PM says Australians 'devastated' by domestic violence attack

And justifies the burning alive of one's spouse and children not one whit.

There can obviously be no discussion or progress whatsoever if one is going to insist that a post contrasting what a person said against what another said about their post was in any way meant to justify the burning alive of...well....anyone at all.

I may have said too much when I said there was no lack of support for women. But its pretty clear there is simply far less for men. BTW, since this seems to a point which is nearly rocket science, when I say "support" I mean systems that will dissuade a man from setting people on fire, not a system that hands him a medal for doing it. Okay? I feel the need to make that absolutely clear because it seems there is some confusion about that. But if it doesn't work I will have to see if I can justifiably condescend just a bit further.

Nobody says "All men" do it, and nobody believes "all men" do it. The word "All" is introduced by those who wish the derail the discussion.

Finally, you may not have noticed, but women have been saying, loudly and in large numbers, Please stop assaulting and killing women for years. Decades.

Which is fair enough, but let's be realistic, if morals, laws, and the love of one's own children are not enough to stop these monsters who would do this, asking them not to is not going to stop them.

Not that I don't think it should be said, but I do dislike it when the comments above are phrased at 'men'. Because, as much as people hate to hear 'not all men', it's not all men. When making these statements, the term 'men' needs to top being used, and instead something that accurately refers to those men who would do this. Using the term 'men' is counter productive, as it leads to discussions like this, instead of discussions on how we can stop these murderous bastards.

The above "evidence" does not contradict Andrew in the slightest. Andrew made precisely three claims: In divorce 1) men lose custody more 2) men lose their assets and 3) they are forced to pay child support which leaves them broke.

Horrendous. And justifies the burning alive of one's spouse and children not one whit. Literally, to the point of being entirely irrelevant, since nothing would ever justify that. Nothing. Even the worst ex-ever and the most bitter custodial dispute humanity has ever known.

But hey, don't stop mysognists, this is clearly a problem caused by women, right?

there is no shortage of support for women and women are never ridiculed for seeking it.

Really?

And yet ...

they are still being attacked and murdered in large numbers;

they are systematically disbelieved and blamed when they report an attack;

they are often being advised not to bother reporting rape, but to fins counselling instead, because there's no point;

they are given far harsher sentences for attacking or killing a partner - even when it was self-defense - than men who attack and kill a partner are given.

I think we need to provide equal support at least

 But I am afraid that will entail a discussion of men's issues 

It's been a big topic for several years now. Where is it lacking? In which areas?

There are plenty of mental health groups, contact numbers, events, and articles, aimed at helping men. If you need help, look for it, you'll find it. Go and get it. Ask for help.

Finally, you may not have noticed, but women have been saying, loudly and in large numbers, Please stop assaulting and killing women for years. Decades.

And the overwhelming reply? Not All Men. An outright, kneejerk refusal to accept responsibility - usually a violent and aggressive refusal by MRA members.

As for what Andrew Crisp wrote, suggesting that this man murdering his wife and children is somehow connected to an unfair custody system in Australia which works against men, that is untrue: A 2015 analysis by the Australian Institute of Family Studies showed that when the Family Court makes orders about child custody arrangements, it overwhelmingly makes orders for children to spend time with both parents.....

The above "evidence" does not contradict Andrew in the slightest. Andrew made precisely three claims: In divorce 1) men lose custody more 2) men lose their assets and 3) they are forced to pay child support which leaves them broke. None of that was addressed by the study. Visitation isn't custody. Mandatory consultation isn't custody. Access isn't custody. And even if you choose to accept them as equal enough to custody ( and I don't) , that still leaves points 2 and 3 to address.

I think there is a misunderstanding happening in this thread. Its not that women do not need support. I don't think anyone here is claiming they don't. I think that what is being said is that there is no shortage of support for women and women are never ridiculed for seeking it. In fact, they are encouraged, and no loss of gender status in it. But you know, it is interesting; women suffering mental anguish are far less likely to kill people over it yet they are the ones with more support? Hmmmm....I think we need to provide equal support at least. But I am afraid that will entail a discussion of men's issues to get that ball rolling....and yeah, I can smell the derision of being called an MRA heading toward me already. And if anyone cannot see that as being part of the problem, well, sorry, but it is.

