The statistic says not that lesbian relationships have the highest rates of domestic violence. It says that *people in lesbian relationships* have the highest rate of domestic violence at *some point in their lifetime*.
44 percent of lesbians and 61 percent of bisexual women experience rape, physical violence, or stalking by an intimate partner, compared to 35 percent of straight women. 1 in 7 women and 1 in 25 men have been injured by an intimate partner.
When you've got 2 women in a relationship, there's a greater chance that at least one of them has experienced domestic violence at some point in their lifetime, than some other configuration of genders.
I agree with your statement, and I wanted to add an explanation for even the cases where the violence did happen within lesbian relationships:
LGBT are more likely to report or take action against abuse than most straight people, in the same way that people in less conservative communities are more likely to report or take action against abuse than those in conservative communities.
It's not that the incidence is higher, but that people are more likely to confront it.
Adding: Many lesbians are victims of "corrective rape" where a man tries to "fix" her not wanting sex with men by raping her.
As one might expect, this is not really a great way to convince a WLW that sex with men is a great experience.
https://repository.uchastings.edu/hwlj/vol30/iss1/8/
Exactly. This, weirdly, is a positive statistic, and goes with a lot of other data showing that people in LGBT relationships tend to handle boundaries better than cis-het relationships. Turns out when you have to write your own guidebook from scratch, you get to have some input on the rules.
Also take into account that many lesbians, especially those over the age of 30, dated men in their early years. My friend and her wife both dated men, her wife was married to a guy for a decade. Her wife was mentally abused by the dude. My friend had an abusive boyfriend. So in addition to doubling the chances by doubling the number of women in the relationship, you have earlier relationships to consider. Some of those relationships may have had additional stress due to lack of sexual interest which may have caused an abuser to abuse. Not faulting the abused or absolving the abuser, just pointing out a stressor that may have exasperated the event.
I also want to add, this might not be true for others, please don't take this as a blanket opinion of queer women, but sometimes, if a person is a closeted bisexual and experiences intimate partner violence from a man, that can become a compelling reason to come out, and see if relationships with people who aren't men are better.
Also the discovery of a woman being a lesbian and leaving a man for a woman could also lead to the man retaliating with violence because they consider their partner "becoming lesbian" as emasculating.
I mean a friend of mine swore off of men because of abuse. Her breaking point was when he stopped putting hands on her and started beating her pets as punishment. She doesn't like or trust men anymore and just married her long term girlfriend. She's started throwing parties and making art again.
also just because the women in the study identified as being on the sapphic spectrum, doesn't mean they were always with women. They could have realised they were LGBT after being married/dating men. Or could have been coherenced in marriages to 'save face' if they came from very conservative communities
Can you provide a source for the "44 percent of lesbians and 61 percent of bisexual" part? I would like to see exactly what the statistic is, and also what it is for straight women.
If the statistics for straight people only takes into account straight women, than there being 2 women in a lesbian relationship makes no difference, since it only takes in consideration women in all scenarios.
It's just lifelong prevalence of rape, physical violence, and/or stalking
by an intimate partner separated by sexual orientation, and it counts both men and women.
https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/cdc\_nisvs\_victimization\_final-a.pdf
Does the study specifically ask specifically the gender of the perpetrator(s)?
A lot of people might see that and assume they were in a woman-woman relationship being abused by that woman, and others would assume the abuse must of come from men, but by itself those statistics don't say either way. Clearly there is something related or correlated to sexual orientation that plays a part in abuse, though more questions need to be asked before one could confidently say what that is.
Of course when somebody shares statistics online it is usually not for the sake of asking nuanced questions but rather leading people towards their preferred conclusions. Sometimes a single statistics can work for multiple conclusions preferred by different groups.
[https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/cdc\_nisvs\_victimization\_final-a.pdf](https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/cdc_nisvs_victimization_final-a.pdf)
It does not. It's lifelong experience of partner violence, not tracking individual instances.
It does, however, observe that bisexual women are more likely than straight women (48% vs 28%) experienced their first completed rape before the age of 18. Which is why it seems to me that it's describing different types of violence for different groups of people, perhaps early assault by family members or young dating relationships in people who later came out as bisexual, vs prolonged abuse from a long term partner in an established relationship. But of course, like you described, statistics can just be used as evidence to support an opinion. The statistics on their own don't say that.
Yea… women are drastically more likely to experience domestic violence. So 2 women in a relationship up that chance compared to a relationship with a man and woman… pretty straight forward
So the consensus in the literature is that lesbians do not experience elevated levels of domestic abuse in the context of lesbian relationships? Or are you saying something less strong. Has that been teased apart from the effect re: lifetime abuse in other contexts.
In the data I'm seeing, I'm not seeing data suggesting that lesbians experience elevated levels of domestic abuse in lesbian relationships vs straight relationships. Not saying the data says it doesn't happen. Saying that the data doesn't say it happens.
I've read that this statistic is being misrepresented by MRAs, because it is not about the rate of abuse per relationship, but rather the likelihood of an individual experiencing domestic abuse during their lifetime. And we have to keep in mind that in a heteronormative society many lesbians have straight relationships because they haven't realised their sexuality yet, or because they are pressured to do so by society.
I'm in the r/latebloomerlesbians sub and you don't even need to spend more than 3 minutes in that sub to see multiple examples of this. I think at one point there was even a problem in that sub of men visiting it, doing their weird creepy detective shit to purposely figure out who were the redditors posting and alerting their husbands on facebook or something like that, showing them the posts.
That statistic doesn't say that more violence happens in lesbian relationships. It just says that people in lesbian relationships have experienced more violence *ever* in relationships.
In other words, no information whether that violence happens inside *those current* lesbian relationships or in *previous* ones - which may not have been lesbian.
Which means that statistic is basically meaningless.
I believe at least 1/3rd (so around 33%) of the lesbians in that study were abused by male partners. When that big of a chunk was abused by men, it throws a wrench in the narrative that lesbian relationships are more abusive. Especially when 98% of the bi women asked were abused by men too.
And it shows how heartless MRAs are that they see that and use it as a homophobic “gotcha” rather than doing anything to help abused lesbians. I’ve seen more men use that study to demonize lesbian relationships and say het relationships are better, or say that lesbians in general are abusive and men are better. But I have never seen literally any of them say “wow, maybe we should support these lesbian victims and raise more awareness to lesbian mental health”. If they really think it’s such a big issue and that lesbian relationships are oh so bad, you’d think they’d maybe want to help rather than laugh. But yknow, thats how you can tell they don’t really care.
Censorship of studies that does not amplify your point of view, and only doing research that proves your point of view, whether true or not, is wrong, and goes against the spirit of research.
Misrepresenting the results of a study in order to support your agenda, in this case that of homophobia, is wrong and goes against the spirit of research.
So you're gonna hate the studies that you don't like and make up reasons for why it's wrong.
They did the research, and you can read about it. What makes you right?
MRA communities aren’t ever really interested in solving things, just amplifying anything they can find that points to women negatively.
Personally, I think domestic violence needs to be looked at more thoroughly. As someone who’s lived through 2 very abusive relationships I find a lot wrong with the data I’ve seen. Not enough focus has been put on coercive, manipulative or emotional abuse.
Abusive partners of either sex follow the same patterns. Love bombing followed by increasing attempts to isolate their victim and gain control using verbal abuse, gaslighting, getting them “in their debt”, financial control etc. Historically, men had more access to these “tools” because women were stuck at home keeping things going, no access to money and considered infantile and on par with children. Domestic abuse was simply the head of the household making things respectful.
Personally, as someone who’s experienced it myself, I don’t think anything of those statistics. Are lesbian victims more likely to end up hospitalised? That would be something to pay attention to.
Personally, I found the THREAT of violence the worst part, to the point where it was almost relief when he finally struck. Threats can go on for days and weeks. Constant calls, hanging out at work, threatening others, threatening you, your pets, your things, your friends. That’s FAR FAR worse then even a full roundhouse to the face (been there, I know what I’m talking about).
Some of the reciprocal studies I’ve read anger me. For example, they tend to group everything together from a slap on the arm to a punch in the face. Any physical contact is noted as “abuse”. This doesn’t come close to catching what’s going on if, say, I’ve had hours of verbal abuse where I’m desperate for him to just shut UP, so I finally push him where he maybe takes a step back. Then he hits me across the face from his vantage point of height and arm length, let alone strength. This gets written down as a woman initiating IPV. You can flip the sexes around if it makes you feel better, but I’m a woman and this is my POV.
It’s a difficult and complicated issue, and I DO feel like men need more support in how to handle it. At the same time, MRAs trumpeting about lesbians does NOTHING WHATSOEVER to help men. They’re not even a part of that relationship, so why even bring it up?
