The Duluth Model

The Duluth Model is the Foundation stone of Radical Feminism, designed, built, refined and sold as the primary tool prioritising and empowering Females over Males controlling Male/Female interaction.

The Duluth Model is massively based upon Non-Statistical (ie:opinion) data based Intervention by their own admission.

The Duluth Model (also known as Domestic Abuse Intervention Project or DAIP[1] or Pence’s model[2]) is a program developed to reduce domestic violenceagainst women. It is named after Duluth, Minnesota, the city where it was developed.[3] The program was largely founded by feminist Ellen Pence.[3]

The Duluth Model is in direct contradiction to EVERY scientifically conducted study into Domestic Violence (DV) prior to or since the model was created. The primary flaw in the Duluth Model starts to clarify as you read it’s name; Domestic Abuse Intervention Programs (DAIP). The model is simply based on attributing blame to the male then intervening by removing them.

Pence and her Radical Feminist cohorts boast of building privately controlled back doors into administrations and legislative systems to shovel their dogma through rather than go through correct or conventional research, testing and data presentation to create agreed legislative reform. If this isn’t HiJacking the law book, what is?

DAIP organizers—activists in the battered women’s movement—set out to understand the laws, policies and procedures of the criminal justice system, as well as understand the cultures of each of the involved agencies. In doing so, they built relationships that allowed new interventions to be proposed and tested. The results were strikingly effective in keeping batterers from continuing their abuse. Eventually, eleven community agencies agreed to continue to formally work together to continue to make positive change in the criminal justice system around battering. This effort became known as “The Duluth Model.”

The Duluth Model has evolved and changed over the last 30 years and has spread across the globe. DAIP continues to work toward ending violence against women through its programs in Duluth and in partnership with domestic violence practitioners around the world.

The writers of the Duluth Model clearly chose to not just ignore but to actively discredit all legitimate studies and surveys (provided later) conducted using appropriate respondent sampling and participant randomisation methodology.

It was extremely clear, correctly harvested and collated data was in complete contradiction to the Feminist created Duluth Model teachings where Men are considered aggressors, women considered innocent victims. To control the data stepping away from statistics, the Feminist movement needed to legitimise an alternative method of data collection and analysis. The new method needed to be very manipulatable, supporting chosen outcomes by reporting desirable observations. Blaming specific groups by pretense behaviours are completely attributable to specific groups rather than individuals.

So How was the Duluth Model created?

Why would you listen to me when you can hear it straight from the horse’s mouth. Ellen Pence describes the So-Called research upon which her Societally Destructive Duluth Model is constructed upon. The entire Duluth Model is based, in the founders own description, by a bunch of abused (not necessarily battered) women talking about their experiences, completely from their own perspective. The entire model was the construct of a mammoth, ongoing bitching session.

I’m not trivialising any legitimate mistreatment any woman suffered, however I am very clearly demanding answers on the full and complete truth of each woman’s statements. More so, I’m asking where there’s any discussion, even questions let alone acknowledgement bi-directional, female vs female or female vs male instigated violence exists.

As a survivor of a Female perpetrated Violence household, I assure the effects of Female violence upon males can be even worse. When a male is battered, he gets no support. Due to Police Duluth Training, if a man reports a Female for bashing him, he will most likely end up becoming the persecuted and/or arrested person. There are virtually no Mens refuges. There is no Legal assistance for Battered males. All because of this calculating, scheming, undermining Man hating Feminist’s determination to focus all blame on males.

At 3.00 minutes, listen to her own self concocted interpretation of how anything a man does is to get power and control. She admits it’s just her interpretation! This is the most crucial Building block of the Radical Feminist Anti-Male ideology and Pence admits she just cooked it up!

