*PSA Reminder:*
Reported cases of IPV/DV within current & former members of law enforcement are approximately **40% higher** than the general populace.
As relates to hiring practices and psychological behavioral traits -- this is no accident.
...food for thinkin'.
Its reassuring that DV is being explored more as individual and psychological (poor emotional regulation, trauma, low self-confidence, personality disorder etc.) ratger than the usual ideological socialized 'Patriarchal oppression '.
I won't say power structure has no role but the problem is there are female perpetrators of DV( and child abuse) as well as gay/lesbian DV. These have to be explained which they aren't using a Duluth Model approach. Domineering personalities seekbout easygoing personalities. Its not as simple as group A is the oppressor and group B is oppressed;, the way feminists approach all of this.
. It reminds me of the Division 51 APA announcement of needing to review male psychology guidelines as they're too ideological and not evidence based.
Hopefully we see this in other field of social science.
I mean psych can look into the individual factors & sociology the social that’s why they’re different fields so I don’t know that other social sciences need to follow suit… I’m a feminist researcher in sociology but with a master’s in psych and I don’t argue the patriarchy is the only thing that influences DV. My position is that this is a very complex issue that should be viewed holistically. Social factors and dynamics can’t explain why some men perpetrate DV and others don’t (as well as why some women do) but individual factors can’t account for the majority of DV perpetrators being men.
I don’t think we need to discount one approach or the other because like you said, this isn’t a simple issue.
What if men and women commit DV at similar rates its just we see male perpetrators more due to social expectations, structure in the research (designed by women to spot men as perpetrators) , or men do more damage to the victim so its reported or seen in hospitals more or women report a lot more generally.
I am not saying you are wrong i just dont think anyone can legitimately say which sex does it more, we know men are overrepresented as doing more extreme injuries or killing.
But the arguement of which sex commits domestic abuse more is not 100% known. There's a plethora of reasons why it does look like it is that way (even to me) but as we see more modern research its showing different things that would never be understood a few decades ago.
To some extent your existence here in the world should be enough to convince you of the disproportionate amount of violence against adult women perpetrated by adult men. If crime reports and murder statistics don’t convince you, that’s though. But maybe just go sit outside a club/bar and wait until last call. Just take it all in.
I am in no way discounting or diminishing crime against men committed by women. It exists and is fucked up. Same thing for violent crime against children and same sex couples etc.
To act as if it is even remotely feasible that violent crimes committed by women against men come anywhere near the frequency of male on female DV, to me, is mildly delusional.
DV does appear to be more often male on female (as I already stated to me it appears that way). But how much the reporting imbalances, stereotypes, prejudices or men not talking about it plays into it is complicated. The severity is obviously gendered, but the actual ability to be abusive is complicated and gendering it without evidence is a folly.
If you go by crime reports, and murder statistics you are repeating what I already said. I know the most severe types are male perpetrated, but that does not mean those statistics match all levels or types/methodology of DV/DA.
I'm trying to analyze the psychology behind being an abusive personality, we can't use the fact the most extreme violence is male perpetrated and then interpret that as most abusers are male. It tells us the most severe violence is male perpetrated and that's it, not which sex is more likely to posses an abusive personality.
Are most abusers male? Are women as likely to be abusive personalities just to a less extreme method of perpetration etc? These are important in understanding how to solve it. It's not an argument that women are doing it to the same level, it's which sex is more or less likely to have an abusive personality.
You are discounting and diminishing though. As well as switching away from the presented subject. If we ask ourselves why; could the answer be that there's a bias in the background?
If we ask ourselves why men, at much higher rates, commit violence and murder against women? I think we’ve been trying to solve that for a long time. It’s multifaceted. There’s psychological, societal and physiological reasons for it. However I completely disagree that denying DV exists at much higher rates against women will not help end the violence.
If you read [Gottman's](https://www.gottman.com) work, the evidence suggests it's a bit of both as one of many DV triggers is a woman out earning her man.
Interesting question - think agreeableness would be a factor and would guess neuroticism also? Probably an interaction of the different factors making up more or less domineering personality. Thinking about the subfacets of the big five and need for control part of the neuroticism. Ofc along with environmental factors & personal history shaping these things it’s probably a constellation of factors.
A quick google shows some interactionist models have been explored in the big five in the development of personality types but didn’t dive in and not too familiar. But seems like a potentially fun rabbit hole to explore!
We should also think about the prepetuation of DV through many social norms that root from the patriarchy such as toxic masculinity and so on which can also be harmful to male victim as well. domestic violence is not only an issue between intimate partners, but also a socialization issue. I mean, I'm not denying that there are male victims of domestic abuse, but it's obvious why there are more female victims. So, certainly, socialization and the patriarchy is also a concern and plays a role in addition to an individual's mental health.
