World Health Organization - "1/3 Of All Women In World Abused"
36 replies, posted
[QUOTE]More than one third of all women around the world have been physically or sexually abused according to a new report by the World Health Organisation.
In what it billed as the first-ever systematic study of global data on the prevalence of violence against women and its health impact, the UN agency said on Thursday that 30 percent worldwide faced such abuse at the hands of their partners.
"These to me are shocking statistics," said Flavia Bustreo, head of the WHO's family, women's and children's health division.
"It's also shocking that this phenomenon cuts across the entire world," she told reporters.
The WHO blamed taboos that prevent victims from coming forward, failings in medical and justice systems, and norms that mean men and women may see violence as acceptable.
[B]
'Shocking figures'[/B]
The findings were extrapolated from figures provided by 81 countries which maintain data, and did not single out individual nations.
The scale of abuse was highest in Asia, where data from Bangladesh, East Timor, India, Myanmar, Sri Lanka and Thailand showed that 37.7 percent of women were affected.
Next was the Middle East, where prevalence averaged at 37 percent. Sub-Saharan Africa followed, with 36.6 percent.
An average of 23.2 percent were affected in a group of high-income countries including North America, the European Union, Japan, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand.
"These data really show the tremendous toll violence has on the health of women," said Claudia Garcia-Moren, a WHO specialist on gender, reproductive rights, sexual health and adolescence.
[/QUOTE]
[URL]http://www.aljazeera.com/video/asia-pacific/2013/06/2013620172350609216.html[/URL]
[url]http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/85239/1/9789241564625_eng.pdf[/url]
Here is the full report if you wanna read it, the study that is.
[quote]23.2 percent were affected in a group of high-income countries including North America, the European Union, Japan, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand.[/quote]
Wow that is more than I expected from industrialized, modern nations.
[QUOTE=toaster_2.0;41120721]Wow that is more than I expected from industrialized, modern nations.[/QUOTE]
Well even in North America the numbers that have been floating around indicate between 1 in 10 and 1 in 3
According to an independent survey of my neigbor, Paul, women need to shut their mouths if they know what's good for them. His wife declined to comment.
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;41120904]According to an independent survey of my neigbor, Paul, women need to shut their mouths if they know what's good for them. His wife declined to comment.[/QUOTE]
Confirmed by Reddit. Also, women are the Boston Bomber.
A criticism I have of the study, though I may have misread, is that although they do differentiate between severe violence and relatively minor violence, they include both in forming their estimate. So there is a bit of ambiguity as to what the rates of minor violence and severe violence are in their extrapolation.
Severe violence and minor violence are two very different things, and although both are unacceptable one is not the other.
Overall though it's not really news to me, I've known for a while about the prevalence of partner violence, this is really just confirmation. What is new to me is the news about the long term physical and mental effects it can have though, as some of the things mentioned I was not aware of.
this is pretty much just confirmation from the WHO, several organizations had the 1/3 number floating around for quite sometime.
[QUOTE]An average of 23.2 percent were affected in a group of high-income countries including North America, the European Union, Japan, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand.[/QUOTE]
It's pretty sad but I can see this as truth. I wonder what a report on the abuse of men would bring it. Would it be comparable?
I'm not even sure how they could get these figures since alot of abuse goes unreported.
the other 2/3...
[img]https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/p480x480/601284_384143038362360_1095108295_n.jpg[/img]
are my waifus
[highlight](User was banned for this post ("No" - Starpluck))[/highlight]
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;41121429]It's pretty sad but I can see this as truth. I wonder what a report on the abuse of men would bring it. Would it be comparable?[/quote]
[url]http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/V70-Gender-symmetry-PV-Chap-11-09.pdf[/url]
Possibly gender symmetry, but with women more likely to be killed/seriously injured by their partners than men. Would probably be different for third/second world countries where violence against women is more accepted/less reviled.
[quote]I'm not even sure how they could get these figures since alot of abuse goes unreported.[/QUOTE]
Read the methodology of full report, it's only a few pages long.
