1) Men are more likely to be arrested than their abusers, even when they call the police

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3175099/

Men who call police arrested 33.3% of the time, their abusers arrested 26.5% of the time. Negative experiences with DV agencies correlate with PTSD symptoms of a clinical level.

https://web.archive.org/web/20200904045053/http://www.dewar4research.org/DOCS/mdv.pdf

Nearly half of male victims who reported abuse against them were subsequently excluded from the family home, and a significant proportion lost meaningful or any contact with their children, w ho usually remained with the violent mother. Father victims who report abuse against them by the mother are particularly vulnerable to the consequences of parental separation and the continuing hostility and obstruction of the mother. Only a small propor tion of father victims subsequently had regular unimpeded contact with their children. Over three quarters of the 203 children involved witnessed the violence by the mother against the father.

[...]None of the male victim s responding to the Dewar Research Survey 2001 who had applied for an exclusion order had been granted one, compared to a high success rate by female partners against them

[...]about 35% claimed that the police had totally ignored what they had to say ü 47% of English and Welsh victims had been threatened with arrest for ‘breach of the peace’ despite being the victim

ü 21% of English and Welsh victims and 18% of Irish victims had themselves been arrested

ü 29% of English and Welsh victims and 21% of Irish victims claimed that the police had only spoken to the female partner and ignored actual evidence that the male victim had been assaulted

ü only 3% of female partners had been arrested

http://www.sascv.org/ijcjs/pdfs/carolettaijcjs2010vol5iss1.pdf

Formal social control exists through legal agents within the criminal justice system. Mostly the response of police to intimate partner violence has been based upon the social position that the men have within the society. According to George and Yarwood (2004), police have threatened 47% of male victims of intimate partner violence with arrest. George and Yarwood also found that the police ignored 35% of male victims and 21% were actually arrested instead of the female perp etrators. This is due to the disbelief that a woman could not have been the perpetrator of this type of crime and the male must be intimidating the woman to the point that the woman is attacking in self-defense.

https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=7284&context=jclc

A 1999 study conducted in Boulder found that male victims were three times more likely than female victims to be arrested along with the offender.24 Similarly, a study of three Massachusetts towns revealed that male victims were five times more likely than female victims to be the subjects of a dual arrest.2

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/12061547/How-male-victims-of-domestic-abuse-often-end-up-getting-arrested-themselves.html

Mark Brooks, chairman of the Mankind Initiative charity, which takes calls from around 1,000 men per year, said: “Over the past ten years we have seen a steady increase in the number of callers to our helpline stating they have been the victims of false allegations.

“The type of thing we hear is ‘my wife or girlfriend has said if I leave, or tell anyone, she will say I was the one attacking her and she was just defending herself.”

“It is an extremely powerful weapon in the armoury of the perpetrator and leaves the victim feeling trapped and helpless.”

https://research.tees.ac.uk/ws/files/6368855/554408.pdf

George (2007) argued that the prejudice against male victims is extreme and has led to under reporting by the police, with more men being put into the Criminal Justice System (CJS) if counter charges are made against them. Cook (2009) reported that in some cases, men’s calls to police during an episode of partner violence were not responded to. In other cases, men were ridiculed by the police or wrongly arrested as the primary perpetrator. Furthermore, research has displayed the influence of gender stereotypes amongst the general public and psychologists (Sorenson & Taylor, 2005; Follingstad, DeHart and Green, 2004). Thus it is likely that CJS professionals are also influenced by these gender biases. However, the report based upon the National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey conducted in the U.S. (Black et al., 2011) offers a balanced perspective of IPV, highlighting the prevalence and impact for both men and Men’s Experiences of the CJS Following Female IPV 7 women. This reflects a movement away from traditional feminist views of IPV and towards a more gender-informed perspective.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2669408/Rise-female-relationship-terrorists-Study-finds-women-controlling-aggressive-partners-men.html

But the latest research turns the accepted view on its head.

Study leader Dr Elizabeth Bates said: ‘The stereotypical popular view is still one of dominant control by men. That does occur but research over the last ten to 15 years has highlighted the fact that women are controlling and aggressive in relationships too.’

She said scientists may have to think again about the reasons for male violence against women, which previous studies said arose from ‘patriarchal values’ in which men are motivated to seek to control women’s behaviour, using violence if necessary.

2) Men are frequently ill served by programmes for domestic abuse survivors

http://wordpress.clarku.edu/dhines/files/2012/01/Douglas-Hines-2011-helpseeking-experiences-of-male-victims.pdf

Of the 132 men who sought help from a DVagency, 44.1% (n=86) said that this resource was not at all helpful; further, 95.3% of those men (n=81) said that they were given the impression that the agency was biased against men.

