NPR Article Diverts Listener's Attention Away From Majority of Victims
Considering that the majority of those victimized by violent crime are men, why does National Public Radio turn a story about the Federal Crime Victim's Fund into a story about battered women? (See http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4661887)
Men are 3.4 times as likely to be murdered than women according to the U.S. Dept. of Justice (http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/gender.htm). And although rates for all types of violent crime have dropped significantly in the last decade, men continue to be 38.4% more likely to be victims of violent crime than are women (http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/tables/vsxtab.htm).
If NPR must focus on victims of domestic abuse, why do they focus exclusively on female victims when the U.S. Dept. of Justice reports that 834,732 men are physically assaulted by an intimate partner, constituting 36% of those so victimized? (http://ncjrs.org/pdffiles1/nij/183781.pdf)
The article claims, "Money goes to states to help families make up for lost wages or pay hospital bills or funeral expenses." But based on the organization featured in the article, it would appear that funding is going instead to organizations that blatantly discriminate against males, both adult and child. The featured organization is the Family Crisis Center's Prince Georges County "Safe House", which is listed on the DC Housing Network's website (http://www.headinghome.org/table.html) as accepting only women and their children, and then only if the children don't happen to be boys over 12.
After discriminatory organizations like that have received their cut, is there any money left to cover the lost wages, hospital bills, and funeral expenses that the program was intended to cover? Are the majority of crime victims, who happen to be male, left unserved while the funding that was intended to compensate them is used by organizations that vilify them? And why does NPR choose to glorify such organizations?
Contact National Public Radio and tell them:
More than three times as many men as women are murdered annually. (U.S. Dept. of Justice http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/gender.htm)
38.4% more men than women suffer violent crime. (U.S. Dept. of Justice http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/tables/vsxtab.htm)
Even when considering only domestic violence cases, over one-third of those victimized are men. (U.S. Dept. of Justice http://ncjrs.org/pdffiles1/nij/183781.pdf)
By using only battered women to illustrate a story on the Crime Victim's Fund, they've made the majority of victims of violent crime invisible.
Here's the contact information:
National Public Radio
635 Massachusetts Ave., NW
Washington, D.C. 20001-3753
Jeffrey A. Dvorkin
Send comments to Mr. Dvorkin via the webform at:
When you write, be sure to include your name, address, and daytime telephone number.
Bush Plan to Divert Victim Fund Prompts Debate
Weekend Edition - Sunday, May 22, 2005
Top state prosecutors are concerned that the federal fund to help crime victims is in jepoardy. They're lobbying against a White House proposal to divert the fund's surplus to the general fund where it would help offset the budget deficit. The administration says it's still committed to helping victims of crime. But states worry that the fund for crime victims would be empty in two years. From member station WAMU, Lisa Nurnberger reports:
Congress created the federal crime victim's fund in 1984. President Ronald Reagan had set up a task force that determined that the government wasn't doing enough to help victims. Maryland Attorney General Joseph Curran remembers it this way, "Many times, the victim was an afterthought. It was the state versus the bad guy. The prosecutors were concerned with getting the evidence to convict the defendant, when in fact of course it really was the victim who the state was speaking for."
So Congress created a fund paid for by the criminals themselves in the form of fines and forfeitures. Money goes to states to help families make up for lost wages or pay hospital bills or funeral expenses.
More than 4000 agencies get money for programs such as rape counseling centers and domestic violence shelters. For example, the non-profit Family Crisis Center runs a shelter in Prince Georges County, Maryland. It's called "A Safe House". Barbara Harvard is a counselor. "We have had clients to come in that have been stabbed. I can remember a couple of years ago we had a female that had been stabbed seven times. She came from a hospital. We have had women to come in that have had black eyes, bruises. And then we sometimes have women that are emotionally abused."
On a recent evening, more than two dozen women are staying at the safe house. The women sit around the table for a support group meeting. They're learning how to recognize, and ultimately avoid what's called the cycle of abuse. It begins with tension, leads to violence, and often ends in a honeymoon phase.
"That's when fighting is done. It's blown up. It's blown over. He says he's sorry. Bam! You're having sex. The 'I'm sorry, I'll never do it again.' Could be candy, it could be anything. But it's like the honeymoon phase. It's usually something like that. Luring you back."
Programs such as this one are in danger according to the attorneys general in all 50 states. That's because the president's proposal would move money now designated for the crime victim's fund to the general treasury. Leaving the $1.2 billion fund empty by 2007. Then it would be replenished slowly as criminal fines are collected. States worry that they'd be expected to carry the load in the interim. They wonder whether they'd have to provide extra money during downtime, when collections from fines and forfeitures are low. Acting U.S. Assistant Attorney General Tracey Henke says she can't answer that question. "Well, it would depend on what the president's budget proposes for the next fiscal year. You know, that will have a bearing on what happens. But understand that the funding provided by the Victims of Crime Act under the Crime Victim's Fund supplement state programs. It's not 100% of their funding. It supplements their funding."
But in Maryland, the fund provides $7 million a year. The state kicks in a fraction of that. The White House insists that it's firmly committed to the fund and will always find the money from somewhere to pay for the program.
Henke calls the Bush program more honest accounting because essentially it stops Congress from saying it's setting aside revenue for the Crime Victim's Fund while actually following the common practice of spending the money on other things as it flows into the treasury. "It makes it a more straightforward approach to budgeting, quite honestly. And it in no means is a reflection or should be a concern that individuals have about the committment of this administration as to crime victims." But what the Bush proposal would do is remove the government's promise to spend the fund's surplus at some point on crime victims.
