Encouraging domestic abuse.

Thank you all for your responses. Nothing resolved of course. But it has helped to clarify my thinking.

I was once the only man attending a domestic violence working group (for professional, not personal reasons) and I was grateful that the women realised the situation might be a bit sensitive for me and made a real effort to make sure I felt at home. As far as I can work out, domestic violence occurs mostly when someone cannot control their anger or where they feel inadequate. The problem is not being angry or even feeling violent impulses but failing to control them. Most people have wanted to hit someone and I suspect most men at least have kicked a door, chair etc. However, domestic violence seems to be addictive: it becomes the default response to frustration of any sort. I can see how writing, including mine, could in principle encourage this behaviour especially for literal-minded people who couldn't distinguish the real world from fantasy, but in practice I suspect there's virtually no crossover. For most of us the punishment scenarios are sexy. I don't think they are for domestic abusers, though the same people may separately take part in more than one kind of abuse.

I think nibra deserves praise for raising the issue.

Here. Here. Ave nibra!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

To be fair though it is usually women who are the victims of domestic abuse. When I was about nine I had a female cousin exactly four days older than me and she could beat me at arm wrestling which was pretty embarrassing. Thanks though to my intensive chip butty diet I have come a long way since then and I don't think she would stand an earthly now! Woman are rarely stronger than men and it's usually verbal bullying. I mean we've all had the odd ashtray thrown at us or been soaked by the occasional glass of wine but I should think physical abuse by a woman against a man is reasonably rare. On the other hand how many times do you see women walking around with a black eye or split lip. The demon drink and too much testosterone are the main culprits I would guess.

I don't know the figures, but I suspect that of abuse of men by women is possibly more common than we realise. It is one of those crimes not always reported because many men fear they would be laughed at. The 6' rugby player won't want to admit he is being abused by his 5' 1", 7 stone partner.

Yes, men are generally physically stronger, but most men have been brought up to believe that 'you don't hit girls'. So, while they could defend themselves against a violent woman, they won't.

I also think that women, perhaps because of their lesser strength, tend to use weapons. I have seen the results of a glass ashtray hurled in a man's face, and it's not pretty. (Yes, we all know there are women who are built like brick shithouses and could go ten rounds with Mike Tyson ... I'm generalising).

However, as has been stated before, books and films are full of rape, abuse and murder ... I've read and seen plenty, and I imagine most people have seen at least some. The majority, however, do not go out and commit those crimes - unless the predisposition is already there.

We cannot legislate for lunacy. If we did, then everything - films, books, games - would be reduced to a childlike level. I don't believe what we write here encourages domestic violence, any more than The Texas Chainsaw Massacre encourages mass murder.

About domestic abuse. Couples get into fights and they use the weapons that are available to them. Most men are physically stronger so when pushed they tend to use that. Most women are better at talking so they tend to be more verbally abusive. Both men and women are equally abusive but just in different ways.

There was a study done of relationships where the woman was physically stronger, either because she was just naturally stronger or because the man was elderly or disabled. In those relationships the men were just as often physically abused as in more traditional relationships.

It has been often wrongly stated that if women were in charge the world would be more peaceful. I doubt that. When women have become heads of state they are just as likely to be as violent as men. When Indira Ghandi was prime minister of India India was always fighting with Pakistan about something. When Golda Mier was prime minister of Israel there was a war between Israel and the Arabs. When Margret Thatcher was prime minister of England she went to war over the Falkland Islands. Mary Queen of Scots was so violent that she was called Bloody Mary, which is where the name of the drink comes from.

Violence is not related to gender, we just express it in different ways.

I think it would be more peaceful if women were in charge but of course we can't make the mistake we made last time with a certain iron lady. The trouble is the women that get to the top often seem worse than the men. Perhaps because they have to be even more ruthless to get to the top job as the dice are still loaded against them. Even when a woman gets to the top she is still surrounded by men. It would be interesting to see a women only cabinet or parliament in charge of the country.

The actor, Alistair Sim, felt that only children should be allowed to vote and be in any kind of power.

Oh I have been to loads of domestics where the male has been the victim. When women are bad, they are really bad for some reason. I would much rather deal with men fighting etc than women any day!

I agree. I taught for 25 years at a secondary school in a rough and deprived area. Fights were fairly common in the playground, and while I would happily wade in to separate two warring boys, the girls were a different matter.

Boys punch; girls kick and gouge, bite and pull hair. And I'm not talking about children; these were adolescents, most of them bigger and stronger than I was. (I'm only little!)