Over the past month or so a number of articles and letters have appeared in The Irish Times challenging the emerging truth that women are as likely as men to perpetrate domestic violence, writes Mary Cleary.
These appear to have been prompted by Prof Michael Kimmel's article of December 4th. Your columnist Medb Ruane claimed that "Prof Michael Kimmel delivered a devastating attack on the view that men and women hurt each other in equal measure and degree . . ." That may appear to be the case for anyone who was predisposed to accepting his views but not to anyone who has had the opportunity to compare his essay for the Department of Education with the report commissioned by the Department of Health. A number of factors should be borne in mind when comparing these documents. The Department of Health report:
The Department of Education essay, on the other hand:
While this essay might appear plausible, even a cursory examination shows its many shortcomings. The starting point is Prof Kimmel's own deep rooted pro-feminist views. He tries to make the facts fit his theory rather than the reverse. In the early part he claims that he will "examine all existing sources of data on domestic violence" but in my view, he does not do so. Instead he launches an attack on any gender neutral studies which do not suit his preconceptions. Single gender studies, which exclude men's experiences and inevitably suit his views, are unquestionably accepted.
Predominately, such studies were predicated on the assumption that men were the aggressors and women the victims. To claim that gender specific one-sex studies are a more accurate reflection of the prevalence of domestic violence than gender neutral two-sex studies defies all logic. But logic is not a feature of this essay. His conclusion that "Irish data on domestic violence shows gender asymmetrical levels of violence" cannot be sustained as there were no Irish gender-neutral studies of domestic violence at the time he composed his essay. He cites his own works and selected newspaper articles as having the same authority as major studies.
Anything from a feminist source is accepted by Prof Kimmel without question. In order to support his thesis that domestic violence is asymmetrical (women are predominant victims) he includes figures for rape and sexual assault, as well as assaults in dating relationships.
His manipulation of language is evident throughout the report. For example the National Violence against Women in America Survey found that 36 per cent of victims of domestic violence annually are men. Prof Kimmel's presentation of that finding is that: "The NVAW found that men physically assaulted their partners at three times the rate in which women assaulted their spouses." One of the more bizarre parts of his essay is his convoluted argument that men are more likely than women to report being assaulted by their partners.
Ms Ruane expresses her admiration for Prof Kimmel and speaks of ". . . his commitment to the equality agenda whether the subjects are men, women, children, disabled people or African-Americans". Prof Kimmel's performance at his recent lecture in UCD, which I attended, suggested that, like so many other alleged champions of equality, he only supports those who fall into one of the politically acceptable victim categories.
While Ms Ruane accepts that both men and women are victims of domestic violence she goes on to state that it is untrue and downright dangerous to claim the damage done is one and the same. The problem is that while women and women's groups have been given supports, services and the opportunity to articulate their experiences and influence public policy, there is a concerted effort to deny the same to men.
I reject Ms Ruane's insinuation that my organisation Amen (a group for men who are abuse victims) is anti-equality. It is precisely because men are not treated equally that Amen came into existence. In her final paragraph she appears to suggest that unless we subscribe to the "masculinity reconstructing" agenda of Prof Kimmel and other social engineers, ". . . men who are victims of domestic violence are unlikely to be heard". There is no need to deconstruct or reconstruct men or masculinity in order to treat all victims of domestic violence equally. What is needed is to deconstruct the myths and misinformation on which current policies and services are based.
Mary Cleary is national co-ordinator of Amen