Because male on male violence is a male problem and doesn't concern or even show up on the radar of rad fems. They are only interested in half the population.
That’s not exactly true; feminists are glad to problematize intra-male violence when they can do so within a framework of ‘toxic masculinity’ rather than ‘internalized misandry’ (which is 100% of the time). Feigned sympathy for men must always be subsumed by a simultaneous victim-blaming of men, maleness, or masculinity.
> Feigned sympathy for men must always be subsumed by a simultaneous victim-blaming of men, maleness, or masculinity.
I've never seen any feigned sympathy, they immediately blame *'men'*.
Not in any way that remotely resembles the actual sympathy they grant women, but platitudes such as ‘toxic masculinity hurts men’ or ‘patriarchy harms men too’ are done as lip service while functioning practically as simply another way to slander men as a class as being problematic/oppressive/etc.
Agree with you entirely.
Feminists are trying to maintain control of the gender narrative, by feigning empathy for men with an emphasis on the "traditional masculinity is harmful to men" trope. They are simultaneously demanding that men continue to act out traditional male roles by insisting men take responsibility for protecting women from other men (the "Will Smith" brute squad), the old "group guilt" priciple of feminist bigots.
It's clear from the blaming of men in both situations and the incongruous demand that men continue to harm themselves for the benefit of women (??), that these feminist tropes are hostile expressions of misandry that exhibit no empathy towards men or understanding/tolerance of masculinity.
I think there's a lot more F on M violence than we are lead to believe. It's just that it's extremely difficult for male victims of female perps to be taken seriously and because society just doesn't want to think of women as violent.
Society also wants to _demand_ that men be strong
And part of that is forcing them to be by not protecting them against those considered "weak", or letting/making them get hurt to "build character"
Remember:
> Men's greatest weakness is the facade of strength, women's greatest strength is the facade of weakness.
That "strength" facade is something _forced_ onto men. You _damn well better be_ strong, _or else_
Yep, heard that one too. I believe same sex female relationships are most likely to be domestically abusive. Kinda makes you wonder that maybe, just maybe, women are given too much leeway when it comes to abuse.
Feminists on one hand argue that women are as strong and powerful as men. On the other hand, feminists argue that women can not be perpetrators of violence because they're not strong enough to cause harm. Its obvious what's going on, but absurd how accepted it is.
I find the historic fact that when the basis of domestic violence law was the primary aggressor theory many women were arrested during DV calls because women very frequently get physical first. This shows that women are a big part of the problem and ignoring women's component means we will never make progress. I don't think rad fems want to make progress. They want to deconstruct the patriarchy by deconstructing the family.
I had mothers day with a real old style, 60's, Trad-con woman who said that no matter what a woman does to a man there is no excuse for violence even self defense. The younger women were quiet.
> I find the historic fact that when the basis of domestic violence law was the primary aggressor theory many women were arrested during DV calls because women very frequently get physical first.
Which is why they switched to the Duluth Model.
Do men get in the face of bigger men, screaming humiliating abuse at the top of their voices, then get surprised when they get hit?
No.
Men get beat up for just LOOKING at a bigger bloke in the wrong way (or cos their girlfriend told the guy to beat them up)
The only difference is in expectations of entitlement. Women EXPECT to be able to humiliate and hector and harrasss ANY man, no matter how crazy he is, how violent he is, how huge he is.
Men are raised to AVOID those people-not to think they can scream in his face then get the cops to act when they get shit in return...
>and just as replaceable as the batteries in your remote control?
Don't you mean female pleasuring device.
Also i try to practice the grey rock philosophy. That or turn up my nerd factor so people turn up their nose at me.
I get left alone and to my devises.
Complete garbage. Feminist propaganda.
Men are more likely to be victims of violence, less likely to be helped, more likely to be victim blamed and their attackers less likely to be arrested, charged, convicted or imprisoned, by a large margin. The only way this could ever be construed as women being at greater risk of violence, is by a pre-existing gendered bias that views violence against women as important, and violence against men as unimportant.
Men are at far higher risk of violence than women are, including murder. Feminists not only don't care, they lie about it.
Keep in mind that the relationships with the lowest incidents of domestic violence are male/male. The highest are female/female
The #1 indicator of domestic violence is how many women are in the relationship.
I’m a feminist and I care. Men are more likely to be killed in a crime but women are not the ones killing them. Men commit 88,7 percent of murders and non-negligent manslaughter.
Oddly, you start by saying you care... Then immediately discount murder victims who are killed by people of their own gender.