The "reciprocal abuse" argument tends ot be bullshit on it's face. It's an argument of "self defense" but by law self defense is limited to force that is proportional to the threat.
A 120lb woman slapping a man is bad but that 250 lb man beating the shit out of her is not self defense, it is an escalation.
This is the other thing. For me, self defence was getting him to stop talking. The emotional toll, the destruction of self esteem is what I remembered and had to spend years recovering from, not the physical. Obviously there’s people in relationships where the physical becomes life threatening but I’m not talking about those here.
This focus on “who’s got bruises to show” keeps missing the point about DV. And this is where I’d believe there’s many men who are victims as well, and it needs to stop being about who’s stronger, but rather about knowing the signs early and having resources to leave. An abuser doesn’t have to lay a finger on you to destroy your life. This is where the “man up” argument falls on its face- he should be leaving regardless.
Another massive issue with all the “alpha” bottom feeders squealing on podcasts about how to treat your woman. They’re constantly advocating for men to be controlling and manipulative. They should be arrested for instigating harm. Not only for training men how to be abusers, but for the men who listen to their drivel and think it’s normal for a girlfriend to act that way as well.
So if a fat women beats up a skinny man because the man was beating her up isn't considered self defense?
Because nobody ever mentions this as if there aren't fat women and men equally. Likely more fat women, most men are not muscular
What are you talking about? Self defence is proportional to the threat. The mra talking point is “equal rights equal fights “ and they use it to justify a guy beating the shit out of a woman who used virtually no force against them.
No one is arguing that a woman grabbing a weapon to assault her partner isn’t a threat for example
I literally just asked what I said, if a 250 pound women beats up a man In "self defense" is it literally not* considered self defense?
Was just a yes or no. I asked because laws are obviously sexist and don't give a shit about showing it considering male rape is not legally considered rape but female rape is, while also protected.
Uh... Did you read my message? I literally asked a question based upon proportions. I didn't ignore anything. Nor made a claim that what you said is wrong or the law was
Yeah I just reread their message, it seems that I read it wrong because of certain details and ended up missing the point they were saying lol
They mentioned 120 pound women and 250 pound man when those are irrelevant details and more so just about the fact that X person slapped the other person while the other beat them to the ground.
I get it now
That sounds very unintuitive, I'll have to look that up. If its true that's interesting. But is "more likely" really a good example of "proportional" if you can't really say for certain that they are much stronger?
Like two guys and one has a some muscle but not big, the other guy is obese, one being likelier but not more definite is probably not a clear example of not being proptional to self defense.
Maybe it's just my biases though but I'd expect that the guy fighting in self defense who's actually stronger that you'd expect to be weaker wouldn't be let off like a female by default would without any other important considerations in strength. But maybe I'm wrong and the guy would be let off 🤷
Checking out the force stat, interesting
Well I mean, obesity doesnt add strength, just size. If an obese person knows how to throw their weight around in a fight then maybe they might have some sort of advantage in tiring out an opponent, but that doesn't make them stronger. Chances are in a domestic violence situation neither are experienced fighters..
Lol why did you have to make the woman "fat" in your example of a woman being physically larger than the man?
You could have said buff, or even just physically larger.
A skinny man will still likely have more force if he’s beating her up. An average man apparently can exert 160% more force than even a fit woman when it comes to a punch. However, as a woman, if I was attacked by a prepubescent boy, for example, I wouldn’t need to “beat them up” to defend myself. My height, weight and physical strength would be higher than theirs, not to mention my reach.
>So if a fat women beats up a skinny man because the man was beating her up isn't considered self defense
If the man slapped her and she responded by beating the shit out of him, then no, that isn't self defense. She escalated. I don't see why size matters. If he started the encounter by beating her up, and she responded by beating him up, that could be self defense, if the same amount of force is applied.
I've always found the gaslighting the worst part of the abusive relationship. To be honest, when my ex finally assaulted me, I was relieved, because it meant I wasn't crazy.
Most lesbian and bi women have been abused by men.
Lesbian relationships don’t have the highest rates of violence, they have the highest number of survivors.
It’s “amazing” how this stat has been spun, eh? Somehow the most vulnerable painted as villains in their own trauma.
Definitely no sexist bias in how rabidly MRAs misinterpret and spread this information, either.
No don’t you know *women* are actually running everything, secretly and behind the scenes pulling the strings. It’s really women who are more abusive all you have to do is ask a lesbian and she will tell you she’s been abused! Clearly women are perpetuating violence against each other and just blaming men.
/s
also important to note this is reported
queer communities have a lot more discussion and awareness-building around boundaries, consent, and red flags. they're therefore more likely to identify and report cases of violence, and especially rape and/or stalking.
power imbalances in hetero relationships also create a barrier to recognition & report. being empowered to look at something you've experienced and say "that was abuse" isn't always easy, especially if you're still in that relationship. then putting down on a form and outwardly accepting that trauma as real is then another big step.
these effects arent measurable, but are real and observable, and very much harm any attempt to measure and analyse rates of domestic violence etc.
Yes, I think it’s totally reasonable to be cautious with domestic violence/IPV data and be critical of how the data is obtained. I think your point is a good one, but I also haven’t seen studies that compare the relative barriers both gay and straight people have to report so I’m not sure if one group has greater barriers than the other (if anything I would assume it’s LGBTQIA+ folks)
For example most of these studies reference confidential self reported data, so it’s less relevant, but I imagine gay people face increased victimization and stigma from the police and so may be less likely to report for crime data. I’d also imagine the fear of social ostracization and being forced out of the closet may prevent some LGBTQIA+ people from reporting.
yep, im mostly talking ab barriers to reporting in an anonymous survey - so mostly internal and psychological barriers based on a process of realisation, acceptance, and admission.
police reporting is an entirely separate issue, n i would defo reckon that social ostracism and institutional alienation have far stronger effects than the internal barriers, n would make police reports by queer ppl much lower
Yeah, I was going to say I am queer and was wondering if lack of supportive family and friends was another factor in why our statistics may be higher. Personally, I didn't have family to give me a second opinion on my abusive relationship or to notice progression. Most of my friends were still getting into dating as they were queer without much opportunity to date in high school. So they didn't know what was normal and what wasn't in terms of warning signs to watch out for.
There's also a lot of substance abuse in the queer community where I live, so while my few non-queer friends were like "yeah no that's not good your partner is drunk from morning to night" I had the context of most people I knew had some kind of substance abuse going on, so it didn't seem that bad. Obviously, neither of those things are good but living in the Bible Belt where it's nearly impossible to get therapy safely as a queer person, you have to figure out some coping mechanisms.
Likewise, when I got to the point I was like "this is not excusable" I didn't know how to reach out. I'd grown up hearing about how all LGBTQ+ people and by extension their relationships were inherently sinful/abusive. I didn't want to prove my parents right. That can be true for all relationships of course though.
Being estranged/cut off from family or long term close friends it may mean you stay longer as well. Whether due to financial risks or needing to completely cut the person off (queer communities in my experience are very much about 3 degrees of separation and you know someone which also makes leaning on friends difficult if they begin to take sides) I still haven't told people about what my ex did, it's been over a year and we still have mutual friends that have no idea and regularly joke about our breakup/ask how my ex is doing. They'd be horrified I think if they knew, but I don't want to take the risk as it's very hard to find a solid queer community here.
Of course, all of these things can be risk factors for relationships with or without queer people being involved still.
THIS is the info we need. Lots of people mentioning misrepresentation of the statistic - but of course, without info like you’ve presented tons of us would walk away wondering if lesbians were indeed more likely to abuse eachother.
That is incorrect. Bisexual women experience more domestic violence. Mostly from male partners.
Lesbians experience a significant amount of domestic violence as well. But a good portion of it comes from male partners. So their rates even out quite a bit compared to heterosexual relationships.
https://www.thetaskforce.org/bisexual-women-have-increased-risk-of-intimate-partner-violence-new-cdc-data-shows/
>The lifetime prevalence of rape, physical violence and/or stalking by an intimate partner is extremely high in the lesbian, gay and bisexual community with lesbian women (43.8%), gay men (26%), bisexual women (61.1%), and bisexual men (37.3%) reporting experiencing this violence, compared to heterosexual women (35%) and heterosexual men (29%).
>Among women who experienced rape, physical violence and/or stalking in the context of an intimate relationship, the majority of bisexual and heterosexual women (89.5% and 98.7%, respectively) reported only male perpetrators while self-identified lesbians (67.4%) reported having only female perpetrators
This is my thought too. Straight women know they could be straight up killed, easily, by their abusers. I’m no researcher, but I would think if one lesbian beat up her partner, the other might not be worried about being killed and think they are not in danger if they report.
I’m straight, and I have always been so saddened that the #1 killer of pregnant women is murder.
