By
Mark Rosenthal
August 19, 2005
NewsWithViews.com
For thirty years
now, researchers have known that wives
kick, punch, stab, or shoot their
husbands about as often as husbands
kick, punch, stab, or shoot their
wives. But federal law ignores the
facts and instead uses the power of
the purse to get states to impose
Kafkaesque policies that punish victimized
men and reward violent women.
Back in 1975, the
First National Family Violence Survey
turned up results that surprised even
the sociologists conducting the survey.
Wives attack husbands about as often
as husbands attack wives. And wives
attack first about as often as husbands
attack first, which is strong evidence
that women's assaults on men can't
be explained away simply as self-defense.[1]
But battered women's advocates were
intent on portraying domestic violence
as something only men do and only
women suffer from. So they'd conveniently
leave out the part about women's assaults
on men whenever they cited the study's
results.[2]
Susan R. Paisner
is a criminologist and longtime advocate
for abused women and men. She recalls
being stunned by the hostile attitudes
toward male victims that she encountered
at one of the nation's first conferences
on domestic violence. She naively
thought that "we were all there
to do good -- for all who needed it."
Yet when she mentioned having read
a brief newspaper article about male
victims, many of the other women at
the conference turned on her, saying,
"This is OUR issue, OUR cause.
If men are battered, then let other
MEN do something for them."[3]
The Second National
Family Violence Survey was conducted
ten years after the first. Contrary
to advocates' claims of an epidemic
of wife abuse, violence toward women
had declined. But violence toward
men by women had not changed since
the first survey.[4]
When battered women's
advocates lobbied Congress, they quoted
only the part of the results that
suited their agenda. And so, in spite
of longstanding knowledge among researchers
about the existence of significant
numbers of abusive women and victimized
men, Congress enacted legislation
in 1994 that addressed only part of
the problem. Rather than passing an
inclusive Family Violence Act, they
enacted a Violence Against Women Act.
VAWA provided billions
of dollars for organizations whose
primary purpose is helping abused
women, but nothing whatsoever for
organizations to help abused men.
The Violence Against Women Office,
which administers VAWA, states that
the law prohibits funding of programs
that focus on male victims.[5]
At least one state agency that distributes
VAWA funds explicitly lists "Programs
that focus on children and/or men"
under "Ineligible Activities"
on their application form.[6]
Even after receiving
$5.1 billion under the past two VAWA
bills, battered women's advocates
still argue that there's too little
money, and therefore the government
should allocate no funding whatsoever
for organizations whose primary purpose
is to help the 835,000 men the U.S.
Dept. of Justice estimates are assaulted
by their partner annually.[7]
Yet somehow there's enough money in
the current $4.2 billion VAWA reauthorization
bill to make special provisions for
an estimated 32,600 Native Americans,[8]
but of course, only if those Native
Americans are female. No males need
apply.
RADAR (Respecting
Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting)
has reviewed the VAWA reauthorization
bill and identified the numerous serious
problems listed below.[9]
The bill:
1 Misrepresents domestic
violence as almost always man-on-woman
violence.
2 Violates men's
Fourteenth Amendment right to equal
protection.
3 Lacks safeguards
against false allegations of domestic
violence, thus encouraging the unscrupulous
to use false allegations during divorce
proceedings to separate children and
fathers.
4 lurs the distinction
between violent crime and a verbal
argument.
5 Allows restraining
orders based on a woman's word; no
proof required.
6 Encourages mandatory
reporting, mandatory arrest, and "no-drop"
prosecutions, policies which even
the Feminist Majority Foundation says
often end up harming families.[10]
7 Pre-empts state
partner assault laws and the federal
Victims of Crime Act. Spends $1 billion
a year duplicating existing programs.
8 Funds trainings
that teach judges to violate the Constitution.
In one such training, judges were
instructed: "Your job is not
to become concerned about all the
constitutional rights of the man that
you're violating as you grant a restraining
order. Thrown him out on the street,
give him the clothes on his back and
tell him, 'See ya' around.'"[11]
9 Funds treatment
programs based on ideology, not science.
10 Represents an
overreaching of federal power.
11 Corrupts family
violence research. VAWA-funded researchers
often seek to bias the outcome of
their research by interviewing only
women, slanting the wording of questions,
asking only questions that will produce
the desired answer, or by selectively
reporting research findings.[12]
12 Funds educational
programs that consistently depict
men as perpetrators and women as victims
of domestic violence.
VAWA should have
treated all people equally when it
was first enacted. Instead, VAWA tramples
on persons' basic human rights while
ignoring what scientific researchers
have known for three decades. Our
elected officials have a responsibility
to make sure VAWA helps all victims
of domestic violence.
Related Article:
Domestic Violence & Show Trials
With Predetermined Outcomes
Footnotes:
1, Richard J. Gelles,
Ph.D., "The
Hidden Side of Domestic Violence:
Male Victims," (The Women's
Quarterly, 1999,)
2, Ibid
3, Susan R. Paisner , personal communication,
January 2005.
4, Gelles, Op Cit
5, Rejection letter from Delaware
Domestic Violence Coordinating Council
to Forum for Equity and Fairness in
Family Issues, October 9, 2002,[pdf
File] quoting documentation provided
by the Violence Against Women Office
which says, "states must fund
only programs that focus on violence
against women."
6, Rejection letter from North Central
Texas Council of Governments to Fathers
for Equal Rights, December 16, 2002,
[pdf
File] including copy of application
form which lists "Programs that
focus on children and/or men"
as the first item under "Ineligible
Activities."
7, National Institute of Justice,
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,
U.S. Department of Justice, "Prevalence,
Incidence, and Consequences of Violence
Against Women: Findings From the National
Violence Against Women Survey,"
p. 7
8, National Institute of Justice,
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,
U.S. Department of Justice, "Extent,
Nature, and Consequences of Intimate
Partner Violence,", p. iii,
states that 1.5% of women reported
being raped or physically assaulted
by a partner in the previous year.
U.S. Census Bureau reports the
population of American Indians and
Alaska Natives as 2,173,834 (Read)
So a rough estimate of the number
of Native American women abused annually
can be calculated as 2,173,834 x 1.5%
= 32,607.5
9, A document containing more detail
on each point can be downloaded from
[pdf
File]
10, Ms. Foundation for Women, "Safety
& Justice for All," 2003,
"Undue Compulsion," p. 6
11, Cathy Young, "Hitting
Below the Belt," Salon.com,
10/25/1999, [Read], p. 2, tape recorded
remarks of Judge Richard Russell of
Ocean City, N.J. at a training seminar
for municipal judges, printed in the
New Jersey Law Journal.
12, Murray Straus, Ph.D., "The
Controversy Over Domestic Violence
by Women: A Methodological, Theoretical,
and Sociology of Science Analysis,"
(X. B. Arriaga & S. Oskamp (Eds.),
Violence
in Intimate Relationships, Thousand
Oaks Sage, 1999, ), pp. 17-44
© 2005 - Mark Rosenthal - All Rights
Reserved |