Some of the men were accused of being the batterer in the relationship: This happened to men seeking help from DVagencies (40.2%), DV hotlines (32.2%) and online resources (18.9%). Over 25% of those using an online resource reported that they were given a phone number for help which turned out to be the number for a batterer’s program.

The results from the open-ended questions showed that 16.4% of the men who contacted a hotline reported that the staff made fun them, as did 15.2% of the men who contacted local DV agencies.

These findings are in stark contrast to ratings of social services by battered women. For example, in a study of 119 women who sought services for DV-related concerns from a DV shelter, 89% of the clients believed that they were helped by the services that they received and 84% reported that they felt better because of these services (McNamara et al. 2008). These findings are similar to a study which examined women’s impressions of a hospital-based DV support group (Norton and Schauer 1997). Of the 59 women in this study, 95% reported that they were mostly or very satisfied with the services that they received.

3) Feminist organisations continue to lobby against funding for men's services or for gender neutral services, while excluding men from their own systems

https://www.saveservices.org/pdf/SAVE-VAWA-Discriminates-Against-Males.pdf

The Department of Justice’s Office on Violence Against Women (OVW) is the principal federal agency that administers VAWA funds. On several occasions the OVW has issued directives or established funding mechanisms that openly discriminatory in nature:

• In 2002, the OVW instructed the Delaware Domestic Violence coordinating council that, “states must fund only programs that focus on violence against women.”17

• Department of Justice (DoJ) research solicitations have explicitly excluded applications that focus on male victims. One Solicitation for Proposals from the DoJ National Institute of Justice specifically prohibited “proposals for research on intimate partner violence against, or stalking of males of any age...”

...

Given these federal actions, it is not surprising that state-level governmental programs follow suit:

In Texas, an application for a program serving male victims was turned down because “programs that focus on children and/or men” were deemed ineligible.20 The next year, a grant application kit from the Texas Criminal Justice Division used identical words to reiterate the exclusion: “Programs that focus on children and/or men.”21 Likewise, the OVW awarded $3 million to Baylor University to establish the Faith and Community Technical Support (FACTS) program designed to reduce domestic violence in rural communities. In 2006 the FACTS program issued a grant solicitation stating, “As with previous VAWA methods, it is assumed that ... all victim data reported is about victimized women.”22 One of the questions on the FACTS grant application asks, “Number of years organization has spent working on violence against women."

...

These coalitions have not been welcoming to organizations that serve male victims. In Maine, the Maine Coalition to End Domestic Violence refused to approve the application for membership from the Domestic Abuse Helpline for Men, explaining that our “current criteria require that membership be organizations whose primary purpose is to provide a full range of services to battered women and their children.”27 In New Hampshire, the New Hampshire Coalition against Domestic and Sexual Violence likewise refused membership to the Violence Intervention Program – New Hampshire, on the grounds that VIP-NH, which had a predominantly male clientele, duplicated the services already provided by A Safe Place, a domestic violence crisis center located in the same area. But Ann Venier, the center’s education and outreach coordinator, had a different story to tell: “We did not provide shelter to any men.”28 The West Virginia Coalition Against Domestic Violence has published a judicial education handbook titled, “For a Safer State of Family.”29 The handbook all but ignores male victims and is adamant in discounting female aggression: Domestic violence educators are often challenged to use gender-neutral language when talking about intimate partner abuse. However, domestic violence is not gender neutral. The face remains that the vast majority of heterosexual victims are women and the vast majority of heterosexual perpetrators are men.

...

And even when the police know the aggressor is female, the man may be forced to pursue the case on his own. The director of a crisis intervention program in New Hampshire explains:

Most often when women are arrested and jailed for domestic violence, and a no contact order or restraining order is issued, the Domestic Violence crisis centers will appear in Court to represent the interest of, and offer support to the batterer...simply because she is a woman...while a male victim can place a call to his local crisis center, most often upon referral by the Police, and, at best, be offered minimal if any support and often turned away or not taken seriously.

https://www.womensaid.org.uk/international-womens-day-womens-aid-launches-petition-to-require-local-authorities-to-fund-womens-domestic-abuse-services/

We're very concerned that a number of local authorities are commissioning services with a ‘gender neutral’ approach, which in practice is defunding women’s refuges and lifesaving violence against women services. Evidence shows that women experiencing domestic abuse need access to women-only support. We need action now, as government plans to separate domestic abuse from the Violence Against Women and Girls strategy could only serve to encourage more ‘gender neutral’ responses to domestic abuse."

http://wordpress.clarku.edu/dhines/files/2012/01/Douglas-Hines-2011-helpseeking-experiences-of-male-victims.pdf

Of the 132 men who sought help from a DVagency, 44.1% (n=86) said that this resource was not at all helpful; further, 95.3% of those men (n=81) said that they were given the impression that the agency was biased against men.

