Domestic abuse- male victims & statistics

[MrsGhastlyCrumb]

So: I was at a class this evening where we were informed that about 20% of police call-outs for DA involve male victims.

Now, I do recognise that there are male victims, which is of course awful, but this seems high to me. I have certainly encountered and heard of male abusers calling in counter claims against their female partners in order to cover themselves. Is it possible that this is more widespread than I realised, therefore accounting for a large proportion of the numbers we were quoted, or is it genuinely that high, do you think?

TIA for your thoughts.

Why would it sit badly with you?

Some women are terrible people. That in no way diminishes violence by men against women.

It sat badly with her because she knows of an abusive man who made a false statement and she thought this could be men successfully abusing a women through the police. It was a group for women with trauma and if I'm reading it right one of those women will have been on the receiving end of this kind of control, so this info at this time could rub it in her face a bit.
There are times when this info would be useful, maybe this wasn't one of them.

@TokidokiBarbie I'll be honest - I've not had time to go back to source on each of those surveys (and I would want to do so) but I would make a few points based on experience of editing in Wikipedia and a couple of the pieces I recognise:

• clear explanation of methodology is critical. Mens rights groups have repeatedly promoted "research" which defines assault differently for men and women. The most infamous example was combining research which excluded sexual assault on women (so if a woman was assaulted as part of a rape that was excluded but if the same woman hit back, that was counted as assault on the man).

• Dates matter - even now, "domestics" and sexual assault are significantly under reported by women because in many countries they are still not taken seriously and there is a lack of trust in law enforcement and their reputation will be damaged. Throughout the 90s it was still commonplace for victims to be treated as the problem and dismissed. Even attempting to take sexual violence and domestic violence seriously is a recent phenomenon even in countries who claim to be advanced in women's rights.

• The pool and number of victims can skew the results, if you focus on a pool where its known there will be a higher percentage male victims (eg in the sex industry or prison populations). Researchers need to state the pool they draw from.

On wikipedia in particular always look at the edit history on contentious subjects. Wikipedia has a massive problem with male domination of editing, even on quite innocuous subjects such as women's achievements in history and science (being removed by random dudes downgrading the achievement for no specified reason). There are edits on that page deliberately removing the contributions of women and some of those names have form for this.

There is no doubt that domestic violence is committed by women but the suggestion that its anything like in equal numbers or with equal impact flies in the face of a great deal of research and experience from service providers. Domestic violence against men is also generally reported as disproportionately committed by men (allowing for the smaller pool that is same sex relationships).

Go back to source in every case, including the numbers and methodology in every case rather than relying on the summaries and spin from authors who are free to write anything they like and drown out women's voices.

My DP was abused regularly (a couple of times a month) - punched in the head, kicked etc. - by his now ExW; for over 10 years.
When he finally left:

• and told his mum, she said she didn't want to take sides
• and told a couple of friends, one brushed it off saying different things happen in relationships
• his daughter rages at him for splitting up despite knowing about it and even seeing an instance of it two years after he left (yes, it happened again...)

There is significant societal conditioning that tells me they should never hit women, even in self-defence.
Add in the general social stigma around a man being beaten by a woman and I can see how this would happen.

I think a lot of women also don't see their behaviour as abuse.
I one had a conversation with a friend on a similar subject. He told me that his girlfriend had punched him on two occasions, due to fairly menial frustrations (think along the lines of her not feeling he was putting in enough effort in picking a holiday destination) over the course of their years long relationship .

He wasn't hurt or injured and he didn't do anything other than make it clear that her behaviour wasn't acceptable on both occasions.

I don't think she would call it domestic violence, but I also couldn't imagine her doing the same to an unfamiliar man of similar size and stature who she couldn't be sure wouldn't hit back (said friend is big and athletic and his girlfriend is quite possibly half his weight).
It's violence that could only occur in the context of their relationship

As for the abuse being within same-sex couples, with male-male couples, you would expect this to be offset by abuse within female-female couples. All the stars I have seen have suggested that women in same-sex relationships experience more DV than men in same-sex relationships, so draw from that what you will.

