For the most part, the fight against domestic violence has been lead by left-leaning people. I am making a case that conservatives should take a strong stance against domestic violence as well. The reason is not gender equality, and it is not nonviolence. Conservatism believes in neither. Rather the reasons are two concepts central to conservatism: Character and incentives. Much conservative ideation revolves around the concept of character. A man who beats up on people who can't defend themselves from him does not have character; he is a coward and a slimeball. One major part of character is self-control, and another major part of character is refusing to abuse one's power. From the perspective of character, it stands to reason that violence toward women is incompatible with character; which means that it is incompatible with conservatism. Another concept central to conservatism is that of incentives. The conservative wants to make profitable the actions that are beneficial and not profitable the actions that aren't. There needs to be an incentive on men to act with character; and that means, to avoid being violent to their wives. For this reason both the institution of divorce, which makes it possible for women and children to leave situations of violence, and the institution of jailing men who are guilty of serious violence, work for the benefit of conservatism. They make it profitable for men to behave with character toward their wives and their children and not profitable for men to act without character toward their wives and their children. Thus, according to conservatism itself, there need to be strong laws in place - and strong enforcement of these laws in place - to prevent violence toward women and children. Men need to be taught to behave like gentlemen, and strong measures need to be taken against men who do not. Character most certainly demands controlling oneself around the people who are closest to oneself. And incentives, whether the right for the woman to leave a man who practices violence toward the woman and the children, or criminalization of domestic violence, must be in place to demand this gentlemanly behavior. The fight against violence to women should not only involve people on the Left. The conservatives should be in the front lines of this fight as well, as doing so is a natural outgrowth of conservative values. Character most certainly means controlling oneself around the people closest to oneself. The men of goodwill will do that anyway. But for men of ill will, there is a need for incentives to act with character. A lot of men who practice real abuses toward wives and children hide behind social conservatism and then go around posturing that they have character or values and that other people do not. They don't have character, and they don't have values; and for as long as these people use conservatism in that way, that discredits conservatism and its claims of supporting family values. If there really is to be a pressure on people to behave in more righteous ways, then that most certainly means a pressure to end violence against women. A man with character would never allow himself to behave in that way; and men who would must be subjected to strong incentives against doing that. If conservatism is serious about its claims of possessing character, then it will fight violence against women. And if it does not do that, then it cannot be allowed to maintain its claim of being in favor of character and family values.
Your concerns about violence against women are very laudable, especially in a conservative, but they ring just slightly false, since you say conservatives don't believe in gender equality. I see the two issues as one and the same, since inequality is often enforced by violence.
I don't know what conservatives you've met, but everyone one I know IS against domestic violence... I know everyone likes to pull a bunch of crap from off the news, internet, or by word of mouth from one ignorant person to the next, but really, how many people do you know that think it's ok to beat their spouse?
I have my issues with conservatives, but I have never seen them endorse or support domestic violence on any grounds. They are not partial to people beating up people to my knowledge.
Plus the thread's just equating not supporting regulations against domestic violence (of dubious effectiveness) with "thinking domestic violence is okay" - to which all I can say is lol, just lol It's the same as the extremists who claim that not supporting a "soda" ban at restaurants means that you "support obesity" If anyone's 'in favor' of domestic violence anyway, it's the far-left who doesn't want women to be able to own guns, and thinks she should just pee and vomit on her rapist or attacker instead
This thread is utterly stupid considering the fact that everyone regardless of political affiliation should be against domestic violence.
