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

@KayKayWat

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.

As a supporter of women's rights and I'm assuming female.

What do you mean by damage control?

Studies aside. I'd be interested in your beliefs/ experiences.

I'm lucky enough never too have had a partner who abused me, physically or otherwise.

What I know from my life is that, in the vast majority of situations. Men and boys over puberty are just overwhelmingly stronger than us.

Eg
Me and bro used to argue and fight. We got on well normal sibling stuff.
Puberty. some point we argued he shoved me as usual. I went flying across the room. We never fought physically again, unspoken agreement.

At bus stop when teen. Man walked out of pub punched me in the face. I was lifted off the ground and flew backwards like 8 feet landed on back. Friends said after like something from film.

I have had all sorts of randoms in clubs just pick me up and move me/ carry me about. I know this is not uncommon. Can we generally lift blokes off the ground casually and wander about? That's a no.

And DH.
If I wanted to hurt him physically I would need to plan it, be armed, catch him totally by surprise.
If he wanted to hurt me. He could easily hold me in place. And if he punched me hard once. I would be seriously injured possibly dead .

Yes men and women. Are humans. With all the things we do. Including being just cruel etc.

But

I learnt at 19 just how much stronger they really are. And that in the end. It's by choice not to use that.

And globally that's the bottom line and always has been.

Not interested in endless debate with feminists on damage control.

Not really interested in a poster who comes on, asserts a view, and I spend a bit of time giving a polite, informed reply but just throws their toys out of the pram instead of even reading what I said. I gave your the curtesy of actually looking at your view. Disappointing.

That Strauss and gelleson survey was super dodgy. It didn't ask about the manifestations of coercive control that we know about now. It gets used as an example of how not to do research on interpersonal violence.

NC and a supporter of women's rights as well :(

Gelles, rather.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflict_tactics_scale

Coercing someone into sex is classed as 'minor', for example.

There are some fun reviews of their book online.

I must say I find the essence of the different views on this thread.

That when it comes to DV the OBVIOUS physical differential is essentially a tiny component in a much more important bigger picture.

And the fact that men kill women, and the opposite is much less common. Is not worth talking about because the number of deaths is too small. To mean anything really.

???!!!

@SuperLoudPoppingAction
Interesting… it shows how much we have learnt about coercive control, about domestic abuse being a pattern of behaviour.

I can well believe that there is ‘volatility’ within relationships that lead into domestic abuse from both sides, and the pity of much of the surveys and other studies which are held up as showing it isn’t gendered, is that they just seem to blanket conclude ‘women are just as violent’ when that
A) isn’t borne out in any of the hard data - men are not being killed or turning up with significant injuries on the same scale
B) there is much to learn about how serious domestic abuse develops, how a couple can begin to normalise behaviour, or a man will, a lot of rich data that could give society more of an insight into how it always seems to develop so that one person, the woman and children in most cases are controlled.

I don’t know, but I am guessing that many women within DV situations do feel like they are losing their minds at some point, do sometimes lose it themselves. Sometimes maybe even feeling, did I deserve being punched because I screamed at him?

Our relationships are complex. But many women in DV cases are accused by their partners of being the abuser/parent alienation etc, there is a lot of gas lighting. So it is quite serious to without evidence, imply that women are just making up a lot of DV or not really the victim, it’s just as likely the man, as in the courts out there they are having a difficult enough time as it is being believed.

One of the few protections is that the evidence does not point to women on the whole being the ones who inflict serious, sustained, escalating violence. It is one way that sometimes, women are believed and we are only just getting sensitive DV services within the police force etc. Which echoes our society, in that almost all violence is perpetrated by men. And that is not to say all men are violent. Plenty of men are on the receiving end of male violence.

I don't think it's straightforward. If a housecat and a lion try to kill somebody they will likely have very different outcomes. Who is more violent out of the housecat who attacks 50 people and the lion who kills one?

Just to check I understand your analogy because I want to make sure before replying!

Is the lion the man and the housecat the woman?

Or the other way around?

NumberTheory
I'm not pushing any agenda and what 'straw-man argument' are you referring too?
My original post was a response to a post already on the thread - there is no need to start a new thread.

NCBlossom
Why is it lazy to pose a question when several other people have done just that on this thread? And i did look it up, that's why I posted the link. And where exactly did I berate you? And why start a new thread when there is no need to.