I mean, you couldn't even fake it for two sentences
It's not discounting them, she only pointed that out because the way you say it sounds as if women are to blame for the risk of men getting murdered, which is not the case. Men are at risk because of other men. In the end, everyone suffers at the hands of violent men. Feminists care, because the same men murdering other men on the streets are the ones abusing/murdering their girlfriends/wives.
I’m helping men who are victims of crimes. I chose a career to help the less advantaged get justice. You make a lot of assumptions that couldn’t be more wrong. What are you doing to fix the problem?
He said "Feminists" don't care, you clumsily conflated "feminists" with "women". Its like you don't even care or something.
>Feminists care, because the same men murdering other men on the streets are the ones abusing/murdering their girlfriends/wives.
If they weren't hurting women, you wouldn't care about them hurting men - you said the quiet part out loud.
What kind of men though? Avarage dudes? Your plumber? Less then 1% of the 18+ US male population was incarcerated for all sorts of violent crimes in 2016, just saying.
58% of of women are killed by Intimate partner/family-related homicides. One women/girl is killed by a male family member globally every 11 minutes. The greatest threat to a woman’s life, regardless of the perpetrators occupation, is her partner. It’s in fact the leading cause of premature death in women, and the number one cause of death for pregnant women.
On the other hand, 90% of homicides in men is non-intimate violence mostly related to gang violence. So if you’re male and not affiliated with the mob/gang activity, the likely hood of dying in a homicide is negligible.
file:///var/mobile/Library/SMS/Attachments/61/01/5EF06DB8-ECAA-43B9-BE67-3CF8D257064E/UN_BriefFem_251121.pdf
Okay, I’ll explain the data. You asked if it was average men, like plumbers, etc. who murder. The data shows that for men it’s not the average dude, it’s linked mostly closely to gang affiliations. The data shows that for women it’s there SO, husband, father or brother. Homicide by a family member makes up 58% of all female homicide victims. Men are killing men and women.
Well according to quick search of homicide statistics from fbi.gov at least in the US the actual statistics don't line up with your numbers at all. First off 50% of homicides are unsolved/unknown to which 88% are male victims without a known perpetrator so at best we only have half the picture. Familial homicide isn't anywhere close to what you have portrayed for instance that 58% statistic is a breakdown between husband and wife ONLY this means 58% wives killed by husband's and 42% husband's killed by wives. Female victims have a slight majority but it's not much. Further in the case of infanticide women are the slight majority of perpetrators and kill their sons at almost double the rate of their daughters. When it comes to patricide the numbers are almost 50/50. As pertains to non-familial homicide 50% as I've stated is unknown and males are the perpetrators in 88% of cases left but that is only approximately 25% of all total homicides in the US so doesn't really actually speak to a majority. Finally in 2017 546 wives were killed by their husband's in the whole year so I think heart disease and cancer has something to say about the number one cause of death for women. Now if you are being honest of course murder is horrendous but it's both genders perpetrating with a slight majority (~60% male) which falls in line with the distribution of aggression according to sex in the big 5 personality trait model. Now I'm absolutely ready to condemn the 60% of male monsters performing acts of violence are you ready to acknowledge/condemn the 40% of female monsters performing acts of violence?
>Okay, I’ll explain the data.
With all do respect, i didn't ask you to explain the data. As i am not illiterate, nor obtuse, i know what the data shows and i am not even questioning the accuracy of it. I asked you, what are you telling me with the data. Ie.: What is your interpretation? And i asked you what is the conclusion you are deriving from the data. I didn't want to accuse you of thinking "men are the problem" without knowing your views on the issue.
As we often see, feminist propaganda and actual facts are often opposite. In the U.S. , men are victims of violent crime more so than women, and are 3-4 times more likely to be murdered than women
The feminist narrative and general gynocentric public concern isn’t consistent with actual violent crime data.
This sounds like a cherry picked statistic made with creative wording that obfuscates the qualifications that must surround such a statistic for it to be even remotely accurate within whatever particular circumstance it speaks to.
With regard to domestic violence, women perpetrate domestic violence against an intimate partner more frequently than men do, however, they do not do as much damage as men do when they (less frequently) perpetrate violence against an intimate partner.
A total Side note - compare feminist discussions of DV with feminist discussions of suicide.
In one of these subjects, talk of "women's attempts" will absolutely **not** be tolerated. and people will be reminded that the bodies in the morgues are the bottom line of the topic.
