women who abuse and supportgroups

[PhoenixAsh]

Yesterday I had an interesting debate with some friends about abuse and domestic violence and historical and social development.

Inevitably the debate covered a whole range of the usual subjects....which ranged from the prevalence of abuse against women, the failure of society to recognize such abuse and the eventual recogintion and set/up of support groups and the development thereof and the develeopment of help groups for those who abuse. We also covered the abuse of men in a domestic setting by their spouses, which is getting more and more attention in the last few years and though this occurs much less than the reversed situation...it seems to be a sufficient number to merit attention.

In Holland some case studies are done...which indicate that about 20% of all situations of domestic violence involve violence of women against men. I know that the DOJ in the US has up until two years ago refused to fund studies into the topic and two years ago decided to fund studies if they put equal attention on violence against women.

Now...that in itself is an interesting development and an interesting topic....about which I am sure we can and will have heated debats. But what is more interesting is that...none of us knew what is being done for women who abuse their partners.

We couldn´t find a single help group for female abusers. No helpline, no support group, no programs to deal with their problems. On the other hand...we could find several sites, programs and numbers for men who are abusive to get professional help.

To me this sounds like the effects of patriarchical sturctures. Not only are the issues abusive women deal with not taken seriously...but it also means that there is no help for them to solve these issues. Now...that in itself is serious enough, but the consequences of this are that, if you think this through logically, women who are abusive do not get a `second` chance men get and will be more likely to be charged with criminal behaviour. In my opinion this is part of the punitative side of genderroles in which society thinks it is unacceptable and unfitting for women to become abusive and will more often than with men take punative measures to enforce role patterns.

What are your ideas about this?

[Dumb]

I'll see if I can find the links, but I've read that most reputable studies into the subject lately have been showing that 2/3 of physical violence in a relationship is actually women upon men. Granted, one has to put that into context - the average man hitting the average woman is more likely to cause more extensive physical damage than vice versa (not much of an excuse, really, but whatever...), and historically a woman is more likely to be economically trapped in abusive relationships than is a man.

[Ele'ill]

I thought this conversation had already run its course but I guess not. Abuse against women is far more prevalent in a patriarchal society than women against men. This is why there are so many shelters and support groups for women as victims of abuse and not as many for women as abusers. There is no way that suggesting women 'can be abusive' will bring the situation to a neutral center 'where everyone is abusive and patriarchy is affecting everyone equally and such'. That's inevitably where this conversation ends up nine times out of ten and it's an absolute farce.

However- I think that a healthy society could use support groups for 'relationships'. The reason we don't see this now is because violence against women is so rampant that those involved as healers of such situations (shelters, support, hotlines etc) are in damage control mode- full crisis- losing ground.

[PhoenixAsh]

I think the situation of women and men are incomparible as such. Obviously we deal with an extremely bias against one group and a group which, overall, is predominant in society. As such domestic violence against women takes place in a society which is wholely biassed against them and that makes their situation completely different and more difficult.

But within society the structures which involve abuse against men are also heavilly influenced by the patriarchical role divisions. That means there is a huge mythology being build around the image of the "unbeatable and unrapable macho conquering man". Often this leads to the abuse being hidden and remaining hidden. Not only because of shame and fear in the men who suffer it; but also because society does not recognize them or denies the possibility of it happening. To some extend that makes the abused men experience part of society which for women in general is a reality on a day to day basis.

I think it is necessary and should be a recognised part of any sturcture that these cases happen. If not for anything else then for the fact that acknowledging that this happens is important to break the myth of the gender role division....but offcourse also because people should not suffer abuse for whatever reason.

What struck me was not the fact of the numbers, they do not surprise me, but the fact that the patriarchical structures work through even in these cases with their bias against women.

This is the womensrights subforum...so it is not my intention to discuss the prevalence of domestic abuse against men. What my concern was with my OP is the fact that society measures on two scales even in such cases.

When I think about this more is that this often highlighted during some incest cases that the mother was either actively involved or kept quiet. This is often called shocking by the judge and when sentencing is handed out this actually counts as aggravating for the sentence hight of the woman. This in my opinion means that women are not supposed and expected to be capable of such things and that society punishes them not only for that crime but also punishes them for breaking gender role and expectations.

The absence of support for abusive women is basically a different chapter in that very same story....

[Ele'ill]

I don't inherently agree with the position that society views women as being 'incapable of abuse' - I just don't think that abuse by women happens to the same intensity or extent as the abuse/violence against them (as a group).

[PhoenixAsh]

I thought this conversation had already run its course but I guess not. Abuse against women is far more prevalent in a patriarchal society than women against men.

