Here's a study that just appeared in the Journal of Family Violence:
http://www.springerlink.com/content/x7654m79327161g2/

Published online: 5 July 2007

Abstract:
Using data on a nationally representative cohort of pregnant women in US cities, this study examines the prevalence and correlates of interpersonal violence (IPV) -- physical, emotional, and coercion-control -- during pregnancy and 1 year after birth. Overall, 33% of mothers and 40% of fathers experience some form of IPV during or after pregnancy. Hispanic women and those no longer romantically involved with their children’s fathers were most likely to experience IPV during pregnancy. Less educated women, women who reported that they or their spouses used substances (i.e., alcohol or illicit drugs), and women who reported that their pregnancy was unwanted were at high risk of IPV both during and after their pregnancy. Violence during pregnancy strongly predicted violence after pregnancy. Recent immigrants were among the least likely to leave a violent relationship 1-year post-partum. US-born women who were employed during their pregnancy were among the most likely to leave an abusive relationship 1-year post-partum.

What would differentiate the two groups?
What would define a 'violent' relationship?
Who defines 'abuse' and who is abusing whom?

This is pseudo scientific fiddle faddle!

Screwing is simple and enjoyable but making new people requires a bit of effort from both parents. You can't buy a take-away parent voucher at McDo's.

How fortunate that thousands of dollars are spent on 'research' to tell us things that our ancestors knew a milliion years ago.

No offence to you John. This kind of detailed introspection of the western navel should be brought into the bright light of day.

Do we want to have kids or not?

1. Yes, at any cost!
2. Never in a milliion years - it's too dangerous!
3. Depends on who I am and where I am - ask me when I'm ready - insufficient data at this time for meaningful output - re-submit data.

That's how 'polls' work.

"The Journal of Family Violence" ?
Pfffft.

This is a respectable journal. It's by no means an MRA journal, but they have published studies of researchers who recognize that domestic violence is perpetrated at parity between men and women. I got a lot of material for my domestic violence search engine, DVstats.com, from the Journal of Family Violence.

And in this case, with this particular study, the notable thing is that men are abused more than women during the woman's pregnancy! Whether the rest of the study's findings jibe with our movement or not, I consider that little tidbit worth pointing out to any feminists who promote the lie that pregnancy is the time when women are at greatest risk of getting murdered. Maybe it's because they're beating on the husband so much.

I can relate, my first (and only wife/ex-wife!), was a mean bitch from hell during our kids. Get me this, do that for me...

And of course, being a young male brainwashed mangina (at the time), I did whatever I could to make her happy.

Oh well, live and learn, as most men, they don't realize they are fucked till after they are fucked. Thats the system we are in...

-iw

As more and broader definitions of 'abuse' appear, the numbers of men will grow. If the research interviewers explained 'economic' abuse and 'verbal' abuse a bit more they will eventually include every male over 10.

The older feminists will have a hard time wriggling out of their abusiveness to men from whom those women demanded their pay packet every week. It was the norm to economically abuse men in the '50s and '60s.

I always have a wry smile whenever such reports come out. It isn't that they tell the obvious so much as they ignore what every man knows from personal experience. The skill in writing research questionnaire questions is to do so in a way that most men overlook all the abuse they get all the time, not just from their 'partner' but from any passing woman who can breathe.

Okay. I thought the title sounded pretty odd.

It doesn't surprise me that a pregnant woman might be inclined to lash out more, especially if she doesn't want the baby. But the numbers seem too high.

You contradict yourself. Is it a "lie" or not?

I guess you didn't perceive the oh-too-subtle sarcasm in there... It is a lie that pregnancy presages murders of women. That lie was promoted by the Washington Post newspaper a few years ago, and then debunked on Slate, the online news magazine. We discussed it here sometime around last November, I believe.

The funny thing about the most effective lies is that they contain truths that seem believable. In the studies quoted in the Washington Post, for example, women who were killed up to 12 months after giving birth (whether by their intimate partners or not) were counted in with women who were murdered during their pregnancies. Is it a terrible thing that any women were killed? Of course. Is pregnancy a condition that puts women at increased risk for murder? Well, THAT'S the lie.

Oops. I'll check the archives for that discussion some time then.

I would like to see some numbers for mental abuse both of my ex wives used to hit me but the toll that they took on me was more mental abuse. Like being told that I wasn't a real man,didn't have any balls,was a pig,was a liar because I was male,or my favorite was from my last ex that I must be gay because I no longer wanted to have sex with her. I even tried to tell her that it was because I didn't want to risk having more children with her and since I am a die hard pro lifer the only obvious way not to have a kid was not to breed her.

As feminists have consistently lied about how abusive women really are and always pointed the figure in our direction, it appears that those figures to some here need to be questioned. How is