Domestic Violence. The phrase implies a villain.
Whom might that villain be?
Not women. Never women.
Men are the relationship abusers. In fact, not only are they the abusers. Everything that isn’t right and that goes wrong in relationships is their fault.
This isn’t true, of course—not even close. Yet, one can’t deny the abuse of women at the hands of men. It’s true; men can be and have been abusive towards women.
But one doesn’t have to deny the abuse of men at the hands of women, because it’s never really been proposed. Something must be proposed to necessitate denial.
Who admits to lying without being first called a liar?
No one. Denial and defense aren’t required.
So, that’s what we’re officially doing here: proposing it—“it” being the relational abuse of men at the hands of women.
And to this proposition is to be applied good ol’ Rule Number One, which is: the accuser is almost always guilty of doing the very thing of which they accuse.
In other words, it’s the accuser, not the accused, who deserves some serious side-eye, which is particularly true in this case.
So then, as to this domestic abuse, how bad is it for men?
Well, open up a newspaper, turn on the television, or surf the internet. The evidence is certainly out there to support the abuse of men at the hands of women. Again, it’s just that no one makes the men are victims of domestic violence proposition. Hence, women aren’t then implied in the “domestic violence” phrase, and don’t have to deny the accusation for not being charged.
See how it works? It’s a wonderful arrangement, is it not?
Nevertheless, our question: how bad is the abuse for men?
Let’s begin with this above-the-fold headline from my local paper: Domestic Violence Victims Are Not Alone.*
“In Indiana last year,” the article began, “63,671 Hoosiers called domestic violence crisis lines, 10,531 women and children were housed in the domestic violence shelters, and 67 people died from an act of domestic violence in our state.”
It was Domestic Violence Awareness Month. The article was raising awareness.
“The roots of domestic violence run deep, cutting across social, economic, religious, and cultural boundaries,” the article noted. “Too many Hoosiers are being victimized and many of them are suffering silently. We must spread the word that help is available, and empower victims to end the cycle of abuse.”
Let’s cut to the chase: the article mentioned women and children were being housed in domestic violence shelters, and that 67 non-descript “people” died from domestic violence. Also, that Hoosiers in general were suffering in silence.
So what’s missing?
Men. There was not one mention of them or male victimhood in the entire piece—not one.
Why was there no mention?
Because men are the ones committing all the domestic violence. That men are the reason for Domestic Violence Awareness Month is implied.
Be that as it most certainly is, the following from the article is what should be the most troubling for men: “Domestic violence is usually thought of as physical abuse, but it can also be financial, emotional, and sexual abuse.”
So, we have moved beyond defining domestic violence by mere physical violence and subsequent abuse. Included now in the domestic violence line-up are financial, emotional, and sexual abuse.
Why, that’s quite the range of abuses. Cruelties that offer quite the range for subjective definition, too.
In other words, how do we define domestic violence of the financial, emotional, and sexual varieties exactly?
Perhaps this way:
If for affordability men say “no” to a particular vacation destination, or “no” to brand name items in favor of generic items. The decision can be classified as domestic violence of the financial abuse variety.
If men make their women cry or angry either one. If men generally upset women with their practical, hardline recommendations. Then that can be classified as domestic violence of the emotional abuse variety.
And if men complain about how much sex they aren’t getting. If they put too much pressure on women to fulfill their sexual obligation to the relationship. Then that can be classified as domestic violence of the sexual abuse variety.
“No” means “No,” gentlemen. And it’s a standing “No,” too.
And in fact, what does nearly every woman say about their defunct relationships? They say they endured every sort of abuse—physical, verbal, emotional, financial—at the hands of awful men, of course.
Abuse—the contemporary and universal female excuse for failed relationships.
Women would scoff at the previous abuse classifications, would say they are silly, and blown way out of proportion. Of course, women can scoff because they don’t have to live with the domestic violence stigmata.
See how it works? It’s a wonderful arrangement, is it not?
Women certainly commit domestic violence and abuse, however. They just get to high-heel their way past the stigmata:
Why, lil’-o-vulnerable me? Commit the heinous acts of domestic violence? Why I neva’! That is so ungentlemanly of you to suggest such a thing. Whack! You quite deserve that slap across yoah face! Whack! And there’s anutha!
What. Women don’t commit domestic violence?
Please. Eye-rolling so hard, I just sprained my eyes.
The Center for Disease and Control (CDC), a federal agency under the United States Department of Health and Human Services, released data from its 2010 National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey.
A few highlights for non-believers, and notice the italics:
- By the study’s definition of physical violence—including slapping, pushing, and shoving—roughly 5,365,000 men had been victims of intimate partner physical violence in the previous 12 months, compared with 4,741,000 women.
- More severe threats like being beaten, burned, choked, kicked, slammed with a heavy object, or hit with a fist were also tracked. Roughly 40 percent of the victims of severe physical violence were men.
- The CDC repeated the survey in 2011, publishing the results in 2014. The numbers were almost identical, with the percentage of male severe physical violence victims slightly rising.