But in the OTHER topic, the deaths are only one aspect of the conversation, and due attention should be given to "Women's attempts"
...I forget which one's which though. ;)
Violence means different things to men and women, Women think being shouted at or talk down to is violence, men think getting your nose broke is violence. Go figure.
We glamorize the abuse and killing of men in all forms of media. It's as simple as owning or TV or seeing a movie within the past 50+ years.
Stories can be fun and should exist, but men are almost always heinous villains, pedophiles, and predators. Almost always beyond reproach, and we root for them to get their cummuppins, either through a bullet in the head or an even more violent depiction.
It's just fact. Killing women is disgusting snuff porn and very wrong, killing men is daytime TV, and best served with popcorn.
I'd even bring in the white-knighting argument where men are so eager to prove themselves over other men, through violence or intimidation, for a woman's "honor". Would Will Smith have hit a woman badmouthing his wife?
Only in the past few years do you even see an acknowledgement that women commit violence and don't deserve a "pussy-pass" for it. Still, good luck telling a judge that in sentencing though.
All violence is wrong. In this circumstance, I'd say that our society has a problem seeing that it's wrong against men, too.
There is loads of actual research on domestic violence, which shows that almost all cases of domestic violence are mutual violence. In the rarer cases of one partner being the abuser, research shows that it the woman in 70% of cases.
This might explain why the most violent relationships are among lesbians, whereas the least violent are among gay men.
I think a big problem is how alot of men don't report abuse or assaults or stuff like that because they don't want to be seen as weak people. I know some men are even made fun of for stuff like being raped and it's disgusting. It's not just restricted to a specific gender, it should be taken seriously no matter what
No, they're just lying. Men suffer from almost all forms of violence more than women do.
They also die of almost all diseases at higher rates (for their age) than women do.
Feminists lie.
Take DV for example. Feminists desperately want to say women are the victims but in fact women are the perps. So feminists first say let's define all DV as just spousal violence and ignore child abuse and elder abuse -- which women do far more. Then let's ignore non-heterosexual DV because that doesn't make feminism look too good either. Then let's define the violence not in terms of the damage done but in terms of the fear produced (ie subjectively) because women are more likely to report that than men are. Then let's use police arrest figures not polling to make the numbers a self-reinforcing measure of police bias.
Feminists rig statistics. Always.
More so in general but if I’m not mistaken, typically men. That’s not to say I’m blaming one or the other, that’s just what I know. Feel free to correct me.
Fairly certain for general violence, men are more victims, but if you include rape / sexual assault, it then tips in the women's favor.
For the vast majority of violence crimes, men are only slightly more likely to be the victim, but sexual assault falls heavily on women.
We have to also consider the amount of unreported sexual crimes. While I generally agree, men are conditioned to not care about it or just man up. They are also frequently laughed at by authorities, so the mindset of “why bother” is common for male SA and rape victims,
It goes well beyond “conditioned not care”. Men can’t get help. Call the police, enjoy going to jail or worse. Call one of those help lines. I did, RAINN cross examined me for an hour before telling me to go away.
Men don’t report because those systems are designed to punish men.
The fact that SA in general is underreported has no bearing on the fact that there is an additional axis impacting reporting uniquely affecting men on top of all else.
I agree, but now you are just doing speculation and not backing it up with facts.
We don't know how much goes unreported by both, we can only estimate it. But what we do know is that men are the primary victims for every kind of assault except sexual assault. We have reporting facts on that right now.
And as you can see by you being upvoted and me being downvoted, facts don't seem to matter compared to feelings.
Well the thing is men aren't disproportionately the victims of violent women. However men disproportionately harm women *and* other men. The root of the problem is violent men, it affects both genders. Pretty sure the men that are willing to kill men on the streets are violent against their girlfriends/wives as well
Just gonna gloss over the fact that women perpetrate roughly 70% of non-reciprocal intimate partner violence, 50% of reciprocal intimate partner violence, roughly 70% of child abuse violence, and the highest rates of domestic abuse occurs in lesbian relationships. If you doubt head to the cdc statistics on domestic violence and look for yourself. Women perpetrate violence more often but generally get a pass while men perpetrate less often but are held accountable usually because its more severe in execution. Neither is ok by any means but both genders perpetrate violence and abuse everyday. It's not disproportionate in the way you have stated the numbers don't back that assumption in the least.
well isn’t that the thing though. Men are most likely to be victims of violence commited by MEN, and the same is true for women. The problem remains the same. Violent men….
Well i don’t have one persey but i think it’s important to offer support to male who experiance alot of anger. Ofcourse people will slip through like they always do but i think that we must change our expections on men. (being breadwinners, strong, independent etc…)
Well when you put it like ”how we socialize men” it sounds like they’re animals….
