South Asian Women's Forum: Men are More Likely Than Women to Be Victims in Dating Violence

	posted by Matt on 02:29 PM May 24th, 2006
	Marc A. writes: "Link here. Excerpt: 'A 32-nation study by University partners that about a third of dating partners had been violent, and most incidents of partner violence involve violence by both the man and woman, according to Murray Straus from the University of New Hampshire. The second largest category was couples where the female partner was the only one to carry about physical attacks, not the male partner. Straus’ new research also found that dominance by the female partner is even more closely related to violence by women than is male dominance. These results call into question the widely held belief that partner violence is primarily a male crime and that when women are violent it is self defense.'"

<  The Revolution is Revolting | 15-YO Girl Makes False Accusation of Rape To Avoid Cab Fare  >

  

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

I Guess They'll Just Have To Change The Rules (Score:1) by RandomMan on 10:31 PM May 24th, 2006 EST (#1) Since the study didn't yield feminist-friendly results, I'm sure we can count on dozens of "counter-studies" that use tried and true feminist techniques to produce the message they want the public to hear: - non-random samples (i.e. surveying only abused women in DV shelters to ensure that an overwhelming majority of domestic violence is done TO women BY men, when the "results" are presented) - using misleading or overly broad definitions of "violence" in questions posed to the non-random participants (comments about a bad hairstyle = "intimate violence"), but requiring that in order to be counted, acts of "violence" against men require true physical assaults (you know, violence), then claim the assaults by women were all in self defense, as self-reported by the non-random sample of women already in a DV shelter - misrepresentation of results or deliberate misinterpretation of results (e.g. claiming that women who seek custody only gain sole custody some of the time, while totally ignoring the fact that courts hand custody to the mother by default in a huge majority of cases anyhow, and then claiming that this means that any men who want to see their children are "abusers"). I'm sure I've seen that one used somewhere before... It's no surprise that this study came out of New Hampshire, endowed as it is with a Commission on the Status of Men. What on Earth will the feminists do if honesty or a real interest in lowering domestic violence rates ever becomes the norm? Without their victim myth, all feminist greed and hate would be exposed as, well, greed and hate, and they know it. They can't parade around claiming that porn, the sex trade and a diseased sluttiness are all simultaneously degrading to women AND empowering to women without that key to their doublethink. Ditto for child theft/extortion in divorce, slavery and debtor's prisons for men, their life expectancy and healthcare advantages, preferred access to education, status (as 51% of the population of ALL cultures) as a "minority" to steal advantages intended for those who actually need them, and so on. All of it comes crashing down without the victim myth. DV rates can't realistically be expected to fall until society starts acknowledging that half the perpetrators are women, and that when child abuse is involved, MORE than half of the perps are women. Current no-drop, mandatory-arrest (of the man), blame'n'shame programs that crap all over men, be they abusers or victims, don't do a thing to address the "multi-causal" - from the article - basis of DV. It's a very real problem, but until the feminists are disarmed, unable to make their false victim claims AND have the mindless zombies out there believe "women good, men bad" on every issue, no progress will be made, and women, men and children will ALL pay for this feminist greed with their health and sometimes their lives. Imagine that, men and women truly concerned about human suffering instead of ideology or privilege, and actually working together to try and address the problem. What a concept. Ooops, sorry, I got stuck daydreaming there. Why would the feminists who run the (giggle) "justice" departments of the world ever allow silly things like science, statistics or facts to interfere with their politics? In fact, I think it's safe to assume that the feminists are busily working on a way to have studies and statistics that oppose the feminist zeitgeist declared patriarchal "violence", just so this inconvenient researcher's wife can kill him off in his sleep, call it self-defense, keep everything he owns and get an award of some kind for her efforts to preserve the feminist bureaucracy. That's why I focus on trying to deprogram or convert individuals - society as a whole is pretty much lost, and the small signs of honesty breaking through in the media and elsewhere are more representative of the changes in individuals than some collective social trend (even if the net result will eventually be the same). Of course, that's up for debate.

[an error occurred while processing this directive]