Domestic Abuse Against Men (DAAM!)

[Jolly_Penguin]

Was randomly going through facebook and came a link I found interesting about violence against men. You can find it here: http://www.prweb.com/releases/2013/5/prweb10741752.htm?PID=4003003

Among PASK’s findings are that, except for sexual coercion, men and women perpetrate physical and non-physical forms of abuse at comparable rates, most domestic violence is mutual, women are as controlling as men, domestic violence by men and women is correlated with essentially the same risk factors, and male and female perpetrators are motivated for similar reasons.

“Although research confirms that women are more impacted by domestic violence,” stated Hamel, “these findings recommend important intervention and policy changes, including a need to pay more attention to female-perpetrated violence, mutual abuse, and the needs of male victims.”

Hamel also argues that men are not only disproportionately arrested in domestic violence cases, but sometimes arrested for arbitrary reasons, citing, for example, that police often arrest the bigger and stronger party in cases where the perpetrator is unclear. “Such policies are not only ineffective but violate people’s civil rights,” Hamel concludes. “People in the domestic violence field say that ‘it’s all about the victims.’ Well, the victim is not always the one hit, but sometimes the one arrested.”

I remember a while back we had a thread about violence against women and the USA's "Violence against women act". Derec and others raised objections to the name, as it seems to exclude violence against men. I think violence against men should be taken more seriously than it is. Usually when a man complains about being abused by a woman he is told to "man up" or fears that if he complains he will be charged for domestic abuse against her, regardless of any evidence.

How could this be fixed without hampering efforts against violence against women? I imagine some of you will be saying that speaking about violence against men distracts from that issue.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Also, came across this: http://aplus.com/a/slap-her-children-react-to-violence?utm_campaign=i102&utm_source=a6427&ts_pid=2

It appears to have gone viral on the interwebs. They asked young Italian boys, agesd 8 to 11 to slap a girl. They wouldn't do it. Lots of people copied the idea and you can find videos on this from around the world. The boys never slap the girls. Not a great social experiment really. Why would they slap her? They just met her. What I find telling is the reasons they gave why. Even at that age it was mostly "I don't want to hit a girl" or "She's beautiful. Nobody should hit her". There was only one kid who said anything about violence itself being wrong, regardless of the gender of the target. That troubled me.

But then I found this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Np4xpXYV1rE.

Somebody actually decided to try the reverse to show young girls refusing to slap a boy. Good for them.

 

[Bronzeage]

I am perfectly fine with the "man up" strategy.

My grandfather had a standard bit of oldman wisdom, which has become one of mine. He said a man should never fight a woman, unless he has a hat. He can put his hat on his head and leave. A man without a hat, can't do that.

Whether or not "men and women perpetrate physical and non-physical forms of abuse at comparable rates," is not really relevant. When domestic violence occurs, women suffer greater injury and are killed more often than men. Speaking about violence against men doesn't have to distract from the greater issue of domestic violence, since any reduction in domestic violence is a benefit to both men and women, but whenever I've seen it raised, it's always as an attack on any special consideration for female victims.

I don't have statistics on how many women go to their partner's workplace and shoot him, but I don't think it is common. In my roughly 40 years of gainful employment, I have been close to such an incident twice. Maybe once every 20 years is not a lot, but both times, it was unhappy husbands who hunted down their spouse and killed her.

Working to reduce domestic violence against men is certainly a noble cause, but the results of domestic violence speak for themselves.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

I am perfectly fine with the "man up" strategy.

Even though it implies that you're not a "real man" if you don't "man up"? It's completely fucked up.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

I am perfectly fine with the "man up" strategy.

My grandfather had a standard bit of oldman wisdom, which has become one of mine. He said a man should never fight a woman, unless he has a hat. He can put his hat on his head and leave. A man without a hat, can't do that.

What?

Whether or not "men and women perpetrate physical and non-physical forms of abuse at comparable rates," is not really relevant.

I think the writer meant that it is relevant because it can help direct the approach you take. If you live under the perception that men are aggressive and women are passive, and women never or rarely abuse men, you may encourage a culture where women abusing or striking men is ignored or even applauded or found humorous. This may encourage women to do it, which may incite men to strike back and hit the women and harm them. As the writer says, a lot of abuse is mutual.

When domestic violence occurs, women suffer greater injury and are killed more often than men.

Is that because there is something particular about gender, or is that just based on the correlation between gender and size? Should large women and small men be given special consideration?

 

[Togo]

Not news. Domestic abuse against men has been recognised for decades. People don't like to talk about it, but it happens. I've had to restrain violent people, men and woman.

It has less of a physical impact though. Fewer men are seriously injured in domestic incidents with violent men, than vice versa. Men tend to be larger and stronger than women. Because of that, male violence on women, is a bigger problem in general. It's still serious when it occurs though.

