My Efforts at Educating Officialdom

So I received this card in the mail announcing the new domestic violence reporting requirements for the Tennessee Department of Health. I decided to check out their website and found it to be lacking in the recent research on the role women play in domestic violence. I also noticed that the reporting form had the word "female" listed first under "patient" and under perpetrator in the first column listed:

o Husband
o Ex-husband
o Boyfriend
o Ex-boyfriend


So I sent them this letter:

Division of Health Statistics/DV
4th Floor, Cordell Hull Building
425 5th Avernue North
Nashville, TN37243

Dear Domestic Violence Reporting Coordinator:

As a licensed psychologist, I recently received a card on the new domestic violence reporting requirements that states that licensed professionals are now required to report cases of suspected or confirmed domestic violence/abuse to the Tennessee Department of Health. I am writing out of concern after reading the information on your site and noticing that much of this information is not updated with the most recent research on domestic violence.

I am a psychologist who has worked with numerous patients who have been victims of domestic violence over the years. As you may well know, domestic violence is not just perpretrated by men against women, it is also perpretrated against men by women. Many professionals do not know this and it is not apparent in your literature. For example, your information to EMS workers states:

"Approximately 98% of documented domestic assaults are committed by men against women. As a result, throughout this text, we will refer to the perpetrator as “he” and the survivor or victim as “she” even though some domestic violence is initiated by women and some cases involve people of the same sex."

Recent studies are finding that both men and women act out physically in relationships and in one recent study, women initiated violence in over 70% of cases. Here is some information from the head of the American Psychological Association:

"Several studies of domestic violence have suggested that males and females in relationships have an equal likelihood of acting out physical aggression, although differing in tactics and potential for causing injury (e.g., women assailants will more likely throw something, slap, kick, bite, or punch their partner, or hit them with an object, while males will more likely beat up their partners, and choke or strangle them). In addition, data show that that intimate partner violence rates among heterosexual and gay and lesbian teens do not differ significantly."

The source is here.

Another recent study in the journal "Violence and Victims" found that nearly twice as many women as men perpetrated domestic violence:

"The study, published in the journal Violence and Victims, also found no independent link between an individual's use of alcohol or drugs and committing domestic violence. In addition it showed that nearly twice as many women as men said they perpetrated domestic violence in the past year, including kicking, biting or punching a partner, threatening to hit or throw something at a partner, and pushing, grabbing or shoving a partner, said Herrenkohl."

The source is here.

Psychiatric News also reports a study funded by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development that stated that men should not be overlooked as victims and that reciprocal violence leads to injury in men more often than women:

"Regarding perpetration of violence, more women than men (25 percent versus 11 percent) were responsible. In fact, 71 percent of the instigators in nonreciprocal partner violence were women. This finding surprised Whitaker and his colleagues, they admitted in their study report.

As for physical injury due to intimate partner violence, it was more likely to occur when the violence was reciprocal than nonreciprocal. And while injury was more likely when violence was perpetrated by men, in relationships with reciprocal violence it was the men who were injured more often (25 percent of the time) than were women (20 percent of the time). "This is important as violence perpetrated by women is often seen as not serious," Whitaker and his group stressed."

The source is here.

In summary, I would just like to request that professionals receive information on female on male domestic violence and that your website be updated to reflect the findings of current research in the field of domestic violence. My fear is that professionals will only report male on female violence and the men and perhaps children that are victims of domestic violence will be left out of the equation to suffer on their own.

Thank you in advance for your time and attention to this matter.

Helen Smith, PhD, HSP
Licensed Psychologist

So what do you think the chances are that they will respond or make changes to update their website with current data on domestic violence?

The Truth about Domestic Violence

"Canada is the scariest country on the planet." So says Erin Pizzey, at a domestic violence conference in Sacramento, Calif. Pizzy is an Englishwoman who founded the world's first shelter for battered wives in 1971 (thanks Mike). However, she quickly learned in her work that domestic violence is reciprocal and that women were just as culpable as men. She states, "Canada is ..."scary to men who suffer because of it, certainly, but apparently not to most other Canadians, who remain curiously indifferent to the demonstrable misandry permeating the institutions that define and shape our culture."

Apparently, this head-in-the-sand approach to domestic violence is prevalent in the US as well as Canada. What happens when someone tries to break the code of silence?

Holding women responsible for their violence was so at odds with the received wisdom of the movement's activists that, for her whistle-blowing pains, Pizzey's dog was killed and her entire family received death threats. Undaunted, she pursued her equal-responsibility crusade in the United States for many years in a fusillade of articles and books.