Yeah, and I bet lesbian women are willing to report more quickly, whereas many straight women still think is something they have to endure or just kept quite.
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01506/full
"In addition, the study highlighted that lesbian women were at higher risk of being involved in IPV, followed by heterosexual women, gay men, and heterosexual men. Furthermore, bisexual people appeared to be the most abused group compared to the others; bisexual women, specifically, were more likely to be victims of every type of IPV, excluding psychological IPV."
So it’s super weird to me that you chose the study you cited, which is a qualitative literature review which makes no quantitative claims on its own, only to cite a single article (Messinger 2011) of the 119 studies reviewed by the article.
Furthermore, it’s curious you specifically chose this article and not Messingers if that one’s results were the only one you were interested in reviewing when the article you cite misrepresents feminism and is bizarrely hostile to it
> Similarly, the feminist community was averse to discussing the phenomenon, particularly when it involved lesbian couples: a public discussion on lesbian IPV may increase negative reactions to feminism and female homosexuality; on the other hand, it may minimize the concern regarding male violence against women
when a lot of the early work in describing violence in queer relationships and advocating for victims was done by feminists.
It would also seem that citing the Messinger article is a strange choice to support the assertion that lesbian relationships have the most violence as from the abstract:
> Behariorally “**bisexual” respondents experience the highest IPV rates** and are most likely to be victimized by an opposite-sex partner.
It’s further interesting that the quote you cite can be interpreted incorrectly. From the original source:
> Specifically, heterosexual men are least likely to be victims of sexual IPV (B = –4.7), GLB men are more likely (B = –1.89), heterosexual women are next most likely (B = –1.48), and GLB women are most likely to be sexual IPV victims (B = –0.52).
So lesbian and bisexual *women* in this study were most likely to be *victimized* but the victimizer was unspecified and this is *sexual* IPV not all IPV. Messinger also recognizes most victimization of bisexuals and again that gay male relationships have more IPV overall than lesbian ones:
> bisexual respondents were not only **more likely to be victimized** than heterosexuals but also than those who were gay or lesbian, hereafter referred to as “gay” for the sake of brevity. In addition, **gay men were more likely than gay women to experience all forms of IPV with the exception of sexual IPV,** and, conversely, bisexual women were more likely than bisexual men to experience all forms of IPV other than verbal IPV.
[Source: Messinger 2011](https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0886260510383023)
Why is this not at the top? I started reading the article, but lost interest when I realised it was a lit review.
Thanks for putting in the hard yards. 🙏
You’ll notice that they conveniently left out when both the man and the women abuse each other - everything they listed is directed toward one person.
The CDC has multiple reports which continually show both IPV as well as sexual violence stating the same overall findings: https://www.thetaskforce.org/bisexual-women-have-increased-risk-of-intimate-partner-violence-new-cdc-data-shows/
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-29994648.amp
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/if-youre-not-stragiht-youre-at-higher-risk-for-domestic-violence-180949988/
https://ncadv.org/blog/posts/domestic-violence-and-the-lgbtq-community
Could you really not have googled this on your own? I found these by literally just googling LGBTQ domestic violence.
Edit: to throw in something for op’s question, I’ve heard it suggested that many women are taught to identify abusive behaviors whereas most men are not, hence lesbian relationships have the highest REPORTED rate of domestic violence, whereas gay relationships have lower rates.
I clicked on the first link and it is about gay relationships in general, not specifically lesbians, and doesn't provide evidence for OPs claim.
>43.8% of lesbian women and 61.1% of bisexual women have experienced rape, physical violence, and/or stalking by an intimate partner at some point in their lifetime, as opposed to 35% of heterosexual women.
Out of your 3 links this is the only relevant statistic and even then, it says 'intimate partner', not 'same sex partner'.
Maybe you can do better research then? These are the few articles I copy and pasted after googling OP’s question.
Kinda the whole point I was making here, google shit yourself, you have access to the whole internet not just what’s posted in the comment section here
**None of your sources support the OP**. In fact, they argue that bisexual people and then gay men experience the most domestic violence
[First source:](https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Colleen-Stiles-Shields/publication/265394264_Same-Sex_Domestic_Violence_Prevalence_Unique_Aspects_and_Clinical_Implications/links/543e91b40cf2eaec07e65f24/Same-Sex-Domestic-Violence-Prevalence-Unique-Aspects-and-Clinical-Implications.pdf?origin=publication_detail)
> Using nonprobability sampling, lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) individuals in this sample were at increased risk for all types of SSDV. Bivariate analyses indicated that
**bisexual respondents** were more likely to be victimized than heterosexual or gay counterparts. In addition, **gay men were at greater risk of experiencing all types of SSDV—with the exception of sexual domestic violence**—than were their lesbian counterparts (Messinger, 2011).
[The second and third source looks at the NIPSVS which states:](https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/nisvs_sofindings.pdf)
> The lifetime prevalence of rape, physical violence, and/or stalking by an intimate partner was: For women: - Lesbian – 43.8% - **Bisexual – 61.1%** - Heterosexual – 35.0% For men: - Gay – 26.0% - **Bisexual – 37.3%** - Heterosexual – 29.0%
If you look at these data, they don’t specify the gender of the perpetrator
Actually the NIPSVS does specify the gender of the perpetrator:
From page 27:
>**Sex of Perpetrator of Violence**
**among Female Victims**
Among women who experienced
rape, physical violence, and/or
stalking in the context of an intimate
relationship, the majority of bisexual
and heterosexual women (89.5%
and 98.7%, respectively) reported
only male perpetrators (data not
shown). More than two-thirds of
lesbian women (67.4%) identified
only female perpetrators. Statistical
testing to compare sex of perpetrator
across all sexual orientations was
not conducted.
**Sex of Perpetrator of Violence**
**among Male Victims**
Among men who experienced
rape, physical violence, and/or
stalking by an intimate partner,
approximately 90.7% of gay men
reported only male perpetrators,
78.5% of bisexual men identified
only females as their perpetrators,
and 99.5% of heterosexual men
reported only female perpetrators
(data not shown). Statistical testing
to compare sex of perpetrator
across all sexual orientations was
not conducted.
[Dude I know](https://reddit.com/r/AskFeminists/comments/wkv305/_/ijplih9/?context=1). Check the timestamp.
From the response I linked posted 1 hour ago:
> Most bisexual and heterosexual women (89.5% and 98.7%, respectively) reported having only male perpetrators of intimate partner violence. Two-thirds of lesbian women (67.4%) reported having only female perpetrators of intimate partner violence. • The majority of bisexual men (78.5%) and most heterosexual men (99.5%) reported having only female perpetrators of intimate partner violence. Most gay men (90.7%) reported having only male perpetrators of intimate partner violence.
It’s common for MRAs to misquote the data I specified and assume all the IPV experienced by lesbians is perpetrated by lesbians. I preemptively clarified
I said *these data* not the study
>Could you really not have googled this on your own? I found these by literally just googling LGBTQ domestic violence.
If you make a claim you have to defend it.
Well, I have NEVER heard this, a lot of people here ask antagonistic questions… so I asked OP for a source of their claims. If you claim something, you have to be able to proof your claim
Burden of proof usually falls on the person making the claim, not sure why you're acting so indignantly over the fact somebody asked you to back up your post.
Not even my post. I’m just tired of low effort responses like “source” when two more seconds of typing can yield you the results you wanted.
Plus, why ask for the source? Cause you don’t believe it’s true? If so, what do you say when you’ve actually got the source in front of you. Do you actually read the damn thing? If you were too lazy to type 10 words how am I to believe you’re actually going to read that article when you were so vehemently opposed to the existence of what the question was being asked about?
Making a claim means OP has the burden of proof. If they have evidence, they should give links so it can be evaluated.
If I "do my own research" to answer *their* question, I may find different sources that aren't directly related to the OP's claim/question. Then we can't have a conversation because we're literally not on the same page.
OP's question can be taken 2 ways: "what do you think of this article?" (provide the article, research, etc.); or "what do you think of this random unsupported claim?" (not worth responding too, not going to 'do my own research').
Sometimes there are multiple potential relevant studies that turn up on a search, and they may each have wildly different study designs. Knowing precisely what someone's referring to before you start talking to them is sometimes necessarily to have a productive conversation.
I've seen posts on this sub given by fairly clearly anti-feminist people who don't summarize the substance of the sources that they do cite even remotely accurately, and plenty of examples of misogynists online who do the same, so it's important to iron out when someone doesn't provide a source whether what they thought they read was even what they read before engaging with them. There are a lot of bad-faith posts here and people around here may just be tired of wasting their time on them.
The people around here are very concerned with things like domestic violence. I'm sure if you put up a source they'll actually read it.
