The Big Debate

I don’t know how and why it happened but the original post of the recent DV debate seems to be missing on A Voice for Men and so my comments on the topic are gone too. (The current link) I will be commenting here from now on :|

It’s evident that the debate boils down to Independent Statistics vs Feminist Statistics. I think it’s a no-brainer already since if one side is politically and monetarily interested in different results than independent researchers then their “statistics” don’t have any credibility from the get-go. Independent researchers of DV are not interested in skewing the results, but feminists are, so if there’s a difference in findings it’s clear who’s cheating. I think there’s not much to debate here, but nevertheless I’ll analyze manboobz’ response, and man, this will be a monster of an article.

“your argument depends on a highly selective reading of the scientific literature on DV”

Not unlike your argument, David…

“You’ve ignored the serious methodological flaws of the studies you cite”

We all know how feminist studies are made, so let’s not even go there. Methodological flaws? You mean like when a “researcher” goes into a battered women’s shelter and ask the women there wassup, and then she reports that all victims of DV are women?

“and drawn conclusions from the research that the researchers themselves have stated explicitly are completely false”

I very much doubt that any researcher in any field of science ever published a study in which he presented his findings and then stated they are false, but with some strange twist of trickery he then insisted that they are right.

“Anyone looking into the vast literature on the subject will be struck at once by the radically different conclusions researchers have drawn from their data.”

Of course. We have just arrived to the point where I began this post: independent vs feminist research, ie. disinterested vs interested “research”.

“One group of studies, the one that you relied on almost exclusively, advances an idea called “gender symmetry.” That is, they seem to show that men and women start fights, and land blows, in roughly equal percentages.”

How strange… Are we all human beings? Are we all capable of violence? Is it possible that women are not better than men?

“A second, and much larger, group of studies, finds men responsible for the overwhelming majority of DV.”

Nah. Women are better, men are scum. Women are angels, men are devils. And this is objective scientific research!

“There’s a good reason why we should take these studies more seriously than the ones you cited. Most of the “gender symmetry” studies are surveys conducted using a methodologically flawed research tool called the Conflict Tactics Scale”

With all due respect, I honestly feel we shouldn’t start an argument about whose methodology is (more) flawed. Feminist “researchers” usually don’t ask women if they were violent and most of the times don’t ask any men at all. And it’s not uncommon for them to use sample groups already influenced and/or to ask loaded questions. All these facts are well known. OTOH most of the critics of the CTS are feminists themselves.
Let’s look into this CTS: “the CTS has since been widely used by scientists and scholars. As of 2000, the CTS has been used in over 70,000 empirical studies and about 400 peer reviewed scientific or scholarly papers, including longitudinal birth-cohort studies; at least ten books reporting results based on the CTS were published.” (source) It’s easy to see that it’s not some small group of misogynists who use the CTS but the very majority of all the independent researchers.

“Researchers using the CTS ask survey respondents about an assortment of specific acts of violence. What the CTS doesn’t ask about are the causes, contexts, or consequences of these acts of violence.”

Well, yeah, because “acts of violence” are objective facts while “causes, contexts, or consequences” are subjective matters blurred by feelings, cognitive dissonances, memory distortions and a host of other things. Science deals with facts, not feelings. If you try to find out who commits violence you have to ask who commits violence, not how anyone felt at the time or what the consequences turned out to be. And to be frank, if one consideres the CTS to be flawed, it’s just as possible that it’s all the better this way for women. Because the assumption that it would favor women if you’d take into consideration the causes and contexts is a sexist one based on nothing but victorian belief in the goodness of women.
On a side note, “cause” is a dodgy business in itself because we can see every day that if the perpetrator is a woman, the media tries to find justifiable causes for her, but if the perp is a male then nothing in the world is an acceptable cause, most of the times not even self defense.

“As a result, one critic notes, the CTS…”

And here comes a ton of loaded bullshit I won’t quote. Typical feminist drivel about exactly what I said in the previous paragraph about “causes”. “Women only commit DV in self-defense”, yeah-yeah, we’ve all heard that a thousand times.
Just one interesting example though: “It combines categories such as “hitting” and “trying to hit” despite the important difference between them.” What is that difference exactly? If she tries to hit me but I step back and her punch misses then she’s not violent? Come on, gtfo.

