This article is subject to discretionary sanctions; any editor who repeatedly or egregiously fails to adhere to applicable policies may be blocked, topic-banned, or otherwise restricted. Note also that editors on this article are subject to a limit of one revert per 24 hours (with exceptions for vandalism or BLP violations). Violation may result in blocks without further warning. Enforcement should be requested at WP:AE.
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.
Domestic violence is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Feminism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Feminism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBT-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject South Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of South Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
I read an abstract once of a study saying women with higher education married to men with lower education than them had higher risk of being abused. Does anyone happen to have the citation of this? (I know the reverse seems to be the case in Bangladesh, so presumably there's some confounding factor here.)
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Kiwibird (talk • contribs) 08:03, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
Ah, now I found it. Martin (2007)
, cites Johnson (2003) as saying that "women with higher education were at greater risk of being physically and sexually assaulted by their partners", although other studies have also shown that unemployed women are at higher risk of marital rape, not sure how to interpret all this. (Martin 2007 seems to be a very good review.)
Following is Musicwaves' proposal from above. The table shows the current second paragraph of the lead and the proposed new text.
Globally, the victims of domestic violence are overwhelmingly women, and women tend to experience more severe forms of violence. They are also likelier than men to use intimate partner violence in self-defense. In some countries, domestic violence is often seen as justified, particularly in cases of actual or suspected infidelity on the part of the woman, and is legally permitted. Research has established that there exists a direct and significant correlation between a country's level of gender equality and rates of domestic violence, where countries with less gender equality experience higher rates of domestic violence. Domestic violence is among the most underreported crimes worldwide for both men and women. Due to social stigmas regarding male victimization, men who are victims of domestic violence face an increased likelihood of being overlooked by healthcare providers.
Despite many hundreds of studies, debate continues on whether women are much more likely than men, to be victims of domestic violence or whether domestic violence is closer to gender symmetrical. However, women tend to experience more severe forms of violence than men. Women are also likelier than men to use intimate partner violence in self-defence. In some countries, domestic violence by men is often seen as justified, particularly in cases of actual or suspected infidelity on the part of the woman, and is legally permitted. Research has established that there exists a direct and significant correlation between a country's level of gender equality and rates of domestic violence, where countries with less gender equality experience higher rates of domestic violence. Domestic violence is among the most underreported crimes worldwide for both men and women. Due to social stigmas regarding male victimization, men who are victims of domestic violence face an increased likelihood of being overlooked by healthcare providers.
^ abMcQuigg, Ronagh J.A. (2011), "Potential problems for the effectiveness of international human rights law as regards domestic violence", in McQuigg, Ronagh J.A. (ed.), International human rights law and domestic violence: the effectiveness of international human rights law, Oxford New York: Taylor & Francis, p. 13, ISBN9781136742088, archived from the original on 2016-05-15, This is an issue that affects vast numbers of women throughout all nations of the world. [...] Although there are cases in which men are the victims of domestic violence, nevertheless 'the available research suggests that domestic violence is overwhelmingly directed by men against women [...] In addition, violence used by men against female partners tends to be much more severe than that used by women against men. Mullender and Morley state that 'Domestic violence against women is the most common form of family violence worldwide.'Cite uses deprecated parameter |deadurl= (help)
^ abGarcía-Moreno, Claudia; Stöckl, Heidi (2013), "Protection of sexual and reproductive health rights: addressing violence against women", in Grodin, Michael A.; Tarantola, Daniel; Annas, George J.; et al. (eds.), Health and human rights in a changing world, Routledge, pp. 780–781, ISBN9781136688638, archived from the original on 2016-05-06, Intimate male partners are most often the main perpetrators of violence against women, a form of violence known as intimate partner violence, 'domestic' violence or 'spousal (or wife) abuse.' Intimate partner violence and sexual violence, whether by partners, acquaintances or strangers, are common worldwide and disproportionately affect women, although are not exclusive to them.Cite uses deprecated parameter |deadurl= (help)
^ abLupri, Eugene; Grandin, Elaine (2004), "Consequences of male abuse – direct and indirect", in Lupri, Eugene; Grandin, Elaine (eds.), Intimate partner abuse against men(PDF), Ottawa: National Clearinghouse on Family Violence, p. 6, ISBN9780662379751, archived from the original(PDF) on January 4, 2009, retrieved June 21, 2014
Per WP:LEAD such a change is not satisfactory since the lead has to be a summary of what is in the article. However, that is a technical issue. I have not yet looked at the new csulb.edu reference which appears to be a Microsoft document—is it published somewhere other than as a personal opinion? Johnuniq (talk) 02:05, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
