"She always feels regret when she sees her husband with a black eye..."

(Tim, w/thanks to Dan) The violence and victims literature tells us women are every bit as violent as men, and lesbian couples are the most violent of all. Even when asked to report on prior heterosexual relationships, lesbians report their present homosexual relationship to be more violent than any prior heterosexual relationship. I've written of this before, pointing out how religious feminists exploit spouse abuse as if it's a uniquely male crime and produced by biblical sexual order (hierarchy, that is).

This is one of the most wicked deceits of religious feminists, and many (if not most) of them do this knowingly. They are well aware women and mothers initiate violence and beat their husbands and children as often as husbands and fathers, but only the violence of men is of any use to them. So they write books about wife abuse--not spouse abuse--thereby exploiting half the victims of domestic violence for the sake of promoting their own rebellion against God.

Who cares about a man who lets a woman beat him up, anyhow; it's his own fault. If he were a real man, he'd put a stop to it, wouldn't he?

Well, as the new year approaches, here's a story that may serve as an encouragement to all those called to serve the church as elders, deacons, Titus 2 women, and pastors to ask couples in marital conflict if anyone is hitting anyone else? Never ask the wife without asking the husband, too. Our churches have many women who are given to violence against their husbands and children, and this needs correction and discipline every bit as much as violent husbands and fathers.


When Ginger and I were foster parents we had seen a lot of this in the foster children we had and friends who had others.

Also, a brother in Christ who I'm very close to, married a woman who had been sexually abused as a child - she therefor had major trust issues. So when her husband tried to lead the home she called the police saying that he'd abused her physically when all he had done was yell. She later admitted that he had never actually touched her or the children or threatened them in any way - but by then her husband had decided (wrongly but understandably) to just plead guilty to the charges, he was a new Christian and thought that to be Christlike for his family he should take one for the team and plead guilty so that he could get home to them. It all sounds strange but they both agree that this is what happened - now he and his wife are both Christians but he still cannot (and truly is still somewhat unwilling) lead his home because he knows that at any time, all she has to do is call CPS and he's finished.

He called me one night certain that his marriage was over, all torn up because his parents had divorced as well - he had promised never to do what his father had done to his family (leave them.) But he complained that there was no way he could lead because she always threatens to call the police. I told him to do it in faith and be patient.

But he has managed to stick it out for the past 5 years - they've been married about 10 - but I don't know how, he has no power in his own home. His wife has all of it as given her by the state.


- Clint

I wonder if another way to view this, is that the the cause of the problems you describe, could actually be the unwillingness of your friend's wife to actually deal with what happened to her.

There is an article on the CBMW website on strategies to adopt when a wife won't be submissive; that may be of use as well.

Further to the above. I know a couple of men who are both survivors of sexual abuse. Both of them are the sort of people who are "always in contention with their brethren" (like Ishmael), and one of them has had major problems over the year with authority, especially church authority. Perhaps something to keep in mind in understanding the situation outlined above.


I'm glad you have the courage to post this.

Even if no physical violence occurs in a marriage, the courts are skewed against men so obviously that a mere accusation is many wive's most effective tool. No evidence, just one accusation in family court and the children go to the mother and the husband will be required to pay child support even though he is no longer allowed to see his own children.


Clint - I have two suggestions for your friend.

If his wife is willing, he could suggest she undertake a long-term Bible study - something like Bible Study Fellowship (BSF). They study complete books from the Bible and explore various topics as they move through the books. It's a non-denominational Christian study and it does tend to produce fruit of the Spirit.

The second suggestion is after she has been to BSF for roughly a year, to attend a Weekend to Remember put on by FamilyLife. These Christian marriage conferences are great for showing God's plan for both the husband and the wife. There are also book materials available that he can explore.

Of course the most powerful thing he can do is pray for his wife often (without being accusatory or combative, but truly loving her as Christ does) and every so often do that out loud while holding her in his arms.

If he is leading spiritually, God will touch her heart.

Thanks, Chris, I haven't kept in touch with them too much, I've tried to send books and neither of them will read them. I think he feels like it's hopeless. Though I should probably try again.

Ross, I definitely think the problem is the wife's unwillingness to deal with what has happened to her, but also it's the man's unwillingness to lead consistently.

