Taz,
Thanks for such informative post. I couldn't help but notice that every other major U.S. city had a South Asian specific support network except for LA. I know that not everyone is apathetic here...(hint hint)..oh well..maybe someday LA will catch up with all the mutiny going on everywhere else.

also there is Raksha in Atlanta which helps abused women as well....

In (west) London, there's the Southall Black Sisters (0181 571 9595). They provide services to Asian and African-Caribbean women in particular (both crisis intervention and long-term casework). Its resource centre provides information, advice, advocacy, counselling and support.

(their website)

RAINN is a great resource as well. They deal with stranger and aquaintence rape and several other issues. They also have information on helping youself and what to do to help someone you know who has been sexually assaulted (link).

The Canadian Association of Sexual Assault Centers. (pan-canadian and bilingual, one in every major urban center, in every province, and several smaller towns)

here's their cross-canada listing of rape crisis centres

Hot Peach Pages

This website features a worldwide list of agencies against domestic violence. It contains a global inventory of hotlines, shelters, refuges, crisis centres and women's organizations, searchable by country, plus index of domestic violence resources in over 60 languages.

organizations/resources working with men

wow, hot peach pages is a pretty remarkable resource. thanks Kenyandesi.

An article for the brothas: (language NSFW)

How Two Aspiring Pornographers Turned Me Into An F Word
by Hank Shaw
http://www.whiteribbon.ca/articles/default.asp?aID=821

Manavi is the oldest South Asian domestic violence organization in the nation, and uses a model that's slightly different from the other groups.

Also, it's important to add that there are really strong pan-Asian organizations that have done very good work for our communities. The New York Asian Women's Center, founded in 1982, is very large, has a very diverse staff including a number of South Asian women in leadership positions, runs 3-4 shelters, and actually acted as an incubator for Sakhi when it was starting out.

In DC, there's the API Domestic Violence Resource Project, which also has a South Asian American Exec. Director.

i'm glad you recognized this month, week, and the events that Lifetime is doing on Capitol Hill. Just fyi- keep in mind that all these shelters mentioned above (I only the US ones) are also for domestic violence survivors...

Seattle and the Eastside (Bellevue, Redmond etc) have Chaya, a fantastic organization that offers help and counseling in a wide variety of South Asian languages. They also do a lot of community activism & awareness-raising work, have specific initiatives on topics like S. Asian women's health issues, domestic violence in the Muslim community, etc., and are very queer-friendly as well.

Taz,
Thank you for posting this and all the details as well. Please don't mind if I link it elsewhere. There isn't anything better written and more informative out there with similar resources for the South Asian community.

I think the first time I heard of this issue, I was shocked that it even was an issue; that families where the men were supposed to be highly educated and successful professionally could have this kind of domestic violence hidden in their closets. Something which is relevant and not often talked about is why men like this would abuse their spouses and if there is something that can be done to prevent that.

I think it would be easy to blame either the individual ('that guy is evil') or South Asian culture (dowry-deaths, honor killings etc). But those are simplistic explanations. I have my own hypotheses, but I wonder what you guys think the causes of this violence are.

Um, sorry, I hate to sound like a broken drum here, but I do want to reiterate that rape and even domestic violence do happen to men--sometimes even with women as the perpetrators. I just think it's important to at least note that it's the principle of human rights and human dignity that's at stake here.

Yay for Preparedness! Preparedness is good.

payal-
here in Los Angeles you can contact SAHARA (which is a 24-hour hotline for anything) and South Asian Network, who I beleive may have someone on staff to work on these issues, but more importantly is VERY connected to all the shelters/social work groups here. I know they are able to plug people into the right places when they need help. That being said, the resources I'm connected to here in L.A. are not desi-specific, though aware of the issues in our community- surprising that 2nd largest desi metropolitan is lacking our own DV group.

JOAT
Of course you can link- I'm here to serve you on SM this month, remember? ;-)

Of course you can link- I'm here to serve you on SM this month, remember? ;-)

you should probably stay longer than a month, you're doing a great job so far

you should probably stay longer than a month, you're doing a great job so far

amen to that

There isn't anything better written and more informative out there with similar resources for the South Asian community.

Though it's critical to re-emphasize the importance of these resources, especially to new audiences, I think this is hardly the case that no one has documented or written about thse groups before. See Margaret Abraham's book on the subject and groups, and countless articles and resources on the same.

For women who have limited English proficiency, the API Domestic Violence Resource Project (DVRP) also has bilingual advocates who speak Hindi, Nepali and Urdu (and other API languages). We train community members to become advocates twice a year and we are always looking to expand our language capacity, so if you are interested, please contact us.

I think it would be easy to blame either the individual ('that guy is evil') or South Asian culture (dowry-deaths, honor killings etc). But those are simplistic explanations. I have my own hypotheses, but I wonder what you guys think the causes of this violence are.

What is your take technophobicgeek?

To me from "within the Indian culture" view it's about downright disrespect towards women, lack of sexual outlet and the utter disregard of any responsibility towards one's actions. I know rape is about power but as an Indian woman I can't help but feel like it's about a lot more shitty things then just "power".

I think it runs deep in how you were raised, what you were taught about respect of lack of it towards women while growing up and the environment you grew up in. Guys can be assholes but to be a rapist within a culture that is so big on "honor and respect" takes a special kind of "asshole"; not the run of the mill rapist type.

