http://www.vix.com/menmag/panofull.htm
With that information, it makes one wonder if some women may take a martial art for unscrupulous purposes as well.
Women as Rapists
Moderator: Available
-
Allen M.
Women as Rapists
Hi Cecil.
There's an awful lot on the web concerniong women perpetrators.
------------------
Allen Moulton from Uechi-ryu Etcetera
There's an awful lot on the web concerniong women perpetrators.
------------------
Allen Moulton from Uechi-ryu Etcetera
Women as Rapists
Sounds like they were abusing tiny children. Who needs martial arts for that? Now MEN who represent the large majority of abusers also represent the large majority of people potentially learning MA for the wrong reasons, especially since they favor using force more often than women seem too.
Women as Rapists
Thank you Ian,
While men may certainly get tired of the "male bashing" when violent crime conversations start - on this forum that is not the intent. We don't need to focus on female criminals to balance it out. Neither do we need to focus on "martial arts molesters." The dregs of society cross all boundaries - martial arts being one segment alone.
Certainly we can state a few obvious facts:
1) Women have been victimized, and so have men, children, racial and religious groups, etc. etc. etc.
2) Some women come to martial arts to learn how not to become victims, or to avoid becoming a victim again.
Primarily - the perpetrators of violent crime are male - according to DeBecker and other National Crime statistics. This does NOT mean that there are no women criminals - but let's look at the positive influences of martial arts training in a woman's life rather than how the twisted minds of this world may try to incorporate the training.
While men may certainly get tired of the "male bashing" when violent crime conversations start - on this forum that is not the intent. We don't need to focus on female criminals to balance it out. Neither do we need to focus on "martial arts molesters." The dregs of society cross all boundaries - martial arts being one segment alone.
Certainly we can state a few obvious facts:
1) Women have been victimized, and so have men, children, racial and religious groups, etc. etc. etc.
2) Some women come to martial arts to learn how not to become victims, or to avoid becoming a victim again.
Primarily - the perpetrators of violent crime are male - according to DeBecker and other National Crime statistics. This does NOT mean that there are no women criminals - but let's look at the positive influences of martial arts training in a woman's life rather than how the twisted minds of this world may try to incorporate the training.
Women as Rapists
"We don't need to focus on female criminals to balance it out. "
I prefer to look at each side, male female, crooked, straight. Because to not look at all sides may lead someone to go into more denial. A victim of a female's attack may go "Oh, no, not me, it could not have happened---she didn't---I must have wanted it."
Debecker may give up crime stats that point to men being more prone to violence---but in his book "Protecting The Gift" he certainly talks about how lousy his mother was. I know I was horrified reading that stuff.
Didn't some woman just drown her children? And yet, we want to say "she's just sick." Yeah, I think she IS sick---but her sick behind needs to be locked up so that she can't kill any more children. And it's too bad they can't lock the doctor who took her off the meds up (don't get me started on some doctors....)
I think that a lot of men are in denial when it comes to female violence. I know I used to be a full blown proponent of "Oh, the damsel couldn't possibly [insert foul act here]", despite blatant evidence to the contrary. Women's violence, it seems, tends to be less physical, more along the lines of psychological terror. And, believe it or not, I think there are warped women taking karate for the same reason warped men take karate: to gain more physical power.
Also, not all the victims women target are little kids. Some are teens and adults. Scary, ain't it? It will probably get even worse once some women figure out how to drug people or get over their aversion to doing so.
Denial is so pervasive: I know of a case where a guy was basically raped by a woman. Scenario of his being drunk and she mounting him while he was asleep. Considering that a male's genitals goes through states of hard and soft while sleeping, I think it is reasonable that he could have been mounted against his will as he dozed. The woman was supposedly larger than he was, plus he was plastered. He fell asleep at the wrong house, around the wrong drunk people and ended up with a child he did not ask for, a child for whom he must pay support.
Do you think he will EVER press charges? If he did, would he be believed? Does he himself even believed he got raped? Can pigs do computer programming? How could that guy ever be seen as a rape victim: he's supposed to be "a thug".
I prefer to look at each side, male female, crooked, straight. Because to not look at all sides may lead someone to go into more denial. A victim of a female's attack may go "Oh, no, not me, it could not have happened---she didn't---I must have wanted it."
Debecker may give up crime stats that point to men being more prone to violence---but in his book "Protecting The Gift" he certainly talks about how lousy his mother was. I know I was horrified reading that stuff.
Didn't some woman just drown her children? And yet, we want to say "she's just sick." Yeah, I think she IS sick---but her sick behind needs to be locked up so that she can't kill any more children. And it's too bad they can't lock the doctor who took her off the meds up (don't get me started on some doctors....)
I think that a lot of men are in denial when it comes to female violence. I know I used to be a full blown proponent of "Oh, the damsel couldn't possibly [insert foul act here]", despite blatant evidence to the contrary. Women's violence, it seems, tends to be less physical, more along the lines of psychological terror. And, believe it or not, I think there are warped women taking karate for the same reason warped men take karate: to gain more physical power.
Also, not all the victims women target are little kids. Some are teens and adults. Scary, ain't it? It will probably get even worse once some women figure out how to drug people or get over their aversion to doing so.
