0
55

[–] Dashippy 0 points 55 points (+55|-0) ago 

I'm saying this with no real understanding, so feel free to disregard everything I say and claim I suck cocks. Generally spousal abuse is one of those cases where there is a definite sexist shift to supporting the woman over the man. There are people who genuinely believe a woman can't abuse a man. Male abuse victims (I am one myself) are often afraid to come forward. What man wants to admit he was beaten by a woman after all?

Because of this, in some cases, I imagine a woman who abuses her partner can claim that it was self defense. Or that she was left with no choice, and have this come across as more believable than if a man did it. Courts are very favourable towards women in cases like abuse, so it wouldn't surprise me if that was the case.

If that wasn't the case, and men are just arrested, then I honestly have no clue.

0
11

[–] Broc_Lia 0 points 11 points (+11|-0) ago 

Sorry to hear that happened to you. Hope you were able to get away from her.

It goes beyond mere prejudice though, in some cases it's actual policy.

0
7

[–] VoatFuckingSucks 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago 

One of the common narratives around the abuse of men is 'what did he do to deserve it'

Violence towards men is seen by default as something earned.

0
4

[–] Dashippy 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

Stop victim blaming! Unless it's a man.

0
3

[–] Buttershine 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

This is the story of my father. He was abused by my pain killer addicted mother who turned to street drugs once we almost lost the house from her frivolous spending on meds. The whole time I was growing up sure played the victim. Police believed her. Doctors believed her. I believed her, until I spoke to the cop about to bring my dad to jail for the 10th time. I said, "I need to talk to you. You won't believe me because I'm a kid but my mother is lying. She hit him. She always hits him and he never hit back." They took him out of the car, out of the cuffs, and hauled her to jail.

0
1

[–] Dashippy 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

I'm glad that story had a happy ending. I'm just sad it took so long to come about.

0
35

[–] blinton 0 points 35 points (+35|-0) ago 

Because the system always sides with the woman. 99.99% of the time anyway. My ex used to hit me all the time but I just dealt with it. Then in a fit of rage she called the police and told them I hit her which I didn't. No marks or anything and I got arrested. Then she accused me of a bunch of stuff I didn't do to make me look bad to the court. When it comes to that kind of shit you are never innocent until proven guilty. You are guilty and have to prove otherwise. Some advice out there to any men dealing with this kind of shit, get out now. If you don't and it comes to a head you will get fucked by the courts every time. Because of the false accusations I had to go to anger management classes and I found that there are a shit ton of guys that went through the exact same shit I did and like myself thought they could handle it on their own. You can't. Get help. Get it documented or you will get fucked over by the system.

0
30

[–] NotMatt 0 points 30 points (+30|-0) ago 

Because that's what happens. If they police are called to a domestic abuse, somebody is going to jail. Historically it was assumed that men were the only ones guilty of domestic abuse because, ya know, a measly woman could never hurt a manly man (obviously that's not the case). It just hasn't changed since then. It's similar to how the woman usually will get the kids in a divorce (starting to change recently).

On a lighter note, why hasn't this been used as a defense for the "patriarchy" bullshit? Surely the woman would go to jail if they were truly so oppressed??

0
13

[–] BananaBro 0 points 13 points (+13|-0) ago 

Surely the woman would go to jail if they were truly so oppressed??

I'd imagine the workaround would be that this is proof of the patriarchy, because women aren't seen as actors, and are only to be acted upon. Delusions are scary.

0
8

[–] NotMatt 0 points 8 points (+8|-0) ago 

Never thought of it that way. Huh, delusions are scary!

0
7

[–] Aubryn 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago 

why hasn't this been used as a defense for the "patriarchy" bullshit?

It is, it's just ignored or minimized with the rest of the rational responses to the "patriarchy" nonsense. Don't forget, the kind of people spouting that banal shite have a vested interest in not acknowledging or outright ignoring things that don't fit their narratives.

0
22

[–] Broc_Lia 0 points 22 points (+22|-0) ago 

The duluth model is a sociological theory (named for the town where it was developed) which models domestic violence as a product of male domination of women. It's a symptom and symbol of the nature of DV laws and policies in many western countries today. This view was been exploded by pretty much every major study which has examined spousal abuse by both genders, but public policy has yet to catch up.