Guys can be assholes but to be a rapist within a culture that is so big on "honor and respect" takes a special kind of "asshole"; not the run of the mill rapist type.

Don't forget the "blame the victim" mentality, where excuses will be found to imply that the woman somehow "deserved it", either because of her dress, her behaviour at the time, or her personality in general.

Perhaps the men involved look for such loopholes (or fabricate them) in order to justify their own behaviour towards the women they rape, especially if they know that there will be cultural factors -- and many people within the society concerned, including more conservative women and those from the older generation -- which will somehow support such a stance and such an attempt to deflect some of the responsibility for the attack onto the victim.

Perhaps the men involved look for such loopholes (or fabricate them) in order to justify their own behaviour towards the women they rape

Women do it too. Our society in general does a lot of "victim-blaming" because it makes females feel safer to think that it's a game and if they follow "the rules" they won't be attacked. The way they dress, the way they act, what they were doing, how much they drank, etc. So, while it is definitely used as a defense for the rapist, it's also used as a false sense of security. Completely false, because most rapes are acquaintance rapes.

There's a fascinating but deeply disturbing book called Men Who Rape. A psychologist interviewed dozens of rapists about the rapes they committed. Most of them couldn't even remember what their victim was wearing.

yo, saheli is making an important point that i want to celebrate/amplify

Um, sorry, I hate to sound like a broken drum here, but I do want to reiterate that rape and even domestic violence do happen to men--sometimes even with women as the perpetrators. I just think it's important to at least note that it's the principle of human rights and human dignity that's at stake here.

sexual assault is sexual assault. the general pattern is heterosexual male-on-female assault, but all the other combos happen too.

heterosexual woman-on-man assault is more common than might be acknowledged. the victim tends to be very confused and feel guilty, because for the act to be fully consummated, he had to be in some degree of a state of arousal, for obvious technical reasons. and even if it wasn't "fully consummated" (getting groped, molested as opposed to penetrative rape), the pattern of social expectation is that somehow he was "getting sex" therefore should have been enjoying it.

all of which leads him to think that he asked for it, caused it, etc. even when he's enlightened enough to not blame a woman getting assaulted on what she wore or where she went, he may blame himself when he was the one who was victimized. i carried such a burden around for years - like a decade - after it happened to me, before realizing that shit, i was violated, and shit, i was pissed off about it. and those realizations were liberating.

it's this sense of "well, i asked for it, so it must be my fault" that is a huge barrier to honesty and resolution, for men and women alike. in that, we have much in common.

thanks saheli, taz, anna, and everyone else, for this discussion.

peace

Just to add to the list of organizations already on this thread-- Daya, is a S. Asian DV in Houston that does work with victims. One of the reasons that all of these ethnic DV organizations are critical is because they also address citizenship/legal issues that stem from divorce or seperation for women. So much of the power structure in marriages where the partners move to a new country is about the fact that the men often get their legal status through their jobs making their wives even more dependent on them. Another great book that covers this issue ethnographically is Sharmila Rudrappa's Ethnic Routes to Becoming American.

I think another important aspect of all of this is that many desi survivors of violence, sexual or otherwise feel as though the counselors they see do not fully understand their cultural issues...so I'd like to point out the work of CHAI: Counselors Helping Asian Indians. They seek to help desis find culturally compenent counselors...

I'm in a huge rush, and I can't find their url, but I'll dig it up later

i wrote my senior thesis at berkeley on sexual violence in the south asian community, and conducted an online survey with about 300 youth between 18-25. about 13% of women reported having experienced rape or incest, and 21% of women answered yes as to whether they had experienced "sexual violence," but when asked without the words "sexual violence" whether they had been engaged in sexual activity despite verbally or physically protesting or while incapacitated from alcohol of drugs, it came out to about 40%. 17% of these assaults were committed by relatives, 71% by other south asians, and 83% by people known to the victims.

but the most disturbing finding was that although more than half of youth under age 21 were sexually active, and 80% of female and 67% if male respondents felt that sexual violence did affect the south asian community, only 4.5% of respondents thought the south asian community provided a good support network for sexual concerns. so it's a very important step to share these resources, and props to anna for bravely bringing her own story to this space and helping break some of the silence and denial that injects our "model minority" community.

i'd also like to point out a couple of bay area/california efforts: narika, a support organization for south asian surivors of domestic violence, and south asian sisters (web site in need of update), a progressive women's network against racism, sexism, classism, and heterosexism, who have been organizing an annual "yoni ki baat" since 2003 to bring visibility to women's perspectives and experiences on gender and sexuality. in addition to the bay area, the show has also been performed at rutgers and u michigan and is making its way around to other locations. south asian sisters also has ongoing workshops and "days of dialogue" to discuss empowering women, and we welcome all women to join the listserv and attend our meetings and events to keep the dialogue going.

SAWNET has a listing of South Asian Domestic Violence resources, categorized by state and country: http://www.sawnet.org/orgns/violence.php
Many of the other sites listed in this post have a 'links' page offering links to resources in other regions of the US; California has many so I'm sure LA probably has some sort of resource as well. Besides Apna Ghar in Chicago, Midwesterners who are in need of services can use the 24-hour helpline at SAWERAA (based in St. Louis, Missouri): http://www.saweraa.org/
As Taz said, if you are facing an emergency, call 9-1-1.

