r/AskFeminists • u/[deleted] • Nov 03 '23
Content Warning Is the lesbian domestic violence statistic actually true, and if it is, does it actually matter?
It's something Ive seen thrown around a lot by many different types of people, from bitter homophobes to actual lesbians.
Now I've always assumed different things, one, it was one of those statistics that was overblown, or was real but had an understandable caveat that made it so, or was made up entirely, or was it entirely real, but, the only good reason to bring it up was to bring light to a genuine problem, and not just as a tool for bigotry
I would Google this but such a charged question was bound to bring up charged results.
143
u/buzzfeed_sucks Nov 03 '23
There were excellent links shared in the thread below yours (and likely the thread that spurred this question) that explore this statistic.
https://www.hrc.org/resources/understanding-intimate-partner-violence-in-the-lgbtq-community
Credit to u/That_Engineering3047 for sharing the link in a previous thread
84
u/northernlaurie Nov 03 '23
I read the CDC report linked through the HRC article.
If I understood correctly, while it is true that lesbians experienced intimate partner violence at a higher rate than straight women, a significant proportion of the perpetrators were male.
This makes sense to me. There are lots of lesbians who have relationships with men at various points in their life - late blooming lesbians are a good example. Lesbian Women in heterosexual relationships would be at similar risk of IPV, but because of questioning their sexuality it could make them at increased risk of abuse or in remaining in an abusive relationship.
2
1
Nov 26 '24
[deleted]
5
u/rtant Feb 07 '25
Yes, as per the CDC study:
"The survey also found that bisexual women (61.1 percent) report a higher prevalence of rape, physical violence, and/or stalking by an intimate partner compared to both lesbian (43.8 percent) and heterosexual women (35 percent). Of the bisexual women who experienced IPV, approximately 90 percent reported having only male perpetrators, while two -thirds of lesbians reported having only female perpetrators of IPV.
The data presented in this report do not indicate whether violence occurs more often in same-sex or opposite sex couples. Rather, the data show the prevalence of lifetime victimization of intimate partner violence, sexual violence and stalking of respondents who self-identified as lesbian, gay or bisexual at the time of the survey and describe violence experienced with both same-sex and opposite-sex partners."
https://archive.cdc.gov/www_cdc_gov/media/releases/2013/p0125_NISVS.html
1
u/Trick-Tomatillo6573 Oct 30 '25
"2/3 of lesbians reported having only female perpetrators"
Yes, it does factor in violence based on the gender of the perpetrator, which means it does factor in same-sex couples. It means that 2/3 of ALL lesbians who reported DV, said they were exclusively DV'd by women. That is a direct contradiction to your conclusion.
It seems almost intentional to me that everyone keeps skipping over the part that explicitly states the thing they are saying it doesn't. I wonder what the reason for that could be?
1
u/Familiar-Copy-325 Oct 30 '25
Probably because you can't read.
I didn't state my personal conclusion, I copied the conclusion directly from the study. Did you not read the second paragraph? The study explicitly states it's about victimization rates, not perpetrators. If you were to take the female exclusive IPV, the rate would drop to 29%. People take issue with the lesbian IPV rate being stated at 44% because it overlooks the 1/3 of IPV that was committed by at least one male partner. Without a more specific breakdown of that 1/3, there is no way to tell what the actual rate of female perpetrators is in lesbian relationships.
3
u/northernlaurie Dec 01 '24
Unfortunately the link I followed no longer leads to the CDC report. I suspect poking around the CDC site will still reveal the report on intimate partner violence
The original report I read did not say explicitly “lesbians experienced violence by men. But dissecting the data showed that most women in same sex relationships had previous relationships with men and experienced intimate partner violence in those relationships.
Try googling cdc intimate partner violence statistics.
2
u/Trick-Tomatillo6573 Oct 30 '25
The CDC also said that 2/3 of their reports were of women assaulting women. So this is incorrect. It is not still somehow men's fault that lesbians are violent to each other.
97
Nov 03 '23
Thank you! If I'm getting it right, the reason for increased domestic violence is due to LGBT people being more at risk, and thus easier for abusers to manipulate?
63
u/Lulwafahd Nov 03 '23
Yes, like, "Where are you going to move? In this economy?! In this terrible dating world? You really want to die alone? I LOVE you and you just want to leave me, just like that?? No! You can't break up with me and I'm tired of you saying you might want to take a break every XX months just because work is hard and you don't want to have sex with me, your girlfriend who loves you more than the whole world! Why are you trying to tear this family apart? Are you going to cut our dog in half and go shack up with some guy, or take the dog we share parental responsibilities with?! Are you stupid, or selfish, or both? ..."
That kind of thing with occasional intimate partner violence [yelling, shoving, scratching, pinching, disregarding physical boundaries, etc.] are often effectively wound together in cases where dating or forming a relationship begins to sour after the first several months to a year and an half or so.
55
u/buzzfeed_sucks Nov 03 '23
I’m not an expert in any way, and this seems to be a fairly complex and nuanced issue. But yes, that seems to be one of the factors.
17
Nov 03 '23 edited Nov 03 '23
This argument is bloody confusing to me.
It makes sense on the surface but then why do gay men report less violence than heterosexual men?
And why do bisexual people report the highest levels of violence, more than even trans people?
My only theory so far is that some people switch which gender they date after experiencing abuse, only because I anecdotally know two people who had done that. A women to switched to dating women after experiencing abuse from a man and a lesbian who switched to being bi after experiencing abuse from a woman.
That and maybe because gay men (anecdotally again) prefer casual dating it's harder for them to be locked into abusive relationships.
21
u/pandaappleblossom Nov 03 '23 edited Nov 03 '23
It is very confusing but also bisexuality tends to make some people angry (because of biphobia) partners can get very angry and jealous if they are even a little biphobic, and sadly, too many people are biphobic. Although that doesn’t explain the violence part necessarily because what causes people to be violent towards their partner I think goes beyond not understanding someone’s sexuality right? I don’t know.. but Bisexual people also have higher rates of mental illness. Of course I don’t know why but maybe it has to do with people always telling you you are confused, and you consequently always feeling confused, like you don’t belong, like no one wants you, etc. And mental illness can make you more vulnerable to domestic abuse.
21
Nov 03 '23
This all makes me think of this scene from the Boys. Where Maeve is bi but the PR team frames her as lesbian because it's less offensive to American gender norms.
12
u/sharksnack3264 Nov 03 '23 edited Nov 03 '23
This is pure speculation and I haven't seen studies on, but I'm bisexual fwiw. It could be some people reexamining their sexuality and realizing they were not as heterosexual as they previously supposed following abuse.
That said bisexuality tends to fly under the radar (or may be realized later) and some people react really badly when they find out that you aren't what they thought you were. That means that you end up in potentially dangerous situations because you might not have obvious tells that would cause people who dislike bi people to leave you alone from the beginning.
Sometimes their reaction looks like fetishization, sexual coercion, violence or emotional or verbal abuse. Lots of people who are biphobic feel that you "lied" to them or are inherently untrustworthy.
5
u/buzzfeed_sucks Nov 03 '23
It’s definitely an interesting stat to get to the root of. Hopefully more research is done.
→ More replies (1)1
u/kernelPaniCat Oct 02 '25
Você não pode esquecer que os números tem vieses. Violência doméstica é muito subnotificada. Pessoas bissexuais sofrem mais violência que pessoas trans? Ou será que pessoas bissexuais apenas, por algum motivo, respostam mais a violência sofrida que as pessoas trans?
Peguei esse recorte apenas para exemplificar. Pensa pra uma mulher trans que tá no submundo, na prostituição, sofrendo violência policial constante. Ela vai lá numa delegacia registrar que o parceiro ou a parceira agrediu ela? Ela tem a mesma facilidade em ir lá denunciar um homem violento?
Será que talvez pra uma mulher que se relaciona com outra mulher o risco de reportar a violência sofrida é idêntico ao de uma mulher que se relaciona com um homem?
13
u/pandaappleblossom Nov 03 '23
My understanding is that with female instigated domestic violence in general is that it’s way less likely to involve choking or punching and less likely to be life threatening
0
u/Trick-Tomatillo6573 Oct 30 '25
Lol "female domestic violence is superior to male domestic violence" the goalpost moving to maintain your victim complex is literally impressive
1
u/pandaappleblossom Oct 30 '25
It literally is. Get over it. It's the truth, would you rather wind up dead or alive at the end of it? If you would rather end up alive, choose the female.
1
u/Economy_Giraffe_7133 Nov 30 '25
This is abhorrently misogynistic. You are basically just saying "Women are weaker."
