Supplemental: Susan Reimer gets it right!

FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, 2014

What Edie Dugan said:
People shouldn’t punch other people. It’s especially true that people who are much bigger and stronger shouldn’t punch those who are smaller.

The NFL seems to have a fair number of players who engage in domestic violence. We’d love to see the Players Association step in and make something good happen.

What would something good look like? We thought Susan Reimer got it right in this part of yesterday’s column in the Baltimore Sun:
REIMER (9/11/14): Experts on the subject are filling the airways right now, and there is hope this very public disaster for the Rice family will serve some good end.

But I bet every one of those experts, if asked, would say that possibly the worst thing you can do to a family in this kind of crisis is to make the abuser unemployed and unemployable, which is exactly what the Ravens and the NFL have done.

They have not only taken away his livelihood—probably forever—but they have isolated him from his friends and teammates and banished him from an organization with the resources to help him and his family.

And while we are at it, let's erase every evidence that he ever existed. Strip his image from the most popular football video game ever and buy back all his jerseys.

My God. It is like the team and the league would like nothing better than to push Ray Rice so far into despair that he removes himself as an irritant.
We like how far she went in the last paragraph we’ve posted.

How weird has the NFL been in the way it has handled this case? This weird:

Two weeks ago, the league announced its new blanket policy: Domestic violence would mean a six-game suspension!

Two weeks later, along came the videotape of Rice. Just that fast, he got booted for life! (“Probably forever”) Whatever became of league policy?

Reimer is suggesting that Ray Rice and Janay Rice be treated a bit more like humans. We don’t know them, but other people do. Reimer is suggesting that they should be given some help, instead of undiluted punishment on the banished-to-Elba model.

We’re not big fans of punishment culture. When we’ve read the occasional comment like Reimer’s, we’ve thought of Edie Dugan’s speech to Terry Malloy in the beautiful female undercard of the beautiful film, On the Waterfront.

(The featured thread in On The Waterfront involves Terry’s pitched battle with the big rough boys. The more beautiful secondary thread involves Terry’s desire to be more like Edie, who he sees is the better person.)

Out of respect for those who want punishment, we’re not going to post what Edie said. But you can read what she said to Terry.

To do so, just click here.

69 comments:

  1. As a victim of severe childhood abuse I was appalled by Ray's abuse. At the same time I was appalled by the punishment meted out by the team and the NFL. I agree with Susan Reimer and Bob completely.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, I am sure that "as a victim of severe childhood abuse" you fully agree that we shouldn't be too hard on your abuser.

      Delete
    2. " ... I was appalled by the punishment meted out by the team and the NFL."

      It's called covering your butt.

      Delete
    3. "Yes, I am sure that "as a victim of severe childhood abuse" you fully agree that we shouldn't be too hard on your abuser."

      What do you mean "we"? Like it's your business?

      Why do these haters get such kicks out of all this hostility and punishment? What right does anyone have to hate Rice or call for anything?

      It's really nuts. It's like the whole world's gone TMZ, with all the phony outrage and scorn all the time.

      Delete
    4. My dear friend. You have made a pact with the devil. Call out to God and believe in Jesus to change your heart and who you are, not just your circumstances. Spells and witchcraft belong to the evil one. Run away from it.

      Delete
  2. "The worst thing you can do to a family in this kind of crisis is to make the abuser unemployed and unemployable."

    Everyone should have realized this before the race baiters and media
    hounded poor George Zimmerman out of home, employment, and marriage even though he wasn't even told to stay in his truck.

    Now he has nothing to do but remain alone, armed in the cab of his pickup, riding around with the weight of his salavation from a brutal beating hounding him like harpies sent to snatch his happiness and even his humanity.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, when the guy with the gun is the victim, it's not that hard to turn the guy with the fist into the victim, either.

      Delete
    2. From WKMG Channel 6 in Orlando today:

      Police said the man, whose name was not released, called police after a truck pulled up next to him and the driver yelled, "Why are you pointing a finger at me?"

      The man pulled into the Circle K at 4410 W. Lake Mary Blvd. to call 911, according to police, who added that driver followed him into the parking lot but took off before police arrived.

