Violence against women and violence against men are different. Men are more likely to be the victims of violent crimes, and especially more likely to be attacked by strangers. Violence against women is more likely to be rape or domestic violence. Men are more likely to wind up in something you could describe as a "fight." Depending on context, you could say that men are in more danger than women (because most violence is man vs. man) or that women are in more danger than men (because a lot of violence against women comes from familiar figures like family members or boyfriends, and because self-defense is often harder for women.)

Sorry, I'm not a native speaker, only now I realize how this sounds...

What I meant to say is, men can do almost nothing to prevent violence against them (or at least reduce the probability of it happening), since violence against men is (in my experience) often very random, and happens even in public places with a lot of other people involved.

In contrast, women are almost never a target of physical violence, and they can often avoid being a target of sexual violence using relatively simple measures, e.g. staying with friends and not getting drunk/drugged.

On the other hand, men have better ways of dealing with violence once it happens (fight back), but it doesn't help if things escalate and you get beaten to death (in Slovenia, a man was once beaten to death by club security guards!!).

I disagree with the above commenter's general points, but I believe he's picking up on the concept that violence against men is much less visible a problem. Admittedly it's generally non-sexual (until we talk about prisons, and then it's seen as a joke or a righteous part of punishment) but men are expected to shrug off violence. There's even a social stigma for men who can't defend themselves.

It's a mistake to view it as a him versus her debate anyway. It doesn't make women's public lives better or worse if men have an easier or harder time.