April 2009 - March 2020, Data collected by Karen Ingala Smith

In the 11 years from April 2009 to March 2020, 1,027 people were killed by a current or former partner, defined by the ONS as when the relationship between the victim and the perpetrator falls into one of the following categories: spouse, common-law spouse, cohabiting partner, boyfriend or girlfriend, ex-spouse, ex-cohabiting partner or ex-boyfriend or girlfriend or adulterous relationship.
890 (86.7%) of the victims were female, 137 (13.3%) were male. So, for every 2 men killed, there were thirteen women.

But there are differences in who is doing the killing too. Of 137 male victims, 109 were killed by women. Of 890 female victims, 884 (99%) were killed by men. There were 912 men who killed a current or former partner and 115 women. So, one in five men (20.4%) killed by a current or former partner were killed by a man; for women, approximately one in 147 women killed by a current or former partner were killed by a woman.

Men who are killed by a current or former partner are 29 times more likely to be killed by someone of the same sex than women are.
There is a further important difference too, but this can’t be found in the ONS data. When the Femicide Census published our 10-year report on women killed by men in the UK between 2009 and 2018, we found evidence in 59% of cases that the man who killed them had been violent and/or abusive to them in the past. We think this is highly likely to be an undercount since it is not unusual for women to tell no-one that they are being abused, and also in many cases, this might not have been reported in publicly available information even if someone did know about it. The Centre for Women’s Justice looked at women who have killed current or former male partners. They found a very different picture, that in 77% of cases, it was the man who had been killed who had been abusing the woman who killed him.

www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/articles/domesticabusevictimcharacteristicsenglandandwales/yearendingmarch2020#sex

'For the year ending March 2020, the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) estimated that 1.6 million women and 757,000 men aged 16 to 741 years experienced domestic abuse in the last year'

...

'Data from the Home Office Homicide Index for the year ending March 2017 to the year ending March 2019 show that over three-quarters of victims of domestic homicide were female (77% or 274 victims).'

Yeah, you defo have to look where the info is coming from. However, in these cases a lot of it is from government studies and large independent organisations rather than men's groups.

I remember posters being very resistant to the data when it was first posted in another thread. One poster was going on about how it was using small sample sizes and wasn't big enough to draw any conclusions. When the OP pointed out the study that involved over 2000 couples, the one that involved 32 countries, and the meta study, plus a few others, the same poster then said it wasnt relevant as it wasn't in the UK. OP then pointed out the UK study and the international one. The poster then moved to saying they weren't recent enough. Nothing was going to be good enough for her and a fair few others it seemed.

I'm somewhere in the middle. I still believe male violence is a bigger problem as many of the studies showing gender symmetry still mention that men are much more likely to cause serious injury. However, I believe women are also a lot more violent than is generally recognised/accepted and that there are a lot of women who seem intent on playing it down and pushing a somewhat toxic agenda unfortunately.

Using figures from service providers is unlikely to be accurate in the slightest because men are much less likely to report (many studies have found this) and because there are also vanishingly small numbers of services available to men in the first place - I remember the documentary where a battered guy was basically told there was no service available in his area to help him and that was pretty much that.

When I mention that men are found in studies to under-report, I'm talking about the fairly recent finding whereby greater numbers of assaults on men are unearthed by asking women if they've ever hit their partner as opposed to asking men if they've ever been a victim - basically, hardly any men freely admit they've been a victim but quite a lot of women admit to assaulting their partner. I think it's misplaced male pride that makes men not want to look 'weak'. In general we're not attracted to wet lettuces so this likely becomes a male insecurity.

clear explanation of methodology is critical. Mens rights groups have repeatedly promoted "research" which defines assault differently for men and women. The most infamous example was combining research which excluded sexual assault on women (so if a woman was assaulted as part of a rape that was excluded but if the same woman hit back, that was counted as assault on the man).

I agree MRAs tend to be pushing a clear agenda. Certain types of feminists also do the same by only focusing on domestic homicides because they know men constitute 80% of normal homicides and are really the ones who should feel unsafe walking alone at night (women are actually much safer out the house than at home with their partner/spouse when you look at the statistics).

