Domestic abuse

[Disaffected.citizen]

This may make for uncomfortable reading, but it is important to open up this topic and explore it in relation to our lives.

The above phrase almost singularly conjures up an image of a battered woman and a male agressor. Society as a whole has a skewed perspective and this bleeds into the justice system. Why? Because members of society populate the justice system and their views shape the laws and set the precedents. Don't believe me? Who makes the laws, who enforces the laws, who decides when and what to prosecute? The powers that be may state that the law does not discriminate, but the simple fact is that it does, simply because people discriminate.

So, who here has NOT been the victim of prejudice and discrimination?

Hopefully, I'm not falling foul of forum rules and protocols here.

In the UK, I have read, there is just one support organisation (charity) for male victims of domestic abuse and it receives no support from national or local government; whereas numerous support organisations and refuges exist for women. Advertising campaigns are all biased and further skew public perception of this crime; i.e. it is a crime perpetrated by men against women.

The establishment will say they do not discriminate, but when was the last time a woman was told to "man up"? We get it all the time.

There is a new "campaign" in Essex tagged "togetherwecan" aimed at highlighting the problem; yet again skewed.

A new piece of legislation came into effect between Christmas and New Year introducing the concept of coercive control. Police need to establish a pattern before it can be used, but it took Essex Police less than two weeks to bring the first case! Guess who was the victim and who was the perpetrator? They've made no comment on their statistics for male victims though.

So what happens in domestic abuse? Well, if it's physical, it's quite easy to see. But psychological, financial and controlling abuse can do much deeper damage. How do I know? Because I almost lost everything! I'm not just talking about possessions - pretty much everything I've worked for; my home; my employment and career; my abuser tried to coerce my ex-wife into preventing me from having contact with my child. She made accusations which weren't true, but they stuck in minds. Everyone believed her. I tried to end it all, only failing because I had no tools to do so; I had walked off and so was miles from anywhere - but I also had no food, water or shelter - so should have only been a matter of time. I was found though.

How did I become susceptible? Isolation. Former friends turned out to be prejudiced. Family, too. Odd really that people who profess liberal and libertarian views can be so judgmental about a man who wears a skirt; I don't anymore!

So what happened? Well, eventually her friends found out the truth. Sadly, too late to help me. They're no longer her friends, but I'm still wary of almost everyone.

So, let's not be "tough" "men's men" about everything. Our health and welfare matters. Get the word out that men can be victims, too.

This is only some of the story; I could talk about the missed opportunities where the health service should have picked up the problem. Or my former employer. Or friends and family (except they'd already shunned me). Or the police when I turned to them; I later found out they suspected domestic abuse yet did nothing. Sorry if any of this touches a nerve or makes anyone uncomfortable.

[dillon]

I do agree that the laws are biased against a man and do not afford equal protection, having known more than one man who has been affected that way. There is much over-reaction in the protection of women, and the authorities now have neither the means or will to rectify a situation where the law is being misapplied or deliberately abused. I can relate to a woman making false accusations, or to taking your money, but really not to allowing her to have psychological coercive control. But that's just me, I guess.

[RichardA]

In a statement made to the courts by my ex wife “I became very frightened as he's a Blacksmith”
I weighed 10 stone at the time, it's a good job I wasn't a toilet cleaner it could have got very dirty.

[Disaffected.citizen]

There's a government backed advertising campaign in the UK titled "Disrespect NoBody".

If you've not yet seen it, it is another example of the skewed perspective as it suggests abuse is only perpetrated by men against women. There is a petition https://t.co/HLrQj76cWW, seeking to have the campaign stopped and hopefully revised, that links to a YouTube for the ad.

Hope the link works as I found it via Twitter, and also hope I'm not falling foul of rules here.

[moonshadow]

When I see the phrase "Disrespect NoBody" I would have thought it would have been something equally applied.

I hate to see that apparently it's not.

However, I was told by a county deputy that according to Virginia law, in a domestic violence case, the "aggressor" is always arrested on site. When I asked "what if the aggressor is the woman?", he replied that he would be forced to arrest her.

Still I wouldn't want to apply the scientific method to this and test it out myself. I still think you'd have to be a pretty gentle man, and she'd have to be one mean and violent woman for her to get locked up.

I don't expect the man hating to stop anytime soon, so my advice to anyone not involved is to either stay that way (unattached), or be VERY VERY VERY VERY VERY careful about who you take home. Yes there are crazy abusive men out there, lots of them, and our justice system locks up thousands every day, there are also crazy women, and our justice system mostly ignores them, except for extreme cases, so you're on your own.