      Police spokeswoman Bianca Gillett said the man recognized the truck driver as Zimmerman. The man said Zimmerman, who was carrying a gun, asked, "Do you know who I am?" before saying, "I'll (f***ing) kill you."

      Two days later, the man said he saw Zimmerman in his truck outside his workplace. He called police but declined to press charges.

      Delete
    3. Zimmerman just took a ride, and you tribal lizard-brained liberals continue to hound the poor man. Leave him be! If he wants to randomly yell out "I'll fucking kill you," (there's no PROOF he was yelling it at a specific person, is there?) while (once again) following a stranger while carrying a gun, who cares? Are you going to criminalize every behavior there is? Besides, he's getting better: from what I can tell, this was done in broad daylight rather than at night. You're turning this once-great country into a banana republic with your punitive mindset. In the tradition of that great song from Paul McCartney, just Let It Be. Wistful words of wisdom.

      Delete
    4. You're the one not leaving Zimmerman alone. Every time the blogger blows his race dogwhistle, you and your ilk show up to regurgitate your crap. Grow up.

      Delete
  3. ". . . possibly the worst thing you can do to a family in this kind of crisis is to make the abuser unemployed and unemployable,"

    Bob actually agrees with this?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Obviously giving him a raise and a good talking to would be preferable since the other is the worst. Well, she did suggest
      it could have been worse since she only said "possibly."

      Delete
    2. Anon 4:10, must everything be 100% one way? This is a complex subject. Do we know whether or not this was a one time incident with Rice, or a pattern? Ruining him financially, or others in a similar situation can actually hurt the victim, his now wife. You ask whether TDH actually agrees with the quoted statement. Do you? If not, why not? Anon 4:39, obviously the only alternative between making the abuser unemployed and unemployable is to give him raise and a good talking to, thanks for pointing that out.

      Delete
    3. You possibly a dumbfuck AC / MA.

      Delete
  4. "The NFL seems to have a fair number of players who engage in domestic violence. We’d love to see the Players Association step in and make something good happen.

    What would something good look like? We thought Susan Reimer got it right in this part of yesterday’s column in the Baltimore Sun:"

    Well, we read what you posted. Still wondering what something good looks like since Reimer suggested nothing of the sort.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And of course, Reimer, who got it "right" commits a grave error that Somerby used to catch -- when his preferred targets do it.

      Using weasel words such as "I bet" and "possibly" she nevertheless reads the minds of all the "experts" and tells us what they would say.

      Which is, of course, exactly the opposite of what they ARE saying.

      The "experts" I hear are saying that domestic violence is a crime of pattern. If it happens once, the odds are pretty high that it will happen again. And with increasing ferocity.

      And thus, the "worst thing you can do to a family like this" is . . . nothing. Write it off. Excuse it. Believe the guy when he says he is sorry and it will never happen again. And above all, don't make the consequences too hard on the poor guy.

      Delete
    2. He isn't suggesting that "nothing" be done. Rice had already been punished by being directed to counseling and being suspended. The complaint is that with public scrutiny the NFL and Ravens became more punitive, in ways that may be self-defeating if the idea is to help Rice change his behavior.

      Delete
  5. The thing that strikes me is how Janay's contribution to escalating the violence seems to have utterly vanished from the conversation. Who knows what happened beforehand but here's the sequence as I saw it on the TMZ video: Rice spit on his fiancee as she walked by (a clear indication that they had been fighting) who then turned around and slapped him. They then get in the elevator and hang around the floor buttons for a moment or two. Rice moves to the other side of the car at which point his fiancee suddenly lunges at him, obviously in attack mode, whereupon Rice punches her lights out.

    Clearly, his fiancee bears some serious responsibility for what happened because she was a blatantly willing contributor to the escalation of violence. If she hadn't lunged at him she never would have gotten punched.

    And yet nobody seems to care. Everybody is piling on Rice and sanctimoniously ruining not only his life but hers as well. I love moral stands, don't you?

    A lot of women, not just men, are abusive a-holes. But we virtually never hear about them. All we hear about is how men need to control themselves, but never women.