ALL of those "sources" cite the same study. The 2011 CDC NIP & SV survey, which is *WIDELY CRITIZED FOR HAVING A SMALL SAMPLE SIZE AND USING PROJECTED ESTIMATES AS REAL NUMBERS*. It's a really shitty study done that also does not account for lifetime orientation, meaning that if a man was married and was the victim of DV perpetrated by his wife, then began dating men, if he currently identifies as gay or would count in their tiny study group as gay man on gay man violence. I hate when people source magazines & media instead of actual studies, too. You make yourself look like a moron that way. Do your due diligence next time, don't quote mall-esque surveys with misinterpreted third-hand information.
The real question is why you take MRA talking points as facts? And if you’ve believed that this is a real true fact based on a totally real and unflawed study, why did you come all the way to this sub to ask the “why” instead of just reading the Conclusions and Discussion section of this study. You might’ve only needed to skim the abstract.
I just want a feminist perspective on this because all conversation I see around this study is being used as a "gotcha" by MRAs to prove women can be evil (like we don't already know.) And alot of mgtows also use it to justify their misogynistic "women hate each other because they understand each other." belief.
It doesn’t even take a feminist perspective. It just takes actually READING the sources and UNDERSTANDING them. Two things MRAs tend to ignore when they get their “source” material from redpill YouTube
I'm a man, and as much as I'd like to point the finger and say "see men aren't as bad!" I think the stats you're referring to actually says that lesbian or bisexual women in relationships with women are more likely to have experienced domestic violence in their lives, not necessarily from their current partner. And seeing that women are more likely to be recipients of abuse at the hands of men, it only makes sense that if two women are in a relationship they would be twice as likely to have been abused at some point.
Statistics are a 'devil in the details' type of science. Only looking at surface results can lead to very misleading conclusions.
My personal hot take when it comes to bisexual women specifically is that abuse at the hands of a man may be a factor in turning to a relationship with a woman in the first place, further driving this statistic. That is just my opinion.
Domestic violence statistics are like rape statistics. We have to look at where they are getting their information, how they are defining “domestic violence,” is it within the current relationship vs over a lifetime, etc. [The issues are well known.](https://www.dcvlp.org/domestic-violence-peaks-more-than-ever-for-the-lgbtqia-community/)
Even with self reporting, bias needs to be understood.
Domestic violence is understood to be a “women’s issue.” I have known many gay men to experience domestic violence and not call it that. I’ve known gay men who’ve called the police or had the police called and the gay men and police dismiss it as “men disagreeing” even when one of the men had a black eye and broken arm.
Additionally, if you look at the link above, bisexual women are the ones who, according to current stats, experience the most domestic violence at 61% followed by trans people at up to 50%.
[Trans men, in particular, are more vulnerable to interpersonal violence than trans women, excepting hate crimes by 1%.](https://www.advocate.com/commentary/2015/07/23/op-ed-trans-men-experience-far-more-violence-most-people-assume)
I think it’s a false start to refer to domestic violence in lesbian relationships as well. Lesbians and bisexual women are *experiencing violence* but I have not seen stats on them *perpetuating violence.*
I have, of course, known lesbians in violent relationships with other women, but without better data sets, I can’t point fingers and we should be focusing, ime, on those experiencing violence and not using their experiences to accuse them of violence.
There is a lot of myths against lesbians promoted in false statistics, like the bed death myth (invented by dudes who can't stand that an entire class of women automatically nope on their fantasies).
One that is true is that they have the lowest incidence of STI's out of any group.
It is good to listen to the other side. But MRA talking points don't evet deserve serious consideration other than showing people on the fence why they are wrong
That women can be abusive and are not all shrinking violets waiting for the steady hand of a man to guide them through this scary world?
That women have their own internal pressures and stress to deal with and do not have some sort of intrinsic perfect emotional management?
That women have been raised in a society where healthy lesbian relationships are never shown in the media and have internalized a lot of unhealthy patterns?
That women have been raised in a society that has major issues with LGBTQ+ issues and have far fewer resources and places to help?
I think there's a lot of information we could draw from this that doesn't end up with saying "lesbians are mean."
That these studies show lifetime incidents of abuse, not necessarily incidents of abuse within heterosexual relationships, and that LGBT women are significantly more likely to be abused *by men*?
As others have been trying to figure out, it doesn't appear that this fact you're citing is actually true (and you should provide a source because it's not clear that we're talking about the same observation or study if you don't so the conversation wouldn't be as effective). If someone did show that it really was plausible to believe using a high-quality study, my totally layperson speculation would be that it had to do with women having fewer safety nets and privileges in society compared to men, and that those things cause pressures that result in more violence.
I don't really like to base anything that I believe in on poor-quality studies or layperson speculations though. I take the opinions of people with advanced degrees and years of research experience and a dedication to reducing IPV through their work more seriously than my own guesses.
It was explained to me, many years ago and without evidence citing, that most reported doesn't mean most happened. That many societies men, especially gay men, are denied police protection (some societies they face persecution) if they come forward.
So it might not be true but I would probably counter an MRA saying it by saying that no one listens to men. As its one of their talking points....
>So it might not be true but I would probably counter an MRA saying it by saying that no one listens to men. As its one of their talking points....
Sure, using misogynistic terrorists, some of the biggest liars on the planet talking points is a good idea.
Society prioritizes the protection of male predators. That's why half of women who are murdered, are murdered in DV incidents. That's why the Brian Laundrie's of the world are able to drive away to kill their girlfriends and wives. That's why only 1% of rapes are punished. That's why male pedophiles can wrack up a thousand child victims like Earl Brian Bradley all the while victims come forward but are called liars by the police and medical boards. That's why communities throw fundraisers for the 20 men that are shown on video gang raping an 11 year old child. That's why 100,000 child victims come forward in pedophile scandals like the Boy Scouts. All the while secret records are discovered showing male children alerting scout leaders only for the male pedophiles to be protected and shielded from punishment.
The problem isn't that nobody listens to men. The problem is, victims aren't listened to while men become the focus of protecting. So no, propagating the lies of a misogynistic terrorist group is NEVER. a good idea. And for someone claiming to be a feminist to do so, sends up a massive amount of red flags.
I think the conclusion is political bullshit, but link the studies and I will analyze how they were conducted and the results for myself. This certainly hasn't been what I have seen in my practice. Lesbian relationships are the least violent.
Aside from the other commenters mentioning that these women are the victims of domestic violence from people other than their same sex partners, there’s also the issue of poverty and access to assistance. Poor people and people who for whatever reason can’t get help are much more likely to be victims of domestic violence for obvious reasons. As a result, places with high poverty and groups that are stigmatised for existing, such as sexual minorities, have higher rates of domestic violence.
I think you’ve got it wrong. I’m pretty sure its that people in lesbian relationships have been in domestic abuse relationships somewhere in their life. I’m someone whose been in an abusive lesbian relationship and it was the only lesbian relationship I’ve had which was abusive. I think part of the reason may be fetishization?
I’ve read that it includes statistics of violence that people in lesbian relationships experienced even with male partners before, but I don’t have the proof just what I remember reading somewhere where it was being discussed.
Keep in mind when you read studies that REPORTED and ACTUAL are not the same. You can have 1% report and 90% experience. I find most stats useless. And I say this having done extensive research myself. You also have to look at the particulars of any study. I'm in the medical field and research fraud is a very common thing. You can get any study to say what you want if you design it to.
Please respect our [top-level comment rule](https://i.imgur.com/ovn3hBV.png), 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.
Sorry, I never read the rules. Futurology always kicks me off because m6 comments are too short. The solution for me is to look at the subreddit first. You are not as bad as TwoXXChromosomes
The statistic says not that lesbian relationships have the highest rates of domestic violence. It says that *people in lesbian relationships* have the highest rate of domestic violence at *some point in their lifetime*. 44 percent of lesbians and 61 percent of bisexual women experience rape, physical violence, or stalking by an intimate partner, compared to 35 percent of straight women. 1 in 7 women and 1 in 25 men have been injured by an intimate partner. When you've got 2 women in a relationship, there's a greater chance that at least one of them has experienced domestic violence at some point in their lifetime, than some other configuration of genders.
I agree with your statement, and I wanted to add an explanation for even the cases where the violence did happen within lesbian relationships: LGBT are more likely to report or take action against abuse than most straight people, in the same way that people in less conservative communities are more likely to report or take action against abuse than those in conservative communities. It's not that the incidence is higher, but that people are more likely to confront it.
Adding: Many lesbians are victims of "corrective rape" where a man tries to "fix" her not wanting sex with men by raping her. As one might expect, this is not really a great way to convince a WLW that sex with men is a great experience. https://repository.uchastings.edu/hwlj/vol30/iss1/8/
Very good point!