No to the proposal, per the most recent RfC and per what I've argued you on in the #Redirecting critics of the gender balance of this article. section above. And a few suspicious accounts cannot overturn that RfC consensus. We are not going to remove "globally, the victims of domestic violence are overwhelmingly women" from the lead. We are not going to add the WP:Undue gender symmetry material to the lead, especially without the minor partner violence context. You propose adding something about much debate regarding whether or not women "in uni-directional domestic violence are much more likely than men to be victims." Um, no, the literature (and I do mean the vast majority of it and the high-quality end of it) is very clear that women are much more likely to be victims (and that includes those first two sources for the version on the left). And this is even more so the case when it comes to one-way violence. We are not going to add WP:Synthesis like "this bi-directional or uni-directional violence between partners can also occur in same sex relationships." I'm not going to keep pointing you to that RfC, where I listed quality and high-quality sources. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 21:43, 19 April 2019 (UTC) Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 22:36, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
And you can keep debating (yes, you are debating) this as much as you want to, but Wikipedia has rules. And using quality and high-quality sources on a topic like this and following the literature with WP:Due weight (which means giving most of our weight to the majority view or majority aspect) are a couple of the rules. The annotated bibliography you pointed to does not come close to trumping the sources I pointed to in the RfC or challenging the due weight that states that "globally, the victims of domestic violence are overwhelmingly women," "Although there are cases in which men are the victims of domestic violence, nevertheless 'the available research suggests that domestic violence is overwhelmingly directed by men against women [...]" and "Intimate male partners are most often the main perpetrators of violence against women, a form of violence known as intimate partner violence [...] Intimate partner violence and sexual violence, whether by partners, acquaintances or strangers, are common worldwide and disproportionately affect women, although are not exclusive to them." Don't expect me to keep discussing/debating this with you. I will ignore you. And if you become a problem, I will report you. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 22:36, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
Hello Flyer, Thanks for your input. I had hoped that you may have had a look at Fiebert's annotation and re-thought your views regarding the balance of perpetrators in Domestic Violence. I note that you have said that in minor domestic violence there is gender symmetry but in more violent cases, women suffer most. I cannot disagree with that. The point which I make is that domestic violence appears to be intergenerational and if children witness DV from their parents, the "learned behaviour" carries on througn generations. As such, Wikipedia has a duty to reflect this in its neutral description of Domestic Violence. I would ask you to look at Fiebert's wide ranging annotation of many studies and find a way to reflect this in the Wikipedia article. Musicwaves (talk) 23:07, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
"Appeal to neutrality," you say? You either still do not know how WP:Neutrality works or you are ignoring how it works. How many more times must I tell you that WP:Due weight, which is what WP:Neutrality is about, means giving most of our weight to the majority view or majority aspect? How many times must I note to you that the gender symmetry view is the significant minority view and that "material based on Archer's research and similar is flawed because those rates are usually based on the United States and often on college samples. Those samples are flawed in part because sources on IPV most commonly find situational couple violence being committed nearly equally by both genders when it comes to younger couples, such as college students. But even in those 'younger couple' cases, the IPV is gender asymmetrical for a number of reasons"? I've been clear about why gender symmetry is disputed. Like this 2014 "Domestic Abuse, Homicide and Gender: Strategies for Policy and Practice" source, from Springer, starting on page 30, which I pointed to in the aforementioned RfC, states, "What we know is that female and male use of violence and abuse is different, cannot be easily compared, and has different repercussions and outcomes. The biggest problem, universally acknowledged and evidenced based, is that women are the group who are most often the victims of serious, long term, life challenging domestic abuse (Hester 2013a, Stark 2013, 2007, Websdale 1999). [...] When we look at the problem nationally, internationally and globally it is overwhelmingly women who are the predominant group suffering homicide, violence, and life altering control. Even if it were the case, which it is not, that men were suffering equal seriousness of abuse at the hands of women, and dying in similar numbers, it would not reduce the problem of violence against women. It would still be the problem it currently is. [...] It is also our experience that the arguments which assert that women are the predominant victims are often automatically labelled as coming from a particular feminist perspective. [...] Feminist arguments are often considered biased, political and anti-men, which is, of course, inaccurate. This has an effect of reducing the status of the argument. [...] There is simply no global epidemic of female violence against men. [...] arguments which seek to undermine the fact that women are predominantly the victims."
