Friday, 5 September 2014

Woman No Cry, Man Out Cry (Part One)

Forgive the poetic licence used in titling this piece ‘Woman No Cry, Man Out Cry’ but I wish to highlight once more the different attitudes regarding men and women accused of Domestic Violence offences.

When a man, celebrity or otherwise, is reported as being a Domestic Violence perpetrator there is often a huge public outcry and rightly so.  However  when a female is the assailant, a different attitude prevails.  In fact, most approaches seem to project the reports in a jovial fashion.  I find this totally shocking because if you are the victim of abuse, it doesn’t matter who your abuser is, it is not humorous or amusing. 

This week has since a few more examples in the national media.  One is an actress who is serialising her autobiography through media outlets.  This actress is probably better known for the paparazzi  coverage given to her many high-profile romances than her body of work.   Her beau’s include Jason Statham, Billy Zane, Thom Evans, David McIntosh and Danny Capriani. 

Kelly Brook admits to hitting ex-boyfriends Jason Statham and Danny Capriani.  In her account, she justifies her actions by saying that she attacked English Rugby player Danny Capriani after discovering that he was cheating on her.  The general attitude towards this is “good for you girl, the cheat deserved it and had it coming.  Now, imagine for a moment that the roles was reversed.  If Mr. Capriani had struck Ms. Brook and then claimed that he only did it in response to discovering infidelity, would that make it acceptable?   Of course not,  violence is never acceptable and shouldn’t be acceptable under any circumstances.  So why does society seem to think that a woman hitting a man is acceptable when a man striking a woman in similar circumstances is clearly not??

Ms Brook also admits to hitting hard-man movie actor Jason Statham.  She justifies this behaviour by claiming this was because he made flirty comments about another actress while with her.  Again, reverse the genders and would such action be tolerated?  I think not.

Ms Brook actually offers an insight into her behaviour when she writes:

“ My earliest memory is of my mother throwing an iron down the stairwell at my dad after he came back late from the pub.”

So the lesson she learnt from her parents was   If you think your partner steps out of line, you punish them with violence. 

There should never be any excuse for violence towards another person  irrespective of gender, race, religion, sexuality. 

Why is it then when women are the perpetrators, we don’t treat it with the contempt it deserves, but society continues to find the idea of a female attacking a man rather amusing?  


  1. SI Victim, this is the best response to the story that I have seen.

    Men and women of different races and creeds can exploit their position in society. Take someone in a universally respected caring position doing an excellent job providing emotional and practical support to patients on the wards. When an accusation is made against them, if they are a man there will be a reluctance to investigate, but it may happen in due course. Take it to the extreme, Jimmy Saville got away with it for decades.

    Now consider a woman in that position. Will anyone ever believe that she might be capable of abusive behaviour, that she might go home to abuse those closest to her, knowing no-one will believe any allegations? As a woman in a respected position, she is more protected from investigation because the authorities have so much respect for her. They don't want to investigate because such abuse doesn't happen, does it? Surely the police will look into it?

    Now look at the organisation that guides the police. The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has made new proposals for dealing with domestic violence. It includes a 44 page document with the title "Violence against Women and Girls" (VAWG). There is no similar tome "Violence against Men and Boys" it doesn't exist, but the CPS considers an occasional bland statement of equality to be enough to cover men and boys. VAWG covers males as well, With that title? Is that really true? Yes, that is the CPS position. Male victims are mentioned in VAWG; just twice in its 44 pages!

    The new proposed CPS guidance on prosecuting domestic violence is worse that what currently stands. Write to your MP about it, because other consultation has closed.

    One respected carer's conduct outside the working environment was recorded regularly by her victim, It was compiled from date auditable notes made by the victim over a period of years, often whilst he was being abused. Police cautioned not her, but him. That was because eventually, when she refused to leave, he tried to push her out of the house. It was considered a crime because he accepted that it might have caused bruising. Yet his records have not, to this day, been seen by the police. They refused to consider it as evidence to support his case without seeing it. They also refused to give him the access to specialist domestic violence officers that he requested.

  2. This is a great discussion. I have noticed that men in women are viewed differently in the media when domestic violence is involved. Women can be perpetrators too, but society does tend to give more sympathy towards women. They label their domestic violence crime "okay" (partly because they are the 'weaker' sex) but for me it's just "wrong" to beat your wife or partner. Both men and women should be held accountable for their actions. It's just a gender issue, it's a human issue. Thanks for blogging on this important subject.