Political Commentary and Opinion
All through this studies section is issues that need to be really seriously look by governments who put laws in place for their speical interest groups pals, who not only are profiting off tax payers, but are misusing laws that violate men's and male children's god given rights. The laws are to apply to everyone, not just feminists and women's rights. If those in power wish to remain willfully ignorant, then they need to step down and let people who care for the rights and freedoms of everyone take their place, who will make sure the laws do allpy to everyone.
STUDIES AND REFERENCES EXAMINING ASSAULTS AND OTHER VIOLENCE ISSUES AND NEWS STORIES
A basic tenet of feminist theory is its view of intimate violence as a manifestation of our culture’s “patriarchal” structure, with its attendant differential status, power, and control, which are reflected in individuals’ attitudes and behaviours. Dobash et al. (1992, 1998) propose that gender asymmetry in partner violence reflects a context of gender inequality both within the household and in the larger society. Their research program conceptualizes men as perpetrators and women as victims, but it fails to provide comparative findings on woman-to-man verbal and physical abuse to validate these gendered patterns. While their historical research on patriarchy is informative, their contemporary data are derived primarily from narratives of battered women living in shelters and transition houses, not from representative samples of both genders.
Notwithstanding these conceptual and methodological problems, feminist scholars have developed several strategies and implemented them successfully in the academic, political, legal and public domains. One important strategy is to construct intimate violence as a gender issue rather than as a human problem (Lupri, 2004). As stated above, men have been constructed as the primary oppressors and perpetrators of intimate violence and women have been regarded primarily as victims. A second successful strategy has been, and still is, to use advocacy efforts to convince the state to acknowledge the oppression of women, both within and outside the household. Their third successful strategy has been, and still is, to ensure that domestic violence against women is acknowledged as a public issue and a serious social problem. A corollary of the latter strategy entails focusing sharply on physical violence as well as on outcomes. However, radical feminists have ignored the complexity of the dynamic that is an integral part of intimate interaction and have been reluctant to recognize that men and women are intimately engaged in, and part of, the dialectic interplay of abuse.
There has been an enormous growth in the amount of public, professional, and media attention given to wife assault in Canada (Lupri and Grandin, 2004). Countless studies have examined the nature and extent of the problem. Thousands of women’s shelters have been established in North America and throughout the world. Legislation and police charges have evolved in response to the growing appreciation of the extent of that problem. The issue of domestic abuse of men, by comparison, has received little attention. Even today, there still exists a strong institutional resistance to fully acknowledging that intimate violence is a two-way street. While some progress has been made, male abuse has yet to be recognized as a public issue and a social problem.
Aggressive Girls - Female Violence
Health Canada
The Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) - Family Violence Revention Unit
français
Aggressive Girls - Overview Paper
Until recently, males were believed to be more aggressive and violent than females, and therefore few studies of aggression and violence included girls and women. Lately, however, more adolescent girls have been charged with violent crimes than before,1 which has led to increased research on girls who use violent strategies. Nevertheless, prevention programs and intervention services often rely on research based on explanations of male behaviour. However, more recent research addresses how best to prevent and intervene in girls’ use of aggression and violence.2-5
The rate of violent crime reflected in official reports increased steadily among both male and female youth during the late 1980s and the 1990s: the rate among male youth nearly doubled, and the rate among female youth almost tripled.6,7 For example, the violent crime rate among female youth rose from 2.2 per 1,000 in 1988 to a peak of 5.6 per 1,000 in 1996, and began to decline in 1999. Two key points must be noted. First, the number of charges laid against boys is still three to four times greater than the number against girls. Second, the actual number of girls charged is small, so that a small increase in the number of charges results in a large percentage increase. "WORD DOC".......8Aggressive Girls.doc
WOMEN CAN BE ABUSIVE, TOO
By Michael J. Geanoulis, Sr.
A revealing paper on domestic violence (DV) published in the Florida State University Law Review provides a promising new twist to a thorny problem - assuming, of course, it gets the attention it deserves.
According to author and Indiana School of Law Professor, Linda Kelly, women can be batterers. Men can be victims. And abuse by females needs to be eradicated, as well. (Kelly, L, Disabusing the Definition of Domestic Abuse: How Women Batter Men and the Role of the Feminist State ; Fla. St. Univ. Law Rev, Vol 30:791)
It will be interesting to see how Kelly's 65 page paper is received, as she treads on ground long held sacred and untouchable by special interests, who, according to Kelly, have been influencing DV policy using double standards and biased data which discriminates against men.
As long ago as 1981, Straus, Gelles and Steinmetz discovered some of the data referred to by Kelly, reporting it in "Behind Closed Doors: Violence in the American Family." Nearly 180 million women were assaulted annually by their husbands that year -- shameful data that was elevated for all to see via incite-ful ads trumpeting the fact that "Every 17 seconds a woman is assaulted by her husband."
What the general public never saw, though, was the "real surprise," to quote the authors: 200 million husbands who were likewise assaulted by their wives.
In what can only be described as a conspiracy of misinformation, the data on assaulted husbands was swept under the rug. No ads were ever produced depicting the average 16 second time span between assaults by wives on their husbands.
And so it is, as Kelly warns against, with New Hampshire 's annual Conference on DV sponsored by the Governor's Commission on Domestic and Sexual Violence which bills itself to "Improve the Investigative, Judicial, Administrative and Community Response."
Efforts to "improve" seems fair on its face -- except that judges who want to "improve" themselves should not be attending DV conferences loaded with sexist half truths and innuendo.
The slide projections of Mary Bettley in Seminar 4 of this year's conference provided the best evidence of such bias. What judge could be expected to make fair decisions after being exposed to half truths like, "50% of men who assaulted their wives also abused their children"? Shouldn't judges also be taught the rate of child abuse for women who assaulted their husbands? And shouldn't judges be aware that women are twice more likely to assault their children than men are?
