Domestic violence stats?

[Ringsender2]

Hi

I came across this item in the comments of a tweet about DV.
www.rte.ie/brainstorm/2020/0123/1110351-7-myths-about-domestic-violence/

It's by a PhD candidate in an Irish uni.

It doesn't ring true to me but maybe that's just my received knowledge being inaccurate.

Does anyone know of other studies that assess comparable things and what their conclusions are?

TIA

If there is a project / group that count young men killed as a result of involvement with/ living somewhere with a lot of gan gangs and gang violence.

Is that biased? Sawdust?

NiceGerbil What I said initially about Ingala-Smith, was that she did not present an accurate picture of Domestic Violence - see my post on 12 Oct at 09:02. This was in reply to @GCAndProud 's post an hour earlier. She said this

I’d look to someone who has worked in this field for many years like Karen Ingala-Smith if you want a more accurate picture.

My point was that her work was focused to the violence done by men on women and KIS didn't seek to look at DV as a whole. Being biased isn't a problem if the bias is acknowledged - which in KIS's case, it clearily is.

BTW I haven't looked at KIS website in any detail, but it's an obvious point that counting fatalities irrespective of the sex of the victim, also doesn't give much insight into DV as a whole. Again @GCAndProud in her above post makes a point that

When men kill women, a lot of the time (probably most of the time), they don’t have a clear intention to kill. Instead, they intend to beat them up severely but it goes further (which is still enough to convict for murder).

If that is true then as men generally have greater strength and often more aggression, might that explain why more DV assaults by men on women result in death, as opposed to the numbers the other way around.

So, let me see if I have this right:

You didn't undertsand the context of the post you initially took umbrage with. You just want us to think of the men!

You haven't actually read KIS, her mission statement, the years of her work. You just want us to think of the men!

You wish to excuse explain some men who murder their partner because it "was an accident of strength"?

You want us to think about the men?

Nope!

It's so bloody insulting, it's farcical!

Great, a mind reader.

It was a question - based on your posts.

You don't seem to be able to hear women telling you that many women don't want to spend any time at all adding men to their feminism.

But here you are, still telling us that we should be! Telling us that any woman who chooses to focus on women is being biased, is presenting untrustworthy data etc. Somehow managing to type, without apparent irony, that we are being unreasonable because the aggression and strength of men could be the reason they kill partners!

Meh! It's tiresome.

@NiceGerbil

Oh fgs Felix.

I said that if the SEVERITY of DV is the same both ways then where are all the men's bodies?

Care to answer?

Rather than lecturing me about a load of other stuff as if I didn't already know...

And then going on to suggest that male suicide could often be caused by DV by a woman and therefore men probably have it worse?

Really excellent move if you want to show that you don't care at women at all and just cannot bear to see issues etc discussed full stop.

You didn't think oh that sort of thread I'll let them get on with it. Of course not.

Do you imagine the same happens on male dominated sites? On something about suicide? People (women) jumping in and saying yeah but yeah but what about women eh you CALLOUS CALLOUS people?

No you said.

"...No one actually believes that DV female on male has the same SEVERITY as the other way round..."

Those two statements are not the same.

And I'm not 'lecturing' anyone - I am merely putting an opinion across on a discussion forum.

And at no point have I said "...that male suicide could often be caused by DV by a woman and therefore men probably have it worse..." - Stop mis-quoting me (if indeed this is what this thread is about).

And i don't see why you jump to a conclusion of - "...Really excellent move if you want to show that you don't care about women at all and just cannot bear to see issues etc discussed..." - No i think its important to discuss issues

@NCBlossom

No evidence that suicide in men is due significantly to DV by women. Men more likely who are in fact, unmarried, alone and isolated. Men more likely if they have the means. Please look up evidence before quoting misinformation.

Which is the whole point of this thread. Misinformation by RTE in the extreme.

We are dealing with facts here. Supposedly.

www.england.nhs.uk/blog/tackling-the-root-causes-of-suicide/

And i again - I didn't say "...suicide in men is due significantly to DV by women..."

I said suicide rates in men are higher and how many of those are attributed to DV related issues? I am in effect posing the question.

[quote NumberTheory]@Felix125

I think you need to read the thread properly. These comments aren't about the idea that DV doesn't happen to men. They are about the article linked in the OP which misquotes research to give the impression that intimate partner violence is mainly about women hurting men.

No one is dismissing violence against men, they are simply outraged that a main stream media outlet is happy to be involved in a smoke screen to dismiss violence against women.[/quote]
Exactly.