I am a 43-year old divorced father of two young children. From when I was __this__ small I wanted the lady in my life to be an independent, successful, well educated person. After a marriage of twelve years, and a divorce process that took about 3 years to wrap up here's my two cents on this subject.

The organisations that purport to help victims of domestic violence are inherently biased. They assume the victims are women and the perpetrators male. If you don't fit that profile they don't pay attention to you. This raises the issue: what is the agenda here? If DV is the issue the organisations ought to help the victim, regardless of gender.

My ex was ordered to therapy for DV against me and the children and for alienating the children against me. She was diagnosed by a clinical psychologist she chose to have numerous personality disorders (borderline, histrionic, passive/aggressive in case you care) which manifest in emotional manipulation/blackmail, rage, anger, projection (wherein her feelings and behavior are presented as that of others around her). And so on...

In the meantime...she presented her claims to some of the Bay Area orgs mentioned here. They, swayed by her emotions or because it fits their agenda, fortified her feelings of victimhood and martyrhood. And my childrens lives and mine became hostage in the process.

Do I bear illwill now toward these orgs? No. I wish though they (or someone here having a say in them) explore their ground assumptions about DV. In their attempts to help they may be making a bad situation worse by encouraging someone with pathologies that remain to be diagnosed.

FYI...Santa Clara Family Court statistics indicate women are victims in 60% of DV cases. What has not been discussed yet, and the mentioned organisations are not prepared to deal with, is the 40% where women are the perpetrators and men victims. Did you know borderline personality disorder, a serious problem, is present more, disproportionately so, in women? Are the women's help orgs aware of that and prepared to help men that are victims?

I write this after much hesitation and apprehension for I didn't want to relive what I went through. I felt compelled to write in the hope that perhaps, just perhaps, some change will occur in perceptions and assumptions that will help someone downstream from experiencing what I and my children went through.

sorry...I forgot to mention our family physician that knew us for twelve+ years recommended I divorce my ex and found me an attorney to begin the process. Says something, huh?
And in the meantime the bay area women's orgs were advocating her to harden her stance and "take me to the cleaners" (as one advised her in an email).

Makes one cynical though that's a bad place to be...

Narika, Maitri, and other such help in the Bay Area for victims of DV....
And there are numerous social service activists (trained or not, most volunteers) that also help.
I'll grant that most of them are well intentioned.
However...many are also embittered and divorced and it is only inevitable that their help is colored by their experience.

So has anyone wondered whether those helping those in need are in need of help themselves? What prevents a prominent activist that is going through her own divorce replete with bitterness and poison from advising others in need of help to re-enact her misery?

Hmmm.... your comment sounds a little "colored" itself.... not so neutral, perhaps? I don't think it's anyone's place to discourage those who need help from seeking it. In fact, many women are already hesitant to do so.

Metric Ang, I didn't know if you were referring to me or Neutral. In any case...sure, my comment is "colored" by my experience as seems Neutral's. Given my experience how can it not be? I want to clarify however I am not discouraging anyone from seeking help. Instead, what I am trying to do is highlight the possibility of seeking help from those in need of help themselves.
There are measures to ensure health-care providers aren't violating certain professional codes. Despite that a few creep in through the cracks.
I don't know if there are any measures in place at the various DV orgs (and I speak of the Bay Area). From my experience there didn't seem to be. Maybe I was the only one to catch a bullet. Lucky me!

No, my comment was not directed to Suguna, but to Neutral.... yes, you both have similar comments. Nonetheless, I do not wish to judge your experience. It is unfortunate that you felt you've had a bad experience - I'm sorry that you did. I only wish to comment that the resources are out there, and we should be encouraging women and men to use them. If the stats are correct, they are underutilised. Far too many people don't get the help they need.

Just a general point of information: in the past, people have been banned for posting comments under several handles. During a discussion which is this important, I hope everyone can continue to participate.

Several important issues have been raised in the above posts.

Suguna, I'm saddened to hear about your experiences with dv agencies in the Bay Area. I volunteer with and am deeply involved in one of the Bay Area South Asian agencies and our policy is typically to work with only one spouse...the one who calls first due to conflict of interest issues. Approximately, 5% of our caseload consists of men undergoing dv. We think the number should be higher but believe that men find it very hard to reach out for help. I myself have been working with a married man undergoing major dv experiences for the past two years and it has helped me overcome biases that I didn't even realize I had. I have 3 other clients (all women) and I would say other than the gender being different for one of them, the experiences are pretty much the same. The fact that the victim is a man can sometimes be really difficult for people to accept, especially for S. Asians because in general dv involves male perpetrators and S. Asians belong to such a strong patriarchal society. btw, i'd interested to see the study from the santa clara court system that says in 40% of dv cases, the woman is the batterer. it is interesting coz the national studies indicate 10% of dv cases where the man is the victim.

The issue of those helping victims bringing personal bitterness or personal agendas to the table is very troubling and must be addressed with every agency setting up safeguards. However, this does not happen always. Initially, when we started 15 years ago, we did not understand fully the importance of the safeguards but very quickly we realized that people undergoing dv or having had a recent experience are not the best to help others in need. So now for the last 10 years, we have required people (both women and men) to have been out of dv situation for at least 5 years before being considered eligible to volunteer at our agency. In addition, we have a rigorous screening process (written quiz, interview, waiting period, and training) and frequently turn away people who come across with personal agendas.