NiceGerbil
There are lots of people in conversation here - nearly 90 posts. And why not post here, since its on a subject matter that I have had 20+ years experience of dealing with.

But if my thoughts, experiences and opinions are upsetting people on here too much and you don't want to engage further I will leave and post no more.

@KayKayWat

I don't think it's straightforward. If a housecat and a lion try to kill somebody they will likely have very different outcomes. Who is more violent out of the housecat who attacks 50 people and the lion who kills one?

I don’t think that’s a useful analogy. If the house cat wanted to kill it would go after mice. A house cat that attacks a lion is not trying to kill.

Hello! I'm not upset. Are you?

I don't recall telling you not to post if any posts came across that way, please accept my apologies.

Have had a quick look back and I think that this bit contains the question you asked?

I will add my thoughts again to avoid anyone having to scroll.

I essentially said. The claim in OPs link was that the SEVERITY of the violence was the same with DV with men and women. And I said. Bottom line if true where are the bodies of men killed by women in DV scenarios.

Something like that.

The (I think?) pertinent part of your response was-

'Yes, the percentage of DV violence against females by males is significantly higher.'

* Is it? Any violence at all? Got stats? Interested. What about under reporting etc by men?

'But it does happen the other way around and to dismiss it is not right.'

* Yessss... Good job that these days hardly anyone does.

'You keep saying 'where are the bodies' - DV cases can manifest in so many different ways - controlling & coercive behaviour can impact on a persons life to a massive degree - both male and female as victims.'

* Yep. BUT. I was talking about the SEVERITY of violence being the same both ways. So. Where are the bodies? Being killed due to DV is a pretty basic indicator of severity. Obviously.

'The 'bodies' - you could argue that the percentage of male suicide is significantly higher than female suicide. How many of those have been cause by DV issues?'

* Well you could argue that but unless you can back it up then it's just... Random. And in the context of whether severity of violence in DV male/ female is equal or not... And referencing the women murdered by men in DV circs Vs the other way round...

Chucking in an... Idea? With no supporting studies etc anything. In response to those dead women. Suggesting that well maybe MAYBE a proportion of male suicides are due to women in their lives. With a further implication that could... Balance it out....

That's a bit... Well it's interesting that's for sure.

Sorry xpost mine to Felix.

And also yes it's a shite analogy.

I guess the point I'm making is that the woman who lashes out in fury is no better than the man who does the same. It's just that the man has a vastly higher chance of killing his partner, which is probably why a small proportion of the cases end in death.

Looking at the statistics it seems that women are just as likely if not more likely to hit their partners than men and my anecdotal experience certainly supports this and the fact that it's still perfectly socially acceptable in films for the female to belt a man around the face - particularly in romcoms which are 99% watched by women.

If you try and shoot somebody but the gun's not loaded you still tried to shoot them. Of course the end result does matter in terms of the impact on lives etc but the individual is not absolved of guilt IMO if the gun was empty or they just happened to be too weak to kill the person they punched with all their might.

@KayKayWat

I guess the point I'm making is that the woman who lashes out in fury is no better than the man who does the same. It's just that the man has a vastly higher chance of killing his partner, which is probably why a small proportion of the cases end in death.

Looking at the statistics it seems that women are just as likely if not more likely to hit their partners than men and my anecdotal experience certainly supports this and the fact that it's still perfectly socially acceptable in films for the female to belt a man around the face - particularly in romcoms which are 99% watched by women.

If you try and shoot somebody but the gun's not loaded you still tried to shoot them. Of course the end result does matter in terms of the impact on lives etc but the individual is not absolved of guilt IMO if the gun was empty or they just happened to be too weak to kill the person they punched with all their might.

It’s not just whether someone kills someone. It’s the impact of the violence - both physical and psychological. It’s much less likely that a man would be genuinely frightened of his female partner - plenty of women flee violence with nowhere to go and they are terrified of their exes. This would be very unusual for a man (and it’s not due to stigma because the research shows that men actually aren’t hesitant to report women to the police - in fact they are more likely to do so than for a woman to report a male partner). The power dynamics tend to be very different too. Men have more physical power but also social and financial power.

