|
|
|
|
|
|
Claim: More women are victims of domestic
violence on Super Bowl Sunday than on any other
day of the year.
Status: False.
Origins: The claim that Super Bowl Sunday is
"the biggest day of the year for violence
against women" demonstrates how easily an idea
congruous with what people want to believe can
be implanted in the public consciousness and
anointed as "fact" even when it has been
fabricated out of whole cloth.
Domestic violence has been a problem all too
often ignored, covered up, and swept under the
rug. Many well-intentioned and successful
efforts have been made in the last few decades
to bring the issue to public attention — to get
the word out to women that they need not suffer
silent, helpless, and alone; to advertise that
there are organizations victims can turn to for
help and support; and to educate others in
spotting the signs of abuse. Unfortunately,
nearly every cause will encompass a sub-group of
advocates who, either through deliberate
disingenuousness or earnest gullibility, end up
spreading "noble lies" in the furtherance of
that cause. The myth of Super Bowl Sunday
violence is one such noble lie.
Christina Hoff Sommers charted a timeline of how
the apocryphal statistic about domestic violence
on Super Bowl Sunday was foisted upon the public
over the course of a few days leading up to the
Super Bowl in January 1993:
Thursday, January 28
A news conference was called in Pasadena,
California, the site of the forthcoming Super
Bowl game, by a coalition of women's groups. At
the news conference reporters were informed that
significant anecdotal evidence suggested that
Super Bowl Sunday is "the biggest day of the
year for violence against women." Prior to the
conference, there had been reports of increases
as high as 40 percent in calls for help from
victims that day. At the conference, Sheila
Kuehl of the California Women's Law Center cited
a study done at Virginia's Old Dominion
University three years before, saying that it
found police reports of beatings and hospital
admissions in northern Virginia rose 40 percent
after games won by the Redskins during the
1988-89 season. The presence of Linda Mitchell
at the conference, a representative of a media
"watchdog" group called Fairness and Accuracy in
Reporting (FAIR), lent credibility to the cause.
At about this time a very large media mailing
was sent by Dobisky Associates, warning at-risk
women, "Don't remain at home with him during the
game." The idea that sports fans are prone to
attack wives or girlfriends on that climactic
day persuaded many men as well: Robert Lipsyte
of the New York Times would soon be referring to
the "Abuse Bowl."
Friday, January 29
Lenore Walker, a Denver psychologist and author
of The Battered Woman, appeared on "Good Morning
America" claiming to have compiled a ten-year
record showing a sharp increase in violent
incidents against women on Super Bowl Sundays.
Here, again, a representative from FAIR, Laura
Flanders, was present to lend credibility to the
cause.
Saturday, January 30
A story in the Boston Globe written by Linda
Gorov reported that women's shelters and
hotlines are "flooded with more calls from
victims [on Super Bowl Sunday] than on any other
day of the year." Gorov cited "one study of
women's shelters out West" that "showed a 40
percent climb in calls, a pattern advocates said
is repeated nationwide, including in
Massachusetts."
Writers and pundits were quick to offers reasons
why this "fact" was so obviously true. After
all, everyone knows that men are mostly loutish
brutes, and football is the epitome of mindless,
aggressive, violent, testosterone-driven macho
posturing. Certainly during the culmination of
the football season, the final, spectacular,
massively-hyped "super" game, more men than ever
are going to express their excitement or
disappointment by smacking their wives and
girlfriends around. So much attention did the
"Super Bowl abuse" stories garner that NBC aired
a public service announcement before the game to
remind men that domestic violence is a crime.
Ken Ringle, a reporter for the Washington Post,
was one of the few journalists to bother to
check the sources behind the stories. When he
contacted Janet Katz, a professor of sociology
and criminal justice at Old Dominion University
and one of the authors of the study cited during
the January 28 news conference, he found:
Janet Katz, professor of sociology and criminal
justice at Old Dominion and one of the authors
of that study, said "that's not what we found at
all. "
One of the most notable findings, she said, was
that an increase of emergency room admissions
"was not associated with the occurrence of
football games in general, nor with watching a
team lose." When they looked at win days alone,
however, they found that the number of women
admitted for gunshot wounds, stabbings,
assaults, falls, lacerations and wounds from
being hit by objects was slightly higher than
average. But certainly not 40 percent.
