Domestic violence : What everyone wants to ignore

In l?express of 24th November, I came across an interview by a feminist lawyer, Rada Gungaloo, where she refers to O. J. Simpson?s case. To her, this is one instance illustrative of man?s difficulty in accepting his separation from his wife. Why should it be so? Should all couples enter and leave matrimony to the whims and caprices of a partner. What if all couples suddenly start to separate after a while of living together?

What does the feminist lawyer implies? She refers to a case where a husband is convinced to his wife?s infidelity and adultery. Should husbands pass over silence the adultery of their wives? This approach is characteristic of most people involved in the current debate. None ever asks: Why is there any domestic violence? Almost all articles or debates I come across ignore this question.

Domestic violence occurs mostly when there is a breakdown in marital relationship. And why does this happen ? To answer the question we need more the opinions of those involved and of psychologists or sociologists, not necessarily feminist lawyers. Has anyone considered whether feminism and the mounting repressive laws directed mainly againt man might be the source of family instability ? The main premise on which feminism is predicated, namely, that the female gender is a consistently innocent creature is no longer true.

Domestic violence should not be so narrowly confined as a debate. We are living in a society where free-floating adultery is widespread by both sexes. Should we consider it as the progress of the modern age? That the husband should accept marital separation easily as implied by the feminist lawyer? I am of opinion that society is doing much harm by allowing such issues as domestic violence prominently in the hands of some feminist lawyers. It is high time we should question the premises of feminism and their true objectives.

L. BUCKTAWOR