Only half the story, furthermore, was given for the cycle of violence: "He (the boy) sees hitting and learns, "reports Beattley. Don't girls learn about hitting when they see it? Was it Bettley's intention to teach the hundreds of judges and criminal justice people gathered to "improve" themselves, that only males learn about and do the hitting around the house?
In Seminar 10, Dr. James Knoll echoed the Rule of Thumb, debunked long ago by "Who Stole Feminism" author Christine Hoff' Sommers as a libelous falsehood. The rule, which serves as an unfair character assassination that refuses to die and which never existed except in the mind set of the feminist state, held that men could beat their wives so long as they used a stick no bigger than their thumb.
Dr. Knoll seemed loathe to acknowledge that men have a long record of loving, protecting and glorifying the fair sex -- building magnificent temples to honor women and installing them on high pedestals. Apparently it's more PC and profitable to malign men as cruel beasts, especially at well-financed conferences constructed to teach that only men are responsible for DV.
Noticed for his absence from the conference was Murray Straus, PhD, director of the Family Research Lab at UNH and world class expert on DV who lives and works right here in New Hampshire . He was not invited. Was this because of his position that female aggression should not be ignored? Or his revelation that men are compelled to stay in abusive relationships for the same reasons heretofore reserved for women? Or that his life might again be threatened for treading on untouchable topics?
Will Kelly be ignored, too?
DV is an equal opportunity employer that should demand all perpetrators be held accountable on an equal basis. Let's hope that reasonable and objective people like Kelly and Straus, et al, can be part of the dialogue going forward. (Mr. Geanoulis is president of the New Hampshire Chapter of the National Congress for Fathers & Children and sits on the New Hampshire Commission on the Status of Men.
Email: geancfc@juno.com )
Submitted by:
Michael J. Geanoulis
Pres. of NH Chapter
National Congress for Fathers & Children
PO Box 45, New Castle , NH 03854-0045
http://web.archive.org/web/20050403154211/http://www.ncfcnh.org/
603-436-8810
http://mail.canada.com/jump/http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/jamieson/177711_robert14.html
http://mail.canada.com/jump/http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/jamieson/177711_robert14.html
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER
Monday, June 14, 2004
"Battered men are starting to speak up"
By ROBERT L. JAMIESON Jr. - COLUMNIST
By the droves, men are coming out of the closet to talk about a type of violence they once dared not speak about -- violent abuse from their wives and girlfriends The outpouring -- hundreds of e-mails and calls -- was in response to a recent column I wrote about Dean Lai-how, a Renton man who tried his best to avoid stalking from his ex-wife. After months of harassing behavior, police say Dean's ex eventually ran after him and shot him dead.
"I have twice been the victim, even though I hate that word," Mark, a reader, writes about his former spouse. "Once I was chased down the hall with a butcher knife ... Second time, I was in the recliner, napping in the basement when (my wife) left a steak on the broiler, took the kids and left. Don't ask me how you could 'forget' dinner was cooking, but luckily there were few flames, just a ton of smoke." "Since last October I have been harassed, stalked, slandered and financially impacted by an ex-girlfriend," says Vaughn. "I have had to move three times, change phone and cellular numbers and e-mail addresses. This woman has caused me to lose (business) contracts, interfered with my relationship with my children, had me falsely arrested and then harassed all friends who helped me through this ... I have been in therapy. I am not the first ex-boyfriend she has done this to."
"I've been there, for many years. It wasn't fun," confesses Tom. "There are plenty of men who are being battered, just as there are plenty of women. Too many of each. We all agree domestic violence is a serious problem, but we can't solve it as long as we insist on treating only one side of it: Man equals abuser, and woman equals victim." I wasn't so much surprised to hear from men with stories -- about flimsy restraining orders, the lack of shelter services for abused men, about how the legal deck favors women -- as I was to hear from so many women who powerfully echoed what the men were breaking long-held silences to say. By one estimate, a man in America is battered every 37.8 seconds. Nationally, about 1.5 million women are victims of domestic violence each year compared to about 835,000 men, according to a 1998 National Violence Against Women Act survey. But given the way the issue has been publicly framed for so long one could easily conclude women are the sole victims of domestic abuse.
"I know that women initiate violence," says Jackie. "Of my friends that say it's not a problem, the usual response is that the 'man is bigger and has more physical strength.' ... I've thought for some time that women need to be as accountable as men for involvement in domestic violence."
"I have first-hand experience with women batterers -- my sister is one," writes Deborah. "When I tell people that women batter too, they look at me as if I am some kind of traitor. I guess 'us women' are supposed to stick together. I refuse to stick up for an abusive person, male or female. Deborah adds: "I have a friend who called the state's Domestic Violence Hotline, the one MY tax dollars pay for, and because he is male, they told him he was probably a batterer and a liar." Lisa Scott, a family law attorney in Bellevue , points out that society has an ingrained double standard when it comes to issues involving men who are victims of abuse at the hands of women.
That just serves to divide men and women who should be united on an issue of power and control that affects both genders.
Not long after Dean died, the local news was flooded with the story of a young Stanwood woman who was slain by her ex-boyfriend, who then killed himself. "I saw several prominent stories about her case, with the usual interviews with family, friends and domestic violence advocates," Scott says. "Not so much as a peep was heard about Mr. Lai-how's background or what a horrendous experience he had already gone through before he was murdered. No interviews with DV victim advocates, talking about how dangerous it can be to get away from an abuser." Scott is working to change perspectives and foster positive change in our legal system by making it less gender-biased. She's working with a reform group -- Taking Action Against Bias in the System -- that can be reached at this Web site:
http://web.archive.org/web/20050403154211/http://mail.canada.com/jump/www.tabs.org.