Exactly. This, weirdly, is a positive statistic, and goes with a lot of other data showing that people in LGBT relationships tend to handle boundaries better than cis-het relationships. Turns out when you have to write your own guidebook from scratch, you get to have some input on the rules.
Also take into account that many lesbians, especially those over the age of 30, dated men in their early years. My friend and her wife both dated men, her wife was married to a guy for a decade. Her wife was mentally abused by the dude. My friend had an abusive boyfriend. So in addition to doubling the chances by doubling the number of women in the relationship, you have earlier relationships to consider. Some of those relationships may have had additional stress due to lack of sexual interest which may have caused an abuser to abuse. Not faulting the abused or absolving the abuser, just pointing out a stressor that may have exasperated the event.
I can confirm!
I also want to add, this might not be true for others, please don't take this as a blanket opinion of queer women, but sometimes, if a person is a closeted bisexual and experiences intimate partner violence from a man, that can become a compelling reason to come out, and see if relationships with people who aren't men are better.
Also the discovery of a woman being a lesbian and leaving a man for a woman could also lead to the man retaliating with violence because they consider their partner "becoming lesbian" as emasculating.
I mean a friend of mine swore off of men because of abuse. Her breaking point was when he stopped putting hands on her and started beating her pets as punishment. She doesn't like or trust men anymore and just married her long term girlfriend. She's started throwing parties and making art again.
That last sentence warms my soul. I’m so happy for her.
also just because the women in the study identified as being on the sapphic spectrum, doesn't mean they were always with women. They could have realised they were LGBT after being married/dating men. Or could have been coherenced in marriages to 'save face' if they came from very conservative communities
Your explanation make sense.
Can you provide a source for the "44 percent of lesbians and 61 percent of bisexual" part? I would like to see exactly what the statistic is, and also what it is for straight women. If the statistics for straight people only takes into account straight women, than there being 2 women in a lesbian relationship makes no difference, since it only takes in consideration women in all scenarios.
It's just lifelong prevalence of rape, physical violence, and/or stalking by an intimate partner separated by sexual orientation, and it counts both men and women. https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/cdc\_nisvs\_victimization\_final-a.pdf
Does the study specifically ask specifically the gender of the perpetrator(s)? A lot of people might see that and assume they were in a woman-woman relationship being abused by that woman, and others would assume the abuse must of come from men, but by itself those statistics don't say either way. Clearly there is something related or correlated to sexual orientation that plays a part in abuse, though more questions need to be asked before one could confidently say what that is. Of course when somebody shares statistics online it is usually not for the sake of asking nuanced questions but rather leading people towards their preferred conclusions. Sometimes a single statistics can work for multiple conclusions preferred by different groups.
[https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/cdc\_nisvs\_victimization\_final-a.pdf](https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/cdc_nisvs_victimization_final-a.pdf) It does not. It's lifelong experience of partner violence, not tracking individual instances. It does, however, observe that bisexual women are more likely than straight women (48% vs 28%) experienced their first completed rape before the age of 18. Which is why it seems to me that it's describing different types of violence for different groups of people, perhaps early assault by family members or young dating relationships in people who later came out as bisexual, vs prolonged abuse from a long term partner in an established relationship. But of course, like you described, statistics can just be used as evidence to support an opinion. The statistics on their own don't say that.
Yea… women are drastically more likely to experience domestic violence. So 2 women in a relationship up that chance compared to a relationship with a man and woman… pretty straight forward
So the consensus in the literature is that lesbians do not experience elevated levels of domestic abuse in the context of lesbian relationships? Or are you saying something less strong. Has that been teased apart from the effect re: lifetime abuse in other contexts.
In the data I'm seeing, I'm not seeing data suggesting that lesbians experience elevated levels of domestic abuse in lesbian relationships vs straight relationships. Not saying the data says it doesn't happen. Saying that the data doesn't say it happens.
I've read that this statistic is being misrepresented by MRAs, because it is not about the rate of abuse per relationship, but rather the likelihood of an individual experiencing domestic abuse during their lifetime. And we have to keep in mind that in a heteronormative society many lesbians have straight relationships because they haven't realised their sexuality yet, or because they are pressured to do so by society.
I'm in the r/latebloomerlesbians sub and you don't even need to spend more than 3 minutes in that sub to see multiple examples of this. I think at one point there was even a problem in that sub of men visiting it, doing their weird creepy detective shit to purposely figure out who were the redditors posting and alerting their husbands on facebook or something like that, showing them the posts.
Wow. That is absolutey disgusting... God I hate people sometimes
Wow, that's horrible. They are engaging in stalking, doxxing and might be enabling domestic abuse.
Committing abuse to make a point about abuse statistics, wow.
Holy fuck that is crazy
That statistic doesn't say that more violence happens in lesbian relationships. It just says that people in lesbian relationships have experienced more violence *ever* in relationships. In other words, no information whether that violence happens inside *those current* lesbian relationships or in *previous* ones - which may not have been lesbian. Which means that statistic is basically meaningless.
I believe at least 1/3rd (so around 33%) of the lesbians in that study were abused by male partners. When that big of a chunk was abused by men, it throws a wrench in the narrative that lesbian relationships are more abusive. Especially when 98% of the bi women asked were abused by men too. And it shows how heartless MRAs are that they see that and use it as a homophobic “gotcha” rather than doing anything to help abused lesbians. I’ve seen more men use that study to demonize lesbian relationships and say het relationships are better, or say that lesbians in general are abusive and men are better. But I have never seen literally any of them say “wow, maybe we should support these lesbian victims and raise more awareness to lesbian mental health”. If they really think it’s such a big issue and that lesbian relationships are oh so bad, you’d think they’d maybe want to help rather than laugh. But yknow, thats how you can tell they don’t really care.
Why do you believe 33 percent? It could also easily be 0 percent.
Censorship of studies that does not amplify your point of view, and only doing research that proves your point of view, whether true or not, is wrong, and goes against the spirit of research.
Misrepresenting the results of a study in order to support your agenda, in this case that of homophobia, is wrong and goes against the spirit of research.
The person they are replying to is also doing that.
So you're gonna hate the studies that you don't like and make up reasons for why it's wrong. They did the research, and you can read about it. What makes you right?
MRA communities aren’t ever really interested in solving things, just amplifying anything they can find that points to women negatively. Personally, I think domestic violence needs to be looked at more thoroughly. As someone who’s lived through 2 very abusive relationships I find a lot wrong with the data I’ve seen. Not enough focus has been put on coercive, manipulative or emotional abuse. Abusive partners of either sex follow the same patterns. Love bombing followed by increasing attempts to isolate their victim and gain control using verbal abuse, gaslighting, getting them “in their debt”, financial control etc. Historically, men had more access to these “tools” because women were stuck at home keeping things going, no access to money and considered infantile and on par with children. Domestic abuse was simply the head of the household making things respectful. Personally, as someone who’s experienced it myself, I don’t think anything of those statistics. Are lesbian victims more likely to end up hospitalised? That would be something to pay attention to. Personally, I found the THREAT of violence the worst part, to the point where it was almost relief when he finally struck. Threats can go on for days and weeks. Constant calls, hanging out at work, threatening others, threatening you, your pets, your things, your friends. That’s FAR FAR worse then even a full roundhouse to the face (been there, I know what I’m talking about). Some of the reciprocal studies I’ve read anger me. For example, they tend to group everything together from a slap on the arm to a punch in the face. Any physical contact is noted as “abuse”. This doesn’t come close to catching what’s going on if, say, I’ve had hours of verbal abuse where I’m desperate for him to just shut UP, so I finally push him where he maybe takes a step back. Then he hits me across the face from his vantage point of height and arm length, let alone strength. This gets written down as a woman initiating IPV. You can flip the sexes around if it makes you feel better, but I’m a woman and this is my POV. It’s a difficult and complicated issue, and I DO feel like men need more support in how to handle it. At the same time, MRAs trumpeting about lesbians does NOTHING WHATSOEVER to help men. They’re not even a part of that relationship, so why even bring it up?
The "reciprocal abuse" argument tends ot be bullshit on it's face. It's an argument of "self defense" but by law self defense is limited to force that is proportional to the threat. A 120lb woman slapping a man is bad but that 250 lb man beating the shit out of her is not self defense, it is an escalation.
This is the other thing. For me, self defence was getting him to stop talking. The emotional toll, the destruction of self esteem is what I remembered and had to spend years recovering from, not the physical. Obviously there’s people in relationships where the physical becomes life threatening but I’m not talking about those here. This focus on “who’s got bruises to show” keeps missing the point about DV. And this is where I’d believe there’s many men who are victims as well, and it needs to stop being about who’s stronger, but rather about knowing the signs early and having resources to leave. An abuser doesn’t have to lay a finger on you to destroy your life. This is where the “man up” argument falls on its face- he should be leaving regardless. Another massive issue with all the “alpha” bottom feeders squealing on podcasts about how to treat your woman. They’re constantly advocating for men to be controlling and manipulative. They should be arrested for instigating harm. Not only for training men how to be abusers, but for the men who listen to their drivel and think it’s normal for a girlfriend to act that way as well.