Denial is so pervasive: I know of a case where a guy was basically raped by a woman. Scenario of his being drunk and she mounting him while he was asleep. Considering that a male's genitals goes through states of hard and soft while sleeping, I think it is reasonable that he could have been mounted against his will as he dozed. The woman was supposedly larger than he was, plus he was plastered. He fell asleep at the wrong house, around the wrong drunk people and ended up with a child he did not ask for, a child for whom he must pay support.
Do you think he will EVER press charges? If he did, would he be believed? Does he himself even believed he got raped? Can pigs do computer programming? How could that guy ever be seen as a rape victim: he's supposed to be "a thug".
-
Allen M.
Women as Rapists
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
I read this little cutie this morning: <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>What it boils down to is that violence against a woman is anything she says it is. If she calls police and claims she was frightened by her partner's behaviour, she kickstarts a system that's all gears and no brakes. It starts with jail for the accused, a restraining order, and a slow and expensive tour of the court system.
If the call to police was made in anger because the caller wanted to win a quarrel, recanting is a difficult option. Domestic violence (DV) specialists say once a call is made only they know what's best. Women recant because they feel threatened, and only a thorough legal thrashing of the man will solve the problems.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I just don't believe that "[men] are the large majority of abusers."
You don't know they are the large majority of abusers.Now MEN who represent the large majority of abusers
I read this little cutie this morning: <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>What it boils down to is that violence against a woman is anything she says it is. If she calls police and claims she was frightened by her partner's behaviour, she kickstarts a system that's all gears and no brakes. It starts with jail for the accused, a restraining order, and a slow and expensive tour of the court system.
If the call to police was made in anger because the caller wanted to win a quarrel, recanting is a difficult option. Domestic violence (DV) specialists say once a call is made only they know what's best. Women recant because they feel threatened, and only a thorough legal thrashing of the man will solve the problems.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I just don't believe that "[men] are the large majority of abusers."
Women as Rapists
© Simon Fraser University, Media and Public Relations
Spousal abuse rates similar for men, women, study finds
Men and women report similar rates of violence perpetration and
victimization, says the first Canadian study that investigated the matter.
"And, while more comprehensive study is needed, it appears that a
substantial proportion of women's violence cannot be explained as acts of
self-defence," says the study.
Gender Differences in Patterns of Relationship Violence in Alberta by
graduate student Marilyn Kwong (below) and psychology professor Kim
Bartholomew of SFU and Donald Dutton of UBC, was published in the July issue
of Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science.
Kwong, who has just completed the first year of her MA in clinical
psychology, says the research shows "that we need to be aware that this kind
of survey research picks up on a type of violence that's not necessarily as
extreme as the violence we commonly think about in terms of the battered
woman."
She says many media stories conflate survey rates of domestic violence with
the common perception of the battered woman. This implies that a substantial
proportion of men are extremely violent to their wives, "and that's just not
accurate."
There certainly are very violent men out there, but in reporting
the survey rates and confounding them with the common perception of the
battered woman, the media leaves the impression that the survey finds a
greater percentage of men batter their wives than is actually the case. The
majority of the violence reported by these women is minor.
Kwong says violence can happen against men and the public should be open to
different forms of violence that may take place in the family.
"We shouldn't reject any notion outside that of the battered women one. I
think men have a right to have services available to them, but they just
don't have anything to go to."
Data for the research was collected in Alberta in 1987 through telephone and
one-on-one interviews. About 700 people were surveyed.
Similar surveys have been done in the U.S. Kwong says there were
similarities between U.S. and Alberta surveys in rates of violence, both
perpetrated and received by men and women.
The violence includes everything from a push or shove, to using a knife or a
gun.
"The majority of violence reported is minor," she says. "Women slap more and
men might grab or hold the woman down, but generally, the nature of the
violence is not much different."
Spousal abuse rates similar for men, women, study finds
Men and women report similar rates of violence perpetration and
victimization, says the first Canadian study that investigated the matter.
"And, while more comprehensive study is needed, it appears that a
substantial proportion of women's violence cannot be explained as acts of
self-defence," says the study.
Gender Differences in Patterns of Relationship Violence in Alberta by
graduate student Marilyn Kwong (below) and psychology professor Kim
Bartholomew of SFU and Donald Dutton of UBC, was published in the July issue
of Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science.
Kwong, who has just completed the first year of her MA in clinical
psychology, says the research shows "that we need to be aware that this kind
of survey research picks up on a type of violence that's not necessarily as
extreme as the violence we commonly think about in terms of the battered
woman."
She says many media stories conflate survey rates of domestic violence with
the common perception of the battered woman. This implies that a substantial
proportion of men are extremely violent to their wives, "and that's just not
accurate."
There certainly are very violent men out there, but in reporting
the survey rates and confounding them with the common perception of the
battered woman, the media leaves the impression that the survey finds a
greater percentage of men batter their wives than is actually the case. The
majority of the violence reported by these women is minor.
Kwong says violence can happen against men and the public should be open to
different forms of violence that may take place in the family.
"We shouldn't reject any notion outside that of the battered women one. I
think men have a right to have services available to them, but they just
don't have anything to go to."
Data for the research was collected in Alberta in 1987 through telephone and
one-on-one interviews. About 700 people were surveyed.
