RObert, there has been more studies done on women perpetrating domestic violence than you think.

I have read much on this issue over the past week.
I read the link you provided above, and I can certainly see why all forms of domestic violence should be addressed.

I tend to take more notice of Australian papers on the subject, simply because we live in Australia. I never read papers or studies brought to us by authors with other agendas.

I don't know whether you will bother reading any links that I post, but I found this one very interesting.

www.adfvc.unsw.edu.au/PDF%20files/Men_as_Victims.pdf

Suzie, I may read the rest of it but the paper starts with lies and repeats of the doctorine of faith. Its clear from the start that the authors are ignoring the vast body of research that shoes its not overwhelmingly men hitting women and children.

Hardly a good start.

R0bert

Suzie, sorry perhaps a bit terse with that last post.

I really get tired of so called papers which start with those mantra's to assure the faithful that they won't challenge the orthodoxy too much.

There has been a large amount of research done which shows a high level of gender symmetry in initiating violence against intimate partners. Women tend to initiate a bit more of it, women also tend to be seriously hurt more often in that minority of DV that gets to that level. A significant proportion involves both partners initiating at different times (and has some correlation to the more serious injuries I think).

A challenge if you want to give me some reason to re-evaluate, find material which has asked both genders the same questions about being hit (or other physical assaults) by a partner (and without other gendered filters) which demonstrates that DV is gendered. I know I posted a link to summary material with the Straus paper but I also posted a link to the Radar site which references a lot of research into the numbers.

Police and hospital reports have pre-existing filters in them because police and hospital staff are trained are working largely on existing beliefs rather than trying to confirm or disprove those beliefs.

I've referenced it before because it is Australian but it won't hurt to try again. Australian research that asks both genders the same questions.

http://www.fact.on.ca/Info/dom/heady99.htm

And from New Zealand
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/170018.pdf

R0bert

RObert, I understand this is a personal, emotional issue for you, but if you do read through this well referenced article you will see why it gave me pause to think again.

What I now believe is that it is not helpful to compare male versus female victims or perpetrators of domestic violence.
They are two completely different situations in many ways.

The article I mentioned stated:
" Males reported that they were not living in an ongoing state of fear from the perpetrator;
• Males did not have prior experiences of violent relationships; and,
• Males rarely experienced post-separation violence and, in the one reported
case, it was far less severe that in male-to-female violence"

This is not to dismiss male victims of domestic violence in any way, but merely to say that the experiences of domestic violence are often different to women, except in the few very physically violent ways of course.

The article also gives the names of various help organisations for male victims, so I think the situation is being addressed more and more now.

I hate to see anyone, male or female, physically or emotionally abused, as the mental health cost to the victims and to the community at large is huge.

Suzie, "This is not to dismiss male victims..." right, its to dismiss "the violence" perpetrated upon them.

We know all, repeat all, violence irrespective of the nature or context, against women should be taken seriously because one push or a shove will have a woman living in constant fear of her partner. Yep, we've got the message.

Suzie I will try and stick with it but when you say well researched the opening section makes a mockery of that

"To date there is little statistical data recording men as victims, either within Australia or overseas."
and
"Although men are hit by their wives, figures on husband abuse vary too widely to determine the exact extent or seriousness of the problem"

From http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm
"This bibliography examines 286 scholarly investigations: 221 empirical studies and 65 reviews and/or analyses, which demonstrate that women are as physically aggressive, or more aggressive, than men in their relationships with their spouses or male partners. The aggregate sample size in the reviewed studies exceeds 371,600. "

When they start with clearly false claims such as those it's very hard to consider the paper well researched, perhaps well researched in material they agree with but there is plenty of research around over a sustained that shows that if you ask both genders similar questions about intimate partner violence you get similar answers.

What I've read so far reminds me of a paper written by a couple of catholic clergy discussing the impacts on victims of catholic clergy which starts with a claim that there is very little evidence of children being victimised by catholic clergy. Not a lot of reason to take the rest seriously.

I get the bit talked about the difference in physical fear between genders but I also think that argument ignores the massive emotional impact having an abusive spouse can have on men. Men who generally will have much weaker networks outside the home to provide support, who will often face social ridicule if they dare to speak up and potentially significant legal consequences if they dare to try and involve the authorities or leave the violent relationship.

None of us really know what it's like to walk a mile in someone else's shoes. My own impression is that the negatives on men from an abusive spouse could be just as serious as those facing women, just in different areas.

R0bert