Congressman Ted Poe, a Republican from Texas, calls the Bush plan bureaucratic nonsense. "Many of these agencies are working on a shoestring budget anyway. Most of them will close because they need this money to stay in business. Many of these other funds go to children's assessment centers. These are organizations that help sexually assaulted children cope with the crime and prepare them for trial. Many of them will close their doors. They have become dependent on these funds."
Congressional appropriators will decide whether to accept the president's proposal within the next couple of months.
For NPR News, I'm Lisa Nurnberger in Washington.
Yahoo! Groups Links
To visit your group on the web, go to:
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Equality is not a difficult concept
Having worked closely with both victims of violent crimes as well as battered women, I believe it's important that you qulaify your previous statements.
Yes, men are far more likely to be victims of violent crimes. However, the perpetrators of such crimes are also, statistically speaking, men.
Please do not confuse the general term of violent crimes with the specific term of domestically violent crimes. In cases of domestic violence, men statistically outweigh women as perpetrators 5:1 in the U.S for the past 3 decades. Also, domestic violence perpetrated by men is far more likely to have fatal consequences.
If anyone here takes issue with this, please refer to Eric's own links...as they will show the discrepency between general violent crimes and domestic violent crimes with more clarity.
As an aside, and from someone who has survived spousal abuse, I find your justifications and attempted rationality incredibly offensive and potentially damaging to other's out there who might be trying to break the cycle of domestic abuse.
"Practice may make perfect, but failure makes practice necessary"- M. McCloud
That was a nice post. Well thought out, even.
Here's the truth that has not been "white washed" by the miltant feminists groups that promote their lies at the expense of children and good women & Men:
REFERENCES EXAMINING ASSAULTS BY WOMEN ON THEIR SPOUSES OR MALE PARTNERS: AN ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Martin S. Fiebert
Department of Psychology
California State University, Long Beach
SUMMARY: This bibliography examines 169 scholarly investigations: 133 empirical studies and 36 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 152,500.
Aizenman, M., & Kelley, G. (1988). The incidence of violence and acquaintance rape in dating relationships among college men and women. Journal of College Student Development, 29, 305-311. (A sample of actively dating college students <204 women and 140 men> responded to a survey examining courtship violence. Authors report that there were no significant differences between the sexes in self reported perpetration of physical abuse.)
Archer, J. (2000). Sex differences in aggression between heterosexual partners: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 651-680. (Meta-analyses of sex differences in physical aggression indicate that women were more likely than men to “use one or more acts of physical aggression and to use such acts more frequently.” In terms of injuries, women were somewhat more likely to be injured, and analyses reveal that 62% of those injured were women.)
Archer, J. (2002). Sex differences in physically aggressive acts between heterosexual partners: A meta-analytic review. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 7, 213-351. (Analyzing responses to the Conflict Tactic Scale and using a data set somewhat different from the previous 2000 publication, the author reports that women are more likely than men to throw something at their partners, as well as slap, kick, bite, punch and hit with an object. Men were more likely than women to strangle, choke, or beat up their partners.)
Archer, J., & Ray, N. (1989). Dating violence in the United Kingdom: a preliminary study. Aggressive Behavior, 15, 337-343. (Twenty three dating couples completed the Conflict Tactics scale. Results indicate that women were significantly more likely than their male partners to express physical violence. Authors also report that, "measures of partner agreement were high" and that the correlation between past and present violence was low.)
Arias, I., Samios, M., & O'Leary, K. D. (1987). Prevalence and correlates of physical aggression during courtship. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 2, 82-90. (Used Conflict Tactics Scale with a sample of 270 undergraduates <95 men, 175 women> and found 30% of men and 49% of women reported using some form of aggression in their dating histories with a greater percentage of women engaging in severe physical aggression.)
Arias, I., & Johnson, P. (1989). Evaluations of physical aggression among intimate dyads. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 4, 298-307. (Used Conflict Tactics Scale-CTS- with a sample of 103 male and 99 female undergraduates. Both men and women had similar experience with dating violence, 19% of women and 18% of men admitted being physically aggressive. A significantly greater percentage of women thought self-defense was a legitimate reason for men to be aggressive, while a greater percentage of men thought slapping was a legitimate response for a man or woman if their partner was sexually unfaithful.)
Arriaga, X. B., & Foshee, V. A. (2004). Adolescent dating violence. Do adolescents follow in their friends' or their parents' footsteps? Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 19, 162-184. (A modified version of Conflict Tactics Scale was administered on two occasions, 6 months apart, to 526 adolescents, <280 girls, 246 boys> whose median age was 13. Results reveal that 28% of girls reported perpetrating violence with their partners <17% moderate, 11% severe> on occasion one, while 42% of girls reported perpetrating violence <25% moderate, 17% severe> on occasion two. For boys, 11% reported perpetrating violence <6% moderate, 5% severe> on occasion one, while 21% reported perpetrating violence <6% moderate, 15% severe> on occasion two. In terms of victimization, 33% of girls, and 38% of boys reported being victims of partner aggression on occasion one and 47% of girls and 49% of boys reported victimization on occasion two.
Bernard, M. L., & Bernard, J. L. (1983). Violent intimacy: The family as a model for love relationships. Family Relations, 32, 283-286. (Surveyed 461 college students, 168 men, 293 women, with regard to dating violence. Found that 15% of the men admitted to physically abusing their partners, while 21% of women admitted to physically abusing their partners.)
Billingham, R. E., & Sack, A. R. (1986). Courtship violence and the interactive status of the relationship. Journal of Adolescent Research, 1, 315-325. (Using CTS with 526 university students <167 men, 359 women> found Similar rates of mutual violence but with women reporting higher rates of violence initiation when partner had not--9% vs 3%.)