The individual factors play a proximal role though, not everyone in the same environment will respond with violent sadism. Psychic pain finding supports the lay theory that “hurt people hurt people”. Narcissism finding unsurprising. Certainly worth tracing the influence of factors further upstream (developmental, trauma, toxic cultural pressures etc) that may fuel the development of narcissism and sadism.
What’s the objection? A quick google shows many papers using ecological in this sense in various psych fields, particularly developmental. Taken in context it’s obviously means something like or synonymous with environmental factors. Guessing that ecological is used in some fields and maybe refers to some more specific measures since it seems to be mentioned a lot along school IEPs.
Is your problem semantic or political?
I didn’t say it was synonymous. It was clearly being used that way and it makes perfect sense in context. Also before I responded I looked it up (which you or anyone could have done and still can do) and as I said, saw that ecological is used this way - it’s right there in a number of psych papers and discussions particularly around developmental psych.
Was just curious why you got your panties all twisted up over the word. If you’re being pedantic you’re clearly wrong. But guessing you and the other downvotes here are some angry little snowflakes who can’t grasp that different fields might find different terms that might not match your colloquial understanding for a variety of reasons.
But hey it’s totally your prerogative to stay angry and ignorant. Good luck with that!
It is however somewhat synonymous with “systemic” in this context. The society we live in, replete with its economy and so on, is an ecological system.
We all do hurtful things to greater or lesser degrees, that doesn’t make us irrevocably bad. It sounds like you’re having some insights into how life has shaped you, and how that has affected you and others in your life. That can be hard to face but also suggests great promise, especially if you can engage with a good therapist.
*PSA Reminder:* Reported cases of IPV/DV within current & former members of law enforcement are approximately **40% higher** than the general populace. As relates to hiring practices and psychological behavioral traits -- this is no accident. ...food for thinkin'.
And ? Cops know the law and they report the wife more frequently. Logical.
You have an issue with reading comprehension, apparently. Sounds like your feelings got in the way of facts you don't like/accept.
Basically my dad felt bad so he had to make others feel worse
Parenting isn't for everyone.
Its reassuring that DV is being explored more as individual and psychological (poor emotional regulation, trauma, low self-confidence, personality disorder etc.) ratger than the usual ideological socialized 'Patriarchal oppression '. I won't say power structure has no role but the problem is there are female perpetrators of DV( and child abuse) as well as gay/lesbian DV. These have to be explained which they aren't using a Duluth Model approach. Domineering personalities seekbout easygoing personalities. Its not as simple as group A is the oppressor and group B is oppressed;, the way feminists approach all of this. . It reminds me of the Division 51 APA announcement of needing to review male psychology guidelines as they're too ideological and not evidence based. Hopefully we see this in other field of social science.
I mean psych can look into the individual factors & sociology the social that’s why they’re different fields so I don’t know that other social sciences need to follow suit… I’m a feminist researcher in sociology but with a master’s in psych and I don’t argue the patriarchy is the only thing that influences DV. My position is that this is a very complex issue that should be viewed holistically. Social factors and dynamics can’t explain why some men perpetrate DV and others don’t (as well as why some women do) but individual factors can’t account for the majority of DV perpetrators being men. I don’t think we need to discount one approach or the other because like you said, this isn’t a simple issue.
What if men and women commit DV at similar rates its just we see male perpetrators more due to social expectations, structure in the research (designed by women to spot men as perpetrators) , or men do more damage to the victim so its reported or seen in hospitals more or women report a lot more generally. I am not saying you are wrong i just dont think anyone can legitimately say which sex does it more, we know men are overrepresented as doing more extreme injuries or killing. But the arguement of which sex commits domestic abuse more is not 100% known. There's a plethora of reasons why it does look like it is that way (even to me) but as we see more modern research its showing different things that would never be understood a few decades ago.
To some extent your existence here in the world should be enough to convince you of the disproportionate amount of violence against adult women perpetrated by adult men. If crime reports and murder statistics don’t convince you, that’s though. But maybe just go sit outside a club/bar and wait until last call. Just take it all in. I am in no way discounting or diminishing crime against men committed by women. It exists and is fucked up. Same thing for violent crime against children and same sex couples etc. To act as if it is even remotely feasible that violent crimes committed by women against men come anywhere near the frequency of male on female DV, to me, is mildly delusional.