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;41120904]According to an independent survey of my neigbor, Paul, women need to shut their mouths if they know what's good for them. His wife declined to comment.[/QUOTE]
reminds me of this
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iT2hfG3WbT8[/media]
The part of these studies that always makes me wonder is the VERY vague descriptions of violence that they give. For example, one of the criterion is: "being pushed or shoved." Under that description I would bet 90% of school children have undergone violence.
In effect, the vagueness of their description would mean almost everyone has been a victim of violence.
[QUOTE=sgman91;41122636]The part of these studies that always makes me wonder is the VERY vague descriptions of violence that they give. For example, one of the criterion is: "being pushed or shoved." Under that description I would bet 90% of school children have undergone violence.
In effect, the vagueness of their description would mean almost everyone has been a victim of violence.[/QUOTE]
Seeing how creative people can get when really angry, it'd be easier to say what's [U]not[/U] considered very violent rather than trying to say what [U]is[/U] very violent. I mean being pushed or shoved isn't that violent in my opinion, being punched so hard it actually causes pain is violence. Of course, this is just my view but you get my point and I agree with you. A more defined description of violence would clear this study a lot more. This just shows that women are feeling bad a lot of times, but considering how much violence this study would show from man to man and man to woman, this vague of a description doesn't give as much information as it should.
[QUOTE='[Green];41123441']Seeing how creative people can get when really angry, it'd be easier to say what's [U]not[/U] considered very violent rather than trying to say what [U]is[/U] very violent.[/QUOTE]
That might be true, but it might not be true. With a study like this we will never know.
In my opinion they went into this study in order to prove a point as opposed to actually trying to find the truth. I think a much more telling description of violence might be something along the lines of: "An act that caused lasting physical or mental pain."
The other thing that bothers me about this study is the initial subject. Instead of being about domestic abuse it only looked at the female side. I would assume many of these violent situations would also include violence (most probably verbal abuse) on the side of the women. It's just plain silly to ignore domestic violence against men when it could make up almost half of all abuse. ([URL]http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/sep/05/men-victims-domestic-violence[/URL])
[QUOTE=Riutet;41122312][url]http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/V70-Gender-symmetry-PV-Chap-11-09.pdf[/url]
Possibly gender symmetry, but with women more likely to be killed/seriously injured by their partners than men. Would probably be different for third/second world countries where violence against women is more accepted/less reviled.
Read the methodology of full report, it's only a few pages long.[/QUOTE]
If I recall though, children are more likely to be killed by a woman.
Generally speaking there's different motives behind murder and attacks and it's often in the sense that a male attack is spur of the moment violence from an aggressive individual while female attacks tend to have a revenge aspect.
Which is one of the reasons it's often the child that gets hurt.
I can say that it's generally what I see at work.
There's also generally a big difference between longterm abuse and short term one of occurences.
Longterm abuse tends to be what we consider typically abusive, the wifebeater and similar. Whereas outbursts tend to be frustration based and just looking for a target and even more interestingly quite often coupled with long term emotional abuse from the woman at the man.
[QUOTE=wraithcat;41123849]If I recall though, children are more likely to be killed by a woman.
Generally speaking there's different motives behind murder and attacks and it's often in the sense that a male attack is spur of the moment violence from an aggressive individual while female attacks tend to have a revenge aspect.
Which is one of the reasons it's often the child that gets hurt.
I can say that it's generally what I see at work.
There's also generally a big difference between longterm abuse and short term one of occurences.
Longterm abuse tends to be what we consider typically abusive, the wifebeater and similar. Whereas outbursts tend to be frustration based and just looking for a target and even more interestingly quite often coupled with long term emotional abuse from the woman at the man.[/QUOTE]
[URL=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acid_attack]There's plenty of revenge-oriented abuse from men, too, sometimes of a particularly nasty and scarring variety.[/URL]
[QUOTE=wraithcat;41123849]If I recall though, children are more likely to be killed by a woman.
Generally speaking there's different motives behind murder and attacks and it's often in the sense that a male attack is spur of the moment violence from an aggressive individual while female attacks tend to have a revenge aspect.
