More on the Lesbians are Violent Theory by Mitch Berg
from the comment thread on Mitch's blog:
A week or more ago, I commented:
Mitch, I missed the defense of your citations until today. I did respond to this on my blog. Am I going to waste my time reading Renzetti? No - domestic violence really isn't an issue I'm interested in.
It still isn't very honest or ethical to continue using that citation - which you say is an error - on your post about Lucy's. There is some ethics in correcting bad information.
To which Mitch responds about a week later:
Well, now that this has died down a bit:
Eva: I DON'T CARE how violent lesbians are. In my PERSONAL, ANECDOTAL experience, and in the bit of Renzetti that I absorbed back when hatred of Renzetti was ds rigeur among gay activists, there are some violent lesbians out there; no more proportionately than gay straights, certainly, but when they ("they" meaning violent people of any orientation) get together and start drinking, violence increases and things like common-sense and rationality drop off sharply. Which was my point in the original thread - which you've managed to pound into oblivion during three weeks (!) of this gawdforsaken ranting!
EY: Hey, that's true for anyone. Get a bunch of drunks together - and sometimes there are bar fights. Your original statement on the St Paul
list said this:
There is dispute on this point, but lesbians seem to be statistically at least as disposed to violence as any other group, and some would say more so. This has been my experience. This is not a knock on lesbians - but there does seem to be a physically aggressive streak among a sizeable minority.
Then you back it up with this:
- Gays and lesbians seem to be no less prone to domestic violence
[this source says what Mitch says it does]
- A wide variety of sources echo the notion that lesbians are, at the very least, no less violent than straight males. [this one goes to a footnote which doesn't say what you claim it does - the article talks about domestic
violence in Gay and Lesbian relationships]
- That violence among lesbians has some different precursors than violence among straights - but then, violence is violence, right?
[cursory look - this seems to say what Mitch says it does]
- Claire Renzetti's Violence in gay and lesbian domestic partnerships (New York: Harrington Park Press, 1996) claimed to find a higher statistical incidence of violence among lesbian couples than among straights or gay male couples.
[haven't read or heard of this book before Mitch mentioned it.]
And if you were upfront enough to say that the footnote was "inadvertendent" in your blog comments, why not be upfront enough to put the correction in your blog entry? Inquiring Minds want to know.
Rusty: You seem to take gross offense to my saying "Rusty, whoever he is" - as if I should have researched you before I wrote anything. Jeez, uncork it; it was a flippant observation about a poster who (to be honest) hadn't impressed me much. I have met Tom Swift. I don't agree with everything he says - he may have different views on gays than I do (not that I'd know from his enemies' fevered rantings, which the proceedings on this blog only hint at - you'd think he killed someone, from the rhetoric he seems to draw). I voted for him, because he HAS done this community an invaluable service by exposing some of the low-level, venial corruption and mutual back-scratching between the School Board and groups like "Progressive Minnesota". I don't know enough about the issue that put him in local gay groups' crosshairs - the "Out For Equity" fracas - to comment, so I won't.
EY: Actually, Swift was the author of a flyer that showed Al Oertwig's advertisement in Lavender, and added a comment about the "homosexual
agenda". Al Oertwig is openly gay, and serves on the school board. Swift was clearly trying to make his homosexuality an issue, rather than the issue that should be debated - and that is whether he should serve on the St Paul School Board. Obviously, the voters in St Paul rejected Swift's
bigoted appeal. In fact, Swift's flyer just served to help Oertwig raise money for his campaign - which to me seems to be the best way to use such flyers.
As far as the concerns Swift raised about Progressive Minnesota and their role in School Board races - and the money they got from the SPPS (even though it was a "private" grant) - I thank Swift for raising those concerns also. If Swift would have run on that, without trying to pander to anti-gay bigotry, I'd have voted for him also if I lived in St Paul.
About a year or so back, Swift got on the Minneapolis Issues list and posted about a "Loring Men and Boys" yahoo group that was supposedly representative of the gay community in Minneapolis. Somehow he missed the "Minneapolis Married and Looking" yahoogroup in the same group category.
Swift's own words on the St Paul Issues list clearly show him to be rather obscessed with anti-gay attitudes. It's nothing I've said about him - just his own words.
On the other hand, Rusty, I have never met you. Judging only by your style of writing, I'd say you live in your mother's basement and sit endlessly at your computer, honing your "I can insult you worse than you can insult me, ha ha, hee hee" style of writing for 15 hours a day. No, I don't know that for a fact - just an observation. You may be wonderfully fine, functional, rational human being - but your first impression with me - the owner of this site, lest you wonder - was a very poor one.
(Note to the audience: I fully expect Eva or Rusty to carefully excise context-free pieces from this omment to continue this endlessly-recursive argument).
EY: Actually, no, the complete post was taken - and I respond point by point. A link is given to the original so people can read for themselves.
Mr. Howe - I'm "off the mark" exactly how (so to speak)? In asking for people to reserve their judgement about the goings-on in the bar? In calling Eva "grossly unethical" for crossposting my private email address to a dozen other groups (note that my spam count has gone WAY up since this thread started)? Help me out here.
And, Rusty - cowardice has nothing to do with being glad this thread fell off the bottom of my blog. Unlike most of you, I don't LIVE for this kind of mindless rhubarb. I've read Eva's blog, and some of the USAQ mailing list traffic; it's all about dissecting the finest points of the most meaningless arguments with Yeshiva-like zeal...
..and to what end? To me, none! I have two kids to raise, a job to do,
To add some more comments go here.
Seems like he wants this to start up again.