Interesting comment from Women's Aid on latest ONS stats on domestic violence

[stumbledin]

" ... An estimated 1.6 million women have experienced domestic abuse in the year ending March 2020 with young women aged 16-24 years continuing to be the age group at most risk. The ONS only collects data on victims up to the age of 74, however domestic abuse affects all age groups, including older women.

The official prevalence data has important information missing. While the prevalence estimates show the sex of the victim, they do not show the sex of the perpetrators. The estimates do not tell who is experiencing abuse as part of pattern of coercive control, or who is experiencing repeated abuse. The estimates do not tell us who is harmed and how severe it was (physical or psychological). It is vital to describe context and impact. For instance, the perpetrator who encounters resistance to the abuse could be counted as a victim. We know from other research that once all this important information is included, the gendered nature of the crime becomes increasingly clear. ... "

www.womensaid.org.uk/womens-aid-responds-to-the-latest-ons-stats-on-domestic-abuse/

Well the point seemed to be quite valid and important but undermined by finishing it off by using the phrase "gendered nature".

If they are not recording sex who can they be getting accurate information, and also is they go down the gender identity route there will appear to be an "increase" in domestic violence by same sex partners.

So we are caught again between established but not very thought through procedures, meeting pressure from trans activists to record sex not gender.

And, cannot understand why anyone thought they should record stats for domestic violence for women over 74? ???????

What's wrong with gendered nature?

I thought it was clear that in this context, 'the gendered nature' of the crime means pertaining to males.

cannot understand why anyone thought they should record stats for domestic violence for women over 74? ???????

You mean cannot understand why they thought they shouldn't record those stats??

they are talking about the gendered nature of the crime not the gender identity of the perpetrator or victim.
This is appropriate use of the word, in my opinion. It's gender (the social expectations associated with a sex class) that is at the root of men's violence against women. There's nothing inherently violent on the Y chromosome. It's what our society teaches those with it that they can ans should do.

The sex of the perpetrator is important.
Theories about possible reasons follow from that.
It's clear what's meant, to those who have sense but that seems to be fewer and fewer people these days.

MyMajesty - you are of course right Ma'am!

Well we will have to agree to disagree about "gendered nature".

If you believe that women are oppressed as a sex class by men as a sex class, that started long before any "social constructs" and I think in the context of the crime they are recording totally the wrong word.

And how does that word work for those cases recorded of men experiencing domestic violence from a female partner?

Where there are people there are social constructs, it's what makes us human
some social constructs are better than others, is all
and yes, of course they should be recording the sex of the perpetrator- I can't really believe they don't

I'm actually stunned they dont record abuse of women over 74. I dont think I've seen such a clear as day decision that shows how women are discarded once we have completed our 'purpose' of birthing and rearing children. Presumably they also realise that women over 74 most likely make up a large proportion of carers for elderly men and we cant have them gaining independence and leaving it to the state.

There were women over 80 on the Counting Dead Women twitter today.

Overall, I was also shocked at the number of sons involved.

Overall, I was also shocked at the number of sons involved.

I felt like that last year. As someone with several sons it was quite sobering. Of course I'd like to think none of my three would do that but statistically my odds won't be great when compared with mothers of daughters.

melroses yes where I live not Uk most were older or elderly women , and yes often murdered by sons And brothers.

Agreed that the lack of respect for the violent deaths of older women is astonishing.

Also, I am now wondering whether the deaths of women that are called erroneously "honour" killings are included in the statistics about domestic violence?

Have a feeling the term 'honour' killings is not to be used. Wished I knew where I read it but I think the UN wont use the term. Could be mistaken, hopefully not.

@StillWeRise

they are talking about the gendered nature of the crime not the gender identity of the perpetrator or victim. This is appropriate use of the word, in my opinion. It's gender (the social expectations associated with a sex class) that is at the root of men's violence against women. There's nothing inherently violent on the Y chromosome. It's what our society teaches those with it that they can ans should do.

Yup totally agree that gendered nature is correct in this context. Also, as it’s only a very small number of people who claim that their gender is different to their sex, these figures are likely to be fairly accurate in that a victim who is described as a woman is also a female person.