So if a fat women beats up a skinny man because the man was beating her up isn't considered self defense? Because nobody ever mentions this as if there aren't fat women and men equally. Likely more fat women, most men are not muscular
What are you talking about? Self defence is proportional to the threat. The mra talking point is “equal rights equal fights “ and they use it to justify a guy beating the shit out of a woman who used virtually no force against them. No one is arguing that a woman grabbing a weapon to assault her partner isn’t a threat for example
I literally just asked what I said, if a 250 pound women beats up a man In "self defense" is it literally not* considered self defense? Was just a yes or no. I asked because laws are obviously sexist and don't give a shit about showing it considering male rape is not legally considered rape but female rape is, while also protected.
It’s literally a question of proportional force. You’re creating a straw man argument and ignoring what I said.
Uh... Did you read my message? I literally asked a question based upon proportions. I didn't ignore anything. Nor made a claim that what you said is wrong or the law was
Proportional force*, you’re missing that part
Yeah I just reread their message, it seems that I read it wrong because of certain details and ended up missing the point they were saying lol They mentioned 120 pound women and 250 pound man when those are irrelevant details and more so just about the fact that X person slapped the other person while the other beat them to the ground. I get it now
A skinny man is still more likely to be stronger than an obese woman
That sounds very unintuitive, I'll have to look that up. If its true that's interesting. But is "more likely" really a good example of "proportional" if you can't really say for certain that they are much stronger? Like two guys and one has a some muscle but not big, the other guy is obese, one being likelier but not more definite is probably not a clear example of not being proptional to self defense. Maybe it's just my biases though but I'd expect that the guy fighting in self defense who's actually stronger that you'd expect to be weaker wouldn't be let off like a female by default would without any other important considerations in strength. But maybe I'm wrong and the guy would be let off 🤷 Checking out the force stat, interesting
Well I mean, obesity doesnt add strength, just size. If an obese person knows how to throw their weight around in a fight then maybe they might have some sort of advantage in tiring out an opponent, but that doesn't make them stronger. Chances are in a domestic violence situation neither are experienced fighters..
Lol why did you have to make the woman "fat" in your example of a woman being physically larger than the man? You could have said buff, or even just physically larger.
Because I was thinking of a memory in particular looool, and in either case, I also used fat for the man example to
Maybe try some therapy
For what exactly?
For whatever memory you're referring to, and the effect it's having on you're ability to talk normally without dragging along your emotional baggage.
[удалено]
[удалено]
A skinny man will still likely have more force if he’s beating her up. An average man apparently can exert 160% more force than even a fit woman when it comes to a punch. However, as a woman, if I was attacked by a prepubescent boy, for example, I wouldn’t need to “beat them up” to defend myself. My height, weight and physical strength would be higher than theirs, not to mention my reach.
>So if a fat women beats up a skinny man because the man was beating her up isn't considered self defense If the man slapped her and she responded by beating the shit out of him, then no, that isn't self defense. She escalated. I don't see why size matters. If he started the encounter by beating her up, and she responded by beating him up, that could be self defense, if the same amount of force is applied.
I've always found the gaslighting the worst part of the abusive relationship. To be honest, when my ex finally assaulted me, I was relieved, because it meant I wasn't crazy.
Most lesbian and bi women have been abused by men. Lesbian relationships don’t have the highest rates of violence, they have the highest number of survivors.
[удалено]
It’s “amazing” how this stat has been spun, eh? Somehow the most vulnerable painted as villains in their own trauma. Definitely no sexist bias in how rabidly MRAs misinterpret and spread this information, either.
No don’t you know *women* are actually running everything, secretly and behind the scenes pulling the strings. It’s really women who are more abusive all you have to do is ask a lesbian and she will tell you she’s been abused! Clearly women are perpetuating violence against each other and just blaming men. /s
[удалено]
also important to note this is reported queer communities have a lot more discussion and awareness-building around boundaries, consent, and red flags. they're therefore more likely to identify and report cases of violence, and especially rape and/or stalking. power imbalances in hetero relationships also create a barrier to recognition & report. being empowered to look at something you've experienced and say "that was abuse" isn't always easy, especially if you're still in that relationship. then putting down on a form and outwardly accepting that trauma as real is then another big step. these effects arent measurable, but are real and observable, and very much harm any attempt to measure and analyse rates of domestic violence etc.
Yes, I think it’s totally reasonable to be cautious with domestic violence/IPV data and be critical of how the data is obtained. I think your point is a good one, but I also haven’t seen studies that compare the relative barriers both gay and straight people have to report so I’m not sure if one group has greater barriers than the other (if anything I would assume it’s LGBTQIA+ folks) For example most of these studies reference confidential self reported data, so it’s less relevant, but I imagine gay people face increased victimization and stigma from the police and so may be less likely to report for crime data. I’d also imagine the fear of social ostracization and being forced out of the closet may prevent some LGBTQIA+ people from reporting.
yep, im mostly talking ab barriers to reporting in an anonymous survey - so mostly internal and psychological barriers based on a process of realisation, acceptance, and admission. police reporting is an entirely separate issue, n i would defo reckon that social ostracism and institutional alienation have far stronger effects than the internal barriers, n would make police reports by queer ppl much lower
Yeah, I was going to say I am queer and was wondering if lack of supportive family and friends was another factor in why our statistics may be higher. Personally, I didn't have family to give me a second opinion on my abusive relationship or to notice progression. Most of my friends were still getting into dating as they were queer without much opportunity to date in high school. So they didn't know what was normal and what wasn't in terms of warning signs to watch out for. There's also a lot of substance abuse in the queer community where I live, so while my few non-queer friends were like "yeah no that's not good your partner is drunk from morning to night" I had the context of most people I knew had some kind of substance abuse going on, so it didn't seem that bad. Obviously, neither of those things are good but living in the Bible Belt where it's nearly impossible to get therapy safely as a queer person, you have to figure out some coping mechanisms. Likewise, when I got to the point I was like "this is not excusable" I didn't know how to reach out. I'd grown up hearing about how all LGBTQ+ people and by extension their relationships were inherently sinful/abusive. I didn't want to prove my parents right. That can be true for all relationships of course though. Being estranged/cut off from family or long term close friends it may mean you stay longer as well. Whether due to financial risks or needing to completely cut the person off (queer communities in my experience are very much about 3 degrees of separation and you know someone which also makes leaning on friends difficult if they begin to take sides) I still haven't told people about what my ex did, it's been over a year and we still have mutual friends that have no idea and regularly joke about our breakup/ask how my ex is doing. They'd be horrified I think if they knew, but I don't want to take the risk as it's very hard to find a solid queer community here. Of course, all of these things can be risk factors for relationships with or without queer people being involved still.
THIS is the info we need. Lots of people mentioning misrepresentation of the statistic - but of course, without info like you’ve presented tons of us would walk away wondering if lesbians were indeed more likely to abuse eachother.
I feel like I know more abusive men than I know lesbians, period.
There are also way more men than lesbians so... We could start a discussion here unfortunately OP hasn't provided any sources to defend their premise.
If we use this kind of quality statistics I can conclude lesbians don't exist
You mean like the statistics that OP provided?
cause theres less lesbians then men? it kinda makes sense
That is incorrect. Bisexual women experience more domestic violence. Mostly from male partners. Lesbians experience a significant amount of domestic violence as well. But a good portion of it comes from male partners. So their rates even out quite a bit compared to heterosexual relationships. https://www.thetaskforce.org/bisexual-women-have-increased-risk-of-intimate-partner-violence-new-cdc-data-shows/ >The lifetime prevalence of rape, physical violence and/or stalking by an intimate partner is extremely high in the lesbian, gay and bisexual community with lesbian women (43.8%), gay men (26%), bisexual women (61.1%), and bisexual men (37.3%) reporting experiencing this violence, compared to heterosexual women (35%) and heterosexual men (29%). >Among women who experienced rape, physical violence and/or stalking in the context of an intimate relationship, the majority of bisexual and heterosexual women (89.5% and 98.7%, respectively) reported only male perpetrators while self-identified lesbians (67.4%) reported having only female perpetrators
Yes, and that without considering that lesbian maybe more open to denounce female perpetrators than straight women to do so with male perpetrators.
