Dustin Martin - total [censored]

[rjay 24,887]

26 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

To support what you have presented - Fox footy website survey also strong on suspensions:

Should Richmond suspend Dustin Martin?

Yes  73.39%  (10,416 votes) No  22.24%  (3,157 votes)  Not sure  4.36%  (619 votes) 

 

Total Votes: 14,192

 

Over 14,000 people have taken the time to vote!  That is a lot for an online survey!. 

I don't know the typical reader of 'fox footy' but I suspect most are men who are husbands, fathers, brothers, sons who have been affected in some way by domestic violence (usually against women). 

 

I don't have a view on sanctions but as someone said in an earlier post Andy D would have jumped all over this on day 1 and shouted his condemnation from the rooftops, irrespective of what sanctions, if any are later imposed.

The AFL needs to wake up to itself and practice what it preaches.

 

 

You can expect a response soon 'Lucifer', it seems like the poles are coming in and Dill will now have a position.

The AFL integrity department is code for market research....anyone ever see "The Rise & Rise of Michael Rimmer"? it's kind of an AFL operations manual.

[Akum 2,660]

28 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

To support what you have presented - Fox footy website survey also strong on suspensions:

Should Richmond suspend Dustin Martin?

Yes  73.39%  (10,416 votes) No  22.24%  (3,157 votes)  Not sure  4.36%  (619 votes) 

 

Total Votes: 14,192

 

Over 14,000 people have taken the time to vote!  That is a lot for an online survey!. 

I don't know the typical reader of 'fox footy' but I suspect most are men who are husbands, fathers, brothers, sons who have been affected in some way by domestic violence (usually against women). 

 

I don't have a view on sanctions but as someone said in an earlier post Andy D would have jumped all over this on day 1 and shouted his condemnation from the rooftops, irrespective of what sanctions, if any are later imposed.

The AFL needs to wake up to itself and practice what it preaches.

 

 

Still a concern that just over 1 in 4 don't think he should be suspended. 

Maybe some of those think there should be other sanctions (e.g. fine) or that the AFL or police should punish him.

But that still must leave too many that don't see anything wrong with what he did.

[Akum 2,660]

3 minutes ago, rjay said:

You can expect a response soon 'Lucifer', it seems like the polls are coming in and Dill will now have a position.

The AFL integrity department is code for market research....anyone ever see "The Rise & Rise of Michael Rimmer"? it's kind of an AFL operations manual.

Spot on - great Pete'n'Dud movie.

[stuie 7,374]

38 minutes ago, Rafiki said:

I never said it was worse for men than women Stuie, you seem to have a problem with putting words into peoples mouths. Do I think that men have it worse than women? Obviously not, but is your quoted 1 in 20 men being assaulted at home not a problem? After seeing the effects of woman on man violence in my personal life I find it quite disgusting there is nothing out there to help men. 

Look I agree there needs to be more resources to help men also, but I think due to weight of numbers and not wanting to dilute focus, violence against women has become the primary topic at least until the changes made make an impact on the statistics. I hear you more than most mate, I've been there myself and it's truly horrible, but I also know that our experiences aren't in the majority and that means it takes a bit of a backseat while the bigger issue is dealt with. Despite my own experience, I'm comfortable with that, I don't know if that's because of the statistics or the fact that I never feared for my life, or maybe because I have a daughter, but the reality is until it starts to change there won't be any focus for the statistically less-pressing issues.

[Akum 2,660]

Is it right to assume that the majority of male victims of partner violence are in same-sex relationships i.e. the perpetrator is male?

[daisycutter 29,604]

6 minutes ago, Akum said:

Is it right to assume that the majority of male victims of partner violence are in same-sex relationships i.e. the perpetrator is male?

r u srs?

[DeeSpencer 25,477]

By all reports Martin is not a great person and certainly showed that in this incident. But at the same time his biggest indiscretion before this has been abusing sleeping pills. I think it's a little hypocritical from some people to be labelling him as some kind of repeat offender when at this stage he isn't. There's no laws against having a bad haircut, tattoos, liking a party and not being nice. 

It's why when I hear talk about suspending Martin for an entire year or Richmond 'dealing with' him I am a little surprised. 

This is a serious incident. But I don't think it's trivialising it by also saying in the scheme of things it's not that bad. Bad stuff happens all the time in the world and I'm not really convinced of this idea that singling out Martin will solve all the problems of violence towards women, domestic violence (which gets dragged in to violence towards women), alcohol and drug abuse, AFL players behaving badly and so on.

I think we've heard little so far from the police because in the scheme of things they have to deal with making a threat to a stranger before walking away and later apologising is probably not high on their priority list. Again, I'm sorry if those upset about violence to women find that as a weak excuse but I think it's true. Given that he is likely to receive a significant punishment via his work place and have it made public the police might be satisfied he will get his penalty.

