She Hit Him. No, He Did Nothing to Provoke Her

When a man says his female partner assaulted him, the first question should not be what he did to deserve it. The first response should recognise the violence. Anything else risks turning the victim into the accused.

By Halima Layeni

There is a fundamental principle that should guide every conversation about domestic violence: no one has the right to use violence against another person. Yet when the victim is a man and the perpetrator is his female partner, that principle is often subjected to a different standard.

Instead of focusing on the violence itself, attention can quickly shift towards the man’s behaviour. What did he do? What did he say? Was he disrespectful? Why did he push her to that point? These questions become deeply problematic when they imply that a man’s behaviour somehow makes the violence against him understandable or justified.

Relationships inevitably involve disagreement, frustration and conflict. Partners can hurt one another’s feelings, experience betrayal, face financial pressures, or struggle with parenting and other responsibilities. None of these circumstances creates permission for physical violence.

A disagreement can explain why an argument occurred, but it does not determine who is responsible for choosing violence.

We understand this principle when the victim is a woman. If a man assaults his female partner because she insulted him, we do not regard the insult as a justification for his violence.

If she made him angry, we do not treat her behaviour as a defence for his actions. We hold him responsible for how he chose to respond. That same standard must apply when the victim is a man and the abuser is a woman.

If a woman hits her male partner during an argument, the fact that he said something she found offensive does not make the assault his fault. If she strikes him because she was frustrated, her frustration does not transfer responsibility for the violence onto him.

If she throws something at him because she felt disrespected, the disrespect does not excuse her actions. Her emotions may provide context for what she was experiencing, but they do not eliminate her responsibility for what she chose to do.

Yet male victims are often subjected to a different standard. Before their experience is taken seriously, there can be an immediate search for something they must have done to cause the violence. Why should the victim’s behaviour determine whether the perpetrator’s actions are condemned?

Female abusers exist. They are around us, and they do not need to be provoked to become abusers. Some women choose to use violence against their partners, and their behaviour should be understood for what it is: abuse. We should not automatically search for something a man did to explain away or justify what she chose to do.

A man does not have to establish that he handled every disagreement perfectly before his experience of violence can be recognised. He does not have to prove that he was always calm, patient, respectful or emotionally composed.

Protection from violence should not depend on a victim demonstrating perfection. When attention is placed on what the victim supposedly did to cause the assault, responsibility can quietly shift away from the person who used violence.

The focus should remain where it belongs: on the decision to use violence and the accountability that follows.

We must stop minimising violence against men because the perpetrator is a woman. A slap is still violence when the person receiving it is a man. A punch does not become less serious because it comes from a woman.

A man’s perceived physical strength does not eliminate his right to bodily safety, nor does it make violence against him acceptable. We should also be careful about assuming that a male victim can simply defend himself physically.

He may not want to escalate the situation, may fear being portrayed as the aggressor if he responds, may be concerned about causing serious harm to his partner, or may simply be shocked that the person he trusts has become violent towards him. These circumstances do not make the abuse less real.

The response from others can make that silence even worse. When a man discloses that his female partner assaulted him and the response is laughter, ridicule or an immediate search for what he might have done wrong, the message is that his experience will not be treated with the same seriousness as that of other victims.

That is not harmless. It can discourage disclosure, delay access to support and reinforce the belief that men are expected to endure violence without complaint.

For years, this social response has helped keep many male victims silent. Violence by women against men has too often been normalised, trivialised or treated as a source of humour rather than recognised as violence.

A woman hitting her husband or boyfriend may be dismissed as a moment of anger, portrayed as something amusing, or treated as evidence that the man should simply “take it”. When that reaction is repeated often enough, men learn that speaking up may bring embarrassment rather than support.

Some remain silent because they fear ridicule. Others may question whether what they experienced is serious enough to report. Some may believe that no one will believe them, particularly when the cultural expectation is that men should be stronger than women and capable of handling themselves. Normalisation does not make the violence less harmful. It makes it easier to overlook and harder for victims to speak.

A man’s gender does not make him immune to abuse. His physical strength does not make him undeserving of protection. His mistakes do not make violence against him acceptable. His words do not give another person permission to assault him.

His imperfections as a partner do not cancel his right to bodily safety. Nothing a man does justifies abuse at the hands of his female partner. Absolutely nothing.

This is why we must also begin holding women accountable for violent actions against men. Accountability cannot depend on whether the person who used violence fits society’s traditional image of an abuser.

A woman who hits, punches, kicks, throws objects at, or otherwise physically harms her male partner has used violence, and that conduct should be taken seriously.

Her gender should not shield her from accountability, just as a man’s gender should not prevent him from being recognised as a victim. If we genuinely believe that violence is unacceptable, then we must apply that principle consistently.

Holding women accountable is not about demonising women or minimising the violence experienced by female victims. It is about establishing a standard that does not change according to the sex of the perpetrator or victim.

A woman should be able to acknowledge that she acted violently, face appropriate consequences and receive support to change that behaviour. At the same time, the man who experienced the violence should be able to report it, seek protection, access support and be treated as a victim without being ridiculed or questioned about what he did to cause it.

Examining the circumstances of an incident should never become an excuse for placing the victim on trial or treating violence as justified. A woman has every right to be angry with her partner. She has the right to disagree with him, confront him, establish boundaries, seek help or end the relationship. She does not have the right to assault him.

A man deserves the same basic protection from violence that we expect for every other victim. So when a man says, “She hit me,” our first response should be to recognise the violence rather than search for a reason to make it acceptable.

Violence against a partner is wrong because it is violence, not because of who commits it or who receives it.

A man who has been hit by his partner does not need to explain himself, defend his behaviour or prove that he was blameless. He needs to hear, plainly and without hesitation, that nothing he did justified it. Nothing ever does.

Halima Layeni: Speaker | Global Voice For Men’s Mental Health & Policy Reform | Author of Dear Man | Executive Director, Life After Abuse Foundation | Mental Health Coach For Professionals | U.S. Consul General Award Recipient