Thank you Amy. Im getting rather tired of this BS as well. Either women are full adults capable of controlling their emotions and being expected to not resort to violence (as men are) or they are not.

And if they are not, then they deserve to be treated accordingly.

I have a coworker (female) that was pushed by her hubby within the past day that she ended up with a bruise.

We are encouraging her to get the hell out. I, being the male in the group, am saying just get the hell out but don't do the DV route. (Ohio has a preferred arrest/prosecutor prosecution (DV victim excised from the decision) setup.)

I want her safe -- but there is no good outcome once the prosecutor gets a hold on the guy.

It sucks when I have to say something like that.

"Is female-on-male violence on the rise? '"Teen Mom's"' Amber Portwood has turned a spotlight on women who hit. We take a closer look at the supposed trend," (catch the "supposed" innuendo there?).

That's just one more thing that gets me mad about this issue: the reporting that it's "on the rise," not that it's been going on for a long time with no one reporting and or/caring. It's like all the bullying lately: it's not some disturbing new trend, it's just that people are finally talking about it and doing something about it. Marking something as a trend diminishes the issue. If it's a trend, then it hasn't be happening for long and it will then decline without any real intervention. As soon as the reporting declines, belief in the fact that it's happening declines. Therefore, the "trend" has gone away, when in fact it's just continuing behind the veil of ignorance.

Ms. Harris claims that women use violence out of frustration to get attention i.e. women are weak and needy of attention, while men use violence to assert their power and control over women, i.e. to keep them in their place and subservient to men.

What the hell does she think all those "needy" women are really trying to do? Neediness and attention-grabbing are all about control. That's not the distinction Ms. Harris thinks it is. She's just dismissing the idea that it's just as serious for a woman to hit a man as it is the other way around. That it's understandable because women aren't violent, they're just frustrated and ignored.

One wonders how long the camera crew and producers would have let Gary get away with hitting, slapping, choking and berating Amber before stopping or reporting the domestic violence had roles been reversed.

Indeed, one does wonder. I mean, I guess I get it: it would take longer because bystanders would be trying to determine if she was actually hurting him. But that's not an excuse, and there wouldn't have been 55 seconds of tape if the roles had been reversed.

"I have a coworker (female) that was pushed by her hubby within the past day that she ended up with a bruise. We are encouraging her to get the hell out..."

Do remember that you are only hearing one side of an argument. Consider the video in the referenced article. I imagine many men would have grabbed the woman's arms, to stop her from hitting. Given her temper, she would have struggled, and this would undoubtedly have left bruises on her arms.

You know, a_random_guy touches on a point that hadn't made it into the front of my mind until now. Another problem I have with the lack of respect for this issue is the concept that abuse is zero-sum. If women are capable of abusing men, then it somehow means that what the men are doing isn't defined as abuse. That if we take away the concept of Woman as Perpetual Victim, then it makes it more okay for men to abuse them. I'm not saying that it's consciously thought of in those terms, but it seems to be the logic behind the outcry that women aren't really abusing in the way men are abusing. Because that's where a lot of the counterarguments are coming from: it's not really abuse, because a woman couldn't hurt a man in the way that he could hurt her. Besides, her motive isn't to make the man subservient to her, it's because she craves attention, which totally trivializes the issue. Male Violence is reprehensible, but Female Neediness is pitiable.

Read Paglia on the OJ trial

I am really sorry to go totally off topic, especially since this item is about abuse and I don't want to trivialize it. BUT.

Check out this insane TSA fuck up. Also. Please tell me if you think this doctor lady looks like an automaton/Stepford wife/not a human. Like a life sized Barbie whose special features include "REAL BLINKING EYES!"

Wicked creepy, but you go girl!

http://gizmodo.com/5703878/the-most-stupid-tsa-action-to-date-defies-belief

Violence should never be considered entertainment which obviously it is considering the fact that this show is even still on the air. I don't watch it. This girl has serious problems and went and had a kid. Not only do I question how a crew can watch this for so long, but why haven't the local authorities stepped in to take her child away. It is more proof of how messed up the Child Protecive Services are. If what she does gets protected for the sake of ratings, I can only imagine the stuff that goes on in private and in homes that don't make the reality show cut. Disgusting!

