Pauline is correct which the Dunedin research clearly supports: inter-partner violence is "two way", and Pauline is right women in abusive relationships should not "put up with it."

 No according to research. Do the work.Pauline is correct which the Dunedin research clearly supports: inter-partner violence is "two way", and Pauline is right women in abusive relationships should not "put up with it." Pauline is not saying the death of women are not important that the relative difference in physical and mental harm is not significant due to the imbalance of physical power between men and women, it is grotesque anyone would infer this is the case. Do the work and accept Pauline has a much more nuanced understanding of inter-partner violence.

The Dunedin Study Findings

When the Dunedin cohort reached age 21, researchers assessed them for intimate partner violence (IPV). They found that 37.2% of the women and 21.8% of the men reported perpetrating physical violence against a partner (Magdol et al., 1997).

A follow-up study looking at the cohort at age 26 specifically examined "clinically abusive relationships"—defined as relationships where the abuse resulted in physical injury or required official intervention by police or medical personnel. In these severe cases, the researchers found that both men and women engaged in physical abuse at similar frequencies, but women were significantly more likely to require medical treatment for their injuries (Ehrensaft et al., 2004).

The data confirmed exactly what you pointed out: while the frequency and types of abusive acts were symmetrical, the physiological size and strength differences meant the physical consequences were overwhelmingly borne by the women.

The Controversy in the US

When these findings were published in the late 1990s and early 2000s, they caused massive controversy, particularly among feminist domestic violence researchers and sociologists in the United States.

Historically, US research on IPV relied heavily on "clinical samples"—data gathered from women in domestic violence shelters, police reports, and men in court-mandated batterer programs. This data painted IPV almost exclusively as male-to-female violence driven by a patriarchal desire to control women (Ehrensaft et al., 2004).

When the Dunedin Study (an "epidemiological" or community-wide sample) showed high rates of female-to-male violence, US critics fiercely attacked the methodology. They argued that the survey tools used by the Dunedin researchers (like the Conflict Tactics Scale) merely counted acts (e.g., ticking a box for "slapped partner") without capturing the context of the violence. Critics argued that treating male and female violence as equivalent in frequency ignores crucial factors like who initiated the violence, whether the violence was in self-defense, the level of fear experienced, and the severity of the force used (Ehrensaft et al., 2004; Magdol et al., 1997).

Supporting and Disputing Literature

The Dunedin findings spurred a massive wave of research attempting to understand this "gender symmetry" in IPV.

Papers Supporting the Findings:

A comprehensive review of the literature confirmed that in community populations, women and men perpetrate equivalent levels of physical and psychological aggression (Swan et al., 2008).

Other epidemiological studies replicated the findings. For example, the Pacific Islands Families Study (another New Zealand birth cohort) found that mothers were just as likely as fathers to perpetrate physical IPV, with 37% of mothers and 11% of fathers reporting perpetration (Schluter et al., 2007).

Papers Disputing or Adding Nuance:

The Context of Victimization: While the frequency of violent acts may be similar, researchers dispute that the nature of the violence is the same. Studies show that when women use violence, it is overwhelmingly in the context of being victimized by their male partners themselves—often as reciprocal violence or self-defense. Furthermore, men are significantly more likely to utilize sexual coercion and stalking than women (Swan et al., 2008).

The "Two Typologies" Argument: To resolve the conflict between the Dunedin findings and the reality of battered women's shelters, researchers developed a highly influential theory proposing two distinct types of IPV. "Common couple violence" is bilateral, involves both partners lashing out during conflicts, and is what community surveys capture. "Patriarchal terrorism" (or intimate terrorism) is severe, involves coercive control, is asymmetrical, and is almost exclusively perpetrated by men against women (Ehrensaft et al., 2004).

References

Ehrensaft, M. K., Moffitt, T. E., & Caspi, A. (2004). Clinically Abusive Relationships in an Unselected Birth Cohort: Men's and Women's Participation and Developmental Antecedents. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 113(2), 258–270. doi.org/10.1037/0021-8… by: 427

Magdol, L., Moffitt, T. E., Caspi, A., Newman, D. L., et al. (1997). Gender differences in partner violence in a birth cohort of 21-year-olds: Bridging the gap between clinical and epidemiological approaches. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 65(1), 68–78. doi.org/10.1037//0022-… by: 936

Schluter, P. J., Paterson, J., & Feehan, M. (2007). Prevalence and concordance of interpersonal violence reports from intimate partners: findings from the Pacific Islands Families Study. Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health, 61(7), 625–630. doi.org/10.1136/jech.2… by: 52

Swan, S. C., Gambone, L. J., Caldwell, J. E., Sullivan, T. P., & Snow, D. L. (2008). A Review of Research on Women’s Use of Violence With Male Intimate Partners. Violence and Victims, 23(3), 301–314. doi.org/10.1891/0886-6… by: 599

I support Pauline on this issue but I have my own view because of the significant imbalance of power between men and women that the law needs to be changed to make it clear to men violence will not be tolerated against women. "Italy has classified femicide as a distinct criminal offense, making gender-motivated murders of women punishable by automatic life imprisonment. The law applies to killings driven by hatred, discrimination, or an attempt to dominate and control a woman." This is not to diminish the violence by women against men but the harm being is so significantly different regards outcomes it demands a significant differentiation in law.