As is often the case with this sort of thing, the abused woman marries a man who is fundamentally selfish as well (like her abusers) and thus they cannot get out of their generational sin. As my wife said about this stuff on another posting - just because you've been hurt by men doesn't give you the right not to submit to a Godly one, in fact it's the fix.

Hmm, instead of writing on it, I'll think I'll call him - long overdue...


I just stumbled on this post and wanted to comment since I am now in the DV field. The tide is turning, slowing, and there is a recognition of violence against men. The current stats indicate that of the domestic violence cases reported, 85% are women and 15% are men. This change reflects more accurate figures from the past two years or less.

While we do not house men, Sheltering Wings, a Christ centered shelter, will support men and direct them to appropriate resources. If you need help in this area, we are here for you!

I've thought about this topic for a few days and it brought back some memories. It took me a few years of seasoning as a cop before I started realizing that some women actually battered themselves in addition to their husbands (or more often their boyfriends). This was a form of manipulation and punishment to the man. She'd get him arrested and mess his life up if she didn't get her way. I started learning to investigate better and ask better questions. In the old days we'd haul the guy off without much thought. How many guys did I arrest unjustly?...Who knows. The hardest part was that you had to take each incident and look at it in isolation to spot this stuff. The reason is that the next week you'd be there and the guy had actually beat her up. It's a pretty dark world.

Men report abuse by women about as often as boys report abuse by men.

Which means, never.

> It's a pretty dark world.

Yes, it's a pretty dark world and there are quite a lot of abused people in that world. It is part and parcel of living in a fallen world. But I am more than a bit taken back by this post. I am a Licensed Christian Counselor and have never seen research cited that backs the claims made in this post. There also happen to be no sources cited here either. It is also not in my experience as a counselor.

Some solid sources and information on this topic:

According to the U.S. Department of Justice, between 1998 and 2002:

* Of the almost 3.5 million violent crimes committed against family members, 49% of these were crimes against spouses.
* 84% of spouse abuse victims were females, and 86% of victims of dating partner abuse at were female.
* Males were 83% of spouse murderers and 75% of dating partner murderers
* 50% of offenders in state prison for spousal abuse had killed their victims. Wives were more likely than husbands to be killed by their spouses: wives were about half of all spouses in the population in 2002, but 81% of all persons killed by their spouse.

Matthew R. Durose et al., U.S. Dep't of Just., NCJ 207846, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Family Violence Statistics: Including Statistics on Strangers and Acquaintances, at 31-32 (2005), available at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/fvs.pdf

* Estimates range from 960,000 incidents of violence against a current or former spouse, boyfriend, or girlfriend each year to 4 million women who are physically abused by their husbands or live-in partners each year.
* While women are less likely than men to be victims of violent crimes overall, women are 5 to 8 times more likely than men to be victimized by an intimate partner.
* Violence by an intimate partner accounts for about 21% of violent crime experienced by women and about 2 % of the violence experienced by men.
* 31,260 women were murdered by an intimate from 1976-1996.
* Females accounted for 39% of the hospital emergency department visits for violence-related injuries in 1994 but 84% of the persons treated for injuries inflicted by intimates.

"Violence by Intimates: Analysis of Data on Crimes by Current or Former Spouses, Boyfriends, and Girlfriends, U.S. Department of Justice, March, 1998"

Being a Berean is a good thing. Check the sources always.

>Being a Berean is a good thing.

I don't think the Bereans checked Paul's writings against the US DoJ...

As a matter of fact, I did include citations. It simply required clicking a link in my post above.

More to the point, though...

Any time the issue of husband abuse is brought up, efforts are made to deny the problem, often because it's thought that any focus on the abuse of men would diminish our efforts to end violence against women. It is true that husbands' violence against wives more frequently ends in death than wives' violence against husbands. It's no surprise men are generally stronger and commit more serious harm.

Other differences between the sexes emerge in reviews of the literature, but the fact remains that many studies find symmetry between men and women in a number of areas of domestic violence and abuse.

Of course, as soon as the studies find this symmetry, attempts are made to explain it away. Speaking about men being victims of women is about as acceptable as speaking about boys being victims of homosexual men or whites being victims of black racism. Like it or not, though, these things exist and efforts to end both racism and domestic violence and abuse on the part of both men and women are not mutually exclusive. We can work to end them both, can't we?

