I am shocked by so many tales of nasty, controlling, bullying men on here...

[snowleopard]

I know it is very common. I know domestic abuse goes on in many poeple's lives and people often don't realise. But what makes men like this? We hear a lot about how women can grow up with low self-esteem and ending up in abusive relationships... but that couldn't happen if there weren't so many men out there who are prepared to hit, belittle, control and abuse.

I would really like to know what makes men like this in the first place. It's a great truism that domestic abusers can come from any background, social group and walk of life - so what do they have in common? Is there a feature of their upbringing that made them this way - or is it something we can atrribute more to society in general?

Is anyone studying this or does anyone know anything about it or have any ideas? I'm interested in discussing it, but also I have a son - how can we make sure we aren't raising these abusers?

HD - I don't think all men are violent, far from it.

But some men are. What are we doing about it? I really mind about this - women do have responsibility for defending themselves, they DO. There isn't a Father Christmas.

HappyDaddy, thanks for your remarks. I was the first person he told about it. Like men AND women he kept quiet about. She cut off contact with his son too, when he was just a boy.
He has a lot to be angry about. Lots of stuff beyond his control, like his Dad dying when he was 15. Like his violent ex. Like his 2nd divorce.

But his behaviour as an adult? That's NOT beyond his control. A lot of the times he would say I was abusing HIM. I knew differently though. For me, although my story sounds horribly like classic co-dependence, I thought if I could change then so could/should he. I lost my Mum at 17. My Dad threw me out when I was 19. I had a lot to be angry about too.

My DP and I are a classic case of two damaged people spotting and being attracted to the damage in each other. We werent functional and had to do a lot of work to get anywhere near it. We're still working hard, but I chose to have a child with him because I see his children and they are lovely. We live seperately which is my choice because he has a bit to go to really prove he has changed. So far it has been ten months.

A responsibility for defending ourselves, or a responsibility to create a more 'harmonious home environment?' Isn't that what you think women with violent partners should do?

krang - read what I wrote. I have never condoned violence, not once.

You can work positively to create harmony in relationships. Read what LisaLisa and BearMama have done. That is the very best form of self-defence.

i dont think any woman should be repsonsible for defending themselves.

men should be responsible for CONTROLING themselves.
if they dont then they should be charged with assault and given a pretty hefty jail term.

at the moment a man is taken from hsi home after abusing his wife. she is too scared to press charges so he comes home within a couple of hours.

even if it does get to court he is given a £200 fine and alloed back to abuse again.
even if not with teh same partner, his next.

mamazon - I don't mean physical self-defence when a man is laying into you.

I mean defending yourself from getting into situations where violence erupts. Knowing how to take care of yourself so that only good things happen.

You may not wish to be responsible for that -it would be lovely to be able to walk the planet in safety with never a care - but I think it's naïve to think that will ever be the case.

BearMama, I sympathise I really do.

I too had a lot to be angry about. My dad died when I was 6. My ex was a bully and when we split up messed around with my access to our daughter as often as she could.

DW pretty much forced me to open up and start talking as she could see how much bottling it all up was hurting me. DW helped keep me sane.

but i have given countless accounts of times where i couldn't have done anything to prevent getting hit?

his violance was irrational.

yes of course when out in teh street youdont go up to a drunk man shouting and tell him to shut up, obviously that is placing yourself at risk. but most violance against women happens in teh home.

and only long term socialogical changes to the way we deal with abusive men/women will change that.

whilst there are still people who walk around saying that women provoke a mans anger, or that they are some how responsible for the violance against them then the perpetrators of this violance will continue to think they are right to do so, that theyhave support.

it is less to do with the civilising effect women can have on men and more to do with endemic attitudes in society

there are still men ( in the police force and in the judiciary no doubt) who still feel that women drinking, wearing short skirts, and being provocative contribute to their own assualt/ rape by how they are dressed

there are still men who think it is ok to hit a woman becasue she annoyed him, he was drunk/ stoned/ high , he was tired etc

this is going to take generations to change, and you are preaching to the converted here. the people who most likely need to read these stories and change their behaviour are the least likely to be on mumsnet debating things.

x post with mamazon

You wrote:

"so men who are physically violent towards women always do it for reasons that are entirely savage and unprovoked? There is never anything in women's power to make their homes more harmonious places?"

and

do you think that women also have a duty not to provoke men to a point where their self-control is undermined?

and

don't you think that that kind of upbringing is teaching girls that it is OK to provoke men, and creating in a boy a feedback system in the brain to react to that teasing?

Now you're turning your rather weak argument that women into an impassioned plea for female solidarity which I don't buy for a minute. Oh, and phrasing your opinions as questions? Classic troll behaviour, and sneaky too, though I've no doubt it makes for a nice harmonious household.

Anyway, must be off, got to warm husband's pipe and slippers.

What should have the two women who are killed every week in this country by their violent partners done to create harmony in their home Anna? You also never answered my question about how my mum could have created harmony in the situation where my dad waited in the dark to attack her.