Bland, R., & Orne, H. (1986). Family violence and psychiatric disorder. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 31, 129-137. (In interviews with 1,200 randomly selected Canadians <489 men, 711 women> found that women both engaged in and initiated violence at higher rates than their male partners.)
Bohannon, J. R., Dosser Jr., D. A., & Lindley, S. E. (1995). Using couple data to determine domestic violence rates: An attempt to replicate previous work. Violence and Victims, 10, 133-41. (Authors report that in a sample of 94 military couples 11% of wives and 7% of husbands were physically aggressive, as reported by the wives.)
Bookwala, J. (2002). The role of own and perceived partner attachment in relationship aggression. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 17, 84-100. (In a sample of 161 undergraduates, 34.3% of women <n=35> reported being victims of partner aggression compared to 55.9% <n=33> of men.)
Bookwala, J., Frieze, I. H., Smith, C., & Ryan, K. (1992). Predictors of dating violence: A multi variate analysis. Violence and Victims, 7, 297-311. (Used CTS with 305 college students <227 women, 78 men> and found that 133 women and 43 men experienced violence in a current or recent dating relationship. Authors reports that "women reported the expression of as much or more violence in their relationships as men." While most violence in relationships appears to be mutual--36% reported by women, 38% by men-- women report initiating violence with non violent partners more frequently than men <22% vs 17%>).
Brinkerhoff, M., & Lupri, E. (1988). Interspousal violence. Canadian Journal of Sociology, 13, 407-434. (Examined Interspousal violence in a representative sample of 562 couples in Calgary, Canada. Used Conflict Tactics Scale and found twice as much wife-to-husband as husband-to-wife severe violence <10.7% vs 4.8%>. The overall violence rate for husbands was 10.3% while the overall violence rate for wives was 13.2%. Violence was significantly higher in younger and childless couples. Results suggest that male violence decreased with higher educational attainment, while female violence increased.)
Brown, G. (2004). Gender as a factor in the response of the law-enforcement system to violence against partners. Sexuality and Culture, 8, (3-4), 3-139. (Summarizes partner violence data from the 1999 Canadian General Social Survey <GSS>. The GSS is based on a representative sample of 25,876 persons. Overall in the 12-month period preceding the survey, an estimated 3% Canadian women and 2% of Canadian men reported experiencing violence from their partners. During the 5 year period from 1995-1999, an estimated 8% of Canadian women and 7% of Canadian men reported violence from their partners. Reviewed police and legal responses to partner violence in Edmonton, Canada and concludes that ". . . men who are involved in disputes with their partners, whether as alleged victims or as alleged offenders or both, are disadvantaged and treated less favorably than women by the law-enforcement system at almost every step.")
Brush, L. D. (1990). Violent Acts and injurious outcomes in married couples: Methodological issues in the National Survey of Families and Households. Gender & Society, 4, 56-67. (Used the Conflict Tactics scale in a large national survey, n=5,474, and found that women engage in same amount of spousal violence as men.)
Brutz, J., & Ingoldsby, B. B. (1984). Conflict resolution in Quaker families. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 46, 21-26. (Used Conflict Tactics Scale with a sample of 288 Quakers <130 men, 158 women> and found a slightly higher rate of female to male violence <15.2%> than male to female violence <14.6%>.)
Burke, P. J., Stets, J. E., & Pirog-Good, M. A. (1988). Gender identity, self-esteem, and physical and sexual abuse in dating relationships. Social Psychology Quarterly, 51, 272-285. (A sample of 505 college students <298 women, 207 men> completed the CTS. Authors reports that they found "no significant difference between men and women in reporting inflicting or sustaining physical abuse." Specifically, within a one year period they found that 14% of the men and 18% of the women reported inflicting physical abuse, while 10% of the men and 14% of the women reported sustaining physical abuse.)
Caetano, R., Schafter, J., Field, C., & Nelson, S. M. (2002). Agreement on reports of intimate partner violence among white, Black, and Hispanic couples in the United States. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 17, 1308-1322. (A probability sample of 1635 couples was interviewed and assessed with the CTS. Agreement concerning intimate partner violence was about 40%, with no differences reported across ethnicities. Women significantly reported perpetrating more partner violence than men in all three ethnic groups.)
Capaldi, D. M. & Crosby, L. (1997). Observed and reported psychological and physical aggression in young, at-risk couples. Social Development, 6, 184-206. (A sample of 118 young men and their dating partners were surveyed regarding their own physical aggression as well as that of their partners. Findings reveal that 31% of men and 36% of women engaged "in an act of physical aggression against their current partner.")
Capaldi, D. M. & Owen, L. D. (2001). Physical aggression in a community sample of at-risk young couples: Gender comparisons for high frequency, injury, and fear. Journal of Family Psychology, 15(3), 425-440. Drawn from a community based at-risk sample, 159 young couples were assessed with the Conflict Tactics scale and measures of self reported injuries. Findings indicated that 9.4% of men and 13.2% of women perpetrated frequent physical aggression toward their partners. Contrary to expectations, 13% of men and 9% of women, indicated that they were physically injured at least once. Authors report "2% of the men and none of the women indicate that they had been hurt by their partners between five and nine times."
Carlson, B. E. (1987). Dating violence: a research review and comparison with spouse abuse. Social Casework, 68, 16-23. (Reviews research on dating violence and finds that men and women are equally likely to aggress against their partners and that "the frequency of aggressive acts is inversely related to the likelihood of their causing physical injury.")
