I have to agree that it's fair to assume that the men is usually the initial perpetrator of violence. Simple statistics support that whether you like it or not.
I still fail to see how that would or should stop a man from reporting DV. Surely if a man is beaten, and doesn't retaliate, his abusing partner wouldn't have a leg to stand on.
If however, he beat her back, they're both in the wrong, as is the case in the OP, and both need to deal with their anger and violent tendencies.
No amount of verbal goading makes DV OK, no matter in which direction it does. Let me describe two scenarios to you. The gender of A and B is irrelevant in each case.
Scenario 1:
A launches a verbal tirade against B.
B gets angry and slaps A. A retreats from the situation and may either report B for assault or wait until the situation has calmed down and a rational discussion can be had.
Scenario 2:
A launches a verbal tirade against B.
B gets angry and slaps A. A then punches B in the head and puts them in hospital.
In scenario 1, B is the person at most fault. If B doesn't like the verbal abuse from A, they can rationally discuss with A how it makes them feel, and the couple can find a way to fix the situation or end the relationship if this a constant issue. Retaliating to verbal abuse with violence is never acceptable.
In scenario 2, A is utterly and completely most at fault. A has both initiated the verbal abuse and escalated the violence. While B shouldn't have slapped A, A certainly has no justifiable reason to hit back even harder.
But in both scenarios, neither party is blameless and the couple would do well to seek relationship therapy.
Why is this so difficult a concept for some of you to grasp?