But no, not if our goal is to rebel against God's order of creation rather than ending violence. And that is how domestic abuse and violence is used by feminists and their willing helpers today. It's always wife abuse and anyone who pushes to change it to spouse abuse or husband and wife abuse is viewed as trying to minimize violence against women. Nothing could be further from the truth.

So, the fact remains that rates of abuse and violence committed by women and men are roughly equivalent, although much ink has been spilled denying it. As women continue to grow in the percentage of violent crimes they commit, we can expect their proportion of domestic abuse and violence to continue to increase.

So, it's time to figure out how to expose and oppose this problem in our churches. A wife who initiates violence against her husband is not submissive, and a husband who initiates violence against his wife is not loving.

As for stats, the world is filled with studies on these issues and anyone wanting to find citations on either side of this problem, as well as political denials of the stats on one or the other side, need look no further than Google.

But for those who want it within easy reach, here is a link to a bibliography examining 271 scholarly investigations: 211 empirical studies and 60 reviews and/or analyses, which demonstrate that women are as physically aggressive, or more aggressive, than men in their relationships with their spouses or male partners. The aggregate sample size in the reviewed studies exceeds 365,000.

The bibliography is titled, "References Examining Assaults by Women on Their Spouses or Male Partners: An Annotated Bibliography." The bibliography is the work of Martin S. Fiebert of the Department of Psychology, California State University, Long Beach, and it was last updated in November of 2009.


* * *

Then too, here is an excerpt from a 2003 piece by Linda Kelly published in the "Florida State University Law Review" titled, "Disabusing the Definition of Domestic Abuse: How Women Batter Men and the Role of the Feminist State."


Over the last twenty-five years, leading sociologists have repeatedly found that men and women commit violence at similar rates.

The 1977 assertion that “the phenomenon of husband battering” is as prevalent as wife abuse is confirmed by nationally representative studies, such as the Family Violence Surveys, as well as by numerous other sources. However, despite the wealth and diversity of the sociological research and the consistency of the findings, female violence is not recognized within the extensive legal literature on domestic violence. Instead, the literature consistently suggests that only men commit domestic violence. Either explicitly, or more often implicitly, through the failure to address the subject in any objective manner, female violence is denied, defended and minimized.

How is it that our general legal understanding of domestic violence as defined by the male abuse of women is so squarely contradicted by the empirical reality? Honestly answering this question requires tracing the history of both the theory and practice of domestic violence law. Undertaking such an exploration, one quickly finds that the “discovery” of domestic violence is rooted in the essential feminist tenet that society is controlled by an all-encompassing patriarchal structure.

This fundamental feminist understanding of domestic

violence has far-reaching implications. By dismissing the possibility of female violence, the framework of legal programs and social norms is narrowly shaped to respond only to the male abuse of women. Female batterers cannot be recognized. Male victims cannot be treated.

If we are to truly address the phenomenon of domestic violence, the legal response to domestic violence and the biases which underlie it must be challenged.


"So, the fact remains that rates of abuse and violence committed by women and men are roughly equivalent"

Not unless men have started becoming wimps.

Perhaps L. Martin and all the naysayers should take a look at Erin Pizzey's experience. Pizzey is the "mother" of the women's shelter movement in Britain. Her first book was hailed as being very important, she was lauded and feted and asked to help set up shelters over here, etc. But her own crime was to, from the beginning of her work, help *all* victims of domestic violence (male and female). When she wrote her second book which told the truth about female perpetrators and male victims of domestic violence, it was "blackballed", sold less than a tenth the number of copies that her first book did and many, many libraries won't carry it. I can't find even one copy in the entire Colorado "Prospector" interlibrary loan system.

Feminists just LOVE to badger their way into the police force, the military, etc. with their own special rules. But when it comes to domestic violence, they tell an entirely different tale.

If men have become wimps, it's because they know what would happen if they returned blow for blow.


I thought about this and i grew up in a home were my mother verbally abused my Dad and us as we grew up. My Dad learned to know when and where to help my mother by ignoring her and taking us kids out and doing fun activities or learnng to calm her by helping her. My Dad could have physically abused my Mother to quiet her but chose to pray to help how he and us could help my Mother get through her rough patches. They were many but she was mentally unstable and we learned how a man could truely love his wife and family in sickness and health. it is not talked about because the man was to run the home. We made it and I am so glad I had a wonderful Dad, who has been gone for 13 years now, but his example still stays with all of us.


