Women 3 times more likely to be arrested for domestic violence even if 92% of perpetrators are men (U.K.)
The U.K. Guardian includes an article: "Women three times more likely to be arrested for domestic violence; While the vast majority of perpetrators of domestic violence are men, women are arrested in three of every 10 incidents and men in only one of 10, a study says."
Here are some excerpts:
Men are responsible for most cases of domestic violence, but women are
three times more likely to be arrested for incidents of abuse, research
reveals today.
A report into domestic abuse and gender by Bristol University found that
the majority of cases involved alcohol misuse, that women were more
likely to use a weapon to protect themselves and that children were
present in the majority of cases.
Previous research has shown that the vast majority of domestic violence
perpetrators recorded by the police are men (92%) and their victims
mainly female (91%), with many more repeat incidents recorded for male
than female perpetrators.
While the majority of incidents of domestic violence recorded by the
police involve male-to-female abuse, little is known about the nature of
incidents where men are recorded as victims and women as perpetrators,
nor about the circumstances where both partners are recorded as perpetrators.
The new study, by professor Marianne Hester of the University of
Bristol's school for policy studies and carried out on behalf of the
Northern Rock Foundation, looked at 96 examples from 692 "perpetrator
profiles" tracked from 2001 to 2007.
(...)
Some 83% of men had at least two incidents recorded; one man had 52. In
contrast, 62% of women recorded as perpetrators had only one incident
recorded, and the highest number of repeat incidents for any woman was eight.
Men were significantly more likely than women to use physical violence,
threats and harassment, and to damage the women's property; women were
more likely to damage their own.
Men's violence tended to create a "context of fear and control", the
researchers said, whereas women were more likely to use verbal abuse or
some physical violence.
(...)
All cases with seven or more incidents, most of which involved men, led
to arrest.
But in general, women were three times more likely to be arrested:
during the six-year period, men were arrested once in every 10 incidents
and women arrested once in every three.
<snip>
Children were present in 55% of cases when the violence or other abuse
took place. In cases involving post-separation violence, problems of
child contact were cited in 30% of cases.
Hester said: "Both men and women can be violent, but there are
significant differences in the way men and women use violence and abuse
against their partners and also the impact of such behaviour. (...)
So they are more willing to arrest women than men, eh.
2 fold purpose, women are taught not to fight back back or they will be arrested.
Men and women are taught it is okay for men to abuse women.
The title is a bit misleading.
First of all, it's 92% of alleged perpetrators, since according to this article so many men are allowed to go free.
Secondly, the two statements are not related, although the author of the title tries to link the two. It would seem to suggest that if group A is accused of a crime more often, than group A should go to prison at least as often as Group B, which doesn't really make any sense.
So, the relevant thing here, is that women are arrested three times as often for reported incidents (assuming).
That in itself is alarming. But there may be some legitimate reasons. Men traditionally are embarassed to report being assaulted by their spouse. It is part of the male-ego machismo thing. So, it's possible that they only report it when it is an assault causing a serious injury, in which case it is more likely that the perpetrator will be charged.
The other conclusio that one could draw from the article is that the police and court system are biased against women who abuse, but are tolerant of men who abuse, but given the intellectual dishonesty of the title, it doesn't have a lot of credibility.
From the article: "Previous research has shown that the vast majority of domestic violence perpetrators recorded by the police are men (92%)"
Who is being dishonest here, Keystone? Do you think maybe people can't read?
Fuck, babble is getting to be a sickening place these days.
That is, without a doubt, one of the mostly poorly written articles I have read in a long time. For the author's sake, I hope the end product was the result of an overzealous editor not paying attention. There is an absolutely tsunami of statistical information being bandied about, but it is so poorly organized I get lost about a third of the way through the article. If anyone knows how to access the actual study, it would be a real service to link to it. The article, as it stands, is an open invitation for misinterpretation and is going to generate a lot of "what ifs" or "did they really mean". The example that I would use is the statement in the article "But women were more likely to use a weapon, although this was often to stop further violence from their partners." What are the numbers? 51/49? 60/40? 90/10? The lower the ratio the more support for the implicit contention there is an anti-woman bias on the part of the law. For an article that is not shy about tossing in actual number of instances and percentages this is a puzzling oversight. Again, please, if anyone knows of a link to the actual study....
Here you go. You can download the full report from here. I disagree with your indictment of the article. A sentence such as "But women were more likely to use a weapon, although this was often to stop further violence from their partners." is perfectly acceptable even if actual stats are not provided. The Guardian could have hyperlinked to the actual report, but other than that, it was correct in reporting the finding without going into more detail. The "what if" and "did they really mean" crowd would still clamor away, were they given figures.
Thanks for the link Martin. Reading the study itself has totally reinforced my opinion that the article was poorly written and a total disservice.
Violance against women is repugnant, any man of proper upbringing knows this to be true. It amazes me that we still have so much of it. Unfortunately, violence against women is only a part of the overall violence picture. It is amazing how much violence of all types is tolerated when you think of it.
I don't know what the ultimate solution would look like... Maybe something like the driving while drunk campaings would be a good start. They changed drunk driving from a mainstream "non issue" to the current situation where it still exists, but people that do it are pariahs. Progress is still being made.
A world where violence toward all members of society was considered repugnant would be a good thing.
Violance against women is repugnant, any man of proper upbringing knows this to be true. Doesn't seem to hold them back much. Unfortunately, violence against women is only a part of the overall violence picture. You can't be saying that what is unfortunate is that other people than women also get hurt? A world where violence toward all members of society was considered repugnant would be a good thing. Of course. Meanwhile, I'll keep trying for an acknowledgment of the misogyny that drives male violence against women, without dilution in a general lament.
Violance against women is repugnant, any man of proper upbringing knows this to be true. Doesn't seem to hold them back much.
To this, I would simply say that men with a proper upbringing seem to be exceedingly rare, respect for women is not all that common in the general population.
Unfortunately, violence against women is only a part of the overall violence picture. You can't be saying that what is unfortunate is that other people than women also get hurt?
I think it was pretty obvious that I was simply saying that abuse is a real issue... everything from violence against women, child abuse to elder abuse.
A world where violence toward all members of society was considered repugnant would be a good thing. Of course. Meanwhile, I'll keep trying for an acknowledgment of the misogyny that drives male violence against women, without dilution in a general lament.
Of course that is what drives violence against women... I would think that to be self evident.