• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Police detain George Zimmerman after 911 call from wife [W:265]

Well then brother we need to talk about the kind of women you are spending your time with.


It isn't just me; these behavior patterns are well known and there have been scientific studies done.


Many studies suggest that at least 1/3 of all domestic violence cases are initiated by the female, and that many men arrested for CDV were in fact reacting to an initiation of violence by the female, and in many cases a long-standing pattern of violence by the female. Other studies have demonstrated that domestic violence is typically mutual and women are the aggressors almost as often as men.


Findings that women are as violent as men have been termed "gender symmetry".[1][9][10][11][12][13]

A 32-nation study of university students "revealed an overwhelming body of evidence that bidirectional violence is the predominant pattern of perpetration; and this study, along with evidence from many other studies (Medeiros & Straus, 2007), indicates that the etiology of PV is mostly parallel for men and women."[14]

Straus and Gelles found that in couples reporting spousal violence, 27% of the time the man struck the first blow; in 24% of cases, the woman initiated the violence. The rest of the time, the violence was mutual, with both partners brawling. The results were the same even when the most severe episodes of violence were analyzed. In order to counteract claims that the reporting data was skewed, female-only surveys were conducted, asking females to self-report, and the data was the same.[15] The simple tally of physical acts is typically found to be similar in those studies that examine both directions, but some studies show that male violence may be more serious. Male violence may do more damage than female violence;[16] women are more likely to be injured and/or hospitalized. Female partners are more likely to be killed by their male partners than the reverse (62.1% to 37.9% per Department of Justice study), and women in general are more likely to be killed by their spouses than by all other types of assailants combined.[17] From a data set of 6,200 cases of spousal abuse in the Detroit area of the US in 1978-79, a study found that men used weapons 25% of the time while female assailants used weapons 86% of the time; 74% of men sustained injury and of these 84% required medical care.[18] Other studies report that female perpetrated domestic abuse is more common than male among adolescents.[19][20]

Domestic violence against men - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Last edited:
Abused women often recount their accusations.


And abused men often do not report female domestic violence at all, or decline to prosecute it.


Determining how many instances of domestic violence actually involve male victims is difficult. Male domestic violence victims may be reluctant to get help for a number of reasons.[1] Some studies have shown that women who assaulted their male partners were more likely to avoid arrest even when the male victim contacts police.[2] Another study examined the differences in how male and female batterers were treated by the criminal justice system. The study concluded that female intimate violence perpetrators are frequently viewed by law enforcement and the criminal justice system as victims rather than the actual offenders of violence against men.[3] Other studies have also demonstrated a high degree of acceptance of aggression against men by women.[4]
 
It isn't just me; these behavior patterns are well known and there have been scientific studies done.


Many studies suggest that at least 1/3 of all domestic violence cases are initiated by the female, and that many men arrested for CDV were in fact reacting to an initiation of violence by the female, and in many cases a long-standing pattern of violence by the female. Other studies have demonstrated that domestic violence is typically mutual and women are the aggressors almost as often as men.

I guess this is where I get a little old fashioned on you G. I think men need to practice greater self control because they have such a physical advantage over women.
 
Well then brother we need to talk about the kind of women you are spending your time with.

I'm assuming that Goshin is talking about this from an LE standpoint and he's right. In 9 out of 10 of the domestics I responded to things only calmed down after the female shut her yap. I'd also say that in more than half of the disputes the female was the one who was first to act violently.
 
I'm assuming that Goshin is talking about this from an LE standpoint and he's right. In 9 out of 10 of the domestics I responded to things only calmed down after the female shut her yap. I'd also say that in more than half of the disputes the female was the one who was first to act violently.

I am one of those women who believes that men have a greater obligation to control themselves then women do. Also, men are easily aggravated by a woman who won't back down (or shut her yap) as you so eloquently put it.
 
I guess this is where I get a little old fashioned on you G. I think men need to practice greater self control because they have such a physical advantage over women.


I think all human beings need to exercise the necessary self-restraint to avoid practicing physical or emotional abuse on their spouse.


A woman hitting is just as wrong as a man hitting. It is assault and battery; it is illegal; and furthermore given the disparity of force you've mentioned it is UNWISE in the extreme... and it is unfair that many men end up in prison after RESPONDING violently after years of abuse, and how difficult it is to get the police and courts to take female-on-male violence seriously.


There's also the case that women much more frequently use weapons or blunt objects in their attacks than men, which alters the force equation substantially... especially if the man suffers from a deeply-embedded compulsion not to strike a woman under any circumstances, and can't find a good answer to responding to female domestic violence.