“a number of studies show that men are far more likely to use domestic violence to control their victim”

I very much doubt that feminist researchers ever asked men “did you hit her because you were angry or because you tried to control her?” and then the men answered “I was just trying to control her”. So I’m pretty sure that those “number of studies” are just feminist fantasizing about why men beat women. (The very similar example of rape comes to mind, where despite all the hard evidence feminists insist that it’s not about sex, because… well because they said so. I very much doubt that any rapist ever said he was not interested in sex, just “controlling”.)

“Other studies that look at motivation find that much female “violence” is in fact self-defense.”

LOL… The makers of these “other studies” should have asked me, I’ve experienced reciprocal DV with more then one women but I think that even they would admit that for them it was never self defense. Of course I know that personal anecdotes are not scientific evidence but still… There are tons of evidence that women are initiating DV, like the now-famous jezebel article where feminists talk about how and why they punched their BFs – let me tell you, self defense is not a common theme there. This self-defense myth is just feminist day-dreaming not backed up by any credible research.

“The first version of the [CTS] questionnaire left out sexual assaults by current or former intimate partners, which according to the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) make up nearly 20% of all spousal assaults”

If you talk about methodological errors you should be aware that the NCVS is criticized for them: “This methodology has some disadvantages for surveying domestic violence crimes, since the entire selected household (above age 12) is interviewed instead of just one member selected.” (source) But what’s more important is noticing the words “the first version” in manboob’s post. What he criticizes is not the CTS in use. Also, I reckon the original CTS didn’t “left out” sexual assault, it just didn’t deal with it as a separate category.

“And the CTS also ignores violence that happens after partners separate”

…for which there’s no reason whatsoever for us to think is male-only. But let’s make this clear: DV in relationships is not really common, but it is very-very rare after the relationship has ended, so this objection is rather illusory.

“violence tends to escalate, sometimes quite dramatically, after a separation”

It might escalate in very rare cases but his framing is quite misleading because he seems to suggest that violence after separation is more common than in relationships while the opposite is true. With all the restraining orders and whatnot around it would be more than a miracle if ex-spouses would be abusive towards their ex-partners. Violence does nottend to” escalate, it just sometimes does.

“The NCVS found that separated women are 8 times as likely to face violence from an ex-partner than married women are from their husbands.”

That is freakin’ bullshit. You’re trying to make me believe that for every husband who beats his wife there’s 8 who beats his ex? They’d be thrown in jail faster than you can say GET REAL FOR FUCK’S SAKE. That might be a common fear of women which they tend to project, but it’s not reality. Men get thrown in jail for speaking with their children on the phone; don’t tell me they’d be walking free after abusing their exes. And I’m quite surprised that you didn’t see the obvious mathematical impossibility of it already since it’s been claimed that more than 1/8th of husbands are abusive towards their wives, so if you say that it’s 8 times more likely for ex-husbands to be abusive it’d be more than a 100%. But let’s suppose only one in ten husbands is abusive; than it would mean that 8 out of ten exes are abusive. I’d try to be polite but there’s no other way to put it: fuck off. So much for feminist credibility. The only possible way for this “statistic” to be true would be if the number of abusive husbands would be so low that if you multiply it by 8 then the number of abusive exes would still be “acceptable” – but then there comes the question that if the number of abusive husbands are so low, what’s all the hysteria about? And how come all men are demonised on billboards and such?

“Researchers who use the CTS and similar surveys have acknowledged that their surveys provide only a limited look at DV as a whole, and that they do not capture much of the most serious kinds of abuse.”

Did they? All of them? Care to link?
Where’s the proof that feminists do indeed provide a “complete” look at DV as a whole?
What are the most serious kinds of abuse? Murder? Then what about those women who hire hitmen to kill their husbands? They don’t show up in DV statistics. How about Lorena Bobbitt or Mary Winkler? Was the abuse they commited “serious” enough? How about mothers killing their own children? They sure as hell do it more often than fathers. Is that “serious” enough?