Fortunately, these days, with the advancement of smart phones, one should try to make video recordings of any argument that may get out of control. Especially if you're with one of those chics that likes to slam her own head in the door and make a false complaint. Otherwise it's your word against hers, and the system just can't believe that a woman would lie!

Proceed with caution.

My wife points out that "not all women are bad", and I agree, in fact, probably most women are perfectly fine, however most street don't carry constant traffic, yet we still look both ways before crossing.

[moonshadow]

For those who would like to see the commercial:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iglbaK8E1jo

You will note the comments.. I've got nothing more to add, these people have all said it better than I ever could.
And kudos to the women commenters who also called the piece total sexist, misandrist, trash....!

Also, there is another commercial exactly like this, but it was published by the same people who produced the ad.

Comments are disabled....

[dillon]

I was going to hold my tongue on this matter, having once decided that it was not worth stirring the pot. But, like so much in politics, the truth lies where the truth lies, and rarely where advocates CLAIM it lies.

I think we have very different definitions of abuse; my definition being less subtle and more serious than that of some who consider themselves "oppressed." Clearly, any situation involving law enforcement and courts is serious, but that is not the sort of complaint that we encounter here very often. So I hope to clarify my thoughts, though you may still disagree.

In past posts, I have acknowledged that domestic abuse by females upon males happens. I even knew a farm worker from 40 years ago who was stabbed to death by his wife during a marital dispute. And a more recent case of a woman who shot her husband in the back...a relative of a client. But too I have known recently a farmworker who beat his wife senseless in a domestic dispute, and numerous other women who have fled abusive relationships. And the latter is simply far more common than the former.

Too, as the child of a rural law officer, I can recall more than once when a distraught woman, battered by her husband, showed up at our door in search of protection. My father’s best friend on the county police force responded to a domestic dispute call and was shot dead by the husband hiding in the bushes with a hunting rifle. And my father was shot and wounded in the line of duty by a demented man with a shotgun who had driven all the rest of his family from the home. So, I am not likely to share the view that female on male abuse is BY ANY STRETCH OF IMAGINATION the issue you are making it to be. Serious abuse is often violent and usually involves the law. That’s how I define it. There are civil remedies to anything less. No doubt, some women ABSOLUTELY abuse their presumptive need for special protection under the laws; I have known men who were legally entrapped in that way. But those laws are not without concrete foundations; they are simply inadequately investigated, and allow for far too much presumption of guilt.

But to be clear on my points, let’s look at facts as presented by US Department of Justice surveys of family violence.

By survey data – and I would expect DOJ has a good team of statisticians and analysts working on this – family violence accounted for 11% of all reported and unreported violence during the study period, 1998 to 2002. You may think that is old data – and it is - but according to the DOJ, domestic violence has actually decreased steadily in the US in the two decades between 1994 and 2014. I chose this data because it is one of the more comprehensive studies that has been done; DOJ collects data annually but not in nearly the detail of this study. Since it is survey data, it is NOT dependent on law enforcement records alone, which would obviously under-report the issue. The category “Family Violence”, BTW, includes all acts of violence by any family member, including boyfriend/girlfriend, and includes spousal abuse, child abuse, and elder abuse. I will break out spousal violence separately.

During the study period, simple assault was the most common family violence. Murder was less than half of 1% of all family violence. It is even less today.

84% of victims of spousal abuse were female. 86% of boyfriend/girlfriend abuse victims were female. Of total family violence, including against children and old people, 73% of the abusers were male. So, three-quarters of the total abused in family violence are female, and three-quarters of the abusers are male. The data suggest that 15% or less of victims are male. That, of course, does not account for those men who are victims of vindictive women abusing the laws that protect them.

In family violence reports to police, a weapon was used or wielded in 16% of family violence cases. That weapon was a firearm in only 2% of cases. In other violent crimes (non-family), a weapon was used in 22% of the cases, and a firearm in 6%. Most family violence involves non-weapon assault – fists, choking, etc, and, at times, incidents culminate in rape.

Eight in ten murderers in family violence situations were male. Males committed 83% of spousal murders, and 75% of boyfriend/girlfriend murders (remember, this was pre-same-sex marriage times).

My intent wasn’t to deny the existence of women who abuse male partners: that happens, without a doubt. But in a situation where it is a building or persisting pattern, I don’t understand why anyone, male or female, allows a behavioral pattern that yields only misery to continue to happen.