It is not just a matter of "there is gender symmetry in minor partner violence, but in more violent cases, women suffer most." It's the case that gender symmetry is disputed in all forms. Even in the case of minor partner violence, it's disputed because of the "many or most girls and women are hitting in self-defense, for other self-protection, or out of fear" aspect of the research and because it's only that some research has found "gender symmetry." It is not as consistent a finding as "domestic violence/IPV is overwhelmingly directed by men against women." And I reiterate that this finding is a global finding. Stop trying to combat the global finding with research that mainly pertains to the United States or one or more other countries. And, again, "gender symmetry" is found significantly more among adolescents and young adults than among older adults.
I'm tired of repeating myself. Just like with the other section, I'm not responding to you again in this section. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 00:21, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
Hello Flyer, The first point that I would make is that Fiebert has annotated bibliographies of 343 scholarly investigations involving almost half a million subjects - they were not all from the US and not all of college students and not all Archer or Strauss - such a huge study simply cannot be overlooked. And coincidentally, just a few days ago, on 15 April 2019 in the journal, Partner Abuse, Authors Alexandra Lysova (SFU), Donald Dutton (UBC) and Emeka Dim (University of Saskatchewan) report conclusions, based on the 2014 Canadian General Social Survey,that states
Both male and female victims reported severe forms of domestic violence at alarming rates.
Gender was not a factor in whether an individual suffered long-term mental health effects of domestic violence, including experiencing PTSD-related symptoms.
The victim’s gender profile was only a relevant factor at the most extreme end of physical violence.
The title is - “Prevalence and Consequences of Intimate Partner Violence in Canada as Measured by the National Victimization Survey: Focus on Male Victims” 
The points which I have made 'Despite many hundreds of studies, debate continues on whether women, in uni-directional domestic violence, are much more likely, than men, to be victims or whether domestic violence is closer to gender symmetrical.' I do not state it as a fact that there in gender symmetry, merely that there are many studies which state that there is symmetry and that this issue continues to be debated. I do accept that women suffer more extreme violence, so the issue regarding minor violence is actually covered. The bi-directional issue is perhaps a separate issue from uni-directional DV, but it should be mentioned in the WP:Lead due to its importance, however, I would not get hung up about that specific issue. I have to disagree with you on 'the available research suggests that domestic violence is overwhelmingly directed by men against women' - there is simply too much research indicating symmetry - although I am NOT saying that there is symmetry, I am saying that differing studies are inexplicably stating widely varying results and that it is a matter of debate - and I don't speak about just one study or one geographical area etc., I mean many respected studies. Nor am I disagreeing with your point that women are the recipients of serious domestic violence. However, you mention deaths at the hands of intimate parters and for example in the UK between 2010 and 2015, there were an average of 86.4 women pa killed by their partners but also an average of 19.6 men pa killed by their partners, so again, it is simply wrong to use the term 'overwhelming', especially since death is at the extreme end of domestic violence and I have already stated that women suffer more at the extreme end. Musicwaves (talk) 19:14, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
I have changed the wording of the proposed second paragraph to remove references to bi-directional & uni-directional domestic violence, but have retained the thrust of the main change, which is, that despite many studies into domestic violence, there is disagreement between scholars about the proportion of perpretator/victim genders. I reiterate that the studies advocating symmetry are substantial & this should be reflected in the WP:LEAD. Having read the Domestic violence article again thoroughly, the case for gender approaching symmetry is already made further down in the article. I am perfectly open to other wording as long as the debate between differing studies is acknowledged Musicwaves (talk) 13:16, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
Musicwaves, per the RfC and what I stated above, do not make this edit (where you even removed "women tend to experience more severe forms of violence") or anything like it again. You cannot force your faulty version in the lead simply because I and others stopped engaging with you. I stopped engaging with you for valid reasons -- WP:IDIDN'THEARTHAT reasons. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 22:39, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
