policy.
Here’s another catch-22:
“Sometimes batterers call the police, especially if they have sustained visible injuries. They may do this ruin their partner’s credibility with law enforcement or to deter her from calling law enforcement in the future.”
So, if the man sustains injuries and calls the police, he’s just trying to fool the police into thinking he’s the victim. Got a problem with that? You must be part of the “abuse lobby.”
If children are present, then the female may be more aggressive to “protect them,” but you should be skeptical of their statements if they defend their father:
“If children are present, the victim might act with force to protect them.
[...]
Children may also make statements that minimize the violence and protect the batterer parent out of fear. Children may also wish to protect their batterer parent if he has systematically undermined the abused parent’s ability to parent or has repeatedly belittled the abused parent.”
All of the above will typically implicate the man. Feminists are so brazen that they will use the slanted standards as “proof” that men should be automatically arrested in any domestic dispute, and in most cases they get their way.
However, imagine if we had a “primary aggressor” law in regards to interactions between police and citizens. In 90% or more of the violent encounters, we’d have to assume that the police are the guilty party. By feminist logic, anyone who wins in a violent encounter because they are stronger and more physically capable should be assumed – all else being equal – to be a violent criminal. It has nothing to do with justice, and everything to do with feminist equalism — enforced with violence, naturally.
Because of primary aggressor laws, if Travis Alexander had successfully defended himself from Jodi Arias, feminists would have lined up with Arias and demanded he go to prison, and there’s a chance that’s where he would be today. It’s a sobering thought for any man in a relationship with a woman, but that’s the world we live in.
{ 34 comments… read them below or add one }
Damn, if this keeps up the human race will be reduced to reproducing through paid anonymous glory-hole action.
sounds like a good idea to me anonymous
It is the Sword of Damocles over every male child.
Another caveat: the type of person, male or female, who would be capable of assaulting another human being to such an extent, only to then further their sociopathic profile by claiming a victim status would definitely fall under the category of “least likely to be afraid.”
“It’s a sobering thought for any man in a relationship with a woman, but that’s the world we live in.”
It’s also a reason men should GTOW.
Women never lie!
http://www.ipt-forensics.com/journal/volume6/j6_2_4.htm
Many years ago I had a girlfriend who I didn’t want to see one particular night. She came to my door and I made a mistake of letting her come in. I then asked her to leave but she wouldn’t. I threatened to call the police but she still wouldn’t budge. I finally call the police and they came. What followed scared the heck out of me and made me realize that in no circumstance should I ever call the police again. They kindly took her aside and asked her questions to see if she had a right to be in my house: what was the address on her driver’s license, does she have any belongings in my house, etc. Had she answered affirmative on any of these questions I am positive that it would’ve been treated as a case of domestic violence and I would’ve been arrested!
VAWA lists a kangaroo court set of rules. Yet, in the next day or two this perversion of law will be passed because men in Congress lack courage to use their common sense,
She can unleash her proxy enforcers if you forget to take out the trash. Men living with women are on a very short leash – it’s called “911 – He hit me”. And once you have a DV charge on your record you can pretty much forget employment and many other entitlements.
Don’t raise your voice in anger at her, don’t even disagree with her.
She’s in control and in charge of your life.
All it takes is one call.
I know that someone here must has posted this link before:
http://jodiariasisinnocent.com/
Speak and you shall be heard.
Meet the 40-something childless singles turning to ‘co-parent’ partnerships – where raising a family doesn’t include romance.
“Their solution was to have the child together and co-parent, without any romantic relationship.”
So…..a lot like a traditional marriage then.
Charles how did you know what my marriage was like?
Roommates is all we are.
Separate bedrooms for 16 years.
No sex for 11 years.
Anyone know the nearest only for sexual gratification glory hole?
I have no intention of bringing another child in to this shit hole of misandry.
Charles- now THAT’s funny!
I know this is off-topic, but it will affect Americans effective 01/01/2014 and there is evidence that it is affecting them already as people lose their full-time work status so that employers can stay in business and even liberals are realizing that on the health-care front they made a mess by voting for Obama:
http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article38944.html
It’s the seven biggest lies about Obamacare.
Speaking of which … Looks like the U.S. Senate just passed an extension of VAWA today by a vote of 78-22. It now heads to the U.S. House of Representatives.