At 4.42 minutes, listen to her horse shit playing down the violence I dealt with where a knife/gun/steel object wielding woman just doesn’t even get considered. According to Pence, my father was at fault for getting set on fire, run over with the car, bashed, shot or stabbed with anything that could be picked up, all because he worked too much (which in hindsight was probably to keep out of harm’s way). I seriously wonder where she cooked these ideologies up from. Can you imagine any man wanting or trying to dominate her? I seriously wonder if she just had too much think time between soap operas and bitching sessions.

The Feminist who destroyed Western Civilisation

One more time, just for the record, in cases where women have been attacked without massively provoking a man, every male I know, myself included would do everything in our power to “Deal With” such an offender ensuring no recidivism without some Massively profitable Duluth pretence of education. In 59 years, I’ve never known a male who has assaulted his female partner other than in serious self defence. I’m asking you to consider how many men you know who have, then ask were they massively provoked, were there drugs, alcohol or serious financial hardship attached. Statistical data demonstrates these contributors and factors very well when collected scientifically, as they also show the rarity of unprovoked attacks.

With very little credible evidence to Pence’s claims of all this men’s Power grabbing violence, Feminists needed a hook to hang their hat on. They couldn’t find one so they created it. Wikipedia shows us a well known Marxist Feminist, Dorothy E. Smith is attributed with developing Institutional ethnography (IE). IE is an alternative approach of studying and understanding the social. IE is best understood as an ethnography of interactions which have been institutionally (grouped) rather than an ethnography of specific individuals, companies, organizations or employment sectors, which would be considered industrial sociology or the sociology of work. IE was first developed by “for women, for people”. This technique allows the observer to basically see and report what they choose, completely devoiding any requirement to individualise outcomes based on circumstance. This model specifically aligns with massive generalisations, negating any need to detail individual cases or specifics.

So with a new theory and a new way to create mis-information or misleading data, the Feminists moved in on a single court for trial.

Where and how did Duluth Model gain a toehold?

The first trial of this Male blaming Model took place in Duluth, Minnesota. The courts in Minnesota were very keen to find a way to curb Domestic Violence, rightly so! The Minnesota Judicial system completely failed the world in their Duty of Care in exercising fairness, balance, evidence, points of proof or the law itself in even agreeing to trial such an evidentially incorrect system.

The system would have provided very similar outcomes if they’d trialed a system of “Firing Squad for every accused male”. For the accused males, it would have prevented an entire lifetime of financial castration, shame, career destruction, persecution and convictions after having been either wrongfully accused or should have been co-accused with their violent partners. It certainly wouldn’t have taken 45-50 years for a Firing Squad system to be declared ludicrous in it’s application.

The outcome of reducing DV was assured by a certitude of Male blaming, penalisation and removal, regardless of circumstance. Pence then compiled quasi statistics demonstrating inarguable Male persecution did in fact reduce violence. With factually misrepresenting presentations and highly misleading numbers, delivered through their cunningly opened back doors, other courts decided to trial, again without questioning the validity of logic, law, fairness or circumstance.

These trials created the toehold because the courts could administer most cases with a “He’s wrong and Guilty, She’s right and deserves compensation” preconceived standpoint, quickly, cheaply and easily. With little to no requirement to investigate, hear evidence hearing cases became very simple and virtually eliminated dealing with ongoing issues and appeals because most cases were a foregone conclusion.

Again, it was just as effective as Shooting every accused male. The underlying simplicities this Male-Blaming technique provided was immediacy, ability to force men to pay, ability to award child custody to women and ability to award property settlements to women. These outcomes were loved by governments because it meant Men had to pay continuously relieving or reducing social welfare payments.

This was a Judicial and Government cost cutting breakthrough, reducing case load time and cost, while shifting all ongoing costs to men regardless of true blame. With this preloaded Male Guilt model, courts generally only ever had to really look at evidence if Police actively witnessed a female viciously assaulting a male or some other very rare circumstance. This system clearly controlled all men because if they objected, they’d be denied access to their children.

