Let me say this - women are the primary victims of domestic violence. I don't deny that --- in fact, I affirm it. I'm just trying to make a point that to generalize/stereotype is not helpful. You said "it's almost always the same story" which I assume (since you didn't say) means that it's male on female violence. Again, I think these men are total cowards, but the reason isn't just testosterone, being male, "natural aggressiveness", etc. The reason is very simple. When men and women get into physical altercations, chances are the woman will lose. (The man loses later, when the cops show up). There are other dynamics present which I won't get into, such as women who prefer to be with a loser jerk rather than a stable, decent man, because it somehow turns them on. But that sounds like "blaming the victim" so I won't go there.
Getting back to this story...first of all, I find golf to be perhaps the most boring of all sports, it amazes me that so many people are into it. I would rather walk around the block with my dog. But I (again) disagree with you - I think DV is taken VERY seriously! It's just that this "joke" struck a raw nerve with many, that's the whole focus of the article. I thought it was lame, but then, I have witnessed real-life conversations where women find it funny that some woman ran down her ex-husband with her Cadillac, vandalized his property (like that song "Before He Cheats"), or cut off his genitals. I have NEVER heard a man laughing at a news report that some man has run down his ex-wife, vandalized her property, or mutilated her body. NEVER. This is what is disturbing to me. I am just sick and tired of the misogynistic generalizations and stereotypes against men. Most of us are PROTECTORS of women. I think you know that is true. I hope you look at your husband/boyfriend, if you have one in that light. That's the rule, not the exception.

well, I see we haven't agreed to disagree yet. :)

I am basing my comments on first-hand knowledge. I have worked with victims of domestic violence for years. It's almost always the same story with a few variations here and there. Please don't try to change my mind on how the female gender is treated, how the majority of women feel about their finances or careers or about how being with a violent partner affects a person, emotionally, physically and financially.

BTW: this story is about d.v. and how the impact of its hold on society is not taken seriously enough. When we diminish the serious affects of these illegal actions of violence to jokes in otherwise reputable media, it stresses that awareness and education is still necessary (for all people, for both genders) if we are ever going to be able to stop violence where it exists.

Once again sassy, you seem to be putting a lot of your personal experience and opinions into the mix. Keep in mind, especially regarding your last two posts, that we are primarily discussing male/female dynamics (including domestic violence) within the context of committed male/female relationships. So I agree with most of your comments regarding single people. But single women who have a reasonable expectation of eventual marriage under less pressure to make decent money, invest, etc., than a single man. C'mon, we both know women who charge up their credit cards to the max, then expect their new husband to "take care of it". Single men, however, are acutely aware of the fact that their perceived career success is one factor that women consider when evaluating them as "marriage material".
We often hear of the fact that women do most of the housework and are responsible for most of the childcare, men "help". But we rarely hear how men are responsible for being the primary breadwinner, taking care of the finances including retirement planning, take care of the cars and yards and safety and security, nurture an emotional spouse or child, etc. etc. And the wife "helps". These gender roles are a two-edged sword.
And of course there are more single mothers! Women almost always get physical custody.
I see nothing "antiquated" in any of my comments. If the thinking of one of us is antiquated, that would be you sassy. You are so parroting back many of the old stereotypes, I sincerely hope you re-think some of your ideas.

I would also like to assert that there are many more single mothers out there than there are single fathers. Probably an equal amount of single females and single males. Singles have to work (or have an income), regardless of gender. Men have a choice as to their career just as women do! Men COULD choose a lower paying career (such as social work, teaching, etc) just as women do. Most people make a career choice based on their personal interests and skill sets as well as their potential for learning new skills whether on-the-job or in higher education. Women do not choose to "secure" a lower-paying job with the intention of getting married and have her husband support her! That is a stereotype that is unfair! Women seek a career in order to be financially independent, just like men do! A lot of women are not satisfied in their profession, but continue because it "pays the bills", just like men do. So, yes, I think your logic is antiquated.

I don't know what to make of the Wikipedia self-reported stats, so I will not comment at this time. stay tuned ;)

This could be taken offensively, so I apologize upfront...HOWEVER, is it POSSIBLE that the reason women make more of the decisions is because SOMEONE has to? When posed a question, such as: "Where would you like to go for our family vacation this year?" The answer typically (not always, of course) is an apathetic: "I don't care."