And Pizzy is not alone:

Another outlier, University of British Columbia psychology professor Don Dutton, is acknowledged by his peers as a world expert on IPV. He has proven, over and over again -- most recently in his definitive 2006 book, Rethinking Domestic Violence -- that the tendency to violence in intimate relationships is bilateral and rooted in individual dysfunction: Men and women with personality disorders and/or family histories of violence are equally likely to be violent themselves, or seek violent partners.

But Dutton's scientific credentials and extensive 25-year archive of peer-reviewed research cut no ice with Canadian policymakers, none of whom has ever solicited his advice.

I tried on a smaller scale to get the Tennessee Department of Health to review their misconceptions of domestic violence but never got a response from them --although I did hear back from one of my state senators whom I sent a copy of my letters to. It seems that when it comes to domestic violence, the status quo remains, women are the victims, men the perpetrators.

It seems, the article in the National Post that I linked to above put it correctly:

...pseudo-science absolving women of violent impulses, delivered on demand to interest groups by the same tiny, incestuous coterie of ideologically sympathetic professionals, is routinely applied in training police, family law judges, social workers and women's shelter personnel.

Pathetic and sad.

Reciprocal Violence can Lead to More Injury

When it comes to domestic violence, we're frequently told that men getting hit doesn't matter because even if men get hit, they are rarely hurt. A new study shows this may not be the case, especially if the violence is reciprocal (thanks to Steve for pointing out the article):

Regarding perpetration of violence, more women than men (25 percent versus 11 percent) were responsible. In fact, 71 percent of the instigators in nonreciprocal partner violence were women. This finding surprised Whitaker and his colleagues, they admitted in their study report.

As for physical injury due to intimate partner violence, it was more likely to occur when the violence was reciprocal than nonreciprocal. And while injury was more likely when violence was perpetrated by men, in relationships with reciprocal violence it was the men who were injured more often (25 percent of the time) than were women (20 percent of the time). "This is important as violence perpetrated by women is often seen as not serious," Whitaker and his group stressed....

Of the study's numerous findings, Whitaker said, "I think the most important is that a great deal of interpersonal violence is reciprocally perpetrated and that when it is reciprocally perpetrated, it is much more likely to result in injury than when perpetrated by only one partner."

If reciprocal violence results in more injuries, it would seem important for domestic violence prevention to focus on both women and men in these cases. By focusing only on men, women never get the help they need to reduce violence. The false notion that men perpetrate the majority of domestic violence and women are on the receiving end just doesn't seem to be holding up in study after study.

Update: Trudy W. Schuett over at Dean's World has some thoughts on domestic violence.

Update II: Take a look at these "feminists" who brag about beating up their boyfriends and other men (Hat Tip: Dean's World). This seems to undercut claims that women are nicer or fundamentally more innocent than men. You can read more on that subject, here.

"Nearly twice as many women as men said they perpetrated domestic violence in the past year"

Trudy W. Schuett at Dean's World sent me a link to this interesting study on domestic violence:

SEATTLE, June 27 (UPI) -- University of Washington researchers tracing the development of violent behavior have found a link between teenage violence and domestic violence.

Adolescents who engaged in violent behavior at a relatively steady rate through their teenage years and those whose violence began in their mid-teens and increased over the years are significantly more likely to engage in domestic violence in their mid-20s than other young adults, according to lead author Todd Herrenkohl, an associate professor of social work at the University of Washington in Seattle.

The study, published in the journal Violence and Victims, also found no independent link between an individual's use of alcohol or drugs and committing domestic violence. In addition it showed that nearly twice as many women as men said they perpetrated domestic violence in the past year, including kicking, biting or punching a partner, threatening to hit or throw something at a partner, and pushing, grabbing or shoving a partner, said Herrenkohl.

Our culture seems to be encouraging aggressive behavior in girls and women, who tend to display aggression in interpersonal relationships. It is no wonder that many young women feel that it is acceptable to kick, bite or punch a partner. A commenter mentioned the movie, The Holiday, in a previous post. I saw this movie over the weekend and I must say that the part where Cameron Diaz punched her cheating boyfriend squarely in the face not once but twice and left him bleeding made me wince, it was not funny. But our culture thinks women hitting, pushing and shoving men is hilarious. I wonder if more girls and women just feel more comfortable now admitting that they hit men since it is seen as powerful rather than "unladylike." But is hitting, kicking and punching your significant other really the way to solve a problem, for either sex?