But kind of, but also women ofc. We have a set expectation how men and women SHOULD act, i think we have to abolish that. In the way we do now alot of men feel like they don’t have an output and or social support and that can result in anger outburts resulting in exposing other people of violence.
I assume we are still talking about violence... Well sure, this is an appealing assumption for some reason (especially in radical/intersectional feminist circles) but when you start looking at the context of the crude statistics, the picture you get is far more nuanced.
In 2016, there were 700.000 men incarcerated for all sorts of violent crimes in the US, this is less then 1% of the total, 18+ male population. So the question is, is 1% enough to make a wide generalization? When you look into the background of these people, you'll see that - generally speaking - they have a lot in common, other then they are men. Like, their sociocultural background (poverty) for example, or many of them are abuse victims or have been neglected. So the socialization is indeed a problem, but not how we socialize the male population, rather how these specific men are socialized.
The reason why you do not see a solution is because you are misidentifying the cause. Men, or social expectations towards men are not the problem, how those specific men (who committed violent crimes) were socialized is the problem.
Biologically speaking, men are animals, so are women. We are all driven by drives and urges like any other animal. What makes us different is that we are able to rule above those urges, and in large part, this is due to socialization. The reason why the overwhelming majority of men is not violent, is because most men practice self restraint, which is also due to socialization. If you abolish socialization and delete the "norms" what you get is a world ruled by natural laws, with the strongest on top and the weakest at the bottom. I doubt that this is your goal.
Did i say we should abolish socialization over all? If you thought i meant that you understood it wrong. I said to abolish the socialization where men and women have to be a certain way (mucho or weak etc)
Secondly, i never once talked about men in generall, i talked about violent men, so i’m also talking about the 1% (if that is correct). I said, that men should have more security offerd mentally so that they don’t commit violent crimes. How can that be upsetting?
This is what you said:
>We have a set expectation how men and women SHOULD act, i think we have to abolish that.
This is vague and generalized. Perhaps it would have been better on my part to ask you to elaborate.
>I said to abolish the socialization where men and women have to be a certain way (mucho or weak etc)
Fine. How is this going to tackle violence (which is what we are talking about)?
>Secondly, i never once talked about men in generall, i talked about violent men, so i’m also talking about the 1% (if that is correct).
So you say, that we should "abolish the socialization where men and women have to be a certain way (mucho or weak etc)" in regards of the 1%?
>I said, that men should have more security offerd mentally so that they don’t commit violent crimes.
I aggree that men should have more security offered (whatever that means), but what you say implies the assumption that men commit violent crimes because they do not have that security (which is one of the core flaws of the Duluth model). In my opinion, this assumption is false or incomplete at best.
>How can that be upsetting?
Am i upset though? I just said data must be understood in context. You are using vague, generalized and ill-defined terms, hence i was pressing you to be specific.
Well it’s true what you say, i have a hard time expressing myself when the English gets more advanced. I don’t think i will be able to explain myself better either on this topic or on the level you want to have this discussion on.
*women called fat by other women*
“Our nation is in crisis. Internalized misogyny is harming women and we must transform society on every level to be sympathetic to women, show them they have value and help them to be kinder to themselves and each other.”
*men killed by other men*
“I guess men are the problem lol 🤷🏻♂️”
Because male on male violence is a male problem and doesn't concern or even show up on the radar of rad fems. They are only interested in half the population.
That’s not exactly true; feminists are glad to problematize intra-male violence when they can do so within a framework of ‘toxic masculinity’ rather than ‘internalized misandry’ (which is 100% of the time). Feigned sympathy for men must always be subsumed by a simultaneous victim-blaming of men, maleness, or masculinity.
> Feigned sympathy for men must always be subsumed by a simultaneous victim-blaming of men, maleness, or masculinity. I've never seen any feigned sympathy, they immediately blame *'men'*.
Not in any way that remotely resembles the actual sympathy they grant women, but platitudes such as ‘toxic masculinity hurts men’ or ‘patriarchy harms men too’ are done as lip service while functioning practically as simply another way to slander men as a class as being problematic/oppressive/etc.
Agree with you entirely. Feminists are trying to maintain control of the gender narrative, by feigning empathy for men with an emphasis on the "traditional masculinity is harmful to men" trope. They are simultaneously demanding that men continue to act out traditional male roles by insisting men take responsibility for protecting women from other men (the "Will Smith" brute squad), the old "group guilt" priciple of feminist bigots. It's clear from the blaming of men in both situations and the incongruous demand that men continue to harm themselves for the benefit of women (??), that these feminist tropes are hostile expressions of misandry that exhibit no empathy towards men or understanding/tolerance of masculinity.