If that's a problem, then it joins a long list of problems, from discrimination against woman in the workplace, to discrimination against men when it comes to childcare. Some don't support equal pay for woman, because they see them as earning extra cash rather than being the primary breadwinner. Most companies financially penalise men who want to help care for new born children.

But again, the problems are generally more serious for woman, which is why that side of them attracts more attention. In practice, gender stereotyping hurts everyone, and is freely acknowledged as doing so.

 

[ronburgundy]

I'll read the article, but my prediction is that they reach such conclusions via absurdly and meaninglessly broad definitions of their constructs of "abuse" and "violence".

Overly broad definitions that ignore critical distinctions is how activist "research" likes to pad its numbers. It is standard practice in victimization research such as experiences of racism, sexual assault, or domestic abuse. Not only does it inflate the overall rates, but it tends to create false equivalences in rates between subgroups.

A while back there was a thread based upon "research" claiming that men suffered similar sexual assault rates to women. Hidden beneath the misleading conclusions was that this was only true if one included every time a person had sex while intoxicated (including with their spouse) as "assault", and included prison rape, which is a completely different phenomena.

In sum, I'll bet dollars to donuts they in order to get comparable rates, they categorize drastically different types of acts under the same categories, some of which don't reasonably qualify as abuse or violence and are not viewed as such by the "victims" who report them on surveys but don't label them that way or label themselves as victims. Typically, the researchers take peoples responses to vague questions they don't mention these terms, then slap those labels onto the actions and the persons.

I'll go look at this analysis and see if my prediction of its pseudo-science status bears out.

 

[Bronzeage]

I am perfectly fine with the "man up" strategy.

Even though it implies that you're not a "real man" if you don't "man up"? It's completely fucked up.

Does that make me seem insensitive? You'll need to provide a definition of "real man" before we can go further on that line. Remember Mr. Miyagi's advice, "Don't be there." Few would say Mr. Miyagi was less than a real man.

What?

Whether or not "men and women perpetrate physical and non-physical forms of abuse at comparable rates," is not really relevant.

I think the writer meant that it is relevant because it can help direct the approach you take. If you live under the perception that men are aggressive and women are passive, and women never or rarely abuse men, you may encourage a culture where women abusing or striking men is ignored or even applauded or found humorous. This may encourage women to do it, which may incite men to strike back and hit the women and harm them. As the writer says, a lot of abuse is mutual.

When domestic violence occurs, women suffer greater injury and are killed more often than men.

Is that because there is something particular about gender, or is that just based on the correlation between gender and size? Should large women and small men be given special consideration?

It really doesn't matter who is aggressive and who is passive. What if both are aggressive? Are we trying to make better people, or trying to see that less people are injured?

I have been the victim of domestic violence. Fortunately, I was able to use my size and superior strength to bring the incident to a close without serious injury to myself. If there had been a gun or knife involved, it may have ended differently.

Guns, knives, and skillets do not respect gender or size.

Domestic violence, by definition, requires two people who have some sort of long term relationship. Anything which reduces assaults against the male partner is a good thing. No one is saying men should be hurt or killed more often, just to make it fair. In the real world, it is women who suffer the most and while addressing violence against men is a noble thing, it's not really the problem.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

It must be especially hard for a man who is abused, being told his pain doesn't matter and is not the problem we should care about, and that he should "man up". I wonder how many men suffer this and are too ashamed to say anything about it.

 

[ronburgundy]

So, the full report is 3,000 pages. But the Editor provides a 12 page over-view of the findings. In it, a glaringly important "finding" is the % of men and women who commit IPV against someone.

Wide range in perpetration rates: 1.0% to 61.6% for males; 2.4% to 68.9% for women,

In other words, the empirical definition used to categorize acts act intimate-Partner-Violence is so vague, subjective, and thus variable across studies that depending on the study, you can get anywhere from 1% to 69% rates, and that men could be anywhere from 60 times more likely or 60 times less likely to commit IPV.
That suggests the numbers in the OP averaging across different studies, which is completely invalid since they are not measuring the same thing at all. Using a different operational definition means you are not measuring the same variable.
About the only thing one could conclude from such data is that there is little valid science going on in this field, just a bunch of people slapping the same labels on drastically different behaviors.

Sadly, but predictably, the 12 page summary report spouts lots of "data" and "facts" for use in profitable headlines, but never actually presents any of the empirical definitions for violence and abuse, without which the "data" are as meaningless as any random number that pops into your head.

 

[Terrell]

Easier said than done, but judge each person by their actions, regardless of their gender. Both sexes should be expected to keep their hands to themselves, unless they have the other party's permission.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

It must be especially hard for a man who is abused, being told his pain doesn't matter and is not the problem we should care about, and that he should "man up". I wonder how many men suffer this and are too ashamed to say anything about it.

