A comment in the Germaine Greer thread and a series of posts in another thread a while back have encouraged me to start this thread.
There seems to be a bit of a backlash by males against recognised domestic spousal abuse perspective that shows women as far more likely to be victims.
I don't deny there are male victims of heterosexual partnerships, but I still believe it is a far, far smaller problem that the male on female violence.
This article in Time was referred to as part of the evidence that female violence may be almost as bad as the male type*.
First off, the lead picture is irrelevant, because I know from beaten and murdered kids statistics that women are as bad as men - I am discussing sexual partnerships or spousal abuse and I think there's a danger that by de-trivialising F->M violence, there is a danger of trivialising M->F violence by default.
An example.
I could - and should - honestly answer a questionnaire on domestic violence that asked "Has your partner ever hit you?" in the affirmative.
Does that make me a victim of domestic violence?
The answer, by the way is no - I am not in the slightest a victim of domestic violence. My ex-wife had a hell of a temper, but at 5' 4" against my 6' 3" she was completely incapable of hurting me with her bare hands. She knew that; I knew that, but statistics on domestic violence do not know that.
Ok, if I'd been 5' 3", she probably would have beaten the crap out of me, but it cannot count as violence.
Are we seeing a lot of that skewing statistics, or is there in fact a hidden tsunami of violence being perpetrated by women on their male partners?
*Interesting that lesbian partnerships have the highest rate of spousal violence and gays the lowest.
There seems to be a bit of a backlash by males against recognised domestic spousal abuse perspective that shows women as far more likely to be victims.
I don't deny there are male victims of heterosexual partnerships, but I still believe it is a far, far smaller problem that the male on female violence.
This article in Time was referred to as part of the evidence that female violence may be almost as bad as the male type*.
First off, the lead picture is irrelevant, because I know from beaten and murdered kids statistics that women are as bad as men - I am discussing sexual partnerships or spousal abuse and I think there's a danger that by de-trivialising F->M violence, there is a danger of trivialising M->F violence by default.
An example.
I could - and should - honestly answer a questionnaire on domestic violence that asked "Has your partner ever hit you?" in the affirmative.
Does that make me a victim of domestic violence?
The answer, by the way is no - I am not in the slightest a victim of domestic violence. My ex-wife had a hell of a temper, but at 5' 4" against my 6' 3" she was completely incapable of hurting me with her bare hands. She knew that; I knew that, but statistics on domestic violence do not know that.
Ok, if I'd been 5' 3", she probably would have beaten the crap out of me, but it cannot count as violence.
Are we seeing a lot of that skewing statistics, or is there in fact a hidden tsunami of violence being perpetrated by women on their male partners?
*Interesting that lesbian partnerships have the highest rate of spousal violence and gays the lowest.
via International Skeptics Forum http://ift.tt/1l9No8y
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire