I wouldn’t have responded if I hadn’t read the whole article.

I didn’t say female on male violence doesn’t occur. It does and it’s rising. Still, it’s nowhere near the levels of male violence on either gender. While female violence is rising, it is not rising in tandem to or superceding the rise in male violence either.

I also did not say that men deserve to be abused. I think we can all agree that no one deserves to be abused.

While you’re correct in that YOU specifically didn’t highjack someone else’s discussion, you did excuse the doing of it by men. You’re right, I could have worded that better. Still, you basically gave them a pass, an excuse, and it’s not your place to do so.

You also did imply that female on male violence is equivalent in number of occurrences to male on female or male on male violence. They’re no where near equal statistically speaking.

Might want to check your wording if that’s not what you meant.

Speaking statistically doesn’t mean that men deserve to be abused by women or that women perpetrators shouldn’t be punished. It means if you want to make a real dent in lessening the violence men experience, you focus on the largest block of people hurting men to ease the statistic. And that is other men. Not women. You’re chasing sensationalism and creating false narratives, not working on tangible solutions.

You’re also wrong with that cockamamie sentence about how mothers are more likely to sexually abuse their children than fathers are able to. This is logistical and grammatical nonsense. All adults are able to abuse because all adults can overpower and manipulate children if they so chose. Since most parents don’t sexually abuse their children, clearly ability to do so is not related strongly with likelihood of doing so. Also, since 88% of sexual abuse perpetrators are familial males, it’s clear Mom is not the main problem.
https://www.rainn.org/statistics/children-and-teens

You would be more correct if you’re talking about physical abuse. But again, its not about ability to abuse but opportunity. Typically, women are the primary care givers which means they have more opportunity to abuse. Still, statistically speaking they are roughly twice as likely to abuse based on numbers of abuse cases (I’m actually shocked it’s not much higher). But, if you broke it down to a ratio of time spent with opportunity to abuse and actual incidents of abuse by gender, you’d get a far different picture of likelihood, wouldn’t you? You’d find that men are, once again, much much more likely to abuse. In other words, the only reason the number of paternal abuse cases is lower than the number of maternal abuse cases is because fathers are not taking care of their kids to the same degree mothers are.