Poirot thanks, I don't get to bothered by ChazP and Patricia's slurs rather by the potential impact of what they do. There are others such as pelican who's views concern me more because I generally consider pelican a fair and decent commentator.

Ammonite who are you trying to kid? Almost every post you have put on these threads contains some kind of slur against men or more of the it's all men's fault, and women are victims stuff.

"some males using intimidating language; scurrilous rubbish, questions about hormones, ad nauseum"
"some females unable to keep from being baited. "

Why not "some people using intimidating language; scurrilous rubbish, questions about hormones, ad nauseum some others unable to keep from being baited.

"permanently aggrieved male posters"

"just people trying to find excuses to inflict violence (for door slamming etc) and others who try to point out that the bulk of physical violence is perpetrated by men"

We've presented clear evidence that bulk of physical violence is pretty much shared, what's not shared equally are the physical consequences when it reaches the extreme. On the other hand male suicide rates should give reason to think that the extreme end of emotional harm is not equally shared either. You've claimed elsewhere that women are more inclined to emotional tactics (or something like that), if true can you see the implications?

You continue to snipe away at male posters and at the same time play the victim and excuse the almost all the excesses of female posters.

It's maybe that the battle lines have firmed up so much that we are all doing some of that, even those of us who try not to. The feeling of being under attack tends to do that.

R0bert

Nice try, PooRot and robert to misconstrue my words. What I was mocking was the pathetic `Statistics' which robert submitted as a claim for evidence of males being subjected to domestic violence and not robert, directly or indirectly. Robert normally takes a quite sensible position, but to submit such statistics with no qualitative data and analysis was open to such a critique.
robert - "We've presented clear evidence that bulk of physical violence is pretty much shared..." - You very clearly have not. You've presented evidence that males experience some minor assaults but the studies quoted go nowhere near using a definition of domestic violence as it has been developed and defined over the last two decades. To ask students if anyone has ever hit them, shoved them, or thrown something at them should have a 100% positive return. But asking them if they'd suffered serious injury as a consequence or were psychologically traumatised whould bring a wholly different result. A clear case of selective use and misuse of statistics robert, as I said before.

ONE WOMAN A WEEK IS KILLED IN AUSTRALIA BY A MALE PARTNER and a third are SERIOUSLY ASSAULTED during their lifetime by a male partner.

ChazP,

"Nice try, PooRot..."

The only thing I misconstrued here is your is your level of maturity.

SydneyMH ~ July 15, 2011
..in an attempted-murder trial yesterday, the court (heard)about the abuse she had suffered at the hands of the defendant during 20 years. He once tried to choke her before shooting at her. He twice threatened her with knives and forced her to have sex with him. He placed a gun under her chin and said: ''Get that fear out of your eyes bitch. The torment started in 1977,...the man was found guilty of..three charges of attempted murder and other charges of assault, sex without consent and detaining with intent...her husband came thundering up the driveway in a rage. As she heard him coming...she tried to lock the door but was too late. The man grabbed his .22 rifle, raised it to her face and pointed it between her eyes. He then dragged her out of the house by her hair on to the concrete pathway at the back of the house. He picked up an electrical lead and wrapped it twice around her neck. She passed out briefly. He then gave her a shove and walked back toward the house. As she started running towards the back gate, two shots rang out. The shots missed...this was one of 10 incidents over two decades. The man also used an electric cattle prod, knives and a fire poker to threaten his wife and forced her to have sex with him. At one stage, he tied her to a bed. In her testimony, the woman explained the situation she had been in: ''I couldn't get away - I was under threat. I got away five times and he found me every time.... cross-examining his own children, he asked one of his daughters whether she thought he had been a good parent. (She)responded:'If you were a good father you would have known that I spent my life anxious and I was stressed beyond belief.'' He accused his daughter of concocting her testimony. She replied: "I wish that I didn't have these memories and that you weren't who you are.''
Hitting?. Shoving?. Throwing things?. Get real.

ChazP does make a valid point. The raw numbers don't tell us much about the nature of incidents. One of the problems with a lot of the alarmist material around which plays on perceptions of the extreme end of DV while including low end stuff as well. For the record the types of incidents described still sound like violence and the calous disregard for male victims of DV is pretty much what I've come to expect from ChazP.

I went looking for some figures on spousal murder.

It seems a bit tricky to find clear figures, the rates for intimate partner homicides seem to be routinely expressed as a percentage for the relevant gender rather than as a direct figure.

The Australian Institute of Criminology has a one page summary which provides enough detail to turn percentages into numbers.

http://www.aic.gov.au/statistics/homicide/victim-offender.aspx

In 2006/2007 243 men were the victims of homicides and 55 women.
10% of the men were killed by intimate partners and 53% of the women were killed by intimate parters.

That as far as I can tell means around 24 to 25 men and 29 to 30 women were killed by intimate partners.

A statistically significant difference but nothing like the kind of difference that some would have us believe.

I assume that there are some killings by intimate partners which would be classified as manslaughter and other's which are unsolved but without more detail it's not credible to think that they would significantly alter the overall figures. If anyone has credible figures on that I'm happy to have another look.

The manslaughter rates seemed to be around 1/6th or the homicide rates (and both are slowly dropping) http://www.aic.gov.au/statistics/homicide.aspx

Yet another example of showing a version of the stats that suits a propaganda purpose but which is deliberately misleading in the presentation.

R0bert

I've been hunting around looking at numbers some more.
Of concern is that the numbers I referenced earlier from the AIC appear to be contradicted elsewhere in AIC documents.

http://www.aic.gov.au/documents/F/F/B/%7BFFB9E49F-160F-43FC-B98D-6BC510DC2AFD%7Dmr01.pdf 2006/2007 report gives different percentages on page's 8 and 14 which give a markedly different outcome.

http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/current%20series/cfi/181-200/cfi182.aspx

"In almost 4 out of 5 intimate-partner homicides, the perpetrator was a male and the victim a female. In a little over 1 in 5 incidents, the homicides were committed by a female against a male. A small number corresponded to killings among partners in same-sex relationships."
http://www.aic.gov.au/documents/6/1/3/%7B613390AC-6E23-43F2-8070-45095691D7F0%7Dti90.pdf

The 2007-2008 report is referenced here as well/
http://www.aic.gov.au/documents/8/9/D/%7B89DEDC2D-3349-457C-9B3A-9AD9DAFA7256%7Dmr13_003.pdf

"Of the 134 domestic homicides in 2007–08, 80 were sub-classified as intimate partner homicides (60%),"
"In 2007–08, there were 161 male (59%) and 112 female (41%) homicide victims." (page 19)

18 males killed by intimate partners, 62 females killed by intimate partners. (page 20)

When I'm a bit more clear headed I'll try and revisit this to see if I can get a better understanding of the differences.

R0bert