Domestic violence best left to the professionals

not really women get on average 40 %less time in jail then men for the exact same crime oh and go visit a mens jail then a womens and tell me where you would prefer to be

thats wrong yes women are injured more thats because they are generally weaker then men physically so whats its ok for women to hit because there not as strong and cant do as much damage thats just stupid

so if i pick a fight with a ufc fighter he should just cop it cause he knows how to fight and i dont or how about dont be an idiot a start fights or even dont be an idiot and start fights with people who can kick your ass women in general are taught its ok to hit men but if they hit u its abuse thats why when the start hitting men and finally someone hits back there so shocked and surprised and start screaming abuse abuse i say again IT IS WRONG TO HIT ANYBODY no matter if they are man or women or u r a man or women

Being ignorant of the facts surrounding a case and then passing a judgement on that case is not just ignorant and stupid it is dangerous. It's one thing for the NRL to have codes of behaviour it is another thing to know all the facts surrounding a case before you play god with other peoples lives. Taking a stand without considering all of the terms of brief is just stupid. That's why the courts are there they make considered judgements based on evidence. It is NOT as simple as one person beats up another and to think it is is to be ignorant of the law. There are such things as provocation, mental illness, pushing as apposed to using a closed fist , using a weapon as apposed to verbal abuse etc. to ignore that is just simply stupid. In the Auva case did you even consider the idea that the apparent lenient sentence handed down by the courts may reflect the degree of assault involved. I wonder how you would feel if the perpetrator of a relatively minor assault on a women was to read an article you wrote he then was filled with remorse and then out of immense guilt proceeded to kill himself. How would you justify that? As you say it's about bringing the game into disrepute then let the degree of punishment fit the degree of the crime. But destroying peoples careers or lives because you touched someone inappropriately or you pushed someone is just dumb. However if it is life threatening or rape or something more serious or even a repeated pattern of behaviour then there may be case for removing that person from the game. It appears that you like your world black and white. Or maybe it's just a case of opening your mouth before you think.

What's rubbish is what you have wrongly posted. 1 in 3 victims of domestic violence are men. Don't try to frame your bias angle on it. They are the facts and is not a vast minority as you wrongly claim. It's a shame that this issue gets swamped with liars and people deliberately distorting the facts.

Interesting the Sydney Morning Herald takes a hard line against domestic violence http://www.smh.com.au/comment/smh-editorial/time-to-act-on-domestic-violence-20140307-34cqt.html but when a Souths premiership player is found guilty of DV they bury it on page 16 on a slow news day...

I play for one of the teams that's in the Tackling Violence programe (not Bourke, but they're in the same comp as us) and it has had a success rate - the police have told me that domestic violence in the town is quite significantly down since the programme began. As well as the hour workshop, signing up that you can be banned from games for any conviction for a violent offence (not just domestic violence) we also have to do two blocks of community service. This is done by running a family day at the club in conjunction with the NRL Ambassadors and also coaching the U13s and U17s. I think it's a goood scheme.

Just like this video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDAT9zT78dc Female aggressors. Hits male at 1:05.

Criminal matters should be left to the courts not the NRL, they have all the facts and all the police investigation information, they know what the correct punishment should be, not the NRL. Not News LTD. Not Rothfield, not the supporters. Second guessing the courts punishment and adding further punishment can cause further damage and far more serious damage to either or both sides of the domestic violence issue. Further punishment may cause the victimisation issues, further blaming by either parties involved leading to further violence, depression. Or worse. It's easy to say what should happen to people from your side of a computer but unless you have all the facts about these people who are involved in domestic violence, unless you know the reasons, the psychology involved ,the emotional maturity etc. then passing a judgement with out all the information involved then you leave yourself exposed to not only being wrong but also foolish. It's the NRL,s job to punish the on field stuff, the police matters should be left to the courts. It's definitely not the self appointed moral crusaders that pass themselves of as newspapers these days to decide what punishments should or should not be handed down. I would never believe anything I read in a newspaper especially a News LTD paper. Domestic violence is a serious issue, but it is not as simple as man comes home drunk and beats up his partner for fun. It's far more complex and involves many different issues and unless your an expert your narrow opinions on what should be done are based on not much more than what the telegraph tells you and a large amount of ignorance. Leave it to the experts.