Yes, female-on-male violence happens and perhaps more often than is accounted for by social survey methods, but is clearly just a fraction of family violence compared to male-on-female violence; it is NOT THE NORM. It may be partly the fear of the consequences of fighting back that stymies men from self-defense; domestic disputes are seldom simple matters when there is anger on both sides. Also the shame felt by men in reporting physical abuse by a female partner may often keep charges from being filed. Men tend to take their licks and get back on their feet.

The simple matter of physical ability, however, is not something that can be quickly discounted. If one is old or disabled, then his dependence on a spouse is evident. But an able-bodied man should be capable of fending off an abusive female, unless she is armed or unless you’re married to Ronda Rousey. According to research studies from the European Journal of Applied Physiology, and libraried in the US National Institutes of Health, it is assessed that women are approximately 52% and 66% as strong as the men in the upper and lower body respectively. In other words, the average woman has the physical strength of a 12 year-old boy.

I don’t especially believe in the “emotional abuse” complaint. We are grown men. You have a say-so in the household, unless you are somehow physically or psychologically co-dependent; if so, that is a whole other sort of problem. That’s why, when differences cannot be reconciled, I think the best course of action is to walk. When a situation becomes intolerable, when push comes to shove, answer with your feet. That applies to either male or female.

Loving a woman should not require surrendering your manhood. It could be argued that the emotional strength you display in this realm will equal the regard your spouse gives you. Respect yourself if you want to be respected.

And, yes, some women will lie about, fabricate, and embellish anything to win a serious dispute, without regard to the unimaginable harm they are doing to their former lover/spouse. Where angry men exact reprisal with brute force, women will use lies and laws. I think that must be an X-chromosome thing.

What I intended to infer in my previous comments is that I don’t understand men who would accept or continue situations where they had become abuse victims. Admittedly, I may be a bit more “Alpha”, i.e. less passive, than some of my brothers on this site, so there are a lot of things posted here that I don’t really understand. One such thing is men who state that their wives won’t ALLOW them to wear skirts. I suppose I don’t understand why they feel they must have permission to dress as they please, and why they don’t resist such domination. After all, it is one thing to compromise, and another to capitulate and then seek empathy. One can show love and respect for a spouse by choosing not to wear a skirt in EVERY situation, but why would one accept a relationship where he is told he may not wear a skirt in ANY situation? To me, that seems humiliating and, frankly, emasculating. If my rejection of that sort of thing is really “insensitive”, then so be it. But if we cannot bear to confront the attitude of a spouse, how do we ask the public at large for tolerance?

I am sorry that I offended anyone, and that I continue to do so, but I’m just being honest. Perhaps there may co-dependence involved, and, while no two relationships are the same, it is still unhealthy to be a psychological captive. For that, professional counseling is best. The average man would probably not understand that sort of problem, and it may be the cause of the “man-up” and “grow a pair” advice from other men. I won't say that, because all men are different and entitled to be so. But I insist on honesty with the facts.

[moonshadow]

When a situation becomes intolerable, when push comes to shove, answer with your feet.

I agree with that.

One such thing is men who state that their wives won’t ALLOW them to wear skirts. I suppose I don’t understand why they feel they must have permission to dress as they please, and why they don’t resist such domination. After all, it is one thing to compromise, and another to capitulate and then seek empathy. One can show love and respect for a spouse by choosing not to wear a skirt in EVERY situation, but why would one accept a relationship where he is told he may not wear a skirt in ANY situation? To me, that seems humiliating and, frankly, emasculating. If my rejection of that sort of thing is really “insensitive”, then so be it. But if we cannot bear to confront the attitude of a spouse, how do we ask the public at large for tolerance?

I agree with this too, and in fact, it's interesting because Jennifer and I were talking about this very subject tonight, not so much regarding other member's, how they handle their home life is their own business. However I was referencing various post made that seemed to imply that I should more or less try to remain in my wife's good graces with regards to skirt wearing. I love my wife, and I try to respect her. But respect is a two way street. I have agreed that if she wants me to wear proper men's clothes on dates, then I'd oblige that request. In return she stays off me about events that are less formal. But to set the record, Jennifer has never been "pissed off" at me for activities that I do that bring no harm to her, such as skirts, my religion, and my hobbies. In return I aim to stay out of her way when she wants to engage in her hobbies. In fact, upon my willingness to compromise, she has agreed to let me wear a dress on dates. To which my natural answer was... "no, I'll wear proper men's trousers because your kindness in this matter calls for no less".

