Since the beginning of the year 44 Spanish women have died at the hands of current or past husbands, fiances and lovers. 28 of these women were over 40. Only eight had asked for protection. Despite the war declared on sexist violence by the governmnet of Jose Zapatero, and despite the resources dedicated to fighting it, the problem gets worse.  73 women were killed by men close to them in 2010, 18 more than the year before.

“The fight with violence against women is a rout of our socialist government”, the director of the Foro Español por la Familia Benigno Blanco told Rzeczpospolita. He says “the fault lies with the purely ideological approach to the problem, which is essentially very complex”.

“It’s not just a matter of conflict between the sexes, there is also a cultural component, of personal ethical culture or upbringing, or, for example, alcoholism”. He pointed out that violence is significantly  more common in informal relationships. 

From here (google translate version – it confuses subject and object a lot, and “sam” means himself, not Sam-the-name, but if you bear in mind it’s the men doing the stabbing you’ll get the gist).

 Newspapers are very frustrating. This is an interesting story, but there’s no debate, no presentation of argument and answer. They’ve quoted someone who “would say that sort of thing”; the other major daily would have picked someone would say the other sort of thing. I was a bit disappointed when I came back to this story this morning to blog it and noticed who the quotee represented. It’s not that what he says doesn’t seem to make sense, but it’s not much use in discussion with someone who is convinced of the rightness of what a socialist government does and what a feminist ideology says.

I was the more interested because I just came across Erin Pizzey, famous (I learn) for setting up a women’s refuge in London. Possibly a screaming femino-nazi, one thinks. But in fact she sees domestic violence as being about persons, as involving moral agents. Funny I should be particularly moved by reading that her dream in founding the refuge was “women working with women in co-operation with men”. I have been reading some of the statements of Wanda Nowicka, the abortion campaigner who tried and failed to sue for defamation of character someone who pointed out she was paid by concerns making money from abortion and contraception; less interest in people, in human beings, than in her brand of woman. The usefulness of Pizzey’s statements is that she worked hands on in the field she is talking about. Like the Good Counsel Network (who, incidentally, need some material help at the moment). Wanda Nowicka isn’t, I will bet, spending inconvenient time and money she can’t afford helping socially vulnerable women not to have abortions.


Advertisements