Domestic violence against men and boys

Although domestic violence is an issue that is talked about a lot and treated with seriousness, that is unfortunately not the case when it comes to domestic violence against men and boys. Not only is it underreported globally, but most countries don’t even have a legal framework to deal with domestic violence against male victims. This also reinforces social stigma against men and boys being victims, which is both infuriating and disheartening, as according to the NISVS survey and collected data, domestic violence rates in both genders were pretty similar.

Here are some key highlights:

• Almost 1 in 2 women (47.3%) and more than 2 in 5 men (44.2%) reported experiencing contact sexual violence, physical violence, and/or stalking victimization by an intimate partner at some point in their lifetime.
• One in 13 men (7.6%) reported contact sexual violence from an intimate partner in their lifetime, Less than 1% reported rape, 2.8% reported being made to penetrate• 5% reported sexual coercion and 2.1% reported unwanted sexual contact.
• More than 60% of male victims of intimate partner violence reported that they were first victimized before the age of 25. One in 5 were first victimized before the age of 18.

There are more data, statistics, and studies around this topic, but they vary from each other as only a handful of countries and organizations collect data on it. There still remains the problem of underreporting as well as the erasure of male victims of abuse. Yes, you heard that right. Around 2.9 million male victims of DV were falsely classified as female victims by their own government.

---

Duluth Model

It is a model that is based on the belief that domestic violence is not caused by anger, mental illness, or substance abuse but rather by the desire to control women through patriarchy. According to it, only men can be perpetrators, and women can only be victims. Sounds ridiculous, doesn’t it?

But it’s still the most widely adopted model globally, and most countries have based their domestic violence frameworks on it. Not only is the Duluth Model grossly sexist against men but also against people in non-heterosexual relationships. It has also been criticized by mental health professionals for ignoring a lot of the underlying reasons for abuse.

Let’s hear from the creator of the Duluth Model, Ellen Pence herself:

“By determining that the need or desire for power was the motivating force behind battering, we created a conceptual framework that, in fact, it did not fit the lived experience of many of the men and women we were working with. The DAIP staff … remained undaunted by the difference in our theory and the actual experiences of those we were working with … It was the cases themselves that created the chink in each of our theoretical suits of armor. Speaking for myself, I found that many of the men I interviewed did not seem to articulate a desire for power over their partner. Although I relentlessly took every opportunity to point out to men in the groups that they were so motivated and merely in denial, the fact that few men ever articulated such a desire went unnoticed by me and many of my coworkers. Eventually, we realized that we were finding what we had already predetermined to find.”

She herself proves that Duluth model is pseudoscientific protocol model for domestic violence.

---

Gender symmetry in domestic violence

Destroying the Duluth Model is as simple as looking at the data Feminists don’t want you to see. For example: this meta review of over 200 studies shows total gender symmetry in domestic violence, as well as the ways in which gender symmetry has been concealed from the public. Concluding that “(the) assumption that PV (Partner Violence) was about men dominating women has been contradicted by a mass of empirical evidence from my own research and from research by many others, which found that women physically attack partners at the same or higher rate. And that “about 200 studies …. have found approximately equal rates of perpetration by men and women partners.” Noting that “Men sustain about a third of the injuries from PV, including a third of the deaths from attacks by a partner”.

Despite all of the evidence, Feminist organisations continue to deny the reality of gender parity in domestic violence. Supressing mention of such with fascistic attempts to silence and destroy the critic. Often by claiming they ‘hate women’. This wilful cover-up has endured since the 1970s, where parity in domestic violence was first discovered by Erin Pizzey (founding mother the first women’s shelter).

Her initial creation of ‘Refuge’ lead her to encounter scores of highly violent women seeing escape from highly violent men. Which led her to create the first men’s shelter. This set her at odds with the radical Marxist Feminists corrupting the Women’s Movement. Which, in turn, led them to censor her from their history and smear her to this day.

---

Domestic linked to male suicide

An analysis of the 2014 Adult Psychiatric Morbidity Survey, a cross-sectional survey of 7,058 adults (aged 16 and above) in England:

• “Among both women and men, the prevalence of self-harm and suicidality was higher in those who had experienced IPV than in those who had not… The direction and strength of association between IPV and self-harm and suicidality were not statistically different in men and women in this dataset.”
• “After adjustment for demographic factors (age, gender, ethnicity; version A models), the odds of a suicide attempt in the past year were 4.03 times higher in people with a lifetime history of IPV than in the rest of the population.”
• Among men who attempted suicide, 1 in 10 experienced intimate partner violence in the previous year.
• https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9630147/
• In spite of all this, most domestic violence shelters do not help men or even minor teenage boys.
• “92.4% of refuges are currently able to accommodate male children aged 12 or under. This reduces to 79.8% for male children aged 14 and under, and to 49.4% for male children aged 16 and under. Only 19.4% of refuges are able to accommodate male children aged 17 or over.”

The implication of the above statement is that 80% of shelters do not accommodate male children older than 17. If that is the case for male children, imagine what the reality is for adult men seeking help.