A regular season suspension of 2-4 weeks and a decent fine would be punishment enough. Others might think that is light but I don't think punishing any individual heavily will solve any of the issues involved. AFL players are going to continue to make mistakes just like every group of young men. Alcohol will continue to be involved. A change in attitudes regarding violence towards women will come from all of the community saying enough is enough and particularly dragging domestic violence out of the shadows. Dusty might not be a nice guy but I don't particularly think he deserves addition punishment for it.

 

[Phadraig 760]

18 minutes ago, Akum said:

Is it right to assume that the majority of male victims of partner violence are in same-sex relationships i.e. the perpetrator is male?

There was an interesting article in the Herald Sun early this year about this, I'll try find it

Edit: Here it is http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/domestic-violence-a-silent-epidemic-in-gay-relationships-20150415-1mm4hg.html

Edited December 9, 2015 by Rafiki

[monoccular 17,413]

3 hours ago, willmoy said:

I'm thinking more of extended supervised community service in women's organisations 

 

Oh sure.  A misogynistic sociopathic man with poor self control in a woman's' organization!?!? I am sure they would welcome him with open arms...not.

[McQueen 17,864]

25 minutes ago, Georgiou R.R. Martin said:

By all reports Martin is not a great person and certainly showed that in this incident. But at the same time his biggest indiscretion before this has been abusing sleeping pills. I think it's a little hypocritical from some people to be labelling him as some kind of repeat offender when at this stage he isn't. There's no laws against having a bad haircut, tattoos, liking a party and not being nice. 

It's why when I hear talk about suspending Martin for an entire year or Richmond 'dealing with' him I am a little surprised. 

This is a serious incident. But I don't think it's trivialising it by also saying in the scheme of things it's not that bad. Bad stuff happens all the time in the world and I'm not really convinced of this idea that singling out Martin will solve all the problems of violence towards women, domestic violence (which gets dragged in to violence towards women), alcohol and drug abuse, AFL players behaving badly and so on.

I think we've heard little so far from the police because in the scheme of things they have to deal with making a threat to a stranger before walking away and later apologising is probably not high on their priority list. Again, I'm sorry if those upset about violence to women find that as a weak excuse but I think it's true. Given that he is likely to receive a significant punishment via his work place and have it made public the police might be satisfied he will get his penalty.

A regular season suspension of 2-4 weeks and a decent fine would be punishment enough. Others might think that is light but I don't think punishing any individual heavily will solve any of the issues involved. AFL players are going to continue to make mistakes just like every group of young men. Alcohol will continue to be involved. A change in attitudes regarding violence towards women will come from all of the community saying enough is enough and particularly dragging domestic violence out of the shadows. Dusty might not be a nice guy but I don't particularly think he deserves addition punishment for it.

 

The decisive variable is the maliciousness of the threat. 

For example, a threat of "sitting you on your arse if you don't shut up" directed at a woman is bad enough however, "I'm gonna stab you in the face with a chopstick" is clearly more violent and any suspension should be weighted proportionally.

[Bombay Airconditioning 6,359]

2 hours ago, stuie said:

I have a broad view and have personal experience in the area.

You have a quack who you're basing your info on who: In November 2014, Pizzey became owner/manager of the AVFM WhiteRibbon.org website,^[63] which has been criticized by the original White Ribbon Campaign as "a copycat campaign articulating ... archaic views and denials about the realities of gender-based violence."

Sounds pretty aligned to your archaic views in blaming women and trying to play the victim.

Our REAL problem is we have "men" like you who never take responsibility for their actions and want to blame women for the fact men are killing women at an alarming rate in this country. As a separated single parent I'd like to know what these "incentives" for women to keep their children away from their fathers are?

Why do I keep quoting Stuie??

demonland??

 

Rafiki, that wasn't my post.

[hardtack 10,514]

1 hour ago, Akum said:

Spot on - great Pete'n'Dud movie.

No Dud in that one... but yes, polling company boss becomes PM... I think Gill may have been on that treadmill walking down a country lane, a few times of late.

[Phadraig 760]

2 minutes ago, Bombay Airconditioning said:

Why do I keep quoting Stuie??

demonland??

 

Rafiki, that wasn't my post.

Yeah I noticed his quote was included in your post afterwards sorry

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,693]

1 hour ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

To support what you have presented - Fox footy website survey also strong on suspensions:

Should Richmond suspend Dustin Martin?

Yes  73.39%  (10,416 votes) No  22.24%  (3,157 votes)  Not sure  4.36%  (619 votes) 

 

Total Votes: 14,192

 

Over 14,000 people have taken the time to vote!  That is a lot for an online survey!. 

I don't know the typical reader of 'fox footy' but I suspect most are men who are husbands, fathers, brothers, sons who have been affected in some way by domestic violence (usually against women). 

