More Good Stuff for your Reading Pleasure
". . .To enhance the understanding of family violence, my colleagues Murray Straus and Suzanne Steinmetz and I conducted the First National Family Violence Survey in 1976.
"We interviewed a nationally representative sample of 2,143 individual family members. The results were reported in a number of scholarly articles and, finally, in the book Behind Closed Doors: Violence in the American Family. . .
"The most controversial finding was that the rates of female-to-male and male-to-female intimate violence were the same. Even the rates of abusive female-to-male and male-to-female violence were the same. When my colleague Murray Straus presented these findings at a conference in 1977, he was nearly hooted and booed from the stage. When my colleague Suzanne Steinmetz published a scholarly article, The Battered Husband Syndrome, in 1978, the editor of the professional journal published, in the same issue, a critique of Suzanne's article.
"The response to these findings sparked not only heated scholarly criticism, but intense and persistent personal attacks. All three of us received death threats. Bomb threats were phoned in to conference centers and buildings where we were scheduled to speak.
"Suzanne bore the brunt of the attacks. People urged her university to deny her tenure, and urged government agencies to rescind her grant funding. All three of us became "nonpersons" in our field; invitations to conferences dwindled. Advocacy literature and feminist writing would cite our research, but not attribute it to us. Librarians publicly stated that they would not order or shelve our books.
"The more sophisticated critiques were not personal but methodological, focusing on how we had measured violence. We had developed an instrument, the Conflict Tactics Scales, which met all the scientific standards for reliability and validity, so the criticisms focused on content. First, the measure assessed acts of violence, not outcomes -- so it did not reflect the consequences of those acts. Second, it did not assess who struck whom, or whether the violence was in self-defense. These two criticisms became a mantra-like refrain over the next two decades.
"Meanwhile, Murray Straus and I conducted the Second National Family Violence Survey in 1986, seeking to address the two methodological criticisms. We interviewed a nationally representative sample of 6,002 individual family members by telephone, and this time, we asked about the outcomes of the violence, and who started the conflict and how.
"This study also produced surprises. As expected, women were found to be much more likely than men to be injured by acts of domestic violence. But we also found that women were as likely to initiate the violence as were men. In order to correct for a possible bias in reporting, we re-examined our data, looking only at what women had reported. The survey had asked subjects about the last time there was partner violence: "In that particular instance, who started the physical contact, you or your spouse/partner?" And the women we interviewed reported similar rates of female-to-male and male-to-female violence; they also said they were as likely to initiate the violence as men.
"When we reported the results of the Second National Family Violence Survey, the personal attacks continued, and the professional critiques simply ignored the methodological changes we'd made. This round of personal attacks was much more insidious -- including charges that Murray had abused his wife. This is not unusual in the field of family violence -- men whose research results prove contrary to political correctness are labeled "perps."
"It's important to note that our findings have been corroborated numerous times by many different researchers, using many different methodological approaches. Reviewing more than 30 such studies, my colleague Murray Straus found that every study not based on a "self-selective" sample has reported comparable rates for female-to-male and male-to-female assaults on partners. . ."
Read the whole article here:
This is only the tip of the iceberg, of course. But perhaps it will sharpen your appetite for a more enhanced understanding in this crucially important sector of feminism's anti-male propaganda offensive.
P.S. The article doesn't mention it, but apparently Suzanne Steinmetz recieved threats to her children!