Galloism wrote:Purgatio wrote:
According to Dobash & Dobash, they based their research on interviews with men and women that were part of a criminal justice IPV intervention studied that Dobash conducted in 2000. Thus, the men in the study had already been criminally-convicted of domestic violence. Before you say this skews the results of the study, Dobash & Dobash state specifically that " It should be noted that while the focus of this paper is on women’s violence to a malepartner, the sample is drawn from men who have used violence against a woman part-ner. As such, women’s violence is being examined in the context of men’s violence. While it might be useful to study only women who have been arrested for using non-lethal violence against a male partner, this is such a rare occurrence that it would bedifficult to obtain an adequate sample. As such, women’s violence within the contextof a sample of male abusers may be the most realistic approach to sampling, given that the focus is on violent behaviour and not domestic conflicts, disagreements, arguments, name calling and the sort of ‘aggressive’ behaviour often measured using the CTS and, in turn, defined as violence. As with all samples, this one has its limitations, but this sample has allowed us to open a window on the existing body of knowledge by providing intensive and extensive knowledge about intimate partner violence from both men and women partners, who discussed at length and in great detail their ownviolence and that of their partner."
So the system is so sexist they can't even sample it with the correct population.
Great.
Quelle surprise.
I mean, that's your interpretation of the data. An alternative interpretation, that Johnson and Dobash & Dobash seem to favour, is that cases of female DV against men are rarer, more infrequent, and generally less severe than cases of male DV against women. It all comes down to differing interpretations of the same data, but as Dobash & Dobash have stated, female-on-male DV is simply not as common and rare enough that they couldn't even build up a statistically-significant sample for their study, despite them clearly trying to build one up for that purpose. That should tell you something.