Carrado, M., George, M. J., Loxam, E., Jones, L., & Templar, D. (1996). Aggression in British heterosexual relationships: a descriptive analysis. Aggressive Behavior, 22, 401-415. (In a representative sample of British men <n=894> and women <n=971> it was found, using a modified version of the CTS, that 18% of the men and 13% of the women reported being victims of physical violence at some point in their heterosexual relationships. With regard to current relationships, 11% of men and 5% of women reported being victims of partner aggression.)
Cascardi, M., Langhinrichsen, J., & Vivian, D. (1992). Marital aggression: Impact, injury, and health correlates for husbands and wives. Archives of Internal Medicine, 152, 1178-1184. (Examined 93 couples seeking marital therapy. Found using the CTS and other information that 71% reported at least one incident of physical aggression in past year. While men and women were equally likely to perpetrate violence, women reported more severe injuries. Half of the wives and two thirds of the husbands reported no injuries as a result of all aggression, but wives sustained more injuries as a result of mild aggression.)
Caulfield, M. B., & Riggs, D. S. (1992). The assessment of dating aggression: Empirical evaluation of the Conflict Tactics Scale. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 4, 549-558. (Used CTS with a sample of 667 unmarried college students <268 men and 399 women> and found on a number of items significantly higher responses of physical violence on part of women. For example, 19% of women slapped their male partner while 7% of men slapped their partners, 13% of women kicked, bit, or hit their partners with a fist while only 3.1% of men engaged in this activity.)
Clark, M. L., Beckett, J., Wells, M., & Dungee-Anderson, D. (1994). Courtship Violence among African-American college students. Journal of Black Psychology, 20, (3), 264-281. (A sample of 311 African-American college students <76 men, 235 women> responded to the CTS. Findings reveal that 41% of men and 33% of women reported being physically abused by a dating partner.)
Claxton-Oldfield, S. & Arsenault, J. (1999). The initiation of physically aggressive behaviour by female university students toward their male partners: Prevalence and the reasons offered for such behaviors. Unpublished manuscript. (In a sample of 168 actively dating female undergraduates at a Canadian university, 26% indicated that they initiated physical aggression toward their male partners. Most common reason for such behavior was because partner was not listening to them.)
Coney, N. S., & Mackey, W. C. (1999). The feminization of domestic violence in America: The woozle effect goes beyond rhetoric. Journal of Men’s Studies, 8, (1) 45-58. (Authors review the domestic violence literature and report that while society in general as well as the media portray women as “recipients of domestic violence...epidemiological surveys on the distribution of violent behavior between adult partners suggest gender parity.”)
Cook, P. W. (1997). Abused men. The hidden side of domestic violence. Westport, CN.: Praeger. (Presents the evidence, empirical and personal, for male spousal victimization. Examines resistance to acceptance of findings and offers solutions to reduce domestic violence.)
Corry, C. E., Fiebert, M. S., & Pizzy, E. (2002). Controlling domestic violence against men. Available: www.familytx.org/research/Control_DV_against_men.pdf Earlier version presented at Sixth International Conference on Family Violence, San Diego, CA. (A critical examination of men as victims of partner violence.)
Cunradi, C. B., Caetano, R., Clark, C. L., & Schafer, J. (1999). Alcohol-related problems and intimate partner violence among white, Black, and Hispanic couples in the U.S. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 23, 1492-1501. (A probability sample of 1440 couples <565 white, 358 Black, 527 Hispanic> was obtained from the 1995 National Alcohol Survey. Subjects completed the Conflict Tactics Scale. Ethnicity results reveal that overall rates of partner aggression were similar for whites and Hispanic while Black rates were significantly higher. In terms of gender, white men and women had similar rates of partner aggression, Hispanic women were somewhat more aggressive than Hispanic men and Black men were more aggressive than Black women. Alcohol related problems were a predictor of intimate partner violence in Black couples.)
Deal, J. E., & Wampler, K. S. (1986). Dating violence: The primacy of previous experience. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 3, 457-471. (Of 410 university students <295 women, 115 men> responding to CTS and other instruments, it was revealed that 47% experienced some violence in dating relationships. The majority of experiences were reciprocal. When not reciprocal men were three times more likely than women to report being victims. Violent experiences in previous relationships was the best predictor of violence in current relationships.)
DeKeseredy, W. S. & Schwartz, M. D. (1998). Woman abuse on campus. Results from the Canadian National survey. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. (A large sample <1,835 women; 1,307 men> of Canadian college students completed the Conflict Tactics Scale. Results reveal that women report engaging in higher rates of violence than men. Specifically, 46.1% of women reported engaging in some physical violence in intimate relationship since leaving high school. With 38% employing "minor" violence and 19% employing "severe" violence.)
DeMaris, A. (1992). Male versus female initiation of aggression: The case of courtship violence. In E. C. Viano (Ed.), Intimate violence: interdisciplinary perspectives. (pp. 111-120). Bristol, PA: Taylor & Francis. (Examined a sample of 865 white and black college students with regard to the initiation of violence in their dating experience. Found that 218 subjects, 80 men and 138 women, had experienced or expressed violence in current or recent dating relationships. Results indicate that "when one partner could be said to be the usual initiator of violence, that partner was most often the women. This finding was the same for both black and white respondents.")
Dutton, D. G. & Nicholls, T. L. (In press.) The gender paradigm in domestic violence research and theory: the conflict of theory and data. Aggression and Violent Behavior. (A review and analysis of the data regarding male victimization. Critical of feminist approaches that minimize female perpetration and trivialize male injury.)
