Many US women abused by men, study finds (A Lesson in Bias)

Reuters ^ | May 17, 2006 | Reuters

[okiecon]

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - More than 40 percent of women surveyed in the Seattle area reported they had been physically or psychologically abused by their husbands, dates or boyfriends, researchers said on Wednesday.

[okiecon]

I posted this on another thread about this study. I'm not defending the study or its methods, but there sure seems to be a rush to judgment to say it's totally invalid.

It is invalid. It tells us nothing useful. Everyone knows abuse exists. Attempts to quantify it should be precise.

My dear husband would never abuse me, (no real man ever would), but I was a victim of acquaintance rape in college. In the short time I've been on FR, I've read a lot of comments by women -- strong, courageous women, not whiners -- who've suffered terrible abuse by husbands and boyfriends . . . even by men who call themselves conservative and Christian.

While I sympathize with you, anecdotal evidence is a very weak indicator of the scope of the problems.

I'm not crazy about lumping verbal abuse into the mix, but I think the study shows that abuse of women is still an issue in our society. I don't think it's an issue we can ignore, even if it doesn't apply to our own personal relationships -- especially if we have daughters or granddaughters.

If you need a study to validate that abuse is still a problem, then you need to stop and think more. I prefer scientific studies, not pseudoscience. Emotional abuse was included purposefully to bring the numbers up.

Heck, what would you call the greater majority of divorces?

[David Allen]

This is a classic example of how opinions are shaped with false implications of surveys.

I didn't know there were any women who didn't feel they'd been verbally abused by some male some time in their life. Are there any, because I've never met them.

Physical abuse I want to hear about. Verbal abuse? That's the net the feminazis use to catch all men. It's bogus.

[Chanticleer]

You're right -- there is no way to solve any societal problem completely, but does that mean you ignore or discount it? Here's a simple, unscientific study -- get a large group of women in a safe environment where they feel they can honestly share. Ask them point blank -- have you ever been physically or sexually abused. Don't ask it at a homeless shelter or drug abuse clinic -- ask it at a church group or a homeschool parent meeting. You might be surprised at the number of women who would answer that they had been physically or sexually abused by a parent, an acquaintance, a boyfriend or a spouse.

I don't like to talk about my rape. I was a 17 year old virgin at the time -- my first week at college. It's an unpleasant memory for me. But on occasions when I have opened up and shared my experience, I am always astonished that I'm not the only one. The number of women who have been raped or beaten would probably astonish you -- it always shocks the hell out of me.

[okiecon]

Thanks for the info.

[Alia]

In my opinion, one case of abuse is one too many.

Yeah, especially when it comes from a false accuser.

[okiecon]

My problem is when this stuff is cited in court cases?! It is good to know that at least one medical professional has a sceptical eye.

[hocndoc]

Are men and women "equal" in a physical fight? That might have been his mistake.

[burzum]

You're right -- there is no way to solve any societal problem completely, but does that mean you ignore or discount it?

I don't discount or ignore anything. I just give it the weight that it deserves. I am not arguing that rape or domestic violence doesn't occur. I am arguing that this study was made for political purposes and liberals are misleading the public about the significance of the results. The scientists are claiming things that their data simply does not support. Other data may support their claims, but the data that they have cited does not. As far as I'm concerned *this* study is debunked.

The number of women who have been raped or beaten would probably astonish you -- it always shocks the hell out of me.

It does surprise me. But that is not why I posted.

[Alia]

Correction: "She calls him a lousy, no good piece of scum because he's not making enough money."

He calls her a hateful shrew.

I hadn't gotten to physical "equality" level yet.

But since you've gone there.. there are some women who take advantage of the old adage "never hit a woman"; but who go full bore into administering a raging physical abuse upon men. Were I a man, and she hit me hard, physically. Yep, I'd lower the boom immediately before she grabbed a kitchen knife.

[okiecon]

Has an intimate partner ever put you down, or called you names repeatedly, or controlled your behavior?

I have been put down by a partner, therefore I am a victim of IPV. Lumping trivial insults of an ex-girlfriend or boyfriend with physical abuse is dishonest.

[mother22wife21]

"it always shocks the hell out of me."

Ditto.

[okiecon]

Skeptical eye, I am not sure what a sceptical eye is.

[okiecon]

Are men and women "equal" in a physical fight?

I think I read somewhere that women are more likely to use a weapon.

[hocndoc]

"Sound Politics" mixes apples and oranges, just as some articles on domestic violence do. However, look at the hospitalization rates, death rates, and even the conviction rates and sentences. There's a huge disparity.

Men and women should teach physics to both boys and girls: There are laws that have to be taken into account in any situation, force is related to mass and displacement, and that for actions there are reactions.

[MD_Willington_1976]

Demographically, there are a lot more Sihks than Muslims in Western Canada, those two groups do not play well together... One thing I will agree on, there are a lot of Liberals just North in Vancouver.

[hocndoc]

ditto ditto.

And the anger that these threads bring out.

[Chanticleer]

You're right. You posted an article on a study with suspect and flawed methods. What worries me is the immediate, violent knee-jerk reaction that the women in the study were drug-addict, liberal, whining lesbians who just like to complain. I guess my knee jerks, too.

But the problem is real, and it has ramifications to the Republican party. This board has had many threads that are offensive and/or hostile to women. I especially enjoy the "Why American Women Stink" threads. Yes, I know many men have been burned in ugly relationships, and that sad . . . but it's wrong for these men to turn bitter and hostile toward women just as it is wrong for abused women to hate all men.

Conservatives can't afford to alienate conservative women. Those of you who delight in posting cutting, witty comments in threads like this should remember this. Criticize the study all you want, but I think everyone would be wise to make it clear that physical abuse of women is totally unacceptable.

Thanks, Burzum, for having the courage to address me, and to do so respectfully.

[Alia]

No, it doesn't bring out anger in those who disagree with your "women good/men bad" theorems. It brings out information which dissents from the PC conventional perspective of believing everything you read or hear is a truism.

Chanticleer posts of her own personal story. And one can hear this big "ah, poor lady".

Some male posters post about their own abuse by females. And there's this huge "NOTHING" response.

That's what stories and discussion about this topic typically produce. If a female brings up a "victim" story, everyone is supposed to feel really, really bad for her.

But a man? HA! He can take it -- he's an evil man (and he probably deserved it)/sarc off.

So yes, these types of articles and psuedoscientific studies are never good at bringing about true and productive change; but instead are written in order to apply if not direct more "taxpayer dollar and private grants" to whomever the entity is promoting such a study.

One thing that studies in past did, at least have the honesty in reporting the frequency by which these so-called "abused" women returned home, never missed a beat, in staying with their so-called abusers.

This led to the "battered women's syndrome". 90 women who coldbloodedly executed their husbands and boyfriends were given a "get out of jail free pass" by a then Dem in Illinois, during the 90s.

This report does not ask that question.

And it ain't because women aren't making the same or can't make the same as men.

It's because the studies are not rigged to provide answers, genuine solutions. They are rigged for funding purposes.

[Alia]

Conservatives can't afford to alienate conservative women

Alienate? If a conservative woman is going to base her vote upon what she reads by anonymous posters, then she's in trouble already and will more than likely always vote Democrat.

Conservative women vote Republican.

This board has had many threads that are offensive and/or hostile to women.

Do you have the ability to fathom whether it is males or females, trolls, posting those comments?

Through all my years on forums, I've seen men of all political hue comment as you describe disliking. Why is this? Because they sure can't say these things in real time. But women can. And not be hauled off for creating hostile environments, ad nauseum.

[Toby06]

Canuckistan.