Over on the Men’s Rights subreddit, mgriff2k4 is angry that the picture to the right here showed up on his computer screen. Sorry, make that fucking angry. “Did this really just fucking pop up on my news feed?” he asks in the title of his post, adding in a comment: “sorry about the word “fucking” but im really pissed off about this.”
Why is he angry? Presumably, he assumes the statistic is untrue, and that it unfairly paints men as evil murderers.
Luckily, in this Age of the Internet it is trivially easy to find out whether statistics like this are true. It involves something called “Google.” mgriff2k4 did not bother to avail himself of this easy-to-use research tool.
But I did. In less than 5 minutes, I confirmed that this factoid is indeed true, at least according to the most recent figures on gender and homicide found on the Department of Justice’s web site, drawn from FBI data covering the years from 1976-2005. According to the FBI, 30% of women who are murdered are murdered by “intimates.” Roughly 20% are killed by husbands or ex-husbands; 10% by boyfriends or girlfriends. (In the overwhelming majority of cases the murderers are boyfriends, not girlfriends; men are ten times more likely to commit murder than women.)
While four times as many men are murdered than women, only 5% of murdered men are killed by “intimates.” Men kill women more than twice as often as women kill men. Women suffer far more serious injuries from domestic violence than men do; so it is not altogether unexpected that they are also far more likely to be murdered by intimates.
If you want to see what this means on a human level, I suggest you take a look at the excellent if depressing web site Domestic Violence Crime Watch, which links to stories in which men are the perpetrators, and in which men are the victims. There are far more of those in the former category than in the latter.
I should note that (as of this writing) one commenter in the thread also found his way to the DOJ site, and noted that men were more likely to be killed by strangers or acquaintances. But he didn’t bother to tell mkgriff2k4 that the sign in the picture was in fact accurate.
NWO has some balls to claim he’s close to slavery. NWO, you are a lying liar who lies.
Owly knows how to search, he just doesn’t know how to interpret what he finds.
Scores on the HITS questionnaire range from 4-20, but only scores greater than 10 are considered cause for concern. In other words, if you score from 4 to 10, the relationship is not identified as abusive. Just to make Owly’s brain explode, a score of 10 out of a possible 20 is 100% innocent of IPV not 50% guilty! (I know, that makes no sense, but I wanted to throw him a bone.)
It’s a pretty rough diagnostic tool. A person could therefore report that their partner fairly often hurts them (4) AND fairly often threatens them with harm (4), but if they also report that they never insult (1) or scream (1) at them — Yahtzee! It’s not an abusive relationship. Of course normally those behaviors tend to occur in concert, which is why it is considered a reasonably effective screening test.
What interventions are recommended when a screening indicates there MAY be abuse? The answer is in one of Owly’s links:
You know what things are NOT recommended as interventions?
I do not know why this recommendation is limited to women of childbearing age, especially since it is not a costly screening. I can’t think of any reason not to extend the screening and interventions to men. Even if women suffer more serious health risks than men do from IPV, men do suffer too. Oh, but wait — Owly isn’t in favor of extending health care to men, since that would be big, bad government taking care of people. What he IS in favor of is denying it to women. My bad! Carry on.
Unimaginative, don’t forget white indentured servants to texas farmers in the 1940’s like NWO’s father.
@Unimaginative
“Physically hurt you; insult or talk down to you; threaten you with harm; scream or curse at you” are all abusive behaviours. They are not the same things as “total defferment to a woman, never talking back, never raising ones voice, never cursing.”
Several problems exist.
1) it’s mandatory. The question is why? There’s no reason other than to stir up trouble where none existed.
2) it’s a one way street. Only women are tested and there’s many more tests I’ve yet to even see.
3) Since the rules are dictated by the State, what’s to stop the State from adding another line/s of questions?
Example; Destruction of property, throws vase.
Example; Makes light of your opinion.
Example; Assumes authority over situations.
A line/s of questioning have been added, yet the same criteria remains the same. Who can challenge? The rules are dictated. Now a man might be at 50%, 60% or 70% guilt out of the gate.
Insults are not violence.
Talking down to is not violence.
