When police find probable cause to make an arrest for alleged domestic violence, the decision to actually arrest varies by state.

Practially, this means that when violence has been alleged, an arrest of "somebody" (usually the man) is essentially required. Even if a hysterical false accuser calms down and recants her accusation, the allegation has already been made and it is now too late to prevent an arrest (and likely restraining order).

Mandatory arrest policy Pro-arrest policy Officer's discretion

Interestingly, some states that have a clear pre-disposition to adopting feminist policies in criminal law decided against the "must arrest" approach, and instead adopted a "pro-arrest" policy. In California, for example, when a "must arrest" policy was first adopted at the beginning of the 1990s, officers were required to arrest anyone they had probable cause to suspect of doing criminal violence, including women. A 1998 study of arrests in Los Angeles revealed the effects of the "must arrest" law:  When the number of arrested men doubled, the number of arrested women quadrupled with the implementation of mandatory arrest.¹   In response, the state implemented the now-current "pro-arrest" policy, and men were again arrested in higher percentages.

Did women suddenly become "more peaceful" when California moved from a "must arrest" to a "pro-arrest" policy? Or is violence done by women simply denied and disregarded?

For further insight into this claim, see "Disabusing the Definition of Domestic Abuse: How Women Batter Men and the Role of the Feminist State" (page 39 in the PDF, footnote 166) by Linda Kelly, Professor of Law, Indiana University School of Law.