Similar surveys have been done in the U.S. Kwong says there were
similarities between U.S. and Alberta surveys in rates of violence, both
perpetrated and received by men and women.
The violence includes everything from a push or shove, to using a knife or a
gun.
"The majority of violence reported is minor," she says. "Women slap more and
men might grab or hold the woman down, but generally, the nature of the
violence is not much different."
Women as Rapists
Additionally__ abuse by women upon men takes the more insidious form of emotional battering,mental "vampirism" __ Or _ emotive vandalism_ 
------------------
Van Canna
------------------
Van Canna
Women as Rapists
Is anybody's controlled, traditional, one-step defense against a knife going to stop a crazed wife who catches her husband in bed with another woman? Do they have a one-step attack against a pot of hot grits or boiling water (yes, I'm southern, how could you tell?) I guess we can argue AVOIDANCE would be the only thing that would work in those situations.
I really need to get my black belt. Then I may be able to convince some people to help me experiment with these types of training scenarios.
Why don't we ever practice one-steps from laying down? I mean, set up a mock bed inside a dojo and have an attacker come at the defender while he or she is laying down.
Most of our techinques assume that we're going to be standing up or rolling on the ground with someone on a hard or semi-hard surface.
Speaking of women in the martial arts, I scared a female junior student because I yelled at her. I gave a full-force kiai as I prepared to the one-step attack, as would her attacker on her exam. She FROZE. Nobody had ever yelled at her that loudly in the dojang before. I know I hadn't because I was too busy working on my own stuff.
I heard she passed her test later that week with flying colors. It taught me that we handicap women if we go too easy on them. It's probably a good thing she froze in class, rather than on the street. Perhaps her freezing will diminish somewhat now.
On another note: In "A Bouncer's Guide to Barroom Brawling", Peyton Quinn writes about the evils of going to the ground in a real fight. I'm glad somebody put the fact in print that if you go to the ground in a real fight, Uke's friends just might kick you in the head. And, he talks about the most effective kicking techique: kicking the person while he's rolling on the ground in pain.
I just started reading my copy.
I really need to get my black belt. Then I may be able to convince some people to help me experiment with these types of training scenarios.
Why don't we ever practice one-steps from laying down? I mean, set up a mock bed inside a dojo and have an attacker come at the defender while he or she is laying down.
Most of our techinques assume that we're going to be standing up or rolling on the ground with someone on a hard or semi-hard surface.
Speaking of women in the martial arts, I scared a female junior student because I yelled at her. I gave a full-force kiai as I prepared to the one-step attack, as would her attacker on her exam. She FROZE. Nobody had ever yelled at her that loudly in the dojang before. I know I hadn't because I was too busy working on my own stuff.
I heard she passed her test later that week with flying colors. It taught me that we handicap women if we go too easy on them. It's probably a good thing she froze in class, rather than on the street. Perhaps her freezing will diminish somewhat now.
On another note: In "A Bouncer's Guide to Barroom Brawling", Peyton Quinn writes about the evils of going to the ground in a real fight. I'm glad somebody put the fact in print that if you go to the ground in a real fight, Uke's friends just might kick you in the head. And, he talks about the most effective kicking techique: kicking the person while he's rolling on the ground in pain.
I just started reading my copy.
Women as Rapists
Whoa.
What actually turns out to be real is that physical acts against partners are quite similar in RATE between men and women (remembering back to research I did coming up four years ago this summer).
What that kind of fact can obscure is that the damage a woman inflicts is substantially less than what a man inflicts. For example:
There's a fight over the dishes. Words go back and forth. There's pushing which escalates and its hard to say which was the first "push" because it started with little taps. But she is clearly the aggressor this time and starts to hit him heavily about the chest and arms. He punches her in the face and sends her to the ER with a broken nose and a missing tooth.
Assault tally:
Woman: 1
Man: 1
Looks EQUAL huh? She might even apologize and believe everything was her fault because she hit first. However:
Inflicting ER visit and damage tally:
Woman: 0
Man: 1.
I've seen several raped women in the ER, several with bruises head to toe, several suicidal after abuse from men. No abused men. (the violence they do to each other, of course, is many orders of magnitude higher than that done by women, but not as emasculating, I guess, and tends to be forgotten when these discussions take place). Domestic abuse is the third most common cause of injuries in women at the ER, with second being "falls," a category that includes a lot of unreported domestic abuse. A number of articles have advised screening women in the ER for domestic abuse, the problem is so common. Not men.
Women aren't frequently sending beaten men to the ER or to battered persons shelters (or out of the home battered, since I know battered mens shelters are few and far between). Men are, in fact, doing that to women. What's the gender split on murder? 99 to 1, if I reember correctly. Are we to believe that domestic abuse is 50 50 or something? Violence stems from a common denominator. It's not even close, anecdotal reports of woman violence aside. Women by their size and nature just aren't as violent as men and while the isolated instances of men being emotionally or physically whipped by their female mates cannot be ignored, it is just not on the same order of magnitude. Just like breast cancer in men is serious, deadly, tragic, and not even on the same level as breast cancer in women.