Funny that the answer also typically ends up making it the woman's "fault" for a less-than-perfect family vacation, after she has to do all the research, planning, packing, purchases for the supplies needed for said family vacation (in her "spare" time, no less) etc.

It's still a man's world, by the way, despite our wishes to have it be an EQUAL world. It's still viewed as the woman's "job" to buy groceries, cook, do laundry, etc. I know there are many guys out there who pitch in. But what does that mean? The guys want a "pat on the back" for helping, rather than taking the view that it is an equally shared responsibility to live in a clean home, eat, provide loving care for the children (not "babysit" his own children).

*sigh* We better agree to disagree on this topic. I think we have both had very different experiences and our personal opinions don't appear to be changing. :)

Regarding women's spending and women's wealth, here's a link for you:

http://www.submityourarticle.com/article...

One quote from there "Women are the sole or primary decision makers for as many as 80% of all purchasing decisions. Women make the choice on new bank accounts 89% of the time, in DIY 80%, in cars 60% and in choice of holiday, 92% of the decisions are made by women. Women's wealth is growing ' between 1970 and 1998 men's median income rose by 0.6 percent while women's median income rose by 63%".

That was the first one I found, there are many others.

sassy: Antiquated? Hardly. The men's movement, and men's rights, are just now starting to get some attention. Regarding my claim that women are more likely to batter a partner than men are, I did a little research for you. First of all, I am being very specific here. I am referring to physically lashing out at a partner, which is usually one partner hitting another. Here's a quote from a Wikipedia article on domestic violence stats: "In May, 2007, researchers with the Centers for Disease Control reported on rates of self-reported violence among intimate partners using data from a 2001 study. In the study, almost one-quarter of participants reported some violence in their relationships. Half of these involved one-sided ("non-reciprocal") attacks and half involved both assaults and counter assaults ("reciprocal violence"). Women reported committing one-sided attacks more than twice as often as men (70% versus 29%). In all cases of intimate partner violence, women were more likely to be injured than men, but 25% of men in relationships with two-sided violence reported injury compared to 20% of women reporting injury in relationships with one-sided violence. Women were more likely to be injured in non-reciprocal violence". That's pretty consistent with what I've been saying.
Regarding women in the workplace - which is really off-topic from the previous posts - I don't see your point. MY point is that women have a CHOICE - they can choose to work or choose not to work. Men do not generally have that choice. And women who choose to work often work an easier, more fulfilling, and lower paying job than their husband, because they rely primarily on their husband to be the breadwinner. That skews the statistics, because you can say - SEE, a man is being paid more than a woman! But who's in the better position here, the man who feels he must pursue and continue to advance in his 40+ year career in order to support a family, or the woman that enjoys the support of her husband and still decides to take a job for her own outside fulfillment? Yes, women CAN and DO excel in many, perhaps most professions, but my point is that they generally have a choice - one that is generally denied to men.

well, SuperDave, while I agree with some of your statements, I think your logic is somewhat antiquated. Could you please support your statements with sources ("women physically lash out at men more than the other way around. I don't know why, but that is a fact") - says who? Where do you get your information? Believe me, I have done my homework and I am quite familiar with the cycle of domestic violence, the long-term results of family violence and the history of working women in America. Not too many years ago, women were NOT ALLOWED to work in fields other than as nurses or teachers (and a few select other fields) especially if they had a husband and/or children. Please don't tell me most women want to stay home and be homemakers! This is 2009! Women have proven that we can and do belong in the "marketplace" not in the supermarket, barefoot and pregnant! Women FOUGHT HARD for the ability and respect of peers to work at jobs traditionally held by males. Also, women may spend money at the malls, but you CAN'T tell me that the majority of sport vehicles (boats, ATV's, motorcycles and the like) and stereo components (surround sound systems, big screen televisions, etc) which are big ticket dollar items aren't purchased by men. Consider thousand(s) of dollars per item to the $20 here $100 there items. Can you show me your source for the disposable income data? And lastly, I agree, you don't want to be a female...I'm not sure you could handle it, anyway. :)