Baxter's estranged husband and the children's father, Rowan Baxter, allegedly doused his family with gas before setting the car alight.

And yet, and yet... it's the men who must be understood.

If a woman was responsible for this attack, there'd be several calls for her to be hanged.

Interesting, that. For what it's worth, and nothing justifies this heinous crime, mental health issues need to be addressed. And also, irrational hatred and violence against women. There needs to be more outlets to discuss and try and prevent more horrors like this. Whoever snaps.

As for what Andrew Crisp wrote, suggesting that this man murdering his wife and children is somehow connected to an unfair custody system in Australia which works against men, that is untrue:

"A 2015 analysis by the Australian Institute of Family Studies showed that when the Family Court makes orders about child custody arrangements, it overwhelmingly makes orders for children to spend time with both parents. It found:

When parents consent to court orders, 93 per cent of former partners will equally share parental responsibility, meaning both parents must be consulted on major parenting decisions.

When judges make orders, parents will equally share parenting responsibility about 40 per cent of the time, but the other parent will have access to their child in almost every case.

Just 3 per cent of fathers will lose all access to their children.

Reforms introduced by the Howard government in 2006 gave both parents the presumption of shared care of children after separation."

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/a-fraction-of-fathers-lose-access-to-their-kids-why-the-family-court-isn-t-anti-men-20190919-p52syn.html?fbclid=IwAR1UTYX7hVJ8r3U6Wr-6vlbRGX-3DzxkA0b2noTrmTvhh0UEPYyrYM0sDcY

According to the latest BBC reports, Ms Baxter - an possibly the children - had been the repeated victim of domestic violence at the hands of this man:

Family services had previously supported Mrs Baxter with domestic violence issues, and a number of court orders had been granted, police said.

Anyone who has sympathy for him due to custody disputes, would do well to consider that.

It seems to me its the men needing the support.

Your wording here implies "rather than the women". Is that what you meant to imply?

Sort of might help prevent them going on a killing spree even better than shaming or saying "get over it" or "be a man". Just a thought.

I can agree with this. Fortunately, the younger generations are getting past this way of thinking to some degree. We as men need to find a healthy balance of masculinity and empathy.

Now that all said, let's not make this about men. It was a woman and her children who were murdered. When it's a story about an abusive husband murdered by his battered wife, we can have that discussion.

The main reason people take to "what about," when a crime is being discussed, is to downplay the severity of said crime:

"Well, sure, the guy burnt his children alive and tried to do the same to his partner, but it's worse in [name random place you know next to nothing about], and anyway women do it to, I read about [an incident you vaguely remember bits of and make up the rest], and anyway, he was provoked...."

Yep, the men are always provoked into snapping, and committing appalling crimes like these. Aren't they the real victims...?

No. No they aren't. This man had enough gasoline in the passenger seat of the car to douse five people. This was deliberate, planned, he thought about it and knew what he was doing. He's no victim.

A terrible incident indeed, but it happens a lot. A man murders his partner or ex-partner once a week, on average, in Australia (which is not to say that it is any worse there than any other English-speaking country; the UK stats are about the same).

If only the woman had died, this wouldn't get the press it has done. Women are expendable in a way that children are not.

This incident isn't good, but its not just women who have been murdered by their partners there's certainly men in those statistics the real issue is when the bust up happens the family court should be making more orders that don't discriminate against men - when the divorce happens its the men that lose a substantial part of their assets built up over years, its men that don't get custody of any kids along with a child support system that literally leaves the father broke, some of these men cant see a way out so they hit out.

She said that women were seeking assistance more than ever and "we should have the systems there, appropriate systems to be able to respond to them.”

It seems to me its the men needing the support. Sort of might help prevent them going on a killing spree even better than shaming or saying "get over it" or "be a man". Just a thought.