Coalition to End Domestic Violence

Feminists Increasingly Engage in Acts of Violent Extremism

Bob Thompson — Sat, 26 Apr 2025 19:00:14 +0000

PRESS RELEASE

Contact: Henry Herrera

Telephone: +1-301-801-0608

Feminists Increasingly Engage in Acts of Violent Extremism

April 28, 2025 – Terrorism has long been part of the feminist armamentarium. During the decade before the First World War, feminists terrorized the United Kingdom with a wave of attacks on churches and shops that included bombings, arson, and physical violence. In 1912, suffragettes attempted to assassinate Prime Minister Herbert Asquith by hurling a hatchet at him (1).

Suffragette Emmeline Pankhurst justified these acts of terrorism by claiming that at a time of injustice, it was inexcusable to not set off bombs. As a result of the misguided suffragette campaign, at least five persons died and dozens were seriously injured (2).

In Germany, historian Elizabeth Heineman has written an entire book on Feminism and Terrorism, highlighting the terrorist activities conducted by feminists Ulrike Meinhof and Gudrun Ensslin in the notorious Red Army Faction during the 1970s and 1980s. (3)

Now, feminists in the United States and Latin America are increasingly engaging in extremist and violent attacks on property and persons:

United States: Following the leak of the impending Dobbs v. Jackson decision by the U.S. Supreme Court, a dramatic spike of violent attacks on churches and pro-life clinics and organizations was documented. In 2023 alone, 436 acts of violence were identified, including fire-bombings, desecration of religious objects, and vandalization of buildings (4). In New Jersey, seven high school students were suspended after they assaulted 16-year-old Nichole Pagano for holding a pro-life sign (5).

The FBI later opened investigations of many of these incidents as “potential acts of domestic violent extremism.” (6)

Latin America: International Women’s Day has become a rallying point for pro-abortion feminists across Latin America as they engage in lawless activities such as vandalizing churches, spraying graffiti, and attacking bystanders. In many cases, civilians form a human shield to protect churches from the attacks.

During the 2021 Women’s Day protest in Mexico City, feminists wielding hammers and sticks attacked the National Palace, injuring 81 police officers and civilians. One photograph depicts four women carrying a slab of metal as a battering ram against the police defenses (7).

In Morelos, feminists sought to violently remove the fencing in front of the Cuernavaca Cathedral. In Oaxaca, feminists attempted to set fire to the church front door (8).

One report reveals the scope of feminist extremism:

“Increasingly violent demonstrations in Mexico, Chile, Colombia, Argentina, as well in several countries in the West, for example those organized to mark the UN’s ‘Women’s Day’ (8th March), saw religious buildings and faithful attacked. People were left unaided by police and other emergency services as they sought to defend their churches, temples, and other religious buildings at great personal risk.” (9)

World Watch Research analyst Rossana Ramirez admits, “It is especially worrying that the degree of violence and aggression towards churches and religious statues is increasing in intensity every year.” (10)

Of equal concern is the tendency of media accounts to downplay the seriousness of the feminist attacks. Accordingly, there have been few legal consequences for the perpetrators. In England, feminist Emmeline Pankhurst once boasted about the inability of officials to keep her in prison: “Four times they took me back again; four times I burst the prison door open.” (2)

Physical attacks on persons, bombings, arson, and more. Amazingly, not a single feminist organization is known to have ever condemned or called for a cessation of the terrorist tactics.

The Domestic Abuse and Violence International Alliance – DAVIA — consists of 185 member organizations from 38 countries in Africa, Asia, Australia, Europe, Latin America, and North America. DAVIA seeks to ensure that domestic violence and abuse policies are science-based, family-affirming, and gender-inclusive. https://endtodv.org/davia/

Links:

Survey: One in 10 Falsely Accused of Abuse. Women Usually the Accusers, Men Most Often the Targets

EEB — Mon, 27 Feb 2023 15:23:23 +0000

PRESS RELEASE

Rebecca Hain: 513-479-3335

Email: info@endtodv.org

United States Survey: One in 10 Falsely Accused of Abuse. Women Usually the Accusers, Men Most Often the Targets

WASHINGTON / February 27, 2023 – A new national survey reveals 10% of Americans report they have ever been falsely accused of domestic abuse. Recent news accounts involving high-profile personalities echo the growing problem of false allegations.

Broken down by sex, the survey found 13% of males and 8% of females were targeted by a false allegation. Asked about false allegations against “anyone you know,” 58% of respondents reported the false accuser was a female. 31% said the false accusation was made as part of a child custody dispute.

The 2023 numbers reflect an increase from 2020, when 8% of persons – 11% of males and 6% of females — reported being victimized by a false allegation (1).

False allegations represent a serious threat to families and to justice. False accusations are often used as a tactic in child alienation cases, which have been described as “sinister” and a “weapon of destruction in a family.” (2) According to the National Registry of Exonerations, false allegations and perjury are the most common contributing factor to wrongful convictions, causing 61% of such travesties of justice (3).