What we can do about male violence towards women is do what we are doing here, to offer no excuses for violent bullies and to make it very clear that it is never the woman's fault. In other words we can stop blaming women for male crimes.

On the a wider level we can donate or volunteer to domestic violence charties like Women's Aid and we can lobby our MPs for domestic violence to be taken seriously in the courts. At the moment far too many abusers get away with it.

But you know if you think your "harmony in the home" approach is going to work better then I'm all ears. You haven't given any specific examples though, but I'm sure if you give your analysis on what my mum for example could have done differently we'll begin to get a clearer picture.

great post by Krang and quite right - what started out as frankly quite strident opinions for such a cutiepie are now simply pleas for women to link hands and sing in harmony

I think we've also moved away from the original question which was what makes men (and women) violent, and particularly what makes them violent in intimate relationships.

Anna your question about what women can do to civilise men - well, expect them to be civilised, for a start, and put the ball in their court. We are not responsible for how men act and we should refuse to take responsibility for anyone's actions but our own.

I find it quite interesting that you think men have a lower "violence threshhold" than woman. Is that in the workplace? Are men constantly beating up their colleagues? Should we make sure we don't challenge them in the boardroom in case they punch us? Is it with their children? Should we not trust fathers alone with their children, in case the kids irritate them, what with their threshold being so low and all? Better make sure we don't award them custody then, eh? Or is it just in their sexual relationships that you think this mysterious lower violence threshold comes into play?

The quotes Krang has selecte show quite clearly your view Anna, that men aren't fully responsible for their actions. Women are responsible for challenging and directing men's actions.

Which frankly is deeply insulting to men. You sound like you have a really, really low opinion of them. Much lower than those of us who expect them to be equal to us.

Sorry that should say channelling their actions, not challenging

Anna, you show through your posts that you have had the very best of examples of adult males. Men are quicker to resort to physical violence, but the majority still won't. It is possible to deflect physical violence from ordinary adult men.

Men who are abusive revel in gentle pleas for peace and love. It means that their behavior is making an impact. That's why they do it.

If you start to change your behavior to avoid the domestic violence, eventually you will be a cleaning, fucking, non-eye-contact-making, silent except when spoken to, whore in the bedroom and full hijab outside automaton.

Furthermore, you would probably have the occasional welching anyway, to keep you on your toes.

Men who are abusive do not abuse to get a specific behavior, they do it because they like their partner to be frightened of them. They won't stop until they see the fear.

Anna - it blatantly obvious that you have never been in a violent relationship.

You have no idea.

Elizabetth - you seem intent on picking small parts of whole posts of mine and taking them quite a way out of context.

I dont think "provocation" is an excuse for DV in itself. I've said that.

I've also said that there are many factors towards DV occuring (not suggesting any of it is the victim's fault either).

I'm giving my opinion on a subject (which I am perfectly entitled to do, without needing to provide details of my 'qualifications' as to my experience on the subject) and you seem to want to pick holes in it, when essentially, I am agreeing with you and lots of others on this thread.

What exactly is your problem?

Yvaine, I'm not asking you for your qualifications or experience, I'm asking what facts you base your opinions on.

One of the issues around domestic violence is the number of myths that are promulgated about it - that men can't help it because they are full of testosterone, that women's provocation of men is part of the problem, etc. These myths help take away violent men's responsibility and help maintain the status quo. That is the problem I've had with what you've said.

The point about domestic violence is that it is a choice. The men who do it choose to behave that way - quite a simple analysis but one that most people find hard to accept. It's got nothing to do with testosterone, provocation or whatever. And if they are choosing to do it, they can also choose not to do it. Social pressure is one of the ways we can try to get them to make the right choice. Making excuses for them that somehow they just can't help themselves will help them continue with their current behaviour.

This issue of so much DV starting either during pregnancy or within a year of the birth of a first child - this is not an indication of hormones, stress, etc., it's an indication of the shifting of power in a relationship which happens with the arrival of a baby.

We live in a society which penalises women extremely heavily for having babies. Having a baby with a man is a leap of faith and psychologically women feel much more dependent on the man they're with when they're either carrying or nursing their child. At an instinctive level, abusers realise this and that's why, at the most emotionally vulnerable time of her life, at a time when she feels most psychologically and emotionally unable to leave, he chooses to land the first punch. It is not a co-incidence. I'm not saying it's a thought-out, cyncial plan, but I do think it's a gut instinct.

I think Anna has lived in France too long - they take a very different view of the crime passionel. Read this for an interesting insight.

I'm not, and never have, made excuses for people who commit DV (its women as well as men, if we want to be completely accurate).

I was just postulating on the physiological differences of men and women, as mentioned by harpsichordcarrier.

I have not, please do feel free to correct me if I am wrong though, perpetuated any myths here.

Please, go get self-righteous on someone else. Preferably someone who is disagreeing with you.