Thread: Domestic Violence, Part 1 Rewrite #1

one thing you forgot to mention is almost all folks who perp or are victims of DV from intimate partners are either drunks or dope fiends

But let me sum up those conclusions in a clearer form of English. Relationships where both are violent are more likely to result in the woman getting hurt.

Again, I challenge that, Lester.

I gave you some data from research that shows the opposite.

It is all too often repeated that women get hurt 'more' but this is simply NOT the case.

How does one 'measure' 'hurt'?

By tears?

Injury is a better indicator, shirley???

Hurt enough to need medical attention even if just first aid to repair cuts. Not to mention broken noses and bones.

I racall some years ago a study in the US, probably CDC data again, that looked at hospital data. Emergency room data. It showed very clearly and unequivocally that the majority of emergency room treatment of DV caused injury were to men, not women.

The study also found that it was mutual violence that most often resulted in serious injury, and that most of those injuries were to women at the hands of men. Another way of saying this perhaps is that those most physically capable of inflicting injuries were the most successful at it.

There is no connection between gender physical capacity and outcome where it comes to damage. Women use weapons. Anything at hand. They hit men with kitchen equipment, ornaments, fire irons, knives, tools, whatever they can lay a hand on. 'Male strength' does not extend so far as making skin inviolable.

I think your podscript is good but care - by all of us - should be taken to make sure we are not inadvertently repeating the same false claims that the feminazis make and just take them as conventional wisdom.

I think you need to do some more work on the script, lest you re-inforce prevailing mendacities. Feminists will use it against us and Truth.

"Male Rights Activist admits women get hurt more"

I'll try to help a little too, Lester.

OK, so here is the myth. Domestic violence is almost exclusively perpetrated by men against women; the product of sinister, unilateral male aggression against weaker, female victims.

The myth is: Men do more damage than women.

It is statistically proven (this is what they do) by collecting stats of men and women being killed by intimate violence.

One study alone is easy enough to dispute, even from a sound source. So I thought I would also refer to a hundred more.

Real Niiicce!!! IMHO

Men’s violence was much more likely to be isolated, and, contrary to the rabidly repeated assertions of feminists, not likely to be repeated.

This clearly puts the adage “If he hits you once, he will do it again,” in serious question. Unless we change "he" to "she."

I have to be honest and say, "This is hard to swallow". But maybe if it was a real bad bashing, he might have got a real hard fright and never did it again. Maybe just the fact he lost his temper and hit gave him a fright.

I think that might need a bit more explaining.

I should take the time here to note a personal theory that may well be at the root of some of this aggression, especially male aggression that results in injury. It is clear, despite copious amounts of feminist drivel about how aggressive and violent men are, that much of the attacks from women are delivered with an absolute certainty that the men won’t hit back. That is probably because they most often don’t, as is normal for men our culture.

Great stuff. Some people like to know what the messenger thinks themselves. IMHO. As an a man, you are the perfect person to give your views.

I think that makes it more personal.

Everything else was wonderful. IMHO. That should get men thinking.

.........

BTW, Percy is right to encourage you down the path of women using weapons and men visiting hospitals more.

Just a thought.

If you wanted to add that women kill their partners more than men kill their partners, you could always use statistics of poisoning or the use of hit men.

It doesn't have too much to do with actual domestic violence but it still would give listeners a dose of women being equal to men as murderers.

Quote from Percy

Again, I challenge that, Lester.

I gave you some data from research that shows the opposite.

It is all too often repeated that women get hurt 'more' but this is simply NOT the case.

How does one 'measure' 'hurt'?

By tears?

Injury is a better indicator, shirley???

Hurt enough to need medical attention even if just first aid to repair cuts. Not to mention broken noses and bones.

I racall some years ago a study in the US, probably CDC data again, that looked at hospital data. Emergency room data. It showed very clearly and unequivocally that the majority of emergency room treatment of DV caused injury were to men, not women.