Targets of false allegations are beginning to fight back. In December, Amber Heard agreed to pay Johnny Depp $1 million for making defamatory and false accusations of domestic violence (4).

More recent news accounts reveal how commonplace false allegations have become:

On February 15, a Colorado judge dismissed an allegation of domestic violence against actor Armie Hammer. Hammer said he had proof that he was in a different city on the date of the alleged incident (5).
Last week, Ashley Smithline, who had accused singer Marilyn Manson of rape, retracted her claims. Smithline filed a declaration in Los Angeles Superior Court saying she had been pressured to make the accusation (6).

The survey defined domestic abuse as including domestic violence, child abuse, sexual assault, or other form of abuse. The 2023 survey utilized identical questions and methodologies as the 2020 survey.

Survey respondents consist of 1,266 American adults aged 18+. The figures have been weighted and are representative of all US adults (ages 18+). Fieldwork was undertaken February 22-23, 2023. The survey was conducted using an online interview administered to members of the YouGov panel of persons who have agreed to participate.

The full survey results can be viewed online (7).

A false accusation of abuse is a crime (8). The Coalition to End Domestic Violence urges prosecutors, family judges, lawmakers, and others to work to end the current epidemic of false allegations.

Citations:

PR: As Florida Abuse Shelter Scandal Widens, National Abuse Coalition Calls on Lawmakers Nationwide to Strengthen Oversight

EEB — Wed, 26 Feb 2020 02:02:10 +0000

PRESS RELEASE

Contact: Rebecca Stewart

Telephone: 513-479-3335

Email: info@EndToDV.org

As Florida Abuse Shelter Scandal Widens, National Abuse Coalition Calls on Lawmakers Nationwide to Strengthen Oversight

WASHINGTON / February 26, 2020 – After continuing revelations of shady financial practices, mistreatment of shelter residents, and bloated compensation packages in Florida, the national Coalition to End Domestic Violence (CEDV) calls on state lawmakers to dramatically increase oversight of domestic violence coalitions and abuse shelters around the country.

Recently, a Florida ethics panel learned that Tiffany Carr, former director of the Florida Coalition Against Domestic Violence, received $7.4 million over three years as part of her compensation package (1). In response, the Florida House issued subpoenas to 13 associates of the statewide abuse organization (2), and Representatives Ted Deutch and Kathy Castor sent a letter calling on the federal Department of Justice to investigate possible criminal activity (3).

In addition, the Miami Herald revealed the experience of a former shelter worker who lamented, “I saw so much stuff that just wasn’t appropriate. It was physically making me sick.” The Herald noted it had reports from “dozens of former domestic violence staffers who submitted hundreds of complaints.” (4).

Similar problems are known to affect other abuse coalitions and shelters around the country:

— A Special Report documented dozens of examples of deficient shelters, identified 12 major problem areas, and offered recommendations for improvement (5).

— An article in the Washington Post revealed how lack of proper oversight led to the closure of a Maryland shelter, with one shelter resident declaring, “It was a living hell.” (6)

— Laura Ewing, former employee of the Wisconsin Coalition Against Sexual Assault, was sentenced to three years of probation for unlawfully writing 34 checks payable to herself (7).

— A review of Department of Justice audits of Violence Against Women Act grantees documented widespread financial abuses. Out of 47 recipients of VAWA funds, 34 were found to be “Generally Non-Compliant” revealing the abuse agency failed to meet minimum standards across a broad range of indicators (8).

A recent analysis of salaries of Executive Directors at state domestic violence coalitions shows the average Total Compensation Package is $112,466 (9).

Citations:

Domestic Violence: Ideology versus Science

EEB — Wed, 16 May 2018 15:37:19 +0000

Richard Davis

I have experienced domestic violence professionally as a police officer and personally as a parent. I was a board member and president of a batter’s program. I have researched, read, and written about domestic violence for 30 years. I believe I am as knowledgeable as anyone concerning the intersection of domestic violence and the Criminal Justice System (CJS). I remain passionately concerned about victims, abusers, and their families.

Science vs. Ideology

The National Research Council (NRC) advises the federal government about the most recent research. In its 1996 report, “Understanding Violence Against Women,” the NRC reported that most contemporary domestic violence programs and services are still driven by 20^th century “ideology and stakeholder interests rather than by plausible theories and scientific evidence.”

Many scholarly texts, studies and papers document that domestic violence is a complex and multifaceted conundrum. Domestic violence has proven to be a difficult, demanding and problematic issue to resolve.

It is irrational and/or myopic for anyone to believe that domestic violence suddenly, mysteriously and magically appears out of nowhere when males and females are old enough to engage in intimate partner relationships. It is an accepted fact that domestic violence victims and abusers span all ages, genders, sexual orientations, and familial relationships.

Its many distinct and diverse forms of victimization coupled with many disparate forms of abuse should convince everyone – but surprisingly has not – that domestic violence is far more complex and multifaceted than only or primarily a “gender-based” crime.”