Helpline for Abused Men

In response to my post on domestic violence, Jan Brown, the founder and director of the Domestic Abuse Helpline for Men and Women writes in:

Dear Helen,

Thanks for starting a dialouge about this topic. I started researching domestic violence back in 1996 after a male family member reached out to me and told me of his wife's verbal, emotional, physical and sexual abuse of him throughout their 13 year marriage. I found out that his options were severely limited by society's understanding of domestic violence. Male victims are rarely welcomed at the over 2000 battered women's programs throughout the US and most times they are treated as abusers when they call looking for assistance. In October of 2000 I started a non profit agency. We run the only nationally available toll free crisis line that specializes in offering support and services to male victims of female domestic violence. For the last six plus years over 16,000 people have called our toll free helpline seeking information, support, referrals, and services. Please let male victims know that we are here and we care.

Our toll free line is 888-7HELPLINE (888-743-5754) and our website is www.dahmw.org

PS We receive no federal or state funding, our contributions come from private donations so some of our services are limited, but we do what we can to assist all victims who call our crisis line.
Sincerely,
Jan Brown, Founder and Director
Domestic Abuse Helpline for Men and Women

It is good to know that there are services out there that treat men as fairly as women are treated in the arena of domestic violence. If you would like to learn more about the characteristics of men who are abused and the women who abuse them--take a look at Ms. Brown's article here. Not surprisingly, many of the abused men are in their early forties with children who are being used as "hostages" for keeping the men in their situation.

Women, just like men, need to learn to keep their emotions in check before they become angry enough to abuse those they live with and risk harming their families and those they should care about. The site I mentioned above has a workbook by a forensic psychologist for women entitled The Anger Workbook for Women: How to Keep Your Anger from Undermining Your Self-Esteem, Your Emotional Balance, and Your Relationships that may be a helpful resource. I noticed that the forward was by Sandra Thomas, an expert in anger and one of my current co-authors on a violence article that should be forthcoming. Apparently, the workbook can be used by women or professionals to help reduce feelings of anger and violence.

Research is Good, Public Policy Change is Better

I have been doing a bit of summer reading and wanted to share a book with you that I thought was a rather fair-minded view of domestic violence. The book Violent Partners: A Breakthrough Plan for Ending the Cycle of Abuse was written by lawyer and social worker, Linda Mills, who holds the controversial view that women can often be as violent as men. In an interview, Mills states:

Over 200 studies of violent relationships have confirmed a pattern: Of relationships that are violent, one quarter of the violent incidents are initiated by women and one-quarter are initiated by men. What may be most surprising, however, is that 50 percent of the cases involve men and women who are inititating violence against each other--there is a back and forth.

The book has a good chapter on the anatomy of intimate abuse with sections such as "Are Women as Violent as Men? and "The Feminist Backlash Against Those Who Speak Up." Mills states that women are more likely to report abuse than men and that men are expected to tolerate hurt feelings, abuse, and even injury, since it supposedly tests their manhood, and they are often taught that they should hide their suffering. Apparently, only 14% of men who have experienced significant incidents of intimate violence even bother to report it vs. women who report such incidents at twice the rate.

Mills points out that homicide statistics report that women are far more frequently killed by intimate partners than men are but another trend suggests that a different pattern is emerging:

The Department of Justice reports that between 1991 and 2000, the number of girls under eighteen convicted of aggravated assault crimes increased 44%, whereas for their male contemporaries, the percentage decreased by 16%. Similarily, crimes involving weapons increased 18% for girls while decreasing 29% for boys. These patterns have also been detected in reports of dating violence.

A study by Murray Straus published in 2008 reveals that approximately 30 percent of college students who are dating in the United States experience a physically violent episode in their relationships. Overall, Straus found that approximately 21% of thse violent incidents were initiated by women, 10 percent by men. As these young women move into adulthood, we may very well detect an increase in intimate violence among married couples.

While it is all well and good to report the research and I am glad that Mill's book sheds some light on the real gender stats, this research needs to translate into policy changes in domestic violence laws such as VAWA and predominant aggressor laws that unfairly target men. For in the coming years, if there is an increase in domestic violence due to women's increased participation, guess which gender will pay a legal price for that domestic violence and guess which will just get away with it more often?

Women Abusers on the Rise in Australia

A reader emails an article from Australia about the rise of female domestic violence there:

New South Wales Bureau of Crime Statistics figures show that over the past eight years, the number of women charged with domestic abuse has rocketed by 159 per cent.

In 2007, 2,336 women fronted court on domestic violence charges, compared to around 800 in 1999.

Preconceived ideas of gender roles have led a lot of people to believe it would be virtually impossible for a women to physically abuse a man.

But co-director of Men's Rights Agency Sue Price says it is exactly this stereotype that leads to battered men hiding in shame, fearful of being ridiculed, or even prosecuted.

"I've had SAS soldiers in tears because the wife is a black belt karate expert and yet they know that if they even try to restrain her he might be charged with assault and domestic violence," she said.....