Which is one of the reasons it's often the child that gets hurt.
I can say that it's generally what I see at work.
There's also generally a big difference between longterm abuse and short term one of occurences.
Longterm abuse tends to be what we consider typically abusive, the wifebeater and similar. Whereas outbursts tend to be frustration based and just looking for a target and even more interestingly quite often coupled with long term emotional abuse from the woman at the man.[/QUOTE]
Do you have a source for this?
B-But MRAs told me feminism is passé and oppressive!
[QUOTE=Riutet;41124611]Do you have a source for this?[/QUOTE]
I'd need to go trough my old psych I books on crime theory again to be honest to grab some sources. But some of it is based on personal experience from work. (legal firm) and you tend to get a lot of first hand evidence and a pretty good insight at how people actually tend to behave.
Honestly abuse is bad of any sort, the problem is that men, in part because of the fact that they are stronger and bigger on average tend to often be able to do visible damage.
Which is why most criminal cases are only against men. There's a lot of other issues as well, in the form that women are actively backed up in seeking help, while men tend to hide the abuse a lot more - a lot of woman also hide it if it's happening, but there really is a different notion in society towards the issue which really mocks up the crime statistics.
We actually had a case of a guy who was charged with battery, abuse in a slew of other things but we did actually manage to prove, that he was a victim that lashed out in the end. Lots of emotional abuse, lots of minor physical abuse, got stuff like plates thrown at him at a relatively constant basis.
In the end he did confide in his friends and the idiots told him to just give her a slap the next time she tried to do anything, as opposed to seek out help. Guy suffered for another six months or so before he finally snapped and actually gave her a slap. Next thing he knows he's in custody.
[QUOTE=Florence;41124618]B-But MRAs told me feminism is passé and oppressive![/QUOTE]
I still say MRAs and feminists should just stop shouting at each other words like patriarchy, matriarchy etc and find common ground. Considering all in all from a purely ethical standpoint their points are nearly the same.
[QUOTE=Florence;41124618]B-But MRAs told me feminism is passé and oppressive![/QUOTE]
Technically, the study was only really looking at violence targeted towards women, so it may be the case that in the first world countries the rate of violence directed towards men by their partners/non-partners is fairly similar at least, so that it's not a case of there being an epidemic of violence against women, but just an epidemic of violence in general. There is evidence to suggest similar rates of violence from either gender. Which would mean it isn't a problem that feminism needs to tackle, but a problem everyone needs to take on.
That being said I wouldn't doubt the violence against women in second and third world countries being much greater than that of violence towards men. Don't throw away that fedora yet son.
[QUOTE=Riutet;41124668]Technically, the study was only really looking at violence targeted towards women, so it may be the case that in the first world countries the rate of violence directed towards men by their partners/non-partners is fairly similar at least, so that it's not a case of there being an epidemic of violence against women, but just an epidemic of violence in general. There is evidence to suggest similar rates of violence from either gender. Which would mean it isn't a problem that feminism needs to tackle, but a problem everyone needs to take on.
That being said I wouldn't doubt the violence against women in second and third world countries being much greater than that of violence towards men. Don't throw away that fedora yet son.[/QUOTE]
As a rule, I'd say that the more equal society is, the more equal violence will be as well on a type standpoint. Advanced nations will have similar rates of physical violence. The main difference will be in the effect of the violence.
In the end there's still an physical difference between daily slaps from a big guy to slaps from a woman. The emotional impact might be similar though. In some cases even worse for the men. But emotional impact is really hard to prove to the police in short order. There's also a lot of cultural stereotypes. our society tends to adore strong charismatic men. We women are definitely attracted self-assured, strong men in general. And most men are aware of it on some level. As such reporting such violence or even confiding in it to friends, doctors and similar is often not even considered by them. That's not to mention that a man that does it puts himself at risk of being ridiculed and seen as weak.
I really don't envy that position.
And less advanced nations will tend to put more violence, emotional and physical into the hands of men.
That said, in third world nations, some of the biggest abusers of younger women tend to actually be older women who tend to act as certain morality enforcers.