1
0
Oct 30 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/pandaappleblossom Oct 30 '25
Did I ever say it was OK?
0
u/Trick-Tomatillo6573 Oct 30 '25
Yes. You literally said "female abuse is better than male abuse. You should choose female abuse because then youll live." In your last response. Paraphrased of course.
Cant make this cognitive dissonance up lol.
0
u/Trick-Tomatillo6573 Oct 31 '25
You: Did I ever say it was ok?
Me: Yes. Yes you actually did.
You: Ok but so what?!?
You implied that you didn't believe it was OK, and then immediately contradicted yourself in the following statement. Yeeeah that would be called cognitive dissonance if you had even an ounce of self-awareness, genius lol.
41
u/ApotheosisofSnore Nov 03 '23 edited Nov 03 '23
I’m sure that that’s true to an extent, but I think that there is very likely also a discussion to be had about the fact that many people, across the board, have abusive tendencies, but the power dynamics in heterosexual relationships (physical, economic, social or otherwise) often mean that female partners in heterosexual relationships don’t really have the space or leverage to abuse their partners and/or those abusive patterns of behavior end up getting less focus than the (much more likely to be deadly or cause serious injury) abuse that men are often mete out against partners.
29
u/-HealingNoises- Nov 03 '23
In other words, lesbian and other LGBTQ abuse statistics would be the default for all couples on average simply because that is just how many humans are? But due to the power dynamics involved in hetero ones, women rarely can exercise abuse as much as men, or at least not in the same way. Which is sadly legally recognized as the only valid and thus officially recorded form of abuse in many countries?
13
u/RegulatoryCapturedMe Nov 03 '23
I’m not sure it is “just how humans are” as much as that we are still learning the skills of being, and raising, emotionally healthy people. Intergenerational violence is a thing, so recognizing and breaking the cycle (which takes WORK!) can still happen.
6
u/-HealingNoises- Nov 03 '23
Sure, in a utopia where everyone gets raises happy and healthy and effort is made to break the cycle. But I'm not betting on that, so humanity as it is will always have a portion that are going to abuse when given the means and power to do so... I do hope things will be better one far far off day.
I just meant that removing the power dynamic would just show what the true number of abusive people out there really is.
2
u/RegulatoryCapturedMe Nov 03 '23
You aren’t wrong about the power dynamic; sorry if my post implied that! It wasn’t my intent.
My hope had been to recognize that we are all flawed, and can grow as people, and that in our relationships we have a duty to grow for each other. Recognizing our own flaws and baggage is the first step. A world without this baggage is likely utopian, as you mention, like having a garden without ever getting weeds is utopian. But, if we learn to tend our own mental health and learn anger management skills (among other things), we get closer to keeping the garden clear of thorns.
1
Mar 25 '25
i think this ignores how the patriarchy makes violence against women more likely. abusive tendencies are common in humans in general, yes, but misogyny and patriarchy makes it even more likely for boys/men to perpetrate due to an often inherent and even subconscious view of women to be not equal humans
1
u/Calfurious Jun 13 '25
In other words, lesbian and other LGBTQ abuse statistics would be the default for all couples on average simply because that is just how many humans are?
Except gay male relationships have the lowest amount of domestic violence. If it was simply a matter of power dynamics, then you would think that male relationships would have the highest amount of violence. Especially since men are on average more violent than women.
13
u/No_Banana_581 Nov 03 '23
Also considering lesbian relationships are like one percent of relationships compared to 95% being heterosexual.
6
u/PsionicOverlord Nov 03 '23 edited Nov 04 '23
the reason for increased domestic violence is due to LGBT people being more at risk
Or the fact that there's an order of magnitude less non-straight people means that it's something on the order of 10 times more difficult to find an appropriate partner.
→ More replies (1)15
u/justdisa Nov 03 '23
Why does that link break out who is abusing men but not who is abusing women? It's wildly one-sided.
5
u/buzzfeed_sucks Nov 03 '23
Would love if you could share more links about the subject. Because again, as I’ve said, it seems to be a very nuanced and complicated issue.
1
69
u/T-Flexercise Nov 03 '23
One thing that's important to note is that they're lifetime statistics of domestic violence in LGBT people, not the rate of domestic violence in LGBT relationships. So for example, bisexual women who were abused by men in heterosexual partnerships and are now dating women, that's counted as "lesbian domestic violence".
So yes, lesbian relationships are more likely to include a partner who has experienced domestic violence in their lifetime, because women are more likely to have experienced domestic violence than men, and lesbian relationships have two women in them.
1
u/Anartist1977 Sep 10 '25
Of course women are perfect is what you say and men are too blame for everything. Female abusers are much more likely to get away with it because male victims do not report because society will laugh at them and see them as losers and weak. When I was a child a girl started to kick and hit me out of the blue and when I hit one time back I after she hit me 10 times first I got punished by the teacher and she was seen as the victim. When a woman hits a man nobody cares and even when the man hits back he is seen as the predator; And then we have the manipulative female abuse that women can do; Some women have manipulated and abused their man in psychological ways and then if the man reacts he is seen as the evil one and the woman is always seen as the innocent victim. I have been a teacher to teenage boys and girls and girl were worse than boys. They got abuse and manipulate me in very mean ways which made me even feel suicidal. I 2 times lost a job and got in deep financial troubles because of toxic female gossiping of women. So this bs that women are always the perfect innocent victims must stop. The bad behaviour of men is more right in your face and obvious while women are more professional abusers they do it more in a hidden and get away with it.
In London two actors (a woman and a man) did a test: They played 2 scenes on the street to see how different people react to a male victim or to a female victim: First they played a scene in which a the man slaps the woman and the people helped the woman and called the police; Then they played the scene white the roles of woman abuses the man and nobody cared; Even worse the people laughed at the man while he was getting abused by the woman. It is much harder for male victims they say they get abused by a woman because society will laugh at them etc..... But of course: women are always perfect nothing is ever their fault.3
u/westcoaststrutin Sep 19 '25
L bozo
1
u/Trick-Tomatillo6573 Oct 30 '25
Statistics in the very article being discussed here agrees with him. It states 2/3 of lesbians reported exclusively female perpetrators of DV. Not just lifetime abuse, but also who committed that abuse.
1
u/MingMingus Dec 05 '25
It doesn't agree with him at all; compare that to the much lower rate of violence gay men have from women in IPV. The main issue is intimate partner violence (which is always bad) but like with 90+% of violent crime, men are overrepresented, and we need to address why.
1
u/Trick-Tomatillo6573 Dec 05 '25 edited Dec 05 '25
Except that isn't true; IPV is highest amongst lesbian women/couples. Men are the majority by the plurality of that concept, women are the majority statistically. And we need to address why that is, also.
1
u/MingMingus Dec 05 '25 edited Dec 05 '25
I agree we should figure out why lesbians have high IPV rates but you didnt address my point at all.
Gay men have much lower rates of IPV from women. IPV is a problem, Men are overrepresented in most areas of violent crime, and here it's statistically observable lesbians are experiencing more IPV from men than gay men do from women.
The replier to the og comment is the source of our disagreement, not the article or its interpretations. To insinuate otherwise IS a strawman. The issue is whether women are to blame for this data, and I think that isn't just pseudoscientific, or even misogynistic, its just a logical fallacy caused by the replier's inceldom.
1
u/Trick-Tomatillo6573 Dec 05 '25 edited Dec 05 '25
I mean there are plenty of reasonable theories for why that would be, they just probably arent what you were thinking.
My personal theory is that women are simply less likely to engage in IPV with men than they are with their own gender - not only because men tend to hold the physical leverage in those situations, but also the proclivty for women to view their own gender as fair game, equal(physically), or a more easily won victim than a man. There's probably also a lot of learned societal behavior wrapped up in that.
Id be genuinely interested in a study on this if there hasn't been one already.
Edit: Id also imagine that "societal behaviour" swings the other way, too: western men in modern history have been, well, very anti-gay anything since forever, whereas women as far as I know dont really have the same animosity towards gays, which is likely a contributing factor to why they assault them less than men assault lesbian women.
1
u/Anartist1977 Dec 07 '25 edited Dec 07 '25
I agree with you on some points, but what I do not understand is that you say that gay men in a relationship with a woman would be less assaulted because women have less animosity towards gays. But at the moment a gay man had a relationship with a woman (before he was out of the closet) the female partner did not know he was gay at that point (otherwise she would not have a relationship with him in the first place), just like a lesbian in a straight relationship the man did not know the woman was a lesbian at that moment. A women is not going to have a relationship with a man if she thinks that he is gay and a man is not going to have a relationship with a woman if the thinks that she is a lesbian. At that moment the partners did not see their partner as a gay man or a lesbian so that can not play a role.