Such an effort comes as more and more groups are coming to the fore. There's the Domestic Abuse Helpline for Men, which can be reached at
http://web.archive.org/web/20050403154211/http://mail.canada.com/jump/www.noexcuse4abuse.org. Jan Brown, founder and executive director of the helpline, says it's "a shame" that it takes a story such as Dean's slaying to get the public to look at the least-served victims of domestic violence -- men. Philip Cook e-mailed to mention his Oregon-based international organization called Stop Abuse For Everyone, which can be visited at this Web address:
http://web.archive.org/web/20050403154211/http://mail.canada.com/jump/www.safe4all.org.
Cook says lawmakers need to see whether adequate state money is set forth for male victims in need of services or emergency shelter. He also says police and sheriff's departments need to offer "outreach" efforts for male victims that are comparable with what they do for females victims.
His point is reinforced by one officer named David who says that in a decade of working patrol it "became obvious to me that there were more incidents of women being the primary suspect than what was being put forth during training." David says prosecutors got police to buy into the "only arrest the primary aggressor" axiom and that officers were taught that person was likely going to be the man because of an assumption the man is stronger. "I stopped going to the annual Puget Sound Domestic Violence conferences because of the biased slant toward only male suspects," David adds. "They would put silhouette cutouts on the stage of 30 or so dead victims and they were all women."
Domestic violence hurts both men and women. Are we as a society ready to speak up and confront the problem on all fronts as we should for the benefit of everyone? *P-I columnist Robert L. Jamieson Jr. can be reached at 206-448-8125 or
http://web.archive.org/web/20050403154211/http://mail.canada.com/jump/robertjamieson@seattlepi.com
Send comments to
http://web.archive.org/web/20050403154211/http://mail.canada.com/jump/newmedia@seattlepi.com
Seattle Post-Intelligencer
Battered men--the full story
"... she started pawing and ripping at him with her fingers,
scratching his back and face..."
From Dec. 12, 1990 police report detailing the beating of Stanley
G. by his wife
"... multiple bruises, abrasions and lacerations... chest wall
contusion... psychological trauma..."
From the hospital injury report of the same incident
Billboards, radio and TV ads across the country proclaim that "every fifteen seconds a women is beaten by a man." Violence against women is clearly a problem of national importance, but has anyone ever asked how often men are beaten by women? The unfortunate fact is that men are the victims of domestic violence at least as often as women. While the very idea of men being beaten by their wives runs contrary to many of our deeply ingrained beliefs about men and women, female violence against men is a well-documented phenomenon almost completely ignored by both the media and society.
Consider recent studies on family violence. In 1975, and again in 1985, researchers Murray A. Straus, Ph.D., and Richard J. Gelles, Ph.D., et al., conducted the National Family Violence Survey, one of the largest and most respected studies of family violence ever done in this country. The Survey showed that men are just as likely to be the victims of domestic violence as women. In addition, Straus and Gelles found that between 1975 and 1985, the overall rate of domestic violence by men against women decreased, while women's violence against men actually increased. In 1991, to avoid accusations of gender bias, Straus recomputed the assault rates based solely on the responses of the 2,947 women in the 1985 Survey. The new results confirmed that even according to women, men are the ones more likely to be assaulted by their partners.
Violence takes various forms. According to Professors R.L. McNeely and Coramae Richey Mann, "the average man's size and strength are neutralized by guns and knives, boiling water, bricks, fireplace pokers and baseball bats." In fact, a 1984 study of 6,200 cases of reported domestic assault found that 86% of female-on-male violence involved weapons, while only 25% of male-on-female violence did.
But not all men are bigger than their wives. On one occasion, Stanley G., whose wife weighed over two hundred pounds, locked himself in his car to keep her from attacking him. She managed to get in anyway. Once inside, she shoved him face-first into the passenger side of the seat and jumped on him, putting her knees in his back. Stanley reached for the cellular phone to call for help but his wife wrestled it away from him and hit him with it several times on the side of the head.
According to many women's rights advocates, female violence against men--if it exists at all--is purely a self-defense response to male violence. Several studies, however, show that women initiate about one quarter of all domestic assaults, men initiate another quarter, and the remaining half are classified as "mutual." Other researchers, attempting to discredit the findings on men as victims, claim that since women are physically weaker and do less damage, only "severe assaults" should be compared. The results of that analysis show men are only slightly more likely (35% by men, 30% by women) to initiate the violence. Overall, Dr. Straus found that whether the analysis is based on all assaults, or is focused exclusively on dangerous assaults, "about as many women as men attack a spouse who has not hit them during a one year period." Clearly, then, the claim that women's violence is purely "self-defense" doesn't hold water.
But if female-on-male domestic violence is so widespread, why haven't we heard about it before? For several reasons. First, men, in general, are extremely reluctant to report that they have been the victims of any assault. After all, men are supposed to be tough, able to take care of themselves, right? What would people think...? "Men are trained not to ask for help, and a man's not being able to solve his own problems is seen as a sign of weakness," says Dr. Alvin Baraff, a psychotherapist and the founder of MenCenter, a Washington, D.C. counseling and research group focusing on men. It's hardly a surprise, then, that men report all types of violent victimization 32% less frequently than women, according to the 1990 Department of Justice Survey of Criminal Victimization.
But confessing to being knocked around by another man is a piece of cake compared to admitting being victimized by a woman. Why? Most likely, men fear--quite justifiably--society's traditional reaction. In 18th- and 19th-century France, a husband who had been pushed around by his wife would be forced by the community to wear women's clothing and to ride through the village, sitting backwards on a donkey, holding its tail. If he tried to avoid the punishment, the crowd would instead punish the man's closest neighbor--for having allowed such a travesty to occur so close to his own home. This humiliating practice, called the charivari,
was also common in other parts of Europe. In Brittany, villagers strapped wife-beaten husbands to carts and "paraded them ignominiously through a booing populace."
