Share this:
According to those who work in the area of men’s health, the current approach to domestic violence ignores the one in three victims of family violence who are male. While not wanting to undermine the decades of effort that have gone into establishing services for female victims of domestic violence, they want the government to do more to raise awareness about the plight of male victims, many of whom find they have nowhere to turn when a female partner becomes violent or abusive.
Gary’s ex-wife had punched him in the face with a closed fist on several occasions. But it wasn’t until she punched the couple’s 16 month old daughter while he was holding her, that the father of two decided enough was enough. “She walked over and punched my baby daughter in the middle of the back, sending us both flying. It was a terrific blow. I fled the house with my daughter and looked for somewhere to stay, but all my friends were at work or on holidays. So I phoned an emergency refuge who literally laughed at my request for help and proceeded to tell me that the service was only for women,” Gary told the One in Three campaign website.
“I tried another shelter without success. I had no money left and couldn’t afford accommodation. So I spent the night sleeping under a derelict building without blankets and I held my daughter close to keep her warm. She cried for most of the night because she was afraid and hungry. I could only give her water from a nearby tap. My daughter was traumatised and so was I (and we both still are). The next morning we returned home because we had no alternative. I later asked my wife why she punched our daughter and her answer was literally ‘because I knew that would upset you more than if I had hit you’ and she apologised profusely.”
Gary added, “At the moment she hit our daughter I knew instantly that the marriage must finish. I now have sole care of my two beautiful children after a court found her unfit to be a parent for a number of reasons. Violence against men and their children is real.”
While men are even less likely than women to report domestic violence to the police, the One in Three campaign website has published more than 60 stories from men like Gary, who have experienced some form of violence or abuse by a female partner.
Co-founder of the One in Three campaign, Greg Andresen, says one in three victims of family violence are men. However, the ‘one in three’ statistic is a little misleading, as this statistic includes incidences of violence perpetrated by other men, as well as members of the extended family.
“We need to draw a distinction between family violence and domestic violence. It’s a subtle distinction but it’s an important one, especially for us because our campaign is around family violence, not just domestic violence,” Mr Andresen told Australian Women Online.
“So when we talk about one in three men, we are talking about men who are victims of violence by their female partner. But we’re also talking about gay men who are victims of family violence by their male partners and the often forgotten men and boys who are victims of broader family violence – abuse by their parents, by other siblings and other family members.”
What first brought the One in Three campaign to our attention, was a media release dated 5th March 2010, wherein Greg Andresen criticised the latest round of funding for the federal government’s Respectful Relationships program, labeling it as ‘boy-bashing’:
Respectful relationships education is an essential part of the school curriculum. However, conflating ‘respectful relationships’ and ‘violence against women’ implies that disrespect in relationships only leads to males abusing females. Why is the government ignoring the 50 per cent of relationships in which girls physically and psychologically abuse their boyfriends? We are concerned that these ‘respectful relationships’ programs are really just boy-bashing exercises in disguise.
When asked by Australian Women Online to explain what he meant by “boy-bashing”, Greg Andresen said: “When you see TV ads like Violence Against Women, Australia says No and all you see are these images of violent male brutes and not a single image of a woman being violent, it does paint a picture of domestic violence as men beating up women. Every government campaign seems to have the same imagery and maybe it’s governments we need to be targeting, more than women in general.”
So we asked the federal minister responsible for the ‘Respectful Relationships’ program, the Minister for the Status of Women, Tanya Plibersek, to comment on this issue.
Ms Plibersek told Australian Women Online, “There’s a very good men’s line service that men can call for advice on issues like abusive relationships or relationship breakdown and I think it’s very important to have that service. It’s certainly not the case that there isn’t support available for men who are victims of violence.”
“The statistics show that while there are some men who are victims of domestic violence, the vast majority of violence experienced by men is from other men and it’s usually in situations outside the home and it’s absolutely important to tackle that sort of violence. But it’s important to acknowledge that women are most likely to be attacked by someone they know and usually in their own home. It’s important to have responses for all the different types of violence that we experience in our community, but to be realistic – and the fact is that the characteristics of that violence are generally different for men and for women,” she said.
University of Western Sydney researcher Micheal Woods, says family violence is not a gender issue, it’s a public health issue.
“By appearing to focus on gender as the cause of relationship violence and abuse, these programs ignore the internationally accepted evidence that other causes play a much larger part. The social determinants that can lead to abusive relationships include social disadvantage, drug and alcohol abuse, mental health issues, and inadequate conflict management and affect regulation skills,” said Mr Woods.