Honestly the argument about women slapping men and making out that it’s all equal is like someone saying that because children lash out sometimes that child on parent violence is as bad as parent on child. It’s not the physical act in isolation, it’s the surrounding dynamics and context. If you knew anything about DA, you’d understand that.

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. Again... what has this to do with a thread started to discuss specific and biased data being disseminated?

Why, when discussing anything even vaguely feminist, are women held to such high account? So many posters come and say "Hey! Women! Whilst you are discussing that specific thing don't forget to mention, discuss, acknowledde every other facet, datum and topic. If you don't We will come and tell you you are 'damaging the cause' and generally Nasty Wimmins"?

@KayKayWat NOBODY has said that women cannot be violent or are not as capable of DV as anyone else. Film tropes are discussed her often too. Just not on this thread as they have bugger all to do with th OP!

It's just that the man has a vastly higher chance of killing his partner, which is probably why a small proportion of the cases end in death.

Just!?!? JUST!?!?! THAT is the fuckwittery I was discussing earlier. Men live with their strength. On a daily basis they use it. It is their norm. So fuck off telling me and any other woman that it is an 'accident of strength' that mkes it more likely that a man will kill his partner than a woman would.

Your gun analogy sucks too. Remember - Guns don't kill people, Rappers do!

Basically, no matter how well intentioned or well thought out you logic stream is you are forgetting one thing... actual fact!

Even our government has said out loud that femicide is now pandemic in the UK; UN reports state the same globally.

UN Data - 137 women across the world are killed every day by a partner or member of their own family – a total of 50,000 women a year murdered by people they know and should be able to trust

Now, I don't pretend or ignore the number of men killed each and every year - the same UNDOC puts the number at about 450,000. But those deaths are all people, all causes. and 90% of the perpetrators are men.

Women killed by partners, people they should be able to trust form a high percentage of all murders globally, between 10 and 20% annually.

If women wish to discus that as a standalone fact then they will. And sod all the whataboutery.

www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/global-study-on-homicide.html

Just in case anyone wished to quibble

@HoardingSamphireSaurus

www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/global-study-on-homicide.html

Just in case anyone wished to quibble

I don't think anybody is questioning that men aren't 80% of victims. But also a similar proportion of perpetrators. As a group they are impacted much more than us but oddly don't seem as bothered. I do wonder if this is down to the almost non existent focus on male victims.

Wonder all you like. But not here, a space where when focus on women. That being the point if feminism and the FWR fora.

Not saying feminism dismisses all things male, just that it doesn't centre them.

Which was the point if the OP and if my posts asking you to have a rethink about what it is you are actually asking posters to do.

Wonder all you like. But not here, a space where when focus on women. That being the point if feminism and the FWR fora.

Last time I checked you weren't a moderator/have the authority to police other people's posts. You can't really create a thread about male violence and then expect people not to mention men.

FWIW, I think a large factor in why people disregard VAWG is because VAMB is a much bigger issue and yet largely ignored. It's like expecting people to prioritise racism against white people whilst racism against POC is still largely unresolved.

Oh please. Could you just listen to what is being said and apply some critical thinking?

Engage with what I said rather than choosing to lay down your Thread Police card.

Ok, you say: 'fuck off telling me and any other woman that it is an 'accident of strength' that mkes it more likely that a man will kill his partner than a woman would.'

However, the previous poster quoted below seems to disagree with you too.

'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'.

I don't think it's inconceivable that a man who punches a woman in fury might kill her - it certainly happens a lot to other men. In fact, it's a pretty logical conclusion IMO given that women are more likely to hit their partners than men are, but still fewer men die.

I'm finding some responses to the idea that with dv the SEVERITY of violence is as bad male on female or vice versa a bit unusual.

Eg.

Men kill women more than vice versa because they don't know their own strength.

That as men are bigger and stronger yes they are more likely to kill if they attack violently.
However women can be and are violent as well and that is very very important.
Given that, the fact men cause more damage is kind of by the bye. A natural consequence.
I think that's what's being said.

And I'd really like to have the lion/ cat analogy explained in more detail because for me it's not self explanatory. And I'd be interested in understanding the point it is trying to explain.

I don't want to get hung up on what was a passing analogy. I think a better explanation is the one I said after. That a woman losing her temper and hitting a man as hard as she can isn't morally better than a man doing the same. Obviously if the man is calm and collected and does so knowing he may kill the woman then this is different.