Contemporary Interventions

A 20^th century mantra of domestic violence advocates was that the criminal justice system must respond to domestic violence the same way it responds to crimes against strangers. However, these advocates soon understood just how wrong they were. They then demanded the exact opposite, insisting that CJS policies and procedures treat domestic violence dramatically different from stranger crimes.

Later, advocates demanded that law enforcement officers make mandatory arrests and for prosecutions to proceed, regardless of the victim’s desires and/or needs. The advocates claimed the reason for this is that many victims were under so much coercion, duress and stress that they were unable to make logical or safe decisions. Now a growing number of studies document that mandatory policies can be more harmful than helpful for some victims (See report, Arrest Policies for Domestic Violence:http://www.saveservices.org/downloads/Justice-Denied-DV-Arrest-Policies ).

Now many domestic violence advocates and public policy makers, without any empirical evidence to support their beliefs, again demand systematic change. Many advocates now suggest that, what they label “victim centered” interventions, are best for victims. These advocates claim that complainants, not law enforcement, should control the investigations. What has led these advocates to believe that the same victims they once claimed were unable to make logical or safe decisions, are now able to make them?

Once again, advocates have “zero” evidence-based facts to support their demand for change. For the safety of victims and other family members, public policy makers must not place ideology over victim safety, plausible theory and scientific fact.

Solution

Reams of studies document that all unilateral, mandatory or “one-size-fits-all” interventions can actually hinder or prevents the CJS from providing individual victim expectations, needs, and desires. It is true that some victims are able to make the “right” decisions. However, some victims still need to have safe decisions made for them. Each intervention must be specifically tailored to fit each incident’s unique circumstances.

Man Who Was Accused of DV Awarded $18M in Wrongful Termination Case

EEB — Fri, 11 May 2018 15:15:34 +0000

San Diego jury awards ex-Allstate staffer $18M+ in wrongful termination case

A San Diego jury this week awarded a former insurance company employee upwards of $18 million for firing him following an arrest that ultimately saw the dismissal of all charges.

The jury found Allstate Insurance Co. liable for about $2.6 million in actual damages Thursday, and the following day added nearly $16 million more to the award for punitive damages to the plaintiff, Michael Tilkey.

The verdicts came after a roughly week-long trial in San Diego Superior Court.

An Allstate spokeswoman said the company disagrees with the jury’s verdict and plans to appeal.

Tilkey, who had worked for Allstate for 30 years, said he feels “vindicated after three years battling this.”

“Now I feel like I have justice,” he said Friday.

His attorney, Joann Rezzo, said firing Tilkey had violated state labor law, which she said prohibits employers from considering arrest records that don’t result in a conviction in a decision to fire an employee.

Rezzo said she and partner attorney L.C. Chip Edleson “are thrilled for our client for both verdicts.”

“It vindicates him, it vindicates his reputation,” she said. “It sends a message to corporate America that if you are going to do biz in California, you must comply with California law.”

Tilkey, now 55, lives in Riverside County. He was responsible for overseeing about 30 independent agents in San Diego, Riverside and Orange counties when he was fired in 2015.

His termination came nine months after he was arrested in Arizona following an argument with his then-girlfriend. According to court records, the woman had called police because she had locked Tilkey out her home after an argument and he was banging forcefully on the door.

Police arrived and arrested him for possession of marijuana paraphernalia and two domestic violence counts, according to court filings in the civil case.

Two charges were dismissed in January 2015. The third charge, alleging domestic violence disorderly conduct, was dismissed about six months later, after Tilkey attended an anger-management course as part of his plea deal, according to a pre-trial ruling issued by Judge Katherine Bacal in February.

Allstate learned of the arrest after Tilkey’s ex-girlfriend sent him an email at work discussing the criminal case. The email was flagged as part of a compliance review for employees who are subject to financial industry regulations.

Allstate began an internal investigation, and in December 2015, Tilkey admitted to the arrest and to his agreement to attend the counseling classes. As of February 2016, the company investigator found no violation of company policy and had no plans for further action, according the statement of facts in Bacal’s February ruling.

Then in March 2016, Tilkey’s ex-girlfriend sent an email to the company leadership, accusing him of threatening her during the Arizona incident and asking for an investigation.

Allstate fired Tilkey less than three months later, alleging he’d violated company policy by engaging in threatening behavior that led to his attending counseling classes.

In court documents, Allstate’s attorneys describe the company as having “an ethos of caring for and about people — both its employees and customers.”

The company has a “strict policy” that allows for the immediate firing of employees “who engage in threats or acts of physical harm or violence.” Tilkey, the company said, was an at-will employee who knew that the company took seriously threatening or potentially violence behavior.

Tilkey said his subsequent attempts to get other jobs were stymied when potential employers learned why he had been fired.