Sonya, thank you for the candor and quality of your response. I appreciate it very much and from what I can tell, those getting help from you should be benefiting a lot.

As you described, the DV agencies help those that call first. It is established truth that men are very reluctant to discuss personal matters with others, even with close friends. Odds are very low that they will call a DV org. To make things worse since women are likely to discuss these matters amongst their friends and even strangers odds are very high they will call the DV org first. That tips the situation already. Add to this personality disorders like borderline--4 of 5 are women and science is still working on understanding why--and histrionic (same stats, same lack of understanding why). Someone with those disorders will also engage in serious "projection" where their behavior and feelings are understood by themselves and presented to others as done to them by the spouse/others. Someone with those conditions, most likely the woman in a relationship, calling a DV org first makes it hard for that org to not respond and take her under its wing. And then the problem compounds for, as you acknowledge, we have in-built bias in the orgs, society, and even in Family Court (though, as your message indicates and my experience reveals that is changing s-l-o-w-l-y) that men (especially Asian, Indian...) are the perpetrators and women victims.

I am not an expert in these matters. In my experience however the DV orgs can do a far better job of ensuring the other spouse's voice is heard too. If say Narika has a conflict of interest in that it has taken the woman's call first, can it contact Maitri or another "sister" org (for there aren't any brother orgs! :-) to call the man so there is balance. Between the two orgs you can compare notes to help the family best. In the absence of something like that I, from sheer experience, feel/know that the perpetrators that think they are the victim convince others they are the victim, get help as the victim and make life miserable for everyone. In my case it took a year-long custody evaluation that established I was normal and healthy and my ex had the mentioned disorders and so on. In the meantime, not just owing to the DV orgs the situation was so grim for my children that my daughter was ordered to therapy by Family Court to unenmesh from the mother, the mother ordered to therapy for DV and such (though she still feels it was because the Court felt she was the victim of DV) and so on. Has a single DV org involved in this called me to say they were wrong? No. I feel they have an agenda to support that is more important. Has a single activist that helped my ex called since, even if it is to just say hi to my children? No. For they are too busy helping others and this doesn't fit their agenda.

I haven't lost faith in the need for orgs like Narika. My experience hasn't left me embittered and mistrustful of women. I see this as a case where I caught a bullet and my experience since shed me of my illusions about society and people, especially women. Writing this in a way rekindles memories and experiences and leaves me a wreck. I do it because I still have hope that the DV orgs and those that read this message, well intentioned as they are, may be able to benefit from my experience and look at things differently, a little bit differently, when a call comes in over the transom.

though I feel a hard timeframe (five years, ten? ...) may not

Caught up in this vortex of emotions I thought I'd write another note to clarify the delta on DV stats between Family Court (as I learnt) and the national system (as Sonya indicates).

Almost 100% of 911 calls on DV are initiated by women.
Almost 100% of police reports on DV allege men are the perpetrators.
And, at the end of custody evaluation and psychological tests and such Family Court in Santa Clara indicates where certain disorders are present, that % drops down to 60. Maybe Santa Clara is an anomaly with too many nerds and to compensate, Amazons to render balance! Maybe the system, having worked through most disorders present in men, is only now getting better at uncovering certain disorders more prevalent in women that are invisible and yet very insidious. Maybe most DV cases don't end up going through custody evals and psych reports because it takes that process to bring out the facts. Most men would rather give up and move on than engage in this process. You can imagine the impact on statistics then....

A far more telling stat on DV, I feel, are custody cases that involve psych reports and interviews rather than 911 calls or calls into DV orgs.

I know I almost gave up many times during this whole saga because it was exhausting and draining. You feel you are constantly fighting the system with inbuilt bias and prejudices wherein I have to prove I (and my children) were being abused and my ex, being a woman, is automatically granted victim status and, always, the benefit of the doubt.

I grew up in a large family with several sisters. Women were a strong presence in my family and I have always had a warmth, regard, and respect for women. It has been a struggle to not let my marital experience color all that. I think I have won that struggle.

Writing about my experience has taken so much out of me that this will be my last post. I hope you found my perspective and experience valuable and helpful in some way.

Leena, thanks for posting that link. Great read.

I know nothing about this subject but googled for domestic violence male victims and this is some of what I found. I know nothing about this topic, just what I found on google. I'd have to read a lot more on both sides to come to an opinion about the relative rates of violence and their consequences.

It seems like a tricky issue. On the one hand, there are stats like these, indicating that men are clearly more physically powerful:
http://www.abanet.org/domviol/mrdv/facts.html

# Among all female murder victims in 1994, 28% were slain by husbands or boyfriends. Only 3% of the male victims were killed by wives or girlfriends.
FBI, Crime in the United States: 1994 (1995), p. 17.

On the other hand, advocates for men argue that:
http://www.batteredmen.com/batrNVAWf.htm

* 1,510,455 women and 834,732 men victims of domestic violence1.5% vs. 0.8% in one year, 22.1% vs. 7.4% lifetime—why the discrepancy?
* Annual physical assault rate—44.2/1000 women, 31.5/1000 men
Average 3.5 victimizations per male victim, 3.4 per female victim
* 1.1% of married/co-habiting women and 0.6% of men assaulted annually
* About twice as many male victims has a knife used on them (10.8% to 4.1%), were threatened with a knife (21.6% to 12.7%), or were hit with an object likely to cause harm (43.2% to 22.6%.

