H, Jeannette,

Speaking from an American perspective, there has been widespread disempowerment of males in the labor force over the last 40 years. Declining wages. Unstable work hours. What would basically be categorized as employer abuse in most developed countries as workers have been shoved off of benefit-providing primary sector jobs onto the service sector or gig economy. When men who want to work full-time are limited to contingent labor, the loss of control is palpable.

In my opinion, male-initiated domestic violence is fueled by the changes in the American labor force.

In my anecdotal experience it is about male (or sometimes female where the dv is female on male or female on female) anger, and the venting of that anger at home on the weaker party. That anger builds up for all sorts of reasons, some already mentioned, which is often about male perceptions of role, power, injustice etc, then it is expressed violently. To quote a female colleague about dv "It was like I had become the enemy". The perpetrator in this case greatly benefited from anger management and went on to take up a new socially valuable role and to stop the dv although the relationship broke down (although my friend feels safe around him now, physically). Often there is not a good outcome though and patterns are repeated. Nothing in the above should be seen in any way as a moral justification of male abuse, but understanding can lead to solutions. In the end the perpetrator has to accept responsibility even though he may have had difficulties and injustices in his life or indeed been abused himself. It is about separating out determinants and moral responsibility.