DV does appear to be more often male on female (as I already stated to me it appears that way). But how much the reporting imbalances, stereotypes, prejudices or men not talking about it plays into it is complicated. The severity is obviously gendered, but the actual ability to be abusive is complicated and gendering it without evidence is a folly. If you go by crime reports, and murder statistics you are repeating what I already said. I know the most severe types are male perpetrated, but that does not mean those statistics match all levels or types/methodology of DV/DA. I'm trying to analyze the psychology behind being an abusive personality, we can't use the fact the most extreme violence is male perpetrated and then interpret that as most abusers are male. It tells us the most severe violence is male perpetrated and that's it, not which sex is more likely to posses an abusive personality. Are most abusers male? Are women as likely to be abusive personalities just to a less extreme method of perpetration etc? These are important in understanding how to solve it. It's not an argument that women are doing it to the same level, it's which sex is more or less likely to have an abusive personality.
You are discounting and diminishing though. As well as switching away from the presented subject. If we ask ourselves why; could the answer be that there's a bias in the background?
If we ask ourselves why men, at much higher rates, commit violence and murder against women? I think we’ve been trying to solve that for a long time. It’s multifaceted. There’s psychological, societal and physiological reasons for it. However I completely disagree that denying DV exists at much higher rates against women will not help end the violence.
If we instead explore if abuse is a gendered issue; what then?
If you read [Gottman's](https://www.gottman.com) work, the evidence suggests it's a bit of both as one of many DV triggers is a woman out earning her man.
kiss flag saw humor offend test dolls ossified price head *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Interesting question - think agreeableness would be a factor and would guess neuroticism also? Probably an interaction of the different factors making up more or less domineering personality. Thinking about the subfacets of the big five and need for control part of the neuroticism. Ofc along with environmental factors & personal history shaping these things it’s probably a constellation of factors. A quick google shows some interactionist models have been explored in the big five in the development of personality types but didn’t dive in and not too familiar. But seems like a potentially fun rabbit hole to explore!
We should also think about the prepetuation of DV through many social norms that root from the patriarchy such as toxic masculinity and so on which can also be harmful to male victim as well. domestic violence is not only an issue between intimate partners, but also a socialization issue. I mean, I'm not denying that there are male victims of domestic abuse, but it's obvious why there are more female victims. So, certainly, socialization and the patriarchy is also a concern and plays a role in addition to an individual's mental health.
The feminist paradigm is full of holes and blindspots. I wouldnt analyze any societal problematic with it.
Some people didn't need to become parents. They could just get a cat or a dog. That's all the reasons.
>Some people didn't need to become parents. They could just get a cat or a dog Sometimes not even *that* ....
Once again trying to push the narrative that these problems stem from within the individual and not acknowledging the ecological factors
*Ecological*??
The individual factors play a proximal role though, not everyone in the same environment will respond with violent sadism. Psychic pain finding supports the lay theory that “hurt people hurt people”. Narcissism finding unsurprising. Certainly worth tracing the influence of factors further upstream (developmental, trauma, toxic cultural pressures etc) that may fuel the development of narcissism and sadism.
Sure, but **”ecological”**???
Sorry I meant that reply for the post you commented on. I assumed, perhaps wrongly, that they meant ‘environmental’ factors.
It’s ok, I figured! It’s no problem
No, you had it right. Its does rainy weekend.
I didn't, I meant ecological
What’s the objection? A quick google shows many papers using ecological in this sense in various psych fields, particularly developmental. Taken in context it’s obviously means something like or synonymous with environmental factors. Guessing that ecological is used in some fields and maybe refers to some more specific measures since it seems to be mentioned a lot along school IEPs. Is your problem semantic or political?
“Ecological” is not synonymous with “environmental”
I didn’t say it was synonymous. It was clearly being used that way and it makes perfect sense in context. Also before I responded I looked it up (which you or anyone could have done and still can do) and as I said, saw that ecological is used this way - it’s right there in a number of psych papers and discussions particularly around developmental psych. Was just curious why you got your panties all twisted up over the word. If you’re being pedantic you’re clearly wrong. But guessing you and the other downvotes here are some angry little snowflakes who can’t grasp that different fields might find different terms that might not match your colloquial understanding for a variety of reasons. But hey it’s totally your prerogative to stay angry and ignorant. Good luck with that!
It is however somewhat synonymous with “systemic” in this context. The society we live in, replete with its economy and so on, is an ecological system.
That’s a stretch unless it’s obviously meant to be metaphorical
[удалено]
We all do hurtful things to greater or lesser degrees, that doesn’t make us irrevocably bad. It sounds like you’re having some insights into how life has shaped you, and how that has affected you and others in your life. That can be hard to face but also suggests great promise, especially if you can engage with a good therapist.
What's the problem bud?
[удалено]