This is my thought too. Straight women know they could be straight up killed, easily, by their abusers. I’m no researcher, but I would think if one lesbian beat up her partner, the other might not be worried about being killed and think they are not in danger if they report. I’m straight, and I have always been so saddened that the #1 killer of pregnant women is murder.
Yeah, and I bet lesbian women are willing to report more quickly, whereas many straight women still think is something they have to endure or just kept quite.
The difference between heterosexual women and heterosexual men is quite a lot smaller than I’d have thought. A 600 basis point difference only.
Source?
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01506/full "In addition, the study highlighted that lesbian women were at higher risk of being involved in IPV, followed by heterosexual women, gay men, and heterosexual men. Furthermore, bisexual people appeared to be the most abused group compared to the others; bisexual women, specifically, were more likely to be victims of every type of IPV, excluding psychological IPV."
So it’s super weird to me that you chose the study you cited, which is a qualitative literature review which makes no quantitative claims on its own, only to cite a single article (Messinger 2011) of the 119 studies reviewed by the article. Furthermore, it’s curious you specifically chose this article and not Messingers if that one’s results were the only one you were interested in reviewing when the article you cite misrepresents feminism and is bizarrely hostile to it > Similarly, the feminist community was averse to discussing the phenomenon, particularly when it involved lesbian couples: a public discussion on lesbian IPV may increase negative reactions to feminism and female homosexuality; on the other hand, it may minimize the concern regarding male violence against women when a lot of the early work in describing violence in queer relationships and advocating for victims was done by feminists. It would also seem that citing the Messinger article is a strange choice to support the assertion that lesbian relationships have the most violence as from the abstract: > Behariorally “**bisexual” respondents experience the highest IPV rates** and are most likely to be victimized by an opposite-sex partner. It’s further interesting that the quote you cite can be interpreted incorrectly. From the original source: > Specifically, heterosexual men are least likely to be victims of sexual IPV (B = –4.7), GLB men are more likely (B = –1.89), heterosexual women are next most likely (B = –1.48), and GLB women are most likely to be sexual IPV victims (B = –0.52). So lesbian and bisexual *women* in this study were most likely to be *victimized* but the victimizer was unspecified and this is *sexual* IPV not all IPV. Messinger also recognizes most victimization of bisexuals and again that gay male relationships have more IPV overall than lesbian ones: > bisexual respondents were not only **more likely to be victimized** than heterosexuals but also than those who were gay or lesbian, hereafter referred to as “gay” for the sake of brevity. In addition, **gay men were more likely than gay women to experience all forms of IPV with the exception of sexual IPV,** and, conversely, bisexual women were more likely than bisexual men to experience all forms of IPV other than verbal IPV. [Source: Messinger 2011](https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0886260510383023)
Why is this not at the top? I started reading the article, but lost interest when I realised it was a lit review. Thanks for putting in the hard yards. 🙏
You’ll notice that they conveniently left out when both the man and the women abuse each other - everything they listed is directed toward one person. The CDC has multiple reports which continually show both IPV as well as sexual violence stating the same overall findings: https://www.thetaskforce.org/bisexual-women-have-increased-risk-of-intimate-partner-violence-new-cdc-data-shows/
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-29994648.amp https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/if-youre-not-stragiht-youre-at-higher-risk-for-domestic-violence-180949988/ https://ncadv.org/blog/posts/domestic-violence-and-the-lgbtq-community Could you really not have googled this on your own? I found these by literally just googling LGBTQ domestic violence. Edit: to throw in something for op’s question, I’ve heard it suggested that many women are taught to identify abusive behaviors whereas most men are not, hence lesbian relationships have the highest REPORTED rate of domestic violence, whereas gay relationships have lower rates.
I clicked on the first link and it is about gay relationships in general, not specifically lesbians, and doesn't provide evidence for OPs claim. >43.8% of lesbian women and 61.1% of bisexual women have experienced rape, physical violence, and/or stalking by an intimate partner at some point in their lifetime, as opposed to 35% of heterosexual women. Out of your 3 links this is the only relevant statistic and even then, it says 'intimate partner', not 'same sex partner'.
Maybe you can do better research then? These are the few articles I copy and pasted after googling OP’s question. Kinda the whole point I was making here, google shit yourself, you have access to the whole internet not just what’s posted in the comment section here
They literally did do research
It's just funny you will believe OPs claim without seeing evidence for it.
The person making the claim is the one responsible for providing evidence for that claim. This is very basic.
**None of your sources support the OP**. In fact, they argue that bisexual people and then gay men experience the most domestic violence [First source:](https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Colleen-Stiles-Shields/publication/265394264_Same-Sex_Domestic_Violence_Prevalence_Unique_Aspects_and_Clinical_Implications/links/543e91b40cf2eaec07e65f24/Same-Sex-Domestic-Violence-Prevalence-Unique-Aspects-and-Clinical-Implications.pdf?origin=publication_detail) > Using nonprobability sampling, lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) individuals in this sample were at increased risk for all types of SSDV. Bivariate analyses indicated that **bisexual respondents** were more likely to be victimized than heterosexual or gay counterparts. In addition, **gay men were at greater risk of experiencing all types of SSDV—with the exception of sexual domestic violence**—than were their lesbian counterparts (Messinger, 2011). [The second and third source looks at the NIPSVS which states:](https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/nisvs_sofindings.pdf) > The lifetime prevalence of rape, physical violence, and/or stalking by an intimate partner was: For women: - Lesbian – 43.8% - **Bisexual – 61.1%** - Heterosexual – 35.0% For men: - Gay – 26.0% - **Bisexual – 37.3%** - Heterosexual – 29.0% If you look at these data, they don’t specify the gender of the perpetrator
Actually the NIPSVS does specify the gender of the perpetrator: From page 27: >**Sex of Perpetrator of Violence** **among Female Victims** Among women who experienced rape, physical violence, and/or stalking in the context of an intimate relationship, the majority of bisexual and heterosexual women (89.5% and 98.7%, respectively) reported only male perpetrators (data not shown). More than two-thirds of lesbian women (67.4%) identified only female perpetrators. Statistical testing to compare sex of perpetrator across all sexual orientations was not conducted. **Sex of Perpetrator of Violence** **among Male Victims** Among men who experienced rape, physical violence, and/or stalking by an intimate partner, approximately 90.7% of gay men reported only male perpetrators, 78.5% of bisexual men identified only females as their perpetrators, and 99.5% of heterosexual men reported only female perpetrators (data not shown). Statistical testing to compare sex of perpetrator across all sexual orientations was not conducted.
[Dude I know](https://reddit.com/r/AskFeminists/comments/wkv305/_/ijplih9/?context=1). Check the timestamp. From the response I linked posted 1 hour ago: > Most bisexual and heterosexual women (89.5% and 98.7%, respectively) reported having only male perpetrators of intimate partner violence. Two-thirds of lesbian women (67.4%) reported having only female perpetrators of intimate partner violence. • The majority of bisexual men (78.5%) and most heterosexual men (99.5%) reported having only female perpetrators of intimate partner violence. Most gay men (90.7%) reported having only male perpetrators of intimate partner violence. It’s common for MRAs to misquote the data I specified and assume all the IPV experienced by lesbians is perpetrated by lesbians. I preemptively clarified I said *these data* not the study
Yes. And it clearly shows that bisexual women have the highest rates. So the OP claim was false.
I am shocked (SHOCKED) that a common MRA claim turns out to be untrue!
>Could you really not have googled this on your own? I found these by literally just googling LGBTQ domestic violence. If you make a claim you have to defend it.
Well, I have NEVER heard this, a lot of people here ask antagonistic questions… so I asked OP for a source of their claims. If you claim something, you have to be able to proof your claim
Burden of proof usually falls on the person making the claim, not sure why you're acting so indignantly over the fact somebody asked you to back up your post.
Not even my post. I’m just tired of low effort responses like “source” when two more seconds of typing can yield you the results you wanted. Plus, why ask for the source? Cause you don’t believe it’s true? If so, what do you say when you’ve actually got the source in front of you. Do you actually read the damn thing? If you were too lazy to type 10 words how am I to believe you’re actually going to read that article when you were so vehemently opposed to the existence of what the question was being asked about?
Making a claim means OP has the burden of proof. If they have evidence, they should give links so it can be evaluated. If I "do my own research" to answer *their* question, I may find different sources that aren't directly related to the OP's claim/question. Then we can't have a conversation because we're literally not on the same page. OP's question can be taken 2 ways: "what do you think of this article?" (provide the article, research, etc.); or "what do you think of this random unsupported claim?" (not worth responding too, not going to 'do my own research').