I don't know this organization, but they claim to be quoting from the "National Violence Against Women Survey—Full Report Prevalence, Incidence and Consequences of Violence Against Women"

Clearly a controversial issue:
http://www.ncfmla.org/gelles.html

In order to build a more solid knowledge base and understanding of family violence, my colleagues Murray Straus and Suzanne Steinmetz and I conducted the First National Family Violence Survey in 1976. The survey interviewed a nationally representative sample of 2,143 individual family members. The results were reported in a number of scholarly articles and, finally, in the book Behind Closed Doors: Violence in the American Family (1980, Anchor Books). What surprised my colleagues and me the most was the high rates of violence towards children, between siblings, toward parents and between partners that were reported by those we interviewed. Up until this point, estimates of child abuse and wife abuse were placed in the hundreds of thousands and no higher than one million. But our study, based on self-reports, placed the rates in the one to two million range.

The most controversial finding, as it would turn out, was that the rate of adult female-to-adult male intimate violence was the same as the rate of male-to-female violence. Not only that, but the rate of abusive female-to-male violence was the same as the rate of abusive male-to-female violence. When my colleague Murray Straus presented these findings in 1977 at a conference on the subject of battered women, he was nearly hooted and booed from the stage. When my colleague Suzanne Steinmetz published a scholarly article, ”The battered husband syndrome,” in 1978, the editor of the professional journal published, in the same issue, a critique of Suzanne’s article.

The response to our finding that the rate of female-to-male family violence was equal to the rate of male-to-female violence not only produced heated scholarly criticism, but intense and long-lasting personal attacks. All three of us received death threats. Bomb threats were phoned in to conference centers and buildings where we were scheduled to present. Suzanne received the brunt of the attacks—individuals wrote and called her university urging that she be denied tenure; calls were made and letters were written to government agencies urging that her grant finding be rescinded. All three of us became ”non persons” among advocates. Invitations to conferences dwindled and dried up. Advocacy literature and feminist writing would cite our research, but not attribute it to use. Librarians publicly stated they would not order or shelve our books.

The examination of context and consequences also produced surprises. First, as advocates expected and as data from crime surveys bore out, women were much more likely to be injured by acts of then were men. Second, contrary to the claim that women only hit in self-defense, we found that women were as likely to initiate the violence as were men. In order to correct for a possible bias in reporting, we reexamined our data looking only at the self-reports of women. The women reported similar rates of female-to-male violence compared to male-to-female, and women also reported they were as likely to initiate the violence as were men.
It is worth repeating, however, that almost all studies of domestic or partner violence, agree that women are the most likely to be injured as a result of partner violence.

This is what he recommends, which is interesting:
http://www.ncfmla.org/gelles.html

Given the body of research on that finds continued unexpectedly high rates of violence toward men in intimate relations, it is necessary to reframe as something other than a ”gender crime” or example of ”patriarchal coercive control.” Protecting only the female victim and punishing only the male offender will not resolve the tragedy and costs of domestic violence. While this is certainly not a politically correct position, and is a position that will almost certainly ignite more personal attacks against me and my colleagues, it remains clear to me that the problem is violence between intimates not violence against women. Policy and practice must address the needs of male victims if we are to reduce the extent and toll of violence in the home.

I'm finding Gelles' argument surprising, although I've seen something similar in a recent work on DV saying that often men are attacked as well.

Again, I have no axe to grind. I was just intrigued by what Suguna had to say and thought I would spend a few minutes looking around. If this work is bogus, I'm sorry.

Again, I have no idea if either of the latter two sources are respectable. I do find it confusing. Gelles argues two things above:
1. Domestic violence is worse in consequence for women than men
2. However, the incidence of DV against men is equal to that of violence against women. Further, this violence is initiated by women, even according to the women involved.

This is consistent with a number of different stories:
1. Women launching pre-emptive attacks against men who threatened them
2. Men and women brawling
3. A large number of abusive women equal to the number of abusive men.

#3 I find hard to believe, just from my own experience. Not that I don't believe that there are violent women, there are. I find it hard to believe that there are as many. Across society, men are far more violent than women, so it would be surprising for the numbers to be equal in the home. Either #2 or #1 are plausible, but ... given the physical consequences for women again, I find #2 less likely as a complete explanation. That is, I'm having trouble seeing this without #1 being a part of the explanation.

Anyway, again, sorry if I upset anybody.