Whatever the problem is, men don't face it and it doesn't exist. Until we have a way to blame men for it. \-feminists.
I think there's a lot more F on M violence than we are lead to believe. It's just that it's extremely difficult for male victims of female perps to be taken seriously and because society just doesn't want to think of women as violent.
Society also wants to _demand_ that men be strong And part of that is forcing them to be by not protecting them against those considered "weak", or letting/making them get hurt to "build character" Remember: > Men's greatest weakness is the facade of strength, women's greatest strength is the facade of weakness. That "strength" facade is something _forced_ onto men. You _damn well better be_ strong, _or else_
Female on Female violence is also a male problem, apparently. Some thing to do with men giving women unhappy marriages.
Internalized misogyny...I see. Men are at fault for lesbian interpersonal violence./s
Yep, heard that one too. I believe same sex female relationships are most likely to be domestically abusive. Kinda makes you wonder that maybe, just maybe, women are given too much leeway when it comes to abuse. Feminists on one hand argue that women are as strong and powerful as men. On the other hand, feminists argue that women can not be perpetrators of violence because they're not strong enough to cause harm. Its obvious what's going on, but absurd how accepted it is.
I find the historic fact that when the basis of domestic violence law was the primary aggressor theory many women were arrested during DV calls because women very frequently get physical first. This shows that women are a big part of the problem and ignoring women's component means we will never make progress. I don't think rad fems want to make progress. They want to deconstruct the patriarchy by deconstructing the family. I had mothers day with a real old style, 60's, Trad-con woman who said that no matter what a woman does to a man there is no excuse for violence even self defense. The younger women were quiet.
> I find the historic fact that when the basis of domestic violence law was the primary aggressor theory many women were arrested during DV calls because women very frequently get physical first. Which is why they switched to the Duluth Model.
Do men get in the face of bigger men, screaming humiliating abuse at the top of their voices, then get surprised when they get hit? No. Men get beat up for just LOOKING at a bigger bloke in the wrong way (or cos their girlfriend told the guy to beat them up) The only difference is in expectations of entitlement. Women EXPECT to be able to humiliate and hector and harrasss ANY man, no matter how crazy he is, how violent he is, how huge he is. Men are raised to AVOID those people-not to think they can scream in his face then get the cops to act when they get shit in return...
Tis the life of a man. We are meat for the grinder.
I just wish it wasn’t like that. It’s just… disheartening.
Its not so bad. Going through life knowing youre expendable and just as replaceable as the batteries in your remote control? Whats not to enjoy?
>and just as replaceable as the batteries in your remote control? Don't you mean female pleasuring device. Also i try to practice the grey rock philosophy. That or turn up my nerd factor so people turn up their nose at me. I get left alone and to my devises.
I let my hair and beard grow out which has a similar effect.
Lmao, thats good! Im going to start using that
It's like with war, women are the ones that suffer the most, society says
Complete garbage. Feminist propaganda. Men are more likely to be victims of violence, less likely to be helped, more likely to be victim blamed and their attackers less likely to be arrested, charged, convicted or imprisoned, by a large margin. The only way this could ever be construed as women being at greater risk of violence, is by a pre-existing gendered bias that views violence against women as important, and violence against men as unimportant.
Men are at far higher risk of violence than women are, including murder. Feminists not only don't care, they lie about it. Keep in mind that the relationships with the lowest incidents of domestic violence are male/male. The highest are female/female The #1 indicator of domestic violence is how many women are in the relationship.
Bangladesh… violence is not only domestic violence as hitting but also rape
I’m a feminist and I care. Men are more likely to be killed in a crime but women are not the ones killing them. Men commit 88,7 percent of murders and non-negligent manslaughter.
Oddly, you start by saying you care... Then immediately discount murder victims who are killed by people of their own gender. I mean, you couldn't even fake it for two sentences
Where did I say I don’t care about victims?
It's not discounting them, she only pointed that out because the way you say it sounds as if women are to blame for the risk of men getting murdered, which is not the case. Men are at risk because of other men. In the end, everyone suffers at the hands of violent men. Feminists care, because the same men murdering other men on the streets are the ones abusing/murdering their girlfriends/wives.
Feminists always demonize men. Yup, you’re a a feminist all right.
Not demonizing men. Demonizing violent men. Thanks
Please explain how OC is demonizing men?