I was merely answering a post which had comments that I didn't agree with. Long threads such as these often have a degree of deviation from the original post and this may be the case here.

But a media outlet invoking a smoke screen can cover up a much greater picture.

ONS data on domestic abuse.

And let's repeat the Irish data as well forthose who missed it.

We really should just ignore Felix125.

He is part of the smokescreen. Building straw man arguments (e.g. that we are dismissing IPV against men because we are criticising an article that misrepresents research to imply men are at higher risk than women) so he can push his agenda (the poor menz!). And that takes the focus away from what we are discussing. Let Felix have a little man shout on his own. (Or start a thread on a more appropriate board where people can engage with his discussion).

Maybe Felix and Sawdust could start their own thread and then we women could choose whether or not to engage with their points on a specific thread.

It would be less irritating than feeling obligated to let Those Who Lurk that they are derailing a thread that OP started with a specific topic in mind.

Then again...

@Felix125 its’ really lazy to just pose questions - which you yourself were saying in order to say well perhaps men commit suicide because of DV - and not look them up yourself!

This is supposed to be debate where you bring knowledge to the table. Not ask me, a woman, to do it for you. Which I did anyway, not sure why, only to be berated again! Why do that, if you aren’t going to listen or take on a valid point? There is no point, that’s not a debate, it’s just banging on about… well what exactly?

Start your own thread here and debate it. Look up some evidence and make some valid points. Otherwise it’s just circular stupidedness and ignorance to be honest.

I think that looking at deaths is only tip of the iceberg even if they're the most serious cases. We're talking about a 100 vs literally hundreds of thousands of cases.

Some stats in this thread which support the OP to an extent. www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/4362908-To-say-there-are-some-decent-men?pg=19

Cut and pasted for ease of reading....

I'm definitely a supporter of women's rights but this is defo an area where I feel many feminists cherry pick data and hurt the wider cause as people see the reality with their own eyes.

The earliest empirical evidence of gender symmetry was presented in the 1975 U.S. National Family Violence Survey carried out by Murray A. Straus and Richard J. Gelleson a nationally representative sample of 2,146 "intact families". The survey found 11.6% of women and 12% of men had experienced some kind of IPV in the last twelve months, also 4.6% of men and 3.8% of women had experienced "severe" IPV.

The 2010–2011 report found that whilst 27% of women who experienced IPV reported it to the police, only 10% of men did so, and whilst 44% of women reported to some professional organization, only 19% of men did so.[29]In a 2005 report carried out by the National Crime Council in the Republic of Ireland, it was estimated that 5% of men who had experienced IPV had reported it to the authorities, compared to 29% of women.

In 2012, two Swedish studies were released that showed men experienced IPV at rates similar to women—8% per year in one study and 11% per year in the other.

A growing body of international research indicated that men and women experience IPV in some similar proportions. An example might be a recent survey from Canada's national statistical agency that concluded that "equal proportions of men and women reported being victims of spousal violence during the preceding 5 years."

In 2013, the American Centers for Disease Control and Prevention(CDC) found that from a sample of 16,000 U.S. adults, 26% of homosexual men, 37.3% of bisexual men, and 29% of heterosexual men had been a victim of IPV, compared to 43.8% of lesbians, 61.1% of bisexual women and 35% of heterosexual women.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_violence_against_men

Women ‘more likely to hit their partners

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/women-more-likely-to-hit-their-partners-wx29qb0nwwg

Women are more violent, says study

www.google.com/amp/s/www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/women-are-more-violent-says-study-622388.html%3famp

Sawdust and Felix.

Genuine question.

What are your drivers for posting?

On threads in a corner of a site in a corner of the world in a corner of the internet.

I understand you disagree with things said/ want to present a different view.

But why here? Hardly anyone in conversation / reading.

Why not somewhere with more traffic etc?

I'm a bit sceptical of studies with only like 100 participants like in OP but some of the ones above have tens of thousands which is hard to dismiss.

'I'm definitely a supporter of women's rights but this is defo an area where I feel many feminists cherry pick data and hurt the wider cause as people see the reality with their own eyes.'

I just don't understand this.

Of course women and older girls can be and are aggressive, violent, angry drunks, etc etc.

Yes there are plenty of relationships where both are short fused and both shouty insulting nasty and get physical.

I've seen this plenty times. A friend I've known for decades she and her bloke (they are still together drink way less and seem happy both calmed down etc). They used to get paralytic and scream at each other in the pub. Shoving etc. On way home bumped into them one time she was going all out to attack him middle of high street and one time he had her in hold to put her head first though shop window.

