I didn't get the feeling from this, or other articles I read, that anyone was saying it was less emotionally upsetting having an abusive female spouse rather than an abusive male spouse, just different.

It states in several places in the articles that it is difficult to get exact statistics from men who have been abused by their wives or partners because of an embarrassment at admitting the problem, so how are we ever to know how much of a problem it really is?

I believe there should be a separate campaign aimed at men, which could encourage all those in an abusive marriage to speak out and seek help.

Maybe if it was labeled a men's help line, these men wouldn't be so reluctant to call.
I see no reason why these men couldn't already ring the Domestic Violence help lines available anyway.

Susie, You say because it is difficult to get the exact statistics from men "how are we ever to know how much of a problem it really is?". If you have ever looked at the rubbish reports produced for the DV industry you'd know that lack of "exactness" does not get in the way of it telling society how big the problem really is.

The office of women commissioned Access Economics to produce a report calculating the cost to economy caused by DV. It came up with a figure of $8.1 billion ( UNSW researchers have come up magically with the figure of $13.6 billion). The report was littered with qualifications like:

*In applying the methodology, we encountered severe problems in obtaining accurate estimates of many of the detailed components of costs. ... Hence the overall findings must be considered indicative (and in some cases speculative).

* 2.6 Measurement Problems
2.6.1 Extent of Violence
The data on DV and its costs are subject to considerable uncertainties. NCIPC (2003 p. 5) lists reasons why it has been difficult to measure its extent in the US:
• Lack of consensus about definition.
• Variations in survey methodology.
• Gaps in data collection: Estimates are often drawn from data gathered for other purposes and provide only incomplete information about DV.
• Different time frames: eg, use of annual vs. lifetime victimisation.
• Reluctance to report victimisation.
• Repetitive nature of domestic violence: Reports about DV do not always indicate clearly whether they refer to number of incidents or number of victims.

*Data on men’s experience of DV and that between same-sex partners is almost completely lacking in Australia. Consequently it is necessary to extrapolate from overseas experience.

Now those qualifications didn't stop the DV industry battering citizens' ears with the $8 billion cost to Australian economy without being upfront about it resulting from both "male" and "female" violence. Why interfere with the well cultivated notion DV is something only women experience?

Susie if you ever want to do a study of fundamental dishonesty you have to look no further than the DV industry.

Roscop, I'm sorry but I just can't see this big conspiracy about 'false ' domestic violence statistics from 'women'.

What women are doing this?
What would they get out of it?

The parliament, Governments and the law enforcement agencies are predominantly populated by males, so who the hell is telling all these 'lies' about domestic violence statistics?

If the injury and death statistics are wrong, then obviously the medical profession is colluding with this conspiracy as well?

Roscoe, I can't see it.

I still suggest that if all the militant men's groups are so sure of this big anti-male conspiracy thing happening here in Australia, then why not get together and work out a solution to assist males affected by domestic violence?

Why not start their own help organisation ?

Susie, who said anything about a conspiracy?...it is more like a culture of misrepresenting the truth. So of the $8 billion cost to the economy that I mentioned, how much is attributable to women's violence and how much is attributable men's violence? You know what we are meant to think. Another example is the female PM Gillard saying one billion women will be raped or beaten in their lifetime. What research supports that statement being applicable to Australia?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_JkyWapMns&feature=youtu.be&a

When you ask "what women are doing this?" , it is not just women. Without mentioning names there are male academics, politicians, television personalities peddling DV nonsense. What would these men and women get out of it? Think, funding to sustain and expand the DV industry, jobs, empowerment, votes, taxpayer funded trips to DV conferences on the Gold Coast etc...its a big big gravy train. Why did you have to ask? I you would have thought that you would have known this.

When you talk about about "all the militant men's groups" what groups are you talking about? I've only ever heard of the Blackshirts and I thought that group disbanded.

I think we are going to just have to agree to disagree on this subject Roscop.
Look up Men's groups in Australia online for a list of groups too many to list here.
They mostly consist of 'fatherhood' groups.

I am all for fathers myself, as I have a wonderful father , as well as my husband being a wonderful father, but I'm not keen on all the guys that blame all women for all of their woes.

Not all women hate men.....

I see you've dropped the words "all the militant" when referring to men's groups. Maybe you realised that you were being a bit loose with the hyperbole.

I can only think of one group that claims to be the peak group of men's organisations and last time I looked it had more women on the committee than men and there is absolutely nothing militant about that group. When did you last see a men's group out protesting loud and angrily and if you did it definitely wasn't that peak group?

As to the wonderful men you know. It's good see you have two men in your life. If you had three, according to the PM, statistically the third would be the rapist and/or woman beater.