"We have so many reports of people having hot liquids poured over them in bed, glasses broken, men hit over the head from the back, attacked while they're asleep, cut, burnt," she said.

Ms. Price, in the article, also points out that more and more women are engaging in violence--even murder-- because they can get away with it without consequences. This is an important point. The more we overlook female on male domestic violence, the more prevalent it becomes. The trouble is, no one cares and those of us who do are treated like pariahs or ignored. This must change--we must fight back against the stereotype of man perpetrator, woman victim--it is a matter of persistence and education.

Recently, a reader emailed to tell me he was upset that doctors and staff were asking his pregnant wife in front of him if she was "in a safe relationship." He asked me for help in finding research to give to these "do-gooders" to educate them about violence against men and children committed by women. If someone asked me at a doc's office if I was in a "safe relationship," I would have a few choice words for them. Or perhaps I would just hand them this article or this book and save myself the aggravation.

The Truth About Domestic Violence

Here is a good article about the money being showered to domestic violence victims (only women, of course) via DesertLight Journal. Here in Knoxville where I live, there was a grant given for domestic violence to one of the leaders of the community and I saw him speaking about it with a family court judge on tv one day. They kept running stats about how only women were the recipients of domestic violence which I found quite frustrating, having dealt with many abused men in my career and personal life (no, I was not the abuser, these were male friends and acquaintances who had problems with other women). I faxed the tv network information about domestic violence statistics on how many men were abused and/or killed by women but got no response. I guess the million dollar grant they received meant more to them than telling the truth.

"..they heard shots. They said she then 'calmly walked away.'"

A number of you have been emailing me this article about the lobbyist in Atlanta who killed her husband:

A 45-year-old woman, charged with ending a domestic dispute by killing her 26-year-old husband of five days, is a registered lobbyist for a group fighting domestic violence.

Arelisha Bridges was ordered held without bond in the Fulton County Jail. She is scheduled for a preliminary hearing later this month on charges of felony murder, murder, aggravated assault and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony.

Officials said Bridges claimed she was unemployed. But records show she is a lobbyist for an organization called the National Declaration for Domestic Violence Order; its Web site says the group is pushing legislation to create a database of those convicted of sex crimes or domestic abuse.

Witnesses told police that Bridges was wearing a nightgown and a shower cap as she argued with Rankins on the sidewalk on North Avenue near West Peachtree Street around 10:45 p.m. Monday.

And moments later, witnesses said, they heard shots. They said she then "calmly walked away...."

Bridges' group isn't among the prominent domestic violence lobbying groups in Georgia, said Kirsten Rambo, the executive director of the Georgia Commission on Family Violence.

"This is the first I've heard about that organization," Rambo said. "I certainly couldn't say if they were legitimate or not," she said, adding, "It's certainly a new name to me."

I thought Rambo's explanation was a little funny, if not telling of where she stands. It's as if she's saying, "if a woman kills her husband and is not part of a prominent domestic violence lobbying group, it doesn't really count then, does it?" Or at least she is trying to distance herself and her organization from this violent act.

These sexist lobbying groups need to open their minds to the fact that women kill and injure men and that their lack of concern allows it to flourish. Perhaps, like the gem in the article who killed her husband, when a man is hurt or killed, they are unconcerned and "calmly walk away."

Carey Roberts at PJM: "Domestic Violence Fairytales Threaten Constitutional Protections" (thanks to Trey for emailing the article):

Like everything in the law, the problem begins with definitions. The Violence Against Women Act, passed during the first term of the Clinton administration, includes a definition of domestic violence that is so wide you could drive a Mack truck through it.

States picked up on the loophole, and now most states include within their definitions of abuse, actions like making your partner “annoyed” or “distressed.”

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) likewise followed suit. The CDC’s Uniform Definitions and Recommended Data Elements declares that partner violence includes “getting annoyed if the victim disagrees,” “withholding information from the victim,” and even “disregarding what the victim wants.”

In her book, Violent Partners: A Breakthrough Plan for Ending the Cycle of Abuse,Lawyer Linda Mills makes the point that domestic violence is a complex story in which both partners often participate in the dynamic of abuse. She also mentioned that more than 800,000 men are assaulted by their intimate partners every year. I bet it's more than that. Why call 911 when attorneys give advice like this (click on report):

“Don’t call 911 unless you are bleeding and she still has a weapon in her hand. Too many men who have called 911 for help have ended up being arrested for DV.”13
—Family law attorney Lisa Scott

Civil rights groups are starting to file law suits on men's behalf. If you are the victim of an unfair domestic violence charge, contact one of these groups and do the same. When the cost of stripping men of their Constitutional rights starts to cost something, it will change.

