Domestic violence myths

From an article exposing some of the myths propagated by the media and advocates with a vested financial interest in the "domestic violence" industry:

... Above all, the ideologues will never admit that partner violence is more common among lesbians than heterosexual couples. Just consider the case of Jessica Kalish, the 56-year-old Florida woman who was stabbed 222 times last October with a Phillips screwdriver wielded by ex-girlfriend Carol Anne Burger. But no one dared call it "domestic violence."

Once you begin to play tricks with the truth, you need to invent ever grander prevarications. So sit back and get ready for a good chuckle, because there's not a shred of truth to any of these claims regularly put forth by the domestic abuse industry:

1. A marriage license is a hitting license. (Truth is, an intact marriage is the safest place for men and women alike.)

2. Domestic violence is the leading cause of injury to women. (The leading causes of female injury are unintentional falls, motor vehicle accidents, and over-exertion. Domestic violence is not even on the list.)

3. The March of Dimes reports that battering is the leading cause of birth defects. (The March of Dimes has never done such a study.)

4. Women never make false allegations of domestic violence. (That's the biggest whopper of all.)

5. Super Bowl Sunday is the biggest day of the year for violence against women. (Will the abuse industry never tire of its demagoguery?)

These are just five of the 50 domestic violence myths documented in the RADAR report. As former Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan once deadpanned, "You're entitled to your own opinions; you're not entitled to your own facts." Hopefully the $4 billion partner abuse industry will begin to pay attention.

Article here. Read the RADAR report on domestic violence myths here.

Obviously, this is not to trivialize the real cases of domestic violence and spousal abuse that do occur, but understanding that media hype and false or misleading information is part and parcel of the portrayal of the problem. Such a misleading perspective can have deleterious effects on the legal rights of those accused of such behaviors. As I wrote almost a year ago with regard to the abuse of restraining orders in D.V. cases (see my post here),

The problem of domestic violence is real, and many women (and some men) undoubtedly live their lives in fear of their spouses or significant others. The ease with which the legal protections afforded by restraining orders can be abused by spouses or significant others, however, is also a real and growing problem. As the first article shows, the problem is exacerbated by judges who rubber-stamp restraining order applications, even in the face of evidence suggesting that the person seeking the order is doing so not out of real fear for her safety, but as a tool to punish the other party or gain tactical advantage in divorce or child custody proceedings. In such cases, the ones who typically suffer most are the children, who often become pawns in the divorce and/or custody battle, and who are deprived of their father's ability to see them.

From a gun rights perspective, the promulgation of falsehoods and the inherent bias against men have led to such flagrant infringements as the Lautenberg amendment, which bans gun possession for those convicted of domestic violence misdemeanors, in effect placing them on the same level as those convicted of violent felonies such as rapists, robbers and murderers.