Here’s a link regarding reduction in hours for employees, and it’s not confined to the Omaha area:
http://www.omaha.com/article/20130210/LIVEWELL03/702109902/1707
On victim blaming and pussy-pass appealing: Here is another idiot woman blaming an ex-husband of forcing her multiple instances of abortion. [As an ideal way to frame herself as a threatened woman availed of the defense of marital coercion for committing crime]
The shameless woman Vicky Price not amused that her ex governmental minister and ex cabinet member husband left her for a change-back-tyranny, more cultured and sweeter than herself.
So in revenge Vicky price has gone to court alleging that her ex husband, for whom she fielded traffic violation points 10 years ago was an arrogant and cruel man.
The authorities so very eager and open to such new managerial and governmental business in order to justify themselves and their state borrowed wages are lapping it up with relish. What better way to draw cash and other benefits from the state coffers than to preside over synthetic gender disputes eh ?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21333624
Vicky Pryce ‘wanted revenge’ over Chris Huhne’s affair
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21378664
Ms Pryce told the court she insisted on having her fifth child when she fell pregnant in 1992 despite Huhne having demanded that she have an abortion.
She has already told the court Huhne pressured her into having an abortion in 1990 because it was “bad for his career”.
“I woke up and knew how I had felt about the previous one and knew I couldn’t do it,” she said.
Didn’t VAWA just get renewed?
Speaking of which … Looks like the U.S. Senate just passed an extension of VAWA today by a vote of 78-22. It now heads to the U.S. House of Representatives.
78-22. So many Republicans voted for it too.
That means it will pass the House.
Doom.
None of this is surprising in a Democracy, when women are into the 3rd and 4th generation of voting.
A democracy gives voters exactly what they ask for short-term. Hence, such laws are inevitable in a Democracy, once one grasps the true nature of women.
This is what women want. It cannot be removed unless the system of women voting is removed. Period. Since women’s suffrage is not about to go away, a man has to adapt around this reality.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21409145
Note that this woman Vicky Pryce, is such an obviously ugly creature, repellently so. And a woman’s ugliness of appearance may to some people, indicate a revelation of ugliness of her character.
She may indeed be the cruel and manipulative person, hiding behind a better but flawed man.
Who knows, the chauvinist judiciary may set aside their rent seeking motives in this instance and deny the woman’s not guilty plea of perverting justice. That is on grounds of her bad looks alone and in spite of her gender. But I doubt it.
Pussy pass may prevail.
@ TFH
Given that the House is likely to likewise extend the VAWA, that would be even more incentive to GYOW.
MGTOW is the only viable option for men at this point.
I can live with the fact that I will probably be at least fifty-one (I’m thirty-one right now) and too old to be a viable parent before VAWA is rescinded.
Most women won’t be worth dating anyway at that point as they will just be leftovers, having made babies with other men and, let’s face it, if you’re raising another man’s kids, you’re a loser.
@Charles Martel
Another good find. That’s what gay marriage used to be.
VAWA/VOCA will send over $1.5 Billion dollars from the Federal Govt to State courts and LEO.
Judges,officers,nurses,doctors,basically anyone in a position of authority is given more funds and resources to further themselves DIRECTLY as %5-%15 of those funds are ‘discretionary.’
The other %85-%95 go directly to infrastructure of the LEO system.
It is a cash cow,and also enables and justifies supra and super legal powers,by circumventing 1st,4th,5th,and 14th Amendment protections.
Meanwhile Court officials and cops have passed laws exempting themselves from liability and criminal prosecution for misusing these powers.
They are truly above the law.
LEO’s have their own Separate Bill of Rights which prevents them from persecution under the system they claim to serve.
Any remaining feeble protections of law are often not allowed into the courtroom as a mater of policy and procedure.
They have become genuine Star Chambers.
Women have internalized the power of this nuclear option and are aware there is no downside of liability or prosecution either,they are also among the protected classed.
This leaves men with little or no legal due process or recourse.
Women have become arrogant and aggressive,seeking confrontation for thrill with no danger to themselves and most men are not violent,or violent enough to throw it all away on a one shot payback.
Given the combination of these factors it would be surprising if more violence
was the outcome,SAVE service recently posted that PPO’s and RO’s cause more violence in %42 of the cases.
SAVE services also reports one million false accusations per year,I have researched the Wayne County Michigan area and over %50 of RO’s are overturned upon a hearing.
That is a low number because a certain percentage of men choose not to appeal the ex-parte loss of civil rights due to monetary cost or difficulty of process.
The Magna Carta’s and Black’s law principles have been overthrown in favor of an unjust system.
The politicians refuse to hear appeals for mens basic rights put forth by mens activists such as NCFM and SAVE services,State and Federal Senators refuse to respond directly to correspondence upon these matters from constituents,replying only by non-relate form mail.