Compromise, fairness, yin yang kind of stuff.

Using the pinkish tennis dress as an example, she protested it, however upon adding the black undergarments (skirt and t-shirt) she found it much more tolerable, and proceeded to accompany me out in it while we did our end of week errands. It was a fair compromise and I thank her for it. I too must be careful not to offend as this is a sensitive subject, but I am also perplexed as to how some men (here) can sit back and allow their wives to dominate their clothing choices to such an extent. Now FAR BE IT for me to judge, or criticize, but if I were in such a situation, I'd find it totally intolerable, and would have to simply leave. To me, love should not restrict us, but set us free. All this BS about "being sensitive to her feelings and embarrassment about seeing her man in a skirt" is just that.... BS. What about what goes through the poor mans head as he sits and watches as women all around him are ALLOWED to be FREE with their bodies, and their men still love them for it. No, that's being controlling, and dominating, and is no better than the old ways of men dominating what "their women" wore 60 years ago.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again.... "anyone who seeks to control others to pacify their own ego isn't worthy of a relationship of REAL LOVE".

...the double standard is remedied, or I'd answer with my feet.

And I too am not trying to offend anyone... but just laying my thoughts on the table.

As Barney Fife stated... you've got to NIP IT IN THE BUD!

[dillon]

Moon, I agree, but with the recognition that it is difficult for our spouses to understand us, let alone accept that they are exceedingly important to us when we reject that which they may view as normal and healthy. How do we explain that we sre striving for what is healthy for ourselves? I cannot fault them for seeing it differently. It is no simple path to stroll. It is odd that we become the ones singing "I beg your pardon; I never promised you a rose garden."

[moonshadow]

Moon, I agree, but with the recognition that it is difficult for our spouses to understand us, let alone accept that they are exceedingly important to us when we reject that which they may view as normal and healthy. How do we explain that we sre striving for what is healthy for ourselves? I cannot fault them for seeing it differently. It is no simple path to stroll.

True, it is a complicated and difficult road. And I don't mean to make light of it for the ladies out there. I know that suddenly seeing your macho man in a women's skirt or dress can be a big pill to swallow. I can only beg of ladies out there to see it from the man's point of view. They wear skirts, they surely realize the comfort they bring. I can only beg them to understand that it is a real slap in the face when they are so free to do what they want without prejudice, and yet men are expected to wear the uniform. But just as the men of western society have had to "get over it" in regards to their ideal that their wives were their property.... women too must swallow that same pride. We are not each others property. Husbands and wives should build each other up, not tear each other down. I implore the close minded women of our society to let it go, wise up, recognize that true equality means fairness on BOTH sides, and above all GET OVER IT. And if it's not possible... then they should walk... She will surely find a man who detest the idea of wearing a skirt. God knows they're plenty of them still out there.... and he might just find a woman who loves him for who he is.

It is odd that we become the ones singing "I beg your pardon; I never promised you a rose garden."

HA! So that's what that means! (sorry a little before my time, I've heard the main part of the song, but never bothered to look into it's meaning)
Got a good chuckle out of that!

[crfriend]

If we constrain the definition of "domestic abuse" to incidences where physical violence is personally visited on the victim then I tend to agree with Dillon's and the DOJ's numbers. Conspicuously missing from the numbers, however, are incidences where the violence was done by proxy (as was in my case) or where the abuse is psychological in nature (which, in retrospect, I received a lot of, sometimes seemingly in simple gratuitous woundings). Also missing, are unreported incidents (obviously), and I'd posit that men are a lot less likely to report such things than women -- we feel more shame because of it. So, yes, murders of men by women show up (they'd pretty much have to), although proxy-killings may not be linked back correctly, but a long poisonous relationship (which can get that way slowly over time and nobody notices it happening) won't unless it explodes.

So, much is down to the source of the numbers, and whether those producing the numbers have some sort of objective in using them. Meaning nothing personal here, I am reminded of the old adage that, "Figures don't lie, but liars figure."

[moonshadow]

Not to mention, female victims have the full backing of the state, whereas men, while may have some legal recourse have nowhere NEAR the support network that women have.

Which is another reason why many in that 16% statistic of men victims may turn to suicide.

In our republic of individual rights and liberty, one victim is one too many. That 16%, even if it is a truly accurate number deserves equal protection and due process under the law. It's important for us as a society not to downplay the rights of the minority. I'll agree that even considering under reported incidents of female on male violence, I'm sure women get beat more than men, and that's not cool.