Source: http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/courts/sd-me-allstate-verdict-20180504-story.html

Letter from the Tahirih Justice Center, a Proponent of Open Borders

EEB — Sat, 05 May 2018 16:32:54 +0000

[NOTE: The Tahirih Justice Center is a VAWA grantee that has adopted an aggressive open-borders policy. This letter was designed to discourage NBC from doing further stories about VAWA marriage fraud.]

Tahirih’s Open Letter to NBC4 Washington

The Tahirih Justice Center’s Chief of Policy, Archi Pyati, submitted this letter to NBC4 Washington on February 16, 2018 in response to a misleading story that calls into question critical protections for immigrant survivors of gender-based violence.

Dear NBC4,

I write to express serious concern about the piece you aired on February 13, 2018, “Americans Say Immigrants Duped Them Into Marriage, Then Claimed Abuse to Stay in U.S.,” which is factually misleading and perpetuates prejudices against immigrant women. The story made a statistically unsupported correlation between claims of domestic violence and terrorism, and you chose not to highlight the facts, stories, and perspectives that I made available to your team. The story was sensationalist and may jeopardize the lives of immigrant women who are often afraid to come forward and whose protection depends on the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA).

This is a critical year for VAWA, which, since 1994, has been a cornerstone law in our nation’s response to domestic violence. The law is up for reauthorization, which means that it can be either weakened or strengthened depending on what our elected lawmakers decide. They listen to their constituents and they listen to reporters from your station. There is so much at stake, most of all for the survivors of domestic violence and sexual assault that VAWA is meant to protect. I’d like to invite you to consider a different story highlighting the importance of VAWA and its protections for immigrant survivors of domestic and sexual violence.

Below is a detailed explanation of what your story got wrong.

Domestic and sexual violence are grave and widespread societal problems that our laws should address more aggressively, not less. Your story failed to explain that domestic and sexual violence occur at exceptionally high rates in the United States: on average, about 24 people are abused, raped, or stalked per minute, adding up to 12 million each year. The vast majority of victims are women. By focusing on several cases of marriage fraud, and inaccurately conflating that with the protections offered by VAWA, you downplayed the importance of VAWA in combatting domestic and sexual violence to the detriment of survivors.

Immigrant women are especially vulnerable, and the power imbalance between them and their U.S. citizen spouses requires protection – protection that is very difficult to obtain. Immigrant women are particularly vulnerable to abuse because they lack equal footing. Abuse feeds off a web of emotional, verbal, physical, and sexual tactics that are meant to establish and reinforce the abuser’s power and control over the victim. If a woman does not have immigration status, she is likely to be afraid to call 911 or even talk with school, medical, and mental health professionals about what she is experiencing. This fear has been heightened since new immigration enforcement policies came out in early 2017, along with increases in hate speech and hate crimes. Reports show that immigrant women are less likely to seek helpnow than they were prior to January 2017. Immigrant victims often feel isolated, have no family in the country to support them, and limited ability to work, travel, and envision an independent life. A woman may fear that if she leaves her abuser, she won’t be able to get custody of her children. These factors deepen the power imbalance and make emotional and physical abuse tactics all the more effective.

Norma is among the many immigrant women who have experienced this type of abuse. She fell in love with and married a U.S. citizen who was smart, fun-loving, and handsome. They lived happily for years until her husband began to beat and rape her. As a method of control and humiliation, he would lock Norma outside or force her to sleep on the floor of the home they owned together. He became increasingly emotionally abusive, blaming Norma’s performance as a wife and a mother for the physical and emotional pain he inflicted.

When she finally built up the courage to leave, her husband used Norma and her children’s undocumented status to exploit, intimidate, and threaten her. He promised to have them deported if they called the police, and he destroyed Norma’s personal documents to prevent her from filing for immigration relief on her own. He removed her name from their shared bank accounts, canceled her credit card, and eventually forged her signature on a document transferring full ownership of their house to his name. He showed Norma that he could take everything from her, and made her fear reaching out for help as much as she feared him. Norma’s voice got smaller and smaller.

Recognizing this pattern of abuse, VAWA creates a pathway to protection for immigrant victims. U.S. citizens and permanent residents can sponsor their spouses to ensure that all Americans can enjoy the right to build their own families in this country. But what if a citizen husband refuses to sponsor his immigrant wife, knowing that keeping her undocumented increases his ability to control her? The self-petition under VAWA allows immigrant women to envision a safe life for themselves and their children, and a few thousand avail themselves of this each year.

Olga was one of those women. Within a year of marrying her U.S. citizen husband, he controlled her emails and phone calls, separated her from her daughter for hours at a time, and forced her to endure constant physical and emotional abuse. He even filed a restraining order against her when she fought back. He took away her immigration papers and threatened to report her to immigration if she ever left him. He held all of the power, and Olga lived in fear. In an opinion piece for the Washington Post last year, Olga explained that “escaping the abuse was the greatest ordeal of my life.”