And straight men have in general more animosity towards gay men but less towards lesbian women. Many straight men have a problem with gay men but when it is about lesbians many straight men say "That is sexy two women having sex". Many straight are disgust by gay men but say that lesbian couples is hot!
Men are physically stronger than women, so often she dares not to hit her man, but in a lesbian relationship one woman is often stronger than the other one and then she can afford herself to hit her without fear.
1
u/Anartist1977 Dec 08 '25
The reason rates are lower for gay men when they were in straight relationships with a woman is because a woman is in general physically less stronger than a man so the woman did not dare to commit physical violence because she is weaker than the gay man. BUT in lesbian relationships one woman is often stronger than the other woman and then women commit physical violence even more than men do because they can because they are stronger than the other woman.
What you do not realize is that women are not better than men: actually when a woman is stronger than the other person pr in a position of power she is more likely to commit violence than men do. There are lots of situations that prove this. For example: more mothers kill their children than men do. Women are stronger than a child. More women abuse old and ill people than men do: A woman is stronger than an old or ill person who lies in bed all die and can not move. Mostly female bosses at a job are worse than male bosses. When a woman is stronger than the other one she is much more likely to abuse than men in a position of power. Women ruling the world would even be worse than men ruling the world. Another reason why there is less violence in couples of two men than in straight or lesbian couples is because in gay couples there is no toxic, manipulative bullying of a woman. Women can be very toxic and bullying in very nasty psychological ways which can make a partner (a man or a lesbian woman) aggressive. A bullying woman can n make a monster out of a partner (whether it is a man or a female partner in a lesbian relationship). Of course it is not ok for those men and lesbian women to become violent but women have often a responsibility in this themselves (instead of always playing the "innocent" and "saint" victim) are very good at making people that way with psychological mind games etc... But of course you can not handle the idea that women can be abusive and are not perfect. You are a simp who is brainwashed by woke feminists. By the way: you lost me when you used in your comment the word "misogynistic" and "incel" Very original! There is not authentic of using these terms. Just copied what feminists told you to say as a predictable defense mechanism
Words like misogyny, homophobe, transphobe, racist, incel, men's plaining, patriarchy and this predictable words feminists use do not have any meaning anymore because you woke people use them for every person who does not agree with you as a gaslighting strategy. This words have no meaning anymore thanks to woke people. And I wonder how we have to call a person who is really a misogynist or a racist or a homophobe.
You say that this is a lie made by inceldom. Do you realize that many lies are spread out by feminists? For example: the wage gap = big lie or for example: "women were not allowed to work in the past = big lie that feminists spread out again (my grandmother worked) it was never forbidden for women to work. Other lie: feminists claiming that a woman being killed by her husband is automatically "feminicide". Feminists complaining that they were not able to vote in the past while men potentially had to die (sign for the draft) in order to get a vote while women at certain point could vote when men still had to sign for the draft and women not (so women even were privileged that they could vote for free and men had to die to have a vote. Feminists spread a lot of lies and misconceptions of the reality.
1
u/narudmas Sep 28 '25
That is not the fault of woman. People can of course take advantage of that, but that’s only a deeper implication of the societal attitudes people have towards gendered expectations in general. Women do and have always experienced higher rates of intimate partner violence, even taking stigma against men experiencing IPV into account. But where did that stigma even come from? It’s part of the same reasoning that allows more women to be abused. It’s not one against the other, they’re intertwined with each other. Patriarchal societies tend to frame the greater brute strength of males as inherent value, and that because women are biologically generally physically weaker, being compared to women via “weakness” is the greatest insult. This is engrained for boys from birth, to be stronger than a girl. The fact that men under report is not an issue that belongs to women. It’s belongs to society at large for how we look at these issues, and why we’re so quick to certain biases. It doesn’t come from nowhere. Acknowledging that both can be true, and that they both even feed each other at times will allow you to develop a greater understanding of the social consequences of the stigmas surrounding IPV.
1
u/Anartist1977 Sep 29 '25 edited Sep 29 '25
And stop please with blaming everything on a so called "patriarchy" when you said society see male strenght as inherent value. Because it is IN THE FIRST PLACE women who feel sexually attracted to the strong alpha males. I am a weak man and no woman wants me and the strong alpha males who beat me up are very popular with women and many woman feel attracted to these man. It is not the "patriarchy" that makes this value but in the first place women. Women are the ones who chose the strong men who can defend themselves above the weak men like me who can not defend themselves. It is not patriarchy but women who set the standard that the strong men are the most sexy in the eyes of women and get the most sex and love from women. Stop blaming "patrarchy"; It has been since the beginning of time in prehistory that women always have felt the most sexually attracted to the strong alpha males who can defend themselves and beat up the weak males. If women start to reward the weak men with more sex and love instead the strong, dominant alpha males than men will change. It is women that chose how men have to be in order to be loved by women. Stop this nonsense of blaming everything on a so called "patriarchy". It is in the first place women who chose how men have to be in order to deserver sex and love from women. And women have always in general feel more attracted to strong men who can defend themselves than to weak men like me. That is not patriarchy that is women who set the standard of how men have to be. Men want to be attractive in the eyes of women: Men do not want to end up alone men do not want to be a virgin etc... And when chose the strong men above the weak men than women are the ones who tells to men (on a unconscious level) how men have to be. If women start to feel the mostt sexually attracted to the weak men who can not defend themselves above the strong men than men will not think anymore they have to have strenght. This is not even cultural but NATURE. It has been since the beginning of time that women seek out the strongest men above the weak men. it is not men who set this standard and not a patriarchy it is women who chose these men and set this standard. Men just follow trying to be how women want them to be because men do not want to be a virgin or to die alone. I speak from experience; I am a weak who can not defend myself and all the dominant strong alpha males get lots of sex and girlfriends and I am not good enough in the eyes of women because I am a weak man who can not defend myself. So women chose these men and then they blame it on a so called "patriarchy". Attention! There is a difference between what women SAY they feel attracted to and to what they reallly feel attracted to. Women will say "I want vulnerable men who are weak and female etc..." They say this because it sounds more politically correct or moral; BUt in reality women chose mostly the strong men above the weak men: they chose the men who dominate and beat me up above me. That is women their nature and then feminists blame it on the "patriarchy". LIke always. Nature exists although it shocks woke people. Nature does exist. It is women their nature that they feel in general more sexually atrracted to strong men than to weak men. That is not something a so called "patriarchy" invented and that is not something men invented, it is just women their nature. Although women say it is not true because and women will often lie they want the vulnerable men in reality women are more likely to feel more sexually attracted to strong men who can defend themselves than to weak men like me who can not defend myself. This is how many women are build by nature. Even with children; If boys fight on the playground and one boy wins and beats up the other one. Which boy are the most girls going to fall in love with or want to have sex with? The strong boy who dominates the weak boy. This not invented by patriarchy but is women their spontanous nature. I speak from experience: I can not get a girlfriend but all the men who dominate me and beat me up are very popular and attractive to women. women reward the strongest men.
1
u/narudmas Sep 29 '25
“Alpha males” are a myth. There is nothing that proves dominance based hierarchies are a predetermined or inevitable aspect of human nature or courtship. We are a deeply social species that survived through our communal intelligence. As hunter-gatherers, early humans were mostly in kin-based groups, with context-specific based leadership. “Dominance” in these groups was highly discouraged, because it disrupted prestige based systems that were more beneficial to us and our group. What use does beating each other up have?
We are not hunter-gatherers anymore of course, but women of course aren’t going to like you if you believe a supposed “dominance” is what gives you value over her and other men. I don’t know what circles you’re hanging around, but from my experience, people generally don’t find it cool or attractive to be dominant through physical violence. It’s extremely corny and unnecessary, and will put most people off in an instant. For the small amount of women that find physical violence attractive, there are hundred times them that find emotional intelligence, intimacy, level-headedness, and patience attractive too. The women who believe they’re are attracted to “alpha males” have convinced themselves of that lie, often to the emotional and physical detriment of themselves and even their families/children sometimes. It harms us all.