Cursing is not violence.
Even threats are not violence.
By the very criteria laid out everyone of you is guilty of DV against me. Everyone of you have cursed at me frequently and talked down to me and insulted me frequently. 5 + 5 + 1 +1 = 12. If the criteria used can determine guilt of DV for people who have never even seen each other how can it ever be used to dictate actual violence?
If no actual violence has taken place between any of us, then no violence has taken place between couples.
There are five more sections to these question’s that will be mandatory for your yearly check up. If they’re as bad as this one, entire States will have to be turned into concentration camps to hold all the men.
John —
“I’m not disputing the 150% number at all. I hope I didn’t leave that impression. My question was how equal do the numbers have to be before something becomes gender neutral. Do they have to be dead even? Let’s look at the CDC stats between rape and forced to penetrate. Let’s assume that the numbers are equal (1.27 vs 1.267) for math’s sake. We can even factor out that about 20% of the forced to penetrate is a male perpetrator (I know that genders it, but indulge me), we would get a ratio of 5:4. 55% to 45% if you’re looking at percentages of a whole. What about 40% and 60%?”
Did you read that statistical analysis I did for Arks? The one looking at that very data and explaining why you can’t use 12-month data? Here’s an analogy, you can’t look at 12-month data and determine whether a region is polio free, the region needs to have had 0 cases of polio for a full 12 months to get a tentative “probably”, iirc it’s 5 years to be declared definitely for sure polio free — because anomalous years happen. It’d be like determining the national SAT average from the scores of one graduating class, at one school, it just doesn’t work, statistics do not generalize like that. Which is also why you have to use only “forced to penetrate” and not “rape” for the male victims — there were not enough cases of male rape in those 12-months to do statistics on. But hey, noting that we’re again excluding male rape victims because we want to talk about a specific type of male rape, let’s do some math!
Female rape victims, 12-month data — 1,270,000 // 5.6%
Male “made to penetrate” (rape) victims, 12-month data — 1,267,000 // 1.1%
No, you can not fucking round, because “Rounded to the nearest thousand.” — they already did. We’ve had enough rounding errors without intentionally inducing more. Yes the raw numbers are similar, but you need to use the weighted percents because I don’t have a fucking clue what percent of the student participants were female, it appears to be many more than were male though.
If female, chance of being raped in those 12 months = 5.6%
If male, chance of being forced to penetrate in those 12 months = 1.1%
If male, chance of being raped, by CDC definition, in those 12 months = 0, because the 12 month data is too small a sample.
What were you arguing again? Something ignoring half of what the CDC said on the same page as those numbers? But let’s factor this by gender of perpetrator anyways.
“For female rape victims, 98.1% reported only male perpetrators.”
“For three of the other forms of sexual violence, a majority of male victims reported only female perpetrators: being made to penetrate (79.2%),”
98.1% of 5.6% = .981 * .056 = 0.054936 = 5.5%~
79.2% of 1.1% = .792 * .011 = 0.008712 = 0.9%~
If female, chance of being raped in those 12 months by a man = 5.5%~
If male, chance of being raped in those 12 months by a woman = 0.9%~
That’s just over a 6x risk, as in, women raped by men : men raped by women = 6:1. Any other ways you’d like to try breaking the CDC data? The rate the MRM misuses these numbers I’m going to end up memorizing them.
“Are those number close enough to say that it is a societal problem and not one related to gender or does it still have to be gender related? Since women make up 20% of murder victims, isn’t violence a men’s issue and not a women’s issue? Personally, I think it’s everyone’s issue.”
Those numbers are made up, so no. Regarding the latter question, if you weren’t battling straw feminists, you might’ve noticed we’re generally against all violence — and certainly against the idea that men must prove themselves and never back down from a fight (that’s part of why the male homicide rate is so much higher, stupid fights getting out of control).
Seriously, what about having nudie pics on her computer makes your ex-sister-in-law an unfit parent? Questionably fit since the kid found them, but most of us have walked in on our parents doing it, and after a brief “omgs, need eye bleach!” we’ve survived. You, as the parent, take better steps to prevent it from happening again — not really the same as if she’d, idk, set a nudie pic to the desktop background.