So the real question isn't how to fend off the knife wielding wife who caught you in bed with another woman. It's why Texas (at least into the 80s, I don't remember the date) had laws that said it was impossible for rape to occur within a marriage and that there was a murder exception if a MAN found his wife in the act. What is the rule of thumb? Hint, it's not that the stick a WOMAN beats her husband with has to be no thicker than HER thumb. In the history of marriage, was it the man or the woman considered to be property?
This is changing but one thing is clear: serious domestic abuse is still largely perpetrated by men on women. I'd like to take this chance to screen the audience with the recommended ER approach: "Has anyone hit, kicked, or sexually or otherwise attacked you? Is there anyone in your life that makes you frightened?" Other than the (VERY SERIOUS) reports of men being taken advantage of sexually while intoxicated (something men do to women often and more easily because intoxication widens the differences in ability to fight), do we really think a lot of guys out there are living in fear of their female partners?
I'm going to take a leave of absence from this thread to let some WOMEN write, if they want. What's here so far looks a bit out of place.
What actually turns out to be real is that physical acts against partners are quite similar in RATE between men and women (remembering back to research I did coming up four years ago this summer).
What that kind of fact can obscure is that the damage a woman inflicts is substantially less than what a man inflicts. For example:
There's a fight over the dishes. Words go back and forth. There's pushing which escalates and its hard to say which was the first "push" because it started with little taps. But she is clearly the aggressor this time and starts to hit him heavily about the chest and arms. He punches her in the face and sends her to the ER with a broken nose and a missing tooth.
Assault tally:
Woman: 1
Man: 1
Looks EQUAL huh? She might even apologize and believe everything was her fault because she hit first. However:
Inflicting ER visit and damage tally:
Woman: 0
Man: 1.
I've seen several raped women in the ER, several with bruises head to toe, several suicidal after abuse from men. No abused men. (the violence they do to each other, of course, is many orders of magnitude higher than that done by women, but not as emasculating, I guess, and tends to be forgotten when these discussions take place). Domestic abuse is the third most common cause of injuries in women at the ER, with second being "falls," a category that includes a lot of unreported domestic abuse. A number of articles have advised screening women in the ER for domestic abuse, the problem is so common. Not men.
Women aren't frequently sending beaten men to the ER or to battered persons shelters (or out of the home battered, since I know battered mens shelters are few and far between). Men are, in fact, doing that to women. What's the gender split on murder? 99 to 1, if I reember correctly. Are we to believe that domestic abuse is 50 50 or something? Violence stems from a common denominator. It's not even close, anecdotal reports of woman violence aside. Women by their size and nature just aren't as violent as men and while the isolated instances of men being emotionally or physically whipped by their female mates cannot be ignored, it is just not on the same order of magnitude. Just like breast cancer in men is serious, deadly, tragic, and not even on the same level as breast cancer in women.
So the real question isn't how to fend off the knife wielding wife who caught you in bed with another woman. It's why Texas (at least into the 80s, I don't remember the date) had laws that said it was impossible for rape to occur within a marriage and that there was a murder exception if a MAN found his wife in the act. What is the rule of thumb? Hint, it's not that the stick a WOMAN beats her husband with has to be no thicker than HER thumb. In the history of marriage, was it the man or the woman considered to be property?
This is changing but one thing is clear: serious domestic abuse is still largely perpetrated by men on women. I'd like to take this chance to screen the audience with the recommended ER approach: "Has anyone hit, kicked, or sexually or otherwise attacked you? Is there anyone in your life that makes you frightened?" Other than the (VERY SERIOUS) reports of men being taken advantage of sexually while intoxicated (something men do to women often and more easily because intoxication widens the differences in ability to fight), do we really think a lot of guys out there are living in fear of their female partners?
I'm going to take a leave of absence from this thread to let some WOMEN write, if they want. What's here so far looks a bit out of place.
-
Stryke
Women as Rapists
Ian I acknowledge what you write but in some respects have to disagree , the degree of damage done is relevant but more so is the emotional element , a physical abuse is wrong period, male or female , i dont think we can lesson it though by bringing in effectiveness , long after the physical scars have healed the emotional ones remain .
Having said that i find it hard to believe to many men or women use the martial arts to further there abuse , to be honest i think proficeincy in the martial arts is to hard for most erratic people , and the ones that can use it and harness it are so motivated they would of found a means anyway , it`s all about intent .....
Having said that i find it hard to believe to many men or women use the martial arts to further there abuse , to be honest i think proficeincy in the martial arts is to hard for most erratic people , and the ones that can use it and harness it are so motivated they would of found a means anyway , it`s all about intent .....
Women as Rapists
Ian,
How many men would show up in the ER claiming that their wife had busted their nose? They'd probably lie and say some guy did it in order to save face (no pun intended).
"Now MEN who represent the large majority of abusers also represent the large majority of people potentially learning MA for the wrong reasons"
I don't think so. I think a lot more women may be joining these days so that they can learn how to beat up men. Not to feel empowered or safe, but to get POWER. See the difference? No, I'm not saying all or most, just some. If men make up the majority of practitioners with bad motives, it's because men make up the majority of practitioners.
Sadism and bullying are equal-opportunity employers.
"Spousal abuse rates similar for men, women, study finds"
Cops have told me that lots of times when they show up, they WANT to lock up the woman, but usually, they HAVE to take the man because of procedure/tradition. Most cops I've talked to say it's a 50/50 split between who is the violent one in the home.
