Toronto’s first shelter for male victims of domestic abuse opens: a concrete sign of acknowledgement for a long-denied reality

"I was told that helping male victims of domestic violence was not part of their mandate and would not likely appear on their planning agenda for the foreseeable future."


As a member of the advisory board of the Canadian Association for Equality, I was particularly delighted to see CAFÉ’s press release last week stating:

“A capital campaign hosted by prominent men’s issues charity Canadian Association for Equality (CAFE) has raised a quarter of a million dollars to open Toronto’s first family shelter for men and children who have experienced domestic abuse. This will make Toronto the first metropolitan city in North America with such a facility.”

Long overdue, but welcome nonetheless.

Some years ago, motivated by the deluge of personal stories I received once I started writing sympathetically about male victims of partner violence, I asked a male friend, presenting as a victim of partner abuse, to approach several different social service organizations for help. He was politely informed at each and every one (one funded by United Way of Greater Toronto) that the only help available to him without a fee was a course in anger management.

When he explained that it was his partner who had the anger problem and that he was the victim, he was met with frosty indifference. I called the United Way to inquire about this gender inequality.

I was told that helping male victims of domestic violence was not part of their mandate and would not likely appear on their planning agenda for the foreseeable future.

So the fact that male victims of DV finally have a refuge and resources to help them and their children (children heretofore have only been admitted to shelters in their mother’s company) when they are in crisis as a result of a female partner or parent’s abuse seems like a hopeful sign  that a gender apartheid wall in the domain of domestic violence is finally crumbling.

As a gender contrarian, I have for many years taken an interest in sorting out facts from myths in the emotive world of domestic violence – or as it is more precisely and commonly known, Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) – and so, to avoid being caught up in “narratives” and ideological theories, I turned my attention to the epidemiology of this pathology. And when I did, I discovered a fascinating, but hidden world of incontrovertible evidence that beat against the current of received wisdom.

The “wisdom” has it that IPV is a scourge in which women are virtually always victims and men the perpetrators. There is no evidence-based reason for this generally accepted notion. No methodologically sound study supports such a conclusion.

In fact, all reputable studies, including those underpinning Statistics Canada, bear out quite the opposite conclusion: namely, that in all but the most extreme cases of abuse, men and women are almost equally likely to initiate physical abuse.

Educational materials are conceived by, or under the direction of feminists. They feature shocking visuals of extreme abuse to women. Certainly one never sees a public service announcement pointing to male victims of partner violence.

So it is understandable that most people assume this tip of the iceberg represents the whole. It doesn’t. It really is a small tip of a far more complex and balanced iceberg. But one must actively pursue the data hidden under the surface to appreciate how distorted the public image of IPV is when compared to evidence-based reality.

I got “woke” more than ten years ago when I read Rethinking Domestic Violence (2006) by University of British Columbia professor of psychology, Don Dutton. Now emeritus, Dutton is globally acknowledged as an expert in this domain.

Nobody of good faith can read this meticulously annotated text and maintain – without blushing, anyway – that IPV is a unilateral phenomenon, and that it is both a widespread and culturally significant problem.

IPV homicides are, statistically speaking, quite rare in Canada, where, for example, there were 83 domestic homicides in 2014, most of the victims women. But in a nation of more than 35 million people, epidemiologically speaking, that figure does not point to a systemic problem of “toxic masculinity” or general misogyny amongst the male population.

Homicidal violence characterizes a very tiny percentage of IPV in general, which afflicts about 7% of Canadian couples – a concerning, but again, hardly a systemic swath of the population. Indeed, if alcohol, drugs and socially dysfunctional environments were miraculously removed as factors, IPV would largely exist, amongst Canadians raised and educated here, as a relatively small cluster of psychologically damaged men and women who have difficulty handling intimate relationships.

I recently caught up with Dr. Dutton’s most recent publication on all forms of domestic violence, including siblings, children and parents (DV). He reviews longitudinal surveys, such as the National Longitudinal Survey on Adolescent Health, the National Comorbidity Survey, the National Youth Survey, and the National Survey of Couples, independent surveys conducted between 1985 and 2007. Unlike StatsCan, such surveys ask both men and women whether they have been victims, as well as if they have perpetrated violence themselves. Dutton finds the results to be “remarkably consistent.” Some findings:

  • The incidence of stereotypical wife beating is .008% for married couples, and for cohabitating couples .001% ;
  • The most common form of IPV is bilateral – men using violence against women, women using violence against men – matched for a level of severity (which can include hitting, biting, kicking, pushing, hitting with objects, burnings, etc);
  • Women are more likely to commit unilateral violence against a non-violent male partner than the reverse;
  • Male violence against non-violent women accounts for about 15% of all reported IPV, and 5% includes serious – i.e., potentially injurious – acts;

“In short,” Dutton concludes, “five large sample surveys have found that 5% of all reported DV roughly fits the stereotype of wife beating. About 1/3 of those who commit DV do so repeatedly. There are two predictors of chronic DV: 1) perpetrator chronicity- tied to a personality disorder in the perpetrator and2) couple chronicity – tied to a dysfunctional interactive pattern.”

