Anthony Albanese announces $925 million funding to combat gender-based violence

[danieldemol]

'Anthony Albanese announces $925 million funding to combat gender-based violence'
Source: Live: Funding announced to support survivors of domestic violence, combat male extremist views online

I welcome the move personally, I especially like the counter influencing initiative.

What do you think can be done to counter violence against women?

 

[ChristineM]

What do you think can be done to counter violence against women?

Education.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

I'm heavily, heavily conflicted on this.
To be clear, our society (and many) has an issue with domestic violence, and women are disproportionately the victims.
I also like that recent protests and rallies have had an effect. Those same rallies and protests could have been held at any time over my lifetime and been valid expressions of frustration with the status quo.

Having said that, this is the release of a billion dollars in pretty short order soon after the rallies and public pressure was brought to bare. I handle contracts with the government worth $10m, and there is a serious amount of hoops to jump through, competitive pressure on how the money is spent, etc.
Whereas this looks like a quick response, with money opened up to...well...that's why I'm conflicted. The spend simply can't be targeted and considered in that amount of time. They'll provide buckets of money (almost literally) to a variety of agencies, who will then spend it in a variety of ways, with limited or no overall coherence and planning.

It's hard to communicate just how piecemeal the use of a large amount of money like this can end up being. Further, a lot of the issues that influence DV are not directly DV issues. By that, I mean combatting extremist men's forums online is all well and good, but perhaps it is actually more effective in combatting DV to ignore those, and use that money in alchohol and drug rehabilitation. Or enforcement. Or social work. Or mental health work. Or...well...you see what I mean.

So...heavily conflicted.

 

[Shaul]

What do you think can be done to counter violence against women?

Statistics show that most of the victims of violence are men. That should be reflected in the solutions for violence.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Statistics show that most of the victims of violence are men. That should be reflected in the solutions for violence.

This is specifically targeted at domestic violence, not violence writ large. The statistics assuredly do NOT show that most victims of domestic violence are men, much as I would say domestic violence against men is underreported.

Rate of intimate partner homicide involving female victims rose 28pc last financial year

New data shows almost half the women who were victims of a homicide in the last financial year were killed by a former or current intimate partner. While this represents a 28 per cent increase on the previous year, it is also the second-lowest rate since records began in 1990.

www.abc.net.au

 

[Shaul]

This is specifically targeted at domestic violence, not violence writ large. The statistics assuredly do NOT show that most victims of domestic violence are men, much as I would say domestic violence against men is underreported.

Rate of intimate partner homicide involving female victims rose 28pc last financial year

New data shows almost half the women who were victims of a homicide in the last financial year were killed by a former or current intimate partner. While this represents a 28 per cent increase on the previous year, it is also the second-lowest rate since records began in 1990.

www.abc.net.au

What I am saying is that ALL victims should be helped regardless of gender. Support of female victims of violence, whether domestic violence or not, is disproportionate and support of male victims of violence are given short shrift.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

What I am saying is that ALL victims should be helped regardless of gender. Support of female victims of violence, whether domestic violence or not, is disproportionate and support of male victims of violence are given short shrift.

What I'm suggesting is that this is a targeted response to domestic violence.
Your comments that 'most of the victims of violence are men' is neither relevant nor accurate when the topic is domestic violence.
If you are suggesting that there should be NO targeted assistance or programs addressing domestic violence, and that any measures or programs addressing violence in Australian communities needs to be untargeted and address all violence, make that case.

 

[danieldemol]

What I am saying is that ALL victims should be helped regardless of gender. Support of female victims of violence, whether domestic violence or not, is disproportionate and support of male victims of violence are given short shrift.

'The Leaving Violence Program is for victim-survivors, which includes men...'
Source: Funding announced to support survivors of domestic violence, combat male extremist views online — as it happened

Men are *not* being short shrifted in Australia in my view.

 

[Twilight Hue]

'Anthony Albanese announces $925 million funding to combat gender-based violence'
Source: Live: Funding announced to support survivors of domestic violence, combat male extremist views online

I welcome the move personally, I especially like the counter influencing initiative.

What do you think can be done to counter violence against women?

Whenever I hear funding what does that really mean?

Actual help for someone or just to increase one's personal income?

 

[Shaul]

What I'm suggesting is that this is a targeted response to domestic violence.
Your comments that 'most of the victims of violence are men' is neither relevant nor accurate when the topic is domestic violence.
If you are suggesting that there should be NO targeted assistance or programs addressing domestic violence, and that any measures or programs addressing violence in Australian communities needs to be untargeted and address all violence, make that case.

"Targeting domestic violence victims" should NOT mean limiting it to only females. To do so denies that many male victims of domestic violence. By the purported purpose being to "combat male extremist views online" displays the true agenda. It also ignores the fact that women are often the perpetrators of domestic violence. For example females in same sex relationship face higher rates of domestic violence that in male/female relationships. The point is Anthony Albanese is being sexist.