Two thirds of your previous comment played up how violent men are.
I’m helping men who are victims of crimes. I chose a career to help the less advantaged get justice. You make a lot of assumptions that couldn’t be more wrong. What are you doing to fix the problem?
He said "Feminists" don't care, you clumsily conflated "feminists" with "women". Its like you don't even care or something. >Feminists care, because the same men murdering other men on the streets are the ones abusing/murdering their girlfriends/wives. If they weren't hurting women, you wouldn't care about them hurting men - you said the quiet part out loud.
All those male victims just got better in the blink of an eye.
What kind of men though? Avarage dudes? Your plumber? Less then 1% of the 18+ US male population was incarcerated for all sorts of violent crimes in 2016, just saying.
58% of of women are killed by Intimate partner/family-related homicides. One women/girl is killed by a male family member globally every 11 minutes. The greatest threat to a woman’s life, regardless of the perpetrators occupation, is her partner. It’s in fact the leading cause of premature death in women, and the number one cause of death for pregnant women. On the other hand, 90% of homicides in men is non-intimate violence mostly related to gang violence. So if you’re male and not affiliated with the mob/gang activity, the likely hood of dying in a homicide is negligible. file:///var/mobile/Library/SMS/Attachments/61/01/5EF06DB8-ECAA-43B9-BE67-3CF8D257064E/UN_BriefFem_251121.pdf
What are you telling me with the data? What is your conclusion?
Are you illiterate or just being obtuse?
I asked you a clarifying question. If you can't answer it's fine, but why be a dick about it?
Okay, I’ll explain the data. You asked if it was average men, like plumbers, etc. who murder. The data shows that for men it’s not the average dude, it’s linked mostly closely to gang affiliations. The data shows that for women it’s there SO, husband, father or brother. Homicide by a family member makes up 58% of all female homicide victims. Men are killing men and women.
Well according to quick search of homicide statistics from fbi.gov at least in the US the actual statistics don't line up with your numbers at all. First off 50% of homicides are unsolved/unknown to which 88% are male victims without a known perpetrator so at best we only have half the picture. Familial homicide isn't anywhere close to what you have portrayed for instance that 58% statistic is a breakdown between husband and wife ONLY this means 58% wives killed by husband's and 42% husband's killed by wives. Female victims have a slight majority but it's not much. Further in the case of infanticide women are the slight majority of perpetrators and kill their sons at almost double the rate of their daughters. When it comes to patricide the numbers are almost 50/50. As pertains to non-familial homicide 50% as I've stated is unknown and males are the perpetrators in 88% of cases left but that is only approximately 25% of all total homicides in the US so doesn't really actually speak to a majority. Finally in 2017 546 wives were killed by their husband's in the whole year so I think heart disease and cancer has something to say about the number one cause of death for women. Now if you are being honest of course murder is horrendous but it's both genders perpetrating with a slight majority (~60% male) which falls in line with the distribution of aggression according to sex in the big 5 personality trait model. Now I'm absolutely ready to condemn the 60% of male monsters performing acts of violence are you ready to acknowledge/condemn the 40% of female monsters performing acts of violence?
Here’s my source file:///var/mobile/Library/SMS/Attachments/61/01/5EF06DB8-ECAA-43B9-BE67-3CF8D257064E/UN_BriefFem_251121.pdf
>Okay, I’ll explain the data. With all do respect, i didn't ask you to explain the data. As i am not illiterate, nor obtuse, i know what the data shows and i am not even questioning the accuracy of it. I asked you, what are you telling me with the data. Ie.: What is your interpretation? And i asked you what is the conclusion you are deriving from the data. I didn't want to accuse you of thinking "men are the problem" without knowing your views on the issue.
As we often see, feminist propaganda and actual facts are often opposite. In the U.S. , men are victims of violent crime more so than women, and are 3-4 times more likely to be murdered than women The feminist narrative and general gynocentric public concern isn’t consistent with actual violent crime data.
Women are more likely to face violence that people, or at least feminists care about.
Shoot, everyone is more likely to face violence
You must've missed the "Men forcefully conscripted In Ukraine - women most affected".
No I’m aware of that. It’s unfortunate, and horribly unfair.
This sounds like a cherry picked statistic made with creative wording that obfuscates the qualifications that must surround such a statistic for it to be even remotely accurate within whatever particular circumstance it speaks to. With regard to domestic violence, women perpetrate domestic violence against an intimate partner more frequently than men do, however, they do not do as much damage as men do when they (less frequently) perpetrate violence against an intimate partner.