“Murray Straus, for example, has noted that “the statistics are likely to be misused by misogynists and apologists for male violence.””

Please show us where we act as “apologists for male violence”. What we say is not that male violence is good. What we say is females are violent too. And this is proven by the numbers, one does not have to be a misogynist to see that.

“The statement that men and women hit one another in roughly equal numbers is true, however, it cannot be made in a vacuum without the qualifiers that a) women are seriously injured at seven times the rate of men and b) that women are killed by partners at more than two times the rate of men…. [W]hen we look at injuries resulting from violence involving male and female partners, it is categorically false to imply that there are the same number of “battered” men as there are battered women. Research shows that nearly 90 percent of battering victims are women and only about ten percent are men… The most brutal, terrorizing and continuing pattern of harmful intimate violence is carried out primarily by men.” Richard Gelles

men and women hit one another in roughly equal numbers” – oh. What are we talking about then? Are women as violent as men? Yes.
women are seriously injured at seven times the rate of men” – that is possible but does not justify the current trend of neglecting male victims. All it means is that yes, men are stronger, and when both partners hit the other, most of the times it’s the women who ends up worse. And no, it doesn’t mean that women perps of DV should be let off the hook.
women are killed by partners at more than two times the rate of men” – let’s not forget that women often hire or incite other men to do the dirty work. Also worth mentioning is that men are falsely accused by their partners a lot more than two times the rate of women and this also doesn’t show up in DV statistics, but can result in incarceration and a lot of other nasty stuff.
it is categorically false to imply that there are the same number of “battered” men as there are battered women” – so what’s important is not that women initiate violence as often as men do, but that the visible reminders are different. Men are not “battered” because that slap in the face didn’t left visible marks – and who gives a fuck about that it was humiliating and unprovoked? When a women slaps her husband, well, it’s not so serious, why is he whining, he doesn’t even have a black eye, right?
The most brutal, terrorizing and continuing pattern of harmful intimate violence is carried out primarily by men.” – If you mean strictly physical violence, maybe. But if you talk about any other form of DV, women are just bad as men, if not worse. We all know husbands personally, or have heard stories about women making the life of their husbands a living hell. Also, let’s again make it clear that these cases of “most brutal, terrorizing and continuing pattern of harmful intimate violence” are so exceedingly rare that it really does not warrant a mass DV hysteria. It’s a common feminist routine to suggest that behind every other door lives a Josef Fritzl but that’s just their usual bullshit.

“Straus, meanwhile, urges those citing his research to remember that women suffer far more from the consequences of abuse”

It’s a f*cked up fallacy to believe that because the scars on men are less visible they don’t suffer. It’s just a variation of the common theme that the souls of men doesn’t matter. The psychological effects of a slap in the face can be devastating to a men too. It’s not only women who have emotions or suffer emotional consequences; it’s just that they are a lot more talkative about it. Men are told to suck it up and get over it, but that still does not mean that women are less violent.

“The solution to DV against men is not to publish articles with titles like “When is it OK to Punch Your Wife,” filled with explicit fantasies of male retribution against women.”

The authors of such pieces always explicitly stated themselves that they were not serious so there’s no point in trying to act like they were.

“attempt to get them to stop funding the shelter, as Glenn Sacks did to The Family Place, a DV shelter that ran some ads he deemed “misandrist.””

A lot of shelters don’t need deeming, so to speak; they are misandrist. And it’s quite natural for a sane person to try to redirect funds to better solutions.

“how is trying to make life harder for female victims of abuse possibly going to help male victims of abuse?”

First of all, if we lessen the institutional misandry we’re already much better off because the less the hatred the better. OTOH, as I already said, the intent is not to make life harder for battered women but to give the money to those who want to help all victims, not just the properly plumbed ones.

“Shelters for women did not fall from the sky. They were not set up by a feminist matriarchy. They exist because individual women activists”

LOL… Ever heard of Erin Pizzey? You should have. Feminists threatened to kill her a couple of times despite the fact that she founded the first shelter ever.

“Most shelters today run on shoestring budgets”

Erm, you mean they refuse to help men while operating on taxpayer’s money? How’s that for ekvalitee?