"In general, a restraining order is only enforceable against a law-abiding, non-violent man."

Mike McCormick and Glenn Sacks: Restraining Orders Can Be Straitjackets On Justice:

Women’s advocates and the state Attorney General's office are criticizing a new court ruling which will make it harder for women to get restraining orders against their male partners. Star-Ledger columnist Fran Wood, in her recent op-ed “Don't soften protection for women,” called New Jersey’s Domestic Violence Prevention Act “one of the best statutes in the country,” and said the new ruling could “diminish the ability of domestic violence victims to get the protection they need.”

Certainly abused women need protection and support, but there are many troubling aspects of the DVPA’s restraining order provisions that merit judicial and/or legislative redress.

Under the DVPA, it is very easy for a woman to allege domestic violence and get a restraining order (aka “protection order”). New Jersey issues 30,000 restraining orders annually, and men are targeted in 4/5ths of them. The standard is “preponderance of the evidence” (often conceptualized as 51%-49%), and judges almost always side with the accusing plaintiff.

Under the DVPA, the accuser need not even claim actual abuse. Alleged verbal threats of violence are sufficient, even though it’s almost impossible for the accused to provide substantive contradictory evidence.

The restraining order boots the man out of his own home and generally prohibits him from contacting his own children. Men are cut off from their possessions and property, and some end up in homeless shelters.

Update: Vox Day has more on New Jersey's lack of regard for the Constitution when it comes to men and domestic violence.

"Stats" that Make the World Worse

I was listening to Kate O'Beirne, the author of Women Who Make the World Worse : and How Their Radical Feminist Assault Is Ruining Our Schools, Families, Military, and Sports,on C-Span last night. Okay, so I don't agree with some of her points on why women should stay married even if unhappy, for the sake of children, blah blah blah. But she had a number of interesting things to say, including a discussion of how some feminists continue to exaggerate the extent to which women are abused and involved in domestic violence, etc. Yes, some women are being abused as are some men, but some feminists see fit to call psychological abuse and "controlling behavior" domestic violence--hell, this would make all of us victims (and perpetrators) of abuse at one time or another. This overexaggeration of what constitutes abuse as well as a distortion of the number of women who are physically abused has resulted in over a billion federal dollars being funneled to domestic violence causes as well as to the passing of sexist laws such as the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA).

One of O'Beirne's most salient points to the smirking journalist/interviewer on C-Span was that girls and women are being sold a bill of goods that there is danger lurking around every corner. How will this message help our girls and young women build the real confidence and assets they need to go into the working world as fully functioning adults if they resort to victimhood as a way of life? These messages of the lurking dangers for women are blatant at times, but in other ways are subtle enough to be excused, even by intelligent people.

For example, at the Volokh Conspiracy this week, Professor Eugene Volokh pointed out to an Oregon State University newspaper that it was not possible to have 2000 rapes a day, one every five minutes, as a press release and website from the Oregon State University Women's Center stated. Well...duh. It is admirable that Professor Volokh points out the problem to the women's center but they do little about it, as you can see, they did not even remove this lie -- I mean, "fact" -- from their Myths and Facts sheet. But in the comments section, Professor Volokh defends these distortions as a problem with numbers:

Here is commenter Smithy's take on the "mistake":

Typical leftist exaggeration from the unhinged feminist left. You can chalk it up to enumeracy -- I chalk it up to plain craziness.

And Professor Volokh's reply:

Smithy: It's not exaggeration; it's mathematical error. It's not "enumeracy"; it's "innumeracy." I know of no "craziness" that manifests itself as the inability or unwillingness to do arithmetic. There's little reason to think that the authors of the underlying web page or of the newspaper article are "unhinged." There's nothing inherently leftist in high estimates of the level of rape; conservatives should be and are concerned about rape, too. As my original post suggested, there's a debate among serious scholars about the true incidence of rape; the 2000 per day figure is not outlandish, though it is on the high end of the estimates.

I tend to agree with Smithy--although I will go a step further and say it is not craziness on the part of unhinged feminists--it is craftiness. There is a logic and the subtle art of propaganda in these feminists' statistics that scream "give me more funding for women's issues ASAP." Heck, this exaggeration of stats even sells books out of fear--In Gavin De Becker's,The Gift of Fear,he has a chapter on "Intimate Enemies" that reminds us that before our next breakfast, twelve women will be killed by domestic violence--man, that will really get you choking on your Cheerios. However, if we take a look at the tables by the Bureau of Justice, I am a little puzzled that so many women's lives are being cut short before I have had my first meal of the day. I counted 1193 women killed by intimates in all of 2002--if 12 were killed before breakfast that would mean 4380 women would be killed during that time period.