Suzi, I'm so glad I met him. And you. What an example!


Tim/Mary Lee

"If men have become wimps, it's because they know what would happen if they returned blow for blow."

There is no doubt in my mind that there are instances like that. There are more angry women in America probably than any other country right now. Some research as to why that is would be a good idea. However, it is not the norm as some of you suggest. The normal instances of male female violence is the stronger male abusing the weaker female. One can easily check the stats in hospitals.

Also, as to what would happen if they returned blow for blow is that the woman would become dangerously injured. Your case falls apart at this observation. It is actually quite difficult for a woman to hurt a man with her bare hands unless she is a karate expert like the woman in the story. Even then, just one well placed punch from a man's stronger arm will stop her.

As for those cases of female abuse on a male, where the woman is slapping and hitting a man which doesn't really injure him, women should not be doing this. But it might be worth noting that they've learned this approach from abusive men. The only difference is that when men do it, the women are injured. However, if I as a man had just finished confessing an affair to my wife, letting her slap me and hit me would be some small comfort since I would know I deserved much more.

We know men are much more prone to abusing our privileges. Sad but true. Frankly, it is time women did not just sit and take it. However, beating us up is not the best approach.

Your Dad was a wonderful example. Verbal abuse is horrible to live with.

L. Martin,

On a number of levels, your presuppositions are faulty.

But time's out.


L. Martin,

You said "We know men are much more prone to abusing our privileges. Sad but true. Frankly, it is time women did not just sit and take it. However, beating us up is not the best approach."

So very true. Violence and abuse in any form by any gender towards any gender is wrong. Scripture calls us to love others and abuse is never loving. Domestic violence is not uniquely male upon female but, due to most women realizing that they are the weaker vessel, men tend towards it more readily.

I also agree with you that men can do more damage with their physical abuse of women than the other way around. This is one of the many reasons why more women are treated in hospitals and are murdered by abuse than men.

I have yet to hear a pastor teach that a man should endure abuse for a season as John Piper taught (http://www.desiringgod.org/ResourceLibrary/AskPastorJohn/ByTopic/49/4154_What_should_a_wifes_submission_to_her_husband_look_like_if_hes_an_abuser/).
As a woman who weighs around 130 lbs, I'm thinking being smacked around for a night would make for a very long night for anyone - male or female. Church discipline and God's ordained authority (i.e. government agents such as the police) should be called immediately. But I know that even men who fight for a living such as in boxing or mixed martial arts recognize that weight classes are necessary for a reason. Most men weigh quite a bit more than I do, and even though I am tall for a woman, most are much stronger than I. Whereas a man might be able to withstand one or two of my best head blows, a good blow from a man could seriously damage me.

Domestic violence by anyone towards anyone is wrong and should be handled accordingly but it must be recognized that women and children are in much greater danger. Unfortunately, many times - not always - women who do not sit and just take it, but try to reason about this problem are branded feminists or heretics or even unsaved heathen.

>it must be recognized that women and children are in much greater danger

Children's greatest danger is that their mother will betray her wedding vows (given that women are more prone to initiate divorce than men).

"Children's greatest danger is that their mother will betray her wedding vows (given that women are more prone to initiate divorce than men)."

I'm not so sure that that is children's greatest danger. And men are much more prone to betray wedding vows than women are. Consider how widespread pornography is among all men, Christian or not.

> And men are much more prone to betray wedding vows than women are.

Divorce statistics would indicate otherwise.

Mr. Gray - do you have a good resource to find statistics of women being more prone to betray wedding vows or cause divorces? Seems a difficult thing to measure, but I suppose that because I'm a woman I definitely always assumed it was usually the man.

The person who initiates divorce is not necessarily the one to betray the wedding vows. Most often it is because the wedding vows have already been betrayed that legal divorce is sought.

>Most often it is because the wedding vows have already been betrayed that legal divorce is sought.

I don't know of any factual basis for that statement.

David, the same divorce statistics that you use, which say that women initiate most divorces, tell us this. Women are not facetiously throwing away the men. They are responding to men's marital infidelities, both Christians and non-Christians.