“Most, while not set up to handle male victims, try to help as best they can”

Sure, feminists are renown for that everywhere. Erin Pizzey tried that but feminists  destroyed her.

“if you really want DV shelters for men, and aren’t simply interested in scoring rhetorical points against feminists, build them”

Nice try, genius, but I couldn’t help noticing that feminists do get help from the government and they’re fighting tooth and nail so that we won’t. And you completely missed the point anyways. What we primarily want is not shelters for men but the laws to be fair – of which you said nothing. Must-arrest laws, sexist laws like VAWA, uncontrolled restraining order handouts, etc. Like Rob Fedders said, the solution is not asking the government to help us too. The solution is to repeal bad laws. How can anyone talk about equality or fairness when there are police officers out there with orders that in cases of DV they should arrest the man regardless of who committed the violence?

A couple of questions to close this post: How about the fact that children are safer living with a separated father than with a separated mother? What about lesbian DV, which is more common than heterosexual DV? How about the common knowledge that a lot of women punch men in the face without fear because they know the man won’t hit back – and that these women could spare themselves a lot of black eyes if they themselves weren’t so arrogant?

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Blogging, Feminism and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

20 Responses to The Big Debate

  1. Paul Elam says:

    I don’t understand what you are saying here. The original debate and all comments remain on the site. Please feel free to include your comments on the debate thread.

    Paul

  2. Paul Elam says:

    I think I found part of the problem. Whenever one of us responds in this debate, and the post title is amended to reflect it, it actually changes the url. That is why your original link does not work.

    But, the current comments on the thread have remained, including comments from you.

    If there is anything missing, I cannot figure out why. But again, you are welcome to post this to the comments and I will make sure it remains.

    Sorry for the difficulties.

  3. Deansdale says:

    No problem :)
    But the first comment I see at the current thread is Nergal’s from October 23rd, 2010 – 03:27. You can call me stupid but I can’t find the comments that were made yesterday.
    To tell you the truth it’s not a real problem for me since I didn’t post here for a long time so it’s a win-win for me to post my answer here :) And to tell you an other truth I’m always reluctant to post huge walls of text to other blogs.

  4. Paul Elam says:

    Ahhh. If you look at the bottom of the comments thread you will see link for “older comments”

    Unlike The Spearhead my theme displays comments in blocks of 50. With comment 51, 101, etc. it starts a new block.

    Let me know if this does not explain the problem.

    Cheers

    Paul

  5. Deansdale says:

    Thanks :) You can officially call me stupid :))

  6. Paul Elam says:

    I’ll pass on that since it isn’t true. Enjoy the debate, sir.

  7. Wanderer says:

    What about lesbian DV, which is more common than heterosexual DV?

    I saw your comment in Mr. Futrelle’s blog and wandered in here, if you’d pardon me for doing so. Out of curiosity, and genuinely not trolling here (just ignorant), but where does this statistic come from? The first time I saw it was from this report:

    http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/181867.pdf

    which I got from the blog of a fellow named scarecrow (http://men-factor.blogspot.com/2010/10/lesbian-relationships-are-more.html). Is it the same citation you’re referring to, or did you get it from another one? Pardon me for asking, of course.

  8. JackAmok says:

    Man, you keep writing things like this and you’re going to get fired from NPR. Even if you don’t work there, they’ll hire you just so they can fire you. You can’t challenge the orthodoxy! That’s not allowed.

  9. Deansdale says:

    #Wanderer
    I saw your comment in Mr. Futrelle’s blog and wandered in here, if you’d pardon me for doing so.
    I welcome anyone who has anything constructive to say. I’m not afraid of feminists :) In fact I’d love to have a dispassionate discussion with them but it’s nearly impossible because most of the time they seem to be allergic to facts.

    where does this statistic come from?
    To be honest I was lazy enough not to bookmark sources. A silly mistake.
    But then again, I usually see this data surfacing from time to time, and I’ve never seen it refuted.

    The results of a sudden googling:
    Just one piece of data from “Lesbian Life“:
    “30% of LGBT couples experience domestic violence”
    If you compare it to the CDC’s data that approxiamtely 25% of hetero relationships have DV then the conclusions are clear.
    By the way, some of the data on “Lesbian Life” is feminist inspired hysteria, so if you factor that in then it’s possible that even the 30% they say is an understatement.

