It’s also fascinating that all those murderous stalkers that this blogger mentioned, only killed because they were sick of getting abused by….the women they were stalking. You really do have to be desperate to justify abuse against women to manage to believe that one.

In my state, California, there is data that show that police are becoming more aware over the years of the hidden and subtle abuse that women have gotten away with. Arrest rates for domestic violence (Excel) show a trend over the last 23 years with increasing arrest rates for women. In 1980, 1 percent of arrests for DV were for women; by 2004, the number was 20 percent (and it’s probably still climbing). Source (PDF).

You are correct in your statement that the existing system is ineffective at preventing or addressing domestic violence. One indicator of this is the effect of mandatory arrest laws. According to the following studies (one of which is a government study), mandatory arrest actually led to an increase in retaliatory homicides. Legislators had been noting that, mostly in the 1980s, arrests for domestic violence corresponded to a lower reoccurrence of subsequent violence. So, stupidly, they assumed that they would enact laws that made it mandatory that police must arrest when an allegation has been made, or when probable cause exists. They assumed that the success of optional arrest would be carried over if they implemented mandatory arrest. It turns out that they ended up indirectly killing members of certain demographic groups, which were affected by their misguided policy. Here are the studies:

“Exposure Reduction or Backlash? The Effects of Domestic Violence Resources on Intimate Partner Homicide”
Authors: Laura Dugan ; Daniel Nagin ; Richard Rosenfeld
Study sponsored by the US Dept of Justice, National Institute of Justice
http://www.ncjrs.gov/app/Publications/Abstract.aspx?ID=186194

“Does the Certainty of Arrest Reduce Domestic Violence? Evidence from Mandatory and Recommended Arrest laws”
Author: Radha Iyengar
National Bureau of Economic Research
http://www.nber.org/papers/w13186

As you can see, there is plenty to reform in existing polices. There is also plenty of abuse heretofore unacknowledged, namely the seriousness of domestic violence against men. Perhaps a more open attitude about this in our culture would lead to more willingness of men to report abuse they suffer by women. I personally believe that the tendency is for men to endure being hit, slapped, punched and kicked for a time, thinking that it is shameful to retaliate. Then he reaches a certain point and says, “Fuck this!” and retaliates disproportionately, causing significant injury. He then is labeled as a batterer, and must take a batterer’s program (a “$400 program” as you referred to it) which labels him as an abuser, who is supposed to accept the idea that he caused any violence that his partner committed against him. It’s not the cost of the program that is the problem; in such programs, the true problem is the complete displacement of blame and responsibility from abusive women onto men. I know; I was required to take such a program, and it was pure hell.

So, apparently, if you’re in a relationship with a man, the odds (regardless of your gender) are 1 in 3 that he will abuse you.

Let’s be very blunt. The average woman is 5′4″, and weighs 130. The average man is 5′9″ and weighs about 170. He has 30% more upper body strength. Add in the psychological warfare that usually goes with the abuse: cutting her off from friends and family, destroying self-esteem and convincing her she’s worthless (essentially externalizing all the messages she’s internalized), and you have a man with all the advantages and a woman who thinks she deserves what she gets.

So don’t give me “oh the menz are sooooo victimized,” guys. The basic picture is absolutely against you.