Violence Knows No Gender
(c) 2001 Bill Kuhl
Domestic violence against men is the subject of my graduate
thesis. From my research, I have come to realize that, despite the
increased media attention it has received lately, people still know
very little about this form of abuse - especially two of its most
common components.
The first is that men, as a group, endure about as much violence
to their possessions as they do to their bodies. My research has
uncovered scores of anecdotes from men who have experienced, what
I call, "domestic vandalism." Typically, their stories are punctuated
with moments where the abuser, "bashed out the windows of my cherry
red Camaro" or "cut up my varsity letter from high school." In spite
of all the anecdotal information, I have yet to come across any
published material specifically on domestic vandalism. Nor have
I ever heard of anyone calculating a total cost of men's destroyed
possessions. Whatever the monetary cost is, the emotional cost is
likely to be higher; it is not at all uncommon for abusers to purposely
choose a keepsake as the object to be bashed in or cut up.
The other component of domestic violence against men that few
people seem to be aware of is the method with which women usually
gain the upper hand in violent encounters. As much of the research
points out, women are often able to neutralize men's greater strength,
or at times even dominate them, by using a weapon. But after digesting
the accounts of numerous male victims, I have concluded that it
is not physical weapons that give women the upper hand. What puts
women in a position to cause serious injury is the weapon that all
good generals throughout history have known to be the most effective
- the element of surprise. In countless cases where men were seriously
injured, the abuser used surprise as her chief weapon. One such
victim appeared on an Oprah Winfrey telecast devoted to domestic
violence against men. He reported that, in one instance, he was
not aware his wife was behind him as he started down the stairs
of their home. She gave him a good shove causing him to tumble down
the steps; he ended up with a concussion.
The resultant problem for male victims is that, like everybody,
they have to eat, sleep, shower and just take it easy. Living with
a spouse whose number one weapon is surprise, male victims are likely
to be constantly on guard - a frame of mind that could produce a
psychological toll as well. With this in mind, the need for shelters
for male victims becomes even more imperative. Yet, such shelters
are practically nonexistent. Some cities offer very short term services
such as two or three free nights at a hotel, while others offer
space at only the most inaccessible shelters. Among the 20 or more
women's shelters in Los Angeles, the only one that also accepts
men is about 70 miles from downtown L.A.
Why no services for men? Because no funding exists. According
to the Bangor Daily News, "the Violence Against Women Act allocates
$3.3 billion to help abused women but contains no money to help
male victims." Legislators allot no money for men even though a
mammoth body of scientific research dating back to the 1970's shows
women to be as frequently violent in relationships as men. (For
a list of 122 such scholarly articles see: www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm)
Plus, researchers agree that many domestic assaults against men
are probably not being reported because of the humiliation the victims
would suffer.
Perhaps more shameful than society's lack of funding for male
victims is the greater problem from which this slight seems to stem
- our compulsion to use partisanship rather than principles as a
basis for public policy, a stance that has only produced divisiveness.
It is high time men and women started working together to stop abuse
..... no matter the gender doling it out.
-Bill Kuhl
bridgewater6729@msn.com
|