    Pardon me for asking, of course.
    Come on, you don’t need to apologise for talking to me. If my answer was not satisfying I’ll try to find better sources.

    Oh, and to answer your actual question: no, I’ve never seen the sites you’ve linked to.

  10. Wanderer says:

    In fact I’d love to have a dispassionate discussion with them but it’s nearly impossible because most of the time they seem to be allergic to facts.

    Hah, hah! Sorry to disappoint you, brother, but you’ll have to keep looking…I’m hardly a feminist ;) I’m not an MRA either, though, but at this point in my life I’d be lying if I said I didn’t have a *bit* more sympathy for the folks on your side of the fence than theirs.

    If you’re up for discussion, though, I have to admit I still have a question about the study you quoted. Don’t worry about not being able to find the original one you were thinking of (happens to me more often than I’d care to admit :rolleyes: ) but I’m not sure the quote from Lesbian Life proves that *lesbian* violence is more endemic. It says “30% of LGBT couples experience domestic violence,” but LGBT stands for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender. Without any more information, for all we know domestic violence among gays, bisexual men/women in relationships with men, or transexuals represent the greater part of that 30% and lesbians are less prone to it. That’s the problem of using a catch-all term like “LGBT” :/

    Now, I’m not sure–for all we know, it’s the other way around and lesbians do make up the majority of that 30% you described. And regardless of the answer, it doesn’t change the fact that DV is 100% wrong and that there is absolutely no legitimate reason to marginalize or portray as “less important” the suffering of men vis a vis women. But I’m just sayin’, I’ve been looking for a little while for the source of the “lesbians are more violent” stat, and I don’t think I’ve found it yet. The file I mentioned above is the best I managed to find, but even that has a few problems with it :/

  11. Deansdale says:

    As far as I know lesbians are the worst offenders from the LGBT crowd. If they weren’t, feminists would be all over us with headlines like “gay men are the most violent”. They are strangely silent on these issues though :) I reckon if lesbians weren’t the worst, no lesbian or feminist would ever group them with the LGBT crowd. Nobody could accuse feminists of *not* cherrypicking statistics and use them how it benefits them the most, so I don’t see why this should be an exception.
    Of course this little theorising of mine is not proof.

    If/when I find other sources I will bookmark them, that’s for sure.
    …oh well, what the hell… I’m looking into it now.

    Violence in gay and lesbian domestic partnerships
    Claire M. Renzetti,Charles Harvey Miley
    “Preliminary studies show that 22% to 46% of all lesbians have been in a physically violent same-sex relationship. Coleman (1990) found that of the 90 lesbian couple surveyed, 46% experienced repeated acts of violence in their relationships. (…) of the 1,000 gay men surveyed, 17% reported having been in a physically violent gay relationship.”
    So on average lesbians are twice as violent as gays.

    Comparing domestic abuse in same sex & heterosexual relationships
    Uni of Sunderland and Uni of Bristol
    “(…) had experienced abuse (…) in a same sex relationship (…) 40.1% of the female and 35.2% of the male respondents.”
    The numbers are rather inflated but still, lesbians have more violence.

    Fair’s Fair.
    A Snapshot of Violence and abuse in Sydney LGBT relationships. 2006
    “Female previous relationships / Hit, kicked, pushed or thrown things at you: 36.5%
    Male previous relationships / Hit, kicked, pushed or thrown things at you: 25.8%”

    While I searched for data I found something interesting. When the “research” was of the feminist kind, they painstakingly avoided the admission about the prevalence of lesbian DV. Take this document for example; they have presented tons of statistics including things like how many of the LGBT DV victims were homeless, but they do not present any data on the prevalence of lesbian or gay DV. Weird. Leaving out what’s probably the most important data from such a comprehensive study…

  12. Wanderer says:

    Ah, thanks for the sources. Hmm…just as a note, though, remember that as several commentators at A Voice for Men said, though, males are generally less likely to report/admit abuse than females. While lesbians could genuinely be more violent than gays, it’s also possible that gays, being male, are just less likely to report abuse than lesbians are. :/