Modern versions of the charivari persist today. Take Skip W., who participated in a program on domestic violence aired on the short-lived Jesse Jackson Show in 1991. Skip related how his wife repeatedly hit him and attacked him with knives and scissors. The audience's reaction was exactly what male victims who go public fear most: laughter, and constant, derisive snickering. Even when they are severely injured, men will go to great lengths to avoid telling anyone what they've been through. Dr. Ronn Berrol, an emergency-room physician at Mercy Hospital in San Diego, sees a lot of men with hot-water burns on the face, deep cuts on the hands, and other injuries consistent with being on the receiving end of domestic violence. But when Berrol asks how they were injured, most of these victims are evasive and claim they somehow "did it themselves or that their kids accidentally dropped something on them."
A few men, though, are willing to swallow their pride and call the police when they've been abused by their wives. While each of the police officers I spoke with very carefully claimed that "domestic violence calls are all handled the same way--regardless of the gender of the victim," male victims tell a very different story. Tracy T., for example, a 36-year old professional from near San Francisco, was regularly attacked by his wife and, just as regularly, called the police. "But every time they'd show up, they'd just laugh it off and tell me not to take it so seriously."
One evening, after his wife had hit him with a shoe and thrown a phone at him, Tracy says he finally decided enough was enough. When she came at him again, he slapped her. "She immediately stopped hitting me and called the police." When they arrived a few minutes later, Tracy tried to explain what had happened. "There I was, cuts and bruises all over my arms, but when I told the cops I'd only slapped her in self-defense, they told me I was under arrest for beating my wife." For Skip W., things weren't much better. After he reported his wife's violence, he was ordered to attend a program for abusive men, while his wife was put into a program for battered women.
But besides the police, the mental health community has also been in deep denial when it comes to acknowledging men's victimization. Because most therapists rarely see battered men or abusive women, many of them ignore subtle (or not so subtle) clues that their male patients may be abused, or that their female patients may be violent. For example, when a man admits he loses his temper, most therapists, in an attempt to find out whether he might be physically abusive, will ask a few questions. The most common ones would probably be, "How do you express your anger when you lose your temper? Do you throw things? Do you hit people?" On the other hand, female patients who admit they lose their tempers are rarely asked these questions.
But if the right questions aren't asked, the truth just won't come out. Dr. John G. Macchietto, a counseling psychologist and Director of the Student Counseling Center at Tarleton State University in Texas, recently began doing what he calls "role reversals" with his patients. A woman patient who wanted a better relationship with her boyfriend, complained she was often angry at how insensitive he was. When Macchietto pressed her to explain how she expressed her anger, the woman replied that she "hit him--sometimes with heavy objects--during arguments" and that it was always she who struck him, never the reverse.
Unfortunately, most therapists seem uninterested in confronting their own stereotypes about domestic violence. One man, Dean C. had an experience that in many ways sums up the mental health community's attitude towards the problem. Dean and his then-girlfriend went to see a therapist to discuss, among other things, her violence towards him. During one session, Dean told the therapist about an occasion when he had fallen asleep on the couch while watching TV. About 2 a.m., he was awakened by his girl-friend, pounding on the front door. After Dean opened the door to tell her to go home, she suddenly clobbered him over the head with a glass seltzer bottle. After hearing of this incident, the therapist looked at Dean and asked: "Do you often fall asleep in
front of the TV?"
Another aspect of female violence the mental-health professionals usually overlook is lesbian partner abuse. Victims of female-against-female domestic violence--a widespread yet completely unacknowledged issue in the lesbian community--are frequently viewed as crazy. Susan L. Morrow, one of the authors of a 1989 article in the Journal of Counseling and Development, witnessed a therapist refer to a lesbian who had been abused by her partner as "borderline" and "paranoid." The fact that the patient was a victim was completely ignored. Morrow and co-author Donna M. Hawxhurst found that several myths--that women are less aggressive than men and therefore don't batter, and that women are incapable of inflicting serious harm--"have contributed to the secrecy surrounding the issue" of lesbian partner abuse.
When it comes to domestic violence, society seems to have one set of rules for men and another for women. Perhaps it's because we have been socialized to view women's violence as somehow less "real" (and consequently more acceptable) than men's violence. A 1989 study published in the Journal of Interpersonal Violence found that "both men and women evaluated female violence less negatively than male violence." When it came to domestic violence, the researchers found that "[p]hysical violence of any kind was perceived less negatively when the female in the arguing couple was the aggressor." The double standard for violence apparently extends as far as murder. A recent survey of 60,000 people over 18, conducted by the Department of Justice, found that people rated a husband's stabbing his wife to death 40% worse than a wife's stabbing her husband to death.
There are several very serious effects of society's reluctance to acknowledge the female potential for violence. First, women are subtly encouraged to be more violent. Dr. Straus found that "a large number of girls have been told by their mothers 'If he gets fresh, slap him.'" Images of women kicking, punching, and slapping men with complete impunity are not only widespread in movies, TV, and books, but the viewer/reader's reaction is usually "good for her." Second, while it is possible to argue that a slap is unlikely to do any severe damage, not recognizing that a slap is still violence sets a rather dangerous precedent. Arresting a man who slaps a woman, while dismissing a woman who slaps a man as "nothing to worry about," both condones violence and reinforces a double standard that historically has been used to oppress women in the name of "protection."
Men's victimization is a fact. Nevertheless, a few nagging questions remain: First, if men are so much bigger and stronger, why don't they protect themselves? The answer, when you think about it, makes perfect sense. First of all, at the same time little girls are being taught its OK to slap, little boys are being told "Never hit a girl." And when these little boys grow up, they are told that any man who hits a woman is a bully. But if a woman hits him, he's supposed to "take it like a man." James B., for example, is a battered husband who was repeatedly told by his therapists that his wife's violence was something he'd "just have to put up with." Second, according to Professor Suzanne Steinmetz , Director of the Family Research Institute at Indiana University-Purdue University at Indianapolis (IUPUI), men recognize the severe damage they are capable of doing and therefore consciously try to limit it.