In short we’re up the creek w/o a paddle.
Since the low hanging fruit has already been picked,expect new criteria for
“crimes” to be enacted,criminalizing any interaction with an ‘offended’ woman.
There is only one way to redress these usurpations,I will not say the obvious.
GeoBeeFinalist,
I can live with the fact that I will probably be at least fifty-one (I’m thirty-one right now) and too old to be a viable parent before VAWA is rescinded.
Don’t forget that there are men who hire a surrogate and go it alone. Toban Morrison is one such man.
http://www.thestar.com/life/health_wellness/2011/08/12/single_man_wanted_a_child_hired_a_surrogate_had_a_baby.html
Not all men are cut out for this, but you should at least be aware that the option exists, and some men are doing it. Just having that option, is power.
never get married, because… VAWA!
Makes an excellent bumper sticker.
VAWA is short for BOHICA.
“the type of person, male or female, who would be capable of assaulting another human being to such an extent, only to then further their sociopathic profile by claiming a victim status would definitely fall under the category of “least likely to be afraid.””
Being aggressive then claiming to be a victim if retaliation is received is classic Borderline Personality Disorder. BPD people, especially women, are extremely dangerous to be around. Even if you receive not a single wound by their hand the likely reputational and legal entanglements (by false accusation) will hurt like hell.
Keyster
She can unleash her proxy enforcers if you forget to take out the trash. Men living with women are on a very short leash – it’s called “911 – He hit me”.
“He hit me” is not needed. “I’m afraid of him” is sufficient.
Susie says: So you think that most of them are divorcing, when in reality only around 20% do and they do it multiple times.
Give it up. At least 40% of first marriages end up in divorce. Be aware when you come on a board dominated by men, you will be called down on lies and flagrantly incorrect “facts”.
Did anyone see the Simpsons on Sunday? They did this montage where Bart Simpson gets abused by women throughout his life, going from youth to old age, because he “won’t listen to them.” And then at the end his elderly wife shoots him dead and coldly takes his wallet.
I give the Simpsons a lot of leeway, because they tend to lampoon everyone. They’ve even made a few jokes about feminism. But that just seemed awfully creepy and humorless to me. I mean, what humor is there in a wife shooting her husband and coldly taking his wallet, walking off counting the money? Is this what we are coming to as a society, where anything women do is justified, no matter how heinous, due to the “horrible oppression that we all agree women have suffered”?
Looks like the Arabs have had the right idea all along.
Feminists want slavery of men. They have passed laws to criminalize every action of men. Soon we will see passing them laws to lower the sentences of female murderers because they are so called “victims”. It is already being proposed in UK.
If men stares at women, it is abuse. If men disagree with her in office, it is discrimination. If men doesn’t care about her, it is abuse, if men care too much about her, it is abuse. If men don’t defend himself, he is a wimp and may be psychopathic abuser.
If men doesn’t want to have sex with her, it is neglect. If men don’t spend money on her wishes, it is domestic violence, read Australian VAWA. Damed if you do. Damed if you don’t.
Do you really think if feminists will let men go their own way. No, that is not going to happen. They will soon pass laws to outlaw men going their own way. Will make marriage mandatory like a draft otherwise go to prison.
Such is the world we have gotten into. Feminists are not going to let men be free. It is going to be a huge struggle for men in coming decades, may be for centuries. I genuinely hope humanity won’t survive with feminism for long..
Bit of a delayed response here I know but I’ve been following this case since the beginning of the trial and I have asked myself this same question…what if Travis Alexander was able to successful defend himself against Jodi Arias? It has occurred to me that Travis may have been so indoctrinated with the “never hit a woman” crap that he was psychologically unable to defend himself. Maybe I’m going out on a limb there but I find it odd that Arias left the scene of the murder with only a few cuts on her hand that were the result of the stabbing. Travis inflicted zero injuries on Jodi, even when he was fighting for his life. This is curious to me. I can’t help rolling my eyes when I hear some of the talking heads express compassion for Jodi, claiming her obvious mental illness as the reason. What if Jodi were a man and Travis was the woman? There is NO WAY anybody would be extending compassion to the perpetrator in such a case. This trial was chock full of examples of misandry in our culture and legal system. Frankly, I’m surprised that I haven’t seen more bloggers in the manosphere commenting on this case. Anyway, thanks for your post. The points you make are powerful and very important in exposing a female bias in our society when it comes to domestic violence.