    And if you're a guy who's a victim of domestic abuse, in the overwhelming number of cases you're totally screwed. If you don't fight back you're pathetic. If you do fight back, you're a monster. If you call the cops and you're physically larger than your partner, you're the one who gets arrested.

    Frankly, I think Rice should change is name to Hope Solo and then get back in the NFL as an affirmative action hire in the fight against sexism, because, you know, men have all the advantages.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And on top of all that, no law enforcement person specifically told Rice not to punch his fiance/wife in the face with full force. How was the poor, innocent boy supposed to know?

      Delete
    2. You missed Rice spitting on her the 2nd time, which precipitated "the lunge." Your concern for Ray Rice's well-being is duly noted.

      Delete
    3. Anonymous at 5:25 PM,

      I think it was wrong for Rice to punch his wife full force but, again, doesn't she bear some responsibility for the problem? Did she not escalate the violence by lunching at him? I'm saying that they BOTH bear responsibility. When he spit at her she could have just told him to cut that out and that he was behaving like a child but, no, she slapped him. She escalated.

      Anonymous at 5:56,

      There's this:

      "Ray Rice and Janay Palmer can be heard shouting obscenities at each other, and she appears to spit in the face of the three-time Pro Bowl running back right before he throws a brutal punch in a video shown to The Associated Press by a law enforcement official."

      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/09/ray-rice-video_n_5789752.html

      It was actually Palmer who spit at Rice in the elevator. So female misbehavior is not just being ignored, it's being falsely attributed to the male. By you.

      The same article does say, however, that Rice punched Palmer twice, the first time before she lunged. But she did lunge. She chose to continue the fight and was a completely willing participant in the violence. She as well as Rice need to be held accountable. Not just Rice.

      You know you're dealing with ideologues when the simplest of points go right over their heads.

      Delete
    4. Back atcha slick.

      Delete
    5. "I think it was wrong for Rice to punch his wife full force but, again, doesn't she bear some responsibility for the problem?"

      No, she doesn't.

      And that's a concept you apparently can't grasp.

      What is it now, two dead unarmed teenagers and now an unconcious woman? And it's always their fault?

      Someday, Heironymous, shock me about talking about a victim who didn't really deserve it.

      Delete
    6. Hey HB, you coulda been a contender.

      Delete
    7. Don't you get it? If her face hadn't gotten in the way of his fist, none of this would have happened.

      Delete
    8. Anonymous at 6:58,

      Mere assertion is not proof or logic. It's only assertion. What you can't grasp is that a woman who willingly engages in violence when other options are available is responsible for the continuance of that violence.

      The evidence overwhelmingly indicates that Trayvon Martin was the aggressor in his confrontation with George Zimmerman. That, child, is why Zimmerman won his case. Because the state didn't have one.

      As for what happened in Ferguson, I'm an agnostic and am waiting for the investigation to be completed. Unlike you, I don't pretend to know what really happened.

      I'm not saying that Palmer "deserved" it. I am saying that she bears responsibility for being a willing participant in the violence. Rice hit her way too hard and that was seriously out of proportion.

      And I'm perfectly happy to talke about a victim or group of victims who didn't deserve it. Remember the Duke lacrosse players who were vilified for a gang rape that never happened by so-called liberals? They didn't deserve it, did they?

      Anonymous at 7:10,

      If she hadn't been prone to violence and spit at him after she slapped him and lunged at him after he punched her and walked to the opposite end of the elevator, thus displaying what nowadays is referred to as enthusiastic consent as a willing participant in the violence, she would not have gotten punched out.

      Feminists want women to be treated as equal to men. They just don't want to be held responsible for anything. No unsustainable contradiction there.

      Delete
    9. The evidence showed no such thing. There's a difference between not having enough evidence to convict, and having enough evidence to show who was the "aggressor" -- unless you're a dumbfuck trying to protect their own ego for having passionately taken a position that subsequent events have shown was probably wrong.

      As for the rest of your slop, you sound like Rush Limbaugh. On a bad day. They aren't "feminists," but "feminazis." If you're going to imitate, do it right.