This apparently obvious fact that women who are feminists think all men are bad and all women wouldn't hurt a fly is manufactured. Easy ways to see us as totally unreasonable, easier than actually properly engaging.

@KayKayWat
I am always open to evidence, however you are the one who is cherry picking. You have picked up media reports of surveys which have just not been replicated and are not robust, and are small numbers, in the 100s. I think you maybe just googled? One is behind a paywall. At the moment, almost all evidence from recorded deaths, crime figures on prosecutions, quality studies show that female domestic abuse, whilst it exists, is much rarer.

The evidence seems to show that there are incidents of female to male abuse, but these are not on the whole sustained, not severe and do not usually progress in severity and control.

Domestic Abuse ‘is a gendered crime’ is the headline from Women’s Aid UK which lists substantial evidence for this. It is worth a read.
www.womensaid.org.uk/information-support/what-is-domestic-abuse/domestic-abuse-is-a-gendered-crime/

This is taken directly from women’s aid and this puts it across better than myself:
Every case of domestic abuse should be taken seriously and each individual given access to the support they need. All victims should be able to access appropriate support. Whilst both men and women may experience incidents of inter-personal violence and abuse, women are considerably more likely to experience repeated and severe forms of abuse, including sexual violence. They are also more likely to have experienced sustained physical, psychological or emotional abuse, or violence which results in injury or death.

There are important differences between male violence against women and female violence against men, namely the amount, severity and impact. Women experience higher rates of repeated victimisation and are much more likely to be seriously hurt (Walby & Towers, 2017; Walby & Allen, 2004) or killed than male victims of domestic abuse (ONS, 2020A; ONS, 2020B). Further to that, women are more likely to experience higher levels of fear and are more likely to be subjected to coercive and controlling behaviours (Dobash & Dobash, 2004; Hester, 2013; Myhill, 2015; Myhill, 2017).

I don't understand why a project with a specific remit of gathering and publishing data on one specific group/ one specific crime profile is biased?

I asked earlier.

Is a man who grew up in an area with a dominant culture of gangs. Biased if he focuses on that area/ those streets, that community etc. And gathers stats around the situation for boys in that area around stabbings? Other things related to the situation, and focussed on boys?

I don't see that as biased.

I see that (and there are men doing that + other things) as admirable. I see men who have lived that way and want to reduce/ stop it. Who care enough to stay and try to help the boys in that situation or likely to be in the future.

Is that biased too?

What's the difference?

You have picked up media reports of surveys which have just not been replicated and are not robust, and are small numbers, in the 100s.

Did you read them? Most had thousands of participants. UK one was 34,000.

@KayKayWat did you read any of my post, at all, did you read the column in women’s aid?

Office for National Statistics - you can’t really get much more robust than that.

A survey is much weaker than an actual research study.

That UK one wasn’t a study of 34,000.
It was one man looking at lots of other studies from 1972 and formed his own opinion. And he trotted up the numbers in those studies.

Looking at other studies is only valid if it is done in a systematic review, and usually needs to have a really thorough weighing up of quality studies as otherwise it is just a big bag of smaller, not great quality surveys again. Pooling these all together doesn’t make one good study.

So no, 34,000 is just a way of puffing up this pretty basic review, which is open to lot of bias. Which is probably why it only got a few biased media reports rather than taken seriously in academia.

Several of those in the link were studies. Like 'the two Swedish studies' referenced.

One problem with ONS data is that it doesn't account for things like the extremely low rate of male reporting compared to women, which is why the other studies are interesting.

Anyway, I was just replying to the OPs request for similar studies as I remembered the linked thread I'd read. Not interested in endless debate with feminists on damage control.

Sorry Kay but I don't really follow your thinking.

The op had something saying severity of violence was essentially the same. Between men and women commiting DV.

Yes I pointed out deaths. Because when it comes to severity then killing someone is
Pretty severe and
Deaths tend to get counted/ noticed.

A response that murder is only the tip of the iceberg
And it's only 100s of women killed Vs much larger number of DV victims

I don't understand your point?

If severity is the same where are all the men killed by women? And rather than answering, saying murder is the tip of the iceberg (and so no reason to consider as a single metric) and the numbers are too low to be meaningful etc... Only in the 100s..
This is dead women you are referring to. Only.

When it comes to men and boys being severely injured killed etc then there are way more pressing matters. What are your views on those?