By Raymond Hughes
rhughes@cyberportal.net
Published 10/30/97 in the "News Leader"
Claremont, NH

Almost forgot, October (was) is domestic violence (DV) month. I didn't forget to check my facts, though. "Facts" too often rendered by women's advocates into "factoids"--facts which aren't really.

Like only men are guilty. I even heard Barry MacMichael, an innovator of New Hampshire's DV programs and prime mover of faulty factoids, claim there were 44,000 battered women last year statewide. Unless I'm missing something, that means there were 44,000 batterers--all men by her standards.

Now, I've cross-referenced census data three ways and around 140,000 men lived with women here in 1996 (married or live-in). If 44,000 abuse their mates, that's almost one in three--which implies that about all us guys are suspect. This is insultingly absurd and sexist. Look in your own social circles and pick out the one-in-three evil male mates and tell me I'm wrong. Especially when according to the New Hampshire Hospital Association, in 1996 total hospital admissions for women from all assaults--not just domestic--were just 40 with another 1,412 checked and released on an outpatient basis (includes all fights, rapes, battering).

Not exactly 44,000.

And when you hear advocates claim that domestic violence nationwide is the "leading cause of injury to women age 14 to 44," why is it that according to the U.S. Center for Disease Control, April, 1997, women were more dangerous to themselves than in danger from another--4.6% of all admissions were for overexertion or "strenuous movements," only 4.1% hospital visits by women were from all intentional assaults/homicides.

There is no breakdown in either the CDC or NH stats for how many were domestic injuries, but certainly many were from assaults by strangers or, even, other women, say mother to daughter. In any case, the actual number of domestic assaults in NH is probably more like a hundredth of the 44,000 MacMichael claims, especially considering not even four hundred sought shelter. Of course, "claim" is definitely the operative word, here, since federal domestic violence grants hinge on numbers of cases.

Exaggerating statistics means more money. And, yes, I am outright accusing women's advocates of shamelessly skewing the numbers for entitlement money. Remember the Super Bowl Sunday scare in 1993 when advocates claimed a study concluded it was the most dangerous time of year for women, that 40% more would be assaulted? Newspapers nationwide jumped on the bandwagon, calling it the "Abuse Bowl," warning women not to stay home. Fellow skeptic Ken Ringle of the Washington Post actually ran a fact check. He found there was no study, and furthermore, shelters and hotlines reported no increase, even in Buffalo, whose team was slaughtered.

It was, in fact, a lie. So when you read there are 44,000 battered women in New Hampshire, ask yourself what the definition of battering is if only 1452 women sought help for any assault, maybe half of which were from strangers and other women.

Actually, the last fight I saw was two women, and if you turn to the court briefs you'll see there are always female assaulters. An article in "USA Today" even claimed 54% of women in lesbian relationships acknowledged violence, and studies right here at the University of New Hampshire (UNH) show women initiate more domestic violence than men, plus abuse kids at double the rate of men.

Yet domestic violence is always framed as a male problem. So you have to ask yourself, men, since obviously domestic violence to advocates is mostly verbal, do you start all the arguments in your home? Maybe we could ask the New Hampshire policeman who had to turn in his gun after his wife got a restraining order for "verbal" abuse which he told me wasn't even an argument. And, gosh, when was the last time in the domestic debate anyone mentioned that, hey, once every month a lot of women cycle the entire household onto an emotional roller coaster?

One woman lawyer down South actually used PMS as a defense for assaulting a cop--and got off. Cops themselves, in fact, will tell you half the time drugs and alcohol are involved, and regardless of any rhetoric, every credible unbiased scientific study has concluded that women are just as prone to violence as men--though not as effective, mostly due to size. Yet, I know the Vermont man deaf in one ear from a frying pan, the man with photos of his bruises on file in Newport to no avail, the Rockingham County man with a court finding against his wife for assault whom the police will not stop from harassing him. Even if a man reports, it won't be taken seriously (though about one in 16 in New Hampshire shelters last year were men), and I and every boy I know were raised not to "hit girls," so the notion men hit women is ingrained socially is absurd.

I quote Canadian Senator Anne Cools, someone who has worked with domestic violence for decades, for another take--"For every abusive husband there is an abusive mother." And as long advocates insist domestic abuse is not just physical, let's frame the whole picture and do something about all the false accusations, especially those to manipulate custody.

This is another ugly head of abuse, plain and simple. In fact, my research shows that false allegations by women are all too common. You can't tell me women don't level false allegations to gain an advantage, just remember the 44,000 figure used by federally-funded advocates.

I have even suggested to the state to open an office specifically for those falsely accused. In the effort to protect women, lost is the notion that we are equals in anything insidious.

So when domestic violence advocates get serious about all forms of domestic abuse and do something about their math, I'm all ears. Until then, as a journalist--and a man--I'm simply insulted by the stinky, sexist stats.

Back to the NCFM Text Based Home Page

NCFM, PO Box 129, Manhasset, NY 11030