Olga has also described how in the current environment, she’d be even more afraid to approach the police: “That was 10 years ago. That was when women like me weren’t afraid to go to the police. If my journey had been today, I would not have gone to the police. With today’s policies, and reports of law enforcement facilitating the deportation of undocumented survivors, I would have feared them. Like so many immigrant women today, I would fear being sent back to a country I no longer call home, being re-victimized by violence, and being separated from my daughter forever.”

Your story perpetuated a number of harmful myths around VAWA. Here are those myths debunked.

1. Myth: A woman can just say she was abused and get protection.

As a lawyer who has handled many VAWA self-petitions, I can say that the process is extremely difficult, even grueling. We submit documentary evidence demonstrating that our clients meet each of the requirements: a good faith marriage, battery or extreme cruelty, and good moral character. And even with all that, we often receive requests for further evidence, more details, expert testimony, psychological evaluations, and testimonials from friends, churches, relatives, neighbors, schools. These are exhaustive applications that take months to adjudicate.

The declaration of the victim is the hardest thing to prepare, from the perspective of a legal worker. In order to elicit enough detail to demonstrate the credibility of the claim, we have to ask our clients to relive long nights of rape, daily insults and humiliation, or years of trauma. We have to watch hundreds of clients relive the heartbreak they felt when they realized that the men they loved and trusted, even had children with, turned out to be controlling, violent, and manipulative. Sometimes, they suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder because of the abuse and need the support of mental health providers in order to go through this process.

Knowing how real the pain is for the women we represent, and how critical the VAWA self-petition is in ending cycles of violence for women and their children, we are invested in ensuring that the system works. Legal workers in non-profits like mine help thousands of the women who apply for protection under VAWA. We know that for each client we represent, there are so many other women out there who need this protection, and anything we do to discredit it will diminish the strength and value of the law.

Finally, according to the agency that adjudicates VAWA self-petitions, out of 4,481 applications filed in 2017, only 2,936 were granted. In other words, 34.5%, were denied. This should tell us that the adjudication process is exceptionally rigorous, and that it is absolutely not true that someone can just say they are abused and receive protection.

2. Myth: People who receive protection under VAWA are a security or terrorism threat.

There is no statistical link between petitioners for protection under VAWA and terrorism. Your interviewed expert said that several terrorists engaged in marriage fraud, but she did not claim that any utilized VAWA protections. To connect false claims of abuse with marriage fraud and terrorism is inaccurate and misleading. Rigorous background checks are conducted on the few thousand recipients per year, and applicants are screened against multiple crime databases. If public safety is what we’re after, then we’re barking up the wrong tree by focusing on VAWA. For example, we should be much more afraid of guns in America than immigrants, with 1,867 gun deaths in America just in 2018 so far, and guns increasing the risk of intimate partner homicide by 500%.

3. Myth: Marriage fraud is the same thing as VAWA fraud.

In your story, you confused marriage fraud with the need for the protections under VAWA. Abuse of the system, including marriage fraud, hurts everyone, especially those who are legitimately marrying and sponsoring their spouses. There are severe penalties for marriage fraud; a conviction can result in imprisonment and/or fines. But not all marriage fraud leads to applications for protection under VAWA, and when it does, there is a rigorous adjudication process that evaluates whether the marriage was entered into in good faith, among other things. Conflating these two issues is unhelpful to dealing with marriage fraud as an issue, and only serves to undermine the life-saving protections for immigrant survivors in VAWA.

4. Myth: An interview of the abuser would help in adjudicating VAWA claims or grant a deserved right to the abuser.

The VAWA self-petition is a statutorily closed process, kept confidential by Congress because of the well-known risk posed by telling an abuser that a victim is trying to become independent of him. Some self-petitioners are still living with their abusers and are in danger if their efforts to receive protection are revealed. Leaving an abusive marriage is difficult for immigrant women who fear they will not be able to get a job or an apartment without a work permit and a social security number. Victims may therefore quietly organize their status before they move on. Experts and survivors know that violence can escalate during the process of becoming independent, since the primary motivation of abuse is the control of the victim. Your story should have explained that telling an abuser about an application in this type of situation could result in serious physical harm – or even death – to the victim.

Furthermore, abusers very rarely admit that they have abused someone, so there is no visible purpose to this type of interview. The only effect would be to deter applicants and undermine the whole point of the self-petition.

Finally, the VAWA self-petition is an administrative process to protect the victim. The abuser is at no risk in the process – it is not a criminal or civil court proceeding. Therefore, no right is created under the law for the U.S. citizen spouse to speak on his own behalf in this context.

Right now, this country is grappling with serious questions about how we treat immigrants, while at the same time talking openly about how important it is that we believe victims of sexual and domestic violence. We should think hard about what it means to show solidarity with victims of sexual abuse, such as in the context of the #MeToo movement. Surely immigrant women who say they’ve been abused or raped, when they have been all but silenced by draconian immigration policies, deserve our credence.

I hope this information will help NBC4 to tell a more balanced story in the future.

