Want more evidence that crimes are targeted based on leftist ideological concerns rather than the menace they present? A new report by the Coalition to End Domestic Violence (CEDV) provides it—demonstrating that men are not the most common perpetrators but are targeted in service of feminist and socialistic agendas.
According to CDC statistics referenced in that report, approximately 4.2 million males are victims of domestic violence annually and 17.3 million subjected to “coercive control.” For female victims the respective numbers are 3.5 million and 12.7 million. Such figures demolish the myth that men tend to be aggressors and women victims. Yet the myth persists—propagated by organizations including the Office for Victims of Crime, the International Association of Police Chiefs, the National District Attorneys Association, the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges and the American Bar Association.
Why is this? Some uncritically rely on inaccurate sources. Others distort facts and statistics, suppress evidence and sometimes directly lie. As numerous examples are in the CEDV report I’ll mention just one: In August 2009 then federal attorney general Eric Holder stated “intimate partner homicide is the leading cause of death for African-American women ages 15 to 45.” In February 2011 USA today proved the claim was bogus. The Department of Justice website did not correct the statement until 2014.
Bad character aside, the causes of domestic violence are frequently misrepresented. The CEDV report stresses that “Scientists have long known that domestic violence is associated with substance abuse, mental health problems, relationship problems, marital separation, and other factors.” Expert sources cited by the CEDV include: 1) The American Society for Addiction Medicine, “a professional medical society representing over 6,600 physicians, clinicians and associated professionals.” 2) The academic, peer review Journal of Interpersonal Violence which “only publishes reports on individual studies in which the scientific method [my emphasis] is applied.” 3) The Bureau of Justice Statistics, “the primary statistical agency of the Department of Justice.”
“Mainstream anti-domestic violence” efforts aren’t grounded in science. They’re based in an ideological presupposition that violence results from “inequalities.” As the CEDV states, domestic violence is then “seen as arising solely from a power imbalance between the sexes, with men posited as the beneficiaries.” Such beliefs are exemplified by a quote from radical feminist Susan Schechter (included in the CEDV report): “Since male supremacy is the historical source of battering, and class domination perpetuates male privilege, a long-range plan to end abuse includes a total restructuring of society that is feminist, anti-racist, and socialist.”
The CEDV challenges this on the grounds that “Domestic violence activists do not define ‘patriarchy,’ provide any evidence of its existence, or offer scientific support for the posited imbalance of ‘power and control.’” But there is another objection—unbiased research hasn’t found that “inequalities” cause violence.
The best known attempt to demonstrate a link between “inequality” and violence was the Stanford Prison Experiment. 24 college students took on roles as guards and prisoners in a mock prison. “Guards” quickly became harsh. Irrefutable evidence—including videotapes—proves their behavior was shaped by the instructions and expectations of the organizers. It wasn’t spontaneous adaptation to their roles.
Studies purporting to demonstrate links between “economic inequality” and violence also twist facts to fit presuppositions. Examples include: 1) Treating “defensive force” as “violence” when it protects the property of the affluent. 2) Claiming aggressive violence by members of the lower classes results from comparative economic inequality—not objective poverty or perpetrators’ choices. In reality, violence often pervaded primitive societies whose members were equal in subsistence poverty. Yet there is no evidence people with reasonable standards of living become violent when others are much wealthier. The lowest classes best attain such standards of living under the same economic freedom that allows economic inequality.
Misinterpretation of facts by the “inequality theory of violence” is exemplified by professors Shamus Khan and Jennifer Hirsch. The pair blames “economic inequality” and “inequality of the sexes” for an incident in which a female college student was “coerced” into sex after taking off her clothes in a male friend’s apartment and smoking marijuana with him. Why? She couldn’t afford a cab, didn’t want to walk to a subway stop in the rain and “felt less powerful.”
Male on female violence is not emphasized by “mainstream anti-domestic violence” initiatives because it’s more prevalent than female perpetrated violence. It’s emphasized because it serves a broader agenda—eliminating normal “economic inequalities” and class structures. What needs total restructuring isn’t society. It’s “anti-domestic violence” policies. Such restructuring must be geared to addressing real problems on the basis of facts. The above mentioned ideological influences must be overcome.
Obviously this is a large and complicated task but certain first steps suggest themselves:
1) Police departments, district attorneys, judges, government agencies and others charged with responding to domestic violence must be made aware of the true facts.
2) Government agencies specializing in domestic violence must be required to allocate resources for addressing male and female perpetrated violence on the basis of statistic prevalence.
3) The existence of legislation and government agencies specializing in violence against women is only justifiable if comparable legislation and agencies specializing in violence against men also exist. Legislators should propose that either current “specialist” legislation and agencies be reformed to cover all domestic violence or that “male victim specialist” equivalents be created.
4) Publicity campaigns drawing attention to the problem of female on male violence.