  13. Pingback: Linkage is Good for You: Free Sample Edition

  14. Gunn says:

    Wanderer wrote: “Ah, thanks for the sources. Hmm…just as a note, though, remember that as several commentators at A Voice for Men said, though, males are generally less likely to report/admit abuse than females. While lesbians could genuinely be more violent than gays, it’s also possible that gays, being male, are just less likely to report abuse than lesbians are. :/”

    Doesn’t matter. All you need to do is compare lesbian rates of violence with heterosexual rates of violence. Even if you assume a worst case that all dv in heterosexual couples was initiated by the man and reported by the woman (which is obviously a very unsafe assumption to make), if lesbian couples’ rates of violence are still higher (which they appear to be, based on the evidence cited above) then you have to allow the idea that (homosexual) women at least are much more prone to violence than heterosexual men.

    Triangulation on this idea would come from comparing gay rates of reporting vs. heterosexual rates. If we believe that men underreport, then you’d expect rates of reporting from gay men in relationships to be lower than for heterosexual couples. I haven’t seen the statistics on this, but the numbers cited earlier (say 15-20% for gay couples) seem higher than the statistics commonly ascribed to heterosexual couples.

    My (unverified) opinion on this is that men in heterosexual relationships are the ones who feel the biggest taboo in reporting violence against themselves. Its shameful for them to be beaten up by women.

    Gay men don’t have this problem (of breaking a taboo in reporting abuse), and neither do lesbians. If we take the actual reported rates as being a reasonble proxy for prevalence, the lowered rates for gays vs. lesbians would further suggest that gay men don’t enter into as many abusive relationships as gay women. This would seem logical if we assume that the standard attraction factors are the same for gay men as for straight men (i.e. a focus on looks rather than on power / status as for women) which would tend to mean that gay men avoid the trap that women fall into when they chase thugs and violent men as being representative of ‘powerful/high status’ men. For gay women, I suspect that they still find power/status attractive in their mates (even if they’re women) which leaves them vulnerable to entering into relationships with abusive females.

    The irony here is of course that whereas men (even thugs) are socialised from childhood not to hit women, women are not. Hence the higher rates of violence within lesbian couples.

  15. Wanderer says:

    Gay men don’t have this problem (of breaking a taboo in reporting abuse)

    This isn’t necessarily true, though. You’re right in that it’s shameful for a man to admit being hit by a woman, but at the same time, it’s shameful for a man to admit being hit, period–there aren’t many man who’d say they were beaten up because that would be admitting they’re weak, and gay men are still socialized, like other men, to “be strong” and “suck it up” and all that. There’s also a homosexuality taboo–as some of the articles mention, many homosexual couples, both gay and lesbian, feel pressure to make it seem like their relationships are “more egalitarian” than hetero ones. So both groups may be understating their victimization, though it’s a question of which one…

    About that, though, another thing to keep in mind is that it’s possible the lesbian couples are *overstating* theirs. I’ve heard a lot of MRAs say women lie all the time about DV, and that many, if not most, of the statistics saying women are victimized are inflated for that reason. However, doesn’t that apply to gay women as well? It’s also possible a lot of the lesbians who said they were victims of violence/abuse are just making it up, for attention or sympathy or whatever. So it may also be possible the numbers for lesbians are, in actuality, lower than reported, while the numbers for gays are higher–women, being dishonest, will claim to be victimized more often, while men, socialized to “be strong” and “suck it up” will claim to be victimized less often. :/

  16. Nergal says:

    “However, doesn’t that apply to gay women as well? It’s also possible a lot of the lesbians who said they were victims of violence/abuse are just making it up, for attention or sympathy or whatever. So it may also be possible the numbers for lesbians are, in actuality, lower than reported, while the numbers for gays are higher–women, being dishonest, will claim to be victimized more often, while men, socialized to “be strong” and “suck it up” will claim to be victimized less often. :/”

    Wanderer,you raise a decent point, although it would be difficult to verify one way or the other.