NWO —
Oi, you fail reading today.
1. Physically hurt you O O O O O
2. Insult or talk down to you O O O O O
3. Threaten you with harm O O O O O
4. Scream or curse at you O O O O O
If I called you an asshole unworthy of the time of day, that’d be a sometimes on 4; if I drop a hammer on my foot and yell FUCK! that would not. (And no, I did not just call you an asshole, not any more than I just dropped a hammer on my foot, which I did not)
“Hubby/boyfriend is going to at least anger management, maybe prison or a little cooling off in the big house. He hates you now by the way and will certainly never trust you again.”
Where, pray tell, do you get the impression that this is to be used for more than offering the victim counseling? That’s what “…and provide or refer women who screen positive to intervention services.” means.
Read that, twice, then get back to me on where it even implies he’d be told, forget arrested.
Unimaginative —
“And I’ve seen this kind of survey before. It may say a score of 10 is a sign of problems, but it probably also says something like a score of 4 is a sign of a healthy relationship.”
It says neither really, what it does say is —
In non-geek, that means the average office patient scored 6.13, while the average abuse victim (as ID’ed with another measure) scored 15.15; and that using 10 as a cut-off score has 90%+ valid predictive value. NWO’s arguing about a 9% false positive risk ruining all men everywhere in other words.
Shadow — “You’ll have better luck arguing with goldfish Owly if you’re looking for a blank slate for every post you make” — no he won’t, fish are subject to conditioning like most species, if he taps their tank they’ll start fearing the sit of him. (Contra, if you have treats in a neon red container, they’ll react to neon red like it’s treat time, too cute!)
Hippodameia — “MISANDRY also seems to involve properly understanding math, as this thread’s repeatedly demonstrated.” — that appears correct, yes.
In other news, India’s hit the 12-month polio free mark, so fingers crossed! (And Angola is 3 days shy of doing the same! Progress, it is being had)
One thing I love about this blog is how often it causes me to look shit up. Unlike Owly, I actually read it.
Indentured servitude pretty much ended in the U.S. by 1840, and was outlawed in the rest of the Americas in 1917. The Rise and Fall of Indentured Servitude in the Americas: An Economic Analysis (JSTOR)
See also The End of European Immigrant Servitude in the United States: An Economic Analysis of Market Collapse, 1772-1835 (JSTOR)
“So we’ll say, as in all relationships there are rocky patches there was one fight during the year. So physical hurting is rarely, that’s a 2. You hurt him as well, but that doesn’t matter. ”
It really is sad that Slavey thinks that a physical fight that leads to some sort of physical pain/injury is a normal part of every relationship and can be assumed to be happening at least once a year.
@cloudiah
“I can’t think of any reason not to extend the screening and interventions to men.”
I can. Why would I want any woman given a criminal record or possibly imprisoned for cursing, screaming or insulting? There’s a petition to do exactly that, have men screened as well. I certainly won’t sign that. It’s a joke. Imagine how easily and frequently it’ll be abused. Man/woman cheats or somehow infuriates the other party. You tell me what’ll happen.
—————
@Cliff Pervocracy
“Oh, and y’know, racism against black people is technically still a form of racism.”
And show me anywhere where I’ve ever said anything against black people. You forget where I grew up princess. We all hung out together. I was lucky to be able to crawl outta that shithole know as Philadelphia about 10 or so years ago. Just cause the rest you people grew up in cracker country and all you know about the ghetto is from the communist network news doesn’t mean shit. Did you see a black person in national geographic once? What a joke you people are.
—————
“Your father was a white indentured servant in the 1940s???”
That’s right princess, lot’s of people got over here that way. All you little college girls act like your so wise and worldly and educated. You live in little guilded cages immune to the sightest hardship of life. So much so that you consider a slight to your precious feelings unbearable. Oh golly, did a man you deem unworthy try to speak to you? Did a, “partner” dare to disreguard you most valued opinion. DV! DV! DV!
—————
You’re all so blind and stupid as you lead each other around patting yourselves on the back at your acceptance of everything that falls into your narrow, misguided, genderless utopia.
