Sociology

Considerable evidence has been collected by sociologists over the previous years on the occurrence of abuse among men and women in heterosexual relationships in domestic relations. Partly owing to the information collected, partner abuse amongst heterosexual partners has been established as a major social ill that has to be addressed assertively through public-education campaigns, funding of extensive support services, and more so, the re-training of the law enforcement officers who includes the police, prosecutors as well as judges. Nonetheless, these policy measures diverge considerably from the sociological data collected, that ostensibly motivates these sociologists, which has established that until now there is overwhelming gender specific abuse. Meaning that, partner abuse is continuously viewed and acted on as if it was nearly solely about men abusing innocent women as well as their children, in spite of the considerable sociological evidence indicating that a large amount of abuse is as well suffered by men. Continual sketchy reports from male victims together with participation of law-enforcement system indicates that such ideological stress on male as the main or only perpetrators has resulted in deleterious impact on the unprejudiced administration of justice, leading to more harsh treatment of men than women upon being accused of partner abuse.

Intimate partner violence
Ever since the start of methodical research concerning intimate partner violence, (IPV) started in the 1970s, among the most controversial issue has been intimate partner violence by women. Despite the fact that available data from authorities such as crime agencies and hospital reports indicate that women are the main victims of IPV, studies based on population using the community or convenience samples have persistently indicated that women commit IPV as much as men do.  However, there are those criticizing this observation by stating that, women commit IPV only as a way of self-defense or vengeance, and thus the main concern ought to be addressing abuse against women. Still others like Felson, argue that violence acts are human problems and not a gender issue thus violence committed by women ought not to be overlooked merely because they were done in self-defense.

In a study carried by Hines, Brown and Dunning to determine the extent of IPV against men, 190 male callers who had called for help through Domestic Abuse Helpline for were studied. The entire male population sample had been abused physically by their women partners, a small number of them dreaded their wives abuse and were being stalked. Out of this number (190), 90 of them experienced controlling habits and a number of them reported frustrations occasioned by domestic violence system.

Callers reports showed that their female abusers were having a history of drugalcohol, trauma, mental disturbance and homicidal.  A number of themes were established in this study.
Generally, male victims suffering from severe IPV in a lot of ways are similar to female victims in the same category. This is because they both experience resembling controlling as well as physically abusive conduct from their partners. However, in a lot of ways what male victims experience is more unique to them. It is worth noting that this study did not aim at getting the prevalence rate of severe IPV committed against men.

The themes observed included the fact that male victims of severe IPV can go through life-threatening violence acts, and usually dread their wives violent behaviors. At times, their wives stalk them and try to control their activities. Therefore, the study concluded that domestic violence is normally a human problem and not a gender issue. As such, violence committed by women towards their male partners ought to be taken seriously in order to achieve the objective of ending all domestic violence.

Critics who oppose population-based studies mainly are feminist, who assert that studies indicating that both men and women abuse each other in a relation in similar level, do not essentially indicate that men and women are similarly violent. They assert that basing on the violence acts disregards motivations, impetuous events, as well as the interpersonal and the historical background of the abuse. Thus, they argue that if a person has to understand domestic violence between men and women, then according to them, the person needs to initially understand the power structure within society, a society that men dominate it socially, economically and politically.

Such societal power structure is later  reflected within interpersonal relationships, where men abuse the power they posses in their relationships with women since they have been brought up socially believing that they got the right to dominate over women, even if it means using violence. In view of this, many feminists assert that, domestic violence is a gender issue where men perpetuate violence acts against women, and when women carry out violence acts to their men, then it is mainly as a result of self-defense or they are only identifying themselves with the male antagonists.  This implies that, according to the feminist structure, males are main perpetrators while female are the key victims.

However, those arguing that violence committed by women is as well a major issue have accepted that violence committed by men towards women is a far more serious issue since it can lead to more serious injuries. Yet again, they assert that for the correct understanding of domestic violence, it must be acknowledged that women can as well become violent without being abused. These scholars base on a number of past studies that have indicated that

Most women who abuse their male partners do so in not state self-defense as being their motive for their violent acts. But, they cite the main motives as being anger, revenge for emotional harm, jealousy and attempts to have control over their men.

50 percent of all violent disagreements are started by women. In about 50 percent of abusive relationships, the violence in these relationships is mutual and about 25 of the violence is committed by male partners alone, while about 25 violence is carried out sorely by female.

Averagely, men and women posses equally powers in American families (McDonald, 1980).

Therefore, these scholars assert that, domestic violence requires to be seen as a human issue, and not as a gender issue.

The above debate has resulted in some scholars arguing that there are two equally exclusive categories of IPV, these are, one, common couple violence, that is normally reported in researches carried out on the general population, and it is illustrated by trivial mutual violence among husbands and wives. Two, terroristic violence, a more serious violence that is commonly established in studies carried out on shelter populations of abused women and also criminal justice studies women undergoing terroristic violence are normally subjected to planned, grave and continuous beatings that are founded in a broad system of control, thus any violent act by the abused women would be normally as a self-defense act.

This type of typology has showed to be applicable for settling a number of the controversies surrounding the results of studies on violence committed by women against their male partners. Nevertheless, this typology has basically overlooked men who are the opposite number to the female victims regarding terroristic violence.

One of the reasons why male victims of serious IPV by women seem to be overlooked in this typology is because of the fact that there have been rarely systematic studies carried out on this issue. Likewise, there have been little grassroots attempts to assist these male victims suffering from IPV, and those available are not as well managed and widespread as the ones provided for female victims, that have permitted studies on abused women to proliferate since battered women have got places where they can meet.