I guess all we can deduce from this is that feminists with agendas can't do math.

"I was told that by two people who run domestic crisis shelters,...."

Don't you love all the scientific evidence that politicians use when trying to ram through pet bills that they want passed? In this case, Harry Reid says that unemployment is causing men to engage in domestic violence. Rather than apologize when asked to by men's groups, he responds like someone with an agenda, rather than any facts (thanks to the reader who emailed the article):

Reid's office responded by e-mailing articles that show domestic violence is increasing with unemployment, including one published by the Atlantic Monthly. And Reid repeated the assertion Tuesday, saying that two people who run domestic crisis shelters in Las Vegas told him that the high unemployment has "created lots of additional work for them they would rather not have."

"There is no question that people being out of work causes more people to be involved in domestic violence. I mean, I didn't make that up. I was told that by two people who run domestic crisis shelters," he said.

Wow, two whole people and an article published in The Atlantic Monthly-well, that just proves it then. Thanks to RADAR for standing up to this misandrist:

Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting (RADAR) took Reid to task for his comments, arguing that the $787 billion stimulus package that he supported last year funneled close to half of the spending to programs that women while 80 percent of those who lost jobs in the recession were men.

"Grant for the moment that, in spite of all the scientific research to the contrary, maybe Sen. Reid is naïve enough to believe that only men, and not women, turn violence to their partners when unemployed," the group said in a press release. "What kind of misogynist promotes a bill as unjust as last year's massive stimulus package while sincerely believing that doing so will cause more women to be beaten?"

It's hard to say if Reid is a misogynist or a misandrist but I guess it depends on what bill he needs passed.

MTV, Teen Mom and domestic violence against men

I realize that few of the readers of this blog would be watching "Teen Mom" on MTV; however, if you caught the September 28th episode when Amber beat the crap out of her ex-fiance Gary, you would realize why this episode is so important in at least making an attempt to expose the blatant domestic violence against men.

Reluctantly, I admit that I watch and was sucked into this show on a fairly regular basis. I was shocked when I saw Amber attacking Gary a number of times and then finally, in the Sept. 28th episode, she hit him in the head and tried to kick him down a flight of stairs while he carrying down a TV to put in his car. Yahoo.com has this information on that episode:

Teen Mom star Amber Portwood tells the new Us Weekly that she's facing her serious anger issues head on.

Fans of the MTV show were shocked by the Sept. 28 episode, in which an enraged Portwood, 20, punched, kicked and screamed at Gary Shirley, her on-and-off fiance and father to daughter Leah, 23 months.

"A lot has changed," Portwood, now in couple counseling with Shirley, tells Us Weekly. "I haven't hit him since that fight." (Local authorities in Anderson, Ind. reportedly launched an investigation after the incident aired, and MTV broadcast a domestic violence PSA during commercial breaks.)

I must say I was surprised that MTV broadcast the domestic violence PSA for an abused man after the show. It was subtle but well-done. Kudos to MTV for exposing this taboo topic. They could have played it down and ignored it but they caught Amber's abuse on tape for all of the world to see. Yes, I know if the roles were reversed, the man would be in jail with no questions or apologies but at least it's a start.

"Senator Biden Wants to Give Your Ex-Wife a Free Attorney..."

So says Glenn Sacks:

Biden’s latest domestic violence bill is the National Domestic Violence Volunteer Attorney Network Act, which amends Biden’s Violence Against Women Act to create an extensive network of volunteer attorneys to help abused women. The attorneys would provide free legal help in forging divorce or separation agreements and in winning child custody...

Why should only women get "free" attorneys basically provided by the government? What about low income men who cannot get custody of their children or men who are falsely accused of domestic violence--where is their free attorney? Isn't this unfair?

"People think that if you can bombard people with numbers and jargon, you have more legitimacy"

Sometimes, those numbers and jargon are called facts--something Walter DeKeseredy, a professor of criminology at the University of Ontario Institute of Technology refuses to consider-- when it comes to domestic violence research. In an interesting article in the National Journal, Neil Munro looks at the politics of domestic violence:

Proponents of the rival perspectives have amassed studies and facts to buttress their arguments. Feminist-affiliated groups cite surveys from battered-women's shelters to bolster their claims of male violence; family-conflict advocates and groups of divorced fathers cite data collected in surveys of men and women. The different perspectives "have historically been fueled rather than resolved by research, which has ... generated a variety of findings, some flatly contradictory ... [and has] left little room for cooperation," according to a report by participants in the Wingspread conference.