But situations like the one you went through Carl aren't cool either. A society can not be considered free unless ALL are free. I know Dillon is correct on the way things used to be back in the day. True, there was a time where beating your wife was condoned, and even sometimes encouraged by the community. Thankfully, we have moved away from that now, where a wife beater is shamed by the community at large, and eventually convicted in a court of law.

It's time to visit the issue of female on male abuse. Psychological abuse is abuse. A man who feels he's in a helpless situation may turn to drugs, excessive alcohol, or even worse, self harm or suicide.

Progress has been made though, I have heard that once upon a time, men were legally liable for many of the actions of their wives. This goes waaaaaaay back into the day when women were considered property, and I would assume the liability of their actions would be similar to how a dog owner would be responsible in the event the dog bit someone.

In some states, fragments of that mentality still exist, such as the case of if a woman runs up a bunch of debt, the man is liable for it. As for Virginia, the internet states that Virginia holds each individual responsible for their individual debt, but I've had actual friends and co-workers tell me that if the woman has a good lawyer, the man's gonna pay! I kind of have a problem with that mentality. That reason alone is enough to make any sane person avoid wedlock. Why would anyone in their right mind want to put their selves in a situation where they could be legally liable for the debt of someone else? To which they have no control over?

[moonshadow]

In some states, fragments of that mentality still exist, such as the case of if a woman runs up a bunch of debt, the man is liable for it. As for Virginia, the internet states that Virginia holds each individual responsible for their individual debt, but I've had actual friends and co-workers tell me that if the woman has a good lawyer, the man's gonna pay! I kind of have a problem with that mentality. That reason alone is enough to make any sane person avoid wedlock. Why would anyone in their right mind want to put their selves in a situation where they could be legally liable for the debt of someone else? To which they have no control over?

Now that I think about it... this may have a lot to do with who is the bread winner in the household. Which is still typically the man. Which is why we, as a society, and more importantly, men should support equal pay for women.

Personally, I'm all for women making equal pay, and if they are more qualified, even MORE! Personally, sex should not be a consideration in pay rate at any event, but I would like to see a world where most households of working spouses receive near equal pay (it would be rare for a husband and wife to make EXACTLY the same amount unless they both had EXACTLY the same job with the same employer), even a rise in female bread winners.

Personally, I feel if women had more to loose financially in an ugly divorce, they might be more inclined to "be more friendly" during the marriage. You gotta admit, many modern women are getting pretty arrogant. Of course, modern female breadwinners are QUICK to demand a prenup before they tie the knot, less they be stuck carrying dead weight. Men, tend to be more foolish in this regard.

As I said in another thread.... fools, women are NOT. They are much smarter then we give them credit for. And they tend to think with their head, not their hormones. Men would be well advised to take that into consideration before entering a serious relationship with one. That ditzy, bimbo act some of them put on is just that... an ACT. They are the most dangerous of them all.

[hoborob]

I have thought about the issue presented here and while I agree with the previous thoughts I would also observe that another part of the issue is the Dominant/Submissive culture that we live in and is promulgated everyday in our educational system. We are all taught that boys need to be masculine (dominant) and girls need to be feminine (submissive). The real truth is that boys need to be taught to be secure in themselves and to master themselves. Being the BMOC (Big Man On Campus) or the local bully is not cool. Girls need to be taught also to be secure in themselves and that they do not need the approval of others to be themselves.

The issue is that we are commonly taught that "Wives should submit themselves to their husbands as unto the Lord." but with the difference that is actually being said is that "Wives should be submissive to their husbands." The term Submit and Submissive are NOT interchangeable. To Submit means to willing give yourself over to the leadership and decisions of another. To be submissive means to just give up and do whatever another tells you. Wives are not told to be submissive and indeed other lessons tells us that a strong wife is good to have. It is also said that a wise husband will listen to the counsel of his wife.

The real issue is that we are improperly applying the lessons by picking and choosing the ones we want rather than understanding them all. In a true and good domestic relationship each participant is giving 100% to the other. The so called 50-50 relationship is simply one looking for the other to respond to something they have done in kind and then getting upset when the response doesn't come. In the long run these types of relationships are doomed to failure but we are taught that this is the best way for a relationship to be.

Now what was that definition of insane again....Oh yeah....When a man keeps attempting the same experiment expecting different results.....I wonder whos insane???

[Elisabetta]

For those that say women get away with abusing men. Not all do. If their caught like these two were.


http://www.wktv.com/news/Mother_daughte ... EMcWG.dpuf