      Delete
    10. Dear Anonymous at 8:25 PM,

      Trayvon Martin had more than enough time to get home. According to the prosecution's own case, Martin had over three-and-a-half minutes to get away from Zimmerman from the moment Zimmerman told police he was running up the concrete walkway. In that amount of time I can easily walk the distance of a football field and a half or 450 feet. In other words, Martin had all the time he needed to get away. Yet the fatal confrontation took place only about 100 to 150 feet from Martin's point of departure. Martin, therefore, must have laid in wait or doubled back. The state's two top witnesses have also effectively damned Martin. The guy closest to the fight said that Martin was on top beating down on Zimmerman and Rachel Jeantel told Piers Morgan after the trial that she told Martin on the phone just before the fight that she thought Zimmerman may have been a gay guy who wanted to rape him. Therefore, the most logical explanation is that Martin died a queer basher. I say good riddance.

      I think Rush Limbaugh is a jerk and that Al Franken's "Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot--and Other Observations" is just about the funniest takedown I've ever read.

      So much rage. So little intelligence. You poor child.

      Delete
    11. Because he didn't (or couldn't) go straight home doesn't represent "overwhelming evidence that he was the aggressor" you dumbfuck. The term "aggressor" has a specific meaning that goes beyond whether he might or might not have "doubled back" or anything else you work up in what passes for your mind. The fact is that no one knows exactly what happened that night, beyond the bare facts. Everything else is just conjecture -- in this case, conjecture coming from someone who made an ass of himself desperately defending somebody who is clearly dangerous, and unworthy of defense. Conjecture isn't "overwhelming evidence."

      As for Limbaugh being a jerk, why do you imitate him then? You "reason" like him, adopt his positions, even use pale imitations of his phraseology. It's the right fit for you, although I understand, and sympathize with, the fact that you're unable to realize that.

      Delete
    12. OK, so what do you think Trayvon was doing with all that time to get away that he had but didn't use? He had a huge head start and plenty of time. Did you know that at trial Jeantel told the jury that Martin told her not to worry about Zimmerman because he was near his father's fiancee's place? So, why shouldn't I think he doubled back? And you previously claimed that Zimmerman's guilt was certain. But you also say "The fact is that no one knows exactly what happened that night." So, how can you presume the certianty of Zimmerman's guilt? Intelligently, I mean.

      Also, you claim that I am "desperate." What evidence do you have that that claim is true? I must say I don't feel desperate and see no reason why I should.

      The thing I notice about you is that you're extremely belligerent and have made serial assertions that you have utterly failed to try and substantiate in any way. Would it be too much to ask that you at least try to prove some of your claims?

      As for your remarks about Limbaugh, those are classic examples of the ad hominem falllicy--as are your claims that I've made an ass of myself and that I'm desperate. A claim is true or not true based on facts and logic. Not who makes the claims. It may interest you to know that Gandhi supported apartheid in South Africa. The Nazis were the first to try to stamp out smoking for health reasons. Falsely tying me to Limbaugh in your own mind in order to dismiss my arguments w/o offering any substantiation on your part is the way an idiot reasons.

      Why am I not surprised?

      Delete
    13. "So much rage. So little intelligence."

      Project much?

      Delete
    14. Look, shithead, f you want to debate the issue, fine. But if all you're good for are cheap excruciatingly witless insults there's no reason why I or any other reasonably intelligent person should respect you or your opinion. You're just angry because I made a logically solid argument exposing the hypocrisy of the left that you aren't even pretending to address. Your remark is the expression of pure, intellectually impotent rage.

      I own you. You're my bitch.

      Delete
    15. Heironymous, you have no idea how completely foolish you look, do you?

      Delete
    16. And if you're a guy who's a victim of domestic abuse, in the overwhelming number of cases you're totally screwed. If you don't fight back you're pathetic. If you do fight back, you're a monster.

      I'm gonna have to go with @12:54P's opinion here. There are battered husbands, but Rice isn't one of them. In the overwhelming number of cases, if you don't fight back, you're the adult; and if you do fight back, you endanger a person you claim to love. If Rice hadn't struck his then-fiance, who would think him pathetic?