Sincerely,

Archi Pyati
Chief of Policy
Tahirih Justice Center

Willingboro woman pleads guilty to beating her husband to death

EEB — Wed, 02 May 2018 19:56:11 +0000

April 30, 2018

A Willingboro woman pleaded guilty Monday in Superior Court to fatally beating her husband with a fire extinguisher last year, the Burlington County Prosecutor’s Office said.

Laciana Tinsley, 43, will serve 24 years in New Jersey state prison for aggravated manslaughter in the death of Douglas Tinsley, 74, as part of an agreement with the prosecutor’s office.

“I just kept beating him in the head, because he kept trying to get up and come after me,” Tinsley said in a recording of a 911 call she made on Jan. 30, 2017.

Source: http://www.philly.com/philly/news/willingboro-woman-pleads-guilty-to-beating-her-husband-to-death-20180430.html

Explaining Domestic Violence using Feminist Theory

EEB — Tue, 01 May 2018 19:12:26 +0000

Dr. Richard Amaral

March 21, 2011

In the next few blogs, I’ll be discussing some of the more common theories and approaches used for understanding and treating intimate partner abuse. In today’s blog, we’ll look at feminist theory.

Feminist Theory and Domestic Violence

Feminist theory in domestic violence emphasizes gender and power inequality in opposite-sex relationships. It focuses on the societal messages that sanction a male’s use of violence and aggression throughout life, and the proscribed gender roles that dictate how men and women should behave in their intimate relationships (Pence & Paymar, 1993). It sees the root causes of intimate partner violence as the outcome of living a society that condones aggressive behaviours perpetrated by men, while socializing women to be non-violent.

Proponents of feminist theory acknowledge that women can also be violent in their relationships with men; however, they simply do not see the issue of women abusing men as a serious social problem, and therefore, does not deserve the same amount of attention or support as violence against women (Kurz, 1997).

Treatment Approach

The “Duluth Model” represents the dominant treatment approach aligned with feminist theory. This model was created following a serious domestic violence homicide that took place in Duluth, Minnesota (Pence & Paymar, 1993). Community and government officials wanted to address the problem of domestic violence, but did not know where to begin. They wanted to create a treatment approach that involved the courts, police services, and ‘human services’. Guiding the model’s development were the following questions:

Why is she the target of his violence? How does his violence impact the balance of power in their relationship? What did he think could change by hitting her? Why does he assume he is entitled to have power in the relationship? How does the community support his use of violence against her? (Pence & Paymar, 1993, p. xiii).

Much of the Duluth model revolves around the power dynamics inherent in opposite-sex relationships, which is a reflection of the different ways men and women are socialized on issues of power and equality. The goal of treatment is to educate men about gender roles, and how behaviours and values identified as ‘masculine’ have been shaped by societal messages and attitudes that reinforce patriarchal privilege and unhealthy ways of relating with women.

Limitations of Feminist Approach

Limitations of feminist theory can be found when trying to explain violence in same-sex relationships (Lawson, 2003). While issues of power, control, and autonomy have also been identified as reasons for intimate partner abuse in lesbian relationships, issues such as dependency and jealousy also exist (Renzetti, 1992). The point is that partner abuse in same-sex couples requires a more comprehensive analysis and theoretical explanation.

Secondly, a feminist approach is also limited for explaining abuse perpetrated by women. Feminist theory typically explains women’s use of violence in the context of self-defence and retaliation for previous abuse. Yet, by doing so, a strictly feminist orientation denies that women can also feel angry and enraged without provocation in their relationships with men (Nolet-Bos, 1999). Additionally, while much of a woman’s use of violence does exist within the framework of retaliation and self-defence, feminist theory does not explain why women perpetrate violence outside their intimate relationships (e.g., at work, with children, or with peers).

References

Kurz, D. (1997). No: Physical Assaults by male partners: A major social problem. In M. R. Walsh (Ed.), Women, men, & gender: Ongoing debates (pp. 222-246). New Haven: Yale University Press.

Lawson, D. M. (2003). Incidence, explanations, and treatment of partner violence. Journal of Counselling and Development, 81, 19-32

Nolet-Bos, W. (1999). Female perpetrators and victims of domestic violence: The contribution of feminist and psychoanalytic theories. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Rutgers, New Jersey.

Pence, E., & Paymar, M. (1993). Education groups for men who batter. London: Springer

Renzetti, C. M. (1992). Violent betrayal: Partner abuse in lesbian relationships. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Source: https://knowledgeforgrowth.wordpress.com/2011/03/21/explaining-domestic-violence-using-feminist-theory/

Oklahoma Abuse Shelter Serves Men, Women, and Children

EEB — Fri, 27 Apr 2018 13:31:30 +0000

ENID, Okla. — YWCA Enid is expanding its services to the community with new programs that extend beyond the walls of the organization’s crisis center.

