The False Un-Profile

Why is it that DV (Domestic Violence) advocates support the stereotype of the male being the perpetrator of DV? When you talk to DV counselors they admit that there is no profile of a DV abuser, yet all of their material and emphasis is on women as victims. Why the double talk and especially the denial of male DV victims when the perpetrator is female? Why do DV advocates dispute studies showing 50% of DV is committed against males?

The reason for the double talk and denials is the unspoken and unacknowledged conundrum faced by DV advocates regarding the mindset of DV itself. The abuser’s mindset believe themselves to be the victim of another’s actions and therefore justifies inappropriate behavior against the victim. Why is this a problem for DV advocates? The victim’s mindset also believes they are a victim of another’s actions. If you are a victim you have the right to defend yourself by any means available. Therefore the only real difference between the victim and the abuser is the individual who has the upper hand at any given moment. The conundrum, who is the real victim when both think and act exactly the same?

DV advocates surreptitiously solve the conundrum using gender by blaming the male for all DV, even when the female instigates the conflict or is the sole perpetrator. DV advocates justify and excuse any behavior committed by the female victim no matter how inappropriate. They consistently portray the female as the victim and therefore by inference the male is the abuser. When the female is abusing, DV advocates blame the male by claiming she is the victim acting out of past abuse from unresolved anger, basically Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. However, when the male acts from unresolved anger, he is an abuser, no exceptions allowed.

The double standard extends to child abuse as well. When the female is abusing children (most child abuse is committed by females), advocates immediately claim unresolved anger from past DV to side step conviction. In fact, children are not afforded protection under most state DV laws by maintaining there are existing laws that specifically cover child abuse. The problem here is the standards for child abuse are much higher than the DV laws covering women. The grim reality of currently applied DV laws is the political justification of child abuse due to age discrimination. Why are DV advocates not howling over the comparatively lacks standards of child abuse? They know full well that most individuals accused of child abuse are overwhelmingly female. They know that even with the disproportionately high conviction rates against males, females by sheer numbers still end up the majority (63.7% involvement) of child abuse convictions. They know that if the DV standards were applied to child abuse, women’s conviction rate would then constitute somewhere around 90% of that abuse.

The False Un-profile of male aggression is a mask used by DV advocates to engage in gender discrimination against men and age discrimination against children. Why do DV advocates vocally insist that child abuse increases dramatically with DV? It is a misdirection from the failure to confront their own dysfunctional mentality of victimization. We should not be surprised by this failure to recognize victim thinking as a dysfunctional pattern since most DV counselors are victims of child abuse or DV themselves. Is it any wonder they don’t know the difference between victim and abuser, they haven’t experienced normal behavior, they therefore have no basis to distinguish normal from dysfunctional behavior. While their wish to be a part of the solution is understandable, however, their insistence on gender based determination of DV indicates most counselors lack the objectivity to handle all parties concerned. At best, most DV counselors due to their past experience are waging proxy fights to satisfy their own unresolved issues with DV and child abuse. Therefore any court testimony or counseling offered by such people is tainted and does more harm than good.