      You seem to have no idea about the distinction between contributory responsibility and blame. Palmer has some responsibility for the toxic nature of her relationship with Rice. If she spit on him and slapped him, then for whatever reason she's injected contempt and violence into that relationship. That doesn't relieve Rice of the responsibility for making sure things don't escalate, and it doesn't make him any less culpable for returning a knock-out blow.

      It's the same with Martin. The smart and responsible thing to do is go home without confronting a stranger in the dark. But the law doesn't require that. Who's to blame for Martin's death can't be known because (contrary to your blithe claims) we don't know what happened immediately after the two came face to face. Florida law is written so that it could be one, the other, or neither.

      Delete
    17. Deadrat,

      She hit him. That's battery. The fact that he's bigger is beside the point because she felt perfectly comfortable doing it. And when you say that men shouldn't fight back then you are admitting to a sexist double standard exist that clearly disfavors men.

      Show me some evidence that the idea that a man who takes hitting from his wife is to be admired as an adult is in any way a mainstream position.

      Like almost all feminists you think men should women's willing punching bags. You couldn't be more clear about it. Fuck you, you man-hating shit-for-brains.

      According to Zimmerman it was Martin who confronted him and the evidence overwhelmingly shows that. And since, according to you, "we don't know what happened" you are implicitly admitting that you're talking out of the usual location because you've blatantly contradicted yourself.

      Sadly, I have to go back to work. I'd love to continue.

      Delete
    18. I don't know what Martin was doing, or why he was doing it, in those 3.5 minutes, and neither do you. And only a dumbfuck, AND someone deeply invested in Zimmerman's, not just lack of guilt, but total innocence, would consider those 3.5 minutes as "overwhelming evidence" that Martin, who had been followed around for what, 10 minutes by an armed Zimmerman who has since demonstrated (as if this instance alone wasn't enough) that he has more than one screw loose, was suddenly the "aggressor."


      I call you a dumbfuck not to insult you, but because you are one. I also use the word because there is really no other word in our language that even approaches the depth of your dumfuckery. Don't burn any of those burgers you flip. For people like you, jobs are hard to come by.

      Delete
    19. HB,

      Whoa, there! I'm afraid you might have some anger issues of your own. Perhaps you should get that checked out.

      Where do you get the idea that I think that men should be women's punching bags? As I said, there are numerous cases of battered husbands. Just because women are smaller and physically weaker than men on average doesn't mean that's true for every couple, especially when one of them is enraged. Everyone under attack has the right to self-defense, including those husbands.

      My position is that physical attack is out of bounds for both parties. But it happens, and when it does, the usual circumstance is that the stronger party is the man. That's the result of the sexual dimorphism of our species, and not because I'm some man-hating shit-for-brains. I think that both parties bear a responsibility to back away from violence when it flares up, but I think that applies especially to the party capable of inflicting injury but only capable of sustaining insult. Just because Palmer struck Rice doesn't relieve him of his obligation to back away.

      As for Zimmerman, we have his self-serving statements (but not under oath) that Martin confronted him, but that's not necessarily a crime. If the confrontation put Zimmerman in reasonable fear for his safety, that's one thing. Asking "What's your problem?" wouldn't qualify. When I say we don't know what happened, I mean that we (which includes you) don't know enough of what happened to make a legal determination of criminal liability. I don't see how this constitutes anything close to contradicting myself.

      Delete
  6. The beautiful anti-union propaganda movie, "On the Waterfront"?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anti-union? I thought it was pro-rat.

      Delete
  7. And for those who think Somerby still has "important things to say" here is is Edie's speech to Terry from "On the Waterfront."

    You decide how it relates to a professional athlete knocking a woman unconscious in an elevator:

    TERRY: Now you got me. The way those sisters used to whack me, I don't know what. They thought they was going to beat an education into me, but I foxed them.

    EDIE: Maybe they just didn't know how to handle you.

    TERRY: How would you have done it?

    EDIE: With a little more patience and kindness. That's what makes people mean and difficult. People don't care enough about them.

