symmetry in abuse

[James Dean]

I was thinking to myself today about the issues of domestic violence, and how most studies I've read show the perpetrators are men and women pretty equally, maybe with more men perhaps chalked up to the problems of male victims being shamed. I had a thought that seemed interesting and I hoped I could get some feedback.

 

From the statistics I have found in my (admittedly sparse) research, it seems the incidence of child abuse is split down the middle the same way; half boys and half girls. Of course if you come from an abusive household you are far more likely to perpetrate some sort of abuse. It seems somehow feminists think that when girls are abused they come through it stronger and wiser yet boys degrade into these wife beating monsters. How could domestic violence not mirror child abuse in terms of gender? It just seems logical to me, maybe I missed something. 

 

[Pleiades]

I have some theories on this. These are not mutually exclusive.

 

Confirmation Bias:

So, there are people who "know" what the outcome is before they even begin their research or do any type of survey. These people will only identify or recognize data and results which confirm their beliefs. No other data exists to them.

 

Ideology:

Our society has been vagina praising for a while. Everything early, spiritual and good is feminie. Everything else is masculine and evil. When they are looking for or conducting research they don't even think to look for data about female abuse and male victimization because it doesn't exist. It can't exist for their world view to persist and be valid.

 

Rationalization:

This is the "Women only hit in response to men's violence". It's even to the point that I've heard feminists refer to female initiated violence as pre-emptive self defense and; therefore, not domestic violence, but physical abuse. I read an article about a woman who shot her husband in his sleep and claimed self defense and had all charges dropped.

 

Being Absolutely Fucking Stupid:

A "researcher" in Ottawa published an article with false statistics. In her article she converted male victims into female victims and quoted a Statistics Canada data source. The numbers were about 1.2 million victims in the past (I think it was year, but please don't quote me). About 620K female, 580K male (the numbers are not exact and may deviated by approximately 20K). There's no way you can make that mistake unless you're an idiot (in which case how did you get to publish articles) or you're dishonest. I'm not sure which. Another survey was insulted by one of my textbooks in university. The survey concluded over 90% of wives were beaten by their husbands. The sample was based off of women in a battered woman's shelter. No mention of sample bias.

 

There's so much dishonesty with academic feminism and flat out rationalization with feminism that it's insulting and makes me wonder how anyone can take it seriously.