It seems to me that it's pretty much the male equivalent of slut shaming. They're not acting the way a "proper man" should act and therefore bad things that happen to them are kind of their own fault and not really the sort of things which decent people need to worry about.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

It must be especially hard for a man who is abused, being told his pain doesn't matter and is not the problem we should care about, and that he should "man up". I wonder how many men suffer this and are too ashamed to say anything about it.

It seems to me that it's pretty much the male equivalent of slut shaming. They're not acting the way a "proper man" should act and therefore bad things that happen to them are kind of their own fault and not really the sort of things which decent people need to worry about.

I think that is a great comparison.

I found this study: http://wordpress.clarku.edu/dhines/...or-article-on-sex-aggression-v-abused-men.pdf

The authors of it raise a similar issue in their results and suggestions/review section. Female victims of domestic and sexual abuse face barriers with doctors and society in general not believing or accepting or having empathy for what they have gone through. I imagine that is tenfold for male victims, who get told it doesn't happen and isn't a problem, and they are sissies or liars if they complain about it, etc.

Bennice and Resick (2003) outlined several barriers for
female sexual PV victims. These include that the victims do not
typically receive the medical, mental health, and social service
help they need to address their trauma issues; that their experiences
are often invalidated by treatment providers who do not
recognize sexual PV within relationships as a problem; that
treatment providers may minimize the contributions of sexual
PV to the mental health problems the women are experiencing;
that sexual PV is not a trauma or serious at all; that female
victims may fear being blamed by their friends, relatives, and
service providers, which may dissuade them from seeking
help; and that they may question that what they experienced
was even a sexual assault. We would argue that all of these
issues are likely exacerbated in male victims of sexual PV.

 

[Bronzeage]

It must be especially hard for a man who is abused, being told his pain doesn't matter and is not the problem we should care about, and that he should "man up". I wonder how many men suffer this and are too ashamed to say anything about it.

There is nothing in "man up" that requires a man to endure that kind of treatment in silence. Who is telling men to shut up and take it?

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

There is nothing in "man up" that requires a man to endure that kind of treatment in silence. Who is telling men to shut up and take it?

Wouldn't it be awesome if the answer to that question was nobody?

 

[Bronzeage]

There is nothing in "man up" that requires a man to endure that kind of treatment in silence. Who is telling men to shut up and take it?

Wouldn't it be awesome if the answer to that question was nobody?

"Man up," means "deal with the problem."

The question a woman is always asked is, "Why did you stay?"

The same can be asked of any man and it's a fair question. If the answer is, "I had a strange concept of macho bullshit that meant I couldn't complain, even though I lived in constant fear she would get violent and hurt me, even when she knew I wouldn't fight back, or leave," what advice should we give?

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

"Man up," means "deal with the problem."

The question a woman is always asked is, "Why did you stay?"

The same can be asked of any man and it's a fair question. If the answer is, "I had a strange concept of macho bullshit that meant I couldn't complain, even though I lived in constant fear she would get violent and hurt me, even when she knew I wouldn't fight back, or leave," what advice should we give?

I would postulate that abused men often stay for much the same reasons that abused women do. Is it a fair question for the women? is it fair to blame the victim in either case here?

And the "macho bullshit that I couldn't complain" is a red herring. It isn't that he feels macho and doesn't want to complain. It is that his society doesn't want to listen to him or believe him and will shame him if he does, and that's if he is lucky enough not to get arrested himself if he calls the police on his abuser, as they are likely to assume he is the abuser and not her.

 

[bigfield]

Wouldn't it be awesome if the answer to that question was nobody?

"Man up," means "deal with the problem."

The question a woman is always asked is, "Why did you stay?"

The same can be asked of any man and it's a fair question. If the answer is, "I had a strange concept of macho bullshit that meant I couldn't complain, even though I lived in constant fear she would get violent and hurt me, even when she knew I wouldn't fight back, or leave," what advice should we give?

Sounds like that hypothetical man learned his lesson already.

I can't say I have much sympathy for people who choose such awful partners.

But I despise the abusers much, much more and hate to see them get away with their deeds simply because their victim was ashamed, afraid, or isolated.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

I can't say I have much sympathy for people who choose such awful partners.

It's often not obvious at first that a partner will be abusive. You seem to be saying they deserve it because they chose it, or at least, you don't care if they're abused. If they do not deserve it, then you do in fact care whether they are abused.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

I can't say I have much sympathy for people who choose such awful partners.

It's often not obvious at first that a partner will be abusive. You seem to be saying they deserve it because they chose it, or at least, you don't care if they're abused. If they do not deserve it, then you do in fact care whether they are abused.

People of spousal abuse and child abuse often find a way to blame themselves, no matter how convoluted. They seem to need to believe they deserve it. I see something similar in a lot of religious belief (God very much comes across as an abusive relationship and believers find a way to blame themselves) and I don't think it a coincidence.