Hello Flyer, Do you think there is a possibility of you and I agreeing on some words which reflect the debate on the gender division of perpetrators?--Musicwaves (talk) 09:18, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
No, and I've already been over why. What aren't you understanding about the RfC consensus? That RfC consensus also concerns the lead. We state "Globally, the victims of domestic violence are overwhelmingly women, and women tend to experience more severe forms of violence." in the lead because it should be there and is WP:Due weight. What you added, especially in the way that you added it and based on your reading of the annotated bibliography, does not belong there. Your view that women are not the overwhelming majority of domestic violence victims does not trump the literature being explicitly clear that they are. Your annotated bibliography does not trump that. I am not going to start another RfC on the due weight pertaining to the lead and article as a whole being clear that women are the overwhelming majority of domestic violence victims. Your WP:IDIDN'THEARTHAT behavior is disruptive and worth reporting at WP:ANI if it continues. Per WP:IDIDN'THEARTHAT (read it), move on. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 10:05, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
The text "In some countries, domestic violence by men is often seen as justified, particularly in cases of actual or suspected infidelity on the part of the woman, and is legally permitted." Do you have any references for that? I do recall seeing an article somewhere that women in the USA are more likely than men to consider it OK to use (mild?) DV but even that would not support "some countries..." Varybit (talk) 11:18, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
The RfC already settled this question and debating it over again does not seem to be a productive use of our time. El_C 10:12, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
Yes. To quote El_C from above: "The RfC already settled this question and debating it over again does not seem to be a productive use of our time." I don't see an article for Martin Fiebert and something more significant would be required to overturn reliable sources. A gf once threw an ornament at a wall (she was angry at her brother, not me!). That would count as "intimate partner violence" as I was in the room, but counting such events misses the point of what domestic violence is actually about. The Fiebert study is silent on what is counted, and how much injury was caused. Johnuniq (talk) 09:52, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
Agreed. We can't be having the same debate every year. Some long lasting resolution is to be expected. El_C 10:37, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
Yes, and close this The closer of the last RfC noted that the consensus on this point was "overwhelming." Nothing has changed and there's no reason to revisit this now. Fyddlestix (talk) 12:19, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
Yes and close. Fiebert's sources do not demonstrate that women are as physically agressive as men. As has been discussed before, most of Fiebert's sources are studies of U.S. college dating couples (since that's what researchers at U.S. colleges can most easily study). They do not represent sufficiently broad world-wide demographic samples to make such sweeping conclusions from. For that we have to rely on organizations that actual study domestic violence worldwide, such as the World Health Organization and UN. Kaldari (talk) 13:45, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
Agree with closing this We have better sources that come to other conclusions. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 18:15, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
Yes, and agree with the people above about closing this. The argument here seems like WP:SYNTH - the question of whether women are as aggressive as men and the question of whether women are overwhelmingly likely to be the victims of domestic violence aren't connected in a way that let us, ourselves, make clear conclusions (ie. there are plenty of reasons women might be aggressive but still be overwhelmingly more likely to be the victims.) To dispute the current conclusion, which seems well-sourced, we'd need other sources contesting it directly, not inference and speculation using tangential statistics. --Aquillion (talk) 02:28, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
Yes, and close this. This source doesn't address the statement, while others that do support the language. Also, this RFC was unnecessary and out of process. StudiesWorld (talk) 09:59, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