Advocates on either side charge the other with dishonesty and bad intentions. Murray Straus, a sociology professor at the University of New Hampshire, says that feminist groups deserve credit for launching the campaign against domestic violence. However, they "have created a climate of fear that has inhibited research," he wrote in the July 2007 issue of the European Journal of Criminal Policy and Research.

Straus and like-minded researchers are "advancing a political agenda that supports the goal of fathers' rights groups," responded Walter DeKeseredy, a professor of criminology, justice, and policy studies at the University of Ontario Institute of Technology. "People think if you can bombard people with numbers and jargon, you have more legitimacy, but it is a struggle about whose side you are on -- and our side is on the side of women, and we're proud of it."

So Professor Dekeseredy admits that he is proud of the fact that he overlooks statistics and methodology, which is basically what "numbers and jargon" are--and just sides with whatever studies favor women? What kind of research is that?

If you save a few lives and ruin thousands of others, is it worth it?

Christina Hoff Sommers, author of Who Stole Feminism?: How Women Have Betrayed Women, has a good article in USA Today on false domestic violence stats and why they are so harmful:

But when the BBC journalists presented the deputy chief constable, Carmel Napier, from the town of Gwent with evidence that the World Cup abuse campaign was based on twisted statistics, she replied: "If it has saved lives, then it is worth it."

It is not worth it. Misinformation leads to misdirected policies that fail to target the true causes of violence. Worse, those who promulgate false statistics about domestic violence, however well-meaning, promote prejudice. Most of the exaggerated claims implicate the average male in a social atrocity. Why do that? Anti-male misandry, like anti-female misogyny, is unjust and dangerous. Recall what happened at Duke University a few years ago when many seemingly fair-minded students and faculty stood by and said nothing while three innocent young men on the Duke Lacrosse team were subjected to the horrors of a modern-day witch hunt.

The Duke accusers used the same tired stereotyped collective guilt to make false claims. I am so sick of people saying "if it saves one life, it's worth it." That is no justification for lying about domestic violence statistics, and then using this lie to treat men without due process and take away their rights as citizens of the US. How can you save lives by lying about the problem? Careers, maybe, but not lives.

Maybe men "should take back the night"

I found it sort of (okay, really) ironic after reading a news article about University of Tennessee women at a "Take back the night" rally to highlight violence against women that two of the stories linked to this story were about....women's violence against men.

In the first story, a teacher is arrested with the statutory rape of a male student:

FENTRESS COUNTY, Tenn. (WVLT) -- The Fentress County Grand Jury has indicted a high school teacher for allegedly having sex with a 16-year-old student.

Lindsey Seymour, 27 of Allardt turned herself in to Fentress County authorities on Thursday afternoon. She was officially charged with eight counts of statutory rape.

Seymour allegedly had the sexual encounters with the male student between June 2009 and September 2009. In late September, the teen’s parents complained to the district attorney about the contact.

In the second news story, a woman is just now serving time (not much) for shooting her boyfriend through the head in 2005:

KNOXVILLE, Tenn. (WVLT) – The Blount County woman who gunned down her live-in boyfriend in June 2005 will begin serving her sentence on Monday.

April Jennifer Warren, 38 pleaded guilty to voluntary manslaughter on April 8th, 2008. According to police, she killed Charles Russell, 32 with a single shotgun blast to his head following an argument in their home on June 13th, 2005. Court records indicated she was performing CPR on Russell when police arrived on the scene.

Warren was sentenced to 10 years in prison on May 28th, 2008, but later appealed when it came out that Judge Mike Meares had contacted the family of the victim about the verdict. After sentencing Warren, Judge Meares apparently told Russell’s family that he gave her the maximum penalty with them in mind and asked that they support him in his upcoming election.

This murderer will have to serve only 35 percent of the 10 year prison sentence. I understand this is due to a technicality but 10 years wasn't much to begin with. And I wonder how this murder was counted? As a woman murdering a man? As some lesser crime due to it being voluntary manslaughter? Was it entered in the national data base at all as a woman killing a man?

Maybe it's time men who have been affected by female sexual and physical violence to"take back the night" but that will never happen. Men will rarely stand up for themselves and society sees their lives as expendable, especially when taken by a woman. Men will continue to be abused and will suffer or die in silence, or with the frequent sneer that "he deserved it."

Update: Here is yet another story linked from the same news site (WVLT) about a woman who killed her boyfriend (Good grief, how many are there?). Naturally, she again got only voluntary manslaughter and here is what she served:

In May 2008, the defendant pleaded guilty to voluntary manslaughter in that case and was sentenced to three years in prison as a standard offender. According to her sentencing report, she was to serve 120 days in the county jail in 20-day increments -- with the remainder of her sentence as supervised probation.