Ernst, A. A., Nick, T. G., Weiss, S. J., Houry, D., & Mills, T. (1997). Domestic violence in an inner-city ED. Annals of Emergency Medicine, 30, 190-197. (Assessed 516 patients <233 men, 283 women> in a New Orleans inner-city emergency Department with the Index of Spousal Abuse, a scale to measure domestic violence. Found that 28% of the men and 33% of the women <a nonsignificant difference>, were victims of past physical violence while 20% of the men and 19% of the women reported being current victims of physical violence. In terms of ethnicity, 82% of subjects were African-American. Authors report that there was a significant difference in the number of women vs. men who reported past abuse to the police ,19% of women, 6% of men.>)
Farrell, W. (1999). Women can’t hear what men don’t say. New York: Tarcher/Putnam. See Chapter 6. (Pp. 123-162; 323-329.) An excellent social and political analysis of couple violence.)
Feather, N. T. (1996). Domestic violence, gender and perceptions of justice. Sex Roles, 35, 507-519. (Subjects <109 men, 111 women> from Adelaide, South Australia, were presented a hypothetical scenario in which either a husband or wife perpetrated domestic violence. Participants were significantly more negative in their evaluation of the husband than the wife, were more sympathetic to the wife and believed that the husband deserved a harsher penalty for his behavior.)
Felson, R. B. (2002). Violence and Gender Reexamined. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. (Scholarly review and analysis of the literature. Author concludes that, "Women are just as likely as men to be victims of violence from their partners. . . ." Also "casts doubt on the battered wife syndrome as an explanation for why women kill their male partners.")
Fiebert, M. S., & Gonzalez, D. M. (1997). Women who initiate assaults: The reasons offered for such behavior. Psychological Reports, 80, 583-590. (A sample of 968 women, drawn primarily from college courses in the Southern California area, were surveyed regarding their initiation of physical assaults on their male partners. 29% of the women, n=285, revealed that they initiated assaults during the past five years. Women in their 20's were more likely to aggress than women aged 30 and above. In terms of reasons, women appear to aggress because they did not believe that their male victims would be injured or would retaliate. Women also claimed that they assaulted their male partners because they wished to engage their attention, particularly emotionally.)
Fiebert, M. S. (1996). College students' perception of men as victims of women's assaultive behavior. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 82, 49-50. (Three hundred seventy one college students <91 men, 280 women> were surveyed regarding their knowledge and acceptance of the research finding regarding female assaultive behavior. The majority of subjects (63%) were unaware of the finding that women assault men as frequently as men assault women; a slightly higher percentage of women than men (39% vs 32%) indicated an awareness of this finding. With regard to accepting the validity of these findings a majority of subjects (65%) endorsed such a result with a slightly higher percentage of men (70% vs 64%)indicating their acceptance of this finding.)
Flynn, C. P. (1990). Relationship violence by women: issues and implications. Family Relations, 36, 295-299. (A review/analysis article that states, "researchers consistently have found that men and women in relationships, both marital and premarital engage in comparable amounts of violence." Author also writes, "Violence by women in intimate relationships has received little attention from policy makers, the public, and until recently, researchers...battered men and abusive women have receive 'selective inattention' by both the media and researchers.")
Follingstad, D. R., Wright, S., & Sebastian, J. A. (1991). Sex differences in motivations and effects in dating violence. Family Relations, 40, 51-57. (A sample of 495 college students <207 men, 288 women> completed the CTS and other instruments including a "justification of relationship violence measure." The study found that women were twice as likely to report perpetrating dating violence as men. Female victims attributed male violence to a desire to gain control over them or to retaliate for being hit first, while men believed that female aggression was a based on their female partner's wish to "show how angry they were and to retaliate for feeling emotionally hurt or mistreated.")
Foo, L., & Margolin, G. (1995). A multivariate investigation of dating aggression. Journal of Family Violence, 10, 351-377. (A sample of 290 college students <111 men, 179 women> responded to the CTS. Results reveal that 24.3% of men and 38.5% of women reported perpetrating physical violence toward their dating partners.)
Foshee, V. A. (1996). Gender differences in adolescent dating abuse prevalence, types and injuries. Health Education Research, 11, (3) 275-286. (Data collected from 1965 adolescents in eighth and ninth grade in 14 schools in rural North Carolina. Results reveal that 36.5% of dating females and 39.4% of dating males report being victims of physical dating violence. In terms of perpetrating violence 27.8% of females while only 15.0% of males report perpetrating violence.)
Gelles, R. J. (1994). Research and advocacy: Can one wear two hats? Family Process, 33, 93-95. (Laments the absence of objectivity on the part of "feminist" critics of research demonstrating female perpetrated domestic violence.)
George, M. J. (1994). Riding the donkey backwards: Men as the unacceptable victims of marital violence. Journal of Men's Studies, 3, 137-159. (A thorough review of the literature which examines findings and issues related to men as equal victims of partner abuse.)
George, M. J. (1999). A victimization survey of female perpetrated assaults in the United Kingdom. Aggressive Behavior, 25, 67-79. (A representative sample of 718 men and 737 women completed the CTS and reported their experience as victims of physical assaults by women during a five year period. Men reported greater victimization and more severe assaults than did women. Specifically, 14% of men compared to 7% of women reported being assaulted by women. Highest risk group were single men. The majority (55%) of assaults on men were perpetrated by spouses, partners, or former partners.)
George, M. J. (2002). Skimmington Revisited. Journal of Men's Studies, 10, No. 2, 111-127. (Examines historical sources and finds that men who were victims of spousal aggression were subject to punishment and humiliation. Inferences to contemporary trivialization of male victims of partner aggression is discussed.)
George, M. J. (2003). Invisible touch. Aggression & Violent Behaviour, 8, 23-60. (A comprehensive review and analysis of female initiated partner aggression. Historical, empirical and case evidence presented to demonstrate reality of "battered husband syndrome.")