    ReplyDelete
  8. The person who gets hurt worse is innocent. For example, the Axis Powers, so horribly beaten by the Allies, were innocent. It was all the Allies' fault, and they have still not been brought to justice.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The person who "starts it" deserves whatever happens to them. There is no concept of asymmetrical justice, disproportionate punishment, excessive force in retaliation for being "wronged." For example, Saddam Hussein once said something bad about some American somewhere at some time. He got what was coming to him. As did the Iraqi people.

      Will some dumbfuck on a par with Brainlesstree applaud me now? Wait, there is no one o that particular par.

      Delete
    2. For your information at Anonymous at 8:07, I retroactively favor WW II because the Germans really were a bunch of evil bastards who wanted to take over the world and killed tens of millions of people for shits and giggles. Saddam Hussein was a murderous bastard so claiming that the reason we went to war with him was because he "said something bad, about some American somewhere," is nothing short of retarded. Even so I was against the Iraq war because 1) He had nothing to do with 9/11 and 2) saw the needless damage it would do. What Anonymous at 7:22 was mocking is the idea that a person who gets their ass kicked is automatically regarded as a victim unless it's a white guy. Because that's what's really brainless and stupid.

      I think your reading comprehension needs some work.

      Delete
    3. Yes, and Ray Rice's (now) wife is just like the Germans in WWII.

      You dumbfuck.

      Delete
    4. Well now, I didn't exactly say that, did I?

      What I did say was that Ms. nee Palmer was jointly responsible with Rice for escalating the violence and, therefore shared responsibility for her own injury. You can rage and call me a dumbfuck all you like but all you're doing is showing that you, like the the then Ms Palmer, have anger management issues in need of addressing.

      You dumbfuck.

      Delete
    5. I recall instances of propagandists speaking of "the next Hitler" to trick people and do really bad things. Reality check, the guy in question is not Hitler, so Nazi Germany shouldn't even have to come into consideration.

      Delete
    6. Then you obviously didn't get the original point.

      Delete
    7. Every time the blogger waves his bloody shirt, scumbags like Brainleak show up to spew their filth, yet the blogger bemoans the exploitation of the Rices. What a hypocrite.

      Delete
    8. I did not bemoan the exploitation of Rice. I bemoaned his ridiculously one-sided and unfair treatment. That was utterly clear from what I wrote. I am not a hypocrite. You are a hypocrite because you claim you want equal treatment for women but you don't want them held responsible for their contribution to domestic abuse. Only men. You're also a sanctimonious bag of gas.

      Delete
    9. People are unwilling to examine the woman's contribution because part of domestic abuse involves a man believing that marriage (or relationship) entitles him to dictate and control a woman's behavior, whatever it might be, instead of her making autonomous choices about how to behave in the relationship. The abuse is correction for her independence of action, not for what she has done. There is no point in examing the woman's contribution under these circumstances because there is nothing she can do that won't contribute to receiving more abuse. The abuse is to assert control, not because of what she did or didn't do. This itself is abusive because two adult people should each have the right to make their own choices about what to do, without one being told by the other what to do or being punished for doing something "wrong". You seem to want to further this idea by "examining" what the woman did to evoke the abuse from her partner. That isn't the way relationships work.

      Equal treatment for women means they don't get hit -- no matter what they do "wrong."

      Delete
    10. HB,
      RE: Saddam Hussein: "He had nothing to do with 9/11.."

      Why would you support war with Iraq, even if he did? Clearly the U.S. bears some responsibility for 9/11.

      Berto

      Delete
    11. Anonymous September 13, 2014 at 10:24 AM could be describing Franklin Roosevelt's policy toward Germany and Japan before Pearl Harbor. He was trying to limit their freedom of action, trying to get them to behave in the way he preferred. After they spat at him, he joined his allies in kicking the shit out of them.

      Delete
    12. No, you dumbfuck, you simply "applauded" a post that did.

      Delete
    13. anon 4:00 p.m, what you have to say is not totally without reason, but I would suggest that the repeated use of the pejorative term "dumbfuck" doesn't help your argument and is being overused by you.

      Delete
    14. Overused? Can we humans reason at all? Is our reasoning really a set of cartoons? Is it cartoons all the way down?
      Can we talk?