Commenting on this apparent revelation of female abusiveness was Karla Ivankovich, PhD, an adjunct professor of psychology at the University of Illinois, Springfield.
Ivankovich acknowledged the decline in women reporting abuse, and the increase in men, but admitted there wasn’t much buzz about the changing statistics or the implications because, simply, nobody knows how to handle intimate partner violence against men.
“Society supports that men should not hit women,” she said, “but the same is not true for the reverse.”
Along with not knowing “how to handle intimate partner violence against men,” Ivankovich’s comment is interesting. Considering the line in the newspaper article stated clearly, “Our message to victims is simple: You are not alone, and help is available.”
Oh really. We don’t know “how to handle intimate partner violence against men,” and society doesn’t support that women not hit men. Yet men “aren’t alone” and “help is available” for them?
I think men are indeed alone, and I think there is no help at all available for them.
That’s what I think.
Actually, men need to just, shut-up and play the villain, so as this problem of not knowing “how to handle intimate partner violence against men” goes away.
That’s what men need to do—crybabies, momma’s boys.
Nevertheless, men should not commit domestic violence against women, right? So, shouldn’t the same standard apply to women? Why doesn’t society support men as it does women?
A retired professor of family law, Anne P. Mitchell, has the answer. She said that woman-on-man violence is often turned into onscreen amusement, such as on a slew of reality shows.
In other words, whatever abuse women dole-out to men is fun and entertainment—good fun and entertainment, in fact. Because of course, those abusive bastards deserve it.
Being a retired professor of family law, and one of the first fathers’-rights lawyers in the country, this isn’t how Mitchell sees it. She believes domestic violence towards men is neither fun nor entertainment, and that men no more deserve abuse of any kind than women.
Mitchell mentioned the Lorena Bobbitt incident, Bobbitt having cut off her husband’s penis, and having been acquitted by reason of temporary insanity.
Mitchell pointed out, “If something remotely similar had happened to a woman, there would have been a very different response.”
And men can bet their penis on that!
Nevertheless, the one-way street view of domestic violence of the physical variety can be laid to rest. It is indeed a two-way street. The so-called experts may not know handle “intimate partner violence of the physical variety” toward men. But there is no doubt intimate partner violence of the physical variety is being performed on men!
Yet, unlike women, men have to endure intimate partner violence of the physical variety until the so-called experts figure out how to handle it.
Well, the experts need to get on the stick, because it isn’t just intimate partner violence of the physical variety being performed on men.
In another article, a woman explained how ground beef inspired an awakening to the fact she was emotionally abusing her husband.
The wife had asked her husband to pick-up some dinner items from the grocery store on his way home, one of those items being the infamous ground beef. She began pulling the items from the grocery bag after he arrived, only to learn he’d purchased 70/30 ground beef—which means 70% lean and 30% fat—instead of the 80/20 she preferred.
Displeased with the 10% crisis in leanness, a displeasure I’m sure most rational people can understand, eh-hm, she launched into him.
The wife berated the husband for not being smarter, for not reading the labels, and for not being trustworthy. She yelled at, criticized, and demeaned him in such a way that, having been the recipient of the same treatment herself, would have prompted a call to the domestic abuse hotline.
To the attacks and to the demeaning disrespect, the husband responded as most modern men have learned to respond: “I never noticed. I really don’t think it’s that big of a deal.” And, “I’ll get it right next time.”
His affability was of no benefit, however. To his abuser, it was like blood in the water.
Of course, this wasn’t the first time the wife had scolded him. Admittedly, she had done it for years. It is why domestic violence of the emotional variety came so natural and easy to her.
“I scolded him for not doing something the way I thought it should be done,” she admitted. “He was always putting something away in the wrong place, or leaving something out, or neglecting to do something altogether. And I was always right there to point it out to him.”
Let’s reverse this situation. Imagine if women were being treated this way.
Hmm. Seems vaguely familiar, like we have already been there.
Why yes, of course! We have been here!
These sorts of things happening to women is why we have Domestic Abuse Awareness Month and the Domestic Violence Hotline.
It appears we are back at square one. Only, with a different victim this time.
The self-described “hamburger meat moment” was this woman’s wake-up call to the fact she was abusing her husband emotionally. It was a reckoning that, I’m sure, came too many abusive and misery-filled years late for one guy:
Glad you saw the light, honey. It’s been terrific living with you all these years.
The wife seemed genuinely embarrassed and remorseful, and she made one comment that stood out.
She said, “Too many women have fallen into the belief that Wife Always Knows Best. There’s even a phrase to reinforce it: ‘Happy wife, happy life.’”
Then she added this, “That doesn’t leave a lot of room for his opinions, does it?”
Nope. It does not.
And women wonder why their men end-up banging other chics—other women who merely listen to them, appreciate them, value them, respect them, and who actually pursue them. Well, initially, at least. Long enough to bang the newness off, anyway.
The newness banged off, they’re ranting about hamburger meat, and are themselves abusing men, too.