Part 2 - Lastly, it's a "man's world"? Again, yes that IS the stereotype. But what exactly does that mean? I might agree that that was true in some interpretations of the platitude - maybe about one hundred and fifty years ago. But certainly not in my lifetime. Ever heard the saying "most men lead lives of quiet desperation"? Men have far fewer choices than women, but more responsibilities. And I'm not saying women have it easy! I'm saying that, on balance, women have an easier life than men, are better physiologically adapted to the modern world (dealing better with stress, for example), and in fact that is one of the reasons women tend to live longer. Women, at least in the US, outnumber men and could theoretically determine the outcomes of most elections if only they would collectively take interest. Women also control a larger share of all of the wealth in the US than men do.
I just love slaying sacred cows LOL. But I am sincere - do your homework and don't believe all the stupid stereotypes.
Here's one more for you - what percentage of all "disposable income" is spent by men, and what percentage by women? Answer: Women spend a whopping 80% of all DI. (And don't tell me it's all shopping for the family). Men might EARN more than woman, but women sure as heck are SPENDING more! Which way would you prefer it be? How many men can find a woman to marry, saying "Honey, I expect YOU to be the 'breadwinner', it's only natural. And I'll just stay home and take care of the house". Any man that adapted the woman's standard attitude towards domestic "balance" would be considered..oh let's see..a LOSER, LAZY, unmotivated, having no goals or direction, and one of my favorites, "doesn't get it". You get the idea - I hope!
Well it's been fun - time to hit the gym.

Part. 1 sassy: You are too funny! Never said I wanted to be a woman. And don't even start on the "men make more than women" stuff. Again, looking at the raw statistics would support that statement, but what are the reasons? Here are a couple obvious ones: 1) women tend to NOT WANT TO WORK but instead stay home and raise the kids, if any. This (can) limit how far they advance in their careers. 2) men are willing to take more dangerous/challenging jobs in order to make more money to support a family. It simply does not make sense that an employer would pay a female less for the same work as is being done by a male. Employers are motivated by the desire to efficiently run their business. Remuneration is largely based on the ability of an employee to perform assigned tasks. The gender of the employee rarely matters, Hooters' waitresses and firemen notwithstanding.
RE: testosterone - yes, men probably do have more violent tendencies then women, but in the context of a relationship (since we are talking about domestic violence here), women physically lash out at men more than the other way around. I don't know why, but that is a fact - and one that few reading this will believe. See my earlier posts for more.

again, SuperDave, vagina envy! :O)

I think if you check the statistics you will see that men have more violent tendencies than women. Women may yell more, but men are generally more physically agressive when they are angry. Testosterone has a lot to do with it. We cannot change our chemical make-up in our bodies, so I am not blaming men; I'm saying that more men (and YES, women) need to learn how to control their anger and their behavior when angry.

About when shelters will be available to men who are leaving an abusive relationship...who knows? Look at how long it took for society to recognize that women needed shelters from abusive partners! DECADES! It used to be "acceptable" to treat women as property. Now, women who as girls, perhaps grew up in violent homes and perhaps have been in violent relationships and don't know how to control themselves when they are angry. I'm NOT excusing their behavior, because regardless of what gender strikes out in anger, it is wrong. And it has become a learned behavior that CAN be "unlearned", when given the appropriate training and tools.

As far as your "DUH" statement: that is why women's shelters started in the first place. I'm sorry that it's a males world and men make more than women, but it's the reality, so don't "DUH" me...I'm well aware :) (and you probably don't really want to be a woman afterall...)

SarahB1 wrote..."The hearts are placed like that for one reason and one reason only: Women think with their minds and men think with their ... well, you know what I mean."

Actually.. I'm not sure what you mean Sarah...but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and let you explain away your apparent sexist comment...

Funny sassy...:O) What does it tell you, that "It is just recently being reported and tracked". Think about it........just recently??
And "Hopefully, there will be services in the future for the male victims as well". When?????????? It's the 21st century!!! How long do these victims have to wait?!?
Re: "The fact remains, however, that many more women than men are abused by a romantic partner". I disagree - read my comments posted Jul 31, 2009 at 10:39 a.m.
"the majority of men would more than likely have the financial means to leave an abusive partner". I can't speak to that, I don't know, other than to say it's usually the MAN who supports the couple/family so that would be a big DUH.
Finally, "keep in mind that many men who are in abusive relationships have a male partner". I think you are projecting your own stereotypes, i.e. that the abusers "tend to be" male. Not true. Abusers are of both genders, with females abusing males being prevalent. Again, see my previous post, I know this goes against the grain of what most people think they "know".

sounds like you have a pretty bad case of vagina envy, SuperDave! :O)

Actually, there are many calls that go through the crisis lines regarding men reporting being abused. It is just recently being reported and tracked. Hopefully, there will be services in the future for the male victims as well.