The services provided for IPV have only targeted abused women mainly due to the fact that the organizers of these services have adopted the feminist view point that domestic violence is a result of patriarchal structures placed within our societies.

The second reason, which is also related to the first one, as to why the male victims of terroristic domestic violence have not received extensive research is because a lot of researchers in this field refute that such male victims exist, rather if they do exist, the level to which women abuse men is not significant to be taken as a social issue.

Present circumstances for studies on male severe IPV can only be compared to the circumstance for female server IPV before the setting up of shelter movements, very little was known about them since there were few places available where studies could be carried about them. Likewise, those who are interested in male IPV have failed to carry out studies on them owing to the fact there is no known shelter places where abused men come to meet or are sheltered.

Nonetheless, population-based research has revealed that male victims of serious IPV do exist. Recent records from National Family Violence Survey indicate that about 4.8 (2.6 million men) countrywide report being violently abused by their wives. This violence includes acts such as punching, beatings, kicking, and use of knife or and guns.

Its necessary that studies should be carried on these male victims in order to understand the context of this kind of abusive relationships. The moment we are able to understand the context, we can offer additional support to one of the two opposing views regarding domestic violence (if its gender based or human problem).

Reporting violence
Grant says that in a study carried out by Browining and Dutton (1986), where they worked with a sample population of couple from Vancouver, they established major variations in the reporting of men and women regarding the number and kinds of violent acts that took place in their relationship. In a follow-up study carried out by it established that 18 percent of men abusers and 25 percent of women abusers denied carrying out violent acts that they had earlier admitted.  However, it was not surprising to find out that both men and women underreported their individual perpetration of partner abuse, but men seem to underreport this considerably compared to women.

Maybe, the most surprising aspect is that both men and women as well seem to underreport cases in which they are victimized. Even getting dependable, independent data of victimization presents clear complexity, nonetheless established that women underreported their own victimization by 43 whereas men percentage of underreporting was 93.

Owing to the fact that self- reporting of those abused seem to be much more dependable compared to reporting of the perpetration, and because majority of studies concerning partner violence depend on the self reports given by the victims, the reality that men might be as much double possibly to underreport when abused compared to their women counterparts may be important.

There various reasons as to why men may seem to underreport cases in which they are abused as compared to women. One, reason is that fact that, a lot of partner violence men experience is unlikely to be seen by them as being an abuse at the first place. Phrases such as buttered husbands are not very much available when it comes to men, who are victims such as battered wife. For example, when a man is hit at the genitals by his woman is not seen as sexual violence by a lot of people. Indeed, such an act is played for laughter on television regularly.

The second reason of male underreporting may because men are much less self-conscious of the bodily injuries they get from their abusive partners. This results from the fact that men from tender age are intensely socialized to repress their pain, suffering and fear. The third reason is that, the memories of men regarding their victimization are likely to be less clear as that of women. Partly this is because of the earlier two points however, it is also due to the fact that men seem to be less critically injured less frightened of their partners. Lastly, a higher social stigma is attached to men who suffer form domestic abuse by their partners compared to women experiencing abusive relationships. This results in victimized men being more wary in admitting that they have been victimized.

In studies carried out by Grant it was revealed that men who are experiencing violent relationships by their partners or who are abusive of their partners are both disadvantaged, and thus are treated in a bad way compared to women by criminal agencies. The study established that men are likely not to report being victimized because their view it as being unmanly to report such cases. Another reason may be because they suppose that the authorities will not take complaints from them in a serious way.  Or, if a third part reports such cases the law enforcements agencies are less likely to charge the women who abused them compared to the way they would to male suspects.  Indeed, police appear reluctant to lay any charges on women in cases of partner abuse unless a serious crimeabuse has taken place or there are other aggravating issues that are present.

The outcome of this aspect is even though a number of women are charged of partner violence the number is still low when compared to sociological data available on partner violence. The classes of female-only violence and mutual violence appear particularly underrepresented in charging data available from the police.

The moment the police finishes laying partner violence charges, they are most likely to put a man into jail than a woman, regardless of factors like the degree of injury suffered and the past criminal records. Neither do prosecutors seem to help in this disparately unkind treatment of men. Unfortunately, prosecutors seem to follow cases that involve male suspects more serious than those cases where women are involved as suspects. Therefore, men are more possibly to be found as guilty, and likewise are more unlikely to gain from withdrawn charges, though in many cases their cases may be of no-injury.

Men are also unlikely to gain from positive plea bargains in spite of the fact men averagely seem to commit less serious offences.  More so, men are mostly likely to get severe sentences compared to women, in spite of taking other factors on board. In fact, gender is usually the most important aspect in predicting the way the law-enforcement agencies reacts to cases of partner violence. This system of unfavorable results indicates all the typical signs of a system that reinforces discrimination against men, which is supported by myths, stereotypes as well as false ideologies.

Conclusion
One of the major debates regarding women abuse against men has been intimate partner violence (IPV). Feminists normally argue that IPV is only committed by men against women however, others state that violence and abuse are human nature and no gender based, thus both men and women commit violence against each other, indeed in studies carried out, it was established that women can commit as much violence against their partners as men. However, when it comes to report both underreport, but men highly underreport their abuse, this is because their feel authorities will not act on such issue or that they are not badly harmed. from the above review, we can concluded that violence against partner is human nature and not gender based and a high percentage of men are abused in their relations, more help thus should be given to such men in addressing partner violence.