Amy Alkon: on Mira Sorvino's Stinky T-Shirt:
Amy lets the writer of the email in on a little secret (sure, one that everyone should know, but pretend not to)--her stats are false. See Amy's response here.
On a superficial note, I am not a "gal pal," nor do I have "gal pals," and if I did, I'd be too busy throwing up to have much contact with them. Got this icky-toned e-mail last month, and I was a bit behind due to book-related stuff, so I'm only posting it now:
Subject: Re: Mira Sorvino Wants You To Tell a Gal P.A.L.
In a message dated 9/30/09 3:40:25 PM, Jamie.Dammrich@zenogroup.com writes:
Hi Amy,
As gal pals, we talk about everything. Yet there's one subject that often goes unsaid - domestic violence. Did you know that one in four women reports being abused by a husband or partner in her lifetime?....
Amy lets the writer of the email in on a little secret (sure, one that everyone should know, but pretend not to)--her stats are false. See Amy's response here.
Labels: domestic violence
posted by Helen at 4:06 AM
15 Comments:
It's the "you're a woman I'm a woman and since we both have a vagina we all think the same" methodology of manipulating the masses. This may work for some women, or people in general, but not for me.
While it's great that she responded as she did, I think it's unfortunate that she didn't go further.
http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm
As I'm sure you're aware, there is some controversy over studies using CTS1. Some people believe it to be an inaccurate measure of relationship violence for what I believe to be spurious reasons.
So, if we go through that list and exclude all of the studies and reviews where Mr. Fiebert identifies CTS as the scale being used (I've pegged the number at around 73), we find that we are left with 183 scholarly investigations that show that women are as likely or more likely to abuse the men that they're with as men are to abuse the women they're with. If we also exclude those studies and reviews since 1996 where it's not clear whether the original CTS or the newer CTS was used (I've pegged the number at around 11), we find that we're left with 167 scholarly investigations that show the same results. If we go even further and exclude all of the references to studies and reviews where either CTS was used (even those where Mr. Fiebert clearly identifies CTS2 as the scale being used (all of which (11) were from 1996-on)), we're still left with 156 scholarly investigations that show that women are as likely or more likely to abuse the men they're with as men are to abuse the women they're with.
Regardless of how you view the inclusion of studies using either version of the CTS, Mr. Fiebert over at UC Long Beach has a list of some pretty damning evidence that shows that the feminist line is just a bunch of clap-trap. Women are, according to the research, as violent as men. The only differences between men and women vis-a-vis "domestic violence" appear to be how damage they cause (a completely irrelevant issue, in my opinion) and how much they report (the difference of which, I believe, can be attributed to socialization (men are taught to just accept women's violent behavior because you're typically a bunch of weaklings) and to incentives created by the government that encourage women to report (and sometimes lie about) domestic violence (read: money) and that encourage men to not report it (read: we're far more likely to be arrested if we call the police when we are victims simply because we have a penis, so why bother?)).
Speaking of domestic violence, here's an editorial from a paper in my area, the South Bend Tribune. At the bottom is my response.
By the way, I recall reading about a school imposing a class like the one called for in this editorial on their students. A parent of one of the students raised hell about the class because of the same concern that I have, which is that the information was horrifically one-sided. Was that you who wrote about that?
J.Bowen,
That was awsome!!! Did you hear anything back from that article? Did anybody else reply to your reply? I would be interested in finding out.
Sad Dad
J.Bowen,
Thanks for writing that response. Everytime there is an editorial, show, etc with false stats on domestic violence or that shows it as male on female, we need to speak up immediately.
Well, I did get a response from the person who manages the Voice of the People section. She said she'd be glad to print my letter, if I could shorten it to 200 words. So, given that it appears as though they aren't going to consider my submission for the Viewpoint section, does anybody have any ideas on how I can shorten that piece to 200 words while still retaining the critical aspects of it? The critical elements of the letter, in my opinion, are the second, the first half of the fourth paragraph (the second one following the list of references), and the fifth and sixth paragraphs. Any ideas?
I trimmed it down to just under 300 words, good luck!
Sunday's editorial (Violent Dating: Teens need help) was ill-informed and highlights the propaganda that is the mainstay of those special interests that control the domestic violence industry.
Government and bureaucrats would have us believe that "domestic violence" (which is violence plain and simple) is a problem that only afflicts girls and women and is only caused by boys and men. This fallacy has been repeated so often to appear as fact. A lie is still a lie though. Here is a small sample of 10 different studies out of hundreds that show the reality of this issue:
Hird (2000), Arriaga & Foshee (2004), O'Leary, et al (2008) - Studies of violence in adolescent and high school student relationships showing girls were more likely to engage in violent behavior toward their male partners than men were toward their female partners;
Straus (2001), Katz, et al (2002), Straus & Ramirez (2002), Hines & Saudino (2003), Hendy, et al (2004) - Studies of violence in relationships of college students which show that girls were at least as likely to engage in violent behavior toward their male partners than men were toward their female partners;
Callahan, et al (2003) - a study of violence in adolescent relationships which showed that boys were more likely to be injured by their dating partners than girls were;
Capaldi, et al (2007) - a study of violence in relationships which showed that the rate of femail initiated violence was twice as high as men's during late adolescence and young adulthood, but that by the mid-20s the rate of initiation was about equal;
I could list hundreds more that show young girls and women in general, are just as violent as men but I think the point has been made.
That is one heck of a limit and not really enough to do your responce justice. Sorry I could not do better. This needs to be published...
This comment has been removed by the author.
This comment has been removed by the author.
I think you got a 200 word limit because they knew it couldn't be done without losing the point of the letter. Boy that sucks!!!
Well, it's a 200-word limit for any letters submitted for printing in the Voice of the People section. However, I do think they refused my letter as a piece for the longer Viewpoint section for that reason.
You're aware of the 1975 and 1985 National Family Violence Surveys by Strauss, Geller and Steinmentz, right?
Steinmetz has stated publicly that she no longer does domestic violence research because of the death threats she received from feminists.
My public library had these as late as 1994, but they've since "disappeared".
Justin Bowen: could you maybe explain what the CTS are, why some object to them, and why you think their objections are invalid? I'm really tired of those biased against male victims casually dismissing all the studies that demonstrate DV isn't an exclusively male-on-female event.
I have to resist the temptation to reply, "Maybe the bitch deserved it." Strong temptation to snark.
Post a Comment
<< Home