Seesh what garbage studies. Clearly they never heard of a control group.
For example, the 42k EU study:
“ ‘violence against women’ means any act of gender-based violence that results in, or is likely to result in, physical, sexual or psychological harm or suffering to women, including threats of such acts, coercion or arbitrary deprivation of liberty, whether occurring in public or in private life.” In this statement, any perceived threat by the respondent that is likely, from the perspective of the respondent, to result in a psychological harm, is considered violence against women. Granted, the interpretation is bad enough and may constitute violence even if that is a significant stretch in the application of the term, but I highlight it because we would find a lot of male victims, too. When one reads __% of women experience violence in their private life, keep that in mind, because we'd very likely see large numbers of male victims.
(a) physical, sexual and psychological violence occurring in the family, including battering, sexual abuse of female children in the household, dowry-related violence, marital rape, female genital mutilation and other traditional practices harmful to women, non-spousal violence and violence related to exploitation; Male children aren't battered? Men aren't expected to do the dangerous jobs? Once again we see psychological violence lumped in with physical and sexual violence. Yes, psychological violence is bad, but when the study results are presented, psychological violence is lumped in with the other forms and they are all presented as violence or domestic violence. Without a doubt psychological violence makes up the vast majority of what gets considered violence against women (42% in study, compared to <1/3 for either sexual or physical violence). It would be for men, too.
“(b) physical, sexual and psychological violence occurring within the general community, including rape, sexual abuse, sexual harassment and intimidation at work, in educational institutions and elsewhere, trafficking in women and forced prostitution; How about male circumcision, military draft, slave labor?
“(c) physical, sexual and psychological violence perpetrated or condoned by the State, wherever it occurs.” Covered some examples, but how about India's presumption of rape regarding reneged marital promises that overwhelmingly target just men?
“(a) ‘violence against women’ is understood as a violation of human rights and a form of discrimination against women and shall mean all acts of gender-based violence that result in, or are likely to result in, physical, sexual, psychological or economic harm or suffering to women, including threats of such acts, coercion or arbitrary deprivation of liberty, whether occurring in public or in private life; Once again, another dramatic expansion in how violence is interpreted. Economic suffering, as perceived the respondent, is considered violence. An example of economic harm is if a man doesn't give his spouse money when she feels entitled to it, at least ONCE. Even more benign, this study would consider it economic violence if the spouse, at one time, prevented the respondent from making a financial decision for the both of them.
“(b) ‘domestic violence’ shall mean all acts of physical, sexual, psychological or economic violence that occur within the family or domestic unit or between former or current spouses or partners, whether or not the perpetrator shares or has shared the same residence with the victim.” Once again we see the economic violence concept merged under the umbrella of all violence, and this time the perpetrator doesn't even ever have to have lived with the victim. But how about a spouse simply insisting that their partner no longer see a friend anymore? That is also considered psychological violence. Even if people think physical or sexual violence doesn't exist for men, surely they can agree that men are victims of psychological and economic violence just as often as women.
I haven't even scratched the surface for how these definitions are far-reaching in scope. Sexual violence is usually a catch all from anything between a violent physical rape act to unsolicited sexual comments and even as far as inadvertent or careless exposure of a sexual nature. In addition, these studies very often lump completed violent acts, whatever they may be, along with threat of committing such act and attempt at committing such act, while being judged as having happened entirely due to the perspective of the respondent as they then remember it. All of the acts uncovered by the study are then lumped into broad categories. We see this with rape surveys time and time again. For instance, when it is 1 in 6 women that will be raped in their lifetime, they leave out the fact that the figure included attempts along with completions, and again, only as judged by the respondent.
With such broad definitions, men are victimized just as often as women. A good example of this would be the NISVS studies conducted by the CDC. They discovered over 2 consecutive annual studies, during 2010-'11, that as many males as females were raped(or experienced attempted rape), and female perpetrators were responsible for 40% of all recorded cases among both genders. These are the kinds of surprises we encounter when researchers actually survey both genders with identical questions and intent, or at the very least implement a control.
Another issue is response rate. It was 42%. So we are left with clearly a self-selected sample population.
The bottom-line is that men are still the overwhelming majority of victims of violence, including extreme violence and death, and yet the focus on ending violence falls squarely on preventing female victims. In addition, how the definitions are expanded and the frequency of differnt types of questions asked creates the results that the researchers want, which is an apparantly huge prevalence of violence against women.