Posted on 07/13/2006 2:10:55 PM PDT by srotaG adirolF
Women more likely to be perpetrators of abuse as well as victims
Filed under Research, Education, Family, Law, Gender on Thursday, July 13, 2006.
GAINESVILLE, Fla. — Women are more likely than men to stalk, attack and psychologically abuse their partners, according to a University of Florida study that finds college women have a new view of the dating scene.
“We’re seeing women in relationships acting differently nowadays than we have in the past,” said Angela Gover, a UF criminologist who led the research. “The nature of criminality has been changing for females, and this change is reflected in intimate relationships as well.”
In a survey of 2,500 students at UF and the University of South Carolina between August and December 2005, more than a quarter (29 percent) reported physically assaulting their dates and 22 percent reported being the victims of attacks during the past year. Thirty-two percent of women reported being the perpetrators of this violence, compared with 24 percent of men. The students took selected liberal arts and sciences courses. Forty percent were men and 60 percent were women, reflecting the gender composition of these classes.
In a separate survey of 1,490 UF students, one quarter (25 percent) said they had been stalked during the past year and 7 percent reported engaging in stalking, of whom a majority (58 percent) were female.
Although women were the predominant abusers, they still made up the largest number of victims in both surveys, accounting for 70 percent of those being stalked, for example.
The reason more college men weren’t victims may be that women in the study did not exclusively date them, preferring men who had already graduated, not yet enrolled in college or chose not to attend college at all, Gover said. “It shows that students who are perpetrating these attacks aren’t just targeting other students on campus,” she said.
It also is possible that some of the physical attacks women claim they are responsible for are actually acts of self-defense, Gover added. “Maybe some of these women have been abused by their partner for some time and they’re finally fighting back,” she said.
Recent studies on domestic violence suggest that whereas in the past victims might have felt trapped in violent situations, today’s women are more likely to understand they have options instead of putting up with mistreatment, she said.
“I think we may also be seeing sort of a new dynamic in dating relationships in terms of women feeling more empowered,” she said. “They recognize they don’t have to be in a dating relationship forever. They can get out of it.”
Child abuse was the single biggest determining factor for men and women becoming perpetrators or victims of either dating violence or stalking, Gover said. Even if one never personally experienced abuse, witnessing violence between one’s parents as a child increased the likelihood of stalking or being stalked as a young adult and it made girls more susceptible to becoming victims of dating violence when they grew up, she said.
The survey found that men and women who were abused as children were 43 percent more likely than their peers who were not mistreated to perpetrate physical violence and 51 percent more likely to be victims of physical violence in a dating relationship. Violent acts included kicking or slapping, pushing or shoving, punching or hitting with a hand or object, slamming someone against a wall and using force to make a partner have sex, she said.
Sexual risk-taking – the age when survey respondents first had sex and the number of sexual partners in their lifetime – was another important risk factor, but surprisingly, attitudes toward women made no difference, said Gover, who did her research with Catherine Kaukinen, a University of South Carolina criminology professor, and Kathleen Fox, a UF graduate student in criminology. Some of the findings were presented at the American Society of Criminology annual meeting in November in Toronto.
The study also was among the first to look at psychological abuse. Examples included preventing partners from seeing family or friends, shouting at them and using threats to have sex. Fifty-four percent of respondents reported being psychologically abusive, and 52 percent said they were victims of this type of behavior. Women were more likely to be psychologically abusive, with 57 percent saying they were perpetrators versus 50 percent of males.
Shelley Serdahely, executive director of Men Stopping Violence, in Decatur, Ga., questions the validity of studies showing women are more violent. “Women might be more likely to get frustrated because men are not taught how to be active listeners and women feel like they are not being heard,” she said. “Often women are more emotional because the relationship matters a lot to them, and while that may come out in a push or a shove or a grab, all of which are considered dating violence, it doesn’t have the effect of intimidating the man.”
Credits Writer Cathy Keen, ckeen@ufl.edu, 352-392-0186
Source Angela Gover, agover@ufl.edu, 352-219-4977
I suspect we may have a case here of marajade being married to the only man in the world who understands her; and of RipSawyer being married to the only woman he has found who understands him.
I also suspect that if the two of you had gotten together it probably would not have been a successful union. Fair to say?
Those of us who are fortunate enough to find ourselves in blissfully happy marriages may well have found the only/ideal person for us, as well. Otherwise, we would likely be among the lonley divorced folks who end up not caring much for the opposite sex.
