A few weeks ago, Ashik said something that made me think. Now, it wasn’t any of his BNP-esque rhetoric about interracial couples, rather it was a criticism that by talking a lot about ‘honour’-based violence (HBV), Pickled Politics was somehow operating a double standard because we didn’t spend enough time discussing domestic violence throughout British society. I don’t think that it is a problem posting frequently on HBV. This is one of the few sites that does, and many people who read it have experienced the problems associated with HBV, or at least the attitudes that underpin it. However, he was right in that we don’t write enough about domestic violence in wider society.
Thus I would like to direct your attention at this post over at the F Word, which is about a journalist’s time spent working at a domestic violence shelter. Her account is interesting enough, but it is the statistics that are the really interesting part:
* Domestic violence accounts for between 16% and one quarter of all recorded violent crime.
* Ten suicides are ascribed to it per week.
* Today there is still a shortage of womenâ€™s refuges – there are four animal sanctuaries to every womenâ€™s refuge.
* A third of local authorities offered no specialised services at all.
Given that we have an evident shortage of domestic violence shelters, I think that we should come up with a new public spending test for all projects over a certain value. Namely, can this project be justified (or at least the amount spent on it) when there is a lack of funding for domestic violence refuges? You could throw in a shortage of money at NICE as well if you wanted to. That would concentrate minds over the Olympics, which would have to justify an estimated Â£20 billions pounds of taxpayersâ€™ money, as well as other projects.
|Post to del.icio.us|
Filed in: 'Honour'-based violence,Sex equality