SaturnV wrote: » Have you read the article? Because, if you have, you will find that there is no analysis or documentation of the motivation for the abuse.
Using the term "patriarchal terrorism" implies a knowledge of the motivation. This has no evidential support (as presented). Personally, I would be very wary of a "scholarly" article using loaded terms such as this, which are intended to communicate something beyond the evidence - it is intellectually dishonest.
Also, the article notes that there are two traditions in the study of abuse and violence in relationships. One is based on quantitative analysis and random sampling surveys, and finds little gender difference in violence and abuse (in general).
The other is research from a feminist standpoint, which uses a fundamentally different strategy in collecting data, typically interviews with women self reporting abuse.
In short, that article, whatever its merits, does not support the position you think it does. It substantiates precisely nothing you think it does.
T runner wrote: » There is yes. It is only your assertion that there is no evidence. None of the researchers, however, are in any doubt that patriarchy is a motivation in male domestic violence against females. He states that all researchers do acknowledge the role of Patriarchy in wife abuse (Strauss, Gelles, Steinmetz p242-3 these are actually the main proponents of the quantative analysis, infact Steinmetz even coined the phrase "baterred husband".) There is nothing loaded about the term. If the motivation is patriarchy, then it is accurate. It also puts the emphasis on the perpetuator who is after all responsible for the violence. That's misleading. It finds varied reasons not little difference, because it includes all violence. As stated it acknowledges that patriarchy is a motivation for mens violence against their wives which refutes what you are trying to imply. Incorrect on at least two fronts: the statistics come typically from crime reports, police records, hospital records etc. The article also says that this research began with the narrower focusing on violence against women by spouses but acknowledges that many of these researchers have used quantative anaylsis that includes general violence. Martin (1981). (The author maintains that the different methods actualy observe two different phenomena.) Again, he states with reference, that all researchers do acknowledge the role of patriarchy in wife abuse. (Strauss, Gelles, Steinmetz p242-3)
Seriously? wrote: » Sorry my mistake, I didn't realise we had to accept this purely based on faith. Clearly I take it all back, if you believe really really hard enough it must be true. Or to quote James Randi, "you can't prove a negative"
ancapailldorcha wrote: » One researcher cannot speak for all researchers. The fact that this "study" contains such a ridiculous statement is just another reason why it's only fit for the bin. The statement that the patriarchy is responsible for the abuse of women is simply the author's opinion and is subjective. Also, why are you using such old references? Is it because most people are aware that this notion of "patriarchy" is tosh?
T runner wrote: » He's not speaking for them He has referenced them. If "people are aware that the notion of patriarchy is tosh" then you should have no difficulty providing evidence to back up your remarkable claim. If you cant then your own beliefs must be based on prejudice, if not evidence.
T runner wrote: » Accept what exactly? All the researchers referenced in the article are in accord that patriarchy not only exists....
ancapailldorcha wrote: » The evidence is all around us. Women have more opportunities than ever before. Heck, they've even brought in quotas to ensure these opportunities. I've seen more than a few "female only" positions. No employer nowadays would dare pay a woman less than a man for the same job. Women's prisons are vastly superior to those where men are incarcerated and women hold all the cards in relation to family law. There's still a ways to do but we're getting there. You insist on citing heavily flawed opinion pieces as evidence while clinging fervently to this notion that all perpetrators of domestic violence are men. If anyone here is prejudiced, it is you.
T runner wrote: » You cant substantiate any of the above nor can you substantiate that the article I referenced is flawed. There is no credible researcher in this field who does not agree that a patriarchal upbringing is a motive for male domestic violence against women. If you feel the article I referenced is flawed then you should easily be able to provide one to refute it. You don't because you done substantiate your beliefs with evidence, only with prejudice.
jackofalltrades wrote: » And what are they using to back up this opinion? Have they conducted research that shows that "the patriarchy" exists? Do they reference other peoples research, that proves that it exists?
T runner wrote: » ALL creditible researchers into domestic violence agree that a patriarchal outlook/upbringing is a motive for domestic violence carried out by men against women. If you want to argue that patricarchy or sexism or racism don't exist, eat your heart out. But substantiate it or else stop wasting our time.
T runner wrote: » Accept what exactly? All the researchers referenced in the article are in accord that patriarchy not only exists but is a motivation for male domestic violence against women.
ancapailldorcha wrote: » Most of what I've said is common knowledge. I don't see how it can be down to a patriarchal upbringing given that women hold the cards in family law in all but the most extreme of cases. I've no idea what a patriarchal upbringing would even involve to be honest. Spousal abuse and it's causes are more complicated than you're making out and I couldn't care less what biased researchers have to say on the subject. Here's one piece. It mentions a patriarchal upbringing as a possible factor amongst many:http://www.princeton.edu/futureofchildren/publications/journals/article/index.xml?journalid=47&articleid=228§ionid=1495
py2006 wrote: » May be some use that as an excuse, others are just mentally ill or just downright violent aggressive people. Some just snap and it is out of character. What is your excuse for female violence on men?
ancapailldorcha wrote: » Credible researchers being those who's "research" backs up your point, yes? I never said that sexism and racism don't exist. You keep mentioning prejudice but you've not mentioned anything regarding the high amount of instances of female on male domestic abuse. If you can't say anything new, I'll take a break.