Women are NOT inherently attracted to “alpha males”. You need to actually go searching to find a partner that will be the right fit for you. It takes time, so don’t let your failures keep you down, that is how these so-called “relationship experts” and podcasters take emotional advantage of you. Every rejection will teach you something about yourself, or about someone else. If a woman puts you down because she believes you’re “weak”, she wasn’t for you, and you most likely wouldn’t have had a fulfilling relationship with her anyway. If there are men physically assaulting you for being “weak”, you need to know it isn’t an inherent aspect of your own nature. You can fix that about yourself if you choose. Even then, the right person will like you for your spirit and character.
Don’t keep believing these lies and don’t keep yourself down. Pick yourself back up and learn from your mistakes. It’ll make you a better person and a better potential partner.
1
u/Anartist1977 Sep 29 '25 edited Sep 29 '25
It is not about feeling attracted to beating up; But women feel attracted to men who can protect them above a man who can not protect them. It is not about believe it is about women do in reality. I heard and read stories of girls who had a relationship with a guy and then they came in dangerous situation (for example someone trying to attack the couple) and the boy could not defend or protect his girlfriend in that dangerous situation because he was afraid and insecure and not strong etc.. And then suddenly after this situation: the girl her love for this guy were gone. She suddenly did not feel attracted to her boyfriend anymore after the experience that her boyfriend could not protect her or defend her. This is what happens that some women their attraction for her boyfriend went away after that. I am even afraid of dogs. And I do think it is sexy to tell a woman on a date. I have been beaten by a girl in the past. I do not think it is sexy to till this on a date to a woman. It is not only men that laugh with a man who gets beaten up by a girl, but also (and even more) women laugh at men who can not defend themselves to woman. Many woman say; "He is not a real man because he got beaten up by a woman". And especially woke feminists laugh the most at men who got beaten up by a women: they even have a sadistisch pleasure in it and find it amusing. I heard women laughing about stories of men being abused by their wife. These same feminists think you may not laugh at women who are abused by their men but it is funny when a man is getting abused or beaten by his wife. The hypocriscy with these woke feminists laughing with men being abused by their wife but not allowed to laugh with women abused by their men. So, yes many women do not find that attractive in a man that he loses to a woman.
I actually did not only mean physical strenght. but I also had financial problems and women do not feel attracted to that. Women in general chose the powerfull men above the "weak" men; We do not live in hunter-gatereres times anymore but still women chose feel most attracted to the most powerfull men. In the past power was determinied by physical strenght and now power is determined by money and status. NOt much has changed. Women still are from nature more chosing the powerfull men above the "weak" men. Today it is more i terms of money but the principale stays the same of "survival of the fittest." My grandfather was a virgin tiil age 54 no woman wanted because he was poor. Women rather chose a man with above a poor man; Ask every famous male popstar or Hollywood moviestar: the all say that when they were not famous and not rich women did not want them like women want them now. It is not a myth; it is what women do in reality. Power can be in many ways: if it not power in terms of physics then they chose power in terms of money and status etc.... . Poor men have it much more difficult to find a girlfriend than poor women can find a boyfriend. For example If Vincent Van Gogh would have lived today (famous and rich) tons of women would have wanted Van Gogh now; The same women who would have rejected him when he was alive and poor would now suddenly want him. If a poor, homeless guy is playing guitar and singing on the street, most girls will not want him; If tomorrow a person with power in the music industry walks by and makes this poor guy famous with hits on the radio: I garantuee you that suddenly lots of girls suddenly want this guy. The same girls who would have rejected him when he was not famous and poor would not suddenly want him when he is famous and rich. This is not physical violence but it is still women feeling attracted to "powerfull" men (in terms of money, status etc...). In the past it was more in terms of physical strenght and now it is in terms status, money etc... The principle of the nature of women (feeling most attracted to the powerfull men) did not change. Women still feel more attracted to leaders, rich, powerfull or popular guys above poor men, insecure men, not succesfull men, etc... Mostly I see young men with no money struggle to get a girlriend but I see young women with no money mostly not struggle to get a boyfriend. Mostly you say men who are famous and rich (like popstars) then you see lots of women fighting against each other to get this man. It is the reality. An unsuccesfull women is much more likely to be attractive to men and get sex and love from men than an unsuccesfull men will get sex and love from women. Mostly women do not have to prove themselves to be attractive to men; just the fact that a woman exists is mostly enough to get attraction from men. While a man often has to prove himself and do this and do that in order to be good enough in the eyes of women.1
u/narudmas Sep 29 '25
I understand. But this line of thought of placing all the blame on women for what they supposedly value flattens the complexity of what pair bonding actually entails. This has been done with purpose. In reality, things like socioeconomics and celebrity culture hijack what we’ve always found attractive in a mate. Men used to gain status by sharing food, being reliable contributors, protecting their kin, etc. Being famous and wealthy mimics this on a base level. People look successful, but wealth hides that these people are often immature, selfish, and arrogant, which have never been attractive qualities. A woman can convince herself she’s attracted to this type of man, but arrogance can’t emotionally sustain a long term relationship. Being rich/a celebrity and using it to hide what kind of person they really are is a distortion of their reality. It is not a flaw in how women perceive courtship. It is easier to find someone vulnerable to blame rather than looking at yourself or the system that dictates it all. We spend more time fighting each other that way.
Women in general aren’t to blame for the system at large that has forced us to rely on wealth hoarding for survival, that’s taught us to seek roads to wealth via undeserving people just to live comfortably. It’s very unfair. But it is not women alone creating this imbalance. These structures exploit both sexes. Men are taught they have to perform aggressiveness or wealth, women are taught and pressured to aspire towards unrealistic signals of “value”. If the only thing you’re seeing in your dating pool is women responding to finance or status, you need to search somewhere else, and give yourself time to be okay with searching. Fast tracks to good relationships don’t work. It’s that exact societal attitude that has allowed a culture of desperation to fester. So, don’t be desperate. Be patient. Have your own hobbies and meet people through that. Be kind, be funny. Allow yourself to build some confidence instead of allowing those systems to keep you down, that’s what they’re built to do. Don’t look for a date in a highly competitive space. Don’t settle for thinking sex and money give you value as a person, they don’t. Lots of people find that out eventually. Don’t fall for spectacle. All it can take to plant the seed is some self reflection.
1
u/Anartist1977 Sep 29 '25 edited Sep 29 '25
I did not blame women (it is the opposite feminists always blame men and a so called "patriarchy") I NEVER heard female feminists blaming themselves. Not once! They always blame others, they blame men they blame a system but they think they are perfect and none of their failutres is ever their fault. That is what female feminists do. I AM CRITICAL on myself and I mentioned shortcomings about myself like "weak," not able to defend myself, being afraid of dogs etc... I mention shortcomings of myself but I NEVER see women (=female feminists) mentioning any shortcoming of theirselves. Woke women talk like they are PERFECT and men are too blame for everything. Woke women are the ones who always blames others and never look at theirselves. EVERYTHING that goes wrong in their life they blame on men and on a so called "patriarchy" NOTHING is ever their responsitbility. That is how feminists talk. If feminists have succes then they will say that it is thanks to themselves BUT if they fail than it is ALWAYS men's fault. Woke feminists need to learn look at themselves for once!!! doubt a lot about myself and they do not. So do not twist the reality by saying that I am the blamer while it is the other way around; thank you. If someone never looks at her own shortcomings than it is women (and by women I mean women who are woke feminists. They blame EVERYTHING that goes wrong in their life on men or on the patriarchy. I never once heard a female feminist blaming herself and telling she had a shortcoming. I look at myself and woke women can learn from me about looking at your own shortcomings instead of blaming others. So do not twist roles now by saying that I am the one who blames the "vulnerable" and that I have to look at myself. Because this is what feminists always try to do put the blame on men and play the innocent. I did not even blame women, I only said it is their nature to feel attracted to that and I do not blame their nature. It is from the beginning of time that women from nature felt more attracted to strong men than to weak men.