      Delete
  9. You know who else isn't big on punishment culture? Criminals. Bob, you are way off base on this one. Ray Rice should be in prison for what he did to his wife.

    ReplyDelete
  10. It depends on what your goals are. Punishment works to suppress unwanted behavior, but only when it is severe. So going easy on abusers won't stop abuse.

    If your goal is to teach couples to get along better, punishment will be entirely ineffective and counterproductive.

    The NFL doesn't care about helping save the Rice marriage. Nor do the people calling for Rice to be put in jail.

    If you believe that abusive people cannot change then punishment makes more sense than counseling. Maybe the punishment ought to be automatic mandatory court-enforced divorce with equal division of all property.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "It depends on what your goals are."

      How about, to show we, as a society will not tolerate this kind of behavior, and to warn others who might act like this that they will get the same response?

      Berto

      Delete
    2. I don't think evidence supports the idea that severe punishment deters crime and I don't agree that sending society a message is more important than helping two people make their marriage work (without violence).

      Delete
    3. So if we just reduce consequences for committing crimes to mere slaps on the wrists and "counseling" the crime rate would remain the same?

      Look, there are people out there who will commit horrible crimes knowing full well the severe consequences.

      But then there are other people who might think twice. And I think the toughening of DUI laws are a pretty good example of that.

      Or do you think that "designated drivers" just sprung up out of the blue?

      Delete
    4. This goes to your theories about why domestic violence occurs. It isn't only about hitting but also about other forms of abuse within a relationship. How will strong punishment change a man's view that he owns a woman and can dictate how she must behave? Only counseling can get at that. Getting hit isn't the worst thing that can happen to a woman in an abusive relationship.

      Delete

  11. I promise Dr.Brave if my husband come back i will shear testimony about him.

    Hello to every one i want to testify of what a spell caster has done for me,i was in a relationship for two years happy with my partner few months to our wedding he left me and went after another woman he never came back home again, i cry all day looking for help i have contacted so many spell caster but no result one day i was on the internet when i came across a testimony on how Dr.Brave helped some one to get back his lover so i gave a try and it work out for me am so happy to have my lover back to my self again thanks once again Dr.Brave for helping me to bring back my lover if you are passing through the same problem or any kind of situation and you think all hope is lost my dear is not. contact Dr.Brave on his email : bravespellcaster@gmail.com, or kindly visit he website http://bravespellcaster.yolasite.com . .He is real.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I wish we could just leave "On The Waterfront" out of it. Talk about creeping Dowdism.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If Dowdism creeps at the rate of Cudzu, it should be at Hudson's Bay and Cuernevaca by now.

      Delete


  13. I WANT TO USE THESE MEDIUM TO ENCOURAGE MAN AND WOMAN THAT ARE HEART BROKEN , IN PAIN OR DEPRESSED BECAUSE OF THEIR MARRIAGE OR LONG TERM RELATIONSHIP TO FORGET ABOUT THERE WORRIES FOR THE WILL GET THE HELP THE WANT OR HAPPIENESS BACK.I was married to my husband for 4 years and all of a sudden he started seeing another lady (his mistress).he started hailing at me and he was abusive.. and he hated me , but I still loved him with all my heart . the situation made me unsettle and not to focus at work .so a friend told me about trying (prophet salifu )spiritual means to get my husband back and introduced me to him ? i did not listen to her and hoped that my husband will come back home . after 9 month of seperation and depression , it got out of hand and my husband came back home to break the news to me that he want a divorce that he is getting married to his mistress .Hmmm it was so shocking to me ,i felt sad and more depressed ,so i contacted my friend again and decieded to try to use spiritual means reluctantly..although I didn't believe in all those things? I never thought in a million years that i will get my husband back to me a again. but I was proved wrong.after 24 hours, my husband came back and was pleading..he had realized his mistakes..i just couldn't believe it that we are back together. I am deeply satisfied and thankful with prophet salifu work .if you also want to fix you marriage or relationship email him at prophetsalifu@yahoo.com or prophetsalifu@gmail.com , his work is for a better life .

    ReplyDelete