From here, this unilateral Male blaming system was taught to Policing and various other community and government agencies. By their own admission, the Duluth organisers used personal relationships to covertly slide this system into every Nook and Cranny of our Tax Payer funded systems. Police in most Western world states must undergo Duluth Model training to learn how to identify the male as the perpetrator and view the female as the victim. In many states, forces will be defunded if they don’t force Duluth training on members.

DAIP organizers—activists in the battered women’s movement—set out to understand the laws, policies and procedures of the criminal justice system, as well as understand the cultures of each of the involved agencies. In doing so, they built relationships that allowed new interventions to be proposed and tested. The results were strikingly effective in keeping batterers from continuing their abuse.

Law, Balance, Fairness, Evidence, Justice are not even considered in the Duluth Model. The only consideration is if a Male displeases a Female, that is somehow classified as abuse.

Did Duluth have some success?

Of course. If you put a glass cage around a Cobra, it can’t fight a Mongoose. Ironically, it’s never been considered to put a cage around the Mongoose, the animal that usually starts the fight. This unilateral blame based model views the Mongoose as a cute, fluffy, inoffensive creature incapable of either attack or defense, whilst they view the Cobra as the cold, slithery, reptilian attack serpent. In truth, the Mongoose is almost universally the instigator and usually triumphant. The Duluth Model refuses to acknowledge the possibility a Mongoose can attack.

This model completely ignores all scientific evidence proving Females attack more consistently and more persistently with less povocation. Since the early 1980’s every reputable study into DV shows females attack physically more often than males if not equally as often. Every reputable study also showed most times injuries occurred, the violence was reciprocal, again, usually female initiated.

Ellen Pence or her Feminist cohorts had no interest in the statistics, data, fairness, truth or detail of how DV occured. Pence was an active Feminist fighting for the Battered Women’s Movement! Ellen Pence had one laser targeted vision, to show Women were Massively Oppressed victims of Tyrannical Patriarchal Male Overlords. By presenting her highly controlled data and outcomes, this has become the Catchphrase of the Entire Radical Feminist movement.

How Bad is the Model?

The Duluth Model is so bad, even many other Feminist groups are trying to Debunk it. Many Non-Radical Feminists believe in legitimate Equality. Feminists who comprehend the societal value of Males and Females being equally important and deservant of fairness are fighting the ineptitudes of the system.

A study by Dutton and Corvo in 2006, noted the foundation of DAIP was formed on incredibly weak evidence. The original study was tiny, with only four men and five women completing the course. Despite the miniscule sample size and questions over credibility of the results, it was used to push reforms. In addition, this evidence was not gathered by a team of psychologists, but by a pair of radical feminists and a small handful of representatives from EMERGE Boston. This data was not tested by an independent team of experts before it was promoted.

In itself, preventing women being assaulted is a legitimate goal. It could have been done more efficiently by either murdering every male or nuking the entire globe. The science behind these options is about as high as the science applied in Pence’s model which we’ll show in later pages.

The model doesn’t seek to establish any problem’s source, embrace statistical or individual data, build communication skills, rectify the genuine underlying problems, create collaborative outcomes or educate the actual offenders. By its own definition, it’s an Intervention Project. This model specifically intervenes by blaming, penalising and removing males regardless of who is at fault.

The Duluth Model is directly responsible for the mentality and behaviour demonstrated here.

The creators and current day implementers of Duluth boast their clear stance to ONLY Intervene and ONLY support Female victims. Their models and programs assure ALL blame MUST ALWAYS be born by males. Their education doctrine and methods are completely written to have all viewers disbelieve anything a Male says in his defence and that women must always be believed even to the contrary of physical observations.

Statistically, following their model, it appears that even Female vs Female verbal violence is counted to look like men assaulting 2 women.

Why is the Duluth Model critically flawed

We can walk you through their teachings Line by Line or Wheel by Wheel as Duluth people interpret the world, alternately we can direct you to the Duluth Model website. When you’re there, please look for all the ways a woman can be a victim, then look for all the ways a woman can be hurt. Next look for all the ways children can be victims, then look for all the ways children can be hurt. Please check out the “Men’s Non-Violence courses”.

