1,418 of 1,554 people found the following review helpful
on April 5, 2013
As a professor, author, and researcher in intimate relationships and sexuality, I feel qualified to assess LaViolette's book.
While some of her discussions are accurate, the difficulty lies in the fact that her thoughts and ideas are left over from the 1970s and are from a radical feminism framework (which is fine for those who adhere to that ideology); in full disclosure, ethical researchers and scholars typically discuss their paradigm (bias), but LaViolette does not. This is important to note, because the radical feminist framework always holds the male accountable for the violence, and holds women innocent; this is in direct contrast with what current research studies indicate. While empirical evidence does indicate that women are typically the victims and men are the perpetrators, this is NOT ALWAYS the case. LaViolette's book fails to note that men are battered, too.
Other problems exist in the research cited in the book--most of her research is QUITE antiquated, dating back as far as the 1950s. This is unfortunate as it does not truly represent what we know about Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) and Domestic Violence (DV) in our culture today; the research is not current, it is not relevant, and it is NOT representative of the landscape of IPV. Furthermore, LaViolette's interpretation of some of the benchmark studies is skewed. I suspect this is due, in part, to her lack of research experience. After all, she is a clinician, not a researcher. This is evident in her writings.
I knew of LaViolette's work prior to the now-famous murder trial of Travis Alexander and because of her lack of research knowledge chose not to cite her in any of my books. Now that I have watched her testify and have seen how she grossly misrepresents Walker's Cycle of Abuse, I question her knowledge of IPV and DV and her relevancy in today's culture.
555 of 609 people found the following review helpful
on April 2, 2013
As a victim of Domestic Violence, with the broken bones, trauma, protective orders, etc., all in my past to prove it, don't spend a dime on this self serving BS. This "Expert", as she calls herself, has done incredible damage to the very term "Domestic Violence". What took decades to be recognized as a horrific and, sometimes, deadly situation, for both MEN and WOMEN who have been abused, La Violette has turned the clock back. Her general hatred towards men is apparent. If you are a victim of Domestic Violence, call your local DV hotline, call Law Enforcement, do anything but spend your hard earned money on this piece of biased garbage. Try "Co-Dependent No More"...it may help you get back on the path to normalcy. For the right amount of money, currently $250-$300, La Violette will say ANYTHING you want her to say. Shame on her!
903 of 995 people found the following review helpful
on April 3, 2013
I am saddened and disgusted by how men in general are portrayed by LaViolette. This woman has taken the most innocent of actions and has made them out to be abuse, and I lack the understanding as to why she has done this. So many simple actions are now twisted to the point where if a man doesn't call a woman right away after a date or a sexual encounter, he is emotionally abusive, or if a man just so happens to become angry in traffic, it's a precursor to violent behavior and abuse. I'm totally up in arms! Look, I was in a very violent and abusive marriage, and I am absolutely sickened by what this author has done to genuinely TRUE DV victims. She has set this issue back at least 30 years. She wonders why DV is rarely taken seriously? Well Ms. LaViolette, the reason this is true is all due to people like you. My brother was also involved in a violent relationship where he was punched, bitten, kicked, had a tooth chipped, holes in the walls, and was finally falsely accused of hitting his girlfriend (the mother of his child) with a gun over her head. She admitted to the officer involved that she lied (my brother never even owned a gun), and charges were dropped against my him, but nothing was done about her, nothing! My brother now has sole physical custody of their daughter due to her abusive behavior (she is not even allowed any visitation), and we all thank God every day for that. HE was a victim of abuse/DV, but it took a very long time for anyone to take him seriously because he was a male. Anyway, because of the way this woman has portrayed this issue, and also due to her defending the actions of a female abuser, I fear that DV won't be taken as seriously as it should. I truly hope LaViolette thinks about how her recent actions have affected this issue.
642 of 706 people found the following review helpful
on April 3, 2013
This woman's professional opinion is for sale, and she wouldn't know a domestic violence victim if they shot her in the face, cut her throat and stabbed her 29 times.
409 of 448 people found the following review helpful
on April 3, 2013
I read this book to see if this woman really had some valuable insights into the topic of battered women. I was really disappointed in a very hard to follow and disjointed book. Find something else if you want information on this topic.
343 of 375 people found the following review helpful
on April 3, 2013
This sorry excuse for a woman is a true snake oil saleswoman.
Her books are a complete joke, and it will not help you one iota.
According to this so called "EXPERT", all men are evil monsters who need to be wiped off the face of the earth.