Can we kiss and make up? LOL
SoS
I'm still on first marriage as is my husband. And we use "pet names" in re: to each other all the time. We just make sure they are positive. I would never hesitate to call him "sweety" in public at all. And he if objected to that, I feel I'd certainly have cause to be angry with him.
RipSawyer posted that he never met a woman who accepted blame for their divorce and then proceeded to post his current wife did before marrying him. Either she did or she didn't, which is it?
Can we kiss and make up? LOL
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Only if you promise to find me a high quality copy of the movie you use as your screen name. I have a low quality reproduction but I think it is a wonderful movie and it is a shame that it was taken off the market under the pretense that it has some kind of diabolical racial message to it, Uncle Remus was my hero when I was a small boy learning to read. I still remember when all the characters seemed as real to me as my own family.
Either she did or she didn't, which is it?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You need to read more carefully, I said that she accepts the blame for marrying him in the first place. Having made that error I fail to see how anyone could blame her for correcting it by divorcing him. I can promise that if you had ever spent a day with that man you would find me incredibly attractive by comparison.
"I did not meet a single woman who would admit that the divorce was her fault."
Your quote in your post 19. I do read carefully.
Uncle Remus: There's other ways of learnin' 'bout the behind feet of a mule than gettin' kicked by him, sure as I'm named Remus. And just because these here tales is about critters like Br'er Rabbit an' Br'er Fox, that don't mean it can't happen to folks! So 'scuse me for sayin' so, but them who can't learn from a tale about critters, just ain't got the ears tuned for listenin'.
There was a wisdom and a gentleness in the movie --- and it portrays people in a simpler manner --- the way they once were. Uncle Remus was and is dear to the hearts of many of us.I would have to find two good quality copies of the movie --- one for me and one for you. If you find one first, pick one up for me, too.
SoS
Your quote in your post 19. I do read carefully
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Do you not comprehend the difference between, "I caused the divorce by my actions during the marriage" and "I made a mistake by marrying him"?
What is the diff?
What is the diff?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Admitting to marrying the wrong person is not in any way saying that you did anything to cause the divorce, only that you entered a marriage that you never should have entered. I have met many women who said this same thing. It is really just another way of saying that the divorce was his fault. In my wife's case I believe that having made the initial mistake she made every effort to hold the marriage together but it would have been impossible given the sort of man she married. Given a different upbringing he might have been a better man but he never overcame all the crazy things that happened to him while growing up. I never said that ALL those women who blamed the man were wrong, just that some of them had to be at fault and I never met one who accepted the responsibility in the way that some men do.
"Admitting to marrying the wrong person is not in any way saying that you did anything to cause the divorce, only that you entered a marriage that you never should have entered."
That implies "fault" to me. Was she or wasn't she?
That implies "fault" to me. Was she or wasn't she?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
If you don't believe there is any difference between those two things then I see no point in further discussion, we simply agree to disagree.
Sheesh, sounds like her husband has quite the bundle of joy, eh. Nitpicking one word at a time.
"Sheesh, sounds like her husband has quite the bundle of joy, eh. Nitpicking one word at a time."
I stand up for myself as a woman. And guess what? My husband respects it in me and encourages me.
Sheesh, sounds like her husband has quite the bundle of joy, eh. Nitpicking one word at a time.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Ya think maybe somebody else made a mistake? 8 0 )
I think that we are finally out of the feminist "all women are innocent victims" era. That took awhile.
I've seen many episodes of COPS where the guy is arrested on the woman's word alone, even if she doesn't have a mark on her. The woman doesn't get arrested unless the guy has visible injuries. Even in those cases, she has to be screaming and belligerent, and she gets a ton more benefit of the doubt than the guy does.
"I've seen many episodes of COPS where the guy is arrested on the woman's word alone, even if she doesn't have a mark on her."
That might be because its the law.
I was reading a story about a woman who was addicted to meth and got off of it. She was saying that 15 years ago, the cops busted in her boyfriend's house (she and another girlfriend were there, too) on a raid. The cops found several ounces of meth, scales, and packaging materials. Her boyfriend was arrested and drugs and paraphernalia were confiscated. What's interesting was that the boyfriend was arrested, the two women were left behind. They were briefly asked if they were involved in the drugs, of course they said "no", and that was it. After the cops left, the two women were just sitting there asking each other, "How the hell are we not in jail right now???"
That wouldn't happen today. Today, the women would be hitting the floor just as hard as the guys and they would be doing time just like them.
"That's fine if it goes both ways."
I believe the law does.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.