There is no connection between gender physical capacity and outcome where it comes to damage. Women use weapons. Anything at hand. They hit men with kitchen equipment, ornaments, fire irons, knives, tools, whatever they can lay a hand on. 'Male strength' does not extend so far as making skin inviolable.

I think your podscript is good but care - by all of us - should be taken to make sure we are not inadvertently repeating the same false claims that the feminazis make and just take them as conventional wisdom.

I think you need to do some more work on the script, lest you re-inforce prevailing mendacities. Feminists will use it against us and Truth.

"Male Rights Activist admits women get hurt more"

OK, Percy, I hear your point, but I will need some help with this one. And from Julie too as she cites the same challenge.

The CDC study excluded violence that included weapons and didn't even really include and analysis of injury per gender. Archers research concluded that women were injured more than women in DV situations.

So what I need is some legit numbers that can be extrapolated to the general population via the direct source. Dr. Spencer, who read the script on the Joe Bob video is helping with this by scouring the research and methodology with me. She is an ally, but also thankfully very thorough.

I remember you posting the numbers on the first aid rendered in Australia which indicated men needed more medical attention, but there was no source and I can't find any other info that backs the assertion that men are injured with the frequency of women.

I don't want fembots to use this in a convoluted way, but I am going to maintain allegiance to the truth as I find it.

If I am mistaken in my info, then someone will have to prove it to me so that I can make the change in good conscious.

Thanks for your help with this.

Quote from Aug9th-LiveOrDie

one thing you forgot to mention is almost all folks who perp or are victims of DV from intimate partners are either drunks or dope fiends

It is a fair request to consider. As I have stated with Percy, and for everyone kind enough to help with this, what I need is PROOF.

This is an important piece to me, and I am in no hurry, so if people want to bring me actual research to substantiate information, I will be most grateful.

http://www.mensrights.com.au/page13y.htm
http://www.australian-news.com.au/domestic_violence_statistics.htm
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE IN AUSTRALIA: ARE WOMEN AND MEN EQUALLY VIOLENT?
Headly, Scott and De Vaus


The CDC data on hospitals is deep within the AM archives somewhere.

Quote from Lester Burnham

So many of these women attack with the idea of a sort of gender based “diplomatic immunity” from their actions. And when that immunity is revoked by the occasional male, the next image we see is hers, on that billboard with the hotline number and catchy slogan.

Exactly, no one who is an aggressor should expect immunity.

Good piece Lester.

Are you going to make a video and/or podcast with the rewrite?

Quote from Celtic Druid

Exactly, no one who is an aggressor should expect immunity.

Good piece Lester.

Are you going to make a video and/or podcast with the rewrite?

Abso-friggin-lutely! As soon as I can pour over Percy's link info (thanks) and run it by Dr. Spencer for her critique. I should be less than a week from having this on my site and on youtube.

Quote from Lester Burnham

My work as men’s rights activist is mostly in countering lies, distortions and misperceptions. Frequently all three at the same time. I have covered many of them in my writings and videos. But in today’s talk, I am going to address the grandmother of all feminist fakeries.

Domestic violence.

Even the mention of the words conjures up the larger than life image of some battered, bruised woman on a highway billboard; a day glow orange hot-line number beneath her visage, and some catchy slogan like “love shouldn’t hurt.”

And no, I am not insensitive to battered women. My heart goes out to any real victim. But the day I see the images of bruised men on those billboards, I’ll be less prone to such irreverence.

OK, so here is the myth. Domestic violence is almost exclusively perpetrated by men against women; the product of sinister, unilateral male aggression against weaker, female victims.

As always, this mendacity is short and sweet and memorable. Not much need to think or scrutinize something that makes so much sense.

But let’s think and scrutinize it some more anyway. You deserve a lot more depth than is offered in a sound bite.

I’ll start with some research that most would feel was from a reputable source. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta, GA. This is the summary of their findings as published in the American Journal of Public Health, March 2007.

First, almost 24% of all relationships had some level of violence. Half of those relationships involved just one of the partners being violent. The other half were reciprocally violent. For feminists, that means that both people were throwing punches.