I don't think a man can truly appreciate a woman as an equal unless he admits that she is equally capable of hurting you. No, she may not have an all-powerful roundhouse kick, but she can bat her eyes and cry on the shoulder of some man who does about how badly you have treated her. Think about it: a woman can HAVE a man beaten up if she's that type of manipulator. I know if my sister or daughter or wife or other female relative just ran to me, crying, bleeding and pointed at some man and said he hit her, I'd go after him. She could be making the whole thing up, mind you, but the protector program would initiate.
Men and women are equal in their ability to harm another human being. The genders just go about it differently.
How many men would show up in the ER claiming that their wife had busted their nose? They'd probably lie and say some guy did it in order to save face (no pun intended).
"Now MEN who represent the large majority of abusers also represent the large majority of people potentially learning MA for the wrong reasons"
I don't think so. I think a lot more women may be joining these days so that they can learn how to beat up men. Not to feel empowered or safe, but to get POWER. See the difference? No, I'm not saying all or most, just some. If men make up the majority of practitioners with bad motives, it's because men make up the majority of practitioners.
Sadism and bullying are equal-opportunity employers.
"Spousal abuse rates similar for men, women, study finds"
Cops have told me that lots of times when they show up, they WANT to lock up the woman, but usually, they HAVE to take the man because of procedure/tradition. Most cops I've talked to say it's a 50/50 split between who is the violent one in the home.
I don't think a man can truly appreciate a woman as an equal unless he admits that she is equally capable of hurting you. No, she may not have an all-powerful roundhouse kick, but she can bat her eyes and cry on the shoulder of some man who does about how badly you have treated her. Think about it: a woman can HAVE a man beaten up if she's that type of manipulator. I know if my sister or daughter or wife or other female relative just ran to me, crying, bleeding and pointed at some man and said he hit her, I'd go after him. She could be making the whole thing up, mind you, but the protector program would initiate.
Men and women are equal in their ability to harm another human being. The genders just go about it differently.
-
Dana Sheets
- Posts: 2715
- Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2002 6:01 am
Women as Rapists
More than you want to know:
This is part of the conclusion from tis article: http://www.vaw.umn.edu/FinalDocuments/towards.asp
Entitled:
Towards an understanding of women's use of non-lethal violence in intimate heterosexual relationships
by Shamita Das Dasgupta, Ph.D., DVS
Manavi, Inc.
February, 2001
This article has more than you may want to read. But is a fair and fairly objective review of the available research on the topic.
I'm not all the way done digesting this article so I'm not going to post my reaction yet. But I invite the others on this thread to read the article so we can have an informed discusion on what seems to be a disturbing trend and a growing trend of the use of violence by women.
Dana
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Discussion
The major problem plaguing the popular understanding of women's violence is the tendency to remove such behavior from its complete context. Even when the surrounding contexts are somewhat recognized, the dynamic underpinnings of the interactions are overlooked. The criminal justice system plays an extremely important part in how we as a society interpret and define events and actions. Since the criminal justice system approaches incidents as isolated and separate from each other, we also end up removing behaviors from their circumstances. Once actions and behaviors are dislodged from their contexts, the result is often a fallacious understanding.
The above discussion suggests that men's and women's violence towards their heterosexual partners is historically, culturally, motivationally, and situationally distinct. In addition, the consequences of these actions are also different. For instance, since traditionally our cultures delineate different norms for men and women's roles, perceptions of their own abusive behaviors also differ fundamentally. Women recognize such behavior as a violation of their socially prescribed gender role and readily confess to this transgression (Vivian & Langhinrichsen-Rohling, 1996; Dobash, Dobash, Cavanagh, & Lewis, 1998; Dasgupta, 1999). Men, on the other hand, often minimize their violence against female partners or blame the victim, which reflects a greater sense of entitlement to such behavior than for women.
Available research appears to indicate that both men and women use violence to realize their own particular goals. Although both genders use violence to achieve control, women more often try to secure short-term command over immediate situations whereas men tend to establish widespread authority over a much longer period. Even when such results are not consciously intended, historical, political, and ideological aspects of society confer these attributes to men and women's abusive behavior. In reality, men's violence strikes prolonged fear in their partners whereas such behavior by women tends not to produce similar results (Russell, Lipov, Phillips, & White, 1989; Langhinrichsen-Rohling, Neidig, & Thorn, 1995; Morse, 1995; Barnett et al., 1997; Dasgupta, 1999).
Furthermore, the majority of research findings report that women who use violence are battered themselves and use physical aggression to escape or stop this abuse. Studies also indicate that women are generally quite unsuccessful in achieving their objectives. In most cases women are able to neither control violence against themselves nor modify their abusers' behaviors according to their own will (e.g., Barnett et al., 1997; Dasgupta, 1999). On the contrary, most women declare that such behaviors make them even more vulnerable to their partners' aggression (Bowker, 1983; Gelles & Straus, 1988; Straus, 1993, 1999; Bachman & Carmody, 1994; Morse, 1995; Dasgupta, 1999). In the face of such failure, women's continued use of violence against their partners has to be examined in a more complex way.
