The problems with the advocacy based DV articles have been well covered on OLO numerous times. I don't know if the number is really up to 9 million yet or not but what is clear is that if you go in with the same false assumptions and don't allow those assumptions to be tested you will keep coming up with the same answers.

Again - when researchers try to determine if men and women suffer DV at the same rates they tend to find the answer is yes. When all researchers are interested in is women's subjective experience of DV then that's what they find.

The difference between all those articles Liz refers to and the small sample I've referenced here is that the one's I've tried to reference tried to find the truth rather than just repeat the desired outcomes.

R0bert

The major line of argument that I have consistently pushed is that our society needs to genuinely understand the way that DV really happens in order to stop it. All of the research suggests that DV tends to be reciprocal. Understanding a problem better usually means coming up with better solutions. In short, I believe that simply asking him to stop will achieve little and that both participants need to learn on conflict resolution skills.

Others have found research to support their arguments, I liked this report http://domestic-violence.martinsewell.com/DuttonCorvo2006.pdf
It is quite long, but the introduction gives a good overview and discusses evidence about bidirectional DV. The next two sections discuss current approaches, which they describe as a political solution imposed on a psychological problem. The next section discusses understanding the incidents from his perspective as a basic skill of the counsellor.

Liz claims that her personal experience with DV proves that I am wrong. The fact that she cannot contribute to an internet debate without adopting such an angry tone and resorting to personal attacks only goes further to prove that people who are involved with DV need to learn skills to better resolve conflict.

@benk - The reason I adopt such an angry tone, is because I'm bloody angry! I put up with a life of his violence for over 20 years. I was subjected to having my car tampered with just because I'd done or he decided I'd done something-calm could have been restored,but he'd interfere with my car while I was in the shower - or move it a few streets away; or steal my keys. He took pleasure in me ringing him at work,hanging up on me, loving the fact that I'd ring back, running late for work; all he knew would stress me - he was in control!He made the decision when to tell me where my car was, or where my keys were - he decided when it ended - when I was nearly a nervous wreck - these are not WELL PEOPLE!
You and your mate,who probably have never even spoken to anyone in my position, or the police or counsellor, or rape crisis centres, or other women, or ?No idea!
You refer to me as 'she' not in a direct way. YOu pick and choose what articles you read that uphold your views? You ignore the millions that uphold my experiences and assertions?
Tell me, do you debate, argue, disagree, insult people who've had their house broken into, or their car stolen? No! I'm sure you wouldn't want to sound like a callous brute to them.
How about other crimes? Bank robberies? It's the fault of the workers is it? the bank manager! No, I bet you don't. Why these crimes?
Says more about you - you are part of the problem - you could be an abuser in denial for all I know! You are of concern!

@RObert - How do you treat the women in your life? I have some concerns about you too. Interesting that you are so intent on proving me to be incorrect. Why is that do you think? You don't know me. What are you trying to prove - that your ingrained attitudes to women are being challenged? I've heard and read about men who bash their wives because the creases in their underpants are not exact. I know of a bloke who when he came home late, and his dinner was on the stove, he'd empty it in his wife's shopping bag or handbag. These men are sociopaths, and some go all the way to murder. I was lucky,I could've been dead. the more I learn these days about medical knowledge re the brain and how easily it is to kill someone, I get the shakes - it's a form of PTSD - after all these years! I'm not neurotic or have a mental illness - I'm a person who responds/responded in a normal way to being forced to live in a terrorist environment - never knowing when he'd 'attack'? Don't say why didn't you leave? Or it couldn't have been that bad. The fact is, that most women who end up dead are murdered after they left the perpetrator.
I don't intend to spend too much more time on this site,as you have no idea what you're talking about, and are just talking through a hole in the top of your head. That is, you're an ignorant brute who probably rules those in your life - that is abuse? Why? Because no human being has the right to bring terror into the life of anyone - particularly the person he promised to love and protect!
I'm involved in many areas of women's health, and I do not need an ignoramus telling me what my reality was, or is!

Liz45:"The facts are, that some men use control to intimidate and have power over women. "

Yes indeed and some women use control to exert power over men. I have a very good friend who works as a maintenence palnned for a large food manufacturer. He is responsible for ensuring that the equipment is properly looked after. He has to balance the competing demands of production and safety, as well as considering the implications of sales targets and so on.

His wife won;t allow him to have a card giving access to their joint bank account. She won't allow him to be out past 8:30 at night. she won;t allow him to buy his own clothes or choose his own mobile phone plan or have enough money in his pocket to buy a beer when it's his shout.

He can't protest - the last time he tried she simply told him that if he didn't like it he could lump it. Having seen my experience and that of other friends, he's terrified that if he goes through a divorce he'll be completely ruined, so he puts up with it.

In my own experience, the domineering and controlling wife is a far more common creature than the violent husband, but we never hear about her from the taxpayer-funded mother's rights groups. The shrew and the fishwife are not stereotypes, they are archetypes and well represented in the population. I suspect most of the more strident female posters here would fit the mould.

"How do you treat the women in your life?" - particularly well actually.

"I have some concerns about you too." - Chaz said something about that type of tactic recently.

"Interesting that you are so intent on proving me to be incorrect. Why is that do you think?" - because you seem intent on defaming men on this site on a regular basis. You use exaggerated or plain false, one sided stats and claims to try and sustain a gendered understanding of family violence. I've been on the wrong side of that where violence against me was dismissed by those who should have known better. Why are you so intent on trying to stop calls for an end to all family violence rather than just that where the male hits?

"Because no human being has the right to bring terror into the life of anyone - particularly the person he promised to love and protect" - agreed except the "he" should be more generic. All family terrorists should be stopped not just the "he" ones.

"That is, you're an ignorant brute who probably rules those in your life - that is abuse?" - Oh a little bit of flaming. I hope that get's left up.

Strange as it may seem to you this thread was not supposed to be about you specifically, other peoples lives matter as well including the lives of men with abusive spouses. You have persisted with the idea that because you claim to have had an abusive partner that men's experiences as the recipients of abuse don't count and should be silenced.

R0bert