So the growing consensus among researchers is that women initiate as many incidents of domestic violence or spousal abuse as men; about 25% are initiated by females, 25% are initiated by males, and the other 50% are classified as 'mutual aggression' to which no unilateral action or provocation can be attributed. Women are almost as likely as men to hit, slap, kick, and shove their partners, and just as likely to verbally abuse them. Among relationships where only one partner is unilaterally violent (no mutual aggression), women are nearly as likely as men to be the violent partner.
Women now account for 20% ~ 25% of all domestic violence arrests and that percentage is growing, reflecting that police and domestic violence investigators are unsympathetic to the view advanced by feminists - that women who hit and abuse are merely lashing-out because they were provoked by their oppressive or dominating male partners. Isn't this the 'excuse' they villify when it is offered by male abusers? "She makes me lose my temper?" "Its her fault I lose my temper?"
In fact, when "domestic violence" is measured by 'acts', women are as violent as men. Only when one measures "domestic violence" by 'injuries' can it be said that men are more violent than women.
Obviously being larger and stronger and thus more capable of inflicting injury isn't 'more violent'. Violence is an act, the outcome has little or no bearing on who is 'more violent'.
If one person assaults another in an unprovoked act of criminal aggression, and the victim turns the tables on that aggressor, injuring the aggressor while the victim escapes injury, that doesn't then make the aggressor the 'victim' and the victim the aggressor.
So violence must be substantially defined and measures by acts, not outcomes.
It is somewhat encouraging that the politics of gender-exclusive victimhood is being exposed and discredited increasingly by female themselves. But it is clear by these accounts that men have a long row to hoe before they can hope to receive equal consideration and status as women in courts on this and other issues where men often lose big for no other reason than they're not the female in the relationship.
Discuss??
Women now account for 20% ~ 25% of all domestic violence arrests and that percentage is growing, reflecting that police and domestic violence investigators are unsympathetic to the view advanced by feminists - that women who hit and abuse are merely lashing-out because they were provoked by their oppressive or dominating male partners. Isn't this the 'excuse' they villify when it is offered by male abusers? "She makes me lose my temper?" "Its her fault I lose my temper?"
In fact, when "domestic violence" is measured by 'acts', women are as violent as men. Only when one measures "domestic violence" by 'injuries' can it be said that men are more violent than women.
Obviously being larger and stronger and thus more capable of inflicting injury isn't 'more violent'. Violence is an act, the outcome has little or no bearing on who is 'more violent'.
If one person assaults another in an unprovoked act of criminal aggression, and the victim turns the tables on that aggressor, injuring the aggressor while the victim escapes injury, that doesn't then make the aggressor the 'victim' and the victim the aggressor.
So violence must be substantially defined and measures by acts, not outcomes.
It is somewhat encouraging that the politics of gender-exclusive victimhood is being exposed and discredited increasingly by female themselves. But it is clear by these accounts that men have a long row to hoe before they can hope to receive equal consideration and status as women in courts on this and other issues where men often lose big for no other reason than they're not the female in the relationship.
Discuss??
Facebook
Twitter