Thank you Michael, your article was very thought-provoking.

Can anyone offer a working definition of domestic violence, or some kind of accurate statistics?

In such surveys it is deliberate policy to conceal the fact that with crime of all kinds, there are "ethnic" clusters - that is most of the crime is committed by a small group of offenders and in this case, there is a huge rate of domestic violence in Gay "families", but it would be 'discriminatory" to reveal this fact, so it is added on and the assumption is made by the Media that crime etc is randomly distributed - that we are all miserable sinners and so should not discriminate against the Crime Families. Keith

Ruby, here is a link to a list of 169 scholarly investigations: 133 empirical studies and 36 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:
http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm

The reason why the feminazis still rely on the dated 1996 ABS Safety of Women Survey commissioned and controlled by the Office for the Status of Women, is because it was results driven research that misrepresents dynamics and extent of domestic violence in the community as revealed by more scholarly and scientific studies on the issue. This helps to sustain a burgeoning domestic violence industry in which there are many women on fat salaries.

You'll will notice that the mob promoting hysteria over domestic violence never seeks to have courts publish a proper breakdown of domestic violence orders to show where there have been findings of actual domestic violence committed, what the genders are in respect to perpetrators and victims. Most court jurisdictions are shy about revealing domestic violence figures and trends.

My understanding is that there are high levels of domestic violence between lesbians and that children are more likely to experience domestic violence from their mothers than fathers.

Enaj,
I am not in the least surprised that you have been assigned to some type of domestic violence public education campaign, when you unquestionably believe myths such as the one about the “rule of thumb”. The idea that a man could beat his wife with something thinner than the width of his thumb has been investigated by numerous people, and proven to be no more than a feminist myth.

Eg
“The expression rule of thumb has been recorded since 1692 and probably wasn’t new then. It meant then what it means now—some method or procedure that comes from practice or experience, without any formal basis. “http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-rul1.htm

"So the "rule" referred to in "rule of thumb" isn't an edict so much as a measurement. Evan Morris, known in some circles as the Word Detective, concurs. He goes on to cast aspersions on the mythic sexist derivation, stating: "So I guess the first 'rule of thumb' in these cases is 'Check your sources, lest they be hokum.'"http://ask.yahoo.com/ask/20030411.html

“It is often claimed that the term originally referred to the maximum size of a stick with which it was permissible for a man to beat his wife. This claim has been debunked, for instance by Christina Hoff Sommers in her book Who Stole Feminism? (1994 ISBN 0684801566). In particular Sommers notes that there is no mention of this in the legal commentaries of William Blackstone. “http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_thumb

However the “rule of thumb” myth is a very good example of how feminist myth so easily establishes itself, (similar to “one in four”), and how so many people are willing to believe it without a second thought.

So this is where domestic violence campaigns are presently at. These campaigns are now a mixture of myth, propaganda, brainwashing, biased research, anecdotal evidence and of course continuous attempts to demonise males as much as possible.

We’ve certainly come along way in Social Science.

katrina, I appreciate your point about the lack of focus on non-physical DV and at the same time see some benefit in seperating the two.

Physical DV is a lot easier to draw a line around and say "NO". Any hitting (apart from the mutual consent type and that thread would be on a different web site I think) in an adult relationship is not OK. Things like nagging, prying, control and a lot of the other aspects of emotional/psychological abuse are more an issue of degree. It is OK to ask a partner to empty the rubbish bin, doing so over and over is not. Withholding sex in a monogamous relationship because your partner does not want to take on a bigger mortgage - OK or not?

I saw Russell Crowe talking about his wifes need to know where he is and who he is with every day (on the Letterman interview). Is her insistance on knowing that stuff DV? It certainly fits within the kind of descriptions I have seen some places. I can't call it either way for them but would not personally like to have a partner who exercised that level of suspicion in a relationship.

Non physical DV is not OK, it may even be more damaging in a lot of cases than the physical stuff but it is a lot harder to define in a meaningful manner and is much more situation dependant.

I have posted a quote from Qld Health previously which horrifies me and which I strongly suspect is a massive abuse of statistics. Anybody believe this combination of definition and statistic?

"DOMESTIC VIOLENCE is the physical, sexual, emotional or psychological abuse of trust and power between partners in a spousal relationship.

Most (85% to 98%) domestic violence is perpetrated by men against women." http://www.health.qld.gov.au/violence/domestic/default.asp

Robert you inserted this in your post:

"Most (85% to 98%) domestic violence is perpetrated by men against women." http://www.health.qld.gov.au/violence/domestic/default.asp

What readers should come to understand in respect to domestic violence is that the government has no compunction whatssoever, in exaggerating, telling lies and cherry picking research etc, for the purpose of misleading the public on this issue. This area of government is normally poorly taken care of, by femocrats who have very low ethics.

I noticed, on the referred to webpage, the only reference is to the dated 1996 ABS Womens Safety Survey which was a results driven exercise commissioned by the Office for the Status of Women. Once again, why is a dated survey relied upon. The answer is the mass of research, conducted in a more scholarly scientific manner, tells a different story which is closer to the truth.