 

[danieldemol]

"Targeting domestic violence victims" should NOT mean limiting it to only females

Except that as explained in post #8 male victims are covered as well, which you conveniently ignore in my view.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

"Targeting domestic violence victims" should NOT mean limiting it to only females. To do so denies that many male victims of domestic violence. By the purported purpose being to "combat male extremist views online" displays the true agenda. It also ignores the fact that women are often the perpetrators of domestic violence. For example females in same sex relationship face higher rates of domestic violence that in male/female relationships. The point is Anthony Albanese is being sexist.

This isn't limited to females, and the combatting of male extremist views online is one small part of where the funding is going.
You're carrying a hammer and looking for nails.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Whenever I hear funding what does that really mean?

Actual help for someone or just to increase one's personal income?

In this case/over here, it will mean an increase in funding for a number of government, and semi-government organisations.
There would typically be some guidelines or restrictions in how the funding is used (eg. Targetted to reduce DV or something).

Those organisations would then use it to either improve existing internal capability (hire staff, build facilities) or access external capability (consultants, education programs, advertising).

I have issues with how quickly this has been done, and the politics of it versus the reality of what 'help' would even actually look like, so I agree/think it's fair to question the approach.

But I have confidence that the vast majority of the money will be spent with good intentions, just ineffectively I think.
As opposed to handouts or other direct cash injections and rebates, which have been more open to abuse over time.

 

[Kathryn]

Wow, that's a lot of money.

 

[libre]

What I am saying is that ALL victims should be helped regardless of gender. Support of female victims of violence, whether domestic violence or not, is disproportionate and support of male victims of violence are given short shrift.

Do you deny that domestic violence is an issue that disproportionately affects women? Is that why you're so concerned with de-centering the predominantly gendered nature of domestic violence? or are you just trying to obfuscate such? Why does it make you uncomfortable?

 

[Shaul]

Except that as explained in post #8 male victims are covered as well, which you conveniently ignore in my view.

Except I didn't ignore it. As it clearly states in the OP the stated purpose of this funding is to "combat male extremist views"[sic]. As your own link states, "Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has announced programs to help women escaping violence, as well as several measures to combat toxic male extremist views online." The funding is to help women. NOT both men and women. It is also funding against the previously mentioned "male extremist views on line". This scheme is sexist.

 

[Shaul]

Do you deny that domestic violence is an issue that disproportionately affects women? Is that why you're so concerned with de-centering the predominantly gendered nature of domestic violence? or are you just trying to obfuscate such? Why does it make you uncomfortable?

I deny that sex or gender should have a bearing on providing funding for victims of domestic violence. Do you want male victims of domestic violence to not receive the same help as female victims of it? I am advocating for helping ALL victims of domestic violence. Period.

 

[Shaul]

This isn't limited to females, and the combatting of male extremist views online is one small part of where the funding is going.
You're carrying a hammer and looking for nails.

Read the OP. The stated purpose of this initiative was that is "met to combat gender-based violence after weeks of rallies."
and
"Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has announced programs to help women escaping violence, as well as several measures to combat toxic male extremist views online."
This initiative indeed is limited to females through its programs and simultaneously against men under the most dubious pretext of "combat toxic male extremists views".
You are wrong.
This initiative is sexist.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

Read the OP. The stated purpose of this initiative was that is "met to combat gender-based violence after weeks of rallies."
and
"Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has announced programs to help women escaping violence, as well as several measures to combat toxic male extremist views online."
This initiative indeed is limited to females through its programs and simultaneously against men under the most dubious pretext of "combat toxic male extremists views".
You are wrong.
This initiative is sexist.

From a link in the OP answering this question:

"The Leaving Violence Program is for victim-survivors, which includes men..."

Funding announced to support survivors of domestic violence, combat male extremist views online — as it happened

The government announces a five-year, $925 million package that will include the Leave Program, offering financial support and safety to people looking to escape domestic violence.

www.abc.net.au

 

[danieldemol]

Except I didn't ignore it. As it clearly states in the OP the stated purpose of this funding is to "combat male extremist views"[sic]. As your own link states, "Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has announced programs to help women escaping violence, as well as several measures to combat toxic male extremist views online." The funding is to help women. NOT both men and women. It is also funding against the previously mentioned "male extremist views on line". This scheme is sexist.

The funding is divided into sections, one section is to assist *both* male and female victims of domestic violence (which you have ignored again in my view), and another portion is devoted to combating male extremist views online.

You may take aim at the lack of funding to fight female online extremism if you wish, however your claim that male domestic violence victims recieve no support is false as they are covered by the same portion of the funding that provides support to female victims as cited in post #8 in my view