Goldberg, W. G., & Tomlanovich, M. C. (1984). Domestic violence victims in the emergency department. JAMA, 251, 3259-3264. (A sample of 492 patients <275 women, 217 men> who sought treatment in an emergency department in a Detroit hospital were survey regarding their experience with domestic violence. Respondents were mostly African-American (78%), city dwellers (90%), and unemployed (60%). Victims of domestic violence numbered 107 (22%). While results indicate that 38% of victims were men and 62% were women this gender difference did not reach statistical significance.
Gonzalez, D. M. (1997). Why females initiate violence: A study examining the reasons behind assaults on men. Unpublished master's thesis, California State University, Long Beach. (225 college women participated in a survey which examined their past history and their rationales for initiating aggression with male partners. Subjects also responded to 8 conflict scenarios which provided information regarding possible reasons for the initiation of aggression. Results indicate that 55% of the subjects admitted to initiating physical aggression toward their male partners at some point in their lives. The most common reason was that aggression was a spontaneous reaction to frustration).
Goodyear-Smith, F. A. & Laidlaw, T. M. (1999). Aggressive acts and assaults in intimate relationships: Towards an understanding of the literature. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 17,285-304. (An up to date scholarly analysis of couple violence. Authors report that, “...studies clearly demonstrate that within the general population, women initiate and use violent behaviors against their partners at least as often as men.”
Grandin, E. & Lupri, E. (1997). Intimate violence in Canada and the United States: A cross-national comparison. Journal of Family Violence, 12 (4) 417-443. (Authors examine data from the 1985 U.S. National Family Violence Resurvey and the 1986 Canadian National Family Life Survey. Report that "although the United States exhibits significantly higher rates of societal violence crime than Canada, Canadian women and men were more likely than their American counterparts to use severe and minor intimate violence." This finding is counter to the "culture of violence theory." Moreover, in both cultures the rates of violence of wives to husbands were higher than husbands to wives. Specifically, the overall violence index for men in America was 10.6 and in Canada it was 18.3; while the overall violence index for women in America was 12.2 and in Canada it was 25.3.)
Gray, H. M. & Foshee, V. (1997). Adolescent dating violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 12, 126-142. (A sample of 185 adolescents responded to a questionnaire about dating violence; 77 students reported being involved in physical violence in their current or most recent dating relationship. Mutual violence was present in 66% of cases; while 26% of males and 8% of females reported being victims of violence and 29% of females and 4% of males reported being sole perpetrators of violence.)
Gryl, F. E., Stith, S. M., & Bird, G. W. (1991). Close dating relationships among college students: differences by use of violence and by gender. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 8, 243-264. (A sample of 280 first year college students <156 women, 124 men> at a mid-Atlantic university completed the violence sub-scale of the Conflict Tactics Scale. Results reveal that almost 30% of the females and 23% of males reported that they had been violent in the current relationship. Also almost 28% of women and 39% of men reported sustaining violence in their current relationship.)
Hamel, J. (2005). Gender Inclusive Treatment of Intimate Partner Abuse. New York: Springer. (Reviews the "most reliable and empirically sound research" and concludes that "men and women physically and emotionally abuse each other at equal rates. . ." Offers a comprehensive gender inclusive treatment approach to domestic violence.)
Hampton, R. L., Gelles, R. J., & Harrop, J. W. (1989). Is violence in families increasing? A comparison of 1975 and 1985 National Survey rates. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 51, 969-980. (Compared a sample of 147 African Americans from the 1975 National Survey with 576 African Americans from the 1985 National Survey with regard to spousal violence. Using the CTS found that the rate of overall violence (169/1000) of husbands to wives remained the same from 1975 to 1985, while the rate of overall violence for wives to husbands increased 33% (153 to 204/1000) from 1975 to 1985. The rate of severe violence of husbands to wives decreased 43% (113 to 64/1000) from 1975 to 1985, while the rate of severe violence of wives to husbands increased 42% (76 to 108/1000) from 1975 to 1985. In 1985 the rate of abusive violence by black women was nearly 3 times greater than the rate of white women.)
Harned, M. S. (2002). A multivariate analysis of risk markers for dating violence victimization. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 17, 1179-1197. (In a university sample of 874 daters <489 women, 385 men> assessed with the revised CTS, 22% of women and 21% of men reported experiencing physical aggression from dating partners.)
Harders, R. J., Struckman-Johnson, C., Struckman-Johnson, D. & Caraway, S. J. (1998). Verbal and physical abuse in dating relationships. Paper presented at the meeting of American Psychological Association, San Francisco, CA. (Surveyed 274 college students <92 men, 182 women> using a revised formed of the Conflict Tactics Scale. Found that women were significantly more physically aggressive than men, particularly in the areas of: pushing, slapping and punching.)
Headey, B., Scott, D., & de Vaus, D. (1999). Domestic violence in Australia: Are women and men equally violent? Data from the International Social Science Survey/ Australia 1996/97 was examined. A sample of 1643 subjects (804 men, 839 women) responded to questions about their experience with domestic violence in the past 12 months. Results reveal that 5.7% of men and 3.7% of women reported being victims of domestic assaults. With regard to injuries results reveal that women inflict serious injuries at least as frequently as men. For example 1.8% of men and 1.2% of women reported that their injuries required first aid, while 1.5% of men and 1.1% of women reported that their injuries needed treatment by a doctor or nurse.
Hendy, H. M., Weiner, K., Bakerofskie, J., Eggen, D., Gustitus, C., & McLeod, K. C. (2003). Comparison of six models for violent romantic relationships in college men and women. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 18, 645-665. (A sample of 608 students <164 men, 444 women> were surveyed with the Conflict Tactics Scale. Results indicate that 16% of men and 26% of women report inflicting violence on their current romantic partner.)
