• Ascrod@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    68
    ·
    8 days ago

    Also, rubber bullets being fired at head height are punching holes into store windows. Protesters don’t use rubber bullets, but the damage will be blamed on them anyway.

      • SCmSTR@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 days ago

        If you could actually eat him to end him, but had to finish ALL of him, hair and nails and guts included, in less than 72 hours, and if you failed, he would come back even stronger and you and everybody you knew would die, would you?

  • djsoren19@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    39
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    8 days ago

    I will never understand the mind of the shitlib. “No please, don’t respond to the overwhelming violence with violence of your own!” The actions of this country are sickening, but it seems like liberals are able to tolerate it in the name of “peace” even once it comes home.

    • Maeve@kbin.earth
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      8 days ago

      Reactive abuse (self defense?) is always used to shift responsibility.

      Eta: also abuse by proxy.

  • zebidiah@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 days ago

    that’s the SELF REPORTED number! in reality it’s much, much higher.

  • kittenzrulz123@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 days ago

    Oh no, a bunch of megacorporations lost a few million dollars. Im truly pouring one out for my favorite megacorporations and I hope they have a good fiscal quarter /s

  • LaLuzDelSol@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    8 days ago

    That isn’t really true.

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/fact-check-posts-claiming-40-110000305.html?guccounter=1

    The Neidig study stated in its abstract, “Survey results revealed that approximately 40 percent of the participating officers reported marital conflicts involving physical aggression during the previous year.” However, that “physical aggression” included violence perpetrated by the officers’ spouses. The results for violence perpetrated in the relationship in general was 41% for male officers and 40% for female officers. Importantly, Neidig’s results for violence specifically perpetrated by the officers against their spouses were much lower: 28% for male and 27% for female.

    So 28% is the number, really, and “physical violence” is not necessarily the same thing as “beating their spouse.” That could mean shoving them, or pulling their arm or something. One criticism of the original study is how vaguely it defines “physical violence”.

    I know I will be labeled as a bootlicker, and I swear I’m not, I just don’t like misinformation and on lemmy all the misinformation is leftist. On PCM on reddit I spend my time calling out conservative BS.

    • curbstickle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      8 days ago

      The one thing I’d point out here - physical abuse is physical abuse. “Just shoving them” is still physical abuse.

      Getting punched in the face doesn’t need a clarification as to whether a bone was broken or not, its still a punch to the face.

      I’d also note that according to the CDC around 1 in 4 women and 1 in 7 men have experienced some degree of physical abuse in their lifetime. So the rate for police - in their active relationship and self-reported by officers against their own spouses - is still drastically higher than the average.

      Agreed on the inaccuracies of information though.

      • LaLuzDelSol@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        8 days ago

        Yes, I am not trying to downplay the seriousness of any physical violence, or ignore the fact police officers are more likely to be domestic abusers. However, the post title does say “beat their spouses” which to me implies, at the very least, the intent to harm and actually inflicting physical harm, neither of which are implied in physical violence.

        • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
          cake
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          8 days ago

          physical violence.

          actually inflicting physical harm

          What am I missing here? You don’t think ‘physical violence’ implies ‘physical harm’?

          • LaLuzDelSol@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            8 days ago

            No not really. If I throw a punch at you that is an act of physical violence. But if I miss or the punch doesn’t hurt you at all, I have not inflicted physical harm. That’s why assault and battery are different charges even though both are violent crimes.

            • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
              cake
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              8 days ago

              A distinction without a meaningful difference. Throwing a punch at your spouse but missing is still you throwing a punch at your spouse.

              Just because you didn’t make contact doesn’t mean you aren’t a danger

              • LaLuzDelSol@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                7 days ago

                Sure, when using the throwing a punch example. But there is a big difference between someone shoving or slapping their partner and someone beating their partner. Both are obviously bad, but only one of them would be an example of “beating your spouse”, and obviously that is much worse.

                • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
                  cake
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  7 days ago

                  Nah man, I don’t think that matters.

                  In the context of domestic abuse, it doesn’t matter if your spouse leaves a mark or physically injures you, it still creates an environment of fear for your physical safety. Displaying any willingness to cross that boundary with your spouse creates fear that they could cross it again, or go further. That’s what makes ‘beat your spouse’ such an evocative description to begin with. It isn’t supposed to be a precise classification of the type of violence you committed against them, just that you violated that physical barrier that shouldn’t be crossed. You can play semantic games and try finding a less objectionable term for it if you want, the truth is that even a slap or a shove is a severe betrayal of marital trust, and undermines the feeling of security that every person has a right to in their domestic environment. I think “beat” is a perfectly fine word to describe someone who willing to do that to their spouse.

    • Jerkface (any/all)@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      8 days ago

      Regardless of the methodology, the figure is meaningless in isolation. What’s meaningful about the study is the comparison to other professions using the same methodology.