Eeva Sodhi, had a website "Nojustice" which is archived here:

Manufacturing Research
http://web.archive.org/web/20050313222440/http://www.nojustice.info/Research/ManufacturingResearch.htm

Manufacturing research is truly insightful into research tactics.

Manufacturing Percentages
http://web.archive.org/web/20050313222509/http://www.nojustice.info/ManufacturingPercentages.htm

Perceptions are not Facts
http://web.archive.org/web/20050313222509/http://www.nojustice.info/PerceptionsarenotFacts.htm

Is a very interesting in that it displays how words are used to change perceptions.

Eeva, I believe had to give up her website due to ill health, which I understand to have been breast cancer.

(Although I think the “black eye” and “ilk” arguments are a distraction) I agree with HRS’s summary of DV stats- “Almost 24% of all relationships had some violence, and half (49.7%) of those were reciprocally violent. In non-reciprocally violent relationships, women were the perpetrators in more than 70% of the cases…. Regarding injury, men were more likely to inflict injury than were women”

Often when one disputes the figure that 1/3 women experience sexual assault and 1/4 experience DV, or one states that the figures are similar for men, there is often a point blank rebuttal with no discussion of the facts. A more sneaky response is to claim that although the 1/3 and 1/4 stats include non-physical forms of violence and sexual abuse, which men do experience on a similar scale, women are still more likely to experience physical forms of abuse than men. I always find this response interesting- a tacit admission that DV/ abuse rates are equal, but the physical aspect is more important. However you only come across this change of story if you point out the breakdown of the statistics. Otherwise, the 1/3 and 1/4 stats are repeated ad nausea, creating the impression of an epidemic of physical DV and physical sexual abuse, because most people don’t know where the figures come from.

Regarding context,

Another common argument is that women’s violence, both physical and non-physical, occurs less regularly, as one-off outbursts, in retaliation, or self-defence, while men use it as a systematic form of control. I believe this is completely wrong.

Here’s why:

The following link, (US stats, although I understand Australia has similar ratios,) http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/intimates.htm, shows that in 1975, murder rates of “intimate partners” were relatively even- about 1500 female victims per year, and about 1350 male victims p/y. One would think that with the advent of women’s shelters, which have grown in number since the 1970’s, the murder rate of female partners would have dropped dramatically. In fact, murders of females have only dropped to about 1200 per year, while murders of males has fallen to about 350 a year.

cont..

This could back up conventional wisdom- women no longer have to murder their abusive partners to escape an abusive relationship- shelters, and a wide range of other support services, give abused women options. But surely an escape option for abused women would lead to a more dramatic drop in homicides of female intimate partners? There have been huge education and public awareness campaigns over the past decades. We have become a much less macho society, with women present, although not always equally represented, across all areas of society.

I would argue that similar numbers of men find themselves as victims in controlling and abusive relationships as women. However, contrary to conventional wisdom, men have fewer options than women. They have a hard time convincing anybody that they are being abused, and an even harder time coming to the realization that they are being abused in the first place. There are almost no shelters for men trying to get away from abusive relationships. The only information on the true extent of DV against men, or help for men to get away from abusive situations, is on internet websites that most consider to be right-wing extremist.

The issue of domestic violence will not be solved until equal attention and importance is placed on violence committed by women against men as male violence against women. I believe a similar approach needs to be taken to reduce sexual assault against women, and wider problems of denigration of women and sexualisation of young teenage girls. Very few people disagree that attitudes toward, and treatment of women in our society are a concern, but it is very difficult to raise similar concerns about similar attitudes toward, and treatment of men without facing severe censure.

I am very serious about tackling sexual abuse and domestic violence against men and women. Articles such as Crabbe’s, which focus on abuse against women, then make token references to all being “worthy of the utmost respect as human beings,” only tackles one part of the problem. We must also listen to “HRS and those of his ilk.”

JamesH: "Firstly it is much more common to see guys who have been bashed than women, secondly there are more woman who present to A&E with a heart attack than one who has been bashed."

You're right. But in the vast majority of cases it's by other men.

TurnRightThenLeft, regarding your comment from the election. I had a similar thought but that does not take away from the importance of the issue.

I don't know what the Shared Parenting party are like but I strongly believe that with some safeguards in place shared parenting can be far better for all concerned than sole parenting.

I came across a list of references to studies of outcomes this morning (while looking at some totally unrelated matter)

http://www.wiskit.com/marilyn/custody.html

Unfortunately the material mostly looks old and there are no links to the papers themselves, just summary info. I think that we should have some serious research into outcomes in this area. In regard to the original topic of this thread it may be fair to ask how much impact the family situation of children has on teenagers susceptibility to peer pressure and dangerous behaviours.

The research which I have seen seems to suggest that kids from single parent homes are more at risk of a variety of behavioural problems. Are there safe ways we can do better for kids when relationships end?

R0bert

Robert - one of my biggest problems is that when I came to China, obviously I could not bring all my books and papers with me. I have done a lot of research in this area and have all sorts of links and addresses to organisations and studies that have been conducted, but I'm afraid that they are all in storage.

However, from something you once said I believe you work in Brizzie? If you ever have a spare hour (yeah, I know: when do parents ever get a spare hour?)pop over to UQ library. The librarians there love getting their teeth into enquiries and are stars at giving access to all sorts and kinds of materials. Also, try the big library in Brisbane. The trouble with Internet sources is just as you have outlined - and its difficult to sort out what is genuine research and outcomes and what is just people with bees in their bonnets and good intentions.

There is a plethora of material on this subject: it will blow you away. As to children of single-parent families being more at risk? The jury is still out on that as, especially in the lower socio-economic sectors where a lot (but but no means all) of delinquency presents, "disfunctional" (such a silly word, really) families, albeit with two parents in residence, are are represented pretty highly in the background of troubled teens.

Does any of this help at all?