Killarney:

“The irony is that at least 90% of the feminists I've known over the decades are happily (or at least contentedly) married - and the reason they're happily married is because they put their financial and emotional self-worth first.”

But obviously not their physical well-being. If they are in a domestic relationship then there is a one in three chance of them being victims of violence. They are the odds and anyone who plays with those odds is a fool. You cannot be happy when you are living in a situation that is so threatening.

//For one thing, it's mathematically impossible for men to 'require' more sex than women, because women are the people they 'require' sex with.//

How very heteronormative, Killa.

//The myth of men needing a lot more sex than women is all about power, not libido.//

Nobody 'needs' sex: celibacy does not make you ill and nobody has ever died of 'blue balls'. However, some people desire it more than others and there is a huge smegging heap of research to back up the popularly held belief that men (on average) desire sex more than women (on average). When you consider it from the perspective of evolutionary psychology, it's not really surprising that this should be the case.

//The main reason a lot of women get turned off sex is because most men are selfish lovers who make little to no effort to please a woman in bed or learn anything about the basics of female anatomy.//

I've been speaking to a few of my female friends about this. They disagree. The general consensus is that the dud roots are less common than the decent roots. Maybe you're just trying your luck with the wrong crowd?

Even if the sex is lousy, why do women masturbate less than men? If libidos were the same you'd expect women to jill off as much as men jack off, but they don't. What's up with that, Killa?

//The culture just doesn't permit men to be caring, generous or monogamous lovers - indeed, it brainwashes men virtually from birth to be the very opposite.//

Again, the friends I spoke to disagree. I also passed this comment along to my mate Aaron, who prefers the romantic company of gentlemen. His reply is not fit to repeat, but suffice it to say that he doesn't think much of your uninformed appraisal of his boyfriend. I think I speak for both of us when I request that you refrain from making such sweeping negative generalisations on the basis of scant information.

Since when does a man pass a female on the street or anywhere else that he does not size her up as a sex object. It’s what men do continually. There is no exceptions.

The world of goody goody’s does not exist, and that is no lie.

It’s a fact of life for any normal healthy man, Sex is number one on the list. Celibacy does not exist, as some would have you believe it does. It is laughable to think a man would pass up on an occasion of getting his oats if offered. It does not and never will happen.

Celibacy of 24 hours is almost an unbearable length of time. This is why I say sex features heavily in DV cases. I have no proof of that but I suspect it is the root cause. I have never seen or heard of it discussed as a cause of DV.

If a female allows sex once a week, and the partner wants sex three times a week, you have potential conflict. Can a compromise be negotiated or is no negotiation taking place.

Either way you have grounds for DV to arise. This leaves a man between a rock and a hard place, and it will take a special kind of man to accept no terms of agreement, or a lesser agreement.

I say sex is the most predominantly non discussion ever held.
What else would couples blue about. Mortgages, dogs, kids, money, mother in-laws’, drugs, alcohol.

There will never be a single subject as why violent in home behavior occurs, I think it is a matter of more in-house discussion of why conflict arises.

Probably the women would be the most reluctant to talk about balanced quotas. It is not uncommon to hear men say ,they got more sex before marriage than after. Sex is a tool of persuasion, and a man would agree to anything at the crucial time

doog while I agree in part with the point I think you are trying to make about different sexual needs/wants this " It is laughable to think a man would pass up on an occasion of getting his oats if offered." is getting very close to an uncovered meat and cats view of men (other than the offered rather than taken part).

Maybe not what you were meaning but most of the men I know well would pass up on the occasion because doing otherwise generally means harm or hurt to a partner. There may well be other reasons to pass but I all other considerations aside that is there. I know there are plenty of exceptions of people who cheat on partners just because there is opportunity to do so don't define either gender.

I also think that there are people who manage to stick to celebacy, I don't necessarily think its healthy unless there is an abnormally low interest in sex and I certainly would not want to take sexual or relationship advice from those who do so (or from those who claim to be celebate and act otherwise).

R0bert

Hi R0bert

Thanks for the links. I couldn’t get beyond the abstracts for the researchgate articles, but the other article was interesting and pointed to a few other areas worth exploring. Hence it has taken a little while to respond to you.

To oversimplify rather, it seems to me the statistics supporting the argument that intimate partner violence (IPV) is overwhelming asymmetrical (male against female) derive primarily from victims of crime surveys and agency data (hospitals, police, family and general courts, injury and death stats, refuges). These are the data I was most familiar with.

The statistics you point to supporting symmetry (women are as likely, if not a little more, to initiate IPV) seem to rely mainly on surveys of people in relationships, especially using Straus’s Conflict Tactics Scales and similar instruments.

The issue is clouded because both sets of data are ideologically freighted – feminists emphasise male control and asymmetry; anti-feminists stress symmetry.

I have no idea whether he is regarded as credible in the field, but I found Michael P. Johnson’s analysis interesting and persuasive in explaining the differences in the data, and proposing a way forward for academics and policymakers. He proposes that the gap between the findings of different statistical methods is a product of failure to identify that there are different types of IPV, with different probabilities of being initiated by men or women; combined with sampling biases in the methods used to measure violence which tend to under- or over- count some types of violence. So “coercive controlling violence” is more likely to be perpetrated by men, and more likely to result in behaviour captured by agency data, but is likely to be under-reported in family conflict surveys. Other forms of violence may be symmetrical or asymmetrically initiated by women, but tend to be less severe in consequences or for other reasons less likely to appear in agency. These are over-represented in survey data.

http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CCUQFjACahUKEwi11_e6rrTIAhUBrZQKHXP4BVk&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.personal.psu.edu%2Fmpj%2Fin%2520press%2520VAW.doc&usg=AFQjCNEyIMYuZd7ciztVsfd2IPbVzVC9uA

http://ocadvsa.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Differentiation-Among-Types-of-Intimate-Partner-Violence.pdf

There is broad agreement that the consequences of IPV are more severe for women than for men (hence the strong asymmetry in the agency data)

Robert That is a very cautious way of getting around being kind to some men but not all.

Celibacy to me is a figment of imagination, I will never believe that it exists. No doubt Harm or hurt does happen when caught out playing with someone else’s property. But that happens on both side’s of gender forms. And would have to be a gigantic contributor to DV.

Personally I do not like uncovered meat, it does nothing for the imagination. You are right about celibacy not being healthy, my cardio doctor told me that. He said it is just something else floating around in your blood stream.

Sex is a subject that people do not talk about in mixed company. Do you notice there is no females on this thread. DV and sex are off limits for the fairer gender. That will add to a solution for DV being ever found. No one could outright dismiss Sex as a cause for DV

So unless you blow every scenario of relationships out of the closet, you are never likely to find any sort of meaningful solution to DV.

Women that murder men in acts of DV can I believe only do that as an escape from an inescapable situation.

There was a women and son being continually bullied by a husband that would come home every day drunk and demand sex. The end was she got the son to hit the man with a jimmy bar. She got 3 years and the son being young got off. Probable 10 years ago now.