    Anecdotally, from my own rather extensive experience with lesbians and I have spent more time in their love triangles than I feel comfortable admitting,I can say that lesbian females tend to ape and exaggerate stereotypical male behaviors, in other words, they act more “manly” than straight men do.

    So if any factors were to be considered that would make the data itself suspect it would be the OTHER way around, that lesbians report MORE dv (for status) because they believe it is masculine to beat your spouse, since their only sources of information on masculinity are feminist in nature.

    There are very few lesbians that are anything but Dworkinite radical feminists,I can tell you this from experience.

    Actually, a funny story on that, one time I had a debate with a group of Socialist lesbians who wanted to burn down a housing project to “strike a blow at the Capitalist Patriarchy”. See, they thought they would be stopping “the rape of Mother Earth”.

    I laughingly explained to the fools that if you burn down the housing project, they will cut down MORE TREES to make up for the wood that was burned. They got PISSED and argued with me for a LONG TIME about that, trying in vain to rationalize their original course of action but eventually conceded my point. They are NOT operating on logic, it is very much “style over substance” with these people and I can assure you that a lesbian would beat her partner or claim to have done so for societal status. It is in their nature to do such things.

  17. thevagrantsvoice says:

    Wanderer,you raise a decent point, although it would be difficult to verify one way or the other.

    Mmm, yeah. That’s the trouble with these sorts of things :/

    Man, those lesbians sound pretty crazy. I’d like to say I haven’t, but I gotta admit I’ve met a few like them IRL as well. What you said reminds me of another problem, though–for lesbians, or women in general, who admit to domestic violence, they might actually be *overstating* it, i.e claiming to have done so when they haven’t. Like you said, it’s a status thing, so some lesbians or women in straight relationships might claim to beat their partner even when they didn’t actually do so just to make themselves look like “strong grrls.” It’s far-out, I know, but somethin I can’t help thinkin about…

  18. Wanderer says:

    Oh, BTW, the above comment was me. I got a wordpress account to allow me to look at the blog of a friend of mine and didn’t log out, sorry about that (wanderer.wordpress.com was already taken, lol). Would you like me to keep myself logged in, or do you prefer your commenters to remain anonymous, Deansdale? Either is fine with me of course :)

  19. Deansdale says:

    #Wanderer: it’s better if we know who’s who for obvious reasons but it’s not that important as long as the discussion is constructive.
    I just keep on wondering though what have you heard about MRAs that made you so defensive. We’re decent fellows, there’s no need for you to ask permission or apologize for anything :)

    All you need to do is compare lesbian rates of violence with heterosexual rates of violence.
    Exactly.

    it’s possible the lesbian couples are *overstating* their [DV]
    Considering that the topic of DV is highly politicized and that in the current climate hetero women are encouraged to overreport DV against them while lesbians are encouraged to underreport it, the situation at hand is quite bad for feminists either way.
    That’s because either
    1. Lesbians overstate DV, but this implies that hetero women also do this (there’s no reason for us to believe otherwise), probably even more so, and thus the entire DV hysteria is a bloated feminist lie.
    2. Lesbians do not overstate their DV, but this clearly shows that they are more violent than men of any sexual interest, thus implying that women are at least as violent as men overall.

  20. Wanderer says:

    I just keep on wondering though what have you heard about MRAs that made you so defensive.

    Heh, it’s nothing about MRAs in particular :) I’ve made a bit of a fool of myself on a couple of blogs before (some MRA, like avoiceformen, but most just general interest/random stuff) so nowadays I try to keep myself as polite as possible. I’ve gained an appreciation for the importance of etiquette, so whenever I go on someone else’s blog, regardless of whether they’re an MRA or feminist or whatever, I always make sure I try to follow the rules they set, since they’re the hosts, after all. :)

    Now, yeah, I suppose those two points of yours would be right. I guess it does buttress the ‘women are violent’ assertion, though of course, one could always find confounding factors–just off the top of my head, a lot of lesbians are really butch, meaning they have a lot of testosterone (and some of them have even had literal problems with their actual sex organs). The higher DV rate among them might be attributed to their hormonal issues/disorders rather than something peculiar to women in general. But yeah, it’s just as likely what you say is true as well.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s