Without getting into any of the rest, the arresting part is due to procedures and "sensitivity training" sessions for judges and officers developed by feminist groups to favour women. For example, in many jurisdictions it's mandatory to arrest the "aggressor" if there's a callout, even though such violence is often mutual and less than clear. The criteria for determining the aggressor include things like body size and whether they appear calm and logical when talking to the officers, in other words, "pick the male." Another thing which can be taken into account is bruise marks on someone's arms. Trouble is, this frequently arises from self defence, so even preventing your spouse from hitting you or stabbing you can be taken as evidence of assault.

It's never been studied, but there seems to be a strong reluctance on the part of (particularly male) officers to arrest women, regardless of the circumstances.

0
14

[–] BananaBro 0 points 14 points (+14|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Some police forces have a policy that someone has to be arrested when they are called out to a DV situation.

Let's pretend you're a police officer, and you get to an apartment building. You can hear screaming and yelling all the way up the stairs. Neighbors standing in their doorways in their nightgowns, looking annoyed, but a little worried as well. You find the apartment, door still open, 2 individuals yelling, screaming, throwing objects at each other. They both look to be violent. You have to take one of them back with you to the station. Who do you take?

Now lets get more sinister. You get to the apartment, and the wife has a black eye, and the husband has a knife in his leg. She swears it was self-defense, so does he. Who was the aggressor? The neighbors stipulate that there was a male being very loud, and then the sound of breaking glass before they called the police.

Now even if you didn't have a policy that you always have to book one, you do need to take one of them back with you. Which one do you take?

The fact, society as a whole tends to be more likely to view a male as the aggressor in a male/female situation like this. Men are often times louder, and quicker to anger. Men are often much stronger then their female SOs. Even when the injuries of the man are more severe, they are often singled out as the aggressors, because it's easy to believe that he started it, and she was simply protecting herself. The police arriving at these DV calls may never know who really started the fight, no matter how much investigating they do, no matter how many neighbors they interview, how much evidence they collect. It's easy to just take the man in, and throw him in the drunk tank for the night (assuming that's all he gets).

0
6

[–] ciano 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

Why not arrest both?

0
4

[–] BananaBro 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago  (edited ago)

You'd have to ask lawmakers and the police force. I'd imagine it's probably cost prohibitive.

Plus, then you're guaranteed one of them has some kind of cause to sue the police force

0
12

[–] SuperConductiveRabbi 0 points 12 points (+12|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Because it's a claim supported by real, scholarly evidence.

I know this because, having been a frequent member of /r/undelete, I noticed that the TIL powermods would continually censor this information. E.g: https://www.reddit.com/r/undelete/comments/2kdg2n/333501261_til_male_victims_of_domestic_violence/

Here's a link to the PDF: TIL Male Victims of Domestic Violence who call law enforcement for help are statistically more likely to be arrested themselves than their female partner- NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF HEALTH

[–] [deleted] 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago  (edited ago)

[Deleted]

0
4

[–] SuperConductiveRabbi 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

You should present this NIH article in class, but prepared to be socially shamed for it, or have it dismissed without anyone actually reading it.

The fact of the matter is that the stigma against male domestic abuse victims pervades society, to the point where attempts to discuss that information are actively hampered by do-gooders and white-knight pussies. For now, at least it can be discussed on Voat. Perhaps I'll post that to /v/TIL

0
5

[–] heili 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

Because of the Duluth Model and the criteria that have to be used to determine the predominant aggressor which depend heavily on the relative height and weight of the individuals involved.

Men are set up from the starting gate to be determined to be the primary aggressor. The Duluth Model requires that someone goes to jail. So the men get arrested, even when they're the victim.

0
4

[–] RedSocks157 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

Some places have what's called "primary aggressor" laws which in their various forms come down to this: if the police are called to a domestic disturbance, they HAVE to arrest the man because he is considered stronger and therefore always the "primary aggressor".

load more comments ▼ (7 remaining)