Praxis International encourages domestic violence, when properly applied

Proponents of the New Perspectives approach to domestic violence have long been aware of the sexist, and otherwise biased nature of what has become the "traditional" public response to domestic violence. To the detriment of the public in general, governments at all levels, from federal to local, have been forced to cooperate with political activist groups whose ultimate objectives have little or nothing to do with aiding couples and families where intimate parter abuse is a problem.

Utilizing a fabricated scenario that only addresses the perceived political nature of the issue from a radical feminist standpoint, these political activist groups have managed in the past several decades to establish themselves as "experts" in the field, when nothing could be further from the truth. Time and again, the feminist scenario of domestic violence fails to stand up to scrutiny, since there was never any substance behind the notion that all domestic violence is politically motivated and a political/governmental solution is by any means viable.

One such political activist organization is the Duluth, MN based Praxis International, which states clearly on the entry page of its website: "We work with local, statewide, and national reform initiatives to bridge the gap between what people need and what institutions provide. Since 1996, we have worked with advocacy organizations, intervention agencies, and inter-agency collaborations to create a clear and cooperative agenda for social change in their communities."  It is entirely government-funded, though their IRS 990 forms from 2005, 2006, and 2007 note a decrease in funding from nearly $3 million to $2 million per year. They share a building in downtown Duluth with a soup kitchen, a clothing bank, and other DV-related and social service orgs.

A good portion of their website is devoted to activism, community organizing, and many things which point to their mission of elevating the social status of one group of people over another. Any mention of intimate partner abuse is based on reinforcing their outdated, extreme views in such a way as to make them seem plausible; and an attractive means of "eliminating violence in the lives of women and children."  Nowhere on the site is anything that suggests that their knowledge of "what people need" has come from anything but their arrogant presumption.

Further evidence of their intentions is to be found here:

Praxis was organized in 1996 by activists in the battered women's movement to work with other social change activists seeking to end violence against women. Praxis helps advocacy organizations and inter-agency collaborations analyze how institutions of social control can be challenged to adopt practices and philosophical approaches that promote autonomy, integrity and safety for women and their children. In 1997, we developed a method of analyzing criminal justice and human service agency responses to women who are abused by their partners. This analysis of institutional practices is called an ethnography, or audit.

I wouldn't have known anything about this org but for an e-mail I got from Marc Angelucci, of NCFM. The e-mail was about the outrage felt by participants at the recent Washington State Domestic Violence Coalition (WSDVC) annual conference, where Amanda McCormick, (left) an employee of Praxis said with a grin, "I think I know a lot of men who deserve to be beaten," during her keynote address.

The e-mail he sent to the org looking for an explanation was answered by Janice Wick, Associate Director of Praxis, who said: "Amanda McCormick is an employee of Praxis International but was not representing Praxis at the Washington conference. As I was not present, I can not speak to your concerns. I would not want to make a judgment based on a sentence that may or may not have been taken out of context. I will forward your email to Amanda and she will respond to you directly."

While Marc awaits a response from Amanda herself, I decided to do a little sleuthing. What I found was an eye-opener. Mccormick's statement was really not of out character for the org, which has done a lot to encourage the belief that women do not abuse, should always be perceived as victims, and should be treated differently by courts and law enforcement. What McCormick was doing, in fact, was making a statement of policy for Praxis International. Janice Wick should have been aware of this policy, so it is surprising she wasn't prepared to stand by her girl. Or maybe it shouldn't be surprising, as Amanda is apparently white and middle-class, and Praxis apparently doesn't like them much more than they like men. So Amanda gets thrown under the bus.

Consider the following:

At a Crossroads:Developing a Prosecution Response to Battered Women Who Fight Back

(Manual)  Item #13 -- $30

The Crossroads Program is a program intended for victims of ongoing domestic abuse who are charged with criminal offenses against their partners. It provides participants an opportunity to address violence within the larger context of their victimization. It holds the participants accountable without invoking the full ramifications of the criminal court process.                                                            

Making Social Change: Reflections on Individual and Institutional Advocacy with Women Arrested for Domestic Violence -- By Martha McMahon and Ellen Pence.