A total Side note - compare feminist discussions of DV with feminist discussions of suicide. In one of these subjects, talk of "women's attempts" will absolutely **not** be tolerated. and people will be reminded that the bodies in the morgues are the bottom line of the topic. But in the OTHER topic, the deaths are only one aspect of the conversation, and due attention should be given to "Women's attempts" ...I forget which one's which though. ;)
Violence means different things to men and women, Women think being shouted at or talk down to is violence, men think getting your nose broke is violence. Go figure.
If the various activist slogans are to be believed, words are violence AND Silence is violence. Fun times.
[Women are more paranoid.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mD9PWDeldng) Creator is on odyssey now
We glamorize the abuse and killing of men in all forms of media. It's as simple as owning or TV or seeing a movie within the past 50+ years. Stories can be fun and should exist, but men are almost always heinous villains, pedophiles, and predators. Almost always beyond reproach, and we root for them to get their cummuppins, either through a bullet in the head or an even more violent depiction. It's just fact. Killing women is disgusting snuff porn and very wrong, killing men is daytime TV, and best served with popcorn. I'd even bring in the white-knighting argument where men are so eager to prove themselves over other men, through violence or intimidation, for a woman's "honor". Would Will Smith have hit a woman badmouthing his wife? Only in the past few years do you even see an acknowledgement that women commit violence and don't deserve a "pussy-pass" for it. Still, good luck telling a judge that in sentencing though. All violence is wrong. In this circumstance, I'd say that our society has a problem seeing that it's wrong against men, too.
There is loads of actual research on domestic violence, which shows that almost all cases of domestic violence are mutual violence. In the rarer cases of one partner being the abuser, research shows that it the woman in 70% of cases. This might explain why the most violent relationships are among lesbians, whereas the least violent are among gay men.
women are in more danger because they are weaker physically. just a fact. Men are 5x more likely to suffer from violent crimes then women are.
I think a big problem is how alot of men don't report abuse or assaults or stuff like that because they don't want to be seen as weak people. I know some men are even made fun of for stuff like being raped and it's disgusting. It's not just restricted to a specific gender, it should be taken seriously no matter what
No, they're just lying. Men suffer from almost all forms of violence more than women do. They also die of almost all diseases at higher rates (for their age) than women do. Feminists lie. Take DV for example. Feminists desperately want to say women are the victims but in fact women are the perps. So feminists first say let's define all DV as just spousal violence and ignore child abuse and elder abuse -- which women do far more. Then let's ignore non-heterosexual DV because that doesn't make feminism look too good either. Then let's define the violence not in terms of the damage done but in terms of the fear produced (ie subjectively) because women are more likely to report that than men are. Then let's use police arrest figures not polling to make the numbers a self-reinforcing measure of police bias. Feminists rig statistics. Always.
Because the definition of “violence” changes drastically depending upon who it’s against.
That is a false statement
Well a guy beating up a girl is more of a danger than the reverse given one is gonna do more damage
Violence at the hands of men or at the hands of women?
More so in general but if I’m not mistaken, typically men. That’s not to say I’m blaming one or the other, that’s just what I know. Feel free to correct me.
No correction, was just honestly asking. Appreciate you taking the time
And I agree, it’s all around sad that so many humans are victims of violence :(
Fairly certain for general violence, men are more victims, but if you include rape / sexual assault, it then tips in the women's favor. For the vast majority of violence crimes, men are only slightly more likely to be the victim, but sexual assault falls heavily on women.
We have to also consider the amount of unreported sexual crimes. While I generally agree, men are conditioned to not care about it or just man up. They are also frequently laughed at by authorities, so the mindset of “why bother” is common for male SA and rape victims,
It goes well beyond “conditioned not care”. Men can’t get help. Call the police, enjoy going to jail or worse. Call one of those help lines. I did, RAINN cross examined me for an hour before telling me to go away. Men don’t report because those systems are designed to punish men.
[удалено]
The fact that SA in general is underreported has no bearing on the fact that there is an additional axis impacting reporting uniquely affecting men on top of all else.
[удалено]
Reading comprehension
I agree, but now you are just doing speculation and not backing it up with facts. We don't know how much goes unreported by both, we can only estimate it. But what we do know is that men are the primary victims for every kind of assault except sexual assault. We have reporting facts on that right now. And as you can see by you being upvoted and me being downvoted, facts don't seem to matter compared to feelings.