These reasons explain why most abused men, no matter how capable they are of doing so, offer little or no resistance to their partners' physical violence. And many women, well aware of these fears, may actually continue their abuse, knowing they can get away with it. One man interviewed by Dr. Steinmetz recounted the single time he retaliated against his wife's physical abuse, hitting her in the mouth. "She went flying across the room..." After that, because he realized how badly he could hurt her, he continued to take her physical abuse without retaliation.
Some men, though, are simply unable to offer any resistance to their partner's violence. James B., who now helps other men by doing volunteer peer-counseling, told me about one of his clients, a blind man who was regularly abused by his girlfriend. "She'd just turn the TV up real loud," he said. "So he could never tell when she was coming at him."
Not fighting back is one thing, but why would any sane person stay in an abusive relationship? It may surprise some people to learn that men's reasons differ little from women's: economics and concern for the children. Although the average male victim of domestic abuse has more financial resources available than his average female counterpart, this is changing fast. As more and more women enter the workforce, it's getting harder and harder to find a traditional "man-is-the-sole-breadwinner" family any more. In addition, more men than women lost their jobs in the recent depression, leaving them completely dependent on their wives' income and unable to support themselves alone.
Many abused women fear that if they leave their husbands, the violence they have experienced may be directed against their children. But abused men too--despite widespread stereotypes to the contrary--are just as concerned for their children as women are. Dean C. (the guy who falls asleep in front of the TV) for example, delayed breaking up with his abusive girlfriend because he thought he could better protect the children by staying. His girlfriend repeatedly beat her daughter (from a previous relationship) and often screamed viciously at their infant son. Moreover, since women still get physical custody of children in over 85% of all divorce cases, many men are hesitant to leave, realizing that if they do, the courts will severely limit their access to their children.
For a man, deciding to leave an abusive relationship is only half the battle. The other half is, "Where do I go?" For women, shelters and support groups exist, although still scarce and pathetically under-funded. But where are the facilities for men? Over a dozen calls to battered women's shelters, parental stress hotlines, and men's groups in the San Francisco Bay Area produced not a single resource or shelter for battered men. However, comments like these were common: "Men's victimization is statistically irrelevant," and "Any violence women may do is purely the result of living in a violent patriarchy." After his wife knocked him over, splitting his head open on a bathtub, James B. tried to get help from a local battered women's shelter, but was rudely turned away. The only shelter for battered men in the entire state of California is run by Community United Against Violence (CUAV) in San Francisco, an organization dealing exclusively with gay men. Even straight men who are brave enough to risk the stigma of admitting victimization are unlikely to turn to a group of gay men for support.
In some other states, attempts are being made to help abused men. In St. Paul, Minnesota, George Gilliland, Sr. the director of the Domestic Rights Coalition, has been trying to set up a shelter for battered men for quite a while, although without much success. Gilliland, whose wife hit him in the head with a board with a nail in it, missing his eye by a fraction of an inch, attributes part of the delay to efforts by battered women's groups and other women's organizations to block the project. In San Luis Obispo, California, David Gross is organizing the Allen Wells Memorial Fund for Battered Husbands. Mr. Wells was a battered man who could find no help and finally committed suicide after losing his children to his violent wife in a custody battle.
While battered men find few facilities or support, there are a variety of programs (many of which are run by feminist men's groups) to help abusive men deal more effectively with their violence. But for violent women--strangely enough--no comparable treatment programs exist. This fact further illustrates a serious problem: society is simply unwilling--or unable--to acknowledge and deal with violent women. Dr. Suzanne Steinmetz says there are plenty of women who have been violent to their husbands or who are feeling out of control and are afraid they will hurt someone. But these women have no place to turn. When they call women's shelters or support groups, they are often told that they "can't do any real damage anyway, that their violent feelings are nothing to worry about."
Despite all the evidence about female-on-male violence, many groups actively try to suppress coverage of the issue. Dr. Steinmetz told me that she received verbal threats and anonymous phone calls from radical women's groups threatening to harm her children after she published "The Battered Husband Syndrome" in 1978. In addition, all of her female colleagues were contacted and told to "do everything possible to deny" Steinmetz tenure. And when the ACLU invited her to speak on domestic violence, it received a bomb threat. Steinmetz finds it ironic that the same people who claim that women-initiated violence is purely self-defense are so quick to threaten violence against people who do nothing more than publish a scientific study.
Unfortunately, Steinmetz's story in not unique. Ten years later, R.L. McNeely, Ph.D., a professor at the School of Social Welfare at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, and Gloria Robinson-Simpson, EdD., published "The Truth About Domestic Violence: A Falsely Framed Issue." The article examined various studies on domestic violence and concluded that society must recognize that men are victims "or we will be addressing only a part of the phenomenon." Shortly thereafter, McNeely received letters from a Pennsylvania women's organization threatening to use its influence in Washington to pull his research funding. He also suffered many other "character assassinations." Professor Robinson-Simpson, who uncovered some of the most important data, received relatively little abuse because, according to McNeely, "she, a young, assistant professor, was assumed to have been 'duped' by the more senior male professor."
But existence of female-against-male attacks is not the only aspect of women's capacity for violence that has been suppressed. Morrow and Hawxhurst found that many feminists also refuse to acknowledge battered lesbians, because it would "endanger a feminist gender- specific analysis... that viewed battering as a consequence of male privilege and power in society."
And in the rare instances when female-against-male violence is publicly acknowledged, the woman's responsibility is frequently mitigated. In the recent CBS movie, "Men Don't Tell" (which told the story of a physically abused man), for example, the abusive woman was clearly mentally ill--a fact that made the viewer feel somewhat sympathetic toward her.