T runner wrote: » That's been said already but not substantiated unsurprisingly. You cant substantiate any of the rubbish you've just posted either. Ergo your beliefs are based on prejudice.
T runner wrote: ALL creditible researchers into domestic violence agree that a patriarchal outlook/upbringing is a motive for domestic violence carried out by men against women. If you want to argue that patricarchy or sexism or racism don't exist, eat your heart out. But substantiate it or else stop wasting our time.
T runner wrote: . The child tends to go to the primary carer which in patriarchal countries (like Ireland) is usually the Mother. A lot of fathers have a problem with that. I wouldn't. The law is just trying to do what's best for the child.
Patriarchy is a social system in which males are the primary authority figures central to social organization, occupy roles of political leadership, moral authority and control of property, and where fathers hold authority over women and children.
T runner wrote: » The laws on domestic violence here do not support the victim. In London Police can charge a perpetrator with domestic violence. In Ireland, the person themselves must do this
Under the Domestic Violence Act, 1996, Gardai (the Irish police force) have the power to arrest and prosecute a violent family member.
T runner wrote: » As I've already posted even the person (Steinmetz) who coined the phrase "battered men" admits that (Strauss, Gelles, Steinmetz p242-3) HINT: Steinmetz is one of your "type" of researchers. If you are not even reading the thread then please do take a break. Further proof that your positions are not informed, but based on an already existing prejudice.
T runner wrote: » There is yes.
T runner wrote: » Incorrect on at least two fronts: the statistics come typically from crime reports, police records, hospital records etc.
T runner wrote: » It is only your assertion that there is no evidence. None of the researchers, however, are in any doubt that patriarchy is a motivation in male domestic violence against females.
T runner wrote: » He states that all researchers do acknowledge the role of Patriarchy in wife abuse (Strauss, Gelles, Steinmetz p242-3 these are actually the main proponents of the quantative analysis, infact Steinmetz even coined the phrase "baterred husband".)
T runner wrote: » There is nothing loaded about the term. If the motivation is patriarchy, then it is accurate. It also puts the emphasis on the perpetuator who is after all responsible for the violence.
T runner wrote: » That's misleading. It finds varied reasons not little difference, because it includes all violence. As stated it acknowledges that patriarchy is a motivation for mens violence against their wives which refutes what you are trying to imply.
Lemming wrote: » Don't forget female on female violence too. Or male on male. I'd be fascinated to hear how all three fit into the patriarchy narrative.
jackofalltrades wrote: » So you can't show me where they prove that the patriarchy exists.
Here Wikipedia's definition of Patriarchy: Big whole there in your theory that we live in a patriarchy. If we lived in a patriarchy the father would have full custody of the children. Which is the way it used until a woman lobbied that women are better parents then men. It's got nothing to do with what is best for the child.
T runner wrote: » I have shown you that men who carry out Patriarcal abuse have their roots in a patriarchal upbringing. Do you understand this?
T runner wrote: » No hole in my theory. EVERY researcher into domestic violence acknowledges that a patriarcal outlook rooted a patriarcal upbringing is a motive for male domestic violence against women.
Three Irish gender neutral surveys were carried out by: The Marriage and Relationship Counselling Service (MRCS) Accord A study for the Department of Health and Children The MRCS study found that domestic violence between couples tends to be mutual in a third of the cases (33%), female-perpetrated in four out ten couples (42%) and male-perpetrated in a quarter of couples (25%). The Accord study found that where domestic Violence occurs, (46%) involved mutual violence; in (30%) of cases it was perpetrated by women only and in (24%) by men only. The Department of Health study found, where domestic violence occurs, (50%) was mutual with the remainder divided equally between women-only and men-only perpetration. These findings reflect the results of all independent two-sex studies carried out world-wide.
SaturnV wrote: » Where? No, exactly, point out to me where. Just stating "yes there is" is not sufficient.
There is supposition and assumption about motives, not evidence for. Assumptions are not always wrong or a problem. The problem is when people reading something like this (i.e. you) can't seem to tell the difference between assumptions and evidence based knowledge
but the bottom line is that if you want to know why a man abused his partner, you have to ask the man. No study of battered wives shelters, hospital reports or divorce court proceedings will answer that question.
The majority of referenced studies are heavily weighted on studies conducted in what were known as "battered wives shelters". Nevertheless, this is a fundamentally different sampling approach, which gives you a fundamentally different answer. Now, what does that tell us?
constance tench wrote: » http://www.uspi.ie/DomesticAbuse.php
T runner wrote: » Strange that there are thousands of shelters for women. But the only one opened for men shut down. Nobody needed it......
ancapailldorcha wrote: » No you haven't. You've put up a biased opinion piece and attempted to pass it off as evidence. If "patriarchal upbringings" were the cause of spousal abuse then nearly every household would have suffered from it. You can't speak for every single researcher. What about the fact that 40% of domestic abusers are women?