I've never understood the usual argument about 'oh, well it's men doing the killing' to be honest. I don't think you can only look at sex when analysing these things. A gay man being beaten up by a homophobic thug likely shares very little in common with his attacker despite being the same sex. Same with a black man facing a racist attack.

Biological sex is only part of the story and I don't think you can, for instance, say all men are implicit in things like radical Islamic violence just because of their sex. Middle class white guys aren't the ones killing people in the name of Allah, and those involved in Islamic terrorism probably aren't following people like Tommy Robinson/Britain First/BNP etc.

This is terrible. Why isn't there a male MP who reads out the names of all the many men killed by intimate partner violence in the past year? We need to know how many women are strangling and beating their partners to death.

Thank you for that @TokidokiBarbie

“All the stars I have seen have suggested that women in same-sex relationships experience more DV than men in same-sex relationships, so draw from that what you will.”

I recall reading a very in depth article that showed that these figures were largely from former relationships with men, but ambiguous wording was used to vilify lesbians (which isn’t exactly a new thing).

I can’t find the article again, and googling shows up nothing, so it’s possible that this info was false, but it was plausible. I wonder if anyone else remembers this?

Certain types of feminists also do the same by only focusing on domestic homicides because they know men constitute 80% of normal homicides and are really the ones who should feel unsafe walking alone at night

Yeah feminism is about female oppression. It's okay that feminists identify where females need protecting, they are not all about victims in general, they don't have to be, they are all about danger to females.

MRAs are welcome to look into murder in general and identify how men specifically could be better protected from being murdered (mostly by other men), but that is not the job of feminists.

Males already have the most power, finances and influence to sort their own problems out. That's kind of why feminism has to exist, because without it no one would be doing this for women either.

When there is an MRA who cares enough to collate the list then an MP probably would be I'm sure on International Mens day.
Women do this for women. Counting Dead Women is the hard work of two remarkable women and Womens Aid.

You’ll have to forgive me, but I’ve just spent the last 24 hours or so consoling a good friend whose childhood best friend has just been murdered by her husband, leaving her 4 children behind.

I really can’t be doing with raising false equivalences, playing internet debating games for points, or any of that.

This is real tragedy, with real names and real faces attached. I mean yes of course men suffer from intimate partner violence, but just simply aren’t being slain in anything like the sorts of numbers men are.

As a man myself if I was unlucky enough to have to survive domestic violence I wouldn’t want my statistical contribution to be used in ANY way to obsfucate, derail or otherwise take away from the tackling the greater problem of the staggering number of women killed.

Fuck I feel wretched, powerless and really fucking angry with it all. Sorry.

@TokidokiBarbie Yeah, you defo have to look where the info is coming from. However, in these cases a lot of it is from government studies and large independent organisations rather than men's groups

And? Governments and large organisations being reliably egalitarian? Not in my experience of institutional sexism and racism. You still need to look closely at the raw data, the methodology and how they have interpreted the results, not give a free pass because "big org".

've never understood the usual argument about 'oh, well it's men doing the killing' to be honest. I don't think you can only look at sex when analysing these things. A gay man being beaten up by a homophobic thug likely shares very little in common with his attacker despite being the same sex. Same with a black man facing a racist attack

Biological sex is only part of the story and I don't think you can, for instance, say all men are implicit in things like radical Islamic violence just because of their sex. Middle class white guys aren't the ones killing people in the name of Allah, and those involved in Islamic terrorism probably aren't following people like Tommy Robinson/Britain First/BNP etc

Really? This reads like excuse making for men. In each case you are talking about an example male violence, trying to pretend that the perpetrators' sex is just a coincidence is stretching it frankly.

Because the epidemic of teenage boys being stabbed to death is a much bigger problem.

I'm pretty sure some of the studies listed in the wiki page I linked found that lebidan relationships were most violent and gay make the least. I may be mistaken but I'm pretty sure I saw that while skimming.

Who said it was a coincidence? Please don't start doing that mumsnet feminist thing of putting words into people's mouths because they disagree with you.

