Australian women actually are lucky they’re not getting shot for protesting.

(stay with me here)

In the same way the Prime Minister is lucky none of you have doused him in petrol or alcohol and set him on fire.

You could demonstrate this fact by burning a life sized effigy of him at your next protest. Just saying.

No one gender should have to suffer perpetual threat of violence at the hands of the other.

Women don’t typically assault men in the manner we are always under threat of assault from them. That’s a fact of life. But it’s not because we’re weak and incapable. Because we could assault men if we so chose, quite easily actually. The human body is frail, even the male ones, and very easy to kill or maim; especially in the modern world. Men die just as easily from bullet wounds or other weapons, they’re just as susceptible to roofies, they’re just as helpless when restrained, they collapse when tased, they’re suckers for honey traps, they have all the same blood loss points, and they’re just as easy to trick and incapacitate. Violence is a simple equation of will to harm and opportunity. For any of us. Nothing more. Nothing less.

Women don’t assault men because on the whole because they choose to not be violent; men live unfettered lives in the grace of that choice. Women recognize the humanity in the opposite sex. However, that act of choice suggests a different choice could be made at any time. Men should be asking themselves if they really want violence to be the only redress against violence. Because that may be where things are headed, especially now that the veil of silence around sexual assault has been lifted. Your Prime Minister should ask himself that question. Watching his image burn might spark the inquiry.

So why have women consistently chosen non-violence? Because sexual/gender violence is wrong. Because it damages society and the individuals within it. Because… where does it end?

Because it’s wrong. You don’t need any other reasoning. It’s just wrong.