“The approach behind the [Respectful Relationships] campaign is at odds with the Prime Minister’s preference for evidence-based policies. This roll-out of funding appears to support biased gender ideology, not social good. The denigration of boys as belonging to a “violent” gender and the implicit approval for violence by girls against boys, undermines the intent of reducing violence in relationships.”
As an advocate for male victims of relationship violence and abuse, Melbourne psychologist, Dr Elizabeth Celi, has found herself in the firing line of women’s groups who have devoted a lot time and energy into raising awareness of violence against women.
Dr Celi told Australian Women Online, “People seem to have a perception that it’s us versus them and if we’re talking about male victims, then it must mean that we’re disregarding female victims and that’s simply untrue. It’s simply untrue that by attending to male victims we are undermining the message of the prevalence or the severity of violence against women.”
“What was a silent phenomenon for women in the 50s and 60s is now where male victims of domestic abuse and domestic violence are at today. So after having several decades, and rightly so, of awareness raising, public education, public campaigning and service development for female victims, for various reasons that kind of energy and effort just hasn’t been put into creating awareness and services for male victims.”
“Males are becoming victims of various forms of domestic violence and verbal and emotional abuse, which is just as battering toward the male psyche and results in them needing the same type of attention that a female victim would.”
With campaigns such as UNIFEM’s Say NO to Violence Against Women placing gender based violence on the international agenda, advocates for men’s health are facing an uphill battle trying to convince the federal government here in Australia, to fund programs for the male victims of family violence.
But there is a new hope on the horizon. On 26th May 2010 Edith Cowan University in WA released it’s Intimate Partner Abuse of Men report. The report recommends that government fund public awareness campaigns to raise awareness of intimate partner violence against men and that consideration be given to providing publically-funded services for male victims of intimate partner violence and abuse.
Back in March of this year, we did approach UNIFEM Australia for a comment on the One in Three campaign. But to date, we have received no response.
The story of “Gary” is the same story of many women. The way he experienced the violence from his ex-wife is described no different than by the thousands of women who tell the same story of their ex-husbands. No friends, no family and nowhere to go, the only alternative being to return. Although “Gary” perceives he was laughed at, the same end result occurs for many women who are simply turned away for lack of resources. It sounds like “Gary” managed to work his way through the harrowing minefield that presents itself to countless victims of domestic violence, but for a short while, “Gary” truly did walk in a woman’s shoe.
Services are available for men. Men are allowed Centrelinks crisis payment as much as women are. There have been shelters established for men from time to time, but they have all shut their doors due to lack of participation of victims.
Hence, the following quote, needs to be challenged:
“Males are becoming victims of various forms of domestic violence and verbal and emotional abuse, which is just as battering toward the male psyche and results in them needing the same type of attention that a female victim would.”
In the past, this has proven to not be correct. Most men, when faced with violence by their female partners tend to find it rather funny. Men have maintained mateship networks and usually do have mates to go and stay at, if “the nagging gets too much.” Evidence also shows that when men leave an abusive and violent partner, the violence and abuse stops. This is not the case for women, when after having left, they are subjected to ongoing stalking, threats, intimidating behaviour, an escalation in violence, and for a certain number, they are murdered.
Unfortunately, it is true that for those men who are truly victimised by their female partner, their numbers are so low that they are marginalised by Govt policy and society’s attitudes.
Overall, the headline for this article is simply a mis-statement. There are services for men.
I work in a women’s shelter, and if I were to take a call from “Gary” he would be given the same advice, help and compassion that is extended to all callers needing help from the service. I recognise “Gary’s” story as being no different (in the initial stages at least) from the thousands of women callers that the service takes each year.
While Dr Celi says that by focussing on men being victims there is no intention of undermining of violence against women, clearly has not been analysing (or understood) the discourse that comes from Father’s Rights and Men’s Rights Agency groups. They clearly minimise, justify and deny the violence that is perpetrated by men against women. Their agenda is, without doubt, to dismantle services for women, to declare them “unfair”, “corrupt”, and “discriminatory” amongst others. FR’s and MRA’s fail to recognise the violence perpetrated by men. She blames women’s groups for making it a “them and us” type scenario. No feminists that I know of have this view neither do any of the DV workers I know of. MRA’s however, do.