Henton, J., Cate, R., Koval, J., Lloyd, S., & Christopher, S. (1983). Romance and violence in dating relationships. Journal of Family Issues, 4, 467-482. (Surveyed 644 high school students <351 men, 293 women> and found that abuse occurred at a rate of 121 per 1000 and appeared to be reciprocal with both partners initiating violence at similar rates.)
Hines, D. A. & Malley-Morrison, K. (2001). Psychological effects of partner abuse against men: a neglected research area. Psychology of Men and Masculinity, 2, 75-85. (A review article that examines the issue of men as victims of partner abuse. Considers reasons why men would remain in an abusive relationship.)
Hines, D. A. & Saudino, K. J. (2003). Gender differences in psychological, physical, and sexual aggression among college students using the revised Conflict Tactics Scales. Violence and Victims, 18, (2) 197-217. (A sample of 481 college students <179 men, 302 women> responded to the revised Conflict Tactics scale. Results indicate that 29% of men and 35% of women reported perpetrating physical aggression in their relationships.)
Hoff, B. H. (1999). The risk of serious physical injury from assault by a woman intimate. A re-examination of National Violence against women survey data on type of assault by an intimate. WWW.vix.com/menmag/nvawrisk.htm. (A re-examination of the data from the most recent National violence against women survey (Tjaden & Thoennes, 1998) shows that "assaulted men are more likely than assaulted women to experience serious attacks by being hit with an object, beat up, threatened with a knife or being knifed.")
Jackson, S. M., Cram, F. & Seymour, F. W. (2000). Violence and sexual coercion in high school students' dating relationships. Journal of Family Violence, 15, 23-36. (In a New Zealand sample of senior high school students <200 women, 173 men> 21% of women and 19% of men reported having been physically hurt by their heterosexual dating partner.)
Jouriles, E. N., & O'leary, K. D. (1985). Interpersonal reliability of reports of marital violence. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 53, 419-421. (Used the Conflict Tactics Scale with a sample of 65 couples in marriage therapy and 37 couples from the community. Found moderate levels of agreement of abuse between partners and similar rates of reported violence between partners.)
Kalmuss, D. (1984). The intergenerational transmission of marital aggression. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 46, 11-19. (In a representative sample of 2,143 adults found that the rate of husband to wife severe aggression is 3.8% while the rate of wife to husband severe aggression is 4.6%.)
Katz, J., Kuffel, S. W., & Coblentz, A. (2002). Are there gender differences in sustaining dating violence? An examination of frequency, severity, and relationship satisfaction. Journal of Family Violence, 17, 247-271. (Authors report two studies where dating men and women experienced violence at comparable levels, "although men experienced more frequent moderate violence." In the first study n=286, <183 women, 103 men> 55% of women had nonviolent partners, while 50% of men had nonviolent partners; in the second study n=123 <78 women, 45 men> 73% of women had nonviolent partners, while 58% of men had nonviolent partners.)
Kaura, S. A. & Allan, C. M. (2004). Dissatisfaction with relationship power and dating violence perpetration by men and women. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 19, 576-588. (A university sample of 352 men and 296 women completed the revised Conflict Tactics Scale. Authors report, "Surprisingly, significantly more dating violence perpetration is reported by women than by men.")
Kelly, L. (2003). Disabusing the definition of domestic abuse: how women batter men and the role of the feminist state. Florida State Law Review, 30, 791-855. (A scholarly examination of the issue of male victimization which is critical of feminist perspectives.)
Equality is not a difficult concept
Edited by Eric (06/02/05 07:28 PM)
Look who are the "perpetuators" when it comes to abuse to our children, by far:
Table of Contents
Child Maltreatment 2000
Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION
Background of NCANDS
Annual Data Collection Process
Highlights of Findings
Structure of the Report
Chapter One: Figures and Tables
Chapter 2 REPORTS
Screening of Referrals
Response Time from Report to Investigation
CPS Workforce and Workload
Chapter Two: Figures and Tables
Chapter 3 VICTIMS
Types of Maltreatment
Age and Sex of Victims
Types of Maltreatment by Age and Sex of Victims
Race and Ethnicity of Victims
Child Maltreatment Recurrence
Chapter Three: Figures and Tables
Chapter 4 PERPETRATORS
Characteristics of Perpetrators
Characteristics of Victims in Relation to their Perpetrators
Chapter Four: Figures and Tables
Chapter 5 FATALITIES
Number of Child Fatalities
Fatality Victims by Age and Sex
Fatalities by Type of Maltreatment
Fatalities by Prior Contact with CPS
Chapter Five: Figures and Tables
Chapter 6 SERVICES
Factors Influencing the Receipt of Services
Chapter Six: Figures and Tables
Chapter 7 ADDITIONAL RESEARCH BASED ON NCANDS AND STATE ADMINISTRATIVE DATA
Suggestions for Future Research
Appendix A CAPTA Required Data Items
Appendix A: Tables and Figures
Appendix B Data Submissions and CAF Data Elements
Appendix B: Tables and Figures
Appendix C State Commentary
Appendix D Reader Survey
Equality is not a difficult concept
More on the damage done to our children:
Section 7 Perpetrators
SDC data describe perpetrators’ relationships to victims. DCDC case-level data describe the age and sex of perpetrators. In general, States follow Federal guidelines for defining a child abuse or neglect perpetrator. Under those guidelines, a perpetrator must be in a caretaking relationship to the abused or neglected child.