The Duluth Model says HE’s an abuser if HE’s;

  • Making her afraid by using looks
  • Making her afraid by actions
  • Making her afraid by gestures
  • Smashing things
  • Destroying her property
  • Abusing pets
  • Displaying weapons
  • Putting her down,
  • Making her feel bad about herself,
  • Calling her names,
  • Making her think she’s crazy
  • Playing mind games
  • Humiliating her
  • Making her feel guilty
  • Controlling what she does
  • Controlling who she sees and talks to
  • Controlling what she reads
  • Controlling where she goes
  • Limiting her outside involvement
  • Using jealousy to justify actions
  • Minimizing, Denying and Blaming
  • Making light of the abuse and not taking her concerns about it seriously
  • Saying the abuse didn’t happen
  • Shifting responsibility for abusive behaviour
  • Saying she caused it
  • Making her feel guilty about the children
  • Using the children to relay messages
  • Using visitation to harass her
  • Threatening to take the children away
  • Treating her like a servant
  • Making all the big decisions
  • Acting like the “master of the castle”
  • Being the one to define men’s and women’s roles
  • Preventing her from getting or keeping a job
  • Making her ask for money
  • Giving her an allowance
  • Taking her money
  • Not letting her know about or have access to family income
  • Making and/or carrying out threats to do something to hurt her
  • Threatening to leave her
  • Threatening to commit suicide
  • Threatening to report her to welfare
  • Making her drop charges
  • Making her do illegal things

I feel I can speak for every male friend as well as myself on this issue. If any of us was aware any man was abusing either a woman or children, we wouldn’t question doing everything possible to intervene immediately and ensure an offending male was brought to justice, one way or another!

With clear position stated, now, please go back and inspect the site, the wheels, the downloads, the supporting information and education materials and education courses one more time. Please help me identify where she may, just slightly, in any possible way, just by a sliver possibly bear any responsibility for anything.

Please find me references to possibility she may be the abuser, the basher, the intimidator, the emotional abuser, the isolator, etc, etc. Please find where she may practice coercion or threats, economic abuse, use children let alone use FEMALE PRIVILEGE.

How would Feminism, Criminal law, Family Law and Universities look if it said;

  • Making him afraid by using looks
  • Making him afraid by actions
  • Making him afraid by gestures
  • Smashing things
  • Destroying her property
  • Abusing pets
  • Displaying weapons
  • Putting him down,
  • Making him feel bad about herself,
  • Calling him names,
  • Making him think he’s crazy
  • Playing mind games
  • Humiliating him
  • Making him feel guilty
  • Controlling what he does
  • Controlling who he sees and talks to
  • Controlling what he reads
  • Controlling where he goes
  • Limiting his outside involvement
  • Using jealousy to justify actions
  • Minimizing, Denying and Blaming
  • Making light of the abuse and not taking his concerns about it seriously
  • Saying the abuse didn’t happen
  • Shifting responsibility for abusive behaviour
  • Saying he caused it
  • Making him feel guilty about the children
  • Using the children to relay messages
  • Using visitation to harass him
  • Threatening to take the children away
  • Treating him like a servant (or just a paycheck)
  • Making all the big decisions
  • acting like the “Queen of the castle”
  • being the one to define men’s and women’s roles
  • Preventing him from getting or keeping a job
  • making him ask for money
  • Giving him an allowance
  • Taking his money
  • Not letting him know about or have access to family income
  • Making and/or carrying out threats to do something to hurt him
  • Threatening to leave him
  • Threatening to commit suicide
  • Threatening to report him to welfare or Child Support
  • Making him drop charges
  • Making him do illegal things

Obviously, as well as the things on Duluth’s SHIT-LIST, Men don’t want Tyrannical Overlord power to destroy women. TRUE Equality is just fine! Hang on, maybe these should be the new rules, let me think about that. Maybe it’s payback time! Haha!