What I find interesting is why would the NSW governments "tackling violence" program be focused on country Rugby League clubs?Is there emperical evidence suggesting that this a much bigger issue among rural people who play Rugby League than society as a whole?In any sample of human beings you will find bad people who do bad things, I see no evidence that Rugby League players are any better or worse than any other subset of human beings. Well I will qualify that up to a point, obviously young men tend to be more violent and more inclined to criminality than women or old men and Rugby League players are young men, but I don't see any evidence suggesting they are worse behaved than any other sub group of young men/

http://www.foxsports.com.au/more-sports/phil-rothfields-open-letter-to-dave-smith-nrl-ban-will-not-silence-me-over-the-issue-of-domestic-violence/story-e6frf56c-1227119829607

I wouldn't state it that way but an interesting study here It does show similar violence between the two gender but the injury rate is higher with female due to greater physical strength. In an ideal world men should take in consideration physical strength in terms of responding to violence especially when self defence laws take in consideration whether the self-defence is "proportional" to the initiating attack and they do take in consideration difference in physical strength. However when fight and flight comes in after the slap or first attack, people aren't known for responding rationally to that. 18 to 28 year old participate 11370 respondant in the USA http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.2005.079020 "Almost 24% of all relationships had some violence, and half (49.7%) of those were reciprocally violent. In nonreciprocally violent relationships, women were the perpetrators in more than 70% of the cases. Reciprocity was associated with more frequent violence among women (adjusted odds ratio [AOR]=2.3; 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.9, 2.8), but not men (AOR=1.26; 95% CI=0.9, 1.7). Regarding injury, men were more likely to inflict injury than were women (AOR=1.3; 95% CI=1.1, 1.5), and reciprocal intimate partner violence was associated with greater injury than was nonreciprocal intimate partner violence regardless of the gender of the perpetrator"

actually its a fact that females throw the first slap hit or punch in 60% of domestic fights look it up its just they cant finish what they start and when there hit back well then its a problem equality is its not ok to hit anyone not just a women but dont comment on that its only evil men that commit domestic violence right ??

How would you feel if it was the other way around Let's look at the issue of child abuse There is no gendered statistic of perpetrator in Australia but there is in the USA. http://www.breakingthescience.org/SimplifiedDataFromDHHS.php Child homicide 70.8% were killed by their mothers, whereas only 29.2% were killed by their fathers boys constituted fully 60% of child fatalities. Page 62 http://archive.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/pubs/cm06/cm06.pdf 39.9% of child abuse involves mother only 17.8% child abuse both mother and father 17.8% father only The rest involves non parental child abuse So 57.7% of child abuse involves mother 35.6% of child abuse involves father Now do you think campaign saying mothers can stop murdering children or mothers stop abusing children would be acceptable campaign? I wouldn't accept that campaign because I would like to reduce children homicide from both genders and I think any message to reduce violence would be effective to both genders. We shouldn't ignore violence from both genders simply because one outnumbers the others Similarly even if women do outnumber men in interpersonal violence (really it's more of a 75/25 split in terms of IPV leading to deaths and 66/33 in terms of IPV in general, not to dissimilar to the gender split in child abuse), they will respond just as well to a general domestic violence campaign as men do.

I will correct that in terms of interpersonal homicide (the domestic homicide includes all members of family killing) 33 to men 89 to woman That is still a 75:25 split However the question to people here is there are alot of issues such as suicide, work related deaths, homeless that has similar gender split where men are worst of. We don't consider those as gendered problems that men only face. Yet a similar 1/3 or 1/4 split is a gendered problem when women are worst off in the equation Women should be targeted in terms of protection from domestic violence. However the idea that the other 25-33% of male victims don't matter, I find questionable.

When the questionaire is on 13601 university students in 32 countries, the response approaches gender symmetry in domestic violence http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/ID41-PR41-Dominance-symmetry-In-Press-07.pdf

IT's not as rare as you think http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/current%20series/mr/21-40/mr21/04_homicide.html Between 2008-2010 116 woman die from domestic homicide 75 men die from domestic homicide 1 women a week die from domestic homicide 1 man per 10 days die from domestic homicide Really most government survey on domestic violence shows that 1/3 of people who self-reported domestic violence are men http://www.oneinthree.com.au/overview/