Now, in relationships where violence was perpetrated by just one person, over 70% of that was committed by the woman.

Hold the phone! Did you get that? In all relationships in that particular study, more than 7 out of 10 batterers are female.

For those of you already preparing your scathing comments, save them for the CDC. They did the study, not me.

Let’s look even closer at the data as it relates to relationships where both partners are violent. This half is even more interesting than the first half.

The study concluded that reciprocally violent relationships are a solid predictor of future, repeated violence for women, but not men. In other words, women who engaged in mutual combat with men were much more likely to have a pattern of instigating repeated assaults. Men’s violence was much more likely to be isolated, and, contrary to the rabidly repeated assertions of feminists, not likely to be repeated.

This clearly puts the adage “If he hits you once, he will do it again,” in serious question. Unless we change "he" to "she."

The study also found that it was mutual violence that most often resulted in serious injury, and that most of those injuries were to women at the hands of men. Another way of saying this perhaps is that those most physically capable of inflicting injuries were the most successful at it.

But let me sum up those conclusions in a clearer form of English. Relationships where both are violent are more likely to result in the woman getting hurt. Those relationships are also marked by women who are much more likely than men to initiate and maintain that violence in the first place.

We have common expression for much of the men’s violence in these situations.

It’s called hitting back.

I know, I know, there is no excuse for violence. Never-ever-ever-EVER! But if forced to condone either an unprovoked attack or an act of self defense or retaliation, I know where my choice is, and I’ll happily leave you to yours.

In fairness, it has to be pointed out that this one study, for many reasons, including methodology, can't fairly be generalized to the entire population. Now, if I thought like a feminist, I would just throw the 7 out of 10 figure at you, claim it to be empirical, ignore all other factors, and say anyone who disagrees with me hates men.



But we are actually looking for the truth here, so feminist strategies won't do.



One study alone is easy enough to dispute, even from a sound source. So I thought I would also refer to a hundred more.

Professor John Archer is a psychologist at The University of Central Lancashire and the head of the Aggression Research Group at the same university. In his analysis of 100 British and American studies he concludes that women are more likely than men to initiate violence in their relationships and are more likely to be aggressive more frequently. He also addresses the myth that women are only violent as a matter of self defense by reporting that 29% of female college students admitted to physically attacking their boyfriends when no threat was perceived.

I know feminists and other professional victims won‘t be convinced by this, nor will they by several hundred more studies, but let’s look at them anyway. Professor Martin S. Fiebert of the California State University Psychology Department conducted an analysis of 249 scholarly investigations, 194 empirical studies and 55 reviews regarding domestic violence. The aggregate sample size in the reviewed studies numbers over 241,700 people.

Fiebert's conclusion? Women are as physically aggressive or more physically aggressive in relationships than men.



Even what I have cited here is just the tip of the iceberg. Study after study, from America to the rest of the western world points generally in the same direction. Our collective understanding of domestic violence is woefully inaccurate.



As in so many other ways, we demonstrate a cultural tendency to remake reality, even embrace lies, when the truth about the fairer sex doesn't make them look all that fair.



For those interested, I will post links to all this research and more in the written version of this essay on my website.

I should take the time here to note a personal theory that may well be at the root of some of this aggression, especially male aggression that results in injury. It is clear, despite copious amounts of feminist drivel about how aggressive and violent men are, that much of the attacks from women are delivered with an absolute certainty that the men won’t hit back. That is probably because they most often don’t, as is normal for men our culture.

So many of these women attack with the idea of a sort of gender based “diplomatic immunity” from their actions. And when that immunity is revoked by the occasional male, the next image we see is hers, on that billboard with the hotline number and catchy slogan.

Again, for those with terminal tunnel vision, this does not diminish the plight of women who are real victims of violence. But it is impossible to imagine how we can help them or anyone else as long as we so neurotically insist on misidentifying the problem.