Clearly the principle creator, Ellen Louise Pence (April 15, 1948 – January 6, 2012) a social activist and Radical Feminist was either outright delusional or was just completely hell-bent on blaming men for every possibility. The theory provides virtually no realistic possibilities a woman can have either started or escalated conflict and appears totally dismissive of female violence, abuse, coercion, emotional abuse etc. I don’t know if this was written out of spite, hatred, coercion of others. I wasn’t there, but when you read the material, it was certainly a single gendered Circle-Jerk that penned it.

The Duluth model blames men for every possibility. By their doctrine, “… the Duluth model essentially views all female transgressions (including unprovoked stabbings and shootings) as being self-defensive in nature (even against children!) and can be attributed either to previous victimization by a male or to an allegedly oppressive “patriarchy” (Dutton and Corvo, 2007)”. Their theory provides virtually no realistic possibilities a woman can have either started or escalated conflict completely dismissing female violence, abuse, coercion, emotional abuse etc. This makes it the absolutely ideal platform for hate speech, Female victimisation, Female financial benefits, Females to be awarded men’s property, etc.

This entire theory is Nonsensical.

How do I know so strongly how wrong this theory is? Personal Experience!

If you’d like to see my Truth of Domestic Violence, click the link

Why do Feminists adopt, sell, mandate and push the Duluth Model?

Really, do I really have to type that? Power and MONEY.

Aside from consultancy fees, expert fees and a myriad of government funded services, humongous publically funded advertising campaigns, highly lucrative support services then, the monty! Every male has to pay half a Kings ransom, (directly or indirectly depending where he lives) to do the Male Only Duluth Indoctrination Brainwashing course teaching them how only the woman’s feelings matter.

Ironically, the course is generally not completed nor does it actually work but men, the world over are being herded like sheep to be force fed pure Feminist Dogma. Even more ironical is most men who actually complete the course are the men who were themselves compliant types and victims of attacks because they’re already pre-conditioned to totalitarian female rule. Those men almost certainly were never assaulters in the first place. Remember, a man can be forced to do the lucrative Duluth Men’s Non-Violence classes because SHE says he;

  • looked at her the wrong way
  • asked her to get a job
  • expressed an opinion he’d prefer her to not work
  • tried to save family money into the family 401k/superannuation
  • spent money she designated was hers
  • attempts to allocate any money as his. (His money is Family money, hers is hers)
  • makes her feel bad about herself, etc, etc, etc. The list is above
  • No true violence required! only anything Feminist Models want to reclassify as violence.

This fits perfectly with the completely illogical Neo-Marxist, Postmodernism thinking Feminist movement who want every defect in society to be completely and totally the fault of a Tyrannical Patriarchal Hierarchy.

How has this permeated society

Take a look at this video and ask how quickly authorities would be summoned, the aggressor prosecuted and penalties applied if the aggressor was the man. This woman wasn’t even pursued promptly, let alone prosecuted. Here’s the full story.

Think this is rare? Try looking at this story.

or this one, maybe his attempts to get away or avoid being hit with a weapon make him guilty

Female commentators are beginning to stand against this one sided acceptance of violence as shown next

Next, when four women appear to abduct and attack a single man, attempts are made to discredit the attack because bus stops have coffee ads (bus stop are commonplace ads around the world).

Violence is acceptable when women attack men isn’t it? Check out the Feminist views below. If this didn’t have it’s roots so deep into government and the judicial system, we’d all be ROFL at it. Sadly, the backdoors are wide open in all government departments otherwise the video after it wouldn’t make sense.

Feminists promoting violence against all men is acceptable as long as any one man ever attacks or kills a woman

Maybe this one’s acceptable, what do you think? I’m sure this is all because she was oppressed. Ask any Duluth Model supporting Radical Feminist.

Leave a Reply