 

I don't have a view on sanctions but as someone said in an earlier post Andy D would have jumped all over this on day 1 and shouted his condemnation from the rooftops, irrespective of what sanctions, if any are later imposed.

The AFL needs to wake up to itself and practice what it preaches.

 

 

While I'm not really surprised around 14,000 people have voted on a website, I'm absolutely gobsmacked that 619 people voted "Not sure". Why on earth would you bother to participate if you're not sure?

[McQueen 17,864]

15 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

While I'm not really surprised around 14,000 people have voted on a website, I'm absolutely gobsmacked that 619 people voted "Not sure". Why on earth would you bother to participate if you're not sure?

Why then give the option?

[rjay 24,887]

36 minutes ago, hardtack said:

No Dud in that one... but yes, polling company boss becomes PM... I think Gill may have been on that treadmill walking down a country lane, a few times of late.

That was, to quote Bruce "Special".... I liked Rimmer's effort attempting to save the PM from falling of the rig myself.

A bit ahead of his time was Peter Cook.

[hardtack 10,514]

3 minutes ago, rjay said:

That was, to quote Bruce "Special".... I liked Rimmer's effort attempting to save the PM from falling of the rig myself.

A bit ahead of his time was Peter Cook.

Indeed... I have the DVD of the film... one of my favourites (along with The Bed Sitting Room)

[Sir Why You Little 36,985]

2 hours ago, Akum said:

Spot on - great Pete'n'Dud movie.

One of my favorite Peter Cook movies...

[Willmoy1947 4,081]

Monoccular,

Most of this sort of people, and bear in mind neither of us know him personally(I'm presuming because I don't) whilst he being what you said he was,

will have to, at some point, be able to communicate on an equal footing and have supervised controlled contact as I said before.

Or do we just  give up and throw away the key which I might add does not work in a lot of circumstances.

[Bombay Airconditioning 6,359]

12 hours ago, stuie said:

I have a broad view and have personal experience in the area.

You have a quack who you're basing your info on who: In November 2014, Pizzey became owner/manager of the AVFM WhiteRibbon.org website,^[63] which has been criticized by the original White Ribbon Campaign as "a copycat campaign articulating ... archaic views and denials about the realities of gender-based violence."

Sounds pretty aligned to your archaic views in blaming women and trying to play the victim.

Our REAL problem is we have "men" like you who never take responsibility for their actions and want to blame women for the fact men are killing women at an alarming rate in this country. As a separated single parent I'd like to know what these "incentives" for women to keep their children away from their fathers are?

The incentive is money plus the knowledge they can bend the father over as much as they want with full backing of the law.

[Bombay Airconditioning 6,359]

On 8 December 2015 at 8:54 PM, stuie said:

That has absolutely no bearing on anything. Why would you even bring that up? Does that make it ok?

Going off the next six pages I'd say quite a bit with you leading the charge.

[Bombay Airconditioning 6,359]

On 8 December 2015 at 10:55 PM, stuie said:

Or ask the 60+ women who have been murdered so far this year... Or do you not think that's a problem worth considering?

Can we also ask the men who have taken their own lives because they are denied access to their children because their ex wife/girlfriend fabricated a story against them. Some woman stoop so low as to accuse them or a member of their family of indecently touching their own children/family member. Can't get legal aid because they have a job yet can't afford legal representation because their bank accounts have been cleaned out. 

Can we ask them Stu....can we?

[stuie 7,374]

15 minutes ago, Bombay Airconditioning said:

The incentive is money plus the knowledge they can bend the father over as much as they want with full backing of the law.

This is plainly not true, and I can tell you that from recent experience.

[stuie 7,374]

11 minutes ago, Bombay Airconditioning said:

Can we also ask the men who have taken their own lives because they are denied access to their children because their ex wife/girlfriend fabricated a story against them. Some woman stoop so low as to accuse them or a member of their family of indecently touching their own children/family member. Can't get legal aid because they have a job yet can't afford legal representation because their bank accounts have been cleaned out. 

Can we ask them Stu....can we?

You are speaking to someone who has been through almost exactly that scenario. So yeah you are asking them, and I'm telling you violence against women is the bigger and more pressing issue.

Edited December 9, 2015 by stuie

[Bombay Airconditioning 6,359]

On 8 December 2015 at 11:09 PM, stuie said:

Yeah I hear you, and let me be clear, in no way am I saying that doesn't happen or isn't a problem also. Just saying that the weight of numbers is hugely one sided, so let's deal with the biggest problem first. Labeling those doing what they can to combat violence against women as "bandwagoners" is a bit average though I would think.

Because in some cases the issues are intertwined with other issues so wouldn't it be better to deal with them all at once, or at least let them know that they are working on a solution rather than giving certain groups little to no assistance at all whilst putting all their resources into one area.