7.1 Relationship of Perpetrators to Victims (SDC)
Based on data from 39 States, 401,598 perpetrators (75.4 percent) were victims’ parents, and 54,573 (10.2 percent) were other relatives; 9,646 perpetrators (1.8 percent) were people in other caretaking relationships (e.g., foster parents, facility staff, and child care providers); and 66,915 perpetrators (12.6 percent) were noncaretakers or had an "unknown" relationship with the victim (figure 7–1).
Figure 7–1 Perpetrators by Relationship to Child Victims, 1997 (SDC)
N=532,732 victims in 39 States.
7.2 Age and Sex of Perpetrators (DCDC)
DCDC data reveal that 184,152 perpetrators (62.3 percent) were female, and 111,473 (37.7 percent) were male (table 7–1). Perpetrators tended to be young, with 237,865 (80.5 percent) younger than 40 years old. Of the perpetrators, 122,569 (41.5 percent) were between 30 and 39 years old, the most frequent age category. Only 16,441 perpetrators (5.6 percent) were 50 years old or older, the least frequent age category.
Table 7–1 Perpetrators by Sex and Age (DCDC)
Age Sex Total
19 years or younger Count 9,177 9,882 19,059
% within Age 48.2% 51.8% 100.0%
% within Sex 8.2% 5.4% 6.4%
20 to 29 years old Count 26,646 69,591 96,237
% within Age 27.7% 72.3% 100.0%
% within Sex 23.9% 37.8% 32.6%
30 to 39 years old Count 45,958 76,611 122,569
% within Age 37.5% 62.5% 100.0%
% within Sex 41.2% 41.6% 41.5%
40 to 49 years old Count 21,258 20,061 41,319
% within Age 51.4% 48.6% 100.0%
% within Sex 19.1% 10.9% 14.0%
50 years old or older Count 8,434 8,007 16,441
% within Age 51.3% 48.7% 100.0%
% within Sex 7.6% 4.3% 5.6%
Total Count 111,473 184,152 295,625
% within Age 37.7% 62.3% 100.0%
% within Sex 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
7.3 Type of Maltreatment and Sex of Perpetrators (DCDC)
DCDC data show that male perpetrators were associated with 74.1 percent (15,606) of sexual abuse victims. Female perpetrators were associated with 82.0 percent (4,716) of medical neglect victims and 73.9 percent (83,769) of neglect victims. Males and females were each associated with approximately half of physical abuse and psychological abuse victims (table 7–2).
7.4 Sex and Age of Fatality Perpetrators (DCDC)
Fatality perpetrators were younger than all perpetrators (table 7–3). Two hundred thirty-five (67.7 percent) were 29 years old or younger, compared to 115,296 (39.0 percent) of all perpetrators. Of the perpetrators age 29 or younger, 157 (66.8 percent) were female.
Table 7–2 Type of Maltreatment by Sex of Perpetrator (DCDC)
Type of Maltreatment Perpetrator Sex Total
Physical Abuse Count 18,960 20,115 39,075
% within Type of Maltreatment 48.5% 51.5% 100.0%
% within Sex 17.5% 12.0% 14.1%
Neglect Count 29,587 83,769 113,356
% within Type of Maltreatment 26.1% 73.9% 100.0%
% within Sex 27.4% 49.8% 41.0%
Medical Neglect Count 1,035 4,716 5,751
% within Type of Maltreatment 18.0% 82.0% 100.0%
% within Sex
Sexual Abuse Count 15,606 5,453 21,059
% within Type of Maltreatment 74.1% 25.9% 100.0%
% within Sex 14.4% 3.2% 7.6%
Psychological Abuse Count 6,540 7,005 13,545
% within Type of Maltreatment 48.3% 51.7% 100.0%
% within Sex 6.0% 4.2% 4.9%
Other Abuse Count 14,511 18,355 32,866
% within Type of Maltreatment
44.2% 55.8% 100.0%
% within Sex 13.4% 10.9% 11.9%
Multiple Maltreatments Count 21,881 28,888 50,769
% within Type of Maltreatment 43.1% 56.9% 100.0%
% within Sex 20.2% 17.2% 18.4%
Total Count 108,120 168,301 276,421
% within Type of Maltreatment 39.1% 60.9% 100.0%
% within Sex 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Table 7–3 Perpetrators of Child Fatalities by Sex and Age (DCDC)
Fatality Perpetrator Age Perpetrator Sex Total
19 years or younger Count 15 30 45
% within Age 33.3% 66.7% 100.0%
% within Sex 11.6% 13.8% 13.0%
20 to 29 years old Count 63 127 190
% within Age 33.2% 66.8% 100.0%
% within Sex 48.8% 58.3% 54.8%
30 to 39 years old Count 26 30 56
% within Age 46.4% 53.6% 100.0%
% within Sex 20.2% 13.8% 16.1%
40 to 49 years old Count 20 16 36
% within Age 55.6% 44.4% 100.0%
% within Sex 15.5% 7.3% 10.4%
50 years old or older Count 5 15 20
% within Age 25.0% 75.0% 100.0%
% within Sex 3.9% 6.9% 5.8%
Total Count 129 218 347
% within Age 37.2% 62.8% 100.0%
% within Sex 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Equality is not a difficult concept
I agree with this poster that is commenting on the original post. PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, DO check the links and do your OWN research on this very, very important topic. I can not post EVERYTHING. It would fill up the Smithsonian...
We have been told MANY, MANY, MANY lies by the militant feminists and unfortunately, MANY, MANY, MANY, MANY men and children have been DESTROYED becaue of these lies and FALSE "studies."
Want to make a difference?
Fathers' Integrity & Rights Movement (FIRM)
Equality is not a difficult concept
One last thing...
I am wondering to myself why this poster is "dissing" the violence against men and making the violence against women MORE important (and with lies, to boot)?
Equality is not a difficult concept