[QUOTE=wraithcat;41124700]As a rule, I'd say that the more equal society is, the more equal violence will be as well on a type standpoint. Advanced nations will have similar rates of physical violence. The main difference will be in the effect of the violence.
In the end there's still an physical difference between daily slaps from a big guy to slaps from a woman. The emotional impact might be similar though. In some cases even worse for the men. But emotional impact is really hard to prove to the police in short order.
And less advanced nations will tend to put more violence, emotional and physical into the hands of men.
That said, in third world nations, some of the biggest abusers of younger women tend to actually be older women who tend to act as certain morality enforcers.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Riutet;41120919]A criticism I have of the study, though I may have misread, is that although they do differentiate between severe violence and relatively minor violence, they include both in forming their estimate. So there is a bit of ambiguity as to what the rates of minor violence and severe violence are in their extrapolation.
Severe violence and minor violence are two very different things, and although both are unacceptable one is not the other.
Overall though it's not really news to me, I've known for a while about the prevalence of partner violence, this is really just confirmation. What is new to me is the news about the long term physical and mental effects it can have though, as some of the things mentioned I was not aware of.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=sgman91;41123495]That might be true, but it might not be true. With a study like this we will never know.
In my opinion they went into this study in order to prove a point as opposed to actually trying to find the truth. I think a much more telling description of violence might be something along the lines of: "An act that caused lasting physical or mental pain."
The other thing that bothers me about this study is the initial subject. Instead of being about domestic abuse it only looked at the female side. I would assume many of these violent situations would also include violence (most probably verbal abuse) on the side of the women. It's just plain silly to ignore domestic violence against men when it could make up almost half of all abuse. ([URL]http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/sep/05/men-victims-domestic-violence[/URL])[/QUOTE]
Nice job using anecdotes, made up statistics, studies performed by MRA organizations, and pseudo-statistical gibberish to prove that this report doesn't mean anything guys. You're doing gods work you awful, awful fucking dorks. Godspeed.
[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;41124713]Nice job using anecdotes, made up statistics, studies performed by MRA organizations, and pseudo-statistical gibberish to prove that this report doesn't mean anything guys. You're doing gods work you awful, awful fucking dorks. Godspeed.[/QUOTE]
Did you actually read the report? I did.
It's up there, first reply.
[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;41124713]Nice job using anecdotes, made up statistics, studies performed by MRA organizations, and pseudo-statistical gibberish to prove that this report doesn't mean anything guys. You're doing gods work you awful, awful fucking dorks. Godspeed.[/QUOTE]
Here, someone posted this earlier, I recommend you read trough this. [url]http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/V70-Gender-symmetry-PV-Chap-11-09.pdf[/url]
actually seems to be pretty much in line with my experiences and mutual spousal and relationship violence is a pretty big point in criminal law for the past five years or so. With more focus put on it recently.
[QUOTE=Riutet;41124734]Did you actually read the report? I did.
It's up there, first reply.[/QUOTE]
I'm sorry but I just don't find your criticism of "there is a difference between minor violence and major violence and that somehow casts a shadow over the quality of this study of the prevalence of violence" very salient. It's not actually a coherent, fully-formed argument.
[quote]I still say MRAs and feminists should just stop shouting at each other words like patriarchy, matriarchy etc and find common ground. Considering all in all from a purely ethical standpoint their points are nearly the same.[/quote]
MRAs are often the kind of folk who think this kind of statistic is acceptable or even good. There is no common ground between those vermin and decent folk. And I use the phrase 'vermin' advisedly.
Read about in the archives here: [url]http://manboobz.com/[/url]
If you have the stomach for it. I'm not shaming anyone who has to bow out due to how horrid it is, it's really rather nauseating.
[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;41124756]I'm sorry but I just don't find your criticism of "there is a difference between minor violence and major violence and that somehow casts a shadow over the quality of this study of the prevalence of violence" very salient. It's not actually a coherent, fully-formed argument.[/QUOTE]
It's a valid criticism to make of the methodology used within the study, because if the results are heavily skewed towards most cases of violence being severe, then it's a hugely imminent problem we kind of have to get on asap. If it's the other way around though, it isn't quite as urgent, still tragic, but you have to understand the difference.
