Reddit reviews Women, Violence and Social Change

>The Dobashes from the first citation are sociologists, not feminists.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Violence-Social-Change-Emerson-Dobash/dp/0415036100

>"In their earlier book, "Violence Against Wives: A Case Against the Patriarchy, Dobash and Dobash identified themselves as committed feminist sociologists and clearly located the phenomenon of wife beating in its social and historical context. In the current book, they continue their passionate, scholarly analysis. "Women, Violence and Social Change reminds us of the traditions of social change within which we practice and the visionary and exhilirating movement of which we are a part.."

While I don't know the accuracy of those comments, the patriarchy book clearly does exist, and only feminists really use the term patriarchy.

>Lisa Colarossi from the second citation is a developmental psychologist and a clinical social worker, not a feminist.

>Further, despite 40 years of the feminist movement’s attempts to promote an understanding

Things like this are in the article several times. She talks about lesbians and patriarchy later.

http://www.fordham.edu/images/academics/social_service/colarossi%20cv.pdf

>Adjunct Instructor: Interdisciplinary Seminar in Feminist Practice Department of Women's Studies

Research interests.

>Feminist methods in practice and research.

Onwards

>DeKeseredey and Schwartz from the third citation are sociologists, not feminists.

You're on a feminist site, they repeatedly mention feminism, they believe in the patriarchy. They say it here.

>The CTS, although it may accurately count numbers of blows struck, overlooks the broader social psychological and social forces (e.g., patriarchy) that motivate men to abuse their female partners.

I don't really see that as a reliable criticism- the CTS is wrong because the patriarchy.

http://www.xyonline.net/sites/default/files/DeKeseredy,%20Feminist%20contributions-to-understanding-woman-abuse-Myths,-controversies,-and-realities_2011.pdf

Here's a paper where DeK defends feminist scholarship.

>The NIJ is not a feminist organization.

As Straus mentions, and as you can see in their report, their main counter data source is from a modified CTS report. His analysis of it was that they modified it to exclude men.

There are those who criticize his methods. But the vast majority of the studies done use his methods, so most accept it. Even the feminist's studies often use a modified version of it. And your three random citations of scholars who disagreed with it did turn out to be feminist scholars.

>It's clear that you've never engaged criticisms of the CTS directly, and instead have just taken Straus at his word that the CTS is legit and criticism of it is unfounded because it's ideologically convenient for you.

I have, and I don't find their case hugely plausible, but my main issue is with their data collection. Ideologues may well not collect data properly.

>By "they" you clearly meant "MRA types."

Well actually I mean

>Reddit is strongly supportive of revenge and justice, and so it looks normal to the majority to cheer on when someone resists a bully.

Reddit. That is why I said reddit, and not "MRA types".

OP said MRAs and then linked to a group of random redditors. As such, I talked about redditors.