Hi all,
This is such an interesting and at the same time deeply painful discussion. I was prompted to throw in my two bits because everyone here has been concerned, thoughtful, and involved. I want to share my recent personal experience with DV. I am a woman, a professor, and I was reported by my husband for DV. It's true I did begin it and to that extent it supports the idea that women do often commit DV. I also do not want to dispute Suguna's deeply felt personal experience with this issue. But I do want to point out a further twist in this. My husband is composed, controlled, and seemingly more 'reasonable.' I have put up for years with constant undermining of my abilities subtly by him and more openly by his family. I don't see any place where that comes into the conversation. It is so easy for him to label me 'hysterical,' someone who overreacts, and 'sees things when they don't exist.' The flash point came when he told me one day that since I was annoyed with him, I was in no position to look after our daughter ( I have been doing most of the childcare and had been on that day--though he helps). Since I am highly qualified, socially well-adjusted, and because I have always disliked hysterical personalities, I went out and got myself a therapist. I was told that I am in very good mental health, that I am an excellent mother, and a qualified and successful professional. I also discovered that my 'reasonable' husband had been emotionally and psychologically abusive for years, but because there had not been any physical violence, he still came off looking like the good guy. I should add that the reason this is so mystifying is that my husband is highly educated, talks the sensitive talk, eventually changed diapers, and can say politically correct things till your eyes glaze over. Neither he nor I would ever have believed that we could be involved in anything resembling DV. I still haven't figured out why I believed his evaulation of me, but that is another discussion. I want to point out the complex ways that power works in society. If undermining my ablities as a mother got under my skin, there are both SOCIAL and HISTORICAL reasons for it, and I am not above them. In the end, who is the worse domestic abuser? I, for shoving my husband out of the way for egregiously preventing me from reaching for my daughter or he for carping at me and being totally insensitive for YEARS? And here the discussion does need to address power and the way it shifts in relationships, and what cultural conditioning can do to it, and then factor in gender. I wish there was a 911 to call for emotional and psychological abuse, ridiculous unsubstantiated allegations, and pure disrespect for another human being.

Unlike the legal definition of domestic assault (which often only looks at the physical violence), some organizations work with a much broader definition that acknowledges other forms of abuse:

From A/PI Domestic Violence Resource Project's website:
"Domestic violence is a pattern of violent and coercive behaviors between individuals involved in intimate or familial relationships. It involves the use of verbal, emotional, psychological, sexual, economic and physical forms of abuse by one individual or group of individuals to maintain power and control over another person."

Hey, while I was doing idly clicking on links and look at some stuff Leena posted, I found the following interesting items:

A disertation: "Redefining Babes, Booze and Brawls: Men Against Violence -- Towards A New Masculinity (Paperback) ". . .it looks totally fascinating. Also this: The Men's Program; A Peer Education Guide to Rape Prevention, Third Edition (Paperback). I guess more good reading for people wanting to organize, particularly people still in a campus setting?

i've been wanting to comment suguna's comment #30 all weekend but waited until now:

to therapy for DV against me and the children and for alienating the children against me. She was diagnosed by a clinical psychologist she chose to have numerous personality disorders (borderline, histrionic, passive/aggressive in case you care) which manifest in emotional manipulation/blackmail, rage, anger, projection (wherein her feelings and behavior are presented as that of others around her). And so on...

However, it is important to note that most dv victims/survivors exhibit borderline personality disorders mostly due to the dv they have felt from their partner. This is a common argument used against pepetrators (not saying you are one) particularly in child custody disputes. A junk science disorder called Parental Alienation Syndrome, created by a NY social scientist over his personal observations, made this theory. The theory is that the mother (in most cases, victim) is alienating her children from the father (in most cases, batterer) on purpose. That way the children have no desire to see the father. It has been totally disregarded by the ABA, APA and other major organizations. Unfortunately, father rights groups are still using this junk science in legal arguments. Not that this is the right forum to get into the legal argument, how it is faulty, and why it should not be used, but needless to say the words used by commentator suguna #30 made me get goose bumps.

I have seen way too many mothers lose their parental rights to the batterer based on this junk science. Divorce is a messy legal, emotional, and social monster. However, coupled with domestic violence, it becomes a beast. Becoming wary of jumping on the band wagon that "domestic violence happens to heterosexual men too!!" should be a carefully and deliberately assessed. Again, I am NOT saying that it cannot happen, but the words used by suguna are words I have read in several legal briefs that do not mean anything more than "I am dealing with the beast (divorce coupled with domestic violence)."

A careful reading of rversde23's posting isn't reassuring for what I set out to do with my posting. First let me start with where I agree. Yes, men and women can be aggressors; DV orgs don't have a way of assessing the batterer and victim. I would expand this to: DV orgs and activists NEED better assessment methods to be effective; men can be victims as well. The latter point seems to escaped rversde23's attention which is however emphatic in presenting women as victims, and it only confirms the agenda I brought out in my prior postings.

Some more context so you can understand my experience and what led me to post, in the first place. I was recommended to the divorce by the family physician who knew my ex and me for over twelve years. In the face of my reluctance and confusion he even stepped up and found me the attorney to begin the process. The disorders I mentioned in my earlier posts were diagnosed in my ex by a clinical psychologist of her own (and her attorney's) choosing. The judge who had ordered the evaluation considered the choice of psychologist as excellent as she came with twenty+ years of experience and had worked with the Family Court for twenty five years+. Family Court in prior intervention ordered my ex to therapy for DV and parental alienation.

Is it normal to engage in disorderly conduct whenever you FELT DV from your partner? The operative word here is felt , exactly what rversde23 used in her posting. For most of us a hallmark of maturity and normal behavior is to separate feelings from fact, and to manage our lives based on reason and not feelings and emotions. We learn, through life experiences sometimes, to manage sometimes conflicting emotions and feelings that run their course every day and not let them affect or interfere with our lives. And we get by with that (mostly). For those with disorders feelings are fact and reality. You can imagine the consequences: accusations, allegations, turmoil, volatility and so on. Now we have someone purportedly helping victims of DV support and espouse behavior (produced by disorders) because the victims FELT DV from their partner. That, I fear and know, will only encourage the abusers and punish the victims. It also says a lot about the agenda of DV orgs and activists out there.

