A Fraction Of A Percent

It is very hard nowadays to imagine what life was like without the internet. We now take it for granted that people can communicate very easily with each other and that they can send out information to thousands of people simply by tapping away at their keyboards.

A very easy thing to do.

Even twenty years ago, however, the information about the world 'out there' that entered our brains was mostly delivered to us via a small number of media outlets.

In the UK, for example, the vast majority of people would learn about what was going on in the world from a handful of mainstream TV channels and/or from a dozen or so mainstream newspapers.

Information flowing in the other direction, from the general population and into the brains of those who worked for these mainstream media outlets was largely through writing letters and sending them through the post.

Needless to say, very, very few people bothered to write letters.

Indeed, in order to be motivated to write letters about some issue or other, people would need to be very fired up over it.

Now, I want you to imagine that Issue X, or Incident X, fired up 10,000 people in the UK to such an extent that they decided to write letters to the mainstream media about it.

"This is outrageous!"

"Something must be done!"

Well, quite simply, these 10,000 people would have inundated the few mainstream media outlets with their complaints and their demands.

"450 letters about Issue X in just one month!"

"200 letters about Issue X in the past week alone!"

"My goodness, Issue X must really be a big problem. People all over the country are outraged by Issue X, and they are writing to us!"

Such an outpouring of letters over Issue X would have swamped the media outlets - especially when compared to the tiny number of letters that they would have received about most other issues.

The media people who received these letters would then see the world outside of their offices through the contents of these letters.

"The people out there are enraged over this Issue X. Something big is going on out there. We must report on it!"

And my point is this.

Out of a population of some 45 million adults, 10,000 were fired up over Issue X.

In other words, 0.02% of the population was sufficiently fired up over Issue X to write letters to the mainstream media.

But notice that 99.98% of the population was not.

Nevertheless, those in the media would have felt heavily pressured into supporting the complaints about Issue X because of the relatively large volume of letters that they had received about it.

"Our very own readers are fired up by Issue X. We must support our readers - lest we anger them and, hence, lose them."

And so the people working in the media, themselves, would find themselves being wound up over Issue X.

After all, their readers are bombarding them with a certain point of view.

And so they, too, start to agitate over Issue X.

Indeed, from their point of view, almost the entire population seems to be very concerned about Issue X.

So they start to present the point of view of the readers who wrote to them about Issue X.

But, of course, they do not hear the other side of the story surrounding Issue X because, quite simply, the people on the other side (the 99.98%) have not been fired up over it.

The issue of domestic violence is an example of how a tiny fraction of the population can transform into a major industry an issue which is seen by the vast majority of people to be relatively unimportant.

A small number of women are badly beaten by their partners and, quite rightly, a few thousand women are outraged over the fact that little seems to be done to protect such women.

99.98% of the population remains unmoved.

The issue does not affect them or concern them very much.

Domestic violence? Where? Nope. Can't see any.

But 10,000 women can turn the tide - as outlined above - by writing their letters.

And, before long, the entire country is swamped with one-sided propaganda to do with domestic violence as the media people, themselves, begin to believe, erroneously, that the entire country is concerned about the issue.

"Domestic violence is everywhere!" - or so they think.

Of course, the other side to the issue does not get heard.

Indeed, to begin with, there is no other side.

A handful of women start to pile on the pressure. They want government funding to form a woman's group to help to protect women from domestic violence.

Fair enough. Who can blame them?

And it does not take very much for them to get the funding.

After all, the media people are very happy to support them.

And any politician who does not agree with them must surely be a rat.

But  with this funding, what does this group of women do? Well, they write more letters, to get more funding, to write more letters, to get more funding.

The media are inundated even more so than they were before.

"My goodness. Domestic violence really is EVERYWHERE!"

And, in brief, the end result is that the country is perpetually deluged with overblown hysteria about domestic violence - year in, year out - with thousands upon thousands of people - lawyers, therapists, judges, police officers, politicians, media women, women's groups, academics, social workers etc etc etc - all cashing in on the issue.

In other words, no longer are there just 10,000 'agitators' concerned about Issue X, there are now 200, 000, and rising.

There is money to be made!

And so the hysteria becomes more and more overblown

And so the hysteria becomes more and more overblown as those with vested interests in the issue keep pouring out propaganda - much of it false - in order to feed their stomachs and to grow their careers.

And what was once started by those who had a noble aim - protecting women from domestic violence - grows into a huge self-serving organism that has almost nothing to do with domestic violence and no concern for women.

Indeed, these people have long promoted policies and notions that actually increase the likelihood of domestic violence against women, but they remain unconcerned about this.

Why?

Because the more that women are on the receiving end of domestic violence, the more money do they make - e.g. see Only Women Are Offered An Alternative To Domestic Violence; which is mostly why women are more often killed than are men.

Finally, to put the domestic violence issue into some kind of perspective, we ought to remain aware of the fact that, in the UK, some 100 women are killed by their intimate partners ever year whereas, for example, some 1,500 women will commit suicide and another 1,500 will die in traffic accidents.

You will rarely hear about these other deaths, but you will continually be bombarded with hysteria over domestic violence.

Why?

In a nutshell, because domestic violence against women is an issue that makes hundreds of thousands of people a great deal of money.

And it will also make the government billions - e.g. see Why Governments Love Feminism.

And so it is that an issue which seriously affects only a very tiny fraction of the population gets turned into a never-ending nightmare that poisons everyone's psyche, that demonises every man in the country, and that entitles the state to remove any man from his home without even a shred of objective evidence to show that he has actually done anything to deserve this.