How about this? Just 30 or 40 years ago it was basically accepted that a man could slap a child or his wife to keep them in line. Today this is now considered corporal punishment (for the child) and is banned by most states in Australia and the other is considered domestic violence and also against the law.

I can see the day in maybe 30 or 40 years time that displaying anger will be considered unacceptable also. Not against the law just simply seen as understandable because we make mistakes but still a mistake and therefore unacceptable, just like our violence is being tamed.

Here is the my draft book cover for my next book, if I ever get around to writing it.
IMV: How to Fight Bias, In My View

Is Domestic Violence caused by Domestic Anger? To me the answer an obvious, “yes!”.
All violence to me is unacceptable and domestic violence is no exception.

But could anyone argue that Domestic Violence is not caused by anger ?
I don’t think so. Of course this is very simplistic but to me it is a good start and then we could look at the causes of Domestic Anger and start to deal with them.

But when I type it in Google and read some of the articles, the word “anger” is generally left out. Ha! I say, what a joke. Maybe they think it is too obvious? But I don’t think so. If you read this Australian government article:

Key issues in domestic violence

…out of 8000 words, anger was referred to once and nothing to do with causing DV.
That’s right! If I was writing on domestic violence I think I would dedicate 80% to DOMESTIC ANGER.

So what is going on here and why is anger not discussed as a major cause of domestic violence?
Well I think that it is because the tables would have to be turned and instead of men mainly being referred to as the perpetrators, we would, for the first time, have to include women as part of the (anger) problem. As I believe that both women and men get angry in domestic situations.

So, when governments and NGO’s are really ready to tackle Domestic Violence, in my view, all they will need to do is look at Domestic Anger and its causes and look at how we can reduce it in men and women before Domestic Violence occurs.

We could even start the Domestic Anger discussion off with this proposal of mine,
that we agree that:
“Anger is understandable but not acceptable”
Or in other words we need to be accountable for our own anger and cannot blame anyone else for us getting angry.

I am no fan of this cliche as that is just what it is to me, but have you ever thought what this question is really for?

Well, I think it is to gauge what type of conversation someone is up for and for how long
they might have. Maybe a better question to ask could be:
“Hi, have you got any preference today, for how you would like to be treated during our conversation?”

I actually tried this today with someone I had met previously at my local Startbucks
in Surfers Paradise. His reply was that he would love to talk but he has an assignment
that he has to get out. So after my explicit question I got his explicit answer and we kept the conversation to a minimum.

Imagine, I am 55 and it has taken me that long to ask such an explicit question on a topic that drives how we relate with each other. No wonder I am still single. But if no one else is using explicit language it is no wonder to me, that so many failed relationships exist, also.

Imagine this, that we are all victims. But not victims of perpetrators but victims of ignorance?

Imagine also that from now on, we stopped blaming anybody or everybody for what goes wrong in our world. And we start blaming the ignorance, mine and yours, that has led to our problems.

This is  a rather radical and controversial thought as it would mean that we would finally have to stop blaming such people as Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot, our parents and ex-husbands for what they did and start attributing our past problems to ignorance.

If we agreed to this then, in my view, there would be a huge shift to reducing ignorance in the world.

I believe that my ignorance has a long way to go to be removed and maybe a realistic goal might be more about reducing it rather than perfectly removing it.

So from now on I will be focusing on reducing ignorance, especially my own.

Labeling Theory is an oldie but a goodie. It was very popular in the 80’s and 90’s not to
label the person by their behavior. ie. Sexist, racist, pessimist, pervert, etc etc.

This was based on such labeling theories from Frank Tannenbaum, Edwin Lemert,
Erving Goffman and many others. Basically stating that “Labeling theory holds that deviance is not inherent to an act, but instead focuses on the tendency of majorities to negatively label minorities or those seen as deviant from standard cultural norms”.
And “…satisfies society’s need to control the behavior”.

Tannenbaum found that “This initial tagging may cause the individual to adopt it as part of their identity. The crux of Tannenbaum’s argument is that the greater the attention placed on this label, the more likely the person is to identify themselves as the label.

More form Wikipedia:
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labeling_theory

“While society uses the stigmatic label to justify its condemnation, the deviant actor uses it to justify his actions.”

“They do what they do with an eye on what others have done, are doing now, and may do in the future. One tries to fit his own line of action into the actions of others, just as each of them likewise adjusts his own developing actions to what he sees and expects others to do.”

“Central to stigmatic labeling is the attribution of an inherent. fault. It is as if one says: ‘There must be something wrong with these people. Otherwise, why would we treat them so badly?’ ”

So where am I leading from all of this? Well it seems like in 2014 we seem to have forgotten this simple premise. Since the Ted talk given by Susan Cain, on The Power of Introverts, it seems like everybody that has ever felt shy in their past are now labeling themselves as introverts, as though it is a great badge of honor to carry this or any other label.

I believe that we label to form sides and it then allows to take one side or the other and to be member of a club. Democrat – Republican,  Extrovert – Introvert, Victim – Perpetrator, and the disorders such as ADHD and PTSD. The last two labels are a way, in my view, to
fail to look at the cause of parents that are poor at parenting and governments that are
poor at governing (need to send soldiers off to war).

We all seem to want to find our place and now if we don’t want to be part of this labeling caper  we can end up the deviant or heretic.
“…refusing to be classified it is him they blame the most” Dire Straits, Industrial Disease.

Well I am saying it here that I refuse to agree to classifying or labeling either myself or others. I may do it in error or habit at times, which is understandable, but still not acceptable to me.

Am I honest or am I dishonest that is the question. Such a silly question in my view but ask most people if they are honest and they will say basically “yes”.

My response would be basically “no”, which seems to shock most.
It is all very ironic for anyone that is half intelligent of which I am not gong to explain here.

The real problem is that the question is even allowed and that we talk in such polar language or black and white thinking. Of course we have a degree of “honesty” or a degree of “dishonesty”. The fact that we side on the honest side is part of our level of dishonesty or bias in my view, and all part of the irony that I said would not explain but I lied!.

I was asked by someone yesterday how does she know whether to trust her gut or her logic when she is making a decision?

My gut/logic response was instant and decisive, suggesting that she finds someone that
she can trust and bounce her ideas off, getting their valued opinion.

What would your answer be?

For all of my childhood and for most of my adulthood I have been expecting others to treat me a certain way.

I am sorry. Only recently I have realised that I cannot legitimately expect anything from anyone in the world. I can’t even expect anyone not to expect something from me.

Maybe the act of expecting something from someone else is the definition of slavery.

I think that it is time that the act and desire to enslave others for our own purposes became unacceptable. Understandable, but not acceptable.