> Kimmel 2002 "Gender Symmetry in Domestic Violence"
Right, so kimmel is a hack who uses phrases like "toxic masculinity" and minimizes violence against men through equivocation with labels like "cyclical processes of power and control" but okay, fine, let's dig into this.
page 3:
> activists for “men’s rights” ... efforts are also often motivated by a desire to undermine or dismantle those initiatives that administer to female victims.
BULL FUCKING SHIT
And you know goddamn well that if I tried to pass off a source that did this kind of hateful editorializing about feminism without a single shred of evidence to back it up that you would reject that source out of hand. Well guess what - goose, meet gander. You source is rejected. Find one by a researcher with a slightly less obvious bias.
> most of the gender symmetry results come from the use of the conflict tactics scale (CTS)
"most" is a weasel word. I have nearly 300 studies. What percentage of them use the CTS? Answer: you don't know. So therefore this argument is worthless. What you might have done is to quote from Kimmel's little diatribe:
> Of the 79 empirical articles that Fiebert reviewed, 55 used the same empirical measure of family conflict, the Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS), as the sole measure of domestic violence. This scale was also used in 76 out of the 82 studies that Archer examined
but even that wouldn't matter. This objection isn't at all convincing because:
> the conflict tactics scale (CTS), which does a terrible job of distinguishing between a 1) cyclical process of power control of one person over another where multiple forms of coercion are used (DV); 2) reciprocal violence where he hit her and she hit back; and 3) sporadic instances of violence in which just one
Never, in your entire life, have you ever attempted to minimize violence against women by making an argument of the form, "look guys, not all violence really counts or is really that bad - seriously!"
You would be absolutely disgusted if someone rejected a study about rape because, "it did a terrible job of distinguishing between rape that was 1) legitimate and 2) sporadic one-off instances."
> She has yet to see a male victim
Totally irrelevant, and frankly insulting. Given the biases you've revealed above, try to imagine that we were discussing race and someone with your biases, who doesn't think that racism against POC happens as much as racism against whites, said, "look I've never had a black guy tell me that racism bothered him!"