I am a man and an abuse survivor, and she has insulted me and every single abuse victim. Your gender does not define if you are an abuser or not.
Don't bother with this trash.
Shame on you!!!!!!!!!!!!
295 of 322 people found the following review helpful
on April 4, 2013
In following the Jodi Arias trial, I was willing to give this woman the benefit of the doubt based upon her sterling reputation as a pioneer in the area of Domestic Violence. Even after reading her publications on her website (in which she basically argues against the possibility of women being as violent as men), I was still willing to listen.
First, the defense team has dumped her down (much in the way they dumped Jodi into a meek little Quaker when we know she was a platinum blonde with huge implants who dressed like a dime an hour pole dancer) and dyed her hair grey, took all of her makeup off.
STILL, I was willing to listen because I thought her purpose was to explain Domestic Violence to the jury which is ok. I also EXPECTED her to speak in very general terms and to back away from any direct comparison to Travis or Jodi since she didn't know or speak with Travis (since Jodi (over)killed him in the most horrific manner possible, leaving him absolutely no dignity and allowing him to begin decomposing in his shower).
This woman began speaking about Jodi as a VICTIM and she based her theories, comparisons and assumptions (She actually said, "I'm assuming ..." countless times) BASED ON JODI'S side of the story (which has already been proven to be LIES), partial e-mails, distorted text messages and the completely out of context heresay from Jodi about what other people told Jodi about Travis. REALLY? Does this Domestic Violence expert know that Jodi's OWN MOTHER AND FATHER were in NO WAY surprised to learn that she killed Travis? Did she KNOW that Jodi's mother told the police that Jodi denied having been in Arizona the night of the murder and that "she has the gas receipts to prove it" (she did not purchase gas in Arizona, rented a car 90 miles from her home, dyed her platinum hair to dark brown, all so that NO ONE COULD PLACE HER IN ARIZONA the night of the murder), does this "EXPERT" know that Jodi crawled through Travis' doggie door in order to get into his house? Does she know Jodi broke into Travis's home and would sleep on his sofa, break into his e-mail accounts, break into his bank accounts, MySpace accounts? Does she know that Jodi admitted to sending a fake e-mail to Travis from a man so that Travis would be jealous?
Does she know that Jodi drove over AN HOUR AND A HALF to confront a woman Jodi suspected was dating Travis? Does Miss Expert know that was a pattern with Jodi? Does she know that Jodi confronted a woman in the bathroom of a conference center to stake her claim on Travis and to warn her off from Travis? Does this expert know that Jodi peeped into Travis' windows at night? Does she know Jodi would drive 1300 miles BOTH WAYS from CA to Mesa, AZ to stalk Travis if Jodi could not locate him or reach him by phone? Her co-worker said Jodi often would drive to AZ from CA straight from her shift if she was able to convince him to see her. Does she know that if Jodi could not reach him, she would refuse to report for her shift at the restaurant? Does this woman know that Travis' friends staged an intervention for Travis, warning him about Jodi and Jodi had snuck into the hallway and was listening at the door? Does she know that Jodi and Travis had a fight in which Travis finally called her a sociopath and that she was the worst thing that ever happened to Travis and for her to NEVER contact him again? Does she know that Jodi admitted to the police that she HAD been jealous of Travis dating other women and that she went over to his house to confront him about it and they had a huge fight? Does this woman know that Jodi borrowed money from Travis constantly and not the other way around? Really Miss Domestic Violence woman, Travis had been paying Jodi $200 a month to clean his house. Why would he need to borrow money from HER?