Oh, please don't try spinning this into my making a mountain of a molehill. And here we have someone explaining abusive behavior, as is typical from someone suffering from borderline and equivalent disorders, because they felt DV from their partner.

The irony here is that I agree those with borderline and other personality disorders suffered trauma somewhere in their lives. They are surely a victim and survivor in that sense. I am sure there is something they see or perceive in their partner that is catalytic and brings out behavior that is to protect them but ends up destroying everyone. They need all the help they can get. Their partners can't be held responsible for the past trauma and consequent scars nor can they cure it. Their trauma and experience also does not license them to abuse others because of prior trauma or to unleash the beast at every feeling or emotion. And when DV activists can't distinguish between feeling and fact, allow emotions, feelings and consequent allegations and accusations to drive issues, and fail at separating projection from actual behavior it only furthers the confirms their skewed agendas and the need for better methods.

Limiting myself to my experience rversde23 raises the possibility the health-care and family court individuals (and many of them, all independent) relied on junk science now discarded by professional organisations, couldn't distinguish between victim and perpetrator, and if they had known better wouldn't have issued the recommendations and court orders that they have. I am afraid the painful cycle of DV will be self-sustaining as long as the DV orgs and activists take the position rversde23 has in her posting.

Chandi is right. Denigrating someone, undermining their self-respect and self-worth, accusing or alleging without basis are all forms of violence. They, I feel, are more insidious than physical contact for the scars of the latter go away far sooner than those caused by words. DV isn't just physical violence but includes the emotional, psychological, verbal and other non-physical forms of violating another's rights.

Pushing someone qualifies as DV. In the absence of context it can seem like taking a hammer to swat a fly though there are occasions where that intervention prevented worse by making it clear what's not kosher. DV is also verbal, emotional, psychological, etc. abuse. Sure, it would be nice if partners never disagreed, shared all likes and dislikes, and never carped or nagged. Life doesn't work that way. We deal with many curmudgeons, don't we? Curmudgeons aren't abusive and their behavior isn't DV though their behavior can trigger a person with high sensitivity, low self-esteem or with personality disorders to react in a manner that makes it seem they were abused and qualify for DV victim status. The DV orgs, 911, family court, etc are there to help those that are being abused regardless of how (physical, emotional, verbal, etc.) and I'd very much encourage using their resources judiciously.

My point remains that the DV orgs and activists have a self-serving agenda and only see what fits that and seldom distinguish between allegations and fact, victim and perpetrator. They have a tough job for they have to react to someone reaching out to them that is emotionally in a fragile state and reaction time is too short to establish full context and appraise the issue better. Having the agenda must make this tough job a bit easy I guess...

I was in Chandi's position and didn't know what to do. I didn't talk to anyone and it was for any number of reasons: denial, a bias to fix the immediate problem and move on, appeasement, a male reticence to discuss personal matters?...My ex prevented me from seeing my children for two years although I begged and pleaded with her and her parents to separate their differences with me from my interactions with the kids. I didn't know the underlying causes and realized I was totally burnt out trying to maintain a semblence of normality. I mentioned in an earlier posting that it was my doctor that recommended I divorce. Though the costs are beyond comprehension I don't have any regrets.

I have a few questions that arose from Chandi's and subsequent postings.

Why is the relationship Chandi described worth sustaining? It isn't good for the child(ren) and certainly not good for the adults. I guess I am asking this fully well recognizing I slumbered for fourteen years and it took a doctor's insistence for me to wake up.

Socially, historically family courts have always sided with the mother on custody issues. In the past the fathers put up with whatever custody was dished out to them. And in societies across the world and in every species in the animal kingdom, the mother can get furious and react in unimaginable ways when her relationship with the children is at risk. It is only recently that Family Court and specialists are recognizing the value of the father in the children's lives. And fathers are beginning to respond to their role in the kids lives too. Why is it considered a loss for the mother if she doesn't get full custody? why is it a win for the father if he only gets visitation? If the father asserts his rights he is seen as an uppity POS. If material is presented confirming it is best for the children to spend good time with the father it is dismissed as junk science and pseudo-mumbo jumbo. See rversde's posting...This only creates a self-perpetuating cycle of claiming the fathers don't care and therefore the mothers need all the time with the children. Anything that disturbs the equilibrium (e.g. fathers historically relegated to the backbenches on custody matters insisting their rights be respected) have the DV orgs and activists (read into rversde23's postings) claiming junk science and hopping mad. Funny thing is, if those same professionals said something similar about the father the DV orgs and activists will be spouting that until they froth. Sad, sad....

In this exchange I felt affirmed by Sonia's mature response. Chandi, I hope everything works out for you in the best possible way.

