Rather than telling men what's wrong with them, maybe a new approach is needed

Getting among a hyped-up crowd is not a great idea for anyone and it's certainly no place to make policy. Since when did anyone think handing over policy-making to a baying mob was a good idea? Labor and the media knew better when they attacked Morrison but the smell of self-interest and blood was intoxicating. Now Albo has been burned.

We collectively elect our government and through that, our prime minister. No MP, minister or PM should be at the beck and call of an organised mob of political activists. There's no reason a crowd should have more say or influence than the rest of us just because they've gathered together and their demands will make the news headlines. Good policy is what we're after. Not knee-jerk responses to often understandably frustrated protesters.

Venting frustration is one thing. Just blindly being abusive is another. In what might seem counterintuitive, I think Me Too and so much of the woke movement has played a part in increasing domestic violence. Men and boys collectively are portrayed as misogynistic thugs who need retraining.

Frankly, it's not only damned insulting, it's just not true. Most men are not punch-up artists. Yet daily men and boys read about what's wrong with them. If anyone thinks constantly putting men and boys down is creating kinder, gentler humans they need professional help. Hate or contempt loaded onto individuals doesn't make them better, it just damages them.

It's just rubbish to lump all men and boys into that shocking stereotype. Turn to the good guys and instead of putting them down, belittling and weakening them, build them up.

Ask yourself, who has a chance of getting an anti-violence and sexism message through to through to men who show signs of developing appalling behaviour? Here's a quick insight: it's not angry women. If anyone has a chance of reaching out to troubled, threatened and maybe aggressive men, it's the peers of the potential thugs. Other men who are managing their lives despite the negative images slung at them daily. Yes, the men society keeps loading up with guilt about their oafish, bullying, piggish and misogynistic tendencies. Perhaps if we stopped dropping buckets on them, they might step into the breach.

We've been pouring millions over decades into domestic violence and we haven't had much success. It reminds me of a graduation speech in the United States decades ago. The speaker told of a small village on a big, raging river. They were constantly working to improve their skill at saving people who had somehow fallen in upstream. They got faster boats, more life jackets, more training. What they hadn't done was considered if they could go upstream and lessen the number of people falling in. Policies need to address both the longer term proposition of reducing the problem in the first place and handling the consequences of the here and now.

Labor's big spend on helping women leave is a here-and-now policy which is needed. So many victims just have nowhere to go to get away. But it's like the town getting more boats and life jackets ... it's not addressing the root cause. Oh, has anyone considered the nightmare for the victim of finding out about that possible help and accessing it?

Stopping the stupid practice of presuming bail should be available to serial offenders is another here-and-now change we should make. Both state laws and judicial attitudes in some instances just need immediate recalibration.

However, beware zealous overkill. The heightened emotion around DV has led to some calls for no bail for any accused. That would be stupid. Innocent until proven guilty is a baseline principle to which far too many activists and journalists give little, if any, credence. A lynch mob seems acceptable - even desirable - to surprisingly large numbers of people. To satisfy their egotistical, narcissistic saviour complexes, they throw the cornerstone of our freedom in the bin. They'd be squealing louder than any if they were accused and judged guilty by a crowd rather than a court.

Boring as it might seem, the policy debate would be more meaningful if more decent, basic stats were thrown into the discussion. A nice clean breakdown of who the perpetrators are and the circumstances under which they offend would give some substance to public discussion and a better start to policymakers.

Ditto victims. Domestic violence isn't limited to one or two social groups. But women with fewer job prospects have limited options to get away. That means ensuring girls get the education to get job opportunities. A fuller picture of the characteristics of victims might give us insight into missing pieces of the policy puzzle. We've got the Institutes of Family Studies and of Criminology. Give them what they need rather than outsource to money-hungry opportunists.

It's a sad fact that when there's a bucket of money from the government, you have to watch out for bottom-feeding money hunters disguised as do-gooders. Think NDIS.

Here's an example. One bureaucrat, by a magical slight of hand. granted the same academic at one university a huge slice of federal funding under two separate grants. I thought to disguise the enormous amount of money going to a mate. There was probably a much bigger story there. A club of insiders after funding is what I saw. You won't be surprised to learn that the bureaucrat responsible got a decent wing clip and her contract wasn't renewed. Sadly, it was too late to undo the stupidity. That kind of hopeless public administration is not isolated. It sounds good to announce research into DV ... but it need not so much to sound good as to be good and sound.

If you had a list of every DV research program funded since the Hawke government at state and federal level, the cost of each and an indication of where - if - -t had been effectively used you would need a lot more than smelling salts.

Problems need practical solutions but service providers and researchers want ongoing funding. Those two aspirations don't always sit happily together. Good policy making goes way beyond announcing funding, but by then the care caravan has moved on.