Looked at positively, the vast majority of Canadians will neither inflict upon or suffer physical violence from, their intimate partners.

Anyone, female or male, who does suffer partner violence deserves our sympathy, and more than that, help in escaping it or resolving psychological difficulties to prevent further abuse.

Enough with the gendered stigmatizing. CAFÉ’s new shelter for men is a giant step forward toward the worthy goal of gender equality in social services and a model for other cities to follow.

Dr. Dutton’s report can be found here.


Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  1. Very glad to see some acknowledgement to this extremely serious issue. I only wish it was more than this. As the article states any man asking for help escaping an abusive situation is looked at as weak or somehow abusing a system meant for something or someone else entirely. I really think humanity can still prove itself a real benefit to this planet but sadly that possibility seems to get more remote rather than closer every day. Ppl are just so self-centred anymore they cannot see things from other perspectives or simply cannot be bothered to try.

    1. As a victim of serious Black on White racism and discrimination in Botswana I fled with my African wife and child back to Canada. Although, a former l owner of a small factory and some shops, African racism had destroyed me financially. Upon our arrival in Toronto we landed at the Woodgreen Red Door “Family” Shelter under its then director Sybil Longley. Within 14 days my wife and our child had disappeared and reappeared in Halifax again. As a husband, who had never abused neither said ex-wife nor my present Thai wife, Longley said my ex stated that I abused her. The true reason was that she wanted to return to Botswana, which she eventually did and I haven’t seen my daughter anymore in 23 years. Involved were 2 sexist judges, Main in Toronto, who let fly a sick tirade of wife abuse without any evidence of wrong doing by me and Sparks in Halifax. Canadian “Family” courts are Kangaroo courts. I found out that Longley at the Red Door had provoked the break up of numerous newly arrived refugee families, many Tamils. We are easy prey for the Longleys and their cohords, because new, we have nowhere to turn to and no one cares. I, too, instead of victims counseling, was offered abuser counseling by the sexist and cynical United Way. I declined and in factually male abusive Canada I have never received any child loss counseling. In Canada males are not considered human beings. I most seriously warn new refugees and immigrants never ever to go to a shelter with your family. You’ll come out of it alone. It is even safer in a park. Because I defended myself, I am still terrorized 23 years later as a 72 year elderly man with 4-weeks pension delays and constant threats and troubling, done by Canadian lynch mob women of Service Canada. Because I defended my innocence, I have been vilified and illegally registered in government computers. CAFE has never supported me or even given any advice or referral to an unbiased lawyer, although I am documented provable a victim, not only of the human trafficking of my daughter. Yet, the woods consist of trees. When I appealed to the O”HR”T, I received a “telephone pre-hearing” with a Joanne (Jo-An, Jo-Ann, Jo-Anne Pickel. 8 opposing lawyers, while I couldn’t get one, not even with Legal Aid appeal. It lasted 1 question and Pickel ended and denied my appeal. Canada, worse than Central Congo, has provably only selective human rights and easy prey males in general are definitely not included.

  2. In 2013 Earl Silverman Dead: Owner Of Shelter For Male Victims Of Domestic Abuse In Apparent Suicide. Silverman unsuccessfully lobbied both the provincial and federal governments to provide more funding for his various projects aimed at helping victims like himself. … glad to see they are finally seeing the need. Wish EArl was here to see it.

    1. “They” are still not seeing the need. Those funds that were raised were private donations…no government funding.

  3. This is really good news, and I’m so glad to hear you say this.

    As a survivor of abuse, I struggled with the burden for years until I finally decided to seek help, but I kept my mouth shut because I genuinely thought nobody cared. Who knows how many other men and boys have gone through the same?

    Well done, Barbara. Well done.

Barbara Kay

Barbara is a prize-winning journalist whose writing has also been featured in other large publications such as the National Post, C2C Journal Online, the New York Daily News, and more. Paired with a background in teaching literature, Barbara is also a member of the Board of Governors of the conservative student newspaper, The Prince Arthur Herald. Barbara provides sensational perspectives on everything from current news to her analysis on the sociological factors of sexism. A more in depth biography: Barbara Kay taught English Literature and Composition for multiple years, both at Concordia University and in the Quebec CEGEP system. She is a Woodrow Wilson fellow. For just under a decade, Barbara was a board member of the magazine Cité libre and a frequent contributor to its pages. to boot, Barbara has been a National Post columnist since 2003. Barbara is the co-author as well as author of a few notable publishings such as: Unworthy Creature and ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. Unworthy Creature: A Punjabi Daughter's Memoir of Honour, Shame and Love, published May 2011. However her more recent book, ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS, A cultural memoir and other essays, was published in 2013 by Freedom Press Canada.
Choose A Format
Formatted Text with Embeds and Visuals
Youtube, Vimeo or Vine Embeds