Hey I might as well contribute another link - everybody else does, this discusses the myth of male violence.

Have a read

http://www.xyonline.net/Maleviolence.shtml

Cheers

Ringtail,
The Xyonline web-site has slogans such as “Riot, not Diet”, but this would encourage obesity, as well as anarchy.

I have read a number of articles on that web-site, but I couldn’t find anything positive being said about the male gender (other than “males must change their ways”), and I understand how the author is one of the very few males accepted or quoted by various Domestic Violence organisations, most of whom are made up entirely of females.

So Domestic Violence organisations and research has much more to do with male-hate and demonization of the male gender, than it has to do with actual domestic violence. Consider the following section of an interview, that came from a recent domestic violence study at http://www.austdvclearinghouse.unsw.edu.au/PDF%20files/SHLV.pdf

Interviewer: Did he have a weapon at all?
Marilyn: No just his fists.
Interviewer: That’s a weapon isn’t it?
Marilyn: Yeah, and their mouths are weapons, they’re out to hurt you and they’ll do it.

The interviewer came from UNSW, but the second question asked by the interviewer, (with “isn’t it” added onto the end), is an example of a leading question, which is supposed to be a "No, No" within research. So every male is now a potential domestic violence perpetrator, because they have fists and mouths.

Consider the following:-

Interviewer: Did she have a weapon at all?
Mark: No just her fists.
Interviewer: That’s a weapon isn’t it?
Mark: Yeah, and their mouths are weapons, they’re out to hurt you and they’ll do it.

Would the above interview ever take place. Highly unlikely, as nearly all domestic violence studies do not include males. However I have never heard of any feminists complain that so few males are incorporated into domestic violence studies, or even complain about the way domestic violence study interviews take place.
How odd.

Ringtail, I'm going to head into some murky unsubstantiated waters waith this post and attempt to outline my thinking on some of the issues you have raised. Our struggle as human beings to live together is both a challenge and part of the wonder of who we are.

"Men practice the same psychological tactics as women."
- No proof to the contrary but I do have some suspicion that just as serious violence in the family may be tilted by men's physical strength this one may be tilted by women's strength in this area. Women may be better at this stuff than men.

"but am not convinced that women are as physically violent as men - just doesn't ring true (life experience, police stats, hospital stats etc) "
- I am of the view that the kind of issues we have been discussing are skewing the stats which create the perception of males committing the overwhelming majority of family violence. You might recall the Qld Health definition and stats I posted early in this discussion and how little relationship they bear to reality. You might also think about the experience of the MFCC in the Observer article in terms of threats to funding, abuse etc. That scenario appears to be pretty common. There appears to be substantial statistical evidence that the rates of DV (leaving out severity) are not significantly genderised and yet the Qld Health stuff fails to ring alarm bells for most people.

"also this physical violence doesn't manifest itself in female behaviour in other areas of life to the same extent as men "
- I suspect that this is a reflection of differing roles inside and outside the home for men throughout human history. Historically men have been the providers for and protectors of their families, there is some deep seated stuff there. Outside the family we have been expected to compete with others to provide for our families. Some of that stuff is still in social values and upbringing regardless of how much we try and move on from it.

Cheers
R0bert

The amount of research and report of DV gender neutrality is too great to ignore unless you have an agenda to do so...

Just another drop in the ocean of reports below;

"Women are at least as violent as men,
but the evidence everywhere is being dismissed or ignored"

http://www.travel-net.com/~retap/DV-1.htm

By Melanie Phillips
The Sunday Times, 24 October 1999
NEWS REVIEW

The amount of research and reports that actual violence of all kinds (including but not limited to DV) is overwhelmingly perpetrated by men is too great to ignore unless you have an agenda to do so.

I think that those men who are obsessed with trying to prove the ludicrous assertion that men are victims of DV at anything like the levels experienced by women are victims of what is known in the research trade as 'confirmation bias'.

Timkins' avoidance of the content of the excellent article to which Ringtail directed us is a case in point.

For those who aren't suffering from confirmation bias or vagina envy, go to http://www.xyonline.net/Maleviolence.shtml for a sensible article on this subject. Not only is it clearly and reasonably argued, but it references real research articles from respectable sources that can be verified.

Garra, it is just possible that I am a victim of "conformational bias". I'm fairly confident that I’m not suffering from “vaginal envy” (much though I like themthe ones I prefer are attached to friendly women).

On the other hand it is remotely possible that you have a dose of "conformational bias". Stuff like that gets around on the trains in winter.

I’ve posted a number of links to resources which I believe to be as independent as exist in this debate. Are you aware of bias in the material referenced? From my perspective the authors appear to take pains to be impartial, the xyonline article interesting though it is appears to have made no attempt to seriously consider idea’s which don’t support the view that men are substantially more violent in the home than women.

It did not mention any of the reasons men might stay in a relationship with a violent partner. It did not consider any of the reasons why men might report DV less frequently than women. It did not consider the concept that harm does not only relate to ability but also to the willingness to do harm. Confirmational bias, you bet.

My reasons for being so concerned about this issue.
Firstly the impression that it impacts on peoples attitudes to reform in Family Law. Have a look at http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=3578. This kind of comment seems to be common in public debate when changes to family law are discussed. Regardless of what you want to believe about DV the substantiated child abuse and neglect stats are clear cut. Child abuse is relevant to specific individual’s and is not a reason to support maternal bias in family law.

Secondly and of less personal concern - I think the climate of fear being generated by the way this topic is handled is hurting relationships between men and women. Most men and women have little to fear from each other by way of serious physical harm. A small number of violent individuals should not set the tone for the rest of us.

R0bert