Why not write some more policy, you’ve been doing a bang up job so far. Are there more poor or less poor? Is education better? Is anything better than it was 40 years ago? Fuck no. So every policy you gals have lobbied to have enacted were exactly the wrong thing to do. Guess what these policies are? The exact wrong thing to do. There isn’t one policy women have lobbied for that hasn’t fucked everything up. Not one damn thing.
Sad and dare I say it… creepy? Because that is pretty creepy. Physically hurting people you’re in a relationship with is not cool.
@Argenti Aertheri
First off, you’re on the wrong link. That page in no way translates to the punishment, which isn’t stated what it’ll be on the HITS site. I know you believe everything the State tells you but sometimes they lie by ommision.
If a man says to a woman, “you stupid bitch, sometimes I just feel like fucking slapping you.” It’s an insult, a curse and an implied threat, (haha). Which makes it a threefer. Items 2, 3, and 4, yet no actual violence has taken place.
“And how often does boyfriend act like this?” The nurse asks. “Oh all the time,” she replies. Does she curse? Does she insult? Does she flippantly say she’d like to slap him? It doesn’t matter. Do you notice a slight discrepancy in the power dynamic. The woman has carte blanche to ridicule, insult, scream, curse and even hit. The man can only cower and never even raise his voice. She is backed by the guns of the State.
A woman can never be guilty under this plan, only a man. Do you find this equitable?
My relationship has rocky patches! Like sometimes we have angry words or we get sulky at each other for a couple days. Probably once or twice a year we really yell.
Physically attacking is way the fuck beyond “rocky.”
@Argenti Aertheri
“Results: For phase one, Cronbach’s alpha was .80 for the HITS scale. The correlation of HITS and CTS scores was .85. For phase two, the mean HITS scores for office patients and abuse victims were 6.13 and 15.15, respectively. Optimal data analysis revealed that a cut score of 10.5 on the HITS reliably differentiated respondents in the two groups. Using this cut score, 91% of patients and 96% of abuse victims were accurately classified.”
This means nothing. They dictated what constitutes their version of an, “abuse victim.” So the list they have, which they can add to at their discrection, since their making the rules, can be anything at all. Insulting someone is not abuse, it is not violence.
Everyone of you has insulted me. Has everyone of you been violent to me? No!!!!!!!!! Insults are not violence. Curses are not violence. Raised vioces are not violence. Disagreements are not violence. Violence is violence. Hurt feelings do not constitute being a victim of violence. The only line of any relevance in that test is have you been hit. Nothing else is violence. Grow up.
Given that Slavey has said (I think?) that he was engaged, he’s basically admitting he beat his fiancĂ©e here.
Seriously. That line was jaw-dropping, even from him. What the fuck.
NWO, I laugh at you fairly often, but this one just isn’t funny. Healthy relationships do not involve anyone hitting anyone else in anger. Not once a year. Not once a decade. Not EVER. All relationships do have “rocky patches,” but in healthy relationships, a “rocky patch” means things like saying, “you are really getting on my nerves right now,” or “I am frustrated and need some space,” or maybe even, “I’m pretty pissed off at you, and I think you’re being a jerk.” Please get help if you honestly believe a “rough patch” in a relationship can and should entail hitting your partner.
NWO —
You’re particularly cranky today, can I interest you in some tea? It can be iced if it’s too damned hot for hot tea.
“Even threats are not violence.” — they aren’t legal, and can certainly be a part of verbal abuse. DV includes verbal abuse, please try to remember that.
“If no actual violence has taken place between any of us, then no violence has taken place between couples.”
None of us have threatened you, and more importantly, none of us have a damned clue where you are, so we couldn’t actually harm you. And further, there’s absolutely nothing forcing you to keep commenting here — do we need to start some sort of “cannot stop trolling anonymous” or something?
“Now a man might be at 50%, 60% or 70% guilt out of the gate.”