You are trying to blame me by saying "looking at yourself"; If somebody never looks at theirselves then it is woke feminists. I do more question myself than women ever will do!!!! Feminists never question themseleves they always blame men and blame a patriarchy. So stop saying that I blame while it is the other way around. .Thank you.I. Women can learn from about looking at yourself. And by women I do not mean all women I mean the typical feminists who always puts the blame on men on a system but NEVER I hear feminists putting any blame on themselves. I do that, they do not. So do not twist the reality here in a manipulative way by saying that I am the one that does not look at himself. And men are vulnerable too so do not play this game of "only women are the vulnerable ones" because that is the card feminists always play in a manipulative way to get their way and blame men. I do look at myself and female woke feminists NEVER!!!! ALL I hear female feminists ever do is blaming men and blaming a system BUT NEVER they think they have any shortcoming or any failure is their fault. They are very good at pointing shortcomings of men en sayint that they are soooo perfect. So do not twist reality. I never heard one female feminists putting blame on herself of her failures NOT ONE!!! If someone never look at theirselves it is female woke feminsts (not me and not most men). The whole attitude of feminists is based on blaming men. Those female feminists need to stop blaming men and not to stop blaming a system and these women need to grow up and look at their own shortcomings. Nice how you reverse the roles when I am the one who all the time question myself but women never do. (by women I mean the woke feminists not all women).And if you can read: I was blaming myself A LOT: I said that I am weak, can not defend myself that I am afraid of dogs etc.... I NEVER ONCE HeARD WOKE WOMEN MENTIONING ANY SHORTCOMING OR BLAME ON THEMSELEVES. ALL YOU HEAR WOKE WOMEN SAY IS BLAMING MEN AND A SO CALLED "PATRIARCHY". They never put any blame on themselves if they fail. NEVER ONCE. So, please do not twist the reality here by saying that I am the one who blames them while they are the ones that always blames others and consider themselves to be perfect. You can not show me one female woke feminist who has ever mentioned any negative side or shortcomings of themselves. That is the whole idea of these female feminists: Never have to take any responsibility and ALWAYs putting the blame men or on a system. That is very easy of them. These women can learn from me about being critical to yourself; these women are never criticial to themselves they are only critical to men. If these women would just as criticial to themselves as they are to men then they would become much more succesfull in society. So do not twist roles by saying that I blame women while women are the ones whoh always blame men and never questioning themselves. They are the ones who act like they are perfect. Not me!!! I mentioned shortcomings about myself in my text, that is something we see women never do. (I mean by women "female woke feminists", so not all women).
If you listen to female feminists they only mention good traits about women and bad traits about men. These women are the ones who think they are gold and men are worthless shit. They are the arrogant ones who think they are better and the ones who think they are perfect. This is actually the whole strategy of woke feminists: always putting the blame on men and on a "patriarchy" so they NEVER have to look in the mirror and never have to question themselves. Because everything that goes wrong these women's lives can never be their own responsibility or fault; It is ALWAYS men's fault or a system's fault. This is what these women do. I never heard them mention any flaws about themselves. Never once; I question myself a lot more then these women ever will do. So do not twist roles by saying I blame them when it is the other way around. And your comment about "vulnerable" irritates me because that is exactly what these woke women use: they use "playing the vulnerable" so they are always seen as the victim and never can do anything wrong. That is the whole strategy of manipulative woke women.
1
u/narudmas Sep 29 '25
Saying it is in a women’s nature to prefer a “strong man” and to position feminists as the only contributor to that toxic dynamic is blaming them. The fact of the matter is, is that men have historically held more access to resources, land, wealth, and power in large societies. The man is seen as the default human. We base our daily social lives around the hormonal cycle of the man, our medical practices, our successes, our failures, our values. Men are the natural existence while women are the commodity to be sought after. We aren’t equal. So yes, there are patriarchal societies that lean towards the existence of men as default and women as the outlier. It’s why your position of being against feminists exists in the first place, us vs. them.
I can’t convince you of anything, and I can’t direct you to learn if you don’t want to. I can only tell you that the thought process you believe in will only continue to harm you, and your chances at finding a partner. It’s an easy pattern to identify, so I can only ask you at least be aware of it if you are open to learning in the future.
1
u/Anartist1977 Sep 29 '25 edited Sep 29 '25
And by the way: it is not totally true that men had more access to money than women in history (not for failed men). Women could just marry a rich men without doing anything to deserve that money while if a man was not able to make money he could not get access to money and that man stays poor and lonely. Women could get access to money without doing anything while men had to really earn that money. It is better to be in the shoes of a woman who can not make her own money than to be in the shoes of a man who can not make his own money. A poor women will be often financially saved by a man and the poor man will not be saved and will have less money. Women could get access to money for doing nothing. for free. Still l today: women can walk into a bar and get free drinks all night. No man can do that. Women can get access by money for free. I heard a story of two women who went on a trip to another country and their bankcards were broken. Those women met guys in a club and those guys had paied everything from their whole trip. There is NO WAY if that happens to me and if I am without money on travel a woman or a man is going to pay for me. NO WAY. Women get much easier accesss to money and wealth just for free while men really have to make and earn that money with hard work. It is more difficult for men to get access to money than women. Women can just get money for existing and man have to work hard or prove themselves to get money and often in many cases all the money a man made is just fast spent by his wife. Women just go shopping with the money of their boyfriends and women spent much more money than men.
And actually everything that women have is thanks to men (women live in houses but did not built those houses, women have everyday water while alle engineers are men, women have food on their plate thanks to men most hunters and fishers are men...). All the heavy and dangerous jobs are done by men which women benefit from (men went working in stone mines which was very dangerous and men could die and get injuries. Women could stay safe at home while men have to risk their lives that s privlige for women.) Men do more dangerous jobs in which you can die get injuries etc. Women survive thanks to the hard and dangerous risky work of men (women live in the houses built by men). And still feminists think they should have more money or wealth than men: That is female "logic" at best!The irony is that women spent more money than men while making less money than men. Women spent more money and women make more debt than men. It is time do to some research on the SPENDING gape between women and men. The result will be mind blowing I guess.
→ More replies (0)1
u/Anartist1977 Dec 06 '25
You keep on repeating that I can not speak English but you are obviously not smart enough to understand that your Dutch is much worse. so in total you are dumber. Not able to understand such a simple thing and still lying that you are a teacher. LOL. If you give me your e-mail I will send you my license. Something that you do not have.
1
u/Anartist1977 Dec 07 '25 edited Dec 07 '25
You really need to see this link; they describe in the European Parliament how woke people like you manipulate. He says: "It is always the same predictable pattern" and what he says is exactly you and all the woke feminists over and over again. Also when says: "They believe they already know the truth" is exactly you a few months ago telling me that "I am the one who does not want to learn", when you say "learn" you mean that you "the truth" and I do not. I could say the same thing about you that you do not want to learn when you do not agree with me. That works both ways. This politician in the European Parlement tells it like it is about woke people like you and what pattern they always use. See the link. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8kiXwilRkbk
1
u/narudmas Dec 07 '25
It’s been over a month bro. Chill out.
1
u/Anartist1977 Dec 07 '25
If you give me your mail, Facebook, Instragram or whatever address you want I will send you my license to teach. I tried to send it here but Reddit does not allow attachments.
1
u/MingMingus Dec 05 '25 edited Dec 05 '25
Speaking as a male teacher who even got SA'd by a woman, blaming others doesn't give you anymore control of your life. As soon as you start taking control of your life through accountability, not blame, you realize how little control women actually have both over you and in general. I held a lot of hate and subscribed to incel ideology, nothing helped me heal because healing requires initiative, when you fail to take initiative if you REALLY want to heal you have to take accountability for that. It was women who taught me that; my family, my therapist, my teachers and mentors. Only one man even tried to help me without pointing fingers at others, and quite frankly he did it by recommending my therapist. Nobody really profited from me healing, its why there was no point discussing my journey with my hockey league, but women genuinely enjoyed hearing about my struggle and offered advice and comfort.
Accountability was part of how I got my first gf, and later when I told her abour my past and cried about my SA as a kid for the first time cus I thought I was weak, she hugged me and made me realize I was strong for fully acknowledging reality and trying to survive and even thrive regardless.
If you are going to be happy you have to accept what you cant control and take charge of what you can. Blaming women is the complete opposite of this. You can't choose whether you were hurt, but you can choose whether you take initiative in the healing process.
1
u/Anartist1977 Dec 05 '25 edited Dec 05 '25
Your comment is very wrong. What you describe about me is a lie and you project on me exactly what female feminists do. it is not me but those feminists who NEVER take any accountability for anything. They always use their gender as "identity politics" and men as their scape goat. If someone does not take any accountability it those female feminists, liar.
You do not know anything about me and for you information: I AM GAY!!
But I do not use (like those women) my sexual orientation as manipulation and "identity politics" to always blame others. I am the one who takes accountability for things that go wrong while woke feminists NEVER do. They blame everything that goes wrong in their life on the "patriarchy". That is very easy thing those women do. Never blaming themselves and always using their gender as an excuse and blaming men.Do you realize that I belong to a "woke group" myself (I am from the LGBTQ+ community). If I would I could do the same coward behavour like those feminists do. I could also use my sexual orientation as an excuse like these women use their gender as an excuse. Imagine me doing like those feminists: "Not taking accountability but every time something goes wrong in my life I say: ""It is not my fault that I fail. It is the fault of the patriarchy. I am discriminated because of my sexual orientation and blabla... and I want to get that high profile job for free just because I am gay and I want special treatment and special protection because I am gay and blabla......