20 against 80% division in perpetrators. So this is absolutely true.

When talking about domestic violence there are several cross border studies which indicate that the figures of domestic abuse are the same for men and women. These are extrapolations. If we are looking to the actual filed complaints then the division is 40 against 60% in favor of filed complaints by women.

When we look at studies which involve anonimous questionaires the 50-50 number comes out. Either way; 20% of the abusers are women.

From police reports in the Netherlands it is stated that of all the abuse cases involving men as the victim only 1 in 5 will lead to an official filed complaint as opposed to 3 in 6 by women as the victims.

When we are talking about randomised behavioural studies into what men and women think about slapping your partner:
58% of questioned men and 56% of questioned women think there are situations in which it is ok for women to hit their partner.
21% of questioned men and 25% of questioned women think there are situations in which it is ok for men to hit their partner.
(This was sompared to similar studies a decade earlier in which the numbers were 38% of questioned men and 29% of questioned women thought there were situations in which it was ok for men to hit their partner. The other way around was roughly the same.) So we are dealing with attitude adjustments.

The figures I give btw are applicable to the Netherlands.

When we apply that to what I stated about female abusers and the lack of assistance...we quite obviously have in 20% of the abuse cases against men...we are dealing with abusers who are women. Thats 8 in 100 cases...when it involves abuse against men...now women also abuse other women (mother-daughter/sister-sister/ or within lesbian relationships etc.) SO we are not only dealing with women abusers in cases of violence against men but also against women. So yearly we are talking about 17-22 women per 100 abuse cases.

Now...to me...that sounds like a relevant group that deserves help.

This is why there are so many shelters and support groups for women as victims of abuse and not as many for women as abusers. There is no way that suggesting women 'can be abusive' will bring the situation to a neutral center 'where everyone is abusive and patriarchy is affecting everyone equally and such'. That's inevitably where this conversation ends up nine times out of ten and it's an absolute farce.

The fact remains that it is a bit one sided to look at the issue as "trying to prove women can be abusive too" for example....men can be victims too...pops to mind much more readilly....or just the simple fact that patriarchical gender roles play through for victims of either gender.

That victimisation denial process that men have...is just as much influenced by patriarchical structures as the fact that women are still being placed in subordinate roles and positions in society.

For one by the fact that men are not supposed to be victims. If you could read Ducth I would show you some of the reactions of other men over stories and debate over abuse against men. To summarise...they are either called gay; pussies; whimps; weaklings all of whom deserve exactly what they got.

Now...as long as that hero myth role type about men is not broken in the minds of men that will be a prevalent role model. As long as men see themselves as being the hero types who are entitled and do not realise that this is not the case there will be a far longer road to travel towards an equal society.

I think taht is a more progressive way of looking at things and one which justifies attention for these kind of situations.

However- I think that a healthy society could use support groups for 'relationships'. The reason we don't see this now is because violence against women is so rampant that those involved as healers of such situations (shelters, support, hotlines etc) are in damage control mode- full crisis- losing ground.

If that is the case in the US then this is indeed worrying. Not only because of the obvious health and life threatening situation it perpetuates...but also the psychological welfare. For example...such shelters and the support groups surrounding them were directly responsible for the reduction of clinical depression in women in the last years....seeing as before these shelters and support groups existed women were told that they were to blame and were forced to "rough it out" and placed back in the very same abusive and dominating relationships as is often the case anyways in areas where these shelters do not yet exist or are to crowded.

[PhoenixAsh]

I don't inherently agree with the position that society views women as being 'incapable of abuse' - I just don't think that abuse by women happens to the same intensity or extent as the abuse/violence against them (as a group).

That was not what I meant by saying that. What I meant was that women are seen as the caregiver, the nurturing personality as part of their gender role. When they commit acts of dominance or power...such as abuse...they are not only punished for the crime itself...but also for transgressing the boudraries of their enforced role.

[Dumb]

These were a couple of the links I had in mind when I wrote my first post in this thread: http://www.physorg.com/news72113800.html and http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm. To the best of my knowledge, neither source comes from any sort of "men's rights" movement There's a host of other resources available showing similar findings, but I'm feeling kind of lazy at the moment.

[Ele'ill]

These were a couple of the links I had in mind when I wrote my first post in this thread: http://www.physorg.com/news72113800.html

It also is possible that some of the physical attacks women claim they are responsible for are actually acts of self-defense, Gover added. “Maybe some of these women have been abused by their partner for some time and they’re finally fighting back,” she said.