Kristen,

As someone who regularly indulges in Teen Mom and has followed Amber's issues in a very cursory way, I can assure you that her baby, Leah, was taken away and is with Gary (babydaddy). She can see Leah with a supervisor present and I think it has to be scheduled or approved by someone.

According to my highly academic research, we can also see that Gary is in a very good position now - he has the baby and he is being strong in not allowing Amber to manipulate him or abuse him any longer. Amber wanted to see Leah on Thanksgiving and wanted Gary to bend the court ordered rules to allow it and he refused. GO GARY! Amber is out of control.

Link to story on a very reliable news site:

http://www.radaronline.com/exclusives/2010/11/exclusive-teen-mom-throws-fit-because-shes-banned-seeing-baby-thanksgiving

Gretchen, I read in the news that she got the baby back. I also saw that she got a tremendous tattoo of the baby on the left side of her body. No, I don't follow the show but looked her up after reading Amy's blog item. Again, my issue is that this show should never have seen the light of day. I wish you could explain to me what it is about this show that makes you want to watch it. I'm not a big television viewer and I'll admit to occasionally indulging in the Kardashians, but they are not hurting anyone, so its not the trash factor as much as its just offensive to watch such poor life decisions that affect not just this teenager but a baby being put on television.

Well, you don't see abused men's shelters, do you? Why not? Because men rarely talk about it or are believed if they do.

As a commenter above notes, it isn't on the rise — it's just getting more attention. And when Elin allegedly went after Tiger with a golf club, women cheered her on — we tend to think that if a woman hurts a man
he must have deserved it!

Abuse takes many forms, including verbal and emotional. Men may be more physical (and stronger), but abuse is abuse. Period.

People do need to pay attention to the fact that it is a genderless issue.

Kat is right about the Tiger Woods case. Not only did people cheer Elin on, but even the celebrities got in on the act. Sandra Bullock who was America's Sweetheart (why exactly?) joked during Oscar interviews that she would have used her 9 iron only to discover a short time later that her own husband was carrying on several affairs. It didn't seem so funny then. Had it been reversed and Tiger went after Elin with a golf club, he'd be facing charges and there would be a call for him to be blacklisted. Notice Chris Brown is struggling to get his career back while Rhianna is enjoying great success despite terrible reviews for her last cd. Domestic Violence happens to both genders and its sickening when its considered entertainment or as a means to build and destroy careers.

@Gretchen @Kristen I watch the show too -- every episode of the last 2 seasons.

I used to work with teenagers, and their dismissive attitudes about pregnancy prevention frightened me -- so this show caught my interest. One can argue that this show exposes the Teen Moms' innocent offspring to a national audience and puts their lives in the tabloids before they even have a say-so. I agree. However, it also shows how truly AWFUL and wretched these teens' lives are after having a baby -- failed relationships, dropping out of school, no money, lost friendships, stress, depression, being abandoned by the baby-daddy (who, just months before the birth was going to "marry" them). The only couple who turns out sorta-kinda OK is the couple who placed their baby for adoption!

Yes, it's edited for drama and entertainment. Part of me thinks it's exploitative. And now, with the show's popularity, the teen moms are living a more glam life. But if one of those kids I worked with watched the early episodes and thought, "Wow. Their life sucks," well ... at least there's that.

I think Hollywood is different. I think people just "root" for the more popular half of the couple. It's the best explanation I can come up with for Charlie Sheen still raking in the cash on that crappy, crappy show of his.

Ya know, I remember something my mom and da told me when I was 4 or 5, after I had gotten into a physical altercation with my older brother (and we both got punished):

People are NOT for hitting. EVER.

it's not really abuse, because a woman couldn't hurt a man in the way that he could hurt her

That might be true, if that was it. It isn't. Women are far more likely to pick up a weapon. A woman is "small" and "weak" right up until she's waving a butcher knife in your face. Assuming it's not a shotgun she's waving in your general direction.

