«Only years later, I understand, my mother knew very well what he is, but it also provoked him- flirting with men... I not want to offend women … but now I see how … many women provoke their behavior and cause a man to such behavior». // I am sorry but this idea about provoking role of a woman if a man beats her seems shocking to me. If a woman began to flirt with other men and so on, a man has complete right to leave such woman (but of course still caring about their children if they exist) but _never_ he has any right to _beat_ the woman. Woman is not a property of a man although many men dream about it.

It reminds me the popular and convenient for men idea of accusation for women in short skirts who were raped. In a civilized country if even an absolutely naked woman goes for a walk at night the first man who has right to come to her must be a policeman who offers her politely to pay a fine for forbidden act in the public place. In any such case violator is guilty and responsible although a potential victim is responsible for trying to avoid violence toward her (unfortunately, often it is impossible) – but these are _different_ kinds of responsibility.

In such case maybe to admit that shops with brightly decorated shop windows and people in good clothes also “provoke” robbers and so the shops and such people are guilty being robbed and poor robbers are only have been “provoked”?

The world where people think that “incorrect” in their eyes behavior (I do not mean racism etc. but simply flirt, besides usually men do not limit themselves in such and many other things not being beaten by women) of others justifies beating these others who decided too bravely that they have own right to think and decide, if even incorrectly sometimes, is an awful world that will inevitably destroy itself.