No. The use of imprecise terminology is rarely helpful. When the largest available secondary source is clear that women are at least as agressive as men, saying the opposite becomes not only imprecise but inaccurate. Some sources disagree with the almost half-million-case collation and there's no harm saying that there are some sources that disagree. Varybit (talk) 17:39, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
Yes, agree with closing. Ian Furst (talk) 13:21, 27 June 2019 (UTC)
Close this RfC agree w/ Flyer22--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 18:44, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
Continue the debate - I understand this has been discussed in the past. That discussion seems to have missed obvious considerations, that domestic violence includes a wide variety of behaviours "physical, verbal, emotional, economic, religious, reproductive, and sexual abuse" and includes violence directed at not just spouses but also other family members (ie children and elderly parents). In that light, the statement that victims are "overwhelmingly women" seems problematic. It also seems to gloss over the LGBTQ experience mentioned elsewhere. I do not love that characterization in the lede. It could certainly be argued it gives WP:Undue to sources and perspectives about female victims, and glosses over male children, elderly parents, male heterosexual spouses, gay spouses, and trans-people. I agree the fact that this has been discussed in a RfC before militates towards a quick closure. At the same time, we need to reconsider our position every so often. This might be that time.--Darryl Kerrigan (talk) 01:35, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
Darryl Kerrigan, we can only go by what the literature states with WP:Due weight. The World Health Organization (WHO) and similar are not stating what they state due to glossing over things. The literature has looked at domestic violence against women, children and the elderly, and that includes physical, verbal and emotional abuse, and it still states that women are overwhelmingly the victims of domestic violence worldwide/on a global scale. "Sexual abuse" often falls under "physical abuse," and "reproductive abuse" falls under "sexual abuse." Economic abuse isn't focused on as much as the others I just listed, and it's about one intimate partner having control over the other partner's access to economic resources; it's not about controlling children. Not directly anyway. "Religion" concerns a religious influence on domestic violence. The reason the previous RfC didn't focus on all of what you brought up is because it wasn't about that. Neither is this RfC. Now, by "women are overwhelmingly the victims of domestic violence worldwide/on a global scale," one can assume that the literature means intimate partner violence and is not considering domestic violence in a broad way, but the literature so often uses these two terms (intimate partner violence and domestic violence) interchangeably. As for same-sex couples? Like this 2010 "Encyclopedia of Victimology and Crime Prevention, Volume 1" source that is used in the Domestic violence article, from Sage Publications, page 312, states, "For several methodological reasons – nonrandom sampling procedures and self-selection factors, among others – it is not possible to assess the extent of same-sex domestic violence. Studies on abuse between gay male or lesbian partners usually rely on small convenience samples such as lesbian or gay male members of an association." Yes, one can say that the literature hasn't paid as much attention to same-sex couples, but there are more heterosexual couples in the world than same-sex couples, and domestic violence reporting mostly concerns them. All we can do is follow the literature with due weight. It is not our place to question it. It is the time to discuss otherwise when the literature dictates that it is. I see no valid reason to continue to discuss what this RfC questions. Also, although the "Same-sex relationships" section in the Domestic violence article currently includes some primary source study material, that should be removed per WP:MEDRS. If you reply to me on any of this, I prefer not be pinged since this article is on my watchlist. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 12:35, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
Thanks Flyer. It is a problem if the article lede says "women are overwhelmingly the victims of domestic violence worldwide/on a global scale", but we mean "women are overwhelmingly the victims of intimate partner violence". We are using the broader definition here, so we can't be moving back and forth between them. Agreed, we cannot go beyond what the sources say. The article seems to clearly say there are issues of reporting (and that non-reporting may disproportionately affect men, children, LGBTQ etc due to stigma, and in the case of LGBTQ persons a lack of legal protections). The sources say that too. In those circumstances, it may be better for us to say "The World Health Organization (WHO) says women are overwhelmingly the victims" (assuming they do). Rather than saying it in our own voice as the truth. I think that does perhaps deserve some discussion. The claim that women are "overwhelmingly" the victims is quite a bold and sweeping statement in our voice, and I don't think there is any way to read that that doesn't suggest the opposite (ie that male victims are few, whether LGBTQ, children, elderly, or heterosexual male partners). I am not convinced either way at this point, but I am not sure these issues have been properly explored.--Darryl Kerrigan (talk) 18:58, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