Does this expert know that Jodi only had 62 seconds to stab him 29 times, slit his throat, drag him back to the bathroom and stuff him into the shower then shoot him in the head? IMPOSSIBLE so guess what, Miss Sell Your Soul, Jodi is LYING about how the fight that fateful night started. THANK GOODNESS for Travis' camera because some higher power made sure Jodi was captured on the film standing over his bleeding body. Did you know THAT, Miss Expert? Does Miss Expert know that Jodi claims to have been running for her life, climbed up on a particle shelf that could only hold no more than 40lbs to get a gun she swore Travis owned? Does Miss Expert know that the shelf held shoes only and that it was held up by 4 pegs? If Jodi actually put her foot onto that shelf, it would have tipped forward, causing her to fall backwards. AND Travis' closet was neat beyond any military precision. Everything including shoes, shirts, jackets, ties were lined up perfectly. If there was a race for her life in that closet and she actually jumped up onto the shelf, she would have disturbed almost every item surrounding the area where the gun was but nothing was disturbed. Does Miss Expert know that Jodi had absolutely no explanation for that, just insisted that she did step up on the shelf, reached back into the corner of the closet, grabbed the gun while holding onto the rod where the clothes were hanging and did not disturb one item in the closet? Does Miss Expert know that Jodi called Travis after she killed him to leave voice mail messages and sent him text messages and sent him e-mails to cover her tracks? Does she know that the .25 caliber gun used to kill him is suspiciously like the .25 caliber gun stolen from her grandfather's house WHILE SHE WAS LIVING THERE? Does Miss Expert know that Jodi sent a letter and flowers to Travis's grandmother expressing her deep sorrow for their loss and that she hoped they found the killer so they could have peace? Does she know that after she killed Travis, she drove to another man's house and spent the night with him so that no one would be suspicious? Does she know that Jodi was a snotty, arrogant, egocentric, combative, argumentative, smirky, EVASIVE, smug, condescending, patronizing, disrespectful person when the Prosecutor Juan Martinez questioned her? Yet when her smarmy pedophile defending lawyer asked her questions, she was meek and mild and sad with FAKE tears?
Did you even read the police report which cataloged all of her lies and distortions and the statements from Travis's friends who knew her? NO?
Of course you didn't. That would have been too much work. YOU DIDN'T KNOW ALL OF THAT because you are a sell out and you're lazy, MISS SELL YOUR SOUL. If you'd bothered to do even a CURSORY investigation, you might have been shocked enough to have some pride and respect for true survivors of DV and declined taking the case. DID YOU KNOW YOU WERE THE 6th, yes SIXTH expert they tried to recruit. NO, you were NOT their first choice or even their SECOND choice. You were their last ditch desperate effort. If you'd spoken with everyone who knew Travis as well as the police and the people at the Mormon church and the people who knew her best, you might have thought twice about taking this rotten egg of a case. Oh, all of that investigation would have meant you would not have gotten the quick paycheck and the so far, $10,000 out of the pockets of the Arizona taxpayers.
NO. YOU PURCHASED 4 BOOKS for Jodi and gave her a magazine subscription. Somehow, she managed to snag you into her web along with the disgraced Dr. Richard Samuels (now known as Dick SHAMBLES and Dick SHAMuels).
My contempt for you has no boundaries. How you will be able to look another survivor in the eye escapes me. But wait, every single woman who has had any contact with any men are abused because you're so obviously biased against men. You're biased against them in your books and you're biased against them in your publications and you've shown how cheaply you and your integrity can be purchased.
You should be considered a menace and a danger to any survivor (MALE OR FEMALE) and if you had even one modicum of pride and dignity left (and I imagine you won't after Juan Martinez has shredded you and your Harry Potter glasses), you would quietly retire AFTER you donate ALL OF THE MONEY YOU HAVE SWINDLED FROM THE PEOPLE OF ARIZONA to the nearest shelter for Abuse Survivors.
I have absolutely no respect for you, your theories, your work (past and present). You have found a way to unravel every single thing you may have done in the past to help people with these days on the stand for a known liar and cold blooded murderer. I hope you are haunted every single night by the sight of Travis in those photographs. How you could even look at the autopsy photos (NINE deep wounds to his BACK and to the BACK OF HIS HEAD, defensive cuts deep in his hands and feet!) and not realize what a monster Jodi Arias has inside of her.
IF she gets out (and we all know she won't) but IF she does, you might want to move and change your phone number because I'm sure YOU don't want Jodi Arias as your new BFF.
You've sold your reputation and your credibility for for money stained with Travis Alexander's blood. Good luck recovering any respect.