"These are interesting but very tentative
findings, suggesting what violence there is from
males after football may spring not from a
feeling of defensive insecurity, which you'd
associate with a loss, but from the sense of
empowerment following a win. We found that
significant. But it certainly doesn't support
what those women are saying in Pasadena," Katz
said.
Likewise, Ringle checked the claim made by
Dobisky Associates (the organization that had
mailed warnings to women advising them not to
stay at home with their husbands on Super Bowl
Sunday) that "Super Bowl Sunday is the one day
in the year when hot lines, shelters, and other
agencies that work with battered women get the
most reports and complaints of domestic
violence." Dobisky's source for this quote was
Charles Patrick Ewing, a professor at the
University at Buffalo, but Professor Ewing told
Ringle he'd never said it:
"I don't think anybody has any systematic data
on any of this," said Charles Patrick Ewing, a
forensic psychologist and author of "Battered
Women Who Kill."
Yet Ewing is quoted in the release from Dobisky
Associates declaring "Super Bowl Sunday is one
day in the year when hot lines, shelters and
other agencies that work with battered women get
the most reports and complaints of domestic
violence."
"I never said that," Ewing said. "I don't know
that to be true."
Told of Ewing's response, Frank Dobisky
acknowledged that the quote should have read
"one of the days of the year." That could mean
one of many days in the year.
In addition, Ringle learned that Linda Gorov,
the Boston Globe reporter who'd written that
women's shelters and hotlines are "flooded with
more calls from victims [on Super Bowl Sunday]
than on any other day of the year" hadn't even
seen the study she'd cited in support of that
statement but had merely been told about it by
Linda Mitchell, the FAIR representative who was
present at the January 28 news conference that
had kicked off the whole issue.
Did any evidence back up the assertion that
Super Bowl Sunday was the leading day for
domestic violence? When the Washington Post's
Ringle attempted to follow the chain by
contacting Linda Mitchell of FAIR, Mitchell said
her source had been Lenore Walker, the Denver
psychologist who'd appeared on "Good Morning
America" the day after the news conference. Ms.
Walker's office referred Ringle to Michael
Lindsey, another Denver psychologist who was
also an authority on battered women. Mr. Lindsey
told Ringle that "I haven't been any more
successful than you in tracking down any of
this" and asked, "You think maybe we have one of
these myth things here?"
The upshot? It turned out that Super Bowl Sunday
was not a significantly different day for those
who monitor domestic abuse hotlines and staff
battered women's shelters:
Those who work with the victims of domestic
violence in Connecticut reported no increase in
cases Monday, after a barrage of publicity on
the potential link between Super Bowl gatherings
and family violence.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
An increase in domestic violence predicted for
Super Bowl Sunday did not happen in Columbus,
authorities said yesterday, and others
nationwide said women's rights activists were
spreading the wrong message.
Despite some pregame hype about the ''day of
dread'' for some women, Columbus-area domestic
violence counselors said that Sunday, although
certainly violent for some women, was relatively
routine.
The ensuing weeks and months saw a fair amount
of backpedalling by those who had propagated the
Super Bowl Sunday violence myth, but — as usual
— the retractions and corrections received far
less attention than the sensational-but-false
stories everyone wanted to believe, and the
bogus Super Bowl statistic remains a
widely-cited and believed piece of
misinformation. As Sommers concluded, "How a
belief in that misandrist canard can make the
world a better place for women is not
explained."
|
| |
| * No NFL championship games
played between 1920-32; 1958 NFL Championship decided in
overtime; 1962 AFL Championship decided in double overtime;
first Super Bowl held after 1966 season; 1998 NFC
Championship decided in overtime. |
|
|
|
|