If we look purely at the evidence, it would be easy to make an argument that domestic violence is more a female than a male problem. But that would be as pointless as the current paradigm. So for those of you screaming for me to quit picking on women and take gender out of the equation, that is precisely what I am doing.


And what I am asking you to do, once and for all.


If you are really of the mindset that all violence is bad and shouldn't be tolerated, then here is what you can do to prove it.


Write Joe Biden and tell him to seek an end to the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), the legislation he authored that allocates billions to women victims but leaves men totally out of the picture. Men are, after all, injured too. 835,000 per year in America alone.


Start holding shelters and social services to account when they have no real programs designed for men. Their failure to do this is institutionalized sexism and needs to go.


Confront police and prosecutors for their actions. Men who call for police help when attacked by their partners are more likely than not to be the one arrested, regardless of the circumstances.


Victims should be helped, not incarcerated.


Be sure to express your objections to and boycott the media outlets and corporations like Fedex that consistently use men getting abused as a sight gag for their sales pitches.

All these are good actions, but you can best start by simply and publicly acknowledging what so few seem to know. Violence has nothing to do with what sex you are. It never has. And believing anything else leaves us in a dream world where solutions will never be found.

"""And no, I am not insensitive to battered women. """

wimyn make their choice of a "partner" on the basis of their feminit dogma !! let them live by it as best they can !!

what do wimyn care about your hassells that you couldn' write on the edge of a dime about

Quote from Percy

http://www.mensrights.com.au/page13y.htm
http://www.australian-news.com.au/domestic_violence_statistics.htm
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE IN AUSTRALIA: ARE WOMEN AND MEN EQUALLY VIOLENT?
Headly, Scott and De Vaus


The CDC data on hospitals is deep within the AM archives somewhere.

Thanks Percy. You are helping me build the case here, but I am going to have to find more. The research you provided is telling, but has methodological shortcomings that prevent it from being applied to the general population. That being the case I need to find other studies that mirror these results. If they are out there I will find them.

I would like nothing more than to hit the delete button on the statment that more women than men are injured. But I am not there yet. And then I also have to contend with irrefutable data showing that more women than men are killed by their partners. I know this is likely skewed because of a historical tendency to not even see women as potential suspects and because women often use sex or other manipulations to recruit males to do the killing for them.

Egads, all this in ten short minutes.

Quote from julie

I'll try to help a little too, Lester.



I have to be honest and say, "This is hard to swallow".

BTW, Percy is right to encourage you down the path of women using weapons and men visiting hospitals more.

Hi Julie, the justification for that statement is in the preceding paragraph:

"The study concluded that reciprocally violent relationships are a solid predictor of future, repeated violence for women, but not men. In other words, women who engaged in mutual combat with men were much more likely to have a pattern of instigating repeated assaults. Men’s violence was much more likely to be isolated, and, contrary to the rabidly repeated assertions of feminists, not likely to be repeated."


Regardless of the reasons, this study and many of the others conclude that women are more likely than men to settle in to a pattern of repeated violence.

Thus, "if she hits you once, she will hit you again."

And I agree, Percy is most correct. If the data supports his contention I will race to make the needed changes. Would love nothing better.

Quote from Lester Burnham

Hi Julie, the justification for that statement is in the preceding paragraph:

"The study concluded that reciprocally violent relationships are a solid predictor of future, repeated violence for women, but not men. In other words, women who engaged in mutual combat with men were much more likely to have a pattern of instigating repeated assaults. Men’s violence was much more likely to be isolated, and, contrary to the rabidly repeated assertions of feminists, not likely to be repeated."


Regardless of the reasons, this study and many of the others conclude that women are more likely than men to settle in to a pattern of repeated violence.

Thus, "if she hits you once, she will hit you again."

Thanks for trying to explain Lester. But I still don't get it.

All I know is that he says at the end his research goes against feminists so I gather it is about women being violent.

PERCY

YOU DA MAN! Thanks for pushing me. Here are but a few examples from Fieberts annotated bibliography. There were some (very few) studies that concluded women were injured more than men, but here is a small sample of the great majority of conclusions.

