What do you think of accurate article concerning domestic violence perpetrated against males?

Michael Flood is a researcher - a sociologist - not an "advocacy researcher" whatever the hek that means. He has a PhD like any other researcher.

Gells & Strauss claim themselves that DV is NOT gender neutral. I met Strauss at a conference howerver and without backing up his claim, he said Guatemala also experiences mutual DV. That's so stupidly ridiculous, it shows how biased he is. I've been to Guatemala on a human rights delegation and I sit on a board related to this issue. Some women there actually ask their husbands permission to leave the friggin house. Mutual dv? absurd.

DV is not mutual ---- and great to the other poster to mention that both sides should put aside their "ideaology" - that's very noble and has merit - but don't be so nieve to believe there is not an agenda behind the Fathers Rights & MRAs claim. It is NOT to help men - they've proved that. They dont work as allies, they dont open shelters, they dont set up hotlines. THEY ATTACK. They sue shelters, they prevent women from getting free legal aid... They often have charges or convictions against themselves. Look at Lee Doyle - Fathers4Justice activist...charged with child sexual abuse. Flood exposes these guys - has a web site of those convicted, as does the Liz Library ("in their own words")

Dont believe for a moment they are being helpful to men ----nobody attacks a group for not helping them (attacking DV workers or feminists for not helping men). And, in reality, it's the women & feminists in centers across the country ACTUALLY helping men who've been beaten, raped or stalked -NOT MEN -. Call your local DV, rape or stalking center to ask them how they help men. They'll tell ya. Many of them have stats on their web sites about female violence.

Also, ask them why they don't talk about men's violence against men - that's their greatest threat. Also ask them why women aren't responsible for public violence - in the bars, in gangs, arson, armed robbery? Funny, DV is the ONLY type of violence that's "mutual"

Ask questions, do the research, make the calls - it's quite easy to inform yourself of the truth. (And once you find out the truth, then you gotta ask yourself: WHY are they doing this? Dig deeper and you'l find out).

They are right about the methodological flaws of CTS, right about the selective use MRAs have made of CTS studies, right that the severity of male against female violence tends to be far greater as measured by grievous bodily harm or death, but wrong to turn around and try to downplay the existence of violence against men perpetrated by women.

The problem is that MRAs have overstated their case and misused CTS studies to support their claims. That doesn't diminish the fact that there is still a largely unreported and underreported problem of female on male DV and that there is a lot of denial about the issue. It doesn't diminish the fact that the Duluth Model, favored by many feminists, has a great many flaws of its own.

Both sides need to tone down the rhetoric, examine the truth in what each has to say, and remember that behind these numbers are real human beings - men and women - suffering. Not just numbers to be exploited for political gain.

EDIT

Rephrased to reflect that I was referring to the USE of the studies by MRAs, not their AUTHORSHIP.

This type of "research" is typical of "feminist academics" This is because feminist academics invariably have a 'soft sciences' or liberal arts background, where sentiment and opinion outweigh evidence or proof. 'soft sciences' like psychology and sociology (let alone the liberal arts) are not really sciences at all, since they are not open to disproof or verification in quarantined test environments.

There's a typo in your question. The article is by Flood, that makes it INaccurate.

As my professor would say, this is a leading question that pre-supposes the accuracy of an article.

There fore, it is highly prejudiced.

xyz online aren't known for accurate articles, they publish advocacy research, that means the research sets out to conform to certain political views and prejudices, the other thing they do is publish advocacy material in an attempt to discredit the genuine research, all of which contradicts and debunks patriarchal dominance theory, which is the ideology that the material xyx publishes sets out to conform to.

One thing they do is reference out of date research, note that the Strauss paper they are using is 28 years old.

They are also involved in the hijacking of various wiki pages.

There is a big difference between political activism/advocacy research and real research.

Here is a paper by Strauss about the methods feminist researchers use to distort and conceal gender symmetry in domestic violence.

http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/V74-gender-symmetry-...

Heres one by Gelles

http://www.familieslink.co.uk/download/july07/Poli...

and heres another by Strauss

http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/V75-Straus-09.pdf

Tha brain that doesnt die, MRAs dont produce any research, they quote domestic violence researchers, and that research that they quote doesnt confirms the fact that women are more likely to be injured. Why do feminists have to lie all the time?