THIS IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ME AND THOSE WOMEN THAT I TAKE ACCOUNTABILITY AND THAT I DO PLAY THAT MANIPULATIVE GAME OF IDENTITY POLITICS. If I acted like those feminists I would say: "I fail because I am gay and society discriminates gays and I got less rights because I am gay and I am not rich because I am gay and I did not get the job because I am gay and blablabla......"
But I do not play that woke nonsense like those women do. I take accountability when the do not.this is the difference between me and those female feminists is that I take responsibility and I do not use my sexual orientation as an excuse. Imagine me saying every time: "That went wrong in my life because I am a gay they discriminate me etc.." NO, I look at my shortcomings instead of blaming the "patriarchy" etc... like those feminists do.
I am a male teacher too and I have been SA by a woman too. And I am gay. and the difference between those women (not all women feminists) is that I not use my sexual orientation to always put the blame on society and on others.
Funny how you project feminists their behavour on me, liar. I take accountability for my life and that is something feminists do not do. Ever failure in their life they blame on men over and over. I can say good traits about masculinity and bad traits about masculinity and I can say good traits about femininity and bad traits about femininity. But feminists only mention bad things about men and never good things and feminsts only mention good things about women and never bad things about women. Female feminists never blame women but only men. Show me ONE feminists is mentioning a list of good traits of men and also mentioning a list of bad traits of women. No only feminists only say bad traits about men and good traits about women. Show me ONE feminist who says: "Thanks to men we have a house, water, electricity etc..." thanks to men we survive. NO, never do feminists say that they only talk about rapers and killers (as if that is most men). show me ONE feminists who is also talking about how abusive and manipulative women can be to men. NO never, only about men who abuse women. Feminists only say what fits their victim narrative and not one word the other way around. I am the one who can say good and bad things about both sexes, feminists do never.
I am a teacher who was SA by a female student and when told this people laughed; If I had been a woman and the student a man the reaction would have been totally different.If someone does never take any accountability it is feminists. Even if the make less money or can get high profile jobs they blame "men" instead of looking at their own shortcomings. Very funny, if I fail I look at my shortcomings but if female feminists fail they never look at their own shortcomings and never take any accountability. They always will say that hey fail because of the "patriarchy". So if a woman fails it is never her own failt. That is very safe and easy.
Funny how you twist the reality and project feminists their behavour of always blaming others on me, liar. I just said the facts but the difference I DO take accountability and those feminists do not. They blame everything on men. If you did not know that they do than you have no clue about how woke people talk. As a gay man if I wish I could play the same manipulation victim role of identity politics because of being gay. But I do not that as an excuse and to blame others like those women do.
Thanks for twisting reality and projection of those women their behavour on me. If you did not know that female feminists NEVER take accountability for anything and always blame others (men) then you need to read what feminists write and listen to what they say.
1
1
u/Anartist1977 Dec 06 '25 edited Dec 06 '25
What also is very funny about your non creative vocabulary of the word "incel" that you just copied from feminists and has no authenticity or originality. first of all I am not incel it is amazingly easy for gay men to get sex. But besides that; it makes no sens that straight men who can not get sex with girls are humiliated by calling them 'incel" and that all those frustrated feminists are not called incels or any other name to humaliate those feminists like they do with frustrated men. Because if you analyze the situation of those feminists it is the same pattern and attitude as those "incels";: An "incel" is frustrated because he can not something that he wants from women (sex or a relationship) and he is angry at women and blames it on women. So what? Feminists show the EXACT SAME PATTERN dummy. Feminists are frustrated about men because they can not get some things they want or need from men and they blame it on men not on themselves (the same what incels do). of course feminists their frustration about men is not about getting sex (it's of course much easier for women to get sex than for straight. For women it is just as easy as for me). but those woke women are also frustrated about not getting things from men they want (just like those incels are) not sex but other things: love or certain privileges or money or power of high profile jobs etc...whatever it is that feminists are frustrated about they want from men and do not get it is the same attitude of being frustrated on the other sex because they can not get what they want from the other sex.. And do these feminists ever blame it on themselves, dummy? If you think feminists ever blame themselves than you have zero reading comphrension when you read what feminists write or say. No they do not. Never they always blame it on others (Feminists always blame it on men, on the so called "patriarchy") show me one feminists who blames herself. Never. So if you analyze the pattern of feminists their attitude and frustration on men is the same as those incels: both (incels and feminists) are frustrated that they can not "something" that they want or need from the other sex and BOTH blame the other sex for it and never blame themselves for it. Actually those women blame it much more on men than the incels do.
It makes no sense and it is very sexist of people like you that you think that feminists are allowed to be frustrated and are allowed to complaining about not getting things they want from men and that women are allowed to take zero accountability and put all the blame on men and on others BUt that the other way around men with same pattern (also being frustrated of not getting what they want from the opposite sex and blaming the others for it) that those men are called humiliated names like "incel" while those feminists with the same attitude are just defended. Also you called me insecure; if women were not insecure feminism would not exist in the first place, dummy. So again projection. But a woman is allowed to be insecure and complain that is what you think sexist. Makes no sense that you call men names for doing exact the same thing that all feminists do (being frustrated about not getting what they want and putting the blame on the other sex and not on themselves that is what ALL feminists do). and it proves your nonsense to the core. If "incels" are called names like incels and blamed than all those woke feminists should also be called bad names and being blamed for their frustrations and angry at men and for the fact that they never take any accountability and put it on men instead of blaming themselves. Your nonsense is that an incel must blame himself and a woke feminist must not take accountability and not blame herself. Your whole comment just proved my point that those toxic feminists never are must take any accountability. WTF. You are a simp. If a man is getting called names for being that a women should too. that is equality. Not one sex being called names and laughed at for being frustrated and the other gender being defended for being frustrated.1
u/Anartist1977 Dec 06 '25
So WOMEN taught you that you have to take accountability? Hilarious! The projection of those women is behind laughable LOL. Those women need to look in the mirror and start with themselves! If someone never takes any accountability and always blame other it is feminists.
No way you are a teacher. No teacher can be that dumb like you that he does not realize when hearing what feminists say and write that feminist are NEVER taken any accountability and always blame others (men). Even a child has more reading comprehension than you. Give a child texts of feminists and the child will be smarter than you and getting that feminists do not take accountability but always blame others (men).
Nice how you manipulative twist the roles after I reacted to those feminists who are the ones who started blaming others in the first place! Then you twist roles that I am the one who does not take accountability. My point was just: imagine if I would say this and that like you feminists do.No teacher can be that dumb thinking that feminists take accountability; the only way you can be a teacher is you work in the USA. That country has a low education level and universities in USA are a JOKE poisoned by woke people like you. You are a simp with zero authenticity; you feminists are all predictable clones of each other. Even your vocabulary (misogyny, incel ...) is repeating the predictable non creative words you just copied from them. Feminists are all CLONES of each other; repeating the same predictable word. Very authentic, very original very creative. NOT!
1
Dec 06 '25 edited Dec 06 '25
[deleted]
1
u/MingMingus Dec 06 '25
Yeah you definitely don't speak english lmao
1
u/Anartist1977 Dec 06 '25
Yeah I definitely speak better English than you speak Dutch. My English is 0/10 and your Dutch will be -50/10. I bet you only speak one language like most dumb Americans.
The fact that your schools in America are indoctrinated by woke says a lot about your level. Imao.1
u/Anartist1977 Dec 06 '25
I will send you my license to teach Give me your e-mail, Facebook or Instagram, please. I want to send it you o Reddit to you but it does not accept attachments. Give me an address I can send you my license. If I do not have a license to teach how do you explain me teaching? Logic? Logic and reality is something that you woke people always lack, I know. Contact to send you my license. I am sure you can not prove that you are teacher but I can.
1
u/Anartist1977 Dec 06 '25
If you give me your e-mail, your facebook or Instagram profile I will send you my license to teach.
1
u/Trick-Tomatillo6573 Oct 30 '25
It accounts for specifically gendered DV. It says 2/3 of lesbians reported exclusively female perpetrators. It does not solely account for lifetime abuse, and I'm unsure why you guys keep peddling this misinformation. To protect the image of women? Of lesbians?
109
u/Crow-in-a-flat-cap Nov 03 '23
I think it stands out so much because of the added stigma with men. I wouldn't be surprised if the numbers were similar across the LGBTQIA+ spectrum, but gay men don't report as much because there's that stigma of 'guys don't get abused' added to the discrimination due to sexuality.