Is a shove or a slap as bad as being brutally beaten/burned and put in hospital? No, it's not even anywhere near equivalent, and the two should not count towards the same statistic. I don't see why we should abandon critical analysis just because this happens to be about an issue you feel very strongly about.
Additionally, I have made zero effort to actually discredit the body of evidence presented from this report, I merely dispute some details but otherwise I accept the report as valid. I ask, why are you so eager to put me in the same box as MRAs?
[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;41124756]I'm sorry but I just don't find your criticism of "there is a difference between minor violence and major violence and that somehow casts a shadow over the quality of this study of the prevalence of violence" very salient. It's not actually a coherent, fully-formed argument.[/QUOTE]
While the report does seperate severe and non-severe physical violence, I can't seem to find the numbers on the seperation in just yet.
[quote]
Term Definition for this review
Intimate partner
violencea
Self-reported experience of one or more acts of physical and/or sexual violence by a
current or former partner since the age of 15 years.b
· Physical violence is defined as: being slapped or having something thrown at you
that could hurt you, being pushed or shoved, being hit with a fist or something
else that could hurt, being kicked, dragged or beaten up, being choked or burnt
on purpose, and/or being threatened with, or actually, having a gun, knife or
other weapon used on you.
· Sexual violence is defined as: being physically forced to have sexual intercourse
when you did not want to, having sexual intercourse because you were afraid of
what your partner might do, and/or being forced to do something sexual that you
found humiliating or degrading.c
Severe intimate
partner violence
Is defined on the basis of the severity of the acts of physical violence: being beaten
up, choked or burnt on purpose, and/or being threatened or having a weapon used
against you is considered severe. Any sexual violence is also considered severe.
Current intimate
partner violence
Self-reported experience of partner violence in the past year.
Prior intimate
partner violence
Self-reported experience of partner violence before the past year.
Non-partner sexual
violence
When aged 15 years or over,b
experience of being forced to perform any sexual act
that you did not want to by someone other than your husband/partner.
[/quote]
They do have seperate numbers for non partner sexual violence though.
[QUOTE=wraithcat;41124746]Here, someone posted this earlier, I recommend you read trough this. [url]http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/V70-Gender-symmetry-PV-Chap-11-09.pdf[/url]
actually seems to be pretty much in line with my experiences and mutual spousal and relationship violence is a pretty big point in criminal law for the past five years or so. With more focus put on it recently.[/QUOTE]
I'm reading the shit out it and it distinctly says that "attacks by men cause more fear and injury" which seems to support my thesis of "violence against women is a fairly big fucking deal."
Hey, I'm just trying to point out this weird trend I noticed where whenever any real, hard evidence for the existence of widespread, pernicious sexism across the globe, (even if it's something as hard as a study of the rates of violence against women) lots of fucking guys just stream in and argue lots of either hard arguments against it, trying to casually refute the works of teams of scientists or statisticians, or lots of tiny little assuages of the severity of the information with statements like:
[QUOTE=sgman91;41123495]That might be true, but it might not be true. With a study like this we will never know.[/QUOTE]
Seriously, every single thread about violence against women or discrimination against women or prejudice against women is very very quickly filled with a million different dudes going "I don't trust this study because X" or "this really isn't that bad because Y" where X and Y are very obviously criticisms they just made up or anecdotes instead of actual meaningful critiques of information.
Doesn't it seem like there's something fucked-up at play here?
[editline]21st June 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=wraithcat;41124789]While the report does seperate severe and non-severe physical violence, I can't seem to find the numbers on the seperation in just yet.
They do have seperate numbers for non partner sexual violence though.[/QUOTE]
But how in the world would this possibly make the results of the study less legitimate? If someone posted a study on the prevalence of violence against store-keepers would you do what you're doing right now and comb through it looking for the tiniest little flaw in their methodology?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.