Domestic Violence

[Kevin]

Anecdotally speaking, with regard to same-sex DV, I've seen plenty of it while waiting my turn on the VPO docket (in OKC, we have a judge who only hears cases where people are claiming there is domestic violence which entitles them to a restraining order).

Of course, when I say "same sex," it occurs to me that I've never once seen a male-male DV situation. Of course, due to the state of marriage laws in my state, the same sex community doesn't really have the same access to the legal system as everyone else.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Anecdotally speaking, with regard to same-sex DV, I've seen plenty of it while waiting my turn on the VPO docket (in OKC, we have a judge who only hears cases where people are claiming there is domestic violence which entitles them to a restraining order).

Of course, when I say "same sex," it occurs to me that I've never once seen a male-male DV situation. Of course, due to the state of marriage laws in my state, the same sex community doesn't really have the same access to the legal system as everyone else.

Is it possible that it was presented as a garden variety male-male fight when it was actually domestic violence? i.e. the officers just refused to book it that way?

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by 33girl

Is it possible that it was presented as a garden variety male-male fight when it was actually domestic violence? i.e. the officers just refused to book it that way?

Dunno. I don't handle the criminal side of that stuff. Or at least I haven't yet. I do quite a bit of civil restraining order stuff, which is quasi-criminal in nature, because if a victim's protection order is violated in Oklahoma, it's a felony charge.

With an Oklahoma VPO, the party seeking it has to go to the courthouse and file a petition (it's a fill-in-the-blanks form) and give a valid address for service. There's then a court date and a hearing. At the hearing, the judge will listen to the evidence (imagine a daytime judge tv show and it's about like that) and then decides whether or not a VPO can be entered based on the evidence.

[preciousjeni]

I thought of this thread when I read this:

http://thestir.cafemom.com/in_the_ne...e=home_oneline

[knight_shadow]

Originally Posted by preciousjeni

I thought of this thread when I read this:

http://thestir.cafemom.com/in_the_ne...e=home_oneline

I'm not familiar with Cafemom, so I'm not sure if this is just the writing style for the site, but I found this interesting:

And 17 men have come forward to positively identify the three women as having raped them, so it's not just like one or two guys are telling some cockamamie story.

It seems like there must be more than one accuser in order for a "woman raping a man" claim to be legit. I doubt that we would wait for more women to come forward before a "man raping a woman" claim would be seen as legit. I think it would help solidify a case, but the woman's story would not be a "cockamamie" one until others came forward.

[preciousjeni]

Originally Posted by knight_shadow

I'm not familiar with Cafemom, so I'm not sure if this is just the writing style for the site, but I found this interesting:



It seems like there must be more than one accuser in order for a "woman raping a man" claim to be legit. I doubt that we would wait for more women to come forward before a "man raping a woman" claim would be seen as legit. I think it would help solidify a case, but the woman's story would not be a "cockamamie" one until others came forward.

The original article is at http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/15/world/...imbabwe-sperm/. I referenced the Cafe Mom blog post, because I thought the author's take and reader comments were interesting in light of the topic of this thread, but the comments on the original article are interesting as well.

There are several comments about why Americans would think the concept of women raping men is humorous as opposed to being sick.