In a nutshell, the upshot is really that it’s men’s overall violence that needs to be addressed very seriously. The issues are men’s violence against women AND men. Once our statisticians start to produce numbers that prove that men really are the lesser perpetrators of violence within our society, then we can, as a society, really start to condemn the violence used by women.
In the meantime, the level of services in the community reflect “demand”. If men are entering what has historically been the sphere of female victim, then services for men will also grow with demand. There is nothing stopping the men from creating their own services, that’s exactly the way it occurred for women with the first established refuge in Glebe in 1974.
now that I’ve clicked on the link to the report and read the Executive Summary. I rest my case. 15 men. (n=15). It also recognises that a number of victims were also perpetrators.
The abuses listed, are simply a repetition of the abuses dished out against countless women.
I liked the “administrative-legal” abuse recognition. It’s about time this was brought up. The amount of mothers that have experienced this, especially since the 50/50 shared care arrangments were introduced is now coming into the hundreds, if not thousands.
Muriel is quite right. Partner violence and its impact is not much different for men and women. So it’s no surprise that Gary’s story should sound like the story of too many thousands of women. They’re not saying that what they’re experiencing is unique to my knowlege, they’re just saying that they are suffering too and want some support. Men suffer from being abused by their partners, just as women do. Though studies vary, not surprisingly, there is a difference in frequency of partner abuse and, to a lesser extent, severity, but men still suffer, as do their children. The men I have worked with who were abused by their partners, if they ever found it amusing, soon enough became anxious, depressed, fearful, disempowered, controlled, trapped, isolated – just like women. And both partners are capable of using the Police, the judicial system and the Family Court as tools for expressing their anger and their hurt.
Studies do show that more men do physically abuse their partners than women in heterosexual relationships. However, a woman with a weapon is just as dangerous as a man with a weapon. The fact that men are physically abused by their partners less often than women in heterosexual relationships does not mean we should ignore male victimisation. [If I had a rare form of cancer, I would not like to think that it was going to be ignored because it was less prevalent than some more prevalent form of cancer, or because of my gender.] Furthermore, the children of relationships in which the abuser is their mother suffer just as much as the children of fathers or stepfathers who abuse their mothers.
Self-report studies by women who use violence in relationships also show that self-defence or retaliation after provocation are not the primary reasons for the violence. They are violent for much the same reasons as men. And just as men who abuse their partners should seek help for their behaviour, so should women. This isn’t about attacking women for their violence, any more than it should be about attacking men for their violence. To acknowledge women as perpetrators is not to ignore them as victims. It should be about doing whatever will achieve a safe society in general, and safe families for our children in particular.
Unfortunately, the simple truth is that there are very few services for men experiencing partner violence. The single funded men’s help line that Tanya Plibersek refers to still has a strong gender-based position with regard to partner violence, although they have recently acknowledged that men may be victims too. Unfortunately for men in this position, you have to be a detective to find information about this on the men’s line web site. Such men services as there are are generalist services, and don’t necessarily have specific knowledge with regard to partner violence. And given that the plight of abused men is still not universally acknowledged, it could be some time before they are able to respond appropriately.
If there is a shelter which takes both male and female victims then that is good news indeed. Perhaps the shelter could circulate this information as widely as possible so that men in need could contact it if it’s in their area.
Unfortunately in my experience the us or them attitude is only too prevalent amongst domestic violence workers. It is often stated by workers in the area of partner violence that if male victims get funding, then it will reduce funding available for women victims. They forget about the children completely. It would be better to join forces and campaign for more money for victims of partner violence regardless of sex, but there is no way that our State or Federal Offices for Women will countenance this. Obviously their charter makes it clear that their brief is violence against women only – the name speaks for itself. By extension, they are relegating children of mothers who abuse their partners to second class citizen status. Regardless of the position or enlightened attitude of individual workers, government funding flows according to the influence of the various Offices for Women. Every year efforts by men’s groups to get funding for various support activities are just ignored by governments. They would do more if they could.
MRA is certainly very vocal on behalf of men, some may say even strident, but I’m not aware of them trying to dismantle services for women. I really don’t think they have that much clout, even if they wanted to. They are just trying to get a fair hearing for some men who need it.
With regard to the Edith Cowan study, it was a qualitative survey, which will often have a very small sample size, which does not invalidate the results of qualitative research. Many studies of women victims have been qualitative also. It is a preferred way of doing research for feminists, after all. We don’t dismiss those studies out of hand because of their small number. Qualitative research is not about numbers and proportions and shouldn’t be used this way.