Darryl Kerrigan, like we both agree on, we can only go by what the literature states with due weight. The literature states both -- that women are overwhelmingly the victims of domestic violence worldwide/on a global scale, and that women are overwhelmingly the victims of intimate partner violence worldwide/on a global scale. It is not up to us to try to figure out if they mean domestic violence in a strict sense when stating "domestic violence." I only brought it up because you were questioning the literature and how we present the information in the lead, and I know that intimate partner violence and domestic violence are often used interchangeably. That stated, the second source currently in the lead for the "victims of domestic violence are overwhelmingly women" part does use the terms interchangeably; so we have some insight on the matter in that regard. Either way, it is still up to us to stick to the sources per WP:STICKTOTHESOURCES. As for stating "victims of domestic violence are overwhelmingly women" in Wikipedia's voice, WP:WIKIVOICE in this case means not stating opinions as facts and not stating seriously contested assertions as facts. That victims of domestic violence are overwhelmingly women is never presented as an opinion in the literature; it is always presented as a fact, and it's not a seriously contested fact in the literature. Even the researchers who argue that women are as aggressive as men are in their intimate partner relationships are clear that women are usually the victims. Their aggressiveness is sometimes attributed to self-defense or to other things by those researchers. See what Aquillion stated above. To attribute "victims of domestic violence are overwhelmingly women" to any one source via in-text attribution would be misleading WP:In-text attribution because the literature, not just one source, states that. I appreciate you weighing in on this, but we are going to have to agree to disagree on this matter. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 13:20, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for your comments. I am not sure we do disagree, as I don't think I have personally reached a conclusion. I was just a bit resistant to a quick close of the RfC. Thanks again.--Darryl Kerrigan (talk) 17:18, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
No,, let's get this resolved The dispute is ongoing simply because the protagonists fail to produce data and then agree which data is valid. There are well established ways to do this. Those who want to keep 'overwhelming' are failing to produce the figures to support the claim. The myth that DV is overwhelmingly against women is used to diminish the significance of men's experience.The Equalogist (talk) 08:51, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
There is nothing to resolve. And the suggestion that the statement is a myth is a myth. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 15:23, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
I am not sure whether that is true or not. There is literature mentioned in this article that globally LGBTQ persons under report more than other groups, same for men (due to the stigmas facing them). We know that this is a blind spot (ie that we don't really know how many men, LGBTQ persons etc are not reporting). In that context, can we really say that notwithstanding the fact that we don't really know how many men and LGBTQ individuals are victims, women are "overwhelmingly" the victims? Can we say it is a myth, when we know we have a blind spot there? I am not sure we can.--Darryl Kerrigan (talk) 18:30, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
Darryl Kerrigan, I've debated you on this above. I'm not debating you on it again. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 22:52, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
Yes and close. Anything I could add has been previously stated. Indigenous girl (talk) 15:30, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
No per The Equalogist. Galestar (talk) 22:55, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
The sourcing is too all over the place to make an informed decision on this issue. I'd recommend that both sides of the dispute work together to list out all of the relevant sources and quote the relevant language. The McQuigg source uses the word "overwhelming," while the García-Moreno source uses the word "disproportionate." The Bartlett source is cited in the body for "overwhelming," but I don't know what it says. I'd also like to know if there are other sources that speak to this, as well as whether Fiebert contradicts these sources. It's not immediately apparent to me that the "physical aggressiveness" of women automatically translates into more male victims. R2 (bleep) 17:07, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
