You write “women commit more acts of domestic violence against men.” That’s one of those sophistic arguments. It may be technically true, depending how you measure an act of violence, which usually includes a shove or a hit. But it is somewhat meaningless unless you compare the severity of the acts of violence. In that sense, men are far more violent; see this for example:

The major points of this review are as follows: (a) women’s violence usually occurs in the context of violence against them by their male partners; (b) in general, women and men perpetrate equivalent levels of physical and psychological aggression, but evidence suggests that men perpetrate sexual abuse, coercive control, and stalking more frequently than women and that women also are much more frequently injured during domestic violence incidents; (c) women and men are equally likely to initiate physical violence in relationships involving less serious “situational couple violence,” and in relationships in which serious and very violent “intimate terrorism” occurs, men are much more likely to be perpetrators and women victims; (d) women’s physical violence is more likely than men’s violence to be motivated by self-defense and fear, whereas men’s physical violence is more likely than women’s to be driven by control motives; (e) studies of couples in mutually violent relationships find more negative effects for women than for men; and (f ) because of the many differences in behaviors and motivations between women’s and men’s violence, interventions based on male models of partner violence are likely not effective for many women.

Women commit more acts of domestic violence than men. [And women commit the overwhelming majority of violent acts against children.]

Yes, men are generally capable of inflicting more serious damage (and withstanding a lot of punches, etc. from their wives/partners). But men still constitute 43% of the victims of domestic violence who are hurt badly enough to require admission to a hospital. And we have a reporting problem in that men are culturally likely to deny that a woman was responsible for their injuries.

My point is simply to point out how the propaganda against men has biased people to ignore the reality. (see also similar propaganda which ignores that women are far more likely to sexually abuse students in school.)

As for safe spaces in prisons, etc., I’m all for it. In the tails of the distributions for violent tendencies and criminality, males are indeed far more dangerous. It is not contradictory for women in general to be more prone to violence against a spouse while the males in the criminal tail end of the distribution to be dangerous.

https://notthebee.com/article/two-seattle-public-schools-offer-students-gender-affirming-care-at-no-cost

https://notthebee.com/article/admiral-rachel-levine-defends-puberty-blockers-and-transition-for-minors-what-if-youre-going-through-the-wrong-pubertyi

Like, what planet must this person live on to think that men know what it’s like to experience the things that women do on the physical side, like menstrual cramps, like carrying a baby to term, like childbirth like hysterectomies, etc.?
…
In essence, here’s what Cox (and Rose) did: Biological males who now identify as women mansplained to women that there is nothing “universally” unique about their experiences as females. This must be why they wanted to identify as one or something.

I hope I’m not the only one who finds this line of argument to be deeply disturbing and a direct threat to women’s rights.

True on its face…but after “all we want to do is get married” actually was the slippery slope many of us predicted, it’s damn hard not to see a squeaky wheel on every axle.

Like all those “moderate Muslims” and “diversity is our strength” ‘success’ stories.