R0bert - I'd be willing to envisage the number of incidents being somewhere even, though I don't quite believe it. It doesn't match the reality as stated by those on the front lines.
I'll concede it's possible however.

However, I'd say that this is largely irrelevant if the severity of DV incidents by men tends to be greater, as is pointed out in the statistics you cite.
If men and women have roughly equal amounts of DV for minor incidents, but men are committing more of the brutal bashings, then isn't that enough?

TurnRighThenLeft, I'd be happy to take this to a new thread if you want to discuss it at length but in response to your post.

What some of the stats do show is that serious harm is more likely to occur in situations where there is reciprical violence http://www.ajph.org/cgi/content/abstract/97/5/941 "Regarding injury, men were more likely to inflict injury than were women, and reciprocal intimate partner violence was associated with greater injury than was nonreciprocal intimate partner violence regardless of the gender of the perpetrator." I've seen similar elsewhere.

One conclusion I draw from that is that by ignoring situations where women hit men we place women at greater risk of serious harm. I've also been on the receiving end of regular violence from a partner and I know the pain of not being able to get any support in getting it stopped.

The whole DV issue is spoken about for all levels of abuse not just the extreme end yet despite that female initiated violence is totally played down.

Even if the serious harm rates are 1 in 7 why do we see no government funded adds telling women not to hit men? Don't those 1 in 7 count? If the lower level physical violence is not an issue then why do the adds target it when it happens to women but not when it happens to men?

See the Qld Health website for an example of how the issue gets played

http://www.health.qld.gov.au/violence/domestic/default.asp
"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."

There are a lot of reasons to ignore HRS but a refusal to accept the mantra that DV is a male problem is not one of them.

R0bert

I have watched the exchange with you and Tigerman and it seems (to be fair to Tigerman) that you still have not grasped his point. For example the law is NOT equal for both sexes on this issue - whereas it can now be deemed that a woman was incapable of giving consent to sex when drunk - the same is not true for a man! This means that a couple can have an evening out together get drunk and although the woman may have given explicit consent at the time for sexual intercourse that consent can be regarded later as having NOT occurred if it can be established that she was drunk. This is the case even though both parties may have been equally drunk the man does not have a defence of claiming that since he was drunk he couldn't have given consent for sex either. Note that Tigerman did not talk about a case where an actual rape had occured - he was talking about an new obscenity and double standard in the law where the burden of proof for rape has been lowered so far so as to include situations where no ACTUAL RAPE may have occurred at all. Like Tigerman said - in another scenario should a drunk woman drive a car and kill someone rather than drunkeness being any form of mitigation or proof of 'victimisation' the exact opposite occurs!! If women enjoy being treated like children in one situation and adults in another then fine and good but on no account should the sudden absolution of responsibility in certain situations be used to PERSECUTE an otherwise potentially innocent man.

Vanilla,
Your questions have nothing to do with the topic, but you could ask your questions on another forum.

You have also said many abusive things about me and various others. It is difficult to determine who is the most abusive feminist. You, Turnrightthenleft or C. J Morgan.

You could have a competition to find out who is the most abusive feminist on OLO.

Artic dog,
According to various archeologists, very few people have ever lived in caves, and prehistoric man nearly always lived in villages or man made shelters.

I also don’t think it is possible to drag someone by the hair, so how many men have dragged women off to caves by the hair?

Is it the same number of men as VFL players who rape women?

@TurnRightThenLeft...and pelican

I must admit my knowledge base is primarily in the area of child sexual abuse. I've only delved into intimate partner or domestic abuse as a tangent to this.

Regarding research...

Virtually all the research referenced in current abuse advocacy starts from a premise that there are no male victims and proves this by not talking to men at all. A good example of this can be seen in the 2004 and 2005 reports on intimate partner violence produced by VicHealth. Interestingly the 2005 ABS personal safety survey shows men as at least a third of the victims of intimate partner violence. The same mid nineties ABS survey interviewed only women and was widely referenced by advocacy groups. Notably the 2005 survey is NEVER referenced.

Could I suggest you look at the work of Murray Strauss(http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/), long recognised as one of the world's foremost researchers in this field. Several of his recent efforts are international in scope and include Australia.

Strauss reports that female victims report to authorities at a rate twenty times greater than that of male victims.

TRTL you seem to be asserting the opposite. That female victims are less likely to report.

Why would male victims report? They are not taken seriously at all. Even boys who report being sexually abused by women(a quarter of all child sex victims) are pilloried in our culture let alone men who are physically assaulted by a woman. Additionally all the existing advocacy and outreach is targeted at women as victims and almost all the services are exclusively for women. Male victims are invisible, marginalised and simply not taken seriously.

If you don't speak to them they cannot answer.

Imagine how they feel in a world that laughs at them for being abused and also refuses to help them.

For heaven's sake rape is rape.
Posted by pelican, Monday, 3 March 2008 2:06:08 PM

Is IT?

The definition of rape has been expanded in recent times, so that what once was regarded as bad behaviour could now possibly be regarded as rape.

The latest effort is to make sex a crime if the woman is intoxicated and 'active' consent was not given.

People,
males and females are both charged with drink driving, or for drunken behaviour, so maybe in the name of equality both genders should be charged with having sex whilst under the influence?

An attempt at seduction could very possibly wind up as a sexual assault charge.

Articdog wrote about men, I however have a number of gay female friends and their stories, well if a bloke behaved the way they did, it would be classified as sexual assault. But for some reason because they are women they can get away with it. And there is a research paper which does in fact discuss sexual assault of females by females. However access is restricted to the paper.