A disertation: "Redefining Babes, Booze and Brawls: Men Against Violence -- Towards A New Masculinity (Paperback) ". . .it looks totally fascinating. Also this: The Men's Program; A Peer Education Guide to Rape Prevention, Third Edition (Paperback). I guess more good reading for people wanting to organize, particularly people still in a campus setting?

see also Laura Robinson's work Code of Silence - here's an article by her.

heck... here's some excerpts saheli

"The men will put down their own wives in the inner sanctum of the locker rooms," he reports. "They'll call them hags or worse, say they're terrible in bed, anything to show their dominance." The wives, who are discouraged from attending road trips, "must know their place" if they ever do accompany them. The wives describe themselves as "non-persons" and "second-class citizens" and must play a traditional female role or their husbands will be accused of being "pussy-whipped."... She found the players showed a statistically significant higher level of "rape-myth acceptance," hypermasculinity, belief in danger as excitement, violence as manly, callous attitudes toward sex, sex-role stereotypes, adversarial sexual beliefs, and acceptance of interpersonal violence. The only area in which the players scored lower than non-hockey playing males was in their ability to express empathy.

suguna:

As I stated in my response, I don't know YOU or the facts of the situation. I don't think there is anything wrong in my response to what you wrote, only to show that some of the language you used are used QUITE frequently by father's rights groups. If you think I am immature, by all means, you have the right to think that. This is not the thread to accuse one of immaturity v. maturity. Rather, I was discussing my hesistance to words you chose in your comment #30, not to your personal situation.

And, suguna, to defend anti-violence activists, I must vehmently disagree with your constant bashing of "dv agenda." Most anti-violence, particularly anti-dv activists will say that their agenda is to help the survivor, whoever him/her is. Ironically your response to me (that there is this dv agenda) negates your idea that you think that dv organizations do good work (your conclusion in #30). Or maybe dv organizations do a little good work, eh?

and to clarify- chai is rversde23, rversde23 is chai. thanks. :)

Thanks for your supportive comments Suguna, and everyone else, and peace to you too. I agree with you that DV cases need to be more carefully dealt with, and that it is certainly possible that you, as a man, could have been the victim. But I was disturbed and surprised by what I thought was a slight condescension in your sentence, "Sure, it would be nice if partners never disagreed, shared all likes and dislikes, and never carped or nagged." As a professional and full-time mother, I deal with tons of crap at work and keeping domestic life afloat single-handed. And my problem was hardly not being tolerant, but being too tolerant. You don't really know all the facts of my case, so that seems somewhat judgemental especially coming from someone who has been in the position of feeling abused. There is a definite polarization and disconnect between different perceptions of reality, relationships, emotions, etc and I can't help thinking that gender plays into it. I have been very sensitive and compliant with plans for childcare that my ex came up with. I have a terrific relationship with my father and would not want to deny my daughter the same. And no, it isn't about winning, but realizing that an insensitive and controlling co-parent can throw everyone's life off the rails. All my friends, well-wishers, and therapist think I am finally taking charge of my life and my daughter's and need to.

Chandi: I don't know the facts of your case any more than what was in your posting and from that, it seemed clear you strongly felt you experienced verbal, emotional, and psychological abuse from your partner. I agreed, and emphasize again, they are DV too. I am sorry you found my message somewhat judgmental and condescending (however slight) and feel if you look at the spirit and full context of my message, you'd find me empathetic to DV victims (regardless of gender) as it is indeed traumatic.

It looks like you deal with tons of crap at work. You have a child to take care of too. An abusive partner is the last thing you (and the child) need.

You clarified what was confusing in your first posting. It is nice to see you have taken charge of your life and broken off from a dysfunctional situation. That takes awareness and courage. It also requires a belief in, and respect for, oneself. I am happy for you that you took that step. As difficult as it must have been, the alternative seems worse (especially for your young daughter growing up). It took me too a long time to act and I can't think of a better decision I made in my life so far.

It is nice also to see you are out of a bad situation and yet mature to ensure your daughter has a healthy relationship with her father. What more can one say or want?

Chai: Just so it is clear, the language I mentioned in my postings are from the evaluation report, medical documents, and court orders. However....what is wrong with someone (mother's rights groups, father's rights groups) reusing language used by trained independent custody/healthcare/family court professionals? You seem to react very much only to the latter's usage.

You even suggest something preposterous: "most dv victims/survivors exhibit borderline personality disorders mostly due to the dv they have felt from their partner." So you are proposing those abused by borderline patients are responsible for DV that produced those borderline patients! Ever considered the possibility that they might have suffered DV earlier in their lives, perhaps from their parents, relatives, or prior relationships? That it might have nothing to do with the partner at all? Your assertion simply tells a lot about your mindset: men are always the perpetrators and women never. The bar is always much, much higher for men to prove DV and always conceniently lower, even if the reasoning is inconsistent and self-serving, for women. Thank you for confirming so vividly the agenda of most DV orgs and activists.

To your other question I am convinced there is some good that comes out of the DV orgs and activists. There is some harm too (because of the above agenda). A lot more good can come out, and the harm contained if not eliminated, if assertions and claims like the one you made are thrown out the window. Society (and esp the children) will benefit when these orgs and activists help the survivor regardless of gender. You pay lipservice about men being survivors and deserving of help but reveal your bias and prejudices with preposterous claims such as the one above.

Sonia's response showed empathy, understanding, professionalism, and a sincere desire to help those affected by DV. Your's confirms empathy for women and apathy to men, a bias to twist everything to suit your agenda, and a desire to help those affected by DV as long as they are women (which, given your reasoning will always be the case!)

From this exchange I sense hope for the future because of folks like Sonia. I also sense it will take a long long time for they and their work will have to overcome the bias you confirm so readily.