Most men, in fact, just suffer in silence for years, because, unlike for ladies, there is a distinct lack of societal and court support for men coming out about being the victims of female domestic violence.
 
I am not referring the to the case. I am referring to the public supporters.

Ah yes, those that presumed him to be innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Never trust those biased morons - the prosecutors, Al Sharpton and MSNBC are always right. ;)
 
I am one of those women who believes that men have a greater obligation to control themselves then women do. Also, men are easily aggravated by a woman who won't back down (or shut her yap) as you so eloquently put it.


I think men and women are equally responsible to not engage in acts of physical or emotional abuse of their spouse... don't you agree?
 
Re: George Zimmerman in Custody After Gun Incident

Its possible. Funny how this guy keeps stepping in sh1t though. Whats a guy doing running around with a gun on his hip while fighting with his wife he is divorcing? Anyone with half a brain would have it put away anytime he's going to be around her if they're getting into it every time they talk. There is also the allegation that he assaulted her father so we'll have to see what evidence there is of that.

You have to admit this doesn't look pretty. Its like what Chris Rock said about OJ, about another dead white girl showing up at his house and him saying "I know what you're thinkin'".

Of course people are going to jump on this and say its likely he's a violent psychopath. Especially those sore about him walking about from Florida.

Where does it say his piece is on his hip?
 
There's also the case that women much more frequently use weapons or blunt objects in their attacks than men, which alters the force equation substantially... especially if the man suffers from a deeply-embedded compulsion not to strike a woman under any circumstances, and can't find a good answer to responding to female domestic violence.

Most men, in fact, just suffer in silence for years, because, unlike for ladies, there is a distinct lack of societal and court support for men coming out about being the victims of female domestic violence.

I think all human beings need to exercise the necessary self-restraint to avoid practicing physical or emotional abuse on their spouse.
I don't disagree with that in theory and understand the inequity here. But men are just bigger and stronger and because of that have a greater obligation towards self control because the outcome posses greater risks. I happen to practice the ethic you endorse but on a larger scale I have to promote more self control on the mans side.

A woman hitting is just as wrong as a man hitting. It is assault and battery; it is illegal; and furthermore given the disparity of force you've mentioned it is UNWISE in the extreme... and it is unfair that many men end up in prison after RESPONDING violently after years of abuse

I don't disagree but where does personal responsibility come into play. If you are an abused man or woman and you just take it you have some culpability.

Let me just make one thing clear. Women are gonna hate me for this. But I think a lot of women are bat **** crazy. But still think that men are obligated to back down.
 
Ah yes, those that presumed him to be innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Never trust those biased morons - the prosecutors, Al Sharpton and MSNBC are always right. ;)

No, I am not endorsing blind allegiance on either side. I value being morally and ethically consistent.
 
I think men and women are equally responsible to not engage in acts of physical or emotional abuse of their spouse... don't you agree?

Yes I do. But men are stronger and you have to control your physical selves because it is easier for you to overpower and do harm.
 
I am one of those women who believes that men have a greater obligation to control themselves then women do. Also, men are easily aggravated by a woman who won't back down (or shut her yap) as you so eloquently put it.

In my experience the male was generally far more in control of himself than the female was. He may have tried to restrain her or have inadvertently touched her as he was trying to fend off blows but by the time I got there is was almost always him that was calm and rational and her that was still screaming her head off. That wasn't always the case but it was usually the case and when it wasn't it was usually quite obvious what he'd done.
 
I don't disagree with that in theory and understand the inequity here. But men are just bigger and stronger and because of that have a greater obligation towards self control because the outcome posses greater risks. I happen to practice the ethic you endorse but on a larger scale I have to promote more self control on the mans side.



I don't disagree but where does personal responsibility come into play. If you are an abused man or woman and you just take it you have some culpability.

Let me just make one thing clear. Women are gonna hate me for this. But I think a lot of women are bat **** crazy. But still think that men are obligated to back down.



Are you as adamant about personal responsibility when discussing this from the perspective of abused women? Observing your posts to this point, I would say it does not appear to be the case.

Is a man obligated to back down all the time? How about when his spouse attacks him with blunt objects capable of causing serious injury, or weapons capable of inflicting critical injury? This happens more often than most people realize, as noted in studies linked to by the article above.

Why is the man obligated to back down and the woman isn't? Initiating violence against someone you supposedly love is wrong, period, no matter who does it. So men are bigger... well women are three times as likely to use weapons or objects in their violence, I'd say that goes a long way towards evening things out.