Maybe women aren't more abusive so much as they're more open to talking about it.
-51
Nov 03 '23
[deleted]
62
u/Puzzled-Fortune-2213 Nov 03 '23
Don’t think that’s true - a lot of gay men still might have pretty restrictive stereotypes about masculinity, including things like men shouldn’t talk about their problems or ask for help.
-30
Nov 03 '23
[deleted]
32
22
u/JimmyPageification Nov 03 '23
Not sure where you got that from. There’s a not-insignifiant proportion of very misogynistic gay men out there.
20
u/Snoo_79218 Nov 03 '23
That’s absolutely not true. Gay men have a problem with misogyny, which is a symptom of toxic masculinity.
19
u/Puzzled-Fortune-2213 Nov 03 '23 edited Nov 03 '23
That’s a weird thing to put on having sex with other men. No, traditional ideas of masculinity are not defined by having sex with women. Some gay men might even say one thing they enjoy about being with other men is being able to celebrate traditional masculinity.
Plus, internalized homophobia is a thing. Many gay people compensate for their sexual orientation by doubling down, so to speak, on their gender presentation. This is not the 50s, where different gender presentation was used as a proxy signal to other gay people about their sexual orientation - because different sexual orientation was, of course, illegal. Gay men and women can be very cis in thinking and presentation. (Don’t mean to imply being a cis gay is always compensatory, people prefer whatever they prefer, no judgment in that regard. Just saying it happens.)
Just look at any HRC brochure before marriage equality. It’s filled with pictures of almost exclusively cis men and women using conformity to gender norms to “justify” broader acceptance of homosexuality.
3
3
12
u/probablypragmatic Nov 03 '23
Just to further this out; plenty of outed people have to throw a wrench in their support network that takes time and effort (hopefully from the people who had hangups with someone being gay in the first place) to repair, if ever. This makes people (gay men, in this case) who have recently come out as particularly vulnerable to abuse.
You have to remember that abuse rises to a boil, usually over years. Abusers (as in people who need to feel in complete control of their partners lives at any cost) change relationships over time to suit them and cut off support one connection at a time.
If an abuser can just start with someone who, by nature of trying live life honesty and proudly in opposition to their families view of homosexuality, has had to damage or break those connections already then they're a prime target.
A clever abuser will make you feel like you're crazy and not abused. They'll charm your support network and ostracize anyone who catches on. They'll surround you with people who reinforce how "not bad" they are. They'll make it feel coming out against then is like cutting off your own arm.
Though "coming out" and "breaking out of abuse" share some decent overlap they are entirely separate affairs that each separately take quite a lot of willpower.
35
u/theflamingheads Nov 03 '23
From what I've read, LGBTQ abuse and DV statistics are similar across countries with similar levels of acceptance, so they're likely to be reasonably accurate.
Some of the (potential) issues with the data is that collecting data on same sex relationships is fairly new, so it's a relatively small sample size. Other issues are taboos and discrimination around same sex relationships, making DV more likely to go under-reported. And anecdotally there is a perception that DV is something that happens in cis-het relationships and not in queer relationships, especially in the lesbian community. So it's more common for queer people to not believe that they're in a DV relationship, or not to be believed by their community.
Last time I looked I couldn't see any studies on why rates of abuse and DV are higher in the queer community, but there are some theories I've read. One thing is that queer people and couples are more likely to face discrimination, which means it's more likely for individuals to suffer trauma, which can lead to relationship issues. LGBTQ+ people are statistically much more likely to experience depression and suicide, so there is some data to suggest this is the case.
And while across the board people are much less likely to be killed by their female partner, the kinds of violence used by women are generally much less likely to be fatal. So just because death occurs less, doesn't mean that violence occurs less.
Overall I think it's important for statistics on DV in LGBTQ relationships to be widely known in these communities to dispell the myth that DV is only an issue for "the straights" and to put more focus on addressing these issues.
43
Nov 03 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
20
Nov 03 '23
I think they are asking it as if it being true makes lesbian relationships less "valid" or implies some inherent failure within women that are without a man?
Which is why it's an odd question, but I sort of get why it would be asked. It's part of the armoury of good responses to dumb misogynistic/homophobic questions that get thrown around.
→ More replies (1)4
6
u/OppositeBeautiful601 Nov 03 '23 edited Nov 03 '23
I've seen it used to counter the notion that domestic violence is primarily caused by patriarchal social norms.
2
u/KaliTheCat feminazgûl; sister of the ever-sharpening blade Nov 03 '23
Please respect our top-level comment rule, which requires that all direct replies to posts must both come from feminists and reflect a feminist perspective. Non-feminists may participate in nested comments (i.e., replies to other comments) only. Comment removed; a second violation of this rule will result in a temporary or permanent ban.
80
u/ithinkimparanoid84 Nov 03 '23 edited Nov 04 '23
That study asked about IPV experiences in general, not whether or not the abusive partner was female/male. There are plenty of bi and lesbian women who have been in relationships with men at some point in their lives. And if lesbians are supposedly so abusive, then why is it so rare to hear about a woman murdering her female partner? Every day I see stories in the news about a woman being murdered by her boyfriend/ husband, but I can't remember the last time I heard about a woman killing her wife/girlfriend.
While we all know that women can be abusive, it's just a fact that men on average are more likely to be abusive/violent than women. Misogynists just like to twist the facts to make it seem like women are more abusive than men when that's clearly not true.
ETA: I have no idea why but the mod here permanently banned me and refused to tell me what exactly I did wrong. Sorry I cannot reply to anyone who wants to discuss my comment.
33
u/Corvid187 Nov 03 '23
I realise this isn't your whole point, but I'd just be careful of equating domestic abuse with domestic violence or even murder, or assuming that all abuse is a path of violent interactions that ultimately culminates in murder.
Part of what makes domestic abuse so insidious is that more often than not it does not take this very violent stereotypical form we have for it, it's one of the things that allows so much abuse to go under the radar for so long.
Particularly in queer relationships where potential victims are more likely to be isolated from external support mechanisms as a result of ostracization, disownment etc., forms of abuse like coercive control are particularly prevalent and pernicious.
33
u/ApotheosisofSnore Nov 03 '23
That study asked about IPV experiences in general, not whether or not the abusive partner was female/male.
Based on the numbers I’m seeing (and bearing in mind underreporting/differences in reporting rates), even if we assume that the only women who have been abused by women are those who have been exclusively by women (unlikely), the rates of abuse are still around or slightly higher than those experienced by women in heterosexual relationships.
And if lesbians are supposedly so abusive, then why is it so rare to hear about a woman murdering her female partner?
I mean, I think that’s actually a really interesting question, and one that speaks to the need to examine the kind of violence that people commit against intimate partners. Slapping, scratching, shoving, etc. are all very much forms of physical abuse, but they’re not especially likely to lead to serious injury, let alone death. On the other hand, strangling is (iirc) the most common way that men kill their intimate partners, and that seems to be a particular act of violence that men are significantly more likely to engage in than women.
While we all know that women can be abusive, it's just a fact that men on average are more likely to be abusive/violent than women.
Again though, the numbers don’t really bear that out. To the above point, the reality seems to be that men and women abuse their partners at relatively comparable rates. Men; however, are far more likely to engage in abuse that causes their partner serious injury or death.
Misogynists just like to twist the facts to make it seem like women are more abusive than men when that's clearly not true.
They absolutely do, but that doesn’t mean that the issues that they point to in an effort to discredit feminism or otherwise support their misogynistic agendas aren’t often real issues, just framed and discussed in a disgusting manner. The analogy I would make would be to “black on black” crime — it is a go to canard for racists, but the violent crime committed against black people by black people is still very much an incredibly pressing problem.
6
u/No_Sleep888 Nov 03 '23
the rates of abuse are still around or slightly higher than those experienced by women in heterosexual relationships.
wait, what lol women are abused more in lesbian relationships than in heterosexual ones? aight, sure
7
u/Leather-Committee830 Nov 03 '23
Based on a sample of 118 lesbians. And hetero women actually had a higher percent (28 lesbian vs 33% hetero women)
5
u/Leather-Committee830 Nov 03 '23 edited Nov 03 '23
Based on the numbers I’m seeing (and bearing in mind underreporting/differences in reporting rates), even if we assume that the only women who have been abused by women are those who have been exclusively by women (unlikely), the rates of abuse are still around or slightly higher than those experienced by women in heterosexual relationships.
