What is "psychologically abused"? I think everyone I've ever dated has harmed my psyche in one way or another.

What percentage of men have suffered from some form of "intimate partner violence"?

Not to sound like a misogynist - though men are my only romantic partners - but what's up with the "psychological abuse" portion of the report?

Some of my best girlfriends have done some seriously fucked up shit to their boyfriends that would surely qualify as psychological abuse. Where's the stat for girls messin' with their boys' heads?

That said, most men are pigs.

Oink, oink.

I have to agree—yes, men are more violent. There's a story in the papers every damn day about some asshole who murdered his wife—and often their kids. Men are nuts. I know: I fuck em.

But this study's definition of "intimate partner violence" seems a bit... broad, if I can use that term. I have been in relationships that included "psychological abuse"—hell, I think I'm in one now. It seems soooo subjective, and if people are self-reporting, well, what person who was in a failed relationship, or in an unhappy one, doesn't feel "psychologically abused"?

I call bullshit on this study—and I call "liberal mewling" on the reaction to it. Yes, men are violent—I have no truck with men who claim that female-on-male violence is an equal problem. It's not—not by a long, long, long shot. But this study seems to be overstating the case in order to... what? Make men feel bad? Make every woman out to be a victim of abuse? Get headlines?

Yeah, agree with Dan that the terminology used is rather broad, and plus, as usual with surveys, no detail is given as to who was sampled, where, what region, economic status, etc. Certain cultures within the country still find this behavior acceptable. Take a survey in any such pocket of a population and you'll get disproportionately high abuse statistics.

Ditto if the question is worded vaguely and with a biased slant that tends to induce more 'yes' answers. "Have you ever been treated in a manner that can be considered physically or psychologically abusive?" Pure impressionable mental and social hypochondria can induce several 'yes' answers with such a worded question.

ah the hysterical hypochondriac woman out to make men feel bad and mask all the terrible things they do to men. can we, like, blame the study's authors for vague questions and not the people who answer yes or no to questions put to them?

Yes, absolutely WF. But I think my comment made it clear that I regard male-on-female violence as a huge problem. I did not attempt to minimize it. But I think the study may overstate the case.

Why don't you all READ the article before you start bad mouthing it. Most of your comments are addressed in it.

Here's the section describing the questionnaires used for those without access to the article...

"Intimate partner violence was assessed using five questions from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance Survey (BRFSS) and the ten-item Women’s Experience with Battering (WEB) scale. The BRFSS questions assessed exposure to physical abuse such as hitting, kicking, and slapping (one question); forced intercourse (one question); forced sexual contact that did not result in intercourse (one question); fear due to a partner’s anger or threats (one question); and put-downs, name calling, and controlling behavior (one question). The BRFSS questions on IPV have not been formally validated; however, versions of these questions have been used widely since the 1990s to estimate IPV prevalence in U.S. counties and states.
The WEB scale was used to supplement the assessment of
IPV exposure, because previous studies indicate that the WEB identifies additional dimensions of abuse that may be missed by surveys assessing specific behavioral tactics (e.g.,
BRFSS). The WEB assesses a woman’s fear and perceived
loss of power and control due to her interaction with an
intimate partner. For example, one question asks women to rate the degree to which “my partner could scare me without laying a hand on me.� WEB items were rated on a six-point scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 6 (strongly agree).
Summary scores >20 (range: 10 to 60) were considered
indicative of abuse. To avoid response bias, the WEB was administered before the BRFSS.
The WEB was adapted for administration by telephone and for use in same-sex as well as heterosexual partnerships. WEB responses for current or most recent intimate partner first, and then up to two preceding partners were assessed.
Women were exposed to IPV if they reported any abuse type on the BRFSS and/or their WEB score for any of their three most recent partners
was >20."

I'm not sure why so many here have reacted so negatively to this announcement of study results. It is Reuters' abstraction of the study more than anything else that may or may not be objectionable.

Thanks to been there for quoting bit more of the article. Nobody has been back to add more to the knee-jerk reaction since then.

The knee-jerk reactions above prove that there is truth in this statement I once heard, "Domestic Violence only exists, because it is acceptable at some level of our society."

The previous comments are trying to discredit what those thousands of women said, and without even reading the article. It's a shame.