The fact remains, however, that many more women than men are abused by a romantic partner. Also, the majority of men would more than likely have the financial means to leave an abusive partner. Also keep in mind that many men who are in abusive relationships have a male partner.

People make jokes about d.v. when in actuality, d.v. is one of society's worst problems, especially when so many children are witnesses to it and the violence is then a behavior that is learned and causes the cycle to continue. I'll get off my soapbox now.

You said "If you were a victim of d.v. you would not consider yourself to be in an enviable position". Of course! That applies to men AND women. That's why I said "On a societal level".
As far as women choosing violent men, that's a whole 'nother subject. My opinion is that women often prefer "jerks", for a variety of reasons (the challenge, the excitement/drama, "someone who will protect me" (?!?!??) etc.). But that's another subject.
For male victims of dv, it's difficult, if not impossible to reach out, when society sees you as the problem. You're a MAN - how can you claim to be a victim?!?
Women have most of the options in our society. Men have the option of working...or being a criminal I guess?!? I personally don't know any man who got married in order to "stay at home with the kids" and be a house-husband.
But I guess that's another subject also LOL.

I agree, SuperDave, that there is a population where services are not available/offered.

again, however, I disagree that "On a societal level, women are in the unique and enviable position of being able to simultaneously define themselves to be independent and equal (or in some cases superior) to men, and also be society's victims."

If you were a victim of d.v. you would not consider yourself to be in an enviable position. Some people (and of both genders) see themselves as society's victim, regardless of the consequences of their own actions. That is generally diagnosed as a mental illness rather than a circumstance. There are PLENTY of women who find themselves, repeatedly, in a relationship with a violent partner. That suggests that the woman "likes to be beaten" rather than the actual reality is the cycle of violence creates multi-faceted dysfunction...and a woman eventually decides whether she will be a victim or a survivor, and that is quite clear based on the partner choices she makes, going forward, for herself. I have previously stated that there are more men that have been victims of d.v. than are reported...mainly for the very reasons you stated. There are "holes" in the services a community offers. If men are truly victims of their partner's actions, it is imperitive that they report the abuse so the need for services can be verified. In other words, if a victim, male or female, doesn't reach out for help, it is difficult to know the person needs help.

ms_sassy_wi: You're entitled to your opinion :O)
I'm sorry that you have experience in domestic violence, I hope that it wasn't as a victim.
You said "officers may give both parties resources to work out problems, and give women's shelter info to the female parties", which itself is a discepancy. There are no "men's shelters" that I know of, and I've heard cases where men tried to "get out of the house" and in to a "women's" shelter, and although they were the victim, they were treated as if they were the aggressor! Society basically says, be a man! You don't need a shelter! You're on your own dude!
On a societal level, women are in the unique and enviable position of being able to simultaneously define themselves to be independent and equal (or in some cases superior) to men, and also be society's victims.

sorry SuperDave. I disagree on most of what you said...except for the coward/violence doesn't solve anything, and the asking for directions part...

Not to get anyone irritated, but it certainly hasn't been my experience that male officers have any sympathy to a female victim of dv. Quite the opposite, actually. My experience shows that officers may give both parties resources to work out problems, and give women's shelter info to the female parties; however, there is little sympathy/empathy offered.

Regarding domestic violence, which I abhor, and can speak from personal experience...
First of all, any man that raises a hand to a woman is nothing short of a coward. But I also believe it is inappropriate for a woman to raise a hand to a man. I just don't think violence solves anything.
But, that being said...women beat on men more often than the other way around. But because 1) men are usually bigger, and 2) stronger, and 3) women show bruises better, and 4) male police officers are more sympathetic to women, and 5) some times it's SOP to haul the man to jail, regardless of who is hitting who - then obviously the statistics are going to support the idea that men are the aggressors and women are victims.
This is similar to child support delinquencies. Women who are supposed to be PAYING child support are more likely than men to be delinquent. But because 1) women almost always get custody and therefore men almost always are ordered to pay support, and 2) judges feel more sympathetic towards women (again, the perceived victims of society) and therefore tend to "award" them more money, thus making it more difficult for the man to comply, again the statistics favor the stereotype. That's why we have in our lexicon the term "deadbeat dad", but no female equivalent. It doesn't even sound right - "deadbeat mom"? Huh, what's that?? Of course the alliteration in the former is a nice touch.
Don't always buy in to the stereotypes! Here's another shocker for you - someone did a study a few years back, it turns out that men are MORE likely than women to stop and ask directions. But somehow, we get the erroneous (and apparently funny to some) notion that men have these huge egos, and just refuse to resort to asking for help when they're lost. Yeah, right.