It really, really, doesn’t work like that, google Beck’s Depression Inventory, now does a score of 3/4ths the cutoff mean you’re 75% depressed? No, no it doesn’t, you can’t just add percentage signs because the cutoff is 10 and 10*10=100, that’s not how percentages work. (Now, if you want to keep digging, you can probably find an analysis of all scores with graph showing the breakdown, and then see where 70% of men actually fall) Ah, a simple example, 100 is the average IQ, 70 is 70% average then? 130 is 130% average? No, both of those are 2 standard deviations from the mean, meaning about 2.1% of people have IQs <70 and another 2.1% have IQs >130. You can’t just convert the raw score into a percent.
Would the MRM please offer a basic statistics course already? You don’t even need to teach how to find the SD, just tech what it is.
“First off, you’re on the wrong link. That page in no way translates to the punishment, which isn’t stated what it’ll be on the HITS site. I know you believe everything the State tells you but sometimes they lie by ommision.”
I checked both your links, there was absolutely no mention of anything happening to the partner of the surveyed. Instead, as I expected, there was talk of counseling and other such interventions for the surveyed, if the surveying produces a score consistent with abuse. You can insult me all you like, it won’t change that all that time spent sitting in psych classes learning this shit — no intervention with the abuser is going to be mandated because of the risk to the victim.
“If a man says to a woman, “you stupid bitch, sometimes I just feel like fucking slapping you.” It’s an insult, a curse and an implied threat, (haha). Which makes it a threefer. Items 2, 3, and 4, yet no actual violence has taken place.
“And how often does boyfriend act like this?” The nurse asks. “Oh all the time,” she replies. Does she curse? Does she insult? Does she flippantly say she’d like to slap him? It doesn’t matter. Do you notice a slight discrepancy in the power dynamic. The woman has carte blanche to ridicule, insult, scream, curse and even hit. The man can only cower and never even raise his voice. She is backed by the guns of the State. ”
Dude, if he’s regularly screaming threats and insults, that’s verbal abuse, and she should be given tools to help her leave (eg counseling). I would question why you refuse to admit that verbal abuse is abuse, but you’re you, so I’m guessing the answer is because that wouldn’t fit within your strange worldview.
“A woman can never be guilty under this plan, only a man. Do you find this equitable?”
I’d like to see the surveys tested on male victims and done regularly if that testing produces reliable results. Because that’s how the scientific method works. You’ll perhaps not that with the current evidence the surveying of elderly people is not covered under the ADA as it has a d class rating.
“I can. Why would I want any woman given a criminal record or possibly imprisoned for cursing, screaming or insulting? There’s a petition to do exactly that, have men screened as well. I certainly won’t sign that. It’s a joke. Imagine how easily and frequently it’ll be abused. Man/woman cheats or somehow infuriates the other party. You tell me what’ll happen.”
*sigh* Great, the surveyed lied, and can now either go to counseling re: being abused, or not. That’s all the fuck that means. And where’s this petition? Assuming it’s better at science than you are, I’d sign that.
Re: “white indentured slavery” — I’m descended from Italian coal miners NWO, you have no idea what you’re talking about. (Italian on my mother’s said, Native and various bits of European on my father’s…makes for fun family dinners, all that yummy food!)
“Are there more poor or less poor?”
It’s been fairly steady. (See, this is how a citation works)
“Is education better? Is anything better than it was 40 years ago?”
The first question is vague and undefined, so let’s pick a measure easy to research — I’ll do both literacy and HS graduation rates.
Graduation rate is also relatively stable. And I can’t seem to find US literacy rates over time, so we’ll have to settle on reading scores. (Also stable, for white students, increasing for students of color)
As for “is anything better” let’s try the mortality rate and lifespan data. Infant mortality and life expectancy have been decreasing, and increasing, respectively. Death rates have fallen. (And check that, life expectancy is rising fastest for white men.)
Basically, the only thing changing for the worse is how upset NWO is.
Ah, Owly, given that for everyone else in the U.S. indentured servitude ended in the 19th century, can you give us any corroborating information on your claim that in your family it ended about a century later? And how was it kept so secret?
Ye gods. Doad and I maybe get into a fight that involves raised voices once or twice a year. Physical violence? Not okay! Not even once, ever!
Also, being insulted and/or cursed at by random people on the internet =/= being insulted or cursed by a significant other or family member, you know, someone who you physically spend a lot of time with and who has a specific duty to love and respect you.