And if you're that guy, and you end up dead in that situation, don't expect her to be in jail for very long. You're best bet is to come back as a vengeful spirit and haunt her the rest of days.

@Kristin: Well. I like bad t.v...there's that. Wife Swap, Real Housewives (esp. NJ), makeover shows, I love it all. I'm really deep like that.

I watch Teen Mom (not all the episodes, but if I have free time - which I do sometimes b/c I have no kids!!!!) because I really enjoy watching how other people behave and think. This show covers a really specific series of choices and shows the consequences of them in the same episode. I think Amber is fucked up and I really hope she doesn't get the back back until she goes through some kind of program and even then, Gary should have sole physical and Amber just visitation. Someone who gets that angry and violent needs years of therapy just to have a shot at rewiring their thought processes.

I think it also shows you how not to raise your kid, so in that sense I think it's educational ;-) . Farrah, espesh in earlier episodes, is unbearable. She thinks she should be able to go out until late and party while her parents stay home with the baby. Her argument is that the parents "don't go out and will be home anyway!" and she rages against them when they point out that she had a baby and needs to act like a mother. She indignantly replies with something like "I don't need to take this!". Then they ask her what time she'll be home, you know, so they can maybe get to sleep and not worry about the baby if it cries. And she storms out. I'd have to try hard not to be a hypocrite and punch her in the face. Then I'd punch myself in the face for having raised her.

This is how every single 17-20 year old I've ever known acts. This is probably why I didn't make many friends in college and most of the new friendships I develop are with people older than I am.

The research on DV has long established that incidents of physical assault are evenly distributed between men and women. Women actually tend to predominate, by a little. But law enforcement isn't typically concerned with abused men, so when you look at reported incidents and arrests they are almost all male on female. This is what the activists focus on, which creates a distorted picture of DV.

The current handling of DV may actually be motivating violence. By removing any accountability from women, you're encouraging the violent ones to take their behavior even further. When it's a crime for a man to restrain a woman who's assaulting him, she's given free reign to escalate her behavior. It's like giving in to a bully, you're only rewarding them.

The other consideration is that women are the primary abusers of children. By preventing men from confronting these women, you're putting children at risk. If a male restrains the woman, or calls the police, there's a good chance that he'll be blamed and removed from the home, leaving the child(ren) defenseless.

@Gretchen, darn you for linking radar. I just read a few stories about that trainwreck and now I'm disgusted. Apparently Amber cleaned her house (which was an absolute sty) and that's why CPS gave the baby back to her...but Leah is still technically a ward of the state and they could take her back and put her with Gary or for that matter in a foster home whenever. And Amber is still facing up to three years in prison for her assault against Gary, which is considered aggravated because of Leah's very presence when the assault occurred. Yet STILL somehow Gary was just the back-up parent in the eyes of CPS? Horrible. And, yeah, wait till Amber goes to court for the assault and gets time (I can dream); they're going to have uproot that poor baby again to move her back to Gary. Geez.

I do watch Teen Mom and 16 and Pregnant, it's my one reality TV indulgence, but I usually don't keep up on the gossip after...and I have to kind of stick up for Farrah. She's so much better in the later season of Teen Mom, after she moves out from under her completely psycho, violent mother's roof. She takes good care of her baby completely on her own because her baby-daddy died in a car wreck, takes it upon herself to get therapy, works and goes to school. But, she's impossibly naive and has no common-sense so that's annoying. Farrah's mom actually went to jail for a short time and was sentenced to "anger management" and community service after she split Farrah's lip and threatened police who responded to Farrah's 911 call with a knife.

So here we have one show with relatively few people that accidentally stumbled on TWO unrelated families with female domestic violence issues and none with male violence issues. This is really interesting.

Enough with the "baby-daddy". This young man is the "father". How is it we always call the un-wed woman the mother but the man is the baby-daddy. This is indicative of the lack of respect that men receive in general from our media and society.