It’s about discovering what attitudes exist. And just as some male victims are also perpetrators, the same is true for women victims. Anything up to about 2/3 of relationships where there is violence are mutually violent with both partners being victim and perpetrator.
The real upshot is that any and all violence needs to be taken seriously. All people, and children in particular, should be able to live in safety, without fear, especially fear of parents.
Toni McLean
Counsellor
Mittagong NSW
I applaud the one in three campaign and the need to shift from the single issue of Domestic violence against women to Intimate Partner abuse. I’m not surprised by some of the comments being made they are very much in line with what women have experienced themselves, minimizing the impact of abuse on the victims. The reality is that services are all but non existent for men and whist its great that a few women on the end of the phone may offer some support rather than turn men away this as with Gary has not been my experience.
Intimate Partner Abuse is not about us and them, Toni McLean gets it right on so many levels what its like for women is for men the same.
Thousands and thousands of men don’t come forward because of being minimized shamed and not heard, services, adverting and the permission men need to feel are non existent.
I would ask this of those who feel so confronted by what some see as an attack against DV of women, What would you say to your sons who experience DV your brothers, Nephews, Uncles, friends where should they go when no services exist how would their needs of acknowledgment and validation be met,where are the safe places for men and children. What would you want for them?
Advertising has missed the boat in at least one area that some will see as too confronting and that the recognition of acts of violence against men has in many cases led to acts of violence against women, neither is condonable and i would have thought that if governments and lobbyist groups wanted to reduce stamp out DV then future funding adverting and discussion would need to be inclusive not exclusive thereby raising education,increasing services, giving hope/ permission and safety to all.
Wayne.
Thank-you for writing this article. It was a pleasant surprise for me to read this on Australian Women Online. I have worked in psychiatry for over 15 yeas and have always been concerned that males who are in family abusive relationships are not believed or even ridiculed when they disclose. When they seek help, the specialists services are not available to them and of more concern, they accept the violence because they think it is normal.
This is a courageous article, one that expresses humanity for all victims of domestic violence.
This is such vital work. The 1 in 3 campaign is what I see as a beginning of the road to equality. And not before time!
It saddens me greatly that there are so many women out there whose opinion is voiced by Muriel. There seems to be a general perception that men can only regain their true clean power in this area at the expense of women.
All of the men I know don’t want to take anything away from women. We don’t want to go back to the patriarchal days of the ’50’s. What we want is genuine equality. The assertion we hear from a lot of women’s groups is that “my pain is greater than your pain”. What a crock! What ego driven garbage.
The facts are emerging that there are many men, potentially as many men as women, who are on the receiving end of some sort of abuse. I know I was, and in some ways still am. Even after 7 1/2 years of separation/divorce and 50/50 care of our 3 kids, the abuse continues to be directed at me in a number of different, very subtle forms. Sad.
And no Anne, abuse of Men is not rare. The reality is that for years there have been perceptions in society about what abuse is, and who should or can suffer it. There is still a significant amount of shame associated with a man admitting being abused in any way. In some way in the eyes of society and himself, he is less of a man for having been abused. This Anne, is why people like you have not heard of it. Men keep it to themselves, and when they can no longer do that, some become violent, others drink and some others suicide. They do this because the support services and networks are simply not there for them.
I like the way Wayne puts it. Ask yourselves what you would want for your Son/Brother/Uncle/Nephew/Father/Cousin/Friend should they find themselves in this situation.
I know that if it was my Daughter, or one of my Sons who found themselves in this scenario, I would want any of them to receive the assistance they needed, irrespective of their gender.
Allan
I find it very strange …
If someone hits me and most guys i know they hit them back especially if they hit a child… Now woman are masters of verbal abuse and it can take a lot of restraint not to lash out (as that is our nature ) but physical ???
Do men now need to rely on the Nanny state to defend themselves vs woman physically ( Allan for non physical harassment i think you can make a strong case ) ? Police are so overburdened they don’t even bother investigating theft and more serious crimes anymore .
Where are we going as a society?
Maybe if their parents hit them back after they hit their parents they will learn there are major consequences for hitting people and not just meaningless “time out”.
Isnt it interesting how discussion of an issue is lost…
Anne,The relevance of sales at David Jones and Ben the inference of hitting any one back has no bearing on the discussion of no support for Male Victims of domestic Abuse.
This need not be us and them unless you want it to be.
To both i invite consideration to whats important that Domestic Violence is not exclusive to gender that the imact to Men, Women, Children and society far outways misguided competitive gender inequality.
Wayne.