Women just say the word, "domestic violence" and they are given a pass for killing, as in this case. When women's groups shout non-stop about domestic violence and violence against women, they plant the seeds in the culture that men are never victims. This is not true but people listen, despite evidence to the contrary.

Update II: DADvocate points out another case where a woman stabbed her husband 193 times, gets 25 years and has the verdict overturned (via Althouse blog). The case sounded familiar and I realized it was that of Susan Wright, one of the women profiled on the Oxygen show "Snapped" that I was on as an expert in 2004. The show is coming to the Biography channel soon according to a promo. That's the thing about cable. The shows are recycled forever.

Teen mom charged with domestic violence

Reader Cham and other readers have pointed out this tidbit on Teen Mom Amber Portwood:

Anna Chan writes:Police in Anderson, Ind., have officially charged "Teen Mom" star Amber Portwood with two felonies and one misdemeanor for domestic battery.

During a September episode of season two of the MTV hit show, Portwood was seen repeatedly slapping, punching and kicking her then-fiance, Gary Shirley. Police said that Portwood is facing felony charges because Portwood and Shirley's young daughter, Leah, was present when the alleged violence occurred.

Portwood faces fines of up to $10,000 and three years in jail if she's convicted.

I wrote about this case in a previous post and how shocked I was that MTV aired the episode showing female on male violence. It looks like at last there might be some consequences for a woman who beats up a man, mostly, it seems because their 1-year-old child was present, but it's a good start. It does seem that a man needs physical evidence to get charges brought against a woman for domestic violence. A woman just needs her word against his.

I wonder if security cameras like this one might be a good purchase for men who are being abused by their spouses or girlfriends? Would the physical evidence be admissible in court? Does anyone out there know specific state laws that would allow or not allow this?

The Little Black Book of Violence

I spent part of New Year's Eve reading a book Glenn ordered (after seeing it on Jules Crittenden's blog) entitled The Little Black Book of Violence: What Every Young Man Needs to Know About Fighting. With a title like that, how could I stay away?

The first thing that struck me about the book is that it states it is focused on young men as men commit about 80% of violent crime and are the recipients of violent crime at twice the rate of women. Funny then, that the authors give an example a few pages later of a male friend of theirs whose sister snuck up behind him while he was doing the dishes and tried to kill him with a steak knife. "One moment he was leaning over the dishwasher and the next there was a wedge of razor-sharp steel whistling toward his lower back. Why? She simply wanted to know what it would be like to murder someone..." Uh, okay.

Do authors ever read what they are writing when they are trying to make points? If you are going to talk about how men are the ones who are violent and this is why they need your book, stick with the program. But okay, enough with my pet peeves. This is a book for guys, hence the title, and it is actually pretty good.

It begins with a section entitled, "Before Violence Occurs" that shares a good first rule of self defense: "Don't get hit." The authors talk about how to avoid situations or locations where violence is more likely to occur. These places include traveling through the wrong neighborhoods, hanging out with the wrong people, or frequenting the wrong night spots, and/or acting inappropriately in these places. The authors--two experienced martial artists--point out that there is almost always a build-up to violence, one that many people are not aware of. They teach you to have situational awareness without being paranoid or mentally exhausting yourself. They discuss simple tips like when it's time to leave a party before violence escalates. It's good advice, especially for young men who often have to learn how to deal with aggression, even if they don't want to.

The next section gives advice on what to do during a violent encounter. This chapter is full of information on how to deal with drunks. Their advice? "Never argue with a drunk....They can be unpredictable, violent, and very difficult to corral....Hitting a drunk really doesn't work all that well most of the time....A better strategy is to either dodge his blows in order to let him overbalance himself and facilitate your escape or spin him to cause disorientation and make him fall. Once he's down,you can control him or move to safety."

In the same section, they state, "Never hit a girl...Unless she's armed." They smartly state that, "In today's world, distinctions of gender are made by friends, family, police, and courts. The role of combatant is, oftentimes, secondary." They give advice on how to deal with women, though I would have liked to see more. They do say that if "she is armed with some sort of weapon, all bets are off."

Finally, the last section is on the "Aftermath of Violence" where there is good info on how to perform first aid, handle blows to your self-esteem, deal with psychological trauma, and deal with the police without getting yourself hurt or shot. They even give advice on how to avoid a domestic violence charge and suggest that you conduct a background check on your prospective partner to protect yourself before she moves in. They at least suggest you listen to any warning bells you have and take them seriously. It seems to me that if you feel the need to hire a private investigator as they suggest or conduct a background check on your partner, you already have the answer you need about the relationship.

Anyway, the book is a good one to give to a young man (or read yourself) to fine tune his knowledge of what to do before, during and after a violent encounter. I will definitely keep it on my bookshelf.