If you hit your OH then YES you are as much an abuser as he would be if he hit you.

[QueenGigantaurofMnet]

I have just seen someone on another forum discussing how she couldn't possibly have been an abuser. she has only hit her husband twice (although the second time she hit him twice as she enjoyed the fear and shock in his face) in the 15 years of their marriage.

the rest of the forumn are telling her that it was ok. they are both "headstrong"

other are saying things like "i wish i could hit my oh"

It makes me feel sick.

Violance on a relationship is wrong. It is called Domestic violance, not man hitting wife violance.

if you have hit your partner then you ARE an abuser and you SHOULD be looking at ways to deal with your anger.

Im sorry but i am actually quite angry about this

"It shouldn't be the abused justifying their actions, but the abuser. Most abusers would rub their hands in glee reading this thread, they really would."

most abusers dont consider themselves abusers precisely because they feel justified in their actions.

That'll be me then

well i wasn't actually thinking of you when i posted it but you do admit to feeling justified in you actions.

Well, that's where the need for judgement of an individual case would come in then, don't you think?
Legal judges have to assess the individual circumstances of each case, and there are cases where the abused murderer has been given a suspended sentence for murdering the perpertrator victim (iyswim!).
Luckily, (for Little Mo especially) the law has moved on a bit from applying the absolute principle you seek to advocate to this sort of complicated case.

Haven't read the whole thread. But still wanted to give my two pennorths worth.

I'm a Womens Aid worker, which doesn't make my opinion any more valid than anyone elses, just wanted to say that.....

It isn't the same. I'm sorry, but it isn't. And I'll tell you why:

a) Men are almost always physically stronger than women and therefore more able to defend themselves.

b) Society does not tacitly condone female violence. Indeed, women are far more likely to be sent down for a first violent offence than a man.

c) When women abuse, it is far more likely to be in response to having been abused themselves. An example: when you look into the cases of women who have killed their male partners: in 50% of those cases there is a history of abuse against the woman. In more of those cases there is likely to be a history of emotional abuse. The woman can't take any more and lashes out.

I AM NOT SAYING IT IS OK FOR WOMEN TO ABUSE MEN. But I am saying the power dynamics are drastically different.

You have to look at the social context. When men and women are equal, we will be able to look at abuse equally.

Thank you for posting so eloquently what seems bleeding obvious to me MakeYer!

Why has it taken so long to have someone make the points you do so effectively?!

I'm tempted to repost your post enough times to kill this damned thread.

Good points makeyerowndinner! I might change my name to massageyerownlegs

go for it misshelltoe, knock yourself out.

"a) Men are almost always physically stronger than women and therefore more able to defend themselves."

not sure why this makes it less wrong for a woman to hit a man. physically stronger does not automatically mean the man will fight back or defend himself does it?

"c) When women abuse, it is far more likely to be in response to having been abused themselves. An example: when you look into the cases of women who have killed their male partners: in 50% of those cases there is a history of abuse against the woman. In more of those cases there is likely to be a history of emotional abuse. The woman can't take any more and lashes out."

have you looked into the cases of men that have killed their partners and ascertained the percentage of previous abuse carried out on the men?

MakeYerOwnDamnDinner Mon 24-Jan-11 22:26:30

Now thank goodness for some sanity

*applauds MYODD for a sensible and non emotive response to the hysteria that this thread erupted into.

the best sentence in this whole damn thread

"
When men and women are equal, we will be able to look at abuse equally."

Boo // have you looked into the cases of men that have killed their partners and ascertained the percentage of previous abuse carried out on the men?

why so?

I wasn't going to post but then i thout why should i not give my opioin?

There should be no violence in any relationship.

Any violence should be taken seriours regardless of gender.

In this day and age no one needs to put up with being in a violent relationship.

There is equality already. I know women who are great fighters and men to weak to even stand.

If an abult has an anger issues they should get help as it is available if you ask for it.

It is not big or clever or funny to shrug off or accept that hurting another human being is acceptable in any form by any person.

I thout the above was common sence

it is common sense apart from teh bit about equality. there is definitely not equality.

I think there is more equality now than 50 years ago.

Women are in the army, in sport, in law and in the church.

We can vote, we can rase children on our own, we can have a job, own a house, fly a plain.

Where is there not equality?

Spikey - i see violence as an escalation to verbal aggression. he was shouting at you but you were in no physical harm. Which i think is what you would need to show if you were to use the reasoning of self defence. Unless you are under physical attack i cannot see why you would need to hit out. I understand that you were pushed to your breaking point, but i don't believe that such an action is correct.

i think that over the hundreds of posts on this thread it is clear that this is not an issue we are going to agree on. I don't think it is pertinant to continue to debate the specifics of your case.
I think the discussion will be far more beneficial if we stick to more general terms here on.

a) Men are almost always physically stronger than women and therefore more able to defend themselves.

• I am much much more physically strong than my DP. Does that mean it would be more socially accetable for him to slap me if i push his buttons?

Im sorry but whilst i appreciate that female to male violence may not cause the physical damage that male to female violence does, that does not make it any more or less unnaceptable.

b) Society does not tacitly condone female violence. Indeed, women are far more likely to be sent down for a first violent offence than a man.

That is because only the extreme cases of female violence reach court. If a man slaps a woman it is more likely to be reported to police than if a woman slaps a man.
Low level violence is ignored by society in general.
So whilst a man's first violent act will be reported and dealt with by caution or minor charge a womans wont even be on record until she seriously injures someone.

Because femal to male violence is viewed as a non event statistics will always be scewed by severe under reporting

"I think there is more equality now than 50 years ago."

no, we are just closer to equality (thank heavens) than we were 50 years ago. there is still along way to go.

PHYSICAL EQUALITY

and whilst women accept your statement
as equality
"Women are in the army, in sport, in law and in the church.

We can vote, we can rase children on our own, we can have a job, own a house, fly a plain.

Where is there not equality?"

that is in fact independence , totally different

"Where is there not equality?"

can the father of a newborn take 9 months paid leave out of his job to care for the baby so that his partner may resume her career?

I agree there is still a long way to go

Yes a think i man can take a career brake if his company can accomadte him.

Everyone comes in different sizes and it is not alway the man that is stronger than the woman.

The career brack is not law yet, so it depends on the job and company but i do not know anyone who has done this but i do know of two 19 year olds who have taken full responsibility of their DD's and have worked part time to take care of them.

The average number of violent incidents (and that is categorised as leaving a physical injury) that have taken place before a woman reports it is 12.
I think what most annoys me about this thread (apart from it's ridiculous bickeringlength) is the number of disingenuous arguments, like penelopetitsdropped's.

a career break is not what i asked. a career break is unpaid.

i asked if a father of a newborn can take 9 months paid leave. perhaps i should have said, is he entitled to 9 months of paid leave to care for his baby teh same way a woman who has a baby is legally entitled to 9 months paid maternity leave?

Sorry i miss read it

No as the woman gives birth her body needs at least 2 - 6 weeks recovery time, so it would not be 9 months.

I agree that men should be give that or at lest able to share the 9 months with their partner.

Are FFJ not campaine for that currently?

what is disengenuous about what i have said?

It is misleading to think that all violence is wrong?
some incidents can be understood, even sympathised with, but it is wrong none the less.