The victims and the perpetrators of domestic violence--women and men--have been suffering for too long. As the sharp distinctions between traditional men's and women's roles continue to blur, women are more frequently behaving in ways once thought (often erroneously) to be the exclusive province of men. Many experts feel that the problem of female-initiated violence must be exposed, "legitimized," and addressed by the media, the mental health and law-enforcement communities, and the Legislature.
Resources and facilities to combat domestic violence are, unfortunately, in short supply due to cutbacks in almost all social services. Perhaps some battered women's groups fear that if society recognizes that men are victims too, what little money is available will be diverted. But acknowledging men's victimization in no way involves denying that women are victims. Women's groups that help battered women could also help battered men, while men's groups that counsel abusive men could make their expertise available to violent women as well.
Continuing to portray spousal violence solely as a women's issue is not only wrong--it's also counterproductive. And encouraging such unnecessary fragmentation and divisiveness will ultimately do more harm than good. No one has (or should have) a monopoly on pain and suffering. But until society as a whole confronts its deeply ingrained stereotypes and recognizes all the victims of domestic violence, we will never be able to solve the problem. Domestic violence is a neither a male or a female issue--it's simply a human issue.
http://web.archive.org/web/20050403154211/http://www.menweb.org/throop/battery/commentary/brott-hidden.html
STUDIES AND REFERENCES EXAMINING ASSAULTS
AND OTHER VIOLENCE ISSUES
(CARTOON IS SATIRE IN CONTENT)
"Protest raises questions about gender bias * Domestic violence staff walks out on video showing abuse of men".
http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=8019725&BRD=1973&PAG=461&dept_id=214849&rfi=8
http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/NACJD/PDF/nij-win2001.pdf
Also submit: This bibliography examines 138 scholarly investigations: 111 empirical studies and 27 reviews and/or analyses, which demonstrate that women are as physically aggressive, or more
aggressive, than men in their relationships with their spouses or male partners. The aggregate sample size in the reviewed studies exceeds 100,000. http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm The following statement was a completely lopsided ratio of FACTUAL ASSAULTS (3:2 committed vs. 20:1 getting services) compared to services rendered. The entire staff stated they had just 14 men get services from DSS for abuse, compared to 300 woman.
So, I did a search on http://web.archive.org/web/20050403154211/http://www.google.com/ for "Cecil County Domestic Violence".
After looking at the website for "Cecil County Department of Social Services Domestic Violence/Rape Crisis Center"
http://www.peoples-law.com/domviol/counties/cecil.html
the website clearly states in bold print, LIMITATIONS: We do not accept males over the age of 14. CLEARLY, NOT ONLY DO THEY NOT ADDRESS MEN BEING BATTERED. THEY BOLDLY STATE, DO NOT COME HERE FOR HELP, IF YOU ARE MALE AND OVER THE AGE OF 14.
The next site, did at least mention help for men. The website, Cecil County Domestic Violence Program, clearly states, "About the program: For victims of rape and domestic violence. Women's shelter (410)398-9898. also info on the men's domestic violence and abused children's support group (410) 398-4060." Women, and apparently the children of women, get their SHELTER help line and all the "secret information" unavailable to men, men and apparently male children over 14 get "group support". Is this "Separate, but equal"? So "separate, but equal" that they have to call a different number for FAR LESS HELP being offered women. Apparently, we can't have men finding out what is available to women. Wouldn't want a man or a 15 year old boy showing up expecting the resources a woman is only supposed to get.
But, I'm a man and I still need Domestic Violence help. So, I look for
another link.
The next site, Maryland Judiciary: Domestic Violence,
http://web.archive.org/web/20050403154211/http://www.courts.state.md.us/family/dv.html .
The two main links are, http://web.archive.org/web/20050403154211/http://www.hruth.org/ the House of Ruth, and, http://web.archive.org/web/20050403154211/http://www.wlcmd.org/ , The Woman's Law Center of Maryland.
Is a man, already ashamed of being beaten up by his wife or girlfriend and quite possibly, afraid of women, going to seek help from a place clearly named for women? Would a woman seek help at the House of Bubba? Or the Men's Law Center? Even if it was available to him, which it is NOT. To put things in perspective. Substitute "Whites or Caucasian" wherever "women" is used on these websites, then, substitute "Blacks" wherever the noun "men" is used? When black people were discriminated against, would they have sought help at the "House of Whites" or the "Caucasian Law Center"?
Then add to that, police forces are bombarded with "woman" are victims, while the facts are that the ratio of victims is "3 women for every 2 men", and men are batterers. They approach every domestic violence situation based on that flawed premise. How likely is it that a man is going to be believed from the very start. If a man does manage to be believed when he is battered, he finds "We do not accept males over the age of 14.". Even studies about DV are titled "DV against Women", the titles of the studies themselves show bias.
Until there are studies dealing with Domestic Violence ONLY and not domestic violence against a particular gender, there can be no unbiased study. The titles of the studies themselves promote bias of the survey. How valuable would a study called "Violence against Caucasions" be to Blacks when they were discriminated against? But, even in a study called "Violence against women" a 3 women to 2 men ratio showed up.
While looking for a website to report this gender bias. I came across the DSS site for Maryland. I quote, "The DSS Domestic Violence Unit works with social workers to provide safety for children and their mothers.
The HOUSE OF RUTH site, "helping thousands of battered women and their children find the safety and security that so many of us take for granted." Help for "women" is mentioned 6 times and battered men help is never listed. There are 84 beds, 6 apartments and a staff of 90 for women AND NONE FOR MEN. Yet, this is one of the only 2 sites that DVRCC refers ALL web information to.