Systemic responses to women who use violence continue to be a challenge to advocates and researchers alike. The supposed "gender neutrality" of the system (e.g., mandatory arrest policies) may in fact, be responsible for the increase in women arrested for domestic violence. But this claim to gender-neutrality is expressly erroneous. Renzetti (1994) quite rightly points out that the legal system, erected to meet men's violence towards their women partners, is being used as a standard to assess female conduct (see Hooper, 1996).
Indeed, women's violence towards their intimate partners has historically been seen as a contradiction to their gender role. Not only is a woman not supposed to retaliate against her battering spouse, she is not allowed to even fight back. In conceptualizing a battered woman, society has construed her as a passive and helpless person, who is too paralyzed by the abuse to take any actions on her own behalf. Yet, even the most subservient and fearful battered woman deploys shrewd survival strategies on a daily basis to keep her children and herself alive (see Gondolf & Fischer, 1988). In her reservoir of survival maneuverings, violence may occupy a vital place. Fighting back may be a resistance tactic of many battered women.
Contextualizing women's violence becomes even more important, as we move toward configuring a multicultural society. Although gender roles in most cultures relegate women to a subservient position, there are great variations among societies and ethnicities. Many nations do not suppress women's violence as much as Judeo-Christian cultures. For example, Islam and Hinduism do not consider aggression and femininity as antithetical (see Jones, 1997; Mernissi, 1975; Wadley, 1988). Thus, women from these cultures may not be as inhibited about using violence as their western counterparts. How the American criminal justice system will view this behavior is anybody's guess. We have to recognize the racist, sexist, and xenophobic realities of this system if we want to reconstruct it to fit the diverse population of the future. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
This is part of the conclusion from tis article: http://www.vaw.umn.edu/FinalDocuments/towards.asp
Entitled:
Towards an understanding of women's use of non-lethal violence in intimate heterosexual relationships
by Shamita Das Dasgupta, Ph.D., DVS
Manavi, Inc.
February, 2001
This article has more than you may want to read. But is a fair and fairly objective review of the available research on the topic.
I'm not all the way done digesting this article so I'm not going to post my reaction yet. But I invite the others on this thread to read the article so we can have an informed discusion on what seems to be a disturbing trend and a growing trend of the use of violence by women.
Dana
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Discussion
The major problem plaguing the popular understanding of women's violence is the tendency to remove such behavior from its complete context. Even when the surrounding contexts are somewhat recognized, the dynamic underpinnings of the interactions are overlooked. The criminal justice system plays an extremely important part in how we as a society interpret and define events and actions. Since the criminal justice system approaches incidents as isolated and separate from each other, we also end up removing behaviors from their circumstances. Once actions and behaviors are dislodged from their contexts, the result is often a fallacious understanding.
The above discussion suggests that men's and women's violence towards their heterosexual partners is historically, culturally, motivationally, and situationally distinct. In addition, the consequences of these actions are also different. For instance, since traditionally our cultures delineate different norms for men and women's roles, perceptions of their own abusive behaviors also differ fundamentally. Women recognize such behavior as a violation of their socially prescribed gender role and readily confess to this transgression (Vivian & Langhinrichsen-Rohling, 1996; Dobash, Dobash, Cavanagh, & Lewis, 1998; Dasgupta, 1999). Men, on the other hand, often minimize their violence against female partners or blame the victim, which reflects a greater sense of entitlement to such behavior than for women.
Available research appears to indicate that both men and women use violence to realize their own particular goals. Although both genders use violence to achieve control, women more often try to secure short-term command over immediate situations whereas men tend to establish widespread authority over a much longer period. Even when such results are not consciously intended, historical, political, and ideological aspects of society confer these attributes to men and women's abusive behavior. In reality, men's violence strikes prolonged fear in their partners whereas such behavior by women tends not to produce similar results (Russell, Lipov, Phillips, & White, 1989; Langhinrichsen-Rohling, Neidig, & Thorn, 1995; Morse, 1995; Barnett et al., 1997; Dasgupta, 1999).
Furthermore, the majority of research findings report that women who use violence are battered themselves and use physical aggression to escape or stop this abuse. Studies also indicate that women are generally quite unsuccessful in achieving their objectives. In most cases women are able to neither control violence against themselves nor modify their abusers' behaviors according to their own will (e.g., Barnett et al., 1997; Dasgupta, 1999). On the contrary, most women declare that such behaviors make them even more vulnerable to their partners' aggression (Bowker, 1983; Gelles & Straus, 1988; Straus, 1993, 1999; Bachman & Carmody, 1994; Morse, 1995; Dasgupta, 1999). In the face of such failure, women's continued use of violence against their partners has to be examined in a more complex way.
Systemic responses to women who use violence continue to be a challenge to advocates and researchers alike. The supposed "gender neutrality" of the system (e.g., mandatory arrest policies) may in fact, be responsible for the increase in women arrested for domestic violence. But this claim to gender-neutrality is expressly erroneous. Renzetti (1994) quite rightly points out that the legal system, erected to meet men's violence towards their women partners, is being used as a standard to assess female conduct (see Hooper, 1996).