I would think this to be the case- I wouldn't word it as 'finally fighting back' but as 'being involved in a violent situation and feeling guilty, then taking the survey accordingly'.

Thirty-two percent of women reported being the perpetrators of this violence, compared with 24 percent of men

Men likely didn't feel they were the perpetrators because most of male oriented violence is considered 'status quo' or 'ok' and even 'necessary'.


Regarding the part about 'stalking' I think the word 'stalking' is being interpreted as 'watching', 'keeping tabs on', 'thinking about and watching' rather than 'hunting', 'following' and otherwise violently objectifying a 'target'.

and http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm. To the best of my knowledge, neither source comes from any sort of "men's rights" movement There's a host of other resources available showing similar findings, but I'm feeling kind of lazy at the moment.

I think these statistics are, like the other link, a bit dishonest because they simply ignore status quo gender role pressures that have one group answering differently based on the perceived definition of the word 'violence' and the perceived personal position of either 'perpetrator' or 'victim'.

[¿Que?]

I see a lot of statistics coming from Hindsight, and not a lot of sources. I know it's a pain, but when you post statistics, you need to post a source, just to make sure you're not making shit up. I mean, you can do whatever you want, but I will not engage in this discussion unless I see some sources.

Some things that trouble me straight off the bat:

In Holland some case studies are done...which indicate that about 20% of all situations of domestic violence involve violence of women against men.

I definitely need to see a source on this, or else I simply cannot believe it. I'm not exactly an expert on social science research methods or anything, but case studies do not (cannot) produce statistics that can generalized beyond the sample. There is the exception of single-subject studies. I don't know much about it but from what I know, I don't think it's applicable to that statistic. That would mean that the 20% figure was derived from research into a single individual, and that just can't be right. But that's not to say we can't learn and/or generalize from case studies. It just means that for some reason or another, the sample or the research method was not systematic enough to support generalizing quantitative characteristics.

When we apply that to what I stated about female abusers and the lack of assistance...we quite obviously have in 20% of the abuse cases against men...we are dealing with abusers who are women. Thats 8 in 100 cases...when it involves abuse against men...now women also abuse other women (mother-daughter/sister-sister/ or within lesbian relationships etc.) SO we are not only dealing with women abusers in cases of violence against men but also against women. So yearly we are talking about 17-22 women per 100 abuse cases.

Excuse me, because math is not my strong point, but you say 20% of abuse against men is perpetrated by women. Then you say that's 8 in 100 cases. Well, you must mean 8 in 100 total cases of abuse, not 8 in 100 cases of abuse against men, in which the number would simply be 20 in 100 ((.2)(100) = 20). But then you say, factoring in abuse against women, that the percentage of abuse by women is 17 to 22% of all abuse cases, when you just said it was 8%. Am I missing something? What exactly is 8 out of 100? How did you get the 17 to 22 out of 100 figure. Help me out here.

[Bad Grrrl Agro]

What about couples where they get into fights and end up both beating each other up pretty seriously.

I've beaten my man up before but I was asleep and having nightmares about past traumas. But that is moreso an issue of my ptsd.

[Luc]

What about couples where they get into fights and end up both beating each other up pretty seriously.

I've beaten my man up before but I was asleep and having nightmares about past traumas. But that is moreso an issue of my ptsd.

Thats a good point.

I wonder if thats plays a role or if it will with the soldiers comin' back or other people in a similiar situation.

also, sorry to hear about the ptsd Esperanza hope you over come it I don't know much about it I just know what it can do.

[Bad Grrrl Agro]

Thats a good point.

I wonder if thats plays a role or if it will with the soldiers comin' back or other people in a similiar situation.

also, sorry to hear about the ptsd Esperanza hope you over come it I don't know much about it I just know what it can do.

Oddly enough, I was having a dream about being sexually assaulted. I feel bad about the fact that my man had to suffer for my traumas.

[Luc]

Oddly enough, I was having a dream about being sexually assaulted. I feel bad about the fact that my man had to suffer for my traumas.

Again, I am sorry hear.

I'm sure he understands it is a result of the ptsd, no need to feel bad. The -for lack of a better word- "episodes" aren't to bad I hope?

[Bad Grrrl Agro]

Again, I am sorry hear.

I'm sure he understands it is a result of the ptsd, no need to feel bad. The -for lack of a better word- "episodes" aren't to bad I hope?

I still have nightmares. Though they can be calmed down when he whispers softly in my ear so I kind of know he is there.

[Luc]

I still have nightmares. Though they can be calmed down when he whispers softly in my ear so I kind of know he is there.

Good to hear you found something that helps, I hope you get better.