Abuse is Not Gendered- Pioneer Erin Pizzey

Domestic Violence Is Not “Gendered” — and Why That Myth Fuels the Denial of Parental Alienation

One of the most persistent myths in modern family-law discourse is that domestic violence is a gendered phenomenon—primarily something men do to women. This belief is not only inaccurate, it has had serious downstream consequences for children, particularly through the denial and dismissal of parental alienation. I am an advocate in Canada. I have a national education and support group. I have a plan to change Canada’s federal Divorce Act to recognize parental alienation child abuse as a form of coercive control.

The same ideological framework that insists domestic violence must be male-perpetrated is also the framework most responsible for claiming that parental alienation is merely a legal “defense” used by abusive fathers. That claim collapses under even minimal exposure to the scientific literature.

To understand how we got here, we need to start with history—not ideology.

Erin Pizzey and the Origin of the Non-Gendered Reality

In the early 1970s, Erin Pizzey opened the world’s first domestic violence refuge in Chiswick, England. She was not an academic theorist—she was on the ground, working directly with families in crisis.

After taking in approximately 100 women, Pizzey made an observation that would later make her a pariah within second-wave feminist circles:

Roughly half of the women were as violent as their male partners.

She observed women who assaulted their partners, abused their children, and harmed other residents’ children within the shelter. Pizzey herself was a survivor of severe maternal abuse, beaten badly by her own mother—a lived experience that shaped her refusal to reduce violence to a simple male-perpetrator narrative.

Pizzey concluded what decades of research would later confirm:
domestic violence is not gendered—it is relational, reciprocal, and rooted in dysfunctional dynamics, not sex.

When she proposed opening a second shelter for men and children, the response was not debate—it was intimidation. Pizzey received bomb threats. Police were required to screen her mail. Her dog was shot. Eventually, she fled the country.

This was not fringe activism. This occurred at the height of second-wave feminism.

Evidence Over Ideology: What the Research Actually Shows

The Partner Abuse State of Knowledge (PASK) Project

Decades later, the Partner Abuse State of Knowledge Project—a massive meta-analysis of thousands of peer-reviewed studies—reached conclusions that closely mirrored Pizzey’s firsthand observations.

Its findings were evidence-based, not ideologically driven:

• Most domestic violence is bilateral — both partners engage in abusive behaviors.

• The violence is often situational and incidental, not part of a pattern of unilateral terror.

• The second most common pattern is unilateral female-perpetrated abuse.

The least common pattern is unilateral male-perpetrated abuse—despite this being the most publicly emphasized narrative. This does not mean men never abuse. It means the simplistic gendered framing is empirically false.

Women, Abuse, and Children: The Data That Is Often Ignored

When we turn to child abuse, the data becomes even more uncomfortable for those committed to a gendered framework.

The largest study ever conducted on child abuse was undertaken by the US Department of Health and Human Services (2004), analyzing 718,000 substantiated cases, including a subset of child fatalities.

The findings were unequivocal:

• Biological mothers were the most frequent perpetrators:

  • 58% of physical child abuse cases

  • 59% of child fatalities

• Biological fathers were involved in approximately 40% of each.

• An additional ~20% involved both parents acting together.

These results do not indicate that women are inherently more violent.

They indicate something far more mundane—and far more important:
women are more often the primary caregivers, and therefore more frequently in positions where abuse can occur.

Ignoring this reality does not protect women.
It endangers children.

How the Gendered Violence Narrative Fuels PA Denial

This brings us to parental alienation.

The same advocacy networks that insist domestic violence must be male-perpetrated are the loudest voices claiming:

“Parental alienation is just a defense used by abusive fathers.”

This claim is demonstrably false.

• Thousands of peer-reviewed studies affirm parental alienation as a distinct form of child psychological abuse.

• Alienation is committed by mothers and fathers.

• Clinical models (including multi-factor diagnostic frameworks) reliably distinguish alienation from estrangement due to abuse.

Yet ideological resistance remains—because acknowledging parental alienation requires acknowledging that women can be abusers, children can be manipulated, and power dynamics in families are complex and bidirectional.

For movements built on gendered moral binaries, that complexity is intolerable.

Follow the Evidence, Not the Narrative

Erin Pizzey has been saying for decades what the data now overwhelmingly supports:
the gendered violence model is not just wrong—it is fraudulent.

It diverts resources, distorts family-court outcomes, silences child victims, and obstructs recognition of parental alienation as the serious form of abuse it is.

If our priority is truly to protect victims—especially children—then ideology must give way to evidence.

Domestic violence is not gendered.
Child abuse is not gendered.
And parental alienation is not a legal tactic—it is a documented, destructive reality.

The sooner we accept that, the sooner we can stop harming the very people these narratives claim to protect.