Women with careers 'twice as likely' to be victims of domestic abuse as they 'threaten men's authority and power'

[vivizone]

Do you agree with this article?

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2241324/Women-careers-twice-likely-victims-domestic-abuse-threaten-mens-authority-power.html

No and, as with most of these things, it's not very well researched - they have done based on 'self-reported' statistics, rather than independent ones.

I think the important thing is the fact that these are reported cases.

We cannot know from this whether women with careers are more likely to be assaulted, or are simply more likely to report it as they feel less financially dependant on their abuser.

No I don't.

usually daily mail shit.

Sorry, hit send too early. Essentially all the article shows (could be the actual research is different) is that women who work outside the home are more likely to report abuse than those who don't.

I am sure there was a study last year that showed SAHMs were more likely to be abused and stay because they had less independence.

I think many abusers would want their partners to be at home and totally reliant on them.

Also at work we have independent friends; that would threaten some men.

Define career. Are u /they referring to lawyers type? Do cleaners call having a job a career? I don't know. I struggle with this as it seems everyone has a career but me. I'm sahm now but worked before. I always thought I had a job. What makes it a career? Where's the line?

If it means a working woman is twice as likely to b hit then I'd guess that's just coincidence as there's so many working women around. Seems daft article to me.

I agree with what has been said by other posters, ie I think women who work outside the home are more likely to report domestic violence.

so it's all womens fault again is it ...for encroaching on men's 'power' - do fuck off (not you op) - whataloadofallshit

Whatever you do, don't read the comments.

Apparently, according to some, men hit women because their mum's did everything for them. WTAF.

I think women with their own income are far more likely to report abuse.

exactly Crackfox

I'd guess that women who work outside the home are more likely to report it. (I do and I did).

I don't know about any studies/research etc but my story is that I was a SAHM
there was low level emotional abuse

he gave up work to start his own business, I went back to work to pay the bills (his suggestion)

the abbusive behaviour got worse and worse and everytime I had a success at work it intensified (my parent's spotted this pattern a long time before I did)

when we split, he then went to counselling and then chose to share his new found wisdom with me

apparently me doing well at work emasculated him so he had NO CHOICE but to be more aggressive/controlling with me to re-enstate his masculinity

twat

I had no intention of reading the comments until TheCrackFox told me not to. Dammit.

Completely unfair 'study'.

It might be that those with careers are more able to report it, rather than a SAHM.

I was sure I'd read before that having a degree was a major factor in not suffering domestic abuse? Not that having a degree = career necessarily but it does imply it. Not sure where I read that jthough

I am not even going to click that link. If its the daily mail its a pile of shite!!!! My Ex certainly didn't care if i was in a good job or not. A punching bags a punching bag no matter what their day job.

My own experience - and obviously entirely personal to me - was that my Ex found my intelligence, my verbal dexterity, and my career (as a lawyer), plus the fact I expected that we share household chores, impossibly difficult to deal with, and resorted to physical and emotional abuse as a result.

His mother has a PT unskilled job, however she is a perfect housewife and spends at least 8 hours a day on housework. All his previous gfs had limited education and aspirations, and either did not work or were in min wage jobs. I was in every possible way outside of his realm of experience.

Ultimately the reason he abused me is because he is a twat. My profession, and what I did or didn't do at home has nothing to do with it. But I do think that he wouldn't have abused a more compliant woman - or if he did, that the abuse would've taken much longer to start.

Re more 'professional' women reporting it, when I tried, the response I got from the police was utterly dismissive, so whilst I may have been more empowered to report it by reason of my background, it didn't garner me any assistance.

Am I naive in thinking that if a man/woman is going to be an abuser, they'll do it regardless of their partner having a job or not?

I know my ex would have done the same whether I was jobless or raking it in.

I would think that at least if women have some financial independence they can break away from an abusive relationship much more easily, whereas a SAHM might find it harder to escape from abuse.

These aren't "reported" cases in the sense of reported to the police, it's reported to the interviewer.

The methodology described in the article is of telephone interviews. Normal practice for a survey like this would be to call up a radnom sample of houses within the geographic area being studied and ask to speak with, say, the woman who has most recently had a birthday (in order not to always be talking to people who are default phone answerers). They then screen the women to see if they fall into the population required (in this case by asking the woman if she is currently or recently in a serious romantic relationship and checking she's within the 18 - 81 age range). Then they'd ask about acts of abuse in the last 2 years. Then probably ask some demographics questions at the end so they can check the interviewess appear to match the general population and compare different groups.

It's a small survey group so the confidence will be lowish. But if the figures are accurate it's horrendous - 2/3rds of women who have been in a relationship reporting (i.e. tell the interviewer they have suffered) abuse :( That is horrible.

Not going to read the DM but my thought, as others have said, IF this is true, it's probably only because women with jobs are more able to escape and report, while sahms may be trapped.

I think it fits in beautifully with the mail's view of women.

I do think that there are some male abusers who get particular kicks from grinding down women in whose proximity they are confronted by their own perceived inadequacies.

Most abusers use whatever justification is at their disposal, though. They are abusers because they are abusive.

I think it's the case that the kind of man who engages in domestic violence is an inadequate, insecure bully who uses aggression as a way of exerting control. I sincerely hope that women with jobs or careers aren't more at risk of DV but I'm often struck, when I read the accounts of DV victims, how many will say something like..... 'I'm an intelligent/assertive/strong woman, respected in my work ... how could it happen to me?'

What defines a "career" - does anyone actually refer to their job as a career in general conversation?

I think it's more likely that women with financial independence are more likely to report abuse. Maybe?

Given that so many women work these days it's basically another article saying "some men abuse women just because they can". Which isn't particularly insightful. We all know that anyway.