Anderson, K. L. (2002). Perpetrator or victim? Relationships between intimate partner violence and well-being. Journal of Marriage and Family, 64, 851-863. (Data consisted of 7,395 married and cohabiting heterosexual couples drawn from wave 1 of the National Survey of Families and Households <NSFH-1>. In terms of measures: subjects were asked "how many arguments during the past year resulted in 'you hitting, shoving or throwing things at a partner.' They were also asked how many arguments ended with their partner, 'hitting, shoving or throwing things at you.'" Author reports that, "victimization rates are slightly higher among men than women <9% vs 7%> and in cases that involve perpetration by only one partner, more women than men were identified as perpetrators <2% vs 1%>.")

Archer, J. (2002). Sex differences in physically aggressive acts between heterosexual partners: A meta-analytic review. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 7, 213-351. (Analyzing responses to the Conflict Tactic Scale and using a data set somewhat different from the previous 2000 publication, the author reports that women are more likely than men to throw something at their partners, as well as slap, kick, bite, punch and hit with an object. Men were more likely than women to strangle, choke, or beat up their partners.)

Arias, I., Samios, M., & O'Leary, K. D. (1987). Prevalence and correlates of physical aggression during courtship. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 2, 82-90. (Used Conflict Tactics Scale with a sample of 270 undergraduates <95 men, 175 women> and found 30% of men and 49% of women reported using some form of aggression in their dating histories with a greater percentage of women engaging in severe physical aggression.)

Capaldi, D. M. & Owen, L. D. (2001). Physical aggression in a community sample of at-risk young couples: Gender comparisons for high frequency, injury, and fear. Journal of Family Psychology, 15 (3), 425-440. Drawn from a community based at-risk sample, 159 young couples were assessed with the Conflict Tactics scale and measures of self reported injuries. Findings indicated that 9.4% of men and 13.2% of women perpetrated frequent physical aggression toward their partners. Contrary to expectations, 13% of men and 9% of women, indicated that they were physically injured at least once. Authors report "2% of the men and none of the women indicate that they had been hurt by their partners between five and nine times."

Cercone, J. J., Beach, S. R. H., & Arias, I. (2005). Gender Symmetry in Dating Intimate Partner Violence: Does Behavior Imply Similar Constructs? Violence and Victims, 20 (2) 207-218. (A sample of 414 college students <189 men, 225 women> responded to the CTS2. Results reveal that male and female subjects were equally likely to be perpetrators of minor violence in intimate dating relationships, but women were twice as likely as men to perpetrate severe violence <15.11% vs 7.41%>).

DeKeseredy, W. S. & Schwartz, M. D. (1998). Woman abuse on campus. Results from the Canadian National survey. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. (A large sample <1,835 women; 1,307 men> of Canadian college students completed the Conflict Tactics Scale. Results reveal that women report engaging in higher rates of violence than men. Specifically, 46.1% of women reported engaging in some physical violence in intimate relationship since leaving high school. With 38% employing "minor" violence and 19% employing "severe" violence.)


Hoff, B. H. (1999). The risk of serious physical injury from assault by a woman intimate. A re-examination of National Violence against women survey data on type of assault by an intimate. WWW.vix.com/menmag/nvawrisk.htm. (A re-examination of the data from the most recent National violence against women survey (Tjaden & Thoennes, 1998) shows that "assaulted men are more likely than assaulted women to experience serious attacks by being hit with an object, beat up, threatened with a knife or being knifed.")

McLeod, M. (1984). Women against men: An examination of domestic violence based on an analysis of official data and national victimization data. Justice Quarterly, 1, 171-193. (From a data set of 6,200 cases of spousal abuse in the Detroit area in 1978-79 found that men used weapons 25% of the time while female assailants used weapons 86% of the time, 74% of men sustained injury and of these 84% required medical care. Concludes that male victims are injured more often and more seriously than female victims.)