I guess you could use the term ‘male on female violence’ but I think ‘sex-based violence’ would be incorrect and confusing because many would think it referred to sexual violence and it’s not ‘based’ on sex, unless you think it’s something biologic and inborn. Anyway, the term gendered has been used for decades and decades as a synonym for sex, with no issue until now. To the vast majority of people, it still does refer to a synonym for sex.

in this country I think people use the phrase 'honour'based violence

I use the phrase "cowardly killings".

These fuckers are always bigger than the poor woman and often there's a few of them.

Inadequate males killing decent women.

@LouHotel

I'm actually stunned they dont record abuse of women over 74. I dont think I've seen such a clear as day decision that shows how women are discarded once we have completed our 'purpose' of birthing and rearing children. Presumably they also realise that women over 74 most likely make up a large proportion of carers for elderly men and we cant have them gaining independence and leaving it to the state.

It's occurred to me before, that modern 'intersectional' feminism oddly seems to overlook the intersection of sex and age/frailty. It does seem odd the ONS would have a cutoff.

Intersectional feminism heartily embraces age discrimination and ignoring older women because they are ‘irrelevant’.

No the word gender has not been used for years.

If you look at old newspaper reports and discussion the word sex is always used.

Gender in general discussion has only become common thanks to the sucessful push back by queer politics against the gains of the Women's Liberation Movement in the 70s.

Those educated in Universities, after Women's Studies became Gender studies have been groomed into using this word.

And once they moved into spheres of influence such as the media they changed the house style of many papers.

So for instance the word gender starting appearing in news stories, in the same was as the phrase sex worker was also introduced rather than prostitute.

All part of the choice philosophy.

Previously "gender" many have used in academic work, but was not part of day to day conversation.

Now it is every where. And this is partly why so many young people genuinely believe, because this is what they grew up with, that sex and gender are the same thing.

And it is these small building blocks that queer politics (which has fostered the trans agenda) has put in place that are now the foundations of the movement to erase women as a sex class.

ie we have the Sex Discrimination Act because at that time nobody had been brainwashed into believing that women weren't a sex class (which lets face it if the bill was being written to day would be the Gender Discrimination Act).

Really important that we do not accept that gender is okay to use, when we are talking about sex.

ie the sex of both the perpetrator of domestic violence and the victim of domestic violence should be recorded. It is incomprehensible that someone every thought it shouldn't be.

Any more than excluding women over 74 from domesstic violence stats.

Gender in general discussion has only become common thanks to the sucessful push back by queer politics against the gains of the Women's Liberation Movement in the 70s.

No, gender began to be used in the 20th century as a synonym because sex increasingly meant sexual intercourse. Gender was seen as the polite alternative. I remember at school (late 90s, pre woke or queer ideology) being taught to write gender rather than sex because it was more polite (this wasn’t in science btw). I remember all my school records and Uni registration used the word gender too and it was never thought to mean anything other than sex. It’s only become a big issue due to the recent focus on gender identity and it’s become more widely known that there is a difference between the two terms. If you asked the average person on the street though, I still reckon many would say it’s a synonym for sex.

The first time I personally heard of distinctions between sex and gender was in 2009, when I was in my mid 20s and was sent a work survey asking if my current gender was the same as that assigned at birth. I remember my colleagues and I being a bit wtf, that’s funny isn’t it. Before that, I had genuinely not given it any thought. And the first time I properly understood the difference and started to think about it was about 2015 when I watched a video by Peachyoghurt and then the penny dropped. Before that, I didn’t see what the issue was between feminists and trans people.

As ppl have explained it’s not wrong to say gendered violence here though because it is gender-based. The separate point of course is whether you record biological sex of perpetrator or allow people to self-ID. I’d obv be in favour of the former for accuracy.

And I should also add that I would be in favour of specific stats on trans people, so actually not just biological sex. It’s important to have these so that the constant arguments that TW pose no risk whatsoever and that TW are at much greater risk of violence can be countered.

So I’d be in favour of a question about biological sex and then also a record of whether someone is MTF or FTM.

WE DON'T COUNT MURDERED WOMEN BECAUE THEY ARE OLDER?

You get to name your own island don't you?

I suggest Berns Island (after Magdalen).

Should that be Berns' Island?