Men have long been villified as angry uncontrollable bruts in capable of sustaining any control over their emotions. The feminist movement has done a wonderful job of demasculating the men in this country.

Ask a woman out and she finds you attractive all's well, if not it's sexual harrasment. Come to a womans aid and you'll be chastised for thinking she's incapable, don't come to her aid and your a coward or worse. Defend yourself against her verbal abuse and your a bully. Defend yourself against her physical abuse and your going to jail.

I call this subdigation to the will of woman in our society "the pussification of the American male". I for one am a little tired of it and the only way for it to change is for men to stand up and simply start acting like men.

Men repeat after me "I am a man and I'm proud of being a man". Now doesn't that feel better.....

Gretchen, its not the trash factor that I'm complaining about. We've had Jerry Springer and all sorts of trash tv. I don't think this teen mom will ever change or get the help she needs because right now she's getting paid to be trash, she's getting famous, and eventually when her 15 minutes are up, it will be that poor baby who will suffer even more. People are going to live their lives how they want and I don't think that by not having a show like that prevents it from happening, but it just disturbs me to feel like this girl is reaping rewards for making such poor life choices. I question again, the people who put this show out there. It really is just watching a train wreck and knowing that down the line there will be more train wrecks in the form of an innocent baby. Obviously this girl is in a place like this because her own parents were messed up and so the cycle continues only know there is a financial reward for continuing that cycle.

The mantra from society and the feminists is that when a woman commits a crime she needs help.

When a man commits a crime he needs to be jailed.

That's equality in "Amerika."

You see it on tv too, but they mostly replace verbal abuse for physical abuse. They are called "sit-coms". When violence does come into play, the boy/man gets hit in the crotch, cue the guffaws. Occasionally the girl/woman is very much an expert in judo/karate and the boy/man gets the crap beat out of him.

Apparently you've never heard the term "baby mama" Ed. Its used quite frequently. And David, I've said on this blog before that the law does nothing about domestic violence unless the cases are extreme. If you hit a stranger, you get arrested and do time. If you hit your wife or husband, you go to therapy, and usually not until you've been arrested several times. Instead of sitting here and arguing over who is affected worse by domestic violence, how about calling your local politicians and demanding that laws are changed so that violence in any form is not acceptable whether the perpetrator is a man or a woman. The hard part will be the enforcement.

I don't think the show glorifies abuse in any way. Every conversation I've heard relating to it is of utter disgust of Amber's behavior. If anything, I think this is helping to raise awareness of the problems men face when abused and the unique aspect of their plight.

Just like we're all doing.

I know how much hate there is for Jezebel (esp. since they're all okay with abusing men!!!!!!!!! Oh the irony.). However: http://jezebel.com/5704255/good-news-for-the-teen-mom-college-fund

@Gretchen: it sounds like the T&A did this on purpose as a form of retribution. She's stripped down to her lingerie, and (as far as I know) they aren't going to go prospecting up her [NSFW] or her [NSFW] for bomb parts. Hence, no need for a hand search (unless they actually DID go prospecting during that hour).

They're obviously into the whole vengeance and humiliation scene.

"That might be true, if that was it. It isn't. Women are far more likely to pick up a weapon. A woman is 'small' and 'weak' right up until she's waving a butcher knife in your face. Assuming it's not a shotgun she's waving in your general direction."

Yep. If an average woman swung her fist at me, I would likely do no more than just try to restrain her (and maybe not even that), since she's unlikely to hurt me that way. But once weapons get involved, it's combat, and the sex of your opponent doesn't matter.

A former co-worker of mine is about to go on trial for murdering her husband of three months. They only lived together for six weeks after the marriage before he moved out. He had come over to her house and was sitting at the kitchen table writing her a rather substantial check for her bills. She snuck up behind him with a pistol (I never have found out what kind) and blew his brains out from point blank range. He never knew what hit him.

After she killed him, she called the police on herself. When they arrived, she very calmly told them where the gun was and then refused all further questioning. Her lawyer is still making motions to delay the trial, and it appears that she is going to go for a battered-wife defense. After six weeks of marriage.