***Editing*** to address the absurdities of a LaViolette troll (Ms. "Irish" Heintzelman from Michigan) who is running around this site babbling about websites and posting being "prosecuted" for their opinions. Just unbelievable. One can't be prosecuted for exercising Freedom of Speech when the content of the speech isn't incendiary or inciting violence. She thinks everyone posting here should be "sued" for libel by Ms. LaViolette. Again, she should check her facts or head back to school for a refresher course of "libel." Ms. Heintzelman's education has not extended to any full understanding of the First Amendment. The burden of proof is HIGHER in cases involving public figures. And "public figures" is not limited to celebrities, politicians or titans of industry. In the precedent setting New York Times vs. Sullivan a public figure was defined as either a public official or any other person pervasively involved in public affairs, or a limited purpose public figure, meaning those who have "thrust themselves to the forefront of particular public controversies in order to influence the resolution of the issues involved." A person can become an "involuntary public figure" as the result of publicity, even though that person did not want or invite the public attention, e.g. PEOPLE ACCUSED OF HIGH PROFILE CRIMES may be unable to pursue actions for defamation even (IF or) after their innocence is established. Ms. LaViolette seems to fit the definition of a public figure even if it is in a "limited" status because her involvement generated publicity within a narrow area of interest. In other words, she brought the house down on herself by her own poor choices and desire to garner public attention in a way that has escaped her in the past. She (through Ms. H) is accusing the reviewers of having not read the book(s). And how would she know that? Does she have access to Amazon's sales database to track who is purchasing the book? Does she have ESP through the written word so she can determine who has read the book and who hasn't? And I find it extremely hypocritical of Ms. LaViolette and Ms. Heintzelman to accuse anyone of FORMING AN OPINION WITHOUT HAVING READ THE BOOK OR SPOKEN WITH MS. LAVIOLETTE IN ORDER TO GET HER SIDE OF THE STORY WHEN THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT SHE HAS DONE IN MAKING SWEEPING INDICTMENTS OF TRAVIS ALEXANDER'S CHARACTER WITHOUT HAVING SPOKEN TO HIM, HIS FRIENDS, HIS FAMILY MEMBERS, CONFIRMED THE EXISTENCE OF ANY OTHER COMPLAINTS OR DONE ANYTHING OTHER THAN TAKE JODI "LIZZIE BORDEN" ARIAS' WORD AS GOSPEL. That's the pot calling the kettle black. You can't have it both ways. I'm sure Ms. LaViolette is beginning to regret her own fateful decisions. Way to go, Ms. LaViolette for finding a grave on which to spit.
288 of 314 people found the following review helpful
on April 3, 2013
Do not buy this book. According to Alyce all relationships are abusive. She believes any and every woman that claims abuse without evidence other than what they say. She will testify for cold-blooded murderers, such as Jodi Arias. Jodi Arias killed her ex-boyfriend in cold blood and claims that he abused her. HE DID NOT! Alyce is a disgrace to true victims and has a stoneage view of abuse. She is a paid mouthpiece!!!! Wouldnt even give 1star, but no other option.
652 of 718 people found the following review helpful
on April 4, 2013
I've been involved in Social Work for over 20 years now. Worked graveyard at a battered women's shelter in Arvada, CO. a victim advocate for a sheriff's office in Idaho and as a counselor after getting my degree in Social Work. I've worked with hundreds of people from both sides, female and male, young and old, innocent and the abuser and must state that I am quite amazed at this woman's testimony. As a mental health care provider, we choose our roles and should choose carefully. We can be an advocate, a voice, or an impartial observer as Ms. LaViolette claims she is in this case. However, if we observe her words, she has horribly confused her roles in this case. She is speaking as an advocate for Ms. Arias which is unethical if you say you're an impartial witness. For example, she should always qualify her answers with, "If what I was told was correct," or "Ms. Aria's views are..." etc. Instead, Ms. Laviolette speaks, instead to, "Yes, she felt...," or worse, "He did this or that." Every time she does this, she hurts the true victims who do suffer horrible abuse. Why is she doing this? Why choose to ignore her impartial role to show her bias against men and a gentleman she has never met? A gentleman who was brutally murdered!
She is also, quite unfortunately, now in the role of an abuser when she can look this family in the eye and say what she's saying without ONE piece of evidence that he was an abuser. She only goes by one sided text messages, reads between the lines on Travis Alexanders, did not speak with his family or friends, but uses emails to say what she THINKS someone meant.
For the rest of us who are trained and deeply, truly care about victims will no longer support her. I am not the only one so far who has voiced this opinion! She has put herself on an lonely island indeed. We cannot, nor should we stand by and allow these so-called professionals to damage what we've worked so hard to build. Indeed,some of us have given our whole life to bring validity to victims.
I can only hope she looks at these reviews and rethinks her stance. Her reputation, not the money or status, should be utmost on her mind and the true victims in this case - Travis Alexander and his family. I do hope she spends time looking at his autopsy photos if she needs further push to do so.
719 of 792 people found the following review helpful
on April 2, 2013
I cannot believe people would pay $50 to read something from a woman that can't see who the real victim in a relationship is. She's destroying the reputation of a dead man for $300/hour. She should never be able to sell another book about domestic violence again.