I’m bored, and the 3:2 or not discussion was really mathy, so I decided to dig up the data and make some charts. These are a combination of the following spreadsheets, all available here.
htus8008t01.csv Table 1. Victims and Offenders by Demographic Group, 1980-2008
htus8008f02.csv Figure 2. Number of homicide victims, 1950-2010
htus8008f26.csv Figure 26. Homicides of intimates, by sex of victim, 1980-2008
Homicides by intimates, as a percent of all homicides, by gender.
Homicides by intimates, raw number, by gender.
Homicides by intimates, by gender, stacked percents.
The last one is the 3:2 ratio thing, without the failing assumptions (one caveat, they’re all using the 1980-2008 average for the gender break down, I can’t seem to find that by year).
Homicides by intimates, by gender, stacked percents.
Missed a quotation mark there, whoops!
Mr C and I have been together off and on for over 15 years, and not once has either of us even come close to hitting the other. Raised voices? Maybe 5 or so times in that time period (neither of us are very shouty). Arguments? Lots during some years, other years where there were no serious arguments at all.
I have a sneaking suspicion that this is closer to what the average relationship looks like than NWOs vision of constant insults and displays of mutual contempt that lead to explosions of physical violence on an annual basis.
My husband and I rarely fight. When we do, he lectures more than yells. I don’t think either one of has yelled. We never name call. But, we are still newlyweds 🙂
Given that Slavey has said (I think?) that he was engaged, he’s basically admitting he beat his fiancée here.
No, he’s just admitting that he threatened to beat her. And called her a stupid bitch. He is perplexed as to why she broke off their engagement. Women are just crazy, I guess.
Let’s see, the ex-fiancee scores that dreaded 4, yet, note the ex part. The gaslighting narcissist who ended up threatening to kill me? 1, 5, 2, 2 …he was Mr. Polite while explaining how lazy I was since I didn’t fold laundry the moment I came in, while having a swearing fit about how fucking annoying it was to be spoken to when he first walked in (even if it was something like “how was your day?” or “your cat was surprisingly social earlier”). If that’s precise enough to spot a gaslighting narcissist for what he is, then yeah, it has my support.
Lol, I guess the FWB might manage a 5, idk how “shocking to be asked assistance” would score, pretty sure asking if I really asked for assistance =/= talking down to me though. Unlike Mr. Polite, who’d have managed a nice even calm tone while telling me how useless I was to need assistance and how this proves how much better he is.
It’s that dreaded context again!
Awww, I am still curious how John Anderson’s former sister in law’s having intimate relations with another man means that she is an unfit mother.
I know arguing with NWO is pointlessness itself, but just to vent my own spleen:
A SCREENING QUESTIONNAIRE IS NOT A LAW!!! It is a tool for health and social work professionals to be able to find out who needs victim services. “Victim services” does not mean automatic arrest.
If you score above the threshhold, that means a nurse takes you aside and says “you have a real problem here, what’s happening to you isn’t right, this is how to get out if you’re ready to do so.” It does not mean the man gets carted off to jail. Yelling at people, even in fucking horrible ways, continues to be entirely legal.
I think saying that anywhere black people live is the “ghetto,” that Philly is a shithole because it has black people and that you’re traumatized from having to grow up with them, and that black people belong in National Geographic is pretty fucking racist right there.
Also my dad’s from Philly so I’ve been there many times. Not that that really proves anything significant, just, um… you don’t have a monopoly on Being-From-Philadelphia survivorship.
Also I live in Boston, so I don’t even know what the fuck you’re getting at about “cracker country,” of course black people live here.
Yeah, in, like, the 1600s. Indentured servitude of white people pretty much died down around the time of the American Revolution.
You know that’s actually pretty bad, right? It’s not violence and no court in the land would convict based on it, but you know that despite being legal that’s actually really nasty, right?
Partnership is supposed to be based on actually liking each other, not on making sure you only attack and abuse each other in technically legal ways. If you don’t want to hear someone’s opinions and respect their feelings, why do you even want to be around them, much less sharing your life with them?