I will not abuse a woman, but I will NOT suffer to be struck by one either. And I WILL use force to defend myself, if that means pinning the wench until she calms herself, sobeit. Its not hard to prevent an unarmed woman from doing physical violence, it just takes the pride in one's self to say it will not be tolerated, and the will to behave accordingly.

Why is it that we have forgotten the cheating that Elin Woods and Sandra Bullock had to deal with?

I'm a guy who thinks that if you put her at risk by screwing the trailer park, you oughta be beat and then left. You should know better.

Neither woman was the first offender. Elin's golf club turned out not to be fatal, that idiot is gone and maybe she can find somebody who will tell her the truth and put her first.

Yes, if you want to put on shining armor and do everything nobly, go right ahead. In a lot of cases, that's all you'll have when you're done, but you can point at that when you are quizzed by your next date. They'll be wondering just how much that relationship really meant to you, that you could be calm in that case.

You have a right to expect decency from your erstwhile partner when you, yourself, act decently. Now. Throw that away...

Rad, I don't think anyone is arguing that Elin or Sandra Bullock were cheated on. But plenty of women cheat too. If Tiger Woods or Jesse James discoverd their wives had been cheating and chased after them with a golf club, a fist, or in any violent way, you could be sure that the jokes wouldn't be about smashing them harder or using a better iron. Its a reverse discrimination. Of course you have a right to expect decency from your partner. But if you don't get it, that doesn't mean you should go get your biggest weapon either.

And I WILL use force to defend myself, if that means pinning the wench until she calms herself, sobeit.

And when she reports the bruises as your attempt to do violence unto her, what then?

The police responding to her call for help didn't see her charging you with a knife. In many cases, they don't have much leeway under the law any more. They see bruises on her and you standing there. It's the law in many states that they have to arrest you then and there to protect her.

I've heard and read speculation that Tiger Woods continues to deny allegations that Elin charged him with a golf club because Florida, unlike many states, wrote its domestic violence statutes such that a woman that initiates the violence is subject to arrest and assault charges (the majority of states with immediate arrest provisions in their domestic violence laws specify only that the man is subject to immediate arrest).

Me: it's not really abuse, because a woman couldn't hurt a man in the way that he could hurt her

I R A Darth Aggie: That might be true, if that was it. It isn't. Women are far more likely to pick up a weapon.

That wasn't my thought, IRA, that was my explanation of the thinking that gets female violence dismissed as not really abuse. The whole point of my post was that I'm disgusted with the ways people excuse female violence, like the woman in the article did: women aren't doing it out of a need to control, it's just because they're desperate for attention, so it's okay!

You took one line of my post without the context of the rest of it. I was actually calling bullshit on that entire way of justifying violence by women.

I really dont get why the media insists on perpetuating the myth that women cant really hurt men. Even without a weapon its not hard to harm somebody. If a woman wanted to hurt a guy he could easily end up with a bloody nose, broken lip, black eye and deep scratches. Its not like defending yourself is really an option if a woman is attacking you. Hell if your wife/gf gets a bruise from hitting you too hard you can count on spending a night in jail and possibly criminal charges. Also a weapon isnt necessarily a knife or a gun. A well thrown plate or ashtray can easily give a guy a concussion.

So why don't men speak up? Is it because they are embarrassed, emasculated, and generally more private? Yes. But, there is more than that.

I was in an abusive marriage for quite a while. I'm a real man, so at each occasion, I would thrust my hands in my pockets and take the punches and kicks. Because, as NumberSix said, minus a weapon, the typical woman really can't hurt the typical man. That's a fact.

It hurts, yes. But c'mon, you're a fucking man. She's not going to do any permanent damage with only her fists. She's not even likely to leave a mark.

On the other hand, had I ever just let one punch fly, I would've crushed her face pretty easily.