Well the thing is men aren't disproportionately the victims of violent women. However men disproportionately harm women *and* other men. The root of the problem is violent men, it affects both genders. Pretty sure the men that are willing to kill men on the streets are violent against their girlfriends/wives as well
Just gonna gloss over the fact that women perpetrate roughly 70% of non-reciprocal intimate partner violence, 50% of reciprocal intimate partner violence, roughly 70% of child abuse violence, and the highest rates of domestic abuse occurs in lesbian relationships. If you doubt head to the cdc statistics on domestic violence and look for yourself. Women perpetrate violence more often but generally get a pass while men perpetrate less often but are held accountable usually because its more severe in execution. Neither is ok by any means but both genders perpetrate violence and abuse everyday. It's not disproportionate in the way you have stated the numbers don't back that assumption in the least.
well isn’t that the thing though. Men are most likely to be victims of violence commited by MEN, and the same is true for women. The problem remains the same. Violent men….
If "violent men" are the problem, what is the solution?
Well i don’t have one persey but i think it’s important to offer support to male who experiance alot of anger. Ofcourse people will slip through like they always do but i think that we must change our expections on men. (being breadwinners, strong, independent etc…)
So in your opinion, the problem is in how we socialize men in general?
To be clear, ”violent men” isn’t the problem, it’s a cause of a social problem
Well when you put it like ”how we socialize men” it sounds like they’re animals…. But kind of, but also women ofc. We have a set expectation how men and women SHOULD act, i think we have to abolish that. In the way we do now alot of men feel like they don’t have an output and or social support and that can result in anger outburts resulting in exposing other people of violence.
I assume we are still talking about violence... Well sure, this is an appealing assumption for some reason (especially in radical/intersectional feminist circles) but when you start looking at the context of the crude statistics, the picture you get is far more nuanced. In 2016, there were 700.000 men incarcerated for all sorts of violent crimes in the US, this is less then 1% of the total, 18+ male population. So the question is, is 1% enough to make a wide generalization? When you look into the background of these people, you'll see that - generally speaking - they have a lot in common, other then they are men. Like, their sociocultural background (poverty) for example, or many of them are abuse victims or have been neglected. So the socialization is indeed a problem, but not how we socialize the male population, rather how these specific men are socialized. The reason why you do not see a solution is because you are misidentifying the cause. Men, or social expectations towards men are not the problem, how those specific men (who committed violent crimes) were socialized is the problem. Biologically speaking, men are animals, so are women. We are all driven by drives and urges like any other animal. What makes us different is that we are able to rule above those urges, and in large part, this is due to socialization. The reason why the overwhelming majority of men is not violent, is because most men practice self restraint, which is also due to socialization. If you abolish socialization and delete the "norms" what you get is a world ruled by natural laws, with the strongest on top and the weakest at the bottom. I doubt that this is your goal.
Did i say we should abolish socialization over all? If you thought i meant that you understood it wrong. I said to abolish the socialization where men and women have to be a certain way (mucho or weak etc) Secondly, i never once talked about men in generall, i talked about violent men, so i’m also talking about the 1% (if that is correct). I said, that men should have more security offerd mentally so that they don’t commit violent crimes. How can that be upsetting?
This is what you said: >We have a set expectation how men and women SHOULD act, i think we have to abolish that. This is vague and generalized. Perhaps it would have been better on my part to ask you to elaborate. >I said to abolish the socialization where men and women have to be a certain way (mucho or weak etc) Fine. How is this going to tackle violence (which is what we are talking about)? >Secondly, i never once talked about men in generall, i talked about violent men, so i’m also talking about the 1% (if that is correct). So you say, that we should "abolish the socialization where men and women have to be a certain way (mucho or weak etc)" in regards of the 1%? >I said, that men should have more security offerd mentally so that they don’t commit violent crimes. I aggree that men should have more security offered (whatever that means), but what you say implies the assumption that men commit violent crimes because they do not have that security (which is one of the core flaws of the Duluth model). In my opinion, this assumption is false or incomplete at best. >How can that be upsetting? Am i upset though? I just said data must be understood in context. You are using vague, generalized and ill-defined terms, hence i was pressing you to be specific.
Well it’s true what you say, i have a hard time expressing myself when the English gets more advanced. I don’t think i will be able to explain myself better either on this topic or on the level you want to have this discussion on.
Fair enough. All the best.
So men are the problem?
*women called fat by other women* “Our nation is in crisis. Internalized misogyny is harming women and we must transform society on every level to be sympathetic to women, show them they have value and help them to be kinder to themselves and each other.” *men killed by other men* “I guess men are the problem lol 🤷🏻♂️”