I have been thrown into political turmoil over the means testing of Child Benefit.

Here was, as far as I could see this morning, something actually half sensible coming from a Conservative chancellor (something I rarely thought I’d say). Concentrating cuts on a Victorian style charity benefit for all, rich or poor, but only actually cutting it for the rich, seemed very redistributionist and egalitarian of the most economically right wing cabinet member since Thatcher.

But then I read this post by Cath Elliot. My inner feminist got insanely angry as I read.

There are vulnerable people out there with no personal income in abusive relationships for whom Child Benefit is the only lifeline. Some of the abusive partners earn more than £44k; what now for women whose partners will be penalised by the state until they cancel their CB claim? Will this policy actually create an excuse for someone to go home and beat the child benefit out of the mother of their children because they have £1700 less beer money a year?

The world in this case needs to be clearly subdivided into three categories. Firstly, the good. The objective ones, those who can keep the statistics in their head and argue against institutionally sexist cuts, in spite of the anger.

I try to be in this category but sometimes I fail and end up with the second category: the wrong. In this case, this is the Tory Chancellor and those who agree that means testing child benefit is sensible. The wrong don’t actually want to hurt people, they just don’t think through the full economic consequences of their actions. Better statistical drilling is what is required there.

Finally there is the evil. That is, those who will go home this evening and commit domestic violence against their partners. Domestic violence starts as bullying, because noone will stay in an abusive relationship while they still have any self esteem. When the person is truly broken, the abuser (male or female, but 84% male*) can commit all the violent acts they want, without fear if report to the police. This is true evil, and while the Tories may absent mindedly want to make it easier, they don’t actually want people to beat their spouses.

The lesson here is twofold. Firstly, oppose this benefit cut. It is an attack in women and their freedom, and the chancellor needs to lower the 50% threshold to £100k before resorting to it. Secondly, we need to teach the psychology of domestic violence to teenagers at school. We need them to be able to recognise the precursors of abuse and flag it up, whether in their own relationships or in those of others. We need to free the next generation from this hideous and evil scourge that is in every town and city in the land. Fight this cut, fight the violence. And defend loudly anyone you hear criticised for refusing to cancel their Child Benefit claim in order to keep their husband’s or male partner’s paycheque slightly fatter.

* according for US State Department statistics for 1998-2002. I couldn’t find any for the UK I’m afraid.