Domestic violence is not a male problem, it is a human problem, and until we recognize that as a society and admit there are two sides to it and both genders are frequently to blame, we will fail to address it correctly.
 
Re: George Zimmerman in Custody After Gun Incident

Where does it say his piece is on his hip?

Where else would it be? She initially reported he had his hand on it while threatening her. She has since recanted I believe so it all becomes moot now.
 
Yes I do. But men are stronger and you have to control your physical selves because it is easier for you to overpower and do harm.


So if a female is flailing away at you and flinging dishes at you you should, as a self controlled male, just stand there and be a target? I've seen more than my share of guys with lumps on their head for daring to turn their back and walk out as "sweetie pie" bashed him with a telephone or a kitchen knife or, in one memorable case, a dildo.
 
I guess this is where I get a little old fashioned on you G. I think men need to practice greater self control because they have such a physical advantage over women.

That's no excuse fot a ho to go crazy. If she don't want a dude to go upside her head, she needs to behave.
 
No, I am not endorsing blind allegiance on either side. I value being morally and ethically consistent.

As am I. I am simply pointing out that in a divorce case having criminal allegations, in the form of pending charges from the state, can be a motivation for one party to make such allegations against the other. Why assume that anything illegal actually happened?
 
Yes I do. But men are stronger and you have to control your physical selves because it is easier for you to overpower and do harm.


And women need to control their physical selves, because if you anger a man to the point of rage and THEN initiate violence against him, you are invoking a self-fulfilling prophecy by doing the very things most likely to CAUSE him to become violent... and if you throw the first blow in such a circumstance, you have only yourself to blame for what follows. Don't expect a man to stand there while you spend an hour calling him every vile and hateful thing you can imagine, then proceed to slap him, spit on him, break lamps over his head and threaten to cut off his genitalia.

We don't expect a 200 lb man to take that off a 100 lb man without response.... why expect a man to take such extreme abuse, violence and assault from a women simply because she's not as muscular? We should not expect it.


But back to my original theme... nobody needs to be abusing anybody, domestically, and those who initiate such abuse are the abusers and the ones at fault.
 
I don't disagree with that in theory and understand the inequity here. But men are just bigger and stronger and because of that have a greater obligation towards self control because the outcome posses greater risks. I happen to practice the ethic you endorse but on a larger scale I have to promote more self control on the mans side.



I don't disagree but where does personal responsibility come into play. If you are an abused man or woman and you just take it you have some culpability.

Let me just make one thing clear. Women are gonna hate me for this. But I think a lot of women are bat **** crazy. But still think that men are obligated to back down.

What you are failing to comprehend is that a lot of women don't allow the man to back down. The more he backs off the more pissed off and violent they get.
 
So if a female is flailing away at you and flinging dishes at you you should, as a self controlled male, just stand there and be a target? I've seen more than my share of guys with lumps on their head for daring to turn their back and walk out as "sweetie pie" bashed him with a telephone or a kitchen knife or, in one memorable case, a dildo.


Men are more likely to understand that when an angry man turns around and walks away, it is because he is at his limit and pushing it right then is a bad idea.


It's a pity we can't seem to explain to women that after an hour of verbal/emotional abuse and a red-faced man tries to leave the house, that is NOT a good time to throw blunt objects at his noggin...
 
Re: George Zimmerman in Custody After Gun Incident

Where else would it be? She initially reported he had his hand on it while threatening her. She has since recanted I believe so it all becomes moot now.

Link?
 
Yes I do. But men are stronger and you have to control your physical selves because it is easier for you to overpower and do harm.

Yet it is easier for the woman to call the police, allege threats/acts of violence and have your unhappy man ass barred from entering the once blissful household. ;)
 
Are you as adamant about personal responsibility when discussing this from the perspective of abused women? Observing your posts to this point, I would say it does not appear to be the case.
.

I actually am yes. But my first instinct is to protect against real physical harm. The reality it that you can do more harm then me. The woman is just as responsible for controlling herself but if she loses it a man needs to be able to just leave. I had a man throw me against a wall and shove me into a shower and my response was to quietly walk to the phone and call the police. I tried to calm him down and he wouldn't have it. My only recourse was to call the police because he couldn't stop himself. He was very jealous and felt threatened when there was no need.

Is a man obligated to back down all the time? How about when his spouse attacks him with blunt objects capable of causing serious injury, or weapons capable of inflicting critical injury? This happens more often than most people realize, as noted in studies linked to by the article above.

I don't doubt this. If a man can stop her without loosing control and really hurting her he certainly has a right too. I would say using your physical strength beyond what was required to remove her as a threat. Meaning, taking her weapon.
 
Back
Top Bottom