SarahB1: Yes, that IS the stereotype. I don't believe it, you do. I believe that normal healthy women enjoy sex just as much as men, if not more. And much of what women DO is motivated by that drive. I have much more to say on this topic but I think my comments would be deleted by Gazette staff.
So I'll go in a different direction. Romance. Which gender "falls" harder in love? Which gender has the hardest time adjusting after a divorce or other breakup? Men, in both cases. I don't consider that "thinking with..." well, you know. The heart symbol belongs further north.

SuperDave: The hearts are placed like that for one reason and one reason only: Women think with their minds and men think with their ... well, you know what I mean.

You didn't really think about your question before you asked it, did you, "Truth?"

ask the perpetrators! they believe it's ok to use violence to get what they want. they may not check "yes" on a survey, but their abusive actions speak volumes.

is anyone really "for" domestic violence?

mespl, I'm sorry your friend was in that situation. I would like to interject, however, that more often than not officers will dual-arrest rather than try to sort out who was the perpetrator. I agree wholeheartedly that there are women who abuse their partners. It pisses me off! I am passionate about increasing the awareness of domestic violence and I am against domestic violence (and violence in general!) wherever it exists and regardless of the perpetrator's gender.

jvilledr: thanks for your comments!

I agree with SuperDave, even though the statistics do not support the fact that men are also victimized by women. However the truth is that the majority of men that are victimized have very little if any support if they do come forward, rarely are they believed, and even more rarely are any charges pressed against the woman. You think it is hard for a woman to come forward even though it is socially acceptable for her to seek help for being a victim, how hard do you think it would be for a man when it is not socially acceptable for him to be a victim? I am not saying it does not happen to women; however the truth is that we will never really know how many men are victimized by the women in their lives. I know one man who came forward after his wife attacked him and he had the wounds on his body to prove that he was attacked while she didn’t have a mark on her cause he wouldn’t hit her. And guess what he was kicked out of his house by the cops, the attacker go to stay and the victim had to leave and no one was charged with anything. He had wounds from her and the cops still didn’t believe him.

Sorry camper, I have the right to express my opinion about JOKES whether you like my opinion or not. It's called the FIRST AMENDMENT, and it works in favor of both the JOKER and the JOKEE.

I guess that some people just have nothing better to do than to find things to be offended about.
It must be a sad existence indeed.

I have been through domestic abuse, and I am not personally offended. Why? Because I don't let things like that run my life. I don't look at things to be offended. I take them as they are. It's healthier that way.

Being both funny and in bad taste are not mutually exclusive.

It's a JOKE nothing more, if it offends you just don’t tell it to anyone else and let it go. The reality is almost every joke is going to offend someone. Just get over it.
“A pirate walked into a bar with parrot on his shoulder.....” Well now the Wisconsin Tavern League, and Fellowship of Pirates are offended not to mention the Autobahn Society....and we have not even hit the punch line yet. One more time, it a JOKE!

SuperDave,

I don't think violence against men or women is funny.

But if you check the stats, women are far more often victims of violence by men than the reverse. So what you are asking for is for women to ignore the reality of the risks of violence against them by men -- something that will only make them more likely to fail to protect themselves and wind up as victims in reality, not figuratively.

I think the real question is why are some men so angry at women for not liking the risks of violence against them, instead of being angry at the other men who perpetrate it? Maybe because it's socially acceptable to them that women should be victims of violence -- as evidenced by the "joke" that started this whole debate.

To me, the bigger issue is the disparity between how the genders are treated. If the genders in the joke were reversed, I think most people would still think it's funny, although it works better as is since it fits the stereotype (the man who golfs).
When a man disfigures a woman, no one finds humor. But when a woman disfigures, kills, or runs down a man with a car, women often find humor. The reason is that women are the perceived victims of society (the truth not withstanding).
There is a new movie out, I believe the name is "the Ugly Truth". It shows a woman standing next to man. She has the symbol of a heart on her head. He has the same symbol on his crotch. Imagine what would have happened had those hearts been moved, hers down to her crotch, his up to his head. Women's organizations would be crying "exploitation!", and the promotion would be stopped. But as men, we just take the exploitation of men as a given (witness five decades of sitcoms, the husband/father is always the idiot). To protest would be, well unmanly. Big boys don't cry. Our mothers taught us that.
In the same way that it's time for blacks to give up their victimhood, I believe it's time for women to do the same.