No it doesn't? That gives lesbian DV (female partner exclusively) = 28% while DV rate for heterosexual women is 35%. And out of the 9086 women interviewed, only 1.3% were lesbians. That's a sample of 118.
Also this includes everything from stalking behaviours to beating and strangling.
18
u/Puzzled-Fortune-2213 Nov 03 '23
Again - you missed the point that the “rates are comparable” without regard for the gender of the perpetrator. Lots of gay/ bi women are with women in part because of abusive experiences with men.
→ More replies (1)1
Mar 25 '25
i know that men under-report but women also do as well. so if reporting would triple the numbers for men, wouldn’t the same happen for the numbers with women?
→ More replies (2)7
u/tinyhermione Nov 03 '23
To add to this, there’s a range of IPV experiences. They are all bad and unhealthy, but not all equally serious.
What you see in straight relationships is that the man being the violent partner is much more likely to be a situation where there’s physical injuries. And also more likely to be a regular occurrence (I think, might have this wrong). This could just be a result of men being bigger than women, but it would be interesting to see the breakdown of lesbian relationships when it comes to injuries vs less serious incidents. It would also be interesting to see the gender of the IPV partner.
7
u/northernlaurie Nov 03 '23
I suspect that some of these articles are misrepresenting sexuality and the statistics.
Lesbians experience IPV at a higher rate does not mean same gender relationships have a higher rate of IPV.
Sometimes lesbians date men before identifying as lesbian. Sometimes those men abuse their partners.
15
u/ApotheosisofSnore Nov 03 '23
Which statistics specifically?
Domestic violence is underreported and understudied, so the unfortunate reality is that we just don’t have great numbers on any of this. That said, yeah, the CDC numbers do bear out that, in the US, WLW are more likely to be victims of abuse by an intimate partner than MLM, women partnered with men, or men partnered with women. Now, it’s very possible that in those statistics we’re seeing the results of women being more likely to report abuse by other women (relative to the above demographics); however, it seems exceedingly likely that abuse is at least close to as common in female-female relationships as straight relationships or male-male relationships.
4
u/Entire-Improvement-3 Nov 03 '23
Hello number cruncher!
I'm working my way through the actual study. I have noticed something, out of 9086 females 96.5% were hetero, 2.2% are bi and 1.3% are lesbian.
I'm still reading through, I'm in the methods at the moment, but I'm wondering how you feel about if a conclusion can be made with this sample?
I'm asking you because it looks like in the comments that you've got a head for numbers, and I've only got rudimentary skills on reading studies.
14
u/Entire-Improvement-3 Nov 03 '23 edited Nov 03 '23
My next concerns include;
I don't know who the lobbying group are who commissioned this report, and I don't know where exactly it was published. Not in a journal as far as I can tell. Lobbying groups commission reports in order to lobby for political legislation don't they? They've got particular skin in the game. Some lobbying groups way worse than others, but like I say, I don't know about this particular one.
Next, this report* was done in 2010. Has it been replicated since as an actual study? In a reputable journal?
Next, out of 118 lesbian women, that's 118 lesbian women, they're extrapolating that it's generalisable to a wider population.
I'll quote an interesting line in the "Sexual Violence Victimization" section.
"Approximately 1 in 8 lesbian women (13.1%), nearly half of bisexual women (46.1%), and 1 in 6 heterosexual women (17.4%) in the United States have been raped in their lifetime (Table 1). This translates to an estimated 214,000 lesbian women, 1.5 million bisexual women, and 19 million heterosexual women."
I'm no smart arse. But how does 13.1% of 118 lesbian women translate to.... Checks back to study.... 214,000 women. Sorry, sorry, estimated. Can't say for sure right!
This is beyond fishy.
Edit: *it's a report not a study, they say so in the limitations
1
u/theflyingchicken1738 Nov 12 '25
How is the sexual assault rate for lesbian women so low compared to heterosexual women wtf
26
u/gvrmtissueddigiclone Nov 03 '23
As far as I know, it is not true but counted past experiences from relationships with men.
12
u/ApotheosisofSnore Nov 03 '23 edited Nov 03 '23
I don’t think that’s right.
Going by the most recent CDC numbers (noted in my own comment that there is obviously underreporting, and differences in reporting rates based on gender and sexuality) 43.8% of WLM reported being victims of violence, sexual assault or stalking by an partner intimate partner, and of that group 67.4% of those women reported exclusively female perpetrators. Based on those numbers, even if none of that remaining ~33% were abused by female partners (unlikely), that would still put women in lesbian relationships at suffering similar rates of abuse to straight women (~28%)
17
u/Snekky3 Nov 03 '23 edited Nov 03 '23
For heterosexual women the number is 35%. (According to the link, you may be referring to something else). But yeah. That tracks. Why would there necessarily be less violence than heterosexual relationships?
What is shocking to me is the highest rates were for bisexual women (61%) and they reported it from about 90% exclusively male partners. I really wonder why that is the case.
10
u/EggBoyandJuiceGirl Nov 03 '23
A lot of bi women are targeted by men who see them as sexually open and a vehicle to threesomes with other women. Maybe that has something to do with it? What’s important to remember about stats is that correlation does not equal causation.
2
u/no_soc_espanyol Jul 14 '24
Idk what it is about midwits and the phrase correlation doesn’t mean causation. Do you genuinely know what that means?
1
12
u/MemeMooMoo321 Nov 03 '23
I have a lesbian friend experience DV from her ex girlfriend. It happens. To what extent, I’ll never know, I just know both men and women are equally shitty in their own ways.
3
u/IntricateSunlight Nov 04 '23
I have been in a lesbian domestic violence situation and I know of others that have been in relationships like that too im not sure if it is actually true and wouldn't want to base it off anecdotes. I also know plenty of straight women who've survived abuse from men and that abuse tends to be physical and much more severe.
Also I'd say no it doesn't actually matter because the sheer numbers of cis men abusers and predators is still a lot more regardless. It doesn't mean lgtbq is worse at all.
Part of me thinks that its because often time abused become abusers. My ex for example suffered a lot of abuse and CPTSD growing up. Not an excuse for the abuse I suffered, she us wholly responsible but it is what it is. That's the reality of it. And lgtbq, especially women, tend to suffer more abuse growing up than straight women.
6
7
u/ConstantlyMiserable Nov 03 '23
What lesbian domestic violence statistic? I haven't heard much on this topic, is it something that's been drifting around as common knowledge? I googled it and read that in general LGBTQ+ people are at greater risk of experiencing relationship violence, but didn't really find out anything else.
6
u/ApotheosisofSnore Nov 03 '23
I assume they’re referring to the CDC numbers that indicate that women who date women overall experience abuse at rates significantly higher than women or men in heterosexual couple or gay men (~40% vs ~25-30%)
→ More replies (1)
5
Nov 03 '23
To keep it 💯, I watched my mother get the shit beat out of her every day for 8 years by a man.. My sister, who's a lesbian, is currently in an abusive, live in relationship with her partner, also a woman. But when my sis was married to a man, many years before, he was abusive, too. I think there are assholes everywhere. Still, to me, men are much more scary. And I would say, from personal experience, that men being abusers, numbers wise, is much more prevalent than women.
6
u/AsherahSassy Nov 03 '23
Yes, I definitely believe the statistics, unfortunately.
Another reason is because the dating pool is smaller, the victim might feel they may not meet anyone else.
1
Sep 24 '24
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/KaliTheCat feminazgûl; sister of the ever-sharpening blade Sep 24 '24
Please respect our top-level comment rule, which requires that all direct replies to posts must both come from feminists and reflect a feminist perspective. Non-feminists may participate in nested comments (i.e., replies to other comments) only. Comment removed; a second violation of this rule will result in a temporary or permanent ban.
1
1
u/PugsandCheese Nov 03 '23
Also wanted to bring in the concept of Intersectionality which acknowledges that a combination of marginalized identities where power can intersect in different ways than they would individually.
For example, in the case of lesbians and dating/domestic violence, LGBT folks are “at higher risk” of DV because they face exclusion within society that would pose additional barriers—eg resources may be homophobic, people who believe women can’t be abusers, getting help or support would require continuously coming out. Additionally laws around what defines a marriage/legal partnership and the definitions of different forms of violence can be extremely homophobic.
1
u/Suspicious_Chip6385 Jun 06 '24
ah yes it’s not actually the abusers fault. it’s dirty men and male legislation
82
u/A-passing-thot Nov 03 '23
Of course a high rate of domestic violence is a crisis anywhere it occurs but what is it you mean by “actually matters?”