Some of the men were accused of being the batterer in the relationship: This happened to men seeking help from DVagencies (40.2%), DV hotlines (32.2%) and online resources (18.9%). Over 25% of those using an online resource reported that they were given a phone number for help which turned out to be the number for a batterer’s program.

http://empathygap.uk/?p=2920

But helplines for male victims provided by the women’s charities will certainly deploy the “Respect Toolkit” for addressing male victims, as does the Men’s Advice Line and the Dyn Project in Wales. This requires that male callers are vetted to check that they are not, in fact, abusers masquerading as victims. This is in stark contrast to universal practice with women seeking help, for whom “believe the victim” is the mantra. Men report being made to feel like abusers and liars by this procedure. Worse, these male helplines will sometimes report the man to the police.

4) The Duluth model's gender hypothesis is not supported by evidence, while the the violence hypothesis - the idea that domestic violence is driven by common factors with other forms of violence, rather than by patriarchy - has become politically incorrect

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duluth_model#Criticism

"By determining that the need or desire for power was the motivating force behind battering, we created a conceptual framework that, in fact, did not fit the lived experience of many of the men and women we were working with. The DAIP staff [...] remained undaunted by the difference in our theory and the actual experiences of those we were working with [...] It was the cases themselves that created the chink in each of our theoretical suits of armor. Speaking for myself, I found that many of the men I interviewed did not seem to articulate a desire for power over their partner. Although I relentlessly took every opportunity to point out to men in the groups that they were so motivated and merely in denial, the fact that few men ever articulated such a desire went unnoticed by me and many of my coworkers. Eventually, we realized that we were finding what we had already predetermined to find."[22]

https://www.judicialcollege.vic.edu.au/eManuals/FVBBWeb/index.htm#34578.htm

While men can be victims of family violence, men are more likely to be harmed by a stranger than by a family member. Quantitative research clearly indicates that the majority of incidents are perpetrated by men against women and their children.

The following sections look at things judicial officers should bear in mind, and some of the questions they can ask, when assessing a situation in which a man claims to be a victim of family violence.

The research evidence and experience of family violence professionals unambiguously demonstrates that relatively few men in heterosexual relationships are solely victims of intimate partner violence. The majority of women who use some form of violence towards their partner have been subjected to (worse) violence by that man before, or on the same occasion.

Often, men who are genuinely victims of family violence experience the violence from a same sex partner, carer or a male relative.

...

There are a number of questions a judicial officer can consider asking when a man presents as an affected family member (even in a police application), including:

Have you ever been violent towards your partner? Were you at fault, in any way in causing her violence? This question serves two purposes. First, to assess whether he did anything that caused her to act in self-defence, or to retaliate. Second, people who are genuinely the victims often excuse the perpetrator to some degree and blame themselves for the violence. Are you afraid of her? What are you afraid that she might do? If a man does not feel significant levels of fear, then this raises questions about his victim status. Describe exactly what she did to you. Describe the frequency and any patterns of the violence. What has held you back from seeking help earlier or trying to escape the situation? People who are truly victims might have felt too frightened to seek help earlier. They might have lacked access to money, resources, information and support to leave. They might have felt trapped. Note that they might also feel ashamed for not having sought help earlier.

A feminist article suggesting feminists have used a "containment strategy" to prevent female domestic violence being recognised:

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2790940

5) "Battered Husband Syndrome" is likely to explain the current differences in domestic homicide rates

https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/e6hxvq/battered_husband_syndrome_as_an_explanation_for/

Among all the results already reported, perhaps the most striking and important surrounds the trends in intimate partner homicide, particularly in the context of ongoing efforts to curtail domestic violence. Some researchers argue that the reduction in male intimate partner victimization, a decline of nearly 60% over the past four decades, is because of an increase in the availability of social and legal interventions, liberalized divorce laws, greater economic independence of women, as well as a reduction in the stigma of being the victim of domestic violence. Although at an earlier time a woman may have felt compelled to kill her abusive spouse as her only defense, she now has more opportunities to escape the relationship through means such as protective orders and shelters (Dugan et al. 1999; Fox et al. 2012). As a tragic irony, the wider availability of support services for abused women did not appear to have quite the intended effect, at least through the 1980s, as only male victimization declined.

https://www.reddit.com/r/mensrightslinks/comments/1ytant/dvipvgovernment_homicide_trends_in_the_us/

"There has been a decline in homicide of intimates, especially male victims Intimates are defined to include spouses, ex-spouses, boyfriends, and girlfriends. The number of men murdered by intimates dropped by 75% since 1976."

In 1976, the rate of death by intimate for men and women was roughly equal.