I agree that sourcing is unusually inconsistent and it becomes difficult to both understand and reflect the inconsistencies. I do not believe that there are more male victims, only that there is doubt that women are the overwhelming victimsMusicwaves (talk) 23:13, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
The word 'overwhelming' implies that all other victims of domestic abuse are largely irrelevant. It implies something like 95%. The evidence does not support this. We know that the overwhelming majority of support for victims of DV goes to women (more than 95%). Are some people defending the use of the word here to protect this imbalance of support? The Equalogist (talk) 08:35, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
The literature very much supports "overwhelmingly," as was made clear just last year. And that literature has not changed. There is no inconsistency on the fact that women are overwhelmingly the victims of domestic violence/intimate partner violence on a global scale. No WP:MEDRS-compliant sources state that men are globally overwhelmingly the victims of domestic violence/intimate partner violence or that, globally, men and women are equally the victims of domestic violence/intimate partner violence or are close to being equally the victims of domestic violence/intimate partner violence on a global scale. I addressed Musicwaves's flawed reasoning above on this talk page, including in the #Proposal by Musicwaves section, and I am tempted to address Musicwaves's WP:IDIDN'THEARTHAT behavior at WP:ANI.
global stats from the WHO can be found here. 1 in 3 women globally are victims of IPV, and 38% of all women murdered, are at the hands of their intimate partner. Ian Furst (talk) 01:00, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
That's about 35,000 women per year (or something on the order of 1 in 800 women). These are pretty straightforward statistics: almost all of these cases involve a woman being directly murdered by a single identified male (e.g., not killing herself, not being shot by police responding to a noise complaint, etc.).
Comparable numbers for men may be harder to come by, both because there seems to be less interest in those numbers by the government agencies that compile these numbers, but also because there's greater complexity in the experiences. Here are just two examples of that complexity: In the case of murder–suicide, do you count his suicide as a domestic violence event? What about when the old boyfriend kills the new boyfriend? "She" didn't kill "him" in either of these examples, and these are not uncommon. About 800 murder–suicides each year in the US are related to domestic violence; this is about half of all domestic violence fatality incidents. It wouldn't be enough to say "_____ thousand men die in connection with domestic violence each year"; you'd have to spell out that x% were killed by their female partners (a fraction of which is legally adjudicated as self-defense), y% were killed by other men, and z% killed themselves (either as part of a murder–suicide or in response to a domestic violence event). Or you would say "____ thousand men were killed directly by their female partners" followed by an explanation that a huge number of suicides and an unknown number of murders by romantic rivals and angry father-in-laws are not included. And there might be other significant categories, too; these are just the ones I found in an hour. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:24, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
I agree that just quoting the figures for how many women are victims only helps in raising the emotions, not in resolving the debate. (Added to which the 1 in 3 figure turns out to be a phantom if you dig into the data; however, I won't argue such a case here because Wikipedia only cares that someone said it, not how true it is, and there is little doubt that the WHO should be a credible source.) Further to the deaths WhatamIdoing mentions, I would add direct suicides, since most battered men have no support or help and listing domestic abuse as a reason for suicide is fairly common. Indirect deaths - such as those of men who have made themselves homeless to escape abuse and therefore become ill and die - is a hard thing to measure but if anyone were to really make the statistical effort that has been made with women, they would certainly be added in. Varybit (talk) 18:47, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
I do NOT agree that quoting well-sourced numbers raises emotions. WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:24, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.