The reason the "joke" is not "funny" is because it is using humor to disguise a message that it is okay to beat women. In addition, there is evidence that such "jokes" actually reinforce beliefs that violence against women is acceptable. http://www.medindia.net/news/Sexist-Joke...
What is funny -- but not really "ha ha" funny -- is how quickly people who say everyone is "too PC" are to try to shut up other people -- apparently, only the people who make jokes at the expense of others are entitled to free speech -- no one else is then free to express a dissenting opinion.

This is a... (drum roll please)...Joke!!! Joke: something that is amusing or ridiculous, esp. because of being ludicrously inadequate or a sham; a thing, situation, or person laughed at rather than taken seriously; farce. If you ask me, Wisconsin advocates for domestic violence victims are a joke. People are too quick to get up in arms over anything they can twist around into something they perceive as offensive. Like the husband who goes home and tells his wife her hair looks nice and immediately she gets defensive and says, "Oh, so you're saying yesterday it looked like crap???" Idiots, plain and simple. Go ahead and switch genders in this joke and I still find it amusing- maybe even more so. Focus that initiative and energy on something positive for a change. Look at the donut instead of the hole. Life is way more pleasant that way.

Now Readers' Digest won't be able to have jokes. Every joke will eventually offend someone.
Let's just hand tissues out to everyone with issues, because obviously some people can't be grown-ups and get over it.

Society has become so pathetic. In the 70's and 80's this would have just been a "funny joke" but because as a society we have become so thin skinned and need to be protected from ourselves this is now considered distasteful? Really? We can no longer think for ourselves and decide what is funny and what is not, with out some group or agency screaming foul? Welcome to the world of sheeple. Follow the group baah..baah…

The joke was not politically correct. However, it did not say a husband or wife.

I gotta go golfing now....Readers Digest is getting attacked now...Geeze. I have to clean my bathroom of all the Readers digest after my "Golf" game...:)

As a child, I saw my dad stand over my mom as she cowered behind a chair. I went to a neighbors to call the police. She wouldn't. Spousal abuse wasn't funny in the 60's and it isn't funny now.

That reminds me of one of my favorite jokes...
Why did the lady shoot her husband with a bow and arrow? She didn't want to wake the kids.

Okay...going to put myself in "time out" now.

Truth come on! that movie is a classic! I actually think I got that one with a pizza...

The best part about this is that the joke was not even widely known until someone threw a fit about it. Hmm...sometimes 'tis better to just let something go and fade into obscurity than to bring attention to it.
Sorta like the best way to stop a bully is to ignore them. They stop when they no longer are getting a reaction or attention.

There you go, make anything offensive immoral. We'll all be better off then. Everyone is so thin skinned, grow up and get a pair!

If the guy had been standing over the body of another man with a golf club in his hand, say after a home invasion attempt or a drug deal gone wrong, would it still even be such an issue? The victim in this joke just happened to be a female, the way I see it. If certain groups want to see an end to discrimination, I think they should quit making an issue out of everything they find "objectionable". I for one do not cry foul when a female stand-up comedian bashes men, or when a black guy makes fun of white people and gets away with it. It's a two sided coin. Anything is going to be a self percieved "issue" if you want to be one bad enough.

Yet it didn't get the notice in the movie Mr. Mom. Even Pizza Hut gave that movie out with a pizza as a family time promotion. "Did you shoot him with the 38?" (meaning the caliber of the pistol she was holding), and she responds, "38, 39, whatever it takes".

i just watched law and order on tv and there was a gruesom murder of a woman, also a victim of domestic abuse of the ultimate degree. why is that allowed? someone tell me why all the violence on tv and in the movies is ok. the readers digest joke is not politically correct in our aclu environment. sorry, i found it funny. without seeing the joke, i bet it was in cartoon form.

Wow, when was that joke submitted, 1959?

Yup..still works.

Wasn't even a funny joke to begin with. Ya, and I heard Beth yesterday on WCLO talking about roasting marshmallows over that burning car on I-90. Gosh Beth, what if it was YOUR car on fire? I think I'm going to write a scathing criticism to somebody someday if I don't forget, which I already have.

You can tell if a joke is sexist if you flip it around. Would the joke work if it were the woman standing over the dead man?