"Gender ‘is not in and of itself a justification for discriminating between offenders’ .... Yet, the results of the multivariate modelling show that females are more likely than males to receive community service, community programme or no sentence and less likely to receive a prison sentence, periodic detention or a monetary penalty. Thus, gender differences in sentencing persist even after taking account of differences in the type and seriousness of the offence committed (e.g. the average seriousness of offences committed by women is lower than for men) and in the extent of previous offending (e.g. women have fewer previous convictions on average ...). Indeed, gender is the amongst the most significant variables influencing the probability of receiving a community service sentence or a monetary penalty.
The reason for these gender differences in sentencing cannot be determined from the statistical analysis."
"The perceptions and experiences reported by female attorneys ... differed markedly from those of male attorneys in most categories of questions.... Because gender bias impacts most directly on women, it should not be surprising that female attorneys are more aware of it than are males" (page 136).
"Interestingly four of the five cases involved children in the primary custody of their fathers against whom PAS was alleged. This is contrary to the majority of cases in New Zealand, where children of the relationship continue to live in the primary custody of their mother after separation. This sample size is too small to come to any conclusion on that fact, however it is merely noted that this seems not to coincide with Gardner's original opinion that the mother is the alienating parent in 90 per cent of cases, or even with his recent contention that the split between alienating parents is equal."
"However, physical attacks on men by women are likely to be less damaging, are more likely to occur in self-defence and are less likely to occur in an atmosphere of fear and coercion. Although men may sometimes be on the receiving end of physical assaults, they are seldom victimised by continual abuse."
The Battered Woman is unsatisfactory as a serious work, and completely unacceptable as a foundation for family law. First, it is profoundly unscholarly. Without objective verification of the incidents herein described, they are nothing more than hearsay. Second, the book does not even pretend to be objective: the woman's side, and only the woman's side, is presented, when it is undeniable that in a large percentage of cases, the woman initiates violence against the man. Third, Prof. Walker's expanded definition of "battering" that includes verbal abuse does not even address the issue of female verbal abuse of men. Fourth, there is no reason whatsoever to believe that Prof. Walker's sample of "battered women" is in any way a representative sample, and even if it were, she presents no statistics to support her conclusions. In fact, most of her conclusions are utterly unsupported by any kind of data, and are simply pronounced ex cathedra."
"It may well be that fear is a factor which, if measured, could help distinguish between abusive violence and more minor types of family violence.... making this distinction has been a problem for survey-type research."
'... (Straus, Gelles and their colleagues' studies) do not adequately capture the differences between male-initiated and female-initiated violence, because they do not pick up the syndrome of emotional/physical/sexual violence, which is so frequently the pattern found in men's abuse of female partners, but which is rarely found when women hit their male partners.'
"This paper led to considerable controversy and points to the weakness of the approach to family violence measurement which focuses on counting "hits", rather than describing a syndrome, well-known to those who work with battered women (and to the women themselves), which arises from living in an atmosphere of fear, threats and violence which can be life-endangering."