The organization has long been known for its services for women through the YWCA Crisis Center. Staff continue to focus on the facility but also are expanding services to help women escaping domestic violence get back on their feet, to empower area girls and provide legal aid to victims of domestic violence and sexual assault.

YWCA has a long history in Enid. In the early 1920s, the organization provided the first employment services for women and Enid’s first interracial programs.

In 1979, the organization opened Option House, a shelter for battered women and their children, after employees saw a need in Garfield County for emergency domestic violence services. The two-bedroom house was often at capacity, and community members, in cooperation with the YWCA, would sometimes open their homes to families escaping domestic violence. In 1982, the YWCA Option House moved to an 11-bedroom facility, which was the largest in the state at the time. The name was changed to the Crisis Center.

Sponsorship drive

“Right now, we’re in the midst of our annual sponsorship drive,” said Courtney Strzinek, marketing and youth program coordinator. “Essentially, we’re entirely grant-funded so that obviously leaves a lot of unpaid bills, et cetera. We’re really having to fundraise to keep up with all our programs and the needs that are arising in the community.”

This year’s fundraising goal is $100,000. Those wanting to donate can do so online at bit.ly/DonateNowYWCA.

“We have more than doubled our goal this year. With some new strategies in place, we are looking forward to our biggest campaign yet,” said YWCA Executive Director Debbie Wilczek.

The sponsorship drive allows the YWCA to continue to provide free emergency services to victims of domestic violence and sexual assault, the Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner (SANE) program, as well as quality youth programs such as the annual Girl Power Rally, Project Cinderella and Racial Justice Program. These services impact an average of 1,426 individuals each year.

One of the new strategies employed this year is re-launching the Men Against Violence (Maverick) program. All male community leaders were invited to the Maverick’s Breakfast on April 5 to learn about the effects that domestic violence, sexual assault and stalking have on employees, friends and family members.

“Domestic violence, sexual assault and stalking not only impact the victim (but) these crimes impact the entire community,” Wilczek said. “Our first annual Maverick’s Breakfast was an opportunity for men to join us in taking a stand against domestic violence and sexual assault in our community.

“We have been extremely blessed by the generosity of this amazing community. We offer many levels of giving to allow for diverse array of participation, with sponsorships starting at $50,” Wilczek said. “Sponsorship contributions are simply an investment in our mission and reflect an individuals’ belief in the value of our programs.”

“We’ve seen in other YWCAs that they’ve had a lot of success getting more men involved,” Strzinek said. “We’ve seen a lot of more male victims coming in.”

Strzinek said the sponsorship drive will conclude April 27 with the Walk a Mile in Her Shoes event. For $15, men can put on a pair of high heels to walk around the courthouse square from 11 a.m. to 1 p.m.

“We’ll have lunch available,” Strzinek said. “We would like to see an increase in our walkers this year. We’re hoping to see some of our key leaders and getting them involved.”

Project Cinderella

The Project Cinderella boutique is a collection of dresses and shoes and available to girls in need of attire for prom.

“Any high school girls in need can come in and get a free dress and free shoes,” Strzinek said. “We probably have over 300 dresses looking for a home.”

Those wanting to visit the boutique are asked to contact the YWCA and make an appointment. The boutique will remain open until April 20.

“We’ve had some girls just come in in tears because they couldn’t otherwise go to prom,” Strzinek said.

YWCA Crisis Center

Viviana Smith, women’s services director at YWCA Enid, said the crisis center is specifically designed to serve women with children, unlike other facilities that do not serve children.

The shelter provides services to women fleeing domestic violence, sexual assault and stalking and serves communities in Garfield, Kingfisher, Blaine, Major and Grant counties.

Smith said the crisis center is a short-term shelter, designed to provide a safe haven for about 30 days. But while the shelter may be short-term, Smith said services such as counseling, help with finding jobs and housing and legal services are available after women leave the shelter.

“It’s not like after they leave here their whole support system disappears,” Smith said. “We still assist them with services, as needed, after they leave.”

She said the Crisis Center is not just a place for women.

“We do offer services to men who are victims of domestic violence. If they need a place to stay it does apply to them, as well as the females,” Smith said. “There has always been such a stigma with male victims. We are not going to deny services to anybody.”

Strzinek said statistics show one in three women will experience domestic violence in their lifetime. She said statistics also show one in four men will, too.

“We have seen an increase in the number of men reporting,” she said. “A lot of people have a misconception that we only serve women.”

My Sister’s Closet

Another service of YWCA Enid is My Sister’s Closet, which assists women and their families with clothing and household items.

The on-site donation facility provides gently used or donated clothing for women, men and children, as well as furniture and household goods for those making a new home.

My Sister’s Closet currently is housed in two different storage areas in the YWCA facility: a large room with racks and shelves for donated clothes and a smaller room that contains toys and household goods.

YWCA staff are moving My Sister’s Closet to a larger space being renovated on the facility’s north end, across from the conference room.

In 2016, the closet served almost 1,500 clients and distributed about 22,000 articles of clothing.

