The male violence aspect is a hard one for women to bring up (especially in national newspapers!) without making themselves targets for abuse (which is a form of male violence, ironically).
I'm not familiar with the author's writings, so I don't know where she stands on the issue of male violence, but I suspect that even if it is something that she feels strongly about, she may have realized that she needed to keep her article as simple as possible in order to keep in watertight WRT to potential strawmen. And the strawmen builders have a field day when women dare mention male violence.
As I see it, the feminist position on male violence is that it is linked to male dominance.
We live in a male dominated society and this dominance is maintained through violence and the threat of violence (plus power structures, socialization, etc). For women to achieve equal status, they need to be liberated from male dominance and its bouncer; male violence. To my mind, they all go together; male violence is not a separate issue.
I think the above is straightforward and obvious. However it is a point that inevitably leads to cries of 'man hater'/extremist/nutter and wounded men saying that they would never hurt a fly and yet are being being to feel Unfairly Guilty And Terrible And Hurt by the very mention of the phenomenon of male violence.
I think the subject of male violence probably merits an entire article, in a similar vein, on its own.