Throughout history in every nation, men have had extra marital infidelities in large numbers. Men have thought it was their right and that women should just endure this. Yet, men have divorced women for not enough sex, for not being a good enough cook, or for not providing us with a boy child. Often we men have considered it our right, for the woman was made for us in our thinking. But they were not made for us in that way.

When women were finally granted the right to divorce, eventually they no longer were willing to put up with poor treatment and infidelities. This is why more women than men initiate divorce.

> Women are not facetiously throwing away the men. They are responding to men's marital infidelities, both Christians and non-Christians.

I'm not aware of a factual basis for that assertion. I can understand why you might wish it to be true.

I must differ with L, Martin when he writes, "Women are not facetiously throwing away the men."

That's not my experience with Egalitarians. One woman I knew who had planted a chapter for CBE up and left her husband, bought herself and house and legally took back her maiden name, later admitting it had all been her idea and she didn't want to have a child with her husband. She later started sleeping with a boyfriend because she decided she did, after all, want a child and it was her right to have one.

I could recount other stories but why? Isn't one enough?


Didn't get that this was about egalitarians. I was thinking this was about men and women in general. History (for those who read it) proves what I said.

Among friends, family, co-workers and acquaintences the vast majority of divorces I have known have either been because of marital infidelity, abandonment, physical abuse, drugs/alcohol or refusing to work to support the family and in every case except two it has been the male who was guilty of these things. The women and children were left to pick up the pieces.

Men need to fully understand what loving their wives as Christ loved the church really means. They need to stop making excuses for infidelity, step up to the plate and be men. They need to learn what being a man is and what it isn't. They need to stop playing Adam blameshifting Eve and take responsibility for their own actions, no excuses. When men learn to truly love their wives as Christ loved the church, when they begin to what leadership is all about women will respond. Alot of the women I know are worn out from catering to selfish, immature, hot tempered, demanding, lazy, spoiled men who while they may go to church and talk the talk don't walk the walk.

May God help us because most of what I have just said is from experiences involving middle class church going people, some Christian some not Christians. And we wonder why the church has lost its influence.

Yes, yes, our churches are filled with hot-tempered men with the besetting sin of pornography. No question here, nor with much of what was said above. But.

At some point, we must ask ourselves whether in this post-patriarchal world, there's any room for the moral agency of woman?

Scripture doesn't blush to present the sin of woman, and to exhort them to holiness. But today, we consistently blame the men for woman's sin, implying (or directly stating) that when men become godly, they'll find their daughters and wives there on the top of the holy mountain waiting for their arrival, greeting them with a gentle and quiet spirit, submission, obedience, and all those things their men had forfeited their right to until they became holy.

So what? Eve wasn't to blame? It was the silence of Adam that left her vulnerable to Satan's deception?

Note that Eve was cursed, too. Note that Adam was rebuked for listening to his wife. Note that all the household commands in the Epistles contain exhortations to women--not just to men.

Nowhere does Scripture promise men their wives will submit if just for once they're finally given a husband who loves as Christ loved the Church and gave Himself up for her.

It's time we recover the moral agency of women. It's time we stop falling all over one another trying to show how good women are, and how frustrated they are waiting for men to catch up to them.

After 25 years of pre and post-marital counseling and preaching and visiting and praying with, and speaking to singles and married and college and graduate students, as well as fathering and husbanding--here's the truth: for every evil man, there's an evil woman. The evil is different in its manifestation, but evil it is, and equal in its wickedness.

Scripture teaches us that man is depraved. Depend upon it. And Scripture's "man" is the entire race, both man and woman.


"Scripture teaches us that man is depraved. Depend upon it. And Scripture's "man" is the entire race, both man and woman."

And that is true.

"When women were finally granted the right to divorce, eventually they no longer were willing to put up with poor treatment and infidelities. This is why more women than men initiate divorce."

How do you know? I practice family law in San Jose Calif. My experience doesn't bear out this assertion. After years of listening to people discuss their marriage, family, reasons for separation or divorce, I'm aware that:
A. Women are more likely to initiate divorce
B. Men are more likely (in the initial stages of the process) to seek reconciliation.
C. The sin that seems to be at the root of most divorces seems to be equally distributed between the husband and the wife.

Add new comment