Back to the point. Here is what happens when a man gets fed up with that shit and calls the police:

They arrive and see the obvious signs of violence. Things thrown around the house, a screaming woman as they pull up, etc. Thank God in my case they actually saw her swinging away and me with my hands in my pockets slipping punches. They see no marks on her because I never raised a hand to her. They see no marks on me because she is a woman and is pretty fucking weak.

They're dying to arrest me because that is their instinct -- even though I'm the one that called them.

The end of the story is, they figure, "man, this bitch is crazy". They take her, not to jail, but to the pajama farm. I get a bill weeks later for many thousands of dollars for her mental health treatment.

I never called again. I just took the punches. I could afford those and by the way, I'm a man.

JonQ here, now operating under a more random moniker from here on out. I've been a bit too personal. If anyone I knew came across this blog they'd first take my man card away and then know way too much about me.

Anyway, Suvorov, I was being flippant about your assertion that a woman can't hurt a man. Although it's generally true, I walked around with a small bone fragment rolling around in my face for a few years. It was chipped off of the back of my jaw by the base of a heavy flying drinking glass. That's right, the back of my jaw. In other words, I was walking away.

It eventually dissolved.

oops, I mean you're assertion that a woman can hurt a man.

@Radwaste - "Elin's golf club turned out not to be fatal ... "

Did Elin know that the golf club would turn out that way? Would you feel differently if it had?

By the way, Elin would have behaved the exact same way whether the reports of infidelity "turned out" to be true or not. What if the golf club turned out to be fatal and the accusations turned out to be untrue? Would you be defending her?

Oh, and by the way -- on behalf of men everywhere -- fuck you.

"I will not abuse a woman, but I will NOT suffer to be struck by one either. And I WILL use force to defend myself, if that means pinning the wench until she calms herself, sobeit [sic]"

I happy for you that you have not been in this situation. If I had had this very noble attitude during my bout with it, here's where I would be:

1. domestic violence conviction (no marks on me, marks on her = conviction)

2. Loss of security clearance

3. inability to carry a firearm ( which equals loss of job)

4. Complete loss of all that I've worked for over many years.

5. Access to children limited or supervised

6. Humiliation amongst peers and family

7. I'd Never work again in my chosen field

8. I'm sure there's more. Thankfully, I don't know what other ills could have come from it.

I'm quite pleased that I handled the situation in the way I did. A man does what is right for his family. You can take a punch from a woman.

I don't think it's wrong to examine the idea that men and women have different motivations for committing abuse. We can agree that men and women have different motivations for bullying, eating disorders, sleeping around, etc, so why not abuse? It doesn't mean that one motivation is more acceptable than the other, but understanding where the impulse comes from can help prevent abuse in the first place.

It's also worth pointing out that the idea that women are incapable of abusing men isn't exactly something that feminists just came up with. It dates to hundreds of years of beliefs that women are weak, inferior etc. If anything the feminist ideals of equality have made it more socially acceptable for this issue to be addressed and taken seriously. I've seen Jezebel call out Amber Portwood at least 3 or 4 times, and the prevailing mantra seems to be "men and women are exactly the same, so saying that a woman can't abuse a man is not only wrong but sexist and insulting." While I don't agree that men and women are exactly the same, it's a beneficial attitude for drawing more attention to female abusers.

"Why is it that we have forgotten the cheating that Elin Woods and Sandra Bullock had to deal with?"

No one is forgetting anything. But a spouse having sex with another person does not lessen the crime--yes, crime--of the cheated upon spouse attempting to brain someone with a deadly weapon.

Gender does not matter in that scenario.

No punching family members in anger, ever. Is that so hard a rule to understand?

Three words:

John Wayne Bobbit

Because, as NumberSix said, minus a weapon, the typical woman really can't hurt the typical man.

No, she didn't say that. Please see my above post about how I was saying that thinking is part of why the "female violence isn't abuse" myth is perpetuated. I was saying that the party line is that since a woman can't really hurt a man (not true) it's not really abuse. Please read my December 2, 1:29am post for my actual thoughts on this subject.

You're right. I scanned your post and got all worked up. Sorry about that.