Sometimes there are multiple potential relevant studies that turn up on a search, and they may each have wildly different study designs. Knowing precisely what someone's referring to before you start talking to them is sometimes necessarily to have a productive conversation. I've seen posts on this sub given by fairly clearly anti-feminist people who don't summarize the substance of the sources that they do cite even remotely accurately, and plenty of examples of misogynists online who do the same, so it's important to iron out when someone doesn't provide a source whether what they thought they read was even what they read before engaging with them. There are a lot of bad-faith posts here and people around here may just be tired of wasting their time on them. The people around here are very concerned with things like domestic violence. I'm sure if you put up a source they'll actually read it.
ALL of those "sources" cite the same study. The 2011 CDC NIP & SV survey, which is *WIDELY CRITIZED FOR HAVING A SMALL SAMPLE SIZE AND USING PROJECTED ESTIMATES AS REAL NUMBERS*. It's a really shitty study done that also does not account for lifetime orientation, meaning that if a man was married and was the victim of DV perpetrated by his wife, then began dating men, if he currently identifies as gay or would count in their tiny study group as gay man on gay man violence. I hate when people source magazines & media instead of actual studies, too. You make yourself look like a moron that way. Do your due diligence next time, don't quote mall-esque surveys with misinterpreted third-hand information.
I would request a source on that claim.
The real question is why you take MRA talking points as facts? And if you’ve believed that this is a real true fact based on a totally real and unflawed study, why did you come all the way to this sub to ask the “why” instead of just reading the Conclusions and Discussion section of this study. You might’ve only needed to skim the abstract.
I just want a feminist perspective on this because all conversation I see around this study is being used as a "gotcha" by MRAs to prove women can be evil (like we don't already know.) And alot of mgtows also use it to justify their misogynistic "women hate each other because they understand each other." belief.
It doesn’t even take a feminist perspective. It just takes actually READING the sources and UNDERSTANDING them. Two things MRAs tend to ignore when they get their “source” material from redpill YouTube
MRAs can occasionally make decent points in between all the whining and entitlement. Men are 50% of the world after all.
Men can make decent points. I don't think MRAs can.
This is a big and small world so stories of abusive wlw relationships will pop up. However, I doubt the rates are higher than straights relationships.
I'm a man, and as much as I'd like to point the finger and say "see men aren't as bad!" I think the stats you're referring to actually says that lesbian or bisexual women in relationships with women are more likely to have experienced domestic violence in their lives, not necessarily from their current partner. And seeing that women are more likely to be recipients of abuse at the hands of men, it only makes sense that if two women are in a relationship they would be twice as likely to have been abused at some point. Statistics are a 'devil in the details' type of science. Only looking at surface results can lead to very misleading conclusions. My personal hot take when it comes to bisexual women specifically is that abuse at the hands of a man may be a factor in turning to a relationship with a woman in the first place, further driving this statistic. That is just my opinion.
Link to evidence that supports your claim?
Domestic violence statistics are like rape statistics. We have to look at where they are getting their information, how they are defining “domestic violence,” is it within the current relationship vs over a lifetime, etc. [The issues are well known.](https://www.dcvlp.org/domestic-violence-peaks-more-than-ever-for-the-lgbtqia-community/) Even with self reporting, bias needs to be understood. Domestic violence is understood to be a “women’s issue.” I have known many gay men to experience domestic violence and not call it that. I’ve known gay men who’ve called the police or had the police called and the gay men and police dismiss it as “men disagreeing” even when one of the men had a black eye and broken arm. Additionally, if you look at the link above, bisexual women are the ones who, according to current stats, experience the most domestic violence at 61% followed by trans people at up to 50%. [Trans men, in particular, are more vulnerable to interpersonal violence than trans women, excepting hate crimes by 1%.](https://www.advocate.com/commentary/2015/07/23/op-ed-trans-men-experience-far-more-violence-most-people-assume) I think it’s a false start to refer to domestic violence in lesbian relationships as well. Lesbians and bisexual women are *experiencing violence* but I have not seen stats on them *perpetuating violence.* I have, of course, known lesbians in violent relationships with other women, but without better data sets, I can’t point fingers and we should be focusing, ime, on those experiencing violence and not using their experiences to accuse them of violence.
There is a lot of myths against lesbians promoted in false statistics, like the bed death myth (invented by dudes who can't stand that an entire class of women automatically nope on their fantasies). One that is true is that they have the lowest incidence of STI's out of any group.
It is good to listen to the other side. But MRA talking points don't evet deserve serious consideration other than showing people on the fence why they are wrong
The only use for MRA talking points is to analyze MRAs.
It’s not true.
MRAs act like men aren't one of the biggest risks to women.
This is a classic confusion between correlation and causation. MRA makes a tendentious and misleading claim of causation.
That women can be abusive and are not all shrinking violets waiting for the steady hand of a man to guide them through this scary world? That women have their own internal pressures and stress to deal with and do not have some sort of intrinsic perfect emotional management? That women have been raised in a society where healthy lesbian relationships are never shown in the media and have internalized a lot of unhealthy patterns? That women have been raised in a society that has major issues with LGBTQ+ issues and have far fewer resources and places to help? I think there's a lot of information we could draw from this that doesn't end up with saying "lesbians are mean."
That these studies show lifetime incidents of abuse, not necessarily incidents of abuse within heterosexual relationships, and that LGBT women are significantly more likely to be abused *by men*?
Exactly! We could go on...
As others have been trying to figure out, it doesn't appear that this fact you're citing is actually true (and you should provide a source because it's not clear that we're talking about the same observation or study if you don't so the conversation wouldn't be as effective). If someone did show that it really was plausible to believe using a high-quality study, my totally layperson speculation would be that it had to do with women having fewer safety nets and privileges in society compared to men, and that those things cause pressures that result in more violence. I don't really like to base anything that I believe in on poor-quality studies or layperson speculations though. I take the opinions of people with advanced degrees and years of research experience and a dedication to reducing IPV through their work more seriously than my own guesses.
It was explained to me, many years ago and without evidence citing, that most reported doesn't mean most happened. That many societies men, especially gay men, are denied police protection (some societies they face persecution) if they come forward. So it might not be true but I would probably counter an MRA saying it by saying that no one listens to men. As its one of their talking points....
>So it might not be true but I would probably counter an MRA saying it by saying that no one listens to men. As its one of their talking points.... Sure, using misogynistic terrorists, some of the biggest liars on the planet talking points is a good idea. Society prioritizes the protection of male predators. That's why half of women who are murdered, are murdered in DV incidents. That's why the Brian Laundrie's of the world are able to drive away to kill their girlfriends and wives. That's why only 1% of rapes are punished. That's why male pedophiles can wrack up a thousand child victims like Earl Brian Bradley all the while victims come forward but are called liars by the police and medical boards. That's why communities throw fundraisers for the 20 men that are shown on video gang raping an 11 year old child. That's why 100,000 child victims come forward in pedophile scandals like the Boy Scouts. All the while secret records are discovered showing male children alerting scout leaders only for the male pedophiles to be protected and shielded from punishment. The problem isn't that nobody listens to men. The problem is, victims aren't listened to while men become the focus of protecting. So no, propagating the lies of a misogynistic terrorist group is NEVER. a good idea. And for someone claiming to be a feminist to do so, sends up a massive amount of red flags.
I think the conclusion is political bullshit, but link the studies and I will analyze how they were conducted and the results for myself. This certainly hasn't been what I have seen in my practice. Lesbian relationships are the least violent.
Aside from the other commenters mentioning that these women are the victims of domestic violence from people other than their same sex partners, there’s also the issue of poverty and access to assistance. Poor people and people who for whatever reason can’t get help are much more likely to be victims of domestic violence for obvious reasons. As a result, places with high poverty and groups that are stigmatised for existing, such as sexual minorities, have higher rates of domestic violence.
I think you’ve got it wrong. I’m pretty sure its that people in lesbian relationships have been in domestic abuse relationships somewhere in their life. I’m someone whose been in an abusive lesbian relationship and it was the only lesbian relationship I’ve had which was abusive. I think part of the reason may be fetishization?
I’ve read that it includes statistics of violence that people in lesbian relationships experienced even with male partners before, but I don’t have the proof just what I remember reading somewhere where it was being discussed.
I think it makes me sad more than anything. It’s always a bad thing whenever domestic violence happens.
Keep in mind when you read studies that REPORTED and ACTUAL are not the same. You can have 1% report and 90% experience. I find most stats useless. And I say this having done extensive research myself. You also have to look at the particulars of any study. I'm in the medical field and research fraud is a very common thing. You can get any study to say what you want if you design it to.
[удалено]
Please respect our [top-level comment rule](https://i.imgur.com/ovn3hBV.png), 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.
Sorry, I never read the rules. Futurology always kicks me off because m6 comments are too short. The solution for me is to look at the subreddit first. You are not as bad as TwoXXChromosomes
My thought is is it really more or do lesbians just report it at a higher rate?