What’s Wrong with Mainstream Reporting on Domestic Violence
Last October, I tracked hundreds of stories in the US media relating to Domestic Violence Awareness Month. Out of all those, maybe a dozen represented factual reporting with any attempt at objectivity. Mostly the public was subjected to the same baseless factoids and unsupportable statistics that have been floating around for years, and in some cases, decades.
As often as I could, I e-mailed the reporter and the editor of each publication that published this misinformation and pointed out the errors. These e-mails were generally ignored, though in a few cases I got back something to the effect of “Thanks for your input,” and a couple of reporters attempted to argue with me. The reporters who took exception to my criticism seemed to feel that they could say anything they wanted, because their intentions were good.
In no case was any correction to inaccurate and/or misleading information ever made.
I’m hoping for more responsible reporting this year, though of course when you have an entire industry apparently devoted to misrepresentation and the propagation of hysteria, that is a nearly-unattainable goal. So far the media has been a willing pawn in this game, because they seem to believe they are somehow doing someone a service by ignoring or distorting the truth.
I can’t help but try, because those who are ultimately harmed by all this dissemination of ignorance are the victims themselves. Not only male victims, but female victims and the children in all the households affected by intimate partner abuse suffer from the arrogance of those who stubbornly cling to harmful attitudes.
So here I’ll provide some links to more-realistic information and explain why the most well-known and often used statements are wrong, and in some cases entirely fabricated. Perhaps here and there a media outlet or two will take the time to look past the selected stories presented by their local shelters and ask some hard, but worthwhile questions. A caveat: I have never been given honest answers about the workings of shelters by state coalition reps, or shelter workers.
Those of you reading this, who experience the same frustration with your local media parroting the same incorrect and unsupportable data, year after year, may also find this helpful. Please feel free to copy this material and send it along to anyone you feel may benefit.
Let’s start at the beginning. Here is the philosophy driving these programs.
All men benefit from the violence of batterers. There is no man who has not enjoyed the male privilege resulting from male domination reinforced by the use of physical violence . . . All women suffer as a consequence of men's violence. Battering by individual men keeps all women in line. While not every woman has experienced violence, there is no woman in this society who has not feared it, restricting her activities and her freedom to avoid it. Women are always watchful knowing that they may be the arbitrary victims of male violence.
From the AZ Coalition Against Domestic Violence
Shelters often publicly claim to serve the entire community. However, the list of the populations excluded from their services for various reasons unrelated to need represents a huge segment of the general population. At the moment they are:
Women with full-time employment
Women over the age of 55
Women with older boys
Lesbian women
Handicapped women
Men
Some shelters will provide grudging assistance to those excluded from the regular program, in order to fulfill their mandate to provide equal services to all. This often includes something like a three-day hotel voucher, which can in no way be perceived as equal to a program which may be 120 days in a secure residential facility, with counseling, job training and group activities.
Ironically, those unacceptable individuals are frequently included in the numbers a shelter presents at funding time representing those they turned away due to overcrowding.
Despite the fact that shelters all over the country are expanding, sometimes doubling and tripling their capacities, they most often do not include these populations in their expansion plans, and have no provisions to include them in the future. The excuse for excluding these people used to be that they can’t efficiently serve everyone considering their limited resources. What is the excuse now?
This is the definition of DV used by these programs. It is not what you think.
From the Florida Department of Children and Families
Domestic violence is a pattern of behaviors that adults or adolescents use against their intimate partners or former partners to establish power and control. It may include physical abuse, sexual abuse, emotional abuse, and economic abuse. It may also include threats, isolation, pet abuse, using children and a variety of other behaviors used to maintain fear, intimidation and power over one's partner. Domestic violence knows no boundaries. It occurs in intimate relationships, regardless of race, religion, culture or socioeconomic status.
Some of the most popular sayings on the subject:
Domestic violence is the #1 cause of emergency room visits.
There is no demonstrable proof to this statement. A simple check with any reputable healthcare resource will verify this.
A woman is battered every (x number of) minutes.
This was the subject of some research I did last year. This has no basis in fact and is one of the oldest misconceptions, dating back to the late 1970s. A complete explanation is to be found here.
95% of victims are female. Also stated as: The number of male victims is insignificant. Or: I’ve worked in this field (x number of) years, and never saw any male victims.
The system as it exists does not encourage men to seek help. In fact, due to the attitudes expressed in the statement of philosophy above, many shelter workers believe that men simply don’t deserve any help. Often shelters claim to do outreach for male victims, but both their presentations and even the names of shelters (Bright Horizons for Women, for example) give a clear message that men should stay away. Knowing they will not be offered help, men oblige and stay away.
There is no logical reason to presume that among all the varied human problems, domestic violence alone is limited to female victims. If no women ever abused their families, or committed violent acts, there would be no need for the massive Child Protective Services agencies, or women’s prisons. More here
Women are at greater risk due to their smaller size.
While this seems logical under the popular definition, it no longer applies when the working definition of DV is used. In addition, today’s women are more likely to use weapons of many kinds as equalizers. Size certainly doesn’t matter when the abuse is primarily psychological or verbal. A woman with a handgun, or even a knife is certainly not a negligible danger.
It takes seven attempts for a woman to leave her abuser.
This statement is often used to deflect questions about the small numbers of women who actually complete programs. (Many shelters find women stay with their programs only a few days. The woman with the compelling story from a given shelter may well be the only one that year who completed their program.) While it is true this study does exist, it is very small and limited, and does not entirely explain why women are less than willing to avail themselves of offered services, which is a perennial problem at most locations. It also helps to propagate the mistaken notions that there are no people addicted to violence, and that no one ever abuses the services of a shelter.
What the Media can do
What is needed is an honest approach to the problem, free from ideological philosophies and the concerns most shelter advocates have for their shelter’s budgets and even personal incomes. While it is possible that media have steered clear of any investigation of these services in the belief that to be critical of DV services is to be seen as anti-woman, the fact that so many women are excluded by services themselves should be enough to alleviate those fears.
This is a subject that is in dire need of some light and air, and the media could provide a fine and worthwhile service to the community by asking important questions, and insisting on truthful answers.