Violence Against Women, Vol 9, No. 1, January 2003

Excerpt 1

A strong notion of the social or public good inspired the original changes in the Criminal Justice system to better protect women from violence. Using the same argument that court interventions should serve the public good, women's advocates in Duluth encourage prosecutors to defer cases where women have used violence but were clearly not battering their partners. They argued that public safety is not enhanced by pursuing a prosecution simply because it is technically possible. This, advocates point out, is not the spirit or intent of the legal traditions granting prosecutors broad authority to determine how to charge and prosecute in the interest of justice and the public good. Is there a public interest, advocates ask, in prosecuting women who are being beaten, refuse to "take it," and hit back? Given the gendered nature of violence, should prosecutors not  take into account the difference in risks to such a woman and to her partner

Excerpt 2

Finally, women arrested for domestic violence require an aggressive advocacy program to take up the cause of women who fight back. Today, increasing numbers of advocacy programs are using gender-neutral language to describe their services. When battered women are arrested, advocates are told they cannot advocate for these women because they are not victims but the offenders. In a culture where dominant understandings of equity and fairness rely on the denial of the reality of differences, the strategies we advocate will initially be perceived as unfair or as expressing a double standard. Women's advocates will need to become sophisticated and adept at explaining the gendered nature of violence and the meaning of pursuing equality in social contexts where people are clearly not equal in power and social resources

But even the best arguments will be countered by accusations of reverse sexism. While it is important not to ignore perceptions of unfairness, it is equally important not to capitulate to reactionary forces resisting our goal to provide a community response that protects women from ongoing abuse. Women who fight back become increasingly  vulnerable to their abusers if the advocacy community does not recognize their actions as legitimate responses to being beaten. The idealized image of the perfect victim and the naïve notion that there is a healthy or proper way of being abused makes women who fight back, women who are prostituted, women who have become addicted to drugs or alcohol, and women who are homeless more vulnerable to both the abuser and the institutions they turn to for help.

The leadership in women’s advocacy programs that is white, middle-class, and oriented toward a predominantly westernized view of social relationships can learn much from the struggles of marginalized groups and third world women—whose demands for equity are falsely represented as demands for special privileges or cultural exceptions.

As demonstrated in these struggles, it is important to resist seeing advocacy for women who use violence as an issue of bias or special treatment. It should be remembered that much of the battered women’s movement’s work has been to challenge the social sanctioning of male violence in the private sphere and to end the protections afforded such male privilege by the criminal justice system and other institutions. Every effort we have made has met with resistance and claims that we seek to establish a double standard. We have consistently fought against such efforts to obscure women’s realities. Battered  women who use violence to protect themselves from brutal partners deserve no less from us.

Much more of the same nonsense is to be found at the link. As to be expected, there are some weird acrobatics with words in an attempt to make it all seem gender-neutral. However, the upshot of it all is this: when women use violence it should not be considered as battery.

In other words: men deserve to be beaten.  

 

Some facts about WSDVC's "DV University"

From the site:

DV University starts with an all-campus assembly where we'll take a hard look at our methods and our goals. Visiting faculty Amanda McCormick of Praxis International will speak about their cutting-edge research into the most effective ways to work with survivors, improve as advocates, and change how the public thinks about domestic violence. The Praxis approach offers both practical ideas to reinvigorate your daily work and a large scale change in perspective that will renew your hope in a world without violence.  

Supporters of this violence promotion festival included:

• Washington State Department of Social and Health Services, Children’s Administration, Division of Program and Policy

• Washington State Department of Commerce, Office of Crime Victims Advocacy

• U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families

• U.S. Department of Justice, Office on Violence Against Women

In collaboration with:

HHS Office on Women’s Health – Region 10