Indeed, women's violence towards their intimate partners has historically been seen as a contradiction to their gender role. Not only is a woman not supposed to retaliate against her battering spouse, she is not allowed to even fight back. In conceptualizing a battered woman, society has construed her as a passive and helpless person, who is too paralyzed by the abuse to take any actions on her own behalf. Yet, even the most subservient and fearful battered woman deploys shrewd survival strategies on a daily basis to keep her children and herself alive (see Gondolf & Fischer, 1988). In her reservoir of survival maneuverings, violence may occupy a vital place. Fighting back may be a resistance tactic of many battered women.
Contextualizing women's violence becomes even more important, as we move toward configuring a multicultural society. Although gender roles in most cultures relegate women to a subservient position, there are great variations among societies and ethnicities. Many nations do not suppress women's violence as much as Judeo-Christian cultures. For example, Islam and Hinduism do not consider aggression and femininity as antithetical (see Jones, 1997; Mernissi, 1975; Wadley, 1988). Thus, women from these cultures may not be as inhibited about using violence as their western counterparts. How the American criminal justice system will view this behavior is anybody's guess. We have to recognize the racist, sexist, and xenophobic realities of this system if we want to reconstruct it to fit the diverse population of the future. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Women as Rapists
"How many men would show up in the ER claiming that their wife had busted their nose?"
Dunno. But I do know that women aren't holding men down and sexually assaulting them like men are to women. That's because men are bigger and stronger, and it's quite an unusual situation where a man has to be concerned about getting beat up by a woman.
"I think a lot more women may be joining these days so that they can learn how to beat up men. Not to feel empowered or safe, but to get POWER. See the difference?"
I see the difference, but what I don't see is ANY evidence whatsoever that women are buffing their combat skills to go about subjugating beaten men to their will. At a minimum, if women are learning MA for a sense of power, they're just becoming more like the men in these classes. In any case I taught semesterly karate classes at UVA enrolling 20-30 students for 5 years, and the majority were women. A few were there for challenge and self betterment, the majority were there for self defense, and a few just kind went through the motions and I couldn't tell why they were there.
NOT A SINGLE WOMAN HAD AN AGGRESSIVE NATURE. A few would take the initiative (at times) in sparring and the large majority of the time, they looked like they were forcing to do it against their instincts, and siad they hated it, but wanted to learn it for self defense. I haven't seen ANYTHING to suggest the cultural phenomenon of women training for gratuitous violence. ANYTHING!
"If men make up the majority of practitioners with bad motives, it's because men make up the majority of practitioners."
Disagree and I cite my extended experience in teaching undergraduates as evidence. I met MANY men in multiple clubs at uva whose objective was competitive or aggressive or to learn to fight (not just self defensively). and NOT a SINGLE woman fit this discription.
"Sadism and bullying are equal-opportunity employers."
Evidence? I just don't see girls engaging in the school yard bullying or shootings then boys are engaging in. What did I say about the homicide gap of 99-1? Rqual opportunity? 2 orders of magnitude different.
"Spousal abuse rates similar for men, women, study finds."
And I agreed and said the violence was contextually different and with different outcomes and levels of fear in the partner. The citation rich piece provided by Dana (thank you!) directly supports my contentions here. The question is equal rates of WHAT. And rates of domestic terror, domestic injury, domestic control are NOT at all equal.
"I don't think a man can truly appreciate a woman as an equal unless he admits that she is equally capable of hurting you."
Whoa, nelly. 1) She can't. I'm 6'3". On a whole, despite some exceptions, women are substantially smaller and less strong than the males I face and for whatever reason, many times less interested in truly fighting me with intent. And they have ALWAYS been substantially smaller than me. I have sparred a number and I've never been afraid that a punch or kick to the body or head would hurt me like I am with males.
2) My respect for men, women, squirrels, breakfast cereals etc is TOTALLY 100% independent of their ability to hurt me. People who are aggressive and physical as a negotiating style, I respect less. I respect women as full 100% equals to me because they do what I consider important just as well: practice medicine. Gender is never a question, all that matters to us at work is who can make people feel better and who knows the most about medicine, and it's NOT a competition or a fight.
If you have to be afraid of someone to "respect" them, you're not in a relationship, you're in a gender poisoned cold war. Physical violence and considerations thereof do not enter into healthy relationships, IMHO.
"No, she may not have an all-powerful roundhouse kick, but she can bat her eyes and cry on the shoulder of some man who does about how badly you have treated her. Think about it: a woman can HAVE a man beaten up if she's that type of manipulator."
This would be a concern to anyone who 1) precipitated such behavior through actions of their own (women don't get people beaten for no reason) AND 2) hung out with women who get people assaulted out of malice. I have never met one. The key word in the quote is IF. A woman can blow your brains out IF she wants, can't she? Just like a man. Just like anybody. So what? The question is what do women actually DO? And they're just not on the same level of violence that men are. An analogy: at ANY moment, the phlebotomy staff at my hospital can pop a cap in my butt, poison my food, hire a hitman, tell Hulk Hogan I attacked them. And yet, I have no fear at all of this happening, because I am on a good relationship with them. So al the If's and Possibles and Coulds not only are irrelevant, they don't make any sense.
WHO is having relationships with women that they're always worried about getting beat up or maniuplated?
"Men and women are equal in their ability to harm another human being."
