Someone commented if a celebrity wife hit their husband that no one would care. Well name me a 200+ lb woman who is a former collegiate wrestler and UFC champion who beats their husband and I'll agree with you. I've knocked out a guy, knocked his jaw into his ear almost for hitting a woman before and would again in a heartbeat. I just see red and don't care if it's a midget or a 400lb gorilla (although women are the dominant sex in many gorilla clans so it'd be an exception).
So if a 125lb man beats his 200lb obese wife, it is acceptable then? Sorry, that is not how abuse, physical or otherwise, works. There are various means of inflicting damage and almost all abuse victims will say the psychological and emotional damage far and away surpasses the physical damage inflicted upon them.
And by the way, in most instances, female-to-male abuse involves the use of weapons - so, I really do not need to show you a 200+lb former collegiate wrestler, as a 150lb woman with a bat, a pot, a pan, etc., can be quite persuasive. (It is much more prevalent than you think, by the way.) I am also sure that male abuse victims are comforted knowing that you would defend them should a 400lb female gorilla attack them, which is apparently the only legitimate instance of female-to-male abuse.
At any rate, that was not my point. The point is the massive double standard that exists with regard to popular opinion on instances of domestic abuse: if a man is
suspected of physically abusing his wife, then he is convicted
a priori in the court of public opinion; if a female is suspected of the same act, with the same legal ramifications, same outcome on the victim, we let it slide. The fact is this:
no spouse, male or female, should abuse their spouse, male or female. The disgusting nature of beating somebody and violating the trust of a supposed love one is not dependent on the victim having a penis or a vagina.
