@Killarney While I can't speak for all MRAs, I can honestly say that the reason why male survivors of female perpetrated abuse (and some female survivors of female-perpetrated abuse for that matter) despise feminism is because it's entire narrative on abuse unashamedly enables and ideologically shields every single batterer, rapist and child abuser who is female.

Furthemore, it simultaneously, unashamedly stigmatises every single male victim - as well as female victims of female perpetrators - as nothing but a pack of urban myths - if not pathological liars who "had it coming to us" and essentially as cheap filthy worthless sluts. That is precisely what the feminist narrative does, regardless of how inconvenient or uncomfortable that truth is for you.

According to feminist dogma, all abuse is the product of "patriarchy" -"male power"- where "women are [exclusively] victims" and "men are [exclusively] perpetrators [and when they are victims, they're "doing it to each other" anyway]".

Of course, when confronted on this by male victims, the standard feminists response is "I'm sorry you were abused, but" or "Yes men are abused too, but", yet what feminists consider "being sorry", most people regard as condescension. Furthermore it very quickly reveals itself to be a shallow act of plausible deniability, when it is immediately followed by a response which attempts to justify the very stigmatisation of those of us who are male victims of abuse.

Under those circumstances, why shouldn't male victims of abuse hold feminism in the same regard as female victims of abuse hold Sharia Law?

If feminists don't like that cold, hard, uncomfortable truth, then here's a suggestion: embrace the whole of equality - including accountability - and challenge each other to be a part of the solution - demanding an inclusive narrative on domestic violence which demands compassion and support for all victims and demands that all perpetrators be held accountable and rehabilitated... irrespective of their gender.

Or is applying the phrase "one it too many" to male victims of female perpetrators, as well as female victims of male perpetrators, a little too close to egalitarianism for feminism's liking?

Furthermore from a transnational perspective, the Partner Abuse State of Knowledge Project (P.A.S.K.) has completely debunked the standard feminist narrative on domestic violence [http://domesticviolenceresearch.org/]. The project involved 112 academics at 20 universities, considering 12,000 studies and summarising 1,700+ of them.

It found, regarding perpetration: "Rates of female-perpetrated violence higher than male-perpetrated (28.3% vs. 21.6%)"

It found regarding a gender breakdown: "Among large population samples, 57.9% of IPV reported was bi-directional, 42% unidirectional; 13.8% of the unidirectional violence was male to female (MFPV), 28.3% was female to male (FMPV)"

In other words it found that, 71.7% of all domestic violence involves a female victim and male perpetrator, 86.2% of it involves a male victim and female perpetrator and that 67.2% of all unidirectional domestic violence is perpetrated against men, by women.

It found regarding perpetrator motivation: "Male and female IPV perpetrated from similar motives – primarily to get back at a partner for emotionally hurting them, because of stress or jealousy, to express anger and other feelings that they could not put into words or communicate, and to get their partner’s attention."

Furthermore, regarding self-defence-based perpetration, it found: "Self-defense was endorsed in most samples by only a minority of respondents, male and female. For non-perpetrator samples, the rates of self-defense reported by men ranged from 0% to 21%, and for women the range was 5% to 35%. The highest rates of reported self-defense motives (50% for men, 65.4% for women) came from samples of perpetrators, who may have reasons to overestimate this motive."

Interestingly, it found regarding anger and retaliation:
"None of the studies reported that anger/retaliation was significantly more of a motive for men than women’s violence; instead, two papers indicated that anger was more likely to be a motive for women’s violence as compared to men."

Why do we insist on treating domestic violence as a gender issue when arguably the largest academic review into DV research has completely debunked every single argument for doing so?

Arguably because it goes against the interests of powerful vested interest groups like feminism and the Domestic Violence Industry of "Women's [only] Services".

I tell you what vr041, I will agree to be more concerned about the apparently hidden problem of adult male victims of female perpetrated domestic violence, if you agree to be equally concerned by the much higher murder rate of women by their 'intimate male partners' than the opposite way around?

There is no hiding murder statistics....

@Suzonline Congratulations for demonstrating the very reason why feminism is to male abuse victims, what Sharia Law is to female abuse victims.

Firstly, your argument amounts to an assertion that if as a male survivor of child abuse and domestic violence, I object to being stigmatised as an urban myth - if not a pathological liar - who "had it coming to me" and essentially as a cheap, filthy, worthless slut, then I must have absolutely no sympathy nor empathy with female victims of domestic violence. Such an argument is utterly chauvinistic, victim demonising, domestic violence apologist, and reeks of veiled shaming tactics.

Secondly, your claims about "vastly more battered women are murdered" are blatantly false. The domestic homicide figures for 2008-2010 were 75 men and 116 women and their just released figures for 2011-2012 were 75 men and 121 women - in both cases, battered men accounted for more than 38% of all domestic homicide victims - or roughly 2 in 5 domestic homicide victims. Or are you going to claim that the Australian Institute of Criminology are a pack of liars now too?

Thirdly, in setting the bar for domestic violence being treated seriously at homicide, you are trivialising less serious instances of domestic violence- effectively treating them as "just shoving" - unworthy of attention. That very type of argument is the reason that noone intervenes in domestic violence until it's too late and harms not only bettered men, but battered women as well.

In short, thankyou - whether it was intentional or unintentional, you have just proven my point about the sexist and abuse apologist stance of feminism on the issue of domestic violence (and by the nature of DV, child abuse and rape also) in spades.

vr041 "
In short, thankyou - whether it was intentional or unintentional, you have just proven my point about the sexist and abuse apologist stance of feminism on the issue of domestic violence (and by the nature of DV, child abuse and rape also) in spades."

Aren't you doing the exact same thing in reverse vr041?
And I have not mentioned child abuse or rape at all, so that is your own comment.

As for your statistics, we have been over all that on these pages ad nauseum
The question to ask is, why are you so upset that more women are killed by their intimate partners than the other way around?

The men killed by domestic violence weren't all murdered by their female partner either, were they? But that is not mentioned at all, why is that?

Far more men are killed by other men out on the streets, so why aren't you out there campaigning about that fact?

All murders are awful.
But denying the truth is no help at all.

vr041

You cite a link that doesn’t work. Authoritative websites usually look after their links.

I did some digging to find out who this Partner Abuse State of Knowledge Project was and all I found was what I’ve come to call ‘black, blue and red’ sites. These are shoddy, badly constructed websites that create a sense of sensationalism by using lots of big red headings and lists of links to supposedly authoritative studies, many of which do not work.

They do not disclose who they are or how they are funded – except the usual vague references to dubious ‘empirical research’.

If their research is as stringent and objective as they claim to be, why can’t they put a bit more effort into their website design? Or are they just small ‘cottage’ activists with little funds and virtually no credibility other than with those who share their own worldview?

You throw lots of percentages and statistics around but fail to indicate how those percentages and statistics were obtained.

As for the AIC figures you cite, you are making a rebuttal to an argument that does not exist. What you refer to as the ‘feminist stance’ is nothing of the sort. The so-called feminist stance is that women comprise the MAJORITY of victims of domestic homicide – not the anti-feminist furphy that women are the ONLY victims of domestic homicide. So the rest of your argument falls apart.

Also, just look back at your last two posts. You are full vaguely intense rage that you have chosen to channel into a hate-filled post about what you want feminism to be, not what it actually is.

Feminism is not the enemy of male victims of violence. If you want to blame anyone, look to governments who shirk their responsibility to fund programs that support all victims of domestic violence – male and female. And, for that matter, look to the macho patriarchal values and attitudes that prefer to shame men ‘being victims’ rather than support them