Nope. There is overlap, but men are stronger. And culturally trained to have more experience and initiative in aggressive behavior.
"The genders just go about it differently."
This may be true but irrelevant. The question is how many women have their boyfriends beat senseless by their own hands or by the hand of an acquaintance tricked by a false story, or how many women are destroying men with falsified tales of abuse. All of the above HAPPEN, and men are also struck by lightning. Why are we in a fuss about the former and not the latter? Does anyone have any objective evidence of a social problem with female violence?
Dunno. But I do know that women aren't holding men down and sexually assaulting them like men are to women. That's because men are bigger and stronger, and it's quite an unusual situation where a man has to be concerned about getting beat up by a woman.
"I think a lot more women may be joining these days so that they can learn how to beat up men. Not to feel empowered or safe, but to get POWER. See the difference?"
I see the difference, but what I don't see is ANY evidence whatsoever that women are buffing their combat skills to go about subjugating beaten men to their will. At a minimum, if women are learning MA for a sense of power, they're just becoming more like the men in these classes. In any case I taught semesterly karate classes at UVA enrolling 20-30 students for 5 years, and the majority were women. A few were there for challenge and self betterment, the majority were there for self defense, and a few just kind went through the motions and I couldn't tell why they were there.
NOT A SINGLE WOMAN HAD AN AGGRESSIVE NATURE. A few would take the initiative (at times) in sparring and the large majority of the time, they looked like they were forcing to do it against their instincts, and siad they hated it, but wanted to learn it for self defense. I haven't seen ANYTHING to suggest the cultural phenomenon of women training for gratuitous violence. ANYTHING!
"If men make up the majority of practitioners with bad motives, it's because men make up the majority of practitioners."
Disagree and I cite my extended experience in teaching undergraduates as evidence. I met MANY men in multiple clubs at uva whose objective was competitive or aggressive or to learn to fight (not just self defensively). and NOT a SINGLE woman fit this discription.
"Sadism and bullying are equal-opportunity employers."
Evidence? I just don't see girls engaging in the school yard bullying or shootings then boys are engaging in. What did I say about the homicide gap of 99-1? Rqual opportunity? 2 orders of magnitude different.
"Spousal abuse rates similar for men, women, study finds."
And I agreed and said the violence was contextually different and with different outcomes and levels of fear in the partner. The citation rich piece provided by Dana (thank you!) directly supports my contentions here. The question is equal rates of WHAT. And rates of domestic terror, domestic injury, domestic control are NOT at all equal.
"I don't think a man can truly appreciate a woman as an equal unless he admits that she is equally capable of hurting you."
Whoa, nelly. 1) She can't. I'm 6'3". On a whole, despite some exceptions, women are substantially smaller and less strong than the males I face and for whatever reason, many times less interested in truly fighting me with intent. And they have ALWAYS been substantially smaller than me. I have sparred a number and I've never been afraid that a punch or kick to the body or head would hurt me like I am with males.
2) My respect for men, women, squirrels, breakfast cereals etc is TOTALLY 100% independent of their ability to hurt me. People who are aggressive and physical as a negotiating style, I respect less. I respect women as full 100% equals to me because they do what I consider important just as well: practice medicine. Gender is never a question, all that matters to us at work is who can make people feel better and who knows the most about medicine, and it's NOT a competition or a fight.
If you have to be afraid of someone to "respect" them, you're not in a relationship, you're in a gender poisoned cold war. Physical violence and considerations thereof do not enter into healthy relationships, IMHO.
"No, she may not have an all-powerful roundhouse kick, but she can bat her eyes and cry on the shoulder of some man who does about how badly you have treated her. Think about it: a woman can HAVE a man beaten up if she's that type of manipulator."
This would be a concern to anyone who 1) precipitated such behavior through actions of their own (women don't get people beaten for no reason) AND 2) hung out with women who get people assaulted out of malice. I have never met one. The key word in the quote is IF. A woman can blow your brains out IF she wants, can't she? Just like a man. Just like anybody. So what? The question is what do women actually DO? And they're just not on the same level of violence that men are. An analogy: at ANY moment, the phlebotomy staff at my hospital can pop a cap in my butt, poison my food, hire a hitman, tell Hulk Hogan I attacked them. And yet, I have no fear at all of this happening, because I am on a good relationship with them. So al the If's and Possibles and Coulds not only are irrelevant, they don't make any sense.
WHO is having relationships with women that they're always worried about getting beat up or maniuplated?
"Men and women are equal in their ability to harm another human being."
Nope. There is overlap, but men are stronger. And culturally trained to have more experience and initiative in aggressive behavior.
"The genders just go about it differently."
This may be true but irrelevant. The question is how many women have their boyfriends beat senseless by their own hands or by the hand of an acquaintance tricked by a false story, or how many women are destroying men with falsified tales of abuse. All of the above HAPPEN, and men are also struck by lightning. Why are we in a fuss about the former and not the latter? Does anyone have any objective evidence of a social problem with female violence?
Women as Rapists
I promised to stay away, but in brief, emotional damage is important and in LARGE part it is derived from 1) extent of physical damage 2) extent of fear and helplessness in relationship which is quite dependent on size strength and ability to control, yet another reason why women suffer disproportionately from domestic abuse.