The other site linkage, http://web.archive.org/web/20050403154211/http://www.peoples-law.com/domviol/DV%20definitions.html takes you to "Domestic Violence Service Definitions" which merely defines the options available to ONLY women of domestic violence. They include: Transitional Housing, Protective Order Advocacy and Representation (available through House of Ruth and Women's Law Center), Lawyer Referrals, Family Law (for legal issues outside the reach of Protective Order Advocacy), Direct Representation, Court Accompaniment, Abuse Intervention Programs, Advocacy (again, I guess for those problems not covered by Protective Order Advocacy and Family Law) and Case Management. Those are the services given to a FEMALE victim of domestic violence via the House of Ruth and the Women's Law Center.
So, IN TOTAL, not one single link for help for men was found on the web for Cecil County. I did find a phone number to help for a "support group". I guess, a man would call it to see what kind of help was available provided he can find someplace to stay, eat, bathe, survive.
What is AMAZING to me is that 14 men somehow managed to slip through the cracks when greeted by: WE DO NOT ACCEPT MALES OVER THE AGE OF 14. There are massive amounts of information and help on the net for women (via links) for shelter, legal help, etc., AND ONE LITTLE LINE on ONE site for a phone number for a support group for men.
Now lets examine the statements and "official statements" of DVRCC and its Cecil County protectors against DV Of BOTH genders.
"(The DVRCC) does not use or support the use of melodramatic materials ... no matter what victim group is emphasized. The use of skewered, sensationalist materials, often based on misleading statistics, myths, and non-scientific research, is non-productive to our mission and provides a disservice to all victims of violence," according to one passage in the statement. Isn't this EXACTLY what the DVRCC is doing? They show no facts of myths, melodrama, non scientific research, etc, in the 20/20 episode, and refuse to even address the program by walking out. It would seem to me, IF THEY HAD FACTS, they would most
certainly want to stay and show those false facts for what they are.
THAT IS PRECISELY THEIR PROBLEM. ACTUAL FACTS via the NIJ study DO NOT
SUPPORT THE MELODRAMA, MYTHS, OR MISLEADING STATISTICS THEY HAVE BEEN PRESENTING. So, they do what they allege the program does, in protestation of more misleading facts, melodrama and myths TO KEEP THE FACTS FROM COMING OUT. The ONLY TRACEABLE FACT THEY USE IS "WE ONLY HAD 14 MEN COME TO US FOR HELP AND WE HELPED THEM.", COMPLETELY IGNORING THE FACT THEIR WEBSITE SAYS, "WE DO NOT ACCEPT MALES OVER 14 YEARS OF AGE. OF COURSE THEY ARE NOT GOING TO GET MANY MEN COMING TO THEM FOR HELP WHEN MEN ARE TOLD BY THE DVRCC, "DO NOT COME HERE FOR HELP.".
"Women need more services than men. It's not that we discriminate against men," Dunne said. Dunne does not say how many women are helped that do NOT have children. How is it that the gender of women requires MORE HELP than any man in the same circumstances? Is Ms. Dunne aware of sex discrimination that has not been addressed in the workplace, life, etc., that REQUIRES MORE HELP THAN A MAN IN THE SAME SITUATION? How is this a matter of domestic violence? A battered person is a battered person AND ALL AVAILABLE HELP SHOULD BE GIVEN TO ANY PROVEN ABUSED PERSON REGARDLESS OF GENDER.
As for Mr. Ricciuti, he states, ""The real issue now is how to we reach out to the elderly victims of domestic violence, and victims who are disabled and victims who have a limited proficiency in English," Ricciuti said. "They are the under-served population. I would say
domestic violence against the elderly is the biggest problem." How many of them did the DVRCC help last year. He had no problem dismissing the National Institute of Justice statistics that show DV being 2 men for every 3 women abused, with the statement, only 14 men got help from us last year. Surely, he must have helped hundreds of elderly, disabled and non English speaking abused for that statement to be made. How many of them were helped last year by DVRCC? Are those the 14 men that somehow managed to get past the DVRCC bias of their website?
I believe the actions, statements and "official websites" of the Cecil County DVRCC/DSS clearly show gender bias. But, I most certainly, do not imply or suggest this is a gender bias problem with Cecil County ONLY. In fact, I submit that this is merely one county highlighted and the IT IS PERVASIVE IN EACH COUNTY IN MA AND THE USA. I request an investigation of Cecil County DVRCC/DSS for gender bias. And, I suggest it for all the counties in MA and the nation.
Ed Ward, MD
New Orleans, LA
edward19@cox.net
Sent to:
mnadv@aol.com Maryland Network Against DV
http://web.archive.org/web/20050403154211/http://abcnews.go.com/sections/2020/2020/2020friday_email_form.html
With added header for possible re-evaluation of this incident.
http://web.archive.org/web/20050403154211/http://www.nancyjacobs.com/mailform.html With thanks, request for
government agencies to send complaint,
whigletters@chespub.com with an Attention Carl Hamilton
DANGER! RESTRAINING ORDER AHEAD!
By Ed Ward, MD
April 29, 2003
In the recent case of "Police Chief Shoots Wife, Kills Self."
& "There were no warning signs...", it was just recently noted that
divorce court documents show Mrs. Brame had just asked for a
restraining order, but, it was not yet granted. Everything had
resolved as a best case scenario, until, the RO appeared. As a
police officer and chief, he knew what this meant. His career was
history long before any trial would take place. His access to his
children would be minimal, if at all. Everything of any value in
his life was gone.
http://web.archive.org/web/20050403154211/http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/134684684_brame28m.html
What led up to the restraining order? Her attorney advised her to
get one. More than likely, everyone she talked to suggested one.
ROs make a divorce case easy. Factually, we will never
know. It does not matter to the Brame's children, their father and
their mother, barring a miracle, are gone. Both spouses had at one
time or another called 911 to report domestic violence on their
partner. This would be consistent with non biased studies which show
that males and females are equally violent in committing domestic
violence.