I'm just saying that more nuance is needed and often gets lost when feminists start using it as a tool to moan about men in general. Saying that all men are responsible as part of the wider group means that the focus gets taken away from the Muslim community, for example, in cases of Islamic terrorism and instead you find a white middle class accountant from the Cotswolds is somehow expected to be able to help. Same with black on black teenage gang murders in inner city areas.

Worst thing is that I often feel like some feminists are only really doing it to be able to moan about men, in a similar way to how lots of the woke teens don't really do much to help anybody outside of policing twitter posts and whinging. It's a double whammy in that it also takes the focus away from the root area which needs looked at.

Obv there are individuals who really do want to help but I don't feel like they're the majority.

Dervel, I'm so sorry for your friend. That is so utterly tragic.

As for feminists 'whinging' about domestic violence - JFC.

@Dervel 💐

I'm just saying that more nuance is needed and often gets lost when feminists start using it as a tool to moan about men in general. Saying that all men are responsible as part of the wider group means that the focus gets taken away from the Muslim community, for example, in cases of Islamic terrorism and instead you find a white middle class accountant from the Cotswolds is somehow expected to be able to help. Same with black on black teenage gang murders in inner city areas

I see you.

Oh and every single example you have given is male violence, however you want to dress it up.

I said whinging about men. Please at least quote me accurately. And let's not pretend that some don't make it an almost full time occupation.

I'd like to see an end to male violence as much as any woman but I've pretty much accepted that men are just more violent as a biological group and the best thing we can do is focus on the individual cases. Maybe look at things like how they got radicalised rather than just repeating the same stats everybody already knows about them being more violent because they're men (I mean, no shit sherlock).

I just think a lot of feminism isn't fit for purpose nowadays tbh, and when people start taking potshots about how I should be grateful for being able to vote etc....well, I am grateful but those feminists died decades ago.

I just find too many nowadays are blinkered by ideology in a way that inhibits logical thinking. Like the thread where loads of data was posted about testosterone making men more violent. One poster just wouldn't accept it and kept saying it 'wasn't proof' despite the studies citing 'a clear link between testosterone and aggression'. I'm fairly sure the reason so many feminists deny this basic truth seen in so many mammals is because it becomes harder to criticise men for factors that are at least partly innate. And they absolutely couldn't not criticise men, could they.

At risk of having a rant, I also find a lot of them to be so fucking pompous. In the same way some woke people are, or with the self importance of the trans lobby. Decades of people acquiescing to them out of political correctness has led to the latest generations putting on the feminist hat and assuming a demeanour of pomposity without ever having actually contributed to the events that earned the rep in the first place. Give me egalitarianism any day of the week.

I'm a man, my wife used to hit me.

She is the only female of her generation in her extended family and youngest too. When the boys in her generation became teenagers, they got her to punch them in the stomach as hard as she could to show how tough they were. When we got together, it was her first real relationship.

After we had lived together she started to punch me at infrequent intervals. She assumed it didn't hurt based on her experience with her extended family when she was a child. It's true, I didn't ever suffer lasting physical damage - the pain left quickly. Can't say it ever felt good or that I could relax in my home when I didn't know if she was coming to punch me or just hug me -- even though I didn't suffer any lasting damage ever or feared that I would.

On the day I finally pointed out she was physically abusing me she stopped and never did it again. She didn't accept that was what she was doing at first, but eventually agreed.

My 'suffering' was as mild as can be, utterly trivial in comparison to almost every other victim. It was most of a couple of decades ago, I've not forgotten those times - being randomly punched by someone who professes love and admiration is hard to forget. Until now, I have never told another soul - who could I, that would not laugh at me. She did tell her brothers, they did laugh at me.

I say this - not to request sympathy, I need none, but to say that when men are abused - even when the physical harm is a minimal as can be, it does not mean there is no mental harm and that I suspect it is a lot more widespread since it is almost never taken seriously.

By all means flame me for saying anything about my own experience when women clearly suffer so much more. The thread is titled: "Domestic abuse- male victims & statistics", so thought I could offer my own experience.

Findwen, I'm sorry to hear about your history. If it's not intrusive, can I ask why was she punching you - in anger?