My Sister’s Closet is not limited to residents of the shelter. Community members in need also can browse for needed items. Strzinek said community members only need present photo identification to shop at the closet once per 90 days.

In addition to clothing and household goods, Strzinek said the YWCA is in constant need of donations to support the crisis center clients.

Needed items include towels and washcloths; sheets and blankets; size 5-6 diapers; coffee, creamer and sugar; non-perishable food items; toiletries; laundry soap and dryer sheets; cleaning supplies; sanitizing wipes.

Strzinek also collects school supplies year-round for children of women in the shelter and children of families in need in the community.

Girl Power

YWCA Enid is working this year to expand Girl Power, a workshop designed to empower girls in grades 4-7 with the “knowledge and self-confidence to stand up for themselves, to stand up against peer pressure and injustices of all kind,” according to the YWCA Enid website.

The event has long been a one-day workshop, but the plan is to expand the event this summer to a week-long day camp with “more camp-type activities.”

SANE Exams

YWCA Enid provides a Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner (SANE) exam room and volunteers to assist both female and male victims of sexual assault and rape.

Thanks to a partnership with St. Mary’s Regional Medical Center, victims can have an exam performed in a private room dedicated to that purpose inside the YWCA.

Source: http://www.enidnews.com/news/ywca-enid-opening-its-doors-to-all-needing-help-in/article_e0c23d4c-401c-11e8-9b0e-6b34e3bd7227.html

Allegations of Domestic Abuse Not Protected Speech, MN Court Rules

EEB — Fri, 27 Apr 2018 12:14:06 +0000

Bob Collins

February 12, 2018

The Minnesota Court of Appeals has reinstated a defamation suit against an organization that helps victims of domestic violence, ruling that a story told by a man’s ex-wife at an awards banquet and fundraising newsletter is not protected.

There was no mention of domestic abuse in the divorce decree between Kurt Maethner and Jacquelyn Jorud when their 15-year marriage ended in 2010. But four years later, at a fundraising banquet for Someplace Safe, a Fergus Falls, Minn.-based agency for domestic abuse survivors, the agency gave a “Survivor Award” to Jorud as a “survivor of domestic abuse.”

Someplace Safe also issued a press release with her photo and some area newspapers used it in their articles, even though it never investigated any of her claims.

A subsequent fundraising newsletter carried this message from Jorud:

“I was asked to write a short article celebrating the fact of not just surviving domestic violence, but thriving through recovery.”
“Getting out of an unhealthy, threatening and dangerous relationship is hard. It is scary.”
“Just because you have left, or the divorce is final, . . . doesn’t mean the slate is []wiped clean and you can just start a new life.”
“I don’t know if there will ever be a time when I can be certain I am no longer being stalked and watched.”
“I didn’t want to live in a constant state of fear.”
“I didn’t want daily conflict and fighting.”

The article didn’t mention Maethner by name, nor did it contain any identifying information to suggest she was talking about him.

But he sued her and Someplace Safe because their marriage was well known in the community and a reasonable person would believe she was talking about him.

A district court threw the case out because he wasn’t identified in her story, that the speech was protected, and that Someplace Safe had no duty to investigate her claims.

Whether her claims are true or not isn’t an issue, the Minnesota Court of Appeals made clear today in returning the case for trial (See ruling).

While defamatory statements might be protected when presented in good faith — a psychologist alleging likely child abuse, for example — that’s not the case here, the court said.

“A banquet and newsletter were not the proper occasion to disseminate statements alleging criminal conduct, nor did the fundraising purpose for both of these activities reflect a proper motive for doing so,” Judge Diane Bratvold wrote on behalf of the three-judge panel.

Someplace Safe acknowledged that the banquet’s purpose was to raise money for the organization. Someplace Safe also stated that it published Jorud’s article in a newsletter to “connect” with “funders and supporters” and to solicit donations.

The fourth factor also weighs against applying the privilege because Someplace Safe did not claim to have a “reasonable belief” that Jorud was abused. Instead, Someplace Safe expressly stated that it accepted Jorud’s statements at face value.

Bratvold said the woman’s posts on Facebook also are not protected.

And she said Someplace Safe had a duty to investigate Jorud’s claims, noting that proof of negligence is part of a defamation claim.

Someplace Safe seems to assert that it cannot be held liable for negligence because it did not directly make the allegedly defamatory statements, and merely “printed an article [Jorud] wrote.”

But this narrow exception applies only when the publisher has reprinted a news item obtained from a reputable wire service. (“The ‘wire service’ defense recognizes that a newspaper, under ordinary circumstances, cannot be found by a jury to have acted negligently by relying on the accuracy of a news item obtained from a reputable wire service.”).

Here, no wire or other news service was involved; Someplace Safe solicited, published, and disseminated Jorud’s article containing the allegedly defamatory matters.

Source: https://blogs.mprnews.org/newscut/2018/02/allegations-of-domestic-abuse-not-protected-speech-mn-court-rules/