Unlike this poor guy who had become “resigned” and “demoralized,” I’m not one to sit around for years waiting on an abusive woman to see the light. When she began pointing out my faults and abusing me, she’d have gotten a rather curt “Screw you” of the profane variety.
Upon which, the question would surely be: how could you be so, abusive?
Well, let’s make a comparison.
Issuing a curt “Screw you” of the profane variety would be deemed both verbal and emotional abuse. Curtly issued, it would draw gasps and incredulous expressions, and would incite accusations and threats. It may even prompt an EPO (Emergency Protection Order), followed by mandated anger management courses.
And of course it would not matter to women, or even register, that their never-ending and demeaning criticism prompted the well-deserved “Screw you” of the profane variety.
“Screw you” in the profane is disrespectful, intolerable, and will not stand.
Yet, when it comes to years and decades of berating men over hamburger meat, and for not doing things in the ways women think they should be done, and for putting something away in the wrong place, or leaving something out, or neglecting to do something altogether.
Well, that’s just an emotional tendency of women that, for their undying love and reverence for the female condition, men are supposed to understand, supposed to find endearing, and are supposed to tolerate until women finally see themselves as abusive.
Well, screw that, I say. It clearly takes too long for women to recognize—if they ever do!—their abusiveness, which clearly isn’t just emotional abuse. It is also provably physical. And considering women conceal their spending habits from men, and get monetary favor in the divorce, they are financially abusing men, too.
It’s all domestic violence of the ignored variety.
Men aren’t going to complain about abuse in whatever form, at least not publicly, because they look weak and unmanly. So what do they do instead?
They put-up with the abuse, and deal with it.
Women aren’t worried about looking weak. In fact, they can complain about abuse and become strong, courageous heroes. Thus, they can dish-out all the abuse they want and be justified.
Women are perpetual victims, heroic survivors insulated from the villainous implications in the phrase Domestic Violence.
So, what is the end-game in this gender war, and with this domestic violence and abuse business?
It’s to permanently dethrone and subordinate men.
And what do men think will ultimately happen? A state of gender equality will finally be reached that will make women content?
That’s not going to happen. In fact, it’s never what happens.
Whatever the disputed issue, one party continues conceding and giving up ground, until the other party takes over. That’s exactly what happens—exactly what will happen. So the war is not going to end.
Totally domination of men—that’s the endgame in this gender war. And if one thinks it isn’t the endgame, look at racism. Racism will never be put to rest until blacks or Hispanics or whichever minority has complete power and is dictating everything. No matter how much ground is gained, it will never be enough. There will always be a little more racism to eradicate. Hence, the fight must continue.
The gender war is no different. It will never be put to rest until women have complete power and are dictating everything. And in that war, the claim of domestic violence and abuse is a tool. Both fairly and unjustly, women level the various abuse charges at will—and the charges stick. Or, they work.
And the charges aren’t inconsequential anymore. They have teeth—life-altering teeth.
Thus, women are playing with a stacked deck, relationally speaking. Being clearly immune to charges of abuse themselves, women can behave however they wish, can be as abusive as they want, and for as long as they want.
Men, on the other hand—if they get out of line in the slightest degree—which should be interpreted: if men don’t behave like women command they behave—then women can really do a legal number on them.
And for this modern reality, I’m asked, “What are men supposed to do?”
Here’s my answer: Leave!
Forget the misery and aggravation of female domestic violence. Forget anger management courses and mediation. Those things are small potatoes. We’re talking genuine danger for men. We’re talking career-ending accusations and real, personal legal jeopardy.
It’s a new ballgame, gentlemen. One in which virtually everyone believes in men’s abusive guilt, and one in which nobody bothers with the truth behind allegations or due process either one.
And then, men get hammered legally. Severely hammered.
Former NFL running back, Ray Rice, by all accounts, was a wonderful human being. That is, until his fiancée provoked him in an Atlantic City hotel. They had been drinking, and were arguing. After entering the hotel elevator, Rice decked her.
Did anyone care about her contribution to the incident?
And where is Ray Rice?
Well, he’s here. Er, nowhere.
He’s a pariah with no profession.
Should Rice have struck his fiancée?
Rice should have grabbed his bags, and left; Rice would still be playing football in the NFL. And his fiancée would have been an ex-fiancée, a woman dreaming about the luxurious future she once had within grasp.
The point is, this domestic violence and abuse business is nothing to play around with any longer. It’s a genuine danger for men—with real teeth. It’s a tool with which to control and to punish men, and both an accusation and a stigmata with which women don’t have to concern themselves whatsoever.
So, forget the houses and finances. Forget love. Forget the kids. Forget all the things that keep men in relationships and enduring the abuse everyone ignores. When the abuse starts, grab the bags.
Otherwise, it’s a whole lotta’ one-sided trouble.
Trouble of the singularly and extraordinarily punitive variety.
*Clarion News Opinion, Laura Berry and Greg Zoeller, Oct.28, 2015 ed.
JMWs latest book: New Rules: Relationship Logic for the Darkside