>A.A. Implicit in this is that violence against boys is acceptable. Do you >think it is? No, not acceptable -- inevitable. I'm just saying that putting out such a statistic [like 100% of boys are victims of assault by age 18 is absolutely meaningless]. It doesn't tell us anything and it's actually deceitful, precisely because they include silly things like affirmative answers to 'have you ever had a wrestling match with a friend get out of hand' or 'have you ever engaged in after-the-whistle pushing and shoving in a sports event?'. My point is that if you throw a big enough net, you'll eventually catch all the fish under whatever rubric you throw. You can prove anything if you relax your limitations enough. If you use the same kind of criteria for boys as you do for girls then you MUST conclude that the man abuse problem is out of hand, when in fact, it simply isn't. In other words, of course spousal/child abuse is not to be condoned, but the 'problem' simply isn't as far-reaching as it is purported by certain interested parties. And everyone includes things to beef up their numbers when those things are actually "outliers". > > It all depends on how you define 'mental illness'. It all depends on what > > 'violence' is. It all depends... > >A.A. I define violence as anything that invades my personal space without >my consent. I find that kind of invasion unacceptable. How do you define >violence? Well, a friend of mine was convicted, not just charged, but CONVICTED of assault for yelling at someone. I don't think yelling is violence. Was that prick who charged him with yelling a victim of violence? No, but he should be in the future if karma really does work. not as pissed off as I come across, paul ########## Paul Stone pas@xxxxxxxx Kingsville, ON, Canada ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html