Is it just this particular case? A review of the limited data
submitted in the biased Santa Clara County Death Review Committee's
(SCCDRC) report. Biased, because, it calls men driven to only a
suicide after ROs 'perpetrators' and it includes those suicides in
its 'domestic violence' statistics. It uses the lives of those
driven to suicide, quite possibly, entirely by the ROs in the
ultimate perverse irony to potentate further ROs. Santa Clara County
is one of the few counties that shows a report and the only county
that showed a small portion of ill interpreted and unreleased data.
The SCCDRC shows, but, does not address:
Emergency Restraining Order (ERO)
In 1994 there were 288 EROs, there were 9 homicides/suicides.
In 1995 there were 683 EROs (more than double), there were 16
homicides/suicides (almost double).
In 1996 there were 854 EROs, there were 8 homicides/suicides.
In 1997 there were 1,465 EROs (almost double), there were 21
homicides/suicides (almost triple).
From this date EROs remain about the same with slight increase
each year and the death rates remain double the 1994 statistics.
DESPITE A 660% INCREASE IN EROs, THE DEATH RATES HAVE DOUBLED
THE 1994 RATES FOR THE LAST 5 YEARS IN THAT COUNTY.
IN THE 2 YEARS (1995,1997) THAT EROs DOUBLED THE PRIOR YEAR EROs,
THE HOMICIDE/SUICIDE DEATHS ALMOST DOUBLED OR TRIPLED THE PRIOR
YEAR HOMICIDE IN THAT COUNTY.
In the 1994-2002 report, 130 deaths, 9 suicides had or were getting
EROs on them. The SCCDRC did not reveal the total number of suicides
being included in its prevention of domestic violence to women
statistics. The SCCDRC did reveal that 22 suicides used a
firearm to kill themselves. From that statistic and a review
of the methods, it appears that 20 to 30% of the statistics
used to prevent domestic violence to women are suicides in
that particular county. Seven (7%) per cent of the total deaths
(suicides) seem to be directly related to having EROS being placed.
There are over 3,500 counties in the USA.
While alleviating less severe abuse in domestic violence cases,
restraining orders seem to potentiate deaths. When the reality of
the true effects of a restraining order are finally known to the
accused, whether, the allegements are true or false, there are
essentially only 2 possible avenues of action after your MANDATORY
ARREST.
Either, stay within the unconstitutional rulings of the court which
may and usually include: no contact with your children, removal from
your home, placement on a permanent database as an 'abuser', weekly
pre-probationary and court appointments, anger management classes,
curfews, inability to consume alcohol legally, removal of possession
of any firearms or 'other weapons', inability to visit anyone with a
firearm or 'other weapon' in their residence, admitting to an offense
you did not commit, drug testing, electronic monitoring, mental health
evaluations, no contact with the 'victim' of the accused violence, no
contact with any witness, family of the 'victim' or any location at
which the victim may be found. Any of these will very likely cost the
accused their job. All of these are done BEFORE YOU GO TO TRIAL for
the accusations. If the accused is caught doing any one of these
violations, the violator goes directly to jail for up to 5 years (minimum for a
firearm violation) WITHOUT a trial. If you have been accused falsely,
vindictively, you may just decide to imprison yourself in your
residence. But, is that enough?
Just deciding you are going to accept these unconstitutional decrees
does not keep you from going to jail. There are multiple cases in
which accidental meetings, or well intended circumstances, may put
the accused there anyway. There are documented cases where a parent
called his child on the wrong day of the week. Or, wrote a note to
inform the other parent of a Childs illness. Or, passed the 'victim'
on the other side of an interstate going in the opposite direction.
Or, sent their child a birthday card. Or, the parent got out of
their car to assist their child. All resulted in prison sentences.
Or, you can just decide that losing everything of importance in your
life; your home, your children, your career, most of any future
wages, simply does not make life living any more and you may also
decide to take the accuser with you. This does not condone or
excuse the act. In fact, that response is inexcusable even in the
most extreme of circumstances. But, that's the reality of restraining
orders.
In the state of MA, 2002, there were 36,000 ROs. 71% of the
restraining orders were granted not on abuse, nor even the claim of
abuse, but, the 'fear' of abuse. Most courts, prosecutors, and police
will be glad to state, "If we are going to err, we are going to err
on the side of safety". The present 'political correctness' makes
every day Halloween and restraining orders are candy. There are many
instances of prosecutors and judges stating that something needs to be
done about the rampant abuse of restraining orders.
Yet, the NOW generation (that was no baby, that was my unborn tissue)
wants more ROs, more denial of constitutional rights to the accused,
more safety for women. No matter how few or what the cost to the
falsely accused and their children. It is truly a shame, in my opinion, what
that ethical and moral organization has become. The RO 'death
sentence' and parentless children is a high price to pay for a slap, emotional
or verbal abuse done in the heat of an argument started by either
partner. The penalty is the same for all types of domestic abuse
once the RO is issued. As Stephen Baskerville says, "There must be
some 'Restraint on Restraining Orders'."
In 10 or 15 years, David and Haley Brame will be able to tell you
about the effects of ROs, but, by that time, there will be tens of
thousands more. This is not a Tacoma problem, this is a present day
western civilization problem.
Ed Ward, MD
3223 Canal St.
New Orleans, LA., 70119
504-822-2747
Dr. Ed Ward has been involved in individual, family,
constitutional rights and judicial reform for 5 years.
Currently co-moderator of Fathers Integrity Rights
Movement, http://web.archive.org/web/20050403154211/http://www.firmncp.com/ , participant in:
Child Protection Reform, Jail 4 Judges,
http://web.archive.org/web/20050403154211/http://www.jail4judges.net/ and Million Dad's March, June